Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:12 AM - Trying to resubscribe to the EZ group website HELP (Mr SHANNON STEWART)
2. 03:22 AM - PM /OV filter and OV protection kit for Jab3300 (chris Sinfield)
3. 04:46 AM - Re: PM /OV filter and OV protection kit for Jab3300 (Rodney Dunham)
4. 06:20 AM - Re: Dual Battery Contactor (Chris Stone)
5. 07:24 AM - Re: Trying to resubscribe to the EZ group website HELP (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 09:04 AM - Re: Dual Battery Contactor (user9253)
7. 09:24 AM - Re: Re: Dual Battery Contactor (Sam Hoskins)
8. 09:48 AM - Re: Re: Dual Battery Contactor ()
9. 09:51 AM - Re: Re: Dual Battery Contactor ()
10. 10:29 AM - Re: Re: Dual Battery Contactor (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 10:32 AM - Re: Power Opti-Miser (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
12. 10:57 AM - Re: Dual Battery Contactor (user9253)
13. 12:48 PM - Re: Dual Battery Contactor (user9253)
14. 03:25 PM - Re: HID/LED (Speedy11@aol.com)
15. 06:28 PM - Re: Re: Dual Battery Contactor (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
16. 07:10 PM - Re: Re: Dual Battery Contactor (Bill Mauledriver Watson)
17. 09:28 PM - Re: Re: Power Opti-Miser (Bill Bradburry)
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: | Trying to resubscribe to the EZ group website HELP |
I have tried to resubscribe to the EZ list with your website as i
changed my email address and provider. I am on your list and get info
from you. when it tells me toclick on my name site I'm not sure what
that means....I did not get the return mail that i received the time i
changed and resubmitted my new email address...what am i doing wrong?
Shannon
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: | PM /OV filter and OV protection kit for Jab3300 |
Hi
I have a standard Jab 3300 with the single phase 20 Amp PM Alt. I was going to
Use the B&C PM /OV filter and OV protection kit 505-1, as it said it was good
up to 30 Amps and the 504-1 kit was only good for up to 15 Amps.
The 505-1 kit when it came shoes a wiring diagram for a 3 phase PM Alt have I
got the wrong one? I wanted a kit that could handle the single phase 20 Amp load.
I was going to use the Z21 drawing as my starting point
What Z diagram did most people use with the Jab engine/Alt. / Reg combo?
My aircraft is just a Night VFR 2 seater.
Chris.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276795#276795
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: | PM /OV filter and OV protection kit for Jab3300 |
Chris
Just reviewed the products listed and wiring diagram.
That's the unit I installed on my Sonex/Jab3300 with single phase ALT. I wi
red it just like the drawing.
The 3 phase v 1 phase issue is related to the voltage regulator (VR)=2C I t
hink. I used the "standard" Kubota regulator and have had no problem at all
. That is=2C after I connected the yellow wire (not shown in B&C drawing)
to the VR output. It's a voltage probe and the VR won't charge unless it ca
n sense its own output. Or mebbe it's sensing the battery condition. At any
rate. If you connect the yellow wire (assumes Kubota VR) to the red output
wire the VR should work as advertised and so will the OVPM.
Rod
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live Hotmail gives you a free=2Cexclusive gift.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/hotmail_bl1/hotmail_bl1.aspx?o
cid=PID23879::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-ww:WM_IMHM_7:092009
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: | Dual Battery Contactor |
Great thread! Thanks.
Chris
>>
>>Chris,
>>
>>As Bob noted, the alternator will continue to output at its rated
>>capacity as long as the regulator is demanding it. Each alternator
>>should be able to run at its rated capacity for N hours before
>>failing (some calculus test performed at the factory).
>
> In the aviation world we test alternators/generators/motors to rated
> loads and worst case temperatures to meet specifications. If the customer
> observes published limits, they have a high probability of seeing
> the laboratory experience repeated in the field.
>
>>The bigger question is what are you doing in your cockpit while you
>>are waiting for the alternator to explode and your bus architecture
>>to melt down? Answer, you should be activating your fire gear. No, a
>>diode won't immediately melt if you drop to 8 volts, but by then you
>>should have your contingency plan in action. Should you experience 1
>>or more failures in any situation, you should start shedding load
>>and if the alternator seems to be a problem, shut it down.
>>
>>Two heads are better than one and one good battery and two
>>alternators are better than 2-3 batteries any day.
>
> Exactly. I'll re-enforce that idea with the notion that
> except for unanticipated failure, NOTHING that goes on
> in your electrical system should be a surprise. I've written
> often about failure mode effects analysis wherein all
> normal and abnormal operating conditions are deduced,
> studied for deleterious effect to be mitigated by design.
>
> The ONLY way you're going to beat the @#$@# out of your
> alternator is to jump-start with a DEAD battery and
> then launch into the blue with all your electro-whizzies
> turned on. Until the battery's recharge demands begin to
> taper, the alternator will be running flat-out. The duration
> of this event is generally a few tens of minutes at the
> most. All other times, I would hope that the builder has
> PREDICTED what loads can be serviced under any/all
> conditions and is operating the airplane accordingly.
>
> Chapter 17 in the 'Connection speaks to this process
> in detail. I've also suggested that the hierarchy of
> importance for surviving the flight experience stacks
> up like this:(a) airframe, (b) owner/builder/pilot
> (c) powerplant (d) all other things.
>
> The significance of the second item goes far beyond
> the knowledge and skills needed AFTER the wheels are
> up. There is a great deal that can be done in the
> craftsmanship, understanding and decisions made long
> before the airplane leaves the shop . . . like due
> diligence to the study of category (d).
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>>Glenn
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Stone
>>Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 1:20 PM
>>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Dual Battery Contactor
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>This brings to mind a question as to what happens to the alternator
>>when the load placed on it exceeds it's output capacity? Will the
>>output voltage start to drop as capacity is exceeded? If overload
>>is continued are the diodes the weak link in the chain? Will the
>>diodes fail before overheating of the stator windings? What is the
>>common failure mode?
>>
>>Chris Stone
>>RV-8
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>> >From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
>> >Sent: Dec 8, 2009 11:55 AM
>> >To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>> >Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Dual Battery Contactor
>> >
>> <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
>> >
>> >At 05:34 PM 12/7/2009, you wrote:
>> <skywagon@charter.net>
>> >
>> >Chris,
>> >Thanks for the tip and lead on a great solution for preserving
>> >alternators from high stress loads...
>> >
>> > Not sure there is "benefit" to be realized for shielding
>> > an alternator from "high stress" loads.
>> >
>> > As converters of mechanical to electrical energy, these
>> > devices have specifications. They also tend to be designed
>> > for a particular marketplace task. The prudent designers,
>> > manufacturers and installers of such devices understand the
>> > capabilities and limits. That understanding is factored
>> > into satisfaction of design goals and establishment
>> > of maintenance programs.
>> >
>> > Subscribing to the notion of "stress mitigation" on
>> > an alternator by programming the manner in which loads
>> > are applied to the machine suggests that design goals,
>> > capabilities and limits are suspect or perhaps known
>> > to be poorly married.
>> >
>> > The aux battery management module for OBAM aircraft was
>> > first proposed in an article I wrote for Sport Aviation
>> > many moons ago. The intent of this device was to provide
>> > automatic management of an auxiliary battery included
>> > to power flight critical electro-whizzies. The ABMM
>> > prevented connection of the aux battery to the system
>> > unless bus voltage was high enough to avoid discharging
>> > the battery (i.e. alternator on line). Hence the 13.0
>> > volt switchpoint calibration for closing the contactor.
>> > The corollary idea was that the ABMM opens the contactor
>> > automatically during alternator shut down or failure
>> > thus isolating the aux battery and preserving contained
>> > energy for a specific task.
>> >
>> > The product being discussed appears to perform in
>> > precisely the same manner where it's desirable
>> > to isolate a RV vehicle battery from recreational
>> > electro-whizzies battery unless the alternator
>> > is available to service BOTH batteries.
>> >
>> > This is a PARTICULAR case where the recreational
>> > battery is EXPECTED to be deeply discharged. Now,
>> > if the vehicle battery has not been abused while
>> > parked, then the bus is expected to rise above
>> > 13.0 (or 13.2) volts seconds after the engine
>> > starts. This device would spare the alternator
>> > from "high stress" loads only if BOTH batteries are
>> > deeply discharged. But even then, I can't imagine
>> > that the bus will stay below 13.2 volts for very
>> > long even if the vehicle battery was drawn down
>> > completely and the engine was started with jumper cables.
>> >
>> > Finally, irrespective of number of batteries and
>> > no matter how you've abused the batteries, your
>> > alternator should be EXPECTED to happily deliver
>> > full rated output for an indefinite period of time.
>> > If not, there's something wrong with the selection
>> > of alternator or the manner in which it has been
>> > installed.
>> >
>> > Bob . . .
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Bob . . .
> ////
> (o o)
> ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========
> < Go ahead, make my day . . . >
> < show me where I'm wrong. >
> ================================
>
>
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: Trying to resubscribe to the EZ group website |
HELP
At 05:19 AM 12/9/2009, you wrote:
>I have tried to resubscribe to the EZ list with your website as i
>changed my email address and provider. I am on your list and get
>info from you. when it tells me toclick on my name site I'm not
>sure what that means....I did not get the return mail that i
>received the time i changed and resubmitted my new email
>address...what am i doing wrong?
>
>Shannon
Your query was posted to the Aeroelectric-List
hosted on Matronics.com
Go to:
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/
and you can check the subscription status of both
old and new e-mail addresses. You can kill all
subscriptions to the old address (although this
probably happens automatically when the system
gets bounces to the old address). You can also
subscribe to the lists of interest using your
new email address. If you've attempted this
task but with unexpected results, then it's
likely that you mis-typed your email address
into the subscription process. Try again.
Bob . . .
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: Dual Battery Contactor |
> "Two heads are better than one and one good battery and two alternators are better
than 2-3 batteries any day." And Bob Nuckolls replied, "Exactly. I'll re-enforce
that idea . . . . ."
I am not disagreeing but have questions:
Suppose that it is impractical to install two alternators on an electrically dependent
engine in a VFR airplane. If a battery is properly maintained and periodically
tested for capacity, is its risk of failure high enough to warrant
a backup battery?
What if a cell in the battery shorts out? Will the alternator keep working? If
no, then will the battery still have enough voltage and contain enough energy
to supply the ignition system until a landing can be made? I assume yes, but
do not know.
A small backup battery will provide peace of mind, knowing that there is an alternate
current path in case of a failed terminal or connection in the main circuit.
But is the benefit worth the extra weight?
Joe
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276838#276838
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: Dual Battery Contactor |
Joe, I have an electrically dependent VFR plane, and I concluded that yes,
it is worth it= to have the second battery. I like to fly long cross
countrys and from time to time I am over very lonely territory.-
Did you do a full electrical analysis of your devices for takeoff, climb,
cruise, descent, landing, etc? That should point out what you need. I'm
going to try attaching one for you, if it doesnt go I will e-mail it to you
offline. It's not perfect, but you get the idea.
I wound up using two batteries of the same size. I figured in the long run
that would simplify things for me.
Regards.
Sam Hoskins
www.samhoskins.blogspot.com
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 11:00 AM, user9253 <fran4sew@banyanol.com> wrote:
> >
>
>
> > "Two heads are better than one and one good battery and two alternators
> are better than 2-3 batteries any day." And Bob Nuckolls replied, "Exactly.
> I'll re-enforce that idea . . . . ."
>
> I am not disagreeing but have questions:
>
> Suppose that it is impractical to install two alternators on an
> electrically dependent engine in a VFR airplane. If a battery is properly
> maintained and periodically tested for capacity, is its risk of failure high
> enough to warrant a backup battery?
>
> What if a cell in the battery shorts out? Will the alternator keep
> working? If no, then will the battery still have enough voltage and contain
> enough energy to supply the ignition system until a landing can be made? I
> assume yes, but do not know.
>
> A small backup battery will provide peace of mind, knowing that there is an
> alternate current path in case of a failed terminal or connection in the
> main circuit. But is the benefit worth the extra weight?
>
> Joe
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276838#276838
>
>
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: Dual Battery Contactor |
Joe,
Fair question. Certainly not every installation (especially air-motive
types) will lend themselves to dual alternators. The second best backup
would be a second battery. As far as the alternator is concerned, let's
say for example the airplane started under its own power and the battery
had an issue as you flew along. The alternator would still generate
charging energy because it is already excited, however the battery is no
longer benefiting as it will not absorb the charge.
You may have experienced this in your car. You start your car, drive to
work and upon leaving work your car doesn't start, yes? Same deal. This
is why the landfill is full of old batteries and Pep
Boys is rich.
I find this retarded, but did you ever see someone jump start an
airplane and then take off into the wild blue yonder with their
alternator charging a junk battery? Happens every day. I, like you am
electrically dependent and my pet peeve is to ensure I have a battery
that will hold a starting charge for at least two weeks and perform at
normal or below temperatures when requested. It should, on occasion pass
Bob's recommended battery stress test.
A respectable RG battery will not have a catastrophic failure but will
go bad over time. Is the benefit of the extra battery worth it? How many
hours have you flown on one battery with your teeth grinding? One may
never fail, but two will make you feel better. For me two alternators
and one well maintained battery offers ample security and redundancy.
If I had a Subaru or other electrically dependent alternative air-motive
engine without second alt , I'd have a second battery, period.
Get out and fly!
Glenn
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
user9253
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 12:00 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Dual Battery Contactor
<fran4sew@banyanol.com>
> "Two heads are better than one and one good battery and two
alternators are better than 2-3 batteries any day." And Bob Nuckolls
replied, "Exactly. I'll re-enforce that idea . . . . ."
I am not disagreeing but have questions:
Suppose that it is impractical to install two alternators on an
electrically dependent engine in a VFR airplane. If a battery is
properly maintained and periodically tested for capacity, is its risk of
failure high enough to warrant a backup battery?
What if a cell in the battery shorts out? Will the alternator keep
working? If no, then will the battery still have enough voltage and
contain enough energy to supply the ignition system until a landing can
be made? I assume yes, but do not know.
A small backup battery will provide peace of mind, knowing that there is
an alternate current path in case of a failed terminal or connection in
the main circuit. But is the benefit worth the extra weight?
Joe
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276838#276838
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: Dual Battery Contactor |
Sam,
FYI, great job on the plane! I've always liked this design. Maybe next
build.
Glenn
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sam
Hoskins
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Dual Battery Contactor
Joe, I have an electrically dependent VFR plane, and I concluded that
yes, it is worth it= to have the second battery. I like to fly long
cross countrys and from time to time I am over very lonely territory.-
Did you do a full electrical analysis of your devices for takeoff,
climb, cruise, descent, landing, etc? That should point out what you
need. I'm going to try attaching one for you, if it doesnt go I will
e-mail it to you offline. It's not perfect, but you get the idea.
I wound up using two batteries of the same size. I figured in the long
run that would simplify things for me.
Regards.
Sam Hoskins
www.samhoskins.blogspot.com
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 11:00 AM, user9253 <fran4sew@banyanol.com> wrote:
<fran4sew@banyanol.com>
> "Two heads are better than one and one good battery and two
alternators are better than 2-3 batteries any day." And Bob Nuckolls
replied, "Exactly. I'll re-enforce that idea . . . . ."
I am not disagreeing but have questions:
Suppose that it is impractical to install two alternators on an
electrically dependent engine in a VFR airplane. If a battery is
properly maintained and periodically tested for capacity, is its risk of
failure high enough to warrant a backup battery?
What if a cell in the battery shorts out? Will the alternator keep
working? If no, then will the battery still have enough voltage and
contain enough energy to supply the ignition system until a landing can
be made? I assume yes, but do not know.
A small backup battery will provide peace of mind, knowing that there is
an alternate current path in case of a failed terminal or connection in
the main circuit. But is the benefit worth the extra weight?
Joe
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276838#276838
="_blank">www.aeroelectric.com
ooks.com" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
et="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
le, List Admin.
-List"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
http://forums.matronics.com
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: Dual Battery Contactor |
At 11:00 AM 12/9/2009, you wrote:
>
>
> > "Two heads are better than one and one good battery and two
> alternators are better than 2-3 batteries any day." And Bob
> Nuckolls replied, "Exactly. I'll re-enforce that idea . . . . ."
>
>I am not disagreeing but have questions:
>
>Suppose that it is impractical to install two alternators on an
>electrically dependent engine in a VFR airplane. If a battery is
>properly maintained and periodically tested for capacity, is its
>risk of failure high enough to warrant a backup battery?
"Risk of failure high enough" is not quantified.
Even if it WERE quantified, suppose I tell you that
configuration A offers a 3.5 x 10^-6 failure rate
and configuration B is 9.3 x 10^-6 failure rate.
Hmmm . . . obviously configuration A is the better
choice.
Now, suppose the difference in dollars to install
configuration A versus B is $1600 and perhaps adds
8 pounds to the airplane's empty weight. How would
that influence your decision?
The point is that design goals for your project
are personal to you . . . a host of trade-offs
for operation, performance, convenience, weight,
initial costs, maintenance costs, etc. etc.
>What if a cell in the battery shorts out?
Flooded batteries USED to suffer cell shorts . . .
but only after they had been abused to internal
self-destruction in ground vehicles. Had those
batteries been maintained for aircraft service,
their ability to crank the engine would still
be quite strong when the replacement decision
is made. Further, their plates would still have
a good grip on the chunks of stuff that were
responsible for shorted cells.
The RG battery is physically incapable of
shorting. Active materials in plate pockets
is held captive by insulating materials. See
sequence of photos at:
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Concorde/
Here you see cast plates, fiberglas mat material,
porous jacket, which are placed around the negative
plate of a "buttered" plate. Alternating (+) and (-)
plates are sorted, stacked and weighed to match
cell-to-cell capacity. Finally, matched stacks are
installed in a battery case ready to attach inter-
cell connectors. There's no way that any (+) plate
is going to become shorted to a (-) plate in
any cell.
> Will the alternator keep working? If no, then will the battery
> still have enough voltage and contain enough energy to supply the
> ignition system until a landing can be made? I assume yes, but do not know.
If it DID happen, the alternator would go into
current limited full output which would destroy remaining
"good" cells in what has to be an abused and flooded
battery. Since you're not going to use a flooded
battery . . . and you're going to implement a
battery maintenance program . . . shorted cells
are of zero concern.
>A small backup battery will provide peace of mind, knowing that
>there is an alternate current path in case of a failed terminal or
>connection in the main circuit. But is the benefit worth the extra weight?
What are you willing to "pay" for peace of mind?
None of us can properly advise you in that
decision. What we can offer is the proposition
that when you assemble a failure tolerant system
with good craftsmanship, likelihood of more than
one failure on any single tank full of fuel is
exceedingly remote.
Bob . . .
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: Power Opti-Miser |
Here's an exchange with supplier of the product
being examined:
------------------------------------------------
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Power Opti-Miser Performance Data?
Good morning,
I'm a consulting engineer retired after 40+ years in
aviation and industrial electrical systems design. I've
been retained by a client to evaluate suitability
of the Power Opti-Miser to several applications.
I am writing to inquire as to the availability of
reports on testing cited in some of the product
promotions I found on the 'net. Can you tell me
if the product is patented? If so, can you cite
patent numbers?
After evaluating any technical data you might provide,
we'll probably order an exemplar device for evaluation
in our labs. Thanks!
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------------
From: "Frank Garza" <frank.garza@usa.net>
Subject: Re: Power Opti-Miser Performance Data?
Hello Mr. Nuckolls,
The Power Opti-Miser is Patented....
All you questions you may have can be answered by reviewing
my website Frequently Asked Questions Page (FAQs)...
Thank you for your interest in my porduct
sincerely,
Frank (Owner)
---------------------------------------------
I have searched the website for anything that
speaks to patents, reports or tests with no
hits. I've written back to ask for clarification.
I don't expect to receive a reply.
Bob . . .
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: Dual Battery Contactor |
To Sam and Glenn,
Thanks for your responses. And Sam, I received your Excel spreadsheet. I asked
the above questions about dual batteries on behalf of my brother who is building
a Corvair powered 601XL. I am building a RV-12 whose Rotax engine has dual
independent ignition systems (except for the rotating permanent magnets).
It seems that this is one of those situations where there is more than one way
to do something. If it is someone else's airplane, then 1 battery is enough.
But if you are going to be flying in the plane, then two batteries are better.
:D
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276862#276862
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: | Re: Dual Battery Contactor |
Thanks for the reply, Bob. From your explanation, it seems highly unlikely that
the battery will short out. The alternator is the main power source and the
battery is a backup power source (for a limited amount of time). The Essential
Bus switch is the backup for the main power contactor. The wires and terminals
are not backed up, but they can be checked during pre-flight.
> What are you willing to "pay" for peace of mind?
One could ask that same question about a BRS parachute. The weight and cost penalty
are great for a system that will most likely never be used. But just think
of the peace of mind that system offers. These are personal decisions that
each builder has to make.
Joe
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276875#276875
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 |
|
I concur with the statement. I'm using LEDs for my taxi/recognition
lights and they are very good. The LED position lights are good as well because
all they need to do is radiate, not illuminate.
I have HIDs for landing lights and they are excellent for illumination.
The current drawback to both is cost. And the drawback is significant.
Stan Sutterfield
Do not archive
LED can make a very good taxi light now, but
to collimate it for a landing light is still a big hurdle.
It still has a way to go to compete with HID for landing lights.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dual Battery Contactor |
At 02:45 PM 12/9/2009, you wrote:
>
>Thanks for the reply, Bob. From your explanation, it seems highly
>unlikely that the battery will short out. The alternator is the
>main power source and the battery is a backup power source (for a
>limited amount of time). The Essential Bus switch is the backup for
>the main power contactor. The wires and terminals are not backed
>up, but they can be checked during pre-flight.
Wires and terminals properly installed have about the same
order of reliability as prop bolts. This means proper tools
matched to terminals applied to wires that don't wave around
in the wind. Generally not difficult to accomplish.
What engine/alternator combination are you contemplating
and what devices are required for continued engine operations?
>One could ask that same question about a BRS parachute. The weight
>and cost penalty are great for a system that will most likely never
>be used. But just think of the peace of mind that system
>offers. These are personal decisions that each builder has to make.
Yup, that's the universe we live in . . .
Bob . . .
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dual Battery Contactor |
And thanks Bob for teaching so many of us how to use "proper tools
matched to terminals applied to wires that don't wave around
in the wind".
"Generally not difficult to accomplish" Sounds so simple and yet this
pilot/unauthorized repair station managed to smoke a glider cockpit with
astoundingly poor wiring. Yes, a glider. I'm doing better now.
Thanks!
>> Thanks for the reply, Bob. From your explanation, it seems highly
>> unlikely that the battery will short out. The alternator is the main
>> power source and the battery is a backup power source (for a limited
>> amount of time). The Essential Bus switch is the backup for the main
>> power contactor. The wires and terminals are not backed up, but they
>> can be checked during pre-flight.
>
> Wires and terminals properly installed have about the same
> order of reliability as prop bolts. This means proper tools
> matched to terminals applied to wires that don't wave around
> in the wind. Generally not difficult to accomplish.
>
Message 17
| 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: Power Opti-Miser |
Bob,
I can't thank you enough for all the help you have given us. You have
likely saved me (and no telling how many others) $1000 by fully explaining
how this thing works and why we would be wasting our money. It just looked
too good to be true and I could only think of one place to get an answer and
you came through again!
Thanks! Bob.
Bill B
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 1:29 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: re: Power Opti-Miser
Here's an exchange with supplier of the product
being examined:
------------------------------------------------
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Power Opti-Miser Performance Data?
Good morning,
I'm a consulting engineer retired after 40+ years in
aviation and industrial electrical systems design. I've
been retained by a client to evaluate suitability
of the Power Opti-Miser to several applications.
I am writing to inquire as to the availability of
reports on testing cited in some of the product
promotions I found on the 'net. Can you tell me
if the product is patented? If so, can you cite
patent numbers?
After evaluating any technical data you might provide,
we'll probably order an exemplar device for evaluation
in our labs. Thanks!
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------------
From: "Frank Garza" <frank.garza@usa.net>
Subject: Re: Power Opti-Miser Performance Data?
Hello Mr. Nuckolls,
The Power Opti-Miser is Patented....
All you questions you may have can be answered by reviewing
my website Frequently Asked Questions Page (FAQs)...
Thank you for your interest in my porduct
sincerely,
Frank (Owner)
---------------------------------------------
I have searched the website for anything that
speaks to patents, reports or tests with no
hits. I've written back to ask for clarification.
I don't expect to receive a reply.
Bob . . .
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! --
|