Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:46 AM - Fw: RV-List: Vans Amp Gauge (LarryRobertHelming)
2. 05:23 AM - Re: PIDG / Spade / Rachet Tool... (Neville Kilford)
3. 06:11 AM - Re: PIDG / Spade / Rachet Tool... (Don Honabach)
4. 06:37 AM - Re: PIDG / Spade / Rachet Tool... (Neville Kilford)
5. 06:55 AM - Re: Tach Auto Switch... (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 08:41 AM - Re: Crimper - Saga ... (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 10:17 AM - Re: A different way? (Phil Birkelbach)
8. 10:20 AM - Re: A different way? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 10:24 AM - Re: Fw: RV-List: Vans Amp Gauge (Neil Clayton)
10. 10:34 AM - Re: Fw: RV-List: Vans Amp Gauge (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 10:55 AM - Re: Tach Auto Switch... (Don Honabach)
12. 11:03 AM - Re: Crimper - Saga ... (Don Honabach)
13. 11:05 AM - Re: Fw: RV-List: Vans Amp Gauge (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
14. 11:08 AM - Re: A different way? (Don Honabach)
15. 11:10 AM - Re: Thanks, and Happy Trails.... (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
16. 11:53 AM - Re: D-Sub punches (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
17. 11:55 AM - Re: Tach Auto Switch... (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
18. 02:03 PM - Re: A different way? (Phil Birkelbach)
19. 02:25 PM - Re: Grouping wires for firewall penetration (Rick Fogerson)
20. 02:36 PM - Fw: Grouping wires for firewall penetration (Rick Fogerson)
21. 04:04 PM - Safe-Ty (RSwanson)
22. 08:39 PM - Re: Safe-Ty (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
23. 08:48 PM - Re: Grouping wires for firewall penetration (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
24. 09:14 PM - Re: Re: D-Sub punches (John Herminghaus)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Fw: RV-List: Vans Amp Gauge |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
I am forwarding Wheeler's problem to the Lectric List. I'd like to read the
answer to this one myself.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wheeler North" <wnorth@sdccd.cc.ca.us>
Subject: RV-List: Vans Amp Gauge
> --> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North <wnorth@sdccd.cc.ca.us>
>
> Guys,
>
> I'm getting a little fed up with Van's amp gauge, and in particular with
> their lack of response to the fact that it is a bad design.
>
> I haven't talked to them about it in a while, but I will share with you
the
> saga so far.
>
> 1. It has never read correctly in that when I turn things on it doesn't
seem
> to change much (when reading alternator load) unless its a major user like
a
> light going on.
>
> 2. It goes massively haywire when the either radio is in xmit, and I have
> met dozens of folks with this problem.
>
> 3. It is the only Amp gauge I have ever seen that needs a postive and
> negative source along with the shunt lines. Consequently when the master
is
> activated it then provides a path for current to bypass the instrument
> circuit breaker when wired as per Vans schematic. If the amp gauge power
> source is disconnected Item 2 stops happening to the other Vans gauges
which
> go wacky with xmit.
>
> 4. I was doing some work troubleshooting a serial data problem this week
so
> I had my Fluke 99 DSO out there and decided to get a hard measure of the
> alternator load with various devices turned on. It turns out that this amp
> gauge is misreading by 14 amps, ie it reads zero until there is 14 amps
> going through the shunt. (my charging system is set up so I can switch the
> gauge between reading battery charge, or alternator load)
>
> Now you might think "well you must have a bad gauge" Well, I have two of
> these brand new bad gauges, as well as two of the shunts, and no
combination
> of them makes this system read correctly. I even took them completely out
of
> the aircraft and hooked them up to my recently calibrated power supply and
> found that the shunt V drop was normal, but the gauge would not read until
> the current got fairly high (My little pwr supply does not put out 14
Amps).
>
> Now, how do I feel about this. Well, I attempted to solve this several
years
> ago with Vans and they were very resistant to the idea of there being a
> problem. If it were happening in certified aircraft they would have had an
> AD slapped upside their putzy gauge in seconds as this design is
potentially
> very dangerous.
>
> So those of you who are considering this line of gauges, be forewarned,
> there are still some bugs in this design, and I'm not the only one who has
> had these problems. I strongly recoommend if you are using this gauge, get
a
> valid means to assess actual current flow through the shunt. In this
> installation I could have a 13 amp discharge and the unit would say all is
> well.
>
> I guess I should try talking with Tom G about it again and see if they
would
> ever be willing to look into the problems this design is having.
>
> Any thoughts folks???
>
> I like the gauge face, maybe I can swap it into a real amp gauge and just
be
> done with it. ;{)
>
> W
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: PIDG / Spade / Rachet Tool... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Neville Kilford" <nkilford@etravel.org>
Don,
It sounds as though you have the information you need, but I've gone ahead
and put a couple of pictures on the web. Have a bins at
http://uk.photos.yahoo.com/nk1414 to see a picture of the tool and a
completed crimp. The pictures are lacking somewhat, but are okay. They're
on page 2 of the plane pictures.
Hope this helps.
Nev
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: PIDG / Spade / Rachet Tool...
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
>
> Nev,
>
> Thanks for your comments and help!
>
> Do you happen to have a picture of spade terminal or similar that has
> been crimped with the AMP Pro Crimper? Sometimes just seeing what the
> preferred tool is supposed to do would tell me if the one I have is
> essentially the same. I've searched the Internet and haven't been able
> to find one. I was especially surprised that I couldn't find a picture
> or tech document on Amp/Tyco's that would show a proper crimp using
> their tool.
>
> For what it's worth, I'd prefer to go the ratchet route. Just played
> around with the non-ratchet crimper and somehow ended up crimping so
> hard that I broke the wire inside (wire insulation was removed clean
> with no nicks and the wire wasn't moved much at all before testing on
> the fuse block). I'm sure I could get the hang of it, but I'd rather get
> known repeatability.
>
> Thanks!
> Don
>
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: | PIDG / Spade / Rachet Tool... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
Nev,
Thanks for the picture. I also noticed that you went with what looks
like the AMP ProCrimper II tool.
In my attempts to understand how to do a proper crimp and quite honestly
failing at it, I decided to go ahead and purchase the ProCrimper II from
AMP in a PIDG Kit that includes the PIDG die and a few PIDG terminals.
My hunch is that this probably wasn't necessary, but I still didn't feel
comfortable that the crimps I was doing were top notch. I've had a few
wires break in the Terminals even though the original wire strip was
clean. Have to assume I crimped too hard or the wire length/insulation
crimp was wrong. I knew from the academic level from BK's articles what
was necessary to do a good crimp, but with a manual crimper I just
wasn't sure I was in the proper range of crimp (not too tight, not too
loose). With the import ratchet crimper I have, I just wasn't sure it
was the right one for AMP PIDG connectors.
My hope was that someone would have had a picture of the front side and
back side of the terminal so I could so how the crimp itself looked and
it's exact location on the terminal. Unfortunately, I got quite a few
pictures, but none that I could directly compare and say - cool, I'm
doing the exact same thing.
Bottom line, I figured an AMP PIDG Connector and an AMP PIDG Crimper
will help my fears that the crimp isn't up to snuff. Also, if for some
reason the kit doesn't come with instructions I can also call AMP and
since I'm using their crimper and terminals I should be able to get some
help if still needed.
Thanks again!
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: Neville Kilford [mailto:nkilford@etravel.org]
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: PIDG / Spade / Rachet Tool...
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Neville Kilford"
--> <nkilford@etravel.org>
Don,
It sounds as though you have the information you need, but I've gone
ahead and put a couple of pictures on the web. Have a bins at
http://uk.photos.yahoo.com/nk1414 to see a picture of the tool and a
completed crimp. The pictures are lacking somewhat, but are okay.
They're on page 2 of the plane pictures.
Hope this helps.
Nev
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: PIDG / Spade / Rachet Tool...
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach"
> --> <don@pcperfect.com>
>
> Nev,
>
> Thanks for your comments and help!
>
> Do you happen to have a picture of spade terminal or similar that has
> been crimped with the AMP Pro Crimper? Sometimes just seeing what the
> preferred tool is supposed to do would tell me if the one I have is
> essentially the same. I've searched the Internet and haven't been able
> to find one. I was especially surprised that I couldn't find a picture
> or tech document on Amp/Tyco's that would show a proper crimp using
> their tool.
>
> For what it's worth, I'd prefer to go the ratchet route. Just played
> around with the non-ratchet crimper and somehow ended up crimping so
> hard that I broke the wire inside (wire insulation was removed clean
> with no nicks and the wire wasn't moved much at all before testing on
> the fuse block). I'm sure I could get the hang of it, but I'd rather
> get known repeatability.
>
> Thanks!
> Don
>
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
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: | Re: PIDG / Spade / Rachet Tool... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Neville Kilford" <nkilford@etravel.org>
My pleasure, and I entirely understand your sentiments. As Bob says, after a
while one would get to know the right degree of pressure, but I've only about
100 crimps to do in the whole plane, so, like you, I figured, what the hell?
If we're going to live up to the Aeroelectric mission, and produce better
electrics than a production plane, we need the right tools! In any case, 80
extra for a crimp tool is a drop in the ocean compared with the rest of
plane...
Cheers.
Nev
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: PIDG / Spade / Rachet Tool...
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
>
> Nev,
>
> Thanks for the picture. I also noticed that you went with what looks
> like the AMP ProCrimper II tool.
>
> In my attempts to understand how to do a proper crimp and quite honestly
> failing at it, I decided to go ahead and purchase the ProCrimper II from
> AMP in a PIDG Kit that includes the PIDG die and a few PIDG terminals.
>
> My hunch is that this probably wasn't necessary, but I still didn't feel
> comfortable that the crimps I was doing were top notch. I've had a few
> wires break in the Terminals even though the original wire strip was
> clean. Have to assume I crimped too hard or the wire length/insulation
> crimp was wrong. I knew from the academic level from BK's articles what
> was necessary to do a good crimp, but with a manual crimper I just
> wasn't sure I was in the proper range of crimp (not too tight, not too
> loose). With the import ratchet crimper I have, I just wasn't sure it
> was the right one for AMP PIDG connectors.
>
> My hope was that someone would have had a picture of the front side and
> back side of the terminal so I could so how the crimp itself looked and
> it's exact location on the terminal. Unfortunately, I got quite a few
> pictures, but none that I could directly compare and say - cool, I'm
> doing the exact same thing.
>
> Bottom line, I figured an AMP PIDG Connector and an AMP PIDG Crimper
> will help my fears that the crimp isn't up to snuff. Also, if for some
> reason the kit doesn't come with instructions I can also call AMP and
> since I'm using their crimper and terminals I should be able to get some
> help if still needed.
>
> Thanks again!
> Don
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Neville Kilford [mailto:nkilford@etravel.org]
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: PIDG / Spade / Rachet Tool...
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Neville Kilford"
> --> <nkilford@etravel.org>
>
> Don,
>
> It sounds as though you have the information you need, but I've gone
> ahead and put a couple of pictures on the web. Have a bins at
> http://uk.photos.yahoo.com/nk1414 to see a picture of the tool and a
> completed crimp. The pictures are lacking somewhat, but are okay.
> They're on page 2 of the plane pictures.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Nev
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: PIDG / Spade / Rachet Tool...
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach"
> > --> <don@pcperfect.com>
> >
> > Nev,
> >
> > Thanks for your comments and help!
> >
> > Do you happen to have a picture of spade terminal or similar that has
> > been crimped with the AMP Pro Crimper? Sometimes just seeing what the
> > preferred tool is supposed to do would tell me if the one I have is
> > essentially the same. I've searched the Internet and haven't been able
>
> > to find one. I was especially surprised that I couldn't find a picture
>
> > or tech document on Amp/Tyco's that would show a proper crimp using
> > their tool.
> >
> > For what it's worth, I'd prefer to go the ratchet route. Just played
> > around with the non-ratchet crimper and somehow ended up crimping so
> > hard that I broke the wire inside (wire insulation was removed clean
> > with no nicks and the wire wasn't moved much at all before testing on
> > the fuse block). I'm sure I could get the hang of it, but I'd rather
> > get known repeatability.
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Don
> >
>
>
> direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Tach Auto Switch... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:21 AM 6/28/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
>
>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.
Easy. Make one of your ignition switches a 2-pole, double throw
switch. Use one side of the switch to control one ignition system.
Use other side to control tach connection. When the ignition controlled
by this switch is ON, tach gets signal from this ignition. When ignition
controlled by this switch is OFF, tach signal wire is transferred to
the other ignition. If that system is ON, the tach works. If that system
is OFF too, then it doesn't matter that the TACH sees no signal.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
| Subject: | Crimper - Saga ... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:56 PM 6/29/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
>
>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?
Here 'tis . . .
http://216.55.140.222/articles/CrimpTools/crimptools.html
>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.
Please don't rub it in!!!!! I have this love-hate relationship
with d-subs. Once mounted, and if you choose to use the solid-metal
pins, I think they're the biggest value out there in connectors.
But that gawdawful hole you have to cut to mount them neatly is
a real bear . . .
I've lusted after a set of Greenlee d-sub punches for 30 years.
they used to sell for just over $200 . . . about $1000 for a complete
set. Just after I sold the parts business to B&C, I had a wad
of cash burning a hole in my pocket and I had this really great
idea . . . I was going to get a set of d-sub punches.
Dug out the catalogs and to my dismay, found that the price
has risen to nearly $500 each. No way was I going to spend
over $2300 for these punches. I've been talking to a local
tool and die shop about making my own. They think they
could do it for about $150 each. Unfortunately, that project
is WAYYYYYYY back on the burners . . .
I'm jealous . . .
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: A different way? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Phil Birkelbach" <phil@petrasoft.net>
>
> 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.
It is very difficult to find Category 3, 5 or 5e (this is what you are
calling 10BaseT cable) that is plenum grade and not solid wire. The
stranded type of Category 5 wire is used for making patch cables and since
patch cables seldom need to be run through the ceiling they don't usually
come in plenum grade. Solid wire is more prone to breakage. If it were me
(other arguments notwithstanding) I'd run a handfull of 24AWG Tefzel wire
through there.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Canopy
http://www.myrv7.com
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: | A different way? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:45 PM 6/29/2003 -0700, you wrote:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tom Schiff" <tomschiff@attbi.com>
-----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"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 01:06 AM 6/28/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tom Schiff"
<tomschiff@attbi.com>
>
>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.
EVERY switch in the airplane was bad? I applaud the idea
of total replacement of switches as a preventative maintenance
measure in OBAM aircraft 'cause it's usually easy and inexpensive.
Spam cans seldom enjoy this reliability enhancing measure because
of the inflated cost of replacement parts combined with
mandated hi-dollar mechanical help.
Since we're talking about OBAM aircraft, your demonstration
of added value task is to trade off the parts-count and expense
of swapping out $5 switches that are easily replaced
with a few minutes of personal attention.
>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 other 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.
Hmmmm . . . I don't have a basis upon which to agree with that.
Aside from allowing wiring to degrade with age to the point
where insulation begins to fail, wiring is just not very
high on the list of field service failures in airplanes
whether cabled or bundled.
>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.
Fine, but what does this have to do with "noise". If I add
a resistor in series with the ground wire of any product, what
principles of physics can we cite that suggest that the
system so modified becomes either an antagonist or victim
of noise?
>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.
???? . . . you can't prewire the wing-mounted equipment, run
wires to the wing root with sufficient excess coiled up
waiting to be run into the fuselage after last attach?
How would the proposed digitized-control/common-power distribution
system mitigate this situation? You still have n-number
of wires to get wing-stuff connected to fuselage-stuff irrespective
of how the wires function.
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------
( Knowing about a thing is different than )
( understanding it. One can know a lot )
( and still understand nothing. )
( C.F. Kettering )
--------------------------------------------
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: Fw: RV-List: Vans Amp Gauge |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Neil Clayton <harvey4@earthlink.net>
A buddy of mine is an RV builder (personally I do glass!). He says his
Van's amp gauge does the same thing.
He's sent to "complaint" on to Van's. I'll publish what they say about it,.
I care 'cos I just bought the same gauge for my "fast glass" and it's
sitting on my bench waiting for installation.
Neil
At 06:46 AM 6/30/03, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming"
><lhelming@sigecom.net>
>
>
>I am forwarding Wheeler's problem to the Lectric List. I'd like to read the
>answer to this one myself.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Wheeler North" <wnorth@sdccd.cc.ca.us>
>To: "''RV-List Digest Server ' '" <rv-list-digest@matronics.com>
>Subject: RV-List: Vans Amp Gauge
>
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North <wnorth@sdccd.cc.ca.us>
> >
> > Guys,
> >
> > I'm getting a little fed up with Van's amp gauge, and in particular with
> > their lack of response to the fact that it is a bad design.
> >
> > I haven't talked to them about it in a while, but I will share with you
>the
> > saga so far.
> >
> > 1. It has never read correctly in that when I turn things on it doesn't
>seem
> > to change much (when reading alternator load) unless its a major user like
>a
> > light going on.
> >
> > 2. It goes massively haywire when the either radio is in xmit, and I have
> > met dozens of folks with this problem.
> >
> > 3. It is the only Amp gauge I have ever seen that needs a postive and
> > negative source along with the shunt lines. Consequently when the master
>is
> > activated it then provides a path for current to bypass the instrument
> > circuit breaker when wired as per Vans schematic. If the amp gauge power
> > source is disconnected Item 2 stops happening to the other Vans gauges
>which
> > go wacky with xmit.
> >
> > 4. I was doing some work troubleshooting a serial data problem this week
>so
> > I had my Fluke 99 DSO out there and decided to get a hard measure of the
> > alternator load with various devices turned on. It turns out that this amp
> > gauge is misreading by 14 amps, ie it reads zero until there is 14 amps
> > going through the shunt. (my charging system is set up so I can switch the
> > gauge between reading battery charge, or alternator load)
> >
> > Now you might think "well you must have a bad gauge" Well, I have two of
> > these brand new bad gauges, as well as two of the shunts, and no
>combination
> > of them makes this system read correctly. I even took them completely out
>of
> > the aircraft and hooked them up to my recently calibrated power supply and
> > found that the shunt V drop was normal, but the gauge would not read until
> > the current got fairly high (My little pwr supply does not put out 14
>Amps).
> >
> > Now, how do I feel about this. Well, I attempted to solve this several
>years
> > ago with Vans and they were very resistant to the idea of there being a
> > problem. If it were happening in certified aircraft they would have had an
> > AD slapped upside their putzy gauge in seconds as this design is
>potentially
> > very dangerous.
> >
> > So those of you who are considering this line of gauges, be forewarned,
> > there are still some bugs in this design, and I'm not the only one who has
> > had these problems. I strongly recoommend if you are using this gauge, get
>a
> > valid means to assess actual current flow through the shunt. In this
> > installation I could have a 13 amp discharge and the unit would say all is
> > well.
> >
> > I guess I should try talking with Tom G about it again and see if they
>would
> > ever be willing to look into the problems this design is having.
> >
> > Any thoughts folks???
> >
> > I like the gauge face, maybe I can swap it into a real amp gauge and just
>be
> > done with it. ;{)
> >
> > W
>
>
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: Fw: RV-List: Vans Amp Gauge |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 06:46 AM 6/30/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming"
><lhelming@sigecom.net>
>
>
>I am forwarding Wheeler's problem to the Lectric List. I'd like to read the
>answer to this one myself.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Wheeler North" <wnorth@sdccd.cc.ca.us>
>To: "''RV-List Digest Server ' '" <rv-list-digest@matronics.com>
>Subject: RV-List: Vans Amp Gauge
<snip>
I've e-mailed Mr. North with some additional questions.
I'll post results of my findings after I've had a chance
to know more about the product and his difficulties with it.
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: | Tach Auto Switch... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
Bob,
>> Easy. Make one of your ignition switches a 2-pole, double throw
switch. Use one side of the switch to control one ignition system. Use
other side to control tach connection.
Thanks again :)
My hope was to use both poles of the switch so I could have 2 separate
power feeds/circuits for the ignitions in the hopes of making a more
robust setup.
So unless I want to go with a big bulky 3 pole switch, I'm stuck with
using some sort of auto-switch that is feed by the iginition power
feeds.
Thanks,
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:bob.nuckolls@cox.net]
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Tach Auto Switch...
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
--> <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:21 AM 6/28/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach"
>--> <don@pcperfect.com>
>
>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.
Easy. Make one of your ignition switches a 2-pole, double throw
switch. Use one side of the switch to control one ignition system.
Use other side to control tach connection. When the ignition
controlled
by this switch is ON, tach gets signal from this ignition. When
ignition
controlled by this switch is OFF, tach signal wire is transferred to
the other ignition. If that system is ON, the tach works. If that
system
is OFF too, then it doesn't matter that the TACH sees no signal.
Bob . . .
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
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: | Crimper - Saga ... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
Bob,
>> Dug out the catalogs and to my dismay, found that the price has risen
to nearly $500 each.
If you're still interested, Jensen Tools has some relatively low cost
ones availables (sub $200 for each size 9, 15, 25, and 37 pin)
Here's a link the list them:
http://www.jensentools.com/product/group.asp?parent_id=11760
If for some reason it doesn't come up, here are their part #s
190-286 - 9 pin
125-156 - 15 pin
125-158 - 25 pin
190-284 - 37 pin
Regards,
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"
--> <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:56 PM 6/29/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach"
>--> <don@pcperfect.com>
>
>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?
Here 'tis . . .
http://216.55.140.222/articles/CrimpTools/crimptools.html
>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.
Please don't rub it in!!!!! I have this love-hate relationship
with d-subs. Once mounted, and if you choose to use the solid-metal
pins, I think they're the biggest value out there in connectors.
But that gawdawful hole you have to cut to mount them neatly is
a real bear . . .
I've lusted after a set of Greenlee d-sub punches for 30 years.
they used to sell for just over $200 . . . about $1000 for a complete
set. Just after I sold the parts business to B&C, I had a wad
of cash burning a hole in my pocket and I had this really great
idea . . . I was going to get a set of d-sub punches.
Dug out the catalogs and to my dismay, found that the price
has risen to nearly $500 each. No way was I going to spend
over $2300 for these punches. I've been talking to a local
tool and die shop about making my own. They think they
could do it for about $150 each. Unfortunately, that project
is WAYYYYYYY back on the burners . . .
I'm jealous . . .
Bob . . .
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
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: Fw: RV-List: Vans Amp Gauge |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 01:24 PM 6/30/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Neil Clayton <harvey4@earthlink.net>
>
>A buddy of mine is an RV builder (personally I do glass!). He says his
>Van's amp gauge does the same thing.
>He's sent to "complaint" on to Van's. I'll publish what they say about it,.
>
>I care 'cos I just bought the same gauge for my "fast glass" and it's
>sitting on my bench waiting for installation.
>
>Neil
Neil, can you scan and e-mail me the installation instructions
for the instrument?
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: | A different way? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
>> It is very difficult to find Category 3, 5 or 5e (this is what you
are calling 10BaseT cable) that is plenum grade and not solid wire.
I haven't been following this thread very closely so if I'm off-base -
sorry.
I run Plenum CAT 5/5e cable a lot for my business and it's obvious that
the Tefzel(sp?) coated wiring is much tougher and would seem to me a
better choice. While not an expert, it was explained to me that the
plenum covering is a fire issue and does not provide extra protection
over the less expensive PVC coatings.
Regards,
Don Honabach
-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Birkelbach [mailto:phil@petrasoft.net]
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: A different way?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Phil Birkelbach"
--> <phil@petrasoft.net>
>
> 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.
It is very difficult to find Category 3, 5 or 5e (this is what you are
calling 10BaseT cable) that is plenum grade and not solid wire. The
stranded type of Category 5 wire is used for making patch cables and
since patch cables seldom need to be run through the ceiling they don't
usually come in plenum grade. Solid wire is more prone to breakage. If
it were me (other arguments notwithstanding) I'd run a handfull of 24AWG
Tefzel wire through there.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Canopy
http://www.myrv7.com
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Thanks, and Happy Trails.... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 01:16 PM 6/27/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Sam Hoskins"
><shoskins@globaleyes.net>
>
>Bob Nuckolls,
>
>My Quickie Q-200 is re-wired and back in the air! I'm getting ready to
>un-subscribe, but before I do I just wanted to thank you for the great
>service you provide here.
>
<snip>
>I no longer need the 15 or so daily e-mails so I will unsubscribe soon, but
>I wanted to let you know how much I appreciate your service.
>
>I hope to run into you again sometime and show you my plane.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Sam Hoskins
>Quickie Q-200 ~1,275 hrs
>http://home.globaleyes.net/shoskins/page1.htm
Sam,
Your kind words are encouraging and gratifying. I'm very pleased that
your experience here on the list has been so useful. I'd really
appreciate it if you could stay here with us on the list . . . you've
provided good input on numerous occasions and it never hurts to have
more than one folk considering answers and options.
In any case, I'll be at the tandem wing fly-in again this year.
It's one of my favorites and only a couple hours drive from
Wichita. Hope to see you there.
Bob . . .
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: D-Sub punches |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 11:03 AM 6/30/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
>
>Bob,
>
> >> Dug out the catalogs and to my dismay, found that the price has risen
>to nearly $500 each.
>
>If you're still interested, Jensen Tools has some relatively low cost
>ones availables (sub $200 for each size 9, 15, 25, and 37 pin)
>
>Here's a link the list them:
>
>http://www.jensentools.com/product/group.asp?parent_id=11760
>
>If for some reason it doesn't come up, here are their part #s
>190-286 - 9 pin
>125-156 - 15 pin
>125-158 - 25 pin
>190-284 - 37 pin
>
>Regards,
>Don Honabach
Interesting! I looked around the 'net for alternatives
after the Greenlee experience but I missed these guys.
I've bookmarked the link and plan ot order a set in the
not too distant future. Thanks for the heads-up!
Bob . . .
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: | Tach Auto Switch... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 10:54 AM 6/30/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
>
>Bob,
>
> >> Easy. Make one of your ignition switches a 2-pole, double throw
>switch. Use one side of the switch to control one ignition system. Use
>other side to control tach connection.
>
>Thanks again :)
>
>My hope was to use both poles of the switch so I could have 2 separate
>power feeds/circuits for the ignitions in the hopes of making a more
>robust setup.
If you have two batteries and two ignitions, what's
lacking in robustness if one ign runs from one battery
and the second ign runs from the other?
Bob . . .
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: A different way? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Phil Birkelbach" <phil@petrasoft.net>
I'm sorry I wasn't very clear. The Plenum grade Category 5 cable is in fact
easy to find, it is not easy to find in the stranded wire variety. Most
Plenum grade Category 5 is solid wire which is more prone to breakage. If
you can find some stranded plenum grade Cat. 5 then by all means use it.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Canopy
http://www.myrv7.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: A different way?
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach"
<don@pcperfect.com>
>
> >> It is very difficult to find Category 3, 5 or 5e (this is what you
> are calling 10BaseT cable) that is plenum grade and not solid wire.
>
> I haven't been following this thread very closely so if I'm off-base -
> sorry.
>
> I run Plenum CAT 5/5e cable a lot for my business and it's obvious that
> the Tefzel(sp?) coated wiring is much tougher and would seem to me a
> better choice. While not an expert, it was explained to me that the
> plenum covering is a fire issue and does not provide extra protection
> over the less expensive PVC coatings.
>
> Regards,
> Don Honabach
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Birkelbach [mailto:phil@petrasoft.net]
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: A different way?
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Phil Birkelbach"
> --> <phil@petrasoft.net>
>
> >
> > 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.
>
> It is very difficult to find Category 3, 5 or 5e (this is what you are
> calling 10BaseT cable) that is plenum grade and not solid wire. The
> stranded type of Category 5 wire is used for making patch cables and
> since patch cables seldom need to be run through the ceiling they don't
> usually come in plenum grade. Solid wire is more prone to breakage. If
> it were me (other arguments notwithstanding) I'd run a handfull of 24AWG
> Tefzel wire through there.
>
> Godspeed,
>
> Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
> RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Canopy
> http://www.myrv7.com
>
>
> direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
>
>
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: | Re: Grouping wires for firewall penetration |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf@cableone.net>
Do not archive
Hi Bob,
I was thinking the starter contactor normally went on the cockpit side of
the firewall. I'm getting the idea that maybe it should go on the engine
side. If this is correct or does it matter?
Thanks, Rick Fogerson
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Grouping wires for firewall penetration
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> At 09:45 PM 6/26/2003 -0600, you wrote:
> >--> 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?
>
> Don't see any potential for "gotchas" here . . . but why is
> your b-lead coming through the firewall?
>
> 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 |
|
| Subject: | Grouping wires for firewall penetration |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf@cableone.net>
Maybe more explanation is necessary. Z11 has the b lead connected to the
starter pole that connects to the rest of the system via the 2AWG from the
battery contactor.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf@cableone.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Grouping wires for firewall penetration
> Do not archive
> Hi Bob,
> I was thinking the starter contactor normally went on the cockpit side of
> the firewall. I'm getting the idea that maybe it should go on the engine
> side. If this is correct or does it matter?
>
> Thanks, Rick Fogerson
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 7:54 AM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Grouping wires for firewall penetration
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
> >
> > At 09:45 PM 6/26/2003 -0600, you wrote:
> > >--> 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?
> >
> > Don't see any potential for "gotchas" here . . . but why is
> > your b-lead coming through the firewall?
> >
> > 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: "RSwanson" <rswan19@comcast.net>
For those who are in a place to start using wire ties, I found a new tie
that is really much better than regular ties. I had seen them in a
magazine by another name but the email I sent to the website was never
answered. I happened on these at Home Depot today. Give them a look at:
http://www.tnb-canada.com/catalogues/pdf/en/ty_rap/1tyrap_ENG_1d.pdf
Sorry for the pdf, but that's the only picture I could find. Hope some of
you like them as well as I did.
R
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 07:03 PM 6/30/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "RSwanson" <rswan19@comcast.net>
>
>For those who are in a place to start using wire ties, I found a new tie
>that is really much better than regular ties. I had seen them in a
>magazine by another name but the email I sent to the website was never
>answered. I happened on these at Home Depot today. Give them a look at:
>http://www.tnb-canada.com/catalogues/pdf/en/ty_rap/1tyrap_ENG_1d.pdf
>Sorry for the pdf, but that's the only picture I could find. Hope some of
>you like them as well as I did . . .
Here's the full line catalog on Thomas and Betts nylon
cable ties. Notice that the Tyrap name covers a wide
range of products. The product you're looking for is
the Ty-Fast low profile version on page J46
http://tnbelectricalworld.tnb.com/contractor/docs/tyrap.pdf
Bob . . .
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: Grouping wires for firewall penetration |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 03:27 PM 6/30/2003 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf@cableone.net>
>
>Do not archive
>Hi Bob,
>I was thinking the starter contactor normally went on the cockpit side of
>the firewall. I'm getting the idea that maybe it should go on the engine
>side. If this is correct or does it matter?
People have stuck them everywhere. I prefer to use the starter
contactor as a junction point for attaching the alternator b-lead
to the system via ANL current limiter setting right next to the
starter contactor on the engine side of the firewall. Where
is your battery mounted?
Bob . . .
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: D-Sub punches |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: John Herminghaus <catignano@everyday.com>
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
>At 11:03 AM 6/30/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Don Honabach" <don@pcperfect.com>
>>
>>Bob,
>>
>>
>>
>>>>Dug out the catalogs and to my dismay, found that the price has risen
>>>>
>>>>
>>to nearly $500 each.
>>
>>If you're still interested, Jensen Tools has some relatively low cost
>>ones availables (sub $200 for each size 9, 15, 25, and 37 pin)
>>
>>Here's a link the list them:
>>
>>http://www.jensentools.com/product/group.asp?parent_id=11760
>>
>>If for some reason it doesn't come up, here are their part #s
>>190-286 - 9 pin
>>125-156 - 15 pin
>>125-158 - 25 pin
>>190-284 - 37 pin
>>
>>Regards,
>>Don Honabach
>>
>>
>Bob,
>
Take a look at www.buerklin.com. Search for part number 06 L 1380, and
you will get a list of all their punches. It is a german company, but
they have a sales office in Aspen.
They also have dedicated wire strippers at around $8 for wire sizes
awg20 and awg22 which I have and which work very well.
John Herminghaus
06 L 1380 <http://www.buerklin.com/main_sammel.asp?BestNr=06%20L%201380>
1380 <http://www.buerklin.com/main_sammel.asp?BestNr=06%20L%201380>
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! --
|