Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:04 AM - Re: Trim Servo Speed Controller (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
2. 07:12 AM - FAA Policy on Circuit Breakers (Giffen Marr)
3. 08:05 AM - Re: FAA Policy on Circuit Breakers (Rhino)
4. 08:50 AM - Re: Ground Plane on Carbon (Peter Pengilly)
5. 10:18 AM - Re: FAA Policy on Circuit Breakers (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 10:22 AM - Re: Ground Plane on Carbon (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 10:59 AM - Re: High temp p-lead wire..... (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 11:16 AM - Re: Ground Plane on Carbon (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 11:17 AM - Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 37 Msgs - 09/26/07 (Michael Pereira)
10. 12:19 PM - Poor man's high torque servo circuit (John Burnaby)
11. 01:50 PM - subject line, digest. (Deems Herring)
12. 02:38 PM - Re: Responsible Consumerism in a Free Market (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
13. 02:40 PM - Re: Trim Servo Speed Controller (Peter Harris)
14. 03:08 PM - Re: Ground Plane on Carbon (Peter Harris)
15. 03:15 PM - Re: Ground Plane on Carbon (Peter Harris)
16. 03:25 PM - Re: Re: Responsible Consumerism in a Free Market (John Morgensen)
17. 04:54 PM - Re: Trim Servo Speed Controller (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
18. 05:06 PM - Re: FAA Policy on Circuit Breakers (Ralph Hoover)
19. 05:07 PM - Re: Re: Responsible Consumerism in a Free Market (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
20. 06:44 PM - Re: High temp p-lead wire..... (Jim Baker)
21. 07:06 PM - Re: FAA Policy on Circuit Breakers (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
22. 07:27 PM - Re: High temp p-lead wire..... (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
23. 07:35 PM - Re: Poor man's high torque servo circuit (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
24. 08:52 PM - Re: FAA Policy on Circuit Breakers (corrected) (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
Message 1
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Trim Servo Speed Controller |
>
>Same subject if I may ...
>I have no space to fit the position indicators offered by Ray Allen but
>would like to use an LED to light each extreme position using the wiring
>supplied. Does anyone know how to make that work?
>Thanks
>Peter H
See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Flight/Trim/Trim_Limits_Annunciator.pdf
You can get the parts at Radio Shack
----------------------------
><rvreynolds@macs.net>
>
>Bob, Did you ever publish a DIY diagram for a speed controller for
>the Ray Allen trim servos?
Yes.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Flight/Two_Speed_Trim_1.pdf
and
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Flight/Two_Speed_Trim_2.pdf
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
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: | FAA Policy on Circuit Breakers |
Bob
You may find this FAA Designee Newsletter of interest.
http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/designees_delegations/desig
nee_news/designee_updates/
Giff Marr
Message 3
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: FAA Policy on Circuit Breakers |
GAMarr(at)charter.net wrote:
> Bob
>
> You may find this FAA Designee Newsletter of interest.
>
> http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/designees_delegations/desig
> nee_news/designee_updates/
>
> Giff Marr
This link goes directly to the newsletter in question.
http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/designees_delegations/designee_news/designee_updates/media/2007/2007_10_Update.pdf
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136998#136998
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Ground Plane on Carbon |
Could I observe that antennae inside carbon structures often don't
perform very well. On sailplanes the comm antenna is often moulded into
the fin; however on sailplanes with a carbon fuselage the antenna is
often installed in the rudder (skinned with glass) for much improved
transmit & receive performance.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Peter
Harris
Sent: 27 September 2007 23:02
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ground Plane on Carbon
I once saw an antenna installation using a single loop of wire which was
glued inside the hull as a full circle and which acted like a toroid, no
ground plane fitted. The operator claimed he was happy with the
performance. I would like to find out some more about the design length
if anyone knows.
Peter H
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Dennis Johnson
Sent: Friday, 28 September 2007 3:20 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Ground Plane on Carbon
Hi Dan,
I installed antenna ground planes on the outside of my carbon fiber
Legacy. Bob is right that there are big advantages of doing it inside
the fuselage, but for the comm antenna on the Legacy, it is difficult
because of the many obstructions inside. Putting the ground plane on
the outside was way easier.
I made the comm antenna ground plane out of 1/4" wide adhesive backed
copper foil strips available from stained glass supply stores, making
them the length that Bob advises. I made eight "spokes" or radials
equally spaced around the antenna mounting location. I soldered the
foil radials to each other where they met at the center in a way that it
would make good contact with the antenna base. Then I covered each foil
radial with deck cloth saturated with epoxy to keep the radials
permanently attached to the carbon fiber belly. The foil is so thin
that with a little body work, it makes a nearly imperceptible bump.
Besides, it's on the belly where nobody can see it anyway.
I've been flying since March. I have no way of quantifying it, but my
experience with the type of long distance cross country flights that the
Legacy is suited for, I'm happy with the performance of my radio. Bob
has often observed that these unquantified testimonials aren't all that
valuable, but it's all I've got and I think it may be better than
nothing.
The interesting thing is that there are Legacy builders who've done just
about every ground plane variation possible, including no ground plane
at all, and they all seem satisfied with their antenna's performance.
It could be we're worrying over nothing?
Dennis
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
http://forums.matronics.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: FAA Policy on Circuit Breakers |
At 09:07 AM 9/28/2007 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Bob
>
>You may find this FAA Designee Newsletter of interest.
http://tinyurl.com/2hpesb
Yes, it was interesting in a disappointing sort of
way. Here's an analysis of the document:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Testing_in_Aircraft_with_EFID.pdf
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Ground Plane on Carbon |
Peter, you're correct that while carbon fiber is not as
conductive as aluminum (1000x the sheet resistance) it
IS conductive enough to degrade antenna performance for
devices mounted inside the structure. The loop antenna
you were recalling is cited in this posting from the past:
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
If your tailcone has a diameter of around 31 inches, you can try the Morris
Com Loop antenna, which does not require a ground plane and is a better
antenna than the typical quarter wave whip.
http:www.DaveMorris.com/MorrisComLoop
Dave Morris
-----------------------------------------
At 04:48 PM 9/28/2007 +0100, you wrote:
>Could I observe that antennae inside carbon structures often don t perform
>very well. On sailplanes the comm antenna is often moulded into the fin;
>however on sailplanes with a carbon fuselage the antenna is often
>installed in the rudder (skinned with glass) for much improved transmit &
>receive performance.
>
>
>Peter
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Peter Harris
>Sent: 27 September 2007 23:02
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ground Plane on Carbon
>
>
>I once saw an antenna installation using a single loop of wire which was
>glued inside the hull as a full circle and which acted like a toroid, no
>ground plane fitted. The operator claimed he was happy with the
>performance. I would like to find out some more about the design length if
>anyone knows.
>
>Peter H
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: High temp p-lead wire..... |
At 09:59 PM 9/27/2007 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Tho not precicely OBAM directed....
>
>Bellanca Viking aircraft have a soon-to-be-implemented AD to re-
>route p-leads from a common Cannon connector on the left firewall to
>separate leads to each side of the upper firewall....somehow the FAA
>believes this will result in a safer aircraft after the outbreak of a
>fire in the engine compartment ( caused by a related exhaust system
>failure which will most likely be a concurrent AD with the p-lead
>issue).
>
>
>The question is this.....I've looked at several wire specs, such as
>MIL-W-25038/3, and the specs are adequate but there doesn't seem to
>be any shielded wire in this spec. Is there such a product? Or is
>there another product more suitable?
The reason you're not seeing shielded products is that
the specification is for WIRE, as soon as you add shielding
it becomes a CABLE assembly consisting of some combinations
of wire with some over-braid of shield and an outer jacket.
One of the popular specs for shielded cable assemblies is
Mil-W-27500. See page 17 of:
http://www.cambridge-tec.com/pdf/Cable_catalog.pdf
As you see here, you can craft a part number for any
combination of wire, shielding, and outer jackets
to satisfy your every need. Now, write a check for
about 10,000' of the stuff and they'll whip out a
spool for you.
Obviously, there ARE common combinations
of wire, shielding and jacket used by the industry
where you have a high order probability of finding
a suitable wire already in stock on some supplier's
shelf. If you're needing a modern wire suitable for
shielded p-leads on an SE aircraft, consider the
20 or 18AWG shielded wire per Mil-W-27500 offered
by Steinair at:
http://steinair.com/wire.htm#SHIELDED%20WIRE
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
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: | Ground Plane on Carbon |
I thought I had uploaded Dave's article to my website
waaaayyy back when and when I went to look for it, it wasn't
there. This is a pretty slick antenna solution for certain
situations so I've taken the liberty of adding Dave's work
to the archives of the best we know how to do at:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Morris_Com_Loop_Antenna.pdf
Bob . . .
At 12:18 PM 9/28/2007 -0600, you wrote:
><nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
>
>Peter, you're correct that while carbon fiber is not as
>conductive as aluminum (1000x the sheet resistance) it
>IS conductive enough to degrade antenna performance for
>devices mounted inside the structure. The loop antenna
>you were recalling is cited in this posting from the past:
>
>Bob . . .
>
>-----------------------------------------
>
>If your tailcone has a diameter of around 31 inches, you can try the
>Morris Com Loop antenna, which does not require a ground plane and is a
>better antenna than the typical quarter wave whip.
>
>http:www.DaveMorris.com/MorrisComLoop
>
>
>Dave Morris
>-----------------------------------------
>
>At 04:48 PM 9/28/2007 +0100, you wrote:
>
>>Could I observe that antennae inside carbon structures often don t
>>perform very well. On sailplanes the comm antenna is often moulded into
>>the fin; however on sailplanes with a carbon fuselage the antenna is
>>often installed in the rudder (skinned with glass) for much improved
>>transmit & receive performance.
>>
>>
>>
>>Peter
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Peter Harris
>>Sent: 27 September 2007 23:02
>>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ground Plane on Carbon
>>
>>
>>
>>I once saw an antenna installation using a single loop of wire which was
>>glued inside the hull as a full circle and which acted like a toroid, no
>>ground plane fitted. The operator claimed he was happy with the
>>performance. I would like to find out some more about the design length
>>if anyone knows.
>>
>>Peter H
>
>
>--
>269.13.33/1034 - Release Date: 9/27/2007 5:00 PM
>
>
>incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
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: AeroElectric-List Digest: 37 Msgs - 09/26/07 |
>
>>I don't suppose you read the papers? How many Chinese products have had
>>seriousquality problems this year?
>
> . . . as opposed to how many products have NOT had serious quality
> problems? Popular media is the last place one can acquire the
> big picture for significance of any particular issue. Yes,
> lead in the kiddy-toy paint is the crisis du jour found worthy
> of much renting of garments and gnashing of teeth this month.
> Next month it will be something else. The free market has nothing to do with
> quality or origin of goods and services. In a FREE market, the
> buyer is FREE to make a buy-or-pass decision; the seller is
> equally FREE to make a sell-or-pass decision.
The problem is, in china's case, it's not a free market. China pegs it's currency
to the US dollar at an unrealistic rate. Those 21 cent or 37 cent batteries wouldn't
be that price if china's currency floated (how much labor can involved in manufacturing
aa cells, anyway ?) Why our government allows this one-side economic *warfare*
to continue
is beyond me. In the past, we allowed small screwed up countries with devastated
economies
peg their currency to give them a period of stability. The idea being the short
term
harm to our economy that policy would create would be more than compensated by
the long
term benefits to our economy of having one less basket case country in the world.
The currency problem is hard for our elected officials to fix. I have no idea on
how it
could be done without threatening wide-spread tariff's that would lead to recession
or
depression in both this country and china's; if they were ever enacted. Thing is
china's
government doesn't give a tinker's damn about what their people think (they run
tanks
over their citizens that whine) so they have an impossible advantage over our "let's
get
pork to our constituents so we can be elected perpetually" representatives.
[ the rest of the 0.21 cent battery stuff snipped ]
-----
mjpnj@yahoo.com
Need a vacation? Get great deals
to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
http://travel.yahoo.com/
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: | Poor man's high torque servo circuit |
I want to use a wiper motor as a high torque servo on a machine that
feeds sheet sheet goods through itself.
Motor output shaft is at built-in "Park" position.
Sheet edge is placed in position against limit Switch S1(NO) that
closes to supply power to motor.
S1 is attached to an arm, such that it moves out of the material line of
travel (and opens in the process) when the motor output shaft moves the
arm.
Also attached to the arm is S2 (NC), which contacts the sheet and opens
when the arm has moved to a target position. S2 interrupts power to the
motor thus holding the output shaft and arm at the target position.
When the sheet has passed S2, and it closes, I want the motor to start
and return to the built in "park position".
I know this is probably child's play for some of you. I am
electronically challenged and, aside from being told to "Get a life!", I
would like the group's advice.
Thanks,
John
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: | subject line, digest. |
Please use an appropriate subject line when replying from a digest or when
changing subjects. I think there are others like me who get too many emails
to read them all. I sort my mail and "digest" subject lines go to the tras
h. I would hate to miss some good information.
Deems H
> Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 11:15:23 -0700> From: mjpnj@yahoo.com> Subject: Ae
roElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 37 Msgs - 09/26/07> To: aero
hael Pereira <mjpnj@yahoo.com>> > > > >> >>I don't suppose you read the pap
ers? How many Chinese products have had > >>seriousquality problems this ye
ar?> >> > . . . as opposed to how many products have NOT had serious qualit
y> > problems? Popular media is the last place one can acquire the> > big p
icture for significance of any particular issue. Yes,> > lead in the kiddy-
toy paint is the crisis du jour found worthy> > of much renting of garments
and gnashing of teeth this month.> > Next month it will be something else.
The free market has nothing to do with> > quality or origin of goods and s
ervices. In a FREE market, the> > buyer is FREE to make a buy-or-pass decis
ion; the seller is> > equally FREE to make a sell-or-pass decision.> > The
problem is, in china's case, it's not a free market. China pegs it's curren
cy> to the US dollar at an unrealistic rate. Those 21 cent or 37 cent batte
ries wouldn't> be that price if china's currency floated (how much labor ca
n involved in manufacturing > aa cells, anyway ?) Why our government allows
this one-side economic *warfare* to continue > is beyond me. In the past,
we allowed small screwed up countries with devastated economies > peg their
currency to give them a period of stability. The idea being the short term
> harm to our economy that policy would create would be more than compensa
ted by the long > term benefits to our economy of having one less basket ca
se country in the world.> > The currency problem is hard for our elected of
ficials to fix. I have no idea on how it > could be done without threatenin
g wide-spread tariff's that would lead to recession or> depression in both
this country and china's; if they were ever enacted. Thing is china's > gov
ernment doesn't give a tinker's damn about what their people think (they ru
n tanks > over their citizens that whine) so they have an impossible advant
age over our "let's get > pork to our constituents so we can be elected per
petually" representatives. > > [ the rest of the 0.21 cent battery stuff sn
ipped ]> > > > -----> mjpnj@yahoo.com> > > > Need a vacation? Get great dea
=============> > >
_________________________________________________________________
Discover the new Windows Vista
E
Message 12
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | re: Responsible Consumerism in a Free Market |
At 11:15 AM 9/28/2007 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >>I don't suppose you read the papers? How many Chinese products have had
> >>seriousquality problems this year?
> >
> > . . . as opposed to how many products have NOT had serious quality
> > problems? Popular media is the last place one can acquire the
> > big picture for significance of any particular issue. Yes,
> > lead in the kiddy-toy paint is the crisis du jour found worthy
> > of much renting of garments and gnashing of teeth this month.
> > Next month it will be something else. The free market has nothing to
> do with
> > quality or origin of goods and services. In a FREE market, the
> > buyer is FREE to make a buy-or-pass decision; the seller is
> > equally FREE to make a sell-or-pass decision.
>
>The problem is, in china's case, it's not a free market. China pegs it's
>currency
>to the US dollar at an unrealistic rate.
<snip>
Yes, but how do you START up a free market? We KNOW it
cannot be legislated. Government creates no value, it only
taxes productivity of others and snags a good percentage of
it for its own pockets as the cash goes buy.
Given that NO organization can decree a free market into existence what
would we propose? Demonstrations? Letters to American leadership?
Letters to China's leadership? Sanctions? Letters to the United Nations?
Boycotts? It's a demonstrable fact of history that none of these
activities has ever produced the intended result. Many times
the effect was opposite the intended result. Free markets
happen spontaneously in the absence of forces (attacks upon liberty)
that prevent them from evolving.
The bright star on the horizon for those folks the building of
an infrastructure that uses labor to add value to raw materials
teamed with communication, transportation and financial conduits
to support ANY KIND OF MARKET.
Hypothetical: Would you rather stand on a tall building in
Bejing or the top of a tree in Africa and preach the
doctrine of a free markets? In spite of Africa's rich
resources in raw materials and even educable person-power,
there is NO infrastructure. The Soviet republics had an
opportunity to make the quantum jump into free market world
trade because when the empire fell, it had a wobbly but
repairable infrastructure.
But let us not believe it's a noble thing to cry in our
beer and bemoan the ineffectual prattle of governments
or heads of world banks. The more China's infrastructure
grows, the more difficult it will be for small and
dishonorable minds to micro-manage from a central office.
The best we can do for the Chinese people is DEMONSTRATE
what it means to participate in a free market irrespective
of the organizational structure from which they presently
suffer.
That means continue to make the free-market buy-or-pass
decisions of their products based on our perceptions of
value. It also means we don't by sub-standard products
and/or send them back. When and if those in power finally
demonstrate their inability to function in the free market,
the folks really doing the work will already have graduated
from Free-Market 280. Folks in Africa have only the bushes
and mountains to revolt for, the Chinese will have
communications, transportation and facilities to fight
for. Which battle would you be most willing to risk your
life for?
The notion that any entity is capable of compelling the
Chinese government to "let their people go" is a
demonstrable fantasy. But to invite folks to jump the
fence to join us in a demonstrably greener pasture
generates millions of tiny leaks in dam that no
government has EVER been able plug. Some of HF's
products suck . . . and I don't buy them. Some of
them are good value and I do buy them. We can do no
more and we should not do less. To mount a really
effective boycott against Chinese products will only
reinforce their government resolve, make the Chinese
people hungrier, and accomplish nothing of value.
If I were to advise Chinese entrepreneurs today
I would suggest they develop a marketable health services
community. Given the present slide of the Free
World's health care, it may well be that our
children and grandchildren discover that an airline
ticket to China offers a timely and capable alternative
to health care available in the United States. Right
now it doesn't matter whether they develop a ability
by command of the Chinese counterpart to Ted Kennedy
or as independent entrepreneurial endeavor. Having it
in place after the Great Transition is what's most
important.
When and if the Great Transition happens for the
Chinese people, it could be very EXPENSIVE in both
human capital and facilities. What we would hope
for is that their remaining ability to produce and
sell in a free market makes them an attractive
source of goods and services for all of us. The
more stuff we can buy from them then, the faster they
will recover. Buying lots of useful stuff is the
finest form of foreign aid we could offer.
Hopefully it's a bloodless revolution that allows them
to enroll in Free Market 301 . . . but it may not. In the
final analysis it's folks that know how to add value
to raw materials and market the products who will prevail.
But only if there are good examples to emulate and the
tools of production are in place. That's the only thing you
and I can do without being a party to attacks on someone's
liberties . . . be good examples.
Bob . . .
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: | Trim Servo Speed Controller |
THANKS again Robert.
Peter H
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Saturday, 29 September 2007 1:00 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Trim Servo Speed Controller
<nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
>
>Same subject if I may ...
>I have no space to fit the position indicators offered by Ray Allen but
>would like to use an LED to light each extreme position using the wiring
>supplied. Does anyone know how to make that work?
>Thanks
>Peter H
See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Flight/Trim/Trim_Limits_Annunciator.pdf
You can get the parts at Radio Shack
----------------------------
><rvreynolds@macs.net>
>
>Bob, Did you ever publish a DIY diagram for a speed controller for
>the Ray Allen trim servos?
Yes.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Flight/Two_Speed_Trim_1.pdf
and
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Flight/Two_Speed_Trim_2.pdf
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
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: | Ground Plane on Carbon |
Peter
The application was a glass plane and mine is also. I would like to get
design details ie length, diameter ,gain factor and how to match it, to
compare with the external bent whip. Probably something in the Google will
tell.,
Peter H
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Peter
Pengilly
Sent: Saturday, 29 September 2007 1:49 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ground Plane on Carbon
Could I observe that antennae inside carbon structures often don't perform
very well. On sailplanes the comm antenna is often moulded into the fin;
however on sailplanes with a carbon fuselage the antenna is often installed
in the rudder (skinned with glass) for much improved transmit & receive
performance.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Peter
Harris
Sent: 27 September 2007 23:02
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ground Plane on Carbon
I once saw an antenna installation using a single loop of wire which was
glued inside the hull as a full circle and which acted like a toroid, no
ground plane fitted. The operator claimed he was happy with the performance.
I would like to find out some more about the design length if anyone knows.
Peter H
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dennis
Johnson
Sent: Friday, 28 September 2007 3:20 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Ground Plane on Carbon
Hi Dan,
I installed antenna ground planes on the outside of my carbon fiber Legacy.
Bob is right that there are big advantages of doing it inside the fuselage,
but for the comm antenna on the Legacy, it is difficult because of the many
obstructions inside. Putting the ground plane on the outside was way
easier.
I made the comm antenna ground plane out of 1/4" wide adhesive backed copper
foil strips available from stained glass supply stores, making them the
length that Bob advises. I made eight "spokes" or radials equally spaced
around the antenna mounting location. I soldered the foil radials to each
other where they met at the center in a way that it would make good contact
with the antenna base. Then I covered each foil radial with deck cloth
saturated with epoxy to keep the radials permanently attached to the carbon
fiber belly. The foil is so thin that with a little body work, it makes a
nearly imperceptible bump. Besides, it's on the belly where nobody can see
it anyway.
I've been flying since March. I have no way of quantifying it, but my
experience with the type of long distance cross country flights that the
Legacy is suited for, I'm happy with the performance of my radio. Bob has
often observed that these unquantified testimonials aren't all that
valuable, but it's all I've got and I think it may be better than nothing.
The interesting thing is that there are Legacy builders who've done just
about every ground plane variation possible, including no ground plane at
all, and they all seem satisfied with their antenna's performance. It could
be we're worrying over nothing?
Dennis
- The AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
--> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
- NEW MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
--> http://forums.matronics.com
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: | Ground Plane on Carbon |
THANKS yet again Bob.
Peter H
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Saturday, 29 September 2007 4:18 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ground Plane on Carbon
<nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
Peter, you're correct that while carbon fiber is not as
conductive as aluminum (1000x the sheet resistance) it
IS conductive enough to degrade antenna performance for
devices mounted inside the structure. The loop antenna
you were recalling is cited in this posting from the past:
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
If your tailcone has a diameter of around 31 inches, you can try the Morris
Com Loop antenna, which does not require a ground plane and is a better
antenna than the typical quarter wave whip.
http:www.DaveMorris.com/MorrisComLoop
Dave Morris
-----------------------------------------
At 04:48 PM 9/28/2007 +0100, you wrote:
>Could I observe that antennae inside carbon structures often don t perform
>very well. On sailplanes the comm antenna is often moulded into the fin;
>however on sailplanes with a carbon fuselage the antenna is often
>installed in the rudder (skinned with glass) for much improved transmit &
>receive performance.
>
>
>Peter
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Peter
Harris
>Sent: 27 September 2007 23:02
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ground Plane on Carbon
>
>
>I once saw an antenna installation using a single loop of wire which was
>glued inside the hull as a full circle and which acted like a toroid, no
>ground plane fitted. The operator claimed he was happy with the
>performance. I would like to find out some more about the design length if
>anyone knows.
>
>Peter H
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: re: Responsible Consumerism in a Free Market |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> Yes, but how do you START up a free market? We KNOW it
> cannot be legislated. Government creates no value, it only
> taxes productivity of others and snags a good percentage of
> it for its own pockets as the cash goes buy.
>
snip
> When and if the Great Transition happens for the
> Chinese people, it could be very EXPENSIVE in both
> human capital and facilities. What we would hope
> for is that their remaining ability to produce and
> sell in a free market makes them an attractive
> source of goods and services for all of us. The
> more stuff we can buy from them then, the faster they
> will recover. Buying lots of useful stuff is the
> finest form of foreign aid we could offer.
>
Good points, Bob. I like to think that the "Great Transition" will be as
bloodless as the Soviet Union's. The Chinese system is currently a
"kinda sort of" representative government in that they do vote for their
local representative to the communist party.
If you enjoy "Good Value", take a riverboat cruise up the Yangtze river
to and through the Three Gorges Dam while the exchange rate is still
favorable. Highly recommended.
John Morgensen
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: | Trim Servo Speed Controller |
At 07:37 AM 9/29/2007 +1000, you wrote:
><peterjfharris@bigpond.com>
>
>THANKS again Robert.
My pleasure sir.
Bob . . .
Message 18
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: FAA Policy on Circuit Breakers |
I must agree with Bob on his response to this but an even simpler
analysis is that the writer missed half of the breaker definition and
assumed design intent!
"AC 23-17B, System and Equipment Guide for Certification of Part 23
Airplanes, (Amendment 23-49 and Subsequent) For part 23 applications,
the definitions of a switch and a circuit breaker are as follows: 1) A
switch is a device for opening and closing or for changing the
connection of a circuit; 2) A circuit breaker is a device designed to
open and close a circuit by non-automatic means and to open the circuit
automatically at a predetermined overload of current, without injury to
itself when properly applied within its rating. Thus, circuit breakers
used for operational functions are not acceptable because they are not
performing their intended function, which is protection against
overloads. "
According to the above definition the functions of a breaker are *"open
and close a circuit by non-automatic means" *and *"to open the circuit
automatically at a predetermined overload of current"*. To conclude
using the breaker as a switch is not acceptable assumes that only the
second part of the definition is intended. If the breaker is the
pullable type then switching is an intended function. If the designers
intent was to restrict the use of the breaker as a switch then a
non-pullable breaker could be applied. I would assume that if the intent
was to restrict the switching function of a pullable breaker then a
caution should be applied near the breaker or at least in the operation
instructions.
Just my two cents.
--
Ralph C. Hoover
RV7A
hooverra at verizon dot net
Message 19
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: Responsible Consumerism in a Free Market |
>> When and if the Great Transition happens for the
>> Chinese people, it could be very EXPENSIVE in both
>> human capital and facilities. What we would hope
>> for is that their remaining ability to produce and
>> sell in a free market makes them an attractive
>> source of goods and services for all of us. The
>> more stuff we can buy from them then, the faster they
>> will recover. Buying lots of useful stuff is the
>> finest form of foreign aid we could offer.
>
>Good points, Bob. I like to think that the "Great Transition" will be as
>bloodless as the Soviet Union's. The Chinese system is currently a "kinda
>sort of" representative government in that they do vote for their local
>representative to the communist party.
Those are good seeds. There are no doubt others.
>If you enjoy "Good Value", take a riverboat cruise up the Yangtze river to
>and through the Three Gorges Dam while the exchange rate is still
>favorable. Highly recommended.
I'll take that under advisement. Thank you. I know my
wife would love to do it too.
I've had some direct email flack about departing
from subjects germane to our mission. I had to
remind them that my original posting concerned the
results of an inquiry into return on investment for
some batteries offered by a local store. But even
my response to the political retort was do depoliticize
the discussion by focusing on fundamentals of
economics and human behavior.
I think opportunities offered to us by Harbor
Freight and others go directly to the goal of maximizing
return on our investment of $time$ in crafting an
airplane. This is especially true when many of the
tools, while perhaps not adequate for the 40-hr/wk
professional would do nicely for the construction of
one airplane. I bought one of their air-nailers to
re-nailed my sub-floors and built one fence.
If I never use it again, it's paid for itself!
Like the Japanese suppliers of 50 years ago, the
folks at Harbor Freight are a fledgling activity
with great potential. The thing we can do best for
each other and for Harbor Freight is accurately
quantify value received for any of their products
we might find useful. It can only benefit us both.
Bob . . .
Message 20
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: High temp p-lead wire..... |
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (4.41)
> The reason you're not seeing shielded products is that
> the specification is for WIRE, as soon as you add shielding
> it becomes a CABLE
As always, I learn something of value. Thanks to Ron and Bob.
Perhaps I don't need 10k feet....two orders of magnitude will do
nicely.....
http://tinyurl.com/22ud4e
Now, about that shipping.....
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
Elmore City, OK
Message 21
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: FAA Policy on Circuit Breakers |
At 08:06 PM 9/28/2007 -0400, you wrote:
>
>I must agree with Bob on his response to this but an even simpler analysis
>is that the writer missed half of the breaker definition and assumed
>design intent!
>
>"AC 23-17B, System and Equipment Guide for Certification of Part 23
>Airplanes, (Amendment 23-49 and Subsequent) For part 23 applications,
>the definitions of a switch and a circuit breaker are as follows: 1) A
>switch is a device for opening and closing or for changing the
>connection of a circuit; 2) A circuit breaker is a device designed to
>open and close a circuit by non-automatic means and to open the circuit
>automatically at a predetermined overload of current, without injury to
>itself when properly applied within its rating. Thus, circuit breakers
>used for operational functions are not acceptable because they are not
>performing their intended function, which is protection against
>overloads. "
>
>According to the above definition the functions of a breaker are *"open
>and close a circuit by non-automatic means" *and *"to open the circuit
>automatically at a predetermined overload of current"*. To conclude using
>the breaker as a switch is not acceptable assumes that only the second
>part of the definition is intended. If the breaker is the pullable type
>then switching is an intended function. If the designers intent was to
>restrict the use of the breaker as a switch then a non-pullable breaker
>could be applied. I would assume that if the intent was to restrict the
>switching function of a pullable breaker then a caution should be applied
>near the breaker or at least in the operation instructions.
>
>Just my two cents.
>
>--
>Ralph C. Hoover
Interesting take. I missed that. I'm trying to put the
gray-matter around:
"Thus, circuit breakers used for operational functions are
not acceptable because they are not performing their
intended function, which is protection against overloads."
Does this mean that IF you use a breaker for any purpose,
it's first function is for protection and switching is
secondary? Therefore, the antithesis would suggest that
if one uses a breaker primarily for it's capabilities
as a switch and intent for protection is claimed,
then the designer is to be shot at dawn?
Bob . . .
Message 22
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: High temp p-lead wire..... |
At 08:41 PM 9/28/2007 -0500, you wrote:
>
> > The reason you're not seeing shielded products is that
> > the specification is for WIRE, as soon as you add shielding
> > it becomes a CABLE
>
>As always, I learn something of value. Thanks to Ron and Bob.
>
>Perhaps I don't need 10k feet....two orders of magnitude will do
>nicely.....
>
>http://tinyurl.com/22ud4e
>
>Now, about that shipping.....
This is single strand, unshielded wire.
Bob . . .
Message 23
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: Poor man's high torque servo circuit |
At 12:18 PM 9/28/2007 -0800, you wrote:
>I want to use a wiper motor as a high torque servo on a machine that feeds
>sheet sheet goods through itself.
>
>Motor output shaft is at built-in "Park" position.
>
> Sheet edge is placed in position against limit Switch S1(NO) that
> closes to supply power to motor.
>
>S1 is attached to an arm, such that it moves out of the material line of
>travel (and opens in the process) when the motor output shaft moves the arm.
>
>Also attached to the arm is S2 (NC), which contacts the sheet and opens
>when the arm has moved to a target position. S2 interrupts power to the
>motor thus holding the output shaft and arm at the target position.
>
>When the sheet has passed S2, and it closes, I want the motor to start and
>return to the built in "park position".
I take it some motivation other than your motor removed the sheet?
>I know this is probably child's play for some of you. I am electronically
>challenged and, aside from being told to "Get a life!", I would like the
>group's advice.
I'm not sure I have a correct image of your task. Windshield
motors are unidirectional . . . I.e. the act of powering it
OFF is really a signal to continue rotation in original direction
until the park position is reached. I presume you understand this.
Do you have the motor and does it have a built-in control
card for intermittent ops timing and hi/lo speed control?
If it's an older unit with no electronics, then wiring per
my present vision is pretty simple. If it has electronics,
you'll have to do some experimenting with reference to the
target vehicle's wiring diagrams to make it sing, dance and
do dishes.
It's been a LONG time since I used one of these motors to
a task and it had no electronics. However, I dug into my
Safarri wipers to fix an intermittent that was subject of
a recall. Found a poorly soldered joint which I fixed and
the motor ran another 150,000 miles. I recall the car's
wiring diagrams being pretty cryptic . . . fortunately
the problem was visibly obvious and I didn't need to
understand it.
Bob . . .
Message 24
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: FAA Policy on Circuit Breakers (corrected) |
At 09:06 PM 9/28/2007 -0600, you wrote:
<nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
At 08:06 PM 9/28/2007 -0400, you wrote:
I must agree with Bob on his response to this but an even simpler analysis
is that the writer missed half of the breaker definition and assumed design
intent!
"AC 23-17B, System and Equipment Guide for Certification of Part 23
Airplanes, (Amendment 23-49 and Subsequent) For part 23 applications,
the definitions of a switch and a circuit breaker are as follows: 1) A
switch is a device for opening and closing or for changing the
connection of a circuit; 2) A circuit breaker is a device designed to
open and close a circuit by non-automatic means and to open the circuit
automatically at a predetermined overload of current, without injury to
itself when properly applied within its rating. Thus, circuit breakers
used for operational functions are not acceptable because they are not
performing their intended function, which is protection against
overloads. "
According to the above definition the functions of a breaker are *"open and
close a circuit by non-automatic means" *and *"to open the circuit
automatically at a predetermined overload of current"*. To conclude using
the breaker as a switch is not acceptable assumes that only the second part
of the definition is intended. If the breaker is the pullable type then
switching is an intended function. If the designers intent was to restrict
the use of the breaker as a switch then a non-pullable breaker could be
applied. I would assume that if the intent was to restrict the switching
function of a pullable breaker then a caution should be applied near the
breaker or at least in the operation instructions.
Just my two cents.
--
Ralph C. Hoover
Interesting take. I missed that. I'm trying to put the
gray-matter around:
"Thus, circuit breakers used for operational functions are
not acceptable because they are not performing their
intended function, which is protection against overloads."
Does this mean that IF you use a breaker for any purpose,
it's first function is for protection and switching is
secondary? Therefore, the antithesis would suggest that
if one uses a breaker primarily for it's capabilities
as a switch and NO intent for protection is claimed,
then the designer is to be shot at dawn?
Bob . . .
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! --
|