Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:54 AM - Re: RG batteries with 35A generators (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
2. 05:00 AM - Re: Dividing one voltage by another using an op amp? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 05:04 AM - Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 9 Msgs - 09/04/06 (Ben Schneider)
4. 05:07 AM - Re: Turning a Brushless Motor into an Alternator (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 05:30 AM - Re: Turning a Brushless Motor into an Alternator (OOPS) (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 05:38 AM - Re: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 9 Msgs - 09/04/06 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 07:45 AM - b AND C LR3 QUESTION (rlnelson5)
8. 08:14 AM - DC/DC Converter (John Mireley)
9. 08:21 AM - Re: Debating on an alternator or two batteries? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 08:50 AM - Re: b AND C LR3 QUESTION (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 08:51 AM - Re: DC/DC Converter (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
12. 09:22 AM - Re: DC/DC Converter (Alan K. Adamson)
13. 09:53 AM - Re: Logic and experience (was about alternators) ()
14. 10:01 AM - Oil Pressure Gauge Problem (Matt Prather)
15. 03:11 PM - Re: gmcjetpilot (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
16. 05:30 PM - Re: Re: gmcjetpilot (Rob Housman)
17. 05:48 PM - Re: Re: gmcjetpilot (raymondj)
18. 06:19 PM - Re: Re: Logic and experience (was about alternators) (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
19. 06:37 PM - Re: Re: gmcjetpilot (Doug Baleshta)
20. 07:23 PM - Re: Re: gmcjetpilot (Harold Kovac)
21. 08:38 PM - methodology for avionics install (CardinalNSB@aol.com)
22. 08:50 PM - Old Cessna filters/capacitators/avionics (CardinalNSB@aol.com)
23. 09:41 PM - Re: Re: gmcjetpilot (Tony Babb)
24. 09:44 PM - Re: RG batteries with 35A generators (RURUNY@aol.com)
25. 11:44 PM - Re: Re: gmcjetpilot (Ed Holyoke)
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: RG batteries with 35A generators |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 11:10 PM 9/3/2006 +0000, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jim Michael <jm@10squaredcorp.com>
>
>Data point - There is an SB for Stinsons that provides a list of
>current batteries that should be used in the 108 series which have
>generators. RG batteries are on the list, but not the extra capacity
>versions with stated reason being the charging system cannot handle
>the extra capacity.
This is a WAG but I'd bet that the assertion developed from
a lack of understanding of a long standing "rule of thumb"
in battery/generator sizing.
While not explicit in the FARS, AC43-13 suggests that you
reserve 20% of generator/alternator capacity for the recharging
of a dead battery. Another notation in AC43-13 suggests that
a battery should be recharged in 60-90 minutes of flight. Both
of these numbers were pulled from where the sun don't shine.
Now, suppose you have a nice ol' C-140 with a 20A generator
and 24 AH battery. If you run that battery down, there's no
way that you can load the generator to 16A and recharge the
battery in 90 minutes with the 4A left over. Of course, that
airplane left the factory only with lights installed and
anyone who chose to launch with a dead battery could run
essentially 'dark' for an hour or so and get the battery back
up.
Suppose your airplane came from the factory with a 40A alternator
then according to one rule-of-thumb, we can fit the machine with
a 32A running load leaving 8A for charging. Hmmm . . . this means
we should only install a 12 a.h. battery so that 8A will get it
topped off in 90 minutes.
How about we upgrade to a 60A alternator. If the airplane left
the factory certified with 8A of headroom, logic suggests that
we could now carry a 52A running load and still meet the original
intent of recharging our 12 a.h. battery in 90 minutes. But no,
somebody will latch onto the 20% headroom statement and say
that you need to reserve 12A of headroom. Okay, now we can
recharge our tiny 12 a.h. battery in one hour. Good deal.
But suppose you want to upgrade to a 24 a.h. battery. Now
with 12A of headroom, we'll need 2 hours to recharge the 24 a.h.
battery. My bad.
Bottom line is that the best way to size an alternator/battery
combination is to know what your operating requirements are,
what the limitations are for getting the battery recharged under
the rare condition that you should decide to launch with a dead
battery. Then adjust operating conditions for the flight
meet the battery's needs in a whatever you decide is a reasonable
period of time while meeting minimum needs for operating equipment.
The prohibition for the higher capacity battery in the Stinson
is probably based on the 20% rule hat-dance and not upon any
understanding of performance by those who would prohibit or
individuals who can understand the new limitations for recharging
and adjust their operations accordingly.
It's the blind leading the deaf to follow rules by the ignorant
so that pilots are not required to understand. Grand recipe for
success, no? Sounds like groundwork for a juicy dark-n-stormy
night story.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dividing one voltage by another using an op amp? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 11:59 AM 9/4/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John W Livingston"
><livingjw@earthlink.net>
>
>Bob, All,
>
> I seem to remember from my analog computer class (yeh, I'm that old) that
>you can divide using an op amp. Can anyone point me a circuit which does
>this? Thanks. One of my students built an AoA indicator a couple of years
>ago with a cheap differential pressure chip, but he brought the signal out
>and into a digital computer that we already had installed on the airplane
>for storing flight data. He then divided it by the dynamic pressure using
>software. It worked great. I thought it would be fun to see how simple it
>could be done using analog circuits. These pressure measuring chips are just
>a couple of dollars and you would need two of them. One differential for the
>angle and one absolute pressure chip for the dynamic pressure.
It's a special class of op-amp called a four-quadrant mulitiplier.
An exemplar part is the AD633 with a data sheet at:
http://www.analog.com/UploadedFiles/Data_Sheets/277093686AD633_e.pdf
See figure 7.
However, like all analog systems, these devices have their warts
for leakage, offset, drift, tempco, etc. etc.
A PIC microcontroller with on-board a/d could put this effort
on less mushy ground.
Bob . . .
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: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 9 Msgs - 09/04/06 |
Bob,
I have had very good luck with the Hitachi brand VFD's. They will give you
speed control, as well as inverter capability. I have one on my band saw, I
wanted speed control and only had single phase available at the hanger. Bought
the VFD and a 3 phase motor, and it works great. I wouldn't do it any other
way. just keep in mind, motor HP (I am told) drops as the freq is reduced.
Though I have never had a problem with the bandsaw. Cheapest place to find them,
Ebay. A place called Drives Warehouse or some variation of that has them
listed all the time, new in box. Turned out to be cheapest I could find anywhere.
For what its worth.
Ben Schneider
>McMaster Carr has a 5HP 230V single phase for $350 and a 5HP three phase
>(if you want to set up a phase converter with a new motor) for $230.
>
>Dick Tasker
Thanks! I'll check it out. I'm shaft-size critical for this
task. Half of the speed changer mechanism mounts directly on
the motor shaft so that feature has bounded my choices to
some degree. Appreciate the heads-up!
Bob . . .
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: Turning a Brushless Motor into an Alternator |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 11:47 AM 9/4/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John W Livingston"
><livingjw@earthlink.net>
>
>Bob, All,
>
> I have a project coming up that needs a small, high speed (~10K RPM or
>higher), light (as practically possible) alternator which will produce about
>.5KW at 30-50 volts. I was thinking of converting one of the numerous
>permanent spinning magnet brushless motors that are available for RC
>aircraft. My thought was to introduce appropriate diodes and turn it into a
>brushless alternator. Would this be a reasonably straight forward project or
>is it just a crazy idea?
Works for me. The motor has some characteristics called
torque, voltage and velocity constants (Kt, Ke, Kv respectively).
Your motor of choice needs to have a Kv on the order of 40v/10,000
or 40 mV per RPM. 500 watts at 40 volts is about 12.5 amps, so the
motor you choose will need to be capable of running continuously
at loads producing 12.5 amps of current flow.
If you have a motor in mind that falls in this range, then
it's a candidate for the task. Now, voltage regulation is
another issue.
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 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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Turning a Brushless Motor into an Alternator |
(OOPS)
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 07:06 AM 9/5/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
><nuckollsr@cox.net>
>
>At 11:47 AM 9/4/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John W Livingston"
>><livingjw@earthlink.net>
>>
>>Bob, All,
>>
>> I have a project coming up that needs a small, high speed (~10K RPM or
>>higher), light (as practically possible) alternator which will produce about
>>.5KW at 30-50 volts. I was thinking of converting one of the numerous
>>permanent spinning magnet brushless motors that are available for RC
>>aircraft. My thought was to introduce appropriate diodes and turn it into a
>>brushless alternator. Would this be a reasonably straight forward project or
>>is it just a crazy idea?
>
> Works for me. The motor has some characteristics called
> torque, voltage and velocity constants (Kt, Ke, Kv respectively).
> Your motor of choice needs to have a Kv on the order of 40v/10,000
> or 40 mV per RPM. 500 watts at 40 volts is about 12.5 amps, so the
> motor you choose will need to be capable of running continuously
> at loads producing 12.5 amps of current flow.
Correction. 4 mV per RPM not 40.
> If you have a motor in mind that falls in this range, then
> it's a candidate for the task. Now, voltage regulation is
> another issue.
>
> Bob . . .
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: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 9 Msgs - 09/04/06 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 05:03 AM 9/5/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>Bob,
>
> I have had very good luck with the Hitachi brand VFD's. They will give
> you speed control, as well as inverter capability. I have one on my band
> saw, I wanted speed control and only had single phase available at the
> hanger. Bought the VFD and a 3 phase motor, and it works great. I
> wouldn't do it any other way. just keep in mind, motor HP (I am told)
> drops as the freq is reduced. Though I have never had a problem with the
> bandsaw. Cheapest place to find them, Ebay. A place called Drives
> Warehouse or some variation of that has them listed all the time, new in
> box. Turned out to be cheapest I could find anywhere.
My application is already fitted with a variable speed pulley
system. My problem is that it's a 3-phase motor and a single-phase
source. Some variation on a static phase-inverter or static-rotary
phase inverter will get it running at no worse than 25% loss of
nameplate horsepower. It's a boss-hog motor at 10 h.p. Thanks!
Bob . . .
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: | b AND C LR3 QUESTION |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "rlnelson5" <rlnelson-5@peoplepc.com>
hELLO. I have a B and C LR-3 external alt control. I was wondering if there is
a homemade list version to make the themostatic probe for the battery without
spending the 100 or so that Band c charges for that part. Thanks
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=59609#59609
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: John Mireley <mireley@msu.edu>
*I'm looking for a dc/dc converter to power an Airmap 2000c from a 28
volt system. The best value seems to be the Kool Mate refrigerator
converter for trucks and boats. I'd like to know if anyone has
experience using one of the integreated dc to dc devices to roll their
own and the economics of the project.*
*
*
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: Debating on an alternator or two batteries? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 08:19 PM 9/4/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>Hi Group, my name's Tony Gibson, I've been a lurker on the list for almost
>a year now and am building a Sonerai 2L - read 550lb slightly underpowered
>two place! :)
>
>I'm trying to take as much weight out of the plane as I can by keeping it
>simple. There's a lot of reasons I'm considering two batteries rather
>than a battery and an alternator. But saving a bit of weight isn't the
>main reason, the fact that I can move the weight of battery where ever I
>want in the plane is a big bonus for servicing it nevermind balancing, and
>....the last thing I will do is put lead weight back into it!
>
>I have an ignition system that draws ~1 amp and a single fuel pump that
>draws another amp. I decided against the starter and the only other amp
>draws will be two small Stratomaster instruments drawing less than half an
>amp together. Total draw would be less than 2.5 Amps
>
>With the right warning system to indicate a low primary battery I'm
>wondering if something like a 3 - 5 Ah battery would be large enough for a
>backup? What about the primary?
>
>The downside of course is what would I do on a crosscountry trip? Argh! :)
What engine/alternator combination are you considering?
Bob . . .
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: b AND C LR3 QUESTION |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 07:43 AM 9/5/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "rlnelson5" <rlnelson-5@peoplepc.com>
>
>hELLO. I have a B and C LR-3 external alt control. I was wondering if
>there is a homemade list version to make the themostatic probe for the
>battery without spending the 100 or so that Band c charges for that part.
>Thanks
I did that design and no, I'm unaware of any DIY alternatives.
Given that the work was a fee-for-service activity for
a client, I'm not at liberty to offer the information you're
seeking.
What is your battery installation / anticipated service
situation that leads you to believe that you'd benefit
from having temperature compensation?
It's been my experience that very few (less than 1%) of
builders would benefit from adding this feature to
their systems.
Bob . . .
Message 11
| 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: DC/DC Converter |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 11:13 AM 9/5/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: John Mireley <mireley@msu.edu>
>
>*I'm looking for a dc/dc converter to power an Airmap 2000c from a 28 volt
>system. The best value seems to be the Kool Mate refrigerator converter
>for trucks and boats. I'd like to know if anyone has experience using one
>of the integreated dc to dc devices to roll their own and the economics
>of the project.*
How much power are you needing? Do I interpret your request
that you have a 14v accessory you want to run from 28v system?
Bob . . .
Message 12
| 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: "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com>
http://www.astroncorp.com/dcdc.shtml
The 10A version of this is what Cessna uses for their certified
application... I'm going to use one in my Lancair, and they are only $50 if
you shop around...
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John
Mireley
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 11:13 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: DC/DC Converter
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: John Mireley <mireley@msu.edu>
*I'm looking for a dc/dc converter to power an Airmap 2000c from a 28 volt
system. The best value seems to be the Kool Mate refrigerator converter for
trucks and boats. I'd like to know if anyone has experience using one of the
integreated dc to dc devices to roll their own and the economics of the
project.*
*
*
Message 13
| 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: Logic and experience (was about alternators) |
>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Logic and experience (was about
>alternators)
>
>At 11:36 AM 9/1/2006 -0700, you wrote:
> <snip>
> And I might have a lifetime of picking apples but
> that doesn't make me an apple horticulturist. I've
> spent 50 years getting my hands dirty, figuring out
> how things work, designing new products and doing
> my best to keep customers happy, but that doesn't
> make me a human factors expert either.
> I've never asked you to prove anything, only offer logical
> foundation for your assertions . . . be a teacher
> for the ideas you hold dear.
I am not sure what you mean?
I gather you are saying you are not a horticulturist,
your old with dirty hands and you are not an expert
on anything, but you are stubborn and hold on to
your antiquated ideas despite anyone else's opinion?
That is cool. I knew that already. (Its a Joke Bob, don't
take yourself too seriously, I am kidding you.)
I am no human factors expert either, but I did sit in a room
full of PhD's, astronauts and test pilots at one time who
where, when working on cockpit design and checklists.
Some may have rubbed off on me. There is always a
overnight stay at a Holiday Inn Express.
As a pilot, I study CRM, Crew Resource Management or
Cockpit Resource Management for some; part of the
study involves the interaction of man and machine. The
impetus of the CRM study came from accidents like Eastern
Flt 401, Florida Everglades. A two bit light bulb was partly
the cause. Every aspect, including systems, procedures,
switch throwing is encompassed in CRM.
Bob, just because we might disagree it does not mean I dont respect you. Just
respect others perspective,
say you understand but dont agree. Their point of view
may not be important to you Bob, but others may benefit.
Bob embrace the unique inputs from everyone on this list,
who may have a different perspective, not just me. One thing
you learn in CRM is even the junior crew member may have
good and critical info. You run a lot of people away who have
things to contribute. You may think you could not possibly
learn anything about electrical systems from me or others?
You may be surprised on occasion. Teachers need to
keep learning as well.
I already made my point on the topic, so there is no need to
repeat them over and over, again and again. I stand by them
as valid points in the context of, shall I or shan't I turn the
ALT on before or after engine start.
For the third time you are right BOB! It does not matter for
MOST alternators when you turn them on. Where we disagree
is I-VR alternator's. Why override the automatic functions
built-into the I-VR device? You still have not answered me.
That is the beauty of I-VR, is there internal logic and control.
You don't like them, despite your comments otherwise. That
is fine, and you are just stubborn. We still love you.
Me Doth Think-ith Ye protest too much.
This learning thing is suppose to be fun, right Bob. As
a teacher, as you say your are, you know if you make it
a bummer, people will turn off.
>>
>>*Oh I throw the ALT switch after start, even though the
>>checklist says otherwise, because I think it's better,
>>but I forgot this time.**
>>
>>hummmm
>>
>>Can you say violation and license revoked? I love pilots
>>who are too cool to BLINDLY follow checklist. Follow the
>>darn checklist. It's not trivial or just to evaluate pilots by,
>>it's the safety net of aviation, use it. Some day pilots flying
>>a C-150 may be in a G-V or B747 and good checklist
>>discipline is critical. Its just good Airmanship and I don't
>>need any data to prove standardization is goodness.
>
> Discipline IS critical and understanding leads to
> the crafting of good checklists. But when we choose to
> work in the type certificated aviation, we're
> subject to the will and whim of many who exert a force
> based on demands for our faith and fear of reprisal
> for any transgressions. More on this later . . .
Again I dont quite get what you mean, lots of words, but
I get that FARs and the FAA hold sway over all pilots
lives. Again experimental aircraft are called experimental
for a reason, they dont meet or need to meet standard
aircraft regs. I also appreciate the need or desire of people
such as your self to change and make wiring improvements
in little planes, as they see fit. Still my points about when
to (or not to) turn the ALT ON, stands.
I would just add, keep it simple and light as possible. Less
is more.
>>
>>Experimental, do what ever you want, but suggest you try
>>to consider the traditional or standard procedures as a
>>starting point.
>
> . . . agreed . . . and then EXPAND on that to see
> what's supported by the science and what makes sense for
> achieving our own design goals. It's also wise to
> acknowledge a strong probability that government and
> industry have adopted certain practices for nothing more
> than the sake of adopting common practices . . . but that's
> a human factors thing . . .
I agree, but in the same breath you say:
NOTHING MORE THAN THE SAKE OF ADOPTING
COMMON PRACTICES.
Nothing more?
That sounds condescending. Common practices is a corner
stone of aviation safety, it is not, NOTHING MORE.
Look, for me the goal is to FLY at some point, safely fly, not
just to make an electrical system to hang on the wall or
marvel at how complex it is. I don't trivialize your contribution
in designing the perfect DC wiring distribution diagram for light
planes; please don't discount my human factors and common
practices input. I think both perspectives are important. You
obviously like to make subtle comments about the
qualification of the person who makes the comments and boost
your own. Bob that is counter productive.
A system should contribute safety. Poor system design can
adversely affect interaction with the crew. In the case of the
ALT, I prefer a single throw double throw MASTER to assure
the ALT is ON or OFF with the BAT. Simple and protects the
pilot from inadvertently not turning it On/Off by accident.
Triple throw switches are just waiting to be misused.
>>
>>Again it does not matter from an electronics stand point
>>for most alternators when you turn them ON or OFF except
>>for internally regulated alternators. Since there's no I-VR
>>alternators on factory planes, it only affects experimental
>>aircraft that use them.
>
> NEVER argued against that. This is what prompted
> the design goal to craft a way that the I-R alternator
> can be seamlessly integrated into the classic architectures
> so that their controllable shortfall is eliminated.
Why must discussions with you become arguments. I never
said you said anything. Sometimes people say things to ADD
to the conversation that has nothing to do with YOU, Bob.
I was bringing up human factors and checklist all on my own.
I think it was good input, logical. You may (obviously) disagree.
Bob if you want to seamlessly integrate an I-R alternator into
a classic architecture it has been done already. If you want
ADDED protection on a I-R Alt, than buy a Plane Power unit
from Van's aircraft. It has an extra OV module that opens or
cuts power to the I-Regulator. The OV module is compact
and mounts right on the alternator. The beauty is there's no
E-R to mount on the firewall with all the extra wiring. Plus you
have the superior control of an I-R, which all experts agree is
better than an E-Regulator 6-feet away. In fact I-R will protect
the alternator from over heat! Cool. An E-R can not do that.
(We now have microprocessor control in alternators. Isn't the
21st century great.
With the Plane Power OV module add on, that should
satisfy you, right? You will acknowledge and compliment
the designer, Plane Power, on a job well done?
I don't think a stock I-R needs or MUST have an add on OV
module as Plane Power offers, but this should definitively
squelch any worry or complaint you or anyone has about I-R
alternators, Right? Don't you think?
There it is, the perfect alternator, and it's 1/2 the price of B&C,
with the better I-R control.
Personally a stock I-R alternator with out the Plane Power's
add on OV device is very safe and unlikely to ever have a
catastrophic OV event, if service history teaches us anything.
Again the chance of I-R Alt going wild is tiny. The few
documented OV cases where mild (16-18 volts). In most all
cases there was indiscriminate or improper pilot switch
throwing involved or the pilot was not vigilant. In the end there
was only one or two OV events that allegedly caused any
damage of some kind (the battery in one case). Although
kind of documented the conditions and cause where under
some sketchy circumstances.
The I-R protects the alternator from OV very nicely in stock form.
How many cars have you heard of experiencing a catastrophic
OV condition? There are millions I-R on the road around the
world. Most modern avionics are good for 10-30 volts and 60
volt spike BTW, so 16-18 volts is a non event. We can agree to
disagree Bob.
My solution? (really as old as the hills)
A PANEL MOUNTED B-LEAD CIRCUIT BREAKER
(PULL-ABLE), CAN AT LEAST ALLOW YOU TO
MANUALLY DISCONNECT.
Most CB's are rated to 30-60 volts, so it can provide a reliable
B-lead disconnect for a typical OV condition, which are mild as
I said. It is unlikely you will ever need to do this step. Any story
or urban legend of crazy voltages are undocumented and
unproven. Many stories start with a friend of a friend had his
I-R alternator go crazy in his Cessna 172 and all the radios
shot out of the plane like missles. Hummmm? RIght
There is risk in flying. It never will be ZERO and an alternator
is probably the least of your worries in the big scheme of things.
The dark and stormy where every instrument was fried from
an I-VR alternator in Bob's articles are unsubstantiated stories
with no facts. Right Bob? There is no data, date, time, place,
N number, analysis, pictures, NOTHING. This bothers me.
Your burden of proof is so low you accept these stories with
out question, but you demand absolute documentation and
data of everyone else. If you want me to take your seriously,
you need to meet the same standard of proof as you demand
of everyone else.
No one has shown any astronomical long duration extreme
voltage condition. WHY? Because the I-R alternator are
designed to prevent it. I guess THINGS CAN HAPPEN?
I have yet to see the proof.
Don't design by FEAR, design by FACTS.
>>
>>I always have recommended I-VR alternators be ON
>>before cranking the engine and OFF after engine shut
>>down. The logical reason is, I-VR alternators are based
>>on an automotive application. I again ask rhetorically,
>>"How many cars need the driver to activate the alternator
>>separately?" The answer is none. If using a I-VR
>>alternator, it's logical to operate it the same way as it
>>does in the automobile, for which it was designed.
>
> If you embrace that philosophy, fly it in comfort
> and peace. My customers have asked for more and
> I'll do my best to deliver on it . . .
Yep, we agree to disagree, you do your best Bob; we expect
no less.
>>
>>The second reason for not cycling internally regulated
>>alternators while they're spinning is they can fail. From
>>my experience and those of many I have helped and
>>corresponded with, who had I-VR alternator problems,
>>they all had a common thread, they played switch
>>monkey with the ALT (IGN) switch. Anecdotal yes, but
>>it's what I got, take it or leave it.
>
> Agreed. That's what prompted the TEMPORARY withdrawal
> of Z-24 until a better system can be crafted. The
> system integration problem can and will be solved.
OK, great Bob you work on that. No offense I hope your
solution does not include a big OV relay and crow bar
on the B-lead; I just hate that set-up and a nuisance
trip WILL damage I-VR alternators, as we all know. When
Richard Vangrunsven, founder of Van's Aircraft stated he
would no longer warranty alternators connected to an OV
crow-bar, you called him ignorant! You did this with no
data or discussion. Could you be wrong or miss the
point sometimes, Bob? Get the data before you call
people ignorant.
>>
>>Technically IC chips inside some I-VR's have delays and
>>soft start functions most external voltage regulators
>>don't have, including the B&C unit. By using an internal
>>V-regulator to switch high amps ON/OFF is needless and
>>counter to its design. Again, no scientific bench test or
>>scope traces to show. Take it or leave it. Fact is I-VR's are
>>microprocessor controlled in many cases and don't need
>>or benefit from pilot switch monkey intervention (my opinion).
>>
>>Again my logic, my experience, my opinion and
>>research into I-VR designs is the basis of my comments.
>>I have no scientific proof that will make you happy Bob,
>sorry. The best I got, take it or leave it.
>
> Thanks, but I'll have to leave it. I'm not asking you to
> make me happy. I'm not even trying to convince you
> of anything. Your 'research' into IR alternators from
> the engineering perspective has yet to demonstrate
> a depth of information necessary to assist you in
> becoming an illuminating resource on the topic.
Bob you always seem like you are trying to convince people
to me, if I'm going to be totally honest. Aren't you the one that
just went 9 rounds about diodes verses transorbs? Who cares.
We got it, you like diodes. Fine, but we individuals will do as
we like, and sometimes it is not what you would do. That
seems to get to you, like how dare we not follow your logic
and experience. Just my opinion. I still like you and learned
a lot from you, but you don't have all the data all the time.
As far as rejecting my input, well that's your opinion and I'll
be fine with it, but you confuse me. You already agreed
with me on this point in your previous post.
My comment about making you happy was in regards to
answering the avalanche of questions that you asked me.
You either asked those questions to gain knowledge or
just asking a barrage of questions to confuse, obfuscate
and discredit.
I dont need or desire to make you happy, but would like you
to reply directly to the topic without all the bloviating. In this
case, the topic is beat to death and beyond the scope of the
original question or points I made. It is now turned into a
discussion about YOU and your experience. Again Bob
it is not about you. It is about the facts. Sometimes the
answer is it does not matter. I have no Dog in the Fight,
I just added some nuance to the topic, which seems to
have set you off again? No one is steeling your thunder.
You are right Bob. OK. I just filled in some holes.
Just throwing out all kinds of questions makes it seem the
other person's point is questionable. It's a debate technique.
May be your are just being cantankerous. If you asked in
good faith than you have my answer, logic and supporting
points. Take it or leave it. There is no need to beat it like a
rug. How about GOOD POINT GEORGE. Instead you
defend your point to death as if nothing else matters. What
is up with that?
You seem to do that Bob, ask questions and avoid replying
directly. Do you really want to know the answer or view
point, or are you just going ignore it and bury it with more
questions.
There is no need to repeat myself. I know I'm right and happy
with my comments and conclusions.
To be honest Bob you hold other's to a very high standard
of proof to satisfy you. However that's a little frustrating for
many posters who do attempt to answer you, because you
keep asking questions about questions and criticize a single
word. It feels like hypocrisy at times. Many of your ideas and
preferences are justified by no more than your opinion. Your
past comments and horror stories of I-VR have no facts to
back them up. People accept that, and if it makes them or
you happy, that is all that counts.
Your preference Bob is not always the best for all. Sorry,
did I just say the emperor has no clothes?
>>
>>Now Bob tell me why turning the ALT on and off as a
>>separate step, post-start is superior? (Forget electrons,
>>think like a pilot for a minute.)
>
> I'm wasn't arguing superior versus inferior. The question
> was, "does it matter from the perspective of physics" and
> my answer was "NO . . . except for the I-R alternator's
> special case . . . which WILL be dealt with in a
> rational manner."
I am not arguing at all. I agree with you Bob. I just added
a different perspective to the conversation. Again it is not
all about YOU Bob. Sometimes others bring something
new to the table. The table is big and there is room for
all kinds of ideas and options.
>
> You're a teacher of pilots. Craft any syllabus and
> adopt any understanding of physics you wish which
> your handlers will bless. I am a teacher of designers
> and a provider of products. My customers are my "handlers"
> and they've expressed interest in knowing how things work
> so that they may judge the worth of my ideas and products for
> themselves. I hold my own teachers to the same standards.
> My goals are for a shared understanding, not faith.
And you do a great job, keep the work up.
>
> As we're growing up, folks who hold authority over
> us MUST operate under a philosophy of faith and fear: "I'm
> the adult, you're the child. Trust me to know what's
> best for you but know that failure to observe the
> rules of my household may prove painful."
WOW not sure what that means but I hear therapy is useful
sometimes in resolving child hood issues (ha ha ha). A sense
of humor is important. Also forgiving and not holding grudges
is also good thing. Just making a joke.
>
> One hopes that as we transition from child to adult, we
> acquire understanding and confidence: "I understand the nature
> of the problem before me and I'm confident of my ability to
> deal with it in an honorable, reasoned manner that minimizes
> risk."
Yes I am confident in my ability and reasoning and risk
management, as you clearly are in yours.
>
> Unfortunately, many who SHOULD have made this transition
> years ago are still subject to the pressures from those
> who would exert influence on our lives under the doctrines
> of faith/fear. There are individuals who elevate themselves
> above what they've perceived as unfortunate, un-educable
> masses and take on the role of eternal parent. This is in
> contrast with the transient teacher who offers the best they
> know and sends folks on their way in confidence to search
> for new knowledge, skills and understanding.
Again therapy :-). I know you dont like working for others and
feel you are oppressed at work. You write about all the time. That
is why this experimental thing is such a great thing for you. It
allows you freedom to exercise your creativity. I was also in
engineering decades ago and also was under the oppressive rules.
Now I am an airline pilot, which is even more oppressive. Doha!
You got to laugh sometimes; it's not that big of a deal. Dont take
yourself too seriously. It is for fun, its about learning.
>
> A too-large proportion of our fellow citizens place almost
> religious faith in policy, regulation, certification,
> tradition, etc. I'm only suggesting that folks
> who choose to join the OBAM aviation community have already
> rejected a facet of mindless worship of tradition
> and government's willingness to be the the eternal parent.
> In the type certificated household we're told: "I'm in
> charge here, the VALUE of my contribution is irrelevant and
> your understanding matters not - do as I say or be sanctioned."
Double WOW religion, government and parents? If the world
was run by ME things would be better. I feel your pain Bob.
Bob for president (ha ha).
>
> You are free to teach any philosophy you wish . . .
> your students pay their tuition and take their chances.
> That's the way it is in the hard, cold and cruel world
> of consumer/supplier relationships. If your students
> are content with value-received and you've delivered
> on what you promised, then there's no argument from me
> especially if your willing to tell them, "I don't have any
> science but this is what I believe." It's called "truth in
> advertising". I would only counsel that what you offer should
> liberating, not binding. This is the difference between
> being a teacher and a propagandist.
> Bob . . .
What? (no one is after your job Bob) You are in charge and
the king of DC wiring distribution in little planes.
Thanks for your permission for free speech, but I was
granted that by The First Amendment to the United States
Constitution, part of the United States Bill of Rights. Bob
your last sentience is a good one. To coin a phrase it is a
two way street.
Don't you be a dictator. Let others post opinion with out
rhetoric and oppression. A simple we agree to disagree
is all that is needed, with out things like your atrocious
Document Hazard Warning against Greg Richter of Blue
Mountain Avionics you have on your web site. You make
way too much out of small issues. It is not about winning
an argument, it is about teaching. I guess Greg said
there are atrocious examples of wiring, and some is
from following your book. Hey it is his opinion. I think
those people would be making weird stuff with or without
your book. I can't blame you book. There is a lot of info
out there. Wiring DC circuits is not new.
You are the BIG DOG, resident electrical guru and always
will be. It's your thing. You are good at it, you care about it
and have done a lot to help amateur plane builders improve
the quality of wiring. You do have a passion for over kill and
complexity, but that is just my opinion. There are a lot of
Bob *Knuckle Heads* out there who are fans, so you are
doing something right. Of course many home builder like
adding more gizmo's and switches. Many will no doubt flame
me on your behalf. Asbestos underwear on. Flame on.
Cheers Your Fan George
---------------------------------
Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail.
Message 14
| 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: | Oil Pressure Gauge Problem |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
Hello Listers,
Sorry for the length of this. Just providing background to my
questions...
I have a '58 Cessna 182.. Last year when I bought it (when the
weather was cold) I noticed a sporadic sligthly quivering oil pressure
indication (needle varies +/-5psi at ~2Hz) on the panel gauge. I
asked a couple of mechanics about it, and they said it's probably not
an issue - said it's old gauges. Well, I have never liked it...
This summer I started to noticed that when the oil temp warms (middle
of the indication), the indicated oil pressure comes down from above
50psi at cruise RPM to 30psi at cruise, and sometimes below 25psi at
idle. While this might not be something to be completely alarmed
about, it's right at the bottom limit for operating oil pressure
according to the O-470 specs.
So, I started digging into it. The gauge is an electric style with a
crankcase mounted sending unit. Over the weekend, I plumbed in
another mechanical oil pressure instrument to be able to compare
values with. What I found is that the panel instrument has significan
error - generally showing the OP to be lower than actual. The panel
instrument also seems to have significantly nonlinear (non-monotonic?)
response, unfortunately, right around the middle of the operating
range.. That's a better scenario than having a real oil pressure
problem, but it's kind of annoying.
RPM Panel Pressure External Pressure
520 22 30
650 25 35
700 27 38
1000 32 51
1200 35 55
1300 38 56
1500 38 56
It appears that the oil pressure regulator has enough oil volume to
work with at the test temperature to regulate pressure starting at
about 1200RPM. That seems totally fine.
I thought it likely that I had a bad sending unit (as it's in the
harshest environment). To verify this, I decided to take a look at
the response curve of the panel instrument.. I Googled around and
found that most of the Stewart Warner senders vary resistance between
~30-240ohm over their operating range. So, I disconnected the wire
from the sending unit and reconnected it to one leg of a variable pot.
Using an ohmmeter, I adjusted the pot to various R values, then at
each value I connected the other leg of the pot to ground and then
noted the indication on the panel meter:
Resistance OP Indication
23 108
33 100
43 95
47 93
65 80
75 68
87 60
89 41
93 38
130 20
230 0
I was surprised to find that the notchy response seemed to come from
the panel instrument - the sender may yet be good.. Around 40-60psi,
the instrument responded to a very small change in resistance with a
big jump in pressure indication..
The physical motion of the instrument is quite slow, but smooth. It
doesn't appear that the movement is draggy/jumpy. When the master is
switched on, the instrument ramps up from zero somewhat quickly at
first, but the final value isn't reached for something like 30sec. I
find this behavior interesting given that the needle also quivers
sometimes.
I measured the open circuit voltage at the sending unit to be around
12.5V (close to battery voltage).
Okay, so now for questions:
Is there any reason the instrument would be designed to have this
notchy response?
Is this a common failure mode for this kind of instrument? Has anyone
else seen one do this?
Is there anything in the wiring to the instrument that would cause a
big shift in the operating point such that this notchy behavior is now
right in the middle of the indicating range?
Can anybody suggest a way to get this fixed (or other things to check)?
Now that I have seen the response curve, I'll probably not throw very
much money at it.. The meter seems to have predictable behavior - it
actually does show changing oil pressure, though not particularly
accurately. If the gauge indicates less than 15-20psi while at operating
RPM, I should probably start getting concerned. Otherwise, it seems
nothing to be alarmed about.
Does anyone rebuild these instruments?
This week, I may plot the sending unit resistance vs. independently
measured oil pressure - just to fill in that blank - and prove that
the sending unit is behaving reasonably.
Any other thoughts?
Thanks and regards,
Matt-
Message 15
| 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: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 09:51 AM 9/5/2006 -0700, you wrote:
> >From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <<mailto:nuckollsr@cox.net>nuckollsr@cox.net>
> >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Logic and experience (was about
> >alternators)
> >
> >At 11:36 AM 9/1/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>
> > <snip>
> > And I might have a lifetime of picking apples but
> > that doesn't make me an apple horticulturist. I've
> > spent 50 years getting my hands dirty, figuring out
> > how things work, designing new products and doing
> > my best to keep customers happy, but that doesn't
> > make me a human factors expert either.
> > I've never asked you to prove anything, only offer logical
> > foundation for your assertions . . . be a teacher
> > for the ideas you hold dear.
>
>
>I am not sure what you mean?
If you don't know what I mean, where do I begin?
For years on this List you've demonstrated no
ability/willingness to discuss simple-ideas based
on the physics or their assemblage into useful
systems that meet customer's design goals.
You place great value in the advertising hype for
your favorite products while demonstrating no first-
hand knowledge of the product's inner workings nor
willingness or even curiosity to find out.
As far as I know, you're retired, have no customers, and
no commitments to perform for anyone. This leaves plenty of
time to dance around poking 'sticks' into folk's cages
while hiding behind a pseudonym dressed up with lots
of alphabet soup poured over your signature line.
I don't rely on an alphabet-soup-sauce to support
my assertions. I have to demonstrate my performance in
a day-time job, in a night-time job and in service to my
customers. I have to accept consequences for my actions
in terms of tangible gains and losses. The only thing
you risk is flaming e-mails and perhaps censure.
I don't use the word "cage" in a pejorative sense. My
cage is a space I choose to occupy that sets limits
on my behavior. I aspire to the use of words that
inform and sometimes entertain. I avoid use of words
intended to persuade and certainly words intended to
hurt. I'm bound my the limits of my 'cage' from attacking
you or your property. I value my honor and the honorable
behavior of others when they go out of their way
to defend the person and property of others.
You have demonstrated no similar bounds. Even when
I take pains to acknowledge where we're in agreement,
you can still find a still longer stick to poke
with.
The fact that you totally missed the significant points in
my attempts at discussion with Mr. Richter is
ample demonstration of your existence in an parallel
universe. Mr. Richter attacked me sir but would not
cite a single paragraph in the 'Connection wherein
my words lead individuals to do "atrocious work" on
their airplanes. Many of the assertions in his document
were wrong . . . not alternate opinions but
simply wrong. But when questioned for amplification,
he would not focus on nor answer a single question.
Whatever useful information his document contained
was awash in error and unsupportable assertions.
Greg's unwillingness/inability to earn respect as a
teacher while disseminating a volume of bad data has
earned him permanent enshrinement on my website.
Like many of history's infamous documents, Greg's
work is worthy of preservation so as to be available to
serious students of the matters it purports to illuminate.
You willingly defer to the forces of regulation and certification
when it suits your argument but ridicule my goal of adapting
the automotive IR alternator into fold of traditional
(and certified) electrical systems.
When I'm skeptical of traditional regulatory and bureaucratic
management, you find fault in my irreverence but in the
next paragraph, you poke at me for adhering to some
outdated notions of how an alternator should behave in
airplanes - "let 'er run just like they do in cars, no
problem."
You've taken me to task for being critical of a "dark-n-
stormy-night" story wherein a respected test pilot suffered
the indignities, injury and expense of an off field landing
while citing alternator failure as root cause. Subsequent
conversation with him confirmed loss of stator winding as
cause of the alternator failure. Respected test pilot or not, he
was flying an electrically dependent engine wherein
loss of the alternator was all it took to bring him down.
I cannot speak to his skills as pilot but I remain skeptical
of his system design skills or the skills of his
support staff. But you made it clear that I shouldn't
be "attacking" someone's abilities - especially one so
respected - and besides, I shouldn't be piling more
indignities on his already expensive adventure. The fact
that his engine quit for the reasons cited is ample
foundation for my skepticism.
If dark-n-stormy-night stories are to have any real value,
it's in the dissection and discovery and prevention of
future of root causes - and even the most respected
individuals can stub their toe. Come to think of it,
perhaps it was Paul who raked me on this one . . . if
so, please accept my apologies for the attribution error.
In any case, you're either incapable of focusing on an issue
or just having too much fun poking through the boundaries
of my limits. Just the fact that you defend Greg
Richter's document is an overwhelming demonstration of
your dearth of understanding. Your words on the List
are already enshrined in Matronics archives so that
others may research and assess value as they see fit.
Meanwhile, I have many rewarding ways to spend my
time and discussing anything with you is not one of them.
To allow your masquerade to continue is a compromise that
will only distract a quest for the best we know how to do.
It's time to call a halt to this unproductive taxation
on my time and everyone else's patience.
I will ask you too sir to vacate the AeroElectric List.
Bob . . .
Message 16
| 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: "Rob Housman" <robh@hyperion-ef.us>
I second Bob's motion; now let's vote on it.
Best regards,
Rob Housman
A070
Airframe complete
Irvine, CA
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 3:10 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: gmcjetpilot
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 09:51 AM 9/5/2006 -0700, you wrote:
> >From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <<mailto:nuckollsr@cox.net>nuckollsr@cox.net>
> >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Logic and experience (was about
> >alternators)
> >
> >At 11:36 AM 9/1/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>
> > <snip>
> > And I might have a lifetime of picking apples but
> > that doesn't make me an apple horticulturist. I've
> > spent 50 years getting my hands dirty, figuring out
> > how things work, designing new products and doing
> > my best to keep customers happy, but that doesn't
> > make me a human factors expert either.
> > I've never asked you to prove anything, only offer logical
> > foundation for your assertions . . . be a teacher
> > for the ideas you hold dear.
>
>
>I am not sure what you mean?
If you don't know what I mean, where do I begin?
<SNIP>
Meanwhile, I have many rewarding ways to spend my
time and discussing anything with you is not one of them.
To allow your masquerade to continue is a compromise that
will only distract a quest for the best we know how to do.
It's time to call a halt to this unproductive taxation
on my time and everyone else's patience.
I will ask you too sir to vacate the AeroElectric List.
Bob . . .
Message 17
| 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: "raymondj" <raymondj@frontiernet.net>
Aye, in favor of Bob's motion.
Raymond Julian
Kettle River, MN.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Rob
Housman
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 7:26 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: gmcjetpilot
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rob Housman" <robh@hyperion-ef.us>
I second Bob's motion; now let's vote on it.
Best regards,
Rob Housman
A070
Airframe complete
Irvine, CA
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 3:10 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: gmcjetpilot
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 09:51 AM 9/5/2006 -0700, you wrote:
> >From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <<mailto:nuckollsr@cox.net>nuckollsr@cox.net>
> >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Logic and experience (was about
> >alternators)
> >
> >At 11:36 AM 9/1/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>
> > <snip>
> > And I might have a lifetime of picking apples but
> > that doesn't make me an apple horticulturist. I've
> > spent 50 years getting my hands dirty, figuring out
> > how things work, designing new products and doing
> > my best to keep customers happy, but that doesn't
> > make me a human factors expert either.
> > I've never asked you to prove anything, only offer logical
> > foundation for your assertions . . . be a teacher
> > for the ideas you hold dear.
>
>
>I am not sure what you mean?
If you don't know what I mean, where do I begin?
<SNIP>
Meanwhile, I have many rewarding ways to spend my
time and discussing anything with you is not one of them.
To allow your masquerade to continue is a compromise that
will only distract a quest for the best we know how to do.
It's time to call a halt to this unproductive taxation
on my time and everyone else's patience.
I will ask you too sir to vacate the AeroElectric List.
Bob . . .
Message 18
| 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: Logic and experience (was about alternators) |
In a message dated 09/05/2006 1:38:07 PM Central Daylight Time,
gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com writes:
And I might have a lifetime of picking apples but
> that doesn't make me an apple horticulturist
I sincerely hope that whoever invented the "Delete" key is comfortably
relaxing on a sunny beach in the Carribean or SP at this time........
do not archive (sigh)
Mark Phillips
Message 19
| 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: "Doug Baleshta" <dbaleshta@tru.ca>
Aye
Message 20
| 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: "Harold Kovac" <kayce33@earthlink.net>
Bravo, another ego trip aborted.
Harold
----- Original Message -----
From: "raymondj" <raymondj@frontiernet.net>
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 8:44 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: gmcjetpilot
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "raymondj"
> <raymondj@frontiernet.net>
>
> Aye, in favor of Bob's motion.
>
> Raymond Julian
> Kettle River, MN.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Rob
> Housman
> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 7:26 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: gmcjetpilot
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rob Housman"
> <robh@hyperion-ef.us>
>
> I second Bob's motion; now let's vote on it.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rob Housman
> A070
> Airframe complete
> Irvine, CA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert
> L.
> Nuckolls, III
> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 3:10 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: gmcjetpilot
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>
> At 09:51 AM 9/5/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>
>> >From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
>> <<mailto:nuckollsr@cox.net>nuckollsr@cox.net>
>> >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Logic and experience (was about
>> >alternators)
>> >
>> >At 11:36 AM 9/1/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>>
>> > <snip>
>> > And I might have a lifetime of picking apples but
>> > that doesn't make me an apple horticulturist. I've
>> > spent 50 years getting my hands dirty, figuring out
>> > how things work, designing new products and doing
>> > my best to keep customers happy, but that doesn't
>> > make me a human factors expert either.
>> > I've never asked you to prove anything, only offer logical
>> > foundation for your assertions . . . be a teacher
>> > for the ideas you hold dear.
>>
>>
>>I am not sure what you mean?
>
> If you don't know what I mean, where do I begin?
>
> <SNIP>
>
> Meanwhile, I have many rewarding ways to spend my
> time and discussing anything with you is not one of them.
> To allow your masquerade to continue is a compromise that
> will only distract a quest for the best we know how to do.
> It's time to call a halt to this unproductive taxation
> on my time and everyone else's patience.
>
> I will ask you too sir to vacate the AeroElectric List.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
Message 21
| 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: | methodology for avionics install |
I had no avionics or electric turn coordinator in my project aircraft.
I have now installed an audio panel and a gps/com, which seem to be working
find, no feedback or hums or other noise.
My plan is to install each additional unit and do some testing before adding
additional units.
Hopefully, if there is a problem, I can attribute it to the latest addition
for remedial measures.
Is this a sound idea? It is somewhat more timeconsuming, as opposed to
doing it all at once.
I plan to put the turn coordinator back in last, assuming it is the noisiest
electrical unit-should this be on the same ground as the other avionics? Is
mu metal a significently better shield that the sheetmetal gutter material?
Thank you, Skip Simpson
Message 22
| 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: | Old Cessna filters/capacitators/avionics |
My 1968 Cardinal has a whiskey flask sized "filter" in the middle of the
alternator output wire, a metal capacitator on each magneto, a 2 inch square
metal box filter that ties into the Zeftronics voltage regulator and a large
like a half a roll of quarters paper shell capacitator between the turn
coordinator wires.
I work under the supervision of a licensed ap mechanic.
1. what are the various filters for? I have been told that the flask size
in the middle of the alternator line is only needed if using adf or loran.
Because to filter out the ac would require a much bigger filter.
2. Would it be wise to remove them one by one and see what noises are
introduced by their removal? I could always put them back on. Will I hurt
anything if I run the aircraft and avionics sans all filters?
3. Would it be a good idea (noise wise) to run my avionics bus directly
from the battery (feed and ground).?
4. Am I correct in assuming these filters only are effective while the
engine is running?
Thank you Skip Simpson
Message 23
| 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: "Tony Babb" <tonybabb@alejandra.net>
I always thought gmcjetpilot was a pseudonym used by Paul M. Hard to believe
there are two of them out there.!!! If anyone's interested I'd vote Aye -
Aye.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Harold
Kovac
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 7:19 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: gmcjetpilot
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Harold Kovac"
--> <kayce33@earthlink.net>
Bravo, another ego trip aborted.
Harold
----- Original Message -----
From: "raymondj" <raymondj@frontiernet.net>
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 8:44 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: gmcjetpilot
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "raymondj"
> <raymondj@frontiernet.net>
>
> Aye, in favor of Bob's motion.
>
> Raymond Julian
> Kettle River, MN.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Rob
> Housman
> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 7:26 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: gmcjetpilot
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rob Housman"
> <robh@hyperion-ef.us>
>
> I second Bob's motion; now let's vote on it.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rob Housman
> A070
> Airframe complete
> Irvine, CA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> Robert
> L.
> Nuckolls, III
> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 3:10 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: gmcjetpilot
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>
> At 09:51 AM 9/5/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>
>> >From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
>> <<mailto:nuckollsr@cox.net>nuckollsr@cox.net>
>> >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Logic and experience (was about
>> >alternators)
>> >
>> >At 11:36 AM 9/1/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>>
>> > <snip>
>> > And I might have a lifetime of picking apples but
>> > that doesn't make me an apple horticulturist. I've
>> > spent 50 years getting my hands dirty, figuring out
>> > how things work, designing new products and doing
>> > my best to keep customers happy, but that doesn't
>> > make me a human factors expert either.
>> > I've never asked you to prove anything, only offer logical
>> > foundation for your assertions . . . be a teacher for the ideas
>> > you hold dear.
>>
>>
>>I am not sure what you mean?
>
> If you don't know what I mean, where do I begin?
>
> <SNIP>
>
> Meanwhile, I have many rewarding ways to spend my
> time and discussing anything with you is not one of them.
> To allow your masquerade to continue is a compromise that
> will only distract a quest for the best we know how to do.
> It's time to call a halt to this unproductive taxation
> on my time and everyone else's patience.
>
> I will ask you too sir to vacate the AeroElectric List.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
Message 24
| 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: RG batteries with 35A generators |
The article is in the AOPA pilot magazine Aug or Sept issue, on aircraft
batteries.
Bobs name is mentioned right in the introduction of the article and later
near the end with a reference to the connection. I have a rotax 912 with a 20Amp
generater, was setting up
for an RG battery from B&C, but took out the vented battery box I got with
my kit and dusted it off wondering if this article is correct.
Brian
Bob,
I have been doing a lot of reading lately, and somewhere I was
reading an article on RG batteries ....
Thanks
Dave Morris
Mooney M20A
N6030X
Message 25
| 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: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
Aye.
You should see the off list haranguing I got from him in reply to my on
list dark and stormy night story. He attacked Bob in it repeatedly while
assuring me that he likes Bob and his ideas. He called Bob (among other
things) a hypocrite and an asshole and extorted me not to be a
"Dittohead". It is many pages long and it made me slightly ill to read
it.
I'm setting my spam filter for him. I've seen enough, again.
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob
Housman
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 5:26 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: gmcjetpilot
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rob Housman"
<robh@hyperion-ef.us>
I second Bob's motion; now let's vote on it.
Best regards,
Rob Housman
A070
Airframe complete
Irvine, CA
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert
L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 3:10 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: gmcjetpilot
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 09:51 AM 9/5/2006 -0700, you wrote:
> >From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <<mailto:nuckollsr@cox.net>nuckollsr@cox.net>
> >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Logic and experience (was about
> >alternators)
> >
> >At 11:36 AM 9/1/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>
> > <snip>
> > And I might have a lifetime of picking apples but
> > that doesn't make me an apple horticulturist. I've
> > spent 50 years getting my hands dirty, figuring out
> > how things work, designing new products and doing
> > my best to keep customers happy, but that doesn't
> > make me a human factors expert either.
> > I've never asked you to prove anything, only offer logical
> > foundation for your assertions . . . be a teacher
> > for the ideas you hold dear.
>
>
>I am not sure what you mean?
If you don't know what I mean, where do I begin?
<SNIP>
Meanwhile, I have many rewarding ways to spend my
time and discussing anything with you is not one of them.
To allow your masquerade to continue is a compromise that
will only distract a quest for the best we know how to do.
It's time to call a halt to this unproductive taxation
on my time and everyone else's patience.
I will ask you too sir to vacate the AeroElectric List.
Bob . . .
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! --
|