Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:23 AM - Re: SD-8 on a Rotax 914 (Jan de Jong)
2. 03:54 AM - Re: SD-8 on a Rotax 914 (Jan de Jong)
3. 04:27 AM - Question on the Axiliary battery manager (Mark Hall)
4. 05:03 AM - Re: SD-8 on a Rotax 914 (Gilles Thesee)
5. 06:21 AM - Re: Re: Re: Re: question re Z-19 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 06:21 AM - Re: Re: question re Z-19 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 06:21 AM - Re: wing strobe wire disconnects (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 06:45 AM - Re: Battery Performance (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 06:52 AM - Re: Spark plug pickup? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 06:57 AM - Re: SD-8 on a Rotax 914 (Rick Girard)
11. 07:22 AM - Re: SD-8 on a Rotax 914 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
12. 07:33 AM - Re: SD-8 on a Rotax 914 (Jan de Jong)
13. 08:50 AM - Battery Load tester (Mark Banus)
14. 09:45 AM - Re: Battery Load tester (Fred Fillinger)
15. 10:41 AM - Re: question re Z-19 (Glaeser, Dennis A)
16. 10:53 AM - Re: Battery Load tester (Mark Banus)
17. 11:46 AM - Re: Battery Load tester (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
18. 12:11 PM - Re: Battery Load tester (Paul Messinger)
19. 12:14 PM - pinout for Narco Mk 24 ? (Gilles Thesee)
20. 01:10 PM - Re: Battery Load tester (Fred Fillinger)
21. 01:17 PM - Re: Battery Load tester (Mark Banus)
22. 02:17 PM - Re: pinout for Narco Mk 24 ? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
23. 02:21 PM - Re: Battery Load tester (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
24. 02:30 PM - Re: Battery CAPACITY tester (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
25. 02:31 PM - APU versus battery (Eric M. Jones)
26. 02:43 PM - Re: Battery Load tester (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
27. 02:47 PM - Re: Re: question re Z-19 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
28. 03:12 PM - Re: Battery Load tester (Paul Messinger)
29. 03:12 PM - Re: Battery Load tester (Paul Messinger)
30. 03:21 PM - Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: Opital sensor (Jan de Jong)
31. 03:37 PM - Re: wing strobe wire disconnects (Bryan Hooks)
32. 04:30 PM - Re: wing strobe wire disconnects (Randy Pflanzer)
33. 04:30 PM - ND Alternator (Michael Ashura)
34. 05:06 PM - Re: Opital sensor (plaurence@the-beach.net)
35. 05:10 PM - Re: Battery Load tester (Mark Banus)
36. 05:26 PM - Re: Battery Load tester (Fred Fillinger)
37. 06:35 PM - Re: Re: Battery Load tester (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
38. 06:47 PM - Re: APU versus battery (Wayne Sweet)
39. 07:10 PM - Re: wing strobe wire disconnects (Bryan Hooks)
40. 07:19 PM - Re: APU versus battery (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
41. 07:29 PM - Re: Switch type (D Fritz)
42. 07:37 PM - Re: Battery Load tester (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
43. 07:47 PM - Re: EFIS Backup Battery (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
44. 08:10 PM - Re: Switch type//battery (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
45. 08:23 PM - Re: wing strobe wire disconnects (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
46. 08:30 PM - Re: Question on the Axiliary battery manager (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
47. 08:40 PM - Re: Switch type//battery (Paul Messinger)
48. 09:11 PM - Re: Switch type//battery//ref link (Paul Messinger)
49. 09:11 PM - Question about dimmer circuits and annunicators... (Marcos Della)
50. 10:12 PM - Re: Question about dimmer circuits and annunicators... (rv-9a-online)
51. 10:15 PM - Re: Switch type//battery (Greg Young)
52. 10:16 PM - Re: pinout for Narco Mk 24 ? (Gilles Thesee)
53. 10:44 PM - Re: APU versus battery (Frank & Dorothy)
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: SD-8 on a Rotax 914 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jan de Jong <jan.de.jong@xs4all.nl>
>
>
>Your chart for the SD-8 is correct and the % power vs rpm for the Rotax is
>also correct. However, the vacuum pump drive pad turns at 54% of engine
>speed. So when you are at 75% power (5000 engine rpm) the SD-8 is turning
>2700 rpm (54% of 5000) which outputs about 5 amps. That's why I have fitted
>a larger alternator driven off the rear of the crankshaft.
>
>Jim Butcher Europa A185 N241BW
>
The chart takes into account the 54% indeed.
The matter is not urgent for me, unfortunately, but I would be very
interested to know more about a less marginal alternative to the SD-8
that is not driven by a belt. Have you posted details somewhere? Or will
you?
Thank you,
Jan de Jong, Europa 461
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: SD-8 on a Rotax 914 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jan de Jong <jan.de.jong@xs4all.nl>
>
>
>>>
>>> The Rotax standard alternator is permanent magnet. VERY robust.
>>> The weakest link in Rotax's electrical system is their piece of
>>> @#$@# regulator. There are more robust products out there. Further,
>>> one might craft a dual regulator system to back up the standard
>>> regulator. Putting an SD-8 on the Rotax vacuum pump drive is a
>>> VERY marginal proposition.
>>>
>>> Bob . . .
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>Hi Bob and all,
>
>Some time ago I could lay my hands on a 912 Rotax alternator. A buddy
>machined a drive coupling to run the unit on test bench. As he is an
>researcher in things electrical, we made a survey of the unit and the
>Ducati-Rotax regulator. I posted some of his conclusions on this list
>some months ago.
>To make things short, the Rotax regulator cannot deliver the advertised
>output without overheating. Nevertheless, students made some cooling
>tests, and a fan or blast tube can greatly improve things.
>The safe maximal continuous output seems to be about 12-14 amps.
>We chose to use a German Schicke GR4.
>When I have some spare time I'll craft some webpages on the results of
>our investigations.
>
>Regards,
>
>Gilles Thesee
>Grenoble, France
>16 happy test hours on our MCR 4S
>
>
>
Schicke's website is:
http://www.schicke-electronic.de/
Their engineering is probably very good but their marketing and sales
are not.
The website doesn't mention GR4 but it describes GR3.
The GR3 needs either a battery or a capacitor of at least 10000uF.
When it doesn't charge the included led lights.
When it charges the led is out.
When the regulator fuse has popped the led blinks.
This may be a good self-exciting regulator for the SD-8, although the
fuse shown is only 10A.
Jan de Jong
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: | Question on the Axiliary battery manager |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Hall" <mhall67@carolina.rr.com>
I'm new at this wiring thing so forgive me if this has been hashed out before.
First it took some time for me to understand that using fuses are OK for aircraft.
I will need something like this battery manager for my project to keep the
EFIS and other stuff running when starting. What I don't understand is, are
there places that I should use breakers like it shows in the Figure 7 batter
manager wiring for the ALT field or can I use a fuse here too?
Thanks
Mark
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: SD-8 on a Rotax 914 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>Schicke's website is:
>http://www.schicke-electronic.de/
>Their engineering is probably very good but their marketing and sales
>are not.
>The website doesn't mention GR4 but it describes GR3.
>The GR3 needs either a battery or a capacitor of at least 10000uF.
>When it doesn't charge the included led lights.
>When it charges the led is out.
>When the regulator fuse has popped the led blinks.
>This may be a good self-exciting regulator for the SD-8, although the
>fuse shown is only 10A.
>
>
>
Jan,
You're right, they don't mention the GR4, despite the fact they sell it
to numerous ultra light manufacturers : the CT 80, FK 9, etc...
When I sent an email to Mr Schicke, he sent back the following document,
in german only :
http://gilles.thesee.free.fr/temp/GR4.pdf
We conducted some tests on the GR4. The output voltage is around 14.2
volts rather than the (in my opinion) puny 13.7-13.8 V of the Rotax.
It also produces a generous amount of heat, but the radiator seems
larger and more capable of real heat rejection.
The rated output is 16 amps, more than the Ducati practical number.
Contrary to the Ducati-Rotax unit it doesn't need to have a voltage
applied to it's sense wire to come to life. And so might not turn off
when the sense wire is grounded. This could change the philosophy of the
OV protection.
Any opinion about this point ? Bob ?
Regards,
Gilles Thesee
Grenoble, France
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: Re: Re: question re Z-19 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 10:53 PM 3/1/2005 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
>
>I haven't been keeping up with all of this stuff, but your comments
>suggest an acceptable design and operational mode for new ND ir
>alternators. If I just want to turn the alternator off (for whatever
>reason - maybe debugging a noise problem), I can use the control
>lead. This allows you to then disconnect the battery (if you are so
>inclined) without load dump, as long as you turned the alternator off
>first.
>
>If the system goes overvoltage, the only solution is to allow some
>OV circuit to open the B-lead contactor, at which point you might
>not care about the load dump situation. You just don't want the
>alternator connected to your expensive electronics. The remaining
>thing I wonder about is whether getting a false OV event will cause
>the load dumping alternator to fry itself. That would be a bummer.
My thoughts exactly.
Bob . . .
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: question re Z-19 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 11:08 PM 3/1/2005 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
>
>How 'good' does a battery have to be in order for it to reliably
>start an alternator?
A "failed" battery will start an alternator. Most systems will
come up with 2 volts or less on the bus supplied from a source
capable of less than 100 milliamps. I've seen designers install
2 d-cells in series along with a diode/push-button arrangement
to prod an alternator into action. One version of a C-337
system took AC power from a 3-phase tachometer generator and
rectified it to DC. Another push-button/resistor arrangement
allowed the pilot to bring a stalled alternator to life.
> What are the fail modes that a modern battery
>can suffer which will render it unable to fire and stabilize the alternator.
>With glass mat seperators, a shorted cell is unlikely, suggesting that
>the voltage with a light load (initial field current excitation) will be
>adequate, even with a relatively dead battery.
Excellent question . . . a properly maintained RG battery
has a reliability factor approaching that of prop bolts.
The problem with a "relatively dead" battery is that you
cannot get the battery contactor closed. Again, some designers
have gone to the effort of supplying contactor power from
both battery side and bus side through diodes like we do
with crossfeed contactors. They also take a pushbutton from
the battery bus through a current limiting resistor directly
to the altenrator field terminal. With a "dead" battery,
and the engine running. One has a good chance of bringing
the alternator on line.
Of course, this is a feature one hopes would only be
used on the ground and that the battery contains a healthy
charge on it before departure.
>If my main alternator fails and I am running more loads than my backup
>alternator can keep up with, is the behavior going to be that the bus
>voltage will sag until some devices stop performing?
I presume you will retain the ACTIVE notification of low
voltage warning system. You would be ill advised to
operate in the en route mode with that light flashing
at you. Once the airport is in sight, turn on anything
that suits your fancy. While the light may now be flashing,
it doesn't matter because you've retained 100% of battery
capacity for the approach to landing.
>Someone commented that their ignition system needs 6A at cruise
>power. That's a lot of joules. Maybe too many, considering the
>required design tradeoffs. Maybe that's fine for a sport plane, but
>not one which you want to be able to burn all your gas before you
>use all your Amps. Surely there's a less thirsty EI out there for your
>engine. Maybe consumer demand would drive a limp-home mode
>where you don't generate so many MSD's if the alternator dies,
>dropping power consumption.
This is where p-mags have opened the door for VERY austere
energy budgets while en route leaving all the battery
available for approach to landing.
The breathtaking energy requirements for engine support
invariably arise from various forms of auto-conversions
where you not only have to light the fires but maintain
tens of PSI fuel pressure. To make matters worse, they
are even less friendly with respect to dual engine
driven power sources.
I'm not suggesting these are evil engines but they are
FORCING careful consideration of system design and operating
philosophy.
Bob . . .
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: wing strobe wire disconnects |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:58 PM 3/1/2005 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jay Brinkmeyer
><jaybrinkmeyer@yahoo.com>
>
>I'm planning to run my Whelan strobe lines (including shield) through 4-pin
>Molex mate-n-loc connectors at the wing roots. Does this seem reasonable?
sure
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: Battery Performance |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:54 PM 3/1/2005 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
>
>Bob, remember the AH rating of batteries are based on at least 10 hour rate
>and many at 20 hour rate.
>
>A discharge of 10 amps from a 20 amp hour battery is less that 2 hours
>useful as that rate is at least 5 times the AH its rated at. The higher the
>discharge rate the lower the total AH that is available for the user. Also
>the final power may be at a terminal voltage below that needed for some or
>all uses.
>
>In addition the real load must be known for duration. its voltage dependent
>in many cases.
>
>Some equipment will have lower current as the voltage goes down and some
>will have a higher current. Depends on the device and its power conversion
>if any.
>
>Paul
Absolutely. Thanks for bringing this up. Listers, go get the data
sheets on your proposed battery. Batteries we use in the pig-iron
are 1-hour rated. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Capacity_vs_Voltage.gif
For a typical 37 a.h. battery, we can load it to 37 amps
and have it deliver 100% or better of rated capacity. Note
that when we load it at a 2C rate (the ubiquitous 30 minute
requirement) the available capacity falls to about 95% of
rated. If we load it heavier yet, more and more otherwise
useful energy is tossed off in the battery's internal
resistance leaving less and less for running electro-whizzies
in the airplane.
For example: Go to http://aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data
and click on Batteries . . .
On the 1217 battery data sheet take a look at the
discharge characteristics graph. Note that with a
17 amp load, the battery falls below 11 volts (5%
remaining capacity) in about 30 minutes. If you load
this battery in the original spirit of crafting
an austere e-bus load of say 4 amps, note that it
will deliver useful energy for over 2 hours. If you
want 4 hours of useful power, you need to get down
into the 3 amp range for e-bus loads.
Take a look at the X1220 battery, it will support
a 4A load for 4 hours. The 1233 will support 6+ amps
for 4 hours. This is the foundation for the
suggested 20% headroom in an earlier post but forgive
me, rules-of-thumb are in poor taste when real data
are available.
Bob . . .
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Spark plug pickup? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 10:35 PM 3/1/2005 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: AI Nut <ainut@hiwaay.net>
>
>Does anyone know a convenient, cheap way to read an engine's spark plug
>signals into an oscilloscope? Would one of those inductive pickups
>work, with suitable connector change at the o'scope end?
>
>Thanks.
I have used inductive pickups to detect spark plug CURRENT
but never with a goal of characterizing waveform or making
accurate measurements. Tektronix and others have current
probes that would probably do accurate waveform presentation.
See
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=50971&item=3876885503&rd=1
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=0&item=3878259799&rd=1
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: SD-8 on a Rotax 914 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Rick Girard <fly.ez@verizon.net>
Harley Davidson motorcycles use a PM alternator. Their regulator /
rectifier is available for about $50 to $60 and can handle up to 30 amps.
Rick Girard
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: SD-8 on a Rotax 914 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 06:54 AM 3/2/2005 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Rick Girard <fly.ez@verizon.net>
>
>Harley Davidson motorcycles use a PM alternator. Their regulator /
>rectifier is available for about $50 to $60 and can handle up to 30 amps.
Found some listings at:
http://www.legendmcs.com/Electrical-Ignition/regulators-mounting-brackets-covers.html
Looks like good potential for a beefy replacement of
marginal PM regulators. I'll e-mail these folks and
see if they'll send me installation manuals.
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: SD-8 on a Rotax 914 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jan de Jong <jan.de.jong@xs4all.nl>
> **
>
>When I sent an email to Mr Schicke, he sent back the following document,
>in german only :
>
>http://gilles.thesee.free.fr/temp/GR4.pdf
>
>We conducted some tests on the GR4. The output voltage is around 14.2
>volts rather than the (in my opinion) puny 13.7-13.8 V of the Rotax.
>It also produces a generous amount of heat, but the radiator seems
>larger and more capable of real heat rejection.
>The rated output is 16 amps, more than the Ducati practical number.
>
> **
Thank you Gilles.
Strange that Schicke draws and sizes the fuse ("max. 16A") as protecting
the regulator against delivering too much current instead of protecting
wiring from the battery. It is a way I suppose. Do you use a CB for this
fuse? Ever have to reset it?
> **
>
>Contrary to the Ducati-Rotax unit it doesn't need to have a voltage
>applied to it's sense wire to come to life. And so might not turn off
>when the sense wire is grounded. This could change the philosophy of the
>OV protection.
>
>
> **
Do you mean it will operate (apart from the led) without the 0.2A fuse
in circuit?
It must because it can work without a battery:
"Funktionsmerkmale" says (approximately):
"When the main switch is operated the charge verification light lights
up.It goes out as soon as the generator supplies current. If/when the
battery voltage exceeds regulation voltage the generator is separated
from the battery and charging is thereby interrupted. When the voltage
drops charging resumes. Instead of the battery a capacitor of at least
10000uF can be connected."
> ****
>
>Any opinion about this point ? Bob ?
>
> ****
OV protection from the Ducati-Rotax regulator does not rely on dropping
the control line anyway. The protection is in dropping the relay. IMHO.
I have another question: how much do these regulators cost
approximately? No prices on the website either...
Jan de Jong
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: | Battery Load tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Banus" <mbanus@hotmail.com>
Bob/Paul
As I am going to use the same engine Paul M described requiring up to 10 amps
@ high RPM.
Any recommendations for a battery load tester for the OBAM tool kit?
Mark Banus
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Battery Load tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Fred Fillinger" <n3eu@comcast.net>
> ...
> Any recommendations for a battery load tester for the OBAM tool
kit?
>
> Mark Banus
>
Harbor Freight Tools has both 50A and 100A load testers, low-priced of
course. They are intended for automotive batteries of typically
higher capacity than we use. But good enough if you know what a new,
fully-charged battery of your capacity will read on its voltmeter.
The lower the cranking amps spec, the more it will try to tell you
that your battery is marginal when it really isn't. However,
discharging to 80% of volts and doing the math on the time required
may cause these things to get too hot. But they are handy for
automotive use if you can't test your electrolyte.
Fred F.
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: question re Z-19 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Glaeser, Dennis A" <dennis.glaeser@eds.com>
Bob,
Thanks for the explanation on how to check the field lead.
I wholeheartedly empathize with your 'pain in the arse' comments. The
automotive folks have done us almost a favor by making alternators more
reliable and less expensive, but messed it up by putting in IRs, and even
worse by making it difficult to remove them.
Adding external OVP, a contactor, and a transorb (or 3), does add parts and
complexity. But these are relatively inexpensive, not all that difficult to
do, and lower risk than not doing them (IMHO of course).
I appreciate your tolerance for 'pain', and devising solutions despite it.
Dennis Glaeser
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L.
Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 10:04 PM 3/1/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "glaesers"
><glaesers@wideopenwest.com>
>
>If I understand correctly, you're saying that even 'non
latching' field
>leads on internal VRs do not absolutely control the power
to the alternator
>field (right?).
>
>I put the external OVP only in the field circuit, expecting
that removing
>power to that lead kills the field (and therefor alternator
output) -
>period. If that is not the case, it's not really
'non-latching', by my
>definition anyway.
>
>I'm not against the contactor on the B-lead, but figured on
saving the
>weight and complexity if it added no value. Apparently it
does.
>
>Dennis Glaeser
Measure current in the control lead while the alternator
is running
with engine at low RPM and lots of "stuff" turned on. If
the current
is less than 2A . . . field current is being controlled
internally
to the alternator with some manner of solid state device.
This is
the device that will launch system voltage to the mood
when it shorts.
If the current is over 2A and the alternator shuts down
when control
switch is opened, then it's likely that ov protection
concentrating
on the control lead will suffice.
Understand that it's risky to make any deduction of
alternator
internal configuration and behavior based on make/model
of alternator
unless it's factory new or known to be stock. Once an
after-market
regulator is fitted to the alternator, all bets are off
with
respect to abnormal behavior. I'm seeing traffic on
several
'net lists where the pedigree of Van's alternators cannot
be deduced . . .
This internal regulator thing has been a real pain in the
arse.
For the first 10 years of publishing I stuck to my
recommendations
for purchasing modified alternators or modifying them
yourself
to use external regulation. Then as a designer I could
state that
external ov protection on the field-lead will do the job
EVERY
time. However, there are huge market pressures to use
automotive
products right off the car. Risky? Minimally so but NOT
zero . . .
and more risky than an externally regulated machine with
field-
lead ov protection.
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: Battery Load tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Banus" <mbanus@hotmail.com>
Thanks Fred.
I will be using RG batteries. I can live with a false "bad" but not a false
"good" as I need electrons to make noise.
Any other suggestions?
Mark Banus
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: Battery Load tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 12:59 PM 3/2/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Fred Fillinger" <n3eu@comcast.net>
>
> > ...
> > Any recommendations for a battery load tester for the OBAM tool
>kit?
> >
> > Mark Banus
> >
>
>Harbor Freight Tools has both 50A and 100A load testers, low-priced of
>course. They are intended for automotive batteries of typically
>higher capacity than we use. But good enough if you know what a new,
>fully-charged battery of your capacity will read on its voltmeter.
>The lower the cranking amps spec, the more it will try to tell you
>that your battery is marginal when it really isn't. However,
>discharging to 80% of volts and doing the math on the time required
>may cause these things to get too hot. But they are handy for
>automotive use if you can't test your electrolyte.
>
>Fred F.
In the interest of clarity of meaning, let's consider the
terms used to describe battery tests . . .
Load Test: In the aircraft world, this refers to a test
wherein the battery's performance under heavy load is
measured. At Concord and Hawker, the final test of a battery
before it is crated is to place so heavy a load on the battery
that its terminal voltage falls to 1/2 the open circuit value.
A little consideration of this condition reveals that
1/2 voltage is achieved when the EXTERNAL test load resistance
is equal to the INTERNAL resistance of the battery. This
load is maintained for 15 seconds and current measured at the
end of the test interval. This must be greater than some
minimum value cited in the battery's specifications. Numbers
in the 1000-1500 amps range are not uncommon for a biz-jet
battery.
Capacity Test (or "Cap Check"): This is a test to confirm
the battery's total energy content -AND- the ability to
deliver it to the outside world. As mentioned in an earlier
post, the apparent capacity can be markedly different than
the true capacity depending on what current prevails during
the test. Higher currents induce higher internal
losses such that the apparent or useful capacity is reduced.
If the load test cited above were continued until the terminal
voltage falls to 5.5 volts then one would realize only one-half
of the total energy stored as useful output. All the rest
would be used up heating the battery internally . . . probably
to destruction. After only a 15 second test, the battery is
markedly warm to the touch in spite of the fact that only
about 5 a.h. of a 40 a.h. battery has been expended.
As Paul mentioned earlier, the apparent capacity you wish for
may be different than the nameplate capacity. This is not a
suggestion of subterfuge on the part of battery manufacturers.
Manufacturers attempt to rate a battery into the service for
which it is designed. When you want a battery to provide backup
lighting for extended periods, the capacity might be given as
a 20 hour rate. When you want a battery to perform in an
"emergency" situation for bringing an airplane down comfortably,
the duration for rating the battery may be much shorter . . .
like 1 hour.
When aviation shops do a CAP CHECK on a battery, it will be at
some fairly heavy rate like 1/2 hour rate . . . because this
is the battery's most critical task aboard the airplane and
is probably an all-inclusive test. A battery that's up to
the 1/2 hour discharge test is certainly capable of cranking
an engine.
This is why Paul's reminder prompted my comments on the
importance of acquiring the test data for any battery that
you're considering for your project.
"Load Testers" in the automotive world are typical of
the gizmos sold in parts stores and Harbor Freight. These
are small, high current resistors and a voltmeter that
make fair guess as to the battery's performance
in the all important CRANKING mode. These testers are NOT
suited for deducing a battery's ability to keep things
working after the alternator craps.
In the chapter on batteries, I proposed a battery capacity
tester that provides an accurate relative measurement
of battery capacity. It uses an electric clock to measure
the time it takes for some nominal load (like 4.5 amps of
lighting load) to discharge a battery to the point where
a relay drops out stopping the clock. I suggested that you
test a new battery and note the reading obtained. Using
the time interval from the first test to make a relative
deduction as to loss of capacity during later tests.
Now, adjust those loads to some value commensurate with
your e-bus or electrically dependent engine loads and
the clock will show you a fair representation of your
expected endurance at that load.
Given that apparent capacity is both time and load dependent,
there are NO off-the-shelf instruments in the automotive
world capable of deducing useful battery capacity.
The professional tools for capacity measurement are
probably beyond the reach of average-Joe OBAM aircraft
owners. I'll get with my byte-thrasher guy and see
if we can craft an etched circuit board with micro-
processor and a/d that would form the seed of a kit
whereby po' folks can afford to build and own a reasonably
accurate capacity meter.
In the mean time, please be aware of the limitations of
testing a battery with off-the-shelf automotive tools.
Bob . . .
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Battery Load tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
What you want is NOT a battery load tester but a battery capacity tester.
Very different.
A load tester tells you the terminal voltage under a typically hi current
load.
A Capacity tester measures the amp hour capacity of the battery.
www.westmountainradio.com has the one I use as well as being used by several
FBO's for annual checks.
It puts a constant current load on the battery that you program the amount
of current as well as the cutoff point. Then you get a graphic display of
volts vs. time at that current as well as the Amp hour delivered down to the
cutoff point.
It needs a computer with a USB port and is $100. max current for a lead acid
battery is 7.5 amps regardless of the advertising that may lead you to think
it can load to 10 amps.
However its very accurate and has the ability to record battery temp with a
optional temp probe.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Banus" <mbanus@hotmail.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery Load tester
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Banus" <mbanus@hotmail.com>
>
> Bob/Paul
> As I am going to use the same engine Paul M described requiring up to
> 10 amps @ high RPM.
> Any recommendations for a battery load tester for the OBAM tool kit?
>
> Mark Banus
>
>
>
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: | pinout for Narco Mk 24 ? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Hi all,
A buddy found a Narco Mark 24 VHF. Anyone happen to have the
corresponding pinout ?
Any input appreciated,
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Gilles Thesee
Grenoble, France
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: Battery Load tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Fred Fillinger" <n3eu@comcast.net>
>Thanks Fred.
> I will be using RG batteries. I can live with a false "bad" but
> not a false "good" as I need electrons to make noise. Any other
> suggestions?
>Mark Banus
>
I didn't mean to imply it will give you a "false good" reading." My
50A version was only $15, and the meter scale on it purports to report
condition on a "rainbow" of scales for batts between 200 and 1000
cranking amps, but the translated lliterature doesn't say whether
that's CA, CCA, HCA, or cranking amps on Pluto.
As Bob has stated in his post here, battery mfrs do not specify this
type of test, and the units a good auto shop uses run about $1,000.
However, you need only know what your battery should read at best, at
room temperature range, and the thing will tell you future condition
as the battery weakens, if only approximately so.
Reg,
Fred F.
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: Battery Load tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Banus" <mbanus@hotmail.com>
" .......Given that apparent capacity is both time and load dependent, there
are NO off-the-shelf instruments in the automotive world capable of deducing
useful battery capacity.
The professional tools for capacity measurement are
probably beyond the reach of average-Joe OBAM aircraft
owners. I'll get with my byte-thrasher guy and see
if we can craft an etched circuit board with micro-
processor and a/d that would form the seed of a kit
whereby po' folks can afford to build and own a reasonably
accurate capacity meter.
In the mean time, please be aware of the limitations of
testing a battery with off-the-shelf automotive tools.
Bob . . ."
Bob,
Thanks for the detailed explanation of what initially appeared (at least to
this none EE type) a simple question. I am always amazed at how much I don't
know. But learning is what building "experimental aircraft" is all about and
I'm on a steep curve.
If you could provide a circuit board for the OBAM players to give us an accurate
assessment of our battery, I will be first in line.
This issue will become more widespread as the number of electrically dependent
aircraft increase. A good battery assessment could prevent some "dark and
stormy" stories in the future.
I look forward to building your load tester.
Mark Banus
Glasair Super II FT
NSI Subaru
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: pinout for Narco Mk 24 ? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:13 PM 3/2/2005 +0100, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gilles Thesee
><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
>Hi all,
>
>A buddy found a Narco Mark 24 VHF. Anyone happen to have the
>corresponding pinout ?
>Any input appreciated,
I checked the database I have and it only shows the MK12.
Sorry.
Bob . . .
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Battery Load tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 12:09 PM 3/2/2005 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
>
>What you want is NOT a battery load tester but a battery capacity tester.
>Very different.
>
>A load tester tells you the terminal voltage under a typically hi current
>load.
>
>A Capacity tester measures the amp hour capacity of the battery.
>
>www.westmountainradio.com has the one I use as well as being used by several
>FBO's for annual checks.
>
>It puts a constant current load on the battery that you program the amount
>of current as well as the cutoff point. Then you get a graphic display of
>volts vs. time at that current as well as the Amp hour delivered down to the
>cutoff point.
>
>It needs a computer with a USB port and is $100. max current for a lead acid
>battery is 7.5 amps regardless of the advertising that may lead you to think
>it can load to 10 amps.
>
>However its very accurate and has the ability to record battery temp with a
>optional temp probe.
Great catch Paul. I ordered my self one a few minutes ago.
Bob . . .
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: Battery CAPACITY tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 04:09 PM 3/2/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Banus" <mbanus@hotmail.com>
>
>" .......Given that apparent capacity is both time and load
>dependent, there are NO off-the-shelf instruments in the
>automotive world capable of deducing useful battery capacity.
>
> The professional tools for capacity measurement are
> probably beyond the reach of average-Joe OBAM aircraft
> owners. I'll get with my byte-thrasher guy and see
> if we can craft an etched circuit board with micro-
> processor and a/d that would form the seed of a kit
> whereby po' folks can afford to build and own a reasonably
> accurate capacity meter.
>
> In the mean time, please be aware of the limitations of
> testing a battery with off-the-shelf automotive tools.
>
> Bob . . ."
>
>
>Bob,
> Thanks for the detailed explanation of what initially appeared (at
> least to this none EE type) a simple question. I am always amazed at how
> much I don't know. But learning is what building "experimental aircraft"
> is all about and I'm on a steep curve.
>
> If you could provide a circuit board for the OBAM players to give us
> an accurate assessment of our battery, I will be first in line.
>
> This issue will become more widespread as the number of electrically
> dependent aircraft increase. A good battery assessment could prevent
> some "dark and stormy" stories in the future.
>
> I look forward to building your load tester.
Mark, Check out Paul M's find at
http://www.westmountainradio.com/CBA.htm
For the money, this is a VERY capable product. I just
ordered one for me. It will do about 95% of my battery
testing.
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: | APU versus battery |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
You won't find gigantic batteries on gigantic airplanes---but you will find
APU's (Auxiliary Power Units)--an efficient way of turning fuel into
electricity.
Are tiny APU's reasonable for tiny airplanes?---let's take a look:
Honda makes an excellent 4-cycle 1 hp (GX22) that is approximately 7 pounds
stripped and is roughly an 8-inch cube. (I have taken the liberty of
removing the fuel tank, and muffler, etc.) To this little engine we add a
30A or larger alternator--In fact this little engine could drive a 50A
alternator--minus inefficiency. The completed assembly would be 8X8X12 and
it would weigh about 15 pounds.
Now, with such an APU, we would go out to our airplane, start the APU, wait
a minute to fill up our "UltraCapacitors", and start the engine. As soon as
we achieve a steady idle, we shut down the APU and run the airplane on the
alternator alone. If the main alternator dies---start the APU. Camping out
under the wing--run the APU. Crashed in the outback--run the APU. Dead
battery---Oops--- we have no stinking battery!
The APU would share the common avgas supply, sipping 400 grams per
kilowatt-hour when in use. The air intake and exhaust would port to the
outside. It requires some fooling with because it has a carburetor--so
altitude compensation has to be added. The thing is very quiet.
An interesting choice--and the APU will outlast your airplane.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones@charter.net
"Everything you've learned in school as "obvious" becomes
less and less obvious as you begin to study the universe.
For example, there are no solids in the universe. There's
not even a suggestion of a solid. There are no absolute con-
tinuums. There are no surfaces. There are no straight lines."
- R. Buckminster Fuller
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: Battery Load tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 04:20 PM 3/2/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Fred Fillinger" <n3eu@comcast.net>
>
> >Thanks Fred.
> > I will be using RG batteries. I can live with a false "bad" but
> > not a false "good" as I need electrons to make noise. Any other
> > suggestions?
> >Mark Banus
> >
>
>I didn't mean to imply it will give you a "false good" reading." My
>50A version was only $15, and the meter scale on it purports to report
>condition on a "rainbow" of scales for batts between 200 and 1000
>cranking amps, but the translated lliterature doesn't say whether
>that's CA, CCA, HCA, or cranking amps on Pluto.
>
>As Bob has stated in his post here, battery mfrs do not specify this
>type of test, and the units a good auto shop uses run about $1,000.
>However, you need only know what your battery should read at best, at
>room temperature range, and the thing will tell you future condition
>as the battery weakens, if only approximately so.
Fred is correct in that this kind of test can BENCHMARK a battery
but you need to put TIME into the activity. For example, I have
an SB-5 Autometer (See: http://www.batterymart.com/battery.mv?p=ACC-SB-5 )
that's simply a VARIABLE load tester like those found in most
automotive shops. The tester sold by Harbor Freight is a FIXED
load meter and marginally useful.
The SB-5 has a 15 second timer in it that allows one to
manually orchestrate a kind of combination load/capacity
test. You manually adjust the load value such that voltage falls
into the proper point on the voltmeter based on temperature
of the battery. When the timer light stops flashing, note the
current the battery supports at the pre-determined test voltage.
It's not uncommon for a new car battery to test in the 400-600
amp range after 15 seconds (tester really stinks!). A new
Panasonic 1217 will test at 300-350 amps. New Odyssey 17 a.h.
batteries will dump better than 400.
Knowing what this number is lets you make a fair judgement
as to the battery's internal health both in terms of internal
impedance and capacity. I think I'd take it out of service
in an airplane if the test current fell below 250 amps.
However, the SB-5 is half a kilobuck and the CBA-II is
only $100 . . . great value. Sombody mail Paul a 5th
of his favorite for this tidbit!
Bob . . .
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: question re Z-19 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 01:38 PM 3/2/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Glaeser, Dennis A"
><dennis.glaeser@eds.com>
>
>Bob,
>
>Thanks for the explanation on how to check the field lead.
>
>I wholeheartedly empathize with your 'pain in the arse' comments. The
>automotive folks have done us almost a favor by making alternators more
>reliable and less expensive, but messed it up by putting in IRs, and even
>worse by making it difficult to remove them.
>
>Adding external OVP, a contactor, and a transorb (or 3), does add parts and
>complexity. But these are relatively inexpensive, not all that difficult to
>do, and lower risk than not doing them (IMHO of course).
>
>I appreciate your tolerance for 'pain', and devising solutions despite it.
>
>Dennis Glaeser
No problem, it's my job . . . and certainly easier
to do in the OBAM aircraft world than the heavy-iron
world. Very nearly EVERYTHING we do in certified aircraft
is less than the best we know how to do for a whole host
of reasons!
Bob . . .
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L.
>Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> At 10:04 PM 3/1/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "glaesers"
> ><glaesers@wideopenwest.com>
> >
> >If I understand correctly, you're saying that even 'non
>latching' field
> >leads on internal VRs do not absolutely control the power
>to the alternator
> >field (right?).
> >
> >I put the external OVP only in the field circuit, expecting
>that removing
> >power to that lead kills the field (and therefor alternator
>output) -
> >period. If that is not the case, it's not really
>'non-latching', by my
> >definition anyway.
> >
> >I'm not against the contactor on the B-lead, but figured on
>saving the
> >weight and complexity if it added no value. Apparently it
>does.
> >
> >Dennis Glaeser
>
> Measure current in the control lead while the alternator
>is running
> with engine at low RPM and lots of "stuff" turned on. If
>the current
> is less than 2A . . . field current is being controlled
>internally
> to the alternator with some manner of solid state device.
>This is
> the device that will launch system voltage to the mood
>when it shorts.
>
> If the current is over 2A and the alternator shuts down
>when control
> switch is opened, then it's likely that ov protection
>concentrating
> on the control lead will suffice.
>
> Understand that it's risky to make any deduction of
>alternator
> internal configuration and behavior based on make/model
>of alternator
> unless it's factory new or known to be stock. Once an
>after-market
> regulator is fitted to the alternator, all bets are off
>with
> respect to abnormal behavior. I'm seeing traffic on
>several
> 'net lists where the pedigree of Van's alternators cannot
> be deduced . . .
>
> This internal regulator thing has been a real pain in the
>arse.
> For the first 10 years of publishing I stuck to my
>recommendations
> for purchasing modified alternators or modifying them
>yourself
> to use external regulation. Then as a designer I could
>state that
> external ov protection on the field-lead will do the job
>EVERY
> time. However, there are huge market pressures to use
>automotive
> products right off the car. Risky? Minimally so but NOT
>zero . . .
> and more risky than an externally regulated machine with
>field-
> lead ov protection.
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.5.7 - Release Date: 3/1/2005
>
>
>-- incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266 - Release Date: 3/1/2005
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 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: Battery Load tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
I do not drink alki but I really love to help others.
Your kind thanks makes my day, week, and perhaps month.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery Load tester
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> However, the SB-5 is half a kilobuck and the CBA-II is
> only $100 . . . great value. Sombody mail Paul a 5th
> of his favorite for this tidbit!
>
> Bob . . .
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: Battery Load tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
I disagree to a small extent. The new AGM batteries seem to loose capacity
and not cranking amps. Thus you can start the engine but not have reserve
power if needed. SEE Bob's comments on this in more detail
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Fillinger" <n3eu@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery Load tester
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Fred Fillinger"
> <n3eu@comcast.net>
>
>>Thanks Fred.
>> I will be using RG batteries. I can live with a false "bad" but
>> not a false "good" as I need electrons to make noise. Any other
>> suggestions?
>>Mark Banus
>>
>
> I didn't mean to imply it will give you a "false good" reading." My
> 50A version was only $15, and the meter scale on it purports to report
> condition on a "rainbow" of scales for batts between 200 and 1000
> cranking amps, but the translated lliterature doesn't say whether
> that's CA, CCA, HCA, or cranking amps on Pluto.
>
> As Bob has stated in his post here, battery mfrs do not specify this
> type of test, and the units a good auto shop uses run about $1,000.
> However, you need only know what your battery should read at best, at
> room temperature range, and the thing will tell you future condition
> as the battery weakens, if only approximately so.
>
> Reg,
> Fred F.
>
>
>
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: AeroElectric-List Digest: Opital sensor |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jan de Jong <jan.de.jong@xs4all.nl>
http://www.gemssensors.com/PDF/Catalog/ELS1100.pdf
http://www.gemssensors.com/PDF/IOM_Bulletins/138184.pdf
http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T051/1464.pdf
143570 for $73.95 at Digikey
Jan de Jong
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: | wing strobe wire disconnects |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bryan Hooks" <bryanhooks@comcast.net>
Snip
>I'm planning to run my Whelan strobe lines (including shield)
>through 4-pin
>Molex mate-n-loc connectors at the wing roots. Does this seem
>reasonable?
>
>Jay
I just posed this question to Bill at Creative Air. Here is the answer
I got for what it's worth:
Bryan... The problem is that you can't do anything with the strobe
leads...
They need to be continuous and the shield grounded...
However, I should have single strobe power paks soon, then you can put
them
in the wing tips and use connectors at the wing for power leads to
them...
Hope this helps...
-Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "BRYAN HOOKS" <bryanhooks@comcast.net>
Subject: Enquiry from CreativAir
I am going to buy your strobe light kit and led positions lights for a
Vans
RV-7A (I'll get the tail pos/strobe combo from vans). Can you please
tell me
if there is an elegant way to make a wiring conector at the wing root,
so
that I can wire the wings and fuselage seperately? I'm building in my
garage
and don't have room to put the wings on just yet, but I'd like to get
the
wiring runs done now.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay
Brinkmeyer
Subject: AeroElectric-List: wing strobe wire disconnects
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jay Brinkmeyer
<jaybrinkmeyer@yahoo.com>
I'm planning to run my Whelan strobe lines (including shield) through
4-pin
Molex mate-n-loc connectors at the wing roots. Does this seem
reasonable?
Jay
=====
__________________________________
http://baseball.fantasysports.yahoo.com/
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: wing strobe wire disconnects |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Randy Pflanzer" <f1rocket@comcast.net>
Sounds like hooey to me. You can certainly cut the strobe leads, including
the ground wire, and insert a 4-pin Molex connector. I've done it and I'm
quite sure many others have as well.
Randy
F1 Rocket
www.pflanzer-aviation.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryan Hooks" <bryanhooks@comcast.net>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: wing strobe wire disconnects
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bryan Hooks"
> <bryanhooks@comcast.net>
>
> Snip
>>I'm planning to run my Whelan strobe lines (including shield)
>>through 4-pin
>>Molex mate-n-loc connectors at the wing roots. Does this seem
>>reasonable?
>>
>>Jay
>
> I just posed this question to Bill at Creative Air. Here is the answer
> I got for what it's worth:
>
> Bryan... The problem is that you can't do anything with the strobe
> leads...
> They need to be continuous and the shield grounded...
>
> However, I should have single strobe power paks soon, then you can put
> them
> in the wing tips and use connectors at the wing for power leads to
> them...
>
> Hope this helps...
>
> -Bill
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "BRYAN HOOKS" <bryanhooks@comcast.net>
> To: "CreativAir" <info@creativair.com>
> Subject: Enquiry from CreativAir
>
>
> I am going to buy your strobe light kit and led positions lights for a
> Vans
> RV-7A (I'll get the tail pos/strobe combo from vans). Can you please
> tell me
> if there is an elegant way to make a wiring conector at the wing root,
> so
> that I can wire the wings and fuselage seperately? I'm building in my
> garage
> and don't have room to put the wings on just yet, but I'd like to get
> the
> wiring runs done now.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay
> Brinkmeyer
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: wing strobe wire disconnects
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jay Brinkmeyer
> <jaybrinkmeyer@yahoo.com>
>
> I'm planning to run my Whelan strobe lines (including shield) through
> 4-pin
> Molex mate-n-loc connectors at the wing roots. Does this seem
> reasonable?
>
> Jay
>
>
> =====
>
>
> __________________________________
> http://baseball.fantasysports.yahoo.com/
>
>
>
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Michael Ashura" <ashuramj@hotmail.com>
I have a 35 amp ND--removing external reg for LR-3--I assume (hate doing that)
I can ignore "N" and "E", use only "B" and "F"? Also have left over new Eaton
6041H105 (Master Battery Contactor) and new Prestolite SAW-4204 (Starter solenoid)
from failed Bonanza restoration. Again, I assume these will work in my
RV-6? Thanks, Mike
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: plaurence@the-beach.net
Thanks Chris
I had made capacitance senders for my RV6 and thought there might be an
alternativefor my RV9. A friend who is restoring a 1954 Piper Tripacer removed
the
old float resistive senders. One still worked.
I agree. Not very practical.
Peter
On 1 Mar 2005 at 8:32, Chris Horsten wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Chris Horsten"
> <airplanes@sympatico.ca>
>
> Peter,
>
> Check out http://www.aircraftextras.com/. They have the optical low
> level warnings but it is based on a simple condition: not getting back
> a reflection. If you want to use it for levels, it looks like you
> would have to install several sensors at varying heights and then
> calibrate them. Not very practical. Perhaps there is another sensor
> that will "see" fuel and measure it.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
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: | Re: Battery Load tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Banus" <mbanus@hotmail.com>
>www.westmountainradio.com has the one I use as well as being used by several
>FBO's for annual checks.
>
>It puts a constant current load on the battery that you program the amount
>of current as well as the cutoff point. Then you get a graphic display of
>volts vs. time at that current as well as the Amp hour delivered down to the
>cutoff point.
>
>It needs a computer with a USB port and is $100. max current for a lead acid
>battery is 7.5 amps regardless of the advertising that may lead you to think
>it can load to 10 amps.
>
>However its very accurate and has the ability to record battery temp with a
>optional temp probe.
Great catch Paul. I ordered my self one a few minutes ago.
Bob . . .
Bob,
Can I assume you will test this device and let us know if it fits the bill?
Thanks
Mark Banus
Message 36
| 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: Battery Load tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Fred Fillinger" <n3eu@comcast.net>
> I disagree to a small extent. The new AGM batteries seem to loose
> capacity and not cranking amps. Thus you can start the engine but
not
> have reserve power if needed. SEE Bob's comments on this in more
detail.
>
> Paul
>
That can be possible. I remember from long-ago days in the auto
repair business where sometimes diagnosing occasional odd behavior in
a newish battery was more intuition than science -- given the test
tools we had at the time. Ultimately it came down to our customer
service philosophy on replacement where mild argument with a customer
was preferable to minimizing "callbacks" at the jump-start end of our
trusty tow truck But there's a vast world of difference between
getting to work on time the next morning and launching IFR at night
where your best alternate is forecast marginal.
Regarding computer technology to do what needs to be done re
rechargeable batteries -- fascinating, as recently I bought for $30 a
spare, oriental knockoff, lithium-ion battery off eBay for my tiny,
Sony Cyber-Shot digital camera -- takes even great high-res movies at
20+ fps ref the competition, if you can afford the proprietary memory
cards. The "etailer" made good on a return of the battery, but in
polite email exchanges he refused to believe that a battery -- with
only three terminals of output -- could cause the camera's computer to
display an error message before shutting down the charge operation:
"Use only a genuine Sony Cyber-Shot battery."
So a couple weeks ago, I spotted a genuine Sony battery tagged at $39
at a Circuit City, but the guy at the register wanted $70 for this
tiny thing. Pointing out what display said, he checked computer and
told me, oops, we have the wrong product tag in the display. That's
for the Maxell aftermarket product, out of stock; our mistake is your
gain....
Reg,
Fred F.
Message 37
| 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: Battery Load tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:08 PM 3/2/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Banus" <mbanus@hotmail.com>
>
> >www.westmountainradio.com has the one I use as well as being used by several
> >FBO's for annual checks.
> >
> >It puts a constant current load on the battery that you program the amount
> >of current as well as the cutoff point. Then you get a graphic display of
> >volts vs. time at that current as well as the Amp hour delivered down to the
> >cutoff point.
> >
> >It needs a computer with a USB port and is $100. max current for a lead acid
> >battery is 7.5 amps regardless of the advertising that may lead you to think
> >it can load to 10 amps.
> >
> >However its very accurate and has the ability to record battery temp with a
> >optional temp probe.
>
> Great catch Paul. I ordered my self one a few minutes ago.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>Bob,
>
> Can I assume you will test this device and let us know if it fits the
> bill?
Sure, but Paul has already weighed in and I have no
foundation for being skeptical. As soon as it gets here,
I'll test every battery in the shop and then take the batteries
out to RAC for testing on a 10 Killobuck Christie. The
technology to do a good job at this is a rudimentary programming
task using jelly-bean parts. I fully expect the results of my
effort to confirm what Paul has already told us.
Bob . . .
Message 38
| 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: APU versus battery |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet@comcast.net>
Surely you jest. If King Air's have batteries (and they do), then batteries
are for us small guys. APU's in LARGE aircraft are for running all the
accessories while on the ground so the paying customers can enter a
cooled/warmed aircraft and the flight crew can enter the all that stuff into
the FMS.
And for starting those bruts if GPU's are not available at the megalopolis
airports. One still must remember to shut the thing off and to have it
maintained regularily; after all it's really just another engine or one sort
or another. Just what our little planes need, another maintenance item. My
B&C RG battery lasts 6 years with no attention, then it's put out to pasture
and a new one installed. Works for me.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: APU versus battery
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones"
> <emjones@charter.net>
>
> You won't find gigantic batteries on gigantic airplanes---but you will
> find
> APU's (Auxiliary Power Units)--an efficient way of turning fuel into
> electricity.
>
> Are tiny APU's reasonable for tiny airplanes?---let's take a look:
>
> Honda makes an excellent 4-cycle 1 hp (GX22) that is approximately 7
> pounds
> stripped and is roughly an 8-inch cube. (I have taken the liberty of
> removing the fuel tank, and muffler, etc.) To this little engine we add a
> 30A or larger alternator--In fact this little engine could drive a 50A
> alternator--minus inefficiency. The completed assembly would be 8X8X12 and
> it would weigh about 15 pounds.
>
> Now, with such an APU, we would go out to our airplane, start the APU,
> wait
> a minute to fill up our "UltraCapacitors", and start the engine. As soon
> as
> we achieve a steady idle, we shut down the APU and run the airplane on the
> alternator alone. If the main alternator dies---start the APU. Camping out
> under the wing--run the APU. Crashed in the outback--run the APU. Dead
> battery---Oops--- we have no stinking battery!
>
> The APU would share the common avgas supply, sipping 400 grams per
> kilowatt-hour when in use. The air intake and exhaust would port to the
> outside. It requires some fooling with because it has a carburetor--so
> altitude compensation has to be added. The thing is very quiet.
>
> An interesting choice--and the APU will outlast your airplane.
>
> Regards,
> Eric M. Jones
> www.PerihelionDesign.com
> 113 Brentwood Drive
> Southbridge MA 01550-2705
> Phone (508) 764-2072
> Email: emjones@charter.net
>
> "Everything you've learned in school as "obvious" becomes
> less and less obvious as you begin to study the universe.
> For example, there are no solids in the universe. There's
> not even a suggestion of a solid. There are no absolute con-
> tinuums. There are no surfaces. There are no straight lines."
>
> - R. Buckminster Fuller
>
>
>
Message 39
| 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: | wing strobe wire disconnects |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bryan Hooks" <bryanhooks@comcast.net>
Good to hear. I wonder if it's got anything to do with HIS power pack?
Seems 'lectrons are 'lectrons though.
Has anyone used the Creative Air strobe power pack and the molex
conectors at the wing root? It's called the EX-AVI-PAK.
-bryan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Randy
Pflanzer
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: wing strobe wire disconnects
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Randy Pflanzer"
<f1rocket@comcast.net>
Sounds like hooey to me. You can certainly cut the strobe leads,
including
the ground wire, and insert a 4-pin Molex connector. I've done it and
I'm
quite sure many others have as well.
Randy
F1 Rocket
www.pflanzer-aviation.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryan Hooks" <bryanhooks@comcast.net>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: wing strobe wire disconnects
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bryan Hooks"
> <bryanhooks@comcast.net>
>
> Snip
>>I'm planning to run my Whelan strobe lines (including shield)
>>through 4-pin
>>Molex mate-n-loc connectors at the wing roots. Does this seem
>>reasonable?
>>
>>Jay
>
> I just posed this question to Bill at Creative Air. Here is the
answer
> I got for what it's worth:
>
> Bryan... The problem is that you can't do anything with the strobe
> leads...
> They need to be continuous and the shield grounded...
>
> However, I should have single strobe power paks soon, then you can put
> them
> in the wing tips and use connectors at the wing for power leads to
> them...
>
> Hope this helps...
>
> -Bill
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "BRYAN HOOKS" <bryanhooks@comcast.net>
> To: "CreativAir" <info@creativair.com>
> Subject: Enquiry from CreativAir
>
>
> I am going to buy your strobe light kit and led positions lights for a
> Vans
> RV-7A (I'll get the tail pos/strobe combo from vans). Can you please
> tell me
> if there is an elegant way to make a wiring conector at the wing root,
> so
> that I can wire the wings and fuselage seperately? I'm building in my
> garage
> and don't have room to put the wings on just yet, but I'd like to get
> the
> wiring runs done now.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay
> Brinkmeyer
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: wing strobe wire disconnects
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jay Brinkmeyer
> <jaybrinkmeyer@yahoo.com>
>
> I'm planning to run my Whelan strobe lines (including shield) through
> 4-pin
> Molex mate-n-loc connectors at the wing roots. Does this seem
> reasonable?
>
> Jay
>
>
> =====
>
>
> __________________________________
> http://baseball.fantasysports.yahoo.com/
>
>
>
Message 40
| 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: APU versus battery |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 05:37 PM 3/2/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
>
>You won't find gigantic batteries on gigantic airplanes---but you will find
>APU's (Auxiliary Power Units)--an efficient way of turning fuel into
>electricity.
>
>Are tiny APU's reasonable for tiny airplanes?---let's take a look:
>
>Honda makes an excellent 4-cycle 1 hp (GX22) that is approximately 7 pounds
>stripped and is roughly an 8-inch cube. (I have taken the liberty of
>removing the fuel tank, and muffler, etc.) To this little engine we add a
>30A or larger alternator--In fact this little engine could drive a 50A
>alternator--minus inefficiency. The completed assembly would be 8X8X12 and
>it would weigh about 15 pounds.
>
>Now, with such an APU, we would go out to our airplane, start the APU, wait
>a minute to fill up our "UltraCapacitors", and start the engine. As soon as
>we achieve a steady idle, we shut down the APU and run the airplane on the
>alternator alone. If the main alternator dies---start the APU. Camping out
>under the wing--run the APU. Crashed in the outback--run the APU. Dead
>battery---Oops--- we have no stinking battery!
>
>The APU would share the common avgas supply, sipping 400 grams per
>kilowatt-hour when in use. The air intake and exhaust would port to the
>outside. It requires some fooling with because it has a carburetor--so
>altitude compensation has to be added. The thing is very quiet.
>
>An interesting choice--and the APU will outlast your airplane.
>
>Regards,
>Eric M. Jones
About 15 years ago B&C and I teamed with a combustion
research house in Annapolis, MD to progotype a diesel
ground power unit for Grumman. The core engine was
stolen out of a chain saw. The "generator" was a 48v permanent
magnet DC motor that also served as starter. The carb and
head was modified to run diesel in an Otto cycle mode. I did
the software and controls to start the beastie, warm it up,
and regulate throttle for charging voltage.
Years later I learned that during field trials of the whole
system our GPU was the only sub-system that ran as "advertised."
About a year ago, I was involved in a discussion about mating
a small gas engine to a 3-phase, PM alternator. The alternator
could be used as a brushless motor for starting and revert to
generator mode for running. Power from this system would be
VERY clean due to ability to throttle engine for power control
as opposed to hashing up the DC output with switchmode
components. Electrical efficiencies are high too.
The guy is still thinking about it. Our last
discussion centered on the notion of ditching the carb
in favor of throttle-body fuel injection. Most carbs are
very sensitive to contamination, dried out diaphragms, etc.
Fuel injection can be run from the same processor making
the device tolerant to long periods of inactivity.
He's also thinking about going to propane for fuel so as
to eliminate aging issues with gasoline. This particular
application calls for high degree of readiness in spite
of long storage intervals.
I agree with Eric. If price is no object (development
expenses are always gut wrenching), the hardware
to do this kind of thing is laying out there on the
ground. There are no technological dragons to slay.
The pig-iron airplanes are already going to smaller
batteries to start mini-turboshaft engines under
the nacelle which in turn starts the main engine.
Electrical energy required to start the engine is
1/10th that of pure electric start and overall system
weight goes down when 100 pounds of battery and 30 pounds
of starter are replaced with 15 pounds of battery,
2 pounds of starter and 15 pounds of turboshaft
engine for a weight reduction of 98 pounds and a 10x
increase in MTBO of the starting system. Emergency
power is supplied from a similarly miniaturized
APU that runs from kerosene. Big batteries should
be (and generally are) a thing of the past in
many applications not the least of which is aircraft.
Bob . . .
Message 41
| 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: D Fritz <dfritzj@yahoo.com>
Has anyone got any experience with this alternator:
http://www.gami.com/frames.htm
It may be a solution for the folks with dual electronic ignitions and EFISs (EFII?)
who want endurance busses that can handle all their endurance loads in a
Z-13 arrangement.
Dan Fritz
Message 42
| 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: Battery Load tester |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 03:11 PM 3/2/2005 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
>
>I disagree to a small extent. The new AGM batteries seem to loose capacity
>and not cranking amps. Thus you can start the engine but not have reserve
>power if needed. SEE Bob's comments on this in more detail
>
>Paul
The reason for this apparent aberration in operation
of modern AGM batteries is pretty simple. Consider a
24 a.h. flooded cell with perhaps 12 milliohms source
impedance will Ip test at about 540 amps. As cell
sites die in the battery, capacity goes down and
source impedance goes up approximately on the same
proportion. So a battery degraded to 12 a.h. has
24 milliohms resistance and Ip goes down to 270 amps.
A VSLA/AGM battery starts at about 7 milliohms and Ip
tests at 930 amps. When it degrades to 12 a.h. the
source impedance goes up to 14 milliohms and an Ip
tests at 460 amps.
This means that the half-used VSLA/AGM battery
has about as much cranking ability as a new flooded
battery. This makes casual observation of engine cranking
ability a poor indicator of battery capacity.
Many builders have come to the booth at OSH and extoll
the virtues of the new batteries, "Hey Bill, remember
that battery I bought here 5 years ago, it's still
in my airplane!" I tried to offer the above explanation
to most of them but I don't recall that any of them
bought a new battery on the spot. They were waiting
until it wouldn't crank the engine any more.
This phenomenon won't be so apparent where builders
are down-sizing batteries from 24 a.h. flooded
to 17 a.h. VSLA/AGM. Here there is value in trading
weight for battery longevity especially when it lets
you use commercial off-the-shelf batteries that are
especially inexpensive to purchase.
Bob . . .
Message 43
| 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: | EFIS Backup Battery |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:25 PM 3/1/2005 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Scott Winn (Matronics List)"
><swmat@cox.net>
>
>Bob,
>
>What I'd really like to have is a 'charge fault' light. Is there a
>simple way to attach an LED that would light IF charge voltage is
>present on main bus AND the output of the relay has not been driven to
>ground (I.E. bad relay)?
>
>--Scott
The only way I can think to automate that is two LVW/ABMM. One
to control the relay and a second to monitor that the output
has come up to bus voltage and is now supporting the battery.
The most efficient way would be a rotary selector switch to
zip the voltmeter around to the various battery busses to
see that they are all elevated to main bus voltage as part
of a pre-flight test.
Bob . . .
Message 44
| 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: Switch type//battery |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 07:42 PM 3/1/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Fred Fillinger" <n3eu@comcast.net>
>
>"Paul Messinger" wrote:
>
> > The FAA requires a battery capacity test as part of the annual,
> > as specified by the battery manufacturer ...
> >
>
>That may come as news to some of us. If you're referring to Part 43
>and arguing that the language of FAR 43.13 requires strict adherehnce
>to a manufacturer's service instructions (two long-time A&P/IAs I know
>say it does not, though good judgment should control), the service
>manual for my plane states only to "check specific gravity." My
>battery mfr says, to determine if serviceable, to either check
>specific gravity or do a capacity test without specifics on how to do
>it, and they label both as "suggested methods."
Yeah, there's been a lot of praying over the meanings of
words in the various documents in an effort to deduce The Law.
The FARS have had verbage like this for a some time:
(h) In the event of a complete loss of the primary electrical power
generating system, the battery must be capable of providing at least 30
minutes of electrical power to those loads that are essential to continued
safe flight and landing. The 30 minute time period includes the time needed
for the pilots to recognize loss of power and take appropriate
load shedding action.
Compliance with this rule has a ton of open ended questions
as to what is essential? How big is the battery when new?
How many a.h. of capacity does it take to meet the 30 minute
requirement?
It would be interesting to go through the dockets and amendments
over the period of 1965 to 1996 and find out when those words
were added. I know that in 1965 we had no factory recommended
testing procedures or test intervals in the maintenance manuals
at Cessna. I was writing those words from 1964 to 1969. The only
thing we did was publish a specific gravity chart to aid in
assessing state of charge. I'm not sure how s.g. varies with
capacity if at all. I think the words we wrote suggested
battery replacement if it couldn't be charged to 100% as
indicated by the s.g. reading.
I think it was because the words about 30-minute reserves
were not present in the FAR that folks like Concord reached
into a dark, warm place and pulled out an 80% number . . .
it was as good as any other number.
Nowadays, the official maintenance manual for the airframe
trumps all others as the last word in battery maintenance and
replacement criteria.
Bob . . .
Message 45
| 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: wing strobe wire disconnects |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 07:28 PM 3/2/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Randy Pflanzer"
><f1rocket@comcast.net>
>
>Sounds like hooey to me. You can certainly cut the strobe leads, including
>the ground wire, and insert a 4-pin Molex connector. I've done it and I'm
>quite sure many others have as well.
>
>Randy
>F1 Rocket
>www.pflanzer-aviation.com
I agree.
Bob . . .
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Bryan Hooks" <bryanhooks@comcast.net>
>To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: wing strobe wire disconnects
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bryan Hooks"
> > <bryanhooks@comcast.net>
> >
> > Snip
> >>I'm planning to run my Whelan strobe lines (including shield)
> >>through 4-pin Molex mate-n-loc connectors at the wing roots. Does this seem
> >>reasonable?
> >>
> >>Jay
> >
> > I just posed this question to Bill at Creative Air. Here is the answer
> > I got for what it's worth:
> >
> > Bryan... The problem is that you can't do anything with the strobe
> > leads... They need to be continuous and the shield grounded...
> >
> > However, I should have single strobe power paks soon, then you can put
> > them in the wing tips and use connectors at the wing for power leads to
> > them...
> >
> > Hope this helps...
> >
> > -Bill
Message 46
| 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: Question on the Axiliary battery manager |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 07:23 AM 3/2/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Hall" <mhall67@carolina.rr.com>
>
>I'm new at this wiring thing so forgive me if this has been hashed out
>before. First it took some time for me to understand that using fuses are
>OK for aircraft. I will need something like this battery manager for my
>project to keep the EFIS and other stuff running when starting. What I
>don't understand is, are there places that I should use breakers like it
>shows in the Figure 7 batter manager wiring for the ALT field or can I use
>a fuse here too?
You can use fuses anywhere in the Z-figures except that
a breaker is recommended for crowbar-protected field
supply circuits.
Bob . . .
Message 47
| 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: Switch type//battery |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
Disagree.
The FAA has somewhere (as I misplaced the ref) requiring the battery
manufacturers to publish the required annual testing. Concord has done this
as I have a copy and it states that battery must test to at least 85% of the
new advertiesd rating based on the testing procedure herein (my words but
the entire document is at the concord battery site.
This "trumps" any older requirements any where.
Not sure how this relates to the 30 min flight time (I see no relation here
its strictly battery condition) but Concord says now the battery is not
airworthy if it tests under 85% of original capacity. Local FSDO ( I asked
and was provided with a 100% yes reply) among others all agree. This rule is
only a couple of years old and ALL batteries shipped since this was issued
include by (FAA edict) the related annual testing requirements. Basically
just as ELT batteries are controlled but not by the FAA but the ELT maker.
Here its the battery maker that provides the FAA approved test and GO/NO GO
requirements. Neither are trumpted by acft manuals etc.
I suggest you contact Concord (or go to the web site and download the
testing requirements, mine are old and could have changed) and the local
FSDO.
Your results may vary based on who you contact at the FAA :-)
westmountain radio is also current on this issue as they are considering a
higher powered unit just for this application. They also have several FBO's
using their current tester for the annual requirements.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Switch type//battery
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
>>
> Nowadays, the official maintenance manual for the airframe
> trumps all others as the last word in battery maintenance and
> replacement criteria.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
Message 48
| 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: Switch type//battery//ref link |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
Here are the links I was referring to.
Instructions for continued airworthiness:
http://www.concordebattery.com/otherpdf/IFCA1.pdf
The first page covers modification of the aircraft maintenance manual and
page 8 provides 85% for return to service.
The second link has the 80% as well as the 85% numbers but the first link is
the binding FAA document where 85% is also stated.
Owner manual:
http://www.concordebattery.com/otherpdf/ownermanual.pdf
The westmountainradio capacity checker is limited to around 7.5 amps for a
large 12V battery and thus will not meet FAA requirements for certificated
aircraft but is great for our usage where most applications in "alternator
out" modes have a battery load under that and thus one can test the battery
under the "real" expected emergency flight conditions.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Switch type//battery
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger"
> <paulm@olypen.com>
>
> Disagree.
>
> The FAA has somewhere (as I misplaced the ref) requiring the battery
> manufacturers to publish the required annual testing. Concord has done
> this
> as I have a copy and it states that battery must test to at least 85% of
> the
> new advertiesd rating based on the testing procedure herein (my words but
> the entire document is at the concord battery site.
>
> This "trumps" any older requirements any where.
>
> Not sure how this relates to the 30 min flight time (I see no relation
> here
> its strictly battery condition) but Concord says now the battery is not
> airworthy if it tests under 85% of original capacity. Local FSDO ( I asked
> and was provided with a 100% yes reply) among others all agree. This rule
> is
> only a couple of years old and ALL batteries shipped since this was issued
> include by (FAA edict) the related annual testing requirements. Basically
> just as ELT batteries are controlled but not by the FAA but the ELT maker.
> Here its the battery maker that provides the FAA approved test and GO/NO
> GO
> requirements. Neither are trumpted by acft manuals etc.
>
> I suggest you contact Concord (or go to the web site and download the
> testing requirements, mine are old and could have changed) and the local
> FSDO.
>
> Your results may vary based on who you contact at the FAA :-)
>
> westmountain radio is also current on this issue as they are considering a
> higher powered unit just for this application. They also have several
> FBO's
> using their current tester for the annual requirements.
>
> Paul
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Switch type//battery
>
>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
>> <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
>>
>>>
>> Nowadays, the official maintenance manual for the airframe
>> trumps all others as the last word in battery maintenance and
>> replacement criteria.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 49
| 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: | Question about dimmer circuits and annunicators... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Marcos Della" <mdella@cstone.com>
I have a set of 12 annunicators that are either all activated by active
ground (either through a diode to a ground switch like oil pressure or
via a diode and a NPN transistor to tie the line to ground from a power
lead like turning on landing lights)
So all the hot leads are tied to power and the push-to-test is a ground
switch (again via diodes to the annunciators). I wanted to tie the hot
lead to the dimmer circuit (its way too bright at night) but if I turn
the dimmer all the way down (or its off during the day) then the
annunicators wouldn't work.
What I'd like is to take the bigger of two power supplies, 9V (my lowest
for the annunicators) vs the dimmer circuit. And if the dimmer circuit
is off, then it uses the full 14v.
Is this beginning to be too big a request? Should I just leave it tied
to power and not bother with worrying about the annunicators being too
bright at night?
(P.S. I am almost done with the circuit board for a 12 indicator that
has 5 ground switches, 6 power switches, and a "gear in motion"
(difference between gear up and gear down indicator))
Marcos
Message 50
| 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: Question about dimmer circuits and annunicators... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online@telus.net>
Marcos: I understand your question.
I made a 4-channel annunciator (the IL-4A), available from
http://www3.telus.net/aviation/vx . In the application section of the
datasheet, you see how it can be wired to a dimmer bus and an Nav light
switch to give you what you are looking for.
During the day (Nav Off), the SPDT switch (B&C sells them as S700-1-3)
connects the +12V to the lighting controller. When the Nav is On, the
power is disconnected, but the dimmer power is active because it is
powered from the Nav light circuit. A simple diode switch in the IL-4A
allows either power source to operate it, thus automatically giving you
full brightness during the day, and variable dimming at night. The lamp
test works either way as well.
The IL-4A also senses active ground or active power inputs
(programmable), and reversing switches (such as flap motors).
You can use the same powering technique for your design, if your Nav
switch has two poles. The datasheet has a complete schematic of the
IL-4A, plus the application information.
Thanks,
Vern Little
RV-9A
Marcos Della wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Marcos Della" <mdella@cstone.com>
>
> I have a set of 12 annunicators that are either all activated by active
>ground (either through a diode to a ground switch like oil pressure or
>via a diode and a NPN transistor to tie the line to ground from a power
>lead like turning on landing lights)
>
>So all the hot leads are tied to power and the push-to-test is a ground
>switch (again via diodes to the annunciators). I wanted to tie the hot
>lead to the dimmer circuit (its way too bright at night) but if I turn
>the dimmer all the way down (or its off during the day) then the
>annunicators wouldn't work.
>
>What I'd like is to take the bigger of two power supplies, 9V (my lowest
>for the annunicators) vs the dimmer circuit. And if the dimmer circuit
>is off, then it uses the full 14v.
>
>Is this beginning to be too big a request? Should I just leave it tied
>to power and not bother with worrying about the annunicators being too
>bright at night?
>
>(P.S. I am almost done with the circuit board for a 12 indicator that
>has 5 ground switches, 6 power switches, and a "gear in motion"
>(difference between gear up and gear down indicator))
>
>Marcos
>
>
>
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Message 51
| 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: | Switch type//battery |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Greg Young" <gyoung@cs-sol.com>
Concord's ICA (Instructions for Continued Airworthiness) that were
included with my battery had a clause that it did not require load
testing until the 2nd year. I don't have the exact wording in front of
me so I don't know if you could tap dance and stretch it to a 3rd year
but, at minimum, if you're willing to replace it every 2 years, you
don't have to load test it.
Regards,
Greg Young - Houston (DWH)
RV-6 N6GY - project Phoenix
Navion N5221K - just an XXL RV-6A
> -----Original Message-----
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger"
> --> <paulm@olypen.com>
> The FAA has somewhere (as I misplaced the ref) requiring the
> battery manufacturers to publish the required annual testing.
> Concord has done this as I have a copy and it states that
> battery must test to at least 85% of the new advertiesd
> rating based on the testing procedure herein (my words but
> the entire document is at the concord battery site.
<snip>
>
> I suggest you contact Concord (or go to the web site and
> download the testing requirements, mine are old and could
> have changed) and the local FSDO.
>
Message 52
| 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: pinout for Narco Mk 24 ? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Robert L. Nuckolls, III a crit :
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
>At 09:13 PM 3/2/2005 +0100, you wrote:
>
>
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gilles Thesee
>><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>A buddy found a Narco Mark 24 VHF. Anyone happen to have the
>>corresponding pinout ?
>>Any input appreciated,
>>
>>
>
> I checked the database I have and it only shows the MK12.
> Sorry.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
Bob,
Thank you.
Gilles
Message 53
| 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: APU versus battery |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Frank & Dorothy <frankvdh@xtra.co.nz>
Eric M. Jones wrote:
>An interesting choice--and the APU will outlast your airplane.
>
>
So, why bother with an alternator on your engine? Why not use just the
little engine (eventually to be replaced by a fuel cell, I guess) to
generate electricty, and just use the big engine (perhaps also to
eventually be replaced by a fuel cell?) to propel you round the sky?
Frank
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! --
|