---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Mon 12/26/05: 19 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 05:09 AM - Re: Re: Choosing a switch and learn how to wire it (BobsV35B@aol.com) 2. 07:38 AM - Re: Re: Choosing a switch and learn how to wire it (Larry Mac Donald) 3. 09:01 AM - Re: Alternator torque (switching alternators) (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 4. 09:11 AM - Re: Re: Choosing a switch and learn how to (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 5. 09:33 AM - Re: Re: Choosing a switch and learn how to (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 6. 10:16 AM - brass straps between contactors (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 7. 10:44 AM - Re: Terminals for M22520/5-100 die (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 8. 11:10 AM - Canadian Aero (Niagara Air Parts) (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 9. 11:47 AM - Re: More SD8 Installation Questions (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 10. 11:58 AM - Re: Re:More SD8 Installation Questions (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 11. 12:27 PM - Re: Re: Choosing a switch and learn how to wire it (Carlos Trigo) 12. 01:07 PM - Requesting Peer Review of Electrical Architecture () 13. 01:26 PM - Re: More SD8 Installation Questions (Werner Schneider) 14. 02:14 PM - Re: Re: Choosing a switch and learn how to (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 15. 02:53 PM - Yet another crimper question (MLWynn@aol.com) 16. 04:02 PM - Re: Requesting Peer Review of Electrical Architecture (Kevin Horton) 17. 05:39 PM - Re: Manual Battery switches (Speedy11@aol.com) 18. 10:53 PM - Ground Fault Protection For Rear Battery Cable (Jerry Grimmonpre) 19. 11:19 PM - Re: Yet another crimper question (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 05:09:01 AM PST US From: BobsV35B@aol.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Choosing a switch and learn how to wire it --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com In a message dated 12/26/2005 12:34:13 A.M. Central Standard Time, Speedy11@aol.com writes: So, I read it that He wants to power both EFIS units simultaneously with either bus. It seems as though Larry's solution would work. Stan Sutterfield Good Morning Stan, I agree, but don't you think my solution would work as well? I always thought simpler was better! Happy Skies, Old Bob AKA Bob Siegfried Ancient Aviator Stearman N3977A Brookeridge Air Park LL22 Downers Grove, IL 60516 630 985-8503 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 07:38:16 AM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Choosing a switch and learn how to wire it From: Larry Mac Donald --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Larry Mac Donald Bob, I have to agree. Your idea is simpler, and better. Although Carlos should make sure he has a switch that is rated at 130% of the ampacity of the total load. Larry Mac Donald lm4@juno.com Rochester N.Y. Do not achcive On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 08:05:02 EST BobsV35B@aol.com writes: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com > > > > In a message dated 12/26/2005 12:34:13 A.M. Central Standard Time, > Speedy11@aol.com writes: > > So, I read it that He wants to power both EFIS units simultaneously > with > either bus. > It seems as though Larry's solution would work. > Stan Sutterfield > > > > Good Morning Stan, > > I agree, but don't you think my solution would work as well? I > always > thought simpler was better! > > Happy Skies, > > Old Bob > AKA > Bob Siegfried > Ancient Aviator > Stearman N3977A > Brookeridge Air Park LL22 > Downers Grove, IL 60516 > 630 985-8503 > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 09:01:46 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Alternator torque (switching alternators) --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 12:23 AM 12/26/2005 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Goguen, Jon" > > >I don't know how relevant it is to any particular installation, but if an >alternator is delivering constant power the torgue will indeed double as >the RPM is halved. The relevant equation is the same for alternators as >it is for electric motors: power output is directly proportional to the >product of RPM and torque. So, if an alternator is capable or delivering >350 watts (25 amps @ 14 volts) at 1500 RPM, twice the torque is needed to >yield this power as would required to get 350 watts from the same same >alternator at 3000 RPM. You're correct that for speeds ABOVE minimum speed for full output, Torque(1) * RPM(1) is approximately equal to Torque(2) * RPM(2). I.e., for a given power output the torque-rpm product is relatively constant. > Of course, the alternator may not be capable of twice the power (700 > watts) at the higher RPM due to magnetic saturation etc, but that isn't > the issue. If one were designing an alternator drive mechanism, the > power to be delivered by the alternator at low RPM would be a key factor > in determining the torque requirement for the drive. Here's the rub . . . define "low rpm". This thread was based on a supplier use of the term "low rpm" without giving the user a clue as to what that means. The supplier's admonition further fails to define the magnitude of benefit to be derived from observing the cited concerns. If I pamper your product as recommended, may I expect twice the life? 1.1 times the life? 1.00001 times the life? If he can't tell you, then it's another manifestation of, dare I say ignorance about the capabilities of his own product. > The torque required for power generation is much larger than that > contributed by rotor > inertia and friction in automotive alternators. Absolutely. And the major force in a belt, particularly one with a small wrap angle around a small pulley is static tension. Any additional forces attributable to electrical loading of the alternator are a small fraction of the total. My points intended to illuminate the vacuousness of this discussion are: (1) "extra strain" under extra demand is a foregone conclusion and should be accommodated by the skilled designer as an expected and normal condition. The notion that a customer should be advised to have concerns for turning ANY electrical device on or off during the course of normal operations is either baseless or an overt admission that the alternator is not suited to the task. For example. Assume XYZ Alternator Co were selling alternators across the isle from AEC Alternator Co and a customer walked up to me wanting to talk alternators. He says, "XYZ guys tell me that it's a good thing to worry about when and under what conditions I turn their product off and on. What about YOUR product?" Aside from an intense curiosity as to why they would so limit their customer's utilization of their product, I would confidently say, "Our alternators are as robust as any offered to the DC powered vehicles market. We have no such restrictions no matter what kind of system you anticipate will utilize our product. I have no idea why they would make such an assertion. However, knowing what I do about alternators in general, I'll bet a dollar to a donut that the folks in XYZ booth haven't a clue as to the physics that control the functionality of their product and they're simply repeating some hangar myth or mis-understanding." (2) We can hypothesize about the term 'low rpm' and accurately deduce that below minimum speed for regulation, the constant speed-torque product does not apply and there is no way that turning the alternator on-off under any conditions exerts any more "strain" on the system than when the alternator is turning faster than minimum speed for full output. If they're talking about speeds right at minimum speed for full output, then it's true that maximum torque demanded by the alternator is at its peak value. Depending on whether you have a 7.5" or 9.7" ring gear pulley, and assuming 2.5" alternator pulley and 6000 rpm for full output, this calls for prop rpms of 2000 and 1540 as the "areas of concern" for indiscriminate flipping of alternator switches. If this is a REAL concern, then they should further advise their customers to tape a colored arc to the face glass of their tachometer to remind them when alternator operating caution is called for. Hmmmm . . . now, shall we make it 2000-2100? How about 2000 to 2200? I know, let's recommend switching the alternator ON before engine start up, and OFF after engine shut down. Switch at all other times is deleterious to system longevity and to be avoided. This is silly on the face of it. Anyone dispensing such advice is hurting both themselves and their customers. As I mentioned in another post, should I suggest such a caution be added to the POH of any product I've worked on, at a minimum I could expect a serious talk between my boss and myself in his office . . . but it would get a good laugh in a engineering coordination meeting as my fellow designers would believe I was making a joke. I'll remind readers that while this thread title originally suggested this is an issue for internally regulated alternators. The physics that control mechanical stresses is the same for both internally and externally regulated machines. We've always designed DC power generation systems for aircraft to accommodate positive control by the pilot under any and all conditions with both generators and alternators. If the OBAM aircraft community is striving for performance and utility equal to or better than what spam cans since day-one, then trash-canning the "extra strain" concerns for alternator operations is a good thing to do. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 09:11:02 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wire it Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Choosing a switch and learn how to wire it --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wire it At 10:32 AM 12/26/2005 -0800, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Larry Mac Donald > >Bob, > I have to agree. Your idea is simpler, and better. > Although Carlos should make sure he has a switch that >is rated at 130% of the ampacity of the total load. >Larry Mac Donald Switch "ratings" for use in personally owned and operated light aircraft are almost meaningless. Most switches in airplanes die of old age and effects of the environment in which they live. I've replaced or "cleaned" far more switches due to corroded contacts and dis-use that switches that wore out due to failure to observe ratings. See: http://aeroelectric.com/articles/swtchrat.pdf Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 09:33:51 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wire it Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Choosing a switch and learn how to wire it --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wire it At 01:29 AM 12/26/2005 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Speedy11@aol.com > >"But it was my understanding that Carlos wanted to run one unit off one buss >and both units off the other buss. Maybe I got that screwed up !" > > >Larry and Old Bob, >What Carlos said was, > >"what I want is a switch that has 1 >OFF position (no power for both EFIS units), 1 ON position (power from one >source bus is feeding both units) and other ON position (power from 2nd >source bus is feeding both units" > >So, I read it that He wants to power both EFIS units simultaneously with >either bus. >It seems as though Larry's solution would work. If the goal is to insure SYSTEM reliability, has anyone considered the potential consequences for driving power for both systems through a single switch? May I suggest that the idea of independent power sources via either dual batteries or perhaps dual alternator is sufficient to insure that power adequate to comfortably terminate any flight is always available. After that, SYSTEM reliability benefits most by hard-wiring dual systems to each of dual power sources WITHOUT intermediate switches . . . and one certainly wants to avoid single points of failure for both systems. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 10:16:21 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: AeroElectric-List: brass straps between contactors --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Bob, The lister was inquiring about "strapping" between the contactors. I wonder if a 1/2" width is suffcient given the size of Contactor posts. It seems at least a 3/4" or maybe 1" strip should be used. K&N has this in 0.64" thicknesses. Here's a picture of what I just did. Do you think this will be ok? Good catch! Of course, cutting a .312" hole in a piece of material only .500" wide doesn't leave much hole edge margin . . . only about .090" per side. If done carefully, it's going to be okay. Outcome of the task in .032" material may be problematic. Of course it's okay to go both thicker and wider. Electrically, .032 x .50 (.016 square-in) is sufficient to the current carrying task given the surface area and heat sinking afforded by the installation. But as a practical matter, the neophyte builder will have a better probability of success with .75" wide material (.22" edge margins) and .064" thick for easier hole drilling (by all means use a Unibit). I've added your photo to the collection of examples for contactor interconnect strapping at: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Wiring_Technique/Contactor_Interconnect Thanks for sharing this with us. What you've fabricated is most assuredly adequate to the task . . . perhaps bordering on overkill but I wouldn't suggest you change a thing. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 10:44:32 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Terminals for M22520/5-100 die --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 12:54 AM 12/26/2005 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Goguen, Jon" > > >Thanks Bob. I had a very curious conversation with Daniels trying to get >this information. I told them which tool and die I had, and asked for >reccomended terminals. I was told that they couldn't provide this >information. However, they did say offer to confirm if the die would >crimp a specific terminal if I provided the part number. I told them I >had consulted their catalog, and that this die was the only one listed for >crimping pre-insulated terminals from 10-26 AWG. No good. I was told >that the proper sequence is to specifiy my terminals, then buy the >tool. I suggested that if their computer could work the problem one way, >it ought to also be workable the other way around. Nope. They then asked >if I was in the aircraft industry, and I admitted my outsider >status. They seemed releived to know this, and provided no more information. > >I was also unsuccessful in finding mil-spec status for either the PIDG or >Avicrimp terminals, so would have been reduced to the experimental route >if you hadn't come through. By the way, the Daniels HX-4 with this die >seems to be quite common on Ebay and sells in $50 range. I'm not surprised. In an world that seems hell-bent on "reducing cost" by outsourcing and driving job descriptions out of policy and procedure manuals, I'm finding that less and less folks who interact with customers know much about the products they're offering. With respect to your specific need for data, I found an AMP catalog at: http://www.tycoelectronics.com/aerospace/pdf/1308940_Sec_09.pdf Do a search on "25036" and you'll discover that the AMP PIDG, Ampli-Bond and Terminyl products have dash numbers under MS25036. Given the nature of your tool's description and compatibility with other mil-specs for the smaller terminals suggests that the dash-numbers that Daniels had in mind for your die-set include the PIDG series. Do some test crimps and pull tests. The end result should not look mashed (over crimped) and it should pass the pull tests for up to 20 pounds of pull on 22AWG in a red PIDG terminal. I'm 99% certain that your tool is find for this task. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 11:10:36 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Canadian Aero (Niagara Air Parts) --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Found installation instructions for the CAM-040 series alternators here: http://www.canadianaeromanufacturing.com/alt-instr.pdf The most noteworthy items in the instructions is at the bottom where we see the statement: Conditions in which a very high draw is being made of the alternator at low RPM will cause extra strain on the alternator and drive belt. Consider reducing the total load in these situations, or switching the alternator off and drawing from the battery only, if the high load will be brief. I'll write to the technical support folks and see if they can offer any clarification of the recommendation with either better numbers on "high draw", "low rpm", "extra strain" etc. I'll inquire further as to what benefits might be expected from adopting an operating philosophy that embraces the cautionary paragraph. Finally, in other places on the website we see a link for an overvoltage protection system: http://www.canadianaeromanufacturing.com/ASP101-PIT%201.pdf Amazingly similar to figure Z-24. I'll inquire also as to their experience and recommendations for incorporating OV protection with their product. Watch this space . . . Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 11:47:38 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: More SD8 Installation Questions --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > > > > The safe, conservative thing to do is mount it inside. Lots > > of folks have mounted them outside and have not reported > > unsatisfactory service life . . . but this is purely anecdotal > > along with any opinions offered one way or the other. If you WANT > > to put it outside, then give it a try. Let us know what you > > discover. > >But, most people install the SD-8 to have as a backup in case the >main alternator fails. Main alternators don't fail that often, so I >bet most installed SD-8s have never been used for very long. The >apparently good service history might not mean that much. You should understand that the SD-8 was the very first product B&C brought to the OBAM aviation community. This would have been about 25 years ago. This alternator was very popular with Rutan's Variez builders looking for the ultimate in light weight installations with no starter and minimum battery. As the ONLY source of engine driven power, many of these builders flew VFR night conditions where nav lts, strobe and one radio were the only loads. The SD-8 has a very long history as primary source of power for some aircraft . . . it wasn't until I suggested the all-electric airplane on a budget in 1999 . . . http://aeroelectric.com/articles/allelect.pdf . . . that the idea of replacing a vacuum pump with the SD-8 really took off. >No matter where you install it, if you are counting on it to power >your electrical system with a certain electrical load, for a given >duration, you should demonstrate this capability by actual test. If >you haven't demonstrated the capability, including electrical load, >duration and ambient temperature, you have no way of knowing whether >the SD-8 (and regulator) will be able to do the job when needed. A >short test is not sufficient, as it might not get the regulator up to >its stabilized temperature. Absolutely! We have to do this all the time in the certified side. Confirming achievement of one's design goals by considered testing is required for certified ships . . . the only thing that keeps it from being "required" of OBAM aircraft is (1) the fact that the FAA hasn't figured out a way to make it happen and/or (2) the willingness some folks have to assume that all the stuff they install will do the expected job. This works MOST of the time but when it doesn't work, the problem invariably rests on unanticipated installation variables . . . like the ability of the rectifier-regulator to dump heat. Nothing builds more confidence than going out to measure something followed by another investigator's CONFIRMATION of results. Variez builders have conducted the repeatable experiment on the SD-8 for two decades . . . but when it comes to installation variables we can only deduce that it's possible to duplicate the performance in an RV-8 after we've taken the data and shared it for others to confirm and/or rely on. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 11:58:54 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re:More SD8 Installation Questions --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 09:21 AM 12/25/2005 -0800, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mike Holland" > >The poster doesn't indicate what flavor of RV he is building. If you >install the regulator/capacitor/relay combination (and the relay is flimsy >plastic) "Flimsy"? Look under the hood of your car and find out how many relays are non-flimsy metal. The S704-1 relay is a member of a large family of products designed to live in the automotive world. See: http://relays.tycoelectronics.com/schrack/pdf/T9A.pdf >, on the left side of the firewall of a 6,7 or 9, it will sit behind the >oil cooler outlet and exposed to a blast of 150 - 200F+ air(on a hot >climb-day). Do you have some measured data on these temperatures? Is there a cooler location forward of the firewall? >If it were me, I'd find an "accessible" location on the cold side and put >it there. The upper right side on a 7/9 might be OK but you'd need to >move the brake reservoir. > >All this depends on battery location. If it's on the hotside you should >watch out that you don't hang something above it too close that you can't >remove it from the case for service or replacement. Yup, the conservative thing to do is get it out of the engine compartment . . . but this does not guarantee anything. The rectifier-regulator generates its own heat and unless accommodated for heat transfer into the mounting surface, ambient temps won't have much to do with the device's ultimate performance. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 12:27:59 PM PST US From: "Carlos Trigo" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Choosing a switch and learn how to wire it --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Carlos Trigo" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Choosing a switch and learn how to wire it >>"what I want is a switch that has 1 >>OFF position (no power for both EFIS units), 1 ON position (power from one >>source bus is feeding both units) and other ON position (power from 2nd >>source bus is feeding both units" >> >>So, I read it that He wants to power both EFIS units simultaneously with >>either bus. >>It seems as though Larry's solution would work. > > If the goal is to insure SYSTEM reliability, has anyone > considered the potential consequences for driving power for > both systems through a single switch? May I suggest that > the idea of independent power sources via either dual batteries > or perhaps dual alternator is sufficient to insure that > power adequate to comfortably terminate any flight is always > available. After that, SYSTEM reliability benefits most > by hard-wiring dual systems to each of dual power sources > WITHOUT intermediate switches . . . and one certainly wants > to avoid single points of failure for both systems. > > Bob . . . Bob This is not a Dual System. This is a system (GRT-EFIS) with 2 separate units, the Multi Function Display and the AHRS (actually 3 but the magnetometer gets power from the AHRS), both needing power, and both admitting 3 sources of power. I intend to use 2 sources of power in each unit, coming from 2 different busses (the ExpBus and the Aux Battery bus). Are you suggesting that I should connect the MFD Unit and the AHRS unit directly to both power busses? In that case, from what source are both units going to get the juice? And what about if I want to fly with the EFIS turned Off (for example in a local flight or a simple test flight) ? Or in a cross country flight if the alternator go south and I simply need to turn Off the EFIS to save power? How can I achieve it without a switch? Thanks Carlos ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 01:07:03 PM PST US From: Subject: AeroElectric-List: Requesting Peer Review of Electrical Architecture INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0433 1.0000 -1.7424 --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Responding to an AeroElectric-List message previously posted by Jeff Smith Lists: AeroElectric-List Subject: Requesting Peer Review of Electrical Architecture http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/SMITHBKN@aol.com.12.25.2005/index.html>> 12/26/2005 Hello Jeff, It appears that when you are operating on the endurance bus only (altitude encoder not functioning) that you will not be in compliance with 14 CFR Sec. 91.215. Do you concur? Is this of concern to you? OC ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 01:26:43 PM PST US From: Werner Schneider Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: More SD8 Installation Questions --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Werner Schneider Hello Bob > This alternator was very popular > with Rutan's Variez builders looking for the ultimate in > light weight installations with no starter and minimum > battery. As the ONLY source of engine driven power, many > of these builders flew VFR night conditions where nav lts, > strobe and one radio were the only loads. > > As far as I know they had a Conti O-200 so they had the 1 : 1.5 gear From my old load analysis this would be (measured with 12.5 V): Strobes 3.1 A Nav 3.96 A Position 3.44 A KX-125 0.4 A In cruise with 12.5 V I see that the SD-8 delivers around 10.6 A the load without transmission would be according the numbers I measured on my Aeroflash units 10.9 A. Did I calculate someting wrong or did they use lower consumation units? The advantage without starter is, that the battery is still plenty full, but on the ground we would drain the whole load on the battery only and in cruise we just generate as much energy as in a NVFR situation is used. I guess this is a thight situation on the electrical side and one has to make a good calculation as to decide what to do. Werner ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 02:14:45 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wire it Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Choosing a switch and learn how to wire it --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wire it > >Bob > >This is not a Dual System. This is a system (GRT-EFIS) with 2 separate >units, the Multi Function Display and the AHRS (actually 3 but the >magnetometer gets power from the AHRS), both needing power, and both >admitting 3 sources of power. I intend to use 2 sources of power in each >unit, coming from 2 different busses (the ExpBus and the Aux Battery bus). >Are you suggesting that I should connect the MFD Unit and the AHRS unit >directly to both power busses? What does the manufacturer suggest? When I design gizmos for multiple power sources, there are two or more pins that hard-wire to two or more sources and automatic switching inside my product. Any need for pilot intervention is avoided where ever possible. Can you send me wiring diagrams? Are installation instructions downloadable from their website? >In that case, from what source are both units going to get the juice? >And what about if I want to fly with the EFIS turned Off (for example in a >local flight or a simple test flight) ? Or in a cross country flight if the >alternator go south and I simply need to turn Off the EFIS to save power? >How can I achieve it without a switch? How does your load analysis stack up that you would find yourself in a "save power" mode? These devices use so little energy that I would think you can easily craft an endurance mode that would make shutting the EFIS off unnecessary. If there are no EFIS controls for independent control of activity and you believe there is value in shutting the system off, then a switch becomes necessary. I'd like to understand the imperative for ever shutting it off. We don't do it on any of our glass-cockpits at RAC. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 02:53:27 PM PST US From: MLWynn@aol.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Yet another crimper question --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: MLWynn@aol.com Hi Bob, I acquired a used AMP 59250 T-head crimper. Seems to be in almost new condition. It did not come with instructions and I have been puzzling about what the little dial at the top is for (for that matter, how exactly do I use this thing in general). Do you know of somewhere that TYCO/AMP has instructions for use? I couldn't find it anywhere on their web site. Meanwhile, I sent to B & C for a bunch of connectors and will start experimenting with the crimper. An ongoing thanks for all your time and insights. Regards, Michael Wynn RV 8 Wings San Ramon, CA 94583 ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 04:02:17 PM PST US From: Kevin Horton Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Requesting Peer Review of Electrical Architecture --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Kevin Horton On 26 Dec 2005, at 16:06, wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: > > Responding to an AeroElectric-List message previously posted by > Jeff Smith > > < > Poster: Jeff Smith > > Lists: AeroElectric-List > > Subject: Requesting Peer Review of Electrical Architecture > > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/SMITHBKN@aol.com. > 12.25.2005/index.html>> > > 12/26/2005 > > Hello Jeff, It appears that when you are operating on the endurance > bus only > (altitude encoder not functioning) that you will not be in > compliance with > 14 CFR Sec. 91.215. Do you concur? Is this of concern to you? But, this should only occur following an electrical failure. If we have to comply with all the FARs following a systems failure, we had better install dual transponders, dual everything else, and a second engine. Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) Ottawa, Canada http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 05:39:41 PM PST US From: Speedy11@aol.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Manual Battery switches --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Speedy11@aol.com I can attempt to describe my manual battery switch plan. Alternatively, if you are familiar with RV-8 construction, you can see how I've installed the switches at www.rv-8a.net at the end of the Chronology page. You can also find electrical info on the Electrical page. I have two battery switches, one for the front (I call it the Main) battery and one for the aft (I call it the Standby) battery. I'm planning a 4AWG (or maybe 6AWG) cable from the main battery to the manual switch (distance of about 22") with a 200A fuse at the battery end. Then from the manual switch back to the battery compartment to attach to the starter contactor (hmmm...I suppose I could use a manual switch instead of a contactor for the starter). At that same connction to the starter contactor, I would take power to the main bus. Is 22" too far from the battery to have manual switches? For the aft standby battery, the manual switch is even farther from the battery - about six feet of #8 wire. Stan Sutterfield >Have any builders opted to use manual battery switches? If so, do they work >well? Any problem with the "keys?" Is there a way to paint the red plastic >keys? >I'm thinking about having a key machined out of aluminum if the plastic key >cannot be painted. >Stan Sutterfield ????Why???? . . . manual battery switches are perfectly fine replacements for contactors. Many of the first electrically fitted airplanes used them along with manual starter switches. But a manual battery switch needs to be as close to the battery as your contactor would have been. Unless your battery is handy to the pilot's seat, the battery switch is not going to be handy either. I've known several builders over the years who have crafted Bowden controls to remotely operate a manual battery switch. In this case, the 'key' was replaced with a belcrank that translated the push-pull action of a Bowden control into a rotary motion required by the battery switch. Can you describe your proposed installation in more detail? ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 10:53:31 PM PST US From: "Jerry Grimmonpre" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Ground Fault Protection For Rear Battery Cable --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jerry Grimmonpre" Bob and everyone else ... When considering a ground fault, what is best used to protect a #4 cable run, from the rear battery, in an RV, while powering a bus? What is best used to protect this same #4 cable, when it is in parallel with the front battery and charging current is flowing to the rear batt? Thanks ... Jerry Grimmonpre' RV8A ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 11:19:00 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Yet another crimper question --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 05:52 PM 12/26/2005 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: MLWynn@aol.com > >Hi Bob, > >I acquired a used AMP 59250 T-head crimper. Seems to be in almost new >condition. It did not come with instructions and I have been >puzzling about what >the little dial at the top is for (for that matter, how exactly do I use >this >thing in general). Do you know of somewhere that TYCO/AMP has instructions >for use? I couldn't find it anywhere on their web site. Meanwhile, I sent >to B & C for a bunch of connectors and will start experimenting with the >crimper. > >An ongoing thanks for all your time and insights. The "dial" is used to set crimp height on insulation only. This allows the fabricator to accommodate the thinnest (22769/16) to thickest (automotive PVC) wires. For 99% of your terminals, "1" is appropriate. If you want to put multiple wires into a single crimp as described in: http://aeroelectric.com/articles/multiplewires/multiplewires.html Then some number above "1" will open the dies as appropriate to the bulkier insulations. This feature is discussed in: http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/CrimpTools/crimptools.html and illustrated close up in: http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/CrimpTools/JR.jpg Bob . . .