AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-ec
March 04, 2005 - March 15, 2005
Bob
At 06:16 AM 3/4/2005, you wrote:
>
>
>Bob - we haven't talked in about four years. Your designs are flying
>well in our Falco. Thanks for the advice back then, and here's a
>question for the new project.
>
>I very much like the low voltage warning system and the setup in your
>recently reference schematic
>http://aeroelectric.com/articles/lvwarn/9021-620.pdf . This setup is
>exactly to my needs. However, one thing is getting complicated and I
>wonder if you have any thoughts.
>
>I really like the fuseblock idea instead of acres of breakers. But this
>design requires four buses, so we're starting to get "acres of buses".
>When you divvy up the load this way, there are not many circuits on each
>bus. What would be ideal is one common mechanical bus, with the ability
>to segregate it electrically. Obviously nobody is likely to have it set
>up the way I want, but perhaps yours (or other products?) can be "cut"
>and fed from both ends, so that each mechanical block is good for two
>electrical buses? Thoughts?
>
>Mike
Mike,
Bussman makes a newer style of fuse block which allows 2 power sources.
They differ from the standard style Bob prefers, in that the power output
wires exit from the rear of the fuse block. See
http://order.waytekwire.com/IMAGES/M37/catalog/217_063
http://www.mihdirect.biz/
I purchased mine from MIH.
Charlie Kuss
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> Attn Bob |
| Subject: | Re: EFIS Backup Battery and fuseblocks - |
Attn Bob
Attn Bob
>
>
>Bob - we haven't talked in about four years. Your designs are flying
>well in our Falco. Thanks for the advice back then, and here's a
>question for the new project.
>
>I very much like the low voltage warning system and the setup in your
>recently reference schematic
>http://aeroelectric.com/articles/lvwarn/9021-620.pdf . This setup is
>exactly to my needs. However, one thing is getting complicated and I
>wonder if you have any thoughts.
>
>I really like the fuseblock idea instead of acres of breakers. But this
>design requires four buses, so we're starting to get "acres of buses".
>When you divvy up the load this way, there are not many circuits on each
>bus. What would be ideal is one common mechanical bus, with the ability
>to segregate it electrically. Obviously nobody is likely to have it set
>up the way I want, but perhaps yours (or other products?) can be "cut"
>and fed from both ends, so that each mechanical block is good for two
>electrical buses? Thoughts?
I'm a bit lost. The fuse blocks are available in sizes from 6 to 20
slots. A group of say 4, 6-slot fuseblocks is only slightly larger
than a pair 12 slot devices. Modifying these devices as you suggest
is difficult and fraught with risk. At one time, I tried to split
a 20-slot fuseblock into two segments and install an e-bus normal
feed diode inside the fuseblock. Time consuming and marginally
successful.
If you're cramped for space such that the narrow range of selection
from B&C (6, 10, 20-slot) don't permit an optimized bussing
arrangement, then I'll suggest you seek suppliers of the intermediate
sizes on the 'net. When I first offered those devices from our
website catalog, they were difficult to find "in the wild" . . .
that was 8 years ago and they're offered by many suppliers
in all sizes.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Butcher" <europa(at)triton.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Alternator |
Bob,
I notice that Z-16 has the control on the "C" wire. My Rotax install manual
states "never sever connection between terminal "C" and "+B+ of regulator
e.g. by removal of a fuse". Likewise the Rotax supplied wiring diagram shows
"R", "+B" and "C" all tied together. This makes me think the senerio
described by others where the OV module makes "C" go to zero and drives the
alt to full on is probably correct. Perhaps Z-16 needs edited.
I have wired my install per Z13 where the 2 blue wires correspond to the 2
yellow wires off the Rotax; my tied together "R", "+B" and "C" correspond to
Z13 Red and case ground corresponds to Z13 Blk. Do you see any problem with
this? With this configuration with the Aux Alt switch off, the Rotax
regulator does not have a battery to sense bus voltage. Will this be a
problem? Or will the capacitor take a charge and represent the 14 V battery?
Is a 15 WV capacitor ok here or will there likely be transients that require
a higher voltage capacitor?
Thanks
Jim Butcher
Europa A185 N241BW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | D Wysong <hdwysong(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master alarm circuit |
Already started, Jim. Is your logic similar to what James mentioned
(e.g. - if Switch A is open and Switch B is
closed then sound the alarm)? How many contact/switch closures are
you monitoring?
D
-----
>
> That's what I am looking for D.
> Jim
> When can you start on it?
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Question about dimmer circuits and annunicators... |
| From: | "Marcos Della" <mdella(at)cstone.com> |
Absolutely! I'm AutoCAD LT 2005 myself...
mdella(at)cstone.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Fiveonepw(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Question about dimmer circuits and
annunicators...
In a message dated 3/2/05 11:12:30 PM Central Standard Time,
mdella(at)cstone.com writes:
> Should I just leave it tied
> to power and not bother with worrying about the annunicators being too
> bright at night
>>>
Hi Marcos- IMHO you definately need BRT/DIM capability, especially if
your
annunciator is mounted direct center of vision. I used zener diodes and
a
BRT/DIM toggle switch on my 10 function LED annunciator and it works
well- you can
play with the zener diodes and LED resistor values to achieve the levels
you
desire. If you can do AutoCAD (I'm R14) I can send you a copy of my
circuits,
if you'd like...
Mark Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Redmon" <james(at)berkut13.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master alarm circuit |
Sounds like you have just about what I'm looking for.
>
>
> Ok, the circuit I have is for twelve annunciators hard wired for 5 ground
> active and 6 hot active. The last is tied to the gear up and down lights
> (to provide a gear transition light)...
Sounds about right...but positive feed indicator lights are rather simple in
nature and in my case, have already been installed. I'm really only
interested in the "ground" triggered warning lights/alarm circuit. In
fact, I think that a indicator bank like you have is a great idea if
designed into the panel, but for retrofits like this one, many of the
individual lights are already in place - the alarm portion however, is not.
> Just curious (I'm running out of PCB space without a massive increase in
> cost) would it be worth it to make the inputs "selectable" (meaning you
> can use either a GND or + to activate the LAMP) (almost doubles the
> required components) and also to install a "Master Caution" light? The
> problem I have with the master caution is that of all my annunciators,
> only about 5 of them are actually cautions whereas the others are
> indicators of things like "landing light", "taxi light", "pitot heat",
> etc... I suppose I could install a header w/jumpers to identify which
> ones are master caution and which ones aren't
In a matrixed design, there would have to be a way to select the trigger
inclusion for master alarm. I would think that several positive inputs
could be routed through your device to drive lights only very easily.
Negative logic could too, as the PCB would just be in the middle of trigger
switch, light and power source. It would help builder creat a nexus of all
indicator and alarm wiring inputs...then a condolidated output to individual
or banked indicator lights, and the master alarm. If there were 5x5 neg/pos
input triggers, with or without individual indicator lights, that could be
selectable for master alarm or not...that would be the ticket.
I also think that a seperate, ground logic based indicator circuit for
throttle/gear warn and transition/lock indicators would be preferable.
However, remember that some aircraft don't have 3 retractable gear, so I
would think the position indicator and "squat or lock" circuits might need
to be seperate.
For my immediate need, I just need the alarm circuit and the allowance for
multiple (2-3) triggers. Canopy open and gear warns are all I'm looking at
for the moment but a more versital configuration would be needed for a
"product".
> Lastly, many people I have talked to want the dang thing built, not too
> many homebrew hackers like me out there :-) Would it be worth it to
> anyone if I could produce a few of these circuits for their aircraft?
> Price is probably going to be somewhere around $100 for the boards and
> stuff (better in a case, but everything costs a little more :-)
I'm willing to build the circuit myself...I just don't possess the knowledge
to design it, or print PCBs. I could probably solder board it if I have a
schematic and parts list.
Sounds like you're on the right track here.
James Redmon
Berkut #013 N97TX
http://www.berkut13.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Flap Motor Warning |
Caution: If you are using a Commercial Aircraft products Flap motor DO NOT
break one of the up or down roller limit switches.
The V3L-3 Honeywell/Micro switch has been discontinued and after trying
extensively to locate another switch that will fit the D145 flap motor I am unable
to find one of the right dimensions that will work on this design.
Commercial Aircraft will not sell you one of their stock. Honeywell will not
sell you one of their stock. The authorized suppliers will sell you one of
these $5 switches for $50 to $70 dollars which will be shipped from Honeywell.
An expensive lesson learned about using loctite and trying to remove the
screw.....
P.S. I bought the only two I could find on the Honeywell dealers inventory
list that were less than $50 and they were $28 each.
Mike Sigman
Zodiac 601XL N7092N
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: EFIS Backup Battery and fuseblocks - Attn Bob |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
wrote:
> I really like the fuseblock idea instead of acres of breakers. But this
> design requires four buses, so we're starting to get "acres of buses".
> When you divvy up the load this way, there are not many circuits on each
> bus. What would be ideal is one common mechanical bus, with the ability
> to segregate it electrically. Obviously nobody is likely to have it set
> up the way I want, but perhaps yours (or other products?) can be "cut"
> and fed from both ends, so that each mechanical block is good for two
> electrical buses? Thoughts?
Mike - Bussman makes a series of fuse blocks now that do just what you
want. We installed two blocks, but each is electrically segregatged into
20 & 8 fuses per sections. This is overkill for us but we had intended to
have the two smaller busses feed a FADEC system.Try looking at their 15710
series on their website. Also, David Schwartzenruber is stocking some of
these blocks. I don't have his email address handy, nor his website. When
I get home next week, I could send you a .pdf file of their drawings and a
picture of our installed blocks.
Cheers,
John
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: WD-40 as Contact Cleaner |
After the penetrates evaporate from the WD 40 I actually leaves a sticky
residue that attracts moisture. Documented
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Master alarm circuit |
James, are your switches wired with normally open and normally closed
contacts (like lever 'microswitches')? If so, it makes it very easy to
produce the alarms you want without fancy logic circuits.
For example, if you used the switches so that they were 'off' when
actuated (i.e. the switches are 'open' when canopy is open and the
throttle is advanced), then you could just wire the switches together
and connect them to an input on the IL-4A lamp controller, programmed
for active high sense. (see http://www3.telus.net/aviation/vx). You'd
need to wire in a 'pull-up' resistor to make this work.
Thanks, Vern Little
James Redmon wrote:
>
>Sounds like you have just about what I'm looking for.
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>Ok, the circuit I have is for twelve annunciators hard wired for 5 ground
>>active and 6 hot active. The last is tied to the gear up and down lights
>>(to provide a gear transition light)...
>>
>>
>
>Sounds about right...but positive feed indicator lights are rather simple in
>nature and in my case, have already been installed. I'm really only
>interested in the "ground" triggered warning lights/alarm circuit. In
>fact, I think that a indicator bank like you have is a great idea if
>designed into the panel, but for retrofits like this one, many of the
>individual lights are already in place - the alarm portion however, is not.
>
>
>
>>Just curious (I'm running out of PCB space without a massive increase in
>>cost) would it be worth it to make the inputs "selectable" (meaning you
>>can use either a GND or + to activate the LAMP) (almost doubles the
>>required components) and also to install a "Master Caution" light? The
>>problem I have with the master caution is that of all my annunciators,
>>only about 5 of them are actually cautions whereas the others are
>>indicators of things like "landing light", "taxi light", "pitot heat",
>>etc... I suppose I could install a header w/jumpers to identify which
>>ones are master caution and which ones aren't
>>
>>
>
>In a matrixed design, there would have to be a way to select the trigger
>inclusion for master alarm. I would think that several positive inputs
>could be routed through your device to drive lights only very easily.
>Negative logic could too, as the PCB would just be in the middle of trigger
>switch, light and power source. It would help builder creat a nexus of all
>indicator and alarm wiring inputs...then a condolidated output to individual
>or banked indicator lights, and the master alarm. If there were 5x5 neg/pos
>input triggers, with or without individual indicator lights, that could be
>selectable for master alarm or not...that would be the ticket.
>
>I also think that a seperate, ground logic based indicator circuit for
>throttle/gear warn and transition/lock indicators would be preferable.
>However, remember that some aircraft don't have 3 retractable gear, so I
>would think the position indicator and "squat or lock" circuits might need
>to be seperate.
>
>For my immediate need, I just need the alarm circuit and the allowance for
>multiple (2-3) triggers. Canopy open and gear warns are all I'm looking at
>for the moment but a more versital configuration would be needed for a
>"product".
>
>
>
>>Lastly, many people I have talked to want the dang thing built, not too
>>many homebrew hackers like me out there :-) Would it be worth it to
>>anyone if I could produce a few of these circuits for their aircraft?
>>Price is probably going to be somewhere around $100 for the boards and
>>stuff (better in a case, but everything costs a little more :-)
>>
>>
>
>I'm willing to build the circuit myself...I just don't possess the knowledge
>to design it, or print PCBs. I could probably solder board it if I have a
>schematic and parts list.
>
>Sounds like you're on the right track here.
>
>James Redmon
>Berkut #013 N97TX
>http://www.berkut13.com
>
>
>
>
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Redmon" <james(at)berkut13.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master alarm circuit |
> James, are your switches wired with normally open and normally closed
> contacts (like lever 'microswitches')? If so, it makes it very easy to
> produce the alarms you want without fancy logic circuits.
Thanks, and this is true. However, the problem here is that I'm not looking
just for a buzzer and blinking light. I'm actually looking for a resetable
alarm circuit. One that is triggered by the manual switch logic, sounds the
alarm (light and buzzer) and has a momentary mute (or acknowledge) button.
It would need to continue to illuminate the warning light as long as the
condition exists but silence the buzzer. If a different alarm condition
occurs at the same time, it should re-engage the buzzer. Once the alarm
condition is removed, then the circuit resets (light off, buzzer off).
Unfortunately, I can't get that from just manual switches, and/or a light
bank.
My fall back position is a simple switch/light/buzzer combo that will use a
manual on/off switch for the buzzer...no logic, not idiot proof, not
optimum.
James Redmon
Berkut #013 N97TX
http://www.berkut13.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Roy Wheaton <roy_wheaton(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Master alarm circuit |
The type of alarm you are referring to is not a major design project. We have
created several types of monitoring systems for motorcycles, race vehicles,
watercraft, construction equipment, and light aircraft that are close to what
you are looking for.
Modern microprocessor and software allow you to create a device that will
monitor several parameters, and give programmable visual, audible, and spoken
responses based on pre-selected events. For example, we created a system for a
rally race car that would monitor oil pressure, charging system voltage, engine
coolant temperature, transmission coolant temperature and engine speed. If a
problem occurred, the microprocessor would alert the driver and co-driver by
selecting the correct message and "speaking" it through the intercom system. A
woman's voice was used because it has been determined by various research
groups that it produces less stress in the operator / pilot. Configurable
outputs were provided for external devices such as flashing v/s steady LEDs,
piezo alarms, etc.
I have a unit that has 16 configurable inputs (battery or ground activated) and
is capable of sounding unique sounds for different events. It also has 6 analog
inputs for monitoring charging system voltage, Oil pressure, etc.
Our first product was designed for use on motorcycles. It monitors the charging
system and oil pressure switch and sounds a falling sound if the charging
system falls below a preset level, a rising tone if the voltage is too high,
and a pulsating tone if oil pressure fails. You can see that unit at
http://www.eguardsystems.com
If you have any questions, or would like a solution tailored to your unique
requirements, please feel free to contact me.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Master alarm circuit |
Right. What you are looking for is a bit more sophisticated. You can't
just turn off the alarm buzzer because you may miss a second alarm.
This functionality is in the Rocky Mountain Micromonitor, but I assume
that you are not using it or don't have room for it.
I'll keep my eyes open for something more appropriate.
Vern
James Redmon wrote:
>
>
>
>>James, are your switches wired with normally open and normally closed
>>contacts (like lever 'microswitches')? If so, it makes it very easy to
>>produce the alarms you want without fancy logic circuits.
>>
>>
>
>
>Thanks, and this is true. However, the problem here is that I'm not looking
>just for a buzzer and blinking light. I'm actually looking for a resetable
>alarm circuit. One that is triggered by the manual switch logic, sounds the
>alarm (light and buzzer) and has a momentary mute (or acknowledge) button.
>It would need to continue to illuminate the warning light as long as the
>condition exists but silence the buzzer. If a different alarm condition
>occurs at the same time, it should re-engage the buzzer. Once the alarm
>condition is removed, then the circuit resets (light off, buzzer off).
>
>Unfortunately, I can't get that from just manual switches, and/or a light
>bank.
>
>My fall back position is a simple switch/light/buzzer combo that will use a
>manual on/off switch for the buzzer...no logic, not idiot proof, not
>optimum.
>
>James Redmon
>Berkut #013 N97TX
>http://www.berkut13.com
>
>
>
>
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Speedy11(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs battery |
In a message dated 3/3/2005 6:52:44 AM Eastern Standard Time,
aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
Are tiny APU's reasonable for tiny airplanes?---
Eric,
You crack me up. : )
You are causing me to stretch mentally.
The APU idea may have merit.
Stan Sutterfield
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | OBAM Configuration |
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<<....skip.....But make no mistake about it folks, your OBAM airplane's
configuration belongs to YOU and no one else.....skip.....Bob . . .>>
3/4/2005
Hello Bob Nuckolls, Your statement above could mislead people.
The Special Airworthiness certificate issued to each amateur built
experimental aircraft includes Operating Limitations for that aircraft. The
Operating Limitations will include the following sentence: "After completion
of phase I flight testing, unless appropriately equipped for night and/or
instrument flight in accordance with 91.205, this aircraft is to be
operated under VFR, day only."
The FAA policy regarding this sentence is:
1) If the aircraft is flown day VFR only it does not need to meet any of
the instrumentation or equipment requirements of FAR Sec. 91.205.
2) If the aircraft is flown VFR at night it must comply with the
requirements of FAR Sec. 91.205 (b) and (c).
3) If the aircraft is flown IFR it must comply with the requirements of FAR
Sec. 91.205 (b), (c), and (d).
These three FAR paragraphs list the instrumentation and equipment required
for day VFR, night VFR, and IFR respectively.
In addition:
1) FAR Sec. 91.207 lists flight conditions under which aircraft must have
ELT's.
2) FAR Sec. 91.215 lists flight conditions under which aircraft must have
transponders.
Amateur built experimental aircraft are not excused from either of these two
equipment requirements in those applicable flight conditions
OC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs battery |
One more comment; my friend, a retired FedEx 747 captain told me when I
mentioned about this thread, that the APU on the 747 would frequently quit
because of lack of oil, or some other maintenance issue. It only had two
gauges, which I have forgotten what they were, but he stated the gauges did
not indicate much about the status of the APU, other than it was running or
not running.
The 747 also had batteries, a 24 volt system. Now if a 747 (ahhh, that
qualifies as a BIG airplane) has batteries, my little P.A. two seater will
live it's life without an APU.
However this thread did provides some giggles.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: <Speedy11(at)aol.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: APU vs battery
>
> In a message dated 3/3/2005 6:52:44 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
> Are tiny APU's reasonable for tiny airplanes?---
> Eric,
> You crack me up. : )
> You are causing me to stretch mentally.
> The APU idea may have merit.
> Stan Sutterfield
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | B Tomm <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs battery |
how about this...
www.basicaircraft.com
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: Speedy11(at)aol.com [SMTP:Speedy11(at)aol.com]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: APU vs battery
In a message dated 3/3/2005 6:52:44 AM Eastern Standard Time,
aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
Are tiny APU's reasonable for tiny airplanes?---
Eric,
You crack me up. : )
You are causing me to stretch mentally.
The APU idea may have merit.
Stan Sutterfield
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike & Lee Anne Wiebe" <mwiebe(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | EFIS Backup Battery and fuseblocks - Attn Bob |
Thanks Charlie - good start! Now I'm going to get picky . I don't
mind the rear exit of the contacts, but I am kind of partial to the idea
of 1/4" spade connectors, instead of the "round pin" type that this
device has. Thoughts?
M
-----Original Message-----
From: Charlie Kuss [mailto:chaztuna(at)adelphia.net]
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup Battery and fuseblocks -
Attn Bob
At 06:16 AM 3/4/2005, you wrote:
>
>
>Bob - we haven't talked in about four years. Your designs are flying
>well in our Falco. Thanks for the advice back then, and here's a
>question for the new project.
>
>I very much like the low voltage warning system and the setup in your
>recently reference schematic
>http://aeroelectric.com/articles/lvwarn/9021-620.pdf . This setup is
>exactly to my needs. However, one thing is getting complicated and I
>wonder if you have any thoughts.
>
>I really like the fuseblock idea instead of acres of breakers. But
this
>design requires four buses, so we're starting to get "acres of buses".
>When you divvy up the load this way, there are not many circuits on
each
>bus. What would be ideal is one common mechanical bus, with the
ability
>to segregate it electrically. Obviously nobody is likely to have it
set
>up the way I want, but perhaps yours (or other products?) can be "cut"
>and fed from both ends, so that each mechanical block is good for two
>electrical buses? Thoughts?
>
>Mike
Mike,
Bussman makes a newer style of fuse block which allows 2 power
sources.
They differ from the standard style Bob prefers, in that the power
output
wires exit from the rear of the fuse block. See
http://order.waytekwire.com/IMAGES/M37/catalog/217_063
http://www.mihdirect.biz/
I purchased mine from MIH.
Charlie Kuss
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs battery |
In a message dated 3/5/2005 1:46:39 A.M. Central Standard Time,
Speedy11(at)aol.com writes:
In a message dated 3/3/2005 6:52:44 AM Eastern Standard Time,
aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
Are tiny APU's reasonable for tiny airplanes?---
Eric,
You crack me up. : )
You are causing me to stretch mentally.
The APU idea may have merit.
Stan Sutterfield
Good Morning Stan,
It does sound interesting, but where is the advantage over a second
electrical generating source mounted on the existing engine?
It appears to me that adding another engine that cannot keep the airplane in
the air has little value that could not be gained by a second alternator on
that one and only power plant.
Even an APU has to be connected in some manner to the primary electrical
system. That seems to be the point where problems may occur.
The idea is to be able to have enough electricity to complete the planned
flight. Are batteries any more reliable than multiple generating sources?
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs battery |
In a message dated 3/5/2005 6:49:07 A.M. Central Standard Time,
fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net writes:
how about this...
www.basicaircraft.com
Bevan
Good Morning Bevan,
The big problem I see with this answer is that it has to be activated.
On top of that, it has been my experience that the best backups are multiple
sources that are in constant use.
The drop out (or push out) wind driven generators cost at least as much as a
B&C standby unit. The B&C provides a full time source of power. It will
even help out an overloaded primary power source then go back to rest when it
is no longer needed. It may even weigh less!
I think that a full time second alternator would be much more reliable than
something that had to be activated by the pilot.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaztuna(at)adelphia.net> Attn Bob |
| Subject: | EFIS Backup Battery and fuse blocks - |
Attn Bob
<002b01c52170$aebea2b0$1132fea9@mikeyymdynhq4n>
Bob
Mike,
These new blocks actually REDUCE the number of connections between the
fuse and the protected circuit. The older style has 3 connection points.
#1 The contact surface between the fuse's blade and the female contact
in the block.
#2 The male/female fast on connection
#3 The crimp on the female fast on connection at the wire
These new style blocks do not have the #2 connection, so there are only 2
connections rather than 3.
The connectors used on these fuse blocks are open barrel style
connectors, like Molex connectors. Since you will most likely be purchasing
or borrowing a crimper to do the Molex or Amp style connectors on your
project, use of this block will not require the purchase of additional
tools. The female end of the connectors makes direct contact with the fuse.
This is an advantage, not a disadvantage in my view. With the older marine
style blocks, it the connection between the fuse and the block fails or
develops high resistance, you must scrap the entire fuse block. With this
new style, you simply replace the offending connector.
The new blocks also save space. Note that the older "fast on" style 10
fuse block is physically nearly as large as the newer 20 fuse style. For
those of us with space considerations, this is valuable.
MIH sells you the block, a great selection of the connectors and the tool
to release the connectors from the block for $38. Having the wires exit the
rear allows for a much neater wiring harness. The new block can be flush
as well as surface mounted. The cover will prevent accidental contact with
metal objects. See attached photos for mounting ideas. Your mounting
options using this style of block are increased.
I am still using the older style block for my battery bus, as I only need 6
fuses on this bus.
Charlie
PS Those of you reading this via the list will not see the photos. The list
will strip them out. If interested, contact me "off list".
>Thanks Charlie - good start! Now I'm going to get picky . I don't
>mind the rear exit of the contacts, but I am kind of partial to the idea
>of 1/4" spade connectors, instead of the "round pin" type that this
>device has. Thoughts?
>
>M
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Charlie Kuss [mailto:chaztuna(at)adelphia.net]
>Sent: March 4, 2005 9:22 AM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Cc: mwiebe(at)sympatico.ca
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup Battery and fuseblocks -
>Attn Bob
>
>At 06:16 AM 3/4/2005, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >Bob - we haven't talked in about four years. Your designs are flying
> >well in our Falco. Thanks for the advice back then, and here's a
> >question for the new project.
> >
> >I very much like the low voltage warning system and the setup in your
> >recently reference schematic
> >http://aeroelectric.com/articles/lvwarn/9021-620.pdf . This setup is
> >exactly to my needs. However, one thing is getting complicated and I
> >wonder if you have any thoughts.
> >
> >I really like the fuseblock idea instead of acres of breakers. But
>this
> >design requires four buses, so we're starting to get "acres of buses".
> >When you divvy up the load this way, there are not many circuits on
>each
> >bus. What would be ideal is one common mechanical bus, with the
>ability
> >to segregate it electrically. Obviously nobody is likely to have it
>set
> >up the way I want, but perhaps yours (or other products?) can be "cut"
> >and fed from both ends, so that each mechanical block is good for two
> >electrical buses? Thoughts?
> >
> >Mike
>
>Mike,
> Bussman makes a newer style of fuse block which allows 2 power
>sources.
>They differ from the standard style Bob prefers, in that the power
>output
>wires exit from the rear of the fuse block. See
>
>http://order.waytekwire.com/IMAGES/M37/catalog/217_063
>
>http://www.mihdirect.biz/
>
>I purchased mine from MIH.
>
>Charlie Kuss
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs battery |
BobsV35B(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
>In a message dated 3/5/2005 1:46:39 A.M. Central Standard Time,
>Speedy11(at)aol.com writes:
>
>In a message dated 3/3/2005 6:52:44 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
>Are tiny APU's reasonable for tiny airplanes?---
>Eric,
>You crack me up. : )
>You are causing me to stretch mentally.
>The APU idea may have merit.
>Stan Sutterfield
>
>
>Good Morning Stan,
>
>It does sound interesting, but where is the advantage over a second
>electrical generating source mounted on the existing engine?
>
>It appears to me that adding another engine that cannot keep the airplane in
>the air has little value that could not be gained by a second alternator on
>that one and only power plant.
>
>Even an APU has to be connected in some manner to the primary electrical
>system. That seems to be the point where problems may occur.
>
>The idea is to be able to have enough electricity to complete the planned
>flight. Are batteries any more reliable than multiple generating sources?
>
>Happy Skies,
>
>Old Bob
>AKA
>Bob Siegfried
>Ancient Aviator
>Stearman N3977A
>Brookeridge Airpark LL22
>Downers Grove, IL 60516
>630 985-8502
>
Sometimes we just have to get 'outside the box'. The 'Dawn Patrol' guys
in KC (flying VW powered WW-I replicas) discovered that a chainsaw motor
made an extremely lightweight starter for their engines & kept them from
needing batteries & charging systems. Pull the rope, rev it up, VW
starts, shut down the chainsaw motor.
Now, what if the little 4hp engine Eric speaks of had a pilot
controllable clutch to a starter gear in addition to the aux alternator?
Most new ideas are worthless. But if we didn't look at all 100%, we'd
miss the good ones.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs battery |
Yet another mechanical device that can and will eventually fail.
This is nothing new, since most 50 year old airplanes that have gyros had
one of this wind driven vacuum pump. Backward to the future?? I doubt it.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: APU vs battery
>
> how about this...
>
> www.basicaircraft.com
>
> Bevan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Speedy11(at)aol.com [SMTP:Speedy11(at)aol.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 6:13 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: APU vs battery
>
>
> In a message dated 3/3/2005 6:52:44 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
> Are tiny APU's reasonable for tiny airplanes?---
> Eric,
> You crack me up. : )
> You are causing me to stretch mentally.
> The APU idea may have merit.
> Stan Sutterfield
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs battery |
In a message dated 3/5/2005 8:38:58 A.M. Central Standard Time,
ceengland(at)bellsouth.net writes:
Most new ideas are worthless. But if we didn't look at all 100%, we'd
miss the good ones.
Charlie
Good Afternoon Charlie,
Please don't get me wrong!
I agree wholeheartedly with the basic philosophy.
For one thing, an APU is nice to have when you are stuck in the boonies.
I would carry a Honda Generator if I were flying in the bush with no close
by support. The tiny APU sounds like a great idea in principle. It just
seems that the extra alternator doesn't really require an extra engine to drive
it when we are considering nothing other than extending the flight time. For
a backup electrical supply in the bush, it would be tremendous!.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: EFIS Backup Battery and fuseblocks - Attn Bob |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Mike -
The pins for these Bussmann 15710 fuse blocks are open barrel crimp style.
They snap into the block from the rear much like any other pins into
connectors (eg. AMP CPC's). They come with a pin removal tool and the pins
are very easy to take out with this tool.
I hope this clears up some of the concerns you have. BTW, they come with a
cover that snaps on the block and covers the fuses.
Cheers,
John
wrote:
> Thanks Charlie - good start! Now I'm going to get picky . I don't
> mind the rear exit of the contacts, but I am kind of partial to the idea
> of 1/4" spade connectors, instead of the "round pin" type that this
> device has. Thoughts?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul McAllister" <paul.mcallister(at)qia.net> |
| Subject: | Batteries - Off topic |
Hi all,
This is a bit off topic but I was wondering if someone could point me in the right
direction. I have a Makita 14.4v drill and its 2.2 ah batter has died. I
went to the hardware store to get another one only to find that they were 80.00,
which is half the cost of a new drill with 2 batteries.
Does anyone know of a third party supplier, or a supplier that opens up the old
battery packs and replaces the cells.
Thanks, Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | B Tomm <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs battery |
Yes, I agree.
The link I provided was for a "backup" alternator but most of the pictures
on the web site shows it mounted in such a way that it would always be in
the airflow and therefore turning. I thought it was interesting because it
could be "deployed" via a door AND because the Eggenfellner package cannot
accomodate a second engine driven alternator.
If I find that my dual batteries need to be mounted aft of the baggage area
for W&B considerations (RV7A with Egg H6), would you consider it
advisable/wise/practical to mount the two engine busses (fuse blocks) next
to the rear batteries and then run several fused wires forward for ECM,
fuel pumps etc? I'm thinking Z-19 here.
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com [SMTP:BobsV35B(at)aol.com]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: APU vs battery
In a message dated 3/5/2005 6:49:07 A.M. Central Standard Time,
fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net writes:
how about this...
www.basicaircraft.com
Bevan
Good Morning Bevan,
The big problem I see with this answer is that it has to be activated.
On top of that, it has been my experience that the best backups are
multiple
sources that are in constant use.
The drop out (or push out) wind driven generators cost at least as much as
a
B&C standby unit. The B&C provides a full time source of power. It will
even help out an overloaded primary power source then go back to rest when
it
is no longer needed. It may even weigh less!
I think that a full time second alternator would be much more reliable than
something that had to be activated by the pilot.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Batteries - Off topic |
Try www.google.com - Makita 14.4V battery. I got lots of hits, but I
don't know exactly what your battery looks like.
Dick Tasker
Paul McAllister wrote:
>
>Hi all,
>
>This is a bit off topic but I was wondering if someone could point me in the right
direction. I have a Makita 14.4v drill and its 2.2 ah batter has died.
I went to the hardware store to get another one only to find that they were 80.00,
which is half the cost of a new drill with 2 batteries.
>
>Does anyone know of a third party supplier, or a supplier that opens up the old
battery packs and replaces the cells.
>
>Thanks, Paul
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs battery |
Hi Bevan,
That's what I did:
http://www.rv8.ch/article.php?story=20050112132057110
Mickey
>
> If I find that my dual batteries need to be mounted aft of the baggage area
> for W&B considerations (RV7A with Egg H6), would you consider it
> advisable/wise/practical to mount the two engine busses (fuse blocks) next
> to the rear batteries and then run several fused wires forward for ECM,
> fuel pumps etc? I'm thinking Z-19 here.
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 Wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave" <dave(at)coltnet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Batteries - Off topic |
Paul,
I had a similar experience with a 12 volt Makita battery pack. I took it to
a place called "Batteries Plus" in Boise, Idaho and they replaced the
batteries inside of the pack. I think it was about $30.00.
Dave
> Does anyone know of a third party supplier, or a supplier that opens up
> the old battery packs and replaces the cells.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs battery or fuel cell |
There has been amount of some talk of alcohol fuelled fuel cells that are
intended to replace batteries in portable computers and other consumer
electronics. By now there might even be some product available.
It does not seem to be a big development shift to have this technology
provide back up for batteries or for power backed up by batteries depending
upon the variables of personal approach and mission requirements etc.
Fuel cells can be configured to burn alcohol, hydrogen among a list ? of
other fuels Why not avgas?
Is there anyone out there up to date with small fuel cell technology current
(no pun intended) and future.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: APU vs battery
>
> Yes, I agree.
>
> The link I provided was for a "backup" alternator but most of the pictures
> on the web site shows it mounted in such a way that it would always be in
> the airflow and therefore turning. I thought it was interesting because
> it
> could be "deployed" via a door AND because the Eggenfellner package cannot
> accomodate a second engine driven alternator.
>
> If I find that my dual batteries need to be mounted aft of the baggage
> area
> for W&B considerations (RV7A with Egg H6), would you consider it
> advisable/wise/practical to mount the two engine busses (fuse blocks) next
> to the rear batteries and then run several fused wires forward for ECM,
> fuel pumps etc? I'm thinking Z-19 here.
>
> Bevan
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com [SMTP:BobsV35B(at)aol.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2005 5:47 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: APU vs battery
>
> In a message dated 3/5/2005 6:49:07 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net writes:
> how about this...
> www.basicaircraft.com
> Bevan
> Good Morning Bevan,
>
> The big problem I see with this answer is that it has to be activated.
> On top of that, it has been my experience that the best backups are a
> multiple
> sources that are in constant use.
> The drop out (or push out) wind driven generators cost at least as much as
> a
> B&C standby unit. The B&C provides a full time source of power. It will
> even help out an overloaded primary power source then go back to rest
> when it
> is no longer needed. It may even weigh less!
>
> I think that a full time second alternator would be much more reliable
> than
> something that had to be activated by the pilot.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Batteries - Off topic |
Hi Paul,
I sold mine on eBay, and there is always a great market in Makita batteries
there.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris Horsten" <airplanes(at)sympatico.ca> |
Hi there,
Anyone know if I can use a Garmin 35HVS or similar basic GPS to drive an
Argus 5000?
Thanks
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | B Tomm <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs battery |
Thanks Mickey.
I thought it was a good idea and now I feel even better about it.
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: Mickey Coggins [SMTP:mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch]
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: APU vs battery
Hi Bevan,
That's what I did:
http://www.rv8.ch/article.php?story=20050112132057110
Mickey
>
> If I find that my dual batteries need to be mounted aft of the baggage area
> for W&B considerations (RV7A with Egg H6), would you consider it
> advisable/wise/practical to mount the two engine busses (fuse blocks) next
> to the rear batteries and then run several fused wires forward for ECM,
> fuel pumps etc? I'm thinking Z-19 here.
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 Wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "923te" <923te(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RG58 vs RG400 Coax Cable |
Acording to the following reference RG58 weighs 2.9 LBS per 100ft while RG400 weighs
5 LBS per 100ft. If you used 100ft to wire 2 coms, 2 navs and your Transponder
and other antennaes your would be 2.1 LBS hevier using RG400 than RG58.
Is the RG400 worth the extra weight?
Is there an even lighter coax that would perform just as well as these two?
Thanks,
Ned
http://www.antennawarehouse.com/coaxdata.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | LED current control for Nav lights |
I have a question for you LED gurus...
I want to use LED Nav lights on my RV-10. I was thinking of getting
the Creative Air kit....but I'm not too fond of the "circuit board"
look to them. Then I saw the perihelion ones that look like they
might look nicer, but they have fewer LED's.
A 2nd issue is that the Van's Rv-10 wingtips are cut about 110 degrees
of visible area, whereas the regs say you need 120 I believe. So,
if I got the Creative Air ones, and mounted them as shown on their site,
I think the light angle will be insufficient to the rear.
To come up with the ideal, I thought maybe I'd take a stab at
designing a custom layout, where I have some LED's on the
back of the sheared tip area, and some on the sidewall where
the strobes will mount. But, I had a design question to start
with...
I see that people are advertising theirs with current control
regulators in the circuits...what benefit is this in an LED
Nav light situation? Can't someone just use the individual
LED + resistor arrangement, or is there something else I'm
not thinking of?
--
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #170
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | RG58 vs RG400 Coax Cable |
Definately YES...it's worth it. RG-400 is superior in many ways. Check the
archives or some of Bob's in depth analysis for review, but it's much better
to skip a couple big mac's than to skip the RG-400. Better Shielding,
Better Conductor and superior jacket are a few.
Just out of curiosity, I went and weighed a 1,000' spool of RG-400 a few
minutes ago. It weighed 44lbs, which is pretty close to the actual Mil
spec, which states 42lbs/MFT (per 1K). Most distributors/mfgs quote
50lbs/MFT, but the actual Mil Spec reads 42 so the real numbers are
somewhere between 42-50lbs/MFT.
Just my 2 cents as usual!
Cheers,
Stein Bruch
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of 923te
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RG58 vs RG400 Coax Cable
Acording to the following reference RG58 weighs 2.9 LBS per 100ft while
RG400 weighs 5 LBS per 100ft. If you used 100ft to wire 2 coms, 2 navs and
your Transponder and other antennaes your would be 2.1 LBS hevier using
RG400 than RG58.
Is the RG400 worth the extra weight?
Is there an even lighter coax that would perform just as well as these two?
Thanks,
Ned
http://www.antennawarehouse.com/coaxdata.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Riley <Richard(at)RILEY.NET> |
In case anyone's looking for cheap RG-400, here it is for under $.50 a foot.
http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3704&item=5756023513&tc=photo
At 10:14 PM 3/5/05, you wrote:
>
>Acording to the following reference RG58 weighs 2.9 LBS per 100ft while
>RG400 weighs 5 LBS per 100ft. If you used 100ft to wire 2 coms, 2 navs and
>your Transponder and other antennaes your would be 2.1 LBS hevier using
>RG400 than RG58.
>
>Is the RG400 worth the extra weight?
>Is there an even lighter coax that would perform just as well as these two?
>
>Thanks,
>Ned
>
>
>http://www.antennawarehouse.com/coaxdata.htm
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike & Lee Anne Wiebe" <mwiebe(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Interior lighting |
Listers..Thanks all for advice on the fuse panel. Bussman looks like my
solution.
On to the next problem, interior lighting. So that you can understand
my mission, this is an amphibious float plane with predominant
instrumentation being an EFIS. It will fly occasionally at night (try
landing on your favourite lake at night, and you'll know why I say
"occasionally" ). However, it is fully open to the back, so it will
also be used as an overnight camper on those fishing trips to nowhere.
I'm looking for two lighting solutions. First is some simple panel
lighting, in the form of a swivel-able, focus-able, dimmable light I can
mount up high left and right, and use to wash light into the corners of
the panel where there is no EFIS, but there are unlit switches, etc.
The Aircraft $pruce solution is sort of what I had in mind (part number
S1990/12), but I can't help think there is something more cost
effective, without having to build from scratch. I really don't want to
get fancy luminescence bars, bezels or post lights for this "occasional"
need. With the mini-mag on the headset, I just need some night-vision
friendly overhead fill-in to keep the scary monsters away.
Second solution is to light that cargo bay at night, in order set up the
sleeping bag for beddy-by time, drink hot cocoa with a good book, etc.
A little LED array seems like the perfect solution (again A/S part
number 11-02882), but at a reasonable price. I tried DigiKey, who seem
to have a ton of them. However, it's all most too many choices for my
mechanically adept, electrically challenged mind to ponder. Anybody
have a good idea?
Mike
p.s. I gotta tell you about a cool toy. As I start to cut metal for
the panel, I've been investigating GPS solutions. A closer look has
sealed my decision on a Garmin 296. It appears that they have a module
that will turn it into a fishfinder/depthfinder. Isn't that the
ultimate decadence - land on the lake, switch modes on the GPS and troll
for fish. Now all I need is electric downriggers on the belly, and I'll
never have to get out of the plane! I'm selling the idea to my wife on
the merits of knowing the depth so that I don't damage those expensive
floats...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RG58 vs RG400 Coax Cable |
>Acording to the following reference RG58 weighs 2.9 LBS per 100ft while
RG400 weighs
>5 LBS per 100ft. If you used 100ft to wire 2 coms, 2 navs and your
Transponder
>and other antennaes your would be 2.1 LBS hevier using RG400 than RG58.
>Is the RG400 worth the extra weight? Is there an even lighter coax that
would perform just as well as these two?
>Thanks,
>Ned
Ned,
Semflex RG+142 weighs only 35% of standard RG58. 1.5 lbs/100 ft. And it
performs better too. Most coax has a steel or copper core and inner PE
insulation. RG+142 has a copper-clad aluminum core and TFE tape insulation.
Higher temps, longer life, better performance. AND you can buy it from
Perihelion Design!
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
"Life may have no meaning. Or even worse, it may have a meaning of which I
disapprove." -- Ashleigh Brilliant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LED current control for Nav lights |
>I want to use LED Nav lights on my RV-10. I was thinking of getting
>the Creative Air kit....but I'm not too fond of the "circuit board"
>look to them. Then I saw the perihelion ones that look like they
>might look nicer, but they have fewer LED's.
My white LED tail light has ONE led. But it puts out well over 100 lumens.
The number of LEDs is not the issue---the fewer the better. The LED wingtip
position light designs usually have few LEDs---See Whelen or Goodrich.
>A 2nd issue is that the Van's Rv-10 wingtips are cut about 110 degrees
>of visible area, whereas the regs say you need 120 I believe. So,
>if I got the Creative Air ones, and mounted them as shown on their site,
>I think the light angle will be insufficient to the rear.
>To come up with the ideal, I thought maybe I'd take a stab at
>designing a custom layout, where I have some LED's on the
>back of the sheared tip area, and some on the sidewall where
>the strobes will mount. But, I had a design question to start
>with...
If you want to make you own PLEASE read my posting on the subject
http://www.periheliondesign.com/downloads.htm (Even Whelen reads them!)
>I see that people are advertising theirs with current control
>regulators in the circuits...what benefit is this in an LED
>Nav light situation? Can't someone just use the individual
>LED + resistor arrangement, or is there something else I'm
>not thinking of?
>Tim Olson -- RV-10 #170
Yes, you can use a regular arrangement. In my case for the white LED tail
light, it draws 700 mA at 5 Volts. So the resistor would be
(15V-5V)/0.700=14.3 ohms at 7W minimum (say 10W). At 10V the resistor would
be (10V-5V)/0.700=7 ohms at 3.4W (let's say 5W)......so you see that just
regulating the LED current is often simpler and leads to a more predictable
current through the LED, as well as automatically filtering out bumps in the
electrical supply.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
"I tried being reasonable--I didn't like it!"
--Clint Eastwood
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul McAllister" <paul.mcallister(at)qia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LED current control for Nav lights |
Tim,
After a lot of reading and soul searching I settled on the LED wingtip and
tail lights from Perihelion. One of the reasons I choose to use them was
because it was quite apparent that a lot of design thought had gone into
them so they would meet / exceed the FAA requirements. I have had them for
nearly a year now and they have worked well.
I have been happy with the product and the service from Perihelion
Paul
http://europa363.versadev.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
Walter Tondu used an LED to light the cockpit of his RV7. Here
<http://www.rv7-a.com/cockpit_3.htm>:
<http://www.rv7-a.com/cockpit_3.htm> is where it starts, and there is
more on subsequent pages of his web site. This, with a 9v battery may
work for you.
From an email from Walter:
"It's so bright it lights up the entire cabin. I may replace it with
a red bulb, don't know yet. I'm gonna fly at night first and see.
So in a sense that's my cockpit lighting, I have no other lights.
What you see in the picture is a heat sink, which sits directly
on top of the led (the back of it of course). These little suckers
get quite hot and need a heat sink. The power puck is the little
round disk which modifies the 12V aircraft power to the appropriate
amperage for the led.
Look for the power puck here.
http://www.theledlight.com/luxeonaccessories.html
Look for the Luxeon LED's here.
http://www.theledlight.com/led-specs.html
You can also find the led's and power pucks in a combo package.
What's really neat is that you can power these suckers with a
little square 9V battery as a backup :) "
Mike & Lee Anne Wiebe wrote:
>
>Listers..Thanks all for advice on the fuse panel. Bussman looks like my
>solution.
>
>On to the next problem, interior lighting. So that you can understand
>my mission, this is an amphibious float plane with predominant
>instrumentation being an EFIS. It will fly occasionally at night (try
>landing on your favourite lake at night, and you'll know why I say
>"occasionally" ). However, it is fully open to the back, so it will
>also be used as an overnight camper on those fishing trips to nowhere.
>
>I'm looking for two lighting solutions. First is some simple panel
>lighting, in the form of a swivel-able, focus-able, dimmable light I can
>mount up high left and right, and use to wash light into the corners of
>the panel where there is no EFIS, but there are unlit switches, etc.
>The Aircraft $pruce solution is sort of what I had in mind (part number
>S1990/12), but I can't help think there is something more cost
>effective, without having to build from scratch. I really don't want to
>get fancy luminescence bars, bezels or post lights for this "occasional"
>need. With the mini-mag on the headset, I just need some night-vision
>friendly overhead fill-in to keep the scary monsters away.
>
>Second solution is to light that cargo bay at night, in order set up the
>sleeping bag for beddy-by time, drink hot cocoa with a good book, etc.
>A little LED array seems like the perfect solution (again A/S part
>number 11-02882), but at a reasonable price. I tried DigiKey, who seem
>to have a ton of them. However, it's all most too many choices for my
>mechanically adept, electrically challenged mind to ponder. Anybody
>have a good idea?
>
>Mike
>
>p.s. I gotta tell you about a cool toy. As I start to cut metal for
>the panel, I've been investigating GPS solutions. A closer look has
>sealed my decision on a Garmin 296. It appears that they have a module
>that will turn it into a fishfinder/depthfinder. Isn't that the
>ultimate decadence - land on the lake, switch modes on the GPS and troll
>for fish. Now all I need is electric downriggers on the belly, and I'll
>never have to get out of the plane! I'm selling the idea to my wife on
>the merits of knowing the depth so that I don't damage those expensive
>floats...
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Neil K Clayton <harvey4(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Mike and headset jack location |
Although I've deliberately kept my panel mounted compass close to the
air-driven instruments to avoid stray fields, a good place to put my
drivers side headset and mike jacks is near (~3") the compass.
Are the signals in the phones and mike wires sufficient to disturb the
compass or are they so small as to not matter that much?
Thanks
Neil
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Mike and headset jack location |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Standard headset current is very low. Shouldn't be an issue.
Some newer ANR headsets make use of one of the extra portions
of the headset plug to provide power for the circuitry. Even
in that case, the current requirement is very low and shouldn't
cause any problems for the compass.
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
> Although I've deliberately kept my panel mounted compass close to the
> air-driven instruments to avoid stray fields, a good place to put my
> drivers side headset and mike jacks is near (~3") the compass.
>
> Are the signals in the phones and mike wires sufficient to disturb the
> compass or are they so small as to not matter that much?
>
> Thanks
> Neil
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
Mike & Lee Anne Wiebe wrote:
>
> Second solution is to light that cargo bay at night, in order set up the
> sleeping bag for beddy-by time, drink hot cocoa with a good book, etc.
> A little LED array seems like the perfect solution (again A/S part
> number 11-02882), but at a reasonable price. I tried DigiKey, who seem
> to have a ton of them. However, it's all most too many choices for my
> mechanically adept, electrically challenged mind to ponder. Anybody
> have a good idea?
At the suggestion on this list sometime back, I bought an Energizer LED
lantern at Wall Mart. It runs on 4 AA batteries and has to output
settings. They claim 200 hours on low and 100 hours on high for a set of
batteries. It has a folding hook made for hanging in a tent and the
angle is adjustable just over 180 degrees.
Dennis
--
Dennis Golden
Golden Consulting Services, Inc.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Speedy11(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs Battery |
In a message dated 3/5/2005 2:57:24 AM Eastern Standard Time,
aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
One more comment; my friend, a retired FedEx 747 captain told me when I
mentioned about this thread, that the APU on the 747 would frequently quit
because of lack of oil, or some other maintenance issue. It only had two
gauges, which I have forgotten what they were, but he stated the gauges did
not indicate much about the status of the APU, other than it was running or
not running.
The 747 also had batteries, a 24 volt system.
In the past ten years, I've never had an APU fail. I've had some that were
inop for maintenance and were MEL'd for flight, but never had one fail once it
was running. It's true that there are only two guages monitoring the APU and
they basically tell you whether it's running or not and whether it's putting
out power - but, for something that is producing electrical power for you, how
much more info do you need? The B-737 24v aircraft battery is used ONLY to
start the APU. Once running, the APU provides all power for electrics and bleed
air for other systems such as starting the engines. The battery is not used
as a backup for the electrical system as they are used in GA aircraft. An
airliner battery is far too miniscule to power anything for very long. If one
loses an engine (not physically), the remaining engine generator (alternator)
powers the electrical system until the APU is started and begins powering the
"dead" side of the electrical system.
I had a dead battery when I got to the airplane this morning and we could not
close the circuits to enable external power nor could we start the APU. But,
once the APU was running, we could have removed the battery and flown away.
The F-16 had a hydrazine-powered APU that could start within seconds such that
if the (single) engine failed, the APU could quickly provide electric and
hydraulic power to the "glider."
I don't think we should write off Eric's idea as unsuitable for GA.
Especially for experimental GA. Afterall, coloring outside the lines and stretching
the limits of technology are what experimental aviation is all about.
I, for one, am interested in Eric's APU idea - even if the APU had it's own
tiny (lightweight and low cost) battery for starting - and if the APU could
come up to operating speed very quickly. In the event of alternator failure, in
IMC, I would want the APU to automically start and to be running very quickly.
Stan Sutterfield
Tampa
www.rv-8a.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Speedy11(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs Battery |
In a message dated 3/5/2005 2:57:24 AM Eastern Standard Time,
aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
how about this...
www.basicaircraft.com
Bevan,
Another valid idea. I've never seen a deployable, emergency wind generator
like this before for GA aircraft. I've seen fixed wind generators on some
older aircraft such as Luscombes and C-140s that provided limited electrical power
in planes that did not have an engine-powered electrical source.
The only deployable wind generator I've seen before was on the F-4 which had
an emergency generator that, when delpoyed, could provide (as I recall) both
electrical and hydraulic power.
Stan Sutterfield
Tampa
www.rv-8a.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: APU vs battery |
In a message dated 3/5/2005 9:38:58 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
ceengland(at)bellsouth.net writes:
Most new ideas are worthless. But if we didn't look at all 100%, we'd
miss the good ones.
Charlie
New ideas often seem impractical or too complicated to be of use. They are
often ahead of the existence of the right materials to build them with. When
I was a kid (12-14 yrs old) I built a "Weed Eater" type tool for trimming
grass. I used the blower motor from dad's old '53 Chevy attached to a broom
handle. The motor turned a plywood disk on it's shaft. The wooden disk had
two opposite screws in it to anchor two small cat whisker pieces of stranded
aircraft control cable. I carried a car battery on my back. It worked like a
champ with a few problems:
The battery was nearly heavier than me. The motor was very heavy at the end
of a non-counter balanced handle. When the stranded lengths of cable
"cutters" wore for a short time, they would unravel and throw small ends of the
cable strands into the air and stick in my shins! (no guard on this model) I
tossed it aside as impractical. I can still feel that 6 volt battery's weight
on my sore back!
Fast forward a few years and I saw my "invention" advertised on television
with nylon monofilament cutter line on a spool (invented long after my 1963
device), a light weight 120 volt motor -powered with an extension cord, and
years before small light weight cheap two stroke engines were available at every
hardware store.
John P. Marzluf
Columbus, Ohio
Kitfox Outback (out back in the garage)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs Battery |
Speedy11(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>In a message dated 3/5/2005 2:57:24 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
>One more comment; my friend, a retired FedEx 747 captain told me when I
>mentioned about this thread, that the APU on the 747 would frequently quit
>because of lack of oil, or some other maintenance issue. It only had two
>gauges, which I have forgotten what they were, but he stated the gauges did
>not indicate much about the status of the APU, other than it was running or
>not running.
>The 747 also had batteries, a 24 volt system.
>
>In the past ten years, I've never had an APU fail. I've had some that were
>inop for maintenance and were MEL'd for flight, but never had one fail once it
>was running. It's true that there are only two guages monitoring the APU and
>they basically tell you whether it's running or not and whether it's putting
>out power - but, for something that is producing electrical power for you, how
>much more info do you need? The B-737 24v aircraft battery is used ONLY to
>start the APU. Once running, the APU provides all power for electrics and bleed
>air for other systems such as starting the engines. The battery is not used
>as a backup for the electrical system as they are used in GA aircraft. An
>airliner battery is far too miniscule to power anything for very long. If one
>loses an engine (not physically), the remaining engine generator (alternator)
>powers the electrical system until the APU is started and begins powering the
>"dead" side of the electrical system.
>I had a dead battery when I got to the airplane this morning and we could not
>close the circuits to enable external power nor could we start the APU. But,
>once the APU was running, we could have removed the battery and flown away.
>The F-16 had a hydrazine-powered APU that could start within seconds such that
>if the (single) engine failed, the APU could quickly provide electric and
>hydraulic power to the "glider."
>I don't think we should write off Eric's idea as unsuitable for GA.
>Especially for experimental GA. Afterall, coloring outside the lines and stretching
>the limits of technology are what experimental aviation is all about.
>I, for one, am interested in Eric's APU idea - even if the APU had it's own
>tiny (lightweight and low cost) battery for starting - and if the APU could
>come up to operating speed very quickly. In the event of alternator failure,
in
>IMC, I would want the APU to automically start and to be running very quickly.
>Stan Sutterfield
>Tampa
>www.rv-8a.net
>
I mentioned the following earlier in my response to 'Old Bob':
If the little motor could be fitted with a starter drive gear in
addition to the alternator, it could replace the starter. The (real)
domino effect could start & by swapping the weight of the starter for
the little motor, you could reduce the battery capacity because you no
longer need high current for the starter and you have a backup
alternator. You might get by with just a little 4 or 6 AH battery &
electrical power duration limited by fuel supply.
Now, how much will altitude affect operation of a little motor like
this? If you are cruising at 10k feet & have an alt failure, how hard
will it be to start the apu?
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Speedy11(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs Battery |
Whew. Wayne you are one pessimistic dude. Your entire airplane is a
mechanical device that can fail. Perhaps you shouldn't fly at all. That would
be
the safest thing to do.
The wind powered generator is not claiming to be a new innovation. It simply
offers another option for builders to consider. And the gyros on older
airplanes were driven by a venturi tube, not by a wind-driven generator. Some
of
the old planes had WDGs added to power radios and nav lights because they
didn't have an engine-powered generator.
Stan Sutterfield
In a message dated 3/6/2005 2:57:38 AM Eastern Standard Time,
aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
Yet another mechanical device that can and will eventually fail.
This is nothing new, since most 50 year old airplanes that have gyros had
one of this wind driven vacuum pump. Backward to the future??
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Hall" <mhall67(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Dimmer cockpit control question |
Is there a dimmer control that works like a auto dimmer, that we can install?
When you turn it past the brightest dimmer setting it will turn on the cockpit
flood light?
Thanks
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs Battery |
Do you seriously consider adding yet another "engine" to do what a 12 volt
battery that is contained, no leaking, will function if charged regularly
for years, an intelligent idea???
Come on, get serious. I have had an alternator failure with my all electric
airplane. IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL. Flew 40 minutes back to my home airport on
the MAIN BATTERY never using the backup battery. I'll say it again; AN ALL
ELECTRIC AIRPLANE, dual LSE CDI's that need electrical power.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: <Speedy11(at)aol.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: APU vs Battery
>
> Whew. Wayne you are one pessimistic dude. Your entire airplane is a
> mechanical device that can fail. Perhaps you shouldn't fly at all. That
> would be
> the safest thing to do.
> The wind powered generator is not claiming to be a new innovation. It
> simply
> offers another option for builders to consider. And the gyros on older
> airplanes were driven by a venturi tube, not by a wind-driven generator.
> Some of
> the old planes had WDGs added to power radios and nav lights because they
> didn't have an engine-powered generator.
> Stan Sutterfield
>
>
> In a message dated 3/6/2005 2:57:38 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
> Yet another mechanical device that can and will eventually fail.
> This is nothing new, since most 50 year old airplanes that have gyros had
> one of this wind driven vacuum pump. Backward to the future??
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Oke <wjoke(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: APU vs Battery |
My "day" airplane is a Dash-8 which is mostly DC based (six DC busses with
automatic bus transfers depending on what else goes down). It has an APU
which provides AC output but can also drive a trickle charger for the main
and aux batteries. The APU does not provide sufficient DC output to start
the engines directly.
The aircraft engines use a electric starter/generator to spin the compressor
stages up prior to "fuel on". Normally ground power is used to start the
aircraft as the initial current draw is about 1500 amps (at 28 V) to get the
compressor spinning, etc. It takes a strong & healthy GPU to get a start and
on the road I have watched more than one GPU die in a puff of smoke as the
starter kicks in. Internal starts off the main battery are possible but must
be watched closely as a too slow spin-up can result in a very costly hot end
inspection.
Anyway, if a ground start is called for, the usual approach is to run the
APU for awhile to ensure the batteries are fully charged and then do a
battery start. The main DC generators then recharge the batteries which are
the inflight emergency power sources to support an "E-bus" like mode to get
on the ground.
This suggests one possible application for a "micro APU" on a light
aircraft. If stuck someplace with a dead battery, get the APU running with
something like a small aux battery (or how about a hand pull cord like a
lawnmower ?), use the output of the APU to re-charge the main aircraft
battery, and then start the engine normally that way. Not sure what
technology is being suggested but something like a model aircraft engine
might spin a tiny generator and provide a battery charge capability.
Jim Oke
Wpg., MB
RV-6A, etc.
----- Original Message -----
From: <Speedy11(at)aol.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: APU vs Battery
>
> In a message dated 3/5/2005 2:57:24 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
> One more comment; my friend, a retired FedEx 747 captain told me when I
> mentioned about this thread, that the APU on the 747 would frequently quit
> because of lack of oil, or some other maintenance issue. It only had two
> gauges, which I have forgotten what they were, but he stated the gauges
> did
> not indicate much about the status of the APU, other than it was running
> or
> not running.
> The 747 also had batteries, a 24 volt system.
>
> In the past ten years, I've never had an APU fail. I've had some that
> were
> inop for maintenance and were MEL'd for flight, but never had one fail
> once it
> was running. It's true that there are only two guages monitoring the APU
> and
> they basically tell you whether it's running or not and whether it's
> putting
> out power - but, for something that is producing electrical power for you,
> how
> much more info do you need? The B-737 24v aircraft battery is used ONLY
> to
> start the APU. Once running, the APU provides all power for electrics and
> bleed
> air for other systems such as starting the engines. The battery is not
> used
> as a backup for the electrical system as they are used in GA aircraft. An
> airliner battery is far too miniscule to power anything for very long. If
> one
> loses an engine (not physically), the remaining engine generator
> (alternator)
> powers the electrical system until the APU is started and begins powering
> the
> "dead" side of the electrical system.
> I had a dead battery when I got to the airplane this morning and we could
> not
> close the circuits to enable external power nor could we start the APU.
> But,
> once the APU was running, we could have removed the battery and flown
> away.
> The F-16 had a hydrazine-powered APU that could start within seconds such
> that
> if the (single) engine failed, the APU could quickly provide electric and
> hydraulic power to the "glider."
> I don't think we should write off Eric's idea as unsuitable for GA.
> Especially for experimental GA. Afterall, coloring outside the lines and
> stretching
> the limits of technology are what experimental aviation is all about.
> I, for one, am interested in Eric's APU idea - even if the APU had it's
> own
> tiny (lightweight and low cost) battery for starting - and if the APU
> could
> come up to operating speed very quickly. In the event of alternator
> failure, in
> IMC, I would want the APU to automically start and to be running very
> quickly.
> Stan Sutterfield
> Tampa
> www.rv-8a.net
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1deltawhiskey(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
In a message dated 06-Mar-05 4:56:56 Pacific Standard Time,
mwiebe(at)sympatico.ca writes:
Second solution is to light that cargo bay at night, in order set up the
sleeping bag for beddy-by time, drink hot cocoa with a good book, etc.
A little LED array seems like the perfect solution (again A/S part
number 11-02882), but at a reasonable price.
Mike,
I found a small oblong 12 v LED lighting unit used for boat step lighting at
West Marine. Price was around $10 as I recall. They are made by a well known
manufacturer, but not at the hanger, and cannot recall who they are. They
come in red, white and possibly other colors. I plan to use one to shed light
on the floorboards, possibly overall cockpit lighting for that mount/dismount
activity, and possibly also for the baggage compartment.
Regards, Doug Windhorn
Regards, Doug Windhorn
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Guy Buchanan <bnn(at)nethere.com> |
| Subject: | Small "Forest of Tabs" |
All,
I'd like to consolidate about 8-10 grounds on my panel before
sending them off to my main ground bus. (The SPA-400 intercom wants all
headphone, mic, and switch grounds brought back to one point. It's easier
to do so at the intercom than run them all to the main bus.) I remember
seeing screwed down fans of tabs in stereo components. Does anyone know
what they're called, or where I might get them?
Thanks,
Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582 / 99% done, thanks to Bob Ducar.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: APU vs Battery |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Once microprocessor controlled ignition and direct injection
fuel delivery is standard in aircraft, I believe we may see
starter motors go away. Why, you might ask.. Well, if the
engine management system knows where each cylinder is in its
power cycle, it can squirt fuel where it belongs and fire the
correct plug, causing the engine to run. With the correct
crank timing - making it not possible to have every cylinder
simultaneously at BDC or TDC, it gets pretty easy. I believe
new Corvettes will have this in a very few years.
As an anecdote supporting this notion.. I have an old style
LSE ignition which triggers the plugs when it is power cycled.
On a hand propped airplane - my Varieze, that can be an anoying
'feature', or sometimes be labor saving. You see, the starting
ritual is to get a burnable mixture in each of the cylinders
before turning on the key. Its the standard, squirt some fuel,
pull 4 blades, set the prop and turn on the ignition. If the
engine is warm, about 10% of the time the engine starts on
its own, just via one spark event. Another 10% of the time (now
the annoying part), a cylinder fires, and disturbs the crank from
the correct position, and I have to turn off the switches, walk
around and reset the prop, then turn the switches back on, and
hope enough of the cylinders still have a burnable mixture in
them. Otherwise clearing the cylinders is required.
Regards,
Matt-
>>
>
> I mentioned the following earlier in my response to 'Old Bob':
> If the little motor could be fitted with a starter drive gear in
> addition to the alternator, it could replace the starter. The (real)
> domino effect could start & by swapping the weight of the starter for
> the little motor, you could reduce the battery capacity because you no
> longer need high current for the starter and you have a backup
> alternator. You might get by with just a little 4 or 6 AH battery &
> electrical power duration limited by fuel supply.
>
> Now, how much will altitude affect operation of a little motor like
> this? If you are cruising at 10k feet & have an alt failure, how hard
> will it be to start the apu?
>
> Charlie
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | Small "Forest of Tabs" |
They're called numerous things, such as "ground tabs", "terminal strips",
etc.., but you can get them from me for a buck each with 10 tabs on them at
http://www.steinair.com and click on "accessories". Sorry for the shamelss
plug....
Cheers,
Stein.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Guy
Buchanan
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Small "Forest of Tabs"
All,
I'd like to consolidate about 8-10 grounds on my panel before
sending them off to my main ground bus. (The SPA-400 intercom wants all
headphone, mic, and switch grounds brought back to one point. It's easier
to do so at the intercom than run them all to the main bus.) I remember
seeing screwed down fans of tabs in stereo components. Does anyone know
what they're called, or where I might get them?
Thanks,
Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582 / 99% done, thanks to Bob Ducar.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank & Dorothy <frankvdh(at)xtra.co.nz> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
For those willing to roll-your-own, I recently saw a cunning design for
a 10-LED variable brightness light... an LM3914 IC is intended to drive
up to 10 LEDs as a bar graph, depending on voltage at the input. Put 10
whites LEDs on it, and a variable resistor at the input, and voila! A
lamp with 10 levels of brightness.
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
Doug...
Is it on this page (Mark Hall...note there are also a variety of dimmers
at the bottom of the page)?
*http://tinyurl.com/4j5ey**
If not, West Marine's web site has their entire catalog online...
www.westmarine.com
Harley
*
*
*
N1deltawhiskey(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>In a message dated 06-Mar-05 4:56:56 Pacific Standard Time,
>mwiebe(at)sympatico.ca writes:
>Second solution is to light that cargo bay at night, in order set up the
>sleeping bag for beddy-by time, drink hot cocoa with a good book, etc.
>A little LED array seems like the perfect solution (again A/S part
>number 11-02882), but at a reasonable price.
>
>Mike,
>
>I found a small oblong 12 v LED lighting unit used for boat step lighting at
>West Marine. Price was around $10 as I recall. They are made by a well known
>manufacturer, but not at the hanger, and cannot recall who they are. They
>come in red, white and possibly other colors. I plan to use one to shed light
>on the floorboards, possibly overall cockpit lighting for that mount/dismount
>activity, and possibly also for the baggage compartment.
>
>Regards, Doug Windhorn
>
>Regards, Doug Windhorn
>
>
>
>
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Schneider <plumberben(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | DigiKey Batteries |
Bob,
As per one of our discussions at the Wicks seminar this past weekend
(which I thoroughly enjoyed by the way), I find that Digikey lists two
Panasonic batteries that are the same size physically, but one is a 17AH
12V battery, and the other a 20AH 12v battery, both have "nut/bolt"
terminals on them. (part number P174-ND @ $38.36, weighs 14.3lbs, and part
number P231-ND @ $44.68, weighs 14.6lbs) In my simple mind, wouldn't it be
wise to get the 20AH battery that is the same size, almost no weight
difference, and only 6 bucks more. Just to refresh your memory, I am using
a Mazda rotary engine that is electrically dependant, and will have dual
bat/dual alt.
Am I missing something? Seems to me to be an obvious choice.
Thanks,
Ben Schneider RV7 Mazda Renesis rotary,
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: DigiKey Batteries |
In a message dated 3/7/05 7:30:52 AM Central Standard Time,
plumberben(at)yahoo.com writes:
> wouldn't it be
> wise to get the 20AH battery that is the same size, almost no weight
> difference, and only 6 bucks more
>>>>
I've had one in my RV-6A for a little over a year, 153 hours. Cranks my 150
hp Lyc fine using an old Prestolite style direct-drive starter, even after
sitting for a month without a trickle charge (in paint shop), and as low as 40
degrees. Will be ordering a new one soon.
From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark Phillips N51PW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net> |
Anecdote Warning- All those Easily Offended by Lack of Direct Relevance,
please delete now!
Speaking of back to the future, or forward to the past, somewhere around
the late teens or early twenties Hisso came up with a starting system much
like the system Matt has recently described. As I understand it, the
engine (150 hp for one) was primed, the prop positioned, and a mag at or in
the cockpit cranked. A plug sparked, and voila, the engine started. This
is the same system employed on that incredible Jenny at OSH last year.
But wait, there's more! There was a German WWII era jet bomber at Silver
Hill that had a curious APU set up. It was a twin engine, all plywood
Heinkle (SP?) Salamander, IIRC. There was a circular hole in tip of the
inlet bullet. Straddling this hole and aligned with the relative wind was
what looked like a giant flat washer. I asked the docent what that was
about, and he told me that it was the pull start handle for the small
reciprocating engine that spun the jet engine up for starting.
So. Some of the strange ideas on this list have been in mass production
before, in one form or another. With the collective genius of this group
and the technologies currently available, I, for one, have great hope for
refined versions and reinvented wheels.
We now return to our regularly scheduled listing....
Glen Matejcek
aerobubba(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Interior lighting |
| From: | "Mark R Steitle" <mark.steitle(at)austin.utexas.edu> |
Mike,
Have you seen the 24/36 led board assemblies available from
Superbrightleds.com? They're a 1-1/2" x 1-1/2" board with 24 or 36
white leds, and a choice of an 1156 or a T10 pigtail & socket. If you
don't want the socket, cut it off and wire directly to your
switch/dimmer. They're made for mounting overhead. I bought the 24 led
unit for my overhead console in my Lancair.
Link: http://www.superbrightleds.com/other_bulbs.htm
Mark S.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mike
& Lee Anne Wiebe
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Interior lighting
Listers..Thanks all for advice on the fuse panel. Bussman looks like my
solution.
On to the next problem, interior lighting. So that you can understand
my mission, this is an amphibious float plane with predominant
instrumentation being an EFIS. It will fly occasionally at night (try
landing on your favourite lake at night, and you'll know why I say
"occasionally" ). However, it is fully open to the back, so it will
also be used as an overnight camper on those fishing trips to nowhere.
I'm looking for two lighting solutions. First is some simple panel
lighting, in the form of a swivel-able, focus-able, dimmable light I can
mount up high left and right, and use to wash light into the corners of
the panel where there is no EFIS, but there are unlit switches, etc.
The Aircraft $pruce solution is sort of what I had in mind (part number
S1990/12), but I can't help think there is something more cost
effective, without having to build from scratch. I really don't want to
get fancy luminescence bars, bezels or post lights for this "occasional"
need. With the mini-mag on the headset, I just need some night-vision
friendly overhead fill-in to keep the scary monsters away.
Second solution is to light that cargo bay at night, in order set up the
sleeping bag for beddy-by time, drink hot cocoa with a good book, etc.
A little LED array seems like the perfect solution (again A/S part
number 11-02882), but at a reasonable price. I tried DigiKey, who seem
to have a ton of them. However, it's all most too many choices for my
mechanically adept, electrically challenged mind to ponder. Anybody
have a good idea?
Mike
p.s. I gotta tell you about a cool toy. As I start to cut metal for
the panel, I've been investigating GPS solutions. A closer look has
sealed my decision on a Garmin 296. It appears that they have a module
that will turn it into a fishfinder/depthfinder. Isn't that the
ultimate decadence - land on the lake, switch modes on the GPS and troll
for fish. Now all I need is electric downriggers on the belly, and I'll
never have to get out of the plane! I'm selling the idea to my wife on
the merits of knowing the depth so that I don't damage those expensive
floats...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: DigiKey Batteries |
>
>Bob,
>
> As per one of our discussions at the Wicks seminar this past weekend
>(which I thoroughly enjoyed by the way), I find that Digikey lists two
>Panasonic batteries that are the same size physically, but one is a 17AH
>12V battery, and the other a 20AH 12v battery, both have "nut/bolt"
>terminals on them. (part number P174-ND @ $38.36, weighs 14.3lbs, and part
>number P231-ND @ $44.68, weighs 14.6lbs) In my simple mind, wouldn't it be
>wise to get the 20AH battery that is the same size, almost no weight
>difference, and only 6 bucks more. Just to refresh your memory, I am using
>a Mazda rotary engine that is electrically dependant, and will have dual
>bat/dual alt.
>
> Am I missing something? Seems to me to be an obvious choice.
I agree. See data sheets on Panasonic batteries at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Batteries
Note the 1220 offers not only a higher capacity but
a lower internal resistance as well. The 20 a.h.
device seems a prudent choice.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Small "Forest of Tabs" |
Guy, I'm working on a simple solution to this problem. I initially used
a 'forest of tabs' using 0.110" fast-ons for my SPA-400 installation.
Without hesitation, I'd say that the audio wiring in my aircraft was the
most difficult subsystem because of all of the stiff shielded cables and
ground home-runs.
My new solution would save space and aggravation by using a small
circuit board and D-sub connectors. All of the audio cables would then
terminate on D-Sub machined crimp pins (available from SteinAir or B&C)
and plug into a D-Sub connector. Its a lot easier dealing with these
pins than using a forest of fast ons.
If you are still interested, let me know. The design should be finished
in about a week, and I'm seeking feedback.
Vern Little, RV-9A
Guy Buchanan wrote:
>
>All,
> I'd like to consolidate about 8-10 grounds on my panel before
>sending them off to my main ground bus. (The SPA-400 intercom wants all
>headphone, mic, and switch grounds brought back to one point. It's easier
>to do so at the intercom than run them all to the main bus.) I remember
>seeing screwed down fans of tabs in stereo components. Does anyone know
>what they're called, or where I might get them?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Guy Buchanan
>K-IV 1200 / 582 / 99% done, thanks to Bob Ducar.
>
>
>
>
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hans Teijgeler" <hans(at)jodel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: DigiKey Batteries |
FWIW, I've got a pair of the 17 Ah Panasonic batteries on my EJ-25 powered
Jodel. Each of them easily cranks the engine. And cranks. And cranks. And
cranks.
Needless to say that I am happy with them.
A friend of mine stocks these (plus a lot of other stuff). Unfortunately, he
doesn't have the 20 Ah version, hence my choise for the 17 Ah. (In fact, I
didn't know the 20 Ah existed until 5 minutes ago.)
Hans
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: DigiKey Batteries
>
>
> >
> >Bob,
> >
> > As per one of our discussions at the Wicks seminar this past weekend
> >(which I thoroughly enjoyed by the way), I find that Digikey lists two
> >Panasonic batteries that are the same size physically, but one is a 17AH
> >12V battery, and the other a 20AH 12v battery, both have "nut/bolt"
> >terminals on them. (part number P174-ND @ $38.36, weighs 14.3lbs, and
part
> >number P231-ND @ $44.68, weighs 14.6lbs) In my simple mind, wouldn't it
be
> >wise to get the 20AH battery that is the same size, almost no weight
> >difference, and only 6 bucks more. Just to refresh your memory, I am
using
> >a Mazda rotary engine that is electrically dependant, and will have dual
> >bat/dual alt.
> >
> > Am I missing something? Seems to me to be an obvious choice.
>
> I agree. See data sheets on Panasonic batteries at:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Batteries
>
> Note the 1220 offers not only a higher capacity but
> a lower internal resistance as well. The 20 a.h.
> device seems a prudent choice.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Avionics Grounds (was: Small "Forest of Tabs") |
>
>All,
> I'd like to consolidate about 8-10 grounds on my panel before
>sending them off to my main ground bus. (The SPA-400 intercom wants all
>headphone, mic, and switch grounds brought back to one point. It's easier
>to do so at the intercom than run them all to the main bus.) I remember
>seeing screwed down fans of tabs in stereo components. Does anyone know
>what they're called, or where I might get them?
Light grounding tasks can be managed in a very compact
and convenient form using D-sub connectors. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Grounding/9031-100-1_Avionics_Ground.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Grounding/9031-100-1_Avionics_Ground_2.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Grounding/DIY15_AvxGround_1.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Grounding/DIY15_AvxGround_2.jpg
This technique allows one to fabricate a very compact,
easily built and user friendly ground bus for the light
loads (avionics, audio and instrumentation) on the panel.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jan de Jong <jan.de.jong(at)xs4all.nl> |
| Subject: | alternator as load |
What kind of load does an alternator represent when there is no field
current (switched off)?
Would like to know.
Jan de Jong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: alternator as load |
>
>What kind of load does an alternator represent when there is no field
>current (switched off)?
>Would like to know.
>Jan de Jong
leakage through the diode array only . . . nanoamperes perhaps?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Lineberry" <glineberry(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Adding an AUX Battery to Z-13 |
Bob:
I am designing my RV-8 electrical system around Z-13 and will have a 60A
main alternator and an SD-8 aux alternator. But since I have dual
electronic ignitions I am adding a 9 AHr aux battery as a "peace of mind"
factor, to supply the second ignition system. I know you would probably
recommend a second battery of the same capacity as the first, but weight and
space considerations have led me in this direction. In my original design I
simply paralleled the second battery with the main 17 AHr battery bus
through a Schottky diode and then fed the aux battery bus from that
connection. As such, I had no way to isolate the aux battery from the main
battery or the rest of the system. In a second design I fed the aux battery
bus, through a Schottky diode from the main battery bus. Then I fed the aux
battery into the aux battery bus through one of the fused tabs. By adding a
switch or perhaps one of Eric Jones' solid state relays in that feed line, I
would have the ability to isolate the aux battery for purposes of checking
individual battery voltages, or if there were some kind of misbehavior
between it and the main battery. On the other hand, this adds another
switch and/or relay and additional potential points of failure. Considering
that the whole purpose of having this battery is to provide a reasonably
fail-safe source of power for one of the electronic ignitions, would I
better off to leave the original design in place or is the ability to
isolate the aux battery essential?
Wow, it is tough to try to put a diagram into words...hope this is somewhat
clearer than the often referenced "mud".
Thanks for your thoughts and for all the great advice you provide in this
forum.
Gary Lineberry
RV-8 QB N48GG reserved
Valencia, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: alternator as load |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Mechanical or electrical load?
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
> What kind of load does an alternator represent when there is no field
> current (switched off)?
> Would like to know.
> Jan de Jong
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jan de Jong <jan.de.jong(at)xs4all.nl> |
| Subject: | Z13 and SS contactor? |
Might Z13 offer a safe opportunity to replace the battery contactor with
a solid state device as supplied selectively by Perihelion Design? Z13
has bypasses for the battery contactor on both the supply side (spare
alternator) and the consumer side (alternate feed).
Weight advantage of 11 ounces would offset a little of the extra
alternator weight.
BTW, if it failed it would be on the ground during or right after
starting but one wants to know what would happen if it did in flight.
If it failed open:
- what would happen to alternator output?
- any load dump danger?
- how would one notice/diagnose?
- alternate feed and alternate alternator for endurance operation
- main off
This could happen to a regular contactor too.
If it failed closed:
- normally one wouldn't notice until on the ground
- would preclude pure endurance operation: main off has no effect
This would probably not happen to a regular contactor.
Comments?
Jan de Jong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Adding an AUX Battery to Z-13 |
>
>
>Bob:
>
>
>I am designing my RV-8 electrical system around Z-13 and will have a 60A
>main alternator and an SD-8 aux alternator. But since I have dual
>electronic ignitions I am adding a 9 AHr aux battery as a "peace of mind"
>factor, to supply the second ignition system. I know you would probably
>recommend a second battery of the same capacity as the first, but weight and
>space considerations have led me in this direction. In my original design I
>simply paralleled the second battery with the main 17 AHr battery bus
>through a Schottky diode and then fed the aux battery bus from that
>connection.
Why not add the second battery per Z-30? Make the second battery any
type you like . . . just don't use small batteries to help start
the engine.
> As such, I had no way to isolate the aux battery from the main
>battery or the rest of the system. In a second design I fed the aux battery
>bus, through a Schottky diode from the main battery bus. Then I fed the aux
>battery into the aux battery bus through one of the fused tabs. By adding a
>switch or perhaps one of Eric Jones' solid state relays in that feed line, I
>would have the ability to isolate the aux battery for purposes of checking
>individual battery voltages, or if there were some kind of misbehavior
>between it and the main battery. On the other hand, this adds another
>switch and/or relay and additional potential points of failure. Considering
>that the whole purpose of having this battery is to provide a reasonably
>fail-safe source of power for one of the electronic ignitions, would I
>better off to leave the original design in place or is the ability to
>isolate the aux battery essential?
First, have you purchased your ignition systems? Have you considered
the p-mags? A single battery Z-13 system teamed with p-mags is about
as bullet-proof as one can get. If it were my airplane, this is the
way I'd go in a heartbeat.
I think your agonizing over this too much. With RG batteries and
modern alternators, you ALREADY have 5x-10x the system reliability
of a spamcan. A simple aux battery relay teamed with ACTIVE notification
of low voltage and perhaps automatic Aux battery management is
pretty simple.
A voltmeter that can be switched between e-bus, main bus, main battery
bus and aux bus makes it easy to scan the system for open relays/contactors.
>Wow, it is tough to try to put a diagram into words...hope this is somewhat
>clearer than the often referenced "mud".
>
>
>Thanks for your thoughts and for all the great advice you provide in this
>forum.
My pleasure sir. Couldn't do it if it wasn't so much fun.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | 21st century power systems. |
I have accepted a contract to design an electrical system for a new
experimental aircraft engine. A 21st century engine needs a 21st century
electrical system.
The engine and matching propeller has been developed over a period of more
than 10 years and has been extensively tested. It's a truly 21st century
engine that deserves a 21st century electrical system.
The engine is essentially the same size and weight and is a drop in
replacement for an O-360 rated at 180 hp. It is 220 hp however and includes
a very efficient muffler for sound reduction. The fuel flow is at least 20%
lower than the O-360 in normal cruise power % settings.
Power is a single control in the HP power range of approx 35% to 100%. Only
in the final stages of preps for landing is the throttle used as otherwise
its set at full power from the start of takeoff roll to landing pattern
entry. The single "Lever" (usually a switch on the stick) controls the power
and the mixture, etc. is computer controlled at any altitude. So the pilot
work load is simply to set cruise speed/power and forget it. There is no
mixture control. Different to be sure, but having flown the system it's
really very simple to use.
The engine electronics system is active redundant for fuel and spark etc.
and multiple failures can occur with no pilot required action to correct
(other than a warning light). If the failure is total on one or two of the 4
cylinders, the HP is reduced but with any two cylinders the engine produces
sufficient power for continued level flight to an airport. Total failure of
the cooling system coolant can also be tolerated with continued flight to a
safe airport.
The engine is derived from an auto engine, and in that configuration, been
factory tested for long durations at over 500 hp in racing trim and no lower
end failures so common with the LYC engines. There are extensive design
changes so it's truly an experimental aircraft engine and it's not
appropriate to consider it a converted auto engine. The engine can burn all
grades of auto fuel and aviation fuel with no modifications or adjustments
of any kind. The engine and prop meet all the FAA requirements for
certification and certification is being considered in the future.
The 21st century electrical system I have planned is totally solid state
using proven parts from the automotive market. For those not familiar with
the automotive requirements they are much harder to meet than the famous
DO-160 often used as the standard for aircraft usage (and then DO-160 is
only a recommendation). In the automotive market it's not optional as the
component manufacturer must meet ALL the requirements to be qualified. Fully
automatic fault tolerant with no required pilot action is a design feature.
There are no mechanical relays, contactors, fuses, fusible links or circuit
breakers needed. The solid state component switches can provide device load
current to a central computer (optional) and can detect "out of
specification" current on that circuit. These solid state switches include
an over current circuit breaker function that is settable to the required
load current as well as the ability to allow for the current inrush of
lamps. Over and under voltage protection as well as over temperature
protection is included. The primary engine alternator provides the necessary
electrical systems power at engine idle with power also available to charge
the batteries. An optional second alternator can be added if desired. Dual
batteries are used for backup but the system can run with both batteries off
line as well.
The final required function is a true real time display of the power
remaining in the batteries in the unlikely event of an alternator failure. A
dynamic display of the power remaining that adjusts for changing loads and
uses the history of prior loads for correct reading is provided. The pilot
has a real time display of the battery power remaining (in minutes), based
on the current and past electrical load history. Change the load and the
display corrects for the new conditions.
In conclusion, the pilot work load is reduced to use of a single lever for
in-flight power and the electrical system informs the pilot of what is
happening, and in the event of alternator failure provides the flight time
remaining based on battery remaining charge.
The new solid state design is lower cost, simpler, more reliable, and
lighter in weight. With the optional second alternator there is no reduction
of flight time as a result of battery power limitations.
No magic, just a simple application of what is available from the automotive
world where components must meet much higher standards than aircraft even
those that meet DO-160.
My background is from the spacecraft world where there is no human to take
action in the event of a failure (ground or in orbit) and so should be the
power systems of the 21st century general aviation aircraft.
My accomplishments and background qualifications are many pages long but one
that stands out (to me) is being personally congratulated by the President
of the USA at the White House for scientific achievement.
Paul Messinger
Aeronautical and Electronic engineer
Commercial, Instrument, SEL, SES, MEL, CFI
EAA Flight Advisor and Technical Counselor
Designer of 21st century electrical systems
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jan de Jong <jan.de.jong(at)xs4all.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: alternator as load |
>
>
>> What kind of load does an alternator represent when there is no field
>> current (switched off)?
>
>Mechanical or electrical load?
>
I meant electrical load. Diode reverse leakage only Bob says.
Without current, mechanical load would be minimal no?
Jan de Jong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 21st century power systems. |
Evening, Paul...
Auto engine?
Coolant?
4 "cylinders" that take any fuel? Two go and it still flies?
Needs a "very efficient muffler" ?
Sounds like a rotary to me...trying to throw us off with the
"cylinders" description?
Wouldn't be a new version of the Mistral series would it?
Harley Dixon
Paul Messinger wrote:
>
>I have accepted a contract to design an electrical system for a new
>experimental aircraft engine. A 21st century engine needs a 21st century
>electrical system.
>
>The engine and matching propeller has been developed over a period of more
>than 10 years and has been extensively tested. It's a truly 21st century
>engine that deserves a 21st century electrical system.
>
>...snip... and includes a very efficient muffler for sound reduction. The fuel
flow is at least 20%
>lower than the O-360 in normal cruise power % settings.
>
>
>...snip... If the failure is total on one or two of the 4
>cylinders, the HP is reduced but with any two cylinders the engine produces
>sufficient power for continued level flight to an airport. Total failure of
>the cooling system coolant can also be tolerated with continued flight to a
>safe airport.
>
>
>The engine is derived from an auto engine, and in that configuration, been
>factory tested for long durations at over 500 hp in racing trim and no lower
>end failures...snip... The engine can burn all
>grades of auto fuel and aviation fuel with no modifications or adjustments
>of any kind.
>...snip...
>Paul Messinger
>
>Aeronautical and Electronic engineer
>
>Commercial, Instrument, SEL, SES, MEL, CFI
>
>EAA Flight Advisor and Technical Counselor
>
>Designer of 21st century electrical systems
>
>
>
>
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: alternator as load |
>
> >
> >
> >> What kind of load does an alternator represent when there is no field
> >> current (switched off)?
> >
> >Mechanical or electrical load?
> >
>I meant electrical load. Diode reverse leakage only Bob says.
>Without current, mechanical load would be minimal no?
>Jan de Jong
There is friction . . . and depending on speed, perhaps
a significant amount of "windage" . . . the fans keep working
and will suck some energy from the engine.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 21st century power systems. |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Hi Harley,
The Mistral is advertising BSFC numbers in parity with Lycoming,
not 20% better. Plus the 13b based rotary would be considered
either 6 cylinders or 2 cylinders, depending on how you do the
math. There are 3 sides to each rotor.
Mistral already has an in-house highly developed engine management
effort going. I think its based on some German and French program.
It doesn't sound as sophisticated as what Paul described (though very
good).
If it's actually 4 cylinders, I would have to guess its a Subaru based
engine.
Matt-
>
>
> Evening, Paul...
>
> Auto engine?
>
> Coolant?
>
> 4 "cylinders" that take any fuel? Two go and it still flies?
>
> Needs a "very efficient muffler" ?
>
> Sounds like a rotary to me...trying to throw us off with the
> "cylinders" description?
>
> Wouldn't be a new version of the Mistral series would it?
>
> Harley Dixon
>
>
> Paul Messinger wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>I have accepted a contract to design an electrical system for a new
>> experimental aircraft engine. A 21st century engine needs a 21st
>> century electrical system.
>>
>>The engine and matching propeller has been developed over a period of
>> more than 10 years and has been extensively tested. It's a truly 21st
>> century engine that deserves a 21st century electrical system.
>>
>>...snip... and includes a very efficient muffler for sound reduction.
>> The fuel flow is at least 20% lower than the O-360 in normal cruise
>> power % settings.
>>
>>
>>...snip... If the failure is total on one or two of the 4
>>cylinders, the HP is reduced but with any two cylinders the engine
>> produces sufficient power for continued level flight to an airport.
>> Total failure of the cooling system coolant can also be tolerated with
>> continued flight to a safe airport.
>>
>>
>>The engine is derived from an auto engine, and in that configuration,
>> been factory tested for long durations at over 500 hp in racing trim
>> and no lower end failures...snip... The engine can burn all
>>grades of auto fuel and aviation fuel with no modifications or
>> adjustments of any kind.
>>...snip...
>>Paul Messinger
>>
>>Aeronautical and Electronic engineer
>>
>>Commercial, Instrument, SEL, SES, MEL, CFI
>>
>>EAA Flight Advisor and Technical Counselor
>>
>>Designer of 21st century electrical systems
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 21st century power systems. |
Has a very efficient muffler so no need for "head sets" in cruise etc. Does
not need it like the rotary seems to. Aircraft engines need not be noisy,
its just not a requirement in the USA. It a requirement in Europe however.
Props make 50% of total noise in the common USA LYC/CONT engines.
Its a liquid cooled flat 4 boxer type. Derived from auto engine technology
as I have said.
I will not confirm or deny any relationship with any manufacturer as that is
not relevant to the task of an all solid state "state of the art" electrical
system.
System design (or at least the major components will eventually be made
public and its likely that some or all will be available in a complete
"ready to install" configuration. After its fully flight debugged.
NUFF said,
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Harley" <harley(at)AgelessWings.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 21st century power systems.
>
> Evening, Paul...
>
> Auto engine?
>
> Coolant?
>
> 4 "cylinders" that take any fuel? Two go and it still flies?
>
> Needs a "very efficient muffler" ?
>
> Sounds like a rotary to me...trying to throw us off with the
> "cylinders" description?
>
> Wouldn't be a new version of the Mistral series would it?
>
> Harley Dixon
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AI Nut <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 21st century power systems. |
I'm coming in on the middle of this thread, so if this is a repeat,
please pardon me.
That said, it looks like the UltraMegaSquirt is a *very* promising
unit. About $125 if you build it yourself. It may even include ion
sensing for ignition control.
HTH.
Paul Messinger wrote:
>
>Has a very efficient muffler so no need for "head sets" in cruise etc. Does
>not need it like the rotary seems to. Aircraft engines need not be noisy,
>its just not a requirement in the USA. It a requirement in Europe however.
>Props make 50% of total noise in the common USA LYC/CONT engines.
>
>Its a liquid cooled flat 4 boxer type. Derived from auto engine technology
>as I have said.
>
>I will not confirm or deny any relationship with any manufacturer as that is
>not relevant to the task of an all solid state "state of the art" electrical
>system.
>
>System design (or at least the major components will eventually be made
>public and its likely that some or all will be available in a complete
>"ready to install" configuration. After its fully flight debugged.
>
>NUFF said,
>
>Paul
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 21st century power systems. |
I am on that list also. But not current on the ultra version. Can two
systems run the engine at the same time??
Does it support dual simultaneous ign and fuel injection and have fault
detection and switching?
The real problem with fuel injection is at reasonably hi duty cycles the two
computers are not in sync and this is a requirement if both drive the same
injector. Thus the need for lock step of dual computer systems. Its a new
(as far as I know feature for both to run in lock step for fuel) plus
automatic fault detection and correction. Spark can be slightly off and its
no problem.
This thread just started a couple of hours ago so you are at the start.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "AI Nut" <ainut(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 21st century power systems.
>
> I'm coming in on the middle of this thread, so if this is a repeat,
> please pardon me.
> That said, it looks like the UltraMegaSquirt is a *very* promising
> unit. About $125 if you build it yourself. It may even include ion
> sensing for ignition control.
>
> HTH.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jan de Jong <jan.de.jong(at)xs4all.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: alternator as load |
> **
>
>leakage through the diode array only . . . nanoamperes perhaps?
>
> **
Sorry Bob, should have looked in the book first - Chapter 3, alternator,
3 phases, 6 diodes...
Jan de Jong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Schlatterer" <billschlatterer(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Clinic in St. Louis and P-Mag call ? |
Bob, the clinic this weekend was entertaining as well as enlightening. I
took away two quotes. Bus failures = snipes :o) that was one. The other
had to do with P-Mags by EMag. As I remember it (and there were
witnesses ) you said with some enthusiasm, "I gotta call these guys and
talk to them, looks like the real deal" or something to that effect.
http://www.emagair.com/P-MAG.htmOne
I waited until Bart at Aerosport had a chance to try one and he blessed it
so I ordered one(1) on the engine he is building for me. If you would talk
to these guys and give them a double blessing, I would think really hard
about replacing the other mag as well. I think there are a LOTS of folks
who would be really interested in your comments after that call.
Again great clinic.
Thanks Bill Schlatterer
7a Arkansas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AI Nut <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 21st century power systems. |
I suppose one could have two systems; I assume you want this for
redundancy safety? However, I would not run them both simultaneously.
The backup unit could constantly monitor the health of the primary and
switch control to itself should a fault be detected. I would guess that
failover could be handled in milliseconds or less than time for a single
piston misfire.
Dual systems are not currently standard, but one could drop a bug on the
development board and get it started. If not, you're free to do it
yourself as all schematics and source code are open source.
The Ultra unit has not finished alpha design so it's not reality yet,
. It seems we've been waiting for it *forever.* 8-) Some
versions of the MegaSquirt II will do ignition and fuel, but I don't
think they have provisions for wideband O2 sensors, nor do they have
provisions for ion sensing.
HTH.
David
Paul Messinger wrote:
>
>I am on that list also. But not current on the ultra version. Can two
>systems run the engine at the same time??
>
>Does it support dual simultaneous ign and fuel injection and have fault
>detection and switching?
>
>The real problem with fuel injection is at reasonably hi duty cycles the two
>computers are not in sync and this is a requirement if both drive the same
>injector. Thus the need for lock step of dual computer systems. Its a new
>(as far as I know feature for both to run in lock step for fuel) plus
>automatic fault detection and correction. Spark can be slightly off and its
>no problem.
>
>This thread just started a couple of hours ago so you are at the start.
>
>Paul
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "AI Nut" <ainut(at)hiwaay.net>
>To:
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 21st century power systems.
>
>
>
>
>>
>>I'm coming in on the middle of this thread, so if this is a repeat,
>>please pardon me.
>>That said, it looks like the UltraMegaSquirt is a *very* promising
>>unit. About $125 if you build it yourself. It may even include ion
>>sensing for ignition control.
>>
>>HTH.
>>
>>
>
>
>.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1deltawhiskey(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: 21st century power systems. |
Paul,
I bow to you, sir!
Until I got to the part about the electrical, it sounded as though you were
talking NSI's spiel about their engine (I largely agree with it, but the proof
will be in the pudding, as they say).
Any time frame for this electrical gee-whizzy you propose? It sounds great
and I would be a candidate to mate it to my NSI Soob. It's nice to dream, but
for it to be anything but, some hard core materialist black box that does what
you say is needed.
With regards, I bow out, sir!
Doug Windhorn
In a message dated 07-Mar-05 14:30:31 Pacific Standard Time, paulm(at)olypen.com
writes:
I have accepted a contract to design an electrical system for a new
experimental aircraft engine. A 21st century engine needs a 21st century
electrical system.
The engine and matching propeller has been developed over a period of more
than 10 years and has been extensively tested. It's a truly 21st century
engine that deserves a 21st century electrical system.
The engine is essentially the same size and weight and is a drop in
replacement for an O-360 rated at 180 hp. It is 220 hp however and includes
a very efficient muffler for sound reduction. The fuel flow is at least 20%
lower than the O-360 in normal cruise power % settings.
Power is a single control in the HP power range of approx 35% to 100%. Only
in the final stages of preps for landing is the throttle used as otherwise
its set at full power from the start of takeoff roll to landing pattern
entry. The single "Lever" (usually a switch on the stick) controls the power
and the mixture, etc. is computer controlled at any altitude. So the pilot
work load is simply to set cruise speed/power and forget it. There is no
mixture control. Different to be sure, but having flown the system it's
really very simple to use.
The engine electronics system is active redundant for fuel and spark etc.
and multiple failures can occur with no pilot required action to correct
(other than a warning light). If the failure is total on one or two of the 4
cylinders, the HP is reduced but with any two cylinders the engine produces
sufficient power for continued level flight to an airport. Total failure of
the cooling system coolant can also be tolerated with continued flight to a
safe airport.
The engine is derived from an auto engine, and in that configuration, been
factory tested for long durations at over 500 hp in racing trim and no lower
end failures so common with the LYC engines. There are extensive design
changes so it's truly an experimental aircraft engine and it's not
appropriate to consider it a converted auto engine. The engine can burn all
grades of auto fuel and aviation fuel with no modifications or adjustments
of any kind. The engine and prop meet all the FAA requirements for
certification and certification is being considered in the future.
The 21st century electrical system I have planned is totally solid state
using proven parts from the automotive market. For those not familiar with
the automotive requirements they are much harder to meet than the famous
DO-160 often used as the standard for aircraft usage (and then DO-160 is
only a recommendation). In the automotive market it's not optional as the
component manufacturer must meet ALL the requirements to be qualified. Fully
automatic fault tolerant with no required pilot action is a design feature.
There are no mechanical relays, contactors, fuses, fusible links or circuit
breakers needed. The solid state component switches can provide device load
current to a central computer (optional) and can detect "out of
specification" current on that circuit. These solid state switches include
an over current circuit breaker function that is settable to the required
load current as well as the ability to allow for the current inrush of
lamps. Over and under voltage protection as well as over temperature
protection is included. The primary engine alternator provides the necessary
electrical systems power at engine idle with power also available to charge
the batteries. An optional second alternator can be added if desired. Dual
batteries are used for backup but the system can run with both batteries off
line as well.
The final required function is a true real time display of the power
remaining in the batteries in the unlikely event of an alternator failure. A
dynamic display of the power remaining that adjusts for changing loads and
uses the history of prior loads for correct reading is provided. The pilot
has a real time display of the battery power remaining (in minutes), based
on the current and past electrical load history. Change the load and the
display corrects for the new conditions.
In conclusion, the pilot work load is reduced to use of a single lever for
in-flight power and the electrical system informs the pilot of what is
happening, and in the event of alternator failure provides the flight time
remaining based on battery remaining charge.
The new solid state design is lower cost, simpler, more reliable, and
lighter in weight. With the optional second alternator there is no reduction
of flight time as a result of battery power limitations.
No magic, just a simple application of what is available from the automotive
world where components must meet much higher standards than aircraft even
those that meet DO-160.
My background is from the spacecraft world where there is no human to take
action in the event of a failure (ground or in orbit) and so should be the
power systems of the 21st century general aviation aircraft.
My accomplishments and background qualifications are many pages long but one
that stands out (to me) is being personally congratulated by the President
of the USA at the White House for scientific achievement.
Paul Messinger
Aeronautical and Electronic engineer
Commercial, Instrument, SEL, SES, MEL, CFI
EAA Flight Advisor and Technical Counselor
Designer of 21st century electrical systems
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1deltawhiskey(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
Harley,
This lights I had in mind can be found at:
http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/SiteSearch
but when clicking on the item, the page is no longer active. Their prices
were also at least double what I had remembered (could be the impact of the
falling dollar since I bought mine perhaps 3 years ago.
These are the ones I had in mind:
http://www.hella.com/produktion/HellaPortal/WebSite/Internet_usa/ProductsServi
ces/Marine/LED_Lamps/LED_Stair/LED_Stair.jsp
Check out some of the other Hella LED light. You'll have to see where you
might find them though if West Marine no longer distributes (at their prices, I
can understand a low demand).
Regards, Doug
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Clinic in St. Louis and P-Mag call ? |
I contacted Emagair and asked for a status report on my mags (going into
an Aerosport O-320). Here is the reply I got on Sunday:
Vern Little
E-MAG Customers:
We are mindful of the current delay in ignition deliveries, and truly regret
any inconvenience. We hope you understand that refinements are made to the
design as we approach each production run. This is when we integrate a)
changes based on customer feedback, and b) changes that will improve the
product's manufacturability. In the current run, we are also installing
several pieces of new production equipment that will significantly improve
assembly speed and accuracy. These are all healthy "growing pains"
associated with launching a new product. Unfortunately, they also insert a
degree of uncertainty in our fabrication schedule. Please understand, we
are as eager to ship as you are to receive the ignitions. We collect only a
small deposit when taking orders. From a business standpoint we are well
motivated to complete the transaction. Even so, everyone agrees it's more
important to get the products right than to get them quick.
Listed below are some of the more visible refinements we are implementing in
the current series (designated E-112 and P-112). We will revise all
current orders to reflect this change in designation.
1. Overall ignition frame length will be 6.15". This is 1/3" longer than the
111 series. Previously, the nose and main case sections were threaded
together (with Locktite) which made servicing the ignitions difficult, and
in some cases impossible. It also made the orientation between these
sections hard to control. In the 112 series, they will be secured
internally with 6 bolts, which necessitates the small case extension. As
before, installations with firewall clearance issues (primarily canards)
have the option of detaching the coil from the ignition, and mounting it on
the firewall. In this configuration, the ignition is only 3" deep.
2. The Mode Switch has been moved from the connector head to a DIP switch
accessible by removing a threaded plug on the side of the ignition case.
This will facilitate more efficient manufacturing, and will better protect
the switch. The 111 series mode switch was occasionally getting damaged by
customers when the screw driver used to secure the connector scraped across
the face of the switch.
3. The aircraft harness is now offered as standard 5/8"-24 aircraft spark
plug connectors (cigarette and spring) that are pre-installed on the ends of
our auto lead kit. This has several advantages.
a. It eliminates the need (and expense) of Aircraft Coil Adapters ($45.00)
per ignition. (This charge will be deleted from affected orders.)
b. It permits the use of our low profile 90 degree connections on the coil
end. This reduces the overall length of the aircraft ignition/harness by
1.25". The length of the earlier aircraft harness was preventing some
builders who wanted to use aircraft plugs from doing so.
c. It permits greater flexibility as leads can be routed and trimmed to
length according to individual preferences. Spark plug terminals and boots
are field installed. A terminal crimping tool is included with the kit at
no extra charge. Note: Auto leads use noise suppressive wire in lieu of a
grounded shield. We've had no reports of noise problems from customers
using the auto harness. Even so, builders have the option, if needed, of
adding a shield over the leads and ground them at the spark plug connector.
4. The DIP switch referenced in 2 above will also let customers set the tack
output for either one or two pulses per revolution. Customers will no
longer need to research this item and report back so we can program an
appropriate setup. Also, if the tack is later changed to a different
style, any needed changes can be made on the spot.
5. Unlike the 111 series, the tack lead will have a pull up resistor built
into the unit. It will produce a 12 volt tack pulse. Instruments that need
a 5 volt signal will be able to reduce the voltage by adding an external
diode (not provided).
6. The DIP switch will also let customers set the baseline timing for 20 or
25 degrees at installation. This will eliminates the need for customers to
investigate and report back when ordering their ignition.
7. The mounting flange has been sized so existing magneto mounting clips can
be reused. The 111 series flange was slightly undersized which required us
to provide custom fitted clips. If you do not have mounting clips to reuse,
just let us know and we will add a set(s) to your order ($15/set).
As always, our goal is to improve the ease of installation and performance
of your ignition. We appreciate your patience and understanding. Please
do not hesitate to call if you have any questions.
At this point, we are hoping to make our next deliveries in about 5 weeks.
Kindest Regards,
Brad Dement
E-MAG Ignitions
649 Boling Ranch Road
Azle, TX 76020
(817)448-0555
Bill Schlatterer wrote:
>
>Bob, the clinic this weekend was entertaining as well as enlightening. I
>took away two quotes. Bus failures = snipes :o) that was one. The other
>had to do with P-Mags by EMag. As I remember it (and there were
>witnesses ) you said with some enthusiasm, "I gotta call these guys and
>talk to them, looks like the real deal" or something to that effect.
>
> http://www.emagair.com/P-MAG.htmOne
>
>I waited until Bart at Aerosport had a chance to try one and he blessed it
>so I ordered one(1) on the engine he is building for me. If you would talk
>to these guys and give them a double blessing, I would think really hard
>about replacing the other mag as well. I think there are a LOTS of folks
>who would be really interested in your comments after that call.
>
>
>Again great clinic.
>
>Thanks Bill Schlatterer
>7a Arkansas
>
>
>
>
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Stone" <jsto1(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Batteries - Off topic |
D&D Battery in Largo FL rebuilds battery packs. www.4batteries.com
727-535-1044
Jim Stone
Jabiru J450 / N450SJ
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul
McAllister
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Batteries - Off topic
-->
Hi all,
This is a bit off topic but I was wondering if someone could point me in
the right direction. I have a Makita 14.4v drill and its 2.2 ah batter
has died. I went to the hardware store to get another one only to find
that they were 80.00, which is half the cost of a new drill with 2
batteries.
Does anyone know of a third party supplier, or a supplier that opens up
the old battery packs and replaces the cells.
Thanks, Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Question about dimmer circuits and annunicators... |
In a message dated 03/04/2005 9:25:37 PM Central Standard Time,
mdella(at)cstone.com writes:
Absolutely! I'm AutoCAD LT 2005 myself...
>>>>
Oooops! Apologies for taking so long to get backatcha- still learning how
AOL folds/spindles/mutilates e-mail to both of my computers! Here are the
files, let me know if you see any errors or have any ?s.
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Question about dimmer circuits and annunicators... |
| From: | "Marcos Della" <mdella(at)cstone.com> |
Hm, didn't get any files...
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Fiveonepw(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Question about dimmer circuits and
annunicators...
In a message dated 03/04/2005 9:25:37 PM Central Standard Time,
mdella(at)cstone.com writes:
Absolutely! I'm AutoCAD LT 2005 myself...
>>>>
Oooops! Apologies for taking so long to get backatcha- still learning
how
AOL folds/spindles/mutilates e-mail to both of my computers! Here are
the
files, let me know if you see any errors or have any ?s.
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 21st century power systems. |
Full production in 3rd Q of 2005 is reasonable for all but the "Battery Fuel
Gauge" that does require some proof of concept testing etc.. But then I am
only responsible for the prototypes not production etc. Full flight testing
before July 2005 at the latest.
The hardest part is to decide which device to use where as there are several
parts available that are good for each application from a 1 amp switch to
the 300 amp main switch. And everything between.
Its really not that hard, as I have said, everything is currently in full
production and parts are on distributors shelves, some for 10 years.
It will work on most any electrical system with 1-2 batteries and 1-2
alternators where the builder wants to go modern and save money, weight,
complexity and increase reliability.
Just use of solid state fully protected switches (SSS) replaces a Fuse of CB
and a relay for much lower cost and 10 SSS's will fit where one relay was
with room left over.
I am a firm believer in modules that can be adapted with wiring to most any
design needs. The design will be available to the public when its finally
proven to my satisfaction that it works as intended. The one hold back is
the Battery Fuel Gauge as that may be sold only as a completed system TBD.
Its the only truly new component but its the key in my opinion to a truly
safe "battery only" mode of flight.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: <N1deltawhiskey(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 21st century power systems.
>
> Paul,
>
> I bow to you, sir!
>
> Until I got to the part about the electrical, it sounded as though you
> were
> talking NSI's spiel about their engine (I largely agree with it, but the
> proof
> will be in the pudding, as they say).
>
> Any time frame for this electrical gee-whizzy you propose? It sounds
> great
> and I would be a candidate to mate it to my NSI Soob. It's nice to dream,
> but
> for it to be anything but, some hard core materialist black box that does
> what
> you say is needed.
>
> With regards, I bow out, sir!
>
> Doug Windhorn
>
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
Morning, Doug...
Ahh! I see what you are talking about! Those ARE neat! Funny thing,
though ...it shows the item and allows you to add them to your cart, but
if you request the details, the page, as you said, is no longer available.
But, a quick search using Google turned up these (and a little cheaper
than West's prices):
http://www.rallylights.com/hella/LED_Lighting.asp
There are probably better deals out there if I look a little further.
Harley
N1deltawhiskey(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>Harley,
>
>This lights I had in mind can be found at:
>
>http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/SiteSearch
>
>but when clicking on the item, the page is no longer active. Their prices
>were also at least double what I had remembered (could be the impact of the
>falling dollar since I bought mine perhaps 3 years ago.
>
>These are the ones I had in mind:
>
>http://www.hella.com/produktion/HellaPortal/WebSite/Internet_usa/ProductsServi
>ces/Marine/LED_Lamps/LED_Stair/LED_Stair.jsp
>
>Check out some of the other Hella LED light. You'll have to see where you
>might find them though if West Marine no longer distributes (at their prices,
I
>can understand a low demand).
>
>Regards, Doug
>
>
>
>
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Heathco" <cheathco(at)comcast.net> |
I read, with intrest, all posts re P-mag and the "next big thing" . I was about
to order a lightspeed, and see that the E-mag is much cheaper. My question is-
can anyone vouch for reliability/improved effeciency of either, better yet,
a webb adr with comparisons? Having had recent power loss on takeoff,(carb), I
am most interested in reliability. Charles heathco Atl.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Interior lighting |
| From: | "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen(at)dts9000.com> |
I installed the 'white' version of this light in the overhead ventilation plenum
of a Velocity.
http://www.hella.com/produktion/HellaPortal/WebSite/Internet_usa/ProductsServices/Marine/Interior_Exterior/Model_8516/Model_8516.jsp It's tied to the battery instead of master so I can shut everything down and use the light for loading/unloading at night without the master being on. I installed a local on/off push button. The LED draw is so low that if I inadvertantly left it on for a few days, it wouldn't kill the battery. It gives a soft illumination of the cabin that could be used as a backup for panel illumination, though its not enough to read maps...at least for 50 year old eyes.
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
N1deltawhiskey(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Interior lighting
Harley,
This lights I had in mind can be found at:
http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/SiteSearch
but when clicking on the item, the page is no longer active. Their prices
were also at least double what I had remembered (could be the impact of the
falling dollar since I bought mine perhaps 3 years ago.
These are the ones I had in mind:
http://www.hella.com/produktion/HellaPortal/WebSite/Internet_usa/ProductsServi
ces/Marine/LED_Lamps/LED_Stair/LED_Stair.jsp
Check out some of the other Hella LED light. You'll have to see where you
might find them though if West Marine no longer distributes (at their prices, I
can understand a low demand).
Regards, Doug
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Troy Maynor" <wingnut54(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
Hi All,
About a week and half ago I was watching a custom car program on cable and
this guy was putting some lighting into a custom car. I occured to me this
product could be used for instrument or interior lighting in my Europa. I
wrote down the product generic name and googled it when I got home. Then low
and behold when I opened the latest copy of Kitplanes there was my idea.
Could someone more familiar with the electrics of this comment. I saw a
similar product at Sun N Fun but it was a lot more costly. The website is
http://www.elwirecheap.com/ . I am not sure if the cold cathode tubes would
be better or the EL wire or tape would be better electrically. The EL tape
would be perfect for the instrument lighting under the glareshield. Just not
sure about the electrical setup and inverter, etc. it mentions. It's cheap
and all kinds of colors available. I also need to be able to vary the
intensity. Will this work? I saw a potentiometer setup at one point on the
site then lost my way and could not find it again. Comments anyone in the
know?
Troy Maynor
N120EU Europa Monowheel Classic
Left to finish:
Paint,interior,engine install, wiring.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic Ign |
I have had a LSE CDI system in my IO-360 for a little over 200 hours with no
problems as yet. LSE has been around for many years and probably many
builders have more time than do I.
E-Mags and P-Mags are relatively new, but the technology seems (SEEMS)
inviting. I'm waiting on more proof time in many aircraft.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco(at)comcast.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electronic Ign
>
>
> I read, with intrest, all posts re P-mag and the "next big thing" . I was
> about to order a lightspeed, and see that the E-mag is much cheaper. My
> question is- can anyone vouch for reliability/improved effeciency of
> either, better yet, a webb adr with comparisons? Having had recent power
> loss on takeoff,(carb), I am most interested in reliability. Charles
> heathco Atl.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic Ign |
>
>
>I read, with intrest, all posts re P-mag and the "next big thing" . I was
>about to order a lightspeed, and see that the E-mag is much cheaper. My
>question is- can anyone vouch for reliability/improved effeciency of
>either, better yet, a webb adr with comparisons? Having had recent power
>loss on takeoff,(carb), I am most interested in reliability. Charles
>heathco Atl.
We're never going to see a scientific analysis of
relative reliability between various offerings to
the OBAM aircraft community. Such studies take time
and talents seldom found in the skunk-works environment.
Further, reliability studies are predicated on top-notch
craftsmanship and best-we-know-how-to-do designs.
For example, I can cite several very important systems
on certified aircraft that received the benefits of a
stellar "reliability" studies . . . all of which failed
miserably in real life.
The best we can do for the e-mag/p-mag guys is
apply the light and scrutiny of experience and common
sense which rightly suggests that low parts count,
good craftsmanship and utilization of modern components
go a long way toward assuaging concerns.
There is very little field history on this product
but I'm confident that it will be as good or better
than what's presently offered. I have photographs
of gross mechanical failures of components in
one of the popular electronic ignition products . . .
The electronic design and component selection is
fine but the craftsmanship stinks.
Besides, comparing carburetor problems (you only
have one of those) with ignition problems (where
there are two) is probably not a useful effort.
Current offerings are the best we knew how to do
10-15 years ago. Agreed, they are now a relatively
known quantity, so are tractor mags. However, the
experience and common sense perceptions of the
e-mag/p-mag products are both encouraging and
exciting. If you have any concerns, run one
e-mag/p-mag and a tractor mag for awhile.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: alternator as load |
>
> > **
> >
> >leakage through the diode array only . . . nanoamperes perhaps?
> >
> > **
>
>
>Sorry Bob, should have looked in the book first - Chapter 3, alternator,
>3 phases, 6 diodes...
No problem . . . and the illustration in chapter 3 may not
be all inclusive . . .
There are many automotive products these days that do not go
to zero current draw when off. My wife's Saturn has about 50
milliamperes of constant drain on the battery with the car parked.
Don't know where all this current is going but for a car that is
used regularly, it's transparent to the owner. I don't know if
modern alternators might have some need for a small amount of
current to keep some feature active . . . trying to second
guess a creative engineer 10,000 miles away while sitting here
at a keyboard is not real risky but it's not a sure bet either.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: DigiKey Batteries |
When "naming" batteries, manufacturers -and we - use the term "xx amp hours
battery", i.e., it will last that many hours at a 1 amp discharge rate. The
Panasonic "20 amp hour" battery spec sheet shows the battery capacity as:
20 hours at a 1 amp discharge rate, thus, it's a 20 amp hour battery.
- Further down, it shows the "1 hour rate" - the battery will provide
12 amps for 1 hour. From other reading, I assume the battery would reach
10.5 volts at the end of 1 hours at 12 amps.
- I like this "1 hour rating" as a "book answer of what my "endurance
load should be at or below" to be able to go an hour before battery is new
"empty". I hope we can get this "1 hour rating" for each "candidate"
battery.
I'm using an SVR-20 (an 18 ah battery) - I just requested the factory
provide the "1 hour rate" so I can compare it to the Panasonic. The SVR is
just slightly smaller (by fractions of an inch)
The SVR spec sheet says it weighs 15#. My scales showed 15.8 #. I checked
"calibration" of the scales with 1 gal of water and corrected from 16.25#
reading to 15.8# actual.
- The "book" weights of "15# for SVR and "14.6" for Panasonic are about
the same.
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: DigiKey Batteries
>
>
> >
> >Bob,
> >
> > As per one of our discussions at the Wicks seminar this past weekend
> >(which I thoroughly enjoyed by the way), I find that Digikey lists two
> >Panasonic batteries that are the same size physically, but one is a 17AH
> >12V battery, and the other a 20AH 12v battery, both have "nut/bolt"
> >terminals on them. (part number P174-ND @ $38.36, weighs 14.3lbs, and
part
> >number P231-ND @ $44.68, weighs 14.6lbs) In my simple mind, wouldn't it
be
> >wise to get the 20AH battery that is the same size, almost no weight
> >difference, and only 6 bucks more. Just to refresh your memory, I am
using
> >a Mazda rotary engine that is electrically dependant, and will have dual
> >bat/dual alt.
> >
> > Am I missing something? Seems to me to be an obvious choice.
>
> I agree. See data sheets on Panasonic batteries at:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Batteries
>
> Note the 1220 offers not only a higher capacity but
> a lower internal resistance as well. The 20 a.h.
> device seems a prudent choice.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Swartout" <jgswartout(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | 21st century power systems. |
Any advance word on what this engine is going to cost?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul
Messinger
Subject: AeroElectric-List: 21st century power systems.
>I have accepted a contract to design an electrical system for a new
>experimental aircraft engine. A 21st century engine needs a 21st
century
>electrical system.
>The engine and matching propeller has been developed over a period of
more
>than 10 years and has been extensively tested. It's a truly 21st
century
>engine that deserves a 21st century electrical system.
>The engine is essentially the same size and weight and is a drop in
>replacement for an O-360 rated at 180 hp. It is 220 hp however and
includes
>a very efficient muffler for sound reduction. The fuel flow is at least
20%
>lower than the O-360 in normal cruise power % settings.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Danielson" <johnd(at)wlcwyo.com> |
I am looking for a source and part number for connectors that are used
in the Radio Controlled aircraft. The type used on Futaba and JR radio
systems to connect servos to the receiver.
I am thinking of using these to connect the RC Allen trim servos in the
elevator and aileron of my RV-6.
I know I've seen these in Digikeys catalog, but I am not sure which one
I need.
Thanks
John L. Danielson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Orear" <jorear(at)new.rr.com> |
John:
Go to www.towerhobbies.com
On the left of the opening page you will find a link listed as RC parts
Superstore. Click there an then go the the Browse Catagories at the top of
the page and select Radio Accy.
Scroll down and you will come to Radio Servo Plugs/Wires/Cables. Should
find what you are looking for there.
Regards,
Jeff Orear
RV6A N782P (reserved)
Filtered Airbox
Peshtigo, WI
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Danielson" <johnd(at)wlcwyo.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Connectors
>
>
> I am looking for a source and part number for connectors that are used
> in the Radio Controlled aircraft. The type used on Futaba and JR radio
> systems to connect servos to the receiver.
> I am thinking of using these to connect the RC Allen trim servos in the
> elevator and aileron of my RV-6.
> I know I've seen these in Digikeys catalog, but I am not sure which one
> I need.
> Thanks
>
> John L. Danielson
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronald J. Parigoris" <rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US> |
Hello John
I am pretty sure http://www.batteriesamerica.com/ these guys sell them. If not
try hobby lobby and tower hobby.
That is what i used for roll control on my Europa servo. I think I purchased
them from Batteriesamerica at a show somewhere and they are gold plated. It
could have been SR Batteries. In addition I purchased some model electric high
amperage silicon covered wire with a gazillion strands and put that inside a
thin hydraulic line for taking on movement. also since you are looking, look
into sermos or anderson power pole connectors as used on models. they are my
favorite modeling connector. they are modular and can easily be assembled so
there is a Key. i plan on using them for wing attachments and other in panel.
www.mcamaster.com in addition to the above sells these excellent modular
connectors. For just a bit of extra work, i would derate a high amp connector
by 2/3rds, and then install 2 smaller connectors rather than 1 larger connector.
in other words, make sure that if 1 of the 2 connectors fail, that the other
connector will not take more than 2/3 of rating.
When using them at rated amperage, for the most part they work OK, but once in
a
while i see a high resistance connection that arced and created a lot of heat.
you can usual see a slight dirty contact area, or silver coat is hurt or tension
is not quite enough or alignment not absolute perfect. They are far superior to
molex connectors in high amp applications. One guy at airport installed a set on
his 172 for landing light connector in cowl. Works great. The molex connectors
he was using were always melting (high resistance).
Sincerely
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John & Amy Eckel" <eckel1(at)comcast.net> |
First check your local hobby store if there is one in your area and then
check Tower Hobbies on the internet.
John
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Danielson" <johnd(at)wlcwyo.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Connectors
>
>
> I am looking for a source and part number for connectors that are used
> in the Radio Controlled aircraft. The type used on Futaba and JR radio
> systems to connect servos to the receiver.
> I am thinking of using these to connect the RC Allen trim servos in the
> elevator and aileron of my RV-6.
> I know I've seen these in Digikeys catalog, but I am not sure which one
> I need.
> Thanks
>
> John L. Danielson
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <chaztuna(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: alternator as load |
> >Sorry Bob, should have looked in the book first - Chapter 3, alternator,
> >3 phases, 6 diodes...
>
> No problem . . . and the illustration in chapter 3 may not
> be all inclusive . . .
>
> There are many automotive products these days that do not go
> to zero current draw when off. My wife's Saturn has about 50
> milliamperes of constant drain on the battery with the car parked.
> Don't know where all this current is going but for a car that is
> used regularly, it's transparent to the owner. I don't know if
> modern alternators might have some need for a small amount of
> current to keep some feature active . . . trying to second
> guess a creative engineer 10,000 miles away while sitting here
> at a keyboard is not real risky but it's not a sure bet either.
>
> Bob . . .
Bob,
That current draw is going to the "keep alive" memory in the car radio (station
presets) and various computer memory circuits (self tuning for the engine computer.
Memory for advanced power seats, remembers seat and mirror settings for
2 drivers. This goes on and on. The new Lexus have no fewer than 42 computers
in them.
Charlie Kuss
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | D Wysong <hdwysong(at)gmail.com> |
Here's a list of prefabricated pigtails:
http://www.maxxprod.com/mpi/mpi-3.html
You can also look at Molex SL and/or Mini-Fit connectors from Digikey or
Mouser.
HTH,
D
------------
John Danielson wrote:
>
> I am looking for a source and part number for connectors that are used
> in the Radio Controlled aircraft. The type used on Futaba and JR radio
> systems to connect servos to the receiver.
> I am thinking of using these to connect the RC Allen trim servos in the
> elevator and aileron of my RV-6.
> I know I've seen these in Digikeys catalog, but I am not sure which one
> I need.
> Thanks
>
> John L. Danielson
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 21st century power systems. |
I am designing the electronics. Pricing is not my area.
When the new electronics are mated and tested to the current engine it will
be announced and you all can decide if its worth it. I would not be evolved
if costs were not going to be competitive.
And competative ignoring the increased value and reliability etc.
Far too many advertise a price before the production costs are known.
I expect it will be announced this summer as a new experimental aircraft
engine package that is available for delivery and fully flight tested on a
couple of different aircraft designs for example. RV for sure and at least
one other popular design.
The major electrical components will also be available individually as well
as the design disclosure for those who want to do it themselves and or have
unique needs.
My own aircraft is too small for the engine but I will be using it for some
testing also as well as replacing older discrete electromenical parts like
relays etc.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Swartout" <jgswartout(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: 21st century power systems.
>
>
> Any advance word on what this engine is going to cost?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Dennis -
We have looked very seriously for some time at the EL product and glow
wire for backlighting our panel; especially the switch panels on the
bottom of the panel.
If you want to see some solid info on the product, go to:
http://www.luminousfilm.com/
Our thinking and conclusions are pretty much like yours.
They have some very good technical papers on fabrication and installation.
I have had several email exchanges with their tech and marketing folks. It
is a winner, IMHO, for a panel flood system when installed on the glare
shield. When it comes to backlighting reverse-engraved lettering on panel
overlays, it gets difficult. Intensity is a problem; which leads to making
a lamp that is the same size as the overlay itself. Because this would
involve cutting holes where the switches and other devices come thru the
panel and the overlay, you get a serious technical problem.
For the time being, we plan to go with a fairly large EL lamp under the
glareshield and illuminate the whole panel with it. We'll continue to look
for back lighting of the switch panels. LED's are surely brighter, but
harder to wire and get even lighting to show the lettering.
We'd sure like to hear solutions from others. Cars seem to have exactly
what we need, but who does it for us OBAM folks.
Cheers,
John
>
> The quality of the stuff is marginal, but OK (just doesn't look robust).
> The inverters and tapes come with small connectors. The EL wires you
> have
> to terminate yourself - the instructions on their website explain how to
> do
> that. The small 'outer' wires on the EL wire are really small - hair
> thin
> actually, but are fairly strong. They are 'springy' so if you twist them
> together they don't stay, so it takes a bit of playing to get a neat
> connection.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
This is exactly the solution I used on my RV6. I have a 1.5" x 36" length
of the high quality EL tape, hooked to a dimmer. It is the best panel
lighting I've seen, bar none. It looks the same as them military and 747's
when lit, and emits a cool blue/green light on my panel, lighting the whole
thing. It draws very little current, and does a great job.
Contrary to beliefs, you can buy the stuff already terminated with nice
quality wires (not the cheap computer or car stuff you see on ebay - called
"glo wire" or something similar), and I used the good quality tape. If
there is enough interest, I'll order a bunch of it and offer it on my
website along with everything else. I think the cost is somewhere around
$75-80.00 for the tape, wiring, & inverter. The stuff I used and have
researched is wide, thin and already terminated with 20 AWG wires. I can
get a kit together with the inverter, and I think the pricing would be the
same as above.
If there is interest, contact me off list and I'll get some going.
Cheers,
Stein.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of John
Schroeder
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Interior lighting
Dennis -
We have looked very seriously for some time at the EL product and glow
wire for backlighting our panel; especially the switch panels on the
bottom of the panel.
If you want to see some solid info on the product, go to:
http://www.luminousfilm.com/
Our thinking and conclusions are pretty much like yours.
They have some very good technical papers on fabrication and installation.
I have had several email exchanges with their tech and marketing folks. It
is a winner, IMHO, for a panel flood system when installed on the glare
shield. When it comes to backlighting reverse-engraved lettering on panel
overlays, it gets difficult. Intensity is a problem; which leads to making
a lamp that is the same size as the overlay itself. Because this would
involve cutting holes where the switches and other devices come thru the
panel and the overlay, you get a serious technical problem.
For the time being, we plan to go with a fairly large EL lamp under the
glareshield and illuminate the whole panel with it. We'll continue to look
for back lighting of the switch panels. LED's are surely brighter, but
harder to wire and get even lighting to show the lettering.
We'd sure like to hear solutions from others. Cars seem to have exactly
what we need, but who does it for us OBAM folks.
Cheers,
John
>
> The quality of the stuff is marginal, but OK (just doesn't look robust).
> The inverters and tapes come with small connectors. The EL wires you
> have
> to terminate yourself - the instructions on their website explain how to
> do
> that. The small 'outer' wires on the EL wire are really small - hair
> thin
> actually, but are fairly strong. They are 'springy' so if you twist them
> together they don't stay, so it takes a bit of playing to get a neat
> connection.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris & Kellie Hand" <ckhand(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic Ign |
I thought about the proposed solution below until more hours are flown on
e-mag/p-mag, but how about running LSE on one side and p-mag on the
other....anybody see any significant downsides to that solution?
Chris Hand
RV-6A, ready for engine & electrical.....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Electronic Ign
.
If you have any concerns, run one
> e-mag/p-mag and a tractor mag for awhile.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky) |
| Subject: | finishing up FWF |
I am done with the FWF except final securing wiring and my question seems half
engine half electrical.
The large starter wire runs from the firewall mounted starter relay seems to naturally
want to get secured to the oil return tubing from cylinder # 2 . There's
no additional stress put on the wire to be where it is just under the tubing
so Adel clamping it to the oil return line seems low risk but is it a bad idea
anyway? I am thinking that overtime this might lead to a failure of the tubing
in some and I just don't want to unnecessarily risk an oil failure. But
I also see that if I don't find a way to support the wire near the starter there
is a lot of force and additional movement of the wire and stress put on the
starter wire terminal.
Also, halfway between the firewall and the starter that same wire runs parallel
with the large fuel tubing from the fuel pump to the fuel injector servo. Is
it OK to nylon tie-wrap them together? I have some gasket material wrapped around
them for chafing protection and then a couple of tie-wraps wrapped around
both. However, p11-44 seems to suggest to always keep at least 2 inch separation
from fluid lines so should I scrap that? The next most convenient place
to secure that wire under the cylinders is again to the oil return lines as they
enter into the sump.
If I wasn't using Van's premade wiring so I had more length to play with I could
reroute the whole thing closer to the crankcase and probably use some bolts
there for clamps.
Thanks,
Lucky
I am done with the FWF except final securing wiring and my question seems half
engine half electrical.
The large starter wire runs from the firewall mounted starter relay seems to naturally
want to getsecuredto the oil returntubing from cylinder # 2 . There's
no additional stress put on the wire to be where it is just under the tubingso
Adel clamping it to the oil return line seems low risk but is it a bad idea anyway?
I am thinking that overtime this might lead to a failure of the tubing
in some and I just don't want to unnecessarily risk an oil failure. But I also
see that if I don't find a way to support the wire near the starter there is
a lot of force and additional movement of the wire and stress put on the starter
wire terminal.
Also, halfway between the firewall and the starter that same wire runs parallel
with the large fuel tubing from the fuel pump to the fuel injector servo. Is
it OK to nylon tie-wrap them together? I have some gasket material wrapped around
them for chafing protection and then a couple of tie-wraps wrapped around
both. However, p11-44 seems to suggest to always keep at least 2 inch separation
from fluid lines so should I scrap that?The next most convenient place to secure
that wire under the cylindersis again to the oil return lines as they enter
into the sump.
If I wasn't using Van's premade wiring so I had more length to play with I could
reroute the whole thing closer to the crankcase and probably use some bolts
there for clamps.
Thanks,
Lucky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic Ign |
Morning, Chris...
>>see any significant downsides to that solution<<
Someone else will probably present any electrical reasons to do it or
not, but the reason I chose ALL e-mag/p-mag is for the simplicity.
You get an electronic ignition, but no more parts than with the old
magnetosaurus.
With the LSE, you have to find a place to mount an additional large box
(most of those I've seen were mounted behind the passenger head
rest...Long Ezs...which may not be a problem with your tractor engine),
run wires to the battery, switches and the engine. The e-mag/p-mags
simply mount in the old magneto holes. Can even use the existing magneto
p-leads.
With E-mag/p-mag (someone else mentioned that they were using one of
each...I am as well) Everything is in that one package.
The old KISS principle, I guess!
Harley Dixon
Long-EZ N28EZ
Chris & Kellie Hand wrote:
>
>I thought about the proposed solution below until more hours are flown on
>e-mag/p-mag, but how about running LSE on one side and p-mag on the
>other....anybody see any significant downsides to that solution?
>
>Chris Hand
>RV-6A, ready for engine & electrical.....
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
>To:
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Electronic Ign
>.
>If you have any concerns, run one
>
>
>> e-mag/p-mag and a tractor mag for awhile.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Butcher" <europa(at)triton.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
I formerly owned and operated a specialized shop that refurbished EL panels
as found in most corporate jets. Those panels were constructed with a
plexiglass base, then the EL lamp material (which is like a capacitor - a
top and bottom electrode - actually a conductive film with the luminenscent
material sandwiched between) and finally on top another thin (.030)
plexiglass. All this is sandwiched together and laminated together. For
finishing, the top plexiglass is painted or screen printed white - the
thickness of the white determines the brightness. On top of the white is
the final panel color, usually gray - if the final color is not dense, a
black light blocking coat is applied. We reverse screen printed the gray -
others spray it and then engrave thru it but not thru the white coat. It's
easy to refinish these panels but somewhat difficult to fabricate from
scratch - the problem being the lamination step. EL lamps are very
suspectable to moisture between the electrodes which will cause the lamp to
fail.
Jim Butcher
Europa N241BW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: finishing up FWF |
>
>I am done with the FWF except final securing wiring and my question seems
>half engine half electrical.
>The large starter wire runs from the firewall mounted starter relay seems
>to naturally want to get secured to the oil return tubing from cylinder #
>2 . There's no additional stress put on the wire to be where it is just
>under the tubing so Adel clamping it to the oil return line seems low risk
>but is it a bad idea anyway? I am thinking that overtime this might lead
>to a failure of the tubing in some and I just don't want to unnecessarily
>risk an oil failure. But I also see that if I don't find a way to support
>the wire near the starter there is a lot of force and additional movement
>of the wire and stress put on the starter wire terminal.
>Also, halfway between the firewall and the starter that same wire runs
>parallel with the large fuel tubing from the fuel pump to the fuel
>injector servo. Is it OK to nylon tie-wrap them together? I have some
>gasket material wrapped around them for chafing protection and then a
>couple of tie-wraps wrapped around both. However, p11-44 seems to suggest
>to always keep at least 2 inch separation from fluid lines so should I
>scrap that? The next most convenient place to secure that wire under the
>cylinders is again to the oil return lines as they enter into the sump.
>
>If I wasn't using Van's premade wiring so I had more length to play with I
>could reroute the whole thing closer to the crankcase and probably use
>some bolts there for clamps.
>Thanks,
If it were my airplane, I'd replace the problem runs of wire
with new pieces of welding cable (you can easily solder terminals
on). Make them long enough to do an artful job of routing and
supporting the wires. The welding cable is robust, user
friendly and unlike the stiffer 22759, is quite flexible
thus reducing stresses induced on terminal flags (weakest
mechanical link in fat wires) and imparts negligible stress
on other items where they are tied together for mutual support.
Welding cable is ALWAYS recommended for battery jumpers [battery(+)
to contactor and battery(-) to ground] for the same reason.
The most vulnerable feature of the smaller SVLA batteries are
lead terminal posts. Soft 4AWG jumpers from battery to the electrical
system will greatly reduce risk of battery post failure.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: finishing up FWF |
| From: | "Craig P. Steffen" <craig(at)craigsteffen.net> |
> If it were my airplane, I'd replace the problem runs of wire
> with new pieces of welding cable (you can easily solder terminals
> on).
Using welding cable for starter cable: I assume this is one of those
things that you can do in an experimental that's forbidden in
certified aircraft?
--
craig(at)craigsteffen.net
public key available at http://www.craigsteffen.net/GPG/
current goal: use a CueCat scanner to inventory my books
career goal: be the first Vorlon Time Lord
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rd2(at)evenlink.com |
| Subject: | off-topic - leather seat covers |
Hi all,
Sorry for the off-topic question. This list has offered so much knowledge,
that one (I) tends to resort to it for any question.
Does anyone know a good source for mail order cessna 172 leather seat
covers, color selection, reasonably priced, with FAA fire approval?
Thanks
Rumen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | sarg314 <sarg314(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: finishing up FWF |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> Welding cable is ALWAYS recommended for battery jumpers [battery(+)
> to contactor and battery(-) to ground] for the same reason.
> The most vulnerable feature of the smaller SVLA batteries are
> lead terminal posts. Soft 4AWG jumpers from battery to the electrical
> system will greatly reduce risk of battery post failure.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
Bob:
The 22759 is indeed much stiffer than the welding cable, but it also
will hold a bend. The welding cable is flexible but remains forever
springy. It seems to me to be easier to get the 22759 to stay where I
want it to. You have to bend it to the desired shape *before* you
solder the lugs on. The lugs tend anchor the small wire bundles
together so they can't slide over each other as they need to when you
bend it. This is true for the short (~1 ft) pieces, anyway. I found it
easy to make a battery-to -contactor cable this way which seems not to
put any stress on the battery terminal because it retains its shape.
--
Tom Sargent
RV-6A, engine.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: finishing up FWF |
> friendly and unlike the stiffer 22759, is quite flexible
> thus reducing stresses induced on terminal flags (weakest
> mechanical link in fat wires) and imparts negligible stress
Bob, you hit the nail on the head. I had a starter wire ring terminal break
recently. Here's what I sent to Lucky on the Lycoming list a few minutes
ago. I hadn't thought about using welding cable, but I think the same
principles (of strain relief) apply either way...my response is more about
physical installation than electrical, but here goes...
Lucky,
You might want to take a look at the photos in the middle of this page:
http://www.rvproject.com/20050122.html
...and of the "solution" on this page:
http://www.rvproject.com/20050130.html
...and of the same engine ground wire solution on this page:
http://www.rvproject.com/20050131.html
I had my 2 AWG starter wire break on me a month or so ago. I had clamped it
in only one spot, and the flex in the wire induced by engine shudder on
startup/shutdown was enough to stress the end ring terminals. One ring
terminal snapped, as you can see in the first photos.
I have now clamped both the starter and ground wires in two places each --
near the ends. I have isolated all movement to the stretch of wire
*between* the clamps, thus removing any flex/strain from the ring terminals.
I think this is critical, personally. 20:20 hindsight.
As far as where to clamp the starter wire, I recommend clamping it to the
engine mount at the contactor end, and to an intake tube at the starter end.
Just my 2 cents.
In any case, just make sure that no stain will be induced at the ring
terminal ends...otherwise, expect the ring terminal(s) to break at some
point. Losing the starter isn't the end of the world, but if this happens
to your engine ground wire, and the engine is able to ground itself through
higher resistance items, it could ruin your day.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: off-topic - leather seat covers |
Hi Neal,
I just tried the web page for the seat covers and it doesn't work, could
there be an error?
Cheers
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stucklen, Frederic W UTPWR" <Fred.Stucklen(at)UTCFuelCells.com> |
| Subject: | MicroSwich 4TL1-10 |
Bob,
I'm looking for a source for the Microswitch 4TL1-10 switch you call out
in your Single Switch, two power source Wing-Wag lighting schematic. I've
looked in several
web sights to no avail. Any suggestions?
Fred Stucklen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | D Wysong <hdwysong(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | "Harley" regulator/rectifier for a Rotax 914?? |
Hi Bob -
A while back someone mentioned using a motorcycle PM voltage
regulator/rectifier (e.g. - COMPU-FIRE from www.customchrome.com) as a
replacement for the stock Ducati unit that's shipped with the Rotax 914.
Did you reach a verdict? Thanks in advance for the educated insight!
D
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Hall" <mhall67(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | amp crimping tool |
does anyone out there know what tool I would need to crimp an AMP part # 61070-1
it's a flag faston non-insulated terminal?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "R. Craig Chipley" <mechtech81(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | KA 134 Audio panel to Monroy ATD-300 Attach |
Hello,
I need a little help. I am hardwiring in my Monroy
ATD-300 Traffic alerter to my panel and have a
question. First all the spare inputs on the audio
panel are 500 Ohm and the output of the ATD-300 is 300
Ohm. Does this need a resistor?
Thanks, Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Frank -
Do you have more details on the circuitry for this? For example, does it
require the bias resistors for the LED's?
Thanks,
John
For those willing to roll-your-own, I recently saw a cunning design for
a 10-LED variable brightness light... an LM3914 IC is intended to drive
up to 10 LEDs as a bar graph, depending on voltage at the input. Put 10
whites LEDs on it, and a variable resistor at the input, and voila! A
lamp with 10 levels of brightness.
Frank
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Stone" <jrstone(at)insightbb.com> |
| Subject: | Re: finishing up FWF |
Great post Dan,
I'm redoing mine per your lesson.
Jim Stone
HRII
Louisville
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: finishing up FWF
>
>
>> friendly and unlike the stiffer 22759, is quite flexible
>> thus reducing stresses induced on terminal flags (weakest
>> mechanical link in fat wires) and imparts negligible stress
>
> Bob, you hit the nail on the head. I had a starter wire ring terminal
> break
> recently. Here's what I sent to Lucky on the Lycoming list a few minutes
> ago. I hadn't thought about using welding cable, but I think the same
> principles (of strain relief) apply either way...my response is more about
> physical installation than electrical, but here goes...
>
> Lucky,
>
> You might want to take a look at the photos in the middle of this page:
>
> http://www.rvproject.com/20050122.html
>
> ...and of the "solution" on this page:
>
> http://www.rvproject.com/20050130.html
>
> ...and of the same engine ground wire solution on this page:
>
> http://www.rvproject.com/20050131.html
>
> I had my 2 AWG starter wire break on me a month or so ago. I had clamped
> it
> in only one spot, and the flex in the wire induced by engine shudder on
> startup/shutdown was enough to stress the end ring terminals. One ring
> terminal snapped, as you can see in the first photos.
>
> I have now clamped both the starter and ground wires in two places each --
> near the ends. I have isolated all movement to the stretch of wire
> *between* the clamps, thus removing any flex/strain from the ring
> terminals.
> I think this is critical, personally. 20:20 hindsight.
>
> As far as where to clamp the starter wire, I recommend clamping it to the
> engine mount at the contactor end, and to an intake tube at the starter
> end.
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> In any case, just make sure that no stain will be induced at the ring
> terminal ends...otherwise, expect the ring terminal(s) to break at some
> point. Losing the starter isn't the end of the world, but if this happens
> to your engine ground wire, and the engine is able to ground itself
> through
> higher resistance items, it could ruin your day.
>
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> Attach |
| Subject: | Re: KA 134 Audio panel to Monroy ATD-300 |
Attach
Attach
>
>
>Hello,
>
>
>I need a little help. I am hardwiring in my Monroy
>ATD-300 Traffic alerter to my panel and have a
>question. First all the spare inputs on the audio
>panel are 500 Ohm and the output of the ATD-300 is 300
>Ohm. Does this need a resistor?
No, hook 'em right together.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Raymond Maxwell" <wrmaxwell(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mike and headset jack location |
but maybe first check out the material used to construct the jacks
themselves. Non-ferous metals would be ok but I susoect any steel used in
them would deviate your compass?
-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Prather <mprather(at)spro.net>
Date: Monday, 7 March 2005 8:36
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Mike and headset jack location
>
>Standard headset current is very low. Shouldn't be an issue.
>
>Some newer ANR headsets make use of one of the extra portions
>of the headset plug to provide power for the circuitry. Even
>in that case, the current requirement is very low and shouldn't
>cause any problems for the compass.
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Matt-
>
>>
>>
>> Although I've deliberately kept my panel mounted compass close to the
>> air-driven instruments to avoid stray fields, a good place to put my
>> drivers side headset and mike jacks is near (~3") the compass.
>>
>> Are the signals in the phones and mike wires sufficient to disturb the
>> compass or are they so small as to not matter that much?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Neil
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: MicroSwich 4TL1-10 |
>
>
>
>Bob,
>
> I'm looking for a source for the Microswitch 4TL1-10 switch you call out
>in your Single Switch, two power source Wing-Wag lighting schematic. I've
>looked in several
>web sights to no avail. Any suggestions?
Allied has one in stock. See:
http://www.alliedelec.com/cart/ProductDetail.asp?SKU=642-0197&SEARCH=4tl1%2D10&ID=&DESC=4TL1%2D10
It says only one in stock and they've gone up about 50%
since I ordered one last. If that price is too steep for
you, you might want to consider one of the alternative
schematics.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: finishing up FWF |
>
>
>
> > If it were my airplane, I'd replace the problem runs of wire
> > with new pieces of welding cable (you can easily solder terminals
> > on).
>
>Using welding cable for starter cable: I assume this is one of those
>things that you can do in an experimental that's forbidden in
>certified aircraft?
Oh . . . probably. Actually, if we did the necessary testing
to prove airworthiness, we could probably get this wire
into a spamcan under our type certification . . . but yes,
when bowing at the altar of AC43-13, this wire would be
frowned upon.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: finishing up FWF |
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> > Welding cable is ALWAYS recommended for battery jumpers [battery(+)
> > to contactor and battery(-) to ground] for the same reason.
> > The most vulnerable feature of the smaller SVLA batteries are
> > lead terminal posts. Soft 4AWG jumpers from battery to the electrical
> > system will greatly reduce risk of battery post failure.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> >
>Bob:
> The 22759 is indeed much stiffer than the welding cable, but it also
>will hold a bend. The welding cable is flexible but remains forever
>springy. It seems to me to be easier to get the 22759 to stay where I
>want it to. You have to bend it to the desired shape *before* you
>solder the lugs on. The lugs tend anchor the small wire bundles
>together so they can't slide over each other as they need to when you
>bend it. This is true for the short (~1 ft) pieces, anyway. I found it
>easy to make a battery-to -contactor cable this way which seems not to
>put any stress on the battery terminal because it retains its shape.
But what are the coupling modes with respect to vibration?
Being able to pre-set the shape may mitigate stresses in terminals
and posts as-installed . . . but the stuff is still pretty
rigid. It's the vibration that kills the hardware.
If you're pleased with the results then so be it. I try
to avoid materials that are process sensitive with respect
to performance. This is why gluing and soldering are reduced
to a minimum on any production line. I cannot offer 2AWG
Tefzel with any degree of certainty that the neophyte builder
will achieve the desired end results . . . but in this case,
2 or even 4AWG welding cable takes all the guesswork out of
making battery posts and terminal flags last under vibration.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: amp crimping tool |
>
>does anyone out there know what tool I would need to crimp an AMP part #
>61070-1 it's a flag faston non-insulated terminal?
This is an open-barrel crimp which may be installed with
B&C's BCT-1 crimp tool.
See http://www.bandc.biz
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Letempt, Jeffrey CW4" <jeffrey.letempt(at)us.army.mil> |
| Subject: | EGT/CHT Probe Extensions |
Is it really necessary to spend the money on extension leads for CHT and EGT
probes or is there an DIY alternative?
Thanks,
Jeff
Dragonfly N41GK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: KA 134 Audio panel to Monroy ATD-300 Attach |
Craig:
Probably not. Since the audio panel inputs are isolated from each other
(I assume), the only affect will be on the audio level, which can be
adjusted on the ATD-300.
Vern Little (ATD-300 connected directly to the headset bus on an SPA-400).
R. Craig Chipley wrote:
>
>Hello,
>
>
>I need a little help. I am hardwiring in my Monroy
>ATD-300 Traffic alerter to my panel and have a
>question. First all the spare inputs on the audio
>panel are 500 Ohm and the output of the ATD-300 is 300
>Ohm. Does this need a resistor?
>
>Thanks, Craig
>
>
>
>
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AI Nut <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: EGT/CHT Probe Extensions |
The leads have to be the same metal(s) structure. Else, you're
introducing even more cold junctions. The leads aren't expensive
fortunately.
Letempt, Jeffrey CW4 wrote:
>
>Is it really necessary to spend the money on extension leads for CHT and EGT
>probes or is there an DIY alternative?
>
>Thanks,
>Jeff
>Dragonfly N41GK
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank & Dorothy <frankvdh(at)xtra.co.nz> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
John Schroeder wrote:
>
>Frank -
>
>Do you have more details on the circuitry for this? For example, does it
>require the bias resistors for the LED's?
>
>
http://www.siliconchip.com.au/cms/A_102195/article.html has an article
on using the LM3914. It looks like you still need a 1K current-limiting
resistor for each LED.
Googling for LM3914 turns up dozens of examples of using this chip.
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Butcher" <europa(at)triton.net> |
| Subject: | Re: off-topic - leather seat covers |
You might check out Oregon Aero. We're very happy with their service. Web
site is www.OregonAero.com or 800-888-6910. Gail is the seat person.
Jim & Heather Butcher
Europa N241BW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | sarg314 <sarg314(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: finishing up FWF |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> But what are the coupling modes with respect to vibration?
> Being able to pre-set the shape may mitigate stresses in terminals
> and posts as-installed . . . but the stuff is still pretty
> rigid. It's the vibration that kills the hardware.
>
> If you're pleased with the results then so be it. I try
> to avoid materials that are process sensitive with respect
> to performance. This is why gluing and soldering are reduced
> to a minimum on any production line. I cannot offer 2AWG
> Tefzel with any degree of certainty that the neophyte builder
> will achieve the desired end results . . . but in this case,
> 2 or even 4AWG welding cable takes all the guesswork out of
> making battery posts and terminal flags last under vibration.
>
> Bob . . .
>
Bob:
You have convinced me to use welding cable from the firewall to the
engine. The vibration there would be hard on a stiff cable. But
shouldn't the connection from the battery to the contactor should have
orders of magnitude less vibration (both are on the cabin side of the
firewall in my plane)?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> Rotax 914?? |
| Subject: | Re: "Harley" regulator/rectifier for a |
Rotax 914??
Rotax 914??
>
>Hi Bob -
>
>A while back someone mentioned using a motorcycle PM voltage
>regulator/rectifier (e.g. - COMPU-FIRE from www.customchrome.com) as a
>replacement for the stock Ducati unit that's shipped with the Rotax 914.
>
>Did you reach a verdict? Thanks in advance for the educated insight!
I wrote to the supplier but did not receive a response. I suspct
I'll need to simply purchase some hardware and test it. But at
the moment, I have nothing useful to report/recommend.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Heathco" <cheathco(at)comcast.net> |
I have been going thru archives to try to evaluate elecronic ignition. I have an
A&P friend who swears by LASAR, but I have found several posts re problems with
this system, but the posts are not very current. I find hardly any problems
posted re LSI, or E/P-mags. I imagine e-mags are so new that not a lot is known
about them yet. My research has me leaning toward the e/p-mag sys for lower
cost/simplicity. Lead times it seems are out there tho. Any LASAR defenders/happy
users? Charlie Heathco
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Jumpers |
>
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > But what are the coupling modes with respect to vibration?
> > Being able to pre-set the shape may mitigate stresses in terminals
> > and posts as-installed . . . but the stuff is still pretty
> > rigid. It's the vibration that kills the hardware.
> >
> > If you're pleased with the results then so be it. I try
> > to avoid materials that are process sensitive with respect
> > to performance. This is why gluing and soldering are reduced
> > to a minimum on any production line. I cannot offer 2AWG
> > Tefzel with any degree of certainty that the neophyte builder
> > will achieve the desired end results . . . but in this case,
> > 2 or even 4AWG welding cable takes all the guesswork out of
> > making battery posts and terminal flags last under vibration.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
>Bob:
> You have convinced me to use welding cable from the firewall to the
>engine. The vibration there would be hard on a stiff cable. But
>shouldn't the connection from the battery to the contactor should have
>orders of magnitude less vibration (both are on the cabin side of the
>firewall in my plane)?
Perhaps . . . but we're still speaking in non-quantitative
terms. I have no way to put my hands on and/or instrument
every variation on a theme. Therefore, I must err on the side of
always applying the best I know how to do. If the battery has
brass, female threaded bosses for terminal connections, it's
not much of an issue . . . but the notion of attaching anything
but the softest, most compliant wires I can find to lead battery
terminals opens questions for which there are no 'hard'
answers without turning it into a science project.
The only gross failures of SVLA batteries I've been privy
to in the OBAM aircraft market have been separation of lead
terminal posts from the battery because of stresses induced
by stiff and/or heavy connections.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vern W." <vernw(at)ev1.net> |
Hey guys,
I just bought a new "Lamar LVM-1" off of Ebay. I didn't spend that much
(under $50) but while I can find other Lamar LVM products at Aircraft
Spruce, I can't find any reference to this particular monitor.
This is it here:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4532691233&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT
It seems to be perfectly suited for it's purpose so I grabbed it, but I'm
wondering if anyone knows about this particular product and how well it
works.
Thanks,
Vern
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Battery hard failures |
Couple of years ago we had (in the span of a year)
Hard cell open internal failures in the Concord RG25. One in flight in a
MK20 at 12 months of service and 100 hours flight time.
I had one fail in 6 months on my bench waiting for install. Same failure
mode as in an open (internal) cell.
Specifically will not take charge nor deliver any current but "no load
terminal" voltage in a ""normal range""
The MK20 owner went back to flooded cell Gill as he had replaced one that
was gong fine after 6 years based on my suggestion. The RG replacement cost
(under warranty) in shipping was more than the cost of a new Gill delivered
so he went with a new Gill. Now 3 years old and going fine.
For those not familiar with the aircraft the battery is forward of the
firewall.
Two out of two and no one around here will buy or install a Concord given
this experience.
I am sure its rare but it sure got pilots attention around here.
The MK20 had gone on a XC and after a fuel stop the battery had no cranking
power. It was returned and I checked it and found an apparent internal open.
My Concord failure was identical in symptom. Seemed ok but needed topping
off charge and was unable to get a charging current and failed quick load
test as no real current could be delivered.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery Jumpers
>
>
> The only gross failures of SVLA batteries I've been privy
> to in the OBAM aircraft market have been separation of lead
> terminal posts from the battery because of stresses induced
> by stiff and/or heavy connections.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vern W." <vernw(at)ev1.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery hard failures |
Interesting info Paul, but let's play the "Scenario" game.
If, for instance, with either of those two batteries that failed the way
they did, would the alternator have been able to continue to supply power
until the aircraft landed? Or would the batteries failing in the way they
did bring the whole system down?
I'm wondering if even though the batteries failed, if they would have still
served well enough as an exciter and a big capacitor to allow either the
primary or backup alternators to run the system.
And more specifically, would a failure of those types have brought down the
"Z-13" system, or any other system that relies on a single battery?
Vern
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
>
> Couple of years ago we had (in the span of a year)
>
> Hard cell open internal failures in the Concord RG25. One in flight in a
> MK20 at 12 months of service and 100 hours flight time.
>
> I had one fail in 6 months on my bench waiting for install. Same failure
> mode as in an open (internal) cell.
>
> Specifically will not take charge nor deliver any current but "no load
> terminal" voltage in a ""normal range""
>
> The MK20 owner went back to flooded cell Gill as he had replaced one that
> was gong fine after 6 years based on my suggestion. The RG replacement
cost
> (under warranty) in shipping was more than the cost of a new Gill
delivered
> so he went with a new Gill. Now 3 years old and going fine.
>
> For those not familiar with the aircraft the battery is forward of the
> firewall.
>
> Two out of two and no one around here will buy or install a Concord given
> this experience.
>
> I am sure its rare but it sure got pilots attention around here.
>
> The MK20 had gone on a XC and after a fuel stop the battery had no
cranking
> power. It was returned and I checked it and found an apparent internal
open.
>
> My Concord failure was identical in symptom. Seemed ok but needed topping
> off charge and was unable to get a charging current and failed quick load
> test as no real current could be delivered.
>
> Paul
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
> To:
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery Jumpers
>
>
> >
> >
>
> > The only gross failures of SVLA batteries I've been privy
> > to in the OBAM aircraft market have been separation of lead
> > terminal posts from the battery because of stresses induced
> > by stiff and/or heavy connections.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Frank-
Thanks for the info. I downloaded the datasheet in .pdf form from DigiKey.
The General Description section says that since the current can be set, no
bias resistor is needed. The 1 k's shown in the article must be associated
with the project they describe. Pretty neat chip.
John
>> Frank -
>>
>> Do you have more details on the circuitry for this? For example, does it
>> require the bias resistors for the LED's?
>>
>>
> http://www.siliconchip.com.au/cms/A_102195/article.html has an article
> on using the LM3914. It looks like you still need a 1K current-limiting
> resistor for each LED.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery hard failures |
Well I've have a couple of identical failures in cars of wet cell
automotive batteries. These were mid to upper quality batteries over a
several year period, but all from the same manufacturer. Anyway after a
boost to start them all were driven home with no secondary damage.
While I suspect they failed during the start attempt, I'm quite sure I
would not have noticed if they failed on the road.
Ken
Vern W. wrote:
>
>Interesting info Paul, but let's play the "Scenario" game.
>
>If, for instance, with either of those two batteries that failed the way
>they did, would the alternator have been able to continue to supply power
>until the aircraft landed? Or would the batteries failing in the way they
>did bring the whole system down?
>
>I'm wondering if even though the batteries failed, if they would have still
>served well enough as an exciter and a big capacitor to allow either the
>primary or backup alternators to run the system.
>And more specifically, would a failure of those types have brought down the
>"Z-13" system, or any other system that relies on a single battery?
>
>Vern
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery hard failures |
Its all in the ability of the alternator to provide reasonable regulation
when the battery is essentially open circuit.
My testing has shown that use of an OVP set at 16.2V as Bob recommends will
trip under large load dumps like turning off landing lights IF the rest of
the electrical system load is low. I have not tried to define this exactly
as there are too many variables with alternators/regulators etc. Adding a
25,000 mfd cap helped but still tripped the OVP.
Thus I would recommend any intending to run without the battery in a limp
mode verify that ant installed OVP will not trip.
Anyone know where the trip setting of 16.2 +/- comes from? Sure its above
any working alternator but higher sat 17+ or 18V will also seem to be just
as safe.
However in the case of an alternator failure and a bad battery there is no
juce available to run the ENGINE?? :-) if it is required.
In any event My point is even gold plated batteries (proces a Concord RG
lately) can and do fail at times. Having a failure rate of one in 10,000
means nothing if you are the one.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vern W." <vernw(at)ev1.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
>
> Interesting info Paul, but let's play the "Scenario" game.
>
> If, for instance, with either of those two batteries that failed the way
> they did, would the alternator have been able to continue to supply power
> until the aircraft landed? Or would the batteries failing in the way they
> did bring the whole system down?
>
> I'm wondering if even though the batteries failed, if they would have
> still
> served well enough as an exciter and a big capacitor to allow either the
> primary or backup alternators to run the system.
> And more specifically, would a failure of those types have brought down
> the
> "Z-13" system, or any other system that relies on a single battery?
>
> Vern
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
> To:
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
>
>
>
>>
>> Couple of years ago we had (in the span of a year)
>>
>> Hard cell open internal failures in the Concord RG25. One in flight in a
>> MK20 at 12 months of service and 100 hours flight time.
>>
>> I had one fail in 6 months on my bench waiting for install. Same failure
>> mode as in an open (internal) cell.
>>
>> Specifically will not take charge nor deliver any current but "no load
>> terminal" voltage in a ""normal range""
>>
>> The MK20 owner went back to flooded cell Gill as he had replaced one that
>> was gong fine after 6 years based on my suggestion. The RG replacement
> cost
>> (under warranty) in shipping was more than the cost of a new Gill
> delivered
>> so he went with a new Gill. Now 3 years old and going fine.
>>
>> For those not familiar with the aircraft the battery is forward of the
>> firewall.
>>
>> Two out of two and no one around here will buy or install a Concord given
>> this experience.
>>
>> I am sure its rare but it sure got pilots attention around here.
>>
>> The MK20 had gone on a XC and after a fuel stop the battery had no
> cranking
>> power. It was returned and I checked it and found an apparent internal
> open.
>>
>> My Concord failure was identical in symptom. Seemed ok but needed topping
>> off charge and was unable to get a charging current and failed quick load
>> test as no real current could be delivered.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
>> To:
>> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery Jumpers
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> > The only gross failures of SVLA batteries I've been privy
>> > to in the OBAM aircraft market have been separation of lead
>> > terminal posts from the battery because of stresses induced
>> > by stiff and/or heavy connections.
>> >
>> > Bob . . .
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Sampson" <SSampson.SLN21(at)london.edu> |
| Subject: | Noise in the headset. |
Bob - I have recently fired up my installation and have a few problems.
Nothing major, but irritating.
Its broadly Z11, with a VANS altenator, PC680 battery, Microair radio, Nova
606 strobe pack (in the stbd wing) and Navaid servo in the port one.
The problems are these:
1) I can hear the strobes (primarily the bulbs firing) in the
radio/headset. It will become irritating on long flights.
2) The strobe makes the Navaid servo 'grumble' just slight twitches, not
aileron roles, but with the strobe off, it goes quiescent on the ground.
3) The radio can effect the trim indicator when I key the mike, though not
the trim itself. Its the standard Ray Mac system used by VANS.
Powering the strobes from a different battery completely cures problems 1)
and 2), which leads me to believe the fix is to put a capacitor / inductor
filter on the supply to the strobe. Do you agree? Can you suggest the
components I should use? The spec indicates it draws about 5.5 amps.
Presumably it is best to put the filter by the strobe power unit. It would
be much easier to locate it near the fuseblock.
Thoughts on item 3?
Thanks for the help, Steve.
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dj Merrill <deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Noise in the headset. |
Steve Sampson wrote:
> 1) I can hear the strobes (primarily the bulbs firing) in the
> radio/headset. It will become irritating on long flights.
Hi Steve,
I too had noise in my headsets, and fixed it with
a Radio Shack filter recommended by Bob.
Here is a copy of the e-mail I sent to the list awhile
back about my solution - hope it helps:
Mickey Coggins wrote:
>>
>> Hi Dj,
>>
>> Are these filters between the power supply and
>> the 12v input or the ground? Where did you
>> have them grounded when you had the noise?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mickey
These are installed in a Glasair (fiberglass
airplane), so no metal wings. The noise filters
have 4 wires, a 12v and ground for the input side connected
to the 12v aircraft power source and the ground wire
going back to the aircraft common ground point, and a 12v and ground
on the output side connected to the 12v and ground
on the strobe power supply. The instructions on the
package show the proper way to install the filter.
http://www.radioshack.com/product.asp?catalog%5Fname=CTLG&product%5Fid=270-051
When I had noise, the strobe power supply was
connected to the same 12v aircraft power and ground wires.
I essentially added the filter in-line to the existing
wired connections.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Tasker <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
You do NOT need individual limiting resistors to drive up to 10 LEDs.
The LM3914 controls the individual LED currents and can be programmed
for 2-30mA per LED.
Dick Tasker
Frank & Dorothy wrote:
>
>John Schroeder wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>Frank -
>>
>>Do you have more details on the circuitry for this? For example, does it
>>require the bias resistors for the LED's?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>http://www.siliconchip.com.au/cms/A_102195/article.html has an article
>on using the LM3914. It looks like you still need a 1K current-limiting
>resistor for each LED.
>
>Googling for LM3914 turns up dozens of examples of using this chip.
>
>Frank
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery hard failures |
I would say it is more an indictment of Concord than of RG technology. I
have had two B&C RG batteries, one lasting 6 years and was still going fine.
The Concord flooded cell my experimental started service with lasted 12
months.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
>
>
> Couple of years ago we had (in the span of a year)
>
> Hard cell open internal failures in the Concord RG25. One in flight in a
> MK20 at 12 months of service and 100 hours flight time.
>
> I had one fail in 6 months on my bench waiting for install. Same failure
> mode as in an open (internal) cell.
>
> Specifically will not take charge nor deliver any current but "no load
> terminal" voltage in a ""normal range""
>
> The MK20 owner went back to flooded cell Gill as he had replaced one that
> was gong fine after 6 years based on my suggestion. The RG replacement
> cost
> (under warranty) in shipping was more than the cost of a new Gill
> delivered
> so he went with a new Gill. Now 3 years old and going fine.
>
> For those not familiar with the aircraft the battery is forward of the
> firewall.
>
> Two out of two and no one around here will buy or install a Concord given
> this experience.
>
> I am sure its rare but it sure got pilots attention around here.
>
> The MK20 had gone on a XC and after a fuel stop the battery had no
> cranking
> power. It was returned and I checked it and found an apparent internal
> open.
>
> My Concord failure was identical in symptom. Seemed ok but needed topping
> off charge and was unable to get a charging current and failed quick load
> test as no real current could be delivered.
>
> Paul
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
> To:
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery Jumpers
>
>
>>
>>
>
>> The only gross failures of SVLA batteries I've been privy
>> to in the OBAM aircraft market have been separation of lead
>> terminal posts from the battery because of stresses induced
>> by stiff and/or heavy connections.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery hard failures |
Agree but I have had great success with PC-625 batteries with amp hours like
new after 4 years.
But Both Concords has very swelled cases (One at removal from the aircraft).
The PC-625's are like new physically and electrically.
With PC-625 and PC-680 available under $60 plus shipping why even consider
Panasonic for $45 plus shipping.
As I have said its critical to check your battery AH capacity often if you
need electrons to keep the prop spinning. With the availability of a simple
reasonable cost AH checker keeping a good battery for several years can be
reasonable and cost effective.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
>
>
> I would say it is more an indictment of Concord than of RG technology. I
> have had two B&C RG batteries, one lasting 6 years and was still going
> fine.
> The Concord flooded cell my experimental started service with lasted 12
> months.
> Wayne
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: LASAR/elecr ign |
I have installed the LASAR on PA 32 300 Aircraft. It is what it says it is.
Limited authority spark regulator. It advances spark up to 25 degrees at
power settings below 75 percent. I personally think it saves spark plugs but
requires a logic type breakout box to set/check timing. So at altitude you
can benefit from a lesser fuel flow because timing is advanced automatically
so a more efficient fuel/temperature management can be achieved. A engine
monitor would help realize the true savings. Also you can do away the impulse
coupling if you want because the secondary is excited during start switch
position given a good electrical source. So all my data is pertaining to
conventional mags though. I love to key in on the discussions. David
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | FW: RV-List: LASAR/elecr ign |
Resent to the Aeroelectric list also:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Peterson [mailto:alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net]
> Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 8:14 PM
> To: 'rv-list(at)matronics.com'
> Subject: RE: RV-List: LASAR/elecr ign
>
>
>
> > My advice is to install your LASAR on a breaker switch near
> > the master
> > switch so it can be turned off. The simply fact is that your
> > engine will run
> > hotter with LASAR because it's buring the fuel/air charge
> > more efficiently
> > in the combustion chamber, not in the exhaust system.
> > Therefore you need to
> > be aware of it. On my RV-8 I learned to turn the system off
> > for a long
> > climbout on a hot day, then switch it back on once leveled
> > off. Now my RV-8
>
> I have 584 hours on my Lasar system now over the last 3.5
> years, and here are some thoughts: Regarding what Randy has
> written above, the system does not advance past the baseline
> 25 degrees for the first 15 minutes of operation, allowing
> for a pretty good taxi and climbout for an RV. I don't
> believe any of the other EI's do this, and I can't say how
> much difference it really makes. One does need to be aware
> of this, as fine tuning mixture settings for cruise should
> wait until this period is expired.
>
> Reliability wise I have had two failures. At 342 hours, the
> left mag died. It was detected by a higher than normal EGT
> noted during a 40 minute flight, and the mag check on the
> return showed that the left mag was sick (not dead, but not
> good either). Unison sent another mag free of charge next
> day to me, excellent service. I left for the west coast the
> next day, and was thinking about that new mag when over the
> Rocky Mountains.... At 569 hours, during cruise flight, the
> engine hesitated (this tends to get one's attention) for
> perhaps 1/4 second, then recovered. The fault light was on
> indicating the system was in backup mode (mags running).
> Once over an airport, I checked the L/R mags, and the left
> was completely dead (one tends to move the switch back quite
> rapidly when the engine completely stops firing). Once
> again, Unison replaced it with a brand new one free of
> charge, although this took a couple weeks this time. I
> suspect if I had been on the road, they would have
> overnighted one. I never did learn what the failure was on
> the first mag, but the recent failure was caused by a broken rotor.
>
> So, overall, Unison really sticks behind their product, but
> two failures of two different left mags is a little
> troubling. Ignition systems are not yet trouble free -
> anyone's. One person here had to rebuild a lot of his cowl
> and baffling when an encoder wheel came off inside his
> Electroair during startup. Others have had problems with
> Lightspeed. It is impossible to say with any accuracy what
> anyone's system's reliability is.
>
> Given the performance afforded by EI, mainly fuel economy, I
> would not be interested in running my plane on standard mags.
>
> Alex Peterson
> RV6-A 584 hours
> Maple Grove, MN
>
> http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: off-topic - leather seat covers |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Charlie -
I'd appreciate getting the contact for the hides.
> You can buy hides with the FAA stamp of approval. A friend just had a
> local upholstery shop sew an interior for his C-182 using 'approved'
> hides. They just used the old upholstery as patterns.
> If you want, I'll get the source for the hides for you.
>
> Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Earl_Schroeder <Earl_Schroeder(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery hard failures |
Please let us know where these can be purchased for 'under $60'. The
best price I found was $69.95 plus $7.77 UPS. Thanks, Earl
Paul Messinger wrote:
>
>Agree but I have had great success with PC-625 batteries with amp hours like
>new after 4 years.
>
>But Both Concords has very swelled cases (One at removal from the aircraft).
>The PC-625's are like new physically and electrically.
>
>With PC-625 and PC-680 available under $60 plus shipping why even consider
>Panasonic for $45 plus shipping.
>
>As I have said its critical to check your battery AH capacity often if you
>need electrons to keep the prop spinning. With the availability of a simple
>reasonable cost AH checker keeping a good battery for several years can be
>reasonable and cost effective.
>
>Paul
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet(at)comcast.net>
>To:
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>I would say it is more an indictment of Concord than of RG technology. I
>>have had two B&C RG batteries, one lasting 6 years and was still going
>>fine.
>>The Concord flooded cell my experimental started service with lasted 12
>>months.
>>Wayne
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Fisher" <sonex76(at)velocity.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery hard failures |
Check out the following web site..
https://www.batteries4everything.com/index.html
Cost is $57.32 + shipping
Dick Fisher
sonex76(at)velocity.net
> Please let us know where these can be purchased for 'under $60'. The
> best price I found was $69.95 plus $7.77 UPS. Thanks, Earl
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | sarg314 <sarg314(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Jumpers |
>>Bob:
>> You have convinced me to use welding cable from the firewall to the
>>engine. The vibration there would be hard on a stiff cable. But
>>shouldn't the connection from the battery to the contactor should have
>>orders of magnitude less vibration (both are on the cabin side of the
>>firewall in my plane)?
>>
>>
>
> Perhaps . . . but we're still speaking in non-quantitative
> terms. I have no way to put my hands on and/or instrument
> every variation on a theme. Therefore, I must err on the side of
> always applying the best I know how to do. If the battery has
> brass, female threaded bosses for terminal connections, it's
> not much of an issue . . . but the notion of attaching anything
> but the softest, most compliant wires I can find to lead battery
> terminals opens questions for which there are no 'hard'
> answers without turning it into a science project.
>
>
I didn't realize we were talking about soft lead terminals. My battery
is an RG with brass terminals.
--
Tom Sargent, RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LASAR/elecr ign |
I have a Lasar on my O-320 in my Glastar (90hrs), I like two things, the
easy to start and you can really lean the engine to save fuel, spark plugs
do not show any deposit as well as the exhaust pipe is always clean. For
leaning you need an engine monitor, as the engine does not start coughing as
with standard magnetos and the cylinder which is peaking is not always the
same.
I love it however I can not compare with other systems then standard
magnetos.
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: <Dww0708(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: LASAR/elecr ign
>
> I have installed the LASAR on PA 32 300 Aircraft. It is what it says it
is.
> Limited authority spark regulator. It advances spark up to 25 degrees
at
> power settings below 75 percent. I personally think it saves spark plugs
but
> requires a logic type breakout box to set/check timing. So at altitude
you
> can benefit from a lesser fuel flow because timing is advanced
automatically
> so a more efficient fuel/temperature management can be achieved. A engine
> monitor would help realize the true savings. Also you can do away the
impulse
> coupling if you want because the secondary is excited during start switch
> position given a good electrical source. So all my data is pertaining
to
> conventional mags though. I love to key in on the discussions. David
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Earl_Schroeder <Earl_Schroeder(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery hard failures |
Hi Dick,
Thanks. I see they add $2 'handling' and then add shipping. Earl
Dick Fisher wrote:
>
>Check out the following web site..
>https://www.batteries4everything.com/index.html
>
>Cost is $57.32 + shipping
>
>Dick Fisher
>sonex76(at)velocity.net
>
>
>
>
>>Please let us know where these can be purchased for 'under $60'. The
>>best price I found was $69.95 plus $7.77 UPS. Thanks, Earl
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Noise in the headset. |
>
>
>Bob - I have recently fired up my installation and have a few problems.
>Nothing major, but irritating.
>
>Its broadly Z11, with a VANS altenator, PC680 battery, Microair radio, Nova
>606 strobe pack (in the stbd wing) and Navaid servo in the port one.
>
>The problems are these:
>
>1) I can hear the strobes (primarily the bulbs firing) in the
>radio/headset. It will become irritating on long flights.
>2) The strobe makes the Navaid servo 'grumble' just slight twitches, not
>aileron roles, but with the strobe off, it goes quiescent on the ground.
>3) The radio can effect the trim indicator when I key the mike, though not
>the trim itself. Its the standard Ray Mac system used by VANS.
>
>Powering the strobes from a different battery completely cures problems 1)
>and 2), which leads me to believe the fix is to put a capacitor / inductor
>filter on the supply to the strobe. Do you agree? Can you suggest the
>components I should use? The spec indicates it draws about 5.5 amps.
>Presumably it is best to put the filter by the strobe power unit. It would
>be much easier to locate it near the fuseblock.
>
>Thoughts on item 3?
Looks like you've done your homework. Since the noise has been
show to be CONDUCTED on the 14v power line, a filter at any point
along that line would have beneficial effects. You might try
one of Radio Shack's offerings. See:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/filter/RS_Noise_Filters.pdf
If you need to get "fatter" filters, you may have to resort to
assembly from discrete components.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery hard failures |
I have tried using the batteries4everything website. But, what is the
method to find the concord pc680 or 625 battery at $57.32?? Thanks. Larry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dick Fisher" <sonex76(at)velocity.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
>
>
>
>
> Check out the following web site..
> https://www.batteries4everything.com/index.html
>
> Cost is $57.32 + shipping
>
> Dick Fisher
> sonex76(at)velocity.net
>
>
>> Please let us know where these can be purchased for 'under $60'. The
>> best price I found was $69.95 plus $7.77 UPS. Thanks, Earl
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Grimmonpre" <jerry(at)mc.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery hard failures |
Click the red banner announcing over 40,000 items, scroll down to: Odyssey,
Hawker, Cyclon, Genesis Batteries, click on ODYSSEY Enjoy the trip.
Jerry
----- Original Message -----
From: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
>
>
> I have tried using the batteries4everything website. But, what is the
> method to find the concord pc680 or 625 battery at $57.32?? Thanks.
> Larry
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dick Fisher" <sonex76(at)velocity.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Check out the following web site..
>> https://www.batteries4everything.com/index.html
>>
>> Cost is $57.32 + shipping
>>
>> Dick Fisher
>> sonex76(at)velocity.net
>>
>>
>>> Please let us know where these can be purchased for 'under $60'. The
>>> best price I found was $69.95 plus $7.77 UPS. Thanks, Earl
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Fisher" <sonex76(at)velocity.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery hard failures |
Larry, when you get to the main page click on "Product List"
then scroll down to motorcycle batteries. Then click on Odyssey
and you'll find their PC680 and PC625 batteries. Concord is
a whole different animal but can be found under "Aircraft Batteries"
on the product list.
Dick Fisher
sonex76(at)velocity.net
>
>
> I have tried using the batteries4everything website. But, what is the
> method to find the concord pc680 or 625 battery at $57.32?? Thanks.
> Larry
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dick Fisher" <sonex76(at)velocity.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Check out the following web site..
>> https://www.batteries4everything.com/index.html
>>
>> Cost is $57.32 + shipping
>>
>> Dick Fisher
>> sonex76(at)velocity.net
>>
>>
>>> Please let us know where these can be purchased for 'under $60'. The
>>> best price I found was $69.95 plus $7.77 UPS. Thanks, Earl
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | erie <erie(at)shelbyvilledesign.com> |
| Subject: | Re: off-topic - leather seat covers |
Check out Friitala, largest leather supplier, ask for their clearance
list to be faxed to you, if you have some flexibility, it can save you a
fortune.
erie
Neil K Clayton wrote:
>
>Me to please Charlie.
>Neil C
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
ATTENTION:
Please help all of us that don't have the ability, or knowledge, to search
ALL the various lists announcing Fly-Ins, Get Together's, and Important
Events.
If you are aware of an event, please get someone to post it on flyins.com,
so we can have a common point of search, so we don't miss an important
happening.
Thank you
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Voltage regulator |
| From: | "paul atkinson" <paul(at)theatkinsons.demon.co.uk> |
Hello all
I have just taken delivery of a Rotax 912s and am rejigging my electrical
system to suit. I currently have a B&C LR3 voltage regulator, which I
assume is now redundant as the Rotax has its own rectifier/regulator, but
I would like to retain the crowbar over voltage regulation that the LR3
provides. If I were to leave the LR3 in the system will it interfere in
any way with the regulator on the engine, or would I be better off
starting again and following Bob's scheme on Z-16.
If the latter is favourite does anyone want an LR3?
Thanks in advance
Paul Atkinson
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Sampson" <SSampson.SLN21(at)london.edu> |
| Subject: | Noise in the headset. |
Bob - I am getting messages that that file is corrupt, but I assume its the
filters that you have mentioned in your book. Since buying stuff from Radio
Shack is really hard here in the UK, any chance you could recceomend
standard parts that I can get at say Radio Spares or Farnell?
Also, thoughts on item 3?
Thanks, Steve.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert
L. Nuckolls, III
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Noise in the headset.
>
>
>Bob - I have recently fired up my installation and have a few problems.
>Nothing major, but irritating.
>
>Its broadly Z11, with a VANS altenator, PC680 battery, Microair radio, Nova
>606 strobe pack (in the stbd wing) and Navaid servo in the port one.
>
>The problems are these:
>
>1) I can hear the strobes (primarily the bulbs firing) in the
>radio/headset. It will become irritating on long flights.
>2) The strobe makes the Navaid servo 'grumble' just slight twitches, not
>aileron roles, but with the strobe off, it goes quiescent on the ground.
>3) The radio can effect the trim indicator when I key the mike, though not
>the trim itself. Its the standard Ray Mac system used by VANS.
>
>Powering the strobes from a different battery completely cures problems 1)
>and 2), which leads me to believe the fix is to put a capacitor / inductor
>filter on the supply to the strobe. Do you agree? Can you suggest the
>components I should use? The spec indicates it draws about 5.5 amps.
>Presumably it is best to put the filter by the strobe power unit. It would
>be much easier to locate it near the fuseblock.
>
>Thoughts on item 3?
Looks like you've done your homework. Since the noise has been
show to be CONDUCTED on the 14v power line, a filter at any point
along that line would have beneficial effects. You might try
one of Radio Shack's offerings. See:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/filter/RS_Noise_Filters.pdf
If you need to get "fatter" filters, you may have to resort to
assembly from discrete components.
Bob . . .
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System
on behalf of the London Business School community.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | B Tomm <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: [subaruaircraft] Re: CV Report on Ind Mod Failure |
Gary,
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I'm sure Bob would be more than happy to
adapt an electrical layout for the EGG package. That is essentially what
Z-19 is. The only major mod that I can think of is putting the batteries
aft of the baggage (RV7A H6). I have already talked to him about this but
not finalized the details yet. I'll copy this email to Bob for comment.
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Newsted [SMTP:fcs(at)jlc.net]
Subject: [subaruaircraft] Re: CV Report on Ind Mod Failure
I should point out that it is CV's optional enunciator module that I
have trouble with. The EXP is fine for what it does.
When I started working on the electrical design, I was given the EXP
as a starting point. That is, take this design and make it work for
us, improve it where you can, but most importantly, make it
consistent. I feel that this has been achieved, and credit goes to
many people in this newsgroup for contributing their expertise.
The install guide presents an airworthy adaptation of the EXP for
Eggenfellner engines, and tries to make the installation clear and
simple. If you follow the guide, you will have a modern, airworthy
system which is easy to operate and easy for us to diagnose should it
ever give you trouble. I occasionally pick on people who deviate
from this design, not because the design is perfect, but because I
believe consistency is at the very root of the success of
Eggenfellner packages.
Let's face it, the thing that will bring down a Subaru will be fuel
or electrical, so these two systems must be consistent, with lots of
eyes reviewing these designs. One failure impacts all of us.
Several times we have tossed around the pros and cons
of "conventional" electrical designs, of which Aeroelectrics are a
good example. I have not pursued this, although others have. In my
eyes, conventional designs leave too many doors open which could
result in inconsistency and even dangerous installations. If some
qualified individual wanted to invest the time and energy into
perfecting and thoroughly documenting a conventional design
specifically for the Eggenfellner engines, I think Jan would support
the effort (in spirit anyway).
If you are a long ways away from wiring, don't rush into your
decision either. There just might be better things coming soon.
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/subaruaircraft/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
subaruaircraft-unsubscribe(at)yahoogroups.com
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Load Dump Testing Synopsis |
I have decided to present the results at this time as the detailed report is
huge and is still in process. The complete report will be posted on my web
site later this year.
The Load Dump testing was started in April 2004 with the intent of finding
out the cause and solution(s) of a number of alternator failures of Vans
aircraft rebuilt alternators. The failures seemed to be related to the use
of the Over Voltage Protector (OVP) crowbar device as promoted by Bob N. of
Aeroelectric connection. A senior individual at Vans stated to me that all
the reported alternator failures to date (NOV 2004) had the Aeroelectric
connection OVP (or similar crowbar OVP device) and "B" lead contactor
installed. There had been NO reported alternator failures where the Vans
recommended installation was followed. This is where there is no "B" lead
contactor or OVP in the system.
What is a load dump? A load dump is the result of the current flowing in an
inductor being interrupted suddenly with no place to go. The current wants
to continue and the result is an increasing voltage across the open circuit
(interruption) until there is a path to dump the energy. An example is the
spark plug coil in an ignition system. The 12V on the primary of the coil
shoots to as high as 400V when the points open and the secondary voltage
increases until there is a spark (15,000 V to 25,000V). Another example is
the common relay where it is typical to have a simple diode across the coil
so the controlling switch contacts are protected from what would otherwise
be a hi-voltage spark. The final example is the case of an alternator that
is supplying current to the load (the aircraft electrical buss) and a load
is turned off. The result is the original load current wants to continue for
a short time and the battery absorbs this excess current. There are a couple
of different cases however where the battery is not connected. The battery
may be off line or failed with an open cell (also in a separate "Points for
discussion" post). The remaining load on the system will absorb the current
surge and the system bus voltage will rise for a short time. The amount of
rise and the duration of the voltage rise are dependent on the size of the
load being dumped and the current load on the buss. The conditions can vary
from insignificant to many volts in the extreme, but possible, cases.
The other and more common case of load dump is if the "B" lead is
disconnected intentionally or by the OVP or by some failure. In this case
the alternator voltage increases until the internal regulator over voltage
protection device clamps the voltage below the damage point of the
regulator. In the case of an externally regulated alternator there is no
alternator internal device to protect the alternator and the rising voltage
will eventually clamped by the rectifier diodes in the alternator. Normally
the alternator rectifier diodes are not harmed by this.
The load dump is independent of where the alternator regulator is. The cause
is a sudden reduction of alternator current load and what remains attached
to the "B" lead determines the effect on the alternator and the system.
A single alternator and battery basic circuit as typically found on many
aircraft electrical systems was built up using commonly used parts,
contactors, Circuit breakers etc. Both an internally regulated alternator
and an externally regulated alternator were used as well as the above
mentioned OVP protector. This part of the circuit was exactly as recommended
in Aeroelectric Connection documents.
The testing was complicated by several unexpected problems with the
supporting components. Most issues were traced to the contactors contact
bounce and the design of the OVP. Both of these details will be discussed in
separate "Points for discussion" posts in the very near future.
The load dump is real and has potentially very large power transients that
can damage anything attached to the alternator "B" lead when they happen.
One solution to prevent internal alternator regulator damage is simple. The
addition of a transorb (a super fast Zener type diode) from the "B" lead to
ground on the alternator side of any fuse or contactor will protect the
alternator. It's not clear why the only reported regulator failures due to
load dump transients are from Van's alternators. The alternator we used was
severely tested with no failures and no external load dump protection. This
was not a ND alternator and a 55A rebuilt (by a different rebuilder, Bosch
Aerospace) ND alternator will be tested to its limits in the near future.
The testing to date suggests the following as suitable (and is backed up
with analysis of the parts selected). A 1.5KE18A is recommended. This is a
unidirectional device rated at 1,500 watts peak and starts clamping at 18V
and several will keep the transient to 22V peak. One part for each 20 amps
of alternator rating with an additional part IF there is a crowbar OVP
device being used. The reasoning is covered in ( A "Points for discussion"
post) Thus 3 or 4 devices are suggested. While there is an equivalent 5,000
watt device available it's hard to find in small quantities and it has a
couple of electrical disadvantages. First it starts clamping at a slightly
higher voltage and it has poorer voltage vs. current clamping
characteristics. Finally it's only one device and if a lead (they are solid
copper and subject to work hardening) should break you could have no
protection at all. With several devices in parallel there is redundancy and
they load share quite well.
Issues with the OVP and contactor contact bounce will be addressed in points
for Discussion posts in the very near future.
Seems simple and short but the details and all the related problems
developing during the testing were even more complex. Analyzing the problems
and designing a solution and finally testing the solution took many months
and continues at a lower level. There seems to be no single solution that
fits all requirements.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
> This is exactly the solution I used on my RV6. I have a 1.5" x 36"
> length of the high quality EL tape, hooked to a dimmer. It is the best
> panel
> lighting I've seen, bar none. It looks the same as them military and
> 747's
> when lit, and emits a cool blue/green light on my panel, lighting the
> whole
> thing. It draws very little current, and does a great job.
Stein -
What type of dimmer did you use? B&C (Nuckolls')? a PWM?
I tried the PWM from Flight Data Systems. It is a 4 channel PWM. It does
not do very well dimming the EL. At low levels, the lamps pulse and it
does not get acceptable until about full open on the dimmer.
Thanks,
John
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
I've used two different dimmers in my RV6's. One RV has the el-cheapo
$20something Van's dimmer, and the other RV6 has a 'lectric Bob dimmer which
is a bit more "robust" than the Van's one. Both have worked REALLY well,
creating a nice even curve of light power from very dim to full brightness.
Also, I finally worked out a deal this week with a some mfgrs and ordered a
couple dozen EL light strip kits in Blue/Green color, which I'll have on my
website in a couple of weeks at nice low prices as usual!
Cheers,
Stein.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of John
Schroeder
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Interior lighting
> This is exactly the solution I used on my RV6. I have a 1.5" x 36"
> length of the high quality EL tape, hooked to a dimmer. It is the best
> panel
> lighting I've seen, bar none. It looks the same as them military and
> 747's
> when lit, and emits a cool blue/green light on my panel, lighting the
> whole
> thing. It draws very little current, and does a great job.
Stein -
What type of dimmer did you use? B&C (Nuckolls')? a PWM?
I tried the PWM from Flight Data Systems. It is a 4 channel PWM. It does
not do very well dimming the EL. At low levels, the lamps pulse and it
does not get acceptable until about full open on the dimmer.
Thanks,
John
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Slowing down the ABMM |
Hi Bob and all,
Our Rotax 914 powered MCR 4S is wired per fig Z16 with dual battery and
ABMM.
To date we have logged 17 happy flight hours and we are waiting for the
Civil Aviation Aythority to send back the registration papers.
When fast idling, when the regulator is just below nominal voltage, the
votage must be rapidly varying around 13 V, and the ABMM connects and
disconnects the Aux Battery contactor at a very fast rate. The rattle of
the contactor closing and opening at 4-5 Hz is a bit of a concern.
Here is my question :
How could I slow down the action of the ABMM ? Once every two seconds
would seem far safer.
I imagine I could try to install a capacitor between ground and the
sense wire. Or could a device introduce some hysteresys into the ABMM
action ?
As the airplane is presently flying, I'd prefer to just add one or two
components, rather than rewire the whole circuit.
Any input appreciated.
Thanks in advance,
Regards,
Gilles Thesee
Grenoble, France
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris Byrne" <jack.byrne(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | P-Mag Electrical System |
Bob.
Excuse me if this has been a thread recently, I've just rejoined after a few months
absence. It may be relevant though as I see there is a discussion on P-Mag.
Have just ordered an engine and have specified one E-Mag and one P-Mag (may change
to 2 P-Mags). The rest of the aircraft is all electric IFR.
Aircraft Cozy MIV (composite)
Given that the ignition side of things should be self sufficient in the event of
an electrical problem how should one plan the electrical system.
Two batts and one Alt?
2 Alts one Batt?
Which Z drawing? (have revision 8 and just downloaded the updates)
How big an Alt for IFR (a'pilot,gps,2 radios,nav/com,txpdr,efis and poss heated
pitot,strobes & pos lts).
Does the list have an archive?
Thanks.
Regards
Chris Byrne
Sydney
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Slowing down the ABMM |
><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
>Hi Bob and all,
>
>Our Rotax 914 powered MCR 4S is wired per fig Z16 with dual battery and
>ABMM.
>To date we have logged 17 happy flight hours and we are waiting for the
>Civil Aviation Aythority to send back the registration papers.
>
>When fast idling, when the regulator is just below nominal voltage, the
>votage must be rapidly varying around 13 V, and the ABMM connects and
>disconnects the Aux Battery contactor at a very fast rate. The rattle of
>the contactor closing and opening at 4-5 Hz is a bit of a concern.
>
>Here is my question :
>How could I slow down the action of the ABMM ? Once every two seconds
>would seem far safer.
>I imagine I could try to install a capacitor between ground and the
>sense wire. Or could a device introduce some hysteresys into the ABMM
>action ?
>
>As the airplane is presently flying, I'd prefer to just add one or two
>components, rather than rewire the whole circuit.
>Any input appreciated.
The LVWarn/ABMM was never envisioned to be used in so
small a system (18A alternator) and dual batteries. However,
one suggestion is to wire per the page 7 of the instructions where the
aux battery is controlled by an S700-2-10 switch which offers
OFF (aux battery manually selected OFF), AUTO (aux battery controlled
by ABMM for automatic reversion to alternator out mode), and ON (aux
battery manually selected ON.
Placing the switch in the ON position for taxi/takeoff and approach/
land/taxi modes would prevent the phenomenon you cited while retaining
the automatic reversion mode for cruising flight ops.
Alternatively, one could eliminate the auto mode entirely and
use a manual aux battery master switch with an OFF/ON functionality.
When the low voltage light comes on, the pilot is instructed/expected
to reposition a few switches to re-configure the system for alternator-out
operations. It's not like there's a great sense of urgency for
re-configuration when the alternator fails. If the pilot delays by several
minutes in reconfiguration, the outcome of the flight is not affected.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "April Gilbert" <aprilgilbert(at)cox.net> |
Hi,
Would anyone have a pinout for the KLN-94 GPS? I am adding a FS-450 and need to
know the RS232
input/output.
Thanks,
April Gilbert
(Yes, a girl)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jan de Jong <jan.de.jong(at)xs4all.nl> |
| Subject: | the ideal OV protection (maybe) |
I have been thinking...
1. issue: polite disconnection with electronic latch/reset or crowbar
with CB latch/reset
- PM alternator - polite disconnection preferred?
- groundpower - polite disconnection preferred?
- alternator with field - polite disconnection ok or is there merit in
shorting the field windings as well?
2. issue: trigger voltage and trigger delay
- Bob and Eric M. both use 16.2V, but Bob mentions 5ms in the book and
Eric M. 200ms I believe on the website.
- confusing to a layman for sure
- a compromise is sought, I suppose, between allowing small temporary
voltage excursions because of bad load regulation (dead battery) and
cutting short runaway voltage excess from failed regulation
- taking into account, I suppose, the relative current capabilities of
alternator and battery.
- still confusing
3. the ideal OV protection (maybe):
- disconnects the supply politely and immediately shorts the load to ground
- without losing latch/reset and notification;
- decreases progressively the trigger delay with excess voltage , f.i.
by a decade per volt: 1s at 16V to 1ms at 19V; I can think of 3
implementations:
- 1. continuous: voltage to current exponential amplifier and
symmetrical charge-discharge of the timing capacitor (but temperature
dependence of diode junction I(V) a concern)
- 2. discrete steps: parallel comparators and symmetrical
charge-discharge of the timing capacitor
- 3. discrete steps: parallel comparators and charge-reset timing
capacitors, OR-ing of trigger results
Jan de Jong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jan de Jong <jan.de.jong(at)xs4all.nl> |
Bob,
Is the bus-monitoring part of LR3C (the flashing light output) a
separate function that just happens to be in the same box as regulator
and OV crowbar for convenience?
Thank you.
Jan de Jong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: the ideal OV protection (maybe) |
>I have been thinking...
>1. issue: polite disconnection with electronic latch/reset or crowbar with
CB latch/reset
>- PM alternator - polite disconnection preferred?
>- groundpower - polite disconnection preferred?
>- alternator with field - polite disconnection ok or is there merit in
>shorting the field windings as well?
Jan,
The only reason to ground the field is to blow the CB. The OV usually occurs
from a malfunctioning regulator, thus shorting the F lead could have
unexpected results.
>2. issue: trigger voltage and trigger delay
>- Bob and Eric M. both use 16.2V, but Bob mentions 5ms in the book and
>Eric M. 200ms I believe on the website.
>- confusing to a layman for sure
>- a compromise is sought, I suppose, between allowing small temporary
>voltage excursions because of bad load regulation (dead battery) and
>cutting short runaway voltage excess from failed regulation
>- taking into account, I suppose, the relative current capabilities of
>alternator and battery.
>- still confusing
I use the 16.2V limit because it seems like a reasonable value...and Bob has
recommended it. The crowbar described in the Aeroelectric Connection may
trip in 5 mS but the fuse or CB certainly takes much longer. The design of
the Linear-OVM (non-crowbar) delays 200 mS so that a Load Dump Suppressor at
18V can do its business before the OV trip politely disconnects the F lead
(or opens the B-line contactor).
When you think of it--200 mS is still quite short for a system that has
other suppressors in it, and guarantees no glitches.
>3. the ideal OV protection (maybe):
>- disconnects the supply politely and immediately shorts the load to ground
As above, cutting off the line is best.
>- without losing latch/reset and notification;
>- decreases progressively the trigger delay with excess voltage , f.i.
>by a decade per volt: 1s at 16V to 1ms at 19V; I can think of 3
>implementations:
>- 1. continuous: voltage to current exponential amplifier and
>symmetrical charge-discharge of the timing capacitor (but temperature
>dependence of diode junction I(V) a concern)
>- 2. discrete steps: parallel comparators and symmetrical
>charge-discharge of the timing capacitor
>- 3. discrete steps: parallel comparators and charge-reset timing
>capacitors, OR-ing of trigger results Jan de Jong
In the Linear-OVM The chip is an LTC1696 which does decrease the trigger
delay with excessive rate of rise/time (dv/dt). Other strategies are
possible.
Thanks for the input.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | B Tomm <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
April,
Looks like Bendex/King will not supply wiring diagrams (according to their
website). You may want to try contacting an avionics shop or
http://www.approach-systems.com/test.asp. They must know the pinouts
because they make wiring harnesses for the KLN-94.
Good luck.
PS what aircraft you working on?
Bevan
RV7A
-----Original Message-----
From: April Gilbert [SMTP:aprilgilbert(at)cox.net]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: KLN-94 pinout
Hi,
Would anyone have a pinout for the KLN-94 GPS? I am adding a FS-450 and
need to know the RS232
input/output.
Thanks,
April Gilbert
(Yes, a girl)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
You're right! From my dealings with them, they seem to be working hard
lately to get themselves removed from the experimental market entirely. I
hate dealing with them, and usually won't choose to wire up any more of
their products for customers. I'm not a certified repair station so they
quickly give you/me the cold shoulder and flatly tell you to contact one of
their dealers. Garmin is much nicer about that and wonderful to deal with.
That being said, Here's the answer to your question about.
On the KLN-94, you need to use the "P891" connector, which is the DB-25
connector. The pins are as follows (for yor FS)
Pin 1) RS-232IN
Pin 2) RS-232 OUT
There are several other RS-232's, but you won't use those, I'll put them
down for reference:
Pins:
3=dataloader RS-232 IN
4=dataloader RS-232OUT
5=spare RS-232 IN
6=spare RS-232OUT
Hope this helps!
Cheers,
Stein.
P.S., did I say how much I do NOT like working with King/Bendix products or
their company anymore?!!?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of B Tomm
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: KLN-94 pinout
April,
Looks like Bendex/King will not supply wiring diagrams (according to their
website). You may want to try contacting an avionics shop or
http://www.approach-systems.com/test.asp. They must know the pinouts
because they make wiring harnesses for the KLN-94.
Good luck.
PS what aircraft you working on?
Bevan
RV7A
-----Original Message-----
From: April Gilbert [SMTP:aprilgilbert(at)cox.net]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: KLN-94 pinout
Hi,
Would anyone have a pinout for the KLN-94 GPS? I am adding a FS-450 and
need to know the RS232
input/output.
Thanks,
April Gilbert
(Yes, a girl)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: P-Mag Electrical System |
>
>
>Bob.
>
>Excuse me if this has been a thread recently, I've just rejoined after a
>few months absence. It may be relevant though as I see there is a
>discussion on P-Mag.
>
>Have just ordered an engine and have specified one E-Mag and one P-Mag
>(may change to 2 P-Mags). The rest of the aircraft is all electric IFR.
>Aircraft Cozy MIV (composite)
>Given that the ignition side of things should be self sufficient in the
>event of an electrical problem how should one plan the electrical system.
>Two batts and one Alt?
>2 Alts one Batt?
>
>Which Z drawing? (have revision 8 and just downloaded the updates)
>How big an Alt for IFR (a'pilot,gps,2 radios,nav/com,txpdr,efis and poss
>heated pitot,strobes & pos lts).
Once you've decided to go with p-mags, the rest is pretty
simple. Unless you have some unusual "sleeper" in choice
of appliances, a 40A alternator will suffice nicely. Figure
Z-13/8 would be my first suggestion. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Architecture/Zfigs_K_5.pdf
You can use either an internally regulated main alternator
as illustrated but I recommend the externally regulated alternators
as shown in other z-figures.
>Does the list have an archive?
Yes, see:
http://www.matronics.com/archive/archive-index.cgi?AeroElectric
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LR3C question |
>
>Bob,
>Is the bus-monitoring part of LR3C (the flashing light output) a
>separate function that just happens to be in the same box as regulator
>and OV crowbar for convenience?
>Thank you.
>Jan de Jong
Yes. It's an independent low voltage warning system.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "n801bh(at)netzero.com" <n801bh(at)NetZero.com> |
Hi,
Would anyone have a pinout for the KLN-94 GPS? I am adding a FS-450 and
need to know the RS232
input/output.
Thanks,
April Gilbert
(Yes, a girl)
When I wired
my Zenith 801 I coupled my King KMD150 MFD to my FS450. Works good,,, If ya want
I can provide ya with my pin out for the 150. I bet its not too far off from
the KLN-94. Good to see woman venturing in this realm.. You go girl !!!
Ben Haas N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: the ideal OV protection (maybe) |
>
>I have been thinking...
>
>1. issue: polite disconnection with electronic latch/reset or crowbar
>with CB latch/reset
>- PM alternator - polite disconnection preferred?
Define polite.
>- groundpower - polite disconnection preferred?
>- alternator with field - polite disconnection ok or is there merit in
>shorting the field windings as well?
>2. issue: trigger voltage and trigger delay
>- Bob and Eric M. both use 16.2V, but Bob mentions 5ms in the book and
>Eric M. 200ms I believe on the website.
>- confusing to a layman for sure
>- a compromise is sought, I suppose, between allowing small temporary
>voltage excursions because of bad load regulation (dead battery) and
>cutting short runaway voltage excess from failed regulation
>- taking into account, I suppose, the relative current capabilities of
>alternator and battery.
>- still confusing
Overvoltage protection is indicated for a VERY impolite condition
that while rare, promises to create some combination of
expensive, smelly, and tense situations in the airplane. I am
mystified by the concerns for being "polite".
Should someone invade my home and brandish a 45 should I
do the polite thing and go after him with a broom . . . or
would a 12-gage be more in keeping with my mission to bring
the situation to a speedy resolution and decidedly in
my favor?
3. the ideal OV protection (maybe):
>- disconnects the supply politely and immediately shorts the load to ground
>- without losing latch/reset and notification;
>- decreases progressively the trigger delay with excess voltage , f.i.
>by a decade per volt: 1s at 16V to 1ms at 19V; I can think of 3
>implementations:
>- 1. continuous: voltage to current exponential amplifier and
>symmetrical charge-discharge of the timing capacitor (but temperature
>dependence of diode junction I(V) a concern)
>- 2. discrete steps: parallel comparators and symmetrical
>charge-discharge of the timing capacitor
>- 3. discrete steps: parallel comparators and charge-reset timing
>capacitors, OR-ing of trigger results
You're making a mountain out of a mole hill. I've been designing
over-voltage protection for aviation customers for about 30 years.
In fact, my very first design job for Electro-Mech back in '75
was to replace the RBM Controls 138-1 electro mechancial ov
protection relay with a smaller, more reliable device
with assembly friendly characteristics. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/RBM138-1_A.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/RBM138-1_B.jpg
The 14v version of this product was fairly reliable but
the 28v version had a habit of burning the field relay
contacts and going open circuit.
The replacement we crafted was 1/10th the weight and
volume. Very easy to build. It used solid state voltage
sensing and relay latching circuits and had only one
power relay. We also had to learn how to make the fire
go out between contacts that were trying to open up and
break the field circuit. Better yet, it sold to our
customer (Cessna Twins) for less than they were paying
for the RMB Controls device.
A number of iterations of the ov relay have been
produced over the years. Each step worked toward
reducing cost to manufacture, increasing reliability,
increased ruggedness and if possible, getting the
size down.
Now, relays that open the field circuit are rather
"polite" . . . but to the detriment of their own ability
to withstand 50 ov trips in a row and still be functioning
to specification on the 51st trip (common qualification
test popular with local industry).
After 15 years and dozens of evolutionary steps the
components to totally eliminate relays became
available and several iterations of the crowbar
system were produced with the best-we-knew how to
do for reduction of parts count, reduction in volume and
stability of performance came into being with . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/OVM_14_Prototype.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/OVM-14_C.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/OVM-14_A.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/OVM-14_B.jpg
One of the reasons this critter got so small is because
it sidesteps the issue of what to do with stored energy
on the field by shunting it to ground instead of
trying to keep it from setting the relay on fire. Some
rather bulky arc-suppression components went away.
There's been a bit of marketing hype, a sprinkle of
mis-statements about performance and a lot of worry
about the peak currents involved when this very impolite
device goes after the "invader wielding a 45" . . .
If one operates the gear on a Lancair, Glasair or
Beech Sierra, guess what? Every time you hit the gear
switch the system sees a peak load 3x greater and 4-5
times longer than a crowbar ov trip and it happens
twice per flight cycle. On the Sierra, system leaks
are usually bad enough to cause the gear pump to
cycle for short intervals several times per flight.
When you hit the starter button, inrush currents are
larger and longer yet. This is also a most "impolite"
event that happens every flight. These events are far
more dramatic electrically and yet they're no big
deal. None-the-less OV events (that may never happen over
the lifetime of most airplanes) get worried about
should they task a measly 5 amp breaker with doing
exactly what it was designed to do . . . clear a
fault. Oh, by the way, that fault begins an alternator
shutdown process as soon as the SCR fires . . . it's
essentially under control even BEFORE the breaker opens!
I have no problem with folks who wish to offer
competing products and alternative ideas . . . to
each his own when bestowing the crown of elegance
upon a solution. However, I will insist that we keep
our science and facts straight. To do less
causes folks on the List to spend no-value-added
time and effort worrying over will-o'-the-wisps
(or "ignis fatuus" . . . I really like that one!)
instead of advancing the state of their projects.
The OVM series crowbar modules have only 6 components.
(It was 5 components while we were hand-selecting
fixed calibration resistors). I'll be delighted to
purchase a 5th of any designer's favorite beverage
if they can put as much or more functionality into
a more compact and/or lower parts count package.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Noise in the headset. |
>
>
>Bob - I am getting messages that that file is corrupt, but I assume its the
>filters that you have mentioned in your book. Since buying stuff from Radio
>Shack is really hard here in the UK, any chance you could recceomend
>standard parts that I can get at say Radio Spares or Farnell?
See:
http://uk.farnell.com/jsp/endecaSearch/partDetail.jsp?SKU=248320&N=401
http://uk.farnell.com/jsp/endecaSearch/partDetail.jsp?SKU=3198455&N=401
Wire as an "L" filter. Put inductor in series with power supply(=)
. . . capacitor from bus-end of inductor to power supply(-). It would
probably be best to install this right at the power supply.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Voltage regulator |
>
>
>Hello all
>
>
>I have just taken delivery of a Rotax 912s and am rejigging my electrical
>system to suit. I currently have a B&C LR3 voltage regulator, which I
>assume is now redundant as the Rotax has its own rectifier/regulator, but
>I would like to retain the crowbar over voltage regulation that the LR3
>provides. If I were to leave the LR3 in the system will it interfere in
>any way with the regulator on the engine, or would I be better off
>starting again and following Bob's scheme on Z-16.
The LR3 is not useable with a permanent magnet alternator. Z-16
or some variant is indicated.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Jumpers |
>
>
> >>Bob:
> >> You have convinced me to use welding cable from the firewall to the
> >>engine. The vibration there would be hard on a stiff cable. But
> >>shouldn't the connection from the battery to the contactor should have
> >>orders of magnitude less vibration (both are on the cabin side of the
> >>firewall in my plane)?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Perhaps . . . but we're still speaking in non-quantitative
> > terms. I have no way to put my hands on and/or instrument
> > every variation on a theme. Therefore, I must err on the side of
> > always applying the best I know how to do. If the battery has
> > brass, female threaded bosses for terminal connections, it's
> > not much of an issue . . . but the notion of attaching anything
> > but the softest, most compliant wires I can find to lead battery
> > terminals opens questions for which there are no 'hard'
> > answers without turning it into a science project.
> >
> >
>I didn't realize we were talking about soft lead terminals. My battery
>is an RG with brass terminals.
Very good. This moves the risk from battery post over to
wire terminal. On the larger wires, the terminal is more likely
to break than the wire itself.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Riley <Richard(at)RILEY.NET> |
| Subject: | Wholesale HID PAR-36 lights |
I can get HID Par 36 lights wholesale, if I order a batch of them. $350
with shipping by ground. Pre-made cable, complete with the latest
generation ballast. I have several people from the Velocity mailing list
interested, so I'm going to put an order together. Anyone here want one?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "R. Craig Chipley" <mechtech81(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | King Pin crimpers |
Looking for a decent priced crimper for the open end
pins like the ones on the KA-134 audio panel. Thanks,
__________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jan de Jong <jan.de.jong(at)xs4all.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: the ideal OV protection (maybe) |
>
>
>In the Linear-OVM The chip is an LTC1696 which does decrease the trigger
>delay with excessive rate of rise/time (dv/dt). Other strategies are
>possible.
>
Interesting. Didn't know it existed.
If I read the datasheet correctly the delay time shortens by a maximum
factor of 2 when voltage increases by about 12% or more above trigger level
Thank you for sharing what's inside the black box.
Jan de Jong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jan de Jong <jan.de.jong(at)xs4all.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: the ideal OV protection (maybe) |
Bob,
Thank you for the voice of experience.
I'm sure you're right that politeness is overrated nowadays.
The OVM-14 is an amazing result with discrete parts. How a simple little
unijunction thingy can make a whole lot of complexity unnecessary. Very
interesting. I hope they will keep making them. Digikey seems to carry
only PUT's now in the small unijunction categories.
Jan de Jong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: the ideal OV protection (maybe) |
Take a look at the newer crow bar circuit.
It doesn't use the obsolete unijunction. Now it just uses a transistor
trigger.
Ken
Jan de Jong wrote:
>
>Bob,
>Thank you for the voice of experience.
>I'm sure you're right that politeness is overrated nowadays.
>The OVM-14 is an amazing result with discrete parts. How a simple little
>unijunction thingy can make a whole lot of complexity unnecessary. Very
>interesting. I hope they will keep making them. Digikey seems to carry
>only PUT's now in the small unijunction categories.
>Jan de Jong
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Meyette" <brianpublic(at)starband.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: [subaruaircraft] Re: CV Report on Ind Mod Failure |
clamav-milter version 0.80j
on andromeda
As someone who does not plan to use the EXPBUS in my Eggenfellner
installation, I would be most interested in something specific that Bob
could put together. There was a lot of talk on the Eggenfellner list awhile
back about someone designing a replacement for the EXPBUS, but it didnt
materialize. I plan to use a combination of modified versions of Bobs
existing layouts and a couple of the Hyperion components. Anything that
Bob could put together as a complete, professional layout for the
Eggenfellner FWF (all-electric, one alternator, dual batteries, with full
backup, switchover, and protection) would be just great.
brian
expecting my STi in just a couple more weeks!
http://brian76.mystarband.net/RV-7Ahome.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: B Tomm [mailto:fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net]
Subject: RE: [subaruaircraft] Re: CV Report on Ind Mod Failure
Gary,
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I'm sure Bob would be more than happy to
adapt an electrical layout for the EGG package. That is essentially what
Z-19 is. The only major mod that I can think of is putting the batteries
aft of the baggage (RV7A H6). I have already talked to him about this but
not finalized the details yet. I'll copy this email to Bob for comment.
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Newsted [SMTP:fcs(at)jlc.net]
Subject: [subaruaircraft] Re: CV Report on Ind Mod Failure
I should point out that it is CV's optional enunciator module that I
have trouble with. The EXP is fine for what it does.
When I started working on the electrical design, I was given the EXP
as a starting point. That is, take this design and make it work for
us, improve it where you can, but most importantly, make it
consistent. I feel that this has been achieved, and credit goes to
many people in this newsgroup for contributing their expertise.
The install guide presents an airworthy adaptation of the EXP for
Eggenfellner engines, and tries to make the installation clear and
simple. If you follow the guide, you will have a modern, airworthy
system which is easy to operate and easy for us to diagnose should it
ever give you trouble. I occasionally pick on people who deviate
from this design, not because the design is perfect, but because I
believe consistency is at the very root of the success of
Eggenfellner packages.
Let's face it, the thing that will bring down a Subaru will be fuel
or electrical, so these two systems must be consistent, with lots of
eyes reviewing these designs. One failure impacts all of us.
Several times we have tossed around the pros and cons
of "conventional" electrical designs, of which Aeroelectrics are a
good example. I have not pursued this, although others have. In my
eyes, conventional designs leave too many doors open which could
result in inconsistency and even dangerous installations. If some
qualified individual wanted to invest the time and energy into
perfecting and thoroughly documenting a conventional design
specifically for the Eggenfellner engines, I think Jan would support
the effort (in spirit anyway).
If you are a long ways away from wiring, don't rush into your
decision either. There just might be better things coming soon.
ADVERTISEMENT
click here
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129usbfu5/M=298184.6018725.7038619.3001176/D=gr
oups/S=1705063107:HM/EXP=1110662276/A=2593423/R=0/SIG=11el9gslf/*http://www.
netflix.com/Default?mqso=60190075>
_____
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/subaruaircraft/
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
subaruaircraft-unsubscribe(at)yahoogroups.com
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Points for discussion OVP |
Points for discussion OVP: Shorting/opening/limited current.
Sorry I did not have the normal time to wordsmith this so its somewhat ruff
J
Some sort of buss over voltage protection (OVP) is needed in the unlikely
event of the alternator regulator failing with a high voltage output. The
output can go to over 100V under some conditions so this is a catastrophic
event to an aircraft electrical system.
One popular solution is an OVP device that shorts out the system bus and
opens a circuit breaker that either removes power from an external
alternator regulator or opens the "B" lead of an internally regulated
alternator. (Ref: Aeroelectric connections build your own OVP).
Let's look at voltage and current time line using this popular crowbar OVP
and Contactor setup. Our testing included a duplicate of the suggested
implementation with a 5 amp CB the OVP and a "B" lead power contactor with
its coil was shunted with the common rectifier diode for "spike"
suppression.
Time is indicated in milliseconds.
T-0 Bus voltage rises to above 16.2 V (the OVP trip point) and is not OV
controlled.
T-5 OVP Triggers after 5 ms of hi bus voltage. And the battery is shorted
thru the OVP creating over 400 amps of current. (In one test it was over 730
amps)
T-75 CB trips and the bus current returns to "normal" with the failed HV
alternator back supplying its full output to the bus.
T-125 "B" lead contactor opens and removes the alternator from the bus.
So what has happened?
First there is up to 5 ms of HI voltage applied to the bus before the
crowbar causes a 400+ amp short on the bus. This causes the alternator to go
to full current output.
Depending on your setup the battery voltage could drop below the Voltage
needed to run the electrically dependent engine and cause the engine to
quit. Depends on the Engine computers ability to run during low voltages and
not reset and restart which can take one or more seconds long enough to
cause engine to stop and need to be restarted. Not nice J
After 70 ms the CB pops and the short is removed from the bus and it goes
into a high OV condition either from a shorted regulator or the full maximum
load dump mode. In either case the bus voltage goes to several times normal
depending on the alternator current capacity vs. the bus load. A load of 10
amps and a 40 amp load dump/fault creates a potential bus voltage 4 times
normal or over 50V.
This condition lasts for 50ms while the "B" lead contactor opens.
Thus we see a 5 ms HV followed with a 70 ms 400 amp current pulse followed
by a 50 ms HV on the bus.
The time to open the CB is based on tests of 3 different brand CB's and none
were less than 70 ms when tripped cold. Once you get to 10X current the trip
value the time to trip is driven by the mechanical reaction to the trip
current and more current is does not speed up tripping.
The 50 ms for the contactor to open was based on measuring 3 different
popular types using the widely recommended rectifier diode across the coil
(see a different point for discussion on this)
There are other conditions but all follow a similar pattern of not
clipping/controlling the over voltage all the time and causing an
excessively hi current pulse.
In the 20th century current pulses were more common and the flight
instruments did not have internal sensitive magnetometers that can be
damaged with strong magnetic fields that are produced with multi hundred amp
current pulse.
The simple addition of one small resistor can control the current pulse and
not defeat the circuit function. The elimination of this current pulse can
be argued as not needed as there are other sources of current pulses but
there should be no current pulses any where near the flight instruments.
After all what is one more current pulse among friends? J
Hardly nice, more like a bull in the china shop. Or perhaps a case of using
a sledge hammers to kill flies? J
Compare this to a 21st century solution where the OV is always
clipped/controlled and then the alternator is taken off line. NO HV on the
bus (outside DO-160 requirements), NO 400 amp current surge. Eric Jones has
such a device right now. It is the result of what was learned during the
"load dump" testing we performed last year.
Also in the 21st century design there is NO hi current or current pulses
near the instrument panel for anything from starter to landing gear to
landing lights etc. The current and its protective devices are in the
shortest path from the battery to the load, not thru a panel mounted
electromechanical fuse or CB. The hi inrush current of hi powered devices is
controlled with built in soft start logic.
Why have a OVP that is brute force and subject to false tripping (see
another point for discussion) when its not required, and in the field has a
rather poor usage record as evidenced by the failure rate in RV's?
As you know the Load dump testing program was the result of numerous Vans
Aircraft alternators with rebuilt internal regulators failing. It has been
suggested that Vans rebuilt regulators were somehow not as stout as others.
There are over 4,000 Vans aircraft flying and Zero failures where there was
no OVP device installed (Based on a Telecom with a senior person at Vans and
none of the factory aircraft have ever had an OVP installed). 100% of the
failed alternators were the result of the OVP whether it was a crow bar
device or a device that simply opened the "B" lead. Another manufacturer of
experimental aircraft engines etc has over 400 flying (many for 10+ years)
with no failures of the ND alternator. There were 2 failures where the
builder wanted the 'very best' and installed a B&C LR3 and modified ND
alternator. After the second failure early in the life of the aircraft he
went changed to an internally regulated ND alternator and has had no
failures for the last 10 years
Does this mean that the LR3 or the use of OVP devices is bad? Not at all,
but its clear to us that the current product and or its installation or
usage is faulty somewhere as something is wrong when all the reported
alternator failures are only associated with OVP uses.
The short circuit current results in the alternator going to FULL power and
then when the short is removed the maximum possible load dump starts and is
only terminated after 50 ms when the "B" lead contactor opens. Thus the
system is first shorted out and then given a huge load dump and finally the
alternator is taken off line. 50ms is quite long enough to damage equipment
if the voltage is high enough.
What's sad is all of the above is totally unnecessary and to suggest that
the system can take it (because it MIGHT meet DO-160) is invalid in many
cases. I have a reasonably modern panel with EFIS and moving map GPS and
NOTHING I own is stated to pass any part of DO-160 and in fact the supply
voltage limits (in some cases) are well inside DO-160 requirements. DO-160
may be applicable in the expensive products but one must not assume what you
have installed meets any part of DO-160 much less all of it.
If one simply used the above data it's a logical conclusion that adding an
OVP of any common type causes failures and dramatically.
Alternator regulators in modern automobiles are designed with internal
safety circuits that prevent over voltage operation (except in the very rare
pass transistor shorting). The probably of a modern battery failing open is
many, many times higher. Spare prop bolts anyone J
Seriously total engine failure and or propeller failures are far more
frequent. Perhaps its time to forget about a rare failure whose attempts at
protection have caused dozens of failures that otherwise would not have
happened?
Our testing shows that the best method of preventing OV is to first try to
turn off the alternator using the field control lead (present and works on
ND internal regulated alternators) only if this fails to work should the "B"
lead be opened. This combined approach is the ultimate solution and is
likely overkill. Just controlling the ND regulator lead is 99.99999% of the
solution (in my opinion to be sure) but its simple and has no high currents
to switch etc.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: [subaruaircraft] Re: CV Report on Ind Mod Failure |
I can help if you can wait until mid year when the 21st century design is
completed and flight proven.
There will be complete schematics etc and likely major modules available at
that time.
The major difference is my design has an optional second alternator and dual
active engine management systems vs. a single tricked out OEM system. you
are not forced to do anything as its completely modular but there will be
complete end to end schematics with options.
My contract is for a complete system but its not proprietary or exclusive. I
can and will provide a universal system but intended for automotive derived
experimental engines IE truly electrically dependent. I am sure Eric Jones
will be a source for some of the components for those who do not want to
build them for themselves. Also the company I have the contract with will be
selling major modules that are universal in use.
For a box that controls power to the various components in the aircraft
where the load current is 20 amps or less. 2-3 dozen circuits with solid
state switches etc internally you simply wire the power and control each
function with a panel switch.
Similar module for the main batteries/starter/alternator etc. Other modules
as needed or than can be included in a couple of box designs.
I am not doing all this work just for a one of a kind requirement as all of
us can benefit with modern highly reliable and smart electrical systems.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Meyette" <brianpublic(at)starband.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: [subaruaircraft] Re: CV Report on Ind Mod
Failure
>
>
> As someone who does not plan to use the EXPBUS in my Eggenfellner
> installation, I would be most interested in something specific that Bob
> could put together. There was a lot of talk on the Eggenfellner list
> awhile
> back about someone designing a replacement for the EXPBUS, but it didnt
> materialize. I plan to use a combination of modified versions of Bobs
> existing layouts and a couple of the Hyperion components. Anything that
> Bob could put together as a complete, professional layout for the
> Eggenfellner FWF (all-electric, one alternator, dual batteries, with full
> backup, switchover, and protection) would be just great.
> brian
> expecting my STi in just a couple more weeks!
> http://brian76.mystarband.net/RV-7Ahome.htm
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: B Tomm [mailto:fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net]
> To: 'subaruaircraft(at)yahoogroups.com'
> Subject: RE: [subaruaircraft] Re: CV Report on Ind Mod Failure
>
> Gary,
>
> Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I'm sure Bob would be more than happy to
> adapt an electrical layout for the EGG package. That is essentially what
> Z-19 is. The only major mod that I can think of is putting the batteries
> aft of the baggage (RV7A H6). I have already talked to him about this but
> not finalized the details yet. I'll copy this email to Bob for comment.
>
> Bevan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gary Newsted [SMTP:fcs(at)jlc.net]
> To: subaruaircraft(at)yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [subaruaircraft] Re: CV Report on Ind Mod Failure
>
>
> I should point out that it is CV's optional enunciator module that I
> have trouble with. The EXP is fine for what it does.
>
> When I started working on the electrical design, I was given the EXP
> as a starting point. That is, take this design and make it work for
> us, improve it where you can, but most importantly, make it
> consistent. I feel that this has been achieved, and credit goes to
> many people in this newsgroup for contributing their expertise.
>
> The install guide presents an airworthy adaptation of the EXP for
> Eggenfellner engines, and tries to make the installation clear and
> simple. If you follow the guide, you will have a modern, airworthy
> system which is easy to operate and easy for us to diagnose should it
> ever give you trouble. I occasionally pick on people who deviate
> from this design, not because the design is perfect, but because I
> believe consistency is at the very root of the success of
> Eggenfellner packages.
>
> Let's face it, the thing that will bring down a Subaru will be fuel
> or electrical, so these two systems must be consistent, with lots of
> eyes reviewing these designs. One failure impacts all of us.
>
> Several times we have tossed around the pros and cons
> of "conventional" electrical designs, of which Aeroelectrics are a
> good example. I have not pursued this, although others have. In my
> eyes, conventional designs leave too many doors open which could
> result in inconsistency and even dangerous installations. If some
> qualified individual wanted to invest the time and energy into
> perfecting and thoroughly documenting a conventional design
> specifically for the Eggenfellner engines, I think Jan would support
> the effort (in spirit anyway).
>
> If you are a long ways away from wiring, don't rush into your
> decision either. There just might be better things coming soon.
>
>
> ADVERTISEMENT
> click here
> <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129usbfu5/M=298184.6018725.7038619.3001176/D=gr
> oups/S=1705063107:HM/EXP=1110662276/A=2593423/R=0/SIG=11el9gslf/*http://www.
> netflix.com/Default?mqso=60190075>
>
>
> _____
>
> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/subaruaircraft/
>
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> subaruaircraft-unsubscribe(at)yahoogroups.com
>
>
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
>
> --
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Points for discussion OVP/correction |
Sorry the Capital "J" is supposed to be a smiley face. I work in word and
then copy into email.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Points for discussion OVP
>
>
> Points for discussion OVP: Shorting/opening/limited current.
>
>
> Sorry I did not have the normal time to wordsmith this so its somewhat
> ruff
> J
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Points for discussion OVP//more |
After reading my first subject post I have the following to suggest.
Both Eric and I have often fallen into the trap of fixing the old vs.
starting with a fresh idea.
The increasingly common use of the ND internally regulated alternator along
with modern regulators suggests the following approach to the OV issue.
Use a hi quality ND rebuild alternator and / or a new one. One with a hi
quality regulator that controls the field all the time.
Use the proper size fuse in the "B" lead. I suggest that a 55 amp alternator
should use a 60 amp as that fuse is designed to run forever at 60 amps and
hopefully your load will hardly ever approach 55 amps. A failed and shorted
alternator will supply more than rated current but lets not over due it.
Use a OVP that opens the alternator field circuit. The 16.2V setting is
fine. Eric Jones has this as a stock item. Please do not use a shorting
crowbar here as that is cruel and unusual punishment to the electrons.
Put a parallel set of 16V transorbs across the system bus between the fuse
and the bus. The transorbs will clamp the bus to under 20V and blow the fuse
if the failure is a real (quite rare)failure of the alternator that the
field lead cannot control. Normally the field OVP will trip (having a 200 ms
delay for load dump transients) and correct the problem. If this fails the
transorbs will clamp the bus to a safe level and blow the fuse. The number
of transorbs is under investigation (6-10 max expected worst case) but they
are low cost ($0.41 each) in small quantities and Mouser has them in stock
at this time.
Look for 1N6276A or 1.5KE16A they are the same part functionally.
The KISS principal wins another battle.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Heathco" <cheathco(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Need known good mag |
I have deceided to go with one mag and one electronic for now on my RV6a, and both
my mags are old and fear they are near end of service. I wonder if anyone
might have a known good mag laying around from an elec conversion they want o
sell. I now have bendix, could convert if have the wiring. my engine is O-320E2A
Charlie heathco, reply to mail
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | B Tomm <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | Bob's approval electrical for Eggenfelner all electric |
system
Yes I agree and I think many other will also be looking for "Bob and Jan
approved" electrical system for Egg Subies. I suspect that it will be very
close to Z-19 BUT I for one would sure like to hear from Bob and Jan on
this.
Bevan
RV7A Fuse
wiring soon
Planning for Egg H6
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Meyette [SMTP:brianpublic(at)starband.net]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: [subaruaircraft] Re: CV Report on Ind Mod
Failure
As someone who does not plan to use the EXPBUS in my Eggenfellner
installation, I would be most interested in something specific that Bob
could put together. There was a lot of talk on the Eggenfellner list
awhile
back about someone designing a replacement for the EXPBUS, but it didnt
materialize. I plan to use a combination of modified versions of Bobs
existing layouts and a couple of the Hyperion components. Anything that
Bob could put together as a complete, professional layout for the
Eggenfellner FWF (all-electric, one alternator, dual batteries, with full
backup, switchover, and protection) would be just great.
brian
expecting my STi in just a couple more weeks!
http://brian76.mystarband.net/RV-7Ahome.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: B Tomm [mailto:fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net]
Subject: RE: [subaruaircraft] Re: CV Report on Ind Mod Failure
Gary,
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I'm sure Bob would be more than happy to
adapt an electrical layout for the EGG package. That is essentially what
Z-19 is. The only major mod that I can think of is putting the batteries
aft of the baggage (RV7A H6). I have already talked to him about this but
not finalized the details yet. I'll copy this email to Bob for comment.
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Newsted [SMTP:fcs(at)jlc.net]
Subject: [subaruaircraft] Re: CV Report on Ind Mod Failure
I should point out that it is CV's optional enunciator module that I
have trouble with. The EXP is fine for what it does.
When I started working on the electrical design, I was given the EXP
as a starting point. That is, take this design and make it work for
us, improve it where you can, but most importantly, make it
consistent. I feel that this has been achieved, and credit goes to
many people in this newsgroup for contributing their expertise.
The install guide presents an airworthy adaptation of the EXP for
Eggenfellner engines, and tries to make the installation clear and
simple. If you follow the guide, you will have a modern, airworthy
system which is easy to operate and easy for us to diagnose should it
ever give you trouble. I occasionally pick on people who deviate
from this design, not because the design is perfect, but because I
believe consistency is at the very root of the success of
Eggenfellner packages.
Let's face it, the thing that will bring down a Subaru will be fuel
or electrical, so these two systems must be consistent, with lots of
eyes reviewing these designs. One failure impacts all of us.
Several times we have tossed around the pros and cons
of "conventional" electrical designs, of which Aeroelectrics are a
good example. I have not pursued this, although others have. In my
eyes, conventional designs leave too many doors open which could
result in inconsistency and even dangerous installations. If some
qualified individual wanted to invest the time and energy into
perfecting and thoroughly documenting a conventional design
specifically for the Eggenfellner engines, I think Jan would support
the effort (in spirit anyway).
If you are a long ways away from wiring, don't rush into your
decision either. There just might be better things coming soon.
ADVERTISEMENT
click here
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129usbfu5/M=298184.6018725.7038619.3001176/
D=gr
oups/S=1705063107:HM/EXP=1110662276/A=2593423/R=0/SIG=11el9gslf/*http://
www.
netflix.com/Default?mqso=60190075>
_____
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/subaruaircraft/
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
subaruaircraft-unsubscribe(at)yahoogroups.com
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: Points for discussion OVP//more |
Hi,
Where does one buy a *new* ND alternator?
Thanks,
Mickey
>
> The increasingly common use of the ND internally regulated alternator along
> with modern regulators suggests the following approach to the OV issue.
>
> Use a hi quality ND rebuild alternator and / or a new one. One with a hi
> quality regulator that controls the field all the time.
>
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 Wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Points for discussion OVP//more |
There was a link on this list in the last couple of months. I lost my old
email so I cannot help specifically but as I recall it was approx $250 for a
45 amp unit with LYC brackets and there were higher amp units available.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mickey Coggins" <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Points for discussion OVP//more
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Where does one buy a *new* ND alternator?
>
> Thanks,
> Mickey
>
>
>>
>> The increasingly common use of the ND internally regulated alternator
>> along
>> with modern regulators suggests the following approach to the OV issue.
>>
>> Use a hi quality ND rebuild alternator and / or a new one. One with a hi
>> quality regulator that controls the field all the time.
>>
>
> --
> Mickey Coggins
> http://www.rv8.ch/
> #82007 Wiring
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Points for discussion OVP//more |
> Hi,
>
> Where does one buy a *new* ND alternator?
>
> Thanks,
> Mickey
http://www.niagaraairparts.com/, I believe theirs is a ND 40 amp.
Alex Peterson
RV6-A 584 hours
Maple Grove, MN
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Points for discussion OVP//more |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
wrote:
> Put a parallel set of 16V transorbs across the system bus between the
> fuse and the bus.
> The number of transorbs is under investigation (6-10 max expected worst
> case)
> The KISS principal wins another battle.
Paul -
Somehow, this and the rest of your solution does not sound very simple to
me. My problem here, as is usual for many of us OBAMers, is trying to
implement the "new" solutions from the "idea" folks. How does one package
these neat items? If there are pictures, schematics, PCB's or any other
helpful hints in this regard, they would go a long way in convincing us
that it is worth the effort. Putting 10-16 transorbs into a package and
then "parallel" across the system buss sounds like an engineering problem
of major significance - so much so, that I believe I'll stick with the
"old" and make do with our perfectly good B&C regulators, stock alternator
and backup alternator - all wired very close to a proven schematic (Z14).
I like the dialogue and ferment of this forum so please keep the ideas
coming. Just don't expect many of us to buy in without a lot more
"engineering" of those ideas.
Cheers,
John
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Swartout" <jgswartout(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Points for discussion OVP//more |
Bob Gross of RocketBoy Aircraft Products
(www.f1-rocketboy.com/alternators.htm) recommends the Nippon Denso
alternator (NSA Part No. ALT5021) for the 1987 Suzuki Samurai, available
new, which is the same as a GEO Metro alternator (model year unknown)
but has a v-belt pulley instead of the Metro's serpentine belt pulley.
This 55 amp alternator is internally regulated to 14.5 volts. He says
the Vans 35 amp alternator is called out for a 1978 Honda Civic.
Would you regard the '87 Samurai alternator as a "modern" alternator,
and, more to the point, the internal regulator as a "high quality
regulator that controls the field all the time"? How does one determine
these things when considering an alternator candidate?
Thanks
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul
Messinger
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Points for discussion OVP//more
The increasingly common use of the ND internally regulated alternator
along
with modern regulators suggests the following approach to the OV issue.
Use a hi quality ND rebuild alternator and / or a new one. One with a hi
quality regulator that controls the field all the time.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "j1j2h3(at)juno.com" <j1j2h3(at)juno.com> |
Our club C-172 has LASAR ign on a carbureted 0-360 with a mogas STC. I find it
starts far easier than standard mags. I like the fact that on a failure of
the electronics, it reverts back to a standard mag (won't help for a broken rotor,
though). No electrical backup needed.
I have flown several other C-172's with 0-360's and standard mags and this one
seems to be noticeably stronger. With standard mags, I had trouble leaning beyond
peak without the engine running rough. With the LASAR it is no problem.
Once I tried just for fun to see how far I could lean it. It went so lean that
the falling EGT scared me and I quit, but it never did run rough or quit making
power.
I haven't done any long cross country flights, so I can't give you any firm figures
on fuel usage, but it seems to be considerably better than the standard mags.
The only data that I can give you is that on an hour of doing take-offs
and landings, I use about 5.2 gallons. Using fuel savings data from Unison, I
figure that the system will have paid for itself in a couple of years.
We have been flying 10-12 hours per week for several years with no failures.
Jim Hasper
Franklin, TN
RV7 - Just starting empennage (giving new meaning to the term slow-build)
(snip)
I have been going thru archives to try to evaluate elecronic ignition.
Any LASAR defenders/happy users?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris Byrne" <jack.byrne(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Re: P-Mag Electrical System |
Bob
Thanks very much for you reply and the Revision 11 drawings.
> Once you've decided to go with p-mags, the rest is pretty
> simple. Unless you have some unusual "sleeper" in choice
> of appliances, a 40A alternator will suffice nicely. Figure
> Z-13/8 would be my first suggestion. See:
Appreciate your help very much.
Just want to confirm one thing. With the 40 Amp alt and the B@C 8 AMP alt I
will have 48 AMPS avial.
I guess my question is. Is the 8 AMP alt supplying to the circuit at all
times or just in the case of a main alt outage.
From my very limited understanding of the drawing the 8AMP is suppling to
the circut at all times to make a total of 48AMPs.
Chris Byrne
Sydney
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Swartout" <jgswartout(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Points for discussion OVP//more |
Paul, thanks for being patient with me and others on this list who are
neophytes. Trying to follow along, learn something, and build a better
airplane.
Is the system you describe below approximately the same thing as the
Zeftronics-built ASP101 Overvoltage protection sold by Niagara Airparts
(described and schematicized here:
http://www.niagaraairparts.com/ASP101-PIT%201.pdf), except that you add
the transorbs?
Thanks.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul
Messinger
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Points for discussion OVP//more
Use the proper size fuse in the "B" lead. I suggest that a 55 amp
alternator
should use a 60 amp as that fuse is designed to run forever at 60 amps
and
hopefully your load will hardly ever approach 55 amps. A failed and
shorted
alternator will supply more than rated current but lets not over due it.
Use a OVP that opens the alternator field circuit. The 16.2V setting is
fine. Eric Jones has this as a stock item. Please do not use a shorting
crowbar here as that is cruel and unusual punishment to the electrons.
Put a parallel set of 16V transorbs across the system bus between the
fuse
and the bus. The transorbs will clamp the bus to under 20V and blow the
fuse
if the failure is a real (quite rare)failure of the alternator that the
field lead cannot control. Normally the field OVP will trip (having a
200 ms
delay for load dump transients) and correct the problem. If this fails
the
transorbs will clamp the bus to a safe level and blow the fuse. The
number
of transorbs is under investigation (6-10 max expected worst case) but
they
are low cost ($0.41 each) in small quantities and Mouser has them in
stock
at this time.
Look for 1N6276A or 1.5KE16A they are the same part functionally.
The KISS principal wins another battle.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | White Paper on Crowbar OV Protection |
See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Crobar_OV_Protection/Crowbar_White_Paper.pdf
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: P-Mag Electrical System |
>
>
>Bob
>
>Thanks very much for you reply and the Revision 11 drawings.
>
> > Once you've decided to go with p-mags, the rest is pretty
> > simple. Unless you have some unusual "sleeper" in choice
> > of appliances, a 40A alternator will suffice nicely. Figure
> > Z-13/8 would be my first suggestion. See:
>
>
>Appreciate your help very much.
>
>Just want to confirm one thing. With the 40 Amp alt and the B@C 8 AMP alt I
>will have 48 AMPS avial.
>I guess my question is. Is the 8 AMP alt supplying to the circuit at all
>times or just in the case of a main alt outage.
It's for standby. The largest full up IFR load I've calculated
to date was 27 amps for an all-electric system. An L-40 or similar
alternator supplies this load with plenty of heatroom for battery
charging. The SD-8 is intended for standby use in supporting
the e-bus in case of main alternator failure and is NOT operated
in conjunction with the main alternator.
> From my very limited understanding of the drawing the 8AMP is suppling to
>the circut at all times to make a total of 48AMPs.
The SD-8 is normally OFF except when the main alternator is
not available.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Points for discussion OVP//more |
>
>After reading my first subject post I have the following to suggest.
>
>Both Eric and I have often fallen into the trap of fixing the old vs.
>starting with a fresh idea.
>
>The increasingly common use of the ND internally regulated alternator along
>with modern regulators suggests the following approach to the OV issue.
>
>Use a hi quality ND rebuild alternator and / or a new one. One with a hi
>quality regulator that controls the field all the time.
I've wrestled with this issue for years. The term "high quality"
is simply not quantifiable.
>Use the proper size fuse in the "B" lead. I suggest that a 55 amp alternator
>should use a 60 amp as that fuse is designed to run forever at 60 amps and
>hopefully your load will hardly ever approach 55 amps. A failed and shorted
>alternator will supply more than rated current but lets not over due it.
How so? For several years we used to supply JJN- and JJS series
fuses for alternator b-lead protection. A 60-amp fuse was offered
for both 40 and 60 amp alternators. Several years into the activity,
folks started complaining about popping the 60A fuse on an L-60
installation.
After some invstigation we found that the fuses popped when
the owner tried to charge a dead battery by running the engine.
The cold L-60 would easily open a 60A fast fuse.
>Use a OVP that opens the alternator field circuit. The 16.2V setting is
>fine. Eric Jones has this as a stock item. Please do not use a shorting
>crowbar here as that is cruel and unusual punishment to the electrons.
"Cruel and unusual" is not quantified. Went to the bench this afternoon
and duplicated some work I did at Electro-Mech about 25 years ago.
See white paper report at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Crobar_OV_Protection/Crowbar_White_Paper.pdf
>Put a parallel set of 16V transorbs across the system bus between the fuse
>and the bus. The transorbs will clamp the bus to under 20V and blow the fuse
>if the failure is a real (quite rare)failure of the alternator that the
>field lead cannot control. Normally the field OVP will trip (having a 200 ms
>delay for load dump transients) and correct the problem. If this fails the
>transorbs will clamp the bus to a safe level and blow the fuse. The number
>of transorbs is under investigation (6-10 max expected worst case) but they
>are low cost ($0.41 each) in small quantities and Mouser has them in stock
>at this time.
If you set the voltage regulator for 16.3 volts with the transorbs
in place, will they take the system off line?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mitch Faatz" <mitchf(at)skybound.com> |
| Subject: | Electrical System Loads (was P-Mag) |
> >I guess my question is. Is the 8 AMP alt supplying to the circuit at all
> >times or just in the case of a main alt outage.
>
> It's for standby. The largest full up IFR load I've calculated
> to date was 27 amps for an all-electric system. An L-40 or similar
> alternator supplies this load with plenty of heatroom for battery
That's not including any lights, right? From what I've gathered so far,
lighting is *huge*: strobes (8A) + nav (9A) = 17A, throw in a couple
landings lights (4.5A each) for a draw of 26A on final for lights alone.
If lights are off in my case: Garmin 430 (not transmitting - 3.3A),
Transponder (1.5A), Intercom (0.5A), Autopilot (3.6A), Alternator Field (4A)
and couple gauges and an engine monitor (2A) = ~15A, or 23A if you've
got pitot heat on.
If lights were on, you'd have a healthy draw of 41A, or 49A with pitot heat.
Does that sound right?
Mitch Faatz RV-6A Finish Kit (wiring diagram, actually) Auburn, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical System Loads (was P-Mag) |
>
> > >I guess my question is. Is the 8 AMP alt supplying to the circuit at all
> > >times or just in the case of a main alt outage.
> >
> > It's for standby. The largest full up IFR load I've calculated
> > to date was 27 amps for an all-electric system. An L-40 or similar
> > alternator supplies this load with plenty of heatroom for battery
>
>That's not including any lights, right? From what I've gathered so far,
>lighting is *huge*: strobes (8A) + nav (9A) = 17A, throw in a couple
>landings lights (4.5A each) for a draw of 26A on final for lights alone.
This is why the very first step in configuring an electrical system
is to do a load analysis and decide what kinds of things need to
be on at the same time under various flight modes.
Strobes are usually 5-6 amps peak and average less than 3. Nav
lights are usually 2a per bulb but you can use Eric Jone's LED
kits and push what's normally a 6a system down to something on
the order of 3A. Landing lights are temporary loads but
yes, 9A is a fair continuous running load value. You don't need
pitot heat any time lights are on (clear of clouds) and vice versa.
Autopilots don't generally draw max loads except in turbulence
and then the average loads are less than max. Alternator field
may or may not be part of running loads . . . the maufacturer
of an alternator knows that it needs to support it's own field
and the output rating of the alternator should be IN ADDITION
to field requirements. It will be maxed out only at low RPM and
full electrical load. Most alternators cruise at under 1 amp.
>If lights are off in my case: Garmin 430 (not transmitting - 3.3A),
>Transponder (1.5A), Intercom (0.5A), Autopilot (3.6A), Alternator Field (4A)
>and couple gauges and an engine monitor (2A) = ~15A, or 23A if you've
>got pitot heat on.
>
>If lights were on, you'd have a healthy draw of 41A, or 49A with pitot heat.
>
>Does that sound right?
Nope . . . that's why the load analysis is so important. Lots of
builders are carrying around oversized alternators that increase
cost of ownership while not contributing to performance of the
airplane.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Garforth" <richard(at)hawk.flyer.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Alternator Control |
Paul,
Having just had a real long and bad experience with ND internally regulated alternators
(without OV protection). I am curious about your statement that suggests
you can turn off the alternator via the 'field control' lead. My experience
has been you can initiate o/p by applying +12v to the 'field' lead but subsequent
removal of the 12 volts leaves the alt churning out amps. Have the alternators
supplied by VANS (60 amp ND) a different regulator ?
Richard ( a convert to B&C )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hans Teijgeler" <hans(at)jodel.com> |
| Subject: | Points for discussion OVP//more |
Mickey,
Your local car dealer, or better: a shop that specializes in alternators.
Hans
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-
> aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] Namens Mickey Coggins
> Verzonden: maandag 14 maart 2005 23:15
> Aan: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Onderwerp: Re: AeroElectric-List: Points for discussion OVP//more
>
> matronics(at)rv8.ch>
>
> Hi,
>
> Where does one buy a *new* ND alternator?
>
> Thanks,
> Mickey
>
>
> >
> > The increasingly common use of the ND internally regulated alternator
> along
> > with modern regulators suggests the following approach to the OV issue.
> >
> > Use a hi quality ND rebuild alternator and / or a new one. One with a hi
> > quality regulator that controls the field all the time.
> >
>
> --
> Mickey Coggins
> http://www.rv8.ch/
> #82007 Wiring
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jan de Jong <jan.de.jong(at)xs4all.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: the ideal OV protection (maybe |
Ah, yes, I found it: http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/crowbar.pdf.
B&C still shows the 6-parts diagram. And supplies it presumably.
>Take a look at the newer crow bar circuit.
>It doesn't use the obsolete unijunction. Now it just uses a transistor
>trigger.
>Ken
>
>
Jan de Jong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Jurotich <mjurotich(at)hst.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Points for discussion OVP//more |
Bob and Paul et all
I have been reading the OVP discussion with great interest. The system on
my plane is a 60 amp B&C alt with the B&C voltage regulator (LR
3-14C??). For the sake of discussion say I want to limit the crowbar
current per Paul Messenger advice, what is the recommended resistor size,
ohms and watts? Could I get a similar result by making the 20 gauge wire
to the circuit breaker 6 feet instead of 2?
Thanks
Matthew M. Jurotich
e-mail mail to:
phone : 301-286-5919
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: the ideal OV protection (maybe |
>
>Ah, yes, I found it: http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/crowbar.pdf.
>B&C still shows the 6-parts diagram. And supplies it presumably.
>
> >Take a look at the newer crow bar circuit.
> >It doesn't use the obsolete unijunction. Now it just uses a transistor
B&C did a lifetime buy of the MBS4991 trigger diodes before they
disappeared.
I think they found several thousands so availability of the device
pictured at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/OVM-14_B.jpg
will be available for some time.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Points for discussion OVP//more |
>
>
>Bob and Paul et all
>
>I have been reading the OVP discussion with great interest. The system on
>my plane is a 60 amp B&C alt with the B&C voltage regulator (LR
>3-14C??). For the sake of discussion say I want to limit the crowbar
>current per Paul Messenger advice, what is the recommended resistor size,
>ohms and watts? Could I get a similar result by making the 20 gauge wire
>to the circuit breaker 6 feet instead of 2?
Sure . . . 20AWG is 10 milliohms per foot. But how long are
your leads now and what resistances are already in place to
limit current? In the bench test experiment I documented
yesterday the dominant circuit resistances were stuff other
than wire.
Consider further the effects of increasing loop resistance
in the crowbar system . . . time to trip goes up, heat dissipated
in the crowbar SCR for a trip-event goes up. It seems that
the most important question is "When the crowbar system is
installed such that OV protection performance is maximized,
what are the down sides to the rest of the system?"
Analysis based on the bench test indicated that one would
have to work diligently to reduce loop resistance such
that crowbar currents would approach 250 amps. Even then,
the event is over in under 10 milliseconds and bus voltage
drops to 10.6 volts.
In most installations of crowbar OV protection systems
offered by B&C and illustrated in the Z-figures, it's
unlikely that the system as-installed will approach
the 250A idealized trip currents described in the
experiment report . . . but assuming your system
IS capable of producing a 250A trip current, is there
any analysis to support the notion that this is "bad"
for other systems in the aircraft?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: the ideal OV protection (maybe) |
>
>Bob,
>Thank you for the voice of experience.
>I'm sure you're right that politeness is overrated nowadays.
>The OVM-14 is an amazing result with discrete parts. How a simple little
>unijunction thingy can make a whole lot of complexity unnecessary. Very
>interesting. I hope they will keep making them. Digikey seems to carry
>only PUT's now in the small unijunction categories.
The OVM-14 started out with a precision trigger diode from
Teccore . . . the part number escapes me at the moment. This
is the part you can see in the far left on:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/OVM_14_Prototype.jpg
Teccor didn't sell many of them and the yields were poor
in manufacturing so they discontinued it.
We went to the MBS4992 trigger diode from Motorola (now
Onsemi). Yields were poor and market utilization was
low so that part became difficult to find. We went to
the less precise cousin, the MBS4991. This drove the
decision to add a potentiometer as shown in
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/OVM-14_B.jpg
so that variability of the 4991 could be accommodated.
When Motorola discontinued the 4991, we made lifetime
buys in the thousands so that the project wouldn't
need to be re-designed again.
The two transistor array in the DIY project mimics a
unijunction. Unijunction devices trigger on a ratio
of the inter-base resistances and applied inter-base
voltage. In the two-transistor implementation,
the "inter-base" voltage is set by the external
zener reference.
I believe the MBS4992 has been designed out of
all B&C's LR and LS series regulators in favor of
the two-transistor faux unijunction. Only the OVM-14
still uses the MBS4992.
If folks would like to build the minimum parts count
crowbar OVM, it could be assembled very much like the
prototype illustrated in the first photo above. I have
several hundred MBS4992 trigger diodes left over from
my own production runs of the OVM-14. If folks want
some, they can contact me directly.
The 'spider web' construction of a crowbar ov module
is quite robust when covered with a piece of heat-shrink.
Resistors can be hand-selected for proper trip point
thus eliminating the potentiometer.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru z-figure |
Z-19 was produced in cooperation with an individual builder
for use with his Subaru engine. I've had no conversations with
suppliers of engine packages although I've offered a collaborative
effort on several occasions to several such suppliers.
I've not heard from the builder. This was several years ago
and I'd have to dig around in my e-mails to see if I can locate
him. As I recall, our several exchanges of Z-19
iterations ended with him expressing satisfaction with the
approach. If anyone has some suggestions and/or critical review
useful for enhancements to the approach, I'd be pleased to
receive them.
Bob . . .
>
>
>As someone who does not plan to use the EXPBUS in my Eggenfellner
>installation, I would be most interested in something specific that Bob
>could put together. There was a lot of talk on the Eggenfellner list awhile
>back about someone designing a replacement for the EXPBUS, but it didnt
>materialize. I plan to use a combination of modified versions of Bobs
>existing layouts and a couple of the Hyperion components. Anything that
>Bob could put together as a complete, professional layout for the
>Eggenfellner FWF (all-electric, one alternator, dual batteries, with full
>backup, switchover, and protection) would be just great.
>brian
>expecting my STi in just a couple more weeks!
>http://brian76.mystarband.net/RV-7Ahome.htm
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: B Tomm [mailto:fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net]
>To: 'subaruaircraft(at)yahoogroups.com'
>Subject: RE: [subaruaircraft] Re: CV Report on Ind Mod Failure
>
>Gary,
>
>Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I'm sure Bob would be more than happy to
March 04, 2005 - March 15, 2005
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-ec