Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:59 AM - Re: Re: Matt's Profiteering (not) (Ernest Christley)
2. 06:59 AM - Re: Master Relay Switching High Current (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 07:15 AM - Re: Z-20 System (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 07:17 AM - Re: Re: Z-20 System (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 07:22 AM - Re: Custom Instrument Panel Ground Block (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 07:52 AM - Re: Custom Instrument Panel Ground Block (sam ray)
7. 09:02 AM - Re: Re: Custom Instrument Panel Ground Block (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 09:53 AM - Wire Layout Ideas (Richard T. Schaefer)
9. 09:55 AM - Thermo-Couples through pressure bulkhead (Richard T. Schaefer)
10. 10:10 AM - Re: Re: Custom Instrument Panel Ground Block (Ernest Christley)
11. 10:12 AM - Re: Re: Custom Instrument Panel Ground Block (SteinAir, Inc.)
12. 10:47 AM - Re: Fuses and fusible links (DaveG601XL)
13. 12:04 PM - Re: Re: Fuses and fusible links (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
14. 12:27 PM - Re: Fuses and fusible links (DaveG601XL)
15. 12:33 PM - Re: Thermo-Couples through pressure bulkhead (David M.)
16. 12:47 PM - Re: Thermo-Couples through pressure bulkhead (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
17. 12:48 PM - Re: Wire Layout Ideas (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
18. 01:15 PM - Re: Wire Layout Ideas (Ron Quillin)
19. 01:23 PM - Re: Re: Fuses and fusible links (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
20. 03:14 PM - Kool site, click on aeroplane and cockpit will be displayed ()
21. 04:23 PM - My SL-7- findings (Charles Brame)
22. 05:48 PM - Re: Wire Layout Ideas (B Tomm)
23. 06:26 PM - Re: Wire Layout Ideas (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
24. 07:04 PM - Re: Wire Layout Ideas (B Tomm)
25. 08:52 PM - Z19RB question (Allen Fulmer)
26. 09:27 PM - Europa ULPower schematic (Gaye and Vaughn)
Message 1
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Matt's Profiteering (not) |
Werner Schneider wrote:
> <glastar@gmx.net>
>
> And Ernest do not forget, your numbers are the mails coming in, but
> how many 1000 users has the server to send out mail to? I think that
> might account for most of the traffic over the needed link.
>
> I could tell you from another list server, due to a heavy SPAM attack
> I've not got ANY mail since 7 days I can only read them currently over
> the web interface as the message fwd is shutdown since a week.
>
> and do not archive
The first concern is a red herring, because SMTP doesn't work that way.
The protocol is inherently multicast. If there are 100 users on one
mail server, it will send out one message, and the SMTP server that the
users share will duplicate the message on the recieving end. The larger
ISPs use several techniques to insure that all the incoming mail comes
through one server address (even if it isn't a single physical server)
so that the multicast features of SMTP are optimized. A dumpster dive
computer with a residential broadband connection could handle all the
*normal* list traffic we're discussing. The connection would be the
bottleneck. The computer would have enough bandwidth left over for a
decent game of Doom2.
The spam is a valid concern. With the system we have (SMTP) the only
way to do anything at all about it is to pre-send headers and dump
anything that isn't from a valid/registered user that is subscribed to a
list. Unfortunately, that requires cooperation from people that don't
want to cooperate. The job is analogous to standing in no-man's land
trying to sort bullets from enemy machine gun fire. It'd be nice if the
enemy would label their bullets, and stop shooting the ones that you
don't like. 8*)
I ran my server several years ago, and it seems that the spam problem is
growing exponentially.
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Master Relay Switching High Current |
The data sheet for the Stancore-WhiteRogers contactors
can be viewed at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Contactors/Stancor-WhiteRogers/Stancor_70-Series.pdf
The p/n of interest to us is the 70-902 which is
said to have a service rating of 80A Continuous and
150A inrush. Further down in the data sheet, we're told
that the manufacturer signs up to 100,000 cycles
of performance at rated load.
You have correctly observed that the added load
of a hydraulic pump motor becoming active at the same
time the battery contactor is closing (contacts
bouncing) is more stressful than if the contactor
is allowed to close and become stable before the
added stress of starting a motor is added
to the mix.
However, the stresses are not extra-ordinary with
respect to the device's ratings. Having said that,
it's a given that your contactor isn't going to last
100,000 cycles in your airplane . . . with or without
added motor startup loads. Laboratory confirmation of
service life was accomplished at 4 cycles per minute
so the whole 100,000 cycle test took 25,000 minutes or
about 17 days in the relatively pristine environment
of the test lab sans humidity and temperature
cycles applied over years of service.
In your airplane, the effects of TIME will prove more
severe than effects of utilization and it would not
be surprising for you to experience a contactor failure
on a par with experience in the field with the same
contactor on other aircraft. Replacement every 5-10
years is average. I had two Cessnas in my rental fleet
need new contactors in the 6-months I owned the airport
and I have no idea how long these were in service but
it's a certainty that neither device had more than
a few thousand cycles on them.
Suffice it to say at about $18 each ( http://alliedelec.com
and http://newark.com ) the 70 series devices are a good value
on spam-cans and even better value on OBAM aircraft
architectured for failure-tolerance.
It's a good that you're perceptions of "added
stress" are correct and that you've raised the question.
The answer is, "I see no return on investment of the $time$
needed to mitigate these stresses." Yes, in a fleet of
100 aircraft wired and operated just like yours, you
MIGHT see a observable decrease in service life in battery
contactors for ships that DO get the battery-on motor
inrush load as opposed to those that DON'T, But in the
grand grand scheme of things, the differences will be
insignificant.
At 07:22 PM 11/13/2007 -0700, you wrote:
>
>There may be some concern with making the connection (turning on the
>system including the pump), but I'd guess the real limitation is on
>breaking the connection. It wouldn't surprise me if your master relay
>lives a normal lifespan under this kind of use. I'll be interested in
>what the experts come up with.. :)
YES! A study of relay and contactor switching physics
readily demonstrates that for most applications, contact
opening is the more stressful activity. But a feature
of switch physics oft overlooked is contact BOUNCE that
occurs every time the switch closes. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/switch_transition_CK7201.jpg
This is the transition/conduction trace for a miniature
toggle switch like:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Switches/miniswitches.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Switches/CK7000.jpg
Note that total transition time from first motion
of closed contact until stable condition against
the opposite contact is small . . . about 1.4 milliseconds.
Note further that the contact closes, opens and re-closes
about 8 times in the exemplar trace. This is TYPICAL of
virtually all mechanical switches, relays and contactors.
This BOUNCE means that the contact OPENS under inrush loads
multiple times for each action that goes toward moving the
switch to a new, CLOSED position. I have numerous failure
studies on aircraft where especially unique conditions
NOT specified in manufacturer's data sheets precipitated
tense failures for crew on relays that had VERY FEW total
operating cycles on them. The stressor exhibited only during
contact "closure" when in fact, the multiple micro-events
during closure bounce provided part of the recipe for
sticking the relays (and a runaway trim actuator).
I mention this only to point out that while manufacturer's
data is useful and quite probably truthful, it cannot
and does not cover all the simple-ideas that feed
recipes for success . . . or failure. Too many of our
contemporaries are content to rely on the snapshot of
knowledge offered by the data sheets but find they
lack understanding when things are not behaving as
the data sheets suggest they should.
Bob . . .
>Regards,
>
>Matt-
>
> > I now have a hundred hours on my Lancair Legacy wired using Z13-8. I'm
> > happy that I've only had a few electrical issues, none of which were
> > significant. But I'm wondering about my master relay, a continuous duty
> > one from B&C.
> >
> > My airplane uses a hydraulic pump to raise and lower the landing gear.
> > The pump is powered by an electric motor protected by a 40 amp ANL fuse.
> > I haven't measured it, but factory specs indicate that current peaks at
> > close to 100 amps just before the pump shuts off as it produces peak
> > pressure.
> >
> > The hydraulic pump automatically turns on and off to maintain set pressure
> > whenever the master switch is on. When the airplane is parked overnight,
> > hydraulic pressure bleeds down enough that the automatic pressure switch
> > closes. Of course, since the master switch is turned off, the pump
> > doesn't turn on.
> >
> > But when I turn on the airplane's master switch, the hydraulic pump
> > immediately runs for a split second to restore hydraulic pressure. I
> > think that the master relay is therefore switching approximately 100 amps.
> > My understanding is that a continuous duty relay, like the master relay,
> > can carry large current loads once it is closed, but it isn't good at
> > switching large loads.
> >
> > Should I expect premature failure of my master relay? If so, I'll just
> > carry a spare. They're reasonably cheap and light weight.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dennis Johnson
> > Lancair Legacy #257
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 |
|
At 03:45 PM 8/13/2007 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Hi All,
>
>I'm getting ready for the electrical system in my zenith 601XL with a
>Jabiru 3300.
>
>I'm trying to keep things simple and am thinking about going with the Z-20
>Small Jabiru System. That diagram switches the main bus thru the Master
>switch instead of a battery contactor. Whats the practical cutoff in terms
>of current for using a contactor vs routing directly thru the switch. Any
>downside to adding a contactor to this plan ? Any upsides ?
>
>Any issues with the Z-20 plan ?
The reason for NOT having a battery contactor in Z-20
is to eliminate the energy lost keeping a battery
contactor closed when that loss is a significant
total of the alternator's output. Figure Z-17 is
similarly devoid of battery contactor for the same
reason.
This architecture is appropriate to engines having
PM alternators on the order of 10A or less . . .
which means bus loads of 10A or less. This architecure
does not offer a secondary means for shutting the
system down in case of a stuck starter contactor
but these events are rare.
If you want a battery contactor, wire per Z-16 but
be sure to include battery contactor loads in your
calculations for equipment you plan to install
and your engine's ability to support those loads with
what ever alternator is installed.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
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 |
|
At 02:45 PM 11/13/2007 -0800, you wrote:
><mosquito-56@hotmail.com>
>
>I have just seen your post and I am also interested in the 601-Jab3300
>z/20 diagram. I haven't seen any answers to your post but would like to
>know more about this diagram
>Don
P.S. I just looked up the 3300 and find that it's alternator
is 15A continuous, 22A intermittent. Z-16 is the appropriate
architecture for this engine.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
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: | Custom Instrument Panel Ground Block |
At 04:23 PM 11/13/2007 -0600, you wrote:
>
>SteinAir has them...
>
> http://www.steinair.com/accessories.htm
>
>Neal
>
>
>
>Bob
>I'd like to make a custom instrument panel ground block for my rv8- checked
>with B&C, they only make the two sizes, and do not sell the parts. Are the
>fast on tabs commercially available?
Yes but not easy to find. You COULD consider something like
a D-sub connector soldered to a sheet of thin brass to
accommodate the majority of grounds which are 3A or less
and use screws/ring terminals to tie down the few high
current grounds. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Grounding/AGB_V.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Grounding/AVG_RA.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Grounding/Avionics_Bus_3.jpg
You could do a variation on a theme for the firewall
ground block where there is a combination of high-density
wiring for low current grounds and coarser density for
a few high current grounds.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Custom Instrument Panel Ground Block |
I'm looking for the tabs with a pair spacing of 0.26
inch across- the steinair tabs have a larger spacing
for a larger terminal block and are only a single
pair. I've found 3 tab pairs made by Amp in the Tyco
catalog, but nothing like the larger 12 pair sets used
by B&C. I was hoping Bob would know where I can get
these...
Sam Ray
>SteinAir has them...
> http://www.steinair.com/accessories.htm
>Neal
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
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: Custom Instrument Panel Ground Block |
At 07:51 AM 11/14/2007 -0800, you wrote:
>
>I'm looking for the tabs with a pair spacing of 0.26
>inch across- the steinair tabs have a larger spacing
>for a larger terminal block and are only a single
>pair. I've found 3 tab pairs made by Amp in the Tyco
>catalog, but nothing like the larger 12 pair sets used
>by B&C. I was hoping Bob would know where I can get
>these...
When I crafted that product mucho years ago, I
found a reel of paired tabs in an industrial
surplus store. That first real carried us through
a number of years of production. I don't know where
Bill gets them now.
He probably purchases on reels as an industrial
offering by AMP or T&B. I've never seen them in
small quantities/sizes as catalog items.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
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: | Wire Layout Ideas |
Folks,
I would like some guidelines on how to distribute the following wires
through the fuselage to minimize interference:
1) #4 Battery Cables for rear battery
2) 2 GPS-Waas antennas
3) 1 XM Antenna
4) 1 Com Antenna inside the rudder.
5) Ray Allen Trim Tab
6) ELT
7) Master Relay
8) Strobe/Position lights
I know I should keep the Com Antenna cable away from the GPS Antenna and
cables.
How best to distribute the rest .
This is a LancAir IV-P. Carbon Fiber fuselage . Fiber Glass Vertical and
Rudder.
Richard T. Schaefer E-mail: schaefer@RTS-Services.com
RTS Services Inc Web: http://www.RTS-Services.com
<http://www.rts-services.com/>
7330 Cave Hollow ___ Voice: (512) 923-2755
Austin, TX 78750 | Fax: (830) 798-9644
`---------(*)---------'
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: | Thermo-Couples through pressure bulkhead |
Folks,
What is the effect of running EGT, and CHT thermocouples through a
bulkhead connector?
I believe these are all "K" type thermo couples and I believe that if they
are extended need to be done
with thermo couple wire. But can I have a connector with gold contacts
joining two pieces of thermo couple wire?
r.t.s.
Richard T. Schaefer E-mail: schaefer@RTS-Services.com
RTS Services Inc Web: http://www.RTS-Services.com
<http://www.rts-services.com/>
7330 Cave Hollow ___ Voice: (512) 923-2755
Austin, TX 78750 | Fax: (830) 798-9644
`---------(*)---------'
Message 10
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Custom Instrument Panel Ground Block |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
>
> At 07:51 AM 11/14/2007 -0800, you wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm looking for the tabs with a pair spacing of 0.26
>> inch across- the steinair tabs have a larger spacing
>> for a larger terminal block and are only a single
>> pair. I've found 3 tab pairs made by Amp in the Tyco
>> catalog, but nothing like the larger 12 pair sets used
>> by B&C. I was hoping Bob would know where I can get
>> these...
>
> When I crafted that product mucho years ago, I
> found a reel of paired tabs in an industrial
> surplus store. That first real carried us through
> a number of years of production. I don't know where
> Bill gets them now.
>
> He probably purchases on reels as an industrial
> offering by AMP or T&B. I've never seen them in
> small quantities/sizes as catalog items.
I ordered a handful from Digikey.
Catalog page 341.
http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T073/P0341.pdf
Message 11
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Custom Instrument Panel Ground Block |
Hi Sam,
What part of mine are you talking about?
The SA-9900 people pointed you to previously (below) are what you are
wanting - they have five pairs of tabs (10 total) and are spaced exactly
.26" apart.
I think Perhaps you were looking at something else because these are NOT
what you are describing below?!?!
Look again and you'll see they are exactly what you're describing! They are
a whopping $1.00 each, as everyone pretty much noted before.
Cheers,
Stein
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of sam
>ray
>Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 9:51 AM
>To: AeroElectric-List@matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Custom Instrument Panel Ground Block
>
>
>
>I'm looking for the tabs with a pair spacing of 0.26
>inch across- the steinair tabs have a larger spacing
>for a larger terminal block and are only a single
>pair. I've found 3 tab pairs made by Amp in the Tyco
>catalog, but nothing like the larger 12 pair sets used
>by B&C. I was hoping Bob would know where I can get
>these...
>
>Sam Ray
>
>>SteinAir has them...
>
>> http://www.steinair.com/accessories.htm
>
>>Neal
>
>
>Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
>http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>
>
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: Fuses and fusible links |
Bob,
The initial electrical schematic for my 20 amp Jabiru alternator main bus and e-bus's
included fuse links as their means of protection based on your writings.
This post tells me I could go either way with a fuse link or an in-line fuse
in my application. Your comments in the lead-in material for your Z-diagrams
say that in-line fuse-holders for the 20 amp SD-20 alternator level of loads
are "marginal at best." I am a bit confused with this contradiction so if you
could please clarify your position, I would appreciate it. I am more familiar
with in-line fuse-holders and would like to use them, but not if their reliability
in this application is in question.
If I were to use an in-line fuse for the 20 amp alternator output, would I use
a minimum 25 amp fuse to ward off nuisance trips?
Thanks,
--------
David Gallagher
601 XL, tail and wings completed,
fueslage almost done. Working engine and electrical systems.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145999#145999
Message 13
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Fuses and fusible links |
At 10:42 AM 11/14/2007 -0800, you wrote:
><david.m.gallagher@ge.com>
>
>Bob,
>
>The initial electrical schematic for my 20 amp Jabiru alternator main bus
>and e-bus's included fuse links as their means of protection based on your
>writings. This post tells me I could go either way with a fuse link or an
>in-line fuse in my application. Your comments in the lead-in material
>for your Z-diagrams say that in-line fuse-holders for the 20 amp SD-20
>alternator level of loads are "marginal at best." I am a bit confused
>with this contradiction so if you could please clarify your position, I
>would appreciate it. I am more familiar with in-line fuse-holders and
>would like to use them, but not if their reliability in this application
>is in question.
>
>If I were to use an in-line fuse for the 20 amp alternator output, would I
>use a minimum 25 amp fuse to ward off nuisance trips?
The fuseholders and fuses I cited were the MAXI series
devices that fill applications from 20 to 80 amps
as described in:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Fuses_and_Current_Limiters/Bussman/MAXI_Specs.pdf
. . . as opposed to the smaller ATC series which I
recommend up to and including 15A circuits. The data
sheet is here:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Fuses_and_Current_Limiters/Bussman/ATC_Specs.pdf
The full range of in-line fuse holders citing
the fuses they fit is illustrated here:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Fuses_and_Current_Limiters/Bussman/Bussmann_in_line_Holders.pdf
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
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: | Re: Fuses and fusible links |
OK, that really helps clear it up for me. I did not initially understand that
the Maxi fuses and holders are on a whole different playing field the plain-Jane
automotive blade fuses and holders. I see that the maxi specs show fuses starting
off at 20 amps and going up in 10 amp intervals to 80 amps. For my 20
amp application, is the 30 amp maxi fuse the appropriate size?
Thank again!
--------
David Gallagher
601 XL, tail and wings completed,
fueslage almost done. Working engine and electrical systems.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146012#146012
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: | Re: Thermo-Couples through pressure bulkhead |
Not if you can help it. Try your best to use the TC wire and ground in
one solid strand from the sensor to the instrument, if at all possible.
You'll vastly improve your error rate that way.
David M.
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard T. Schaefer
To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 11:54 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Thermo-Couples through pressure bulkhead
Folks,
What is the effect of running EGT, and CHT thermocouples through a
bulkhead connector?
I believe these are all "K" type thermo couples and I believe that if
they are extended need to be done
with thermo couple wire. But can I have a connector with gold contacts
joining two pieces of thermo couple wire?
r.t.s.
Richard T. Schaefer E-mail: schaefer@RTS-Services.com
RTS Services Inc Web: http://www.RTS-Services.com
7330 Cave Hollow ___ Voice: (512) 923-2755
Austin, TX 78750 | Fax: (830) 798-9644
`---------(*)---------'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
11/13/2007 9:22 PM
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: Thermo-Couples through pressure bulkhead |
I've run stranded and solid thermocouples through
ordinary machined pins in connectors with insignificant
effects on accuracy. While connector pins of material
"foreign" to the thermocouple wire alloy is inserted
into the Seebeck signal path and while each new joint
introduces error, the joints are paired in opposite
polarities and over the small space of a connector
mass, are very close in temperature to each other.
I'd recommend using a connector that puts a 4-quadrant
crimp on machined metal pins
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Connectors/D-Subminature/D-Sub_Machined_Pins.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Connectors/D-Subminature/D-Sub_4-quad-crimp.jpg
as opposed to soldering or using sheet metal, b-crimp pins.
Bob . . .
(---------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
Message 17
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Wire Layout Ideas |
There are no practical limitations on proximity of
wires for the purpose of limiting exchange of
noises between wires. We don't do it on the
heavy iron and you shouldn't need to do it on
your OBAM aircraft either.
Bob . . .
At 11:50 AM 11/14/2007 -0600, you wrote:
>Folks,
>
> I would like some guidelines on how to distribute the following wires
> through the fuselage to minimize interference:
>
>
>1) #4 Battery Cables for rear battery
>
>2) 2 GPS-Waas antennas
>
>3) 1 XM Antenna
>
>4) 1 Com Antenna inside the rudder.
>
>5) Ray Allen Trim Tab
>
>6) ELT
>
>7) Master Relay
>
>8) Strobe/Position lights
>
>
>I know I should keep the Com Antenna cable away from the GPS Antenna and
>cables.
>
>How best to distribute the rest &
>
>
>This is a LancAir IV-P. Carbon Fiber fuselage & Fiber Glass Vertical and
>Rudder.
>
>
>Richard T. Schaefer E-mail:
><mailto:schaefer@RTS-Services.com>schaefer@RTS-Services.com
>
>RTS Services Inc Web:
><http://www.rts-services.com/>http://www.RTS-Services.com
>
>7330 Cave Hollow ___ Voice: (512) 923-2755
>Austin, TX 78750 | Fax: (830) 798-9644
> `---------(*)---------'
>
>
> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
><http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>
>
>incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
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: Wire Layout Ideas |
At 12:47 11/14/2007, you wrote:
>There are no practical limitations on proximity of
>wires for the purpose of limiting exchange of
>noises between wires. We don't do it on the
>heavy iron and you shouldn't need to do it on
>your OBAM aircraft either.
>
>Bob . . .
Not even for Stormscope antenna proximal to 400Hz power and/or CFS
5kHz autopilot power lines?
The SS IM has pretty specific guidance otherwise IIRC...
Ron Q.
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: Fuses and fusible links |
At 12:26 PM 11/14/2007 -0800, you wrote:
><david.m.gallagher@ge.com>
>
>OK, that really helps clear it up for me. I did not initially understand
>that the Maxi fuses and holders are on a whole different playing field the
>plain-Jane automotive blade fuses and holders. I see that the maxi specs
>show fuses starting off at 20 amps and going up in 10 amp intervals to 80
>amps. For my 20 amp application, is the 30 amp maxi fuse the appropriate size?
Yes. You can get holders and fuses at
most auto parts stores.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
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: | Kool site, click on aeroplane and cockpit will be displayed |
Kool site, click on aeroplane and cockpit will be displayed:
http://www.codeonemagazine.com/test/archives/2007/articles/jan_07/cockpits/cockpits.html
Ron Parigoris
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: | My SL-7- findings |
Ralph,
Unfortunately, I cannot answer either question. My GPS is not hooked
to the SL-70, so no way to determine if it still processes data. The
only time I have ever seen a FAIL message was right after engine
start. And as I said, with a "FAIL" message, I just turn the set off,
then back on and it works normally. I have never checked the fail
mode, but I will take a look the next time I fly. Unfortunately, that
will be about ten days or so, due to a deer hunting trip.
I'll keep you posted.
Charlie Brame
RV-6A N11CB
San Antonio
-----------------------------------------
> Time: 10:07:15 AM PST US
> From: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen@earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: My SL-70 findings
>
>
> Charlie,
>
> Thanks for the response....I'm still doing ground testing - haven't
> got the big
> fan up front running yet. I have a regulated power supply feeding
> my PC680 battery
> set up for 13.5VDC. I've also called GarminAT repair - they said
> to chase
> down the resistance in the antenna coax first.
>
> When yours fails, does it still process altitude data to your GPS?
> Have you tried
> turning the inner knob to see which subtest invoked the failure mode?
>
> Just curious to see how it acts overall.
>
> Thanks,
> Ralph
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
>> From: Charles Brame <chasb@satx.rr.com>
>> Sent: Nov 13, 2007 12:37 PM
>> To: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen@earthlink.net>, AeroElectric List
>> <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: AeroElectric-List: My SL-70 findings
>>
>>
>> My SL-70 does the same thing. However, I find that if I turn the
>> transponder off, wait a few seconds and then turn it back on, it goes
>> through its "TEST" phase and works normally. I think the FAIL mode is
>> triggered by a low voltage situation which occurs during engine
>> start. I put it on my checklist to turn the transponder "OFF" before
>> start. Once the alternator is on line, I turn the transponder "ON"
>> and rarely have problems.
>>
>> Charlie Brame
>> RV-6A N11CB
>> San Antonio
>>
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: | Wire Layout Ideas |
Bob,
By this do you mean to say, run all wires as is most convenient to the
install process?. I too was planning on separating antenna wires from mic
wires, and both from auto pilot wires, +/- power wires close together or
even twisted etc. Although I have not completely figured out how to do this
in an RV7. I just don't want ANY interference and have to re-wire to get
it. BTW I've never done this before. More advice please.
Bevan
RV7A wiring
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wire Layout Ideas
--> <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
There are no practical limitations on proximity of wires for the purpose of
limiting exchange of noises between wires. We don't do it on the heavy iron
and you shouldn't need to do it on your OBAM aircraft either.
Bob . . .
At 11:50 AM 11/14/2007 -0600, you wrote:
>Folks,
>
> I would like some guidelines on how to distribute the following
> wires through the fuselage to minimize interference:
>
>
>1) #4 Battery Cables for rear battery
>
>2) 2 GPS-Waas antennas
>
>3) 1 XM Antenna
>
>4) 1 Com Antenna inside the rudder.
>
>5) Ray Allen Trim Tab
>
>6) ELT
>
>7) Master Relay
>
>8) Strobe/Position lights
>
>
>I know I should keep the Com Antenna cable away from the GPS Antenna
>and cables.
>
>How best to distribute the rest &
>
>
>This is a LancAir IV-P. Carbon Fiber fuselage & Fiber Glass Vertical
>and Rudder.
>
>
>Richard T. Schaefer E-mail:
><mailto:schaefer@RTS-Services.com>schaefer@RTS-Services.com
>
>RTS Services Inc Web:
><http://www.rts-services.com/>http://www.RTS-Services.com
>
>7330 Cave Hollow ___ Voice: (512) 923-2755
>Austin, TX 78750 | Fax: (830) 798-9644
> `---------(*)---------'
>
>
>
><http://www.matronics.com/contribution>http://www.matronics.com/contrib
>ution
><http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List>http://www.matron
>ics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>
>
>incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
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: | Wire Layout Ideas |
At 05:46 PM 11/14/2007 -0800, you wrote:
Bob,
By this do you mean to say, run all wires as is most convenient to the
install process?. I too was planning on separating antenna wires from mic
wires, and both from auto pilot wires, +/- power wires close together or
even twisted etc. Although I have not completely figured out how to do this
in an RV7. I just don't want ANY interference and have to re-wire to get
it. BTW I've never done this before. More advice please.
Understand. Know that when we wire a BIG airplane,
the electro-wienies are at the bottom of the food
chain when it comes to space claims on board the
airplane. We get what's left over after fuel,
engine, flight, hydraulics and air-conditioning
are installed. The only time we had the luxury of
choosing to route THIS wire separate from THAT
wire was when the first electrical system went aboard
something like big honking radial engined machine
that offered relatively open spaces and few competing
systems.
Fortunately, systems designed for modern aircraft
have matured along with the airplanes . . . and
they're designed to run in happy co-habitation
with other systems. By design and qualification,
we craft devices that DO NOT require special
consideration from the installer to insure
harmonious communities potential victims
and antagonists.
The wild is replete with ol' mechanic's
hangar tales about how some intractable
interference problem was cured by separating
the bundles of squabbling systems. However, if
one tracks down root cause of the
symptoms, it's likely that one or both systems
lacked the pedigree to be installed aboard
aircraft . . . or cars . . . or boats. Or
some important instruction for installing one
of the systems was ignored.
It doesn't take long for a handful of real
problems (masked by the wrong solutions) to
morph into a body of sage advice from many
a wizened mechanic concerning the building
of "fences" between potentially recalcitrant
systems. While well intentioned, 99% of
what we hear has no basis in physics. Happily
for you (and for those of us still building
heavy iron) the inter-system squabbles are
pretty much taken care of at the factory.
Route your wires for convenience and good
craftsmanship. There's no automatic value
to be achieved by separating any wires based
on hangar legend.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
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: | Wire Layout Ideas |
Thank you very much. Onward and Upward !!
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 6:25 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Wire Layout Ideas
--> <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
At 05:46 PM 11/14/2007 -0800, you wrote:
Bob,
By this do you mean to say, run all wires as is most convenient to the
install process?. I too was planning on separating antenna wires from mic
wires, and both from auto pilot wires, +/- power wires close together or
even twisted etc. Although I have not completely figured out how to do this
in an RV7. I just don't want ANY interference and have to re-wire to get
it. BTW I've never done this before. More advice please.
Understand. Know that when we wire a BIG airplane,
the electro-wienies are at the bottom of the food
chain when it comes to space claims on board the
airplane. We get what's left over after fuel,
engine, flight, hydraulics and air-conditioning
are installed. The only time we had the luxury of
choosing to route THIS wire separate from THAT
wire was when the first electrical system went aboard
something like big honking radial engined machine
that offered relatively open spaces and few competing
systems.
Fortunately, systems designed for modern aircraft
have matured along with the airplanes . . . and
they're designed to run in happy co-habitation
with other systems. By design and qualification,
we craft devices that DO NOT require special
consideration from the installer to insure
harmonious communities potential victims
and antagonists.
The wild is replete with ol' mechanic's
hangar tales about how some intractable
interference problem was cured by separating
the bundles of squabbling systems. However, if
one tracks down root cause of the
symptoms, it's likely that one or both systems
lacked the pedigree to be installed aboard
aircraft . . . or cars . . . or boats. Or
some important instruction for installing one
of the systems was ignored.
It doesn't take long for a handful of real
problems (masked by the wrong solutions) to
morph into a body of sage advice from many
a wizened mechanic concerning the building
of "fences" between potentially recalcitrant
systems. While well intentioned, 99% of
what we hear has no basis in physics. Happily
for you (and for those of us still building
heavy iron) the inter-system squabbles are
pretty much taken care of at the factory.
Route your wires for convenience and good
craftsmanship. There's no automatic value
to be achieved by separating any wires based
on hangar legend.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
Message 25
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 |
|
Bob,
I am using your Z19RB architecture in my RV7 with Eggenfellner Subaru E6T.
With the dual batteries and battery contactors in the rear of the plane and
a single "fat wire" coming forward do you see any problem with putting a bus
bar (like Stein's BB235: http://www.steinair.com/images/store/bb2305.jpg)
near the firewall to terminate the fat wire?
I would continue the fat wire from this bus bar to the starter contactor on
the engine. The feed for the "Main Power Distribution Bus" would come from
this bus rather than the starter contactor as depicted on Z19RB. This way I
can do all the wiring (and testing) behind the firewall without having the
engine mounted. I can see that I have created one more joint in the run
from the batteries to the starter contactor but is that really a problem?
Also, I have a pair of Gigavac GX11 contactors for the battery contactors
and I was wondering how best to connect the coil ground wire (and optional
NO/NC/COM contact wires if I choose) to the wires carrying them to the
instrument panel mounted switch? Possible choices include:
AMP "Mate-n-Lock" / Molex
Mount a terminal strip with faston tabs by each contactor
AMP Knife Splice?
Thanks,
Allen Fulmer
Message 26
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: | Europa ULPower schematic |
Attached is the revised drawing of the system. As you can see, I have
added crowbar overvoltage. I've yet to hear from ULPower in regards to
the internal shunt that they use in their rectifier/regulator to provide
overvoltage protection. Were it sufficient to provide OV protection in
case the r/r failed, is there any harm in having the OV protection
module as inserted into this drawing? Am I worried about OV? You bet. I
had a Cougar that suffered a regulator failure. Since a light in the
dash only tells you that something is amiss, I wrongly assumed that the
battery was not being charged and turned of the fan, radio,etc and
continued the 20 miles home. When I raised the hood, the battery was
almost roud and whistling as it released acid gas into the air. I
quickly shut the hood for a few hours and let things cool down. I
wouldn't care to repeat the episode in 3D.
Vaughn
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! --
|