Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:30 AM - Re: D-Sub connectors ()
2. 06:06 AM - Re: Re: System recommendations (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 06:38 AM - Re: D-Sub connectors (Charlie England)
4. 09:37 AM - Re: D-Sub connectors (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 10:09 AM - Re: D-Sub connectors (Sam Hoskins)
6. 05:23 PM - Re: D-Sub connectors (Chris)
7. 05:23 PM - Re: System recommendations (jetech)
8. 05:31 PM - 90 degree backshell (Jim Berry)
9. 06:28 PM - Re: D-Sub connectors (rampil)
10. 06:34 PM - Multiple coax in same conduit (Allen Fulmer)
11. 10:36 PM - Re: D-Sub connectors (Ed Holyoke)
Message 1
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: D-Sub connectors |
Hi Ron
The only D sub i decided was critical is the one for the trim tab motor,
After fitting i used a large diameter Shrink tube to fully in case it,
It easy to slice open if needed at a later date,
regards
Ivor
---- rparigor@SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US wrote:
>
>
> I think I remember reading that some use an addition to the screws to hold
> together D-Sub connectors?
>
> Is ther additional security that is
> recommended?
>
> Ron Parigoris
>
>
>
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: System recommendations |
At 07:55 PM 1/9/2009, you wrote:
>
>Bob
>
>I will look into the SD-8, It would be easy to pre-wire for it.
>
>The battery is located under the right front seat, it has local
>ground with a short lead. There is a electrical box under the front
>of the left seat that contains the start relay, some fuses and the
>push to start.
Okay, this COULD continue to be a location for power
distribution. How does your partner feel about modern
fuse blocks?
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fuse_Holders/Fuse%20Holders.jpg
These are inexpensive and have proven themselves as
suited to task in what must now be thousands of
OBAM aircraft.
>Electro-whizzies, Well here is what I have so far,
>
>AeroElectric dimmer
>SSF-1 wig-wag
>LED map lights
>Some type of panel lighting
>Under the wing light
>Aft cabin lighting
>Intercom
>PFD
>GPS
>Comm
>X-ponder
>Alt warning lgt
>Upgraded ammeter
>
>As an A&P I haven't been very involved with electrical system
>design, I did design a system for a Warner Sporster but I wish I had
>found your site sooner, I think I would have done a better job.
>
>I would like to learn the correct approach to designing a system so
>I am here to learn.
>As far as design goals, This is our company airplane, It will be
>used to advertise our restoration abilities. Our main goal is to
>update it to current standards with the main focus being the
>interior and electrical system.
"Current standards" is a nebulous term . . . interpreted
by most bureaucrats as "don't do it any different than
BePiCesMo has been doing it for . . . oh let's say the
past 30 years". Anything outside this box is viewed with
anticipation of being able to bring a lot of regulatory
"attention and assistance" to bear against your project.
The regulators can get just as excited about being
involved in something new as you are. What's more, they
can demand a spot on your team whether you think you
need it or not. Of course, all $time$ expended on their
part is at taxpayer expense and they're not concerned
with the cost additional $time$ levied on you.
The problem with "updating" an aging aircraft hinges
on whether you'll be allowed to do this as a 337 or
be forced to do an STC. Now, a very well crafted and
documented 337 can have all the appearances of an STC
but without the burden of no-value-added qualification
and piles of paper. There is a thing called a "one time
STC" that accommodates an owner's desire and ability
to accomplish a major modification to a TC aircraft
without all the pomp and circumstance of a full-blown
cert program. The one-time-STC cannot be sold. But
I don't think it precludes the sharing of approved
data for the purpose of accomplishing a similar
process to another airplane.
My personal idea of a cost effective flying machine
is to de-certify a Pacer or Tri-Pacer, rip out all
the electrical/instrumentation system. Rip out the
back seat and install a baggage/cargo platform. Rip
out the bench seat in front and install some nice
buckets from a car. Install Z-13/8 with toggle switches,
and fuse blocks. Maximize the numbers of instruments
utilizing LCD displays. This means all new Tefzel
wiring, modern RG battery - probably 17AH, modern
alternator(s), switches, etc.
>This model didn't have much of an electrical system, it is pretty
>basic and I don't think I can add much more to it unless I convert
>the mechanical engine instruments to electrical. I had a hard time
>selling the idea of a PFD to my partner so he probably wont let me do that.
Okay, doesn't sound like your project is a
candidate for the modification(s) I described
above - a 100% change-out for modern architecture
and components.
>Can you elaborate on the batter issue? It would be great to get rid
>of the PMA'd battery.
>
>I would like to make some real substantial alterations to the plane,
>something that hasn't been done yet. Two areas that could benefit
>are the combination nav lgt/dimmer switch and the fuel system with
>the aux fuel tank.
While these are useful modifications, I would classify them
as detailed enhancements to an existing system.
>The nav light can be fixed with a separate switch and dimmer. The
>fuel system can be fixed somewhat with Eddie Trimmers fuel system
>STC but it would be even better if the fuel transfer from the aux
>tank to the right wing tank was automatic without pilot intervention.
This implies some degree of automation which
usually calls for calibrated sensors to manage
power to a transfer pump, warn against failed
pumps and guard against stuck pumps that
risk pumping fuel overboard. In the eyes of
the FAA, this is a MAJOR system alternation
that would cost more than the airplane is worth
to get an STC on it.
>Our company is a member of the short wing piper club and we have
>every intention of posting our paperwork there and anywhere else
>that has interest.
Okay, this is where we need to synchronize visions
of what the final product is going to look like.
The original wiring in the airplane was mil-76
cotton over rubber, 7-strand wire. Even if the
wire is still in good shape, it would be good to
consider replacing all easily accessed runs with
Tefzel. This is allowed under ordinary maintenance
operations described in AC43-13.
Replacement of funky 50's push-pull and rotary
switches with modern toggles is also allowed as
a maintenance item . . . especially if you use
mil-spec hardware.
Replacement of fuses and factory stock breakers
is pretty much encouraged . . . again no questions
asked if you use mil-spec hardware.
Hanging PMA or TSO electronics on the panel using
best shop practices is a no-brainer although
I've heard that some FAA jurisdictions are requiring
337 forms to be submitted for accessory installations
even if it's STC'ed. These used to be a log
book entry only.
Swapping out PMA junk batteries for modern SVLA
devices, adding an e-bus, adding the SD-8 are ideas
that will get somebody's shorts in a bunch somewhere.
This is why I suggested that it was important to
assemble a bottom-to-top team of folks and craft
a detailed statement of work that the whole team
understands and supports before you launch
into the project. Many such projects have stalled
when unforeseen "requirements" were discovered
along the way. Delays and backtracking can become
prohibitively expensive.
Now, if you could only de-certify the airplane like
in Canada . . . you could treat it like an RV7
and we could do some really good things for your
airplane at a coat you're willing to support.
>I welcome your help and have already talked with a local EAA chapter
>about hosting you for a weekend.
I'd be pleased to come share a weekend of airplane-
speak with your friends. Let's work on it.
Bob . . .
Message 3
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: D-Sub connectors |
rparigor@SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US wrote:
> I think I remember reading that some use an addition to the screws to
> hold together D-Sub connectors?
>
> Is ther additional security that is recommended?
>
> Ron Parigoris
If you're talking about a pair 'in line' that are just used as a splice
point (wing/fuselage, etc) that you'll rarely or never open, you can
just twist safety wire through the screw holes.
I'd definitely do *something* to keep 'em closed.
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: D-Sub connectors |
At 08:36 AM 1/10/2009, you wrote:
><ceengland@bellsouth.net>
>
>rparigor@SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US wrote:
>>I think I remember reading that some use an addition to the screws
>>to hold together D-Sub connectors?
>>
>>Is ther additional security that is recommended?
>>
>>Ron Parigoris
>
>If you're talking about a pair 'in line' that are just used as a
>splice point (wing/fuselage, etc) that you'll rarely or never open,
>you can just twist safety wire through the screw holes.
>
>I'd definitely do *something* to keep 'em closed.
Intuitively on looks at those little 4-40 jackscrews
and wonders if they're willing and able to stay put
under the rigors of an aircraft (or any other vehicle)
environment.
As a matter of due diligence to legacy worries, we
might figure out some way to safety these screws.
As a matter of practice, I can tell you that they're
used "barefoot" in a host of applications and I've
never heard of one coming off.
There is a certain springiness in the make-up of
a d-sub jackscrew that prevents a sudden fall-off
in rotational friction should the screw rotate
slightly. I don't believe there's a significant
risk for leaving these guys to their own devices
for anti-loosening.
All my new designs for D-Subs onto TC aircraft and
target vehicles called out Positronic V-series
slide locks for connector mateup retention.
http://aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Connectors/Positronic/V3-VL_Latching.pdf
The folks on the line REALLY liked these because
you could mate-demate a D-Sub connector one-handed
and without a screwdriver. Of course, this retaining
methodology precluded loosening under vibration
too.
One thing you can ALWAYS do with any threaded fastener
is coat the treads with some low durometer adhesive
like RTV or E6000 before mating the threads. This
contaminant in the threads adds considerable friction
that will prevent a loosened screw from backing right out.
But not so much retention that you can't open the
joint for on-purpose reasons at a later time.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: D-Sub connectors |
I had two D-sub shells fall apart on me. I had purchased these from B&C.
I had used the self-fusing silicone tape at the outlet and this required
over tightening the screws to get the two sides to come together. Days
later the plastic, under the screw heads, failed and two connectors fell
apart.
My fix will be to reduce the number of turns of fusing tape and to be
careful not to over tighten (what ever that is) the screws.
Sam
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
>
> At 08:36 AM 1/10/2009, you wrote:
>
>> ceengland@bellsouth.net>
>>
>> rparigor@SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US wrote:
>>
>>> I think I remember reading that some use an addition to the screws to
>>> hold together D-Sub connectors?
>>>
>>> Is ther additional security that is recommended?
>>>
>>> Ron Parigoris
>>>
>>
>> If you're talking about a pair 'in line' that are just used as a splice
>> point (wing/fuselage, etc) that you'll rarely or never open, you can just
>> twist safety wire through the screw holes.
>>
>> I'd definitely do *something* to keep 'em closed.
>>
>
> Intuitively on looks at those little 4-40 jackscrews
> and wonders if they're willing and able to stay put
> under the rigors of an aircraft (or any other vehicle)
> environment.
>
> As a matter of due diligence to legacy worries, we
> might figure out some way to safety these screws.
> As a matter of practice, I can tell you that they're
> used "barefoot" in a host of applications and I've
> never heard of one coming off.
>
> There is a certain springiness in the make-up of
> a d-sub jackscrew that prevents a sudden fall-off
> in rotational friction should the screw rotate
> slightly. I don't believe there's a significant
> risk for leaving these guys to their own devices
> for anti-loosening.
>
> All my new designs for D-Subs onto TC aircraft and
> target vehicles called out Positronic V-series
> slide locks for connector mateup retention.
>
> http://aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Connectors/Positronic/V3-VL_Latching.pdf
>
> The folks on the line REALLY liked these because
> you could mate-demate a D-Sub connector one-handed
> and without a screwdriver. Of course, this retaining
> methodology precluded loosening under vibration
> too.
>
> One thing you can ALWAYS do with any threaded fastener
> is coat the treads with some low durometer adhesive
> like RTV or E6000 before mating the threads. This
> contaminant in the threads adds considerable friction
> that will prevent a loosened screw from backing right out.
> But not so much retention that you can't open the
> joint for on-purpose reasons at a later time.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ----------------------------------------)
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: D-Sub connectors |
I have another D-Sub question... are the pin types with the u shaped
cross section for crimping the wire and another section for crimping the
wire ok to use - or is the solid pin type the norm?
Thanks
Chris Lucas
RV-10
----- Original Message -----
From: Sam Hoskins
To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: D-Sub connectors
I had two D-sub shells fall apart on me. I had purchased these from
B&C.
I had used the self-fusing silicone tape at the outlet and this
required over tightening the screws to get the two sides to come
together. Days later the plastic, under the screw heads, failed and two
connectors fell apart.
My fix will be to reduce the number of turns of fusing tape and to be
careful not to over tighten (what ever that is) the screws.
Sam
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III
<nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote:
<nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
At 08:36 AM 1/10/2009, you wrote:
<ceengland@bellsouth.net>
rparigor@SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US wrote:
I think I remember reading that some use an addition to the
screws to hold together D-Sub connectors?
Is ther additional security that is recommended?
Ron Parigoris
If you're talking about a pair 'in line' that are just used as a
splice point (wing/fuselage, etc) that you'll rarely or never open, you
can just twist safety wire through the screw holes.
I'd definitely do *something* to keep 'em closed.
Intuitively on looks at those little 4-40 jackscrews
and wonders if they're willing and able to stay put
under the rigors of an aircraft (or any other vehicle)
environment.
As a matter of due diligence to legacy worries, we
might figure out some way to safety these screws.
As a matter of practice, I can tell you that they're
used "barefoot" in a host of applications and I've
never heard of one coming off.
There is a certain springiness in the make-up of
a d-sub jackscrew that prevents a sudden fall-off
in rotational friction should the screw rotate
slightly. I don't believe there's a significant
risk for leaving these guys to their own devices
for anti-loosening.
All my new designs for D-Subs onto TC aircraft and
target vehicles called out Positronic V-series
slide locks for connector mateup retention.
http://aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Connectors/Positronic/V3-VL_Latching.pd
f
The folks on the line REALLY liked these because
you could mate-demate a D-Sub connector one-handed
and without a screwdriver. Of course, this retaining
methodology precluded loosening under vibration
too.
One thing you can ALWAYS do with any threaded fastener
is coat the treads with some low durometer adhesive
like RTV or E6000 before mating the threads. This
contaminant in the threads adds considerable friction
that will prevent a loosened screw from backing right out.
But not so much retention that you can't open the
joint for on-purpose reasons at a later time.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: System recommendations |
> Okay, this COULD continue to be a location for power
> distribution. How does your partner feel about modern
> fuse blocks?
>
> This box isn't very big but I was thinking of using it to house the battery contactor,
main battery bus, and push to start. Fuse blocks would work the best
is this location.
>
>
The problem with "updating" an aging aircraft hinges
on whether you'll be allowed to do this as a 337 or
be forced to do an STC. Now, a very well crafted and
documented 337 can have all the appearances of an STC
but without the burden of no-value-added qualification
and piles of paper.[quote]
I agree, I would sure like to push it through as a 337. When you look at the the
available previous 337 modifications you find there just isn't much out there
for the PA-22. You have the standard things like sky lights, alternator, oil
cooler and a host of other minor changes. Everyone seems content on flying with
wires, switches and instruments that are 50 years or older. They keep patching
up faulty, dirty worn out equipment while the OBAM crowd enjoys updated technology
that is right up there with the heavy jets.
I think great progress would be made for the short wing pipers if we could get
paperwork through that allows a better than stock electrical system with features
such as fuse blocks, e-bus, single point ground, etc.
our plane doesn't have complex systems and isn't IFR but I think it is a good starting
point to spur the interest of others. We probably don't need three buses
but incorporating them into the system may help the next person with a full
IFR panel and the desire to add more electro-whizzies.
> This means all new Tefzel
> wiring, modern RG battery - probably 17AH, modern
> alternator(s), switches, etc.
I already have the Tefzel in stock, the original harness is on the bench and will
not go back in.
> While these are useful modifications, I would classify them
> as detailed enhancements to an existing system.
Ok, I can live with detailed enhancements, any upgrade is a step forward.
> This implies some degree of automation which
> usually calls for calibrated sensors to manage
> power to a transfer pump, warn against failed
> pumps and guard against stuck pumps that
> risk pumping fuel overboard. In the eyes of
> the FAA, this is a MAJOR system alternation
> that would cost more than the airplane is worth
> to get an STC on it.
I am sure you are correct on this. It would probably cause the local Fed's eyes
to cage and a major short circuit to occur.
Mostly wishful thinking. It would be nice to remove the electrical switch on the
pull lever and just use an on/off switch, but then again a procedure would probably
have to be written. Maybe a different type or design switch can be used
in place of the original.
> This is why I suggested that it was important to
> assemble a bottom-to-top team of folks and craft
> a detailed statement of work that the whole team
> understands and supports before you launch
> into the project.
Ok, If I understand correctly, I should compose a basic concept, something not
to left field but has a chance getting approved. Then maybe solicit comments,
input from other short wing owners might be good. Gather support from the manufacturers
whose products will be used. Sometime during the early stages meet with
fSDO and sell the idea to them and ask for their participation. Once the concept
becomes a plan submit the paperwork.
What program do you use to draw your schematics?
The local EAA will probably have their next meeting in Feb, I will ask the officers
to present your services then and hopefully there will be a large interest.
My company has offered to co-host with the EAA.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223950#223950
Message 8
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | 90 degree backshell |
Does anyone have a source for a 90 degree backshell for a 62 pin high density d-sub
connector ? Thanks
Jim Berry
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223953#223953
Message 9
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: D-Sub connectors |
Chris,
the radio shack grade crimp connector pins/sockets are adequate IF
you know exactly how to crimp them, i.e., use the correct wire
with the correct insulation thickness, the right tooling dies for the
wire and insulation, trim the insulation to exact spec, and use a ratchet
cycle tool which has been recently calibrated.
Short of that, some of your crimps will, under use, pull free.
I've been make wire connections for more than 40 years and I can
attest to the above.
The best solution is to use a mil spec crimper (octa-dent) like a Daniels
on machined solid connection pins. These kits can usually found at
SnF or Oshkosh. Just make sure you get the proper positioner/die
for the wire gauge/insulation you are using. Some positioner heads
are adjustable for different wire gauge and insulation thickness
Failing that, you want to continue to use the cheap stamped crimps, I'd
advise you to solder the wire connection after crimping. Be careful not to
get solder on the retention springs that hold the pin in its connector frame
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223969#223969
Message 10
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Multiple coax in same conduit |
Bob,
Is it okay to run two or more coax in same plastic conduit?
Thanks,
Allen Fulmer
RV7 Wiring/Plumbing
Message 11
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: D-Sub connectors |
If we're talking about mating two D-sub connectors together, I just push
'em together and use a couple of small zip ties through the screw holes
to keep them from separating. This after not installing the thumb screws
in the hoods or even if I just covered the connectors with heat shrink
instead of using hoods.
I suppose that if you're worried about hoods falling off the D-sub
(which I've never seen happen), you could replace the screws with zip
ties though the screw holes and around the hood.
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
rparigor@SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US wrote:
> I think I remember reading that some use an addition to the screws to
> hold together D-Sub connectors?
>
> Is ther additional security that is recommended?
>
> Ron Parigoris
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|