AeroElectric-List Archive Browser

:--)> http://forums.matronics.com

:--)> -

:--)> List Contribution Web -->

:--)> http://www.matronics.com/contr ibution

:--)>

________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Pitot Tube Help

From:

"Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>

Date:

Jun 14, 2012

I was always of the opinion that a heated pitot tube would be very useful for home-built aircraft even it it wasn't certified for known-icing-conditions at 30,000 feet and jet plane speeds. Furthermore the reason pitot tubes are heated with such high power is because they are made of material that conducts heat rapidly. A strange design to be sure. For those interested in my old Thermostatic Pitot Tube see: http://www.periheliondesign.com/downloads/thermopitot.pdf I test it outside my workshop every time an ice-storm dumps on New England...and it performs flawlessly. Everything else is iced over while it is not. No flight tests yet. -------- 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=375666#375666 ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 14, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: SL-40

At 07:08 PM 6/13/2012, you wrote: The 'low voltage=high current' thing works for AC induction motors, but I wouldn't bet too heavily on it being the problem in a DC circuit. If you look at the volts/ohms/amps formulas, you can see why. Many modern radios have switchmode power supplies that deliver a constant voltage to the radios internal workings over a wide range of input voltages. For example, many radios today are rated to run on 10 to 32 volts DC and will work in any airplane. It stands to reason then that since the radio expects to see "constant power availability" over that range of inputs, then the power supply electronics current draw goes up as input voltage goes down. A radio with would be expected to draw 3.2 x more current at 10 volts than it does at 32 volts. Hence, lower bus voltage translates directly into higher current draw. The radio performs as advertised over the full range of inputs. Unless the device is fitted with a constant power energy system, then the current can generally be expected to go down as supply voltage goes down . . . with a commensurate drop in device performance. One thing that *can* happen is the fuse will get hot if there's a poor connection anywhere in the neighborhood: wire to terminal, terminal to fuse, and back again on the other side of the fuse. Think resistance heater. If it gets hot, it's weaker & vibration will increase the odds of mechanical failure of the fuse link itself. Is it a glass fuse, or one of the newer automotive blade type fuses? (Blade fuses should be somewhat less susceptible to the high resistance issue.) Can you monitor voltage at the power terminal of the radio, & watch the voltage when you key the mic & actually transmit? If it drops noticeably, you've got high resistance somewhere in the circuit, & the fuse would be my 1st stop, especially if it's the old glass variety. It is a widely circulated myth that some devices should be expected to draw more current at lower supply voltages . . . especially motors. Output torque is proportional to current in the armature. If the motor is powering something that demands more torque as the speed drops, then yes, current will go up. This is NOT because of any special characteristic of the motor; rather a characteristic of the system the motor drives. Also, increased resistance in the loop of any closed system will drop the voltage available elsewhere in the loop while increasing energy dissipated in the localized loss of conduction. But thermally operated fuses and breakers are oblivious to such events. They only know how many electrons per second they're asked to carry (amps) and will perform accordingly. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 14, 2012

From:

GERRY VAN%20DYK <gerry.vandyk(at)shaw.ca>

Subject:

Re: Pitot Tube Help

Here in Canada the equipment regs for IFR flight require the pitot be heated. Is this not the case in the US? Gerry ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:46:54 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Pitot Tube Help I was always of the opinion that a heated pitot tube would be very useful for home-built aircraft even it it wasn't certified for known-icing-conditions at 30,000 feet and jet plane speeds. Furthermore the reason pitot tubes are heated with such high power is because they are made of material that conducts heat rapidly. A strange design to be sure. For those interested in my old Thermostatic Pitot Tube see: http://www.periheliondesign.com/downloads/thermopitot.pdf I test it outside my workshop every time an ice-storm dumps on New England...and it performs flawlessly. Everything else is iced over while it is not. No flight tests yet. -------- 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=375666#375666 ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 14, 2012

From:

Dan Billingsley <dan(at)azshowersolutions.com>

Subject:

Re: SL-40

=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" =0ATo: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0ASent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:03 PM=0ASubject: Re: AeroElectric-List: III" =0A=0AAt 07:08 PM 6/13/2012, you wrote: =0AThe 'low voltage=high current' thing works for AC induction motors, bu t I wouldn't bet too heavily on it being the problem in a DC circuit. If yo u look at the volts/ohms/amps formulas, you can see why.=0A=0A- Many mod ern radios have switchmode power supplies that deliver=0A- a constant vo ltage to the radios internal workings over a wide=0A- range of input vol tages. For example, many radios today are=0A- rated to run on 10 to 32 v olts DC and will work in any airplane.=0A=0A- It stands to reason then t hat since the radio expects to see=0A- "constant power availability" ove r that range of inputs, then=0A- the power supply electronics current dr aw goes up as input voltage=0A- goes down. A radio with would be expecte d to draw 3.2 x more current=0A- at 10 volts than it does at 32 volts. H ence, lower bus voltage=0A- translates directly into higher current draw . The radio performs=0A- as advertised over the full range of inputs.So with the E-Bus operating at somewhere around 1.5V lower than the main bus, then there may be a possibility of radio transmission kicking the current h igh enough to burn the fuse? Or do you think there may be more going on her e (like some unwanted resistance)? I wasn't able to get to the field today (so no testing yet) but there were a couple suggestions / thoughts...=0A(a) change out the 5A fuse to 7.5A and call it good (still on the E-bus).=0A(b ) move the SL-40 power to the main bus with a switch to send it over to the E-bus should it go south again.=0Aand another thought...do I remember corr ectly (Z-16) that changing over to your schottkey diode may increase the av ailable voltage on the E-bus?=0A=0ASo the question....WWBD -(what would b ob do?)=0A- Also, increased resistance in the loop of any closed=0A- sy stem will drop the voltage available elsewhere in the=0A- loop while incr easing energy dissipated in the localized=0A- loss of conduction. But the rmally operated fuses and=0A- breakers are oblivious to such events. They only know=0A- how many electrons per second they're asked to carry=0A- =============== ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 14, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: SL-40

At 09:22 PM 6/13/2012, you wrote: >Thanks guys, That gives me info to work with. Will let you know what >I find tomorrow. >Dan > Dan, have you ever published a diagram of your architecture? It's not clear to me where the 'problem fuse' is located in your system. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 14, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: SL-40

So with the E-Bus operating at somewhere around 1.5V lower than the main bus, then there may be a possibility of radio transmission kicking the current high enough to burn the fuse? If the fuse is already being pushed to the edge . . . yes. What engine are we talking about . . . and alternator? If a Rotax, then the alternator is essentially non-op on the ground so you've got battery voltage less diode drop (1.5 is too much . . . it should be more like .7 for silicon junction and .5 for Schottky device). So on the ground your system supply is basically a battery (12.5 volts) + diode drop might take you down to 12.0 volts or less. This would cause the radio to draw 14/12 or 16% more current than in cruising flight . . . still more if the battery is soggy. You should not have any fuse loaded to more than 75% of rated value anywhere in the system under any operating condition. Or do you think there may be more going on here (like some unwanted resistance)? I wasn't able to get to the field today (so no testing yet) but there were a couple suggestions / thoughts... If you have 'unwanted resistance' it's in the normal feed path wiring that might add to total drop in that path . . . but that shouldn't add more than 0.1 volt or so on top of diode drop. (a) change out the 5A fuse to 7.5A and call it good (still on the E-bus). Do some measurements. KNOW why the fuse is popping . . . (b) move the SL-40 power to the main bus with a switch to send it over to the E-bus should it go south again. and another thought...do I remember correctly (Z-16) that changing over to your schottkey diode may increase the available voltage on the E-bus? By a few tenths of a volt, yes. But if you're slicing your energy pie up in slices that thin, there's no robustness in your design. Check every fuse and make sure it's rated for at least 1.5x max service draw. Recall that fuses protect wires from HARD faults, no wire ever burned from a soft fault (2-4x overload). The 22AWG wire in this photo has been loaded to 20Amps for over 10 minutes http://tinyurl.com/6qr72fr . . . so don't get wrapped around the 'ratings' axle for fuses versus wire size. Nuisance trips are to be designed out before you go flying. So the question....WWBD (what would bob do?) Get some measurements. Resize fuses as needed. From the SL40 Installation Manual: Emacs! The 3.2A max at 13.75 could be 3.6A at 12 volts. The radio has a 7A fast blow fuse installed inside. So where is the 7.5A fuse? If it's on your battery bus to protect the alternate feed path, then this fuse would could be loaded to 3.6 amps PLUS what ever else is on the E-bus . . . need to know what all the numbers are. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 14, 2012

From:

Dan Billingsley <dan(at)azshowersolutions.com>

Subject:

Re: SL-40

=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" =0ATo: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0ASent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 1:14 PM=0ASubject: Re: AeroElectric-List: SL-40=0A =0A=0AAt 09:22 PM 6/13/2012, you wrote:=0A=0AThanks guys, That giv es me info=0Ato work with. Will let you know what I find tomorrow.=0A>Dan =0A>=0A- Dan, have you ever published a diagram of your architecture?=0A - It's not clear to me where the 'problem fuse' is located=0A- in your system.=0ABob, the problem fuse -is on the E-bus (Z-16) going to the SL-4 0 radio. I have a 5A fuse there as called out in the installation manual. -I used the bridge rectifier from Radio Shack between the main and the E. I can sketch out what loads are sitting where between the two busses if th at would help. When I installed everything I was wanting on the E-bus, I en ded up getting a total load of about 7A (measuring across the E switch with it off). That was checked and included keying the radio. I know your book says the E bus should carry a Max of 4 A continuous load, but when I mentio ned -it here, I was told it should be a non-issue as the transmitting onl y occurs in short bursts. So perhaps I SHOULD be using your diode instead o f the rectifier? I need to do these and more Voltage & Amp tests to know wh ================ ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 14, 2012

From:

fedico94(at)mchsi.com

Subject:

G3X Garmin EFIS

need advice I want to test the hall effect sensor wire input to the G3X (Slick Mag sensor from UMA). I have never gotten the rpm sensor to test as one would a cam shaft hall effect sensor on a car with an analogue voltmeter. According to Klaus Savier's instructions the input signal from his device will record on the G3X His signal from the Plasma II puts out a square wave (rather than sine wave) at 10V amplitude and 0.3me ? width. 2 pulses per revolution so about so for 2k rpm need 4K pulses per min. Is there a reasonably priced pulse generator that will send out a signal like this or is there place to get it locally like radio shack ? The flap indicator does not work. it is dependent upon a slde potentiometer from Ray Allen Is there a way to build a device to send a signal down the input wire to the G3X that varies voltage ? The G3X displays 0.3 V on the flap panel but no chage as I run the flaps up and down. I assume the max voltage going in is 0.3V. I thought of using a 9 V battery with a potentiometer and this may be useful for the fuel senders as well. I have yet to test the fuel tank senders to see if they work. Very disappointed that this professionally assembled suite of Garmin equipment has some major problems in receiving a signal. Hard to tell if it is the senders or the LSU computer brain. So far the senders all check out as working properly. My main problem is getting access to data to safely test the input signal wires for the RPM sensor, but Klaus Savier has some information on his Plasma II device for electronic signal to the input of the RPM of the G3X. Prior to installation I use OHM meter to make sure the supplied harneses had continuity and correct pin readout. So much for plug-n-play. ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Vern Little" <sprocket@vx-aviation.com>

Subject:

Re: Inexpensive CAD Software

Date:

Jun 14, 2012

This is as close to a Calma editor that I=99ve found. I like the precision and ability to enter coordinate information directly. A definite trip in the way-back machine! Once I got my mind back in the object select:action:execute model, it all came back to me. For those who don=99t know what a Calma is, it was one of the first CAD tools for designing integrated circuits. It ran on a Data General Nova computer and had custom color high resolution displays, keyboards and tablets. Because of the low contrast of the displays, it was customary to have no lights on and tents around the workstations to eliminate glare. After 8 to 12 hours a day x several months on one of these, one got a little pasty in complexion... kind of like working in the hangar all day. Nice tip. Thx, Vern From: cdnch701builder Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 7:55 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Inexpensive CAD Software Try DeltaCad... it is simple and very easy to use! I have been using it for years! http://www.deltacad.com/ I have a number of CAD programs... including TurboCad, DesignCad, etc and DeltaCad I find is very easy and not complicated to use... Try the 30 day free demo... that will give you a good idea at how simple to use! Also keep in mind this is 2D... not 3D. Ron :--)> Several :--)> months ago, I think I saw some traffic on this list about inexpensive CAD software. :--)> :--)> :--)> All I :--)> really need is some simple line-drawing & dimensioning capabilities to layout a :--)> panel. :--)> :--)> :--)> I :--)> used to use TurboCAD (~5-7 years ago). What=C2=92s the hot ticket today? :--)> :--)> :--)> -Jeff :--)> :--)> :--)> - The :--)> AeroElectric-List Email Forum - :--)> such as List Chat, href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www. matr :--)> - :--)> MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - --> :--)> http://forums.matronics.com :--)> - :--)> List Contribution Web --> :--)> http://www.matronics.com/contribution :--)> No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 06/14/12 ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>

Subject:

Re: Pitot Tube Help

Date:

Jun 15, 2012

Looks great Eric! Very interesting page... Jay -----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: 14 June 2012 08:47 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Pitot Tube Help --> I was always of the opinion that a heated pitot tube would be very useful for home-built aircraft even it it wasn't certified for known-icing-conditions at 30,000 feet and jet plane speeds. Furthermore the reason pitot tubes are heated with such high power is because they are made of material that conducts heat rapidly. A strange design to be sure. For those interested in my old Thermostatic Pitot Tube see: http://www.periheliondesign.com/downloads/thermopitot.pdf I test it outside my workshop every time an ice-storm dumps on New England...and it performs flawlessly. Everything else is iced over while it is not. No flight tests yet. -------- 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=375666#375666 ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Franz Fux" <franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com>

Subject:

Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 12 Msgs - 06/14/12

Date:

Jun 15, 2012

only intermittent access to e-mail until June 19th, in an urgent matter contact info(at)lastfrontierheli.com ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 14, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: G3X Garmin EFIS

At 05:45 PM 6/14/2012, you wrote: need advice I want to test the hall effect sensor wire input to the G3X (Slick Mag sensor from UMA). I have never gotten the rpm sensor to test as one would a cam shaft hall effect sensor on a car with an analogue voltmeter. Sensors that can be 'read' with an analog voltmeter are generally variable reluctance devices . . . Magnetic sensors by CRA Division of Electro-Numerics These have a permanent magnet center pole piece with many turns of 'cat hair' wound around them. When the teeth of a ferrous gear fly past the end of the pole piece, the change in magnetic flux around the wires generates a small, generally sinusoidal, ac waveform with a frequency equal to teeth-per-second and an amplitude proportional to teeth-per-second. On the other hand, a 'hall effect device' for RPM sensing generally depends on an external magnetic field (like the one that spins around the shaft of a magneto). It's usually a 3-wire device (ground, signal and power) but CAN be a 2-wire device for accommodating instruments. These need to be powered up by 3-15 volts DC and the output signal is generally a square wave, again frequency equal to pole passages per second but an amplitude fixed to some value close to the power supply voltage. Emacs! So if the sensor you're trying to test is indeed a Hall Effect device, you'll need to wire it up to emulate the power supply and signal loads present in normal operations. Observation of a the output signal will require an oscilloscope as opposed to a simple voltmeter. According to Klaus Savier's instructions the input signal from his device will record on the G3X His signal from the Plasma II puts out a square wave (rather than sine wave) at 10V amplitude and 0.3me ? width. 2 pulses per revolution so about so for 2k rpm need 4K pulses per min. Is there a reasonably priced pulse generator that will send out a signal like this or is there place to get it locally like radio shack ? Sure, it's called a 555 timer. The flap indicator does not work. it is dependent upon a slde potentiometer from Ray Allen Is there a way to build a device to send a signal down the input wire to the G3X that varies voltage ? The G3X displays 0.3 V on the flap panel but no chage as I run the flaps up and down. I assume the max voltage going in is 0.3V. I thought of using a 9 V battery with a potentiometer and this may be useful for the fuel senders as well. That seems likely. I have yet to test the fuel tank senders to see if they work. Very disappointed that this professionally assembled suite of Garmin equipment has some major problems in receiving a signal. Hard to tell if it is the senders or the LSU computer brain. So far the senders all check out as working properly. My main problem is getting access to data to safely test the input signal wires for the RPM sensor, but Klaus Savier has some information on his Plasma II device for electronic signal to the input of the RPM of the G3X. Prior to installation I use OHM meter to make sure the supplied harneses had continuity and correct pin readout. So much for plug-n-play. Garmin is pretty good at displaying the right numbers representing various system values. The problem is with the wide variety of sensor styles, scale factors, offsets and wave shapes. Had Garmin supplied all components they would have been married in production. But as you've discovered, doing the engagement, marriage and honeymoon yourself can be challenging. These have a permanent magnet center pole piece with many turns of 'cat hair' wound around them. When the teeth of a ferrous gear fly past the end of the pole piece, the change in magnetic flux around the wires generates a small, generally sinusoidal, ac waveform with a frequency equal to teeth-per-second and an amplitude proportional to teeth-per-second. On the other hand, a 'hall effect device' for RPM sensing generally depends on an external magnetic field (like the one that spins around the shaft of a magneto). It's usually a 3-wire device (ground, signal and power) but CAN be a 2-wire device for accommodating instruments. These need to be powered up by 3-15 volts DC and the output signal is generally a square wave, again frequency equal to pole passages per second but an amplitude fixed to some value close to the power supply voltage. So if the sensor you're trying to test is indeed a Hall Effect device, you'll need to wire it up to emulate the power supply and signal loads present in normal operations. Observation of a the output signal will require an oscilloscope as opposed to a simple voltmeter. >According to Klaus Savier's instructions the input signal from his >device will record on the G3X >His signal from the Plasma II puts out a square wave (rather than >sine wave) at 10V amplitude and >0.3me ? width. 2 pulses per revolution so about so for 2k rpm need >4K pulses per min. >Is there a reasonably priced pulse generator that will send out a >signal like this or is there place to get it locally like radio shack ? Sure, it's called a 555 timer. See schematic Emacs! According to the calculator just below this image at http://home.cogeco.ca/~rpaisley4/LM555Astable.GIF 100 ohms at R1, 3300 ohms at R2, 4.7 uF at C1 will give you about 45 Hz, 2700 pulses per minute or 1350 rpm equivalent test signal. Running this test generator on a 9v battery would probably be close enough to the 10v pulse generated by the Lightspeed system. The flap indicator does not work. it is dependent upon a slde potentiometer from Ray Allen Is there a way to build a device to send a signal down the input wire to the G3X that varies voltage ? The G3X displays 0.3 V on the flap panel but no chage as I run the flaps up and down. I assume the max voltage going in is 0.3V. I thought of using a 9 V battery with a potentiometer and this may be useful for the fuel senders as well. That seems likely. I have yet to test the fuel tank senders to see if they work. Very disappointed that this professionally assembled suite of Garmin equipment has some major problems in receiving a signal. Hard to tell if it is the senders or the LSU computer brain. So far the senders all check out as working properly. My main problem is getting access to data to safely test the input signal wires for the RPM sensor, but Klaus Savier has some information on his Plasma II device for electronic signal to the input of the RPM of the G3X. Prior to installation I use OHM meter to make sure the supplied harneses had continuity and correct pin readout. So much for plug-n-play. Garmin is pretty good at displaying the right numbers representing various system values. The problem is with the wide variety of sensor styles, scale factors, offsets and wave shapes. Had Garmin supplied all components they would have been married in production. But as you've discovered, doing the engagement, marriage and honeymoon yourself can be challenging. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 15, 2012

From:

D L Josephson <dlj04(at)josephson.com>

Subject:

Re: Inexpensive CAD software

We have used Autocad LT for years and it just works, but have been looking for something more recent, just because some of our contractors and customers send us files too new for our LT to read. I was very pleasantly surprised with nanoCAD which seems to be a functional clone of recent Autocad. It's from Russia and is free. Their business model seems to be that the basic program is free but they have various other add-on tools for sale. I haven't evaluated it closely yet but it looks promising. Another possibility is DraftSight from Dassault Systems (yes, the Dassault that makes airplanes and owns SolidWorks). It's also free, for Mac, Windows and soon Linux. ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 15, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: SL-40

>Bob, the problem fuse is on the E-bus (Z-16) going to the SL-40 >radio. I have a 5A fuse there as called out in the installation manual. Yeah, I recall now. Okay, if you're blowing that fuse, it's because the radio draws enough current to do it. Do I recall that the fuse does not pop if the alternate feed switch to the e-bus is closed? A useful experiment would be to leave the alternate feed switch on for all normal ops. Turn it on before master switch, off after master switch. See if the fuse blowing behavior changes. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"John Loram" <johnl(at)loram.org>

Subject:

Re: Inexpensive CAD software

Date:

Jun 15, 2012

And then there's Siemens' Solid Edge Drafting, the 2D version of their super expensive 3D Solid Edge PLM software. It's free: http://www.plm.automation.siemens.com/en_us/products/velocity/solidedge/free 2d/ -john- > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On > Behalf Of D L Josephson > Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 10:25 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Inexpensive CAD software > > --> > > We have used Autocad LT for years and it just works, but have > been looking for something more recent, just because some of > our contractors and customers send us files too new for our > LT to read. I was very pleasantly surprised with nanoCAD > which seems to be a functional clone of recent Autocad. It's > from Russia and is free. Their business model seems to be > that the basic program is free but they have various other > add-on tools for sale. I haven't evaluated it closely yet but > it looks promising. > > Another possibility is DraftSight from Dassault Systems (yes, > the Dassault that makes airplanes and owns SolidWorks). It's > also free, for Mac, Windows and soon Linux. > ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 15, 2012

From:

Henador Titzoff <henador_titzoff(at)yahoo.com>

Subject:

Re: Inexpensive CAD software

Are nanoCAD, DraughtSight and Solid Edge Drafting files compatible with lat est and greatest AutoCAD files?- How easy or hard is it to migrate betwee n all of these CAD packages? Henador Titzoff --- On Fri, 6/15/12, John Loram wrote: From: John Loram <johnl(at)loram.org> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Inexpensive CAD software Date: Friday, June 15, 2012, 11:26 AM And then there's Siemens' Solid Edge Drafting, the 2D version of their supe r expensive 3D Solid Edge PLM software. It's free: http://www.plm.automation.siemens.com/en_us/products/velocity/solidedge/fre e 2d/ -john- > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On > Behalf Of D L Josephson > Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 10:25 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Inexpensive CAD software > > --> > > We have used Autocad LT for years and it just works, but have > been looking for something more recent, just because some of > our contractors and customers send us files too new for our > LT to read. I was very pleasantly surprised with nanoCAD > which seems to be a functional clone of recent Autocad. It's > from Russia and is free. Their business model seems to be > that the basic program is free but they have various other > add-on tools for sale. I haven't evaluated it closely yet but > it looks promising. > > Another possibility is DraftSight from Dassault Systems (yes, > the Dassault that makes airplanes and owns SolidWorks). It's > also free, for Mac, Windows and soon Linux. > le, List Admin. ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 15, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Inexpensive CAD software

At 04:21 PM 6/15/2012, you wrote: >Are nanoCAD, DraughtSight and Solid Edge Drafting files compatible >with latest and greatest AutoCAD files? How easy or hard is it to >migrate between all of these CAD packages? > >Henador Titzoff I just downloaded and installed the nanoCAD program. Installation was seamless. It has the look and feel of contemporary AutoCAD programs. Opens, edits, prints and saves my .dwg AutoCAD files. Fantastic value for the price . . . $0. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 15, 2012

From:

fedico94(at)mchsi.com

Subject:

Re: G3X Garmin EFIS

thanks for your timely and accurate advice. I researched the internet last night and it seems a number of schools use the 555 timer circuits. Your calculations and drawing will make my my breadboard assembly easy. Unfortunately I found major wiring snafu in G3X system. The signal input wire does trace to the appropriate pin 17 of the 80 pin J732 LSU connector. Unfortunately I get a voltmeter reading of 13.5 out of this wire. The power should come form pin 58 wire but has no power coming out. It seems this system is to complex to assemble, even for a large avionics shop in northern US. ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: G3X Garmin EFIS At 05:45 PM 6/14/2012, you wrote: need advice I want to test the hall effect sensor wire input to the G3X (Slick Mag sensor from UMA). I have never gotten the rpm sensor to test as one would a cam shaft hall effect sensor on a car with an analogue voltmeter. Sensors that can be 'read' with an analog voltmeter are generally variable reluctance devices . . . Magnetic sensors by CRA Division of Electro-Numerics These have a permanent magnet center pole piece with many turns of 'cat hair' wound around them. When the teeth of a ferrous gear fly past the end of the pole piece, the change in magnetic flux around the wires generates a small, generally sinusoidal, ac waveform with a frequency equal to teeth-per-second and an amplitude proportional to teeth-per-second. On the other hand, a 'hall effect device' for RPM sensing generally depends on an external magnetic field (like the one that spins around the shaft of a magneto). It's usually a 3-wire device (ground, signal and power) but CAN be a 2-wire device for accommodating instruments. These need to be powered up by 3-15 volts DC and the output signal is generally a square wave, again frequency equal to pole passages per second but an amplitude fixed to some value close to the power supply voltage. Emacs! So if the sensor you're trying to test is indeed a Hall Effect device, you'll need to wire it up to emulate the power supply and signal loads present in normal operations. Observation of a the output signal will require an oscilloscope as opposed to a simple voltmeter. According to Klaus Savier's instructions the input signal from his device will record on the G3X His signal from the Plasma II puts out a square wave (rather than sine wave) at 10V amplitude and 0.3me ? width. 2 pulses per revolution so about so for 2k rpm need 4K pulses per min. Is there a reasonably priced pulse generator that will send out a signal like this or is there place to get it locally like radio shack ? Sure, it's called a 555 timer. The flap indicator does not work. it is dependent upon a slde potentiometer from Ray Allen Is there a way to build a device to send a signal down the input wire to the G3X that varies voltage ? The G3X displays 0.3 V on the flap panel but no chage as I run the flaps up and down. I assume the max voltage going in is 0.3V. I thought of using a 9 V battery with a potentiometer and this may be useful for the fuel senders as well. That seems likely. I have yet to test the fuel tank senders to see if they work. Very disappointed that this professionally assembled suite of Garmin equipment has some major problems in receiving a signal. Hard to tell if it is the senders or the LSU computer brain. So far the senders all check out as working properly. My main problem is getting access to data to safely test the input signal wires for the RPM sensor, but Klaus Savier has some information on his Plasma II device for electronic signal to the input of the RPM of the G3X. Prior to installation I use OHM meter to make sure the supplied harneses had continuity and correct pin readout. So much for plug-n-play. Garmin is pretty good at displaying the right numbers representing various system values. The problem is with the wide variety of sensor styles, scale factors, offsets and wave shapes. Had Garmin supplied all components they would have been married in production. But as you've discovered, doing the engagement, marriage and honeymoon yourself can be challenging. These have a permanent magnet center pole piece with many turns of 'cat hair' wound around them. When the teeth of a ferrous gear fly past the end of the pole piece, the change in magnetic flux around the wires generates a small, generally sinusoidal, ac waveform with a frequency equal to teeth-per-second and an amplitude proportional to teeth-per-second. On the other hand, a 'hall effect device' for RPM sensing generally depends on an external magnetic field (like the one that spins around the shaft of a magneto). It's usually a 3-wire device (ground, signal and power) but CAN be a 2-wire device for accommodating instruments. These need to be powered up by 3-15 volts DC and the output signal is generally a square wave, again frequency equal to pole passages per second but an amplitude fixed to some value close to the power supply voltage. So if the sensor you're trying to test is indeed a Hall Effect device, you'll need to wire it up to emulate the power supply and signal loads present in normal operations. Observation of a the output signal will require an oscilloscope as opposed to a simple voltmeter. >According to Klaus Savier's instructions the input signal from his >device will record on the G3X >His signal from the Plasma II puts out a square wave (rather than >sine wave) at 10V amplitude and >0.3me ? width. 2 pulses per revolution so about so for 2k rpm need >4K pulses per min. >Is there a reasonably priced pulse generator that will send out a >signal like this or is there place to get it locally like radio shack ? Sure, it's called a 555 timer. See schematic Emacs! According to the calculator just below this image at http://home.cogeco.ca/~rpaisley4/LM555Astable.GIF 100 ohms at R1, 3300 ohms at R2, 4.7 uF at C1 will give you about 45 Hz, 2700 pulses per minute or 1350 rpm equivalent test signal. Running this test generator on a 9v battery would probably be close enough to the 10v pulse generated by the Lightspeed system. The flap indicator does not work. it is dependent upon a slde potentiometer from Ray Allen Is there a way to build a device to send a signal down the input wire to the G3X that varies voltage ? The G3X displays 0.3 V on the flap panel but no chage as I run the flaps up and down. I assume the max voltage going in is 0.3V. I thought of using a 9 V battery with a potentiometer and this may be useful for the fuel senders as well. That seems likely. I have yet to test the fuel tank senders to see if they work. Very disappointed that this professionally assembled suite of Garmin equipment has some major problems in receiving a signal. Hard to tell if it is the senders or the LSU computer brain. So far the senders all check out as working properly. My main problem is getting access to data to safely test the input signal wires for the RPM sensor, but Klaus Savier has some information on his Plasma II device for electronic signal to the input of the RPM of the G3X. Prior to installation I use OHM meter to make sure the supplied harneses had continuity and correct pin readout. So much for plug-n-play. Garmin is pretty good at displaying the right numbers representing various system values. The problem is with the wide variety of sensor styles, scale factors, offsets and wave shapes. Had Garmin supplied all components they would have been married in production. But as you've discovered, doing the engagement, marriage and honeymoon yourself can be challenging. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Franz Fux" <franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com>

Subject:

Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 8 Msgs - 06/15/12

Date:

Jun 16, 2012

only intermittent access to e-mail until June 19th, in an urgent matter contact info(at)lastfrontierheli.com ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Inexpensive CAD Software

From:

"user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>

Date:

Jun 16, 2012

I made drawings using Solid Edge. Months later when I tried to open the drawings, Solid Edge said that my license had expired. It would not let me look at my drawings unless I renewed my license (free). This happened again the following year. I got to thinking, what will happen if Solid Edge changes their licensing policy or if they go out of business? I will not be able to access my drawings. So I switched to TurboCad, although it is not very intuitive. I prefer programs that are easy to learn without having to read the help files. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=375794#375794 ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 16, 2012

Subject:

battery charge.

From:

bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com>

i have an odessey 625 that is 5 yrs old and has only begun to be used last oct. it has spent 100% of its life on a schumacher maintainer. now i at times run into a situation where the battery won't spin the engine. other factors may be involved too. this is a jab 3300 with the old model starter, engine is new, engine is tight when hot. soooooooo i don't know if it is my starter or battery is to blame. i took the fully charged battery to carquest and a load test said it was good. i know how load tests were done 20 yrs. ago, can they be done so easily with a 1 lb. handheld digital thing as carquest used in a few seconds? here are a few stats on my battery on the tender and where its voltage goes after being taken off the tender.master solenoid, starter solenoid , diode were installed per b and c instructions. any opinions where to go next? battrey charge immediately after coming off tender...13.23 volts after 24 hrs off.......12.92 volts after 5 days off........12.74 volts is it possible my wiring setup is causing a draw? i have not disconnected it and checked voltage yet. any suggestions appreciated. bob noffs ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 16, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Inexpensive CAD Software

At 04:17 AM 6/16/2012, you wrote: > >I made drawings using Solid Edge. Months later when I tried to open >the drawings, Solid Edge said that my license had expired. It would >not let me look at my drawings unless I renewed my license >(free). This happened again the following year. > I got to thinking, what will happen if Solid Edge changes their > licensing policy or if they go out of business? I will not be able > to access my drawings. So I switched to TurboCad, although it is > not very intuitive. I prefer programs that are easy to learn > without having to read the help files. >Joe Then microCAD (or any of the AutoCADS) are two excellent solutions. They understand English. If you want to draw a line say "line" and then enter a from (intersection, nearest, tangent midpoint, etc) then a to (same constellation of options) while guiding to those terminations with the mouse. Further, AutoCAD and nanoCAD have .pgp 'overlay' files that you can edit with an ordinary text editor like notepad. A, *ARC AA, *AREA AL, *ALIGN AR, *ARRAY BL, *BLOCK BR, *BREAK CI, *CIRCLE C, *CHANGE CH, *CHAMFER CO, *COPY D, *DIMSTYLE DDI, *DIMDIAMETER DED, *DIMEDIT DI, *DIST DT, *DTEXT E, *ERASE ED, *DDEDIT EL, *ELLIPSE EXIT, *QUIT F, *FILLET H, *HATCH I, *INSERT L, *LINE LA, *LAYER LE, *QLEADER LI, *LIST LT, *LINETYPE LTS, *LTSCALE M, *MOVE MI, *MIRROR O, *OSNAP P, *PAN PE, *PEDIT PL, *PLINE PG, *POLYGON PU, *PURGE R, *REDRAW RE, *REGEN RA, *RECTANGLE RO, *ROTATE S, *STRETCH SO, *SOLID T, *TRIM V, *VIEW WB, *WBLOCK XP, *EXPLODE XT, *EXTEND Z, *ZOOM When you enter the short command, the cad program interprets it for the full command. I found that I could draw left-handed with the mouse while one-hand typing with the right and go through the 'dance moves' with greater rapidity than by accessing all those little tool-bar boxes (most of which I didn't need/ use). In fact, I can turn all the tool-bars off and have the full, un-clutered screen to work on. Aside from the isometric drawings I made for illustrating the 'Connection, I've not found a strong need for 3d drawings. If you need that capability, I'm not a good source for advise. Your personal .pgp file becomes a good teaching tool too. Out of hundreds of commands that the CAD program understands, editing your overlay file down to those you use 99% of the time make the .pgp file a sort of syllabus for a short course in AutoCAD. Search the 1-inch thick book of 1000 commands for how these few work . . . you'll have 99% of your dance moves learned in a very short time. In fact, I would recommend that anyone wanting to get their feet wet in either AutoCAD or microCAD cut-n-paste the list above into a new version of a .pgp file and print a paper copy too. Hang it on the wall behind your monitor as a reference list. This will steepen your learning curve greatly. You can always add/delete commands to customize the list to your own needs but I'm betting that becoming proficient in those listed will get you up to speed very quickly. Turning off all the tool bars and talking to the program in 'English' is about as intuitive as you can get. Over the years I've spent thousands of dollars of my boss's money on AutoCAD and sundry upgrades. nanoCAD now does everything that cost us the price of a good used car . . . for free. Interestingly enough, NONE of those upgrades added features that I needed for my work. Everything I do today can be done in say AutoCAD R10 for DOS! There may be other applications that are as intuitive and/or attractively priced . . . don't know. But I can tell you that nanoCAD is an exceedingly good value and easy to learn if you start with the few dozen commands I listed above. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 10, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Found it!

At 10:19 AM 6/10/2012, you wrote: I just wanted to stop and thank everyone for their suggestions and help as I was searching for this gremlin. The fix did turn out to be installing that $11 in-line audio filter into the audio jack on the 396 and sending it on its way to the intercom. Jumped in, fired it up and taxied around for the first time in peace and quiet. The 'filter' is probably a simple isolation transformer as opposed to any sort of noise rejection device. This technique is used to break any potential (orrealized) ground loop. Back in the good ol' days, audio inputs and many outputs from the 'higher end' devices had such transformers built in. These were common to audio amplifiers for large installations that might have signal or microphone cables hundreds of feet long. I used to shag audio systems for a group of acoustic music aficionados and learned about the usefulness of such devices first hand. When your mixer board was 100+ feet of wire away from the power amplifiers, the potential for ground loop noises was very high. Yeah, even carried the stuff around in a VW microbus, just no psychodelic paint job! There have been cases where I would have liked to install such a transformer in TC aircraft . . . but that's a "no-no" without a lot of paperwork; change of configuration. Hence, it's not uncommon to hear buzzes, whines, pops, etc. in the audio systems for REALLY expensive machines. It would have been interesting to locate root cause for the original loop, but not worth tearing into hard-to-get-at wire bundles, etc. None-the-less, a loop-breaker transformer is an elegant fix. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Franz Fux" <franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com>

Subject:

Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 5 Msgs - 06/16/12

Date:

Jun 17, 2012

only intermittent access to e-mail until June 19th, in an urgent matter contact info(at)lastfrontierheli.com ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Peter Mather" <peter(at)mather.com>

Subject:

OBS resolver signals

Date:

Jun 17, 2012

Can anyone explain or point me at any documentation that explains the OBS resolver signals for setting the course on a NAV set, e.g. a King 165. What I know is the the NAV set produces a rounded off square wave at either 30HZ or 300HZ. The OBS knob then returns two signals representing the sine and the cosine of the position. So for example sine of 90 degrees is 1 and cos is zero, sine of 270 degrees is -1 and cos is still 0 What I don't know is whether the returning signals go negative (the older CDIs use transformer technology so could easily produce negative voltage) or whether they are referenced to the mid point of the excitation signal and whether the excitation signal itself goes negative or it just varies between 0 and the reference voltage. Any help or pointers to docs appreciated - google has failed me. Thanks Peter ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"John Loram" <johnl(at)loram.org>

Subject:

Re: Inexpensive CAD software

Date:

Jun 17, 2012

Solid Edge has extensive import/export capabilities, (largely untested by me). -john- _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Henador Titzoff Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 2:22 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Inexpensive CAD software Are nanoCAD, DraughtSight and Solid Edge Drafting files compatible with latest and greatest AutoCAD files? How easy or hard is it to migrate between all of these CAD packages? Henador Titzoff ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"John Loram" <johnl(at)loram.org>

Subject:

Re: Inexpensive CAD Software

Date:

Jun 17, 2012

Annoying, isn't? I been renewing for years now 'cause I like the features. Fortunately their file format can be imported by other CAD programs. -john- > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On > Behalf Of user9253 > Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2012 2:17 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Inexpensive CAD Software > > --> > > I made drawings using Solid Edge. Months later when I tried > to open the drawings, Solid Edge said that my license had > expired. It would not let me look at my drawings unless I > renewed my license (free). This happened again the following year. > I got to thinking, what will happen if Solid Edge changes > their licensing policy or if they go out of business? I will > not be able to access my drawings. So I switched to > TurboCad, although it is not very intuitive. I prefer > programs that are easy to learn without having to read the help files. > Joe > > -------- > Joe Gores > ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Viking Schematic

From:

"user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>

Date:

Jun 17, 2012

I am helping a friend with a schematic for his Viking powered airplane. See the attached pdf. Is it safe to eliminate the Schottky diode in the lower left corner? I want to remove the diode because it is one more failure point and I do not know if it can handle the full load of the main bus, perhaps as much as 25 or 30 amps. The concern is a short in the alternator or starter circuit (Or is this a remote possibility?) with no way to isolate it without stopping the electrically dependent engine. Thanks for any advice. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=375936#375936 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/viking_rv_12e_847.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Franz Fux" <franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com>

Subject:

Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 5 Msgs - 06/17/12

Date:

Jun 18, 2012

only intermittent access to e-mail until June 19th, in an urgent matter contact info(at)lastfrontierheli.com ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 18, 2012

From:

Dan Billingsley <dan(at)azshowersolutions.com>

Subject:

Re: SL-40

Bob,=0AA good thought, but the first fuse blew as I was doing that very thi ng (running with the alternate feed switch closed). So for the last 12 hour s or so, I have run with the alternate switch off. Just strange that it too k 12 hours to pop again. Like one of the guys suggested, when I do my tests I might find the radio draw is dancing around the 5A limit...so over time it would probably eat away at the fuse until it fails. I guess the easy fix could be to throw the 7.5 A in there, but it still bothers me that the rad io specs indicate the high end draw at tx should be 3.5A (going from memory here) or close to that. I am off to the field now and hope to gather some useable information today. Just hopeI don't blow a fuse out there...should get up to about 110 in Phoenix today.=0ADan=0A=0A=0A_______________________ _________=0A From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com >=0ATo: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0ASent: Friday, June 15, 2012 10:3 5 AM=0ASubject: Re: AeroElectric-List: SL-40=0A =0A=0ABob, the=0Aproblem fu se- is on the E-bus (Z-16) going to the SL-40 radio. I=0Ahave a 5A fuse t here as called out in the installation manual. =0A-Yeah, I recall now.=0A =0A-Okay, if you're blowing that fuse, it's because the=0A-radio draws enough current to do it. Do I recall that=0A-the fuse does not pop if the alternate feed switch to=0A-the e-bus is closed? A useful experiment wou ld be to=0A-leave the alternate feed switch on for all normal ops.=0A-T urn it on before master switch, off after master=0A-switch. See if the fu ============= ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 18, 2012

From:

<r.r.hall(at)cox.net>

Subject:

Apollo 706? Anyone heard of it?

Has anyone heard of an Apollo 706 radio? I recently bought a experimental that has an Apollo 706 radio in it but I know nothing about it and haven't been able to find anything for the wiring or operation. I don't even know if it is 720 channel or not. The operation does not seem vary intuitive to me as it is all pushbuttons. It is probably from the late 80's or early 90's. A manual or general information would be helpful. Rodney Hall ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jim Wickert" <jimw_btg(at)earthlink.net>

Subject:

Apollo 706? Anyone heard of it?

Date:

Jun 18, 2012

It is a Loran/Com that was built by Apollo and later purchased by Garmin. Garmin dropped all but the SL series of the Apollo line from their support pages. 54817896.jpg - Apollo 706 Transceiver - obscure radio, and hard to find any details, but it appears to work well on my crude home bench test! Jim Wickert Tel 920-467-0219 Cell 920-912-1014 From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of r.r.hall(at)cox.net Sent: Monday, June 18, 2012 9:59 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Apollo 706? Anyone heard of it? Has anyone heard of an Apollo 706 radio? I recently bought a experimental that has an Apollo 706 radio in it but I know nothing about it and haven't been able to find anything for the wiring or operation. I don't even know if it is 720 channel or not. The operation does not seem vary intuitive to me as it is all pushbuttons. It is probably from the late 80's or early 90's. A manual or general information would be helpful. Rodney Hall ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 18, 2012

From:

Paul Millner <millner(at)me.com>

Subject:

Re: Pitot Tube Help

Not required on the US. Paul On 6/14/2012 12:20 PM, GERRY VAN%20DYK wrote: > Here in Canada the equipment regs for IFR flight require the pitot be heated. Is this not the case in the US? -- Please note my new email address! millner(at)me.com ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>

Subject:

Generator suppressor

Date:

Jun 18, 2012

I'm busy replacing an old regulator (carbon pile with a cut-out relay) on a de Havilland Chipmunk. I bought a modern regulator from Zeftronics (who, in a world of poor service, excel themselves at being at the top of the bad service list) and was about to install it when I noticed that there is also what is termed a 'suppressor' between the generator and the regulator. It is basically what I think is a smoothing filter - two inductors in series with two capacitors, one after each inductor, connected to ground. There are one of these circuits connected to either side of the generator (that is, on either side of the main windings) and one to the one side of the field winding. Since the original of this has disappeared from the aircraft I need to make another one, but I am not sure of what values of inductance and capacitance to use- does anyone have these values squirreled away somewhere so that I can make a new suppressor? Thanks Jay ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"JOHN TIPTON" <jmtipton(at)btopenworld.com>

Subject:

Re: Apollo 706? Anyone heard of it?

Date:

Jun 18, 2012

I presume if the last digit can be a 2 or a 7 as well as 5 & 0 it is 720 channels John ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Wickert To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, June 18, 2012 5:31 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Apollo 706? Anyone heard of it? It is a Loran/Com that was built by Apollo and later purchased by Garmin. Garmin dropped all but the SL series of the Apollo line from their support pages. Jim Wickert Tel 920-467-0219 Cell 920-912-1014 From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of r.r.hall(at)cox.net Sent: Monday, June 18, 2012 9:59 AM To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Apollo 706? Anyone heard of it? Has anyone heard of an Apollo 706 radio? I recently bought a experimental that has an Apollo 706 radio in it but I know nothing about it and haven't been able to find anything for the wiring or operation. I don't even know if it is 720 channel or not. The operation does not seem vary intuitive to me as it is all pushbuttons. It is probably from the late 80's or early 90's. A manual or general information would be helpful. Rodney Hall http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-Listhttp://www.matronics. com/contribution ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Hall Effect rpm sensor

From:

Michael Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com>

Date:

Jun 18, 2012

List guys, Can someone direct me to "complete rpm sensor circuit", including either a digital or analog gauge that would go along with it? I have need of something that will display visually a rotating motor's shaft. A Hall Effect circuit would be fine, but I'm open to anyone's suggestion if they have a better idea how to monitor rpms of a motor. FYI, the motors will turn at a relatively slow 200-250 rpm (if that matters). If you know of a specific gauge, or LCD display, that could read these rpms, I'd appreciate that, too. Thanks in advance, Mike Welch ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Franz Fux" <franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com>

Subject:

Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 8 Msgs - 06/18/12

Date:

Jun 19, 2012

only intermittent access to e-mail until June 19th, in an urgent matter contact info(at)lastfrontierheli.com ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 19, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Generator suppressor

>, but I am not sure of what values of inductance and capacitance to >use- does anyone have these values squirreled away somewhere so that >I can make a new suppressor? Not sure what these would be. I'd leave them off until you find that they are necessary. Most generator noises were antagonistic to ADF and low frequency nav services. You probably don't need them now. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 19, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: SL-40

At 08:22 AM 6/18/2012, you wrote: Bob, A good thought, but the first fuse blew as I was doing that very thing (running with the alternate feed switch closed). So for the last 12 hours or so, I have run with the alternate switch off. Just strange that it took 12 hours to pop again. Like one of the guys suggested, when I do my tests I might find the radio draw is dancing around the 5A limit...so over time it would probably eat away at the fuse until it fails. I guess the easy fix could be to throw the 7.5 A in there, but it still bothers me that the radio specs indicate the high end draw at tx should be 3.5A (going from memory here) or close to that. I am off to the field now and hope to gather some useable information today. Just hope I don't blow a fuse out there...should get up to about 110 in Phoenix today. As I mentioned before, fuses should be 'de-rated' about 25%, 50% doesn't hurt a thing. If your radio is drawing that much current, there has to be a reason. What are your bus voltage measurements showing? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>

Subject:

Generator suppressor

Date:

Jun 19, 2012

Thanks Bob, I was thinking along the same lines. It seems to me that these are simply a broad spectrum smoothing filter. I think that I will test run the generator on my lathe and have a look at the output on a scope to see if it looks too rough- a mass produced line filter may just do the job if any smoothing is required. Jay -----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: 19 June 2012 12:54 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Generator suppressor --> >, but I am not sure of what values of inductance and capacitance to >use- does anyone have these values squirreled away somewhere so that I >can make a new suppressor? Not sure what these would be. I'd leave them off until you find that they are necessary. Most generator noises were antagonistic to ADF and low frequency nav services. You probably don't need them now. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 19, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Generator suppressor

At 06:20 AM 6/19/2012, you wrote: > >Thanks Bob, > >I was thinking along the same lines. It seems to me that these are simply a >broad spectrum smoothing filter. I think that I will test run the generator >on my lathe and have a look at the output on a scope to see if it looks too >rough- a mass produced line filter may just do the job if any smoothing is >required. > >Jay That's probably more trouble than it's worth. Generators produce a lot of trash. A 'scope picture is almost never informative. A spectrum analyzer would give you a notion of potential EMC problems but know that DO-160 calls for 'qualified' devices to shrug off up to 1.5 volts pk-pk over 1 to 5 kHz http://tinyurl.com/78kwfk8 and lesser amounts above and below. A 'scope picture of this is pretty spectacular. Alternators are less 'spikey' but still offer considerable ripple voltage. Any filters you might need would go to issues in the RF spectrum http://tinyurl.com/7wrhxbg and cannot be observed in a time domain display. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 19, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Viking Schematic

At 04:34 PM 6/17/2012, you wrote: I am helping a friend with a schematic for his Viking powered airplane. See the attached pdf. Is it safe to eliminate the Schottky diode in the lower left corner? I want to remove the diode because it is one more failure point and I do not know if it can handle the full load of the main bus, perhaps as much as 25 or 30 amps. The concern is a short in the alternator or starter circuit (Or is this a remote possibility?) with no way to isolate it without stopping the electrically dependent engine. Thanks for any advice. Joe -------- Joe Gores The rationale for this design is not clear just from the schematic. It appears to borrow nothing from the design philosophies for failure tolerance offered in the Z-figures. I'd have to know more about why it was all wired this way. What are the current demands for the two ignition systems? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 19, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Hall Effect rpm sensor

At 05:21 PM 6/18/2012, you wrote: >List guys, > > Can someone direct me to "complete rpm sensor circuit", including > either a digital or analog gauge >that would go along with it? > > I have need of something that will display visually a rotating > motor's shaft. A Hall Effect circuit >would be fine, but I'm open to anyone's suggestion if they have a >better idea how to monitor rpms >of a motor. FYI, the motors will turn at a relatively slow 200-250 >rpm (if that matters). > > If you know of a specific gauge, or LCD display, that could read > these rpms, I'd appreciate that, too. > >Thanks in advance, >Mike Welch What is the rpm range of interest? Is the instrument to be permanently mounted or is it a 'test' or 'setup' environment that could use a hand-held? See: http://tinyurl.com/77ulekb http://tinyurl.com/77lw4bs If you need a permanent, panel mounted instrument, you could use something like this http://tinyurl.com/7nxrh4w but you'd need to build a sensor and some interface electronics. As long as you're building stuff, the data can be displayed on a small, analog instrument where a customized scale sized to your task is pretty easy. https://matronics.com/aeroelectric/Catalog/Loadmeter.jpg Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com>

Subject:

Hall Effect rpm sensor

Date:

Jun 19, 2012

Bob=2C Thank you for replying! Here are some of the parameters: 1) motor shafts are anticipated to rotate between 0-300 rpm2) the tach-di splays need to be remotely=2C and permanently mounted (in a console)(I real ly like that digital tach you suggested!!)3) the 'precise' motor rpms do n ot have to be "highly accurate"=2C but they do need to be consistant.(in ot her words=2C if the shaft is actually spinning at 307 rpms=2C and the gauge says "320"=2C that's fine=2C as long as each time it is consistantly off t he same amount!) I did find a very nice electronics package that was close to what I'm loo king for=2C but it had a couple of glitches. First glitch was the rpm rang e it measured=2C which was way too high=2C and the second glitch was the tw o 7 segment displays=2C when I would prefer an actual tachometer like the o ne you suggested. See:http://www.eio.com/p-23310-velleman-k2625-digital-ta chometer.aspx Thanks for your help=2C Bob=2CMike ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>

Subject:

Generator suppressor

Date:

Jun 19, 2012

Sigh... its never simple :-) -----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: 19 June 2012 04:38 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Generator suppressor --> At 06:20 AM 6/19/2012, you wrote: >--> > >Thanks Bob, > >I was thinking along the same lines. It seems to me that these are >simply a broad spectrum smoothing filter. I think that I will test run >the generator on my lathe and have a look at the output on a scope to >see if it looks too >rough- a mass produced line filter may just do the job if any smoothing >is required. > >Jay That's probably more trouble than it's worth. Generators produce a lot of trash. A 'scope picture is almost never informative. A spectrum analyzer would give you a notion of potential EMC problems but know that DO-160 calls for 'qualified' devices to shrug off up to 1.5 volts pk-pk over 1 to 5 kHz http://tinyurl.com/78kwfk8 and lesser amounts above and below. A 'scope picture of this is pretty spectacular. Alternators are less 'spikey' but still offer considerable ripple voltage. Any filters you might need would go to issues in the RF spectrum http://tinyurl.com/7wrhxbg and cannot be observed in a time domain display. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Viking Schematic

From:

"user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>

Date:

Jun 19, 2012

Bob, My friend is building an RV-12 with an automotive engine, the Viking, which is fuel injected and electrically dependent. The power requirements for the ECU are not known but Viking uses 15 amp fuses. http://www.vikingaircraftengines.com/Wiring%20page.html I do not like the electrical drawing on the Viking website because there are several possible points of failure all in series and supplying power to the engine through only one wire. I suggested to my friend that he use one of your drawings but he said they were too complicated. I tried to simplify by removing the E-Bus and E-Bus diode, while still having a redundant power source for the ignition and fuel pumps without having always hot wires pass through the firewall. The ignition and fuel pumps are located on the opposite side (aft) of the firewall from the engine. If the Alternate Feed Switch is turned on, the engine start circuit is disabled. This will prevent starting current from flowing through the Alternate Feed Relay and damaging its contacts. It is intended that the Alternate Feed Switch be turned on after starting and left on for the remainder of the flight. My friend prefers circuit breakers even though I recommended fuses. He also wants to keep weight down by not having a starter contactor. The Main Bus receives power at each end of the bus. If one connection should fail, the other will still provide power to the bus. The engine should keep running with power coming from only the Alternate Feed Relay or only from Master Contactor or only from the Alternator. The Viking ECU has two independent (almost) units in one enclosure, although it only has one wire supplying power. There is no pin-out available for the ECU 37-Pin D-Sub. The only information comes from the Viking website. The ECU has a SELECT wire that enables one of the two units, depending on whether the voltage on that wire is high or low. At least that is what I deduced from the scant information on the Viking website. The major difference between your excellent drawings and my schematic is that I have eliminated the E-Bus diode and replaced it with part of the Alternate Feed switch to prevent starting current from flowing though the Alternate Feed Relay contacts. Now, without that E-Bus diode, I am having second thoughts about possible reverse current due to faults in the starter or alternator circuit. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376092#376092 ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 19, 2012

From:

David Josephson <dlj04(at)josephson.com>

Subject:

Re: OBS resolver signals

On 6/17/12 11:56 PM, AeroElectric-List Digest Server wrote: > Can anyone explain or point me at any documentation that explains the OBS > resolver signals for setting the course on a NAV set, e.g. a King 165. > > What I know is the the NAV set produces a rounded off square wave at either > 30HZ or 300HZ. The OBS knob then returns two signals representing the sine > and the cosine of the position. So for example sine of 90 degrees is 1 and > cos is zero, sine of 270 degrees is -1 and cos is still 0 > > What I don't know is whether the returning signals go negative (the older > CDIs use transformer technology so could easily produce negative voltage) or > whether they are referenced to the mid point of the excitation signal and > whether the excitation signal itself goes negative or it just varies between > 0 and the reference voltage. If you want to interface with a KX165 you might look at the schematic of that unit, but the nav radios I'm familiar with (just checked a couple of older King and Radair schematics) are all capacitor-coupled so the signal should stay positive with respect to the audio reference ground. Some CDIs may have a transformer input to prevent ground loops -- the return side of the transformer would be run back to the nav radio audio reference ground rather than through the airframe. A VOR station transmits a reference subcarrier at 9.96 kHz, frequency modulated with a 30 Hz tone, and amplitude modulation, also of a 30 Hz tone. The phase angle between the 30 Hz frequency modulation of the subcarrier, and the 30 Hz amplitude modulation of the main carrier, corresponds to the angle between north and the direction from the station to you. The audio input from the nav receiver contains both the 30 Hz AM tone and the 9960 Hz subcarrier with its FM reference modulation. The CDI or VOR converter demodulates the 9960 Hz carrier so you now have two 30 Hz tones. The resolver introduces a known phase shift in the reference; when you turn the OBS knob, you change the amount of phase shift. The VOR needle is driven by a phase comparator that measures the phase difference between the 30 Hz variable signal and the demodulated and phase-shifted 30 Hz reference signal. When the needle centers, the phase shift is zero because the resolver has introduced a phase shift equal to the phase difference between the two 30 Hz signals. Localizer is a different signal entirely but sent on the same wire; there are two tones, 90 and 150 Hz, and the needle reflects the ratio between the amplitude of the two tones. When you are on the centerline of the localizer, you're receiving equal signals from the two sets of antennas on either side of the centerline, one of which is transmitting with 90 Hz modulation and the other with 150 Hz. ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Rob Henderson" <robnrobinh(at)comcast.net>

Subject:

Antenna length

Date:

Jun 19, 2012

Hi all I would like to make a couple of antennas for my Glastar. Does anyone know what the length is for dipole, or any reason not to "role my own". Transponder: Comm: Nav: Marker: Glide Slope: UAT: I will be using Garmin GTX327 SL30 GMA340 Navworxs ADSB Thanks in advance for all advice -Rob Henderson ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 19, 2012

From:

Peter Pengilly <peter(at)sportingaero.com>

Subject:

Re: Antenna length

It is straight forward to figure out the length required from the frequency of the signal, velocity = frequency x wave length so wave length = vel/freq Using SI units (coz its just easier than imperial) Velocity = 3 x 10^8 m/s Freq = 118 to 137 MHz (so centre freq is 126.5 x 10^6 Hz) So wave length = 3/1.265 m = 2.37m ( about 93 inches) Most dipoles are half wave, a lot of aircraft antennas are quarter wave. Wikipedia (or the Aeroelectric connection) can probably explain better than me - less change of remembering the basic physics wrong! Peter On 19/06/2012 21:11, Rob Henderson wrote: > > Hi all > > I would like to make a couple of antennas for my Glastar. > > Does anyone know what the length is for dipole, or any reason not to > "role my own". > > Transponder: > > Comm: > > Nav: > > Marker: > > Glide Slope: > > UAT: > > I will be using Garmin > > GTX327 > > SL30 > > GMA340 > > Navworxs ADSB > > Thanks in advance for all advice > > -Rob Henderson > > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"John MacCallum" <john.maccallum(at)bigpond.com>

Subject:

Antenna length

Date:

Jun 20, 2012

A rough rule of thumb for a free space dipole is:- 299.8/126.5=2.3669m (speed of light divided by the Frequency) 2.3669 * 0.97=2.2989m (Adjusted for the end effect) 2.2989/2=1.1494m (divide by 2 to make a half wave dipole) 1.1494m / 0.0254 (because the US still has not converted to metric) (Couldn=92t resist that one ) 45.25 inches (but make it slightly longer maybe 45.5 inches so you can adjust it by trimming equally on both sides) Cut this in two to make the two halves of the dipole and keep the feed points reasonably close together, Say around =BD an inch, then check with an SWR meter. (If the lowest SWR is below 126.5 mhz then the antenna is trimmed slightly on both ends by say 1/16=94 a time) And the SWR rechecked. If you want to make a qtr wave antenna like the Comant Antennas you see on a lot of Aircraft then make the Antenna about 22.8 inches long and Once again trim for desired SWR spread with an SWR meter. Just remember not to try a use a Dipole inside a Carbon fibre structure since the Carbon fibre is conducive. In the end even though I have made many antennas over the years I decided to buy Comant Antennas for my RV10. Cheers John MacCallum VK2 -GCN Builder #41016 VH-DUU From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Peter Pengilly Sent: Wednesday, 20 June 2012 7:20 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Antenna length It is straight forward to figure out the length required from the frequency of the signal, velocity = frequency x wave length so wave length = vel/freq Using SI units (coz its just easier than imperial) Velocity = 3 x 10^8 m/s Freq = 118 to 137 MHz (so centre freq is 126.5 x 10^6 Hz) So wave length = 3/1.265 m = 2.37m ( about 93 inches) Most dipoles are half wave, a lot of aircraft antennas are quarter wave. Wikipedia (or the Aeroelectric connection) can probably explain better than me - less change of remembering the basic physics wrong! Peter On 19/06/2012 21:11, Rob Henderson wrote: Hi all I would like to make a couple of antennas for my Glastar. Does anyone know what the length is for dipole, or any reason not to =93role my own=94. Transponder: Comm: Nav: Marker: Glide Slope: UAT: I will be using Garmin GTX327 SL30 GMA340 Navworxs ADSB Thanks in advance for all advice -Rob Henderson ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 19, 2012

Subject:

Re: Antenna length

From:

"DeWitt (Dee) Whittington" <dee.whittington(at)gmail.com>

Rob, You should already have Comm I inside your vertical. For our Sportsman we bought the very economical Bob Archer antennas for our Comm II, transponder, and marker beacon. When we checked the two Comm antennas for SWR they measured 1.1 which as far as I know is excellent. The glideslope antenna is the 5T from Advanced Aircraft Electronics, Inc. http://www.advancedaircraft.com/, in Alberqurgue which we mounted crossways just behind Bulkhead A. Our ADS-B antenna came from: <http://www.navworx.com/navworx_store/Delta_Pop_Aviation_978_MHz_ADS_B_Ante nna.html> Delta Pop Aviation 978 MHz ADS-B *Antenna*<http://www.navworx.com/navworx_store/Delta_Pop_Aviation_978_MHz_A DS_B_Antenna.html> <http://www.navworx.com/navworx_store/Delta_Pop_Aviation_978_MHz_ADS_B_Ante nna.html> Dee Whittington <http://www.navworx.com/navworx_store/Delta_Pop_Aviation_978_MHz_ADS_B_Ante nna.html> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Rob Henderson wrot e: > Hi all**** > > I would like to make a couple of antennas for my Glastar.**** > > Does anyone know what the length is for dipole, or any reason not to =93r ole > my own=94.**** > > ** ** > > Transponder:**** > > Comm:**** > > Nav:**** > > Marker:**** > > Glide Slope:**** > > UAT:**** > > ** ** > > I will be using Garmin**** > > GTX327**** > > SL30**** > > GMA340**** > > Navworxs ADSB**** > > Thanks in advance for all advice**** > > -Rob Henderson**** > > * > =========== =========== =========== =========== > * > > -- DeWitt Whittington www.VirginiaFlyIn.org Building Glasair Sportsman with 3 partners ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"JOHN TIPTON" <jmtipton(at)btopenworld.com>

Subject:

Re: Antenna length

Date:

Jun 20, 2012

or any reason not to "role my own" 1) Time spent could be better utilized 2) Professional manufactured work out of the box 3) Will the 'role my own' product be readily reproducible in case of damage to the original John ----- Original Message ----- From: Rob Henderson To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 9:11 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Antenna length Hi all I would like to make a couple of antennas for my Glastar. Does anyone know what the length is for dipole, or any reason not to "role my own". Transponder: Comm: Nav: Marker: Glide Slope: UAT: I will be using Garmin GTX327 SL30 GMA340 Navworxs ADSB Thanks in advance for all advice -Rob Henderson ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 20, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Hall Effect rpm sensor

At 10:32 AM 6/19/2012, you wrote: >Bob, > > Thank you for replying! > >Here are some of the parameters: > >1) motor shafts are anticipated to rotate between 0-300 rpm Okay, if you were going to display on an analog instrument, you'd want a sensor that was watching say, 10 events per revolution so that you were measuring 3000 evenst/min or 50 events/second. It's hard to get a fast responding display that is also free of 'wiggles' when the measured frequency is below 20 Hz or so. With a digital instrument, one can measure the period of time between pulses and then calculate rpm . . . this technique will get you a good rpm measurement for every counted event. >2) the tach-displays need to be remotely, and permanently mounted >(in a console) >(I really like that digital tach you suggested!!) This is an automotive device that probably expects to get a signal from the ignition system. It's scaled internally to present shaft rpm when the engine produces 3 or 4 ignition events per revolution. The specs on this instrument are suspect when they said, "A tach adapter may be required if you have a multiple coil ignition system to ensure a proper signal." It didn't mention whether the instrument had a jumper setting to allow tailoring the installation to cars of different engine sizes. I've built tach adapters that would convert observed shaft RPM into a signal that would emulate an engine . . . but that's a bit of added fuss that you probably want to avoid if practical. >3) the 'precise' motor rpms do not have to be "highly accurate", >but they do need to be consistant. >(in other words, if the shaft is actually spinning at 307 rpms, and >the gauge says "320", that's fine, as long as >each time it is consistantly off the same amount!) Digital can and should be quite accurate and very repeatable to +/- one least significant digit. But how sensitive is your process to RPM variations in the 1 LSD range? 320 real RPM on some tachs might produce a 319-320-321 "wobble" in readings. In other words, just how accurate dose the displayed speed reading need to be. Again, having lots of events per revolution (10-20 toothed gear to stroke your sensor). > I did find a very nice electronics package that was close to what > I'm looking for, but it had a couple of >glitches. First glitch was the rpm range it measured, which was way >too high, and the second glitch was the >two 7 segment displays, when I would prefer an actual tachometer >like the one you suggested. > See: >http://www.eio.com/p-23310-velleman-k2625-digital-tachometer.aspx > > Thanks for your help, Bob, You've probably seen the response from Jim Hausch. He's no doubt slain this dragon many times. Why don't you guys strike up a battle plan on the List? I'll join in if I think I've got something extra to contribute but I'll bet Jim can handle it. If it turns out that you do need some kind of data conversion device, We might be able to accommodate the requirement with custom software in the open source, digital wig-wag project board. Our byte herding friends here on the List could probably get the board to sing, dance and do dishes for your application. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Antenna length

From:

Tim Andres <tim2542(at)sbcglobal.net>

Date:

Jun 20, 2012

Hi John Not to be argumentative, but IMO foil dipoles are very easy to make, take pe rhaps 30 minutes to assemble and work quite well. Best of all they don't add drag! The foil and ferrite beads are readily available from ACS, and the leg lengt hs can be determined easily. For the gps you probably should use a manufactured product as most of these a re powered and amplified devices. For a glass plane and antennas for VHF, I don't think there is a be tter option. RST sells a kit, but I keep hearing reports on an other list of the kits shi pping months after the order. Tim Sent from my iPad On Jun 20, 2012, at 12:02 AM, "JOHN TIPTON" wrote : > or any reason not to =9Crole my own" > > 1) Time spent could be better utilized > 2) Professional manufactured work out of the box > 3) Will the 'role my own' product be readily reproducible in case of da mage to the original > > John > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Rob Henderson > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 9:11 PM > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Antenna length > > Hi all > I would like to make a couple of antennas for my Glastar. > Does anyone know what the length is for dipole, or any reason not to =9Crole my own=9D. > > Transponder: > Comm: > Nav: > Marker: > Glide Slope: > UAT: > > I will be using Garmin > GTX327 > SL30 > GMA340 > Navworxs ADSB > Thanks in advance for all advice > -Rob Henderson > > > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.m atronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List > href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com > href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Rob Henderson" <robnrobinh(at)comcast.net>

Subject:

Antenna length

Date:

Jun 20, 2012

Do not order from RST I have been waiting for a kit since January it is now almost July. They took my money though. They do not answer email and the phone number just rings. -Rob From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Andres Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 7:23 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Antenna length Hi John Not to be argumentative, but IMO foil dipoles are very easy to make, take perhaps 30 minutes to assemble and work quite well. Best of all they don't add drag! The foil and ferrite beads are readily available from ACS, and the leg lengths can be determined easily. For the gps you probably should use a manufactured product as most of these are powered and amplified devices. For a glass plane and antennas for VHF, I don't think there is a better option. RST sells a kit, but I keep hearing reports on an other list of the kits shipping months after the order. Tim Sent from my iPad On Jun 20, 2012, at 12:02 AM, "JOHN TIPTON" wrote: or any reason not to =9Crole my own" 1) Time spent could be better utilized 2) Professional manufactured work out of the box 3) Will the 'role my own' product be readily reproducible in case of damage to the original John ----- Original Message ----- From: Rob Henderson <mailto:robnrobinh(at)comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 9:11 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Antenna length Hi all I would like to make a couple of antennas for my Glastar. Does anyone know what the length is for dipole, or any reason not to =9Crole my own=9D. Transponder: Comm: Nav: Marker: Glide Slope: UAT: I will be using Garmin GTX327 SL30 GMA340 Navworxs ADSB Thanks in advance for all advice -Rob Henderson href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www. matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c ========= st">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List ========= cs.com ========= matronics.com/contribution ========= ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: RPM Sensor

From:

Michael Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com>

Date:

Jun 20, 2012

Jim, Bob, list members, Thank you for your responses. My initial request was brief, in an attempt to pay respect to the Matronics rules, since obviously my needs are not aviation related. They are, however, electronic in nature, and I, for one, always enjoy every electronic post, aviation or not, because I always enjoy learning from the best!! Since Bob suggests bringing the subject onto the this list, I hope those that read this topic are able to glean some electronic knowledge and, or share their skills. So, with an understanding this topic is not aero-electric, but yet it certainly is electronic, so it may help educate some of us electronic novices, here goes; My recently submitted, patent-pending invention (UNDERWATER GOLD PROCESSOR) is essentially an underwater, remotely powered Bobcat style, ocean floor, skidloader/material sifter. ALL functions are hydraulically powered, and the means (pump, controls, etc) remain onboard the (floating) dredge, and at the control of the operator. Hydraulic lines, air lines, electric cords, etc, etc, combine in conjunction with the suction hose, that goes down to the machine, at an approx. depth between 10 to 30 feet. (although 100' depth may be a consideration) My invention is essentially a "tractor" (sort of), that clears big boulders out of the way, scoops up tremendous amounts of sea floor dirt, classifies the dirt to discard the rocks and unwanted gravel, and sends the remaining gold ore concentrate up to the dredge in phenomenal amounts. The dredge then processes this gold ore in traditional sluicebox methods. The present method, known as 'state of the art', in use today is a diver walking along the seafloor with a suction hose. This diver and the dredge operator frequently pull in 1/2 oz/day. My machine replaces this diver, and is anticipated to produce at least 20 to 50 times (or MUCH more) his daily gold tally. Initial calculations, with my machine progressing forward at an easy, and likely "1/2 mph", suggest processing 4 cubic yards of sea floor dirt PER MINUTE. Since much of the coast off of Nome has gold assayed at .01 oz AU per cu/yd, that equates close to 4/100 oz./minute ($72/min), or, on a productive day, 10 hrs X 60 minutes/hr X .04 oz/min = 24 oz AU per day. These calculations are for the "personal" size machine. The commercial model is off the charts! (30 cu/yds per minute {that's an ounce every three minutes). As with many things, the bigger the machine, the better it operates. My invention does not require a human operator controlling it "hands-on" underwater, but rather, the dredge operator still need to be able to monitor the various implement functions (rotating shaft's speed)from the boat. Of all the various rotating parts, two are of primary importance. The first one is sort of a rototiller style rock remover, and the second function is the revolving scoops conveyor. Although underwater video cameras are expected to assist the operator in monitoring the machine's efficiency, through practice and experience, he would be greatly augmented by knowing how fast the two primary implements are turning. "Extremely precise" readings are not likely needed. For instance, once the operator gets used to working the machine, he may find that 215 rpm seems to work well with most seafloor regions. So, when he sets himself up for the beginning of his daily run, he can set the speed of that at a "proven-to-be-successful" 215 rpms, or something close to that. Obviously, rpms in the range of 200-230 are probably 'close enough' to watch the action, and he can make adjustments as needed. I am convinced my invention can, and will, make some people very wealthy. There are unique features about it that I have not discussed so far. My intention is to either license it to a fabrication plant, or maybe even begin making them myself, (if I could find an investor). I just put together a website this past weekend, and is a "work-in progress". (I don't have anything on it yet) However, I am building a 1/4 scale, fully functioning model, too, and am about 60% finished with the model. I will video the model in action, and post it on my website as soon as I can. My wife just conceded she "may" actually agree to me building the very first one, and go use it! If I were to build one, I'd need those rpm circuits figured out, for sure. If I were ever to fabricate them on a commercial level, the monitoring circuits would need to be in a "plug & play" package. Shaft rpm's would be needed for 5 separate functions. Underwater salt environment. 20' average depth. rpm ranges around 0- 300. I'd prefer digital accuracy. Thank to all for their tolerance to this non-aviation subject. Please feel free to contribute any suggestions regarding the rpm circuitry. However, if anyone is interested in further discussions regarding my invention itself, please contact me OFF-LIST, as appropriate. Mike Welch On Jun 20, 2012, at 8:52 AM, Jim Hausch wrote: > Sounds like a neat project. My last "out of the ordinary" project was DARPA funded. It was to test the idea for an automated winch to deploy a soldier on a parachute from an autonomous jetski. The idea is that the jetski would pull him to altitude and then he would disconnect and glide to shore or "wherever". I worked on the winch controls. It is certainly more fun than the usual factory applications I work on. > > Your application just might beat that one out for "cool factor with the ability to actually make some money!" :) > > At what depth do the sensors need to survive? > > It sounds like the displays are to help the operator of the tractor know what his manipulation of the proportional valves are doing. If you think he might ever actuate the motors to turn very slowly, we might want to display RPM with at least one digit to the right of the decimal point and want more "data" than one pulse per rev. > > Are there any other system readouts that would be of value to the operator (pressures, levels, depths, etc)? I ask because if you get up to more than 4 individual meters, looking at a single larger programmable display starts to make more sense. > > Let me know the answer to at least the depth question and I will work first on the simple RPM display. > > Jim Hausch > Power/mation > Cell - 414-254-1857 > Office - 262-408-6146 > > On Jun 20, 2012 8:25 AM, "Michael Welch" wrote: > Hi Jim, > > Thank you for your response and interest in my post regarding an rpm meter. > This reply is also off Matronics, mostly because my need is non-aero, but it certainly is > electric. > So, unless we get sort of an invite from Bob, I think it is courtesy to stay off-list. So, I thank you. > > Now, to answer your questions, but first, some background info on why I need the rpm circuits; > For the last 3+ months, I have been working on an invention. It is in the field of gold prospecting, > and very specifically, underwater offshore gold prospecting. About a month ago, I submitted my > completed application for a "non-provisional patent" to the US Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO). > > My invention replaces the typical underwater diver (lugging an 8" suction hose). It is essentially an > underwater remotely operated tractor. My calculations predict between 20 to 50 times > his productivity. (picture the comparison between a guy digging a ditch with a shovel, and an excavator) > At any rate, my invention relies on hydraulic motors to perform its sundry motions. I don't have any > detailed designs of the particular shafts, but if I knew what the rpm circuit(s) would look like, I would > make accommodations as necessary. In all likeliness, the shafts(s) will be simple rotating axles, > where an attachment (magnet?) can be mounted to give a rotational pulse. The environment is > underwater, (sea water). > > See below for additional answers adjacent to the question. > > Thanks for your help, > Mike Welch > > On Jun 20, 2012, at 5:52 AM, Jim Hausch wrote: > >> Mike, >> >> I am a lurker on Aero-Electric. I noticed your post (and Bob's reply) looking for some RPM meters. I work in factory automation, so this is right up our alley. I am sending this from my work email so if we start a conversation I have the record "where i need it". >> >> Bob (CC'd on this message), >> >> If you would prefer I recap this on the Matronics list, please let me know. >> >> Mike, >> >> What is on the shaft that the sensor will sense? Is there a key, flat, or other feature we can sense with a simple inductive prox? If you have a drawing or picture of the shaft, please send it along. (assume a simple 1 1/2" dia., full-length woodruff keyed, rotating steel shaft, in an underwater environment) >> How many shafts need to be measured simultaneously? (two separate,independent circuits, at least, with two displays. However, depending on the design, I could use as many as 6) >> How large would you like the display to be? (if gauges are individual, 2" or so, each. If multiple displays per single screen, maybe 1/4" to 3/8" high numbers) >> What sort of environment does the system need to live in? (sensors live in salt water, displays live in dry, above water, console) >> What is the available power (115 from a wall outlet, or is there an existing panel with lower voltage AC or even a 24Vdc supply in it)? (the dredge (support boat) will have any form of necessary power. 115 ac will be available, BUT, due to the water hazards, I would greatly prefer to stay with something no more dangerous than 24Vdc. 12Vdc would be my most preferred, but 24Vdc would be fine if a circuit operated better with it) >> Let me know and I can give you a proposal. >> >> Regards, >> Jim Hausch >> Power/mation >> Cell - 414-254-1857 >> Office - 262-408-6146 >> >> Interesting Information and Random Updates >> > ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 20, 2012

From:

dlj04 <dlj04(at)josephson.com>

Subject:

Re: Antenna length

Rob Henderson wrote: >> Hi all >> >> I would like to make a couple of antennas for my Glastar. >> >> Does anyone know what the length is for dipole, or any reason not to >> "role my own". >> >> Transponder: >> >> Comm: >> >> Nav: >> >> Marker: >> >> Glide Slope: >> >> UAT: You've seen in other replies the lengths you should plan for, and length is of course important. Other parameters are at least as important, though. Everything metal in your airplane (including the cable that leads to your dipole) is a part of your antenna, and will influence its frequency range and directivity, whether you want it to be or not. The resin you use in your composite structure can also influence the electrical length of your antenna elements. The only reason not to roll your own is that it takes a while to learn what you need, build and test your results. Using wide (1" for VHF, 1/2" for txp/DME/UAT) foil tape, genuine current mil spec or land mobile grade coaxial cable and connectors, and the factory-specified crimp tool for the connectors will make it much easier and more reliable. Surplus lengths of mil spec or LMR foam coax cable with the connectors already installed with proper factory gear may be your best bet (but avoid adapters and splices!) You can lay out your antennas on a thin piece of glass cloth, tape it in place on your airplane for ground tests, and then bond it in place later. Transponder is particularly tricky because of the frequency and power level, although not so bad with your Garmin GTX-327 as with older types that have a cavity tube (which can be detuned by off-frequency antennas). You probably don't have a way to check SWR at transponder frequencies. Besides reduction in range, high SWR could damage the output of the transponder. I would hope but don't know that the Garmin is protected against that. You should confirm that it can operate into a high SWR load without damage (it should shut down rather than smoking the final power amp stage.) Comm is probably the most critical, particularly now that you need to cover the whole 118-137 MHz band. You can use distant ATIS/AWOS stations as test signal sources, and compare where you can receive given stations with results from a known good installation. A vertical or sloping dipole is good if you have the space (about 47") but you may find that a quarter-wave monopole and counterpoise ("ground plane") might be easier to do and easier to match. Folding dipoles and monopoles is also possible but requires a lot of extra analysis and test. Fortunately, preserving true vertical polarization isn't that important. A wing-mounted vee dipole is good (assuming it's far enough away from other conductors) but many of the designs I've seen are nearly straight -- which means poor reception off the ends. An asymmetrical installation, like one of the shunt-fed wingtip antennas, might be fine for VOR but can give different results if you intercept a localizer from the left or from the right. GS and marker are much less critical. A wideband transponder/DME antenna will work fine for UAT which is in the DME band at 978 MHz. You could put it at the tip of the tail for good coverage on the ground, for instance, but this means a lot of loss in the cable (unless you put the UAT in the tailcone). Likewise the transponder antenna is best placed on the belly, but you need to think about reflections from the gear legs. This is one area where you might choose a factory type - the "all metal" NI-50 antennas are particularly good, rugged, low drag and often found on auction sites (they may have an uncommon "C" connector if they come from airline surplus, but these are available and very low loss.) There are lots of military designs that can teach a lot about antennas. Sometimes you see slow airplanes and helicopters that look like a combination of a porcupine and a circus act, but others have everything embedded using patch, slot and notch topologies. I've been a little surprised that no one has really embraced some of these designs for homebuilts, although they have been used in some airliners over the years. ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 20, 2012

Subject:

1562A problem

From:

Janet Amtmann <jgamtmann2(at)gmail.com>

I have several trusty Schumacher 1562A maintainers, but one of them suddenly stopped maintaining and stayed on charge (yellow light). I fortunately caught it in time to keep the AGM battery from being damaged. I tried it on another AGM and same problem. Schumacher says that the unit can not be repaired since it is a sealed unit. Doesn't appear sealed to me. I took it apart and the transformer and PCB are plainly visible. Can anyone advise me as to how to check what the problem with the PCB might be? I'm not an electronics type but an ME, so I can follow directions. If I can't fix it I'll buy a new one, but my inclination is to rather fix than buy. Jurgen Amtmann ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"David Lloyd" <skywagon(at)charter.net>

Subject:

Re: 1562A problem

Date:

Jun 20, 2012

Jurgen, Since you opened up the box, there is probably a small pot that can be adjusted. That maybe bad or just sitting on a bad spot on the potentiometer. Turn the pot wiper a small amount and clip it back to a battery and see if it will regulate and go to a float mode by watching with your voltmeter. If it will not regulate then the solid state regulator chip has probably gone bad. Most of the "low cost" maintainers like to be powered up in a set sequence. Connect clips to the battery first, then, plug into wall power. And, reverse that to shut down. AC power off first, then unclip from the battery. Not sure how many cycles they can take if not done in that order.... D ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- ----- Original Message ----- From: Janet Amtmann To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 5:16 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: 1562A problem I have several trusty Schumacher 1562A maintainers, but one of them suddenly stopped maintaining and stayed on charge (yellow light). I fortunately caught it in time to keep the AGM battery from being damaged. I tried it on another AGM and same problem. Schumacher says that the unit can not be repaired since it is a sealed unit. Doesn't appear sealed to me. I took it apart and the transformer and PCB are plainly visible. Can anyone advise me as to how to check what the problem with the PCB might be? I'm not an electronics type but an ME, so I can follow directions. If I can't fix it I'll buy a new one, but my inclination is to rather fix than buy. Jurgen Amtmann ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Hall Effect rpm sensor

From:

"jhausch" <jimhausch(at)gmail.com>

Date:

Jun 21, 2012

Bob, I have been receiving Mike's responses to my email. I only receive a daily digest from the list. I will leave it up to him to post the collection/recap of our conversation on the web. I was a bit surprised to see my work email signature pop up on the list, but I guess that's the nature of the internet. I've contacted encoder and prox vendors looking for 100' submersible solutions. I think that is the most challenging part of this application as viewed from my world. We have items rated for high pressure washdown, but 3 atm of constant pressure is likely another story.... You'd think a fully potted solid state solution would be fine, but my gut tells me the saltwater will creep in at the cable entry point and perhaps along the mating surfaces between the housing and potting material - searching for any void it can find to get at the electronics.... I agree with you that multiple PPR (pulses per rev) are needed to provide some accuracy/display stability. We'll see where this goes... certainly an interesting application. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376197#376197 ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Tacho pulses

From:

"Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>

Date:

Jun 21, 2012

Based on recent discussions: Just a note to remind builders that I have a free tacho-pulse divide-by-two circuit if anyone wants one. I usually have PCBs too (cheap but not free) or can furnish the ExpressPCB design free. Contact me off list. -------- 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=376201#376201 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/tacho_divider_133.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/tach_adapter_1_785.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 21, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Viking Schematic

At 12:22 PM 6/19/2012, you wrote: > >Bob, >My friend is building an RV-12 with an automotive engine, the >Viking, which is fuel injected and electrically dependent. The >power requirements for the ECU are not known but Viking uses 15 amp fuses. I've looked over the published instructions from Viking and the drawing you attached. The 'instructions' from Viking bear no demonstrable understanding of failure tolerant architecture for aircraft applications. There's a similar 'disconnect' from legacy and modern processes and techniques for aircraft wiring. If your friend is willing to bring his project to "The List" and submit performance numbers to mission goals, I (and probably others) would be willing to help him sort the bits and pieces to arrive at the elegant solution. But the drawing taken together with abysmal instructions do not describe a 'sandbox' in which I would want to play. I would further advise you to distance yourself from this project. I've been made aware of several problem projects wherein the builders conversed with me but for reasons of their own, chose to do other things . . . yet they claim to have consulted me in the crafting of their system. The engine is VERY experimental . . . which is not a singular cause for concern. But the entire electrical system is even more "experimental". Burt Rutan used to advise, "do your engine experiments on a TC aircraft and your airframe experiments with a TC engine." The overarching point is to drive risks to a minimum which must INCLUDE educating the owner/pilot on how the system works and what to do when things don't work. I suggest your worries over the bus isolation diode is but the tip of an iceberg in terms of having identified and crafted work-arounds for all perceived risks. Driving those risks up with decidedly untried or demonstrably unsuited techniques and materials. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 21, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: RPM Sensor

At 12:43 PM 6/20/2012, you wrote: Jim, Bob, list members, Thank you for your responses. My initial request was brief, in an attempt to pay respect to the Matronics rules, since obviously my needs are not aviation related. They are, however, electronic in nature, and I, for one, always enjoy every electronic post, aviation or not, because I always enjoy learning from the best!! Since Bob suggests bringing the subject onto the this list, I hope those that read this topic are able to glean some electronic knowledge and, or share their skills. So, with an understanding this topic is not aero-electric, but yet it certainly is electronic, so it may help educate some of us electronic novices, here goes; Okay, 100' water pressure (50 PSI is no sweat). Digital display with say 1 RPM resolution and 0.5 RPM accuracy at 300 RPM maximum. Jim was asking about how the shaft speed to be measured was made available for electronic inspection . . . it could be as simple as counting passages of a woodruff key. In your case, the relatively slow speed combined with 1 part in 300 resolution probably precludes looking at one-count-per-rev signal sources . . . jitter in spacing of the counting edges can make an otherwise smoothly rotating shaft appear to be unstable. What length and diameter of the shaft is available to mount say a disk of magnets to be counted? Jim may have other ideas to offer but my first thought was based on a hall switch watching an array of 10 magnets. This could easily be made water proof to those pressures. Jim may be aware of an off the shelf, programmable instrument that would convert 300 counts per minute into a 300.0 RPM display. Such a device could be built too . . . the electronics is easy, PACKAGING is the hard part . . . especially for salt water service. Is this machine to be processor or computer guided? Would you want a tachometer to computer interface capability to know the current RPM? Except for the salt-water under pressure requirement and decidedly non-aircraft style motor shaft, this tachometer display task is not unlike that for aircraft applications. After selecting and interfacing a suitable sensor, one needs to know the 'scale factor' (pulses-per-revolution) from the sensor so that the readout can be appropriately configured. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 21, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Hall Effect rpm sensor

At 06:59 AM 6/21/2012, you wrote: Bob, I have been receiving Mike's responses to my email. I only receive a daily digest from the list. I will leave it up to him to post the collection/recap of our conversation on the web. I was a bit surprised to see my work email signature pop up on the list, but I guess that's the nature of the internet. You were in a cc list and the reply-all response got you dumped into the List data flow but not in the bucket of List subscribed addresses. I've contacted encoder and prox vendors looking for 100' submersible solutions. I think that is the most challenging part of this application as viewed from my world. We have items rated for high pressure washdown, but 3 atm of constant pressure is likely another story.... You'd think a fully potted solid state solution would be fine, but my gut tells me the saltwater will creep in at the cable entry point and perhaps along the mating surfaces between the housing and potting material - searching for any void it can find to get at the electronics.... If you can find a square-wave (hall effect) driven instrument with the approrpiate features for scaling say 3000 ppm to a 300 rpm display, we can hammer a high pressure sensor together. I agree with you that multiple PPR (pulses per rev) are needed to provide some accuracy/display stability. We'll see where this goes... certainly an interesting application. Agreed. Let's see what kind of shaft is exposed to the inquisitive world of instrumentation. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: RPM Sensor

From:

Michael Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com>

Date:

Jun 21, 2012

Bob, See below for the answers to your questions. > > Okay, 100' water pressure (50 PSI is no sweat). Digital display with > say 1 RPM resolution and 0.5 RPM accuracy at 300 RPM maximum. Jim was > asking about how the shaft speed to be measured was made available for > electronic inspection . . . it could be as simple as counting passages > of a woodruff key. In your case, the relatively slow speed combined > with 1 part in 300 resolution probably precludes looking at one-count-per-rev > signal sources . . . jitter in spacing of the counting edges can > make an otherwise smoothly rotating shaft appear to be unstable. Regarding the pressure needed to work well, good (50 psi). The digital display with 1 rpm and .5rpm accuracy sounds perfect. I anticipate a splined shaft of approx. 1.75" diameter (for sprockets). If I need to add an extra couple of inches to allow for a rotating wheel, that would be no problem at all!! Are we talking about roughly 10 strong magnets, say...on a 6" diameter wheel? If so, that would be VERY easy to fabricate a fiberglass disc, encapsulating said magnets near the rim. > > What length and diameter of the shaft is available to mount say > a disk of magnets to be counted? Jim may have other ideas to offer > but my first thought was based on a hall switch watching an array > of 10 magnets. (Mine, too, and this would be an easy task to build) > This could easily be made water proof to those > pressures. Jim may be aware of an off the shelf, programmable > instrument that would convert 300 counts per minute into a 300.0 > RPM display. Such a device could be built too . . . the electronics > is easy, PACKAGING is the hard part . . . especially for salt > water service. Other than the sensor to read those rotating magnets, what else would need to be underwater? The sensor? That should be a sealed unit, no? Other than the 10-magnet disc and sensor, all other item are topside. The gauge/display unit would be in a water-tite console. > Is this machine to be processor or computer guided? Would you > want a tachometer to computer interface capability to know > the current RPM? > Except for the salt-water under pressure requirement and > decidedly non-aircraft style motor shaft, this tachometer > display task is not unlike that for aircraft applications. > After selecting and interfacing a suitable sensor, one needs > to know the 'scale factor' (pulses-per-revolution) from > the sensor so that the readout can be appropriately > configured. > No, not computer guided or driven. Hands on operation, but requiring only occasional adjustment, from information from the various rpm gauges. I think 10 pulses per rev is plenty good resolution. If we can read these magnets by way of a familiar sensor you have in mind, I'll make a parts order tomorrow, and get going making the disc. Bob, back a year ago when we were talking neodymium magnets & Hall Effect sensors for an airspeed indicator, I bought a handful of 1/8" x 1/8" x 1/2". They be small, but they be purdy strong! Will they work? Any ideas for the sensor? > > Bob . . . > > > ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: RPM Sensor

From:

Michael Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com>

Date:

Jun 21, 2012

Bob, Is there any way we can make these display units work with our design? I REALLY like their products, I have two of them in my plane. One for turbo boost (from a MAP sensor), and one of their EGT gauges and senders. Nice stuff! http://www.auberins.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=16&prod ucts_id=212 The displays units are easy to mount, and are bright in sunlight. Mike Welch ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Viking Schematic

From:

"user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>

Date:

Jun 21, 2012

Bob, Thanks for your words of wisdom so eloquently stated. I think that the Viking powered aircraft can be wired, for the most part, using one of your drawings. There is one item unique to the Viking that is not addressed: ECU SELECT. The Viking website recommends using one DPDT switch wired in parallel to act as a SPDT switch. This switch will select either a high or low voltage and send it to the dual ECUs to enable either ECU1 or ECU2. My concern is that if this switch fails, the pilot will not be able to switch to the backup ECU if needed. Or if the switch fails open, who knows which ECU will be enabled, if any. It is unknown what bad things might happen if both ECUs are enabled at the same time, even for a second. Is it safe to use one switch to choose between ECUs? If not, is there a better way than to use 2 mechanically interlocked switches? Perhaps a solid state circuit powered by the aircraft supply so that it would not load down the ECU. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376273#376273 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/select_207.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Viking Schematic

At 08:27 PM 6/21/2012, you wrote: Bob, Thanks for your words of wisdom so eloquently stated. I think that the Viking powered aircraft can be wired, for the most part, using one of your drawings. The exact architecture is not so important as the overall philosophy for the design and materials being considered. The Viking instructions did not speak eloquently to wire insulation but did caution about leaving your cowl open with the engine exposed to the sun! They also suggested the use of screw-terminal barrier strips . . . never used in TC aircraft to my knowledge and certainly not on my watch. On those two points alone, I would be inclined to comb the document for fundamental points of fact for performance (which there are precious few) and then pitch the document. This builder needs to FIND OUT how much current each of the ECU power inputs need. Then size wires, breakers and ENERGY SOURCES accordingly. This is not much different than a Lightspeed dual ignition system. If he is truly interested in simplicity, then wire per C-150; no e-bus or avionics bus. Run all normal ops equipment from a single bus including #1 ECU. Then add an aux battery sized to meet THE BUILDER's alternator out endurance requirements and drive the #2 ECU from that battery through it's own switch . . . not unlike the Lightspeed recommendations. Separate switch for each ECU. There is one item unique to the Viking that is not addressed: ECU SELECT. The Viking website recommends using one DPDT switch wired in parallel to act as a SPDT switch. This switch will select either a high or low voltage and send it to the dual ECUs to enable either ECU1 or ECU2. My concern is that if this switch fails, the pilot will not be able to switch to the backup ECU if needed. Or if the switch fails open, who knows which ECU will be enabled, if any. It is unknown what bad things might happen if both ECUs are enabled at the same time, even for a second. Then find this out. Anyone willing to launch into the blue without answers to such questions is an accident waiting to happen . . . either from ignorance of this specific question or others like it. There is a reason that flight test pilots are required to have engineering degrees. It is insufficient to simply be able to fly the airplane. The pilot needs to (1) have an intimate understanding of the airplane and (2) a well founded confidence in those who say, "trust me, this will work." If this guy is in the "trust me" mode of receiving data, then you and everyone contributing that data are assuming risk that goes beyond simple advise. An RV built per Van's instructions is a very low risk flight system even for the "trust-me-it-will-work" customer. A warm fuzzy to the FAA's utopian quest for spending how ever much money it takes to drive the accident rate to zero. Failure mode effects analysis takes an intimate understanding of how the device or system is built right down to the last resistor. Baring that kind of knowledge, you 'partition off' blocks of a system and treat them as unknowns to be accommodated with failure tolerant design. This is reminiscent of the philosophy I was applying some years back during the "great IR/ER alternator debates". Conversations which were in fact not debates but affirmations of faith buy individuals who had no intimate knowledge of the systems and devices which they were promoting as "trust me, this will work." This airplane and it's prospective pilot would benefit from a top-down review not only of the engine and it's requirements/idiosyncrasies but the materials, power sources, distribution, and in particular developing the Plan-B, C and D that can be called upon with CONFIDENCE to deal with specific failures. This data needs to be combined with mission profiles . . . day VFR only? Is it safe to use one switch to choose between ECUs? No airplane is safe . . . every airplane ever built will terminate your existence in a heartbeat. Some more easily than others. The BD-5 comes to mind. Each comes with varying levels of risk that are dependent as much upon pilot knowledge and skill as system reliability. If not, is there a better way than to use 2 mechanically interlocked switches? Perhaps a solid state circuit powered by the aircraft supply so that it would not load down the ECU. FIND OUT if the operating the two ECUs in tandem presents a risk. FIND OUT also how much current these systems demand in cruising flight. If dual ECU ops presents risk and assuming that the builder is driven by the ultimate in simplicity, then use two separate switches with the #2 being annunciated with a really annoying light and taking power from a separate battery. Might even space the #2 switch off in it's own corner of the panel. The point being that if all this modern equipment operates true to history in its automotive applications, then it's unlikely that #2 ECU will ever be needed in flight. The only time #2 is ever turned on is in pre-flight, on the ground and in accordance with check-list procedure. As you've already perceived, this "keep me from throwing the wrong switch" interlock philosophy may add more risk than simply having each system stand alone. The answers to the questions you've posed are stone simple. They require no more information than any other system integrator would DEMAND in the design of any other machine that poses risks to people and property. It matters not whether it's an airplane or a 10-story tall construction crane. The biggest question in my mind is to determine if your friend is a cognizant beneficiary of your efforts or whether you're simply putting band-aids onto a system with more risk-issues (yet unidentified) than the choice of an ECU select switches. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: RPM Sensor

From:

Michael Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com>

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

Mornin' Jim, I think you've found the sensor we're looking for! By any chance, do you or Bob know if the little neodymium magnets I have on hand will work with this one? (they are 1/8" x 1/8" x 1/2" long). If they're too small, I get can bigger ones. When you say "5mm or less from a mild steel target", are you talking about the magnets, or will literally 'any' steel work? I envision whatever 'target' we end up with will be 100% encapsulated into the fiberglass disc. Making a bracket to have the sensor maintain a <5mm distance is no problem at all. I'd shoot for 2mm, and can't see why that would be an easy task. I still haven't understood what it is that we are calling targets. Can these be Neodymium magnets? Some guidance would be appreciated, please. Aside from "the targets, the sensor, and the gauge itself.....we would still need some sort of circuitry to interrogate the pulses, right? I'm looking forward to seeing your display(s), and your 'other suggestion. Thanks, Mike Welch On Jun 22, 2012, at 7:11 AM, Jim Hausch wrote: > I've found some proximity sensors: > > BI 5-P18-AP6/S139-S90 > http://www.turck-usa.com/illustrations/M1660350%20(sheet_1).pdf > > This example only has a 2 meter cable, but longer are available > Special housing with PUR cable. > oil and seawater resistant > to 500 meters (1641 ft)and 725 PSI. > > I have displays similar to what you posted. I have another suggestion, too. > > I will put some stuff together for you this weekend. That sensor needs to be 5mm or less from a mild-steel target. Less to SS. Think about how you can give that sensor 4 targets per rev and I think you will be happy with the system performance. > > Regards, > Jim Hausch > > > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Jim Hausch wrote: > OK, thanks. I can refer to this in my files now as the Dsog project... perfect. > > I understand the response re hyd flow monitoring. Thanks for the info. I will continue to look for the 12 or 24Vdc submersible solution. > > Regards, > Jim Hausch > Power/mation > Cell - 414-254-1857 > Office - 262-408-6146 > > Interesting Information and Random Updates > > > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Michael Welch wrote: > Hi Jim, > > A) I don't think the hydraulic flow, or even the pressure will be very useful, especially due to the varying loads in use. I think what it is infinitely more useful is the implement's rotational > speed, which can be tapped off of a drive axle or motor shaft. > 2) Yes, I have a name for my invention. It's called the Dsog. See my attached company logo; > > Mike Welch > > > > > > > > > On Jun 20, 2012, at 3:59 PM, Jim Hausch wrote: > >> Great. Thanks. I am no hydraulics expert, but would monitoring flow rate on the hyd lines feeding the motors be an accurate way to monitor speed, or do these motors have built-in bypasses to protect from overload? I only mention this because it would keep the speed sensors above the surface.... >> >> Regards, >> Jim Hausch >> Power/mation >> Cell - 414-254-1857 >> Office - 262-408-6146 >> >> Interesting Information and Random Updates >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Michael Welch wrote: >> Jim, >> >> The 1 1/2" shaft is for the 'real' model. The scale model is not intended to be that detailed such >> that it would would require monitors. >> >> Mike >> >> >> >> On Jun 20, 2012, at 3:32 PM, Jim Hausch wrote: >> >>> The 1.5" shaft diameter spec from a previous email - is that for both the 1/4 scale model and the actual unit? If not, what is the shaft diameter you need today? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Jim Hausch >>> Power/mation >>> Cell - 414-254-1857 >>> Office - 262-408-6146 >>> >>> Interesting Information and Random Updates >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Michael Welch wrote: >>> Jim, Bob, list members, >>> >>> Thank you for your responses. My initial request was brief, in an attempt to pay respect to the Matronics rules, since obviously my needs are not aviation related. They are, however, electronic in nature, and I, for one, always enjoy every electronic post, aviation or not, because I always enjoy learning from the best!! Since Bob suggests bringing the subject onto the this list, I hope those that read this topic are able to glean some electronic knowledge and, or share their skills. >>> >>> So, with an understanding this topic is not aero-electric, but yet it certainly is electronic, so it may help educate some of us electronic novices, here goes; >>> >>> My recently submitted, patent-pending invention (UNDERWATER GOLD PROCESSOR) is essentially an underwater, remotely powered Bobcat style, ocean floor, skidloader/material sifter. ALL functions are hydraulically powered, and the means (pump, controls, etc) remain onboard the (floating) dredge, and at the control of the operator. Hydraulic lines, air lines, electric cords, etc, etc, combine in conjunction with the suction hose, that goes down to the machine, at an approx. depth between 10 to 30 feet. (although 100' depth may be a consideration) >>> >>> My invention is essentially a "tractor" (sort of), that clears big boulders out of the way, scoops up tremendous amounts of sea floor dirt, classifies the dirt to discard the rocks and unwanted gravel, and sends the remaining gold ore concentrate up to the dredge in phenomenal amounts. The dredge then processes this gold ore in traditional sluicebox methods. The present method, known as 'state of the art', in use today is a diver walking along the seafloor with a suction hose. This diver and the dredge operator frequently pull in 1/2 oz/day. My machine replaces this diver, and is anticipated to produce at least 20 to 50 times (or MUCH more) his daily gold tally. >>> >>> Initial calculations, with my machine progressing forward at an easy, and likely "1/2 mph", suggest processing 4 cubic yards of sea floor dirt PER MINUTE. Since much of the coast off >>> of Nome has gold assayed at .01 oz AU per cu/yd, that equates close to 4/100 oz./minute ($72/min), or, on a productive day, 10 hrs X 60 minutes/hr X .04 oz/min = 24 oz AU per day. These calculations are for the "personal" size machine. The commercial model is off the charts! (30 cu/yds per minute {that's an ounce every three minutes). As with many things, the bigger the machine, the better it operates. >>> >>> My invention does not require a human operator controlling it "hands-on" underwater, but rather, the dredge operator still need to be able to monitor the various implement functions (rotating shaft's speed)from the boat. Of all the various rotating parts, two are of primary importance. The first one is sort of a rototiller style rock remover, and the second function is the revolving scoops conveyor. Although underwater video cameras are expected to assist the operator in monitoring the machine's efficiency, through practice and experience, he would be greatly augmented by knowing how fast the two primary implements are turning. "Extremely precise" readings are not likely needed. For instance, once the operator gets used to working the machine, he may find that 215 rpm seems to work well with most seafloor regions. So, when he sets himself up for the beginning of his daily run, he can set the speed of that at a "proven-to-be-successful" 215 rpms, or something close to that. Obviously, rpms in the range of 200-230 are probably 'close enough' to watch the action, and he can make adjustments as needed. >>> >>> I am convinced my invention can, and will, make some people very wealthy. There are unique features about it that I have not discussed so far. >>> >>> My intention is to either license it to a fabrication plant, or maybe even begin making them myself, (if I could find an investor). I just put together a website this past weekend, and is a "work-in progress". (I don't have anything on it yet) However, I am building a 1/4 scale, fully functioning model, too, and am about 60% finished with the model. I will video the model in action, and post it on my website as soon as I can. My wife just conceded she "may" actually agree to me building the very first one, and go use it! If I were to build one, I'd need those rpm circuits figured out, for sure. >>> If I were ever to fabricate them on a commercial level, the monitoring circuits would need to be in a "plug & play" package. >>> >>> Shaft rpm's would be needed for 5 separate functions. Underwater salt environment. 20' average depth. rpm ranges around 0- >>> 300. I'd prefer digital accuracy. >>> >>> Thank to all for their tolerance to this non-aviation subject. Please feel free to contribute any suggestions regarding the rpm circuitry. However, if anyone is interested in further discussions regarding my invention itself, please contact me OFF-LIST, as appropriate. >>> >>> Mike Welch >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jun 20, 2012, at 8:52 AM, Jim Hausch wrote: >>> >>>> Sounds like a neat project. My last "out of the ordinary" project was DARPA funded. It was to test the idea for an automated winch to deploy a soldier on a parachute from an autonomous jetski. The idea is that the jetski would pull him to altitude and then he would disconnect and glide to shore or "wherever". I worked on the winch controls. It is certainly more fun than the usual factory applications I work on. >>>> >>>> Your application just might beat that one out for "cool factor with the ability to actually make some money!" :) >>>> >>>> At what depth do the sensors need to survive? >>>> >>>> It sounds like the displays are to help the operator of the tractor know what his manipulation of the proportional valves are doing. If you think he might ever actuate the motors to turn very slowly, we might want to display RPM with at least one digit to the right of the decimal point and want more "data" than one pulse per rev. >>>> >>>> Are there any other system readouts that would be of value to the operator (pressures, levels, depths, etc)? I ask because if you get up to more than 4 individual meters, looking at a single larger programmable display starts to make more sense. >>>> >>>> Let me know the answer to at least the depth question and I will work first on the simple RPM display. >>>> >>>> Jim Hausch >>>> Power/mation >>>> Cell - 414-254-1857 >>>> Office - 262-408-6146 >>>> >>>> On Jun 20, 2012 8:25 AM, "Michael Welch" wrote: >>>> Hi Jim, >>>> >>>> Thank you for your response and interest in my post regarding an rpm meter. >>>> This reply is also off Matronics, mostly because my need is non-aero, but it certainly is >>>> electric. >>>> So, unless we get sort of an invite from Bob, I think it is courtesy to stay off-list. So, I thank you. >>>> >>>> Now, to answer your questions, but first, some background info on why I need the rpm circuits; >>>> For the last 3+ months, I have been working on an invention. It is in the field of gold prospecting, >>>> and very specifically, underwater offshore gold prospecting. About a month ago, I submitted my >>>> completed application for a "non-provisional patent" to the US Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO). >>>> >>>> My invention replaces the typical underwater diver (lugging an 8" suction hose). It is essentially an >>>> underwater remotely operated tractor. My calculations predict between 20 to 50 times >>>> his productivity. (picture the comparison between a guy digging a ditch with a shovel, and an excavator) >>>> At any rate, my invention relies on hydraulic motors to perform its sundry motions. I don't have any >>>> detailed designs of the particular shafts, but if I knew what the rpm circuit(s) would look like, I would >>>> make accommodations as necessary. In all likeliness, the shafts(s) will be simple rotating axles, >>>> where an attachment (magnet?) can be mounted to give a rotational pulse. The environment is >>>> underwater, (sea water). >>>> >>>> See below for additional answers adjacent to the question. >>>> >>>> Thanks for your help, >>>> Mike Welch >>>> >>>> On Jun 20, 2012, at 5:52 AM, Jim Hausch wrote: >>>> >>>>> Mike, >>>>> >>>>> I am a lurker on Aero-Electric. I noticed your post (and Bob's reply) looking for some RPM meters. I work in factory automation, so this is right up our alley. I am sending this from my work email so if we start a conversation I have the record "where i need it". >>>>> >>>>> Bob (CC'd on this message), >>>>> >>>>> If you would prefer I recap this on the Matronics list, please let me know. >>>>> >>>>> Mike, >>>>> >>>>> What is on the shaft that the sensor will sense? Is there a key, flat, or other feature we can sense with a simple inductive prox? If you have a drawing or picture of the shaft, please send it along. (assume a simple 1 1/2" dia., full-length woodruff keyed, rotating steel shaft, in an underwater environment) >>>>> How many shafts need to be measured simultaneously? (two separate,independent circuits, at least, with two displays. However, depending on the design, I could use as many as 6) >>>>> How large would you like the display to be? (if gauges are individual, 2" or so, each. If multiple displays per single screen, maybe 1/4" to 3/8" high numbers) >>>>> What sort of environment does the system need to live in? (sensors live in salt water, displays live in dry, above water, console) >>>>> What is the available power (115 from a wall outlet, or is there an existing panel with lower voltage AC or even a 24Vdc supply in it)? (the dredge (support boat) will have any form of necessary power. 115 ac will be available, BUT, due to the water hazards, I would greatly prefer to stay with something no more dangerous than 24Vdc. 12Vdc would be my most preferred, but 24Vdc would be fine if a circuit operated better with it) >>>>> Let me know and I can give you a proposal. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Jim Hausch >>>>> Power/mation >>>>> Cell - 414-254-1857 >>>>> Office - 262-408-6146 >>>>> >>>>> Interesting Information and Random Updates >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: RPM Sensor

Regarding the pressure needed to work well, good (50 psi). The digital display with 1 rpm and .5rpm accuracy sounds perfect. I anticipate a splined shaft of approx. 1.75" diameter (for sprockets). If I need to add an extra couple of inches to allow for a rotating wheel, that would be no problem at all!! Are we talking about roughly 10 strong magnets, say...on a 6" diameter wheel? If so, that would be VERY easy to fabricate a fiberglass disc, encapsulating said magnets near the rim. Doesn't need to be that "hoggy" except for general mechanical robustness. If the magnet disk is subject to being struck during normal ops, handling or maintenance then it needs to be shielded or perhaps enclosed. Diameter could be just large enough to fit over the shaft and leave room for mounting magnets. Sensor would be potted into a non-magnetic housing not unlike a pipe-threaded thermowell temperature sensor. This is one of thousands of Hall switches that could be considered to the task. http://tinyurl.com/77pmvke Other than the sensor to read those rotating magnets, what else would need to be underwater? The sensor? That should be a sealed unit, no? Other than the 10-magnet disc and sensor, all other item are topside. The gauge/display unit would be in a water-tite console. Just the magnet disk and sensor. Is there any way we can make these display units work with our design? I REALLY like their products, I have two of them in my plane. One for turbo boost (from a MAP sensor), and one of their EGT gauges and senders. Nice stuff! http://www.auberins.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=16&products_id=212 The displays units are easy to mount, and are bright in sunlight. Sure, the counter seems to offer a customer programmed multiply by N divide by K feature for calibrating odd pulse-per-rev values into other units like rpm, fps, etc. But then, your 'operator' probably doesn't give a toot about RPM . . . you could simply display the speed counts raw and write an operator manual that suggests unitless values as opposed to RPM. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: RPM Sensor

From:

Michael Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com>

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

Hi Jim, Four targets is fine with me. Can we count on say, a 6" diameter fiberglass disc, with four steel target, equally spaced near the outer edge, and a fixture that securely hold the sensor 2mm away from the rotating disc? Mike On Jun 22, 2012, at 8:30 AM, Jim Hausch wrote: > This inductive proximity sensor does not use a magnet as a target. SS or mild steel would work. You could use an of the shelf gear or sprocket ant sense the teeth. You just dont want the teeth too close together so the sensor can have an OFF condition between the ON conditions. In the case of this sort of sensor, a "barrel diameter" between teeth is more than enough. > > The datasheet shows the max switching freq. Speed should not be a problem, but we can confirm once you tell me how many targets we have on the disk we will be sensing (such as how many teeth if you use a sprocket) > > Jim > ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: RPM Sensor

From:

Michael Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com>

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

Bob, > "But then, your 'operator' probably doesn't give a toot > about RPM . . . you could simply display the speed counts > raw and write an operator manual that suggests unitless > values as opposed to RPM." Exactly!! (to the above quote) All our operator needs is a consistent and reasonably accurate reading, so that he/she can 'learn' what numbers do what. Yes, I can picture the sensor/wheel enclosed in a protective cover. Too many rough scenarios to not expect to protect it all under some sort of guard. Thanks for your expertise and help. Jim said he has some more stuff he'll work on this weekend. I'll wait on him and see what he comes up with before I order any parts. Best regard, Mike On Jun 22, 2012, at 8:35 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > Regarding the pressure needed to work well, good (50 psi). The digital display with 1 rpm and .5rpm accuracy sounds perfect. I anticipate a splined shaft of approx. 1.75" diameter (for sprockets). If I need to add an extra couple of inches to allow for a rotating wheel, that would be no problem at all!! Are we talking about roughly 10 strong magnets, say...on a 6" diameter wheel? If so, that would be VERY easy to fabricate a fiberglass disc, encapsulating said magnets near the rim. > > Doesn't need to be that "hoggy" except for general > mechanical robustness. If the magnet disk is subject > to being struck during normal ops, handling or maintenance > then it needs to be shielded or perhaps enclosed. Diameter > could be just large enough to fit over the shaft and leave > room for mounting magnets. Sensor would be potted into > a non-magnetic housing not unlike a pipe-threaded thermowell > temperature sensor. This is one of thousands of Hall switches > that could be considered to the task. > > http://tinyurl.com/77pmvke > > > Other than the sensor to read those rotating magnets, what else would > need to be underwater? The sensor? That should be a sealed unit, no? > Other than the 10-magnet disc and sensor, all other item are topside. > The gauge/display unit would be in a water-tite console. > > Just the magnet disk and sensor. > > > Is there any way we can make these display units work with our design? I REALLY like their products, I have two of them in my plane. One for turbo boost (from a MAP sensor), and one of their EGT gauges and senders. Nice stuff! > > http://www.auberins.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=16&prod ucts_id=212 > > The displays units are easy to mount, and are bright in sunlight. > > Sure, the counter seems to offer a customer programmed > multiply by N divide by K feature for calibrating odd > pulse-per-rev values into other units like rpm, fps, etc. > But then, your 'operator' probably doesn't give a toot > about RPM . . . you could simply display the speed counts > raw and write an operator manual that suggests unitless > values as opposed to RPM. > > > Bob . . . > > > ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: RPM Sensor

> Thanks for your expertise and help. Jim said he has some > more stuff he'll work >on this weekend. I'll wait on him and see what he comes up with >before I order any parts. Sounds a like a plan. Thanks for the heads-up on those counters. That user programmable scale factor feature is slick. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: RPM Sensor

From:

Michael Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com>

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

Bob, Regarding Auber Instruments, I especially like the programmable relays that are included in them, too. On my EGT gauge, for instance, I have it set at 1200 deg F to switch on an adjustable fuel enrichment feature, in conjunction with a activated LED flashing alarm, to let me know the circuit is active. Similar story with my boost gauge. Since I ONLY want 6 psi max boost, and no more, I have the boost gauge's relay activate a 19 LED alarm strobing flashing system. It sort of looks like those mobile highway light signs that strobe an arrow to change lanes. Can't miss it. Mike On Jun 22, 2012, at 9:44 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: >> Thanks for your expertise and help. Jim said he has some more stuff he'll work >> on this weekend. I'll wait on him and see what he comes up with before I order any parts. > > Sounds a like a plan. Thanks for the heads-up > on those counters. That user programmable > scale factor feature is slick. > > Bob . . . > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Anybody remember when . . .?

I seem to recall a conversation some years ago about an accident involving an RV wherein the crash remains contained instances where wires were literally pulled from their terminals. Does anyone recall the thread and can give me a date and/or search phrase? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

Subject:

Re: Anybody remember when . . .?

From:

James Kilford <james(at)etravel.org>

19/01/2011, subject "Crimping Big Lugs". James On 22 June 2012 16:39, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com**> > > I seem to recall a conversation some years ago about > an accident involving an RV wherein the crash remains > contained instances where wires were literally pulled > from their terminals. > > Does anyone recall the thread and can give me a date > and/or search phrase? > > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)bellsouth.net>

Subject:

Connecting type K thermocouple

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

I have a thermocouple of the type shown from AC Spruce. I was getting erratic high temp readings and my hangar mate found that the ring terminals on the thermocouple were cutting into the insulation of the adjacent wire and causing a short. I need to reconnect the wires and would like some suggestions as to a good method. I don't want to go back with ring terminals for obvious reasons, If I use inline crimp connectors, will this affect the reading since these connections would only be about a foot from the exhaust manifold and still inside the engine compartment.\? Any better suggestions available?? Bill B ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Connecting type K thermocouple

At 02:11 PM 6/22/2012, you wrote: >I have a thermocouple of the type shown from AC Spruce. I was >getting erratic high temp readings and my hangar mate found that the >ring terminals on the thermocouple were cutting into the insulation >of the adjacent wire and causing a short. > >I need to reconnect the wires and would like some suggestions as to >a good method. I don't want to go back with ring terminals for >obvious reasons, If I use inline crimp connectors, will this affect >the reading since these connections would only be about a foot from >the exhaust manifold and still inside the engine compartment.\? > >Any better suggestions available?? PIDG butt-splices are fine . . . but permanent. Is there enough slack in the wires to allow clipping out a butt-splice and replacing it perhaps a half dozen times? You can also silver-solder a j-hook joint and then put heat shrink over it. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Anybody remember when . . .?

At 10:39 AM 6/22/2012, you wrote: > > >I seem to recall a conversation some years ago about >an accident involving an RV wherein the crash remains >contained instances where wires were literally pulled >from their terminals. > >Does anyone recall the thread and can give me a date >and/or search phrase? thanks guys. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)bellsouth.net>

Subject:

Connecting type K thermocouple

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

The red wire insulation seems to be cracking. Will I burn it with the torch when I try to silver solder it? Bill B _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 3:48 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Connecting type K thermocouple At 02:11 PM 6/22/2012, you wrote: I have a thermocouple of the type shown from AC Spruce. I was getting erratic high temp readings and my hangar mate found that the ring terminals on the thermocouple were cutting into the insulation of the adjacent wire and causing a short. I need to reconnect the wires and would like some suggestions as to a good method. I don't want to go back with ring terminals for obvious reasons, If I use inline crimp connectors, will this affect the reading since these connections would only be about a foot from the exhaust manifold and still inside the engine compartment.\? Any better suggestions available?? PIDG butt-splices are fine . . . but permanent. Is there enough slack in the wires to allow clipping out a butt-splice and replacing it perhaps a half dozen times? You can also silver-solder a j-hook joint and then put heat shrink over it. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Viking Schematic

From:

"user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

> This builder needs to FIND OUT how much current each > of the ECU power inputs need. Unfortunately there is only ONE power input to the Dual ECU. I find it hard to believe that the ECU manufacturer would provide only one power input to their dual ECUs. I suspect that the Viking Engine developer, Jan Eggenfellner , has elected NOT to use a second available power input. I do not know this to be a fact. It is just speculation on my part. > Then find this out. Anyone willing to launch into the blue > without answers to such questions is an accident waiting > to happen . . . either from ignorance of this specific > question or others like it. Unfortunately, Mr Eggenfellner has not answered such questions, probably because he does not know the answers. He is a good mechanic but might lack electrical knowledge. > FIND OUT if the operating the two ECUs in tandem > presents a risk. FIND OUT also how much current these > systems demand in cruising flight. This question has been asked on the Viking website with no response from Mr Eggenfellner. If my assumption is correct that a high signal enables ECU1 and a low signal enables ECU2, then it would be impossible to operate both at once. No one knows the consequences of the simultaneous application of both high and low signals to the SELECT wire or the consequences of an open floating input. My friend is making the final decisions on wiring his airplane. He has accepted some of my recommendations and rejected some. From my point of view, it is hard to design a fool proof system without knowing the requirements or answers to above questions. All I can do is ensure that power is always available to the lone ECU power wire, regardless of the failure of any one component. And ensure that there is either a high or low signal on the SELECT wire, but never both at once. I think that we agree that the electrical system for the Viking engine has not been designed with a backup plan in the event of failure of key components. I am happy with my Rotax 912 engine. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376382#376382 ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Connecting type K thermocouple

At 03:58 PM 6/22/2012, you wrote: >The red wire insulation seems to be cracking. Will I burn it with >the torch when I try to silver solder it? You need to use a very small butane torch http://tinyurl.com/7mm63u4 my personal favorite is a Bernzomatic product http://tinyurl.com/7mucxz5 which you can often find at Lowe's, Home Depot, et. als. But you will still damage a small amount of insulation which you'll cover with the shrink. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 22, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Viking Schematic

From my point of view, it is hard to design a fool proof system without knowing the requirements or answers to above questions. All I can do is ensure that power is always available to the lone ECU power wire, regardless of the failure of any one component. And ensure that there is either a high or low signal on the SELECT wire, but never both at once. I think you're right . . . I think that we agree that the electrical system for the Viking engine has not been designed with a backup plan in the event of failure of key components. Hmmmm . . . I think this is a system I'd like to steer clear of . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 24, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Viking Schematic

> From my point of view, it is hard to design a fool proof system > without knowing the requirements or answers to above > questions. All I can do is ensure that power is always available > to the lone ECU power wire, regardless of the failure of any one > component. And ensure that there is either a high or low signal on > the SELECT wire, but never both at once. >I think that we agree that the electrical system for the Viking >engine has not been designed with a backup plan in the event of >failure of key components. Joe, I don't know your friend . . . and I hope that my worst concerns for how his project is going together are unfounded. You're in the best position to add to his knowledge pool for making sure that his airplane goes together with a minimum of built-in risks. I recall having tried to converse with Eggenfellner some years back. Very uncooperative to the extent that I was concerned about his knowledge and attitudes for offering critical systems to aircraft. If your friend has not already read and studied the hindsight available on line surrounding the Dan Lloyd, RV-10, Eggenfellner accident, please encourage him to do so. The postings in part are available here: http://tinyurl.com/7292l3z http://tinyurl.com/6lqzab2 http://tinyurl.com/7ho2w57 Maybe he's already 'plugged in' . . . without having engaged him in conversation and observed his work, we cannot know. I am particularly miffed with the Eggenfellner design in that supposedly dual, independent engine critical systems are not fitted with independent power and control paths. I don't recall the engine being considered when Z-19 was being crafted, it might have been the Eggenfellner product. It suggests steering diodes mounted close to the single-power input connection to one-of power plant accessories. If I had no other choices but to install a Viking engine I would take a similar approach. Normal and Alternate engine control switches. One taking power from the Main Battery Bus, one taking power from an Aux Battery Bus. If the numbers of switches is to be kept low, then use #1 switch to activate both power and command to the ECU for Normal Ops, the #2 switch to activate both power and command for Survivable Failure Ops. They have a moral, ethical, professional and even perhaps legal duty to make such data available to customers. Alternatively, they should offer their own iteration of Z-19 to provide failure tolerant functionality. One or the other. If Dan Lloyd's engine quit due to the disconnect of one wire and could not be restarted by selection of Plan-B . . . then somewhere along the line, too many balls were fumbled . . . and not for subtle, esoteric reasons. My perceptions of risk for the Viking engine versus Eggenfellner are disturbingly similar. A discussion that really needs to be conducted for mounting a concentrated effort to acquire system integration data from Viking Engines as to current demands and consequences of having both ECU active at the same time. This is simple data, easy to acquire and absolutely necessary for competent system integration. Get me a name of a person that your friend is working with at Viking and I'll make the call. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Viking Schematic

From:

"user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>

Date:

Jun 24, 2012

Bob, My friend sent me a CC email today that he also sent to others who are installing a Viking engine. Here is a copy of that message: > Joe introduced me to the Matronics forum, sponsored by Bob Nuckolls. There is an RV 12 section, and Joe submitted our concerns for public comments. Suggest you read the exchange and join the list. And so, my friend and others are aware of the inadequate electrical system illustrated on the Viking website. > Get me a name of a person that your friend > is working with at Viking and I'll make the call. I am not aware of anyone at Viking giving electrical advice beside Jan E. I think that it would benefit Jan Eggenfellner to make available all information about the electrical system, especially the ECU. Helping to prevent crashes of Viking powered aircraft will help his business. Even if Jan E is electrically challenged, others can use information that he provides to come up with an electrical system that will keep the engine running despite the failure of any one component. Bob, I appreciate your concern. There may be some builders blindly following the Viking electrical drawings. But the builders that I am in contact with know the dangers and risks. Unfortunately the risks can not be mitigated without more knowledge of the ECU requirements and capabilities. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376495#376495 ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 24, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Viking Schematic

I am not aware of anyone at Viking giving electrical advice beside Jan E. I think that it would benefit Jan Eggenfellner to make available all information about the electrical system, especially the ECU. My face is red . . . I didn't realize that Viking was direct descendant from the original Eggenfellner Subaru operations. Okay, I'll drop a note to Jan and see what, if any, information he can share toward the goal of crafting a more failure tolerant design Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 25, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: 1562

At 10:25 AM 6/25/2012, you wrote: >Thanks to David and the List, the problem with my 1562 Maintainer >has been solved. Schumacher, on the other hand was either unwilling >or unable to help me. Good to hear . . . probably 'unable' . . . in large, ISO9000 organizations folks are hired to fill silos of duty and supplied with "organizationally correct" knowledge to fulfill those duties. On top of that, they're seldom mentored to hone their skills at performing those duties. Hence, the individuals who talk to you on the phone are multiple levels and silos away from the folks who designed the product. Unlike airplanes, there's no maintenance services for customers. Devices like a 1562 that retails for $20 and costs less than $5 to build is simply a disposable commodity. The very best response one can expect from 'factory support' is an offer to replace on warranty. You may recall my narrative of a visit to MPA's alternator re-manufacturing facilities a few years ago. Return rates for good, better, best alternators was something like 18, 12, and 6 percent. All three 'grades' were the exact same alternator sold perhaps in a different box and supported by a service- contract that the customer buys built into the price for the better and best. MPA didn't keep tight records as to reasons for returns. Periodic studies showed that the vast majority of all returns were 'no fault found' . . . the rates of return seemed to have more to do with the grade of installing/troubleshooting mechanic. Returned units didn't get any heavy screening at the retail counter. Perfectly good returns were simply dumped into the re-cycle stream and processed just like a unit covered in 100,000 miles of grease and mud. This is because labor is the largest single cost for end-to-end service on most commodity products. It simply doesn't make sense to even wonder about why a device is returned. Only when statistical process controls show a marked jump in overall returns will engineering or QA even get into the loop. The cost of processing no-fault-found returns is simply factored into the cost of doing business and added to the retail price. So I'm not surprised that your experience with Schumacher was less than satisfying. I suspect it would be equally unsatisfying if you were dealing with MPA. There's simply no return on investment for giving the occasional customer an intellectually satisfying experience for having found, understood and fixed root cause in spite of the fact that both companies produce a stellar product, It's the new world of consumer products where everybody strives for a $100,000/year job. It's cheaper to pitch/replace their work product than to fix it. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 25, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: OS Wig-Wag Project

Greg, Been up to my fanny in loft beds and plumbing but while plying the asphalt between here and Wichita I came up with this idea for getting "more" from the OS wig-wag module. How about two switches labeled LANDING and TAXI. Have each switch provide an active LO to produce an action on the two lights as follows: Emacs! This would give the builder/installer the option of both on steady or wig-wag depending on a difference in paired or separate selection of the two switch positions. If in single lamp operation, the switches would both have to be placed at off and the simultaneously placed to ON to switch to Wig-Wag. Otherwise, the two switches independently control their respective lamps in steady-on operation. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 25, 2012

Subject:

1562 Maintainer

From:

Janet Amtmann <jgamtmann2(at)gmail.com>

David suggested that I publish the steps I took to get my 1562 Maintainer to revert to its normal mode of operation after it stopped maintaining and stayed in the charge mode (yellow LED). He suggested that some processors (like the one in the 1562) can get confused and need to go thru a reset sequence to get back to normal operation. So, for anyone that has the same problem: disconnect the maintainer from power and battery, after a decent interval connect the charge clips to the battery, then connect the power cord. Disconnect the power cord first, then disconnect the charge clips. I did it twice. The maintainer is now acting normally and maintaining my battery (green LED). Thanks David. ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: 1562 Maintainer

From:

Michael Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com>

Date:

Jun 25, 2012

Thanks for the tips. Mine is doing the exact same thing. I'll give it a try. Mike Welch On Jun 25, 2012, at 12:54 PM, Janet Amtmann wrote: > David suggested that I publish the steps I took to get my 1562 Maintainer to revert to its normal mode of operation after it stopped maintaining and stayed in the charge mode (yellow LED). He suggested that some processors (like the one in the 1562) can get confused and need to go thru a reset sequence to get back to normal operation. So, for anyone that has the same problem: disconnect the maintainer from power and battery, after a decent interval connect the charge clips to the battery, then connect the power cord. Disconnect the power cord first, then disconnect the charge clips. I did it twice. The maintainer is now acting normally and maintaining my battery (green LED). Thanks David. > > > ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Garmin believes in Old Wive's Tales.

From:

"user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>

Date:

Jun 25, 2012

From: Aviation Product Support Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 9:52 AM Subject: Start engine with SL40 turned on ISSUE=87343 PROJ=1 Email Notification from Garmin Aviation Product Support Thank you for contacting Garmin Aviation Product Support. Your service record has been created with the information below. For immediate assistance please call 866-739-5687 during normal business hours (7AM 7PM US Central time, Monday through Friday) and refer to the Service Record Number below. Service Record Number: 87343 Subject: Start engine with SL40 turned on Last update: 06/25/2012 07:52:39 Brief description of the problem: It is not recommended - damage could result if a spike from the electrical system made it to the unit and was to fast for the protection circuitry to catch it. If any of the above information is incorrect, please reply to this email with corrected contact information. You may also contact Garmin Aviation Product Support at 866-739-5687 and provide the information to the agent who assists you. For the latest news about Garmin products and services, please visit our Web site at www.garmin.com. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376582#376582 ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 25, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Garmin believes in Old Wive's Tales.

At 02:00 PM 6/25/2012, you wrote: > >From: Aviation Product Support >Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 9:52 AM >Subject: Start engine with SL40 turned on ISSUE=87343 PROJ=1 > >Email Notification from Garmin Aviation Product Support >Thank you for contacting Garmin Aviation Product >Support. Your service record has been created with the information below. > >For immediate assistance please call >866-739-5687 during normal business hours (7AM > 7PM US Central time, Monday through Friday) >and refer to the Service Record Number below. > >Service Record Number: 87343 >Subject: Start engine with SL40 turned on >Last update: 06/25/2012 07:52:39 > >Brief description of the problem: >It is not recommended - damage could result if a >spike from the electrical system made it to the >unit and was to fast for the protection circuitry to catch it. > > >If any of the above information is incorrect, >please reply to this email with corrected contact information. Can you give me the reverse e-mail link? It would be interesting to see if anyone at Garmin has identified a new spike risk. It would also be interesting to know how one crafts "slow protection circuitry" . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Garmin believes in Old Wive's Tales.

From:

"user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>

Date:

Jun 25, 2012

Aviation.Support (at) garmin dot com Here you go Bob. Replace the (at) with @ and replace the dot with a period and remove the spaces. Mention Service Record Number: 87343 Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376586#376586 ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Garmin believes in Old Wive's Tales.

From:

"user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>

Date:

Jun 25, 2012

Below is the question that my friend asked Garmin: > I would like to know if it is acceptable to start the engine when my SL40 is turned on. [/code] -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376589#376589 ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: OS Wig-Wag Project

From:

"gregmchugh" <gregmchugh(at)aol.com>

Date:

Jun 25, 2012

Bob, That seems to be a good solution. I will spin a version of the software for this and send another PIC chip along to you. Probably sent off to you by the end of the week. Greg McHugh Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376597#376597 ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 25, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Service Record Number 87343

Good morning, By way of introduction, I'm an electrical engineer retired from a 45 year career in aviation related electrics and electronics. My last 13-year stint was with Hawker-Beechcraft where most of my job focused on environmental robustness and DO-160 certification issues. The last 5 years at HBC included the duties of Lead Subject Matter Expert for Electrical Systems. A client of mine forwarded an email from your address wherein it was suggested that certain 'spikes' present on the electrical system during engine cranking might be damaging to your SL-40 product. I was surprised by this assertion for two reasons: (1) DO-160 Qualification Protocols have evolved over the last 50+ years to assist designers and manufacturers in the production of products immune to the worst case stresses that one might expect on the DC power system of an airplane (or any other vehicle). (2) In years of watching instrumented DC power conditions under all operating conditions on everything from Cessna 150s through the Hawker 800, I've never had occasion to capture a transient event (other than gross over-voltage) that would offer a threat to an artfully crafted and qualified piece of avionics. During engine cranking, the bus is remarkably free of transients that exceed energy levels to which every qualified device is subjected during DO-160 testing. The assertion made in your email to my client gives one pause to wonder if Garmin is (1) aware of some design deficiency that would make the product vulnerable to normal and expected DC bus transients or (2) some new and heretofore undiscovered threat has been identified that exceeds DO-160 qualification requirements. I've been teaching my students that we no longer need be concerned about such matters for devices qualified to DO-160. Indeed, I've either designed or been cognizant of dozens of 'fragile', micro-processor based devices which are connected to the ship's main bus under all conditions including engine cranking. None of these devices requires extra-ordinary protection for start-up transients. I'm curious about differences in the SL-40 that prompts Garmin to assert some value in disconnecting the radio during engine cranking. The idea is contrary to my own understanding of the physics involved and argues with what I have been teaching in my classes for the last 25 years. If I'm in error, I'd really need to be aware of any enlightenment one of your engineers might offer. Thanks! Kindest regards, Robert L. Nuckolls, III AeroElectric Connection P.O. Box 130 Medicine Lodge, Kansas 67104 (316)209-7528 ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>

Subject:

What'w wrong with this circuit?

Date:

Jun 25, 2012

Please see attached jpg (and forgive my scribbling). Schematic is simplified - omitting things like contactors. Looking for discussion on the general theory of feeding main bus thru isolation diodes for max protection from failure in batt -> contactor -> feed cable chain Mission: To provide reliable power to the Bus Assume: The diodes are big & well heat-sunk (sinked?) Analysis: 1. What are the top 3 reasons not to use a circuit like this 2. Other ways to accomplish the same thing Thanks, Jeff Luckey ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Roger" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net>

Subject:

Re: What'w wrong with this circuit?

Date:

Jun 26, 2012

Schematic is simplified - omitting things like contactors. Looking for discussion on the general theory of feeding main bus thru isolation diodes for max protection from failure in batt -> contactor -> feed cable chain Mission: To provide reliable power to the Bus Assume: The diodes are big & well heat-sunk (sinked?) Analysis: 1. What are the top 3 reasons not to use a circuit like this 2. Other ways to accomplish the same thing Thanks, Jeff Luckey Your system will work, but there are many unanswered questions that must be addressed before the final design can be reached. Among other things you need to decide the utility of the craft ie., day VFR, IFR, etc. Instrumentation, lights etc. that will need to be powered. Is the engine ignition battery dependent? This along with system integrity and reliability, much of which has been discussed on this forum. My suggestion is to go through the schematics offered on the Aeroelectric site and pick the one that is the simplest and will suit your needs. No reason to reinvent the wheel,"Bob already did it" If you do not feel comfortable selecting a schematic, or need some help with special mods, then this is a great place to ask. You will only be able to get help if you detail your aircraft and how it will be used. As you can see, from looking at Bob's library of schmatics there are a variety of options to craft a good reliable electrical system. Roger ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: What'w wrong with this circuit?

From:

"Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>

Date:

Jun 26, 2012

Basically it's fine. I have been selling a Power-Schottky part that will do this function for some time. I think others do to. See attached. -------- 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=376632#376632 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/power_deuce_schottky_manual_142.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Vern Little" <sprocket@vx-aviation.com>

Subject:

Producing pdf or xps files with ExpressSCH

Date:

Jun 26, 2012

For those of you using ExpressSCH/ExpressPCB, I have been corresponding with technical support at expresspcb.com about a =98printing problem=99. I would like to product .pdf files for multi-sheet ExpressSCH files. When I do this, I get multiple dialogs (one per sheet), and multiple single-page files as the output rather than one file with all sheets. I have confirmed this bug on XP, Vista and Win7 on two different computers. Further investigation gives me the same problem with .xps output (not that anyone cares about this format). I=99ve also found that when I print to a physical printer, multiple print jobs are created in the queue. The physical print issue is not really a problem. I have some schematics that are 20 pages long that I wish to publish and share in pdf format. For example are my electrical system designs for my RV-9A and Harmon Rocket and several designs for electronic gadgets that may be of interest. I=99m curious if anyone else has this problem. An easy way to test it is to try to print as an .xps file, which is supported on all versions of Windows. Thanks, Vern. ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 26, 2012

From:

Henador Titzoff <henador_titzoff(at)yahoo.com>

Subject:

Re: What'w wrong with this circuit?

Roger, The only thing that concerns me is how you're going to connect the alternat or to BOTH batteries.=C2- That will essentially short their positives tog ether, thus paralleling them.=C2- Do you have two alternators? Henador Titzoff --- On Tue, 6/26/12, Roger wrote: From: Roger <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: What'w wrong with this circuit? Date: Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 6:04 AM =0A=0A =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=C2-=0A=0A =C2- =0A =0A =C2- =0A Schematic is simplified =93 omitting things like =0A con tactors.=C2- Looking for discussion on the general theory of feeding main =0A bus thru isolation diodes for max protection from failure in batt -> =0A contactor -> feed cable chain=0A =C2-=0AMission: =0A =C2-To pr ovide reliable power to the =0A Bus =0A =C2-Assume: =0A =C2-The di odes are big & well heat-sunk =0A (sinked?) =0A =C2-Analysis: =0A =C2- =0A 1. What are the top 3 reasons not to use a circuit like =0A th is =0A 2. Other ways to accomplish the same =0A thing =0A =C2- =0A T hanks, =0A =C2- =0A Jeff =0A Luckey =0A =C2- =0A =C2-=0A =0A Your system will work, but there are many =0A unanswered questions that must be addressed before the final design can be =0A reached.=C2- Among other things you need to decide the utility of the =0A craft ie., day VFR, IFR, etc.=C2- Instrumentation, lights etc. that will =0A nee d to be powered.=C2- Is the engine ignition battery dependent?=C2- =0A This along with system integrity and reliability, much of which has been =0A discussed on this forum. =0A =C2-=0A My suggestion is to go through the schematics =0A offered on the Aeroelectric site and pick the one that is the =0A simplest=C2-and will suit your needs.=C2- No reason to reinvent the =0A wheel,"Bob already did it" =0A =C2-=0A If you do not feel comfortable selecting a =0A schematic, or need s ome help with special mods, then this is a great place =0A to ask.=C2- You will only be able to get help if you detail your aircraft =0A and h ow it will be used.=C2- As you can see, from looking at Bob's library =0A of schmatics there are a variety of options to craft a good reliable ===================0A=0A ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>

Subject:

What'w wrong with this circuit?

Date:

Jun 26, 2012

Henador, The diodes shown isolate the batts from each other. _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Henador Titzoff Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 11:35 Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: What'w wrong with this circuit? Roger, The only thing that concerns me is how you're going to connect the alternator to BOTH batteries. That will essentially short their positives together, thus paralleling them. Do you have two alternators? Henador Titzoff --- On Tue, 6/26/12, Roger wrote: From: Roger <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: What'w wrong with this circuit? Date: Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 6:04 AM Schematic is simplified - omitting things like contactors. Looking for discussion on the general theory of feeding main bus thru isolation diodes for max protection from failure in batt -> contactor -> feed cable chain Mission: To provide reliable power to the Bus Assume: The diodes are big & well heat-sunk (sinked?) Analysis: 1. What are the top 3 reasons not to use a circuit like this 2. Other ways to accomplish the same thing Thanks, Jeff Luckey Your system will work, but there are many unanswered questions that must be addressed before the final design can be reached. Among other things you need to decide the utility of the craft ie., day VFR, IFR, etc. Instrumentation, lights etc. that will need to be powered. Is the engine ignition battery dependent? This along with system integrity and reliability, much of which has been discussed on this forum. My suggestion is to go through the schematics offered on the Aeroelectric site and pick the one that is the simplest and will suit your needs. No reason to reinvent the wheel,"Bob already did it" If you do not feel comfortable selecting a schematic, or need some help with special mods, then this is a great place to ask. You will only be able to get help if you detail your aircraft and how it will be used. As you can see, from looking at Bob's library of schmatics there are a variety of options to craft a good reliable electrical system. Roger http://www.matron="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://www.matronics.com/contribution">ht tp://www.matronics.com/contribution=========== No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>

Subject:

What'w wrong with this circuit?

Date:

Jun 26, 2012

That was an incomplete answer. If on a single-alternator system, the alternator will have to charge thru a charge divider circuit. _____ From: Jeff Luckey [mailto:JLuckey(at)pacbell.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 13:33 Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: What'w wrong with this circuit? Henador, The diodes shown isolate the batts from each other. _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Henador Titzoff Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 11:35 Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: What'w wrong with this circuit? Roger, The only thing that concerns me is how you're going to connect the alternator to BOTH batteries. That will essentially short their positives together, thus paralleling them. Do you have two alternators? Henador Titzoff --- On Tue, 6/26/12, Roger wrote: From: Roger <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: What'w wrong with this circuit? Date: Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 6:04 AM Schematic is simplified - omitting things like contactors. Looking for discussion on the general theory of feeding main bus thru isolation diodes for max protection from failure in batt -> contactor -> feed cable chain Mission: To provide reliable power to the Bus Assume: The diodes are big & well heat-sunk (sinked?) Analysis: 1. What are the top 3 reasons not to use a circuit like this 2. Other ways to accomplish the same thing Thanks, Jeff Luckey Your system will work, but there are many unanswered questions that must be addressed before the final design can be reached. Among other things you need to decide the utility of the craft ie., day VFR, IFR, etc. Instrumentation, lights etc. that will need to be powered. Is the engine ignition battery dependent? This along with system integrity and reliability, much of which has been discussed on this forum. My suggestion is to go through the schematics offered on the Aeroelectric site and pick the one that is the simplest and will suit your needs. No reason to reinvent the wheel,"Bob already did it" If you do not feel comfortable selecting a schematic, or need some help with special mods, then this is a great place to ask. You will only be able to get help if you detail your aircraft and how it will be used. As you can see, from looking at Bob's library of schmatics there are a variety of options to craft a good reliable electrical system. Roger http://www.matron="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://www.matronics.com/contribution">ht tp://www.matronics.com/contribution=========== No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 26, 2012

From:

Henador Titzoff <henador_titzoff(at)yahoo.com>

Subject:

What'w wrong with this circuit?

What's a charge divider circuit, Jeff? =C2-Is it an electronic hatchet co mprised of one, two or a PLC controlled by a laptop? =C2-Can you send us a screamatic? Henador Titzoff --- On Tue, 6/26/12, Jeff Luckey wrote: From: Jeff Luckey <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: What'w wrong with this circuit? Date: Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 1:38 PM =0A=0A=0A =0A =0A=0A =0A=0A =0A=0A =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AThat was an incomplete answer =0A=0A =C2- =0A=0AIf on a single-alter nator system, the=0Aalternator will have to charge thru a charge divider ci rcuit. =0A=0A =C2- =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AFrom: Jeff Luckey=0A[mai lto:JLuckey(at)pacbell.net] =0ASent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 13:33 =0ATo: ' aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com ' =0ASubject: RE: AeroElectric-List:=0AWhat'w wrong with this circuit? =0A=0A =0A=0A =C2- =0A=0AHenador, =0A=0AThe diodes shown isolate the batts from =0Aeach other. =0A=0A =C2- =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AFrom: owner-aero electric-list-server(at)matronics.com=0A[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server @matronics.com] On Behalf Of Henador Titzoff =0ASent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 11:35 =0ATo: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0ASubject: Re: AeroElectric-List:=0AWhat'w wrong with this circuit? =0A=0A =0A=0A =C2- =0A=0A=0A =0A =0A Roger, =0A =0A The only thing that concerns me is how you're going to connect the alt ernator=0A to BOTH batteries.=C2- That will essentially short their posi tives=0A together, thus paralleling them.=C2- Do you have two alternator s? =0A =0A Henador Titzoff =0A =0A =0A --- On Tue, 6/26/12, Roger =0A wrote: =0A =0A From: Roger <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net> =0A Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: What'w wrong with this circuit? =0A To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0A Date: Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 6:04 AM =0A =0A =0A =0A =C2- =0A =0A =0A =0A =C2- =0A =0A =C2- =0A Schematic is simplified =93 omitting=0A things like contactors.=C2- Looking for discussion on th e general theory of=0A feeding main bus thru isolation diodes for max prot ection from failure in=0A batt -> contactor -> feed cable chain =0A =C2 -=0A Mission: =0A =C2-To provide reliable power to=0A the Bus =0A =C2-Assume: =0A =C2-The diodes are big &=0A well heat-sunk (sinked?) =0A =C2-Analysis: =0A =C2- =0A 1. What are the top 3 reasons not=0A to use a circuit like this =0A 2. Other ways to accomplish the=0A same t hing =0A =C2- =0A Thanks, =0A =C2- =0A Jeff Luckey =0A =C2- =0A =C2- =0A =0A Your system will work, but there=0A are many unanswered questions that must be addressed before the final design=0A can be reached .=C2- Among other things you need to decide the utility of=0A the craft ie., day VFR, IFR, etc.=C2- Instrumentation, lights etc. that=0A will ne ed to be powered.=C2- Is the engine ignition battery=0A dependent?=C2- This along with system integrity and reliability, much of=0A which has be en discussed on this forum. =0A =C2- =0A My suggestion is to go through the=0A schematics offered on the Aeroelectric site and pick the one that is the=0A simplest=C2-and will suit your needs.=C2- No reason to reinv ent the=0A wheel,"Bob already did it" =0A =C2- =0A If you do not feel comfortable=0A selecting a schematic, or need some help with special mods, then this is a=0A great place to ask.=C2- You will only be able to get help if you detail=0A your aircraft and how it will be used.=C2- As you can see, from looking at=0A Bob's library of schmatics there are a variety of options to craft a good=0A reliable electrical system. =0A =C2- =0A Roger =0A =0A =0A http://www.matron="nofollow" target="_blank" hre f="http://forums.matronics.com">http://www.matronics.com/contribution">ht tp://www.matronics.com/contribution============ =C2 - =0A =0A =0A =0A=0A=0A =C2- =C2-http://www.matronics.com/Navigator ?AeroElectric-Listhttp://forums.matronics.comhttp://www.matronics.com/contr ibution =C2- =0A=0A=0A=0ANo virus found in this message. =0AChecked by AVG - www.avg.com =====0A=0A ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>

Subject:

What'w wrong with this circuit?

Date:

Jun 26, 2012

There are certainly "intelligent" charge dividers available but in this case I'm thinking about something much more "old-fashioned" - like a couple of diodes in the output of the alternator which isolate the 2 batteries from each other. I will scribble a schematic when time permits. _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Henador Titzoff Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 16:08 Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: What'w wrong with this circuit? What's a charge divider circuit, Jeff? Is it an electronic hatchet comprised of one, two or a PLC controlled by a laptop? Can you send us a screamatic? Henador Titzoff --- On Tue, 6/26/12, Jeff Luckey wrote: From: Jeff Luckey <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: What'w wrong with this circuit? Date: Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 1:38 PM That was an incomplete answer. If on a single-alternator system, the alternator will have to charge thru a charge divider circuit. _____ From: Jeff Luckey [mailto:JLuckey(at)pacbell.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 13:33 Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: What'w wrong with this circuit? Henador, The diodes shown isolate the batts from each other. _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Henador Titzoff Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 11:35 Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: What'w wrong with this circuit? Roger, The only thing that concerns me is how you're going to connect the alternator to BOTH batteries. That will essentially short their positives together, thus paralleling them. Do you have two alternators? Henador Titzoff --- On Tue, 6/26/12, Roger wrote: From: Roger <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: What'w wrong with this circuit? Date: Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 6:04 AM Schematic is simplified - omitting things like contactors. Looking for discussion on the general theory of feeding main bus thru isolation diodes for max protection from failure in batt -> contactor -> feed cable chain Mission: To provide reliable power to the Bus Assume: The diodes are big & well heat-sunk (sinked?) Analysis: 1. What are the top 3 reasons not to use a circuit like this 2. Other ways to accomplish the same thing Thanks, Jeff Luckey Your system will work, but there are many unanswered questions that must be addressed before the final design can be reached. Among other things you need to decide the utility of the craft ie., day VFR, IFR, etc. Instrumentation, lights etc. that will need to be powered. Is the engine ignition battery dependent? This along with system integrity and reliability, much of which has been discussed on this forum. My suggestion is to go through the schematics offered on the Aeroelectric site and pick the one that is the simplest and will suit your needs. No reason to reinvent the wheel,"Bob already did it" If you do not feel comfortable selecting a schematic, or need some help with special mods, then this is a great place to ask. You will only be able to get help if you detail your aircraft and how it will be used. As you can see, from looking at Bob's library of schmatics there are a variety of options to craft a good reliable electrical system. Roger http://www.matron="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://www.matronics.com/contribution">ht tp://www.matronics.com/contribution=========== http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List http://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 06/26/12 http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-Listhttp://================ ===== No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 26, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

What'w wrong with this circuit?

At 06:41 PM 6/26/2012, you wrote: >There are certainly =93intelligent=94 charge dividers available Can you cite such a product we can see on the 'net? I'm not sure I know what these devices are . . . > but in this case I=92m thinking about something > much more =93old-fashioned=94 ' like a couple of > diodes in the output of the alternator which > isolate the 2 batteries from each other. I > will scribble a schematic when time permits. You might wish to fold ideas in this article into your deliberations. http://tinyurl.com/77sf9sx http://tinyurl.com/78lg7kf http://tinyurl.com/7lhbbah What value do you see for solid-state isolation of batteries? What's the failure you're trying to make tolerable? What are the cost, weight, energy benefits ratios for diode isolation versus hard-contacts isolation? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>

Subject:

What's wrong with this circuit?

Date:

Jun 26, 2012

Bob, What's the failure you're trying to make tolerable? Mechanical failure of feed lines from a batt contactor to distribution panel (in instrument panel). One possibility: a lug cracking and breaking loose and going to ground. (I've seen this one) I'm sure I could dream-up a few other scenarios.(likelihood is really the question) What are the cost, weight, energy benefits ratios for diode isolation versus hard-contacts isolation? I see the $ cost as acceptable; the additional weight as minimal; the wasted energy as insignificant; I see the "automatic" nature of this protection as a big plus. -Jeff _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 17:49 Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: What'w wrong with this circuit? At 06:41 PM 6/26/2012, you wrote: There are certainly "intelligent" charge dividers available Can you cite such a product we can see on the 'net? I'm not sure I know what these devices are . . . but in this case I'm thinking about something much more "old-fashioned" - like a couple of diodes in the output of the alternator which isolate the 2 batteries from each other. I will scribble a schematic when time permits. You might wish to fold ideas in this article into your deliberations. http://tinyurl.com/77sf9sx http://tinyurl.com/78lg7kf http://tinyurl.com/7lhbbah What value do you see for solid-state isolation of batteries? What's the failure you're trying to make tolerable? What are the cost, weight, energy benefits ratios for diode isolation versus hard-contacts isolation? Bob . . . No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>

Subject:

What's wrong with this circuit?

Date:

Jun 26, 2012

Can you cite such a product we can see on the 'net? I'm not sure I know what these devices are . . . Charge Dividers: http://www.philippi-online.de/index.php5?url=produkte.php5 <http://www.philippi-online.de/index.php5?url=produkte.php5&m1id=2&sprache=e n&kat1_nr=2&kat2_nr=2> &m1id=2&sprache=en&kat1_nr=2&kat2_nr=2 http://www.ludomcgurk.com/charge-divider-1-product-32.html _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 17:49 Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: What'w wrong with this circuit? At 06:41 PM 6/26/2012, you wrote: There are certainly "intelligent" charge dividers available Can you cite such a product we can see on the 'net? I'm not sure I know what these devices are . . . but in this case I'm thinking about something much more "old-fashioned" - like a couple of diodes in the output of the alternator which isolate the 2 batteries from each other. I will scribble a schematic when time permits. You might wish to fold ideas in this article into your deliberations. http://tinyurl.com/77sf9sx http://tinyurl.com/78lg7kf http://tinyurl.com/7lhbbah What value do you see for solid-state isolation of batteries? What's the failure you're trying to make tolerable? What are the cost, weight, energy benefits ratios for diode isolation versus hard-contacts isolation? Bob . . . No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 26, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

What's wrong with this circuit?

At 08:24 PM 6/26/2012, you wrote: >Bob, > >What's the failure you're trying to > make tolerable? > >Mechanical failure of feed lines from a batt >contactor to distribution panel (in instrument >panel). One possibility: a lug cracking and >breaking loose and going to ground. (I=92ve seen >this one) I=92m sure I could dream-up a few other >scenarios=85(likelihood is really the question) But doesn't the dual feed e-bus take care of this exceedingly unlikely scenario? A cracked lug and/or bus going to ground speaks of poor materials and craftsmanship. I've never seen this become a worry to be addressed by design changes. Dual batteries with and dual-feed e-bus pretty much covers it . . . and doesn't hide anything from the pilot by making failure mitigation 'automatic'. So just suppose the bus does go dark? How long does it take to get on line with an adequate suite of gear for continued flight by flipping a couple of switches? Just run electrically dependent engines from dual sources, at least one of which is a battery bus. Low volts light ON. Turn alternator off and then exercise your plan-B designed to deal with this event. The last high current feeder going to ground I heard of at HBC was a King Air on short final who was suddenly deprived of elevator control. Go-around was followed by un-eventful landing using elevator trim. Found re-routed wire under co-pilot's floorboard that rubbed against elevator cable. This soft-fault eroded away the steel cable over many hours of operation while doing little damage to the copper wire. No smoke, no flashing lights, no smells . . . It was one for the books. Bottom line is that good craftsmanship with suitable materials makes your fat-wires about as reliable as prop-bolts. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>

Subject:

What's wrong with this circuit?

Date:

Jun 26, 2012

My comments are mixed in below. _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 18:56 Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: What's wrong with this circuit? At 08:24 PM 6/26/2012, you wrote: Bob, What's the failure you're trying to make tolerable? Mechanical failure of feed lines from a batt contactor to distribution panel (in instrument panel). One possibility: a lug cracking and breaking loose and going to ground. (I've seen this one) I'm sure I could dream-up a few other scenarios.(likelihood is really the question) But doesn't the dual feed e-bus take care of this exceedingly unlikely scenario? A cracked lug and/or bus going to ground speaks of poor materials and craftsmanship. I've never seen this become a worry to be addressed by design changes. Dual batteries with and dual-feed e-bus pretty much covers it I don't think I'm totally convinced of the benefit of multiple busses, main & essential. In my airplane almost everything is essential (except perhaps lighting & a few accessories). My list of essential stuff: Electronic Ignition, fuel pump, regulator, EFIS, at least one nav/com, transponder. Everything else is either not used frequently (like pitot heat) or has very minimal draw where a minute or two delay in turning-off the item is not significant. With the single main bus that is essentially wired like a UPS (uninterruptible power supply) it seems simpler from an operational standpoint. . . . and doesn't hide anything from the pilot by making failure mitigation 'automatic'. Not to confuse automatic w/ unknown - In this scenario, the system would produce a "Low Batt B Volts" alarm. (and a quick look at the Batt B voltmeter would indicate not only low but zero). So just suppose the bus does go dark? How long does it take to get on line with an adequate suite of gear for continued flight by flipping a couple of switches? Just run electrically dependent engines from dual sources, at least one of which is a battery bus. Low volts light ON. Turn alternator off and then exercise your plan-B designed to deal with this event. The last high current feeder going to ground I heard of at HBC was a King Air on short final who was suddenly deprived of elevator control. Go-around was followed by un-eventful landing using elevator trim. Found re-routed wire under co-pilot's floorboard that rubbed against elevator cable. This soft-fault eroded away the steel cable over many hours of operation while doing little damage to the copper wire. No smoke, no flashing lights, no smells . . . Un-authorized arc welding (while airborne), very scary! It was one for the books. Bottom line is that good craftsmanship with suitable materials makes your fat-wires about as reliable as prop-bolts. agree, there is no substitute for quality components properly installed. Bob . . . No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Garmin believes in Old Wive's Tales.

From:

"mmayfield" <mmayfield(at)ozemail.com.au>

Date:

Jun 26, 2012

I just find this whole "don't dare turn it on before the engine is started" argument a little crazy. Those who have flown the B767 and similar vintage big metal things will be familiar with the significant CLUNK as engine generators come online and transfer power, causing various lights and screens to blank, flicker and carry on spectacularly. Or other effects when the APU generator comes online and takes over from battery power. Yet the 20+ year old comm radios and nav systems made by Collins, Honeywell, Garmin, etc still survive these power transients, spikes, and surges. Excactly the same goes for other large aircraft I've flown. Radios and nav gear were regularly switched on, as a matter of necessity, before engine start. In almost 30 years of flying these things, I've never experience an avionics failure due to power transients when engine-driven power sources have come online and assumed the load! This morbid fear, bordering on complete paranoia, of avionics being on before engine start in the small-plane world is quite new to me! -------- Mike Your political opinions are noted. And ignored. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376697#376697 ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 27, 2012

From:

Scott Klemptner <bmwr606(at)yahoo.com>

Subject:

Re: Producing pdf or xps files with ExpressSCH

=0A=0AVern,=0A=0Ai have been using ExpressSCH for years and it has always b ehaved this way on both XP and Vista.=0A=0Ai have never found a workaround. =0A=0A-=0AScott A Klemptner=0Abmwr606 on Yahoo IM=0A ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Bendix Magneto Wiring

From:

"MikeDunlop" <mdunlop001(at)aol.com>

Date:

Jun 27, 2012

Having searched the forum I have found the following: ------- Is there is any significant degradation in starting performance when only one mag is hot? You betcha . . . most engines come with only one impulse coupled mag. Unless both mags are impulse coupled, you need to add a jumper between the right mag's p-lead terminal and a nearby switched ground terminal on the key-type magneto switch. This has the effect of grounding out the right mag while cranking. It also has the effect of letting the right mag become "hot" with the engine still moving after an aborted cranking attempt - been known to break starter castings. ------------------------- Question is: My Long-EZ is being fitted with a O-320 B3B that has two impulse couplings! Does this mean that the jumper between the right mag's p-lead terminal and a nearby switched ground terminal on the key-type magneto switch (with Start position - Gerdes A510-2) IS NOT REQUIRED? This is all described in article at http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/MagnetoSwitchOptions.pdf I would like to clarify this now because looking at the engine logs, it shows that the previous owner had replaced the woodruff key in the starter motor 3 times within 130 hours! This sounds as if there is a problem with kicking back on startup. BTW the engine has now been zero timed and the mags will now be overhauled. MikeD (U.K.) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376706#376706 ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Bendix Magneto Wiring

Date:

Jun 27, 2012

From:

"George, Neal Capt 505 TRS/DOJ" <Neal.George(at)hurlburt.af.mil>

Mike - If both mags are fitted with impulse couplings, and both function correctly, you may remove the jumper. neal -----Original Message----- Question is: My Long-EZ is being fitted with a O-320 B3B that has two impulse couplings! Does this mean that the jumper between the right mag's p-lead terminal and a nearby switched ground terminal on the key-type magneto switch (with Start position - Gerdes A510-2) IS NOT REQUIRED? This is all described in article at http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/MagnetoSwitchOptions.pdf I would like to clarify this now because looking at the engine logs, it shows that the previous owner had replaced the woodruff key in the starter motor 3 times within 130 hours! This sounds as if there is a problem with kicking back on startup. BTW the engine has now been zero timed and the mags will now be overhauled. MikeD (U.K.) ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Vern Little" <sprocket@vx-aviation.com>

Subject:

Re: Producing pdf or xps files with ExpressSCH

Date:

Jun 27, 2012

Thanks for the confirmation, Scott. =98Express=99 has been consistently denying that they have a problem. As soon as I said that I threatened to post it on internet forums, they said that they would have an engineer look at it. Sounds like they follow the Microsoft support model (not a compliment). If you are up to it, an email to =98Express=99 describing your problem would go a long way... they said that they had never had anyone report this problem before, therefore I must be wrong (what an attitude!). My response to them was... =9CI=99m not wrong, just the first=9D. Thanks for your support. Vern From: Scott Klemptner Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 5:09 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Producing pdf or xps files with ExpressSCH Vern, i have been using ExpressSCH for years and it has always behaved this way on both XP and Vista. i have never found a workaround. Scott A Klemptner bmwr606 on Yahoo IM No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 06/26/12 ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 27, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Garmin believes in Old Wive's Tales.

At 12:01 AM 6/27/2012, you wrote: I just find this whole "don't dare turn it on before the engine is started" argument a little crazy. Those who have flown the B767 and similar vintage big metal things will be familiar with the significant CLUNK as engine generators come online and transfer power, causing various lights and screens to blank, flicker and carry on spectacularly. Or other effects when the APU generator comes online and takes over from battery power. Similarly, there are dozens of potentially 'sensitive' electro-whizzies firmly attached to the various busses on most aircraft with DC power system. My first such product was a pitch trim speed controller and runaway monitor for the most of the fleet of Lears. It was stuffed full of C-mos devices. Had we asked for procedures and systems to 'shut it off during cranking' . . . the product would never have made it to the production line. Yet the 20+ year old comm radios and nav systems made by Collins, Honeywell, Garmin, etc still survive these power transients, spikes, and surges. Excactly the same goes for other large aircraft I've flown. Radios and nav gear were regularly switched on, as a matter of necessity, before engine start. In almost 30 years of flying these things, I've never experience an avionics failure due to power transients when engine-driven power sources have come online and assumed the load! Exactly . . . and indeed radios much older. Don't know about the heavier iron but I was working at Cessna's single-engine facility when the Avionics Master Switch was birthed. We were indeed 'killing' a goodly number of brand new 300 series radios that sported the latest 'transistorized' audio systems and power supplies. It seemed that radios which worked when the airplane was parked in the finished goods patch didn't work the next time the airplane was started. It was 'assumed' that spikes from the starter were killing transistors. The AMS seemed like a quick and easy solution to isolating all radios from those presumed risks. In retrospect, I've deduced that it wasn't spikes that killed radios but 'brown out' transients experienced during cranking of a new, tight engine on a battery that might never have been fully topped off and had been setting on the ramp for 30-60 days. Those new, relatively fragile, germanium PNP power transistors were coming out of saturation and going into second breakdown under low voltage conditions. It was some years later that the DO-160 tests for brown out conditions were expanded . . . combined with more robust silicon transistors and designs by engineers who were good students of lessons-learned and were doing a better job. This morbid fear, bordering on complete paranoia, of avionics being on before engine start in the small-plane world is quite new to me! Agreed. But we planted the weeds back about 1965 and every flight instructor since has watered and fertilized those weeds dutifully for the 50 years hence. What was once a misinterpretation of cause and effect out of ignorance morphed into a full blown superstition. I too was once a believer but a few years after that experience at Cessna as a tech writer, I had a responsibility to understand and apply DO-160 requirements to my work product. The task turned out to be a real superstition-killer. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>

Subject:

Latching Relay Redux

Date:

Jun 27, 2012

Back in 2011 there was some discussion of new latching-type relay/contactors that might be suitable for use as master relays. I remember at the time looking at the spec sheets & pricing of some of those devices and they seemed available & reasonably priced. I google search earlier this week failed to turn-up any devices that were reasonably priced and they seemed to have huge lead times. I want to consider using such a device but if they are difficult to get, I won't bother. Does anyone have a source(s) for such a device? TIA Jeff Luckey ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 27, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

What's wrong with this circuit?

At 10:30 PM 6/26/2012, you wrote: I dont think Im totally convinced of the benefit of multiple busses, main & essential. In my airplane almost everything is essential (except perhaps lighting & a few accessories). My list of essential stuff: Electronic Ignition, fuel pump, regulator, EFIS, at least one nav/com, transponder. Everything else is either not used frequently (like pitot heat) or has very minimal draw where a minute or two delay in turning-off the item is not significant. Actually, it's not a 'essential bus' but an 'endurance bus'. It's a means by which one can reduce loads on a battery to the useful necessities for continued flight in the en route mode. The idea is to design an electrical system with endurance equal or greater than fuel aboard. This concept goes to Plan-B for dealing with failure of the least reliable energy source on the airplane . . . the alternator. Suggest you review the chapter on system reliability and List discussions on the philosophy and utility of the E-bus . . . Your 'concerns' are significant but may I suggest that many are of such low risk as to be outside the sphere of thought for designing your system? The hapless Mr. Lloyd may have installed every back-up-to-backup system in his airplane but all went for naught when wires pulled out of terminal. A search of FAA Service Difficulty Reports and NTSB accident reports will show that very few accidents were precipitated or exacerbated by electrical system failures. Those accidents that DID have an electrical system component would have been greatly mitigated by a combination of thoughtful architecture, good preventative maintenance (don't run batteries 'til they die) and pilot understanding of how the system worked. The prime directives for this List are "thougtful architecture that goes to comfortable tolerance of high risk failures", "understanding based on simple ideas in physics, processes and materials" and the study of "lessons learned from the experiences of others". With the single main bus that is essentially wired like a UPS (uninterruptible power supply) it seems simpler from an operational standpoint. Simpler for the mitigation what failure for which there is a demonstrably significant risk? Not to confuse automatic w/ unknown In this scenario, the system would produce a Low Batt B Volts alarm. (and a quick look at the Batt B voltmeter would indicate not only low but zero). But what is the risk for "zero volts" on a bus and what elements make up the constellation of events that might produce that event. Is it not better to first reduce those risks by changes in design, process or materials? After the ingredients that go into your proposed recipe for success are carefully combed, only then do you exercise tools necessary to craft a Plan-B for the failure that might put the mission (or hygene in your shorts) at risk. The goal is to comfortably assert that "my airplane is exceedingly unlikely to suffer an electrical emergency. It may suffer many failures of components for which I will suffer the expense of maintenance . . . but any and all will be no-sweat events." Un-authorized arc welding (while airborne), very scary! Scary to contemplate but in reality, so 'gentle' that it took many flight hours for the effects to achieve the interesting conclusion. The fact that there was a Plan-B in the pilots hip pocket paired to other features of the airplane's architecture turned a 'scary' contemplation into a 'no sweat' event. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 27, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Latching Relay Redux

At 12:21 PM 6/27/2012, you wrote: Back in 2011 there was some discussion of new latching-type relay/contactors that might be suitable for use as master relays. I remember at the time looking at the spec sheets & pricing of some of those devices and they seemed available & reasonably priced. I google search earlier this week failed to turn-up any devices that were reasonably priced and they seemed to have huge lead times. I want to consider using such a device but if they are difficult to get, I won't bother. Does anyone have a source(s) for such a device? If your design incorporates this, or any other uniquely crafted product, you're presented with both 'spares' and 'unconventional operations' issues. If the design goal is to reduced energy consumption in the battery contactor, you could craft a duty-cycle controller that drops the contactor excitation to about 1/2 say 1 second after you energize it. More than enough to keep it closed yet drops heating (energy consuption) by 75% or so. Then you can use ANY contactor in the constellation of similar devices while. What's more, with a alternate feed path to an E-bus, risks to mission for failure of your energy conservation device are covered by the same Plan-B that covers main alternator failure. The airplane's controls are consistent with legacy philosophies and no new spares issues are created. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>

Subject:

Latching Relay Redux

Date:

Jun 27, 2012

Bob, All good points, many of which have been discussed on this forum. I'm currently doing a more academic analysis (you know, when you are stuck in traffic) as to how such devices might improve a system design (if at all) but, if they are difficult to obtain then I think the point is moot. BTW - a "pull & hold" circuit seems to me to be a non-starter - putting a bunch of 'exotic' circuitry in the critical path of the coil circuit to accomplish such a trivial task seems to me to be counter-productive. If you are counting milliamps then your system probably has bigger problems. -Jeff -----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, June 27, 2012 11:02 Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Latching Relay Redux At 12:21 PM 6/27/2012, you wrote: Back in 2011 there was some discussion of new latching-type relay/contactors that might be suitable for use as master relays. I remember at the time looking at the spec sheets & pricing of some of those devices and they seemed available & reasonably priced. I google search earlier this week failed to turn-up any devices that were reasonably priced and they seemed to have huge lead times. I want to consider using such a device but if they are difficult to get, I won't bother. Does anyone have a source(s) for such a device? If your design incorporates this, or any other uniquely crafted product, you're presented with both 'spares' and 'unconventional operations' issues. If the design goal is to reduced energy consumption in the battery contactor, you could craft a duty-cycle controller that drops the contactor excitation to about 1/2 say 1 second after you energize it. More than enough to keep it closed yet drops heating (energy consuption) by 75% or so. Then you can use ANY contactor in the constellation of similar devices while. What's more, with a alternate feed path to an E-bus, risks to mission for failure of your energy conservation device are covered by the same Plan-B that covers main alternator failure. The airplane's controls are consistent with legacy philosophies and no new spares issues are created. Bob . . . ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 27, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Latching Relay Redux

>BTW - a "pull & hold" circuit seems to me to be a non-starter - putting a >bunch of 'exotic' circuitry in the critical path of the coil circuit to >accomplish such a trivial task seems to me to be counter-productive. If you >are counting milliamps then your system probably has bigger problems. That philosophy is core to this product from Tyco http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/Kilovac_EV200_c which not only offers a sealed atmosphere environment for better high voltage handling but an after-engagement duty-cycle managed for reduced power consumption. But it's about a $135 device as I recall. One of the drivers for installation of the E-bus was to eliminate the 0.7A draw of a battery contactor during alternator-out operations. That much current would run several radios . . . but might seriously impact a design goal for battery-only endurance to exceed fuel endurance. Trivial task? It's a matter of degree . . . Exotic? About $6 worth of Radio Shack parts will do it and it doesn't increase risks. But if one has a Rotax 18A or SD-8 excited airplane the wasted watts become more critical than when you've got 60A alternator with 40 to burn. So one could choose to achieve similar performance with a plain vanilla contactor and DIY duty-cycle management. Hardware capable of very fancy footwork is becoming less expensive while consuming less power. The things one could put in a 25 year-old VariEz lit up with an SD-8 were very limited . . . not so much today. It's all inter-related and as mentioned earlier, related to mission, hardware, full up vs. endurance loads, battery sizes and PM protocols. So if latching battery contactor is more a attractive than a duty-cycle managed device, you are ultimately responsible for the formulation of design goals and techniques used to meet them. The basket of bits-and-pieces with which the big picture is painted is huge . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Engine start on Z14 with different size batteries

From:

"bobbarrow" <bobbarrow(at)bigpond.com>

Date:

Jun 28, 2012

I have the Z14 architecture (dual independent buses with crossfeed contactor) on my RV7. But the architecture is not symmetrical as per Bob Knuckolls drawings. In my set-up I have an Odyssey 680 battery (17 AH) plus a B&C 40 amp alternator on Bus 1. On Bus 2, I have an Odyssey 310 (7.5 AH) plus a B&C 20 amp alternator. Yes, I know as a system it's overkill but let's not go there because it's already installed. In my architecture Bus 1 with the big battery is the sole starter cranking bus for normal operations. Accordingly all "starter current path" wires on Bus 1 are 2 AWG to reduce resistance during engine start. By comparison I calculate that the largest wire on Bus 2 could be 8 AWG for normal operations on that bus including Xfeed operations to bus 2 (for non cranking operations). However it occurs to me that if my Bus 1 battery (Odyssey 680) was struggling to crank the engine in a remore location I would be tempted to switch on the Xfeed and get whatever current boost I could from the smaller Odyssey 310 on bus 2. My question is this: What size wire do I need to incorporate in the "starter current" path of bus 2 to facilitate assisted engine cranking on the odd occasion from the smaller battery. Presumably bigger would always be better....but what's reasonable. Regards Bob Barrow :) :) :) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376755#376755 ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Producing pdf or xps files with ExpressSCH

From:

"Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>

Date:

Jun 28, 2012

> I have some schematics that are 20 pages long that I wish to publish and share in pdf format. Vern, I can't solve the ExpressPCB issue in general, but what I do is use a "screen-capture" like the screen grabber import function in Paint Shot Pro. (I use this to grab all layers of a pcb, then flip one layer, to produce folded mockup paper boards for circuit tracing and examination before sending board out for manufacture.) This is a good function to have at your disposal for capturing all sorts of images. If you can see an image on the video display, then you can grab it and manipulate it as a BMP. JPG, etc. Then you can print anything as a pdf using Smart PDF Converter or other free or cheap pdf converters. There are free older versions of Paint Shop Pro for the taking online. -------- 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=376762#376762 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/lv_warning_o_194.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 28, 2012

From:

Roberto Waltman <aero(at)rwaltman.com>

Subject:

Re: Producing pdf or xps files with ExpressSCH

Vern Little wrote: > For those of you using ExpressSCH/ExpressPCB, > ... and multiple > single-page files as the output rather than one file with all sheets. Not a solution, but as a work-around, there are tools that will allow you to combine several PDF's into a single file. Don't recall names from the top of my head, will try to locate some over the weekend and report here. Roberto. ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>

Subject:

Producing pdf or xps files with ExpressSCH

Date:

Jun 28, 2012

Try PDF995 (http://www.pdf995.com/); their pdf creator is cheap and easy to use. I have been using it for a while now and its great. Cost around $10 I think Jay -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roberto Waltman Sent: 28 June 2012 02:47 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Producing pdf or xps files with ExpressSCH --> Vern Little wrote: > For those of you using ExpressSCH/ExpressPCB, ... and multiple > single-page files as the output rather than one file with all sheets. Not a solution, but as a work-around, there are tools that will allow you to combine several PDF's into a single file. Don't recall names from the top of my head, will try to locate some over the weekend and report here. Roberto. ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 28, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Engine start on Z14 with different size batteries

At 04:40 AM 6/28/2012, you wrote: >In my architecture Bus 1 with the big battery is the sole starter >cranking bus for normal operations. Accordingly all "starter current >path" wires on Bus 1 are 2 AWG to reduce resistance during engine start. Unless your batteries are in the tail, 2AWG is heavier than necessary but certainly not an electrical performance issue. >By comparison I calculate that the largest wire on Bus 2 could be 8 >AWG for normal operations on that bus including Xfeed operations to >bus 2 (for non cranking operations). If your batteries are up front and the small battery is not intended to crank the engine, then probably 12AWG is sufficient on the aux alternator side . . . >However it occurs to me that if my Bus 1 battery (Odyssey 680) was >struggling to crank the engine in a remore location I would be >tempted to switch on the Xfeed and get whatever current boost I >could from the smaller Odyssey 310 on bus 2. > >My question is this: What size wire do I need to incorporate in >the "starter current" path of bus 2 to facilitate assisted engine >cranking on the odd occasion from the smaller battery. Presumably >bigger would always be better....but what's reasonable. We're talking seconds here. 20A through a 22 AWG wire wont 'burn' the wire. 12AWG or perhaps 10AWG in your aux alternator system is quite adequate to the task even if you find yourself tempted to 'boost' the larger battery's abilities with the smaller battery. But I'll suggest that a ground power system capable of jump-starting from a ground vehicle is a much better hedge against soggy batteries in remote locations. If you plan to frequent remote locations, then keeping a sharp eye on the condition of the larger battery is important. You need to replace it when it drops to 70% or less of capacity . . . this isn't an endurance issue, it's a cranking issue for ventures into higher risk airports. Being able to 'stack' the 7.5 a.h. battery on top of a soggy 17 a.h. battery is poor insurance irrespective of wire sizes. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Latching Relay Redux

From:

"user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>

Date:

Jun 28, 2012

Attached is an untried circuit to reduce contactor current using PWM. The TC648 costs less than $2. It will start up at 100 percent duty cycle to pull in the master contactor. Then it will hold with PWM at reduced current. The progressive transfer type switch will normally be operated in the center position but can be full up to bypass the PWM circuit. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376783#376783 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/contactor_pwm_789.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>

Subject:

Re: Latching Relay Redux

Date:

Jun 28, 2012

Joe As I have mentioned in previous posts, I'm not a big fan of adding complex circuitry to the coil circuit of the master contactor. I think it makes the system less reliable for very little benefit. However, I do like the way the switch is wired in that schematic with the bypass circuit. -Jeff -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of user9253 Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 08:52 Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Latching Relay Redux Attached is an untried circuit to reduce contactor current using PWM. The TC648 costs less than $2. It will start up at 100 percent duty cycle to pull in the master contactor. Then it will hold with PWM at reduced current. The progressive transfer type switch will normally be operated in the center position but can be full up to bypass the PWM circuit. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376783#376783 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/contactor_pwm_789.pdf ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Vern Little" <sprocket@vx-aviation.com>

Subject:

Re: Producing pdf or xps files with ExpressSCH

Date:

Jun 28, 2012

I=99m replying to my own message with an update: Before anyone else comments on my messages, please try to read carefully the original posting. I don=99t need work-arounds, new software downloads or converting hundreds of schematics to a new package. All I need to know is if others have the same problems. Better yet, if they do, please report it to ExpressPCB. They are dragging their feet on acknowledging this bug and until others complain, a fix won=99t happen. Applying pressure to these guys is the only way to correct their indifferent customer service. Yes, their software is free, but it drives a lot of business their way. Thanks! From: Vern Little Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 8:20 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Producing pdf or xps files with ExpressSCH For those of you using ExpressSCH/ExpressPCB, I have been corresponding with technical support at expresspcb.com about a =98printing problem=99. I would like to product .pdf files for multi-sheet ExpressSCH files. When I do this, I get multiple dialogs (one per sheet), and multiple single-page files as the output rather than one file with all sheets. I have confirmed this bug on XP, Vista and Win7 on two different computers. Further investigation gives me the same problem with .xps output (not that anyone cares about this format). I=99ve also found that when I print to a physical printer, multiple print jobs are created in the queue. The physical print issue is not really a problem. I have some schematics that are 20 pages long that I wish to publish and share in pdf format. For example are my electrical system designs for my RV-9A and Harmon Rocket and several designs for electronic gadgets that may be of interest. I=99m curious if anyone else has this problem. An easy way to test it is to try to print as an .xps file, which is supported on all versions of Windows. Thanks, Vern. No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 06/26/12 ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Dick Wildman" <dick(at)minetfiber.com>

Subject:

Re: Engine start on Z14 with different size batteries

Date:

Jun 28, 2012

Question; See below. How is the test performed to see if the battery has at least 70% capacity? Dick Wildman 7S5 > If you plan to frequent remote locations, then keeping a > sharp eye on the condition of the larger battery is > important. You need to replace it when it drops to 70% > or less of capacity . . . this isn't an endurance issue, > it's a cranking issue for ventures into higher risk airports. > > Being able to 'stack' the 7.5 a.h. battery on top of a soggy > 17 a.h. battery is poor insurance irrespective of wire > sizes. > > > Bob . . . > > > ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

Bob Meyers <bobmeyers(at)meyersfamily.org>

Subject:

Re: Latching Relay Redux

Date:

Jun 28, 2012

Just a note, I got one of these Tyco EV200 for use in my Sonex with an Aerovee Volkswagen conversion with a 20 amp alternator. I got mine on eBay for about $60 three years ago and they seem to be in that same ballpark today on ebay. I went from a measured contractor draw of 0.7A to 0.13A. The product is very robust and the amperage savings can almost operate my EFIS. Bob Meyers Flight testing completed, now flying Sonex N982SX. Web Site Index http://N982SX.com ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 28, 2012

Subject:

Re: Engine start on Z14 with different size batteries

From:

Bill <wtrooper(at)gmail.com>

Check out the two page pdf from Bob's web site: Battery Replacement - a plan for throwing in the towel<http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/battest.pdf>. . . a capacity test fixture. Regards - Bill On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Dick Wildman wrote: > dick(at)minetfiber.com> > > Question; > > See below. How is the test performed to see if the battery has at least > 70% capacity? > > Dick Wildman > 7S5 > > > If you plan to frequent remote locations, then keeping a >> sharp eye on the condition of the larger battery is >> important. You need to replace it when it drops to 70% >> or less of capacity . . . this isn't an endurance issue, >> it's a cranking issue for ventures into higher risk airports. >> >> Being able to 'stack' the 7.5 a.h. battery on top of a soggy >> 17 a.h. battery is poor insurance irrespective of wire >> sizes. >> >> >> Bob . . . >> > > >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Dick Wildman" <dick(at)minetfiber.com>

Subject:

Re: Engine start on Z14 with different size batteries

Date:

Jun 28, 2012

Thanks. Dick ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 12:34 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Engine start on Z14 with different size batteries Check out the two page pdf from Bob's web site: Battery Replacement - a plan for throwing in the towel . . . a capacity test fixture. Regards - Bill On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Dick Wildman wrote: Question; See below. How is the test performed to see if the battery has at least 70% capacity? Dick Wildman 7S5 If you plan to frequent remote locations, then keeping a sharp eye on the condition of the larger battery is important. You need to replace it when it drops to 70% or less of capacity . . . this isn't an endurance issue, it's a cranking issue for ventures into higher risk airports. Being able to 'stack' the 7.5 a.h. battery on top of a soggy 17 a.h. battery is poor insurance irrespective of wire sizes. Bob . . . -List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List http://forums.matronics.com le, List Admin. ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 28, 2012

From:

Peter Pengilly <peter(at)sportingaero.com>

Subject:

Resistance fuel senders to 2 gauges

Guys, I've recently re-built my panel and added an EFIS, updated the radios, taken out the Expbus2 and included an endurance bus. As I already had a pair of fuel gauges I thought I would retain them to avoid booting the EFIS when I wanted to find out how much fuel is loaded before flight. I have regular resistance fuel senders and wired the gauges in parallel with the EFIS. I should have realised that the apparent resistance now seen by the fuel gauges has decreased, so their reading decreases when the EFIS is switched on. This isn't a problem for the EFIS as I can calibrate them accordingly. But it would be good if the fuel gauges were more accurate when the EFIS is on. So my question is, is there a straight forward way to share a resistance sender with 2 gauges without impacting the calibration of either gauge? Peter ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 28, 2012

From:

Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net>

Subject:

Re: Engine start on Z14 with different size batteries

Bob Barrows I like your idea. Why not use all the capability available even if the batteries are different sizes. I know I don't have a regular capacity checking schedule for my Z-14 batteries. Flipping a paralleling switch is safer than messing with a boost on the lake or hand propping when all alone in the boonies. Unless you install a ground service plug, carry matching cables, and have a vehicle handy, I can't say I've ever enjoyed boosting an airplane with jumper cables and an open cowl. That little battery can supply over 100 amps if the main battery is very weak or failed so I would favor at least 8awg to get everything I could out of it even if the difference in resistance is small over a short length of wire. Heavier wire tends to mean heavier lower resistance lugs as well. One of those little batteries will start my subaru all by itself in the summer although mine do auto parallel during cranking. If the batteries and xfeed contactor are beside each other like mine are there isn't much of a weight penalty. Sure #4 is overkill but I used it mainly because I already had #4 welding cable on hand for the run up to the starter as well as the lugs and a method of installing them. It also lets me compare battery cranking current by disconnecting them one at a time and cranking the engine with the ignition off. Ken (Z-14 with two 8ah batteries and liking it) On 28/06/2012 11:47 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > At 04:40 AM 6/28/2012, you wrote: > >> In my architecture Bus 1 with the big battery is the sole starter >> cranking bus for normal operations. Accordingly all "starter current >> path" wires on Bus 1 are 2 AWG to reduce resistance during engine start. > > Unless your batteries are in the tail, 2AWG is heavier > than necessary but certainly not an electrical performance > issue. > >> By comparison I calculate that the largest wire on Bus 2 could be 8 >> AWG for normal operations on that bus including Xfeed operations to >> bus 2 (for non cranking operations). > > If your batteries are up front and the small battery > is not intended to crank the engine, then probably 12AWG > is sufficient on the aux alternator side . . . > > >> However it occurs to me that if my Bus 1 battery (Odyssey 680) was >> struggling to crank the engine in a remore location I would be tempted >> to switch on the Xfeed and get whatever current boost I could from the >> smaller Odyssey 310 on bus 2. >> >> My question is this: What size wire do I need to incorporate in the >> "starter current" path of bus 2 to facilitate assisted engine cranking >> on the odd occasion from the smaller battery. Presumably bigger would >> always be better....but what's reasonable. > > We're talking seconds here. 20A through a 22 AWG wire > wont 'burn' the wire. 12AWG or perhaps 10AWG in your aux > alternator system is quite adequate to the task even > if you find yourself tempted to 'boost' the larger battery's > abilities with the smaller battery. But I'll suggest that > a ground power system capable of jump-starting from a > ground vehicle is a much better hedge against soggy batteries > in remote locations. > > If you plan to frequent remote locations, then keeping a > sharp eye on the condition of the larger battery is > important. You need to replace it when it drops to 70% > or less of capacity . . . this isn't an endurance issue, > it's a cranking issue for ventures into higher risk airports. > > Being able to 'stack' the 7.5 a.h. battery on top of a soggy > 17 a.h. battery is poor insurance irrespective of wire > sizes. > > > Bob . . . > ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 28, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: Resistance fuel senders to 2 gauges

At 05:13 PM 6/28/2012, you wrote: Guys, I've recently re-built my panel and added an EFIS, updated the radios, taken out the Expbus2 and included an endurance bus. As I already had a pair of fuel gauges I thought I would retain them to avoid booting the EFIS when I wanted to find out how much fuel is loaded before flight. I have regular resistance fuel senders and wired the gauges in parallel with the EFIS. I should have realised that the apparent resistance now seen by the fuel gauges has decreased, so their reading decreases when the EFIS is switched on. This isn't a problem for the EFIS as I can calibrate them accordingly. But it would be good if the fuel gauges were more accurate when the EFIS is on. So my question is, is there a straight forward way to share a resistance sender with 2 gauges without impacting the calibration of either gauge? Variable resistor transducers must be "powered up" by their mated instrument. When you tie two resistance measurement instruments onto the same sensor, their "power up biases" add together and upsets the readings of both. What you'll need to do is tell the EFIS to work on a variable VOLTAGE input and turn off it's internal excitation of the remote sensor. Then allow the original instrument to POWER the transducer. Finally teach the EFIS how to read it. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

MOV on switch contacts?

From:

"gregmchugh" <gregmchugh(at)aol.com>

Date:

Jun 29, 2012

Bob, I notice on some of the documents from AeroElectric there is a Metal Oxide Varistor across the switch contacts on some of the examples of switches controlling battery contractors but they are not shown on other examples. I was wondering when the addition of a MOV needed / recommended, where are they placed when used, and what specific part is recommended? I don't recall seeing them used in any other of the examples but I have seen the use of diodes on the battery contactors to suppress transients. Are the MOV's and diodes alternate options for transient suppression? I picked up a couple of the Tyco Kilovac EV200 contactors on eBay for $60 each that I am planning to use in my system and my understanding is that they do not need any external protection for transients. I am planning on a standard Odyssey main battery and an aux battery (probably a lightweight Lithium Iron battery from Shorai designed for engine cranking). This is a motor glider application so the engine will be off for long periods of time. I will have the main battery online powering the system with the aux battery offline during gliding in reserve in case the main battery is allowed to drain too far or if there is a main battery problem. Backup power for engine restart seems like a prudent approach even though one should always be planning for the possibility that the engine cannot be restarted in a motor glider with a safe alternate landing location available at all times. Greg McHugh Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376852#376852 ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 29, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: MOV on switch contacts?

At 12:39 PM 6/29/2012, you wrote: Bob, I notice on some of the documents from AeroElectric there is a Metal Oxide Varistor across the switch contacts on some of the examples of switches controlling battery contractors but they are not shown on other examples. I was wondering when the addition of a MOV needed / recommended, where are they placed when used, and what specific part is recommended? I don't recall seeing them used in any other of the examples but I have seen the use of diodes on the battery contactors to suppress transients. Are the MOV's and diodes alternate options for transient suppression? Those were on the original Z-figures. In fact, I went to some pains to acquire MOV transient suppressors that were rated to conduct at low voltages characteristic of DC systems in vehicles. The rationale for using them was based on the fact that they are bi-directional, no polarity. The builder couldn't put them in wrong. But they were more expensive than a diode, much harder to find in low voltage ratings and I eventually changed my mind about suggesting them. I picked up a couple of the Tyco Kilovac EV200 contactors on eBay for $60 each that I am planning to use in my system and my understanding is that they do not need any external protection for transients. I am planning on a standard Odyssey main battery and an aux battery (probably a lightweight Lithium Iron battery from Shorai designed for engine cranking). This is a motor glider application so the engine will be off for long periods of time. I will have the main battery online powering the system with the aux battery offline during gliding in reserve in case the main battery is allowed to drain too far or if there is a main battery problem. Backup power for engine restart seems like a prudent approach even though one should always be planning for the possibility that the engine cannot be restarted in a motor glider with a safe alternate landing location available at all times. Okay. Are you aware of the discussion we had a few months ago about the LiFe battery fire at Cessna . . . and the fact that Cessna withdrew their highly vaunted LiFe battery from the market? I'm not suggesting that you should not be doing what you're planning . . . just making sure you've got all the data. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 29, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: MOV on switch contacts?

P.S. I picked up a couple of the Tyco Kilovac EV200 contactors on eBay for $60 each that I am planning to use in my system and my understanding is that they do not need any external protection for transients. Not a big deal but be aware that the EV200 has been noted to be a low frequency noise generator in the 200 Hz range. When in the duty-cycle limited hold mode, it's axiomatic that artifacts of that switching frequency will show up on wires that come out of the product. I've had a couple builders not that they could hear this noise on some intercom installations. I don't think it was loud enough to be heard in flight but it was strong enough to be noteworthy during ground tests. I'd be interested in your observations and experience . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 29, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Not all USB ports are what they seem

Just smoked a rechargeable MP3 player by attempting to power it up with what appeared to be a cigar lighter to USB power port power adapter. After the smoke cleared, I opened the critter up to find that somebody thought it was a good idea to use this ubiquitous connector for some kind of 12V application too. Emacs! Just a heads-up . . . when in doubt check it out. Some electro- whizzies one might wish to power up from such a device could be a whole lot more expensive than my $29 mp3 player! Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 29, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Mother nature is a stern teacher . . .

An entire Kansas family was killed a few weeks ago as the result a Pilatus turboprop crash in FL. Here's the talking-head, news-drivel on the event . . . full of inaccuracies http://tinyurl.com/7j2vpuc A clearer picture of what happened can be accessed here. . . http://tinyurl.com/86g5pgz This accident is noteworthy because of the amount of detail available. It was daytime and watched/recorded on radar. Numerous witnesses were interviewed and I think one even got some video. At first blush this appears to be a weather related in-flight break-up. If any of you have ever spent much time in FL, you'll know how spectacular the convective activity can be. But those effects which produce really amazing lighting shows on the ground are the same effects that chew up airplanes and spits them out in pieces. I expect investigation of the this "stormy noon day event" to be rich with data. I'll be tracking this event for the final report. I may order the blue-ribbon report if one is produced. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: MOV on switch contacts?

From:

"gregmchugh" <gregmchugh(at)aol.com>

Date:

Jun 29, 2012

Bob, Thanks for the info. I recall a story of a Cessna fire related to ground power and a Lithium Ion battery and then an FAA AD for these batteries, but I was not aware of a fire involving a Lithium Iron Phosphate battery. Was this also Cessna approved battery? Greg McHugh Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376877#376877 ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 29, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: MOV on switch contacts?

At 06:07 PM 6/29/2012, you wrote: > >Bob, > >Thanks for the info. I recall a story of a Cessna fire related to ground >power and a Lithium Ion battery and then an FAA AD for these batteries, >but I was not aware of a fire involving a Lithium Iron Phosphate battery. >Was this also Cessna approved battery? Yes. It almost got 'covered' with a mandatory service bulletin but it seems a small number of the airplanes fielded with LiFe batteries were out of the country. Hence the A/D to make sure they were taken care of. I've not heard whether the LiFe effort will be resumed. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Resistance fuel senders to 2 gauges

From:

"racerjerry" <gki(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us>

Date:

Jun 30, 2012

DPDT toggle switch from sender? -------- Jerry King Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376901#376901 ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

National Electronics Museum in Baltimore

From:

Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com>

Date:

Jun 30, 2012

I just spent a few hours going through the National Electronics Museum, very close to the BWI airport. The exhibits are primarily about military and government electronics like radar, communications, navigation systems, and countermeasures. Seeing such complex and antique systems really puts homebuilt wiring in perspective! We really have it easy. The exhibits also show what folks have been able to achieve in the last 100+ years, which is an alarming amount. I would highly recommend a visit for anyone who is feeling overwhelmed with light plane avionics and wiring. You'll leave with a proverbial kick in the pants of motivation after seeing how much our human predecessors were able to overcome, sometimes under extreme adversity. One exhibit left me thinking, "those guys built a terrain following radar for the B-52. Why haven't I finished my airplane again?" ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jun 30, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: National Electronics Museum in Baltimore

I would highly recommend a visit for anyone who is feeling overwhelmed with light plane avionics and wiring. You'll leave with a proverbial kick in the pants of motivation after seeing how much our human predecessors were able to overcome, sometimes under extreme adversity. One exhibit left me thinking, "those guys built a terrain following radar for the B-52. Why haven't I finished my airplane again?" Because you don't have a cast of thousands and a production budget of $billions$. Yeah, all that stuff is pretty mind bending. I spent too short a time in the Smithsonian Museum of Science and Industry about 35 years ago. I remember marveling at early examples of particle accelerators, cloud chambers, and a SMALL chunk of the 50 ton, 18,000 vacuum tube ENIAC computer. I remember thinking about how much of that stuff looked like it was built in somebody's garage . . . indeed it was. You couldn't pull a catalog off the shelf and order one for any amount of money, nor could anyone tell you exactly how to build one. You whipped out your hammer, saws, wrenches and soldering irons and went at it . . . with stuff you got from the hardware store. The only computer I'd personally had contact with before the Smithsonian was a cast-off device offered to Wichita University when my yet to be friend and mentor was dean of engineering. He needed to raise $5000 in a hurry to transport the carcass to Wichita, built and air-conditioned space to house it and get it set up. Budgets were set two years out and the present year's budget didn't have any surplus. He called Olive Ann Beech and explained his problem. Ms. Beech threw a party at her house the next weekend and Monday morning, she walked into Ken Razak's office and turned out her purse on his desk. Out fell the checks and cash necessary to get the computer moved to Wichita. I was a junior in H.S. that year . . . a friend of mine who was a senior and math whiz was already taking college courses at the university. He managed to get a time slot on the new acquisition (I think it was like 3 a.m.) where he was allowed to run his peg-board program on the computer. I think he had to go back another time to finish the experiment after discovering some bugs. I remember my physics teacher showing us two pieces of paper on which Ralph had taught the computer to type out 6 columns of numbers like the log tables in our math books. On the left column were numbers 1 to 100. The next five columns were the inverse, square, square root, cube and cube root of the number in the first column. Pretty heady stuff in 1960! Speaking of the B52, I had to take a class in "Wirebooks 101" at Boeing to learn how to trace the electron pipes around the airplane. No two airplanes were wired exactly alike. Each airplane left he factory with a set of ON-BOARD wire books. They were 8-1/2 x 11 inch sheets in 12 or 13 volumes about 6" thick. The organization of those things was amazing. You could pick any wire, read the number stamped on it, go to the book and find out everything you needed to know about it even if it ran across multiple pages and volumes in the set. That 100 plus pounds of paper could now be fitted into a palm-top or simply wi-fi connected to an Ipad. Yes, creatures that walk around on two legs and consume resources on the planet are demonstrably capable of some amazing things . . . if they can just be convinced not to get into lethal arguments! Hope to take my grandson on a trip 'back east' . . . got a couple of weeks of things to show him . . . not the least of which is Voyager hanging in the lobby of the Air and Space unit. It's got two B&C regulators in it. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jul 01, 2012

From:

Peter Pengilly <peter(at)sportingaero.com>

Subject:

KLX-135A NMEA output

Guys, I have an old KLX-135A that works fine, I'm trying to hook it up to an AFS EFIS I have just installed. THE KLX manual implies it outputs to a NMEA stream, "The RS232 output is designed to interface with certain ARTEX ELTs and certain Moving Map dispalys", but does not give any more details. Does anyone know the output format from a KLX-135A, such as baud rate? Regards, Peter ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jul 01, 2012

From:

Glen Matejcek <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net>

Subject:

NASM

.....Hope to take my grandson on a trip 'back east' . . . got a couple of weeks of things to show him . . . not the least of which is Voyager hanging in the lobby of the Air and Space unit. It's got two B&C regulators in it....... I've had that pleasure several times, and I always stop and grin. Thanks for all you do for us, Bob! Glen Matejcek ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jul 01, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: KLX-135A NMEA output

At 04:01 AM 7/1/2012, you wrote: Guys, I have an old KLX-135A that works fine, I'm trying to hook it up to an AFS EFIS I have just installed. THE KLX manual implies it outputs to a NMEA stream, "The RS232 output is designed to interface with certain ARTEX ELTs and certain Moving Map dispalys", but does not give any more details. Does anyone know the output format from a KLX-135A, such as baud rate? Regards, Peter NMEA-183 is the marine counterpart to aviation's ARINC-425. These conventions describe a family of communications protocols that cover a wide range of applications for having electro-whizzies talk and listen to each other on a common 'party line' bus. There's a compendium of NMEA-183 articles and documents that will probably offer a whole lot more than you ever wanted to know about NMEA-183 . . . http://tinyurl.com/6pzlp8n The short answer is that the prevalent convention for GPS (and at one time, LORAN) receivers to speak to things like EFIS, autopilots, moving maps and the like is contained in one or two standard 'sentences' out of many described in the above documents. As a 'talker', your GPS receiver will, when queried, spit out a digital sentence that begins with the characters $GP followed by an identifier and a string of data consistent with that identifier. The standard baud rate is 4800 using 8-bit protocols consistent with many other communications conventions like RS232, RS422, etc. etc. As a general rule, all aviation specific GPS receivers will output one or two of the sentences as talkers which all aviation specific listeners will watch for, capture and parse out accordingly. Does your EFIS have a setup screen that asks questions about your GPS data source? If so, what are the questions? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jul 01, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: KLX-135A NMEA output

> >Does anyone know the output format from a KLX-135A, such as baud rate? here's some more data you may find sufficiently informative to your task: http://tinyurl.com/6vkrt85 Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: OS Wig-Wag Project

From:

"gregmchugh" <gregmchugh(at)aol.com>

Date:

Jul 01, 2012

Bob, I have a new version of the software that implements the new control logic and can flash it into a PIC and send it along. I tested it on a breadboard and it seems to be working fine. I need to change the sample board you sent to have individual switches on the two control lines which I will probably do sometime this week and then I will test the new version on that board. In any case I will be able to send a new PIC chip along to you this week that has the new logic that you can use for your testing. Greg McHugh Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=376989#376989 ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jul 01, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: OS Wig-Wag Project

>In any case I will be able to >send a new PIC chip along to you this week that has the >new logic that you can use for your testing. > >Greg McHugh Cool! I'll stuff another board here and confirm. Next are the temperature rise studies to see just how much current the present board configuration should be rated for. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jul 01, 2012

From:

Peter Pengilly <peter(at)sportingaero.com>

Subject:

Re: Resistance fuel senders to 2 gauges

Of course, the large assumption I made was that the EFIS and the fuel gauges operate at the same voltage - which they do not ... So now I have a pair of u/s fuel gauging circuits within the EFIS which will have to be returned to the manufacturer for repair. I guess the moral is when you think you are being really smart, you have probably missed something and are about to be really dumb. Peter On 29/06/2012 03:50, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > At 05:13 PM 6/28/2012, you wrote: > > > Guys, > > I've recently re-built my panel and added an EFIS, updated the radios, > taken out the Expbus2 and included an endurance bus. As I already had > a pair of fuel gauges I thought I would retain them to avoid booting > the EFIS when I wanted to find out how much fuel is loaded before > flight. I have regular resistance fuel senders and wired the gauges in > parallel with the EFIS. I should have realised that the apparent > resistance now seen by the fuel gauges has decreased, so their reading > decreases when the EFIS is switched on. This isn't a problem for the > EFIS as I can calibrate them accordingly. But it would be good if the > fuel gauges were more accurate when the EFIS is on. > > So my question is, is there a straight forward way to share a > resistance sender with 2 gauges without impacting the calibration of > either gauge? > > Variable resistor transducers must be "powered up" > by their mated instrument. When you tie two resistance > measurement instruments onto the same sensor, their > "power up biases" add together and upsets the readings > of both. > > What you'll need to do is tell the EFIS to work on > a variable VOLTAGE input and turn off it's internal > excitation of the remote sensor. Then allow the > original instrument to POWER the transducer. Finally > teach the EFIS how to read it. > > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jul 01, 2012

From:

Paul Millner <millner(at)me.com>

Subject:

Re: Resistance fuel senders to 2 gauges

>> DPDT toggle switch from sender? Probably not very good human factors to get used to looking at a fuel gage that reads "empty" as being normal... Paul ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: OS Wig-Wag Project

From:

"gregmchugh" <gregmchugh(at)aol.com>

Date:

Jul 02, 2012

Bob, I mailed the new PIC chip off today. Here is the source code for this version with the new control logic using separate switches for each lamp. Greg McHugh Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=377103#377103 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/wigwag_555.c ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jul 02, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Re: OS Wig-Wag Project

At 04:12 PM 7/2/2012, you wrote: > >Bob, > >I mailed the new PIC chip off today. Here is the source code for this >version with the new control logic using separate switches for each >lamp. > >Greg McHugh Just out of curiosity, how much memory did it take of the total to make it play? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jul 03, 2012

From:

"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

Subject:

Old hangar tales . . .

-------------------- Original Query to Garmin ------------------- Good morning, By way of introduction, I'm an electrical engineer retired from a 45 year career in aviation related electrics and electronics. My last 13-year stint was with Hawker-Beechcraft where most of my job focused on environmental robustness and DO-160 certification issues. The last 5 years at HBC included the duties of Lead Subject Matter Expert for Electrical Systems. A client of mine forwarded an email from your address wherein it was suggested that certain 'spikes' present on the electrical system during engine cranking might be damaging to your SL-40 product. I was surprised by this assertion for two reasons: (1) DO-160 Qualification Protocols have evolved over the last 50+ years to assist designers and manufacturers in the production of products immune to the worst case stresses that one might expect on the DC power system of an airplane (or any other vehicle). (2) In years of watching instrumented DC power conditions under all operating conditions on everything from Cessna 150s through the Hawker 800, I've never had occasion to capture a transient event (other than gross over-voltage) that would offer a threat to an artfully crafted and qualified piece of avionics. During engine cranking, the bus is remarkably free of transients that exceed energy levels to which every qualified device is subjected during DO-160 testing. The assertion made in your email to my client gives one pause to wonder if Garmin is (1) aware of some design deficiency that would make the product vulnerable to normal and expected DC bus transients or (2) some new and heretofore undiscovered threat has been identified that exceeds DO-160 qualification requirements. I've been teaching my students that we no longer need be concerned about such matters for devices qualified to DO-160. Indeed, I've either designed or been cognizant of dozens of 'fragile', micro-processor based devices which are connected to the ship's main bus under all conditions including engine cranking. None of these devices requires extra-ordinary protection for start-up transients. I'm curious about differences in the SL-40 that prompts Garmin to assert some value in disconnecting the radio during engine cranking. The idea is contrary to my own understanding of the physics involved and argues with what I have been teaching in my classes for the last 25 years. If I'm in error, I'd really need to be aware of any enlightenment one of your engineers might offer. Thanks! Kindest regards, Robert L. Nuckolls, III AeroElectric Connection P.O. Box 130 Medicine Lodge, Kansas 67104 (316)209-7528 --------------- Response received 7-3-12 ------------ Service Record Details Service Record Number: 88142 Subject: Service Record Number 87343 Last update: 07/02/2012 08:03:23 Name: Phone: Email: nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com Brief description of the problem: It is true that system is designed to operate through all DO-160 testing However I would recommendd not running the radio during engine start unless you need to for some other requirement. During engine start you typically want as much battery power available to the starter motor as possible, so unless you need the radio at that time, it make more sense to turn it off. Cranking the engine reduces the buss voltage significantly; in some extremes, this could cause a brown out condition, which causes the radio to reset This is not a big deal since the boot time is about one second in the SL40. It is not likely that any failure of the system could be traced back to an odd voltage spike, hence if the system were under warranty Garmin would pay to repair it, but if it was out of warranty the customer would need to pay that bill. This is similar to adding a FAN to some of the other Garmin equipment, like the GTX330 transponder. It is not required, but it is a good idea. If any of the above information is incorrect, please reply to this email with corrected contact information. You may also contact Garmin Aviation Product Support at 866-739-5687 and provide the information to the agent who assists you. For the latest news about Garmin products and services, please visit our Web site at www.garmin.com. ----------------- Commentary ------------------- I was initially tempted to engage this writer in further conversation but really don't have time for it. Garmin's response is typical of exchanges I've had with avionics OEMs in years gone by, "Yeah, we're fully DO-160 compliant but there's nothing like the belt/suspenders approach to protecting one's radios from the "odd voltage spike". To date, none were willing/able to come forward with an origin, amplitude, duration, or source impedance for any "odd voltage spike" that would (1) exceed DO-160 requirements or (2) justify negating a warranty. Similarly, I've been aware anecdotally of dozens of claims by some bench technicians who have asserted that "a spike got it" but without offering a clue as to where that spike came from and just how large it had to be to trash the radio. 'nuf said Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: OS Wig-Wag Project

From:

"gregmchugh" <gregmchugh(at)aol.com>

Date:

Jul 03, 2012

Bob, Below is the memory usage summary. As shown, the PRO compiler ($1195) provides optimization compared to the free LITE version I am using. Currently I am using 22.9% of the 2K bytes of program memory and 39% of the 128 bytes of data memory. Not using any of the 256 bytes of EEPROM memory at the moment. Lots of ways to reduce memory usage if you get near the limit but we probably will not get near it for most of the types of applications we have discussed so far. Greg McHugh ------------------------------------- Memory Summary: Program space used 1D4h ( 468) of 800h words ( 22.9%) Data space used 32h ( 50) of 80h bytes ( 39.1%) EEPROM space used 0h ( 0) of 100h bytes ( 0.0%) Configuration bits used 1h ( 1) of 1h word (100.0%) ID Location space used 0h ( 0) of 4h bytes ( 0.0%) Running this compiler in PRO mode, with Omniscient Code Generation enabled, produces code which is typically 40% smaller than in Lite mode. The HI-TECH C PRO compiler output for this code could be 187 words smaller. -------------------------------- Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=377157#377157 ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jul 03, 2012

Subject:

Re: Old hangar tales . . .

From:

Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com>

Bob, It seems it's still easy to baffle with BS rather than blind with brilliance. Garmin's answer is pretty much what I used to get when I questioned some edict by my Grandmother, "Because I said so, that's why". Rick Girard On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > -------------------- Original Query to Garmin ------------------- > > Good morning, > > By way of introduction, I'm an electrical engineer retired > from a 45 year career in aviation related electrics and > electronics. My last 13-year stint was with Hawker-Beechcraft > where most of my job focused on environmental robustness and > DO-160 certification issues. The last 5 years at HBC included > the duties of Lead Subject Matter Expert for Electrical Systems. > > A client of mine forwarded an email from your address wherein > it was suggested that certain 'spikes' present on the electrical > system during engine cranking might be damaging to your SL-40 > product. > > I was surprised by this assertion for two reasons: > > (1) DO-160 Qualification Protocols have evolved over the last 50+ > years to assist designers and manufacturers in the production > of products immune to the worst case stresses that one might > expect on the DC power system of an airplane (or any other vehicle). > > (2) In years of watching instrumented DC power conditions under > all operating conditions on everything from Cessna 150s through > the Hawker 800, I've never had occasion to capture a transient event > (other than gross over-voltage) that would offer a threat > to an artfully crafted and qualified piece of avionics. During > engine cranking, the bus is remarkably free of transients that > exceed energy levels to which every qualified device is subjected > during DO-160 testing. > > The assertion made in your email to my client gives one pause > to wonder if Garmin is (1) aware of some design deficiency that would > make the product vulnerable to normal and expected DC bus transients > or (2) some new and heretofore undiscovered threat has been identified > that exceeds DO-160 qualification requirements. > > I've been teaching my students that we no longer need be > concerned about such matters for devices qualified to DO-160. > Indeed, I've either designed or been cognizant of dozens of > 'fragile', micro-processor based devices which are connected > to the ship's main bus under all conditions including > engine cranking. None of these devices requires extra-ordinary > protection for start-up transients. I'm curious about differences > in the SL-40 that prompts Garmin to assert some value in > disconnecting the radio during engine cranking. > > The idea is contrary to my own understanding of the physics > involved and argues with what I have been teaching in my > classes for the last 25 years. If I'm in error, I'd really > need to be aware of any enlightenment one of your engineers > might offer. Thanks! > > Kindest regards, > > Robert L. Nuckolls, III > AeroElectric Connection > P.O. Box 130 > Medicine Lodge, Kansas 67104 > > (316)209-7528 > > --------------- Response received 7-3-12 ------------ > > > Service Record Details > Service Record Number: 88142 > Subject: Service Record Number 87343 > Last update: 07/02/2012 08:03:23 > Name: > Phone: > Email: nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com > > Brief description of the problem: > > It is true that system is designed to operate through all DO-160 testing > However I would recommendd not running the radio during engine start unless > you need to for some other requirement. > > During engine start you typically want as much battery power available to > the starter motor as possible, so unless you need the radio at that time, > it make more sense to turn it off. > > Cranking the engine reduces the buss voltage significantly; in some > extremes, this could cause a brown out condition, which causes the radio to > reset This is not a big deal since the boot time is about one second in > the SL40. > > It is not likely that any failure of the system could be traced back to an > odd voltage spike, hence if the system were under warranty Garmin would pay > to repair it, but if it was out of warranty the customer would need to pay > that bill. > > This is similar to adding a FAN to some of the other Garmin equipment, > like the GTX330 transponder. It is not required, but it is a good idea. > > If any of the above information is incorrect, please reply to this email > with corrected contact information. You may also contact Garmin Aviation > Product Support at 866-739-5687 and provide the information to the agent > who assists you. For the latest news about Garmin products and services, > please visit our Web site at www.garmin.com. > > ----------------- Commentary ------------------- > > I was initially tempted to engage this writer in further > conversation but really don't have time for it. Garmin's > response is typical of exchanges I've had with avionics > OEMs in years gone by, "Yeah, we're fully DO-160 compliant > but there's nothing like the belt/suspenders approach to > protecting one's radios from the "odd voltage spike". > > To date, none were willing/able to come forward with an > origin, amplitude, duration, or source impedance for any > "odd voltage spike" that would (1) exceed DO-160 requirements > or (2) justify negating a warranty. > > Similarly, I've been aware anecdotally of dozens of claims > by some bench technicians who have asserted that "a spike > got it" but without offering a clue as to where that spike > came from and just how large it had to be to trash the > radio. > > 'nuf said > > Bob . . . > > * > > * > > -- Zulu Delta Mk IIIC Thanks, Homer GBYM It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy. - Groucho Marx ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>

Subject:

Old hangar tales . . .

Date:

Jul 03, 2012

These non-answer CYA responses are kind of frustrating. It seems as though these answers get filtered thru the legal dept before getting to us - thus omitting the details we are seeking. We all know that there are several engineers on their staff who designed the power supplies and have intimate knowledge of this subject. Why can't we get a response from one of them. Anecdote: I recently queried a manufacturer regarding performance of one of their products in a specific environment (I'm being deliberately vague). The person on the other end of the phone kept saying "we have not tested for that condition". This person was obviously technical in nature, and I got the feeling that he knew more info but was restricted by corporate policy from giving me anything more than the canned response. Frustrating! Referring back to the previous topic "What's wrong w/ this circuit..". It occurs to me that using isolation diodes in that manner would help mitigate "brown-out" condition on the main bus. If you are cranking w/ Batt A and feeding the bus w/ both Batts A & B, the Batt B would be able to maintain bus voltage when Batt A's voltage sags during crank. Food for thought. _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Girard Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 10:43 Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Old hangar tales . . . Bob, It seems it's still easy to baffle with BS rather than blind with brilliance. Garmin's answer is pretty much what I used to get when I questioned some edict by my Grandmother, "Because I said so, that's why". Rick Girard On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: -------------------- Original Query to Garmin ------------------- Good morning, By way of introduction, I'm an electrical engineer retired from a 45 year career in aviation related electrics and electronics. My last 13-year stint was with Hawker-Beechcraft where most of my job focused on environmental robustness and DO-160 certification issues. The last 5 years at HBC included the duties of Lead Subject Matter Expert for Electrical Systems. A client of mine forwarded an email from your address wherein it was suggested that certain 'spikes' present on the electrical system during engine cranking might be damaging to your SL-40 product. I was surprised by this assertion for two reasons: (1) DO-160 Qualification Protocols have evolved over the last 50+ years to assist designers and manufacturers in the production of products immune to the worst case stresses that one might expect on the DC power system of an airplane (or any other vehicle). (2) In years of watching instrumented DC power conditions under all operating conditions on everything from Cessna 150s through the Hawker 800, I've never had occasion to capture a transient event (other than gross over-voltage) that would offer a threat to an artfully crafted and qualified piece of avionics. During engine cranking, the bus is remarkably free of transients that exceed energy levels to which every qualified device is subjected during DO-160 testing. The assertion made in your email to my client gives one pause to wonder if Garmin is (1) aware of some design deficiency that would make the product vulnerable to normal and expected DC bus transients or (2) some new and heretofore undiscovered threat has been identified that exceeds DO-160 qualification requirements. I've been teaching my students that we no longer need be concerned about such matters for devices qualified to DO-160. Indeed, I've either designed or been cognizant of dozens of 'fragile', micro-processor based devices which are connected to the ship's main bus under all conditions including engine cranking. None of these devices requires extra-ordinary protection for start-up transients. I'm curious about differences in the SL-40 that prompts Garmin to assert some value in disconnecting the radio during engine cranking. The idea is contrary to my own understanding of the physics involved and argues with what I have been teaching in my classes for the last 25 years. If I'm in error, I'd really need to be aware of any enlightenment one of your engineers might offer. Thanks! Kindest regards, Robert L. Nuckolls, III AeroElectric Connection P.O. Box 130 Medicine Lodge, Kansas 67104 (316)209-7528 --------------- Response received 7-3-12 ------------ Service Record Details Service Record Number: 88142 Subject: Service Record Number 87343 Last update: 07/02/2012 08:03:23 Name: Phone: Email: nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com Brief description of the problem: It is true that system is designed to operate through all DO-160 testing However I would recommendd not running the radio during engine start unless you need to for some other requirement. During engine start you typically want as much battery power available to the starter motor as possible, so unless you need the radio at that time, it make more sense to turn it off. Cranking the engine reduces the buss voltage significantly; in some extremes, this could cause a brown out condition, which causes the radio to reset This is not a big deal since the boot time is about one second in the SL40. It is not likely that any failure of the system could be traced back to an odd voltage spike, hence if the system were under warranty Garmin would pay to repair it, but if it was out of warranty the customer would need to pay that bill. This is similar to adding a FAN to some of the other Garmin equipment, like the GTX330 transponder. It is not required, but it is a good idea. If any of the above information is incorrect, please reply to this email with corrected contact information. You may also contact Garmin Aviation Product Support at 866-739-5687 and provide the information to the agent who assists you. For the latest news about Garmin products and services, please visit our Web site at www.garmin.com <http://www.garmin.com/> . ----------------- Commentary ------------------- I was initially tempted to engage this writer in further conversation but really don't have time for it. Garmin's response is typical of exchanges I've had with avionics OEMs in years gone by, "Yeah, we're fully DO-160 compliant but there's nothing like the belt/suspenders approach to protecting one's radios from the "odd voltage spike". To date, none were willing/able to come forward with an origin, amplitude, duration, or source impedance for any "odd voltage spike" that would (1) exceed DO-160 requirements or (2) justify negating a warranty. Similarly, I've been aware anecdotally of dozens of claims by some bench technicians who have asserted that "a spike got it" but without offering a clue as to where that spike came from and just how large it had to be to trash the radio. 'nuf said Bob . . . ist" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List tp://forums.matronics.com _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution -- Zulu Delta Mk IIIC Thanks, Homer GBYM It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy. - Groucho Marx No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>

Subject:

GPS Database Updates Availability

Date:

Jul 03, 2012

I'm considering buying a used Garmin GNC-300XL GPS/Comm. I want to know how long database updates will be available for that model. I emailed Garmin and they said that since Jeppesen handles the Database Subscriptions that I should contact them. I just spoke w/ Jeppsen and you'll never guess what they said. Yup, you guessed it! Jeppesen said it was up to Garmin to decide how long to support any given unit. I pushed a little harder and was told that Jeppesen supplies the Master database to Garmin & other manufacturers. Each manufacturer then messages that data into whatever format their hardware needs. Then the manufacturer provides the specially-formatted file to Jeppesen for use with Jeppesen's subscription service. I had another service rep @ Jeppesen tell me that there is no official policy on sun-setting databases and that it was essentially a decision that is made year-to-year based upon demand. Two versions of the Truth - go to love it! 3 Questions: 1. What do people who own them think of the 300XL? 2. Does anyone have any better info on the availability of database updates? (I can't be the only one with this question) 3. Does anyone have an idea of how many 300XLs were sold? ( this info might help us make our own projections as to availability) Jeff Luckey ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)bellsouth.net>

Subject:

GPS Database Updates Availability

Date:

Jul 03, 2012

I have a KMD 150 made by Bendix King. It is a moving map with GPS in it. The most recent database update was in Feb of 2005! So this MFD has not been supported for a long time! This brings up a question that I hope someone on the list can answer. I have this KMD 150 moving map and also the Garmin GNS430W. The KMD can be used with either the internal GPS or with an external GPS. Both Honeywell and Garmin agree that the KMD should be able to read the GNS, however, I have been unable to make this happen. The KMD works fine if I use the internal GPS, but if I switch it to external it can not read the GNS. I have contacted both Garmin and Honeywell. Garmin thinks it is a Honeywell problem and Honeywell, well, they just don't seem to care. Probably because they don't really support the unit anymore. I would really like to have the KMD get its input from the GNS430W because it is still being updated. Has anyone on the list integrated these two devices before or can tell me how to do it? I can provide the install manual for both units if anyone would need to look at them. Bill B _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Luckey Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 5:35 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: GPS Database Updates Availability I'm considering buying a used Garmin GNC-300XL GPS/Comm. I want to know how long database updates will be available for that model. I emailed Garmin and they said that since Jeppesen handles the Database Subscriptions that I should contact them. I just spoke w/ Jeppsen and you'll never guess what they said. Yup, you guessed it! Jeppesen said it was up to Garmin to decide how long to support any given unit. I pushed a little harder and was told that Jeppesen supplies the Master database to Garmin & other manufacturers. Each manufacturer then messages that data into whatever format their hardware needs. Then the manufacturer provides the specially-formatted file to Jeppesen for use with Jeppesen's subscription service. I had another service rep @ Jeppesen tell me that there is no official policy on sun-setting databases and that it was essentially a decision that is made year-to-year based upon demand. Two versions of the Truth - go to love it! 3 Questions: 1. What do people who own them think of the 300XL? 2. Does anyone have any better info on the availability of database updates? (I can't be the only one with this question) 3. Does anyone have an idea of how many 300XLs were sold? ( this info might help us make our own projections as to availability) Jeff Luckey ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jul 03, 2012

From:

Jeff Page <jpx(at)qenesis.com>

Subject:

Re: Latching Relay Redux

Joe, Not shown in your diagram is the spike shunting diode on the contactor to protect the FET. Jeff Page Dream Aircraft Tundra #10 > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Latching Relay Redux > From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com> > > Attached is an untried circuit to reduce contactor current using PWM. > The TC648 costs less than $2. It will start up at 100 percent duty > cycle to pull > in the master contactor. Then it will hold with PWM at reduced current. The > progressive transfer type switch will normally be operated in the > center position > but can be full up to bypass the PWM circuit. > Joe > > -------- > Joe Gores ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

BobsV35B(at)aol.com

Date:

Jul 03, 2012

Subject:

Re: GPS Database Updates Availability

Good Afternoon Jeff, There is no way I can give you an answer as to how long the database will be available, but I will try to answer a few of your questions. I have a GNC300XL installed and find that it works very well. It IS IFR approvable. No idea how many were built, but I do see quite a few around. Chances are you will have to have some sort of heading resolver and some sort of panel annunciator, but that is not certain. Each FAA FSDO is a Fiefdom unto itself and they vary widely on their interpretations of the applicable regulations. On top of that, most avionics shops have derived a method of compliance that satisfies their supervising FAA inspector. May or may not be an economical installation! I find the GPS set to be very reliable and relatively easy to use. The comm unit works well. The box is much shorter than most panel mount units which makes it a lot easier to mount than most other similar sets. The compact nature of the box is what sold me on the GNC300XL. I think the databases will be available for quite some time. Garmin massages the data that goes to Jepp so they do make a few extra bucks on ev ery update. Easy money as far as I can tell. Unfortunately, I do NOT have much confidence in Garmin's attitude toward repair. They have a history of dumping the product once it is no longer bei ng sold new. Jeppesen is very reliable and I am positive that the only limiting factor will be Garmin. I have a couple of Trimbles in other airplanes. Free Flight now owns the rights to the Trimble line and they have been very good about keeping the boxes working and supplying Jeppesen with the needed data. The only draw back I see with the GNC300XL is the fact that it was made by Garmin. Good box, lousy company. Happy Skies, Old Bob In a message dated 7/3/2012 4:43:13 P.M. Central Daylight Time, JLuckey(at)pacbell.net writes: I=99m considering buying a used Garmin GNC-300XL GPS/Comm. I want t o know how long database updates will be available for that model. I emailed Garmin and they said that since Jeppesen handles the Database Subscription s that I should contact them. I just spoke w/ Jeppsen and you=99ll never guess what they said. Yu p, you guessed it! Jeppesen said it was up to Garmin to decide how long to support any given unit. I pushed a little harder and was told that Jeppesen supplies the Master database to Garmin & other manufacturers. Each manufacturer then messages that data into whatever format their hardware needs. Then the manufacture r provides the specially-formatted file to Jeppesen for use with Jeppesen =99s subscription service. I had another service rep @ Jeppesen tell me that there is no official policy on sun-setting databases and that it was essentially a decision tha t is made year-to-year based upon demand. Two versions of the Truth =93 go to love it! 3 Questions: 1. What do people who own them think of the 300XL? 2. Does anyone have any better info on the availability of database updates? (I can=99t be the only one with this question) 3. Does anyone have an idea of how many 300XLs were sold? ( this info might help us make our own projections as to availability) Jeff Luckey ________________________________________________________________________________

Date:

Jul 03, 2012

From:

John Morgensen <john(at)morgensen.com>

Subject:

Re: GPS Database Updates Availability

Bill, I think you are on the wrong track. If you can get the KMD to read the GNS, it will still be getting the raw GPS location the same as the internal GPS. In other words, the communication from the GPS has nothing to do with the map. sorry, john On 7/3/2012 2:56 PM, Bill Bradburry wrote: > > I have a KMD 150 made by Bendix King. It is a moving map with GPS in > it. The most recent database update was in Feb of 2005! > > So this MFD has not been supported for a long time! > > This brings up a question that I hope someone on the list can answer. > > I have this KMD 150 moving map and also the Garmin GNS430W. The KMD > can be used with either the internal GPS or with an external GPS. Both > Honeywell and Garmin agree that the KMD should be able to read the > GNS, however, I have been unable to make this happen. The KMD works > fine if I use the internal GPS, but if I switch it to external it can > not read the GNS. I have contacted both Garmin and Honeywell. Garmin > thinks it is a Honeywell problem and Honeywell, well, they just don't > seem to care. Probably because they don't really support the unit anymore. > > I would really like to have the KMD get its input from the GNS430W > because it is still being updated. Has anyone on the list integrated > these two devices before or can tell me how to do it? > > I can provide the install manual for both units if anyone would need > to look at them. > > Bill B > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:*owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of > *Jeff Luckey > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 03, 2012 5:35 PM > *To:* aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > *Subject:* AeroElectric-List: GPS Database Updates Availability > > I'm considering buying a used Garmin GNC-300XL GPS/Comm. I want to > know how long database updates will be available for that model. I > emailed Garmin and they said that since Jeppesen handles the Database > Subscriptions that I should contact them. > > I just spoke w/ Jeppsen and you'll never guess what they said. Yup, > you guessed it! Jeppesen said it was up to Garmin to decide how long > to support any given unit. > > I pushed a little harder and was told that Jeppesen supplies the > Master database to Garmin & other manufacturers. Each manufacturer > then messages that data into whatever format their hardware needs. > Then the manufacturer provides the specially-formatted file to > Jeppesen for use with Jeppesen's subscription service. > > I had another service rep @ Jeppesen tell me that there is no official > policy on sun-setting databases and that it was essentially a decision > that is made year-to-year based upon demand. > > Two versions of the Truth -- go to love it! > > 3 Questions: > > 1. What do people who own them think of the 300XL? > 2. Does anyone have any better info on the availability of database > updates? (I can't be the only one with this question) > 3. Does anyone have an idea of how many 300XLs were sold? ( this info > might help us make our own projections as to availability) > > Jeff Luckey > > * * > * * > ** > ** > ** > *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List* > ** > ** > *http://forums.matronics.com* > ** > ** > *http://www.matronics.com/contribution* > * * > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

avipak strobes not firing during flight

From:

"tomhanaway" <tomhanaway(at)comcast.net>

Date:

Jul 03, 2012

Just did my first night flight after completing phase 1. I have an Avipak box firing wing and tail strobes. If it's just on battery power on the ground, all strobes work fine. Once flying, the strobes stopped firing. If I switched them off and on, I could see the wing tips flashing for one or two sequences, then nothing. When I returned to ground and shut down engine, the strobes were working fine again. My guess is it's somehow connected to alternator output, which would increase at cruise power. However, no issues with any other electronics. Tom Hanaway RV-10 Boynton Beach, FL Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=377197#377197 ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Latching Relay Redux

From:

"user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>

Date:

Jul 03, 2012

Good point, Jeff. My mistake. I added a diode. Keep in mind that I have never built this circuit. So there is no guarantee that it will work. The TC648 operating frequency of 30HZ can possibly be increased with a smaller value of C5. The TC648 is designed for use with fan motors which have inertia. The off time period is not a concern with fans but is a concern with contactors that could drop out. If my math is correct, the off time period at 25 percent duty cycle is 25ms. This might be too long and allow the contactor to drop out. The diode will delay the drop out. Will a capacitor in parallel with the contactor coil also help to delay the drop out? Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=377202#377202 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/contactor_pwm_118.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Re: Latching Relay Redux

From:

"Tundra10" <jpx(at)qenesis.com>

Date:

Jul 03, 2012

Has anyone considered this voltage doubling circuit ? It was the Circuit Cellar EQ question in Issue 248 March 2011. The theory behind the circuit is that while the contactor is off, the capacitor charges to 12V. When the switch is turned on, the positive of the capacitor is 0V, so the negative side becomes -12V. The transistor now conducts, applying 12+12=24V across the contactor coil, closing it. The capacitor quickly discharges and the transistor switches off, leaving 12V across the contactor coil. 12V is probably enough to keep the contactor closed and at half the current of a 12V contactor. Once the flight has begun, the failure mode is down to the contactor, the switch and one diode, which is the same component count as the standard circuit (The spike shunt diode is not required for this circuit, since the current from the coil serves to charge the capacitor faster). The article did not propose values for the components, so it is quite possible that the capacitor would need to be impractically large. Jeff Page Dream Aircraft Tundra #10 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=377206#377206 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/24v_contactor_184.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:

Terra by Trimble

From:

Sam Staton <pj260(at)bellsouth.net>

Date:

Jul 04, 2012

Folks - An earlier poster noted the Free Flight is supporting Trimble Avionics. That is not 100% correct. All of the Terra/Trimble line of avionics except the GPS products are now supported by TSTC Waco, in Waco, TX. I recently have had occasion to do business with them and can heartily recommend them, both for cost and quality of service. Troy Ellison is an excellent person to work with, and will ensure that your radios are handled quickly, correctly, and efficiently. Sam Staton ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

BobsV35B(at)aol.com

Date:

Jul 04, 2012

Subject:

Re: Terra by Trimble

Good Morning Sam, Good Information! Glad to hear they have found good home. I had heard that Southeast Avionics picked up the Terra line at the same time that Free Flight was formed to handle the GPS line. Nice to hear they have found a loving home. Did TSTC also get the radar altimeter or does FreeFlight have that? As I said before, we owners of the Trimble line of GPS units are very fortunate to have such good service available from FreeFlight. Still getting regular 28 day updates to the database from Jeppesen and FreeFlight is supplying the packing software to Jeppesen for the database. Very Happy Camper! Happy Skies, Old Bob AKA Bob Siegfried Downers Grove, Illinois Stearman N3977A Beech V35B N20318 In a message dated 7/4/2012 6:41:36 A.M. Central Daylight Time, pj260(at)bellsouth.net writes: --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Sam Staton Folks - An earlier poster noted the Free Flight is supporting Trimble Avionics. That is not 100% correct. All of the Terra/Trimble line of avionics except the GPS products are now supported by TSTC Waco, in Waco, TX. I recently have had occasion to do business with them and can heartily recommend them, both for cost and quality of service. Troy Ellison is an excellent person to work with, and will ensure that your radios are handled quickly, correctly, and efficiently. Sam Staton ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com>

Subject:

Re: Terra by Trimble

Date:

Jul 04, 2012

Thanks for the info, Sam I still fly with a Terra radio which because of form factor would be a lot of work to replace, nice to know there is an alternative to replacing it. Ed Edward L. Anderson Anderson Electronic Enterprises LLC 305 Reefton Road Weddington, NC 28104 http://www.andersonee.com http://www.eicommander.com -------------------------------------------------- From: "Sam Staton" <pj260(at)bellsouth.net> Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 7:39 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Terra by Trimble > > Folks - > An earlier poster noted the Free Flight is supporting Trimble > Avionics. That is not 100% correct. All of the Terra/Trimble line of > avionics except the GPS products are now supported by TSTC Waco, in Waco, > TX. I recently have had occasion to do business with them and can heartily > recommend them, both for cost and quality of service. Troy Ellison is an > excellent person to work with, and will ensure that your radios are > handled quickly, correctly, and efficiently. > > Sam Staton > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"ROGER & JEAN CURTIS" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net>

Subject:

Z-19RB clarification

Date:

Jul 04, 2012

I plan to use a slightly modified version of Z-19RB in my aircraft. It appears to me that during an alternator failure you would want to deenergize both the Main battery contactor and the Engine battery contactor, to conserve battery power. In doing this there is no power available from the engine battery to the endurance bus. The endurance bus alternate feed is the only power feed path to this bus, with the contactors deenergized. My question is, am I missing something, was this overlooked in the design phase, or is there a specific reason for this design philosophy? Thanks, Roger ________________________________________________________________________________

From:

"Allen Fulmer" <afulmer(at)charter.net>

Subject:

Z-19RB clarification

Date:

Jul 04, 2012

Roger, I am using Z-19RB in my Subaru H6 powered RV7. My understanding as to why the endurance bus alternate feed is from the Main Battery only is that the engine bus and its battery are reserved for the running of the engine alone just as long as possible. I guess if you lose the main battery and thus the endurance bus then you can still fly the airplane to a safe landing site as long as the engine is running. Whereas, if you lose the engine battery/bus the endurance bus is not going to do you any good as you glide to a landing. I am sure Bob will chime in with a more elegant explanation. Allen Fulmer RV7 Finishing wiring Subaru hanging and run N808AF reserved -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ROGER & JEAN CURTIS Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 6:09 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Z-19RB clarification I plan to use a slightly modified version of Z-19RB in my aircraft. It appears to me that during an alternator failure you would want to deenergize

AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-le

AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-le