---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sun 06/29/03: 20 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 06:04 AM - Success Story (RVEIGHTA@aol.com) 2. 06:12 AM - Re: Tach Auto Switch... (Van Caulart) 3. 06:42 AM - Canard Pusher Ground System (Alexander Balic) 4. 06:43 AM - KX155 Pin Identification (Jon Finley) 5. 09:47 AM - Re: Crimp tools for Molex Avikrimp or PIDG terminations (Don Honabach) 6. 10:39 AM - Crimper - Saga ... (Don Honabach) 7. 11:34 AM - Re: KX155 Pin Identification (Tom Brusehaver) 8. 12:04 PM - Re: Crimper - Saga ... (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 9. 12:06 PM - Connecting Whelen Strobes (BAKEROCB@aol.com) 10. 12:35 PM - Re: KX155 Pin Identification (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 11. 12:48 PM - Re: Canard Pusher Ground System (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 12. 12:49 PM - Re: Success Story (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 13. 01:46 PM - Re: Crimper - Saga ... (Don Honabach) 14. 08:46 PM - Re: A different way? (Tom Schiff) 15. 08:49 PM - Re: Crimper - Saga ... (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 16. 09:57 PM - Re: Crimper - Saga ... (Don Honabach) 17. 10:06 PM - Re: Tach Auto Switch... (Don Honabach) 18. 10:08 PM - Re: Tach Auto Switch... (Don Honabach) 19. 10:15 PM - Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 30 Msgs - 06/28/03 (Ronald Cox) 20. 10:16 PM - Fw: AeroElectric-List Digest: 30 Msgs - 06/28/03 (Ronald Cox) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 06:04:52 AM PST US From: RVEIGHTA@aol.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Success Story --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: RVEIGHTA@aol.com A while back I posted a message to the list saying that my import turn coordinator was so noisy it made my radio transmissions unreadable. Bob referred me to his article on "Hammering the Radio Shack 270-030 filter into submission" Well to make a long story short, I bought the filter kit for $4 and put it together per Bob's instructions, installed it in my RV-8A and now my radio works great! Thanks, Bob...... Walt Shipley Greeneville, TN ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 06:12:05 AM PST US From: Van Caulart Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Tach Auto Switch... --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Van Caulart Don: Try the MSD Tach Splitter which has two diodes installed so that you can select either ign and see the tach indication on a single tach. PeterVC ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 06:42:36 AM PST US From: Alexander Balic Subject: AeroElectric-List: Canard Pusher Ground System --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Alexander Balic Bob/everyone, I have the Z-15, and it seems to show ground going from the battery to a post on the foreword ground bus. Then a second #2 cable going from the foreword ground bus to the rear mounted ground bus. Then a 3rd cable (or strap) going to the engine to ground bus for the starter/alternator. I spoke with Tim at B&C, he said that he would not want to see 3 bolt connections between the battery and the engine case. If I have the engine gauges (obviously in the rear), and some ground to the engine block, and some don't - (fuel pressure comes to mind) so Tim suggested that I run the ground to the block directly, then use the strap to go to the firewall mounted ground buss, then run say a #6 up to the front from the rear ground to front ground buss, so then I can ground the instruments at the front, and even though the senders ground to the case, the instrument grounds run back there before going to the battery. Please let me know about this, I am at this point, and need to get some copper flying!! :) Thanks Alex ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 06:43:35 AM PST US From: "Jon Finley" Subject: AeroElectric-List: KX155 Pin Identification --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jon Finley" Hi all, Could someone please point me to a diagram that defines the pins on a King KX155 Nav/Com?? I have the wiring diagram but have not been able to determine which pin on the radio represents which pin on the diagram. I know - sounds pretty silly but I can't see any markings on the radio other than an "S" (even took the covers off). Thanks! Jon Finley N90MG Q2 - Subaru EJ-22 DD - 450 Hrs. TT - 1 Hr Engine Apple Valley, Minnesota http://www.FinleyWeb.net/default.asp?id=96 ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 09:47:34 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Crimp tools for Molex Avikrimp or PIDG terminations From: "Don Honabach" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" Gaylen, Thanks a million - this is exactly what I was looking for. The pictures answer all my questions. I've been surprised that you can purchase a pair of cheap crimpers and they don't even have instructions - seems a little odd since we aren't born with the knowledge of how to do a proper crimp or more importantly how to crimp the terminal as the engineer's invisioned to provide a robust connection. Thanks Again! Don Here is our "How To" page for mil spec termination crimping: http://www.terminaltown.com/Pages/Page7.html -----Original Message----- From: Gaylen Lerohl [mailto:lerohl@rea-alp.com] Subject: Crimp tools for Molex Avikrimp or PIDG terminations Don: Check out our Eclipse 300-054 tool and the 300-058 die set or the Sargent SC4140 tool with dieset. Both are ratcheted tools and these die sets will do the double crimp in one operation. http://www.terminaltown.com/Pages/SargentBrandCrimpers.html http://www.terminaltown.com/Pages/EclipseCrimpTools.html Here is our "How To" page for mil spec termination crimping: http://www.terminaltown.com/Pages/Page7.html Best Regards, Gaylen Lerohl www.terminaltown.com ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 10:39:53 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Crimper - Saga ... From: "Don Honabach" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" Hey Everyone, I was talking with an engineering friend and he mentioned that they also make ratchet crimpers that put 3 crimps on the wire and one crimp on the insulation. This sounded like a neat idea, but he then added that it's only used for high high high end stuff like satellites, etc. In any case, I was curious if any one had any experience with these crimpers - where to buy, how much, overkill, etc.? Thanks! Don ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 11:34:48 AM PST US From: Tom Brusehaver Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: KX155 Pin Identification --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Tom Brusehaver Jon, I have one of those Quik Shot books http://www.qsproducts.com/ It has the pinouts for the kx-155. If you want to borrow it or anything. Jon Finley wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jon Finley" > > Hi all, > > Could someone please point me to a diagram that defines the pins on a > King KX155 Nav/Com?? I have the wiring diagram but have not been able > to determine which pin on the radio represents which pin on the diagram. > I know - sounds pretty silly but I can't see any markings on the radio > other than an "S" (even took the covers off). > > Thanks! > > Jon Finley > N90MG Q2 - Subaru EJ-22 DD - 450 Hrs. TT - 1 Hr Engine > Apple Valley, Minnesota > http://www.FinleyWeb.net/default.asp?id=96 > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 12:04:20 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Crimper - Saga ... --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 10:39 AM 6/29/2003 -0700, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" > >Hey Everyone, > >I was talking with an engineering friend and he mentioned that they also >make ratchet crimpers that put 3 crimps on the wire and one crimp on the >insulation. This sounded like a neat idea, but he then added that it's >only used for high high high end stuff like satellites, etc. In any >case, I was curious if any one had any experience with these crimpers - >where to buy, how much, overkill, etc.? I'd like to know of the brand and part number of such a product. I cannot imagine how this makes any sense. Consider that the "wire" crimp in a PIDG or about any other small terminal has a wire engagement length of perhaps .125" and often less. Consider further that the ultimate goal of making a terminal and wire become a single entity is satisfied by the "gas tight" interface achieved by pressing the two malleable metals into such tight proximity that gasses at the molecular level are excluded. If this can be achieved with what might be called a 'single crimp' used to attach hundreds of millions of terminals over the past 60 years, I'm having trouble visualizing how (a)one can even split that .125" of wire grip area into three separate regions and (b) what might be gained by such an effort assuming it was even possible or practical. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 12:06:30 PM PST US From: BAKEROCB@aol.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Connecting Whelen Strobes --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BAKEROCB@aol.com AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" < wrote: >Bob/Others - First - I bleieve you recommend attaching both ends of the Whelen >strobe shielding on composites. What's the best way to attach the AL foil, >solder wire to it? I've installed a Molex connector for service at the >strake-wing junction, what kind of connector would you recommend there, >another Molex? And finally, would it be sufficient to put a ring terminal >under the mounting screw for the ground connection at the light fixture, >or should I solder the sheild to the housing, or what? There is a bare, stranded wired IN ADDITION to the three insulated wires under the shield. This forth wire is called a "drain wire" and its purpose is to provide you with a convenient means for making electrical connection to the shield-foil which is, as you've noted, impossible to make connection with. You can extend the drain wire with a short piece of wire, install a ring terminal and attach to mounting screw for fixture. If you DON'T do this, in all probability, you won't know the difference.>> 6/29/2003 Hello Bob Nuckolls and Bret Ferrell, I'd like to flog this horse a few more lashes. 1) Bob Nuckolls really says the drain wire should be attached at both ends on a composite aircraft? But not on a metal aircraft? Why? 2) When one receives the strobe light installation kit from Whelen the cable already has two AMP plastic 3 wire connectors attached, one on each end. These connectors are the ones that plug into the mating 3 wire connectors at the strobe light ends. After cutting the cable somewhere in the middle and snaking those two cut ends through the airframe to the vicinity of the strobe power supply one installs the other two (different) appropriate 3 wire connectors provided by Whelen and plugs the cables into the power supply. 3) The installation instructions say that the drain wire should be connected to the housing / mounting of the power supply. Easy enough to do by leaving the drain wire longer when you cut the cable, strip it, and install the 3 wire connectors that plug into the power supply. 4) But out at the strobe light end of the cable where the Whelen installed connectors are, Whelen has left no access to the drain wire. I suppose one could cut back the plastic covering, remove the aluminum shield, attach a short wire to the now exposed drain wire, and then attach that short wire to some metal part of the strobe light housing, but I find this action both puzzling and unnecessary. 5) Whelen has thousands of these units in service throughout the skies mounted on both metal surfaces and composite wing tips. I am unaware of any need to go through the additonal effort of connecting the drain wire to the metal light housing out at the strobe light end. Can anyone show me different? 'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/? ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 12:35:11 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: KX155 Pin Identification --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 08:43 AM 6/29/2003 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jon Finley" > >Hi all, > >Could someone please point me to a diagram that defines the pins on a >King KX155 Nav/Com?? I have the wiring diagram but have not been able >to determine which pin on the radio represents which pin on the diagram. >I know - sounds pretty silly but I can't see any markings on the radio >other than an "S" (even took the covers off). > >Thanks! See http://216.55.140.222/Installation_Data/KX155.pdf Physical pin numbering is usually marked right on the back of the connector. They tiny raise letters molded on and same color as connector body. I find them useful mostly for getting connector oriented correctly on installation. I use a white or yellow ink pen to put a dot on every 5th terminal location so that I can easily "count" the holes for proper wire location when inserting a pin. From the wiring aid I've published above, I infer that the A1 connector is mounted upside down compared to the A2 connector where pin designations increase in order from left to right. I'm sure there is some reasonable engineering explanation for this seemingly perverse decision but be careful that you account for this as the parts all come together. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 12:48:18 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Canard Pusher Ground System --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 08:30 AM 6/29/2003 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Alexander Balic > > >Bob/everyone, >I have the Z-15, and it seems to show ground going from the battery to a >post on the foreword ground bus. Then a second #2 cable going from the >foreword ground bus to the rear mounted ground bus. Then a 3rd cable (or >strap) going to the engine to ground bus for the starter/alternator. I >spoke with Tim at B&C, he said that he would not want to see 3 bolt >connections between the battery and the engine case. If I have the engine >gauges (obviously in the rear), and some ground to the engine block, and >some don't - (fuel pressure comes to mind) so Tim suggested that I run the >ground to the block directly, then use the strap to go to the firewall >mounted ground buss, then run say a #6 up to the front from the rear ground >to front ground buss, so then I can ground the instruments at the front, and >even though the senders ground to the case, the instrument grounds run back >there before going to the battery. Please let me know about this, I am at >this point, and need to get some copper flying!! :) You didn't say what kind of airplane you were building and wether or not you have an amidships battery. In any case, you may have instruments for engine parameters that are saddled with crankcase ground senders. This suite of instruments works best with their own ground wire (20AWG is sufficient) to bring crankcase ground forward to those instruments that get signals from crankcase grounded senders. If you don't have an amidships battery, then you don't need a robust ground point at the firewall. The firewall ground bus and the braid jumper can be eliminated if you wish by taking the main ground all the way to the crankcase. Having the "extra" set of bolted joints in the ground path is not a great sin as long as you use robust brass hardware (5/16 minimum, 3/8 better). I think it's cleaner to go from aircraft structure to the crankcase with braided strap or welding cable (much more robust with respect to vibration/flexure stresses). If you're using welding cable for the main ground wire, and no battery behind the seats, then by all means take it all the way to the crankcase. But count on a separate ground for the engine instruments plagued with local ground senders. If you have components on the firewall that depend on the firwall for ground, THEN you'll need to bond the firewall to the crankcase too. A braid strap or welding cable jumper would be fine . . . they can be small if they don't carry starter current. If it were my airplane, I'd wire it per http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Appendix_Z_Drawings/z15ak.pdf and ground crankcase referenced engine instrumentation to the firewall ground bus. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 12:49:44 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Success Story --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 09:03 AM 6/29/2003 -0400, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: RVEIGHTA@aol.com > >A while back I posted a message to the list saying that my import turn >coordinator was so noisy it made my radio transmissions unreadable. Bob >referred me >to his article on "Hammering the Radio Shack 270-030 filter into submission" > >Well to make a long story short, I bought the filter kit for $4 and put it >together per Bob's instructions, installed it in my RV-8A and now my radio >works great! > >Thanks, Bob...... The laws of physics are a wonderful thing . . . especially when understanding them can make life more pleasant. You are most welcome my friend . . . Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 01:46:00 PM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Crimper - Saga ... From: "Don Honabach" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" Bob, >> I'd like to know of the brand and part number of such a product. I cannot imagine how this makes any sense. My engineering friend works at a defense company and designs test equipment for the various projects, etc. Next time I'm in touch I'll try and get further information. For what's it worth, he just uses an inexpensive AMP non-ratchet style crimper that requires two manual crimps and has been quite happy with it. He told me about the 3/4 crimper as an FYI type of thing. >> Consider that the "wire" crimp in a PIDG or about any other small terminal has a wire engagement length of perhaps .125" and often less. Does that mean that the wire should be stripped to .125"? If I measure the a RED PIDG Spade connector, it appears that there is .250" of wire available to crimp and ~.125" for the insulation crimp. I've taken a picture to make sure we're on the same page and put black lines to show the two areas I'm referring to - http://zodiac.pcperfect.com/PIDG-1.jpg Also, I took another picture just to make sure I'm understanding where the wire's insulation should stop and the wire should start. I'm assuming and have been told that the insulation should not go into the wire crimp area. In other words, stop right at the funnel entry point. Here's another picture that might help - http://zodiac.pcperfect.com/PIDG-2.jpg For what it's worth, I'm sure that I'm going overkill on this matter, but I just want to make sure I understand the process or more importantly the 'right process' for the task. >> If this can be achieved with what might be called a 'single crimp' used to attach hundreds of millions of terminals over the past 60 years, I'm having trouble visualizing how (a)one can even split that .125" of wire grip area into three separate regions and (b) what might be gained by such an effort assuming it was even possible or practical. Wow! I'm really surprised to hear the argument from you Bob. Starting to justify something by the fact that it's been used for over 60 years. Isn't this the same argument that goes into the Avionics Bus Switch and so on... (sorry couldn't resist - smile). Seriously, I'm just trying to understand and if a 3 crimp connection is even possible, it's benefits might be none or just perceived. My hopes though is to find out or at least better understand the thinking behind the processes. Thanks! Don -----Original Message----- From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:bob.nuckolls@cox.net] Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Crimper - Saga ... --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" --> At 10:39 AM 6/29/2003 -0700, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" >--> > >Hey Everyone, > >I was talking with an engineering friend and he mentioned that they >also make ratchet crimpers that put 3 crimps on the wire and one crimp >on the insulation. This sounded like a neat idea, but he then added >that it's only used for high high high end stuff like satellites, etc. >In any case, I was curious if any one had any experience with these >crimpers - where to buy, how much, overkill, etc.? I'd like to know of the brand and part number of such a product. I cannot imagine how this makes any sense. Consider that the "wire" crimp in a PIDG or about any other small terminal has a wire engagement length of perhaps .125" and often less. Consider further that the ultimate goal of making a terminal and wire become a single entity is satisfied by the "gas tight" interface achieved by pressing the two malleable metals into such tight proximity that gasses at the molecular level are excluded. If this can be achieved with what might be called a 'single crimp' used to attach hundreds of millions of terminals over the past 60 years, I'm having trouble visualizing how (a)one can even split that .125" of wire grip area into three separate regions and (b) what might be gained by such an effort assuming it was even possible or practical. Bob . . . direct advertising on the Matronics Forums. ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 08:46:44 PM PST US From: "Tom Schiff" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: A different way? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tom Schiff" -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: A different way? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 01:06 AM 6/28/2003 -0700, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tom Schiff" > >I am about to close out the leading edge of the first wing of my >Glastar. I need to string the wiring first as the area is inaccessible >after leading edge closeout. > >I would like to try something different. I am thinking of running two >heavy wires (Positive and ground out to the wing tip.) These wires would >be protected by a fusible link or a large breaker (one breaker for each >wing) and would be sized to carry the current for all of the items that >are on that wing. Near the wing tip there would be a bus that >distributes the power via solid state relays to the power consumers >listed below. > >On each wing there would be >1. Landing light >2. Taxi Light >3. Navigation light >4. Strobe >5. Anything else. > >There would be a fusible link at the distribution point for each relay. >Although if a link fused I would not have the option of resetting it I >would have the backups of the items in the other wing. Downstream circuit protection should have a fusing constant a fraction that of the upstream protection. For example, a faulted 22AWG fuselink downstream of a 20A breaker will open the breaker first. Suggest a ATC fuseblock for a remote distribution bus. Each Relay would have it's own fuseable link sized to the intended load. Could also be a Fuse. >If there were >Landing Light flashers they would be located at the wing tip bus. I >would not attempt to synchronize the flashing of the left and right >wings. > >To control the relays I was thinking of running some Computer grade >10BaseT cable. There is a version to that is approved to run through >plenums in buildings and has a fire rating that I believe is similar to >that of aviation wiring. > >Advantages. >1. I would not carry power through the airframe as a return wire would >be included. >2. If I wanted to add something in the future the 10 base T wiring has 4 >or 5 more wires to control relays. Break one wire and everything quits . . . That is true but. Loosing the lights on one wing isn't tragic, it could be monitored to give an indication of failure of either the left or right wing bus and finally properly installed the chance of loosing a bus wire is probably quite low. >3. Switches should last much longer as they would be carrying only micro >amps. How long will they last if you don't do this? I'm flying 40 year old rentals with original switches still in place . . . Just replaced all of the switches in my 31 year old Cessna 150 and they had been replaced at least once before. >4. Wiring is simplified. One pair for power and one cable for signal. The "wiring" may be simple but the total parts count in the system has multiplied by factors of 10 or more . . . all othing things being equal, reliability is inversely proportional to parts count. Remember I am removing the bundle of individual wires that are normally strung out to the wing for the individual components and replacing it with a cable. My guess is that a cable has a higher reliability than a bunch of hand strung individual wires. >5. As the power feed will be a heavier gage than would be normally used >for any individual circuit the voltage drop caused by items with a >periodic high current drain (read strobes) should be minimized. With >less drain comes less electrical noise. Explain the physics to support this assertion. The power feed will be of a gage to handle all of the items for the wing including the landing/taxi lights. Therefore it will be of a heavier gage than would normally be used to just wire a strobe. With a thicker wire comes lower resistance. >6. In the course of building the Glastar there are at least 3 mountings >and un-mountings of the wing that have to take place with only two sets >of wires this would be simplified. I plan to remove the wings one more >time after the time is flown off to paint them. Don't hook things up until the wings are on to stay. I'd venture a guess that from same fleet of airplanes I fly, wings have never been removed from most of them. Unfortunately I don't have that option. The Glastar is a strange beast the wings have to come of a minimum of two times during construction. In addition if I want to run the wires through the leading edge I need to do it before the wings are mounted. The area isn't accessible afterward. I may get around this by using conduit and pulling the wires later. >7. I could also use the remaining wires of the 10BaseT for some future >instrumentation (angle of attack, stall warning, or something that we >haven't though of yet) > >I am planning on running two RG-400 wires out to the wing tip but don't >know their exact usage right now. > >I would like to run the wiring through some sort of conduit my concern >is that the cable would be floating in the conduit and not tied down as >it is in spam cans. Would the cable chafe from being free inside of the >conduit or is this OK? > >So what do you folks think? It is unconventional but is it OK? Henry Ford and Charles Kettering didn't worry about anyone's endorsement before launching a new idea. It either flies or flops on it's own merit and risks are never zero. Not all of their ideas flew but when they did, the results were gratifying if not spectacular. If you have a good foundation based on experience and/or considered analysis of the fundamentals, then you can get a leg up on the market by being there first. Your selling points have to offer some combination of lowered installation time/cost, lower maintenance time/cost, and/or increased service life by some factor that makes it a compelling design. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 08:49:46 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Crimper - Saga ... --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 01:45 PM 6/29/2003 -0700, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" > >Bob, > > >> I'd like to know of the brand and part number of such a product. I >cannot imagine how this makes any sense. > >My engineering friend works at a defense company and designs test >equipment for the various projects, etc. Next time I'm in touch I'll try >and get further information. For what's it worth, he just uses an >inexpensive AMP non-ratchet style crimper that requires two manual >crimps and has been quite happy with it. He told me about the 3/4 >crimper as an FYI type of thing. > > >> Consider that the "wire" crimp in a PIDG or about any other small >terminal has a wire engagement length of perhaps .125" and often less. >Does that mean that the wire should be stripped to .125"? If I measure >the a RED PIDG Spade connector, it appears that there is .250" of wire >available to crimp and ~.125" for the insulation crimp. I've taken a >picture to make sure we're on the same page and put black lines to show >the two areas I'm referring to - http://zodiac.pcperfect.com/PIDG-1.jpg I mis-poke there. The wire grip for an open barrel pin is typically .125" A machined D-sub is about .180" I just pulled a red and blue PIDG terminal apart an measured wire grips of .170" A yellow is .250" If in doubt, pull the insulating sleeve off a terminal in question and see how long the wire grip is. >Also, I took another picture just to make sure I'm understanding where >the wire's insulation should stop and the wire should start. I'm >assuming and have been told that the insulation should not go into the >wire crimp area. In other words, stop right at the funnel entry point. >Here's another picture that might help - >http://zodiac.pcperfect.com/PIDG-2.jpg That's right . . insulation should not extend into the wire grip area. See: http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/terminal.pdf >For what it's worth, I'm sure that I'm going overkill on this matter, >but I just want to make sure I understand the process or more >importantly the 'right process' for the task. > > >> If this can be achieved with what might be called a 'single crimp' >used to attach hundreds of millions of terminals over the past 60 years, >I'm having trouble visualizing how (a)one can even split that .125" of >wire grip area into three separate regions and (b) what might be gained >by such an effort assuming it was even possible or practical. > >Wow! I'm really surprised to hear the argument from you Bob. Starting to >justify something by the fact that it's been used for over 60 years. >Isn't this the same argument that goes into the Avionics Bus Switch and >so on... (sorry couldn't resist - smile). No, the avionics bus was never justified based on physical fact verifiable by repeatable experiment. It was a POLICY based on the best guess anyone had at the time. Solderless connector technology has been spec'd and tested out the wazoo . . . I can cite dozens of documents which all suppliers must observe if they expect to sell to the US military or aerospace industry. >Seriously, I'm just trying to understand and if a 3 crimp connection is >even possible, it's benefits might be none or just perceived. My hopes >though is to find out or at least better understand the thinking behind >the processes. Understand. I just finished photographing some figures for an article that I hope to finish tonight. It will be an adjunct to the "anatomy" article. Bob . . . >Thanks! >Don > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:bob.nuckolls@cox.net] >To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Crimper - Saga ... > > >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" >--> > >At 10:39 AM 6/29/2003 -0700, you wrote: > >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" > >--> > > > >Hey Everyone, > > > >I was talking with an engineering friend and he mentioned that they > >also make ratchet crimpers that put 3 crimps on the wire and one crimp > >on the insulation. This sounded like a neat idea, but he then added > >that it's only used for high high high end stuff like satellites, etc. > >In any case, I was curious if any one had any experience with these > >crimpers - where to buy, how much, overkill, etc.? > > I'd like to know of the brand and part number of such a > product. I cannot imagine how this makes any sense. Consider > that the "wire" crimp in a PIDG or about any other small > terminal has a wire engagement length of perhaps .125" and > often less. Consider further that the ultimate goal of > making a terminal and wire become a single entity is > satisfied by the "gas tight" interface achieved by pressing > the two malleable metals into such tight proximity that > gasses at the molecular level are excluded. If this can > be achieved with what might be called a 'single crimp' > used to attach hundreds of millions of terminals over the > past 60 years, I'm having trouble visualizing how (a)one > can even split that .125" of wire grip area into three > separate regions and (b) what might be gained by such an > effort assuming it was even possible or practical. > > Bob . . . > > >direct advertising on the Matronics Forums. > > Bob . . . -------------------------------------------- ( Knowing about a thing is different than ) ( understanding it. One can know a lot ) ( and still understand nothing. ) ( C.F. Kettering ) -------------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 09:57:23 PM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Crimper - Saga ... From: "Don Honabach" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" Bob, Thanks your follow up comments and help. I hope the new 'anatomy' article is going well. Will it be a available as an update to the existing AeroElectric Book or a special article published on your website? On a happier note - since I got side tracked on the PIDG connectors this weekend and couldn't get any productive plane work done, I decided to wire up the serial connectors for my EFIS and GPS units. In the process of mounting the DB9 connectors I used a punch set I purchased a few years back. Spent way too much money on it back then, but it's definitely made this job incredibly easy and leaves a professional hole for the connector. Thanks again, Don Honabach -----Original Message----- From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:bob.nuckolls@cox.net] Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Crimper - Saga ... --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" --> At 01:45 PM 6/29/2003 -0700, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" >--> > >Bob, > > >> I'd like to know of the brand and part number of such a product. I >cannot imagine how this makes any sense. > >My engineering friend works at a defense company and designs test >equipment for the various projects, etc. Next time I'm in touch I'll >try and get further information. For what's it worth, he just uses an >inexpensive AMP non-ratchet style crimper that requires two manual >crimps and has been quite happy with it. He told me about the 3/4 >crimper as an FYI type of thing. > > >> Consider that the "wire" crimp in a PIDG or about any other small >terminal has a wire engagement length of perhaps .125" and often less. >Does that mean that the wire should be stripped to .125"? If I measure >the a RED PIDG Spade connector, it appears that there is .250" of wire >available to crimp and ~.125" for the insulation crimp. I've taken a >picture to make sure we're on the same page and put black lines to show >the two areas I'm referring to - http://zodiac.pcperfect.com/PIDG-1.jpg I mis-poke there. The wire grip for an open barrel pin is typically .125" A machined D-sub is about .180" I just pulled a red and blue PIDG terminal apart an measured wire grips of .170" A yellow is .250" If in doubt, pull the insulating sleeve off a terminal in question and see how long the wire grip is. >Also, I took another picture just to make sure I'm understanding where >the wire's insulation should stop and the wire should start. I'm >assuming and have been told that the insulation should not go into the >wire crimp area. In other words, stop right at the funnel entry point. >Here's another picture that might help - >http://zodiac.pcperfect.com/PIDG-2.jpg That's right . . insulation should not extend into the wire grip area. See: http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/terminal.pdf >For what it's worth, I'm sure that I'm going overkill on this matter, >but I just want to make sure I understand the process or more >importantly the 'right process' for the task. > > >> If this can be achieved with what might be called a 'single crimp' >used to attach hundreds of millions of terminals over the past 60 >years, I'm having trouble visualizing how (a)one can even split that >.125" of wire grip area into three separate regions and (b) what might >be gained by such an effort assuming it was even possible or practical. > >Wow! I'm really surprised to hear the argument from you Bob. Starting >to justify something by the fact that it's been used for over 60 years. >Isn't this the same argument that goes into the Avionics Bus Switch and >so on... (sorry couldn't resist - smile). No, the avionics bus was never justified based on physical fact verifiable by repeatable experiment. It was a POLICY based on the best guess anyone had at the time. Solderless connector technology has been spec'd and tested out the wazoo . . . I can cite dozens of documents which all suppliers must observe if they expect to sell to the US military or aerospace industry. >Seriously, I'm just trying to understand and if a 3 crimp connection is >even possible, it's benefits might be none or just perceived. My hopes >though is to find out or at least better understand the thinking behind >the processes. Understand. I just finished photographing some figures for an article that I hope to finish tonight. It will be an adjunct to the "anatomy" article. Bob . . . >Thanks! >Don > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:bob.nuckolls@cox.net] >To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Crimper - Saga ... > > >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" >--> > >At 10:39 AM 6/29/2003 -0700, you wrote: > >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" > >--> > > > >Hey Everyone, > > > >I was talking with an engineering friend and he mentioned that they > >also make ratchet crimpers that put 3 crimps on the wire and one > >crimp on the insulation. This sounded like a neat idea, but he then > >added that it's only used for high high high end stuff like > >satellites, etc. In any case, I was curious if any one had any > >experience with these crimpers - where to buy, how much, overkill, > >etc.? > > I'd like to know of the brand and part number of such a > product. I cannot imagine how this makes any sense. Consider > that the "wire" crimp in a PIDG or about any other small > terminal has a wire engagement length of perhaps .125" and > often less. Consider further that the ultimate goal of > making a terminal and wire become a single entity is > satisfied by the "gas tight" interface achieved by pressing > the two malleable metals into such tight proximity that > gasses at the molecular level are excluded. If this can > be achieved with what might be called a 'single crimp' > used to attach hundreds of millions of terminals over the > past 60 years, I'm having trouble visualizing how (a)one > can even split that .125" of wire grip area into three > separate regions and (b) what might be gained by such an > effort assuming it was even possible or practical. > > Bob . . . > > >direct advertising on the Matronics Forums. > > Bob . . . -------------------------------------------- ( Knowing about a thing is different than ) ( understanding it. One can know a lot ) ( and still understand nothing. ) ( C.F. Kettering ) -------------------------------------------- direct advertising on the Matronics Forums. ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 10:06:44 PM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Tach Auto Switch... From: "Don Honabach" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" Ben, Thanks for the reply and information. I wish I would of known about the switch beforehand. I don't have a lot room around the area where my ignition switch is going and a larger switch probably wont fit. Thanks for the offer though. Don -----Original Message----- From: Benford2@aol.com [mailto:Benford2@aol.com] Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Tach Auto Switch... --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Benford2@aol.com In a message dated 6/28/2003 10:22:15 AM Mountain Daylight Time, don@pcperfect.com writes: > posted by: "Don Honabach" > > I'm using a Subaru EA-81 engine which currently has a primary and > backup ignition. I'd like to setup a switch with two separate power > feeds that allows me to toggle between the two ignitions (only one > should run at a time). However, by having two power feeds into the > switch I lose the ability to switch the tach lead as well without > installing another switch which then becomes more complicated for > basic operations. So I started thinking about setting up an auto-tach > lead switch for my tach gauge (negative side coil based). > > My thoughts are that if I used a basic relay that was powered by the > same wire that would power my ignition I could design a simple circuit > that would switch the tach lead based on which ignition was active. > However, since I'm switching the tach lead that is connected to the > negative side of the coil and my deep understanding of electronics is > limited, I was hoping to find out if my base idea was okay or if I'm > setting myself up for some unknown issues related to the coil/tach > operation. Also, if the relay switch of the tach lead is okay, would > it still be standard practice to put a diode on this small type of > relay? > > I hope this question isn't too basic and any input is appreciated. > > Thanks! > Don Honabach > Tempe, AZ - 601HDS > > I am running duel MSD ignitions on my Ford and what i did was to use a triple pole double throw switch. As you cycle between both Ignition systems the third pole switches the positive lead going to the tach. Bob gave me the info on sources for this switch a few months back. If ya want I will look back at my files to find it. My problem was the first switch I ordered was physically too big because I had already drilled out the holes for my Ign switch and the body of it hit my transponder. I bought another one from a different vendor and that one barely fit. If ya want I will dig out the one I didn.t use and and give you the part #. I do remember it was not cheap. Ben Haas N801BH. direct advertising on the Matronics Forums. ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 10:08:07 PM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Tach Auto Switch... From: "Don Honabach" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" Michel - As always - thanks!!!! Don -----Original Message----- From: Michel Therrien [mailto:mtherr@yahoo.com] Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Tach Auto Switch... --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Michel Therrien --> I did exactly that, but did not fly with the plane yet. I used a relay whose coil is powered from the ignition 2 +12V circuit. The default source (no power to the relay coil) is the ign 1 negative side of coil. If the relay coil is energized, then, I read the ign 2 negative side of coil. I tested this in my garage when I tried my engine and it worked. I did not install an additional diode, but I used an automotive relay (those you can get as accessories for anti-theft or remote starting systems). See the relay mounted at the top of firewall near the ignition system. http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/images/DCP02042.JPG Michel --- Don Honabach wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don > Honabach" > > I'm using a Subaru EA-81 engine which currently has > a primary and backup > ignition. I'd like to setup a switch with two > separate power feeds that > allows me to toggle between the two ignitions (only > one should run at a > time). However, by having two power feeds into the > switch I lose the > ability to switch the tach lead as well without > installing another > switch which then becomes more complicated for basic operations. So I > started thinking about setting up an auto-tach lead > switch for my tach > gauge (negative side coil based). > > My thoughts are that if I used a basic relay that > was powered by the > same wire that would power my ignition I could > design a simple circuit > that would switch the tach lead based on which > ignition was active. > However, since I'm switching the tach lead that is > connected to the > negative side of the coil and my deep understanding > of electronics is > limited, I was hoping to find out if my base idea > was okay or if I'm > setting myself up for some unknown issues related to > the coil/tach > operation. Also, if the relay switch of the tach > lead is okay, would it > still be standard practice to put a diode on this > small type of relay? > > I hope this question isn't too basic and any input > is appreciated. > > ===== ---------------------------- Michel Therrien CH601-HD http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby __________________________________ direct advertising on the Matronics Forums. ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 10:15:00 PM PST US From: "Ronald Cox" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 30 Msgs - 06/28/03 --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ronald Cox" Jim: My Glasair (IO-360 Lyc.) with B&C L-60 needs the Gates 7315 (available at reasonable price from B&C, by the way, they just need to know which of the two alternator drive pulleys your ring gear has). It's dimensions are 9.5/10mm x 815mm. If you have "the other one" (I forget which I have) there's another size available. Call B&C after measuring the diameter of the pulley, and they can fix you up either way. Ron Cox > Time: 06:11:25 PM PST US > From: Jim Bean > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Alternator Belt > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jim Bean > > Listers, > Does anybody know of a source for the right size alternator belt for a > Lycoming IO360. Hopefully automotive or industrial. I hate to have to > pay Lycoming's price. > Local car mechanic matched the cross section but that size is not made > in very many lenghts, just too long and too short. Cars don't use > individual belts anymore. > Thanks Jim Bean > RV-8 engine room ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 10:16:01 PM PST US From: "Ronald Cox" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Fw: AeroElectric-List Digest: 30 Msgs - 06/28/03 --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ronald Cox" Jim: My Glasair (IO-360 Lyc.) with B&C L-60 needs the Gates 7315 (available at reasonable price from B&C, by the way, they just need to know which of the two alternator drive pulleys your ring gear has). It's dimensions are 9.5/10mm x 815mm. If you have "the other one" (I forget which I have) there's another size available. Call B&C after measuring the diameter of the pulley, and they can fix you up either way. Ron Cox > > Time: 06:11:25 PM PST US > > From: Jim Bean > > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Alternator Belt > > > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jim Bean > > > > Listers, > > Does anybody know of a source for the right size alternator belt for a > > Lycoming IO360. Hopefully automotive or industrial. I hate to have to > > pay Lycoming's price. > > Local car mechanic matched the cross section but that size is not made > > in very many lenghts, just too long and too short. Cars don't use > > individual belts anymore. > > Thanks Jim Bean > > RV-8 engine room >