Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:19 AM - Another Question, Different Subject (William Bernard)
2. 06:42 AM - Re: Wingtip VOR antenna (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 07:13 AM - Re: Another Question, Different Subject (C. M. Shearer)
4. 07:55 AM - RingTerminalBoltSize (DAVID REEL)
5. 08:26 AM - Main Bus (Tinne maha)
6. 09:39 AM - Re: Main Bus (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 09:41 AM - Re: Ring terminal sizes for contactors (Neville Kilford)
8. 09:50 AM - Re: Another Question, Different Subject (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 10:45 AM - Re: Ring terminal sizes for contactors (Dan Checkoway)
10. 11:19 AM - Re: RingTerminalBoltSize (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 11:32 AM - Re: Ring terminal sizes for contactors (Neville Kilford)
12. 11:42 AM - Re: Ring terminal sizes for contactors (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
13. 11:45 AM - Re: Ring terminal sizes for contactors (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
14. 11:47 AM - Re: Another Question, Different Subject (Don Honabach)
15. 11:55 AM - Re: 10622 Capen (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
16. 12:37 PM - Re: Another Question, Different Subject (Matt Prather)
17. 02:18 PM - Re: Terra 760 D/manual source (Paul Messinger)
18. 02:26 PM - Wiring VM1000 for dual alternator installation (BAKEROCB@aol.com)
19. 08:09 PM - Re: Mom-on toggle (Larry Bowen)
20. 08:27 PM - Re: Mom-on toggle (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
21. 08:32 PM - KX-125 pinout (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
22. 08:43 PM - Grouping wires for firewall penetration (Rick Fogerson)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Another Question, Different Subject |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "William Bernard" <billbernard@worldnet.att.net>
Thanks to Bob for the answer on the TC. The main reason I installed the diode was
that the LEDs that were lit up were assosiated with the angle of attack computer.
I doubted that this would cause a problem long term, but didn't want to
take the chance. Also, it just didn't seem right the that they should light up
when the power was turned off.
I plan to not install any diodes in the power lines for the future DG and AH.
My next question is about the VOR antenna shown on page 13-16 (Figuare 13-12) in
the Aeroelectric Connection. It appears from the sketch that the central conductor
for the antenna coax is electrically insualted from the antenna itself.
Is this actually the case? Are there any revisions or updates to the sketch?
Is the thing worth building, or should I just buy an antenna>
Thanks again.
Bill
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: | Re: Wingtip VOR antenna |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 06:22 AM 6/26/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "William Bernard"
><billbernard@worldnet.att.net>
>
>Thanks to Bob for the answer on the TC. The main reason I installed the
>diode was that the LEDs that were lit up were assosiated with the angle of
>attack computer. I doubted that this would cause a problem long term, but
>didn't want to take the chance. Also, it just didn't seem right the that
>they should light up when the power was turned off.
>
>I plan to not install any diodes in the power lines for the future DG and AH.
>
>My next question is about the VOR antenna shown on page 13-16 (Figuare
>13-12) in the Aeroelectric Connection. It appears from the sketch that the
>central conductor for the antenna coax is electrically insualted from the
>antenna itself. Is this actually the case? Are there any revisions or
>updates to the sketch? Is the thing worth building, or should I just buy
>an antenna>
If you study the assembly carefully, you'll find that the
center conductor ties to one side of a CAPACITOR formed by
two strips of aluminum sandwiched around a piece of phenolic.
This design was purloined from an issue of RVAtor some years
ago. I found out several years later that someone else had
purloined it from one of Bob Archer's designs. I met Bob for
the first time in California at a seminar I was doing for
Aircraft Spruce. He told me that this was his original design.
If you build this antenna as depicted it will probably
perform as well as necessary . . . unless you plan to
use VOR for long range, en route navigation where NO
wingtip antenna is going to perform as well as a set of
cat-whiskers on the tail.
Bob . . .
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: | Another Question, Different Subject |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "C. M. Shearer" <cshearer@kent.edu>
Bill,
I am new to the forum, so I hope I am not breaking any protocol with my
response. However, I have an answer for your VOR antenna question.
The antenna listed as figure 13-11 is a half-wave dipole antenna. When
connecting a coax to a dipole one should connect the inner wire to one rod
(it doesn't matter which one) and the outer breaded shield to the other
wire.
A ground plane antenna has the inner wire connected to the vertical rod and
the shield to the ground plane.
BTW, if your are building your own VOR antenna, be aware that the length of
the antenna is important. The closer your antenna is to 1/2 of a wave
length of the VOR signal, the better your reception will be. The formula
for finding the total length (both sides added together) is
length = 491.8 divided by frequency in MHz
Hope this helps.
CMS
C. M. Shearer
Taylorcraft N43502
March 11, 1946
Serial No. 7161
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> William Bernard
> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 7:22 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Another Question, Different Subject
>
> My next question is about the VOR antenna shown on page 13-16
> (Figuare 13-12) in the Aeroelectric Connection. It appears
> from the sketch that the central conductor for the antenna
> coax is electrically insualted from the antenna itself. Is
> this actually the case? Are there any revisions or updates to
> the sketch? Is the thing worth building, or should I just buy
> an antenna>
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Bill
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 |
|
| Subject: | RingTerminalBoltSize |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "DAVID REEL" <dreel@cox.net>
A number 2 wire ring terminal with a hole to fit the .193" bolt that comes with
Bob's favorite battery, a Panasonic LC-RD1217P , will not clear the case but
must be ground down to bolt flush to the battery terminal. Is there any advantage
to doing this versus just using a ring terminal for a larger bolt?
Dave Reel - RV8A
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: "Tinne maha" <tinnemaha@hotmail.com>
List,
I am building a kitfox with the battery in the tail. Recent posts have brought
a question to mind: In my aircraft the wire running from the battery contactor
to the bus will be about 15-20 feet. Figure Z-11 indicates the wire should be
8AWG but it is not protected. If that wire somehow shorted I think I would be
in a world of hurt. Should I protect it with a fusible link ordoes the battery
haveinsufficient capacity to burn that size wire (or am I completely missing
something?)
Grant
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: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:09 AM 6/26/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tinne maha" <tinnemaha@hotmail.com>
>
>List,
>
>I am building a kitfox with the battery in the tail. Recent posts have
>brought a question to mind: In my aircraft the wire running from the
>battery contactor to the bus will be about 15-20 feet. Figure Z-11
>indicates the wire should be 8AWG but it is not protected. If that wire
>somehow shorted I think I would be in a world of hurt. Should I protect it
>with a fusible link ordoes the battery haveinsufficient capacity to burn
>that size wire (or am I completely missing something?)
If your battery is located behind the seat, then you tie the
main bus feeder onto the starter contactor on the firewall
which will significantly shorten this wire.
There is no compelling reason to "protect" heavy feeders
other than to put them downstream of the battery contactor.
It is sufficient to install these wires with due diligence
for avoiding mechanical damage to the wire . . . same as
one would do for a fuel line or a control cable. Likelihood
of these feeders causing in-flight problems is extremely remote.
This fact has be recognized by the FAA in certification of
light aircraft. I'll quote Part 23 in part:
Sec. 23.1357 Circuit protective devices.
(a) Protective devices, such as fuses or circuit breakers, must be
installed in all electrical circuits other than--
(1) Main circuits of starter motors used during starting only; and
(2) Circuits in which no hazard is presented by their omission.
. . .
Bob. . .
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: Ring terminal sizes for contactors |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Neville Kilford" <nkilford@etravel.org>
Thanks Bob...
> http://216.55.140.222/temp/Tap_and_Clearance_Drill.pdf
That is the mother of all conversion tables. Made no sense whatsoever!
I really wanted to know just what the size of #10, #8, and #6 would be (in
inches or mm).
Gilles has said that #10 is a 5mm, which should suit the contactors alright,
and I have some M8 PIDG terminals. I just need to order the .31" uninsulated
rings for the fat leads. So, I think I'm there or thereabouts. I'll shout
if I need any more info.
Cheers.
Nev
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ring terminal sizes for contactors
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> At 04:44 PM 6/25/2003 +0100, you wrote:
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Neville Kilford"
> ><nkilford@etravel.org>
> >
> >Hi guys,
> >
> >Does anyone know what size studs are required for the contactors? In
metric
> >they're M5 & M8, but I only see imperial sizes on Bob's order form.
> >
> >The M8 one converts to .31" or so, but what about the M5? It's smaller
than
> >.25", so perhaps it's #10, #8, or #6, but I've no idea what those mean!
>
>
> An "M" size is in approx millimeters. A millimeter is about
> 0.040" An M8 would be therefore about 0.32", an M5 is about
> 0.20"
>
> See
>
> http://216.55.140.222/temp/Tap_and_Clearance_Drill.pdf
>
> for a list of tap and clearance drill sizes for the vairious
> screw sizes. Note that a free fit on a #6 screw is a #25
> drill (0.145") if one were to convert this to millimeters,
> it would be an M3.7
>
> If you go to
>
http://catalog.tycoelectronics.com/TE/bin/TE.Connect?S=13836&M=FEAT&LG=1&I=13
> you'll find a listing of terminal sizes offered in the PIDG
> series from AMP. Note the data fields labeled "Stud Diameter" and
> "Stud Size" You can order a terminal sized in mm/in format
> or by screw size (#4, #6, etc.)
>
> Does this help?
>
> Bob . . .
>
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: | Another Question, Different Subject |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 10:13 AM 6/26/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "C. M. Shearer" <cshearer@kent.edu>
>
>Bill,
>
>I am new to the forum, so I hope I am not breaking any protocol with my
>response. However, I have an answer for your VOR antenna question.
The "protocols" for this list-server is to offer, analyze, and
deduce practical application of simple ideas that support
the physics and art of building airplanes. Your considered
participation in this endeavor is always welcome . . .
>The antenna listed as figure 13-11 is a half-wave dipole antenna. When
>connecting a coax to a dipole one should connect the inner wire to one rod
>(it doesn't matter which one) and the outer breaded shield to the other
>wire.
He was referring to the 1/4-wave, gamma-matched antenna in Figure
13-12.
>A ground plane antenna has the inner wire connected to the vertical rod and
>the shield to the ground plane.
>
>BTW, if your are building your own VOR antenna, be aware that the length of
>the antenna is important. The closer your antenna is to 1/2 of a wave
>length of the VOR signal, the better your reception will be. The formula
>for finding the total length (both sides added together) is
>
> length = 491.8 divided by frequency in MHz
This yields a length in FEET.
Bob . . .
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: Ring terminal sizes for contactors |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
> I really wanted to know just what the size of #10, #8, and #6 would be (in
> inches or mm).
http://bobmay.astronomy.net/misc/drillchart.htm
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: RingTerminalBoltSize |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 10:54 AM 6/26/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "DAVID REEL" <dreel@cox.net>
>
>A number 2 wire ring terminal with a hole to fit the .193" bolt that comes
>with Bob's favorite battery, a Panasonic LC-RD1217P , will not clear the
>case but must be ground down to bolt flush to the battery terminal. Is
>there any advantage to doing this versus just using a ring terminal for a
>larger bolt?
>
>Dave Reel - RV8A
Having trouble visualizing this . . . I presume that your
talking about the edge margin around the bolt hole for
terminal with a 0.193"+ hole is so large that the edge
of the terminal hits the battery case and prevents alignment
of the two holes for bolt insertion.
I'm wondering how a terminal with a larger hole helps.
Usually, as hole size goes up, overall diameter of the
margin around the hole goes up too.
The drawing I have for the Panasonic battery isn't
very well dimensioned but it seems to suggest there
is a 0.315 distance from hole center to top of battery
case. This allows for a 0.600" diameter terminal
with a 0.200" hole in it to still fit the battery
terminal without modification. If the terminal you
have is too large, it is best to trim the edge
to gain needed clearance. The real meat of where
a terminal does it's job is area under the nut and
around the hole . . . the hole should fit the
bolt as closely as practical.
There are no "standards" for overall terminal
diameter around the hole versus actual hole
size. You can download a typical terminal catalog
at
http://www.hollingsworth.com/Misc/hollingsworth%20catalog.pdf
check out page 46 for un-insulated terminals
for 4AWG wire. Note that for each stud size
there can be more than one diameter offered
for overall size of the flag. If you have trouble
finding a terminal with the right hole size
and still small enough to fit the battery, you
can sometimes use hole size down down for hole
size and drill it out to fit . . . or trim a
flat on the edge as you've suggested above.
Bob . . .
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: Ring terminal sizes for contactors |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Neville Kilford" <nkilford@etravel.org>
Brilliant,
Thanks, Dan. Just the ticket. They're closer together than I thought they
would be
Cheers.
Nev
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ring terminal sizes for contactors
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway"
<dan@rvproject.com>
>
> > I really wanted to know just what the size of #10, #8, and #6 would be
(in
> > inches or mm).
>
> http://bobmay.astronomy.net/misc/drillchart.htm
>
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
>
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: Ring terminal sizes for contactors |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 05:38 PM 6/26/2003 +0100, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Neville Kilford"
><nkilford@etravel.org>
>
>Thanks Bob...
>
> > http://216.55.140.222/temp/Tap_and_Clearance_Drill.pdf
>That is the mother of all conversion tables. Made no sense whatsoever!
???
>I really wanted to know just what the size of #10, #8, and #6 would be (in
>inches or mm).
The chart says the range of sizes from close to loose fit on
a 10-32 threaded stud is 0.196" to 0.201" diameter drill.
Divide these by 0.039"/mm and you get 4.97 to 5.1 mm. I would
assume a 5mm terminal is available. A #8 works over range
of 0.169 to 0.177" for a mm range of 4.29 to 4.49 mm. Depending
on who is supplying your terminals, a 4mm (tight) or 4.5mm terminal
seems to be in order. A #6 stud needs 0.144" to 0.149" or
3.65 to 3.78 mm, I would guess a 4mm terminal would be best
fit on the #6 stud.
>Gilles has said that #10 is a 5mm, which should suit the contactors alright,
>and I have some M8 PIDG terminals. I just need to order the .31" uninsulated
>rings for the fat leads. So, I think I'm there or thereabouts. I'll shout
>if I need any more info.
A 8 mm terminal times .039"/mm yields 0.315" in diameter . . . just
right for a 0.312" (5/16) treaded stud on the contactor.
Bob . . .
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: | Re: Ring terminal sizes for contactors |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 10:40 AM 6/26/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
>
> > I really wanted to know just what the size of #10, #8, and #6 would be (in
> > inches or mm).
>
>http://bobmay.astronomy.net/misc/drillchart.htm
pretty cool chart . . . but it gives TAP drill
sizes, not clearance drill sizes.
Bob . . .
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: | Another Question, Different Subject |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
Please excuse my lack of knowledge, but I'm confused on this diode issue
with the TC.
What is the difference between putting diode(s) on the contactors to
prevent the energy wave back into the critical parts of the circuit and
putting the diode on the TC to prevent it from doing the same or
similiar? I'm sure I'm missing something, but on the surface it looks
like the same type of problem/solution.
Thanks!
Don Honabach
-----Original Message-----
From: William Bernard [mailto:billbernard@worldnet.att.net]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Another Question, Different Subject
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "William Bernard"
--> <billbernard@worldnet.att.net>
Thanks to Bob for the answer on the TC. The main reason I installed the
diode was that the LEDs that were lit up were assosiated with the angle
of attack computer. I doubted that this would cause a problem long term,
but didn't want to take the chance. Also, it just didn't seem right the
that they should light up when the power was turned off.
I plan to not install any diodes in the power lines for the future DG
and AH.
My next question is about the VOR antenna shown on page 13-16 (Figuare
13-12) in the Aeroelectric Connection. It appears from the sketch that
the central conductor for the antenna coax is electrically insualted
from the antenna itself. Is this actually the case? Are there any
revisions or updates to the sketch? Is the thing worth building, or
should I just buy an antenna>
Thanks again.
Bill
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>Bob,
>
>I am building an all-electric RV-6A and currently planning on a dual
>alternator, single battery electrical system (a-la Z-12), with a D25 Diode
>assy providing E-Buss primary feed...fuses - not breakers.
>
>For overvoltage protection, a crow-bar (OVM-14) driving a B-lead contactor
>(S701-1)...or do I really need two sets - one for each alternator? I
>don't really understand how it works - looks like it (OVM-14) would short
>the circuit that normally provides power to the S-701 (easiest path)
>causing the S-701 to open....yes/no? Although it looks like the LR-3/SB-1
>alternator controllers would be one-stop shopping providing OV protection
>too?!
First, not that Z-12 is shown set up with breakers. If you go the
fuseblock route, you need to treat your alternator field supply
circuit like that shown in Figure Z-11 where there is a fusible
link coming off the bus to supply field power to the alternator
control switch. This path continues on through a 5A breaker
mandated for the crowbar ov protection . . .
The second alternator would have its own fusible link and field
supply circuit as the first alternator.
OV protection is built into the regulators B&C makes. You would
not need to add an OVM-14.
>I would prefer the autoswitching as described on pg 17-12. Are these
>mutually exclusive? OV protection is more critical to me than
>autoswitching if I have to make a choice - I'm open to education though.....
Autoswitching happens because the standby alternator is
set to regulate at 0.5 to 1.0 volts BELOW normal bus
voltage. Normal operation is for both alternator switches
to be ON all the time. Should the main alternator fail,
bus voltage sags and the #2 regulator brings the #2 alternator
on line to support ship's loads. The Alternator Load/Overload
light will flash until you reduce ship's load to or below
20A.
>SB-1's and SD-20's are not listed anywhere on your website - are they
>discontinued?
I don't sell those, B&C does at http://www.bandc.biz
>I hope that I've conveyed my intended direction...please validate or
>provide education. I would like to make sure that the pathway is valid
>given current availability of hardware.
All the hardware you need is currently available. Figure Z-12
is most often applied to airplanes that already have breaker
panels. You can certainly apply it to a new airplane with
fuseblocks provided that you make the small changes described
above to add fusible links and alternator field breakers.
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------
( Knowing about a thing is different than )
( understanding it. One can know a lot )
( and still understand nothing. )
( C.F. Kettering )
--------------------------------------------
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: | Another Question, Different Subject |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
Don,
Diodes across relay coils allow for increased switch life by eliminating
arcing across the contacts caused by the inductive load of the application.
The illumination of LED's caused by the mechanical energy stored in the
gyro doesn't pose a reliability/durability threat to any of the components in
the circuit. I can't really see needing to turn off the bus that feeds the
gyros while in flight, while in the dark - the condition which causes the
LED's to light up. I'd guess that leaving any component on the bus turned
on while the bus feed is off would probably extinguish the LED's.
Regardless, it doesn't sound like the LED's can provide useful information
while the bus is turned off, so they can be ignored for the minute or two
that the gyros take to wind down, if the bus loads are that low.
Regards,
Matt Prather
N34RD
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach"
> <don@pcperfect.com>
>
> Please excuse my lack of knowledge, but I'm confused on this diode issue
> with the TC.
>
> What is the difference between putting diode(s) on the contactors to
> prevent the energy wave back into the critical parts of the circuit and
> putting the diode on the TC to prevent it from doing the same or
> similiar? I'm sure I'm missing something, but on the surface it looks
> like the same type of problem/solution.
>
> Thanks!
> Don Honabach
>
snip
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: Terra 760 D/manual source |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
I have had good luck with the following for older manuals etc.
http://www.esscoaircraft.com
The quality was good last time I used them.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "David J. Spencer" <djs@54Transmission.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Terra 760 D
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David J. Spencer"
<djs@54Transmission.com>
>
> Ed...
>
> Sorry, but I don't have any advice about the technical difficulties.
>
> However, I have dual TXN-960s and am wondering how you got a maintenance
> manual? I'd love to have one for my 960s... have the install manual.
>
> David J. Spencer
> Super3
> djs@54Transmission.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Terra 760 D
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ed Anderson"
> <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
> >
> > Hi Bob,
> >
> > Don't know if you or anyone on the list may be able to help me with my
> > problem or not. I have a Terra 760D transceiver. I have always had a
> > problem with distortion when transmitting. Sometimes so bad folks
> receiving
> > can not understand me. At first, I though it might be the high noise
> level
> > in the cockpit, so got a better noise supression mic and also
uphosteried
> > the interior to reduce ambient noise. Nothing seemed to solve the
> problem.
> > There is no static/distortion when receiving and my side tone does not
> have
> > any distortion. I have had the transceiver in three times to have it
> > checked, but you know how an intermittent problem is - never show up in
> the
> > repair shop. Antenna and Coax has been changed as well.
> >
> > I finally obtained a maintenance manual and noticed that the sidetone is
> > generated one transistor before the modulation transistor. This leads
me
> to
> > assume that the audio portion of the circuit is good (at least up to the
> > side tone generator) and I wonder if an intermittent condition with the
> > modulation transistor could cause distortion. It does seem worst during
> hot
> > weather. If anyone has had a similar problem and discovered the cause,
> would
> > appreciate hearing from them.
> >
> > Best Regards
> >
> > Ed Anderson
> > RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
> > Matthews, NC
> > eanderson@carolina.rr.com
> >
> >
>
>
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: | Wiring VM1000 for dual alternator installation |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BAKEROCB@aol.com
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Treff, Arthur"
<Arthur.Treff@Smartm.com>
<<Listers, I'm wiring my RV-8 with Z-13. My ammeter will the embedded in the
Vision MIcrosystems VM-1000 display.
My questions are:
1) What would be the consequence if I connected the leads from both ammeter
shunts to the VM-1000? Since both alternators would be operating at
different times
wouldn't the display just show the current from which ever alternator was
switched on? No doubt I'm missing something, please poke holes in my
logic......skip... Arthur Treff Asheville, NC >>
6/26/2003
Hello Arthur, I have installed a VM1000 system in my not yet flying airplane.
I get the impression from your question that you don't have the hardware or
VM manual in hand yet and are sort of feeling your way along.
I would like to emphasize that I think the VM equipment is top quality gear
(although perhaps no longer on the cutting edge of technology) and I have been
absolutely pleased with the support that I have gotten from Lance Turk and his
people, BUT there are some "gotchas". If you don't have the hardware and
manual in hand and are very familiar with them you might be in for some surprises.
Such as:
1) There is a cigar box sized DPU (Data Processing Unit) that you must mount
somewhere with some subsequent access to. Many, many wires will run from your
engine compartment to the DPU and connect through a D sub plug that you must
wire. A flat ribbon cable will run from the DPU to the instruments in the
instrument panel.
2) The wires going to the DPU D sub plug come from sensors either attached
directly to the engine / magneto (CHT, EGT, OIL TEMPERATURE, RPM) or located in
front of the firewall (OIL PRESSURE, FUEL PRESSURE, FUEL FLOW) or located
optionally either in front of or behind the firewall (MANIFOLD PRESSURE,
AMPERAGE). Voltage feeds directly to the D sub from the bus / source that you choose
with no sensor. OAT and CAT connect directly to the DPU D sub if you are using
those sensors.
3) As Bob Nuckolls said VM uses a Hall effect sensor for amperage input. The
sensor provided by VM is a small printed circuit board with a hole in the
middle and a coil around that hole. The hole is big enough for maybe one (fat)
wire to go from the alternator to the positive side of the starter contactor (how
I wired mine). VM would like you to put this sensor in a benign environment
(aft of the firewall), but I did not want that "fat, noisy wire" in the
cockpit. If you can't put the sensor in a benign environment then VM wants you
to
protect or encase the sensor in some fashion. I found that next to impossible to
do because of its shape and size and the fat wire running perpendicularly
through the board's middle, so mine is hanging exposed from a bracket fastened
to
the front of the firewall.
4) Coming from the amperage sensor are four wires within the shieldedcable
provided by VM that lead to the D sub plug going into the DPU. It is difficult
for me to envision how you would rig two different alternators to feed the DPU,
but I'm sure that it could be done with some effort and extra hardware such
as switches (12 contact rotary?) and maybe an extra Hall effect sensor.
5) VM provides you with high quality four wire shielded cable to go from the
sensors to the DPU. But you don't need all four wires for all the sensors. You
can reduce weight and bulkiness (big issue when wiring the D sub plug) by
buying some two and three wire shielded cable and using that where appropriate
rather than the four wire cable provided by VM.
6) If you go for the VM fuel quantity system you get another printed circuit
board (naked, no enclosure) that VM calls the IO board. You must also mount
that some place and protect it as desired / needed. The wires from the fuel
sensor probes go to the IO board via another D sub connector and the flat wire
from the DPU to the instruments on the panel goes through the IO board.
Arthur, I know that this is very nutsy and boltsy and I'm sure that you know
some of this already, but the above information would have been very helpful
to me at one stage of my building. Please let me know if you have any questions
(by direct email if appropriate) and I'll give it my best shot.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@bowenaero.com>
A follow-up on my quest for the guarded momentary-on toggle switch:
I'm not having much luck so far. For use with the switchguard, they
have to be mounted a certain way. Basically, the momentary-on needs to
be opposite the groove in the neck that is used for the anti-rotation
tab. The switch listed in the previous email below has the opposite
action: (on)-on as mounted in the switchguard. So, I ordered
CARLING 6FA5H73: ALLIED STOCK # 683-5119
which is listed as having a (on)-off action. But it's the same -- the
momentary on is opposite the groove. So using either of the switched
purchased so far, the starter will engage as soon as the switchguard is
flipped open, and stay engaged until the guard is closed. That's not
what I'm after.
Is the only solution to file off the anti-rotation tab on the
switchguard, or am I over looking something?
Thanks,
-
Larry Bowen
Larry@BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
2003 - The year of flight!
> -----Original Message-----
> >I'm looking for a off-(on) toggle switch for use as a starter engage
> >switch. Same functionality as the push button that Bob sells, but I
> >want the form-factor of the toggle switches. This will be used with
> >the red flip-guard. Anyone know a source? I guess one of the
> >three-position switches would work [xx-xx-(on)], but ...
>
> CARLING 6FB5H73XA: ALLIED STOCK # 683-5121
>
http://www.alliedelec.com/catalog/pf.asp?FN=896.pdf
Bob . . .
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 11:05 PM 6/26/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@bowenaero.com>
>
>A follow-up on my quest for the guarded momentary-on toggle switch:
>
>
>I'm not having much luck so far. For use with the switchguard, they
>have to be mounted a certain way. Basically, the momentary-on needs to
>be opposite the groove in the neck that is used for the anti-rotation
>tab. The switch listed in the previous email below has the opposite
>action: (on)-on as mounted in the switchguard. So, I ordered
>
>CARLING 6FA5H73: ALLIED STOCK # 683-5119
>
>which is listed as having a (on)-off action. But it's the same -- the
>momentary on is opposite the groove. So using either of the switched
>purchased so far, the starter will engage as soon as the switchguard is
>flipped open, and stay engaged until the guard is closed. That's not
>what I'm after.
>
>Is the only solution to file off the anti-rotation tab on the
>switchguard, or am I over looking something?
Nope, that's how we all do it. Most guards are not built to any
standard . . . only those done to a Mil-Spec are going to be
consistent. I've purchased guards that had anti-rotation tabs
both ways. Use anti-rotation tab washers on the BACK of the panel
for the switches and file off the tab on the guard. They'll probably
work just fine. If push comes to shove, put two tiny dots of adhesive
on the back of the guard's mounting plate. Sho-Goo or one of its
cousins works well.
Bob . . .
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: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
> Bob
>I'm looking for pin-out info for a KX125. Have any idea where I can
>borrow or download a copy.
>Thanks
Try
http://216.55.140.222/Installation_Data/KX125.pdf
I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List
to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to
share the information with as many folks as possible.
A further benefit can be realized with membership on
the list. There are lots of technically capable folks
on the list who can offer suggestions too. You can
join at . . .
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/
Thanks!
Bob . . .
|---------------------------------------------------|
| A lie can travel half way around the world while |
| the truth is till putting on its shoes . . . |
| -Mark Twain- |
|---------------------------------------------------|
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: | Grouping wires for firewall penetration |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf@cableone.net>
Hi Bob,
I plan on grouping wires in the following two groups for firewall penetration:
1) CHT, EGT, and tach, oil T&P, MAP, and fuel pressure transducer wires
2) E.I. controllers (2), Alternator field and B output, and starter contactor
Is this okay?
thanks, Rick Fogerson
RV3, finish
Boise, ID
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! --
|