---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Mon 01/08/07: 17 ---------------------------------------------------------- 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 _____________________________________ Time: 08:50:33 AM PST US From: 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: > > > 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 _____________________________________ Time: 08:50:33 AM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: $low$ handi-talkies From: Larry Mac Donald 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 _____________________________________ Time: 08:59:34 AM PST US From: "jdalton77" Subject: AeroElectric-List: 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 _____________________________________ Time: 09:35:15 AM PST US From: "Bill Denton" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: GRT GPS TSO "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: > > > 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 _____________________________________ Time: 09:49:15 AM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: $low$ handi-talkies From: "Matt Prather" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 09:49:15 AM PST US From: Subject: AeroElectric-List: ABEA and TSO's 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 _____________________________________ Time: 10:13:11 AM PST US From: luckymacy@comcast.net (lucky) 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 > > 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 . . . > > > > > > >
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>

> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken
>
> 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
________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 10:21:15 AM PST US From: D Fritz Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 _____________________________________ Time: 10:33:44 AM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: RE: $low$ handi-talkies From: "Stovall Todd Lt Col AF/A4RX" 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 --> 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 10 ____________________________________ Time: 10:53:58 AM PST US From: Ernest Christley Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:07:50 AM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: RE: $low$ handi-talkies From: "Chuck Jensen" 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 --> 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 --> 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 12 ____________________________________ Time: 11:14:09 AM PST US From: "McFarland, Randy" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: 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 > > 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 ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 11:20:22 AM PST US From: "Bill Boyd" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 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 > > > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:27:56 AM PST US From: luckymacy@comcast.net (lucky) Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: 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" 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 > > 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
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
To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
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>

> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken
>
> 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 contri b utio n 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 observatio ns , t he 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-p layer
& 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 thra shed f or d ays bu
________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 04:40:47 PM PST US From: Bill Bradburry Subject: AeroElectric-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:17:33 PM PST US From: "glaesers" Subject: AeroElectric-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:01:56 PM PST US From: "jdalton77" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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" Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 9:09 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: 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) > 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message aeroelectric-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/aeroelectric-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.