---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 04/26/05:22 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 01:10 AM - Re: nav/com and transponder antenna (Werner Schneider) 2. 03:54 AM - Re: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection (Chuck Jensen) 3. 06:22 AM - Re: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection (Ken) 4. 06:49 AM - Terra 960 Nav Com & Fly Buddy Loran for sale (Richard Hughes) 5. 07:11 AM - Re: CBA-II battery tester and $low$ NiMh cells (George Neal E Capt AU/XPRR) 6. 08:02 AM - Re: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)) 7. 08:47 AM - Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP (Speedy11@aol.com) 8. 03:05 PM - Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection () 9. 03:36 PM - Re: Rebuilt versus Original (Eric M. Jones) 10. 03:55 PM - Autozone alternators (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)) 11. 05:18 PM - Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection () 12. 07:08 PM - Re: CBA-II battery tester and $low$ NiMh (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 13. 07:14 PM - Re: Autozone alternators (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 14. 08:02 PM - Re: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection (George Braly) 15. 08:04 PM - Re: Flap Motor Warning (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 16. 08:13 PM - Re: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 17. 08:13 PM - Re: basic reasoning for system architecture (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 18. 08:57 PM - Re: Autozone alternators (Rick Girard) 19. 09:12 PM - Re: Autozone alternators (Bill Schlatterer) 20. 09:44 PM - Re: basic reasoning for system architecture (B Tomm) 21. 09:58 PM - Re: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection (Chris & Kellie Hand) 22. 11:28 PM - Re: Re: Rebuilt versus Original (owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 01:10:21 AM PST US From: "Werner Schneider" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: nav/com and transponder antenna --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Werner Schneider" In the Glastar we have a foil antenna already laminated into the vertical fin, that's what I'm using, however in certain situation receiving is difficult (long distance away and pointing in direction of the station). Werner ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 2 _____________________________________ Time: 03:54:21 AM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection From: "Chuck Jensen" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Chuck Jensen" Paul Messinger, Thanks for the post. Do Not Archive -----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: (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" >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 >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 >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 >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 >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 >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 >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 >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 3 _____________________________________ Time: 06:22:58 AM PST US From: Ken Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken Hi Chris If the field driver shorts (part MTB20N20E in your first reference or part 2N6284 in your second reference) then there is no way that I can see for the referenced devices to stop an over voltage. How likely is that - I don't know but I have replaced a few similar 'transistors' that were indeed shorted in other equipment over the years. If a separate external OVP device fails to work when it should then we have two separate devices failing simultaneously which is pretty rare. We can't test the functionality of an OVP internal to an alternator but we can test the separate OVP device if we so desire. From another post - yes I have seen a few vehicles with extremely bright lights that I believed had a runaway alternator and were not going to get very far. That would be a few years ago when headlights were all standard incandescent devices and an extremely bright and white unit was obvious. The lights won't necessarily blow until after the battery gives up and electronic devices sometimes die and kill the engine first. FWIW my feeling is that yes external ov protection is a good thing on an IR alternator but not essential for most of us. I suspect that it will indeed decrease overall system reliability and I doubt very much whether that is going to be quantified on this forum. However I also believe it reduces risk to my brand new icomm A-200 transceiver that still warns that over 16 volts will kill it and that it must be turned off during engine starting... (%$#%) I did add the transorbs to the alternator side of the my ov contactor to increase the likelihood of the contactor working as desired. And I'm still happy with my decision to not route the alternator B-lead through a battery master. Ken Chris & Kellie Hand wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Chris & Kellie Hand" > >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 > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 06:49:48 AM PST US From: Richard Hughes Subject: AeroElectric-List: Terra 960 Nav Com & Fly Buddy Loran for sale --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Hughes Hello folks, I have these items on sale at e-bay. If you are interested please see the links. -Rich http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4545650820&ssPageName=ADME:B:LC:MT:1 tp://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4545646962&ssPageName=ADME:B:LC:MT:1 ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 07:11:45 AM PST US From: George Neal E Capt AU/XPRR Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: CBA-II battery tester and $low$ NiMh cells --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: George Neal E Capt AU/XPRR Bob - I have made several purchases from www.all-battery.com and have been very happy with their products and service. When the original NiCd packs that came with my drills gave up, I rebuilt them using NiMH cells from All-Battery (same folks you mention below, but thru the storefront, rather than ebay). I gave up a little torque, but gained run-time and shelf-life per charge. Since I don't use the cordless drill all day every day, but sporadically for the occasional hole or screw here and there, it works much better. Highly recommended. 73... n8zg (neal) RV-7 N8ZG (*still* waiting for my fuselage) The cells I'm working with right now came off ebay from these folks: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=48620&item=5769405150 &rd=1 Bob . . . Bob - I have made several purchases from www.all-battery.com and have been very happy with their products and service. When the original NiCd packs that came with my drills gave up, I rebuilt them using NiMH cells from All-Battery (same folks you mention below, but thru the storefront, rather than ebay). I gave up a little torque, but gained run-time and shelf-life per charge. Since I don't use the cordless drill all day every day, but sporadically for the occasional hole or screw here and there, it works much better. Highly recommended. 73... n8zg (neal) RV-7 N8ZG (*still* waiting for my fuselage)

The cells I'm working with right now came off ebay from these folks:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory48620item5769405150rd1

Bob . . .

________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 08:02:59 AM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" Speaking of alternators...I almost returned my Toyota Camry ND rebuilt alternator to Autozone based on the fact that indeed it was rebuilt....I was going to replace it with a Van's unit...When I realised that their alternators are rebuilt as well but cost a bit more money...In fact looking at the Vans 60A unit it looks suspiciously like my Camry alternator, 'cept it comes standard with a v belt pulley whereas I had to find one for the Camry unit. So now its separate OVP or not to separate OVP??That is the question. Seeing as I will probably have a minimal IFR stack (certainly not minimal money!) I'm thinking the OVP module might be the way to go, especially as I will have at least 40 hours of Day VFR to root out infant mortality on the OVP and everything ele for that matter. Frank ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 08:47:00 AM PST US From: Speedy11@aol.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Speedy11@aol.com In a message dated 4/25/2005 2:58:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, aeroelectric-list-digest@matronics.com writes: I learned everything I need to know about Mr. Messinger when he acted on his need to share all his wonderful industry awards. Those to whom awards mean the most learn humility in their acceptance. Those who deserve awards the most rarely need to display them to earn other's respect. Mark & Lisa Sletten Malarky! There's nothing wrong with Paul (Mr. Messinger) defining his expertise by mentioning awards or honors received. On the internet, it is helpful for one to explain his background and experience so that we have tools with which to judge his remarks. Stan Sutterfield RV-8A FG N7477P www.rv-8a.net ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 03:05:13 PM PST US From: Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Subject: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection >From: "George Braly" gwbraly@gami.com >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 >aircraftenvironment 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. Thanks for replying. OK, it sounds like we agree. First I thought you were said "ALL internal regulators have a single point failure mode", but from your statement, I can prove that the internal regulator I use doesn't have that problem, we agree. So, there are some very good alternators using internal VR. It is difficult if not impossible to prove a negative, but there is another way to look at it. I could turn it around for those people using an external regulator. Prove that your OV protection will never fail. You cant. I agree unless you know the design (make/made/version) you dont know. Unfortunately it is not easy to get detailed info and practically speaking most of use would not know what to do with it. Fortunately many have done the work for us and is where this fine group comes in. What IR Alternator are you using George B? I have read the spec of my little ND alternators IR, and it was partially in Japanese (read below). First to SUMMARIZE my points regarding this internal regulator/ OV issue: -The level or worry is not equal to the risk for most modern alternators /w I-VR -Lowest risk alternators use the latest IC chip technology, and have a proven track record in homebuilt aircraft (typically ND but Mitsubishi and other brands have be used successfully.) -Any alternator, voltage regulator, crowbar or OV module can fail -Popular opinion that external regulators are superior is from old info, was all you could get before micro-electronics and I-VR set voltage was not compatible with popular gel-cel batteries used in homebuilt planes 10 years ago. None of this is relevant now. -Alternators with IR have been around in mass since 1972; alternators have gotten smaller and more powerful; 1982 marked a leap in better designs and have steadily improved and have achieved a reputation for reliability. -I dont buy the aircraft environment will make them fall apart if they can run 16 hours a day on a shaking tractor or forklift engine, and they are proven in aircraft. -Horror stories are just that, stories with facts few and far between. I am not saying it has never happened, but the one or two stories I heard were sketchy at best. -WORDS: "internal voltage regulators have no place on airplanes" or "you are crazy to use an internal voltage regulator on your plane" are just that WORDS. Let's have some facts. FACT: I-VR's work very well, and cars have gone to them exclusively because they have the technology and can control and protect the alternator (and the electrical system it is connect to) better. -Expect smaller, lighter more powerful alternators in the future, using more dense windings developed recently. These alternators will likely all use internal regulators. -External regulators are old school and were done that why before electronics, because they used a mechanical relay, so they needed to be remote mounted; all alternator regulators were mechanical in 1962. Today external regulators are almost gone, but they do have a place in heavy-duty marine/industrial equipment for really large (200-800amp) alternators. These alternators are large (heavy) and not much room for a voltage regulator, and the external regulators they use often have a digital microprocessor to control charging of several batteries for example. Much more advance than an analog regulator but not for small planes alternators. HISTORY Looking at the history of Denso alternators: Early IR alternators (circa 1974-first to use a IC). They have improved, like airbags and proven to be very reliable. Later generation IR alternators, around 82 used new materials, windings, faster rotation (smaller pulley) and dual internal fans to reduce size/weight while increasing output (better cooling); the latest generation to come around in the last few years use new technology that makes them even smaller and more powerful. Again I may not be able to prove a negative, but. **I can point to the seriously awesome track record and technical design** We trust the engineers who designed the airbag (with very sophisticated sensors, computers and mechanical systems); we can trust the engineers to manufacture modern alternator to provide a reliable safe product. I see no reason for all the pessimism and miss trust? Yes some early one-wire alternators (any brand?) were begging to melt down, but those days are long gone. In 1962 an external VR alternator had a weight/output ratio of 22.9-lbs/KW. Now we have 5.95-lbs/KW alternators. (My little ND 45amp is around 8-10lbs/KW which is very good.) Auto manufactures build and warrantee cars with very expensive computers cannot afford to have an alternator melt down the electronics (DVD, CD, airbag computer, GPS, sat-radio, computers to control the engine/transmission/traction). At some point it becomes religion, you have to trust something that you dont have absolute proof of. For the record, I do go to the church of compact alternators w/ internal VR and prefer the Nippondenso alternator. Automotive electrical supply houses sometimes sell them as racing alternators and are used by the hotrod/race guys. CHECKING SPECS OF MY ALTERNATOR Niagara Air parts also provides an alternator kit with: mounts, hardware and connector for about $225. I am not recommending it, just giving some info. I do have their kit for my new RV-7 project, and I am happy with the quality but have not used it yet. It is a new (not rebuilt) ND 40 amp model with an IR-VR incorporating OV protection. As far as single point failure mode I can tell you about the research for my alternator: (FACTS) -This and similar model ND alternators have been flown in 100s of experimental aircraft with no problems not to mention thousands of industrial applications. Application for mu alternator is an Ishikawajima or Toyoda forklift. Some builders use a similar 1987 Suzuki Samurai alternator, a small frame 55amp ND alternator, which some find suitable. I recommend buying a new unit, not rebuilt, no matter what brand alternator you use. I prefer actual Denso produced alternators and not second tier OEM if possible. -VR: 14.5V (**perfect for SLA batteries), OV protected (17v set point), Rotor Short protected, Field soft start, PWM (pulse width modulation, which is for very smooth linear regulation control of voltage), LRC (handles large increase in current demand at low RPM), operating temp range 40C to 135C (-104F to +275F), Low and Over volt warning light. The VR is a small sealed module w/ with cooling fins, IC chip, two transistors, capacitor, diode and fuse device. I have no doubt the aircraft environment will not be a problem. If you are worried about +275F, I would put a little blast tube on, I did and may add a heat shield. Vibration for a sealed module, encased and solidly potted (electronic grade, flexible epoxy) should not be a problem. (**The reason for the popularity of external regulators in experimental aircraft years ago was because the gel-cel batteries used back then did not like the standard voltage setting of internal regulators. Therefore adjustable external regulators were popular. Now with Odyssey type sealed lead acid batteries, which need 14.2v (min!) to 15v, the typical 14.5v internal regulator is perfect. No need to have adjustable regulators if the I-VR is set to the typical 14.5volts +/-) Niagara kit I bought included a ND alternator that is specifically for industrial equipment (eg forklift). No way to really verify how many of this specific model ND are flying or how many hours they have in service, except for the one with 8 years of airplane service with no problem. Many are flying in experimental planes for at least 8-10 years. I am sure some have racked up more time than that. I personally used a small ND on a RV-4 for 6 years (800 hours) with no problem, until I sold the plane, at which time it was still working well. OTHER ALTERNATORS Vans sells a larger frame 60 amp Denso alternator. I am sure it is of the same high Denso quality as the smaller frame model. Going with a unit many other builders use has an advantage. With more in the field, more experience will be gained and any weakness will be discovered quicker, if people report the problem. They dont call it experimental for nothing. Call Van and ask how many hours they have on them and what they know. I guess they will say they have been 100%, **except** for the ones that got toasted (true story) when the builder used an external OV protection, eg crow-bar / b-lead disconnect. YOU CALL THE SHOTS With airbags, I trust the engineers have done their job, and the same goes for alternators; I trust they made a device that will protect my electronics and me from all conceivable (anticipated) failures, or it will fail in a benign way. You can always have a Gamma particle come from outer-space hit your alternator in the wrong way and make it go crazy. Chance of failure = very very low. Make you choice and take your chance; make the best installation you can w/ a good ground. If you rely on the engine mount or tension arm for ground, make sure they have electrical contact. Paint and anodized mounts cause ground problems. Cheers George W. Bushwacker ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 03:36:49 PM PST US From: "Eric M. Jones" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rebuilt versus Original --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" There has been some disparagement of rebuilt equipment recently--so I think we should set the record straight. Is original stuff better than rebuilt? Original equipment is "good enough" for the task, and task is mainly to satisfy the customer until the warranty expires. I'm not being cynical here. Since the huge production volumes are sensitive to costs, nothing that is better than what-is-needed-to-satisfy-the-task is required. In fact to do anything else would be throwing money away. My Dad showed me how American machine tools made in 1941 would have the sharp edges INSIDE castings smoothed down while the same machine made a few months later would not. The task had changed. It is also true in some assembly operations that a part which goes into an assembly may have inspections and tests done on it which a part destined for the new original stock (but not used in an assembly) never has to undergo. A part that comes out of a box may indeed be inferior to a part out of a junkyard in these instances. Selling slightly not-so-good parts in the aftermarket is common. But let's look at original and rebuilt alternators. Mythical rebuilding operation: Starting with a "core", the alternator is disassembled. All the fasteners and bearings are thrown away and new ones are used. The bearings can be of better quality than original. The case, rotor and stator are inspected and cleaned up. Often new, higher voltage-withstand diodes are retrofitted, new brushes are added. Often a new regulator assembly (incorporating the newest electronics) is fitted. Everything is inspected, torqued, fitted, and sometimes, YES (per B&C, thanks Bill...) even dynamically balanced. Is this better than new? Probably so....In many cases it certainly is. Offer to take the rebuild shop owner up in your airplane. Watch his reaction. Regards, Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge MA 01550-2705 Phone (508) 764-2072 Email: emjones@charter.net Teamwork: " A lot of people doing exactly what I say." (Marketing exec., Citrix Corp.) ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 03:55:01 PM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Autozone alternators From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" So does anyone have any input specifically on Autozone rebuilt alternators? I don't have enough data to say whether I should go get a refun on my Camry ND unit. Thanks Frank ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 05:18:18 PM PST US From: Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: >Richard Riley Richard@riley.net: OK, until all the phantoms, jerks, sock puppets and >trolls run out of steam, I'm unsubscribing. I'll check back in a month. Could you have just left with out all that? This is not the first time you deposited wack-o vitriolic diatribes with hostile and threatening attacks on the internet before, is it, Dick. I figure you know what all those words mean because you've been called them before; I had to look them up: internet troll -person who sends messages on the Internet hoping to entice other users into angry or fruitless responses internet sock puppet -describes a second account created by an existing member of an Internet community, sometimes to manufacture the illusion of support in a vote or argument. I have participated or monitored these lists for 10 years, building several planes, with one email address. As far as Troll and Sock-puppets, get help, your need it. Youre a scary hole. I am glad you left, up yours. George ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 07:08:34 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" cells Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: CBA-II battery tester and $low$ NiMh cells --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" cells At 09:10 AM 4/26/2005 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: George Neal E Capt AU/XPRR > > >Bob - > > >I have made several purchases from www.all-battery.com > and have been very happy with their products >and service. When the original NiCd packs that came with my drills gave up, >I rebuilt them using NiMH cells from All-Battery (same folks you mention >below, but thru the storefront, rather than ebay). I gave up a little >torque, but gained run-time and shelf-life per charge. Since I don't use >the cordless drill all day every day, but sporadically for the occasional >hole or screw here and there, it works much better. Highly recommended. I've purchased from them before. I note further that the 2300 mah NiMh cells they're offering are the same brand as those I bought off ebay. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 07:14:45 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Autozone alternators --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 03:54 PM 4/26/2005 -0700, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" > > >So does anyone have any input specifically on Autozone rebuilt >alternators? > >I don't have enough data to say whether I should go get a refun on my >Camry ND unit. Funny you should ask that Frank . . . your question exactly matches my question about recommending means by which the "generic automotive" alternator can be used in confidence. Several posters have stated that "the regulator I use is not plagued with any potential for OV failure." I say, "Fine, please let us know which one that is so that we might specify it for future acquisitions." There have to be thousands of sources for after market regulators and tens of thousands of overhaul shops. Without having specific knowledge of which manufacturers and suppliers build the golden alternator, I have to assume that none do and offer a means to allow comfortable installation of bronze or pot-metal alternators. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 08:02:48 PM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection From: "George Braly" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "George Braly" You miss the point. Even the ON SEMI data sheet shows a blatant and obvious single point failure mode in their recommended "universal" design. That sort of single point failure mode that creates that associated hazard is normally considered unacceptable for aircraft use. Normally one would not elect to accept that kind of risk when it is relatively easy to design around and prevent the single point failure mode. But you can't dig into an automotive OEM integrated circuit/board on their internal alternators (I have tried) and do anything with them to modify them to eliminate the single point failure mode. ND's internal regulators have the chips down to the die level and you can't work on those short of using a microscope. Regards, George Braly -----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: Subject: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection >From: "George Braly" gwbraly@gami.com >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 >aircraftenvironment 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. Thanks for replying. OK, it sounds like we agree. First I thought you were said "ALL internal regulators have a single point failure mode", but from your statement, I can prove that the internal regulator I use doesn't have that problem, we agree. So, there are some very good alternators using internal VR. It is difficult if not impossible to prove a negative, but there is another way to look at it. I could turn it around for those people using an external regulator. Prove that your OV protection will never fail. You cant. I agree unless you know the design (make/made/version) you dont know. Unfortunately it is not easy to get detailed info and practically speaking most of use would not know what to do with it. Fortunately many have done the work for us and is where this fine group comes in. What IR Alternator are you using George B? I have read the spec of my little ND alternators IR, and it was partially in Japanese (read below). First to SUMMARIZE my points regarding this internal regulator/ OV issue: -The level or worry is not equal to the risk for most modern alternators /w I-VR -Lowest risk alternators use the latest IC chip technology, and have a proven track record in homebuilt aircraft (typically ND but Mitsubishi and other brands have be used successfully.) -Any alternator, voltage regulator, crowbar or OV module can fail -Popular opinion that external regulators are superior is from old info, was all you could get before micro-electronics and I-VR set voltage was not compatible with popular gel-cel batteries used in homebuilt planes 10 years ago. None of this is relevant now. -Alternators with IR have been around in mass since 1972; alternators have gotten smaller and more powerful; 1982 marked a leap in better designs and have steadily improved and have achieved a reputation for reliability. -I dont buy the aircraft environment will make them fall apart if they can run 16 hours a day on a shaking tractor or forklift engine, and they are proven in aircraft. -Horror stories are just that, stories with facts few and far between. I am not saying it has never happened, but the one or two stories I heard were sketchy at best. -WORDS: "internal voltage regulators have no place on airplanes" or "you are crazy to use an internal voltage regulator on your plane" are just that WORDS. Let's have some facts. FACT: I-VR's work very well, and cars have gone to them exclusively because they have the technology and can control and protect the alternator (and the electrical system it is connect to) better. -Expect smaller, lighter more powerful alternators in the future, using more dense windings developed recently. These alternators will likely all use internal regulators. -External regulators are old school and were done that why before electronics, because they used a mechanical relay, so they needed to be remote mounted; all alternator regulators were mechanical in 1962. Today external regulators are almost gone, but they do have a place in heavy-duty marine/industrial equipment for really large (200-800amp) alternators. These alternators are large (heavy) and not much room for a voltage regulator, and the external regulators they use often have a digital microprocessor to control charging of several batteries for example. Much more advance than an analog regulator but not for small planes alternators. HISTORY Looking at the history of Denso alternators: Early IR alternators (circa 1974-first to use a IC). They have improved, like airbags and proven to be very reliable. Later generation IR alternators, around 82 used new materials, windings, faster rotation (smaller pulley) and dual internal fans to reduce size/weight while increasing output (better cooling); the latest generation to come around in the last few years use new technology that makes them even smaller and more powerful. Again I may not be able to prove a negative, but. **I can point to the seriously awesome track record and technical design** We trust the engineers who designed the airbag (with very sophisticated sensors, computers and mechanical systems); we can trust the engineers to manufacture modern alternator to provide a reliable safe product. I see no reason for all the pessimism and miss trust? Yes some early one-wire alternators (any brand?) were begging to melt down, but those days are long gone. In 1962 an external VR alternator had a weight/output ratio of 22.9-lbs/KW. Now we have 5.95-lbs/KW alternators. (My little ND 45amp is around 8-10lbs/KW which is very good.) Auto manufactures build and warrantee cars with very expensive computers cannot afford to have an alternator melt down the electronics (DVD, CD, airbag computer, GPS, sat-radio, computers to control the engine/transmission/traction). At some point it becomes religion, you have to trust something that you dont have absolute proof of. For the record, I do go to the church of compact alternators w/ internal VR and prefer the Nippondenso alternator. Automotive electrical supply houses sometimes sell them as racing alternators and are used by the hotrod/race guys. CHECKING SPECS OF MY ALTERNATOR Niagara Air parts also provides an alternator kit with: mounts, hardware and connector for about $225. I am not recommending it, just giving some info. I do have their kit for my new RV-7 project, and I am happy with the quality but have not used it yet. It is a new (not rebuilt) ND 40 amp model with an IR-VR incorporating OV protection. As far as single point failure mode I can tell you about the research for my alternator: (FACTS) -This and similar model ND alternators have been flown in 100s of experimental aircraft with no problems not to mention thousands of industrial applications. Application for mu alternator is an Ishikawajima or Toyoda forklift. Some builders use a similar 1987 Suzuki Samurai alternator, a small frame 55amp ND alternator, which some find suitable. I recommend buying a new unit, not rebuilt, no matter what brand alternator you use. I prefer actual Denso produced alternators and not second tier OEM if possible. -VR: 14.5V (**perfect for SLA batteries), OV protected (17v set point), Rotor Short protected, Field soft start, PWM (pulse width modulation, which is for very smooth linear regulation control of voltage), LRC (handles large increase in current demand at low RPM), operating temp range 40C to 135C (-104F to +275F), Low and Over volt warning light. The VR is a small sealed module w/ with cooling fins, IC chip, two transistors, capacitor, diode and fuse device. I have no doubt the aircraft environment will not be a problem. If you are worried about +275F, I would put a little blast tube on, I did and may add a heat shield. Vibration for a sealed module, encased and solidly potted (electronic grade, flexible epoxy) should not be a problem. (**The reason for the popularity of external regulators in experimental aircraft years ago was because the gel-cel batteries used back then did not like the standard voltage setting of internal regulators. Therefore adjustable external regulators were popular. Now with Odyssey type sealed lead acid batteries, which need 14.2v (min!) to 15v, the typical 14.5v internal regulator is perfect. No need to have adjustable regulators if the I-VR is set to the typical 14.5volts +/-) Niagara kit I bought included a ND alternator that is specifically for industrial equipment (eg forklift). No way to really verify how many of this specific model ND are flying or how many hours they have in service, except for the one with 8 years of airplane service with no problem. Many are flying in experimental planes for at least 8-10 years. I am sure some have racked up more time than that. I personally used a small ND on a RV-4 for 6 years (800 hours) with no problem, until I sold the plane, at which time it was still working well. OTHER ALTERNATORS Vans sells a larger frame 60 amp Denso alternator. I am sure it is of the same high Denso quality as the smaller frame model. Going with a unit many other builders use has an advantage. With more in the field, more experience will be gained and any weakness will be discovered quicker, if people report the problem. They dont call it experimental for nothing. Call Van and ask how many hours they have on them and what they know. I guess they will say they have been 100%, **except** for the ones that got toasted (true story) when the builder used an external OV protection, eg crow-bar / b-lead disconnect. YOU CALL THE SHOTS With airbags, I trust the engineers have done their job, and the same goes for alternators; I trust they made a device that will protect my electronics and me from all conceivable (anticipated) failures, or it will fail in a benign way. You can always have a Gamma particle come from outer-space hit your alternator in the wrong way and make it go crazy. Chance of failure = very very low. Make you choice and take your chance; make the best installation you can w/ a good ground. If you rely on the engine mount or tension arm for ground, make sure they have electrical contact. Paint and anodized mounts cause ground problems. Cheers George W. Bushwacker --- --- ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 08:04:57 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Flap Motor Warning --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 02:11 PM 3/4/2005 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Sigmo@aol.com > >Caution: If you are using a Commercial Aircraft products Flap motor DO NOT >break one of the up or down roller limit switches. >The V3L-3 Honeywell/Micro switch has been discontinued and after trying >extensively to locate another switch that will fit the D145 flap motor I >am unable >to find one of the right dimensions that will work on this design. >Commercial Aircraft will not sell you one of their stock. Honeywell will not >sell you one of their stock. The authorized suppliers will sell you one of >these $5 switches for $50 to $70 dollars which will be shipped from Honeywell. >An expensive lesson learned about using loctite and trying to remove the >screw..... >P.S. I bought the only two I could find on the Honeywell dealers inventory >list that were less than $50 and they were $28 each. Mike, sorry to take so long to get back to you on this. Seems that the roller levered V3 series basic switches are disappearing from the Microswitch bag of tricks . . . but there are dozens of substitute V5 and V7 series some with "simulated rollers" on their levers. This class of switch is a world-wide standard package size manufactured by virtually everyone in the switch business. There are low-dollar substitutes that can be had . . . most under $10 and some under $5. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 08:13:35 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" protection Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" protection At 09:23 AM 4/26/2005 -0400, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken > >Hi Chris > >If the field driver shorts (part MTB20N20E in your first reference or >part 2N6284 in your second reference) then there is no way that I can >see for the referenced devices to stop an over voltage. How likely is >that - I don't know but I have replaced a few similar 'transistors' that >were indeed shorted in other equipment over the years. Hear hear! This is exactly the simple-idea upon which the notion of additional OV protection and/or external control by means of switch on panel is based. Every alternator has some sort of solid state device in series with the field with a responsibility to modulate field current in response to regulator commands for voltage control. If that puppy fails shorted -OR- gets an uncontrolled ON-command from failed circuitry elsewhere, the alternator's voltage is officially out of the gate and racing for the moon. >If a separate external OVP device fails to work when it should then we >have two separate devices failing simultaneously which is pretty rare. >We can't test the functionality of an OVP internal to an alternator but >we can test the separate OVP device if we so desire. Dead-on . . . >FWIW my feeling is that yes external ov protection is a good thing on an >IR alternator but not essential for most of us. I suspect that it will >indeed decrease overall system reliability and I doubt very much whether >that is going to be quantified on this forum. However I also believe it >reduces risk to my brand new icomm A-200 transceiver that still warns >that over 16 volts will kill it and that it must be turned off during >engine starting... (%$#%) I did add the transorbs to the alternator >side of the my ov contactor to increase the likelihood of the contactor >working as desired. And I'm still happy with my decision to not route >the alternator B-lead through a battery master. Which goes to another post of mine that speaks to design goals. There are no REQUIREMENTS that any of us can levy upon the wishes and goals of any other builder. Lots of folk are tightly wrapped around an axle assuming that what I write has come manner of social design goal to control or set requirements on other people's actions. Ken is demonstrating a high level of understanding that would assuage any concerns I might have should I have an opportunity to ride with him in his airplane. This kind of conversation is what makes the AeroElectric-List an arena of ideas as opposed to a barroom brawl over who is trying to control whom. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 08:13:35 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: basic reasoning for system architecture --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 04:20 PM 4/25/2005 -0700, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: B Tomm > >Yes, > >I'm basing my design on Z-19 (Thank you very much by the way for producing >so many drawings). Your most welcome. >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. If it's a battery the same size as the main battery, then it would sure be NICE to use it for cranking assistance . . . hard to do with 12AWG feeders. > Engine critical loads have dual feeds (Z-19). This way, only the main > battery would be used for starting (that's OK with me). Then go for it. That's another mis-interpretation of my writing when I suggest something. EVERY architecture is based on certain DESIGN GOALS from which REQUIREMENTS are developed and a solution deduced. Everyone is encouraged to develop their own design goals and then drive toward their own solution. Folks often believe that what I publish is based on some kind of REQUIREMENT when in fact, the only requirements are those which you place on the project yourself. My goal is to impart sufficient understanding that new architectures don't add complexity without also adding value. > I assume I would use a some kind of current >limiting device at the battery to protect the 12 AWG wire running forward. > Yes? Yeah, in fact you might consider something just a tad heavier like 10 or 8AWG. Unlike the FAT feeders, these smaller wires are certainly more subject to gross failure under the hard-fault condition. I think I'd put the battery bus back at the battery location so each of the feeders extending from the battery are protected. I'd have a battery "contactor" which might be a fat relay but the plain vanilla, Stancore/White-Rogers/Cole-Hersee parts would be just fine too. You'd want to protect the small feeder at both ends . . . it's subject to energy coming from the battery it feeds -AND- the battery in the front. ANL-30 or the modern, miniature automotive fuses could be considered. > 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? I don't know . . . and in view of recent mis-interpretations of my statements I have to emphasize that when I don't KNOW it's neither an endorsement or rejection of an idea or a product. There ARE some really nice, hefty solid state devices available that we could only dream about 30 years ago when you could sneeze at a "power" transistor and reduce it to a blob of molten trash. I was involved in the design of a solid state replacement for contactors used in the tail de-ice system on a bizjet a couple of years ago. Here's a couple of pictures of the resulting product. http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Solid_State_100A_Contactor.jpg Bennie and I were talking about suggesting a new environmental test for the next revisoin of DO-160. We were going to call it the Chevy Suburban endurance test. http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Solid_State_Endurance.jpg This critter is rated at 100A continuous and shuts off to protect itself after 500 mS of 550 amps overload. So I can tell you first hand that a clever designer can produce some robust, no-moving parts designs. I'd like to believe that Eric is a clever designer so I'd say that the odds are very much in your (and his) favor. I have a couple of designs I'm considering farming out to a production activity. Nothing like a bit of competition to keep the suppliers honorable and the customers happy. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 08:57:19 PM PST US From: Rick Girard Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Autozone alternators --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Rick Girard Bob, All, Why not go to Rock Auto? Cheaper prices, even with shipping. You will have to do a little research to get just what you want, but no more than you would at Autozone. http://www.rockauto.com/ Rick Girard ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 09:12:56 PM PST US From: "Bill Schlatterer" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Autozone alternators --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Schlatterer" Geez, something I actually know about! Parts business guy! You didn't ask the right question. AutoZone, just like NAPA, Advance, O'Reilly and even the good ole Bumper to Bumper guys all sell several alternators at various price points remanufactured by one of several folks. Yup, you guessed it. Pay more get more. Not only that, but occasionally you actually get a "new" product for rebuilt. It used to be that there was a distinction between rebuilt and remanufactured. Not so any more, all marketing hype. There are only a handful of national manufacturers who can produce the volume for national chains. These would be folks like DelcoRemy, Worldwide, AMP, Unit Parts, etc. They produce and package it in a AZ box. The next run off the same line goes in a NAPA box, CarQuest box, etc. No surprise, who fills the box is a price quality trade-off. Also noted are many smaller regional manufacturers who all produce at various levels of quality under not one but usually 5 or 6 different brand names. In most electrical reman facilities, they test everything that comes off the line. Normal defective rates BEFORE they go out the door will run about 5%. These are returned to the line and repaired again. Normal defective rates on rebuilt/remain electrical will run 10-18% at the local parts store (these are normal defective return rates, TRUE defective rates run 6% - 9%) What goes in them? Some good stuff and some not so good. A new regulator can cost from cents to a couple of bucks on the line but there is a huge variance in where they come from. Stuff from the Pacific Rim is much cheaper and usually but not necessarily inferior. Who knows at the local level what goes in them,.... nobody! Next question is what is in the box? The reason AutoZone brands their product is kinda obvious for "marketing" but not so obvious is that they can switch brands, quality, manufacturers, etc at will and you will never know it. This is not unique to AZ, it's the way all private branded parts packaging works. It's that way on purpose. Next questions is "where" is what is in the box? Because of the problem with handling cores (two ways) and the weight of the products which results in high freight costs, you have no guarantee that what is in the AZ or NAPA or CarQuest(choose any)box is the same in California as it would be in Florida. This is just the business and nothing wrong with it! EXCEPT if you want to really know what is in the box and I promise that the average guy on the parts counter can't tell you any more than is written on the box. This means "new regulator" but does not mean "quality regulator". Maybe or maybe not! The ONLY way you know about the quality of a reman alternator is to know the guy that built it and know what he is using, or rely on the price point as an assurance of "quality". Just remember that there are various levels of "good". What do you get with B&C? Who knows, BUT, they know where the buy parts, they know they check the balance, they field test the unit AGAIN, remember 5% defects right off the line, and they know the specs on their regulators. If you don't have a local rebuilder who knows what he is doing rebuild the unit, you really just don't know what is in the box. B&C is the rebuilder and we all trust them to put out a better than "good" product in every box. Good news! Virtually any good parts store has a "best" quality line that will have "good" quality parts but don't delude yourself into thinking that a cheap one is as good as a more costly version just because both are "tested" and use "new" replacement parts. They will all give good service in average conditions with a good battery. From my perspective, B&C is the quality inspection guy! They do know what is in the box because they put it there. YMMV Bill S 7a Ark -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis) Subject: AeroElectric-List: Autozone alternators --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" So does anyone have any input specifically on Autozone rebuilt alternators? I don't have enough data to say whether I should go get a refun on my Camry ND unit. Thanks Frank ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 09:44:45 PM PST US From: B Tomm Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: basic reasoning for system architecture --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: B Tomm If it's a battery the same size as the main battery, then it would sure be NICE to use it for cranking assistance . . . hard to do with 12AWG feeders. Yes the battery would be the same size but not for the reason of cranking power. If the engine battery won't start it, I really don't want it onboard even with a backup battery (electrically dependant engine). The front battery would be the easy one to get at for a change or to remove for charging. . That's another mis-interpretation of my writing when I suggest something. EVERY architecture is based on certain DESIGN GOALS from which REQUIREMENTS are developed and a solution deduced. Everyone is encouraged to develop their own design goals and then drive toward their own solution. Folks often believe that what I publish is based on some kind of REQUIREMENT when in fact, the only requirements are those which you place on the project yourself. My goal is to impart sufficient understanding that new architectures don't add complexity without also adding value. Actually I, as I'm sure many others also, don't view your stuff as based on some kind of requirement. On the contrary I see the obvious experience and thought behind the theory and architecture. This keeps me learning in the learning/absorbing mode. As the student, I look to the teacher as somewhat of an authority. Trying to understand his material but not questioning/criticizing every detail needlessly. I've been on this list for quite some time and started with no knowledge of "aircraft electrical systems". Yesterday I couldn't even spell aveeyawnix tacknotion, but now, I think I have a pretty good understanding of the basics for what my system needs. Enough to order a bunch of electrical components today. That said I must have learned something because I'm not one to gain confidence without understanding. Yeah, in fact you might consider something just a tad heavier like 10 or 8AWG. Unlike the FAT feeders, these smaller wires are certainly more subject to gross failure under the hard-fault condition. I think I'd put the battery bus back at the battery location so each of the feeders extending from the battery are protected. I'd have a battery "contactor" which might be a fat relay but the plain vanilla, Stancore/White-Rogers/Cole-Hersee parts would be just fine too. You'd want to protect the small feeder at both ends . . . it's subject to energy coming from the battery it feeds -AND- the battery in the front. ANL-30 or the modern, miniature automotive fuses could be considered. I would have thought of that...eventually, really!!! Thanks >What is your opinion on the solid state power contactors offered by >Perehelion in terms of reliabilty and suitability to the aircraft >environment? I don't know . . . and in view of recent mis-interpretations of my statements I have to emphasize that when I don't KNOW it's neither an endorsement or rejection of an idea or a product. There ARE some really nice, hefty solid state devices available that we could only dream about 30 years ago when you could sneeze at a "power" transistor and reduce it to a blob of molten trash. "Don't know" is a perfectly acceptable answer. Yeah we understand that you're human, BUT you know more about most of this stuff than most (if not all) of us first time builders. In other words, even your opinions are well respected here. I could ask the manufacturer, but a third party's opinion without a vested interest has a different value. I have a couple of designs I'm considering farming out to a production activity. Nothing like a bit of competition to keep the suppliers honorable and the customers happy. The future is bright indeed. Now if we could only find a solution to the rising costs of avgas... Bevan ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 09:58:32 PM PST US From: "Chris & Kellie Hand" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Chris & Kellie Hand" Ken & Bob, Thanks for the education...and at the risk of sound a little EE-ignorant, I hope you don't mind a few follow up questions: When you say you've replaced a few similar shorted transistors, are you talking about replacing ICs due to short type faults (how could you tell?), or are you talking about a failed stand-alone single transistor in a ckt? Do you consider transistors in an IC ckt (such as those used in an I-VR) to be any more or less likely to short than single device transistors in a standard built up ckt? Or is there any way to know/quantify the difference in reliability? Are you saying it's not possible to design ICs for I-VRs without having a single point failure mode, or is your position based on assuming that most are designed with a single point failure mode (or you can't tell)? Thanks again, Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III protection" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Internally regulated alternator OVP protection > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" protection > > At 09:23 AM 4/26/2005 -0400, you wrote: > > >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken > > > >Hi Chris > > > >If the field driver shorts (part MTB20N20E in your first reference or > >part 2N6284 in your second reference) then there is no way that I can > >see for the referenced devices to stop an over voltage. How likely is > >that - I don't know but I have replaced a few similar 'transistors' that > >were indeed shorted in other equipment over the years. > > Hear hear! This is exactly the simple-idea upon which > the notion of additional OV protection and/or external > control by means of switch on panel is based. Every alternator > has some sort of solid state device in series with the field > with a responsibility to modulate field current in response > to regulator commands for voltage control. If that puppy > fails shorted -OR- gets an uncontrolled ON-command from > failed circuitry elsewhere, the alternator's voltage is > officially out of the gate and racing for the moon. > > >If a separate external OVP device fails to work when it should then we > >have two separate devices failing simultaneously which is pretty rare. > >We can't test the functionality of an OVP internal to an alternator but > >we can test the separate OVP device if we so desire. > > Dead-on . . . > > > > >FWIW my feeling is that yes external ov protection is a good thing on an > >IR alternator but not essential for most of us. I suspect that it will > >indeed decrease overall system reliability and I doubt very much whether > >that is going to be quantified on this forum. However I also believe it > >reduces risk to my brand new icomm A-200 transceiver that still warns > >that over 16 volts will kill it and that it must be turned off during > >engine starting... (%$#%) I did add the transorbs to the alternator > >side of the my ov contactor to increase the likelihood of the contactor > >working as desired. And I'm still happy with my decision to not route > >the alternator B-lead through a battery master. > > Which goes to another post of mine that speaks to design goals. There > are no REQUIREMENTS that any of us can levy upon the wishes > and goals of any other builder. Lots of folk are tightly > wrapped around an axle assuming that what I write has > come manner of social design goal to control or set requirements > on other people's actions. > > Ken is demonstrating a high level of understanding that > would assuage any concerns I might have should I have > an opportunity to ride with him in his airplane. > > This kind of conversation is what makes the AeroElectric-List > an arena of ideas as opposed to a barroom brawl over who > is trying to control whom. > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 11:28:16 PM PST US From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rebuilt versus Original --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Grist for your mill - and digressing somewhat off subject. Legend has it that Henry Ford used to go to junk yards and looked at parts in his junked cars. If the parts had still a lot of life in them, then they were overbuilt quality wise. He would take the part to design and manufacturing and had quality, hence costs, reduced. So, new is not necessarily better than rebuilt - all depends as to who does the rebuilding. I'll add to that, with today's blossoming counterfeit parts being proposed at low prices, new can indeed be very bad. Michele RV8 - fuselage > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner- > aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric M. Jones > Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 12:37 AM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rebuilt versus Original > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" > > > There has been some disparagement of rebuilt equipment recently--so I > think > we should set the record straight. > > Is original stuff better than rebuilt? > > Original equipment is "good enough" for the task, and task is mainly to > satisfy the customer until the warranty expires. I'm not being cynical > here. > Since the huge production volumes are sensitive to costs, nothing that is > better than what-is-needed-to-satisfy-the-task is required. In fact to do > anything else would be throwing money away. My Dad showed me how American > machine tools made in 1941 would have the sharp edges INSIDE castings > smoothed down while the same machine made a few months later would not. > The > task had changed. > > It is also true in some assembly operations that a part which goes into an > assembly may have inspections and tests done on it which a part destined > for > the new original stock (but not used in an assembly) never has to undergo. > A > part that comes out of a box may indeed be inferior to a part out of a > junkyard in these instances. Selling slightly not-so-good parts in the > aftermarket is common. > > But let's look at original and rebuilt alternators. > > Mythical rebuilding operation: Starting with a "core", the alternator is > disassembled. All the fasteners and bearings are thrown away and new ones > are used. The bearings can be of better quality than original. The case, > rotor and stator are inspected and cleaned up. Often new, higher > voltage-withstand diodes are retrofitted, new brushes are added. Often a > new > regulator assembly (incorporating the newest electronics) is fitted. > Everything is inspected, torqued, fitted, and sometimes, YES (per B&C, > thanks Bill...) even dynamically balanced. > > Is this better than new? Probably so....In many cases it certainly is. > Offer > to take the rebuild shop owner up in your airplane. Watch his reaction. > > Regards, > Eric M. Jones > www.PerihelionDesign.com > 113 Brentwood Drive > Southbridge MA 01550-2705 > Phone (508) 764-2072 > Email: emjones@charter.net > > Teamwork: " A lot of people doing exactly what I say." > (Marketing exec., Citrix Corp.) > > > > >