Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:48 AM - Re: Re: PMA-6000 intercom 28V install (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
2. 07:38 AM - Close to the battery ()
3. 08:05 AM - Re: Close to the battery (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 08:57 AM - Re: Dual redundant electrical system (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 09:08 AM - Re: Close to the battery ()
6. 10:54 AM - ANL Distribution Panel ()
7. 10:57 AM - Dynon , sl40, pm1000II, and GTX327 Pinout numbers (gcarnforth)
8. 11:46 AM - Re: Close to the battery (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 12:36 PM - Re: Dynon , sl40, pm1000II, and GTX327 Pinout numbers ()
10. 12:40 PM - Re: ANL Distribution Panel (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 01:35 PM - Re: 6 AWG vs Copper Bar (Henry Trzeciakowski)
12. 02:37 PM - Re: Avoiding strobe noise? (Henry Trzeciakowski)
13. 02:51 PM - Re: Re: PMA-6000 intercom 28V install (Ernest Christley)
14. 05:25 PM - Re: Dual redundant electrical system (Ron Quillin)
15. 06:01 PM - Re: Dual redundant electrical system (Ron Shannon)
16. 06:23 PM - Re: Dual redundant electrical system (Ron Quillin)
17. 06:27 PM - Re: Dual redundant electrical system (Robert McCallum)
18. 07:04 PM - Re: Dynon , sl40, pm1000II, and GTX327 Pinout numbers (Ron Shannon)
19. 07:30 PM - Re: Dual redundant electrical system (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
20. 07:31 PM - Re: Avoiding strobe noise? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
21. 07:31 PM - Re: Re: 6 AWG vs Copper Bar (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: | Re: PMA-6000 intercom 28V install |
At 01:55 PM 5/15/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>
>To be clear, a switching power brick (aka DC-DC converter) turns DC
>into AC then processes it and reconverts to DC. This process makes
>audio and potentially RF noise. Noise injected into your intercom
>will be a much worse problem than an old resistor hung on your firewall.
DC to DC converters come in all flavors. Modern devices have
internal operating frequencies in the hundreds of kilohertz
and generally do not present a noise issue to audio systems.
They have been BIG issues to low frequency nav aids like
VLF Omega and LORAN but few folks use these technologies.
The next most vulnerable system would be an AM radio . . .
generally used for listening to ball games while airborne.
They have packaging issues. I'm aware of no bolt-in-and-wire-
it-up product suited to this task. DC to DC converters come
packaged as components for a larger assembly. Here's an
exemplar device:
http://www.lambdapower.com/ftp/Manuals/pxe_single_ins.pdf
So after you've selected a device with the right power
ratings, now you have to put it in a package of some kind
with screw terminals, push on tabs or perhaps a connector
of some kind. Of course this also offers an opportunity to
add whatever filtering is necessary to live responsibly with
the DO-160 rules of engagement.
>A resistor should also be about 1/10 the cost of a power brick. I
>would guess available of amps to squander in a voltage dropping resistor
>would not be an issue in your RV-10.
Dropping resistors are, as a rule, to be avoided if there
are more elegant solutions at hand. Back when 12v cars were
coming into the marketplace, one could purchase a "Glo-Bar"
resistor designed to drop 12v down to 6v for the purpose of
installing a legacy 6v radio in a new 12v car. These ran
rather warm (30 watts or so) and the "squandering" of energy
was significant but not overtaxing to the system that produced
300+ watts.
In this case, we're considering a system that draws perhaps
100 mA in a quiescent state (1.5 volts dropped across the
15-ohm resistor and tossing off 150 MILLIwatts) and averages
perhaps 300 mA while listening to some music (4.5v drop and
1.3 watts). Peak currents pushing 1A would run the PEAK
dissipation in the dropping resistor up to 10-15 watts or
so . . . but this is exceedingly transient . . . in a system
that produces over 1000 watts of useable power makes this
decision electrically trivial.
The BIG driver in these deliberations is the hassle and
expense of $time$ that it would take to put a DC to DC
converter in a system that probably should have been fitted
with such capabilities from the factory.
Bob . . .
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: | Close to the battery |
I have two of the six pack fuse blocks from B & C that I want to use for
battery 1 & 2 respectively (Z19). The diagram indicates "close to the
battery". I take that as on the firewall if batteries are mounted as
such.
Does anyone know if B & C or other makes covers for this fuse block?
Naturally If I mount them on the firewall, I want to keep the rif-raf
out. There's always duct tape, but we need a little style here.
Thanks
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: Close to the battery |
At 10:26 AM 5/16/2008 -0400, you wrote:
>
>I have two of the six pack fuse blocks from B & C that I want to use for
>battery 1 & 2 respectively (Z19). The diagram indicates "close to the
>battery". I take that as on the firewall if batteries are mounted as
>such.
>
>Does anyone know if B & C or other makes covers for this fuse block?
>Naturally If I mount them on the firewall, I want to keep the rif-raf
>out. There's always duct tape, but we need a little style here.
The easiest cover is to use threaded spacers as 'nuts'
to mount the fuse block. Bring screws through the mounting
surface and cut them just long enough to get good thread
engagement. Make spacers long enough to extend just above
the tops of seated fuses. Cut a plate of the right size
to cover the block. You could consider bending flanges on
it that would droop down over the fuses and offer more
coverage. A piece of sheet rubber on the underside of
the cover would let you screw the cover down 'solid' and
still not put the supper-munch on the fuses.
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Dual redundant electrical system |
At 11:27 PM 5/15/2008 -0400, you wrote:
>Bob, thanks for the reply. As requested, I'm sending you the 2 schematic
>files in .pdf format for reposting. They are much larger than the .dwg and
>.dxf files, so I am sending them right to you rather than via the Matrox
>file server. I can also give them to you in a variety of AutoCad formats
>if that would be better.
The .pdf files are fine. I've posted them to my
server at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/_temp/
I'll invite folks on the List to go get them and
participate in this thread as the spirit moves them . . .
>I think from some of your comments that you may have misunderstood my
>intentions in sending out a request for comments. I am not trying to
>propose a new standard. The standard as far as I can see is your Z14
>design, I have seen numerous references to it in my research on the Net,
>and as I indicated I have read your book several times. I have thoroughly
>analysed Z13 and Z14. You have a lot of good ideas, which is why right up
>front in my letter I acknowledged your contributions. However there are
>some drawbacks to Z14 from my perspective, and since you have requested
>it, I will mention a few specifics. below.
Not at all. The works published in the 'Connection are not
intended to be the "final solution". They're drawings that
were evolved to meet certain design goals.
>However, my intention was not to knock your design, but to see if in fact
>anyone could find any safety or reliability flaws in something I came up
>with. Also, it may be more obvious when you get a look at a clearer
>drawing that a significant part of the complexity you refer to is due to
>the AeroSance FADEC system. That is specified by AeroSance, not me, and
>includes 2 additional switch controlled buses dedicated to the control
>system, and their own starter switch, fuel pump control switch, and fuel
>pump relay.
Absolutely understand . . . and no offense taken. My
mission with channeling this discussion is to offer it
as a learning experience for folks on the List. Another
element of the mission is to justify a modicum of my
time to participate without asking for a indenturship
documents on your first-born.
We can increase the depth of the study by involving
lots of folks on the List while not taxing my presently
tight schedule.
>Regarding the lighting circuit, if you concede that wig-wag landing lights
>enhance safety, the traditional toggle-switch approach would require 5
>toggle switches; Nav, Strobes, Wig-Wag/Steady, Taxi and Landing. I don't
>see how this could reduce pilot workload compared to a rotary switch plus
>a rocker switch. The circuits behind those controls would appear less
>complex if there was a readily-available high-reliability switch to
>control each circuit directly, but for my application- again, I'm not
>proposing this as a standard- 4 relays, a rocker and a rotary switch vs 5
>toggle switch is a good tradeoff against reduced pilot workload and more
>time looking outside the cockpit.
>
>As requested, here are some reasons why Z14 did not meet my needs. One of
>the things I wanted to ensure enhanced reliability was minimal firewall
>penetration by power circuits, and fuse protection where this was
>unavoidable. As I began looking at integrating Z14 with the FADEC
>circuits, some conflicts became apparent. The RV7 standard battery
>configuration is on the engine side of the firewall, and there are quite a
>few power circuits to the FADEC on the engine side as well. Using a
>grounding cockpit switch to remotely control the FADEC bus meant all the
>critical power circuits for the FADEC would remain in the engine
>compartment- shorter wires, fewer firewall penetrations, and greater
>reliability.
>
>This still left an unavoidable firewall penetration by the main battery
>feed to the cockpit circuitry however, and a fault on that extended cable
>would do serious damage before it could be switched off manually via the
>traditional master relay. Fuse protecting this line and using a lighter
>lower power master relay in the cockpit right next to the bus it fed was
>to me a logical step, I've already noted that I don't see isolating the
>starter solenoid as necessary.
>
>There are 3 issues with the Z14 cross-feed contactor from my perspective.
>First is that according to Bill Bainbridge of B&C I won't need to parallel
>batteries with his starter. Second is that I would need an avionics master
>switch- single contingency failure point and one more part to fail as you
>have noted- to isolate the EFISs from the batteries during start. Third is
>that if a fault appeared in the wrong spot-such as the unprotected line
>between master relay and bus- switching in the cross-feed contactor to
>bring on the backup alternator would immediately fail that circuit as
>well. An additional objection to the circuit as shown, from my
>perspective, is combining the starter and cross-feed control into a single
>switch. If there is to be manual intervention required in an emergency, it
>should be with a separate dedicated clearly marked switch, not the switch
>you've used a thousand times to start the engine.
>
>The diode-isolated bus automatically brings the backup system on line (no
>pilot intervention) to sustain the critical circuits, prevents backfeeding
>into a fault on the failed side, and it is less complex and more reliable
>than a manual switch, relay and warning lamp.
>
>Let me make it clear that I'm not bashing your design- you asked me why it
>doesn't meet my personal goals, and that's what I've done. In fact, what
>I've done above is what I was hoping to have done to my design; have clear
>specific points made about what might be problematic. Comments like more
>complex, may not meet design goals of failure tolerance, reduced weight &
>workload etc don't really help me if I don't know where it fails in these
>regards. Everyone benefits when specific construction criticism advances
>the state of the art and/or encourages people to keep contributing new ideas.
Very good sir. I've looked this over briefly but I'll
throw it out to the folks on the List with the
notion of joining in as time permits.
Bob . . .
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: | Close to the battery |
Thanks Bob,
Great idea. I believe I have seen suitable spacers made from
nylock. We'll give it a go.
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 10:58 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Close to the battery
--> <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
At 10:26 AM 5/16/2008 -0400, you wrote:
>
>I have two of the six pack fuse blocks from B & C that I want to use
>for battery 1 & 2 respectively (Z19). The diagram indicates "close to
>the battery". I take that as on the firewall if batteries are mounted
>as such.
>
>Does anyone know if B & C or other makes covers for this fuse block?
>Naturally If I mount them on the firewall, I want to keep the rif-raf
>out. There's always duct tape, but we need a little style here.
The easiest cover is to use threaded spacers as 'nuts'
to mount the fuse block. Bring screws through the mounting
surface and cut them just long enough to get good thread
engagement. Make spacers long enough to extend just above
the tops of seated fuses. Cut a plate of the right size
to cover the block. You could consider bending flanges on
it that would droop down over the fuses and offer more
coverage. A piece of sheet rubber on the underside of
the cover would let you screw the cover down 'solid' and
still not put the supper-munch on the fuses.
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: | ANL Distribution Panel |
I was reading my Porsche Boxster repair manual the other day...
Porsche uses a distribution box which has 5-6 ANL fuses mounted inside.
Picture it as a fuse block with hookups for ANL type fuses. The purpose
is to distribute current protected by various amperage ANL's to fuse
blocks segments which are organized by function and size.
Has anyone attempted this kind of design and is there any value of which
surpasses the increased part count?
Thanks
Do Not Archive
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: | Dynon , sl40, pm1000II, and GTX327 Pinout numbers |
Hello!
I have been motoring along on my RV7 and have always been able to find answers
in the archives.
I am having troubles firing up my panel and am in the process of going back through
the harness.
Does anyone have the pin numbers for connecting these units?
Flightdek to GTX327
SL40 to PM1000II
I have the diagrams but anyone with the pin numbers would help verify what I have
done right/wrong
Thanks
G carnforth RV7 louisville KY
--------
G. Carnforth
Louisville, KY
RV7
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=183459#183459
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: | Close to the battery |
At 12:04 PM 5/16/2008 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Thanks Bob,
> Great idea. I believe I have seen suitable spacers made from
>nylock. We'll give it a go.
You may need to make them. Got access to a lathe?
If push comes to shove, you can use aluminum rod stock.
Cut length just longer than you need for finished part.
Chuck stock in drill press and grab bit in drill press
vise. By turning the stock and holding drill stationary,
you can take advantage of tendency for drill to center
automatically. Start out with small pilot drill and then
finally drill with size appropriate to thread size you
plan to use (probably 6-32 or 8-32).
Tread both ends of the part before sanding carefully
to achieve proper length and flatness of ends. Then
use countersink or oversized drill to chamfer/de-burr
edges of finished holes.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
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: | Dynon , sl40, pm1000II, and GTX327 Pinout numbers |
G.
Not to confuse you, but I have them for the Dynon, sl30 and GTX330. Not
exact, but close family.
If you get stuck, they may help. They are hard copy so I'll need to scan
them in (Monday).
I'll bet the sl40 is the same as the sl30 w/o the nav junk. Don't know
about the 330 since it has different options than the 327.
Thanks
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
gcarnforth
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 1:54 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Dynon , sl40, pm1000II, and GTX327 Pinout
numbers
--> <greg@chesterpools.com>
Hello!
I have been motoring along on my RV7 and have always been able to find
answers in the archives.
I am having troubles firing up my panel and am in the process of going
back through the harness.
Does anyone have the pin numbers for connecting these units?
Flightdek to GTX327
SL40 to PM1000II
I have the diagrams but anyone with the pin numbers would help verify
what I have done right/wrong
Thanks
G carnforth RV7 louisville KY
--------
G. Carnforth
Louisville, KY
RV7
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=183459#183459
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: ANL Distribution Panel |
At 01:50 PM 5/16/2008 -0400, you wrote:
>
>I was reading my Porsche Boxster repair manual the other day...
>
>Porsche uses a distribution box which has 5-6 ANL fuses mounted inside.
>Picture it as a fuse block with hookups for ANL type fuses. The purpose
>is to distribute current protected by various amperage ANL's to fuse
>blocks segments which are organized by function and size.
>
>Has anyone attempted this kind of design and is there any value of which
>surpasses the increased part count?
The ANL style fuse is the easiest device to
accommodate with a DIY fuse block. Further,
know that there are some miniature siblings to
the relatively 'boss-hogg' ANL devices. Here's
an ANL base:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fuse_Holders/ANN-ANL_Base.jpg
Here's a base intended to mount the MEGA series
current limiters:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fuses/all_mega.JPG
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fuses/megafuse250.gif
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fuse_Holders/mfb736_angle.gif
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fuse_Holders/mfb736_dwg.jpg
Here are some alternative, high current, stud mounted
devices:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fuses/ABI_fuses.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fuses/BF2.jpg
The common thread for mounting these or similar fuses
is a pair of sturdy, captive threaded posts. These
can be steel bolts (we don't depend on bolt for
current carrying). Fabricate a block from sturdy,
insulating material like phenolic, Delrin, Polysulphone,
etc. You need some sheet material with a thickness on
the order of 1/2 to 5/8 inch. Drill hole pattern for
installation of one or more fuses. Counter bore back
side to take heads of bolts just under flush. Install
bolts with one nut and no washer. Pot the head of the
bolt with JB Weld. After epoxy sets up, remove nut
and re=install using thread locker on nut. JB Weld
works here too. Torque down real good.
Of course, you'll need mounting holes in the base
for installation. You may also need a copper sheet
or brass bus-bar between studs at one end. Go
3/4" wide x .062 or more thickness.
After the stud-nuts cure, install in a/c and
set your fuse down first before stacking terminals
onto the studs. Put flat washer on and secure with
fiber lock-nut torqued to value recommended by AC43.13 for
steel parts of same size. Hold your wires stationary
while applying final torque so that you avoid
this:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fuses/ANL_Twisted.jpg
Once assembled, the system is quite stable due to
rigidity of the potted heads on studs.
Bottom line is that with a little time at the table
saw, drill press and belt sander, you can build
a perfectly acceptable fuse block for any of the
many choices of stud-mounted protective devices.
Here's a multi-fuse installation on a production
aircraft:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Wiring_Technique/Contactor_Interconnect/Contactor_Strap_3.jpg
We COULD have made a much smaller and lighter
installation from scratch but the qualification
costs were prohibitive. You folks are not so
hindered . . .
Bob . . .
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: 6 AWG vs Copper Bar |
Bob:
Insteard of using 6 AWG from starter contctor to Current Limiter, I want to
use .063 copper bar...is that adequate or should I use .125.
thanks
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Avoiding strobe noise?
<nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
>
> At 07:16 AM 5/15/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >I am building a 601XL (all aluminum), and have located the COMM antenna
on
> >the bottom of the fuselage between the seats. (It's a taildragger, so
> >this is behind the gear.) I have the primary battery under the right
seat
> >and am holding off locating the second battery until I see how the W&B
> >turns out.
> >
> >It has turned out to be convenient, wiring-wise, to locate the strobe
> >power supply, an XPAK-604X-HR, under the left seat. In this location,
the
> >coax to the COMM antenna and at least one of the wires to the strobe
heads
> >will end up in close proximity.
> >
> >My question is: Assuming the coax is properly terminated and the strobe
> >cables' shields are properly grounded at one end, is there going to be a
> >problem with strobe noise interfering with communications? (The strobe
> >cables have a foil shield with a drain wire. The drain wire is grounded
to
> >the wing structure at the tip.)
> >
> >If a problem is likely, are there any additional precautions I could take
> >to avoid one?
> >
>
> Every time someone reports a "noise problem cured
> by repositioning wiring" it was a demonstration of
> some OTHER root cause.
>
> When products are qualified to be used on airplanes,
> they are qualified to both control emissions and
> withstand certain stresses that are known to exist
> in the aircraft environment.
>
> The wiring you've cited are not particularly
> communicative with respect to noise . . . assuming
> that the installation of said wires is in accordance
> with manufacturer's instructions.
>
> In the heavy iron birds, we are seldom blessed with
> enough room to run all the wires that are necessary
> for operation much less comb them into potentially
> antagonistic and/or victim systems.
>
> The short answer is run them neatly together and
> you'll be fine.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> ----------------------------------------)
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
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: Avoiding strobe noise? |
So Bob:
as long as all wires are installed and grounded per maunfacture's spec,
running (stringing) wires like Strobe Power Supply, Nav/Com, Transponder,
Flaps, Pitot Heat together along the bottom of a fuselage and thru bulkheads
together are OK ?
Hank
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Avoiding strobe noise?
<nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
>
> At 07:16 AM 5/15/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >I am building a 601XL (all aluminum), and have located the COMM antenna
on
> >the bottom of the fuselage between the seats. (It's a taildragger, so
> >this is behind the gear.) I have the primary battery under the right
seat
> >and am holding off locating the second battery until I see how the W&B
> >turns out.
> >
> >It has turned out to be convenient, wiring-wise, to locate the strobe
> >power supply, an XPAK-604X-HR, under the left seat. In this location,
the
> >coax to the COMM antenna and at least one of the wires to the strobe
heads
> >will end up in close proximity.
> >
> >My question is: Assuming the coax is properly terminated and the strobe
> >cables' shields are properly grounded at one end, is there going to be a
> >problem with strobe noise interfering with communications? (The strobe
> >cables have a foil shield with a drain wire. The drain wire is grounded
to
> >the wing structure at the tip.)
> >
> >If a problem is likely, are there any additional precautions I could take
> >to avoid one?
> >
>
> Every time someone reports a "noise problem cured
> by repositioning wiring" it was a demonstration of
> some OTHER root cause.
>
> When products are qualified to be used on airplanes,
> they are qualified to both control emissions and
> withstand certain stresses that are known to exist
> in the aircraft environment.
>
> The wiring you've cited are not particularly
> communicative with respect to noise . . . assuming
> that the installation of said wires is in accordance
> with manufacturer's instructions.
>
> In the heavy iron birds, we are seldom blessed with
> enough room to run all the wires that are necessary
> for operation much less comb them into potentially
> antagonistic and/or victim systems.
>
> The short answer is run them neatly together and
> you'll be fine.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> ----------------------------------------)
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
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: PMA-6000 intercom 28V install |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> They have packaging issues. I'm aware of no bolt-in-and-wire-
> it-up product suited to this task. DC to DC converters come
> packaged as components for a larger assembly. Here's an
> exemplar device:
>
check mpja.com
part number 14335-PS
They have a number of other DC-to-DC converters available, but if it was
just one low power device, I would use a 4-legged bridge rectifier or
eight, lined up on a circuit board. The negative output of one feeding
the positive input of the next. No noise. Compact. Useful for several
amps.
--
http://www.ronpaultimeline.com
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: Dual redundant electrical system |
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 8:51 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III
<nuckolls.bob@cox.net> wrote:
> <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
>
> At 11:27 PM 5/15/2008 -0400, you wrote:
>
> The .pdf files are fine. I've posted them to my
> server at:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/_temp/
>
> I'll invite folks on the List to go get them and
> participate in this thread as the spirit moves them . . .
>
Incomplete or incorrect url Bob?
Ron Q.
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: Dual redundant electrical system |
>
>
> > http://www.aeroelectric.com/_temp/
> >
> > I'll invite folks on the List to go get them and
> > participate in this thread as the spirit moves them . . .
> >
>
> Incomplete or incorrect url Bob?
>
> Ron Q.
>
The link works from here. Note there is an underscore character preceding
"temp".
FWIW, as a former IT geek, I discouraged webmasters from using underscores
in web URL's because when the whole link is automatically highlighted and
the whole link becomes underscored (as it does in most email programs) the
unaware reader may not realize there's a separate underscore character. If
spacing is necessary, hyphens are better. Of course, spaces never work in a
URL.
Ron
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: Dual redundant electrical system |
About 10-15 minutes after the post, it also worked for me...
Sigh.
Also paid to be an IT geek at work.
Ron Q.
At 17:57 5/16/2008, you wrote:
> > <http://www.aeroelectric.com/_temp/>http://www.aeroelectric.com/_temp/
> >
> > I'll invite folks on the List to go get them and
> > participate in this thread as the spirit moves them . . .
> >
>
>Incomplete or incorrect url Bob?
>
>Ron Q.
>
>
>The link works from here. Note there is an underscore character
>preceding "temp".
>
>FWIW, as a former IT geek, I discouraged webmasters from using
>underscores in web URL's because when the whole link is
>automatically highlighted and the whole link becomes underscored (as
>it does in most email programs) the unaware reader may not realize
>there's a separate underscore character. If spacing is necessary,
>hyphens are better. Of course, spaces never work in a URL.
>
>Ron
>
>
><http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
><http://www.matronics.com/contribution>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
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: Dual redundant electrical system |
The link worked fine for me and there were two .pdf's there which both
opened fine as well. One labelled "lights" the other "master". Just clicked
on the e-mail link and away we went.
Bob McC
DO NOT ARCHIVE
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron Quillin" <rjquillin@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 8:21 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Dual redundant electrical system
> Incomplete or incorrect url Bob?
>
> Ron Q.
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: Dynon , sl40, pm1000II, and GTX327 Pinout numbers |
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 10:54 AM, gcarnforth <greg@chesterpools.com> wrote:
> greg@chesterpools.com>
> ...
> Does anyone have the pin numbers for connecting these units?
>
> Flightdek to GTX327
> SL40 to PM1000II
>
SL-40 pin outs are:
1 DC power
2 (reserved)
3 RS232 serial data out (TxD)
4 TxKey,pulled low to transmit
5 (no contact -- do not connect)
6 speaker
7 mic ground
8 Mic 1 input
9 DC power ground
10 RS232 serial data in (RxD)
11 RS232 signal ground
12 Intercom select, pulled low to turn on intercom
13 Audio ground (speaker & headphone)
14 Headphone terminal out
15 Mic 1 input
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: Dual redundant electrical system |
At 05:21 PM 5/16/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>
>On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 8:51 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III
><nuckolls.bob@cox.net> wrote:
> > <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
> >
> > At 11:27 PM 5/15/2008 -0400, you wrote:
>
> >
> > The .pdf files are fine. I've posted them to my
> > server at:
> >
> > http://www.aeroelectric.com/_temp/
> >
> > I'll invite folks on the List to go get them and
> > participate in this thread as the spirit moves them . . .
> >
>
>Incomplete or incorrect url Bob?
Don't think so. This is a link to a directory where
you will find two separate .pdf files each of which
needs to be downloaded independently.
This is not unlike the general files archives
on my server like:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/
and
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/
where you don't get a particular document
but a directory structure for many documents.
You should be able to double-click the link
cited and it should take you to the appropriate
directory(ies).
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: | Re: Avoiding strobe noise? |
At 05:40 PM 5/16/2008 -0700, you wrote:
><hammer408@comcast.net>
>
>So Bob:
>
>as long as all wires are installed and grounded per maunfacture's spec,
>running (stringing) wires like Strobe Power Supply, Nav/Com, Transponder,
>Flaps, Pitot Heat together along the bottom of a fuselage and thru bulkheads
>together are OK ?
yup . . /
Bob . . .
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: 6 AWG vs Copper Bar |
At 04:37 PM 5/16/2008 -0700, you wrote:
><hammer408@comcast.net>
>
>Bob:
>
>Insteard of using 6 AWG from starter contctor to Current Limiter, I want to
>use .063 copper bar...is that adequate or should I use .125.
>
>thanks
.063 x .75" copper is fine.
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! --
|