Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:27 AM - Re: RV-List: installing fire sleeve - basic question (j1j2h3@juno.com.c059c0b0a949b0512d)
2. 06:09 AM - ground returns? (Jay Brinkmeyer)
3. 06:56 AM - KX-125 Problem Solved (Jack Lockamy)
4. 07:15 AM - Protection Diodes (Rick)
5. 07:27 AM - Re: KX-125 Problem Solved (Wayne Sweet)
6. 07:54 AM - Re: Re: Load Dump mitigation (Paul Messinger)
7. 07:54 AM - Re: Re: Load Dump mitigation (Paul Messinger)
8. 08:27 AM - Re: KX-125 Problem Solved (cgalley)
9. 08:32 AM - Re: Protection Diodes (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 08:33 AM - Re: KX-125 Problem Solved (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 08:34 AM - Re: ground returns? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
12. 08:47 AM - Re: Re: Load Dump mitigation (Brian Lloyd)
13. 09:17 AM - Wichita Ice Storm (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
14. 09:41 AM - Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors (f1rocket@comcast.net)
15. 10:16 AM - Re: Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta))
16. 10:18 AM - Re: Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors (McFarland, Randy)
17. 10:44 AM - Re: Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors (Scott Bilinski)
18. 10:45 AM - Re: Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors (James Redmon)
19. 11:05 AM - Re: Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors (f1rocket@comcast.net)
20. 11:17 AM - Re: Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors (f1rocket@comcast.net)
21. 11:31 AM - Re: ground returns? (John Schroeder)
22. 11:57 AM - Load Dump Mitigation ()
23. 01:31 PM - Re: Load Dump Mitigation (Eric M. Jones)
24. 02:20 PM - Re: Ideas on painting panel? (Greg.Puckett@united.com)
25. 02:27 PM - Re: Wichita Ice Storm (John Schroeder)
26. 02:38 PM - Re: Re: Ideas on painting panel? (Bob Kuc)
27. 02:59 PM - Re: DC motor reversing relay schematic (Tom Brusehaver)
28. 03:48 PM - Re: Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors (Jim Streit)
29. 04:40 PM - Re: Re: Load Dump mitigation (Paul Messinger)
30. 04:40 PM - Re: Load Dump Mitigation (Paul Messinger)
31. 06:50 PM - Re: ground returns? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
32. 07:03 PM - Re: Re: Load Dump mitigation (George Braly)
33. 07:34 PM - Alternator control switch (D Fritz)
34. 09:44 PM - Re: Alternator control switch (Brian Lloyd)
35. 10:57 PM - COM static on 123.05 (aeroelectric@cleanh2o.com)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-List: installing fire sleeve - basic question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: j1j2h3@juno.com c059c0b0a949b0512d
On 12/19/04 "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>wrote;
(SNIP)
>I couple of years ago I attended the EAA show at Arlington Washington.
While
>there I bought a "ClampTite" tool for making clamps out of stainless
steel
>tie wire.
>Contact: http://198.63.56.18/pages/order.html
Their cheapest price is $40.00. You can get it for $22.05 at
https://www6.mailordercentral.com/modernfarmcodymercantile/searchprods.as
p
I agree that it is a very useful tool.
Jim Hasper - RV-7
Franklin, TN
Do not archive
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jay Brinkmeyer <jaybrinkmeyer@yahoo.com>
I'm starting to wire my RV-10... Are there any rules of thumb regarding which
components can use airframe ground versus needing a hard return ground wire?
I'm especially interested in landing / position lights, autopilot servo and
heated pitot as that's where I am today.
Cheers,
Jay Brinkmeyer
Colorado Springs, CO
=====
__________________________________
http://my.yahoo.com
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: | KX-125 Problem Solved |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jack Lockamy <jacklockamy@verizon.net>
Just wanted to report back on a recent post I made to the List... too many times
I never see any "fixes" getting reported back to the group.
The RV-7A I'm currently flying for my buddy (23.2 hours and counting...) has a
KX-125 installed. Comm works great, NAV always showed 'FLAGGED'.
A couple listers recommended we check to make sure there was a jumper between Pins
H and J. Sure enough.... no jumper! The builder/owner had indeed overlooked
the jumper when he wired/installed the harness.
Jumper was installed. NAV works as good as the comm now. BTW.... the NAV antenna
is a Bob Archer NAV antenna mounted in the RT wingtip. This thing was picking
up VORs located on the other side of hills were flying AWAY from!!! Amazing....
Thanks again.
Jack Lockamy
Camarillo, CA
Test Pilot N174TY
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: | Protection Diodes |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Rick <n701rr@yahoo.com>
I checked the archives but keep getting the same hits.
Can someone bring me up to speed on the protection diodes being used on the (battery)
master relay? I bought a couple from Aircraft Spruce but they came diodeless.
Do I need to upgrade??
Thanks in advance,
rick
Rick
Orlando, FL
http://www.geocities.com/n701rr/index.html
---------------------------------
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: KX-125 Problem Solved |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet@comcast.net>
Jack,
Could you give a source for the NAV antenna, web address please.
Thanks.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy@verizon.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: KX-125 Problem Solved
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jack Lockamy
> <jacklockamy@verizon.net>
>
> Just wanted to report back on a recent post I made to the List... too many
> times I never see any "fixes" getting reported back to the group.
>
> The RV-7A I'm currently flying for my buddy (23.2 hours and counting...)
> has a KX-125 installed. Comm works great, NAV always showed 'FLAGGED'.
>
> A couple listers recommended we check to make sure there was a jumper
> between Pins H and J. Sure enough.... no jumper! The builder/owner had
> indeed overlooked the jumper when he wired/installed the harness.
>
> Jumper was installed. NAV works as good as the comm now. BTW.... the NAV
> antenna is a Bob Archer NAV antenna mounted in the RT wingtip. This thing
> was picking up VORs located on the other side of hills were flying AWAY
> from!!! Amazing....
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Jack Lockamy
> Camarillo, CA
> Test Pilot N174TY
>
>
>
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 671 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!
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: Load Dump mitigation |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
Couple of comments.
First any load removal when the alternator is producing power is a load
dump. Turn off your navcom and you get a load dump. Landings lights bigger
load dump etc.
The secret that keeps these load dumps from causing a problem is the battery
or something on the buss that is capable of absorbing the load dump without
an excessive voltage increase. Small (1-5 amp) load dumps can be mitigated
with A 10-30k mfd battery.
Yes your approach will work but there is no need to turn off the alternator
before shutdown.
The real concern is not the field but the current in the "B" lead.
Looking at Bobs designs you can see there is a contactor in the "B" lead of
internally regulated alternators in case the alternator fails in the max
output mode,
An OVP that opens this contactor can produce a large load dump that can
stress the alternator electronics including apparently the internal regular
of vans alternators.
Another just as big a problem is disconnection of the battery when the
alternator is charging it. Here the system buss will overvoltage and the OVP
will trip with the same end result.
I have gone into this and lots more in my report but the simple conclusion
is as a minimum a load dump clamp across the "B" lead of internally
regulated alternators.
BTW externally regulated alternators have the same load dump, the difference
is the regulator is isolated so the regulator is not the issue but the
internal diodes in the power side of the alternator can be damaged if the
"B" lead is disconnected under load.
What happens is the output current wants to keep going and the output
voltage increases (to hundreds of volts if necessary) until the higher
voltage finds a load.
So if you have an external regulated alternator and disconnect the battery
when its being charges the rest of the system must absorb the current that
was being delivered to the battery.
If the system load is only a few amps and the battery is being charged at
say 20 amps the 20 amp load dump is diverted to the system and the buss
voltage increases until something absorbs the excess current. Again the OVP
circuit can shutdown the alternator regulator (see Bob's circuits but the
over voltage can exceed the duration of the crowbar action and leave a
smaller but still a problem remaining.
There are several different issues here and so far on this list I have only
addressed load dump protection for the internally regulated alternator,
specifically when the "B" lead is disconnected when the engine is running.
As Eric was and is my partner in the electrical system analysis which
includes load dump, the part Eric is selling is a convenient mechanical
package of a well tested design that evolved during our testing.
Paul
PS sorry but mind is drugged up some so thoughts are not as well spelled out
as I would like.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Sipp" <rsipp@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Load Dump mitigation
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard Sipp"
<rsipp@earthlink.net>
>
> Eric:
>
> I am impressed, as an electrical theory student still in 101 what you
wrote
> looks like a master's class and very interesting.
>
> I know you have an interest in selling your WhackJacks (love the name) but
> is there an operational technique that will also mitigate load dump; i.e.
> with engine idling turn off all electronic loads, deactivate alternator
> field, shut down engine.
>
> Regards
> Dick Sipp
> RV4/RV10
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Load Dump mitigation
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones"
> > <emjones@charter.net>
> >
> >
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "George Braly"
<gwbraly@gami.com>
> >> With the battery off line, I have repeatedly been able to destroy
5KP18
> >>devices with load dumps from 40 amp alternators on 14 volt systems.
> >>
> >> Regards, George
> >
> > George....George....George....Something else is going on in your test
> > setup
> > to blow the 5KP18's. A schematic and enough information to duplicate
your
> > results would be appreciated.
> >
> > Paul Messinger and I have been working on this for some time and I agree
> > with him that blowing up the 5KP18 seems impossible. There is one way it
> > might have happened--Zeners and Mosorbs and Transorbs have a very
> > (picosecond) short trip time. It would seem to be good practice to try
by
> > component placement and very short lead lengths to keep the trip time
very
> > short by minimizing lead inductance (thus length). Engineers familiar
with
> > high frequencies would do this by second nature.
> >
> > A small note in the 1N6267A-series On-Semi datasheet page 5, gives one
> > pause: "Some input impedance...is essential to prevent overstress of the
> > protection device. This impedance should be as high as possible, without
> > restricting the circuit operation."
> >
> > Oops....! It is true that the initial discharge of capacitors,
inductors,
> > batteries, static accumulations, etc. would be infinite were it not for
> > lead
> > inductance (and a little internal resistance and stray
> > capacitance...etc.).
> > So On Semiconductor says use the highest impedance that will still do
the
> > job.
> >
> > Paul and I and others have discussed the proper value for the Load Dump
> > Suppressor trip voltage. I was holding out for 22 volts but Paul
convinced
> > me that it made no sense to go any higher than was absolutely necessary
to
> > allow the other OVP devices to function. Since this OVP voltage seems to
> > be-- by consensus--16.2V, then 18V was entirely adequate. Why not...?
> > Nothing good happens by letting the voltage get higher.
> >
> > I am now selling the WhackJack Load Dump Suppressor (18V) on my website
> > that
> > will do the job. It uses three Mosorbs, since the oscilloscope shows a
> > very
> > nice flattening of the Load Dump curve overshoot when using parallel
> > devices. The redundancy is nice too.
> >
> > See: http://www.periheliondesign.com/whackjack18.htm
> >
> > Paul has been a bit under the weather lately but I anxiously await the
> > finished Load Dump report.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Eric M. Jones
> > www.PerihelionDesign.com
> > 113 Brentwood Drive
> > Southbridge MA 01550-2705
> > Phone (508) 764-2072
> > Email: emjones@charter.net
> >
> > "telegraph is a kind of a very, very long cat. You pull his tail in New
> > York
> > and his head meows in Los Angeles. And radio operates exactly the same
> > way--
> > you send signals here, they receive them there. The only difference is
> > that
> > there is no cat."
> > --Albert Einstein
> >
> >
> >
>
>
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: Load Dump mitigation |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
A public thank you for our telecom. (I had requested a private discussion on
this)
For the rest of the group; We concluded that we were both right. George has
a slightly different application than what is under discussion on this list
with the standard electrical system circuit. However the failures Gorge had
were real, repeatable, and currently with no definable cause.
On the other hand I have tested hundreds of times with lower power
protection devices and had no failures.
We both are puzzled at what is different that could cause them to fail for
George and not for Paul. The application is essentially identical with
regard to the use of a transorb to clamp load dumps.
The issue is open but neither of us has any ideas at present.
George went on to a different approach that is a little more complex (than a
single transorb) that, In my opinion, is far superior to anything I have
seen to date for load dump protection etc.
Georges solution is a drop in replacement to the failed transorbs that
worked with no failures. This shows that something was killing the transorbs
and his design under the identical conditions did not fail. While we do not
know what was killing the transorbs we have a more robust design solution.
I have encouraged George to consider marketing this module (currently a part
of a larger product)
Thanks again George.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Load Dump mitigation
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
>
> I talked with Paul at some length today.
>
> You are right, he is a sick puppy, right now.
>
> Hope he gets better.
>
> Eric, I'm not saying your device does not work. I don't know that. I
assume it works, just because you say it does and you do good work.
>
> OTOH, I have blown a couple of dozen 1.5, and even 5K TVS devices of a
variety of different trip voltages.
>
> They did not protect other components in the same system.
>
> 40amp alternator at 4000 rpm, into landing lights for a load.
>
> Switch the landing lights off ... and ZAP... smoke comes out.
>
> I tried several of them in various combinations in parallel --- more
smoke.
>
> That was my experience. After playing around trying to figure it out
over a period of a couple of months, I confessed defeat, and backed up and
re-thought the whole issue, and took a different approach that is
relatively inexpensive, straightforward, and works. Consistently.
>
> Further, it is thermally protected so that it does not fail from overload.
>
> It works so well that I made a flight a few weeks ago - - 2.5 hours,
night, IMC flight with nothing pumping electrons but the 40 AMP
alternator - - the battery and aircraft primary alternator were disabled.
At the end of the flight, I load dumped every thing in a real airplane with
a real panel of expensive electronics. Everything came back to life.
>
> Regards, George
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric M.
Jones
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Load Dump mitigation
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones"
<emjones@charter.net>
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
> > With the battery off line, I have repeatedly been able to destroy 5KP18
> >devices with load dumps from 40 amp alternators on 14 volt systems.
> >
> > Regards, George
>
> George....George....George....Something else is going on in your test
setup
> to blow the 5KP18's. A schematic and enough information to duplicate your
> results would be appreciated.
>
> Paul Messinger and I have been working on this for some time and I agree
> with him that blowing up the 5KP18 seems impossible. There is one way it
> might have happened--Zeners and Mosorbs and Transorbs have a very
> (picosecond) short trip time. It would seem to be good practice to try by
> component placement and very short lead lengths to keep the trip time very
> short by minimizing lead inductance (thus length). Engineers familiar with
> high frequencies would do this by second nature.
>
> A small note in the 1N6267A-series On-Semi datasheet page 5, gives one
> pause: "Some input impedance...is essential to prevent overstress of the
> protection device. This impedance should be as high as possible, without
> restricting the circuit operation."
>
> Oops....! It is true that the initial discharge of capacitors, inductors,
> batteries, static accumulations, etc. would be infinite were it not for
lead
> inductance (and a little internal resistance and stray
capacitance...etc.).
> So On Semiconductor says use the highest impedance that will still do the
> job.
>
> Paul and I and others have discussed the proper value for the Load Dump
> Suppressor trip voltage. I was holding out for 22 volts but Paul convinced
> me that it made no sense to go any higher than was absolutely necessary to
> allow the other OVP devices to function. Since this OVP voltage seems to
> be-- by consensus--16.2V, then 18V was entirely adequate. Why not...?
> Nothing good happens by letting the voltage get higher.
>
> I am now selling the WhackJack Load Dump Suppressor (18V) on my website
that
> will do the job. It uses three Mosorbs, since the oscilloscope shows a
very
> nice flattening of the Load Dump curve overshoot when using parallel
> devices. The redundancy is nice too.
>
> See: http://www.periheliondesign.com/whackjack18.htm
>
> Paul has been a bit under the weather lately but I anxiously await the
> finished Load Dump report.
>
> Regards,
> Eric M. Jones
> www.PerihelionDesign.com
> 113 Brentwood Drive
> Southbridge MA 01550-2705
> Phone (508) 764-2072
> Email: emjones@charter.net
>
> "telegraph is a kind of a very, very long cat. You pull his tail in New
> York
> and his head meows in Los Angeles. And radio operates exactly the same
way--
> you send signals here, they receive them there. The only difference is
that
> there is no cat."
> --Albert Einstein
>
>
> ---
>
>
> ---
>
>
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: KX-125 Problem Solved |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "cgalley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
bobsantennas@earthlink.net is Bob Archer's e-mail!
Cy Galley - Bellanca Champion Club
Newsletter Editor-in-Chief & EAA TC
www.bellanca-championclub.com
Actively supporting Bellancas every day
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: KX-125 Problem Solved
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Wayne Sweet"
<w_sweet@comcast.net>
>
> Jack,
> Could you give a source for the NAV antenna, web address please.
> Thanks.
> Wayne
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy@verizon.net>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: KX-125 Problem Solved
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jack Lockamy
> > <jacklockamy@verizon.net>
> >
> > Just wanted to report back on a recent post I made to the List... too
many
> > times I never see any "fixes" getting reported back to the group.
> >
> > The RV-7A I'm currently flying for my buddy (23.2 hours and counting...)
> > has a KX-125 installed. Comm works great, NAV always showed 'FLAGGED'.
> >
> > A couple listers recommended we check to make sure there was a jumper
> > between Pins H and J. Sure enough.... no jumper! The builder/owner had
> > indeed overlooked the jumper when he wired/installed the harness.
> >
> > Jumper was installed. NAV works as good as the comm now. BTW.... the
NAV
> > antenna is a Bob Archer NAV antenna mounted in the RT wingtip. This
thing
> > was picking up VORs located on the other side of hills were flying AWAY
> > from!!! Amazing....
> >
> > Thanks again.
> >
> > Jack Lockamy
> > Camarillo, CA
> > Test Pilot N174TY
> >
> >
> >
>
> I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
> It has removed 671 spam emails to date.
> Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
> Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!
>
>
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: Protection Diodes |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 07:14 AM 1/6/2005 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Rick <n701rr@yahoo.com>
>
>I checked the archives but keep getting the same hits.
>Can someone bring me up to speed on the protection diodes being used on
>the (battery) master relay? I bought a couple from Aircraft Spruce but
>they came diodeless. Do I need to upgrade??
>
>Thanks in advance,
>rick
Yup, get some diodes from Radio Shack (2 for $1) and
do the "upgrade" . . .
See
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/s701-1l.jpg
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/spikecatcher.pdf
Bob . . .
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: KX-125 Problem Solved |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
Jack, thank you for this feedback!
Bob . . .
At 06:55 AM 1/6/2005 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jack Lockamy
><jacklockamy@verizon.net>
>
>Just wanted to report back on a recent post I made to the List... too many
>times I never see any "fixes" getting reported back to the group.
>
>The RV-7A I'm currently flying for my buddy (23.2 hours and counting...)
>has a KX-125 installed. Comm works great, NAV always showed 'FLAGGED'.
>
>A couple listers recommended we check to make sure there was a jumper
>between Pins H and J. Sure enough.... no jumper! The builder/owner had
>indeed overlooked the jumper when he wired/installed the harness.
>
>Jumper was installed. NAV works as good as the comm now. BTW.... the NAV
>antenna is a Bob Archer NAV antenna mounted in the RT wingtip. This thing
>was picking up VORs located on the other side of hills were flying AWAY
>from!!! Amazing....
>
>Thanks again.
>
>Jack Lockamy
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: ground returns? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 06:07 AM 1/6/2005 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jay Brinkmeyer
><jaybrinkmeyer@yahoo.com>
>
>I'm starting to wire my RV-10... Are there any rules of thumb regarding which
>components can use airframe ground versus needing a hard return ground wire?
>I'm especially interested in landing / position lights, autopilot servo and
>heated pitot as that's where I am today.
Yes. Remote items in airplane which are neither strong antagonists
nor vulnerable victims can be grounded locally. This includes
lighting and pitot heaters. I'd run all other accessories to
the ground block on the firewall.
Bob . . .
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: Load Dump mitigation |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Jan 6, 2005, at 10:54 AM, Paul Messinger wrote:
> We both are puzzled at what is different that could cause them to fail
> for
> George and not for Paul. The application is essentially identical with
> regard to the use of a transorb to clamp load dumps.
I can see a scenario that would cause what George has been seeing. Load
dump occurs because it takes a finite amount of time for the B-field in
the armature to collapse when one reduces the field current (no longer
asking the alternator to produce as much current). I can see George's
problem occurring if the regulator is slew-rate limited in reducing the
field current. In that case he is not seeing an actual a load-dump
incident but rather a delay in the regulator reducing the output of the
alternator which would make the available energy a LOT higher. Any
chance George's regulator had a big cap across the field output to
reduce switching noise from the field circuit?
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
Antoine de Saint-Exupry
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: | Wichita Ice Storm |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
We've been pre-occupied with the consequences of Tuesday's
ice storm. Two of our family's households are without power.
Our house stayed lit up but event today, my uninterruptible
beeps from time to time . . . pieces of ice falling from trees
and lines are causing short interruptions in power.
The last of the old Bradford Pears in our neighborhood was
at the west end of our house and relatively protected from
the winds. I was working in my office when the first limb
fell . . . really noisy! After a few hours, the only limbs
left on the tree are those which extended over the house!
I've posted a few pictures at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Ice/
I'm trying to get spooled back up on tasks at Raytheon
so my participation over the next few days will be limited.
We're supposed to get some warm weather Saturday and Sunday
that will allow me to start on the wreckage. Should get
enough fireplace wood for the next five years out of that
old tree!
Bob . . .
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors |
0.50 MIME_BOUND_NEXTPART Spam tool pattern in MIME boundary
0.01 RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE Received: by and from look like IP addresses
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: f1rocket@comcast.net
Thought I'd share a "gotcha" that I found out about today. If you're using a GRT
EIS system and a Lightspeed Engineering electronic ignition, you CANNOT use
the Lightspeed to drive the RPM input to the EIS without modification of the
EIS unit. Sandy at EIS said she could walk me through the modification, or I
could send the unit in for them to fix. Neither looked appealing to me so I'm
just driving the RPM input from the magneto instead.
If you are going to order an EIS unit, you might want to let them know if you are
using a LSE ignition system so they can ship the unit to you correctly the
first time.
As an aside, I'm a little disappointed that there isn't any way to drive the RPM
input with both signals. Now, I won't be able to measure the RPM drop when
the EI is shut off during run up. It's not a big deal, but it would be nice if
the EIS unit handled this.
I looked at using the other side of the DPDT mag switches to drive the RPM input,
but the progressive transfer switch used (I think it's a 2-5) doesn't really
work in this case.
Randy
F1 Rocket
www.pflanzer-aviation.com
Thought I'd share a "gotcha" that I found out about today. If you're using a GRT
EIS system and a Lightspeed Engineering electronic ignition, you CANNOT use
the Lightspeed to drive the RPM input to the EIS without modification of the EIS
unit. Sandy at EIS said she could walk me through the modification, or I could
send the unit in for them to fix. Neither looked appealing to me so I'm just
driving the RPM input from the magneto instead.
If you are going to order an EIS unit, you might want to let them know if you are
using a LSE ignition system so they can ship the unit to you correctly the
first time.
As an aside, I'm a little disappointed that there isn't any way to drive the RPM
input with both signals. Now, I won't be able to measure the RPM drop when the
EI is shut offduring run up. It's not a big deal, but it would be nice if the
EIS unit handled this.
I looked at using the other sideof the DPDT mag switches to drive the RPM input,
but the progressive transfer switch used (I think it's a 2-5) doesn't really
work in this case.
Randy
F1 Rocket
www.pflanzer-aviation.com
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: | Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart@iss.net>
Randy I had the same issue on my ACS 2002 unit and since the pick up off
the mag is from the sensor and NOT the p-lead, then you will get the rpm
drop checking either unit with the ACS unit.
But I am with you, I was very disappointed to find this out.
Does yours get rpm from P-lead?
Mike
S8
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
f1rocket@comcast.net
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: f1rocket@comcast.net
Thought I'd share a "gotcha" that I found out about today. If you're
using a GRT EIS system and a Lightspeed Engineering electronic ignition,
you CANNOT use the Lightspeed to drive the RPM input to the EIS without
modification of the EIS unit. Sandy at EIS said she could walk me
through the modification, or I could send the unit in for them to fix.
Neither looked appealing to me so I'm just driving the RPM input from
the magneto instead.
If you are going to order an EIS unit, you might want to let them know
if you are using a LSE ignition system so they can ship the unit to you
correctly the first time.
As an aside, I'm a little disappointed that there isn't any way to drive
the RPM input with both signals. Now, I won't be able to measure the
RPM drop when the EI is shut off during run up. It's not a big deal,
but it would be nice if the EIS unit handled this.
I looked at using the other side of the DPDT mag switches to drive the
RPM input, but the progressive transfer switch used (I think it's a 2-5)
doesn't really work in this case.
Randy
F1 Rocket
www.pflanzer-aviation.com
Thought I'd share a "gotcha" that I found out about today. If you're
using a GRT EIS system and a Lightspeed Engineering electronic ignition,
you CANNOT use the Lightspeed to drive the RPM input to the EIS without
modification of the EIS unit. Sandy at EIS said she could walk me
through the modification, or I could send the unit in for them to fix.
Neither looked appealing to me so I'm just driving the RPM input from
the magneto instead.
If you are going to order an EIS unit, you might want to let them know
if you are using a LSE ignition system so they can ship the unit to you
correctly the first time.
As an aside, I'm a little disappointed that there isn't any way to drive
the RPM input with both signals. Now, I won't be able to measure the RPM
drop when the EI is shut offduring run up. It's not a big deal, but it
would be nice if the EIS unit handled this.
I looked at using the other sideof the DPDT mag switches to drive the
RPM input, but the progressive transfer switch used (I think it's a 2-5)
doesn't really work in this case.
Randy
F1 Rocket
www.pflanzer-aviation.com
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: | Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "McFarland, Randy" <Randy.McFarland@novellus.com>
I just had Sandy walk me thru the modification to the EIS and it was simple
and took 5 minutes. Believe it or not, she had me remove two ceramic
components from the board, and that was it. Haven't fired up the engine yet,
so don't know if I did it works yet, but soon (I hope!!)
Randy
-----Original Message-----
From: f1rocket@comcast.net [mailto:f1rocket@comcast.net]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: f1rocket@comcast.net
Thought I'd share a "gotcha" that I found out about today. If you're using
a GRT EIS system and a Lightspeed Engineering electronic ignition, you
CANNOT use the Lightspeed to drive the RPM input to the EIS without
modification of the EIS unit. Sandy at EIS said she could walk me through
the modification, or I could send the unit in for them to fix. Neither
looked appealing to me so I'm just driving the RPM input from the magneto
instead.
If you are going to order an EIS unit, you might want to let them know if
you are using a LSE ignition system so they can ship the unit to you
correctly the first time.
As an aside, I'm a little disappointed that there isn't any way to drive the
RPM input with both signals. Now, I won't be able to measure the RPM drop
when the EI is shut off during run up. It's not a big deal, but it would be
nice if the EIS unit handled this.
I looked at using the other side of the DPDT mag switches to drive the RPM
input, but the progressive transfer switch used (I think it's a 2-5) doesn't
really work in this case.
Randy
F1 Rocket
www.pflanzer-aviation.com
Thought I'd share a "gotcha" that I found out about today. If you're using a
GRT EIS system and a Lightspeed Engineering electronic ignition, you CANNOT
use the Lightspeed to drive the RPM input to the EIS without modification of
the EIS unit. Sandy at EIS said she could walk me through the modification,
or I could send the unit in for them to fix. Neither looked appealing to me
so I'm just driving the RPM input from the magneto instead.
If you are going to order an EIS unit, you might want to let them know if
you are using a LSE ignition system so they can ship the unit to you
correctly the first time.
As an aside, I'm a little disappointed that there isn't any way to drive the
RPM input with both signals. Now, I won't be able to measure the RPM drop
when the EI is shut offduring run up. It's not a big deal, but it would be
nice if the EIS unit handled this.
I looked at using the other sideof the DPDT mag switches to drive the RPM
input, but the progressive transfer switch used (I think it's a 2-5) doesn't
really work in this case.
Randy
F1 Rocket
www.pflanzer-aviation.com
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: | Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
When I ordered my VM-1000 I had to specify what ignition I was going to
use. I am sure this is important and if you dont mention it, well, you get
what you got. For the LightSpeed ignition I think I also had to install a
resistor somewhere dont remember exactly.
At 10:18 AM 1/6/2005 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "McFarland, Randy"
><Randy.McFarland@novellus.com>
>
>I just had Sandy walk me thru the modification to the EIS and it was simple
>and took 5 minutes. Believe it or not, she had me remove two ceramic
>components from the board, and that was it. Haven't fired up the engine yet,
>so don't know if I did it works yet, but soon (I hope!!)
>Randy
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: f1rocket@comcast.net [mailto:f1rocket@comcast.net]
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors
>
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: f1rocket@comcast.net
>
>Thought I'd share a "gotcha" that I found out about today. If you're using
>a GRT EIS system and a Lightspeed Engineering electronic ignition, you
>CANNOT use the Lightspeed to drive the RPM input to the EIS without
>modification of the EIS unit. Sandy at EIS said she could walk me through
>the modification, or I could send the unit in for them to fix. Neither
>looked appealing to me so I'm just driving the RPM input from the magneto
>instead.
>
>If you are going to order an EIS unit, you might want to let them know if
>you are using a LSE ignition system so they can ship the unit to you
>correctly the first time.
>
>As an aside, I'm a little disappointed that there isn't any way to drive the
>RPM input with both signals. Now, I won't be able to measure the RPM drop
>when the EI is shut off during run up. It's not a big deal, but it would be
>nice if the EIS unit handled this.
>
>I looked at using the other side of the DPDT mag switches to drive the RPM
>input, but the progressive transfer switch used (I think it's a 2-5) doesn't
>really work in this case.
>
>Randy
>F1 Rocket
>www.pflanzer-aviation.com
>
>Thought I'd share a "gotcha" that I found out about today. If you're using a
>GRT EIS system and a Lightspeed Engineering electronic ignition, you CANNOT
>use the Lightspeed to drive the RPM input to the EIS without modification of
>the EIS unit. Sandy at EIS said she could walk me through the modification,
>or I could send the unit in for them to fix. Neither looked appealing to me
>so I'm just driving the RPM input from the magneto instead.
>
>If you are going to order an EIS unit, you might want to let them know if
>you are using a LSE ignition system so they can ship the unit to you
>correctly the first time.
>
>As an aside, I'm a little disappointed that there isn't any way to drive the
>RPM input with both signals. Now, I won't be able to measure the RPM drop
>when the EI is shut offduring run up. It's not a big deal, but it would be
>nice if the EIS unit handled this.
>
>I looked at using the other sideof the DPDT mag switches to drive the RPM
>input, but the progressive transfer switch used (I think it's a 2-5) doesn't
>really work in this case.
>
>Randy
>F1 Rocket
>www.pflanzer-aviation.com
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "James Redmon" <james@berkut13.com>
I'm not sure what sensor the EIS uses on the magneto. But, if the GRT unit
is using a hall-effect sensor that plugs into the "vent" hole of the magneto
as most monitors do, you will still get RPM reading with/with-out either the
mag or LSE ignition firing. The magneto still generates "juice" that is
picked up by the sensor as it rotates, even when that energy is grounded to
the magneto's case (off position).
I have this exact setup using my ACS2002 engine monitor. Works like a
charm.
James Redmon
Berkut #013 N97TX
http://www.berkut13.com
> As an aside, I'm a little disappointed that there isn't any way to drive
> the RPM input with both signals. Now, I won't be able to measure the RPM
> drop when the EI is shut off during run up. It's not a big deal, but it
> would be nice if the EIS unit handled this.
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: | Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: f1rocket@comcast.net
Yep.
-------------- Original message --------------
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)"
>
>
> Randy I had the same issue on my ACS 2002 unit and since the pick up off
> the mag is from the sensor and NOT the p-lead, then you will get the rpm
> drop checking either unit with the ACS unit.
>
> But I am with you, I was very disappointed to find this out.
> Does yours get rpm from P-lead?
>
> Mike
> S8
Yep.
-------------- Original message --------------
-- AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)"
<MSTEWART@ISS.NET>
Randy I had the same issue on my ACS 2002 unit and since the pick up off
the mag is from the sensor and NOT the p-lead, then you will get the rpm
drop checking either unit with the ACS unit.
But I am with you, I was very disappointed to find this out.
Does yours get rpm from P-lead?
Mike
S8
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: Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: f1rocket@comcast.net
Nope. The EIS unit wires directly to the P-lead of the magneto to sense the ignition
pulses. When the mag is grounded, there's no signal.
Since it looks like I'm not the first one to hit this problem, (I didn't think
I was), it sure would be nice if GRT would modify their stellar documentation
to inform us. In fact their wiring diagram for the tach input clearly states
that "Connect directly to the tach output from the ignition system. No resistor
required." Well, this doesn't apply to the Lightspeed.
-------------- Original message --------------
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "James Redmon"
>
> I'm not sure what sensor the EIS uses on the magneto. But, if the GRT unit
> is using a hall-effect sensor that plugs into the "vent" hole of the magneto
> as most monitors do, you will still get RPM reading with/with-out either the
> mag or LSE ignition firing. The magneto still generates "juice" that is
> picked up by the sensor as it rotates, even when that energy is grounded to
> the magneto's case (off position).
>
> I have this exact setup using my ACS2002 engine monitor. Works like a
> charm.
>
> James Redmon
> Berkut #013 N97TX
> http://www.berkut13.com
>
Nope. The EIS unit wires directly to the P-lead of the magneto to sense the ignition
pulses. When the mag is grounded, there's no signal.
Since it looks like I'm not the first one to hit this problem, (I didn't think
I was), it sure would be nice if GRT would modify their stellar documentation
to inform us. In fact their wiring diagram for the tach input clearly states that
"Connect directly to the tach output from the ignition system. No resistor
required." Well, this doesn't apply to the Lightspeed.
-------------- Original message --------------
-- AeroElectric-List message posted by: "James Redmon" <JAMES@BERKUT13.COM>
I'm not sure what sensor the EIS uses on the magneto. But, if the GRT unit
is using a hall-effect sensor that plugs into the "vent" hole of the magneto
as most monitors do, you will still get RPM reading with/with-out either the
mag or LSE ignition firing. The magneto still generates "juice" that is
picked up by the sensor as it rotates, even when that energy is grounded to
the magneto's case (off position).
I have this exact setup using my ACS2002 engine monitor. Works like a
charm.
James Redmon
Berkut #013 N97TX
http://www.berkut13.com
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: ground returns? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder@perigee.net>
Bob -
We are doing a fiberglass airplane and grounding everything back to the G3
or G2 grounds. When a piece of avionics like a Garmin (UPS) SL-30 NAV/COM
has 2 grounds (one for comm and one for nav) is it OK to tie them together
at the stack and use one ground wire to the G3?
Thanks,
John
>> I'm starting to wire my RV-10... Are there any rules of thumb regarding
>> which components can use airframe ground versus needing a hard return
>> ground wire? I'm especially interested in landing / position lights,
>> autopilot servo and heated pitot as that's where I am today.
>
> Yes. Remote items in airplane which are neither strong antagonists
> nor vulnerable victims can be grounded locally. This includes
> lighting and pitot heaters. I'd run all other accessories to
> the ground block on the firewall.
>
> Bob . . .
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: | Load Dump Mitigation |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Eric M. Jones"
<emjones@charter.net>
> Paul Messinger and I have been working on this for some time....skip....
1/6/2005
Hello Eric, As a complete electrical novice I have watched this load dump
information exchange on the list with the same fascination that one has when
watching a poisonous snake show on public TV. I don't believe that there are
any King Cobras living in northern Virginia, but now I want to hedge my bets
with your help.
My engine ( TCM IO-240 B9B) has a 60 AMP gear driven alternator that is
externally regulated by a B&C LR3B-14 voltage regulator. My questions are:
1) Are any components in my electrical / electronic system at risk as I turn
major amperage items (landing lights, taxi lights, pitot heat, etc) off
during normal in flight engine operating conditions?
2) Are any components in my electrical / electronic system at risk if I
should accidentally turn my battery switch off during normal in flight
engine operating conditions? Single battery, single alternator wiring.
In case of the low voltage warning light coming on (abnormal flight
conditons) indicating insufficient alternator output, I would be turning the
battery switch off and operating on an essential bus.
3) If any components are at risk in items 1) and 2) above would a Whack Jack
mitigate / eliminate such risk?
4) Is a Whack Jack a one time use item? In other word, does it get consumed
in one use and need to be replaced after that one use, or does it continue
to provide protection for multiple events of load dump?
Many thanks for your help.
OC
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RE: Load Dump Mitigation |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
OC
> 1) Are any components in my electrical / electronic system at risk as I
turn
> major amperage items (landing lights, taxi lights, pitot heat, etc) off
> during normal in flight engine operating conditions?
Nobody really knows how many planes' electronics have been damaged by load
dump. Paul's point (and mine) is that this problem has been known about for
many years. The car companies have strict standards for it. The deleterious
effects are well understood. So let's fix it.
> 2) Are any components in my electrical / electronic system at risk if I
should accidentally turn my battery switch off during normal in flight
> engine operating conditions? Single battery, single alternator wiring.
Yes, that's why you never could turn off your car battery I suspect.
> In case of the low voltage warning light coming on (abnormal flight
conditions) indicating insufficient alternator output, I would be turning
the >battery switch off and operating on an essential bus.
If the alternator has failed you are better off disconnecting battery than
if the alternator is cranking happily.
> 3) If any components are at risk in items 1) and 2) above would a
WhackJack mitigate / eliminate such risk?
Yes, that's the idea.
> 4) Is a Whack Jack a one time use item? In other word, does it get
consumed in one use and need to be replaced after that one use, or does it
continue to provide protection for multiple events of load dump?
It should never require replacement. A check at annuals would be to measure
the trip voltage, I'll add that to my literature.
> Many thanks for your help.
>
> OC
>
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones@charter.net
"Doctors are the same as lawyers; the only difference is that
lawyers merely rob you, whereas doctors rob you and kill
you too."
~ Anton Chekhov
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Ideas on painting panel? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Greg.Puckett@united.com
Sorry for the bad link,
For some strange reason when I post to the list from work, some special
character get replace with what must be their ASCII code. In this case
it is replacing the underscore with '5F'
the link should be:
http://204.31.68.69/DCP=5F252.jpg
the file name after the url should be dcp=5F252.jpg
if you see a 5F after dcp replace it with an underscore.
Greg
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: Wichita Ice Storm |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder@perigee.net>
Bob -
As one who was hit by an early December ice storm in North Carolina a
couple of years back, I know what you are enduring. It really is a time
of beauty, but lots of angst when the power goes down for 5 days. With a
well there are no "facilities", as well as no lights, etc..
Great pictures - and beautiful too.
Hope all is getting back to normal.
Best,
John
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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: Ideas on painting panel? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bob Kuc" <bkuc1@tampabay.rr.com>
Try this link http://204.31.68.69/DCP_252.JPG
----- Original Message -----
From: <Greg.Puckett@united.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Ideas on painting panel?
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Greg.Puckett@united.com
>
> Sorry for the bad link,
>
>
> For some strange reason when I post to the list from work, some special
> character get replace with what must be their ASCII code. In this case
> it is replacing the underscore with '5F'
>
> the link should be:
>
>
> http://204.31.68.69/DCP=5F252.jpg
>
>
> the file name after the url should be dcp=5F252.jpg
>
> if you see a 5F after dcp replace it with an underscore.
>
> Greg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.8 - Release Date: 1/3/2005
>
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
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: DC motor reversing relay schematic |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tom Brusehaver" <cozytom@mn.rr.com>
I don't know if you have seen my lm18200 controller:
http://home.mn.rr.com/brusehaver/circuit.html
The software on the page isn't real good. I have updated
what is there and am using that. It works with the
landing brake linear actuator and the strong electric
trim (you need a 0.01uf cap near the motor).
Let me know if you like it, or want any help.
tom
On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 23:52:03 -0800, Richard Riley <richard@RILEY.NET>
wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Riley
> <richard@riley.net>
>
> James, if you can wait a few weeks I'm having an IC board with an
> LMD18200
> H-bridge motor controller made up. It's good for 3 amps continuous, 6
> amps
> peak. I'll be using it for a landing brake too.
>
>
> At 10:15 PM 1/2/05, you wrote:
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "James Redmon"
>> <james@berkut13.com>
>>
>> Can someone point me to a schematic for a DC motor circuit reversing
>> polarity using a SPDT switch and two relays. I'll also be using up/dn
>> limit
>> switches but I think I can figure out where they fit if not already in
>> the
>> diagram. ;-)
>>
>> This is for a high current linear actuator application.
>>
>> James Redmon
>> Berkut #013 N97TX
>> http://www.berkut13.com
>>
>>
>
>
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: | Re: Electronic Ignition and Engine Monitors |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jim Streit <wooody04@bellsouth.net>
f1rocket@comcast.net wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: f1rocket@comcast.net
>
>Thought I'd share a "gotcha" that I found out about today. If you're using a
GRT EIS system and a Lightspeed Engineering electronic ignition, you CANNOT use
the Lightspeed to drive the RPM input to the EIS without modification of the
EIS unit. Sandy at EIS said she could walk me through the modification, or I
could send the unit in for them to fix. Neither looked appealing to me so I'm
just driving the RPM input from the magneto instead.
>
>If you are going to order an EIS unit, you might want to let them know if you
are using a LSE ignition system so they can ship the unit to you correctly the
first time.
>
>
>I looked at using the other sideof the DPDT mag switches to drive the RPM input,
but the progressive transfer switch used (I think it's a 2-5) doesn't really
work in this case.
>
>Randy
>F1 Rocket
>www.pflanzer-aviation.com
>
>
>
>Randy and all, The EIS doen _not_ need to be modified if you are using the Lightspeed
lll, but it does need the modification for the lightspeed ll
>
>
Jim Streit
90073
finish
Lightspeed lll owner....
>
>
>
>
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Load Dump mitigation |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
Worth asking about. The alternator regulator is George design not auto
based.
Still the transorb should take it.
The peak was not clipped resulting in other component damage and the
transorb simply burned up as really burned. These things should both clip
(it did not) and take much more than it was asked to do thus the question.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl@lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Load Dump mitigation
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
>
> On Jan 6, 2005, at 10:54 AM, Paul Messinger wrote:
>
> > We both are puzzled at what is different that could cause them to fail
> > for
> > George and not for Paul. The application is essentially identical with
> > regard to the use of a transorb to clamp load dumps.
>
> I can see a scenario that would cause what George has been seeing. Load
> dump occurs because it takes a finite amount of time for the B-field in
> the armature to collapse when one reduces the field current (no longer
> asking the alternator to produce as much current). I can see George's
> problem occurring if the regulator is slew-rate limited in reducing the
> field current. In that case he is not seeing an actual a load-dump
> incident but rather a delay in the regulator reducing the output of the
> alternator which would make the available energy a LOT higher. Any
> chance George's regulator had a big cap across the field output to
> reduce switching noise from the field circuit?
>
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
> brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
> +1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
>
> I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
> Antoine de Saint-Exupry
>
>
Message 30
| 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: Load Dump Mitigation |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
> 2) Are any components in my electrical / electronic system at risk if I
> should accidentally turn my battery switch off during normal in flight
> engine operating conditions? Single battery, single alternator wiring.
It matters not what type of alternator (and or regulator) you have you are
going to have buss voltage regulation issues with no battery.
You should not be able to turn off the battery (Physical interlock is best)
with the alternator still on. Erics clamp will keep things under 24V but are
you sure all your equipment is rated for 24V?? I have several that has an
upper limit of 20V.
> In case of the low voltage warning light coming on (abnormal flight
> conditons) indicating insufficient alternator output, I would be turning
the
> battery switch off and operating on an essential bus.
FIRST TURN OFF THE ALTERNATOR, NEVER NEVER disconnect the battery when the
alternator is on line unless your electrical system is specifically designed
to work in this mode and few are.
Paul
Message 31
| 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: ground returns? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 02:31 PM 1/6/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder"
><jschroeder@perigee.net>
>
>Bob -
>
>We are doing a fiberglass airplane and grounding everything back to the G3
>or G2 grounds. When a piece of avionics like a Garmin (UPS) SL-30 NAV/COM
>has 2 grounds (one for comm and one for nav) is it OK to tie them together
>at the stack and use one ground wire to the G3?
>
>Thanks,
I'd run separate wires to G3. That way loss of one wire doesn't
crap both radios.
Bob . . .
Message 32
| 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: Load Dump mitigation |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
Brian,
Good question about the "slew rate" on the regulator.
The regulator was specifically designed to be certified hardware - - - AND built
into the alternator in place of the automotive regulators. As such, it is designed
so as to avoid the single point failure modes and the potential for "run-away"
that are normally inherent in the automotive built-in regulator designs.
Those are very good and very reliable units - - and because of the mass production
and QC efforts, they are nearly bullet proof, but they do have some
design features that are more appropriate for vehicles that can pull over to
the side of the road and stop.
In any event, on this regulator, the full ON to full OFF slew rate to kill the
field current is a fraction of the duration of a normal load dump event.
Further, the fully independent over voltage circuit operates at even faster rates
to kill the field current when it senses over voltage conditions.
Regards, George
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Load Dump mitigation
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Jan 6, 2005, at 10:54 AM, Paul Messinger wrote:
> We both are puzzled at what is different that could cause them to fail
> for
> George and not for Paul. The application is essentially identical with
> regard to the use of a transorb to clamp load dumps.
I can see a scenario that would cause what George has been seeing. Load
dump occurs because it takes a finite amount of time for the B-field in
the armature to collapse when one reduces the field current (no longer
asking the alternator to produce as much current). I can see George's
problem occurring if the regulator is slew-rate limited in reducing the
field current. In that case he is not seeing an actual a load-dump
incident but rather a delay in the regulator reducing the output of the
alternator which would make the available energy a LOT higher. Any
chance George's regulator had a big cap across the field output to
reduce switching noise from the field circuit?
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
Antoine de Saint-Exupry
---
---
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Alternator control switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: D Fritz <dfritzj@yahoo.com>
Here's a question for the list: I'm working up my wiring architecture right now
and trying to keep parts count low and simple. As a result, I'm questioning
the need for an alternator control switch. In normal operation, don't I just
want the alternator to come alive when the main bus is powered (via the main
contactor) and the engine begins to turn? Is there any time I would want to turn
the alternator off with the engine running in normal operations? In a non-normal
situation, could I not just pull the alternator field circuit breaker
to take the alternator off line? (Keep in mind, the need to disable the alternator
appears to be a very low probability event, I know I've never needed to.)
I'm not a EE, so if this question is way out in left field, I apologize for
taking up time and bandwidth, but I just can't seem to see why I would need to
include this switch in the architecture.
Thanks for all your helpful experience, the list is an endless source of learning
thanks to all of you.
Dan Fritz
---------------------------------
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Alternator control switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Jan 6, 2005, at 10:32 PM, D Fritz wrote:
> In normal operation, don't I just want the alternator to come alive
> when the main bus is powered (via the main contactor) and the engine
> begins to turn?
Yes.
> Is there any time I would want to turn the alternator off with the
> engine running in normal operations?
No.
> In a non-normal situation, could I not just pull the alternator field
> circuit breaker to take the alternator off line?
Yes.
This is how I wire things. The battery master switch is a double-pole
unit with one pole controlling the battery contactor and the other
controlling the alternator field. You can't turn off the battery with
the alternator left on. If you really need the alternator off, pull the
alternator field breaker.
> (Keep in mind, the need to disable the alternator appears to be a very
> low probability event, I know I've never needed to.) I'm not a EE, so
> if this question is way out in left field, I apologize for taking up
> time and bandwidth, but I just can't seem to see why I would need to
> include this switch in the architecture.
Your thinking seems very clear and proper to me but then, I agree with
you so you must be right. ;-)
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
Antoine de Saint-Exupry
Message 35
| 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: | COM static on 123.05 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: aeroelectric@cleanh2o.com
I've been scratching my head and searching the archives about this
problem. No static on 120.6 or 118.3. Static on 123.05 and 122.7.
My COM worked fine for > 125 hours and now this.
I've checked all the connections. I do have grounded ignition
switch wires. I don't have the problem on the ground, only at
cruise. I noticed that if I put the ignition switch in R or L
no static. I only have static on BOTH. So I replaced the switch
- no joy.
The static tone does change with RPM so I 'know' that it is
ignition noise.
Any thoughts on what to do? I don't want to fly on one magneto.
(It's a Jabiru 3300 with stock ignition.)
Cheers, Joe E
N633Z @ BFI
150 hours
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! --
|