---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sun 09/17/06: 26 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 04:45 AM - Re: 2-70 Toggle switch (MikeEasley@aol.com) 2. 06:06 AM - Systems Testing (was Fuel Pump Switch(es)) (Peter Pengilly) 3. 07:06 AM - Re: Systems Testing (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 4. 07:14 AM - Re: Gear Indicator Lights (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 5. 07:23 AM - Re: Systems Testing (luckymacy@comcast.net (lucky)) 6. 08:07 AM - Re: Systems Testing (Deems Davis) 7. 08:32 AM - Re: Systems Testing (luckymacy@comcast.net (lucky)) 8. 10:12 AM - Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 8 Msgs - 09/16/06 (William Morgan) 9. 10:28 AM - Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 8 Msgs - 09/16/06 (William Morgan) 10. 11:15 AM - Re: Systems Testing (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 11. 12:42 PM - Re: Mic plug / PTT wiring (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 12. 03:30 PM - Cable Tie Mounting Blocks (Jeff Moreau) 13. 04:09 PM - Re: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks (John McMahon) 14. 04:19 PM - Re: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks (Bruce Bell) 15. 04:28 PM - Re: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks (Dave N6030X) 16. 04:47 PM - Re: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks (OldBob Siegfried) 17. 05:01 PM - Re: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks (A DeMarzo) 18. 06:43 PM - Re: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks (Bob White) 19. 07:36 PM - Re: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks (LRE2@aol.com) 20. 07:51 PM - Re: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks (Bob McCallum) 21. 08:07 PM - Re: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks (Harold Kovac) 22. 08:17 PM - Re: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks () 23. 08:19 PM - Re: Temperature calibration..... (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)) 24. 08:43 PM - Re: Temperature calibration..... (Richard E. Tasker) 25. 08:47 PM - radio wires (Dennis Jones) 26. 08:51 PM - Re: Temperature calibration..... (Bob McCallum) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 04:45:33 AM PST US From: MikeEasley@aol.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: 2-70 Toggle switch John, I've bought hard to find switches from _www.alliedelec.com_ (http://www.alliedelec.com) several times. Try... _http://www.alliedelec.com/Search/SearchResults.asp?N=0&Ntk=Primary&Ntt=toggle +%28on%29-on-%28on%29&sid=450C900033E2617F_ (http://www.alliedelec.com/Search/SearchResults.asp?N=0&Ntk=Primary&Ntt=toggle+(on)-on-(on)&sid=450C900033E2617F ) Mike Easley Colorado Springs Lancair ES ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 06:06:50 AM PST US From: "Peter Pengilly" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Systems Testing (was Fuel Pump Switch(es)) --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Peter Pengilly" Try writing down a list of things your fuel system must do. Write simple statements and start with the basics - transfer fuel from the tank to the carb/injector fuel inlet at xx pressure. Write only one 'feature' per statement. Think about what you want to happen in unusual situations or when components fail. Try not to think about your design. You are creating a set of "Requirements". Include details - must be able to get at fuel filter easily for servicing - as well as whole system issues - system must only need servicing yearly. Define words like 'easily'. There are now two parallel paths to follow. 1) Look at your design to ensure you have met all of the requirements - be critical (not always easy). If the design does not meet the requirements then change the design. 2) Develop a verification or test for each requirement. If a ground test is too difficult you will now understand any risks you are taking - for example you may decide to trust the pressure gauge manufacturer's calibration (most people do). Minimize flight testing, its risky and getting good data is more difficult than you think. The best way is to get someone other than the designer to write the tests (your wife may be?), but that's not always possible. Be honest with yourself when testing. A second pair of eyes often helps. Try to keep it all simple. Yours, Pete -----Original Message----- On 15 Sep 2006, at 10:18, Gary Casey wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gary Casey > > > Kevin previously wrote: >> "If you don't do the test then, someday you may >> stumble across that condition when you hadn't planned it. If the >> system works as expected, then everything is OK. But if the system >> does not perform, then you may lose the aircraft. > > Good points, but what "assumptions" do you have in mind that should > be tested? ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 07:06:07 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Systems Testing --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" On 15 Sep 2006, at 10:18, Gary Casey wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gary Casey > > > Kevin previously wrote: >> "If you don't do the test then, someday you may >> stumble across that condition when you hadn't planned it. If the >> system works as expected, then everything is OK. But if the system >> does not perform, then you may lose the aircraft. > > Good points, but what "assumptions" do you have in mind that should > be tested? >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Peter Pengilly" > > >Try writing down a list of things your fuel system must do. Write simple >statements and start with the basics - transfer fuel from the tank to >the carb/injector fuel inlet at xx pressure. Write only one 'feature' >per statement. Think about what you want to happen in unusual situations >or when components fail. Try not to think about your design. You are >creating a set of "Requirements". Include details - must be able to get >at fuel filter easily for servicing - as well as whole system issues - >system must only need servicing yearly. Define words like 'easily'. > >There are now two parallel paths to follow. 1) Look at your design to >ensure you have met all of the requirements - be critical (not always >easy). If the design does not meet the requirements then change the >design. > >2) Develop a verification or test for each requirement. If a ground test >is too difficult you will now understand any risks you are taking - for >example you may decide to trust the pressure gauge manufacturer's >calibration (most people do). Minimize flight testing, its risky and >getting good data is more difficult than you think. The best way is to >get someone other than the designer to write the tests (your wife may >be?), but that's not always possible. > >Be honest with yourself when testing. A second pair of eyes often helps. >Try to keep it all simple. > >Yours, Pete Pete, thanks for posting this. An excellent illumination of the thought processes behind setting requirements, evaluating performance against those requirements, and conducting a failure mode effects analysis (FMEA) from which one (1) revises requirements and/or (2) deduces Plan-B for each necessary item that fails to perform under Plan-A. With respect to development of requirements, design, testing and failure mitigation, I would encourage Listers to publish their thoughts here on the List. No doubt some folks will be inclined to evaluate your words with too much emphasis on their assessment of your lack of skill and knowledge. Expect it to happen and know that these postings should be summarily ignored. However, others are willing and able to assist with step/by/step analysis of simple-ideas with the supporting logic needed for achieving your design goals. In this manner, we elevate the skills and knowledge of all who choose to participate. The OBAM aviation Skunkwerks ranks amongst the largest and most capable given the huge diversity individuals who decide to build airplanes. They bring a wealth of knowledge with them and there's no better place for that resource to be cultivated and shared than right here on the List. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 07:14:58 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Gear Indicator Lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" >>Time: 04:36:32 PM PST US >>From: Greg Young >>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Gear Indicator lights >> >> I need some help finding suitable gear indicator lights for a certified ai >>rcraft, my Navion. I'm doing some cleanup and want to cut a new panel with >>the gear lights repositioned. The current lights would work except they are >> circa 1959 and the lenses are disintegrating. They are press-to-test with >>a sort of mushroom shaped lense. I've gotten a couple replacement lenses fr >>om my avionics shop junk drawer but would rather source new lights (or lens >>es if they are still made) rather than depend on the "luck of the drawer" w >>hen they break again. Anything with Mil, PMA or mfg blessing would make it >>a logbook entry per my IA but I'm not adverse to doing a 337 to get LED's o >>r something more modern and aestetically pleasing than MS25041 (ugly and ex >>pensive). Any help would be appreciated. >> >>Thanks, >>Greg Young Greg. How many and what colors? How are they labeled. I'm sure that by now, your adventures into the catalogs have shown that the choices are limited and getting more expensive all the time. Incandescent lamp fixtures rugged enough to meet most folks design goals are becoming more rare and the prices are not attractive. Consider fabricating a landing gear indicator assembly using LEDs. Let's talk about your design requirements and then sort through some ideas. Obviously, you can replace the existing lamps with brand new, similar fixtures . . . but perhaps there's a way to use a collection of much less expensive hardware to produce a new approach with LEDs . . . Of course, you may wind up spending more $time$ in design and fabrication than the simple replacement of existing fixtures would cost . . . but perhaps you have an interest in advancing the best-we-know-how-to-do. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 07:23:41 AM PST US From: luckymacy@comcast.net (lucky) Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Systems Testing I don't see anything wrong with the designer "writing the test", I see good things about that in the OBAM world. I'd add though to make the requirements & test plan/test procedures public so they can be "peer reviewed". Lucky -------------- Original message -------------- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > > On 15 Sep 2006, at 10:18, Gary Casey wrote: > > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gary Casey > > > > > > Kevin previously wrote: > >> "If you don't do the test then, someday you may > >> stumble across that condition when you hadn't planned it. If the > >> system works as expected, then everything is OK. But if the system > >> does not perform, then you may lose the aircraft. > > > > Good points, but what "assumptions" do you have in mind that should > > be tested? > > >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Peter Pengilly" > > > > > >Try writing down a list of things your fuel system must do. Write simple > >statements and start with the basics - transfer fuel from the tank to > >the carb/injector fuel inlet at xx pressure. Write only one 'feature' > >per statement. Think about what you want to happen in unusual situations > >or when components fail. Try not to think about your design. You are > >creating a set of "Requirements". Include details - must be able to get > >at fuel filter easily for servicing - as well as whole system issues - > >system must only need servicing yearly. Define words like 'easily'. > > > >There are now two parallel paths to follow. 1) Look at your design to > >ensure you have met all of the requirements - be critical (not always > >easy). If the design does not meet the requirements then change the > >design. > > > >2) Develop a verification or test for each requirement. If a ground test > >is too difficult you will now understand any risks you are taking - for > >example you may decide to trust the pressure gauge manufacturer's > >calibration (most people do). Minimize flight testing, its risky and > >getting good data is more difficult than you think. The best way is to > >get someone other than the designer to write the tests (your wife may > >be?), but that's not always possible. > > > >Be honest with yourself when testing. A second pair of eyes often helps. > >Try to keep it all simple. > > > >Yours, Pete > > Pete, thanks for posting this. An excellent illumination > of the thought processes behind setting requirements, > evaluating performance against those requirements, and > conducting a failure mode effects analysis (FMEA) from > which one (1) revises requirements and/or (2) deduces > Plan-B for each necessary item that fails to perform under > Plan-A. > > With respect to development of requirements, design, testing > and failure mitigation, I would encourage Listers to publish > their thoughts here on the List. No doubt some folks will be > inclined to evaluate your words with too much emphasis on their > assessment of your lack of skill and knowledge. Expect it to happen > and know that these postings should be summarily ignored. > > However, others are willing and able to assist with step/by/step > analysis of simple-ideas with the supporting logic needed for > achieving your design goals. In this manner, we elevate the > skills and knowledge of all who choose to participate. > > The OBAM aviation Skunkwerks ranks amongst the largest > and most capable given the huge diversity individuals who > decide to build airplanes. They bring a wealth of knowledge > with them and there's no better place for that resource to > be cultivated and shared than right here on the List. > > Bob . . . > > > > >
I don't see anything wrong with the designer "writing the test", I see good things about that in the OBAM world.  I'd add though to make the requirements & test plan/test procedures public so they can be "peer reviewed".
 
Lucky
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>

> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
>
>
> On 15 Sep 2006, at 10:18, Gary Casey wrote:
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gary Casey
> >
> >
> > Kevin previously wrote:
> >> "If you don't do the test then, someday you may
> >> stumble across that condition when you hadn't planned it. If the
> >> system works as expected, then everything is OK. But if the system
> >> does not perform, then you may lose the aircraft.
> >
> > Good points, but what "assumptions" do you have in mind that should
> > be tested?
>
> >--> Ae roElec tric-List message posted by: "Peter Pengilly"
> >
> >
> >Try writing down a list of things your fuel system must do. Write simple
> >statements and start with the basics - transfer fuel from the tank to
> >the carb/injector fuel inlet at xx pressure. Write only one 'feature'
> >per statement. Think about what you want to happen in unusual situations
> >or when components fail. Try not to think about your design. You are
> >creating a set of "Requirements". Include details - must be able to get
> >at fuel filter easily for servicing - as well as whole system issues -
> >system must only need servicing yearly. Define words like 'easily'.
> >
> >There are now two parallel paths to follow. 1) Look at your design to
> >ensure you have met all of the requirements - be critical (not always
> >easy). If the design does not meet the requirements then change the
> >design.
> >
> >2) Develop a verification or test for each requirement. If a ground test
> >is too difficult you will now understand any risks you are taking - for
> >example you may decide to trust the pressure gauge manufacturer's
> >calibration (most people do). Minimize flight testing, its risky and
> >getting good data is more difficult than you think. The best way is to
> >get someone other than the designer to write the tests (your wife may
> >be?), but that's not always possible.
> >
> >Be honest with yourself when testing. A second pair of eyes often helps.
> >Try to keep it all simple.
> >
> >Yours, Pete
>
> Pete, thanks for posting this. An excellent illumination
> of the thought processes behind setting requirements,
> evaluating performance against those requireme nts, a nd
> conducting a failure mode effects analysis (FMEA) from
> which one (1) revises requirements and/or (2) deduces
> Plan-B for each necessary item that fails to perform under
> Plan-A.
>
> With respect to development of requirements, design, testing
> and failure mitigation, I would encourage Listers to publish
> their thoughts here on the List. No doubt some folks will be
> inclined to evaluate your words with too much emphasis on their
> assessment of your lack of skill and knowledge. Expect it to happen
> and know that these postings should be summarily ignored.
>
> However, others are willing and able to assist with step/by/step
> analysis of simple-ideas with the supporting logic needed for
> achieving your design goals. In this manner, we elevate the
> skills and knowledge of all who choose to participate.
>
> The OBAM aviation Skunkwerks ranks among .matro
________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 08:07:02 AM PST US From: Deems Davis Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Systems Testing --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Deems Davis There's pretty compelling evidence from industry that strongly suggests that test plans written by the designers are biased to 'prove' the design. More often then not this is not a conscious but an unconscious bias. Someone, who is *equally* expert on the subject who is not invested in the design writing a test plan will uncover more errors and uncover them earlier. Mike Fagan @ IBM did some compelling research on this subject and developed his 'inspection' process for software based partly upon this principle. Other Quality guru's have done similarly on manufacturing and other processes. Deems Davis # 406 Panel/wiring http://deemsrv10.com/ lucky wrote: > I don't see anything wrong with the designer "writing the test", I see > good things about that in the OBAM world. I'd add though to make the > requirements & test plan/test procedures public so they can be "peer > reviewed". > > Lucky > > -------------- Original message -------------- > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > > > > > On 15 Sep 2006, at 10:18, Gary Casey wrote: > > > > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gary Casey > > > > > > > > > Kevin previously wrote: > > >> "If you don't do the test then, someday you may > > >> stumble across that condition when you hadn't planned it. If the > > >> system works as expected, then everything is OK. But if the > system > > >> does not perform, then you may lose the aircraft. > > > > > > Good points, but what "assumptions" do you have in mind that > should > > > be tested? > > > > >--> Ae roElec tric-List message posted by: "Peter Pengilly" > > > > > > > > >Try writing down a list of things your fuel system must do. > Write simple > > >statements and start with the basics - transfer fuel from the > tank to > > >the carb/injector fuel inlet at xx pressure. Write only one > 'feature' > > >per statement. Think about what you want to happen in unusual > situations > > >or when components fail. Try not to think about your design. > You are > > >creating a set of "Requirements". Include details - must be > able to get > > >at fuel filter easily for servicing - as well as whole system > issues - > > >system must only need servicing yearly. Define words like > 'easily'. > > > > > >There are now two parallel paths to follow. 1) Look at your > design to > > >ensure you have met all of the requirements - be critical (not > always > > >easy). If the design does not meet the requirements then change > the > > >design. > > > > > >2) Develop a verification or test for each requirement. If a > ground test > > >is too difficult you will now understand any risks you are > taking - for > > >example you may decide to trust the pressure gauge manufacturer's > > >calibration (most people do). Minimize flight testing, its > risky and > > >getting good data is more difficult than you think. The best > way is to > > >get someone other than the designer to write the tests (your > wife may > > >be?), but that's not always possible. > > > > > >Be honest with yourself when testing. A second pair of eyes > often helps. > > >Try to keep it all simple. > > > > > >Yours, Pete > > > > Pete, thanks for posting this. An excellent illumination > > of the thought processes behind setting requirements, > > evaluating performance against those requireme nts, a nd > > conducting a failure mode effects analysis (FMEA) from > > which one (1) revises requirements and/or (2) deduces > > Plan-B for each necessary item that fails to perform under > > Plan-A. > > > > With respect to development of requirements, design, testing > > and failure mitigation, I would encourage Listers to publish > > their thoughts here on the List. No doubt some folks will be > > inclined to evaluate your words with too much emphasis on their > > assessment of your lack of skill and knowledge. Expect it to happen > > and know that these postings should be summarily ignored. > > > > However, others are willing and able to assist with step/by/step > > analysis of simple-ideas with the supporting logic needed for > > achieving your design goals. In this manner, we elevate the > > skills and knowledge of all who choose to participate. > > > > The OBAM aviation Skunkwerks ranks among .matro > >* > > >* > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 08:32:45 AM PST US From: luckymacy@comcast.net (lucky) Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Systems Testing Hence the peer review process. Remember, we're not talking big software program where our promotions/pay raises are based on how well we are perceived to be doing. We're talking OBAM with next to no one writing code or making fuel pumps from scratch. Writing your own draft test plan/test procedure is another chance to learn something about yourself and your design. Allows you to think about what you've actually done and find mistakes first. That can be a very satisfying party of this airplane experience. Peer Reviewing your "drafts" will add the sanity check. For us OBAM'ers, it's mostly developing system designs to use off the shelf components and succesfully physically installing them and ensuring they play well with other components. Just my two cents and I do this for a living too. -------------- Original message -------------- From: Deems Davis > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Deems Davis > > There's pretty compelling evidence from industry that strongly suggests > that test plans written by the designers are biased to 'prove' the > design. More often then not this is not a conscious but an unconscious > bias. Someone, who is *equally* expert on the subject who is not > invested in the design writing a test plan will uncover more errors and > uncover them earlier. Mike Fagan @ IBM did some compelling research on > this subject and developed his 'inspection' process for software based > partly upon this principle. Other Quality guru's have done similarly on > manufacturing and other processes. > > Deems Davis # 406 > Panel/wiring > http://deemsrv10.com/ > > > > lucky wrote: > > > I don't see anything wrong with the designer "writing the test", I see > > good things about that in the OBAM world. I'd add though to make the > > requirements & test plan/test procedures public so they can be "peer > > reviewed". > > > > Lucky > > > > -------------- Original message -------------- > > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > > > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > > > > > > > > On 15 Sep 2006, at 10:18, Gary Casey wrote: > > > > > > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gary Casey > > > > > > > > > > > > Kevin previously wrote: > > > >> "If you don't do the test then, someday you may > > > >> stumble across that condition when you hadn't planned it. If the > > > >> system works as expected, then everything is OK. But if the > > system > > > >> does not perform, then you may lose the aircraft. > > > > > > > > Good points, but what "assumptions" do you have in mind that > > should > > > > be tested? > > > > > > >--> Ae roElec tric-List message posted by: "Peter Pengilly" > > > > > > > > > > > >Try writing down a list of things your fuel system must do. > > Write simple > > > >statements and start with the basics - transfer fuel from the > > tank to > > > >the carb/injector fuel inlet at xx pressure. Write only one > > 'feature' > > > >per statement. Think about what you want to happen in unusual > > situations > > > >or when components fail. Try not to think about your design. > > You are > > > >creating a set of "Requirements". Include details - must be > > able to get > > > >at fuel filter easily for servicing - as well as whole system > > issues - > > > >system must only need servicing yearly. Define words like > > 'easily'. > > > > > > > >There are now two parallel paths to follow. 1) Look at your > > design to > > > >ensure you have met all of the requirements - be critical (not > > always > > > >easy). If the design does not meet the requirements then change > > the > > > >design. > > > > > > > >2) Develop a verification or test for each requirement. If a > > ground test > > > >is too difficult you will now understand any risks you are > > taking - for > > > >example you may decide to trust the pressure gauge manufacturer's > > > >calibration (most people do). Minimize flight testing, its > > risky and > > > >getting good data is more difficult than you think. The best > > way is to > > > >get someone other than the designer to write the tests (your > > wife may > > > >be?), but that's not always possible. > > > > > > > >Be honest with yourself when testing. A second pair of eyes > > often helps. > > > >Try to keep it all simple. > > > > > > > >Yours, Pete > > > > > > Pete, thanks for posting this. An excellent illumination > > > of the thought processes behind setting requirements, > > > evaluating performance against those requireme nts, a nd > > > conducting a failure mode effects analysis (FMEA) from > > > which one (1) revises requirements and/or (2) deduces > > > Plan-B for each necessary item that fails to perform under > > > Plan-A. > > > > > > With respect to development of requirements, design, testing > > > and failure mitigation, I would encourage Listers to publish > > > their thoughts here on the List. No doubt some folks will be > > > inclined to evaluate your words with too much emphasis on their > > > assessment of your lack of skill and knowledge. Expect it to happen > > > and know that these postings should be summarily ignored. > > > > > > However, others are willing and able to assist with step/by/step > > > analysis of simple-ideas with the supporting logic needed for > > > achieving your design goals. In this manner, we elevate the > > > skills and knowledge of all who choose to participate. > > > > > > The OBAM aviation Skunkwerks ranks among .matro > > > >* > > > > > >* > > > > > > >
Hence the peer review process.  Remember, we're not talking big software program where our promotions/pay raises are based on how well we are perceived to be doing.  We're talking OBAM with next to no one writing code or making fuel pumps from scratch. Writing your own draft test plan/test procedure is another chance to learn something about yourself and your design.  Allows you to think about what you've actually done and find mistakes first.  That can be a very satisfying party of this airplane experience.  Peer Reviewing your "drafts" will add the sanity check.  For us OBAM'ers, it's mostly developing system designs to use off the shelf components and succesfully physically installing them and ensuring they play well with other components.
 
Just my two cents and I do this for a living too.
 
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>

> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Deems Davis
>
> There's pretty compelling evidence from industry that strongly suggests
> that test plans written by the designers are biased to 'prove' the
> design. More often then not this is not a conscious but an unconscious
> bias. Someone, who is *equally* expert on the subject who is not
> invested in the design writing a test plan will uncover more errors and
> uncover them earlier. Mike Fagan @ IBM did some compelling research on
> this subject and developed his 'inspection' process for software based
> partly upon this principle. Other Quality guru's have done similarly on
> manufacturing and other processes.
>
> Deems Davis # 406 < BR>> Panel/wiring
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>
>
>
> lucky wrote:
>
> > I don't see anything wrong with the designer "writing the test", I see
> > good things about that in the OBAM world. I'd add though to make the
> > requirements & test plan/test procedures public so they can be "peer
> > reviewed".
> >
> > Lucky
> >
> > -------------- Original message --------------
> > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> >
> > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> > >
> > >
> > > On 15 Sep 2006, at 10:18, Gary Casey wrote:
> > >
> > > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gary Casey
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Kevin previously wrote:
> > > >> "If yo u don't do the test then, someday you may
> > > >> stumble across that condition when you hadn't planned it. If the
> > > >> system works as expected, then everything is OK. But if the
> > system
> > > >> does not perform, then you may lose the aircraft.
> > > >
> > > > Good points, but what "assumptions" do you have in mind that
> > should
> > > > be tested?
> > >
> > > >--> Ae roElec tric-List message posted by: "Peter Pengilly"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Try writing down a list of things your fuel system must do.
> > Write simple
> > > >statements and start with the basics - transfer fuel from the
> > tank to
> > > >the carb/injector fuel inlet at xx pressure. Write only one
> > 'feature'
> > > >per state ment. Think about what you want to happen in unusual
> > situations
> > > >or when components fail. Try not to think about your design.
> > You are
> > > >creating a set of "Requirements". Include details - must be
> > able to get
> > > >at fuel filter easily for servicing - as well as whole system
> > issues -
> > > >system must only need servicing yearly. Define words like
> > 'easily'.
> > > >
> > > >There are now two parallel paths to follow. 1) Look at your
> > design to
> > > >ensure you have met all of the requirements - be critical (not
> > always
> > > >easy). If the design does not meet the requirements then change
> > the
> > > >design.
> > > >
> > > >2) Develop a verification or test for each requirement. If a > > ground test
> > > >is too difficult you will now understand any risks you are
> > taking - for
> > > >example you may decide to trust the pressure gauge manufacturer's
> > > >calibration (most people do). Minimize flight testing, its
> > risky and
> > > >getting good data is more difficult than you think. The best
> > way is to
> > > >get someone other than the designer to write the tests (your
> > wife may
> > > >be?), but that's not always possible.
> > > >
> > > >Be honest with yourself when testing. A second pair of eyes
> > often helps.
> > > >Try to keep it all simple.
> > > >
> > > >Yours, Pete
> > >
> > > Pete, thanks for posting this. An excellent illumination
> > > of the thought processes behind set ting r equirements,
> > > evaluating performance against those requireme nts, a nd
> > > conducting a failure mode effects analysis (FMEA) from
> > > which one (1) revises requirements and/or (2) deduces
> > > Plan-B for each necessary item that fails to perform under
> > > Plan-A.
> > >
> > > With respect to development of requirements, design, testing
> > > and failure mitigation, I would encourage Listers to publish
> > > their thoughts here on the List. No doubt some folks will be
> > > inclined to evaluate your words with too much emphasis on their
> > > assessment of your lack of skill and knowledge. Expect it to happen
> > > and know that these postings should be summarily ignored.
> > >
> > > However, others are willing and able to assist with step/by/step
> > > analysis of simple-id eas wi the W
________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 10:12:42 AM PST US From: William Morgan Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 8 Msgs - 09/16/06 John, Allied Electric: page 830 Allied p/n Eaton p/n Mil # Type 826-1522 8501K19 MS-27407-6 (On)-On-(On) Scott At 01:55 AM 9/17/2006, you wrote: >Time: 09:29:06 PM PST US >From: "John F. Herminghaus" >Subject: AeroElectric-List: 2-70 Toggle switch > >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John F. Herminghaus" > > >Does anyone know of a source for a 2-70 toggle switch ((on)-on-(on))? > > ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 10:28:22 AM PST US From: William Morgan Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 8 Msgs - 09/16/06 John, Rechecked my notes, Allied Elect page 853, Honeywell, same switch and about half the price, there are 2 of them on this page, 1 is mil-spec and the other is not Scott At 12:09 PM 9/17/2006, William Morgan wrote: >John, > >Allied Electric: page 830 >Allied p/n Eaton p/n Mil # Type >826-1522 8501K19 MS-27407-6 (On)-On-(On) > >Scott > > >At 01:55 AM 9/17/2006, you wrote: >>Time: 09:29:06 PM PST US >>From: "John F. Herminghaus" >>Subject: AeroElectric-List: 2-70 Toggle switch >> >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John F. Herminghaus" >> >> >>Does anyone know of a source for a 2-70 toggle switch ((on)-on-(on))? >> >> >> ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 11:15:18 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Systems Testing --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 03:31 PM 9/17/2006 +0000, you wrote: >Hence the peer review process. Remember, we're not talking big software >program where our promotions/pay raises are based on how well we are >perceived to be doing. We're talking OBAM with next to no one writing >code or making fuel pumps from scratch. Writing your own draft test >plan/test procedure is another chance to learn something about yourself >and your design. Allows you to think about what you've actually done and >find mistakes first. That can be a very satisfying party of this airplane >experience. Peer Reviewing your "drafts" will add the sanity check. For >us OBAM'ers, it's mostly developing system designs to use off the shelf >components and succesfully physically installing them and ensuring they >play well with other components. > >Just my two cents and I do this for a living too. Exactly. Many moons ago, I dreaded being at the front of the room to present meat for the grinder in a Critical Design Review. Years later, I began to look forward to them. It was a chance to validate the work by fielding the most probing questions. It became 'fun' when I realized that irrespective of the outcome of the review, one of two things would happen: (1) I was able to field all the questions with solid incorporation of simple-ideas into an invention the customer wanted and my peers approved or (2) a bad idea was prevented from going to production. Win-win all the way around. It's kinda like biennial flight reviews with a new instructor. You don't know what they might ask you to do (my last one was under totally the hood until 200' AGL on final approach). The goal is NOT to demonstrate repeating all the things you've done before but being able to do something different while operating within personal and airframe limits. That's the real advantage of OBAM aviation. Suggest anything you want to try with free CDR support. This atmosphere encourages you to work the problem from conception to installation knowing that any biases against the "not invented here syndrome" are likely to be spotted and avoided. In TC aviation, we compartmentalize tasks from design to production so tightly that nobody understands the whole system. Better to do it all and field the cabbages and tomatoes than have something slip by for lack of communication. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 12:42:04 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Mic plug / PTT wiring --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 12:12 PM 9/14/2006 -0700, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Deems Davis > >The example on Bob's web site shows that the PTT switch is wired to the >Ground/common on the Mic plug recepticle (in addition to the key/terminal) >is there any reason why the PTT switch (in my case on a control >stick/grip) can't be wired to a common ground for the control/ grip rather >than to the mic plug common? The push-to-talk circuit is not a potential ingress point for noise to a radio. It's probably a safe bet to combine PTT ground with other grounds in the stick grip. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 03:30:22 PM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks From: "Jeff Moreau" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jeff Moreau" Does anyone on the list have any experience using the stick on mounting blocks for cable ties? I am wondering in particular if the adhesive holds up after time and if there is any need to worry about corrosion when sticking these to metal surfaces? They sure seem convenient but I dont want to use them if they don't hold up or will cause corrosion problems down the road. Thanks! -------- Jeff Moreau RV8A Virginia Beach, VA Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=62148#62148 ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 04:09:08 PM PST US From: "John McMahon" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks Jeff, I was thinking of using them, but one fellow I know used them on his Lancair ES and said they started to let go after only a year or so.... I din't want to take the chance so used screws with washers, imbedded in the prepreg with micro. As they say "Your mileage may vary!" FWIW On 9/17/06, Jeff Moreau wrote: > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jeff Moreau" > > Does anyone on the list have any experience using the stick on mounting > blocks for cable ties? I am wondering in particular if the adhesive holds > up after time and if there is any need to worry about corrosion when > sticking these to metal surfaces? They sure seem convenient but I dont want > to use them if they don't hold up or will cause corrosion problems down the > road. > Thanks! > > -------- > Jeff Moreau > RV8A > Virginia Beach, VA > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=62148#62148 > > -- John McMahon Lancair Super ES, N9637M ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 04:19:55 PM PST US From: "Bruce Bell" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Bell" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Moreau" Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 5:28 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jeff Moreau" > > Does anyone on the list have any experience using the stick on mounting > blocks for cable ties? I am wondering in particular if the adhesive holds > up after time and if there is any need to worry about corrosion when > sticking these to metal surfaces? They sure seem convenient but I dont > want to use them if they don't hold up or will cause corrosion problems > down the road. > Thanks! > > -------- > Jeff Moreau > RV8A > Virginia Beach, VA > Hi Jeff, I used J-B Weld to secure a few of them. So far so good. I ran some wires through the main spar opening on my RV-4. Only been flying a month and a half but were installed five or so years ago. Roughed up both sides. Regards, Bruce Bell Lubboc, Texas RV-4 N23BB Ser#2888 DO NOT ARCHIVE > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=62148#62148 > > > ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 04:28:21 PM PST US From: Dave N6030X Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave N6030X Are you guys talking about the ones Bob Nuckolls sells that he recommends attaching with E-6000, or something else? Dave Morris At 06:07 PM 9/17/2006, you wrote: >Jeff, I was thinking of using them, but one fellow I know used >them on his Lancair ES and said they started to let go after only a >year or so.... I din't want to take the chance so used screws with >washers, imbedded in the prepreg with micro. As they say "Your >mileage may vary!" FWIW > > >On 9/17/06, Jeff Moreau <jmoreau2@cox.net> wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jeff Moreau" ><jmoreau2@cox.net> > >Does anyone on the list have any experience using the stick on >mounting blocks for cable ties? I am wondering in particular if the >adhesive holds up after time and if there is any need to worry about >corrosion when sticking these to metal surfaces? They sure seem >convenient but I dont want to use them if they don't hold up or will >cause corrosion problems down the road. >-- >John McMahon >Lancair Super ES, N9637M > > >http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List > > >http://www.matronics.com/contribution > > ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 04:47:50 PM PST US From: OldBob Siegfried Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: OldBob Siegfried Good Evening All, Just as a data point. I used several of the common stick-on type when I did a major upgrade to our Bonanza's radio package sixteen years ago. They have all worked just great and I have not noted any that have failed. They were all attached to aluminum however. I wonder if fiberglass might not gas a little and cause them to lose their adhesiveness. I know one data point doesn't mean much, but my experience has been good! Happy Skies, Old Bob Stearman N3977A Downers Grove, IL LL22 --- Dave N6030X wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave N6030X > > > Are you guys talking about the ones Bob Nuckolls > sells that he > recommends attaching with E-6000, or something else? > > Dave Morris > > At 06:07 PM 9/17/2006, you wrote: > >Jeff, I was thinking of using them, but one > fellow I know used > >them on his Lancair ES and said they started to let > go after only a > >year or so.... I din't want to take the chance so > used screws with > >washers, imbedded in the prepreg with micro. As > they say "Your > >mileage may vary!" FWIW > > > > > > > >On 9/17/06, Jeff Moreau > <jmoreau2@cox.net> wrote: > >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jeff > Moreau" > ><jmoreau2@cox.net> > > > >Does anyone on the list have any experience using > the stick on > >mounting blocks for cable ties? I am wondering in > particular if the > >adhesive holds up after time and if there is any > need to worry about > >corrosion when sticking these to metal surfaces? > They sure seem > >convenient but I dont want to use them if they > don't hold up or will > >cause corrosion problems down the road. > >-- > >John McMahon > >Lancair Super ES, N9637M ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 05:01:38 PM PST US From: "A DeMarzo" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks I use these in my occupation and as with everything else, prep is the key. make sure the area is clean and dry. Bare aluminum? Clean the immediate area with MEK. Painted? Clean with isopropyl alcohol before applying the patch. On 09/17/2006 6:45:28 PM, OldBob Siegfried (oldbob@beechowners.com) wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: OldBob Siegfried > > > Good Evening All, > > Just as a data point. I used several of the common > stick-on type when I did a major upgrade to our > Bonanza's radio package sixteen years ago. They have > all worked just great and I have not noted any that > have failed. They were all attached to aluminum > however. I wonder if fiberglass might not gas a little > and cause them to lose their adhesiveness. > > I know one data point doesn't > mean much, but my > experience has been good! > > Happy Skies, > > Old Bob > Stearman N3977A > Downers Grove, IL > LL22 > > --- Dave N6030X wrote: > > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave N6030X > > > > > > Are you guys talking about the ones Bob Nuckolls > > sells that he > > recommends attaching with E-6000, or something else? > > > > Dave Morris > > > > At 06:07 PM 9/17/2006, you wrote: > > >Jeff, I was thinking of using them, but one > > fellow I know used > > >them on his Lancair ES and said they started to let > ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 06:43:33 PM PST US From: Bob White Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Bob White I'll add one more comment to this thread. I used quite a few of the stick on mounting blocks. The ones I used also have two holes for mounting. After sticking them down, I drilled out most of them and secured them with 1/8" pop rivets. I don't expect to experience any failures. :) Bob W. On Sun, 17 Sep 2006 15:28:26 -0700 "Jeff Moreau" wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jeff Moreau" > > Does anyone on the list have any experience using the stick on mounting blocks for cable ties? I am wondering in particular if the adhesive holds up after time and if there is any need to worry about corrosion when sticking these to metal surfaces? They sure seem convenient but I dont want to use them if they don't hold up or will cause corrosion problems down the road. > Thanks! > > -------- > Jeff Moreau > RV8A > Virginia Beach, VA > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=62148#62148 > > > > > > > > > > -- http://www.bob-white.com N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 (first engine start 1/7/06) Custom Cables for your rotary installation - http://www.roblinphoto.com/shop/ ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 07:36:14 PM PST US From: LRE2@aol.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks I took a different tack, probably overkill, but easy , and I think very reliable. I cut multiple ~1" squares of 2-3 ply glass and screwed the blocks to them from the back. Then I applied the roughened squares to the fiberglass with structural Epoxy. They aren't going anywhere. LRE ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 07:51:03 PM PST US From: "Bob McCallum" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks Jeff; The long term reliability of these anchors depends, as with most things, on which ones you buy. The type that are secured with epoxy of some sort, are reasonably long term reliable, as are the ones noted by Bob White, if you add the rivets as he suggests. The ones however which are secured with adhesive foam tape are prone to rapid deterioration and bond failure if exposed to elevated temperature or petroleum product contamination or simply excessive age. Even within this foam tape group there are large variations in quality, largely based on brand. So you see, the answer to your question is really, "it depends". There are many products sold which fit the description you provided, and some work much better than others. I have not come across an issue with corrosion with any of these products, but, as mentioned by others, preparation is important, as is the specific adhesive used by the brand you choose to buy. All are not created equal. Bob McC ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Moreau" Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 6:28 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jeff Moreau" > > Does anyone on the list have any experience using the stick on mounting blocks for cable ties? I am wondering in particular if the adhesive holds up after time and if there is any need to worry about corrosion when sticking these to metal surfaces? They sure seem convenient but I dont want to use them if they don't hold up or will cause corrosion problems down the road. > Thanks! > > -------- > Jeff Moreau > RV8A > Virginia Beach, VA > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=62148#62148 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 08:07:48 PM PST US From: "Harold Kovac" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks Q uestion, if you have these mounts less the tape, would Bob's goop work. I've used it to glue stuff to a shower wall & it was a bear to remove Harold, RV9A ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 08:17:18 PM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Cable Tie Mounting Blocks From: --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Hello Jeff "Does anyone on the list have any experience using the stick on mounting blocks for cable ties?" I would not trust them. My favorite way to deal with getting cable blocks or similar hose blocks stuck, is to remove sticky back and very aggressive sand with 60 grit the mounting face, and where it is getting stuck to, if on a composite I use 80 grit. With aluminium go as course as you dare. I get stuck with 4 minute JB Weld (Epoxy), then try and get at least 2 sides covered with 1 ply BID (BiDirectional cloth, Spruce sells it under Rutan Supplies), I like using Redux 420, very expensive and a bit hard to find. T-88 would probably work OK and Spruce sells it. After JB is cured, scuff sand plastic and what you want to attach to, wet out, and fill transition with your epoxy and with flox mixed in. Easy way to apply BID is to mark a piece of Vis-queen the size you want, flip it over, clean off Slip with alcohol (slip is talc that is on plastic sheeting that prevents it from sticking together) lay on a piece of BID, and use a old credit card, playing card, or rubber squeegee to wet out BID and remove excess. Now cut on line, the lines will become visible once wet out, and apply with the plastic still on. The plastic will give the BID dimensional stability. Then once in place push it down, could use a acid brush or china bristle brush and remove plastic. I just did 6 fuel line pads tonight. Sand 6 pads and target area / a few minutes Mix JB / a few minutes Butter 6 pads and install / a few minutes By the time the JB cured I had the Redux mixed and 12 plies of BID wet out and cut Ron Parigoris ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 08:19:03 PM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Temperature calibration..... From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" Boiling water is dead accurate at 220F if your within 1000ft of sea level. All of my Dynon probes were within a degree or 2. Frank -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim Baker Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 12:06 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Temperature calibration..... --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Baker" Anyone have any unique ways to accomplish a calibration of a CHT sender/gauge at, say, 400F. I know about Tempilsticks and Tempilaq and others of that ilk, plus the NIST certified multimeteres (IR and contact) but wondered if there was something else out there I might have missed....read that as cheap. Tho, Tempil is about as cheap as you can get..... Jim Baker 580.788.2779 Elmore City, OK ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 08:43:01 PM PST US From: "Richard E. Tasker" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Temperature calibration..... --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard E. Tasker" Unless you are on a different planet than the rest of us, water boils at 212 sea level. Dick Do not archive Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis) wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" > >Boiling water is dead accurate at 220F if your within 1000ft of sea >level. > >All of my Dynon probes were within a degree or 2. > >Frank > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com >[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim >Baker >Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 12:06 PM >To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Temperature calibration..... > >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Baker" > >Anyone have any unique ways to accomplish a calibration of a CHT >sender/gauge at, say, 400F. I know about Tempilsticks and Tempilaq and >others of that ilk, plus the NIST certified multimeteres (IR and >contact) but wondered if there was something else out there I might have >missed....read that as cheap. Tho, Tempil is about as cheap as you can >get..... > >Jim Baker >580.788.2779 >Elmore City, OK > > -- Please Note: No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however, that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced. -- ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 08:47:28 PM PST US From: "Dennis Jones" Subject: AeroElectric-List: radio wires I must have upset Bob N. with one of my questions of a question. So here goes again. During the daisy chain from the shields of the mic wires to the ground wire (all on the radio end of the wires) what is the best way to tie the pig tail into the ground wire coming from the aircraft ground? No I'm not using a ground wire with a shield. The diagram shows the shields attaching to the ground wire from the aircraft ground pin. I'm using d-subs. Thanks Dennis ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 08:51:49 PM PST US From: "Bob McCallum" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Temperature calibration..... --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bob McCallum" Uh- - - don't you mean 212 degrees F ??????? Bob McC ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 11:16 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Temperature calibration..... > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" > > Boiling water is dead accurate at 220F if your within 1000ft of sea > level. > > All of my Dynon probes were within a degree or 2. > > Frank > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim > Baker > Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 12:06 PM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Temperature calibration..... > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Baker" > > Anyone have any unique ways to accomplish a calibration of a CHT > sender/gauge at, say, 400F. I know about Tempilsticks and Tempilaq and > others of that ilk, plus the NIST certified multimeteres (IR and > contact) but wondered if there was something else out there I might have > missed....read that as cheap. Tho, Tempil is about as cheap as you can > get..... > > Jim Baker > 580.788.2779 > Elmore City, OK > >