---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 12/02/05: 36 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 03:28 AM - Re: Van's ND alternator failure () 2. 04:28 AM - Re: Do I Need an Ammeter? (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)) 3. 05:26 AM - Re: With or without DYNON Internal Backup Battery (Werner Schneider) 4. 05:57 AM - Required FAA Paperwork () 5. 07:10 AM - Re Do I Need An Ammeter? (Hall effect is very accurate) () 6. 07:11 AM - Re: Re: Van's ND alternator failure (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 7. 08:27 AM - Re: Simple Audio System (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 8. 08:27 AM - Re: Do I Need an Ammeter? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 9. 09:31 AM - Re: Z-19 Eng Bat (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 10. 09:39 AM - Re: Do I Need an Ammeter? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 11. 09:45 AM - Re: Electronics International Capacitive Fuel (D Wysong) 12. 09:47 AM - Re: Re Do I Need An Ammeter? (Hall effect is very accurate) (Matt Prather) 13. 09:59 AM - Re: Electronics International Capacitive Fuel Level Probes P-300C (Mark R Steitle) 14. 10:21 AM - Re: Do I Need an Ammeter? (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)) 15. 10:30 AM - Re: Re Do I Need An Ammeter? (Hall effect is very accurate) (Fiveonepw@AOL.com) 16. 11:18 AM - Re: Do I Need an Ammeter? (David Lloyd) 17. 11:30 AM - Re: Do I Need an Ammeter? (David Lloyd) 18. 11:30 AM - Re: Re Do I Need An Ammeter? (Hall effect is very accurate) (Terry Watson) 19. 11:40 AM - Re: Re Do I Need An Ammeter? (Hall effect is very accurate) (RV Builder (Michael Sausen)) 20. 12:06 PM - Regulator VR (Jerry2DT@aol.com) 21. 12:12 PM - Re: Do I Need an Ammeter? (Earl_Schroeder) 22. 03:54 PM - Question on Z-35 (SMITHBKN@aol.com) 23. 04:45 PM - Re: With or without DYNON Internal Backup Battery (rv-9a-online) 24. 05:02 PM - Alternator with External Regulator? (Tammy Goff) 25. 05:22 PM - Generator question (Ron) 26. 05:39 PM - Re: Alternator with External Regulator? (Earl_Schroeder) 27. 06:15 PM - Re: Alternator with External Regulator? (Wayne Sweet) 28. 06:15 PM - Garmin 300XL and Database intent () 29. 07:35 PM - Troubleshooting/agonizing over minutia...(was something about ammeters, IIRC) (Fiveonepw@aol.com) 30. 07:43 PM - Re: Do I Need an Ammeter? (Speedy11@aol.com) 31. 07:59 PM - Re: Electronics International Capacitive Fuel Level Probes P-300C (John Schroeder) 32. 08:07 PM - Re: Question on Z-35 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 33. 08:09 PM - Re: Do I Need an Ammeter? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 34. 08:28 PM - Re: Regulator VR (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 35. 08:30 PM - Re: Alternator with External Regulator? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 36. 09:01 PM - Re: Master Relay Mount (DonVS) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 03:28:29 AM PST US From: Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Van's ND alternator failure --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: >From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" >Subject: Van's ND alternator failure >His Glasair is fitted with the B&C system. He reports no problems with it. Of course there could never be a problem with a B&C product, but what does that have to do with the issue at hand, besides a little unbiased advertisement? Just Kidding Bob :-) >Within 4 hours of installing an alternator from Van's on the RV, he was out flying over the countryside and noted an acid smell in the cockpit. He first assumed the odor was from a local Kaolin plan which uses sulphuric acid in its manufacturing processes and often smells like this. Did he have any other OV indications except his nose, the manufacturing plant and the voltmeter? >After a few minutes, he noted that his present position was upwind of the plant. He started looking around the panel and noted that the voltmeter was pegged. Hummmm, but no other damage to any other item? The ND alternator has an OV set point of 18 volts. In other words if the prime voltage regulation fails is goes to a max OV limit of 18 volts. It could be very possible that the alternator reached this level and remained there (for quite) awhile, as your customer and his nose cruised around the countryside. >He reports that after shutting the alternator OFF, the voltage dropped to levels appropriate to battery only operations and he landed without further deterioration of the situation. Turned it off with what? (Just curious) I assume he removed power from The IGN wire, and that worked? Hummmmm I am surprised since when this happened or like events happened the IGN wire became ineffective? Interesting. >The alternator shop said that the regulator had failed (but obviously not in a way that prevented the pilot from shutting it off) and had overheated the stator windings as well. The Odyssey battery case was bulged out. No other damage was done to the airplane's accessories The Odyssey can be damaged with anything over 15 volts (per their technical literature which states 15 volt is the MAX voltage for charging). Now I can imagine if 18 volts was allowed to abuse the battery for a while it might protest. Bob, this just point to the wisdom of your recommendation for a good OV/LO volt (idiot) light on the panel. >After $150 work on alternator and new battery, the system operates normally. >He asked if there was a way to prevent this from happening again and I gave him a brief rundown on topical conversations that had transpired on the List over the past year. I told him we were working on a methodology for operating the ND and similar machines under the same design goals as alternators in certified aircraft but that the solution was still perhaps months off. >I sent him a copy of the original Z-24 along with operating limitations for not operating the alternator control switch while the alternator was loaded and at high RPMs. I don't know if he plans to install this system as an interim fix. That was nice of you Bob. I would love to get the failed VR. What is the chance of that? I am not happy it happened but would love to take the thing and test it and may be do an autopsy. Ill pay for shipping. >Just wanted to post this additional data point for incorporation as appropriate into future deliberations on the subject. There was another similar event to this, just recent on another list, but the gentleman turned the Vans alternator ON/OFF while flying just to SEE? It failed right after he turned it back ON and it went right to a higher voltage. I dont know if it is the brand of rebuilds Van uses or what? I do know there is several aftermarket makers of VRs for ND alternators. I think TRANSPO is one of the better one. I notice the same VR from one maker is $19 and another is $39. I wonder if quantity is an issue with the parts in Vans alternator. Clearly this is unacceptable performance and there seems to be alternators, bought from Van's, in any issue involving a ND alternator? Thanks for the info Bob, Regards George >Bob . . . --------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 04:28:12 AM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Do I Need an Ammeter? From: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" >Frankly, given the choice, Id take amps over volts as long as I had an >alarm, which I do, that tells me when my amps are too low or too high. Where do you set the alarm for "too low" and "too high" and how did you arrive at these values? Bob . . . I found that with my basic running, I pull 13 amps on my all glass panel. I also found that with everything on I can pull 47. So I set the boundaries above and below that. I arrived at these values through my initial flight testing. I can and do often look at the amps to confirm that I suspect is the draw. I have found on occasion that when the number shown, and the number in my head don't match, something is amiss(usually I have failed to do something like turn the aux pump off or whatever.) With a voltage number I would not get that. No matter what I do, 14.1v is what I see. I have alarms for the voltage too. I run 14.1v +-.2 volts and set the alarms accordingly. My summary is that my amps tells me much more than my volts. The number often tells me that I have forgotten something. I suppose that this would not work in a complex G-V. I also suspect that I am much more in tuned with my current draw than most as I an all electric single engine piston 2 seater and I know to the amp what the number should be no matter What Im doing. Obviously both amps and voltage are important but IF I had to prioritize, Id take amps over volts as an indication of whats going on with my electrons. ==== And would not a low voltage warning set at 13.0 (or 26.0) volts be more indicative of the alternator's ability to support the current system loads? Bob That I am not sure of Bob. I am not familiar with the failure modes and the rates as you are. Would an alternator continue to show my normal 13 amps AND only deliver 13 volts? Beats me. Best, Mike Do not archive ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 05:26:28 AM PST US From: Werner Schneider Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: With or without DYNON Internal Backup Battery ? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Werner Schneider Hello Gilles, just talked with the guy which did the measurement I was wrong, charging the depleted internal battery showed 50-70mA the keepalive was around 10 mA. Sho with a fully charged battery you should be fine for more then a month. br Werner Gilles Thesee wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gilles Thesee > >Hi Werner and all, > > > >>the keepalive does recharge the internal battery and there was one >>software version with a fault there. Indeed the Dynon does use some >>50-70 mA >> >> >> >That's enough to run the battery flat within a week. >When designing our ship's circuits, the question arose about the panel >clock keepalive. I'm happy with my decision to rely on the internal >battery instead of running the keepalive from the ship's main battery. > > > >>Can I take you also on the Battery tester just living in Switzerland >>about 80 minutes away from Grenoble and want to visit my friends from >>work, he is flying from LFLG. >> >> >> >> >> >Sure, you're welcome. > >Regards, >Gilles Thesee >Grenoble, France >http://contrails.free.fr > > > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 05:57:19 AM PST US From: Subject: AeroElectric-List: Required FAA Paperwork --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Responding to AeroElectric-List message copied below and previously posted by: John Markey markeypilot@yahoo.com <> 12/2/2005 Hello John, Short answer first. No, your friend does not have to file any additional IFR approval paperwork with the FAA for the installation of a Garmin 430 GPS in his Glasair amateur built experimental airplane. To explain: 1) Your friend did not need and did not have any specific ".....orginal signoff for IFR in his operating limitations." He did not need, and should not have attempted to obtain, any such subsequent FAA approved sign off. 2) His Operating Limitations, which were part of his original special airworthiness certificate issued by either an FAA or DAR inspector, should contain words like the following from the then current version of FAA Order 8130.2_: "After completion of phase I flight testing, unless appropriately equipped for night and/or instrument flight in accordance with 91.205, this aircraft is to be operated under VFR, day only." "Aircraft instruments and equipment installed and used under 91.205 must be inspected and maintained in accordance with the requirements of part 91. Any maintenance or inspection of this equipment must be recorded in the aircraft maintenance records." 3) Those sentences are the grand sum total of IFR approval for his aircraft. There are some other instructions in his Operating Limitations that would apply when operating the aircraft IFR such as: "In addition, this aircraft must be operated in accordance with applicable air traffic and general operating rules of part 91and all additional limitations herein prescribed under the provisions of 91.319(e)." "When filing instrument flight rules (IFR), the experimental nature of this aircraft must be listed in the remarks section of the flight plan." As long as his aircraft is in compliance with his Operating Limitations and the instructions in the current version of the AIM he is legal to fly IFR with no further aircraft approval or paperwork from the FAA. 4) I might point out that included in the AIM for IFR GPS operations are the requirements that the pilot comply with instructions in his AFM and AFM supplement and pilot guides. Since your friend is in control of what is in, or not in, his planes AFM and supplement that should present no problem. Since the pilot guide for his Garmin GPS is published by Garmin, complying with that guide should be no problem. 5) Common sense would require that the pilot follow some installation guidance such as that provided in AC 20-138A and a perform a healthy dose of VFR / VMC flight testing before attempting any IFR operations. Please let me know if I can be of further help. OC ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 07:10:40 AM PST US From: Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re Do I Need An Ammeter? (Hall effect is very accurate) --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ammeter or no ammeter, I like them and my vote is to put it on the alternator output. I don't care what the battery "current" is, since most of the time it would read a slight charge. If the alternator fails the volt meter is the prime electrical measurement of interest. Really an ammeter on the battery is not too much use in my opinion. Given just one ammeter, how hard the alternator is working, where all electrical power comes from when the engine's running is more important. HOW DOES A HALL EFFECT CURRENT SENSOR WORK? What is the difference to a ammeter shunt? Shunts have been around forever, where hall effect for current measurement is fairly new. I know the hall effect method of measuring current is a little mysterious but it is dead nuts accurate. The term hall effect gets misused but in this case, current sensors, they are true hall effect devices. Magnetic fields are not as simple to understand as Ohms law, but the physics is not difficult. They are the preferred way to measure current with high tech devices. Shunts do work and are dead simple but they are old fashion. Old is not always bad, but the hall effect has some unique advantages over the traditional way to measure current. Some implied that the Hall effect is not accurate or that the old shunt method is better, that is not correct in my opinion. The Hall effect is very accurate and not subject to extraneous readings. Also it is lighter and has less connections than a shunt. A shunt by its very nature produces a voltage drop across it. Hall effect is an elegant simple device and the wire just passes thru with no break. The down side is it may not work with a standard ammeter (which is really a voltmeter). Here how it works: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hall_effect http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/hall.html http://www.ampsense.com/HANDBOOK%204.pdf It is a little more technical than just a shunt which is just ohms law, where V=IR. If you know R (the shunt) you measure V (drop across the shunt) with a little volt meter in the panel, you know current (I=V/R). So lets say the shunt is equal to a .001 ohm resistor. So at 50 amp the voltage drop across the shunt is 50 mV. So if you have volt gage that is scaled to show 50 amps at 50mV you have an ammeter. A digital panel meter that reads mV will read the mV as amps digitally. With a shunt we affect the circuit by the voltage drop. A halls effect has no affect on the circuit. Shunt http://www.emproshunts.com/webstore/item.aspx?sku=MLA-50-50 http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/6522/20040416a882kz.jpg (above from RV-9A builder) Most stand alone amp meters still use the shunt because it is simple, cheap and has been around since dirt. I can buy or make a shunt for a few bucks and use a digital panel meter for another few bucks and make my own amp meter. Using a hall effect sensor may take a little more sophistication in the meter display to scale or "offset" the null or zero point. However with modern engine monitors it is easy to adjust scale of offset factors to use a hall effect sensor. This is the wave of the present / future. The hall effect actually uses the current in the wire and it's effect in a magnetic field to sense current. When the current in the wire goes thru the hall effect sensor, perpendicular to the magnetic field in the sensor, another current is produced. Since the hall effect device is a closed loops with the only current being the wire passing thru it, they are not effected by outside currents as some might think, since the magnetic field is focused inside the sensors loop. In a word they are accurate and not subject to interference. Examples of hall effect sensors http://www.ampsolution.com/AMP200,300.pdf http://www.ampsense.com/ I played around with the hall effect on my engine monitor and it's dead nuts accurate when tested. They are very small, light and don't require breaks in the wire like a shunt. This is a big advantage. Hall effect devices do work different than a shunt and therefore a simple millivoltmeter may not work. Also if you want to measure current in two directions you need a meter that can "offset" the null point and add a negative sign, since the hall effect does not reverse the output "signal" current, it only sends the magnitude. The prime use of an ammeter is the output from the alternator, which is in one direction only, reverse current is not needed. If you want to measure +/- current you need to do a little more fancy process at the meter to read it. With microprocessor based engine monitors it's not an issue to "program" it, to scale and read the output of the sensor. The sensor output is just a small current relative and proportional (linear) to the current measured, like a shunt. The main advantage the old method has the shunt is "self powered". The hall effect needs a 5v signal to work. As was mentioned if you have an engine monitor you will likely use a hall effect current sensor. George --------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 07:11:30 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Van's ND alternator failure --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 03:26 AM 12/2/2005 -0800, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: > > >From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > >Subject: Van's ND alternator failure > > >His Glasair is fitted with the B&C system. He reports no problems with it. > > Of course there could never be a problem with a B&C product, but what > does that have to do with the issue at hand, besides a little unbiased > advertisement? Just Kidding Bob :-) Those were his words . . . the thrust of his queries were to help him decide whether or not I recommended replacing a system that had just produced a problem with one that had not. > > > >Within 4 hours of installing an alternator from Van's on the RV, he > was out flying over the countryside and noted an acid smell in the > cockpit. He first assumed the odor was from a local Kaolin plan which > uses sulphuric acid in its manufacturing processes and often smells like this. > > > Did he have any other OV indications except his nose, the manufacturing > plant and the voltmeter? No . . . or if he did, it was not mentioned. This is a simple day-vfr machine and was fitted with a minimal panel. I think the only radios were a transponder and a Microair transceiver. They were not damaged. > > > >After a few minutes, he noted that his present position was upwind of > the plant. He started looking around the panel and noted that the > voltmeter was pegged. > > Hummmm, but no other damage to any other item? The ND alternator has an > OV set point of 18 volts. In other words if the prime voltage regulation > fails is goes to a max OV limit of 18 volts. It could be very possible > that the alternator reached this level and remained there (for quite) > awhile, as your customer and his nose cruised around the countryside. Yup . . . > >He reports that after shutting the alternator OFF, the voltage dropped > to levels appropriate to battery only operations and he landed without > further deterioration of the situation. > > Turned it off with what? (Just curious) I assume he removed power from > The IGN wire, and that worked? Hummmmm I am surprised since when this > happened or like events happened the IGN wire became ineffective? Interesting. He was not specific . . . since this was a Van's alternator, I assume it was wired per Van's recommendations. > >The alternator shop said that the regulator had failed (but obviously > not in a way that prevented the pilot from shutting it off) and had > overheated the stator windings as well. The Odyssey battery case was > bulged out. No other damage was done to the airplane's accessories > > > The Odyssey can be damaged with anything over 15 volts (per their > technical literature which states 15 volt is the MAX voltage for > charging). Now I can imagine if 18 volts was allowed to abuse the battery > for a while it might protest. Bob, this just point to the wisdom of your > recommendation for a good OV/LO volt (idiot) light on the panel. The certified aviation community has suggested for decades that an "over voltage condition" is any time-magnitude that lies above the envelope described in http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/MSTD704_28V_OV.jpg (cut voltages in half for 14v systems) . . . hence the selection of 16/32 as the nominal static voltage trip points for ov protection offered by suppliers to the certified aviation community. While I've strongly suggested an idiot light for active NOTIFICATION of low voltage, I'd much prefer automatic and active RESPONSE to over voltage thus negating the value of an ov warning light . . . if present in the system, it would be illuminated for only milliseconds. > >After $150 work on alternator and new battery, the system operates normally. > > >He asked if there was a way to prevent this from happening again and I > gave him a brief rundown on topical conversations that had transpired on > the List over the past year. I told him we were working on a methodology > for operating the ND and similar machines under the same design goals as > alternators in certified aircraft but that the solution was still perhaps > months off. > > >I sent him a copy of the original Z-24 along with operating limitations > for not operating the alternator control switch while the alternator was > loaded and at high RPMs. I don't know if he plans to install this system > as an interim fix. > > > That was nice of you Bob. I would love to get the failed VR. What is > the chance of that? I am not happy it happened but would love to take the > thing and test it and may be do an autopsy. Ill pay for shipping. My thoughts exactly. I asked about it. These events transpired a few weeks ago and were worked in a commercial overhaul shop. Likelihood that the trash barrels have not been emptied (assuming the technician would know exactly which regulator came out of the problem alternator) is somewhere between zero and none. > > > >Just wanted to post this additional data point for incorporation as > appropriate into future deliberations on the subject. > > There was another similar event to this, just recent on another list, > but the gentleman turned the Vans alternator ON/OFF while flying just to > SEE? It failed right after he turned it back ON and it went right to a > higher voltage. I dont know if it is the brand of rebuilds Van uses or > what? I do know there is several aftermarket makers of VRs for ND > alternators. I think TRANSPO is one of the better one. I notice the same > VR from one maker is $19 and another is $39. I wonder if quantity is an > issue with the parts in Vans alternator. Clearly > this is unacceptable performance and there seems to be alternators, > bought from Van's, in any issue involving a ND alternator? This underscores certified aviation's obsession with ISO, QTP, QA manuals, TSO, PMA, etc ad nauseam. If one does not enjoy the benefits of purchasing products from a capable and honorable supplier, then certifications of one kind or another must be relied on as substitutes. For folks who ignorant of the technology, certification is all they have . . . and sometimes it isn't enough. Bob . . . ( There are many hypotheses in science which are wrong. ) ( That's perfectly all right; they're the aperture to ) ( finding out what's right. ) ( -Carl Sagan- ) http://www.aeroelectric.com ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 08:27:51 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Simple Audio System --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" >Comments/Questions: I'm planning on having two comm radios and would like >a simple audio panel to switch transmission between the two but also >monitor the second. All the off the shelf audio panels seem to have much >more than I need. Any direction would be much appreciated. See http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/18Audio_R11.pdf Figure 18-7 for headphone wiring, figure 18-11 for mic/ptt wiring. Bob . . . -------------------------------------------------------- < Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition > < of man. Advances which permit this norm to be > < exceeded -- here and there, now and then -- are the > < work of an extremely small minority, frequently > < despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed > < by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny > < minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes > < happens) is driven out of a society, the people > < then slip back into abject poverty. > < > < This is known as "bad luck". > < -Lazarus Long- > <------------------------------------------------------> http://www.aeroelectric.com ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 08:27:54 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Do I Need an Ammeter? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 07:26 AM 12/2/2005 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" > > > > >Frankly, given the choice, Id take amps over volts as long as I had an > >alarm, which I do, that tells me when my amps are too low or too high. > > Where do you set the alarm for "too low" and "too high" and > how did you arrive at these values? > >I found that with my basic running, I pull 13 amps on my all glass >panel. I also found that with everything on I can pull 47. So I set the >boundaries above and below that. I arrived at these values through my >initial flight testing. I can and do often look at the amps to confirm >that I suspect is the draw. I have found on occasion that when the >number shown, and the number in my head don't match, something is >amiss(usually I have failed to do something like turn the aux pump off >or whatever.) With a voltage number I would not get that. No matter what >I do, 14.1v is what I see. I have alarms for the voltage too. I run >14.1v +-.2 volts and set the alarms accordingly. How accordingly? What are your specific setpoint values? >My summary is that my amps tells me much more than my volts. The number >often tells me that I have forgotten something. I suppose that this >would not work in a complex G-V. I also suspect that I am much more in >tuned with my current draw than most as I an all electric single engine >piston 2 seater and I know to the amp what the number should be no >matter What Im doing. Obviously both amps and voltage are important but >IF I had to prioritize, Id take amps over volts as an indication of >whats going on with my electrons. You've accurately described the functionality of both instruments. The point I would make is that the ammeter is a good indicator of how much electro-stuff is turned on. You use the ammeter to raise flags that some device not needed at the moment has been inadvertently left on. Obviously this fits your operational protocols and design goals. An ammeter alarm with adjustable set-points could have some utility . . . but limited. See next point. >==== > And would not a low voltage > warning set at 13.0 (or 26.0) volts be more indicative of the > alternator's ability to support the current system loads? >Bob > >That I am not sure of Bob. I am not familiar with the failure modes and >the rates as you are. Would an alternator continue to show my normal 13 >amps AND only deliver 13 volts? Beats me. Only if the regulator's failure mode includes an ability to simply shift the point of regulation. For example, suppose you had a little screw on the back of the alternator that allowed you to set the voltage regulator down to 12.8 volts. Then, yes. The loads displayed on the ammeter would change very little while the system voltage is too low to properly charge the battery. Alarms on current are insufficiently discriminating to bring all failures to a pilot's attention. There are no common failure modes in integrated circuits or other surface mount devices that "drift" . . . they either work or run out into the weeds. The way I use airplanes, I can't rely on ammeter or voltmeter readings for operational assistance in flight. The reason is that the rentals I use have no voltmeter and there's a mix of (1) Battery-ammeters with limited operational utility but the ONLY warning offered when the readings go negative and (2) loadmeters with more utility but with variable significance depending on the airplane. For folks that fly the same airplane all the time, loadmeter readings can become a useful part of the pilot's sense of system condition including a poor degree of warning - a zero reading is significant. The two conditions that all but guarantee comfortable completion of any flight is that the voltage is above 13.0 volts (greater than a battery-only bus) and less than 16.0 (not in a runaway condition). This is why I've suggested that addressing these two points covers 99.9% of concerns about system functionality with active notification of low volts and active response to high volts while airborne. Adding more numbers never hurts for normal operations but they're never enough for a full diagnostic study and they MIGHT be a no-value-added distraction or even mis-leading if things are not going well. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 09:31:07 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Z-19 Eng Bat --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 09:59 AM 12/1/2005 -0700, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark R. Supinski" > > >I am implementing a Z-19 based layout for an all-electric experimental. > >One area I am puzzling over is the Eng Bat switch. Specifically, I am not >implementing the Low Voltage Monitor module. Instead, I have an engine >controller which includes this functionality, and also will drive an >external lamp to flash when voltage (or many other issues) fall below a >preset value. Thus I will drive the lamp found in Z-19 from this device. > >My question is: what is the point of the ON vs. AUTO setting in my case? >Looking at the schematic, it seems the only function performed in the AUTO >case is to activate the low voltage monitor?? I believe that in my case I >only need a simple on/off switch to ground the contactor -- I cannot see >what AUTO does for me in addition to this. See http://aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9005/9005.html The device is called a "Low Voltage Warning / Auxiliary Battery Management Module". One has the option of using only the low volts warning feature or adding an automatic aux battery isolation subsequent to an alternator failure. >Am I correct, or am I missing something essential here? Keep in mind that the z-figures are intended to show architectures and how some features like electronic ignition, different kinds of alternator/regulator combinations, lv warning, etc. These individual features can be mixed/matched between the various architectures as your needs and accessories dictate. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 09:39:13 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Do I Need an Ammeter? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 10:25 PM 12/1/2005 -0800, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan Beadle" > > >I subscribe to the "annual battery replacement" program that you >propose. You do need to know where the battery starts from. But I >disagree with the simple Plan B. If you trust the battery, due to >replacement, Plan B give you a minimum endurance. I can still do better >than that by consulting the ammeter and shutting down optional circuits. >I need position lights on Plan B (The failure may happen at night an >this is a regulatory requirement - I know - I could say PIC discretion >to dump the position lights at night - but I want o invoke that with due >consideration). Then your Plan-B is not a "plan" but a "suite of options". In Chapter 17 I've suggested that when the alternator quits, you're #1 goal is to reach airport of intended destination without breaking a sweat. The equipment needed to achieve this goal is a tiny fraction of total electrical system loads and does not include exterior lighting. Your perception of the value of position lights adds about 6A of load (in a 14v airplane) to the battery that might more than double the e-bus loads and cut alternator-out endurance by more than 50%. >If the Plan B gives me an hour and I can shed some more load to get 2 >hours, why not be able to tell what it is from the ammeter? Because you KNOW what each device/system in your airplane needs. If it's ON, it requires a known supply of power, if it's OFF that value goes to zero. There's no need to "tune" alternator-out loads based on an ammeter reading when you have pre-planned operating configurations backed by a battery of known performance. >Finally, most loads on the circuits are over-stated - Peak Values. Use >the ammeter to see what the real loads are. Absolutely! Get measurements in the shop while you're building your airplane. Do the load analysis to KNOW what your system requirements are for the various failure modes. Write the "plan" on the ground to assure an outcome as opposed to shuffling the deck of options while airborne hoping for a good outcome. >I agree that looking at the trend over time from pilot perspective is a >non-starter. Pilots are busy and time "warps". Exactly. The Plan-B/E-bus operating philosophy has been crafted to get you to a condition where you're "cleared to land". After that, the concrete ahead belongs to you and you can bring back any additional accessories you like without affecting the outcome of the flight even if the battery finally tosses in the towel. This idea of an endurance bus versus an essential bus is not well understood but the differences between them are significant. Endurance-buses are intended to prevent an emergency from developing, an essential bus assumes you're already IN an emergency condition. There's obvious value for "staying ahead of the airplane" at the controls . . . I'll suggest it's even easier to "stay ahead of the electrical system". Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 09:45:20 AM PST US From: D Wysong Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Electronics International Capacitive Fuel Level Probes P-300C --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: D Wysong Ah, HA! I stand corrected, Mark. Thanks for the data! My last statement should have read "capacitive fuel probes won't generate a PWM signal without additional circuitry." As usual, the confusion about EI the P-300C probes was on MY end! :-) So, to decode it all: -- Van's fuel probes are simple capacitors (i.e. - Van is NOT reselling EI probes). If you need PWM output, hook the probe to the $45 dongle from Van's. If you need 0-5 VDC proportional output, hook the probe to a $70 dongle (purchased in pairs for $140) from BM. -- EI and Vision Microsystems probes provide PWM output. This PWM output can be fed into BM units via the high frequency inputs. If you need/want 0-5 VDC proportional output instead, hook them to a $$$ dongle from Princeton. -- If you haven't purchased probes and want 0-5 VDC proportional output look to Princeton or Westach. Unless you're bolting on a turbine engine or something else that requires the BM high freq inputs for instrumentation you should be good to go. If all else fails, at least the solution is only a dongle away. Thanks again for those scope traces! D ------------ Mark R Steitle wrote: > Hi D, > I'm responding to you directly so I can include some screen shots of the > output from my EI capacitive fuel probes. I sent them to John also. > > I was told by EI that the output was a pwm signal, so I don't understand > your last sentence. Anyway, they do generate a signal that the BMA E/1 > can read on the frequency input channel. At least, it sure appears to > work. I'll be able to tell for sure when I get the wings on and I'm > able to add fuel to the tanks. The lab tests turned out positive. > > Mark > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of D > Wysong > Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 7:54 PM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com.Level.Probes.P-300C > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Electronics International Capacitive > Fuel Level Probes P-300C > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: D Wysong > > Hi John - > > It sounds like Mark is using frequency inputs available on the BM unit > instead of the proportional analog (0-5 VDC) inputs for his fuel level > signals. > > That was a work-around for the BM units late last decade (... before the > > external DC dongles were created) when folks were trying to integrate > their Vision Microsystems probes. Those probes, however, are PWM > generators. > > A P-300C (EI capacitive fuel probe) won't generate a PWM signal without > additional circuitry. So... I reckon I'm puzzled, too! :-) > > D > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 09:47:10 AM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re Do I Need An Ammeter? (Hall effect is very accurate) From: "Matt Prather" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" Hi George, Comment below: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: > > the circuit by the voltage drop. A halls effect has no affect on the > circuit. > Nit to pick.. I think it's one of the fundamental principles of physics that observing a system changes the behavior of the system. Some methods of observation are less intrusive than others. I will admit that the hall effect sensor intrudes very little on the system we are discussing, but I believe it is untrue to say that a sensor has "no" effect on the system being measured. Regards, Matt- ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 09:59:25 AM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Electronics International Capacitive Fuel Level Probes P-300C From: "Mark R Steitle" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark R Steitle" D, Super!!! I though I had missed something somewhere(I'm not an EE or anything close), but this makes me feel better. Thanks for your feedback. Mark S. Do Not Archive -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of D Wysong Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Electronics International Capacitive Fuel Level Probes P-300C --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: D Wysong Ah, HA! I stand corrected, Mark. Thanks for the data! My last statement should have read "capacitive fuel probes won't generate a PWM signal without additional circuitry." As usual, the confusion about EI the P-300C probes was on MY end! :-) So, to decode it all: -- Van's fuel probes are simple capacitors (i.e. - Van is NOT reselling EI probes). If you need PWM output, hook the probe to the $45 dongle from Van's. If you need 0-5 VDC proportional output, hook the probe to a $70 dongle (purchased in pairs for $140) from BM. -- EI and Vision Microsystems probes provide PWM output. This PWM output can be fed into BM units via the high frequency inputs. If you need/want 0-5 VDC proportional output instead, hook them to a $$$ dongle from Princeton. -- If you haven't purchased probes and want 0-5 VDC proportional output look to Princeton or Westach. Unless you're bolting on a turbine engine or something else that requires the BM high freq inputs for instrumentation you should be good to go. If all else fails, at least the solution is only a dongle away. Thanks again for those scope traces! D ------------ Mark R Steitle wrote: > Hi D, > I'm responding to you directly so I can include some screen shots of the > output from my EI capacitive fuel probes. I sent them to John also. > > I was told by EI that the output was a pwm signal, so I don't understand > your last sentence. Anyway, they do generate a signal that the BMA E/1 > can read on the frequency input channel. At least, it sure appears to > work. I'll be able to tell for sure when I get the wings on and I'm > able to add fuel to the tanks. The lab tests turned out positive. > > Mark > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of D > Wysong > Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 7:54 PM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com.Level.Probes.P-300C > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Electronics International Capacitive > Fuel Level Probes P-300C > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: D Wysong > > Hi John - > > It sounds like Mark is using frequency inputs available on the BM unit > instead of the proportional analog (0-5 VDC) inputs for his fuel level > signals. > > That was a work-around for the BM units late last decade (... before the > > external DC dongles were created) when folks were trying to integrate > their Vision Microsystems probes. Those probes, however, are PWM > generators. > > A P-300C (EI capacitive fuel probe) won't generate a PWM signal without > additional circuitry. So... I reckon I'm puzzled, too! :-) > > D > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 10:21:58 AM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Do I Need an Ammeter? From: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" With a voltage number I would not get that. No matter what >I do, 14.1v is what I see. I have alarms for the voltage too. I run >14.1v +-.2 volts and set the alarms accordingly. How accordingly? What are your specific setpoint values? >Bob I have a high point of 14.3v, and a low of 13.9v. Neither of which I have seen in any normal flight condition. Mike Do not archive ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 10:30:25 AM PST US From: Fiveonepw@AOL.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re Do I Need An Ammeter? (Hall effect is very accurate) --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com In a message dated 12/2/05 11:48:46 AM Central Standard Time, mprather@spro.net writes: > I think it's one of the fundamental principles of physics > that observing a system changes the behavior of the system. >>> I have personally verified this for over 25 years as an automation electrician, but never had it so simply expressed- thank you Matt for this gem! Mark Phillips - do not archive ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 11:18:54 AM PST US From: "David Lloyd" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Do I Need an Ammeter? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Lloyd" Maybe I missed part of this thread on "set" points for voltage alarming. My 2 cents.... In cold weather or when the battery is down, I have seen the high charge voltage at 14.1 to 14.3 range as pretty normal; 14.1 as pretty close to ideal for cold temps. On a hot day or when the battery is being just carried with a charge, the charge level voltage is approx. 13.1 volts. If I had an accurate high and low battery voltage alarm capability.... I would probably set the high alarm about 0.1 volt above the highest "normal"; maybe about 14.4 v., in this example, and the lowest alarm set about 12.8 v. The lower value having a little more tolerance because of start up loads, etc. initially draining the battery and stressing it. David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Do I Need an Ammeter? > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" > > > With a voltage number I would not get that. No matter what >>I do, 14.1v is what I see. I have alarms for the voltage too. I run >>14.1v +-.2 volts and set the alarms accordingly. > > How accordingly? What are your specific setpoint values? > >>Bob > > I have a high point of 14.3v, and a low of 13.9v. Neither of which I > have seen in any normal flight condition. > > Mike > Do not archive > > > ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 11:30:56 AM PST US From: "David Lloyd" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Do I Need an Ammeter? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Lloyd" Thanks Bob for the leads....... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Do I Need an Ammeter? > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > > At 04:54 PM 12/1/2005 -0800, you wrote: > >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Lloyd" >> >> >>Probably mentioned before.... there are single meters, that with a push >>button will show both amps (current flow and direction) and buss voltage. >> >>Who makes a good idiot light for system voltage that will indicate both >>high >>and low alarm settings??? > > If you have ov protection, the conventional wisdom that you > don't need ov indication too. An ov condition trips the system > off line which generates an immediate lv condition. > > However, B&C offers an OV/LV sensor in one package that I > designed for them about 15 years ago for the ultralight > market. See: > > http://bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?6X358218 > > http://bandc.biz/BC207-1install.pdf > > For turnkey lv warn and aux battery management see: > > http://aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9005/9005.html > > For DIY lv warn and aux battery management see: > > http://aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9005/9005-701B.pdf > http://aeroelectric.com/articles/lvwarn/LVWarn-ABMM.html > and > http://aeroelectric.com/articles/lvwarn/9021-620.pdf > > Bob . . . > > > ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 11:30:57 AM PST US From: "Terry Watson" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re Do I Need An Ammeter? (Hall effect is very accurate) --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Terry Watson" And I thought that was just one of the more esoteric aspects of quantum mechanics, applicable only in very special circumstances. If I observe a steam locomotive's piston cranking the wheels, how am I changing the behavior of the system? Maybe putting a pressure gauge on the system to see if the pressure varies throughout the cycle could be said to minutely change the behavior of the system, but just observation? OK, I've wasted enough of everybody's time. Terry --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com In a message dated 12/2/05 11:48:46 AM Central Standard Time, mprather@spro.net writes: > I think it's one of the fundamental principles of physics > that observing a system changes the behavior of the system. >>> I have personally verified this for over 25 years as an automation electrician, but never had it so simply expressed- thank you Matt for this gem! Mark Phillips - do not archive ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 11:40:46 AM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re Do I Need An Ammeter? (Hall effect is very accurate) From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" Unless we are going to start measuring things at a quantum level, I wouldn't worry too much about the superposition state effecting the direct state . Hmm, was that a bird flapping it's wings in Tokyo just then. :-) Do not archive -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fiveonepw@aol.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re Do I Need An Ammeter? (Hall effect is very accurate) --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com In a message dated 12/2/05 11:48:46 AM Central Standard Time, mprather@spro.net writes: > I think it's one of the fundamental principles of physics that > observing a system changes the behavior of the system. >>> I have personally verified this for over 25 years as an automation electrician, but never had it so simply expressed- thank you Matt for this gem! Mark Phillips - do not archive ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 12:06:39 PM PST US From: Jerry2DT@aol.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Regulator VR --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jerry2DT@aol.com List and Bob... The guy at NAPA AV Dept. *thinks* the regulator he sold me, Echlin VR440, interchanges with Ford VR166 per Z-11 and Bob's note 21. Would it matter if it isn't as long as terms are wired the same? Jerry Cochran Wilsonville, OR ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 12:12:06 PM PST US From: Earl_Schroeder Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Do I Need an Ammeter? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Earl_Schroeder David, I guess that is one reason the B&C offers a temperature 'probe' to be located at the battery terminal.. ;-) Not intended to stir the pot but I use a simple indication of current reference suggested by Jim Weir at Oshkosh many moons ago. Just install a sensitive volt meter to read the drop across the wire from the alternator to the bus or from the battery to the bus or use two meters as I do. Of course it doesn't give accurate current flow [unless you take the time to calibrate it] but does give an indication if the flow is more or less than the reference mark you placed [on a previous normal flight with normal stuff turned on with a FAA approved grease pencil] on the face of the meter. I find myself glancing at it after the wheels are tucked away each time I climb out for comparisons. Once it varied on the high side a bit so I glanced at it more often and found comfort when it slowly lowered to the normal mark. This was after I made more than the normal attempts to get the 0-320 to light off so even that was 'normal'. I do have the B&C voltage reg with OV and 'idiot' light for low voltage warning. Earl David Lloyd wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Lloyd" > >Maybe I missed part of this thread on "set" points for voltage alarming. >My 2 cents.... >In cold weather or when the battery is down, I have seen the high charge >voltage at 14.1 to 14.3 range as pretty normal; 14.1 as pretty close to >ideal for cold temps. >On a hot day or when the battery is being just carried with a charge, the >charge level voltage is approx. 13.1 volts. > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 03:54:00 PM PST US From: SMITHBKN@aol.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Question on Z-35 --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: SMITHBKN@aol.com Can someone with more understanding than I tell me if the auxillary battery in the Z-35 architecture is recharged while the aircraft is operating, or in this setup will the battery never see the alternator and thus never be recharged while in the plane? Jeff ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 04:45:55 PM PST US From: rv-9a-online Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: With or without DYNON Internal Backup Battery ? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rv-9a-online Here's my advice on the keep alive: I originally wired my D10A using the keep alive power connected to the battery through a fusible link. Even with up to date software, it discharged my main battery. I have the internal battery, and for some reason, it continued to draw about 100 mA, even when charged. It sounds like the software bug, but Dynon is going to check the hardware. I also have a real time clock problem which may be related. The 'fix' was to disconnect the keep alive power, and run the clock on the internal battery only. No danger of running the main battery down. In conclusion, if you have an internal battery, do not connect the keep alive power. Vern Little RV-9A Werner Schneider wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Werner Schneider > >Hello Gilles, > >just talked with the guy which did the measurement I was wrong, charging >the depleted internal battery showed 50-70mA >the keepalive was around 10 mA. Sho with a fully charged battery you >should be fine for more then a month. > >br Werner > > >Gilles Thesee wrote: > > > >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gilles Thesee >> >>Hi Werner and all, >> >> >> >> >> >>>the keepalive does recharge the internal battery and there was one >>>software version with a fault there. Indeed the Dynon does use some >>>50-70 mA >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>That's enough to run the battery flat within a week. >>When designing our ship's circuits, the question arose about the panel >>clock keepalive. I'm happy with my decision to rely on the internal >>battery instead of running the keepalive from the ship's main battery. >> >> >> >> >> >>>Can I take you also on the Battery tester just living in Switzerland >>>about 80 minutes away from Grenoble and want to visit my friends from >>>work, he is flying from LFLG. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>Sure, you're welcome. >> >>Regards, >>Gilles Thesee >>Grenoble, France >>http://contrails.free.fr >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 05:02:01 PM PST US From: "Tammy Goff" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Alternator with External Regulator? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tammy Goff" I did a search of the aeroelectric list to see if I could find this question's answer. I could not so: Does anyone know of an alternator that is externally regulated (40 to 60 amp) that will mount easily on a Lycoming O-320 E2D in a RV-6A? I have the Van's Boss Mounts for the 60 AMP that he sells. I have his regulator too but upon close inspection it was obvious the shipping was paid for but not the "handling." The pulley is dented and two of the studs on the back are bent! I thought I would see if there is any plug and play that would work with the B&C regulators and absolve me from having to remove the IR. I made the discovery when I went to do the IR removal on the Van's unit. I stopped without touching it and will attempt to send it back to Van's or sell it. Thanks George ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 05:22:52 PM PST US From: "Ron" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Generator question --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ron" If I am still using the Delco 20Amp generator on my 0200 continental do I really need the ANL60 with the brass strap? and for my ammeter should I get a 50MV 20amp shunt and do I really need the OV protect module for a generator? I am trying to get as close to the Z-19 drawings as I can with the two batteries. Thanks in advance Ron Triano ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 05:39:11 PM PST US From: Earl_Schroeder Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Alternator with External Regulator? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Earl_Schroeder Why not go to B&C and use theirs? That is what I did on a 0-320-D and along with their reg/ov/idiot light combo makes a rock solid installation. No problems! Earl Tammy Goff wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tammy Goff" > >I did a search of the aeroelectric list to see if I could find this question's answer. I could not so: > >Does anyone know of an alternator that is externally regulated (40 to 60 amp) that will mount easily on a Lycoming O-320 E2D in a RV-6A? > > ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 06:15:55 PM PST US From: "Wayne Sweet" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Alternator with External Regulator? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Wayne Sweet" I agree. I have B&C alternator, battery (and backup for dual LSE CDI's), voltage regulator and starter. Other than a field wire termial connector breaking due to my not providing a support for the wire, it's been over 10 years with only one battery replacement. And that replaced battery sits on my hangar floor (in a box) for 3 years STILL holding a charge (OK, I charged it once). Why was it removed, you ask...........six years on a battery is long enough. Wayne ----- Original Message ----- From: "Earl_Schroeder" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Alternator with External Regulator? > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Earl_Schroeder > > > Why not go to B&C and use theirs? That is what I did on a 0-320-D and > along with their reg/ov/idiot light combo makes a rock solid > installation. No problems! Earl > > Tammy Goff wrote: > >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tammy Goff" >> >> >>I did a search of the aeroelectric list to see if I could find this >>question's answer. I could not so: >> >>Does anyone know of an alternator that is externally regulated (40 to 60 >>amp) that will mount easily on a Lycoming O-320 E2D in a RV-6A? >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 06:15:55 PM PST US From: Subject: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 300XL and Database intent INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0003 1.0000 -4.4871 --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Responding to an AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Mark & Lisa" and copied below. 12/02/2005 Hello Mark and Lisa, I read your posting below with great interest and found myself mostly in agreement. But a few points puzzled me -- can we pursue them? 1) <> If we are talking amateur built experimental aircraft here the point is moot because the builder can write his AFM and AFM supplement to say, or not say, what he chooses as long as it is not in direct conflict with the FAR's, the GPS manufacturer's "pilot guide", or the AIM. If we are talking type certificated aircraft here then it would appear that the actual wording contained in the AFM supplement that was approved by the FAA for that aircraft would control. If the supplement was written back when AC 20-138 was current and the supplement contains the sample wording provided by that AC one has considerable data substitution leeway as described by Old Bob in his quotes from that version of the AC. If the supplement was written after AC 20-138A became effective and it contains the wording from the sample in that version of the AC then one is forced into splitting much finer hairs regarding the FAA's intent in my opinion . 3) You wrote: "I've never received (from the FAA) a notice telling me to change the information in the FAA-approved supplement, so I believe I'm still legal in using it, as approved." I presume here that you are referring to a type certificated aircraft with AFM supplement wording following the sample wording provided in AC 20-138. I would agree with your position. 4) You wrote: "I update my database at the beginning of the update cycle, such that my database is dated later than the date of the chart system's first update cycle. Now I know all changed data on the update cards apply to my database." You lost me here unless you mean that you put in a new chip, card, or software that officially updates the entire navigation database. It is not important that I understand, but I'll provide the following from TSO C129a regarding Class A equipment. "a. (3) (x) 1. The equipment shall provide an appropriately updatable navigation data base containing at least the following location information in terms of latitude and longitude with a resolution of 0.01 minute or better for the area(s) in which IFR operations are to be approved: all airports, VORs (and VORTACs), NDBs, and all named waypoints and intersections shown on en route and terminal area charts, Standard Instrument Departures (SIDs) and Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs). NOTE: Manual entry/update of navigation data base data shall not be possible. (This requirement does not preclude the storage of "user defined data" within the equipment.)" Since I am not sure what you are doing I don't know if this pertains or not. 5) You wrote: "Prior to flight, I check all the data I plan to use. By carrying this list in-flight I can quickly and accurately assess the validity of data I hadn't planned to use. If data I need for a particular route is out of date, I simply request a different route, or use the VOR. So far (3 years), I've never NOT been able to complete a flight due to out-of-date data." This seems very conservative and safe to me. 6) You wrote: "I'm meeting the intent of both the FAA and equipment manufacturer -- and my own fairly stringent common-sense and safety requirements. And I believe I'm making Old Bob smile, because this is exactly the result he was shooting for!" Anything that makes Old Bob smile is OK with me. OC < So it appears to me that you are correct > if one is following AC20-138, but > that AC20-138A has a specific limitation > wording recommendation that the > ".... database must be installed and > contain current data." I interpret that > to mean that all of the data in the > data base must be current. My interpretation is if SOME of the data is current, then the database contains current data and meets the intent of the AC. It's up to me to determine of the data is current before use. This allows me (and everyone else in my situation) to continue to use my GX60 following the guidance contained in the supplement approved when the unit was installed. I've never received (from the FAA) a notice telling me to change the information in the FAA-approved supplement, so I believe I'm still legal in using it, as approved. > As a practical matter it would be > very difficult for a pilot flying IFR > in IMC who was taken off his planned > route to confirm that all of the data > points on his new routing were in fact > accurately portrayed in his out dated > data base. Actually data currency is very easily determined in a number of ways. I use Howie Keefe's Air Chart system. I receive a cycle update every 28 days listing all the information that's changed since the last cycle. The list is cumulative; all changes since the first cycle of the year are on the list. I update my database at the beginning of the update cycle, such that my database is dated later than the date of the chart system's first update cycle. Now I know all changed data on the update cards apply to my database. Prior to flight, I check all the data I plan to use. By carrying this list in-flight I can quickly and accurately assess the validity of data I hadn't planned to use. If data I need for a particular route is out of date, I simply request a different route, or use the VOR. So far (3 years), I've never NOT been able to complete a flight due to out-of-date data. I'm meeting the intent of both the FAA and equipment manufacturer -- and my own fairly stringent common-sense and safety requirements. And I believe I'm making Old Bob smile, because this is exactly the result he was shooting for! Mark & Lisa Sletten Legacy FG N828LM http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 07:35:29 PM PST US From: Fiveonepw@aol.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Troubleshooting/agonizing over minutia...(was something about ammeters, IIRC) --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com In a message dated 12/02/2005 1:32:41 PM Central Standard Time, terry@tcwatson.com writes: If I observe a steam locomotive's piston cranking the wheels, how am I changing the behavior of the system? Maybe putting a pressure gauge on the system to see if the pressure varies throughout the cycle could be said to minutely change the behavior of the system, but just observation? OK, I've wasted enough of everybody's time. >>> It's esoteric- my own unfortunate experience is that when a system/device/machine exhibits an anomaly, observing same with intentions of corrective action only incites the system/device/machine to NOT malfunction resulting in additional caffiene & nicotine consumption and crossword prosecution. My advice FWIW? Be a Nuckollhead, build an airplane, be at one with physics... Life's a bee-atch, no? Wanna discuss tailwheel(vacuum tubes) vs. tricycles(transistors)? Ooops! Nomex originated as NASA recovery parachutes but may not help here....8-) Mark -do NOT archive ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 07:43:05 PM PST US From: Speedy11@aol.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Do I Need an Ammeter? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Speedy11@aol.com In reference to voltmeters, ammeters, and loadmeters, Bob says: I'm not suggesting that one should not have these capabilities on the panel. We're bringing a new line of high-quality loadmeters and perhaps voltmeters to the market place in a few weeks. I'll only suggest that these devices are adjuncts to active notification of low voltage combined with a knowledge of battery capacity as it relates to e-bus loads and the builder's pre-selected endurance goals. Instrument readings are interesting and useful in some venues but nearly useless when operations/maintenance are not well planned and things under the cowl are having a bad day. Agree wholeheartedly. Now, assuming I have a low voltage warning at, say 13.0 volts, and an OV protection scheme with associated warning light, I want to know how and where is best to take voltage and amperage readings. Here's what I want to know about: I want to sense amperage load at the alternator B lead and the main battery and the standby battery. What is the appropriate indicator to use for each of those readings (i.e., a plus-minus ammeter or a positive indication ammeter (loadmeter?))? Do I need to also sample voltage at each of those locations or is the voltage the same throughout the electrical circuit? The way I understand it (from listening on this list) is that the voltage can be measured at any location in the entire circuit and that it is the same for the entire circuit. Amperage loads, however, will vary depending on where the reading is taken in the circuit. So, a reading at the alternator B lead could indicate when a new load is added to the circuit (such as pitot heat) whereas a reading at the main or standby battery will indicate the charge or discharge being applied to the respective battery. I would find such information to be, at the least, interesting. From what I understand, an acceptable method to sample the load at any one point in the circuit is by using a hall effect device. I understand a HE device can only provide me with an amperage reading - no voltage. If my understandings are convoluted, then please correct me. However, if I've understood it correctly, then please tell me how to best obtain the desired readings. In advance, thanks. Stan Sutterfield ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 07:59:05 PM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Electronics International Capacitive Fuel Level Probes P-300C From: "John Schroeder" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder" Mark & D - Here is a quote from the BMA discussion board, followed by a reply from Bob Northrup - their tech support guy. We were told that the EI and VM probes were virtually identical so we had to buy the Princeton modules for our VM probes. Using the sensor map that BMA put together, we are putting the output of the two princeton modules into pins 11 & 12 of Analog 2 on the EFIS/ONE. We are using the frequency channels for fuel flow and tachometer. Mark - It looks like you are hooking your EI probes directly to the two hi freq channels (13 & 14) (Pins 9 & 10 of analog 2). I'll be interested in seeing how it works and quite irked if we got a bad steer from BMA. And being irked is also contingent on finding out that the EI and VM probes are not equal electrically. This would make the tech people at EI appear to be wandering in the swamp. Anyway, since neither of us are flying yet, let's keep each other informed as to how this problem shakes out. Cheers, John ===================Quote ============= mark Guest Posts: n/a Did I miss it somewhere that the EI capacitance fuel probes can be hooked to the Hi-frequency channels on the BMA, without any interface/converter box? I have just spent many hours trying to figure out how to do this and I stumbled across this fact almost by accident. Seems that this information could/should have been included in the installation instructions. What I did get (see previous posting) was the statement, "EI probe transducers are PWM which is not supported by BMA." The EI probe comes with a small circuit that converts the signal to PWM, so I don't need another one, and the 0-5v PWM signal can be read by the BMA EFIS-1. #43 07-27-2004, 10:59 PM bob Guest Posts: n/a No Mark you didn't miss anything. You can't use the high freq channels to measure your fuel. You need freq to voltage converters that put out 0 - 5 vdc and wire to the voltage channels. ================Unquote==================== On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 11:47:13 -0600, D Wysong wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: D Wysong > > Ah, HA! I stand corrected, Mark. Thanks for the data! My last > statement should have read "capacitive fuel probes won't generate a PWM > signal without additional circuitry." As usual, the confusion about EI > the P-300C probes was on MY end! :-) > > So, to decode it all: > -- Van's fuel probes are simple capacitors (i.e. - Van is NOT reselling > EI probes). If you need PWM output, hook the probe to the $45 dongle > from Van's. If you need 0-5 VDC proportional output, hook the probe to > a $70 dongle (purchased in pairs for $140) from BM. > -- EI and Vision Microsystems probes provide PWM output. This PWM > output can be fed into BM units via the high frequency inputs. If you > need/want 0-5 VDC proportional output instead, hook them to a $$$ dongle > from Princeton. > -- If you haven't purchased probes and want 0-5 VDC proportional output > look to Princeton or Westach. > > Unless you're bolting on a turbine engine or something else that > requires the BM high freq inputs for instrumentation you should be good > to go. If all else fails, at least the solution is only a dongle away. > > Thanks again for those scope traces! > > D > > ------------ > Mark R Steitle wrote: >> Hi D, >> I'm responding to you directly so I can include some screen shots of the >> output from my EI capacitive fuel probes. I sent them to John also. >> >> I was told by EI that the output was a pwm signal, so I don't understand >> your last sentence. Anyway, they do generate a signal that the BMA E/1 >> can read on the frequency input channel. At least, it sure appears to >> work. I'll be able to tell for sure when I get the wings on and I'm >> able to add fuel to the tanks. The lab tests turned out positive. >> >> Mark >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of D >> Wysong >> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 7:54 PM >> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com.Level.Probes.P-300C >> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Electronics International Capacitive >> Fuel Level Probes P-300C >> >> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: D Wysong >> >> Hi John - >> >> It sounds like Mark is using frequency inputs available on the BM unit >> instead of the proportional analog (0-5 VDC) inputs for his fuel level >> signals. >> >> That was a work-around for the BM units late last decade (... before the >> >> external DC dongles were created) when folks were trying to integrate >> their Vision Microsystems probes. Those probes, however, are PWM >> generators. >> >> A P-300C (EI capacitive fuel probe) won't generate a PWM signal without >> additional circuitry. So... I reckon I'm puzzled, too! :-) >> >> D >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 08:07:14 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Question on Z-35 --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 06:52 PM 12/2/2005 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: SMITHBKN@aol.com > >Can someone with more understanding than I tell me if the auxillary battery >in the Z-35 architecture is recharged while the aircraft is operating, or in >this setup will the battery never see the alternator and thus never be >recharged while in the plane? If you close the switch, the relay closes and the battery is supported like all other batteries in the airplane. The switch is closed for all operations after the engine starts and just after shutdown. The only time the switch is open for operation is times when the alternator(s) are not available for running system loads (and charging batteries). During this time, the switch is open so that the aux battery is isolated from the rest of the system and tasked with powering devices having a higher order priority than devices on the other battery. This philosophy is the same for all multiple battery installations and is discussed in Chapter 17. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 08:09:00 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Do I Need an Ammeter? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 01:02 PM 12/2/2005 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" > > >With a voltage number I would not get that. No matter what > >I do, 14.1v is what I see. I have alarms for the voltage too. I run > >14.1v +-.2 volts and set the alarms accordingly. > > How accordingly? What are your specific setpoint values? > > >Bob > >I have a high point of 14.3v, and a low of 13.9v. Neither of which I >have seen in any normal flight condition. These are sufficiently 'tight' to properly annunciate an 'abnormal' condition. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 08:28:12 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Regulator VR --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 03:05 PM 12/2/2005 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jerry2DT@aol.com > >List and Bob... > >The guy at NAPA AV Dept. *thinks* the regulator he sold me, Echlin VR440, >interchanges with Ford VR166 per Z-11 and Bob's note 21. Would it matter >if it >isn't as long as terms are wired the same? Wouldn't call it an interchange. See: http://www.rockauto.com/ref/SMP/SMPDetail2.html?VR440.jpg while the "Ford" VR166 looks like: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Regulators/Ford_SS_Reg.jpg The VR440 has 4 wires that in all probability have functions like: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Regulators/Alternator_Test_1.jpg . . . but without specific data describing the VR440 functionality, the most I could offer is "probably". VR166 regulators are common and plentiful. See: http://www.sherco-auto.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Session_ID=088ff92644653b316e0c97d6f1c9ce36&Screen=PROD&Product_Code=VR166 http://www.rockauto.com/ref/SMP/SMPDetail2.html?VR166.jpg This product crosses to a variety of other drop in replacements like these: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8013496032&category=33577 and the GR540 and VR266 shown on http://autolider.com.tw/acc%20parts/electrical%20%20parts/elec%20eng%20parts/REGULATORS-1.htm So knowing nothing about the regulator he sold you and given the prolific supply of regulators I know will work for anything from 5 to 20 dollars, I think I'd see if he'll take the VR440 back. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 08:30:17 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Alternator with External Regulator? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 07:01 PM 12/2/2005 -0600, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tammy Goff" > >I did a search of the aeroelectric list to see if I could find this >question's answer. I could not so: > >Does anyone know of an alternator that is externally regulated (40 to 60 >amp) that will mount easily on a Lycoming O-320 E2D in a RV-6A? I have >the Van's Boss Mounts for the 60 AMP that he sells. I have his regulator >too but upon close inspection it was obvious the shipping was paid for but >not the "handling." The pulley is dented and two of the studs on the back >are bent! I thought I would see if there is any plug and play that would >work with the B&C regulators and absolve me from having to remove the >IR. I made the discovery when I went to do the IR removal on the Van's >unit. I stopped without touching it and will attempt to send it back to >Van's or sell it. >Thanks George B&C is the only company I'm aware of that offers the ND alternator modified for external regulator usage. Depending on how handy you are with the tools and figuring things out, you might consider modifying your own. Some articles on suggested techniques have been cited here on the list. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 36 ____________________________________ Time: 09:01:11 PM PST US From: "DonVS" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Master Relay Mount --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "DonVS" Bob, Anything new on this issue? Would you use them as delivered or would you recommend cutting the plastic off? Thanks. Don -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Master Relay Mount --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 11:34 AM 11/23/2005 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com > > >In a message dated 11/23/2005 10:06:58 A.M. Central Standard Time, >rv-9a-online@telus.net writes: > >Bob, another issue with the booties is that they interfere with torquing >the mounting bolts. They will crack before the proper torque is >achieved. I've chucked my B&C contactors for this reason. > >Vern Little >RV-9A > > >Good Morning Vern, > >That brings up the question as to how we are determining "proper " torque? > >To have the attaching hardware stretched to just short of it's elastic limit >is one type of "torque". To squeeze a plastic such as the booties to a >point where no creeping or cracking is another form of "proper" torque. If >elastic stop nuts are used for attachment of the booted device, they >should hold >adequately at whatever point is determined to be optimum for the subject >fastening. > >The term "torque to specification" is often used without proper regard to >what it is that we are trying to accomplish. Exactly. When I design joints that have compressibility, I'll call out an all metal locknut. Drive the threaded fasteners together such that all the slack is out. Finally I'll specify some amount of additional rotation beyond the zero-slack point where thread pitch and rotation set the crush value. Stancor's choice of plastic in this instance is truly mystifying. Bob . . .