AeroElectric-List Digest Archive

Fri 12/26/08


Total Messages Posted: 12



Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 01:48 AM - Z-14 extrapolation (Christopher Barber)
     2. 07:03 AM - Re: Is this scheme valid to save weight, add flexibility and reduce noise from fat wires? (Brian R. Wood)
     3. 07:04 AM - Re: Z-14 extrapolation (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
     4. 07:29 AM - Re: Is this scheme valid to save weight, add flexibility and reduce noise from fat wires? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
     5. 07:41 AM - Re: AGM Battery Charger (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
     6. 07:55 AM - Re: Is this scheme valid to save weight, add flexibility and reduce noise from fat wires? (Brian R. Wood)
     7. 07:58 AM - Re: Re: Anyone done Bob Nuckoll's CBA modifications? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
     8. 04:12 PM - Re: Is this scheme valid to save weight, add flexibility and reduce noise from fat wires? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
     9. 04:50 PM - Re: Is this scheme valid to save weight, add flexibility and reduce noise from fat wires? (Brian R. Wood)
    10. 05:25 PM - Re: Is this scheme valid to save weight, add flexibility and (CamLight)
    11. 05:42 PM - Re: Anyone done Bob Nuckoll's CBA modifications? (CamLight)
    12. 07:13 PM - Re: Is this scheme valid to save weight, add flexibility and reduce noise from fat wires? (Paul McAllister)
 
 
 


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: 01:48:10 AM PST US
    From: "Christopher Barber" <CBarber@TexasAttorney.net>
    Subject: Z-14 extrapolation
    Pardon my sophmoric ignorance on this question (sophmore = wise fool) but I have installed my Z-14 system in my Velocity with a Mazda Rotary. I am using two standard/stock alternators for this engine rated at 80 amps each. The Z drawing uses two 40 amp alternators and mostly 20 awg wire. Do I need to increase the wire size to perhaps 10 awg for my larger alternators? This is becoming an issue as after finally seeming to get my system to "work" mostly properly after having my EE friend come out and figure out some basic switch functioning that I missed I am having my two Bat circuit breakers trip whenever the engine is running and the crossover toggle is in the NON crossover mode. My friend, Blain (who formed and owns the company who supplies air conditioner units for smaller airplanes such as Cirus, Moody, Columbia/Cessna and now developing for the EXP market, namely Velocity) is very versed in electrics but was unable to stick around once this issue came up. He had already spent the day helping me get things right and had a family to tend to for the holidays. He did suggest that I may need to change the 5 amp CB to 7.5 but cautioned to find out more before going too much further by simply adding higer CB's ect. Back to my problem. As mentioned, when in the "crossover mode", ie both alternators acting together the CB's do NOT trip. However, when I put the toggle in the center position (from down) having the systems act indipendently, both trip. It happens only when the engine is running thus the alternator, well, alternating...so to speak. I did change to the 7.5 amp CB's but when I tested it tonight, they both tripped as well. My thought is since I used the 20 awg wire as in the Z drawing, but am using higher output alternators that my system is not up to the task and that I may need to beef things up with larger wire. Again, pardon my ingonrance...even though the fog lifts a bit every day. So, thoughts, concerns, insight???? All is appreciated. Thank you. All the best, Chris Barber Houston www.LoneStarVelocity.com


    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: 07:03:58 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Is this scheme valid to save weight, add flexibility
    and reduce noise from fat wires?
    From: "Brian R. Wood" <brianrobertwood@gmail.com>
    Speaking of smokng wires, one time when I was working on a certificated airplane, I inadvertantly shorted a #22 compass light wire. Almost immediately the cabin was filled with black acrid smoke. I was almost overcome. I ran out to the hangar door to get some fresh air. I still marvel at how much nasty material just 6 inches of tiny wire can create. I think the safest course is to avoid any smoking wires, either one foot or twelve feet, I think either one would probably kill you. Brian > Same question with Chlorinated Polyethylene jacketed welding cable: > Are you be happy with using Chlorinated Polyethylene jacketed welding > cable for the full run to and from engine to aft battery knowing if it > smokes, a dozen feet is in the cockpit (aeroplane is fiberglass)? How > about only 1 foot? > -- Brian R. Wood JH Manutencao Anapolis. Goias, Brazil


    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: 07:04:45 AM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
    Subject: Re: Z-14 extrapolation
    At 03:45 AM 12/26/2008, you wrote: ><CBarber@texasattorney.net> > >Pardon my sophmoric ignorance on this question (sophmore = wise >fool) but I have installed my Z-14 system in my Velocity with a >Mazda Rotary. I am using two standard/stock alternators for this >engine rated at 80 amps each. The Z drawing uses two 40 amp >alternators and mostly 20 awg wire. Do I need to increase the wire >size to perhaps 10 awg for my larger alternators? This is becoming >an issue as after finally seeming to get my system to "work" mostly >properly after having my EE friend come out and figure out some >basic switch functioning that I missed I am having my two Bat >circuit breakers trip whenever the engine is running and the >crossover toggle is in the NON crossover mode. The Z-figures are to illustrate architectures and are not intended to drive alternator size, wire sizes, fuse/breaker sizes. Nor are they intended to drive the selection of what devices are fed from which bus. >My friend, Blain (who formed and owns the company who supplies air >conditioner units for smaller airplanes such as Cirus, Moody, >Columbia/Cessna and now developing for the EXP market, namely >Velocity) is very versed in electrics but was unable to stick around >once this issue came up. He had already spent the day helping me >get things right and had a family to tend to for the holidays. He >did suggest that I may need to change the 5 amp CB to 7.5 but >cautioned to find out more before going too much further by simply >adding higer CB's ect. The very FIRST thing you do in crafting an electrical system is make a list of every device that needs DC power to function and you decide what that device's position is in the hierarchy of necessity. If it's functionality is highly desirable for comfortable completion of flight, then you have TWO of those devices fed from separate power sources. Design goals for achieving comfortable termination of flight after some component failure are outlined in Chapter 17 of the 'Connection. Next you select an architecture that mitigates the effect on outcome of flight for having lost one of the devices. Unless you plan on boring long holes in the most marginal kinds of weather AND you're planning on full-up capability of flight in IMC on both sides of the panel, it's not clear that the features offered by Z-14 is really all that useful to you. However, if you're already a long way down that path, so be it. Have you conducted a load analysis on your proposed system and filled out forms like: http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Load_Analysis/Blank_Form.pdf Fill out one sheet for each bus in your proposed design with the goal of deducing what your electrical system load are for each flight condition AND insuring separate power sources for systems that back each other up. Or you can take advantage of the load analysis exercises conducted by a number of List members and offered in Excel spread sheets. You can download those for study or modification to your needs in this director from my website: http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Load_Analysis After ALL the electrico-whizzies in your airplane have been identified, quantified and assigned functionality, then you pick fuse/breakers and wire sizes to accomModate the needs of each system. >Back to my problem. As mentioned, when in the "crossover mode", ie >both alternators acting together the CB's do NOT trip. However, >when I put the toggle in the center position (from down) having the >systems act indipendently, both trip. It happens only when the >engine is running thus the alternator, well, alternating...so to >speak. I did change to the 7.5 amp CB's but when I tested it >tonight, they both tripped as well. My thought is since I used the >20 awg wire as in the Z drawing, but am using higher output >alternators that my system is not up to the task and that I may need >to beef things up with larger wire. Again, pardon my >ingonrance...even though the fog lifts a bit every day. > >So, thoughts, concerns, insight???? All is appreciated. There are no positions of switches in Z-14 or any other Z-figure that would cause a breaker to trip. The cross-feed contactor is there to (1) PERMIT running both sides from one alternator should one alternator become inoperable and (2) using both batteries to crank the engine. But if the crossfeed is closed during normal operations, no untoward behaviors should be expected. One alternator (with the higher voltage setting) will hog the load but no breakers will pop. I'm not sure of the 20AWG wire reference. Wires this small are used in power distribution and control downstream of the appropriately sized fuse or breaker. The wire is selected to meet requirements for carrying current in that particular task and the PROTECTED by the appropriate size fuse or breaker. If you've strung a lot of 20AWG wire into your airplane without having evaluated each of those wires with respect to their current carrying function, then you've not conducted the load analysis exercise suggested above. 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
    Time: 07:29:25 AM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
    Subject: Re: Is this scheme valid to save weight,
    add flexibility and reduce noise from fat wires? At 11:16 PM 12/25/2008, you wrote: > >Hi Bob Thx. for the reply > >My mission is to electrically connect my aft battery to the upfront 914 >supplying it sufficient amperage and voltage, while being able to fit >wires neatly under door sill/fuse seam and allow routing required to >connect to battery switch (tight bends). > >Old style starter amp draw is stated at I think 60 amps, I have new style >that is a bit less. > >If I can save some weight in the process that is a bonus. > >Just a quick calculation of one #4 compared to two #8s for 5 meters of >wire would be a savings of a little over a half pound with two #8s. > >The larger the diameter of wires, the harder it will be to route under >door sill and allow for door centering pin receptacle to help keep door >from bulging. > >#4 Tefzel wire is .310" in diameter > >#6 EPDM jacket 259 strand is .332" diameter (#4 406 strand .380") > >#6 Chlorinated Polyethylene 660 strand is .370" diameter (#4 1045 strand >.420") > >It's true I could lap solder #6 welding wire to #4 Tefzel, but my interior >cover/conduit for wires would need to be larger to accommodate, and the >laps would be in an already tight area. Butt soldering #4 Tefzel to #6 >welding would approx. be the same diameter. > >I am not sure of the weight of welding cable compared to Tefzel, but I >would think it heavier. > >I have a Hobart TRT 250 TIG welder. The ground wire I suspect is EPDM >jacketed. It has cracks and splits and in general the jacketing is in bad >health. True it sees a lot of UV and for a TIG ground strap that is fine. > >Are you be happy with using EPDM jacketed welding cable for the full run >to and from engine to aft battery knowing if it smokes, a dozen feet is in >the cockpit (aeroplane is fiberglass)? How about only 1 foot? > >Same question with Chlorinated Polyethylene jacketed welding cable: >Are you be happy with using Chlorinated Polyethylene jacketed welding >cable for the full run to and from engine to aft battery knowing if it >smokes, a dozen feet is in the cockpit (aeroplane is fiberglass)? How >about only 1 foot? > >Knowing I need flexibility for routing at battery switch, want the >smallest diameter that is feasible, be able to provide reasonable voltage >and cranking amps, not take unreasonable risks of breathing noxious fumes >if wires smoke, not have much risk that aging wire insulation will crack >and split and be the instigator of smoke and loss of electron flow and be >of a reasonable weight. > >What would be your two favorite choices: > >****#4 Tefzel with #6 EPDM jacketed butt soldered battery and battery >switch ends? > >****#4 Tefzel with #6 Chlorinated Polyethylene jacketed butt soldered >battery and battery switch ends? > >****All #4 EPDM jacketed wire? > >****All #4 Chlorinated Polyethylene jacketed wire? > >****Two paralleled #8 Tefzel wire that doesn't need twisting? To use terms like "reasonable weight" and "this wire is heavier than that wire" without quantifying the overall weight savings. I think I'd run 4AWG welding cable throughout. The delta-weights are trivial and the effort to run multiple twisted, spliced, variable gage wires has a poor return on investment and looks pretty chopped and hacked when you're done. I've never understood the thought process that suggests smoke from one kind of insulation is preferable to smoke form another kind of insulation. When you get the first whiff of ANY smoke, all switches are OFF ASAP. I can't speak to your experience with cracked insulation on welding cable. The stuff I've been buying around here for years looks like this: http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Wire/4AWG_Welding_Cable_1.jpg I'm not sure of the chemical makeup of the two layers but it's a sure bet they're selected for robustness as insulation on wires that lay on gravel roads and get run over by dump-trucks. The fat wires in your airplane are not subject to great abuse by liquids, mashing, pulling, etc. They're easily observed during annual inspection for degraded performance such as cracks. The risks for using this stuff is exceedingly low, the benefit for low cost, flexibility, and ease of installation is significant. The idea that you're going to save a few ounces at most on total installed weight may be intellectually pleasing but probably won't produce practical benefits later. 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
    Time: 07:41:08 AM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
    Subject: Re: AGM Battery Charger
    At 04:16 PM 12/25/2008, you wrote: >Is a special charger needed for AGM batteries such as the Odyssey? >At <http://www.odyessy.com/>www.odyessy.com they recommend two >types, but I'm wondering why something like a Schumacher ><http://store.schumachermart.com/se-1010-2.html>http://store.schumachermart.com/se-1010-2.html >won't work just as well. ALL battery technologies benefit from the use of "smart" battery chargers that offer charge, top-off and maintenance cycles. The charger you cited doesn't cite this feature. A really nice, low cost Schumacher product sold at Wallmart is the 1562 series critters cited in http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Batteries/Multiple_Battery_Myths_A.pdf and illustrated here: http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Battery_Chargers/Schumacher_Chargers/1562.jpg Schumacher makes a range of smart chargers identifiable by the word "maintainer" in their descriptions. These include the SC600, SC1000, SC1200, etc. The idea that one should finely tune a plug-in-the-wall battery charger to the brand/technology of the battery is not supported by the way we charge batteries in our vehicles and expect years of service life. Consider also a variety of small battery charger/maintainers like: http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Battery_Chargers/Battery_Minder/ http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Battery_Chargers/Battery_Tender_Jr/Battery_Tender-Junior.jpeg 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: 07:55:12 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Is this scheme valid to save weight, add flexibility
    and reduce noise from fat wires?
    From: "Brian R. Wood" <brianrobertwood@gmail.com>
    Speaking of smokng wires, one time when I was working on a certificated airplane, I inadvertantly shorted a #22 compass light wire. Almost immediately the cabin was filled with black acrid smoke. I was almost overcome. I ran out to the hangar door to get some fresh air. I still marvel at how much nasty material just 6 inches of tiny wire can create. I think the safest course is to avoid any smoking wires, either one foot or twelve feet, I think either one would probably kill you. Brian > Same question with Chlorinated Polyethylene jacketed welding cable: > Are you be happy with using Chlorinated Polyethylene jacketed welding > cable for the full run to and from engine to aft battery knowing if it > smokes, a dozen feet is in the cockpit (aeroplane is fiberglass)? How > about only 1 foot? > -- Brian R. Wood JH Manutencao Anapolis. Goias, Brazil


    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: 07:58:44 AM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
    Subject: Re: Anyone done Bob Nuckoll's CBA modifications?
    >Well, I can give you the trail I followed. :-) >A friend had told me about seeing an analysis of the CBA but forgot >where. A Goodle search led to an archive of a thread here on, IIRC, >April 10, 2005. In that thread you provided a link to your analysis >in the Articles section of your site. But the document was no longer >there. This link though gave me the file name and my search led to >an individual who had the document available from their site. I >don't remember who. Okay, I found it. I don't know why it was taken off the website. It's still on the CDRom image of the website as it existed some months ago. I've put the article back up at: http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/WestMountain_CBAII.pdf >I completely agree. My analysis of two CBA's was pretty extensive >(43 page document) and led me to conclude that it shouldn't be used >at over 65W for long-term reliability and 86W to prevent the MOSFET >from exceeding its max rated operating temperature. I also found out >that the CBA's stock MOSFET isn't even rated for use as a load and >was susceptible to hotspotting and thermal runaway (resulting in the >MOSFET burning out) at well below the CBA's 100W rating when >discharging at higher voltages. > >A MOSFET change, over to the IPP048N06L, and a fan change were the >mods I made to bring the CBA's continuous power rating up to 106W at >up to 48V without worrying about exceeding any of the MOSFET's >specs. The extra fan also helped to keep the fuse and fuseholders >from dropping out of the circuit board too when discharging at 30A >or so. It happened more than once to me (and others) before we >finally found ways to cool the circuit board and fuse. Very frustrating. :) I had some extensive conversation with WMR. First with regard to the FET failure and a second attempt to discover the communication protocols on the USB connection that controls the CBA-II and then gets reported data back. I offered to craft an engineer's version of battery test software that would provide watt-seconds instead of amp-hours displays, conduct battery impedance tests, etc. I even told him I would share the software for him to use as I saw fit. He said similar plans were already in work in his facilities and he declined to share any information. The new software was 3 years in the making and still falls short of what I would like to do with his product. Further, the software reads the serial number of the specific CBA II and you have to purchase separate registered copies of the software to use each CBA II. I have three computers and two CBA II that I would like to use in interchangeable combinations but I'm not going to buy a second software package when it still doesn't do the things I would like to do and offered to him for free. 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
    Time: 04:12:58 PM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
    Subject: Re: Is this scheme valid to save weight, add flexibility
    and reduce noise from fat wires? Same question with Chlorinated Polyethylene jacketed welding cable: Are you be happy with using Chlorinated Polyethylene jacketed welding cable for the full run to and from engine to aft battery knowing if it smokes, a dozen feet is in the cockpit (aeroplane is fiberglass)? How about only 1 foot? >Speaking of smokng wires, one time when I was working on a certificated >airplane, I inadvertantly shorted a #22 compass light wire. Almost >immediately the cabin was filled with black acrid smoke. I was almost >overcome. I ran out to the hangar door to get some fresh air. I still >marvel at how much nasty material just 6 inches of tiny wire can create. > >I think the safest course is to avoid any smoking wires, either one foot >or twelve feet, I think either one would probably kill you. Without a doubt, the smoking of wires with insulation of any pedigree produces a most disagreeable atmosphere. But at the same time, let's made a distinction between small wires that are ROUTINELY protected and fat wires that are not. Small wires are very likely to smoke when driven by high current sources. FAT wires are generally few in number, installed with special care and more likely to burn away the faulting intrusion than to burn and become an emitter of smoke. Small wire protection is generally takes the form of breakers or fuses (I prefer fuses cause they're light, cheap, fast and take up minimum panel space on airplane). Had the #22 wire cite above been thoughtfully protected, the outcome of the experience would have been much less exciting. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------) ( . . . a long habit of not thinking ) ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial ) ( appearance of being right . . . ) ( ) ( -Thomas Paine 1776- ) ----------------------------------------


    Message 9


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • PREVIOUS
  • Skip to PREVIOUS Message
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 04:50:16 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Is this scheme valid to save weight, add flexibility
    and reduce noise from fat wires?
    From: "Brian R. Wood" <brianrobertwood@gmail.com>
    Yep, you are right about that. Small wire=high-resistance=heat which leads to smoke. How hot would a run of #4 get if it were shorted out (batt+ to ground)? Would it smoke the insulation? Brian in Brazil Em Fri, 26 Dec 2008 22:10:55 -0200, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> escreveu: >> I think the safest course is to avoid any smoking wires, either one foot >> or twelve feet, I think either one would probably kill you. > > Without a doubt, the smoking of wires with insulation > of any pedigree produces a most disagreeable atmosphere. > But at the same time, let's made a distinction between small > wires that are ROUTINELY protected and fat wires that are > not. Small wires are very likely to smoke when driven by > high current sources. FAT wires are generally few in number, > installed with special care and more likely to burn away the > faulting intrusion than to burn and become an emitter of smoke. > Small wire protection is generally takes the form of breakers or > fuses (I prefer fuses cause they're light, cheap, fast > and take up minimum panel space on airplane). Had the #22 wire > cite above been thoughtfully protected, the outcome of the > experience would have been much less exciting. > > > Bob . . . > > ----------------------------------------) > ( . . . a long habit of not thinking ) > ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial ) > ( appearance of being right . . . ) > ( ) > ( -Thomas Paine 1776- ) > ---------------------------------------- > > -- Brian R. Wood JH Manutencao Anapolis. Goias, Brazil


    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: 05:25:34 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Is this scheme valid to save weight, add flexibility
    and
    From: "CamLight" <jmuchow@camlight.com>
    brianrobertwood(at)gmail. wrote: > Yep, you are right about that. Small wire=high-resistance=heat which leads > to smoke. How hot would a run of #4 get if it were shorted out (batt+ to > ground)? Would it smoke the insulation? > > Brian in Brazil > > Brian R. Wood > JH Manutencao > Anapolis. Goias, Brazil I've run 300A through #4 synthetic rubber insulated welding cable (105 degrees-C rated) for several minutes without the insulation smoking or failing. It did get VERY hot though. :) A lot depends on the insulation. PVC is often rated at 85-degrees C. and will smoke a lot sooner than 400 degree-C rated fiberglass insulation. The "fusing current" level, at which the copper will melt and the wire acts like a fuse, is around 800A. -------- John M. Owner CamLight Systems Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=221284#221284


    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: 05:42:38 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Anyone done Bob Nuckoll's CBA modifications?
    From: "CamLight" <jmuchow@camlight.com>
    nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote: > > Okay, I found it. I don't know why it was taken off the > website. It's still on the CDRom image of the website > as it existed some months ago. I've put the article back > up at: > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/WestMountain_CBAII.pdf > I had tried to contact you via e-mail last month regarding my analysis. Some of my test results and recommendations differ from yours and I wanted to ask if you might be interested in discussing them? nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote: > > I had some extensive conversation with WMR. First > with regard to the FET failure and a second attempt to > discover the communication protocols on the USB > connection that controls the CBA-II and then gets > reported data back. > > I offered to craft an engineer's version of battery > test software that would provide watt-seconds instead > of amp-hours displays, conduct battery impedance tests, > etc. I even told him I would share the software for > him to use as I saw fit. He said similar plans were > already in work in his facilities and he declined > to share any information. > > The new software was 3 years in the making and still > falls short of what I would like to do with his product. > Further, the software reads the serial number of the > specific CBA II and you have to purchase separate > registered copies of the software to use each CBA II. > I have three computers and two CBA II that I would like > to use in interchangeable combinations but I'm not going > to buy a second software package when it still doesn't > do the things I would like to do and offered to him for > free. > > Bob . . . Sigh...you're not the only one frustrated with WMR's policies! The requirement to assign the software to a particular CBA II is maddening. And within a day or two after its release, a couple of us over at the RC Group forums found several obvious bugs in their version 2 software. Our biggest frustrations now? They've had at least 6 releases of the beta and "final" version 2 software since 10/28 and none of them have listed the changes from the previous release. Arggghhh! -------- John M. Owner CamLight Systems Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=221287#221287


    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: 07:13:17 PM PST US
    From: Paul McAllister <l_luv2_fly@yahoo.com>
    Subject: Re: Is this scheme valid to save weight,
    add flexibility and reduce noise from fat wires? Hi Ron, I have been up and down this pole with my Europa.- I ended up running- the + # 4 welding cable in the duct under the window sill and the - # 4 cab le through the wheel tunnel.- The battery and contactor are in close prox imity under the baggage bay. With all that said, I can remember when I purchased the cable (25' if I rem ember) thinking how much the darn stuff weighed.- I haven't done the comp arisons, but it would be worth seeing if there was a worthwhile saving usin g CCA cable that Eric sells.- For the sake of calculation, I think that I ultimately used about 22' of welding cable.- The only downside is that i t does have a larger diameter than # 4 welding cable. Cheers,- Paul --- On Thu, 12/25/08, rparigor@SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US <rparigor@SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.U S> wrote: From: rparigor@SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US <rparigor@SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Is this scheme valid to save weight, add flexibility and reduce noise from fat wires? Hi Bob Thx. for the reply My mission is to electrically connect my aft battery to the upfront 914 supplying it sufficient amperage and voltage, while being able to fit wires neatly under door sill/fuse seam and allow routing required to connect to battery switch (tight bends). Old style starter amp draw is stated at I think 60 amps, I have new style that is a bit less. If I can save some weight in the process that is a bonus. Just a quick calculation of one #4 compared to two #8s for 5 meters of wire would be a savings of a little over a half pound with two #8s. The larger the diameter of wires, the harder it will be to route under door sill and allow for door centering pin receptacle to help keep door from bulging. #4 Tefzel wire is .310" in diameter #6 EPDM jacket 259 strand is .332" diameter (#4 406 strand .380") #6 Chlorinated Polyethylene 660 strand is .370" diameter (#4 1045 strand .420") It's true I could lap solder #6 welding wire to #4 Tefzel, but my interior cover/conduit for wires would need to be larger to accommodate, and the laps would be in an already tight area. Butt soldering #4 Tefzel to #6 welding would approx. be the same diameter. I am not sure of the weight of welding cable compared to Tefzel, but I would think it heavier. I have a Hobart TRT 250 TIG welder. The ground wire I suspect is EPDM jacketed. It has cracks and splits and in general the jacketing is in bad health. True it sees a lot of UV and for a TIG ground strap that is fine. Are you be happy with using EPDM jacketed welding cable for the full run to and from engine to aft battery knowing if it smokes, a dozen feet is in the cockpit (aeroplane is fiberglass)? How about only 1 foot? Same question with Chlorinated Polyethylene jacketed welding cable: Are you be happy with using Chlorinated Polyethylene jacketed welding cable for the full run to and from engine to aft battery knowing if it smokes, a dozen feet is in the cockpit (aeroplane is fiberglass)? How about only 1 foot? Knowing I need flexibility for routing at battery switch, want the smallest diameter that is feasible, be able to provide reasonable voltage and cranking amps, not take unreasonable risks of breathing noxious fumes if wires smoke, not have much risk that aging wire insulation will crack and split and be the instigator of smoke and loss of electron flow and be of a reasonable weight. What would be your two favorite choices: ****#4 Tefzel with #6 EPDM jacketed butt soldered battery and battery switch ends? ****#4 Tefzel with #6 Chlorinated Polyethylene jacketed butt soldered battery and battery switch ends? ****All #4 EPDM jacketed wire? ****All #4 Chlorinated Polyethylene jacketed wire? ****Two paralleled #8 Tefzel wire that doesn't need twisting? Thx. Ron Parigoris =0A=0A=0A




    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! --