Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:24 AM - Re: Open letter to the list (James E. Clark)
2. 12:29 AM - Re: Open letter to the list (James E. Clark)
3. 02:52 AM - Electrical System Design (Richard Talbot)
4. 06:28 AM - Re: Open letter to the list (Gordon or Marge Comfort)
5. 07:03 AM - Re: Toggle switches with lock (Hans Teijgeler)
6. 07:47 AM - Re: DC rated switches clamav-milter version 0.80j on juliet.albedo.net (Joel Jacobs)
7. 07:52 AM - Re: Electrical System Design (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 08:23 AM - Re: Re: Tools for knurled switch nuts (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 08:31 AM - Re: Open letter to the list (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 08:31 AM - Re: Dual Electronic Starting Issues (Hans Teijgeler)
11. 08:33 AM - standby regulator for sale (Ron Raby)
12. 09:06 AM - Re: DC rated switches clamav-milter version 0.80j on juliet.albedo.net (923te)
13. 09:27 AM - Re: Re: Tools for knurled switch nuts (John Schroeder)
14. 10:04 AM - Jabiru 2200 (Mervin Friesen)
15. 11:49 AM - Re: DC rated switches (Leo J. Corbalis)
16. 12:01 PM - Re: Shrink tube expanding? (Leo J. Corbalis)
17. 02:54 PM - Re: Dual Electronic Starting Issues (Ken)
18. 04:57 PM - Re: Open letter to the list (Emrath)
19. 05:21 PM - Question (Sigmo@aol.com)
20. 06:20 PM - E-Mag/P-Mag Electronic Ignition (John Swartout)
21. 06:32 PM - solid state relays (D Fritz)
22. 07:02 PM - Re: solid state relays (James Freeman)
23. 07:13 PM - Re: E-Mag/P-Mag Electronic Ignition (Wayne Sweet)
24. 08:23 PM - Re: E-Mag/P-Mag Electronic Ignition (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
25. 09:39 PM - Re: E-Mag/P-Mag Electronic Ignition (rv-9a-online)
26. 10:23 PM - Re: Toggle switches with lock (Richard E. Tasker)
27. 10:35 PM - Re: Jabiru 2200 (Kingsley Hurst)
28. 11:32 PM - Official Usage Guideline [Please Read] [Monthly Posting] (Matt Dralle)
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: | Open letter to the list |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <james@nextupventures.com>
I assume your questions were philosophical to make the point.
These **choices** were presented because there is someone out there than do
prefer them. I *think* in the Book there is info that leads to a set of
logic that would answer each question.
Examples (for me):
| -----Original Message-----
{SNIP}
|
| For example, Why should I buy a $600 alternator + $250 regulator when
| Van's
| sells the whole kit for $160? ... surely if an external regulator is
| important one can at least modify the $160 one and someone here has
| posted
| an article with pictures?
I have one of Van's alternators in a flying plane and have chosen to put one
of the "$600" alternators in one I am building. My reason ... I **perceive**
one to be more reliable and more robust. And *that* is more so important to
me in the second plane.
|
| Why would I want a dual alternator configuration even on an all electric
| single engine, plane? One of each is already a redundant system. One
| would
| think dual batteries and one alternator would suffice? If I wanted to do
Same as above ... I am doing the dual alternator/dual battery routine (Z-14)
because it appeals to my sense of comfort. Yup it weighs more. Yup it costs
more, but by George, I feel more comfortable about it. And if that helps me
be just a little less tense while flying IFR, at night, over the mountains,
any of or all of the preceding combined, then so be it. I gladly spend the
extra $1000 and 10-15 lbs. That is one of those trade-offs I choose to make.
I can save the $$$$ somewhere else (but probably won't) and I can save the
weight from around my waist (but PROBABLY won't!).
| a
| six hour flight over water I could see the point.
|
| Why would I really want complicated cross-feed switches in the aircraft,
| even while under IFR? I do have one fan and one crankshaft after all.
I don't have the option to add another crank and fan. But I can add a simple
cross-feed that **seemingly** has very little downside and way more upside
for my system with two independent electrical systems.
|
| As you can probably see, more than one of the potential topics Paul
| proposed
| interested me. In the last two weeks I have been subscribed many of you
| have successfully filled my inbox with utter crap. I am quickly becoming
| a
| very silent member of the list.
I too would have loved to have read the dialogue about the proposed subjects
... and maybe even contributed an opinion.
James
|
| Regards
| Richard
|
| do not archive
|
|
| -----Original Message-----
| From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
| [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
| Fiveonepw@aol.com
| To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
| Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Open letter to the list
|
| --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
|
| In a message dated 1/31/05 4:21:46 AM Central Standard Time,
| gyoung@cs-sol.com writes:
|
| > I was offering my opinion/hypothesis on why so few post.
|
| >>>>
|
| Here's another: Perhaps the majority of the "silent 1300" draw sufficient
| knowledge & information from the matierial provided to make their OBAM
| aircraft
| function just fine and don't need to post? I'd assume if they are
| reading
| this
| that they know how to "send mail" or reply and hit "send"...
|
| Mark Phillips - 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 |
|
| Subject: | Open letter to the list |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <james@nextupventures.com>
Comments below ....
James
{SNIP}
| >
|
| I completely understand where you are coming from on this. I
| had exactly the same thinking when I started wiring. I only
| wanted a cookbook and a parts list. Trying to figure out the
| electron thing was really not my bag, baby.
|
| Since I'll be running an electrically dependent engine, I knew
| that getting the design right was important. The engine
| supplier provides exactly what I was looking for - a parts
| list and a cookbook, and it is working fine in many airplanes.
I was intending to mention that example but forgot. You don't HAVE to go
with it but it is there and thus you have a basis from which to "improve".
|
| However, there were just a few things I wanted to do differently
| in my airplane, which led me to the aeroelectric connection book.
| Yes, it's been an investment in trying to understand things, and
| gather the bits and pieces. My schematic is a work in progress.
| I am modifying and refining it with the help of many on this list.
| I feel when it is completed it will be exactly what I am
| looking for. Since it is based on a technically sound
| foundation, one of the Z figures, most of the work has been
| on implementation details.
I too use the Book. And I too will be using a "Z". What I mean is to not
SKIP the Book but figuring out a way to get stuff at the "next level".
Bob has brought us to the 90 yard line. Just looking make it easier for the
last 10 yards.
|
| The work required to do the wiring is actually less than I
| had anticipated, and it is really a very rewarding part of
| the construction. I think I would have missed a very fun
| part of the project had I simply followed a cookbook.
The key is making it more fun as you make it right.
James
|
| --
| Mickey Coggins
| http://www.rv8.ch/
| #82007 Wiring
|
|
|
|
|
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: | Electrical System Design |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard Talbot" <rwtalbot@purephotos.com.au>
Hi Chuck,
The regulator I mention is the B&C LR16-14 listed on their site for $228.
This regulator is specifically mentioned in Chapter 4 of Bob's book Page
4-7. The implication is that it is the most complete and easiest regulator
to use. As I see it the chapter is aimed at describing why Auto gear is not
a great idea in an aircraft. I do see the point, but the external regulator
alone is worth more than the whole box and dice from Vans. The basic
diagrams also feature the regulator.
The alternator in question is the B&C L60. $595 on their website. I would
assume that it is the easiest to use on a B&C regulator. It also makes use
of the technology mentioned in Ch-3. Balanced, better bearings, external
regulation etc. May not be the cheapest way to go.
Point taken on the batteries and alternators, however on page Z-2 you will
see some of the comments that would lead me to make these statements.
I suspect the issues come as there are at least two types of people that
lurk here. Some want to advance the state of the art. Some want to build
safe, cheap, reliable airplanes. Both are just as important, but sometimes
there is going to be a difference in opinion.
Ignore my ramblings.... I get frustrated seeing people argue rather than
discuss what is important.
Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chuck
Jensen
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Open letter to the list
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Chuck Jensen"
<cjensen@dts9000.com>
Mr. Talbot, where did that come from? Are we talking about the same
website. I haven't heard (m)any proposing that a $600 alternator was a good
idea, when Van's and NDs can fulfill the mission for bucks-less. And dual
batteries and dual alternators--not. In fact, I think it's consistently
been Bob's position that dual batteries are mostly a matter of personal
comfort, not a necessity or even recommended for reliability and redundancy,
given their high service reliability (when treated well and changed
regularly--even for cheap batteries). And the single battery will get you
home (or at least to a safe spot) even if the single alternator goes in the
crapper.
However, for those that want such redundancies, wiring schemes are offered.
But such offerings are not necessarily recommendations. Time and again, it
seems to me that this website has stood four-square against high dollar,
complex solutions to simple problems. Consistently parsimonious, I would
say.
Yes, the site may go off on tangents occasionally, but the weight of the
wheat is still manifold compared to the chafe. So, don't be so silent for so
long. In the mean time, suffer with us pontificators with generous
patience. We mean well.
Chuck
Do Not Archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Richard Talbot
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Open letter to the list
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard Talbot"
<rwtalbot@purephotos.com.au>
Frankly, I am one of the silent 1300 who is totally sick of this thread. I
am currently working on designing the electrical for a RV7A. I have Bob's
book and find a lot of the material in it very helpful.
I do however think that some of the proposed solutions are expensive for the
value that I perceive they provide. There does not seem to be a cost
benefit analysis in the book, neither does there appear to be a lot of
emphasis on matching the electrical system to your mission profile. Both of
these issues are important for a builder on a budget.
For example, Why should I buy a $600 alternator + $250 regulator when Van's
sells the whole kit for $160? ... surely if an external regulator is
important one can at least modify the $160 one and someone here has posted
an article with pictures?
Why would I want a dual alternator configuration even on an all electric
single engine, plane? One of each is already a redundant system. One would
think dual batteries and one alternator would suffice? If I wanted to do a
six hour flight over water I could see the point.
Why would I really want complicated cross-feed switches in the aircraft,
even while under IFR? I do have one fan and one crankshaft after all.
As you can probably see, more than one of the potential topics Paul proposed
interested me. In the last two weeks I have been subscribed many of you
have successfully filled my inbox with utter crap. I am quickly becoming a
very silent member of the list.
Regards
Richard
do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Fiveonepw@aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Open letter to the list
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
In a message dated 1/31/05 4:21:46 AM Central Standard Time,
gyoung@cs-sol.com writes:
> I was offering my opinion/hypothesis on why so few post.
>>>>
Here's another: Perhaps the majority of the "silent 1300" draw sufficient
knowledge & information from the matierial provided to make their OBAM
aircraft
function just fine and don't need to post? I'd assume if they are reading
this
that they know how to "send mail" or reply and hit "send"...
Mark Phillips - do not archive
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: | Open letter to the list |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gordon or Marge Comfort" <gcomfo@tc3net.com>
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]
Bob: You might check out a magazine titled "Experimental Aircraft
Technology" by Enchanted Publications, LLC in White Sands, NM. Perhaps
they would be receptive to articles submitted to them about electrical
matters. The editors name is Brett Hahn and the e-mail address is:
<editor@extechmag.com>. They are new and I hope they succeed. There is
some involvement with racing, so performance is important to the group.
I believe Hahn has worked on a sport class White Lightening that has
appeared at Reno. They have an impressive list of contributors
including Darryl Greenamyer and Jon and Tricia Sharp. Subscription phone
number is 505-635-7444. Nice guys.
Gordon Comfort
N363GC
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: | Toggle switches with lock |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hans Teijgeler" <hans@jodel.com>
Also have a look at www.apem.com
Their 600 series toggle switches (rated at 10A @ 30VDC) can be ordered with
locking levers.
Hans
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-
> aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] Namens Carlos Sa
> Verzonden: maandag 31 januari 2005 22:23
> Aan: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Onderwerp: AeroElectric-List: Toggle switches with lock
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Carlos Sa <carlosfsa@yahoo.com>
>
> Hello, all
>
> A little while ago someone was looking for a switch with some sort of
> protection (like the Saturn
> rocket "ignition" switch).
>
> I just saw a switch that might be of interest to some of you - model "H"
> in this page:
> http://www.mouser.com/catalog/620/1020.pdf
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Carlos
> do not archive
>
>
>
>
>
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: DC rated switches clamav-milter version |
0.80j on juliet.albedo.net
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Joel Jacobs" <jj@sdf.lonestar.org>
Thanks Ken and Brian,
Yes I forgot to mention there are two nuts with the switch and one is a hex
nut. I like the looks of the knurled one for the outside. I had not
considered tightening the hex nut from behind but that sounds like the way
to go..
Joel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken" <klehman@albedo.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: DC rated switches clamav-milter version
0.80j on juliet.albedo.net
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
>
> Hi Joel
> To my surprise after finger tightening the knurled nuts on the Carling
> switches, I was able to tighten the knurled nuts with the end of a pair
> of pliers withough damaging the paint. I used the end not the sides of
> the jaws. In some cases you can also slip a wrench behind the panel and
> tighten the hex nut if you use a hex nut behind the panel to adjust the
> depth of the switch in the panel.
> Ken
>
> Joel Jacobs wrote:
>
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Joel Jacobs"
<jj@sdf.lonestar.org>
> >
> >For those that may be interested, I've found some nice toggle switches
with
> >actual DC ratings stated. The 15 and 20 amp ones are quite inexpensive.
> >The 30 and 50 amp ones are a bit pricey. Have a look.
> >http://www.mouser.com/catalog/620/1021.pdf
> >I ordered a S-1F a while back just to check it out and it seems like a
well
> >built switch. I think I'm going to use these. The only problem I can
see
> >is the nut that holds them in the panel is not a hex nut. It's a round
> >knurled nut and I haven't found a tool to tighten it yet.
> >
> >Joel
> >
> >
>
>
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: Electrical System Design |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:50 PM 2/1/2005 +1100, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard Talbot"
><rwtalbot@purephotos.com.au>
>
>Hi Chuck,
>
>The regulator I mention is the B&C LR16-14 listed on their site for $228.
>This regulator is specifically mentioned in Chapter 4 of Bob's book Page
>4-7. The implication is that it is the most complete and easiest regulator
>to use. As I see it the chapter is aimed at describing why Auto gear is not
>a great idea in an aircraft. I do see the point, but the external regulator
>alone is worth more than the whole box and dice from Vans. The basic
>diagrams also feature the regulator.
I designed the earliest versions of the LR series regulators
for B&C and most of the original design philosophy persists in
present versions. We debated at length whether to offer three
separate components (regulator, ov protection, lv warning) or
some intermediate combinations. Certainly ANY externally regulated
alternator will function just fine with about ANY external regulator.
The final decision was driven by a philosophy that encouraged
builders to have ALL THREE devices as a part of their power
generation system. Further, if the builder's time was worth
anything and assuming there's value in reducing risk of installation
errors, the decision was made to put all three devices in a
single enclosure. So, for about 15 years I've fielded complaints
about the cost of this product . . . and offered the idea
that it's really three $75.00 products already assembled for
you in one box.
To be sure, this product line is getting long in the tooth
and if B&C expects to maintain the hard won popularity of
the product, they should be looking at the next generation
devices. The trend in virtually every product using
electronics is more capability for less money next week.
I understand that Zeftronics already offers similar capability
in an integrated alternator controller for about half the price.
I asked Bill a few years ago what he was planning to do to
obsolete this product and didn't get an answer.
The Z-figures feature the LR series regulators but alternatives
are offered too. One can assemble generic components like the
stone simple Ford regulator, an ov protection system and
active notification of low voltage and achieve the same level
of performance (if not convenience) for under $100 total.
>The alternator in question is the B&C L60. $595 on their website. I would
>assume that it is the easiest to use on a B&C regulator. It also makes use
>of the technology mentioned in Ch-3. Balanced, better bearings, external
>regulation etc. May not be the cheapest way to go.
If you purchase a brand new ND alternator from any source
and spend the time and effort to achieve a condition
equivalent to the B&C L-40 or L-60 alternators, I'll
bet the total $time$ expended will exceed the
price from B&C.
Numbers of folk have offered their own solutions to
modifying various alternators based on their own
experiences and suggested that these alternatives
offer better value. It's a judgement call for every
builder to decide how the economics of $time$ fit
into their project decisions. It's often been suggested
that the average builder (whatever that is) would spend
less total $time$ acquiring an airplane if they
got a part time job and used the money from that job
to pay for an airplane as opposed to building it.
It's an acknowledge fact that all education is
expensive and the root commodity we all have to invest
in getting smarter is $time$. The purchased airplane
only makes you better plying the skills of your part
time job while building it adds to your knowledge and
skills base. So I presume that all of you are driven
more by the pleasure of finding things out than you
are for the simple task of acquiring and owning an airplane.
>Point taken on the batteries and alternators, however on page Z-2 you will
>see some of the comments that would lead me to make these statements.
>
>I suspect the issues come as there are at least two types of people that
>lurk here. Some want to advance the state of the art. Some want to build
>safe, cheap, reliable airplanes. Both are just as important, but sometimes
>there is going to be a difference in opinion.
If we were good economists and had real numbers by
which one could compare all the options, I suspect that
the value judgements would be much easier to make.
Opinions would become clearer as to value to any
particular task. The whole fuse-block concept was
driven by the obvious savings of both $time$ and
panel space. The hurdles to jump were based on opinions
that there was value in pushing and pulling on breakers
while trying to extricate one's bod and machine from
a stressful situation. This is where the economics of
skills and ability to make troubleshooting decisions
with one half of the brain while continuing to be
a good pilot with the other drove the architecture.
It seems better to design so that you DON'T CARE
if a particular component has just crapped than
to stack plan-b on top of plan-c but only if plan-k
is in effect and oh yeah, keep the airplane pointed
in the right direction while doing this mental
exercise.
With respect to cost-benefit analysis, I've often
made the case that (1) if you believe the technical
features of the B&C products worthy of desire then
you'll spend more $time$ achieving them on your own
than by simply purchasing them ready to install.
And (2) if you believe there is value in considering
the service history on B&C belt driven alternators
(less than 1% return for any reason on the whole fleet
of alternators produced over the last 15+ years) then
perhaps the make/buy/substitute decision is easier
yet.
We KNOW that alternators are the most highly stressed
part in the electrical system and that they figure
prominently in many dark-n-stormy-night stories.
So, I'll simply suggest that you can't have your
cake and eat it too. If the dark-n-stormy-night
stories accomplish the author's goal of scaring
you into preventative actions, then what actions
are appropriate? Best stuff with proven track records
or slightly better stuff scarfed off a junk yard
car and pushed through somebody's overhaul shop?
Well, it DEPENDS on your levels of skill and how
to intend to use the airplane. We all have those
very personal decisions to make and risks to assume.
Yes, it's HARD . . . and this is what makes it
largely impossible to do turn-key designs for
every contingency. There are turn-key designs out
there and thousands of airplanes flying them.
When I set out to do the 'Connection, it was not
to compete with Tony B or Van's idea of what it
takes to make an airplane function. I wanted to
open ALL the doors we could find and attempt
to explain the physics of what goes on for each
of those discoveries. Only then could we propose
to go beyond what the turn-key or spam-can systems
have offered for decades. I apologize if anyone
believes I've mis-represented the 'Connection but
it does say right on the cover, that we're going
to DESIGN a system . . . not sell you a cookie-
cutter approach. If that's what anyone needs, please
do take advantage of the EXP-Bus, Van's kits,
and/or Tony B's books.
I wouldn't propose to push anyone . . . but I think
the numbers for performance history combined with
arguments for failure tolerant design and operation
are pretty clear. Further, they go a long way toward
making sure you will not be sharing your own
dark-n-stormy-night story with any of us soon.
However, if your project is going to fly day-vfr only
and you don't mind tinkering with stuff to keep
it working, perhaps the approaches offered by the
'Connection are not for you. We've always had
a satisfaction guaranteed policy. One can return
their book for a refund. I did get one back a few
years ago . . . it took quite some time to
decide that the 'Connection what not for him.
The book was dog eared and coffee stained. But
he got his money back anyhow.
Bob . . .
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: Tools for knurled switch nuts |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:11 PM 1/31/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder"
><jschroeder@perigee.net>
>
> >
> > There are tools for the knurled switch nuts. I used to have one
> > but haven't seen it in years. When switches come in with the
> > knurled nuts, I replace them with 15/32-32 hex nuts which
> > are MUCH easier to tighten with ordinary tools.
> >
> > Bob . . .
>
>Bob -
>
>Where can you get these nuts, and also some plain, thin washers to go with
>them?
B&C has the nuts. They're not in the catalog but I think they would
sell you some.
>I can also use some 3/8" D and 1/4" D nuts and thin washers.
Are these switch nuts? The 1/4" size for miniature toggles
come in three common threads one of which is metric.
I'm not familiar with a 3/8 switch nut. Need more info.
Take a peek at lower left corner of
http://www.mouser.com/catalog/620/1155.pdf
Are these what you're looking for? There are some
washers in upper right corner of page too.
Bob . . .
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Open letter to the list |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
Gordon, good to hear from you my friend. I was thinking about you
and Marge when we returned to OSH for the first time in 10 years.
Since we were not strapped down in a booth, it seemed unlikely that
we would cross paths.
Thanks for the heads up. I took a peek at the Extechmag.com
website. Interesting. I'll sign up for a subscription today
and see if I might like to participate in their efforts.
We'll be going back to OSH this year too. We need to make
arrangements to get connected.
Bob . . .
>-----Original Message-----
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]
>
>Bob: You might check out a magazine titled "Experimental Aircraft
>Technology" by Enchanted Publications, LLC in White Sands, NM. Perhaps
>they would be receptive to articles submitted to them about electrical
>matters. The editors name is Brett Hahn and the e-mail address is:
><editor@extechmag.com>. They are new and I hope they succeed. There is
>some involvement with racing, so performance is important to the group.
>I believe Hahn has worked on a sport class White Lightening that has
>appeared at Reno. They have an impressive list of contributors
>including Darryl Greenamyer and Jon and Tricia Sharp. Subscription phone
>number is 505-635-7444. Nice guys.
>
>Gordon Comfort
>N363GC
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.2 - Release Date: 1/28/2005
>
>
>-- incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265 - Release Date: 1/28/2005
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------------------
< Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition >
< of man. Advances which permit this norm to be >
< exceeded -- here and there, now and then -- are the >
< work of an extremely small minority, frequently >
< despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed >
< by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny >
< minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes >
< happens) is driven out of a society, the people >
< then slip back into abject poverty. >
< >
< This is known as "bad luck". >
< -Lazarus Long- >
<------------------------------------------------------>
http://www.aeroelectric.com
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: | Dual Electronic Starting Issues |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hans Teijgeler" <hans@jodel.com>
Hi list,
I guess I am one of the 1300 silent ones on this list. Joined fairly
recently and trying to catch up as much as I can.
Quick introduction: I am working on a Subaru powered Jodel DR1050. It has
flown last summer, before I decided to redo the engine and fit an NSI rather
than my own contraption. The first iteration was single strand everything
(battery, alternator, computer, ignition), the NSI has a lot of redundancy
built in.
Sanity check please guys?
I've been going over the NSI wiring diagrams and came away impressed by the
complexity of it all. Switches, keyed switches, backup switches that
overrule other switches. All very neat and dandy, and each of the systems
can take over other parts without the systems "downstream" noticing
anything.
But oh boy, what a lot of complexity. A dozen relays, two dozen diodes,
switches all over the place, and a dizzified pilot scratching his head on
his way down to terra firma with a frozen prop.
Personally, I was thinking more along the following lines:
(Keep it simple)
Battery A feeds engine bus A and EFI pump A
Battery B feeds engine bus B and EFI pump B
The engine bus will run the computer, ignition, injectors, the lot. All
except the fuel pumps.
So four switches: EFI/IGN A and B and pump A and B.
NO crossovers between the systems.
This means that in case of a double-failure (and one occuring in each
system) I am screwed, where the original NSI will likely purr on. I can live
with that.
What remains then:
* The main electrical bus
* The alternator
* The starter
The main bus I want to connect to either battery A or B via a toggle switch
(with relay to prevent the switch from going ballistic)
The alternator I wanted to connect to both batteries via a pair of 60 amp
diodes and a pair of disconnect-relays (and yes, if I completely isolate
battery A from the alternator circuit, I will use battery B to power that
relay and vice versa)
The starter would get its main power supply via either one of two external
starter solenoids. The external solenoids and the internal one are to be fed
by a push (starter) button and a toggle switch to select battery A or B.
And, coming back to the original subject: I guess it makes sense to start
the engine with the computer on one battery and selecting the other battery
for the starter.
Any comments are welcome!
Thanks,
Hans Teijgeler
www.jodel.com
PH-MGA, Jodel DR1050, Subaru engine
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-
> aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] Namens Duane Zavadil
> Verzonden: maandag 31 januari 2005 6:02
> Aan: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Onderwerp: Re: AeroElectric-List: Dual Electronic Starting Issues
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Duane Zavadil"
> <dzavadil@hometownaccess.net>
>
> That is interesting - maybe with diodes to prevent backfeeding. Probably
> just one more part to break though. When diodes go bad, they go open!
>
> I like Frank's idea of a switchable voltmeter to check the backup battery
> and Georges point about nothing between the battterys and the unit other
> than a switch. I think that is the way it is now. I'll take a look at
> the schematics that George forwarded. Thanks for all the help!
> ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
> From: TimRhod@aol.com
> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 17:30:15 EST
>
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: TimRhod@aol.com
> >
> >Does it make any sense in a duel battery duel electronic ignition setup
> to
> >run two wires from each battery to each electronic ignition.?
> >
> >
>
>
> Sent via the WebMail system at hometownaccess.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | standby regulator for sale |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ron Raby" <ronr@advanceddesign.com>
To everyone:
I have a B&C SB1B-14 regulator. I took it of my firewall fast build. It has
never been used. I will sell it for $135.
Please contact me of list if interested.
Regards
Ron Raby
Lancair ES
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: DC rated switches clamav-milter version |
0.80j on juliet.albedo.net
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "923te" <923te@cox.net>
Why don't you just trade places.? Put teh hex nut on the front of the panel
and the knurled nut on the back of the panel.
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Joel Jacobs"
<jj@sdf.lonestar.org>
>
> Thanks Ken and Brian,
> Yes I forgot to mention there are two nuts with the switch and one is a
hex
> nut. I like the looks of the knurled one for the outside. I had not
> considered tightening the hex nut from behind but that sounds like the way
> to go..
> Joel
>
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: Tools for knurled switch nuts |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder@perigee.net>
>> Where can you get these nuts, and also some plain, thin washers to go
>> with
>> them?
>
> B&C has the nuts. They're not in the catalog but I think they would
> sell you some.
>
>> I can also use some 3/8" D and 1/4" D nuts and thin washers.
>
> Are these switch nuts? The 1/4" size for miniature toggles
> come in three common threads one of which is metric.
> I'm not familiar with a 3/8 switch nut. Need more info.
> Take a peek at lower left corner of
Bob -
Thanks for the info. For some reason, I could not find this page in Mouser
when I did a search for washers. The ones I pulled up were non- stock
items.
The 3/8" mounting is on a 1000 ohm pot I'm using for a dimmer.
I'm mostly interested in thin washers to protect the engraved overlays on
the panels. The lock washer that are supplied with a lot of the switches
and pots would really scar the overlays. I did find a source for washers,
but they have a zillion and you have to ask for a quote on every item.
I'll let you know if this source pans out. http://www.bokers.com/ is the
place.
Thanks for the help,
John Schroeder
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mervin Friesen" <mefriese@hsd.ca>
I'm quite new to this list and am slowly learning about the requirements of a safe
electrical system. I'm building a Sonex with a Jabiru 2200 engine. I plan
on keeping it simple with an EIS, com radio, and intercom. The plans come with
an electrical diagram. Several Sonex builder websites show what they have done.
But in comparing them with the Z appendix diagrams, I see extra things like
diodes, ov protection, and alternator protectors.
Has any one worked through a simple system with a Jabiru engine? Has any one thought
of adding a Z style diagram for the increasingly popular Jabiru? I'd appreciate
suggestions on electrical design for a system such as mine.
Thanks,
Mervin Friesen
Sonex 122
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: DC rated switches |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Leo J. Corbalis" <leocorbalis@sbcglobal.net>
Get thee to an electronics store or mail order and buy some hex nuts for
yours witches. If you insist on using the knurled rings, cut a hole in thin
aluminum just larger than the outside diameter of the ring. Hand tighten
then put the alum shield over it and use your channellocks an twist. When
the pliers slip the alum shield will save the panel.
Leo
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Jacobs" <jj@sdf.lonestar.org>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: DC rated switches
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Joel Jacobs"
<jj@sdf.lonestar.org>
>
> Channel locks would mar them. I did find this wrench that looks like it
> might work but hesitant to order one if I'm not sure. Actually I'm
leaning
> toward trying to make one. I was thinking lightly coat the nut with
grease,
> lay it on a flat surface, glob some JB weld around the nut and slip a
piece
> of 1/2" copper water pipe over that and let it set up a bit...
>
http://www.stewmac.com/shop/Electronics,_pickups/Tools:_Toggle_switch_wrench
> .html
>
> Joel
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "George Neal E Capt AU/CCP" <Neal.George@maxwell.af.mil>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: DC rated switches
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: George Neal E Capt AU/CCP
> <Neal.George@MAXWELL.AF.MIL>
> >
> > Channel Locks? :)
> >
> > Neal
> > RV-7 N8ZG
> > Fuselage ordered
> >
> > >
> > The only problem I can see is the nut that holds them in the panel is
not
> a
> > hex nut. It's a round knurled nut and I haven't found a tool to tighten
> it
> > yet.
> >
> > Joel
> > <
> >
> >
>
>
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Shrink tube expanding? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Leo J. Corbalis" <leocorbalis@sbcglobal.net>
I found that the stuff in 91 octane car gas will expand some kinds of clear
shrink tubes back to full size. I wanted to protect the gallon numbers on a
dip tube. Other stuff worked fine. Moral = TEST first
Leo
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder@perigee.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Shrink tube expanding?
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder"
<jschroeder@perigee.net>
>
> Ron -
>
> There are a zillion brands/kinds of heat shrink out there. We used a piece
> from a relatively known source today and the heat gun melted it thru on
> one end!! It was no big deal because the piece was to be a buffer under a
> strain relief of an AMP CPC. After using this shrink wrap for many moons,
> I don't think it was our technique with the gun.
>
> We also used several pieces of mil spec stuff where it really counted and
> it shrinks better, shrinks more, shrinks tighter and is impossible to melt
> even when a solder gun hits it momentarily.
>
> I'd use mil spec stuff or at least "heavy duty" stuff where it counts:
> over bare connections.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
>
>
> > It was some heat shrink i had purchased from Active Electronics.
> >
> > Is there a certain type of heat shrink tube should be using?? Or apply
> > in a certain manor to prevent this?
> >
> > Thx.
> > Ron Parigoris
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
>
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: Dual Electronic Starting Issues |
clamav-milter version 0.80j
on juliet.albedo.net
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
Hi Hans, nice to hear from you.
I think you could simplify it more if you wanted. Which engine and
computer are you using this time?
>snip
>The alternator I wanted to connect to both batteries via a pair of 60 amp
>diodes and a pair of disconnect-relays (and yes, if I completely isolate
>battery A from the alternator circuit, I will use battery B to power that
>relay and vice versa)
>
>
Have you considered one diode at most to the second battery only, and
only one contactor to isolate the alternator in case it goes
overvoltage. If a battery can't power its own contactor then I think
it's best to leave it disconnected rather than using the other battery
to close its contactor. I am assuming that we are talking about normally
open contactors. AFAIK there is no problem charging two parallel
batteries without using any diodes. Have you looked at the ABMM aux batt
management module?
>The starter would get its main power supply via either one of two external
>starter solenoids. The external solenoids and the internal one are to be fed
>by a push (starter) button and a toggle switch to select battery A or B.
>
>And, coming back to the original subject: I guess it makes sense to start
>the engine with the computer on one battery and selecting the other battery
>for the starter.
>
>
I did not go that way. I believe the Subaru computer will start the
engine if there is enough juice to turn the engine over. Quite different
than some of the aviation systems that have been discussed here.
It seems like you may be trying to cater to a shorted battery and maybe
an inflight restart for a non-windmilling engine but I'm not sure how
realistic that is. Batteries tend to go open circuit internally or have
a bad external connection. Or a cell might short. But none of that is
likely to stop an operating engine. Cranking would be assured with
paralleled batteries. I guess I don't really see the value in separate
selectable starter contactors from each battery. I do see an advantage
in paralleling the batteries for starting, especially if you use small
batteries.
I hard wired my engine computers to a battery (not through a battery
contactor). Batteries are pretty good at dampening voltage excursions
and protecting the electronics and that is really how the car computer
was designed to be connected. Instead of conventional battery contactors
I used one contactor to feed the auxillary non-engine things like lights
and the starter. Seemed reasonable to me.
I altered my switch design a bit after considering the procedure for an
engine failure. I've got 5 engine related switches all in a row plus two
alternator switches above that but the checklist is to insure/put them
all up if the engine is not running properly. Those 5 switches insure
both ignitions, fuel pumps, and both efi systems are on. No single
switch or wire failure can kill both systems. If the engine isn't
running properly at that point I can turn a fuel valve to pressurize the
second fuel rail (which has a separate filter) but that is the only
circumstance that will ever require a fuel valve to be operated. So two
actions which can be accomplished without looking, then find a place to
land it if need be. The point is that one can have similar to a z-14
system with dual batteries, alternators, computers and ignitions that
should be much simpler to operate than any carbuerated aircraft.
The small batteries and alternators came in no heavier and cheaper than
some flooded cell single alternator installations. The two sources that
helped me most with this were of course Bob and the folks on this list,
and Garfield, so a thank you to all for sharing the learning experience
is appropriate. It took a few years but I only plan to do this once and
I wanted a step above the "cookie cutter" approach, at least in my mind.
Next step is to put gas in it when the weather warms up. Hope it works ;)
Ken
ej22
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: Open letter to the list |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Emrath" <emrath@comcast.net>
Sure there are, several right here in Gray/Cloudy Nashville TN. We had two
fly last year and maybe three this year and a couple of -9A's
Marty
Do not Archive
Time: 11:02:15 PM PST US From: "Gregory Young" <gyoung@cs-sol.com>
Subject: Open letter to the list
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gregory Young"
<gyoung@cs-sol.com>
<<snip>>
Well put. If you get over to Hooks be sure to stop by and chat. There
aren't
many of us slow-build -6's left
Regards,
Greg Young - Houston (DWH)
RV-6 N6GY - project Phoenix
Navion N5221K - just an XXL RV-6A
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Sigmo@aol.com
I know this may not be the best forum for this but you all have a lot of
aviation contacts.
I have a friend who is looking for a Sonex kit someone has started on and
wants to sell.
I'm building a 601xl and don't know a lot of people in the Sonex circles.
Thanks,
Mike Sigman
N7092N
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: | E-Mag/P-Mag Electronic Ignition |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Swartout" <jgswartout@earthlink.net>
Well, it's time to fish or cut bait. I'm about to install in my Zenith
CH-801 the Mattituck-built ECI O-360 I bought without magnetos 15 months
ago with the intention to use dual electronic ignition. But after
getting brain freeze from reading the archives on building fail-safe
electrical redundancy to support all-EI engines (e.g. B&C L40 and LR-3,
plus an SD-8 aux alternator--for $1100-!-and possibly 2 batteries--talk
about weight, expense and complexity!) the idea of installing two
self-contained P-Mags that don't depend on the electrical system looks
pretty appealing. But like Hydra, you cut off one head and two more
grow in its place. I'm sure Bob or Paul or another of the suave EE's on
this list knows what kind of components go into an electronic ignition.
I don't.
So two questions:
Will these components stand up as well as a magneto to the heat and
vibration of being mounted on the engine?
How do you know when it's time to replace an electronic ignition?
Thanks a million in advance.
John
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: | solid state relays |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: D Fritz <dfritzj@yahoo.com>
Question for the group: anyone know of a source of SS relays that work up to about
7 Amp and work in a SPDT fashion? Does such a beast exist? All I seem to
find out there are SSRs that work as SPST. I'm working on a roll your own trim
relay deck.
Thanks,
Dan Fritz
---------------------------------
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: solid state relays |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: James Freeman <flyeyes@mac.com>
On Feb 1, 2005, at 8:31 PM, D Fritz wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: D Fritz <dfritzj@yahoo.com>
>
> Question for the group: anyone know of a source of SS relays that
> work up to about 7 Amp and work in a SPDT fashion? Does such a beast
> exist? All I seem to find out there are SSRs that work as SPST. I'm
> working on a roll your own trim relay deck.
>
> Thanks,
> Dan Fritz
>
>
There are others more qualified to comment than I am, but I'm curious
why you need 7 amps. That seems like a lot for most trim motors.
Have you considered an H-bridge IC like the the LMD 18200? see:
http://www.national.com/ds/LM/LMD18200.pdf
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: E-Mag/P-Mag Electronic Ignition |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet@comcast.net>
Klaus Savior has a simple backup battery wiring diagram which is charged
through a diode for a dual CDI LSE system. I have it and had to use it one
trip when I lost the alternator (connection broke). I also installed a
voltmeter switch selectable to check the backup battery voltage. It is used
to start so no kick-back (this has not been an issue with LSE CDI system, as
far as I know). The backup battery system cost me ~$100, the cost of the 7.6
AH B&C battery.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Swartout" <jgswartout@earthlink.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: E-Mag/P-Mag Electronic Ignition
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Swartout"
> <jgswartout@earthlink.net>
>
> Well, it's time to fish or cut bait. I'm about to install in my Zenith
> CH-801 the Mattituck-built ECI O-360 I bought without magnetos 15 months
> ago with the intention to use dual electronic ignition. But after
> getting brain freeze from reading the archives on building fail-safe
> electrical redundancy to support all-EI engines (e.g. B&C L40 and LR-3,
> plus an SD-8 aux alternator--for $1100-!-and possibly 2 batteries--talk
> about weight, expense and complexity!) the idea of installing two
> self-contained P-Mags that don't depend on the electrical system looks
> pretty appealing. But like Hydra, you cut off one head and two more
> grow in its place. I'm sure Bob or Paul or another of the suave EE's on
> this list knows what kind of components go into an electronic ignition.
> I don't.
>
> So two questions:
> Will these components stand up as well as a magneto to the heat and
> vibration of being mounted on the engine?
>
> How do you know when it's time to replace an electronic ignition?
>
> Thanks a million in advance.
>
> John
>
>
>
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 706 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!
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: E-Mag/P-Mag Electronic Ignition |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:19 PM 2/1/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Swartout"
><jgswartout@earthlink.net>
>
>Well, it's time to fish or cut bait. I'm about to install in my Zenith
>CH-801 the Mattituck-built ECI O-360 I bought without magnetos 15 months
>ago with the intention to use dual electronic ignition. But after
>getting brain freeze from reading the archives on building fail-safe
>electrical redundancy to support all-EI engines (e.g. B&C L40 and LR-3,
>plus an SD-8 aux alternator--for $1100-!-and possibly 2 batteries--talk
>about weight, expense and complexity!) the idea of installing two
>self-contained P-Mags that don't depend on the electrical system looks
>pretty appealing. But like Hydra, you cut off one head and two more
>grow in its place. I'm sure Bob or Paul or another of the suave EE's on
>this list knows what kind of components go into an electronic ignition.
>I don't.
>
>So two questions:
> Will these components stand up as well as a magneto to the heat and
>vibration of being mounted on the engine?
No reason why not. At RAC we routinely designed electronics that
went through environments you wouldn't put a crowbar through.
I've talked with these guys and I plan to visit them this spring.
I've got a couple of builders who are planning to install
variations on the theme and keep me updated with their experiences.
At this time, I'd judge your risks of purchasing these products
to be quite low.
> How do you know when it's time to replace an electronic ignition?
Same way you know to replace a mag . . . it fails pre-flight run-up.
Bob . . .
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: E-Mag/P-Mag Electronic Ignition |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online@telus.net>
I'm installing an e-mag/p-mag pair into my RV-9A, mounted to an
AeroSport O-320.
I modified my electrical system to include a DPDT switch that will allow
the power to be switched to both mags.
This allows testing of the PMAG internal generator during run-up.
Also, the down or 'AUX' position of the switch on the E-MAG side is
wired to my Dynon EFIS internal backup battery. This allows me to
hand-prop the engine when the main battery is flat by powering up the
Dynon and switching the ignition to 'AUX' for startup.
With the Dynon OFF, the switch acts as power on/off for the mags.
It's a bit convoluted, but the run-up procedure is:
Dynon OFF
IGN ON
mag check (both work normally)
IGN OFF
mag check (only P-Mag works)
Dynon ON
IGN OFF
mag check (both work normally)
This procedure checks all operating modes and integrity of both mags.
It will also work for two E-Mags or two P-Mags with slightly different
results.
Since I already had a backup battery in the EFIS, I felt that it could
be used as emergency power for the ignition. I didn't diode couple the
main feed with the backup feed because a short circuit in the wiring
would take out both sources of power. Better to leave it in the hands
of the pilot to determine which source of power to use. If the breaker
for the E-Mag pops, I would NOT switch to AUX power. Only if I lost
main bus power would I do this.
Details can be viewed at
http://www3.telus.net/aviation/flying/RV-9A/rv-9a.html click the link
near the top. You'll need to download the free schematic software from
http://www.pcbexpress.com.
The first page of schematics has the mag wiring.
Vern Little
John Swartout wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Swartout" <jgswartout@earthlink.net>
>
>Well, it's time to fish or cut bait. I'm about to install in my Zenith
>CH-801 the Mattituck-built ECI O-360 I bought without magnetos 15 months
>ago with the intention to use dual electronic ignition. But after
>getting brain freeze from reading the archives on building fail-safe
>electrical redundancy to support all-EI engines (e.g. B&C L40 and LR-3,
>plus an SD-8 aux alternator--for $1100-!-and possibly 2 batteries--talk
>about weight, expense and complexity!) the idea of installing two
>self-contained P-Mags that don't depend on the electrical system looks
>pretty appealing. But like Hydra, you cut off one head and two more
>grow in its place. I'm sure Bob or Paul or another of the suave EE's on
>this list knows what kind of components go into an electronic ignition.
>I don't.
>
>So two questions:
> Will these components stand up as well as a magneto to the heat and
>vibration of being mounted on the engine?
>
> How do you know when it's time to replace an electronic ignition?
>
>Thanks a million in advance.
>
>John
>
>
>
>
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: Toggle switches with lock |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker@optonline.net>
If you decide that you like these type switches, you can get a lot of
them at www.onlinecomponents.com for very reasonable prices.
Dick Tasker
Hans Teijgeler wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hans Teijgeler" <hans@jodel.com>
>
>Also have a look at www.apem.com
>
>Their 600 series toggle switches (rated at 10A @ 30VDC) can be ordered with
>locking levers.
>
>Hans
>
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Kingsley Hurst" <khurst@taroom.qld.gov.au>
> Has any one worked through a simple system with a Jabiru engine? Has
any one thought of adding a Z style diagram for the increasingly popular
Jabiru? I'd appreciate suggestions on electrical design for a system
such as mine.
Mervin,
Electrically, I know of no real difference between the Jabiru and Rotax
912 so suggest you check out Fig Z16.
Regards
Kingsley Hurst in Oz.
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: | Official Usage Guideline [Please Read] [Monthly Posting] |
DNA: do not archive
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Matt Dralle <dralle@matronics.com>
Dear Lister,
Please read over the AeroElectric-List Usage Guidelines below. The complete
AeroElectric-List FAQ including these Usage Guidelines can be found at the
following URL:
http://www.matronics.com/FAQs/AeroElectric-List.FAQ.html
Thank you,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
******************************************************************************
AeroElectric-List Usage Guidelines
******************************************************************************
The following details the official Usage Guidelines for the AeroElectric-List.
You are encouraged to read it carefully, and to abide by the rules therein.
Failure to use the AeroElectric-List in the manner described below may result
in the removal of the subscribers from the List.
AeroElectric-List Policy Statement
The purpose of the AeroElectric-List is to provide a forum of discussion for
things related to this particular discussion group. The List's goals
are to serve as an information resource to its members; to deliver
high-quality content; to provide moral support; to foster camaraderie
among its members; and to support safe operation. Reaching these goals
requires the participation and cooperation of each and every member of
the List. To this end, the following guidelines have been established:
- Please keep all posts related to the List at some level. Do not submit
posts concerning computer viruses, urban legends, random humor, long
lost buddies' phone numbers, etc. etc.
- THINK carefully before you write. Ask yourself if your post will be
relevant to everyone. If you have to wonder about that, DON'T send it.
- Remember that your post will be included for posterity in an archive
that is growing in size at an extraordinary rate. Try to be concise and
terse in your posts. Avoid overly wordy and lengthy posts and
responses.
- Keep your signature brief. Please include your name, email address,
aircraft type/tail number, and geographic location. A short line
about where you are in the building process is also nice. Avoid
bulky signatures with character graphics; they consume unnecessary
space in the archive.
- DON'T post requests to the List for information when that info is
easily obtainable from other widely available sources. Consult the
web page or FAQ first.
- If you want to respond to a post, DO keep the "Subject:" line of
your response the same as that of the original post. This makes it
easy to find threads in the archive.
- When responding, NEVER quote the *entire* original post in your
response. DO use lines from the original post to help "tune in" the
reader to the topic at hand, but be selective. The impact that
quoting the entire original post has on the size of the archive
can not be overstated!
- When the poster asks you to respond to him/her personally, DO NOT
then go ahead and reply to the List. Be aware that clicking the
"reply" button on your mail package does not necessarily send your
response to the original poster. You might have to actively address
your response with the original poster's email address.
- DO NOT use the List to respond to a post unless you have something
to add that is relevant and has a broad appeal. "Way to go!", "I
agree", and "Congratulations" are all responses that are better sent
to the original poster directly, rather than to the List at large.
- When responding to others' posts, avoid the feeling that you need to
comment on every last point in their posts, unless you can truly
contribute something valuable.
- Feel free to disagree with other viewpoints, BUT keep your tone
polite and respectful. Don't make snide comments, personally attack
other listers, or take the moral high ground on an obviously
controversial issue. This will only cause a pointless debate that
will hurt feelings, waste bandwidth and resolve nothing.
-------
[This is an automated posting.]
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! --
|