Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:16 AM - grounding to fuselage (thomas sargent)
2. 08:31 AM - Re: grounding to fuselage (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 08:52 AM - Re: grounding to fuselage (Vern Little)
4. 09:01 AM - Re: grounding to fuselage (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 02:27 PM - Re: Re: Engine mount as starter ground path (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 02:31 PM - Re: Re: Lightweight Aux Battery? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 04:17 PM - Re: Lightweight Aux Battery? (sonex293)
8. 05:20 PM - Re: Re: Lightweight Aux Battery? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 05:59 PM - Re: Lightweight Aux Battery? (sonex293)
10. 06:22 PM - Re: Re: Lightweight Aux Battery? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 06:24 PM - Re: Re: Lightweight Aux Battery? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
12. 07:34 PM - Re: Re: Lightweight Aux =?UTF-8?Q?Battery=3F? ()
13. 07:34 PM - Jabiru 3300 starter (jaybannist@cs.com)
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: | grounding to fuselage |
In general I am opposed to running current thru the fuselage, but in the
case of the white tail light, I am willing to make an exception. Is there
any "approved" way of doing this so as to avoid causing corrosion due to the
contact of dissimilar metals? Is a tin plated (it is tin isn't it?) ring
terminal against bare aluminum going to cause a problem? Should it be
covered/sprayed with something to protect it from moisture? Or is this just
a bad idea under any circumstances?
Thanks,
--
Tom Sargent, RV-6A final assembly.
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: grounding to fuselage |
At 08:48 AM 6/2/2009, you wrote:
>In general I am opposed to running current thru the fuselage, but in
>the case of the white tail light, I am willing to make an
>exception. Is there any "approved" way of doing this so as to avoid
>causing corrosion due to the contact of dissimilar metals?
> Is a tin plated (it is tin isn't it?) ring terminal against bare
> aluminum going to cause a problem? Should it be covered/sprayed
> with something to protect it from moisture? Or is this just a bad
> idea under any circumstances?
Local concerns for the attachment of wires to
the airframe have been the topic of many pages
of "how to" and "how not" to do. In the
most hostile of environments, all the recommended
processes and materials add longevity to
the connection.
Our airplanes are seldom operated in conditions
that qualify as strenuous much less hostile.
Design goals for local grounding/bonding
speak to deleterious effects for failure to
faithfully observe recipes for success but they
seldom speak to the physics of the effects or
relative risks.
Keep in mind that for corrosion to occur, oxygen
laden moisture must be present in the joint.
Only then do the electrolytic effects of
dissimilar metals in ionized solutions
arise.
Yes, the tin plating of copper terminals #1
task is an electrolytic "buffer" between copper
and aluminum . . . but if you damage the tin
layer in any way during assembly or maintenance
of the joint, that barrier is breached and
the original copper-aluminum couple is exposed.
For all the fuss and froth about materials
control, the very best prophylactic against
corrosion call for making joints up with sufficient
pressure to produce "gas-tightness" enhanced
with a means by which future moisture ingress
is retarded assuages 99.99% of your concerns.
Join clean metals with robust, locking fasteners.
Coat the metals with silicon grease before joining.
And the joint will be fine for more than the
lifetime of airplane. You can "drink from the
fire hose" off grounding/bonding processes
in section 15 of AC43-13 offers a rigorous study.
There's nothing inherently evil about using the
airframe to carry power system currents. Modern
production aircraft made of aluminum have
countless airframe grounds crafted with due
diligence to the principals of gas-tightness
and choice of materials. These function as
desired for the lifetime of the airplane.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: grounding to fuselage |
AC43.13-1B has an extensive discussion of aircraft bonding (grounding),
including the proper procedure for connecting to the airframe and
protection against corrosion.
This document is available in .pdf format if you don't have a hardcopy.
It's a bit large to email, so if you can find it online for download,
that's good.
If not, please let me know and I'll make other arrangements.
Thanks,
Vern Little
www.vx-aviation.com
----- Original Message -----
From: thomas sargent
To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 6:48 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: grounding to fuselage
In general I am opposed to running current thru the fuselage, but in
the case of the white tail light, I am willing to make an exception. Is
there any "approved" way of doing this so as to avoid causing corrosion
due to the contact of dissimilar metals? Is a tin plated (it is tin
isn't it?) ring terminal against bare aluminum going to cause a problem?
Should it be covered/sprayed with something to protect it from
moisture? Or is this just a bad idea under any circumstances?
Thanks,
--
Tom Sargent, RV-6A final assembly.
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: grounding to fuselage |
At 10:50 AM 6/2/2009, you wrote:
>AC43.13-1B has an extensive discussion of aircraft bonding
>(grounding), including the proper procedure for connecting to the
>airframe and protection against corrosion.
>
>This document is available in .pdf format if you don't have a
>hardcopy. It's a bit large to email, so if you can find it online
>for download, that's good.
>
>If not, please let me know and I'll make other arrangements.
AC43-13 is available for download at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/FAA/
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: Engine mount as starter ground path |
At 07:00 AM 6/1/2009, you wrote:
>Bob,
>The basis of my design is Z-14. Dual Odyssey 680 batteries aft with
>cross-feed contactor (using one for startup and one for avionics
>during starting-then switching avionics over to primary battery
>after running-both batteries available if necessary for starting))
>but only one alternator (option to add second alternator later
>depending on upcoming plane power product).
okay
>Diode inline allows alternator feed to one or both batteries.
why diodes? close all the contactors and both
batteries get charged by one alternator.
>
>Batteries really both need to be aft due to engine weight considerations.
>So... is grounding both batteries at a common point aft in metal
>plane a viable solution?
Sure. Here's some exemplar battery grounds to
airframe:
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_1.jpg
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_2.jpg
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_3.jpg
>I note that you made reference to working on some info specific to
>the RV-10. That would be great.
Since the forest of tabs is on thin stainless
(very poor conductor) it would be a good thing
to put a 4 or 2AWG jumper from ground stud to
similar structure as in photos above.
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: Lightweight Aux Battery? |
At 01:26 PM 6/1/2009, you wrote:
>
>Bob,
>
>This will be on an existing Jabiru 3300 installation using the Z-20 wiring .
Hmmm . . . what are the anticipated loads and
duration for the aux battery? In other words, how
does the aux battery fit into your recipe for plan-b
success?
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: Lightweight Aux Battery? |
sonex293 wrote:
> Power requirements are calculated @ 8 amps.
This would include Fuel Pump, Injectors, and EFI Controller. I was looking for
a one hour run time.
--
Michael
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=246526#246526
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Lightweight Aux Battery? |
At 06:15 PM 6/2/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>sonex293 wrote:
> > Power requirements are calculated @ 8 amps.
>
>
>This would include Fuel Pump, Injectors, and EFI Controller. I was
>looking for a one hour run time.
How big is your planned main battery and
what feature of its selection and installation
suggests that you can't get what you need
out of the main battery?
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Lightweight Aux Battery? |
I'm currently flying with a Odyssey PC625 battery, which has a 16Ah capacity.
I'm also currently flying behind an engine/carb/magneto combo that has no fuel
pumps, so even in the event of full electrical/battery failure the engine will
keep running.
By switching to an endurance buss my current draw with the new fuel injection system
would be around 14-16 amps, I don't think the PC625 can provide 16amps
for an hour in the case of charging problems.
What do you think?
--
Michael
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=246537#246537
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Lightweight Aux Battery? |
At 07:57 PM 6/2/2009, you wrote:
>
>I'm currently flying with a Odyssey PC625 battery, which has a 16Ah
>capacity.
>
>I'm also currently flying behind an engine/carb/magneto combo that
>has no fuel pumps, so even in the event of full electrical/battery
>failure the engine will keep running.
>
>By switching to an endurance buss my current draw with the new fuel
>injection system would be around 14-16 amps, I don't think the
>PC625 can provide 16amps for an hour in the case of charging problems.
>
>What do you think?
Hmmmm . . . how much STUFF have you shoe-horned into
this neat little airplane that needs that much snort?
Your alternator is probably a PM machine so if you've
got a robust rectifier/regulator, loss of engine
driven power is rare. But assuming you do need to
go battery only, what situation do you anticipate
that you cannot get from where you are to where you
need to be using the ultimate battery-only comm/nav/
lighting system . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/Vacination_for_Dark_Panel_Syndrom.pdf
Also, those numbers seem high for a small engine.
Have you ever seen real energy numbers from somebody
who has one of these systems flying?
I hate to see you carry around any more weight than
is REALLY useful. I've been pondering a li-ion battery/
automatic charter pack for OBAM aircraft. It will be
the very lightest of batteries for all services other
than engine cranking . . . i.e. AUX service. But it's
weight, volume and price is not zero or even really
attractive for airplanes like yours. I'd like to explore
all the plan-A, plan-B options available to you before
you start adding the $time$, $cost$, $weight$ of an
additional or larger battery.
Oh yeah, consider making your existing battery
BIGGER before adding a second battery. But let's
talk . . .
Who sells your power plant package? Let's get some
real running numbers from them.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Lightweight Aux Battery? |
P.S. What's the driver for switching to the ECFI engine
package? Does fuel efficiency go up so much that the
additional complexity, power requirements and cost look
like an attractive alternative?
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Lightweight Aux =?UTF-8?Q?Battery=3F? |
Hi Michael
What sort of upgrade do you have planned for your 3300?
Enquiring minds, thinking likewise, would like to know?
All the best.
Peter Eedy
Waiex 109 - 50% there.
Newcastle. NSW. Australia.
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 16:15:52 -0700, "sonex293" <sonex293@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> sonex293 wrote:
>> Power requirements are calculated @ 8 amps.
>
>
> This would include Fuel Pump, Injectors, and EFI Controller. I was
looking
> for a one hour run time.
>
> --
> Michael
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Jabiru 3300 starter |
I am helping a friend put together a power schematic for a Jabiru 3300.? I have
seen several sample schematics that have both a starter solenoid and a starter
contactor.? Is this really what is required and if so why ?? Is a starter contactor
any different than a battery contactor?
Jay Bannister
________________________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
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! --
|