Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:54 AM - Re: Some experiments fail (Ernest Christley)
2. 07:59 AM - Some experiments fail (Fergus Kyle)
3. 08:31 AM - Re: Re: Fuse Link At Battery (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 08:45 AM - Re: Voltage Across Open Batt Contactor (Bob McCallum)
5. 10:23 AM - Re: Some experiments fail (Ernest Christley)
6. 02:05 PM - Re: Some experiments fail (Kevin Horton)
7. 04:50 PM - Some experiments fail (Harold Kovac)
8. 05:08 PM - Re: Some experiments fail (Ernest Christley)
9. 05:10 PM - Re: Some experiments fail (Ernest Christley)
10. 05:24 PM - Re: Some experiments fail (Harold Kovac)
11. 05:33 PM - Re: Some experiments fail (Kevin Horton)
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: Some experiments fail |
Gilles Thesee wrote:
> <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
>
>>
>> Maybe a better approach would be to engineer a suitable antenna, then
>> hollow it out to act as a pitot,
> Hi all,
>
> In my buddy's article at
> http://contrails.free.fr/instruments_ant_sonex.php, he says he
> designed the antenna out of an aluminum tube, and matched it to the
> particular form of the vertical fin, acting as a ground plane.
> He as not flown yet, and advises to wait for real world tests.
>
That would be the intelligent way to do it, but like Bob has said
several times, the normal procedure is for structural guys to have their
say, then the aerodynamics guys, yada, yada, yada, and somewhere down
the list the antennae guys get to say something. In my case, I'm using
Dynon's AOA indicator. It doesn't include a static port (which you
think it would for $200US), and there isn't a nice place for one on the
sides of a Delta, so I had to engineer one in. The antennae experiment
proceeded from that point.
I tried adding some coils of 22AWG. Wrapped around a drill bit, and
held with tape, I put them in series with the element. It made things
so much worse that I didn't even bother recording numbers. I've got
some ferrite beads, but don't know if it's worth disassembling the coax
connector to install them. I guess it couldn't hurt at this point. The
ground is basically the entire welded tube airframe. The black wire
coming from the coax connetor is grounded next to the antennae's base.
The connector is also mounted on a strip of stainless that is riveted to
another piece of stainless that is in turn welded to the airframe.
Is it possible that some combination of fiddling can bring the SWR down
from the astronomical 8.6 to something below a 3? I think something
below 3 would be marginal but acceptable. I think.
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: | Some experiments fail |
Ernest,
Tying a VHF antenna to a pitot design is very ingenious..... and deserves
some serious thought! Kudos to you for the idea.
What needs doing is to revise the length of the pitot to match the needs of
a 1/4wave monopole OR devising matching circuit to adjust the pitot to 50
ohms impedance at 127 Megs. I don't think devising apitot system from an
antenna is the way to go.
I am hesitant to believe the matching scheme shown would measure the
true impedance/results, but can't offer any advice in that area.
The latter would be the easiest if not the best (one always seems to
prefer a natural resonance) but it cries out for a suggestion......... It
strikes me that the vertical length might be the problem since the greater
depth would reduce losses due to some horizontal content - the pitot need.
Is this a metal skin or fibreglass?
Good luck!
Ferg Kyle
Europa A064 914 Classic
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: Fuse Link At Battery |
At 08:42 PM 12/19/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>Bob . . .
>The authority rests with experiment.
> --Lawrence M. Krauss
>
>Thanks for the follow up and feedback. The need to experiment at the wrong
>time has been averted.
>
>I appreciate it. Happy holidays to you and yours.
>Johnathan
Thanks to yourself and others for the kind words. I'll
endeavor to remain worthy of them.
I've been off line for a few days. Seems the flu bug came
to visit and I've been tethered to the commode on a very
short leash for the first two days. Dr. Dee and I are going
to go for a walk in the park this morning to try and stir up
some muscles and circulatory systems that have been setting
idle too long!
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 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: Voltage Across Open Batt Contactor |
Jim;
If the contactor is open and there are any loads connected on the
downstream side then you would expect to see approximately battery
voltage across it, just like any other open switch with a load attached.
However if there are absolutely no loads at all attached then you would
see no voltage across it as there would be no return path for the
electricity to complete your meter circuit and it would read zero. The
reading you are getting is so close to zero that you should conclude
that you have essentially no loads connected downstream of the
contactor, but there is a tiny leakage sufficient to provide a return
path and indicate on your meter. Depending on your meter, this
resistance would be in the millions of ohms indicating, perhaps, simply
the insulation resistance to ground of some component or other. (quite
normal) If you turn on anything downstream then you will get a reading
of battery voltage if all is well.
Bob McC
----- Original Message -----
From: PIAVIS
To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 1:30 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Voltage Across Open Batt Contactor
After connecting the battery contactor per Z-13, is it common to have
about .04 V across the contactor when open? I'm sure I'll have plenty of
basic Electrical 101 questions as this is sure my weak area on this RV
so far. But I'm learning!
Jim
-7
Redmond, WA
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: Some experiments fail |
Fergus Kyle wrote:
>
> Ernest,
> Tying a VHF antenna to a pitot design is very ingenious..... and deserves
> some serious thought! Kudos to you for the idea.
> What needs doing is to revise the length of the pitot to match the needs of
> a 1/4wave monopole OR devising matching circuit to adjust the pitot to 50
> ohms impedance at 127 Megs. I don't think devising apitot system from an
> antenna is the way to go.
> I am hesitant to believe the matching scheme shown would measure the
> true impedance/results, but can't offer any advice in that area.
> The latter would be the easiest if not the best (one always seems to
> prefer a natural resonance) but it cries out for a suggestion......... It
> strikes me that the vertical length might be the problem since the greater
> depth would reduce losses due to some horizontal content - the pitot need.
> Is this a metal skin or fibreglass?
> Good luck!
>
>
Fiberglass and fabric skins over a 4130 frame with stainless steel rib
structure.
I've been playing with the position of the jumper from the pitot to
connector, and the best I've been able to come up with is a low SWR of
6.5 or so.
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: Some experiments fail |
On 23-Dec-06, at 11:52 AM, Ernest Christley wrote:
> I'm using Dynon's AOA indicator. It doesn't include a static port
> (which you think it would for $200US), and there isn't a nice place
> for one on the sides of a Delta, so I had to engineer one in. The
> antennae experiment proceeded from that point.
>
Static ports need to be in a location where the pressure is very,
very close to the ambient pressure if they are to provide an accurate
static source. Pitot tubes in single-engine aircraft are almost
always mounted below the wing. The pressure below the wing is higher
than the ambient pressure - otherwise no lift would be generated.
This makes a pitot tube a very poor place to locate a static source,
unless you are prepared to test a large number of different
locations, with several test flights at each location.
I've watched one small aircraft manufacturer do this exercise with a
Piper pitot tube. They invested many hours of flight testing on
several different configurations before finding a location that
worked acceptably well with a custom angle on the bottom of a Piper
pitot tube - the angle changes the pressure sensed at the static source.
Kevin Horton
RV-8 (Finishing Kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
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: | Some experiments fail |
Hi Kevin,
I'm building an RV9A and have installed the Dynon pitot.
Besides the ram air,there's a small hole on the bottom for static air, that
way I suspect the engineering's already been done.
Food for thought at any rate.
Harold
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Horton" <khorton01@rogers.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Some experiments fail
> <khorton01@rogers.com>
>
> On 23-Dec-06, at 11:52 AM, Ernest Christley wrote:
>
>> I'm using Dynon's AOA indicator. It doesn't include a static port
>> (which you think it would for $200US), and there isn't a nice place for
>> one on the sides of a Delta, so I had to engineer one in. The antennae
>> experiment proceeded from that point.
>>
>
> Static ports need to be in a location where the pressure is very, very
> close to the ambient pressure if they are to provide an accurate static
> source. Pitot tubes in single-engine aircraft are almost always mounted
> below the wing. The pressure below the wing is higher than the ambient
> pressure - otherwise no lift would be generated. This makes a pitot tube
> a very poor place to locate a static source, unless you are prepared to
> test a large number of different locations, with several test flights at
> each location.
>
> I've watched one small aircraft manufacturer do this exercise with a
> Piper pitot tube. They invested many hours of flight testing on several
> different configurations before finding a location that worked acceptably
> well with a custom angle on the bottom of a Piper pitot tube - the angle
> changes the pressure sensed at the static source.
>
> Kevin Horton
> RV-8 (Finishing Kit)
> Ottawa, Canada
> http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
>
>
>
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: Some experiments fail |
Kevin Horton wrote:
> <khorton01@rogers.com>
>
> On 23-Dec-06, at 11:52 AM, Ernest Christley wrote:
>
>> I'm using Dynon's AOA indicator. It doesn't include a static port
>> (which you think it would for $200US), and there isn't a nice place
>> for one on the sides of a Delta, so I had to engineer one in. The
>> antennae experiment proceeded from that point.
>>
>
> Static ports need to be in a location where the pressure is very, very
> close to the ambient pressure if they are to provide an accurate
> static source. Pitot tubes in single-engine aircraft are almost
> always mounted below the wing. The pressure below the wing is higher
> than the ambient pressure - otherwise no lift would be generated.
> This makes a pitot tube a very poor place to locate a static source,
> unless you are prepared to test a large number of different locations,
> with several test flights at each location.
That's why I copped out and just used the location the plans called
for. Heh, I can't run but so many experiments at once!! 8*)
After 4 hours of fiddling, I was able to drop the SWR to 7.3 by moving
the point where it attaches to the tube. I actually was able to get it
to drop to 1 at one point. I installed a T connector...the antennae on
the leg, the line coming off one side of the top and a 50 ohm
termination on the other side. I don't think that counts though.
Message 9
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Some experiments fail |
Harold Kovac wrote:
> <kayce33@earthlink.net>
>
> Hi Kevin,
> I'm building an RV9A and have installed the Dynon pitot.
> Besides the ram air,there's a small hole on the bottom for static air,
> that way I suspect the engineering's already been done.
> Food for thought at any rate.
> Harold
The hole in the bottom rear is a drain hole. The hole at the front on
the slant is for the AoA indicator. There's no static.
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: Some experiments fail |
Thanks, I don't have the instrument yet, and assumed....it's plumbed to the
wing root...probably another year to get a look at the real thing.
Harold
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernest Christley" <echristley@nc.rr.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 8:09 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Some experiments fail
> <echristley@nc.rr.com>
>
> Harold Kovac wrote:
>> <kayce33@earthlink.net>
>>
>> Hi Kevin,
>> I'm building an RV9A and have installed the Dynon pitot.
>> Besides the ram air,there's a small hole on the bottom for static air,
>> that way I suspect the engineering's already been done.
>> Food for thought at any rate.
>> Harold
>
> The hole in the bottom rear is a drain hole. The hole at the front on the
> slant is for the AoA indicator. There's no static.
>
>
>
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: Some experiments fail |
Harold,
1. I think that is actually a water drain hole.
2. If someone did the engineering and flight testing required to use
a static source on a pitot tube, it would be specific to one exact
mounting location and mounting angle on only one type of aircraft.
It wouldn't be practical for Dynon to do the flight testing required
to define a mounting location for each type of aircraft that people
would want to mount this pitot on. Each aircraft type would probably
require at least a dozen hours of flight testing, with mod work
required to move the pitot tube around every two or three flights.
Huge job.
Kevin
On 23-Dec-06, at 8:48 PM, Harold Kovac wrote:
> <kayce33@earthlink.net>
>
> Hi Kevin,
> I'm building an RV9A and have installed the Dynon pitot.
> Besides the ram air,there's a small hole on the bottom for static
> air, that way I suspect the engineering's already been done.
> Food for thought at any rate.
> Harold
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Horton"
> <khorton01@rogers.com>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 5:02 PM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Some experiments fail
>
>
>> <khorton01@rogers.com>
>>
>> On 23-Dec-06, at 11:52 AM, Ernest Christley wrote:
>>
>>> I'm using Dynon's AOA indicator. It doesn't include a static
>>> port (which you think it would for $200US), and there isn't a
>>> nice place for one on the sides of a Delta, so I had to engineer
>>> one in. The antennae experiment proceeded from that point.
>>>
>>
>> Static ports need to be in a location where the pressure is very,
>> very close to the ambient pressure if they are to provide an
>> accurate static source. Pitot tubes in single-engine aircraft
>> are almost always mounted below the wing. The pressure below the
>> wing is higher than the ambient pressure - otherwise no lift
>> would be generated. This makes a pitot tube a very poor place to
>> locate a static source, unless you are prepared to test a large
>> number of different locations, with several test flights at each
>> location.
>>
>> I've watched one small aircraft manufacturer do this exercise with
>> a Piper pitot tube. They invested many hours of flight testing
>> on several different configurations before finding a location
>> that worked acceptably well with a custom angle on the bottom of
>> a Piper pitot tube - the angle changes the pressure sensed at the
>> static source.
>>
>> Kevin Horton
>> RV-8 (Finishing Kit)
>> Ottawa, Canada
>> http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
>>
>>
>>
>>
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! --
|