---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 10/25/05: 5 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 12:47 AM - Re: Re: Controlling IR ND Alternators (Bob) (Kingsley Hurst) 2. 01:14 AM - Re: Re: Controlling IR ND Alternators (Bob) (Steve Hunt) 3. 12:07 PM - fatwire (Larry E. James) 4. 05:42 PM - Re: Hobbs meter wiring (RURUNY@aol.com) 5. 09:37 PM - Unnecessary personal invective. (Rob W M Shipley) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 12:47:46 AM PST US From: "Kingsley Hurst" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Controlling IR ND Alternators (Bob) --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Kingsley Hurst" Bob, Why oh why do you keep replying to that man ? Whether he is right or wrong, he has a serious personality problem that nobody on this list including you can fix and I'm sure your time can be better spent than feeding the fire. You know, time $$$ and all that stuff, no return on investment with that man Bob. Regards Kingsley in Oz. ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 01:14:50 AM PST US From: "Steve Hunt" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Controlling IR ND Alternators (Bob) --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Steve Hunt" I understand little to nothing about electrics. But I know about people. After such invective aimed at Bob I believe his reply to be a model of behaviour that many extremists would do well to observe. You teach us more than wiring diags in this reply Bob! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Controlling IR ND Alternators (Bob) > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > > At 07:20 AM 10/24/2005 -0700, you wrote: > >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: >> >>Dear Bob: >> >>Once again you bring nothing to the table when it comes to IR alternators. >>Bob has attacked the words of another, again. This time they are from the >>installation instructions for Niagara Airparts alternator kit, which uses >>a ND >>alternator part number 100211-1680, application is for a Ishikawjima >>General >>S753 engine (used on industrial equipment such as folklifts). This is the >>same one Mickey reported on. it is nominally rated at 43 amps at 5000 RPM. >>At 5000 RPM it can produce up to 48 amps, max capacity is a little over 50 >>amps. (I also own this model). All comments are regarding this exact >>model. >>On the bottom of the first page of the below link you will see the >>paragraph Bob >>has spewed more useless ignorant comments. > > > > >>(Chance is if you have an alternator properly sized this alternator strain >>is not >>an issue at idle, just be aware of it.) >> >>(Bob, If you don't know what it means just ask and don't attack. If you >>would like >>call Niagara, they will help you with out insulting or making >>condescending >>comments.) > > George, George . . . > > I have lived, worked and designed with DC systems driven by > generators and alternators for almost 40 years. We have > mockups of every electrical system on our production line. > We turn alternators and generators ON and OFF at will at > at any system load and any rpm and not once have we detected > any reason for modifying this behavior to "reduce strain" on > the alternator for the purpose of increasing service life > or avoiding damage. If anyone shipped us an alternator with > such an admonition in their installation manual, I would be > most suspicious of their ability to fabricate and deliver > products suitable for our needs . . . not because of any > perceived weakness in their machine but an obvious weakness > in their understanding. > > >>(BTW, I absolutely have nothing to do with Niagara Airparts. Also this >>condition >>is unlikely in our application, but it is impossible. Idle alternator RPM >>may be >>less than 3000 RPM. If you idle with every item on you could tax (strain) >>the >>alternator. Increasing RPM or reducing the total load is the proper action >>if >>needed. If you need to know, using a lycoming you need engine RPM, you may >>have >>a ratio of 2.6 to 3.8 depending on pulley sizes, e.g. engine 1000 rpm, >>alternator >>RPM is 2,600 to 3,800. Anything under 5000 RPM (alternator) is too low for >>efficient full output, ND model 100211-1680. In other words the pilot >>needs to >>have at least 1300-1900 RPM. Niagara can not give you this info, since >>they can >>not assume what pulley you are using. Since 1900 RPM is at the low end of >>the >>typical RPM for flight Ops it is not an issue. ONLY Be aware that at idle >>you >>may have less power available.) > > The idea that turning the alternator ON and OFF under ANY of the cited > conditions being injurious to the alternator (or any other part of the > system) is without foundation in physics or practice. Anyone who makes > such a statement in their literature has demonstrated a lack of > understanding . . . I won't use the word ignorance since you have > chosen to take such offense at it. > > >>(Note: Of interest from the above Niagara instructions, Alternator >>Characteristics, >>paragraph 3, last sentence, talks to the fact the alternator SHUTS it self >>down, >>which it will for: Over Voltage, internal fault, overload and B-lead >>short. To >>reset the alternator you turn the IGN off and than on. Also the warning >>light will >>come on to indicate a fault trip. COOL. The I-VR electronics **(IC chip) >>is really >>a micro-processor or computer if you will. Future car alternators will >>have data >>links to the car's central computer. Still many will still be putting >>1950's >>technology in their home-built plane even then. The days of external VR's >>for >>small alternators as the preferred method in homebuilt planes has passed. >>SHOW >>ME YOUR FAILURE ANALYSIS DATA BOB TO PROVE OTHERWISE. THAT >>IS WHAT I THOUGHT, BS STORIES. You are short on facts, long on opinion.) > > I have NO facts on the design of anyone's chips. Therefore I cannot > and never have rendered an opinion about any of them other than to > state that I cannot recommend them as suited to my design goals until > I do understand them. > > >>**(Bob once wrote he thought the only reason for IC chips in I-VR was for >>cheaper manufacturing, but the fact is there are so many transistors in >>the IC >>chip and functions that it is not possible without integrated circuits. If >>you >>made it like B&C makes it's external VR, it would be as big as battery.) > > Well duh . . . of course a single chip design offers less expensive > manufacturing . . . I can't imagine anyone believing anything > different. > And yes, integrated circuits offer a means for compacting many more > features (necessary or not, wanted or not, certifiable under > contemporary > design goals or not) onto a single piece of silicon. Big as a battery? > Your hyperbole is expanding at an ever increasing rate . . . > > >>(All the BS and miss understanding on this Forum is the result of Bob's >>duplicitous >>and slanted mis-representation of the facts. He hides behind attacks to >>bolster >>either his ego, insecurity or desire to promote one way of thinking.) >> >>(I have nothing against Bob and his ideas, but all this personal attacks >>are a waste >>of time. My comments only echo Bobs tirades back. I don't always agree >>with Bob, >>but that is OK. Bob, you are great and we all Love Ya, but stop the >>grumpy old man >>stuff.) > > > You've blown it now George. Your behavior has demonstrated that you DO > have > a LOT against me and it has nothing to do with ideas or facts. I've > attacked > nobody. It's not my style. I'm also not grumpy but I will have to admit > to getting > older . . . > > >>(Where are your facts Bob? You told me you are a man of facts because in >>your >>work you only use facts. We are all smart enough to understand your >>technical >>explanation.) > > I have explained my lack of knowledge (ignorance if you will) to you > several times George. This is the reason for the new experiments. > > >>(Bob, your like a dog. Another dog has pissed on you favorite fire >>hydrant, >>you don't have any piss but you are going to lift your leg anyway. I don't >>want to >>be an expert or piss on you fire hydrant Bob; however you are leaving big >>steaming >>piles all over, smelling the place up, but feel free to spread you yellow >>stream of >>wisdom. Stop lying and dropping your piles of BS about IR alternators >>which you >>clearly have little experience with or care to support. You are clearly a >>expert >>with external VR alternators and your crow bar. Stick with that or put a >>chapter on >>I-VR in your book called: Internal Regulated Alternators a Great Option) > > Gee George, for someone who "loves" me, your sure flinging a lot > of unsavory adjectives around. > > >>(You noticed that more people are asking about IR alternators. I think >>people where >>afraid to ask before, but not any more. This is good.) >> >>(Bob YOUR whole rant and raves about IR alternators are baseless and has >>no >>foundation in physics or design limits for the alternator. You are a >>hypocrite >>extraordinaire.) >> >>( You use words like Physics and think dropping this word lends validity >>to your >>attack. Back it up with facts Bob. WHAT PHYSICS? If you want to explain it >>and >>be the teacher, please do. Otherwise you are hypocritical in accusing >>everyone >>else being loose with the facts. Pompous, condescending, self righteous >>attacks >>on everyone who disagree with is not helping your image of benevolent >>teacher >>either.) >> >>(Niagara is in good company and has about 10 years experience with their >>product. >>Guess how many have come back or had a problem? ZERO. How many crow bars >>and B&C regulators have issues or came back? MANY. TAKE A HINT FOLKS.) > > Really? How many? And of what has been returned, what were the returns > as a percentage of fielded product? What would you consider to be a > marketing > goal for field returns? I belive that 1% for the last year's > deliveries and > 10% for the fleet after 10 years would be an exemplary performance. We > have > suppliers to the certified world who can only dream about such numbers. > I belive B&C's track record meets or surpasses these goals. I've seen > their > rework bench. There have been a LOT of product returned for damage but > VERY few for failure . . . well under 10% for the nearly 20 years of > production. > > >>(I am not saying you should buy their product. I am saying don't take >>everything >>Bob says as gospel and go out an make your own alternator set up.) >>Bob, what do you know about IR alternator design? I would love to hear it. > > What do YOU know sir? I worked in a DC machinery house for over 9 years > and have maintained a close association with it and two others for over > 30 years. I designed regulators for the alternators and generators we > produced and overhauled. > >> Please >>explain real power, apparent power, reactive power, imaginary numbers and >>how it >>relates to alternator torque/speed/load and efficiency. Really I can't >>explain it >>and may be you can enlighten all of us. > > In the upcoming experiments, I plan to do just that . . . > > >>Let me close with something you would say, >> >>Good Day Sir, I said GOOD DAY SIR! >> >>Gosh darn it, son of ........STOP IT AND STICK TO FACTS YOU >>ACTUALLY KNOW. >> >>STOP THE ATTACKS AND SPREADING RUMORS ABOUT IR >>ALTERNATORS. > > What rumors? I've stated nothing that was not offered by the persons > who experienced problems first hand. > > >>IF YOU DON'T CARE FOR IR ALTERNATORS STOP GUESSING >>AND LEAVE US I-VR USER'S ALONE. > > I'm increasingly amazed at you sir. I've never said that I > didn't care for IR Alternators. In fact, the whole purpose > of the planned testing is to figure a way to integrate the > modern IR Alternator into aircraft under design goals I've > worked under for decades. > > How is this an attack? How can this be construed as an > effort to deny anyone the advantages of exploiting this > great technology? > > You clearly don't understand anything I've offered or > the reasons for offering it. > > >>MAJORITY OF THE BUILDERS ARE NOT INEPT AND YOU >>UNDERESTIMATE THEIR POTENTIAL TO UNDERSTAND. JUST >>PRESENT THE FACTS AND STOP THE "STORIES", LET THEM >>DECIDE. > > > >>IR ALTERNATORS ARE SUITABLE FOR AIRCRAFT USE, AND THE FACT >>THE FAA HAS NOT CERTIFIED IT MEANS NOTHING TO EXPERIMENTAL >>AIRCRAFT BUILDERS. IT IS A MOOT POINT. > > You sir are the one who twists words. The vast majority > of statements you attribute to me are contradictions or > mis-statements of fact. An now that you're shouting > at me I would judge that all opportunities for a > rational exchange of ideas have passed. > > >>YES YES YES BOB WE KNOW YOU CAN'T SUPPORT IT, WE GOT THAT. >>IT IS A FREE COUNTRY, AND YOUR PROPAGANDA WILL NOT CHANGE >>THE FACTS, I-VR ALTERNATORS ARE VERY RELIABLE AND FAIL >>PASSIVE. > > > >>I AM HONORED TO BE ON THE SAME LIST OF PEOPLE LIKE: >>VAN'S AIRCRAFT, BLUE MOUNTAIN AVIONICS, RST ENGINEERING >>AND A CAST OF MANY WHO YOU HAVE ATTACKED. >>EVERYONE HAS CONTRIBUTED GREAT THINGS TO EXPERIMENTAL >>AVIATION AND AIRCRAFT. EVERYONE OF THESE TALENTED PEOPLE >>HAS BEEN ATTACKED AND CALLED IGNORANT BY YOU. I TAKE THAT >>AS A COMPLIMENT. > > > If your pleased, then I'm pleased. But I sincerely > wish it was for more pleasant reasons. When and if > you're ready to speak in civil words and tones, I'd > be pleased to have your feedback on the outcome of > experiments and design trade-offs that are forthcoming. > > My father-in-law finished mounting my 2 hp DC motor and > Micky's alternator on a makeshift drive stand. Dee and > I are concentrating on getting a production order out > for a customer but I hope to run the alternator next > weekend. All activities will be measured, recorded and > the results posted. THIS is how I choose to mitigate my > own ignorance George. Care to join us? > > Bob . . . > > > ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 12:07:32 PM PST US From: "Larry E. James" Subject: AeroElectric-List: fatwire SpamAssassin (score=-2.571, required 3.7, autolearn=not spam, AWL 0.03, BAYES_00 -2.60) --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry E. James" I just caught the thread on fatwire and looked at the website. At first take this looks great. What insulation is being used ?? I read that 4awg wire has the same performance as 2awg wire ..... does this mean I could replace my planned 2awg runs (2) from battery in baggage to engine starter with CCA 4awg ?? -- Larry E. James Bellevue, WA Harmon Rocket II ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 05:42:49 PM PST US From: RURUNY@aol.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Hobbs meter wiring --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: RURUNY@aol.com Gerry, Thanks so much for this link, I purchased mine today!! One of the last puzzles of my electrical system was getting the hobbs to go automatically on "engine start". None of the oil pressure switch solutions would work with the Zenith 701 firewall forward installations for my Rotax 912 .I would have had to remove the existing oil pressure sensor, install a T connector and install the sender and a pressure switch. This would not have been possible due to room and inteference of parts This is great idea and "exactly" what I needed. Bob do you have any issues with this installation? Brian Unruh Long Island, NY _http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/pm.cgi?login=bunruh&ID=113813&action=displa y_ (http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/pm.cgi?login=bunruh&ID=113813&action=display) Bob Hi! I'm using a device called Power Genie to supply start and stop Voltage to Hobbs Meter. About to start my Rotax Engine. OK? Find it at: _http://www.powergenie.central5.com/_ (http://www.powergenie.central5.com/) Regards Gerry ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 09:37:51 PM PST US From: "Rob W M Shipley" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Unnecessary personal invective. --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rob W M Shipley" George aka gmcjetpilot contributed the following snip "(Bob that is brilliant, "credentialed crystal ball gazers". Who are you directing that weak back-stab at, in typical condescending verbose style. All those big words. Are you trying to impress, be clever or cover your insecurity. Just stop with your petty little crap.) (Bob you ARE the MASTER of anecdotal stories. What the hell. Lets see some data or facts Bob. How many STORIES are we talking about. You are full of STORIES. The rest of this document is full of prejudice & opinion lacking facts.) (As far as "credentialed" are you jealous? I guess not. We all know you think education is stupid and engineers useless. "When I was working on the Piaggio P.180 Avanti..." stories you tell to validate your creditability, Bob is your "credentialed". I am not ashamed of my engineering education or my professional experience.) (I only asked you if you where an engineer Bob because you implied you have engineering "credentials" and abilities, which where apparent you don't have from what you write. This in no way takes away from your experience as a technician.) HERE IS THE HYPOCRISY, WHAT BOB WROTE ON HIS SITE " and also snip "......Bob has spewed more useless ignorant comments. " George, I am heartily fed up with your petty attacks on Bob Nuckolls. I cannot imagine why you feel it necessary to descend to this type of personal diatribe. It is absolutely inappropriate in addressing Bob or anyone else. Neither I nor any of the other listers believe Bob has an unimpeachable inside track on engineering truth and debate and dissent is the path to greater understanding. For this to be conducted meaningfully emotion and invective need to be exchanged for data and reason. I personally find him to be honest, sincere and generous in his willingness to discuss and a great contributor to the list. He is above all else a gentleman in the way he conducts himself. You are not, sir. You demean the list and yourself. Please discuss fact, debate evidence and be polite to other listers or take your unpleasant invective elsewhere. Rob Rob W M Shipley N919RV (res) Fuselage .....still! La Mesa, CA. (next to San Diego) I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users. It has removed 7699 spam emails to date. Paying users do not have this message in their emails. Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!