Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:03 AM - Re: RE load dump (Steve Hunt)
2. 04:52 AM - Re: RE load dump from a novice point of view (Mark & Lisa)
3. 07:17 AM - Wire selection (Ernest Christley)
4. 07:36 AM - Re: LVW problem (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 08:03 AM - Re: Wire selection (Stein Bruch)
6. 08:14 AM - Re: Re: Breaker Interrupt Rating (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 08:36 AM - Re: Re: magneto timing buzz box (Dan Checkoway)
8. 09:30 AM - Re: Wire selection (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
9. 09:52 AM - Re: Wire selection (rv-9a-online)
10. 10:49 AM - Re: Wire selection (John Schroeder)
11. 11:56 AM - Re: RE load dump (Dj Merrill)
12. 04:21 PM - Re: Wire selection (Kevin Horton)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE load dump |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Steve Hunt" <stephen.hunt19@btinternet.com>
Bob,
thanks for the reply. I along with a great many others, worldwide, are
indebted to your most generous approach which is typified in your last
paragraph. We really appreciate it Bob,Steve. RV8 in the UK
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE load dump
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>
> At 09:32 PM 9/18/2005 +0100, you wrote:
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Steve Hunt"
>><stephen.hunt19@btinternet.com>
>
>>Hi Bob
>
>
>>Wow! I just joined............ I want to ask you if you think it OK for
>>me
>>to proceed with my effort at hooking up my Vans 60 A int regulated alt as
>>follows. (I am no engineer, have little electrical knowledge)I have a B& C
>>cont rated contactor on the B lead which is switched by the second throw
>>of
>>my Batt/Alt sw (2-10). I have, as yet no crowbar. I intend to always start
>>with alt switched off and stopping eng with alt switched on. I dont know
>>how
>>I got here as I have the lost the thread of the latest advice and am
>>feeling
>>confused. The loom all laid up, panel cut. I was ready to go and then got
>>hopelessly lost trying to follow this. Whilst it may not be the best
>>solution Bob, will this work?
>
> Absolutely! I would not discourage anyone from proceeding with
> any plans in place to get their projects finished and flying.
> Risks are small irrespective of any hazard one might wish to
> address in their design. Further, once rational solutions to
> the questions before us are derived, they're easy to add later.
> Don't let the floobydust flying around slow you down or worry
> you in the least.
>
> It's the job of folks who understand the issues and share
> a common interest in offering high value solutions that
> will happily filter the floobydust for nuggets of good data
> and make the results available to all along with details
> as to how the decisions were made.
>
>
>>Thanks in anticipation,Steve
>
>
> You're most welcome.
>
> 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: | Re: RE load dump from a novice point of view |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark & Lisa" <marknlisa@hometel.com>
Bob,
You said:
> As a scientist, you'll appreciate my pedantic
> quest for underlying simple-ideas that support our design decisions.
"Pedantic" is the word Paul might have chosen. I think the vast majority of
list readers would have chosen "Erudite."
Mark & Lisa Sletten
Legacy FG N828LM
http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
I'd like to keep my wire rack nice and simple. Instead of having
multiple spools of various wire sizes, I think it would be beneficial to
have just one spool of a multistranded cable. I don't see it weighing
significantly more. There's just not enough wire in the plane to make a
difference. The cable is more expensive, but the installation would be
simpler and safer. Simpler since, for instance, there would only be one
run of wire out to the wingtip lights. Safer since the wire by default
would have an extra jacket. Before anyone gets a chance to say it, I am
indeed accepting a less than optimum design in exchange for a lack of
the need to plan carefully. My response is that the offset from optimum
will not have measurable results in the final product, and the best laid
plans of mice and men... (so, it's 4:00 on Saturday. You've got a roll
of 22AWG left, but what you really need is 2ft of 20AWG. Aaargh!)
So, with this goal in mind, what would be a good wire size that would
basically cover all the wiring needs, with the obvious exception of the
starter? 18AWG? 20AWG? Certain high current devices, like pitot heat,
could use multiple strands in a cable, or lower current technologies,
like Eric's thermal switch design. Stenair has 3 and 4 strand cables of
22AWG, which I think is a little small. Is there a good source for
larger aviation grade cables?
--
,|"|"|, |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta |
o| d |o www.ernest.isa-geek.org |
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 10:12 PM 9/18/2005 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: N1deltawhiskey@aol.com
>
>Bob,
>
>Lost your response to the message below, but thanks for the offer to replace
>the unit if damaged. Too bad more providers of equipment are not so willing
>to stand by what they dump on unsuspecting people.
>
>Anyway, I reinstalled the unit and it is working fine as far as I can tell.
>
>Regards,
>
>Doug Windhorn
Great! While reflecting on past conversations with Paul and
pondering the missing pieces of his puzzles, I tried to recall
every troubleshooting task I've taken on over the years. The
most recent experiences were the easiest and no doubt some
are lost to the ages but I could not remember a single instance
where root cause of a problem turned out to be a "violation" of
manufacturer's specifications for a part.
In every case, the problem was some very simple mechanical error
of installation, an error in programming, or failure of a supplied
component to meet his own specifications. My most recent task was
to find a bad pin in a very hard to reach set of connectors that
would only open at altitude. We had to install a data acquisition
system, put an x-ticket on the airplane and fly it to 38K to
get our arms around the failure. Finding the bad pin cost my
company a bucket full of money, and months of frustration on
the part of the owner of a new airplane who seemed to believe
that for $6 million the thing really should work right.
I was fairly certain that your problem fell into the "really simple"
category . . . all we had to do was find it. As it turns out,
I need to fix my published data so as to not set the installer
up for the error you suffered. While your experience was
frustrating and time consuming for you, sharing it here
on the List prompted actions that will benefit those who
follow you. To me, this is the finest example of how the
consumer/supplier relationships ought to run. Thanks!
I mention this for the benefit of folks who may have been
feeling lost and frustrated trying to follow the thread on
design and architecture issues. While it may have seemed like
a really big deal, it was in fact much ado about very little
because some of the participants couldn't focus on science and
the excitement of problem solving. I just received a phone call
from a very good friend of mine who is my mechanical counterpart
here in Wichita. He thinks in gears, motors and leadscrews
like I think in switches and microchips. We're going to have
lunch today. We'll no doubt wrestle with some of the world's
design problems on the back of some napkins . . . just for fun.
One such lunch seeded a solution for the flap system that
flies on Eclipse today. 100% failure free since first article
was delivered about two years ago. I would have been delighted
if Paul (or Eric) could have participated in the same spirit
and excitement and exploration of the possibilities as I
enjoy with too few folks in Wichita. Contributions to
the OBAM aircraft community could have been significant.
We'll still get there . . . just a little slower perhaps.
In the mean time, we have over a century of aviation history
and success stories upon which we can rely for any project
that is already under way and should continue to move ahead
with confidence. Real improvements come in tiny pieces that
can be added any time. Most OBAM aircraft will evolve just
like spam cans have for a century. Bolt-on accessories to
the panel or engine. However, a few will be proving test
beds for incremental changes to architectures and new
I hope that owners of such aircraft will be participants
here on the List and will share their experiences and
achievements with all of us. I'll do what I can to make
their efforts exciting and rewarding.
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
While in theory this might be sound, for a variety of reasons I'd urge you
to re-consider your approach. You'd be surprised at how much weight wire
can add. If you go with AWG18 (which you'll need some of) for the whole
match and used shielded cable, you'll add quite a few pounds to your plane.
You're right, AWG 22 just won't cut it for the whole plane, and just picking
multiple strands for power isn't always the best way to go either.
To do your plane, you'll probably need:
AWG8 or something like that for Alternator feed line
AWG14 or 16 for pitot heat
AWG16 for decent sized landing lights
AWG18 for things like flaps motors, strobe power, nav lights, master relay,
boost pumps, etc...
AWG18 or 20 Shielded for Magneto "P" leads.
AWG20 for powering things like Autopilot servos, avionics, etc..
AWG22 for powering other things and for sensor wires.
Shielded wire SEPARATE From everything else for audio wires, headset jacks,
etc..
It's pretty hard to get away from at least a basic variety of wire in a
normal aircraft wiring scheme.
I'm not flaming your approach, just trying to point out that it would be
difficult at best for a variety of reasons to use one type of multi-stranded
cable.
Just my 2 cents as usual.
Cheers,
Stein.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ernest
Christley
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Wire selection
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ernest Christley
<echristley@nc.rr.com>
I'd like to keep my wire rack nice and simple. Instead of having
multiple spools of various wire sizes, I think it would be beneficial to
have just one spool of a multistranded cable. I don't see it weighing
significantly more. There's just not enough wire in the plane to make a
difference. The cable is more expensive, but the installation would be
simpler and safer. Simpler since, for instance, there would only be one
run of wire out to the wingtip lights. Safer since the wire by default
would have an extra jacket. Before anyone gets a chance to say it, I am
indeed accepting a less than optimum design in exchange for a lack of
the need to plan carefully. My response is that the offset from optimum
will not have measurable results in the final product, and the best laid
plans of mice and men... (so, it's 4:00 on Saturday. You've got a roll
of 22AWG left, but what you really need is 2ft of 20AWG. Aaargh!)
So, with this goal in mind, what would be a good wire size that would
basically cover all the wiring needs, with the obvious exception of the
starter? 18AWG? 20AWG? Certain high current devices, like pitot heat,
could use multiple strands in a cable, or lower current technologies,
like Eric's thermal switch design. Stenair has 3 and 4 strand cables of
22AWG, which I think is a little small. Is there a good source for
larger aviation grade cables?
--
,|"|"|, |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta |
o| d |o www.ernest.isa-geek.org |
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: Breaker Interrupt Rating |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 06:39 PM 9/18/2005 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Tom Velvick <tomvelvick@cox.net>
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>I think this is the post from 04/02/2005 that Paul is referring to.
>Regards,
>Tom Velvick
<snip>
Thank you for tracking this down! I've found the whole
message and printed it off. I don't know how I missed it
but it there was a lot going on . . . sometimes with
replies passing each other in cyberstream. I'll ponder
it for a bit. Appreciate your help.
Bob . . .
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: magneto timing buzz box |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
Nice!! Thanks much for posting that!
do not archive
)_( Dan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Campbell" <GregCampbellUSA@comcast.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: magneto timing buzz box
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Greg Campbell"
> <GregCampbellUSA@comcast.net>
>
> Take a look at the $25 kit from www.MagnetoTimer.com
> and see if that meets your needs.
>
> I've built two - it's a fun little soldering project, all the parts
> are included and identified (taped to the instruction sheet).
> About an hour of fitting & soldering and you've got a nice tool.
>
> The leads coil up and stow inside the open front of the plastic case.
>
> Greg
>
>
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wire selection |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
In a message dated 9/19/05 9:19:15 AM Central Daylight Time,
echristley@nc.rr.com writes:
> Simpler since, for instance, there would only be one
> run of wire out to the wingtip lights.
>>>
I'd have to say that for this particular example (or even back to the tail)
an 18 or 20 awg 5 or 6 conductor cable could be useful (I did likewise in my
RV), but when you consider the (most likely) hundreds of short runs from bus to
switch to device to ground to etc, trying to employ this for all conductors
could be a much larger challenge than just pulling from a standard parts bin of
good ol' tefzel wire...
Mark Phillips - Aeroelectric RV-6A N51PW - 235 hours
do not archive
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: Wire selection |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online@telus.net>
Stein covered the weight issue, but there is another consideration...
the diameter of the wiring bundles is important when routing through
spars, wings, snap bushings and so on.
Using shielded wire everywhere would significantly increase your routing
problems.
Vern Little
RV-9A
ready to move the airport!
Ernest Christley wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
>
>So, with this goal in mind, what would be a good wire size that would
>basically cover all the wiring needs, with the obvious exception of the
>starter? 18AWG? 20AWG? Certain high current devices, like pitot heat,
>could use multiple strands in a cable, or lower current technologies,
>like Eric's thermal switch design. Stenair has 3 and 4 strand cables of
>22AWG, which I think is a little small. Is there a good source for
>larger aviation grade cables?
>
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wire selection |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder@perigee.net>
Ernest -
I wholeheartedly agree with Stein. It is not that difficult to do some
measurements and then increase the lengths by a foot or two to get a
requirement for the wire. Wire is relatively cheap. Shielded cable is much
more expensive. I'd order 25% more of each wire size than you calculate
you will need - to get past that ooops factor.
John
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 10:02:50 -0500, Stein Bruch <stein@steinair.com> wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch"
> <stein@steinair.com>
>
> While in theory this might be sound, for a variety of reasons I'd urge
> you
> to re-consider your approach. You'd be surprised at how much weight wire
> can add. If you go with AWG18 (which you'll need some of) for the whole
> match and used shielded cable, you'll add quite a few pounds to your
> plane.
> You're right, AWG 22 just won't cut it for the whole plane, and just
> picking
> multiple strands for power isn't always the best way to go either.
>
--
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE load dump |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dj Merrill <deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu>
Steve Hunt wrote:
> I have, as yet no crowbar. I intend to always start
> with alt switched off and stopping eng with alt switched on. I dont know how
> I got here as I have the lost the thread of the latest advice and am feeling
> confused.
Hi Steve,
I have Bob's crowbar OV design in my Glasair with an
O320 in it, and I also have one of Eric's LVW modules installed
(http://www.periheliondesign.com/lvwaabm.htm).
I've been using the method you mention for the last
year or so with no apparent ill effects. Ie:
1) Alternator switch off, turn on Master switch
2) Check for red blinky light indicating low voltage (should be on)
3) Start engine
4) Turn on alternator switch, check for red blinky light to go
out indicating alternator is working and producing voltage
Turn off engine, turn off master, and then turn off alt switch.
However, based on discussions on this list recently, I'm
considering slightly altering my startup process to:
1) Alternator switch off, turn on Master switch
2) Check for red blinky light indicating low voltage (should be on)
3) Turn on alternator switch (light should still be on)
4) Start engine
5) Check for red blinky light to go out indicating alternator is working
and producing voltage
Shutdown would remain the same - engine off, master off, alt off.
The reason for the change is that there is a possibility that
the alternator does not liked be "turned on" when it is already
spinning, and there may be a chance of doing harm. While this may
not in reality be true (I'm not sure), I don't see any harm in having
the alternator switch turned on while starting the engine.
Please note these are just my opinions - I'm not an expert.
However, it seems to work for me.
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill
Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118
"Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an
airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005
"TSA: Totally Screwing Aviation"
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: Wire selection |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
On 19-Sep-05, at 11:15 AM, Ernest Christley wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ernest Christley
> <echristley@nc.rr.com>
>
> So, with this goal in mind, what would be a good wire size that would
> basically cover all the wiring needs, with the obvious exception of
> the
> starter? 18AWG? 20AWG? Certain high current devices, like pitot
> heat,
> could use multiple strands in a cable, or lower current technologies,
> like Eric's thermal switch design. Stenair has 3 and 4 strand
> cables of
> 22AWG, which I think is a little small. Is there a good source for
> larger aviation grade cables?
>
If you try to use multiple strands in a cable, you have lost the
protection from a fuse or CB, unless you put a fuse on each strand.
If you use one fuse or CB for the device, and you use multiple
strands to feed that device, a short on one strand could lead to an
electrical fire, as the CB rating will be too high than needed for a
strand of that size.
This is a corner I wouldn't cut.
Kevin Horton
Ottawa, Canada
RV-8 - Finishing Kit
http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
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! --
|