Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 09:08 AM - Electrical System Diagnostics (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
2. 09:16 AM - Question Re: Garmin SL40 COM (Bill Denton)
3. 10:00 AM - Re: Question Re: Garmin SL40 COM (Bret Smith)
4. 10:16 AM - Re: Electrical System Diagnostics (Matt Prather)
5. 11:21 AM - Re: Question Re: Garmin SL40 COM (John Schroeder)
6. 11:30 AM - Re: Re: recharge/jump start recepticle (Carlos Trigo)
7. 11:58 AM - Re: Re: recharge/jump start recepticle (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 12:39 PM - Re: Question Re: Garmin SL40 COM (Bill Denton)
9. 12:46 PM - Re: Electrical System Diagnostics (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 12:46 PM - ELT Antenna ()
11. 02:06 PM - panel design ()
12. 04:38 PM - Re: panel design (Eric M. Jones)
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: | Electrical System Diagnostics |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
A follow-up on an earlier posting. I wrote:
>Once you're on the ground, likelihood that ammeters and voltmeters
>as-installed will reveal everything you need to zero in on
>root cause of failure is remote . . . there are not enough readings
>available from the rudimentary installations of such displays.
I've suggested that what ever electrical instrumentation
is installed on the panel, the number and kind of measurements
displayed will be far short of what's necessary to do a full-up
diagnostics evaluation of the electrical system.
I've further suggested that INDICATORS displaying present value
of any parameter are poor warning devices.
In the automotive world, one can plug diagnostic tools into
a handy connector and the vehicle spills its guts. Let's
consider how something similar might be implemented on an
OBAM aircraft.
Readers will recall many times that folks have posted calls
for assistance diagnosing an electrical system problem here
on the list. More often than not, remote assistance for
deducing the problem requires DATA . . . voltage and/or
current measurements at various points in the system give
clues for a divide-and-conquer approach to isolating the
problem.
The task ALWAYS involves putting your multi-meter probes
on various points, usually with the engine running. There
are few machines more difficult to troubleshoot than an
airplane.
What's a mother to do? Take a peek at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdf/Electrical_System_Diagnostics.pdf
Here's an approach to adding a diagnostics connector to
the airplane during construction. In this case, I've
illustrated a couple dozen permanently installed test
leads brought out to a 37-pin D-sub connector. A jack
panel similar to the one shown on the last page can be
plugged into the test connector. One can sit in the right
(in flight if needs be) and make voltage measurements
in strategic spots to aid in isolating root cause of
the problem. With this type of system installed, I can
deduce root cause of about any misbehavior down to a
few connections, wires, and line-replaceable accessories.
The example shown only speaks to electrical system. One
might wish to extend test points in other systems out
to the same connector.
This illustrates my assertion that display of any small
number of electrical system parameters on the panel will
almost never be adequate for detailed diagnosis of a
problem. Further, if real time indicators are also poor
warning devices, then I'll suggest that carefully crafted,
active notification of failures will guide you to implementation
of alternative operating procedures. A few chunks of 22AWG
wire and a D-sub connector will permit detailed access to
the system under conditions better suited to diagnosis and
repair.
Bob . . .
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: | Question RE: Garmin SL40 COM |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Denton" <bdenton@bdenton.com>
On the Garmin SL40 COM radio, there is no means of flip-flopping the
frequencies via: a yoke-mounted switch.
Assuming that the radio would be used on an Ultralight or Experimental
aircraft, is there any reason why this radio could not be field-modified to
provide this functionality?
Does anyone know how to do it?
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: Question RE: Garmin SL40 COM |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bret Smith" <smithhb@tds.net>
Just read this and thought how apropos...Mike did it!
http://www2.mstewart.net:8080/forsale/index.htm
Bret
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Denton" <bdenton@bdenton.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Question RE: Garmin SL40 COM
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Denton"
<bdenton@bdenton.com>
>
> On the Garmin SL40 COM radio, there is no means of flip-flopping the
> frequencies via: a yoke-mounted switch.
>
> Assuming that the radio would be used on an Ultralight or Experimental
> aircraft, is there any reason why this radio could not be field-modified
to
> provide this functionality?
>
> Does anyone know how to do it?
>
>
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: Electrical System Diagnostics |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
Hi Bob,
Okay, I'll take the other side on this one.. Just to be a trouble maker. :)
We, as builders, should learn the fundamentals of wiring things. That's
it. Buy a bunch of wire, connectors, switches, various strain reliefs,
solder, shrink tube, labels, etc. Practice and learn. Don't start
installing anything electrical into the airplane until we can be confident
that we won't put a cruddy crimp or a cold solder joint in the airplane.
It takes discipline. Don't use hardware store switches. If we select
'good' quality stuff for the airplane, and install it together with robust
electrical connections and appropriate strain relief, the need for
diagnostics drops so drastically that it may be a non issue. How many
cars go to the junkyard with diagnostic plugs that have never been used?
I'll suggest that if you do a good enough job installing the extra
diagnostic stuff so that it has a chance of being useful, the rest of the
electro-whizzies (similarly installed) won't likely need any diagnostics
during their useful life.
As a further and related suggestion... When you are basically done with
your electrical system, burn all of the schematics of the system and
datasheets from the components onto a CDROM, and stash that in your
chances of it having a systems failure at home are somewhat low. Having
the exact part number (or year, make, and model of the donor car) for the
crapped-out part could be extremely useful. Lots of FBO's have PC's with
CDROM drives. Make sure the CDROM has a copy of Adobe reader and any
other necessary software required to view the docs.
Regards,
Matt-
do not archive
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>
> A follow-up on an earlier posting. I wrote:
>
>
>>Once you're on the ground, likelihood that ammeters and voltmeters
>> as-installed will reveal everything you need to zero in on
>>root cause of failure is remote . . . there are not enough readings
>> available from the rudimentary installations of such displays.
>
> I've suggested that what ever electrical instrumentation
> is installed on the panel, the number and kind of measurements
> displayed will be far short of what's necessary to do a full-up
> diagnostics evaluation of the electrical system.
>
> I've further suggested that INDICATORS displaying present value of
> any parameter are poor warning devices.
>
> In the automotive world, one can plug diagnostic tools into
> a handy connector and the vehicle spills its guts. Let's
> consider how something similar might be implemented on an
> OBAM aircraft.
>
> Readers will recall many times that folks have posted calls
> for assistance diagnosing an electrical system problem here
> on the list. More often than not, remote assistance for
> deducing the problem requires DATA . . . voltage and/or
> current measurements at various points in the system give
> clues for a divide-and-conquer approach to isolating the
> problem.
>
> The task ALWAYS involves putting your multi-meter probes
> on various points, usually with the engine running. There
> are few machines more difficult to troubleshoot than an
> airplane.
>
> What's a mother to do? Take a peek at:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdf/Electrical_System_Diagnostics.pdf
>
> Here's an approach to adding a diagnostics connector to
> the airplane during construction. In this case, I've
> illustrated a couple dozen permanently installed test
> leads brought out to a 37-pin D-sub connector. A jack
> panel similar to the one shown on the last page can be
> plugged into the test connector. One can sit in the right
> (in flight if needs be) and make voltage measurements
> in strategic spots to aid in isolating root cause of
> the problem. With this type of system installed, I can
> deduce root cause of about any misbehavior down to a
> few connections, wires, and line-replaceable accessories.
>
> The example shown only speaks to electrical system. One
> might wish to extend test points in other systems out
> to the same connector.
>
> This illustrates my assertion that display of any small
> number of electrical system parameters on the panel will
> almost never be adequate for detailed diagnosis of a
> problem. Further, if real time indicators are also poor
> warning devices, then I'll suggest that carefully crafted,
> active notification of failures will guide you to implementation
> of alternative operating procedures. A few chunks of 22AWG
> wire and a D-sub connector will permit detailed access to
> the system under conditions better suited to diagnosis and
> repair.
>
> 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: | Re: Question RE: Garmin SL40 COM |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder@perigee.net>
Bill -
Back when we were going to install an SL-40, it was my understanding that
you can use a remote flip=flop switch. Have you talked with the Garmin AT
folks about it?
John
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Denton"
> <bdenton@bdenton.com>
>
> On the Garmin SL40 COM radio, there is no means of flip-flopping the
> frequencies via: a yoke-mounted switch.
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 |
|
Received-SPF: softfail (mta11: domain of transitioning trigo@mail.telepac.pt does
not designate 85.138.31.102 as permitted sender) receiver=mta11; client_ip=85.138.31.102;
envelope-from=trigo@mail.telepac.pt;
| Subject: | Re: recharge/jump start recepticle |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Carlos Trigo" <trigo@mail.telepac.pt>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
Subject: Re: recharge/jump start receptacle
> If you want to install maintainers (largely unnecessary on RG
> >batteries)
> then a small, 3 pin connector for ground, bat 1, bat 2 with
> relatively small wires tied to fuses on each battery's hot
> battery bus is the way to support the batteries while hangared.
>
> Bob . . .
>
Does this mean that it is possible (and desirable) to connect the same
maintainer (battery "tender") to both batteries at the same time?
Carlos
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: recharge/jump start recepticle |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 07:24 PM 8/29/2005 +0100, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Carlos Trigo"
><trigo@mail.telepac.pt>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: recharge/jump start receptacle
>
>
> > If you want to install maintainers (largely unnecessary on RG
> > >batteries)
> > then a small, 3 pin connector for ground, bat 1, bat 2 with
> > relatively small wires tied to fuses on each battery's hot
> > battery bus is the way to support the batteries while hangared.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
>
>Does this mean that it is possible (and desirable) to connect the same
>maintainer (battery "tender") to both batteries at the same time?
It can be done. I have several instrumentation batteries being
"tended" at any one time. This is done with two tenders . . . one
in the electronics shop, the other out in the mess-shop. There
are 2 to 4 batteries on any one tender at a time.
I have batteries that might set for a year or more between useage.
It seems unlikely that a airplane flown more that 4 times a year will
will get much benefit from battery tending while parked.
Bob . . .
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Question RE: Garmin SL40 COM |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Denton" <bdenton@bdenton.com>
According to Garmin: "No, there are no remote controls available for the SL
40 Comm Radio." The install manual for the SL40 doesn't show any means for a
remote flip-flop, either.
However, the SL30 NAV/COM does offer remote flip-flop...
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of John
Schroeder
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Question RE: Garmin SL40 COM
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder"
<jschroeder@perigee.net>
Bill -
Back when we were going to install an SL-40, it was my understanding that
you can use a remote flip=flop switch. Have you talked with the Garmin AT
folks about it?
John
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Denton"
> <bdenton@bdenton.com>
>
> On the Garmin SL40 COM radio, there is no means of flip-flopping the
> frequencies via: a yoke-mounted switch.
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: Electrical System Diagnostics |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 11:15 AM 8/29/2005 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>Okay, I'll take the other side on this one.. Just to be a trouble maker. :)
>
>We, as builders, should learn the fundamentals of wiring things. That's
>it. Buy a bunch of wire, connectors, switches, various strain reliefs,
>solder, shrink tube, labels, etc. Practice and learn. Don't start
>installing anything electrical into the airplane until we can be confident
>that we won't put a cruddy crimp or a cold solder joint in the airplane.
>It takes discipline. Don't use hardware store switches. If we select
>'good' quality stuff for the airplane, and install it together with robust
>electrical connections and appropriate strain relief, the need for
>diagnostics drops so drastically that it may be a non issue. How many
>cars go to the junkyard with diagnostic plugs that have never been used?
>
>I'll suggest that if you do a good enough job installing the extra
>diagnostic stuff so that it has a chance of being useful, the rest of the
>electro-whizzies (similarly installed) won't likely need any diagnostics
>during their useful life.
Yup. You understand this very well my friend. It's like buying
insurance. The reason you can buy insurance for rare events at
relatively low prices is due to low risk of ever having to
invoke the policy.
Of course, for the few that DO have problems, the $time$ required
to run down a solution often drives a hindsight wish that the
diagnostic tools had been installed.
I wrestle with this all the time in the certified world. I can't
put breakout boxes into a system and fly it for the purposes of
gathering diagnostic data without putting an experimental ticket
on the airplane and flying it with exp-test pilots. Once you
add the x-ticket notation to the logs of the airplane, there
is perception of reduced value of the airplane. At the same time,
you can have a customer who just bought your whippy new airplane
who rightfully wishes that the broke system would work. So, between
the marketing folks and customers who say "fix it" and the
managers and regulators who have a dozen reasons why you can't
fix it, it's a real Catch 22.
For the OBAM lightplane, the trade-offs seem to be as follows:
(1) What is the cost of installation/ownership of permanently
mounted diagnostic displays which have been elevated to hallowed
if not essential status on the panel?
(2) Can test wires/connector be installed for a comparable expenditure
of $time$? If equal to or less, then there's immediate positive
value for going diagnostic connectors as opposed to permanently
mounted instruments of limited usefulness. Further, it opens some
panel space for other uses.
(3) If there is a premium in $time$ to install the diagnostic
connector, then the DIFFERENCE between (1) and (2) is the
insurance premium you pay hoping that you'll never have to
invoke the policy . . . but you'll probably be glad you bought
the policy the first time you need it. I only get to work on
customer aircraft issues after the customer's mechanics have
exhausted their bag of tricks. Then we send a company man out
to look at it. The problem is 2-4 months old by the time I get
involved. Then I want to do these $high$ investigative experiments
to gather data. I don't think I've touched a single problem over
the past 10 years that blew away less than $100,000 and some have
cost $millions$.
As you've correctly noted, it's a matter of perceptions of risk
and return on investment benefit for having easy, real-time access
to the ship's nervous system.
>As a further and related suggestion... When you are basically done with
>your electrical system, burn all of the schematics of the system and
>datasheets from the components onto a CDROM, and stash that in your
>chances of it having a systems failure at home are somewhat low. Having
>the exact part number (or year, make, and model of the donor car) for the
>crapped-out part could be extremely useful. Lots of FBO's have PC's with
>CDROM drives. Make sure the CDROM has a copy of Adobe reader and any
>other necessary software required to view the docs.
ABSOLUTELY! At every seminar, I point out that the majority
of aircraft sold have little or no documentation as to what parts
were installed or how they were wired. Accurate documentation
goes a long way toward inducing a buyer to give you the asking
price for the airplane. The same data is INSURANCE for $time$ it
takes for YOU to repair your project 2-10 years from now.
Diagnostics connectors and service data are investments that
have some prospect for pay-out in the future . . . i.e. features
that reduce workload when the snoozing dogs arise to make your
life more of a challenge than you'd like. It's part and parcel
of lots of choices we have to make in life.
Bob . . .
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
8/29/2005
Hello Jim Timoney, some ELT related comments:
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: JTORTHO@aol.com
<<....skip....Not much metal in the center wing for the ELT antenna. Is the
1 meter
separation from the COM a regulation or a suggestion?....skip....>>
1) No such regulation, but I found out that transmitting on my number one
VHF comm radio would trigger the ELT when the antennas were too close (both
inside my fuselage). I moved the ELT antenna a bit and changed its
orientation to solve the problem.
<<.....skip....Is there a regulation against putting the ELT in side the
fiberglass tail section?....skip....>>
2) No such regulation. Internal antennas are great inside fiberglass
structures.
<<.....skip..... IT would be "upside down" but still vertically oriented,
with a wire/copper ribbon groundplane.....skip....>>
3) One of my friends commented that I had my ELT antenna installed with
improper orientation. I said "Fine, tell me just exactly what attitude my
fuselage will be in when I am finished crashing and I will reinstall my
antenna accordingly." He smiled and got the point.
OC
PS: Put the ELT in because you have to. Carry a personal locator beacon
because you want to. http://www.sarsat.noaa.gov/emerbcns.html
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Eric M. Jones"
<emjones@charter.net>
<<........skip........Your knees will be rammed into them in an accident if
they are where
Cessna put them.....skip.....Whatever you do---Put NO switches on the lower
panel in front of your knees. Regards,Eric M. Jones>>
8/29/2005
But Eric, The bottom of my panel is where the bottom of my panel is.
It was not extended in any fashion for a row of switches. I guess that I
could have cut maybe an inch or so off the bottom of the panel in that area,
but certainly not enough to significantly affect knee clearance in an
accident.
Maybe I'll consider some padding along the bottom edge of the panel in that
area. Thanks for the tip.
OC
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: panel design |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: bakerocb@cox.net
<<........skip........Your knees will be rammed into them in an accident if
they are where Cessna put them.....skip.....Whatever you do---Put NO
switches on the lower
panel in front of your knees. Regards, Eric M. Jones>>
>But Eric, The bottom of my panel is where the bottom of my panel is.
>It was not extended in any fashion for a row of switches. I guess that I
>could have cut maybe an inch or so off the bottom of the panel in that
>area,
>but certainly not enough to significantly affect knee clearance in an
>accident.
>Maybe I'll consider some padding along the bottom edge of the panel in that
>area. Thanks for the tip.
OC,
Years ago A-town changed all sort of hard surfaces and protrusions to
"safety conscious" features. I didn't mean to imply that one should cut the
bottom off the panel, but no switches and some padding seems like a good
plan. Padding the bottom edge of the panel could save your legs in a crash.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
(508) 764-2072
"...Beans for supper tonight, six o'clock.
Navy beans cooked in Oklahoma ham....
Got to eat 'em with a spoon. Raw onions
and cornbread; nothing else...."
--Will Rogers
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! --
|