AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-ew
October 03, 2005 - October 17, 2005
future advice. I am building an experimental plane and plan on using your
Fatwire to move my battery aft in order to eliminate the tailcone ballast
weight req'd when the battery is hung in its usual place on the firewall. I
bought a copy of Bob's Aeroelectric Connection and have begun the journey to
electrical literacy, so that I can install an all-electric panel in the
aircraft myself.
You mentioned "My airplane will have.......,etc." --I wanted to ask
you--what plane are you interested in or building? Also, can you recommend
any reading for a person who wants to self-teach avionics and aircraft
electrical stuff other than Bob's book? I already have a good background in
basic automotive electrical troubleshooting but want to go further.
Thanks,
Will
> My airplane will have a high current B+ noise filter near the alternator,
> and
> one or more low current devices on the "avionics bus" or associated with
> radios and intercoms wirings.
> Regards,
> Eric M. Jones
> www.PerihelionDesign.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>How about three sources of audio? Will three sources work with resistors
>only and no isolation amp?
Probably. Try it and see. You can always add the iso-amp
later if the resistor-mix method doesn't work for you.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: capacitor and music jack help needed |
>
>The thing that is slightly frustrating about this whole discussion is that
>when you buy the XCOM (or whatever else), presumably you are buying a comm
>transceiver that is designed to be installed in an aircraft. And that it
>will be wired into the aircraft power buss. Why the heck wasn't the radio
>designed to perform correctly in that environment (without adding
>additional "stuff")??
I'm pretty certain that the XCOM (like it's predecessor in the market -
Microair 760) will work just fine on typical light aircraft bus fed by
an automotive alternator. Many ultra-light owners like these tiny
radios too and they're almost always fitted with PM alternators that
are NOISY without additional filtering.
Check the instructions carefully, is the large cap ALWAYS recommended
or a suggested solution in case you do have noise? Unless you're flying
behind a Rotax, you won't need the cap. If you are flying a PM alternator,
then I presume one will begin with one of the appropriate Z-figures where
this capacitor is always included. The XCOM is not the only accessory that
will appreciate the presence of the extra filtering.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
Will:
There is a series of presentations on aircraft electrical system design
at http://b4.ca/raa_85/story/index.html .
These presentation were designed for the non-EE types who have to build
or maintain their own aircraft. They are not the definitive training
course, but may be of use as an introduction in conjuction with Bob's
book (which is referenced along with some other publications).
Vern Little
-9A in the paint shop.
Will N. Stevenson wrote:
>
>Eric,
>I'm new on this list and am overjoyed to find both you and Bob as sources of
>future advice. I am building an experimental plane and plan on using your
>Fatwire to move my battery aft in order to eliminate the tailcone ballast
>weight req'd when the battery is hung in its usual place on the firewall. I
>bought a copy of Bob's Aeroelectric Connection and have begun the journey to
>electrical literacy, so that I can install an all-electric panel in the
>aircraft myself.
>
>You mentioned "My airplane will have.......,etc." --I wanted to ask
>you--what plane are you interested in or building? Also, can you recommend
>any reading for a person who wants to self-teach avionics and aircraft
>electrical stuff other than Bob's book? I already have a good background in
>basic automotive electrical troubleshooting but want to go further.
>
>Thanks,
>Will
>
>
>
>
>>My airplane will have a high current B+ noise filter near the alternator,
>>and
>>one or more low current devices on the "avionics bus" or associated with
>>radios and intercoms wirings.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>Regards,
>>Eric M. Jones
>>www.PerihelionDesign.com
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Fox tails anyone? |
>
> > My airplane will have a high current B+ noise filter near the alternator,
> > and one or more low current devices on the "avionics bus" or associated
> with
> > radios and intercoms wirings.
A few weeks ago, we had some discussions about the value
of applying certain prophylactic measures to the installation
of devices in light aircraft with the notion that the
additions were of some value in standing off spikes and
noises (their intended purpose) and that a generous sprinkling
of these devices about the system (while not harmful) were
recommended just to make sure the offending stimulus, should
it manifest itself, would be managed with dispatch and aplomb.
In the very early days of publishing the 'Connection, a Longez
builder called me one evening to explain that, "I've wired the
whole airplane with shielded wire. I filtered the fuel pumps,
alternator, mags and defog blower. What else do I need? I was
taken aback by his story and asked, "Gee, I don't know. What
kind of a noise problem do you have?" "Oh, no problem", replies
he, "I haven't flown the airplane yet but I'm just trying to be
sure that noise isn't going to be a problem."
Similarly, I've noted that certain purveyors of quick-install
bus and switch products are fond of citing extra noise filters
and/or spike catchers as built in features worthy of elevating
their product's return on investment.
Just for grins, I went out to the driveway with trusty 'scope
and took this picture off the cigar lighter in my '95 Safari
with a 90A alternator, all loads turned on, engine over 2000
RPM so that the bus voltage was over 14.0 volts:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Safari_Bus_Noise_1.gif
Note that the major noise components are bounded by pk-pk
excursions on the order of 300 millivolts. There were some
narrow, higher voltage transients which I expanded out in
this picture:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Safari_Bus_Noise_2.gif
Hmmm . . . about a millisecond wide and excursions on the
order of 600-800 millivolts. Interestingly enough, the
general appearance of these noises did not seem to be affected
much by what was turned on or by engine RPM. It was difficult
to see what I hoped to identify as alternator ripple . . .
typically 1.5 volts peak-to-peak from an unfiltered
3-phase rectifier.
The reason that these noise are so small is because the
system is already fitted with a very effective filter called
a BATTERY. In the spam can business, we tell prospective
suppliers of electro-whizzies to EXPECT and be TOLERANT
of noises as described in:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/MSTD704_28V_Noise.jpg
This is for a 28v system, we're working with a 14v system
so the values are cut in half. In the frequency range of
1000 to 8000 Hz, expect noises in a 14v system of 0.5 vrms
or 1.5 v pk-pk. Outside this band, the energy of expected
noises falls off at 10 to 40 db per decade.
At first blush, my '95 Safari's electrical system complies
with the spirit and intent of Mil-Std-704 for allowable noise.
In fact, it's much quieter. I can tell you that unless the
battery is VERY soggy, light aircraft with automotive
alternators have similar noise energies.
Now, let's consider a conversation of a few hours ago wherein
a builder was understandably miffed by the need to add
external noise filtering in the form a hefty capacitor
as recommended by the radio's manufacturer. I suggested
that this requirement made sense for small aircraft with
single-phase, PM alternators where the rectified output
was VERY trashy. Most accessories would benefit from
having the large capacitor added to the battery in terms
of overall system noise reduction. Indeed, this capacitor
was shown in all Z-figures illustrating PM alternator
installations.
I'm quite certain that makers of the XCOM (along with
the vast majority of professional suppliers to industries
featuring DC powered vehicles) fully understand the nature
of the world they're expected to live in as do all of RACs
suppliers by specification. The idea that there is benefit
to adding extra filtering . . . just for good measure . . .
does not drive toward the elegant solution. It drives up
parts count concentrated in the supply line to a suite of
accessories and probably adds no operational value except
to accommodate poorly designed products that need the extra
filtering. In the later case, it's more prudent to add
needed filtering to that one system only so as to avoid
adding unnecessary complexity in series with systems that
never needed extra filtering in the first place.
I recall a crusty ol' mechanic I worked beside in one
of my earliest jobs in two-way radio. He had a fox-tail
on his car's radio antenna. He called it his "go fast
ornament". When I inquired about its title, he offered
that once the fox tail was added to the antenna, it could
be observed increase the speed of his car. Since the antenna
laid back so much further the car was obviously going faster.
The siren song of gee-whiz features is seductive. Folks
at OSH sell all kinds of products with ad hype bolstered
by claims having no or poor foundations in practice or
physics. Any time a claimed feature increases parts
count without adding operational value, the elegance of design
is degraded. Additionally weight, volume, and cost of ownership
go up.
We have lots of filters and fixes applied to various
systems and devices in our production aircraft . . . all
of which are incorporated to mitigate a known performance
problem. We work up to the boundaries of DO160/MS704
but no further. This judicial application of remedy
in response to real problems avoids unnecessary and
reliability reducing over-design. It also avoids addition
of no-value-added "go fast" features.
One's risk of encountering a noise problem after good practice
for grounding and manufacturer's recommendations for shielding.
Any residual noise problems will be relatively easy to find
and fix and will probably demonstrate a design flaw that the
"fox-tail" wouldn't have helped with anyhow.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Graham Singleton <graham(at)gflight.f9.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 19 Msgs - 10/03/05 |
<| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
Howdy Bob-
I am using one of these bilge blowers to ventilate the cabin of my RV:
http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?resultCt=1&
jspStoreDir=wm51&catalogId=10001&productId=50224&keyword=1896950&y=20&x=12&
storeId=10001&ddkey=SiteSearch
If that mess don't work, try www.westmarine.com and product search pt#
1896950
Unit is fused from Main Bus on its own circuit through a SPST switch with
built-in LED indicator integrated into switch. After perhaps 20 hours of
operation (for the fan- over 150 hours on plane at the time) I began getting noise
in
audio system from the fan, but not all the time. I can't imagine that the
brushes have worn to the point of arcing any differently than when new, nor can
I explain intermittent noise. Usually when fan is turned on it's noisy,
sometimes it's as quitet as new. Is this a case where a capacitor across the fan
input leads should help & if so, what are criteria for determining cap value?
Would similar capacitor installed between fuse and ground instead of at the
fan have the same effect, and if not, why? Plane is Z-11, B&C L-40, generic VR,
LVWM & OVP, very quiet otherwise. Comm RG400 cable passes within 8 inches of
motor and is bundled for short distance with fan feed wire.
I followed the recent fan noise discussion, but difference here is one-speed
fan.
Thanks!
Mark Phillips, Columbia, TN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Stringham" <fstringham(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | RE:Battery Problem |
Hi to all
two cells in 24 volt battery boil over consistently, is over voltage relay
not protecting battery or is it a bad battery.
TIA
Frank @ SGU and SLC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fox tails anyone? |
Now Bob, there you go again with your floccinaucinihilipilification.
> > My airplane will have a high current B+ noise filter near the
> > alternator,
> > and one or more low current devices on the "avionics bus" or associated
> >with radios and intercoms wirings.
I certainly don't suggest that builders just add foxtails and flame decals
on the side of their cowling or Transorbs without reason, but I do think
your design idiom is not the way I will build my airplane.
My posting on filters is in reaction to inherently poor design in many light
aircraft electrical systems. Now many who just swamp the powerline with a
big cap will do fine. The use of the proper fitering is simply engineering
aesthetics. But I've flown in areas where the nearest station was not much
closer than the COSPAS-SARSAT satellite. A few bucks to keep the bus noise
down would be money well spent.
Your posting of the scope shots from your '95 Safari are instructive. If
that were my aircraft electrical system I would take some steps (but not a
lot) to quiet it down--merely for the reason that the noise introduces some
measurable reduction of performance in other electronic devices, and device
I haven't even installed yet, or devices that haven't even been invented
yet.
Now, if I were involved in reducing the noise to some standard and on a
contract, I wouldn't spend a minute trying to make it any better than it had
to be. This would be a waste of time--and in the engineering
vernacular--nuts.
So Bob---Let it be resolved that YOU think much of the details that I like
to look at are unnecessary. AND I'M SURE YOU'RE CORRECT. But which ones of
the many, are really reasonable insights and might advance the art? Do you
know?
And Paul Messinger keeps telling me, "One size doesn't fit all." And he's
perfectly right too.
But my concerns and my designs are often exploratory in nature--and that is
often how the world progresses. My designs incorporate shi-shi fru-fru
stuff, because I don't know what environment the device will see--and by
adding a transorb across the power inputs, I express the perhaps futile hope
that a lightning strike or other untold event MIGHT NOT kill it.
You call these "prophylactic measures"? Well, I say "a prophylactic, in time
save nine".
Please don't spend too much time on a reply. I only read six hours a day and
I'm near my limit today.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
(508) 764-2072
America is a nation that conceives many odd inventions for getting somewhere
but it can think of nothing to do once it gets there.
--Will Rogers
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fox tails anyone? |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Hi Bob,
A good discussion.
Question below..
>
>
>
>>
>> > My airplane will have a high current B+ noise filter near the
>> alternator, and one or more low current devices on the "avionics
>> bus" or associated
>> with
>> > radios and intercoms wirings.
>
>
> A few weeks ago, we had some discussions about the value
> of applying certain prophylactic measures to the installation
snip
> as recommended by the radio's manufacturer. I suggested
> that this requirement made sense for small aircraft with
> single-phase, PM alternators where the rectified output
> was VERY trashy. Most accessories would benefit from
> having the large capacitor added to the battery in terms
> of overall system noise reduction. Indeed, this capacitor
> was shown in all Z-figures illustrating PM alternator
> installations.
>
>
I wonder if the single-phase PM alternators (without big cap) meet the mil
standard (if there is one) for suppliers of electrical energy. If you
have one of these alternators and expect to power any avionics with it, it
only makes sense to install whatever is necessary (in terms of filters) to
meet the DO/mil standard. If you're just going to run some strobes and
nav lights, it probably doen't make any difference.
Do you have any scope shots of the output of one of these devices?
snip
Regards,
Matt-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "J. Mcculley" <mcculleyja(at)starpower.net> |
| Subject: | LM-317 & Noise Filtering |
Request to Eric Jones:
I've used the LM-317 family of chips for voltage regulation but don't
understand how they would be wired for noise filtering. Can you
describe the circuitry appropriate for this purpose? Thanks.
Jim McCulley
Noise free Tailwind--but still a student!
> A really robust and useful filter that is hardly ever used is an LM317
> voltage regulator (or better yet some of its newer sisters). These voltage
regulators can do a much better filtering job than a pound of
capacitor and
inductor, especially at audio frequencies.
Eric Jones
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> 10/03/05 |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 19 Msgs - |
10/03/05
>
>
>< < Microair 760) will work just fine on typical light aircraft bus fed by
>
> alternator,
> that
>
> Bob
>
>Bob
>my understanding is the the big C is required to act as a sink/battery if
>the main battery goes open circuit with the engine running. This will then
>prevent the alternator going high.
>Graham
Is that what XCOM says? Again, the capacitor is a great
adjunct to battery-less operation of a PM alternator . . .
and much less so for an automotive alternator. It would be
out of character for XCOM (or anyone eles) to make
recommendations for electrical system power generation.
Is this in their instruction manuals or anything I can
access on the 'net?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE:Battery Problem |
>
>
>Hi to all
>
>two cells in 24 volt battery boil over consistently, is over voltage relay
>not protecting battery or is it a bad battery.
What is your bus voltage while this is happening? The fact that only
two cells of the 12 are affected suggests failures in those cells only.
A generalized OV condition would be expected to affect all cells the
same way.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fox tails anyone? |
>
>
>
>
>Now Bob, there you go again with your floccinaucinihilipilification.
>
> > > My airplane will have a high current B+ noise filter near the
> > > alternator,
> > > and one or more low current devices on the "avionics bus" or associated
> > >with radios and intercoms wirings.
>
>I certainly don't suggest that builders just add foxtails and flame decals
>on the side of their cowling or Transorbs without reason, but I do think
>your design idiom is not the way I will build my airplane.
>
>My posting on filters is in reaction to inherently poor design in many light
>aircraft electrical systems. Now many who just swamp the powerline with a
>big cap will do fine. The use of the proper fitering is simply engineering
>aesthetics. But I've flown in areas where the nearest station was not much
>closer than the COSPAS-SARSAT satellite. A few bucks to keep the bus noise
>down would be money well spent.
>Your posting of the scope shots from your '95 Safari are instructive. If
>that were my aircraft electrical system I would take some steps (but not a
>lot) to quiet it down--merely for the reason that the noise introduces some
>measurable reduction of performance in other electronic devices, and device
>I haven't even installed yet, or devices that haven't even been invented
>yet.
"Measurable" does not translate to "perceivable" or even "deleterious."
I saw some noise traces taken from Space Shuttle busses and they were
awesome
sights to behold. They didn't even meet Mil-Std-704! Elegant engineering
is a process of trade-offs with a goal of optimizing return on
investment and building customer confidence in your abilities. If
my customer's machines were carrying any 'lectric "foxtails" with
my name on the drawings, I should be summarily dismissed.
>Now, if I were involved in reducing the noise to some standard and on a
>contract, I wouldn't spend a minute trying to make it any better than it had
>to be. This would be a waste of time--and in the engineering
>vernacular--nuts.
>
>So Bob---Let it be resolved that YOU think much of the details that I like
>to look at are unnecessary. AND I'M SURE YOU'RE CORRECT. But which ones of
>the many, are really reasonable insights and might advance the art? Do you
>know?
Based on my experience yes, I do know. I'm not suggesting you do anything
different in your airplane. I'm only cautioning others that not all
recommendations are supported by anything more than personal desires
on the part of the advisor. Unless the advice is founded on
data or a real problem solving experiment one is justified in being
skeptical and adopting a wait-and-see policy as opposed to adopting every
bit of advice 'cause it sounds good and made the advisor feel good.
>And Paul Messinger keeps telling me, "One size doesn't fit all." And he's
>perfectly right too.
Never suggested it does . . . I think it was Greg Richter who marched
off down that path.
>But my concerns and my designs are often exploratory in nature--and that is
>often how the world progresses. My designs incorporate shi-shi fru-fru
>stuff, because I don't know what environment the device will see--and by
>adding a transorb across the power inputs, I express the perhaps futile hope
>that a lightning strike or other untold event MIGHT NOT kill it.
I understand how your concerns can grow in proportion to lack of
data and experience. Please do whatever is necessary to achieve your
personal comfort goals. I'm only suggesting to 1300 other readers
that their comfort levels need not be lock-stepped with anyone else's
especially where there is no data to support the comforting hypothesis.
>You call these "prophylactic measures"? Well, I say "a prophylactic, in time
>save nine".
>
>Please don't spend too much time on a reply. I only read six hours a day and
>I'm near my limit today.
Just over 3 minutes . . . and I don't expect an answer.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LM-317 & Noise Filtering |
>Request to Eric Jones:
>I've used the LM-317 family of chips for voltage regulation but don't
>understand how they would be wired for noise filtering. Can you
>describe the circuitry appropriate for this purpose? Thanks. Jim McCulley
>Noise free Tailwind--but still a student!
>> A really robust and useful filter that is hardly ever used is an LM317
>> voltage regulator (or better yet some of its newer sisters). These
>> voltage
>> regulators can do a much better filtering job than a pound of
>>capacitor and inductor, especially at audio frequencies. Eric Jones
Jim,
The LM317 has 80 dB of ripple rejection built right in--because ripple is
just a variable voltage. It's not ideal--since fast op amps and active
filters do the job better--but compared to a big electrolytic cap and
inductor it weighs far less and has no altitude or aging problems. It will
handle 1.5 amps, and a couple more minor parts makes it a more versatile and
convenient choice for some applications.
A real engineer would say, "Why bother?" and point out some other simple
approaches But if you have an LM317 and a noise problem and only have to
filter an amp. Hey...it works well.
For those interested see: www.ixys.com/t03232kb.pdf
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
(508) 764-2072
"Beaten paths are for beaten men."
-Eric A. Johnston
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Firewall penetrations |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Hello All,
Starting to think about the above subject seriously and spent some time
in the local hardware store looking for a way to provide a quick,simple
lightweight way to make a fire resistant hole in the 'wall.
So I found these metal conduit adaptors for electrical panels, the ones
with a single screw on on side.
They come in almost any size, are lightwight and have a threaded ring
which secures them to the wall... A dab of hi strength locktite will
required to secure the threads.
They are about 1.5 inch long that allows you to pack the free space with
fire sealant, and you could also push an additional short length of
firesleeve tube over the end secured with hose clamps if you so desired.
Best part they cost less than a buck each.
For control cables there are the NMB connectors which basically clamp
Romex for strain relief going into an electric panel. The neat thing
about these is they come with a metal sheild that pretty much covers the
unused part of the opening. They don't have the length of the above
conduit adaptors but they are sure better than a plastic snap bushing!!
Does this sound like a plan???
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetrations |
Are they steel or low melting temp "white" metal?
The steel or stainless steel towel rack/grab bars as per the
Aeroelectric Connection works well for efi systems with lots of wires.
Ken
Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis) wrote:
>
>Hello All,
>
>Starting to think about the above subject seriously and spent some time
>in the local hardware store looking for a way to provide a quick,simple
>lightweight way to make a fire resistant hole in the 'wall.
>
>So I found these metal conduit adaptors for electrical panels, the ones
>with a single screw on on side.
>
>They come in almost any size, are lightwight and have a threaded ring
>which secures them to the wall... A dab of hi strength locktite will
>required to secure the threads.
>
>They are about 1.5 inch long that allows you to pack the free space with
>fire sealant, and you could also push an additional short length of
>firesleeve tube over the end secured with hose clamps if you so desired.
>
>Best part they cost less than a buck each.
>
>For control cables there are the NMB connectors which basically clamp
>Romex for strain relief going into an electric panel. The neat thing
>about these is they come with a metal sheild that pretty much covers the
>unused part of the opening. They don't have the length of the above
>conduit adaptors but they are sure better than a plastic snap bushing!!
>
>
>Does this sound like a plan???
>
>Frank
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LM-317 & Noise Filtering |
>
>Jim,
>
>The LM317 has 80 dB of ripple rejection built right in--because ripple is
>just a variable voltage. It's not ideal--since fast op amps and active
>filters do the job better--but compared to a big electrolytic cap and
>inductor it weighs far less and has no altitude or aging problems. It will
>handle 1.5 amps, and a couple more minor parts makes it a more versatile and
>convenient choice for some applications.
>
>A real engineer would say, "Why bother?" and point out some other simple
>approaches But if you have an LM317 and a noise problem and only have to
>filter an amp. Hey...it works well.
With limitations. See:
http://cache.national.com/ds/LM/LM117.pdf
A popular part stocked by Radio Shack is the LM317T (TO-220
plastic power package). The middle plot on the right side of
page 6 describes a feature called "Dropout Voltage" and illustrates
how it varies with temperature and operating current. Assuming you
want to operate at say 500 milliamps and your chip will never be
called to function at or below 0C, then we read from the chart
that dropout voltage is about 1.8 volts.
Assuming a bus voltage of 13.8 volts minimum and a noise
component of say 1 volt peak-to-peak, then the MAXIMUM
expected regulated output from the LM317 is 13.8 minus
1.8 minus 0.5v or 11.5 volts. Another way of stating this
operating characteristic is to say that the input voltage
cannot be allowed to drop any closer than 1.8 volts of the
output setpoint which must INCLUDE the negative most going
excursion due to noise.
Generally speaking, three-terminal regulators can be used
to great advantage to provide a noise free power source for
accessories that operate substantially below bus voltage.
This is why the max setpoint for our three-terminal reguator
based dimmer is designed to 12 volts. The audio isolation
amplifier described at
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9009/9009-700E.pdf
operates at 8.7 volts . . . well below the incoming
bus voltage.
One can purchased "low dropout" devices that work down to
a few hundred millivolts differential but you must always
set for an output voltage low enough to prevent the negative
going component of noise does not go below the allowable
dropout value.
As a general rule, these devices are not well suited for
reducing bus noise to accessories that are designed to
operate directly from bus voltages. They work quite well
in situations like those illustrated.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Will N. Stevenson" <will(at)wavecable.com> |
Vern, many thanks for tipping me about your seminars, I shall work my way
through them.
Will
----- Original Message -----
From: "rv-9a-online" <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: New to List
>
>
> Will:
>
> There is a series of presentations on aircraft electrical system design
> at http://b4.ca/raa_85/story/index.html .
>
> These presentation were designed for the non-EE types who have to build
> or maintain their own aircraft. They are not the definitive training
> course, but may be of use as an introduction in conjuction with Bob's
> book (which is referenced along with some other publications).
>
> Vern Little
> -9A in the paint shop.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Graham Singleton <graham(at)gflight.f9.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 16 Msgs - 10/04/05 |
>>Bob
>>my understanding is the the big C is required to act as a sink/battery if
>>the main battery goes open circuit with the engine running. This will then
>>prevent the alternator going high.
>>Graham
>>
>>
>
> Is that what XCOM says? Again, the capacitor is a great
> adjunct to battery-less operation of a PM alternator . . .
> and much less so for an automotive alternator. It would be
> out of character for XCOM (or anyone eles) to make
> recommendations for electrical system power generation.
> Is this in their instruction manuals or anything I can
> access on the 'net?
>
> Bob .
>
>
Bob
no, it's what Rotax say in their installation manual
Graham
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net> |
| Subject: | Diodes on B&C contactor |
Hi. I'm just getting started on my electrical system and have received some
parts from B&C. One of those, the continuous contactor to be used as the
battery contactor, arrived with three diodes on it, all oriented toward the
one of the two smaller posts. I know there should be one from ground (i.e.,
one of the two smaller posts) to the "actuator" post, but what are the other
two, from each of the load side posts to the "actuator" post, for?
Thanks for your help.
Bill Steer
Zenith 601HD/Stratus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Diodes on B&C contactor |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Bill -
That soounds like the crossfeed contactor. See Z-14 and you should be able
to see what they are for. That contactor has to serve both electrical
systems and their battery switches.
John
>
> Hi. I'm just getting started on my electrical system and have received
> some
> parts from B&C. One of those, the continuous contactor to be used as the
> battery contactor, arrived with three diodes on it, all oriented toward
> the
> one of the two smaller posts. I know there should be one from ground
> (i.e.,
> one of the two smaller posts) to the "actuator" post, but what are the
> other
> two, from each of the load side posts to the "actuator" post, for?
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> Bill Steer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Stone" <jrstone(at)insightbb.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetrations |
They weigh a ton, and are not make of Stainless. But, sould work fine. I
considered them too, but went with the ss hand bar at Home Depot.
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Firewall penetrations
>
>
> Hello All,
>
> Starting to think about the above subject seriously and spent some time
> in the local hardware store looking for a way to provide a quick,simple
> lightweight way to make a fire resistant hole in the 'wall.
>
> So I found these metal conduit adaptors for electrical panels, the ones
> with a single screw on on side.
>
> They come in almost any size, are lightwight and have a threaded ring
> which secures them to the wall... A dab of hi strength locktite will
> required to secure the threads.
>
> They are about 1.5 inch long that allows you to pack the free space with
> fire sealant, and you could also push an additional short length of
> firesleeve tube over the end secured with hose clamps if you so desired.
>
> Best part they cost less than a buck each.
>
> For control cables there are the NMB connectors which basically clamp
> Romex for strain relief going into an electric panel. The neat thing
> about these is they come with a metal sheild that pretty much covers the
> unused part of the opening. They don't have the length of the above
> conduit adaptors but they are sure better than a plastic snap bushing!!
>
>
> Does this sound like a plan???
>
> Frank
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> 10/04/05 |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 16 Msgs - |
10/04/05
>
>
>
> >>Bob
> >>my understanding is the the big C is required to act as a sink/battery if
> >>the main battery goes open circuit with the engine running. This will then
> >>prevent the alternator going high.
> >>Graham
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Is that what XCOM says? Again, the capacitor is a great
> > adjunct to battery-less operation of a PM alternator . . .
> > and much less so for an automotive alternator. It would be
> > out of character for XCOM (or anyone eles) to make
> > recommendations for electrical system power generation.
> > Is this in their instruction manuals or anything I can
> > access on the 'net?
> >
> > Bob .
> >
> >
>Bob
>no, it's what Rotax say in their installation manual
Very good. Rotax has acknowledged an operating characteristic
of their alternator system and has recommended a technique for
reducing the deleterious effects of that characteristic. Good
engineering, good marketing. The folks at XCOM have every
reason to expect that their product will be fed by a system that
is no worse for noise than those standards and practices adopted
by the industry for decades. I'd be very surprised if XCOM or
anyone else would ask for a large cap to be installed upstream
of their product for any instance except to acknowledge the
need already defined by folks who sell PM alternators.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "J. Mcculley" <mcculleyja(at)starpower.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LM-317 & Noise Filtering |
Bob,
Thanks for your detailed and helpful explanation, as usual. It appears
this would not be a very suitable noise suppresion technique applicable
to most avionics equipment that operates ideally at 12 volts minimum.
Jim
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> With limitations. See:
>
> http://cache.national.com/ds/LM/LM117.pdf
>
>
> A popular part stocked by Radio Shack is the LM317T (TO-220
> plastic power package). The middle plot on the right side of
> page 6 describes a feature called "Dropout Voltage" and illustrates
> how it varies with temperature and operating current. Assuming you
> want to operate at say 500 milliamps and your chip will never be
> called to function at or below 0C, then we read from the chart
> that dropout voltage is about 1.8 volts.
>
> Assuming a bus voltage of 13.8 volts minimum and a noise
> component of say 1 volt peak-to-peak, then the MAXIMUM
> expected regulated output from the LM317 is 13.8 minus
> 1.8 minus 0.5v or 11.5 volts. Another way of stating this
> operating characteristic is to say that the input voltage
> cannot be allowed to drop any closer than 1.8 volts of the
> output setpoint which must INCLUDE the negative most going
> excursion due to noise.
>
> Generally speaking, three-terminal regulators can be used
> to great advantage to provide a noise free power source for
> accessories that operate substantially below bus voltage.
> This is why the max setpoint for our three-terminal reguator
> based dimmer is designed to 12 volts. The audio isolation
> amplifier described at
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9009/9009-700E.pdf
>
> operates at 8.7 volts . . . well below the incoming
> bus voltage.
>
> One can purchased "low dropout" devices that work down to
> a few hundred millivolts differential but you must always
> set for an output voltage low enough to prevent the negative
> going component of noise does not go below the allowable
> dropout value.
>
> As a general rule, these devices are not well suited for
> reducing bus noise to accessories that are designed to
> operate directly from bus voltages. They work quite well
> in situations like those illustrated.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Karen and Robert Brown" <bkbrown(at)ashcreekwireless.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetrations |
Hi Frank-
I used those conduit adapters that have a locking ring on each side. I do not
believe they are steel. I ran my wiring through them and then sleeved them with
a 6" piece of firesleeve hose which has a stainless steel clamp installed at
both ends. After the wires were run, I injected 3M Firestop (from Home Depot)
into the firesleeve. My thoughts are that for most high temp situations, this
will be fine. For the highest temp situations (5 or 10 minutes at 2000F),
my cowl will have burned off (it's epoxy) and my windscreen will have burned
through (it's plexi) and at that time, I don't think a steel flange around a wiring
bundle will be the crux of the matter... If it is, I guess you'll read
about it in the archives.
And thank you Mr. Nuckolls for all the learning AND for making me think about MY
design goals. One of my main goals in building this plane was to have a simple,
robust electrical system that I understood and installed. With your help
(and the contribution of all you listers!) I have achieved that. Being a non-electric
type when I started, I have not contributed nearly as much as I have
read, listened and learned.
Bob Brown
RV7A - Fitting cowl/baffles/the last 99%
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Diodes on B&C contactor |
>
>Hi. I'm just getting started on my electrical system and have received some
>parts from B&C. One of those, the continuous contactor to be used as the
>battery contactor, arrived with three diodes on it, all oriented toward the
>one of the two smaller posts. I know there should be one from ground (i.e.,
>one of the two smaller posts) to the "actuator" post, but what are the other
>two, from each of the load side posts to the "actuator" post, for?
Sounds like they sent you one wired for crossfeed application.
See figure Z-14 and :
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/s701-2.jpg
For battery contactor and other simple applications, the S702-1
is usually sufficient. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/s701-1.jpg
Now, having said that, there are builders who have wired their
battery contactors like crossfeed contactors. They have dual
batteries and they were thinking that if only one battery had
been accidently run down, one could bring the good battery on
line though the normal power path and start the engine. Then
the battery contactor on the dead battery could STILL be closed
using power from the bus instead of depending only upon energy
from the depleted battery to get the contactor closed.
The extra diodes are cheap and it might be a useful feature
at some point in the future operation of your airplane.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetrations |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Frank -
Lancair uses these for firewall penetrations.
http://www.mcmaster.com/ search for part number: 7529K21 These are zinc
coated steel. You can use a piece of fire sleeve around the whole thing
and cinch it in place wi/ safety wire.
John
wrote:
>
> I still think the pot metal is a LOT better than a empty hole/nylon bush
> but if some kind of steel is available I'd rather have it.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Firewall penetrations |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Ahhh....Cord grips, yes that's where I have seen them....I seen these
here at work.
Thanks for the pointer.
Of course there is another small thought I had about the pot metal...I.e
we have this SS firewall and we make fuel connections through it with
Aluminium bulkhead connectors....Go figure..Shouldn't we be using steel?
Where is the melting point of pot metal vs aluminium?..Anyone know?
Frank
-----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: Firewall penetrations
-->
Frank -
Lancair uses these for firewall penetrations.
http://www.mcmaster.com/ search for part number: 7529K21 These are zinc
coated steel. You can use a piece of fire sleeve around the whole thing
and cinch it in place wi/ safety wire.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetrations |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Frank -
Note that you can get the cord grips in stainless from McMaster-Carr.
Cheers,
John
> (Corvallis)"
>
> Ahhh....Cord grips, yes that's where I have seen them....I seen these
> here at work.
>
> Thanks for the pointer.
>
> Of course there is another small thought I had about the pot metal...I.e
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N5SL <nfivesl(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetrations |
Hi John:
Thanks for the link and the tip. Part number 7529K31 is the aluminum equivalent.
Why not use the aluminum chord grip? It's about the same price as the zinc
part. Another question - do you need the accessory kit for mounting it to the
firewall? Here's some text from the McMaster Carr page:
"Temperature range for aluminum is -40 to +300 F; for nylon it's -40 to +225
F; for zinc-plated steel it's -30 to +225 F."
Scott Laughlin
www.cooknwithgas.com
601XL / Corvair
Wiring & Stuff
John Schroeder wrote:
Frank -
Lancair uses these for firewall penetrations.
http://www.mcmaster.com/ search for part number: 7529K21 These are zinc
coated steel. You can use a piece of fire sleeve around the whole thing
and cinch it in place wi/ safety wire.
John
---------------------------------
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Firewall penetrations |
Hi Frank-
>Of course there is another small thought I had about the pot metal...I.e
>we have this SS firewall and we make fuel connections through it with
>Aluminium bulkhead connectors....Go figure..Shouldn't we be using steel?
A very good observation. I believe all the usual suppliers carry the appropriate
fittings in steel. Also, if you take a look at any fittings that came on your
mechanical fuel pump and fuel injection system or carb, I believe that you
will see that they are steel. The only aluminum in my fuel system forward of
the firewall are the mechanical pump vent elbow and a short piece of rigid tube
between the bulkhead elbow and the firewall mounted fuel flow transducer.
This, as well as all the fuel and oil hose FWF is jacketed in firesleeve.
Also along those lines, Van's hydraulic reservoir is aluminum, filled with flamable
liquid, and directly penetrates the firewall. Mine will be liberally sealed
to the firewall with intumescent caulk. Probably the biggest offender is
the cabin heat box. A SS flapper doesn't do much good when the aluminum box it's
in melts off the firewall....
Just another .02!
Glen Matejcek
aerobubba(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Firewall penetrations |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Actually you can get all the fittings in steel from your local
hydraulics shop very inexpensively...I have made a few special fittings
by cutting the ends off two fittings and welding them back together.
Hmm...from your observations Glenn it would seem using the aluminium
cord grips (I happened to find in the scrap bin) would be as good/better
as the weakest points.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Glen
Matejcek
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Firewall penetrations
-->
Hi Frank-
>Of course there is another small thought I had about the pot
>metal...I.e we have this SS firewall and we make fuel connections
>through it with Aluminium bulkhead connectors....Go figure..Shouldn't
we be using steel?
A very good observation. I believe all the usual suppliers carry the
appropriate fittings in steel. Also, if you take a look at any fittings
that came on your mechanical fuel pump and fuel injection system or
carb, I believe that you will see that they are steel. The only
aluminum in my fuel system forward of the firewall are the mechanical
pump vent elbow and a short piece of rigid tube between the bulkhead
elbow and the firewall mounted fuel flow transducer. This, as well as
all the fuel and oil hose FWF is jacketed in firesleeve.
Also along those lines, Van's hydraulic reservoir is aluminum, filled
with flamable liquid, and directly penetrates the firewall. Mine will
be liberally sealed to the firewall with intumescent caulk. Probably
the biggest offender is the cabin heat box. A SS flapper doesn't do
much good when the aluminum box it's in melts off the firewall....
Just another .02!
Glen Matejcek
aerobubba(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Morning all,
I need to wire up jacks for Sterio music input (1/8th jack), Cell phone
connect (no clue what the connector is) and the Stereo headsets.
I have the mic wiring and am thinking the headset follows the same
format as the mic...i.e the barrel is the ground and the other two pins
are left and right...Correct??
So what does the music and cell phone wiring look like?
Thanks
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Stone" <jrstone(at)insightbb.com> |
I'm setting up my dimmers and was wondering if I need one for the Garmin stack.
I've got the 480 mfd, sl-40, 330 transponder and their audio panel. Anyone
been down this road before?
Can all 4 boxes be dimmed by a single pot?
Thanks,
Jim
Harmon Rocket II
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetrations |
In a message dated 10/6/05 9:18:22 AM Central Daylight Time,
aerobubba(at)earthlink.net writes:
> Also along those lines, Van's hydraulic reservoir is aluminum, filled with
> flamable liquid, and directly penetrates the firewall. Mine will be
> liberally sealed to the firewall with intumescent caulk. Probably the biggest
> offender is the cabin heat box. A SS flapper doesn't do much good when the
> aluminum box it's in melts off the firewall....
>>>
Not sure if it would work for y'all taildragger types, but my brake reservoir
is mounted on the far right cockpit side of the sub-panel where it's easy to
get to (tip-up canopy!) and see (clear plastic reservoir # MTR-100 Matco from
Wicks). Lines drop down from a T on the reservoir to the brake cylinders and
nothing through the firewall. An alternative would be the reservoirs on the
master cylinders (MT-MC5 also from Wicks).
Plus, I made a duplicate cabin heat box and door from stainless, and used a
steel hinge for the door. There's a complete one available on Doug Reeve's
website (I think that's where I saw an ad, but couldn't find it just now), but
it
was very simple to make using Vans parts for patterns...
From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark Phillips - 6A, N51PW, 245 hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Denton" <bdenton(at)bdenton.com> |
What will you be wiring them TO? Generally, the installation manual for the
audio panel/intercom/whatever will show you how to wire them.
This might also be of some help:
http://www.ps-engineering.com/docs/PMA8000_Wire.pdf
It shows how the phone and music jacks are wired on this particular unit,
but I think the wiring is pretty standardized.
Good luck...
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Hinde,
Frank George (Corvallis)
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Audio wiring
Morning all,
I need to wire up jacks for Sterio music input (1/8th jack), Cell phone
connect (no clue what the connector is) and the Stereo headsets.
I have the mic wiring and am thinking the headset follows the same
format as the mic...i.e the barrel is the ground and the other two pins
are left and right...Correct??
So what does the music and cell phone wiring look like?
Thanks
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetrations |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Scott -
Yes, you do need the accessory kit for some of the fittings. I don't know
why we went with the zinc coated steel fittings instead of the aluminum. I
did not register on that info on temperatures. Intuitively, I would have
thought that steel has a higher temp rating than aluminum. Perhaps the AL
is an alloy that can take more heat.
Cheers,
John
> Another question - do you need the accessory kit for mounting it
> to the firewall?
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: gamin avionics |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Jim -
The only one that needs a dimmer is the 340. One circuit runs the
backlighting on the buttons and may need a dimmer. The rest dim with a
photo cell.
John
>
>
> I'm setting up my dimmers and was wondering if I need one for the Garmin
> stack. I've got the 480 mfd, sl-40, 330 transponder and their audio
> panel. Anyone been down this road before?
> Can all 4 boxes be dimmed by a single pot?
> Thanks,
> Jim
> Harmon Rocket II
>
>
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Hi all,
Just checked with radio Shack and they tell me you can't connect a cell
phone to an audio panel like I want to. I find this hard to believe and
was about to wire in a standard 3/32nd phone jack but the guy told me
you can't get a cable to go between the cell phone and the jack and it
won't work anyway.
Seems very odd, I mean how do hands free set ups work then?
So has anyone wired their cell phones into their audio panels using a
standard 3/32nd jack sucessfully?
Note I have no intention of using the phone while arborne, just my Wife
often likes to make a call just before take off...Don't ask why...:)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jon Goguen <jon.goguen(at)umassmed.edu> |
| Subject: | Recommendations for automotive alternators |
We're considering building our own vacuum pad driven alternator set up
for a Rotax 912S. (The Rotax external alternator doesn't fit without
extensive cowl modifications, and exisiting vacuum pad mount alternator
options either have inadequate output due to low rpm of the drive (B&C
systems) or have unverified output specs.) The basic idea is to mount
a pulley on the pump pad, and use it to drive an external automotive
alternator at 2-3 x the pump drive rpm. A 30-40 amp alternator is
sufficient, and would ideally be small, light, and externally
regulated, although we haven't rejected the internal regulation
option. Anyone have specific recommendations regarding the available
alternator models?
Thanks!
Jon
Jon Goguen
jon.goguen(at)umassmed.edu
Central Massachusetts
Kitfox Series V Rotax 912S / N456JG (reserved)
Complete except for electrics and avionics
"Nothing worth knowing can be understood by the human mind"
--Woody Allen
On Oct 6, 2005, at 9:01 AM, N5SL wrote:
>
> Hi John:
>
> Thanks for the link and the tip. Part number 7529K31 is the aluminum
> equivalent. Why not use the aluminum chord grip? It's about the same
> price as the zinc part. Another question - do you need the accessory
> kit for mounting it to the firewall? Here's some text from the
> McMaster Carr page:
>
> "Temperature range for aluminum is -40 to +300 F; for nylon it's -40
> to +225 F; for zinc-plated steel it's -30 to +225 F."
>
> Scott Laughlin
> www.cooknwithgas.com
> 601XL / Corvair
> Wiring & Stuff
>
> John Schroeder wrote:
>
> Frank -
>
> Lancair uses these for firewall penetrations.
>
> http://www.mcmaster.com/ search for part number: 7529K21 These are zinc
> coated steel. You can use a piece of fire sleeve around the whole thing
> and cinch it in place wi/ safety wire.
>
> John
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Recommendations for automotive alternators |
| From: | James H Nelson <rv9jim(at)juno.com> |
Jon,
Get on the Europa e-mail list, I designed and built a direct
drive for a 40A alternator that ran off the back side of the engine
(912S). I built an Europa mono wheel and wanted more power. I gave my
drawings and instructions on how to do it to one of the guys who copied
mine. It takes a bit of time but it all fits. I used a IFIR (internal
fan, int. reg.) automotive unit that bolted up to the crank at the
flywheel. Used a B&C regulator as I modified the alternator to a "B" lead
config. The alternator was coupled through a sureflex coupling 3S size
(only Martin sprocket and Gear will work) for the emergency sheer point.
Ran great. I had mine for two years and 85 hours of trouble free useage.
Can be done but requires time and machine work on the mounting plate ect.
Jim Nelson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | PWilson <pwmac(at)sisna.com> alternators |
| Subject: | Re: Recommendations for automotive |
alternators
How about the John Deere PM unit?
http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/corvair/dynamo.html
I am tied up now but am sure interested in what you describe. keep
us up to date.
Regards, Paul
========================
At 01:24 PM 10/6/2005, you wrote:
>
>We're considering building our own vacuum pad driven alternator set up
>for a Rotax 912S. (The Rotax external alternator doesn't fit without
>extensive cowl modifications, and exisiting vacuum pad mount alternator
>options either have inadequate output due to low rpm of the drive (B&C
>systems) or have unverified output specs.) The basic idea is to mount
>a pulley on the pump pad, and use it to drive an external automotive
>alternator at 2-3 x the pump drive rpm. A 30-40 amp alternator is
>sufficient, and would ideally be small, light, and externally
>regulated, although we haven't rejected the internal regulation
>option. Anyone have specific recommendations regarding the available
>alternator models?
>
>Thanks!
>
>Jon
>
>Jon Goguen
>jon.goguen(at)umassmed.edu
>Central Massachusetts
>Kitfox Series V Rotax 912S / N456JG (reserved)
>Complete except for electrics and avionics
>
>"Nothing worth knowing can be understood by the human mind"
>--Woody Allen
>On Oct 6, 2005, at 9:01 AM, N5SL wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi John:
> >
> > Thanks for the link and the tip. Part number 7529K31 is the aluminum
> > equivalent. Why not use the aluminum chord grip? It's about the same
> > price as the zinc part. Another question - do you need the accessory
> > kit for mounting it to the firewall? Here's some text from the
> > McMaster Carr page:
> >
> > "Temperature range for aluminum is -40 to +300 F; for nylon it's -40
> > to +225 F; for zinc-plated steel it's -30 to +225 F."
> >
> > Scott Laughlin
> > www.cooknwithgas.com
> > 601XL / Corvair
> > Wiring & Stuff
> >
> > John Schroeder wrote:
> >
> > Frank -
> >
> > Lancair uses these for firewall penetrations.
> >
> > http://www.mcmaster.com/ search for part number: 7529K21 These are zinc
> > coated steel. You can use a piece of fire sleeve around the whole thing
> > and cinch it in place wi/ safety wire.
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | sportav8r(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetrations |
Makes one wonder what they mean by a "temperature rating;" it certainly can't be
a melting point. 225 F is just barely above the boiling point of water. Try
to imagine a steel that fails at that temp. Aluminum aircraft cylinders hold
up well at 450 degree cht's; mild steel exhausts work into the 1500 degree range.
Are we to believe they have made a nylon that withstands the same temp
extremes as steel? Or a steel that's as low-melting-point as nylon?
I am merely suggesting we be careful what we swallow from the catalog descriptions
here, as they may not address suitability for our intended use.
-Stormy
-----Original Message-----
From: N5SL <nfivesl(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Firewall penetrations
Hi John:
Thanks for the link and the tip. Part number 7529K31 is the aluminum
equivalent. Why not use the aluminum chord grip? It's about the same price as
the zinc part. Another question - do you need the accessory kit for mounting it
to the firewall? Here's some text from the McMaster Carr page:
"Temperature range for aluminum is -40 to +300 F; for nylon it's -40 to +225
F; for zinc-plated steel it's -30 to +225 F."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Frank -
Why don't you buy a set of Lightspeed 20XL or 25XL's (both rehab'ed) from
Lightspeed. They will install a cell phone jack for $75. This is a hell of
a lot simpler than messing with the wiring to an audio panel.
IMHO.
John Schroeder
wrote:
> So has anyone wired their cell phones into their audio panels using a
> standard 3/32nd jack sucessfully?
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
I could except that John Stark already wired the audio panel for the
cell phone so (in theory) its simply a case of wiring up the appropriate
jack on the end of the supplied cable and plugging the phone in.
As I said...in theory, plus I'm hoping to keep my current
headsets...we'll see..:)
Thanks
Frank
-----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: Cell Phone
-->
Frank -
Why don't you buy a set of Lightspeed 20XL or 25XL's (both rehab'ed)
from Lightspeed. They will install a cell phone jack for $75. This is a
hell of a lot simpler than messing with the wiring to an audio panel.
IMHO.
John Schroeder
wrote:
> So has anyone wired their cell phones into their audio panels using a
> standard 3/32nd jack sucessfully?
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Firewall penetrations |
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
If I had to guess I would say the difference is in the failure temps of the gasket
materials. Because aluminum conducts heat much better than steel, there
is a good chance the nylon/rubber/whatever will stay below it's melting/flash
point longer thus the higher temp rating for the aluminum.
The failure of any one component should be the max temp. Not necessarily of the
whole.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Flaps
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of sportav8r(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Firewall penetrations
Makes one wonder what they mean by a "temperature rating;" it certainly can't be
a melting point. 225 F is just barely above the boiling point of water. Try
to imagine a steel that fails at that temp. Aluminum aircraft cylinders hold
up well at 450 degree cht's; mild steel exhausts work into the 1500 degree range.
Are we to believe they have made a nylon that withstands the same temp
extremes as steel? Or a steel that's as low-melting-point as nylon?
I am merely suggesting we be careful what we swallow from the catalog descriptions
here, as they may not address suitability for our intended use.
-Stormy
-----Original Message-----
From: N5SL <nfivesl(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Firewall penetrations
Hi John:
Thanks for the link and the tip. Part number 7529K31 is the aluminum equivalent.
Why not use the aluminum chord grip? It's about the same price as the zinc
part. Another question - do you need the accessory kit for mounting it to the
firewall? Here's some text from the McMaster Carr page:
"Temperature range for aluminum is -40 to +300 F; for nylon it's -40 to +225 F;
for zinc-plated steel it's -30 to +225 F."
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Firewall penetrations |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
The cord caps have a rubber insert in them to clamp on the cord...You
would throw that away in any case.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV
Builder (Michael Sausen)
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Firewall penetrations
-->
If I had to guess I would say the difference is in the failure temps of
the gasket materials. Because aluminum conducts heat much better than
steel, there is a good chance the nylon/rubber/whatever will stay below
it's melting/flash point longer thus the higher temp rating for the
aluminum.
The failure of any one component should be the max temp. Not
necessarily of the whole.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Flaps
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
sportav8r(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Firewall penetrations
Makes one wonder what they mean by a "temperature rating;" it certainly
can't be a melting point. 225 F is just barely above the boiling point
of water. Try to imagine a steel that fails at that temp. Aluminum
aircraft cylinders hold up well at 450 degree cht's; mild steel exhausts
work into the 1500 degree range. Are we to believe they have made a
nylon that withstands the same temp extremes as steel? Or a steel
that's as low-melting-point as nylon?
I am merely suggesting we be careful what we swallow from the catalog
descriptions here, as they may not address suitability for our intended
use.
-Stormy
-----Original Message-----
From: N5SL <nfivesl(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Firewall penetrations
Hi John:
Thanks for the link and the tip. Part number 7529K31 is the aluminum
equivalent. Why not use the aluminum chord grip? It's about the same
price as the zinc part. Another question - do you need the accessory kit
for mounting it to the firewall? Here's some text from the McMaster
Carr page:
"Temperature range for aluminum is -40 to +300 F; for nylon it's -40 to
+225 F; for zinc-plated steel it's -30 to +225 F."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
I would think the easiest thing to do is put a standard size jack in, doesn't
matter what size just pick one that has enough connections (3?). Then depending
on the type of phone, as many have different plugs anyway, you would just have
to take a standard handsfree cord for that phone, chop the earbud end off
and wire it to the mating plug for your standard jack.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Flaps
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Cell Phone
--> (Corvallis)"
I could except that John Stark already wired the audio panel for the cell phone
so (in theory) its simply a case of wiring up the appropriate jack on the end
of the supplied cable and plugging the phone in.
As I said...in theory, plus I'm hoping to keep my current headsets...we'll see..:)
Thanks
Frank
-----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: Cell Phone
-->
Frank -
Why don't you buy a set of Lightspeed 20XL or 25XL's (both rehab'ed) from Lightspeed.
They will install a cell phone jack for $75. This is a hell of a lot simpler
than messing with the wiring to an audio panel.
IMHO.
John Schroeder
wrote:
> So has anyone wired their cell phones into their audio panels using a
> standard 3/32nd jack sucessfully?
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Evenson" <revenson(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: gamin avionics |
Check your 330 manual. I think dimming is built in to that unit based on
ambient light.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Stone" <jrstone(at)insightbb.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: gamin avionics
>
>
> I'm setting up my dimmers and was wondering if I need one for the Garmin
> stack. I've got the 480 mfd, sl-40, 330 transponder and their audio
> panel. Anyone been down this road before?
> Can all 4 boxes be dimmed by a single pot?
> Thanks,
> Jim
> Harmon Rocket II
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Most, if not all, cell phones now use the same earphone jack and wiring.
Nokia used to be an oddball with a 4 section plug but they switched over
a couple years ago. Use the same mini-jack as your phone and use a
straight thru patch cord. Stark should have labeled the wires (ringer,
phone & mic IIRC) and should know what section of the jack each goes to.
Greg Young
Ps - my audio panel supports a phone but the connection thru my
Lightspeed 30-3G is just too convenient to fool with it. Quality is so
good no one knows I'm in the plane.
>
> --> (Corvallis)"
>
> I could except that John Stark already wired the audio panel
> for the cell phone so (in theory) its simply a case of wiring
> up the appropriate jack on the end of the supplied cable and
> plugging the phone in.
>
> As I said...in theory, plus I'm hoping to keep my current
> headsets...we'll see..:)
>
> Thanks
>
> Frank
>
>
> -->
>
> Frank -
>
> Why don't you buy a set of Lightspeed 20XL or 25XL's (both
> rehab'ed) from Lightspeed. They will install a cell phone
> jack for $75. This is a hell of a lot simpler than messing
> with the wiring to an audio panel.
>
> IMHO.
>
> John Schroeder
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff" <jdalton77(at)comcast.net> |
There's a neat adapter you can buy called "safety Cell" that works well. It
has both an amplified and non-amplified versions (for you guys who have
quiet planes)
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Cell Phone
>
>
> Frank -
>
> Why don't you buy a set of Lightspeed 20XL or 25XL's (both rehab'ed) from
> Lightspeed. They will install a cell phone jack for $75. This is a hell of
> a lot simpler than messing with the wiring to an audio panel.
>
> IMHO.
>
> John Schroeder
>
>
> wrote:
>
>> So has anyone wired their cell phones into their audio panels using a
>> standard 3/32nd jack sucessfully?
>
>
> --
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetrations |
I believe the rating has more to do with the insert than the body
material. These parts have an insert of some type that clamps onto the
wires when the grip is tightened. We use similar parts at my company
and you can get all sorts of inserts that have temperature ratings all
over the map. The bodies are not the limiting factors, with the
exception of the nylon one.
Dick Tasker
sportav8r(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>Makes one wonder what they mean by a "temperature rating;" it certainly can't
be a melting point. 225 F is just barely above the boiling point of water. Try
to imagine a steel that fails at that temp. Aluminum aircraft cylinders hold
up well at 450 degree cht's; mild steel exhausts work into the 1500 degree
range. Are we to believe they have made a nylon that withstands the same temp
extremes as steel? Or a steel that's as low-melting-point as nylon?
>
>I am merely suggesting we be careful what we swallow from the catalog descriptions
here, as they may not address suitability for our intended use.
>
>-Stormy
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: N5SL <nfivesl(at)yahoo.com>
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Firewall penetrations
>
>
>Hi John:
>
>Thanks for the link and the tip. Part number 7529K31 is the aluminum
>equivalent. Why not use the aluminum chord grip? It's about the same price as
>the zinc part. Another question - do you need the accessory kit for mounting it
>to the firewall? Here's some text from the McMaster Carr page:
>
>"Temperature range for aluminum is -40 to +300 F; for nylon it's -40 to +225
>F; for zinc-plated steel it's -30 to +225 F."
>
>
>
>
--
----
Please Note:
No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however,
that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced.
----
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bob noffs" <icubob(at)newnorth.net> |
| Subject: | firewall penetration |
hi all,
i am doing my firewall forward right now and am attempting to follow good building
practices. i think that in my case at least, some of the methods of firewall
protection are a little overgunned. my holes for bowden cable in the firewall
are all a tight fit. then several wraps of safey wire around the cable on
each side of the firewall keeps the cable from moving. then a dab of hi temp
silicone around the hole. it seems that another layer of a stainless steel over
the cable is just duplicating what the metal firewall is already doing.
i can see that a hole for multiple cables or wiring needs a different treatment.
my airplane is a wood and cloth fisher dakota hawk. i have a feeling that my airframe
would be gone before hot gas leaking around my choke cable got my attention.
bob noffs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Werner Schneider <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
| Subject: | similar vendor experience? |
Hello out there,
I would like to ask, if someone of you had similar experience with Bendix -King
(Honeywell )
as I have currently.
Situation, 3 years ago, I've bought a KX-125 and used it in my Star. From Day one
on the VOR part was not working (couldn't get a signal strong enough) as testing
took a year with two configuration to test plus noise measurement etc. I
did not spend much attention (I know I should because of guarantee) on that until
last spring. A test showed immediately, that the VOR Receiver must be bad.
As policy does not allow to repair outside factory we had to send it back, took
more then 3 month with several quotes raising the estimated repair cost from
about 600$ to meanwhile 1264$ plus tax and shipping (the Com being also defect).
I think this is a bit of a rip off, as a re conditioned one goes in the rang of
1700/1800$ most.
Any similar experience?
br
Werner
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetration |
If you look at the history, you can see that engine fires caused by broken
fuel lines was a major technological problem. Early aircraft frequently had
a fuel tank between the pilot and the firewall, and fuel lines that tended
to break and leak. The invention of flexible lines that were capable of
carrying fuels as a big deal. See:
http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1921/naca-tm-48/
also see:
http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1922/naca-tm-144/
My Glastar kit comes with a 10 pound sheet of stainless steel firewall that
I just can't bear to use. There are dozens of good approaches to building a
firewall that makes sense and weighs a lot less. The big guys don't use
stainless steel firewalls anymore, but of course only single front-mounted
engines require one. There are dozens of good approaches to building a
firewall that makes sense and weighs a lot less. Additional sound deadening
can be achieved at the same time by using a sandwich of fiberfrax, 3M dot
paper, carbon fiber and silicone.
It does seem odd that a whole hank of cables can run through a hole and most
of the effort seems devoted to making a fireproof collar for the hole.
Something seems amiss. It also seems a bit misguided to worry about the
firewall in a plastic airplane.
A number of issues--
1) The Lancair approach to bringing in cabin air from the tail seems great.
In the event of an engine fire, smoke won't get in.
2) A fire extinguisher that injects Purple K into the engine compartment,
perhaps in several places would be easy to add. (but Halon or such for the
cabin....)
3) A flame/smoke hood for each person on board would be cheap insurance.
Aircraft Spruce sells a pair of hoods and two lightsticks!-- P/N 13-01636
for $7.50. This is an absolute must-have for aircraft. Thank you ACS.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
(508) 764-2072
The despotism of custom is everywhere the standing hindrance to human
advancement.
--John Stuart Mill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Firewall penetrations |
Mornin' Mark, Frank-
Snip
Not sure if it would work for y'all taildragger types, but my brake
reservoir
is mounted on the far right cockpit side of the sub-panel
I'm Building an -8, and I think that location would be problematic for me.
But you do have me revisiting the layout of that system...
Snip
Plus, I made a duplicate cabin heat box and door from stainless, and used a
steel hinge for the door.
I dodged that task and sprang for the prebuilt SS unit.
I also used Bob's SS shower grab bar idea for wire / cable penetrations.
I'm very happy with the results. The one addition I made to the concept on
my -8, for what it's worth, was to use a length of 3/4 aluminum tube I had
laying around as a conduit along the R/H sidewall of the fwd baggage
compartment, between the firewall and the gear tower. It runs just below
the longeron. The only drawback was that by the time I had run all my
sensor wires, MP tube, and Stby alt wiring, I was wishing I had gotten some
1 inch tube for the installation.
While I'm at it, what are you guys using for FWF manifold pressure line,
and are you running it all the way to the instrument, or making a
transition of some sort at the firewall? I thought I had mine all mapped
out,, but have heard some dissension lately (off list ) that has got me
rethinking it.
Thanks a bunch-
Glen Matejcek
aerobubba(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Cochran" <mac(at)atac.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetration |
Eric,
I couldn't find any data about the Exitair smoke hood's capabilities to
protect against carbon monoxide. The Exitair may be an adequate device to
use for escape if you're already on the deck. A better choice to carry in
the cockpit may be a hood that does filter CO, such as the Evac-U8. Combined
with an in-flight CO detector, a CO-filtering hood could provide the
necessary time to land the aircraft from altitude if CO is detected, or
there is smoke or a fire. Yes, the Evac-U8 and similar are more expensive
and take up more space, but....
Would be very interested to know more about firewall alternatives, can you
point us in the right direction?
Mark Cochran
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric M.
Jones
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Firewall penetration
If you look at the history, you can see that engine fires caused by broken
fuel lines was a major technological problem. Early aircraft frequently had
a fuel tank between the pilot and the firewall, and fuel lines that tended
to break and leak. The invention of flexible lines that were capable of
carrying fuels as a big deal. See:
http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1921/naca-tm-48/
also see:
http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1922/naca-tm-144/
My Glastar kit comes with a 10 pound sheet of stainless steel firewall that
I just can't bear to use. There are dozens of good approaches to building a
firewall that makes sense and weighs a lot less. The big guys don't use
stainless steel firewalls anymore, but of course only single front-mounted
engines require one. There are dozens of good approaches to building a
firewall that makes sense and weighs a lot less. Additional sound deadening
can be achieved at the same time by using a sandwich of fiberfrax, 3M dot
paper, carbon fiber and silicone.
It does seem odd that a whole hank of cables can run through a hole and most
of the effort seems devoted to making a fireproof collar for the hole.
Something seems amiss. It also seems a bit misguided to worry about the
firewall in a plastic airplane.
A number of issues--
1) The Lancair approach to bringing in cabin air from the tail seems great.
In the event of an engine fire, smoke won't get in.
2) A fire extinguisher that injects Purple K into the engine compartment,
perhaps in several places would be easy to add. (but Halon or such for the
cabin....)
3) A flame/smoke hood for each person on board would be cheap insurance.
Aircraft Spruce sells a pair of hoods and two lightsticks!-- P/N 13-01636
for $7.50. This is an absolute must-have for aircraft. Thank you ACS.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
(508) 764-2072
The despotism of custom is everywhere the standing hindrance to human
advancement.
--John Stuart Mill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Off the topic - Buss |
Matt: forgive me.
Bob Nuckolls said:
" Yup. At Cessna (1965) and every job I've had since, they are referred to
as a "bus". Folks often forget to take the second "s" off when paring down
from
plural busses to a singular bus. Further, the brand name Bussmann and
their foreshortening of the trade name for other marketing names
(Buss-Power, has been cited as a strong influence for misspelling the word
as well.
A Google search on "power distribution buss" yielded 67 hits. A search
on "power distribution bus" yielded 1020 hits. Bob . . ."
I'm afraid I must gently agree with 'Old Bob'. Here in Canada we (who
aren't taught by USTV) have learned to respect the source of our language
(English) by maintaining traditional spelling - very few of us apparently.
Like Old Bob, I was taught by aviation teachers who spelt it BUSS to
diffrerentiate it from BUS (Omnibus). "Buses" is thus the 'common' pleural
of 'buse' and we all know where that leads. What ever happened to the
grammatical rule that a double consonant renders the previous vowel - short
or am I all alone here?
Referring to Google for spelling is like asking Elmer Fudd to sign up for
Astronautical Physics. It simply refers to 'common usage' - the sole
quality being most common. Thus we have color for colour (couleur), fit for
fitted, etc.
I can't wait for channel X Pajama Patty to refer to a meeting as a
rendess-vowse.
Ferg
flames expected
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetrations |
In a message dated 10/07/2005 8:56:10 AM Central Standard Time,
aerobubba(at)earthlink.net writes:
While I'm at it, what are you guys using for FWF manifold pressure line,
and are you running it all the way to the instrument, or making a
transition of some sort at the firewall?
>>
As usual, I took the cheap&easy track- my engine came with 3 cylinders
already plumbed for primer, but as I opted to forgo priming, I used these for MAP
instead. I just ran a piece of auto style vacuum hose from the T fitting that
collected the primer lines on the engine to a steel fitting on the firewall,
then on to the MAP sensor (EIS4000). A short section of 1/8" copper tubing from
the T provides a place to attach the hose at the engine end, and another
short piece at the firewall side.
http://websites.expercraft.com/n51pw/images/117969595342a106f8d3529.jpg
In the foto, you can (barely) see the fitting where the line is connected
directly under #4 cylinder, passes behind the exhaust tube and in front of the
engine mount web, down the mount tube and into the short copper line at the
steel fitting through the firewall just under the outer end of the oil cooler.
Other than being pretty easy, I'd theorize that the MAP sensor is being fed the
average MP from the 3 cylinders it's connected to as opposed to just one
(typically #3) and possibly results in a smoother pressure gradient at the sensor,
FWIMBW.... (For What It Might Be Worth!)
From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark Phillips - RV-6A N51PW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CardinalNSB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: help with Positronix pins-King 206 cdi |
Hello, I have a king 206 cdi. I want to wire it myself to a kns-80. I have
the connector and shell, but I can't find the "positronix" female pins, I
believe they are "Positronix FC120N". What crimp tool can I use? What
insertion and extraction tools and tricks and hints? Will brass tubing work as
an
extractor? what size? Any other hints or suggestions? Thank you, Skip
Simpson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> cdi |
| Subject: | Re: help with Positronix pins-King 206 |
cdi
>
>Hello, I have a king 206 cdi. I want to wire it myself to a kns-80. I have
>the connector and shell, but I can't find the "positronix" female pins, I
>believe they are "Positronix FC120N". What crimp tool can I use? What
>insertion and extraction tools and tricks and hints? Will brass tubing
>work as an
>extractor? what size? Any other hints or suggestions? Thank you, Skip
>Simpson
Hmmm . . . I think the connector on the back of your indicator
is a Positronics GAP series connector. You can get the catalog
at:
http://www.connectpositronic.com/pdf/StdDensityRect_C009RevB.pdf
Look thorough this document and see if dimensions for a 41 pin
device matches your indicator. Now the hard part. It's hard to
find tools (and even perhaps pins) for a one-of-a-kind project.
Avionics shops stock all then necessary tools and pins for these
popular connectors. However, Positronic doesn't sell through dealers.
You can probably get them to sample you enough pins for a one-of
project but you still need a crimp tool. I think you can use the
RCT-3 tool from B&C by removing the pin positioner for d-subs and
manually positioning the pin in the tool.
You might see if an avionics shop would sell you 41 pieces of
22AWG wire with pins installed. You can insert them without a
tool and won't need to extract them if you're careful with the
wiring job.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Alternator Noise |
| From: | "Jim Pack" <jpack(at)advancedmd.com> |
I've got some pretty heavy Radio noise that I've traced to my Alternator. I cut
the alternator and - Quite.
Any suggestions on where to look? It's a B&C 60 amp.
- Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MikeEasley(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Really Dead Concorde RG Battery |
My aircraft has been down for paint and interior for about 8 months. I went
to charge my two 25ah RG batteries, one did fine, the other was so dead it
wouldn't even take a charge. I must have left a small overhead lamp on and
ran it all the way down to zero. I'm getting less than 1/10 volt. My car
charger is the automatic type. Can I resurrect my battery?
Mike Easley
Lancair ES
Colorado Springs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise |
I had some noise develop with my alternator that could be heard in the
headsets. The whine would change with rpm speed. Not real bad noise but I
could hear it and it was not there before. Then after a couple of hours of
flying time with the noise, the alternator died. After replacing it with
like kind (rebuilt from AutoZone) I did an autopsy. It showed signs of
being very hot. Also two of the three screws that hold the two halves
together had somehow become less than tight. You might check that. The
brushes looked fine. I am not sure what actually died in it to cause it to
fail. It turned smoothly. Mine was/is an externally regulated 77 Honda
Civic 35amp.
I am supplying more cooling air to the back of the replacement. I got 62
hours of service out of the failed one.
Indiana Larry in Evansville, RV7 Tip Up SunSeeker
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Pack" <jpack(at)advancedmd.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Alternator Noise
>
> I've got some pretty heavy Radio noise that I've traced to my Alternator.
> I cut the alternator and - Quite.
>
> Any suggestions on where to look? It's a B&C 60 amp.
>
> - Jim
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Really Dead Concorde RG Battery |
Do you fly at night? You don't say how old the battery is. But why work
with a battery that might not take a charge even if you get it over this
hump?? You could replace the bad one and make a policy of swapping out the
oldest one every year so you know you have at least one new, reliable
battery in the plane. Have you read Bob's recommendation on batteries?
Indiana Larry in Evansville, RV7 Tip Up SunSeeker
----- Original Message -----
From: <MikeEasley(at)aol.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Really Dead Concorde RG Battery
>
> My aircraft has been down for paint and interior for about 8 months. I
> went
> to charge my two 25ah RG batteries, one did fine, the other was so dead
> it
> wouldn't even take a charge. I must have left a small overhead lamp on
> and
> ran it all the way down to zero. I'm getting less than 1/10 volt. My
> car
> charger is the automatic type. Can I resurrect my battery?
>
> Mike Easley
> Lancair ES
> Colorado Springs
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Franz Fux" <franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com> |
Hi group,
I have an internally regulated 60v alternator from Vans as supplied in the
firewall foreward kit. I have wired it according to Bob's drawing Z11 with
the additional protection according to his drawing, using the
contactor(S701-1) he suggested. It is a prewired contactor that has a small
wire from the battery side to the smaller post where also the one side of
the diode terminates. Each time I turn on the battery this wire burns
through. I have checked all connections and they are according to Bob's
drawings. I am wondering if anybody could help me safe this puzzle and may
know what could be causing this short.
Thanks in advance
Franz Fux
C-FUXI reserved
----
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: IR alternator |
>
>
>Hi group,
>I have an internally regulated 60v alternator from Vans as supplied in the
>firewall foreward kit. I have wired it according to Bob's drawing Z11 with
>the additional protection according to his drawing, using the
>contactor(S701-1) he suggested. It is a prewired contactor that has a small
>wire from the battery side to the smaller post where also the one side of
>the diode terminates. Each time I turn on the battery this wire burns
>through. I have checked all connections and they are according to Bob's
>drawings. I am wondering if anybody could help me safe this puzzle and may
>know what could be causing this short.
The contactor you purchased had certain features pre-installed
for the device to serve as a BATTERY contactor. If you study the
z-figures for battery contactor wiring, you'll see that a wire
between one of the fat terminals (battery side) connects to an
adjacent small terminal. This wire is not shown in the old Z-24
depiction of a b-lead contactor. You need to remove this jumper
for use as a b-lead contactor.
Be aware that while Figure Z-24 (and documents describing installation
of B&C over voltage protection products) increase risk for damage to
an alternator if the alternator is switched off under load. The system
you've installed WILL fulfill its intended purpose for absolute control
of alternator combined with over-voltage protection. Just be aware that
the alternator should not be switched off until after the engine stops
except in cases of system malfunction where the alternator must be
shut off due to OV condition -or- other reasons (like smoke in cockpit)
where it's more important to get things electric shut down than it
is to worry about hazards to the alternator.
Studies are under way to devise an alternative to Z-24 so as to
reduce if not eliminate risks to the alternator . . . in the mean
time, you're on solid ground to proceed with an awareness of risks
and operating procedures in place to mitigate those risks.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Really Dead Concorde RG Battery |
>
>My aircraft has been down for paint and interior for about 8 months. I went
>to charge my two 25ah RG batteries, one did fine, the other was so dead it
>wouldn't even take a charge. I must have left a small overhead lamp on and
>ran it all the way down to zero. I'm getting less than 1/10 volt. My car
>charger is the automatic type. Can I resurrect my battery?
Probably not. In fact I'll say no. This has been much too long a period
of time for a battery to set in a discharged condition.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise |
>
>I've got some pretty heavy Radio noise that I've traced to my
>Alternator. I cut the alternator and - Quite.
>
>Any suggestions on where to look? It's a B&C 60 amp.
>
>- Jim
Have you reviewed chapter 16? There are a number of possible
cause/effect scenarios that could be operating here. You need
to investigate them and have results of those investigations
in-hand when you toss the problem into the group.
Has the noise always been there? What kind of ground system are
you using? Have you done the independent battery tests to determine
the pathway by which the noise is getting into your headsets? Have
you opened signal pathways and/or adjusted volume controls to deduce
what part of your system is the real victim? Are your microphone and
headset jacks insulated from airframe? It's answers to these questions
that will be necessary for you or anyone else to deduce a plan of
attack for eliminating the noise.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise |
>
>
>I had some noise develop with my alternator that could be heard in the
>headsets. The whine would change with rpm speed. Not real bad noise but I
>could hear it and it was not there before. Then after a couple of hours of
>flying time with the noise, the alternator died. After replacing it with
>like kind (rebuilt from AutoZone) I did an autopsy. It showed signs of
>being very hot. Also two of the three screws that hold the two halves
>together had somehow become less than tight. You might check that. The
>brushes looked fine. I am not sure what actually died in it to cause it to
>fail. It turned smoothly. Mine was/is an externally regulated 77 Honda
>Civic 35amp.
>
>I am supplying more cooling air to the back of the replacement. I got 62
>hours of service out of the failed one.
What got hot? Wires? I suspect one or more shorted diodes . . . which
MAY be linked to inadequate cooling. Is there anything about your
installation
that is unique compared with other aircraft? I can tell you that the
average alternator installation on an OBAM aircraft would probably not
pass the part 23 cooling test for hot day, Vy climb at max load. However,
given that nobody operates their airplane this way, 99.9% of what might
be called "inadequate" installations perform just fine. If you still have
the dead machine, I'd be pleased to dissect it in more detail.
In the mean time, more cooling never hurts but without real data
(thermocouples
in the windings) you can never be 100% sure that you've fixed anything.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | In honor of the "Repeatable Experiment". |
I've often used the term "repeatable experiment" much to the
consternation and derision of some here on the list so it seems
appropriate to take two lessons from the planned investigations
into alternator performance and operating characteristics under
abnormal conditions.
I just received a shiny new ND alternator from one of the
participants in this activity. Thank you Mr. Coggins! I'll
endeavor to please you with a useful return on your investment.
I've been talking with the folks who own the big variable speed
drive and they're quite willing to give me access to it. However,
after studying the brackets needed to mount a small, belt driven
alternator on it and then constrict my study to time when they're
open (my normal work hours) the time-to-first-test-results seems
like it will be greater than if I were to build my own drive stand
tailored to the task. I have a 2 hp DC motor and variable speed
drive controller for it. My father-in-law is going to craft
a fixture to hold the motor and alternator.
In the mean time, I've shifted discussions with my old employer
about trading some gray-matter time for an old environmental
chamber they've relegated to the mod shop and are using as an
oven for curing epoxies. This was the first chamber we ever owned
and I was the first to operate the thing after it was purchased
in 1976 for about $1200. If I can refurbish this ol' dog into
operating condition, I'll end up with a tool that will allow me
to test from -55C to +70C to explore temperature related issues
with small articles that will fit in the chamber (it's about
1 cubic foot in volume).
So, we're moving ahead with both tools and test articles to explore
the burning questions we have about alternator performance and system
integration. We're also crafting a series of experiments to be
conducted with these tools and materials for the purpose of gathering
data. Data will permit a deduction and crafting of activities that
enable integration of these alternators into our aircraft with
confidence and understanding.
I'll start a series of pages on the website that will chronicle
the experiment(s) in detail. The goals are (1) to arrive at useful
conclusions about the topic under investigation (alternators) AND
(2) to demonstrate and illustrate what is meant by "repeatable
experiment". There will be no detail of the activity purposefully
concealed or ignored. All questions about the process will be
forthrightly addressed; all constructive critical review welcomed.
My intention is to provide sufficient details on the whole
process so that anyone who chooses may repeat the experiment
to the end that data acquired and deductions crafted are VALIDATED
by others. I'll suggest that repeatable experiments are the most powerful
tools in science wherein activities carried in the lab by ONE ultimately
become activities carried out in the shop by MANY; the EXPERIMENT
morphs from an exploration ideas to a PROCESS by which the MANY
will derive benefits of performance and confidence in soundness
of design.
This should be fun. To my way of thinking, this is what engineering
is all about.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetration |
>Eric,
>I couldn't find any data about the Exitair smoke hood's capabilities to
>protect against carbon monoxide. The Exitair may be an adequate device to
>use for escape if you're already on the deck. A better choice to carry in
>the cockpit may be a hood that does filter CO, such as the Evac-U8.
>Combined
>with an in-flight CO detector, a CO-filtering hood could provide the
>necessary time to land the aircraft from altitude if CO is detected, or
>there is smoke or a fire. Yes, the Evac-U8 and similar are more expensive
>and take up more space, but....
Mark,
I didn't think the CO problem went much much beyond detectors. In the even
of CO in the cabin, close the heat (and forward air vents), get outside air.
I'd hate to have to land an airplane in one of those hoods.
>Would be very interested to know more about firewall alternatives, can you
>point us in the right direction? Mark Cochran
There is no prescription like the stainless steel sheet mentioned by the FAA
advisory circular AC20-135. The FAA says you can do it some other way but
must prove it. The test is not hard, but you should probably get the buy-in
of the person who will sign off your airworthiness certifcate, or you risk
disappointment.
Check http://www.3m.com/market/industrial/ceramics/ and go from there.
Remember that you really want a number of layers.
a) Cosmetic and perhaps reflective. Lots of stuff looks like heck after a
few hours under the cowl, and it must be fuel proof, etc.
b) FAA flame barrier 2000 F, 15 minute without burn-thru.
c) Acoustic barrier (optional)
The FAA requirement for flame barriers seems to be in flux right now. We'll
see.....
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
(508) 764-2072
Don't worry about people stealing an idea. If it's original, you will have
to ram it down their throats."
-- Howard Aiken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Riley <richard(at)RILEY.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: LINKS - Jeff's F1 Rocket Page |
Do you mean to send 3 and 4 messages per minute to the list, with
nothing but a link? Or has your computer been invaded by spyware?
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetration |
| From: | "George Braly" <gwbraly(at)gami.com> |
In the event of CO detection, one of the first things to be done is to
set the mixture well LOP.
It stops the SOURCE of the CO - - at the source.
Then figure out where the leak is coming from.
George
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric
M. Jones
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Firewall penetration
>Eric,
>I couldn't find any data about the Exitair smoke hood's capabilities to
>protect against carbon monoxide. The Exitair may be an adequate device
to
>use for escape if you're already on the deck. A better choice to carry
in
>the cockpit may be a hood that does filter CO, such as the Evac-U8.
>Combined
>with an in-flight CO detector, a CO-filtering hood could provide the
>necessary time to land the aircraft from altitude if CO is detected, or
>there is smoke or a fire. Yes, the Evac-U8 and similar are more
expensive
>and take up more space, but....
Mark,
I didn't think the CO problem went much much beyond detectors. In the
even
of CO in the cabin, close the heat (and forward air vents), get outside
air.
I'd hate to have to land an airplane in one of those hoods.
>Would be very interested to know more about firewall alternatives, can
you
>point us in the right direction? Mark Cochran
There is no prescription like the stainless steel sheet mentioned by the
FAA
advisory circular AC20-135. The FAA says you can do it some other way
but
must prove it. The test is not hard, but you should probably get the
buy-in
of the person who will sign off your airworthiness certifcate, or you
risk
disappointment.
Check http://www.3m.com/market/industrial/ceramics/ and go from there.
Remember that you really want a number of layers.
a) Cosmetic and perhaps reflective. Lots of stuff looks like heck after
a
few hours under the cowl, and it must be fuel proof, etc.
b) FAA flame barrier 2000 F, 15 minute without burn-thru.
c) Acoustic barrier (optional)
The FAA requirement for flame barriers seems to be in flux right now.
We'll
see.....
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
(508) 764-2072
Don't worry about people stealing an idea. If it's original, you will
have
to ram it down their throats."
-- Howard Aiken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Check out Jeff's F1 Rocket Page |
Sir, your flood of miscellaneous announcements and promotions to the
AeroElectric-List are in direct contradiction with the list-server's
rules of conduct as defined by the owner of the system on which this
list-server resides.
You're most welcome to join us in any technical or practical discussions
that contribute to a group understanding of aircraft . . . but please
don't repeat the behavior I've cited above. If necessary, we can have you
"blacklisted" with the server's administrator but to my knowledge, this has
never been necessary in the history of the AeroElectric-List. I'd be
most pleased not to have this incident mark a black milestone in the list's
history.
Thank you for your swift and diligent attention to this matter.
Bob . . .
>
>_Click here: Jeff's F1 Rocket Page_ (http://www3.telus.net/public/deucharj/)
>
>
>--
>
>
>-- incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------------------
< Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition >
< of man. Advances which permit this norm to be >
< exceeded -- here and there, now and then -- are the >
< work of an extremely small minority, frequently >
< despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed >
< by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny >
< minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes >
< happens) is driven out of a society, the people >
< then slip back into abject poverty. >
< >
< This is known as "bad luck". >
< -Lazarus Long- >
<------------------------------------------------------>
http://www.aeroelectric.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | EMAILS SENT IN ERROR |
My apology to the list. I have emailed Matt and asked him to delete
anything from my email address sent today.
Sorry.
Wally
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LINKS - Jeff's F1 Rocket Page |
>
>Do you mean to send 3 and 4 messages per minute to the list, with
>nothing but a link? Or has your computer been invaded by spyware?
An astute call Richard. The email address belongs to a Wally
Hunt who is a long time participant on the Matronics Lists.
It's almost a certainty that he understands list server etiquette.
Wally. Please forgive my hasty conclusion. It seems quite
likely that either your computer has been invaded -or- someone
is spoofing your e-mail address in posting the promotional items
to the AeroElectric-List.
Not sure how this gets fixed. It may be that Matt will ask you
to change your e-mail address and re-subscribe to the list so
that the old address can be blocked. Let's see what happens over
the next few days before we go to Matt . . . although it may be
that the "spoofer" has attacked every list you subscribe to and
it's only a matter of time before someone switches you OFF.
I'll suggest you contact Matt directly at mailto:dralle(at)matronics.com
and explain what's going on. He'll no doubt have good suggestions
as to how you proceed. My condolences for having to suffer this
pestilence. It happened to me a few years ago and I had to roll my
email address.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | New comic book on circuit breaker issues |
Thanks to Ken Baker's willingness to send me some very
good data on a circuit breaker failure he experienced,
I've been able to craft a new article on the topic. See:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Breakers/Breakers.html
If anyone else has breakers that might broaden our selection
(or de-selection) of parts, I'd be pleased to get exemplar
devices for study.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Lindstrom <tigerrick(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetration |
Good point, George.
And only fitting that you would think of posting that! Of course, SOME
fuel injected engines run MUCH better lean of peak than others...
Thanks for the chuckle.
Best,
Rick Lindstrom
George Braly wrote:
>
>
>In the event of CO detection, one of the first things to be done is to
>set the mixture well LOP.
>
>It stops the SOURCE of the CO - - at the source.
>
>Then figure out where the leak is coming from.
>
>George
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric
>M. Jones
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Firewall penetration
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>Eric,
>>I couldn't find any data about the Exitair smoke hood's capabilities to
>>protect against carbon monoxide. The Exitair may be an adequate device
>>
>>
>to
>
>
>>use for escape if you're already on the deck. A better choice to carry
>>
>>
>in
>
>
>>the cockpit may be a hood that does filter CO, such as the Evac-U8.
>>Combined
>>with an in-flight CO detector, a CO-filtering hood could provide the
>>necessary time to land the aircraft from altitude if CO is detected, or
>>there is smoke or a fire. Yes, the Evac-U8 and similar are more
>>
>>
>expensive
>
>
>>and take up more space, but....
>>
>>
>
>Mark,
>
>I didn't think the CO problem went much much beyond detectors. In the
>even
>of CO in the cabin, close the heat (and forward air vents), get outside
>air.
>I'd hate to have to land an airplane in one of those hoods.
>
>
>
>>Would be very interested to know more about firewall alternatives, can
>>
>>
>you
>
>
>>point us in the right direction? Mark Cochran
>>
>>
>
>There is no prescription like the stainless steel sheet mentioned by the
>FAA
>advisory circular AC20-135. The FAA says you can do it some other way
>but
>must prove it. The test is not hard, but you should probably get the
>buy-in
>of the person who will sign off your airworthiness certifcate, or you
>risk
>disappointment.
>
>Check http://www.3m.com/market/industrial/ceramics/ and go from there.
>Remember that you really want a number of layers.
>
>a) Cosmetic and perhaps reflective. Lots of stuff looks like heck after
>a
>few hours under the cowl, and it must be fuel proof, etc.
>b) FAA flame barrier 2000 F, 15 minute without burn-thru.
>c) Acoustic barrier (optional)
>
>The FAA requirement for flame barriers seems to be in flux right now.
>We'll
>see.....
>
>Regards,
>Eric M. Jones
>www.PerihelionDesign.com
>113 Brentwood Drive
>Southbridge MA 01550-2705
>(508) 764-2072
>
>Don't worry about people stealing an idea. If it's original, you will
>have
>to ram it down their throats."
>-- Howard Aiken
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetration |
>
>
>In the event of CO detection, one of the first things to be done is to
>set the mixture well LOP.
>
>It stops the SOURCE of the CO - - at the source.
>
>Then figure out where the leak is coming from.
>
>George
Cool work-around George . . . made possible by the wonderful world
of chemistry! Would it also be advisable to drop to or below 60% power
to avoid problems of very lean combustion effects?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CardinalNSB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Positronic removal with hammer |
Thank you Bob for the link, I was at least able to get an idea of the shape.
I went to the hobby store and got some thinwall tubing to try to emulate
the factory removal tool-it looks like a tube but has a spring loaded "gun"
inside it to punch out the contactor. I used a thinwall tube to go down past
the "springs", then a small phillips inside the tube with some gentle tapping
with a ballpeen hammer. (my wife always gets nervous when I use a hammer in
my aircraft repair). They popped out, some with a little more persuasion than
others. These are the female solder cup types. I found a source for the
crimp type female, but not for the contactor block so I needed to get these
out. I stuck a few back in and they seem to work ok. Would it be imprudent to
reuse these? How can I easily remove the old solder-propane torch, should I
heat them in a skillet, will hearing them harm them? Should I remove the
tiny spring loaded retaining clip before heating? These appear to be brass, but
there is a lengthwise slit down the barrell which provides the tenion for
the male pen.
Thanks again for the help. Skip Simpson
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetration |
| From: | "George Braly" <gwbraly(at)gami.com> |
Bob,
We have hundreds of 300 Hp class TCM engines running 70F LOP of peak TIT
- - at 80 to 85% of rated power. These engines are operating with
exceptional reliability and durability. Just borescoped one high time
engine this week and it was almost stunning to look inside the
cylinders and NOT see pancaked crude and deposits everywhere which is
what you see in the typical ROP engine at that stage of life.
Regards, George
-----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: Re: Firewall penetration
>
>
>In the event of CO detection, one of the first things to be done is
to
>set the mixture well LOP.
>
>It stops the SOURCE of the CO - - at the source.
>
>Then figure out where the leak is coming from.
>
>George
Cool work-around George . . . made possible by the wonderful world
of chemistry! Would it also be advisable to drop to or below 60%
power
to avoid problems of very lean combustion effects?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetration |
| From: | "George Braly" <gwbraly(at)gami.com> |
Bob,
Not necessary to reduce power except that it might reduce the pressure
of the exhaust gases in a turbo'd engine and thereby reduce the amount
that gets into the heater plumbing.
However, CO makes up about 4 to 9% of the exhaust when 50 to 150d F
rich of peak EGT.
One of the primary sources of the efficiency of LOP operations comes
from further oxidizing the CO to COO (CO2) and it turns out that at 25
to 50F LOP the level of CO in the exhaust stream is down about one order
of magnitude.
Regards, George
-----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: Re: Firewall penetration
>
>
>In the event of CO detection, one of the first things to be done is
to
>set the mixture well LOP.
>
>It stops the SOURCE of the CO - - at the source.
>
>Then figure out where the leak is coming from.
>
>George
Cool work-around George . . . made possible by the wonderful world
of chemistry! Would it also be advisable to drop to or below 60%
power
to avoid problems of very lean combustion effects?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
>
>Bob,
>
>Not necessary to reduce power except that it might reduce the pressure
>of the exhaust gases in a turbo'd engine and thereby reduce the amount
>that gets into the heater plumbing.
>
>However, CO makes up about 4 to 9% of the exhaust when 50 to 150d F
>rich of peak EGT.
>
>One of the primary sources of the efficiency of LOP operations comes
>from further oxidizing the CO to COO (CO2) and it turns out that at 25
>to 50F LOP the level of CO in the exhaust stream is down about one order
>of magnitude.
Interesting! Thanks. I don't know where I was seeded with the
notion that lean ops called for reduction in total power to
"protect" the engine. I probably picked that up from a flight
instructor years ago and we know that while flight instructors
are whizzes at FARS, procedures and manipulating the airplane,
their understanding of systems and underlying simple-ideas is
often found lacking.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Positronic removal with hammer |
>
>Thank you Bob for the link, I was at least able to get an idea of the shape.
> I went to the hobby store and got some thinwall tubing to try to emulate
>the factory removal tool-it looks like a tube but has a spring loaded "gun"
>inside it to punch out the contactor. I used a thinwall tube to go down
>past
>the "springs", then a small phillips inside the tube with some
>gentle tapping
>with a ballpeen hammer. (my wife always gets nervous when I use a hammer in
>my aircraft repair). They popped out, some with a little more persuasion
>than
>others. These are the female solder cup types. I found a source for the
>crimp type female, but not for the contactor block so I needed to get these
>out. I stuck a few back in and they seem to work ok. Would it be
>imprudent to
>reuse these? How can I easily remove the old solder-propane torch, should I
>heat them in a skillet, will hearing them harm them? Should I remove the
>tiny spring loaded retaining clip before heating? These appear to be
>brass, but
>there is a lengthwise slit down the barrell which provides the tenion for
>the male pen.
You are to be commended for your resourcefulness. Sounds like you
have a reasonable grasp of how these things fit together and an
appreciation for their limits.
To clean out the solder cups, hold the pin with a needle nose pliers
and heat the joint with a soldering iron. Use some solder on the iron
to 'wet' the contact between tip of iron and the pin. When the solder
melts, shake the now loose wire and excess solder out of the pin. You can
just fling it downward (careful not to throw hot globs of solder into
your shoes or against polyester pants). Alternatively, striking the edge
of your workbench with the pliers such that the open pin faces downward
will accelerate the debris out of the solder cup and generally leave it
quite clean and ready to accept the new wire. You need not disassemble
the pin for any part of the recovery and reuse operations.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Positronic removal with hammer |
One of the most effective ways to clean out a solder cup is to heat as
you've described, then just drop the pin a foot or two onto a hard
surface.
Bob W.
"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote:
>
>
> >
> >Thank you Bob for the link, I was at least able to get an idea of the shape.
> > I went to the hobby store and got some thinwall tubing to try to emulate
> >the factory removal tool-it looks like a tube but has a spring loaded "gun"
> >inside it to punch out the contactor. I used a thinwall tube to go down
> >past
> >the "springs", then a small phillips inside the tube with some
> >gentle tapping
> >with a ballpeen hammer. (my wife always gets nervous when I use a hammer in
> >my aircraft repair). They popped out, some with a little more persuasion
> >than
> >others. These are the female solder cup types. I found a source for the
> >crimp type female, but not for the contactor block so I needed to get these
> >out. I stuck a few back in and they seem to work ok. Would it be
> >imprudent to
> >reuse these? How can I easily remove the old solder-propane torch, should
I
> >heat them in a skillet, will hearing them harm them? Should I remove the
> >tiny spring loaded retaining clip before heating? These appear to be
> >brass, but
> >there is a lengthwise slit down the barrell which provides the tenion for
> >the male pen.
>
> You are to be commended for your resourcefulness. Sounds like you
> have a reasonable grasp of how these things fit together and an
> appreciation for their limits.
>
> To clean out the solder cups, hold the pin with a needle nose pliers
> and heat the joint with a soldering iron. Use some solder on the iron
> to 'wet' the contact between tip of iron and the pin. When the solder
> melts, shake the now loose wire and excess solder out of the pin. You can
> just fling it downward (careful not to throw hot globs of solder into
> your shoes or against polyester pants). Alternatively, striking the edge
> of your workbench with the pliers such that the open pin faces downward
> will accelerate the debris out of the solder cup and generally leave it
> quite clean and ready to accept the new wire. You need not disassemble
> the pin for any part of the recovery and reuse operations.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
http://www.bob-white.com
N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 (real soon)
Prewired EC2 Cables - http://www.roblinphoto.com/shop/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New comic book on circuit breaker issues |
Wow!
Enlightenment and understanding that can actually be used to make
intelligent decisions.
thankyou again Bob
BTW I've also read that it is not possible to damage an engine by
overleaning -provided power was not more than about 75%!
Ken L.
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>Thanks to Ken Baker's willingness to send me some very
>good data on a circuit breaker failure he experienced,
>I've been able to craft a new article on the topic. See:
>
>http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Breakers/Breakers.html
>
>If anyone else has breakers that might broaden our selection
>(or de-selection) of parts, I'd be pleased to get exemplar
>devices for study.
>
>Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Franz Fux" <franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com> |
Thanks Bob for your in depth answer, in your opinion, should the alternator
be switched on before starting the engine or after,
Franz
-----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: IR alternator
>
>
>Hi group,
>I have an internally regulated 60v alternator from Vans as supplied in the
>firewall foreward kit. I have wired it according to Bob's drawing Z11 with
>the additional protection according to his drawing, using the
>contactor(S701-1) he suggested. It is a prewired contactor that has a small
>wire from the battery side to the smaller post where also the one side of
>the diode terminates. Each time I turn on the battery this wire burns
>through. I have checked all connections and they are according to Bob's
>drawings. I am wondering if anybody could help me safe this puzzle and may
>know what could be causing this short.
The contactor you purchased had certain features pre-installed
for the device to serve as a BATTERY contactor. If you study the
z-figures for battery contactor wiring, you'll see that a wire
between one of the fat terminals (battery side) connects to an
adjacent small terminal. This wire is not shown in the old Z-24
depiction of a b-lead contactor. You need to remove this jumper
for use as a b-lead contactor.
Be aware that while Figure Z-24 (and documents describing installation
of B&C over voltage protection products) increase risk for damage to
an alternator if the alternator is switched off under load. The system
you've installed WILL fulfill its intended purpose for absolute control
of alternator combined with over-voltage protection. Just be aware that
the alternator should not be switched off until after the engine stops
except in cases of system malfunction where the alternator must be
shut off due to OV condition -or- other reasons (like smoke in cockpit)
where it's more important to get things electric shut down than it
is to worry about hazards to the alternator.
Studies are under way to devise an alternative to Z-24 so as to
reduce if not eliminate risks to the alternator . . . in the mean
time, you're on solid ground to proceed with an awareness of risks
and operating procedures in place to mitigate those risks.
Bob . . .
--
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>Thanks Bob for your in depth answer, in your opinion, should the alternator
>be switched on before starting the engine or after,
>Franz
I don't think it's electrically critical and from what we understand
about the startup dynamics under normal conditions, it doesn't
matter. From the systems OPERATOR perspective, it seems practical
and prudent to bring things up in steps so that the pilot can
observe the effects of each new action separately. When I write
POH supplements, I get high marks for orderly, one-step at a time
instructions. So, lacking information suggesting that it's unwise,
I'll say that the alternator be left OFF until the engine is
running smoothly whereupon the pilot's attention can be shifted
to cause an effects of bringing the electrical system up to full
operation.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: aggressive engine leaning |
>
> Wow!
>Enlightenment and understanding that can actually be used to make
>intelligent decisions.
>thankyou again Bob
>
>BTW I've also read that it is not possible to damage an engine by
>overleaning -provided power was not more than about 75%!
RAC's top engine guru is a few offices east of me in building.
We'll see what he has to offer with respect to both historical
and present fact.
I'll hit up the guys over in flight test and our instructors
in the flying club. It would be interesting to see if any
of them can offer an attribution to this little nugget of
aviation mythology . . . or who knows? We may find someone who
want's to contest George's assertions. All in good fun and
enlightenment as long as the gladiators bring data.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry2DT(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re:In honor of the "Repeatable Experiment". |
Bob,
I understand typically folks leave the external fan on the "77 Civic" type
Autozone alternators referred to earlier. Will you be testing with/without
the fan? I have one of these not flying yet, so inquiring minds...
Jerry Cochran
Wilsonville, OR
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: In honor of the "Repeatable Experiment".
I've often used the term "repeatable experiment" much to the
consternation and derision of some here on the list so it seems
appropriate to take two lessons from the planned investigations
into alternator performance and operating characteristics under
abnormal conditions.
I just received a shiny new ND alternator from one of the
participants in this activity. Thank you Mr. Coggins! I'll
endeavor to please you with a useful return on your investment.
I've been talking with the folks who own the big variable speed
drive and they're quite willing to give me access to it. However,
after studying the brackets needed to mount a small, belt driven
alternator on it and then constrict my study to time when they're
open (my normal work hours) the time-to-first-test-results seems
like it will be greater than if I were to build my own drive stand
tailored to the task. I have a 2 hp DC motor and variable speed
drive controller for it. My father-in-law is going to craft
a fixture to hold the motor and alternator.
In the mean time, I've shifted discussions with my old employer
about trading some gray-matter time for an old environmental
chamber they've relegated to the mod shop and are using as an
oven for curing epoxies. This was the first chamber we ever owned
and I was the first to operate the thing after it was purchased
in 1976 for about $1200. If I can refurbish this ol' dog into
operating condition, I'll end up with a tool that will allow me
to test from -55C to +70C to explore temperature related issues
with small articles that will fit in the chamber (it's about
1 cubic foot in volume).
<>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re:In honor of the "Repeatable |
Experiment".
>
>
>Bob,
>
>I understand typically folks leave the external fan on the "77 Civic" type
>Autozone alternators referred to earlier. Will you be testing with/without
>the fan? I have one of these not flying yet, so inquiring minds...
>
>Jerry Cochran
>Wilsonville, OR
The test article is fitted with internal, bi-directional fans.
Most external fans have canted blades optimized for airflow
in one direction. However, tests that we did at Electromech
about 30 years ago showed that while the flow was reduced by
turning the external fans "backwards", this was more than offset
by pulley ratios on Lycoming engines that turned the alternator
much faster than on cars.
Now, having made this anecdote available, I'll suggest there
is no substitute for data. It's not terribly difficult to
thermocouple the stator wires and in some cases, diode
heatsinks and GO MEASURE temperature rises under Vy climb
at full load.
I'm continually amazed at the numbers of threads over the years
where builders are advised to take fans off 'cause they
"run the wrong way". Or, "add blast tubes to avoid overheating",
or any number of other remedies to mitigate an alternator
failure . . . Yet not a single discussion talked about studies
to measure operating temperatures or any suggestion that they be done.
Alternator failures on OBAM aircraft are probably more rare
than for certified ships where folks did a lot of testing to
qualify 1960's technology onto spam cans. Those alternators
fail mostly due to lack of exploitation of modern technology.
OBAM aircraft have fewer failures probably because of the
modern technology but we generally haven't a clue as to why
they DO fail due to lack of data and a reluctance to go get it.
It's easier to hip shoot the solutions . . . and if you blaze
away at a problem long enough, odds are in your favor that you'll
eventually "hit" it with the solution.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: aggressive engine leaning |
| From: | "George Braly" <gwbraly(at)gami.com> |
Bob,
Actually, we have already had some of the Beech guys and the TCM guys
and several FAA engine guys go through all of this.
We teach a 16 hour weekend class on all of this about every other month.
www.advancedpilot.com.
It will be interesting to hear what your Beech guys say - - or how they
"react". You should anticipate some howls and screams, and LOTS of
opinions and old wive's tales - - but no data to the contrary.
OTOH - - they will really dip their deals in deep do-do if they take
that position - - because the A36 and the Baron IO-550 manual already
SPECIFICALLY APPROVES LOP OPERATION at power settings up to about 78%
power on the IO-550. They have been that way since 1984. Still are as
of 2005.
If the RAC/Beech folks take a different position - - then they need to
re-write their own POH for those aircraft.
Bob, keep in mind that there are only about 400 million hours of engine
operation in piston powered aircraft with the engines operating at very
high BMEPs (about equal to 90% of the BMEP of an IO-550) and the mixture
set to about 50 to 75F LOP. Those engines typically went to about 3000
to 3600 hours between overhauls.
The hard data is this: If you set an IO-550 engine up at 225 Hp and
75d F ROP, the peak internal cylinder pressures will be about 10%
higher than the same engine at the same HP with the mixture set to about
50d F LOP. Further, the CHTs will be about 30 to 50d F HOTTER when
ROP. The spark plug ceramic will be about 100 to 150dF hotter at the
ROP setting (my data - - and yes, it really is hard to measure a
thermocouple embedded in a spark plug ceramic putting out mv signals
about 3/8ths of an inch from 16KV sparks happening at about 22Hz.)
Regards, George
-----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: AeroElectric-List: Re: aggressive engine leaning
>
> Wow!
>Enlightenment and understanding that can actually be used to make
>intelligent decisions.
>thankyou again Bob
>
>BTW I've also read that it is not possible to damage an engine by
>overleaning -provided power was not more than about 75%!
RAC's top engine guru is a few offices east of me in building.
We'll see what he has to offer with respect to both historical
and present fact.
I'll hit up the guys over in flight test and our instructors
in the flying club. It would be interesting to see if any
of them can offer an attribution to this little nugget of
aviation mythology . . . or who knows? We may find someone who
want's to contest George's assertions. All in good fun and
enlightenment as long as the gladiators bring data.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | New comic book on circuit breaker issues |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
So yur saying that detonation does not occure below 75%?...Not so sure
about that. I do know Superior did a lot of testing on this but I'm not
so sure they came to that conclusion.
Would be worth you reading John Deakin's articles on leaning procedure
if you haven't done so already.
Frank
thankyou again Bob
BTW I've also read that it is not possible to damage an engine by
overleaning -provided power was not more than about 75%!
Ken L.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | New comic book on circuit breaker issues |
| From: | "George Braly" <gwbraly(at)gami.com> |
It is essentially impossible to make a *conforming* normally aspirated
TCM engine, operating on conforming 100LL fuels - - go into detonation.
If one were to try to do so, one would want to run the CHTs up to
redline at 460 d F, and even then it is doubtful you get it to detonate,
even if you play foose-ball with the mixture control.
Different story for the turbo-charged engines.
That is not to say that some mixture settings are a LOT better for the
engine than others. That is a different issue from detonation.
Regards, George
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: New comic book on circuit breaker issues
(Corvallis)"
So yur saying that detonation does not occure below 75%?...Not so sure
about that. I do know Superior did a lot of testing on this but I'm not
so sure they came to that conclusion.
Would be worth you reading John Deakin's articles on leaning procedure
if you haven't done so already.
Frank
thankyou again Bob
BTW I've also read that it is not possible to damage an engine by
overleaning -provided power was not more than about 75%!
Ken L.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Riley <richard(at)RILEY.NET> |
| Subject: | New comic book on circuit breaker issues |
A year ago a friend of mine destroyed a Cont IO-550 running it full
rich, WOT, 8500 feet. Cyl head temps were in the 375 range, but oil
temp was high (poor cooler installation) at 220-230.
At 07:30 AM 10/10/05, you wrote:
>
>
>It is essentially impossible to make a *conforming* normally aspirated
>TCM engine, operating on conforming 100LL fuels - - go into detonation.
>
>If one were to try to do so, one would want to run the CHTs up to
>redline at 460 d F, and even then it is doubtful you get it to detonate,
>even if you play foose-ball with the mixture control.
>
>Different story for the turbo-charged engines.
>
>That is not to say that some mixture settings are a LOT better for the
>engine than others. That is a different issue from detonation.
>
>Regards, George
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: New comic book on circuit breaker issues
>
>(Corvallis)"
>
> So yur saying that detonation does not occure below 75%?...Not so sure
>about that. I do know Superior did a lot of testing on this but I'm not
>so sure they came to that conclusion.
>
>Would be worth you reading John Deakin's articles on leaning procedure
>if you haven't done so already.
>
>Frank
>
>thankyou again Bob
>
>BTW I've also read that it is not possible to damage an engine by
>overleaning -provided power was not more than about 75%!
>
>Ken L.
>
>
>--
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Angier M. Ames" <N2811A(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Solid State contactors |
Hello Bob,
My Lancair 360 has the usual master and starter contactors as well as
two more contactors for the gear system. Do you know of any solid
state devices which could replace these contactors?
Thanks,
Angier Ames
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | New comic book on circuit breaker issues |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Hi Richard,
Please pardon me for saying so, but this kind of message seems
provocative, and somewhat contentious. What constitutes "destroyed?" Are
you trying to refute what Mr Braly said? Let's not start a "wives tale."
From what very limited data you provided, I have to be suspicious of the
instrumentation. Oil temp of 220-230 is actually at the top normal range,
I think. What ignition system was being used on this engine, and how was
it timed? What type of fuel was being used? What was the end resolution.
Or were you saying that the rich mixture was the cause of the engine
being "destroyed?"
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
> A year ago a friend of mine destroyed a Cont IO-550 running it full
> rich, WOT, 8500 feet. Cyl head temps were in the 375 range, but oil
> temp was high (poor cooler installation) at 220-230.
>
>
> At 07:30 AM 10/10/05, you wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>It is essentially impossible to make a *conforming* normally aspirated
>> TCM engine, operating on conforming 100LL fuels - - go into detonation.
>>
>>If one were to try to do so, one would want to run the CHTs up to
>> redline at 460 d F, and even then it is doubtful you get it to
>> detonate, even if you play foose-ball with the mixture control.
>>
>>Different story for the turbo-charged engines.
>>
>>That is not to say that some mixture settings are a LOT better for the
>> engine than others. That is a different issue from detonation.
>>
>>Regards, George
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>> Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
>>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: New comic book on circuit breaker
>> issues
>>
>>(Corvallis)"
>>
>> So yur saying that detonation does not occure below 75%?...Not so
>> sure
>>about that. I do know Superior did a lot of testing on this but I'm not
>> so sure they came to that conclusion.
>>
>>Would be worth you reading John Deakin's articles on leaning procedure
>> if you haven't done so already.
>>
>>Frank
>>
>>thankyou again Bob
>>
>>BTW I've also read that it is not possible to damage an engine by
>> overleaning -provided power was not more than about 75%!
>>
>>Ken L.
>>
>>
>>--
>
>
> --
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: IR alternator |
If there is only one alternator, another point of view is to run it like
it would run in the original car or whatever. Turn it on before start.
That is still orderly and a step at a time according to the pre-start
checklist. You are going to check that the volts (and or amps) are
normal after start or pre-takeoff anyway and it is logical to me to do
that at the same time as checking oil pressure etc. I don't see any
advantage to waiting until after startup but I don't really think it
matters either. My preference would simply to be to run it like it
normally would in the car and to let the load build as the engine comes
up to idle speed. I've also heard the theory that it is gentler to wait
a few seconds for the battery voltage to recover after cranking, before
turning on the alternator, but I haven't bought into that concept either
yet ;)
Ken
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>Thanks Bob for your in depth answer, in your opinion, should the alternator
>>be switched on before starting the engine or after,
>>Franz
>>
>>
>
> I don't think it's electrically critical and from what we understand
> about the startup dynamics under normal conditions, it doesn't
> matter. From the systems OPERATOR perspective, it seems practical
> and prudent to bring things up in steps so that the pilot can
> observe the effects of each new action separately. When I write
> POH supplements, I get high marks for orderly, one-step at a time
> instructions. So, lacking information suggesting that it's unwise,
> I'll say that the alternator be left OFF until the engine is
> running smoothly whereupon the pilot's attention can be shifted
> to cause an effects of bringing the electrical system up to full
> operation.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Henderson" <wf-k(at)mindspring.com> |
Comments please; I am installing a Light Speed electrical ignition system
with Hall effect on an IO-360 B1B, replacing my right magneto. Should I or
should I not purchase the Slick Start ($385 from Aircraft Spruce) for the
left magneto with the impulse coupler?
Dave Henderson
RV-7 N925LW (Lord Willing)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Wiring questions |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Ok so my wiring of my IFR'd RV7 is looking more like brain surgery than
wiring!
1) Where is one supposed to ground the shields for the coax to the
antennas? My audio/data wiring is sheilded and grounded at the ground
block on the firewall but do I ground all the coax to the same place or
to the airframe at the antennas themselves?
2) Is it realistic to have the marker beacon antenna in the bottom of
the fiberglass cowl or will the electronic ignitions cause me all sorts
of problems??
Thanks
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | Solid State contactors |
Check out Eric'c powerlink @
http://www.periheliondesign.com/powerlinkjr.htm
This is a smaller version of another which looks to be temporarily
unavailable. I to am also interested in the larger one and would like to
hear Eric comment on this, Eric?
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Angier M.
Ames
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Solid State contactors
-->
Hello Bob,
My Lancair 360 has the usual master and starter contactors as well as two
more contactors for the gear system. Do you know of any solid state devices
which could replace these contactors?
Thanks,
Angier Ames
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wiring questions |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Hi Frank,
Antennas that use coax with controlled impedance (50ohm - RG-8/58/400)
should not have any additional electrical connections made - no
'grounding.' The coax feedline efficiently conveys the RF energy between
the antenna and the radio. I don't think 'grounding' is really an
appropriate concept for handling RF energy. If the antenna uses the metal
of the aircraft structure as a 'ground plane,' it's really using the
metal to provide an electrical 'counterpoise' to allow efficient use of a
shorter radiator. The local connection of the coax shield to the metal
aircraft structure makes this design work. It's only coincidentally
'grounded' to the rest of the airframe (though it wouldn't need to be to
work properly). Consider that many plastic airplanes have transponder
antennas designed to be mounted to metal airplanes. In the plastic
airplane, all that's required to make these work is to provide a
conductive disc that's relatively large compared to the wavelength of the
signal - an 8" diameter sheet of .024 Al does the job in my plane. The
only thing that it's electrically connected to is the shield of the feed
line. It works great!
It seems likely that an ignition system that is well engineered and
installed should probably allow mounting the MB antenna nearby. The MB
operates at 75MHz, and should not be an easy victim.
Regards,
Matt-
> (Corvallis)"
>
> Ok so my wiring of my IFR'd RV7 is looking more like brain surgery than
> wiring!
>
> 1) Where is one supposed to ground the shields for the coax to the
> antennas? My audio/data wiring is sheilded and grounded at the ground
> block on the firewall but do I ground all the coax to the same place or
> to the airframe at the antennas themselves?
>
> 2) Is it realistic to have the marker beacon antenna in the bottom of
> the fiberglass cowl or will the electronic ignitions cause me all sorts
> of problems??
>
> Thanks
>
> Frank
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | magneto timing buzz box |
>
>
> Take a look at the $25 kit from www.MagnetoTimer.com
> and see if that meets your needs.
Thanks much Greg. I bought this kit and soldered it up last night. It
works great!!! Photos here:
http://images.rvproject.com/images/magtimer/
The kit is 100% complete, and the instructions are excellent. The
components come taped to a diagram with arrows pointing where they go.
There is zero guesswork. Anybody could build this.
Sure beats paying double for an off-the-shelf buzz box.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D (643 hours)
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet(at)comcast.net> |
I had EXACTLY that setup on my newly overhauled IO-360A1A (converted at
overhaul from O-360A1A). Breaking in the engine (in other words, seating the
rings) I ran up and down the Salinas and Central Valleys in August two
summers ago , with numerous hot starts. NEVER, not once did I have a problem
starting. My friend's Bonanza powered with an IO-550 (mags of course) had to
leave his plane one hot afternoon at Chico because of a hot start problem.
He installed a Slick Start and has flown more than a 200 hours since,
including AirVenture each of the years since installation, no problems.
When installing the Slick Start, part of the checkout is to observe a spark
plug (all other plugs removed) when the starter is engaged to see the super
spark. When anyone sees this, there is left no doubt about igniting a
mixture either too rich or too lean.
Also with the LSE, it produces one heck of a spark.
I now have dual LSE's with a battery backup. I start ONLY on one LSE CDI on
the backup battery whose ONLY function is to fire the #1 CDI. I have not had
a hot start problem either. So this says that you probably don't need the
Slick Start.
In case you haven't heard, if in starting the battery voltage drops below 8
v (mine drops to about 9 v), the CDI should drop off line. However there has
been reports of kick back causing damage to the starter.
SOOOO........this says in your case, get a Slick Start, start on only the
mag and when the engine is running, turn on the CDI.
However, I had no problems when I was starting on both the CDI and Slick
Start, but had only about 100 hours prior to replacing the mag with the
second LSE CDI and backup battery.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Henderson" <wf-k(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Slick Start
>
>
> Comments please; I am installing a Light Speed electrical ignition system
> with Hall effect on an IO-360 B1B, replacing my right magneto. Should I or
> should I not purchase the Slick Start ($385 from Aircraft Spruce) for the
> left magneto with the impulse coupler?
>
>
> Dave Henderson
>
> RV-7 N925LW (Lord Willing)
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Henderson" <wf-k(at)mindspring.com> |
I already have dual alternator (one belt, one gear) and dual battery (2
Odyssey). I get the impression I should skip the Slick Start and buy another
LSE Hall effect. Sure wish I could sell these new mags that came with the
engine. Anybody game, real cheap, wires included!
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Wayne
Sweet
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Slick Start
I had EXACTLY that setup on my newly overhauled IO-360A1A (converted at
overhaul from O-360A1A). Breaking in the engine (in other words, seating the
rings) I ran up and down the Salinas and Central Valleys in August two
summers ago , with numerous hot starts. NEVER, not once did I have a problem
starting. My friend's Bonanza powered with an IO-550 (mags of course) had to
leave his plane one hot afternoon at Chico because of a hot start problem.
He installed a Slick Start and has flown more than a 200 hours since,
including AirVenture each of the years since installation, no problems.
When installing the Slick Start, part of the checkout is to observe a spark
plug (all other plugs removed) when the starter is engaged to see the super
spark. When anyone sees this, there is left no doubt about igniting a
mixture either too rich or too lean.
Also with the LSE, it produces one heck of a spark.
I now have dual LSE's with a battery backup. I start ONLY on one LSE CDI on
the backup battery whose ONLY function is to fire the #1 CDI. I have not had
a hot start problem either. So this says that you probably don't need the
Slick Start.
In case you haven't heard, if in starting the battery voltage drops below 8
v (mine drops to about 9 v), the CDI should drop off line. However there has
been reports of kick back causing damage to the starter.
SOOOO........this says in your case, get a Slick Start, start on only the
mag and when the engine is running, turn on the CDI.
However, I had no problems when I was starting on both the CDI and Slick
Start, but had only about 100 hours prior to replacing the mag with the
second LSE CDI and backup battery.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Henderson" <wf-k(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Slick Start
>
>
> Comments please; I am installing a Light Speed electrical ignition system
> with Hall effect on an IO-360 B1B, replacing my right magneto. Should I or
> should I not purchase the Slick Start ($385 from Aircraft Spruce) for the
> left magneto with the impulse coupler?
>
>
> Dave Henderson
>
> RV-7 N925LW (Lord Willing)
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tinne maha" <tinnemaha(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Audio Wire Shielded? |
Hello Bob & List,
I'm installing a Flightcom 403 Intercom with a King KT-76A & Garmin GNC 250
XL GPS/Comm in a basic VFR Panel. A few questions:
1 - The wires from the PTT switches will be perpendicular to 'fat' wires
with about 3 inches of separation. Will the use of shielded wire here
produce a noticeable difference? I strongly suspect unshielded is the best
choice, but would rather get an experienced opinion.
2 - The wires from the mic & phone jacks must run in a bundle of fat wires
for 6ft or run parallel to but about 6 inches away from the transponder
antenna line for about a couple feet of length. Which is the lesser evil?
Would it be idiotic to install an unshielded wire in either case?
Please forgive me if I missed this in the archives,
Grant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet(at)comcast.net> |
I sold mine on eBay. Forgot what I got for them; sold so much other stuff,
it all get fuzzed together.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Henderson" <wf-k(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Slick Start
>
>
> I already have dual alternator (one belt, one gear) and dual battery (2
> Odyssey). I get the impression I should skip the Slick Start and buy
> another
> LSE Hall effect. Sure wish I could sell these new mags that came with the
> engine. Anybody game, real cheap, wires included!
>
> Dave
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Wayne
> Sweet
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Slick Start
>
>
>
> I had EXACTLY that setup on my newly overhauled IO-360A1A (converted at
> overhaul from O-360A1A). Breaking in the engine (in other words, seating
> the
>
> rings) I ran up and down the Salinas and Central Valleys in August two
> summers ago , with numerous hot starts. NEVER, not once did I have a
> problem
>
> starting. My friend's Bonanza powered with an IO-550 (mags of course) had
> to
>
> leave his plane one hot afternoon at Chico because of a hot start problem.
> He installed a Slick Start and has flown more than a 200 hours since,
> including AirVenture each of the years since installation, no problems.
> When installing the Slick Start, part of the checkout is to observe a
> spark
> plug (all other plugs removed) when the starter is engaged to see the
> super
> spark. When anyone sees this, there is left no doubt about igniting a
> mixture either too rich or too lean.
> Also with the LSE, it produces one heck of a spark.
> I now have dual LSE's with a battery backup. I start ONLY on one LSE CDI
> on
> the backup battery whose ONLY function is to fire the #1 CDI. I have not
> had
>
> a hot start problem either. So this says that you probably don't need the
> Slick Start.
> In case you haven't heard, if in starting the battery voltage drops below
> 8
> v (mine drops to about 9 v), the CDI should drop off line. However there
> has
>
> been reports of kick back causing damage to the starter.
> SOOOO........this says in your case, get a Slick Start, start on only the
> mag and when the engine is running, turn on the CDI.
> However, I had no problems when I was starting on both the CDI and Slick
> Start, but had only about 100 hours prior to replacing the mag with the
> second LSE CDI and backup battery.
> Wayne
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Henderson" <wf-k(at)mindspring.com>
> To:
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Slick Start
>
>
>>
>>
>> Comments please; I am installing a Light Speed electrical ignition system
>> with Hall effect on an IO-360 B1B, replacing my right magneto. Should I
>> or
>> should I not purchase the Slick Start ($385 from Aircraft Spruce) for the
>> left magneto with the impulse coupler?
>>
>>
>> Dave Henderson
>>
>> RV-7 N925LW (Lord Willing)
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: aggressive engine leaning |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
wrote:
> We may find someone who want's to contest George's assertions. All in
> good fun and enlightenment as long as the gladiators > bring data.
I recently took the Advance Pilot Seminar and I believe it is going to
take a herculean effort in both data and theory to best George. I highly
recommend the course to anyone who wants to know what goes on in their
engine.
John Schroeder
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
This is not an original plan, but, I think it's a good one: Get your LSE
setup so that it get's adequate voltage while starting, and install an
impulse coupling driven Slick. Run the Slick until it wears out
(500hours?). Put the other Slick in next and run it until it wears out
too (another 500hours). Now your probably 5-10 years down the road and
haven't had to develop the electricals to keep the LSE's going. At that
point, buy whatever the niftiest spark-maker there is. It probably won't
need a 2nd battery (or whatever). Install that, and live happily ever
after... ;) I think there are even adapters to run automotive plugs from
the magnetos - even cheaper.
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
> I already have dual alternator (one belt, one gear) and dual battery (2
> Odyssey). I get the impression I should skip the Slick Start and buy
> another LSE Hall effect. Sure wish I could sell these new mags that came
> with the engine. Anybody game, real cheap, wires included!
>
> Dave
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rd2(at)evenlink.com |
Hi all,
What is the most likely failing part of a wingtip strobe (aeroflash in a
cessna, over 20 yrs.) and what is the best way of checking? The bulb works
ok when connected to another power supply; the original power supply gives
a humming noise. Capacitor/s?
Rumen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jon Goguen <jon.goguen(at)umassmed.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: strobe problem |
I don't have any direct experience with repair of aircraft strobes, but
work with other equipment has put capacitors and connectors at the top
of the list when I start troubleshooting. Sounds like the capacitors
are a good bet.
Jon
Jon Goguen
jon.goguen(at)umassmed.edu
Central Massachusetts
Kitfox Series V Rotax 912S / N456JG (reserved)
Complete except for electrics and avionics
"Nothing worth knowing can be understood by the human mind"
--Woody Allen
On Oct 10, 2005, at 7:36 PM, rd2(at)evenlink.com wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> What is the most likely failing part of a wingtip strobe (aeroflash in
> a
> cessna, over 20 yrs.) and what is the best way of checking? The bulb
> works
> ok when connected to another power supply; the original power supply
> gives
> a humming noise. Capacitor/s?
>
> Rumen
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: strobe problem |
Sounds like you're in the market for a power supply, if you can't get it
repaired. I recently had a Whelen power supply go on the fritz after less
than 2 years of operation. Whelen repaired it for free.
Here's what came back on the work report:
http://images.rvproject.com/images/whelen/5.jpg
"REPLACED HYBRID, FET, TRANSFORMER, RESISTOR"
I don't even know what a "hybrid" is let alone know how to fix it. ;-)
Hope this is relevant...
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D (643 hours)
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <rd2(at)evenlink.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: strobe problem
>
> Hi all,
>
> What is the most likely failing part of a wingtip strobe (aeroflash in a
> cessna, over 20 yrs.) and what is the best way of checking? The bulb works
> ok when connected to another power supply; the original power supply gives
> a humming noise. Capacitor/s?
>
> Rumen
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Riley <richard(at)RILEY.NET> |
| Subject: | New comic book on circuit breaker issues |
<9853.208.187.29.230.1128963288.squirrel(at)webmail.spro.net>
It was a nearly new Velocity with 120 or so on the factory new I0-550
engine. "Destroyed" in the is case means 2 pistons burned through
and 2 more heavily damaged by what "appeared" to be
"detonation." Engine instrumentation is a JPI system - I don't know
the model but it's a data recording engine analyzer. Ignition was 2
mags, installed by the factory. I don't happen to know the timing, I
assume that it was per factory spec since it hadn't been changed
since it left the factory. Fuel was 100 low lead from the last
airport he was at.
Resolution was a major overhaul, due to the amount of metal the
pistons dumped into the case.
He was running it full rich to try to keep the oil temps down. If he
had leaned it the oil temp would have been much higher.
I do not "know" the reason the engine was "destroyed." I have
"reported" the basic "facts" as I "know" them. Feel free to reach
your own conclusions.
At 09:54 AM 10/10/05, Matt Prather wrote:
>Hi Richard,
>
>Please pardon me for saying so, but this kind of message seems
>provocative, and somewhat contentious. What constitutes "destroyed?" Are
>you trying to refute what Mr Braly said? Let's not start a "wives tale."
> >From what very limited data you provided, I have to be suspicious of the
>instrumentation. Oil temp of 220-230 is actually at the top normal range,
>I think. What ignition system was being used on this engine, and how was
>it timed? What type of fuel was being used? What was the end resolution.
> Or were you saying that the rich mixture was the cause of the engine
>being "destroyed?"
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Matt-
>
>
> >
> >
> > A year ago a friend of mine destroyed a Cont IO-550 running it full
> > rich, WOT, 8500 feet. Cyl head temps were in the 375 range, but oil
> > temp was high (poor cooler installation) at 220-230.
> >
> >
> > At 07:30 AM 10/10/05, you wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>It is essentially impossible to make a *conforming* normally aspirated
> >> TCM engine, operating on conforming 100LL fuels - - go into detonation.
> >>
> >>If one were to try to do so, one would want to run the CHTs up to
> >> redline at 460 d F, and even then it is doubtful you get it to
> >> detonate, even if you play foose-ball with the mixture control.
> >>
> >>Different story for the turbo-charged engines.
> >>
> >>That is not to say that some mixture settings are a LOT better for the
> >> engine than others. That is a different issue from detonation.
> >>
> >>Regards, George
> >>
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> >>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> >> Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
> >>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> >>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: New comic book on circuit breaker
> >> issues
> >>
> >>(Corvallis)"
> >>
> >> So yur saying that detonation does not occure below 75%?...Not so
> >> sure
> >>about that. I do know Superior did a lot of testing on this but I'm not
> >> so sure they came to that conclusion.
> >>
> >>Would be worth you reading John Deakin's articles on leaning procedure
> >> if you haven't done so already.
> >>
> >>Frank
> >>
> >>thankyou again Bob
> >>
> >>BTW I've also read that it is not possible to damage an engine by
> >> overleaning -provided power was not more than about 75%!
> >>
> >>Ken L.
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> >
>
>
>--
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Riley <richard(at)RILEY.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: strobe problem |
I thought Aeroflash strobes were only for the experimental category?
At 04:36 PM 10/10/05, you wrote:
>
>Hi all,
>
>What is the most likely failing part of a wingtip strobe (aeroflash in a
>cessna, over 20 yrs.) and what is the best way of checking? The bulb works
>ok when connected to another power supply; the original power supply gives
>a humming noise. Capacitor/s?
>
>Rumen
>
>
>--
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New comic book on circuit breaker issues <9853.208.187.29.230.1128963288.squirrel(at)webmail.spro.net> |
FWIW, JetA or any form of kerosene could cause what happened to this engine.
A Turbo Charged Aerocommander was fueled with JetA at MRY and ditched in the
Monterey Bay when both engine apparently went into detonation and presumably
pre-ignition and then quit.
Was the fuel of the Velocity checked for contamination?
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Riley" <richard(at)RILEY.NET>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: New comic book on circuit breaker issues
<9853.208.187.29.230.1128963288.squirrel(at)webmail.spro.net>
>
> It was a nearly new Velocity with 120 or so on the factory new I0-550
> engine. "Destroyed" in the is case means 2 pistons burned through
> and 2 more heavily damaged by what "appeared" to be
> "detonation." Engine instrumentation is a JPI system - I don't know
> the model but it's a data recording engine analyzer. Ignition was 2
> mags, installed by the factory. I don't happen to know the timing, I
> assume that it was per factory spec since it hadn't been changed
> since it left the factory. Fuel was 100 low lead from the last
> airport he was at.
>
> Resolution was a major overhaul, due to the amount of metal the
> pistons dumped into the case.
>
> He was running it full rich to try to keep the oil temps down. If he
> had leaned it the oil temp would have been much higher.
>
> I do not "know" the reason the engine was "destroyed." I have
> "reported" the basic "facts" as I "know" them. Feel free to reach
> your own conclusions.
>
>
> At 09:54 AM 10/10/05, Matt Prather wrote:
>
>>Hi Richard,
>>
>>Please pardon me for saying so, but this kind of message seems
>>provocative, and somewhat contentious. What constitutes "destroyed?" Are
>>you trying to refute what Mr Braly said? Let's not start a "wives tale."
>> >From what very limited data you provided, I have to be suspicious of the
>>instrumentation. Oil temp of 220-230 is actually at the top normal range,
>>I think. What ignition system was being used on this engine, and how was
>>it timed? What type of fuel was being used? What was the end resolution.
>> Or were you saying that the rich mixture was the cause of the engine
>>being "destroyed?"
>>
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Matt-
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > A year ago a friend of mine destroyed a Cont IO-550 running it full
>> > rich, WOT, 8500 feet. Cyl head temps were in the 375 range, but oil
>> > temp was high (poor cooler installation) at 220-230.
>> >
>> >
>> > At 07:30 AM 10/10/05, you wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>It is essentially impossible to make a *conforming* normally aspirated
>> >> TCM engine, operating on conforming 100LL fuels - - go into
>> >> detonation.
>> >>
>> >>If one were to try to do so, one would want to run the CHTs up to
>> >> redline at 460 d F, and even then it is doubtful you get it to
>> >> detonate, even if you play foose-ball with the mixture control.
>> >>
>> >>Different story for the turbo-charged engines.
>> >>
>> >>That is not to say that some mixture settings are a LOT better for the
>> >> engine than others. That is a different issue from detonation.
>> >>
>> >>Regards, George
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>-----Original Message-----
>> >>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>> >>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>> >> Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
>> >>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>> >>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: New comic book on circuit breaker
>> >> issues
>> >>
>> >>(Corvallis)"
>> >>
>> >> So yur saying that detonation does not occure below 75%?...Not so
>> >> sure
>> >>about that. I do know Superior did a lot of testing on this but I'm not
>> >> so sure they came to that conclusion.
>> >>
>> >>Would be worth you reading John Deakin's articles on leaning procedure
>> >> if you haven't done so already.
>> >>
>> >>Frank
>> >>
>> >>thankyou again Bob
>> >>
>> >>BTW I've also read that it is not possible to damage an engine by
>> >> overleaning -provided power was not more than about 75%!
>> >>
>> >>Ken L.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>--
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>--
>
>
> --
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" <dean.psiropoulos(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Alternator blast tubes. |
Bob:
Given your comments below, does that mean I don't NEED to install a blast
tube to my alternator? I'm currently finishing my engine baffling
installation and have to locate some blast tube flanges to rivet on to the
baffling if required. If not then I won't have to find a flange and go to
the trouble(and won't have a large air leak out of the baffles either). I'm
planning on installing the B&C 60 amp alternator. Please advise.
Dean Psiropoulos
RV-6A N197DM
South Florida
--------------Original message----------------------------------------------
Experiment".
I'm continually amazed at the numbers of threads over the years
where builders are advised to take fans off 'cause they
"run the wrong way". Or, "add blast tubes to avoid overheating",
or any number of other remedies to mitigate an alternator
failure . . . Yet not a single discussion talked about studies
to measure operating temperatures or any suggestion that they be done.
Alternator failures on OBAM aircraft are probably more rare...
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
They have both experimental and certified systems, although it's interesting
to note they share literally the same components. There are / were a number
of certificated aircraft that did / do come with Aeroflash strobes.....
Cheers,
Stein.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Richard Riley
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: strobe problem
I thought Aeroflash strobes were only for the experimental categor--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New comic book on circuit breaker issues <9853.208.187.29.230.1128963288.squirrel(at)webmail.spro.net> |
> Feel free to reach your own conclusions.
OK......
> It was a nearly new Velocity with 120 or so on the factory new I0-
550 engine.
Now we have a pusher, probably the XL version, that clearly is
designed for the IO-550, and, further, has several examples flying
without incident. What's different about this one?
>"Destroyed" in the is case means 2 pistons burned through and
> 2 more heavily damaged by what "appeared" to be "detonation."
That may be conjecture. Parts flying around in the case often cause
ancilliary damage. What we're interested in is the root cause. Fuel
contamination with Jet A? Has the factory, or any other qualified
engineering firm, looked at these parts?
> Engine
>instrumentation is a JPI system - I don't know the model but it's a
> data recording engine analyzer.
This is a key piece of info....have the data been saved? Mr. Braley
might be interested in seeing these.......????
> He was running it full rich to try to keep the oil temps down. If he
> had leaned it the oil temp would have been much higher.
And I'll bet he didn't even try to lean it. Intuition says lean is hotter,
and that may be true up to a certain fuel/air ratio, but then things get
a lot cooler...fast!...when leaned. Figure 8-9 in Taylor's The Internal
Combustion Engine in Theory And Practice, Vol 1, Thermodynamics,
says a lot about gas temperatures.....
Your friend has a problem that is not standard. Obviously a problem
encountered before but not resolved. Installation? Ducting? Was the
Velocity IO-550 install kit used? I think the bottom line is that running
an engine full rich to keep oil temps down borders on lunacy. There
has to be another factor involved. On any other installation this
engine is capable and willing to keep oil temps in check given a
correctly engineered installation, including the Velocity. Why not in
this case? This has all the earmarks of an operator/systems
problem, not an engine problem (clearly conjecture on my part, as
well....).
> I do not "know" the reason the engine was "destroyed." I have
> "reported" the basic "facts" as I "know" them.
Nor do I know the reason. For what it's worth (and 50 cents for a cup
of coffee).......
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
'71 SV, 492TC
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Werner Schneider <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
| Subject: | Re: strobe problem |
Hello Rumen,
what kind of Aeroflash setup do you have, PS at the wingtips or central?
However on my aeroflash units one of the capacitors gave up (what a
mess) as they are special made you have to get a reconditoned or a new
PS. As I'm running an experimental I did change the whole setup, to LED
and car strobe PS.
br
Werner
rd2(at)evenlink.com wrote:
>
>Hi all,
>
>What is the most likely failing part of a wingtip strobe (aeroflash in a
>cessna, over 20 yrs.) and what is the best way of checking? The bulb works
>ok when connected to another power supply; the original power supply gives
>a humming noise. Capacitor/s?
>
>Rumen
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IR alternator (On before or after start?) |
>Bob N wrote: *lacking information suggesting that it's unwise, I'll say that the
alternator be left OFF until the engine is running smoothly*,
Bob likes to say he deals in facts only. The above comment is unbelievable. We
dont have any info so why the hell not? lol.
Quote, Sir Robert L. Nuckolls (the 3rd): *I focus on nothing but facts George .
. . my career success absolutely depends on an artful exploitation of facts.*
Artful exploitation of facts (more lol). Bob you are a character.
No offense to Bob's opinion, but it is an opinion based on ZERO facts. To quote
or paraphrase Bob he does not recommend IR alternators and does not know anything
about them except he removed them and threw them out, when he converted B&C
alternators to external regulation.
Manually turning IR alternators ON and OFF under load is not needed and is abrupt
at best. The fact is IR alternators are designed for applications where this
is never done should be enough clue. I am not sure where Bob is coming from
but I am still laughing at his super scientific * we don't know any better so
why not*.
There is absolutely NO value added by turning the alternator ON after engine start
in anyway shape or form. It is just one more steps and that is not good. Once
the engine starts look at the load-meter / amp meter (shunt or hall-effect
should be on alternator B-lead). Is it showing a draw or output? Good enough.
More pilot work load distracts from more important tasks.
How many Cessnas or Pipers require a separate action to turn the alternator on
or off? NONE. Alternator on GA planes are turned ON and OFF with the BAT/MASTER
switch when the engine is not turning. It is the first and last thing the pilot
does.
With an IR alternator, you should wire it and operate it as it was intended in
the original application (Toyota Corolla, Suzuki Samurai, Toyota folk lift).
When you turn your master ON, energize the alternator at the same time. When you
turn your BAT/MASTER OFF, the ALTERNATOR is turned OFF. End of story.
One switch, a DPST switch will accomplish this in a single switch throw. Dont make
it more complicated than necessary. Those darn engineers always make it complicated.
Keep it simple. If you need to remove power to the alternator IGN while
the BAT/ALT switch is ON, pull the Alt CB in the panel.
Not only operate the alternator as it was designed, wire the alternator as designed.
You should have pull type CB protection (not fuses) on the panel for the
B-lead and IGN wire. Manually pulling the CB's can isolate the alternator if
needed. THAT IS THE WAY THE DUMB ENGINEERS DESIGNED IT.
May be the engineers who design it, who tested it for 10's of thousands hours in
very demanding lab and field tests (realistic and valid) and made millions of
them with excellent service reliability might be right? May be we should not
GUESS and copy the installation and operation exactly. DO YOU THINK? DeeeDaaaDeeeee.
As far as check list I can tell you on the B737, you start the engines first, than
bring the AC gen on line after checking the AC freq and volts are correct.
I now fly the B757. The 757 GENs are brought on line automatically when available.
Before flying the Boeing 737/757 I was an engineer and instructor for the
Boeing company and made technical input to checklist changes. Checklist are
not written by one person in a casual manner. Engineering system experts, test
pilots, airline pilots, instructors, customers, human factor engineers and the
FAA, all are consulted. The less steps the better. You have to kill to add one
step. Dont make your experimental a B707 where you need a flight engineer.
The less steps the better. Be cool and get the job done with less throws of switches
not more. None of these JET procedures apply to our little sky scooters.
Keep your systems simple.
Bob will tell you there are no GA planes which require you to manually bring the
alternator(s) on line as a separate step, so I have know idea WHY he would suggest
otherwise? Why be different from the standard method and technique used
on all GA planes? Just because
DONT MAKE YOUR EXPERIMENTAL PLANE ODD with odd operating procedures. Have you flown
a Cessna C172 or Piper Cherokee? Do you turn the alternator manually after
start? NO. I have flow 30 different models of GA planes and none required a
separate step.
A builder who posted on this list, operated his ND IR alternator routinely by turning
it ON and OFF manually under load, after engine start and before engine
shut down. He started having some issues. The regulated voltage was not as stable
as it had been, peaking at about 16 volts and than dropping under load. Also
the alternator no longer responded as it had before. He was advised by several
people he talked to, including myself that his normal procedure was not good
practice. There is a cause and affect. You can call people ignorant but that
does not change the facts. Some think if it did not happen on their bench with
a regulated power supply it is not useful. Trust me the real world is a more
valid test than the bench most of the time. It is like nuisance trips of the
crow-bar OV modules causing damage to IR alternators. The crow bar works on
the bench but in the aircraft, well not so much, sometimes, why? The repeatable
test is useless if it is not valid. Is it VALID? Th
is is
the critical part of the scientific method. Not the SWAG method: Scientific Wild
Ass Guess method.
Pilots who DON'T manually turn their alternator on/off or use an OV module, have
little or no problems. Pilots who add on OV modules and/or turn their alternator
on and off under load have problems. Hmmmmmm. Sorry I did not bench tested
it.
Operate the alternator as designed. It was designed to be ON when spun-up and ON
when spun down. Even when abused by the pilot the ND alternators DID NOT have
dangerous or damaging over voltage conditions, even in a failed mode. If the
CHARGE light was connected it would have illuminated to show the fault. So if
you choose to do this you may damage the regulator out in 100-300 hours. However
myself and other pilots have over 8 years and thousand of hours of respective
trouble free service experience with the ND alternator. I also have two Acura
autos, both with ND alternators. One ND alternator went 12 years and equivalent
of 4000 hours with no problems. The second Acura has about 13 years and
120K miles and is still going strong. My Acuras' ND alternator's are always ON
when the engine is started or stopped.
Bob has said he does not recommend IR alternators (at all, period), end of story.
Later Bob says it is OK if you can understand it and the chance of failure
is rare. I dont know what Bob believes. He says he knows nothing of them but has
all kinds of ideas on how to use them. He says he only deals in facts? What
ever. I wish Bob would be consistent here.
Trust me I have researched this subject with an open mind and have determined that
you have two choices:
-Follow Bobs advice on using an external VR with some kind of OV protection. It
is all good stuff. I think Bob's way is simple and easy to understand and there
is no mystery about the IR alternators IC chip. However there is no 100% guarantee.
Bob's crow-bar should work because of *artful exploitation of facts*,
as Bob says. The fact is there are only a few transistors and is dirt simple.
As long as you test the crow bar frequently, it does not trip when is should
not, it should work if ever needed, emphasis on SHOULD. If you have been in design
and analysis long enough you know nothing is 100%. They Key is Bob can control
this simple design, he can not control the ND alternator design. Fair enough.
-Use an IR alternator and install and operate according to its design, DO NOT mix
and match with the external VR architecture or philosophy, they are two different
concepts and animals. DONT MIX AND MATCH.
In the case of Van's 60amp alternator that is a 90's Toyota Corolla application.
Also per Van's recommendations leave the add on OV off. Bob calls Van ignorant
but there is a known history of faults and nuisance trips of the crow bar and
damaged IR alternators. Even though this is empirical data, if a wise man saw
several failures from cutting the b-lead open, while making power, one would
be lead to this hypothesis, it is a BAD COMBO. Of course Bob even though he
has none of the facts that Van is working on or bother to ask him for the data,
Van is ignorant. If you are willing to damage your IR alternator put on the
OV module, by all means. If you are lucky you will not get a nuisance trip or
maybe the added on load dump device will save alternator damage. Now you have
all this crap, RELAY, CROW BAR, LOAD DUMP DEVICE. All this expense, weight and
risk of alternator damage for something unlikely. All this is on top of the OV
protection the IR alternator already provides. This
is
because of some theory the transistor in the IR will fail in a very specific way
with out warning and instantaneously. There is no history of failure but WHAT
THE HELL? WHERE ARE THE FACTS BOB LOVES. Sounds like theory and worry for little
benefit.
FLAME SUIT ON. Stick and stones will
Golden RULES of IR alternator use:
-Wire per manufacture or per original application of the alternator.
-Operate per design, which means dont manually turn it ON and OFF while spinning.
Use a B-lead CB in the panel that can be pulled, forget the non-standard auto Busman
fuse concept**.
**(To quote Bob; THIS COULD NEVER BE CERTIFIED, when he talks about why IR alternators
are inferior or not aircraft worthy some how. We can conclude fuses that
can not be accessed in-flight must also be inferior and bad, since they are
not certified. Using the same argument Bob uses against IR alternators, remote
fuses cant be (or have been) certified, therefore they are BAD. No factory
GA plane has the hidden fuse set up Bob promotes. Please dont quote Biz jets or
Large Jets have CBs in remote locations in the cargo holds you cant access.
This is not a good reason since you don't need the cargo door or cargo light in
flight. The FAA told Bob his fuse concept is not acceptable. What does Bob say?
The FAA is stupid and they cant grasp his brilliance. Hey I agree with Bob,
but I still have a panel full of beautiful mini Texas Instrument Klixon CB's.
I bought them cheap, new surplus. My point is certification is not the gold
standard of the universe.)
-If there is a light or remote voltage sense on the IR alternators wiring plug,
connect them as designed. You can use a fusible link for the remote voltage sense.
The remote voltage sense is off the hot battery and should be protected.
-Dont add on OV modules per Vans aircraft. There is a reason. Bob says Van is and
I quote, IGNORANT. Again there is ignorance going on but it is not Van.
-If your ND alternator shows any unusual voltage variation, remove it, test it
and replace the VR as required. ND alternators tend to fail in a safe and passive
mode.
There are no documented case to show otherwise or case of a massive OV condition,
despite the rumors and urban legend. Not even Bob has came up with a documented
case with FACTS. I have asked and nothing. Anyone from the peanut gallery
have facts please come forward. Please no:
*My Buddies, Friends, Uncle had an OV in a Cessna 172 with a ND alternator.*
Also Nissan uses almost all Hitachi not ND and there are no recalls for any ND
alternator I have researched most commonly used by builders.
Cheers George :-)
>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" nuckollsr(at)cox.net
>Subject: IR alternator
>
>
>
>Thanks Bob for your in depth answer, in your opinion, should the alternator be
switched on >before starting the engine or after, Franz
>
>I don't think it's electrically critical and from what we understand about the
startup dynamics >under normal conditions, it doesn't matter. From the systems
OPERATOR perspective, it >seems practical and prudent to bring things up in
steps so that the pilot can observe the >effects of each new action separately.
When I write POH supplements, I get high marks for >orderly, one-step at a time
instructions. So, lacking information suggesting that it's unwise, I'll >say
that the alternator be left OFF until the engine is running smoothly whereupon
the pilot's >attention can be shifted to cause an effects of bringing the
electrical system up to full >operation. Bob
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IR alternator (On before or after start?) |
>Bob N wrote: *lacking information suggesting that it's unwise, I'll say that the
alternator be left OFF until the engine is running smoothly*,
Bob likes to say he deals in facts only. The above comment is unbelievable. We
dont have any info so why the hell not? lol.
Quote, Sir Robert L. Nuckolls (the 3rd): *I focus on nothing but facts George .
. . my career success absolutely depends on an artful exploitation of facts.*
Artful exploitation of facts (more lol). Bob you are a character, you make me laugh
:-)
No offense to Bob's opinion, but it is an opinion based on ZERO facts. To quote
or paraphrase Bob he does not recommend IR alternators and does not know anything
about them except that he removed them and threw them out, when he converted
B&C alternators to external regulation.
Manually turning IR alternators ON and OFF under load is not needed and is abrupt
at best. The fact is IR alternators are designed for applications where this
is never done should be enough clue. I am not sure where Bob is coming from
but I am still laughing at his super scientific * we don't know any better so
why not*.
There is absolutely NO value added by turning the alternator ON after engine start
in anyway shape or form. It is just one more steps and that is not good. Once
the engine starts look at the load-meter / amp meter (shunt or hall-effect
should be on alternator B-lead). Is it showing a draw or output? Good enough.
More pilot work load distracts from more important tasks.
How many Cessnas or Pipers require a separate action to turn the alternator on
or off? NONE. Alternator on GA planes are turned ON and OFF with the BAT/MASTER
switch when the engine is not turning. It is the first and last thing the pilot
does.
With an IR alternator, you should wire it and operate it as it was intended in
the original application (Toyota Corolla, Suzuki Samurai, Toyota folk lift).
When you turn your master ON, energize the alternator at the same time. When you
turn your BAT/MASTER OFF, the ALTERNATOR is turned OFF. End of story.
One switch, a DPST switch will accomplish this in a single switch throw. Dont make
it more complicated than necessary. Those darn engineers always make it complicated.
Keep it simple. If you need to remove power to the alternator IGN while
the BAT/ALT switch is ON, pull the Alt CB in the panel.
Not only operate the alternator as it was designed, wire the alternator as designed.
You should have pull type CB protection (not fuses) on the panel for the
B-lead and IGN wire. Manually pulling the CB's can isolate the alternator if
needed. THAT IS THE WAY THE DUMB ENGINEERS DESIGNED IT.
May be the engineers who design it, tested it for 10's of thousands hours in very
demanding lab and field tests (realistic and valid) and made millions of them
with excellent service reliability might be right? May be we should not GUESS
and copy the installation and operation exactly. DO YOU THINK? DeeeDaaaDeeeee.
As far as check list I can tell you on the B737, you start the engines first, than
bring the AC gen on line after checking the AC freq and volts are correct.
I now fly the B757. The 757 GENs are brought on line automatically when available.
Before flying the Boeing 737/757 I was an engineer and instructor for the
Boeing company and made technical input to checklist changes. Checklist are
not written by one person in a casual manner. Engineering system experts, test
pilots, airline pilots, instructors, customers, human factor engineers and the
FAA, all are consulted. The less steps the better. You have to kill to add one
step. Dont make your experimental a B707 where you need a flight engineer.
The less steps the better. Be cool and get the job done with less throws of switches
not more. None of these JET procedures apply to our little sky scooters.
Bob will tell you there are no GA planes which require you to manually bring the
alternator(s) on line as a separate step, so I have know idea WHY he would suggest
otherwise? Why be different from the standard method and technique used
on all GA planes? Just because
DONT MAKE YOUR EXPERIMENTAL PLANE ODD with odd operating procedures. Have you flown
a Cessna C172 or Piper Cherokee? Do you turn the alternator manually after
start? NO. I have flow 30 different models of GA planes and none required a
separate step.
A builder who posted on this list, operated his ND IR alternator routinely by turning
it ON and OFF manually under load, after engine start and before engine
shut down. He started having some issues. The regulated voltage was not as stable
as it had been, peaking at about 16 volts and than dropping under load. Also
the alternator no longer responded as it had before. He was advised by several
people he talked to, including myself that his normal procedure was not good
practice. There is a cause and affect. His procedure killed the VR. You can
call people ignorant but that does not change the facts. Some think if it did
not happen on their bench with a regulated power supply it is not useful. Trust
me the real world is a more valid test than the bench most of the time. It
is like nuisance trips of the crow-bar OV modules causing damage to IR alternators.
The crow bar works on the bench, but in the aircraft, well it works not
so well, sometimes. Why? The repeatable test is usel
ess if
it is not valid. Is it VALID? This is the critical part of the scientific method.
Not the SWAG method: Scientific Wild Ass Guess method.
Pilots who DON'T manually turn their alternator on/off or use an OV module, have
little or no problems. Pilots who add on OV modules and/or turn their alternator
on and off under load have problems. Hmmmmmm. Sorry I did not bench tested
it.
Operate the alternator as designed. It was designed to be ON when spun-up and ON
when spun down. Even when abused by the pilot the ND alternators DID NOT have
dangerous or damaging over voltage conditions, even in a failed mode. If the
CHARGE light was connected it would have illuminated to show the fault. So if
you choose to do this you may damage the regulator out in 100-300 hours. However
myself and other pilots have over 8 years and thousand of hours of respective
trouble free service experience with the ND alternator. I also have two Acura
autos, both with ND alternators. One ND alternator went 12 years and equivalent
of 4000 hours with no problems. The second Acura has about 13 years and
120K miles and is still going strong. My Acuras' ND alternator's are always ON
when the engine is started or stopped.
Bob has said he does not recommend IR alternators (at all). Period, end of story.
Later Bob says it is OK if you can understand it and the chance of failure
is rare. I dont know what Bob believes. He says he knows nothing of them but has
all kinds of ideas on how to use them. He says he only deals in facts? What
ever. I wish Bob would be consistent here.
Trust me I have researched this subject with an open mind and have determined that
you have two choices:
-Follow Bobs advice on using an external VR with some kind of OV protection. It
is all good stuff. I think Bob's way is simple and easy to understand and there
is no mystery about the IR alternators IC chip. However there is no 100% guarantee.
Bob's crow-bar should work because of *artful exploitation of facts*,
as Bob says. The fact is there are only a few transistors is dirt simple. As
long as you test the crow bar frequently it should work, emphasis on SHOULD. If
you have been in design and analysis long enough you know nothing is 100%. They
Key is Bob can control the design, he can not control the ND alternator design.
Fair enough.
-Use an IR alternator and install and operate according to its design, DO NOT mix
and match with the external VR architecture or philosophy, they are two different
concepts and animals. DONT MIX AND MATCH.
In the case of Van's 60amp alternator that is a 90's Toyota Corolla application.
Also per Van's recommendations leave the add on OV off. Bob calls Van ignorant
but there is a known history of faults and nuisance trips of the crow bar and
damaged IR alternators. Even though this is empirical data, if a wise man saw
several failures from cutting the b-lead open, while making power, one would
be lead to this hypothesis, it is a BAD COMBO. Of course Bob even though he
has none of the facts that Van is working on or bothered to ask him for the data,
Van is ignorant. If you are willing to damage your IR alternator put on the
OV module, by all means. If you are lucky you will not get a nuisance trip or
maybe the added on load dump device will save alternator from damage. Now you
have all this crap, RELAY, CROW BAR, LOAD DUMP DEVICE. All this expense, weight
and risk of alternator damage for something unlikely. All this is on top of
the OV protection the IR alternator already provide
s. This
is because of some theory the transistor in the IR will fail in a very specific
way with out warning and instantaneously. There is no history of failure but
WHAT THE HELL? WHERE ARE THE FACTS BOB LOVES. Sounds like theory and worry for
little benefit.
FLAME SUIT ON. Stick and stones will
Golden RULES of IR alternator use:
-Wire per manufacture or per original application of the alternator.
-Operate per design, which means dont manually turn it ON and OFF while spinning.
Use a B-lead CB in the panel that can be pulled, forget the non-standard auto Busman
fuse concept**.
**(To quote Bob THIS COULD NEVER BE CERTIFIED, when he talks about why IR alternators
being inferior some how. We can conclude fuses that can not be accessed
in-flight must also be inferior and bad, since they are not certified. Using
the same argument Bob uses against IR alternators, remote fuses cant be certified,
therefore BAD. No factory GA plane has the hidden fuse set up Bob promotes.
Please dont quote Biz jets or Large Jets have CBs in remote locations in the
cargo holds you cant access. This is not a good reason since you don't need
the cargo door in flight. The FAA told Bob his fuse concept is not acceptable.
What does Bob say? The FAA is stupid and they cant grasp his brilliance. Hey
I agree with Bob, but I still have a panel full of beautiful mini Texas Instrument
Klixon CB's. I bought them cheap, new surplus. My point is certification
is not the gold standard of the universe.)
-If there is a light or remote voltage sense on the IR alternators wiring plug,
connect them as designed. You can use a fusible link for the remote voltage sense.
The remote voltage sense is off the hot battery and should be protected.
-Dont add on OV modules per Vans aircraft. There is a reason. Bob says Van is and
I quote, IGNORANT. Again there is ignorance going on but it is not Van.
-If your ND alternator shows any unusual voltage variation, remove it, test it
and replace the VR as required. ND alternators tend to fail in a safe and passive
mode. There are no documented case to show otherwise or case of a massive
OV condition, despite the rumors and urban legend. Not even Bob has came up with
a documented case with FACTS. I have asked and nothing. Anyone from the peanut
gallery have facts please come forward. Please no *My Buddies, Friends, Uncle
had an OV in a Cessna 172 with a ND alternator.* Also Nissan uses Hitachi
not ND and there are no recalls for any ND alternator I have researched used on
Toyota or Suzuki.
Cheers George :-)
>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" nuckollsr(at)cox.net
>Subject: IR alternator
>
>
>
>Thanks Bob for your in depth answer, in your opinion, should the alternator be
switched on >before starting the engine or after, Franz
>
>I don't think it's electrically critical and from what we understand about the
startup dynamics >under normal conditions, it doesn't matter. From the systems
OPERATOR perspective, it >seems practical and prudent to bring things up in
steps so that the pilot can observe the >effects of each new action separately.
When I write POH supplements, I get high marks for >orderly, one-step at a time
instructions. So, lacking information suggesting that it's unwise, I'll >say
that the alternator be left OFF until the engine is running smoothly whereupon
the pilot's >attention can be shifted to cause an effects of bringing the
electrical system up to full >operation. Bob
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Alternator recall |
Paul:
I can guarantee any recall you refer to does not involve any ND alternator in
the 60amp or less range. In my previous research of the ND alternators builders
use the small frame 40-55 amp (two wire) and the medium frame 60 amp (3 wire,
remote sense). These ND alternators are used in Toyota and Suzuki / Geo auto
models and there where no reported complaints, service bulletins, recalls or
safety alerts. Actually as a brand, ND has no recorded problems that I found at
the time. Most alternators made today are 100 amp plus and not the same as the
ones in common use in experimental aircraft. The high amp units are large and
weigh more, so that is why they may not be as popular as the earlier model
lower amp models.
If you are talking about Nissan I think 99% of their alternators are Hitachi or
brands other than ND.
If you are referring to the Nissan Murano recall, I can't tell you what model alternator
it is, likely a 110amp Hitachi. Regardless the recall is benign, a wire
comes off and the battery stops being charged according to the info I quickly
looked up. The symptom besides the battery gets no charge is the ALT idiot
light illuminates.
As far as fire anyone with a computer can look this stuff up with a little effort.
The web site is NSTSA, or just google combos of words like: alternator, recall,
fires, electrical, Nissan, nippondenso, hitachi, mitsubishi, delco, prestolite,
motorolla. You will not find any fire produced by a denso alternator.
Many fires are from external wiring near the alternator or from other components
on the engine near the wiring. Lesson is keep your alternator and wiring shielded
and protected very well.
Bottom line the ND service history very good and if you have specific info please
share. Remember there are 1000's ND flying in aircraft all over. Some ND alternators
As far as "OTHER" so-called superior electrical systems, which are experimental,
hand made/modified components from a small company, exclusively installed in
experimental aircraft. There is no tracking of the reliability of these specialty
devices because they are exclusively used for experimental aircraft. (Not
withstanding some parts have been STC as a back-up only electrical source). The
maker says they have failure analysis blaaa blaaa blaaa. There is no data and
there is no way to prove their products reliability, but that does not stop
them from talking about the reliability of the ND alternator, which they know
nothing about.
Ironically these specialty experimental parts are based on ND alternators, go figure.
There is no solid data on the "superior" device reliability, failures.
There are not even any data on how many are in use for how many total fleet hours
in service. So when comparing reliability consider the source.
Now consider a large company like ND, who makes alternators/voltage regulators,
albeit for autos and industrial equipment, they are designed by professional
engineers whose expertise is in making electronics and alternators. Also as far
as overvoltage do you think that the computers in cars are cheap? Overvoltage
is of major concern and alternators are well designed for it. It's one thing
for a wire to come loose and replace the alternator, but a car's computer can
cost big buck$. I found no reported overvoltage in any car by the way.
The break through in alternators for autos will be from future cars that drive
themselves with radar, sonic and mag sensors, gps and "autopilots". More power
and redundancy will be considered for these robot cars. Even now some alternators
have a "data link" to the cars computers. Regardless current alternators
for cars are very reliable. Even with the advanced design of current and future
auto electrical systems, some so called experts will still be holding on to
their 1960's technology and have you wire a bunch of "extra" stuff on because......(why?)
As you can see recalls can be expensive to auto-makers and at loss of reputation;
therefore great care is taken in the design and manufacture of these devices.
To be honest Hitachi has a long standing history of problems, as well as other
brands, Bosch, Ford, Delco. On the other hand ND alternators do not have any
significant history of problems. ND's are in many makes and models but primarily
in Honda, Acura, Lexus and Toyota. Hitachi is mostly in Nissan. Mitsubishi
are of course in cars of the same name and other makes like Mazda and Nissan.
It is up to the individual to research the alternator for proper installation
and operation. Some folks feel that we are too stupid to make our own decisions
and choices.
My advice has been research the alternator you use, regardless of brand (stay away
from Hitachi) and install and operate it as intended in the original application,
whether from a car or folk lift. If Van or Burt Rutan designed airframes
like some design electrical systems they would still be made of wood, fabric
and have two wings, aka bi-plane.
George
>Date: Sep 29, 2005
>From: PWilson <pwmac(at)sisna.com>
>Subject: Re: ND two-lead alternator question
>
>HI George.
>Do you have any knowledge about the Nissan recall to replace over
>100000 alternators? I just wonder who provided the alternator that
>had internal shorts and cause fires.
>Regards, Paul W
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rodney Dunham" <rdunhamtn(at)hotmail.com> |
George,
Take it eeeeeasy, Buckwheat!
You are obviously an intelligent and well educated and trained pilot person.
You have strong opinions and are passionate about your love of aviation and
things electrical. That's great. So write a book or start a web site. But
get over it!
I, for one, am here because I have read Bob's book, agree with his design
philosophy and seek to improve my knowledge and abilities vis a vis wiring
my SkyRanger and soon, a Sonex. I am a physician, an engineer of things
human, with limited practical experience and knowledge of OBAM aircraft
electrical engineering. My greatest need, electrical wise, before reading
the 'Connection was to understand my aircraft's electrical system so that I
could #1 deal with it safely in failure mode, #2 fix it if something went
wrong and #3 build the dang thing!
All three of these objectives have been met beautifully by studying the
'Connection and Bob's design architecture as a springboard to my own unique
but very similar design. Additionally, I have become a person recognized at
the flight park as knowledgable in aircraft wiring! Imagine that. Last year
I could not even spell electerical engineer and now I ARE one! Recently two
of the aircraft in adjacent hangers had electrical issues, both resulting in
VR failure. I was able to properly diagnose the condition in each case and
taught them some fundamental electrical theory with its practical
applications in the airframe environment. WOW! That was neat.
Lately, I've torn down my panel to rewire my ICOM A-200 radio. It was wired
by a "dealer" and with my new found knowledge of things electrical I have
recognized the inadequecies of the installation. My flying buddies
recognized a long time before me because they complained of trashy
transmitting. Without hesitation, I tore into the project and actually
enjoyed it! I would never have even attempted such a project before the
'Connection.
That's why I am a devotee of the 'Connection. It makes sense for me, in my
airplane, at my flight park! It's not for everyone, and Bob doesn't claim it
to be. It meets the criteria set out by the designers to provide safe,
worry-free flying designed by and built by amateurs.
Most of us are here to get Bob's opinion because we respect it! We've done
our homework and we like it :o) We even sometimes help the newbies with our
knowledge either on-line or at the hanger fly-in. This is GOOD for the sport
and for aviation in general. And yes, even for general aviation.
So... Take a chill pill. Relax. Have a pickle. We'll still respect you in
the morning!
Rodney in Tennessee
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Now mixture control, was: New comic book on circuit |
breaker issues
Good Morning Jim,
I know I am getting in on this conversation very late and may have missed
many pertinent points. I am also unable to determine the name of the original
commentator to which you were replying.
Nevertheless, I would like to comment on the portion pasted in below.
It has been my observation that the most common cause of problems with the
IO-550 engine has been having the mixture set "Not Rich Enough" at full
throttle and takeoff power.
When the commentator says the engine was run at full rich to keep it cool,
how rich is he talking about? That engine should flow at least twenty-eight
GPH on a 'sea level conditions' takeoff. Personally. I like to see them set
at twenty-nine to thirty GPH under those conditions. I have seen many brand
new engines that were flowing as low as twenty-four GPH.
That is dangerously low.
It is a lot easier for a pilot to lean the engine a bit if maximum power is
needed than it is to richen it a bit if the engine is running too lean.
It takes the Braly, Deakin, Atkinson team three days to explain all this
adequately at their seminars so I won't try to do so in a paragraph or two, but
I agree totally that temperature is a function of mixture and that
temperatures can be raised or lowered by either richening or leaning the mixture.
It All Depends on what is trying to be accomplished. The fastest way to
reduce cylinder head temperatures that are rapidly going out of sight to the
high side is to rapidly lean the engine well to the lean side of peak EGT!
The major point is that our aircraft engines are designed to operate at very
rich mixtures during the takeoff regime. If they are not rich enough, bad
things, including, but not limited to, detonation, can occur.
Merely pushing the mixture control to the full rich position will NOT assure
that the mixture is as rich as it should be.
And, as you stated, trying to control the oil temperature with mixture is a
very roundabout way of doing so.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 10/11/2005 1:07:33 A.M. Central Standard Time,
jlbaker(at)telepath.com writes:
This is a key piece of info....have the data been saved? Mr. Braley
might be interested in seeing these.......????
> He was running it full rich to try to keep the oil temps down. If he
> had leaned it the oil temp would have been much higher.
And I'll bet he didn't even try to lean it. Intuition says lean is hotter,
and that may be true up to a certain fuel/air ratio, but then things get
a lot cooler...fast!...when leaned. Figure 8-9 in Taylor's The Internal
Combustion Engine in Theory And Practice, Vol 1, Thermodynamics,
says a lot about gas temperatures.....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
I forget what mke mine were but I had (have) continual problems with
capacitors failing in the power supplies...Simply open it up, get the
numbers and replace...A big (450V) capacitor should cost around $10.
They tend to leak over time...be careful around capacitors they bite!
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
rd2(at)evenlink.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: strobe problem
Hi all,
What is the most likely failing part of a wingtip strobe (aeroflash in a
cessna, over 20 yrs.) and what is the best way of checking? The bulb
works ok when connected to another power supply; the original power
supply gives a humming noise. Capacitor/s?
Rumen
_
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
This is not true...Any capacitor with the same number (0.5microfarad at
450 V I think) will work for a couple of years before you replace it
again...Much better than the $50 rebuilidng fee!
Needless to say my new project will NOT be running Aeroflash!
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Werner Schneider
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: strobe problem
-->
Hello Rumen,
what kind of Aeroflash setup do you have, PS at the wingtips or central?
However on my aeroflash units one of the capacitors gave up (what a
mess) as they are special made you have to get a reconditoned or a new
PS. As I'm running an experimental I did change the whole setup, to LED
and car strobe PS.
br
Werner
rd2(at)evenlink.com wrote:
>
>Hi all,
>
>What is the most likely failing part of a wingtip strobe (aeroflash in
a
>cessna, over 20 yrs.) and what is the best way of checking? The bulb
works
>ok when connected to another power supply; the original power supply
gives
>a humming noise. Capacitor/s?
>
>Rumen
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob C. " <flyboy.bob(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator blast tubes. |
Good question Dean,
Also what about other blast tubes . . . mags, etc.
Regards,
Bob Christensen
RV-8 Builder - SE Iowa
On 10/10/05, DEAN PSIROPOULOS wrote:
>
> dean.psiropoulos(at)verizon.net>
>
> Bob:
>
> Given your comments below, does that mean I don't NEED to install a blast
> tube to my alternator? I'm currently finishing my engine baffling
> installation and have to locate some blast tube flanges to rivet on to the
> baffling if required. If not then I won't have to find a flange and go to
> the trouble(and won't have a large air leak out of the baffles either).
> I'm
> planning on installing the B&C 60 amp alternator. Please advise.
>
> Dean Psiropoulos
> RV-6A N197DM
> South Florida
>
>
> --------------Original
> message----------------------------------------------
>
> Experiment".
>
> I'm continually amazed at the numbers of threads over the years
> where builders are advised to take fans off 'cause they
> "run the wrong way". Or, "add blast tubes to avoid overheating",
> or any number of other remedies to mitigate an alternator
> failure . . . Yet not a single discussion talked about studies
> to measure operating temperatures or any suggestion that they be done.
>
> Alternator failures on OBAM aircraft are probably more rare...
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator blast tubes. |
>
>
>Bob:
>
>Given your comments below, does that mean I don't NEED to install a blast
>tube to my alternator? I'm currently finishing my engine baffling
>installation and have to locate some blast tube flanges to rivet on to the
>baffling if required. If not then I won't have to find a flange and go to
>the trouble(and won't have a large air leak out of the baffles either). I'm
>planning on installing the B&C 60 amp alternator. Please advise.
Can't do that with any foundations in simple-ideas. We can draw broad
assumptions from the general success in OBAM aircraft installations
(the vast majority of which are never instrumented) and that of
certified aviation where all installations were instrumented. Alternator
failures for reasons obviously related to cooling are rare.
The apparent success might be attributable in part to the fact
that few alternators are EVER subjected to extended hot day Vx
cooling conditions under full load.
What this means is that you really have a 60A or 40A machine
under MOST but not all conditions. The FAA makes us explore all
four corners of the envelope. The OBAM aircraft community has
(to my knowledge) never explored any corners of the alternators
performance/cooling envelope. Nonetheless, failures are rare
so odds are decidedly in your favor to install your alternator
just like everyone else has and don't worry about it.
I hesitate to even offer this discussion because it deals with
things very low on the list of concerns for system performance
and reliability. The last thing I want to do is inject
new worries into anyone's project planning. This is intended
to be a simple recitation of observations and facts, not a great
call-to-arms 'cause lots of ugly guys in black hats are lurking
around the corner salivating over the prospect of trashing
your new alternator.
The short answer is "no", a blast tube on your alternator
installation will have a low probability of adding value to
your system if it's operated like 99.9% of all the other
OBAM aircraft without blast tubes.
Now, that's based on MY current suite of data points. If
Van's or some other source recommends cooling, you'll have
to ask them. "Is this based on real data or is it a
hedge against having to go measure something."
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Oh yes also I found that I had a problem with another component
once...Can't rmember what it was but it was humming and vibrating and
replacing the cap did not cure the problem.
I basically poked around the board and eventually it sparked right
up...Turns out I had a dry joint in the board.
Re did the soldered joint and it worked fine.
I have replaced each capacitor at least twice in 6 years. The caps I
have been replacing with are not probably rated for strobe use but for
$10 who cares?...:)
About the hardest part in replacing a cap is drilling out the pop
rivets..:)
Frank
>
>Hi all,
>
>What is the most likely failing part of a wingtip strobe (aeroflash in
a
>cessna, over 20 yrs.) and what is the best way of checking? The bulb
works
>ok when connected to another power supply; the original power supply
gives
>a humming noise. Capacitor/s?
>
>Rumen
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: strobe problem |
Many capacitors tend to have short lives in this kind of service. I've
never had much success finding replacement strobe capacitors. Even so
called "low ESR" (equivalent series resistance) capacitors seem to run
warm but they'd be my choice if I couldn't find the proper ones..
Ken
Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis) wrote:
>
>I forget what mke mine were but I had (have) continual problems with
>capacitors failing in the power supplies...Simply open it up, get the
>numbers and replace...A big (450V) capacitor should cost around $10.
>
>They tend to leak over time...be careful around capacitors they bite!
>
>Frank
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Now mixture control, was: New comic book on circuit |
breaker issues
> It has been my observation that the most common cause of
problems with
> the IO-550 engine has been having the mixture set "Not Rich
Enough"
> at full throttle and takeoff power.
An excellent point. And perhaps an admonishment to not entirely
trust the "fuel flow" meter on the panel (unless calibrated). One of
the Deakin articles on AvWeb makes just this point.
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
'71 SV, 492TC
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne" <webfootboat(at)comcast.net> |
HEAR HEAR
Wayne
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Rodney Dunham
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: George
George,
Take it eeeeeasy, Buckwheat!
You are obviously an intelligent and well educated and trained pilot
person.
You have strong opinions and are passionate about your love of aviation
and
things electrical. That's great. So write a book or start a web site.
But
get over it!
I, for one, am here because I have read Bob's book, agree with his
design
philosophy and seek to improve my knowledge and abilities vis a vis
wiring
my SkyRanger and soon, a Sonex. I am a physician, an engineer of things
human, with limited practical experience and knowledge of OBAM aircraft
electrical engineering. My greatest need, electrical wise, before
reading
the 'Connection was to understand my aircraft's electrical system so
that I
could #1 deal with it safely in failure mode, #2 fix it if something
went
wrong and #3 build the dang thing!
All three of these objectives have been met beautifully by studying the
'Connection and Bob's design architecture as a springboard to my own
unique
but very similar design. Additionally, I have become a person recognized
at
the flight park as knowledgable in aircraft wiring! Imagine that. Last
year
I could not even spell electerical engineer and now I ARE one! Recently
two
of the aircraft in adjacent hangers had electrical issues, both
resulting in
VR failure. I was able to properly diagnose the condition in each case
and
taught them some fundamental electrical theory with its practical
applications in the airframe environment. WOW! That was neat.
Lately, I've torn down my panel to rewire my ICOM A-200 radio. It was
wired
by a "dealer" and with my new found knowledge of things electrical I
have
recognized the inadequecies of the installation. My flying buddies
recognized a long time before me because they complained of trashy
transmitting. Without hesitation, I tore into the project and actually
enjoyed it! I would never have even attempted such a project before the
'Connection.
That's why I am a devotee of the 'Connection. It makes sense for me, in
my
airplane, at my flight park! It's not for everyone, and Bob doesn't
claim it
to be. It meets the criteria set out by the designers to provide safe,
worry-free flying designed by and built by amateurs.
Most of us are here to get Bob's opinion because we respect it! We've
done
our homework and we like it :o) We even sometimes help the newbies with
our
knowledge either on-line or at the hanger fly-in. This is GOOD for the
sport
and for aviation in general. And yes, even for general aviation.
So... Take a chill pill. Relax. Have a pickle. We'll still respect you
in
the morning!
Rodney in Tennessee
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Now mixture control, was: New comic book on circuit |
br...
In a message dated 10/11/2005 10:42:00 A.M. Central Standard Time,
jlbaker(at)telepath.com writes:
And perhaps an admonishment to not entirely
trust the "fuel flow" meter on the panel (unless calibrated). One of
the Deakin articles on AvWeb makes just this point.
Good Morning Jim,
Very good point. The Continental Fuel Injection Manual calls for the fuel
pressure/flow gauge to be calibrated using a device called a FloRator (sp?).
I have never seen one in even the best equipped shops. Almost everyone these
days is either relying on the installer to have set up the fuel controller
and fuel pump correctly or they use an electronic fuel flow unit. The problem
there is that even the manufacturers of those units tell the installer to
calibrate the unit before it is to be relied upon. Lot's of potential for a
very inaccurate fuel flow reading.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Controlling IR ND Alternators |
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: >
10/11/2005
Hello George, I don't understand the above statement.
Are you saying that if I want to stop the electrical output from any IR ND
alternator configured with an IGN wire that I can remove the voltage /
current that may exist on the IGN wire after the alternator is operating by
opening a panel mounted CB and the alternator electrical output will cease?
If this is not what you are saying could you please clarify?
<<.....skip.......Golden RULES of IR alternator use:....skip......Use a
B-lead CB in the panel that can be pulled, forget the non-standard auto
Busman fuse concept**......skip......>>
But if the alternator electrical output can normally be shut down by opening
the IGN wire CB why would you need a second much larger CB (capable of
handling the current in the B lead) in the instrument panel in order to stop
alternator electrical output at that large CB?
Are you advocating having the second large CB installed just in case some
abnormal alternator operating condition develops? Can you please explain?
Thanks, OC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Audio Wire Shielded? |
>
>Hello Bob & List,
>
>I'm installing a Flightcom 403 Intercom with a King KT-76A & Garmin GNC 250
>XL GPS/Comm in a basic VFR Panel. A few questions:
>
>1 - The wires from the PTT switches will be perpendicular to 'fat' wires
>with about 3 inches of separation. Will the use of shielded wire here
>produce a noticeable difference? I strongly suspect unshielded is the best
>choice, but would rather get an experienced opinion.
PTT wires are not potential victims. Further, if you run your
PTT wires as a twisted pair such that the control and ground wires
run all the way from the switch to the intercom or radio, then
they are invulnerable to magnetically coupled interference under
even the worst of conditions.
>2 - The wires from the mic & phone jacks must run in a bundle of fat wires
>for 6ft or run parallel to but about 6 inches away from the transponder
>antenna line for about a couple feet of length. Which is the lesser evil?
>Would it be idiotic to install an unshielded wire in either case?
Shielding is of close to zero value in the aircraft environs. Magnetic
and ground loops account for 99.9% of all interference coupling.
Twisted conductors that carry both signals and grounds for the
remote control or jack will provide all the isolation you need for
perfectly satisfactory operation.
My diagrams use shielded wire for these functions because I used
the shield itself as one of the conductors (usually ground return)
which emulates the benefits of twisting . . . and not because the
shielding is being depended upon to act as an electrostatic shield.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Solid State contactors |
>
>Hello Bob,
>
>My Lancair 360 has the usual master and starter contactors as well as
>two more contactors for the gear system. Do you know of any solid
>state devices which could replace these contactors?
The short answer is "no" . . . I've participated in some
solid state contactor designs that have proven to have great
return on investment but they're about $3000 each and not
suited for use as a battery contactor (you need two-way current
flow).
Can you share your design goals for this substitution? Lower
cost of ownership, lighter, more efficient, longer service life,
etc. ????
Have the contactors on your airplane proven troublesome? Contactors
used in personally owned and operated aircraft then to have VERY
low usage numbers . . . so low in fact that many components in
our airplanes die of old age and long term environmental effects
as opposed to wear out to end of service life. My reason for asking
is to make sure that you're not paying for perceived reliability
or service life that's not a good return on investment.
If you could expand on your concerns and/or design goals, perhaps
we can offer more useful suggestions.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Speedy11(at)aol.com |
I have a question for folks on the list.
I want to control the flaps from both a switch on the panel and a switch on
the stick. I would like to have a flap switch on the panel that has three
positions - momentary up-stick-momentary down. The momentary up and down
positions are self explanatory. The middle "stick" position would direct control
of
the flaps to a switch on the stick.
My question is - what switch would I use for the panel to accomplish the
desired results?
Stan Sutterfield
www.rv-8a.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi Stan,
It sound to me like you want a SPDT (on) off (on) switch on the panel
(like the S700-1-7), and the same on the stick, or two PB switches set
up to emulate that function. Connect them in parallel, and whichever
switch you use will control the flaps. Just don't ever use one switch
one way, and the other switch the other way at the same time.
Bob W.
Speedy11(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> I have a question for folks on the list.
> I want to control the flaps from both a switch on the panel and a switch on
> the stick. I would like to have a flap switch on the panel that has three
> positions - momentary up-stick-momentary down. The momentary up and down
> positions are self explanatory. The middle "stick" position would direct control
of
> the flaps to a switch on the stick.
> My question is - what switch would I use for the panel to accomplish the
> desired results?
> Stan Sutterfield
> www.rv-8a.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
http://www.bob-white.com
N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 (real soon)
Prewired EC2 Cables - http://www.roblinphoto.com/shop/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Earl_Schroeder <Earl_Schroeder(at)juno.com> |
Hi Stan.
I'm wondering why you want to disable the switch on the stick? Mine are
both active all the time. Am I missing something? Earl
>I want to control the flaps from both a switch on the panel and a switch on
>the stick. I would like to have a flap switch on the panel that has three
>positions - momentary up-stick-momentary down. The momentary up and down
>positions are self explanatory. The middle "stick" position would direct control
of
>the flaps to a switch on the stick.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N5SL <nfivesl(at)yahoo.com> |
Hi Stan :
I just installed my flap switch (steinair.com P/N SA-806) and it works just great.
In the neutral position you would have complete control of the flaps with
your stick switch and relay.
I don't see why you need a special flap switch unless you plan to operate both
switches at the same time where you could see some sparks. A few carefully placed
diodes might eliminate the sparking scenario.
Good Luck,
Scott Laughlin
www.cooknwithgas.com
601XL / Corvair
Working on Wiring and FWF
Speedy11(at)aol.com wrote:
I have a question for folks on the list.
I want to control the flaps from both a switch on the panel and a switch on
the stick.
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | D Wysong <hdwysong(at)gmail.com> |
Stan -
A regular old (ON)-OFF-(ON) toggle switch wired in parallel with your
stick will work. The amount of money you want to spend is up to you.
On Allied's site (www.alliedelec.com) I found switches from Carling and
Honeywell. On the 'cheap', a Carling switch like 6FC5H-73 will run you
$8. This is the brand B&C shipped me when I ordered toggles from them.
If you prefer to spend more money, how about a 2TL1-70 for $34?
D
----------------
Speedy11(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> I have a question for folks on the list.
> I want to control the flaps from both a switch on the panel and a switch on
> the stick. I would like to have a flap switch on the panel that has three
> positions - momentary up-stick-momentary down. The momentary up and down
> positions are self explanatory. The middle "stick" position would direct control
of
> the flaps to a switch on the stick.
> My question is - what switch would I use for the panel to accomplish the
> desired results?
> Stan Sutterfield
> www.rv-8a.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bob rundle" <bobrundle2(at)hotmail.com> |
I'm looking for some top quality butt splices. The kind where I can see the
wire inside the splice and it crimps both the wre and the tefzel covering.
Anyone have a good source?
Bob R
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Butt Splices |
Hi Bob,
B & C has butt splices like you describe. http://www.bandcspecialty.com/
Richard Dudley
-6A flying
bob rundle wrote:
>
>I'm looking for some top quality butt splices. The kind where I can see the
>wire inside the splice and it crimps both the wre and the tefzel covering.
>Anyone have a good source?
>
>Bob R
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
I am wondering if someone can point me to a source for a TED 9-30-15
right angle RF connector?
It is used on my Apollo SL-70 transponder.
Thanks,
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AI Nut <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | FI engine fuel flow |
I would like to install some affordable fuel flow sensors in my plane.
It's only a 3/8" line for a turbocharged 1.9L engine, so fuel
requirements are not huge. I've talked to Flowscan (I think it was) and
they say their fuel injection system is not accurate at all. I'll need
to sensors, of course, including one for the low pressure return line.
The feed side is usually 43 psi but can at times reach 90 psi absolute.
Any ideas? Don't need a gauge since I'll be connecting the sensor
output to an A/D for computer input.
Thanks!
David M.
Cost is ALWAYS a consideration.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: FI engine fuel flow |
Hi David
On my list of things to do sometime is a little device to integrate the
pulses going to one of the fuel injectors and display flow. The SDS
injection computer is available with that option. That's the cheapest
and most accurate way that I've thought of...
Ken
AI Nut wrote:
>
>I would like to install some affordable fuel flow sensors in my plane.
>It's only a 3/8" line for a turbocharged 1.9L engine, so fuel
>requirements are not huge. I've talked to Flowscan (I think it was) and
>they say their fuel injection system is not accurate at all. I'll need
>to sensors, of course, including one for the low pressure return line.
>The feed side is usually 43 psi but can at times reach 90 psi absolute.
>
>Any ideas? Don't need a gauge since I'll be connecting the sensor
>output to an A/D for computer input.
>
>Thanks!
>David M.
>Cost is ALWAYS a consideration.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: FI engine fuel flow |
I have been flying for 4 years with an analogy EFI fuel monitoring system
that does just that. I keep track of the injector-On time which together
with the known/calibrated flow rate of the injectors gives me both Flow Rate
and Total Fuel used. No transducers, No connection to the fuel plumbing at
all. On a single wire to one of the injectors. Of course, it only works for
electronic fuel injection.
I calculated the amount of injector time it took to pass 1,000,000th of a
gallon. I then build a pulse generator the period of which was equal to
1/1000,000 of a gallon. Then I gated that pulse generator with the injector
pulse width. I then counted the pulses, when I had counted 1,000,000 pulses
then I knew a gallon had passed through the injectors. So kept track of the
pulses - it was simple in concept but had a horrid parts count and no
flexibility. It was less than 0.3% inaccurate (3/10ths of 1 %) of total
tank. In fact, the gas pump meter had more error.
I am just finishing a digital version of the same which gives a great deal
more flexibility and more fuel parameters like setting alarms and warnings.
It works on the bench and I just need to install it in aircraft, hopefully
this month and test it in the Real World.
I use a PIC18F452 microprocessor in the digital version, it has a module
(CCP) that is designed to measure electronic pulse widths.. I have been
using a character LCD to display the fuel factors, but am now working on a
Graphic LCD so I can display the fuel MAP in the computer. That way I can
easier tell where there may be holes or peaks in the fuel distribution.
Great little chip once you learn it, but of course, plenty of other chips
can do the job.
Ed
Ed Anderson
Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered.
Matthews, NC
eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken" <klehman(at)albedo.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: FI engine fuel flow
>
> Hi David
> On my list of things to do sometime is a little device to integrate the
> pulses going to one of the fuel injectors and display flow. The SDS
> injection computer is available with that option. That's the cheapest
> and most accurate way that I've thought of...
> Ken
>
> AI Nut wrote:
>
>>
>>I would like to install some affordable fuel flow sensors in my plane.
>>It's only a 3/8" line for a turbocharged 1.9L engine, so fuel
>>requirements are not huge. I've talked to Flowscan (I think it was) and
>>they say their fuel injection system is not accurate at all. I'll need
>>to sensors, of course, including one for the low pressure return line.
>>The feed side is usually 43 psi but can at times reach 90 psi absolute.
>>
>>Any ideas? Don't need a gauge since I'll be connecting the sensor
>>output to an A/D for computer input.
>>
>>Thanks!
>>David M.
>>Cost is ALWAYS a consideration.
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rodney Dunham" <rdunhamtn(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Poor Man's Battery Capacity Tester |
I'm about to build the PMBCT as per the 'Connection, page 2-9.
I have purchased the following from Radio Shack;
1) Resistors... 470kOhm 1/2 watt, 5% tolerance (p/n 271-1133)
2) Zener Diode... INT4742A 12 Volt (p/n 276-0563)
3) DPDT Relay... 12VDC coil, 10A 112VAC contact voltage (p/n 275-0218)
4) Transistor... 2N3904 NPN silicon (p/n 276-2016)
Will these parts do??? I don't want to smoke anything. I've never built a
project box before. Looks like fun. Guess if I can wire an airplane, I can
wire a project box :o)
Rodney in Tennessee
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AI Nut <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: FI engine fuel flow |
I considered that, but it will only be accurate at 100% operating
injector. If it becomes even partially clogged, but not to the point of
the plug not firing, you'll be off by increasing amounts. Or, if any or
all of the other injectors start getting clogged, same thing. Actual
fuel flow versus calculated fuel burned should indicate when/if the
injectors are becoming clogged. Etc.
David M.
Ken wrote:
>
>Hi David
>On my list of things to do sometime is a little device to integrate the
>pulses going to one of the fuel injectors and display flow. The SDS
>injection computer is available with that option. That's the cheapest
>and most accurate way that I've thought of...
>Ken
>
>AI Nut wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>I would like to install some affordable fuel flow sensors in my plane.
>>It's only a 3/8" line for a turbocharged 1.9L engine, so fuel
>>requirements are not huge. I've talked to Flowscan (I think it was) and
>>they say their fuel injection system is not accurate at all. I'll need
>>to sensors, of course, including one for the low pressure return line.
>>The feed side is usually 43 psi but can at times reach 90 psi absolute.
>>
>>Any ideas? Don't need a gauge since I'll be connecting the sensor
>>output to an A/D for computer input.
>>
>>Thanks!
>>David M.
>>Cost is ALWAYS a consideration.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: FI engine fuel flow |
My experience (300 hours) of flying with Electronic Fuel Injectors,
mostly with 100LL, have resulted in no problem with plugged injectors. It
may be because when operating our engines are generally outputting
considerably more continuos power than the average auto in traffic. This
of course results in the injectors being ON more frequently (rpm higher) and
for longer duration (higher Manifold pressure). I also think that our
engine probably run a bit cooler than those in auto stuck in traffic running
an A/C. Its my opinion, that the combination of 100LL, higher power
settings and probably cooler operating conditions may result in less
tendency for the injectors to plug or clog.
In any event, any system should have a calibration means to adjust for
difference in injector flow from planned, wear or other causes of flow rate
change over time, etc. One good method is as you say - compare what you
system says you burned vs what the tank says you burned. Take off and land
one the same tank. Stabilize your engine rpm/fuel burn (I like 8 gph) and
the switch to your second tank and fly for X amount of time (I like to use
an hour), switch back to your take off tank and land. Fill up your
"calibration" tank as accurately as you can and compare that to your system
generated data. Then calculate what correction factor your need to adjust
your system to "reality".
Ed
Ed Anderson
Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC
eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "AI Nut" <ainut(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: FI engine fuel flow
>
> I considered that, but it will only be accurate at 100% operating
> injector. If it becomes even partially clogged, but not to the point of
> the plug not firing, you'll be off by increasing amounts. Or, if any or
> all of the other injectors start getting clogged, same thing. Actual
> fuel flow versus calculated fuel burned should indicate when/if the
> injectors are becoming clogged. Etc.
>
> David M.
>
>
> Ken wrote:
>
>>
>>Hi David
>>On my list of things to do sometime is a little device to integrate the
>>pulses going to one of the fuel injectors and display flow. The SDS
>>injection computer is available with that option. That's the cheapest
>>and most accurate way that I've thought of...
>>Ken
>>
>>AI Nut wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>I would like to install some affordable fuel flow sensors in my plane.
>>>It's only a 3/8" line for a turbocharged 1.9L engine, so fuel
>>>requirements are not huge. I've talked to Flowscan (I think it was) and
>>>they say their fuel injection system is not accurate at all. I'll need
>>>to sensors, of course, including one for the low pressure return line.
>>>The feed side is usually 43 psi but can at times reach 90 psi absolute.
>>>
>>>Any ideas? Don't need a gauge since I'll be connecting the sensor
>>>output to an A/D for computer input.
>>>
>>>Thanks!
>>>David M.
>>>Cost is ALWAYS a consideration.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: FI engine fuel flow |
The simplest fuel flow system based on electronic injector open duration
costs about $12-$30.00 to make (depending on what's in your electronic junk
box). It's based on the concept of pulse duty cycle. It basically
integrates the pulse train and drives a 3 digit meter. The one I built was
designed to work up to a flow rate of 20 GPH. It has a diode, inverter,
couple of capacitors and resistors, including a pot for calibration and the
3 digit meter. It takes a few flights to get it calibrated, but it is
surprisingly accurate as a fuel flow meter. I used it for the first year,
but decided I also wanted a fuel totalizer and that resulted in a
conceptually simple but somewhat implementation complex analogy design.
So now I am doing the digital version of the analogy system.
If you are interested in the simple system Fuel Flow meter, send me an e
mail and I'll send you the schematic.
Ed Anderson
Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC
eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "AI Nut" <ainut(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: FI engine fuel flow
>
> I considered that, but it will only be accurate at 100% operating
> injector. If it becomes even partially clogged, but not to the point of
> the plug not firing, you'll be off by increasing amounts. Or, if any or
> all of the other injectors start getting clogged, same thing. Actual
> fuel flow versus calculated fuel burned should indicate when/if the
> injectors are becoming clogged. Etc.
>
> David M.
>
>
> Ken wrote:
>
>>
>>Hi David
>>On my list of things to do sometime is a little device to integrate the
>>pulses going to one of the fuel injectors and display flow. The SDS
>>injection computer is available with that option. That's the cheapest
>>and most accurate way that I've thought of...
>>Ken
>>
>>AI Nut wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>I would like to install some affordable fuel flow sensors in my plane.
>>>It's only a 3/8" line for a turbocharged 1.9L engine, so fuel
>>>requirements are not huge. I've talked to Flowscan (I think it was) and
>>>they say their fuel injection system is not accurate at all. I'll need
>>>to sensors, of course, including one for the low pressure return line.
>>>The feed side is usually 43 psi but can at times reach 90 psi absolute.
>>>
>>>Any ideas? Don't need a gauge since I'll be connecting the sensor
>>>output to an A/D for computer input.
>>>
>>>Thanks!
>>>David M.
>>>Cost is ALWAYS a consideration.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AI Nut <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: FI engine fuel flow |
Thank you kindly for the offer of schematic. The DIY engine controller
will handle injector on/off times so can communicate directly with the
computer that does fuel calculation. Alternatively, with a bit of extra
RAM, the ECU can also handle the fuel calcs and just pass off the totals
to the main computer. That's my plan, anyway 8-).
David M.
Ed Anderson wrote:
>
>The simplest fuel flow system based on electronic injector open duration
>costs about $12-$30.00 to make (depending on what's in your electronic junk
>box). It's based on the concept of pulse duty cycle. It basically
>integrates the pulse train and drives a 3 digit meter. The one I built was
>designed to work up to a flow rate of 20 GPH. It has a diode, inverter,
>couple of capacitors and resistors, including a pot for calibration and the
>3 digit meter. It takes a few flights to get it calibrated, but it is
>surprisingly accurate as a fuel flow meter. I used it for the first year,
>but decided I also wanted a fuel totalizer and that resulted in a
>conceptually simple but somewhat implementation complex analogy design.
>
>So now I am doing the digital version of the analogy system.
>
>If you are interested in the simple system Fuel Flow meter, send me an e
>mail and I'll send you the schematic.
>
>Ed Anderson
>Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
>Matthews, NC
>eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "AI Nut" <ainut(at)hiwaay.net>
>To:
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: FI engine fuel flow
>
>
>
>
>>
>>I considered that, but it will only be accurate at 100% operating
>>injector. If it becomes even partially clogged, but not to the point of
>>the plug not firing, you'll be off by increasing amounts. Or, if any or
>>all of the other injectors start getting clogged, same thing. Actual
>>fuel flow versus calculated fuel burned should indicate when/if the
>>injectors are becoming clogged. Etc.
>>
>>David M.
>>
>>
>>Ken wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Hi David
>>>On my list of things to do sometime is a little device to integrate the
>>>pulses going to one of the fuel injectors and display flow. The SDS
>>>injection computer is available with that option. That's the cheapest
>>>and most accurate way that I've thought of...
>>>Ken
>>>
>>>AI Nut wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>I would like to install some affordable fuel flow sensors in my plane.
>>>>It's only a 3/8" line for a turbocharged 1.9L engine, so fuel
>>>>requirements are not huge. I've talked to Flowscan (I think it was) and
>>>>they say their fuel injection system is not accurate at all. I'll need
>>>>to sensors, of course, including one for the low pressure return line.
>>>>The feed side is usually 43 psi but can at times reach 90 psi absolute.
>>>>
>>>>Any ideas? Don't need a gauge since I'll be connecting the sensor
>>>>output to an A/D for computer input.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks!
>>>>David M.
>>>>Cost is ALWAYS a consideration.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: FI engine fuel flow |
Ok, David
Good luck on your project.
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: "AI Nut" <ainut(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: FI engine fuel flow
>
> Thank you kindly for the offer of schematic. The DIY engine controller
> will handle injector on/off times so can communicate directly with the
> computer that does fuel calculation. Alternatively, with a bit of extra
> RAM, the ECU can also handle the fuel calcs and just pass off the totals
> to the main computer. That's my plan, anyway 8-).
>
> David M.
>
>
> Ed Anderson wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>The simplest fuel flow system based on electronic injector open duration
>>costs about $12-$30.00 to make (depending on what's in your electronic
>>junk
>>box). It's based on the concept of pulse duty cycle. It basically
>>integrates the pulse train and drives a 3 digit meter. The one I built
>>was
>>designed to work up to a flow rate of 20 GPH. It has a diode, inverter,
>>couple of capacitors and resistors, including a pot for calibration and
>>the
>>3 digit meter. It takes a few flights to get it calibrated, but it is
>>surprisingly accurate as a fuel flow meter. I used it for the first year,
>>but decided I also wanted a fuel totalizer and that resulted in a
>>conceptually simple but somewhat implementation complex analogy design.
>>
>>So now I am doing the digital version of the analogy system.
>>
>>If you are interested in the simple system Fuel Flow meter, send me an e
>>mail and I'll send you the schematic.
>>
>>Ed Anderson
>>Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
>>Matthews, NC
>>eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "AI Nut" <ainut(at)hiwaay.net>
>>To:
>>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: FI engine fuel flow
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>I considered that, but it will only be accurate at 100% operating
>>>injector. If it becomes even partially clogged, but not to the point of
>>>the plug not firing, you'll be off by increasing amounts. Or, if any or
>>>all of the other injectors start getting clogged, same thing. Actual
>>>fuel flow versus calculated fuel burned should indicate when/if the
>>>injectors are becoming clogged. Etc.
>>>
>>>David M.
>>>
>>>
>>>Ken wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Hi David
>>>>On my list of things to do sometime is a little device to integrate the
>>>>pulses going to one of the fuel injectors and display flow. The SDS
>>>>injection computer is available with that option. That's the cheapest
>>>>and most accurate way that I've thought of...
>>>>Ken
>>>>
>>>>AI Nut wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I would like to install some affordable fuel flow sensors in my plane.
>>>>>It's only a 3/8" line for a turbocharged 1.9L engine, so fuel
>>>>>requirements are not huge. I've talked to Flowscan (I think it was)
>>>>>and
>>>>>they say their fuel injection system is not accurate at all. I'll need
>>>>>to sensors, of course, including one for the low pressure return line.
>>>>>The feed side is usually 43 psi but can at times reach 90 psi absolute.
>>>>>
>>>>>Any ideas? Don't need a gauge since I'll be connecting the sensor
>>>>>output to an A/D for computer input.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks!
>>>>>David M.
>>>>>Cost is ALWAYS a consideration.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | marknlisa(at)hometel.com |
You might consider an on-off-(on) style toggle switch. The "on" in
parentheses denotes a momemtary position; you can hold the switch in that
position, but a spring moves the toggle back to the middle "off" position
when you release it.
If you install the switch with the momemtary on position down you can
lower the flaps by holding the switch until you attain the desired flap
position, then release. I've timed my flaps at 10 seconds to full down,
so 3 seconds gives me approx 1/3 flaps. I can do it without looking at
the indicator.
To raise 'em just toggle up and forget it; the limit switch will cut power
to the motor when the flaps are up.
Mark & Lisa Sletten
Legacy FG N828LM
http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: FI engine fuel flow |
In practice I doubt whether a flow sensor would really flag the start of
an injector clog in that most of the time the discrepancy is going to be
a similar order of magnitude as caused by temperature change etc. While
this is not a concern to me, if it was I'd look at both systems. ie
compare the electronic commanded on time of the injectors to the
measured flow and flag any significant discrepancy. The easier way would
be to have an EGT for every cylinder of course. I've set up an EIS4000
to flag differences in left side vs. right side EGT on my EJ22 which has
common exhaust ports for each side of the engine.
Ken
AI Nut wrote:
>
>I considered that, but it will only be accurate at 100% operating
>injector. If it becomes even partially clogged, but not to the point of
>the plug not firing, you'll be off by increasing amounts. Or, if any or
>all of the other injectors start getting clogged, same thing. Actual
>fuel flow versus calculated fuel burned should indicate when/if the
>injectors are becoming clogged. Etc.
>
>David M.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
Stan,
My RV-7 kit came with an (on)-off-(on) bat toggle switch just like you
describe. Pretty sure it came with the electric flap sub-kit with the
fuselage.
If your kit didn't come with one, email me your address offline and I'll
just send you mine. I didn't end up using it.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <Speedy11(at)aol.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Flap Switch
>
> I have a question for folks on the list.
> I want to control the flaps from both a switch on the panel and a switch
> on
> the stick. I would like to have a flap switch on the panel that has three
> positions - momentary up-stick-momentary down. The momentary up and down
> positions are self explanatory. The middle "stick" position would direct
> control of
> the flaps to a switch on the stick.
> My question is - what switch would I use for the panel to accomplish the
> desired results?
> Stan Sutterfield
> www.rv-8a.net
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
That could cause some problems in the installation Stan described if
you forget to center the panel switch from the up position, then try
to lower flaps using the control stick switch.
Also, take a look at figure 11-15 at
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/switches.pdf If that type of
motor is in use, the switches and wiring will be different. The
control stick PB's could be done with DPST switches in that case.
Bob W.
marknlisa(at)hometel.com wrote:
>
> You might consider an on-off-(on) style toggle switch. The "on" in
> parentheses denotes a momemtary position; you can hold the switch in that
> position, but a spring moves the toggle back to the middle "off" position
> when you release it.
>
> If you install the switch with the momemtary on position down you can
> lower the flaps by holding the switch until you attain the desired flap
> position, then release. I've timed my flaps at 10 seconds to full down,
> so 3 seconds gives me approx 1/3 flaps. I can do it without looking at
> the indicator.
>
> To raise 'em just toggle up and forget it; the limit switch will cut power
> to the motor when the flaps are up.
>
>
> Mark & Lisa Sletten
> Legacy FG N828LM
> http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com
>
>
--
http://www.bob-white.com
N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 (real soon)
Prewired EC2 Cables - http://www.roblinphoto.com/shop/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Angier M. Ames" <N2811A(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Solid State contactors |
Hi Bob,
My principal concern has to do with the considerable heat generated
in the battery master contactor...
just wondering if there was a reasonable alternative.
Angier Ames
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Controlling IR ND Alternators |
Hi guys-
I've seen a couple of posts over the last few weeks that make me think I need to
clarify a couple of points I made earlier. The info I've gathered on the 60
A alt that Van sells is that the 'I' lead is the voltage sense lead. De-powering
it should not shut down the alternator output. The 'L' lead is the signal
lead. Application of +V to this lead starts alternator output, and removing
+V from this lead shuts it down. Should the alternator fail for any reason, this
lead is taken to ground. There don't seem to be may automotive alternators
that are wired this way, but the one Van calls out is, according to my research.
Also, the odd, unused lead has various functions on various part number
alternators, but on this one it has no function at all.
Hope this helps to clarify the situation-
Glen Matejcek
aerobubba(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AI Nut <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: FI engine fuel flow |
I have installed EGT and CHT sensors for each of the 4 cylinders. I
didn't know that a change in EGT could be an indication of injector
clogging. Do you have any formulae or somewhere to point me where I may
learn more, please?
Thanks,
David M.
Ken wrote:
>
>In practice I doubt whether a flow sensor would really flag the start of
>an injector clog in that most of the time the discrepancy is going to be
>a similar order of magnitude as caused by temperature change etc. While
>this is not a concern to me, if it was I'd look at both systems. ie
>compare the electronic commanded on time of the injectors to the
>measured flow and flag any significant discrepancy. The easier way would
>be to have an EGT for every cylinder of course. I've set up an EIS4000
>to flag differences in left side vs. right side EGT on my EJ22 which has
>common exhaust ports for each side of the engine.
>Ken
>
>AI Nut wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>I considered that, but it will only be accurate at 100% operating
>>injector. If it becomes even partially clogged, but not to the point of
>>the plug not firing, you'll be off by increasing amounts. Or, if any or
>>all of the other injectors start getting clogged, same thing. Actual
>>fuel flow versus calculated fuel burned should indicate when/if the
>>injectors are becoming clogged. Etc.
>>
>>David M.
>>
>>
>>
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> |
Allow me to inject a quick shot of nitro into this discussion of flap switches.
Flap switches of the kind you have to hold down with your finger until they
reach a particular position are - IMHO - something from the 20's. Eric
Jones (www.PerihelionDesign.com) makes a little module (TSCMR) that is
designed for the MAC/RAC servos (but could work with heftier motors as
well, I think), that allows you to "dial in" a particular setting and
forget about it. The motor will extend the control to that position, as
indicated by a built-in or external potentiometer, and then shut off the
motor. It's the electronic equivalent of the Cessna style flap lever, and
IMHO a more modern way to reduce cockpit load. I plan to use it for my
aileron reflexor as well as for computer control of aileron servo tabs and
pitch trim.
Eric, where did you hide your TSCMR product pages? I can't find them on
your site any more.
Dave Morris
At 09:04 AM 10/12/2005, you wrote:
>
>That could cause some problems in the installation Stan described if
>you forget to center the panel switch from the up position, then try
>to lower flaps using the control stick switch.
>
>Also, take a look at figure 11-15 at
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/switches.pdf If that type of
>motor is in use, the switches and wiring will be different. The
>control stick PB's could be done with DPST switches in that case.
>
>Bob W.
>
>
>marknlisa(at)hometel.com wrote:
>
> >
> > You might consider an on-off-(on) style toggle switch. The "on" in
> > parentheses denotes a momemtary position; you can hold the switch in that
> > position, but a spring moves the toggle back to the middle "off" position
> > when you release it.
> >
> > If you install the switch with the momemtary on position down you can
> > lower the flaps by holding the switch until you attain the desired flap
> > position, then release. I've timed my flaps at 10 seconds to full down,
> > so 3 seconds gives me approx 1/3 flaps. I can do it without looking at
> > the indicator.
> >
> > To raise 'em just toggle up and forget it; the limit switch will cut power
> > to the motor when the flaps are up.
> >
> >
> > Mark & Lisa Sletten
> > Legacy FG N828LM
> > http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com
> >
> >
>
>--
>http://www.bob-white.com
>N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 (real soon)
>Prewired EC2 Cables - http://www.roblinphoto.com/shop/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry2DT(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Starter problems |
Hi Folks,
The (Skytech) starter on my RV6a/O-360 just went south, and rather than
spend $355 for a new one, I'd like to attempt a diagnosis and possibly repair
the
stupid thing... It has a whopping 377 hrs on it. To begin with, I suspect
the solenoid. One of the terminals is slightly loose but this thing is sealed
and crimped together so don't see a way to rip it apart and check the contacts.
In days of yore, solenoids had a copper ring that slammed into these
contacts and were frequently the source of troubles BUT you could buy replacement
parts. Anyway, I know there is a simple way to electrically determine the
resistance between the two solenoid terms and I have a multimeter that I hardly
know how to use, so could use some expertise from this list. Aside from that,
does anyone know of a source for new, used, rebuilt solenoids or starters.
Thanks to all, and I second the "Hear, Hear, Hear."....
Jerry Cochran
Wilsonville, OR
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Controlling IR ND Alternators |
10/12/2005
Hello George, Thanks for your clarifying follow up email copied below.
Please confirm that I understand the recommended wiring arrangement:
1) One would initially apply electrical power from the aircraft's battery to
the alternator's IR through a circuit breaker protected L lead by turning on
a switch in the instrument panel. This same switch would also close the
contacts on a battery relay thereby applying battery electrical power to the
aircraft systems. (Having two separate switches for these two purposes is an
option).
2)The alternator would begin providing electrical power after engine start
when rotated at appropriate RPM.
3) One could stop the alternator from supplying electrical power while it is
rotating by either opening the L lead switch or the L lead CB.
4) The internal voltage regulator in the alternator controls the output of
the alternator by means of voltage sensed by the I lead which is connected
to some electrical bus in the aircraft.
5) If one desires to have a warning light that would indicate alternator
failure (low voltage) one should connect one terminal of the light to an
aircraft bus fed by the battery and the other terminal of the light to the V
lead. If the alternator fails the IR will take the V lead to ground thereby
illuminating the light.
6) If one desires an additional means of stopping the alternator from
providing electricity to the aircraft system one should put a large CB in
the B lead out put of the alternator.
7) Damaging overvoltage output of the alternator should be prevented by the
alternator's IR.
Can you please confirm or correct the above? Thank you.
OC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Controlling IR ND Alternators
> Hi guys-
>
> I've seen a couple of posts over the last few weeks that make me think I
> need to clarify a couple of points I made earlier. The info I've gathered
> on the 60 A alt that Van sells is that the 'I' lead is the voltage sense
> lead. De-powering it should not shut down the alternator output. The 'L'
> lead is the signal lead. Application of +V to this lead starts alternator
> output, and removing +V from this lead shuts it down. Should the
> alternator fail for any reason, this lead is taken to ground. There don't
> seem to be may automotive alternators that are wired this way, but the one
> Van calls out is, according to my research. Also, the odd, unused lead
> has various functions on various part number alternators, but on this one
> it has no function at all.
>
> Hope this helps to clarify the situation-
>
>
> Glen Matejcek
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
There are a couple other vendors that offer this functionality including:
Vans <http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident1129142832-494-216&browseairframe&productfps>
Aircraft Extras <http://www.aircraftextras.com/FPS-Plus.htm> which is the one I intend to use
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 wing assembly
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Morris "BigD"
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Flap Switch
-->
Allow me to inject a quick shot of nitro into this discussion of flap switches.
Flap switches of the kind you have to hold down with your finger until they reach a particular position are - IMHO - something from the 20's. Eric Jones (www.PerihelionDesign.com) makes a little module (TSCMR) that is designed for the MAC/RAC servos (but could work with heftier motors as well, I think), that allows you to "dial in" a particular setting and forget about it. The motor will extend the control to that position, as indicated by a built-in or external potentiometer, and then shut off the motor. It's the electronic equivalent of the Cessna style flap lever, and IMHO a more modern way to reduce cockpit load. I plan to use it for my aileron reflexor as well as for computer control of aileron servo tabs and pitch trim.
Eric, where did you hide your TSCMR product pages? I can't find them on your site
any more.
Dave Morris
At 09:04 AM 10/12/2005, you wrote:
>
>That could cause some problems in the installation Stan described if
>you forget to center the panel switch from the up position, then try to
>lower flaps using the control stick switch.
>
>Also, take a look at figure 11-15 at
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/switches.pdf If that type of
>motor is in use, the switches and wiring will be different. The
>control stick PB's could be done with DPST switches in that case.
>
>Bob W.
>
>
>
> >
> > You might consider an on-off-(on) style toggle switch. The "on" in
> > parentheses denotes a momemtary position; you can hold the switch in
> > that position, but a spring moves the toggle back to the middle
> > "off" position when you release it.
> >
> > If you install the switch with the momemtary on position down you
> > can lower the flaps by holding the switch until you attain the
> > desired flap position, then release. I've timed my flaps at 10
> > seconds to full down, so 3 seconds gives me approx 1/3 flaps. I can
> > do it without looking at the indicator.
> >
> > To raise 'em just toggle up and forget it; the limit switch will cut
> > power to the motor when the flaps are up.
> >
> >
> > Mark & Lisa Sletten
> > Legacy FG N828LM
> > http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com
> >
> >
>
>--
>http://www.bob-white.com
>N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 (real soon) Prewired EC2 Cables -
>http://www.roblinphoto.com/shop/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1deltawhiskey(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Starter problems |
Jerry,
I just had a starter repaired (automotive type for Sube) at Romaine Electric
in Seattle (not too far from Wilsonville). Turned out it was a broken spring
behind one of the brushes which they replaced for less than $7. That after I
agreed to pay $50 to have all the brushes replaced! They list Denso, Valeo,
Iskra, Transpo, Prestolite, Bosch, Hehr, Leece-Neville and CPC as some of the
brands. They are part of the Rexco group with affiliates scattered about. I
do know they have one in Portland (A.S.E.) which you can find on their list at
http://www.prestolite.com/pgs_buy/distributor_list_alpha.php?pf=true
Don't know if they would work for your Skytec starter, but you could call
them at 206-583-8600. It wouldn't surprise me if Skytec didn't use one of the
common starter suppliers. As a precautionary note, I would not mention or hint
"airplane" as I do not know how they would respond.
Doug Windhorn
In a message dated 12-Oct-05 10:25:13 Pacific Standard Time, Jerry2DT(at)aol.com
writes:
<>
Aside from that,
does anyone know of a source for new, used, rebuilt solenoids or starters.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Starter problems |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Jerry
This is not very helpful but if it is the solenoid I would bet its an
automotive part that Skytech has bought...Anyone know?
I have a new Skytech starter on my new IO360 sitting in its crate in
Corvallis...No you can't have my starter but I could measure the primary
resistance to see what value it is...Have you checked yours for open
circuit?
You put the multimeter set to Ohms and put the positive lead on the
little terminal and the negative lead on the engine block...If you have
a break in the coil wiring it will read infinate resistance...I would
expect it to read say 1 ohm or so for a 12 amp draw on the solenoid.
If you want to call me we can do this real time...I will be out until
about 7:30pm this evening (going flying) so your welcome to give me a
ring after that.
Frank
541-745-6386
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Jerry2DT(at)aol.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Starter problems
Hi Folks,
The (Skytech) starter on my RV6a/O-360 just went south, and rather than
spend $355 for a new one, I'd like to attempt a diagnosis and possibly
repair the stupid thing... It has a whopping 377 hrs on it. To begin
with, I suspect the solenoid. One of the terminals is slightly loose but
this thing is sealed and crimped together so don't see a way to rip it
apart and check the contacts.
In days of yore, solenoids had a copper ring that slammed into these
contacts and were frequently the source of troubles BUT you could buy
replacement parts. Anyway, I know there is a simple way to electrically
determine the resistance between the two solenoid terms and I have a
multimeter that I hardly know how to use, so could use some expertise
from this list. Aside from that, does anyone know of a source for new,
used, rebuilt solenoids or starters.
Thanks to all, and I second the "Hear, Hear, Hear."....
Jerry Cochran
Wilsonville, OR
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1deltawhiskey(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Starter problems |
OOPs, pick the link before thoroughly checking - this is the one for Romaine
Electric (still has a Portland affiliate).
http://www.romaineelectric.com/locations.html
Doug Windhorn
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Denis Walsh <denis.walsh(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Starter problems |
AHA
I do have some experience with sky-tec starters.
I whole heartedly recommend you call or visit their website. Sky
tec is the only recommended repair station for their starters. They
take great pride in reasonable repair and quick turn around. They
definitely know how to fix your starter.
Denis Walsh
On Oct 12, 2005, at 11:19 AM, Jerry2DT(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> The (Skytech) starter on my RV6a/O-360 just went south, and rather
> than
> spend $355 for a new one, I'd like to attempt a diagnosis and
> possibly repair the
> stupid thing... It has a whopping 377 hrs on it. To begin with, I
> suspect
> the solenoid. One of the terminals is slightly loose but this thing
> is sealed
> and crimped together so don't see a way to rip it apart and check
> the contacts.
> In days of yore, solenoids had a copper ring that slammed into these
> contacts and were frequently the source of troubles BUT you could
> buy replacement
> parts. Anyway, I know there is a simple way to electrically
> determine the
> resistance between the two solenoid terms and I have a multimeter
> that I hardly
> know how to use, so could use some expertise from this list.
> Aside from that,
> does anyone know of a source for new, used, rebuilt solenoids or
> starters.
>
> Thanks to all, and I second the "Hear, Hear, Hear."....
>
> Jerry Cochran
> Wilsonville, OR
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Speedy11(at)aol.com |
Earl,
Nope, I don't necessarily want to disable the stick switch. My thoughts were
that the normal position of the panel switch would be the centered position
which would allow control of the flaps using the stick switch. Then, if
desired or needed, the panel switch could be used instead of the stick switch to
activate the flap motor. Perhaps I'm trying to make a simple thing too
complicated. I suppose the switches could be in parallel such that either switch
could
control the motor. Odd that I needed to bring this up on the list in order
to think it through, but it is more clear now.
Thanks to all for your comments. I'm gradually learning this 'lectric stuff.
Stan Sutterfield
Hi Stan.
I'm wondering why you want to disable the switch on the stick? Mine are
both active all the time. Am I missing something? Earl
>I want to control the flaps from both a switch on the panel and a switch on
>the stick. I would like to have a flap switch on the panel that has three
>positions - momentary up-stick-momentary down. The momentary up and down
>positions are self explanatory. The middle "stick" position would direct
control
of
>the flaps to a switch on the stick.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Earl_Schroeder <Earl_Schroeder(at)juno.com> |
Hi Stan,
I forgot to mention that both my switches are momentary in each
direction with center off. I believe this limits the chance of
activating both in the opposite direction at the same time. This might
not be the best way for those who need to turn their head considerably
to view the flap setting out the window. I can see mine from the corner
of my eye and is well within the normal scan during the approach and
landing phase. Learning 'stuff' is what makes life interesting... Earl
Speedy11(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>Earl,
>Nope, I don't necessarily want to disable the stick switch. My thoughts were
>that the normal position of the panel switch would be the centered position
>which would allow control of the flaps using the stick switch. Then, if
>desired or needed, the panel switch could be used instead of the stick switch
to
>activate the flap motor. Perhaps I'm trying to make a simple thing too
>complicated. I suppose the switches could be in parallel such that either switch
could
>control the motor. Odd that I needed to bring this up on the list in order
>to think it through, but it is more clear now.
>Thanks to all for your comments. I'm gradually learning this 'lectric stuff.
>Stan Sutterfield
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Solid State contactors |
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>My principal concern has to do with the considerable heat generated
>in the battery master contactor...
>just wondering if there was a reasonable alternative.
How is this heat a problem? The battery contactor generally draws
about .8A after it warms up for a total power dissipation of about
12 watts. While this amount of power produces a marked temperature
rise, it's well inside ratings for the materials used in fabrication
of the contactor.
When I was selling these things, I had a couple of builders want
to return "defective" contactors because they were overheating. I
had to explain that virtually all contactors of any size (50A class
or larger) ran too hot to touch under normal conditions. This
isn't a big deal when the alternator is running . . . you generally
have the watts to spare. However, during alternator-out, battery-only
ops, this .8A would run a couple of radios! It's a good load to get
rid of. This was one of the drivers for the alternate feedpath
to the e-bus that you see in our Z-drawings.
So, if you configure the system to limit power losses due to battery
contactor heating to times when you have the power to spare, the
lowly contactor will offer you a good return on investment.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Controlling IR ND Alternators |
10/12/2005
Hello Glen, First off, please let me apologize for getting my "Glens" and my
"Georges" confused.
I also apologize for using the letter "V" when I meant "L" in my paragraph
5) corrected and copied below:
5) (corrected) If one desires to have a warning light that would indicate
alternator
failure (low voltage) one should connect one terminal of the light to an
aircraft bus fed by the battery and the other terminal of the light to the L
lead. If the alternator fails the IR will take the L lead to ground thereby
illuminating the light.
Your 12 Oct 5:17 PM response immediately below leaves me confused.
> Hi OC- What you show would work, but for point 5. The idiot light goes in
> the
> line from the switch to the "L" (lamp) terminal. Glen Matejcek
A) If the incandescent idiot light is in series on the wire leading from the
switch to the alternator L terminal and the filament in the bulb breaks or
burns out then no current can get to the L terminal and the alternator shuts
down and stops providing electricity. Right? Is this the desired
arrangement? If so, why?
B) On the other hand if one terminal of the idiot light is connected to some
normally hot aircraft bus and the other terminal of the idiot light is
connected to the L terminal a normally functioning light will be off as long
as the voltage at the two light terminals are equal. But the light will come
on when the L terminal is pulled to ground by the IR when the alternator
fails. Right? Isn't this the desired arrangement?
C) But what happens to the wire going from the switch to the L terminal,
which is carrying battery voltage and current, when the L terminal is pulled
to ground? Does that not create a direct short between the closed switch and
ground? Is the CB in the wire going from the switch to the L terminal there
to open in this situation?
Thanks for your help.
OC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rodney Dunham" <rdunhamtn(at)hotmail.com> |
Battery contactor
Bob or any protege :o)
I built the SkyRanger2/Rotax912 without a battery contactor (Z-17 with minor
mods) and installed a starter warn lamp. I'm nearing the point where I need
to wire the Sonex/Jabiru3300. Will use Z-20 as my guide. The Sonex project
came with a starter contactor bolted onto the firewall next to the BAT,
starter contactor and VR. The space in there is quite limited and I'd rather
mount an OV relay and condensor where the BAT contactor now lives.
Other than getting the fat wires off the panel, it seems to me the only
thing the starter contactor adds to the architecture is the ability to
disconnect the starter in the event of a stuck (closed) starter contactor or
starter sonlenoid. I guess I need to know just how likely is that? Also,
with a starter warn lamp installed, will I get a hint prior to failure? If
so, and since it happens at initial startup, ie on the ground, then I may
forego the BAT contactor and simplify the architecture. What say you?
On a related subject. In reviewing the Z drawings of my two dreams-come-true
and checking wire size vs fuse size all of a sudden it hit me. The biggest
fattest honker bolted directly to the battery has no fuse at all!!! Can
someone tell me why I don't need one there? Is it that momentary cranking
amps are so high that it would constantly blow fuses???
Rodney in Tennessee
Sonex, Jabiru 3300
Dynon EFIS and EIS
Becker (maybe MicroAir) radio and transponder
The usual lights
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: FW: Re: Controlling IR ND Alternators |
Hi OC-
No problem; I'm glad to help if I can.
>
> A) If the incandescent idiot light is in series on the wire leading from
the
> switch to the alternator L terminal and the filament in the bulb breaks
or
> burns out then no current can get to the L terminal and the alternator
shuts
> down and stops providing electricity. Right? Is this the desired
> arrangement? If so, why?
That is how I understand the arrangement. It does seem peculiar that they
would design a system where the failure of the light bulb would cause both
the loss of power generation AND the loss of the associated warning. This
has made me think of 2 things. First, it could be why there are relatively
few alternators configured this way. Second, if one were to use LED for
the idiot light, the odds of it failing would become remote in the extreme.
Perhaps the automobiles equipped with this alternator do in fact have
LED's. I don't know.
>
> B) On the other hand if one terminal of the idiot light is connected to
some
> normally hot aircraft bus and the other terminal of the idiot light is
> connected to the L terminal a normally functioning light will be off as
long
> as the voltage at the two light terminals are equal. But the light will
come
> on when the L terminal is pulled to ground by the IR when the alternator
> fails. Right? Isn't this the desired arrangement?
Yes, this is how I understand the design to function.
>
> C) But what happens to the wire going from the switch to the L terminal,
> which is carrying battery voltage and current, when the L terminal is
pulled
> to ground? Does that not create a direct short between the closed switch
and
> ground? Is the CB in the wire going from the switch to the L terminal
there
> to open in this situation?
An astute observation. First, when the alternator is functioning
properly, there is little or no actual current in that wire. The
alternator just uses this line to sense voltage, much as an oil or fuel
pressure line senses pressure without actually having fuel or oil flowing
in that line. This lack of current flow is precisely why the idiot light
does not illuminate under normal ops. The presence of the idiot light also
means that there is no direct short in the automotive application when the
'L' terminal goes to ground. I have seen it suggested that if no light is
used, an hundred ohm resistor should be substituted instead to keep the
"alt inop" current reasonable. Also, a resistor in parallel with an
incandescent bulb will allow the alternator to continue to function, even
if the bulb should fail. I had considered letting the Alt field CB serve
as an alternator failed indicator. The problem there is that if all the
above assumptions are correct, every time I turn on the alt switch with the
alt not turning, the CB will trip. This fact combined with the fact that
MANY people have wired their alternators up according to Van's scheme
without complaint leads me to believe that although the alternator takes
the 'L' lead to ground, it still limits the current through that path. IE,
although it goes to ground, it's not a dead short.
I hope that explains more than it confused.....
Glen Matejcek
aerobubba(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: BAT contactor |
Hi Rodney
There is background discussion in the archives on all this but here's my
take on it.
You may want to keep at least one contactor between the battery and the
starter so you can indeed shut off a stuck on starter..
With magnetos I'd keep the battery contactor and toss the starter
contactor. Some folks like to keep both though.
With an electically dependant engine, I tossed the starter contactor. My
starter current goes through the battery contactor. (Actually I wired my
"battery" contactor so that it kills power to everything but leaves the
alternator and ignition connected to the battery. That's just my choice
and it is also discussed in the archives. My B lead (alternator) fuse
and battery bus fuse blocks remain close to the battery.)
Now I thought the Jabiru alternator used an eternal voltage regulator?
If so then there is no need whatsoever for a OV contactor. With an
Internal Regulator automotive type alternator some of us do use a OV
contactor.
As for the heavy battery wire, it is usually very short with the battery
contactor beside the battery and there is nothing to be gained by trying
to fuse it. In addition there is lots of comment about how fat wires
installed properly almost never short or cause problems. If for some
very unusual reason the heavy wire had to be long or in a precarious
location then yes I'd add a current limiter but that would be a last resort.
Ken
Rodney Dunham wrote:
>
>Battery contactor
>
>Bob or any protege :o)
>
>I built the SkyRanger2/Rotax912 without a battery contactor (Z-17 with minor
>mods) and installed a starter warn lamp. I'm nearing the point where I need
>to wire the Sonex/Jabiru3300. Will use Z-20 as my guide. The Sonex project
>came with a starter contactor bolted onto the firewall next to the BAT,
>starter contactor and VR. The space in there is quite limited and I'd rather
>mount an OV relay and condensor where the BAT contactor now lives.
>
>
>Other than getting the fat wires off the panel, it seems to me the only
>thing the starter contactor adds to the architecture is the ability to
>disconnect the starter in the event of a stuck (closed) starter contactor or
>starter sonlenoid. I guess I need to know just how likely is that? Also,
>with a starter warn lamp installed, will I get a hint prior to failure? If
>so, and since it happens at initial startup, ie on the ground, then I may
>forego the BAT contactor and simplify the architecture. What say you?
>
>On a related subject. In reviewing the Z drawings of my two dreams-come-true
>and checking wire size vs fuse size all of a sudden it hit me. The biggest
>fattest honker bolted directly to the battery has no fuse at all!!! Can
>someone tell me why I don't need one there? Is it that momentary cranking
>amps are so high that it would constantly blow fuses???
>
>Rodney in Tennessee
>
>Sonex, Jabiru 3300
>Dynon EFIS and EIS
>Becker (maybe MicroAir) radio and transponder
>The usual lights
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | SD-8 noise levels |
A few days ago, someone asked if the SD-8 was capable
of meeting DO160/M704 standards for system noise. I
don't recall who it was and it took some time to dig out
the traces I did on an SD8 some years ago. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Alternators/SD-8/SD8_Noise_Plots.pdf
These show the noise measured with various combinations
of battery and sizes of filter capacitor across the
SD-8's regulator output.
The traces speak for themselves and show that the noise
levels are quite benign and well inside Mil-Std-704
allowables.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | First Operational GQM Target Flight |
I'm still in contact with a number of the old missiles wiennies
who went to CEI when our targets business was sold (the last of
the skunk works left in Wichita aviation). Got some pictures in
the mail today. The first non-experimental GQM-163 target was
launched recently.
This was my last really neat design task wherein I replaced a
6#, 200 cu-in, $6,000 relay based power distribution box with
a 0.7#, 36 cu-in, $1,000 all solid state replacement. Here's a
picture of the launch.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/1st_Operational_GQM.jpg
The white thing on the back is a solid rocket booster that kicks
the target up to better than M1.5 in about 5 seconds. The engines
on the target are ram jets that need supersonic air coming in before
they'll even run. After the booster falls away, the engines light
off and the critter accelerates on up to M2.5. This sea-skimming (5M)
hard maneuvering (10-12g's in any direction) target. It has a
service life on the order of 3 minutes and covers about 100 miles
of range. GPS and laser altimeter guided to hit an amazingly small
box out in the target range where it gets shot at.
Pretty rich stuff compared to chasing 30 year old rats out of
Hawkers and Beechjets!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Out of town until Thursday |
Dee and I are packing up for the trip to Hamilton, Ontario where
we'll deliver a weekend seminar on Saturday and Sunday. We're going
to take a few extra days to wander the countryside before we come
home so we'll be off line until Thursday.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Poor Man's Battery Capacity Tester |
>
>
>I'm about to build the PMBCT as per the 'Connection, page 2-9.
>
>I have purchased the following from Radio Shack;
>1) Resistors... 470kOhm 1/2 watt, 5% tolerance (p/n 271-1133)
>2) Zener Diode... INT4742A 12 Volt (p/n 276-0563)
>3) DPDT Relay... 12VDC coil, 10A 112VAC contact voltage (p/n 275-0218)
>4) Transistor... 2N3904 NPN silicon (p/n 276-2016)
You need 470 ohm resistors, not 470K ohm . . . there's about
1:1000 difference. A 12v zener is too far removed from the
10v device called for. The other parts are okay. You could use
two of the 1N4733 zeners from radio shack and hook them in series.
They're rated at 5.1 volts each and would come close enough to
behaving like a 10v zener.
Let us know what kind of results you get!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Oke <wjoke(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Controlling IR ND Alternators |
See another schematic for hooking up a DENSO alternator at
http://www.canadianaeromanufacturing.com/alt-instr.pdf.
It is probably more useful for aircraft applications and discusses the
"idiot light" arrangement. If the wiring for the light can simply be
deleted, it clearly doesn't matter is the bulb filament fails or whatever.
I have two of these alternators flying, BTW, they work well, I am happy
with them.
Jim Oke
Wpg, MB
RV-3, RV-6A
Mickey Coggins wrote:
>
>
>
>> > A) If the incandescent idiot light is in series on the wire leading from
>>the
>> > switch to the alternator L terminal and the filament in the bulb breaks
>>or
>> > burns out then no current can get to the L terminal and the alternator
>>shuts
>> > down and stops providing electricity. Right? Is this the desired
>> > arrangement? If so, why?
>>
>> That is how I understand the arrangement. It does seem peculiar that they
>>would design a system where the failure of the light bulb would cause both
>>the loss of power generation AND the loss of the associated warning. This
>>has made me think of 2 things. First, it could be why there are relatively
>>few alternators configured this way. Second, if one were to use LED for
>>the idiot light, the odds of it failing would become remote in the extreme.
>>Perhaps the automobiles equipped with this alternator do in fact have
>>LED's. I don't know.
>>
>>
>>
>
>I asked the Denso people this question, and here is what
>they sent me:
>
> http://rv8.ch/files/DensoConnections.pdf
>
>Just for completeness, here is the contact info on the
>guy that sent me the file:
>
>
>David Yarus
>Assistant Manager
>Heavy Duty Aftermarket Department
>DENSO Sales California, Inc.
>(770) 565-6193 office
>(770) 565-7028 fax
>(678) 984-8353 cell
>CHECK US OUT ON THE WEB AT:
>Denso Heavy Duty Website
>(www.densoheavyduty.com)
>DAVID_YARUS "at" REMOVE-THIS-STUFFdenso-diam.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Circuit Breakers |
Paul Messinger sent me this.
Interesting AD on Circuit Breakers.
http://download.aopa.org/epilot/2005/20052025ad.pdf
I am sure Bob will have more to say on this subject when he returns.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
(508) 764-2072
"Never be afraid to tell the world who you are."
- Anonymous
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Controlling IR ND Alternators |
Makes me wonder exactly why he included the following statement:
"Conditions in which a very high draw is being made of the alternator at
low RPM will cause extra
strain on the alternator and drive belt. Consider reducing the total
load in these situations, or
switching the alternator off and drawing from the battery only, if the
high load will be brief."
At low rpm I'd expect the output to be self limiting and most Lycoming
alternators are out front and well cooled aren't they??
Ken
Jim Oke wrote:
>
>See another schematic for hooking up a DENSO alternator at
>http://www.canadianaeromanufacturing.com/alt-instr.pdf.
>
>It is probably more useful for aircraft applications and discusses the
>"idiot light" arrangement. If the wiring for the light can simply be
>deleted, it clearly doesn't matter is the bulb filament fails or whatever.
>
>I have two of these alternators flying, BTW, they work well, I am happy
>with them.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Controlling IR ND Alternators |
In a message dated 10/14/2005 10:35:35 A.M. Central Standard Time,
klehman(at)albedo.net writes:
Makes me wonder exactly why he included the following statement:
"Conditions in which a very high draw is being made of the alternator at
low RPM will cause extra
strain on the alternator and drive belt. Consider reducing the total
load in these situations, or
switching the alternator off and drawing from the battery only, if the
high load will be brief."
At low rpm I'd expect the output to be self limiting and most Lycoming
alternators are out front and well cooled aren't they??
Ken
Good Morning Ken,
May I make a stab at the question!
Let's say it is a 40 amp alternator and it is operating at the very minimum
RPM at which it can develop the 40 amps. You add a load of forty amps to the
circuit. The torque required to turn the alternator will be substantially
higher than it would be if the RPM was high enough for the alternator to easily
produce that forty amps. Therefore, at the higher RPM, there would be less
torque required and less chance of slippage. Low RPM, greater chance of
slippage.
At least, so it seems to me!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bob rundle" <bobrundle2(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | One antenna or two? |
INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0000 1.0000 -4.4912
I have a dual comm set-up. Trying to decide whether to have 2 antennas or a
splitter (and single antenna).
Opinions?
Bob R
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: One antenna or two? |
Bob:
If you plan on transmitting from either comm, you should not use a
splitter. A splitter will drastically reduce your transmitted power,
may overload the other comm's receiver (possible damage), and may even
overheat the splitter.
The proper way to do this is with a switch... select one comm or the
other but not both. The downside of this is that you can't use the
second comm to monitor a second frequency.
Even with two antennas, you should use a switch (on the ptt line this
time) to allow only one comm to transmit at a time. Audio panels do
this for you, but are expensive for what you get otherwise.
What I did was put one wingtip VOR antenna in place, plus the comm
antenna on the bottom of the fuse. The wingtip VOR goes to a panel jack
where I can connect my handheld NAV/COM, but I could run it to a second
panel Comm. The VOR antenna is not the best for receiving or
transmitting VHF comm signals, but it will work fine as a second comm
for short range (formation flight, ATIS etc.)
I think you are stuck with two antennas and a PTT switch if you want
full functionality out of your two comms. If you don't want the drag
penalty, then stick one in the wingtip or elsewhere if you can-- not
perfect but maybe suitable. If you haven't bought your VHF comms yet,
the Garmin SL-40 provides the 'dual watch' capability in one radio, with
one antenna. I use an SL-40, plus a handheld connected to the VOR as
described above for backup.
Bok N. Has a comic book on his website somewhere about how to wire a
jack for VHF. The same concept could be used to add a switch and two
feedlines switched to one antenna:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/commtap/commtap.html
Vern Little
RV-9A
bob rundle wrote:
>
>I have a dual comm set-up. Trying to decide whether to have 2 antennas or a
>splitter (and single antenna).
>
>Opinions?
>
>Bob R
>
>http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Controlling IR ND Alternators |
Hey fellas (and gals)-
There's a whole lot of anecdotal info flying about, and precious little
research. Mickey is to be commended and thanked for not only having the
interest and motivation to research his alternator, but also for posting
that info for others to benefit from. This is good stuff. He is also to
be commended for basically saying "this is how mine is.", as opposed to
"this is how all alternators work".
This thread started out as a discussion of the rebuilt 60A alternator that
Van sells, Van's wiring directions, how this particular alternator is
configured, and other wiring options available to users of the Van's
supplied alternator. Mickey's is different. Or, perhaps I should say that
the alternator Van supplies is different from the vast majority of
alternators rolling down the road today. One of the big issues with using
IR alternators is the perceived inability to shut them down once running.
Well, the unit Van's sells is specifically configured to do just that.
Coincidence? I doubt it. C'mon folks, apples to apples, please.
I have spoken with the folks at Denso (Mickey's contact et al) to no avail,
as Van markets an O/Hauled unit. I have spoken with great success with a
mass overhauler of these units. Due to my own personal research, I am
satisfied that I now have the data I need to wire my aircraft safely, while
taking full advantage of the relatively unique attributes of my alternator.
I would respectfully suggest that people KNOW what they are dealing with
before turning the key.
Pax-
Glen Matejcek
aerobubba(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rv6n6r(at)comcast.net |
| Subject: | Re: One antenna or two? |
> I have a dual comm set-up. Trying to decide whether to have 2 antennas or
a
> splitter (and single antenna).
>
> Opinions?
How do you intend to use the plane and why dual coms?
Is it for redundancy? Then you probably want two antennas.
Is it just so you can listen on one while talking on the other? Then one
ant. is probably okay. (However in that case I'd consider a single SL40 or
other radio that lets you monitor one freq. while listening/talking on the
other.)
Is it IFR? Then it seems prudent to have one antenna per radio.
You may have other considerations but anyway that's how I'd approach it.
Personally I think a single SL40 is almost as good as two radios, and better
in some ways -- less weight, less cost, fewer wires, only one antenna.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Denton" <bdenton(at)bdenton.com> |
| Subject: | One antenna or two? |
While you definitely would not want to use something like a Nav radio
splitter, there is a device specifically designed for this purpose:
http://www.comant.com/pdfs/[ci%20601]5-05.pdf
Take a look...
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
rv-9a-online
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: One antenna or two?
Bob:
If you plan on transmitting from either comm, you should not use a
splitter. A splitter will drastically reduce your transmitted power,
may overload the other comm's receiver (possible damage), and may even
overheat the splitter.
The proper way to do this is with a switch... select one comm or the
other but not both. The downside of this is that you can't use the
second comm to monitor a second frequency.
Even with two antennas, you should use a switch (on the ptt line this
time) to allow only one comm to transmit at a time. Audio panels do
this for you, but are expensive for what you get otherwise.
What I did was put one wingtip VOR antenna in place, plus the comm
antenna on the bottom of the fuse. The wingtip VOR goes to a panel jack
where I can connect my handheld NAV/COM, but I could run it to a second
panel Comm. The VOR antenna is not the best for receiving or
transmitting VHF comm signals, but it will work fine as a second comm
for short range (formation flight, ATIS etc.)
I think you are stuck with two antennas and a PTT switch if you want
full functionality out of your two comms. If you don't want the drag
penalty, then stick one in the wingtip or elsewhere if you can-- not
perfect but maybe suitable. If you haven't bought your VHF comms yet,
the Garmin SL-40 provides the 'dual watch' capability in one radio, with
one antenna. I use an SL-40, plus a handheld connected to the VOR as
described above for backup.
Bok N. Has a comic book on his website somewhere about how to wire a
jack for VHF. The same concept could be used to add a switch and two
feedlines switched to one antenna:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/commtap/commtap.html
Vern Little
RV-9A
bob rundle wrote:
>
>I have a dual comm set-up. Trying to decide whether to have 2 antennas or a
>splitter (and single antenna).
>
>Opinions?
>
>Bob R
>
>http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: One antenna or two? |
In a message dated 10/14/2005 11:13:32 A.M. Central Standard Time,
bobrundle2(at)hotmail.com writes:
I have a dual comm set-up. Trying to decide whether to have 2 antennas or a
splitter (and single antenna).
Opinions?
Bob R
Good Afternoon, Bob R,
I would strongly suggest using two separate antennas. A switching relay can
be used, but separate antennas work better. I have never tried a splitter,
but I do not think the transmitter would match well if that were attempted.
Splitters work fine for receivers though.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First Operational GQM - OFF TOPIC |
On the other side of that equation, in 1976 I was working on this:
http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/outdoor/od19.htm
We were firing gigawatt laser pulses at drones from a converted KC-135. We
had some extremely cutting edge technology onboard for keeping the turret
pointed at the target at any altitude, and we had some amazing lasers in
our underground, lead-lined labs. This was several years before anybody
had heard of Star Wars, and during the time that the so-called experts were
saying Reagan was crazy, and a missile defense system couldn't be done.
Dave Morris
At 07:28 PM 10/13/2005, you wrote:
>
>
>I'm still in contact with a number of the old missiles wiennies
>who went to CEI when our targets business was sold (the last of
>the skunk works left in Wichita aviation). Got some pictures in
>the mail today. The first non-experimental GQM-163 target was
>launched recently.
>
>This was my last really neat design task wherein I replaced a
>6#, 200 cu-in, $6,000 relay based power distribution box with
>a 0.7#, 36 cu-in, $1,000 all solid state replacement. Here's a
>picture of the launch.
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/1st_Operational_GQM.jpg
>
>The white thing on the back is a solid rocket booster that kicks
>the target up to better than M1.5 in about 5 seconds. The engines
>on the target are ram jets that need supersonic air coming in before
>they'll even run. After the booster falls away, the engines light
>off and the critter accelerates on up to M2.5. This sea-skimming (5M)
>hard maneuvering (10-12g's in any direction) target. It has a
>service life on the order of 3 minutes and covers about 100 miles
>of range. GPS and laser altimeter guided to hit an amazingly small
>box out in the target range where it gets shot at.
>
>Pretty rich stuff compared to chasing 30 year old rats out of
>Hawkers and Beechjets!
>
>Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: One antenna or two? |
It is my understanding that for comm radios, each one must have it's own
antenna. For NAV's, splitters are very common.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "bob rundle" <bobrundle2(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: One antenna or two?
>
>
> I have a dual comm set-up. Trying to decide whether to have 2 antennas or
> a
> splitter (and single antenna).
>
> Opinions?
>
> Bob R
>
> http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson(at)highrf.com> |
| Subject: | First Operational GQM - OFF TOPIC |
http://www.nepra.com/Coyote_Article/Coyote.htm
Afterall as long as we are off topic :)
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave
Morris "BigD"
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: First Operational GQM - OFF TOPIC
-->
On the other side of that equation, in 1976 I was working on this:
http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/outdoor/od19.htm
We were firing gigawatt laser pulses at drones from a converted KC-135. We
had some extremely cutting edge technology onboard for keeping the turret
pointed at the target at any altitude, and we had some amazing lasers in our
underground, lead-lined labs. This was several years before anybody had
heard of Star Wars, and during the time that the so-called experts were
saying Reagan was crazy, and a missile defense system couldn't be done.
Dave Morris
At 07:28 PM 10/13/2005, you wrote:
>
>
>I'm still in contact with a number of the old missiles wiennies who
>went to CEI when our targets business was sold (the last of the skunk
>works left in Wichita aviation). Got some pictures in the mail today.
>The first non-experimental GQM-163 target was launched recently.
>
>This was my last really neat design task wherein I replaced a 6#, 200
>cu-in, $6,000 relay based power distribution box with a 0.7#, 36 cu-in,
>$1,000 all solid state replacement. Here's a picture of the launch.
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/1st_Operational_GQM.jpg
>
>The white thing on the back is a solid rocket booster that kicks the
>target up to better than M1.5 in about 5 seconds. The engines on the
>target are ram jets that need supersonic air coming in before they'll
>even run. After the booster falls away, the engines light off and the
>critter accelerates on up to M2.5. This sea-skimming (5M) hard
>maneuvering (10-12g's in any direction) target. It has a service life
>on the order of 3 minutes and covers about 100 miles of range. GPS and
>laser altimeter guided to hit an amazingly small box out in the target
>range where it gets shot at.
>
>Pretty rich stuff compared to chasing 30 year old rats out of Hawkers
>and Beechjets!
>
>Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Circuit Breakers |
I think it's funny that they cite the possible repercussions of a
shorted-out avionics master circuit breaker as being
"smoke and a burning smell"
How about:
"Fire, and a failure of all your avionics behind the breaker"
LOL!
Aren't you glad you're building an airplane where the entire avionics bus
probably costs less than the $500 repair cost they cite for this one
circuit breaker?
Dave Morris
No-avionics-master
At 10:05 AM 10/14/2005, you wrote:
>
>Paul Messinger sent me this.
>
>Interesting AD on Circuit Breakers.
>
>http://download.aopa.org/epilot/2005/20052025ad.pdf
>
>I am sure Bob will have more to say on this subject when he returns.
>
>Regards,
>Eric M. Jones
>www.PerihelionDesign.com
>113 Brentwood Drive
>Southbridge MA 01550-2705
>(508) 764-2072
>
>"Never be afraid to tell the world who you are."
> - Anonymous
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dawson, Bill" <Bill.Dawson(at)pepperdine.edu> |
| Subject: | One antenna or two? |
Having only one antenna creates a single point of failure.
>
>
> I have a dual comm set-up. Trying to decide whether to have 2 antennas or
> a
> splitter (and single antenna).
>
> Opinions?
>
> Bob R
>
> http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Controlling IR ND Alternators |
Hi Bob
That is certainly a plausible explanation but I don't understand why one
would tolerate such a situation. If that is really the issue I'd want to
upgrade the belt or mount, fit a larger pulley, or whatever it took to
eliminate the concern...
Ken
BobsV35B(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
>In a message dated 10/14/2005 10:35:35 A.M. Central Standard Time,
>klehman(at)albedo.net writes:
>
>Makes me wonder exactly why he included the following statement:
>
>"Conditions in which a very high draw is being made of the alternator at
>low RPM will cause extra
>strain on the alternator and drive belt. Consider reducing the total
>load in these situations, or
>switching the alternator off and drawing from the battery only, if the
>high load will be brief."
>
>At low rpm I'd expect the output to be self limiting and most Lycoming
>alternators are out front and well cooled aren't they??
>
>Ken
>
>
>Good Morning Ken,
>
>May I make a stab at the question!
>
>Let's say it is a 40 amp alternator and it is operating at the very minimum
>RPM at which it can develop the 40 amps. You add a load of forty amps to the
>circuit. The torque required to turn the alternator will be substantially
>higher than it would be if the RPM was high enough for the alternator to easily
>produce that forty amps. Therefore, at the higher RPM, there would be less
>torque required and less chance of slippage. Low RPM, greater chance of
>slippage.
>
>At least, so it seems to me!
>
>Happy Skies,
>
>Old Bob
>AKA
>Bob Siegfried
>Ancient Aviator
>Stearman N3977A
>Brookeridge Air Park LL22
>Downers Grove, IL 60516
>630 985-8503
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> |
| Subject: | One antenna or two? |
The antenna itself is an unlikely source of failure. The connector on the
other hand, is more fragile. Protect the connector and it's pretty
bulletproof. Putting a coax switch between an antenna and a comm radio
introduces way more possible failures than the antenna or the
connector. But you can't put 2 radios on the same antenna without a
switch, or you'll overload or even blow out the receiver in one, when the
other transmits.
Dave Morris
N5UP
At 04:07 PM 10/14/2005, you wrote:
>
>
>Having only one antenna creates a single point of failure.
>
>
> >
> >
> > I have a dual comm set-up. Trying to decide whether to have 2 antennas or
> > a
> > splitter (and single antenna).
> >
> > Opinions?
> >
> > Bob R
> >
> > http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry2DT(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Starter problems |
Guys...
Thanks for the help with my starter. I'd been gone flying for a few days,
but in meantime, I "happened" to have a new Skytech sitting on my "Garage Queen"
RV6a..., so borrowed same for the interim. I will call Skytech ASAP and see
what they say and pass it on.
Jerry Cochran
Wilsonville, OR
AHA
I do have some experience with sky-tec starters.
I whole heartedly recommend you call or visit their website. Sky
tec is the only recommended repair station for their starters. They
take great pride in reasonable repair and quick turn around. They
definitely know how to fix your starter.
Denis Walsh
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Controlling IR ND Alternators |
In a message dated 10/14/2005 5:21:35 P.M. Central Standard Time,
klehman(at)albedo.net writes:
Hi Bob
That is certainly a plausible explanation but I don't understand why one
would tolerate such a situation. If that is really the issue I'd want to
upgrade the belt or mount, fit a larger pulley, or whatever it took to
eliminate the concern...
Ken
Good Evening Ken,
No argument here, but I could perceive a situation where the airplane is
taxiing or otherwise in a situation where a higher power is not reasonable. At
that time, it may be reasonable to avoid trying to carry a high amperage
load. It could be that if the alternator was geared so as to be at a high enough
speed to put out the maximum power when at idle it would be spinning way too
fast at cruise. Most airplanes that I flew fifty years ago had electrical
systems where we had to use electrical power judiciously during almost all
ground operations.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Controlling IR ND Alternators |
Hi Bob
Once again this darn computer didn't type what I meant ;)
I was not suggesting speeding up the alternator but rather the opposite.
I was thinking that if there was a problem with belt slippage etc, that
I might try a larger pulley on the alternator to slow it down. That
would normally reduce belt load and slippage. Also reduced alternator
output might be preferable to no output or having to turn off the
alternator for high loads such as that quote implied.
Ken
BobsV35B(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
>In a message dated 10/14/2005 5:21:35 P.M. Central Standard Time,
>klehman(at)albedo.net writes:
>
>Hi Bob
>That is certainly a plausible explanation but I don't understand why one
>would tolerate such a situation. If that is really the issue I'd want to
>upgrade the belt or mount, fit a larger pulley, or whatever it took to
>eliminate the concern...
>Ken
>
>
>Good Evening Ken,
>
>No argument here, but I could perceive a situation where the airplane is
>taxiing or otherwise in a situation where a higher power is not reasonable.
At
>that time, it may be reasonable to avoid trying to carry a high amperage
>load. It could be that if the alternator was geared so as to be at a high enough
>speed to put out the maximum power when at idle it would be spinning way too
> fast at cruise. Most airplanes that I flew fifty years ago had electrical
>systems where we had to use electrical power judiciously during almost all
>ground operations.
>
>Happy Skies,
>
>Old Bob
>AKA
>Bob Siegfried
>Ancient Aviator
>Stearman N3977A
>Brookeridge Air Park LL22
>Downers Grove, IL 60516
>630 985-8503
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaztuna(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator recall |
>snipped
>If you are talking about Nissan I think 99% of their alternators are
>Hitachi or brands other than ND.
>
>
>If you are referring to the Nissan Murano recall, I can't tell you what
>model alternator it is, likely a 110amp Hitachi. Regardless the recall is
>benign, a wire comes off and the battery stops being charged according to
>the info I quickly looked up. The symptom besides the battery gets no
>charge is the ALT idiot light illuminates.
>
>
>As far as fire anyone with a computer can look this stuff up with a little
>effort. The web site is NSTSA, or just google combos of words like:
>alternator, recall, fires, electrical, Nissan, nippondenso, hitachi,
>mitsubishi, delco, prestolite, motorolla. You will not find any fire
>produced by a denso alternator. Many fires are from external wiring near
>the alternator or from other components on the engine near the wiring.
>Lesson is keep your alternator and wiring shielded and protected very well.
snipped
George,
I just got around to reading all the posts which have piled up from the
AeroElectric List. I noted your comment above. Since I have AllData and
Mitchell On Demand (automotive tech info software) on my computers, I
looked it up. You are correct. The Murano uses a Hitachi model LR1110-723
110 amp alternator on the 2003 model year products. Interestingly, the 2004
models use a Hitachi model LR1110-723B unit. I will second George's opinion
to avoid Hitachi alternators. This is based on my professional experience
with these units.
Charlie Kuss
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rodney Dunham" <rdunhamtn(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Icom A200 issues |
Charlie,
Well, you probably wouldn't have succumbed to the "gotchas" like I did. I'm
new at this. But here are my "tips".
1) Be sure to install the tray such that the PC board and coax can seat
completely when the radio is inserted and tightened up.
2) Be sure to install the little clip on the back of the tray that holds the
coax about 2 to 3 inches from the connector so it is stabilized. Mine broke
here and caused problems.
3) Be sure to construct good "subpanels" so you can take the whole thing
over to the bench to work on it.
4) While on the bench with intercom and radio positioned for maximum
exposure, make wiring harnesses with multi-wire shielded cables and Molex
(or similar) connectors for easy in and out.
5) Crimp and solder! Those intercom wires are small. I crimped the
insulation in both grips on the barrel connectors then soldered the stripped
wire inside the barrel. It's quite easy now that I have the hang of it.
Maybe Bob can teach me how to make a comic book :o)
6) Speaking of comic books,
www.aeroelectric.com/articles/matenlok/matenlok.html is a must read for the
beginner.
That's this beginners 2 cents worth.
Rodney in Tennessee
PS A good education is no excuse for bad manners.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | First Operational GQM Target Flight |
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<<...skip.....The first non-experimental GQM-163 target was
launched recently.....skip......Here's a picture of the launch.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/1st_Operational_GQM.jpg
........skip......Bob . . .>>
10/15/2005
Hello Bob Nuckolls, Any idea where that launch took place? From the nearby
plant life (called "ice plant") and the ocean it looks very much like a
beach launch from NAS Point Mugu / Pacific Missile Range.
Many years ago I had occasion to chase launches from those beach sites while
flying tactical jets. I must admit that the objects that I was chasing were
a bit slower than a GQM, but it was still pretty sporting to be in position
(both spatially and velocity wise) to join up on a vertically launched
itty-bitty cruise missile before it disappeared out of sight and then fly
formation on it a few feet off the surface.
Next step up in difficulty was to join up and track a cruise missile being
launched from a submerged submarine. The lack of reference land marks out in
the ocean made prelaunch positioning for chase and join up a real challenge.
We also chased the cruise missiles over US continental land as they
navigated a route using an onboard terrain comparison database -- this was
pre GPS days. The recovery of a crashed cruise missile was always a very
quick and quiet affair.
OC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Icom A200 issues |
Speaking of
> comic books,
www.aeroelectric.com/articles/matenlok/matenlok.html is a
> must read for the beginner.
Once you've looked that over, take a look at a DB-9/15/25/etc
connector, pin and socket crimp style (type used in serial
connectors). Had a recent project that involved a broken Centronics
24 position male connector for the back of a Century III autopilot
console. The harness to the console was already very short so had
to make up a pigtail of a DB-25 female to Centronics 24 male, with a
DB-25 male on the very short harness up under the panel (Bellanca
Viking). Five of the wires were 20awg and so broke out to seperate 6
position Molex. No other way to do this without wholesale wiring
carnage. Those 19 itty-bitty Centronics pins were each hand crimped
to 24awg wire with nothing more than a set of electronics dykes and
a pair of small, angled needle nose. Quick wick of solder, too. I envy
anyone who has the luxury of .092 pins for the whole project.....
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
'71 SV, 492TC
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bob noffs" <icubob(at)newnorth.net> |
| Subject: | voltage monitoring |
hi bob,
i am looking over z-20 for a jabiru engine. i will be using a grand rapids eis
monitor . should i also install the crowbar over voltage module and the low voltage
monitor ? g.r. offers a voltage monitor, are the other 2 monitors more
likely to prevent damage by incorrect voltage? thanks, bob noffs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Off Topic: G'mint Auctions |
If you have too much time and money on your hands (or you just want to see where
your tax money goes), check out--
http://www.govliquidation.com/
They are having a great electronic test equipment internet auction right now.
This is the way the military disposes of their excess "Stuff" and you can buy amazing
deals in oscilloscopes, Fluke meters, and all the really cool nerdy stuff.
(My signal generator, and an awesome HP54502A digital scope which I need to
fix... and several other devices came from these guys).
Registration is simple and there are no tricks. Just watch the added charges for
transportation and the condition codes. The neatest auction are those that say,
"14 pallets of electronics...no further information." and they show a photo
of ...well....14 pallets of stained and slightly mangled boxes of stuff.
Many years ago two teenagers bought "Large Crate, A/C parts...no further information"
and won a complete F104B fighter in a crate.
They routinely have flight instruments. A few weeks ago they had entire "flight
instrument six packs" suitable for most home-builts. You can buy a couple lots,
sell what you don't want on eBay and use the money to buy other things. Not
too bad as hobbies go.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
(508) 764-2072
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> |
| Subject: | Re: voltage monitoring |
The GRT "monitor" just alerts you to the voltage discrepancy. It doesn't
do anything about it. If you can remember to react quickly enough, you
don't need automated devices. What the LV and OV devices do is to handle
the voltage problem for you (disconnect the main bus or disconnect the
alternator) very fast for you, so you don't have to try to remember what to
do in each case.
Dave Morris
At 06:58 AM 10/17/2005, you wrote:
>
>hi bob,
> i am looking over z-20 for a jabiru engine. i will be using a grand
> rapids eis monitor . should i also install the crowbar over voltage
> module and the low voltage monitor ? g.r. offers a voltage monitor, are
> the other 2 monitors more likely to prevent damage by incorrect voltage?
> thanks, bob noffs
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rodney Dunham" <rdunhamtn(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | RE: voltage monitoring |
7.50 BARRACUDA_HEADER_FP56 RBL: Blacklist bl.spamcop
[Blocked - see <http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?65.54.162.200>]
Bob,
I too am about to wire a Jabiru with Z-20 architecture or similar.
A friend of mine recently had a voltage regulator fail in his Challenger II.
He runs a Rotax 503 (which uses a PM alternator similar to the Jabiru) and a
Key West voltage regulator in a Kuntlzleman hot box. He monitors with the
Grand Rapids EIS.
He first noticed high voltages in the 18V range. He thought it was
everything EXCEPT voltage regulator failure. The big red light would come on
and the screen would tell him about it but the EIS didn't DO anything about
it! He'd radio us in flight and ask what we thought might be wrong. He never
took his alternator off line because he can't! He just flew to the next
landing opportunity and scratched his head. Meanwhile...
With Bob's OV protection system the alternator is taken off line immediately
and automatically. You don't have to figure anything out or take any action.
16V for 5 millisec and the crowbar pops the breaker. More importantly, you
won't hurt your plane while you're trying to decide what to do. It's done.
That's that. And you can figure it out later.
My friend doesn't have any other problems he's aware of as a result of his
recent problem but who knows? This kind of damage is incremental. Something
else may fail prematurely later and he'll not put the two together.
Well, I'm probably preaching to the choir, but I'm putting OV protection on
mine.
Rodney in Tennessee
October 03, 2005 - October 17, 2005
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-ew