AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-iz
August 31, 2009 - September 17, 2009
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Barrow <bobbarrow10(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Sensor wires with ignition leads |
I've seen quite a few Experimental aircraft (and some certificated aircraft
) with the EGT and CHT sensor wires bundled with the lower ignition leads o
n Lycoming engines.
The usual protocol is to attach the lower ignition leads to the cylinder he
ads by means of a clamp attached at the lower rocker cover screw. The EGT a
nd CHT sensor wires are then run through the same clamp.
Is this a kosher practice. It's certainly convenient....but are there any d
ownsides to bundling these sensor wires with ignition leads.
Regards Bob Barrow
_________________________________________________________________
View photos of singles in your area Click Here
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Baleshta" <dbaleshta(at)tru.ca> |
I don't think I've seen this anywhere on the list, but is there a difference between
a type K thermocouple ring style (sits under the sparkplug between the sparkplug
and the head) vs the straight style that screws into the head? And,
I believe Bob (or someone) mentioned that standard aircraft wire can connect to
the thermocouple wires if they are not long enough, provided the lengths are
identical, is that correct?
thanks
Doug
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David M <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
For TC's, Greg, it is not recommended. The unit depends upon an exact
measurement between two certain wires (dependent upon TC type.)
David M...
Doug Baleshta wrote:
>
> I don't think I've seen this anywhere on the list, but is there a difference
between a type K thermocouple ring style (sits under the sparkplug between the
sparkplug and the head) vs the straight style that screws into the head? And,
I believe Bob (or someone) mentioned that standard aircraft wire can connect
to the thermocouple wires if they are not long enough, provided the lengths
are identical, is that correct?
>
> thanks
> Doug
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <r.r.hall(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Transponder Re-Check? |
Sounds to me like you have already made your mind up to have the recheck done.
Personnally I would see if the original people who did the check just before the
failure will recheck it again for free since they probably want to have good
customer feedback. They should be concerned about what kind of reputation they
will get.
You should at least ask them about it.
Rodney Hall
---- Don Curry wrote:
>
> I'm fighting that very temptation. However, all too often if a person will compromise
once, s/he'll do it again. And I don't want to be that person. As
near as I can tell, it's best just to play by the rules. After all, it's a hobby,
right? Don
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: alfranken(at)msn.com
> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Transponder Re-Check?
> >
> >
> > Here's a realistic idea.
> >
> > When your transponder comes back, put it in and forget about the
> > paperwork.
> >
> > Al
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=260540#260540
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Sensor wires with ignition leads |
| From: | "nuckollsr" <bob.nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
Bundling the wires of different and potentially antagonistic systems is quite practical
and in fact a foregone conclusion in the TC aircraft world. There's a
suite of tests conducted for all electro-whizzies that quantifies potential victimization/antagonism
factors when installed per the manufacturer's instructions.
While building wire bundles for biz jets consisting of a hundred miles of wire
and very limited options for wire routing, the LAST challenge anyone wants to
address is a requirement for keeping the wires of one system separated from the
wires of another system.
The general rule is that unless the manufacturer demands that such separations
be established, don't worry about it. It they DO make such demands, you may wish
to consider an alternative system. Separation requirements arise from lack
of due diligence in crafting an installer and user friendly system. Lack of diligence
in issues of environmental co-existence aboard airplanes should make one
wonder if other qualities you seek are likewise lacking.
Bob . . .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=260592#260592
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
Doug Baleshta wrote:
>
> I don't think I've seen this anywhere on the list, but is there a difference
between a type K thermocouple ring style (sits under the sparkplug between the
sparkplug and the head) vs the straight style that screws into the head? And,
I believe Bob (or someone) mentioned that standard aircraft wire can connect
to the thermocouple wires if they are not long enough, provided the lengths
are identical, is that correct?
>
> thanks
> Doug
Morning, Doug...
I'll let someone else answer the difference between mounting a TC under
the plug and in the head...obviously, the temperatures will read
differently, but as far as I know, once you get used to what your
readings are, either method is acceptable.
As for connecting thermocouples, for the most accurate reading, the
wires AND connectors along the entire length, right up to and including
the instrument reading the signal itself, should all be of the same two
dissimilar materials. This includes any terminal or plug connections as
well. These are available at any supply house that deals in
thermocouples and are not expensive. Omega Engineering is a great source
of information and components and is online. It was one source of TC
and RTD supplies in my other life when I was involved in automating a
pharmaceutical company's manufacturing.
A TC is simply two wires of dissimilar material connected at one end.
The different types of TC (J,K,T, etc.) have different sets of materials
in them for different ranges of temperature.
Thermocouples don't work by having a voltage or signal supplied to
them, but are generators of a very small voltage themselves, which
changes slightly as the temperature changes. Monitoring this voltage
change is what the readout instrument does, then massages the reading
and converts it to numbers that relate to a temperature scale that you
have selected.
Connecting ANY two dissimilar metals, not just the ones used in TCs,
will produce voltages. So, connecting the specific wire in a
thermocouple (iron, constantin, etc.) to another type of wire or
connector (copper, steel, brass, aluminum, etc.)along the route to the
instrument will (not "might") generate additional voltages that may add
to or degrade the signal you are trying to read.
For accurate readings, all the wire and connectors should be the same
material as used in the TC itself. So, since the two wires in a TC are
DIFFERENT materials, even when using TC extension wire or thermocouple
couplers or plugs, be sure to connect the wires to the terminal or
extension wire that is the same material (they are color coded) or you
could seriously degrade or even cancel your signal. Remember, even
solder (which is lead or tin) will generate it's own voltages in
contract with the TC wire, and will degrade the signal between the two
wires, so use compatible mechanical connections wherever possible. Many
TC materials don't solder well anyway.
For a clearer description, read this: www.omega.com/thermocouples.html
and this:
www.omega.com/techref/themointro.html
Harley Dixon
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | D10-A can't see compass module |
| From: | thomas sargent <sarg314(at)gmail.com> |
I have hooked up my remote compass module to my D10-A for the first time and
the D10-A complains it can't find the compass module. I ohmed out the cable
and it seems to be correct. Has any one had this problem? The thing has
sat on the shelf for 2 or 3 years so the internal battery is completely
dead, if that makes any difference.
--
Tom Sargent, RV-6A final assembly
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: D10-A can't see compass module |
| From: | Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins(at)gmail.com> |
Tom - you might want to post this message on the Dynon company's direct
support forum.
http://dynonavionics.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl
Sam
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 10:32 AM, thomas sargent wrote:
> I have hooked up my remote compass module to my D10-A for the first time
> and the D10-A complains it can't find the compass module. I ohmed out the
> cable and it seems to be correct. Has any one had this problem? The thing
> has sat on the shelf for 2 or 3 years so the internal battery is completely
> dead, if that makes any difference.
>
> --
> Tom Sargent, RV-6A final assembly
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
| From: | "dalemed" <dalemed(at)gmail.com> |
I'm getting ready to install an Aveo wingtip LED stobe on my all-aluminum wing.
I ran some bench tests and found quite a bit of switching noise on the stobe
wire. I'm assuming I should use shielded wire for this line and I'm assuming
I should ground the shield on only one end.
Which end of the shield should I ground or does it matter?
I'm new to this list so I apologize if this question has been asked and answered
a lot of times. I did a search of the list but nothing jumped out at me.
Thanks!
--------
Dale
Flying Cessna 170B
Building Zenith CH650
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=260638#260638
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Protecting the compass from interference |
Is there anything I use as a shield to protect my compass (panel
mounted) from interference with surrounding neighbors? I was thinking
about dipping it in lead. Perhaps I could wrap it in tin foil?
Thanks,
Glenn
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Protecting the compass from interference |
| From: | Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins(at)gmail.com> |
So, you want to prevent the compass from receiving magnetic influences? If
you do that, it may not work so well.
You are going to have to eliminate the outside influences or move the
compass. You might possibly gain something by wrapping the sources with a
ferrous material, but that sounds like a loser too.
Sam
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 11:46 AM, wrote:
>
> Is there anything I use as a shield to protect my compass (panel
> mounted) from interference with surrounding neighbors? I was thinking
> about dipping it in lead. Perhaps I could wrap it in tin foil?
>
> Thanks,
> Glenn
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
| From: | "nuckollsr" <bob.nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
Shielding has a VERY limited, VERY specific effect on the propagation of noise
from one wire to another. How did you 'measure' switching noise? Just holding
your hand-held transceiver close to the product or its leadwires is not a very
telling experiment. Your handheld can and will detect close proximity noises
that have little or nothing to do with operational aspects of making your 'noisy'
device co-exist with potential 'victims' of that noise.
What does the manufacturer say about noise issues? Email them and ASK if they're
aware of any customers that have encountered noise issues and what they did
about them. It's a 99% bet that an inline filter would be necessary to take care
of noise that is CONDUCTED on the power wires. These are not the kinds of noises
that will couple from one wire to the next because there is no shielding.
Bob . . .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=260660#260660
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Protecting the compass from interference |
Correct, thanks Sam. Looks like there may be a move scheduled for the
compass.
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sam
Hoskins
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Protecting the compass from interference
So, you want to prevent the compass from receiving magnetic influences?
If you do that, it may not work so well.
You are going to have to eliminate the outside influences or move the
compass. You might possibly gain something by wrapping the sources with
a ferrous material, but that sounds like a loser too.
Sam
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 11:46 AM, wrote:
Is there anything I use as a shield to protect my compass (panel
mounted) from interference with surrounding neighbors? I was thinking
about dipping it in lead. Perhaps I could wrap it in tin foil?
Thanks,
Glenn
-List"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
http://forums.matronics.com
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Protecting the compass from interference |
Supposedly, some magnetic interference issues can be solved by
wrapping the source of the interfering magnetism in mu-metal, a nickel-
iron alloy with very high magnetic permeability.
Kevin Horton
On 31-Aug-09, at 13:18 , Sam Hoskins wrote:
> So, you want to prevent the compass from receiving magnetic
> influences? If you do that, it may not work so well.
>
> You are going to have to eliminate the outside influences or move
> the compass. You might possibly gain something by wrapping the
> sources with a ferrous material, but that sounds like a loser too.
>
> Sam
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 11:46 AM, wrote:
>
> Is there anything I use as a shield to protect my compass (panel
> mounted) from interference with surrounding neighbors? I was thinking
> about dipping it in lead. Perhaps I could wrap it in tin foil?
>
> Thanks,
> Glenn
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Ilg <doug.ilg(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
I also have a set of these lights. Iam not to the point of installing and I have
not conducted any experiments, but the manufacturer says that no shielding is
needed. It's one of their selling points. All the flashy bits for the LEDs are
inside the idividual light heads, so all you need to supply is 7-32 VDC. I
guess that doesn't guarantee that no noise can leak out onto the powerleads, but
they claim it's a"noise free" installation.
FWIW
Doug Ilg
Grumman Tiger N74818, College ParkAirport (KCGS), Maryland
Challenger II LSS (N641LGreserved)- kit underway at Laurel Suburban (W18)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ivan Carlson" <ivanjackie(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Protecting the compass from interference |
There is something called mu metal available a Aircraft Spruce. I know
of some who used it that had a similar problem and it worked.
No guarantees.
Ivan Carlson
From: longg(at)pjm.com
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 1:53 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Protecting the compass from interference
Correct, thanks Sam. Looks like there may be a move scheduled for the
compass.
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sam
Hoskins
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Protecting the compass from interference
So, you want to prevent the compass from receiving magnetic influences?
If you do that, it may not work so well.
You are going to have to eliminate the outside influences or move the
compass. You might possibly gain something by wrapping the sources with
a ferrous material, but that sounds like a loser too.
Sam
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 11:46 AM, wrote:
Is there anything I use as a shield to protect my compass (panel
mounted) from interference with surrounding neighbors? I was thinking
about dipping it in lead. Perhaps I could wrap it in tin foil?
Thanks,
Glenn
-List"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
http://forums.matronics.com
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-Listhttp://forums.matroni
cs.comhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
| From: | "dalemed" <dalemed(at)gmail.com> |
I ran about 15 feet of wire from a battery to the strobe. When an AM weather Band
radio was anywhere within 10 feet of the circuit, there was considerable noise
in the radio.
I didn't get any information with my lights. Any info I got was from their website.
Where did you read that they are "noise free"? The spikes I see on the
power lines using an oscilloscope would indicate otherwise.
In any event, I don't see where the use of shielded wire would hurt. I'd like
to know the best way/place to ground the shield.
Thanks for your feedback!
--------
Dale
Flying Cessna 170B
Building Zenith CH650
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=260732#260732
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
| From: | "dalemed" <dalemed(at)gmail.com> |
I ran about 15 feet of wire from a battery to the strobe. When an AM weather Band
radio was anywhere within 10 feet of the circuit, there was considerable noise
in the radio.
I didn't get any information with my lights. Any info I got was from their website.
Where did you read that they are "noise free"? The spikes I see on the
power lines using an oscilloscope would indicate otherwise.
In any event, I don't see where the use of shielded wire would hurt. I'd like
to know the best way/place to ground the shield.
Thanks for your feedback!
--------
Dale
Flying Cessna 170B
Building Zenith CH650
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=260733#260733
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dave.gribble(at)mchsi.com |
| Subject: | Why Brass Bolt for ground terminal? |
I'm building a firewall ground terminal system consisting of faston tabs soldered
to sheets of brass stock. I'll sandwich these around the RV firewall (thin
stainless steel) and use a big bolt on one side to attach the battery and engine
ground straps to.
I see that the B&C version of this calls for a brass bolt - what is the reason
for this, and also what size of bolt to use? I assume it is a dissimilar metals
corrosion problem... I have designed for a few smaller #8 bolts to hold the
brass sheets together.. do these have to be brass too?
Thanks for any info,
Dave Gribble
Cedar Rapids IA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Why Brass Bolt for ground terminal? |
At 08:00 PM 8/31/2009, you wrote:
>
>I'm building a firewall ground terminal system consisting of faston
>tabs soldered to sheets of brass stock. I'll sandwich these around
>the RV firewall (thin stainless steel) and use a big bolt on one
>side to attach the battery and engine ground straps to.
>
>I see that the B&C version of this calls for a brass bolt - what is
>the reason for this, and also what size of bolt to use? I assume it
>is a dissimilar metals corrosion problem... I have designed for a
>few smaller #8 bolts to hold the brass sheets together.. do these
>have to be brass too?
If the Big bolt is long (like through a composite
firewall) the brass bolt is preferred for electrical
conductivity. But for a thin firewall, regular AN
hardware is fine. The #8 hardware is mechanical only,
plain vanilla AN hardware there too.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
At 07:48 PM 8/31/2009, you wrote:
>
>I ran about 15 feet of wire from a battery to the strobe. When an
>AM weather Band radio was anywhere within 10 feet of the circuit,
>there was considerable noise in the radio.
>
>I didn't get any information with my lights. Any info I got was
>from their website. Where did you read that they are "noise
>free"? The spikes I see on the power lines using an oscilloscope
>would indicate otherwise.
>
>In any event, I don't see where the use of shielded wire would
>hurt. I'd like to know the best way/place to ground the shield.
Shielded wire may not hurt . . . but it most certainly
won't help. Shielding is NOT a radio frequency interference
fix. If there is CONDUCTED noise on your strobe supply
leads then adding a shielded wire only insures that any
noise present is carried with better efficiency to the
bus an on to the rest of the airplane. Conducted noise
must be filtered at the antagonist. This and similar
products are called for if the devices prove to be troublesome.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9006/9006-700A.pdf
Here's a noisy LED driver that has been upgraded with
an appropriate RF noise filter.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9051/9051-700A.pdf
Shielding is more weight, more installed complexity
and essentially ineffectual on anything except electro-
statically coupled noises in wire bundles.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Protecting the compass from interference |
At 11:46 AM 8/31/2009, you wrote:
>
>Is there anything I use as a shield to protect my compass (panel
>mounted) from interference with surrounding neighbors? I was thinking
>about dipping it in lead. Perhaps I could wrap it in tin foil?
>
>Thanks,
>Glenn
The magnetic compass is intended to deduce alignment of
the earth's magnetic field (on the order of 500 milliGauss)
and produce a useful navigation display based thereon.
Your query doesn't give us a good sense of any problems
you may be having. ALL compasses installed on ALL vehicles
are subject to external influences that tend to distort
the field of interest. This is why the compass is "swung" or
calibrated at the compass rose after installation. Further,
swinging the compass is done with a known condition for
certain electrical system components being ON or OFF.
There is no value in attempting to isolate surrounding
effects with special shielding. If there is some accessory
that causes a major swing in compass reading, then you
increase the separation between compass and antagonist.
The last compass issue I worked was on the Bonanza after
the B&C standby alternator was installed. Magnetic leakage
from the alternator on the back of the engine produced
an unacceptable deviation to the compass reading when mounted
on the glare shield. Moving the compass to a previously
qualified location higher on the windshield fixed the problem.
The BEST compasses are remotely sensed with the transducer
in the tailcone or out on wing.
But your panel mounted GPS should be backed up with
a hand held GPS . . . the compass has become a historical
curiosity of limited usefulness.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Why Brass Bolt for ground terminal? |
| From: | bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com> |
the brass bolt will carry the current thru the firewall to the ''forest of
tabs'' you will mount on it on the cabin side of the firewall.
bob noffs
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
>
> At 08:00 PM 8/31/2009, you wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm building a firewall ground terminal system consisting of faston tabs
>> soldered to sheets of brass stock. I'll sandwich these around the RV
>> firewall (thin stainless steel) and use a big bolt on one side to attach the
>> battery and engine ground straps to.
>>
>> I see that the B&C version of this calls for a brass bolt - what is the
>> reason for this, and also what size of bolt to use? I assume it is a
>> dissimilar metals corrosion problem... I have designed for a few smaller #8
>> bolts to hold the brass sheets together.. do these have to be brass too?
>>
>
> If the Big bolt is long (like through a composite
> firewall) the brass bolt is preferred for electrical
> conductivity. But for a thin firewall, regular AN
> hardware is fine. The #8 hardware is mechanical only,
> plain vanilla AN hardware there too.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ---------------------------------------
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ---------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
Somewhat related question. I have the Whelen Comet system for my RV-7A, It
has shielded cable, of course, the power unit out to the wingtip strobe,
with the shield grounded at the power unit.
But, because there's a chance I won't be able to fly my project off the
field where it's now being built, I may hve to take the wings off and truck
it to anothre airport, so I want to use a terminal strip at the inboard wing
root, so that the wires can be disconnected. What should I do with the
shield wire at that location. Should I treat it like any other wire and
connect it at the terminal strip and continue it out to the wing tip? Or
should I just terminate it at the wing root?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of dalemed
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 7:47 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe
I ran about 15 feet of wire from a battery to the strobe. When an AM
weather Band radio was anywhere within 10 feet of the circuit, there was
considerable noise in the radio.
I didn't get any information with my lights. Any info I got was from their
website. Where did you read that they are "noise free"? The spikes I see
on the power lines using an oscilloscope would indicate otherwise.
In any event, I don't see where the use of shielded wire would hurt. I'd
like to know the best way/place to ground the shield.
Thanks for your feedback!
--------
Dale
Flying Cessna 170B
Building Zenith CH650
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=260732#260732
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fisher Paul A." <FisherPaulA(at)johndeere.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
Bob,
I treated it like any other wire at the Molex connectors in the wing root. Seems
to be working so far. Full disclosure - I've only got 19 hours on it, but
I don't have any problems with audio, communications, or navigation equipment.
Paul A. Fisher
RV-7A N18PF
-----Original Message-----
...snip...
What should I do with the
shield wire at that location. Should I treat it like any other wire and
connect it at the terminal strip and continue it out to the wing tip? Or
should I just terminate it at the wing root?
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Protecting the compass from interference |
Thanks Bob,
Based on your last comment I've thought seriously of just removing it. I
have 2 Dynon AHRS remotes in the wings and 2 Garmin GPS units (panel)
and 1 handheld unit on board. If all of that goes to hell, I'll just
land in a field and ask directions.
While building my panel I did notice specifically when or what caused
the interference, it just developed over the process. First I should
probably remove the compass to be sure it is in itself accurate simply
standing outside.
I have a small military compass from LL Bean which I carry and may do in
a pinch. Cheaper too.
Glenn
-----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
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 10:42 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Protecting the compass from interference
At 11:46 AM 8/31/2009, you wrote:
>
>Is there anything I use as a shield to protect my compass (panel
>mounted) from interference with surrounding neighbors? I was thinking
>about dipping it in lead. Perhaps I could wrap it in tin foil?
>
>Thanks,
>Glenn
The magnetic compass is intended to deduce alignment of
the earth's magnetic field (on the order of 500 milliGauss)
and produce a useful navigation display based thereon.
Your query doesn't give us a good sense of any problems
you may be having. ALL compasses installed on ALL vehicles
are subject to external influences that tend to distort
the field of interest. This is why the compass is "swung" or
calibrated at the compass rose after installation. Further,
swinging the compass is done with a known condition for
certain electrical system components being ON or OFF.
There is no value in attempting to isolate surrounding
effects with special shielding. If there is some accessory
that causes a major swing in compass reading, then you
increase the separation between compass and antagonist.
The last compass issue I worked was on the Bonanza after
the B&C standby alternator was installed. Magnetic leakage
from the alternator on the back of the engine produced
an unacceptable deviation to the compass reading when mounted
on the glare shield. Moving the compass to a previously
qualified location higher on the windshield fixed the problem.
The BEST compasses are remotely sensed with the transducer
in the tailcone or out on wing.
But your panel mounted GPS should be backed up with
a hand held GPS . . . the compass has become a historical
curiosity of limited usefulness.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Why Brass Bolt for ground |
terminal?
Bob,
Wow, I really appreciate your craftsmanship effort, but why would you
build one of these? B & C sells them relatively cheaply and they are
perfect for the job. Drill a hole, add the appropriate number of washers
and move on.
Glenn
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of bob
noffs
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 7:28 AM
Subject: [Probable SPAM] Re: AeroElectric-List: Why Brass Bolt for
ground terminal?
the brass bolt will carry the current thru the firewall to the ''forest
of tabs'' you will mount on it on the cabin side of the firewall.
bob noffs
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III
wrote:
At 08:00 PM 8/31/2009, you wrote:
I'm building a firewall ground terminal system consisting of faston tabs
soldered to sheets of brass stock. I'll sandwich these around the RV
firewall (thin stainless steel) and use a big bolt on one side to attach
the battery and engine ground straps to.
I see that the B&C version of this calls for a brass bolt - what is the
reason for this, and also what size of bolt to use? I assume it is a
dissimilar metals corrosion problem... I have designed for a few smaller
#8 bolts to hold the brass sheets together.. do these have to be brass
too?
If the Big bolt is long (like through a composite
firewall) the brass bolt is preferred for electrical
conductivity. But for a thin firewall, regular AN
hardware is fine. The #8 hardware is mechanical only,
plain vanilla AN hardware there too.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
s such as List Un/Subscription,
www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
ronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
Matt Dralle, List Admin.
====
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dave.gribble(at)mchsi.com |
| Subject: | Re: Why Brass Bolt for ground terminal? |
Hi Glenn - I built the ground block because I like building things! I enjoy the
challenge, and also learning new skills (never sweat soldered brass before)....Sort
of the same reason I'm building my plane instead of buying one :)
I'm sure the B&C parts are nice, but $50 is about $49 more than I spent and I can
save that money and put it towards my EFIS. Besides, B&C has already got enough
ca$h from me this month!
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: <longg(at)pjm.com>
>
> Bob,
>
>
>
> Wow, I really appreciate your craftsmanship effort, but why would you
> build one of these? B & C sells them relatively cheaply and they are
> perfect for the job. Drill a hole, add the appropriate number of washers
> and move on.
>
>
>
> Glenn
>
>
>
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of bob
> noffs
> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 7:28 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: [Probable SPAM] Re: AeroElectric-List: Why Brass Bolt for
> ground terminal?
>
>
>
> the brass bolt will carry the current thru the firewall to the ''forest
> of tabs'' you will mount on it on the cabin side of the firewall.
>
> bob noffs
>
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> At 08:00 PM 8/31/2009, you wrote:
>
>
> I'm building a firewall ground terminal system consisting of faston tabs
> soldered to sheets of brass stock. I'll sandwich these around the RV
> firewall (thin stainless steel) and use a big bolt on one side to attach
> the battery and engine ground straps to.
>
> I see that the B&C version of this calls for a brass bolt - what is the
> reason for this, and also what size of bolt to use? I assume it is a
> dissimilar metals corrosion problem... I have designed for a few smaller
> #8 bolts to hold the brass sheets together.. do these have to be brass
> too?
>
>
>
> If the Big bolt is long (like through a composite
> firewall) the brass bolt is preferred for electrical
> conductivity. But for a thin firewall, regular AN
> hardware is fine. The #8 hardware is mechanical only,
> plain vanilla AN hardware there too.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ---------------------------------------
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ---------------------------------------
>
> s such as List Un/Subscription,
> www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
> ronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
> Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> ====
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Protecting the compass from interference |
longg(at)pjm.com wrote:
>
> Thanks Bob,
>
> Based on your last comment I've thought seriously of just removing it. I
> have 2 Dynon AHRS remotes in the wings and 2 Garmin GPS units (panel)
> and 1 handheld unit on board. If all of that goes to hell, I'll just
> land in a field and ask directions.
>
Regardless of that, you will need to please the bureaucrats. The regs
say you need a compass. Come hell or high-water, you don't have an
airplane until you have a compass.
I got a cheap, light plastic thingy from Advance Auto. A 1" hole in the
dash, and I have it front and center, but low enough that it can be
safely ignored (ie, it doesn't interfere with the all important view of
the runway 8*).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jared Yates" <junk(at)jaredyates.com> |
| Subject: | Protecting the compass from interference |
If you are thinking of 14CFR part 91.205 b.3, I think it says that you are
required to have a magnetic direction indicator, not a compass. Doesn't a
Dynon satisfy this requirement, since it derives its heading from a
magnetic-field based sensor?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest
Christley
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 10:37 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Protecting the compass from interference
longg(at)pjm.com wrote:
>
> Thanks Bob,
>
> Based on your last comment I've thought seriously of just removing it. I
> have 2 Dynon AHRS remotes in the wings and 2 Garmin GPS units (panel)
> and 1 handheld unit on board. If all of that goes to hell, I'll just
> land in a field and ask directions.
>
Regardless of that, you will need to please the bureaucrats. The regs
say you need a compass. Come hell or high-water, you don't have an
airplane until you have a compass.
I got a cheap, light plastic thingy from Advance Auto. A 1" hole in the
dash, and I have it front and center, but low enough that it can be
safely ignored (ie, it doesn't interfere with the all important view of
the runway 8*).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ron Patterson <scc_ron(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Fried Master switch wires |
Here is a real puzzle.
-
I used Bob's Z-11 wiring plan to structure my wiring system in my RV. All w
as well (3 years)-until I inadvertently jumped a dead battery and reverse
d polarity. The master switch wire that runs from the switch to the master
relay, that powers up the starter relay burned (smoked actually). Nothing e
lse burned, just ancillary damage to wire insulation from the melted insula
tion on the master to ground and master to relay and 7 burned fuses.
-
There was a diode on both relays. The yellow diode on the MR showed discolo
ration (a small brown spot) but appeared intact. I replaced all the master
wiring and the Odyssey-battery and tried to lite it.-Again it smoked th
e master wires to the MR and to ground.
-
Then I replaced the MR, the Starter Relay, both diodes AND the master switc
h along with the burned up wire. Seems fine now and I flew it home. The pro
blem is this. Except for the Yellow MR diode frying during the second attem
pt, nothing in that circuit appears damaged. We cut open the MR and it is a
s new inside. Same with the Master-Switch....contact are normal appearing
. So what happened the second time??? Why does everything appear OK on insp
ection?
-
One side note....except for a loss of a battery, one microphone jack and th
e Alternator now putting out only 13.9 volts, the rest of the avionics and
electrical system-appear unharmed. Burned out 7 fuses on the first incide
nt, but no apparent damage to the expensive equipment. That alone makes fus
es superior to circuit breakers in my mind.
-
I appreciate any electrical Guru's thoughts on this event and what I might
still need to do to insure safety in flight. Not knowing what caused the se
cond event makes me a bit nervous that It might still be lurking. Smoke in
the cockpit is not good!
-
Thanks for your ideas,
Ron
-=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LarryMcFarland <larry(at)macsmachine.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Protecting the compass from interference |
Hi guys,
The compass does seem an excess item until youve left the GPS home or
the replacement batteries dont seem to be working. Ive been only
30-miles out when the snow and visibility had me temporarily dependent
on the GPS and it quit. I knew the last GPS heading and followed it back
via that worthless compass until the white on white of the airport was
back in view. Id give the Compass more respect, as its probably the
only thing that works when all else has dumped out on you. Im
constantly comparing my compass heading with whats on the GPS.
http://www.macsmachine.com/images/flightviews/full/Seaton(4).gif
Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
Ernest Christley wrote:
>
>
> longg(at)pjm.com wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Bob,
>>
>> Based on your last comment I've thought seriously of just removing it. I
>> have 2 Dynon AHRS remotes in the wings and 2 Garmin GPS units (panel)
>> and 1 handheld unit on board. If all of that goes to hell, I'll just
>> land in a field and ask directions.
>>
> Regardless of that, you will need to please the bureaucrats. The regs
> say you need a compass. Come hell or high-water, you don't have an
> airplane until you have a compass.
>
> I got a cheap, light plastic thingy from Advance Auto. A 1" hole in
> the dash, and I have it front and center, but low enough that it can
> be safely ignored (ie, it doesn't interfere with the all important
> view of the runway 8*).
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
| From: | "dalemed" <dalemed(at)gmail.com> |
Since everyone (including the manufacturer) says I shouldn't need shielded wire,
I'm going to go with standard wire and save the weight.
Thanks, everybody!
--------
Dale
Flying Cessna 170B
Building Zenith CH650
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=260896#260896
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Barrow <bobbarrow10(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sensor wires with ignition leads |
Bob=2C I'm building an RV7A (not much guidance from the "manufacturer" on t
his issue). Am I to conclude from your comments below that I might be bette
r off separating the EGT and CHT sensor wires from the ignition leads.
If the sensor wires are run with the ignition leads what possible adversiti
es might I be facing. Might I get radio noise. Might I get erroneous instru
ment readings from the EGT and CHT guages.
Regards Bob Barrow
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Sensor wires with ignition leads
> From: bob.nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com
> Date: Mon=2C 31 Aug 2009 05:10:33 -0700
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>
ectric.com>
>
> Bundling the wires of different and potentially antagonistic systems is q
uite practical and in fact a foregone conclusion in the TC aircraft world.
There's a suite of tests conducted for all electro-whizzies that quantifies
potential victimization/antagonism factors when installed per the manufact
urer's instructions.
>
> While building wire bundles for biz jets consisting of a hundred miles of
wire and very limited options for wire routing=2C the LAST challenge anyon
e wants to address is a requirement for keeping the wires of one system sep
arated from the wires of another system.
>
> The general rule is that unless the manufacturer demands that such separa
tions be established=2C don't worry about it. It they DO make such demands
=2C you may wish to consider an alternative system. Separation requirements
arise from lack of due diligence in crafting an installer and user friendl
y system. Lack of diligence in issues of environmental co-existence aboard
airplanes should make one wonder if other qualities you seek are likewise l
acking.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=260592#260592
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
View photos of singles in your area Click Here
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James Robinson <jbr79r(at)yahoo.com> |
Bob
Is there a link to your wiring diagrams? Particularly the 2 alts 2 battery all
electric airplane. I can't locate mine. I probably put it where I would be
sure to find it HA HA ;-)
James Robinson
Glasair lll N79R
Spanish Fork UT U77
________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <r.r.hall(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Protecting the compass from interference |
You might want to be careful abouting getting rid of the compass. FARs require
a Magnetic direction indicator. If you ditch the compass what do you have that
will meet that requirement? A GPS won't meet it as its not magnetic.
Rodney
---- LarryMcFarland wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> The compass does seem an excess item until youve left the GPS home or
> the replacement batteries dont seem to be working. Ive been only
> 30-miles out when the snow and visibility had me temporarily dependent
> on the GPS and it quit. I knew the last GPS heading and followed it back
> via that worthless compass until the white on white of the airport was
> back in view. Id give the Compass more respect, as its probably the
> only thing that works when all else has dumped out on you. Im
> constantly comparing my compass heading with whats on the GPS.
>
> http://www.macsmachine.com/images/flightviews/full/Seaton(4).gif
>
> Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
>
>
> Ernest Christley wrote:
> >
> >
> > longg(at)pjm.com wrote:
> >>
> >> Thanks Bob,
> >>
> >> Based on your last comment I've thought seriously of just removing it. I
> >> have 2 Dynon AHRS remotes in the wings and 2 Garmin GPS units (panel)
> >> and 1 handheld unit on board. If all of that goes to hell, I'll just
> >> land in a field and ask directions.
> >>
> > Regardless of that, you will need to please the bureaucrats. The regs
> > say you need a compass. Come hell or high-water, you don't have an
> > airplane until you have a compass.
> >
> > I got a cheap, light plastic thingy from Advance Auto. A 1" hole in
> > the dash, and I have it front and center, but low enough that it can
> > be safely ignored (ie, it doesn't interfere with the all important
> > view of the runway 8*).
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dave.gribble(at)mchsi.com |
| Subject: | Re: Sensor wires with ignition leads |
My A&P & I installed the EGT & CHT probes in my Skipper (O-235 Lycoming with Slick
mags) and ran the wires in the traditional way, in shared adel clamps attached
to the bottom of the valve covers, right along with the spark plug wires.
No radio noise, no problems with the engine monitor (Electronics International
UBG). Hope this data point helps. dave
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Bob Barrow <bobbarrow10(at)hotmail.com>
>
>
> Bob, I'm building an RV7A (not much guidance from the "manufacturer" on this
> issue). Am I to conclude from your comments below that I might be better off
> separating the EGT and CHT sensor wires from the ignition leads.
>
>
>
> If the sensor wires are run with the ignition leads what possible adversities
> might I be facing. Might I get radio noise. Might I get erroneous instrument
> readings from the EGT and CHT guages.
>
>
>
> Regards Bob Barrow
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Sensor wires with ignition leads
> > From: bob.nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com
> > Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 05:10:33 -0700
> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> >
>
> >
> > Bundling the wires of different and potentially antagonistic systems is quite
> practical and in fact a foregone conclusion in the TC aircraft world. There's
a
> suite of tests conducted for all electro-whizzies that quantifies potential
> victimization/antagonism factors when installed per the manufacturer's
> instructions.
> >
> > While building wire bundles for biz jets consisting of a hundred miles of wire
> and very limited options for wire routing, the LAST challenge anyone wants to
> address is a requirement for keeping the wires of one system separated from the
> wires of another system.
> >
> > The general rule is that unless the manufacturer demands that such separations
> be established, don't worry about it. It they DO make such demands, you may wish
> to consider an alternative system. Separation requirements arise from lack of
> due diligence in crafting an installer and user friendly system. Lack of
> diligence in issues of environmental co-existence aboard airplanes should make
> one wonder if other qualities you seek are likewise lacking.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=260592#260592
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ===========
> ===========
> ===========
> ===========
> >
> >
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> View photos of singles in your area Click Here
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
9/2/2009
Hello Bob, You wrote: "What should I do with the shield wire at that
location?"
Below is a copy of my 2/16/2005 posting from the archives addressing this
question.
'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
understand knowledge."
=============================================
2/16/2005
Hello Jay, Here is how I solved that problem.
1) I bought some additional connectors and pins of the type that plugs into
the Whelen power supply. They are available from Terminal Town and other
sources.
2) I ran a cut end of the Whelen provided cables in a continuous snake from
each wing tip light all the way to my single power supply in the fuselage
leaving a coil of excess cable in the fuselage near each wing root.
3) Then I installed the connectors on the cable cut end and plugged into the
power supply.
4) If I ever have to remove my one piece wing I will just unplug the two
cable connectors from the power supply, cut the connectors off the cable
ends, and pull the cables out of the fuselage.##
5) When I reinstall the wing I just go through the same process as when
originally installing the wing by snaking the cable ends dangling from the
wing root into the power supply, reinstalling the connectors, and plugging
back into the power supply.
Considering how seldom one pulls the wings off and how little effort and
cost is involved in cutting off and reinstalling the cable end connectors
this is the best solution for me. It also eliminates an additional cable
connection junction at the wing root.
OC
##PS: If one were a really fastidious and pecunious type one could not cut
off the connectors, but rather just extract the pins from the connectors for
wing removal, and then reinsert the pins upon wing reinstall.
End Msg: #136
============================================================
From: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe
Somewhat related question. I have the Whelen Comet system for my RV-7A, It
has shielded cable, of course, the power unit out to the wingtip strobe,
with the shield grounded at the power unit.
But, because there's a chance I won't be able to fly my project off the
field where it's now being built, I may hve to take the wings off and truck
it to anothre airport, so I want to use a terminal strip at the inboard wing
root, so that the wires can be disconnected. What should I do with the
shield wire at that location. Should I treat it like any other wire and
connect it at the terminal strip and continue it out to the wing tip? Or
should I just terminate it at the wing root?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fried Master switch wires |
At 03:26 PM 9/1/2009, you wrote:
Here is a real puzzle.
I used Bob's Z-11 wiring plan to structure my wiring system in my RV.
All was well (3 years) until I inadvertently jumped a dead battery
and reversed polarity. The master switch wire that runs from the
switch to the master relay, that powers up the starter relay burned
(smoked actually). Nothing else burned, just ancillary damage to wire
insulation from the melted insulation on the master to ground and
master to relay and 7 burned fuses.
There was a diode on both relays. The yellow diode on the MR showed
discoloration (a small brown spot) but appeared intact. I replaced
all the master wiring and the Odyssey battery and tried to lite it.
Again it smoked the master wires to the MR and to ground.
"Appearing intact" doesn't mean it was not damaged.
In fact, the reversed polarity on this device caused
the coil of your contactor to appear shorted which is
why the control wire burned. The same current fused
the diode's junction causing it to become shorted
which caused your contactor to appear shorted after
the wire was replaced.
Then I replaced the MR, the Starter Relay, both diodes AND the master
switch along with the burned up wire. Seems fine now and I flew it
home. The problem is this. Except for the Yellow MR diode frying
during the second attempt, nothing in that circuit appears damaged.
We cut open the MR and it is as new inside. Same with the Master
Switch....contact are normal appearing. So what happened the second
time??? Why does everything appear OK on inspection?
The contactor itself would not have been damaged.
It's not a polarity sensitive device. Replacing
the diodes and damaged wire was all that was
necessary.
One side note....except for a loss of a battery, one microphone jack
and the Alternator now putting out only 13.9 volts, the rest of the
avionics and electrical system appear unharmed. Burned out 7 fuses on
the first incident, but no apparent damage to the expensive
equipment. That alone makes fuses superior to circuit breakers in my mind.
I DO favor them for their much faster response to
an overload condition. The first condition (initial
application of reverse polarity) was the only
one that put your system at risk. The second event
was because the diode was also shorted causing a
large fault current to flow in the replacement
wire. The contactors would have been okay to leave
in.
I appreciate any electrical Guru's thoughts on this event and what I
might still need to do to insure safety in flight. Not knowing what
caused the second event makes me a bit nervous that It might still be
lurking. Smoke in the cockpit is not good!
You're experience is not uncommon. I reversed a
set of jumper cables on a couple of cars last
winter when I was working in the dark and it
was snowing on me! In most automotive applications,
the diode array in the alternators is what
keeps the system from going negative by more
than a couple of volts. This may have figured
strongly in your experience too.
This is another example of how adding a ground
power jack (with ov and reverse polarity protection)
would have proved useful. I'm pleased that the
outcome of your experience was so benign . . . it
could have been much worse.
I'm mystified about the microphone jack. What
kind of voltage regulator does your airplane have?
If it's a built in regulator and it shifted in
regulation set point as a consequence of this
event, then it HAS been affected and is now suspect.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wiring diagram |
At 08:00 PM 9/1/2009, you wrote:
>Bob
>Is there a link to your wiring diagrams? Particularly the 2 alts 2
>battery all electric airplane. I can't locate mine. I probably put
>it where I would be sure to find it HA HA ;-)
>
>James Robinson
Good morning Jim. Haven't talked with you in quite
some time.
All of my drawings are on the website. The whole
package is at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/
. . . the drawing you're asking about is probably
this one . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z14N1.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z14N2.pdf
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
At 06:20 AM 9/2/2009, you wrote:
>
>9/2/2009
>
>Hello Bob, You wrote: "What should I do with the shield wire at that
>location?"
>
>Below is a copy of my 2/16/2005 posting from the archives addressing
>this question.
I think we're talking two different systems here. The
classic strobe systems are xenon flash tubes supplied
with high voltage (300v) to light up and triggered by still
higher voltage (10Kv) to flash. These systems come with
shielded wire in the installation kit.
The strobe that is the subject of this tread is an
LED device. We're not talking about the wires
between a hv power supply and strobe heads but the
14v ship's power wire to the device.
Unless the manufacture calls out shielded wire
(and this should NEVER happen on a 14v supply
wire) then potential victim/antagonist pairs
have been identified and shielding is not useful.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sensor wires with ignition leads |
At 07:18 PM 9/1/2009, you wrote:
>Bob, I'm building an RV7A (not much guidance from the "manufacturer"
>on this issue). Am I to conclude from your comments below that I
>might be better off separating the EGT and CHT sensor wires from the
>ignition leads.
>
>If the sensor wires are run with the ignition leads what possible
>adversities might I be facing. Might I get radio noise. Might I get
>erroneous instrument readings from the EGT and CHT guages.
No . . . CHT/EGT sensors are thermocouples which
are exceedingly low impedance systems and are not
potential victims to the noises which do exist
within and around spark plug wires.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Protecting the compass from interference |
At 03:13 PM 9/1/2009, you wrote:
Hi guys,
The compass does seem an excess item until you've left the GPS home
or the replacement batteries don't seem to be working. I've been only
30-miles out when the snow and visibility had me "temporarily"
dependent on the GPS and it quit. I knew the last GPS heading and
followed it back via that "worthless compass" until the white on
white of the airport was back in view. I'd give the Compass more
respect, as it's probably the only thing that works when all else has
dumped out on you. I'm constantly comparing my compass heading with
what's on the GPS.
Don't think anyone is 'dissing' the compass . . .
only suggesting that there are alternatives for
navigation that are equally if not more useful.
But like preventative maintenance on your
ship's battery, the batteries in your "plan-b"
back-ups are worthy of still more attention.
This was the thrust of my article some years ago
that explored the value of el-cheapo alkaline
cells.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/AA_Bat_Test.pdf
The outcome of that study suggested that
my plan-b devices could get a brand new set of
cells before leaving home base of every trip.
The cost of such cells was insignificant compared
to other costs for making the trip. But the
availability of those plan-b devices was never
in doubt. This is why to this day I prefer
the lowly alkaline to any form of rechargeable
battery whether replaceable or built in.
This goes beyond a bureaucratic/regulatory
mandate to have any particular piece of equipment
aboard. According to a particularly lucid B/R type
who attended one of my seminars a few years ago, an
electronic compass with failure resistant power paths
(like an e-bus or second battery) was an acceptable
substitute for the liquid compass. In fact
preferable if the sensor was out in the wing.
These things provided much more stable and useable data
for navigation. But HE too carried a stand-alone,
hand-held GPS in his flight bag and never
expected to be dependant upon the liquid compass
in his airplane either.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Why Brass Bolt for ground terminal? |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Since you want ground termination on both sides of the firewall, you can do approximately
the following:
Take a 2X long copper strap, fold it in the middle and insert it through a slot
in the firewall (or around the edge). Then drill a battery ground bolt hole through
both layers and the firewall too. The bolt hole is better if it is closer
to the fold, but this is a fine detail.
Teamwork: " A lot of people doing exactly what I say."
(Marketing exec., Citrix Corp.)
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=260996#260996
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
Appreciate that but the question isn't whether I should or shouldn't have
connectors. The question is only on the fate of the shielded cable at the
connector.
-----Original Message-----
From: bakerocb(at)cox.net [mailto:bakerocb(at)cox.net]
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 6:21 AM
Subject: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe
9/2/2009
Hello Bob, You wrote: "What should I do with the shield wire at that
location?"
Below is a copy of my 2/16/2005 posting from the archives addressing this
question.
'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
understand knowledge."
=============================================
2/16/2005
Hello Jay, Here is how I solved that problem.
1) I bought some additional connectors and pins of the type that plugs into
the Whelen power supply. They are available from Terminal Town and other
sources.
2) I ran a cut end of the Whelen provided cables in a continuous snake from
each wing tip light all the way to my single power supply in the fuselage
leaving a coil of excess cable in the fuselage near each wing root.
3) Then I installed the connectors on the cable cut end and plugged into the
power supply.
4) If I ever have to remove my one piece wing I will just unplug the two
cable connectors from the power supply, cut the connectors off the cable
ends, and pull the cables out of the fuselage.##
5) When I reinstall the wing I just go through the same process as when
originally installing the wing by snaking the cable ends dangling from the
wing root into the power supply, reinstalling the connectors, and plugging
back into the power supply.
Considering how seldom one pulls the wings off and how little effort and
cost is involved in cutting off and reinstalling the cable end connectors
this is the best solution for me. It also eliminates an additional cable
connection junction at the wing root.
OC
##PS: If one were a really fastidious and pecunious type one could not cut
off the connectors, but rather just extract the pins from the connectors for
wing removal, and then reinsert the pins upon wing reinstall.
End Msg: #136
============================================================
From: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe
Somewhat related question. I have the Whelen Comet system for my RV-7A, It
has shielded cable, of course, the power unit out to the wingtip strobe,
with the shield grounded at the power unit.
But, because there's a chance I won't be able to fly my project off the
field where it's now being built, I may hve to take the wings off and truck
it to anothre airport, so I want to use a terminal strip at the inboard wing
root, so that the wires can be disconnected. What should I do with the
shield wire at that location. Should I treat it like any other wire and
connect it at the terminal strip and continue it out to the wing tip? Or
should I just terminate it at the wing root?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com> |
Does anyone have the pinout/ connection diagram for a King K76 transponder?
Thanks!
Jay
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com> |
| Subject: | Alternator connections |
Hi there,
I am trying to connect a Nippon Denso alternator into a Z scheme and am
confused as to the connections. There are 4 small pins in a plastic housing
and it is these whose function/ connection I cannot deduce. To me there
should be only 1 or 2 pins for positive and negative of the field, or just
positive. The photo (although blurred) shows the pin arrangement of two
pairs of pins separated by a plastic shield. Can anyone cast any light on
how to connect these?
Thanks
Jay
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
Mine is the Xenon type.. The manufacturer instructions do not address the
question.http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/news_c
ut/archive/the_unemployed_series/
-----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
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 7:40 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe
-->
At 06:20 AM 9/2/2009, you wrote:
>
>9/2/2009
>
>Hello Bob, You wrote: "What should I do with the shield wire at that
>location?"
>
>Below is a copy of my 2/16/2005 posting from the archives addressing
>this question.
I think we're talking two different systems here. The
classic strobe systems are xenon flash tubes supplied
with high voltage (300v) to light up and triggered by still
higher voltage (10Kv) to flash. These systems come with
shielded wire in the installation kit.
The strobe that is the subject of this tread is an
LED device. We're not talking about the wires
between a hv power supply and strobe heads but the
14v ship's power wire to the device.
Unless the manufacture calls out shielded wire
(and this should NEVER happen on a 14v supply
wire) then potential victim/antagonist pairs
have been identified and shielding is not useful.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Johnson, Phillip (EXP)" <phillip.johnson(at)lmco.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Protecting the compass from interference |
Interesting comment about the compass being mandatory in the USA. In
the Great White North and according to our inspection agency MDRA it is
permissible to have an electronic compass providing it is backed up by a
battery see item 2 under Cabin/cockpit, page 4 of 11 in
http://www.md-ra.com/pdfs/what_inspectors_ck.PDF. Notice it says
battery backup. Our regulations say :Magnetic compass and page 307 of
the Aeronautical Information Manual
http://www.tc.gc.ca/publications/en/tp14371/pdf/hr/tp14371e.pdf says:
Power-driven Aircraft - day VFR
605.14
No person shall conduct a takeoff in a power-driven aircraft for the
purpose of day VFR flight unless it is equipped with
(a) where the aircraft is operated in uncontrolled
airspace, an altimeter;
(b) where the aircraft is operated in controlled
airspace, a sensitive altimeter adjustable for barometric pressure;
(c) an airspeed indicator;
(d) a magnetic compass or a magnetic direction indicator
that operates independently of the aircraft electrical generating
system;
(e) a tachometer for each engine and
..........................................................
So I guess that since I have dual AHRS and it is also backed up by a
secondary battery I don't need a whisky compass. (My friend has one in
his RV and it swings 90 degrees when the landing lights go on but it is
legal.)
It may be prudent to search the US regulations and confirm the situation
down there as most of our regulations are based on the US regulations
with a few exceptions. Maybe this is one of those exceptions.
Phillip Johnson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Stone <rv8iator(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
Bob...
You can cut the shielded cable and use a two pin connector of your choosing (molex
style, amp mate n loc). It should be a polarized connector to prevent connection
reversal. The short distance that is unshielded at the connector will
have no negatve impact on performance nor will it create noise problems for other
devices.
The total unshielded length created by the connector is a fraction of the total
system length.
Chris Stone
RV-8
Newberg, OR
-----Original Message-----
>From: Bob Collins <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net>
>Sent: Sep 2, 2009 9:21 AM
>To: bakerocb(at)cox.net, aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe
>
>
>Appreciate that but the question isn't whether I should or shouldn't have
>connectors. The question is only on the fate of the shielded cable at the
>connector.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: bakerocb(at)cox.net [mailto:bakerocb(at)cox.net]
>Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 6:21 AM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net
>Subject: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe
>
>9/2/2009
>
>Hello Bob, You wrote: "What should I do with the shield wire at that
>location?"
>
>Below is a copy of my 2/16/2005 posting from the archives addressing this
>question.
>
>'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
>understand knowledge."
>
>=============================================
>
>2/16/2005
>
>Hello Jay, Here is how I solved that problem.
>
>1) I bought some additional connectors and pins of the type that plugs into
>the Whelen power supply. They are available from Terminal Town and other
>sources.
>
>2) I ran a cut end of the Whelen provided cables in a continuous snake from
>each wing tip light all the way to my single power supply in the fuselage
>leaving a coil of excess cable in the fuselage near each wing root.
>
>3) Then I installed the connectors on the cable cut end and plugged into the
>power supply.
>
>4) If I ever have to remove my one piece wing I will just unplug the two
>cable connectors from the power supply, cut the connectors off the cable
>ends, and pull the cables out of the fuselage.##
>
>5) When I reinstall the wing I just go through the same process as when
>originally installing the wing by snaking the cable ends dangling from the
>wing root into the power supply, reinstalling the connectors, and plugging
>back into the power supply.
>
>Considering how seldom one pulls the wings off and how little effort and
>cost is involved in cutting off and reinstalling the cable end connectors
>this is the best solution for me. It also eliminates an additional cable
>connection junction at the wing root.
>
>OC
>
>##PS: If one were a really fastidious and pecunious type one could not cut
>off the connectors, but rather just extract the pins from the connectors for
>wing removal, and then reinsert the pins upon wing reinstall.
>
>
>End Msg: #136
>
>
>============================================================
>
>From: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net>
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe
>
>Somewhat related question. I have the Whelen Comet system for my RV-7A, It
>has shielded cable, of course, the power unit out to the wingtip strobe,
>with the shield grounded at the power unit.
>But, because there's a chance I won't be able to fly my project off the
>field where it's now being built, I may hve to take the wings off and truck
>it to anothre airport, so I want to use a terminal strip at the inboard wing
>root, so that the wires can be disconnected. What should I do with the
>shield wire at that location. Should I treat it like any other wire and
>connect it at the terminal strip and continue it out to the wing tip? Or
>should I just terminate it at the wing root?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | b e <bcrnfnp(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: King K76 pinout |
Check the aeroelectric website.- He has several pinouts there.- Bomar.b
iz used to be GREAT but they don't have their stuff up anymore.- Heard Ce
ssna, etc said it was copyright infringement or something like that.- I h
ave access to one in a round about way and could get it for you if you can'
t find what you need.- =0A=0ABarry Chapman=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________
________________=0AFrom: Jay Hyde <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>=0ATo: aeroelectric
-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Wednesday, September 2, 2009 8:30:51 AM=0ASubje
ct: AeroElectric-List: King K76 pinout=0A=0A=0ADoes anyone have the pinout/
connection diagram for a King K76 transponder?=0A-=0AThanks!=0AJay=0A-
=====================
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RE: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
If you choose to insert a connector at the wing joint, it's fine to route
any shielding through that connector. Dedicate one pin in the connector
for each shield that goes through the connector. If there's a 'bleeder'
wire with foil shield, just route the bleeder through the connector. If
the shield is braid, separate the braid from the center, bundle/trim the
braid as necessary to install it in the connector pin, and install the pin
in the connector body.
Unlike coax (RG-58), it's not important for the shielding to be
uninterrupted. A short length where the shield doesn't surround the
'signal' wire(s) won't have any impact on noise ingress or egress. True
coax feedline depends on maintaining controlled impedance along the
transmission line in order to avoid leakage, reflection, and detuning.
Shielded wire doesn't have the same requirements, as it isn't designed to
offer a controlled impedance environment in the first place.
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
> Appreciate that but the question isn't whether I should or shouldn't have
> connectors. The question is only on the fate of the shielded cable at the
> connector.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bakerocb(at)cox.net [mailto:bakerocb(at)cox.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 6:21 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net
> Subject: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe
>
> 9/2/2009
>
> Hello Bob, You wrote: "What should I do with the shield wire at that
> location?"
>
> Below is a copy of my 2/16/2005 posting from the archives addressing this
> question.
>
> 'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
> understand knowledge."
>
> =============================================
>
> 2/16/2005
>
> Hello Jay, Here is how I solved that problem.
>
> 1) I bought some additional connectors and pins of the type that plugs
> into
> the Whelen power supply. They are available from Terminal Town and other
> sources.
>
> 2) I ran a cut end of the Whelen provided cables in a continuous snake
> from
> each wing tip light all the way to my single power supply in the fuselage
> leaving a coil of excess cable in the fuselage near each wing root.
>
> 3) Then I installed the connectors on the cable cut end and plugged into
> the
> power supply.
>
> 4) If I ever have to remove my one piece wing I will just unplug the two
> cable connectors from the power supply, cut the connectors off the cable
> ends, and pull the cables out of the fuselage.##
>
> 5) When I reinstall the wing I just go through the same process as when
> originally installing the wing by snaking the cable ends dangling from the
> wing root into the power supply, reinstalling the connectors, and plugging
> back into the power supply.
>
> Considering how seldom one pulls the wings off and how little effort and
> cost is involved in cutting off and reinstalling the cable end connectors
> this is the best solution for me. It also eliminates an additional cable
> connection junction at the wing root.
>
> OC
>
> ##PS: If one were a really fastidious and pecunious type one could not cut
> off the connectors, but rather just extract the pins from the connectors
> for
> wing removal, and then reinsert the pins upon wing reinstall.
>
>
> End Msg: #136
>
>
> ============================================================
>
> From: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe
>
> Somewhat related question. I have the Whelen Comet system for my RV-7A, It
> has shielded cable, of course, the power unit out to the wingtip strobe,
> with the shield grounded at the power unit.
> But, because there's a chance I won't be able to fly my project off the
> field where it's now being built, I may hve to take the wings off and
> truck
> it to anothre airport, so I want to use a terminal strip at the inboard
> wing
> root, so that the wires can be disconnected. What should I do with the
> shield wire at that location. Should I treat it like any other wire and
> connect it at the terminal strip and continue it out to the wing tip? Or
> should I just terminate it at the wing root?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
At 07:47 AM 9/1/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>Somewhat related question. I have the Whelen Comet system for my RV-7A, It
>has shielded cable, of course, the power unit out to the wingtip strobe,
>with the shield grounded at the power unit.
>
>But, because there's a chance I won't be able to fly my project off the
>field where it's now being built, I may hve to take the wings off and truck
>it to anothre airport, so I want to use a terminal strip at the inboard wing
>root, so that the wires can be disconnected. What should I do with the
>shield wire at that location. Should I treat it like any other wire and
>connect it at the terminal strip and continue it out to the wing tip? Or
>should I just terminate it at the wing root?
You can use the terminal strip or any of several
practical connectors. Treat the shield ground like
a 4th wire in the bundle and favor it with its
own splice at the terminal strip or in the
connector.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: King K76 pinout |
At 08:30 AM 9/2/2009, you wrote:
>Does anyone have the pinout/ connection diagram for a King K76 transponder?
>
>Thanks!
>Jay
>
See http://www.aeroelectric.com/Installation_Data/
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator connections |
At 08:30 AM 9/2/2009, you wrote:
>Hi there,
>
>I am trying to connect a Nippon Denso alternator into a Z scheme and
>am confused as to the connections. There are 4 small pins in a
>plastic housing and it is these whose function/ connection I cannot
>deduce. To me there should be only 1 or 2 pins for positive and
>negative of the field, or just positive. The photo (although
>blurred) shows the pin arrangement of two pairs of pins separated by
>a plastic shield. Can anyone cast any light on how to connect these?
>
>Thanks
>
>Jay
What's the part number or better yet, the Lester number
of your particular alternator. You can get a pinout
at:
http://www.quality-built.com/catalog.htm
Enter make, model of car that the alternator is used
on or . . .
go to the "Cross Reference" tab of the above
link and enter the OEM or Lester number.
Step though the various photo views of the
particular alternator and I think you'll find
that one of the photos is a pinout diagram.
Having said that, you probably wont find a
connection to your alternator's field terminals.
The vast majority of alternators in the automotive
wild have built in regulators.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Protecting the compass from interference |
I see Aircraft Spruce sells a magnetic compass shield specifically for
the PAI-700 that is 80% nickel. Supposedly this is used to absorb the
offending magnetism.
Glenn
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Ernest Christley
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 10:37 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Protecting the compass from interference
longg(at)pjm.com wrote:
>
> Thanks Bob,
>
> Based on your last comment I've thought seriously of just removing it.
I
> have 2 Dynon AHRS remotes in the wings and 2 Garmin GPS units (panel)
> and 1 handheld unit on board. If all of that goes to hell, I'll just
> land in a field and ask directions.
>
Regardless of that, you will need to please the bureaucrats. The regs
say you need a compass. Come hell or high-water, you don't have an
airplane until you have a compass.
I got a cheap, light plastic thingy from Advance Auto. A 1" hole in the
dash, and I have it front and center, but low enough that it can be
safely ignored (ie, it doesn't interfere with the all important view of
the runway 8*).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
// You can use the terminal strip or any of several
practical connectors. Treat the shield ground like
a 4th wire in the bundle and favor it with its
own splice at the terminal strip or in the
connector.
Will do. Many thanks!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CardinalNSB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Compass interference protection |
Is there any better (generally available) material to wrap around the
magnetic compass to shield it from interference, that's better than MuMetal?
Thanks Skip
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
| Subject: | Protecting the compass from interference |
But how does it let the earths magnetic field lines into the compass?
Bruce
www.Glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
longg(at)pjm.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 11:16 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Protecting the compass from interference
I see Aircraft Spruce sells a magnetic compass shield specifically for
the PAI-700 that is 80% nickel. Supposedly this is used to absorb the
offending magnetism.
Glenn
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Ernest Christley
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 10:37 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Protecting the compass from interference
longg(at)pjm.com wrote:
>
> Thanks Bob,
>
> Based on your last comment I've thought seriously of just removing it.
I
> have 2 Dynon AHRS remotes in the wings and 2 Garmin GPS units (panel)
> and 1 handheld unit on board. If all of that goes to hell, I'll just
> land in a field and ask directions.
>
Regardless of that, you will need to please the bureaucrats. The regs
say you need a compass. Come hell or high-water, you don't have an
airplane until you have a compass.
I got a cheap, light plastic thingy from Advance Auto. A 1" hole in the
dash, and I have it front and center, but low enough that it can be
safely ignored (ie, it doesn't interfere with the all important view of
the runway 8*).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
At 07:40 AM 9/2/2009, you wrote:
>
>
> I think we're talking two different systems here. . .
Oops . . . I see there were two threads of discussion
on similar topics. Got my mouse cord tangled around
my SEND button. The response was accurate with
respect to the simple-ideas, just not well tied
to the thread . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Protecting the compass from interference |
At 10:45 AM 9/2/2009, you wrote:
>
>But how does it let the earths magnetic field lines into the compass?
EXACTLY! The preferred technique for dealing with
on-board, magnetic interference issues is to first
craft your system to minimize such risks. This
includes keeping alternator b-leads out of the cockpit
and keeping other fat-wires as low as practical and/or
forward of the firewall.
Now, go swing your compass and TEST AT ALL 4 cardinal
orientations for the effects of turning things ON and
OFF. If any combination of switch operations causes more than
a couple degrees of variation, you have some choices for
either KNOWING what those variations are and accommodating
them on your compass calibration card -OR- take steps
to reduce the effects to acceptable levels. You do this
by (1) increasing the distance between compass and the
offending field generator or as a last resort, (2)adding
some form of shielding between the compass and the
interfering field source. I mean last resort.
I'm aware of NO instance in a TC aircraft where the
problem was fixed by added shielding.
In fact, for black boxes tested to DO160 there may
have been an investigation into Magnetic Effects
of any black box upon the panel mounted liquid
compass. These effects must be very small or the
device is not qualified for installation on the
aircraft. What we cannot control by DO160 pre-tests
are the effects of wire routing and those of
devices with LARGE magnetic fields like starters,
alternators, PM motors, etc. etc.
Even in the instance where a B&C standby alternator
mounted on the engine accessory case upset a cowl
mounted compass, we MOVED the compass. Adding weight
and $cost$ of ownership by shielding is a repugnant
solution that we'll go to some effort to avoid.
Wrapping the compass itself in a shield will indeed
make it immune to the effects of on-board interference
while making it useless as an aid to navigation.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | rigging a thermocouple on a certified plane |
My son owns a Mooney. He can not lean it past about 50-100 degrees rich of
peak with out it starting to miss. He is burning about 12 Gal/Hr at cruise
when I think he should be able to get to about 10. He could benefit from
some type of injector balancing like from GAMI. Problem is he doesn't have
the necessary EGT probes to get the information for each cylinder and
installing a certified rig to do this would be too expensive.
My thought is that he could clamp probes to the outside of the exhaust
manifold tubes for each cylinder and run them to a reader head in the
cockpit to get "close enough" information for this application. I have
thermocouple wire and could make the probes. Where could he come upon an
inexpensive reader head for thermocouples.
What is the community take on this? Would it work? Is it legal if it is not
permanently attached to the plane?
Name withheld to protect the currently innocent! :>)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | New Z-figure (Corvair) |
I've just uploaded a new Z-Figure intended to address the
unique requirements of automotive conversions that use the
Kettering points/coil/distributor ignition systems.
In this case, the drawing is tailored to the design philosophy
of Wm. Wynn at Flycorvair.com with additional attention
to minimizing single points of failure for both systems
-AND- observance of contemporary philosophies for handling
always hot wires off the battery bus.
This drawing also introduces a new product from the 'Connection.
We've got about a dozen new products in the pipe but I needed
a good training program for my kids who are getting geared up
to take over the business side of the AeroElectric Connection.
The AEC9024
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | New Z-figure (Corvair) |
I've just uploaded a new Z-Figure intended to address the
unique requirements of automotive conversions that use the
Kettering points/coil/distributor ignition systems.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z09A.pdf
In this case, the drawing is tailored to the design philosophy
of Wm. Wynn at Flycorvair.com with additional attention
to minimizing single points of failure for both systems
-AND- observance of contemporary philosophies for handling
always hot wires off the battery bus.
This drawing also introduces a new product from the 'Connection.
We've got about a dozen new products in the pipe but I needed
a good training program for my kids who are getting geared up
to take over the business side of the AeroElectric Connection.
The AEC9024
. . . OOPS . . . got tangled around that SEND button again . . .
The AEC9024 series product offers 4 functions in a single device
that uses a packaging scheme much like the crowbar OV modules.
In this case, the device incorporates a microprocessor and
10 other components that can be used to effect . . .
Contactor Power Management (make el-cheeso battery contactors
operate luke-warm).
Alternator OV disconnect relay driver for PM alternators
LV Warning module for LED or Incandescant lamps.
Aux Battery Management Module.
Figure Z-9 illustrates three of the four functions for
the AEC9024
The 9024 will be shipped with instructions for wiring
to accomplish any of these functions. You program the
device to the intended task by clipping jumpers. This
critter is an attractive training product and equally
attractive merchandising opportunity. One product
of only 11 components helps keep inventory costs low.
The critter will sell for under $30.
Software is under development and the board artwork will
go to the board shop next week. My chamber is up an
running so testing won't take long.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Leffler" <rv(at)thelefflers.com> |
| Subject: | Protecting the compass from interference |
Sort of...... It's really a 5" x 12" strip of mu metal that you'll have to
fabricate into the appropriate form to shield the PAI-700.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
longg(at)pjm.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 11:16 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Protecting the compass from interference
I see Aircraft Spruce sells a magnetic compass shield specifically for
the PAI-700 that is 80% nickel. Supposedly this is used to absorb the
offending magnetism.
Glenn
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Ernest Christley
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 10:37 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Protecting the compass from interference
longg(at)pjm.com wrote:
>
> Thanks Bob,
>
> Based on your last comment I've thought seriously of just removing it.
I
> have 2 Dynon AHRS remotes in the wings and 2 Garmin GPS units (panel)
> and 1 handheld unit on board. If all of that goes to hell, I'll just
> land in a field and ask directions.
>
Regardless of that, you will need to please the bureaucrats. The regs
say you need a compass. Come hell or high-water, you don't have an
airplane until you have a compass.
I got a cheap, light plastic thingy from Advance Auto. A 1" hole in the
dash, and I have it front and center, but low enough that it can be
safely ignored (ie, it doesn't interfere with the all important view of
the runway 8*).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "SteinAir, Inc." <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | rigging a thermocouple on a certified plane |
Hi Bill,
My take would be that you're flying a Mooney - it's not an Ercoupe (meaning
it's not a super cheap airplane to begin with). It cost about $1600 to get
one of the best systems out there (Electronics International), or you can go
cheaper and get a JPI for about $1300. If you start down the GAMI path it's
not going to be cheap anyway...I'd spend the bucks and get a good EGT/CHT
monitor. If you want to keep the engine happy and fly it right, you should
have one anyway....just to see what the engine is doing. Why go through all
the work of balancing the cylinders with some cobbled together system, only
to remove it later?? Makes little sense to me, but that's just my opinion.
My 2 cents as usual.
Cheers,
Stein
_________________________________________
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you receive
this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any
computer.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bill
>Bradburry
>Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 11:11 AM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: rigging a thermocouple on a certified plane
>
>
>
>
> My son owns a Mooney. He can not lean it past about 50-100
>degrees rich of
>peak with out it starting to miss. He is burning about 12 Gal/Hr at cruise
>when I think he should be able to get to about 10. He could benefit from
>some type of injector balancing like from GAMI. Problem is he doesn't have
>the necessary EGT probes to get the information for each cylinder and
>installing a certified rig to do this would be too expensive.
>My thought is that he could clamp probes to the outside of the exhaust
>manifold tubes for each cylinder and run them to a reader head in the
>cockpit to get "close enough" information for this application. I have
>thermocouple wire and could make the probes. Where could he come upon an
>inexpensive reader head for thermocouples.
>What is the community take on this? Would it work? Is it legal if
>it is not
>permanently attached to the plane?
>
>Name withheld to protect the currently innocent! :>)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: rigging a thermocouple on a certified plane |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Here's a dedicated K-type meter:
http://www.virtualvillage.com/digital-thermometer-for-k-type-thermocouples/sku003920-016
If the above wraps, try this:
http://tinyurl.com/kloqam
Matt-
>
>
> My son owns a Mooney. He can not lean it past about 50-100 degrees rich
> of
> peak with out it starting to miss. He is burning about 12 Gal/Hr at
> cruise
> when I think he should be able to get to about 10. He could benefit from
> some type of injector balancing like from GAMI. Problem is he doesn't
> have
> the necessary EGT probes to get the information for each cylinder and
> installing a certified rig to do this would be too expensive.
> My thought is that he could clamp probes to the outside of the exhaust
> manifold tubes for each cylinder and run them to a reader head in the
> cockpit to get "close enough" information for this application. I have
> thermocouple wire and could make the probes. Where could he come upon an
> inexpensive reader head for thermocouples.
> What is the community take on this? Would it work? Is it legal if it is
> not
> permanently attached to the plane?
>
> Name withheld to protect the currently innocent! :>)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: rigging a thermocouple on a certified plane |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
It sounds like you might have a malfunction in either the ignition or fuel
delivery systems on the engine. Maybe an air leak (around an intake tube
where it goes into the sump)? Does the fuel flow match what's published
in the operating manual for the airplane?
I can't speak to the legality of temporarily installing additional
instrumentation. My guess is that if it were battery powered or driven by
the cigar lighter there wouldn't be a problem. Likely nobody wouldn't
find out unless the airplane were involved in an accident while the system
were in the airplane.
Functionally, the temperature measured would be slightly more dependent on
the CHT than would a properly installed EGT probe, as the exhaust stacks
are cooled by their attachment to the cylinders. Regardless, I think you
might get useful data. Depending on how little wiring and soldering you
want to do, it could be fairly clunky to use, but as a diagnostic tool,
temporarily installed, it should be effective enough.
Another thought is that the probes are the 'cheap' part of the certified
system, and the display is the expensive part. Install the probes, and
then use a temporary instrument to read the data from them..
To read the data, I know it's fairly common for the cheap Harbor Freight
multimeters to include an input and display mode for a thermocouple probe.
I can't recall the wire type that mine is designed for, but I'd think it
would be perfectly adequate. Keep in mind, the absolute accuracy isn't
all that important. You need decent repeatability only. The only thing
you really need to find is the order in which each cylinder reaches peak
EGT. The first to peak is the leanest cylinder, and the last to peak is
the richest.
Here's a mutlimeter from Harbor Freight that includes input for a
temperature probe.
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=37772
You could choose to install some sort of switching system (Aircraft Spruce
sells a rotary switch), or you could just route all of the probe leads
into the cockpit and plug each one into the meter in turn and record the
necessary data.
If you are really ambitious, and your time isn't worth that much, Analog
Devices makes an IC designed to read thermocouples. You could use these
IC's in a home grown meter..
BTW, how do the spark plugs look?
Matt-
>
>
> My son owns a Mooney. He can not lean it past about 50-100 degrees rich
> of
> peak with out it starting to miss. He is burning about 12 Gal/Hr at
> cruise
> when I think he should be able to get to about 10. He could benefit from
> some type of injector balancing like from GAMI. Problem is he doesn't
> have
> the necessary EGT probes to get the information for each cylinder and
> installing a certified rig to do this would be too expensive.
> My thought is that he could clamp probes to the outside of the exhaust
> manifold tubes for each cylinder and run them to a reader head in the
> cockpit to get "close enough" information for this application. I have
> thermocouple wire and could make the probes. Where could he come upon an
> inexpensive reader head for thermocouples.
> What is the community take on this? Would it work? Is it legal if it is
> not
> permanently attached to the plane?
>
> Name withheld to protect the currently innocent! :>)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: rigging a thermocouple on a certified plane |
At 11:10 AM 9/2/2009, you wrote:
>
>
> My son owns a Mooney. He can not lean it past about 50-100 degrees rich of
>peak with out it starting to miss. He is burning about 12 Gal/Hr at cruise
>when I think he should be able to get to about 10. He could benefit from
>some type of injector balancing like from GAMI. Problem is he doesn't have
>the necessary EGT probes to get the information for each cylinder and
>installing a certified rig to do this would be too expensive.
>My thought is that he could clamp probes to the outside of the exhaust
>manifold tubes for each cylinder and run them to a reader head in the
>cockpit to get "close enough" information for this application. I have
>thermocouple wire and could make the probes. Where could he come upon an
>inexpensive reader head for thermocouples.
One of my favorite sources of converting various phenomena
into recorded or displayed data is Weeder Technologies.
http://www.weedtech.com/
They offer a 4-channel thermocouple signal conditioner
that you can read on the USB port of a laptop. Check out
the WTTCI thermocouple module for $109. They even offer
software at no charge that will let you display, record,
and/or graph the data.
>What is the community take on this? Would it work? Is it legal if it is not
>permanently attached to the plane?
It's not possible to achieve necessary precision
for balancing individual cylinder performance
without extending a REAL EGT probe into the
gas stream for the cylinder of interest. Now,
this only requires one small hole through which
you can install the standard type K EGT probe.
This is largely between you and your AI at the
next annual . . . how's the "approved" way to
plug 3 holes that you're not using any more.
Do you have a single probe EGT installed now?
I would think you could install 3 additional
EGT probes for the purpose of switching them
to a single instrument. The fact that you
used the extra probes for some investigative
activity in the past . . . or have even abandoned
the switch in favor of the single display
but left three probes in place to "plug the
holes" shouldn't be a hard sell either.
In any case, the probes need to get into the
approximate center of gas flow in the pipe.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New Z-figure (Corvair) |
> I've just uploaded a new Z-Figure intended to address the
> unique requirements of automotive conversions that use the
> Kettering points/coil/distributor ignition systems.
>
> In this case, the drawing is tailored to the design philosophy
> of Wm. Wynn at Flycorvair.com with additional attention
> to minimizing single points of failure for both systems
> -AND- observance of contemporary philosophies for handling
> always hot wires off the battery bus.
>
> This drawing also introduces a new product from the 'Connection.
> We've got about a dozen new products in the pipe but I needed
> a good training program for my kids who are getting geared up
> to take over the business side of the AeroElectric Connection.
>
Bob,
Is there a reason why you are using a single ignition switch, with a single
point of failure, for the dual ignition?
Roger
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | How to convert Z12 to Z14 |
Bob,
I have a Z12 system and want to convert to a Z14. Can I use my B&C SB-1
Alternator Controller instead of springing for a new LR-3 for my SB 20 amp
B&C? If so, what do I do with the hall effect sensor and leads 1 and 2 of
the controller? (I want the dual battery and bus isolation advantage
despite the weight increas and complexity.)
Don
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David LLoyd" <skywagon(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: ELT panel remote test |
Does anyone have the pinout/ connection or circuit diagrams for the
varous 121.5 Mh ELT's, specifically dealing with the mini panel mounted
ELT test units mounted on the main panel and usually connected via
telephone extention type cable ?
You would think the various ELT manuf. would standardize on one ELT test
panel design so it is compatible with more than one manuf.
I am trying to not remove and throw away a mounted ELT function test
unit just because I am mounting another ELT brand that uses a panel
mechanically similar and using the same old telephone cable. I suspect
a simple electronics change in the test unit would make it compatible
with the new unit.......
Thanks, David
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David M <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: rigging a thermocouple on a certified plane |
Aircraft Spruce and Specialty. They even have the probes already made
:) and are quite reasonable in prices.
David M.
Bill Bradburry wrote:
>
> My son owns a Mooney. He can not lean it past about 50-100 degrees rich of
> peak with out it starting to miss. He is burning about 12 Gal/Hr at cruise
> when I think he should be able to get to about 10. He could benefit from
> some type of injector balancing like from GAMI. Problem is he doesn't have
> the necessary EGT probes to get the information for each cylinder and
> installing a certified rig to do this would be too expensive.
> My thought is that he could clamp probes to the outside of the exhaust
> manifold tubes for each cylinder and run them to a reader head in the
> cockpit to get "close enough" information for this application. I have
> thermocouple wire and could make the probes. Where could he come upon an
> inexpensive reader head for thermocouples.
> What is the community take on this? Would it work? Is it legal if it is not
> permanently attached to the plane?
>
> Name withheld to protect the currently innocent! :>)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David M <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: rigging a thermocouple on a certified plane |
We're using the Analog Devices thermocouple IC's and it's not really all
that hard if you use their engineering advice. Very inexpensive, too.
You can bring the outputs of their IC's (AD 494 and AD 495) to feed many
types of readers. We bring the 0-5v into a Labjack USB input into a
laptop for logging and trending. The Labjack U12 is the older model but
that's what we use. It's around $100. There are even cheapers ways to
do the A/D but they take a *lot* more time and engineering.
David M.
Matt Prather wrote:
>
> It sounds like you might have a malfunction in either the ignition or fuel
> delivery systems on the engine. Maybe an air leak (around an intake tube
> where it goes into the sump)? Does the fuel flow match what's published
> in the operating manual for the airplane?
>
> I can't speak to the legality of temporarily installing additional
> instrumentation. My guess is that if it were battery powered or driven by
> the cigar lighter there wouldn't be a problem. Likely nobody wouldn't
> find out unless the airplane were involved in an accident while the system
> were in the airplane.
>
> Functionally, the temperature measured would be slightly more dependent on
> the CHT than would a properly installed EGT probe, as the exhaust stacks
> are cooled by their attachment to the cylinders. Regardless, I think you
> might get useful data. Depending on how little wiring and soldering you
> want to do, it could be fairly clunky to use, but as a diagnostic tool,
> temporarily installed, it should be effective enough.
>
> Another thought is that the probes are the 'cheap' part of the certified
> system, and the display is the expensive part. Install the probes, and
> then use a temporary instrument to read the data from them..
>
> To read the data, I know it's fairly common for the cheap Harbor Freight
> multimeters to include an input and display mode for a thermocouple probe.
> I can't recall the wire type that mine is designed for, but I'd think it
> would be perfectly adequate. Keep in mind, the absolute accuracy isn't
> all that important. You need decent repeatability only. The only thing
> you really need to find is the order in which each cylinder reaches peak
> EGT. The first to peak is the leanest cylinder, and the last to peak is
> the richest.
>
> Here's a mutlimeter from Harbor Freight that includes input for a
> temperature probe.
>
> http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=37772
>
> You could choose to install some sort of switching system (Aircraft Spruce
> sells a rotary switch), or you could just route all of the probe leads
> into the cockpit and plug each one into the meter in turn and record the
> necessary data.
>
> If you are really ambitious, and your time isn't worth that much, Analog
> Devices makes an IC designed to read thermocouples. You could use these
> IC's in a home grown meter..
>
> BTW, how do the spark plugs look?
>
>
> Matt-
>
>>
>>
>> My son owns a Mooney. He can not lean it past about 50-100 degrees rich
>> of
>> peak with out it starting to miss. He is burning about 12 Gal/Hr at
>> cruise
>> when I think he should be able to get to about 10. He could benefit from
>> some type of injector balancing like from GAMI. Problem is he doesn't
>> have
>> the necessary EGT probes to get the information for each cylinder and
>> installing a certified rig to do this would be too expensive.
>> My thought is that he could clamp probes to the outside of the exhaust
>> manifold tubes for each cylinder and run them to a reader head in the
>> cockpit to get "close enough" information for this application. I have
>> thermocouple wire and could make the probes. Where could he come upon an
>> inexpensive reader head for thermocouples.
>> What is the community take on this? Would it work? Is it legal if it is
>> not
>> permanently attached to the plane?
>>
>> Name withheld to protect the currently innocent! :>)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: rigging a thermocouple on a certified plane |
At 12:07 PM 9/2/2009, you wrote:
>
>Here's a dedicated K-type meter:
>
>http://www.virtualvillage.com/digital-thermometer-for-k-type-thermocouples/sku003920-016
>
>If the above wraps, try this:
>
>http://tinyurl.com/kloqam
Yeah, that works too. You can rig a 2-pole, 4-position
rotary switch to "scan" the 4 probes for comparison.
See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/excerpt.pdf
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: How to convert Z12 to Z14 |
At 02:07 PM 9/2/2009, you wrote:
>Bob,
>I have a Z12 system and want to convert to a Z14. Can I use my B&C
>SB-1 Alternator Controller instead of springing for a new LR-3 for
>my SB 20 amp B&C?
Yes, just re-adjust it for 14.4 instead of 13.5
>If so, what do I do with the hall effect sensor and leads 1 and 2 of
>the controller?
If they're installed and hooked up, leave them as
is. The SB-1 doesn't have LV warning so you'll want
to add that to the aux system as a separate accessory.
> (I want the dual battery and bus isolation advantage despite the
> weight increas and complexity.)
Have you had an experience that prompts you to make
this change? Recall that hundreds and perhaps thousands
of expensive GA aircraft are boring holes in lots of
clouds with Z12 installed . . . and even if Z12 were
NOT installed, they'd still be poking holes.
Are you planning on having independent, IFR capable
instrumentation installed on both pilot locations? That
was the original idea behind Z-14.
If not, what single failure of installed equipment
prompts you to believe that Z14 is more likely to
get you on the ground than Z12?
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New Z-figure (Corvair) |
>
>Bob,
>
>Is there a reason why you are using a single ignition switch, with a
>single point of failure, for the dual ignition?
>
>Roger
Yup, that's a William Wynn design philosophy described
in Chapter 5 of his installation documentation:
http://tinyurl.com/nd42op
I would have opted for a pair of independent switches
but his rationale for the single switch is well
articulated. I did expand to 4-poles so that I could
protect each power lead on it's own fuse. Getting into
a one versus two switch argument wasn't going to be
very productive.
Of course, any builder could split to a pair of
switches at their own choosing. This Z-figure offers
an "AeroElectric Connection" style power distribution
diagram that assists his builders in crafting an installation
consistent with his well thought out design goals.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: rigging a thermocouple on a certified plane |
On 2 Sep 2009, at 12:10, Bill Bradburry wrote:
> >
>
> My son owns a Mooney. He can not lean it past about 50-100 degrees
> rich of
> peak with out it starting to miss. He is burning about 12 Gal/Hr at
> cruise
> when I think he should be able to get to about 10. He could benefit
> from
> some type of injector balancing like from GAMI. Problem is he
> doesn't have
> the necessary EGT probes to get the information for each cylinder and
> installing a certified rig to do this would be too expensive.
> My thought is that he could clamp probes to the outside of the exhaust
> manifold tubes for each cylinder and run them to a reader head in the
> cockpit to get "close enough" information for this application. I
> have
> thermocouple wire and could make the probes. Where could he come
> upon an
> inexpensive reader head for thermocouples.
> What is the community take on this? Would it work? Is it legal if
> it is not
> permanently attached to the plane?
I predict that the response time of thermocouples clamped to the
outside of the exhaust pipes would be so slow as to make them
essentially useless. I won't comment on legality.
It sounds like you are spending a lot more on fuel than would be
needed if the aircraft was running correctly. Given the cost of this
extra fuel, and the cost of top overhauls if you cook a cylinder(s)
due to poor EGT data, I recommend you spend the bucks to install an
approved, reasonable quality four cylinder EGT and CHT system. It
would likely prove to be a false economy to go too cheap here.
Good luck.
--
Kevin Horton
RV-8 (Flight Test Phase)
Ottawa, Canada
http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
| Subject: | Re: rigging a thermocouple on a certified plane |
There is something definitely wrong with the engine, assuming it is
Lycoming 200hp fuel injected. Many 200hp Mooneys will run fine LOP with
stock injectors. I'd be looking at plugs, mags and injectors for
starters. Also, a wobble check on the exhaust valves, and a leak check
on the intake tubes.
If it is the 180hp carbureted engine, check for intake leaks, and try
some carb heat to help.
SteinAir, Inc. wrote:
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> My take would be that you're flying a Mooney - it's not an Ercoupe (meaning
> it's not a super cheap airplane to begin with). It cost about $1600 to get
> one of the best systems out there (Electronics International), or you can go
> cheaper and get a JPI for about $1300. If you start down the GAMI path it's
> not going to be cheap anyway...I'd spend the bucks and get a good EGT/CHT
> monitor. If you want to keep the engine happy and fly it right, you should
> have one anyway....just to see what the engine is doing. Why go through all
> the work of balancing the cylinders with some cobbled together system, only
> to remove it later?? Makes little sense to me, but that's just my opinion.
>
> My 2 cents as usual.
>
> Cheers,
> Stein
>
> _________________________________________
> The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
> taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
> entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you receive
> this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any
> computer.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bill
>> Bradburry
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 11:11 AM
>> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: AeroElectric-List: rigging a thermocouple on a certified plane
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> My son owns a Mooney. He can not lean it past about 50-100
>> degrees rich of
>> peak with out it starting to miss. He is burning about 12 Gal/Hr at cruise
>> when I think he should be able to get to about 10. He could benefit from
>> some type of injector balancing like from GAMI. Problem is he doesn't have
>> the necessary EGT probes to get the information for each cylinder and
>> installing a certified rig to do this would be too expensive.
>> My thought is that he could clamp probes to the outside of the exhaust
>> manifold tubes for each cylinder and run them to a reader head in the
>> cockpit to get "close enough" information for this application. I have
>> thermocouple wire and could make the probes. Where could he come upon an
>> inexpensive reader head for thermocouples.
>> What is the community take on this? Would it work? Is it legal if
>> it is not
>> permanently attached to the plane?
>>
>> Name withheld to protect the currently innocent! :>)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: rigging a thermocouple on a certified plane |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Kevin,
I agree that compared to buying engine parts, instrumentation is a fair
deal. However, certainly people were able to diagnose engine malfunction
before multipoint CHT/EGT existed. If the POH says the engine should be
able to do something that this engine isn't doing, a good mechanic should
be able to track it down.
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
> On 2 Sep 2009, at 12:10, Bill Bradburry wrote:
>
>> > >
>>
>> My son owns a Mooney. He can not lean it past about 50-100 degrees
>> rich of
>> peak with out it starting to miss. He is burning about 12 Gal/Hr at
>> cruise
>> when I think he should be able to get to about 10. He could benefit
>> from
>> some type of injector balancing like from GAMI. Problem is he
>> doesn't have
>> the necessary EGT probes to get the information for each cylinder and
>> installing a certified rig to do this would be too expensive.
>> My thought is that he could clamp probes to the outside of the exhaust
>> manifold tubes for each cylinder and run them to a reader head in the
>> cockpit to get "close enough" information for this application. I
>> have
>> thermocouple wire and could make the probes. Where could he come
>> upon an
>> inexpensive reader head for thermocouples.
>> What is the community take on this? Would it work? Is it legal if
>> it is not
>> permanently attached to the plane?
>
> I predict that the response time of thermocouples clamped to the
> outside of the exhaust pipes would be so slow as to make them
> essentially useless. I won't comment on legality.
>
> It sounds like you are spending a lot more on fuel than would be
> needed if the aircraft was running correctly. Given the cost of this
> extra fuel, and the cost of top overhauls if you cook a cylinder(s)
> due to poor EGT data, I recommend you spend the bucks to install an
> approved, reasonable quality four cylinder EGT and CHT system. It
> would likely prove to be a false economy to go too cheap here.
>
> Good luck.
>
> --
> Kevin Horton
> RV-8 (Flight Test Phase)
> Ottawa, Canada
> http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Colm O'Reilly" <colm.oreilly(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Alternator choices |
Is it straightforward / recommended to modify an internally regulated
alternator to be externally regulated or should I opt to buy an
externally regulated model and not attempt to modify ? What kind of
pitfalls should I expect or have been experienced IRL (In Real Life) ?
I ask this because almost all of the alternators I have seen for sale
are internally regulated, even from aircraft / aero engine shops.
Thanks in advance,
Colm O'Reilly
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New Z-figure (Corvair) |
At 04:47 PM 9/2/2009, you wrote:
>
>Given that both sides of the discussion have merit, does any know if
>they still make the blocks that clamp over a pair of toggle
>switches. Much of the stock video footage of missile launches and
>control rooms show someone flipping one. They usually had yellow and
>black diagonal stripes.
>
>Is there a modern equivalent To that type of setup.
There's a variety of hinged covers that can be
used over the bat-handled toggle switches.
http://tinyurl.com/mnoc55
These are readily available from a lot of sources.
Know that they come in a lot of dash numbers for
spring loaded closed, stable in open position,
and cams on the inside of the cover to force the
handle into a certian position when the cover is
closed.
OH . . . a PAIR of toggle switches? Inadvertent
operation fences? I think Eric Jones offers some
off of his website.
Are you talking about those honk'en big covers
with a hinged lid? Why would you want such a thing
on your panel?
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Changing Z12 to the Z14 electrical system |
Bob and group,
I have a Z12 system in my RV-8 and want to change to Z14 because of my
comfort zone with two batteries and two separate busses. I've researched Z14
in the archives and can't find anything about my questions below:
1.Do I have to buy a second LR-3 alternator controller for my 20 amp aux
alternator or can I use my old SB-1 alternator controller, doing whatever is
necessary and prudent with the Hall effect current sensor and leads 1 and 2
that connect to the Hall sensor from the SB-1 controller?
2. Since I finished my RV-8 in 1994, are there any new suggestions for the
main or aux warning lights on Z14?
3. I didn't include the battery temp sensor in 1994 in the Z12. Should I
include them in my Z14?
Don RV-8 N417DS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: rigging a thermocouple on a certified plane |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
> At 12:07 PM 9/2/2009, you wrote:
>>
>>
>> Here's a dedicated K-type meter:
>>
>> http://www.virtualvillage.com/digital-thermometer-for-k-type-thermocouples/sku003920-016
>>
>>
>> If the above wraps, try this:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/kloqam
>
> Yeah, that works too. You can rig a 2-pole, 4-position
> rotary switch to "scan" the 4 probes for comparison.
> See:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/excerpt.pdf
>
>
> Bob . . .
What I found even more interesting is the list of available probes,
including
http://www.virtualvillage.com/k-type-thermocouple-temperature-sensor-probe-10ft-3m/sku003820-032
good to 800 degrees C.
Any thoughts on adapting this as an EGT probe? I like $5.99 a lot better
than $30-$40 for a purpose-built aviation probe. Also, I wonder if it
would be suitable for CHT in the 250-450 F range (120-260C) with a meter
that's compatible with a K series probe.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
9/2/2009
Hello Bob, Yes I understand that. But why not finesse the problem regarding
the fate of the cable shield at the connectors and also the requirement for
any connectors at all when they are not necessary with the technique that I
described?
In this case simpler is both better and cheaper.
'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
understand knowledge."
PS: Recall one of the axioms of building: "That which you leave out cannot
cause you problems later on."
=====================================
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net>
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 9:21 AM
Subject: RE: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe
> Appreciate that but the question isn't whether I should or shouldn't have
> connectors. The question is only on the fate of the shielded cable at the
> connector.
=================================================
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bakerocb(at)cox.net [mailto:bakerocb(at)cox.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 6:21 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net
> Subject: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe
>
> 9/2/2009
>
> Hello Bob, You wrote: "What should I do with the shield wire at that
> location?"
>
> Below is a copy of my 2/16/2005 posting from the archives addressing this
> question.
>
> 'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
> understand knowledge."
>
> =============================================
>
> 2/16/2005
>
> Hello Jay, Here is how I solved that problem.
>
> 1) I bought some additional connectors and pins of the type that plugs
> into
> the Whelen power supply. They are available from Terminal Town and other
> sources.
>
> 2) I ran a cut end of the Whelen provided cables in a continuous snake
> from
> each wing tip light all the way to my single power supply in the fuselage
> leaving a coil of excess cable in the fuselage near each wing root.
>
> 3) Then I installed the connectors on the cable cut end and plugged into
> the
> power supply.
>
> 4) If I ever have to remove my one piece wing I will just unplug the two
> cable connectors from the power supply, cut the connectors off the cable
> ends, and pull the cables out of the fuselage.##
>
> 5) When I reinstall the wing I just go through the same process as when
> originally installing the wing by snaking the cable ends dangling from the
> wing root into the power supply, reinstalling the connectors, and plugging
> back into the power supply.
>
> Considering how seldom one pulls the wings off and how little effort and
> cost is involved in cutting off and reinstalling the cable end connectors
> this is the best solution for me. It also eliminates an additional cable
> connection junction at the wing root.
>
> OC
>
> ##PS: If one were a really fastidious and pecunious type one could not cut
> off the connectors, but rather just extract the pins from the connectors
> for
> wing removal, and then reinsert the pins upon wing reinstall.
>
>
> End Msg: #136
>
>
> ============================================================
>
> From: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe
>
> Somewhat related question. I have the Whelen Comet system for my RV-7A, It
> has shielded cable, of course, the power unit out to the wingtip strobe,
> with the shield grounded at the power unit.
> But, because there's a chance I won't be able to fly my project off the
> field where it's now being built, I may hve to take the wings off and
> truck
> it to anothre airport, so I want to use a terminal strip at the inboard
> wing
> root, so that the wires can be disconnected. What should I do with the
> shield wire at that location. Should I treat it like any other wire and
> connect it at the terminal strip and continue it out to the wing tip? Or
> should I just terminate it at the wing root?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joel Jacobs <jj(at)sdf.lonestar.org> |
| Subject: | Another power distribution scheme |
I'm building a VFR Murphy Rebel with an electronic ignition Subaru
engine and dual rear mounted batteries. I've been working on a power
distribution plan for a couple weeks and I think I got it where I'm
happy with it but wanted to maybe get some input from you folks. You
know - get a few knowledgeable eyes on it and make sure I'm not doing
something really stupid.
Couple notable items,
I am using an internally regulated alternator - I chose not to have an
alternator disconnect. I figure the risk of damaging the alternator or
avionics through load dump was just too great. The B lead goes straight
to battery A. I did however provide a solution for the remote chance of
an OV fault by isolating battery A and running off battery B. Battery A
is sacrificed in this case.
The essential bus can be fed from either or both batteries. The
non-essential bus drops out during battery only operation - this can be
overridden for preflights etc.
I know I could just copy one of the Z drawings and they were a huge
knowledge boost to study but none seemed to fit exactly what I had in
mind and I get a lot of satisfaction going through the noodling process.
Thanks for looking,
Joel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New Z-figure (Corvair) |
ray wrote:
>
> Given that both sides of the discussion have merit, does any know if
> they still make the blocks that clamp over a pair of toggle switches.
> Much of the stock video footage of missile launches and control rooms
> show someone flipping one. They usually had yellow and black diagonal
> stripes.
>
> Is there a modern equivalent To that type of setup.
mpja.com has been giving them away for the almost the cost of shipping
for a while now.
--
Ernest Christley, President
Ernest(at)TechnicalTakedown.com
TechnicalTakedown, LLC
www.TechnicalTakedown.com
101 Steep Bank Dr.
Cary, NC 27518
(919) 741-9397
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | New Z-figure (Corvair) |
At 09:43 PM 9/2/2009, you wrote:
>
>Raymond -
>The switch-tie device you describe would be easy to fabricate.
>A chunk of 0.250 or 0.3125 aluminum, a drill press and a little time with a
>file...
>
>neal
>
>=======
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: New Z-figure (Corvair)
>
>
>I think we've had a little data dropout. What I'm asking about is a way
>to physically tie the 2 handles together so that the 2 switches must be
>operated together. The idea being to eliminate a single point of
>failure while still implementing the 1 switch philosophy from WW.
Aha! But of course. Neal's suggestion works. I've not
seen those as a catalog item but they're not hard to
make. Some aluminum bar stock, drills, taps, set screws,
and some sculpting on the sander would work good. I think
I would sand some flats on the switch handles for the set
screws to grip and run screws in from both sides . . . not
unlike
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Tech_Tips/FlapSwitch/FlapSw2.jpg
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | What single failure of installed equipment prompts |
me to change to Z14...
Bob,
Sorry I sent two nearly identical posts earlier--I thought the first
didn't go through.
You had asked:
"Have you had an experience that prompts you to make
this change? Recall that hundreds and perhaps thousands
of expensive GA aircraft are boring holes in lots of
clouds with Z12 installed . . . and even if Z12 were
NOT installed, they'd still be poking holes.
Are you planning on having independent, IFR capable
instrumentation installed on both pilot locations? That
was the original idea behind Z-14.
If not, what single failure of installed equipment
prompts you to believe that Z14 is more likely to
get you on the ground than Z12?"
1. I fly out of Seattle, and we have a lot of IFR days (some when the ice
is just too daunting to leave the ground!). In August, on the way out of
Puget Sound in IFR soup to VFR conditions east of the Cascades, I had no
problems with my dual Cheltons. On the way back a week later in VFR
conditions, I had a brownout of the Cheltons (first and only time in 235 hours).
They began to reset in seconds, but took the usual two minutes to boot-up. I
don't have a clue as to why the brownout. Prior to this flight I had
sitting on my workbench a GRT Sport EFIS as a backup to the Cheltons and a
Garmin GNS430W (both to be installed this Fall). I already have SL30,
electric T&B and electric AH. I'm totally electric with the current Z12 (34 Ah
Concorde AX35 battery). With the new gear and Z14 , I thought I'd put the
Cheltons on one bus and the 430W and GRT Sport EFIS on the other bus using
two Odyssey PC 680's--same weight as the one Concorde, and together same
34Ah, plus easier to replace in the boondocks.
2. A plus for the Z14 is the extra battery for starting (with the
crossover) in my IO-540 RV-8), but again similar Ah (one Concorde to two PC680's).
3. Just add a brownout battery to the Z12? Point me to your brownout
battery diagram--I couldn't find it on your site. I've ordered your loadmeter
to indicate loads on my Z12 alternators (or future Z14).
Any and all suggestions are greatly appreciated--I'm here to learn!
Many thanks,
Don
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com> |
| Subject: | Alternator connections |
Thanks Bob,
I tried that and it gave me a few clues but I am not sure what the lester
number is. I tried all of the numbers on the nameplate and came up with a
few hits but none that worked. Trouble with specifying the make model etc
is that it is a motorbike engine and they don't list those.
So, back to basics, there are 4 terminals, and a small diagram that indicate
that 2 of them are 'IG' and 'L'. From looking at some of the alternator
diagrams at the link you gave I found that there are the following possible
connections, Ignition, Light and Sense. This is where I get stuck, I am
expecting Field and Earth/ Ground.
What is Ignition and Sense for- or how should they be used? And how is the
Light circuit wired? My idea of a light warning circuit is that one side of
the light is connected (via a switch, etc) to the battery positive terminal
and the other side to the 12-14V out from the alternator. If either the
battery voltage or the alternator voltage drops the light goes on?
The Ignition cct is sort of the field winding in that it requires 12V in?
Have no idea what the Sense cct might be; any ideas?
Thanks
Jay
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: 02 September 2009 05:12 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Alternator connections
At 08:30 AM 9/2/2009, you wrote:
Hi there,
I am trying to connect a Nippon Denso alternator into a Z scheme and am
confused as to the connections. There are 4 small pins in a plastic housing
and it is these whose function/ connection I cannot deduce. To me there
should be only 1 or 2 pins for positive and negative of the field, or just
positive. The photo (although blurred) shows the pin arrangement of two
pairs of pins separated by a plastic shield. Can anyone cast any light on
how to connect these?
Thanks
Jay
What's the part number or better yet, the Lester number
of your particular alternator. You can get a pinout
at:
http://www.quality-built.com/catalog.htm
Enter make, model of car that the alternator is used
on or . . .
go to the "Cross Reference" tab of the above
link and enter the OEM or Lester number.
Step though the various photo views of the
particular alternator and I think you'll find
that one of the photos is a pinout diagram.
Having said that, you probably wont find a
connection to your alternator's field terminals.
The vast majority of alternators in the automotive
wild have built in regulators.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Shielded wire for wingtip strobe |
//PS: Recall one of the axioms of building: "That which you leave out cannot
cause you problems later on."
Heh heh. You know, though, that's not a very good axiom. (g)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Neil Clayton <harvey4(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Compass interference protection |
Where would one lay hands on a quantity of Mu=metal.
A/S want $4.45 an INCH!
Thanks
Neil
At 11:43 AM 9/2/2009, you wrote:
>Is there any better (generally available) material to wrap around
>the magnetic compass to shield it from interference, that's better
>than MuMetal? Thanks Skip
>
>----------
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Borger <rlborger(at)mac.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Compass interference protection |
Neil,
Just do a Google search on "mu metal" and you will find a lot of sources. Not
sure any will be cheep as Nickel isn't a cheep metal.
Bob Borger
On Thursday, September 03, 2009, at 07:07AM, "Neil Clayton"
wrote:
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Why Brass Bolt for ground terminal? |
9/03/2009
Hello Eric, Your proposal (see below) is not entirely clear to me.
So you fold the copper strap only 90 degrees in the middle? Then you insert
one leg of the angle through the slot in the firewall and place that leg
along the stainless steel firewall and drill through both? Then place the
battery ground bolt through that hole to connect the lug on the battery
ground wire to the copper strip and the firewall? Then use the copper strap
leg that is at 90 degrees to the firewall to connect things for grounding on
the other side of the firewall through a previously drilled hole in the
copper strap?
Sounds good, but don't expect that the stainless steel of the firewall will
provide a good reliable ground in other locations because of a non
conducting film that tends to build up on the surface of the stainless
steel.
'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
understand knowledge."
===============================
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Why Brass Bolt for ground terminal?
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Since you want ground termination on both sides of the firewall, you can do
approximately
the following:
Take a 2X long copper strap, fold it in the middle and insert it through a
slot
in the firewall (or around the edge). Then drill a battery ground bolt hole
through
both layers and the firewall too. The bolt hole is better if it is closer
to the fold, but this is a fine detail.
Teamwork: " A lot of people doing exactly what I say."
(Marketing exec., Citrix Corp.)
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Borger <rlborger(at)mac.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Compass interference protection |
Neil,
Just checked McMaster-Carr. They have it in foil form. Thickness 0.002, 0.004,
0.006 & 0.010 (inch), with or without adhesive backing, widths 4 in or 15 in.
Sold by the foot. Prices range from $0.97/in to $6.92/in depending on thickness,
width & backing.
http://www.mcmaster.com/#mu-metal-foil/=3gxg6w
Bob
http://www.mcmaster.com/#mu-metal-foil/=3gxg6w
On Thursday, September 03, 2009, at 07:07AM, "Neil Clayton"
wrote:
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Why Brass Bolt for ground terminal? |
>
>Sounds good, but don't expect that the stainless steel of the
>firewall will provide a good reliable ground in other locations
>because of a non conducting film that tends to build up on the
>surface of the stainless steel.
In the best of all ELECTRICAL worlds, we don't worry about
high quality electrical bonding to the firewall. The goal
of optimum ground system is to avoid using the firewall sheet
(or engine mounts) for any electrical purpose.
The diagrams suggested in Z-15 go toward those goals and
suggest that for metal airplanes, it's no REALLY big deal
to ground strobes, nav lights, and a few odd accessories
locally.
What Eric is suggesting is a 'lamination' of the firewall
sheet between the folds of a copper strap that is fastened
to the firewall with one fat bolt for battery and crankcase
grounds . . . and spreading the other grounds out over the
outside surface of the U-shaped copper strap by what ever
means is most attractive. If everything grounded to this
construct, then it wouldn't matter if the copper were well
bonded to the stainless.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Alternator connections |
At 05:54 AM 9/3/2009, you wrote:
>Thanks Bob,
>
>
>So, back to basics, there are 4 terminals, and a small diagram that
>indicate that 2 of them are 'IG' and 'L'. >From looking at some of
>the alternator diagrams at the link you gave I found that there are
>the following possible connections, Ignition, Light and Sense. This
>is where I get stuck, I am expecting Field and Earth/ Ground.
Well, if they are marked, then you wouldn't get any
different information from the catalogs that only
go telling you what the labels are.
IG is the alternator ON-OFF control lead and is the
lead depicted on
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z24-Interim.pdf
for controlling the alternator. I note that there
is an error on that drawing that calls the input
terminal "F" when indeed, it is "IGN".
"L" is for a warning light that can be ignored.
The best guess for "sense" is that it's a voltage
control input lead for the regulator.
>
>What is Ignition and Sense for- or how should they be used? And how
>is the Light circuit wired? My idea of a light warning circuit is
>that one side of the light is connected (via a switch, etc) to the
>battery positive terminal and the other side to the 12-14V out from
>the alternator. If either the battery voltage or the alternator
>voltage drops the light goes on?
>
>The Ignition cct is sort of the field winding in that it requires 12V in?
>Have no idea what the Sense cct might be; any ideas?
If it's off a motorcycle, get the wiring
diagram for the motorcycle and duplicate that.
Otherwise, consider disassembling the alternator
to remove the built in regulator and bring the
field leads out so you can use an external
regulator.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Alternator connections |
| From: | Ian <ixb(at)videotron.ca> |
On my Nippon Denso internally regulated alternator, there are
essentially four connectors, two of which are in a "T" arrangement.
1. The big battery terminal.
2. The IG terminal which is 12v from the battery through the alternator
switch on the panel then to the IG terminal.
3. The L (lamp) switch which is grounded in the alternator when the
alternator is not charging. A lamp connected from 12V through the lamp
to L would be off in a normally running engine, and on if the alternator
was not charging.
4. The ground is through the body of the alternator, and depends on the
grounding strap from the engine to the firewall.
Ian Brown,
Bromont
Quebec
C-GOHM RV-9A flying
> Thanks Bob,
>
>
>
> I tried that and it gave me a few clues but I am not sure what the
> lester number is. I tried all of the numbers on the nameplate and
> came up with a few hits but none that worked. Trouble with specifying
> the make model etc is that it is a motorbike engine and they dont
> list those.
>
>
>
> So, back to basics, there are 4 terminals, and a small diagram that
> indicate that 2 of them are IG and L. >From looking at some of
> the alternator diagrams at the link you gave I found that there are
> the following possible connections, Ignition, Light and Sense. This
> is where I get stuck, I am expecting Field and Earth/ Ground.
>
>
>
> What is Ignition and Sense for- or how should they be used? And how
> is the Light circuit wired? My idea of a light warning circuit is
> that one side of the light is connected (via a switch, etc) to the
> battery positive terminal and the other side to the 12-14V out from
> the alternator. If either the battery voltage or the alternator
> voltage drops the light goes on?
>
>
>
> The Ignition cct is sort of the field winding in that it requires 12V
> in?
>
> Have no idea what the Sense cct might be; any ideas?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Jay
>
>
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> From:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Robert L. Nuckolls, III
> Sent: 02 September 2009 05:12 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Alternator connections
>
>
>
>
>
> At 08:30 AM 9/2/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi there,
>
> I am trying to connect a Nippon Denso alternator into a Z scheme and
> am confused as to the connections. There are 4 small pins in a
> plastic housing and it is these whose function/ connection I cannot
> deduce. To me there should be only 1 or 2 pins for positive and
> negative of the field, or just positive. The photo (although blurred)
> shows the pin arrangement of two pairs of pins separated by a plastic
> shield. Can anyone cast any light on how to connect these?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jay
>
>
> What's the part number or better yet, the Lester number
> of your particular alternator. You can get a pinout
> at:
>
> http://www.quality-built.com/catalog.htm
>
> Enter make, model of car that the alternator is used
> on or . . .
>
> go to the "Cross Reference" tab of the above
> link and enter the OEM or Lester number.
> Step though the various photo views of the
> particular alternator and I think you'll find
> that one of the photos is a pinout diagram.
>
> Having said that, you probably wont find a
> connection to your alternator's field terminals.
> The vast majority of alternators in the automotive
> wild have built in regulators.
>
>
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ---------------------------------------
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ---------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
> http://forums.matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Alternator choices |
Colm,
Ha ha - Ok, you really want start a forum row? No worries, there are
miles of discussion about internal/external alt's on the forum. Do some
searching first and I think you'll find a lot of what you need.
There are a lot of depends on that subject, but I think most would
recommend you buy the right piece of equipment for the job rather than
bastardize a cheaper (ala Pep Boys) internal unit. If you want to save a
few bucks just use the internal job and add an alt contactor to your
firewall. That's exactly what I did and I have no regrets.
Glenn
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Colm
O'Reilly
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 7:38 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Alternator choices
Is it straightforward / recommended to modify an internally regulated
alternator to be externally regulated or should I opt to buy an
externally regulated model and not attempt to modify ? What kind of
pitfalls should I expect or have been experienced IRL (In Real Life) ?
I ask this because almost all of the alternators I have seen for sale
are internally regulated, even from aircraft / aero engine shops.
Thanks in advance,
Colm O'Reilly
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Colm O'Reilly" <colm.oreilly(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator choices |
Thanks Glenn, I realized this was an area of some contention, so I've
donned my nomex underwear.
I am sold on the merits of external regulation, and given Bob's
excellent recent article (or i read it in the 'connection ) on re-
built alternators and quality not really being brand specific, I'd
like to know if it is just a matter of 'removing' the internal
regulator and connecting an external unit or if there is some other
mysterious difference between an alternator built for internal
regulation Vs one built for external regulation.
Colm
On Sep 3, 2009, at 10:22, wrote:
>
> Colm,
>
> Ha ha - Ok, you really want start a forum row? No worries, there are
> miles of discussion about internal/external alt's on the forum. Do
> some
> searching first and I think you'll find a lot of what you need.
>
> There are a lot of depends on that subject, but I think most would
> recommend you buy the right piece of equipment for the job rather than
> bastardize a cheaper (ala Pep Boys) internal unit. If you want to
> save a
> few bucks just use the internal job and add an alt contactor to your
> firewall. That's exactly what I did and I have no regrets.
>
> Glenn
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Colm
> O'Reilly
> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 7:38 PM
> To: Aero Electric List
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Alternator choices
>
>
>
> Is it straightforward / recommended to modify an internally regulated
> alternator to be externally regulated or should I opt to buy an
> externally regulated model and not attempt to modify ? What kind of
> pitfalls should I expect or have been experienced IRL (In Real Life) ?
>
> I ask this because almost all of the alternators I have seen for sale
> are internally regulated, even from aircraft / aero engine shops.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Colm O'Reilly
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark R. Supinski" <mark.supinski(at)gmail.com> |
Hi everyone-
I'm trying to wire my fuel level sender to the device that displays the
level. I have a simple float-based fuel level sender with 180-degree sweep
& 40-240 ohm resistance. There is a single terminal post at the back of the
sender to hook it up to a display. I am told that I need a 200ohm pullup to
connect it to the device. The fuel sender input for the device is +5v.
I've trolled the web to find out what a pullup is. What I haven't found is
whether I can buy a discrete IC to use for this purpose, or if I need to
breadboard something. Also, I presume I will need some sort of component to
take +12 bus voltage and step it down to +5v as the input to the pullup.
Is there an easy way to accomplish this (where easy = go to radio shack &
buy X) or do I have to build something to accomplish it.
Thanks,
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 200 ohm pullup |
Hi Mark,
The 200 ohm pull up is just a resistor. There is a 5 volt source from
your EC2 that can be used to power it. Pin 11, which may also be
connected to your air input temp sensor depending on how old the unit
is.
Bob W.
"Mark R. Supinski" wrote:
> Hi everyone-
>
> I'm trying to wire my fuel level sender to the device that displays the
> level. I have a simple float-based fuel level sender with 180-degree sweep
> & 40-240 ohm resistance. There is a single terminal post at the back of the
> sender to hook it up to a display. I am told that I need a 200ohm pullup to
> connect it to the device. The fuel sender input for the device is +5v.
>
> I've trolled the web to find out what a pullup is. What I haven't found is
> whether I can buy a discrete IC to use for this purpose, or if I need to
> breadboard something. Also, I presume I will need some sort of component to
> take +12 bus voltage and step it down to +5v as the input to the pullup.
>
> Is there an easy way to accomplish this (where easy = go to radio shack &
> buy X) or do I have to build something to accomplish it.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark
>
--
N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 - http://www.bob-white.com
3.8 Hours Total Time and holding
Cables for your rotary installation - http://roblinstores.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: What single failure of installed equipment prompts |
me to change to Z14...
>1. In August, on the way out of Puget Sound in IFR soup to VFR
>conditions east of the Cascades, I had no problems with my dual
>Cheltons. On the way back a week later in VFR conditions, I had a
>brownout of the Cheltons (first and only time in 235 hours). They
>began to reset in seconds, but took the usual two minutes to
>boot-up. I don't have a clue as to why the brownout.
If you have Z-12 installed, then there is no 'good'
reason for a brownout. If the main alternator had
sagged, the standby alternator should have picked
up as much load as it could shoulder and the
"ALTERNATOR LOADED" light should have flashed at
you. If BOTH alternators had crapped, then the low
voltage warning light should have come on and your
WELL MAINTAINED RG battery should have picked up the
load thus preventing a brown out.
>Any and all suggestions are greatly appreciated--I'm here to learn!
You need to identify the reason for the brown-out you
experienced. Adding in more "stuff" to craft dual
electrical systems may well avoid duplicating the
problem in the second system . . . but the first
problem may be lurking in the first.
What you've described is mystifying and does not
make sense in the context of the mini-FMEA we
went through above. The system you have is
exceedingly robust. A demonstrated lack of robustness
is an design/installation/maintenance issue, not a
lack of equipment.
As an interim prophylactic against an unhappy
event, power one of the Cheltons from your battery
bus. If it doesn't have a built in power switch,
hang a temporary switch under the panel on a bracket
or some such band-aid.
There's something seriously amiss with what you
presently have installed. If the brown-out was so
short in duration that you didn't notice any
warning lights, then loose connections come
to mind. Also, one of your Cheltons should be
on an E-bus and the other on the main bus. This
would automatically give you the "trouble shooting"
fix by flying with the e-bus alternate feed switch
ON.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Alternator choices |
Right,
Ok, yes for the operation there certainly manufacturer
differences and you'll need to be familiar with how the unit is put
together. Some will argue but alternators like starters are one of the
big rip-offs in industry. Most are rebuilt for mere pennies against
their actual cost which makes selling rebuilt units a rather lucrative
business.
Rebuilt units are quickly corrected because of the commonality
of failures they incur. Brushes, contacts, bearings commonly fail and
need only be replaced to create a like new unit to go. I've rebuilt the
starter in my truck twice for about $10.00 each time. After 300k I've
still got the same starter. Think about it, how often do the windings
fail on a alternator? Uh, almost never. Once you get past the core and
windings it's just little stuff.
I've not done what you request but what I would do is find a
couple of junk alternators and take them apart, take out the regulator,
hook them up to a test harness and see what happens.
Even easier, watch this video and they'll walk you through the process.
Looks like the regulator is commonly on the end or outside, so it's a
breeze.
http://www.ehow.com/video_4936005_remove-voltage-regulator-from-alternat
or.html
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Colm
O'Reilly
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 10:57 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Alternator choices
Thanks Glenn, I realized this was an area of some contention, so I've
donned my nomex underwear.
I am sold on the merits of external regulation, and given Bob's
excellent recent article (or i read it in the 'connection ) on re-
built alternators and quality not really being brand specific, I'd
like to know if it is just a matter of 'removing' the internal
regulator and connecting an external unit or if there is some other
mysterious difference between an alternator built for internal
regulation Vs one built for external regulation.
Colm
On Sep 3, 2009, at 10:22, wrote:
>
> Colm,
>
> Ha ha - Ok, you really want start a forum row? No worries, there are
> miles of discussion about internal/external alt's on the forum. Do
> some
> searching first and I think you'll find a lot of what you need.
>
> There are a lot of depends on that subject, but I think most would
> recommend you buy the right piece of equipment for the job rather than
> bastardize a cheaper (ala Pep Boys) internal unit. If you want to
> save a
> few bucks just use the internal job and add an alt contactor to your
> firewall. That's exactly what I did and I have no regrets.
>
> Glenn
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Colm
> O'Reilly
> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 7:38 PM
> To: Aero Electric List
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Alternator choices
>
>
>
> Is it straightforward / recommended to modify an internally regulated
> alternator to be externally regulated or should I opt to buy an
> externally regulated model and not attempt to modify ? What kind of
> pitfalls should I expect or have been experienced IRL (In Real Life) ?
>
> I ask this because almost all of the alternators I have seen for sale
> are internally regulated, even from aircraft / aero engine shops.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Colm O'Reilly
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CardinalNSB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | compass interference |
Thanks for the replies on the issue, I hadn't thought through that all
magnetic stuff is related. (There was an excellent show on the Science
channel recently with "lifelike" images of the iron plumes and magnetic fields
in
the core, its a swirling mass of magnetic/electrical generation, not a
single solid "inner core" like they said in elementary school).
I see on other groups that some say the Pegasus compass is more resistant
to interference, can someone explain that to me?
I want to mount my magnetic compass out of the line of sight, preferable in
the dash like any other instrument. I will go ahead and do that and do
the experiment as Bob suggested with my old Airpath for now.
Thanks, Skip
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator choices |
At 09:56 AM 9/3/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>Thanks Glenn, I realized this was an area of some contention, so I've
>donned my nomex underwear.
>
>I am sold on the merits of external regulation, and given Bob's
>excellent recent article (or i read it in the 'connection ) on re-
>built alternators and quality not really being brand specific, I'd
>like to know if it is just a matter of 'removing' the internal
>regulator and connecting an external unit or if there is some other
>mysterious difference between an alternator built for internal
>regulation Vs one built for external regulation.
Nope, just take it out and bring out the field
leads . . . or ground one of the field leads
internally . . .
If there has ever been any "contention" in the past
it was totally fabricated by individuals with design
goals inconsistent with legacy goals from our 100 yrs
experience with TC aviation and/or AeroElectric
Connection design goals for failure tolerant design.
There has never been an attempt to persuade anyone
that any particular alternator brand or configuration
is unsuitable to the task on an OBAM aircraft.
I'll suggest that readers of the List review the
revised chapter on Alternators from the book which
is currently available for free at:
http://aeroelectric.com/R12A/03_Alternator_12A1.pdf
In these pages you will find an updated version
of the simple-ideas that have been promoted here
on the List and in the book since day-one.
(1) independent, any time, on-off, any conditions
control of the alternator(s).
(2) independent, automatic, lightning fast management
of an OV event . . . NOBODY's regulators are
10 to the minus gee whiz failure rates.
In years past, the path to Nirvana for these design
goals was widest if you had an externally regulated
alternator. In recent times, clever folks like
Plane-Power have MODIFIED contemporary automotive
designs to achieve the above stated design goals . . .
and you can do it too. It's not difficult. And even
if you screw it up the first, second or third times,
you'll eventually get it right. Further, if your system
is truly failure tolerant, the first, second or third
events will be significant only because they are
milestones in your learning process.
Finally, with respect to saluting the flags of
any particular brand name or model, I hope that
the description of my trip to MPA/MPM facilities
last fall will encourage builders to pick an
alternator that best fits their project mechanically
and for performance (output current) and purchase
that item either new (from about anybody) or re-man
(from a facility on the class of MPA/MPM).
Anything else to be said on this topic must have
roots in alternative design goals (which anyone
is free to embrace) or superstition and faith borne
out of ignorance. There are lots of folks here on
the list ready to counsel the unsure or insecure.
How may we be of service?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James Robinson <jbr79r(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wiring diagram |
Yes it has been a long while. Probably because my electrical system has been bullet
proof. I see you moved. I hope you are enjoying your new location. Thanks
again for all you do!!!!
Jim
James Robinson
Glasair lll N79R
Spanish Fork UT U77
________________________________
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2009 6:34:02 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: wiring diagram
At 08:00 PM 9/1/2009, you wrote:
> Bob
> Is there a link to your wiring diagrams? Particularly the 2 alts 2 battery all
electric airplane. I can't locate mine. I probably put it where I would be
sure to find it HA HA ;-)
>
> James Robinson
Good morning Jim. Haven't talked with you in quite
some time.
All of my drawings are on the website. The whole
package is at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/
. . . the drawing you're asking about is probably
this one . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z14N1.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z14N2.pdf
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 200 ohm pullup |
Scratch the comment about the EC2. The 5 V source is pins 11 or 24 on
P2 of the EM2, or if you have an EM3, TB1-12 or TB4-16.
Connect the resistor between 5V and the level sender. Connect that
junction to the input. Max power dissipation in the resistor will be
less than 1/8 watt, so a 1/4 or 1/2 watt resistor will be OK. Don't
expect it to be real linear.
Bob W.
Bob White <bob@bob-white.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> The 200 ohm pull up is just a resistor. There is a 5 volt source from
> your EC2 that can be used to power it. Pin 11, which may also be
> connected to your air input temp sensor depending on how old the unit
> is.
>
> Bob W.
>
> "Mark R. Supinski" wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone-
> >
> > I'm trying to wire my fuel level sender to the device that displays the
> > level. I have a simple float-based fuel level sender with 180-degree sweep
> > & 40-240 ohm resistance. There is a single terminal post at the back of the
> > sender to hook it up to a display. I am told that I need a 200ohm pullup to
> > connect it to the device. The fuel sender input for the device is +5v.
> >
> > I've trolled the web to find out what a pullup is. What I haven't found is
> > whether I can buy a discrete IC to use for this purpose, or if I need to
> > breadboard something. Also, I presume I will need some sort of component to
> > take +12 bus voltage and step it down to +5v as the input to the pullup.
> >
> > Is there an easy way to accomplish this (where easy = go to radio shack &
> > buy X) or do I have to build something to accomplish it.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Mark
> >
>
>
--
N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 - http://www.bob-white.com
3.8 Hours Total Time and holding
Cables for your rotary installation - http://roblinstores.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Alternator choices |
At 10:59 AM 9/3/2009, you wrote:
>
>Right,
>
> Ok, yes for the operation there certainly manufacturer
>differences and you'll need to be familiar with how the unit is put
>together. Some will argue but alternators like starters are one of the
>big rip-offs in industry. Most are rebuilt for mere pennies against
>their actual cost which makes selling rebuilt units a rather lucrative
>business.
Sure . . . since re-man operations purchase cores at
scrap metal prices, they're getting complex castings,
field rings and rotors with a very low investment. The
BIG cost of a rebuild is labor . . . which is why operations
like MPA/MPM are successful in the market . . . I think
the average in-the-door/out-the-door, hands-on labor
averaged 45 minutes per article.
> Rebuilt units are quickly corrected because of the commonality
>of failures they incur. Brushes, contacts, bearings commonly fail and
>need only be replaced to create a like new unit to go.
Unless you tear the incoming part down to nearly individual
parts, clean and inspect with go/no-go gages, turn the
slip rings, chase the threads, and re-assemble with
all new wearing parts, new or re-plated hardware, etc.
This is the difference between a re-man and repair
operation.
>Even easier, watch this video and they'll walk you through the process.
>Looks like the regulator is commonly on the end or outside, so it's a
>breeze.
>
>http://www.ehow.com/video_4936005_remove-voltage-regulator-from-alternat
>or.html
This is not typical of the alternators I've worked with
the most. Removal of the voltage regulator usually
involves splitting the case and studying the manner
in which internal electronics and brush holders are
interconnected. Further, most alternators have one
of the two brushes connected to the b-lead terminal.
This needs to be rewired to take the brush to ground.
The other brush connection needs to come out for
attachment to the regulator. Be wary of trying to
"salvage" the existing fast-on tabs for bringing
your new field wires out. The alloy from which
those tabs are made may be very hard to solder to.
I'd recommend that your first mod simply bring
the brush leads out on wires to be properly
connected externally.
It's not 'hard' . . . the pitfall are more
mechanical than electrical.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Angier M.Ames" <N4ZQ(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: B&C Dimmer DIM30-14 |
Greetings,
The answer to this question may be obvious to all but me but here goes.
The wiring diagram included with 9013-704E dated 09/10/02 shows output
to 5 lights on pins 5,9,7,6,&4.
I have 6 instruments from United Instrument with the typical internal
lighting on the top plus an AirPegasus compass.
Is there any compelling reason not to double up two lights on a single
dimmer pin?
Thanks,
Angier Ames
N4ZQ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Angier M.Ames" <N4ZQ(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: B&C Dimmer DIM30-14 |
Greetings,
The answer to this question may be obvious to all but me but here goes.
The wiring diagram included with 9013-704E dated 09/10/02 shows output
to 5 lights on pins 5,9,7,6,&4.
I have 6 instruments from United Instrument with the typical internal
lighting on the top plus an AirPegasus compass.
Is there any compelling reason not to double up two lights on a single
dimmer pin?
Thanks,
Angier Ames
N4ZQ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: B&C Dimmer DIM30-14 |
At 01:28 PM 9/3/2009, you wrote:
>
>Greetings,
>
>The answer to this question may be obvious to all but me but here goes.
>The wiring diagram included with 9013-704E dated 09/10/02 shows output
>to 5 lights on pins 5,9,7,6,&4.
>I have 6 instruments from United Instrument with the typical internal
>lighting on the top plus an AirPegasus compass.
>Is there any compelling reason not to double up two lights on a single
>dimmer pin?
Not a problem.
Bob
K0DYH
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ron Patterson <scc_ron(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Fried Master Wires |
This is another example of how adding a ground
- ---power jack (with ov and reverse polarity protection)
- ---would have proved useful. I'm pleased that the
- ---outcome of your experience was so benign . . . it
- ---could have been much worse.
- ---I'm mystified about the microphone jack. What
- ---kind of voltage regulator does your airplane have?
- ---If it's a built in regulator and it shifted in
- ---regulation set point as a consequence of this
- ---event, then it HAS been affected and is now suspect.
- - - - Bob . . .
Thanks Bob for helping me understan what happened and why with my starting
system. To answer your question, I have a new ND alternator off a forklift
(35 amp) with internal regulator and "supposed" to have internal over volta
ge protection....can't swear to that, but that is what got me to purchase i
t over the 45 amp suzuki one that others have used.
-
Question. Will my new Odessey battery slowly discharge because the voltage
output at 13.9 is now at least 0.3 volts lower than the 14.2 that the liter
ature says one needs to charge it properly?
-
Ron=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fried Master Wires |
>Thanks Bob for helping me understan what happened and why with my
>starting system. To answer your question, I have a new ND alternator
>off a forklift (35 amp) with internal regulator and "supposed" to
>have internal over voltage protection....can't swear to that, but
>that is what got me to purchase it over the 45 amp suzuki one that
>others have used.
I can tell you with great confidence that there
is NO internally regulated alternator that features
more than an OV WARNING. Further, NONE have independent,
OV PROTECTION that is part and parcel of legacy
design goals for aircraft.
>
>Question. Will my new Odessey battery slowly discharge because the
>voltage output at 13.9 is now at least 0.3 volts lower than the 14.2
>that the literature says one needs to charge it properly?
It will be prevented from achieving 100% state of
charge after cranking the engine for each flight.
It will probably perform as expected in terms of
getting an engine started but its energy content
as a standby power source will be degraded to some
extent. If you take LONG flights, it WILL get to
full charge at 13.9 but looking at my own log shows
that average flight cycle times are on the order of
1 hour.
So the battery won't "slowly discharge" it just wont
get fully charged on short flights.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <berkut13(at)berkut13.com> |
| Subject: | Schematic for OVM-28 |
B&C has discontinued the OVM14 and 28 units completely with no plans to
continue them. I have a need for several more and I am not interested
in the large block variety OV solution they are selling now. The
original was ideal for my usage and the larger form factor presents
un-necessary problems.
Does someone have the schematic and component list for those units. To
get what I want, I am not above building my own. ;-)
Thanks,
James Redmon
Berkut/Race 13
www.berkut13.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | Battery charge voltage |
Bob,
My RV7A is not flying yet but after much reading here over the years I
decided I was confident to make my own battery solution for my Yamaha
personal watercraft. Since I only use the boat for one week of the year, it
doesn't make sense for me to keep a "manufacturer's recommended battery" in
it all year due to the cost. It seemed to need a new one every couple years
even though I kept it on a maintainer during the other 51 weeks.
Background:
Original OEM battery was 12V Champion 16CL-B flooded lead/acid motorcycle
battery
Engine is 155HP 2-cycle Yamaha
Battery was always left in the boat and on a batt maintainer during off
season,
This year I bought a no-name RGB 17AH battery and it cranked/started the
engine just fine.
I made a voltage measurement with the engine running a various RPM and found
that the charging voltage (with battery connected) ranged from 13.0 to 13.4
volts.
Am I correct to conclude that with this arrangement, while good enough to
start the engine, it will never get fully charged up? I would expect to see
14+ volts to charge the OEM flooded battery. Could this be why that OEM
battery never seemed to last more than a couple years even though it was on
a charger 95% of the time?
What, if any, difference is there between the recommended charge voltage for
these two batteries?
This is relevant to my future RV because it too will likely be put away for
long periods during the off season. I don't know yet whether I will use a
flooded or RGB battery.
Bevan
RV7A wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David LLoyd" <skywagon(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery charge voltage |
Bevan,
My own personal findings are that a "maintainer" set to about 13.1 to 13.2
is about right to handle new and old flooded batteries. If you push it
higher, the older batt's with a little bit of sulphation and other cranky
aging, may gas too much when taking in more than 13.2. A new batt. with no
internal deteration handles tad bit more voltage without gassing.
In the normal use airplane world, we use our birds too little. This is hard
on lead/acid batts. Usual life is about 2-3 years. I have have had as much
as 7 years life when keeping on a tuned up maintainer. Even after 7 years I
replace the batt. just to keep the worry factor at bay.
What I mean by a "tuned up" unit. I have found that more than 50% of the
maintainers are not set correctly during manuf. To many are set to higher
voltage. Most of them have 1 or 2 pots inside the case that can be tuned to
the best float voltage. Many are a pain to take apart in their potted
cases.
Be sure to check the float voltage on any maintainer about 24 hrs. after
connection to the batt. with an accurate digital DVM or similar. Again, my
personal high setting is 13.2 v.
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 5:35 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery charge voltage
>
>
> Bob,
>
> My RV7A is not flying yet but after much reading here over the years I
> decided I was confident to make my own battery solution for my Yamaha
> personal watercraft. Since I only use the boat for one week of the year,
> it
> doesn't make sense for me to keep a "manufacturer's recommended battery"
> in
> it all year due to the cost. It seemed to need a new one every couple
> years
> even though I kept it on a maintainer during the other 51 weeks.
>
> Background:
>
> Original OEM battery was 12V Champion 16CL-B flooded lead/acid motorcycle
> battery
> Engine is 155HP 2-cycle Yamaha
> Battery was always left in the boat and on a batt maintainer during off
> season,
>
> This year I bought a no-name RGB 17AH battery and it cranked/started the
> engine just fine.
>
> I made a voltage measurement with the engine running a various RPM and
> found
> that the charging voltage (with battery connected) ranged from 13.0 to
> 13.4
> volts.
>
> Am I correct to conclude that with this arrangement, while good enough to
> start the engine, it will never get fully charged up? I would expect to
> see
> 14+ volts to charge the OEM flooded battery. Could this be why that OEM
> battery never seemed to last more than a couple years even though it was
> on
> a charger 95% of the time?
>
> What, if any, difference is there between the recommended charge voltage
> for
> these two batteries?
>
> This is relevant to my future RV because it too will likely be put away
> for
> long periods during the off season. I don't know yet whether I will use a
> flooded or RGB battery.
>
> Bevan
> RV7A wiring
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | 505-1 PM/OV filter and OV protection kit from B&C |
| From: | "lwinger" <larrywinger(at)gmail.com> |
I have an extra, brand-new 505-1 PM/OV filter and OV protection kit from B&C.
They sell for $65, but the first person with $45 (plus shipping) can have it.
Please contact me off-list at larrywinger(at)gmail.com.
--------
Larry Winger
Tustin, CA
Plans building 601XL/650 with Corvair
Fuselage on gear
Canopy nearly complete
www.mykitlog.com/lwinger
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=261352#261352
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Voltage Drop / amp ????? |
| From: | "jimysymonds" <jimysymonds(at)gmail.com> |
You can play around with the others but if you want to work, the shoes has to be
your choice.
Did you find this review helpful?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=261366#261366
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Schematic for OVM-28 |
At 06:12 PM 9/3/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>B&C has discontinued the OVM14 and 28 units completely with no plans
>to continue them. I have a need for several more and I am not
>interested in the large block variety OV solution they are selling
>now. The original was ideal for my usage and the larger form factor
>presents un-necessary problems.
>
>Does someone have the schematic and component list for those
>units. To get what I want, I am not above building my own.
Sure. Here's a data package I published on the OVM-series
crowbar modules . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/DIY/DIY_Crowbar_OVP_F.pdf
I've begun the manufacture of the OVM-14 devices . . . and
I could do some 28v versions for you. They're not on my website
catalog yet. They're $25 each. You can order at
https://matronics.com/aeroelectric/Catalog/AECcatalog.html
and put the quantity you want in the comments box at the
bottom.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 505-1 PM/OV filter and OV protection kit from |
B&C
At 10:28 PM 9/3/2009, you wrote:
>
>I have an extra, brand-new 505-1 PM/OV filter and OV protection kit
>from B&C. They sell for $65, but the first person with $45 (plus
>shipping) can have it. Please contact me off-list at larrywinger(at)gmail.com.
Larry, are you sure you want to do this? The
only item in that kit that is not useful to you
in the Z-9 configuration is the OVM-14 crowbar
module. Since B&C no longer offers that as a
separate piece of merchandise, it shouldn't
be hard to sell it. But you'll need the capacitor,
relay and you can use the indicator lamp if it
fits into your panel decor.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 505-1 PM/OV filter and OV protection kit from B&C |
| From: | "lwinger" <larrywinger(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks, Bob. That fills in a gap in my understanding of the relationship between
the present and future products.
I guess that means that James is still looking for an OVM-14, I may be able to
help.
--------
Larry Winger
Tustin, CA
Plans building 601XL/650 with Corvair
Fuselage on gear
Canopy nearly complete
www.mykitlog.com/lwinger
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=261398#261398
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery charge voltage |
My RV7A is not flying yet but after much reading here over the years I
decided I was confident to make my own battery solution for my Yamaha
personal watercraft. Since I only use the boat for one week of the year, it
doesn't make sense for me to keep a "manufacturer's recommended battery" in
it all year due to the cost. It seemed to need a new one every couple years
even though I kept it on a maintainer during the other 51 weeks.
Background:
Original OEM battery was 12V Champion 16CL-B flooded lead/acid motorcycle
battery
This is probably the worst battery you can
choose for operational "fragility" . . .
Engine is 155HP 2-cycle Yamaha
Battery was always left in the boat and on a batt maintainer during off
season,
What brand/model of maintainer?
This year I bought a no-name RGB 17AH battery and it cranked/started the
engine just fine.
I made a voltage measurement with the engine running a various RPM and found
that the charging voltage (with battery connected) ranged from 13.0 to 13.4
volts.
Pretty low. I'm pretty sure this engine would
have a pm alternator. Does the rectifier/regulator
have and adjustment screw on it?
Am I correct to conclude that with this arrangement, while good enough to
start the engine, it will never get fully charged up? I would expect to see
14+ volts to charge the OEM flooded battery.
. . . or ANY lead-acid technology . . .
Could this be why that OEM
battery never seemed to last more than a couple years even though it was on
a charger 95% of the time.
Flooded batteries suck for air while on storage.
. . . but it could be a combination of flooded
technology and/or the operating features of
the maintainer. Not all maintainers are cut from
the same engineering expertise. If you plug the
maintainer in while the vehicle is parked, it SHOULD
get fully charged between uses . . . so the low
bus voltage shouldn't be a service life factor.
What, if any, difference is there between the recommended charge voltage for
these two batteries?
None . . .
This is relevant to my future RV because it too will likely be put away for
long periods during the off season. I don't know yet whether I will use a
flooded or RGB battery.
. . . why recombinant gas of course. No battery box.
No spills. Very good self life. Better cranking performance
for the weight and volume. Much better low temperature
performance. Flooded batteries should
be relegated to the museums of electro-whizzies that
have suffered the inevitable effects of planned
obsolescence characteristic of an evolving technology.
But even then, don't get sucked into complacent
apathy because it's the newest and best we know
how to do. If you're going to depend on this battery
for support of a minimum list of equipment during
alternator-out conditions, it needs to be treated
like a house plant. Keep an eye on it's CAPACITY
and replace it when design goals for alternator-out
endurance are no longer met.
It's exceedingly unlikely that you'll keep the
battery on board for more than 3-4 years under the
best of circumstances . . . and it will still be
cranking the engine just fine when you take it out.
Batteries that fail to crank an engine have been
useless as sources of back-up power for some period
of time.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery charge voltage |
At 08:06 PM 9/3/2009, you wrote:
>
>Bevan,
>
>My own personal findings are that a "maintainer" set to about 13.1
>to 13.2 is about right to handle new and old flooded batteries. If
>you push it higher, the older batt's with a little bit of sulphation
>and other cranky aging, may gas too much when taking in more than
>13.2. A new batt. with no internal deteration handles tad bit more
>voltage without gassing.
>
>In the normal use airplane world, we use our birds too little. This
>is hard on lead/acid batts. Usual life is about 2-3 years. I have
>have had as much as 7 years life when keeping on a tuned up
>maintainer. Even after 7 years I replace the batt. just to keep the
>worry factor at bay.
Worry factor? Did you have any protocols in
place for verifying the battery's capacity?
If one is depending on a battery for KNOWN
levels of performance in alternator-out
situations, then the prudent aviator will
usually replace the battery long before it
quits cranking the engine.
>What I mean by a "tuned up" unit. I have found that more than 50%
>of the maintainers are not set correctly during manuf. To many are
>set to higher voltage. Most of them have 1 or 2 pots inside the
>case that can be tuned to the best float voltage. Many are a pain
>to take apart in their potted cases.
Keep in mind that there are a lot of folks selling
"battery maintenance products." We've evaluated
a number of devices here in our shop. While
the widely acclaimed devices from Battery Minder,
Battery Tender and Schumacher do deliver true
"maintainer like" performance, some do not
(including a few devices from Harbor Freight).
>Be sure to check the float voltage on any maintainer about 24 hrs.
>after connection to the batt. with an accurate digital DVM or
>similar. Again, my personal high setting is 13.2 v.
That's a good target value for any maintainer
for lead-acid batteries. This is determined by
the chemistry's open circuit voltage at rest.
All of our batteries here in the shop read 12.9
to 13.0 volts after being off the charger for
a few days. The goal of a maintainer is to simply
support those loads INTERNAL to the battery that
tend to discharge it over time. Hence the maintenence
voltage need not be much if any higher than that.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Current sensor location |
| From: | "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com> |
I have an acs0714 microchip that reads up to 20 amps and connects to a micro-controller.
I am at a total loss on where to hook this thing up.
I want it to operate like the old style amp meters. Left discharge, right charge.
I can not think of a place that would show both?
If I hook it bat to voltage regulator that shows charging.
If I hook it bat to 12v bus that shows discharge.
The chip is bidirectional so it will read in both directions.
Thanx for your help.
Don
zenith 601 xl
jabiruu 3300
--------
Don Merritt- Laredo, Tx
Apologies if I seem antagonistic.
I believe in the freeflowing ideas and discussions between individuals for assistance
in this thing we call life.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=261896#261896
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob McCallum" <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Current sensor location |
Don;
The only device which both charges and discharges is the battery. Therefore
the only lead where you can measure this charge/discharge cycle is the main
battery cable to/from the battery. (Or technically also the ground cable to
the battery as an alternate) If you don't want to "see" starter currents,
then you'd monitor the main cable feeding the rest of the system beyond the
input to the starter contactor. You might want to research the usefulness of
this information before going to this trouble however. The simple low
voltage warning combined with over-voltage protection gives you much more
valuable information, potentially much sooner, than any ammeter indication
will. The low voltage light will grab your attention right away whereas it
may take a while to discern a battery discharge on an ammeter especially if
the discharge is small. A conventional ammeter measuring battery current
will typically read zero most of the time. With light loads and only an
ammeter you could potentially drain the battery to the point of being
totally useless and never know until everything goes dark. Not the "best we
know how to do" paraphrasing Bob K.
Bob McC
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-
> server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of mosquito56
> Sent: Monday, September 07, 2009 2:05 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Current sensor location
>
>
> I have an acs0714 microchip that reads up to 20 amps and connects to a
micro-
> controller. I am at a total loss on where to hook this thing up.
>
> I want it to operate like the old style amp meters. Left discharge,
right charge. I can
> not think of a place that would show both?
> If I hook it bat to voltage regulator that shows charging.
> If I hook it bat to 12v bus that shows discharge.
>
> The chip is bidirectional so it will read in both directions.
> Thanx for your help.
>
> Don
> zenith 601 xl
> jabiruu 3300
>
> --------
> Don Merritt- Laredo, Tx
> Apologies if I seem antagonistic.
> I believe in the freeflowing ideas and discussions between individuals
for assistance in
> this thing we call life.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=261896#261896
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | thomas sargent <sarg314(at)gmail.com> |
I'm looking at ammeters in the spruce catalog. They don't give much
information.
Are there any 2 1/4" aircraft ammeters that use a hall effect sensor? I'm
guessing they'd mention it if they did.
--
Tom Sargent
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Battery Maintainer and Dual System |
| From: | "al38kit" <alfranken(at)msn.com> |
I picked up the Schumacher 1562A Charger-Maintainer...It looks like a neat unit...
Two questions...I would expect it should be a good choice for the odyssey batteries...right?
When I get around to attempting to put a maintainer on a dual system with two batteries,
any good ideas on hooking up a maintainer?
Do you think a person should use two maintainers, or attempt to charge both batteries
with one? I can see some potential for screw ups using one...
Thanks,
Al Kittleson
Granbury, TX
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=261983#261983
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | paul wilson <pwmac(at)sisna.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Maintainer and Dual System |
I have 3 batts in my shop hooked up in parallel to one 1562A and sure
enough all three are fully charged when ever I check them. For my
rolling fleet I use a separate 1562 for each one. Its hard to drive
them all so the maintainer keeps them all topped up.
PW
=========
At 08:11 PM 9/7/2009, you wrote:
>
>I picked up the Schumacher 1562A Charger-Maintainer...It looks like
>a neat unit...
>
>Two questions...I would expect it should be a good choice for the
>odyssey batteries...right?
>
>When I get around to attempting to put a maintainer on a dual system
>with two batteries, any good ideas on hooking up a maintainer?
>
>Do you think a person should use two maintainers, or attempt to
>charge both batteries with one? I can see some potential for screw
>ups using one...
>
>Thanks,
>
>Al Kittleson
>Granbury, TX
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=261983#261983
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Battery Maintainer and Dual System |
| From: | Bob Verwey <bob.verwey(at)gmail.com> |
Paul, I was under the impression that due to differing states each battery
will have to be charged separately to keep it "full" ?
Bob Verwey
A35 Bonanza ZU-DLW
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 4:47 AM, paul wilson wrote:
>
> I have 3 batts in my shop hooked up in parallel to one 1562A and sure
> enough all three are fully charged when ever I check them. For my rolling
> fleet I use a separate 1562 for each one. Its hard to drive them all so the
> maintainer keeps them all topped up.
> PW
> =========
>
>
> At 08:11 PM 9/7/2009, you wrote:
>
>>
>> I picked up the Schumacher 1562A Charger-Maintainer...It looks like a neat
>> unit...
>>
>> Two questions...I would expect it should be a good choice for the odyssey
>> batteries...right?
>>
>> When I get around to attempting to put a maintainer on a dual system with
>> two batteries, any good ideas on hooking up a maintainer?
>>
>> Do you think a person should use two maintainers, or attempt to charge
>> both batteries with one? I can see some potential for screw ups using
>> one...
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Al Kittleson
>> Granbury, TX
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=261983#261983
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
At 06:43 PM 9/7/2009, you wrote:
>I'm looking at ammeters in the spruce
>catalog. They don't give much information.
>
>Are there any 2 1/4" aircraft ammeters that use
>a hall effect sensor? I'm guessing they'd mention it if they did.
Probably not. The 2.25" devices are carry-overs from
the heyday of steam gages . . . hall effect sensors
are the adoptees of of digital/glass displays.
Hoever, there are 2.25" devices out there that
are driven by a shunt.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | paul wilson <pwmac(at)sisna.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Maintainer and Dual System |
After months and months each batt arrive at the same volts within the
accuracy of my cheap meter. Seems to work fine. I have a large truck
(size 65) flooded, a smaller deep cycle AGM for the VW diesel and a
large (65) AGM all in parallel. Quite a diverse combination of
batts. Bob will have to explain how my combo works.
PW
=========
At 11:37 PM 9/7/2009, you wrote:
>Paul, I was under the impression that due to differing states each
>battery will have to be charged separately to keep it "full" ?
>
>Bob Verwey
>A35 Bonanza ZU-DLW
>
>On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 4:47 AM, paul wilson
><pwmac(at)sisna.com> wrote:
><pwmac(at)sisna.com>
>
>I have 3 batts in my shop hooked up in parallel to one 1562A and
>sure enough all three are fully charged when ever I check them. For
>my rolling fleet I use a separate 1562 for each one. Its hard to
>drive them all so the maintainer keeps them all topped up.
>PW
>=========
>
>
>At 08:11 PM 9/7/2009, you wrote:
><alfranken(at)msn.com>
>
>I picked up the Schumacher 1562A Charger-Maintainer...It looks like
>a neat unit...
>
>Two questions...I would expect it should be a good choice for the
>odyssey batteries...right?
>
>When I get around to attempting to put a maintainer on a dual system
>with two batteries, any good ideas on hooking up a maintainer?
>
>Do you think a person should use two maintainers, or attempt to
>charge both batteries with one? I can see some potential for screw
>ups using one...
>
>Thanks,
>
>Al Kittleson
>Granbury, TX
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
><http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=261983#261983>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=261983#261983
>
>
>==========
>-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>==========
>http://forums.matronics.com
>==========
>le, List Admin.
>="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>==========
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com> |
| Subject: | 24V Systems and Contactors |
Hey there Bob,
I see that the contactors that B&C supply are only for use on 12V systems;
any idea of where to get 24V ones for use in the Z-Diagrams? Or can one
adapt the 12V ones to use in a 24V system? It looks to me as if I would
have to use a 15 ohm 10W or higher resistor to drop the voltage to the
contactor coil.
Jay
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
| Subject: | 24V Systems and Contactors |
http://www.gigavac.com/products/contactors/datasheets/gx11/index.htm
Bruce
www.Glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay
Hyde
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2009 5:43 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: 24V Systems and Contactors
Hey there Bob,
I see that the contactors that B&C supply are only for use on 12V
systems; any idea of where to get 24V ones for use in the Z-Diagrams?
Or can one adapt the 12V ones to use in a 24V system? It looks to me as
if I would have to use a 15 ohm 10W or higher resistor to drop the
voltage to the contactor coil.
Jay
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 24V Systems and Contactors |
Hey there Bob,
I see that the contactors that B&C supply are only for use on 12V
systems; any idea of where to get 24V ones for use in the Z-Diagrams?
Or can one adapt the 12V ones to use in a 24V system? It looks to me as
if I would have to use a 15 ohm 10W or higher resistor to drop the
voltage to the contactor coil.
Jay
Aircraft spruce has a 24V master contactor.
Roger
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 24V Systems and Contactors |
At 04:43 PM 9/8/2009, you wrote:
>Hey there Bob,
>I see that the contactors that B&C supply are only for use on 12V
>systems; any idea of where to get 24V ones for use in the
>Z-Diagrams? Or can one adapt the 12V ones to use in a 24V
>system? It looks to me as if I would have to use a 15 ohm 10W or
>higher resistor to drop the voltage to the contactor coil.
That style of contactor (as are most other styles) available
in a variety of operating voltages. Check out the
various catalogs under "Contactors" at:
http://aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data.html
You can get many of those devices from a number of
sources including:
http://www.alliedelec.com
http://www.newark.com
http://www.mouser.com
. . . and no doubt others.
By the way, our 9024 series power monitoring and
management devices will be available in both 12
and 24 volt versions.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RG58 vs. RG59 |
At 11:17 AM 9/9/2009, you wrote:
>I am assembling an APRS system. I have created an J-pole antenna
>out of 300 ohm twin-lead cable (designed to send out short 144.39
>MHz data transmissions)
Why so mechanically complex an antenna in an airplane?
We're talking VHF which is line of sight. What leads
you to believe that this device will perform any better
than a simple 1/4-wave vertical used in VHF communications
applications?
>and have soldered onto that a short (18 inch) length of RG-58
>coax..I note that AEC recommends RG-58 over RG-59 due to the
>latter's higher impedance.
RG58's 50 ohm characteristic impedance has been
generally adopted by the electronics industry
as the design of choice for power handling capability
while the RG58's 75 ohm impedance is favored for
lower loss. The later is used in television and
low level signal situations.
> To connect the coax to the APRS module requires a female SMA
> connector -- I found one at Radio Shack that says it is designed
> for crimping onto RG-58 cable...so far so good. I've been to three
> local stores and can only find strippers/crimpers for RG-59
> cable. However, the ones I find online make it sound like tools
> for RG-58 and RG-59 cable are interchangeable. I also note from
> Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coaxial_cable] that RG-58
> and RG-59 cable have slight differences in their inner, outer and
> dielectric diameters.
Yes, connectors, strippers and application tools are
specific to the dimensions of the coax . . .
>Question #1: Can I successfully use an RG-59 stripper/crimper to
>attach an SMA connector to RG-58 cable or do I need to find a tool
>specifically designed for RG-58 cable?
You need the right tool . . .
>Question #2: Will a crimping tool work equally well with BNC and
>SMA connectors or do I need separate tools for each?
It's brand and part number specific. While MOST
manufacturer's of RG58 compatible connectors will
crimp the shield/pin grips with a .068"/.113" hexes,
it's not automatic. You need to match the tool with the
connector.
>Bonus question: Would my J-pole antenna perform better laying flat
>(horizontal) in my fiberglass wingtip or looped around the leading
>edge so it has some "vertical polarization"?
>
>Thanks to whoever can provide guidance.
Please consider a single run of RG400 from the accessory
to a simple 1/4-wave antenna on a ground plane fabricated
as described in many resources including the chapter
on antennas in the AeroElectric Connection.
You can get a compatible SMA male here:
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=ACX1192-ND
You can get a BNC male and the tool to install both
connectors at:
http://bandc.biz
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | ANL current limiters in Z13-8 |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
> Lincoln,
>
>
snip
>
>
> I've also got a 80 amp (bargain basement item) alternator that helps
> keep the nose down, but unless I install central air-conditioning, I'll
> never use the capacity. I've got a 30 A ANL in front of the load.
>
>
> Glenn
>
>
Glenn,
Does your battery charging current go through this ANL? If so, on a cold
morning after a hard start, I believe your alternator might produce its
rated output (restoring the battery) for some amount of time (many
seconds), unrelated to bus loads. Seems like the ANL might be opened as a
result.
Regards,
Matt-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob McCallum" <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | ANL current limiters in Z13-8 |
Matt;
Don't forget that ANL fuses will carry considerably more than twice their
rated current almost indefinitely, certainly for many minutes. It's unlikely
that starting, even on those difficult cold mornings will drain the battery
enough that the alternator would work hard and long enough to "blow" the
ANL. The time constant graph for a 35 amp ANL shown in the attached link is
vertical at 90 amps meaning that it will hold indefinitely at that current
flow or any lesser value. It's unlikely that an 80 amp alternator would be
putting out over 100 amps for an extended period, and that's what it would
take to open the ANL. Under ideal conditions the 80 Amp alternator might
make it to 90 Amps, but not a lot more.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/anl/anlvsjjs.html
Bob McC
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-
> server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt Prather
> Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 5:00 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: ANL current limiters in Z13-8
>
>
> > Lincoln,
> >
> >
> >
> snip
> >
> >
> > I've also got a 80 amp (bargain basement item) alternator that helps
> > keep the nose down, but unless I install central air-conditioning, I'll
> > never use the capacity. I've got a 30 A ANL in front of the load.
> >
> >
> >
> > Glenn
> >
> >
>
> Glenn,
>
> Does your battery charging current go through this ANL? If so, on a cold
> morning after a hard start, I believe your alternator might produce its
> rated output (restoring the battery) for some amount of time (many
> seconds), unrelated to bus loads. Seems like the ANL might be opened as a
> result.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Matt-
>
>
>
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ANL current limiters in Z13-8 |
At 02:43 PM 9/9/2009, you wrote:
>Spent an hour or so trying to visualize where everything is going to
>mount on the firewall while studying Z-13/8 and came upon Note 10
>regarding current limiters. I understand that these are replacing
>the In-Line Fuses referred to in Chapter 10 of AEC but had these questions:
>
>1. With a 40A alternator, do I use a 40A ANL current limiter?
Yes, or even a 30 - 35 amp device. These are "current limiters",
not fuses. They are EXCEEDINGLY robust and VERY slow. Thus they
are used not for the protection of feeders to individual accessories
like fuses/breakers. They are intended to separate a hard fadeult in
a robust feeder (like the alternator b-lead) where shorted diodes
in the alternator would offer battery fed fault currents on
the order of many hundreds of amps.
Cars don't use them and to the best of my knowledge, the
risks have been low(?). But one wonders sometimes as to
the root cause of some car-fires that start under the hood.
In any case, if you co the mini-ANL route, they're small,
light and no big deal to install.
http://www.knukonceptz.com/productMaster.cfm?category=Mini-ANL%20Fuse
You can make your own mounting block with a chunk of phenolic,
delrin, etc and some 10-32 hardware.
As you can see here . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Fuses_and_Current_Limiters/Bussman/ANL_Specs.pdf
the "current limiter" is quite robust.
>2. Any reason the 4 AWG wire (and ANL current limiter) from the
>alternator B lead can't go to the "downstream" side of the battery
>contactor instead of the "upstream" side of the starter
>contactor? They both seem to be electrically equivalent
>particularly since the wire between them is so short.
The current limiter is a hedge against failed
alternator diodes. You can put the devise at either
end of the b-lead feeder . . .
I draw it at the starter contactor end becuase it's
more difficult to mount it on the back of the alternator.
Of course you can put it in the middle . . .
>3. The following is found under Note 10. in AEC: "Alternator
>noises in the system are reduced by not mounting the alternator
>breaker on the panel in the traditional fashion...consider
>installing the breaker as close as possible to the starter
>contactor" -- Is this referring to the ANL current limiter
>described above or the circuit breaker for the alternator field? If
>the latter, I'm confused and hope someone can provide some more explanation.
This is referring to the legacy practice of brining
alternator b-leads into the cockpit to tie to a 60A
or so breaker on the panel. There's no practical, or
safety related reason for doing this . . . we quit doing
it at Beech years ago.
There are reasons to keep it forward of the firewall
to reduce the level of magnetic interference to compass
and/or coupled to adjacent instrumentation or avionics
wires.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Ray Allen T2-7A trim sevro problems |
| From: | "Thruster87" <alania(at)optusnet.com.au> |
Hi Just installed the aileron trim and elevator trim units but the elevator LED
indicator powers up OK but only indicates one position which is up.I changed
the elevator trim LED to the aileron trim LED and everything is OK.Checked all
wiring to elevator trim servo.So it appears that the problems stems inside the
elevator trim servo unit.What can be done ? Cheers Alan [if I hold the red and
black wires to the elevator LED indicator it seems to work depending on how
tight I squeeze thus my body resistance changing]
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262654#262654
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ray Allen T2-7A trim sevro problems |
| From: | "chris Sinfield" <chris_sinfield(at)yahoo.com.au> |
Alan
borrow my elevator trim actuator to prove its that and then send it back to get
fixed? or get your aileron one out to prove the same..
Chris..
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262686#262686
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ray Allen T2-7A trim sevro problems |
| From: | "rock5219" <rer51(at)netscape.ca> |
I just hooked mine up a couple of weeks ago, complete with the speed reducer. Work
great. I'll see if we made any changes from the installation drawings. Randy
R.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262688#262688
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ray Allen T2-7A trim sevro problems |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
You can send the trim box back to Ray Allen and they will be happy to fix it for you. For anyone who wants to know more about the trim box, see the last few pages of: http://tiny.cc/w1W5p
A couple of notes: I have a couple TSCMRs left, but I have recently started delivering
TSCMR-A with the following changes:
1) Uses Ethernet Cat 5E cable for connection.
2) Furnished with the control pot.
3) "In Transit" and "Locked" indicator LEDs
4) Much improved LED bar graph support
5) Added Needle Indicator support
The "Much improved LED Bar Graph support" is the result of my abandoning the MAC/RAC
standard voltages where they use 1.2 Volts as the maximum voltage to be
sensed by the bar graph innards. This was always problematic, and resulted in
many complaints of jumpy bar graphs when transmitting, etc. I changed this to
12V and life is much easier.
When I look up at the night sky and think about the billions of stars and galaxies
out there, I think to myself: I'm amazing!
- Peter Serafinowicz
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262728#262728
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Tachometer Generator Wiring |
| From: | "Craig Winkelmann" <capav8r(at)gmail.com> |
I have a tachometer generator on my aircraft. I am changing the tach from an analog
to digital tach. The wiring from the tach gen is two leads and neither
are shielded. Given this is an AC signal in the aircraft, I was wondering if
these leads need to be shielded. Any advice or insight into tach gens would be
welcome.
Thank you,
Craig
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262736#262736
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi all,
I am building an RV 8. The battery is rear mounted. I was planning to
ground the battery to the lower longeron that is directly adjacent. I
checked with Vans, who said that four or five rivets no closer than 1/2 inch
apart is fine structurally.
I had previously primed the longeron, so I carefully scraped that off and
buffed it up with white Scotchbrite. I built a lug of 1/8th aluminum with
a 1/4" nutplate on the bottom, which I also carefully polished up. The
question is, is it okay to just rivet these two pieces of aluminum together or
is there something I should sandwich in between them to improve the
connection? Does the bond need to be sealed with dielectric grease or some such?
What have others done in this situation?
Regards,
Michael Wynn
RV 8 Finishing
San Ramon, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tachometer Generator Wiring |
At 08:09 PM 9/12/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>I have a tachometer generator on my aircraft. I am changing the
>tach from an analog to digital tach. The wiring from the tach gen
>is two leads and neither are shielded. Given this is an AC signal
>in the aircraft, I was wondering if these leads need to be
>shielded. Any advice or insight into tach gens would be welcome.
No. It's a sine-wave, low voltage, low frequency
signal that does not propagate electrostatically
between bundles.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Glen Matejcek <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Grounding Lug |
HI Mike-
I have a similar configuration and used a similar solution. I acquired a tube
of goo used to protect aluminum electrical connections from corrosion and and
applied it to the joint area. I'm on the road at the moment, so I can't access
the brand, but IIRC I got it off the shelf at a local home improvement center.
Actually, I'd bet just about anything it was GB, or G&B, whatever the big
name brand is for electrical accessories.
FWIW-
>
>From: MLWynn(at)aol.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Grounding Lug
>
>Hi all,
>
>I am building an RV 8. The battery is rear mounted. I was planning to
>ground the battery to the lower longeron that is directly adjacent. I
>checked with Vans, who said that four or five rivets no closer than 1/2 inch
>apart is fine structurally.
>
>I had previously primed the longeron, so I carefully scraped that off and
>buffed it up with white Scotchbrite. I built a lug of 1/8th aluminum with
>a 1/4" nutplate on the bottom, which I also carefully polished up. The
>question is, is it okay to just rivet these two pieces of aluminum together or
>
>is there something I should sandwich in between them to improve the
>connection? Does the bond need to be sealed with dielectric grease or some such?
>
> What have others done in this situation?
>
>Regards,
>
>Michael Wynn
>RV 8 Finishing
>San Ramon, CA
>
Glen Matejcek
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tachometer Generator Wiring |
| From: | "Craig Winkelmann" <capav8r(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks Bob. I have been told by some other folks that the tach gen can be a significant
source of noise. It is my understanding that in the original wiring
in this aircraft (Yak) the tach gen leads were shielded.
Craig
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262817#262817
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Leonard" <buzzleo(at)graceba.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ray Allen T2-7A trim sevro problems |
I can't find this in acronym finder "TSCMR" what does it mean?
SEL
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tachometer Generator Wiring |
| From: | "Craig Winkelmann" <capav8r(at)gmail.com> |
Bob:
The problem I have is that at RPM below 1000, I get noise in the signal and the
tach jumps all over the place. Over 1000 RPM and all is fine. The radial engine
idles at 500 rpm so this is a problem.
The tach gen wires go to a circuit that is a basically a voltage divider and a
comparator to provide a clean pulse for the engine monitor system.
It has been suggested to 1) shield the tach gen wires to reduce noise, 2) add a
0.1 microfarad ceramic capacitor as a filter, and/or 3) change the voltage at
which the comparator triggers (raise the limit for it to trigger).
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Craig
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262838#262838
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ray Allen T2-7A trim sevro problems |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
True Servo Control for MAC/RAC. This name comes from the fact that the MAC/RAC
trim box is just a motor and a position indicator pot that are not connected to
each other. The TSCMR makes it a real servo and there are advantages to doing
so. See my website.
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262839#262839
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LARRY FLORMAN, M.D." <larryflo(at)prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Alternator Noise |
I have built a SeaRey witha Rotax 912.- It has an internal alternator.-
I have a tremendous amount of noise in the headset.- I have isolated the
problem to the regulator or alternator.- The Radio Shack filters are no
longer available.-- Any suggestions?- Ameriking?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com> |
| Subject: | Filter for Hand held devices |
Hi there Bob,
In your Aeroelectric Connection book/ manual you provide a circuit diagram
for a 'Dual Power Conditioner " (Figure 16.4) where you provide part numbers
for the diodes and inductor components. Would you be able to provide
specifications for these instead? I tried to search Radio Shack for the
inductor part number but had no luck; plus, we have no radio shack in South
Africa so I need to be able to get the part by specification.. :-)
Thanks
Jay
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Filter for Hand held devices |
| From: | "nuckollsr" <bob.nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
Are you sure you need the filter? Most modern hand helds supplied with DC power
input jacks and automotive cigar lighter power cords are already configured to
live in the rough and tumble world of vehicular DC power systems. The discussions
on filters and firewalls in the 'Connection are intended to illustrate
SOLUTIONS to noise issues should such problems arise. It's not necessary or recommended
that such devices be included as an expanded design goal.
Bob . . .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262910#262910
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise |
| From: | "nuckollsr" <bob.nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
Keep in mind that perhaps thousands of similar alternator/regulator systems are
flying where the builders have reported no problems with noise in their electronics.
This strongly suggests that the optimum solution to your problem is to
deduce the difference between how your components are installed and wired as
compared to other systems flying.
Can you describe the your radio/audio system and how you configured the ground
system for your electrical and avionics?
One of the reasons that filters are becoming difficult to find is because folks
who design and manufacture accessories have learned how to make them perform
well (tolerate normal and expected noise levels) in vehicular DC power systems.
The optimum solution for your problem may well be a change to configuration
as opposed to adding the cost, weight and complexity of a filter (which may not
fix the problem).
Bob . . .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262911#262911
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Filter for Hand held devices |
I think that I do need one; I am using a cigarette lighter type connection
to power an Ipod power supply. When I connect this to the Ipod no noise is
heard, but when I connect the Ipod to the radio/ intercom system I
immediately get a high pitched noise in the earphones. I separated the
power and signal leads and the noise stayed. I moved the power supply of
the cigarette/ Ipod charger directly to the battery and the noise stayed. I
will still try a twisted pair on the power supply to the radio/intercom but
it seems to me that the noise is generated by the Ipod charger so I thought
that a filter might do the trick. Perhaps even a ferrite bead on the
positive in to the radio will work.
The only other thing that I can think of is that the loop formed by the
plug->Ipod charger->Ipod audio out->radio/intercom is somehow causing the
problem; but how does one get rid of that loop- its intrinsic to the music
input?
So I am going to try all of these out but need the components for the filter
to give it a bash as well...
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of nuckollsr
Sent: 14 September 2009 02:28 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Filter for Hand held devices
Are you sure you need the filter? Most modern hand helds supplied with DC
power input jacks and automotive cigar lighter power cords are already
configured to live in the rough and tumble world of vehicular DC power
systems. The discussions on filters and firewalls in the 'Connection are
intended to illustrate SOLUTIONS to noise issues should such problems arise.
It's not necessary or recommended that such devices be included as an
expanded design goal.
Bob . . .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262910#262910
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fried Master Wires |
| From: | "susanspy" <susanspy(at)gmail.com> |
hello all,
i am Susan here, i am fun of this place thanks alot for the great informative post
do some more post here.
thanks a lot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262922#262922
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Florman <larryflo(at)prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise |
Bob,
My SeaRey is so tightly wired tha to troubleshoot woul be a massive event ( i.e.
Remove wings, lift engine, drain cooling, etc).
I have a Microaire transceiver and transponder, a PS Engineering intercom. I explicitly
followed the wiring instruction. The com antenna is mounted on top forward
of the engine.
Even the panel is an ordeal to deal with. I guess I am looking for a way around
my inadequacies.
On Sep 14, 2009, at 8:38 AM, "nuckollsr" wrote:
Keep in mind that perhaps thousands of similar alternator/regulator systems are
flying where the builders have reported no problems with noise in their electronics.
This strongly suggests that the optimum solution to your problem is to
deduce the difference between how your components are installed and wired as
compared to other systems flying.
Can you describe the your radio/audio system and how you configured the ground
system for your electrical and avionics?
One of the reasons that filters are becoming difficult to find is because folks
who design and manufacture accessories have learned how to make them perform
well (tolerate normal and expected noise levels) in vehicular DC power systems.
The optimum solution for your problem may well be a change to configuration
as opposed to adding the cost, weight and complexity of a filter (which may not
fix the problem).
Bob . . .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262911#262911
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise |
Do you have a large capacitor between the outgoing positive of the regulator
and ground, as suggested on Z-16?
Jay
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry
Florman
Sent: 14 September 2009 04:38 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Alternator Noise
Bob,
My SeaRey is so tightly wired tha to troubleshoot woul be a massive event (
i.e. Remove wings, lift engine, drain cooling, etc).
I have a Microaire transceiver and transponder, a PS Engineering intercom. I
explicitly followed the wiring instruction. The com antenna is mounted on
top forward of the engine.
Even the panel is an ordeal to deal with. I guess I am looking for a way
around my inadequacies.
On Sep 14, 2009, at 8:38 AM, "nuckollsr"
wrote:
Keep in mind that perhaps thousands of similar alternator/regulator systems
are flying where the builders have reported no problems with noise in their
electronics. This strongly suggests that the optimum solution to your
problem is to deduce the difference between how your components are
installed and wired as compared to other systems flying.
Can you describe the your radio/audio system and how you configured the
ground system for your electrical and avionics?
One of the reasons that filters are becoming difficult to find is because
folks who design and manufacture accessories have learned how to make them
perform well (tolerate normal and expected noise levels) in vehicular DC
power systems. The optimum solution for your problem may well be a change to
configuration as opposed to adding the cost, weight and complexity of a
filter (which may not fix the problem).
Bob . . .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262911#262911
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | PeterHunt1(at)aol.com |
In 420 house over three plus years a number of Van's gauges have failed
(fuel quantity, volts, amps, oil pressure). Now I must install the third volt
meter. I like the look of Van's gauges and the fact that they match, but
don't like the failure rate. What have your experiences been?
Pete in Clearwater
RV-6 - Reserve Grand Champion, S 'n F 2006 and other awards
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tachometer Generator Wiring |
At 03:30 PM 9/13/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>Thanks Bob. I have been told by some other folks that the tach gen
>can be a significant source of noise. It is my understanding that
>in the original wiring in this aircraft (Yak) the tach gen leads were shielded.
>
>Craig
>
I dont' see how . . . These are 3-phase, pm
alternators delivering data on a twisted trio
of wires . . .
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Florman <larryflo(at)prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise |
Yes
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 14, 2009, at 11:23 AM, "Jay Hyde" wrote:
Do you have a large capacitor between the outgoing positive of the regulator
and ground, as suggested on Z-16?
Jay
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry
Florman
Sent: 14 September 2009 04:38 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Alternator Noise
Bob,
My SeaRey is so tightly wired tha to troubleshoot woul be a massive event (
i.e. Remove wings, lift engine, drain cooling, etc).
I have a Microaire transceiver and transponder, a PS Engineering intercom. I
explicitly followed the wiring instruction. The com antenna is mounted on
top forward of the engine.
Even the panel is an ordeal to deal with. I guess I am looking for a way
around my inadequacies.
On Sep 14, 2009, at 8:38 AM, "nuckollsr"
wrote:
Keep in mind that perhaps thousands of similar alternator/regulator systems
are flying where the builders have reported no problems with noise in their
electronics. This strongly suggests that the optimum solution to your
problem is to deduce the difference between how your components are
installed and wired as compared to other systems flying.
Can you describe the your radio/audio system and how you configured the
ground system for your electrical and avionics?
One of the reasons that filters are becoming difficult to find is because
folks who design and manufacture accessories have learned how to make them
perform well (tolerate normal and expected noise levels) in vehicular DC
power systems. The optimum solution for your problem may well be a change to
configuration as opposed to adding the cost, weight and complexity of a
filter (which may not fix the problem).
Bob . . .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262911#262911
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Florman <larryflo(at)prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise |
Yep.
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 14, 2009, at 11:23 AM, "Jay Hyde" wrote:
Do you have a large capacitor between the outgoing positive of the regulator
and ground, as suggested on Z-16?
Jay
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry
Florman
Sent: 14 September 2009 04:38 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Alternator Noise
Bob,
My SeaRey is so tightly wired tha to troubleshoot woul be a massive event (
i.e. Remove wings, lift engine, drain cooling, etc).
I have a Microaire transceiver and transponder, a PS Engineering intercom. I
explicitly followed the wiring instruction. The com antenna is mounted on
top forward of the engine.
Even the panel is an ordeal to deal with. I guess I am looking for a way
around my inadequacies.
On Sep 14, 2009, at 8:38 AM, "nuckollsr"
wrote:
Keep in mind that perhaps thousands of similar alternator/regulator systems
are flying where the builders have reported no problems with noise in their
electronics. This strongly suggests that the optimum solution to your
problem is to deduce the difference between how your components are
installed and wired as compared to other systems flying.
Can you describe the your radio/audio system and how you configured the
ground system for your electrical and avionics?
One of the reasons that filters are becoming difficult to find is because
folks who design and manufacture accessories have learned how to make them
perform well (tolerate normal and expected noise levels) in vehicular DC
power systems. The optimum solution for your problem may well be a change to
configuration as opposed to adding the cost, weight and complexity of a
filter (which may not fix the problem).
Bob . . .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262911#262911
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Grounding Lug |
At 12:40 AM 9/13/2009, you wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>I am building an RV 8. The battery is rear mounted. I was planning
>to ground the battery to the lower longeron that is directly
>adjacent. I checked with Vans, who said that four or five rivets no
>closer than 1/2 inch apart is fine structurally.
>
>I had previously primed the longeron, so I carefully scraped that
>off and buffed it up with white Scotchbrite. I built a lug of 1/8th
>aluminum with a 1/4" nutplate on the bottom, which I also carefully
>polished up. The question is, is it okay to just rivet these two
>pieces of aluminum together or is there something I should sandwich
>in between them to improve the connection? Does the bond need to be
>sealed with dielectric grease or some such? What have others done
>in this situation?
The goals for achieving gas-tightness of
the conducting materials are the same for
your ground lug as for putting terminals on
a piece of wire.
Don't take the corrosion proofing off your
nutplate . . . or other hardware. In fact,
there's no need to scuff the facing aluminum
parts, just get them clean.
Screws would be better than rivets. Rivets
are SHEAR fasteners and what you're trying
to achieve is a intimate contact between two
pieces of metal with TENSION fasteners.
4 - 5 stainless steel, 6-32 screws torqued
to values recommended by the manufacturer
(or AC43-13) would be better. A light coat
of silicone grease between faying surfaces
of the aluminum would be good too.
Having said all that, know that a whole
lot of folks have installed ground lugs
thusly . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_2.jpg
. . . and they're probably gong to be just
fine.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Pengilly" <peter(at)sportingaero.com> |
Similar, my pressure and temperature gauges failed at around 400 hours.
So
all of the Van=92s gauges, save for fuel gauges, were pull out and
replaced
with a GRT EIS 4000. Now approaching 700 hours I=92m going to replace
the fuel
gauges with a dual UMA 2 =BC.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
PeterHunt1(at)aol.com
Sent: 14 September 2009 18:46
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Van's gauges
In 420 house over three plus years a number of Van's gauges have failed
(fuel quantity, volts, amps, oil pressure). Now I must install the
third
volt meter. I like the look of Van's gauges and the fact that they
match,
but don't like the failure rate. What have your experiences been?
Pete in Clearwater
RV-6 - Reserve Grand Champion, S 'n F 2006 and other awards
_____
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Grounding Lug |
| From: | Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com> |
You can also alodine the parts before riveting / bolting.
Rick Girard
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 8:28 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 12:40 AM 9/13/2009, you wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am building an RV 8. The battery is rear mounted. I was planning to
> ground the battery to the lower longeron that is directly adjacent. I
> checked with Vans, who said that four or five rivets no closer than 1/2 inch
> apart is fine structurally.
>
> I had previously primed the longeron, so I carefully scraped that off and
> buffed it up with white Scotchbrite. I built a lug of 1/8th aluminum with a
> 1/4" nutplate on the bottom, which I also carefully polished up. The
> question is, is it okay to just rivet these two pieces of aluminum together
> or is there something I should sandwich in between them to improve the
> connection? Does the bond need to be sealed with dielectric grease or some
> such? What have others done in this situation?
>
>
> The goals for achieving gas-tightness of
> the conducting materials are the same for
> your ground lug as for putting terminals on
> a piece of wire.
>
> Don't take the corrosion proofing off your
> nutplate . . . or other hardware. In fact,
> there's no need to scuff the facing aluminum
> parts, just get them clean.
>
> Screws would be better than rivets. Rivets
> are SHEAR fasteners and what you're trying
> to achieve is a intimate contact between two
> pieces of metal with TENSION fasteners.
> 4 - 5 stainless steel, 6-32 screws torqued
> to values recommended by the manufacturer
> (or AC43-13) would be better. A light coat
> of silicone grease between faying surfaces
> of the aluminum would be good too.
>
> Having said all that, know that a whole
> lot of folks have installed ground lugs
> thusly . . .
>
> http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_2.jpg
>
> . . . and they're probably gong to be just
> fine.
>
> Bob . . .
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Wig-Wagging HDI lamps |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
More and more I get this inquiry: "I want to use your Wig-wag with HDI lamps. Duckworth
says they need to warm up for ten minutes and then they wig-wag fine.
I reply:
Yes, I have been looking at the problem. I even have a set here to measure. But...
In a previous life, I spent almost three decades building high power xenon short-arc,
HDI, and halogen lamp systems. So I have long experience with both the
lamps and their power supplies and their foibles. And I know in detail what is
needed to wig-wag them.
So my problem is--everything I know says not to wig-wag the HDI lamps because they
will have short lamp lifetimes. Everything that is an advantage of HDI lamps
disappears quickly if one abuses them by (let's say) 2500 restarts per hour.
Many problems with HDIs don't occur in any simple way either. There are second-
and even third- order problems to contend with. Furthermore, switched mode
power supplies and starters are particularly failure-prone when abused. I can
guarantee that the manufacturer of the lamp-supply-starter DO NOT warranty their
devices to be used in this fashion.
If the HDI lamp sellers insist that their lamps can be wig-wagged, I would love
to see the 100 hour data.
Until then, I cannot recommend using the Perihelion Design wig-wags for HDI lamps.
Maybe other manufacturers have a different opinion.
Any thoughts?
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=263038#263038
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wig-Wagging HDI lamps |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Go old school and use a mechanical solution.. How about a rotating mirror
(or lens) like in the old bubblegum lamps on a cop car? Can cause the
wig-wagging effect, and not just straight ahead - off to the side too.
The mirror could have a position where it's completely out of the path of
the beam allowing "steady burning" behavior, and full output - no
attenuation from the reflection.
Matt-
>
>
> More and more I get this inquiry: "I want to use your Wig-wag with HDI
> lamps. Duckworth says they need to warm up for ten minutes and then they
> wig-wag fine.
>
> I reply:
>
> Yes, I have been looking at the problem. I even have a set here to
> measure. But...
>
> In a previous life, I spent almost three decades building high power xenon
> short-arc, HDI, and halogen lamp systems. So I have long experience with
> both the lamps and their power supplies and their foibles. And I know in
> detail what is needed to wig-wag them.
>
> So my problem is--everything I know says not to wig-wag the HDI lamps
> because they will have short lamp lifetimes. Everything that is an
> advantage of HDI lamps disappears quickly if one abuses them by (let's
> say) 2500 restarts per hour. Many problems with HDIs don't occur in any
> simple way either. There are second- and even third- order problems to
> contend with. Furthermore, switched mode power supplies and starters are
> particularly failure-prone when abused. I can guarantee that the
> manufacturer of the lamp-supply-starter DO NOT warranty their devices to
> be used in this fashion.
>
> If the HDI lamp sellers insist that their lamps can be wig-wagged, I would
> love to see the 100 hour data.
>
> Until then, I cannot recommend using the Perihelion Design wig-wags for
> HDI lamps. Maybe other manufacturers have a different opinion.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> --------
> Eric M. Jones
> www.PerihelionDesign.com
> 113 Brentwood Drive
> Southbridge, MA 01550
> (508) 764-2072
> emjones(at)charter.net
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=263038#263038
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wig-Wagging HDI lamps |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Oh yeah.. And bring on the LED's.. I don't think they particularly
suffer from cycling, as long as the peak current is kept under control.
> Go old school and use a mechanical solution.. How about a rotating mirror
> (or lens) like in the old bubblegum lamps on a cop car? Can cause the
> wig-wagging effect, and not just straight ahead - off to the side too.
> The mirror could have a position where it's completely out of the path of
> the beam allowing "steady burning" behavior, and full output - no
> attenuation from the reflection.
>
>
> Matt-
>
>>
>>
>> More and more I get this inquiry: "I want to use your Wig-wag with HDI
>> lamps. Duckworth says they need to warm up for ten minutes and then they
>> wig-wag fine.
>>
>> I reply:
>>
>> Yes, I have been looking at the problem. I even have a set here to
>> measure. But...
>>
>> In a previous life, I spent almost three decades building high power
>> xenon
>> short-arc, HDI, and halogen lamp systems. So I have long experience with
>> both the lamps and their power supplies and their foibles. And I know in
>> detail what is needed to wig-wag them.
>>
>> So my problem is--everything I know says not to wig-wag the HDI lamps
>> because they will have short lamp lifetimes. Everything that is an
>> advantage of HDI lamps disappears quickly if one abuses them by (let's
>> say) 2500 restarts per hour. Many problems with HDIs don't occur in any
>> simple way either. There are second- and even third- order problems to
>> contend with. Furthermore, switched mode power supplies and starters are
>> particularly failure-prone when abused. I can guarantee that the
>> manufacturer of the lamp-supply-starter DO NOT warranty their devices to
>> be used in this fashion.
>>
>> If the HDI lamp sellers insist that their lamps can be wig-wagged, I
>> would
>> love to see the 100 hour data.
>>
>> Until then, I cannot recommend using the Perihelion Design wig-wags for
>> HDI lamps. Maybe other manufacturers have a different opinion.
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> --------
>> Eric M. Jones
>> www.PerihelionDesign.com
>> 113 Brentwood Drive
>> Southbridge, MA 01550
>> (508) 764-2072
>> emjones(at)charter.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=263038#263038
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe Dubner <jdubner(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Van's gauges |
Similar to your and Peter Penquilly's poor experiences, my oil pressure
gauge (the only Van's gauge in my Long-EZ) can charitably be described
as "flaky". The basic gauge itself is not reliable as proven on a bench
test with a fixed resistance to replace the sender.
--
Joe
Independence, OR
Aircraft Position: http://www.mail2600.com/position
PeterHunt1(at)aol.com wrote:
> In 420 house over three plus years a number of Van's gauges have failed
> (fuel quantity, volts, amps, oil pressure). Now I must install the third volt
> meter. I like the look of Van's gauges and the fact that they match, but
> don't like the failure rate. What have your experiences been?
>
> Pete in Clearwater
> RV-6 - Reserve Grand Champion, S 'n F 2006 and other awards
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Neil Clayton <harvey4(at)earthlink.net> |
Of all the teething troubles I've experienced
since my plane first flew (about 60 hours on the
airframe now), almost ALL were caused by %^$#&* Van's gauges lying to me.
I spent 6 months chasing hot oil till I realized it was a lie.
The RPM at cruise at 180 kts is regularly reported by Van's as 1000 Revs.
The ammeter swings from full -ve to full +ve all the time in flight.
Voltage display is about 11v most of the time (I
have a digital voltmeter hooked up to the bus showing a true 13.5 volts)
Lately, the CHT on #4 has gone to 450 indicated -
but nothing has been changed to the cooling flow.
I'm gonna take great pleasure in dumping these
trash gauges in the pool and installing a Dynon EIS as soon as I can.
Recommendation to anyone contemplating these gauges is - DON'T! They're
junk!
Neil
At 06:10 PM 9/14/2009, you wrote:
>Similar, my pressure and temperature gauges
>failed at around 400 hours. So all of the Van=92s
>gauges, save for fuel gauges, were pull out and
>replaced with a GRT EIS 4000. Now approaching
>700 hours I=92m going to replace the fuel gauges with a dual UMA 2 =BC.
>
>Peter
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From:
>owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]
>On Behalf Of PeterHunt1(at)aol.com
>Sent: 14 September 2009 18:46
>To: RV6-list(at)matronics.com; aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Van's gauges
>
>In 420 house over three plus years a number of
>Van's gauges have failed (fuel quantity, volts,
>amps, oil pressure). Now I must install the
>third volt meter. I like the look of Van's
>gauges and the fact that they match, but don't
>like the failure rate. What have your experiences been?
>
>Pete in Clearwater
>RV-6 - Reserve Grand Champion, S 'n F 2006 and other awards
>
>
>----------
>
>
>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>
>
>http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Grounding Lug |
I have used conversion coating before priming for much of the
substructure. This conducts well?
Regards,
Michael Wynn
RV 8
San Ramon, CA
In a message dated 9/14/2009 3:49:56 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com writes:
You can also alodine the parts before riveting / bolting.
Rick Girard
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 8:28 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III
<_nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com_ (mailto:nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com) > wrote:
At 12:40 AM 9/13/2009, you wrote:
Hi all,
I am building an RV 8. The battery is rear mounted. I was planning to
ground the battery to the lower longeron that is directly adjacent. I
checked with Vans, who said that four or five rivets no closer than 1/2 inch
apart is fine structurally.
I had previously primed the longeron, so I carefully scraped that off and
buffed it up with white Scotchbrite. I built a lug of 1/8th aluminum with
a 1/4" nutplate on the bottom, which I also carefully polished up. The
question is, is it okay to just rivet these two pieces of aluminum together or
is there something I should sandwich in between them to improve the
connection? Does the bond need to be sealed with dielectric grease or some such?
What have others done in this situation?
The goals for achieving gas-tightness of
the conducting materials are the same for
your ground lug as for putting terminals on
a piece of wire.
Don't take the corrosion proofing off your
nutplate . . . or other hardware. In fact,
there's no need to scuff the facing aluminum
parts, just get them clean.
Screws would be better than rivets. Rivets
are SHEAR fasteners and what you're trying
to achieve is a intimate contact between two
pieces of metal with TENSION fasteners.
4 - 5 stainless steel, 6-32 screws torqued
to values recommended by the manufacturer
(or AC43-13) would be better. A light coat
of silicone grease between faying surfaces
of the aluminum would be good too.
Having said all that, know that a whole
lot of folks have installed ground lugs
thusly . . .
_http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_2.jpg_
(http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_2.jpg)
. . . and they're probably gong to be just
fine.
Bob . . .
ist" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
tp://forums.matronics.com _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob McCallum" <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Wig-Wagging HDI lamps |
Eric;
LoPresti Speed Merchants market their "Boom Beam" lights as HID technology.
They claim that this product http://loprestiaviation.com/PowerPulse.htm can
be used in conjunction with them without damaging the HID system, and is in
fact STC approved. The shortfalls you are citing, they claim to be urban
myth. Not taking sides here, but there are obviously two opinions on the
subject of wig-wag HID lights. Assuming of course that my supposition is
correct that LoPresti lights are in fact HID in the same sense that you are
describing. i.e. apples to apples comparison. Modern automotive HID's
certainly don't need the 10 minute warm-up mentioned below by Duckworth to
be switched on and off repeatedly. Don't know however what damage this may
be causing. Your supposition of shortening the life may well be true.
Bob McC
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-
> server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric M. Jones
> Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 7:20 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Wig-Wagging HDI lamps
>
>
> More and more I get this inquiry: "I want to use your Wig-wag with HDI
lamps.
> Duckworth says they need to warm up for ten minutes and then they wig-wag
fine.
>
> I reply:
>
> Yes, I have been looking at the problem. I even have a set here to
measure. But...
>
> In a previous life, I spent almost three decades building high power xenon
short-arc,
> HDI, and halogen lamp systems. So I have long experience with both the
lamps and
> their power supplies and their foibles. And I know in detail what is
needed to wig-wag
> them.
>
> So my problem is--everything I know says not to wig-wag the HDI lamps
because they
> will have short lamp lifetimes. Everything that is an advantage of HDI
lamps disappears
> quickly if one abuses them by (let's say) 2500 restarts per hour. Many
problems with
> HDIs don't occur in any simple way either. There are second- and even
third- order
> problems to contend with. Furthermore, switched mode power supplies and
starters are
> particularly failure-prone when abused. I can guarantee that the
manufacturer of the
> lamp-supply-starter DO NOT warranty their devices to be used in this
fashion.
>
> If the HDI lamp sellers insist that their lamps can be wig-wagged, I would
love to see
> the 100 hour data.
>
> Until then, I cannot recommend using the Perihelion Design wig-wags for
HDI lamps.
> Maybe other manufacturers have a different opinion.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> --------
> Eric M. Jones
> www.PerihelionDesign.com
> 113 Brentwood Drive
> Southbridge, MA 01550
> (508) 764-2072
> emjones(at)charter.net
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=263038#263038
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Grounding Lug |
| From: | Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com> |
Yes, conductivity is the way Boeing tests material coming off the coating
line at their Auburn facility. It's too hard to tell the difference between
alodine and anodize by color but the conductivity test is conclusive. If it
conducts, it's alodine, if it doesn't, it's anodize.
Rick Girard
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 7:27 PM, wrote:
> I have used conversion coating before priming for much of the
> substructure. This conducts well?
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael Wynn
> RV 8
> San Ramon, CA
>
> In a message dated 9/14/2009 3:49:56 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com writes:
>
> You can also alodine the parts before riveting / bolting.
> Rick Girard
>
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 8:28 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
>
>> At 12:40 AM 9/13/2009, you wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I am building an RV 8. The battery is rear mounted. I was planning to
>> ground the battery to the lower longeron that is directly adjacent. I
>> checked with Vans, who said that four or five rivets no closer than 1/2 inch
>> apart is fine structurally.
>>
>> I had previously primed the longeron, so I carefully scraped that off and
>> buffed it up with white Scotchbrite. I built a lug of 1/8th aluminum with a
>> 1/4" nutplate on the bottom, which I also carefully polished up. The
>> question is, is it okay to just rivet these two pieces of aluminum together
>> or is there something I should sandwich in between them to improve the
>> connection? Does the bond need to be sealed with dielectric grease or some
>> such? What have others done in this situation?
>>
>>
>> The goals for achieving gas-tightness of
>> the conducting materials are the same for
>> your ground lug as for putting terminals on
>> a piece of wire.
>>
>> Don't take the corrosion proofing off your
>> nutplate . . . or other hardware. In fact,
>> there's no need to scuff the facing aluminum
>> parts, just get them clean.
>>
>> Screws would be better than rivets. Rivets
>> are SHEAR fasteners and what you're trying
>> to achieve is a intimate contact between two
>> pieces of metal with TENSION fasteners.
>> 4 - 5 stainless steel, 6-32 screws torqued
>> to values recommended by the manufacturer
>> (or AC43-13) would be better. A light coat
>> of silicone grease between faying surfaces
>> of the aluminum would be good too.
>>
>> Having said all that, know that a whole
>> lot of folks have installed ground lugs
>> thusly . . .
>>
>> http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_2.jpg
>>
>> . . . and they're probably gong to be just
>> fine.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>> *
>>
>> ist" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>> tp://forums.matronics.com
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> *
>>
>>
> *
>
> ===================================
> List href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
> ====================================ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
> ===================================
> tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
> *
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
>Voltage display is about 11v most of the time (I have a digital
>voltmeter hooked up to the bus showing a true 13.5 volts)
Under what conditions? With the engine running and the
alternator supporting all the ship's electrical loads,
one would expect 14.2 to 14.6 volts on the bus.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Grounding Lug |
At 09:02 PM 9/14/2009, you wrote:
>Yes, conductivity is the way Boeing tests material coming off the
>coating line at their Auburn facility. It's too hard to tell the
>difference between alodine and anodize by color but the conductivity
>test is conclusive. If it conducts, it's alodine, if it doesn't, it's anodize.
Alodine and other conversion coatings are "synthetic
rust" wherein the end product is less undesirable than
the naturally occurring alternatives. These treatments
have more to do with protection of the exposed surfaces
from environmental effects.
The definition of a gas-tight joint is that environmental
effects are mechanically excluded from entry. This is
accomplished first by upsetting the two metal surfaces of
interest such that they're mashed together so tightly
that bad stuff can't get in. Micro-gaps can be closed
with things like dielectric greases (silicone) that
squish out of metal-to-metal contact but "plug"
any voids were the metal surfaces do not quite come
together.
While protective surface conversions of any type
may be beneficial to the base metal, they can offer
no particular enhancement of electrical bonding between
two pieces when you put the mash on them.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | P-lead as a source for a tachometer |
| From: | "Craig Winkelmann" <capav8r(at)gmail.com> |
I am trying to figure out how a p-lead is used as a signal source for a tach.
Not how it is wired, but more of the theory behind it. Questions like:
1) what does the signal look like (square wave, sawtooth, sine, etc)
2) What is the typical amplitude
3) why is the p-lead a typical source of noise in the RF range
4) how is the signal produced when the original intent of the p-lead was as a way
to ground the magneto and shut down the engine.
5) how do p-lead tachometers typically prevent from a failure that would ground
the p-lead.
Thanks,
Craig
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=263104#263104
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tachometer Generator Wiring |
| From: | "Craig Winkelmann" <capav8r(at)gmail.com> |
I am deducing from this discussion that the tach gen is the likely source of the
noise.
Craig
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=263105#263105
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Brown <dan(at)familybrown.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Wig-Wagging HDI lamps |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Bob McCallum wrote:
> LoPresti Speed Merchants market their "Boom Beam" lights as HID technology.
> They claim that this product http://loprestiaviation.com/PowerPulse.htm can
> be used in conjunction with them without damaging the HID system, and is in
XeVision also has a pulsing system for their HID lights. It apparently
does shorten the lamp life, as their warranty is reduced from 5000 hours
without the pulsing to 3000 hours with it.
- --
Dan Brown, KE6MKS, dan(at)familybrown.org
"Since all the world is but a story, it were well for thee to buy the
more enduring story rather than the story that is less enduring."
-- The Judgment of St. Colum Cille
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iD8DBQFKr4QMyQGUivXxtkERAnCyAKCNUlz4NBbIu1Yjk7VwpePTRIdkIgCgj36S
0tpJwHtRkh6nCx1rVsn8Imw
=lG1o
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: P-lead as a source for a tachometer |
| From: | Richard Girard <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
Just curious, how will you check for rpm drop between mags if the tach goes
dead when one p lead is grounded?
Rick Girard
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 6:49 AM, Craig Winkelmann wrote:
> capav8r(at)gmail.com>
>
> I am trying to figure out how a p-lead is used as a signal source for a
> tach. Not how it is wired, but more of the theory behind it. Questions
> like:
>
> 1) what does the signal look like (square wave, sawtooth, sine, etc)
>
> 2) What is the typical amplitude
>
> 3) why is the p-lead a typical source of noise in the RF range
>
> 4) how is the signal produced when the original intent of the p-lead was as
> a way to ground the magneto and shut down the engine.
>
> 5) how do p-lead tachometers typically prevent from a failure that would
> ground the p-lead.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Craig
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=263104#263104
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: P-lead as a source for a tachometer |
At 06:49 AM 9/15/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>I am trying to figure out how a p-lead is used as a signal source
>for a tach. Not how it is wired, but more of the theory behind
>it. Questions like:
>
>1) what does the signal look like (square wave, sawtooth, sine, etc)
Very ragged sorta square wave. At least when the
points are closed, the waveform is steady at zero
volts. When the points open, the magnetic field
stored in the inductive iron is allowed to collapse
rapidly. Like the battery powered points/condenser/
coil Kettering system, this mechanically powered
energy storage system delivers a fast rising, high
voltage transient in the fine turns of the secondary
winding (spark energy) while a ratiometric image of
the same waveform appears across the now open windings
of the primary . . . or P-lead.
>2) What is the typical amplitude
The peak voltages can be on the order of 200-300
volts. It's an damped oscillatory waveform who's
period is set by the inductance/capacitance
combination of the system and damped by the loss
of energy that is running out to the spark plug.
>3) why is the p-lead a typical source of noise in the RF range
Any and all perturbations of current/voltage
magnitude can be called "noise". The RATE at which
they vary combined with amplitude of the change
sets the parameters for the frequency spectrum
over which the energy is distributed and propagates.
When I mentioned FAST rise time earlier, this suggests
an unusual opportunity for effects to extend well
up into the RF spectrum. When we combine that with
HIGH voltage, the energy signature becomes potentially
antagonistic.
FAST rise times is the key phrase that suggests why
shielding p-leads is useful. It's waveforms with
high dv/dt (differential) numbers that propagate
electro-statically from one conductor to another.
>4) how is the signal produced when the original intent of the p-lead
>was as a way to ground the magneto and shut down the engine.
The P-lead is connected in parallel with the points
which are themselves connected in parallel with the
primary winding of the magneto's pulse transformer
and the damping condenser. Closing the switch at
the end of a P-lead essentially keeps the "points
closed" all the time thus terminating the train of
sparks.
>5) how do p-lead tachometers typically prevent from a failure that
>would ground the p-lead.
If poorly designed, yes. I've never seen one that
offer this risk. The design goal for a tachometer that
watches magneto p-leads is to first offer a load
impedance that is sufficiently high as to NOT load
normal operation of the magneto. The next task is
to figure out a way to ignore the trash on the p-lead
waveform that might be mis-interpreted as a signal
proportional to engine RPM. My favorite way to do
this is with an active band-pass filter that only
allows the frequency of interest (30 to 150 Hz)
to pass. My last crack at a smoothing circuit followed
the band-pass filter with a phase-locked loop that
produced a pristine square wave that would not
upset the poorest of tachometers. The input impedance
to the system was over 1000 ohms. Incapable of
causing mischief in the ignition system
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: P-lead as a source for a tachometer |
<http://www.matronics.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=262838#262838>
Post
Posted: Sun Sep 13, 2009 3:46 pm Post subject: Re: Tachometer
Generator Wiring
<http://www.matronics.com/forums/posting.php?mode=quote&p=262838>
Reply with quote
----------
Bob:
The problem I have is that at RPM below 1000, I get noise in the
signal and the tach jumps all over the place. Over 1000 RPM and all
is fine. The radial engine idles at 500 rpm so this is a problem.
The tach gen wires go to a circuit that is a basically a voltage
divider and a comparator to provide a clean pulse for the engine
monitor system.
It has been suggested to 1) shield the tach gen wires to reduce
noise, 2) add a 0.1 microfarad ceramic capacitor as a filter, and/or
3) change the voltage at which the comparator triggers (raise the
limit for it to trigger).
Craig,
Sorry, I got side tracked by the use of the term
"tach generator" in your original posting. The
2-wire device you're describing is not the traditional
tach generator but SOME form of transducer. If it's
just a 2-wire device, it MIGHT be a permanent magnet
generator of some kind, most hall effect sensors
require a third wire to carry 5-12 volts out to the
tach TRANSDUCER's electronics. But a clever designer
COULD make halls work on the end of a two-wire loop
too. I suspect that the 500 rpm thing is the problem.
Your tach/instrument combination may well have been
crafted for the more common aircraft engines that don't
even IDLE at 500 RPM. If the transducer is a
magnet/coil signal source, the low speed operation may
well be producing a signal below the design goals by
which the system was crafted. The fact that your
difficulty clears up at higher speeds reinforces this
suggestion.
So you may be correct in your supposition that the
circuitry needs to be tweaked to new design goals
(stable ops at low speed). Without a schematic,
parts values and waveform data, it's not possible to
offer more specific assistance. Do you have access
to such information?
In any case, this isn't a noise problem in the classic
sense that the tachometer system is talking to or being
upset by another system.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tachometer Generator Wiring |
At 06:52 AM 9/15/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>I am deducing from this discussion that the tach gen is the likely
>source of the noise.
>
>Craig
When you say "tach gen" . . . exactly what kind of
device are you describing? The ORIGINAL tachometer
generators were permanent magnet, 3-phase alternators
that produced about 20 VRMS of sine wave energy that
was applied to a drag-cup "speedometer" on the panel
calibrated in RPM. This was about the most noise-free
system on board the airplane. Low frequency, sine wave,
(i.e. SLOW rise times), 3-wire twisted pair signal
cable.
But just as every copy machine has been referred to
as a Xerox machine, lots of tachometer TRANSDUCERS have
been called TACH GENERATORS. But even then, once we
depart the realm of 3-phase energy on a twisted trio,
the kinds of signals produced by most transducers are
very low energy (magnets flying past hall sensors).
The crank position sensors on a Light Speed ignition
are tach transducers and crank position sensors. They
are not potential sources of noise to the rest of the
airplane's systems.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: P-lead as a source for a tachometer |
| From: | Ian <ixb(at)videotron.ca> |
When I installed p-lead signal-sourced RPM monitoring, I learned that
the signal is basically a pulse, not a nice sig. gen. produced signal.
It's going to be around 100V and in my installation (into a Rocky
Mountain engine monitor) there is no noticeable noise that would be
attributed to P-lead. In speaking with Unisom I learned that my Slick
magnetos do not need shielding on the P-leads, and that seems to be
true.
As to how it works, I like to think of it a bit like the ear. There is
air on one side, transmitting sound, and air on the other side of the
ear drum (capacitor) receiving the vibrations and passing them to the
middle ear. Unless the ear drum breaks (capacitor fuses into a dead
short) there is no communication between the air on the outside and the
air on the inside.
Ian Brown
>
> I am trying to figure out how a p-lead is used as a signal source for a tach.
Not how it is wired, but more of the theory behind it. Questions like:
>
> 1) what does the signal look like (square wave, sawtooth, sine, etc)
>
> 2) What is the typical amplitude
>
> 3) why is the p-lead a typical source of noise in the RF range
>
> 4) how is the signal produced when the original intent of the p-lead was as a
way to ground the magneto and shut down the engine.
>
> 5) how do p-lead tachometers typically prevent from a failure that would ground
the p-lead.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Craig
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=263104#263104
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CardinalNSB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Fat wires out of cockpit???? |
First, this is a Cessna, not an experimental; my ap is ok with this, but
will it help?
Currently, the alternator output wire tuns from the alternator at rightside
forward of the engine, straight back to the firewall, behind the engine
to the left (pilot's side) of the firewall, then into the cabin, then to the
extreme right side of the cockpit where it goes into a breaker about 3
inches from the right side fuselage outer skin. The bottom of the breaker
feeds the bus, then at the end of the bus there is a a fat wire to the
ammeter just under the pilot's yoke, then back out the same hole through the
firewall, then down to the battery side of the starter contaactor.
That seems like alot of wire. I have to keep the cb in the cockpit. I
wll use a stc va meter to replace the Cessna ammeter, and will use a remote
shunt, not allowed to rely only on a voltmeter.
I am considering running the wire through the right side of the firewall to
the breaker, then back out of the breaker the same way it came in, then
over to the pilot side and tie into the starter contactor lug. The bus would
still run off of the breaker.
1. Is there concern for the fat wires "cvoming and going" through the
same hole, should I twist them together, are there shielding issues?
2. Should the shunt be inside or outside the cabin? Does the shunt
create electrical interference?
3. If there is no downside to doing this I will do it for the aesthetics
and weight savings alone, since I am replacing the wiring anyway.
Thank you, Skip
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fat wires out of cockpit???? |
At 09:36 AM 9/15/2009, you wrote:
>First, this is a Cessna, not an experimental; my ap is ok with
>this, but will it help?
>
>Currently, the alternator output wire tuns from the alternator at
>rightside forward of the engine, straight back to the
>firewall, behind the engine to the left (pilot's side) of the
>firewall, then into the cabin, then to the extreme right side of the
>cockpit where it goes into a breaker about 3 inches from the right
>side fuselage outer skin. The bottom of the breaker feeds the bus,
>then at the end of the bus there is a a fat wire to the ammeter just
>under the pilot's yoke, then back out the same hole through the
>firewall, then down to the battery side of the starter contaactor.
>
>That seems like alot of wire. I have to keep the cb in the
>cockpit. I wll use a stc va meter to replace the Cessna ammeter,
>and will use a remote shunt, not allowed to rely only on a voltmeter.
Interesting . . . the voltmeter is the much
preferred indicator of electrical system
performance . . .
>
>I am considering running the wire through the right side of the
>firewall to the breaker, then back out of the breaker the same way
>it came in, then over to the pilot side and tie into the starter
>contactor lug. The bus would still run off of the breaker.
>
>1. Is there concern for the fat wires "cvoming and going" through
>the same hole, should I twist them together, are there shielding issues?
No, if you've not identified any wire proximity
issues so far, there's little or no risk of keeping
with the original design goals.
>
>2. Should the shunt be inside or outside the cabin? Does the shunt
>create electrical interference?
Where ever you like. Put it where it's easiest to
access for installation. It's not a potential
source of interference.
>
>3. If there is no downside to doing this I will do it for the
>aesthetics and weight savings alone, since I am replacing the wiring anyway.
That ought to work.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tachometer Generator Wiring |
| From: | "Craig Winkelmann" <capav8r(at)gmail.com> |
Bob:
Thanks for the info. Very helpful. I have misled you a bit though. The tach
gen on the M-14P is a three phase generator. The waveform shaping circuit I have
(between the tach gen and the engine monitoring system) was designed for a
rotax engine (which is a different signal generator that the russian tach gen).
The signal shaping circuit is wired between two phases of the output of the tach
gen.
The circuit accepts one lead to the grounded anode of a zener diode (breakdown
voltage of 5.1) in parallel with a 50K resistor. The second lead connects to
a 1K resistor that is in parallel with the above. The output of the above goes
to a comparator with a reference voltage of 4.25 volts.
I think my problem is having two ac signals going to a circuit that was designed
for the output of the Rotax 912 tach signal generator.
I need a max of a 5 volt signal for the engine monitor. My current thought is
to see if you have a schematic for the circuit you described for using the p-lead
and send this signal to the board above or, if the output can be kept to a
5 volt peak, then use your circuit as the feed for the tach signal. This would
then eliminate the tach gen.
Craig
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=263173#263173
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wade Roe" <wroe1(at)dbtech.net> |
| Subject: | fuel flow transducer location |
Does anyone have a recommendation as to the location of a fuel flow
transducer? I'm building an RV-7 and see two potential options for
positioning this AFS transducer:
* between the boost pump and the firewall, or
* Between the injection servo and the distribution spider.
Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks!
Wade Roe
RV-7 in progress
Aeronca Champ flying
Tuscaloosa, AL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
| Subject: | fuel flow transducer location |
Between boost pump and the firewall is the most perfect spot. Try to mainti
an a straight section of pipe (10 pipe diameter's in front and 5 diameter's
behind I believe). If you can't manage that it seems the unit can be calib
rated pretty accurately anyway. I have known some builders put the flow pra
nsducer on a 90 degree elbow and it still calibrates just fine.
The cabin is cooler, less vibration (at least compared to the engine itself
) and these units almost never go wrong so burying it under the cover is en
tirely satisfactory.
Frank
7a 400 and something hours
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectr
ic-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Wade Roe
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 2:07 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: fuel flow transducer location
Does anyone have a recommendation as to the location of a fuel flow transdu
cer? I'm building an RV-7 and see two potential options for positioning th
is AFS transducer:
* between the boost pump and the firewall, or
* Between the injection servo and the distribution spider.
Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks!
Wade Roe
RV-7 in progress
Aeronca Champ flying
Tuscaloosa, AL
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: fuel flow transducer location |
| From: | Michael W Stewart <mike.stewart(at)us.ibm.com> |
VGhlIGxhdHRlciB3aWxsIGJlIG1vcmUgYWNjdXJhdGUuDQpUaGUgY2xvc2VyIHRvIHRoZSBpbmpl
Y3RvcnMsIHRoZSBiZXR0ZXIuDQpGdXJ0aGVyIGF3YXkgd2lsbCBnaXZlIHlvdSBsZXNzIGFjY3Vy
YXRlIHJlYWRpbmdzIHBhcnRpY3VsYXJseSB3aXRoL3dpdGhvdXQNCmJvb3N0IHB1bXAgb24uDQpT
ZWVtcyBvZGQgSSBrbm93LiBGbG93IGlzIGZsb3cuIEJ1dCB0aGUgcHJlc3N1cmUgY2hhbmdlcyBh
ZmZlY3QgcmVhZGluZ3MNCmV2ZW4gaWYgdGhlIGxpdHRsZSB0dXJiaW5lIHdoZWVsIGluIHRoZSB0
cmFuc2R1Y2VyIGlzIHN0aWxsIHNwaW5uaW5nIGF0IHRoZQ0Kc2FtZSBzcGVlZC4NCk1pa2UNCg0K
DQoNCg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIA0KICBGcm9tOiAgICAgICAiV2FkZSBSb2UiIDx3cm9lMUBk
YnRlY2gubmV0PiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIA0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
IA0KICBUbzogICAgICAgICA8YWVyb2VsZWN0cmljLWxpc3RAbWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbT4gICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIA0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIA0KICBEYXRlOiAgICAgICAwOS8x
NS8yMDA5IDA2OjA5IFBNICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIA0K
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIA0KICBTdWJqZWN0OiAgICBBZXJvRWxlY3RyaWMtTGlzdDogZnVlbCBm
bG93IHRyYW5zZHVjZXIgbG9jYXRpb24gICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIA0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIA0KICBT
ZW50IGJ5OiAgICBvd25lci1hZXJvZWxlY3RyaWMtbGlzdC1zZXJ2ZXJAbWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbSAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgIA0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIA0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCkRvZXMgYW55b25lIGhh
dmUgYSByZWNvbW1lbmRhdGlvbiBhcyB0byB0aGUgbG9jYXRpb24gb2YgYSBmdWVsIGZsb3cNCnRy
YW5zZHVjZXI/ICBJ4oCZbSBidWlsZGluZyBhbiBSVi03IGFuZCBzZWUgdHdvIHBvdGVudGlhbCBv
cHRpb25zIGZvcg0KcG9zaXRpb25pbmcgdGhpcyBBRlMgdHJhbnNkdWNlcjoNCiAgICAgIGJldHdl
ZW4gdGhlIGJvb3N0IHB1bXAgYW5kIHRoZSBmaXJld2FsbCwgb3INCiAgICAgIEJldHdlZW4gdGhl
IGluamVjdGlvbiBzZXJ2byBhbmQgdGhlIGRpc3RyaWJ1dGlvbiBzcGlkZXIuDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0K
QW55IGNvbW1lbnRzIHdvdWxkIGJlIGFwcHJlY2lhdGVkLiAgVGhhbmtzIQ0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCldh
ZGUgUm9lDQoNCg0KUlYtNyBpbiBwcm9ncmVzcw0KDQoNCkFlcm9uY2EgQ2hhbXAgZmx5aW5nDQoN
Cg0KVHVzY2Fsb29zYSwgQUwNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQpfLT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09
PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQ0KXy09ICAgICAgICAgIC0gVGhlIEFl
cm9FbGVjdHJpYy1MaXN0IEVtYWlsIEZvcnVtIC0NCl8tPSBVc2UgdGhlIE1hdHJvbmljcyBMaXN0
IEZlYXR1cmVzIE5hdmlnYXRvciB0byBicm93c2UNCl8tPSB0aGUgbWFueSBMaXN0IHV0aWxpdGll
cyBzdWNoIGFzIExpc3QgVW4vU3Vic2NyaXB0aW9uLA0KXy09IEFyY2hpdmUgU2VhcmNoICYgRG93
bmxvYWQsIDctRGF5IEJyb3dzZSwgQ2hhdCwgRkFRLA0KXy09IFBob3Rvc2hhcmUsIGFuZCBtdWNo
IG11Y2ggbW9yZToNCl8tPQ0KXy09ICAgLS0+IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9OYXZp
Z2F0b3I/QWVyb0VsZWN0cmljLUxpc3QNCl8tPQ0KXy09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09
PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0NCl8tPSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIC0g
TUFUUk9OSUNTIFdFQiBGT1JVTVMgLQ0KXy09IFNhbWUgZ3JlYXQgY29udGVudCBhbHNvIGF2YWls
YWJsZSB2aWEgdGhlIFdlYiBGb3J1bXMhDQpfLT0NCl8tPSAgIC0tPiBodHRwOi8vZm9ydW1zLm1h
dHJvbmljcy5jb20uDQpfLT0NCl8tPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09
PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09DQpfLT0gICAgICAgICAgICAgLSBMaXN0IENvbnRyaWJ1
dGlvbiBXZWIgU2l0ZSAtDQpfLT0gIFRoYW5rIHlvdSBmb3IgeW91ciBnZW5lcm91cyBzdXBwb3J0
IQ0KXy09ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgLU1hdHQgRHJhbGxlLCBMaXN0IEFk
bWluLg0KXy09ICAgLS0+IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9jb250cmlidXRpb24NCl8t
PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09
PT09DQoNCg0K
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wire Marker Label Printer |
Good Evening Wade,
Why don't you ask around and see if anyone in your chapter has a wire
labeling machine? It is really nice to be able to mark every foot or so along
the wire and not have the additional bulk of any shrink sleeve.
For a big job, I borrow an ancient electric wire marker. For occasional
jobs, I use a K-SUN Label Shop 2001xlst. It is several years old and I am sure
the newer ones are faster and better in all ways, but printing right on
the shrink wrap is the next best thing to using a real wire marker!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
LL22 N2858P
In a message dated 9/15/2009 3:02:01 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
wroe1(at)dbtech.net writes:
I am seeing so many really nice looking wire markers on RV projects. What
type handheld printer (Rhino, Kroy, etc.) is everyone using and
particularly, what type media is giving good results for marking small gauge wires
(shrink tube or wrap around)?
Thanks!
Wade Roe
RV-7 in progress
Aeronca Champ flying
Tuscaloosa, AL
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bret Smith
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 6:25 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Z-13/8 electric components for RV firewall
Lincoln,
You are welcome to check my site. Look under "Wiring" and "FWF"
Bret Smith
RV-9A N16BL
Blue Ridge, Ga
_www.FlightInnovations.com_ (http://www.flightinnovations.com/)
____________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lincoln Keill
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 4:07 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Z-13/8 electric components for RV firewall
Could an RV-driver with a Z-13/8 system post a link to any
pictures/diagrams/descriptions they have of the location of the electrical system
components (battery, contactors, grounding lugs, etc.) on their firewall as well
as
wire pass-throughs? I searched under the archive and found information
on throttle/mixture cable location but nothing about where all the electric
stuff goes. Van's suggestion won't work and I'm loathe to start drilling
holes until I know for sure where everything is going to go and not
interfere with something else down the road. Thanks.
Lincoln Keill
airlincoln(at)sbcglobal.net
RV-7A fuselage
Do Not Archive
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.matro
nics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
- The AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
--> _http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List_
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List)
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
--> _http://forums.matronics.com_ (http://forums.matronics.com/)
- List Contribution Web Site -
Thank you for your generous support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
--> _http://www.matronics.com/contribution_ (http
://www.matronics.com/contribution)
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Wire Marker Label Printer |
At 03:54 PM 9/15/2009, you wrote:
>Wade,
>
>My poor man's version of whatever fancy rig the RV gang is using is
>to just use smaller fonts and stuff the label the long-way along
>the wire for a professional look. In MS Word and others you can set
>the text so it reads top to bottom which is normally how the wire is
>marked. Clear shrink wrap is naturally the best cover. If you want
>fancy, do them on a color laser printer. The hardest part is getting
>the computer and printer in your airplane so that you can print what
>you need when you need it J. If you print what you need at home,
>I'll guarantee you'll need something different once you get behind the panel.
>
>Ok, you know all that crap, so if you've got a few pennies to spend,
>brother makes one you really can fit in the cab. Our tech guys use
>one of these and they do a nice job.
Understand that many of the nifty hand-held printers use
thermal ink technology. Labels from these printers will
turn black under the cowl and darken with age in the
rest of the airplane.
I use full sheets of Avery label material and pre-print
columns of 8pt or larger numbers onto full sheets of
label in a laser printer. Peel entire sheet off the backing
and stick down on a poly-e cutting board. Use X-acto knife
to cut out labels as needed in the shop. See:
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Wiring_Technique/Wire_Marking.jpg
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob McCallum" <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Wig-Wagging HDI lamps |
Interesting Dan, that seems to support Eric, and yet LoPresti says their
5000 hour warranty is not affected. Go figure. Each to his own, I guess, and
so the differing opinions each survive. Eric's arguments make sense, yet two
manufacturers actually producing the product can't agree with each other.
Bob McC
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-
> server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Brown
> Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 8:10 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wig-Wagging HDI lamps
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Bob McCallum wrote:
>
> > LoPresti Speed Merchants market their "Boom Beam" lights as HID
technology.
> > They claim that this product http://loprestiaviation.com/PowerPulse.htm
can
> > be used in conjunction with them without damaging the HID system, and is
in
>
> XeVision also has a pulsing system for their HID lights. It apparently
> does shorten the lamp life, as their warranty is reduced from 5000 hours
> without the pulsing to 3000 hours with it.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: P-lead as a source for a tachometer |
| From: | "Craig Winkelmann" <capav8r(at)gmail.com> |
> Just curious, how will you check for rpm drop between mags if the tach goes dead
when one p lead is grounded?
>
> Rick Girard
Rick:
Would basically digitize both p-lead signals and logical OR them together. This
way when left p-lead is grounded, the right p-lead would pass and vice versa.
Both signals should be in phase with one another so when both are on, a signal
passes. This also opens up the possibility of adding a panel light to let
you know if one mag fails in flight.
Craig
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=263246#263246
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jason Beaver <jason(at)jasonbeaver.com> |
| Subject: | d-sub connectors and current carrying capacity |
Are there quality differences between different brands of d-sub
connectors that I should worry about? I purchased a couple of d-sub 9
pin solder cup connectors made by Pan Pacific at a local electronics
supplier:
http://www.jasonbeaver.com/rv7/rv7pictures/Scaled/20090915/CIMG0524.JPG
Would these be acceptable or would any of you recommend a certain
brand and supplier?
Also, what is the rated current capacity per pin? I'm considering
using these to hook up a Dynon RV-7 autopilot servo (to make
disconnection easy if I ever need to). Is this acceptable or would
any of you recommend another way to hook the servo up?
thanks,
jason
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
test
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: d-sub connectors and current carrying capacity |
At 11:26 PM 9/15/2009, you wrote:
>Are there quality differences between different brands of d-sub
>connectors that I should worry about? I purchased a couple of d-sub
>9 pin solder cup connectors made by Pan Pacific at a local
>electronics supplier:
>
><http://www.jasonbeaver.com/rv7/rv7pictures/Scaled/20090915/CIMG0524.JPG>http://www.jasonbeaver.com/rv7/rv7pictures/Scaled/20090915/CIMG0524.JPG
>
>Would these be acceptable or would any of you recommend a certain
>brand and supplier?
Solder cup and b-crimp connectors come in a huge
variety of qualities. This is why I like to use
the machined d-sub pins . . . ALWAYS good electrical
connection. They also pretty much fit the whole
range of removable pin d-subs.
>Also, what is the rated current capacity per pin? I'm considering
>using these to hook up a Dynon RV-7 autopilot servo (to make
>disconnection easy if I ever need to). Is this acceptable or would
>any of you recommend another way to hook the servo up?
The d-sub with machined pins is my preferred connector.
20AWG wire in any one pin is good for 7A or so. I like
to keep it below 5A for a few wires, and 3A average for
a connector full of wires.
It's almost a certainty that the machined pin d-sub will
work just fine for the application you proposed.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: d-sub connectors and current carrying capacity |
| From: | Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins(at)gmail.com> |
I have had rotten luck with the Radio Shack metalized D-sub shells. They
fall apart quite easily.
But, why should that be surprising?
Sam
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Jason Beaver wrote:
> Are there quality differences between different brands of d-sub connectors
> that I should worry about? I purchased a couple of d-sub 9 pin solder cup
> connectors made by Pan Pacific at a local electronics supplier:
>
> http://www.jasonbeaver.com/rv7/rv7pictures/Scaled/20090915/CIMG0524.JPG
>
> Would these be acceptable or would any of you recommend a certain brand and
> supplier?
>
> Also, what is the rated current capacity per pin? I'm considering using
> these to hook up a Dynon RV-7 autopilot servo (to make disconnection easy if
> I ever need to). Is this acceptable or would any of you recommend another
> way to hook the servo up?
>
> thanks,
>
> jason
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Neil Clayton <harvey4(at)earthlink.net> |
It's never 14+v. Since it's a pusher, I had assumed there's a voltage
drop between the alternator and where I'm sampling the voltage behind
the panel - about 8 feet away.
Sounds like it's something I need to look into. The alternator is new.
Neil
At 10:09 PM 9/14/2009, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>>Voltage display is about 11v most of the time (I have a digital
>>voltmeter hooked up to the bus showing a true 13.5 volts)
>
> Under what conditions? With the engine running and the
> alternator supporting all the ship's electrical loads,
> one would expect 14.2 to 14.6 volts on the bus.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ---------------------------------------
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ---------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wig-Wagging HDI lamps |
| From: | "N395V" <Bearcat(at)bearcataviation.com> |
> their warranty is reduced from 5000 hours
> without the pulsing to 3000 hours with it.
>
So if I fly 300 hrs a year and use the lights with a wig wag 10% of the time and
it really shortens the life of the lights by 2000 hours then....
I will have to replace the lights after 100 years as opposed to replacing them
after 166 years. is that correct?
--------
Milt
2003 F1 Rocket
2006 Radial Rocket
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=263290#263290
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wig-Wagging HDI lamps |
| From: | "N395V" <Bearcat(at)bearcataviation.com> |
>
>
> their warranty is reduced from 5000 hours
> without the pulsing to 3000 hours with it.
So if I fly 200 hrs a year and use the lights with a wig wag and it really shortens
the life of the lights by 2000 hours then....
I will have to replace the lights after 10 years as opposed to replacing them after
16.6 years.
--------
Milt
2003 F1 Rocket
2006 Radial Rocket
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=263291#263291
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
At 07:04 AM 9/16/2009, you wrote:
>
>It's never 14+v. Since it's a pusher, I had assumed there's a
>voltage drop between the alternator and where I'm sampling the
>voltage behind the panel - about 8 feet away.
>Sounds like it's something I need to look into. The alternator is new.
Hmmmm . . . yeah, you might take some readings
at both the alternator b-lead terminal and the
battery . . . but 0.7v drop is too much. If
your measurements confirm that much drop, then
you need to upsize the b-lead wire.
For example, a 6AWG wire is .00025 ohms per
foot. 10 feet will drop only 0.1 volt at
40Amps. Check the ground path drop between
crankcase and battery (-) too.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: d-sub connectors and current carrying capacity |
At 06:54 AM 9/16/2009, you wrote:
>I have had rotten luck with the Radio Shack metalized D-sub
>shells. They fall apart quite easily.
>
>But, why should that be surprising?
>
>Sam
The ones with removable crimp pins?
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: d-sub connectors and current carrying capacity |
| From: | Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins(at)gmail.com> |
Yes, but it doesn't involve the connector or pins. Almost every RS plastic
metalized hood has fallen apart. It cracks at the screw bosses.
Sam
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 8:07 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
>
> At 06:54 AM 9/16/2009, you wrote:
>
>> I have had rotten luck with the Radio Shack metalized D-sub shells. They
>> fall apart quite easily.
>>
>> But, why should that be surprising?
>>
>> Sam
>>
>
> The ones with removable crimp pins?
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ---------------------------------------
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ---------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: d-sub connectors and current carrying capacity |
At 08:31 AM 9/16/2009, you wrote:
>Yes, but it doesn't involve the connector or pins. Almost every RS
>plastic metalized hood has fallen apart. It cracks at the screw bosses.
>
>Sam
Aha! I guess I've never used those. Good data point.
We get nearly all of our plastic hoods from Marlin
P Jones . . .
http://www.mpja.com/prodinfo.asp?number=2859+PL
The metalization of plastic hoods serves no useful
purpose. If there is compelling need to encase the
connector-to-connector wire bundles in a metallic
enclosure, then processes MUCH more complex than
adding a metallic coating to the connector shells
is indicated!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Girard <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
Received here.
Rick
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
>
> test
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ---------------------------------------
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ---------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jason Beaver <jason(at)jasonbeaver.com> |
| Subject: | Re: d-sub connectors and current carrying capacity |
On Sep 15, 2009, at 10:21 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> At 11:26 PM 9/15/2009, you wrote:
>> Are there quality differences between different brands of d-sub
>> connectors that I should worry about? I purchased a couple of d-
>> sub 9 pin solder cup connectors made by Pan Pacific at a local
>> electronics supplier:
>>
>> http://www.jasonbeaver.com/rv7/rv7pictures/Scaled/20090915/CIMG0524.JPG
>>
>> Would these be acceptable or would any of you recommend a certain
>> brand and supplier?
>
> Solder cup and b-crimp connectors come in a huge
> variety of qualities. This is why I like to use
> the machined d-sub pins . . . ALWAYS good electrical
> connection. They also pretty much fit the whole
> range of removable pin d-subs.
I've only seen the machined d-sub pins with crimp connectors (like on
the B&C website). I'm fine using those, but several articles on your
site show d-sub connectors with solder cups. I assume those can be
found with machined pins, but B&C doesn't carry them. Do you know
where I can get these?
>> Also, what is the rated current capacity per pin? I'm considering
>> using these to hook up a Dynon RV-7 autopilot servo (to make
>> disconnection easy if I ever need to). Is this acceptable or would
>> any of you recommend another way to hook the servo up?
>
> The d-sub with machined pins is my preferred connector.
> 20AWG wire in any one pin is good for 7A or so. I like
> to keep it below 5A for a few wires, and 3A average for
> a connector full of wires.
>
> It's almost a certainty that the machined pin d-sub will
> work just fine for the application you proposed.
Thanks for your help!
jason
> Bob . . .
>
> ---------------------------------------
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ---------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Corrosion Paste On Terminal Lugs... |
What's the common practice regarding that white goo for corrosion protection that
B&C sells? I've been gooping up all sides of the posts and connector including
the contact faces before I've been bolting these kind of connections together
(like the starter lead and battery connections, etc). I was thinking that
it was kind of like heatsink compound where you do just that. But is that really
the right thing to do with this stuff? Or should it just be added to the
outside of the finished connection? If yes, then what should I do with all
of these connections I've already made?
Thanks!
Matt Dralle
RV-8 #82880 N998RV
http://www.mattsrv8.com
Engine Baffling...
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Corrosion Paste On Terminal Lugs... |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
I think the only place it makes much sense is on the terminals for a
flooded cell lead acid battery.. Applying it to the post before
tightening would provide the best protection and not interfere with
conduction through the joint as long as the hardware is torqued
sufficiently.
I'd guess that the starved cell batteries don't really need the stuff.
Matt-
>
>
>
> What's the common practice regarding that white goo for corrosion
> protection that B&C sells? I've been gooping up all sides of the posts
> and connector including the contact faces before I've been bolting these
> kind of connections together (like the starter lead and battery
> connections, etc). I was thinking that it was kind of like heatsink
> compound where you do just that. But is that really the right thing to do
> with this stuff? Or should it just be added to the outside of the
> finished connection? If yes, then what should I do with all of these
> connections I've already made?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Matt Dralle
> RV-8 #82880 N998RV
> http://www.mattsrv8.com
> Engine Baffling...
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: d-sub connectors and current carrying capacity |
>I've only seen the machined d-sub pins with crimp connectors (like
>on the B&C website). I'm fine using those, but several articles on
>your site show d-sub connectors with solder cups. I assume those
>can be found with machined pins, but B&C doesn't carry them. Do you
>know where I can get these?
Sure, check the catalogs for any of dozens of
electronics suppliers for high quality solder-cup
connectors . . .
However, know that there are NO D-sub connectors with
solder cups that are machined pins. There are certainly
some high-quality, solder-cup connectors. But the only
reason I produced the article you saw was to accommodate
folks who were installing a system that was supplied with
solder-cup connectors and didn't want to buy new connectors.
On occasion, I find it useful/practical to salvage and re-use
a solder cup connector when my preferred choice isn't
readily available. But I haven't purchased a new
solder-cup connector in probably 15 years. The ability
to pre-terminate wires with the best pins we know how
to make . . . and correct wiring errors with a simple
extraction tool is a VERY powerful personal incentive.
Here's some good sources for solder-cup d-subs:
http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/B092/0283.pdf
http://www.mpja.com/products.asp?dept=86
http://tinyurl.com/pq293e
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tachometer Generator Wiring |
| From: | "Craig Winkelmann" <capav8r(at)gmail.com> |
Bob:
Thank you. As always, you keep it simple and do stuff that works. I have also
determined that the two phases connected to the circuit I have was wired improperly.
With two phases there was no ground reference until the tach gen (M-14P)
saw a higher RPM. It was supposed to be wired to one phase and the other
lead grounded (after review of the design),
I have not looked at the waveform out of the M-14P tach gen, but from what you
describe it is a simple and nice way to generate a signal. I had one guy swear
that the tach gen was a "serious source of noise" in his airplane. At such
a low frequency and at 20 V p-p, I don't see how.
I'm going to the airplane Friday to do a bit of rewiring.
Craig
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=263383#263383
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Corrosion Paste On Terminal Lugs... |
At 12:54 PM 9/16/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>What's the common practice regarding that white goo for corrosion
>protection that B&C sells?
If its the same material that was in my catalog
at the time they purchased my inventory, that "goo"
is intended as an anti-corrosion, anti-seize treatment
for threaded fasteners exposed to harsh environment.
> I've been gooping up all sides of the posts and connector
> including the contact faces before I've been bolting these kind of
> connections together (like the starter lead and battery
> connections, etc). I was thinking that it was kind of like
> heatsink compound where you do just that. But is that really the
> right thing to do with this stuff? Or should it just be added to
> the outside of the finished connection? If yes, then what should I
> do with all of these connections I've already made?
At no place I've ever worked for over 40 years did
we "goop" any assembled electrical joint. Every joint
was assembled from shiny, clean, dry components of
proper material and appropriate plating. Where critical
mate-up pressures were to be achieved, the work instructions
called for use of a torque wrench in the final tightening.
In other words, a connection that's properly crafted is
so tightly joined that any goop would be extruded out
of the interface . . . and can only protect the micro-
thin edges of the interface.
I have offered the notion that a di-electric grease
MAY be useful when the OBAM aircraft builder needs to
make up a high-current joint that is subject to harsh
environment and/or located in a very hard-to-inspect
location. 99.9% of all made up electrical joints require
nor would they benefit from any 'treatments'. Getting
the necessary force to achieve gas-tight interconnection
is all that's necessary. Most of those issues are
addressed for you when you use fast-on terminals, crimped
or soldered joints, etc. Things held together with threaded
fasteners have the highest risk of human-factors variables.
Even those are no big deal if you simply take common care
for craftsmanship.
I don't know the qualities of the B&C anti-seize
compound as a prophylactic against environmental degradation
of bolted up electrical joints. It MAY be just fine.
I DO know that plain vanilla silicone grease like
Dow Corning DC4 or
http://www.super-lube.com/silicone-dielectric-grease-ez-52.htm
are specific to the preservation of integrity of electrical
joints. I've got a tube of DC4 that's over 30 years old. I
use it on my tail-light bulb sockets and I've
not had one corrode into the socket in many years. But
I don't find it useful to dope many bolted up electrical
joints.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tachometer Generator Wiring |
At 03:37 PM 9/16/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>Bob:
>
>Thank you. As always, you keep it simple and do stuff that
>works. I have also determined that the two phases connected to the
>circuit I have was wired improperly. With two phases there was no
>ground reference until the tach gen (M-14P) saw a higher RPM. It
>was supposed to be wired to one phase and the other lead grounded
>(after review of the design),
>
>I have not looked at the waveform out of the M-14P tach gen, but
>from what you describe it is a simple and nice way to generate a
>signal. I had one guy swear that the tach gen was a "serious source
>of noise" in his airplane. At such a low frequency and at 20 V p-p,
>I don't see how.
>
>I'm going to the airplane Friday to do a bit of rewiring.
Good show sir. Let us know what you find.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: fuel flow transducer location |
| From: | "al38kit" <alfranken(at)msn.com> |
I have used them in both locations with equal success.
Now I have one mounted on the engine case after the transducer...this is on a Lycoming
August 31, 2009 - September 17, 2009
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-iz