Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:25 AM - Re: Acceptable to use thin non aircraft wire to ... (FLYaDIVE@aol.com)
2. 04:58 AM - Re: automotive alternator question - OT (FLYaDIVE@aol.com)
3. 05:57 AM - Re: automotive alternator question - OT (Bill Boyd)
4. 06:45 AM - Re: automotive alternator question - OT (Steve Thomas)
5. 07:00 AM - Re: automotive alternator question - OT (Kevin Horton)
6. 10:49 AM - Re: 80A Fuse on Z-13 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 12:44 PM - Re: Acceptable to use thin non aircraft wire to coil of relays? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 04:04 PM - What Now? (Ron Patterson)
9. 04:45 PM - Re: What Now? (Richard E. Tasker)
10. 04:45 PM - Re: automotive alternator question - OT (Bill Boyd)
11. 05:34 PM - Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 13 Msgs - 10/19/06 (Lee Logan)
12. 09:19 PM - Relays. (Chris Byrne)
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: Acceptable to use thin non aircraft wire to |
...
Hello Matt:
Wasn't that a bit of interesting information ... Amazing!
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
"Show them the first time, correct them the second time, kick them the third
time."
Yamashiada
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: automotive alternator question - OT |
In a message dated 10/20/2006 8:33:36 PM Eastern Standard Time,
sportav8r@gmail.com writes:
Now, I know there is no way that a battery continually feeds current
into an alternator to keep it going, else charging the battery from
the alternator would be a losing proposition. And I certianly hope
that there is no way a dead battery is going to somehow take out my
dual alternator Z-13/8 architecture, but I cannot reconcile that hope
with what seems to have happened to my car electrical system here.
Tell me I'm not crazy, and that it doesn't take a battery to keep an
alternator alive once excited (the same battery that minutes before
cranked the engine for starting), that the battery is only there for
filtering the 3-phase rectified DC when in cruise mode, and I'll
believe you. But I'll still wonder what happened to the car
yesterday...
-Bill B
==================================
Bill:
There are MANY new things happening to cars today. As soon as you mentioned
HYUNDAI I knew what your problem was... IS.
It is NOT solved yet. The new battery will keep the car going for a few more
weeks but the problem MAY surely pop up again. The battery was border line
due to the problem and did require replacing, maybe not immediately. Still the
new battery is a move in the right direction.
You did not mention the year and model of the Hyundai.
When I said new things happening to cars; there is a different way of
utilizing a car's charging system today. The alternator is still the same and
the
voltage regulator is still the same but with car computer systems and trying to
squeeze more HP from a smaller engine there is a new twist. The computer
takes the alternator TOTALLY out of the electrical system and it does this for
more of a DOWN TIME on the duty cycle. An alternator uses between 2 to 5 HP
during operation. By taking the alternator out of the system you return that HP
so it can be sent to the wheels and use less gas. Now, not all computerized
cars do this ... what year and model is yours?
Also, newer cars with an alternator CAN run without a battery. NOT for a
very long time ... It is know as the Get Home Mode. In the OLD days with
Generators this was the NORM. But, just like in a plane's system a GOOD battery
is
required to let the alternator have an output. If the battery dies there is NO
voltage for the alternators field ... ergo ... No alternator output. New
cars are similar but utilize a large value capacitor to TRY to keep the
alternator running. The "TC" Time Constant is slow so IF you shed load it will
TRY to
get you home. No, I did not design this system so I don't know any more
about it.
I have a Hyundai and I have had the same problem and here is a hit. What is
it, that I bitch about on planes all the time, that always starts the same old
deadhead thought patterns and emails? Well, that is exactly what is wrong
with your car. Repair Time - 15 minutes.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
"Show them the first time, correct them the second time, kick them the third
time."
Yamashiada
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: automotive alternator question - OT |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r@gmail.com>
Thanks, Barry, Ernest,
The car is 99 Sonata, on its second engine but first alternator.
Wife reports the pos battery terminal was very corroded when she
looked under the hood before the repair. Perhaps a sigificant finding
and the whole explanation.
I still struggle to understand how an alternator can carry ship;'s
loads, and recharge the battery after cranking, if the computer
disconnects it in cruise, as well as how an alternator that has been
excited and spun up, making power, can fail to maintain its own field
current even in the absence of a battery. This characterisitc, if
true, is an annoyance in a car; it might be an Achilles heel in a
Z-architecture electrical system, if it means that a dead or even
corroded battery could take out battery and alternator with a most no
warning. I really want to understand this potential failure mode.
Not meaning to offend anyone, I hope the designer of the
Z-architectures will himself weigh in and elucidate me. Meanwhile, I
shall pop the hood and inspect the repairs myself in the light of day,
with VOM in hand. Bob...?
-Bill B
On 10/21/06, FLYaDIVE@aol.com <FLYaDIVE@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 10/20/2006 8:33:36 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> sportav8r@gmail.com writes:
> Now, I know there is no way that a battery continually feeds current
> into an alternator to keep it going, else charging the battery from
> the alternator would be a losing proposition. And I certianly hope
> that there is no way a dead battery is going to somehow take out my
> dual alternator Z-13/8 architecture, but I cannot reconcile that hope
> with what seems to have happened to my car electrical system here.
> Tell me I'm not crazy, and that it doesn't take a battery to keep an
> alternator alive once excited (the same battery that minutes before
> cranked the engine for starting), that the battery is only there for
> filtering the 3-phase rectified DC when in cruise mode, and I'll
> believe you. But I'll still wonder what happened to the car
> yesterday...
>
> -Bill B
> ==================================
> Bill:
>
> There are MANY new things happening to cars today. As soon as you mentioned
> HYUNDAI I knew what your problem was... IS.
>
> It is NOT solved yet. The new battery will keep the car going for a few
> more weeks but the problem MAY surely pop up again. The battery was border
> line due to the problem and did require replacing, maybe not immediately.
> Still the new battery is a move in the right direction.
>
> You did not mention the year and model of the Hyundai.
>
> When I said new things happening to cars; there is a different way of
> utilizing a car's charging system today. The alternator is still the same
> and the voltage regulator is still the same but with car computer systems
> and trying to squeeze more HP from a smaller engine there is a new twist.
> The computer takes the alternator TOTALLY out of the electrical system and
> it does this for more of a DOWN TIME on the duty cycle. An alternator uses
> between 2 to 5 HP during operation. By taking the alternator out of the
> system you return that HP so it can be sent to the wheels and use less gas.
> Now, not all computerized cars do this ... what year and model is yours?
>
> Also, newer cars with an alternator CAN run without a battery. NOT for a
> very long time ... It is know as the Get Home Mode. In the OLD days with
> Generators this was the NORM. But, just like in a plane's system a GOOD
> battery is required to let the alternator have an output. If the battery
> dies there is NO voltage for the alternators field ... ergo ... No
> alternator output. New cars are similar but utilize a large value capacitor
> to TRY to keep the alternator running. The "TC" Time Constant is slow so
> IF you shed load it will TRY to get you home. No, I did not design this
> system so I don't know any more about it.
>
> I have a Hyundai and I have had the same problem and here is a hit. What is
> it, that I bitch about on planes all the time, that always starts the same
> old deadhead thought patterns and emails? Well, that is exactly what is
> wrong with your car. Repair Time - 15 minutes.
>
>
> Barry
> "Chop'd Liver"
>
> "Show them the first time, correct them the second time, kick them the third
> time."
> Yamashiada
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>
>
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: automotive alternator question - OT |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Steve Thomas <lists@stevet.net>
First thing - you pay attention to those kind of things when you do
your routine maintenance. Second, this is another good reason for
Bob's advice to replace batteries at every annual, or, with dual
battery systems, dump #2 battery, rotate #1 into #2, and replace #1
every annual. The one habit we get into with cars is to try and milk
every ounce of battery life we can and wait to replace them until
they are dead in the water. There are many inexpensive battery
options out there where you can replace every annual and not worry
about it.
Best Regards,
Steve Thomas
____________________________________________________________________
On Oct 21, 2006, at 5:55 AM, Bill Boyd wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Boyd"
> <sportav8r@gmail.com>
>
> Thanks, Barry, Ernest,
>
> The car is 99 Sonata, on its second engine but first alternator.
> Wife reports the pos battery terminal was very corroded when she
> looked under the hood before the repair. Perhaps a sigificant finding
> and the whole explanation.
>
> I still struggle to understand how an alternator can carry ship;'s
> loads, and recharge the battery after cranking, if the computer
> disconnects it in cruise, as well as how an alternator that has been
> excited and spun up, making power, can fail to maintain its own field
> current even in the absence of a battery. This characterisitc, if
> true, is an annoyance in a car; it might be an Achilles heel in a
> Z-architecture electrical system, if it means that a dead or even
> corroded battery could take out battery and alternator with a most no
> warning. I really want to understand this potential failure mode.
>
> Not meaning to offend anyone, I hope the designer of the
> Z-architectures will himself weigh in and elucidate me. Meanwhile, I
> shall pop the hood and inspect the repairs myself in the light of day,
> with VOM in hand. Bob...?
>
> -Bill B
>
> On 10/21/06, FLYaDIVE@aol.com <FLYaDIVE@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 10/20/2006 8:33:36 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>> sportav8r@gmail.com writes:
>> Now, I know there is no way that a battery continually feeds current
>> into an alternator to keep it going, else charging the battery from
>> the alternator would be a losing proposition. And I certianly hope
>> that there is no way a dead battery is going to somehow take out my
>> dual alternator Z-13/8 architecture, but I cannot reconcile that hope
>> with what seems to have happened to my car electrical system here.
>> Tell me I'm not crazy, and that it doesn't take a battery to keep an
>> alternator alive once excited (the same battery that minutes before
>> cranked the engine for starting), that the battery is only there for
>> filtering the 3-phase rectified DC when in cruise mode, and I'll
>> believe you. But I'll still wonder what happened to the car
>> yesterday...
>>
>> -Bill B
>> ==================================
>> Bill:
>>
>> There are MANY new things happening to cars today. As soon as you
>> mentioned
>> HYUNDAI I knew what your problem was... IS.
>>
>> It is NOT solved yet. The new battery will keep the car going for
>> a few
>> more weeks but the problem MAY surely pop up again. The battery
>> was border
>> line due to the problem and did require replacing, maybe not
>> immediately.
>> Still the new battery is a move in the right direction.
>>
>> You did not mention the year and model of the Hyundai.
>>
>> When I said new things happening to cars; there is a different way of
>> utilizing a car's charging system today. The alternator is still
>> the same
>> and the voltage regulator is still the same but with car computer
>> systems
>> and trying to squeeze more HP from a smaller engine there is a new
>> twist.
>> The computer takes the alternator TOTALLY out of the electrical
>> system and
>> it does this for more of a DOWN TIME on the duty cycle. An
>> alternator uses
>> between 2 to 5 HP during operation. By taking the alternator out
>> of the
>> system you return that HP so it can be sent to the wheels and use
>> less gas.
>> Now, not all computerized cars do this ... what year and model is
>> yours?
>>
>> Also, newer cars with an alternator CAN run without a battery.
>> NOT for a
>> very long time ... It is know as the Get Home Mode. In the OLD
>> days with
>> Generators this was the NORM. But, just like in a plane's system
>> a GOOD
>> battery is required to let the alternator have an output. If the
>> battery
>> dies there is NO voltage for the alternators field ... ergo ... No
>> alternator output. New cars are similar but utilize a large value
>> capacitor
>> to TRY to keep the alternator running. The "TC" Time Constant is
>> slow so
>> IF you shed load it will TRY to get you home. No, I did not
>> design this
>> system so I don't know any more about it.
>>
>> I have a Hyundai and I have had the same problem and here is a
>> hit. What is
>> it, that I bitch about on planes all the time, that always starts
>> the same
>> old deadhead thought patterns and emails? Well, that is exactly
>> what is
>> wrong with your car. Repair Time - 15 minutes.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Barry
>> "Chop'd Liver"
>>
>> "Show them the first time, correct them the second time, kick them
>> the third
>> time."
>> Yamashiada
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: automotive alternator question - OT |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
On 21 Oct 2006, at 08:55, Bill Boyd wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Boyd"
> <sportav8r@gmail.com>
>
> Thanks, Barry, Ernest,
>
> The car is 99 Sonata, on its second engine but first alternator.
> Wife reports the pos battery terminal was very corroded when she
> looked under the hood before the repair. Perhaps a sigificant finding
> and the whole explanation.
>
> I still struggle to understand how an alternator can carry ship;'s
> loads, and recharge the battery after cranking, if the computer
> disconnects it in cruise, as well as how an alternator that has been
> excited and spun up, making power, can fail to maintain its own field
> current even in the absence of a battery. This characterisitc, if
> true, is an annoyance in a car; it might be an Achilles heel in a
> Z-architecture electrical system, if it means that a dead or even
> corroded battery could take out battery and alternator with a most no
> warning. I really want to understand this potential failure mode.
>
> Not meaning to offend anyone, I hope the designer of the
> Z-architectures will himself weigh in and elucidate me. Meanwhile, I
> shall pop the hood and inspect the repairs myself in the light of day,
> with VOM in hand. Bob...?
It would be interesting to know where the field current comes from,
and where the various automotive systems are getting their power
(i.e. lights, fuel pumps, EFI, etc).
If the "smart" voltage regulator actually shuts the alternator down
during some periods, and the alternator had become electrically
disconnected from the battery due to corrosion on the battery post,
and the field current was getting its power from the alternator
output, then it is plausible that there would be no way to start the
alternator back up again.
But, how were the other systems able to get the power they needed?
Will the other systems run at lower voltages than is required to
start the alternator back up again?
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
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: 80A Fuse on Z-13 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 08:09 PM 10/15/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>Coming off the starter contactor in the Z-13 diagram, there s an 80A fuse
>between the current limiter and the starter contactor. Electrical systems
>are my weakness but is this an in-line fuse? If so who stocks the 80A?
See
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/anl/anlvsjjs.html
Note 10 (page Z-9) of:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11J.pdf
Also see
http://www.aeroelectric.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List/AeroElectric-List_FAQ.pdf
and do a search on "JJS"
The JJS/JJN series fuses looked like this:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/70-80fusekit.jpg
but were not terribly robust.
Today, for a 40A alternator I think I'd recommend a MAX60 with an
in-line fuse-holder like:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/MaxiFuse_Holder.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Fuses_and_Current_Limiters/Bussman/MAXI_Specs.pdf
or the ANL-30 limiter as described in the articles above.
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: | Re: Acceptable to use thin non aircraft wire to coil |
of relays?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 05:22 PM 10/19/2006 +0000, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us>
>
>We spent quite a bit of time trying to keep the panel of our Europa
>Monowheel free of clutter.
>
>There is a convenient piece of real estate between occupants in the
>ceiling.
>
>We are thinking pretty hard about making it a control panel and putting
>small switches up there that would control coil of relays to run non
>critical items, like position lights, strobes, landing light etc.
>
>My partner has access to wire that is bout as thick as a model airplane
>servo wire. They come in twisted pairs, from 3 pairs on up. It is probably
>like the twisted wires you see inside computers, like the ones running
>fans etc.
>
>These wires would be running along side of headphone/mic wiring.
>
>Does this sound acceptable?
Depends on who you talk to. Wire, or more specifically
the INSULATION on wire has evolved tremendously since
Walter put his first generator and battery on an airplane.
There are folks who will tell you that the only acceptable
wires for replacement/new construction are modern products
embraced by the military/certified aviation communities.
You can still buy Mil-W-76 cotton weave over rubber insulated
wire used on Walter's first electrified aircraft . . . very
popular with folks restoring old cars and want them to be
original. By the same token, one could quite legally replace
a damaged or aged wire in a 1956 C-140 with Mil-W-76 wire
as well . . . it's on the original TC, most of the wires
in the airplane are 60+ years old, and a NEW piece of
Mil-W-76 wire isn't going to be a risk any greater
than the wires already in place. Further, if one wished
to restore an old airplane to original stock, the "ratty
old wires" lasted 50+ years the first time around . . .
no reason to be extra-ordinarily suspicious of them the next
time around.
Obviously, modern insulations are lighter, environmentally
tougher and easier to find. But just because it's "modern"
doesn't make it an attractive choice. It seems that some
materials thought to be an insulation-of-choice turned out to
have passed all the tests we did for wires in the past
but exhibit NEW characteristics that participate in some
spectacular insulation failures.
As a purely practical matter, wires smaller than 22AWG
are a pain in the arse for airframe wiring. We moved a lot
of wire from 22AWG to 24AWG in production and the folks
who have to work with it are less than complimentary
of "those @#$@#$!^ engineers . . ." The stuff is
just physically too-small/too-flexible/too-fragile
to work well in the hammer-n-tongs environment that is
a production line.
You don't cite the pedigree of the wire's insulation and
the sizes you describe don't sound like 22AWG (or larger).
My recommendation is that you install wires no smaller
than 22AWG (when you have a choice) and use Tefzel (Mil-W-
22759/16 or /32). This stuff is easy to find, easy to
work with and has an EXCELLENT track record in aircraft
and many other applications. I'm not suggesting that
the wire's you described are automatically a poor choice
but I will suggest that Tefzel insulated wire in 22AWG
or larger is exceedingly user friendly both for installation
and cost of ownership.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
Hey guys,
I'm at a complete loss to understand, and fix, my Altrak. I've got 70 hours on
my RV-4 now and so far have been unable to successfully troubleshoot the Altrak.
once in stable flight I push the button and HOLD ON....it tries to do a loop
everytime!
I've changed the servo and the programmer/brain and even TruTrak is a t aloss now
to try and help me figure it out. there is literally nothing else to change...except
maybe the button/switch....or rewire it from scratch.
I'd appreciate any ideas or suggestions. On the positive side I'm getting pretty
good at holding altitude manually.
Ron
N8ZD@yahoo.com
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker@optonline.net>
Surely you have already changed the connections to the servo, but this
sounds like it is connected so the servo goes opposite of what the
Altrak wants it to go. If it was connected "backwards" then when the
Altrak commanded it to move so as to lower the nose, it would actually
raise the nose, which would cause the Altrak to tell it to lower the
nose even more, which would cause it to raise the nose even more - you
get the idea.
But this is so obvious, that you must have already swapped the
connections...
Dick Tasker
Ron Patterson wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I'm at a complete loss to understand, and fix, my Altrak. I've got 70
> hours on my RV-4 now and so far have been unable to successfully
> troubleshoot the Altrak. once in stable flight I push the button and
> HOLD ON....it tries to do a loop everytime!
>
> I've changed the servo and the programmer/brain and even TruTrak is a
> t aloss now to try and help me figure it out. there is literally
> nothing else to change...except maybe the button/switch....or rewire
> it from scratch.
>
> I'd appreciate any ideas or suggestions. On the positive side I'm
> getting pretty good at holding altitude manually.
>
> Ron
> N8ZD@yahoo.com <mailto:N8ZD@yahoo.com>
>
>*
>
>
>*
>
--
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 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: automotive alternator question - OT |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r@gmail.com>
Follow-up:
My son took the car this morning while I was out flying around, and
before I could check the charging system with a DVM to verify
alternator output. The ensuing events restored my confidence in the
laws of physics and what understanding I thought I had in how
alternators work (smart regulators being another story, I will
concede). The call to come give him a jump start-came about dusk. We
drove the car a few blocks to the repair garage in town, where it will
remain until a new alternator (one that makes current ;-) is
installed.
I hate to flog a new battery into deep discharge the first day I own
it, but at least this time it happened near home, and just as I
thought it would/should with an alternator that almost had to be
inoperative, given the scenario yesterday. Restores my faith in my
understanding of electrical systems, but not in shade tree mechanics.
Probably nothing to see here, folks... just move along... nothing to see here...
Sorry to clog list bandwidth with a problem like this, but the guy
really had me doubting my basic understanding of alternators and
therefore the integrity of my OBAM charging system as well.
-Bill B
On 10/21/06, Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com> wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
>
> On 21 Oct 2006, at 08:55, Bill Boyd wrote:
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Boyd"
> > <sportav8r@gmail.com>
> >
> > Thanks, Barry, Ernest,
> >
> > The car is 99 Sonata, on its second engine but first alternator.
> > Wife reports the pos battery terminal was very corroded when she
> > looked under the hood before the repair. Perhaps a sigificant finding
> > and the whole explanation.
> >
> > I still struggle to understand how an alternator can carry ship;'s
> > loads, and recharge the battery after cranking, if the computer
> > disconnects it in cruise, as well as how an alternator that has been
> > excited and spun up, making power, can fail to maintain its own field
> > current even in the absence of a battery. This characterisitc, if
> > true, is an annoyance in a car; it might be an Achilles heel in a
> > Z-architecture electrical system, if it means that a dead or even
> > corroded battery could take out battery and alternator with a most no
> > warning. I really want to understand this potential failure mode.
> >
> > Not meaning to offend anyone, I hope the designer of the
> > Z-architectures will himself weigh in and elucidate me. Meanwhile, I
> > shall pop the hood and inspect the repairs myself in the light of day,
> > with VOM in hand. Bob...?
>
> It would be interesting to know where the field current comes from,
> and where the various automotive systems are getting their power
> (i.e. lights, fuel pumps, EFI, etc).
>
> If the "smart" voltage regulator actually shuts the alternator down
> during some periods, and the alternator had become electrically
> disconnected from the battery due to corrosion on the battery post,
> and the field current was getting its power from the alternator
> output, then it is plausible that there would be no way to start the
> alternator back up again.
>
> But, how were the other systems able to get the power they needed?
> Will the other systems run at lower voltages than is required to
> start the alternator back up again?
>
> Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
> Ottawa, Canada
> http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
>
>
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: AeroElectric-List Digest: 13 Msgs - 10/19/06 |
"I believe the problem with your comparison is that the GXM 30 outputs
encoded information and is only compatible with certain Garmin
navigator GPSes. Your "mini-computer" will not know what to do with
the signals unless you write software to take the data and display
it. So you need the WX Worx, which does that translation for you
into a format compatible with a Windows computer.
What computer are you using, and have you tested it for interference
with your COM radios on all channels? I ask, because I'm going down
that same road with an 8" Lilliput display and an Epia single-board
computer.
Dave Morris"
Dave:
Sorry to hear the GMX 30 is not what I need; I thought it sounded too good
to be true! I'm assuming the Garmin 300XL is not one of the "compatible"
Garmin receivers, but as yet I've been unable to find a list of those that
are supposed to work with the GMX---the 396/496 etc, I suspect is about it.
I am using a Logic Supply VIA EPIA Mini-ITX mainboard with a ruggedized 20G
hard drive and a Phylon 8" LCD display all on 12v. I'm running AnywhereMap
software on Windows XP with an inexpensive dash mount GPS. The system seems
stable and runs fast with no delays in software functions. Seems to work
well in my car and in the air in a friends Piper Arrow. I wasn't along for
the test flight so I can't speak to any radio interference, but my friend
didn't mention any difficulties. I'll check with him and see if he noted
anything unusual. I'm now trying to tie in a color bullet camera to the
system. It will connect directly to the Phylon so real time video is no
problem, but I'd like to use the Mini to record video as well. Haven't
worked that out yet but I believe a video card and software will allow
saving video to the hard drive. Don't know yet if the Mini has enough
computational power to handle both the nav and video record functions
simultaneously without dropping one or the other. Any ideas about that?
P.S. The Phylon 8" display is very nice but apparently has been
discontinued. Logic Supply still sells the Phylon 7" display, however.
Regards,
Lee...
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: "Chris Byrne" <jack.byrne@bigpond.com>
Am wiring probe heat and taxi/ldg lights.
Should I be using a relay or will straight through the switch suffice?
Both draw 8 Amps.
Using 700 1-3 switches from B & C.
Thanks
Chris Byrne
SYDNEY
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! --
|