Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:36 AM - Re: Essential bus alternate feed from two (Mickey Coggins)
2. 06:48 AM - Re: Essential bus alternate feed from two (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 06:50 AM - Re: Essential bus alternate feed from two (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 07:32 AM - Re: Garmin 430, where to purchase (Richard Dudley)
5. 07:43 AM - Re: Garmin 430, where to purchase (LarryRobertHelming)
6. 07:46 AM - Re: batteries and diode isolation (Dave Morris)
7. 07:47 AM - Re: Flap motor testing (Benford2@aol.com)
8. 08:27 AM - Re: Load Dumps (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 08:41 AM - Re: ANR Headsets (Shaun Simpkins)
10. 08:44 AM - Re: Essential bus alternate feed from two (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 09:18 AM - Z-14/RV6,7,9/PC680 (Dual-Dual) ?????? (James E. Clark)
12. 09:22 AM - Re:Re: Flap motor overload? (buck)
13. 11:21 AM - Re: Essential bus alternate feed from two (Mickey Coggins)
14. 11:47 AM - Re: Essential bus alternate feed from two (Mark Steitle)
15. 12:06 PM - Re: Two alternators-using total rated (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
16. 01:08 PM - Re: Dual fuel pumps (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
17. 01:15 PM - Re: Electric fuel pump circuit (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
18. 01:17 PM - Re: Flap motor testing (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
19. 01:34 PM - Re: William Wynne's Corvair Conversions (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
20. 02:30 PM - Re: Flap motor testing (Jerry2DT@aol.com)
21. 02:43 PM - Re: Re: William Wynne's Corvair Conversions (Dan Branstrom)
22. 03:53 PM - Re: Electric fuel pump circuit (Charlie Kuss)
23. 04:44 PM - Garmin 430, where to purchase (PeterHunt1@aol.com)
24. 05:41 PM - Re: Garmin 430, where to purchase (David Schaefer)
25. 06:58 PM - Re: Essential bus alternate feed from two batteries (Chad Robinson)
26. 07:31 PM - Re: Flap motor testing (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
27. 08:35 PM - Re: Flap motor testing (Benford2@aol.com)
28. 08:52 PM - Antenna Questions (Don Boardman)
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: | Essential bus alternate feed from two |
batteries
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
batteries
> But with a single ignition system (that delivers
> a high degree of reliability and service life with
> reasonable attention to installation and maintenance)
> there seems to be little added value by having more
> than one, well maintained battery to power it.
Could I extend this reasoning to say that if I have
an aircraft with two electric fuel pumps, one
quality alternator, and one electronic ignition that
I too would have little or nothing to gain by
having a second battery?
I'm still "designing"/drawing my system, so
if it is one battery or two it won't make much
difference, but I am a firm believer in the KISS
principle. One well maintained battery sounds
simpler to me, but getting back on the ground
safely is my primary concern. This will be a VFR RV8.
Thanks,
Mickey
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
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: | Essential bus alternate feed from two |
batteries
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
batteries
At 09:35 AM 2/25/2004 +0100, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins
><mick-matronics@rv8.ch> batteries
>
>
> > But with a single ignition system (that delivers
> > a high degree of reliability and service life with
> > reasonable attention to installation and maintenance)
> > there seems to be little added value by having more
> > than one, well maintained battery to power it.
>
>Could I extend this reasoning to say that if I have
>an aircraft with two electric fuel pumps, one
>quality alternator, and one electronic ignition that
>I too would have little or nothing to gain by
>having a second battery?
Sure . . . but forgive me for using such non-quantified
terms as "little" . . . at least "little" is not
zero. One could easily make an argument for risk
reduction by driving on the city streets only
between the hours of midnight and 5 a.m. . . .
but then your next accident might have a root
cause in your lack of sleep and nothing to do
with how many cars share the roadway with you.
It's a trade off between values added and
values lost and their inter-related effects.
>I'm still "designing"/drawing my system, so
>if it is one battery or two it won't make much
>difference, but I am a firm believer in the KISS
>principle. One well maintained battery sounds
>simpler to me, but getting back on the ground
>safely is my primary concern. This will be a VFR RV8.
Over the past 50 years, aviation has demonstrated
the relative risks for accident due to equipment
failure is very low . . . and MOST of those
events can be traced back to poor maintenance
(due to regulatory driven expenses) and not
taking advantage of the evolutionary improvements
in equipment technologies (again, a regulatory
driven condition). If you could outfit a stock
C-172 with an ND alternator, RG battery and an
e-bus, and make the maintenance of these items
as inexpensive for the C-172 as it is for an
RV-8, I'd guess that the dark-n-stormy night
stories on electrical system problems would
virtually disappear.
Anything we do beyond this simple change
with extra alternators, batteries, etc. etc.
are but icing on the cake . . . an increase
in levels of failure tolerance when failure
rates are already VERY low.
Since you're NOT having to deal with a C-172
and those-who-know-more-about-airplanes-than-
we-do, consider a single alternator, single
battery, e-bus design with electrically driven
engine accessories connected from the battery
bus. Leave room to add a second battery later
(go ahead and run the wire in for the aux
battery contactor control and leave room on
panel for extra switch).
See how things play for you with keeping a
fresh battery installed every annual (or
doing periodic battery tests to trigger
a replacement). Odds are very much in your
favor of never feeling a need for a second
battery . . . but if you want to, it's
a Saturday afternoon task.
Bob . . .
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Essential bus alternate feed from two |
batteries
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
batteries
At 06:06 PM 2/24/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "GMC" <gmcnutt@uniserve.com>
>
>And of course there is always a simple solution like using toggle switches
>for the ignition and letting the engine turn over two blades before turning
>the ignition on! SOP for my 6-A.
I was going to suggest that. The PM starter "disadvantage" is the
extra-ordinary magnitude of inrush current . . . an event that's
over in tens of milliseconds. Pushing the starter button before
turning on the ignition (and driving the ignition from the
battery bus) has a high order probability of eliminating the
problem and the need for a second battery.
Bob . . .
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Garmin 430, where to purchase |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Dudley <rhdudley@att.net>
Ross,
Try John Stark of Stark Avionics
Hangar 12
Columbus Metro Airport
Columbus, GA 31909
706-321-1008
If he still has the same policies, his prices are the best at about 5%
over his cost. I'm surprised that no one else has mentioned him. Many
purchased from him in the past, myself included. They will also prewire.
Hope this helps.
Richard Dudley
-6A little details and pain prep
Colt Seavers wrote:
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Colt Seavers" <rv7maker@hotmail.com>
>
> Listers,
>
> Where is the best place to purchase a garmin 430? Local avionics shop,
> internet shop, mail order? Are there any warrantee issues to contend with
> if you install it yourself?
>
> -Ross Schlotthauer
> www.experimentalair.com
> RV-7 finishing
>
> >From: "David Schaefer" <dschaefer1@kc.rr.com>
> >Reply-To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> >To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> >Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 430 install manual
> >Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 18:17:37 -0600
> >
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Schaefer"
> ><dschaefer1@kc.rr.com>
> >
> >If you don't find it I can email you a copy.
> >
> >David
> >RV6-A
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> >[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeffrey
> >W. Skiba
> >To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 430 install manual
> >
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jeffrey W. Skiba"
> ><jskiba@icosa.net>
> >
> >I seem to remember that there was somewhere to download the install manual
> >for garmin products in particular the 430? But I can not find it on there
> >site, Anybody know where I can download this ??
> >
> >Thanks
> >Jeff.
> >
> >
>
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: Garmin 430, where to purchase |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
This the best I could find.
John Stark
E-mail Address(es):
jts7@mindspring.com
John is registered/certified Garman dealer.
Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip-up TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
Firewall Forward
----- Original Message -----
From: "Colt Seavers" <rv7maker@hotmail.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 430, where to purchase
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Colt Seavers"
<rv7maker@hotmail.com>
>
> Listers,
>
> Where is the best place to purchase a garmin 430? Local avionics shop,
> internet shop, mail order? Are there any warrantee issues to contend with
> if you install it yourself?
>
> -Ross Schlotthauer
> www.experimentalair.com
> RV-7 finishing
>
>
> >From: "David Schaefer" <dschaefer1@kc.rr.com>
> >Reply-To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> >To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> >Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 430 install manual
> >Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 18:17:37 -0600
> >
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Schaefer"
> ><dschaefer1@kc.rr.com>
> >
> >If you don't find it I can email you a copy.
> >
> >David
> >RV6-A
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> >[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Jeffrey
> >W. Skiba
> >To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 430 install manual
> >
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jeffrey W. Skiba"
> ><jskiba@icosa.net>
> >
> >I seem to remember that there was somewhere to download the install
manual
> >for garmin products in particular the 430? But I can not find it on there
> >site, Anybody know where I can download this ??
> >
> >Thanks
> >Jeff.
> >
> >
>
>
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: batteries and diode isolation |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave Morris <dave@davemorris.com>
Bob, I'd like to understand better why you prefer to use contactors and
separate buses for 2 batteries, as opposed to diodes and allowing both
batteries to feed the same bus.
I recently saw an elegant circuit that does this and allows both batteries
to be charged by the alternator at the same time.
I have read your treatise on battery isolation so many times I can almost
quote it, but nowhere do you address the possibility that there might be a
way of allowing 3 electrical sources to "automatically" determine - using
diodes - which ones will be feeding the loads. It would seem to require so
much less pilot workload than flipping switches to cut in and out
batteries, requires less current than supporting 2 battery contactors, and
would still elegantly support the concept of annual battery rotation, low
voltage notification, etc.
Diodes are available now with voltage drop of 0.3V and with max forward
currents of 240A, so the diodes themselves would not seem to be an issue.
What am I missing?
Thanks,
Dave Morris
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: Flap motor testing |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Benford2@aol.com
In a message dated 2/24/2004 9:48:15 PM Mountain Standard Time,
james@nextupventures.com writes:
>
> Ben I must assume you are kidding with the comment (looking for the
> smileys), but just in case, there **ARE** women constructing these things
> ... and doing a mighty fine job of it.
>
> I hear that there are some young people that some of *would* call childern
> that are about building as well.
>
> James
>
Or course I was kiddin. One could get hung here in Wyoming by some pretty
fiesty woman.
do not archive.
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 10:02 AM 2/24/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
>
>
>Bob, I have not tried to measure the energy in the load dump event. When
>I started observing some component damage, I started to try to control
>it. This was with an alternator pulling about 35 to 40 amps.
>I tried the easy stuff first, and the 5KWatt TVS device was my second
>effort after the 1.5K.
>Regards, George
Understand. As soon as I can get the next revision of the 'Connection
to the printers, I'll be going up to B&C to run some factory stock
ND alternators in the battery-dump scenario and get some data. I'm
99% certain that some combination of TVS devices will provide the
needed protection but I can't size them without the numbers. I'm
also interested in seeing how well the stock alternator regulator
can stand off it's own transients.
>[PS... Bob, this is being sent as plaint text instead of HTML... should
>stop the gibberish from the last message.]
Yup, that works. The list-server won't pass html in a form
that folks e-mail application will understand. Plain text always works.
Bob . . .
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ANR Headsets |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Shaun Simpkins" <shauns@hevanet.com>
Do you mean you can't hear radio transmissions well?
Lowell is correct - ANR headsets should have exactly the opposite effect
of what you describe. Any sound that makes it into the earcup will have
its bass cut ( the ANR intended effect ). The earcup will provide increasing
attenuation with increasing frequency.
An unavoidable consequence of the ANR mechanism is that wind noise
frequencies - about 1000Hz, a relatively high pitch - are somewhat
boosted. The overall attenuation curve will show progressively increasing
attenuation, with a flattening between 500-2000Hz.
ANR headsets that weren't designed for good "music" reproduction will
have a very limited high frequency range. If the frequencies between 3K
and 8K are compromised you will get very poor speech discrimination.
Most ANR headsets fall into this category. You might
want to try a better quality headset, perhaps one with a music input. This
usually means that the speakers have been selected with a broad frequency
response in mind.
I have had good results with any Lightspeed product. The 20 3G and 30 3G
might be particularly applicable to your situation, since they have "bass boost"
and "treble boost" controls that are intended to partially compensate for
high-frequency hearing loss. But there are others. In general, up to about
$600/set, you get what you pay for.
Note also that any ANR headset I know of will not be that great at "realistic"
music
reproduction because it can't distinguish between externally-generated signals
and line-introduced signals. Like I said, anything that makes it inside the
earcup is affected by the ANR, and low frequencies are affected the most.
SS
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: | Essential bus alternate feed from two |
bat teries
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
bat teries
At 02:42 PM 2/24/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken Harrill
><KHarrill@osa.state.sc.us>
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
><bob.nuckolls@cox.net> batteries
>
>
> >During start I thought I would use the main battery for cranking engine,
> >the aux battery for powering the electronic ignition (to avoid any
> >possibility of kick back in the event main battery voltage drops below
> >min required for electronic ignition).
>
> ???? Is it the stated policy/recommendation by the manufacturer
> of the ignition system that you do this? I'm increasingly mystified
> by what I perceive as an upsurge in worries about this. Perhaps
> it's just that the economy is improving and more folks are building
> airplanes with electronic ignition. Market forces notwithstanding,
> I'm wondering if the risk is real and whether or not the manufacturers
> of these products are acknowledging a shortcoming in their product's
> design. The low voltage event during cranking is tens of milliseconds
> long as the starter motor spins up. There is no good reason why
> you as the user should have to be concerned about this. Designing
> sensitivity to this phenomenon out of the ignition system is
> a rudimentary technique of circuit design.
>
>Bob,
>
>This may be a legitimate "worry". I spent quite a bit of time and energy
>attempting to resolve the starting problems with my LSE ignition system. I
>have a permanent magnet Lycoming starter, a 17 AH battery, and I start the
>engine on the electronic ignition only. My engine would only start when I
>released the starter button. It always started, but it left me with an
>uneasy feeling that sometime, far away from home, it may not. The voltage
>(measured at the ignition module) drops to around 8 volts with the starter
>engaged, and the LSE does not fire at that voltage, regardless of what
>Klause claims. I resolved the problem for now by switching to an Odyssey
>battery, which does not produce quite as much voltage drop. A better
>solution is a B & C starter that draws less current, but that cost $$$. If
>I were building an airplane with two batteries, I would certainly consider
>starting on one and powering the electronic ignition from the other.
Hmmm. Did you try leaving the ignition switch off until after
the engine was rotating?
Bob . . .
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Z-14/RV6,7,9/PC680 (Dual-Dual) ?????? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <james@nextupventures.com>
This is more mechanical than electrical but relates to the positioning of
"electrical stuff". ....
I am curious if anyone has implememted Z-14 using dual PC-680's on the
firewall of an RV6A, 7A, or 9A.
- If you have, where did you mount the two batteries?
- Did you use Van's kit?
- Was there a problem with the wiring of the contactors in Van's proposed
location for the PC680 (their design is for one battery)?
- Did you mount the contactors elsewhere?
As I see it there are two potential locations for the batteries:
1. As proposed by Van's .. near the center recess, one on each side and
2. Lower left/right corner just high enough to clear the engine mount.
Both have their potential problems regarding routing of wires and/or removal
of the battery.
The other question is whether anyone who has done this had any weight and
balance issues. I don't think there are but just checking for actual
implementations.
Thanks,
James
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: Flap motor overload? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "buck" <buckaroo_banzai@the-pentagon.com>
Boeing uses the minimum flight crew required by the airplane.
BB
----------------------------------------------
Original Message
From: ""<Benford2@aol.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Flap motor overload?
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Benford2@aol.com
>
>In a message dated 2/23/2004 9:18:07 AM Mountain Standard Time,
>cgalley@qcbc.org writes:
>
>
>>
>> Having a second person in the cockpit is strictly prohibited by FARs for
our
>> amateur Built planes. Could generate a lot of problems both with the FAA
and
>> the insurance company.
>>
>> Cy Galley
>> Editor, EAA Safety Programs
>> cgalley@qcbc.org or sportpilot@eaa.org
>>
>>
>
>Some of these homebuilts get kinda complex and a second person would be a
>safety factor. Tell me, What does Boeing do on their first flights of new
and
>unproven designs??? Is there just one pilot??? After all they all start
life as a
>homebuilt...
>
>Ben Haas N801BH.
>
>
http://www.MyOwnEmail.com
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: | Essential bus alternate feed from two |
batteries
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
batteries
> ...
> See how things play for you with keeping a
> fresh battery installed every annual (or
> doing periodic battery tests to trigger
> a replacement). Odds are very much in your
> favor of never feeling a need for a second
> battery . . . but if you want to, it's
> a Saturday afternoon task.
Great advice - thanks!
Mickey
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
do not archive
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: | Essential bus alternate feed from two |
bat teries
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mark Steitle <msteitle@mail.utexas.edu>
bat teries
>...My engine would only start when I
> >released the starter button.
I have noticed this interesting condition when starting my 1995 GL-1500
Honda Goldwing motorcycle after it has sat in storage for a few weeks. If
I would charge the battery first, then this wouldn't happen. Sounds like
exactly the same thing to me. Condition has pretty much resolved upon
installing a new RG battery. Need to ride more often!
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: | Re: Two alternators-using total rated |
combined output
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
combined output
At 10:48 PM 2/23/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Carter"
><dcarter@datarecall.net>
>
>Bob, going way back to last August - you suggested it was "not simple" and
>"probably not cost effective" to install, for example, 2ea 20 amp
>alternators and plan on loading them up for near 40 amps steady load - that
>"balancing" and not "causing 1 to produce output over its rated value" was a
>big deal. (I'm paraphrasing & summarizing from the e-mail which is quoted
>below this.)
>
>I was just thinking today of installing two John Deere PM 20 amp
>alternators, using 2 different belts, so as to have a more fault tolerant
>system requiring 32 to 35 amp steady load, total. I have roughly analyzed
>my night/IFR system to be running about 32 amps, steady, under heaviest
>loads.
>
>Without asking you to design the system for me - I respect the work load you
>already have - could you give a quick tutorial to guide me thru the design
>and test of such a system? (or persuade me it's too hard to do with my lack
>of knowledge and test equip)?
it's relatively easy to make two wound field alternators
share a load. You build a "slaving" module that modifies
the bus sense lead for one regulator such that the other
regulator becomes the "master". You use a pair of shunts,
one in each alternator output lead to tell the slaving
module which what to steer the slave regulator so that
the currents are equal.
>Sounds like 1) the "magic" has to be in the "voltage regulator(s)", not just
>how the system is wired up; and 2) the most serious problem is 1 "20 amp
>RATED alternator" actually having the ability to put out much more, but at
>the expense of running over its "rating" and thus overheating and suffering
>a "stress" it was not designed for - probably the same for the REGULATOR
>that is also rated for 20 amps.
>
> - What is the "simplest" way to a) have the two identical regulators
>and alternators each share roughly 1/2 of the load, whatever it is, or, b)
>allow 1 alternator to go up to its rated output and then have any subsequent
>increase in load be picked up by the other alternator? Are there other
>"approaches" to this?
You'd have to build your own regulators to provide a low
current, bus voltage sense input that can be steered from
the outside. If you've got room for a 20A PM alternator,
isn't there enough room for a 40A ND alternator?
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: Dual fuel pumps |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 01:09 AM 2/25/2004 +0000, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: czechsix@juno.com
>
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>Just an FYI for you or anyone else out there considering one of the
>"Bendix thump-thump" pumps....I believe you're referring to the "beer can"
>cylindrical pumps found on lots of Piper/other spam cans. These used to
>be Bendix but were bought by Facet years ago, and Facet still produces
>them, but the newer models now use solid-state triggering to control the
>solenoid for pumping action.
<snip>
Good data Mark. Thanks!
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: Electric fuel pump circuit |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:47 PM 2/24/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss@bellsouth.net>
>
>Bob,
> I'm sorry I was not clear. I have a mechanical pump as well.
>Charlie
Okay, so there's little risk in wiring it for 7A (20AWG wire)
and running a 5A fuse during flyoff. Do some extensive testing
during flyoff to see that the 5A fuse is adequate . . . raise
to 7A if needs be but it seems unlikely. Whether or not you
add the relay is problematic . . . I think there's more risk
that the pump is NOT available because of failure in higher
circuit complexity than the risk of fire for hitting the
mountainside with an always hot battery bus feeder fused at 7A.
But as we've discussed here before, it'a a matter of taste
and subscription to long held and deeply rooted beliefs.
Start with 5A and lets revisit this discussion if it testing
shows that you can open the 5A fuse with repeated pump
actuations.
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: | Flap motor testing |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:48 AM 2/24/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Nightingale Michael"
><NightingaleMichaelV@JohnDeere.com>
>
>Possible heat build up in fuse from first two T&G's. Is the fuse
>cartridge a SLO-BLOW or a standard link type?
The ATC plastic fuse only comes in a medium speed link.
I'm mystified as to why this issue has jumped up on Mark's
airplane. There are LOTS of RV's flying with fused flap motor
circuits. Is there anyone flying that found it necessary to
fuse an RV flap motor at more than 10A?
Bob . . .
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: William Wynne's Corvair Conversions |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:38 PM 2/24/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan Branstrom"
><danbranstrom@verizon.net>
>
> > I'm certainly not qualified to assess anyone's
> > mental competency based on the degree of risk
> > mitigation they choose to fly with. I've seen
> > William Wynne's Corvair engine conversion presentations
> > at fly-ins. He's flown this engine in several
> > configurations with a single alternator, single battery,
> > single Kettering (stock) ignition system for what
> > is most certainly an electrically dependent engine.
> >
> > See http://www.flycorvair.com
> >
> > But with a single ignition system (that delivers
> > a high degree of reliability and service life with
> > reasonable attention to installation and maintenance)
> > there seems to be little added value by having more
> > than one, well maintained battery to power it.
> > He offers compelling reasoning to support that
> > philosophy.
> >
>I just went to William Wynne's Corvair College about a month ago. Risk
>management is a large part of his philosophy. He now advocates an ignition
>system with dual points going to dual coils with a coil switcher. (All are
>high quality parts, and the coils and coil switcher are kept cool and away
>from the engine).
I wonder if he indicated that he'd ever had a failure . . . or was this
simply belt-n-suspenders approach to a market steeped in the
value of redundant everything.
> He also does not advocate flying a Corvair under IFR
>conditions. For that, he says, go with a certified engine.
It would be interesting to know if his concerns have
any foundations with mechanical issues for the basic
engine . . . or whether they're limited to issues of
fuel delivery and ignition systems. I hope he shows up
at the Tandem Wing fly-in this year. I'd like to talk
with him again.
> The failure
>mode of the points is that they gradually lose their effectiveness, giving
>fair warning with hard starting.
>
>Ironically, there are people who don't like having a system with points, but
>prefer mags. As I understand it, mags have points.
Exactly. I used to replace points in my Kettering ignition cars
every fall along with other components as part of a just-before-
winter-tune-up. Car started great all winter and nothing was
badly worn by the next fall. Total cost of ignition and carburetor
refurbishment kit was about $25 and took a Saturday afternoon
to install. Cheap, easy and effective.
12,000 miles at average of 30 mph was 400 hours per year
on the points and plugs and they looked pretty good each
fall at replacement time. 400 hours on the average airplane
takes 8 years. Some engines on the C-195 were fitted with
one mag and one Kettering system. A friend of mine owned
one and had much more problems with the mag than he did
with the Kettering points-and-coil system.
>Because he is using a Corvair engine in a direct drive configuration and low
>rpm, he says the points will last a long time. (He is specific that only
>standard points that have a phenolic - not plastic- rubbing block are to be
>used. The springs on the competition points are too stiff and unnecessary
>at a max of around 3300 rpm). One person flying a Corvair (with a single
>point system), changed the points at the 25 hour mark, and noticed that
>there was no wear. Since then, he's got something like 800 hours on the
>same set of points. He performs regular maintenance on them, and has been
>inspecting and dressing, and re-gapping them as necessary. William is not
>advocating that, just illustrating how long-lived points can be with proper
>care.
Yup!
>William claims that since he's never seen lead fouling of the plugs on a
>Corvair airplane powerplant, he now uses a single plug per cylinder. (The
>engine was designed when high lead, high octane gasoline were common).
>
>The thing that impresses me about William is that if he advocates something,
>he's either flown it, run it on a test stand, or closely monitored someone
>else's use of it. For example, he has found by experimentation that the
>9.25:1 heads are actually less prone to detonation than the 8.25:1 heads.
>The reason? The quench area of the 9.25:1 heads is much larger, and
>produces much more swirling of the mixture during compression.
I was similarly impressed with his presentations. He's
a good scientist as well as able practitioner. A valuable
resource for the OBAM aircraft community.
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: Flap motor testing |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jerry2DT@aol.com
For what it's worth... I noted before we suffered two flap motor failures in
40 hrs on our RV6a, both were caused by "crap" between the brushes and
commutator. We never blew a fuse, but might it be possible that you could be having
the same thing happen and causing a blown fuse. I'm not electrically educated,
but seems possible. This particular problem has happened many times with other
RV's. Others think this gunk is grease coming from flap gearbox, but it would
have had to come through the motor housing and no evidence at all there. I
think it might be residue from the copper brushes. If it happens again I will
take pains to analyse it. The mystery continues...
Bob... thanks for all you do, you are a godsend.
Jerry Cochran
In a message dated 2/24/2004 11:57:21 PM Pacific Standard Time,
aeroelectric-list-digest@matronics.com writes:
From: Fiveonepw@aol.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Flap motor testing
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
Thanks to all for your thoughts on the flap fuse failure fiasco- lot's of
good info... The following is long, tedious and boring (unless you're an
electrical masochist!) so delete now if so inclined............
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: William Wynne's Corvair Conversions |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan Branstrom" <danbranstrom@verizon.net>
>I just went to William Wynne's Corvair College about a month ago. Risk
>management is a large part of his philosophy. He now advocates an ignition
>system with dual points going to dual coils with a coil switcher. (All are
>high quality parts, and the coils and coil switcher are kept cool and away
>from the engine).
I wonder if he indicated that he'd ever had a failure . . . or was this
simply belt-n-suspenders approach to a market steeped in the
value of redundant everything.
I believe it is a matter of looking at which items and under what conditions
they are most prone to failure. I don't think he's ever had a failure on
his craft, but he considers the coil and an individual set of points as the
parts you'd never want to fail. It's probably belt-and-suspenders.
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: Electric fuel pump circuit |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss@bellsouth.net>
Bob,
I was hoping you'd say that. (forget the relay) Do I understand you correctly?
You feel the pump should be wired to the battery bus?
Charlie
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
>At 08:47 PM 2/24/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss@bellsouth.net>
>>
>>Bob,
>> I'm sorry I was not clear. I have a mechanical pump as well.
>>Charlie
>
> Okay, so there's little risk in wiring it for 7A (20AWG wire)
> and running a 5A fuse during flyoff. Do some extensive testing
> during flyoff to see that the 5A fuse is adequate . . . raise
> to 7A if needs be but it seems unlikely. Whether or not you
> add the relay is problematic . . . I think there's more risk
> that the pump is NOT available because of failure in higher
> circuit complexity than the risk of fire for hitting the
> mountainside with an always hot battery bus feeder fused at 7A.
> But as we've discussed here before, it'a a matter of taste
> and subscription to long held and deeply rooted beliefs.
>
> Start with 5A and lets revisit this discussion if it testing
> shows that you can open the 5A fuse with repeated pump
> actuations.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Garmin 430, where to purchase |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: PeterHunt1@aol.com
Colt, I shopped around for my Garmin 530 and found the best deal to be from
John Stark, Stark Avionics, Columbus, Georgia (706) 321-1008. He'll even make
up connecting cables for you.
Pete Hunt
Clearwater, Florida
RV-6, installing engine
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: | Garmin 430, where to purchase |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Schaefer" <dschaefer1@kc.rr.com>
As far as I'm concerned the best pricing on any avionics is from Bill Pippen
at 830-997-8205. I priced Stark and found him higher so I bought my 430s
from Bill. Bill is an RV6 driver and a great guy.
David Schaefer
RV6-A Finish Kit
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Colt
Seavers
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 430, where to purchase
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Colt Seavers"
<rv7maker@hotmail.com>
Listers,
Where is the best place to purchase a garmin 430? Local avionics shop,
internet shop, mail order? Are there any warrantee issues to contend with
if you install it yourself?
-Ross Schlotthauer
www.experimentalair.com
RV-7 finishing
>From: "David Schaefer" <dschaefer1@kc.rr.com>
>Reply-To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 430 install manual
>Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 18:17:37 -0600
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Schaefer"
><dschaefer1@kc.rr.com>
>
>If you don't find it I can email you a copy.
>
>David
>RV6-A
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeffrey
>W. Skiba
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 430 install manual
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jeffrey W. Skiba"
><jskiba@icosa.net>
>
>I seem to remember that there was somewhere to download the install manual
>for garmin products in particular the 430? But I can not find it on there
>site, Anybody know where I can download this ??
>
>Thanks
>Jeff.
>
>
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: Essential bus alternate feed from two batteries |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Chad Robinson <crobinson@rfgonline.com>
John Slade wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Slade" <sladerj@bellsouth.net>
>
>>Wow - this is interesting. I seem to have inferred from all
>>your previous posts and the book that for people with
>>electrically dependent engines (ignition/fuel pump) like
>>auto conversions that two batteries were a "must".
>
> Yes, I've been finding this interesting too. Now I think of it, I'd like to
> be able to power my ebus (EFI, Fuel pumps, Injectors, Coils) from either
> battery. Is there a wiring diagram that covers this?
> John Slade
> Cozy IV
John, you can just use whatever diagram you prefer (Z-14 maybe?) and add a
second switch (or replace the SPST switch with a SPDT switch). The current
e-bus feed works via a wire from the battery bus to a switch to the e-bus. If
you lose your alternator, you can shut off the main contactor, eliminating its
load, and flip the switch, and the e-bus is hooked right to the battery.
So all you have to do is add a wire from the OTHER battery bus to a second
switch to the e-bus. You can technically do this with one switch but I prefer
two because it gives you more options - normal, e-bus on primary, e-bus on
secondary, e-bus on both (both switches on). You would need a 4-pole switch to
get the same functionality in a single control and they're both rare and
clumsy to use. Running on both means you can extend your range if your
alternator fails. Running on either/or lets you isolate a bad battery.
If you can hook your voltmeter up to your e-bus it makes isolating a bad
battery even easier - just flip the switches to alternate positions and see
which gives you a higher voltage (assuming the alternator is offline). This is
especially useful on the ground because you can directly check the voltage of
each battery separately - although this is really too simplistic to identify a
"good" battery, at least it will show you the charge level.
I can send a schematic, but it's really simple - just add a fuse, wire, and
switch per the existing diagrams but hook the second set up to the alternate
battery bus. There's no need for diodes because you control the supply
yourself via the switches.
Regards,
Chad
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: Flap motor testing |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
In a message dated 02/25/2004 3:18:46 PM Central Standard Time,
bob.nuckolls@cox.net writes:
I'm mystified as to why this issue has jumped up on Mark's
airplane. There are LOTS of RV's flying with fused flap motor
circuits. Is there anyone flying that found it necessary to
fuse an RV flap motor at more than 10A?
Flew again today with an LED front & center on the panel tied directly to the
fuse output- did many landings and, several "not so pretty" combined with a
fair amount of "flap abuse", and the damn fuse never blew- go figure...
I'm gonna keep the "idiot light" connected for a while and see what goes
down- if I learn anything, I'll letcha know!
Mark
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: Flap motor testing |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Benford2@aol.com
In a message dated 2/25/2004 8:32:19 PM Mountain Standard Time,
Fiveonepw@aol.com writes:
>
> Flew again today with an LED front & center on the panel tied directly to
> the
> fuse output- did many landings and, several "not so pretty" combined with a
> fair amount of "flap abuse", and the damn fuse never blew- go figure...
>
> I'm gonna keep the "idiot light" connected for a while and see what goes
> down- if I learn anything, I'll letcha know!
>
Ya see. A watched pot never boils. !!!
do not archive.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Antenna Questions |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Don Boardman <dboardm3@twcny.rr.com>
Hi All,
As mentioned on the list earlier, we are installing a Loran as a second nav
to our KMD 150 GPS. A friend had an antenna that he gave us. It is a
physical match to the Com Antennas found on most Cessnas. It indicates it is
a Loran antenna on the bottom.
Do I need to use the pre-amp that came with the Loran with this type
antenna?
I can always experiment and look at the results with and without the
pre-amp. Will it hurt to use the pre-amp if in fact it is not essential to
use?
My friend also brought with him an identical looking antenna with graphics
on its base that say: STS avionics. The identification tag on the bottom is
mostly gone. Does anyone know if this is a Com antenna or another Loran
antenna? The friend did not know.
Is there a way to tell which type it is?
Is there a way other than hooking an antenna to a unit to tell if it is good
to go.
A last question. At one time I was told that is was not good to have a
transmitter powered up without a functioning antenna attached. That
transmitting with no antenna could damage the transceiver. Is this true?
Panel all pre-wired was clecoed into the airframe tonight!!!!!,
Don B
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! --
|