Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:38 AM - Re: Rochester dual indicator (bouguy)
2. 03:32 AM - Re: S700 Switches (ianwilson2)
3. 03:35 AM - Z-20 Mag Switches (ianwilson2)
4. 07:50 AM - Re: Re: S700 Switches (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 08:01 AM - Re: Z-20 Mag Switches (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 08:39 AM - Re: Re: Cabbages and kings . . . (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 08:55 AM - Bridge Diodes Vs Schottky (galaxyone@juno.com)
8. 09:20 AM - Re: Re: Cabbages and kings . . . (Joe Ronco)
9. 09:49 AM - S700 switches (Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com)
10. 11:36 AM - Re: S700 switches (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 12:12 PM - Re: Re: Cabbages and kings . . . (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
12. 02:06 PM - Re: Re: Cabbages and kings . . . (Ernest Christley)
13. 04:19 PM - Re: Re: Cabbages and kings . . . (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
14. 04:38 PM - Re: S700 switches (Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com)
15. 04:56 PM - Re: Re: S700 switches (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
16. 06:27 PM - Over filling during flight? (LarryMcFarland)
17. 10:06 PM - Re: Re: Cabbages and kings . . . (Etienne Phillips)
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: Rochester dual indicator |
hi Bob ,
thank you very much ...
Guy .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=192802#192802
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: S700 Switches |
Thanks Bob, John & Bret for the replies.
However, in the light of contradicting evidence between the Micro SW vs Carling
and figure 11-11 of the Switch Ratings documents, my (limited by equipment) findings
are that the Micro SW vs Carling numbering for the fast-on version of
the 2-10 is right. I don't have any switches with screw terminals to check if
the contact numbers are transposed on these and are as per Figure 11-11 in the
Switch Ratings document, so maybe someone else could confirm/deny this.
Thanks again for all of your input.
Ian
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=192806#192806
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: | Z-20 Mag Switches |
Hi Bob,
I'm looking at Z-20K and I see that you have the 2 mag wires connected to different
terminals on the mag 2 switches. Is there a reason for this? To my somewhat
limited mind, it seems that the left ign as per the drawing is always on
in the off position - Please tell me what I'm missing here.
Thanks.
Ian
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=192808#192808
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: S700 Switches |
At 03:28 AM 7/15/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>
>Thanks Bob, John & Bret for the replies.
>
>However, in the light of contradicting evidence between the Micro SW vs
>Carling and figure 11-11 of the Switch Ratings documents, my (limited by
>equipment) findings are that the Micro SW vs Carling numbering for the
>fast-on version of the 2-10 is right. I don't have any switches with
>screw terminals to check if the contact numbers are transposed on these
>and are as per Figure 11-11 in the Switch Ratings document, so maybe
>someone else could confirm/deny this.
>
>Thanks again for all of your input.
This isn't about screw terminals vs. fast-on tabs. It's
about the fact that there is no industry standard for
setting the sequence of operations for right side vs.
left side of a progressive transfer switch. There is also
no industry standard for assignment of terminal numbers.
ONE possibility for transfer sequence is that adopted
by Microswitch (which is available in EITHER screw or
fast-on) and that adopted by Carling. Switches by
other manufacturers can adopt either convention. They
may mark OTHER numbers on their enclosures.
It's a simple matter to take your ohmmeter and deduce
how YOUR switches-in-hand operate. You'll find they're
either Microswitch-like or Carling-like for transfer
sequence. Once that discovery is made, then assign
numbers to the terminals according to the view in
11-11 IRRESPECTIVE of how the terminals may be
numbered on the actual switch.
THEN . . . numbers you've deduced by examination of
function will match the drawings in the Z-figures.
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: | Re: Z-20 Mag Switches |
At 03:32 AM 7/15/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>I'm looking at Z-20K and I see that you have the 2 mag wires connected to
>different terminals on the mag 2 switches. Is there a reason for
>this? To my somewhat limited mind, it seems that the left ign as per the
>drawing is always on in the off position - Please tell me what I'm missing
>here.
>
>Thanks.
>
>Ian
You've spotted a drafting error that has been in place for quite
some time. Good eye!
The corrected drawing has been published at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z20L.pdf
Bob . . .
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: Cabbages and kings . . . |
At 05:00 PM 7/14/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>
<snip>
>My suggestion is to encourage more independent invention and really clever
>products for the EA community. I don't ever intend to compete with Bob or
>JetPilot or Paul M., but I value all their opinions and contributions. You
>bet I do.
Hear hear! I really like to see what clever things are
being proposed!
>See the attachment if you want to peek at schematic Z100 (in process). I
>mention this because I am barely interested in having anybody tell me I
>should do it Bob's or Paul's of JetPilot's or somebody else's way.
No attachment came through . . .
> Some will want to use parts of Z100 in their design, and some will
> choose the rather dated but well tested design Bob has spent years
> working on (Watch out for those dozen crazy things!).
Okay, I'll bite. List ONE and ONE only of those crazy things.
Let's examine the philosophy, physics and application of any
SINGLE item you suggest is evidence of my psychosis. I tried
to engage Paul in a single-item discussion that I hoped would
illustrate and illuminate some of my most vexing questions in
the task of integrating automotive alternators to aircraft . . .
but no joy.
Bob . . .
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: | Bridge Diodes Vs Schottky |
Thanks Bob, sometimes it is hard to remember where the post started.
Henry
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Bridge diodes VS Schottky
At 09:18 AM 7/14/2008 -0400, you wrote:
By the way, it's a really good idea to trim the previous
postings from your reply unless you're referencing
specific portions in your response. Helps keep the
archives from being stuffed with repeat data.
Bob . . .
Do not archive
____________________________________________________________
Is your computer secure? Get the best Internet Security. Click Here.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mEWrQtNgHG8mb8AgPikDN
oMK6uPfxSY5MaHMT59Cqb2Zpv7/
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: | Re: Cabbages and kings . . . |
BOB: Here is the attachment. It was at the bottom of Eric's e-mail.
http://forums.matronics.com//files/power_protector_revb_161.pdf
Joe Ronco
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 9:26 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Cabbages and kings . . .
<nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
At 05:00 PM 7/14/2008 -0700, you wrote:
<emjones@charter.net>
>
<snip>
>My suggestion is to encourage more independent invention and really clever
>products for the EA community. I don't ever intend to compete with Bob or
>JetPilot or Paul M., but I value all their opinions and contributions. You
>bet I do.
Hear hear! I really like to see what clever things are
being proposed!
>See the attachment if you want to peek at schematic Z100 (in process). I
>mention this because I am barely interested in having anybody tell me I
>should do it Bob's or Paul's of JetPilot's or somebody else's way.
No attachment came through . . .
> Some will want to use parts of Z100 in their design, and some will
> choose the rather dated but well tested design Bob has spent years
> working on (Watch out for those dozen crazy things!).
Okay, I'll bite. List ONE and ONE only of those crazy things.
Let's examine the philosophy, physics and application of any
SINGLE item you suggest is evidence of my psychosis. I tried
to engage Paul in a single-item discussion that I hoped would
illustrate and illuminate some of my most vexing questions in
the task of integrating automotive alternators to aircraft . . .
but no joy.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
I bought my S700 progressive switches from B&C - they came with no
documentation of pin numbers, and I followed the pin diagram from the
Aeroelectric Connection. A couple things (like P-mag powercheck) didnt
work quite right, and on a hunch I eventually checked the switch pins
with
a multimeter and found that them to be transposed (left to right/right
to
left) from the figure in the 'Connection.
No cabbages here though - I didnt know a volt from an amp when I starte
d
building, and Bob's book and website downloads were a godsend. Bob has
been an invaluable resource for me - and at virtually no cost.
Erich Weaver
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: S700 switches |
At 09:46 AM 7/15/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>I bought my S700 progressive switches from B&C - they came with no
>documentation of pin numbers, and I followed the pin diagram from the
>Aeroelectric Connection. A couple things (like P-mag powercheck) didnt
>work quite right, and on a hunch I eventually checked the switch pins with
>a multimeter and found that them to be transposed (left to right/right to
>left) from the figure in the 'Connection.
Interesting! Can you give me a date code off an offending
switch? It will be 4 digits on the side of the switch immediately
under the "Mexico/Carling" stamp. The switch I used to craft
the published data was a 24th week of 2000 production. In fact,
I still have that same switch with the pin numbers marked on
it in silver magic marker.
If one dissects one of these things, it becomes apparent
that there is symmetry in the parts that would allow a switch
to be assembled "upside-down" which results in totally different
(but still serviceable) behavior. Now, the REALLY interesting
possibility is that Carling and Micro DO follow the same
progressive transfer protocol and the switch that I have
was the "bad" one.
I've been through ALL of the progressive transfer devices
from the BBC era (before B&C) and they conform to the configuration
published. Has anyone else on the list encountered this
condition? Does anyone have B&C S700 series progressive-
transfer switches on hand that are not mounted? Could you
check them against page 9 of:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Switch_Ratings.pdf
and see if any differences exist. You might tell us what
date code is on your switch too.
>No cabbages here though - I didnt know a volt from an amp when I started
>building, and Bob's book and website downloads were a godsend. Bob has
>been an invaluable resource for me - and at virtually no cost.
Thank you for the kind words. Your discovery is distressing
but perhaps not terribly surprising. The way these switches
are designed, flipping the mechanism is NOT prevented
by inability to assemble parts. Thanks for the heads-up!
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: Cabbages and kings . . . |
At 10:14 AM 7/15/2008 -0600, you wrote:
>
>BOB: Here is the attachment. It was at the bottom of Eric's e-mail.
>
>http://forums.matronics.com//files/power_protector_revb_161.pdf
Very good. Thank you.
Hmmmm . . . the LT4356 is a device designed to deal with
short term perturbations on the bus. "Surges" that are
typically tens of milliseconds. When used in the manner
suggested, is it intended to stand off a runaway alternator?
The data sheet says that to stand off a 150v surge, one
must protect the Vcc and SNS input pins with independent
limiting of applied voltage as shown on Page 15 of the
data sheet.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Semiconductors/LT4356.pdf
Even then, during the aberration output from
circuit in a 24v system is "clamped at 32v"
(16 volts in a 12v system). It doesn't shut down.
This means that equipment downstream remains
"ON" and powered at the upper limit of supply
voltage. The series pass device (Power MOSFET)
continues to dissipate energy at the difference
between input and output voltage at what ever
current the system is demanding.
There is a discussion beginning on page 10, second column
that speaks to the ability of this system to deal with
short term transients . . . with the limiting factor
being ability of the MOSFET to toss off heat.
What means is proposed to shut the runaway
alternator down before thermal limits of the
surge trapping system are exceeded?
Another point of interest. There's a series shunt
shown of 10 milliohms which would drop 600 mV at
60A for total of 36 watts. The proposed FET could
go to as low as one milliohm instead of the 12
milliohms cited so that dissipation could drop into
the 3 to 4 watt class. A series diode should not be
necessary . . . protection from shorted diodes in
alternator is generally provided by a b-lead fuse
or breaker.
The LT4356 does not seem to be suited for standing
off the uncontrolled runway. The schematic proposed
does not suggest a means by which an alternator may
be controlled . . . I'm presuming that the "new
philosophy" is that the artfully designed system
of the future does not demand control. I'm not
aware of how that might be accomplished.
Perhaps the description of the proposed product does
not tell all of the tale.
Bob . . .
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: Cabbages and kings . . . |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> The LT4356 does not seem to be suited for standing
> off the uncontrolled runway. The schematic proposed
> does not suggest a means by which an alternator may
> be controlled . .
Bob, what if you look at the N-MOSFET as an expensive fuse that
regulates while it is burning? Sacrificing itself to in order to save
my $3,000 EFIS? Digikey is advertising a 60V/60A N-MOSFET units for
less than $2 in lots of one. The LT4356-1 will probably go down with
it, but it still looks like it could save some expensive equipment in an
extremely rare event.
The 10 milliOhm resistor would work as the shunt that many builders use
to drive an ammeter. I'm assuming the diode is to keep the battery from
driving the LT4356-1?
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: Cabbages and kings . . . |
At 04:57 PM 7/15/2008 -0400, you wrote:
><echristley@nc.rr.com>
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>>
>> The LT4356 does not seem to be suited for standing
>> off the uncontrolled runway. The schematic proposed
>> does not suggest a means by which an alternator may
>> be controlled . .
>
>Bob, what if you look at the N-MOSFET as an expensive fuse that regulates
>while it is burning? Sacrificing itself to in order to save my $3,000
>EFIS? Digikey is advertising a 60V/60A N-MOSFET units for less than $2 in
>lots of one. The LT4356-1 will probably go down with it, but it still
>looks like it could save some expensive equipment in an extremely rare event.
It's not stated in the write-up but if the sprit and intent
is to isolate the ship's systems from every form of alternator
failure, then 60v devices wont get it. Until the field winding
opens up to terminate a runaway event, the b-lead on a Lycoming
mounted alternator can be well over 100 volts . . . for perhaps
a minute or more.
Of course, this presumes that there is no battery on line.
In this case, the battery will go into sacrificial mode
attempting to keep the bus from rising . . . and it does
a really good job . . . for seconds, not minutes. The
dynamics of detecting and responding to an alternator
runaway is pretty well understood . . . I'm certain
that I wouldn't attempt to control it with a solid state
device in series with the b-lead. Based on my understanding
of the task, I produced the document at:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Adapting_IR_Alternators_to_Aircraft.pdf
I've brass-boarded the design and all I'm needing
is a few hours testing on the drive stand to get some
measurements of currents, voltages and energies involved
in the process.
I'm skeptical of the design Eric has proposed . . .
but the test stand and ultimately the marketplace
are the gauntlets to be run.
>The 10 milliOhm resistor would work as the shunt that many builders use to
>drive an ammeter. I'm assuming the diode is to keep the battery from
>driving the LT4356-1?
The write-up suggests that the diode is useful to prevent
a battery from driving failed alternators (presumably shorted
diodes).
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: S700 switches |
Bob wrote:
"Can you give me a date code off an offending switch?"
Will do, but my pesky job may prevent me from getting to the hangar and
providing the answer until Friday or Saturday.
erich
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: RE: S700 switches |
At 04:32 PM 7/15/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>Bob wrote:
>
>"Can you give me a date code off an offending switch?"
>
>Will do, but my pesky job may prevent me from getting to the hangar and
>providing the answer until Friday or Saturday.
>
>erich
Understand. Do you have any of these switches "loose" i.e., not
installed?
Bob . . .
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: | Over filling during flight? |
Hi Guys,
July 14 Monday was perfect. I walked Toby our cat, then packed the
flight bag and went to the airport. After a lengthy preflight, the plane
was pulled from the hangar and I did a secondary walk around. All good,
the tower cleared my request for runway 5. I lifted off in a soft
downwind, but still short enough for traffic. I set course for Clinton
and climbed to 3000 ft. On the formerly flooded Mississippi, one could
see the river traffic moving again and a few recreational boaters.
Clinton airport was also visible 8-miles out. I passed over the airport
and entered downwind for 32. Good pattern work, but I flared a foot high
and just bounced the touchdown. I taxied in and parked to check
wheel-pants for damage. None was found, so after visiting with the FBO,
I taxied to 32 and took off, departed west. The header tank was less
than full so the left wing pump was turned on. Engine temps were good
for an 85-degrees ambient. EGTs 1370, oil 220, coolant 198, CHT 210 and
oil pressure was 48 psi. On turning south for the return, I called Quad
Cities approach, collected traffic and guidance and nearly forgot to
track the refill. The header was completely full when I turned off the
wing pump and centered the selector valve. I felt a chill down my spine,
because I didn't want to overfill. I worried that fumes from spilled
fuel could trace across the 601s non-laminar wing to the exhaust pipe's
back draft and turn the plane into a roman candle. I couldn't smell
any fuel within the cabin. On landing, I taxied back and shut down.
Inside the header, fuel was 3-inches from the cap and the overflow tube
was dry. This is the tank's max fill limit. Very relieved, I put the 601
back in the hangar and drove home with this tidbit chewing on my mind.
Nice flight, but the wrong kind of adrenaline rush!
The question would be, is it possible to use the EIS to read the full
point of a common rheostat type tank sensor to set an alarm point?
Or, should one consider a blinking light that constantly runs when
either of the wing pumps is running.
Or, does anyone have a good "reminder" that the pump is running or the
tank is nearly full?
Thanks again,
Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
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: Cabbages and kings . . . |
Eric M. Jones wrote:
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/leos_tale_967.pdf
Cute story... I don't understand it's relevance to the discussion
though...? Am I missing something?
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! --
|