Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:54 AM - Re: Contactor question (Bob Leffler)
2. 07:08 AM - Re: Contactor question (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 10:57 AM - Re: Noise Problem (Ian)
4. 02:02 PM - Re: Contactor question (P.S) (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 02:02 PM - Re: Contactor question (P.S) (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 05:36 PM - Inaccurate RPM readings usingf Lightspeed Plasma II+ digital tack out and P-lead to Dynon D-180. (Vincent Himsl)
7. 06:09 PM - Re: Inaccurate RPM readings usingf Lightspeed Plasma II+ digital tack out and P-lead to Dynon D-180. (Sam Hoskins)
8. 09:51 PM - BMA products wanted ()
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: | Contactor question |
Bob,
Thanks for the response, but I was asking a different question. Since I
wasn't clear, let me restate the question in a different way. I was looking
for feedback as to if there are any issues that would require the contactors
to be in close physical proximity to the batteries.
Vertical Power's Config 4 has a similar design concept as your Z-14, but is
different due to the utilization of VP's dual control units. The following
link is a schematic: http://www.verticalpower.com/docs/VP_Config_4.pdf I
wasn't asking how to run fatwires for Z-14.
Thanks,
bob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 11:05 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Contactor question
<nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
At 04:01 PM 7/10/2009, you wrote:
>I'm currently planning a VP-200 Config 4 implementation in my RV-10
>(similar in concept to Z-14).
>
>I'm at the stage where I need to install any required conduit, so I
>started some high level physical power wire planning.
>
>If I keep the battery and x-tie contactors in the rear with the
>batteries, it appears that I have to run 13 wires from the firewall
>back to the batteries, whereas if I locate the battery and x-tie
>contactors up front, only 5 wires will need to be run to the batteries.
For Z-14 with rear mounted batteries consider
mounting the contactors aft and the crossfeed
contactor on the forward side of the firewall.
This provides a good power distribution location
for fat wires forward of the firewall.
If batteries are aft, then you have two fat wires
coming forward. Batteries are grounded locally.
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
This leaves two contactor wires plus what ever
wires come forward off the battery busses.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
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: | Contactor question |
At 05:56 AM 7/11/2009, you wrote:
>
>Bob,
>
>Thanks for the response, but I was asking a different question. Since I
>wasn't clear, let me restate the question in a different way. I was looking
>for feedback as to if there are any issues that would require the contactors
>to be in close physical proximity to the batteries.
For the battery contactors, yes. The legacy responsbility
for battery contactors is to provide pilot control of battery
energy as close as practical to each battery. All of the Z-figures
should have a (*) notation on the battery (+) leadwire that goes
to the contactor. This symbol suggests "make this wire a short
as practical".
The idea is that shutting off the battery contactors makes the
airplane max-cold with respect to high energy sources. The feeding
of "endurance busses" through 20A fuses directly from the battery
is not in concert with legacy design rules . . . but probably doesn't
present a serious issue.
>Vertical Power's Config 4 has a similar design concept as your Z-14, but is
>different due to the utilization of VP's dual control units. The following
>link is a schematic: http://www.verticalpower.com/docs/VP_Config_4.pdf I
>wasn't asking how to run fatwires for Z-14.
. . . and it doesn't matter if it was Z-14 or Config 4 as depicted.
Recommendations for contactor locations are the same. With no battery
busses, your wire count to the tail is 2-fat, 4-skinny. I can see where
your confusion came from. His schematic ties alternators and bus feeds
to the battery contactors. For rear mounted batteries it should be revised
to move the ship's fat wire feeds to the OTHER ends of the 4AWG wires
tied to the cross-feed condtactor on the firewall.
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: Noise Problem |
Matt and listers,
I'd be interested if anyone has a method to suggest for recording my
annoying intercom problem, or any other suggestions as to the cause.
The intercom is otherwise working just fine.
Ian Brown
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 17:24 -0600, Matt Prather wrote:
>
> Maybe it would only serve novelty purposes, but it would be interesting to
> me to be able to hear these various sounds. Has anyone tried to record
> anything like this? Share it on the web?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Matt-
>
>
> > <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
> >
> > At 10:37 AM 6/30/2009, you wrote:
> >>
> >>It's pretty random. It's about the pitch of metal on metal. It almost
> >>sounds like someone is working in a workshop, throwing bits of scrap
> >>aluminum around. Completely random, but of the order of about one a
> >>second - certainly not a regular vibration type noise. Bursts of two or
> >>three and then silence for a couple of seconds. Apparently someone else
> >>has the same exact noise with the same behaviour on the Flightcom 403 in
> >>intercom mode. He described is as a bit like a snare drum which give
> >>you a feel for the pitch. It reduces with the squelch too.
> >
> > Hmmm . . . beats me. Were the problem in my shop, I'd
> > have to break out the 'scope and signal tracer and start
> > poking around the innards of things.
> >
> > 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 |
|
| Subject: | Contactor question (P.S) |
. . . and it doesn't matter if it was Z-14 or Config 4 as depicted.
Recommendations for contactor locations are the same. With no battery
busses, your wire count to the tail is 2-fat, 4-skinny. I can see where
your confusion came from. His schematic ties alternators and bus feeds
to the battery contactors. For rear mounted batteries it should be revised
to move the ship's fat wire feeds to the OTHER ends of the 4AWG wires
tied to the cross-feed contactor on the firewall.
Oh yeah, the rear mounted batteries in Config 4 would not tie to
the firewall ground but locally to structure as depcited in the
previously cited photographs.
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: | Contactor question (P.S) |
. . . and it doesn't matter if it was Z-14 or Config 4 as depicted.
Recommendations for contactor locations are the same. With no battery
busses, your wire count to the tail is 2-fat, 4-skinny. I can see where
your confusion came from. His schematic ties alternators and bus feeds
to the battery contactors. For rear mounted batteries it should be revised
to move the ship's fat wire feeds to the OTHER ends of the 4AWG wires
tied to the cross-feed contactor on the firewall.
Oh yeah, the rear mounted batteries in Config 4 would not tie to
the firewall ground but locally to structure as depcited in the
previously cited photographs.
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: | Inaccurate RPM readings usingf Lightspeed Plasma II+ |
digital tack out and P-lead to Dynon D-180.
I have the digital pulse information from my Lightspeed plasma II+ electron
ic ignition feeding one input to my Dynon D-180 and a magneto P-lead tap th
rough 30 k resistor (per Dynon manual) to the other RPM input of my Dynon D
-180.
Problem is that with the P-lead Pulse per revolution set to 1=2C and the Pl
asm II+ Pulse / rev set to 2=2C my Dynon reads 2 to 3 hundred rpm low at 90
0 rpm (verified by Tru-Tach) and 4 to 6 hundred low at the high end (2100 t
o 2700 rpm).
I removed the Dynon and using a square wave generator providing 12 volt pk-
pk referenced to ground tested both inputs of the Dynon. It is right on. I
also dropped the voltage down to as little as 8 Volts Pk-Pk and the Dynon r
emained accurate.
Suspecting that the Dynon averages both inputs=2C I tested each input by re
moving the other. Both the Plasma II+ and the P-lead were reading low rpm's
compared to a tru-tac (which can be calibrated by aiming it at flourescent
lighting...pretty slick).
By Resetting the pulse rate of the Dynon to 1.5 for the Plasma II+=2C I get
readings that are consistently 60 rpm low. The P-lead with the recommende
d Dynon resistance of 30K reads 2 to 300 low.
My temporary fix at the moment is to remove the P-lead input to the Dynon f
rom the Magneto (Slick brand via aerosport) and keep the Plasma II+ input s
et to 1.5 pulses / rev even though the Lightspeed manual says it should be
2 pulses.
Has anyone else been down this road? If so would appreciate hearing the sol
ution before I haul a scope to the airport.
Regards=2C
Vince_Himsl
RV8 N8432 Flying! (10 hours)
_________________________________________________________________
Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail=AE.
http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tut
orial_QuickAdd_062009
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: Inaccurate RPM readings usingf Lightspeed Plasma |
II+ digital tack out and P-lead to Dynon D-180.
Yes, I have been down that road. Long story short - the Dynon can only
handle one input. I think it reads one input or the other, switching back
and forth resulting in a confused signal.
Sam
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Vincent Himsl <vshimsl@live.com> wrote:
> I have the digital pulse information from my Lightspeed plasma II+
> electronic ignition feeding one input to my Dynon D-180 and a magneto P-l
ead
> tap through 30 k resistor (per Dynon manual) to the other RPM input of my
> Dynon D-180.
>
> Problem is that with the P-lead Pulse per revolution set to 1, and the
> Plasm II+ Pulse / rev set to 2, my Dynon reads 2 to 3 hundred rpm low at
900
> rpm (verified by Tru-Tach) and 4 to 6 hundred low at the high end (2100 t
o
> 2700 rpm).
>
> I removed the Dynon and using a square wave generator providing 12 volt
> pk-pk referenced to ground tested both inputs of the Dynon. It is right o
n.
> I also dropped the voltage down to as little as 8 Volts Pk-Pk and the Dyn
on
> remained accurate.
>
> Suspecting that the Dynon averages both inputs, I tested each input by
> removing the other. Both the Plasma II+ and the P-lead were reading low
> rpm's compared to a tru-tac (which can be calibrated by aiming it at
> flourescent lighting...pretty slick).
>
> By Resetting the pulse rate of the Dynon to 1.5 for the Plasma II+, I get
> readings that are consistently 60 rpm low. The P-lead with the recommend
ed
> Dynon resistance of 30K reads 2 to 300 low.
>
> My temporary fix at the moment is to remove the P-lead input to the Dynon
> from the Magneto (Slick brand via aerosport) and keep the Plasma II+ inpu
t
> set to 1.5 pulses / rev even though the Lightspeed manual says it should
be
> 2 pulses.
>
> Has anyone else been down this road? If so would appreciate hearing the
> solution before I haul a scope to the airport.
>
> Regards,
> Vince_Himsl
> RV8 N8432 Flying! (10 hours)
>
> ------------------------------
> Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail=AE. See how.<http://w
indowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_Qu
ickAdd_062009>
>
> *
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
> *
>
>
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: | BMA products wanted |
All,
I understand that BMA is no more. Some of you out there may have some
of their products (or know someone who does) and wish to get out of an
un-supported technology and into something more reliable such as a Grand
Rapids or Dynon system. I have a offer for you...
I would like to purchase a limited number of specific units:
- EFIS/Lite Plus
- BMA Engine Pod
These are the only units being pursued at this time. They must be in
good operational condition - used units will be considered.
Please send me the specifics regarding your unit for evaluation. I'll
need specific model number, serial number for each item along with a
brief history of use or installation.
Thanks,
James Redmon
Berkut #013/Race 13
www.berkut13.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! --
|