Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:38 AM - Re: Stobe Noise (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
2. 08:20 AM - Second Com Antenna Placement (rmickey@ix.netcom.com)
3. 09:05 AM - Re Re: Re(buttal) Circuit Breakers and OVPs (Troy Scott)
4. 09:26 AM - Re: Re: Coax Cable (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 09:51 AM - Re: Second Com Antenna Placement pts rule (Brian Lloyd)
6. 09:56 AM - Re: Re Re: Re(buttal) Circuit Breakers and OVPs (Matt Prather)
7. 10:07 AM - Labeling of wires (ALWAYSPDG@aol.com)
8. 10:07 AM - Re: Second Com Antenna Placement pts rule (rmickey@ix.netcom.com)
9. 10:58 AM - Re: Re Re: Re(buttal) Circuit Breakers and OVPs (Eric M. Jones)
10. 11:26 AM - Re: Re Re: Re(buttal) Circuit Breakers and OVPs (Brian Lloyd)
11. 11:39 AM - Re: Re: Coax Cable (Walter Tondu)
12. 12:03 PM - Re: Second Com Antenna Placement (Brian Lloyd)
13. 12:07 PM - Re: Re: Re Re: Re(buttal) Circuit Breakers and (Brian Lloyd)
14. 01:51 PM - RF breakthro on Vans gauges (Richard Garforth)
15. 02:16 PM - Re: RF breakthro on Vans gauges (Alex Peterson)
16. 03:25 PM - Help with tachometer pickup (PeterHunt1@aol.com)
17. 03:50 PM - Re: RF breakthro on Vans gauges (Brian Lloyd)
18. 04:06 PM - Re: Help with tachometer pickup (Paul Schattauer)
19. 07:15 PM - Re: Help with tachometer pickup (Bill Hibbing)
20. 07:59 PM - Re: Labeling of wires (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
21. 08:59 PM - stick it in a cute blonde tonight! 15 (jan)
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 04:19 AM 5/5/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>Below is the result of your inquiry. It was submitted by
>Barry M. Schulte (FLYaDIVE@AOL.COM) on Wednesday, May 5, 2004 at 04:19:06
>
>Wednesday, May 5, 2004
>
>Barry M. Schulte
>
>,
>Email: FLYaDIVE@AOL.COM
>Comments/Questions: Hi Bob:
>
>I have been trying to remove Strobe Whine from my audio system. I found
>on your site (GREAT SITE)a circuit using Radio Shack parts. Only problem
>is the Radio Shack Part is no longer available (Part Number 270-030,
>Filter kit. Would you have the values of the components used (Choke and
>Capicator)?
I usually attack strobe whine at the source . . .
strobe power supply. They are notorious noise sources
but generally easy to tame. Try an off-the-shelf filter
like these from Radio Shack:
http://www.radioshack.com/product.asp?catalog%5Fname=CTLG&product%5Fid=270-051
http://www.radioshack.com/product.asp?catalog%5Fname=CTLG&product%5Fid=270-055
Install at the power supply location. Let us know
what you discover.
I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List
to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to
share the information with as many folks as possible.
A further benefit can be realized with membership on
the list. There are lots of technically capable folks
on the list who can offer suggestions too. You can
join at . . .
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/
Thanks!
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------
( Knowing about a thing is different than )
( understanding it. One can know a lot )
( and still understand nothing. )
( C.F. Kettering )
--------------------------------------------
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: | Second Com Antenna Placement |
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rmickey@ix.netcom.com
I have one Comat bent whip Com antenna mounted just aft of the battery box (next
to the firewall) in the midline of my RV6A. I have a second Archer wingtip
Com antenna in my right wingtip. The Archer is not performing up to my specifications
and I want to put a second bent whip Comat Com antenna somewhere. My
first choice would be behind the first on the midline of the belly. If I put
it there, how far back do I need to place it? Are there other locations that
would be better? My hanger mate has one on the belly and one on the turtledeck.
I don't particularly like the idea of putting the antenna on the top.
Thanks.
Ross Mickey
N9PT
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: Re Re: Re(buttal) Circuit Breakers and OVPs |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Troy Scott" <tscott1217@bellsouth.net>
Eric and Bob,
What do you know about these ECBs listed in AS&S?
ECB-14-02
THE ALL-ELECTRONIC CIRCUIT BREAKER
This circuit breaker has no mechanical parts, except for the reset switch.
The power switching and control components are completely solid state. It
has the added benefit of over- voltage and under-voltage protection. It will
turn off if the input voltage goes too high, protecting valuable avionics or
other equipment.
The above is a quote from the AS catalog. Even if we utilize the OVP in the
B&C VR, I wonder if one of these might be a good choice for a really "FAST"
field interrupt CB?
Another thought: For the ultimate in fast and cheap, why not just use a
fuse for field wire interrupt OVP? The fuse for that one item could be
conveniently located for in-flight replacement even if all other fuses are
behind the panel somewhere.
Regards,
Troy
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: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 02:27 PM 5/6/2004 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
>
>McFarland, Randy wrote:
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "McFarland, Randy"
> <Randy.McFarland@novellus.com>
> >
> > Along the lines of RG 400 use, can anyone tell me why the Garmin 327
> > Transponder installation manual suggests in their Antenna Cable table 2-1
> > the max length for the cable is 8.8 feet if using RG 400?
> > Is this length specific to the transponder antenna only?
>
>Yes. If you have a DME you can consider that it has the same limitation
>since it runs at approximately the same frequency as the transponder.
>
> > Can I run RG 400
> > for Com / Nav antennas longer than 8.8 feet? (like about 20' out to the
> > wingtip?)
>
>Yes.
>
>When you run a signal through coax some of it is lost in heating the
>dielectric between the center conductor and the shield. The loss at 1000
>MHz (where the transponder signal is) is much higher than the loss at 118
>MHz. There should be no problem running VHF comm and nav signals anyplace
>in the airplane using RG-400.
Something I can add to Brian's explanation is illustrated in
a page from our website at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/coaxloss.pdf
Referring to this drawing we see that RG-58 coax has about
30 db loss per 100' of length at transponder frequencies.
RG-400 (and RG-142) will have about 20 db of loss per
100'.
30 db attentuation means that a transponder signal will
loose 99.9% of it's strength while working its way down
100' of RG-58 while 99% of the signal will make it to
the other end of RG-400. Not really good figures in any
case. The point here is that RG58 has 10x the losses
as RG400 at these frequencies.
Now, consider a 10' run of coax to the transponder antenna.
RG-58 will toss off 3 db of your signal (50%) while RG-400
will toss off 2 db (about 37%). For this hypothetical
installation, there is a 12% gain in both outgoing and
incoming signal strengths for replacing RG58 with RG400
in the transponder installation for a 10' cable run.
At VHF comm frequencies, were looking at .7 db (15%) versus
.5 db (11%) for the same 10' run.
Bottom line is that EITHER RG-58 or RG-400 will offer
adequate functionality for the relatively short runs
of coax needed in light aircraft at either comm or
transponder frequencies. The biggest advantage of
RG-400 and its close cousins are modern, high temperature
and stable plastics plus the silver plated, double
shield construction.
In the case originally cited, Garmin is specifying their
equipment to meet published performance with a maximum
of (8.8/100)*20 or 1.75 db of attenuation in both transmit
and receive paths. If you need a longer run, expect
a small (probably imperceptible) degradation or you can
go with a whippier coax like RG-223 where the losses
are 17 db per 100' so you can use up to 10.3 feet of
coax without degrading performance below the published
specifications.
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: Second Com Antenna Placement pts rule |
name description ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
rmickey@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rmickey@ix.netcom.com
>
>
> I have one Comat bent whip Com antenna mounted just aft of the battery box (next
to the firewall) in the midline of my RV6A. I have a second Archer wingtip
Com antenna in my right wingtip. The Archer is not performing up to my specifications
and I want to put a second bent whip Comat Com antenna somewhere.
My first choice would be behind the first on the midline of the belly. If I put
it there, how far back do I need to place it? Are there other locations that
would be better? My hanger mate has one on the belly and one on the turtledeck.
I don't particularly like the idea of putting the antenna on the top.
The best isolation will come from putting one antenna on the top and one on the
bottom. If you do that there is a chance that the receiver in one radio will
still work and not become overloaded when the other radio transmits.
If you don't care you can place both antennas on the belly. The more distance
between them you can manage, the better it will work. Try to keep them at least
1M apart.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
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: Re Re: Re(buttal) Circuit Breakers and OVPs |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
I am still confused about why Eric says that there is a need for a fast
breaker in the field line. It seems like the only benefit to it is that
it might
shorten the duration of the over-voltage event. My impression is that
components built to DO160 standards will have no problem surviving
the transients associated with time constant required to open a standard
breaker....
As has been discussed (view in the archive), the reason not to use the
fuse is that there are short-lived bus transients present that may cause
nuisance trips of the circuit protection but which will cause no damage to
modestly rugged system components.
Regards,
Matt-
N34RD
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Troy Scott"
> <tscott1217@bellsouth.net>
>
> Eric and Bob,
>
snip
> The above is a quote from the AS catalog. Even if we utilize the OVP in
> the B&C VR, I wonder if one of these might be a good choice for a really
> "FAST" field interrupt CB?
>
> Another thought: For the ultimate in fast and cheap, why not just use a
> fuse for field wire interrupt OVP? The fuse for that one item could be
> conveniently located for in-flight replacement even if all other fuses
> are behind the panel somewhere.
>
> Regards,
> Troy
>
>
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: | Labeling of wires |
name@matronics.com, description@matronics.com, ----@matronics.com,
----------------------@matronics.com,
--------------------------------------------------@matronics.com
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: ALWAYSPDG@aol.com
I would like to ask the group if there is some sort of labeling system that
you would recommend when labeling wires. I am not asking what the hardware
should be, but, what sort of letters or numbers or combination thereof to use to
mark all of the different wires.
Thanks, Mike
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 |
|
description@matronics.com, ----@matronics.com,
----------------------@matronics.com,
--------------------------------------------------@matronics.com
| Subject: | Re: Second Com Antenna Placement pts rule |
name description ---- ----------------------
--------------------------------------------------
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rmickey@ix.netcom.com
Thanks, Brian.
When you say 1m apart, what distance are you measuring if they are for and aft
of each other? The distance between the mounting blocks or the distance between
the aft mounting block and the aft tip of the forward antenna?
Thanks again,
Ross
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Second Com Antenna Placement
> The more distance between them you can manage, the better it will work. Try
to keep them at least >1M apart.
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: Re Re: Re(buttal) Circuit Breakers and OVPs |
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
>I am still confused about why Eric says that there is a need for a fast
>breaker in the field line. It seems like the only benefit to it is that
>it might shorten the duration of the over-voltage event.
....As if that weren't reason enough....
The purpose of a fuse or circuit breaker is to interrupt the circuit if
something bad happens.
It is not always the case that excessive current is what trips breakers. But
usually, and in every aeroelectric case except the OVP case, excessive
current determines if and when the circuit breaker trips.
Now, most circuit breaker designs are designed with thermal stresses in
mind; that is, they protect the wire from melting and starting a fire. Speed
is hardly essential. If a short circuit causes a wire to overheat, whether
you cut off the power instantly or a second later usually makes little
difference. Thus most or all other breakers should be delayed trip.
In the OVP case, the alternator field circuit breaker is essentially
modified to trip on excessive voltage, in addition to excessive current.
This is accomplished by adding a device (a crowbar) that activates the
circuit breaker.
So unlike the current activated circuit breakers, one would certainly like
to minimize the dwell time of the over-voltage condition.
Is it necessary? You be the judge.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones@charter.net
"I wouldn't want to belong to a club that would accept someone like me as a
member."
--Groucho Marx.
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: Re Re: Re(buttal) Circuit Breakers and OVPs |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
Matt Prather wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
>
>
> I am still confused about why Eric says that there is a need for a fast
> breaker in the field line. It seems like the only benefit to it is that
> it might
> shorten the duration of the over-voltage event.
I suspect that the time it takes for the output of the alternator to fall off is
a lot longer than the time it takes for the field circuit breaker to open.
Remember, the output of an alternator doesn't go off instantly when you remove
field excitation. Likewise it doesn't come on instantly when you apply field
excitation. The armature (field) has its own time constant that is a function
of applied voltage and the inductance of the armature.
Bob probably knows the typical time constant of an alternator. I am only guessing.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Walter Tondu <walter@tondu.com>
On 05/07 11:23, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
[...]
> In the case originally cited, Garmin is specifying their
> equipment to meet published performance with a maximum
> of (8.8/100)*20 or 1.75 db of attenuation in both transmit
> and receive paths. If you need a longer run, expect
> a small (probably imperceptible) degradation or you can
> go with a whippier coax like RG-223 where the losses
> are 17 db per 100' so you can use up to 10.3 feet of
> coax without degrading performance below the published
> specifications.
[...]
Hi Bob,
Now I KNOW I should wait to ask this question during your seminar
here in Long Beach next month, but...
After reading your post I decided to do some more research via
the web, and to try to understand cabling and the various parameters
and data provided there, because now it seems that there are
more choices than RG400, RG223 for example. Of course, all I ended
up doing was confusing myself even more. Several of the data parameters
I found interesting to note were;
a) Attenuation Ratings - at differing frequencies
b) Power Ratings - at varying frequencies
c) Cable physical properties - terminals, diameter, shielding,
environmental factors, etc.
Now I'm sure that each of these is very important when determining
which cable to use for a specific purpose as transponders, comms
and navs all have different requirements
Of couse, I also found that the numbers a) and b) above varied
greatly from site to site, some indicating nominal values and some
with max values.
Outwardly it would seem that you would be able to select a cable
based upon all the above and it would be obvious which cable to use,
provided you have accurate information.
Can you recomment a source for accurate information and possible
suggested cables for most applications?
See you in a few weeks!
--
Walter Tondu
http://www.tondu.com/rv7
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: Second Com Antenna Placement |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
rmickey@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rmickey@ix.netcom.com
>
> Thanks, Brian.
>
> When you say 1m apart, what distance are you measuring if they are for and aft
of each other? The distance between the mounting blocks or the distance between
the aft mounting block and the aft tip of the forward antenna?
I was thinking about the distance between the mounting bases but more distance
is better. Top and bottom is better still.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
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: Re Re: Re(buttal) Circuit Breakers and |
OVPs
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
Eric M. Jones wrote:
> In the OVP case, the alternator field circuit breaker is essentially
> modified to trip on excessive voltage, in addition to excessive current.
> This is accomplished by adding a device (a crowbar) that activates the
> circuit breaker.
Actually, the crowbar OVP shorts the field circuit to ground cutting off the power
to the field right now. At that point it doesn't matter if the breaker takes
1ms or 100ms to open. The field in the alternator is already off.
> So unlike the current activated circuit breakers, one would certainly like
> to minimize the dwell time of the over-voltage condition.
The crowbar OVP circuit ensures that.
> Is it necessary? You be the judge.
No, it really isn't.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
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: | RF breakthro on Vans gauges |
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard Garforth" <richard@hawk.flyer.co.uk>
Seen some old postings regarding this issue - Has anyone found a fix yet? My MAP
gauge goes full scale using a top antenna but only part full scale using an
underside antenna.
Richard G-RVIX(RV9A)
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: | RF breakthro on Vans gauges |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@earthlink.net>
>
> Seen some old postings regarding this issue - Has anyone
> found a fix yet? My MAP gauge goes full scale using a top
> antenna but only part full scale using an underside antenna.
>
> Richard G-RVIX(RV9A)
Richard, the fix is to not look at it while transmitting:>)
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 463 hours
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Help with tachometer pickup |
rv-list-digest@matronics.com.pts.rule.name.description.----.----------------------.--------------------------------------------------
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: PeterHunt1@aol.com
After installing my SD20 alternator on the vacuum pad of my 0-360-A1A, I find
there isn't sufficient clearance for Van's tachometer transducer to screw
onto the tachometer outlet on the back of my engine. I built my all electric
panel around my SD20, so it will stay. Would someone help me understand my other
tachometer pickup options? Thanks.
Pete
Clearwater, FL
RV-6, installing the engine
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: RF breakthro on Vans gauges |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
Richard Garforth wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard Garforth"
> <richard@hawk.flyer.co.uk>
>
> Seen some old postings regarding this issue - Has anyone found a fix
> yet? My MAP gauge goes full scale using a top antenna but only part
> full scale using an underside antenna.
What have you tried? I am not familiar with Van's MAP gauge but I would not be
at all surprised to find it uses an automotive MAP sensor with three leads: power,
ground, and an output voltage that is proportional to MAP which may then
be read by a meter.
Here are the things I would try:
1. Shield the wiring from the MAP sensor to the indicator. Use some two-conductor
shielded tefzel cable such as your mic cable with the signal and power leads
inside and the shield is ground.
2. Place ferrite beads on the leads at both the sensor and indicator ends.
3. Bypass the signal and ground leads to the shield using .01 uF disc ceramic
capacitors at both ends of the wires.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
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: | Help with tachometer pickup |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Schattauer" <chasm711@msn.com>
Pete
Other vendors use a hall effect transistor mounted on a mag, some use a
strobe affair on the flywheel, light speed uses their timeing mechanism and
im sure there are others. I wasn't too happy with Vans cable to a
transmitter rig but was able to make it work.
Paul Schattauer
RV8 N808PS
50 hrs
Man with one tach always knows what his RPM is, man with two tachs is never
sure.
>From: PeterHunt1@aol.com
>Reply-To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com,
>rv-list-digest@matronics.com.pts.rule.name.description.----.----------------------.--------------------------------------------------
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Help with tachometer pickup
>Date: Fri, 7 May 2004 18:22:03 EDT
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: PeterHunt1@aol.com
>
>After installing my SD20 alternator on the vacuum pad of my 0-360-A1A, I
>find
>there isn't sufficient clearance for Van's tachometer transducer to screw
>onto the tachometer outlet on the back of my engine. I built my all
>electric
>panel around my SD20, so it will stay. Would someone help me understand my
>other
>tachometer pickup options? Thanks.
>
>Pete
>Clearwater, FL
>RV-6, installing the engine
>
>
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: Help with tachometer pickup |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Hibbing" <n744bh@bellsouth.net>
Pete,
Not sure if this will help or not but I had the same problem with the
clearance on my vacuum pump. I got an extension cable from Wicks (P/N
CEE-1) that took care of the clearance problem. The cable is flexible
also.
Bill
Glasair
----- Original Message -----
From: <PeterHunt1@aol.com>
<rv-list-digest@matronics.com.pts.rule.name.description.----.---------------
-------.-------------------------------------------------->
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Help with tachometer pickup
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: PeterHunt1@aol.com
>
> After installing my SD20 alternator on the vacuum pad of my 0-360-A1A, I
find
> there isn't sufficient clearance for Van's tachometer transducer to screw
> onto the tachometer outlet on the back of my engine. I built my all
electric
> panel around my SD20, so it will stay. Would someone help me understand
my other
> tachometer pickup options? Thanks.
>
> Pete
> Clearwater, FL
> RV-6, installing the engine
>
>
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: Labeling of wires |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
In a message dated 05/07/2004 11:08:00 AM Central Standard Time,
ALWAYSPDG@aol.com writes:
what sort of letters or numbers or combination thereof to use to
mark all of the different wires.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You could use a look-up table to indicate that wire #213 is the ground wire
from the Navaid head to the servo, or you could use a system that incorporates
something more intuitive like "M7-4SRV-" which could indicate:
"M"(main bus)
"7"(circuit 7 on main bus)
"4"(fourth wire on separate drawing you have generated for this device)
"SRV"(which is either one of the wires going to the servo, or that you are a
Stevie Ray fan 8-)
"-"(this is the negative or ground wire for the circuit)
Having one of the labeling systems is VERY helpful- I used a Brady Lablemaker
and it worked well, although there are many out there- do an archive seach
for more than you could ever need........
From The PosumWorks in TN
Mark -6A - 72 hours so far and what a damn BUTT KICKIN' MACHINE!!!!!!
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: | stick it in a cute blonde tonight! 15 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "jan" <lydiaxa@pobox.sk>
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! --
|