Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:08 AM - Re: battery / alternator switch (Dale Martin)
2. 04:26 AM - For Bob, Comment? (Dan Branstrom)
3. 04:36 AM - For Bob: Comment? (Dan Branstrom)
4. 06:19 AM - Wing wiring (BAKEROCB@aol.com)
5. 07:43 AM - Re: For Bob, Comment? (ivorphillips)
6. 08:38 AM - Load dump issues (Paul Messinger)
7. 09:12 AM - Re: Kapton insulated wire . . . NOT a OBAM aircraft issue (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 09:22 AM - Re: battery / alternator switch (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 09:28 AM - Battery Charger (Ned Thomas)
10. 10:46 AM - Z12 e-bus questions (f1rocket@telus.net)
11. 10:58 AM - Re: battery / alternator switch (Dale Martin)
12. 11:21 AM - Re: Battery Bus Power Cut Relay - good idea? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
13. 11:24 AM - Re: Wing wiring (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
14. 11:37 AM - Capacitive Fuel Gauges (Mark Steitle)
15. 11:52 AM - Re: battery / alternator switch (Alex Peterson)
16. 11:55 AM - Re: battery / alternator switch (Dale Martin)
17. 11:57 AM - Re: battery / alternator switch (Dale Martin)
18. 12:28 PM - Re: battery / alternator switch (Dale Martin)
19. 01:05 PM - Re: Wing wiring (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
20. 02:13 PM - Re: battery / alternator switch (Matt Prather)
21. 03:02 PM - Re:Re: For Bob, Comment? (buck)
22. 03:23 PM - Re: Accuator switch (TSaccio@aol.com)
23. 04:04 PM - Re: Accuator switch (Dale Martin)
24. 06:31 PM - Re: battery / alternator switch (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
25. 06:32 PM - Re: battery / alternator switch (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
26. 07:28 PM - Re: battery / alternator switch (Dale Martin)
27. 07:43 PM - Re: Capacitive Fuel Gauges (Jerzy Krasinski)
28. 10:24 PM - Hidden antenna (f1rocket@telus.net)
29. 10:26 PM - Compass shielding (hollandm)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: battery / alternator switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
In the schematic's for the all electric airplane (Z-13) and the Generic
Light Aircraft Electrical System (Z-11) both depicts a Battery / Alt switch
# 2-10 - (2 dash 10). However, in the switches, relays and contactors pages
it says switch 2 dash 3 is recommend for the combination Battery
Master/alternator-field switching.
Which one is correct?
BTW, I have just successfully removed all wires from my 28volt IFR LEZ (with
exception of the strobe and nav light wires in the wings) after 18 years and
1,100 + hours of flying. Talk about scary.... This is for a much simplier
electrical system and full panel upgrade. No more vacuum system for me and
no more 28 to 14 inverter. Everything is 28 volt.
One thing I found amazing is how many different places I had ground wires
terminating. I built my own ground bus only because the ones from B&C do
not appear to be mechanically attached to the brass and my two boys needed
some practice using the drill press using brass. The total price was less
then twenty bucks with free labor.
Also this system will only be using one alternator. Using one mag and one
E.I is enough engine redundancy with the lone battery for essential bus. I
believe in the good battery theory and checking it twice per year for acid
specific gravity and over all battery condition and replacing it as needed.
Thanks for your help and comments in advance,
Dale Martin
Lewiston, ID
LEZ-235
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: | For Bob, Comment? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan Branstrom" <danbranstrom@verizon.net>
There is an upcoming program on Public Broadcasting: NOVA: The Deadly Legacy Of
Swiss Air 111 that will be airing on February 17th at 8:00 EST. It deals with
an inflight fire caused by electrical arcing.
Because the article is too long to send out, I'm referring you to the press release that can be seen on the Mon, 09 Feb '04 online edition of Aero News Network http://aero-news.net/index.cfm
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: | For Bob: Comment? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan Branstrom" <danbranstrom@verizon.net>
Here is a more precise address for the article. References to the ANN website
will get different stories every day.
http://aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockIDca2fd051-b7b7-4fe2-94dc-def5c536d3d5&
There is an upcoming program on Public Broadcasting: NOVA: The Deadly Legacy Of
Swiss Air 111 that will be airing on February 17th at 8:00 EST. It deals with
an inflight fire caused by electrical arcing.
(The web address that follows is the general one for ANN. To see the article,
you would have to refer to the date.
Because the article is too long to send out, I'm referring you to the press release that can be seen on the Mon, 09 Feb '04 online edition of Aero News Network http://aero-news.net/index.cfm
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BAKEROCB@aol.com
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Terry Teer"
<threet@telepak.com>
<<Just about completed wings on a RV-7 and need some help. Installing
landing light, position light, strobes (in fiberglass tips), nav/com antenna wiring
(RG-400),
also a roll servo for the a/p. Should I run all the wires through the 3/4
conduit or should some of them be separated from the rest? Also on the
strobe
heads...the whelen strobes say to ground the shielding to the power supply
but in Bob's manual it says to ground the shielding wire to the strobe heads
if mounting in plastic tips. What about it list? This is my second OBAM and
the first to have more advanced equipment and need some advice. Regards,
Terry Ackerman, MS >>
2/8/2004
Hello Terry, The cable from Whelen has foil shielding and a drain wire in
addition to the other wires. Just connect the drain wire to the base of the
(central?) power supply like Whelen says. See previous post below. There are
follow up postings that hash this out some more that you can read using the search
capability if you desire.
'OC'
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?
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: For Bob, Comment? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "ivorphillips" <ivor@ivorphillips.flyer.co.uk>
> There is an upcoming program on Public Broadcasting: NOVA: The Deadly
Legacy Of Swiss Air 111 that will be airing on February 17th at 8:00 EST.
It deals with an inflight fire caused by electrical arcing.
>
Have seen this program a couple of weeks ago, It make you wonder how a
commercial aircraft can have its wiring set up in such away that the pilots
were unable to isolate the entertainment system from the main cockpit Bus!
No breakers tripped to alleviate the problem, just smoke from behind
panelling,
I find it hard to believe that circuits are shared without proper regards
too overload wire protection, Its criminal that so many folk lost their
lives due to a preventable wiring short circuit.
Ivor Phillips
Europa xs
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: | Load dump issues |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
I have watched this discussion and am concerned that the
issue/facts/solution is going off track a little.
Load dump is NOT unique to internally regulated alternators. ANY alternator
can and will exhibit load dump when wired such that the load can be removed
from the "B" lead when the alternator is generating power. IE
internal/external/new/old/rebuilt are all the SAME with regard to Load Dump
concerns.
All alternators, regardless of design, need protection or they can dump
damaging loads either back to the alternator or to the expensive avionics
depending on what opened and where.
Designs that disconnect the "B" lead when OVP is detected are great as long
as there are Zero false trips. Bob has said many times that his OVP can and
does (while very rare) false trip. This can result in alternator damage due
to a false trip and not acceptable to me.
Alternator damage with a real OVP trip is not an issue as the alternator has
already failed.
There are more modern OVP I/C's that have provision for not false tripping
on narrow spikes as they have adjustable delay to trip times. I suggest that
this design approach be used to prevent a OVP protection device from
causing damage from a not quite perfect design.
The Linear LTC1696 is inexpensive and is designed to provide reliable OVP
with minimal additional parts.
Eric Jones has such a OVP design and I highly recommend it IF you are
concerned about False trips. It's already designed and available to us.
http://www.periheliondesign.com/
If the alternator is generating say 50 amps and 40 amps are going to the
battery and 10 amps to the rest of the system and the battery is
disconnected the alternator output voltage (and the acft system bus) will
rise until the 40 amp excess is loaded. This can result in a high voltage
spike that is not stopped with OVP devices that shut off the regulator (too
late action). Thus potential damage to avionics etc is likely if there is a
large enough load dump. The damaging current is already there and thus its
too late for a working regulator with or without OVP design to stop the
energy pulse.
On the other hand if the battery is fully charged there will be near zero
current that is unloaded and no load dump to worry about if the battery is
suddenly off line. Also most alternator regulators will work properly with
out the battery if there is enough load on the system. Some may require a
large cap say 25,000 MFD to stabilize the regulator without the battery
present.
Load dump is not new; some 20+ years ago I/C mfgrs tried to convince auto
makers to incorporate Load dump protection in their alternators. This effort
was unsuccessful (at the time) as this is not an issue with autos, as in
autos the "B" lead is always directly wired to the battery. Thus there is no
"switch" to be accidentally opened to cause load dump action. Also there is
no OVP included as its rare and not a concern in the auto mfgrs mind. At
least a couple of years ago I was unable to find ANY auto mfgr alternator
that protected against load dump.
ANY design that uses an alternator and has a requirement to be disconnected
from the battery (as in acft) needs to be fool proof. Ideally there should
be no way to do it with the accidental throw of a switch as the current Z-xx
diagrams seem allow. At least without considering the potential of damaging
load dump. Again this info (load dump) and design need is decades old and I
wonder why its just becoming an issue on this list.
What we have is the USE of an auto alternator that was designed to be always
directly connected to the battery. In a different application with
additional design requirements to consider those new requirements have not
peen fully considered. Perhaps this is a continuation of what Spam can
mfgrs did when the generator was replaced with an alternator and the
replacement was not totally though out. Also at the time regulators were
mechanical and avionics had vacuum tubes and both are much more immune to
transients that today's solid state devices.
Bob has suggested that NEW alternators have such protection and so Bob
please let us know specifically which NEW alternators have such protection
built in so we can consider them for our use.
Then there are comments about rebuilt alternators being inferior. Perhaps
some are but then many are just as good as the original NEW alternator in
all respects.
As for testing and evaluation of TVS devices for load dump protection and
getting your stamp of approval why do it??
There are such devices available that are designed, tested and industry
approved for this specific application and rated for the largest alternator
likely to be found on any acft. The ST LDP24A is one and rated for 500amp.
I do not understand the need for additional testing in this case. The
Boaters have long since solved the problem and so why are we still
investigating it??
With all due respect my comments are intended to be helpful.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: alternator switch
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> At 10:03 AM 2/7/2004 -0500, you wrote:
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: klehman@albedo.net
> >
> >I still have trouble with the need for absolute alternator control or a
> >need for an alternator switch.
>
> How so? If you hardwire the alternator to the airplane
> and it does go into an ov condition, how would you
> expect to manage the results that follow?
>
> > I am referring to an internal vr
> >alternator. If ov protection trips then I don't want to reset it in
> >flight unless I suspect a nuisance trip. However nuisance ov tripping is
> >unacceptable so I would want to correct that or remove the ov
> >protection.
>
> Nuisance tripping of the crowbar ov module is rare but it
> HAS happened and at higher rates than real ov tripping.
> I'd have no problem with resetting an ov trip one time . . .
> and then watching to see if any second trip is associated with
> some action. (We could do it on Bonanzas by turning landing
> and taxi lights on at the same time - I unaware of any dominant
> nuisance trip modes since we modified the system to accommodate
> eccentricities of the Bonanza'a super bouncy switches).
>
> >If diodes short then the ANL is going to blow before I can
> >manually turn off the alternator. If I think that I might have time and
> >opportunity to turn it off before an impending crash then I'm pretty
> >sure that I'll already have the engine shutoff and I don't expect my
> >psru equipped engine to windmill so the alternator will already be dead.
>
> I'm confused . . . why should your engine die just 'cause the
> alternator misbehaves?
>
> Diodes shorting are also very rare, even more rare than real
> ov trips.
>
> >At this point I'm leaning toward a manual battery switch that is not on
> >the panel so it can't be accidently turned off and no alternator switch.
> >I'm still thinking about it but such an architecture would also allow me
> >to run the electrically dependant engine loads through the manual batt
> >switch. But heh I'm still listening ;) ...
>
> First, keep in mind that the "OV TRIP PROBLEM" seems to be shaping
> up as a condition limited to rebuilt internally regulated alternators
> with possible after-market regulators having poor design. I fully
> expect the "fix" to be simple and probably inexpensive enough for
> it to be included in the Figure Z-24 design for inclusion on ALL
> internally regulated alternators irrespective of pedigree. If this
> turns out to be true, then all of this discussion is making a mountain
> out of a mole hill.
>
>
> >Another option that I'd like is for a reasonable cost replacement for
> >the heavy (weight and current) contactor that seems to be required to
> >add ov protection to my 40 amp alternator. With high current silicon
> >these days, I'd almost think that there would be a way of directly
> >crowbar shorting/blowing the B lead ANL.
>
>
> I've looked at direct crowbar of the alternator b-lead. You
> DON'T want to do this with an ANL . . . we'd probably recommend
> a relatively robust but MUCH faster JJS/JJN series fuse at 100A
> or so. This still has pitfalls. Recall that a crowbar ov module
> faulted downstream of a 5A breaker gets us trip responses in
> the tens of milliseconds with a 300A fault. If we expected
> similar speeds from a direct crowbar of the b-lead, we're going
> to looking a fault currents on the order of 1000A or more.
>
> The BATTERY is an integral component of the crowbar ov trip system.
> We want it do deliver fault currents high enough to get a speedy
> trip while minimizing disruption of power to the rest of the
> airplane. Trip currents necessary to open the b-lead fuse are
> substantially higher than those required to open a 5A control
> breaker.
>
> > Hmmm now that I think about it
> >there might even be some 100+ amp scr's in my junk box... I think they
> >came from an AC/DC welder. Fortunately a lighter S704-1 relay seems to
> >be acceptable for my 20 amp second alternator.
>
> I'm not saying what you're suggesting can't work but
> there's more to it than deciding to "crowbar that fuse
> instead of this breaker" . . . I've already looked at
> some of the issues and there are aspects of b-lead
> crowbar that push our design in the wrong direction.
>
> The goal is to shut the alternator down with minimum
> stress on all parts involved including battery and other
> devices soon to be dependent on the battery for power.
> In fact, Z-24 would work very nicely with a 2A control
> breaker. THAT's indeed a move in the right direction.
>
> Yes, the contactor adds some weight . . but keep in
> mind that the weight penalty of the disconnect contactor
> (12 oz) is less than the variability of popular alternators
> being considered as alternatives to the MUCH heavier
> alternators in certified aircraft. If you did the mod
> to run an external regulator, you add 7-10 ounces for
> the regulator. So, after saving 3-6 pounds by choosing
> not to use contemporary certified alternators,
> then the delta weight between externally regulated
> and internally regulated alternator installations is
> on the order of 2 to 5 ounces.
>
> 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: Kapton insulated wire . . . NOT a OBAM aircraft |
issue
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 04:28 AM 2/9/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan Branstrom"
><danbranstrom@verizon.net>
>
>There is an upcoming program on Public Broadcasting: NOVA: The Deadly
>Legacy Of Swiss Air 111 that will be airing on February 17th at 8:00
>EST. It deals with an inflight fire caused by electrical arcing.
>
>Because the article is too long to send out, I'm referring you to the
>press release that can be seen on the Mon, 09 Feb '04 online edition of
>Aero News Network http://aero-news.net/index.cfm
Thanks for the heads up. I'll try to catch the program. I looked
over the linked article. It's writing typical of "journalists" who
don't know enough about the art and science of the topic to
write intelligently and accurately about it. It will be interesting
see how Nova presents it.
There was a lot of worry wash thrown about with paragraphs like this:
"NOVA reports the electrical arc, generating up to 12,000 degrees (F),
ignited the supposedly fireproof mylar insulation surrounding the interior
of the aircraft. The program quotes experts who say, in aircraft where
there's as much as 150 miles of wire on board, there can be up to 1500
cracks in wiring insulation. Couple that with the type of condensation
typical in the upper compartments of an aircraft in flight and NOVA's
experts suggest the possibility for a disastrous in-flight fire event are
extraordinary."
The discussion then shifts back to failures of policy and procedures
systems to deal with materials used in insulation and other
parts with emphasis on proposals to improve ability to detect and
suppress fires.
I didn't pick up on a single statement dealing with
why an airplane with 150 miles of wire should be reasonably
expected to have 1500 cracks . . . gee, the B-52's I worked
on in 1961 had 500 miles of wire . . . Hmmmm . . . should
we have told crews that their airplane had a good chance
of having 5,000 cracks in the wiring?
The 12,000 degrees (F of course . . . that's only 8,300
degrees C but not nearly as impressive a number) statement
is suspect and not particularly relevant without explaining
what the total energy budget is and how that bundle of energy
gets from the arc to surrounding materials.
Every time you open the pitot heater switch on your airplane,
an arc of very high temperature is generated . . . but with total
energy measured in millijoules and totally contained between
two rather cool contacts. A complete non-issue when
the complete picture is examined . . . but I could write
a paragraph describing the event that would have many
builders swearing never to install a pitot heater on
their airplane.
The article didn't mention Kapton insulation on wires
. . . which I've heard was involved in this accident.
See:
http://www.flight592.com/Flight592Discussion-Current/_disc5/00000158.htm
http://www.iasa.com.au/folders/Safety_Issues/Aircraft_Wire/CBCTranscript.html
Here's a piece the takes a better than average whack at the science:
http://www.eng.buffalo.edu/Courses/ce435/2001ZGu/Kapton_Wires/KaptonWiresReport.htm
I was warned about Kapton in 1985 when we were selecting
wire for the GP-180 at Lear and frustrated with the State
Department's prohibition against exporting 22759 wire
in a product. We certainly didn't want to limit the sales
of our airplanes to US customers. I was told back then
that the Navy was having to wrap wires at the hinges of
folding-wing carrier based aircraft with Scotch 33 tape
to replace Kapton that flaked off in the salt-air environment.
I doubt the B-52 had a few dozens of cracks in wiring much less
5,000. Airplanes wired with Tefzel have to rank among the
very best we know how to do for ease of installation,
reasonable cost, and well demonstrated service life.
The Swiss Air 111 accident will make good worry-fodder
for Nova and others for years to come but I'll be completely
amazed if anyone finally burrows down to the real root cause
and makes it public. It's more useful to bash the
policy and procedures guys for what they're NOT doing
to make us "safer" than to exposed the original designers
and installers of a marginally suitable product and make them
gut those airplanes and rewire them.
Characteristics of the mylar insulation and duct
caps don't worry me nearly so much as the kind of insulation
used on the wires.
Bob . . .
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: battery / alternator switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 12:04 AM 2/9/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
>
>In the schematic's for the all electric airplane (Z-13) and the Generic
>Light Aircraft Electrical System (Z-11) both depicts a Battery / Alt switch
># 2-10 - (2 dash 10). However, in the switches, relays and contactors pages
>it says switch 2 dash 3 is recommend for the combination Battery
>Master/alternator-field switching.
>
>Which one is correct?
Either one works. A 2-3 combined with a PULLABLE field supply breaker
in the crowbar ov protection circuit gives the same functionality as
a 2-10.
It's no big deal to have the alternator ON during cranking . . . so,
a 2-3 works.
-EITHER- the mid-position on a 2-10 switch -OR- pulling the field
circuit breaker allows battery only ops for ground maintenance or turning
off a mis-behaving alternator in flight. It's not a matter of CORRECTNESS
but a matter of PREFERENCE.
>BTW, I have just successfully removed all wires from my 28volt IFR LEZ (with
>exception of the strobe and nav light wires in the wings) after 18 years and
>1,100 + hours of flying. Talk about scary.... This is for a much simplier
>electrical system and full panel upgrade. No more vacuum system for me and
>no more 28 to 14 inverter. Everything is 28 volt.
Are you going to 14v or staying 28v?
>One thing I found amazing is how many different places I had ground wires
>terminating. I built my own ground bus only because the ones from B&C do
>not appear to be mechanically attached to the brass . . .
How so?
>and my two boys needed
>some practice using the drill press using brass. The total price was less
>then twenty bucks with free labor.
Also this system will only be using one alternator. Using one mag and one
>E.I is enough engine redundancy with the lone battery for essential bus. I
>believe in the good battery theory and checking it twice per year for acid
>specific gravity and over all battery condition and replacing it as needed.
Do you have a vacuum pump pad with nothing mounted on it?
For $300 and 4 pounds you can have a SECOND engine driven
power source.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ned Thomas" <315@cox.net>
I am looking at buying a float charger for my 24volt spam can. This spam can
has an always hot battery bus with the the ships clock on it. I was
concerned about the following marketing statement as to whether it might
harm the clock. Anyone care to comment?
Thanks,
Ned
"High-frequency pulse breaks down sulphated crystals that prevent batteries
from holding a full charge."
for more:
http://www.batterymart.com/battery.mv?p=VDC-24021
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: | Z12 e-bus questions |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: f1rocket@telus.net
Hi all (Bob),
I'm planning on using a Z-12 type system on my Rocket. One battery, two
alternators.
I notice the e-bus alternate feed is through a 7 A (fuse?) via a 16 AWG wire.
Two questions: For peace of mind would a breaker be the best way to go here?
I'm thinking that I can easily overload the 7 amps just with the e-bus as
described in Z-11. The plane will be outfitted for night flying, and needs a
fuel booster pump. So if I end up with more than 7 A (which either I will
have, or be very close to) when I loose the main power (assuming two dead
alternators), and throw the switch, at least I can get smart, shed load and
reset the breaker. For the most part though, I plan on using fuses, because I
too have never reset a breaker were there wasn't a problem that resetting the
breaker actually helped, and I plan on having each circuit with it's own fuse.
Second question: Why only 7 amp protection device off the batter bus? The
wire should be able to handle 12 amps? So why not use the protection device to
protect the wire, since each of the devices coming off the e-bus will be
protected on it's own?
Thanks in advance, and also for all the past advice.
Jeff
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: battery / alternator switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
Bob says,
> Do you have a vacuum pump pad with nothing mounted on it?
> For $300 and 4 pounds you can have a SECOND engine driven
> power source.
>
> Bob . . .
I think you mean a Third source. (Battery =1, Alt =2, Second Alt = 3)
I like the fact that I get 4 horsepower back at cruise RPM that the Vacuum
pump stole.
> Are you going to 14v or staying 28v?
I will keep 28 v due to the wire size I use are smaller and paid for! And
have a second full size Alternator on the shelf.
But to your credit I did consider it but..... then would have to change the
starter, Alt, Nav-Com 1, landing light, strobe power unit and all the bulbs
not to mention the LR3. Your talking over $2000 bucks and accepting peanuts
for some of the equipment I have now.
BTW, I have always started the engine with the Alt off.
One thing I think is an error IMHO is not using separate Ignition Switches
either Guarded or Locking toggle switch for magneto's and especially the
older LSE electronic ignitions. When the LSE E.I. are turned on they fire
all the plugs at once - Yikes ! May not be a good idea to do this at any
RPM. If you were to bump on off in-flight and turn it back on... and it
fired say 65 BTDC..... That would really mess things up. Klaus warned me
about it.
On the alternator thread .......
If the C/B on the LR3 field wire were pulled (engine running) is the Alt
able to still send out power just not regulated? If it does, that is not
good. I was taught without the field there is no power.
Thanks for your comments,
Dale Martin
Lewiston, ID
LEZ-235
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: battery / alternator switch
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> At 12:04 AM 2/9/2004 -0800, you wrote:
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin"
<niceez@cableone.net>
> >
> >In the schematic's for the all electric airplane (Z-13) and the Generic
> >Light Aircraft Electrical System (Z-11) both depicts a Battery / Alt
switch
> ># 2-10 - (2 dash 10). However, in the switches, relays and contactors
pages
> >it says switch 2 dash 3 is recommend for the combination Battery
> >Master/alternator-field switching.
> >
> >Which one is correct?
>
> Either one works. A 2-3 combined with a PULLABLE field supply breaker
> in the crowbar ov protection circuit gives the same functionality as
> a 2-10.
>
> It's no big deal to have the alternator ON during cranking . . . so,
> a 2-3 works.
>
> -EITHER- the mid-position on a 2-10 switch -OR- pulling the field
> circuit breaker allows battery only ops for ground maintenance or
turning
> off a mis-behaving alternator in flight. It's not a matter of
CORRECTNESS
> but a matter of PREFERENCE.
>
>
> >BTW, I have just successfully removed all wires from my 28volt IFR LEZ
(with
> >exception of the strobe and nav light wires in the wings) after 18 years
and
> >1,100 + hours of flying. Talk about scary.... This is for a much
simplier
> >electrical system and full panel upgrade. No more vacuum system for me
and
> >no more 28 to 14 inverter. Everything is 28 volt.
>
> Are you going to 14v or staying 28v?
>
> >One thing I found amazing is how many different places I had ground wires
> >terminating. I built my own ground bus only because the ones from B&C do
> >not appear to be mechanically attached to the brass . . .
>
> How so?
>
> >and my two boys needed
> >some practice using the drill press using brass. The total price was
less
> >then twenty bucks with free labor.
>
> Also this system will only be using one alternator. Using one mag and
one
> >E.I is enough engine redundancy with the lone battery for essential bus.
I
> >believe in the good battery theory and checking it twice per year for
acid
> >specific gravity and over all battery condition and replacing it as
needed.
>
> Do you have a vacuum pump pad with nothing mounted on it?
> For $300 and 4 pounds you can have a SECOND engine driven
> power source.
>
> Bob . . .
>
> -----------------------------------------
> ( Experience and common sense cannot be )
> ( replaced with policy and procedures. )
> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Battery Bus Power Cut Relay - good idea? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 03:54 PM 2/8/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Michel Therrien <mtherr@yahoo.com>
>
>Hi Bob!
>
>I designed a modification this evening for my
>electrical system. It is a dual-battery, single
>alternator system for an automobile conversion engine
>(converted for dual ignition).
>
>I would like to know what you think of it.
>Essentially, I propose a relay to cut the power from
>the battery to the battery bus. That relay would be
>wired so I use the normally-closed circuit and to open
>(cut) the circuit when the coil is energized.
>1. As per AeroElectric Connection, I want anything
>that keeps the engine running to receive energy even
>if I turn off the Master switch(es). Ign 1, 2 and
>fuel pumps are on battery bus. And I want that engine
>to continue working even if I make fool operation
>(like turning off masters and then, on any switch that
>would energize the engine).
>
>2. It is recommended to use a relay to energize any
>circuit from the B-Bus that is fused at more than
>5amps. The reasoning is that we want to keep sparks
>as small as possible when the aircraft is disingrating
>during a crash. I'm not an expert at this, but I
>think that no matter the size of a spark, the risk is
>pretty much the same.
>
>3. Two advisors here tell me it's important to be able
>to cut all electrical power should I be in a situation
>were crashing is a real possibility (ex.: lost engine,
>going down in a rough field).
>
>I think the modification should be reliable (but not
>being an expert, this is why I ask for your opinion)
>as I will be using the normally closed circuit from
>the relay (b-bus ON when relay is NOT energized). It
>will also be flexible as I still can turn off the
>masters, use the battery busses and if needed, with
>the second diagram, turn off all electrical system at
>the flick of a single switch (protected with an
>emergency switch cover).
>
>More over, this change addresses your recommendation
>of using relays for 5+amp all circuits with a single
>relay.
I don't like putting the least reliable single component
in a system (relay/contactor) in position to be
single point of failure for all the battery bus.
Recommend you use 5A or less fuse for circuits
will run from these small fuses . . . and add
INDIVIDUAL disconnect relays for each item over
that amount. Leave the battery bus integrity
un-compromised by leaving it firmly attached to
the battery.
Bob. . .
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 04:34 PM 2/7/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Terry Teer" <threet@telepak.com>
>
>Just about completed wings on a RV-7 and need some help. Installing
>landing light, position light, strobes (in fiberglass tips), nav/com
>antenna wiring (RG-400), also a roll servo for the a/p. Should I run all
>the wires through the 3/4 conduit or should some of them be separated from
>the rest? Also on the strobe heads...the whelen strobes say to ground the
>shielding to the power supply but in Bob's manual it says to ground the
>shielding wire to the strobe heads if mounting in plastic tips. What
>about it list? This is my second OBAM and the first to have more advanced
>equipment and need some advice.
Run them all together. Ground landing lights, nav lights and 14v power
leads for strobes locally. If your strobe bases are not grounded by
virtue of their location on non-conductive mounting, try leaving them
floating. If you get strobe pops in received signals, consider "grounding"
them to shields of leadwires that come out from the strobe supply.
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: | Capacitive Fuel Gauges |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mark Steitle <msteitle@mail.utexas.edu>
Bob,
I have a pair of 6 ft. Electronics International tube type capacitive fuel
level probes and would like to build my own fuel level circuit(s) to use
with these senders. I have a Westach 0-5v dual fuel gauge that I would
also like to use. A series of articles were printed in Kitplanes magazine
in mid 2000 describing how to build a CD type circuit
(http://www.rst-engr.com/kitplanes/index.htm), but it used two flat plates
as the sender. Do you know if the "Jim Weir" capacitive fuel level design
should work with these probes. Is there an easy way to determine the
capacitance of these probes?
Thank you for sharing your knowledge and wisdom with the OBAM community.
Mark S.
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: | battery / alternator switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
I like the fact that I get 4 horsepower back at
> cruise RPM that the Vacuum pump stole.
>
Four HP?!? That sounds extremely high (or maybe the air compressor
marketing folks at Sears got ahold of it!). Just to put things in
perspective, a 100 amp, 14 volt alternator would take just a bit more
than two horsepower. In the case of the vacuum pump, where would four
horsepower go? If the vacuum pump is truly taking four horses, the
power has to go somewhere, either doing work (spinning gryos) or
dissipating in the form of heat. The gyros' power requirements are
something near zero, so everything else would be heat. Four horses are
about one eighth as much heat as my home furnace puts out (about
10000btu/hr vs 80000btu/hr). I suspect fractional hp is closer.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 436 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
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: battery / alternator switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
Bob asks,
>One thing I found amazing is how many different places I had ground wires
>terminating. I built my own ground bus only because the ones from B&C do
>not appear to be mechanically attached to the brass . . .
How so?
Mine are riveted on and then soldered. It is the type of -push on tabs -two
way, usually found on Terminal blocks (two holes instead of one) to connect
female 1/4" push-on connecters.
I have attached two Jpeg pictures.
- Dale
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: battery / alternator switch
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> At 12:04 AM 2/9/2004 -0800, you wrote:
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin"
<niceez@cableone.net>
> >
> >In the schematic's for the all electric airplane (Z-13) and the Generic
> >Light Aircraft Electrical System (Z-11) both depicts a Battery / Alt
switch
> ># 2-10 - (2 dash 10). However, in the switches, relays and contactors
pages
> >it says switch 2 dash 3 is recommend for the combination Battery
> >Master/alternator-field switching.
> >
> >Which one is correct?
>
> Either one works. A 2-3 combined with a PULLABLE field supply breaker
> in the crowbar ov protection circuit gives the same functionality as
> a 2-10.
>
> It's no big deal to have the alternator ON during cranking . . . so,
> a 2-3 works.
>
> -EITHER- the mid-position on a 2-10 switch -OR- pulling the field
> circuit breaker allows battery only ops for ground maintenance or
turning
> off a mis-behaving alternator in flight. It's not a matter of
CORRECTNESS
> but a matter of PREFERENCE.
>
>
> >BTW, I have just successfully removed all wires from my 28volt IFR LEZ
(with
> >exception of the strobe and nav light wires in the wings) after 18 years
and
> >1,100 + hours of flying. Talk about scary.... This is for a much
simplier
> >electrical system and full panel upgrade. No more vacuum system for me
and
> >no more 28 to 14 inverter. Everything is 28 volt.
>
> Are you going to 14v or staying 28v?
>
> >One thing I found amazing is how many different places I had ground wires
> >terminating. I built my own ground bus only because the ones from B&C do
> >not appear to be mechanically attached to the brass . . .
>
> How so?
>
> >and my two boys needed
> >some practice using the drill press using brass. The total price was
less
> >then twenty bucks with free labor.
>
> Also this system will only be using one alternator. Using one mag and
one
> >E.I is enough engine redundancy with the lone battery for essential bus.
I
> >believe in the good battery theory and checking it twice per year for
acid
> >specific gravity and over all battery condition and replacing it as
needed.
>
> Do you have a vacuum pump pad with nothing mounted on it?
> For $300 and 4 pounds you can have a SECOND engine driven
> power source.
>
> Bob . . .
>
> -----------------------------------------
> ( Experience and common sense cannot be )
> ( replaced with policy and procedures. )
> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: battery / alternator switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
This time with the pictures..........
Bob asks,
>One thing I found amazing is how many different places I had ground wires
>terminating. I built my own ground bus only because the ones from B&C do
>not appear to be mechanically attached to the brass . . .
How so?
Mine are riveted on and then soldered. It is the type of -push on tabs -two
way, usually found on Terminal blocks (two holes instead of one) to connect
female 1/4" push-on connecters.
I have attached two Jpeg pictures.
- Dale
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: battery / alternator switch
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> At 12:04 AM 2/9/2004 -0800, you wrote:
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin"
<niceez@cableone.net>
> >
> >In the schematic's for the all electric airplane (Z-13) and the Generic
> >Light Aircraft Electrical System (Z-11) both depicts a Battery / Alt
switch
> ># 2-10 - (2 dash 10). However, in the switches, relays and contactors
pages
> >it says switch 2 dash 3 is recommend for the combination Battery
> >Master/alternator-field switching.
> >
> >Which one is correct?
>
> Either one works. A 2-3 combined with a PULLABLE field supply breaker
> in the crowbar ov protection circuit gives the same functionality as
> a 2-10.
>
> It's no big deal to have the alternator ON during cranking . . . so,
> a 2-3 works.
>
> -EITHER- the mid-position on a 2-10 switch -OR- pulling the field
> circuit breaker allows battery only ops for ground maintenance or
turning
> off a mis-behaving alternator in flight. It's not a matter of
CORRECTNESS
> but a matter of PREFERENCE.
>
>
> >BTW, I have just successfully removed all wires from my 28volt IFR LEZ
(with
> >exception of the strobe and nav light wires in the wings) after 18 years
and
> >1,100 + hours of flying. Talk about scary.... This is for a much
simplier
> >electrical system and full panel upgrade. No more vacuum system for me
and
> >no more 28 to 14 inverter. Everything is 28 volt.
>
> Are you going to 14v or staying 28v?
>
> >One thing I found amazing is how many different places I had ground wires
> >terminating. I built my own ground bus only because the ones from B&C do
> >not appear to be mechanically attached to the brass . . .
>
> How so?
>
> >and my two boys needed
> >some practice using the drill press using brass. The total price was
less
> >then twenty bucks with free labor.
>
> Also this system will only be using one alternator. Using one mag and
one
> >E.I is enough engine redundancy with the lone battery for essential bus.
I
> >believe in the good battery theory and checking it twice per year for
acid
> >specific gravity and over all battery condition and replacing it as
needed.
>
> Do you have a vacuum pump pad with nothing mounted on it?
> For $300 and 4 pounds you can have a SECOND engine driven
> power source.
>
> Bob . . .
>
> -----------------------------------------
> ( Experience and common sense cannot be )
> ( replaced with policy and procedures. )
> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
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: battery / alternator switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
Alex,
I will find out from the manufacture if I understood them incorrectly.
Dale Martin
Lewiston, ID
LEZ-235
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: battery / alternator switch
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson"
<alexpeterson@usjet.net>
>
>
> I like the fact that I get 4 horsepower back at
> > cruise RPM that the Vacuum pump stole.
> >
>
> Four HP?!? That sounds extremely high (or maybe the air compressor
> marketing folks at Sears got ahold of it!). Just to put things in
> perspective, a 100 amp, 14 volt alternator would take just a bit more
> than two horsepower. In the case of the vacuum pump, where would four
> horsepower go? If the vacuum pump is truly taking four horses, the
> power has to go somewhere, either doing work (spinning gryos) or
> dissipating in the form of heat. The gyros' power requirements are
> something near zero, so everything else would be heat. Four horses are
> about one eighth as much heat as my home furnace puts out (about
> 10000btu/hr vs 80000btu/hr). I suspect fractional hp is closer.
>
> Alex Peterson
> Maple Grove, MN
> RV6-A N66AP 436 hours
> www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
>
>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?
My friend, you're stirring requirements into the same
pot with practice and recommendations based on physics
of the best we know how to do.
You are correct that hundreds of thousands of airplanes
have been wired per manufacturer's instructions and are
"successfully" navigating the skies. I can also tell you
that when we installed strobes on the Cessnas in the
60's (per manufacturer's instructions) our pilots complained
of new noises in the systems. We went to a lot of effort
to mitigate them. I use the term "mitigate" because we never did
eliminate the noises. However, I recall that adding shielding
to the clear dome over the strobes and grounding the
base of the strobes to the shield produced noticeable
reduction in noise.
40 years later, the noises that our pilots complained about
then are now considered commonplace and nobody bothers to
honk about them. I don't recall now if Cessna decided
whether or not to pursue noise reduction to levels over and
above that which was supplied or recommended by Whelen.
By the same token, there are a hundred thousand plus airplanes
that don't used single point grounds, still bring b-lead right
to the bus, etc. etc. (although I understand current production
Cessnas now have single point grounds).
The task here is to do a best practical anticipation
of future "problems" while elevating our art with
sound supporting science. There are no requirements . . . if
the way a cookie cutter spam-can performs and it's the technology
a builder embraces, then many things discussed here on the list
will not be of interest.
Suggestions should not be mistaken for requirements. The vast
majority of OBAM aircraft ARE being assembled and wired in the
great tradition of Cessna, Piper, Beech, et. als. and most
of those airplanes will be pronounced "satisfactory" by their
owners . . . many because they don't know what their options
are for vaulting over higher bars with ease.
My personal goal is to improve the ODDS on "satisfactory"
completion of the maximum number of airplanes while improving
on system reliability. We know that certain techniques have value.
Sometimes it's a very tiny benefit and perhaps insignificant in
the final configuration of completed project. But when someone
comes up on the list with a noise problem, it's very helpful
to know if they've implemented all the techniques we've identified
as easy and useful. That clears the table of the ordinary problems
and lets us concentrate on new ones. If he says, "Naw,
wired 'er up per Van's diagrams and the kit he supplied,"
the dragons to be eliminated are more numerous to identify
and potentially more laborious to fix.
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: | Re: battery / alternator switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
I don't think matronics allows attachments for this list...
Have a look at:
http://www.matronics.com/enclosures.html/
MAP
do not archive
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin"
> <niceez@cableone.net>
>
> This time with the pictures..........
> Bob asks,
>
>>One thing I found amazing is how many different places I had ground
>> wires terminating. I built my own ground bus only because the ones
>> from B&C do not appear to be mechanically attached to the brass . . .
>
> How so?
>
> Mine are riveted on and then soldered. It is the type of -push on tabs
> -two way, usually found on Terminal blocks (two holes instead of one) to
> connect female 1/4" push-on connecters.
>
> I have attached two Jpeg pictures.
>
> - Dale
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: battery / alternator switch
>
>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>>
>> At 12:04 AM 2/9/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin"
> <niceez@cableone.net>
>> >
>> >In the schematic's for the all electric airplane (Z-13) and the
>> Generic Light Aircraft Electrical System (Z-11) both depicts a
>> Battery / Alt
> switch
>> ># 2-10 - (2 dash 10). However, in the switches, relays and
>> contactors
> pages
>> >it says switch 2 dash 3 is recommend for the combination Battery
>> Master/alternator-field switching.
>> >
>> >Which one is correct?
>>
>> Either one works. A 2-3 combined with a PULLABLE field supply
>> breaker in the crowbar ov protection circuit gives the same
>> functionality as a 2-10.
>>
>> It's no big deal to have the alternator ON during cranking . . . so,
>> a 2-3 works.
>>
>> -EITHER- the mid-position on a 2-10 switch -OR- pulling the field
>> circuit breaker allows battery only ops for ground maintenance or
> turning
>> off a mis-behaving alternator in flight. It's not a matter of
> CORRECTNESS
>> but a matter of PREFERENCE.
>>
>>
>> >BTW, I have just successfully removed all wires from my 28volt IFR
>> LEZ
> (with
>> >exception of the strobe and nav light wires in the wings) after 18
>> years
> and
>> >1,100 + hours of flying. Talk about scary.... This is for a much
> simplier
>> >electrical system and full panel upgrade. No more vacuum system for
>> me
> and
>> >no more 28 to 14 inverter. Everything is 28 volt.
>>
>> Are you going to 14v or staying 28v?
>>
>> >One thing I found amazing is how many different places I had ground
>> wires terminating. I built my own ground bus only because the ones
>> from B&C do not appear to be mechanically attached to the brass . .
>> .
>>
>> How so?
>>
>> >and my two boys needed
>> >some practice using the drill press using brass. The total price was
> less
>> >then twenty bucks with free labor.
>>
>> Also this system will only be using one alternator. Using one mag
>> and
> one
>> >E.I is enough engine redundancy with the lone battery for essential
>> bus.
> I
>> >believe in the good battery theory and checking it twice per year for
> acid
>> >specific gravity and over all battery condition and replacing it as
> needed.
>>
>> Do you have a vacuum pump pad with nothing mounted on it?
>> For $300 and 4 pounds you can have a SECOND engine driven
>> power source.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>> -----------------------------------------
>> ( Experience and common sense cannot be )
>> ( replaced with policy and procedures. )
>> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
>> -----------------------------------------
>>
>>
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: For Bob, Comment? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "buck" <buckaroo_banzai@the-pentagon.com>
Quite often, the installers of a STC system try to take advantage of what's
already in the aircraft without fully realizing that they may be
circumventing the intent of the aircraft manufacturer. It's amazing that
the FAA and JAA are willing to grant the STC at all!
----------------------------------------------
Original Message
From: "ivorphillips"<ivor@ivorphillips.flyer.co.uk>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: For Bob, Comment?
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "ivorphillips"
<ivor@ivorphillips.flyer.co.uk>
>
>> There is an upcoming program on Public Broadcasting: NOVA: The Deadly
>Legacy Of Swiss Air 111 that will be airing on February 17th at 8:00 EST.
>It deals with an inflight fire caused by electrical arcing.
>>
>Have seen this program a couple of weeks ago, It make you wonder how a
>commercial aircraft can have its wiring set up in such away that the pilots
>were unable to isolate the entertainment system from the main cockpit Bus!
>No breakers tripped to alleviate the problem, just smoke from behind
>panelling,
>
>I find it hard to believe that circuits are shared without proper regards
>too overload wire protection, Its criminal that so many folk lost their
>lives due to a preventable wiring short circuit.
>
>Ivor Phillips
>Europa xs
>
>
http://www.MyOwnEmail.com
Looking for friendships,romance and more?
http://www.MyOwnFriends.com
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ectric-List:Accuator switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: TSaccio@aol.com
I'm trying to wire two accuators that let my canopy go up and down. Can
anyone tell me what kind of switch I need to do this and how it is wired? Thanks
in
advance.
Tom Saccio
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: ectric-List:Accuator switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
Stepper motors and a control card otta' do it just fine......
----- Original Message -----
From: <TSaccio@aol.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List:Accuator switch
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: TSaccio@aol.com
>
> I'm trying to wire two accuators that let my canopy go up and down. Can
> anyone tell me what kind of switch I need to do this and how it is wired?
Thanks in
> advance.
>
> Tom Saccio
>
>
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: battery / alternator switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 11:54 AM 2/9/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
>
>Bob asks,
>
> >One thing I found amazing is how many different places I had ground wires
> >terminating. I built my own ground bus only because the ones from B&C do
> >not appear to be mechanically attached to the brass . . .
>
> How so?
>
>Mine are riveted on and then soldered. It is the type of -push on tabs -two
>way, usually found on Terminal blocks (two holes instead of one) to connect
>female 1/4" push-on connecters.
>
>I have attached two Jpeg pictures.
Attachments don't get forwarded through the list
but that's okay. Rivets are fine too but let's take
care lest folks begin to worry about solder as a structural
material. With a tensile strength on the order of 3Kpsi or
better, likelihood of anyone pulling the fast-on tabs from
their B&C fabricated ground bus is very remote.
Bob . . .
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | battery / alternator switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 01:50 PM 2/9/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson"
><alexpeterson@usjet.net>
>
>
>I like the fact that I get 4 horsepower back at
> > cruise RPM that the Vacuum pump stole.
> >
>
>Four HP?!? That sounds extremely high (or maybe the air compressor
>marketing folks at Sears got ahold of it!). Just to put things in
>perspective, a 100 amp, 14 volt alternator would take just a bit more
>than two horsepower. In the case of the vacuum pump, where would four
>horsepower go? If the vacuum pump is truly taking four horses, the
>power has to go somewhere, either doing work (spinning gryos) or
>dissipating in the form of heat. The gyros' power requirements are
>something near zero, so everything else would be heat. Four horses are
>about one eighth as much heat as my home furnace puts out (about
>10000btu/hr vs 80000btu/hr). I suspect fractional hp is closer.
I think you're right. Wonder if the decimal place didn't get
moved. 0.4 Hp sounds just about right!
Bob . . .
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: battery / alternator switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
Seems like Wayne Blackler has one with the tabs coming off in his tool box.
Each to his own I guess.
Dale Martin
Lewiston, ID
LEZ-235
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: battery / alternator switch
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> At 11:54 AM 2/9/2004 -0800, you wrote:
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin"
<niceez@cableone.net>
> >
> >Bob asks,
> >
> > >One thing I found amazing is how many different places I had ground
wires
> > >terminating. I built my own ground bus only because the ones from B&C
do
> > >not appear to be mechanically attached to the brass . . .
> >
> > How so?
> >
> >Mine are riveted on and then soldered. It is the type of -push on
tabs -two
> >way, usually found on Terminal blocks (two holes instead of one) to
connect
> >female 1/4" push-on connecters.
> >
> >I have attached two Jpeg pictures.
>
> Attachments don't get forwarded through the list
> but that's okay. Rivets are fine too but let's take
> care lest folks begin to worry about solder as a structural
> material. With a tensile strength on the order of 3Kpsi or
> better, likelihood of anyone pulling the fast-on tabs from
> their B&C fabricated ground bus is very remote.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Capacitive Fuel Gauges |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jerzy Krasinski <krasinski@direcway.com>
I messed around with Jim Weir circuit, but finally I gave up and I made
it using a circuit commonly used as a converter changing volmeter into
capacitance meter. Such a circuit is much simpler, it uses a popular
double timer (556?) and an op amp. Capacitance of my 1 yard long probes
made of 1/2 and 1/4 tubes is around 114 pF, which I measured by a
digital multimeter as well as by substitution of the probe by a capacitor.
Unfortunately, making such a system requires some tinkering and
adjusting the circuit to get proper readings. You must also have some
basic electronic instruments.
Jerzy
Mark Steitle wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mark Steitle <msteitle@mail.utexas.edu>
>
>Bob,
>I have a pair of 6 ft. Electronics International tube type capacitive fuel
>level probes and would like to build my own fuel level circuit(s) to use
>with these senders. I have a Westach 0-5v dual fuel gauge that I would
>also like to use. A series of articles were printed in Kitplanes magazine
>in mid 2000 describing how to build a CD type circuit
>(http://www.rst-engr.com/kitplanes/index.htm), but it used two flat plates
>as the sender. Do you know if the "Jim Weir" capacitive fuel level design
>should work with these probes. Is there an easy way to determine the
>capacitance of these probes?
>
>Thank you for sharing your knowledge and wisdom with the OBAM community.
>Mark S.
>
>
>
>
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: f1rocket@telus.net
Has anyone out there uses the "Advanced Aircraft Electronics High Gail Aircraft
Antenna Systems" available at AS$?
Esspecially the transponder antenna looks interesting.
Regards,
Jeff
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Compass shielding |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "hollandm" <hollandm@pacbell.net>
I'm getting interference between an electric turn coordinator and a compass (about
2 degrees). Before I start moving things around I was wondering if it would
be possible to shield the compass by surrounding it with some copper screening
or the like, sort of mu-metal chamber approach.
Has anyone tried this and if so did it work?
Thanks
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! --
|