Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:29 AM - Re: S700 2-10 Switches (Kingsley Hurst)
2. 06:06 AM - Re: Anti-rotation washer (Ernest Christley)
3. 06:53 AM - Re: Thinking things Electric (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 07:56 AM - 'Scope offer from Saelig (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 08:50 AM - Re: SD-8 Self-Excitation Option (Ken)
6. 10:02 AM - Re: SD-8 Self-Excitation Option (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 10:18 AM - another dark and stormy night story (Ed Holyoke)
8. 10:37 AM - Re: SD-8 Self-Excitation Option (Ken)
9. 04:20 PM - charging system problems (Collin Campbell)
10. 04:53 PM - rv10 antennas ()
11. 05:55 PM - Re: charging system problems (Matt Prather)
12. 06:56 PM - Re: charging system problems (Collin Campbell)
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: | S700 2-10 Switches |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Kingsley Hurst" <khurst@taroom.qld.gov.au>
>Hehe... That'd prolly be *today* in the US :)... At least the version I
saw,
had a 10/12/06 date, or for you down unders... A 06/10/12 date. Anyway,
it's still the 12th in US land :)...
Try 12/10/06 for the date down under.
Cheers
Kingsley in Oz (Down Under!)
Do not archive
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: Anti-rotation washer |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
Matt Prather wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
>
>B and C sells them.. Go here:
>
>http://www.bandc.biz/parts.html
>
>And enter "washer" into the search window. The first hit is the one I
>think you need.. Not sure if the diameter of the switches are all the
>same, however.
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Matt-
>
>
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ernest Christley
>><echristley@nc.rr.com>
>>
>>What is a good source for tabbed anti-rotation washers? None of the
>>toggle switches I bought had them.
>>
>>
>
Thank you, Matt. I had looked on B&C's sight before, but couldn't find
the washers listed seperately.
--
,|"|"|, Ernest Christley |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta Builder |
o| d |o http://ernest.isa-geek.org |
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: Thinking things Electric |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
From: Speedy11@aol.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Thinking things electic
Sender: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
X-Antivirus: AVG for E-mail 7.1.408 [268.13.2/471]
I'm not sure if Dr. Dunham intended eclectic or electric
in the subject line, but both would have been appropriate.
I still am not convinced that we must all be so trained on electrics
as to be able to derive all electrical answers from our base knowledge.
Sometimes we don't need the huge foundation of knowledge. To use
Dr. Dunham's example, my grandmother knew how to treat a sore throat
(she completed the fourth grade), yet she had virtually no knowledge
of medical techniques.
Absolutely! There are no imperatives for the depth of
knowledge to which one should aspire in setting the course
for life beyond the minimum necessary for self-sufficiency.
I'm not trying to put down Dr. Dunham, I'm just saying we don't
always need to know everything in order to accomplish a relatively
simple task. But, occasionally, we need confirmation from someone
who has that knowledge.
Yup, virtually all of us use the services of folks who
specialize in certain talents and resources to support
our occasional need. I never used a mechanic much 20 years
ago but find it's not a good use of my time to do
the things my mechanic does for me today.
We need someone who will look at our electrical plans, and
instead of saying study Z-99 and come back tomorrow, give us
advice on how to best implement OUR desired plan.
And many do DESIRE that service . . . I get dozens of
packages in the mail and email every year from folks
who may or may not have studied any of the Z-figures
with the hope that I'll study his/her plan and suggest
places where the bugs are hiding.
In many cases, their understanding and skill of the
language and syntax (symbols and drawings) are such that
it would take a lot of hours to achieve a lucid understanding
of the proposed system.
After I do a load plan and draw my schematics I need someone trained
(large knowledge base) in electrics to analyze my concept and help
me find errors.
Say I were to purchase a little successful grocery store,
would it be wise to completely re-arrange the order
of things in the room . . . or would it be a good idea to
study and understand why things are placed where
they are? Some large retailers spend gazillions of
dollars in with human factors geeks studying the
ways to optimize product flow off the shelves. A
little mom-n-pop grocery store didn't have a big
marketing budget, but perhaps they fiddled with
changes and observed their effects over the years
so that when I came along at their retirement, the
business being offered had already benefited from
optimization.
EVERY time I begin a new design task, I've found
it useful to study and understand the history
of what's gone before. There are often times perfectly
good wheels that do not need re-inventing . . .
along with design features worthy of replacement
because of poor diligence on the part of earlier
designers and/or technology obsolescence.
This is why the z-figures were crafted. The notion
was that having selected an architecture for the
operational and redundancy features, then all that
remained was to specify appliances, wire sizes,
fuse/breaker sizes and what style of switches were
most attractive. Probability of intractable error
is small.
This is why my consistent suggestion to new builders
is to "pick a z-figure that most closely matches what
you believe your design goals to be . . . then let's
talk about modifications fix any perceived shortfalls."
More often than not, perceived shortfalls are not
founded on simple-ideas or useful operational
features and can be disregarded. The z-figures
were never intended to be a collection of dreams
pulled from where the sun don't shine. They've
evolved over the years and have become rather stable
today because "mom-n-pop have been making considered
re-arrangements of cans on the shelves". Further
decisions for changes are limited to what sizes of
cans and perhaps what brands to stock.
I am willing to pay for such advice and I suspect others are
willing to do the same. In many cases, builders don't have the
time or desire to learn it all.
Quite correct. And there was a time when I thought
it would be a nice adjunct to my business to offer
custom wirebook services. I hung out the shingle
and in a few months of minimal advertising, I had
a backlog of work that I'd never dig out of. Problem
was, the work was very much like that which many of
my contemporaries are occupied with . . . pushing
around large piles of paper. I can do it but it's
the last thing I want to do in spite of the fact
that it paid very well.
STILL, Dr. Dunham makes me think. His is the best argument
I've seen on this forum in favor of in-depth learning as opposed
to adequate knowledge.
I commend you for your thoughts.
I think I'll rethink my own thoughts and try to implement some of your
thoughts.
How's that for eclectic?
But, I am serious when I say that. I will strive to think more
instead of depending on others to do my electrical thinking.
Until I reach that level of learning (I may never reach it),
any electrical experts out there willing to help me analyze my
electrical?
I don't go into McDonalds expecting to order a t-bone
and I don't expect Subway to offer a cheesburger and fries.
But I patronize either on occasion . . . with fully
informed expectations of what is offered in exchange
for my $time$.
There are numerous folks here on the list who are
most capable and willing to offer good critical review
and advice. Scan your drawings and post them. I don't
take up any tasks that come in through my mail-boxes but
I will do tasks that come up in this forum . . . that
is what's offered on the menu in this intellectual restaurant.
I'll pay a 3 month electrical advice retainer such that I can call
and send emails for advice. Bob?
Save your money and instead invest the $time$ necessary
to communicate your ideas to the group. You're swapping
dollars expended to hire "expert" advice for $time$ to
exploit the collective talents of those who choose to
"dine" here. The end product (your airplane) will probably
be better and your participation will leave a legacy
of expanded understanding for those who participate
and observe . . . to my mind a MUCH better return on
investment.
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: | 'Scope offer from Saelig |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
A few days ago I mentioned an oscilloscope being offered by
Saelig at:
http://saelig.com/
I just received the one I had on order. It's a rough clone
of the Tektronix TDS200 series scopes. Only 25 Mhz but it's
in color. Comes with two probes ($50 value alone). The USB
cable and attending software lets you dump both image and
tabular data to a computer. Here's the test setup on my
bench.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/PDS5022S_OWON_Scope.jpg
Once the data has been dumped to the computer it can be manipulated
in a variety of ways including print to hard copy. Haven't had
occasion to do any serious measurements but I can say that for
$299, it's a hell-of-a-buy.
I'm going to use it as my 'beater' scope to drag around
for looking into problems on airplanes and save my Tek
for less stressful bench work.
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: SD-8 Self-Excitation Option |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
I'm not sure that I'd want self excitation for my system. Also FWIW I
now believe that the 20,000 uF capacitor on the output of the PM
alternator regulator may be a really good idea. I omitted it because I
hard wired the output to an 8AH battery (without a battery contactor)
and figured that would suffice. There was no apparent electrical noise
from the alternator. As mentioned recently though, I started the engine
once with a completely dead battery. I closed the crossfeed contactor
(Z-14 architecture) and observed the alternator charging. Upon opening
the crossfeed contactor, the OVM module immediately tripped and cut
power to the input of the regulator. I did that a couple of times.
Problem was that the John Deere regulator was now failed in the full on
mode. I surmise that the totally dead battery was ineffective at
absorbing any current and keeping the voltage down and that the
regulator fried itself during the few milliseconds that it took for the
OVM to trip. The crossfeed autocloses during cranking and I had
previously closed it with the engine running with no problems. Actually
the system also ran fine with the failed VR and the crossfeed closed as
long as system loads were kept above the 20 amp output of the PM alternator.
I replaced the regulator but being hard headed I have not added a
capacitor. I now know enough not to bring the alternator on line with a
dead battery. However I did add some transorbs which might limit the
voltage for the short period until the OVM trips if I should be silly
enough to accidentally do somethng similar again.
I didn't learn much from an autopsy on the VR other than it uses output
semiconductors that appear to be fabricated on a copper plate instead of
off the shelf devices. The circuit board used surface mount devices and
I gave up on drawing a circuit diagram. I would like to find a
reasonably simple circuit for a homemade replacement VR. I don't really
have the time to properly test a completely new design.
Ken L.
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>
> At 12:12 PM 10/12/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>
>> I can t find the message now, but I believe I recall Bob saying that
>> with the SD-8 self-excitation circuitry (Z-25), the SD 8 would be on
>> all the time. If this is true (my knowledge of electronics is not
>> sufficient to determine this for myself) it seems that, while
>> innovative, this is not really useful. If one wants the SD-8 to
>> always be on, the same battery that starts your engine could excite
>> the SD-8 at the start of each flight. The only way self-excitation
>> would be useful would be if you were out in the bush with a dead
>> battery and had to hand-prop to start the engine.
>
>
> Yup, you got it. Generators of yore carried sufficient
> residual field magnetism to come on line without benefit
> of external power sources. Generators that have stood
> idle for a long time may loose this residual and require
> recharging of the field poles with a technique called
> "flashing".
>
> Alternators were seldom if ever designed to support
> any residual in the field so the vast majority of alternators
> in service require external startup energy to come alive.
> This can be an exceedingly small voltage . . . say between
> 0.2 and 1.0 volts of field voltage. However, given the
> very high speeds for rotating a typical alternator on
> Lycoming engines, some folks have reported that their
> modern alternators will come alive without benefit of
> external voltage applied.
>
>
>> First, is it correct that with Z-25 the SD-8 would always be on?
>
>
> The SD-8 is a PERMANENT MAGNET alternator . . . if
> it's spinning, it's producing voltage. So in this sense,
> it's always ON and there's nothing you can do to change that.
> Many SD-8 users have noted, however, that the REGULATOR
> supplied with the SD-8 will not come alive solely on
> voltage supplied from the alternator side of the system.
> Again, an exceedingly small voltage on the system side
> of the regulator (about .6 volts) to forward bias one
> of the critical solid state devices in the regulator
> would kick-start the regulator.
>
> The notion of being "always ON" or "ON-OFF under
> panel control" does not have the same meaning for the
> SD-8 system as for it's bigger generator/alternator
> cousins. However, given the special duty assigned to
> the SD-8 in a Z-13 installation, it's not an unreasonable
> design goal to have the system become useful whether or
> not there is a battery present.
>
> Earlier discussions about the quality of SD-8 power
> sans battery suggests that a "self-excitation" feature
> is useful. I've suggested that B&C pursue this as a
> product improvement but until that happens, Z-25 is
> the way to make it happen.
>
>
>> Second, I realize that the SD-8 is always spinning whenever the
>> engine is turning, but is there any disadvantage to having it always
>> on-line?
>
>
> It's not "on line" until a connection exists between
> the regulator output and the bus. There are many systems
> in aircraft that operate similarly. A number of generator
> installations on turbine aircraft can be taken "off line"
> by opening the reverse current control contactor . . . the
> generator is still up and running, producing whatever voltage
> the regulator commands . . . but no utilization of that
> energy can be made until the contactor is closed. This is
> how the SD-8 operates under the Z-13 architecture.
>
> Know that if you pre-flight the SD-8, the first time you
> turn it on after the engine is started, it will come alive
> and remain alive as long as it's being turned by the engine.
> The only thing that the Z-25 mod gets you is a cold startup
> sans battery.
>
>>
>>
>> Third, could Z-25 be altered to allow self-excitation only when needed?
>
>
> Sure. Put the relay in series with the AC output from
> the alternator . . . but then a second set of contacts
> on the same relay would be used to keep a small amount
> of bias current from constantly loading the battery when
> the airplane is parked. You double the probability of
> relay failure while adding no operational value for
> having done so. Hence the configuration of Z-13 as you
> see it whether or not modified per Z-25.
>
> 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: SD-8 Self-Excitation Option |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 11:50 AM 10/13/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
>
>I'm not sure that I'd want self excitation for my system.
What's the down-side for having it?
>Also FWIW I now believe that the 20,000 uF capacitor on the output of the
>PM alternator regulator may be a really good idea.
The value of this capacitor is to enable operations of the
SD-8 sans battery . . . but if you don't have a battery -or-
the capacitor -or- self excitation feature, then the SD-8
is at risk to being "stalled" if inadvertently overloaded
during alternator-only ops.
>I omitted it because I hard wired the output to an 8AH battery
>(without a battery contactor) and figured that would suffice.
I think the SD-8 regulator has places a small load (milliamps)
on any power source that is not disconnected during power down.
>There was no apparent electrical noise from the alternator. As mentioned
>recently though, I started the engine once with a completely dead battery.
>I closed the crossfeed contactor (Z-14 architecture) and observed the
>alternator charging. Upon opening the crossfeed contactor, the OVM module
>immediately tripped and cut power to the input of the regulator. I did
>that a couple of times.
>
>Problem was that the John Deere regulator was now failed in the full on
>mode. I surmise that the totally dead battery was ineffective at absorbing
>any current and keeping the voltage down and that the regulator fried
>itself during the few milliseconds that it took for the OVM to trip. The
>crossfeed autocloses during cranking and I had previously closed it with
>the engine running with no problems. Actually the system also ran fine
>with the failed VR and the crossfeed closed as long as system loads were
>kept above the 20 amp output of the PM alternator.
>
>I replaced the regulator but being hard headed I have not added a
>capacitor. I now know enough not to bring the alternator on line with a
>dead battery. However I did add some transorbs which might limit the
>voltage for the short period until the OVM trips if I should be silly
>enough to accidentally do somethng similar again.
Contrary to the fondest wishes of several past participants,
the lowly Transorb is not suited for soaking up the overflow
from a runaway alternator . . . and without carefully crafted
source impedance control, they're not suited for corralling
a load-dump event either. I've had great success using them
to stand off indirect effects of lightning . . . but energies
in normal and abnormal events from engine driven power sources
are just not something we can reasonably expect a Transorb
to handle.
>I didn't learn much from an autopsy on the VR other than it uses output
>semiconductors that appear to be fabricated on a copper plate instead of
>off the shelf devices. The circuit board used surface mount devices and I
>gave up on drawing a circuit diagram. I would like to find a reasonably
>simple circuit for a homemade replacement VR. I don't really have the time
>to properly test a completely new design.
Here's a schematic that is quite common to
all PM alternator regulators.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/PM_Regulator/Kubota_Schematic.jpg
This design looks like it's free of power-down leakage.
As long as the Q4eb, Z1, D6 pathway is out of conduction,
it doesn't appear that anything would be turned on. There
are no voltage dividers across the battery lead either.
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: | another dark and stormy night story |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
http://www.aopa.org/pilot/never_again/2006/na0610.html
Once again they're talking about how dangerous it is when the lights go
out, but there's no mention of why they did or how to keep it from
happening.
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: SD-8 Self-Excitation Option |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
>
> snip
>> There was no apparent electrical noise from the alternator. As
>> mentioned recently though, I started the engine once with a
>> completely dead battery. I closed the crossfeed contactor (Z-14
>> architecture) and observed the alternator charging. Upon opening the
>> crossfeed contactor, the OVM module immediately tripped and cut power
>> to the input of the regulator. I did that a couple of times.
>>
>> Problem was that the John Deere regulator was now failed in the full
>> on mode. I surmise that the totally dead battery was ineffective at
>> absorbing any current and keeping the voltage down and that the
>> regulator fried itself during the few milliseconds that it took for
>> the OVM to trip. The crossfeed autocloses during cranking and I had
>> previously closed it with the engine running with no problems.
>> Actually the system also ran fine with the failed VR and the
>> crossfeed closed as long as system loads were kept above the 20 amp
>> output of the PM alternator.
>>
>> I replaced the regulator but being hard headed I have not added a
>> capacitor. I now know enough not to bring the alternator on line
>> with a dead battery. However I did add some transorbs which might
>> limit the voltage for the short period until the OVM trips if I
>> should be silly enough to accidentally do somethng similar again.
>
>
> Contrary to the fondest wishes of several past participants,
> the lowly Transorb is not suited for soaking up the overflow
> from a runaway alternator . . . and without carefully crafted
> source impedance control, they're not suited for corralling
> a load-dump event either. I've had great success using them
> to stand off indirect effects of lightning . . . but energies
> in normal and abnormal events from engine driven power sources
> are just not something we can reasonably expect a Transorb
> to handle.
>
Understood. But transorbs might have kept the voltage reasonble for the
few milliseconds that it took for the OVM to trip as mentioned in the
top paragraph. The dead battery did not limit the voltage or the OVM
would not have tripped. A large capacitor might have helped a bit. I
think transorbs might help in this situation. The J.D. regulator goes
for $100. in my neighborhood.
> snip
>
> Here's a schematic that is quite common to
> all PM alternator regulators.
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/PM_Regulator/Kubota_Schematic.jpg
>
>
> This design looks like it's free of power-down leakage.
> As long as the Q4eb, Z1, D6 pathway is out of conduction,
> it doesn't appear that anything would be turned on. There
> are no voltage dividers across the battery lead either.
>
> Bob . . .
Gee if they had only put component values on that schematic ;)
Ken L.
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: | charging system problems |
I am still trying to figure out the glitch in my charging system. I
wrote about this a couple of weeks ago, I am new to this group, haven't
figured out how to include all the past discussion without retyping it
all over again. I beg your patience.
To rehash the problem. Everything seems to work fine until five or so
minuites into the flight when the system begins to discharge. I can
reset the system by recycling the field breaker and everything goes back
to normal, for another few minutes. After I recycle the system the
second time, I can continue the rest of the flight with no problems.
The bus voltage is a constant 14.5 volts. I am using a Van's 35 amp
alt, VR-371 regulator, Electronics Int. VA-1 guage installed in the alt.
lead. This is a "Bearhawk" aircraft. (tubing fuselage, metal wings) I
didn't discover this group until I had already wired the plane so I know
I have done some things that I would do differently if I had it to do
over again. My battery (Odyssey 680) is grounded to the engine mount.
Engine is grounded to the mount via a bolt on the oil sump. I know, I
know... there is a better way, just that I copied what I saw on
numerous other planes. My wiring diagram is one that I borrowed from
one of Tony Bengelis' books.
Still hoping someone out there can shed some light on this..
Collin
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <gommone7@bellsouth.net>
Good evening folks,
Hugo with an RV10 ,actually 1300 punds of aluminum wich soon or later will be an
rv10,
Question I install a VOR-glideslope antenna at the top of the rudder,the cable
finish at the mid section ,I suppose I need a diplexer in order to use both features,the
cable split at mid fuse ,asking,will be OK ,in your opinion connect
with male -female at the mid section an install the splitter under the panel,or
use the juncion there to instal the diplexer,I wonder if will be any kind
of lose in the reception.
thanks for the help.
Hugo
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: charging system problems |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
Hello Collin,
I am not clear how you know that the system is "discharging".. If the bus
voltage is solid at 14.5V, then the alternator is regulating, and keeping
up with system demands. Or, what's the bus voltage during the discharge?
If you go to the archive search engine:
http://www.matronics.com/searching/ws_script.cgi
And enter "Collin", you can see everything you have posted to the
Aeroelectric list (be sure to select that Archive as the thing to
search)..
Regards,
Matt-
> I am still trying to figure out the glitch in my charging system. I wrote
> about this a couple of weeks ago, I am new to this group, haven't figured
> out how to include all the past discussion without retyping it all over
> again. I beg your patience.
>
> To rehash the problem. Everything seems to work fine until five or so
> minuites into the flight when the system begins to discharge. I can reset
> the system by recycling the field breaker and everything goes back to
> normal, for another few minutes. After I recycle the system the second
> time, I can continue the rest of the flight with no problems. The bus
> voltage is a constant 14.5 volts. I am using a Van's 35 amp alt, VR-371
> regulator, Electronics Int. VA-1 guage installed in the alt. lead. This
> is a "Bearhawk" aircraft. (tubing fuselage, metal wings) I didn't
> discover this group until I had already wired the plane so I know I have
> done some things that I would do differently if I had it to do over again.
> My battery (Odyssey 680) is grounded to the engine mount. Engine is
> grounded to the mount via a bolt on the oil sump. I know, I know... there
> is a better way, just that I copied what I saw on numerous other planes.
> My wiring diagram is one that I borrowed from one of Tony Bengelis' books.
>
> Still hoping someone out there can shed some light on this..
>
> Collin
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: charging system problems |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Collin Campbell" <collinc@alltel.net>
Matt,
Ok, I forgot to mention that the discharge light comes on. The amp reading
goes to "0" and the voltage drops to 12.8 (a fully charged battery)
Thanks for the reply
Collin
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:53 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: charging system problems
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather"
> <mprather@spro.net>
>
> Hello Collin,
>
> I am not clear how you know that the system is "discharging".. If the bus
> voltage is solid at 14.5V, then the alternator is regulating, and keeping
> up with system demands. Or, what's the bus voltage during the discharge?
>
> If you go to the archive search engine:
>
> http://www.matronics.com/searching/ws_script.cgi
>
> And enter "Collin", you can see everything you have posted to the
> Aeroelectric list (be sure to select that Archive as the thing to
> search)..
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Matt-
>
>> I am still trying to figure out the glitch in my charging system. I
>> wrote
>> about this a couple of weeks ago, I am new to this group, haven't figured
>> out how to include all the past discussion without retyping it all over
>> again. I beg your patience.
>>
>> To rehash the problem. Everything seems to work fine until five or so
>> minuites into the flight when the system begins to discharge. I can
>> reset
>> the system by recycling the field breaker and everything goes back to
>> normal, for another few minutes. After I recycle the system the second
>> time, I can continue the rest of the flight with no problems. The bus
>> voltage is a constant 14.5 volts. I am using a Van's 35 amp alt, VR-371
>> regulator, Electronics Int. VA-1 guage installed in the alt. lead. This
>> is a "Bearhawk" aircraft. (tubing fuselage, metal wings) I didn't
>> discover this group until I had already wired the plane so I know I have
>> done some things that I would do differently if I had it to do over
>> again.
>> My battery (Odyssey 680) is grounded to the engine mount. Engine is
>> grounded to the mount via a bolt on the oil sump. I know, I know...
>> there
>> is a better way, just that I copied what I saw on numerous other planes.
>> My wiring diagram is one that I borrowed from one of Tony Bengelis'
>> books.
>>
>> Still hoping someone out there can shed some light on this..
>>
>> Collin
>
>
>
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! --
|