AeroElectric-List Digest Archive

Sat 07/26/08


Total Messages Posted: 16



Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 01:17 AM - Stick wiring cable (Pascal GROELL)
     2. 04:37 AM - Re: Stick wiring cable (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
     3. 05:56 AM - Re: Stick wiring cable (Charlie England)
     4. 08:59 AM - Re: Stick wiring cable (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
     5. 09:04 AM - DIY large radius layout compass (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
     6. 09:38 AM - Re: Stick wiring cable (Charlie England)
     7. 09:48 AM - Re: Stick wiring cable (Pascal GROELL)
     8. 10:44 AM - Re: Stick wiring cable (Dj Merrill)
     9. 12:43 PM - Connectors for trim servos? (Ralph Finch)
    10. 01:34 PM - Re: Connectors for trim servos? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
    11. 03:36 PM - Re: IR to ER alternator  ()
    12. 03:36 PM - Re: IR to ER alternator mod ()
    13. 05:42 PM - Re: recommendations for building a 24V battery? (D Wysong)
    14. 08:09 PM - Re: Re: IR to ER alternator mod (Kelly McMullen)
    15. 08:38 PM - Re: Re: IR to ER alternator  (raymondj)
    16. 08:40 PM - Re: IR to ER alternator  (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
    Time: 01:17:07 AM PST US
    From: "Pascal GROELL" <pgroell@yahoo.fr>
    Subject: Stick wiring cable
    Hello all, While rummaging through my household cables, I found some Ethernet cable I used to install a network at my home. This looks like an 8 wires, color coded, 24 AWG cable (it's also shielded). Would there be any drawbacks using this cable to wire my stickgrip from grip to a connector (probably D-SUB) at the base of the stick? Thanks for your input. Pascal GROELL RV-7A (near Paris, France) www.notreavion.net


    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
    Time: 04:37:04 AM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
    Subject: Re: Stick wiring cable
    At 10:12 AM 7/26/2008 +0200, you wrote: >Hello all, > >While rummaging through my household cables, I found some Ethernet cable I >used to install a network at my home. > >This looks like an 8 wires, color coded, 24 AWG cable (it s also >shielded). Would there be any drawbacks using this cable to wire my >stickgrip from grip to a connector (probably D-SUB) at the base of the stick? > >Thanks for your input. Most Ethernet cable is solid strands of wire. It's not a wire designed for flexibility or robustness under vibration. You could give it a try. It might last quite some time before needing a replacement. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------) ( . . . a long habit of not thinking ) ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial ) ( appearance of being right . . . ) ( ) ( -Thomas Paine 1776- ) ----------------------------------------


    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
    Time: 05:56:03 AM PST US
    From: Charlie England <ceengland@bellsouth.net>
    Subject: Re: Stick wiring cable
    Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > <nuckolls.bob@cox.net> > > At 10:12 AM 7/26/2008 +0200, you wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> While rummaging through my household cables, I found some Ethernet >> cable I used to install a network at my home. >> >> This looks like an 8 wires, color coded, 24 AWG cable (it s also >> shielded). Would there be any drawbacks using this cable to wire my >> stickgrip from grip to a connector (probably D-SUB) at the base of >> the stick? >> >> Thanks for your input. > > Most Ethernet cable is solid strands of wire. > It's not a wire designed for flexibility or > robustness under vibration. You could give it > a try. It might last quite some time before > needing a replacement. > > Bob . . . Consider cutting up one of the off-the-shelf ethernet patch cables. They should be stranded. The most flexible & durable stuff I've ever seen that's easy to find is regular old telephone patch cord, but terminating it with anything other than the standard displacement-type RG connectors can be a problem. Charlie


    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
    Time: 08:59:14 AM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
    Subject: Re: Stick wiring cable
    >>>While rummaging through my household cables, I found some Ethernet cable >>>I used to install a network at my home. >>> >>>This looks like an 8 wires, color coded, 24 AWG cable (it s also >>>shielded). Would there be any drawbacks using this cable to wire my >>>stickgrip from grip to a connector (probably D-SUB) at the base of the stick? >>> >>>Thanks for your input. >> >> Most Ethernet cable is solid strands of wire. >> It's not a wire designed for flexibility or >> robustness under vibration. You could give it >> a try. It might last quite some time before >> needing a replacement. >> >> Bob . . . > >Consider cutting up one of the off-the-shelf ethernet patch cables. They >should be stranded. I did not know that. Thanks! I've got some laying around here somewhere that I'll investigate that condition. Good to know. 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
    Time: 09:04:28 AM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
    Subject: DIY large radius layout compass
    A few years ago when the digital calipers became really inexpensive at H.F., I converted a pair to a very accurate tram-point compass and layout tool. A few days ago I needed to cut out a nice circle from a chunk of laminated flooring and my little 6" calipers cum compass were too small for the task. While visiting H.F. for some sanding disks yesterday, I spotted a 24" aluminum caliper for $10 that solved my problem. With a couple of small drills, some JB Weld and few minutes of time, I converted the HF 96509 calipers to a handy large radius compass: http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Layout_and_Measurement/Large_Radius_Layout_Compass.jpg The stationary leg of these calipers is held onto the rule with set screws. After the JB Weld is set, you can re-calibrate the point-to-point distance by repositioning the stationary leg. 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
    Time: 09:38:19 AM PST US
    From: Charlie England <ceengland@bellsouth.net>
    Subject: Re: Stick wiring cable
    Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > <nuckolls.bob@cox.net> > > >>>> While rummaging through my household cables, I found some Ethernet >>>> cable I used to install a network at my home. >>>> >>>> This looks like an 8 wires, color coded, 24 AWG cable (it s also >>>> shielded). Would there be any drawbacks using this cable to wire my >>>> stickgrip from grip to a connector (probably D-SUB) at the base of >>>> the stick? >>>> >>>> Thanks for your input. >>> >>> Most Ethernet cable is solid strands of wire. >>> It's not a wire designed for flexibility or >>> robustness under vibration. You could give it >>> a try. It might last quite some time before >>> needing a replacement. >>> >>> Bob . . . >> >> Consider cutting up one of the off-the-shelf ethernet patch cables. >> They should be stranded. > > I did not know that. Thanks! I've got some laying > around here somewhere that I'll investigate that > condition. Good to know. > > Bob . . . Uhh... I hedged a bit with the 'should' in the previous post. Here's a link to the Belden products. Some are solid, some are stranded. The better patch cables are flexible enough that it's hard to believe that they have 8 solid conductors, but it's worth checking. http://www.belden.com/07Markets/07_Industrial/07_Industrial_Products/Industrial_Ethernet_Cable.cfm#ethernet Charlie


    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
    Time: 09:48:49 AM PST US
    From: "Pascal GROELL" <pgroell@yahoo.fr>
    Subject: Stick wiring cable
    Hello, My cable is indeed stranded, I'll count the strands next time I'm in the workshop. Thanks Best regards Pascal > -----Message d'origine----- > De: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner- > aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] De la part de Robert L. > Nuckolls, III > Envoy: samedi 26 juillet 2008 17:53 > : aeroelectric-list@matronics.com > Objet: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stick wiring cable > > <nuckolls.bob@cox.net> > > > >>>While rummaging through my household cables, I found some Ethernet > cable > >>>I used to install a network at my home. > >>> > >>>This looks like an 8 wires, color coded, 24 AWG cable (it s also > >>>shielded). Would there be any drawbacks using this cable to wire my > >>>stickgrip from grip to a connector (probably D-SUB) at the base of > the stick? > >>> > >>>Thanks for your input. > >> > >> Most Ethernet cable is solid strands of wire. > >> It's not a wire designed for flexibility or > >> robustness under vibration. You could give it > >> a try. It might last quite some time before > >> needing a replacement. > >> > >> Bob . . . > > > >Consider cutting up one of the off-the-shelf ethernet patch cables. > They > >should be stranded. > > I did not know that. Thanks! I've got some laying > around here somewhere that I'll investigate that > condition. Good to know. > > Bob . . . > > ----------------------------------------) > ( . . . a long habit of not thinking ) > ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial ) > ( appearance of being right . . . ) > ( ) > ( -Thomas Paine 1776- ) > ---------------------------------------- > > > >


    Message 8


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • PREVIOUS
  • Skip to PREVIOUS Message
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 10:44:34 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Stick wiring cable
    From: Dj Merrill <deej@deej.net>
    Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > Most Ethernet cable is solid strands of wire. > It's not a wire designed for flexibility or > robustness under vibration. You could give it > a try. It might last quite some time before > needing a replacement. Often ethernet cable intended for building wiring is solid, but that destined for patch cables is stranded. If it is a roll of cable, the side of the box/spindle should say on it which type it is, otherwise just cut a piece of the wire apart and look at it. In my experience you have about a 50/50 chance of it being either. -Dj -- Dj Merrill Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 http://deej.net/sportsman/ "Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005


    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
    Time: 12:43:33 PM PST US
    From: "Ralph Finch" <rgf@dcn.davis.ca.us>
    Subject: Connectors for trim servos?
    Real basic question: I need to connect the wires (2 power, 3 indicator, 24 or 26 gage?) coming from Ray Allen trim servos to a removable connector. What's appropriate? D connector, molex, something else? Thanks, Ralph Finch


    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
    Time: 01:34:10 PM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
    Subject: Re: Connectors for trim servos?
    At 12:35 PM 7/26/2008 -0700, you wrote: > >Real basic question: I need to connect the wires (2 power, 3 indicator, 24 >or 26 gage?) coming from Ray Allen trim servos to a removable connector. >What's appropriate? D connector, molex, something else? > >Thanks, >Ralph Finch Here's one of several dozen alternatives. http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/macservo/macservo.html Bob . . . ----------------------------------------) ( . . . a long habit of not thinking ) ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial ) ( appearance of being right . . . ) ( ) ( -Thomas Paine 1776- ) ----------------------------------------


    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
    Time: 03:36:02 PM PST US
    From: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
    Subject: Re: IR to ER alternator
    Bob: I didn't do ANYTHING to deserve your demand for me to "go away". It's just not going to happen. I have not engaged you or said one word about you. Please stop harassing me. I didn't say anything wrong technically, personally or controversial in any way. Your comments are not constructive and just mean Sir. I replied to a Gents post asking for opinions on "IR to ER Mod" that I knew about, having done this mod on a friends alternator. It's not about YOU. It is about converting IR to ER alternator mod. Do you have any comment about the IR to ER alternator mods? If not what is the problem? I DID suggest he consider using the IR ND alternator as it was designed, leave it alone, as is with out chopping it all up, spending more time and money on the modification and an ER. Is that a problem? Using IR is a valid consideration. It saves cost, hassle, retains the thermal protection that IR's have, which ER's don't have. Why butcher a 2008 alternator back to the 1970's? I talked to Matt about this situation with you. I agreed not to argue with you. You are out of line here, accusing me of saying I called anyone a liar is a total miss representation of what I wrote........ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I did not call you or any one a liar. In the PAST any negative story about IR alternators was accepted and repeated with out any challenge on this forum. I read them. There was no lie, just classic hanger flying. I'm happy to say that the reports of service issues are more factual now. However BOB you say you are all about Science. As I read about these stories of OV with IR I was concerned (because I fly with one). I also questioned the vagueness of the stories. I knew these alternators are very reliable on my plane and others, Lexus, Acura, Honda, tractors and forklifts. The stories did not make sense. What does the electronics on a Lexus cost? Auto manufactures have a vested interest to avoid OV. This is not new. Stories of IR alternators allegedly destroying $30,000 panels where void of any details, facts: type / model of alternator, person, place, type of plane, N-number, what failed and why? That's not scientific is it Bob. As the moderator Bob you let them go with out challenge, and as a self proclaimed man of "Science", that lack of evidence or data did not bother you? If I said something as unsubstantiated as B&C regulators destroyed a friend of a friend's plane, you would yell bloody hell for absolute proof. You can't go on hearsay and rumor. However in the last two years since I started to question it, reports are better. You go with what you know, but let us "experimental" aircraft builders experiment and explore improving IR. What skin is it off your nose? Bob, I do a "REPEATABLE TEST" every time I fly my airplane with an IR alternator, sometimes near FL180. Me and my flying mates individually have as much as 15 years and many 1000's of hours of trouble free IR alternator ops each, in kit planes. The results of my repeatable IR test are always the same, awesome! How may kit planes have you built and how many hours do you fly a month? I am not saying you don't know what you're talking about. I am saying I have had very good experience with IR alternators as a builder & pilot, that's all. My interest is in improving the adaptation, installation and operation of IR alternators (ND in particular) in little planes. You a You take one word I say and make it 100% guarantee? No Bob, that's a silly thing to say. You take something I or others say to ridiculous extremes to discredit. It's not going to work Bob. Of the reports of OV with IR ND's where the pilot was able to note the voltage, 16-17 volts is common, but some times its less, some times it must have been more. Unfortunately not all pilots are able to note the actual voltage. In 2 - 3 yrs of really taking a hard look at IR, talking to pilots, manufactures and reading the web, following up with emails to get more detailed info, I found two cases where damage happened from an OV. Keep in mind the vast number of IR units in service. One was pilot induced & the problem was ignored, as he flew around for awhile. Another case was an actual "lose screw". Stuff does happen. I found some issues, and mitigating factors like improper installation and pilot operation, as well as poor quality rebuilds or aftermarket parts. I am just getting the word out. Bob can you give me a 100% guarantee of failure free operation (in writing) follow all your suggestions? "vary rare" - Sorry for the lack of specific statistics and MTBF (mean time between failures). BTW you don't have MTBF data for airplane alternators with ER. You don't. ******************************************************* I don't see the statistics showing IR Alts are prone to catastrophic OV failure (but it can happen). However if installed and operated properly the "statistics" are good. Depending on the cost of your panel EXTRA OV protection may be a wise idea for peace of mind. Some may choose to install MOV's (varistor) on individual circuits to protect them from transients, with CB's so you can reset. Bob calls that the shotgun approach, I call it redundancy. ******************************************************* What is "Modern"? technology developed in say last two decades, use of IC chips with multi control functions and fault detection and warning. If its based on 1970's or older technology (ER) its not modern. ER technology is not being developed or progressing in the auto industry; all the development is for IR, except in large marine or industrial applications, where paralleling and central control is involved. Jet and turboprop is a different, starter/generators or constant speed drive AC with inverters & battery chargers for DC. GA aircraft are stuck some of the most gosh awful alternators and regulators ever made. The after market like Plane Power and B&C are correcting the poor GA aircraft electrical sys with MODERN alternators. They of course are stuck with ER because that is what was certified. There are 10's of millions of IR ND alternators going 24/7 world wide in cars, trucks, tractors and industrial equipment (and kit planes) with out issue. No OEM makes new ER alternators under 100 amps today. IR alternators are more common and easier to get in a pinch from auto parts stores. Try getting a B&C alternator or voltage regulator 1,000 miles from home on Sunday = good luck.. If you're interested in helping me improve IR for aircraft use, than you are welcomed to help, but please stop insulting me. I am not a threat to you. Do you think ER is the pinnacle and can not be improved upon? Do you think IR will always be a poor second choice? If the answer is yes fine, but its your preference. It is very hard to make a "Scientific" case for one or the other. They share 90% with each other anyway. Cheers George >Time: 04:27:01 PM PST US >From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@cox.net> >Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: IR to ER alternator mod >At 02:39 PM 7/20/2008 -0700, you wrote: >>Roger: I have seen that back a few years ago and >>studied it. I even talked by email to the Gent. >> >>If you are doing all this because you are worried that >>your internal regulator will go insane and melt your >>electrical system down, you are worrying too much. That >>story is way over blown and very rare. >Over blown? Is that between humongous and >gargantuan or just under bodacious . . . I forget. >But even your words "very rare" says the risk is >not zero. (WHAT? MY GOSH? YOUR CROW BAR MUST HAVE TRIPPED? YES RARE. LETS SEE YOUR ANALYTICAL STATS? IR ALTS HAVE ACCUMULATED MORE HOURS IN A WEEK (ALL VEHICLES) THAN ALL ER ALTERNATORS IN SMALL GA PLANES (FACTORY OR KIT) IN THE HISTORY OF AVIATION.) >> In the cases where damage was >>done the pilot did a few things to make it happen. >George, go away. You have ZERO evidence of >that and your accusation is uncalled for. >The evidence contrary to that statement is >solid and inarguable which makes your statement >tantamount to calling goodly numbers of folks >liars. (YOU ARE OUT OF LINE) >> Most >>failures of ND type alternator are usually not OV but >>they just stop working. When they do lose stable voltage >>regulation they generally top out in the 16-17 volt range. >Maybe . . . but again, are you ready to offer >100% coverage insurance for the ones that are not >"generally" topping out at 17V? (NO BOB, WHERE IS YOUR 100% GUARANTEE? YOU ARE BEING SILLY. IT IS JUST AN OBSERVATION.) >> Most >>modern avionics can work on 10-30 volts all day long. >But batteries don't. Lights don't. Contactors don't >and how many OBAM aircraft are fitted only with >"modern" avionics . . . and exactly when does "modern" >kick in? 1985? 1996? (BOB BOB, YOU HAVE TO READ THE MANUAL FOR YOUR AVIONICS OR CALL THE MANUFACTURE, VERY SIMPLE. ITS THERE IF YOU WANT TO LEARN.) >>In the event of say an unstable regulator, lower RPM, >Okay, a fully fielded ND puts out full rated current >at about 4500 shaft RPM. When running at cruise >(2500 on engine) the alternator is spinning at about >4x that. So if we want to get the alternator to be >current limited to say 20A, we need to get it down to >about 1500 RPM which puts the engine at less than >idle. What kind of emergency operations procedure >is that? BOB YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT, THERE MY BE LITTLE DIFFERENCE, BUT LOWER RPM WILL LOWER PWR OUTPUT AT ANY RPM. ASSUMING VOLTAGE REGULATOR IS NOT WORKING, RPM AND LOAD ARE THE ONLY WAYS TO CONTROL VOLTAGE. POWER VERSES RPM CURVE IS NOT FLAT, WITH RESPECT. IT DOES START TO FLATTEN OUT AT 7000 TO 8000 RPM BUT LOWER RPM = LESS PWR. YES IN FLIGHT ALT RPM IS ABOUT 6000 TO 8000 (3 TO 1 RATIO NOT 4 TO 1). YES "RATED MIN" POWER IS AT 5000 RPM (NOT 4500 RPM) BUT IT DOES INCREASE ABOVE RATED BY ABOUT 5-7 AMPS FOR HIGHER RPM. SO LOWER RPM DOES HAVE AFFECT ON POWER OUTPUT, ALTERNATOR 101. BUT YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT ITS SMALL AND NOT WORTH THE EFFORT, I AGREE. >>increase load (landing lights) and ideally you have a >>pull-able CB in the panel for you B-lead, pull CB, reduce >>elect load & land. No fear no dark and stormy night. >But assuming that you can pull a b-lead breaker >and bring the power back up, the alternator self- >destructs. YOU ARE DOING THIS BECAUSE ITS AN EMERGENCY AND THE VOLTAGE IS LOW OR HIGH ABOVE THE STANDARD SET VOLTAGE 14.3 - 14.5 VOLTS. WE ASSUME THE ALTERNATOR IS SHOT. YOU ARE NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE ALTERNATOR AT THIS POINT. IF VOLTAGE IS TOO HIGH, WHICH COULD POSSIBLY DAMAGE BATTERY OR AVIONICS, TO HECK WITH THE ALTERNATOR, PULL THE B'LEAD CB. THAT IS WHAT YOUR CROW BAR DOES. IF THE ALTERNATOR IS DEAD PULLING THE CB WILL DO NO DAMAGE, BUT MAY BE SAVE SOME SMALL PARASITIC DRAIN THROUGH THE VOLTAGE REGULATOR. MANUAL CB DISCONNECT AVOIDS ACCIDENTAL TRIPS THAT CAN HAPPEN WITH AUTOMATIC DEVICES LIKE A CROW BAR, WHICH CAN RUIN A GOOD ALTERNATOR. IT HAS HAPPENED MANY TIMES, TURNING GOOD ALTERNATORS INTO TRASH, OUCH. EVEN VAN'S AIRCRAFT BANNED THEM, OUCH X 2. NO OFFENSE BOB. **THE FIRST STEP** SHOULD BE TURNING THE ALT SWITCH OFF, THAN PULL THE CB (B'LEAD). THE ALT SWITCH (POWER TO IGN LEAD) MAY OR MAY NOT TURN ALTERNATOR OFF, DEPENDING IF THE VOLTAGE REGULATOR RESPONDS, WHICH IS AFFECTED BY WHAT FAILED. REGARDLESS IF IT SHUTS DOWN WITH ALT SW, PULL THE CB. YOU CAN'T COUNT ON THE ALT SW (IGN PWR) TO KILL THE ALTERNATOR. ALSO YOU SHOULD NEVER USE THE ALT SWITCH TO ROUTINELY TURN THE ALTERNATOR ON OR OFF WHILE THE ENGINE IS RUNNING, IT WILL DAMAGE THE ALTERNATOR. IN MY RESEARCH PROBLEMS STARTED IN SEVERAL CASES WHEN THE PILOT ELECTED TO PLAY SWITCH MONKEY AND CYCLE THE ALT SW WHILE THE ALTERNATOR WAS UNDER LOAD. IS THIS SCIENCE? WELL ITS MORE ANECDOTAL BUT RELEVANT & SCIENTIFIC OBSERVATION, CAUSE & AFFECT. I HAVE NOT DUPLICATED THIS ON THE BENCH BOB, REPEATABLY, BUT ITS A GOOD OBSERVATION. THIS IS MY CONTRIBUTION TO "SCIENCE". I HAVE DOCUMENTED THIS FAILURE. IF THERE IS CHANCE ITS A PROBLEM DON'T DO IT. FOR SOME REASONS PEOPLE LEARN ON A CESSNA OR PIPER (FAA APPROVED MANUALS) TO NOT CYCLE THE ALT SWITCH UNLESS THERE IS A NON NORMAL CONDITION. HOWEVER HOME-BUILDERS FEEL THE NEED TO THROW STITCHES THEY DON'T NEED TO. MAKE IT SIMPLE, ALT 'ON' WITH BAT BEFORE ENGINE START, ALT 'OFF' WITH BAT AFTER ENGINE SHUTDOWN. THIS IS HOW IT WORKS IN THE CARS IT WAS THESE ALTERNATORS WHERE DESIGNED FOR, ANOTHER "SCIENTIFIC OBSERVATION" OR CORRELATION. >Your advice is horse-hockey by the bucket-full >George. Go away. (YOU ARE BEING RUDE AND AWFUL) >>Also IR gives you a LO/Hi volt and fault warning light. >Which is only a warning light as far as anyone can >deduce from the lack of schematics to substantiate >any claims to the contrary. It does nothing to >actively shut down an alternator being driven by >a failed regulator. BOB THE FUNCTION OF THE IR ALTERNATOR INDICATOR LIGHT (LIKE EVERY CAR HAS) IS WELL ESTABLISHED, AND NO ONE SAID IT WOULD SHUT THE ALTERNATOR DOWN AUTOMATICALLY. BOB THIS INFO IS IN THE AUTO REPAIR MANUALS FOR CARS AND ALTERNATORS. I RESEARCHED THIS. YOU HAVE ASKED OR SAID THIS 20 TIMES BEFORE. THROWING OUT QUESTIONS TO RAISE DOUBT WHEN IT IS CLEAR YOU DON'T REALLY WANT TO LEARN, SO ITS JUST A WASTE OF TIME. YOU WILL NEVER AGREE THERE ARE NICE FEATURES WITH AN IR; YOU JUST ACT LIKE ITS ALL BOGUS SMOKE & MIRRORS. NIPPONDESNO AND THE ENTIRE AUTOMOTIVE ELECTRICAL INDUSTRY ARE IDIOTS, RIGHT. BOB I GAVE YOU A BLOCK SCHEMATIC OF A TYPICAL IC. DID YOU UNDERSTAND IT? IF YOU DON'T GET IT, THAT DOES NOT MEAN IT'S BAD? EVEN IF YOU HAD THE DETAILED ENGINEERING OF THE DIGITAL LOGIC CIRCUITS IN THESE IC CHIPS, WOULD YOU KNOW WHAT IT MEANT? THEY ARE COMPLICATED NO DOUBT, VERY SOPHISTICATED. IT IS MORE THAN TWO TRANSISTOR, DIODE AND A FEW RESISTORS. I SUGGEST BUILDERS INSTALLING IR ALTERNATORS USE THE INDICATOR LIGHT, AND ANY ADDITIONAL HI/LO VOLT IDIOT LIGHT AND VOLT-METER THEY WANT IF DESIRED. THE "INDICATOR LIGHT" ALSO ACTS AS A FAULT LIGHT LIKE TROUBLE CODES ON A CARS COMPUTER. IT DOES NOT GIVE OUT A CODE BUT WHEN IT ILLUMINATES, IT MEANS THERE IS A FAULT CAUSING THE VOLTAGE TO EXCEED SET VOLTAGE (HI/LO). YOU CAN EVEN HAVE NORMAL VOLTAGE AND GET THE INDICATOR LIGHT AS A SOFT FAULT. THE IC CHIP IN IR REGULATORS ARE SMALL MICRO PROCESSORS. YOU JUST DON'T GET THE FACT THESE REGULATORS HAVE FAULT/CONTROL LOGIC. THERE ARE CHEAP AFTERMARKET IR THAT ARE NOT MADE TO FACTORY SPECS OR HAVE AN IC CHIP, BEWARE. YOU WANT TO VERIFY THE BRAND OF REGULATOR. YOU WANT ONE WITH THE ORIGINAL ASIC DESIGN. ONE WAY IS TO BUY OEM ND PARTS OR VICTORY FROM TAIWAN. I'LL BE GLAD TO HELP ANY ONE OFF LIST SO BOB DOES NOT GET MAD. >. . . and oh yes, if the designers included ov warning >in their product, could it be that they also believe >the risk for their product to malfunction is not zero? >. . . or do you think they included that feature just >to placate me? >Go away George. I will not have you trolling this >List for acolytes in the Cult of the Infallible ND. >Go start your own List. >Bob . . . (I AM HAPPY HERE BUT THANKS FOR THE SUGGESTION. IF YOU WANT TO BE AN EXPERT IN IR ALTERNATORS YOU CAN HAVE IT BUT YOU DON'T SUPPORT ITS USE AS OF NOW.)


    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
    Time: 03:36:46 PM PST US
    From: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
    Subject: Re: IR to ER alternator mod
    >From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" ><nuckolls.bob@cox.net> >Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: IR to ER alternator mod >>Bob, Eric, George, JetPilot and the rest of the list: >>From the perspective of someone who has been >>following the list for a >>while and who is not as ignorant as most of >>things electrical nor of lists supporting the free >>exchange of ideas and, perhaps most important, >>someone who is not "tribal" in the least, I >>respectfully ask that Eric, George, JetPilot NOT >>go away. >Sorry. This is MY classroom and in this venue, >it's not a question of opinion and viewpoints. It's a >question of repeatable experiments and good >science. For you to say you use SCIENCE is just funny. It reminds me of the 80's Thomas Dolby song "Blinded By Science" where in the chorus he yells, "SCIENCE"! What do I use, egg salad? You are talking to people, including me, with engineering and science degrees. Any freshman engineering, science or medical student learns scientific methods in their labs. That is great you use science, but Bob what relevant facts do you bring with your "science". What repeatable test have you done regarding IR to ER conversions? Blurting out "repeatable test" and "good science" is a red herring, a non sequitur. It seem like you say it to impress. I have 1000's of flight hours behind IR alternators. That is service history. I run my "test" ever time I fly. Every time I do maintenance and check the brushes, I am doing a test and so are all my friends with IR alternators. I do have more advanced education in engineering, math and science than you Bob, as well as more flight experience and ratings. Advance math is the language of science and the absolute in problem solving and logic. Therefore I must be right since I have more education? Education is irrelevant ...... just like the repeatable test pronouncements are irrelevant. You can't win arguments but just saying "repeatable test". You can try but it doesn't really work. BTW before "repeatable test" you must determine if a test is VALID! You have to know what and why you are testing, what to measure and how to measure it. Than you have to validate the data, correlate with theoretical analysis or other known data. That is why flight test is done, to verify the analysis and component test. I do flight test. I flight test my IR alternators many times a week, as do 100's of other pilots with out problem. My IR alternator has been shown to be reliable, as many friends with IR alternators in their planes have shown. Matt wants a civil tone and contribution from many. I think that is what most members of the list want as well. They just don't want the fighting. We can spar but I rather not. BOB I HAVE INVITED YOU TO JOIN ME IN TESTING AND IMPROVING IR ALTERNATORS. WHY DON'T YOU? >>The 'I'm still right and you're still wrong and >>since you still don't agree with me let me >>explain it to you louder (or longer...)', which, by >>my reading, has been evident in both camps of >>the great debate seems to me to be not just >>disrespectful to the involved parties but also to >>the list-reading public in general. >This List is not frequented by the "public in >general" and the vast majority of the public in >general would receive no benefit from hanging out here. A "can't we all just get along" idea has the >effect of leveling the playing . . . field to average . >. . mediocracy . . .an environment crafted to upset >the least numbers of folks irrespective of their >viewpoints and opinions. I'd like to believe that >the membership of this List represents the top >slice of individuals struggling to build a better >than average airplane. Bob you may think I am the "bottom slice" but you don't know me. I have been involved in building planes both airliners as and engineer out of college and kit planes since 1985. One of my planes, RV-4, won a workmanship award at a major EAA fly-in. There's nothing mediocre or average about what I do, and have much in common with builders as a builder. I did go to college and grad school and paid for every nickel of it my self, by working. No excuses I am proud of that and should be. I also paid every nickel of my initial flight training through 5 instructor ratings and ATP, which helped me get my flying career going, three type ratings and +11,000 hours later and still counting. There's nothing mediocre Bob, I just bring different things ideals to the table as you do. > When you select a doctor, engineer, lawyer or >teacher, do you want one who has been trained >in the "everybody is right to some degree" school >of thought . . . or is the demonstrable best in their >respective fields? > George and Paul have demonstrated nothing . . . >yet they've wasted a lot of $time$ as we >attempted to make nice. Eric has demonstrated a >great deal of initiative and creativity. See: >http://www.periheliondesign.com/ Well that is just rude and untrue. I have helped many people Bob and I know they appreciate it. I know Paul has interesting things to say, which I enjoy, which helped me. The only one upset is YOU! And how do I cost you money? You mean by recommending cool gear that is not B&C, which you get a kick back from? Does that make you mad? Is that what it is about? OK I will not recommend Plane Power any more. It is a free country and free market. I have no interest in Plane Power , Transpo or Perihelion Design. I do want a rich base of knowledge and ideas from more than ONE person. I also want more than one vendor for parts and competition to keep prices down. That is the American way. THE BIG UNKNOWN? You claim there is no detailed info on IR to satisfy you, so you disqualify its use. You just don't want to accept the info. I really don't think more info would make a difference no matter what I show you. I don't think you understand whats going on in an IR. You are set on one idea. Which I am fine with but you seemed like you can tolerate anyone ignoring your advice. If they do they are either dumb or trolls. That is harsh and dogmatic. > . . . and he is trying. And I've offered to assist >his endeavors right here on this List. I'll leave it >up to those who choose to follow the >conversation to judge the value of investing the >$time$. > Please do not mistake confidence and >competence with arrogance and conceit. I'm >simply exercising control over the decorum and >quality of this activity I agree people can make their own minds up. Why are you afraid of other ideas? You claim other input is inferior? Why? More ideas the better. If your concepts are better they will shine. You have to trust people to have the brains to make their own minds up. I just want to help people that DO want to IR alternators. I don't want to sell them on it, only improve upon it for those committed to IR. No criticism of your concepts. >If your concerns are for making nice (no matter >what opinions might be offered) you'll need to >find another group that's more concerned with >making folks feel better than in helping them do >the best we know how to do at a budget they can >afford and technologies their skills and $time$ >can master. > Bob . . . Bob actually I think you are a little insecure. Bob every one agrees and recognizes you are THE expert, the MAIN contributor, but you are proving it all the time. Stop proving it, we all know and respect that. But respect is a two way street. Your last two post have helped me understand how you think and see yourself in this forum, WOW~! I get it. I'll try to say out of your way.


    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
    Time: 05:42:27 PM PST US
    From: "D Wysong" <hdwysong@gmail.com>
    Subject: Re: recommendations for building a 24V battery?
    > What are your battery-only energy storage requirements? The system will draw a bit over 14A worst case and I can shed as much as 4A without sacrificing functionality. My design goal is to keep the remaining 10A of "battery only" stuff alive (bus voltage >20V) for at least an hour if the alternator drops offline. > Does the system DEPEND on a battery for functionality? > In other words, would a failed battery contactor put > the outcome of the flight at risk? No, not as long as the alternator remains well behaved with the batt contactor open. BTW, our primary power source is a dedicated 28V 100A alternator (National Airparts N300) wired per the "Z" diagrams with a Zeftronics R25400 for voltage regulation and over-voltage protection. The architecture also includes a "filter" cap sized per Nat'l Airparts recommendations. Have I made a mistake in assuming that this system will remain online without the battery (e.g. - if the 28V battery contactor fails open)? This is something that we can (and will, unless advised otherwise) check out on the ground as part of a systems functional test. > What preventative maintenance program do you plan > for replacing batteries before they're incapable of > supporting battery only systems for the designed > endurance mode? Standard battery care/feeding is the plan (e.g. - battery tender when down, periodic capacity testing as part of the preflight prep after storage). Replacement will occur when capacity tests show that achieving the "1-hour battery only" target is not possible. > There's no objective data to suggest that any particular > brand of battery is the better value in terms of > $replacement$/service-hours. Periodic cap testing of the > batteries in service is the 100% foolproof way to guarantee > system performance irrespective of the batteries you choose > to try. Understood. It will be interesting to compare the results from the "cheap" battery tests against those from the $approved* battery that rides around in my C150. I have a hunch that the 3x cost doesn't necessarily translate to 3x performance/service-hours... ;-) Thanks for your insight, Bob! D


    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
    Time: 08:09:21 PM PST US
    From: Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com>
    Subject: Re: IR to ER alternator mod
    How incredibly arrogant and rude, George. I don't care about your ratings or your degrees. If you were so smart, you wouldn't be flying for hire. On listservs I run, you would be gone, right now, blocked from ever rejoining for your series of insulting posts and arguments you have been told are not welcome. Your lengthy post added zero, was nothing but self flagellation and insults. I ask that Matt block you from this list if Bob won't do it. This isn't a general list for debate, it is Bob's list to discuss his book and its recommendations. You obviously are too lazy to start your own list and rather interfere with list belonging to someone else. That is most offensive. The rest of us subscribe to discuss topics AeroElectric. We don't want to talk about you. I'll filter your posts out from no on, as I have no respect for your antagonistic approach. gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com wrote: > > > Bob actually I think you are a little insecure. Bob > every one agrees and recognizes you are THE > expert, the MAIN contributor, but you are proving > it all the time. Stop proving it, we all know and > respect that. But respect is a two way street. > > Your last two post have helped me understand how > you think and see yourself in this forum, WOW~! > I get it. I'll try to say out of your way. >


    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
    Time: 08:38:26 PM PST US
    From: "raymondj" <raymondj@frontiernet.net>
    Subject: Re: IR to ER alternator
    Go away, George. Raymond Julian Kettle River, MN "Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst." do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com> Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 5:28 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: IR to ER alternator > Bob: > > I didn't do ANYTHING to deserve your demand for me to > "go away". It's just not going to happen. I have not > engaged you or said one word about you. Please stop > harassing me. I didn't say anything wrong technically, > personally or controversial in any way. Your comments are > not constructive and just mean Sir. > > I replied to a Gents post asking for opinions on "IR to ER > Mod" that I knew about, having done this mod on a friends > alternator. It's not about YOU. It is about converting IR to > ER alternator mod. Do you have any comment about the > IR to ER alternator mods? If not what is the problem? > > I DID suggest he consider using the IR ND alternator as it > was designed, leave it alone, as is with out chopping it all > up, spending more time and money on the modification > and an ER. Is that a problem? Using IR is a valid > consideration. It saves cost, hassle, retains the thermal > protection that IR's have, which ER's don't have. Why > butcher a 2008 alternator back to the 1970's? > > I talked to Matt about this situation with you. I agreed not to > argue with you. You are out of line here, accusing me of > saying I called anyone a liar is a total miss representation > of what I wrote........ > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > I did not call you or any one a liar. > > In the PAST any negative story about IR alternators was > accepted and repeated with out any challenge on this > forum. I read them. There was no lie, just classic hanger > flying. I'm happy to say that the reports of service issues > are more factual now. However BOB you say you are all > about Science. > > As I read about these stories of OV with IR I was > concerned (because I fly with one). I also questioned the > vagueness of the stories. I knew these alternators are > very reliable on my plane and others, Lexus, Acura, Honda, > tractors and forklifts. The stories did not make sense. What > does the electronics on a Lexus cost? Auto manufactures > have a vested interest to avoid OV. This is not new. > > Stories of IR alternators allegedly destroying $30,000 > panels where void of any details, facts: type / model of > alternator, person, place, type of plane, N-number, what > failed and why? That's not scientific is it Bob. > > As the moderator Bob you let them go with out challenge, > and as a self proclaimed man of "Science", that lack of > evidence or data did not bother you? If I said something as > unsubstantiated as B&C regulators destroyed a friend of a > friend's plane, you would yell bloody hell for absolute proof. > You can't go on hearsay and rumor. However in the last > two years since I started to question it, reports are better. > > You go with what you know, but let us "experimental" > aircraft builders experiment and explore improving IR. > What skin is it off your nose? > > Bob, I do a "REPEATABLE TEST" every time I fly my > airplane with an IR alternator, sometimes near FL180. > Me and my flying mates individually have as much as 15 > years and many 1000's of hours of trouble free IR > alternator ops each, in kit planes. The results of my > repeatable IR test are always the same, awesome! > > How may kit planes have you built and how many hours do > you fly a month? I am not saying you don't know what > you're talking about. I am saying I have had very good > experience with IR alternators as a builder & pilot, that's all. > > My interest is in improving the adaptation, installation and > operation of IR alternators (ND in particular) in little planes. > You a > > You take one word I say and make it 100% guarantee? No > Bob, that's a silly thing to say. You take something I or > others say to ridiculous extremes to discredit. It's not > going to work Bob. > > Of the reports of OV with IR ND's where the pilot was able > to note the voltage, 16-17 volts is common, but some times > its less, some times it must have been more. Unfortunately > not all pilots are able to note the actual voltage. > > In 2 - 3 yrs of really taking a hard look at IR, talking to pilots, > manufactures and reading the web, following up with > emails to get more detailed info, I found two cases where > damage happened from an OV. Keep in mind the vast > number of IR units in service. One was pilot induced & the > problem was ignored, as he flew around for awhile. Another > case was an actual "lose screw". Stuff does happen. I > found some issues, and mitigating factors like improper > installation and pilot operation, as well as poor quality > rebuilds or aftermarket parts. I am just getting the word out. > > Bob can you give me a 100% guarantee of failure free > operation (in writing) follow all your suggestions? > > "vary rare" - Sorry for the lack of specific statistics and MTBF > (mean time between failures). BTW you don't have MTBF > data for airplane alternators with ER. You don't. > > ******************************************************* > I don't see the statistics showing IR Alts are prone to > catastrophic OV failure (but it can happen). However if > installed and operated properly the "statistics" are good. > Depending on the cost of your panel EXTRA OV protection > may be a wise idea for peace of mind. Some may choose > to install MOV's (varistor) on individual circuits to protect > them from transients, with CB's so you can reset. Bob calls > that the shotgun approach, I call it redundancy. > ******************************************************* > > What is "Modern"? technology developed in say last two > decades, use of IC chips with multi control functions and > fault detection and warning. If its based on 1970's or > older technology (ER) its not modern. ER technology is not > being developed or progressing in the auto industry; all the > development is for IR, except in large marine or industrial > applications, where paralleling and central control is involved. > > Jet and turboprop is a different, starter/generators or constant > speed drive AC with inverters & battery chargers for DC. GA > aircraft are stuck some of the most gosh awful alternators > and regulators ever made. The after market like Plane Power > and B&C are correcting the poor GA aircraft electrical sys with > MODERN alternators. They of course are stuck with ER > because that is what was certified. > > There are 10's of millions of IR ND alternators going 24/7 > world wide in cars, trucks, tractors and industrial equipment > (and kit planes) with out issue. No OEM makes new ER > alternators under 100 amps today. IR alternators are more > common and easier to get in a pinch from auto parts > stores. Try getting a B&C alternator or voltage regulator > 1,000 miles from home on Sunday = good luck.. > > If you're interested in helping me improve IR for aircraft > use, than you are welcomed to help, but please stop > insulting me. I am not a threat to you. > > Do you think ER is the pinnacle and can not be improved > upon? Do you think IR will always be a poor second > choice? If the answer is yes fine, but its your preference. > It is very hard to make a "Scientific" case for one or the > other. They share 90% with each other anyway. > > Cheers George > > >>Time: 04:27:01 PM PST US >>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@cox.net> >>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: IR to ER alternator mod > > >>At 02:39 PM 7/20/2008 -0700, you wrote: >>>Roger: I have seen that back a few years ago and >>>studied it. I even talked by email to the Gent. >>> >>>If you are doing all this because you are worried that >>>your internal regulator will go insane and melt your >>>electrical system down, you are worrying too much. That >>>story is way over blown and very rare. > > >Over blown? Is that between humongous and > >gargantuan or just under bodacious . . . I forget. > >But even your words "very rare" says the risk is > >not zero. > > (WHAT? MY GOSH? YOUR CROW BAR MUST HAVE > TRIPPED? YES RARE. LETS SEE YOUR ANALYTICAL > STATS? IR ALTS HAVE ACCUMULATED MORE HOURS > IN A WEEK (ALL VEHICLES) THAN ALL ER > ALTERNATORS IN SMALL GA PLANES (FACTORY OR > KIT) IN THE HISTORY OF AVIATION.) > > > >> In the cases where damage was >>>done the pilot did a few things to make it happen. > > >George, go away. You have ZERO evidence of > >that and your accusation is uncalled for. > >The evidence contrary to that statement is > >solid and inarguable which makes your statement > >tantamount to calling goodly numbers of folks > >liars. > > (YOU ARE OUT OF LINE) > > >>> Most >>>failures of ND type alternator are usually not OV but >>>they just stop working. When they do lose stable voltage >>>regulation they generally top out in the 16-17 volt range. > > >Maybe . . . but again, are you ready to offer > >100% coverage insurance for the ones that are not > >"generally" topping out at 17V? > > (NO BOB, WHERE IS YOUR 100% GUARANTEE? YOU > ARE BEING SILLY. IT IS JUST AN OBSERVATION.) > > >>> Most >>>modern avionics can work on 10-30 volts all day long. > > >But batteries don't. Lights don't. Contactors don't > >and how many OBAM aircraft are fitted only with > >"modern" avionics . . . and exactly when does "modern" > >kick in? 1985? 1996? > > (BOB BOB, YOU HAVE TO READ THE MANUAL FOR > YOUR AVIONICS OR CALL THE MANUFACTURE, VERY > SIMPLE. ITS THERE IF YOU WANT TO LEARN.) > > >>>In the event of say an unstable regulator, lower RPM, > > >Okay, a fully fielded ND puts out full rated current > >at about 4500 shaft RPM. When running at cruise > >(2500 on engine) the alternator is spinning at about > >4x that. So if we want to get the alternator to be > >current limited to say 20A, we need to get it down to > >about 1500 RPM which puts the engine at less than > >idle. What kind of emergency operations procedure > >is that? > > BOB YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT, THERE MY BE > LITTLE DIFFERENCE, BUT LOWER RPM WILL LOWER > PWR OUTPUT AT ANY RPM. ASSUMING VOLTAGE > REGULATOR IS NOT WORKING, RPM AND LOAD ARE > THE ONLY WAYS TO CONTROL VOLTAGE. > > POWER VERSES RPM CURVE IS NOT FLAT, WITH > RESPECT. IT DOES START TO FLATTEN OUT AT 7000 > TO 8000 RPM BUT LOWER RPM = LESS PWR. YES IN > FLIGHT ALT RPM IS ABOUT 6000 TO 8000 (3 TO 1 RATIO > NOT 4 TO 1). YES "RATED MIN" POWER IS AT 5000 RPM > (NOT 4500 RPM) BUT IT DOES INCREASE ABOVE RATED > BY ABOUT 5-7 AMPS FOR HIGHER RPM. SO LOWER > RPM DOES HAVE AFFECT ON POWER OUTPUT, > ALTERNATOR 101. BUT YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT ITS > SMALL AND NOT WORTH THE EFFORT, I AGREE. > > >>>increase load (landing lights) and ideally you have a >>>pull-able CB in the panel for you B-lead, pull CB, reduce >>>elect load & land. No fear no dark and stormy night. > > >But assuming that you can pull a b-lead breaker > >and bring the power back up, the alternator self- > >destructs. > > YOU ARE DOING THIS BECAUSE ITS AN EMERGENCY > AND THE VOLTAGE IS LOW OR HIGH ABOVE THE > STANDARD SET VOLTAGE 14.3 - 14.5 VOLTS. > WE ASSUME THE ALTERNATOR IS SHOT. YOU ARE > NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE ALTERNATOR AT THIS > POINT. IF VOLTAGE IS TOO HIGH, WHICH COULD > POSSIBLY DAMAGE BATTERY OR AVIONICS, TO > HECK WITH THE ALTERNATOR, PULL THE B'LEAD CB. > THAT IS WHAT YOUR CROW BAR DOES. > > IF THE ALTERNATOR IS DEAD PULLING THE CB WILL > DO NO DAMAGE, BUT MAY BE SAVE SOME SMALL > PARASITIC DRAIN THROUGH THE VOLTAGE > REGULATOR. > > MANUAL CB DISCONNECT AVOIDS ACCIDENTAL > TRIPS THAT CAN HAPPEN WITH AUTOMATIC DEVICES > LIKE A CROW BAR, WHICH CAN RUIN A GOOD > ALTERNATOR. IT HAS HAPPENED MANY TIMES, > TURNING GOOD ALTERNATORS INTO TRASH, OUCH. > EVEN VAN'S AIRCRAFT BANNED THEM, OUCH X 2. > NO OFFENSE BOB. > > > **THE FIRST STEP** SHOULD BE TURNING THE ALT > SWITCH OFF, THAN PULL THE CB (B'LEAD). THE > ALT SWITCH (POWER TO IGN LEAD) MAY OR > MAY NOT TURN ALTERNATOR OFF, DEPENDING IF > THE VOLTAGE REGULATOR RESPONDS, WHICH IS > AFFECTED BY WHAT FAILED. REGARDLESS IF IT > SHUTS DOWN WITH ALT SW, PULL THE CB. YOU > CAN'T COUNT ON THE ALT SW (IGN PWR) TO > KILL THE ALTERNATOR. > > ALSO YOU SHOULD NEVER USE THE ALT SWITCH TO > ROUTINELY TURN THE ALTERNATOR ON OR OFF > WHILE THE ENGINE IS RUNNING, IT WILL DAMAGE > THE ALTERNATOR. IN MY RESEARCH PROBLEMS > STARTED IN SEVERAL CASES WHEN THE PILOT > ELECTED TO PLAY SWITCH MONKEY AND CYCLE > THE ALT SW WHILE THE ALTERNATOR WAS UNDER > LOAD. IS THIS SCIENCE? WELL ITS MORE > ANECDOTAL BUT RELEVANT & SCIENTIFIC > OBSERVATION, CAUSE & AFFECT. > > I HAVE NOT DUPLICATED THIS ON THE BENCH BOB, > REPEATABLY, BUT ITS A GOOD OBSERVATION. THIS > IS MY CONTRIBUTION TO "SCIENCE". > > > I HAVE DOCUMENTED THIS FAILURE. IF THERE IS > CHANCE ITS A PROBLEM DON'T DO IT. > > FOR SOME REASONS PEOPLE LEARN ON A CESSNA > OR PIPER (FAA APPROVED MANUALS) TO NOT CYCLE > THE ALT SWITCH UNLESS THERE IS A NON NORMAL > CONDITION. HOWEVER HOME-BUILDERS FEEL THE > NEED TO THROW STITCHES THEY DON'T NEED TO. > > MAKE IT SIMPLE, ALT 'ON' WITH BAT BEFORE ENGINE > START, ALT 'OFF' WITH BAT AFTER ENGINE SHUTDOWN. > THIS IS HOW IT WORKS IN THE CARS IT WAS THESE > ALTERNATORS WHERE DESIGNED FOR, ANOTHER > "SCIENTIFIC OBSERVATION" OR CORRELATION. > > > >Your advice is horse-hockey by the bucket-full > >George. Go away. > > (YOU ARE BEING RUDE AND AWFUL) > > >>>Also IR gives you a LO/Hi volt and fault warning light. > > >Which is only a warning light as far as anyone can > >deduce from the lack of schematics to substantiate > >any claims to the contrary. It does nothing to > >actively shut down an alternator being driven by > >a failed regulator. > > BOB THE FUNCTION OF THE IR ALTERNATOR > INDICATOR LIGHT (LIKE EVERY CAR HAS) IS WELL > ESTABLISHED, AND NO ONE SAID IT WOULD SHUT > THE ALTERNATOR DOWN AUTOMATICALLY. > > BOB THIS INFO IS IN THE AUTO REPAIR MANUALS > FOR CARS AND ALTERNATORS. I RESEARCHED THIS. > YOU HAVE ASKED OR SAID THIS 20 TIMES BEFORE. > > THROWING OUT QUESTIONS TO RAISE DOUBT WHEN > IT IS CLEAR YOU DON'T REALLY WANT TO LEARN, SO > ITS JUST A WASTE OF TIME. YOU WILL NEVER > AGREE THERE ARE NICE FEATURES WITH AN IR; YOU > JUST ACT LIKE ITS ALL BOGUS SMOKE & MIRRORS. > NIPPONDESNO AND THE ENTIRE AUTOMOTIVE ELECTRICAL > INDUSTRY ARE IDIOTS, RIGHT. > > BOB I GAVE YOU A BLOCK SCHEMATIC OF A TYPICAL IC. > > DID YOU UNDERSTAND IT? > > IF YOU DON'T GET IT, THAT DOES NOT MEAN IT'S BAD? > > EVEN IF YOU HAD THE DETAILED ENGINEERING OF THE > DIGITAL LOGIC CIRCUITS IN THESE IC CHIPS, WOULD > YOU KNOW WHAT IT MEANT? THEY ARE COMPLICATED > NO DOUBT, VERY SOPHISTICATED. IT IS MORE THAN > TWO TRANSISTOR, DIODE AND A FEW RESISTORS. > > I SUGGEST BUILDERS INSTALLING IR ALTERNATORS > USE THE INDICATOR LIGHT, AND ANY ADDITIONAL > HI/LO VOLT IDIOT LIGHT AND VOLT-METER THEY > WANT IF DESIRED. > > THE "INDICATOR LIGHT" ALSO ACTS AS A FAULT > LIGHT LIKE TROUBLE CODES ON A CARS COMPUTER. > IT DOES NOT GIVE OUT A CODE BUT WHEN IT > ILLUMINATES, IT MEANS THERE IS A FAULT CAUSING > THE VOLTAGE TO EXCEED SET VOLTAGE (HI/LO). YOU > CAN EVEN HAVE NORMAL VOLTAGE AND GET THE > INDICATOR LIGHT AS A SOFT FAULT. > > THE IC CHIP IN IR REGULATORS ARE SMALL MICRO > PROCESSORS. YOU JUST DON'T GET THE FACT > THESE REGULATORS HAVE FAULT/CONTROL LOGIC. > THERE ARE CHEAP AFTERMARKET IR THAT ARE NOT > MADE TO FACTORY SPECS OR HAVE AN IC CHIP, BEWARE. > > YOU WANT TO VERIFY THE BRAND OF REGULATOR. > YOU WANT ONE WITH THE ORIGINAL ASIC DESIGN. > ONE WAY IS TO BUY OEM ND PARTS OR VICTORY > FROM TAIWAN. I'LL BE GLAD TO HELP ANY ONE OFF > LIST SO BOB DOES NOT GET MAD. > > > >. . . and oh yes, if the designers included ov warning > >in their product, could it be that they also believe > >the risk for their product to malfunction is not zero? > >. . . or do you think they included that feature just > >to placate me? > > >Go away George. I will not have you trolling this > >List for acolytes in the Cult of the Infallible ND. > > >Go start your own List. > > >Bob . . . > > (I AM HAPPY HERE BUT THANKS FOR THE > SUGGESTION. IF YOU WANT TO BE AN EXPERT > IN IR ALTERNATORS YOU CAN HAVE IT BUT YOU > DON'T SUPPORT ITS USE AS OF NOW.) > > > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com > 1:31 PM > >


    Message 16


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • PREVIOUS
  • Skip to PREVIOUS Message
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 08:40:51 PM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
    Subject: Re: IR to ER alternator
    Hmmm . . . got the message first privately but I see George posted a copy to the list too. Here was my sniped reply: At 03:28 PM 7/26/2008 -0700, you wrote: >Bob: > >I didn't do ANYTHING to deserve your demand for me to >"go away". It's just not going to happen. I have not >engaged you or said one word about you. Please stop >harassing me. But you keep dispensing the same bad information . . . sprinkled with enough good information to give yourself credibility. Just review the postings I've made in your honor sir and be reminded of the behaviors that illuminated your dishonor . . . http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/gmcjetpilot.html http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/The_Truth_about_Crowbar_OV_Protection.pdf > I didn't say anything wrong technically, >personally or controversial in any way. Your comments are >not constructive and just mean Sir. Soft regulator failures that limit to 16-17 volts are a figment of your imagination. Recommending pilot intervention in an OV condition by reducing rpm, added loads an hoping that a b-lead breaker is bad design and equally bad advice to a neophyte airplane builder that comes here to get solid information. I'm not mean but I am insistent. Your design goals are not consistent with good practice and you've repeatedly demonstrated an unwillingness or inability to carry on a detailed design review in which logic and science prevail. This is not an open forum and you're not being harassed. You're simply being asked to take your advice elsewhere. Probably 95% of the OBAM aircraft licensed each year have no features offered by this forum or my website. That's a pretty fertile ground George. Just imagine how many folks will be impressed with your secret existence, the alphabet soup out the wazoo behind your name and the confidence with which you dispense information about things you have not experienced and cannot demonstrate. Go away George. Bob . . .




    Other Matronics Email List Services

  • Post A New Message
  •   aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
  • UN/SUBSCRIBE
  •   http://www.matronics.com/subscription
  • List FAQ
  •   http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
  • Web Forum Interface To Lists
  •   http://forums.matronics.com
  • Matronics List Wiki
  •   http://wiki.matronics.com
  • 7-Day List Browse
  •   http://www.matronics.com/browse/aeroelectric-list
  • Browse AeroElectric-List Digests
  •   http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list
  • Browse Other Lists
  •   http://www.matronics.com/browse
  • Live Online Chat!
  •   http://www.matronics.com/chat
  • Archive Downloading
  •   http://www.matronics.com/archives
  • Photo Share
  •   http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
  • Other Email Lists
  •   http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
  • Contributions
  •   http://www.matronics.com/contribution

    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! --