Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:01 AM - Re: Starter concerns with FADEC and EFIS (William Slaughter)
2. 05:14 AM - relay switch protection (Gary Casey)
3. 05:14 AM - Coil connections (Gary Casey)
4. 05:34 AM - Re: snubbers (Stucklen, Frederic IFC)
5. 05:46 AM - Re: snubbers (John Schroeder)
6. 06:05 AM - Re: snubbers (CBFLESHREN@aol.com)
7. 06:11 AM - Re: relay switch protection (KITFOXZ@aol.com)
8. 06:23 AM - Crossover Warning Light (Jim Pack)
9. 06:54 AM - Re: Crossover Warning Light (KITFOXZ@aol.com)
10. 07:03 AM - Re: Re: snubbers (Canyon)
11. 07:39 AM - Re: relay switch protection (Canyon)
12. 07:42 AM - Re: Fw: Spike-catcher diode failures (Paul Messinger)
13. 07:44 AM - Nervous about 17Ah battery (Neville Kilford)
14. 08:12 AM - GM low oil sensor (Mark Means)
15. 08:22 AM - Re: Nervous about 17Ah battery (Denis Walsh)
16. 08:45 AM - Re: GM low oil sensor (Benford2@aol.com)
17. 09:10 AM - Re: GM low oil sensor (Finn Lassen)
18. 09:11 AM - Re: GM low oil sensor (Finn Lassen)
19. 10:21 AM - Microair comm and Flightcom 403 intercom wiring (czechsix@juno.com)
20. 10:21 AM - Re: relay switch protection (David Swartzendruber)
21. 10:28 AM - Re: snubbers (David Swartzendruber)
22. 10:33 AM - Re: relay switch protection (Canyon)
23. 11:10 AM - Re: relay switch protection (Peter Laurence)
24. 11:41 AM - Re: GM low oil sensor, bum advise (Benford2@aol.com)
25. 02:08 PM - Re: relay switch protection (David Swartzendruber)
26. 03:10 PM - Re: Nervous about 17Ah battery (Neville Kilford)
27. 03:39 PM - Re: GM low oil sensor, bum advise (Finn Lassen)
28. 06:46 PM - Archer Comm antenna hookup (Julia)
29. 11:22 PM - Fw: Dynon Clock power requirements (czechsix@juno.com)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Starter concerns with FADEC and EFIS |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "William Slaughter" <willslau@alumni.rice.edu>
Hi Leonard,
I'm not Bob, but I am an Aerosance FADEC owner. If this is the unit you're
referring to, there are no external battery connections for the ignition
coils or fuel injectors. The ECU's (Engine Control Units) integrate the
computers, ignition coils and fuel injector drivers all into the two
"computer" boxes (three boxes if you've got a six cylinder). Aerosance will
supply you with all the wiring to connect everything from the ECUs out to
the engine components.
William
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Leonard Garceau
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Starter concerns with FADEC and EFIS
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Leonard Garceau"
<lhgcpg@westriv.com>
Hi Bob,
I have a question about wiring the fuel injected and coil over plug engines.
I see how you wire two hot busses from 2 batteries to the two computers.
But how do I wire the fuel injectors and the coils to the two separate
batteries? What do you think would work the best?
Thanks,
Leonard
----- Original Message -----
From: <TimRhod@aol.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Starter concerns with FADEC and EFIS
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: TimRhod@aol.com
>
> In a message dated 3/14/2003 5:25:57 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> cozytom@mn.rr.com writes:
>
> > <A
HREF="mailto:aeroelectric-list@matronics.com">aeroelectric-list@matronics.co
m
>
> Bob and others:
> Ive been thinking of solutions to some of the things we have been
discussing
> concerning voltage drop when starting FADEC engines. Also concern over
> voltage spikes or low voltage problems with the EFIS/ONE during
starting.
> Here is what I came up with. Using Z-14 DBDA Put all avionics one one
bus.
> For me I think this will be a avionics bus with quad feed. One from main
bus
> through diode and avionics master switch. Second from Alternate bus
through
> diode and avionics secondary master switch. Master switches are included
in
> case EFIS systems need isolated as Greg Ricktor seems to think they should
> be. Third and fourth essential feeds from main batt buss and alternate
batt
> buss on one switch that would choose one or the other. Cross feed
contactor
> will not have starter switch included. Starter switch will be seperate.
Here
> is how I envision it working. During start up sequence the avionics bus
can
> be feed through the alternative electrical system. So the Efis/One is
powered
> up from that source. Also the FADEC ignition is powered from the Alternate
> battery. The main battery is used to start the engine The cross feed is
kept
> open at this point so the two electrical systems never affect each other.
If
> you needed both batteries to start you would not turn on avionics bus
until
> engine started. You wouldnt have you oil pressure immediatly but this
> shouldnt be a common occurance to need both batteries for starting. It
seem
> to me that this allows the Efis/One and the FADEC ing. to be at 12.5 volts
> continually during engine start-up. What do you think?
>
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | relay switch protection |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gary Casey" <glcasey@adelphia.net>
<<In truth, the best, most effective and
safest transient suppression is accomplished with a diode placed
immediately across the inductive element - period. All other methods
using resistors, capacitors, varistors, transorbs etc are far inferior
and thus far less desirable. Don't know how these myths get started...
Steve>>
The question, though, is not which is the most effective device, but which
is most likely to be safe from a shorted failure mode. That is the
rationale for using a capacitor instead of a diode. As I understand it
there is little chance for it failing in a way that would produce a short,
while that is a common failure mode for a diode. If one were to use a relay
for a master contactor the failure modes that could result in a "no power"
condition are an open switch, open or shorted coil, open wire and a shorted
diode. The reason people use the low side of the relay to ground to turn it
on is, I think, that a likely failure mode of the wire to the switch would
be a short to ground and in that case the relay just stays on.
Gary Casey
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Coil connections |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gary Casey" <glcasey@adelphia.net>
<<I have a question about wiring the fuel injected and coil over plug
engines.
I see how you wire two hot busses from 2 batteries to the two computers.
But how do I wire the fuel injectors and the coils to the two separate
batteries? What do you think would work the best?
Thanks,
Leonard>>
There are some (Engineair, I think) that have just connected the drivers
from the ECU's in parallel to the coils and injectors. That works if the
failure mode is simply loss of power to a computer. However, there are
several failure modes of the driver circuitry that would cause a channel to
fail regardless of which computer was being used, such as a shorted driver
or a shorted snubber circuit. What to do? Maybe have a relay bank to
switch the outputs, but that gets pretty complex. But those are the only
two options I know of. Some people have used high-voltage diodes to switch
the outputs of distributor-type ignition systems, but I'm not sure I trust
the reliability of those either.
Gary Casey
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <Fred.Stucklen@UTCFuelCells.com>
Guys,
Properly selected and mounted, a diode will outlast the life of
the contactor. Their failure rate is better than that of any other
component in your electrical design. Even if the diode in the Master
contactor circuit (coil switched to ground) were to fail, the coil
resistance still protects the wires and switch. Same with the started
contactor... So what's the fuss????
Due to the large inrush current through the switch, putting a
large cap across the contactor, (without the diode of resistor in a snubber
circuit) would cause the switch to fail prematurely. A traditional snubber
(could work if the parts were properly selected to absorb the coils spike,
without causing excessive switch current ( with ON or OFF action). This
solution is also harder to tune to the different contactors that are
available.
Varistors can and do work, but are more expensive than diodes.
In short, keep your design simple. Select a diode that is over
rated for the job (1N5400), install it properly, with good strain relief
(use a dab of RTV to "mount" it to the side of the contactor) and don't
worry about it.
Fred Stucklen
RV-6A N926RV Reserved
The diode in this case will die of overvoltage only. The better the
switch, the shorter the cutoff time, and the higher the spike which
will stand over the diode. Overvoltage kills a diode instantly, as
opposed to overcurrent, which will first heat up and then kill.
Adding a capacitor to a coil changes the circuit into a tuned
circuit,
much like a magneto, and if the components are sufficiently wrong
chosen, the end result will be more destructing then imaginable. A
large
capacitor has an notable impedance of it's own, so is out of the
question. So the first step is to choose the diode with an
sufficienty
high reverse voltage, the 1n4001 is (or was) availble from 100 to
800
volts. 800 is the minimum. If nethertheless the diode would fail a
fusable! resistor could prevent the next disaster. Fusable
resistors
will not induce a fire hazard, not on 12 volts at least. A normal
resistor will, and could even short out instead of open.
Problem here is that the the resister would have to be inspected at
regular intervals, otherwise a failed diode would never be noticed.
Jos
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: John Schroeder <jschroeder@perigee.net>
Bob has since stoped recommending the use of MOV's and uses diodes instead. He
has explained the reasoning before but I can't find my notes on it. Check the
archives.
> Hi Jerzy, I've been lurking here & can't help but recall that "Bob" had
>MOV's shown in some of his earlier drawings for the protection of various
>Start & Master relays. I asked him about their use back then & as I recall,
>he stated the reason for his preference over a diode, for the MOV was that no
>concern for polarity made them slightly easier for us "lay" homebuilders to
>cope with. FWIW ---- Chris Fleshren
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: CBFLESHREN@aol.com
In a message dated 3/17/2003 8:47:42 AM Eastern Standard Time,
jschroeder@perigee.net writes:
> Bob has since stoped recommending the use of MOV's and uses diodes instead.
> He
> has explained the reasoning before but I can't find my notes on it. Check
> the
> archives.
>
I know Bob bailed on recommending MOV's, but like you, I don't recall
why. No doubt it was one of the many reasons mentioned in this recent
thread. Chris
Do Not Archive
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: relay switch protection |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: KITFOXZ@aol.com
In a message dated 3/17/2003 8:14:59 AM Eastern Standard Time,
glcasey@adelphia.net writes:
> The question, though, is not which is the most effective device, but which
> is most likely to be safe from a shorted failure mode. That is the
> rationale for using a capacitor instead of a diode. As I understand it
> there is little chance for it failing in a way that would produce a short,
> while that is a common failure mode for a diode. If one were to use a
> relay
> for a master contactor the failure modes that could result in a "no power"
> condition are an open switch, open or shorted coil, open wire and a shorted
> diode. The reason people use the low side of the relay to ground to turn
> it
> on is, I think, that a likely failure mode of the wire to the switch would
> be a short to ground and in that case the relay just stays on.
>
> Gary Casey
>
>
Hello Gary,
This discussion got started over a shorted battery contactor coil dampening
device and the concern of smoke or fire from an UN-fused circuit wired with
22ga. wire used to supply the ground to the battery contactor. Although very
unlikely, the contactor's coil could short, and again not very likely, the
diode used to dampen the contactor's coil could short. All things
considered, a diode is best for coil dampening performance. Most other
devices will be a source for ringing or not clamp the voltage as low as can
be done with a diode. We really are splitting hairs here though. An MOV
will clamp it at some voltage just over 15 volts -not bad. While a diode
will clamp it at .6 volts -better. I am going to insert a 5A fuse in my
grounding leg at the contactor end of the 22ga. wire to be safe I think. One
could increase the size of the wire to say 16, 12, 10 , etc., and let the
shorted diode or coil become the fuse! I am not concerned about a failure
that results in an open circuit. That will just have to be a failure that
requires picking a spot to land. I just want to be reasonable enough to
protect my ship from smoke in the cockpit.
Again, this one circuit may be cause for concern only in the very remote
chance that the contactor's coil shorts or the diode punches through. A
simple fuse can set us all at ease.
John P. Marzluf
Columbus, Ohio
Outback, (out back in the garage)
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Crossover Warning Light |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Pack" <jpack@igs3.com>
I would like to put a light on the panel that indicates that the Crossover
Contactor is on (Dual bat, Dual Alt system). Where should I take the lead
for the light?
- Jim
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Crossover Warning Light |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: KITFOXZ@aol.com
In a message dated 3/17/2003 9:24:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, jpack@igs3.com
writes:
> I would like to put a light on the panel that indicates that the Crossover
> Contactor is on (Dual bat, Dual Alt system). Where should I take the lead
> for the light?
>
> - Jim
>
>
Jim, I would wire it in parallel with the cross feed contactor's coil.
John P. Marzluf
Columbus, Ohio
Kitfox Outback (out back in the garage)
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Canyon <steve.canyon@verizon.net>
Stucklen, Frederic IFC wrote:
> In short, keep your design simple. Select a diode that is
> over
>rated for the job (1N5400), install it properly, with good strain relief
>(use a dab of RTV to "mount" it to the side of the contactor) and don't
>worry about it.
---
Well said and I think the 5400 series is probably what I was trying to
remember. After 40 years of system design, too many p/ns have passed
this way. :-)
Steve
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: relay switch protection |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Canyon <steve.canyon@verizon.net>
KITFOXZ@aol.com wrote:
>Again, this one circuit may be cause for concern only in the very remote
>chance that the contactor's coil shorts or the diode punches through. A
>simple fuse can set us all at ease.
---
Good advice, John. Safety is best handled at the system architecture
level, not at the device level. Of course, this doesn't mean one
should not use the best, most reliable devices in all places. It is
simply a fancy way of saying that one should anticipate sudden failure
of ANY device as any of them can fail at any time. The key to overall
safety lies in forethought about the consequences of ANY device failure.
In the case of diode snubbers on typical relay coils common to these
planes, failure caused by OV from some external source is more likely
than a half cycle or so of current from transient current -- use the
higher PIV (PRV) rated diodes like 1N4006 or an equivalent from the 1N
54XX series.
Thanks, John.
Steve
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Spike-catcher diode failures |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@tenforward.com>
I was not recommending dual series diodes. Just an example where you cannot
fix it and it must work. IE space.
There really is two different cases being discussed.
First there is the controlling device (switch) contact that needs to be
protected. But then if the switch is rated for the specific inductive DC
loads it will likely outlast the aircraft with no diode. This is where the
simple rectifier diode is recommended. The reverse voltage of the diode is
not a real factor as it only sees the coil dc voltage. more reliable diode.
In this application the diode simply recirculates the coil current when the
switch opens and there is never any higher voltage produced. The relay takes
very slightly longer to open but this is rarely a problem and never a
problem with a manual open command.
HV spikes are clipped with devices like Transorbs that are 1000 times as
fast as normal zener diodes and are used to protect electronics from short
HV transients.
Transorbs were developed as the more common MOV and Zener diodes were simply
too slow for some applications and electronics. Even capacitors can be far
too slow to react to a fast moving HV transient.
Its a large subject. I still think a single diode is fine for our uses.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Canyon" <steve.canyon@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fw: Spike-catcher diode failures
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Canyon <steve.canyon@verizon.net>
>
> Paul Messinger wrote:
> >ANY diode can fail short and the primary diode failure is short. In a 12V
> >acft the failure of a 27V transorb is likely completely random and could
> >have happened with a 1N4001. The peak current rating of the transorb
> >is huge
> >compared to the 1N4001. The steady state current rating is similar and is
> >limited by the package getting too hot.
> ---
> Paul, can't argue the point -- it's true. However, it leads one not
> skilled in the art to think they have protection they don't have for
> OV. 27V is far too late to help any typical sophisticated
> system/device likely to be in the circuit. There are simply better
> ways to handle OV, IMO. And in fact, 1N4001 diodes are rated at only
> 50V, IIRC -- the ones that should be used are at least 1N4006 and IIRC,
> the IN52XX (? it's been awhile) series would be even better, and two in
> series should be fine, though not many folks are likely to ever be
> aware if one of them shorted and then you're back to a single. :-)
>
> Steve
>
>
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Nervous about 17Ah battery |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Neville Kilford" <nkilford@etravel.org>
Hello there,
I've been pondering a 17Ah Yuasa RG battery for my Jodel build. It's nice
and light, but the terminals look pretty small for delivering perhaps 200 or
250A to a B&C starter during cranking.
Does anyone have any thoughts about it or experiences with such a low
capacity battery deliverying such a big current? I have to be honest -- I'd
never even heard of an RG battery before I read the Aeroelectric Connection
and I am, of course, tempted by Bob's praise of small RG batteries.
By the way, terminals are .43" x .08" (12 x 2mm).
Many thanks in anticipation.
Nev
--
Neville Kilford
Jodel D-150
UK
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | GM low oil sensor |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Means" <rgvelocity@lmf.net>
I have an auto conversion in the works with a low oil sensor which I'm not sure
how to hook up to a warning light and hoped someone could offer some advice.
I am afraid to route some juice up to it for fear of damage as I can't find out
(so far) what the usual input is.
When unscrewed from the side of the oil pan it looks like a small rod with a small
donut on it, with a knob on the end to keep the donut from falling off. The
donut is weighted so it hangs in one position. I checked the continuity of
the two wires coming out of the base. Moving the donut up and down against the
rod opens and closes the circuit. Anyone out there with any experience with this
sort of thing and advice on wiring this up? Thanks.
Mark Means
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Nervous about 17Ah battery |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Denis Walsh <denis.walsh@attbi.com>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Neville Kilford"
> <nkilford@etravel.org>
>
> Hello there,
>
> I've been pondering a 17Ah Yuasa RG battery for my Jodel build. It's nice
> and light, but the terminals look pretty small for delivering perhaps 200 or
> 250A to a B&C starter during cranking.
>
> Does anyone have any thoughts about it or experiences with such a low
> capacity battery deliverying such a big current? I have to be honest -- I'd
> never even heard of an RG battery before I read the Aeroelectric Connection
> and I am, of course, tempted by Bob's praise of small RG batteries.
>
> By the way, terminals are .43" x .08" (12 x 2mm).
>
> Many thanks in anticipation.
>
> Nev
>
> --
> Neville Kilford
> Jodel D-150
> UK
>
>
>
I had the same concern about the terminals on the Odyssey 17 ah which I
believe are about the same size.
Now after two years of flawless cranking on my ampere hungry sky tec
starter pulling an O-360 with 50 lb prop, it is still hanging in there. Now
I wonder why we had those big studs on the old ones?
Denis
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GM low oil sensor |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Benford2@aol.com
In a message dated 3/17/2003 9:13:59 AM Mountain Standard Time,
rgvelocity@lmf.net writes:
>
>
> When unscrewed from the side of the oil pan it looks like a small rod with
> a small donut on it, with a knob on the end to keep the donut from falling
> off. The donut is weighted so it hangs in one position. I checked the
> continuity of the two wires coming out of the base. Moving the donut up
> and down against the rod opens and closes the circuit. Anyone out there
> with any experience with this sort of thing and advice on wiring this up?
> Thanks.
>
> Mark Means
>
If the circuit closes when the probe rises then the light or whatever will
come on when there is a good level of oil. I am betting the circuit closes
when the probe falls down. All ya got to do is feed it 12v to one wire,
ground the other and the run the light or signaling device in series through
the 12 v wire. When the circuit is complete, the light comes on, telling you
the motor is about to make real kool metalflake colors in the oil pan... Ha
Ha. Ben Haas. N801BH. V-8 Ford all aluminum Ford in an 801 Zenith in an
801 Zenith
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GM low oil sensor |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Finn Lassen <finnlassen@netzero.net>
If I remember correctly, one side if the switch is already grounded to
the oil pan.
I put a hi-intensity LED in my panel, connected to +12V on one side via
a (470 or 4700 ohm?) resistor and the other side of the LED to the wire
from the switch.
You could get more fancy: one side of a relay coil to +12V and the other
side of the coil to the switch.
Then use the relay contacts as you see fit to drive a lamp, audible
alarm or whatever.
Finn
Mark Means wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Means" <rgvelocity@lmf.net>
>
>I have an auto conversion in the works with a low oil sensor which I'm not sure
how to hook up to a warning light and hoped someone could offer some advice.
I am afraid to route some juice up to it for fear of damage as I can't find
out (so far) what the usual input is.
>
>When unscrewed from the side of the oil pan it looks like a small rod with a small
donut on it, with a knob on the end to keep the donut from falling off. The
donut is weighted so it hangs in one position. I checked the continuity of
the two wires coming out of the base. Moving the donut up and down against the
rod opens and closes the circuit. Anyone out there with any experience with
this sort of thing and advice on wiring this up? Thanks.
>
>Mark Means
>
>
>
>
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GM low oil sensor |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Finn Lassen <finnlassen@netzero.net>
Bum advice if one side of the switch is grounded already.
Finn
Benford2@aol.com wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Benford2@aol.com
>
>In a message dated 3/17/2003 9:13:59 AM Mountain Standard Time,
>rgvelocity@lmf.net writes:
>
>
>
>
>>When unscrewed from the side of the oil pan it looks like a small rod with
>>a small donut on it, with a knob on the end to keep the donut from falling
>>off. The donut is weighted so it hangs in one position. I checked the
>>continuity of the two wires coming out of the base. Moving the donut up
>>and down against the rod opens and closes the circuit. Anyone out there
>>with any experience with this sort of thing and advice on wiring this up?
>>Thanks.
>>
>>Mark Means
>>
>>
>>
>
>If the circuit closes when the probe rises then the light or whatever will
>come on when there is a good level of oil. I am betting the circuit closes
>when the probe falls down. All ya got to do is feed it 12v to one wire,
>ground the other and the run the light or signaling device in series through
>the 12 v wire. When the circuit is complete, the light comes on, telling you
>the motor is about to make real kool metalflake colors in the oil pan... Ha
>Ha. Ben Haas. N801BH. V-8 Ford all aluminum Ford in an 801 Zenith in an
>801 Zenith
>
>
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Microair comm and Flightcom 403 intercom wiring |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: czechsix@juno.com
Guys,
I'm wiring up a Flightcom 403 intercom to my Microair radio. The intercom wiring
diagram seems pretty clear...the only connections it has to the radio are the
PTT, headphone, mic, and avionics ground (shown tied to the same ground point
as the radio). No problems there. Just wondering about the radio wiring though...does
the Mic Ground (also called Mic Lo, pin 2 on the Microair) need to
be tied to ground to make the communication with the intercom work, or can it
just be left unconnected?
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D wiring and fwf...
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | relay switch protection |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber@earthlink.net>
Another solution would be to put a transorb across the switch that we
wish to protect. An 18V transorb would keep the voltage at a level that
the switch can handle, it will allow the relay to open quickly, and if
it fails shorted, it's no big deal. The shorted transorb would make you
think your switch contacts had stuck shut. There would be nothing
needed across the terminals of the relay coil, no unacceptable failure
modes, and no increase in parts count.
Dave in Wichita
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber@earthlink.net>
>
> > Bob has since stopped recommending the use of MOV's and uses diodes
> instead.
> > He
> > has explained the reasoning before but I can't find my notes on it.
> Check
> > the
> > archives.
> >
>
> I know Bob bailed on recommending MOV's, but like you, I don't
> recall
> why. No doubt it was one of the many reasons mentioned in this recent
> thread. Chris
>
My recollection is that Bob said the MOV's were harder for people to
find. The advantage of the MOV over the diode is that it allows the
relay to open more quickly. Bob did some sort of testing that led him
to believe that the difference was not significant, so he has been
recommending diodes ever since.
Dave in Wichita
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | relay switch protection |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Canyon <steve.canyon@verizon.net>
David Swartzendruber wrote:
>Another solution would be to put a transorb across the switch that we
>wish to protect. An 18V transorb would keep the voltage at a level that
>the switch can handle, it will allow the relay to open quickly, and if
>it fails shorted, it's no big deal. The shorted transorb would make you
>think your switch contacts had stuck shut. There would be nothing
>needed across the terminals of the relay coil, no unacceptable failure
>modes, and no increase in parts count.
---
Folks, I've probably said enough already (or too much, depending on
your own perspective) but I find this whole notion of how switches,
avionics and other stuff actually works and should be protected totally
lacking in understanding of the physics involved. While most anything
COULD work for awhile, I am at a loss to understand why anyone would be
interested in defying practices for killing transients for many
decades. Diodes are cheap, they work and their failure rate is next to
zero.
Last message on the subject, I promise.
Regards,
Steve
PS: Transorbs do have their places, this just isn't one of them. By
the time the transorb catches any transients, the switch damage has
already occurred. I'm surprised someone hasn't suggested thyrectors or
diacs...
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: relay switch protection |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Peter Laurence <dr.laurence@mbdi.org>
Dave ,
what is a transorb switch?
Can you direct me to a site for more info?
Peter
----- Original Message ----- > Another solution would be to put a transorb
across the switch that we
> wish to protect. An 18V transorb would keep the voltage at a level that
> the switch can handle, it will allow the relay to open quickly, and if
> it fails shorted, it's no big deal. The shorted transorb would make you
> think your switch contacts had stuck shut. There would be nothing
> needed across the terminals of the relay coil, no unacceptable failure
> modes, and no increase in parts count.
>
> Dave in Wichita
>
>
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GM low oil sensor, bum advise |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Benford2@aol.com
In a message dated 3/17/2003 10:12:25 AM Mountain Standard Time,
finnlassen@netzero.net writes:
>
> Bum advice if one side of the switch is grounded already.
>
> Finn
>
> Benford2@aol.com wrote:
>
I read that he said there are TWO wires coming off the sensor. Internally
grounded units have only ONE wire.
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | relay switch protection |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber@earthlink.net>
Not a transorb switch, just a transorb connected between the terminals
of the existing switch that is used to energize the relay coil. A
transorb is a transient voltage suppressor. It begins to conduct when
the voltage applied across it rises above a certain value. Follow the
link below to Bob's discussion of transient voltage suppressors:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/spike.pdf
Dave in Wichita
Do not archive
> Dave ,
>
> what is a transorb switch?
>
> Can you direct me to a site for more info?
>
>
> Peter
> ----- Original Message ----- > Another solution would be to put a
transorb
> across the switch that we
> > wish to protect. An 18V transorb would keep the voltage at a level
that
> > the switch can handle, it will allow the relay to open quickly, and
if
> > it fails shorted, it's no big deal. The shorted transorb would make
you
> > think your switch contacts had stuck shut. There would be nothing
> > needed across the terminals of the relay coil, no unacceptable
failure
> > modes, and no increase in parts count.
> >
> > Dave in Wichita
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Nervous about 17Ah battery |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Neville Kilford" <nkilford@etravel.org>
Do not archive
Thanks Denis. These RG batteries seem pretty amazing. Anyway, it's good to
hear that it's worked out for you. I feel a bit less like I'm on a limb!
Cheers.
Nev
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Denis Walsh
<denis.walsh@attbi.com>
>
> I had the same concern about the terminals on the Odyssey 17 ah which I
> believe are about the same size.
>
> Now after two years of flawless cranking on my ampere hungry sky tec
> starter pulling an O-360 with 50 lb prop, it is still hanging in there.
Now
> I wonder why we had those big studs on the old ones?
>
> Denis
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Neville Kilford"
> > <nkilford@etravel.org>
> >
> > Hello there,
> >
> > I've been pondering a 17Ah Yuasa RG battery for my Jodel build. It's
nice
> > and light, but the terminals look pretty small for delivering perhaps 200
or
> > 250A to a B&C starter during cranking.
> >
> > Does anyone have any thoughts about it or experiences with such a low
> > capacity battery deliverying such a big current? I have to be honest --
I'd
> > never even heard of an RG battery before I read the Aeroelectric
Connection
> > and I am, of course, tempted by Bob's praise of small RG batteries.
> >
> > By the way, terminals are .43" x .08" (12 x 2mm).
> >
> > Many thanks in anticipation.
> >
> > Nev
> >
> > --
> > Neville Kilford
> > Jodel D-150
> > UK
> >
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GM low oil sensor, bum advise |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Finn Lassen <finnlassen@netzero.net>
Ok, I see.
Could have been spectacular though: full battery voltage across a switch
no longer fully submerged in oil. Wonder if the flash would have been
enough to ignite the oil?
Finn
do not archive
Benford2@aol.com wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Benford2@aol.com
>
>In a message dated 3/17/2003 10:12:25 AM Mountain Standard Time,
>finnlassen@netzero.net writes:
>
>
>
>
>>Bum advice if one side of the switch is grounded already.
>>
>>Finn
>>
>>Benford2@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>
>I read that he said there are TWO wires coming off the sensor. Internally
>grounded units have only ONE wire.
>
>
>
>
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Archer Comm antenna hookup |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Julia <wings97302@yahoo.com>
I'm hooking up my bob archer comm antenna -the one for the wing tips - I lost
the directions?
does this sound right - the center coax cable wire goes to the terminal which connects
to most of the metal on the antenna -the other antenna terminal seams
to be insulated from the rest of the antenna itself - this secound terminal on
the antenna just goes to a smaller section of metal which is insulated from the
rest of the antenna - i'm assuming this would be the ground?
thanks
---------------------------------
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Fw: Dynon Clock power requirements |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: czechsix@juno.com
FYI, passing this along in case it's of interest to anyone else ordering
a Dynon EFIS....
--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Gillian D'Ancicco" <gillian@dynondevelopment.com>
Subject: RE: Clock power?
Mark,
We draw 1 mA typically from the keep alive input. However, we also
charge
our internal battery from this source if the battery is not fully
charged.
Thus, if you ran the instrument off its internal battery and never
recharged
it using the master power, we would draw from the keep alive until our
battery was charged. In this case we could draw up to 2 Amp hours off
your
battery to charge our internal battery.
Gillian C. D'Ancicco
Business Manager
Dynon Avionics Inc.
19501 144th Ave NE
Suite C-500
Woodinville, WA 98072
(425)402-4404 Phone (425)984-1751 Fax
-----Original Message-----
From: czechsix@juno.com [mailto:czechsix@juno.com]
Subject: Clock power?
Hi,
How much power does the internal clock in the EFIS D-10 use from pin 2
(Keep Alive Clock Power) when the main power is off? Assume it's only a
milliamp or so otherwise it could drain the battery over a couple weeks
time between flights?
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D wiring....D-10 on order....
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|