Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:30 AM - Re: CBA-II battery tester and $low$ NiMh cells (Michael Pereira)
2. 05:30 AM - Re: CBA-II battery tester and $low$ NiMh cells (Michael Pereira)
3. 06:38 AM - Re: CBA-II battery tester and $low$ NiMh (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 06:38 AM - Re: audio iso amp (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 08:05 AM - Re: basic reasoning for system architecture (B Tomm)
6. 08:32 AM - Re: ...If I didn't know better... (P. Van Caulart)
7. 09:01 AM - nav/com and transponder antenna (EuropaXSA276@aol.com)
8. 09:58 AM - Re: Freq Change Beeps (Speedy11@aol.com)
9. 10:02 AM - Re: nav/com and transponder antenna (Werner Schneider)
10. 10:41 AM - Alternator Sizing (rv-9a-online)
11. 11:01 AM - Re: audio iso amp (rd2@evenlink.com)
12. 02:41 PM - Re: nav/com and transponder antenna (EuropaXSA276@aol.com)
13. 03:03 PM - Re: CBA-II battery tester and $low$ NiMh cells (Gilles Thesee)
14. 03:08 PM - Re: basic reasoning for system architecture (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
15. 04:07 PM - Re: Alternator Sizing (Jerry Grimmonpre)
16. 04:21 PM - Re: basic reasoning for system architecture (B Tomm)
17. 04:40 PM - Re: basic reasoning for system architecture (B Tomm)
18. 06:18 PM - Re: basic reasoning for system architecture (rv-9a-online)
19. 07:19 PM - Re: audio iso amp (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
20. 08:10 PM - Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection ()
21. 08:49 PM - Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection ()
22. 09:21 PM - Re: CBA-II battery tester and $low$ NiMh cells (J. Mcculley)
23. 09:31 PM - Re: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection (George Braly)
24. 10:09 PM - Re: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection (Chris & Kellie Hand)
25. 10:31 PM - Re: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP (Richard Riley)
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: CBA-II battery tester and $low$ NiMh cells |
AeroElectric-List Digest List <aeroelectric-list-digest@matronics.com>
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Michael Pereira <mjpnj@yahoo.com>
Hi Bob,
The device you described is probably (depending on the exact feature set you're
interested in) available commercially from the model airplane/car folks.
It all depends on how you value your money versus your time. Usually
good quality automatic cycler/chargers cost quite a bit.
Sorry for not quoting the original message. My mailer truncates digest messages
on reply.
c'ya,
Michael
-----
mjpnj@yahoo.com
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: CBA-II battery tester and $low$ NiMh cells |
AeroElectric-List Digest List <aeroelectric-list-digest@matronics.com>
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Michael Pereira <mjpnj@yahoo.com>
Hi Bob,
The device you described is probably (depending on the exact feature set you're
interested in) available commercially from the model airplane/car folks.
It all depends on how you value your money versus your time. Usually
good quality automatic cycler/chargers cost quite a bit.
Sorry for not quoting the original message. My mailer truncates digest messages
on reply.
c'ya,
Michael
-----
mjpnj@yahoo.com
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CBA-II battery tester and $low$ NiMh |
cells
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
cells
At 05:29 AM 4/25/2005 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Michael Pereira <mjpnj@yahoo.com>
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>The device you described is probably (depending on the exact feature set
>you're
>interested in) available commercially from the model airplane/car folks.
>
>It all depends on how you value your money versus your time. Usually
>good quality automatic cycler/chargers cost quite a bit.
>
>Sorry for not quoting the original message. My mailer truncates digest
>messages
>on reply.
Thanks for reminding me. I do recall reading about this
equipment somewhere. I'll look into it further. If anyone
else has some time to cruise the 'net in search of the
magic battery cycler/tester, I'd sure appreciate hearing
of your findings.
I have seen some other interesting stuff posted on the 'net.
Here's an excellent example of marketing hype and stretching
facts to craft a persuasive ad:
http://www.ripvan100.com/products_sanyo2100mah.htm
They say each battery gets 50 test cycles before it
leaves the factory. I'd be interested in seeing the
test plan and equipment used to accomplish this. If
we're talking about "deep" cycles that expend the majority
of the battery's capacity . . . at what rate is the
discharge and recharge accomplished. My fast chargers
warm the batteries up substantially to get them recharged
in an hour. A meaningful capacity check has to be done
at the same rate as the battery is spec'd for . . . in
the case of the batteries I was talking about yesterday,
it's a 20 hour rate. Hmmmm . . . 21 hours per test cycle
per cell?
The ad cites 1500% more snort than an alkaline AA.
Hmmm . . . my tests have shown that a variety of cells
running from 37 cents each to $1.50 each all have the
same capacity to plus or minus 6 percent. Further,
their capacity is on the order of 2 watt-hours
per cell. A 2300 mah cell loaded with 5 ohms (200+ ma)
would not be expected to carry that load for more than
11 hours assuming that the 2300 mah rating was based
on a 10-hour rate. Given the discovery that these
cells live up to their advertisements at a 20 hour
rate, we can EXPECT the capacity at the 10 hour rate
to be LESS than advertised. 200 ma for 10 hours x
1.1 volts is 2.2 watt-hours . . . right in the ball-park
with alkaline cells.
The DIFFERENCE in performance comes from the fact that
NiMh cells have a lower internal impedance. So in
applications that load the cell much heavier than their
20 hour rate, we can expect a degradation of capacity
but the NiMh will suffer less degradation due to its
lower internal resistance . . . hence better performance
at the heavier loads. When I get the time, I'll run
a set of NiMh cells on the same load tester I used
for the AA alkaline cells . . . somehow I don't expect
a 15x improvement in contained energies.
Bob . . .
>c'ya,
>Michael
>
>-----
>mjpnj@yahoo.com
>
>
>--
>
>
>-- incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
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 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: audio iso amp |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 11:28 PM 4/24/2005 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tony Johnson"
><tonyjohnson@cfl.rr.com>
>
>I have seen Bob Nuckolls plans for an audio iso amp. I am wondering if that
>device will accomplish my goal of bringing all the audio warning devices
>together, amplifying those that need amplification?
>
>
>I had planned to use a Flighcom 403 intercom, which will take stereo music
>inputs and warning tones. However, the nav radio I plan to use (VAL INS)
>seems to need amplification for its audio output. I can accomplish
>everything but the amplification of the nav radio audio with the Flightcom
>403. I don't think that the Flightcom 403 intercom will amplify the nav
>radio.
>
>
>Would the audio iso amp be the appropriate device for that? It seems that
>the iso amp does more than I might need, so I might need to use only a bit
>of its capability, that is to run all my warning tones thru, then forward
>them to the aux input of the Flightcom 403 intercom.
Tony, chapter 18 on audio systems will be out in Revision 11 this
week. I'll post the chapter on the website for folks to update their
books. The new chapter speaks directly to this issue. I think you'll
find it helpful.
Bob . . .
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | basic reasoning for system architecture |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: B Tomm <fvalarm@rapidnet.net>
No P-mags, Eggenfellner Subaru conversion
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [SMTP:b.nuckolls@cox.net]
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: basic reasoning for system architecture
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 07:40 PM 4/24/2005 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: B Tomm <fvalarm@rapidnet.net>
>
>Bob,
>
>When you talk about possibly adding a second rear mounted battery in the
>future, I assume that this second battery would connect to the same 2 AWG
>feeds right at the first battery. In other words, you would still only
>have one set of feeds going to the firewall? Is this correct?
Yes.
Do I recall correctly that you're considering p-mags?
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: ...If I didn't know better... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "P. Van Caulart" <etivc@iaw.on.ca>
I know better! Paul Messinger does have a history of using false names
once he has marginalized himself from a list. I've witnessed his "Sam
Brown" personage on another list after vowing "never to participate
again." The late, Garfield Willis, moderator of AirSIG, a Subaru
conversion list, had "Pope Paul" (as Garfield called him) pegged thusly.
Paul's M.O. is a sequence.
1. You're wrong, I'm right.
2. You doubt my word, I'm offended.
3. I'm superior because of my credentials, capitulate now.
4. Hissy fit is thrown, followed by, "I'm taking my marbles and not
playing anymore."
5. Posts "press releases" to the list via a 3rd party.
6. Lurks under a pseudonym and lobs bombs until discovered.
7. Lurks in disgrace.
8. Looks for another sandbox to mess in.
9. Repeats the cycle.
George, Bob, this guy is so distracting, I just want to conserve
bandwidth. When we are informed about guys like this, then we can
recognize the problem, go around it and move on.
PeterVC
Time: 07:47:33 PM PST US
From: "Jim's Shaw Mail" <jcorner@shaw.ca> protection
...If I didn't know better I would say that Paul M had returned under an
assumed name. Wait a minute, I don't know better! :-)
Jim Corner
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: | nav/com and transponder antenna |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: EuropaXSA276@aol.com
Hello Group
I noted that many of you have installed the Bob Archer nav/com and
transponder antenna in your aircraft. I wonder if any have chosen the
Advance Aircraft
Electronics units which are also available from Spruce. These units are a bit
more expensive than the Archer units. Worth it?
I would like to hear from you.
Thanks in advance for any information on antennas
Brian Skelly
Texas
Europa # A276 TriGear
See My build photos at:
http://www.europaowners.org/BrianS
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: Freq Change Beeps |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Speedy11@aol.com
In a message dated 4/22/2005 5:42:14 AM Eastern Standard Time,
aeroelectric-list-digest@matronics.com writes:
I want the flip-flop feedback tone. I'm trying not to be defensive about
why I want this feature, but I can't help it. I'm amazed at how much
resistance a simple idea has encountered on this list. So much for "here's
how it's done." Thanks to those who responded already on-topic.
Dan,
No need to be defensive. Fly formation however you like. As long as the
procedures are briefed and practiced, then there is nothing wrong with close
formation radio frequency changes - especially when you have flip-flop radios to
assist. Military aircraft typically had 20 preset channels that were
relatively easy to select while flying close formation. The presets were used
in
situations like yours where the frequencies anticipated for the flight are known
in
advance. Your flip-flop only provides two, but not all of your formation
flying requires close formation, so when you have the flight in spread or trail,
they can set up their radios for the next planned frequency change. That
would be part of my prebriefing.
I have to disagree with Ferg and John regarding frequency changes in close
formation. If it were me, I would made freq changes in spread formation
whenever possible, but when needed, I would make them in close formation - so long
as
my wingmen were prebriefed.
I like your ideas for having the flip-flop on the stick and your idea for the
freq change tone. I would want those myself.
Stan Sutterfield
www.rv-8a.net
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: nav/com and transponder antenna |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Werner Schneider" <glastar@gmx.net>
Brian,
I'm using their transponder antenna and so far ATC never complained, easy to
install, hidden in the fuselage of my Glastar.
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: <EuropaXSA276@aol.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: nav/com and transponder antenna
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: EuropaXSA276@aol.com
>
> Hello Group
>
> I noted that many of you have installed the Bob Archer nav/com and
> transponder antenna in your aircraft. I wonder if any have chosen the
> Advance Aircraft
> Electronics units which are also available from Spruce. These units are a
bit
> more expensive than the Archer units. Worth it?
>
> I would like to hear from you.
>
> Thanks in advance for any information on antennas
>
> Brian Skelly
> Texas
> Europa # A276 TriGear
> See My build photos at:
> http://www.europaowners.org/BrianS
>
>
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: | Alternator Sizing |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online@telus.net>
I took the time to measure/calculate/estimate my alternator requirement
for my RV-9A. My hope was to be able to use a 35A externally regulated
alternator, and avoid the complications of B-Lead contactors, and avoid
the endless OVP debate.
I developed an Excel spreadsheet that anyone is welcome to download and
edit. My aircraft is for day/night VFR and VFR OTT (which requires
pitot heat).
http://www3.telus.net/aviation/flying/RV-9A/photos/Electrical/Electrical_photos
Now, you can blindly total up all reasonable maximum loads and come up
with the need for a 60A alternator, but realistically, the alternator
only needs to operate at worst-case typical loads. For example, the
starter contactor load does not need to be included, and you won't
normally have pitot heat on at the same time your strobes or landing
lights are on. Also, flaps and boost pump are transient loads,
landing/taxi are wig-wagged at 50%, and so on.
It is possible to exceed the maximum output of a 35A alternator in
transient cases... but that's what the battery, ammeter and voltmeter
are for.
My estimates show a worst-case cruise load of 29A, which leaves about 6
A available for battery charging at cruise.
In worst-case landing configuration at night (max field current, 20%
over nominal plus landing and position lights on, fuel pump on,
continous COMM transmission), I get 33.8 A, just below the maximum rating.
So, my conclusion is that I can use a 35A alternator without an OVP
contactor.
Your mileage may vary, and this is an educated estimate. By the way,
modern avionics don't add a lot of idle power consumption-- but lights
sure do. I think it would be possible to build a full IFR aircraft with
modern avionics that would operate on a 35A alternator with good
decision making by the pilot on in-flight loads.
Vern Little
RV-9A
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: audio iso amp |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rd2@evenlink.com
Bob,
please post a message to let us know that the rev. is out.
Tx
Rumen
do not archive
_____________________Original message __________________________
(received from Robert L. Nuckolls, III; Date: 08:38 AM
4/25/2005 -0500)
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 11:28 PM 4/24/2005 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tony Johnson"
><tonyjohnson@cfl.rr.com>
>
>I have seen Bob Nuckolls plans for an audio iso amp. I am wondering if that
>device will accomplish my goal of bringing all the audio warning devices
>together, amplifying those that need amplification?
>
>
>I had planned to use a Flighcom 403 intercom, which will take stereo music
>inputs and warning tones. However, the nav radio I plan to use (VAL INS)
>seems to need amplification for its audio output. I can accomplish
>everything but the amplification of the nav radio audio with the Flightcom
>403. I don't think that the Flightcom 403 intercom will amplify the nav
>radio.
>
>
>Would the audio iso amp be the appropriate device for that? It seems that
>the iso amp does more than I might need, so I might need to use only a bit
>of its capability, that is to run all my warning tones thru, then forward
>them to the aux input of the Flightcom 403 intercom.
Tony, chapter 18 on audio systems will be out in Revision 11 this
week. I'll post the chapter on the website for folks to update their
books. The new chapter speaks directly to this issue. I think you'll
find it helpful.
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: nav/com and transponder antenna |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: EuropaXSA276@aol.com
Thanks Werner!
What did you use for the com?
Brian Skelly
Texas
Europa # A276 TriGear
See My build photos at:
http://www.europaowners.org/BrianS
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CBA-II battery tester and $low$ NiMh cells |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
>More comments on the CBA-II are forthcoming. Giles, have you
>had a chance to play with your CBA-II yet?
>
>
>
Hi Bob,
Last time I went to the airfield we had the welcome barbecue and I
didn't even get a chance to get to the battery compartment ;-)
My intention is to take the batteries home next time a do a thorough
check. Hopefully within the next few days.
My goal is first to run the e-bus loads and measure the exact current
draw with my clamp-on ammeter. I'll then adjust the discharge current to
match and obtain realistic e-bus duration numbers.
Will keep you posted,
Regards,
Gilles
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: | basic reasoning for system architecture |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:01 AM 4/25/2005 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: B Tomm <fvalarm@rapidnet.net>
>
>No P-mags, Eggenfellner Subaru conversion
>
>Bevan
Oh . . . That's different. How full is your worry-bucket
with respect to multiple power sources for the engine
critical loads. Have you seen Figure Z-19? What reasons
do you have for not duplicating Eggenfellner's recommendations?
Bob . . .
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: Alternator Sizing |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jerry Grimmonpre" <jerry@mc.net>
Thanks Vern for taking the time to present this Excel sheet to the list for
our use. It looks well organized and useable as a planning tool.
Regards ....
Jerry Grimmonpre
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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: | basic reasoning for system architecture |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: B Tomm <fvalarm@rapidnet.net>
Yes,
I'm basing my design on Z-19 (Thank you very much by the way for producing
so many drawings).
Eggenfellner's install guide was written for the smaller engine and it's a
step by step guide at that. I have not seen a detailed wiring diagram for
their system. The larger engine seems to require some self do
modifications. I don't have an engine yet so I don't have any
documentation that may come with it, but little is available online. For
example, the builder may need move the batteries aft for CG considerations
since I don't want to add dead ballast to the tail. The best idea yet
regarding this comes from Jim Skala who says to mount only one battery aft
and run only 12 AWG from it to the second buss. Engine critical loads have
dual feeds (Z-19). This way, only the main battery would be used for
starting (that's OK with me). I assume I would use a some kind of current
limiting device at the battery to protect the 12 AWG wire running forward.
Yes? I would prefer to have no fuse block behind the baggage bulkhead, I
would like to run the 12 AWG feed to the firewall area where the other
busses are.
What is your opinion on the solid state power contactors offered by
Perehelion in terms of reliabilty and suitability to the aircraft
environment?
Your thoughts are always appreciated.
Bevan
RV7A
all electric airplane
electrically dependent engine
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [SMTP:b.nuckolls@cox.net]
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: basic reasoning for system architecture
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:01 AM 4/25/2005 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: B Tomm <fvalarm@rapidnet.net>
>
>No P-mags, Eggenfellner Subaru conversion
>
>Bevan
Oh . . . That's different. How full is your worry-bucket
with respect to multiple power sources for the engine
critical loads. Have you seen Figure Z-19? What reasons
do you have for not duplicating Eggenfellner's recommendations?
Bob . . .
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: | basic reasoning for system architecture |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: B Tomm <fvalarm@rapidnet.net>
Bob,
I forgot, the other reason I'm not duplicating Eggenfellners layout is
because they use the EXPbus in their architecture and I don't care for it.
Why? I just don't think it's necessary, it adds cost, it introduces more
things to fail AND if something does fail on the EXP, the whole thing comes
out. The EXPbus is a complex part as opposed to individual switches and
fuses which I can see, remove, test and order from multiple sources. Plus
I would end up remoting the toggle switches anyway so again adding
connections and parts count.
just my opinions, other's mileage may vary. I am not intimidated by lots
of wires.
Bevan
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: basic reasoning for system architecture |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online@telus.net>
I evaluated the EXP bus as well, and came to the conclusion that if you
want any one thing different, you should just make everyting
different.... I used B&C discrete toggle switches and backlit labels
from Superior Panel Technology.
I also use the P&B W28 series breakers that mount on 0.75" centers...
very slick.
Many people, however, are quite intimidated by electrical system design
in aircraft, so that's where the EXP bus comes in. Bob has done a lot
to make electrical design straightforward (I didn't say simple!), but
unless you have the aptitude, many will go with the canned solutions or
hire someone to do it.
Vern Little
B Tomm wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: B Tomm <fvalarm@rapidnet.net>
>
>Bob,
>
>I forgot, the other reason I'm not duplicating Eggenfellners layout is
>because they use the EXPbus in their architecture and I don't care for it.
> Why? I just don't think it's necessary, it adds cost, it introduces more
>things to fail AND if something does fail on the EXP, the whole thing comes
>out. The EXPbus is a complex part as opposed to individual switches and
>fuses which I can see, remove, test and order from multiple sources. Plus
>I would end up remoting the toggle switches anyway so again adding
>connections and parts count.
>
>just my opinions, other's mileage may vary. I am not intimidated by lots
>of wires.
>
>Bevan
>
>
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: audio iso amp |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 01:54 PM 4/25/2005 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rd2@evenlink.com
>
>Bob,
>
>please post a message to let us know that the rev. is out.
>Tx
Will do. At the same time, the What's New? feature on our
website will announce availability of off-the-net updates for
those who wish to revise their books. I'll be removing the
updates for revision 9 and adding updates for revision 11
to the Downloadable Reference Materials page as well.
Bob . . .
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: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
(Alternators with internal voltage regulator are very reliable and safe, have simple
installation and sophisticated state of the art protections, making them
an excellent choice.)
===========================================================
>From: "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
>I don't have a clue to the real name of "gmcjetpilot" @ YAHOO. I generally do
not try to >respond to people that use anything other than their real names
in these discussions. >Regards, George Braly
(George: My name is also George. OK, that's your policy; Ill live with it. I generally
don't give out my name. This is my policy, for security & privacy reasons.
I am not hiding, but if you want, e-mail me your phone number, I'll call
you; For the record, I respectfully disagree with your statement that ALL internally
regulated alternators have a single failure point. This is unproven and
with out merit. Regards George)
==========================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>Mr. George Braly; A quick and easy trick is to goggle the email address. He stated
his >name was George. All the hits I found were named the same.
(Wow, I feel popular, Goggle me? No personal info is attached to any e-mail address,
sorry. Just protecting my privacy. I am not in the witness protection program
or it there any nefarious reason. I guess you could track me down, but
I find that bizarre. Why do that? What would you do with that info? Now you-all
know why I dont add my last name, stalker Eric. Should I make up a fake name?
OK, You got me, its George W. Bushwacker, yes thats the ticket and my wife is
Morgan Fairchild. That is a joke son.)
==========================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>I happen to agree that we should not be picking on Paul as there is just so much
pickable >material in his posts regarding unanswered questions, I cant see
how we could have time >to pick on him personally.
(That just sounds malicious and sarcastic, I am sure you are really nice and smart,
as I am sure Paul is, but why would you say that. Paul has feelings like
we all do. Be nice to me, or I'll Goggle you! Oh NO! or I'll send "Jeeves" after
you. ]8
)
==========================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>Mr. George; You make some very good points, all of which have been covered very
well.
(No Mr. George please, just George or G. is fine, we are all friends so a first
name (or letter) basis is good enough.Thanks)
(I appreciate that you think I made good points, but my goal is not to sway people
to buy any kind of equipment or two alternators, just trying to help people
who are confused about all the technical mystification.)
====================================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>You agree the problems with the OV and Internal Regulated alternators were pilot
error.
(No, I was not referring to any pilot error. The only pilot error was using a crow
bar in the first place, on a device that already had OV protection. Dont add
redundant OV protection to an alternator with internal logic/control chips.
I can't even imagine wanting something called a crow bar in my electrical system
in the first place, but that is just me. If you feel you must, just know at
best it will cost about $50-$80 and add another pound or two to the empty weight,
at worst may blow your alternator needlessly. As you know you should never
disconnect the b-lead from the battery while it is running, but you probably
already knew that.)
(BTW, the modular aspect of the internal VR in a ND alternator allows the module
replacement on the ramp, may be without completely removing the alternator.
I think they a spare would cost $30 bucks? They are small and you could have a
"fly-a-way kit" with a spare.)
(Whether external or internal, the VR should have internal OV protection integrated.
Why not, it is available. If you must use a VR with no OV protection, a
device like this is better:)
http://www.periheliondesign.com/LOVM.htm
(The LOVM solid-state device does not rely on an electro-mechanical device like
a CB. Nothing wrong with CB's, as a matter of fact my panel has 18 little Klixon
CB's lining the bottom. I love them! Yes I am a rebel using CB's instead of
fuseholders. Call me crazy. BTW, I find it odd that CB's are generally maligned
in favor of fuses, but on the other hand CBs are defended as superb devices
in the role of OV protection device. This is why people are confused. CB's are
also very sophisticated "MIL Spec" devices that work well; fuses are cheaper
but not superior. Yea I said it. CB's are great. [please don't open a can of
"Goggle" whoop ass on me] If safety is not involved it is only a matter of opinion
and preference.)
====================================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>Would you agree this pilot error can be designed out simply?
(Not sure what you are driving at, but an internal regulator with out separate
devices would be the most fool proof IMHO. Can designers eliminate all pilot to
system interface or management errors, may be someday. NASA and Boeing spend
a lot research in this area, but we a talking about an alternator on a Lycoming.
The best thing we can do is use a DPST switch to make sure the MASTER (BAT)
is never turned off with the alternator running. This is where Philosopher Sir
Murphy comes in, Sh%#@t Happens. Nothing is fool proof; fools are just too
smart. When we realize how smart we are, we accept our limitations and those of
our little sky-scooters. Relax.)
( I tell myself: KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid, less is more.)
(The biggest danger in flying is not over voltage or alternators, it is we, the
Pilot. You have a infinitely larger chance of doing something stupid in your
plane much worse than the alternator has going super NOVA. Don't go crazy with
systems, but understand, accept, manage and respect the limitations.)
(Instead of dual everything, in your all glass cockpit sky-scooter-3000, consider
a few analog back-ups and a discrete battery to run the "emergency" equipment
for 60-120 minutes. This is how Boeing does it. Yes a Boeing 777/767/757/747
can fly on battery power only. Keep in mind these planes have 3 to 5 Gens. You
could use a Dynon EFIS with the internal battery option and hand-held battery
powered GPS and nav/com's for example. Who cares if the alternator craps out.
Why add all the weight and expense or two alternators? If you are IFR and loose
1-of-2 alternators will you just keep going IMC?)
(As far alternator redundancy to keep from getting stuck on a personal trip, far
from home, in a little homebuilt, I say uhmmm? Even with two alternators, what
about the starter, exhaust, fuel pump and weather? Air transport category redundancy
for the sake of dispatch reliability on a single engine homebuilt plane
is dubious at best. A plane designed 75 years ago that got it right, almost
100% dispatch reliability, and does not use an alternator or starter, its called
a Piper Cub. Simple is better sometimes. Let's just say "if you positively,
absolutely must be there over-night" and can't ship yourself in an UPS/Fedex
envelope, take an airliner or drive. As far as Mr. George Braly story: I do
not want to have the local Million Air facility order up an overnight delivery
of an alternator for Saturday installation so I can fly home on Sunday afternoon.
I ***KNOW*** what that costs (about $2.7K in New Orleans Lakefront). No
offense, I lived in New Orleans and was a corporat
e pilot,
$2,700 give me a break. Are you flying a Cessna Citation? Ramp, alternator (auto
parts store) and 1 hour A&P, $280. If you have your own tools, $200. Go to
Thibadaux or Slidell next time.
==========================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>Bob has said he cannot guarantee what is in the IR, so cannot speak to its reliability
(Well, that is true, Bob N. cant guarantee anything or can I. It is his opinion,
based on his abridged experience and knowledge of the IR and comfort with what
he knows. Bob N. to my knowledge did not design any of these IC chips, or is
he privy to the details of the designs. If you are use to seeing the external
"field wire", you are comfortable with that. Trusting a micro chip is hard to
do, but the fact is they are very reliable and see no proof otherwise. I hope
so because I trust my life to them daily.)
(The problem is these topics get so entrenched in small technical points the good
stuff gets lost. Most of us just want useful info, cut down to the facts, good
practice and opinion. Sometimes I find opinion and personal preference masquerading
as fact or best practice. No disrespect to Bob N., I read everything
he writes for a reason, but I dont have to agree with him?)
(I respect anyones privilege to design as they see fit, but new builders tend to
over do it, which does have negative consequences. Just be safe and use common
sense. It does not have to be gold plated. How many times have you gone down
the road at night and seen all the lights on a nearby car go real bright and
blow out from their socket from over voltage? Never, thank you.)
(Not being an expert I try to understand the WHY behind everyones opinion, experts
and mortals alike, agree or disagree. I took the time to research it and have
enough technical background in aerospace analysis, design, training and pilot
operations to cut thru most of the hyperbolizing. In the end it is an opinion,
take it or leave it.
(There is no smoking gun (or alternator). I predict in the future you will see
more and more people use IR alternators. Of course B&C will have a hard time selling
their set up costing $640, when you can get one for $140. If you read their
site it has "dark and stormy night" comments that are emotional sales pitch.
Linear switching (mechanical went away 30 years), OV protection and Low-Volt
light are also old news, for $240. Nothing special except the eye watering
price. Look at what an internal regulator can do below, things the B&C unit can
only dream of.
(Typical internal VR specs, * denotes features not in most external regulators)
*Load Dump,
*Over Current,
*Over Temperature,
Overvoltage,
*Phase Loss,
*Short Circuit,
*High Remote Sense Resistance,
*High Side MOSFET Control of Field Winding
User Programmable LRC Rates From 1.8 Seconds to 7.4 Seconds
*PWM (pulse width modulation) Fixed Operating Frequency of 395 Hz
*Forced Load Response Control (LRC) at Low Eng RPM due to abrupt system load current
*LRC Response During Initial Start
*Internal Level Shifting of External System Voltages
*Internal Lamp Driver w/ Short Circuit, Current Limit, Thermal Limit and Load Dump
Protection
*Analog or digital duty cycle cont'l of ON/OFF ratio of alternator field current/fixed
freq
Load Response Control (LRC): cont'l alternator field current at low engine RPM,
eliminate engine speed hunting / vibration due to abrupt torque loading w/ sudden
electrical load applied.
===============================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>Can you in good conscience tell us we do not need external OV protection?
(Yes, I can. Take a deep breath, relax.)
(To answer your question, yes, I can recommend, in good conscience the IR alternator
with no external do-dads. Of course adequate back-up in case. The word
*adequate* means different things to a VFR plane and an IFR plane, but it does
not necessarily mean two alternators. The goal is to actually fly someday. Weight
is the enemy. It adds up. Do you REALLY need to add an extra anything? Your
choice will effect aircraft performance & utility, slower climb and less useful
load for example.)
(Eric, good luck on your choice. If you want real security, an absolute 100% guarantee
from OV, I cant give you any guarantee, and I really think you should
ask an expert like Bob N.)
(If he tells you the external VR and crow bar are 100% fail-safe, fail-passive,
pure perfection, than "there you have it". Do that. I would respectively disagree
with Bob N, but than I use circuit breakers instead of fuses. What do I know.)
(It is a very plausible scenario to have a dead "crow bar" which goes undetected
by the pilot. Hell the wire could come undone. Also in theory you could, at
the same time, have a failure of the external VR causing an OV condition. It could
happen! Bob N. says you should test the crow-bar annually. OK what about
the other 364 days a year? Also you have a device that needs maintenance. Why
is that good? Modern VRs have internal fault detection and will safely shut-down
or warn you with a light. )
(I hear the argument, it makes us feel warmest & fuzziest to add these extra do-dads.
Absolutely, make yourself happy, however too much of the warm fuzzy blanket
may suffocate you. I stayed at a Holiday Inn last night, so I am just going
to throwing caution to the wind and rely on my alternator's internal protection
to get the job done without electrocuting my panel. Goggle away!)
Best Wishes, Happy flying, G (name with held for national security, G W.Bush)
Ye aviator, fly-ith with care, lest ye ground cometh up..... and smite thee mightily"
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: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
(Alternators with internal voltage regulator are very reliable and safe, have simple
installation and sophisticated state of the art protections, making them
an excellent choice.)
===========================================================
>From: "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
>I don't have a clue to the real name of "gmcjetpilot" @ YAHOO. I generally do
not try to >respond to people that use anything other than their real names
in these discussions. >Regards, George Braly
(George: My name is also George. OK, that's your policy; Ill live with it. I generally
don't give out my name. This is my policy, for security & privacy reasons.
I am not hiding, but if you want, e-mail me your phone number, I'll call
you; For the record, I respectfully disagree with your statement that "ALL internally
regulated alternators have a single point failure....." This is unproven
and with out merit. Regards George)
==========================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>Mr. George Braly; A quick and easy trick is to goggle the email address. He stated
his >name was George. All the hits I found were named the same.
(Wow, I feel popular, Goggle me? No personal info is attached to any e-mail address,
sorry. I am not in the witness protection program or it there any nefarious
reason, just privacy. Track me down? I find that bizarre. Why do that? What
would you do with that info? Now you-all know why I dont add my last name,
stalkers. Should I make up a fake name? OK, You got me, its George W. Bushwacker,
yes thats the ticket and my wife is Morgan Fairchild. That is a joke son.)
==========================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>I happen to agree that we should not be picking on Paul as there is just so much
pickable >material in his posts regarding unanswered questions, I cant see
how we could have time >to pick on him personally.
(That just sounds malicious and sarcastic, I am sure you are really nice and smart,
as I am sure Paul is, but why would you say that. Paul has feelings like
we all do. Be nice to me, or I'll Goggle you! Oh NO! or I'll send "Jeeves" after
you. ]8
)
==========================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>Mr. George; You make some very good points, all of which have been covered very
well.
(No Mr. George please, just George or G. is fine, we are all friends so a first
name (or letter) basis is good enough.Thanks)
(I appreciate that you think I made good points, but my goal is not to sway people
to buy any kind of equipment or two alternators, just trying to help people
who are confused about all the technical mystification.)
====================================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>You agree the problems with the OV and Internal Regulated alternators were pilot
error.
(No, I was not referring to any pilot error. The only pilot error was using a crow
bar in the first place, on a device that already had OV protection. Dont add
redundant OV protection to an alternator with internal logic/control chips.
I can't even imagine wanting something called a crow bar in my electrical system
in the first place, but that is just me. If you feel you must, just know at
best it will cost about $50-$80 and add another pound or two to the empty weight,
at worst may blow your alternator needlessly. As you know you should never
disconnect the b-lead from the battery while it is running, but you probably
already knew that.)
(BTW, the modular aspect of the internal VR in a ND alternator allows the module
replacement on the ramp, may be without completely removing the alternator.
I think they a spare would cost $30 bucks? They are small and you could have a
"fly-a-way kit" with a spare.)
(Whether external or internal, the VR should have internal OV protection integrated.
Why not, it is available. If you must use a VR with no OV protection, a
device like this is better:)
http://www.periheliondesign.com/LOVM.htm
(The LOVM solid-state device does not rely on an electro-mechanical device like
a CB. Nothing wrong with CB's, as a matter of fact my panel has 18 little Klixon
CB's lining the bottom. I love them! Yes I am a rebel using CB's instead of
fuseholders. Call me crazy. BTW, I find it odd that CB's are generally maligned
in favor of fuses, but on the other hand CBs are defended as superb devices
in the role of OV protection device. This is why people are confused. CB's are
also very sophisticated "MIL Spec" devices that work well; fuses are cheaper
but not superior. Yea I said it. CB's are great. [please don't open a can of
"Goggle" whoop ass on me] If safety is not involved its a matter of opinion and
preference.)
====================================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>Would you agree this pilot error can be designed out simply?
(Not sure what you are driving at, but an internal regulator with out separate
devices would be the most fool proof IMHO. Can designers eliminate all pilot to
system interface or management errors, may be someday. NASA and Boeing spend
a lot research in this area, but we a talking about an alternator on a Lycoming.
The best thing we can do is use a DPST switch to make sure the MASTER (BAT)
is never turned off with the alternator running. This is where Philosopher Sir
Murphy comes in, Sh%#@t Happens. Nothing is fool proof; fools are just too
smart. When we realize how smart we are, we accept our limitations and those of
our little sky-scooters. Relax.)
(The biggest danger in flying is not over voltage or alternators, it is we, the
Pilot. You have a infinitely larger chance of doing something stupid in your
plane much worse than the alternator has going super NOVA. Don't go crazy with
systems, but understand, accept, manage and respect the limitations.)
(Instead of dual everything, in your all glass cockpit sky-scooter-3000, consider
a few analog back-ups and a discrete battery to run the "emergency" equipment
for 60-120 minutes. This is how Boeing does it. Yes a Boeing 777/767/757/747
can fly on battery power only. Keep in mind these planes have 3 to 5 Gens. You
could use a Dynon EFIS with the internal battery option and hand-held battery
powered GPS and nav/com's for example. Who cares if the alternator craps out.
Why add all the weight and expense or two alternators? If you are IFR and loose
1-of-2 alternators will you just keep going IMC KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid,
less is more.)
(As far alternator redundancy to keep from getting stuck on a trip far from home,
in a little homebuilt, I say uhmmm? Even with two alternators, what about the
starter, exhaust, fuel pump and weather? Air transport category redundancy
for the sake of dispatch reliability on a single engine homebuilt plane is dubious
at best. A plane designed 75 years ago almost has 100% dispatch reliability,
and does not use an alternator or starter, its called a Piper Cub. Simple
is better sometimes. Let's just say if you absolutely must be there over-night
and can't ship yourself via UPS/Fedex envelope, take an airliner or drive. As
far as Mr. George Braly story: I do not want to have the local Million Air facility
order up an overnight delivery of an alternator for Saturday installation
so I can fly home on Sunday afternoon. I ***KNOW*** what that costs (about
$2.7K in New Orleans Lakefront)." No offense GB, I lived in New Orleans and
was a corporate pilot, $2,700 give me a break. Are
you
flying a Cessna Citation? My est to repair my RV on the ramp at KNEW, alternator
(auto parts store) and 1 hour A&P, $280. If you have your own tools, $200.
Go to Thibadaux or Slidell next time. Where you get $2,700?
==========================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>Bob has said he cannot guarantee what is in the IR, so cannot speak to its reliability
(Well, that is true, Bob N. cant guarantee anything or can I. It is his opinion,
based on his abridged experience and knowledge of the IR and comfort with what
he knows. Bob N. to my knowledge did not design any of these IC chips, or is
he privy to the details of the designs. If you are use to seeing the external
"field wire", you are comfortable with that. Trusting a micro chip is hard to
do, but the fact is they are very reliable and see no proof otherwise. I hope
so because I trust my life to them daily.)
(The problem is these topics get so entrenched in small technical points the good
stuff gets lost. Most of us just want useful info, cut down to the facts, good
practice and opinion. Sometimes I find opinion and personal preference masquerading
as fact or best practice. No disrespect to Bob N., I read everything
he writes for a reason, but I dont have to agree with him?)
(I respect anyones privilege to design as they see fit, but new builders tend to
over do it, which does have negative consequences. Just be safe and use common
sense. It does not have to be gold plated. How many times have you gone down
the road at night and seen all the lights on a nearby car go real bright and
blow out from their socket from over voltage? Never, thank you.)
(Not being an expert I try to understand the WHY behind everyones opinion, experts
and mortals alike, agree or disagree. I took the time to research it and have
enough technical background in aerospace analysis, design, training and pilot
operations to cut thru most of the hyperbolizing. In the end it is an opinion,
take it or leave it.
(There is no smoking gun (or alternator). I predict in the future you will see
more and more people use IR alternators. Of course B&C will have a hard time selling
their set up costing $640, when you can get one for $140. If you read their
site it has "dark and stormy night" comments that are emotional sales pitch.
They list linear switching (mechanical went away 30 years ago), OV protection
and Low-Volt light, also old news, for $240. Nothing special except the eye
watering price. Look at what an internal regulator can do below, things the
B&C unit can only dream of.
(Typical internal VR specs, * denotes features not in most external regulators)
*Load Dump,
*Over Current,
*Over Temperature,
Overvoltage,
*Phase Loss,
*Short Circuit,
*High Remote Sense Resistance,
*High Side MOSFET Control of Field Winding
User Programmable LRC Rates From 1.8 Seconds to 7.4 Seconds
*PWM (pulse width modulation) Fixed Operating Frequency of 395 Hz
*Forced Load Response Control (LRC) at Low Eng RPM due to abrupt system load current
*LRC Response During Initial Start
*Internal Level Shifting of External System Voltages
*Internal Lamp Driver w/ Short Circuit, Current Limit, Thermal Limit and Load Dump
Protection
*Analog or digital duty cycle cont'l of ON/OFF ratio of alternator field current/fixed
freq
Load Response Control (LRC): cont'l alternator field current at low engine RPM,
eliminate engine speed hunting / vibration due to abrupt torque loading w/ sudden
electrical load applied.
===============================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>Can you in good conscience tell us we do not need external OV protection?
(Yes, I can. Take a deep breath, relax.)
(To answer your question, yes, I can recommend, in good conscience the IR alternator
with no external do-dads. Of course have an adequate back-up in case. The
word *adequate* means different things to a VFR plane and an IFR plane, but
it does not necessarily mean two alternators. The goal is to actually fly someday.
Weight is the enemy. It adds up. Do you REALLY need to add an extra anything?
Your choice will effect aircraft performance & utility, slower climb and
less useful load for example.)
(Eric, good luck on your choice. If you want real security, an absolute 100% guarantee
from OV, I cant give you any guarantee, and I really think you should
ask an expert like Bob N. If he tells you the external VR and crow bar are 100%
fail-safe, fail-passive, pure perfection, than "there you have it". Do that.
I would respectively disagree with Bob N, but than I use circuit breakers instead
of fuses. What do I know.)
(It is a very plausible scenario to have a dead "crow bar" which goes undetected
by the pilot. Hell the wire could come undone. Also in theory you could, at
the same time, have a failure of the external VR causing an OV condition. It could
happen! Bob N. says you should test the crow-bar annually. OK what about
the other 364 days a year? Also you have a device that needs maintenance. Why
is that good? Modern VRs have internal fault detection and will safely shut-down
or warn you with a light. )
(I hear the argument, it makes us feel warmest & fuzziest to add these extra do-dads.
Absolutely, make yourself happy, however too much of the warm fuzzy blanket
may suffocate you. I stayed at a Holiday Inn last night. So I am just going
to throwing caution to the wind and rely on my alternator's internal protection
to get the job done without electrocuting my panel. Goggle away!)
Best Wishes, Happy flying, G (name with held for national security, G W.Bush)
Ye aviator, fly-ith with care, lest ye ground cometh up..... and smite thee mightily"
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: CBA-II battery tester and $low$ NiMh cells |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "J. Mcculley" <mcculleyja@starpower.net>
Robert L. Nuckolls, III cells wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
cells
<SNIP> The curve is neat but the only thing we're interested in is that
> intersection with 11.0 volts. That can be a simple comparator and
> timer mechanism teamed with a set of resistors tailored to emulate
> your e-loads . . . I don't think it needs to be complicated to
> be very useful.<SNIP>
> Bob . . .
Since resistors won't maintain a constant current as the voltage falls
toward the desired end-point cutoff, how about using the higher current
rated versions of the LM 317 linear regulator wired in the constant
current configuration? I have done this for lower current requirements
using the 5 amp rated chip. Could several of these be wired in parallel
to obtain the desired total discharge current? I haven't had a need to
do this higher current load and so don't know they would perform in
parallel, but would guess that works. Anyone know for sure?
Jim McCulley
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: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
"George"
For the record, prove that all internal regulators do NOT have single point failure
modes ?
The burden is properly on those who would use automotive products in an aircraft
environment to establish they are free of such single point failure points that
can cause unacceptable failure modes.
I can prove that the internal regulator I use doesn't have that problem.
But unless you reverse engineer the schematic for the automotive regulator, you
can not establish that necessary condition.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
(Alternators with internal voltage regulator are very reliable and safe, have simple
installation and sophisticated state of the art protections, making them
an excellent choice.)
===========================================================
>From: "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
>I don't have a clue to the real name of "gmcjetpilot" @ YAHOO. I generally do
not try to >respond to people that use anything other than their real names
in these discussions. >Regards, George Braly
(George: My name is also George. OK, that's your policy; Ill live with it. I generally
don't give out my name. This is my policy, for security & privacy reasons.
I am not hiding, but if you want, e-mail me your phone number, I'll call
you; For the record, I respectfully disagree with your statement that ALL internally
regulated alternators have a single failure point. This is unproven and
with out merit. Regards George)
==========================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>Mr. George Braly; A quick and easy trick is to goggle the email address. He stated
his >name was George. All the hits I found were named the same.
(Wow, I feel popular, Goggle me? No personal info is attached to any e-mail address,
sorry. Just protecting my privacy. I am not in the witness protection program
or it there any nefarious reason. I guess you could track me down, but
I find that bizarre. Why do that? What would you do with that info? Now you-all
know why I dont add my last name, stalker Eric. Should I make up a fake name?
OK, You got me, its George W. Bushwacker, yes thats the ticket and my wife is
Morgan Fairchild. That is a joke son.)
==========================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>I happen to agree that we should not be picking on Paul as there is just so much
pickable >material in his posts regarding unanswered questions, I cant see
how we could have time >to pick on him personally.
(That just sounds malicious and sarcastic, I am sure you are really nice and smart,
as I am sure Paul is, but why would you say that. Paul has feelings like
we all do. Be nice to me, or I'll Goggle you! Oh NO! or I'll send "Jeeves" after
you. ]8
)
==========================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>Mr. George; You make some very good points, all of which have been covered very
well.
(No Mr. George please, just George or G. is fine, we are all friends so a first
name (or letter) basis is good enough.Thanks)
(I appreciate that you think I made good points, but my goal is not to sway people
to buy any kind of equipment or two alternators, just trying to help people
who are confused about all the technical mystification.)
====================================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>You agree the problems with the OV and Internal Regulated alternators were pilot
error.
(No, I was not referring to any pilot error. The only pilot error was using a crow
bar in the first place, on a device that already had OV protection. Dont add
redundant OV protection to an alternator with internal logic/control chips.
I can't even imagine wanting something called a crow bar in my electrical system
in the first place, but that is just me. If you feel you must, just know at
best it will cost about $50-$80 and add another pound or two to the empty weight,
at worst may blow your alternator needlessly. As you know you should never
disconnect the b-lead from the battery while it is running, but you probably
already knew that.)
(BTW, the modular aspect of the internal VR in a ND alternator allows the module
replacement on the ramp, may be without completely removing the alternator.
I think they a spare would cost $30 bucks? They are small and you could have a
"fly-a-way kit" with a spare.)
(Whether external or internal, the VR should have internal OV protection integrated.
Why not, it is available. If you must use a VR with no OV protection, a
device like this is better:)
http://www.periheliondesign.com/LOVM.htm
(The LOVM solid-state device does not rely on an electro-mechanical device like
a CB. Nothing wrong with CB's, as a matter of fact my panel has 18 little Klixon
CB's lining the bottom. I love them! Yes I am a rebel using CB's instead of
fuseholders. Call me crazy. BTW, I find it odd that CB's are generally maligned
in favor of fuses, but on the other hand CBs are defended as superb devices
in the role of OV protection device. This is why people are confused. CB's are
also very sophisticated "MIL Spec" devices that work well; fuses are cheaper
but not superior. Yea I said it. CB's are great. [please don't open a can of
"Goggle" whoop ass on me] If safety is not involved it is only a matter of opinion
and preference.)
====================================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>Would you agree this pilot error can be designed out simply?
(Not sure what you are driving at, but an internal regulator with out separate
devices would be the most fool proof IMHO. Can designers eliminate all pilot to
system interface or management errors, may be someday. NASA and Boeing spend
a lot research in this area, but we a talking about an alternator on a Lycoming.
The best thing we can do is use a DPST switch to make sure the MASTER (BAT)
is never turned off with the alternator running. This is where Philosopher Sir
Murphy comes in, Sh%#@t Happens. Nothing is fool proof; fools are just too
smart. When we realize how smart we are, we accept our limitations and those of
our little sky-scooters. Relax.)
( I tell myself: KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid, less is more.)
(The biggest danger in flying is not over voltage or alternators, it is we, the
Pilot. You have a infinitely larger chance of doing something stupid in your
plane much worse than the alternator has going super NOVA. Don't go crazy with
systems, but understand, accept, manage and respect the limitations.)
(Instead of dual everything, in your all glass cockpit sky-scooter-3000, consider
a few analog back-ups and a discrete battery to run the "emergency" equipment
for 60-120 minutes. This is how Boeing does it. Yes a Boeing 777/767/757/747
can fly on battery power only. Keep in mind these planes have 3 to 5 Gens. You
could use a Dynon EFIS with the internal battery option and hand-held battery
powered GPS and nav/com's for example. Who cares if the alternator craps out.
Why add all the weight and expense or two alternators? If you are IFR and loose
1-of-2 alternators will you just keep going IMC?)
(As far alternator redundancy to keep from getting stuck on a personal trip, far
from home, in a little homebuilt, I say uhmmm? Even with two alternators, what
about the starter, exhaust, fuel pump and weather? Air transport category redundancy
for the sake of dispatch reliability on a single engine homebuilt plane
is dubious at best. A plane designed 75 years ago that got it right, almost
100% dispatch reliability, and does not use an alternator or starter, its called
a Piper Cub. Simple is better sometimes. Let's just say "if you positively,
absolutely must be there over-night" and can't ship yourself in an UPS/Fedex
envelope, take an airliner or drive. As far as Mr. George Braly story: I do
not want to have the local Million Air facility order up an overnight delivery
of an alternator for Saturday installation so I can fly home on Sunday afternoon.
I ***KNOW*** what that costs (about $2.7K in New Orleans Lakefront). No
offense, I lived in New Orleans and was a corporat
e pilot,
$2,700 give me a break. Are you flying a Cessna Citation? Ramp, alternator (auto
parts store) and 1 hour A&P, $280. If you have your own tools, $200. Go to
Thibadaux or Slidell next time.
==========================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>Bob has said he cannot guarantee what is in the IR, so cannot speak to its reliability
(Well, that is true, Bob N. cant guarantee anything or can I. It is his opinion,
based on his abridged experience and knowledge of the IR and comfort with what
he knows. Bob N. to my knowledge did not design any of these IC chips, or is
he privy to the details of the designs. If you are use to seeing the external
"field wire", you are comfortable with that. Trusting a micro chip is hard to
do, but the fact is they are very reliable and see no proof otherwise. I hope
so because I trust my life to them daily.)
(The problem is these topics get so entrenched in small technical points the good
stuff gets lost. Most of us just want useful info, cut down to the facts, good
practice and opinion. Sometimes I find opinion and personal preference masquerading
as fact or best practice. No disrespect to Bob N., I read everything
he writes for a reason, but I dont have to agree with him?)
(I respect anyones privilege to design as they see fit, but new builders tend to
over do it, which does have negative consequences. Just be safe and use common
sense. It does not have to be gold plated. How many times have you gone down
the road at night and seen all the lights on a nearby car go real bright and
blow out from their socket from over voltage? Never, thank you.)
(Not being an expert I try to understand the WHY behind everyones opinion, experts
and mortals alike, agree or disagree. I took the time to research it and have
enough technical background in aerospace analysis, design, training and pilot
operations to cut thru most of the hyperbolizing. In the end it is an opinion,
take it or leave it.
(There is no smoking gun (or alternator). I predict in the future you will see
more and more people use IR alternators. Of course B&C will have a hard time selling
their set up costing $640, when you can get one for $140. If you read their
site it has "dark and stormy night" comments that are emotional sales pitch.
Linear switching (mechanical went away 30 years), OV protection and Low-Volt
light are also old news, for $240. Nothing special except the eye watering
price. Look at what an internal regulator can do below, things the B&C unit can
only dream of.
(Typical internal VR specs, * denotes features not in most external regulators)
*Load Dump,
*Over Current,
*Over Temperature,
Overvoltage,
*Phase Loss,
*Short Circuit,
*High Remote Sense Resistance,
*High Side MOSFET Control of Field Winding
User Programmable LRC Rates From 1.8 Seconds to 7.4 Seconds
*PWM (pulse width modulation) Fixed Operating Frequency of 395 Hz
*Forced Load Response Control (LRC) at Low Eng RPM due to abrupt system load current
*LRC Response During Initial Start
*Internal Level Shifting of External System Voltages
*Internal Lamp Driver w/ Short Circuit, Current Limit, Thermal Limit and Load Dump
Protection
*Analog or digital duty cycle cont'l of ON/OFF ratio of alternator field current/fixed
freq
Load Response Control (LRC): cont'l alternator field current at low engine RPM,
eliminate engine speed hunting / vibration due to abrupt torque loading w/ sudden
electrical load applied.
===============================================================
>Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>Can you in good conscience tell us we do not need external OV protection?
(Yes, I can. Take a deep breath, relax.)
(To answer your question, yes, I can recommend, in good conscience the IR alternator
with no external do-dads. Of course adequate back-up in case. The word
*adequate* means different things to a VFR plane and an IFR plane, but it does
not necessarily mean two alternators. The goal is to actually fly someday. Weight
is the enemy. It adds up. Do you REALLY need to add an extra anything? Your
choice will effect aircraft performance & utility, slower climb and less useful
load for example.)
(Eric, good luck on your choice. If you want real security, an absolute 100% guarantee
from OV, I cant give you any guarantee, and I really think you should
ask an expert like Bob N.)
(If he tells you the external VR and crow bar are 100% fail-safe, fail-passive,
pure perfection, than "there you have it". Do that. I would respectively disagree
with Bob N, but than I use circuit breakers instead of fuses. What do I know.)
(It is a very plausible scenario to have a dead "crow bar" which goes undetected
by the pilot. Hell the wire could come undone. Also in theory you could, at
the same time, have a failure of the external VR causing an OV condition. It could
happen! Bob N. says you should test the crow-bar annually. OK what about
the other 364 days a year? Also you have a device that needs maintenance. Why
is that good? Modern VRs have internal fault detection and will safely shut-down
or warn you with a light. )
(I hear the argument, it makes us feel warmest & fuzziest to add these extra do-dads.
Absolutely, make yourself happy, however too much of the warm fuzzy blanket
may suffocate you. I stayed at a Holiday Inn last night, so I am just going
to throwing caution to the wind and rely on my alternator's internal protection
to get the job done without electrocuting my panel. Goggle away!)
Best Wishes, Happy flying, G (name with held for national security, G W.Bush)
Ye aviator, fly-ith with care, lest ye ground cometh up..... and smite thee mightily"
---
---
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: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Chris & Kellie Hand" <ckhand@earthlink.net>
Bob,
I'm another that has followed this thread and changed my mind at least a
dozen times on what alternator setup I will go with in my RV. With respect
to George's position below that the newer IR alternators have the OVP built
into IC's within the alternator, I did some internet searching and found
some evidence to support this, but I'm not an electrical engineer
type....the documents at the links below have ckt diagrams and descriptions
that look to me like these IC chips intended for use in internally regulated
alternators (ON Semiconductor's CS3361 and CS3341/3351/387 ICs) contain both
load dump and OV protection built in.
Can you take a look at the specs/diagrams/descriptions and tell us why or
why not an internally regulated alternator using such a chip would or would
not have what you consider adequate OVP?
Is it your position that chips such as these can fail at a single point,
with the result being a runaway voltage condition? If this is the case,
then what is the difference between that and the possibility that your OVP
module could fail at a single point, preventing the crowbar trip and thereby
allowing the runaway voltage condition to continue - or is there a reason
this might be "less likely" to happen than the IC failing? Why?
I don't claim to know the answers to these questions....just trying to look
at this objectively and make a decision I will be comfortable with.
links to IR IC specs:
http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/CS3361-D.PDF
http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/CS3341-D.PDF
Thanks for your help,
Chris Hand
RV-6A ready for electric & engine
----- Original Message -----
From: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP
protection
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
>
>
> (Alternators with internal voltage regulator are very reliable and safe,
have simple installation and sophisticated state of the art protections,
making them an excellent choice.)
>
> ===========================================================
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP |
protection - UNSUBSCRIBE
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Riley <Richard@Riley.net> protection
- UNSUBSCRIBE
OK, until all the phantoms, jerks, sock puppets and trolls run out of
steam, I'm unsubscribing. I'll check back in a month.
At 08:10 PM 4/25/05, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
>
>
>(Alternators with internal voltage regulator are very reliable and safe,
>have simple installation and sophisticated state of the art protections,
>making them an excellent choice.)
>
>===========================================================
>
> >From: "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
> >I don't have a clue to the real name of "gmcjetpilot" @ YAHOO. I
> generally do not try to >respond to people that use anything other
> than their real names in these discussions. >Regards, George Braly
>
>
>(George: My name is also George. OK, that's your policy; Ill live with it.
>I generally don't give out my name. This is my policy, for security &
>privacy reasons. I am not hiding, but if you want, e-mail me your phone
>number, I'll call you; For the record, I respectfully disagree with your
>statement that ALL internally regulated alternators have a single failure
>point. This is unproven and with out merit. Regards George)
>
>==========================================================
>
>
> >Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
> >Mr. George Braly; A quick and easy trick is to goggle the email address.
> He stated his >name was George. All the hits I found were named the same.
>
>
>(Wow, I feel popular, Goggle me? No personal info is attached to any
>e-mail address, sorry. Just protecting my privacy. I am not in the witness
>protection program or it there any nefarious reason. I guess you could
>track me down, but I find that bizarre. Why do that? What would you do
>with that info? Now you-all know why I dont add my last name, stalker
>Eric. Should I make up a fake name? OK, You got me, its George W.
>Bushwacker, yes thats the ticket and my wife is Morgan Fairchild. That is
>a joke son.)
>
>==========================================================
>
>
> >Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
> >I happen to agree that we should not be picking on Paul as there is
> just so much pickable >material in his posts regarding unanswered
> questions, I cant see how we could have time >to pick on him personally.
>
>
>(That just sounds malicious and sarcastic, I am sure you are really nice
>and smart, as I am sure Paul is, but why would you say that. Paul has
>feelings like we all do. Be nice to me, or I'll Goggle you! Oh NO! or I'll
>send "Jeeves" after you. ]8
>)
>
>==========================================================
>
>
> >Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
> >Mr. George; You make some very good points, all of which have been
> covered very well.
>
>
>(No Mr. George please, just George or G. is fine, we are all friends so a
>first name (or letter) basis is good enough.Thanks)
>
>
>(I appreciate that you think I made good points, but my goal is not to
>sway people to buy any kind of equipment or two alternators, just trying
>to help people who are confused about all the technical mystification.)
>
>====================================================================
>
>
> >Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
> >You agree the problems with the OV and Internal Regulated alternators
> were pilot error.
>
>
>(No, I was not referring to any pilot error. The only pilot error was
>using a crow bar in the first place, on a device that already had OV
>protection. Dont add redundant OV protection to an alternator with
>internal logic/control chips. I can't even imagine wanting something
>called a crow bar in my electrical system in the first place, but that is
>just me. If you feel you must, just know at best it will cost about
>$50-$80 and add another pound or two to the empty weight, at worst may
>blow your alternator needlessly. As you know you should never disconnect
>the b-lead from the battery while it is running, but you probably already
>knew that.)
>
>
>(BTW, the modular aspect of the internal VR in a ND alternator allows the
>module replacement on the ramp, may be without completely removing the
>alternator. I think they a spare would cost $30 bucks? They are small and
>you could have a "fly-a-way kit" with a spare.)
>
>
>(Whether external or internal, the VR should have internal OV protection
>integrated. Why not, it is available. If you must use a VR with no OV
>protection, a device like this is better:)
>
>http://www.periheliondesign.com/LOVM.htm
>
>
>(The LOVM solid-state device does not rely on an electro-mechanical device
>like a CB. Nothing wrong with CB's, as a matter of fact my panel has 18
>little Klixon CB's lining the bottom. I love them! Yes I am a rebel using
>CB's instead of fuseholders. Call me crazy. BTW, I find it odd that CB's
>are generally maligned in favor of fuses, but on the other hand CBs are
>defended as superb devices in the role of OV protection device. This is
>why people are confused. CB's are also very sophisticated "MIL Spec"
>devices that work well; fuses are cheaper but not superior. Yea I said it.
>CB's are great. [please don't open a can of "Goggle" whoop ass on me] If
>safety is not involved it is only a matter of opinion and preference.)
>
>====================================================================
>
>
> >Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
> >Would you agree this pilot error can be designed out simply?
>
>
>(Not sure what you are driving at, but an internal regulator with out
>separate devices would be the most fool proof IMHO. Can designers
>eliminate all pilot to system interface or management errors, may be
>someday. NASA and Boeing spend a lot research in this area, but we a
>talking about an alternator on a Lycoming. The best thing we can do is use
>a DPST switch to make sure the MASTER (BAT) is never turned off with the
>alternator running. This is where Philosopher Sir Murphy comes in, Sh%#@t
>Happens. Nothing is fool proof; fools are just too smart. When we realize
>how smart we are, we accept our limitations and those of our little
>sky-scooters. Relax.)
>
>
>( I tell myself: KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid, less is more.)
>
>
>(The biggest danger in flying is not over voltage or alternators, it is
>we, the Pilot. You have a infinitely larger chance of doing something
>stupid in your plane much worse than the alternator has going super NOVA.
>Don't go crazy with systems, but understand, accept, manage and respect
>the limitations.)
>
>
>(Instead of dual everything, in your all glass cockpit sky-scooter-3000,
>consider a few analog back-ups and a discrete battery to run the
>"emergency" equipment for 60-120 minutes. This is how Boeing does it. Yes
>a Boeing 777/767/757/747 can fly on battery power only. Keep in mind these
>planes have 3 to 5 Gens. You could use a Dynon EFIS with the internal
>battery option and hand-held battery powered GPS and nav/com's for
>example. Who cares if the alternator craps out. Why add all the weight and
>expense or two alternators? If you are IFR and loose 1-of-2 alternators
>will you just keep going IMC?)
>
>
>(As far alternator redundancy to keep from getting stuck on a personal
>trip, far from home, in a little homebuilt, I say uhmmm? Even with two
>alternators, what about the starter, exhaust, fuel pump and weather? Air
>transport category redundancy for the sake of dispatch reliability on a
>single engine homebuilt plane is dubious at best. A plane designed 75
>years ago that got it right, almost 100% dispatch reliability, and does
>not use an alternator or starter, its called a Piper Cub. Simple is better
>sometimes. Let's just say "if you positively, absolutely must be there
>over-night" and can't ship yourself in an UPS/Fedex envelope, take an
>airliner or drive. As far as Mr. George Braly story: I do not want to have
>the local Million Air facility order up an overnight delivery of an
>alternator for Saturday installation so I can fly home on Sunday
>afternoon. I ***KNOW*** what that costs (about $2.7K in New Orleans
>Lakefront). No offense, I lived in New Orleans and was a corporat
> e pilot,
> $2,700 give me a break. Are you flying a Cessna Citation? Ramp,
> alternator (auto parts store) and 1 hour A&P, $280. If you have your own
> tools, $200. Go to Thibadaux or Slidell next time.
>
>
>==========================================================
>
>
> >Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
> >Bob has said he cannot guarantee what is in the IR, so cannot speak to
> its reliability
>
>
>(Well, that is true, Bob N. cant guarantee anything or can I. It is his
>opinion, based on his abridged experience and knowledge of the IR and
>comfort with what he knows. Bob N. to my knowledge did not design any of
>these IC chips, or is he privy to the details of the designs. If you are
>use to seeing the external "field wire", you are comfortable with that.
>Trusting a micro chip is hard to do, but the fact is they are very
>reliable and see no proof otherwise. I hope so because I trust my life to
>them daily.)
>
>
>(The problem is these topics get so entrenched in small technical points
>the good stuff gets lost. Most of us just want useful info, cut down to
>the facts, good practice and opinion. Sometimes I find opinion and
>personal preference masquerading as fact or best practice. No disrespect
>to Bob N., I read everything he writes for a reason, but I dont have to
>agree with him?)
>
>
>(I respect anyones privilege to design as they see fit, but new builders
>tend to over do it, which does have negative consequences. Just be safe
>and use common sense. It does not have to be gold plated. How many times
>have you gone down the road at night and seen all the lights on a nearby
>car go real bright and blow out from their socket from over voltage?
>Never, thank you.)
>
>
>(Not being an expert I try to understand the WHY behind everyones opinion,
>experts and mortals alike, agree or disagree. I took the time to research
>it and have enough technical background in aerospace analysis, design,
>training and pilot operations to cut thru most of the hyperbolizing. In
>the end it is an opinion, take it or leave it.
>
>
>(There is no smoking gun (or alternator). I predict in the future you will
>see more and more people use IR alternators. Of course B&C will have a
>hard time selling their set up costing $640, when you can get one for
>$140. If you read their site it has "dark and stormy night" comments that
>are emotional sales pitch. Linear switching (mechanical went away 30
>years), OV protection and Low-Volt light are also old news, for $240.
>Nothing special except the eye watering price. Look at what an internal
>regulator can do below, things the B&C unit can only dream of.
>
>
>(Typical internal VR specs, * denotes features not in most external
>regulators)
>
>
>*Load Dump,
>*Over Current,
>*Over Temperature,
>Overvoltage,
>*Phase Loss,
>*Short Circuit,
>*High Remote Sense Resistance,
>*High Side MOSFET Control of Field Winding
>User Programmable LRC Rates From 1.8 Seconds to 7.4 Seconds
>*PWM (pulse width modulation) Fixed Operating Frequency of 395 Hz
>*Forced Load Response Control (LRC) at Low Eng RPM due to abrupt system
>load current
>*LRC Response During Initial Start
>*Internal Level Shifting of External System Voltages
>*Internal Lamp Driver w/ Short Circuit, Current Limit, Thermal Limit and
>Load Dump Protection
>
>*Analog or digital duty cycle cont'l of ON/OFF ratio of alternator field
>current/fixed freq
>
>
>Load Response Control (LRC): cont'l alternator field current at low engine
>RPM, eliminate engine speed hunting / vibration due to abrupt torque
>loading w/ sudden electrical load applied.
>
>===============================================================
>
>
> >Eric Ruttan <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
> >Can you in good conscience tell us we do not need external OV protection?
>
>
>(Yes, I can. Take a deep breath, relax.)
>
>
>(To answer your question, yes, I can recommend, in good conscience the IR
>alternator with no external do-dads. Of course adequate back-up in case.
>The word *adequate* means different things to a VFR plane and an IFR
>plane, but it does not necessarily mean two alternators. The goal is to
>actually fly someday. Weight is the enemy. It adds up. Do you REALLY need
>to add an extra anything? Your choice will effect aircraft performance &
>utility, slower climb and less useful load for example.)
>
>
>(Eric, good luck on your choice. If you want real security, an absolute
>100% guarantee from OV, I cant give you any guarantee, and I really think
>you should ask an expert like Bob N.)
>
>
>(If he tells you the external VR and crow bar are 100% fail-safe,
>fail-passive, pure perfection, than "there you have it". Do that. I would
>respectively disagree with Bob N, but than I use circuit breakers instead
>of fuses. What do I know.)
>
>
>(It is a very plausible scenario to have a dead "crow bar" which goes
>undetected by the pilot. Hell the wire could come undone. Also in theory
>you could, at the same time, have a failure of the external VR causing an
>OV condition. It could happen! Bob N. says you should test the crow-bar
>annually. OK what about the other 364 days a year? Also you have a device
>that needs maintenance. Why is that good? Modern VRs have internal fault
>detection and will safely shut-down or warn you with a light. )
>
>
>(I hear the argument, it makes us feel warmest & fuzziest to add these
>extra do-dads. Absolutely, make yourself happy, however too much of the
>warm fuzzy blanket may suffocate you. I stayed at a Holiday Inn last
>night, so I am just going to throwing caution to the wind and rely on my
>alternator's internal protection to get the job done without electrocuting
>my panel. Goggle away!)
>
>
>Best Wishes, Happy flying, G (name with held for national security, G W.Bush)
>
>
>Ye aviator, fly-ith with care, lest ye ground cometh up..... and smite
>thee mightily"
>
>
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! --
|