Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:20 AM - Re: Bus Load Analysis (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
2. 08:22 AM - Re: Bus Load Analysis (Walter Tondu)
3. 08:24 AM - Re: Bus Load Analysis (Dj Merrill)
4. 08:37 AM - Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea (James E. Clark)
5. 09:09 AM - Re: Bus Load Analysis (Dale Martin)
6. 09:11 AM - Re: Bus Load Analysis (Dale Martin)
7. 10:11 AM - Re: Bus Load Analysis (Dj Merrill)
8. 10:53 AM - alternator switch (klehman@albedo.net)
9. 11:34 AM - Re: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea (Walter Tondu)
10. 12:13 PM - Re: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea (James E. Clark)
11. 12:34 PM - Dual Battery, Single Alternator System (Larry Colley)
12. 12:54 PM - Re: Dual Battery, Single Alternator System (Michel Therrien)
13. 01:28 PM - Re: Dynon and EMI (Jim Rodrian)
14. 01:44 PM - Re: Dual Battery, Single Alternator System (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
15. 01:49 PM - Re: alternator switch (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
16. 01:51 PM - Re: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
17. 01:54 PM - Re: Bus Load Analysis (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
18. 01:54 PM - Re: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea (Dale Martin)
19. 01:59 PM - Re: Z12 e-bus questions (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
20. 03:55 PM - Re: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea (Walter Tondu)
21. 04:05 PM - Re: For Bob, Comment? (Kevin Horton)
22. 04:05 PM - Re:Re: For Bob, Comment? (Kevin Horton)
23. 07:30 PM - Re: Bus Load Analysis (Dale Martin)
24. 09:06 PM - Re: Compass shielding (Speedy11@aol.com)
25. 11:29 PM - Re: Re: Compass shielding (Benford2@aol.com)
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: Bus Load Analysis |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 07:45 PM 2/11/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
>
>Bob and All,
>
>Bob ask me in a personal response a couple months back if I had done a
>system analysis of the new electrical system.
>
>Well, I had not. Compiling all the things that consume power is what began
>this quest to update everything.
>
>My question to the group is - what do we consider essential equipment...
There shouldn't be any ESSENTIAL equipment . . . at least not in the
sense that if one item in the airplane stops performing that you
break a sweat.
>Bob had some advise but I did not right it down. Is it possible for us to
>compile a few lists for the VFR and the IFR birds from all the great minds
>amoung us?
What you're looking for is a list of commonly used or most useful
items under the various flight conditions.
Begin with a list of all the goodies . . . use a pencil and fill out
load-analysis forms from http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/Load_Analysis.pdf
You need one form for each bus. Take a best guess at which bus you'll
run everything from and write it down in pencil.
Then publish your work here on the list. It's not a big task and
you can quickly type out the items on each of three or four busses.
Also list the flight conditions under which you'll consider that
item useful/necessary
Folks here will help you decide whether or not any given item
is on the right bus and help gauge its level of necessity. Then
we'll explore what stuff you plan to carry in you flight bag
to back up any items for which there is great utility but no
panel mounted backup.
Doing this in pencil lets you shuffle things around as the
task moves forward. When this is completed, then you're ready
to fill in the squares with load currents and begin to
draw your page-per-system. Note on the example sheet that
your finished document becomes a planning guide for what goes
on each bus, what protection size it gets (the drawings show
breakers but if you're using fuses, just put the protection
size on and "think" fuses), wire size, name of system, page
of your wirebook where that system's wiring will be depicted
and finally, demands that system puts on your battery/alternator
combination in each phase of flight.
This is the single most important planning document for your
system. Next comes the power distribution diagram where
you'll decided just how power is generated, stored, and
distributed to the busses.
THEN you can begin knock each system's wiring off one-page-
at-a-time. It's sorta like eating an elephant . . . one
bite at a time. But you gotta cook him first. That happens
on the load analysis pages and distribution pages. After
that, get out your spoon. It's all little bites from there
on.
>This may have been addressed in the newer updates to the Connection that I
>am delinquent in renewing by only 3 years :-(
>
>It would be a good thing to put in the Zeee Options pages :-) (Pun intended)
>
>It has taken two weeks just to trace down a few operating amperages for some
>equipment.
>
>Is this reasonable?
. . . maybe not. If you have the installation manuals for equipment
items, they should be able to give you current draw. You can call the
manufacturer too. Another option is to power the item up from a battery
or power supply on the bench and measure its current draw. But having
a number to put in the box is not nearly so important now as getting
it listed as an action item and assigning it to the most useful bus.
Bob . . .
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: Bus Load Analysis |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Walter Tondu <walter@tondu.com>
On 02/11 7:45, Dale Martin wrote:
> Bob ask me in a personal response a couple months back if I had done a
> system analysis of the new electrical system.
>
> Well, I had not. Compiling all the things that consume power is what began
> this quest to update everything.
>
> My question to the group is - what do we consider essential equipment...
> Bob had some advise but I did not right it down. Is it possible for us to
> compile a few lists for the VFR and the IFR birds from all the great minds
> amoung us?
>
> This may have been addressed in the newer updates to the Connection that I
> am delinquent in renewing by only 3 years :-(
>
> It would be a good thing to put in the Zeee Options pages :-) (Pun intended)
>
> It has taken two weeks just to trace down a few operating amperages for some
> equipment.
Excellent Idea! How about a spreadsheet with know values for some of
the standard equipment out there. I'll even volunteer to manage it.
This would be a huge timesaver for current and future builders who aspire
to follow the Mr. K route of electronics design. Perhaps those of you
who have completed their system analysis could forward their information
we could compile the list in short order.
--
Walter Tondu
http://www.tondu.com/rv7
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: | Re: Bus Load Analysis |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dj Merrill <deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu>
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> There shouldn't be any ESSENTIAL equipment . . . at least not in the
> sense that if one item in the airplane stops performing that you
> break a sweat.
That would be that big fan out front that keeps the pilot cool.
When it stops performing, you can actually see the pilot start to sweat...
*wink*
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill Thayer School of Engineering
ThUG Sr. Unix Systems Administrator 8000 Cummings Hall
deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu - N1JOV Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755
"On the side of the software box, in the 'System Requirements' section,
it said 'Requires Windows 95 or better'. So I installed Linux." -Anonymous
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: | Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <james@nextupventures.com>
I am sure someone else has thought of this but here goes ...
Bob's comments (see SNIP below) got me to thinking that it would be nice if
we didn't all have to run out and track down manuals for stuff we probably
have not even purchased yet before we do planning.
So, I think it would be a real service if someone with webspace and
capability could keep a running table of current draw on various items.
Maybe Doug Reeves could set up another one of his databases on
http://www.vansairforce.net or maybe Bob has some extra space on his new
system (hate to be asking anymore of Bob as he gives way too much already).
The table (database/spreadsheet/whatever) could have the headings ,mentioned
in the Europa worksheet (from Bobs reference
http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/Load_Analysis.pdf) with the addition of
"Vendor" and "model #".
It would not be the definitive answer but one could look there and get a
good enough to size things answer. As more people research additonal items,
the database could grow and at some point probably capture 90%+ of what we
all are using these days.
Whadday'all think???
James
[SNIP]
>
> . . . maybe not. If you have the installation manuals for equipment
> items, they should be able to give you current draw. You can call the
> manufacturer too. Another option is to power the item up from
> a battery
> or power supply on the bench and measure its current draw. But having
> a number to put in the box is not nearly so important now as getting
> it listed as an action item and assigning it to the most useful bus.
>
> Bob . . .
>
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: Bus Load Analysis |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
Great,
I was amazed to find out that the 12 volt Fuel pump (interrupter type) only
requires 3/4 of an amp. That seems low. For 17 plus years it has enjoyed a
5 amp breaker on the 28v system I use. Cool - Smaller/lighter wire.
Dale
----- Original Message -----
From: "Walter Tondu" <walter@tondu.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Bus Load Analysis
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Walter Tondu <walter@tondu.com>
>
> On 02/11 7:45, Dale Martin wrote:
>
> > Bob ask me in a personal response a couple months back if I had done a
> > system analysis of the new electrical system.
> >
> > Well, I had not. Compiling all the things that consume power is what
began
> > this quest to update everything.
> >
> > My question to the group is - what do we consider essential
equipment...
> > Bob had some advise but I did not right it down. Is it possible for us
to
> > compile a few lists for the VFR and the IFR birds from all the great
minds
> > amoung us?
> >
> > This may have been addressed in the newer updates to the Connection
that I
> > am delinquent in renewing by only 3 years :-(
> >
> > It would be a good thing to put in the Zeee Options pages :-) (Pun
intended)
> >
> > It has taken two weeks just to trace down a few operating amperages for
some
> > equipment.
>
> Excellent Idea! How about a spreadsheet with know values for some of
> the standard equipment out there. I'll even volunteer to manage it.
> This would be a huge timesaver for current and future builders who aspire
> to follow the Mr. K route of electronics design. Perhaps those of you
> who have completed their system analysis could forward their information
> we could compile the list in short order.
> --
> Walter Tondu
> http://www.tondu.com/rv7
>
>
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: | Re: Bus Load Analysis |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
Dj, What do you mean the fan in front??? Fan in the back where it
belongs!!! <Grin> :-)
Dale
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dj Merrill" <deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Bus Load Analysis
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dj Merrill
<deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu>
>
> Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> > There shouldn't be any ESSENTIAL equipment . . . at least not in the
> > sense that if one item in the airplane stops performing that you
> > break a sweat.
>
> That would be that big fan out front that keeps the pilot cool.
> When it stops performing, you can actually see the pilot start to sweat...
> *wink*
>
> -Dj
>
>
> --
> Dj Merrill Thayer School of Engineering
> ThUG Sr. Unix Systems Administrator 8000 Cummings Hall
> deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu - N1JOV Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755
>
> "On the side of the software box, in the 'System Requirements' section,
> it said 'Requires Windows 95 or better'. So I installed Linux." -Anonymous
>
>
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: Bus Load Analysis |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dj Merrill <deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu>
Dale Martin wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
>
> Dj, What do you mean the fan in front??? Fan in the back where it
> belongs!!! <Grin> :-)
>
> Dale
Hey, I've never tried to sit backwards in my plane.
That must be interesting! *grin*
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill Thayer School of Engineering
ThUG Sr. Unix Systems Administrator 8000 Cummings Hall
deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu - N1JOV Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755
"On the side of the software box, in the 'System Requirements' section,
it said 'Requires Windows 95 or better'. So I installed Linux." -Anonymous
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: | alternator switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: klehman@albedo.net
Hi Gary
I have indeed considered such an approach complete with an ov relay that
automatically turns on an electric windshield defroster for some
additional load. I don't think I'd get any reasonable kind of load
sharing with one battery though. Both my alternators have non adjustable
regulators and it sounds like even adjustable regulators are not a good
solution to load sharing. I'd like to keep at least a moderate load on
my permanent magnet alternator rather than just wasting that energy
heating up the regulator.
Might be interesting to see if I can arrange to fully load the 20 amp pm
alternator and get stable operation with the 40 amp ND unit topping up
any extra load. With that scenario, the pm alternator would not be
capable of an ov and if the ND went ov, the pm alternator should drop
off line after some (possibly significant) transients.
I'm starting to lean towards Bob's approach for ov protection on the 40
amp ND and two small batteries in a modified Z14 system rather than more
experimenting with this right now.
Ken
> <<I still have trouble with the need for absolute alternator control or a
> need for an alternator switch. I am referring to an internal vr
> alternator.>>
>
> Here's an idea along those lines. If you have a single large (normal size)
> battery and 2 alternators, make one be of very modest output, like 40 amps,
> and the other a reasonable backup, like 8 or 20 amps. The failure mode will
> be one of them going "ov." At that low capacity you will have plenty of
> warning and will be able to increase the load (in my case 160W of landing
> lights, pitot heat, vent blower) to reduce or even eliminate the excess
> charge current to the battery. I'm not sure I'm recommending it, but it
> does seem like a reasonable approach.
>
> Gary Casey
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: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Walter Tondu <walter@tondu.com>
If there are no issues I will begin to compile a list of known values
for the Bus Load Analysis. This should help builders save a great deal
of time searching.
If you have done the analysis and research and you would like to provide
your input please email the following information for each accessory;
BUS, ACCESSORY, VENDOR, MODEL #, WIRE-GUAGE, FUSE, PRE-FLIGHT, PRE-TAXI, TAKEOFF/CLIMB,
VFR-CRUISE, IFR-CRUISE, APPRCH/LNDG, EMERG
If you have completed the Bus Load Analysis form and would like to send it
to me that would be great.
We'll get this tabulated and then uploaded, hopefully to vansairforce.net.
--
Walter Tondu
http://www.tondu.com/rv7
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: | Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <james@nextupventures.com>
Walter,
I recall there was a person who was doing a Lancair that did a LOT of data
gathering as he had a lot of (nice) toys in that plane. If he is still
monitorong the list, he might send his spreadsheet (I seem to recall he had
built one).
This would be a good starting point for "pre-loading" the file.
Also, THANKS for agreeing to gather this.
James
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Walter
> Tondu
> Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 2:27 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Walter Tondu <walter@tondu.com>
>
> If there are no issues I will begin to compile a list of known values
> for the Bus Load Analysis. This should help builders save a great deal
> of time searching.
>
> If you have done the analysis and research and you would like to provide
> your input please email the following information for each accessory;
>
> BUS, ACCESSORY, VENDOR, MODEL #, WIRE-GUAGE, FUSE, PRE-FLIGHT,
> PRE-TAXI, TAKEOFF/CLIMB, VFR-CRUISE, IFR-CRUISE, APPRCH/LNDG, EMERG
>
> If you have completed the Bus Load Analysis form and would like to send it
> to me that would be great.
>
> We'll get this tabulated and then uploaded, hopefully to
> vansairforce.net.
>
> --
> Walter Tondu
> http://www.tondu.com/rv7
>
>
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: | Dual Battery, Single Alternator System |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Larry Colley <larry@grrok.com>
I am planning an all electric system with two batteries and a single
alternator. My issue is how can I verify that both the Battery Contactor
and the Aux Battery Contactor have closed.
Looking at Figure Z-30. The starter contactor and the main bus are powered
as soon as the first battery contactor closes. If the second contactor
does not close, it is isolated from the charging system but all busses are
fully powered. This can be detected with a simple light if the cause of
the problem is in the contactor coil circuit but how can you detect the
problem if contacts simply do not close.
Applying a low voltage monitor to each Battery Bus would detect this
problem during flight but there must be a more direct method that would
detect the problem during pre-flight.
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: Dual Battery, Single Alternator System |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Michel Therrien <mtherr@yahoo.com>
I suppose this can be done during the pre-flight
check.
Bat 1 ON - volt check
Bat 2 ON, Bat 1 Off - volt check
Bat 1 ON
Michel
--- Larry Colley <larry@grrok.com> wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Larry
> Colley <larry@grrok.com>
>
> I am planning an all electric system with two
> batteries and a single
> alternator. My issue is how can I verify that both
> the Battery Contactor
> and the Aux Battery Contactor have closed.
>
> Looking at Figure Z-30. The starter contactor and
> the main bus are powered
> as soon as the first battery contactor closes. If
> the second contactor
> does not close, it is isolated from the charging
> system but all busses are
> fully powered. This can be detected with a simple
> light if the cause of
> the problem is in the contactor coil circuit but how
> can you detect the
> problem if contacts simply do not close.
>
> Applying a low voltage monitor to each Battery Bus
> would detect this
> problem during flight but there must be a more
> direct method that would
> detect the problem during pre-flight.
>
>
>
> -
> Contributions
> any other
> Forums.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/chat
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD, C-GZGQ
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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: Dynon and EMI |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Rodrian" <Jim.Rodrian@elsyn.com>
Dale,
=93Filtering=94 usually involves incorporation of capacitors, ferrite beads, and
inductors at appropriated places on the product schematic and circuit board.
(A =93filter=94 can be shown on the schematic but located improperly on the
circuit board and it will not have the intended affect of reducing EMI
problems.) Shielded wires may help but not always. Shielded wires won=92t
help if the electrical noise is =93common mode=94 and found on the ground
(shield) wire as well as the power / signal wire.
Use of filter components external to a product may reduce EMI problems. The
final solution will probably be simple. However, if compliance with EMC
requirements was not a requirement from =93day one=94 of a product development
project, it can takes weeks of engineering effort and testing to bring a
product into compliance.
Since Jeff Point is geographically close to me, I am willing to look at his
installation to evaluate the situation.
Jim
Grafton, WI
Defiant
Jim,
When you say filtering - Is that synonymous for shielding? In your
opinion - is the Dynon EFIS missing the mark here or is there a simple
solution for a demanding builder?
Dale Martin
Lewiston, ID
LEZ-235
---
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: | Re: Dual Battery, Single Alternator System |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 01:40 PM 2/12/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Larry Colley <larry@grrok.com>
>
>I am planning an all electric system with two batteries and a single
>alternator. My issue is how can I verify that both the Battery Contactor
>and the Aux Battery Contactor have closed.
>
>Looking at Figure Z-30. The starter contactor and the main bus are powered
>as soon as the first battery contactor closes. If the second contactor
>does not close, it is isolated from the charging system but all busses are
>fully powered. This can be detected with a simple light if the cause of
>the problem is in the contactor coil circuit but how can you detect the
>problem if contacts simply do not close.
>
>Applying a low voltage monitor to each Battery Bus would detect this
>problem during flight but there must be a more direct method that would
>detect the problem during pre-flight.
Turn one battery on, see that bus comes up. You should also
hear the battery contactor "click". Turn on the second battery.
You won't normally see any change on the bus but you should hear
the second click. Turn the first battery off and see that the
bus stays hot. Turn the first battery back on.
Bob . . .
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: alternator switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 01:54 PM 2/12/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: klehman@albedo.net
>
>Hi Gary
>
>I have indeed considered such an approach complete with an ov relay that
>automatically turns on an electric windshield defroster for some
>additional load. I don't think I'd get any reasonable kind of load
>sharing with one battery though. Both my alternators have non adjustable
>regulators and it sounds like even adjustable regulators are not a good
>solution to load sharing. I'd like to keep at least a moderate load on
>my permanent magnet alternator rather than just wasting that energy
>heating up the regulator.
Not sure what kind of PM alternator you have . . . if it's
an SD-8, that system uses a series-pass regulator that does
not waste unused energy from the alternator. Not sure
about other manufacturers but I think Ducati regulators
for Rotax are series-pass also. There's no good reason
to run a parallel-shunt regulator any more.
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: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 11:36 AM 2/12/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "James E. Clark"
><james@nextupventures.com>
>
>I am sure someone else has thought of this but here goes ...
>
>Bob's comments (see SNIP below) got me to thinking that it would be nice if
>we didn't all have to run out and track down manuals for stuff we probably
>have not even purchased yet before we do planning.
>
>So, I think it would be a real service if someone with webspace and
>capability could keep a running table of current draw on various items.
>Maybe Doug Reeves could set up another one of his databases on
>http://www.vansairforce.net or maybe Bob has some extra space on his new
>system (hate to be asking anymore of Bob as he gives way too much already).
Would be pleased to post anything you have to offer. Got LOTS
of server space since I own half of it.
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: | Re: Bus Load Analysis |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:08 AM 2/12/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
>
>Great,
>
>I was amazed to find out that the 12 volt Fuel pump (interrupter type) only
>requires 3/4 of an amp. That seems low. For 17 plus years it has enjoyed a
>5 amp breaker on the 28v system I use. Cool - Smaller/lighter wire.
22AWG is smallest recommended wire, it can be nicely protected with
a 5A breaker. I still have a Facet pump on my bench that's awaiting
time to do some energy studies on it. True, these pulsed pumps take
a hefty peak current compared to their average currents. The 3/4A
average you cite doesn't seem out of line at all but I wouldn't be
surprised to see 3A peak.
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: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
Walt,
It will be WIRE GAUGE / VOLTAGE. I use much smaller wire then the 14 volt
folks and there are others using 28 volt equipment.
- Dale
----- Original Message -----
From: "Walter Tondu" <walter@tondu.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Walter Tondu <walter@tondu.com>
>
> If there are no issues I will begin to compile a list of known values
> for the Bus Load Analysis. This should help builders save a great deal
> of time searching.
>
> If you have done the analysis and research and you would like to provide
> your input please email the following information for each accessory;
>
> BUS, ACCESSORY, VENDOR, MODEL #, WIRE-GUAGE, FUSE, PRE-FLIGHT, PRE-TAXI,
TAKEOFF/CLIMB, VFR-CRUISE, IFR-CRUISE, APPRCH/LNDG, EMERG
>
> If you have completed the Bus Load Analysis form and would like to send it
> to me that would be great.
>
> We'll get this tabulated and then uploaded, hopefully to vansairforce.net.
>
> --
> Walter Tondu
> http://www.tondu.com/rv7
>
>
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: Z12 e-bus questions |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:50 PM 2/10/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: f1rocket@telus.net
>
>Excellent, thanks. Just a couple more questions for the un-informed (me).
>See below.
>
>SNIP> If the wires are longer, then . . . well, shucks. Now,
> > if you need an e-bus alternate feed exceeding 5A from
> > the battery (or battery bus) then using a relay as shown
> > in:
> >
> > http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/E-BusFatFeed.gif
> >
> > seems prudent. This architecture provides a low power
> > version of a battery contactor to provide at-the-battery
> > control of a feeder. The same caveat exists for all
> > feeders from the battery whether e-bus alternate feed
> > or feeders to goodies that support an electrically
> > dependent engine. You mentioned a fuel pump . . . I
> > wouldn't drive this from the e-bus but directly from
> > the battery bus via it's 5A or less fuse and no relay
> > or a 7A+ fuse and a relay.
>
>In both cases you mention going larger than 5A a relay is required? Is this
>just because it is driving a motor (pump) or what am I missing here? I don't
>need to put a relay in for all loads larger than 5A do I?
Yup, assuming you subscribe to conventions. The goal is to
have no feeders fused at more than 5A that cannot be shut
down from the pilots position. We COULD shut down the whole
battery bus but that makes everything on the battery bus
vulnerable to a single point of failure on one of the most
unreliable electo-mechanical devices there is . . . a relay.
> >
> > The VERY FIRST documents you need to craft in your
> > electrical system design are a tabular listing of each
> > feeder that comes off each bus. The system that feeder
> > supplies, the size of protection be it a Lego fuse or
> > Tinker-Toy breaker, size of the wire, then draw 7 columns
> > where you're going to deduce and add up the current draw
> > on each feeder under the following headers, (1) preflight,
> > (2) taxi, (3) takeoff/climb, (4) vfr cruise, (5) ifr cruise,
> > (6) approach to landing and (7) alternator-out.
> >
> > Go get this document:
> >
> > http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/LoadAnalysisHandOut.pdf
>
>I had almost done this, at least for the first three columns (I had one more
>column for switch required/type). I like your document better and looks as
>though it will guide me in a more analytical path.
>Jeff
Sounds like you're out of the gate and running . . .
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: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Walter Tondu <walter@tondu.com>
On 02/12 1:53, Dale Martin wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
>
> Walt,
>
> It will be WIRE GAUGE / VOLTAGE. I use much smaller wire then the 14 volt
> folks and there are others using 28 volt equipment.
Right you are!
BUS, ACCESSORY, VENDOR, MODEL #, WIRE-GUAGE/VOLTS, FUSE, PRE-FLIGHT, PRE-TAXI,
TAKEOFF/CLIMB, VFR-CRUISE, IFR-CRUISE, APPRCH/LNDG, EMERG
--
Walter Tondu
http://www.tondu.com/rv7
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: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
><bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
>At 03:41 PM 2/9/2004 +0000, you wrote:
> >--> 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.
> > >
>
> This incident, typical of all accident scenarios, is a joining
> of links in the chain. Breaking any link would have averted the accident.
> (1) cracks in wires on (2) system voltage high enough to
> support a soft-fault arc (3) close proximity of combustible
> insulation (4) inaccessible to crew to fight fire (5) and
> so rare an event that the crew could not conceive how much
> trouble they were in. Had emergency condition behavior
> been initiated sooner, etc. There are probably other links
> in this deadly chain I've missed.
>
>
I don't disagree with most of what you said about the chain of
events, but I have to take exception to the comment about the crew's
reaction time being part of the chain. They were over the Atlantic
Ocean. Halifax was the closest airport that had a runway anywhere
close to long enough for them. The TSB investigation determined that
even if the crew had done an emergency descent at MMO/VMO when they
first smelled smoke that they could not have gotten on the ground
before the aircraft became unflyable. I've studied the report in
detail and spoken with the investigator who did that analysis, and I
concluded that it was credible. The only way they could have gotten
on the ground would been to have flown well in excess of MMO and VMO
during the descent, and that is not a reasonable expectation given
that could not have known how bad things were going to get.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
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: For Bob, Comment? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
><bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
>At 04:35 PM 2/9/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>>--> 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!
>
> STC's generally cannot be grand-fathered to other airframes.
> STC is exactly what the acronym implies . . . SUPPLEMENT
> to a TYPE CERTIFICATE. These are not used as plug-n-play
> across a range of aircraft.
>
> STC is EXACTLY what those-who-know-more-about-airplanes-than-
> we-do like. Treat every installation like it's never been done
> before and test the hell out of it. This keeps those who
> don't understand what's happening from having to think or
> learn anything. It makes sure that some wheels get invented
> over and over again. The STC route is relatively low risk
> but also expensive because common sense approaches are
> neither encouraged or allowed. Everyone is expected to
> read and respond to a rule book. Whether or not he/she
> understands the system to which the rules are applied
> no longer matters.
>
>
I'm betting you are not a big fan of the Approved Model List STC for
the Apollo CNX-80 Integrated Avionics System. That STC allows
installation on pretty much every light single or twin just by using
the Installation Manual. There doesn't seem to be any requirement to
do any engineering analysis or specific testing.
Approved Model List:
http://www.garminat.com/dwnlds/cnxdoc/CNX80_AML.pdf
STC docs, etc:
http://www.garminat.com/cnx_docs.shtml
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
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: Bus Load Analysis |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
Bob and all,
********
Dale says,
> >I was amazed to find out that the 12 volt Fuel pump (interrupter type)
only
> >requires 3/4 of an amp. That seems low. For 17 plus years it has
enjoyed a
> >5 amp breaker on the 28v system I use. Cool - Smaller/lighter wire.
> *******
*********
Bob says,
> 22AWG is smallest recommended wire, it can be nicely protected with
> a 5A breaker. I still have a Facet pump on my bench that's awaiting
> time to do some energy studies on it. True, these pulsed pumps take
> a hefty peak current compared to their average currents. The 3/4A
> average you cite doesn't seem out of line at all but I wouldn't be
> surprised to see 3A peak.
> ********
And this is the hardest thing for of non-EE's to figure out..... Meaning
not proper test equipment or the lack of understanding of using test
equipment to determine the amperage peak at the first flick of a switch or
when under a very heavy load.
Remembering back years ago - we used to hook up the entire required length,
connect everything, and keep using smaller breakers until one popped when we
threw the switch..... The old trial and fault method. It didn't account for
variables such as temperature, changes in amperage..... We would just up
the circuit breaker value by two numbers and call it good. Now that was
science. Heh-heh...
Now we just ask you :-)
Dale Martin
Lewiston, ID
LEZ-235
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: Compass shielding |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Speedy11@aol.com
In a message dated 2/12/04 2:57:00 AM Eastern Standard Time,
aeroelectric-list-digest@matronics.com writes:
<< Easiest fix for the magnetic compass is to not look at it. Most planes
have gps, use that. While taxiing out, set the DG to match the gps
track. >>
It is easiest - I certainly use it - but if you are being vectored by ATC,
using GPS ground track is not what they are expecting of you. In many parts of
the USA, true heading and mag heading will be the same number, but they will
rarely match the GPS track. Am I splitting hairs - Yup. But, when ATC assigns
a heading, they are expecting you to fly mag heading.
Stan Sutterfield
RV-8A
Tampa, FL
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: | Re: Compass shielding |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Benford2@aol.com
In a message dated 2/12/2004 10:07:57 PM Mountain Standard Time,
Speedy11@aol.com writes:
>
> It is easiest - I certainly use it - but if you are being vectored by ATC,
> using GPS ground track is not what they are expecting of you. In many parts
> of
> the USA, true heading and mag heading will be the same number, but they will
>
> rarely match the GPS track. Am I splitting hairs - Yup. But, when ATC
> assigns
> a heading, they are expecting you to fly mag heading.
> Stan Sutterfield
> RV-8A
> Tampa, FL
>
so ya just set your DG on your take off roll. Runway heading is as close as a
magnetic compass reading. Probably closer. Stan is right about the Mag
variation though. Here in Jackson Hole Wy the difference is 15 degrees,
Ben Haas N801BH. do not archive.
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! --
|