Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:52 AM - Re: Nippondenso alternator question (darinh)
2. 06:20 AM - Re: Fuse Sizing (Jeff Page)
3. 08:55 AM - Re: Nippondenso alternator question (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 09:00 AM - Re: Re: Fuse Sizing (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 10:31 AM - Re: Nippondenso alternator question (Paul)
6. 11:03 AM - Re: Nippondenso alternator question (Bill Boyd)
7. 01:39 PM - Re: Nippondenso alternator question (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 03:35 PM - Z-13/8 Revision P (Lee Logan)
9. 03:51 PM - Re: Nippondenso alternator question (rampil)
10. 04:09 PM - Re: Z-13/8 Revision P (Sam Hoskins)
11. 04:59 PM - Re: Z-13/8 Revision P (Sam Hoskins)
12. 07:02 PM - Re: Nippondenso alternator question (Bill Schlatterer)
13. 07:06 PM - Re: Z-13/8 Revision P (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
14. 09:11 PM - Re: Nippondenso alternator question (Paul)
15. 10:19 PM - Internal regulator alternator discussion (Paul)
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: Nippondenso alternator question |
Thanks guys for the input...mine works without the lamp or the lamp circuit altogether.
--------
Darin Hawkes
Series 7 (Final Assembly)
914 Turbo
Kaysville, Utah
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=192089#192089
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 |
|
> In the case of the ATC plastic devices, the data shows
> http://www.egauges.com/vdo_mult3.asp?Type=Voltmeter12&Series=Cyber_Red&Units=E . . . that you can probablyuse a 10A fuse in a
> circuit
that draws 10A continuously.
The above link points to a voltmeter, not a graph of fuse performance,
which I would like to see.
The rest of the post answered my questions, thank you kindly, so I can
continue with my design.
Do not archive
Jeff Page
Dream Aircraft Tundra #10
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: Nippondenso alternator question |
At 06:45 PM 7/9/2008 -0700, you wrote:
I agree that its been much discussed in the past however there are many
false and remaining incorrect mis stated comments in the past that simply
do not apply to the most common ND alternator. These false statements
remain in the past unchallenged but still remain not correct with respect
to ND alternators.
Okay. I do appologize. Forgive me for assuming too
much. Please allow me to back up and start anew . . .
Other than MY having tested many ND alternators as well as a couple of
other brands of Internally regulated Japan brand alternators .I question
your accusation that I have made absolute errors (or any errors of any
sort) in my statements.
For example, all the ND alternators I have tested can be turned on and off
while running and producing power. They also can be "B" lead disconnected
under load with no damage to the alternator IF the alternator contacts are
rated properly ( the common often used contactor are not rated to
disconnect the load dump voltages). The addition of the proper contact
voltage and proper power rated transorb is required to protect any low
voltage contactor from arcing and passing the higher load dump voltage back
to the bus.
Do you have schematics that describe the test setup along
with materials callouts and a description of test conditions
that you can share with us for an exemplar test?
The subject alternators have internal transorbs but may overheat under
the long contact bounce of the common contactor, in particular if that
contactor has a diode across the coil which extends the opening or the
contact from around 5ms to as long as 50 ms with, in several cases, major
arcing of dozens of arc pulses. Using the industry recommended transorb
across the contactor coil minimizes the arcing and opening delay but does
not resolve the contact voltage rating which is overstressed and
demonstrated to arc during my testing. Its one of the repeatable tests that
ranged from 2 amps to 40 amps load.
I have tested, documented and published tests results
that illustrate my findings with respect to various
arc suppression methodologies for relays and contactors.
The increased contact drop out delay for the most agressive
arc suppression technique (plain diode) was predictable
and demonstrated in every test. However, contact spreading
velocity seems to be affected more strongly by spring rates
and growing air-gaps between coil core and armature. Only
the slightest slowing of spreading velocity could be
detected between NO suppression and the most agressive
suppression. the delta-t was on the order of 2-4 percent.
From those tests I extrapolated that while the contactor
was certainly slower to begin opening, it was not significantly
slower in spreading once the armature became detached
from the coil core.
I have performed 100's of repeatable tests to support the analysis of the
above statements including the contact arcing under load of the common
contactor.. As well as fast opening and lack of arcing with the Kilovac in
"B" lead testing.
It's an acknowledged fact that the Kilovac devices
are a different cat bred for improved performance
under certain operating conditions. But to avoid
mixing apples and oranges, I will confine the current
discussion to more rudimentary devices like those
suggested in the Z-figures.
Given the numbers of tests cited, I presume that
you have data recorded from those tests that illustrate
your findings? This is where rubber hits the road
my friend. If your findings differ from my own, then
there is some variable between our testing conditions
or philosophy that will explain the differences. As
teachers, we should KNOW what those variables are
so that they become part of our stock and trade in
helping others understand.
(1) So, the first difference to be resolved is why
your findings report significant differences in
arcing between spreading contacts that are dependent
upon style of arc suppression used.
My findings include ND alternators commonly used at the time by NSI, Vans
and others in the mid 1990's have the following features.
1. The IG terminal turns on and off the alternator under load.
Note Its safe as far as the alternator is concerned to turn off the
alternator under load. It must be done with properly rated contactors however.
I'm confused here. Assuming the IG terminal exerts
absolute control over the inner workings of the alternator
then there is no need to utilize an external b-lead
contactor. Alternators and generators in aircraft
and other DC systems have been turned on and off under
ALL conditions of load since day-one by exerting
positive control over the field current.
The schematics of all internally regulated alternators
I've been privileged to review take the IG lead onto
the integrated circuit chip for the regulator. For
the astute practitioner of failure mode effects analysis,
this raises some flags as to the system should be
designed to DEPEND on functionality of the IG lead
as an absolute control. Damage to the chip can
obviously cause loss of regulation (over voltage)
but it could also cause loss of absolute control.
Another variability comes from my interpretation
of your words that suggest the alternator control
philosophy you're citing is not unlike that which
is described in the first schematic of:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Adapting_IR_Alternators_to_Aircraft.pdf
Here, I've assumed that EVEN IF the IG lead
does exert absolute control over a normally operating
alternator, it cannot be depended upon to exert
that control under certain failures of the
integrated circuit. Augmentation of that control
is called for in the form of a b-lead disconnect
device of some suitable design.
(2) so another clarification of control philosophies
suggests that EVEN IF the IG lead works as you've
described in all ND alternators you've tested, would
you not agree that the same functionality cannot be
depended upon for other brands? Further, since we
have no way to guarantee our builder friends that
every device marked "ND" functions the same way . . .
ESPECIALLY if overhauled by an after market activity?
2, I have been unable to cause alternator failure even with arcing "B" lead
contactor. Both NSI and Vans at the time was selling rebuilt alternators
and Vans told customers not to use any type of "B" lead crowbar device due
to alternator failure.
Note: This I verified with a personal phone call at the time to Vans. I
have no evidence to suggest your OVP crowbar was the cause but I do suspect
the common contactor was a possible cause due to observed excessive contact
arcing during the extended opening of the contacts due in part to the
simple diode used and the contactor contact V rating.
Interesting hypothesis that argues with my own observations
that generated question (1) above.
3. No ND I tested locked up and could not be turned off at any time safely.
4. No ND required anything connected to the "L" terminal.
Good data points. but in light of potential for variances
that prompted question (2) COMBINED with the desire to
offer a control philosophy that works with ANY brand
of alternator, would you not agree that a 100 ohm resistor
tied between "L" and "IG" is a sure bet even if not
necessary for the particular alternator in-hand?
Clearly its not possible to test all of the hundreds of types of small
shell ND alternators. Further rebuilt alternators may have internal
regulators with difference performance as our application has the
alternator wired differently and the aftermarket rebuilt alternators may
have regulators that only work when installed in an automobile as the
original application.
ABSOLUTELY! This is the exact thinking that drives my
system design suggestions. The goal is NOT to have my
readers worrying over all the possibilities for his/her
particular alternator in-hand but to offer the simplest,
most universal solution that is free of such worries.
5. Its safe to open the "B" lead under load if the contactor is rated for
at least 200V contact rating. Only the KIlovac and similar HV contactors
have proper voltage ratings. The common contractors for 12V system battery
and starter etc have contacts only rated for under 50V max during the
opening process. They can tolerate higher voltage across the contacts when
the contacts are open. They will arc during the opening of an alternator
load and the result may cause damage to both the alternator and aircraft bus.
Okay, here's where we need to talk about system conditions
at time of opening. IF the alternator is being shut down with
all equipment operating normally (alternator output is under
control of a functioning regulator) then upward excursions
of b-lead voltage is limited by the over-shoot response of
the alternator/regulator combination if the alternator is
under load at time of disconnect.
(3) The next question goes to the magnitude, duration and
energy contained in the transient event of a suddenly
unloaded alternator. The magnitude of these numbers are
CRITICAL to understanding the energy that either needs to
be stood off (by sizing of clamping devices like transorbs)
or withstood (by sizing circuit breaking capabilities of
the b-lead contactor). With the testing you've accomplished,
have you quantified this event and can you share that data?
Do not use a common diode across a common contactor coil and do not use a
common 45V contactor contact rating as either or both actions greatly
increase of alternator damage.
(4) This raises some flags. Exactly how does the arcing
across the spreading contacts of the b-lead disconnect
device stress the alternator? The arc is a sustained (if
not smoothly varying) current that is no greater than
the alternator is rated to deliver. I think we can agree
that the voltage available is no greater than the magnitude
of over-shoot transients which I presume you've sized and
can describe in question (3).
Perhaps you can substantiate your statements with some of your testing of
the commonly used ND alternator. Please provide the Lester number so we all
can verify your test results..
As I mentioned in earlier posts, I try to craft design
philosophies that are NOT constrained by selection of
specific parts. My design goals are (A) craft the simplest,
lowest cost of ownership, failure tolerant system. (B)
deduce ways in which the widest selection of components
can be utilized IRRESPECTIVE of their internal operating
differences.
For me, this discussion has never been about the deifying
the ND products or vilifying any other product. It's been
about deducing ways that my readers can use any alternator
they choose. When this goal is achieved, the greatest
concern for selection is that the thing might be a piece
of junk . . . but it doesn't matter because we've designed
a system that if failure tolerant. I.e., ALL failures are
a maintenance expense, not a safety issue.
My reply to the questioner was intended to be general as he did not state
the exact ND Lester number and was it rebuilt or new. With out knowing that
there is no absolute recommendation on how to wire it up.
. . . and I'll suggest that my response for the resistor
was a universally applicable approach that didn't care
about make, model, or functionality of the alternator.
Yes there are alternators of different brands (and perhaps some ND do also,
but not the common ones that I have tested.) that lock up and others that
require a lamp in the wiring to start. perhaps there are also other that
cannot survive a load dump but none in the industry will state that their
regulators lack the universal load dump internal protection (except that
load dumps resulting form extended arcing from contacts or broken wiring
are not protected as overheating or the protection Transorb is possible.
(5) This gives rise to the next question that goes to
the un-quantified "extended arcing". Folks in industry
a fond of talking about such things without numbers that
allow a system integrator to artfully integrate their
products into a consumers system. You have repeated the
phraseology without quantification. It's my goal that
my partner in Douglas-Nuckolls LLC will help me get this
critter . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Alternator_Test_Stand/Alternator_Test_Stand_1.jpg
up and running so that I can expand my personal knowledge
of these questions that have been CRITICAL details of alternator
discussions on this List for 10 years. To date they've
NEVER answered by anyone. If you have access to this
kind of equipment and test articles right now, then
I'll suggest you are in the very best position to advance
the state of our art and the quality of our discussions
to the benefit of anyone interested in reading them.
Your cheep un-substantiated comment that I have made absolute errors does
not suit your normally nice style. Lets keep the discussion technical and
not call me a person making false statements please.
Agreed. I let my frustrations with another matter
bleed over into my work on this List. Explainable
but not excusable. I beg your indulgence.
No respectable person can let that cheep shot pass. If I made a error
please prove it.
How many stock ND alternators used in aircraft have you tested????
My concerns come from the notion that every device
having the ND logo on it is "stock" or "golden"
. . . especially when we know NOTHING about the pedigree
of the alternator in question and even less about how
the regulators are crafted.
Perhaps I missed it in the past and if so I apologize if you show me the
statement. It has been more than 10 years ago when many of my testing was
done and perhaps My memory has failed. To me the discussion on this years
ago was long settled with you on one side and Jet Pilot George (for one) on
the other side.
Describe "sides" . . . my antagonists basically
offered the notion that everything ND was golden
substantiated by nothing more that marketing hype.
I have personally tested NO internally regulated
alternators. ALL of my work with aircraft alternators
and generators has been done on the legacy products
that prevail in type-certificated aircraft. I'm moving
toward the capability to test such devices as noted
above because the data I need for artful design is
has not been forthcoming from other sources. Perhaps
you can assist.
(6) There is one more case for alternator control
that involves understanding how to handle the
fully-excited runaway condition with an external
b-lead contactor . . . but this is a special case
that begs a separate discussion. For now, if you
could share what you know that goes totward (1)
through (5) I'd be more pleased than you can know.
As side comment many regulators have a OVP built in that limits the output
voltage to around 16V.
That claim has been made before . . . and in one discussion,
a reader suggested that when a pilot experienced an
ov condition (that puffed up his battery and zorked a
number of ship's accessories) that the ov condtion
had to have been limited to something on the order
of 16 volts. I presume this statement came from an
interpretation of marketing hype for a particular
product . . . with no guarantees that the failed device
in the guys's airplane had the same feature.
I've often cited the dearth of real data on internally
regulated alternators. This device has been cited
many times in discussions here on the List.
http://aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Semiconductors/MC33092A.pdf
This is the ONLY hard copy of an internal regulator
design I've been privileged to study. If you trace through
the functionality of this device, you'll discover that
there is OV warning, but no OV protection. Is this
20+ year old device a good example of what's available
today? Who knows? If anyone does know, it has not been
shared here on the List.
Given the lack of information, I have to proceed with
worst case assumptions that treat the built in regulators
with no more reverence than external regulators
of yesteryear . . . hence failure tolerant no matter
what.
If we DID have detailed data on ANY brand and part number
of alternator/regulator . . . it would be of little value
to me as purveyor of universally applicable advice. It's
not my goal to help Joe rivet-bucker integrate a particular
part into his system . . . the goal is to offer ways he
can integrate any part with some reasonable sense of confidence
in failure tolerant design.
This will not protect against all failures thus an external OVP is
required. I have experienced 2 regulator failures (over the past 50 years
in autos where the output jumped from 14+ to 16V and held the output there.
One was the common external regulatro YOU long have recommended as a low
cost "ford" style.
The "ford" style has never been a consistently performing
product. The first pass at this design was this
critter . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Regulators/Ford_EM_Reg.jpg
Pure electro-mechanical. No OV protection. I designed the
first OV protection module . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/Cessna_OVModule.gif
that was applied to this regulator at Cessna many moons
ago.
Over the years, the EM regulators were replaced with
solid state devices from a number of suppliers including
Ford and typical of this package . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Regulators/Ford_SS_Reg.jpg
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Regulators/Ford_SS_Reg_open.jpg
At this point, features and functionality from model to
model begins to diverge. I've seen them offered with
over current and over voltage protection built in . . .
but with no definitive descriptions of how those features
worked. I.e., no way that the prudent aircraft systems
designer can accomplish FMEA and deduce suitability to
the task. Therefore, in satisfaction of my goal for
universally applicable advice, I assume that ALL such
devices are applicable to my designs if augmented with
OV protection of predicable functionality illustrated in
the Z-figurs.
Please do not reply and waste bandwidth and all of our time unless you have
specific test data to prove your response. Past history posts that do not
include backed up with actual testing ase just opinion and not worth
considering.
I will request the same courtesy from you and I've
cited the items of divergence/confusion above. I have
provided detail process and numerical data on every
experiment I've conducted. It's my intent to gather
the data we all need, everyone talks about but nobody
possesses or has shared if they do possess it. Toward
this goal, no amount of bandwidth is wasted.
Paul
PS: I do not want to start another often widening discussion. Perhaps I
should have remained silent but you stated you were out of town and I have
had a lot of experience including some from other groups (who in error)
make general statements that ND alternators require a light across the IG
and L connections. Further I have had the impression you have yet to test
any internal ND or any other brand alternator. This was to be done after
you had the test stand up and running.
The discussion will be no wider than necessary to
achieve an understanding of how internally regulated
alternators function to the degree that we can craft
the most universal techniques for using them.
I have witnessed and peer reviewed test setup and test results to support
the above statements. Only the conclusions have ever been document as I
felt at the time there was no reason to do more than I did. I simply am not
interested in trying to prove anything to anything just pass on real test
results that proved how the auto internal reg alternator can be safely used.
We can TALK about tests until you-know-where freezes
over but none of this talk has universal value until
the simple-ideas of the physics and magnitude of effects
are documented and shared. Critics of movies and restaurants
can wax eloquently about their favorite topics . . . and
some individuals find value in reading their words. You
and I are on the other side of the stove where understanding
exactly what and why ingredients go into a recipe for success
is critical to understanding.
Kindest regards,
Bob . . .
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 09:16 AM 7/10/2008 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>In the case of the ATC plastic devices, the data shows
>>http://www.egauges.com/vdo_mult3.asp?Type=Voltmeter12&Series=Cyber_Red&Units=E
>>. . . that you can probablyuse a 10A fuse in a
>>circuit
>that draws 10A continuously.
>
>The above link points to a voltmeter, not a graph of fuse performance,
>which I would like to see.
Sorry 'bout that. Wrong link on the clipboard. Try
http://aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Fuses_and_Current_Limiters/Bussman/
Here you'll find data on a large number of Bussmann products
including the ATC plastic fuses. In particular, note the
characteristics of the ANL devices. Those critters are REALLY
robust!
A review of these data sheets will reinforce the notion that
not all devices called "fuses" have the same or even similar
performance. Each product was designed to meet the design goals
for a particular task.
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: | Re: Nippondenso alternator question |
> THANK YOU for your very nice reply!!
>
> Please bare :-) with me as the data I have is long many years filed away
> and will be hard to resurrect a lot of it other than my conclusions.
>
> The results were so clear to myself and several other local peers as well
> as Eric (on the east coast) I simply pressed on. I had no intent to come
> up with a universal solution when the specific ND type was discovered to
> meet what my group felt was a reasonable recommendation. Low cost, small
> and light weight, readily available, and 50-55 amp output which fit most
> applications including LYC and most popular auto engine conversions.
>
> I will try to provide information to discuss one part at a time as this
> email includes a large range of subjects and can end up being 1,000 lines
> long and too long for others to follow. Thus it may take as many as 8-10
> different subject strings to cover each subject area
>
> I have specific experience (including test stand load tests up to 40 amps
> load) with several types of ND alternators which are different in several
> respects. Its clear to me that blessing all ND alternators as suitable is
> not true. I also have some experience with two brands of alternators.
> These were as I recall MI and HI brands??. I need to look up details as
> they had undesirable design features (at least to me) like requiring a
> lamp and or locking up. Also the reported failure rate in autos was of
> concern. I do not agree that the objective of one solution fits all
> brands/types is a reasonable solution but good luck. With my research 99%
> of internal reg alternators are ND and of the hundreds of types of ND
> available only a couple types are used in any quantity. Thus I settled on
> one brand ND and one type for general use. Today there is a second ND Type
> that is slightly larger and heavier that is 80-90 amp output that might be
> a better choice for the more complex OBAM being today.
>
> In any event its now my turn to start one subject at a time in replying to
> your comments and questions.
>
> Paul
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 8:50 AM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Nippondenso alternator question
>
>
>> <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
>>
>> At 06:45 PM 7/9/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>>
>> I agree that its been much discussed in the past however there are many
>> false and remaining incorrect mis stated comments in the past that simply
>> do not apply to the most common ND alternator. These false statements
>> remain in the past unchallenged but still remain not correct with respect
>> to ND alternators.
>>
>> Okay. I do appologize. Forgive me for assuming too
>> much. Please allow me to back up and start anew . . .
>
> snipped.
>>
>>
>
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: Nippondenso alternator question |
Now THIS I'm looking forward to, not with blood-lust, but just the
anticipation that we are going to _get somewhere_ as an OBAM community on
this lightweight IR alternator issue, with confidence and without too much
frustration. Many others, I suspect, are like me - not wanting to do the
lab research but certainly to understand the research of others, and waiting
patiently for a turn-key solution that works for our planes with a minimum
of fuss and procurement headaches.
Play nice, gentlemen. The students are watching :-)
-Bill B
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Paul <info@mtfind.com> wrote:
>
> THANK YOU for your very nice reply!!
>>
>> Please bare :-) with me as the data I have is long many years filed away
>> and will be hard to resurrect a lot of it other than my conclusions.
>>
>> The results were so clear to myself and several other local peers as well
>> as Eric (on the east coast) I simply pressed on. I had no intent to come up
>> with a universal solution when the specific ND type was discovered to meet
>> what my group felt was a reasonable recommendation. Low cost, small and
>> light weight, readily available, and 50-55 amp output which fit most
>> applications including LYC and most popular auto engine conversions.
>>
>> I will try to provide information to discuss one part at a time as this
>> email includes a large range of subjects and can end up being 1,000 lines
>> long and too long for others to follow. Thus it may take as many as 8-10
>> different subject strings to cover each subject area
>>
>> I have specific experience (including test stand load tests up to 40 amps
>> load) with several types of ND alternators which are different in several
>> respects. Its clear to me that blessing all ND alternators as suitable is
>> not true. I also have some experience with two brands of alternators. These
>> were as I recall MI and HI brands??. I need to look up details as they had
>> undesirable design features (at least to me) like requiring a lamp and or
>> locking up. Also the reported failure rate in autos was of concern. I do not
>> agree that the objective of one solution fits all brands/types is a
>> reasonable solution but good luck. With my research 99% of internal reg
>> alternators are ND and of the hundreds of types of ND available only a
>> couple types are used in any quantity. Thus I settled on one brand ND and
>> one type for general use. Today there is a second ND Type that is slightly
>> larger and heavier that is 80-90 amp output that might be a better choice
>> for the more complex OBAM being today.
>>
>> In any event its now my turn to start one subject at a time in replying to
>> your comments and questions.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <
>> nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
>> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 8:50 AM
>> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Nippondenso alternator question
>>
>>
>>> nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
>>>
>>> At 06:45 PM 7/9/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>>>
>>> I agree that its been much discussed in the past however there are many
>>> false and remaining incorrect mis stated comments in the past that simply do
>>> not apply to the most common ND alternator. These false statements remain in
>>> the past unchallenged but still remain not correct with respect to ND
>>> alternators.
>>>
>>> Okay. I do appologize. Forgive me for assuming too
>>> much. Please allow me to back up and start anew . . .
>>>
>>
>> snipped.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
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: Nippondenso alternator question |
At 10:28 AM 7/10/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>THANK YOU for your very nice reply!!
>>
>>Please bare :-) with me as the data I have is long many years filed away
>>and will be hard to resurrect a lot of it other than my conclusions.
>>
>>The results were so clear to myself and several other local peers as well
>>as Eric (on the east coast) I simply pressed on. I had no intent to come
>>up with a universal solution when the specific ND type was discovered to
>>meet what my group felt was a reasonable recommendation. Low cost, small
>>and light weight, readily available, and 50-55 amp output which fit most
>>applications including LYC and most popular auto engine conversions.
Understand . . . and from the perspective of
needing to design a product, one needs to
be much more specific as to the numbers that
appear on a bill of materials . . .
>>I will try to provide information to discuss one part at a time as this
>>email includes a large range of subjects and can end up being 1,000 lines
>>long and too long for others to follow. Thus it may take as many as 8-10
>>different subject strings to cover each subject area
>>
>>I have specific experience (including test stand load tests up to 40 amps
>>load) with several types of ND alternators which are different in several
>>respects. Its clear to me that blessing all ND alternators as suitable is
>>not true. I also have some experience with two brands of alternators.
>>These were as I recall MI and HI brands??. I need to look up details as
>>they had undesirable design features (at least to me) like requiring a
>>lamp and or locking up. Also the reported failure rate in autos was of
>>concern. I do not agree that the objective of one solution fits all
>>brands/types is a reasonable solution but good luck.
Not so much a dependence on good luck but a degree
of protection from bad luck. Too many of the dark-n-stormy-night
stories on electrical system issues demonstrate a gross lack
of understanding on the part of pilots and an unimpressive
demonstration of design goals on the part of TC aircraft
manufacturers for failure tolerant design. But given that aircraft
and medicine are probably the two most regulated industries
in our nation, we need only look to those to craft law to
understand why these industries are ham-strung.
Given the millions of alternators and many dozens of brands/styles
on the road that provide good service, it's not unreasonable to
suggest that an OBAM aircraft owner has a huge pallet of colors
from which to paint their electrical system. Risk for a bad choice?
Sure . . . but relatively low. Especially If we can prevent a bad
choice from becoming a safety issue.
Now, if any individual has a product performance report to share
with other builders that suggests a good value, that's fine with
me but outside my mission. I don't work in a venue where I can
recommend choices among alternators, switches, engines, tires,
instruments, upholstery materials, etc. But I CAN craft architectures
that minimize cost of ownership, weight, parts count and RISK.
>> With my research 99% of internal reg alternators are ND and of the
>> hundreds of types of ND available only a couple types are used in any
>> quantity. Thus I settled on one brand ND and one type for general use.
>> Today there is a second ND Type that is slightly larger and heavier that
>> is 80-90 amp output that might be a better choice for the more complex
>> OBAM being today.
An your selection for your application is probably the
ideal fit to your design goals. For customers to are
willing to pay my outrageous fees, I'm equally specific.
But for the folks who hang out on this List, I don't
want to close any doors and windows for parts selection
except where there is perceived increases in risk.
>>In any event its now my turn to start one subject at a time in replying
>>to your comments and questions.
Looking forward to a productive exchange of ideas!
Bob . . .
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: | Z-13/8 Revision P |
Thanks for the response, Bob. Actually, I was planning on powering my
EDM-900 from the main bus, but your comment suggests there there is a
useful advantage in powering it from the endurance bus after all. Thanks
for the heads up.
BTW, where can I find/buy Z-13/8 Revision P? The search engine on
Aeroelectric returns revision N and my copy of "the Book" is much older
still...
Thanks!
Lee...
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: Nippondenso alternator question |
Gee,
Has anyone thought to go to http://www.globaldensoproducts.com/em/a/
Root around and get actual information about their specific model
alternator from their library?
I got the info I needed on the specs of my aux ND alternator derived
from the 3 cyl Geo Metro.
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=192186#192186
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: Z-13/8 Revision P |
Try this for the downloads:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/
*Sam Hoskins
Quickie Blog <http://www.samhoskins.blogspot.com>
Quickie Website <http://home.mchsi.com/%7Eshoskins/index.htm>
**On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 5:30 PM, Lee Logan <leeloganster@gmail.com> wrote:
*
>
> *Thanks for the response, Bob. Actually, I was planning on powering my
> EDM-900 from the main bus, but your comment suggests there there is a
> useful advantage in powering it from the endurance bus after all. Thanks
> for the heads up.*
>
> *BTW, where can I find/buy Z-13/8 Revision P? The search engine on
> Aeroelectric returns revision N and my copy of "the Book" is much older
> still...*
>
> *Thanks!*
>
> *Lee...*
>
> *
>
> *
>
> *
*
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: Z-13/8 Revision P |
Try this for the downloads:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/
Sam
*On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 5:30 PM, Lee Logan <leeloganster@gmail.com> wrote:
*
>
> *Thanks for the response, Bob. Actually, I was planning on powering my
> EDM-900 from the main bus, but your comment suggests there there is a
> useful advantage in powering it from the endurance bus after all. Thanks
> for the heads up.*
>
> *BTW, where can I find/buy Z-13/8 Revision P? The search engine on
> Aeroelectric returns revision N and my copy of "the Book" is much older
> still...*
>
> *Thanks!*
>
> *Lee...*
>
> *
>
> *
>
> *
*
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: | Nippondenso alternator question |
Paul, just for grins :-) do you have a part number (industry or particular
brand) that you are recommending or suggesting as a good place to start? Or
a specific automotive application. I keep hearing the 50-60 ND is the one
but ,... Which one?
Thanks Bill S
7a finishing
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 12:29 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Nippondenso alternator question
> THANK YOU for your very nice reply!!
>
> Please bare :-) with me as the data I have is long many years filed
> away and will be hard to resurrect a lot of it other than my conclusions.
>
> The results were so clear to myself and several other local peers as
> well as Eric (on the east coast) I simply pressed on. I had no intent
> to come up with a universal solution when the specific ND type was
> discovered to meet what my group felt was a reasonable recommendation.
> Low cost, small and light weight, readily available, and 50-55 amp
> output which fit most applications including LYC and most popular auto
engine conversions.
>
> I will try to provide information to discuss one part at a time as
> this email includes a large range of subjects and can end up being
> 1,000 lines long and too long for others to follow. Thus it may take
> as many as 8-10 different subject strings to cover each subject area
>
> I have specific experience (including test stand load tests up to 40
> amps
> load) with several types of ND alternators which are different in
> several respects. Its clear to me that blessing all ND alternators as
> suitable is not true. I also have some experience with two brands of
alternators.
> These were as I recall MI and HI brands??. I need to look up details
> as they had undesirable design features (at least to me) like
> requiring a lamp and or locking up. Also the reported failure rate in
> autos was of concern. I do not agree that the objective of one
> solution fits all brands/types is a reasonable solution but good luck.
> With my research 99% of internal reg alternators are ND and of the
> hundreds of types of ND available only a couple types are used in any
> quantity. Thus I settled on one brand ND and one type for general use.
> Today there is a second ND Type that is slightly larger and heavier
> that is 80-90 amp output that might be a better choice for the more
complex OBAM being today.
>
> In any event its now my turn to start one subject at a time in
> replying to your comments and questions.
>
> Paul
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 8:50 AM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Nippondenso alternator question
>
>
>> <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
>>
>> At 06:45 PM 7/9/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>>
>> I agree that its been much discussed in the past however there are
>> many false and remaining incorrect mis stated comments in the past
>> that simply do not apply to the most common ND alternator. These
>> false statements remain in the past unchallenged but still remain not
>> correct with respect to ND alternators.
>>
>> Okay. I do appologize. Forgive me for assuming too
>> much. Please allow me to back up and start anew . . .
>
> snipped.
>>
>>
>
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: Z-13/8 Revision P |
At 06:30 PM 7/10/2008 -0400, you wrote:
>Thanks for the response, Bob. Actually, I was planning on powering my
>EDM-900 from the main bus, but your comment suggests there there is a
>useful advantage in powering it from the endurance bus after all. Thanks
>for the heads up.
>
>BTW, where can I find/buy Z-13/8 Revision P? The search engine on
>Aeroelectric returns revision N and my copy of "the Book" is much older
>still...
>
>Thanks!
Z-figures in the book are often outdated before the ink
is dry. The very latest drawings are available on the
website at
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/
Revision 12 is in the works and will be updated at
that point . . . but may not stay "fresh" for long.
Bob . . .
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: Nippondenso alternator question |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Schlatterer" <billschlatterer@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 6:59 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Nippondenso alternator question
> <billschlatterer@sbcglobal.net>
>
> Paul, just for grins :-) do you have a part number (industry or particular
> brand) that you are recommending or suggesting as a good place to start?
> Or
> a specific automotive application. I keep hearing the 50-60 ND is the one
> but ,... Which one?
>
> Thanks Bill S
> 7a finishing
>
That will be a part of the discussion. I must find my notes from about 3
computers back as its been years since I did my work. Actually it was in two
different studies several years apart, the first around 15 years ago.
Its one of several ND small frame 55-60 amp. units. It will be several days
at least to find the old files unless I am lucky. more recently I found an
80 +/- alternator that was slightly larger that otherwise appeared to have
the same regulator installed for the more electrically demanding aircraft.
The industry uses the "Lester# system" to uniquely identify every variation
of each alternator and there are thousands of numbers. Part of the selection
process is availability of the alternator incase of a failure out of town
and the one I selected is still in stock or overnight most anywhere in 3
versions . Barely rebuilt, mostly rebuilt, and new.
Again patience please this discussion will take many days even with one or
more exchanges between Bob and myself each day and some days will be missed.
The end result should include the information to make an intelligent
decision of several choices based on your own needs.
Paul
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: | Internal regulator alternator discussion |
I hope that everyone can hold off on questions until the discussion
reaches that specific subject.
On the other hand I welcome questions etc on the specific subject
currently being discussed. This will allow Bob and I to spend our time
in information exchange more efficiently and eventually everyone's
questions will be addressed.
In my case I must try and find the hard disk and files of PIX etc from
years ago to provide the details Bob wants (and needs) to evaluate what
I tested as well as researched starting in the first 1/2 of 1990. I do
have the hard drives but they must be installed in USB cases and
searched. Also a lot of the data was never documented beyond pencil
notes and marked Polorads etc scope screen photographs. At the time my
conclusions were accepted by my posts on other groups and Eric for one
started selling some parts to support the conclusions. The end result
was there was no pressing reason to go further in spending the time to
produce an engineering level report. I had other things to do and I was
not selling any thing based on the results.
I expect it will take the rest of this month to complete the discussion
and have agreements and disagreements defined. At that time hopefully
everyone can have the information required to decide what alternator etc
is right for his own OBAM electrical system.
Paul
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! --
|