AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-lf

July 05, 2012 - July 26, 2012



      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: "Roger" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Z-19RB clarification
Date: Jul 05, 2012
Allen, Thanks for your input, also thanks again for the use of your panel punch (best way to make nice clean instrument holes). In my thinking, I was approaching this from a slightly different angle. In IFR conditions if the main battery goes dead, because you had a hard engine start and not sufficient time to recharge the main you have no avionics to get you to VFR conditions. In this case a running engine does you no good. But, to put a little more logic into the situation, you should be seeking an out from IFR asap to improve your chances if something else does go wrong. My slight mod, mentioned previously, to Z-19RB: Since I have dual ignition and dual fuel pumps, I am eliminating the diodes and the 2-3 switches, to be replaced with 4ea. SPST, thus simplifying and also giving me full control of any combination of fuel pumps and ignition. > > > 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 > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > 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 > 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 05, 2012
It will be interesting to see how long the Subaru will run on one battery if the alternator goes out. -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 8:16 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Z-19RB clarification Allen, Thanks for your input, also thanks again for the use of your panel punch (best way to make nice clean instrument holes). In my thinking, I was approaching this from a slightly different angle. In IFR conditions if the main battery goes dead, because you had a hard engine start and not sufficient time to recharge the main you have no avionics to get you to VFR conditions. In this case a running engine does you no good. But, to put a little more logic into the situation, you should be seeking an out from IFR asap to improve your chances if something else does go wrong. My slight mod, mentioned previously, to Z-19RB: Since I have dual ignition and dual fuel pumps, I am eliminating the diodes and the 2-3 switches, to be replaced with 4ea. SPST, thus simplifying and also giving me full control of any combination of fuel pumps and ignition. > > > 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 > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > 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 > 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: "ROGER & JEAN CURTIS" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Z-19RB clarification
Date: Jul 05, 2012
It will be interesting to see how long the Subaru will run on one battery if the alternator goes out. Allen, You should do some tests to see what the electrical load is on each battery with alternator off and endurance bus on. Then check the capacity of your batteries at these loads. I plan to do a battery test as a part of my annual inspection. Roger ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Z-19RB clarification
At 08:16 AM 7/5/2012, you wrote: > > >In my thinking, I was approaching this from a slightly different >angle. In IFR conditions if the main battery goes dead, because you >had a hard engine start and not sufficient time to recharge the >main you have no avionics to get you to VFR conditions. In this >case a running engine does you no good. But, to put a little more >logic into the situation, you should be seeking an out from IFR asap >to improve your chances if something else does go wrong. How do you kill a main battery and not the engine battery too? Why would you launch into IFR after an anomalous engine start with knowledge that the battery(ies) are now less than optimal? How much 'avionics' do you 'need' to navigate to VMC? What's then energy budget? How would you position switches and reduce loads to maximize available resources . . . indeed, what policies and procedures will you put in place to always KNOW what your resources are? >My slight mod, mentioned previously, to Z-19RB: >Since I have dual ignition and dual fuel pumps, I am eliminating the >diodes and the 2-3 switches, to be replaced with 4ea. SPST, thus >simplifying and also giving me full control of any combination of >fuel pumps and ignition. But 'full control' over what? Flying an airplane is like baking a cake. You cannot make useful changes to a recipe AFTER the batter is in the pan. Z-19 was designed to deal comfortably with one annunciated failure. Launching into unfriendly conditions without KNOWING that your Plan-B energy budget can be met is the first failure . . . stacking a "dead battery" on top of that is a second failure . . . adding a dead alternator to that is a third failure. Sounds like the script to a Hollywood dark-n-stormy night movie. Sorry my friend, all the switches offering back-ups to back-ups is the very last thing you need in single-pilot IFR. Please review chapter 17 and apply the logic to your own cake recipe. The chapter is a bit dated given the much heavier e-bus loads but the principal for careful study of system loads, knowing limits to energy sources and insuring timely pilot awareness and SIMPLE response is critical to an effective Plan-B. When the LO VOLTS light comes on, you say 'oh fooey' and reposition a couple of switches at most then get on with the task of putting your wheels on the pavement without breaking a sweat. Adding plans C, D, E and F with lots of new options for total control is an invitation to an unhappy day in the cockpit. Launching with known deficiencies is performance or resources is like hitting the highway for a run to the mountains in a dust storm and 100 miles between towns knowing you're a quart low on oil, one tire is half inflated, or remembering you left your Dopp kit on the bed. Each deficiency adds its own level of uncertainty or risk to the trip. Stack them on top of each other and you may have created a situation that no amount of extra features in the flipping of switches is going to help. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Z-19RB clarification
At 08:16 AM 7/5/2012, you wrote: In my thinking, I was approaching this from a slightly different angle. In IFR conditions if the main battery goes dead, because you had a hard engine start and not sufficient time to recharge the main you have no avionics to get you to VFR conditions. In this case a running engine does you no good. But, to put a little more logic into the situation, you should be seeking an out from IFR asap to improve your chances if something else does go wrong. How do you kill a main battery and not the engine battery too? Why would you launch into IFR after an anomalous engine start with knowledge that the battery(ies) are now less than optimal? How much 'avionics' do you 'need' to navigate to VMC? What's then energy budget? How would you position switches and reduce loads to maximize available resources . . . indeed, what policies and procedures will you put in place to always KNOW what your resources are? My slight mod, mentioned previously, to Z-19RB: Since I have dual ignition and dual fuel pumps, I am eliminating the diodes and the 2-3 switches, to be replaced with 4ea. SPST, thus simplifying and also giving me full control of any combination of fuel pumps and ignition. But 'full control' over what? Flying an airplane is like baking a cake. You cannot make useful changes to a recipe AFTER the batter is in the pan. Z-19 was designed to deal comfortably with one annunciated failure. Launching into unfriendly conditions without KNOWING that your Plan-B energy budget can be met is the first failure . . . stacking a "dead battery" on top of that is a second failure . . . adding a dead alternator to that is a third failure. Sounds like the script to a Hollywood dark-n-stormy night movie. Sorry my friend, all the switches offering back-ups to back-ups is the very last thing you need in single-pilot IFR. Please review chapter 17 and apply the logic to your own cake recipe. The chapter is a bit dated given the much heavier e-bus loads but the principal for careful study of system loads, knowing limits to energy sources and insuring timely pilot awareness and SIMPLE response is critical to an effective Plan-B. When the LO VOLTS light comes on, you say 'oh fooey' and reposition a couple of switches at most then get on with the task of putting your wheels on the pavement without breaking a sweat. Adding plans C, D, E and F with lots of new options for total control is an invitation to an unhappy day in the cockpit. Launching with known deficiencies is performance or resources is like hitting the highway for a run to the mountains in a dust storm and 100 miles between towns knowing you're a quart low on oil, one tire is half inflated, or remembering you left your Dopp kit on the bed. Each deficiency adds its own level of uncertainty or risk to the trip. Stack them on top of each other and you may have created a situation that no amount of extra features in the flipping of switches is going to help. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Z-19RB clarification
At 09:52 PM 7/4/2012, you wrote: 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. During normal operations, BOTH batteries are on line and behave as a single battery equal to their combined capacity. When the low volts warning light comes on, all you have to finish the flight is what ever is carried in the two batteries. At that point in time you drop to the ENDURANCE MODE. Run no piece of equipment that is not necessary for a no-sweat return to earth. Repeat after me: "I will KNOW what the capacity of my batteries is at all times by which I will KNOW what my endurance limits are in alternator-out conditions." This usually calls for getting the battery contactors out of the picture . . . turning off both battery switches, running the engine from the engine battery and minimum electro-whizzies on the endurance bus. Once you have the airport in sight and are cleared to land, you can turn the main battery back on and use what ever is left to make a grander entrance . . . but the idea is that you've kept the engine's power source fire-walled off in a separate energy bucket. Now, if you want to add a second failure to this scenario, then BOTH battery switches are placed to ON and you begin moves to expedite landing while watching bus voltage readings. When it gets down to 10.5 volts, your on-board battery energy is more than 95% used up. You need to be on short final before that time. Being able to switch the engine from one battery to the other is a hedge against contactor failure stacked on top of other failures . . . a statistical tiny dot on the great horizon of possibilities for one failure. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com>
Subject: Z-19RB clarification
Date: Jul 06, 2012
Personal experience with a Odyssey PC 680 (one). Apparently hit an electrical switch with my foot at refueling stop which removed the alternator feed from my battery. I had two EFI fuel pumps running plus electronic fuel injectors (4) and dual ignition and normal comm/nav gear on. About 40 minutes after take off, engine started to miss which condition then gradually deteriorated - I misdiagnosed the problem as being related to fuel feed and failed to notice decreasing battery voltage (have one volt meter that I switch between battery and alternator feeds). The voltmeter was set to monitor the alternator (which was working fine by the way) and the voltage remained at 13.8 volts until engine stoppage at 45 minutes and 5 miles out from Selma Al. Deadsticked it to a safe airport landing and later discovered battery voltage was down to six volts - switch in wrong position precluded alternator power from feeding the battery - yes, design flaw! - since corrected. Initially, during design phase, I was concerned about a "run away alternator" causing the battery (inside the cockpit) to possibly boil/explode. Have a auto alternator so pulling the field coil CB after it has bootstrapped does no good - alternator keeps on producing - so I decided a switch to isolate alternator and battery might be smart. In hindsight, the odds of that condition happened were much less than the switch designed to prevent being accidently mis-positioned {:<(. But, my point is that my PC680 did a good job for longer than I would have expected. So I feel I have a reasonably reliable 30 minutes after encountering such a problem to making it to the airport for a safe landing. Had the battery been fully charged - it never charged after engine start and that drain due to the switch position - I think 5-10 minutes more might have been achieved. However, in hind sight that would have just placed me further from the airport. Clearly useful time depends on battery condition and load. The key, of course, is early indication/recognition of the problem. No my yellow low voltage light never came on - because the alternator never stopped producing voltage. FWIW Ed Edward L. Anderson Anderson Electronic Enterprises LLC 305 Reefton Road Weddington, NC 28104 http://www.andersonee.com http://www.eicommander.com -------------------------------------------------- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 8:11 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Z-19RB clarification > > > At 09:52 PM 7/4/2012, you wrote: > > > 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. > > During normal operations, BOTH batteries are on > line and behave as a single battery equal to their > combined capacity. > > When the low volts warning light comes on, all you > have to finish the flight is what ever is carried > in the two batteries. > > At that point in time you drop to the ENDURANCE MODE. > Run no piece of equipment that is not necessary for > a no-sweat return to earth. > > Repeat after me: "I will KNOW what the capacity of > my batteries is at all times by which I will KNOW > what my endurance limits are in alternator-out > conditions." This usually calls for getting the > battery contactors out of the picture . . . turning > off both battery switches, running the engine from > the engine battery and minimum electro-whizzies on > the endurance bus. Once you have the airport in sight > and are cleared to land, you can turn the main battery > back on and use what ever is left to make a grander > entrance . . . but the idea is that you've kept > the engine's power source fire-walled off in a > separate energy bucket. > > Now, if you want to add a second failure to this > scenario, then BOTH battery switches are placed to > ON and you begin moves to expedite landing while > watching bus voltage readings. When it gets down > to 10.5 volts, your on-board battery energy is > more than 95% used up. You need to be on short > final before that time. > > Being able to switch the engine from one battery > to the other is a hedge against contactor failure > stacked on top of other failures . . . a statistical > tiny dot on the great horizon of possibilities for > one failure. > > > Bob . . . > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2012
Subject: Re: Z-19RB clarification
From: James Kilford <james(at)etravel.org>
Ed, That's an interesting tale about the extra switch & the voltmeter. Glad you got back okay to tell it. James On 6 July 2012 12:35, Ed Anderson wrote: > eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> > > Personal experience with a Odyssey PC 680 (one). Apparently hit an > electrical switch with my foot at refueling stop which removed the > alternator feed from my battery. I had two EFI fuel pumps running plus > electronic fuel injectors (4) and dual ignition and normal comm/nav gear on. > > About 40 minutes after take off, engine started to miss which condition > then gradually deteriorated - I misdiagnosed the problem as being related > to fuel feed and failed to notice decreasing battery voltage (have one volt > meter that I switch between battery and alternator feeds). The voltmeter > was set to monitor the alternator (which was working fine by the way) and > the voltage remained at 13.8 volts until engine stoppage at 45 minutes and > 5 miles out from Selma Al. > > Deadsticked it to a safe airport landing and later discovered battery > voltage was down to six volts - switch in wrong position precluded > alternator power from feeding the battery - yes, design flaw! - since > corrected. Initially, during design phase, I was concerned about a "run > away alternator" causing the battery (inside the cockpit) to possibly > boil/explode. Have a auto alternator so pulling the field coil CB after it > has bootstrapped does no good - alternator keeps on producing - so I > decided a switch to isolate alternator and battery might be smart. In > hindsight, the odds of that condition happened were much less than the > switch designed to prevent being accidently mis-positioned {:<(. > > But, my point is that my PC680 did a good job for longer than I would have > expected. So I feel I have a reasonably reliable 30 minutes after > encountering such a problem to making it to the airport for a safe > landing. Had the battery been fully charged - it never charged after engine > start and that drain due to the switch position - I think 5-10 minutes more > might have been achieved. However, in hind sight that would have just > placed me further from the airport. Clearly useful time depends on battery > condition and load. > > The key, of course, is early indication/recognition of the problem. No > my yellow low voltage light never came on - because the alternator never > stopped producing voltage. > > FWIW > > Ed > > Edward L. Anderson > Anderson Electronic Enterprises LLC > 305 Reefton Road > Weddington, NC 28104 > http://www.andersonee.com > http://www.eicommander.com > > > ------------------------------**-------------------- > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com**> > Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 8:11 PM > To: > > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Z-19RB clarification > >> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com**> >> >> At 09:52 PM 7/4/2012, you wrote: >> afulmer(at)charter.net> >> >> 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. >> >> During normal operations, BOTH batteries are on >> line and behave as a single battery equal to their >> combined capacity. >> >> When the low volts warning light comes on, all you >> have to finish the flight is what ever is carried >> in the two batteries. >> >> At that point in time you drop to the ENDURANCE MODE. >> Run no piece of equipment that is not necessary for >> a no-sweat return to earth. >> >> Repeat after me: "I will KNOW what the capacity of >> my batteries is at all times by which I will KNOW >> what my endurance limits are in alternator-out >> conditions." This usually calls for getting the >> battery contactors out of the picture . . . turning >> off both battery switches, running the engine from >> the engine battery and minimum electro-whizzies on >> the endurance bus. Once you have the airport in sight >> and are cleared to land, you can turn the main battery >> back on and use what ever is left to make a grander >> entrance . . . but the idea is that you've kept >> the engine's power source fire-walled off in a >> separate energy bucket. >> >> Now, if you want to add a second failure to this >> scenario, then BOTH battery switches are placed to >> ON and you begin moves to expedite landing while >> watching bus voltage readings. When it gets down >> to 10.5 volts, your on-board battery energy is >> more than 95% used up. You need to be on short >> final before that time. >> >> Being able to switch the engine from one battery >> to the other is a hedge against contactor failure >> stacked on top of other failures . . . a statistical >> tiny dot on the great horizon of possibilities for >> one failure. >> >> >> Bob . . . >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- >> No virus found in this message. >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Z12 Alternator Amps
From: "RV7ASask" <rv7alamb(at)sasktel.net>
Date: Jul 06, 2012
I have been flying my RV7A for 38 hours and all has been going well. The electrical architecture Z12, is installed stock and is also working well. After start with only the Skyview and two Light Speed Ignitions drawing current the main alternator shows 14.7 volts and 8 amps. As part of the After Start Check I test the Aux Alternator by switching the Main Alternator off. The battery takes over and as the voltage drops to 12.7 volts the Aux Alternator comes on line. It will maintain 12.7 volts, so far so good. As I have only one amp indicator on the Skyview I have a switch to monitor the Main Alternator or Aux Alternator amps. The Aux Alternator amps climb up to and sit around 16 amps with no change in the load. Questions: why is the amperage showing double for the Aux Alternator? Should I be concerned? Warmest regards David Lamb Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=377423#377423 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Z-19RB clarification
> > The key, of course, is early indication/recognition of the > problem. No my yellow low voltage light never came on - because > the alternator never stopped producing voltage. > >FWIW > >Ed I'm pleased that your experience had a happy ending. An obstacle to be overcome in the OBAM aviation community is information and collaboration. When you work for a 60+ year old company of 6,000 plus employees and 800 engineers, there is a wealth of history to call on for things that work well and things that don't work well. We are acutely aware of this shortcoming in OBAM aviation which tends to drive low risk worries into actions that create more risk than they fix. EAA was the first real big leap into a collaboration for sharing information. In years since, the Internet has offered still greater coverage with convenience. But the tendencies to over-think a problem are still there. The most powerful prophylactic against the unintended consequences that raise risk is collaboration. Thank you for sharing your experience with the List. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Z-19RB clarification
Date: Jul 06, 2012
I certainly agree, Bob. A clear case of a where my design focused on a very low probability occurrence (boiling battery) ending up almost assuring that at some point that switch would get in the incorrect position and cause a problem. In fact, has anybody on the list EVER experienced or have first hand knowledge of someone who had a battery boil/overheat due to run away (over voltage) alternator?? Ed -------------------------------------------------- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 9:45 AM Subject: Re: Battery only time -AeroElectric-List: Z-19RB clarification > > > >> >> The key, of course, is early indication/recognition of the problem. No >> my yellow low voltage light never came on - because the alternator never >> stopped producing voltage. >> >>FWIW >> >>Ed > > I'm pleased that your experience had a happy ending. > An obstacle to be overcome in the OBAM aviation > community is information and collaboration. When you > work for a 60+ year old company of 6,000 plus employees > and 800 engineers, there is a wealth of history to > call on for things that work well and things that don't > work well. > > We are acutely aware of this shortcoming in OBAM aviation > which tends to drive low risk worries into actions that create > more risk than they fix. EAA was the first real big > leap into a collaboration for sharing information. > In years since, the Internet has offered still greater > coverage with convenience. > > But the tendencies to over-think a problem are still > there. The most powerful prophylactic against the > unintended consequences that raise risk is collaboration. > Thank you for sharing your experience with the List. > > > Bob . . . > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Z-19RB clarification
Date: Jul 06, 2012
Thanks, James - always willing to share my experience (no matter how embarrassing) in view it could save someone else from the same experience. One thing I didn't mention was when about 5 miles out with prop stopped, I was thinking at least everything is working but the engine, the panel lights were still on and the radio, so got on the radio to let traffic know I was coming in without engine power. I made one call when there was an ominous "clack" ( would have never hear it with the engine running) - all panel lights go dead as well as the radio - now it was really lonesome up there. I later realized that when the battery voltage dropped below sustaining level - the master relay contactor (powered by the battery) released and even the alternator power that had been feeding the panel through that contactor went south. (another design flaw!). But, with no further distractions, I could now concentrate on making sure I didn't screw up this deadstick landing. To show you how distracted I had been, it wasn't until I hit pattern altitude on down wind that the sudden realization hit - that I there was not going to be any maintaining altitude to make that nice base turn at my opinion someplace on downwind. I Immediately initiated the base turn, then found myself wanting to tighten up the turn (was a little close in on downwind - guess you could say I was "hugging" the runway - the comfort factor{:>)) Then a little voice warning about the "Coffin corner turn on base" made me look at my airspeed in the turn and it was down to 80 mph and rate of descent up to 1000 fpm. I decided I would rather land in the grass (overshooting my turn) than dig a hole in the concrete), so I loosened up my turn and lowered the nose to pick up airspeed (hard to do with the ground staring me in the face). But, luck or whatever, it all came together in the last 100 ft or so. Flared to a perfect landing on the runway, rolled to the end of the runway and made the turn off to the taxiway coming to a welcomed stop. So I think its just as important to know when to stop worrying the technical problem and start worrying about your butt and concentrate on the flying{:>) Ed From: James Kilford Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 9:36 AM Subject: Re: Battery only time -AeroElectric-List: Z-19RB clarification Ed, That's an interesting tale about the extra switch & the voltmeter. Glad you got back okay to tell it. James On 6 July 2012 12:35, Ed Anderson wrote: Personal experience with a Odyssey PC 680 (one). Apparently hit an electrical switch with my foot at refueling stop which removed the alternator feed from my battery. I had two EFI fuel pumps running plus electronic fuel injectors (4) and dual ignition and normal comm/nav gear on. About 40 minutes after take off, engine started to miss which condition then gradually deteriorated - I misdiagnosed the problem as being related to fuel feed and failed to notice decreasing battery voltage (have one volt meter that I switch between battery and alternator feeds). The voltmeter was set to monitor the alternator (which was working fine by the way) and the voltage remained at 13.8 volts until engine stoppage at 45 minutes and 5 miles out from Selma Al. Deadsticked it to a safe airport landing and later discovered battery voltage was down to six volts - switch in wrong position precluded alternator power from feeding the battery - yes, design flaw! - since corrected. Initially, during design phase, I was concerned about a "run away alternator" causing the battery (inside the cockpit) to possibly boil/explode. Have a auto alternator so pulling the field coil CB after it has bootstrapped does no good - alternator keeps on producing - so I decided a switch to isolate alternator and battery might be smart. In hindsight, the odds of that condition happened were much less than the switch designed to prevent being accidently mis-positioned {:<(. But, my point is that my PC680 did a good job for longer than I would have expected. So I feel I have a reasonably reliable 30 minutes after encountering such a problem to making it to the airport for a safe landing. Had the battery been fully charged - it never charged after engine start and that drain due to the switch position - I think 5-10 minutes more might have been achieved. However, in hind sight that would have just placed me further from the airport. Clearly useful time depends on battery condition and load. The key, of course, is early indication/recognition of the problem. No my yellow low voltage light never came on - because the alternator never stopped producing voltage. FWIW Ed Edward L. Anderson Anderson Electronic Enterprises LLC 305 Reefton Road Weddington, NC 28104 http://www.andersonee.com http://www.eicommander.com -------------------------------------------------- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 8:11 PM To: Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Z-19RB clarification At 09:52 PM 7/4/2012, you wrote: 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. During normal operations, BOTH batteries are on line and behave as a single battery equal to their combined capacity. When the low volts warning light comes on, all you have to finish the flight is what ever is carried in the two batteries. At that point in time you drop to the ENDURANCE MODE. Run no piece of equipment that is not necessary for a no-sweat return to earth. Repeat after me: "I will KNOW what the capacity of my batteries is at all times by which I will KNOW what my endurance limits are in alternator-out conditions." This usually calls for getting the battery contactors out of the picture . . . turning off both battery switches, running the engine from the engine battery and minimum electro-whizzies on the endurance bus. Once you have the airport in sight and are cleared to land, you can turn the main battery back on and use what ever is left to make a grander entrance . . . but the idea is that you've kept the engine's power source fire-walled off in a separate energy bucket. Now, if you want to add a second failure to this scenario, then BOTH battery switches are placed to ON and you begin moves to expedite landing while watching bus voltage readings. When it gets down to 10.5 volts, your on-board battery energy is more than 95% used up. You need to be on short final before that time. Being able to switch the engine from one battery to the other is a hedge against contactor failure stacked on top of other failures . . . a statistical tiny dot on the great horizon of possibilities for one failure. Bob . . . ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com - ric-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List MS - k">http://forums.matronics.com e - -Matt Dralle, List Admin. t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 07/06/12 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Tony Bingelis, "On Engines"
From: "jonlaury" <jonlaury(at)impulse.net>
Date: Jul 06, 2012
I need a copy of an air-oil separator drawing that I've learned is on pages, 92-93 of Bingelis' "On Engines". If anyone on the list has this volume, I would really appreciate your effort to send me the info. Thank you, John jonlaury AT impulse dot net Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=377440#377440 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2012
Subject: Re: Tony Bingelis, "On Engines"
From: Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com>
John, Have you tried doing a search in the "Sport Aviation" archives? Most of Tony's books were just compilations of his columns. Rick Girard On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 12:49 PM, jonlaury wrote: > > I need a copy of an air-oil separator drawing that I've learned is on > pages, 92-93 of Bingelis' "On Engines". > If anyone on the list has this volume, I would really appreciate your > effort to send me the info. > > Thank you, > John > jonlaury AT impulse dot net > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=377440#377440 > > -- Zulu Delta Mk IIIC Thanks, Homer GBYM It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy. - Groucho Marx ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: RE "On Engines": DONE!
From: "jonlaury" <jonlaury(at)impulse.net>
Date: Jul 06, 2012
Thanks to all, John Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=377452#377452 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Stuart Hutchison" <stuart(at)stuarthutchison.com.au>
Subject: Tony Bingelis, "On Engines"
Date: Jul 07, 2012
-----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jonlaury Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2012 3:50 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Tony Bingelis, "On Engines" --> I need a copy of an air-oil separator drawing that I've learned is on pages, 92-93 of Bingelis' "On Engines". If anyone on the list has this volume, I would really appreciate your effort to send me the info. Thank you, John jonlaury AT impulse dot net Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=377440#377440 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Ciolino" <JohnCiolino(at)carolina.rr.com>
Subject: FW:
Date: Jul 06, 2012
Stewart is quicker on the draw than I am but here is a pdf of page 92 in case you need it. John Ciolino ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps
I have been flying my RV7A for 38 hours and all has been going well. The electrical architecture Z12, is installed stock and is also working well. After start with only the Skyview and two Light Speed Ignitions drawing current the main alternator shows 14.7 volts and 8 amps. As part of the =9CAfter Start Check=9D I test the Aux Alternator by switching the Main Alternator off. The battery takes over and as the voltage drops to 12.7 volts the Aux Alternator comes on line. It will maintain 12.7 volts, so far so good. You don't mention engine RPM during your cited observations. The SD-20 alternator on a vacuum pump pad will develop full output at 3500 shaft RPM . . . with a 1.4:1 pad ratio, you need about 2500 engine RPM to get full output from the SD-20. At 2700 redline on the engine, you can get more . . . the SD-20 is REALLY a 40A alternator de-rated for limits to available pad speeds. Your observed drop to 12.7 is consistent with the SD-20 being essentially relaxed at low engine RPMs and the battery is picking up the loads. Under this condition, I would expect the alternator load amps to be small if not zero. The only time I would attempt to test the SD-20 on the ground is during engine run-up where you can get a substantial output but still less than 20A during the mag-check. Same thing goes for the SD-8 alternator. With the high pulley ratio on belt driven alternators folks are very accustomed to seeing substantial output from the main alternator and bus voltages that do not sag to the point that a battery is asked to support ship's loads. As I have only one amp indicator on the Skyview I have a switch to monitor the Main Alternator or Aux Alternator amps. The Aux Alternator amps climb up to and sit around 16 amps with no change in the load. Questions: why is the amperage showing double for the Aux Alternator? Should I be concerned? Something is wrong. I would expect to see very few amps from the SD-20 at ramp RPMs on the engine. How does it perform in flight? After say 30 minutes of flight when you know that the battery is topped off, first reduce total ship's loads as much as possible and switch between the two alternators. See that both support the bus at similar voltage readings ABOVE 14 volts. Then add small loads and compare the two alternator output readings. Readings of 20A or less on the main alternator should be mirrored on the aux alternator. However, as long as the bus remains above 14 volts with either alternator, my best guess is that the SD-20 is fine and you've got an instrumentation problem. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Wish they would join us here on the AE-List . . .
While looking for the spec sheet on the SD-20 to refresh my memory for the earlier posting I ran across this exchange of conversation about the SD-20 . . . http://tinyurl.com/7lxm5ep The writer was attempting to do a load analysis but made some mystifying statements about his perceptions of current demands of the LR-3 regulator . . . We could be helpful to these guys if they would care to tap the reservoir of collective knowledge available here. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Z-19RB clarification
> >So I think its just as important to know when to stop worrying the >technical problem and start worrying about your butt and concentrate >on the flying{:>) What changes have you made to architecture, development of a Plan-B, and for a preventative maintenance program to make sure your battery(ies) are of known quantity? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Owen Baker " <bakerocb(at)cox.net>
Subject: battery boil/overheat
Date: Jul 07, 2012
7/7/2012 Hello Ed, This posting from the aeroelectric-list archives may be of interest: Match: #10 Message: #48521 Date: Feb 19, 2010 From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: B&C Regulators and water-falls =98OC=99 Baker From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> Subject: Re: Battery only time -AeroElectric-List: Z-19RB clarification I certainly agree, Bob. A clear case of a where my design focused on a very low probability occurrence (boiling battery) ending up almost assuring that at some point that switch would get in the incorrect position and cause a problem. In fact, has anybody on the list EVER experienced or have first hand knowledge of someone who had a battery boil/overheat due to run away (over voltage) alternator?? Ed ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 07, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Boiling batteries
At 09:44 AM 7/6/2012, you wrote: I certainly agree, Bob. A clear case of a where my design focused on a very low probability occurrence (boiling battery) ending up almost assuring that at some point that switch would get in the incorrect position and cause a problem. In fact, has anybody on the list EVER experienced or have first hand knowledge of someone who had a battery boil/overheat due to run away (over voltage) alternator?? There are many such cases over the 100 year history of aircraft . . . or the hundreds of millions of other vehicles with DC power systems. Spectacular events in aviation, like spectacular events elsewhere, get lots of attention mostly because they are rare . . . and spectacular to boot. The ship's alternator is a significant source of energy often rated at 60 amps or more and virtually boundless for voltage during a runaway condition unless (1) shut down in a timely manner or (2) held in a state of current limit by ship's loads + plus what ever the battery is able to accept. RG/SE/SVLA/AGM style batteries offer the most benign responses to OV abuse of any technology. They contain so little liquid that steam-driven events are non-existent. There have been some explosions of liberated H2-O2 mixtures when batteries were boxed up in an airtight container along with an ignition source. But for the most part, the most severely abused batteries will produce failures such as these . . . http://tinyurl.com/cgjoheo http://tinyurl.com/blt9x3l http://tinyurl.com/ckbes36 http://tinyurl.com/bn2wd67 http://tinyurl.com/82azaht http://tinyurl.com/88lhd4n The OV event is an immediate hazard to electro-whizzies with damage taking place in tens to hundreds of milliseconds. Batteries take much longer. In fact, during the first few milliseconds of an OV condition, the battery will "throw itself into the line-of-fire" to forestall rate of rise in bus voltage until the ov protection system (automatic or manual) has time to react. Battery failures due to over-charge are very slow events taking tens of minutes to hours to manifest. An airplane fitted with a capable OV protection system will never suffer such an event. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 07, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: battery boil/overheat
At 11:44 AM 7/7/2012, you wrote: 7/7/2012 Hello Ed, This posting from the aeroelectric-list archives may be of interest: Match: #10 Message: #48521 Date: Feb 19, 2010 From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Subject: Re: B&C Regulators and water-falls OC Baker I'd forgotten about that one. I searched without success for a discussion on a Glasair battery box explosion. An RG battery suffered an extended OV condition within a tight battery box and apparently out-gassed to an ignition source within the box. The box blew up and scattered pieces into the tail cone but the engine was magneto sparked and continued to fly. The pilot got it back on the ground and was able to tell the tale. The modern alternator in an airplane, like a big gun in a battle, can be an essential component of survival. But unleashed in unintended circumstances it can be a substantial hazard too. FAST ov protection is a requirement in TC aircraft . . . for rare but compelling reasons. -------------------- FAR23.1351(c) Generating System. There must be at least one generator/alternator if the electrical system supplies power to load circuits essential for safe operation. In addition-- (1) Each generator/alternator must be able to deliver its continuous rated power, or such power as is limited by its regulation system. (2) Generator/alternator voltage control equipment must be able to dependably regulate the generator/alternator output within rated limits. (3) Automatic means must be provided to prevent damage to any generator/ alternator and adverse effects on the airplane electrical system due to reverse current. A means must also be provided to disconnect each generator/ alternator from the battery and other generators/alternators. (4) There must be a means to give immediate warning to the flight crew of a failure of any generator/alternator. (5) Each generator/alternator must have an overvoltage control designed and installed to prevent damage to the electrical system, or to equipment supplied by the electrical system that could result if that generator/ alternator were to develop an overvoltage condition. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps
From: "RV7ASask" <rv7alamb(at)sasktel.net>
Date: Jul 07, 2012
I went flying today and did an Aux alternator check as you suggested Bob. After turning most of the electrical load off, once again I was left with 8 amps and 14.4 volts on the Main Alternator. Cruising at 2400 RPM I selected the Main Alternator Off. Voltage dropped to 12.9 and the Aux Alternator came on line with a steady 12.9 volts. The amps then slowly climbed up to and settled down at 20 amps, more than double the reading of the Main? To the best of my knowledge everything is wired correctly. Any suggestions? Regards David Lamb Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=377590#377590 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Owen Baker " <bakerocb(at)cox.net>
Subject: IO-240 Starter
Date: Jul 08, 2012
7/8/2012 Hello Tim, I was a bit surprised to read of your recent experience with a TCM provided starter for the IO-240 engine. I thought that all of those crappy TCM designed starters had long since failed and been purged from the field. That was a very ugly chapter in TCM=99s history when they tried to screw Bill Bainbridge of B&C by reverse engineering one of his starters when their original design proved to be a miserable failure. TCM was eventually forced to buy and install B&C starters at the factory on new engines being shipped. TCM agreed to pay for a B&C starter for my engine for me to install when I refused to accept their designed starter that had been shipped with my engine, IO-240 B9B Serial number 806236. If anyone else is still operating a TCM designed starter on their IO-240 (it takes some detail part number sleuthing to determine that) I strongly recommend switching to a B&C starter because the TCM designed starter can fail in a manner that will foul up the interior of the engine =93 big expense and some danger. I have extensive postings on this subject in my files (and there are probably also some in the Matronics archives) if anyone is interested in reviewing that history. OC =========== From: "F. Tim Yoder" <ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com> Subject: KIS-List: IO-240 Starter FYI for those who have this engine or a light weight TCM starter. Circa 1997. My IO-240 came with a TCM starter, Part # 654046 E. It failed at 475 hours. I had been told by a TCM tech. that even though it had a Cont tag on it, it was really made by B&C. I called B&C and made arrangements to send it to them for repair. After they received it the called to advise me that it was not one of theirs but a knockoff that Cont. had made. B&C didn't think that Cont. would repair theirs anymore. I did not check with Cont. because I decided I wanted one of B&C's. They sent me a new one and my old one at no shipping charge. In a side by side comparison, the B&C starter is much better built. There was a dramatic improvement in prop rotation speed by the starter. Tim ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "F. Tim Yoder" <ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com>
Subject: Re: IO-240 Starter
Date: Jul 08, 2012
Hi OC, Obviously TCM new they had put one of their junk starters on my engine and didn't bother to make good on it. As I said before, they even told me it was a B&C after I gave them the part# and serial#. I must have come to the lists after your postings of the starter reports. Maybe there are a few others that haven't herd of the problem and this might help. Thanks to you and others, I have learned allot on these lists. Tim ----- Original Message ----- From: Owen Baker To: ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com ; aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com ; KIS-LIST MATRONICS Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2012 6:40 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: IO-240 Starter 7/8/2012 Hello Tim, I was a bit surprised to read of your recent experience with a TCM provided starter for the IO-240 engine. I thought that all of those crappy TCM designed starters had long since failed and been purged from the field. That was a very ugly chapter in TCM=99s history when they tried to screw Bill Bainbridge of B&C by reverse engineering one of his starters when their original design proved to be a miserable failure. TCM was eventually forced to buy and install B&C starters at the factory on new engines being shipped. TCM agreed to pay for a B&C starter for my engine for me to install when I refused to accept their designed starter that had been shipped with my engine, IO-240 B9B Serial number 806236. If anyone else is still operating a TCM designed starter on their IO-240 (it takes some detail part number sleuthing to determine that) I strongly recommend switching to a B&C starter because the TCM designed starter can fail in a manner that will foul up the interior of the engine =93 big expense and some danger. I have extensive postings on this subject in my files (and there are probably also some in the Matronics archives) if anyone is interested in reviewing that history. OC =========== From: "F. Tim Yoder" <ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com> Subject: KIS-List: IO-240 Starter FYI for those who have this engine or a light weight TCM starter. Circa 1997. My IO-240 came with a TCM starter, Part # 654046 E. It failed at 475 hours. I had been told by a TCM tech. that even though it had a Cont tag on it, it was really made by B&C. I called B&C and made arrangements to send it to them for repair. After they received it the called to advise me that it was not one of theirs but a knockoff that Cont. had made. B&C didn't think that Cont. would repair theirs anymore. I did not check with Cont. because I decided I wanted one of B&C's. They sent me a new one and my old one at no shipping charge. In a side by side comparison, the B&C starter is much better built. There was a dramatic improvement in prop rotation speed by the starter. Tim ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 08, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps
At 11:26 PM 7/7/2012, you wrote: I went flying today and did an Aux alternator check as you suggested Bob. After turning most of the electrical load off, once again I was left with 8 amps and 14.4 volts on the Main Alternator. Cruising at 2400 RPM I selected the Main Alternator Off. Voltage dropped to 12.9 and the Aux Alternator came on line with a steady 12.9 volts. The amps then slowly climbed up to and settled down at 20 amps, more than double the reading of the Main? To the best of my knowledge everything is wired correctly. There's no reason for the currents to be that different. I'd forgotten about the lower setpoint for the standby regulator. 12.9 is a bit low, it should be about 1 volt lower than your main alternator regulator. 14.5 for main, 13.5 for aux. You say that the aux alternator amps 'climbed slowly' where did it start from? I'd tweak the aux alternator regulator up to 13.5 volts and see how the behavior changes. Sounds like the battery is taking on part of the aux loads and reduces its share as the terminal voltage drops. The aux alternator should support all ships loads up to 20A at some voltage just above that which will cause the battery to share the load. This has to be above 13.0 volts. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps
From: "RV7ASask" <rv7alamb(at)sasktel.net>
Date: Jul 08, 2012
Thanks Bob, You asked about the amps climbing slowly. When I switch the main alternator off and switch the amps monitor switch to Aux Alternator the Aux will show zero amps. As the Aux comes on line the amps slowly build from zero to 20 amps and it takes about 20 to 30 seconds. I am not sure if this is the Skyview indicating system or is the battery slowly allowing the load to be taken up by the alternator? I do not have the ability to monitor the amps being drawn by the battery as the two indicator inputs come off the shunts as per Z12. I will not be flying until the end of the week but I will adjust the aux regulator and let you know how the next test goes. Regards David Lamb Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=377702#377702 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michael Burbidge <mburbidg(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Bending ring terminals on superflex-battery cables...
Date: Jul 08, 2012
Is it acceptable to put a 90 degree bend in the ring terminals on the superflex-battery cables from B&C so that the cable attaches to terminals without tension? Michael- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 09, 2012
Subject: Re: Bending ring terminals on superflex-battery cables...
From: bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com>
i would bend it once but never again after that. lets see what the expperts say. bob noffs On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Michael Burbidge wrote: > mburbidg(at)gmail.com> > > Is it acceptable to put a 90 degree bend in the ring terminals on the > superflex-battery cables from B&C so that the cable attaches to terminals > without tension? > > Michael- > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Stuart Hutchison" <stuart(at)stuarthutchison.com.au>
Subject: Bending ring terminals on superflex-battery cables...
Date: Jul 09, 2012
If you're tempted to anneal, keep in mind that that cold-worked copper (such as spark plug seals) is annealed by quenching rather than slow cooling like most other metals. The heat required to anneal would need to be quenched to avoid damage to the insulation anyway ! Cheers, Stu _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of bob noffs Sent: Monday, July 09, 2012 9:30 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Bending ring terminals on superflex-battery cables... i would bend it once but never again after that. lets see what the expperts say. bob noffs On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Michael Burbidge wrote: Is it acceptable to put a 90 degree bend in the ring terminals on the superflex-battery cables from B&C so that the cable attaches to terminals without tension? Michael ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 09, 2012
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Bending ring terminals on superflex-battery cables...
Lets clear up some misconceptions. A copper ring terminal bent once won't need annealing. Copper anneals by heating along, quenching not required. Spark plug gaskets anneal equally well whether they are air cooled or quenched. And yes, you need the copper heated to cherry red to anneal it, so you are not going to protect the insulation that comes on a ring terminal. On 7/9/2012 5:12 AM, Stuart Hutchison wrote: > If you're tempted to anneal, keep in mind that that cold-worked copper > (such as spark plug seals) is annealed by quenching rather than slow > cooling like most other metals. The heat required to anneal would > need to be quenched to avoid damage to the insulation anyway ! > Cheers, Stu > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of > *bob noffs > *Sent:* Monday, July 09, 2012 9:30 PM > *To:* aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > *Subject:* Re: AeroElectric-List: Bending ring terminals on > superflex-battery cables... > > i would bend it once but never again after that. lets see what the > expperts say. > bob noffs > > ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Stuart Hutchison" <stuart(at)stuarthutchison.com.au>
Subject: Bending ring terminals on superflex-battery cables...
Date: Jul 09, 2012
Agree with your single-bend comment Kelly. I was told otherwise by my engine shop in regard to air cooling, but I'll take your word for it in the absence of other evidence! Quenching any metal to anneal seems counter-intuitive to start with, but to think both air cooling and quenching have the same affect on a metal (copper in this case) is quite bizarre ! Yes, cherry red hardly gives plastic a chance. I've used a cool wet wrap when soldering terminals to #2 CCA fatwire with reasonable success. Heatshrink does the rest. -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen Sent: Monday, July 09, 2012 10:27 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Bending ring terminals on superflex-battery cables... --> Lets clear up some misconceptions. A copper ring terminal bent once won't need annealing. Copper anneals by heating alon[e]g, quenching not required. Spark plug gaskets anneal equally well whether they are air cooled or quenched. And yes, you need the copper heated to cherry red to anneal it, so you are not going to protect the insulation that comes on a ring terminal. On 7/9/2012 5:12 AM, Stuart Hutchison wrote: > If you're tempted to anneal, keep in mind that that cold-worked copper > (such as spark plug seals) is annealed by quenching rather than slow > cooling like most other metals. The heat required to anneal would > need to be quenched to avoid damage to the insulation anyway ! > Cheers, Stu > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > *From:* owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of > *bob noffs > *Sent:* Monday, July 09, 2012 9:30 PM > *To:* aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > *Subject:* Re: AeroElectric-List: Bending ring terminals on > superflex-battery cables... > > i would bend it once but never again after that. lets see what the > expperts say. > bob noffs > > ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 09, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Bending ring terminals on superflex-battery cables...
At 06:30 AM 7/9/2012, you wrote: >i would bend it once but never again after that. lets see what the >expperts say. > bob noffs Good call. Yes, the flag on a ring terminal is often shaped to accommodate wire dress but a bend as sharp as 90 degrees happens waayyy down on the s/n curve for failure (stress versus number of cycles). Don't read any imminent risk for failure here . . . you can probably bend and straighten the thing out several times before failure. I just put an 8AWG x 1/4 terminal in a vice and 'stroked' it 8 times before I could detect a reduction in resistance to bending. Failure probably started at about half that number of strokes). You've got a lot of headroom for cycles to failure under the expected vibration levels but putting that 90 degree bend in it cuts a humongous headroom number to a simply big headroom number. But as Bob has suggested, do it only once. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Bending ring terminals on superflex-battery cables...
Date: Jul 09, 2012
From: "George, Neal Capt 505 TRS/DOJ" <Neal.George(at)hurlburt.af.mil>
Before you bend that tab, apply your sheet metal skills. Round the sharp edges and inspect for nicks & scratches that might start a crack. Neal -----Original Message----- From: Kelly McMullen Lets clear up some misconceptions. A copper ring terminal bent once won't need annealing. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 09, 2012
From: jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Bending ring terminals on superflex-battery cables...
Hey Guys, Sitting on the side line reading the answers provided while technical are confusing and I don't think they have really provided the requester a clear answer to go on. One Is the terminal solid copper or some other form of other metal material plated over with copper, would that make any difference. Point is can he bend it? Regards, jerry At 10:44 PM 7/8/2012, you wrote: > >Is it acceptable to put a 90 degree bend in the ring terminals on >the superflex-battery cables from B&C so that the cable attaches to >terminals without tension? > >Michael- > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rob Henderson" <robnrobinh(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Antenna length
Date: Jul 09, 2012
Update I just received my order from RST, I about fell over. You know just a little note in the mail or answering email or the phone or a big statement on the web site would solve most of their customer service issues. Thanks -Rob From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Henderson Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 7:47 AM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Antenna length 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 ========= http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List http://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps
From: "maca2790" <vk2gcn(at)cirruscomms.com.au>
Date: Jul 09, 2012
As Bob says it would seem that you have a load of at least 20 amps or more on the electrical system and because the Aux Alt output Voltage is so low some of the load is being shared with the Battery. As the battery terminal voltage starts to reduce because of current being drawn from it, the load on the Aux Alternator is slowly increasing. Hence you see the increase in indicated Aux Alt output. If 20 amps is the rated output of the AUX Alt you need to turn off unneeded equipment to get the load down to say 16 or 17 amps and so give you some headroom for battery charging. cheers John MacCallum RV10 #41016 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=377820#377820 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: instrument panel connectors
Date: Jul 10, 2012
From: "Allan Aaron" <aaaron(at)tvp.com.au>
If I were to make my instrument panel (mainly steam guages) removable, what would be the best type of connectors to use from a reliability, noise and maintenance perspective. I need to think about power, sensors and radio/audio. I realise that this may introduce some unreliability into the system - just wondering if I were to do this, what are the best type of connectors to use. Thanks - Allan ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 10, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject:
A few months ago there was some discussion on the List about incorporating some precision, non-contact, rotary motion transducers to some of our applications on OBAM aircraft. Well, I'm aware of one company who has already packaged the Austria-Microsystems magnetic sensors into a potentiometer like package. http://tinyurl.com/73sb7tc They sell for less $ than I can afford to make them. We'll be considering them to replace LVDT's in a new design for a flap actuator. Parts count for the new versus old system will drop by 30% or more. Anyone interested in some loose AustriaMicrosystems chips? Got about a dozen I'd part with real reasonable! Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Jul 10, 2012
Subject: Re: instrument panel connectors
Good Morning Allan, A little over twenty years ago I set up my Bonanza floating panel so as to make it easily removable. I had a lot of switches mounted on the panel so there were a lot of connections other than the usual stock connectors on the individual instruments. What I did was arrange to have just one static line and one pitot line going to the panel. The rest of that plumbing stayed with the removed panel. I used stock wrench removable B nut connectors for those two lines as well as all other plumbing. For all of the miscellaneous electrical items I installed a standard 60 pin CPC connector. Used about forty of the available spots. The CPC series of connectors use the same machined pins as do the sub D connectors. That has worked well for the last twenty plus years. I can remove the panel in five minutes and reinstall it in less than ten minutes. Total number of electrical connectors and tubing on the panel is less than ten. Happy Skies, Old Bob In a message dated 7/10/2012 12:43:09 A.M. Central Daylight Time, aaaron(at)tvp.com.au writes: If I were to make my instrument panel (mainly steam guages) removable, what would be the best type of connectors to use from a reliability, noise and maintenance perspective. I need to think about power, sensors and radio/audio. I realise that this may introduce some unreliability into the system - just wondering if I were to do this, what are the best type of connectors to use. Thanks - Allan ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 10, 2012
Subject: Re: instrument panel connectors
From: James Kilford <james(at)etravel.org>
On mine, the radios & GPS are on a separate tray, which gets left in place when the panel is removed. Toggle switches are on a separate permanently-installed sub-panel. Apart from that, there are the following types of connectors: Engine instruments: 9-pin d-sub (all UMA instruments) Stall warner light: Mate-n-lok Annunciator panel: Mate-n-lok Intercom: 9-pin d-sub Turn co-ordinator: wire-lockable Amphenol connector (to suit t/c) Pitot / static: quick-disconnect fittings. Rev counter: quick-disconnect fitting supplied with it (UMA again) Vacuum gauges: haven't thought about these yet! I really like the mate-n-lok connectors and have used them throughout the plane for various connections. FWIW. James On 10 July 2012 10:13, wrote: > ** > Good Morning Allan, > > A little over twenty years ago I set up my Bonanza floating panel so as to > make it easily removable. I had a lot of switches mounted on the panel so > there were a lot of connections other than the usual stock connectors on > the individual instruments. > > What I did was arrange to have just one static line and one pitot line > going to the panel. The rest of that plumbing stayed with the removed > panel. I used stock wrench removable B nut connectors for those two lines > as well as all other plumbing. For all of the miscellaneous electrical > items I installed a standard 60 pin CPC connector. Used about forty of the > available spots. The CPC series of connectors use the same machined pins as > do the sub D connectors. That has worked well for the last twenty plus > years. > > I can remove the panel in five minutes and reinstall it in less than ten > minutes. Total number of electrical connectors and tubing on the panel is > less than ten. > > Happy Skies, > > Old Bob > > > In a message dated 7/10/2012 12:43:09 A.M. Central Daylight Time, > aaaron(at)tvp.com.au writes: > > If I were to make my instrument panel (mainly steam guages) removable, > what would be the best type of connectors to use from a reliability, noise > and maintenance perspective. I need to think about power, sensors and > radio/audio. I realise that this may introduce some unreliability into the > system - just wondering if I were to do this, what are the best type of > connectors to use. > Thanks - Allan > > * > * > > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 10, 2012
From: Steve Stearns <steve(at)tomasara.com>
Subject: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps
Regarding the unexpected slowly rising to too high current reading when switching to the backup alternator, one thing I would check for is that the wrong shunt is in the alternate alternator current patch (leading to the high, but I suspect false, reading) and that the indicator/glass-panel has a very strong low-pass response (leading to the slow rise). Steve Stearns Boulder/Longmont, Colorado CSA,EAA,IAC,AOPA,PE,ARRL,BARC (but ignorant none-the-less) Restoring (since 1/07) and flying again (8/11!): N45FC O235 Longeze Cothern/Friling CF1 (~1000 Hrs) Flying (since 9/86): N43732 A65 Taylorcraft BC12D ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 10, 2012
Subject: grounding procedures
From: bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com>
hi all, lately i have been filling my plane out of 5 gal. plastic cans and i am finding it not too time consuming. the biggest reason is higher octane mogas than i can get at the airport. anyway.............i need some advice on grounding.i have a 12 volt pump mounted and it is powered by a battery 20 feet away. i have a handheld switch . i set the plastic can on the table and fuel is transferred thru vinyl tubing. at the airplane end is a metal filter. pumps a gallon a minute. i plan to set up a ground to the exhaust pipe [all tanks are grounded to the engine] but i do not know how to ground the pump or hoses. any advice would be appreciated. bob noffs ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jul 10, 2012
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
My understanding is that the greatest danger comes from a spark jumping between the container and the filler neck. To prevent that, I always very consciously keep the spout in contact with the filler neck. When I'm finished filling, I methodically drag the spout away from the opening before breaking contact. That way, if a spark jumps the gap, it doesn't happen near the filler opening. The worst accident I've heard of (I met the victim) illustrates some valuable lessons. He was pouring fuel from a bucket through a funnel into a wing. He got the spark/flash, and it wouldn't have been as horrible if he hadn't instinctively jumped back and spilled the bucket all over himself. He's lucky to be alive but he'll never be the same. So another point is to use a closed container with a smallish neck and opening. That way the flash doesn't ignite the entire volume, and it doesn't spill as fast if it's dropped. I've been told that grounding a plastic container is very difficult. I'm curious to hear what others have to say. Dave Saylor 831-750-0284 CL On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 9:37 AM, bob noffs wrote: > hi all, > lately i have been filling my plane out of 5 gal. plastic cans and i am > finding it not too time consuming. the biggest reason is higher octane mogas > than i can get at the airport. > anyway.............i need some advice on grounding.i have a 12 volt pump > mounted and it is powered by a battery 20 feet away. i have a handheld > switch . i set the plastic can on the table and fuel is transferred thru > vinyl tubing. at the airplane end is a metal filter. pumps a gallon a > minute. i plan to set up a ground to the exhaust pipe [all tanks are > grounded to the engine] but i do not know how to ground the pump or hoses. > any advice would be appreciated. > bob noffs > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 10, 2012
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
On 07/10/2012 12:37 PM, bob noffs wrote: i plan to set up a ground to the exhaust pipe > [all tanks are grounded to the engine] but i do not know how to ground > the pump or hoses. any advice would be appreciated. Hi Bob, If you don't mind spending a small amount of money, might I suggest a different container? The really cheap option if you want to continue using a 5 gallon container, is an all metal safety can, such as: http://www.tractorsupply.com/eagle-safety-gas-can-5-gal--3958668 Drill a hole in the handle and attach a flexible grounding wire (Lowes, about $19) http://www.lowes.com/pd_348276-273-5977001_0__?productId=3645156&Ntt=steel+cable&pl=1¤tURL=&facetInfo For something a little more fancy, search for "portable fuel caddy" on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=15+gallon+fuel+tank#/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=portable+fuel+caddy&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Aportable+fuel+caddy I ended up buying a 15 gallon metal fuel container from the local Tractor Supply store, mounted it in my truck, and added one of their 12v GPI EZ-8 Fuel Pumps, which uses conductive hoses. I attached a grounding line between the the tank and pump, and to the aircraft (using the Lowes steel cable above and a simple spring clamp for the airplane end), and since the fuel pump uses conductive hoses it also provides another path for grounding. I probably have $300 in total for this setup, but it is arguably as "safe" as the airport's fuel truck in terms of grounding, and I can use it for all of the toys at home, too. http://www.tractorsupply.com/gpi-reg-ez-8-fuel-pump-1-10-hp-3-4-in-inlet-3858004 http://www.egascans.com/15-gallon-gas-cans/ I'd be very concerned using a plastic fuel can, and vinyl transfer line, neither of which can be grounded safely. -Dj ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 10, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
At 11:37 AM 7/10/2012, you wrote: hi all, lately i have been filling my plane out of 5 gal. plastic cans and i am finding it not too time consuming. the biggest reason is higher octane mogas than i can get at the airport. anyway.............i need some advice on grounding.i have a 12 volt pump mounted and it is powered by a battery 20 feet away. i have a handheld switch . i set the plastic can on the table and fuel is transferred thru vinyl tubing. at the airplane end is a metal filter. pumps a gallon a minute. i plan to set up a ground to the exhaust pipe [all tanks are grounded to the engine] but i do not know how to ground the pump or hoses. any advice would be appreciated. I had this conversation with fellow who stopped in at our airport for fuel way back when. He was flying one of the Rutan Ez airplanes (all plastic) and as I fueled him, he expressed concerns about vapor fires while transferring fuel in the hangar next to his house. I suggested that one could take a cue from the heavy iron airplanes fitted with single point fueling ports. You can avoid vapor/spillage issues entirely when access to the tanks is fitted with a auto shut-off quick- connect like those used in hydraulic systems: [] The fitting might even replace the tank's water drains. You could craft a water-inspection tool to access this port and fit your fuel transfer hose with the mating fitting. Remove the fuel cap to fill. You can watch down the filler cap to effect the appropriate time to shut off flow but without placing anything conductive and/or static prone in the vicinity of the filler cap. He thought he would do that for his airplane . . . but never saw him again or got any feedback on the technique. Seems like one could fill a tank with zero chance for spilled fuel and/or generation of sparks near the vented vapors. If it's good for a Boeing or a Hawker, it might be just as good for an RV. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Lloyd" <skywagon(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
Date: Jul 10, 2012
This is a very worth while thread.... as some time or another, fueling with portable containers can bite you... Some suggestions to add to others replying..... * be especially aware of the static spark problem on hotter, drier days.. * the flowing fuel itself generates static voltage, again, dry days are worse. * some insert a type of copper ground wire inside the fueling line itself so that it is in contact with the fuel from end to end; plastic container to funnel and aircraft. * plastic containers as mentioned before are the worst for fueling when they are used directly on the wing pouring. If on the end of an extended fuel hose via a pump, that is different but, still a problem as the vinyl hose could easily build up a static charge. That is where the copper wire running the whole length inside the hose would help drain off any building charge. * again, as mentioned earlier it is important to figure a method to ground the fuel contain, hoses, etc. to the tank being filled. If done properly, no static of any consequence should build to the point of a discharge. Hopefully, others will add to and correct this list. I also have a personal example of what this kind of accident can do. A local gal, who was a 1st class ultralights pilot and instructor, was filling her wing tank via a plastic container on a warm, dry day in Oregon. A spark jumped, fire ensued instantly and she too accidently got fuel splashed on her as she jumped down. Ultralights was a total loss and she spent years trying to get her body damage corrected with surgery. Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Saylor" <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 10:54 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: grounding procedures > > > My understanding is that the greatest danger comes from a spark > jumping between the container and the filler neck. > > To prevent that, I always very consciously keep the spout in contact > with the filler neck. When I'm finished filling, I methodically drag > the spout away from the opening before breaking contact. That way, if > a spark jumps the gap, it doesn't happen near the filler opening. > > The worst accident I've heard of (I met the victim) illustrates some > valuable lessons. He was pouring fuel from a bucket through a funnel > into a wing. He got the spark/flash, and it wouldn't have been as > horrible if he hadn't instinctively jumped back and spilled the bucket > all over himself. He's lucky to be alive but he'll never be the same. > So another point is to use a closed container with a smallish neck > and opening. That way the flash doesn't ignite the entire volume, and > it doesn't spill as fast if it's dropped. > > I've been told that grounding a plastic container is very difficult. > I'm curious to hear what others have to say. > > Dave Saylor > 831-750-0284 CL > > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 9:37 AM, bob noffs wrote: >> hi all, >> lately i have been filling my plane out of 5 gal. plastic cans and i am >> finding it not too time consuming. the biggest reason is higher octane >> mogas >> than i can get at the airport. >> anyway.............i need some advice on grounding.i have a 12 volt pump >> mounted and it is powered by a battery 20 feet away. i have a handheld >> switch . i set the plastic can on the table and fuel is transferred thru >> vinyl tubing. at the airplane end is a metal filter. pumps a gallon a >> minute. i plan to set up a ground to the exhaust pipe [all tanks are >> grounded to the engine] but i do not know how to ground the pump or >> hoses. >> any advice would be appreciated. >> bob noffs >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Chris Barber <cbarber(at)TexasAttorney.net>
Subject: Ground jumping on Z-14
Date: Jul 10, 2012
Sorry if this is too basic but I am wondering about being able to jump star t my Velocity. I am looking at adding one of the sockets available with pl ug the standard cables hook to. it is only two screws, but it is a pain to remove them to gain access to my battery. Now that I have flown (as of Ju ne 9, 2012) I have noted on one occasion that I left my EFIS on too long an d drained the batteries....actually my secondary battery, and the system re ally did not like it. The secondary low voltage light screaming....uh, bli nking at me was quite bothersome. Once charged up again, it seemed happy. My question. If I am wiring in one of these sockets do I wire to just one battery or to both to allow charging of both at the same time or would this not be the way it worked. Or, wire it to one battery and turn on the cros sover switch to allow charging of both. Currently I will hook my charger t o one of the other battery and charge them individually should the need dev elop. Other than me leaving the EFIS on this has not been an issue as of l ate since I got past some proof of concept wire and engine experimentation. This all may be overkill now that it seems my stuff is working pretty well and the screws are not that big a deal, but I am curious. Thanks Chris Barber Houston Velocity N17010 Rotary 13b turbo ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 10, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Ground jumping on Z-14
At 02:40 PM 7/10/2012, you wrote: Sorry if this is too basic but I am wondering about being able to jump start my Velocity. I am looking at adding one of the sockets available with plug the standard cables hook to. it is only two screws, but it is a pain to remove them to gain access to my battery. Now that I have flown (as of June 9, 2012) I have noted on one occasion that I left my EFIS on too long and drained the batteries....actually my secondary battery, and the system really did not like it. The secondary low voltage light screaming....uh, blinking at me was quite bothersome. Once charged up again, it seemed happy. My question. If I am wiring in one of these sockets do I wire to just one battery or to both to allow charging of both at the same time or would this not be the way it worked. Or, wire it to one battery and turn on the crossover switch to allow charging of both. Currently I will hook my charger to one of the other battery and charge them individually should the need develop. Other than me leaving the EFIS on this has not been an issue as of late since I got past some proof of concept wire and engine experimentation. Chris, Is there AC mains power in your hangar? How about a 3 or 4 pin plug that wires TWO maintainers to your ship's batteries when plugged in. These are low cost, accurate chargers that would be isolated from each other during charging/maintaining the batteries. I would be helpful to know what architecture you are using for a dual battery setup. What are your plan-b procedures for continued flight with a failed alternator? You menion Z-14 . . . do you have dual alternators on the Rotary engine? How did you happen to run down both batteries having left one accessory turned on? If the smaller alternator is having trouble charging the battery while running accessories on its bus, you can close the cross-feed contactor and use the main alternator to get both batteries topped off. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 10, 2012
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
From: bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com>
i am thinking of pushing a copper wire thru the vinyl hose from each end [an end in the can and an end in the aircraft] and when i get to the metal pump i am thinking i can clamp the wire between the vinyl tube wall and the metal barb on the pump. the pump will then be grounded. also ground the plane. how bout that? bob noffs On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 2:20 PM, David Lloyd wrote: > skywagon(at)charter.net> > > This is a very worth while thread.... as some time or another, fueling > with portable containers can bite you... > Some suggestions to add to others replying..... > > * be especially aware of the static spark problem on hotter, drier days.. > * the flowing fuel itself generates static voltage, again, dry days are > worse. > * some insert a type of copper ground wire inside the fueling line itself > so that it is in contact with the fuel from end to end; plastic container > to funnel and aircraft. > * plastic containers as mentioned before are the worst for fueling when > they are used directly on the wing pouring. If on the end of an extended > fuel hose via a pump, that is different but, still a problem as the vinyl > hose could easily build up a static charge. That is where the copper wire > running the whole length inside the hose would help drain off any building > charge. > * again, as mentioned earlier it is important to figure a method to ground > the fuel contain, hoses, etc. to the tank being filled. If done properly, > no static of any consequence should build to the point of a discharge. > > Hopefully, others will add to and correct this list. > > I also have a personal example of what this kind of accident can do. A > local gal, who was a 1st class ultralights pilot and instructor, was > filling her wing tank via a plastic container on a warm, dry day in Oregon. > A spark jumped, fire ensued instantly and she too accidently got fuel > splashed on her as she jumped down. Ultralights was a total loss and she > spent years trying to get her body damage corrected with surgery. Dave > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Saylor" <dave.saylor.aircrafters@ > **gmail.com > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 10:54 AM > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: grounding procedures > > >> dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)**gmail.com > >> >> My understanding is that the greatest danger comes from a spark >> jumping between the container and the filler neck. >> >> To prevent that, I always very consciously keep the spout in contact >> with the filler neck. When I'm finished filling, I methodically drag >> the spout away from the opening before breaking contact. That way, if >> a spark jumps the gap, it doesn't happen near the filler opening. >> >> The worst accident I've heard of (I met the victim) illustrates some >> valuable lessons. He was pouring fuel from a bucket through a funnel >> into a wing. He got the spark/flash, and it wouldn't have been as >> horrible if he hadn't instinctively jumped back and spilled the bucket >> all over himself. He's lucky to be alive but he'll never be the same. >> So another point is to use a closed container with a smallish neck >> and opening. That way the flash doesn't ignite the entire volume, and >> it doesn't spill as fast if it's dropped. >> >> I've been told that grounding a plastic container is very difficult. >> I'm curious to hear what others have to say. >> >> Dave Saylor >> 831-750-0284 CL >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 9:37 AM, bob noffs wrote: >> >>> hi all, >>> lately i have been filling my plane out of 5 gal. plastic cans and i am >>> finding it not too time consuming. the biggest reason is higher octane >>> mogas >>> than i can get at the airport. >>> anyway.............i need some advice on grounding.i have a 12 volt pump >>> mounted and it is powered by a battery 20 feet away. i have a handheld >>> switch . i set the plastic can on the table and fuel is transferred thru >>> vinyl tubing. at the airplane end is a metal filter. pumps a gallon a >>> minute. i plan to set up a ground to the exhaust pipe [all tanks are >>> grounded to the engine] but i do not know how to ground the pump or >>> hoses. >>> any advice would be appreciated. >>> bob noffs >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 10, 2012
From: Peter Pengilly <peter(at)sportingaero.com>
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
Hi Bob, I has a similar set up a while ago. I believe the danger is static produced by the flow of fuel through the plastic hose, with a charge building up on the nozzle jumping to the airplane and igniting and vapour near the filler neck. I used a piece of copper plumbing pipe as a filler spout and soldered some thick speaker cable to it. I connected that to the airplane exhaust to make the airplane and filler spout at the same potential. I also used steel fuel cans and ran the speaker wire. wound around the pipe, back to the filler can and connected with a large croc clip. The pump motor was also hooked up to avoid any static build up. You can also connect the whole lot to a steel stake in the ground if you really want to. I used a small 7ah battery to power the whole thing - it would pump 5gals in about 3 minutes. It worked quite well. Hope this helps, Peter On 10/07/2012 17:37, bob noffs wrote: > hi all, > lately i have been filling my plane out of 5 gal. plastic cans and i > am finding it not too time consuming. the biggest reason is higher > octane mogas than i can get at the airport. > anyway.............i need some advice on grounding.i have a 12 volt > pump mounted and it is powered by a battery 20 feet away. i have a > handheld switch . i set the plastic can on the table and fuel is > transferred thru vinyl tubing. at the airplane end is a metal filter. > pumps a gallon a minute. i plan to set up a ground to the exhaust pipe > [all tanks are grounded to the engine] but i do not know how to > ground the pump or hoses. any advice would be appreciated. > bob noffs > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 10, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Ground jumping on Z-14
At 02:40 PM 7/10/2012, you wrote: Sorry if this is too basic but I am wondering about being able to jump start my Velocity. I missed this . . . if you want to actually crank the engine using ground power, you'll need a robust connector capable of carrying the current. You only need to connect it to the main battery in Z-14 . . . the aux battery gets connected too by closing the battery master switches and cross-feed contactors. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "F. Tim Yoder" <ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com>
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
Date: Jul 10, 2012
Don't use a plastic gas can! Replace it with a steel one. You can't afford to use cheap parts, equipment, on airplanes. :-) Also, if you are flying a composite plane, the the gas cap filler ring is not grounded unless the builder ran a ground wire to the ships ground. When filling from a steel can, touch the nozzle to the ring and your body is ground to earth. Do this even when filling off a truck or fuel island. You only get one chance! ----- Original Message ----- From: bob noffs To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 1:19 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: grounding procedures i am thinking of pushing a copper wire thru the vinyl hose from each end [an end in the can and an end in the aircraft] and when i get to the metal pump i am thinking i can clamp the wire between the vinyl tube wall and the metal barb on the pump. the pump will then be grounded. also ground the plane. how bout that? bob noffs On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 2:20 PM, David Lloyd wrote: This is a very worth while thread.... as some time or another, fueling with portable containers can bite you... Some suggestions to add to others replying..... * be especially aware of the static spark problem on hotter, drier days.. * the flowing fuel itself generates static voltage, again, dry days are worse. * some insert a type of copper ground wire inside the fueling line itself so that it is in contact with the fuel from end to end; plastic container to funnel and aircraft. * plastic containers as mentioned before are the worst for fueling when they are used directly on the wing pouring. If on the end of an extended fuel hose via a pump, that is different but, still a problem as the vinyl hose could easily build up a static charge. That is where the copper wire running the whole length inside the hose would help drain off any building charge. * again, as mentioned earlier it is important to figure a method to ground the fuel contain, hoses, etc. to the tank being filled. If done properly, no static of any consequence should build to the point of a discharge. Hopefully, others will add to and correct this list. I also have a personal example of what this kind of accident can do. A local gal, who was a 1st class ultralights pilot and instructor, was filling her wing tank via a plastic container on a warm, dry day in Oregon. A spark jumped, fire ensued instantly and she too accidently got fuel splashed on her as she jumped down. Ultralights was a total loss and she spent years trying to get her body damage corrected with surgery. Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Saylor" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 10:54 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: grounding procedures My understanding is that the greatest danger comes from a spark jumping between the container and the filler neck. To prevent that, I always very consciously keep the spout in contact with the filler neck. When I'm finished filling, I methodically drag the spout away from the opening before breaking contact. That way, if a spark jumps the gap, it doesn't happen near the filler opening. The worst accident I've heard of (I met the victim) illustrates some valuable lessons. He was pouring fuel from a bucket through a funnel into a wing. He got the spark/flash, and it wouldn't have been as horrible if he hadn't instinctively jumped back and spilled the bucket all over himself. He's lucky to be alive but he'll never be the same. So another point is to use a closed container with a smallish neck and opening. That way the flash doesn't ignite the entire volume, and it doesn't spill as fast if it's dropped. I've been told that grounding a plastic container is very difficult. I'm curious to hear what others have to say. Dave Saylor 831-750-0284 CL On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 9:37 AM, bob noffs wrote: hi all, lately i have been filling my plane out of 5 gal. plastic cans and i am finding it not too time consuming. the biggest reason is higher octane mogas than i can get at the airport. anyway.............i need some advice on grounding.i have a 12 volt pump mounted and it is powered by a battery 20 feet away. i have a handheld switch . i set the plastic can on the table and fuel is transferred thru vinyl tubing. at the airplane end is a metal filter. pumps a gallon a minute. i plan to set up a ground to the exhaust pipe [all tanks are grounded to the engine] but i do not know how to ground the pump or hoses. any advice would be appreciated. bob noffs -List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List http://forums.matronics.com le, List Admin. ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 10, 2012
From: James Robinson <jbr79r(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
Smoe thing that was determined awhile back- by the CAFE foundation was th at the best way to get rid of static was to wipe around the fuel cap with a damp rag before fueling.- This is what i do with my Glasair=0AJim=0A=0A -=0AJames Robinson=0AGlasair lll N79R=0ASpanish Fork UT U77=0A=0A=0A___ _____________________________=0A From: bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com>=0ATo: a eroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0ASent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 1:19 PM=0ASu bject: Re: AeroElectric-List: grounding procedures=0A =0A=0Ai am thinking o f pushing a copper wire thru the vinyl hose from each end [an end in the ca n and an end in the aircraft] and when i get to the metal pump i am thinkin g i can clamp the wire between the vinyl tube wall and the metal barb on th e pump. the pump will then be grounded. also ground the plane. how bout tha t?=0A-bob noffs=0A=0A=0AOn Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 2:20 PM, David Lloyd =0A>=0A>This is a very worth while thread. ... as some time or another, fueling with portable containers can bite you. ..=0A>Some suggestions to add to others replying.....=0A>=0A>* be especiall y aware of the static spark problem on hotter, drier days..=0A>* the flowin g fuel itself generates static voltage, again, dry days are worse.=0A>* som e insert a type of copper ground wire inside the fueling line itself so tha t it is in contact with the fuel from end to end; plastic container to funn el and aircraft.=0A>* plastic containers as mentioned before are the worst for fueling when they are used directly on the wing pouring. -If on the e nd of an extended fuel hose via a pump, that is different but, still a prob lem as the vinyl hose could easily build up a static charge. -That is whe re the copper wire running the whole length inside the hose would help drai n off any building charge.=0A>* again, as mentioned earlier it is important to figure a method to ground the fuel contain, hoses, etc. to the tank bei ng filled. -If -done properly, no static of any consequence should buil d to the point of a discharge.=0A>=0A>Hopefully, others will add to and cor rect this list.=0A>=0A>I also have a personal example of what this kind of accident can do. -A local gal, who was a 1st class ultralights pilot and instructor, was filling her wing tank via a plastic container on a warm, dr y day in Oregon. -A spark jumped, fire ensued instantly and she too accid ently got fuel splashed on her as she jumped down. -Ultralights was a tot al loss and she spent years trying to get her body damage corrected with su rgery. -Dave=0A>=0A>=0A>----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Saylor" =0A>To: =0A>Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 10:54 AM=0A>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-Lis t: grounding procedures=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave Saylor =0A>>=0A>>My understand ing is that the greatest danger comes from a spark=0A>>jumping between the container and the filler neck.=0A>>=0A>>To prevent that, I always very cons ciously keep the spout in contact=0A>>with the filler neck. -When I'm fin ished filling, I methodically drag=0A>>the spout away from the opening befo re breaking contact. -That way, if=0A>>a spark jumps the gap, it doesn't happen near the filler opening.=0A>>=0A>>The worst accident I've heard of ( I met the victim) illustrates some=0A>>valuable lessons. -He was pouring fuel from a bucket through a funnel=0A>>into a wing. -He got the spark/fl ash, and it wouldn't have been as=0A>>horrible if he hadn't instinctively j umped back and spilled the bucket=0A>>all over himself. -He's lucky to be alive but he'll never be the same.=0A>>So another point is to use a closed container with a smallish neck=0A>>and opening. -That way the flash does n't ignite the entire volume, and=0A>>it doesn't spill as fast if it's drop ped.=0A>>=0A>>I've been told that grounding a plastic container is very dif ficult.=0A>>I'm curious to hear what others have to say.=0A>>=0A>>Dave Sayl or=0A>>831-750-0284-CL=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 9:37 AM , bob noffs wrote:=0A>>=0A>>hi all,=0A>>>-lately i hav e been filling my plane out of 5 gal. plastic cans and i am=0A>>>finding it not too time consuming. the biggest reason is higher octane mogas=0A>>>tha n i can get at the airport.=0A>>>-anyway.............i need some advice o n grounding.i have a 12 volt pump=0A>>>mounted and it is powered by a batte ry 20 feet away. i have a handheld=0A>>>switch . i set the plastic can on t he table and fuel is transferred thru=0A>>>vinyl tubing. at the airplane en d is a metal filter. pumps a gallon a=0A>>>minute. i plan to set up a groun d to the exhaust pipe [all tanks are=0A>>>grounded to the engine] but i do not know how to ground - the pump or hoses.=0A>>>any advice would be appr eciated.=0A>>>=0A-bob noffs=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>=0A> =0A>======================= ==============0A>-List" target="_blank">http:// www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List=0A>======== ====0A>http://forums.matronics.com=0A>========== ==0A>le, List Admin.=0A>="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution =0A>======================= ============= ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>
Subject: grounding procedures
Date: Jul 11, 2012
Hi there Bob, The point of grounding is to ensure that all items in the fuelling process are at the same potential; no potential difference then no spark between items; no spark, no BOOM! (sometimes started off by a small and seemingly insignificant announcement like, 'oh, damn!') You get a potential difference between items because of static build up, perhaps a bit of capacitance, and from the flow of the fuel itself (working similarly to you rubbing a jersey against your car in dry air- static build up). Connect a thin wire (even 22AWG would be fine) from the negative of your external pump battery and run it along the fuel tubing to the metal filter- and also back to your plastic can. Connect it electrically to the filter and continue along to the end of the tube where it goes into the tank. Put a crocodile clip on the end and connect that to the tank inlet- also put a croc clip at the plastic can end and clip it to the can. You can also run a lead to the exhaust but essentially the only place that you are concerned about is where the fuel could ignite- right at the filler. By running that wire all along the fuel line, from source to delivery point, each item is held at the same potential; no potential difference, no spark. Yes, I know that the refuelling can is plastic, but plastic can still build up a static charge. As an additional precaution you could also connect the battery negative to a metal plate that it lies on top of, but, that can be quite meaningless in terms of earthing/ grounding the system, depending on what surface this is all sitting on. Better to bring the whole system to voltage equality by holding the metal filter when you approach the aircraft and then touch the wing with your palm. Any potential difference will be balanced and you can now connect the delivery side to the tank inlet comfortably. Jay From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of bob noffs Sent: 10 July 2012 06:38 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: grounding procedures hi all, lately i have been filling my plane out of 5 gal. plastic cans and i am finding it not too time consuming. the biggest reason is higher octane mogas than i can get at the airport. anyway.............i need some advice on grounding.i have a 12 volt pump mounted and it is powered by a battery 20 feet away. i have a handheld switch . i set the plastic can on the table and fuel is transferred thru vinyl tubing. at the airplane end is a metal filter. pumps a gallon a minute. i plan to set up a ground to the exhaust pipe [all tanks are grounded to the engine] but i do not know how to ground the pump or hoses. any advice would be appreciated. bob noffs ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>
Subject: grounding procedures
Date: Jul 11, 2012
That'll work. Jay From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of bob noffs Sent: 10 July 2012 10:19 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: grounding procedures i am thinking of pushing a copper wire thru the vinyl hose from each end [an end in the can and an end in the aircraft] and when i get to the metal pump i am thinking i can clamp the wire between the vinyl tube wall and the metal barb on the pump. the pump will then be grounded. also ground the plane. how bout that? bob noffs On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 2:20 PM, David Lloyd wrote: This is a very worth while thread.... as some time or another, fueling with portable containers can bite you... Some suggestions to add to others replying..... * be especially aware of the static spark problem on hotter, drier days.. * the flowing fuel itself generates static voltage, again, dry days are worse. * some insert a type of copper ground wire inside the fueling line itself so that it is in contact with the fuel from end to end; plastic container to funnel and aircraft. * plastic containers as mentioned before are the worst for fueling when they are used directly on the wing pouring. If on the end of an extended fuel hose via a pump, that is different but, still a problem as the vinyl hose could easily build up a static charge. That is where the copper wire running the whole length inside the hose would help drain off any building charge. * again, as mentioned earlier it is important to figure a method to ground the fuel contain, hoses, etc. to the tank being filled. If done properly, no static of any consequence should build to the point of a discharge. Hopefully, others will add to and correct this list. I also have a personal example of what this kind of accident can do. A local gal, who was a 1st class ultralights pilot and instructor, was filling her wing tank via a plastic container on a warm, dry day in Oregon. A spark jumped, fire ensued instantly and she too accidently got fuel splashed on her as she jumped down. Ultralights was a total loss and she spent years trying to get her body damage corrected with surgery. Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Saylor" Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 10:54 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: grounding procedures My understanding is that the greatest danger comes from a spark jumping between the container and the filler neck. To prevent that, I always very consciously keep the spout in contact with the filler neck. When I'm finished filling, I methodically drag the spout away from the opening before breaking contact. That way, if a spark jumps the gap, it doesn't happen near the filler opening. The worst accident I've heard of (I met the victim) illustrates some valuable lessons. He was pouring fuel from a bucket through a funnel into a wing. He got the spark/flash, and it wouldn't have been as horrible if he hadn't instinctively jumped back and spilled the bucket all over himself. He's lucky to be alive but he'll never be the same. So another point is to use a closed container with a smallish neck and opening. That way the flash doesn't ignite the entire volume, and it doesn't spill as fast if it's dropped. I've been told that grounding a plastic container is very difficult. I'm curious to hear what others have to say. Dave Saylor 831-750-0284 CL On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 9:37 AM, bob noffs wrote: hi all, lately i have been filling my plane out of 5 gal. plastic cans and i am finding it not too time consuming. the biggest reason is higher octane mogas than i can get at the airport. anyway.............i need some advice on grounding.i have a 12 volt pump mounted and it is powered by a battery 20 feet away. i have a handheld switch . i set the plastic can on the table and fuel is transferred thru vinyl tubing. at the airplane end is a metal filter. pumps a gallon a minute. i plan to set up a ground to the exhaust pipe [all tanks are grounded to the engine] but i do not know how to ground the pump or hoses. any advice would be appreciated. bob noffs =================================== -List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List =================================== http://forums.matronics.com =================================== le, List Admin. ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 11, 2012
From: rayj <raymondj(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
Bob, Another thing to consider is what happens if/when the pump fails in some way. Is it possible for the electrons to find a path that would cause a problem? I don't have an answer, but it seems like another possible way for bad things to happen. Raymond Julian Kettle River, MN. "And you know that I could have me a million more friends, and all I'd have to lose is my point of view." - John Prine On 07/10/2012 03:19 PM, bob noffs wrote: > i am thinking of pushing a copper wire thru the vinyl hose from each end > [an end in the can and an end in the aircraft] and when i get to the > metal pump i am thinking i can clamp the wire between the vinyl tube > wall and the metal barb on the pump. the pump will then be grounded. > also ground the plane. how bout that? > bob noffs > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 2:20 PM, David Lloyd > wrote: > > > > > This is a very worth while thread.... as some time or another, > fueling with portable containers can bite you... > Some suggestions to add to others replying..... > > * be especially aware of the static spark problem on hotter, drier > days.. > * the flowing fuel itself generates static voltage, again, dry days > are worse. > * some insert a type of copper ground wire inside the fueling line > itself so that it is in contact with the fuel from end to end; > plastic container to funnel and aircraft. > * plastic containers as mentioned before are the worst for fueling > when they are used directly on the wing pouring. If on the end of > an extended fuel hose via a pump, that is different but, still a > problem as the vinyl hose could easily build up a static charge. > That is where the copper wire running the whole length inside the > hose would help drain off any building charge. > * again, as mentioned earlier it is important to figure a method to > ground the fuel contain, hoses, etc. to the tank being filled. If > done properly, no static of any consequence should build to the > point of a discharge. > > Hopefully, others will add to and correct this list. > > I also have a personal example of what this kind of accident can do. > A local gal, who was a 1st class ultralights pilot and instructor, > was filling her wing tank via a plastic container on a warm, dry day > in Oregon. A spark jumped, fire ensued instantly and she too > accidently got fuel splashed on her as she jumped down. Ultralights > was a total loss and she spent years trying to get her body damage > corrected with surgery. Dave > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Saylor" > <dave.saylor.aircrafters@__gmail.com > > > To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.__com > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 10:54 AM > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: grounding procedures > > > <dave.saylor.aircrafters@__gmail.com > > > > My understanding is that the greatest danger comes from a spark > jumping between the container and the filler neck. > > To prevent that, I always very consciously keep the spout in contact > with the filler neck. When I'm finished filling, I methodically > drag > the spout away from the opening before breaking contact. That > way, if > a spark jumps the gap, it doesn't happen near the filler opening. > > The worst accident I've heard of (I met the victim) illustrates some > valuable lessons. He was pouring fuel from a bucket through a > funnel > into a wing. He got the spark/flash, and it wouldn't have been as > horrible if he hadn't instinctively jumped back and spilled the > bucket > all over himself. He's lucky to be alive but he'll never be the > same. > So another point is to use a closed container with a smallish neck > and opening. That way the flash doesn't ignite the entire > volume, and > it doesn't spill as fast if it's dropped. > > I've been told that grounding a plastic container is very difficult. > I'm curious to hear what others have to say. > > Dave Saylor > 831-750-0284 CL > > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 9:37 AM, bob noffs > wrote: > > hi all, > lately i have been filling my plane out of 5 gal. plastic > cans and i am > finding it not too time consuming. the biggest reason is > higher octane mogas > than i can get at the airport. > anyway.............i need some advice on grounding.i have > a 12 volt pump > mounted and it is powered by a battery 20 feet away. i have > a handheld > switch . i set the plastic can on the table and fuel is > transferred thru > vinyl tubing. at the airplane end is a metal filter. pumps a > gallon a > minute. i plan to set up a ground to the exhaust pipe [all > tanks are > grounded to the engine] but i do not know how to ground > the pump or hoses. > any advice would be appreciated. > bob noffs > > > ====__==============================__= > -List" > target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/__Navigator?AeroElectric-List > ====__==============================__= > http://forums.matronics.com > ====__==============================__= > le, List Admin. > ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/__contribution > ====__==============================__= > > > * > > > * > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Ian Wilson <ianwilson2(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: This one is REALLY from me! - celui-ci est vraiment
de moi!
Date: Jul 11, 2012
Apologies to everyone for the 2 emails that you have received from my accou nt over the last 24 hours. I made the mistake of using a friends PC to acc ess my email when we were away - lesson learnt! For those of you that have clicked on the link in the emails=2C can I sugge st that you change your email password as soon as possible to avoid this vi rus spreading. Ian et en Francias...... Toutes mes excuses =E0 tous pour les 2 e-mails que vous avez re=E7us de mon compte au cours des derni=E8res 24 heures. J'ai fait l'erreur d'utiliser u n PC des amis =E0 acc=E9der =E0 mon courriel lorsque nous =E9tions en vacan ces - le=E7on apprise! Pour ceux d'entre vous qui ont cliqu=E9 sur le lien dans les e-mails=2C pu is-je sugg=E9rer que vous changez votre mot de passe e-mail d=E8s que possi ble pour =E9viter cette propagation du virus. Ian ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jack Haviland <jgh2(at)charter.net>
Subject: Over-voltage Circuit Trips
Date: Jul 11, 2012
Bob N. et al, Since my RV first flew about a year ago the over-voltage circuit has frequently tripped shortly after take off. Resetting the 5 amp pull-able circuit breaker once or twice generally prevents a re-occurence for the remainder of the flight but I need to determine the root cause and correct it. The plane is wired in general conformance with the Z-11 architecture using Van's 30 amp externally regulated alternator, their potted Transpo regulator, Bob's potted over-voltage detection device and a PC-680 battery. Prior to start the main bus voltage is usually around 12.5-12.8 volts measured with a meter plugged into a convenience outlet. After start, the voltage reported by the Grand Rapids EIS (on the endurance bus) is around 13.2-13.6 volts. I've never been able to detect a high voltage reading either on the plug-in meter or on the EIS before the over-voltage breaker trips. The breaker was purchased from a used parts supplier at Oshkosh and is a "prime suspect" but trouble shooting suggestions would be appreciated. Jack H. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Chris Barber <cbarber(at)TexasAttorney.net>
Subject: Ground jumping on Z-14
Date: Jul 11, 2012
Thanks Bob, That is basically what I wanted verified. All the best, Chris Barber Houston Velocity 17010 "Only 38.9 more hours in Phase One Testing" :-) ________________________________________ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] on behalf of Robert L. Nuckolls, III [nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 4:04 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ground jumping on Z-14 At 02:40 PM 7/10/2012, you wrote: Sorry if this is too basic but I am wondering about being able to jump start my Velocity. I missed this . . . if you want to actually crank the engine using ground power, you'll need a robust connector capable of carrying the current. You only need to connect it to the main battery in Z-14 . . . the aux battery gets connected too by closing the battery master switches and cross-feed contactors. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 11, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: OT: batteries in series on maintainer
At 11:06 PM 7/10/2012, you wrote: Greetings, I recall a prohibition on charging batteries in series at the series voltage. I have 2 6V sealed lead/acid batteries. I would like to hook the series connected 6V batteries in parallel with several 12V lead/acid batteries on a maintainer. They would be fully charged before I put them on the maintainer. I would consider holding the voltage in the 6V batteries at 80% of full charge acceptable. I think those discussions were about putting two 12v batteries in series for 24v performance and the TAPPING the mid-point between the batteries to power 12v accessories. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with hooking batteries in series from the perspective of charging/discharging them. A 12v battery is a collection of 6 cells in series, a 24v battery has 12 cells. Whether all the cells are in the same enclosure is irrelevant. The caveats for series connection is that the size and condition of all cells in a series string be as closely matched to each other as practical. In other words, two identical batteries with different service histories are not good candidates for series connection. Similarly, batteries of different manufacture or capacity are at risk for diminished performance in a series connection. If your 6v batteries are charged/discharged as a matched pair from new to discard, they will perform well. This is true even if they are say charged in series but discharged in parallel. But if they are ever separated in the performance of duty as energy sources, then their "alikeness" begins to diverge and some amount of service life as a pair will be lost. That's all very non-quantified. There's no hard cause and effect numbers to be offered. Design goals for longest service life calls for treating all cells in a multi-cell system the same irrespective of their packaging. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 11, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
At 03:31 AM 7/11/2012, you wrote: > >Bob, > >Another thing to consider is what happens if/when the pump fails in >some way. Is it possible for the electrons to find a path that >would cause a problem? I don't have an answer, but it seems like >another possible way for bad things to happen. > >Raymond Julian >Kettle River, MN. The fuel is itself a non-conductor so things happening at the input end of a hose are not electrically relevant to things that occur at the other end. Static electricity is only loosely related to power electricity. While the earliest investigations into the nature of electrons involved the migration of electrons from one surface to another as static sources, none of these phenomenon produced a practical power sources. Static electricity is a byproduct of motion between two substances with dissimilar affinities for hanging onto their electrons. The substances need not be conductive. You can rub a balloon on cat's fur and generate an observable effect of electron migration in spite of the fact that the two materials are exceedingly poor conductors. Hence, the sources for static generation are limitless. The risks are obviously limited to the small sphere of conditions existing in the immediate vicinity of any exposed fuel, oxygen and potential ignition source. Risks are reduced when any number of the three components are removed from the mix. Single point fueling fixtures remove exposed fuel and air sources. So even if drew a healthy arc between the two fittings as they are mated or de-mated, risks for escalating combustion are zero. If your intent is to stick a delivery device into an open fuel tank, then care must be made to control the greatest risks (1) spillage and (2) ignition source that might ignite vapors. The whole grounding issue goes to control of ignition source. This can be vexing for combinations of plastic airplanes, non-conductive hoses, high rates of fuel flow, etc. Filling from a hand-held plastic fuel can does not represent a strong potential for an ignition source. Flow rates are low and there's no gathering point for a build-up of arc potential (like your fingertip approaching the door handle). Instances of fire when filling lawn mowers were the result of added risk for spillage over a hot engine that made the vapors hype-sensitive to tiny sparks that are happening all the time all around us anytime two non conductors move in close proximity to each other. The strongest prophylactic for unintended combustion has more to do with careful avoidance of spillage and high flow rates into the tank (through the same kind of hose used to put a full load on a King Air in minutes). Those same hoses MIGHT be a conductor of differential static potential between two LARGE capacitors . . . the surface of an airplane and the surfaces of a fuel truck. High flow rates into the tank cause both increased intensity of static buildup and outflow of vapors from the tank's heads pace. Adding a 'ground wire' inside a non-conducting fuel hose only serves to bring a connection from the static capacity of the delivery system out to the end of the hose. Adding such wire only INCREASES the need for grounding the delivery system to the airframe before approaching the filler neck with the end of the hose. Risks for a hand-held pour from a plastic 'can' is exceedingly low. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 11, 2012
From: rayj <raymondj(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
Bob, I was thinking more along the lines of a failure of the electrical portion of the pump resulting in the pump body being energized and the electrons moving into the system designed to handle static charge. Similar to kind of event that the grounding wire in a 3 prong plug is designed to manage. Just a thought. Raymond Julian Kettle River, MN. "And you know that I could have me a million more friends, and all I'd have to lose is my point of view." - John Prine On 07/11/2012 11:12 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > At 03:31 AM 7/11/2012, you wrote: >> >> Bob, >> >> Another thing to consider is what happens if/when the pump fails in >> some way. Is it possible for the electrons to find a path that would >> cause a problem? I don't have an answer, but it seems like another >> possible way for bad things to happen. >> >> Raymond Julian >> Kettle River, MN. > > The fuel is itself a non-conductor so things happening > at the input end of a hose are not electrically relevant > to things that occur at the other end. Static electricity > is only loosely related to power electricity. While the > earliest investigations into the nature of electrons involved > the migration of electrons from one surface to another > as static sources, none of these phenomenon produced > a practical power sources. > --------------------------- SNIP ----------------------------------- > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps
From: "RV7ASask" <rv7alamb(at)sasktel.net>
Date: Jul 11, 2012
I managed to get flying again today after turning the Aux Alternator regulator voltage up three turns. This worked. The voltage now shows 13.3 volts with the Main Alternator off. The high Amps, however, did not change. Prior to switching the Main Alternator off it was reading 8 Amps as before and adding up what was on, this was about right. With the Main off the Aux Alternator is still reading 20 Amps. At this point I do not think it has anything to do with the battery charging and I think everything is wired correctly. Still head scratching. Regards David Lamb Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378037#378037 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob McCallum <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps
Date: Jul 11, 2012
David; Amperage cannot just mysteriously appear or disappear. Are you sure that the shunt being used to measure this amperage is the correct one?? and that the instrument reading it is properly set up to interpret the shunt voltage correctly?? (your measurement instrument measures the voltage across the shunt then translates that into an amperage indication. The incorrect shunt will result in an erroneous indication as will a faulty translation calculation setup.) Bob McC > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list- > server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV7ASask > Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 6:31 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps > > > I managed to get flying again today after turning the Aux Alternator regulator voltage > up three turns. This worked. The voltage now shows 13.3 volts with the Main > Alternator off. > > The high Amps, however, did not change. Prior to switching the Main Alternator off it > was reading 8 Amps as before and adding up what was on, this was about right. With > the Main off the Aux Alternator is still reading 20 Amps. > > At this point I do not think it has anything to do with the battery charging and I think > everything is wired correctly. > > Still head scratching. > > Regards > David Lamb > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378037#378037 > > > > > > > > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 11, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps
At 05:31 PM 7/11/2012, you wrote: > >I managed to get flying again today after turning the Aux Alternator >regulator voltage up three turns. This worked. The voltage now shows >13.3 volts with the Main Alternator off. > >The high Amps, however, did not change. Prior to switching the Main >Alternator off it was reading 8 Amps as before and adding up what >was on, this was about right. With the Main off the Aux Alternator >is still reading 20 Amps. Does it now go immediately to 20A instead of 'drifting up'? > > >At this point I do not think it has anything to do with the battery >charging and I think everything is wired correctly. > >Still head scratching. Okay . . . how about calibration issues. What kind of sensors do you have on the alternator b-leads, hall effect? . . . or are they shunts? What instrument displays the alternator current readings. One instruement that watches BOTH current signals or does it switch from one to the other? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 11, 2012
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
From: bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com>
got a lot of good info from all the replies. i think i will go with the wire in the tube only because it is less likely to mar a finish. that wire will connect to metal tube in plastic can, the metal pump and the metal fuel filter on the airplane end. a ground wire from the exhaust pipes to the metal pump should make a spark impossible. am i missing something? the only other thing i can think of is to run a wire from the pump to the earth. would this serve any purpose? bob noffs On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:51 PM, rayj wrote: > > Bob, > > I was thinking more along the lines of a failure of the electrical portion > of the pump resulting in the pump body being energized and the electrons > moving into the system designed to handle static charge. Similar to kind of > event that the grounding wire in a 3 prong plug is designed to manage. > > Just a thought. > > > Raymond Julian > Kettle River, MN. > > "And you know that I could have me a million more friends, > and all I'd have to lose is my point of view." - John Prine > > > On 07/11/2012 11:12 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > >> >> >> At 03:31 AM 7/11/2012, you wrote: >> >>> >>> Bob, >>> >>> Another thing to consider is what happens if/when the pump fails in >>> some way. Is it possible for the electrons to find a path that would >>> cause a problem? I don't have an answer, but it seems like another >>> possible way for bad things to happen. >>> >>> Raymond Julian >>> Kettle River, MN. >>> >> >> The fuel is itself a non-conductor so things happening >> at the input end of a hose are not electrically relevant >> to things that occur at the other end. Static electricity >> is only loosely related to power electricity. While the >> earliest investigations into the nature of electrons involved >> the migration of electrons from one surface to another >> as static sources, none of these phenomenon produced >> a practical power sources. >> >> --------------------------- SNIP ------------------------------**----- > > > Bob . . . >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 11, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
At 12:51 PM 7/11/2012, you wrote: > >Bob, > >I was thinking more along the lines of a failure of the electrical >portion of the pump resulting in the pump body being energized and >the electrons moving into the system designed to handle static >charge. Similar to kind of event that the grounding wire in a 3 >prong plug is designed to manage. Grounds for the purpose of creating a safe-path for internal ground faults within a device are not expected to carry any great amount of current for long nor does the voltage during fault clearance time exceed that of the system . . I presume you have a 12vdc pump. Grounding of two "capacitors" (vehicle and airplane) to each other to prevent a difference in potential at the filler cap between nozzle and cap rim should be independent of and ground system provided for electrical fault clearance inside the pump motor. Single-point grounds for airplane and pump system might be the fuel truck chassis or even a grounding lug on the ramp (we had them all over the floor in the Experimental Flight Test Hangar) but you'd want to avoid daisy-chaining grounds. If the pump has been approved for fuel transfers then seals between fluid path and motor internals are pretty good . . . if non-existent (magnetic drive). The motor itself is probably qualified to high levels of explosion proof-ness (will totally contain products of combustion even if a stoichiometric mixture should become ignited within). The difference in voltage to be bled off is in the gap between fuel nozzle and the tank opening. This is best handled by a ground wire between these two points secured before the fuel tank is uncapped. The same ground is not removed before the cap is replaced and any spills wiped up. Nothing more exotic is necessary or useful. If it's a plastic airplane, then no 'grounding' is possible or necessary. This is an electro-static argument between your fuel delivery exit point and fuel tank entrance. That's where the oxygen-fuel source resides and where the ignition source must be prevented. All else is immaterial. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 11, 2012
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
From: bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com>
soooooooooooo my tanks are grounded to my engine. am i safe to attach a wire from my fuel nozzle to my exhaust pipe or does the wire need to go to the tank filler neck? [that doesn't make sense to me] bob noffs On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com**> > > At 12:51 PM 7/11/2012, you wrote: > >> >> Bob, >> >> I was thinking more along the lines of a failure of the electrical >> portion of the pump resulting in the pump body being energized and the >> electrons moving into the system designed to handle static charge. Similar >> to kind of event that the grounding wire in a 3 prong plug is designed to >> manage. >> > > Grounds for the purpose of creating a safe-path > for internal ground faults within a device > are not expected to carry any great amount of > current for long nor does the voltage during > fault clearance time exceed that of the system . . > I presume you have a 12vdc pump. > > Grounding of two "capacitors" (vehicle and airplane) > to each other to prevent a difference in potential > at the filler cap between nozzle and cap rim should > be independent of and ground system provided for > electrical fault clearance inside the pump motor. > Single-point grounds for airplane and pump system might > be the fuel truck chassis or even a grounding lug > on the ramp (we had them all over the floor in the > Experimental Flight Test Hangar) but you'd want > to avoid daisy-chaining grounds. > > If the pump has been approved for fuel transfers > then seals between fluid path and motor internals > are pretty good . . . if non-existent (magnetic > drive). The motor itself is probably qualified to > high levels of explosion proof-ness (will totally > contain products of combustion even if a stoichiometric > mixture should become ignited within). > > The difference in voltage to be bled off is in the > gap between fuel nozzle and the tank opening. This > is best handled by a ground wire between these two > points secured before the fuel tank is uncapped. > The same ground is not removed before the cap is > replaced and any spills wiped up. Nothing more exotic > is necessary or useful. If it's a plastic airplane, > then no 'grounding' is possible or necessary. > > This is an electro-static argument between your fuel > delivery exit point and fuel tank entrance. That's where > the oxygen-fuel source resides and where the ignition > source must be prevented. All else is immaterial. > > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
From: "toddheffley" <public(at)toddheffley.com>
Date: Jul 12, 2012
I was always doubted the importance of using a metal funnel until I fueled our champ on a dry day with a large plastic funnel. I was standing in the tire so I was also insulated. A charge built up strong enough to attract the hair on my arm to stand up toward the cowl. No Harm, No Foul. It was a warning to alter my behaviour before a really bad indecent occurred. todd -------- WWW.toddheffley.com www.theinterconnectco.com for lighting products AV-TS.com for Jet Aircraft Test Equipment Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378072#378072 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps
From: "RV7ASask" <rv7alamb(at)sasktel.net>
Date: Jul 12, 2012
Early this morning I was in the hanger and did some major testing. I disconnected the 20 Amp Shunt I received originally from B&C when I got the 20 Amp Aux Alternator. I then temporarily installed a 40 Amp Shunt I had received from Dynon but had not used. A ground run gave all the correct and expected indications. The Aux Alternator is now showing the same Amps as the Main. Thanks to everyone who weighed in on this issue. It looks like I have a solution. Regards David Lamb Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378099#378099 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: General Aviation Savior??
From: "jonlaury" <jonlaury(at)impulse.net>
Date: Jul 12, 2012
The following arrived in my Inbox today. I subscribe to a fascinating tech newsletter (www.yet2.com,click yet2.com Marketplace, for free sign-up) and I know this list is for electrical stuff, but we all share the same interest in technology and I thought many of you would be inspired by the stuff that turns up here. I hope you enjoy the article. This technology could be a turning point in decreasing the cost of building airplanes. Cheers, John Uni-body composite plastic chassis Developed at a Fortune 500 company, this innovation is a patented one-piece fiber-reinforced plastic composite chassis produced by the sheet molding compression (SMC) production method of manufacturing. The composite structural material used is high-glass-content vinyl ester, toughened with urethane for good fatigue and damage tolerance. The clamp-to-clamp molding cycle time for this complete one-piece composite chassis is four (4) minutes. Composite structural golf cart chassis molded by the SMC method have been built and tested, and proved to be fully operational and functional. The major advantage of this solution is to reduce the part count from 150-200 to one molded piece with intrinsic corrosion resistance. Moreover, the flexibility in composite design allows the molding of different features to allow customization of the vehicle for different uses and different power trains. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378102#378102 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 12, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
At 08:46 PM 7/11/2012, you wrote: >soooooooooooo my tanks are grounded to my engine. am i safe to >attach a wire from my fuel nozzle to my exhaust pipe or does the >wire need to go to the tank filler neck? [that doesn't make sense to me] > bob noffs The word "grounded" is poorly understood and in this discussion poorly used. As we've studied in other conversations, having "lots of grounds" can be deleterious to system performance in terms of noised conducted from one system to another. This static charge thing, like most studies of physics is an energy management issue. We have an energy source (motion between dissimilar materials in close proximity), energy storage (capacitance - proportional to surface area of mass carrying a charge), potential pathways for the two masses to exchange levels of charge, series resistance of those pathways, and finally open air gaps in the discharge path were a spark might form that is surrounded by a flammable mixture. The legacy hazard from which all these discussions arise are grounded in the management of charges stored on LARGE surface areas (air transport/military aircraft and fuel trucks or underground fueling systems. BIG numbers in terms of potential energy to be released in that worrisome air-gap. I'll refer readers to a couple of documents I've posted to Aeroelectric.com at http://tinyurl.com/7et4jj5 These two documents speak to 'modeling' the human body for the purposes of carrying out standardized tests for ESD vulnerability. Given the surface area of adult humans to be on the order of 1.5 to 2 square meters, they are 'modeled' as 100 picofarad capacitors. Further the ability to conduct a charge off that 'capacitor' is limited by the average conductivity of the body between the center of charge and a discharge point (finger tip) which is modeled with a 1500 ohm resistor. Now, charge the capacitor up to various voltages up to 15,000 volts and you have a repeatable means for generating antagonistic stresses on some device to be tested for ESD immunity. The machine model is similar but 200 picofarads and 1 ohm of series resistance. I.e., more surface area and better conductivity. Now, what might we think the model would be for a B-747? LOTS of surface area and metallic structure which provides very low series resistance. Static charges between large masses can knock you on your can. Getting back to filling puddle jumpers from gas cans or even fuel trucks . . . The model for a plastic airplane might consider a surface area on the order of 1000 picofarads but what's the series resistance? It's an insulator with hing series resistance. In my studies with ESD testing I discovered that the WORST case instances for testing to human body model (15KV) VERY LITTLE of the potential energy was dissipated at the victim . . . that 1500 ohm resistor dissipates 90 plus % of the energy. When dealing with things like metal airplanes and fuel trucks, the machine models are in force with something on the order of 1000-2000 pf each and VERY LOW series resistance. Connecting them together before dragging out the hose MAY NOT dissipate all their charges to zero . . . but it does bring them TOGETHER in terms of voltage thus ELIMINATING a potential of spark through a low series resistance. I forget the structure of the airplane that started this discussion but I think we were talking about a non-conductive hose fitted to a fuel transfer pump. In this instance, ADDING a low series resistance conductor along the hose length only increases potential for energy dissipation in a spark at the end of the hose. Bringing a potential charge on the airplane and fuel storage containers together is 99.9% of the safety issue. Having a very large series resistance in the potential ignition discharge path is another risk mitigation move. I've been reading lengthy discussions about fuel transfer safety on OBAM aircraft for decades sprinkled with hangar tales and speculative advice . . . but never have I seen a study of the physics that underlie the potential for an ignition accident. Just consider the millions of cars that get fueled by ding-a-ling drivers every day without blowing themselves up. Yes, there are the expected 'news' stories and security camera videos about the occasional filling station fire. Shucks even the Mytbusters made a show out of the notion that cell phones can trigger explosions or fire. But even the hallowed Mythbusters failed to mention the physics . . . much less consider how HARD it is to initiate an explosion under laboratory conditions (re: explosion proofing tests on motors we used to build at Electro-Mech). Bottom line is that if you don't have a means to bring the surface charge of a container to the same potential as the surface of your airplane, then the SAME limitation is in force for causing a spark at the opening of your filler cap. I.e. if you can't get a spark at the connection of a potential equalization wire at the exhaust stack of your engine, you won't get a spark at the filler cap either. Potentials generated by flowing fuel are similarly limited in their ability to conduct the charge to a 'arc gap'. Consider that the fuel is in constant motion so any charge the liquid carries is being continuously dumped into the tank . . . Where is the 'conductor' that's going to bring that charge to an arc gap? Flammable hydrocarbons heavier than gasolines are used as medium for cooling and INSULATOR in high voltage transformers and capacitors. Where does the energy come from, where is it stored, what is the potential equalization path, what is the series resistance of that path, is it possible or even NECESSARY to effect an equalization of potentials at some point AWAY from the filler cap? Bottom line is that using the same care you would exercise in filling your car, boat or lawn mower will suffice to secure your healthy use of that machine. Adding prophylactic features willy-nilly without understanding the physics and design goals may increase risk as opposed to reducing it. If the truth were known as to root cause for the anecdotal fuel transfer fires, most if not all would be due to carelessness. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 12, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
At 04:44 AM 7/12/2012, you wrote: > > >I was always doubted the importance of using a metal funnel until I >fueled our champ on a dry day with a large plastic funnel. I was >standing in the tire so I was also insulated. A charge built up >strong enough to attract the hair on my arm to stand up toward the >cowl. No Harm, No Foul. It was a warning to alter my behaviour >before a really bad indecent occurred. > >todd Sure, while funnels provide a handy tool for control of the flow of liquid, they add a piece of 'loose gear' to the mix and expose a the surface of liquid flow to the air (and funnel surface). The former increases local concentration of hazardous vapor, the later increases potential for building an electro-static charge (motion of dissimilar materials in close proximity). Your body became yet another surface on which generated charges could collect. A hair-raising experience both literally and for consideration of increased risk. 99.999+ of fuel transfers in the world are effected with a nozzle extend into the fuel storage system. Most are metallic and in contact with each other. The only thing you can do to IMPROVE on this combination would be to close the liquid motion off from the air and potential for spillage by using some feature like I suggested yesterday. As a general rule, I would avoid the use of funnels. Yeah, Lindbergh used 'em . . . even lined the funnel with a chamois to absorb water. We don't read much about aviators of yor setting themselves on fire during a fueling accident but the risks were demonstrably great. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com>
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
Date: Jul 12, 2012
I was once fueling my Rv-6A out of "Approved" plastic 5 gallon fuel container. I had a racing funnel with a paper filter cartridge in the center of the spout. It was a 60F low humidity day with no wind. I had done this many times before. This time near the end of the 5 gallon container, I attempted to raise the bottom of the container higher to get the last of the fuel and broke connection between the funnel (also plastic) and the fuel container. There was a "Whomp" of ignition and I found myself with an event on my hands, to wit: 1. Holding a 5 gallon container with flames out its nozzle 2. Holding a large racing funnel with fuel soaked paper filter blazing way. 3. Haven been mildly started by the unexpected ignition event - I had stepped back a pace. This resulting in the funnel I was holding being pulled from the fuel tank leaving me with flames coming out of the aircraft fuel tank, flames on the wing surface where I dragged the emptying funnel from the wing tank opening and flames on the tarmac from that dripping from the wing. The first thought after "oh S...t" was not too panic, after which I quickly 1. Walked approx 15 feet from the aircraft and set down flaming container and funnel. 2. Ran to my Van for my fire extinuisher - always stored under drives seat (could not located it) 3. Raced back to the aircraft and brushed off the surface fuel/fire with a rag. 4. Picked up the wing tank fuel cap and remembered thinking "..this always worked in science class!" ..slapped to fuel cap into the flaming opening -which fortuntately worked just like in highschool science class with test tube and cork. 5. Stomped out the small fire on the tarmac. Fortunately no damage to anything but my nerves and the funnel and container. Even though I had used plastic fuel containers for decades refueling lawnmowers, etc without ever having an incident - I never used anything but metal containers aftewards - however, I was later told that the the breaking of the connection permitted the liquid flow to generated a static potential difference and it would not have mattered if funnel and container had been metal - it was the breaking of the connection that apparently resulting in the conditions that lead to ignition. FWIW Ed From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 11:52 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: grounding procedures At 08:46 PM 7/11/2012, you wrote: soooooooooooo my tanks are grounded to my engine. am i safe to attach a wire from my fuel nozzle to my exhaust pipe or does the wire need to go to the tank filler neck? [that doesn't make sense to me] bob noffs The word "grounded" is poorly understood and in this discussion poorly used. As we've studied in other conversations, having "lots of grounds" can be deleterious to system performance in terms of noised conducted from one system to another. This static charge thing, like most studies of physics is an energy management issue. We have an energy source (motion between dissimilar materials in close proximity), energy storage (capacitance - proportional to surface area of mass carrying a charge), potential pathways for the two masses to exchange levels of charge, series resistance of those pathways, and finally open air gaps in the discharge path were a spark might form that is surrounded by a flammable mixture. The legacy hazard from which all these discussions arise are grounded in the management of charges stored on LARGE surface areas (air transport/military aircraft and fuel trucks or underground fueling systems. BIG numbers in terms of potential energy to be released in that worrisome air-gap. I'll refer readers to a couple of documents I've posted to Aeroelectric.com at http://tinyurl.com/7et4jj5 These two documents speak to 'modeling' the human body for the purposes of carrying out standardized tests for ESD vulnerability. Given the surface area of adult humans to be on the order of 1.5 to 2 square meters, they are 'modeled' as 100 picofarad capacitors. Further the ability to conduct a charge off that 'capacitor' is limited by the average conductivity of the body between the center of charge and a discharge point (finger tip) which is modeled with a 1500 ohm resistor. Now, charge the capacitor up to various voltages up to 15,000 volts and you have a repeatable means for generating antagonistic stresses on some device to be tested for ESD immunity. The machine model is similar but 200 picofarads and 1 ohm of series resistance. I.e., more surface area and better conductivity. Now, what might we think the model would be for a B-747? LOTS of surface area and metallic structure which provides very low series resistance. Static charges between large masses can knock you on your can. Getting back to filling puddle jumpers from gas cans or even fuel trucks . . . The model for a plastic airplane might consider a surface area on the order of 1000 picofarads but what's the series resistance? It's an insulator with hing series resistance. In my studies with ESD testing I discovered that the WORST case instances for testing to human body model (15KV) VERY LITTLE of the potential energy was dissipated at the victim . . . that 1500 ohm resistor dissipates 90 plus % of the energy. When dealing with things like metal airplanes and fuel trucks, the machine models are in force with something on the order of 1000-2000 pf each and VERY LOW series resistance. Connecting them together before dragging out the hose MAY NOT dissipate all their charges to zero . . . but it does bring them TOGETHER in terms of voltage thus ELIMINATING a potential of spark through a low series resistance. I forget the structure of the airplane that started this discussion but I think we were talking about a non-conductive hose fitted to a fuel transfer pump. In this instance, ADDING a low series resistance conductor along the hose length only increases potential for energy dissipation in a spark at the end of the hose. Bringing a potential charge on the airplane and fuel storage containers together is 99.9% of the safety issue. Having a very large series resistance in the potential ignition discharge path is another risk mitigation move. I've been reading lengthy discussions about fuel transfer safety on OBAM aircraft for decades sprinkled with hangar tales and speculative advice . . . but never have I seen a study of the physics that underlie the potential for an ignition accident. Just consider the millions of cars that get fueled by ding-a-ling drivers every day without blowing themselves up. Yes, there are the expected 'news' stories and security camera videos about the occasional filling station fire. Shucks even the Mytbusters made a show out of the notion that cell phones can trigger explosions or fire. But even the hallowed Mythbusters failed to mention the physics . . . much less consider how HARD it is to initiate an explosion under laboratory conditions (re: explosion proofing tests on motors we used to build at Electro-Mech). Bottom line is that if you don't have a means to bring the surface charge of a container to the same potential as the surface of your airplane, then the SAME limitation is in force for causing a spark at the opening of your filler cap. I.e. if you can't get a spark at the connection of a potential equalization wire at the exhaust stack of your engine, you won't get a spark at the filler cap either. Potentials generated by flowing fuel are similarly limited in their ability to conduct the charge to a 'arc gap'. Consider that the fuel is in constant motion so any charge the liquid carries is being continuously dumped into the tank . . . Where is the 'conductor' that's going to bring that charge to an arc gap? Flammable hydrocarbons heavier than gasolines are used as medium for cooling and INSULATOR in high voltage transformers and capacitors. Where does the energy come from, where is it stored, what is the potential equalization path, what is the series resistance of that path, is it possible or even NECESSARY to effect an equalization of potentials at some point AWAY from the filler cap? Bottom line is that using the same care you would exercise in filling your car, boat or lawn mower will suffice to secure your healthy use of that machine. Adding prophylactic features willy-nilly without understanding the physics and design goals may increase risk as opposed to reducing it. If the truth were known as to root cause for the anecdotal fuel transfer fires, most if not all would be due to carelessness. Bob . . . No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 07/12/12 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 12, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps
At 10:21 AM 7/12/2012, you wrote: > >Early this morning I was in the hanger and did some major testing. I >disconnected the 20 Amp Shunt I received originally from B&C when I >got the 20 Amp Aux Alternator. I then temporarily installed a 40 Amp >Shunt I had received from Dynon but had not used. A ground run gave >all the correct and expected indications. The Aux Alternator is now >showing the same Amps as the Main. > >Thanks to everyone who weighed in on this issue. It looks like I >have a solution. This speaks to calibration issues for switching one display between multiple values to be measured, converted to 'amps' and displayed to the operator. A ammeter shunt in simply a power resistor, usually fabricated from manganin (high resistance, low temperature coefficient of resistance). Here's a popular example: [] Two terminals for high current, two SEPARATE terminals for sampling the voltage dropped across the resistance (thin strut between the posts). Shunts are always paired with an instrument. The instrument will display some reading at full scale when excited by a voltage. A legacy convention is to craft ammeters that go to full scale with 50 millivolts applied. Accurate pairing calls for installing a scale plate with an appropriate full scale value (in example below it's 30 Amps; and then combining it with a shunt that drops full scale volts for the instrument when carrying 30 amps). [] When you want to watch two different current flows with a single instrument, you pick two shunts large enough to cover the largest expected current flow . . . but for the display in amps to be accurate, they must be identical shunts. If the two current flows are widely separated (suppose b-lead currents from say a 60A main alternator and an 8A SD-8 alternator), then an ammeter that reads 60+ amps full scale is not so useful for slicing up the output of an 8A alternator. This is often handled by not calibrating the ammeter in AMPs but in PERCENT of full load for the devices being monitored. For example, the ammeter we offer Emacs! Is calibrated in percent. We then offer a variety of shunts calibrated to the instrument and scaled to the load being monitored. For example, an SD-8/60A combo would call for a 10A/60A shunts. An SD-20/40A combo would be 20/40, etc. When you have a digital display like Dynon, it may come to you with a FIXED input sensitivity for full scale, like a steam-gauge . . . It may be programmable either from a local keyboard or USB input. But in any case, it's probably NOT capable of different sensitivities. In the situation we're considering, 40A, 50mv shunts give accurate readings on the Dynon . . . irrespective of the size of the device being monitored. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 12, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: General Aviation Savior??
At 10:35 AM 7/12/2012, you wrote: > >The following arrived in my Inbox today. I subscribe to a >fascinating tech newsletter Good find. I've subscribed also. Thanks for the heads-up. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 12, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Battery question not aeroplan related
At 10:48 AM 7/12/2012, you wrote: > >Hello Bob and all, > >as it is not directly aeroplane related I apologize and hope it is >still acceptable to post in that area, at the end it's about >batteries an their differences > >I have an UPS which I neglected a bit and it failed recently; the >batteries in there had an ugly shape but no spill, voltage was >below 2V for each (12v 7.2A nominal) > >I looked now for replacement from Panasonic (using a 17A and now 20A >since years in my plane). Interestingly enough they have two types >of this:] Have you considered automotive batteries for this application? My UPS here has a regular car battery sitting outside the case connected to nice fat wires that extend the leads for a battery normally inside the case. I can get a lot more capacity for less dollars as long as it's not a requirement that the battery 'fit inside'. How old was your original battery? The fact that it failed and changed shape suggests an overcharge condition. What ever your choice of battery, you might want to put a voltmeter on the battery and watch it for a few weeks and in particular after a power-outage event to watch the re-charge event. When all topped off, the battery should be floated at no more than 13.8 volts and no less than 13.0 volts. In other words, too low to allow the battery to be charged and too high to allow the battery to take on 'load'. My UPS battery is about 50A.H. It will keep my desk system up for 5 hours or more. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 12, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
Even though I had used plastic fuel containers for decades refueling lawnmowers, etc without ever having an incident - I never used anything but metal containers aftewards - however, I was later told that the the breaking of the connection permitted the liquid flow to generated a static potential difference and it would not have mattered if funnel and container had been metal - it was the breaking of the connection that apparently resulting in the conditions that lead to ignition. Interestingly enough, 'grounding' the airplane would have probably not have changed the outcome. Your particular air/fuel/ignition triad was constituted within a mini-system outside and separate from the airplane itself. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps
Date: Jul 12, 2012
Isn't the shunt supposed to be the same as the range on the reading instrument? Bill -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV7ASask Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 11:21 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps Early this morning I was in the hanger and did some major testing. I disconnected the 20 Amp Shunt I received originally from B&C when I got the 20 Amp Aux Alternator. I then temporarily installed a 40 Amp Shunt I had received from Dynon but had not used. A ground run gave all the correct and expected indications. The Aux Alternator is now showing the same Amps as the Main. Thanks to everyone who weighed in on this issue. It looks like I have a solution. Regards David Lamb Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378099#378099 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob McCallum <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps
Date: Jul 12, 2012
Yes. (or the reading instrument needs to be calibrated to match the shunt. (same thing)) Bob McC > From: bbradburry(at)bellsouth.net > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps > Date: Thu=2C 12 Jul 2012 14:09:33 -0400 > lsouth.net> > > Isn't the shunt supposed to be the same as the range on the reading > instrument? > > Bill > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV7ASa sk > Sent: Thursday=2C July 12=2C 2012 11:21 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Z12 Alternator Amps > > > > Early this morning I was in the hanger and did some major testing. I > disconnected the 20 Amp Shunt I received originally from B&C when I got t he > 20 Amp Aux Alternator. I then temporarily installed a 40 Amp Shunt I had > received from Dynon but had not used. A ground run gave all the correct a nd > expected indications. The Aux Alternator is now showing the same Amps as the > Main. > > Thanks to everyone who weighed in on this issue. It looks like I have a > solution. > > Regards > David Lamb > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378099#378099 > > > > > > > > > > > =========== =========== =========== =========== > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 12, 2012
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
From: Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com>
Bob, I built this rig to fuel my little LSA. I built it mainly to get out of having to bend over and crawl under the wing to fuel, but it also gets me away from where the fuel is flowing. The tubing legs (titanium from Boeing Surplus!) provide grounding although I am going to take advantage of the advice offered here and install a copper wire to pick up any static from fuel flowing through the plastic pipe and run it out to the legs to ground that, too. Using stuff from my strategic supplies and plastic pipe and fittings from Lowe's the whole thing cost less than $10. The other precaution I use during fueling is to always have a size 20 fire extinguisher rated for flammable liquids right next to me. Rick Girard On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 11:05 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com**> > > > At 04:44 AM 7/12/2012, you wrote: > >> public(at)toddheffley.com> >> >> I was always doubted the importance of using a metal funnel until I >> fueled our champ on a dry day with a large plastic funnel. I was standing >> in the tire so I was also insulated. A charge built up strong enough to >> attract the hair on my arm to stand up toward the cowl. No Harm, No Foul. >> It was a warning to alter my behaviour before a really bad indecent >> occurred. >> >> todd >> > > > Sure, while funnels provide a handy tool for control > of the flow of liquid, they add a piece of 'loose gear' > to the mix and expose a the surface of liquid flow > to the air (and funnel surface). The former increases > local concentration of hazardous vapor, the later increases > potential for building an electro-static charge (motion > of dissimilar materials in close proximity). Your body > became yet another surface on which generated charges > could collect. A hair-raising experience both literally > and for consideration of increased risk. > > 99.999+ of fuel transfers in the world are effected with > a nozzle extend into the fuel storage system. Most are > metallic and in contact with each other. The only > thing you can do to IMPROVE on this combination would > be to close the liquid motion off from the air and > potential for spillage by using some feature like I > suggested yesterday. > > As a general rule, I would avoid the use of funnels. > Yeah, Lindbergh used 'em . . . even lined the funnel > with a chamois to absorb water. We don't read much > about aviators of yor setting themselves on fire > during a fueling accident but the risks were demonstrably > great. > > > 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 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 12, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Over-voltage Circuit Trips
At 06:37 AM 7/11/2012, you wrote: > >Bob N. et al, > >Since my RV first flew about a year ago the over-voltage circuit has >frequently tripped shortly after take off. Resetting the 5 amp >pull-able circuit breaker once or twice generally prevents a >re-occurence for the remainder of the flight but I need to determine >the root cause and correct it. Jack, I'm not ignoring you. Will have a response and some suggestions in the morning . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: grounding procedures
Date: Jul 12, 2012
Ed, Your story scares the s**t out of me (I wonder if the same happened to you?) but thanks for sharing. After having the advantage of reading about your experience I think I would change the order of operations a little: 1. Before starting refueling operations, make sure fire extinguisher is where I think it is - perhaps even set it nearby on tarmac 2. get rid of flaming container in my hands - keep me from catching on fire 3. replace fuel cap - keep my airplane/fuel tank from continuing to burn 4. go for extinguisher I think this will become my pre-fueling check-list. One thing that I do when fueling from plastic containers is, before I start pouring, touch the airplane (metal airplane) near the fuel cap while holding the full fuel container in the other hand. In my little mind this helps equalize any differences in potential among airframe, fuel container, & me. _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ed Anderson Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 09:25 Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: grounding procedures I was once fueling my Rv-6A out of "Approved" plastic 5 gallon fuel container. I had a racing funnel with a paper filter cartridge in the center of the spout. It was a 60F low humidity day with no wind. I had done this many times before. This time near the end of the 5 gallon container, I attempted to raise the bottom of the container higher to get the last of the fuel and broke connection between the funnel (also plastic) and the fuel container. There was a "Whomp" of ignition and I found myself with an event on my hands, to wit: 1. Holding a 5 gallon container with flames out its nozzle 2. Holding a large racing funnel with fuel soaked paper filter blazing way. 3. Haven been mildly started by the unexpected ignition event - I had stepped back a pace. This resulting in the funnel I was holding being pulled from the fuel tank leaving me with flames coming out of the aircraft fuel tank, flames on the wing surface where I dragged the emptying funnel from the wing tank opening and flames on the tarmac from that dripping from the wing. The first thought after "oh S...t" was not too panic, after which I quickly 1. Walked approx 15 feet from the aircraft and set down flaming container and funnel. 2. Ran to my Van for my fire extinuisher - always stored under drives seat (could not located it) 3. Raced back to the aircraft and brushed off the surface fuel/fire with a rag. 4. Picked up the wing tank fuel cap and remembered thinking "..this always worked in science class!" ..slapped to fuel cap into the flaming opening -which fortuntately worked just like in highschool science class with test tube and cork. 5. Stomped out the small fire on the tarmac. Fortunately no damage to anything but my nerves and the funnel and container. Even though I had used plastic fuel containers for decades refueling lawnmowers, etc without ever having an incident - I never used anything but metal containers aftewards - however, I was later told that the the breaking of the connection permitted the liquid flow to generated a static potential difference and it would not have mattered if funnel and container had been metal - it was the breaking of the connection that apparently resulting in the conditions that lead to ignition. FWIW Ed From: Robert <mailto:nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 11:52 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: grounding procedures At 08:46 PM 7/11/2012, you wrote: soooooooooooo my tanks are grounded to my engine. am i safe to attach a wire from my fuel nozzle to my exhaust pipe or does the wire need to go to the tank filler neck? [that doesn't make sense to me] bob noffs The word "grounded" is poorly understood and in this discussion poorly used. As we've studied in other conversations, having "lots of grounds" can be deleterious to system performance in terms of noised conducted from one system to another. This static charge thing, like most studies of physics is an energy management issue. We have an energy source (motion between dissimilar materials in close proximity), energy storage (capacitance - proportional to surface area of mass carrying a charge), potential pathways for the two masses to exchange levels of charge, series resistance of those pathways, and finally open air gaps in the discharge path were a spark might form that is surrounded by a flammable mixture. The legacy hazard from which all these discussions arise are grounded in the management of charges stored on LARGE surface areas (air transport/military aircraft and fuel trucks or underground fueling systems. BIG numbers in terms of potential energy to be released in that worrisome air-gap. I'll refer readers to a couple of documents I've posted to Aeroelectric.com at http://tinyurl.com/7et4jj5 These two documents speak to 'modeling' the human body for the purposes of carrying out standardized tests for ESD vulnerability. Given the surface area of adult humans to be on the order of 1.5 to 2 square meters, they are 'modeled' as 100 picofarad capacitors. Further the ability to conduct a charge off that 'capacitor' is limited by the average conductivity of the body between the center of charge and a discharge point (finger tip) which is modeled with a 1500 ohm resistor. Now, charge the capacitor up to various voltages up to 15,000 volts and you have a repeatable means for generating antagonistic stresses on some device to be tested for ESD immunity. The machine model is similar but 200 picofarads and 1 ohm of series resistance. I.e., more surface area and better conductivity. Now, what might we think the model would be for a B-747? LOTS of surface area and metallic structure which provides very low series resistance. Static charges between large masses can knock you on your can. Getting back to filling puddle jumpers from gas cans or even fuel trucks . . . The model for a plastic airplane might consider a surface area on the order of 1000 picofarads but what's the series resistance? It's an insulator with hing series resistance. In my studies with ESD testing I discovered that the WORST case instances for testing to human body model (15KV) VERY LITTLE of the potential energy was dissipated at the victim . . . that 1500 ohm resistor dissipates 90 plus % of the energy. When dealing with things like metal airplanes and fuel trucks, the machine models are in force with something on the order of 1000-2000 pf each and VERY LOW series resistance. Connecting them together before dragging out the hose MAY NOT dissipate all their charges to zero . . . but it does bring them TOGETHER in terms of voltage thus ELIMINATING a potential of spark through a low series resistance. I forget the structure of the airplane that started this discussion but I think we were talking about a non-conductive hose fitted to a fuel transfer pump. In this instance, ADDING a low series resistance conductor along the hose length only increases potential for energy dissipation in a spark at the end of the hose. Bringing a potential charge on the airplane and fuel storage containers together is 99.9% of the safety issue. Having a very large series resistance in the potential ignition discharge path is another risk mitigation move. I've been reading lengthy discussions about fuel transfer safety on OBAM aircraft for decades sprinkled with hangar tales and speculative advice . . . but never have I seen a study of the physics that underlie the potential for an ignition accident. Just consider the millions of cars that get fueled by ding-a-ling drivers every day without blowing themselves up. Yes, there are the expected 'news' stories and security camera videos about the occasional filling station fire. Shucks even the Mytbusters made a show out of the notion that cell phones can trigger explosions or fire. But even the hallowed Mythbusters failed to mention the physics . . . much less consider how HARD it is to initiate an explosion under laboratory conditions (re: explosion proofing tests on motors we used to build at Electro-Mech). Bottom line is that if you don't have a means to bring the surface charge of a container to the same potential as the surface of your airplane, then the SAME limitation is in force for causing a spark at the opening of your filler cap. I.e. if you can't get a spark at the connection of a potential equalization wire at the exhaust stack of your engine, you won't get a spark at the filler cap either. Potentials generated by flowing fuel are similarly limited in their ability to conduct the charge to a 'arc gap'. Consider that the fuel is in constant motion so any charge the liquid carries is being continuously dumped into the tank . . . Where is the 'conductor' that's going to bring that charge to an arc gap? Flammable hydrocarbons heavier than gasolines are used as medium for cooling and INSULATOR in high voltage transformers and capacitors. Where does the energy come from, where is it stored, what is the potential equalization path, what is the series resistance of that path, is it possible or even NECESSARY to effect an equalization of potentials at some point AWAY from the filler cap? Bottom line is that using the same care you would exercise in filling your car, boat or lawn mower will suffice to secure your healthy use of that machine. Adding prophylactic features willy-nilly without understanding the physics and design goals may increase risk as opposed to reducing it. If the truth were known as to root cause for the anecdotal fuel transfer fires, most if not all would be due to carelessness. Bob . . . href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.matro nics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com>
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
Date: Jul 12, 2012
I think I did require an underwear check, Jeff. Yes, thinking these things out before hand is certainly the way to do it - coming up with a check list during - is not recommended {:>). Actually, after that, I almost always (99%) either have the fuel truck come out or hook up to an airport type fuel facility. Decided transporting and transferring fuel was something I just did not have to do. It would probably never happened again - but, once is more than enough!!! Ed From: Jeff Luckey Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 6:34 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: grounding procedures Ed, Your story scares the s**t out of me (I wonder if the same happened to you?) but thanks for sharing. After having the advantage of reading about your experience I think I would change the order of operations a little: 1.. Before starting refueling operations, make sure fire extinguisher is where I think it is - perhaps even set it nearby on tarmac 2.. get rid of flaming container in my hands - keep me from catching on fire 3.. replace fuel cap - keep my airplane/fuel tank from continuing to burn 4.. go for extinguisher I think this will become my pre-fueling check-list. One thing that I do when fueling from plastic containers is, before I start pouring, touch the airplane (metal airplane) near the fuel cap while holding the full fuel container in the other hand. In my little mind this helps equalize any differences in potential among airframe, fuel container, & me. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ed Anderson Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 09:25 Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: grounding procedures I was once fueling my Rv-6A out of "Approved" plastic 5 gallon fuel container. I had a racing funnel with a paper filter cartridge in the center of the spout. It was a 60F low humidity day with no wind. I had done this many times before. This time near the end of the 5 gallon container, I attempted to raise the bottom of the container higher to get the last of the fuel and broke connection between the funnel (also plastic) and the fuel container. There was a "Whomp" of ignition and I found myself with an event on my hands, to wit: 1. Holding a 5 gallon container with flames out its nozzle 2. Holding a large racing funnel with fuel soaked paper filter blazing way. 3. Haven been mildly started by the unexpected ignition event - I had stepped back a pace. This resulting in the funnel I was holding being pulled from the fuel tank leaving me with flames coming out of the aircraft fuel tank, flames on the wing surface where I dragged the emptying funnel from the wing tank opening and flames on the tarmac from that dripping from the wing. The first thought after "oh S...t" was not too panic, after which I quickly 1. Walked approx 15 feet from the aircraft and set down flaming container and funnel. 2. Ran to my Van for my fire extinuisher - always stored under drives seat (could not located it) 3. Raced back to the aircraft and brushed off the surface fuel/fire with a rag. 4. Picked up the wing tank fuel cap and remembered thinking "..this always worked in science class!" ..slapped to fuel cap into the flaming opening -which fortuntately worked just like in highschool science class with test tube and cork. 5. Stomped out the small fire on the tarmac. Fortunately no damage to anything but my nerves and the funnel and container. Even though I had used plastic fuel containers for decades refueling lawnmowers, etc without ever having an incident - I never used anything but metal containers aftewards - however, I was later told that the the breaking of the connection permitted the liquid flow to generated a static potential difference and it would not have mattered if funnel and container had been metal - it was the breaking of the connection that apparently resulting in the conditions that lead to ignition. FWIW Ed From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 11:52 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: grounding procedures At 08:46 PM 7/11/2012, you wrote: soooooooooooo my tanks are grounded to my engine. am i safe to attach a wire from my fuel nozzle to my exhaust pipe or does the wire need to go to the tank filler neck? [that doesn't make sense to me] bob noffs The word "grounded" is poorly understood and in this discussion poorly used. As we've studied in other conversations, having "lots of grounds" can be deleterious to system performance in terms of noised conducted from one system to another. This static charge thing, like most studies of physics is an energy management issue. We have an energy source (motion between dissimilar materials in close proximity), energy storage (capacitance - proportional to surface area of mass carrying a charge), potential pathways for the two masses to exchange levels of charge, series resistance of those pathways, and finally open air gaps in the discharge path were a spark might form that is surrounded by a flammable mixture. The legacy hazard from which all these discussions arise are grounded in the management of charges stored on LARGE surface areas (air transport/military aircraft and fuel trucks or underground fueling systems. BIG numbers in terms of potential energy to be released in that worrisome air-gap. I'll refer readers to a couple of documents I've posted to Aeroelectric.com at http://tinyurl.com/7et4jj5 These two documents speak to 'modeling' the human body for the purposes of carrying out standardized tests for ESD vulnerability. Given the surface area of adult humans to be on the order of 1.5 to 2 square meters, they are 'modeled' as 100 picofarad capacitors. Further the ability to conduct a charge off that 'capacitor' is limited by the average conductivity of the body between the center of charge and a discharge point (finger tip) which is modeled with a 1500 ohm resistor. Now, charge the capacitor up to various voltages up to 15,000 volts and you have a repeatable means for generating antagonistic stresses on some device to be tested for ESD immunity. The machine model is similar but 200 picofarads and 1 ohm of series resistance. I.e., more surface area and better conductivity. Now, what might we think the model would be for a B-747? LOTS of surface area and metallic structure which provides very low series resistance. Static charges between large masses can knock you on your can. Getting back to filling puddle jumpers from gas cans or even fuel trucks . . . The model for a plastic airplane might consider a surface area on the order of 1000 picofarads but what's the series resistance? It's an insulator with hing series resistance. In my studies with ESD testing I discovered that the WORST case instances for testing to human body model (15KV) VERY LITTLE of the potential energy was dissipated at the victim . . . that 1500 ohm resistor dissipates 90 plus % of the energy. When dealing with things like metal airplanes and fuel trucks, the machine models are in force with something on the order of 1000-2000 pf each and VERY LOW series resistance. Connecting them together before dragging out the hose MAY NOT dissipate all their charges to zero . . . but it does bring them TOGETHER in terms of voltage thus ELIMINATING a potential of spark through a low series resistance. I forget the structure of the airplane that started this discussion but I think we were talking about a non-conductive hose fitted to a fuel transfer pump. In this instance, ADDING a low series resistance conductor along the hose length only increases potential for energy dissipation in a spark at the end of the hose. Bringing a potential charge on the airplane and fuel storage containers together is 99.9% of the safety issue. Having a very large series resistance in the potential ignition discharge path is another risk mitigation move. I've been reading lengthy discussions about fuel transfer safety on OBAM aircraft for decades sprinkled with hangar tales and speculative advice . . . but never have I seen a study of the physics that underlie the potential for an ignition accident. Just consider the millions of cars that get fueled by ding-a-ling drivers every day without blowing themselves up. Yes, there are the expected 'news' stories and security camera videos about the occasional filling station fire. Shucks even the Mytbusters made a show out of the notion that cell phones can trigger explosions or fire. But even the hallowed Mythbusters failed to mention the physics . . . much less consider how HARD it is to initiate an explosion under laboratory conditions (re: explosion proofing tests on motors we used to build at Electro-Mech). Bottom line is that if you don't have a means to bring the surface charge of a container to the same potential as the surface of your airplane, then the SAME limitation is in force for causing a spark at the opening of your filler cap. I.e. if you can't get a spark at the connection of a potential equalization wire at the exhaust stack of your engine, you won't get a spark at the filler cap either. Potentials generated by flowing fuel are similarly limited in their ability to conduct the charge to a 'arc gap'. Consider that the fuel is in constant motion so any charge the liquid carries is being continuously dumped into the tank . . . Where is the 'conductor' that's going to bring that charge to an arc gap? Flammable hydrocarbons heavier than gasolines are used as medium for cooling and INSULATOR in high voltage transformers and capacitors. Where does the energy come from, where is it stored, what is the potential equalization path, what is the series resistance of that path, is it possible or even NECESSARY to effect an equalization of potentials at some point AWAY from the filler cap? Bottom line is that using the same care you would exercise in filling your car, boat or lawn mower will suffice to secure your healthy use of that machine. Adding prophylactic features willy-nilly without understanding the physics and design goals may increase risk as opposed to reducing it. If the truth were known as to root cause for the anecdotal fuel transfer fires, most if not all would be due to carelessness. Bob . . . href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www. matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-Listhref="http://forums.matronics. com">http://forums.matronics.comhref="http://www.matronics.com/contribu tion">http://www.matronics.com/cNo virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 07/12/12 http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-Listhttp://forums.matroni cs.comhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 07/12/12 No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 07/12/12 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Preventing Bird Strikes in Aviation
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Date: Jul 13, 2012
Good news: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02165.x/full also: http://io9.com/5925193/scientists-explain-how-to-prevent-one-of-the-most-common-airplane-disasters Summary...Wig-wags work well in preventing aircraft bird strikes. -------- 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=378181#378181 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 13, 2012
From: Richard <rdsafe2000(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
WARNING FROM SHELL OIL COMPANY DO NOT DELETE, PLEASE READ=0A=0A=0AMUST READ , EVEN IF YOU DON'T OWN A CAR=0A=0A=0AShell Oil Comments - A MUST READ! =0A =0ASafety Alert! =0AHere are some reasons why we don't allow cell phones in operating areas, propylene oxide handling and storage area, propane, gas a nd diesel refueling areas. =0A=0AThe Shell Oil Company recently issued a wa rning after three incidents in which mobile phones (cell phones) ignited fu mes during fueling operations =0A=0AIn the first case, the phone was placed on the car's trunk lid during fueling; it rang and the ensuing fire destro yed the car and the gasoline pump. =0A=0AIn the second, an individual suffe red severe burns to their face when fumes ignited as they answered a call w hile refueling their car! =0A=0AAnd in the third, an individual suffered bu rns to the thigh and groin as fumes ignited when the phone, which was in th eir pocket, rang while they were fueling their car. =0A=0AYou should know t hat: Mobile Phones can ignite fuel or fumes =0A=0AMobile phones that light up when switched on or when they ring release enough energy to provide a sp ark for ignition =0A=0AMobile phones should not be used in filling stations , or when fueling lawn mowers, boat, etc.=0A=0AMobile phones should not be used, or should be turned off, around other materials that generate flammab le or explosive fumes or dust, (I.e., solvents, chemicals, gases, grain dus t, etc...) =0A=0ATO sum it up, here are the Four Rules for Safe Refueling: =0A=0A1) Turn off engine =0A2) Don't smoke=0A3) Don't use your cell phone - leave it inside the vehicle or turn it off =0A4) Don't re-enter your vehic le during fueling.=0A=0ABob Renkes of Petroleum Equipment Institute is work ing on a campaign to try and make people aware of fires as a result of 'sta tic electricity' at gas pumps.=0A-His company has researched 150 cases of these fires. =0A=0AHis results were very surprising: =0A=0A1) Out of 150 c ases, almost all of them were women. =0A=0A2) Almost all cases involved the person getting back in their vehicle while the nozzle was still pumping ga s. =0AWhen finished, they went back to pull the nozzle out and the fire sta rted, as a result of static. =0A=0A3) Most had on rubber-soled shoes. =0A =0A4) Most men never get back in their vehicle until completely finished. =0AThis is why they are seldom involved in these types of fires. =0A=0A5) D on't ever use cell phones when pumping gas =0A=0A6) It is the vapors that c ome out of the gas that cause the fire, when connected with static charges. =0A=0A7) There were 29 fires where the vehicle was re-entered and the nozz le was touched during refueling from a variety of makes and models. =0ASome resulted in extensive damage to the vehicle, to the station, and to the cu stomer. =0A=0A8) Seventeen fires occurred before, during or immediately aft er the gas cap was removed and before fueling began.=0A=0AMr. Renkes stress es to- NEVERget back into your vehicle while filling it with gas. =0AIf y ou absolutely HAVE to get in your vehicle while the gas is pumping, make su re you get out, close the door TOUCHING THE METAL, before you ever pull the nozzle out. =0AThis way the static from your body will be discharged befor e you ever remove the nozzle. =0A=0AAs I mentioned earlier, The Petroleum E quipment Institute, along with several other companies now, are really tryi ng to make the public aware of this danger. =0A=0AI ask you to please send this information to ALL your family and friends, especially those who have kids in the car with them while pumping gas. =0AIf this were to happen to t hem, they may not be able to get the children out in time. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
From: Ron Walker <n520tx(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jul 13, 2012
I agree that cell phone usage while fueling a car is not wise (you should be paying attention to the task at hand), this specific "Warning from Shell" is an internet urban legend. http://www.snopes.com/autos/hazards/gasvapor.asp > WARNING FROM SHELL OIL COMPANY DO NOT DELETE, PLEASE READ > > > MUST READ, EVEN IF YOU DON'T OWN A CAR > > > Shell Oil Comments - A MUST READ! > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Preventing Bird Strikes in Aviation
From: Robert Borger <rlborger(at)mac.com>
Date: Jul 13, 2012
Eric, Good information. Thanks. Blue skies & tailwinds, Bob Borger Europa XS Tri, Rotax 914, Airmaster C/S Prop. Little Toot Sport Biplane, Lycoming Thunderbolt AEIO-320 EXP 3705 Lynchburg Dr. Corinth, TX 76208-5331 Cel: 817-992-1117 rlborger(at)mac.com On Jul 13, 2012, at 9:13 AM, Eric M. Jones wrote: Good news: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02165.x/full also: http://io9.com/5925193/scientists-explain-how-to-prevent-one-of-the-most-common-airplane-disasters Summary...Wig-wags work well in preventing aircraft bird strikes. -------- Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge, MA 01550 (508) 764-2072 emjones(at)charter.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 13, 2012
From: Ed Holyoke <bicyclop(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Contactor
Howdy, I just recieved from B&C a starter contactor S701-1 which, unlike all the others I've seen, has plastic covers on the mounting tabs. Where is this guy going to get a coil ground connection? Is the intention to wire through the switch to ground? http://www.bandc.biz/pdfs/S701-1_Wiring.pdf Pax, Ed Holyoke ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jack Haviland <jgh2(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Over-voltage Circuit Trips
Date: Jul 13, 2012
On Jul 12, 2012, at 5:40 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: >> Since my RV first flew about a year ago the over-voltage circuit has frequently tripped shortly after take off. Resetting the 5 amp pull-able circuit breaker once or twice generally prevents a re-occurence for the remainder of the flight but I need to determine the root cause and correct it. > > Jack, I'm not ignoring you. Will have a response > and some suggestions in the morning . . . Thanks Bob. A short flight this morning demonstrated that replacing the suspect circuit breaker did not correct the situation. The main bus was at 12.6 volts prior to start and read a solid 14.2 volts during the flight. The EIS (on the endurance bus) was displaying around 13.6 volts but the breaker tripped twice during each of two climbs to the pattern. All connections and terminals in the field circuit appear to be secure. The aircraft instrumentation does not include a recording capability. Suggestions will be greatly appreciated! Jack ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 13, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Contactor
At 02:03 PM 7/13/2012, you wrote: > >Howdy, > >I just recieved from B&C a starter contactor S701-1 which, unlike >all the others I've seen, has plastic covers on the mounting tabs. >Where is this guy going to get a coil ground connection? Is the >intention to wire through the switch to ground? > >http://www.bandc.biz/pdfs/S701-1_Wiring.pdf > >Pax, The S701-1 is a continuous duty battery master contactor and not intended for service as a starter contactor. This is why it is shipped configured as a Battery contactor which gets a ground through the battery master switch. If you wish to use this contactor to control power to your starter, you remove the jumper wire installed and run your starter push button to the left, small terminal. You add a longer jumper from the right, small terminal to ground. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 13, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Contactor redux
At 02:15 PM 7/13/2012, you wrote: At 02:03 PM 7/13/2012, you wrote: Howdy, I just recieved from B&C a starter contactor S701-1 which, unlike all the others I've seen, has plastic covers on the mounting tabs. Where is this guy going to get a coil ground connection? Is the intention to wire through the switch to ground? http://www.bandc.biz/pdfs/S701-1_Wiring.pdf Pax, Ed, The S701-1 is a continuous duty battery master contactor and not intended for service as a starter contactor. This is why it is shipped configured as a Battery contactor which gets a ground through the battery master switch. If you wish to use this contactor to control power to your starter, you remove the jumper wire installed and run your starter push button to the left, small terminal. You add a longer jumper from the right, small terminal to ground. AHA! I see the point of confusion. The B&C wiring diagram cited calls for running a fat wire to the "starter contactor" which means the HOT side of the starter contactor which shares a connection to the ship's main bus. This isn't intended to imply that this contactor is used for starter control. The image might better read, "To main bus via hot side of starter contactor" If you're looking for a starter contactor . . . I suggest you consider the S702-1 or equivalent. http://tinyurl.com/6p8raot Bob . . . ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 13, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Over-voltage Circuit Trips
>Thanks Bob. A short flight this morning demonstrated that replacing >the suspect circuit breaker did not correct the situation. The main >bus was at 12.6 volts prior to start and read a solid 14.2 volts >during the flight. The EIS (on the endurance bus) was displaying >around 13.6 volts but the breaker tripped twice during each of two >climbs to the pattern. All connections and terminals in the field >circuit appear to be secure. The aircraft instrumentation does not >include a recording capability. Suggestions will be greatly appreciated! > >Jack What kind of OV crowbar system is installed on your airplane? If it's a crowbar module from me, you can raise the trip voltage setpoint by turning the adjusting potentiometer 1 revolution counter-clockwise. If you have a B&C crowbar module, their pot is under the heat shrink which needs to be cut away and replaced after the device is re-calibrated. If it's inside a B&C alternator controller, you'll need to return it to B&C for re-calibration. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 13, 2012
From: Ed Holyoke <bicyclop(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Contactor
My bad. I meant to say battery contactor, not starter. After I posted, I went out to the shop and verified that the small terminal on the right closes the contactor when grounded. For some reason, I had pictured putting voltage to the contactor to close it instead of pulling it down. Duh, where do I get power to the switch to close the contactor if the main bus is not hot? Didn't think it all the way through. Pax, Ed Holyoke On 7/13/2012 12:15 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > At 02:03 PM 7/13/2012, you wrote: >> >> >> Howdy, >> >> I just recieved from B&C a starter contactor S701-1 which, unlike all >> the others I've seen, has plastic covers on the mounting tabs. Where >> is this guy going to get a coil ground connection? Is the intention >> to wire through the switch to ground? >> >> http://www.bandc.biz/pdfs/S701-1_Wiring.pdf >> >> Pax, > > The S701-1 is a continuous duty battery master > contactor and not intended for service as a > starter contactor. This is why it is shipped > configured as a Battery contactor which gets a > ground through the battery master switch. > > If you wish to use this contactor to control power > to your starter, you remove the jumper wire installed > and run your starter push button to the left, small > terminal. You add a longer jumper from the right, > small terminal to ground. > > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 13, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Contactor redux
At 03:22 PM 7/13/2012, you wrote: > >Bob, > >I noticed that crimp-on terminals were used on the solid leads on >the diode. It was my understanding that using crimp-ons on solid >wire was not recommended. Am I misinformed....again? :) Is that something I wrote? If it was, I cannot recall a context where that would be true. Here's a photomicrograph I just shot for 22AWG solid wire (diode lead) crimped into a red PIDG using an el-cheapo crimp tool. Emacs! I couldn't find my polishing disk so the smoothed end is rather rough. Normally you'd be able to see the ring of tin plating on the wire at the interface between wire and terminal barrel. Nonetheless, this photo confirms that the two metals to be joined have been upset with sufficient force to make them essentially one with no voids. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 13, 2012
From: rayj <raymondj(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: Contactor redux
I thought I saw it one of the electronics catalogs. I'll do a little looking around and see if I can find where I saw it. Thanks again for the info. Raymond Julian Kettle River, MN. "And you know that I could have me a million more friends, and all I'd have to lose is my point of view." - John Prine On 07/13/2012 06:42 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > At 03:22 PM 7/13/2012, you wrote: >> >> Bob, >> >> I noticed that crimp-on terminals were used on the solid leads on the >> diode. It was my understanding that using crimp-ons on solid wire was >> not recommended. Am I misinformed....again? :) > > Is that something I wrote? If it was, I cannot recall > a context where that would be true. Here's a photomicrograph > I just shot for 22AWG solid wire (diode lead) crimped into a > red PIDG using an el-cheapo crimp tool. > > Emacs! > > I couldn't find my polishing disk so the smoothed end is > rather rough. Normally you'd be able to see the ring of > tin plating on the wire at the interface between wire > and terminal barrel. Nonetheless, this photo confirms that > the two metals to be joined have been upset with sufficient > force to make them essentially one with no voids. > > Bob . . . > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 13, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Contactor
At 05:41 PM 7/13/2012, you wrote: >My bad. I meant to say battery contactor, not starter. After I >posted, I went out to the shop and verified that the small terminal >on the right closes the contactor when grounded. For some reason, I >had pictured putting voltage to the contactor to close it instead of >pulling it down. Duh, where do I get power to the switch to close >the contactor if the main bus is not hot? Didn't think it all the way through. No problem. But your query did get some attention to a need for better labeling of the contactor's downstream terminal. Greg at B&C has forwarded the suggestion on . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 13, 2012
From: rayj <raymondj(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: solid wire in PGID terminals
Turns out I'm misinformed again. The pgid terminal specs in the Digikey specify SOLID OR STRANDED wire. The only possible defense of my error I can find is that some larger crimp on lugs (starting at #8 wire) specify that they are for stranded wire, although they don't specifically prohibit solid wire. Thanks again for helping me get things right. Raymond Julian Kettle River, MN. "And you know that I could have me a million more friends, and all I'd have to lose is my point of view." - John Prine On 07/13/2012 06:42 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > At 03:22 PM 7/13/2012, you wrote: >> >> Bob, >> >> I noticed that crimp-on terminals were used on the solid leads on the >> diode. It was my understanding that using crimp-ons on solid wire was >> not recommended. Am I misinformed....again? :) > > Is that something I wrote? If it was, I cannot recall > a context where that would be true. Here's a photomicrograph > I just shot for 22AWG solid wire (diode lead) crimped into a > red PIDG using an el-cheapo crimp tool. > > Emacs! > > I couldn't find my polishing disk so the smoothed end is > rather rough. Normally you'd be able to see the ring of > tin plating on the wire at the interface between wire > and terminal barrel. Nonetheless, this photo confirms that > the two metals to be joined have been upset with sufficient > force to make them essentially one with no voids. > > Bob . . . > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fred Stucklen" <wstucklen1(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Over-voltage Circuit Trips
Date: Jul 14, 2012
Jack, Check for a loose connection in the field circuit, especially in the alternator connector (if you have one). Any Interruption in the field circuit current (after the regulator) will cause an overvoltage condition when the connection is reestablished. This is especially true for a slow responding regulator... Engine heat will sometimes cause the alternator connector contacts to become loose. Also check for an intermittent regulator ground .. If the regulator is internal to the alternator, check for an intermittent engine ground back to the battery. Fred Stucklen RV-7A N924RV 750 Hrs (Flying RV-6A N926RV 875 Hrs (Sold) RV-6A N925RV 2008 Hrs (Sold) Time: From: Jack Haviland Subject: Re: Over-voltage Circuit Trips On Jul 12, 2012, at 5:40 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: >> Since my RV first flew about a year ago the over-voltage circuit has frequently tripped shortly after take off. Resetting the 5 amp pull-able circuit breaker once or twice generally prevents a re-occurence for the remainder of the flight but I need to determine the root cause and correct it. > > Jack, I'm not ignoring you. Will have a response > and some suggestions in the morning . . . Thanks Bob. A short flight this morning demonstrated that replacing the suspect circuit breaker did not correct the situation. The main bus was at 12.6 volts prior to start and read a solid 14.2 volts during the flight. The EIS (on the endurance bus) was displaying around 13.6 volts but the breaker tripped twice during each of two climbs to the pattern. All connections and terminals in the field circuit appear to be secure. The aircraft instrumentation does not include a recording capability. Suggestions will be greatly appreciated! Jack ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 14, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: solid wire in PGID terminals
At 07:58 PM 7/13/2012, you wrote: > >Turns out I'm misinformed again. The pgid terminal specs in the >Digikey specify SOLID OR STRANDED wire. > >The only possible defense of my error I can find is that some larger >crimp on lugs (starting at #8 wire) specify that they are for >stranded wire, although they don't specifically prohibit solid wire. > >Thanks again for helping me get things right. Looking though the AMP literature, they DO make a distinction between terminal types for solid vs. stranded wire. http://www.te.com/catalog/GeneralInfo/sbli04a.gif We can see that AMP offers a 'specialized' product tailored to single-strand wire. Adding a degree of 'roughness' to the inside surface of the wire grip increases tensile strength of the joint (of negligible concern in aircraft wiring) and an increase in electrical contact area. This last benefit is also a tiny percentage increase. Since we don't even begin to load wires in airplanes like they do in ground based vehicles, this too would be a no-big-deal benefit. This is not intended to detract from the engineering that goes into AMP products . . . at the same time, I deduce that it's not significant to the task of wiring a diode to the outside of a contactor. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 14, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Over-voltage Circuit Trips
P.S. forgot to mention that each revolution of the calibration pot on my modules moves the setpoint about 0.5 volts. So if you're getting nuisance trips with a bus voltage that is running in normal ranges, you can try one half turn of counter-clockwise adjustment and see if the trips stop. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "=?utf-8?B?YW1leWVyQG1pbC1hbWF4LmNvbQ==?=" <ameyer@mil-amax.com>
Subject: =?utf-8?B?QWx0ZXJuYXRvciBraWNraW5nIG9mZiBsaW5lLg==?
Date: Jul 14, 2012
SSBhbSBoYXZpbmcgYW4gaXNzdWUgd2hlcmUgd2hlbiBJIGtleSB0aGUgTWljIG9uIG15IEdhcm1p bjQzMCBjb21tICggbXkgb25seSBjb21tIHJhZGlvKSwgbXkgYWx0ZXJuYXRvciBraWNrcyBvZmYg bGluZS4gVGhpcyBkb2Vzbid0IGhhcHBlbiBvbiB0aGUgZ3JvdW5kIHNob3J0bHkgYWZ0ZXIgc3Rh cnRpbmcsIGJ1eSB3aGVuIGFpcmJvcm5lLCBldGMuLi4gSXQgbm93IG9jY3VycyBhbG1vc3QgMTAw JSBvZiB0aGUgdGltZS4gVGhpcyBoYXBwZW5lZCBmb3IgYSB3aGlsZSBpbnRlcm1pdHRlbnRseSwg YnV0IGlzIG5vdyB2ZXJ5IGZyZXF1ZW50LiBJIGhhdmUgYSBDZXNzbmEgc3R5bGUgc3BsaXQgc3dp dGNoIGFuZCBuZWVkIHRvIHR1cm4gb2ZmIGFuZCBiYWNrIG9uIHRoZSBhbHRlcm5hdG9yIHNpZGUg dG8gcmVzdG9yZSBjaGFyZ2luZyB0byB0aGUgc3lzdGVtLiBUaG91Z2h0cz8gVHJvdWJsZXNob290 aW5nIHN0ZXBzPyBJRDEwVCBlcnJvcnM/IAoKSGFwcHkgRmx5aW4nIQpBbmR5CgoKCg= ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 14, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Alternator kicking off line.
At 11:20 AM 7/14/2012, you wrote: >I am having an issue where when I key the Mic on my Garmin430 comm ( >my only comm radio), my alternator kicks off line. This doesn't >happen on the ground shortly after starting, buy when airborne, >etc... It now occurs almost 100% of the time. This happened for a >while intermittently, but is now very frequent. I have a Cessna >style split switch and need to turn off and back on the alternator >side to restore charging to the system. Thoughts? Troubleshooting >steps? ID10T errors? > >Happy Flyin'! >Andy This has the smell of an RF interference issue between ov sense circuits and your comm transmitter. What kind of airplane? What kind of regulator/ov protection system? Where is your antenna located? Have you checked the SWR on the antenna to be sure of feed line integrity? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 14, 2012
Subject: grounding
From: bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com>
hi all, thanks to all who responded for all the info, ideas. sooooooooo here is my plan i will use a new 55 gal drum with a 12 volt pump and conductive hose to a metal end. pump will be grounded to metal rod in ground. i picked up from all the info that electrical connection to hose end and airplane tank before fueling is the key to prevent sparks so i will either connect pump to exhaust pipes or tank rim to hose end before filling. i will pick up a new oil drum for $20 next weekand start to put this together. thanks again, bob noffs ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 14, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Hints for recycling furnace blowers . . .
For years, I've used salvaged the guts of furnaces to fabricate utility blowers for carpet drying, workspace comfort, paint drying, etc. Dr. Dee occasionally uses an energetic blower outdoors when gardening in hot, low-wind weather. These blowers are compact (motor mounts inside the blower wheel) and often include some variable speed options. They can be had for very little from HVAC companies that change out old furnace and a/c units. I just picked one up at a garage sale for $20 where the owner had already mounted it to a base and fitted with a carrying handle and line cord. Most DIY conversions I've seen in the wild do not account for the fact that these blowers are designed to push LOTS of air through a maze of ducts. I.e., they are intended to do more WORK than just move xx cubic feet of air per minute. There is back-pressure of the duct work to consider. Referring to an exemplar speed vs. torque and current curve . . . [] We can see that there's a 'hump' in motor's torque curve. We also see that rated operating characteristics for the motor are on the right-side of that hump. This means that for the motor to start up and accelerate past the hump, the load on the motor MUST be less than the 'break down' torque else the thing won't make it up the hump to it's operating point. I knew that the blower I just bought was exceedingly crippled in performance . . . it's outlet port was wide open. Sure 'nuf. Got it home, plugged it in . . . it did indeed move some air. The snap-on ammeter read 4.5 amps. But operated completely open loop, it gulped in and tried to accelerate too much air. I took a scrap of plywood and blocked off about 1/3 of the outlet. The motor accelerated up over the hump, rpm rose dramatically and it really began to move some air! I've added a permanent baffle adjusted so that the motor draws about 3.5 amps. That's 'cause I'm too lazy to take it apart and see if the motor frame is marked with rated load current. If I knew what the rated current was, I'd adjust the baffle to achieve that current. In any case, it now draws 1 amp less than when I bought it and moves a great deal more air. This is something to remember about induction motor characteristics . . . they must be loaded well down the right side of the 'hump'. If any of you have ever used an induction motor lawn mower, you may have experienced what one might call 'motor stall' when pushing too rapidly into tall weeds . . . the speed is loaded down to where the motor tumbles down the front side of the hump. You have to pull back and let it recover. For you techno-nerds, max torque (or breakdown torque) from an induction motor occurs at a 'slip frequency' in the squirrel cage where inductive reactance is equal to the DC resistance of the cage conductors. It's 105 out there today . . . added air motion in the shop will be welcome. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fran & Joe" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Subject: Re: Hints for recycling furnace blowers . . .
Date: Jul 15, 2012
Blocking off the air inlet has the same effect: less current draw because the motor is doing less work. This is contrary to what one might expect because, in most applications, hindering the process requires more force to accomplish the task. Have you ever noticed that a vacuum cleaner motor speeds up when the air inlet is blocked? Joe ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 15, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Hints for recycling furnace blowers . . .
At 07:15 AM 7/15/2012, you wrote: >Blocking off the air inlet has the same effect: less current draw >because the motor is doing less work. This is contrary to what one >might expect because, in most applications, hindering the process >requires more force to accomplish the task. Have you ever noticed >that a vacuum cleaner motor speeds up when the air inlet is blocked? Work produced (pounds of air per second accelerated to some new velocity) translates to watts of power needed at the motor shaft. If that demand (torque loading) is too great then the induction motor cannot accelerate "up-slope and over the hump' to reach it's designed operating point. The amount of current being drawn is simply a companion artifact of where the motor is operating on it's performance curve while being overloaded. If one were to build an enclosure around an airplane propeller . . . a disk-shaped box with just enough clearance to allow free propeller movement . . . opening the throttle fully would produce a much greater than red-line RPM response from the engine. This is because the engine is now spinning a fixed amount of air in a close volume as opposed to accelerating an unrestrained mass of air through the propeller disk. The series wound motor of a vacuum sweeper doesn't have that hump in the operating curve defined by Xc=R characteristic of the squirrel cage rotor. But RPM of that motor is still a function of load: force proportional to the product of acceleration and mass. And like induction motors, 4-cycle engines have a "hump" in their performance curves. Load them down too much and they 'fall down the curve' and die. Brush-commutated motors don't exhibit this characteristic. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Owen Baker " <bakerocb(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: KIS-List: weights and balances- battery
Date: Jul 16, 2012
7/16/2012 Hello Keith, You wrote: "My 10 year old Concorde battery ( CB35) finally gave up last winter........" 10 years old -- Wow, how did it "give up"? When a car battery finally "gives up" the scenario is usually that one can not get the starter to crank the engine. There is the usual inconvenience of getting a jump start, then driving to a battery supply source, replacing the battery, and proceeding on one's merry way. No great harm done. When an airplane battery can no longer crank the engine that battery has long since previously lost its capacity to supply electrical power to operate any essential electrical devices in the airplane for any significant period of time should the alternator fail. If inability to operate any essential electrical devices for the period of time needed to get the airplane safely on the ground is unacceptable then the pilot has a much more serious problem than just getting a jump start. In that "inability to operate" scenario, flying with a clapped out battery (which can provide no electrical reserve) is analogous to flying with essentially no fuel reserve and expecting to always being able to safely land and taxi to a fuel source before the propeller stops cooling the pilot -- not good. So using successful engine cranking as the sole indicator of an airplane's battery's health (reserve capacity) can be deleterious to the pilot's health. What can one do to ensure that there is sufficient electrical capacity remaining in the battery for essential / endurance needs when just cranking the engine is not a good indicator of battery actual capacity? There are two methods: 1) Use a battery capacity tester to determine the reserve capacity of the battery. Here is just one example: http://www.gillbatteries.com/capacitytesters.aspx 2) Just arbitrarily replace the airplane's battery at some periodic interval -- say every two years? Bob Nuckolls, our great electrical guru, has touched on this subject in his postings on the Matronics aeroelectric-list many times. His thoughts on the subject can be researched through the list archival search capacity. http://www.matronics.com/Navigator/?AeroElectric-List His Jun 09, 2005 posting on battery testing gives his philosophy on preferring this second course of action. OC =============================================================================== From: Keith.Miller(at)esa.int Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 3:59 AM Subject: Re: KIS-List: weights and balances- battery --> KIS-List message posted by: Keith.Miller(at)esa.int Jesse My 10 year old Concorde battery ( CB35) finally gave up last winter and I replaced it with an Aerovoltz Lithium Iron phosphate battery weighing just 3Lbs, So far It has spun up the engine without any problems , but only time can tell if its as reliable as my old lead acid , this solution moved my Cof G forward without any need to rewire or move hardware. Keith ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jack Haviland <jgh2(at)charter.net>
Subject: Over-voltage Circuit Breaker Trips
Date: Jul 16, 2012
Bob N./Fred S./et al, Thanks for the suggestions! My OV device was in heavy shrink wrap (not "potted") so it must be the B&C Specialities version. I exposed the trim pot and tried turning it 1.5 turns CCW and (later) 3 turns CW but the CB still trips. Since the circuit breaker and voltage regulator have been replaced the cause appears to be some hidden fault in the wiring or internal to the alternator. The Van's alternator came with a removable plastic connector for the field wire but no positive method for securing the connector to the alternator. I made the field wire connection using an Amp female push tab. It feels secure but I'll try crimping the working end of the terminal slightly tighter on the alternator lug and revising the wire support strategy. The voltage regulator is grounded to a block of tabs on the firewall and the other connections appear secure and continuous. Any further thoughts will be greatly appreciated. Jack H. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 16, 2012
From: Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com>
Subject: Re: KIS-List: weights and balances- battery
> 7/16/2012 > 1) Use a battery capacity tester to determine the reserve > capacity of the battery. Here is just one example: > www.gillbatteries.com/capacitytesters.aspx Whoah! $1252! You can do at least 25 years of two year battery exchanges for that much money! If you really want a battery capacity tester, how about the one form Harbor Freight: www.harborfreight.com/500-amp-carbon-pile-load-tester-91129.html Less than the cost of 1 battery (BTW, I have an iron in this fire...I have one of these...so far no complaints...except it does get pretty warm when using it!) Harley ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 16, 2012
From: Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net>
Subject: Re: Over-voltage Circuit Breaker Trips
Jack If wired correctly understand that the OV CB can not be your problem. It does nothing unless the OV triggers it. When the crowbar OV circuit activates, it shorts the CB to ground and the CB pops. Bob does have a little test procedure published on how to test or set the trip point of the OV module. I would suggest checking the trigger voltage or replacing the OV module. There were a few homemade modules that were overly sensitive to small voltage excursions and were nuisance tripping. Turning on or off any electrical switch would often trip that unit in my aircraft. There was a capacitor added to stabilize the voltage reference in the OV module to fix that issue several years ago. Mine have never tripped since that circuit mod. I think you are doing the right thing by tracking this down just in case the trips are being caused by a real over voltage. If you are still confident that the regulator is OK then I'd probably dissemble and clean every connection between the alternator, regulator, and battery. I have not had any trouble using a PIDG connector on my alternator. Ken On 16/07/2012 8:22 AM, Jack Haviland wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jack > Haviland > > Bob N./Fred S./et al, > > Thanks for the suggestions! > > My OV device was in heavy shrink wrap (not "potted") so it must be > the B&C Specialities version. I exposed the trim pot and tried > turning it 1.5 turns CCW and (later) 3 turns CW but the CB still > trips. Since the circuit breaker and voltage regulator have been > replaced the cause appears to be some hidden fault in the wiring or > internal to the alternator. > > The Van's alternator came with a removable plastic connector for the > field wire but no positive method for securing the connector to the > alternator. I made the field wire connection using an Amp female push > tab. It feels secure but I'll try crimping the working end of the > terminal slightly tighter on the alternator lug and revising the wire > support strategy. The voltage regulator is grounded to a block of > tabs on the firewall and the other connections appear secure and > continuous. > > Any further thoughts will be greatly appreciated. > > Jack H. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Solid state trim controller
From: "Martymason" <captainmarty(at)bellsouth.net>
Date: Jul 16, 2012
Lectric' Bob, Have you done anything with the two channel solid-state trim controller? If so when might a circuit board be available? I downloaded the PDF drawing of the circuit but could not find anything on the AE Connection web site. A three channel board would be useful for those with rudder trim. Marty Mason Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378436#378436 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "The Kuffels" <kuffel(at)cyberport.net>
Subject: Re: Solid state trim controller
Date: Jul 16, 2012
Marty, << two channel solid-state trim controller? >> Over a year ago Kitplanes accepted my article for a "no-etch" circuit board version of just such a gizmo. If their editor got some emails telling them there is a market need for this article maybe they will print it soon. Meanwhile, don't know why I couldn't email you a copy of the schematic, board and manuscript privately especially if you promise to buy/subscribe to Kitplanes anyway. Because of the dual ICs used, adding 2 more channels is easier than just one but a third would still not be a big deal. Email me off-list if you want the details. Tom Kuffel ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Over-voltage Circuit Breaker Trips
From: John MacCallum <john.maccallum(at)bigpond.com>
Date: Jul 17, 2012
As an experiment I would obtain two .01 mfd ceramic capacitors and bypass the Terminals of the CB to ground. One on each terminal to ground and see if that fixes the problem. Cheers John MacCallum Rv10 41016 Sent from my iPad On 16/07/2012, at 22:22, Jack Haviland wrote: > > Bob N./Fred S./et al, > > Thanks for the suggestions! > > My OV device was in heavy shrink wrap (not "potted") so it must be the B&C Specialities version. I exposed the trim pot and tried turning it 1.5 turns CCW and (later) 3 turns CW but the CB still trips. Since the circuit breaker and voltage regulator have been replaced the cause appears to be some hidden fault in the wiring or internal to the alternator. > > The Van's alternator came with a removable plastic connector for the field wire but no positive method for securing the connector to the alternator. I made the field wire connection using an Amp female push tab. It feels secure but I'll try crimping the working end of the terminal slightly tighter on the alternator lug and revising the wire support strategy. The voltage regulator is grounded to a block of tabs on the firewall and the other connections appear secure and continuous. > > Any further thoughts will be greatly appreciated. > > Jack H. > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: grounding procedures
From: John MacCallum <john.maccallum(at)bigpond.com>
Date: Jul 17, 2012
Interesting read but I think largely urban myth. It is certainly possible to get a spark produced through rectification of RF by a bad joint in a wire or even sheet metal. That is the main reason you can not have a transmitter around explosives. A Cell phone is just a fancy two way radio and it is connected to and talking to the Network whenever it is turned on. So it is possible for a cellphone to transmit without you doing anything. Just having it in your pocket would be a hazard if we accept the urban myth. For example, The led display turning on will not induce a static charge in anything. I think it is much more likely those types of events described in the warnings are because of the types of clothes that people were wearing and that they were ungrounded until they touched something on the vehicle. To be safe you should ground yourself and the vehicle before you take the fuel cap off. I try to remember to touch the fuel hose to the car before I take the fuel cap off. Cheers John MacCallum Sent from my iPad On 14/07/2012, at 1:01, Ron Walker wrote: > > I agree that cell phone usage while fueling a car is not wise (you > should be paying attention to the task at hand), this specific "Warning > from Shell" is an internet urban legend. > > http://www.snopes.com/autos/hazards/gasvapor.asp > > >> WARNING FROM SHELL OIL COMPANY DO NOT DELETE, PLEASE READ >> >> >> MUST READ, EVEN IF YOU DON'T OWN A CAR >> >> >> Shell Oil Comments - A MUST READ! >> > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "bob-tcw" <rnewman(at)tcwtech.com>
Subject: Re: Solid state trim controller
Date: Jul 16, 2012
I'm all for people experimenting, however, if you aren't looking for a project, just wanted to make sure you know that we sell one and two axis solid state trim controllers. They provide run-away trim prevention, two adjustable speeds and allow for pilot and copilot control switches. For all the details visit www.tcwtech.com and click on the Safety-Trim picture. We'll be at Oshkosh, booth 4095 if you want a demo. Thanks, Bob Newman RV-10 N541RV -----Original Message----- From: Martymason Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 4:42 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Solid state trim controller Lectric' Bob, Have you done anything with the two channel solid-state trim controller? If so when might a circuit board be available? I downloaded the PDF drawing of the circuit but could not find anything on the AE Connection web site. A three channel board would be useful for those with rudder trim. Marty Mason Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378436#378436 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob Falstad <bobair(at)me.com>
Subject: How to Use Your iPhone with Your Garmin Audio Panel
Date: Jul 16, 2012
Folks, Rather than ask a question, I thought I'd pass on one solution I came up with if you want/need to plug your iPhone into your Garmin Audio Panel (my audio panel is the non-TSO'd GMA 240 but I assume this approach will work with other Garmin audio panels, at least). I need this capability to call ATC for IFR clearances from uncontrolled fields where there aren't other communication capabilities. Best regards, Bob GlaStar N248BF ~460 Hours Per "Peter" at Garmin Tech Support, the three conductors in the 2.5 mm patch cord that plugs into the audio panel have the following functions: Tip = Mic Ring = Audio Sleeve = Common/Ground. He had access to documentation for the iPhone's four-conductor, 3.5 mm plug/receptacle and he said it is wired up like this: Tip = R.H. Audio Channel Ring No. 1 = L.H. Audio Channel Ring No. 2 = Common/Ground Sleeve = Mic. I found the following item (iPhone TTY Adapter) on Apple's on-line store. http://store.apple.com/us/product/MA854G/A?fnode=MTY1NDAzOQ#overview (The part number is MA854G/A.) Our local Apple store had one in stock so I bought it. It is pretty spendy at $19 but it is an Apple, not third-party, product and the build quality looks good (it is very small and could get lost easily). You may be able to find another source that is less expensive. I checked it out with my ohmmeter. Here are the results: Male 3.5 mm Plug Female 2.5 mm Receptacle Tip (open) Ring No. 1 Ring Ring No. 2 Sleeve Sleeve Tip I tested it out tonight with the 2.5mm patch cord that came with the audio panel and it works just fine. I got mono audio in both ears on my Bose headset. My wife said she could hear me just fine (this was a ground test without the engine running) and I could hear her just fine. As you place the call, you do hear all the normal ringing sounds as the call goes through. So now you know where to get an item that will allow iPhone users to plug their phone into their Garmin audio panels. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: How to Use Your iPhone with Your Garmin Audio Panel
From: Tim Andres <tim2542(at)sbcglobal.net>
Date: Jul 16, 2012
Thanks Bob! I've been meaning to figure this out myself. I have a PSE panel but Im going to assume there is some sort of standard on these and just order the adapte r from Amazon. I see them there all the way from the genuine apple product a t $14 down to some that cost less than the shipping. Tim Sent from my iPad On Jul 16, 2012, at 7:33 PM, Bob Falstad wrote: > Folks, > > Rather than ask a question, I thought I'd pass on one solution I came up w ith if you want/need to plug your iPhone into your Garmin Audio Panel (my au dio panel is the non-TSO'd GMA 240 but I assume this approach will work with other Garmin audio panels, at least). I need this capability to call ATC f or IFR clearances from uncontrolled fields where there aren't other communic ation capabilities. > > Best regards, > > Bob > GlaStar N248BF > ~460 Hours > > Per "Peter" at Garmin Tech Support, the three conductors in the 2.5 mm pat ch cord that plugs into the audio panel have the following functions: > > Tip = Mic > > Ring = Audio > > Sleeve = Common/Ground. > > He had access to documentation for the iPhone's four-conductor, 3.5 mm plu g/receptacle and he said it is wired up like this: > > Tip = R.H. Audio Channel > > Ring No. 1 = L.H. Audio Channel > > Ring No. 2 = Common/Ground > > Sleeve = Mic. > > I found the following item (iPhone TTY Adapter) on Apple's on-line store. h ttp://store.apple.com/us/product/MA854G/A?fnode=MTY1NDAzOQ#overview (Th e part number is MA854G/A.) Our local Apple store had one in stock so I bou ght it. It is pretty spendy at $19 but it is an Apple, not third-party, pro duct and the build quality looks good (it is very small and could get lost e asily). You may be able to find another source that is less expensive. > > I checked it out with my ohmmeter. Here are the results: > > Male 3.5 mm Plug Female 2.5 mm Receptacle > > Tip (open) > > Ring No. 1 Ring > > Ring No. 2 Sleeve > > Sleeve Tip > > I tested it out tonight with the 2.5mm patch cord that came with the audio panel and it works just fine. I got mono audio in both ears on my Bose hea dset. My wife said she could hear me just fine (this was a ground test with out the engine running) and I could hear her just fine. As you place the ca ll, you do hear all the normal ringing sounds as the call goes through. > > So now you know where to get an item that will allow iPhone users to plug t heir phone into their Garmin audio panels. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 17, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Over-voltage Circuit Breaker Trips
At 07:22 AM 7/16/2012, you wrote: > >Bob N./Fred S./et al, > >Thanks for the suggestions! > >My OV device was in heavy shrink wrap (not "potted") so it must be >the B&C Specialities version. I exposed the trim pot and tried >turning it 1.5 turns CCW and (later) 3 turns CW but the CB still >trips. Since the circuit breaker and voltage regulator have been >replaced the cause appears to be some hidden fault in the wiring or >internal to the alternator. Hmmmm . . . the fact that adjusting the screw had no observable effects is mystifying. If the OV module you have is fitted with a muti-turn pot, it sounds like one of mine. In any case, I'd like to see the one you have. I don't have a mailing address for you in my sales data base . . . irrespective of where it came from, I'd like to trade with you. Give me an address to mail you a new one along with a stamped envelope to return the old one to me. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Stuart Hutchison" <stuart(at)stuarthutchison.com.au>
Subject: How to Use Your iPhone with Your Garmin Audio Panel
Date: Jul 17, 2012
Thank you Bob. I'm glad to avoid the extra research for my iPhone and a GMA-240 as well ! _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Falstad Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 12:33 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: How to Use Your iPhone with Your Garmin Audio Panel Folks, Rather than ask a question, I thought I'd pass on one solution I came up with if you want/need to plug your iPhone into your Garmin Audio Panel (my audio panel is the non-TSO'd GMA 240 but I assume this approach will work with other Garmin audio panels, at least). I need this capability to call ATC for IFR clearances from uncontrolled fields where there aren't other communication capabilities. Best regards, Bob GlaStar N248BF ~460 Hours Per "Peter" at Garmin Tech Support, the three conductors in the 2.5 mm patch cord that plugs into the audio panel have the following functions: Tip = Mic Ring = Audio Sleeve = Common/Ground. He had access to documentation for the iPhone's four-conductor, 3.5 mm plug/receptacle and he said it is wired up like this: Tip = R.H. Audio Channel Ring No. 1 = L.H. Audio Channel Ring No. 2 = Common/Ground Sleeve = Mic. I found the following item (iPhone TTY Adapter) on Apple's on-line store. http://store.apple.com/us/product/MA854G/A?fnode=MTY1NDAzOQ#overview (The part number is MA854G/A.) Our local Apple store had one in stock so I bought it. It is pretty spendy at $19 but it is an Apple, not third-party, product and the build quality looks good (it is very small and could get lost easily). You may be able to find another source that is less expensive. I checked it out with my ohmmeter. Here are the results: Male 3.5 mm Plug Female 2.5 mm Receptacle Tip (open) Ring No. 1 Ring Ring No. 2 Sleeve Sleeve Tip I tested it out tonight with the 2.5mm patch cord that came with the audio panel and it works just fine. I got mono audio in both ears on my Bose headset. My wife said she could hear me just fine (this was a ground test without the engine running) and I could hear her just fine. As you place the call, you do hear all the normal ringing sounds as the call goes through. So now you know where to get an item that will allow iPhone users to plug their phone into their Garmin audio panels. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Solid state trim controller
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Date: Jul 17, 2012
A "solid-state trim controller" can mean many things. I sell the TSCMR...True Servo Controller for MAC/RAC trim boxes by the boatload, as well as the Extraordinary Non-MAC servo controller for controlling Futaba and various RC-type servos. -------- 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=378500#378500 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/tscmr_installation_manual_168.pdf http://forums.matronics.com//files/egpnmsc_256.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Over-voltage Circuit Breaker Trips
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Date: Jul 17, 2012
> If wired correctly understand that the OV CB can not be your problem. It does nothing unless the OV triggers it. When the crowbar OV circuit activates, it shorts the CB to ground and the CB pops. Bob does have a little test procedure published on how to test or set the trip point of > the OV module. I would suggest checking the trigger voltage or replacing > the OV module....Ken Au contraire, mon frere. The OV CB can easily be your problem: The OVP as currently designed WILL exceed the maximum Rated Breaking Capacity (Icn) in many or most applications. The result of this is that many CBs, when popped for the first time are functionally and permanently ruined and might thereafter exhibit nuisance tripping. If just sitting on the shelf, be aware that someone might have tested them incorrectly. When the Icn is exceeded the CB might thereafter break at a current lower than specified on the label. Testing the CB is easy, but must be done correctly (Google "testing circuit breakers") The fine details (like how much residual resistance is in the circuit, and the capability of the battery, and the exact type of breaker) matter. And yes Bob disagrees, but the evidence is clear. -------- 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=378502#378502 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 17, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Solid state trim controller
At 03:42 PM 7/16/2012, you wrote: > > >Lectric' Bob, >Have you done anything with the two channel solid-state trim >controller? If so when might a circuit board be available? >I downloaded the PDF drawing of the circuit but could not find >anything on the AE Connection web site. A three channel board would >be useful for those with rudder trim. Marty, Thanks for reminding me of this. I went to the hammer-n-tongs bin to see how far that effort had progressed and found that the board was finished and checked. Don't recall what force moved it to one side but it's back on the rails. Emacs! Ordered boards and relays today. I will be able to offer bare boards for the DIY crowd and assembled boards with connector kits for the plug-n-play folks. I'll have a production proof-batch of six boards about the first of next week. These are single channel boards, 2.5" long by 1.9" wide and a 15-pin D-sub on one edge. There are two speed setting potentiometers that control a constant-voltage supply to the trim motor. These may be used/ignored as the installation dictates. In other words, leaving the speed control pins un-terminated makes the board function as a rudimentary relay-deck. I'll probably put a non-adjustable relay-deck in the catalog along with the adjustable version. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: The last wave of 9lb jump start kits are shipped
From: "rparigoris" <rparigor(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us>
Date: Jul 17, 2012
Hi Group Sorry but I don't have time to send individual E-mails to those waiting for their 9lb jump start kits or parts. Everything owed is in the mail. I dropped off half yesterday (Monday Y12-07-16) to the USPS and half today (Tuesday Y12-07-17). The latest expected delivery is this Thursday (TX). If someone does not receive their stuff by lets say next Tuesday please contact me. I topped off all batteries before I packed them. I apologize to the person who has to remove all the tape and reinforcement I used on the battery/s this shipment (in hopes of keeping any damage to a minimum. Sorry for the delay, this is the first time in weeks i caught a break. Ron Parigoris Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378506#378506 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Stuff for sale
From: "rparigoris" <rparigor(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us>
Date: Jul 17, 2012
Hi Group My build partners Company is closing down their New York office. Here is stuff we need to do something with: https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=550FC20DBDDB521D!714&authkey=!AG8XLx66O0lfgl8 The Data-loggers may be spoken for. Would prefer to ship as a lot. Anyone interested? Ron Parigoris Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378507#378507 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 17, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Over-voltage Circuit Breaker Trips
At 09:53 AM 7/17/2012, you wrote: If wired correctly understand that the OV CB can not be your problem. It does nothing unless the OV triggers it. When the crowbar OV circuit activates, it shorts the CB to ground and the CB pops. Bob does have a little test procedure published on how to test or set the trip point of the OV module. I would suggest checking the trigger voltage or replacing the OV module....Ken Au contraire, mon frere. The OV CB can easily be your problem: The OVP as currently designed WILL exceed the maximum Rated Breaking Capacity (Icn) in many or most applications. The result of this is that many CBs, when popped for the first time are functionally and permanently ruined and might thereafter exhibit nuisance tripping. If just sitting on the shelf, be aware that someone might have tested them incorrectly. When the Icn is exceeded the CB might thereafter break at a current lower than specified on the label. Testing the CB is easy, but must be done correctly (Google "testing circuit breakers") The fine details (like how much residual resistance is in the circuit, and the capability of the battery, and the exact type of breaker) matter. And yes Bob disagrees, but the evidence is clear. "Many CBs" is non-qualified . . . For every discussion in which I participated on this subject I think I made it clear that the circuit breakers being considered were the mil-spec, miniature breakers or their commercial counterparts. I cited boat-loads of testing for this style of breaker per Mil-C-5809 wherein one can read the requirement for continued functionality of the device under test AFTER being subjected to several cycles at thousands of amps in a forced trip. I even crafted a page that spoke to circuit breakers NOT qualified to those specifications: http://tinyurl.com/7desrtb The last breaker in that Shop Note had indeed been subject to a single operation of a crow-bar ovm module. Clearly this device was not a candidate for use aboard aircraft whether upstream of a crowbar module or not. I will refer you to Mil-C-5809G, Table VII, wherein each device under test is subjected to two operations each at rated interruption current at sea level and rated altitude. An exemplar rating can be found in MS3320, Table III where they speak to test currents of 2,000 to 6,000 amps depending on breaker rating. The breaker is to remain functional after being subjected to those test levels. From the Eaton catalog: Emacs! When the Crowbar OVM products from AEC or B&C or PlanePower are installed per recommendations for breaker selection, design goals are being met. This style of breaker is exceedingly unlikely to ever have been "tested" beyond their design requirements for qualification. I watched some testing at Beech at the 3000A fault levels. It's not a trivial task to generate that kind of test level . . . it's not going to be 'exceeded' by the occasional, mis-informed user of such devices. Further, using the crow-bar shut-down technique downstream of such breakers isn't even going to make the breathe hard much less break a sweat. I proved this in the Beech test labs when crowbar shutdown was provisionally qualified to be installed on the model 38P http://tinyurl.com/7smb4k5 and later when the B&C standby alternator was added to the type certificate for the A36. My brother-in-law was similarly mis-educated by some grey-beard journeymen when he got his ticket to string wires in buildings. The tale being circulated was that any new breaker subject to an hard fault trip was already 'damaged goods' and required replacement. This is counter-intuitive to both the reasons that breakers exist, the skill of those who design them and specify them into finished goods. This is old science who's utility should not be polluted by those who have never been there, done that, or read and understood the design and test data. If any breaker is at risk for damage the first time it is tripped, then it's NOT suited to the task and should be replaced with one that is. Please refrain from personalizing this as "a disagreement" between myself and others . . . please refer to the documents cited and explain how they are not applicable to the discussion at hand. Let us take care that we do not propagate shop and hangar myths here on the List. Let us be specific on just WHAT KIND of breaker is being discussed, what it's specifications are and how it is expected to perform. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeffrey W. Skiba" <jskiba(at)icosa.net>
Subject: Solid state trim controller
Date: Jul 17, 2012
I second the request for 3 channel trim but depending on price one could always buy two 2 channel boards and just not use one channel. Any idea on price yet ? or still too early ? Thanks Jeff. At 03:42 PM 7/16/2012, you wrote: Lectric' Bob, Have you done anything with the two channel solid-state trim controller? If so when might a circuit board be available? I downloaded the PDF drawing of the circuit but could not find anything on the AE Connection web site. A three channel board would be useful for those with rudder trim. Marty, Thanks for reminding me of this. I went to the hammer-n-tongs bin to see how far that effort had progressed and found that the board was finished and checked. Don't recall what force moved it to one side but it's back on the rails. Emacs! Ordered boards and relays today. I will be able to offer bare boards for the DIY crowd and assembled boards with connector kits for the plug-n-play folks. I'll have a production proof-batch of six boards about the first of next week. These are single channel boards, 2.5" long by 1.9" wide and a 15-pin D-sub on one edge. There are two speed setting potentiometers that control a constant-voltage supply to the trim motor. These may be used/ignored as the installation dictates. In other words, leaving the speed control pins un-terminated makes the board function as a rudimentary relay-deck. I'll probably put a non-adjustable relay-deck in the catalog along with the adjustable version. Bob . . . _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 17, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Solid state trim controller
At 10:57 PM 7/17/2012, you wrote: >I second the request for 3 channel trim but depending on price one >could always buy two 2 channel boards and just not use one channel. > >Any idea on price yet ? or still too early ? At first blush, an assembled and tested relay deck with 2-speed adjustability and a mating connector kit will be offered at $45. For the configuration shown, a '2-channel' relay deck is simply assembled on the two-up etched circuit boards as fabricated. They're small and there's little to be gained by physically combining two controllers onto a single board. This would also have the effect of forcing replacement of both controllers in the event that one of was damaged or failed. I think it more prudent to offer 'single channel' assemblies as shown so that the builder may choose to assemble as many as necessary for their particular project. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 18, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Solid state trim controller
At 11:53 PM 7/17/2012, you wrote: > > > I think it more prudent to offer 'single channel' > assemblies as shown so that the builder may choose > to assemble as many as necessary for their > particular project. I should point out that while this offering does included some 'solid state' components for the purpose of controlling supply voltage to the trim motor, it's more properly referred to as a "relay deck with speed control". The first time I conducted an MTBF study on a product (multi-speed trim controller for the Lears) I was feeling pretty smug about the calculated numbers falling out when only the solid state devices and their assembly processes were being plugged in. But got a shock when I added the 4PDT power relay into the mix. The relay alone dropped the MTBF numbers by 75%! Besides illuminating the fallacies embedded in naive acceptance of "plugging in the numbers", it did serve as a wake-up notice on the RELATIVE reliability of relays versus transistors. If one's project design goals are driven strongly by MTBF numbers, then it's a good thing to minimize the use of relays. On the other hand, our airplanes fly on average 50 hours a year and in relatively benign environmental conditions. Further, designing for failure tolerance offers an opportunity to exploit the unique features of relays with little concern for risks. Relays are stone simple, very low ON resistance and perfect isolation between controlling signal and switched load. The biggest down side is power consumption of the coil and volumetric considerations for building miniature devices. I chose to stay with relays for this product because of their unique ability to provide a dead-short across the connections to the spinning armature at 'trim command release'. This feature provides 'dynamic braking' which is a legacy design goal of many motor driven systems like flaps, landing gear, cooling doors, etc. This design also provides automatic tolerance for conflicting commands between two trim switches. If one switch is calling for trim up while the other calls for trim down . . . the motor simply stops. There's a family of designs available with differences driven by alternative design goals. I'm not intent upon arguing with those goals but I think it useful to describe the thinking behind the AEC9041 Trim Relay Deck for PM Motors so that the buyer can assess their own design goal fit with products being offered. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeffrey W. Skiba" <jskiba(at)icosa.net>
Subject: Re: AEC Modules
Date: Jul 18, 2012
Any updates on the below ? or if I missed the update sorry just guide me to the update please Thanks in advance 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: Sunday, July 04, 2010 10:15 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: AEC Modules --> At 08:35 AM 7/1/2010, you wrote: >--> > >Hi Bob, > Is the paralysis resolving? I'm wondering when the 9004 and 9011 >modules will be available. >Thanks, >Eric Schlanser >W-10/Lycoming O320 with Z-13 and maybe Z-24 I did some more think-work on them while on the round trip to Denver. Got the packaging decisions resolved. I'll do a board layout on the 9004 Monday and get some proof-of-concept parts built for my software guy to play with. Should be within the next 60 cays. By the way, I'll be looking for "Beta testers" for the 9004. I'll provide a ship set of 9004 parts to someone who is already flying regularly if they'll install the parts and give me feedback on installation/operational/performance issues. Email me directly. The 9011 design is done. I just need to inventory up on parts and show the kids how to assemble and test them. We'll do both programs together. Bob . . . ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Source for DP3T ON-ON-MOM Toggle Switch
From: "jdubner" <jdubner(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Jul 18, 2012
[Pardon me if this is a duplicate. I twice attempted to post it via the email interface with no apparent success. Using the web interface now.] Does anyone have a source for the Apem 644H/2-1R toggle switch (DP3T ON-ON-MOM) in the USA? (It's a non-stock, minimum-25 item at DigiKey.) I'd like to use them to control dual PMags in this manner: http://gikonelectrics.blogspot.com/2008/09/p-mag-wiring.html Thanks, Joe Independence, OR http://www.mail2600.com/position Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378654#378654 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "ROGER & JEAN CURTIS" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Source for DP3T ON-ON-MOM Toggle Switch
Date: Jul 18, 2012
Does anyone have a source for the Apem 644H/2-1R toggle switch (DP3T ON-ON-MOM) in the USA? (It's a non-stock, minimum-25 item at DigiKey.) I'd like to use them to control dual PMags in this manner: http://gikonelectrics.blogspot.com/2008/09/p-mag-wiring.html Thanks, Joe Here is one that might work. Roger http://www.ee-usa.com/warehouse/eaton8511k15 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "The Kuffels" <kuffel(at)cyberport.net>
Subject: Re: Source for DP3T ON-ON-MOM Toggle Switch
Date: Jul 18, 2012
Joe, << toggle switch (DP3T ON-ON-MOM) >> Mouser (mouser.com) has 3 in stock of part number 633-M204701-RO for $15.14 each with solder lugs. If you can tolerate PC pins instead of solder lugs they have 520 in stock of non-catalog part number 633-M2047SD3W03/U switches at $13.57 each. Search M2047 from the Mouser main page. Mouser has a long history of being friendly to the small quantity buyer. I recommend them highly. Tom Kuffel ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 18, 2012
From: Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com>
Subject: Re: Source for DP3T ON-ON-MOM Toggle Switch
Joe... I've always had good luck with Mouser...and they have a minimum order of 1 on this switch at ~$18: www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Apem/644H-21R/?qs=llnlROTr2NZTe%252bbqFmLTF1MyeWy8Xh6svYUAHfvIsqY%3d Here's the Tiny URL in case the full length URL gets wrapped: http://tinyurl.com/bvh4ghy Harley ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Does anyone have a source for the Apem 644H/2-1R toggle switch (DP3T > ON-ON-MOM) in the USA? (It's a non-stock, minimum-25 item at DigiKey.) I'd > like to use them to control dual PMags in this manner: > http://gikonelectrics.blogspot.com/2008/09/p-mag-wiring.html > > Thanks, > Joe > > > Here is one that might work. > > Roger > > http://www.ee-usa.com/warehouse/eaton8511k15 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 18, 2012
From: dlj04 <dlj04(at)josephson.com>
Subject: Re: Over-voltage Circuit Breaker Trips
If it's true that a circuit breaker is damaged and can't be used once it's been tripped with a dead short, why would you ever use a circuit breaker? You might as well have a fuse. As Bob mentioned, it is possible to create a fault current in excess of a circuit breaker's rated interrupting capacity, but you're not going to do it with a light lead-acid (or gel, or AGM, or LiPo) battery in a small airplane with any kind of terminals and wire between the battery and the breaker. You *might* exceed 5000 amps with a fresh NiCd battery from a turbine aircraft *if* the CB and OVP were connected to a bus bar or right at the battery terminals, but that would be about what it would take. -- David Josephson ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Source for DP3T ON-ON-MOM Toggle Switch
From: "jdubner" <jdubner(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Jul 18, 2012
> Here is one that might work. > > Roger > > http://www.ee-usa.com/warehouse/eaton8511k15 Eaton makes a fine switch but at $30 each, screw terminals, and not in stock, I'll pass. > Mouser (mouser.com) has 3 in stock of part number 633-M204701-RO for $15.14 > each with solder lugs. If you can tolerate PC pins instead of solder lugs > they have 520 in stock of non-catalog part number 633-M2047SD3W03/U switches > at $13.57 each. ... > > Tom Kuffel I hadn't considered anything other than Faston terminals but may re-think soldered leads if all else fails. Thanks. > > I've always had good luck with Mouser...and they have a minimum order of 1 on this switch at ~$18: > www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Apem/644H-21R/?qs=llnlROTr2NZTe%252bbqFmLTF1MyeWy8Xh6svYUAHfvIsqY%3d > > Here's the Tiny URL in case the full length URL gets wrapped: > http://tinyurl.com/bvh4ghy > > Harley > Harley, I had been looking at that particular switch but the Mouser description says "ON-ON-ON" instead of "ON-ON-MOM" and the part number is slightly different. That's most likely the switch I want but Mouser hasn't responded to my request for more clarification. So I'm still looking for an Apem 644H/2-1R. Thanks, Joe Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378680#378680 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 18, 2012
From: Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com>
Subject: Re: Source for DP3T ON-ON-MOM Toggle Switch
Joe... Actually, the description says ON-ON-MOM...you just have to look at the data sheet where it defines the part numbers. Check out the data sheet for the link I gave you (click on the "Documents" tab, then "Data Sheet":)...that switch part number that you asked about is definitely an ON-ON-Mom...that's what the IR means. The picture and description on the page is just for the general series of that switch...the data sheet states that it is ON-ON-ON only if the IR suffix is not present...and it is present, so it's On-On-MOM. That is the exact switch you asked for...and I agree with Tom ...Mouser has never done me wrong...good people to work with. Harley ----------------------------------------------------------------- On 7/18/2012 3:37 PM, jdubner wrote: > > >> Here is one that might work. >> >> Roger >> >> http://www.ee-usa.com/warehouse/eaton8511k15 > > Eaton makes a fine switch but at $30 each, screw terminals, and not in stock, I'll pass. > > >> Mouser (mouser.com) has 3 in stock of part number 633-M204701-RO for $15.14 >> each with solder lugs. If you can tolerate PC pins instead of solder lugs >> they have 520 in stock of non-catalog part number 633-M2047SD3W03/U switches >> at $13.57 each. ... >> >> Tom Kuffel > > I hadn't considered anything other than Faston terminals but may re-think soldered leads if all else fails. Thanks. > > >> I've always had good luck with Mouser...and they have a minimum order of 1 on this switch at ~$18: >> www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Apem/644H-21R/?qs=llnlROTr2NZTe%252bbqFmLTF1MyeWy8Xh6svYUAHfvIsqY%3d >> >> Here's the Tiny URL in case the full length URL gets wrapped: >> http://tinyurl.com/bvh4ghy >> >> Harley >> > Harley, I had been looking at that particular switch but the Mouser description says "ON-ON-ON" instead of "ON-ON-MOM" and the part number is slightly different. That's most likely the switch I want but Mouser hasn't responded to my request for more clarification. > > So I'm still looking for an Apem 644H/2-1R. > > Thanks, > Joe > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 18, 2012
From: Harley <harley(at)agelesswings.com>
Subject: Re: Source for DP3T ON-ON-MOM Toggle Switch
Sorry, I meant 1R, not IR! And I noticed there is a data sheet link right under the switch description as well. Might save a couple of clicks if you use that instead of going to the document tab! ;-) ..the definition of the part number is on page 3. Harley ----------------------------------------------------------------- On 7/18/2012 3:55 PM, Harley wrote: > Joe... > > Actually, the description says ON-ON-MOM...you just have to > look at the data sheet where it defines the part numbers. Check > out the data sheet for the link I gave you (click on the > "Documents" tab, then "Data Sheet":)...that switch part number > that you asked about is definitely an ON-ON-Mom...that's what > the IR means. The picture and description on the page is just > for the general series of that switch...the data sheet states > that it is ON-ON-ON only if the IR suffix is not present...and > it is present, so it's On-On-MOM. > > That is the exact switch you asked for...and I agree with Tom > ...Mouser has never done me wrong...good people to work with. > > Harley > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > On 7/18/2012 3:37 PM, jdubner wrote: >> >> >>> Here is one that might work. >>> >>> Roger >>> >>> http://www.ee-usa.com/warehouse/eaton8511k15 >> Eaton makes a fine switch but at $30 each, screw terminals, and not in stock, I'll pass. >> >> >>> Mouser (mouser.com) has 3 in stock of part number 633-M204701-RO for $15.14 >>> each with solder lugs. If you can tolerate PC pins instead of solder lugs >>> they have 520 in stock of non-catalog part number 633-M2047SD3W03/U switches >>> at $13.57 each. ... >>> >>> Tom Kuffel >> I hadn't considered anything other than Faston terminals but may re-think soldered leads if all else fails. Thanks. >> >> >>> I've always had good luck with Mouser...and they have a minimum order of 1 on this switch at ~$18: >>> www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Apem/644H-21R/?qs=llnlROTr2NZTe%252bbqFmLTF1MyeWy8Xh6svYUAHfvIsqY%3d >>> >>> Here's the Tiny URL in case the full length URL gets wrapped: >>> http://tinyurl.com/bvh4ghy >>> >>> Harley >>> >> Harley, I had been looking at that particular switch but the Mouser description says "ON-ON-ON" instead of "ON-ON-MOM" and the part number is slightly different. That's most likely the switch I want but Mouser hasn't responded to my request for more clarification. >> >> So I'm still looking for an Apem 644H/2-1R. >> >> Thanks, >> Joe >> >> >> >> > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Source for DP3T ON-ON-MOM Toggle Switch
From: "jdubner" <jdubner(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Jul 18, 2012
harley(at)AgelessWings.co wrote: > Joe... > > That is the exact switch you asked for... Thanks, Harley -- I'll order a couple. -- Joe Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378706#378706 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 18, 2012
From: Ed Holyoke <bicyclop(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Source for DP3T ON-ON-MOM Toggle Switch
Try this one: http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/2NT1-50 Ed Holyoke On 7/18/2012 10:49 AM, jdubner wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "jdubner" > > [Pardon me if this is a duplicate. I twice attempted to post it via the email interface with no apparent success. Using the web interface now.] > > Does anyone have a source for the Apem 644H/2-1R toggle switch (DP3T ON-ON-MOM) in the USA? (It's a non-stock, minimum-25 item at DigiKey.) I'd like to use them to control dual PMags in this manner: http://gikonelectrics.blogspot.com/2008/09/p-mag-wiring.html > > Thanks, > Joe > Independence, OR > http://www.mail2600.com/position > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378654#378654 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 18, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Qualifying CB's
At 10:12 AM 7/18/2012, you wrote: >Bob, I have a question: How can a CB be qualified at currents many >times (3000A) it's rated breaker current? Is this a calculated >current or real measured current? Does the breaker not trip a long >time before this type of overcurrent is reached? What happens to >the contacts (they must arc) during this type of overcurrent, or, if >I imagine (I have no access to them) the MIL specs correctly, does >the CB go completely undamaged? When you connect a breaker to a bus for the purpose of protecting a downstream wire, there is also a practical limit on how long a breaker can sustain current flow at what ever the bus will deliver while it's deciding to trip. For example, a 28v aircraft battery can easily deliver 2000 to 4000 amps of current if you hard-fault the battery bus to ground. Admittedly, the little ol' 5A breaker trips VERY fast . . . on the order of 1 to 2 milliseconds. The point of this test is to insure that devices crafted to protect say 22AWG wires from burning are not themselves at risk for damage by what ever current the energy source can deliver. This is why all breakers have two classes of current rating (1) trip current for downstream protection and (2) fault/rupture/interruption current ratings where the breaker will not be damaged during the time between onset and clearing of fault. The third breaker featured in the ShopNotes I cited was a good example of a 5A breaker that had perhaps a 100A or less fault current rating. It may be attractive to some system designers but it's certainly not something you'd find in a TC aircraft. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 18, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Over-voltage Circuit Breaker Trips
At 02:04 PM 7/18/2012, you wrote: If it's true that a circuit breaker is damaged and can't be used once it's been tripped with a dead short, why would you ever use a circuit breaker? You might as well have a fuse. As Bob mentioned, it is possible to create a fault current in excess of a circuit breaker's rated interrupting capacity, but you're not going to do it with a light lead-acid (or gel, or AGM, or LiPo) battery in a small airplane with any kind of terminals and wire between the battery and the breaker. You *might* exceed 5000 amps with a fresh NiCd battery from a turbine aircraft *if* the CB and OVP were connected to a bus bar or right at the battery terminals, but that would be about what it would take. Exactly. There was a great kerfuffle in a Walmart bag here on the List over this kind of data: Emacs! This is an exemplar plot of breaker performance when subjected to over-current impulses of up to 10x rated current. Certain individuals chose to interpret these data not only as performance scatter but as not-to-exceed limits as well. The discussion was rooted in a projected crowbar trip current of something like 700A which was in fact, greatly exaggerated. There was also some consideration of single pulse current limits on the SCR which is core to the crowbar ov module's operation. When installed as depicted in AEC drawings, typical trip currents were on the order of 150 amps . . . I did some tests at B&C at 300 amps. Far less than the max interrupt rating of the breaker and well within the capability of the SCRs. A hard fault on an RG battery can easily exceed 1000A but that's still less than what these miniature breakers are qualified to stand off. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 19, 2012
Subject: Source for DP3T On-ON-MOM Toggle Switch
From: MLE <rv6awingman(at)gmail.com>
Joes here's another source if you wish. BandC carries them, and I've always had great service from these folks. S700-2-50 ON-ON-(ON) (+ $19.50) Marty RV-6A Subject: AeroElectric-List: Source for DP3T ON-ON-MOM Toggle Switch From: "jdubner" <jdubner(at)yahoo.com> [Pardon me if this is a duplicate. I twice attempted to post it via the email interface with no apparent success. Using the web interface now.] Does anyone have a source for the Apem 644H/2-1R toggle switch (DP3T ON-ON-MOM) in the USA? (It's a non-stock, minimum-25 item at DigiKey.) I'd like to use them to control dual PMags in this manner: http://gikonelectrics.blogspot.com/2008/09/p-mag-wiring.html Thanks, Joe Independence, OR http://www.mail2600.com/position Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=378654#378654 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Hibbing" <n744bh(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: troubleshooting help needed
Date: Jul 20, 2012
Here's the problem that has me scratching my head. I have a Glasair Super 2 that's been flying with no problems for over 100 hours. The electric system is Z 11, 14 volt. The engine is a Lycoming IO360 and the alternator is the one that came with the engine and of Chrysler origin for aircraft use. I'm told that they are fairly bulletproof. It was completely overhauled before I started flying. The voltage regulator is a B & C LR3C. So here's the problem which has popped up in the last 15 hours or so. When I'm flying at cruise power, or even idling, the voltage wanders up and down from 14.4v to slightly less than 13v. It does go down enough that my Garmin Aera 796 will drop off of ships power and go to it's internal battery. This would indicate to me that this is not a problem with the voltmeter. This does not seem to have any measurable cycle. The amps stay constant at about 16 amps. When I've had the plane flying I've tried turning off equipment one at a time to see if that might have any effect...it didn't. I've checked my connections for any corrosion and everything looks good and tight, including the alternator belt. The next thing I'm going to do is run the B&C troubleshooting checklist but I thought I would put this out for the list to see if anyone has any ideas that I haven't thought of that I might check. I personally suspect the LR3C but the folks at B&C have their doubts. So what y'all think? Bill Glasair SIIS-FT ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: troubleshooting help needed
Date: Jul 20, 2012
Bill, I am having a similar problem with my Lancair. The voltage seems to float up and down about a half volt and I have had problems with the transponder shutting down and the moving map resets. I hope my problem is your problem and someone has a solution. Bill B _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Hibbing Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 4:02 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: troubleshooting help needed Here's the problem that has me scratching my head. I have a Glasair Super 2 that's been flying with no problems for over 100 hours. The electric system is Z 11, 14 volt. The engine is a Lycoming IO360 and the alternator is the one that came with the engine and of Chrysler origin for aircraft use. I'm told that they are fairly bulletproof. It was completely overhauled before I started flying. The voltage regulator is a B & C LR3C. So here's the problem which has popped up in the last 15 hours or so. When I'm flying at cruise power, or even idling, the voltage wanders up and down from 14.4v to slightly less than 13v. It does go down enough that my Garmin Aera 796 will drop off of ships power and go to it's internal battery. This would indicate to me that this is not a problem with the voltmeter. This does not seem to have any measurable cycle. The amps stay constant at about 16 amps. When I've had the plane flying I've tried turning off equipment one at a time to see if that might have any effect...it didn't. I've checked my connections for any corrosion and everything looks good and tight, including the alternator belt. The next thing I'm going to do is run the B&C troubleshooting checklist but I thought I would put this out for the list to see if anyone has any ideas that I haven't thought of that I might check. I personally suspect the LR3C but the folks at B&C have their doubts. So what y'all think? Bill Glasair SIIS-FT ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 20, 2012
From: David <dlposey-atlanta(at)att.net>
Subject: Fwd: Fwd: Fw: FW: True Patriotism ---
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 20, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: troubleshooting help needed
At 03:02 PM 7/20/2012, you wrote: Here's the problem that has me scratching my head. I have a Glasair Super 2 that's been flying with no problems for over 100 hours. The electric system is Z 11, 14 volt. The engine is a Lycoming IO360 and the alternator is the one that came with the engine and of Chrysler origin for aircraft use. I'm told that they are fairly bulletproof. It was completely overhauled before I started flying. The voltage regulator is a B & C LR3C. So here's the problem which has popped up in the last 15 hours or so. When I'm flying at cruise power, or even idling, the voltage wanders up and down from 14.4v to slightly less than 13v. It does go down enough that my Garmin Aera 796 will drop off of ships power and go to it's internal battery. This would indicate to me that this is not a problem with the voltmeter. This does not seem to have any measurable cycle. The amps stay constant at about 16 amps. When I've had the plane flying I've tried turning off equipment one at a time to see if that might have any effect...it didn't. I've checked my connections for any corrosion and everything looks good and tight, including the alternator belt. The next thing I'm going to do is run the B&C troubleshooting checklist but I thought I would put this out for the list to see if anyone has any ideas that I haven't thought of that I might check. I personally suspect the LR3C but the folks at B&C have their doubts. So what y'all think? You need to bring three wires into the cockpit from the regulator. One that is attached to the field output terminal (4), another to ov-sense input (3) and a third to ground (7). Emacs! You need to watch and record the voltage reading between ground (7) and field (4) when the alternator is operating normally at minimum system loads and maximum system loads. Then move your test voltmeter to read voltage between ground (7) and ov-sense (3). Repeat the min/max loads experiment and compare the readings on the test voltmeter and any panel displays for bus voltage. Then when the alternator is mis-behaving under any normal operating load, does the field voltage go UP as the bus voltage indications on the panel go down . . . or vice-versa? Also, during misbehavior notice if there is any deviation from ov-sense readings you acquired earlier and panel displayed voltage readings. If the alternator is working properly, Field and Bus voltage should go up and down together in response to output from the regulator. If they are out of sync . . . then the alternator is bad (probably failing brushes). If they go up and down together, then move your test meter. If they do go up and down together, then turn your attention to the difference between panel voltage display and test meter. Are the differences markedly dissimilar from when the alternator was working? This exercise in data gathering allows one to deduce whether the problem lies in the alternator, regulator or ship's wiring. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: troubleshooting help needed
Date: Jul 20, 2012
See my question inserted about 3/4 way down the page. -Jeff Luckey _____ 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, July 20, 2012 17:59 Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: troubleshooting help needed At 03:02 PM 7/20/2012, you wrote: Here's the problem that has me scratching my head. I have a Glasair Super 2 that's been flying with no problems for over 100 hours. The electric system is Z 11, 14 volt. The engine is a Lycoming IO360 and the alternator is the one that came with the engine and of Chrysler origin for aircraft use. I'm told that they are fairly bulletproof. It was completely overhauled before I started flying. The voltage regulator is a B & C LR3C. So here's the problem which has popped up in the last 15 hours or so. When I'm flying at cruise power, or even idling, the voltage wanders up and down from 14.4v to slightly less than 13v. It does go down enough that my Garmin Aera 796 will drop off of ships power and go to it's internal battery. This would indicate to me that this is not a problem with the voltmeter. This does not seem to have any measurable cycle. The amps stay constant at about 16 amps. When I've had the plane flying I've tried turning off equipment one at a time to see if that might have any effect...it didn't. I've checked my connections for any corrosion and everything looks good and tight, including the alternator belt. The next thing I'm going to do is run the B&C troubleshooting checklist but I thought I would put this out for the list to see if anyone has any ideas that I haven't thought of that I might check. I personally suspect the LR3C but the folks at B&C have their doubts. So what y'all think? You need to bring three wires into the cockpit from the regulator. One that is attached to the field output terminal (4), another to ov-sense input (3) and a third to ground (7). Emacs! You need to watch and record the voltage reading between ground (7) and field (4) when the alternator is operating normally at minimum system loads and maximum system loads. Then move your test voltmeter to read voltage between ground (7) and ov-sense (3). Repeat the min/max loads experiment and compare the readings on the test voltmeter and any panel displays for bus voltage. Then when the alternator is mis-behaving under any normal operating load, does the field voltage go UP as the bus voltage indications on the panel go down . . . or vice-versa? Also, during misbehavior notice if there is any deviation from ov-sense readings you acquired earlier and panel displayed voltage readings. If the alternator is working properly, Field and Bus voltage should go up and down together in response to output from the regulator. [Luckey] Bob, is that correct - shouldn't Field & Bus voltage oppose each other? i.e. as Bus voltage goes up, Field current should go down? If they are out of sync . . . then the alternator is bad (probably failing brushes). If they go up and down together, then move your test meter. If they do go up and down together, then turn your attention to the difference between panel voltage display and test meter. Are the differences markedly dissimilar from when the alternator was working? This exercise in data gathering allows one to deduce whether the problem lies in the alternator, regulator or ship's wiring. Bob . . . No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Scott R. Shook" <scott(at)n696js.com>
Subject: Aircraft Part Fell From Sky
Date: Jul 20, 2012
Listers: This Part fell off of some type of aircraft and punched a hole in a friends roof out in Gold Canyon, AZ. Can anyone help identify this? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 21, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: troubleshooting help needed
At 03:10 PM 7/20/2012, you wrote: >Bill, >I am having a similar problem with my Lancair. The voltage seems to >float up and down about a half volt and I have had problems with the >transponder shutting down and the moving map resets. I hope my >problem is your problem and someone has a solution. > >Bill B > If a .5 volt excursion is causing your electro-whizzies to misbehave, there's something else going on. While it's viscerally satisfying to see a bus voltage reading stay locked down to within a tenth of a volt of the set point, having it vary by 1/2 volt under repeatable conditions should not be an operational issue. Your bus voltage should fly somewhere north of 14.0 volts . . . 14.2 was the 'sweet spot' when I worked at Cessna . . . 14.6 to as much as 15.0 volts seems to show up in contemporary automotive products. But 14.0 is the operating floor for making sure that a battery gets topped off a short time after takeoff. If your transponder is qualified for use in a type certficated airplane, it should operate without complaint down to end-of-battery-life voltage levels on the order of 11.0 volts. The moving map should be similarly qualified. For these devices to complain in concert suggests an intermittent condition that drops to levels much below your panel displays for bus voltage . . . a voltage level below battery supply voltage even. Loose connection? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 21, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: troubleshooting help needed
At 08:33 PM 7/20/2012, you wrote: [Luckey] Bob, is that correct - shouldn't Field & Bus voltage oppose each other? i.e. as Bus voltage goes up, Field current should go down? It depends on what is being held constant and what is being adjusted. If SYSTEM LOAD is the variable, then yes . . . the REGULATOR senses an INCREASE in bus voltage and reacts by REDUCING field voltage. In this instance, we're observing changes in system performance while the load is constant. If the field voltage rises in concert with the bus voltage, then the regulator is commanding that rise due to internal failure or mis-information in the voltage sense path and the alternator is performing normally. If the bus voltage falls while the field voltage rises, then the regulator is flogging a crippled alternator without success. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Aircraft Part Fell From Sky
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Date: Jul 21, 2012
Two questions: 1) What are the materials? If the right hand stuff is steel, I'd have to wonder if it was from a truck. 2) Depending on 1): How far from the I-60 Superstition Freeway is his house? -------- 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=378855#378855 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 22, 2012
Subject: ELT antenna
From: Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com>
For some reason, God only knows why he did half the things he did to this airplane, the previous owner of an E-LSA cut the antenna for a 121.5 Ameri-King ELT down to 14.3" (measured from the base, he bent it, too). What's the rule on a TSO'd unit in an experimental plane? Can I just solder an extension on it to bring it back to the correct length or does it have to be as the manufacturer made it? I don't own it, but I have to sign off the annual. Rick Girard -- Zulu Delta Mk IIIC Thanks, Homer GBYM It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy. - Groucho Marx ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 23, 2012
From: D L Josephson <dlj04(at)josephson.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 07/22/12
On 7/23/12 1:57 AM, AeroElectric-List Digest Server wrote: > For some reason, God only knows why he did half the things he did to this > airplane, the previous owner of an E-LSA cut the antenna for a 121.5 > Ameri-King ELT down to 14.3" (measured from the base, he bent it, too). > What's the rule on a TSO'd unit in an experimental plane? Can I just solder > an extension on it to bring it back to the correct length or does it have > to be as the manufacturer made it? I don't own it, but I have to sign off > the annual. The TSO (required to meet "approved" under FAR 91.207) generally includes the antenna supplied by the ELT mfr, so any modification would void the TSO. You'd have to check with Ameri-King. Bending the antenna is probably not a problem. It would not be a good idea to solder on an extension, mainly because many ELT antennas are physically shorter than quarter-wave due to the presence of loading coils, and you too would be modifying TSO'd equipment without approval. As the inspector, are you equipped to measure the radiated output in accordance with 91.207 (d)(4)? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 23, 2012
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 07/22/12
From: Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com>
DL, No, I'm not, I can update the batteries and all the other requirements. Rick On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 7:21 AM, D L Josephson wrote: > dlj04(at)josephson.com> > > On 7/23/12 1:57 AM, AeroElectric-List Digest Server wrote: > >> For some reason, God only knows why he did half the things he did to this >> airplane, the previous owner of an E-LSA cut the antenna for a 121.5 >> Ameri-King ELT down to 14.3" (measured from the base, he bent it, too). >> What's the rule on a TSO'd unit in an experimental plane? Can I just >> solder >> an extension on it to bring it back to the correct length or does it have >> to be as the manufacturer made it? I don't own it, but I have to sign off >> the annual. >> > The TSO (required to meet "approved" under FAR 91.207) generally includes > the antenna supplied by the ELT mfr, so any modification would void the > TSO. You'd have to check with Ameri-King. Bending the antenna is probably > not a problem. It would not be a good idea to solder on an extension, > mainly because many ELT antennas are physically shorter than quarter-wave > due to the presence of loading coils, and you too would be modifying TSO'd > equipment without approval. As the inspector, are you equipped to measure > the radiated output in accordance with 91.207 (d)(4)? > > -- Zulu Delta Mk IIIC Thanks, Homer GBYM It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy. - Groucho Marx ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 23, 2012
Subject: portable gps
From: bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com>
hi all, can anyone recommend a SMALL handheld gps that either has an aviation database or could accept a download? this would be my backup. i have a garmin 195 ''handheld'' that is as big as a house. i mean something as small as an ''e- trex'', or even the size of the old garmin 12's. bob noffs ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jan <jan(at)CLAVER.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: portable gps
Date: Jul 23, 2012
What about Garmin Pilot III ? All the best Jan On 23 Jul 2012, at 14:29, bob noffs wrote: > hi all, can anyone recommend a SMALL handheld gps that either has an aviat ion database or could accept a download? this would be my backup. i have a g armin 195 ''handheld'' that is as big as a house. i mean something as small a s an ''e- trex'', or even the size of the old garmin 12's. > bob noffs > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 23, 2012
From: Charlie E <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: portable gps
On 07/23/2012 01:29 PM, bob noffs wrote: > hi all, can anyone recommend a SMALL handheld gps that either has an > aviation database or could accept a download? this would be my backup. > i have a garmin 195 ''handheld'' that is as big as a house. i mean > something as small as an ''e- trex'', or even the size of the old > garmin 12's. > bob noffs > *The Garmin III Pilot is really small, if you can find one on the used market. I've got one, but I'm not sure I'm ready to let it go. Charlie * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "JOHN TIPTON" <jmtipton(at)btopenworld.com>
Subject: Re: portable gps
Date: Jul 23, 2012
How about this: http://www.airspaceaware.com/products/devices/awaregps/ Best regards John ----- Original Message ----- From: Jan To: Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 3:09 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: portable gps What about Garmin Pilot III ? All the best Jan On 23 Jul 2012, at 14:29, bob noffs wrote: hi all, can anyone recommend a SMALL handheld gps that either has an aviation database or could accept a download? this would be my backup. i have a garmin 195 ''handheld'' that is as big as a house. i mean something as small as an ''e- trex'', or even the size of the old garmin 12's. bob noffs 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 23, 2012
Subject: Re: portable gps
From: bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com>
i checked out the pilot 3 and it looks like just what i need. now to find one. bob noffs On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:44 PM, JOHN TIPTON wrote: > ** > How about this: http://www.airspaceaware.com/products/devices/awaregps/ > > Best regards > > John > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Jan > *To:* > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 24, 2012 3:09 AM > *Subject:* Re: AeroElectric-List: portable gps > > What about Garmin Pilot III ? > > All the best > > Jan > > On 23 Jul 2012, at 14:29, bob noffs wrote: > > hi all, can anyone recommend a SMALL handheld gps that either has an > aviation database or could accept a download? this would be my backup. i > have a garmin 195 ''handheld'' that is as big as a house. i mean something > as small as an ''e- trex'', or even the size of the old garmin 12's. > bob noffs > > * > > * > > * > > 3D============================================ > href='3D"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List"'>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List > 3D============================================ > href='3D"http://forums.matronics.com"'>http://forums.matronics.com > 3D============================================ > href='3D"http://www.matronics.com/contribution"'>http://www.matronics.com/contribution > 3D============================================ > * > > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Resistor for LR3C-14 and CML LED indicator for low
voltage
From: "pmnewlon" <philn(at)toosan.com>
Date: Jul 23, 2012
http://www.cml-it.com/DEBD/index.php?p=34&a=19030252&b=1725&c=62#Galerie I have installed several yellow and red CML LEDs for various indicator functions. These devices have built-in internal resistors - just hook the appropriate + and - connectors and you are good to go. Almost. As with so many others, my LED is constantly 'on' and flashes when voltage drops - as designed. I found Bob's sketch for attaching an LED to the LR3C-14 using two 470 ohm resistors. http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/LR3_LV_Led_1.jpg What I don't know and could use some direction on, is since my LED module already has built in resistor, which resistor do I add to the circuit to keep the LED from illuminating at all times? Or do I still use both? Same values? I have not found a schematic for the CML device anyplace to help shed any light on the subject. Thanks! Phil Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379028#379028 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Steve Thomas <lists(at)stevet.net>
Subject: For Sale: Garmin GPSMAP 195
Date: Jul 23, 2012
I've had this unit in the shelf for a while and am not using it. It is in very good condition, with a carry case, yoke mount and 12v power cable, serial cable for database downloads, external antenna. Listed on ebay as item number 170882659634. Steve Thomas ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 23, 2012
From: Dennis Roche <r8751(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: For Sale: Garmin GPSMAP 195
What is your price,I have a Cub with no electrical. How long will the batte ry last ? I need something soon.=0A=0A=0AFrom: Steve Thomas <lists(at)stevet.n et>=0ATo: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0ASent: Monday, July 23, 2012 7: 26 PM=0ASubject: AeroElectric-List: For Sale: Garmin GPSMAP 195=0A=0A--> Ae roElectric-List message posted by: Steve Thomas =0A=0AI'v e had this unit in the- shelf for a while and am not using it.- It is i n very good condition, with a carry case, yoke mount and 12v power cable, s erial cable for database downloads, external antenna.- Listed on ebay as item number 170882659634.- =0A=0A=0ASteve Thomas=0A______________________ =============== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Steve Thomas <lists(at)stevet.net>
Subject: Re: For Sale: Garmin GPSMAP 195
Date: Jul 24, 2012
See Ebay item number 170882659634. Or, click here: http://tinyurl.com/cn5hrve Steve Thomas ________________________________________________________________________ On Jul 23, 2012, at 7:59 PM, Dennis Roche wrote: > What is your price,I have a Cub with no electrical. How long will the battery last ? I need something soon. > > From: Steve Thomas <lists(at)stevet.net> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 7:26 PM > Subject: AeroElectric-List: For Sale: Garmin GPSMAP 195 > > > I've had this unit in the shelf for a while and am not using it. It is in very good condition, with a carry case, yoke mount and 12v power cable, serial cable for database downloads, external antenna. Listed on ebay as item number 170882659634. > > > Steve Thomas > ________________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 24, 2012
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Resistor for LR3C-14 and CML LED indicator for
low voltage >What I don't know and could use some direction on, is since my LED >module already has built in resistor, which resistor do I add to the >circuit to keep the LED from illuminating at all times? Or do I >still use both? Same values? I have not found a schematic for the >CML device anyplace to help shed any light on the subject. Just wire a 470 ohm resistor in parallel with your lamp fixture. It's not terribly important were that resistor is located . . . it can be inside across the LED or across the LED-resistor string inside your fixture. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 24, 2012
From: D L Josephson <dlj04(at)josephson.com>
Subject: Re: Unapproved ELT antenna?
I wrote earlier >> The TSO (required to meet "approved" under FAR 91.207) generally includes >> the antenna supplied by the ELT mfr, so any modification would void the >> TSO. You'd have to check with Ameri-King. Bending the antenna is probably >> not a problem. It would not be a good idea to solder on an extension, >> mainly because many ELT antennas are physically shorter than quarter-wave >> due to the presence of loading coils, and you too would be modifying TSO'd >> equipment without approval. As the inspector, are you equipped to measure >> the radiated output in accordance with 91.207 (d)(4)? Sorry, there should have been more detail. The point is that the FAR's don't specify how to measure radiated output. Maybe it's in the manufacturer's instructions, maybe not, in which case you're on your own... different shops use different methods like using a portable radio with no antenna or a remote receiver to see whether there is "sufficient signal radiated from its antenna." But check with Ameri-King, the shortened antenna may be factory length. David ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 24, 2012
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Unapproved ELT antenna?
The requirements are in the TSO. The FARs require compliance with the TSO. TSO approval is on the transmitter with antenna, which prevents substitution with anything but identical antenna or one the manufacturer has determined to perform identically. On 7/24/2012 8:14 AM, D L Josephson wrote: > Sorry, there should have been more detail. The point is that the FAR's > don't specify how to measure radiated output. Maybe it's in the > manufacturer's instructions, maybe not, in which case you're on your > own... different shops use different methods like using a portable > radio with no antenna or a remote receiver to see whether there is > "sufficient signal radiated from its antenna." > But check with Ameri-King, the shortened antenna may be factory length. > > David ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "A. Buess - Aviatik" <ykibuess(at)bluewin.ch>
Subject: For Sale: Garmin GPSMAP 195
Date: Jul 24, 2012
Hi Dennis, I have a Garmin 195 that I don't need any more. I is driven by a standard AA battery pack. With all accessories. Contact me off-line at ykibuess@ bluewin.ch if you are interested. Alfred Von: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] Im Auftrag von Dennis Roche Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. Juli 2012 04:59 An: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Betreff: Re: AeroElectric-List: For Sale: Garmin GPSMAP 195 What is your price,I have a Cub with no electrical. How long will the battery last ? I need something soon. From: Steve Thomas < <mailto:lists(at)stevet.net> lists(at)stevet.net> aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 7:26 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: For Sale: Garmin GPSMAP 195 I've had this unit in the shelf for a while and am not using it. It is in very good condition, with a carry case, yoke mount and 12v power cable, serial cable for database downloads, external antenna. Listed on ebay as item number 170882659634. Steve Thomas ________________________________________________________________________ <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: jan <jan(at)CLAVER.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: portable gps
Date: Jul 24, 2012
Bob, If you post a "I Want to Buy" over at the Vans forum you might be able to find one that someone are selling - That is how I got mine a few months back - Two people contact me who had one for sale. You can still get update for the map from Garmin - a bit hard to find on the Garmin site ... You need to open a free account first .. Also make sure you get a RS232 cable so you can upload the map update. Jan _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of bob noffs Sent: 23 July 2012 23:57 Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: portable gps i checked out the pilot 3 and it looks like just what i need. now to find one. bob noffs On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:44 PM, JOHN TIPTON > wrote: How about this: http://www.airspaceaware.com/products/devices/awaregps/ <http://www.airspaceaware.com/products/devices/awaregps/> Best regards John ----- Original Message ----- From: Jan <mailto:jan(at)CLAVER.DEMON.CO.UK> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 3:09 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: portable gps What about Garmin Pilot III ? All the best Jan On 23 Jul 2012, at 14:29, bob noffs > wrote: hi all, can anyone recommend a SMALL handheld gps that either has an aviation database or could accept a download? this would be my backup. i have a garmin 195 ''handheld'' that is as big as a house. i mean something as small as an ''e- trex'', or even the size of the old garmin 12's. bob noffs 3D=========================3 D=================== href='3D"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List> "'>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List> 3D=========================3 D=================== href='3D"http://forums.matronics.com "'>http://forums.matronics.com 3D=========================3 D=================== href='3D"http://www.matronics.com/contribution <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> "'>http://www.matronics.com/contribution <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> 3D=========================3 D=================== ist" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List tp://forums.matronics.com _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">

Bob,

 

If you post a “I Want to Buy” over at the Vans forum you might be able to find one that someone are selling – That is how I got mine a few months back – Two people contact me who had one for sale.

 

You can still get update for the map from Garmin – a bit hard to find on the Garmin site … You need to open a free account first .. Also make sure you get a RS232 cable so you can upload the map update.

 

Jan

 


From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of bob noffs
Sent: 23 July 2012 23:57
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: portable gps

 

i checked out the pilot 3 and it looks like just what i need. now to find one.

 bob noffs

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:44 PM, JOHN TIPTON <jmtipton(at)btopenworld.com> wrote:

 

Best regards

 

John

----- Original Message -----

From: Jan

Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 3:09 AM

Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: portable gps

 

What about Garmin Pilot III ?  

All the best

 

Jan


On 23 Jul 2012, at 14:29, bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com> wrote:

hi all, can anyone recommend a SMALL handheld gps that either has an aviation database or could accept a download? this would be my backup. i have a garmin 195 ''handheld'' that is as big as a house. i mean something as small as an ''e- trex'', or even the size of the old garmin 12's.

 bob noffs

 
      
 
 
&
      nbsp;
 
3D=3D=3D=
      3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
      =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
      3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
      
href='3D&qu
      ot;http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
      a>"'>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
      a>
3D=3D=3D=
      3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
      =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
      3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
      
href='3D&qu
      ot;http://forums.matronics.com>"'>http://forums.matronics.com>
3D=3D=3D=
      3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
      =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
      3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
      
href='3D&qu
      ot;http://www.matronics.com/contribution>"'>http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
3D=3D=3D=
      3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
      =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
      3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
      
 
 
 
ist" 
      target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroEl
      ectric-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.m
      atronics.com/contribution
 

 

 
 
http://www
      .matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
      
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/
      contribution
 

      
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Owen Baker " <bakerocb(at)cox.net>
Subject: Unapproved ELT antenna?
Date: Jul 25, 2012
7/25/2012 Hello Rick, You wrote: ....or I can get a ferry permit to fly it home to him and he can deal with it. Either one of two provisions of the FARs already give permission to fly that airplane to the owners home field without the need for the paperwork of a ferry permit. See here: 91.207 Emergency locator transmitters. (e) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section, a person may (2) Ferry an airplane with an inoperative emergency locator transmitter from a place where repairs or replacements cannot be made to a place where they can be made." or 91.207 (f) "(10) An aircraft during any period for which the transmitter has been temporarily removed for inspection, repair, modification, or replacement, subject to the following: (i) No person may operate the aircraft unless the aircraft records contain an entry which includes the date of initial removal, the make, model, serial number, and reason for removing the transmitter, and a placard located in view of the pilot to show ELT not installed. (ii) No person may operate the aircraft more than 90 days after the ELT is initially removed from the aircraft;..." 'O C' Baker says "The best investment you can make is the effort to gather and understand information." ======================================================================================= Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Unapproved ELT antenna? From: Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com> David, The antenna has definitely been hacked off. I have an identical Ameri-King ELT on my personal airplane and it is about 7 to 8 inches longer and has a ball end, no saw marks of ragged shrink tubing. I called the Wichita FSDO and got the answer. I can replace the antenna for the owner with an unaltered correct one, or I can get a ferry permit to fly it home to him and he can deal with it. On the sufficient signal strength, the rule is basically there to require a check to see that the antenna is indeed radiating, i.e. connected properly to the radio. Get your hand held, tune to 121.5, activate the ELT, see that you get a signal on the hand held, and your done. The inspector was kind enough to suggest a local shop that might have an antenna, Bevan Rabell, and the good folks there are trying to help. Thanks Guys, Rick Girard ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Resistor for LR3C-14 and CML LED indicator for
low voltage
From: "pmnewlon" <philn(at)toosan.com>
Date: Jul 25, 2012
Thank you Bob! Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379147#379147 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Resistor for LR3C-14 and CML LED indicator for
low voltage
From: "Radold" <lightledlight(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jul 25, 2012
pmnewlon wrote: > Thank you Bob! Thanks a lot bob. I followed your advice and my LED lights are working perfectly now. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379158#379158 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 6 Msgs - 07/20/12
From: larry Severson <larry2(at)socal.rr.com>
Date: Jul 25, 2012
Ok Sent from my iPad On Jul 20, 2012, at 11:56 PM, AeroElectric-List Digest Server wrote: > * > > ================================================= > Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive > ================================================= > > Today's complete AeroElectric-List Digest can also be found in either of the > two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted > in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes > and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version > of the AeroElectric-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor > such as Notepad or with a web browser. > > HTML Version: > > http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter 12-07-20&Archive=AeroElectric > > Text Version: > > http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter 12-07-20&Archive=AeroElectric > > > =============================================== > EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive > =============================================== > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > AeroElectric-List Digest Archive > --- > Total Messages Posted Fri 07/20/12: 6 > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > Today's Message Index: > ---------------------- > > 1. 01:04 PM - troubleshooting help needed (Bill Hibbing) > 2. 01:10 PM - Re: troubleshooting help needed (Bill Bradburry) > 3. 04:57 PM - Fw: Fw: Fw: FW: True Patriotism --- (David) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 25, 2012
From: Paul Millner <millner(at)me.com>
Subject: fueling-created static discharge prevention
On 7/10/2012 11:37 AM, bob noffs wrote: > lately i have been filling my plane out of 5 gal. plastic cans and i > am finding it not too time consuming. the biggest reason is higher > octane mogas than i can get at the airport. > anyway.............i need some advice on grounding.i have a 12 volt > pump mounted and it is powered by a battery 20 feet away. i have a > handheld switch . i set the plastic can on the table and fuel is > transferred thru vinyl tubing. at the airplane end is a metal filter. > pumps a gallon a minute. i plan to set up a ground to the exhaust pipe > [all tanks are grounded to the engine] but i do not know how to > ground the pump or hoses. any advice would be appreciated. Hi Bob, Technically, it's BONDING you're interested in... grounding isn't much important unless you've experiencing lightening... You need some metal screen at the 'can', a conductive hose (run a copper wire through it that's the best you can do) and a connection at the tank inlet on the airplane. All those nee to be bonded together electrically. Paul -- Please note my new email address! millner(at)me.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 26, 2012
Subject: Re: fueling-created static discharge prevention
From: bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com>
thanks paul. bob noffs On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Paul Millner wrote: > > > On 7/10/2012 11:37 AM, bob noffs wrote: > >> lately i have been filling my plane out of 5 gal. plastic cans and i am >> finding it not too time consuming. the biggest reason is higher octane >> mogas than i can get at the airport. >> anyway.............i need some advice on grounding.i have a 12 volt pump >> mounted and it is powered by a battery 20 feet away. i have a handheld >> switch . i set the plastic can on the table and fuel is transferred thru >> vinyl tubing. at the airplane end is a metal filter. pumps a gallon a >> minute. i plan to set up a ground to the exhaust pipe [all tanks are >> grounded to the engine] but i do not know how to ground the pump or >> hoses. any advice would be appreciated. >> > > Hi Bob, > > Technically, it's BONDING you're interested in... grounding isn't much > important unless you've experiencing lightening... > > You need some metal screen at the 'can', a conductive hose (run a copper > wire through it that's the best you can do) and a connection at the tank > inlet on the airplane. All those nee to be bonded together electrically. > > Paul > > -- > Please note my new email address! > millner(at)me.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 26, 2012
From: Hadley Heinrichs <rvhad(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: fueling-created static discharge prevention
i have a similar issue and my idea is to use a cable just like the AVGAS pu mp...grounded to the bolts that hold up the hanger=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A>_________ _______________________=0A> From: bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com>=0A>To: aeroe lectric-list(at)matronics.com t =0A>Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 3:36 AM=0A>S ubject: Re: AeroElectric-List: fueling-created static discharge prevention =0A> =0A>=0A>thanks paul.=0A>-bob noffs=0A>=0A>=0A>On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 a t 10:55 PM, Paul Millner wrote:=0A>=0A>--> AeroElectric-Li st message posted by: Paul Millner =0A>>=0A>>=0A>>On 7/10/2 012 11:37 AM, bob noffs wrote:=0A>>=0A>>-lately i have been filling my pl ane out of 5 gal. plastic cans and i am finding it not too time consuming.


July 05, 2012 - July 26, 2012

AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-lf