Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:27 AM - Re: Annunciator Light Bulb (Eric M. Jones)
2. 06:32 AM - Re: Annunciator Light Bulb (Jack Lockamy)
3. 06:50 AM - Re: Fire Detector (Phil Birkelbach)
4. 07:11 AM - SPAMMING (Fergus Kyle)
5. 07:17 AM - Re: Fire Detector (Robert McCallum)
6. 07:51 AM - Re: Annunciator Light Bulb (Robert McCallum)
7. 11:30 AM - radio wiring (Steve Sampson)
8. 12:09 PM - Re: Annunciator Light Bulb (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 12:55 PM - Re: radio wiring (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 02:03 PM - Re: Field alternator circuit breaker (John Karnes)
11. 03:52 PM - Re: Fire Detector (David Carter)
12. 06:03 PM - Aluminum wire (Ernest Christley)
13. 06:49 PM - Re: Aluminum wire (Dwight Frye)
14. 06:57 PM - Re: Aluminum wire (Cy Galley)
15. 06:59 PM - Re: Aluminum wire (Cy Galley)
16. 10:55 PM - Re: A theoretical question (Jim and Lucy)
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: Annunciator Light Bulb |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy@att.net>
>Anyone have a source for a CM388 light bulb? These are the 12v, really
small light
>bulbs for my annunciator panel buttons. A Google search only showed one
>hit.... but they wanted $9 for each bulb and you had to buy 4 of em!!!
The economics of small bulbs dictates the $9 price. You can bet that most
filament instrument lamps are being sold from existing stocks and when they
are gone...you'll say, "Back in ought-four I could have bought them for just
nine bucks a pop!"
Ledtronics and many others sell LED retrofits. This would be my serious
consideration.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones@charter.net
"Nothing is too wonderful to be true."
- James Clerk Maxwell, discoverer of electromagnetism
"Too much of a good thing can be wonderful."
- Mae West, discoverer of personal magnetism
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: Annunciator Light Bulb |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy@att.net>
Thanks for the info Bob...
It's pretty strange. I have 6 annunciator bulbs in 3 annunciators.... 4 of them
are CM388s and 2-CM386s. The 4-CM388s light up fine, the 2-CM386 did not.
Now here's the strange part..... my electrical system is 12v!
As per your info, I should be using the CM386s. Why would 28v bulbs be working
and not the 12v bulbs in my 12v system?
Now I'm really confused.....
Jack Lockamy
Camarillo, CA
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: Fire Detector |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Phil Birkelbach" <phil@petrasoft.net>
Offshore we set up inputs to the safety system one of two ways. Either all
of the devices are normally closed and when the circuit opens then we take
appropriate action. Or there is a resistor or some kind of end of circuit
device that we can monitor to determine if the wire is broken. The
advantages of the second are that you can tell the difference between a
broken wire and a tripped device. The disadvantage is complexity. The
worst possible scenario is to have a device lose connection to the control
system and no one know it. Then have a fire or a process upset that the
device should have checked also go unnoticed because of it.
After saying that, most of the inputs to my annunciator in my RV-7 are going
to be NO, but I have a way to check that each is working prior to take-off.
So worst case is that I have both a sensor failure and the failure that the
sensor was to detect all in the same flight. In your case however I would
think that it would be a good idea to have the circuit NC because, as you
said, the fire that you are trying to detect is the one that will burn the
wires.
Phil
----- Original Message -----
From: "Troy Scott" <tscott1217@bellsouth.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Fire Detector
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Troy Scott"
<tscott1217@bellsouth.net>
>
> Bob wrote:
> You've got a 40-hour fly-off to do. Suggest you investigate these
> values and then enlighten us.
>
> Bob . . .
>
> Yes, but....., I think that many times the fly-off period is when major
> problems, if any, rear their scary heads. I don't want to wait until
after
> I need a fire detector to install one. Fortunately a few guys have made
> suggestions regarding maximum acceptable cowling exit air temperatures,
> ranging from 51degreesC to 86degreesC. I think I'll start out with a 95C
> encapsulated thermostat. If I get nuisance trips during the fly-off
> period, I'll increase the temperature range. Now for an important
question:
> Is a NO or a NC sensor better for this application? Or does it make any
> difference? I can imagine that NC might be better, since a fire might
> "open" a sensor wire......
>
> Regards,
> Troy
> tscott1217@bellsouth.net
>
>
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: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO@rac.ca>
Charlie,
Good luck with Slobbovia Outernational etc., however - could you
possibly use "B,c.c:" - Blind Carbon Copy for any address list containing
more than a very few addresses? What crooked servers do is relay messages
with large address lists AFTER having stripped the list for sale to
spammmers. Your last invitation contained all the neccessary ingredients for
Matronics to be stripping SPAM messages for the next 30 years.
Thanks,
Ferg
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: Fire Detector |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Robert McCallum <robert.mccallum2@sympatico.ca>
Critical sensors are always "fail-safe" in other words a failure of the
detection system sounds the alarm, OR they are monitored in some way
that gives indication of a failed system. The former is usually much
easier to implement. In your case the NC sensor serves this purpose.
Bob McC
Troy Scott wrote:
>Yes, but....
>Is a NO or a NC sensor better for this application? Or does it make any
>difference? I can imagine that NC might be better, since a fire might
>"open" a sensor wire......
>
>Regards,
>Troy
>
>
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: Annunciator Light Bulb |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Robert McCallum <robert.mccallum2@sympatico.ca>
Jack;
It is conceivable that the higher voltage bulbs were substituted into
the lower voltage system because the original bulbs were too bright. A
28 volt bulb in a 12 volt system is a very simple way to reduce
brightness if a lower wattage bulb is not conveniently available in the
correct voltage. It's also possible that coincidentally both of your 12
volt bulbs are burnt out. The other advantage of using the higher
voltage bulb is to dramatically increase its service life. Therefore, in
your case, the 12 volt bulbs would require replacement several times
before the 28 volt bulbs did, assuming equal usage.
Bob McC
Jack Lockamy wrote:
> The 4-CM388s light up fine, the 2-CM386 did not. Now here's the strange part.....
my electrical system is 12v!
> Why would 28v bulbs be working and not the 12v bulbs in my 12v system?
>
>Now I'm really confused.....
>
>Jack Lockamy
>Camarillo, CA
>
>
>
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Steve Sampson" <SSampson.SLN21@london.edu>
Am I correct in thinking the wires to the ears can be a pair of asw22 and to
the mike a shielded wire using the shield as the return assuming the PTT is
acting on the radio end?
Thanks, Steve.
---
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: Annunciator Light Bulb |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 06:28 AM 4/3/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy@att.net>
>
>Thanks for the info Bob...
>
>It's pretty strange. I have 6 annunciator bulbs in 3 annunciators.... 4
>of them are CM388s and 2-CM386s. The 4-CM388s light up fine, the 2-CM386
>did not. Now here's the strange part..... my electrical system is 12v!
>
>As per your info, I should be using the CM386s. Why would 28v bulbs be
>working and not the 12v bulbs in my 12v system?
>
>Now I'm really confused.....
As others have noted, the original designer may have used
28v lamps to achieve lower intensity as well as a HUGE increase
in lamp life. An incandescent lamp operated at 50% of rated
voltage puts out about 10% of rated intensity and has a life
of 4000 times the rated life. (Edison's earliest production
lamps operate at very low temperatures compared to modern
lamps . . . while rather low in light output and red in
color, some of his originals have been burning continuously
24 hrs a day since he screwed them in the sockets lots of
years ago).
As to lamps that don't work, there's probably another
perfectly good explanation . . . lamp burned out or
some part of the circuit is unhooked.
As to pricing, I'm not aware of any particular lamps going
obsolete to the extent that pricing them like antiques
is common. The lamps we're discussing are readily available
in full boxes for under $1 each. The $9 price cited
is undoubtedly the offering of someone who not
really interested in being a lamp dealer. If
I could offered d-sub pins at $1 each, I could
easily avoid being in the connector business too.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: radio wiring |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:29 PM 4/3/2004 +0100, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Steve Sampson"
><SSampson.SLN21@london.edu>
>
>Am I correct in thinking the wires to the ears can be a pair of asw22 and to
>the mike a shielded wire using the shield as the return assuming the PTT is
>acting on the radio end?
I think I'm getting an accurate image of your question . . .
If all the wires in a microphone and/or headphone circuit were
simply a twisted pair (headset) or twisted trio (microphone +
PTT), the system has a 99 plus percent chance of being just fine.
The major noise mitigation features to seek in wiring these
devices are (1) no ground loops - carry "grounds" all the way
back to radio/intercom and (2) close parallel proximity
of both inbound and outbound electrons for the device - twisted
pairs. If you choose to use shielded wires for any or all of these
circuits, you're now 99.9 plus percent assured of noise free
operation.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Field alternator circuit breaker |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Karnes" <jpkarnes@earthlink.net>
> Okay, it's almost a sure bet that unhooking the ov module will
> stop the tripping but it's worth a confirmation.
Unhooked the ov module and the same thing happened. I pulled all fuses but
the starter and a fuel pump and the circuit breaker still is tripping.
HELP!
>
> The next question to scope out is what's agitating the
> ov module? I presume the system ran well on the new module
> until recently . . . have you made any changes to the system . . .
> installed any new equipment?
No new equipment
> 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: | Re: Fire Detector |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Carter" <dcarter@datarecall.net>
Here's some thoughts on "temp range" for your detector system. I want to
cover two different types of "high temp" events:
1) exhaust leak (turns on OVERHEAT light in fighters) - ambient temp in
engine compartment won't get as hot as "flames"or fire - will be exhaust
gas, quite a bit below "flame temp" because the "flame" has already burned
out and the residual HOT gas is being empied out of the "flame container" -
still very hot and very destructive of whatever is close to the leak. Gets
diluted as it expands into the engine compartment and out wherever it exits.
(in jets, the overheat is for either a tailpipe (exhaust) leak OR a
compressor leak -over 1000 deg when air is compressed before having fuel
injected, and is bled off for various uses - is a "genie out of the bottle"
when it leaks - N/A to RV's)
2) FIRE (turns on FIRE light in military fighters). Fire can be from
fuel or spraying/leaking pressurized oil.
I'm planning on 1) an overheat light for temps around 500 degrees F (has to
be well above coolant temp of 240F max) and has to allow for some air
passing over the exhaust manifold and pipes that is going to be hot); then
2) a fire light for temps at or above 1500 F.
- I'll take refinements on those threshholds if anyone cites actual
threshholds in use in certified or military aircraft - 500 & 1500F are off
the top of my head.
Emergency procedure for "overheat" will be to reduce power to idle to see if
light goes out with reduction in volume and temp of exhaust leak. If
doesn't go off, and fire light does NOT come on, I may just keep it at idle
and glide to a suitable landing and takeoff place and use a bit of power to
assure a safe landing.
Emergency procedure for "fire" will be 1) shut off fuel to engine
compartment (save plane and occupants), 2) activate halogen fire
extinguisher system in engine compartment, 3) dead stick landing.
- Of course, I have to have confidence that the "fire" light really
means I have a fire. In the T-33, there were about 5 or 7 items that could
be causing the "fire" light to illuminate. #5 or 7 was "fire. I.e., wasn't
a very reliable system.
David Carter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Troy Scott" <tscott1217@bellsouth.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Fire Detector
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Troy Scott"
<tscott1217@bellsouth.net>
>
> Bob wrote:
> You've got a 40-hour fly-off to do. Suggest you investigate these
> values and then enlighten us.
>
> Bob . . .
>
> Yes, but....., I think that many times the fly-off period is when major
> problems, if any, rear their scary heads. I don't want to wait until
after
> I need a fire detector to install one. Fortunately a few guys have made
> suggestions regarding maximum acceptable cowling exit air temperatures,
> ranging from 51degreesC to 86degreesC. I think I'll start out with a 95C
> encapsulated thermostat. If I get nuisance trips during the fly-off
> period, I'll increase the temperature range. Now for an important
question:
> Is a NO or a NC sensor better for this application? Or does it make any
> difference? I can imagine that NC might be better, since a fire might
> "open" a sensor wire......
>
> Regards,
> Troy
> tscott1217@bellsouth.net
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
Excuse me if this has been discussed here before. I couldn't find a
search engine for the list, and Google has been nearly useless. Seems
that it is beginnning to turn up more and more sales adds, and less and
less information.
I'm building a Dyke Delta (just finished the elevons today!). The
battery is as far back in the tail as it can be, making for a starter
cable run of about 15ft. I'm trying to gather up information on the
feasibility of making this run with aluminum wire.
What I've gotten so far is from a thread on rec.aviation.homebuilt
(notice that Google in only NEARLY useless). I'd want to use #1 wire,
to keep the resistance low, but even that will save me about 3lbs over
the #4 copper. One person commented that Al wire has been used in some
certified ships (a solid bar was used in a Bellanca, if I remember
correctly).
My plan would be to run the aluminum from one side of a manual
contactor, to a block on the cockpit side of the firewall. I would run
the rest of the electrics from this block, and a jumper of #4 welding
wire would go out to the starter. The Al wire would be securely
strapped to a longeron of the steel tube fuselage.
What I can't find information on is what sort of connectors to use. I
know oxidized Al is resistive and it's different rate of expansion WILL
allow oxygen in a joint if the wrong metal is used. You can't just bolt
it down and hope for the best. Ideally, the wire ends would be TIG
welded onto a block of some sort of compatible metal.
Is this a reasonable idea, or are there already a dozen airplanes
sitting in trees because someone tried?
--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
"Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
alleviated by information and experience."
Veeduber
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: Aluminum wire |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dwight Frye <dwight@openweave.org>
Ernest,
I believe Eric Jones was pulling together some copper-clad aluminum
"fat wires" just for this sort of purpose. It was to have the light
weight of AL, but since it had a jacket of copper could be handled
just like solid copper wire. See :
http://www.periheliondesign.com/fatwires.htm
.. for more details. I can't remember if he actually has this available
or not, but I'm sure he'll chime in here and let you know if he does.
-- Dwight
do not archive
On Sat Apr 3 20:43:42 2004, Ernest Christley wrote :
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
>
>Excuse me if this has been discussed here before. I couldn't find a
>search engine for the list, and Google has been nearly useless. Seems
>that it is beginnning to turn up more and more sales adds, and less and
>less information.
>
>I'm building a Dyke Delta (just finished the elevons today!). The
>battery is as far back in the tail as it can be, making for a starter
>cable run of about 15ft. I'm trying to gather up information on the
>feasibility of making this run with aluminum wire.
>
>What I've gotten so far is from a thread on rec.aviation.homebuilt
>(notice that Google in only NEARLY useless). I'd want to use #1 wire,
>to keep the resistance low, but even that will save me about 3lbs over
>the #4 copper. One person commented that Al wire has been used in some
>certified ships (a solid bar was used in a Bellanca, if I remember
>correctly).
>
>My plan would be to run the aluminum from one side of a manual
>contactor, to a block on the cockpit side of the firewall. I would run
>the rest of the electrics from this block, and a jumper of #4 welding
>wire would go out to the starter. The Al wire would be securely
>strapped to a longeron of the steel tube fuselage.
>
>What I can't find information on is what sort of connectors to use. I
>know oxidized Al is resistive and it's different rate of expansion WILL
>allow oxygen in a joint if the wrong metal is used. You can't just bolt
>it down and hope for the best. Ideally, the wire ends would be TIG
>welded onto a block of some sort of compatible metal.
>
>Is this a reasonable idea, or are there already a dozen airplanes
>sitting in trees because someone tried?
>
>--
>http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
>"Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
> alleviated by information and experience."
> Veeduber
>
>
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: Aluminum wire |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
Piper used Aluminum cable. Bogart has an STC to replace it. If you use
Aluminum make sure you use the sealing compound for aluminum wire as AL
joints gradually corrode and become high resistance if it isn't used.
Incidentally my Bellanca uses only copper wire (1948) Why don't you ask John
Dyke for his opinion?
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley@qcbc.org or sportpilot@eaa.org
Always looking for articles for Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernest Christley" <echristley@nc.rr.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Aluminum wire
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ernest Christley
<echristley@nc.rr.com>
>
> Excuse me if this has been discussed here before. I couldn't find a
> search engine for the list, and Google has been nearly useless. Seems
> that it is beginnning to turn up more and more sales adds, and less and
> less information.
>
> I'm building a Dyke Delta (just finished the elevons today!). The
> battery is as far back in the tail as it can be, making for a starter
> cable run of about 15ft. I'm trying to gather up information on the
> feasibility of making this run with aluminum wire.
>
> What I've gotten so far is from a thread on rec.aviation.homebuilt
> (notice that Google in only NEARLY useless). I'd want to use #1 wire,
> to keep the resistance low, but even that will save me about 3lbs over
> the #4 copper. One person commented that Al wire has been used in some
> certified ships (a solid bar was used in a Bellanca, if I remember
> correctly).
>
> My plan would be to run the aluminum from one side of a manual
> contactor, to a block on the cockpit side of the firewall. I would run
> the rest of the electrics from this block, and a jumper of #4 welding
> wire would go out to the starter. The Al wire would be securely
> strapped to a longeron of the steel tube fuselage.
>
> What I can't find information on is what sort of connectors to use. I
> know oxidized Al is resistive and it's different rate of expansion WILL
> allow oxygen in a joint if the wrong metal is used. You can't just bolt
> it down and hope for the best. Ideally, the wire ends would be TIG
> welded onto a block of some sort of compatible metal.
>
> Is this a reasonable idea, or are there already a dozen airplanes
> sitting in trees because someone tried?
>
> --
> http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
> "Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
> alleviated by information and experience."
> Veeduber
>
>
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: Aluminum wire |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
P.S. If it were mine I'd find some where else to save the 4 pounds. It isn't
worth the trouble.
Cy Galley - Bellanca Champion Club
Newsletter Editor-in-Chief & EAA TC
www.bellanca-championclub.com
Actively supporting Aeroncas every day
Quarterly newsletters on time
Reasonable document reprints
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernest Christley" <echristley@nc.rr.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Aluminum wire
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ernest Christley
<echristley@nc.rr.com>
>
> Excuse me if this has been discussed here before. I couldn't find a
> search engine for the list, and Google has been nearly useless. Seems
> that it is beginnning to turn up more and more sales adds, and less and
> less information.
>
> I'm building a Dyke Delta (just finished the elevons today!). The
> battery is as far back in the tail as it can be, making for a starter
> cable run of about 15ft. I'm trying to gather up information on the
> feasibility of making this run with aluminum wire.
>
> What I've gotten so far is from a thread on rec.aviation.homebuilt
> (notice that Google in only NEARLY useless). I'd want to use #1 wire,
> to keep the resistance low, but even that will save me about 3lbs over
> the #4 copper. One person commented that Al wire has been used in some
> certified ships (a solid bar was used in a Bellanca, if I remember
> correctly).
>
> My plan would be to run the aluminum from one side of a manual
> contactor, to a block on the cockpit side of the firewall. I would run
> the rest of the electrics from this block, and a jumper of #4 welding
> wire would go out to the starter. The Al wire would be securely
> strapped to a longeron of the steel tube fuselage.
>
> What I can't find information on is what sort of connectors to use. I
> know oxidized Al is resistive and it's different rate of expansion WILL
> allow oxygen in a joint if the wrong metal is used. You can't just bolt
> it down and hope for the best. Ideally, the wire ends would be TIG
> welded onto a block of some sort of compatible metal.
>
> Is this a reasonable idea, or are there already a dozen airplanes
> sitting in trees because someone tried?
>
> --
> http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
> "Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
> alleviated by information and experience."
> Veeduber
>
>
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: A theoretical question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jim and Lucy <jpollard@mnsi.net>
There was once a french engine built called a Potez
It was about 100 hp and had battery and points ignition.
It had an electical system that allowed operation on
battery only or alternator only. There was a big
capacitor wired in the system somewhere to allow
this alternator only mode. The wireing diagram is
at
http://www.jodel.com/potezwiring.htm
So it may be possible to do this maybe you just
need a particular type of alternator and big capacitor.
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! --
|