---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 02/28/06: 33 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 04:07 AM - Re: Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)) 2. 04:23 AM - Re: Static Dischargers (steveadams) 3. 05:11 AM - Re: Re: Static Dischargers (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 4. 05:11 AM - Re: Lr-3 question Z diagram question (Peter Laurence) 5. 05:11 AM - Re: d-sub panel connector source (Peter Laurence) 6. 05:19 AM - Re: Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 7. 05:23 AM - Re: High Current Diodes (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 8. 05:26 AM - Re: d-sub panel connector source (Bruce Gray) 9. 05:47 AM - Re: Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Bob N) (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 10. 05:53 AM - Re: d-sub panel connector source (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 11. 06:13 AM - Re: [Possible SPAM] Re: Static Dischargers (Harley) 12. 07:24 AM - Re: Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Brian Lloyd) 13. 07:24 AM - Re: Re: Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Brian Lloyd) 14. 12:34 PM - Re: Mike's LED Position lights (Bill Dube) 15. 01:06 PM - Re: Re: Mike's LED Position lights (Mark R Steitle) 16. 01:19 PM - Re: Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Ken) 17. 01:43 PM - Re: Re: Mike's LED Position lights (Terry Watson) 18. 02:01 PM - Re: Re: Re: Mike's LED Position lights (sgettings@cfl.rr.com) 19. 02:43 PM - Re: Re: Mike's LED Position lights (Alan K. Adamson) 20. 03:28 PM - Re: Re: Mike's LED Position lights (richard titsworth) 21. 03:57 PM - Re: Re: Mike's LED Position lights (Terry Watson) 22. 04:13 PM - Re: Re: Mike's LED Position lights (LarryRobertHelming) 23. 04:48 PM - Re: Re: Mike's LED Position lights (Alan K. Adamson) 24. 05:12 PM - Re: KLN35A Pin/Installation Diagram (Michael Hinchcliff) 25. 05:25 PM - Ground Power circuit diagram query & suggestion (Andy) 26. 05:49 PM - Re: Re: Mike's LED Position lights (Bill Dube) 27. 05:57 PM - Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 15 Msgs - 02/26/06 (Frank Smith) 28. 07:47 PM - Re: Re: Mike's LED Position lights (Peter Laurence) 29. 07:50 PM - Re: Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (BobsV35B@aol.com) 30. 08:02 PM - Re: Re: Mike's LED Position lights (Lloyd, Daniel R.) 31. 08:21 PM - Back-Up Battery (Mitchell Goodrich) 32. 09:17 PM - Re: Back-Up Battery (Bill Schlatterer) 33. 11:44 PM - Re: An Architecture Question - Z13 (Scott) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 04:07:17 AM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup From: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" Oh. Well that is very interesting Brian. Could it be that my IGN wire is dead? I have the IGN with voltage applied before cranking (I think. I have not checked it since initial install) and I have an idiot light installed which does work as expected. I will check that IGN wire next time I have the cowl off to verify it is supplying power before cranking. Based on your note below, it is quite possible the IGN wire is doing nothing. Wonder why temperature is at play though. Ill check it and report back. Thanks Mike Do not archive -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 8:19 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd Robert L. Nuckolls, III Startup wrote: >> Set immediate idle at 800rpm. No charge. Sat ther for 10 seconds or so. >> Went to 1100rpm for about 5 seconds. And Wallah, charging. >> Back to 700rpm for 10 seconds. Still Charging. >> Down to 350rpm for 10 seconds and still charging. > ... > > Don't jerk it out yet. It just might be performing > exactly as the designers intended. This is actually normal behavior for a self-exciting alternator if you don't hook up the ignition terminal or the idiot light. There is no source of power to provide any field excitation so excitation comes from the residual magnetic field in the armature. Eventually you get it spinning fast enough that there is enough output from the stator to begin to excite the regulator and the field. The result is that the alternator begins to bootstrap, i.e. a little current gets to the field which slightly increases the output which causes a little more current to get to the field, until the alternator has enough output to fully turn on the regulator and the field. -- Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630 +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax) I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . . - Antoine de Saint-Exupery ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 04:23:32 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Static Dischargers From: "steveadams" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "steveadams" Thanks for all the suggestions. I have over 150 hours flying, and this never happened before. I was flying down to Florida, straight and level when it first happened. As I said, it cleared slowly after leaving the clouds. I then took a few flights VFR and everything was fine. Then again coming home I was in the clouds and it happened again, but not as bad. On my plane the cowl is fiberglass, but the cabin is carbon fiber and the rest of the plane is metal. Com 1 antenna is on top, and com 2 is on the bottom. Static was worse on #1, but also present on com 2, again, only with transmission. Maybe it is something other than p-static. The CH640 airframe is the same as the Alarus, which does not have static wicks, and from people I have talked to it has no p-static problems. The 640 is about 30 KTS faster though, which could make a difference. I guess it is worth finding a few static wicks and seeing if it makes a difference. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=18363#18363 ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 05:11:51 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Static Dischargers --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 04:22 AM 2/28/2006 -0800, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "steveadams" > > >Thanks for all the suggestions. I have over 150 hours flying, and this >never happened before. I was flying down to Florida, straight and level >when it first happened. As I said, it cleared slowly after leaving the >clouds. I then took a few flights VFR and everything was fine. Then again >coming home I was in the clouds and it happened again, but not as bad. On >my plane the cowl is fiberglass, but the cabin is carbon fiber and the >rest of the plane is metal. Com 1 antenna is on top, and com 2 is on the >bottom. Static was worse on #1, but also present on com 2, again, only >with transmission. Maybe it is something other than p-static. The CH640 >airframe is the same as the Alarus, which does not have static wicks, and >from people I have talked to it has no p-static problems. The 640 is about >30 KTS faster though, which could make a difference. I guess it is worth >finding a few static wicks and seeing if it makes a difference. You bring up an interesting point. Not every owner of a particular airplane has p-static problems to report . . . It's a HIGHLY variable phenomenon. EVERY airplane has a p-static charge on it to some degree or another, it's only in the right combination of variables that noise levels rise sufficiently to be heard on radios. In severe cases, we've had p-static eat away at structural parts of the airplane . . . e.g. window glazing. The results of your experimenting may not be known until you seem to have slain the dragon by not having problems over a series of similar conditions . . . which could take years. It's quite disappointing than to have a solution in place for a couple of years and encounter conditions further out on the bell-curve and find that you're only partially successful. What you're experiencing is not new/startling. In fact, it's so commonplace and has such a problematic history of solutions that first response from those who have wrestled with it is sympathy and best wishes for a lucky break. Folks who do this professionally have access to expensive test and development tools and techniques that are not going to be available to the OBAM aircraft community. So, please do experiment and let us know of your findings. But I would also caution that what works for you may only be a starting point for determining what mitigates someone else's problems at a later date. Good luck! Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 05:11:51 AM PST US From: " Peter Laurence" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Lr-3 question Z diagram question --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: " Peter Laurence" > > Hello I am installing a Lr-3c regulator from B+c. I was wondering if > anybody had made up a temp sensor for this regulator without buying the 85 > dollar one from B+C. > > I have seen several items on this list about Shotsky diodes. The Digikey > book has 4 pages of them . Would they be better to use then the regular 4 > terminal diode that is listed in the Z diagrams for the endurance bus? If > so which one to get? Thanks Try Eric Jones' Perihelion Design Perihelion Design He has them. Peter> > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 05:11:51 AM PST US From: " Peter Laurence" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: d-sub panel connector source --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: " Peter Laurence" > remind me where I can get a panel mount d-sub connector for laptop > interconnectivity with the Dynon and GRT EFIS I hope to install one day. > I've checked websites and list archives with no joy. I know this was > recently discussed. > > Thanks. > > -Bill B Try Digi-Key Corporation - USA Home Page or http://mouser.com/> Peter > > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 05:19:20 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 07:01 AM 2/28/2006 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" > > >Oh. >Well that is very interesting Brian. Could it be that my IGN wire is >dead? >I have the IGN with voltage applied before cranking (I think. I have not >checked it since initial install) and I have an idiot light installed >which does work as expected. I will check that IGN wire next time I have >the cowl off to verify it is supplying power before cranking. Based on >your note below, it is quite possible the IGN wire is doing nothing. >Wonder why temperature is at play though. > >Ill check it and report back. Brian, have you been holding out on us? I've not been aware of any automotive products that would ultimately self-excite at any time interval or speed conditions. An interesting phenomenon to contemplate. Just last year I shared the following from my experience with the alternators on Bonanzas and Barons: ------------ May 2005 ----------------- Example: I was tasked with designing a regulator for Bonanzas way back when. The spec from Beech required that I be able to take advantage of the alternator's self-excitation capabilities. Okay, went out to Beech and borrowed an alternator. On the drive stand, the residual output from the b-lead with the field disconnected was about 1.5 volts. Hmmmm, not enough to get the regulator electronics to come alive . . . we were working in a 28v system. I had to redesign the regulator so that it would offer a bit of leakage through the powered- down device. Sure enough, the smallest amount of feedback from b-lead to field would cause the system to wake up and run regulated. Now, having accomplished the assigned task, I did NOT go investigate the alternator's performance with respect to bus voltage quality sans battery. In later years . . . many later years, I heard of a fuss about a batch of alternators that were rejected because they would not self-excite. This caused a great thrashing through the specs, purchase contracts, acceptance test procedures, etc. The supplier was called on the carpet and was feeling really beat up . . . "Look, there's no requirement for this alternator to self excite." Sho'nuf. Nobody could point to any controlling document and cite a requirement for self-excitation. The vast majority of alternators would do it . . . so many in fact that Beech ASSUMED that it was a designed in feature and decided to capitalize on it. But when some process change or stack up of production variables generated a batch of alternators that would not self-excite, folks started shoveling garbage into the fans. In fact, the supplier had never intended that the alternator perform in this manner and Beech simply assumed that the characteristic was designed in. I've often wondered how much it would affect the normal operation of an alternator to simply add a little rare-earth magnet pellet to the field assembly to cause some tiny but fixed amount of field flux to always exist. We know that there are alternator field assemblies with sufficient magnetic retention to bring themselves on line but I wonder if this is a controlled, design-in feature or a happy fallout of production variables. -------------------------------------------------------- Michael, the stagelight is on you sir. Do let us know about that IGN wire! Bob . . . >Thanks >Mike >Do not archive > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com >[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian >Lloyd >Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 8:19 PM >To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Update: Strange alternator behavior at >Startup > >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd > > >Robert L. Nuckolls, III Startup wrote: > > >> Set immediate idle at 800rpm. No charge. Sat ther for 10 seconds or >so. > >> Went to 1100rpm for about 5 seconds. And Wallah, charging. > >> Back to 700rpm for 10 seconds. Still Charging. > >> Down to 350rpm for 10 seconds and still charging. > > ... > > > > Don't jerk it out yet. It just might be performing > > exactly as the designers intended. > >This is actually normal behavior for a self-exciting alternator if you >don't hook up the ignition terminal or the idiot light. There is no >source of power to provide any field excitation so excitation comes from >the residual magnetic field in the armature. Eventually you get it >spinning fast enough that there is enough output from the stator to >begin to excite the regulator and the field. The result is that the >alternator begins to bootstrap, i.e. a little current gets to the field >which slightly increases the output which causes a little more current >to get to the field, until the alternator has enough output to fully >turn on the regulator and the field. > >-- >Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way >brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630 >+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax) ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 05:23:33 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: High Current Diodes --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 10:59 PM 2/27/2006 -0800, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Scott" > >Instead of a contactor and switch why not use one of these high current >diodes to protect a ground power plug (power in but not out)? Or at least >to eliminate the need for a disconnect switch by preventing "back flow" from >engergizing the contactor? Would these also be appropriate for feeding a >larger secondary bus? > >http://www.surplussales.com/Semiconductors/Diodes-3.html > >Or is there a dangerous failure mode or quirk in their specs I'm missing? > >Thanks! Depends on your design goals for ground power functionality. I produced the article at: http://aeroelectric.com/articles/grndpwr.pdf . . . based on requests for a ground power installation. After having experienced a situation where the guy on the ground had his back to me when he shot 28v to my 14v airplane that I crafted a system with reverse polarity protection, absolute control of incoming power by pilot -AND- ov protection. Bob . . . < What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that > < the authority which determines whether there can be > < debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of > < scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests > < with experiment. > < --Lawrence M. Krauss > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 05:26:08 AM PST US From: "Bruce Gray" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: d-sub panel connector source --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" http://steinair.com/ should have them. Bruce www.glasair.org -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Peter Laurence Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 8:08 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: d-sub panel connector source --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: " Peter Laurence" > remind me where I can get a panel mount d-sub connector for laptop > interconnectivity with the Dynon and GRT EFIS I hope to install one day. > I've checked websites and list archives with no joy. I know this was > recently discussed. > > Thanks. > > -Bill B Try Digi-Key Corporation - USA Home Page or http://mouser.com/> Peter > > > ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 05:47:09 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Startup (Bob N) Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Bob N) --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Startup (Bob N) At 07:51 PM 2/27/2006 -0800, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: > > Bob, most of what you wrote has nothing to do with the topic? > > It is not a debate of IF you should use a I-VR alternator, but I will > try to address you question, fully knowing you will never be > satisfied. > > > >Bob N wrote > >If they have understanding to offer, the block diagrams, > >schematics, test results, etc are in order. That's what I offer and I > >expect no less. > > > Just call them Bob. What's the big deal. > > Bob you provide a wealth of knowledge and experience. I think > we all can say is of immense help and enjoyment to us amateur > airplane electricians. Your help to airplane builders in garages > and hangers world over is with out dispute. Even if I dont agree > with you, that does not mean I dont understand your point or > disrespect your accomplishments. You can't have it both ways George. If my experience and accomplishments have value, then there must be some useful application of tools and philosophies upon which those accomplishments are based. In one breath you extoll the virtues of those accomplishments, and in the next you brush my opinion aside because it does not agree with the one you formed by calling folks on the phone. I talk to lots of people and I read lots of data sheets but these are STARTING places . . . I asked you to help explain the inner workings of an exemplar regulator with a goal of seeing if advertising hype (and the opinions of those you talked to on the phone) have foundation in physics and simple-ideas. After sorting out the sand in data sheets, it's a good idea to hit lab and RUN the thing. It's not common but I've discovered things about people's products that they had no understanding of (and we didn't either until after a few $hundred thousands$ went down the tubes in warranty work). Real engineering (and teaching) can be accomplished only when the activities are supported by an understanding and artful assemblage of simple-ideas. If you choose to drive your career and tutelage based on telephone conversations and faithful acceptance of bang-for-the-buck-bullets on data sheets, it's your choice - but not mine. What you have accepted and now promote as FACT has yet to be demonstrated. I'll publish the MC33092 trade study to show others on the list how the most successful engineering is conducted. By the way, "work product" is anything which you have created. The trade study will be my work product based on the products of others offered as a potential guide for the future efforts of still more folks. That's what engineers do George . . . make sure all the bits and pieces fit smoothly into the whole. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 05:53:57 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: d-sub panel connector source --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 08:07 AM 2/28/2006 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: " Peter Laurence" > > > > remind me where I can get a panel mount d-sub connector for laptop > > interconnectivity with the Dynon and GRT EFIS I hope to install one day. > > I've checked websites and list archives with no joy. I know this was > > recently discussed. These are popcorn parts (everyone has them). See if Radio Shack has the size you need. The folks at http://digikey.com certainly have them as do hundreds of other electronics suppliers. Also check out the article at: http://aeroelectric.com/articles/matenlok/matenlok.html (open barrel d-sub pins are installed the same way with the same tool) and . . . http://aeroelectric.com/articles/dsubs/d_solder.html Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 06:13:35 AM PST US From: Harley Subject: Re: [Possible SPAM] Re: AeroElectric-List: Static Dischargers --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley Morning, David (and everyone)... In my prior life as an engineer at a pharmaceutical company, I spent years trying to convince management how to solve static buildup problems with dry powder transfer systems (Desenex Foot Powder, and Caldesene Baby Powder, among others). Of course, being budget conscious, they didn't want to change out the plastic tubing for conductive tubing. And I couldn't just do it, as every change required extensive documentation and testing followed by FDA approval before it could be implemented. Understandably, the line operators and mechanics would complain every time the air was dry, and they got zapped when they came too near a transfer line (whether it was a vacuum cleaner hose or the main product flex line). During the summer, when the air was warm and more humid, there was no problem. The humidity in the air was the conductor. But, every winter, after the first dry, cold day, I would get a call...fix it.... Of course, they wouldn't listen to my suggestion...spend the money and replace the plastic with conductive tubing...so, the managers came up with many methods they thought would cure it. The mechanics wasted hours hooking up all kind of crazy gadgets the managers thought of or heard about that never worked. When they finally used conductive plastic and ss line, they solved the problems. As you all know, static buildup occurs on NON-CONDUCTIVE surfaces. So, if you attach a grounded, conductive wire or braid to such a surface, it will keep THAT SPOT discharged. Being non-conductive, the rest of the object can't discharge as the current can't "flow". An inch away, on the non-conductive surface, the charge will build just as it always has, looking for a place to jump to when the voltage gets sufficient. Like your finger, or eventually the wire you hooked up if it's not too far away (or your radio antenna lead). It can't traverse along the non-conductive surface to the wire until the voltage is high enough to make the jump. And that creates noise and/or sparks. A single wire or braid attached to a single point cannot discharge the entire plastic surface. As was mentioned already, creating a conducting surface that contacts every point of the plastic to allow bleeding at that point, and within a reasonable distance either side of it, will. Like a fine mesh wire screen. Or a conductive surface. Or, a metal airplane.... Harley Dixon Long EZ N28EZ David Carter wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Carter" > >I believe p-static is principally the noise created by static electricity >jumping from skin panel to skin panel on the way aft and finally off of the >plane in elevator and rudders. I think fiberglass stuff up front is a big >source of buildup. You could try running a wire from nose to tail, with good >electrical connection at each end - this might let the static build up on >fiberglass cowl (I'm thinking RV series aircraft) bleed off by going from >front to back without jumping a lot of little skin gaps along the way (don't >ask me why the fore-aft longerons wouldn't do the same). > >David > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "steveadams" >To: >Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 9:10 AM >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Static Dischargers > > > > >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "steveadams" >> >> >>Hopefully some of you can help me out. Last week I finally got to fly in >>some actual IMC in my plane (total of 4 hours actual). After about 15 >>minutes in the clouds, my radio transmissions became more and more filled >>with static. Still understandable, but not very clear. No static when just >>listenning to controllers or talking without transmitting. Slowly cleared >>up after exiting clouds. I think this is a static build up problem and >>wondered what others thought. My airplane is an CH640 and I have braided >>grounding straps across rudder and horizontal tail hinges. They didn't >>specify static wicks in the design. I know that static dischargers should >>be out and back as far as possible, but otherwise am not sure about >>placement and how many I may need. Is there any general advise concerning >>placement and number, or is it basically a trial and error process to see >>what works? >> >> >> >> >>Read this topic online here: >> >>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=17053#17053 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 07:24:13 AM PST US From: Brian Lloyd Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" > > Oh. > Well that is very interesting Brian. Could it be that my IGN wire is > dead? Could be. > I have the IGN with voltage applied before cranking (I think. I have not > checked it since initial install) and I have an idiot light installed > which does work as expected. I will check that IGN wire next time I have > the cowl off to verify it is supplying power before cranking. Based on > your note below, it is quite possible the IGN wire is doing nothing. Some older regulators get their initial excitation through the idiot light circuit. If the alternator has no output the regulator draws current through the idiot light causing most of the current to flow through the field which starts the bootstrap ball rolling. If the alternator has an ignition terminal then that terminal is used to provide the initial field current to bootstrap the alternator. And every IR alternator is different. If you want the details, you need to find out how your particular alternator works. It is just that I have worked with a fair number (cars, boats, gen-sets, and airplanes) and what I wrote above has been generally true for these devices. The Delco truck alternator I had on my CJ6A had nothing connected to the idiot light circuit or the IGN lead and used to require that I get up to around 2000 RPM (2300 RPM was red-line) before it would self-excite. After that it would be fine even at idle. I ended up selling the airplane before I got around to fixing that problem. > Wonder why temperature is at play though. Just a wild guess but most silicon devices have a negative temperature coefficient. The drop across a cold diode is greater than the drop across a warm diode. This could change the required voltage from the alternator requiring it to turn faster to self-excite. But this latter comment is pure speculation on my part with nothing to back it up so is not worth much. > Ill check it and report back. > Thanks > Mike > Do not archive > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian > Lloyd > Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 8:19 PM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Update: Strange alternator behavior at > Startup > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd > > > Robert L. Nuckolls, III Startup wrote: > >>> Set immediate idle at 800rpm. No charge. Sat ther for 10 seconds or > so. >>> Went to 1100rpm for about 5 seconds. And Wallah, charging. >>> Back to 700rpm for 10 seconds. Still Charging. >>> Down to 350rpm for 10 seconds and still charging. >> ... >> >> Don't jerk it out yet. It just might be performing >> exactly as the designers intended. > > This is actually normal behavior for a self-exciting alternator if you > don't hook up the ignition terminal or the idiot light. There is no > source of power to provide any field excitation so excitation comes from > the residual magnetic field in the armature. Eventually you get it > spinning fast enough that there is enough output from the stator to > begin to excite the regulator and the field. The result is that the > alternator begins to bootstrap, i.e. a little current gets to the field > which slightly increases the output which causes a little more current > to get to the field, until the alternator has enough output to fully > turn on the regulator and the field. > -- Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630 +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax) I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . . - Antoine de Saint-Exupery ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 07:24:13 AM PST US From: Brian Lloyd Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > At 07:01 AM 2/28/2006 -0500, you wrote: > >> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" >> >> >> Oh. >> Well that is very interesting Brian. Could it be that my IGN wire is >> dead? >> I have the IGN with voltage applied before cranking (I think. I have not >> checked it since initial install) and I have an idiot light installed >> which does work as expected. I will check that IGN wire next time I have >> the cowl off to verify it is supplying power before cranking. Based on >> your note below, it is quite possible the IGN wire is doing nothing. >> Wonder why temperature is at play though. >> >> Ill check it and report back. > > Brian, have you been holding out on us? Uh, no. I thought this was common knowledge about IR alternators. > I've not been aware of > any automotive products that would ultimately self-excite at > any time interval or speed conditions. An interesting phenomenon to > contemplate. Almost every IR alternator I have played with exhibits this characteristic. Now it may be that new ones have no residual magnetism in the field armature and therefore cannot self excite. OTOH, *I* have not run into one that would not self excite once you turned it fast enough. > > Just last year I shared the following from my experience with > the alternators on Bonanzas and Barons: Yeah. I just assumed that is how they were supposed to work too. And just the act of using them for awhile builds up magnetism in the armature. I suspect that, even if they don't self-excite when brand new, they will after having been used for several hours. -- Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630 +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax) I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . . - Antoine de Saint-Exupery ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 12:34:13 PM PST US From: Bill Dube Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Bill Dube Did you compare your measured light output with the FAA required light output? You can do a reasonably good job with one-foot piece of string, a protractor, and a photographic light meter that can read ambient light. Here is a list of some of the points you should check on the red and green lights: +/- Azimuth (off the nose) +/-Elevation CP 0 0 40 0 15 28 0 20 20 0 30 12 0 50 2 20 30 9 25 to 110 30 1.5 Azimuth is the number of degrees off the nose. Elevation is the number of degrees off the horizon. The white tail light is even more difficult to get proper light output. Here are a few points to check on the tail light: +/- Azimuth (off the tail) +/-Elevation CP 0 to 70 0 20 0 to 70 15 14 0 to 70 20 10 0 to 70 30 6 It takes a LOT of white LEDs to fill the required FAA pattern. Bill Dube' mchristian@canetics.com wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: mchristian@canetics.com > >I used the Nova EPSX - 402 supply for something like $80. It is fully potted for >"extreme" conditions and has two strobe outlets, 3.75 amps draw and 12 diffrerent >selectable flash patterns in a box 4.7" X 4.4" X 1.7" to feed two wingtip >strobes ($18 each). It works great. > >For position lights, I used three luxeon stars - one red one green, and you guessed it, one white. They are only $6.00 each. I put them in series with a calculated power resistor and they are so bright it is hard to look at. Total draw for position lights is one amp or less. I thermally bonded them to little thin sheetmetal brackets and mounted them under some Kutzleman clear plastic domes with the strobe heads. Since then, Kutzleman has come out with their streamline combo (www.kestrobes.com) essentially doing the same thing for $94 that I made for less than $40 each. > >Total cost of strobe and position light system is less than $180. > >Mike > >reposting to get subject line to adhere... > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 01:06:39 PM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights From: "Mark R Steitle" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark R Steitle" Richard, Thanks for the information (url). Looks pretty simple, until you actually try it yourself for real! Thought you would find this post from the Aero-electric list of interest. Bill Dube makes LED clearance light kits for experimental a/c. Good info to keep on hand if you're going to build your own LED lights. The Luxeon lights are much brighter than the regular leds. See ya, Mark -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Dube Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 2:25 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Bill Dube Did you compare your measured light output with the FAA required light output? You can do a reasonably good job with one-foot piece of string, a protractor, and a photographic light meter that can read ambient light. Here is a list of some of the points you should check on the red and green lights: +/- Azimuth (off the nose) +/-Elevation CP 0 0 40 0 15 28 0 20 20 0 30 12 0 50 2 20 30 9 25 to 110 30 1.5 Azimuth is the number of degrees off the nose. Elevation is the number of degrees off the horizon. The white tail light is even more difficult to get proper light output. Here are a few points to check on the tail light: +/- Azimuth (off the tail) +/-Elevation CP 0 to 70 0 20 0 to 70 15 14 0 to 70 20 10 0 to 70 30 6 It takes a LOT of white LEDs to fill the required FAA pattern. Bill Dube' mchristian@canetics.com wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: mchristian@canetics.com > >I used the Nova EPSX - 402 supply for something like $80. It is fully potted for >"extreme" conditions and has two strobe outlets, 3.75 amps draw and 12 diffrerent >selectable flash patterns in a box 4.7" X 4.4" X 1.7" to feed two wingtip >strobes ($18 each). It works great. > >For position lights, I used three luxeon stars - one red one green, and you guessed it, one white. They are only $6.00 each. I put them in series with a calculated power resistor and they are so bright it is hard to look at. Total draw for position lights is one amp or less. I thermally bonded them to little thin sheetmetal brackets and mounted them under some Kutzleman clear plastic domes with the strobe heads. Since then, Kutzleman has come out with their streamline combo (www.kestrobes.com) essentially doing the same thing for $94 that I made for less than $40 each. > >Total cost of strobe and position light system is less than $180. > >Mike > >reposting to get subject line to adhere... > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 01:19:31 PM PST US From: Ken Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken Michael If it makes you feel better I have some IGN wire sleuthing to do as well although it is not near the top of my to do list at the moment. My brand new mini ND IR alternator (100211-1680) draws 3.3 amp field current through the B-lead any time the OV contactor is closed with the engine not running. The IGN terminal is simultaneously energised so my next test is to see if this still happens with the IGN wire disconnected. If so then it is shopping time for another regulator but of course on mine it is difficult to get at that wire to test it. I thought most of these things were smart enough to not energise the field until the rotor was turning but maybe not. Or perhaps it is just annoyed because I'm not allowing it to draw its normal 4 ma of standby current that it would draw from the battery if I wasn't using an OV contactor ;) It charges and regulates perfectly when the engine is running. Ken Brian Lloyd wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd > >Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) wrote: > > >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" >> >>Oh. >>Well that is very interesting Brian. Could it be that my IGN wire is >>dead? >> >> > >Could be. > > ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 01:43:07 PM PST US From: "Terry Watson" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Terry Watson" I have the RV wingtip tanks designed for the surface mounted nav lights, so the option of the enclosed wingtip leading edge lights is not available to me. Are there any l.e.d. nav/strobe combinations available that meet the FAA requirements? Thanks, Terry RV-8A Seattle ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 02:01:54 PM PST US From: sgettings@cfl.rr.com Subject: Re: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: sgettings@cfl.rr.com I also used luxeons for position lights (2 high-intensity lambertians on each side) and presented it to our EAA meeting as well as our local IA/DAR. The DAR had no problem signing off on the intensity and distribution of the position lights. I previously provided a link to the EAA article on this for those who were interested. Luxeons are really the only practical and affordable LEDS that will meet the position lighting requirements. Making strobes using LEDS are another matter, as it is very tough to get to 400 cp. Even many of the non-aviation strobes and power supplies won't meet this requirement. There are some options other than Whelan(=$$$, however. Scott Gettings ----- Original Message ----- From: Mark R Steitle Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark R Steitle" > > Richard, > Thanks for the information (url). Looks pretty simple, until you > actually try it yourself for real! > > Thought you would find this post from the Aero-electric list of > interest. Bill Dube makes LED clearance light kits for experimental > a/c. Good info to keep on hand if you're going to build your own LED > lights. The Luxeon lights are much brighter than the regular leds. > > See ya, > Mark > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > BillDube > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 2:25 PM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Bill Dube > > > Did you compare your measured light output with the FAA required > light > output? > > You can do a reasonably good job with one-foot piece of string, a > protractor, and a photographic light meter that can read ambient > light. > Here is a list of some of the points you should check on the > red and > > green lights: > > +/- Azimuth (off the nose) +/-Elevation CP > 0 0 40 > 0 15 28 > 0 20 20 > 0 30 12 > 0 50 2 > 20 30 9 > 25 to 110 30 1.5 > > Azimuth is the number of degrees off the nose. > > Elevation is the number of degrees off the horizon. > > The white tail light is even more difficult to get proper light > output. > Here are a few points to check on the tail light: > > +/- Azimuth (off the tail) +/-Elevation CP > 0 to 70 0 20 > 0 to 70 15 14 > 0 to 70 20 10 > 0 to 70 30 6 > > It takes a LOT of white LEDs to fill the required FAA pattern. > > Bill Dube' > > > > > > mchristian@canetics.com wrote: > > >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: mchristian@canetics.com > > > >I used the Nova EPSX - 402 supply for something like $80. It is > fullypotted for > >"extreme" conditions and has two strobe outlets, 3.75 amps draw > and 12 > diffrerent > >selectable flash patterns in a box 4.7" X 4.4" X 1.7" to feed two > wingtip > >strobes ($18 each). It works great. > > > >For position lights, I used three luxeon stars - one red one > green, and > you guessed it, one white. They are only $6.00 each. I put them in > series with a calculated power resistor and they are so bright it is > hard to look at. Total draw for position lights is one amp or > less. I > thermally bonded them to little thin sheetmetal brackets and mounted > them under some Kutzleman clear plastic domes with the strobe heads. > Since then, Kutzleman has come out with their streamline combo > (www.kestrobes.com) essentially doing the same thing for $94 that I > madefor less than $40 each. > > > >Total cost of strobe and position light system is less than $180. > > > >Mike > > > >reposting to get subject line to adhere... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 02:43:37 PM PST US From: "Alan K. Adamson" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson" Might try these guys... I have a set and really like them. www.gs-air.com Alan -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Terry Watson Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 4:40 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Terry Watson" --> I have the RV wingtip tanks designed for the surface mounted nav lights, so the option of the enclosed wingtip leading edge lights is not available to me. Are there any l.e.d. nav/strobe combinations available that meet the FAA requirements? Thanks, Terry RV-8A Seattle ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 03:28:50 PM PST US From: "richard titsworth" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "richard titsworth" Alan, Do you have the XPAK 604-HR strobe driver listed on their website? I'd like to put a strobe driver in each wingtip and have a low voltage synchronizer line between them, rather than 1 central driver and coax (to minimize noise). The picture of the driver on the website seems to have several (extra/additional) connectors/pinouts but I can't tell what they do or if it supports a low voltage synchronizer circuit between multiple drivers. Do you know? Beyond the multiple strobe outputs and power/ground, what are the other connectors for? Rick Titsworth Detroit -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan K. Adamson Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 5:39 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson" Might try these guys... I have a set and really like them. www.gs-air.com Alan -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Terry Watson Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 4:40 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Terry Watson" --> I have the RV wingtip tanks designed for the surface mounted nav lights, so the option of the enclosed wingtip leading edge lights is not available to me. Are there any l.e.d. nav/strobe combinations available that meet the FAA requirements? Thanks, Terry RV-8A Seattle ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 03:57:44 PM PST US From: "Terry Watson" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Terry Watson" Thanks Alan. That's just what I was looking for. Terry -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan K. Adamson Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 2:39 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson" Might try these guys... I have a set and really like them. www.gs-air.com ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 04:13:41 PM PST US From: "LarryRobertHelming" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" I have the one central control power supply. I do not have any noise. So, I don't understand you concerns about wanting to minimize it. It is not there to start with. I wired per the instructions and did nothing special beyond that. The extra connectors are for different flashing patterns. Indiana Larry, RV7 "SunSeeker" 90+ hours flying and XPAK power supply. "Please use the information and opinions I express with responsibility, and at your own risk." ----- Original Message ----- From: "richard titsworth" Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 5:26 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "richard titsworth" > > > Alan, > Do you have the XPAK 604-HR strobe driver listed on their website? > > I'd like to put a strobe driver in each wingtip and have a low voltage > synchronizer line between them, rather than 1 central driver and coax (to > minimize noise). The picture of the driver on the website seems to have > several (extra/additional) connectors/pinouts but I can't tell what they > do > or if it supports a low voltage synchronizer circuit between multiple > drivers. > > Do you know? Beyond the multiple strobe outputs and power/ground, what > are > the other connectors for? > > Rick Titsworth > Detroit > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan K. > Adamson > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 5:39 PM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson" > > > Might try these guys... I have a set and really like them. > > www.gs-air.com > > > Alan > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Terry > Watson > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 4:40 PM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Terry Watson" > --> > > I have the RV wingtip tanks designed for the surface mounted nav lights, > so > the option of the enclosed wingtip leading edge lights is not available to > me. Are there any l.e.d. nav/strobe combinations available that meet the > FAA > requirements? > > Thanks, > > Terry > RV-8A > Seattle > > > ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 04:48:45 PM PST US From: "Alan K. Adamson" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson" I don't have that model, I have a different generation version (actually still made but only 2 channel). Those other ports are for diagnosis and flash selection. The manufacturer is www.strobe.com I got the entire kit from gs-air.com and it included "shielded" hookup wire. If you want separate PS's all over the place, then the only game in town is the certified aeroflash units. I'm not sure if they have a discounted non-certified version or not. Hope that helps. Alan -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of richard titsworth Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 6:27 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "richard titsworth" --> Alan, Do you have the XPAK 604-HR strobe driver listed on their website? I'd like to put a strobe driver in each wingtip and have a low voltage synchronizer line between them, rather than 1 central driver and coax (to minimize noise). The picture of the driver on the website seems to have several (extra/additional) connectors/pinouts but I can't tell what they do or if it supports a low voltage synchronizer circuit between multiple drivers. Do you know? Beyond the multiple strobe outputs and power/ground, what are the other connectors for? Rick Titsworth Detroit -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan K. Adamson Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 5:39 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson" Might try these guys... I have a set and really like them. www.gs-air.com Alan -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Terry Watson Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 4:40 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Terry Watson" --> I have the RV wingtip tanks designed for the surface mounted nav lights, so the option of the enclosed wingtip leading edge lights is not available to me. Are there any l.e.d. nav/strobe combinations available that meet the FAA requirements? Thanks, Terry RV-8A Seattle ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 05:12:05 PM PST US From: "Michael Hinchcliff" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: KLN35A Pin/Installation Diagram --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Michael Hinchcliff" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Baker" Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2006 5:12 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: KLN35A Pin/Installation Diagram > > 2.) How are the alphabetic rows on the connectors arranged >> since they don't line up with their order from their numbered >> counterparts? For example, on the P1, why are pins 22 and Z > adjacent >> instead of 22 and V? On the P4001, pins 15 and S are adjacent > instead >> of 15 and O? Make sense? > > > Ah hah! I think I sense your confusion. Not all the letters are used > since one might get similar looking letters confused with some > numbers if the wires are labeled...i.e. 1 and i, etc..... > > Look at the letter codes in the list and find out which ones are not > used. Makes it confusing but there is a reason.... > > Jim Baker > 580.788.2779 > '71 SV, 492TC > Elmore City, OK > > I resolved my KLN35A Pinout problem. I bought the product install manual on eBay for $13 bucks and it answers all of my questions and then some. Jim, as an FYI, the pin out diagram you sent me for data in/out pins are indeed the same (K,H,J). Thank you again for your assistance! Michael H. ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 05:25:18 PM PST US From: "Andy" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Ground Power circuit diagram query & suggestion --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Andy" Hi Bob, I don't understand the need for a push-to-test lamp in your Low Cost Ground Power circuit (rev C 07/21/05). Surely it would provide a more useful function if it were a regular lamp directly connected to ground, therefore providing either; (a) a warning of presence of a ground power source, or; (b) a warning that the switch/breaker for ground power contactor is still closed (where the ground power contactor is held closed by ship's battery). This function seems important since the contactor takes nearly a Amp to maintain. Either of those without having to press a button to find out. Since you need some ground power-side volts to light it anyway, it will normally be off AND "un-testable". Better still, you could use a bi-colour LED, with GREEN for correct polarity and RED for inverted (help save a contactor diode if you reverse-connect the leads to the 4x4) My 1st post & just getting my head round all the issues, so excuse me if I missed something obvious. Looking forward to the book arriving tomorrow. Regards, Andy Grimshaw grimmers1@ntlworld.com Jodel DR200 group home-build (panel & electrics still on the drawing board) UK ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 05:49:16 PM PST US From: Bill Dube Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Bill Dube sgettings@cfl.rr.com wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: sgettings@cfl.rr.com > >I also used luxeons for position lights (2 high-intensity lambertians on >each side) and presented it to our EAA meeting as well as our local >IA/DAR. The DAR had no problem signing off on the intensity and >distribution of the position lights. I previously provided a link to >the EAA article on this for those who were interested. > > The DAR didn't measure the light output. They very rarely have the equipment to do so. If it doesn't bother you to have less light than required by the FAA, then use whatever position lights will pass muster with your local DAR. Most folks want position lights that are at least as bright as the FAA requires, not just bright enough for the DAR to sign them off. >Luxeons are really the only practical and affordable LEDS that will meet >the position lighting requirements. > > Not so. If you design a light that meets the FAA requirements, you need quite a few of the Luxeon LEDs. It turns out to be less expensive to fill the FAA required light pattern with high-brightness 5 mm LEDs. In lumens per dollar, you are better off with 5 mm LEDs. You will notice that on the Luxeon spec sheets, they never tell you the candlepower output. They won't tell you when you call up. You have to buy one and measure it. They don't tell you because they don't want you to be able to directly compare the output of their lights with other LEDs. The Luxeon LEDs are good if you require a very bright point source, like for a projector. If it is OK to have the light spread out with more than one LED, then 5 mm LEDs provide much more light per dollar. My LED position lights put out more than what the FAA requires in all directions, and they are less expensive than any other LED position light on the market (some of which do not put out the light required by the FAA.) Bill Dube' ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 05:57:35 PM PST US From: "Frank Smith" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 15 Msgs - 02/26/06 --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Frank Smith" Hi Gary, I never heard of that company, but it looks like they have a good price on the oil filter adapter. The company I bought the engine from was AERO, Inc. They sell all the ECI stuff, and the part no of the filter adapter is AEL22772-1. AEL is the ECI parts number. I thiunk it lists for $199, but call them at 800-362-3044. I don't think they have a web site. Regards, Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: "AeroElectric-List Digest Server" Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 2:55 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List Digest: 15 Msgs - 02/26/06 > * > > ================================================== > Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive > ================================================== > > Today's complete AeroElectric-List Digest can also be found in either of > the > two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted > in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes > and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version > of the AeroElectric-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text > editor > such as Notepad or with a web browser. > > HTML Version: > > > http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list/Digest.AeroElectric-List.2006-02-26.html > > Text Version: > > > http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list/Digest.AeroElectric-List.2006-02-26.txt > > > ================================================ > EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive > ================================================ > > > AeroElectric-List Digest Archive > --- > Total Messages Posted Sun 02/26/06: 15 > > > Today's Message Index: > ---------------------- > > 1. 01:24 AM - Re: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT (Gilles Tatry) > 2. 05:11 AM - Re: Re: Gotcha! (BobsV35B@aol.com) > 3. 05:56 AM - Re: Baclup Battery monitor - Aux batt charge (Tim > Olson) > 4. 07:33 AM - Re: LED position lights + strobe (Eric Newton) > 5. 09:27 AM - Re: Re: Gotcha! (Brian Lloyd) > 6. 09:30 AM - Re: Electrical System Design for 2 Stroke Engines (Bill > Czygan) > 7. 11:36 AM - Re: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT (Robert L. > Nuckolls, III) > 8. 12:26 PM - Re: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT (Gilles Tatry) > 9. 12:40 PM - Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Mickey and > Bob N.) () > 10. 01:03 PM - Mic and Headset Jack Installation (SMITHBKN@aol.com) > 11. 02:05 PM - Re: Mic and Headset Jack Installation (SteinAir, Inc.) > 12. 07:28 PM - Re: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT (Robert L. > Nuckolls, III) > 13. 07:28 PM - Re: Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Mickey > and Bob N.) (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) > 14. 07:35 PM - Re: Mic and Headset Jack Installation (Robert L. > Nuckolls, III) > 15. 07:43 PM - Re: Re: Electrical System Design for 2 Stroke Engines > (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) > > > ________________________________ Message 1 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 01:24:46 AM PST US > From: "Gilles Tatry" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gilles Tatry" > > > You are absolutely right, Bob! > Except that I am not concerned with cold, but hot weather flying, when an > open cockpitt is delightful... > It is the worst case for engine temp, and also the worst for CHT reading. > With the cold junction at the back of the instrument, CHT can read about > 20 > C less than reality. If the cold junction was in the engine compartment, > reading might be somewhere in the middle of the scale, or lower, instead > of > close to, or even higher than the engine CHT limitation... > Too late indeed to change the instrument, wich size is very specific: the > panel is built and wired, I don't want to do it again. > Moreover, I am highly interested indeed in this intellectual challenge, > and > learn a lot... > Thank you for the help! > > Gilles > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 3:54 PM > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT > > >> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" >> >> >> At 02:11 PM 2/22/2006 -0600, you wrote: >> >>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: AI Nut >>> >>>Ok, maybe I'm being dense here, but here goes: >>>If the 594 is used, no further cold junction compensation is necessary >>>from the TC side is necessary. If the UMA instrument needs it, then I >>>suggest dropping it. Use a simple microprocessor (about $1) and an LED >>>display ($40?) instead. Some of the micros have an LED display driver >>>already built-in, IIRC. Check out Freescale's website. >> >> I don't think the UMA bothers to use dynamic cold-junction >> compensation. Their cold junction is at the back of the instrument >> and the calibration is optimized at a 20C cockpit. So >> ranges of temperatures that most pilots are willing to >> endure in the cockpit is assumed to introduce insignificant >> error. >> >> Possibly true for most enclosed cockpit/pilot combinations. >> This is an open cockpit a/c where the owner says his >> motivations to fly outweigh other pilot's inhibitions >> (maybe he has a heated flight-suit). In any case, the >> stated accuracy of the stock gage is found deficient for >> his needs. >> >> The idea is to apply EXTERNAL signal conditioning using >> the 594 and drive the instrument with whatever combination >> of constant current/voltage seems best. This allows us >> to provide offset/scale-factor pots that will permit >> calibration to number probably better than the off-the-shelf >> instrument. Dynamic cold-junction compensation comes with >> the package. >> >> >>>If he's married to the UMA, then enjoy the exercises 8-). >> >> That's the major rub. He has the instruments, they're both >> physically attractive for their size (tiny panel) and round >> dials but a tad short on performance. Just ONE of life's >> little challenges . . . >> >> Bob . . . > > > ________________________________ Message 2 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 05:11:35 AM PST US > From: BobsV35B@aol.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Gotcha! > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com > > > In a message dated 2/26/2006 12:36:01 A.M. Central Standard Time, > gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com writes: > > So before you all point finger, if it can happen to a Pro crew, it can > happen > to you or me. First I can't believe an Apollo 820 GPS is legal for long > range > Oceanic flight. It would not meet the requirements to cross the Atlantic. > Second the out of date data base blows me away. With that said they would > have been better off using the old data base way points, even out of > date. They could check the lat/longs against a chart or flight plane. > Entering lat / longs much more error prone than entering a way point ID. > > > Good Morning George, > > Don't get carried away with your indignation. There are many small, low > cost, navigation devices that are approved for operation as sole source > guidance > > for flight across the North Atlantic. Included among them are the Trimble > 2000 > > Approach and Approach Plus, Garmin GNC 300 XL and the Apollo NMC 2001. > There > are probably many more, but that is NOT an area of my expertise. > > Incidentally, I do agree with you that errors are easy to make. I was > flying > long haul when we first got rid of the live navigators (we had errors > with > them too!) and went to INS navigation. I realize that current practice > among > air carriers is much more regulated than it was in my day, but I never > liked > the 'two man' loading scheme. I always loaded my FMC's by having one of > us > load from the chart and the other from the flight plan. (We only used two > FMC's > > on my airline) After we had independently loaded the data, we then cross > checked the two units to assure that both had the same data loaded. No > cross > filling allowed in my cockpit. > > You would be amazed at how many errors we found in the early computer > generated flight plans! > > 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: 05:56:43 AM PST US > From: Tim Olson > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Baclup Battery monitor - Aux batt charge > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Tim Olson > > >>> The problem with diodes is they all have a forward volt drop, standard >>> diodes are about 1 volt drop. So if your system charges at say 14.2 >>> volts, your second battery will only see 13.2V. >> >> Which is a major issue for recharging the standby battery >> to 100% of capacity. >> >> >>> I believe the Shotkey (sp?) diode has a much lower drop...Althouigh I >>> don't know what it is. >>> > > I trimmed much of the thread for brevity on this single issue. > I'm now flying in my RV-10 with a schematic as shown here: > http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/electrical/N104CD_Electrical_Schematic_Rev5.pdf > > By using a couple of different diodes, (one was Eric's schottky), > I've now got a system with a couple of benefits: > > * charges the aux battery through a schottky with a lower Vdrop at all > times. > * Powers the E-Bus from the Avionics bus, whenever the avionics bus is > on. > * Powers the E-Bus directly from the aux battery when E-Bus is on. > > > I use the E-Bus switch during startup to start the EFIS and EIS before > I crank the engine, and I get no Voltage drops rebooting my E-Bus items. > > After engine start, I fire up the avioinics bus, and the rest of my > stuff comes online. I then shut OFF my E-Bus feed switch and if you > trace back the wiring, you'll see that I don't lose power during the > switch because of the diodes, and, I get the benefit of a diode-free > path from the alternator to the Aux battery. So, even though the > charging circuit is there with the schottky, I'll get the benefit > of getting 100% voltage to the aux battery for a full charge. > > The rest of the system works great for me too. Some breakers, > some fuses. I do use a keyswitch with my Lightspeed and a Mag, > which works great, but I couldn't illustrate the switching of the > circuit using the keyswitch model, so I drew it as switches and it's > innacurate. > > The Aux Alternator section is currently not installed. I'm waiting > for Plane-Power to come out with their aux alternator to save a bunch > of cost. It would be a nice thing to have, but actually with the > large set of aux batteries and the wiring that I have, it's nearing > overkill to add that to the system unless I plan not to land when > I have a problem. > > Sorry to chop the thread. I've changed the subject line to accomodate. > > Tim > > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying > > > ________________________________ Message 4 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 07:33:31 AM PST US > From: "Eric Newton" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: LED position lights + strobe > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric Newton" > > > Could be this one: > http://www.creativair.com/cva/product_info.php?cPath=3D21&products_id=3D44 > > Eric > > > ________________________________ Message 5 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 09:27:32 AM PST US > From: Brian Lloyd > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Gotcha! > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd > > gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com wrote: > >> This is the first problem. Before I went across the pond I had 2 weeks >> of >> ground school, of which many days spent on long range nav, simulator >> training and at least one flight with a training Captain over >> the Atlantic. This poor crew was set up to fail. > > Well, there is training and there is training. It is quite possible for > the captain and crew to ensure their own training and to make a plan for > how to deal with contingencies. It would make a lot of sense for the > crew to think about their lack of training and then go get the > information they needed. A lot has been written on the subject and the > basics of navigation are well understood. That is what I did and I had > no problems with long-range, over-water navigation. It is when you > believe in your computers too much that you start to have problems. > >> So before you all point finger, if it can happen to a Pro crew, it can >> happen > >> to you or me. First I can't believe an Apollo 820 GPS is legal for long >> range > >> Oceanic flight. > > When making a ferry flight you can get away with a lot. I have flown my > Comanche across the Atlantic twice, once non-stop. There are a lot of > opportunities to screw up in 11 hours with nothing to look at but ocean. > None of my equipment was "approved" for long-range ocean flight but it > served me adequately well. My primary electronic nav was a LORAN which I > knew would stop working when it got out of range of the Canadian chain > and would remain unusable until I got within range of the North Atlantic > chain. > > My HF was an old Collins KWM-2 that I had retuned to work in the > aviation bands. The Canadian authorities laughed saying they hadn't seen > someone use a KWM-2 for many years. I had designed an e-bus to ensure > that I would have my electronic nav gear in case of a loss of the main > electrical system. The Canadian DOT inspector at Moncton felt that my > e-bus design was pretty neat and eliminated the need for a separate > battery-operated LF DF radio. > > So my real primary nav was DR backed up with LORAN and using ADF and VOR > for secondary backup. Everything worked as planned, including the loss > of LORAN navigation about 5 hours into the flight. The only surprise is > that we didn't get LORAN back until we were almost to Ireland. By then I > had VOR. ADF surprised me by working from mid-Atlantic. (BBC used to > have a very high-power LW station at 201 KHz if I recall. The > programming wasn't great but the signal kept the ADF needle pointed > where we were going.) Regardless, my DR planning got me to my > destination within 30 seconds of flight-plan time. > > I kept a navigation log that cross-referenced DR and LORAN data. When > the LORAN quit working we were on DR-only but had good intermediate nav > data to start from. When I finally got my LORAN back we were only about > 5 miles off-course. DR works a lot better than most people give it > credit for. > > And, yes, I would do it again using the same equipment. > > -- > Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way > brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630 > +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax) > > I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . . > - Antoine de Saint-Exupery > > > ________________________________ Message 6 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 09:30:32 AM PST US > From: Bill Czygan > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Electrical System Design for 2 Stroke > Engines > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Bill Czygan > > Bob, > Thank you for the kind welcome. Yes, I am new to this list and to > aircraft > construction. I am an Extra class Amateur Radio Operator (Ham), so I am > supposed > to know a few basic things about electricity. At my age (55), it is a race > to see if the learning, or the forgetting, is winning. Thank you for > taking the > time to direct me to the right information. You, and the members, have put > together > a valuable resource here. It is obvious that I need to do some serious > studying to come up to speed, enough to even pose useful questions. That I > will > do right now. Meanwhile, I have put together a BLOG to help UL pilots > transition > to Sport Pilot. One of the things I am doing is advising them on how to > transition their UL aircraft. Many of them will need to create electrical > systems, > as I will. If you don't mind, I would like to provide a link to this list > for them. My site is here: > > http://sptraining.blogspot.com/ > > Again, thank you for the help. > Yours, > > Bill Czygan > AA8MF > Quicksilver MXIIA > > > --------------------------------- > Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments. > > > ________________________________ Message 7 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 11:36:56 AM PST US > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > > At 10:13 AM 2/26/2006 +0100, you wrote: > >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gilles Tatry" >> >> >>You are absolutely right, Bob! >>Except that I am not concerned with cold, but hot weather flying, when an >>open cockpitt is delightful... >>It is the worst case for engine temp, and also the worst for CHT reading. >>With the cold junction at the back of the instrument, CHT can read about >>20 >>C less than reality. If the cold junction was in the engine compartment, >>reading might be somewhere in the middle of the scale, or lower, instead >>of >>close to, or even higher than the engine CHT limitation... >>Too late indeed to change the instrument, wich size is very specific: the >>panel is built and wired, I don't want to do it again. >>Moreover, I am highly interested indeed in this intellectual challenge, >>and >>learn a lot... >>Thank you for the help! > > Have you the tools and where-with-all to get > the measurements we need? > > Bob . . . > > > ________________________________ Message 8 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 12:26:46 PM PST US > From: "Gilles Tatry" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gilles Tatry" > > > I will probably be able to send you the measurements shortly, thanks to > well-equipped friends. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 8:30 PM > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT > > >> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" >> >> >> At 10:13 AM 2/26/2006 +0100, you wrote: >> >>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gilles Tatry" >>> >>> >>>You are absolutely right, Bob! >>>Except that I am not concerned with cold, but hot weather flying, when an >>>open cockpitt is delightful... >>>It is the worst case for engine temp, and also the worst for CHT reading. >>>With the cold junction at the back of the instrument, CHT can read about >>>20 >>>C less than reality. If the cold junction was in the engine compartment, >>>reading might be somewhere in the middle of the scale, or lower, instead >>>of >>>close to, or even higher than the engine CHT limitation... >>>Too late indeed to change the instrument, wich size is very specific: the >>>panel is built and wired, I don't want to do it again. >>>Moreover, I am highly interested indeed in this intellectual challenge, >>>and >>>learn a lot... >>>Thank you for the help! >> >> Have you the tools and where-with-all to get >> the measurements we need? >> >> Bob . . . >> >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 9 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 12:40:38 PM PST US > From: > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup > (Mickey > and Bob N.) > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: > > Dear Bob N.: > > I have no Idea what you are talking about again and why its relavant, > but God Bless you. > > ** > COMMENTS BELOW (..............) ; Cheers George > ** > > >From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > >Subject: Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Mickey and > Bob N.) > > >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: > >> > >>Mickey wants to turn his car off at 100 mph and > >> > >> AND > >> > >> Bob N. wants proof. > > >Not proof sir . . . UNDERSTANDING. I see those words on the > 4-color > >brochures and bang-for-the-buck bullets at the top of data > >sheets . . . all of which ASSUME that your understanding > >of their words is the same as their understanding of > >their words. > > > ** > (BOB,CALL TRANSPO, TALK TO ENGINEERS:1800-TRANSPO/800-872-6776) > ** > > > > >> > >> As far as control of I-VR alternators, it would be wonderful to > use > >> and trust the IGN wire. We could put a crow-bar on the CB to > the > >> IGN lead. However you can't depend on it (apparently from > >> historical & empirical data). That's why a pullable CB on the > B- > >> lead, to positively isolate the alternator, independent of > anything > is > >> suggested. Another way to achieve the same isolation is the > crow > >> bar and over voltage relay on the B-lead. That works also but > its > >> heavy, costly, complicated and potentially can cause nuisance > >> trips. In defense of the crow-bar it is automatic. The pullable > CB > >> needs pilot action. The choice is the builders. As Bob N. says > if > >> you can't take the small chance of an OV, than use an External > >> Regulator and OV module of some kind. if for no other reason > >> it is simple. However there is no guarantee that will work > 100% > >> There's no 100% system. > > > . . . and nobody has ever claimed there was. For Part 25 > airplanes > >we're chartered to do the fault trees with probabilities > applied to > >each branch. When just one of those numbers is assumed, the > result > >suffers from a garbage-in-garbage out syndrome. That's why I > >have come to believe that they add little value in determining > our > >future field experience. I can show you dozens of carefully > calculated > >predictions of golden operations in fielded systems that don't > >even come close. That's why failure tolerance is so much easier > to > >embrace that hoped-for failure proof. > > ** > (BOB, I have an EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT; Don't give a RIP about Part 25 or > 23) > ** > > >I'm working on an article that will illustrate the pitfalls of > >accepting the bang-for-the-buck bullets -OR- the four-color > >brochures at face value. Soon . . . > > > ** > (BOB, What? U lost me (again), call Transpo, they'll help your > UNDERSTANDING) > ** > > Bob . . . > > ** > (George, I am done. Peace) > ** > > > --------------------------------- > Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze. > > > ________________________________ Message 10 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 01:03:51 PM PST US > From: SMITHBKN@aol.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Mic and Headset Jack Installation > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: SMITHBKN@aol.com > > Group, > > I've read the AeroElectric connection, searched the archives, etc. but > can't > develop an answer to the following question: when I went to install my > jacks I > > found that I could either drill a ~3/8" hole that would allow the threaded > post of the jack to pass through, or b) drill a slightly larger hole that > would > > allow the threaded post PLUS the small shoulder to pass through. > > I purchased some of the isolation washers from B&C and they slip easily > over > the threaded post of the jack but won't go down over the shoulder at the > base > of the post. > > If I use the ~3/8" hole it appears the threaded portion of the jack could > contact the panel as it passes through it, even with use of the isolation > washers. So I guess I'm not sure what the isolation washers are doing. > > Need some help ......, Thanks, > > Jeff > RV-7A > smithbkn@aol.com > > > ________________________________ Message 11 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 02:05:17 PM PST US > From: "SteinAir, Inc." > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Mic and Headset Jack Installation > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "SteinAir, Inc." > > > If you have the higher end jacks, then the "shoulder" on the threaded part > of the jack is still part of the center ring or threaded portion. The > goal > of the insulated washers is to completely isolate that part of the jack > (center ring) from the metal panel and airframe ground... It's still a > good > idea to use the washers on the jacks, so drill the hold large enough to > allow the insualting washers. > > Cheers, > Stein. > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com >>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of >>SMITHBKN@aol.com >>Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 3:02 PM >>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com >>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Mic and Headset Jack Installation >> >> >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: SMITHBKN@aol.com >> >>Group, >> >>I've read the AeroElectric connection, searched the archives, etc. >>but can't >>develop an answer to the following question: when I went to >>install my jacks I >>found that I could either drill a ~3/8" hole that would allow the threaded >>post of the jack to pass through, or b) drill a slightly larger >>hole that would >>allow the threaded post PLUS the small shoulder to pass through. >> >>I purchased some of the isolation washers from B&C and they slip >>easily over >>the threaded post of the jack but won't go down over the shoulder >>at the base >>of the post. >> >>If I use the ~3/8" hole it appears the threaded portion of the jack could >>contact the panel as it passes through it, even with use of the isolation >>washers. So I guess I'm not sure what the isolation washers are doing. >> >>Need some help ......, Thanks, >> >>Jeff >>RV-7A >>smithbkn@aol.com >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 12 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 07:28:37 PM PST US > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > > At 09:24 PM 2/26/2006 +0100, you wrote: > >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gilles Tatry" >> >> >>I will probably be able to send you the measurements shortly, thanks to >>well-equipped friends. > > Great! > > Bob . . . > > > ________________________________ Message 13 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 07:28:37 PM PST US > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Startup (Mickey and > Bob N.) > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Strange alternator behavior at > Startup (Mickey > and Bob N.) > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > Startup (Mickey and Bob N.) > > At 12:37 PM 2/26/2006 -0800, you wrote: > >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: >> >>Dear Bob N.: >> >> I have no Idea what you are talking about again and why its relavant, >> but God Bless you. > > Proof is for math problems and courts. Understanding is what real > teachers > offer. Engineers are dependent upon understanding for responsible > conduct > of their craft. > >> >> >> ** >> (BOB,CALL TRANSPO, TALK TO ENGINEERS:1800-TRANSPO/800-872-6776) >>** > > If they have understanding to offer, the block diagrams, schematics, > test results, etc are in order. That's what I offer and I expect no > less. Every simple idea I've had to offer was explained at length, > often illustrated and in many cases based on lessons-learned from > the past 40 years of cooking (and burning a few fingers) in this > particular kitchen. > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> As far as control of I-VR alternators, it would be wonderful >> to use >> >> and trust the IGN wire. We could put a crow-bar on the CB to >> the >> >> IGN lead. However you can't depend on it (apparently from >> >> historical & empirical data). That's why a pullable CB on the >> B- >> >> lead, to positively isolate the alternator, independent of >> anything is >> >> suggested. Another way to achieve the same isolation is the >> crow >> >> bar and over voltage relay on the B-lead. That works also but >> its >> >> heavy, costly, complicated and potentially can cause nuisance >> >> trips. In defense of the crow-bar it is automatic. The >> pullable CB >> >> needs pilot action. The choice is the builders. As Bob N. >> says if >> >> you can't take the small chance of an OV, than use an >> External >> >> Regulator and OV module of some kind. if for no other reason >> >> it is simple. However there is no guarantee that will work >> 100% >> >> There's no 100% system. >> >> > . . . and nobody has ever claimed there was. For Part 25 >> airplanes >> >we're chartered to do the fault trees with probabilities >> applied to >> >each branch. When just one of those numbers is assumed, the >> result >> >suffers from a garbage-in-garbage out syndrome. That's why I >> >have come to believe that they add little value in >> determining our >> >future field experience. I can show you dozens of carefully >> calculated >> >predictions of golden operations in fielded systems that >> don't >> >even come close. That's why failure tolerance is so much >> easier to >> >embrace that hoped-for failure proof. >> >> ** >> (BOB, I have an EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT; Don't give a RIP about Part 25 >> or 23) >> ** >> > > I wasn't suggesting you should. It was an ILLUSTRATION of just how > much we've come to depend on tools (and faith in the talent of > others) that started out with high ideals but failed in the > marketplace. All the analysis in the world does not replace > the repeatable experiment. > > Unfortunately, there is so much faith in the up-front, computer > aided analysis that we've totally divested ourselves of any kind > of skunk works. At the same time, we're a bit dismayed that customer > aircraft have become IR&D tools for fixing problems that analysis > failed to reveal. > > You seem to think I'm trying to convince you of something . . . or > sell > you something. The only reason I offer you anything is as a courtesy > from one engineer to another . . . but gee, without all the alphabet > soup > after my name, perhaps my biggest failing is knowing the right kind > of > words to use. I'm only trying to share my experience and > observations > based on that experience. The only folks who's approval I MUST have > are those who send me money and expect a fair value in return. > Everything > else is the fun of considering simple-ideas . . . . and I DO enjoy > it. > I'm sorry if it's upsetting for you. I AM distressed that you don't > seem to > grasp what I'm driving at . . . a serious failing on my part as a > teacher. Hmmmm . . . did you buy a copy of the 'Connection from me? > Do > you want your money back? > >> >I'm working on an article that will illustrate the pitfalls >> of >> >accepting the bang-for-the-buck bullets -OR- the four-color >> >brochures at face value. Soon . . . >> >> >> ** >> (BOB, What? U lost me (again), call Transpo, they'll help your >> UNDERSTANDING) >> ** > > If that's what you did, then are you then a spokesperson for Transpo > or have you developed an independent but supporting professional > opinion you can share? Have you seen schematics, design > philosophies, > parts selection criteria? Would you/they share that with us? I get > access > to this stuff when I approve products for my boss, it's called > preliminary > and critical design reviews. But since you're going experimental, do > you > consider such tools superfluous, perhaps a waste of time? Is it no > longer > necessary that we understand how things work? Just field the pitch > over the > counter at OSH and plunk down the credit card? I may have to ask > your > forgiveness. I consider my OBAM aircraft customers just as deserving > of the best-I-know-how-to-do as my TC aircraft customers. > > Tell you what. I'm about done with the trade study on the MC33092A. > The task is see if there's some way we can adapt this marvelous > piece of technology into a modern replacement for all the external > regulators flying. Look over the data sheet and craft your own trade > study. If it's at all suited, how can we adapt it to this task? > Are there attractive alternatives? Are all the > bang-for-the-buck-bullets > at the front of the data supported by explanation from within and > and at least supported if not confirmed by your independent > analysis? > How do the features cited add value? Are any of the features nothing > more than chrome on the bumpers and fox tails on the antennas? > I've discovered some interesting points of design in the MC33022A > that offer interesting hypothesis on behaviors of failed alternators > cited recently on the List. It's been an enlightening exercise. When > yours > is done, send me a .pdf and I'll put it up on AeroElectric.com along > with my own. > > You've tossed in tons of cabbages and tomatoes which I've attempted > to field with thoughtful, illustrative answers. May I suggest this > friendly competition. Let the List vote on the work product. Looser > sends the winner a copy of his favorite book. > > If you 'dust' me, I'll be pleased to send you a copy of > "The Professional Amateur" by T.A. Boyd. It's a biography of > Charles F. Kettering - a scientist worthy of much respect and > emulation . . . one of my personal heros. > > Bob . . . > > < What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that > > < the authority which determines whether there can be > > < debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of > > < scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests > > < with experiment. > > < --Lawrence M. Krauss > > > > ________________________________ Message 14 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 07:35:33 PM PST US > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Mic and Headset Jack Installation > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > > At 04:02 PM 2/26/2006 -0500, you wrote: > >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: SMITHBKN@aol.com >> >>Group, >> >>I've read the AeroElectric connection, searched the archives, etc. but >>can't >>develop an answer to the following question: when I went to install my >>jacks I >>found that I could either drill a ~3/8" hole that would allow the threaded >>post of the jack to pass through, or b) drill a slightly larger hole that >>would >>allow the threaded post PLUS the small shoulder to pass through. >> >>I purchased some of the isolation washers from B&C and they slip easily >>over >>the threaded post of the jack but won't go down over the shoulder at the >>base >>of the post. > > That isn't what they're supposed to do. > >>If I use the ~3/8" hole it appears the threaded portion of the jack could >>contact the panel as it passes through it, even with use of the isolation >>washers. So I guess I'm not sure what the isolation washers are doing. > > Drill a 1/2" hole. Put the extruded washer on the jack first, extrusion > facing up. Insert jack in hole from behind and place flat insulating > washer on over the jack's barrel followed by the flat metal washer and > finally the screw. > > The insulating washers will sandwich the panel material while the > extrusion keeps the jack centered in the hole and isolated from > the panel. > > Bob . . . > > > ________________________________ Message 15 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 07:43:39 PM PST US > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Stroke Engines > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Electrical System Design for 2 > Stroke Engines > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > Stroke Engines > > At 09:29 AM 2/26/2006 -0800, you wrote: > >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Bill Czygan >> >>Bob, >> Thank you for the kind welcome. Yes, I am new to this list and to >> aircraft construction. I am an Extra class Amateur Radio Operator (Ham), >> so I am supposed to know a few basic things about electricity. At my age >> (55), it is a race to see if the learning, or the forgetting, is winning. >> Thank you for taking the time to direct me to the right information. You, >> and the members, have put together a valuable resource here. It is >> obvious that I need to do some serious studying to come up to speed, >> enough to even pose useful questions. That I will do right now. >> Meanwhile, I have put together a BLOG to help UL pilots transition to >> Sport Pilot. One of the things I am doing is advising them on how to >> transition their UL aircraft. Many of them will need to create electrical >> systems, as I will. If you don't mind, I would like to provide a link to >> this list for them. My site is here: >> >> http://sptraining.blogspot.com/ >> >> Again, thank you for the help. > > You're correct . . . no EASY way to do it. The Vulcan mind-meld > is not yet in anyone's bag of tricks. I got my novice ticket in > spring of '56 in the 7th grade. Did a science class demo that failed > miserably. Dropped a wire out the second story window for an antenna. > My demo partner a few miles away heard me fine but noise from florescent > lights wilted my SX-28 like a pansy in the Mojave sun. > > The website is an impressive effort. I wish you the best of luck > helping this new effort get spooled up. The world can always use > more pilots. > > Bob . . . > > > < What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that > > < the authority which determines whether there can be > > < debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of > > < scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests > > < with experiment. > > < --Lawrence M. Krauss > > > > ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 07:47:15 PM PST US From: "Peter Laurence" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Peter Laurence" My LED position lights put out more than what the FAA requires in all directions, and they are less expensive than any other LED position light on the market (some of which do not put out the light required by the FAA.) Bill Dube' Bill, Can will you point me to your web site? Peter ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 07:50:53 PM PST US From: BobsV35B@aol.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com In a message dated 2/28/2006 8:02:43 P.M. Central Standard Time, mstewart@iss.net writes: So it would seem that it needs that initial rpm to get the juices flowing in the cold. I can live with that. Thanks to whom ever it was that suggested an initial burst of RPM to get her going. Worked Best, Mike Do not archive Good Evening Mike, Do you really want to give it that short burst of power? Personally, I like to warm up the engine at as low an RPM as possible consistent with adequate oil pressure and any need for the crankshaft to throw the oil against the innards of the engine. I do not know what engine you have, but I would not give it a burst above any RPM that I wanted to use for warm up purposes. Isn't that the whole idea behind doing a warm up? Happy Skies, Old Bob AKA Bob Siegfried Ancient Aviator Stearman N3977A Brookeridge Air Park LL22 Downers Grove, IL 60516 630 985-8503 ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 08:02:06 PM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights From: "Lloyd, Daniel R." --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Lloyd, Daniel R." On their website all of the new version III's and V's all have spec sheets with Lumen ratings and the appropriate charts to determine viewing angles, and with more than 80% intensity over 140 degree spectrum, it would be very easy to get the required fill rate of light that the FAA requires, and with shaped reflectors, you can even cut off the angles. Using fog lights from walmart($15) and replacing the halogen bulbs with 4 Luxeons ($30), plus the power supply ($25) easily meets and exceeds the requirements for much less money than you would think. Just my .02 Dan RV10 -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Dube Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 8:42 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Mike's LED Position lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Bill Dube sgettings@cfl.rr.com wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: sgettings@cfl.rr.com > >I also used luxeons for position lights (2 high-intensity lambertians on >each side) and presented it to our EAA meeting as well as our local >IA/DAR. The DAR had no problem signing off on the intensity and >distribution of the position lights. I previously provided a link to >the EAA article on this for those who were interested. > > The DAR didn't measure the light output. They very rarely have the equipment to do so. If it doesn't bother you to have less light than required by the FAA, then use whatever position lights will pass muster with your local DAR. Most folks want position lights that are at least as bright as the FAA requires, not just bright enough for the DAR to sign them off. >Luxeons are really the only practical and affordable LEDS that will meet >the position lighting requirements. > > Not so. If you design a light that meets the FAA requirements, you need quite a few of the Luxeon LEDs. It turns out to be less expensive to fill the FAA required light pattern with high-brightness 5 mm LEDs. In lumens per dollar, you are better off with 5 mm LEDs. You will notice that on the Luxeon spec sheets, they never tell you the candlepower output. They won't tell you when you call up. You have to buy one and measure it. They don't tell you because they don't want you to be able to directly compare the output of their lights with other LEDs. The Luxeon LEDs are good if you require a very bright point source, like for a projector. If it is OK to have the light spread out with more than one LED, then 5 mm LEDs provide much more light per dollar. My LED position lights put out more than what the FAA requires in all directions, and they are less expensive than any other LED position light on the market (some of which do not put out the light required by the FAA.) Bill Dube' ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 08:21:10 PM PST US From: "Mitchell Goodrich" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Back-Up Battery --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mitchell Goodrich" Hello All, I am installing a back-up battery an would like to monitor the condition (voltage) w/warning for it. Any ideas on what to use??? Mitchell Goodrich VEZE Tampa ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 09:17:36 PM PST US From: "Bill Schlatterer" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Back-Up Battery --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Schlatterer" If using the Grand Rapids EFIS system, it monitors voltage on each of up to three separate power sources. Other EFIS systems probably handle several as well. Bill S 7a wiring -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mitchell Goodrich Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 10:19 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Back-Up Battery --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mitchell Goodrich" --> Hello All, I am installing a back-up battery an would like to monitor the condition (voltage) w/warning for it. Any ideas on what to use??? Mitchell Goodrich VEZE Tampa ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 11:44:25 PM PST US From: "Scott" Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: An Architecture Question - Z13 --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Scott" > What caused you to believe that a 60/20 combination of engine > driven power sources was the most useful/practical? What operational > consideration raises questions in the ability of one of the Z-figures > to handle as presently configured? Can't speak for Todd, but my thought pattern which arrived at a point similar to his was: I know that my alternator can't quite keep up with everything on while taxing at relatively low RPM. A little extra help would be nice. I'd also like to give the standby a little exercise as a way to ensure it's running. If it's always in standby it would be easy for it to fail and not be noticed -- until it was needed.