Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 08:50 AM - GRT GPS TSO ()
2. 08:50 AM - Re: Re: $low$ handi-talkies (Larry Mac Donald)
3. 08:59 AM - More Contactor - Newbie questions (jdalton77)
4. 09:35 AM - Re: GRT GPS TSO (Bill Denton)
5. 09:49 AM - Re: Re: $low$ handi-talkies (Matt Prather)
6. 09:49 AM - ABEA and TSO's ()
7. 10:13 AM - Re: Another 60A alternator, internally regulated voltage regulator failure (luckymacy@comcast.net (lucky))
8. 10:21 AM - Re: Keyed push to start switch source?Keyed push to start switch source? (D Fritz)
9. 10:33 AM - Re: Re: $low$ handi-talkies (Stovall Todd Lt Col AF/A4RX)
10. 10:53 AM - Re: ABEA and TSO's (Ernest Christley)
11. 11:07 AM - Re: Re: $low$ handi-talkies (Chuck Jensen)
12. 11:14 AM - Re: Another 60A alternator, internally re gulated voltage regulator failure (McFarland, Randy)
13. 11:20 AM - Re: Another 60A alternator, internally regulated voltage regulator failure (Bill Boyd)
14. 11:27 AM - Re: Another 60A alternator, internally re gulated voltage regulator failure (luckymacy@comcast.net (lucky))
15. 04:40 PM - Transpo V1200 Voltage Regulator (Bill Bradburry)
16. 06:17 PM - Re: More Contactor - Newbie questions (glaesers)
17. 07:01 PM - Re: Re: More Contactor - Newbie questions (jdalton77)
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 |
|
1/8/2006
Hello Bret, You quote GRT as writing: "The new RAIM-equipped version
provides integrity
monitoring and 5 updates per second to meet the requirements of IFR GPS TSO
C129 and C146."
This sounds like some subtle weasel wording to me. A piece of equipment
either meets the full TSO requirements and is marked TSO compliant or it is
not TSO'd.
The manufacturer does not get to cherry pick certain standards within the
TSO, or its references, just meet certain standards, and then mark the
equipment as TSO'd.
Most manufacturers who have gone to the expense and effort of obtaining TSO
approval for a piece of equipment are very eager to make that approval and
marking very evident to any prospective purchaser.
OC -- The best investment we will ever make is in gathering knowledge.
On 5 Jan 2007, at 22:05, Bret Smith wrote:
> <smithhb@tds.net>
>
> See http://www.grtavionics.com/documents/Horizon%20System%20Flyer.pdf
>
> "The addition of the internal GPS receiver eliminates the need for an
> external
> GPS, or may be used as a backup to your primary GPS. Available in two
> versions. The standard WAAS GPS module is perfect for VFR use, or
> as backup
> to an external GPS. The new RAIM-equipped version provides integrity
> monitoring and 5 updates per second to meet the requirements of IFR
> GPS
> TSO C129 and C146."
>
> Standard WAAS GPS Receiver with antenna $450
> RAIM-Equipped WAAS GPS Receiver with antenna $750
>
>
> Bret Smith
> RV-9A (91314)
> Mineral Bluff, GA
> www.FlightInnovations.com
>
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: RE: $low$ handi-talkies |
Well, In the past I've talked to people at the 401st Civil affairs group/
98th Div. in Webster N.Y.
At that time they were sending care packages to Afganistan.
Ive just called them to find out more info but the right man was not
there.
I'll have to call again tomorrow.
Larry Mac Donald
lm4@juno.com
Rochester N.Y.
Do not archive
>Good advice Bob, but Larry McDonald, off-line, suggested even
> better.
> >He suggested that I spend a few dollars more to get a little
> better
> >quality units, then donate them to the troops in Afghanistan and
> Iraq
> >when I'm done--necessary it seems since we are buying so many
> billion
> >dollar bombers and nuclear submarines that we can't afford to
> provide
> >walkie talkies to our troops to keep them safe. Excellent idea
> and
> >consider it done.
>
> Wasn't aware of that. Do you have an address for a "pipe"
> that would put any such donations in the right hands?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | More Contactor - Newbie questions |
Hello,
I'm sorry to be asking such basic questions, but I am still confused
about the use of contactors and relays. I've been reading Bob's book,
but I'm not always sure how to interpret the schematics.
In terms of the battery contactor, I know the hot lead goes from the
battery to the large post, and that the "output" side (leading to the
starter) is not engaged until I flip, or depress, the starter switch.
But how does the 8AWG wire that connects to the main bus from the
contactor's"small" terminal become "hot?" Is it always hot? I see a
switch for "turning on the main bus" but how does that work? Doesn't
the switch need to be hot in order to turn on the current to the main
bus from the battery contactor?
Also, in the back of the book there is a schematic for connecting a
ground power plug (Piper style). A contactor is shown here also. Why
do I need one here, and in a similar vein, wouldn't I need a powered
switch to turn it "on" to allow current to pass through it? What would
activate the contactor when I plugged in the external power. And would
this be a "continuous duty" contactor or more like a starter contactor?
Finally, on two batteries. Is there any reason two batteries could not
be connected in parallel, without using another contactor, or another
switch? Why would that kind of setup not give me redundancy if one of
the two batteries were to perish while flying? I'm not challenging
anything in the book here - I just don't understand it.
I've learned a ton in the two weeks I've been reading the book - but I'm
just starting to learn the language.
Thanks,
Jeff
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 |
|
"A piece of equipment either meets the full TSO requirements and is marked
TSO compliant or it is not TSO'd."
True, but not necessarily the point...
In some instances the regs require that a piece of equipment MUST MEET TSO
STANDARDS. This is the case with transponders.
In other instances the equipment MUST BE TSO'd. This is the case with IFR
GPS units.
You mentioned, "...manufacturers who have gone to the expense and effort of
obtaining TSO approval for a piece of equipment..."
If simply meeting the TSO requirements is adequate, why should a
manufacturer "go to the expense and effort"?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
bakerocb@cox.net
Sent: Monday, January 8, 2007 10:48 AM
smithhb@tds.net
Subject: AeroElectric-List: GRT GPS TSO
1/8/2006
Hello Bret, You quote GRT as writing: "The new RAIM-equipped version
provides integrity
monitoring and 5 updates per second to meet the requirements of IFR GPS TSO
C129 and C146."
This sounds like some subtle weasel wording to me. A piece of equipment
either meets the full TSO requirements and is marked TSO compliant or it is
not TSO'd.
The manufacturer does not get to cherry pick certain standards within the
TSO, or its references, just meet certain standards, and then mark the
equipment as TSO'd.
Most manufacturers who have gone to the expense and effort of obtaining TSO
approval for a piece of equipment are very eager to make that approval and
marking very evident to any prospective purchaser.
OC -- The best investment we will ever make is in gathering knowledge.
On 5 Jan 2007, at 22:05, Bret Smith wrote:
> <smithhb@tds.net>
>
> See http://www.grtavionics.com/documents/Horizon%20System%20Flyer.pdf
>
> "The addition of the internal GPS receiver eliminates the need for an
> external
> GPS, or may be used as a backup to your primary GPS. Available in two
> versions. The standard WAAS GPS module is perfect for VFR use, or
> as backup
> to an external GPS. The new RAIM-equipped version provides integrity
> monitoring and 5 updates per second to meet the requirements of IFR
> GPS
> TSO C129 and C146."
>
> Standard WAAS GPS Receiver with antenna $450
> RAIM-Equipped WAAS GPS Receiver with antenna $750
>
>
> Bret Smith
> RV-9A (91314)
> Mineral Bluff, GA
> www.FlightInnovations.com
>
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: RE: $low$ handi-talkies |
Here's an option:
http://www.anysoldier.com/WhereToSend/
Regards,
Matt-
>
> Well, In the past I've talked to people at the 401st Civil affairs group/
> 98th Div. in Webster N.Y.
> At that time they were sending care packages to Afganistan.
> Ive just called them to find out more info but the right man was not
> there.
> I'll have to call again tomorrow.
>
> Larry Mac Donald
> lm4@juno.com
> Rochester N.Y.
> Do not archive
>
> >Good advice Bob, but Larry McDonald, off-line, suggested even
>> better.
>> >He suggested that I spend a few dollars more to get a little
>> better
>> >quality units, then donate them to the troops in Afghanistan and
>> Iraq
>> >when I'm done--necessary it seems since we are buying so many
>> billion
>> >dollar bombers and nuclear submarines that we can't afford to
>> provide
>> >walkie talkies to our troops to keep them safe. Excellent idea
>> and
>> >consider it done.
>>
>> Wasn't aware of that. Do you have an address for a "pipe"
>> that would put any such donations in the right hands?
>>
>> 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 |
|
1/8/2007
Hello Old Bob, You wrote: "I am definitely stepping out from my area of
expertise here, but is a TSO required for operations of a home built
aircraft?"
I believe that a narrow legalistic response to your question is "No, because
there are no published certification standards that ABEA's (Amateur Built
Experimental Aircraft) are required to meet."
But in a real world practical sense there are some operations that ABEA's
participate in that require them to interface with other aircraft or
facilities and those operations require compatibility with published
standards established for those other entities.
Compatibility could conceivably be achieved by individually creating
equipment equivalent to a published standard, but the practicality of such
creation is, in most cases, very remote.**
In the postings copied below the operation at issue is GPS requirements for
IFR operations. Here is just one extract (others may be found) from chapter
1-1-19 in the current edition of the AIM:
"g. Equipment and Database Requirements
1. Authorization to fly approaches under IFR using GPS avionics systems
requires that:
(a) A pilot use GPS avionics with TSO- C129, or equivalent, authorization in
class A1, B1, B3, C1, or C3; and"
I understand that the AIM is not regulatory in nature, but I believe that an
ABEA pilot having flown a GPS approach under IFR, and being called to
account by the FAA or the NTSB for some sort of deviation or improper
performance on his part would have a very difficult time convincing the
authorities that his non TSO'd GPS equipment should be entirely acceptable
to them.
So the prudent ABEA builder / pilot does his homework and equips his
aircraft so that it will perform in a manner that will not endanger him or
others. If TSO'd equipment is the best way to accomplish that goal then his
choice should be clear to him.
OC -- The best investment we will ever make is in gathering knowledge.
**PS: One notable exception is in the arena of external lighting where some
innovative LED equipment may, in fact, be superior to the TSO requirements.
But proving that superiority and getting an initial airworthiness inspector
of an ABEA to accept the equipment (if he chooses to make it an issue) may
be a problem.
----------------------- COPIED POSTINGS FOLLOW -----------------
Time: 06:53:45 AM PST US
From: BobsV35B@aol.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: 91.205 (WAAS)
Good Morning Kevin,
I am definitely stepping out from my area of expertise here, but is a TSO
required for operations of a home built aircraft?
It isn't even required for all operations of certificated aircraft.
The determination of the equipment that is required for IFR flight appears
to be left up to the operator. As long as the operator determines that the
equipment meets the standards required for IFR flight, the stuff should be
acceptable.
What do you feel is required?
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 1/6/2007 6:26:49 A.M. Central Standard Time,
khorton01@rogers.com writes:
I'd ask to see a copy of the letters from the FAA that confirm the
TSOs have been issued.
Kevin Horton
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: Another 60A alternator, internally regulated |
voltage regulator failure
My update. I bought an alternator from Autozone that matched the suzuki/chevrolet
automobile replacement alternator often quoted to be the same as Van's 60
amp internally regulated alternator even though the part number was just slightly
different. I could not tell a difference from the outside though their computer
said 55 amp and not 60 amp. It has a Nippondenso internal fan and a hotline
of 800 228 9672.
In the install manual, it has a CAUTION: A defective or discharged battery can
damage your new alternator.
But the reason my alternator may have failed is that there was one of the feet
on the alternator was cracked clean through. Though it was still rigidly mounted
that had to set up some fun vibration within the alternator itself. Don't
know if that actually was a cause for the battery to fail as opposed to the opposite
hypothesis I was banting about.
Fun stuff. I still have the magic alternator killing odyssey pc680 battery I removed
if anyone has a Van's 60amp alternator they want to test for kill.....
;-)
Next task is to replace the high intensify landing/taxi light bulbs that burned
out when turned on with 18 volts on the bus....
lucky
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
>
> For years I was skeptical too that a weak battery would hasten
> alternator death. However eventually I developed a few thoughts on why
> there may be some truth to this in automobiles.
>
> 1. Higher longer charging does tend to make the alternator run hotter
> and some internal VR alternators are not well cooled. Any vehicle that
> is started with jumper cables is about to ask for a serious effort from
> its charging system.
>
> 2. Installing a new but partly charged battery may stress the alternator
> even higher than ever as it charges the battery at max current for an
> extended period. An old alternator just may not be up to the effort.
> Maybe the brushes are worn or maybe the solid state devices get hotter
> than they have for awhile. Certainly the cooling of old greasy/dirty
> components is not as good as on a clean new unit. I'm not sure that a
> test stand is going to successfully imitate the service environment that
> I'm thinking of. This might explain death shortly after the new battery
> is installed though.
>
> 3. Weak "maintenance free" batteries are sometimes low on electrolyte. I
> think that further reduces their capacity to absorb any excess voltage
> or current and might lead to more voltage excursions. Most people never
> pop the caps off automobile batteries any more as it is often not
> obvious how to do it, or that it can be done. It seems that my little
> (8AH) AGM batteries will accept very little current initially when fully
> discharged.
>
> 4. As a WAG another contribution might be abnormal operation while
> fooling around with a weak battery. If I leave the ignition/key on with
> my ND IR alternator on my aircraft without starting the engine, the
> alternator does draw several amps of field current and it will heat up
> quite noticeably with no cooling airflow.
>
> Anyway my personal rule now is to change out any suspicious battery with
> a new FULLY charged unit and I can sometimes send the vehicle to the
> wreckers with the original alternator. I do run weak batteries in my
> tractor but that has an external homemade VR that hangs out in the
> breeze (like the alternator) and everything runs very very cool ;)
>
> Ken
>
> >> SNIP>
> >> I had heard that a "weak" battery can damage the alternator/regulator
> >> so this seamed to have validated that statement. For sure though,
> >> from my observations, the battery appeared to go bad first then 2
> >> hours later after a new battery was installed the regulator seems to
> >> have failed.
> >
> >
> > I'm skeptical of such claims. Consider how many batteries
> > you've replaced in cars without having to replace the alternator
> > too.
> >
> > I've "killed" a few alternators in various test situations
> > but all failures involved either loss of cooling or mechanical
> > issues such as bearing or shear-shaft failures.
> >
> > The way to "test" a weak-battery-kills-alternators hypothesis is
> > to separate the two components and then craft a test plan designed
> > to kill an alternator. In other words, if I had a brand new
> > alternator and a charter to damage it in some way on the test
> > stand, what kinds of abuses might I heap upon the unsuspecting
> > device to bring about its untimely demise?
> >
> > Once such a test plan is devised, then deduce how battery
> > behavior mimics any of the abuses you've crafted for the
> > purpose of killing an alternator.
> >
> > I'd be interested in anyone's ideas as to how you might go
> > about it. Alternators are inherently self current limiting.
> > Given sufficient cooling air, you cannot "overload" one to
> > destruction. Alternator diodes are robust and will withstand
> > reverse voltage transients many times greater than system voltage.
> > It's the regulators that are most vulnerable to a load-dump
> > event and that's been demonstrated by several builders using
> > Van's (and perhaps other) alternators combined with b-lead
> > contactor controls.
> >
> > I'm not suggesting that battery condition might not be a bit-player
> > in a scenario that's hard on alternators. For example:
> > I can see how the "weak battery" thing might have morphed into
> > a cause/effect for alternator failure where someone knows that
> > having a battery be disconnected from the alternator at the same
> > time all loads are removed causes a potentially hazardous
> > over-shoot. One might deduce that a "weak" battery has
> > lost its ability to mitigate a load-dump events thereby
> > placing the alternator at-risk.
> >
> > If this hypothesis were in play for your situation, the alternator
> > seems most likely to have failed while the "weak" battery was
> > in place. Certainly having a "strong" new battery in place totally
> > eliminates the risk for hazardous transients during ordinary
> > system load reductions.
> >
> > This could be hypothetically thrashed for days but without very
> > specific test data, we'll never know how your tandem failures
> > may or may not have been related.
> >
> >
> >> My current battery voltage is really good, even after the voltage
> >> regulator failure stress on the battery.
> >
> >
> > The momentary abuses heaped on your battery were of limited duration
> > and will have the net effect of reducing your battery's service
> > life by some small fraction. By the way, once your alternator is
> > turned ON after engine start, are you able to turn it OFF from
> > the pilot's controls while the engine is running?
> >
> > Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
<html><body>
<DIV>My update. I bought an alternator from Autozone that matched the
suzuki/chevrolet automobile replacement alternator often quoted to be the same
as Van's 60 amp internally regulated alternator even though the part number
was just slightly different. I could not tell a difference from the outside
though their computer said 55 amp and not 60 amp. It has
a Nippondenso internal fan and a hotline of 800 228 9672.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In the install manual, it has a CAUTION: A defective or discharged battery
can damage your new alternator.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>But the reason my alternator may have failed is that there was one of
the feet on the alternator was cracked clean through. Though it was
still rigidly mounted that had to set up some fun vibration within the alternator
itself. Don't know if that actually was a cause for the battery to
fail as opposed to the opposite hypothesis I was banting about.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Fun stuff. I still have the magic alternator killing odyssey pc680
battery I removed if anyone has a Van's 60amp alternator they want to test
for kill..... ;-)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Next task is to replace the high intensify landing/taxi light bulbs that burned
out when turned on with 18 volts on the bus....</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>lucky</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px
solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
<BR><BR>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken
<KLEHMAN@ALBEDO.NET><BR>> <BR>> For years I was skeptical too that a weak
battery would hasten <BR>> alternator death. However eventually I developed
a few thoughts on why <BR>> there may be some truth to this in automobiles.
<BR>> <BR>> 1. Higher longer charging does tend to make the alternator
run hotter <BR>> and some internal VR alternators are not well cooled.
Any vehicle that <BR>> is started with jumper cables is about to ask for a
serious effort from <BR>> its charging system. <BR>> <BR>> 2. Installing
a new but partly charged battery may stress the alternator <BR>> even
higher than ever as it charges the battery at max current for an <BR>> extended
period. An old alternator just may not be up to
the ef
fort. <BR>> Maybe the brushes are worn or maybe the solid state devices get
hotter <BR>> than they have for awhile. Certainly the cooling of old greasy/dirty
<BR>> components is not as good as on a clean new unit. I'm not sure
that a <BR>> test stand is going to successfully imitate the service environment
that <BR>> I'm thinking of. This might explain death shortly after the
new battery <BR>> is installed though. <BR>> <BR>> 3. Weak "maintenance
free" batteries are sometimes low on electrolyte. I <BR>> think that
further reduces their capacity to absorb any excess voltage <BR>> or current
and might lead to more voltage excursions. Most people never <BR>> pop the
caps off automobile batteries any more as it is often not <BR>> obvious how
to do it, or that it can be done. It seems that my little <BR>> (8AH) AGM
batteries will accept very little current initially when fully <BR>> discharged.
<BR>> <BR>> 4. As a WAG another contrib
ution
might be abnormal operation while <BR>> fooling around with a weak battery.
If I leave the ignition/key on with <BR>> my ND IR alternator on my aircraft
without starting the engine, the <BR>> alternator does draw several amps
of field current and it will heat up <BR>> quite noticeably with no cooling
airflow. <BR>> <BR>> Anyway my personal rule now is to change out any suspicious
battery with <BR>> a new FULLY charged unit and I can sometimes send
the vehicle to the <BR>> wreckers with the original alternator. I do run
weak batteries in my <BR>> tractor but that has an external homemade VR that
hangs out in the <BR>> breeze (like the alternator) and everything runs
very very cool ;) <BR>> <BR>> Ken <BR>> <BR>> >> SNIP> <BR>>
>> I had heard that a "weak" battery can damage the alternator/regulator
<BR>> >> so this seamed to have validated that statement. For
sure though, <BR>> >> from my observations
, the
battery appeared to go bad first then 2 <BR>> >> hours later after a new
battery was installed the regulator seems to <BR>> >> have failed.
<BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>> > I'm skeptical of such claims. Consider
how many batteries <BR>> > you've replaced in cars without having to
replace the alternator <BR>> > too. <BR>> > <BR>> > I've "killed"
a few alternators in various test situations <BR>> > but all failures
involved either loss of cooling or mechanical <BR>> > issues such as
bearing or shear-shaft failures. <BR>> > <BR>> > The way to "test"
a weak-battery-kills-alternators hypothesis is <BR>> > to separate the
two components and then craft a test plan designed <BR>> > to kill an
alternator. In other words, if I had a brand new <BR>> > alternator and
a charter to damage it in some way on the test <BR>> > stand, what kinds
of abuses might I heap upon the unsuspecting <BR>>
; >
device to bring about its untimely demise? <BR>> > <BR>> > Once such
a test plan is devised, then deduce how battery <BR>> > behavior mimics
any of the abuses you've crafted for the <BR>> > purpose of killing an
alternator. <BR>> > <BR>> > I'd be interested in anyone's ideas
as to how you might go <BR>> > about it. Alternators are inherently self
current limiting. <BR>> > Given sufficient cooling air, you cannot "overload"
one to <BR>> > destruction. Alternator diodes are robust and will
withstand <BR>> > reverse voltage transients many times greater than system
voltage. <BR>> > It's the regulators that are most vulnerable to a
load-dump <BR>> > event and that's been demonstrated by several builders
using <BR>> > Van's (and perhaps other) alternators combined with b-lead
<BR>> > contactor controls. <BR>> > <BR>> > I'm not suggesting
that battery condition might not be a bit-player
<BR>&
gt; > in a scenario that's hard on alternators. For example: <BR>> > I
can see how the "weak battery" thing might have morphed into <BR>> > a
cause/effect for alternator failure where someone knows that <BR>> > having
a battery be disconnected from the alternator at the same <BR>> > time
all loads are removed causes a potentially hazardous <BR>> > over-shoot.
One might deduce that a "weak" battery has <BR>> > lost its ability
to mitigate a load-dump events thereby <BR>> > placing the alternator at-risk.
<BR>> > <BR>> > If this hypothesis were in play for your situation,
the alternator <BR>> > seems most likely to have failed while the
"weak" battery was <BR>> > in place. Certainly having a "strong" new
battery in place totally <BR>> > eliminates the risk for hazardous transients
during ordinary <BR>> > system load reductions. <BR>> > <BR>>
> This could be hypothetically thrashed for d
ays bu
<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
</b></font></pre></body></html>
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: Keyed push to start switch source?Keyed push to |
start switch source?
...snip-
"there may be a simple key-operated circuit
disconnect you could install between the start button and the starting
circuit. You could conceal this keyed-switch wherever you wanted for
security (under the IP?), but maintain the push-to-start feature...."
I plan to do something similar to this, using a key switch to actuate my battery
contactor (in lieu of a standard master switch). It provides a way to lock
out operation of anything electrical in the plane (including the starter) that's
not on the endurance or battery bus. Does anyone see any problems with this.
(Bracing myself....)
Dan
__________________________________________________
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: $low$ handi-talkies |
Folks,
Great idea, but please don't bother. We can't use those types of radios
in theater (FRS/GMRS/CB). They do not cover the freq spectrum or have
the requisite features that are used by troops in the field or
in-garrison.
Todd
#40631
Deploying in 17 days....
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Prather
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: $low$ handi-talkies
--> <mprather@spro.net>
Here's an option:
http://www.anysoldier.com/WhereToSend/
Regards,
Matt-
> --> <lm4@juno.com>
>
> Well, In the past I've talked to people at the 401st Civil affairs
> group/ 98th Div. in Webster N.Y.
> At that time they were sending care packages to Afganistan.
> Ive just called them to find out more info but the right man was not
> there.
> I'll have to call again tomorrow.
>
> Larry Mac Donald
> lm4@juno.com
> Rochester N.Y.
> Do not archive
>
> >Good advice Bob, but Larry McDonald, off-line, suggested even
>> better.
>> >He suggested that I spend a few dollars more to get a little
>> better
>> >quality units, then donate them to the troops in Afghanistan and
>> Iraq
>> >when I'm done--necessary it seems since we are buying so many
>> billion
>> >dollar bombers and nuclear submarines that we can't afford to
>> provide
>> >walkie talkies to our troops to keep them safe. Excellent idea
>> and
>> >consider it done.
>>
>> Wasn't aware of that. Do you have an address for a "pipe"
>> that would put any such donations in the right hands?
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ABEA and TSO's |
bakerocb@cox.net wrote:
>
> I understand that the AIM is not regulatory in nature, but I believe
> that an ABEA pilot having flown a GPS approach under IFR, and being
> called to account by the FAA or the NTSB for some sort of deviation or
> improper performance on his part would have a very difficult time
> convincing the authorities that his non TSO'd GPS equipment should be
> entirely acceptable to them.
Could you please stand back while I prepare to insert my foot in my
mouth, but...
That, to me, is a convoluted way of thinking. "There's no law against
it, but we don't like what you did." Is that any way to run a
country!? The AIM is not regulatory in nature. OK, then when
consideration of fines begin, it is immaterial. That just quacks to
much like "ex post facto" law to not be "ex post facto" law. If the
non-TSOed unit operated as advertised for several years, but then went
flaky enough to cause and incident, it would be no different than a
TSOed unit going tits-up. How an inspector 'feels' about it is smoke in
the wind.
> So the prudent ABEA builder / pilot does his homework and equips his
> aircraft so that it will perform in a manner that will not endanger
> him or others. If TSO'd equipment is the best way to accomplish that
> goal then his choice should be clear to him.
If non-TSOed equipment performs just as well at half the price, only
lacking the reams of paperwork required for the bureaucratic blessing,
why wouldn't the choice be equally clear? The builder has done the
pre-requisite homework, after all?
--
,|"|"|, Ernest Christley |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta Builder |
o| d |o http://ernest.isa-geek.org |
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: $low$ handi-talkies |
Todd,
Good to know. Often times, good intentions are overtaken by
reality---much like donation of clothing and perishable food after a
hurricane. The process could be sped up by just taking the stuff
straight to the dumpster.
When you deploy, be safe and know that your service and sacrifice is
appreciated and highly valued by your fellow citizens and many citizens
of the world.
Thanks,
Chuck Jensen
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Stovall Todd Lt Col AF/A4RX
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 1:33 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: RE: $low$ handi-talkies
--> <Todd.Stovall@pentagon.af.mil>
Folks,
Great idea, but please don't bother. We can't use those types of radios
in theater (FRS/GMRS/CB). They do not cover the freq spectrum or have
the requisite features that are used by troops in the field or
in-garrison.
Todd
#40631
Deploying in 17 days....
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Prather
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: $low$ handi-talkies
--> <mprather@spro.net>
Here's an option:
http://www.anysoldier.com/WhereToSend/
Regards,
Matt-
> --> <lm4@juno.com>
>
> Well, In the past I've talked to people at the 401st Civil affairs
> group/ 98th Div. in Webster N.Y.
> At that time they were sending care packages to Afganistan.
> Ive just called them to find out more info but the right man was not
> there.
> I'll have to call again tomorrow.
>
> Larry Mac Donald
> lm4@juno.com
> Rochester N.Y.
> Do not archive
>
> >Good advice Bob, but Larry McDonald, off-line, suggested even
>> better.
>> >He suggested that I spend a few dollars more to get a little
>> better
>> >quality units, then donate them to the troops in Afghanistan and
>> Iraq
>> >when I'm done--necessary it seems since we are buying so many
>> billion
>> >dollar bombers and nuclear submarines that we can't afford to
>> provide
>> >walkie talkies to our troops to keep them safe. Excellent idea
>> and
>> >consider it done.
>>
>> Wasn't aware of that. Do you have an address for a "pipe"
>> that would put any such donations in the right hands?
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Another 60A alternator, internally re gulated |
voltage regulator failure
Hmmm. My 60A alternator just failed after 15 hours. It also had a cracked
back bracket. Don't know if that had any effect on the failure, but there
sure seems to be a lot of the 60A ND's failing. Mine had blast tubes for
cooing on both front and back openings.
Randy
7A San Jose, Ca
-----Original Message-----
From: luckymacy@comcast.net [mailto:luckymacy@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:11 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Another 60A alternator, internally regulated
voltage regulator failure
My update. I bought an alternator from Autozone that matched the
suzuki/chevrolet automobile replacement alternator often quoted to be the
same as Van's 60 amp internally regulated alternator even though the part
number was just slightly different. I could not tell a difference from the
outside though their computer said 55 amp and not 60 amp. It has a
Nippondenso internal fan and a hotline of 800 228 9672.
In the install manual, it has a CAUTION: A defective or discharged battery
can damage your new alternator.
But the reason my alternator may have failed is that there was one of the
feet on the alternator was cracked clean through. Though it was still
rigidly mounted that had to set up some fun vibration within the alternator
itself. Don't know if that actually was a cause for the battery to fail as
opposed to the opposite hypothesis I was banting about.
Fun stuff. I still have the magic alternator killing odyssey pc680 battery
I removed if anyone has a Van's 60amp alternator they want to test for
kill..... ;-)
Next task is to replace the high intensify landing/taxi light bulbs that
burned out when turned on with 18 volts on the bus....
lucky
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
>
> For years I was skeptical too that a weak battery would hasten
> alternator death. However eventually I developed a few thoughts on why
> there may be some truth to this in automobiles.
>
> 1. Higher longer charging does tend to make the alternator run hotter
> and some internal VR alternators are not well cooled. Any vehicle that
> is started with jumper cables is about to ask for a serious effort from
> its charging system.
>
> 2. Installing a new but partly charged battery may stress the alternator
> even higher than ever as it charges the battery at max current for an
> extended period. An old alternator just may not be up to the ef fort.
> Maybe the brushes are worn or maybe the solid state devices get hotter
> than they have for awhile. Certainly the cooling of old greasy/dirty
> components is not as good as on a clean new unit. I'm not sure that a
> test stand is going to successfully imitate the service environment that
> I'm thinking of. This might explain death shortly after the new battery
> is installed though.
>
> 3. Weak "maintenance free" batteries are sometimes low on electrolyte. I
> think that further reduces their capacity to absorb any excess voltage
> or current and might lead to more voltage excursions. Most people never
> pop the caps off automobile batteries any more as it is often not
> obvious how to do it, or that it can be done. It seems that my little
> (8AH) AGM batteries will accept very little current initially when fully
> discharged.
>
> 4. As a WAG another contrib ution might be abnormal operation while
> fooling around with a weak battery. If I leave the ignition/key on with
> my ND IR alternator on my aircraft without starting the engine, the
> alternator does draw several amps of field current and it will heat up
> quite noticeably with no cooling airflow.
>
> Anyway my personal rule now is to change out any suspicious battery with
> a new FULLY charged unit and I can sometimes send the vehicle to the
> wreckers with the original alternator. I do run weak batteries in my
> tractor but that has an external homemade VR that hangs out in the
> breeze (like the alternator) and everything runs very very cool ;)
>
> Ken
>
> >> SNIP>
> >> I had heard that a "weak" battery can damage the alternator/regulator
> >> so this seamed to have validated that statement. For sure though,
> >> from my observations , the battery appeared to go bad first then 2
> >> hours later after a new battery was installed the regulator seems to
> >> have failed.
> >
> >
> > I'm skeptical of such claims. Consider how many batteries
> > you've replaced in cars without having to replace the alternator
> > too.
> >
> > I've "killed" a few alternators in various test situations
> > but all failures involved either loss of cooling or mechanical
> > issues such as bearing or shear-shaft failures.
> >
> > The way to "test" a weak-battery-kills-alternators hypothesis is
> > to separate the two components and then craft a test plan designed
> > to kill an alternator. In other words, if I had a brand new
> > alternator and a charter to damage it in some way on the test
> > stand, what kinds of abuses might I heap upon the unsuspecting
> ; > device to bring about its untimely demise?
> >
> > Once such a test plan is devised, then deduce how battery
> > behavior mimics any of the abuses you've crafted for the
> > purpose of killing an alternator.
> >
> > I'd be interested in anyone's ideas as to how you might go
> > about it. Alternators are inherently self current limiting.
> > Given sufficient cooling air, you cannot "overload" one to
> > destruction. Alternator diodes are robust and will withstand
> > reverse voltage transients many times greater than system voltage.
> > It's the regulators that are most vulnerable to a load-dump
> > event and that's been demonstrated by several builders using
> > Van's (and perhaps other) alternators combined with b-lead
> > contactor controls.
> >
> > I'm not suggesting that battery condition might not be a bit-player
& gt; > in a scenario that's hard on alternators. For example:
> > I can see how the "weak battery" thing might have morphed into
> > a cause/effect for alternator failure where someone knows that
> > having a battery be disconnected from the alternator at the same
> > time all loads are removed causes a potentially hazardous
> > over-shoot. One might deduce that a "weak" battery has
> > lost its ability to mitigate a load-dump events thereby
> > placing the alternator at-risk.
> >
> > If this hypothesis were in play for your situation, the alternator
> > seems most likely to have failed while the "weak" battery was
> > in place. Certainly having a "strong" new battery in place totally
> > eliminates the risk for hazardous transients during ordinary
> > system load reductions.
> >
> > This could be hypothetically thrashed for d ays bu
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List>
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Another 60A alternator, internally regulated voltage |
regulator failure
Lucky, mind sharing the part # on the alternator? It might be the
same as the Geo Metro 55A machine I just installed (I'd have to pull
the cowl to look) but I'd like to know if it had a significant OV
failure mode history.
Thanks,
-Bill B
On 1/8/07, lucky <luckymacy@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> My update. I bought an alternator from Autozone that matched the
> suzuki/chevrolet automobile replacement alternator often quoted to be the
> same as Van's 60 amp internally regulated alternator even though the part
> number was just slightly different. I could not tell a difference from the
> outside though their computer said 55 amp and not 60 amp. It has a
> Nippondenso internal fan and a hotline of 800 228 9672.
>
> In the install manual, it has a CAUTION: A defective or discharged battery
> can damage your new alternator.
>
> But the reason my alternator may have failed is that there was one of the
> feet on the alternator was cracked clean through. Though it was still
> rigidly mounted that had to set up some fun vibration within the alternator
> itself. Don't know if that actually was a cause for the battery to fail as
> opposed to the opposite hypothesis I was banting about.
>
> Fun stuff. I still have the magic alternator killing odyssey pc680 battery
> I removed if anyone has a Van's 60amp alternator they want to test for
> kill..... ;-)
>
> Next task is to replace the high intensify landing/taxi light bulbs that
> burned out when turned on with 18 volts on the bus....
>
> lucky
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
>
> >
> > For years I was skeptical too that a weak battery would hasten
> > alternator death. However eventually I developed a few thoughts on why
> > there may be some truth to this in automobiles.
> >
> > 1. Higher longer charging does tend to make the alternator run hotter
> > and some internal VR alternators are not well cooled. Any vehicle that
> > is started with jumper cables is about to ask for a serious effort from
> > its charging system.
> >
> > 2. Installing a new but partly charged battery may stress the alternator
> > even higher than ever as it charges the battery at max current for an
> > extended period. An old alternator just may not be up to the ef fort.
> > Maybe the brushes are worn or maybe the solid state devices get hotter
> > than they have for awhile. Certainly the cooling of old greasy/dirty
> > components is not as good as on a clean new unit. I'm not sure that a
> > test stand is going to successfully imitate the service environment that
> > I'm thinking of. This might explain death shortly after the new battery
> > is installed though.
> >
> > 3. Weak "maintenance free" batteries are sometimes low on electrolyte. I
> > think that further reduces their capacity to absorb any excess voltage
> > or current and might lead to more voltage excursions. Most people never
> > pop the caps off automobile batteries any more as it is often not
> > obvious how to do it, or that it can be done. It seems that my little
> > (8AH) AGM batteries will accept very little current initially when fully
> > discharged.
> >
> > 4. As a WAG another contrib ution might be abnormal operation while
> > fooling around with a weak battery. If I leave the ignition/key on with
> > my ND IR alternator on my aircraft without starting the engine, the
> > alternator does draw several amps of field current and it will heat up
> > quite noticeably with no cooling airflow.
> >
> > Anyway my personal rule now is to change out any suspicious battery with
> > a new FULLY charged unit and I can sometimes send the vehicle to the
> > wreckers with the original alternator. I do run weak batteries in my
> > tractor but that has an external homemade VR that hangs out in the
> > breeze (like the alternator) and everything runs very very cool ;)
> >
> > Ken
> >
> > >> SNIP>
> > >> I had heard that a "weak" battery can damage the alternator/regulator
> > >> so this seamed to have validated that statement. For sure though,
> > >> from my observations , the battery appeared to go bad first then 2
> > >> hours later after a new battery was installed the regulator seems to
> > >> have failed.
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm skeptical of such claims. Consider how many batteries
> > > you've replaced in cars without having to replace the alternator
> > > too.
> > >
> > > I've "killed" a few alternators in various test situations
> > > but all failures involved either loss of cooling or mechanical
> > > issues such as bearing or shear-shaft failures.
> > >
> > > The way to "test" a weak-battery-kills-alternators hypothesis is
> > > to separate the two components and then craft a test plan designed
> > > to kill an alternator. In other words, if I had a brand new
> > > alternator and a charter to damage it in some way on the test
> > > stand, what kinds of abuses might I heap upon the unsuspecting
> > ; > device to bring about its untimely demise?
> > >
> > > Once such a test plan is devised, then deduce how battery
> > > behavior mimics any of the abuses you've crafted for the
> > > purpose of killing an alternator.
> > >
> > > I'd be interested in anyone's ideas as to how you might go
> > > about it. Alternators are inherently self current limiting.
> > > Given sufficient cooling air, you cannot "overload" one to
> > > destruction. Alternator diodes are robust and will withstand
> > > reverse voltage transients many times greater than system voltage.
> > > It's the regulators that are most vulnerable to a load-dump
> > > event and that's been demonstrated by several builders using
> > > Van's (and perhaps other) alternators combined with b-lead
> > > contactor controls.
> > >
> > > I'm not suggesting that battery condition might not be a bit-player
> & gt; > in a scenario that's hard on alternators. For example:
> > > I can see how the "weak battery" thing might have morphed into
> > > a cause/effect for alternator failure where someone knows that
> > > having a battery be disconnected from the alternator at the same
> > > time all loads are removed causes a potentially hazardous
> > > over-shoot. One might deduce that a "weak" battery has
> > > lost its ability to mitigate a load-dump events thereby
> > > placing the alternator at-risk.
> > >
> > > If this hypothesis were in play for your situation, the alternator
> > > seems most likely to have failed while the "weak" battery was
> > > in place. Certainly having a "strong" new battery in place totally
> > > eliminates the risk for hazardous transients during ordinary
> > > system load reductions.
> > >
> > > This could be hypothetically thrashed for d ays bu
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Another 60A alternator, internally re gulated |
voltage regulator failure
I have a blast tube towards the back where the regulator is.
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "McFarland, Randy" <Randy.McFarland@novellus.com>
Hmmm. My 60A alternator just failed after 15 hours. It also had a cracked back
bracket. Don't know if that had any effect on the failure, but there sure seems
to be a lot of the 60A ND's failing. Mine had blast tubes for cooing on both
front and back openings.
Randy
7A San Jose, Ca
-----Original Message-----
From: luckymacy@comcast.net [mailto:luckymacy@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:11 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Another 60A alternator, internally regulated voltage
regulator failure
My update. I bought an alternator from Autozone that matched the suzuki/chevrolet
automobile replacement alternator often quoted to be the same as Van's 60
amp internally regulated alternator even though the part number was just slightly
different. I could not tell a difference from the outside though their computer
said 55 amp and not 60 amp. It has a Nippondenso internal fan and a hotline
of 800 228 9672.
In the install manual, it has a CAUTION: A defective or discharged battery can
damage your new alternator.
But the reason my alternator may have failed is that there was one of the feet
on the alternator was cracked clean through. Though it was still rigidly mounted
that had to set up some fun vibration within the alternator itself. Don't
know if that actually was a cause for the battery to fail as opposed to the opposite
hypothesis I was banting about.
Fun stuff. I still have the magic alternator killing odyssey pc680 battery I removed
if anyone has a Van's 60amp alternator they want to test for kill.....
;-)
Next task is to replace the high intensify landing/taxi light bulbs that burned
out when turned on with 18 volts on the bus....
lucky
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
>
> For years I was skeptical too that a weak battery would hasten
> alternator death. However eventually I developed a few thoughts on why
> there may be some truth to this in automobiles.
>
> 1. Higher longer charging does tend to make the alternator run hotter
> and some internal VR alternators are not well cooled. Any vehicle that
> is started with jumper cables is about to ask for a serious effort from
> its charging system.
>
> 2. Installing a new but partly charged battery may stress the alternator
> even higher than ever as it charges the battery at max current for an
> extended period. An old alternator just may not be up to the ef fort.
> Maybe the brushes are worn or maybe the solid state devices get hotter
> than they have for awhile. Certainly the cooling of old greasy/dirty
> components is not as good as on a clean new unit. I'm not sure that a
> test stand is going to successfully imitate the service environment that
> I'm thinking of. This might explain death shortly after the new battery
> is installed though.
>
> 3. Weak "maintenance free" batteries are sometimes low on electrolyte. I
> think that further reduces their capacity to absorb any excess voltage
> or current and might lead to more voltage excursions. Most people never
> pop the caps off automobile batteries any more as it is often not
> obvious how to do it, or that it can be done. It seems that my little
> (8AH) AGM batteries will accept very little current initially when fully
> discharged.
>
> 4. As a WAG another contrib ution might be abnormal operation while
> fooling around with a weak battery. If I leave the ignition/key on with
> my ND IR alternator on my aircraft without starting the engine, the
> alternator does draw several amps of field current and it will heat up
> quite noticeably with no cooling airflow.
>
> Anyway my personal rule now is to change out any suspicious battery with
> a new FULLY charged unit and I can sometimes send the vehicle to the
> wreckers with the original alternator. I do run weak batteries in my
> tractor but that has an external homemade VR that hangs out in the
> breeze (like the alternator) and everything runs very very cool ;)
>
> Ken
>
> >> SNIP>
> >> I had heard that a "weak" battery can damage the alternator/regulator
> >> so this seamed to have validated that statement. For sure though,
> >> from my observations , the battery appeared to go bad first then 2
> >> hours later after a new battery was installed the regulator seems to
> >> have failed.
> >
> >
> > I'm skeptical of such claims. Consider how many batteries
> > you've replaced in cars without having to replace the alternator
> > too.
> >
> > I've "killed" a few alternators in various test situations
> > but all failures involved either loss of cooling or mechanical
> > issues such as bearing or shear-shaft failures.
> >
> > The way to "test" a weak-battery-kills-alternators hypothesis is
> > to separate the two components and then craft a test plan designed
> > to kill an alternator. In other words, if I had a brand new
> > alternator and a charter to damage it in some way on the test
> > stand, what kinds of abuses might I heap upon the unsuspecting
> ; > device to bring about its untimely demise?
> >
> > Once such a test plan is devised, then deduce how battery
> > behavior mimics any of the abuses you've crafted for the
> > purpose of killing an alternator.
> >
> > I'd be interested in anyone's ideas as to how you might go
> > about it. Alternators are inherently self current limiting.
> > Given sufficient cooling air, you cannot "overload" one to
> > destruction. Alternator diodes are robust and will withstand
> > reverse voltage transients many times greater than system voltage.
> > It's the regulators that are most vulnerable to a load-dump
> > event and that's been demonstrated by several builders using
> > Van's (and perhaps other) alternators combined with b-lead
> > contactor controls.
> >
> > I'm not suggesting that battery condition might not be a bit-player
& gt; > in a scenario that's hard on alternators. For example:
> > I can see how the "weak battery" thing might have morphed into
> > a cause/effect for alternator failure where someone knows that
> > having a battery be disconnected from the alternator at the same
> > time all loads are removed causes a potentially hazardous
> > over-shoot. One might deduce that a "weak" battery has
> > lost its ability to mitigate a load-dump events thereby
> > placing the alternator at-risk.
> >
> > If this hypothesis were in play for your situation, the alternator
> > seems most likely to have failed while the "weak" battery was
> > in place. Certainly having a "strong" new battery in place totally
> > eliminates the risk for hazardous transients during ordinary
> > system load reductions.
> >
> > This could be hypothetically thrashed for d ays bu
<html><body>
<DIV>I have a blast tube towards the back where the regulator is.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px
solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: "McFarland,
Randy" <Randy.McFarland@novellus.com> <BR>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2180" name=GENERATOR>
<DIV><SPAN class=572271519-08012007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Hmmm.
My 60A alternator just failed after 15 hours. It also had a cracked
back bracket. Don't know if that had any effect on the failure, but
there sure seems to be a lot of the 60A ND's failing. Mine had blast tubes
for cooing on both front and back openings.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=572271519-08012007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Randy</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=572271519-08012007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>7A San
Jose, Ca</FONT> </SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> luckymacy@comcast.net [mailto:luckymacy@comcast.net]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, January 08, 2007 10:11 AM<BR><B>To:</B> aeroelectric-list@matronics.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: AeroElectric-List: Another 60A alternator, internally regulated voltage regulator failure<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>My update. I bought an alternator from Autozone that matched the
suzuki/chevrolet automobile replacement alternator often quoted to be the same
as Van's 60 amp internally regulated alternator even though the part number
was just slightly different. I could not tell a difference from the outside
though their computer said 55 amp and not 60 amp. It has
a Nippondenso internal fan and a hotline of 800 228 9672.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In the install manual, it has a CAUTION: A defective or discharged battery
can damage your new alternator.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>But the reason my alternator may have failed is that there was one of
the feet on the alternator was cracked clean through. Though it was
still rigidly mounted that had to set up some fun vibration within the alternator
itself. Don't know if that actually was a cause for the battery to
fail as opposed to the opposite hypothesis I was banting about.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Fun stuff. I still have the magic alternator killing odyssey pc680
battery I removed if anyone has a Van's 60amp alternator they want to test
for kill..... ;-)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Next task is to replace the high intensify landing/taxi light bulbs that burned
out when turned on with 18 volts on the bus....</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>lucky</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px
solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
<BR><BR>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken
<KLEHMAN@ALBEDO.NET><BR>> <BR>> For years I was skeptical too that a weak
battery would hasten <BR>> alternator death. However eventually I developed
a few thoughts on why <BR>> there may be some truth to this in automobiles.
<BR>> <BR>> 1. Higher longer charging does tend to make the alternator
run hotter <BR>> and some internal VR alternators are not well cooled.
Any vehicle that <BR>> is started with jumper cables is about to ask for a
serious effort from <BR>> its charging system. <BR>> <BR>> 2. Installing
a new but partly charged battery may stress the alternator <BR>> even
higher than ever as it charges the battery at max current for an <BR>> extended
period. An old alternator just may not be up to
the ef
fort. <BR>> Maybe the brushes are worn or maybe the solid state devices get
hotter <BR>> than they have for awhile. Certainly the cooling of old greasy/dirty
<BR>> components is not as good as on a clean new unit. I'm not sure
that a <BR>> test stand is going to successfully imitate the service environment
that <BR>> I'm thinking of. This might explain death shortly after
the new battery <BR>> is installed though. <BR>> <BR>> 3. Weak "maintenance
free" batteries are sometimes low on electrolyte. I <BR>> think that
further reduces their capacity to absorb any excess voltage <BR>> or current
and might lead to more voltage excursions. Most people never <BR>> pop the
caps off automobile batteries any more as it is often not <BR>> obvious
how to do it, or that it can be done. It seems that my little <BR>> (8AH) AGM
batteries will accept very little current initially when fully <BR>> discharged.
<BR>> <BR>> 4. As a WAG another contri
b utio
n might be abnormal operation while <BR>> fooling around with a weak battery.
If I leave the ignition/key on with <BR>> my ND IR alternator on my aircraft
without starting the engine, the <BR>> alternator does draw several amps
of field current and it will heat up <BR>> quite noticeably with no cooling
airflow. <BR>> <BR>> Anyway my personal rule now is to change out any
suspicious battery with <BR>> a new FULLY charged unit and I can sometimes
send the vehicle to the <BR>> wreckers with the original alternator. I do
run weak batteries in my <BR>> tractor but that has an external homemade VR
that hangs out in the <BR>> breeze (like the alternator) and everything runs
very very cool ;) <BR>> <BR>> Ken <BR>> <BR>> >> SNIP>
<BR>> >> I had heard that a "weak" battery can damage the alternator/regulator
<BR>> >> so this seamed to have validated that statement.
For sure though, <BR>> >> from my observatio
ns , t
he battery appeared to go bad first then 2 <BR>> >> hours later after
a new battery was installed the regulator seems to <BR>> >> have failed.
<BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>> > I'm skeptical of such claims. Consider
how many batteries <BR>> > you've replaced in cars without having
to replace the alternator <BR>> > too. <BR>> > <BR>> > I've
"killed" a few alternators in various test situations <BR>> > but all failures
involved either loss of cooling or mechanical <BR>> > issues such
as bearing or shear-shaft failures. <BR>> > <BR>> > The way to "test"
a weak-battery-kills-alternators hypothesis is <BR>> > to separate
the two components and then craft a test plan designed <BR>> > to kill
an alternator. In other words, if I had a brand new <BR>> > alternator and
a charter to damage it in some way on the test <BR>> > stand, what kinds
of abuses might I heap upon the unsuspecting <BR>
> ;
> device to bring about its untimely demise? <BR>> > <BR>> > Once
such a test plan is devised, then deduce how battery <BR>> > behavior
mimics any of the abuses you've crafted for the <BR>> > purpose of killing
an alternator. <BR>> > <BR>> > I'd be interested in anyone's ideas
as to how you might go <BR>> > about it. Alternators are inherently
self current limiting. <BR>> > Given sufficient cooling air, you cannot
"overload" one to <BR>> > destruction. Alternator diodes are robust and
will withstand <BR>> > reverse voltage transients many times greater than
system voltage. <BR>> > It's the regulators that are most vulnerable
to a load-dump <BR>> > event and that's been demonstrated by several builders
using <BR>> > Van's (and perhaps other) alternators combined with
b-lead <BR>> > contactor controls. <BR>> > <BR>> > I'm not suggesting
that battery condition might not be a bit-p
layer
<BR>& gt; > in a scenario that's hard on alternators. For example: <BR>>
> I can see how the "weak battery" thing might have morphed into <BR>>
> a cause/effect for alternator failure where someone knows that <BR>>
> having a battery be disconnected from the alternator at the same <BR>>
> time all loads are removed causes a potentially hazardous <BR>> >
over-shoot. One might deduce that a "weak" battery has <BR>> > lost its
ability to mitigate a load-dump events thereby <BR>> > placing the alternator
at-risk. <BR>> > <BR>> > If this hypothesis were in play for
your situation, the alternator <BR>> > seems most likely to have failed
while the "weak" battery was <BR>> > in place. Certainly having a "strong"
new battery in place totally <BR>> > eliminates the risk for hazardous
transients during ordinary <BR>> > system load reductions. <BR>>
> <BR>> > This could be hypothetically thra
shed f
or d ays bu <PRE><B><FONT face="courier new,courier" color=#000000 size=2>
</B></FONT></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE><B><FONT face="courier new,courier"
color=#000000 size=2>
</B></FONT></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
</b></font></pre></body></html>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Transpo V1200 Voltage Regulator |
Bob and others,
I have the regulator that is described in the following data sheet.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Regulators/Transpo/V1200_Transpo.pdf
It is a little difficult to tell from the picture, but the connection
tabs are labeled like this left to right and top to bottom:
F S A I
Stator Output
B-
This regulator is a replacement for a stock Ford regulator, however, I
do not think that it is grounded though the case. The case is heavily
anodized aluminum and would be very difficult to make a good connection.
I have the F connected to the alternator field, the A connected to the
5A circuit breaker, the A and S are jumpered together.
I have no idea what to do with the tab labeled "Stator Output" or the
tab labeled "B-". I suspect that the "B-" is the ground, but not certain.
The only instruction that comes with the unit is a sheet of paper that
says not to over torque the mounting screws.
I have tried the internet and all I find is the pdf file above. I have
tried calling Transpo tech support, but they will not call me back.
Does anyone understand regulators well enough to help me out here?
By the way, Bob, thanks for the quick assistance on my diode questions.
Bill B
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: More Contactor - Newbie questions |
Jeff,
This is Dennis in Rochester Hills. You need to give me a call and come over
to see my electrical system and I think things will fall into place quickly!
Call me at 248-953-0374. My wiring is done to the point that I can show you
how the contactors work, and how power flows through the system.
I'm not sure what you mean by the "contactor's small terminal" that has an
8AWG wire connected.
The small terminals on the contactor should have small (20 or 22AWG) wires -
one from the big "+" terminal, the other leads to the master switch. The
battery provides the power for the solenoid coil - the master switch
provides the ground. There should be a diode across the small terminals as
well.
If you have 2 batteries, each one needs a contactor for safety. In normal
operation, both contactors are closed and the batteries are in parallel.
But you need to be able to connect/disconnect them separately 1) for due to
failure modes where one battery could bring down the other one, and 2) each
battery typically powers different things in battery-only mode (when the
alternator fails).
The external power connector has a contactor for the same reasons - control
and potential failure modes. The power for this solenoid comes from the
external power source - again the switch just provides a ground.
Dennis Glaeser
Rochester Hills, MI
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------
Subject: More Contactor - Newbie questions
From: jdalton77 (jdalton77@comcast.net)
Hello,
I'm sorry to be asking such basic questions, but I am still confused
about the use of contactors and relays. I've been reading Bob's book,
but I'm not always sure how to interpret the schematics.
In terms of the battery contactor, I know the hot lead goes from the
battery to the large post, and that the "output" side (leading to the
starter) is not engaged until I flip, or depress, the starter switch.
But how does the 8AWG wire that connects to the main bus from the
contactor's"small" terminal become "hot?" Is it always hot? I see a
switch for "turning on the main bus" but how does that work? Doesn't
the switch need to be hot in order to turn on the current to the main
bus from the battery contactor?
Also, in the back of the book there is a schematic for connecting a
ground power plug (Piper style). A contactor is shown here also. Why
do I need one here, and in a similar vein, wouldn't I need a powered
switch to turn it "on" to allow current to pass through it? What would
activate the contactor when I plugged in the external power. And would
this be a "continuous duty" contactor or more like a starter contactor?
Finally, on two batteries. Is there any reason two batteries could not
be connected in parallel, without using another contactor, or another
switch? Why would that kind of setup not give me redundancy if one of
the two batteries were to perish while flying? I'm not challenging
anything in the book here - I just don't understand it.
I've learned a ton in the two weeks I've been reading the book - but I'm
just starting to learn the language.
Thanks,
Jeff
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: More Contactor - Newbie questions |
Dennis,
Thanks for your offer. I just received my shipping docs for my wing kit.
I'll be out of town until the 17th but will call you when I get back. I
definitely want to see your plane and your wiring.
Jeff
248-709-4775
----- Original Message -----
From: "glaesers" <glaesers@wideopenwest.com>
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 9:09 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: More Contactor - Newbie questions
> <glaesers@wideopenwest.com>
>
> Jeff,
>
> This is Dennis in Rochester Hills. You need to give me a call and come
> over
> to see my electrical system and I think things will fall into place
> quickly!
> Call me at 248-953-0374. My wiring is done to the point that I can show
> you
> how the contactors work, and how power flows through the system.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by the "contactor's small terminal" that has an
> 8AWG wire connected.
>
> The small terminals on the contactor should have small (20 or 22AWG)
> wires -
> one from the big "+" terminal, the other leads to the master switch. The
> battery provides the power for the solenoid coil - the master switch
> provides the ground. There should be a diode across the small terminals
> as
> well.
>
> If you have 2 batteries, each one needs a contactor for safety. In normal
> operation, both contactors are closed and the batteries are in parallel.
> But you need to be able to connect/disconnect them separately 1) for due
> to
> failure modes where one battery could bring down the other one, and 2)
> each
> battery typically powers different things in battery-only mode (when the
> alternator fails).
>
> The external power connector has a contactor for the same reasons -
> control
> and potential failure modes. The power for this solenoid comes from the
> external power source - again the switch just provides a ground.
>
> Dennis Glaeser
> Rochester Hills, MI
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------------------
> Subject: More Contactor - Newbie questions
> From: jdalton77 (jdalton77@comcast.net)
> Date: Mon Jan 08 - 8:59 AM
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm sorry to be asking such basic questions, but I am still confused
> about the use of contactors and relays. I've been reading Bob's book,
> but I'm not always sure how to interpret the schematics.
>
> In terms of the battery contactor, I know the hot lead goes from the
> battery to the large post, and that the "output" side (leading to the
> starter) is not engaged until I flip, or depress, the starter switch.
> But how does the 8AWG wire that connects to the main bus from the
> contactor's"small" terminal become "hot?" Is it always hot? I see a
> switch for "turning on the main bus" but how does that work? Doesn't
> the switch need to be hot in order to turn on the current to the main
> bus from the battery contactor?
>
> Also, in the back of the book there is a schematic for connecting a
> ground power plug (Piper style). A contactor is shown here also. Why
> do I need one here, and in a similar vein, wouldn't I need a powered
> switch to turn it "on" to allow current to pass through it? What would
> activate the contactor when I plugged in the external power. And would
> this be a "continuous duty" contactor or more like a starter contactor?
>
> Finally, on two batteries. Is there any reason two batteries could not
> be connected in parallel, without using another contactor, or another
> switch? Why would that kind of setup not give me redundancy if one of
> the two batteries were to perish while flying? I'm not challenging
> anything in the book here - I just don't understand it.
>
> I've learned a ton in the two weeks I've been reading the book - but I'm
> just starting to learn the language.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
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! --
|