Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:52 AM - Re: 16AWG fusible link (better idea?) (david2005)
2. 07:51 AM - Re: (David Roe)
3. 10:41 AM - strobe power/autopilot interference? (Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com)
4. 10:41 AM - Re: Re: Chapter 8 Update (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 08:06 PM - Re: princeton capactive fuel probe (Mark E Navratil)
6. 09:05 PM - Panasonic LC-RD1217P and Van's Battery Box Misfit (Michael Ashura)
7. 09:27 PM - Re: Panasonic LC-RD1217P and Van's Battery Box Misfit (DonVS)
8. 09:35 PM - Re: Re: princeton capactive fuel probe (Tim Dawson-Townsend)
9. 09:35 PM - Re: Panasonic LC-RD1217P and Van's Battery Box Misfit (James Freeman)
10. 10:06 PM - Iso Amp Testing (Mitchell Faatz)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 16AWG fusible link (better idea?) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: david2005 <david2005@abrahamson.net>
Yes, for instance the HHX fuseholder on p.15 goes up to 60A with 6AWG
leads. There is also a line of fusible links on p.9. Thanks Bob et
al for your help.
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: David Roe <roester@cybermesa.com>
Thanks Bob. I appreciate the help.
David
On Jun 4, 2006, at 1:39 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>
>
>> Comments/Questions: Hi Bob
>>
>> Sorry to have to resort to taking your time,but I have not been able
>> to find any directions on making a balun for a nav antenna
>> installation for my RV8. I was told that it was in AC43-13, but I
>> haven't been able to find it anywhere. Can you point me in the right
>> direction?
>
> No, AC43-13 wouldn't cover such a device. Here are a couple
> of links you can look over:
>
> http://n-lemma.com/calcs/dipole/balun.htm
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipole_antenna
>
> We used to wire our VOR cat-whiskers on the
> single engined Cessnas with a balun back in the
> 60' but gave it up after a series of experiments
> showed no perceivable difference between antennas
> with baluns and antennas that simply attached
> the center conductor to one leg of the dipole
> and coax braid to the other leg.
>
> Some folks believe in slipping ferrite toroidal
> cores over the coax like this figure from the
> AeroElectric Connection:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Antenna/Dipole_Antenna.pdf
>
> However, subsequent to publishing that figure I've
> done some testing in the lab and found that the
> ferrite cores offer no observable improvement in
> VOR receiver or GS receiver performance by their
> use.
>
> Therefore, it's my recommendation that you forgo
> the use of either balun or ferrite cores and simply
> attach the legs of your dipole to the center conductor
> and shield of the coax.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | strobe power/autopilot interference? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com
Greetings
My TruTrak autopilot roll servo is mounted inside the right wing of my
RV-7A. Will the high voltage strobe power line (shielded) interfere with
the autopilot if the wires are run together for about 5 feet inside the
wing? I dont see any way of getting them very far apart, but if a few
inches makes a difference I might be able to drill a new set of holes in
the ribs for a separate wire run.
Separate issue: Per the AeroElectric Connection, I have a single ground
point on the plane, with the standard exceptions where a local ground is
used (landing lights, strobe power supply). Would it be ok to use a local
ground for my resistive fuel level senders as well?
thanks
Erich Weaver
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Chapter 8 Update |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 07:30 PM 6/4/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
>
>Comments on Chapter 8: Wire Selection and Installation.
>
>General comments on materials.
>
>The periodic table does not hide any magic conductors. Copper is the
>second best by volume, it is 94% as good as the bestSilver.
>Surprisingly, gold is not particularly good. Its magic lies elsewhere.
>
>I have to disagree with several statements. I think these were not
>critically examined in the writing:
>
>Weight will not be greatly improved upon; the copper conductor is
>already the major proportion of the weight and there is simply no
>practical way to do with less copper with current technology---Oh? How
>about higher voltages,
> single wire busses, fiberoptics,
??? We're wiring landing lights and pitot heaters here . . .
and the topic is DC power generation and distribution,
not data handling.
> Copper-Clad Aluminum, etc. I am sure you meant something slightly
> different here.
I meant exactly what I wrote . . .
>There is no material more economical than copper for any given wiring
>task. Simply not so. I am sure you do not quite mean it Bob. Throw a
>couple more modifiers in there please.
How so? Economics is the study of scarce resources for which
there are alternative uses. In this case, I'm speaking of $time$
which one spends to acquire cash to buy wire when one also needs
to spend $time$ to do many other things on the project. Except for
the specialize case where CuC-Al offers some weight savings,
it's still more expensive in $time$, is not as pleasant to work with
and occupies more volume in a bundle.
Further, opportunities for CuC-Al might be as much as 20' of
wiring out of a total of hundreds of feet where a weight savings
of a few pounds is possible. For all other applications expense,
less than friendly flexibility, and miniscule weight savings are
not, in my personal opinion, a good trade off . . . even if the
wire was available in the smaller gages.
>Bob, you just plain ignore Copper Clad Aluminum, so I suggest taking a
>look at the link:
>http://www.periheliondesign.com/fatwires_files/Copper%20cables.pdf (I
>will still send free samples to interested Aeroelectric list fans) Boeing
>and Airbus buy kilotons of the stuff. Its advantages may or may not be
>attractive to you, but ignoring it is not serving your readers.
Eric, you're getting your shorts in a bunch over nothing. I
DO talk about the copper clad aluminum. I have samples you sent
me and I show them in my seminars along with examples of soldered-
on terminals. The attendees also get to handle a piece of CuC-Al,
22759/16-2,
and 2AWG welding cable. We discuss insulations, flexibility and
a few cautions about bolting fat-wires to the lead posts on
a small RG battery (4AWG welding cable recommended).
Chapter 8 was updated to correct errors in the wire tables, not
update it to the latest-and-greatest technologies. Those things will
will be added to the text in due course. All I need is a 36-hour
day.
>Flexibility: The discussion of flexibility is not clear on a couple points
>and draws some suspect conclusions. Certainly, flexibility in an electric
>drill is handy, but this does not mean that the general use of
>finely-stranded wire is generally advantageous in DC circuits.
The preference for 19+ stranding has nothing to do with DC circuits.
19 or more strands in small wires has been the process of choice for
resistance to vibration and flexing from other sources for a very long
time.
>Simply putthere is scant evidence that using stranded wire instead of
>solid gains you much except in some special cases---e.g.
>
>1) Flexibility, as in an electric drill cord or a welding cable.
You are free to preach any gospel you wish. Are you suggesting that
it's a rational decision to wire one's airplane with solid conductor
stuff? I'm only repeating what has been practice and policy in
aircraft for many, many years. I've worked with wire in many venues
for a long time and the ONLY place I'd use solid wire is in my house .
. .
>2) Attachment to resonant or vibrating structures. Thats why the ground
>strap to an engine is braided. NOT because fine stranding is more reliable.
??? lost you. Does not resistance to breakage due to persistent
motion translate into increased service life, hence 'reliability'
for that component? And does not the whole airplane have a vibration
signature that is greater than automobiles?
>3) Convenience in spooling, handling, and installation. A solid wire
>always has bias, but it mostlydisappears in stranding.
>
>Note also that stranded wire has a huge surface area relative to solid.
>For the same cross-section, lets say a one square inch solid conductor
>would have a surface area of four square inches per inch, while if it were
>separated into 1/12 X 144 strands would have a surface area of 48
>square inches per inch. This is why stranded wire is the cats meow for
>higher frequencies that depend on skin effect for transmission.
>Complicated subject.
Why even bring it up? Skin effect was never a consideration for
wire selection in airframes. Adoption of relatively fine stranded
wire in aircraft (and as far as I know, all military products)
was for resistance to failure under vibration due to decreased
stresses under vibration and higher reliability - a nick on a stranded
wire puts a few strands at-risk, a nick on a solid wire puts the
whole conductor at risk.
>Solid wire is easier to use in DC circuitsit terminates better, is
>smaller and lighter for equivalent AWG size.
You're splitting hairs (or strands) here. The weight differences
between stranded/solid for any given gage is miniscule. Does your
reference to "DC circuits" suggest an alternative philosophy is
appropriate for AC circuits? Are you suggesting that readers of this
List consider making the switch to solid wire?
>To simplifyI think your thinking on stranded versus solid need
>rethinking a bit.
>
>Bob saysCopper is a very active metal. No it isnt. Copper,
>like many other useful metals forms a protective coating on its exposed
>surface. You can drop a copper penny in the dirt and dig it up in a
>thousand years and still read the date on it. Roman soldiers did the first
>half of this experiment for us. Stainless steel and copper are remarkably
>similar in corrosion resistance except that stainless steel forms a
>transparent coating that is NON-conductive, and looks great. Copper forms
>a conductive coating but looks like hell. At least if I remember my
>chemistry correctly.
Forgive my imprecise speech with respect to reactivity. Keep in mind
that we tin-coat copper to reduce effects of corrosion that folks
fine objectionable at any level however small. Yes, copper is less
reactive than say lithium, iron or zinc but a whole lot more reactive
than chrome . . . I guess we need to put some numbers to "less" and
a "whole lot more" . . .
>Your description of voltage drop etc., would be improved by some nice
>drawings.
Send me some sketches of what you propose. Figure 2-3 has an exemplar
voltage drop analysis and I was assuming that the reader would recall
the discussion when he/she advanced to Chapter 8.
Bob . . .
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Cc: sarg314@comcast.net
| Subject: | Re: princeton capactive fuel probe |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mark E Navratil <czechsix@juno.com>
Hi Tom,
I bought the capacitive Princeton probes through Grand Rapids to use with
my EIS-4000 and the probes came already bent and ready to install in the
RV
tanks. I have an -8A but as far as I know the same bend profile will
work
in the -6 series too. Might not hurt to double-check before ordering.
As far as using them "successfully" goes, I've had decent results with
mine. You go through a calibration setup procedure where you turn power
on, push a button on the probe with the tank empty for the empty set
point,
then fill the tank and push the button again for the full set point. The
first time I did this it worked fine on one tank but the other tank was
reading 0.0 and the LED on the probe was flashing an error code.
Instructions said to try the calibration procedure again before calling
Princeton. This is a bit of a pain because you have to empty the tank
completely....it worked out ok for me because I was flight testing and
figured what the heck, I should run the tank dry in the air anyway just
to
make sure I can really use all the fuel in flight. After resetting it
the
probe has worked fine.
My only complaint--and it's a minor one--is that with the tanks full, the
reading from the senders varies by about a gallon. You can program the
EIS
to show whatever quantity you want when the sender is at the full
level...I
measured about 11 gals in my tank when the fuel is at the top of the
sender
so that's what I programmed into the EIS. But the actual reading after
refueling is anywhere from 10.0 to 10.9, and it varies from day to day.
I
didn't expect capacitive probes to wander in their readings like this.
Anyway, the important part is that they do seem to read accurately when
near empty. I have an alarm on my EIS set up to warn me when fuel level
is
reading 1.0 gals in either tank. It will start to flash at me a few
minutes before the engine quits. So I'm satisfied with that aspect of
it.
One other note of interest, I originally installed Vans float sensors in
my
tanks but decided to change to capacitive in hopes that I'd never have to
yank them out and change them (time will tell...). I made the swap
before
mounting my wings so it was easy. The curious thing is that in order to
install the Princeton probes, I had to install both the probe and the
tank
access plate at the same time, with a series of twists and turns. If you
install the probe in the access plate first, or install the plate and
then
try to put in the probe, it won't work. I just mention this because it
may
be a lot harder to retrofit a flying airplane than it was with the wings
off....
Hope this helps,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D getting ready for 50 hr oil change..
------------------------------------------------------------
From: sarg314 <sarg314@comcast.net>
Subject: RV-List: princeton capactive fuel probe
--> RV-List message posted by: sarg314 <sarg314@comcast.net>
I'm looking for a capacitive fuel probe/gauge to use in my old (circa
1999) RV-6A kit (tanks already built). The princeton probes look
interesting because they could probably be used in this tank. You can
specify a bendable section which I think would make it useable with the
standard RV-6A tank configuration.
Has any one used these probes successfully?
--
Tom Sargent, RV-6A
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Panasonic LC-RD1217P and Van's Battery Box Misfit |
I just received my new Panasonic battery from Digi-Key per the Nuckolls
seminar, and "fit" it into my Firewall Vans Battery Box. It is now
jammed half-way in and half-way out. Soaking with Boe-lube has not
helped. What is the story on this? Anyone else have a misfit problem
like this? I now have two expensive pieces of soon-to-be trash.
Mike
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Panasonic LC-RD1217P and Van's Battery Box Misfit |
The Van's battery box is made to fit the PC 680. You may need to switch
batteries or make your own box. Don
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Michael
Ashura
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 8:59 PM
To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Panasonic LC-RD1217P and Van's Battery Box
Misfit
I just received my new Panasonic battery from Digi-Key per the Nuckolls
seminar, and "fit" it into my Firewall Vans Battery Box. It is now jammed
half-way in and half-way out. Soaking with Boe-lube has not helped. What
is the story on this? Anyone else have a misfit problem like this? I now
have two expensive pieces of soon-to-be trash.
Mike
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: princeton capactive fuel probe |
Skysports will create custome-length bendable capacitive probes for
about $75-80 each, too. They'll even tweak the electrical output
characteristics (within reason) to match whatever gauge/engine system
you're using . ..
TDT
RV-10 40025
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Mark E
Navratil
Sent: Mon 6/5/2006 10:57 PM
Cc: sarg314@comcast.net
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: princeton capactive fuel probe
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mark E Navratil
<czechsix@juno.com>
Hi Tom,
I bought the capacitive Princeton probes through Grand Rapids to use
with
my EIS-4000 and the probes came already bent and ready to install in the
RV
tanks. I have an -8A but as far as I know the same bend profile will
work
in the -6 series too. Might not hurt to double-check before ordering.
As far as using them "successfully" goes, I've had decent results with
mine. You go through a calibration setup procedure where you turn power
on, push a button on the probe with the tank empty for the empty set
point,
then fill the tank and push the button again for the full set point.
The
first time I did this it worked fine on one tank but the other tank was
reading 0.0 and the LED on the probe was flashing an error code.
Instructions said to try the calibration procedure again before calling
Princeton. This is a bit of a pain because you have to empty the tank
completely....it worked out ok for me because I was flight testing and
figured what the heck, I should run the tank dry in the air anyway just
to
make sure I can really use all the fuel in flight. After resetting it
the
probe has worked fine.
My only complaint--and it's a minor one--is that with the tanks full,
the
reading from the senders varies by about a gallon. You can program the
EIS
to show whatever quantity you want when the sender is at the full
level...I
measured about 11 gals in my tank when the fuel is at the top of the
sender
so that's what I programmed into the EIS. But the actual reading after
refueling is anywhere from 10.0 to 10.9, and it varies from day to day.
I
didn't expect capacitive probes to wander in their readings like this.
Anyway, the important part is that they do seem to read accurately when
near empty. I have an alarm on my EIS set up to warn me when fuel level
is
reading 1.0 gals in either tank. It will start to flash at me a few
minutes before the engine quits. So I'm satisfied with that aspect of
it.
One other note of interest, I originally installed Vans float sensors in
my
tanks but decided to change to capacitive in hopes that I'd never have
to
yank them out and change them (time will tell...). I made the swap
before
mounting my wings so it was easy. The curious thing is that in order to
install the Princeton probes, I had to install both the probe and the
tank
access plate at the same time, with a series of twists and turns. If
you
install the probe in the access plate first, or install the plate and
then
try to put in the probe, it won't work. I just mention this because it
may
be a lot harder to retrofit a flying airplane than it was with the wings
off....
Hope this helps,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D getting ready for 50 hr oil change..
------------------------------------------------------------
From: sarg314 <sarg314@comcast.net>
Subject: RV-List: princeton capactive fuel probe
--> RV-List message posted by: sarg314 <sarg314@comcast.net>
I'm looking for a capacitive fuel probe/gauge to use in my old (circa
1999) RV-6A kit (tanks already built). The princeton probes look
interesting because they could probably be used in this tank. You can
specify a bendable section which I think would make it useable with the
standard RV-6A tank configuration.
Has any one used these probes successfully?
--
Tom Sargent, RV-6A
=========================
==========
=========================
==========
=========================
==========
=========================
==========
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Panasonic LC-RD1217P and Van's Battery Box Misfit |
Ouch.
I'm guessing that the coefficient of thermal expansive is greater for
the box than for the battery. You might try (gently) heating the
assembly.
On Jun 5, 2006, at 10:59 PM, Michael Ashura wrote:
> I just received my new Panasonic battery from Digi-Key per the
> Nuckolls seminar, and "fit" it into my Firewall Vans Battery Box.
> It is now jammed half-way in and half-way out. Soaking with Boe-
> lube has not helped. What is the story on this? Anyone else have
> a misfit problem like this? I now have two expensive pieces of
> soon-to-be trash.
> Mike
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mitchell Faatz <mitch@skybound.com>
Bob,
What is the easiest way to test the iso amp project on the bench? I'd
like to try it out before mounting it in the plane, and I don't have the
radios and audio sources all hooked up in the panel yet.
Thanks - Mitch
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|