Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:26 AM - Re: List decorum (Carlos Trigo)
2. 05:24 AM - Re: Z-14 Switch Combos (Ken)
3. 05:24 AM - Re: List decorum (ROGER & JEAN CURTIS)
4. 05:37 AM - Re: Z-14 Switch Combos (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 06:03 AM - Re: List decorum (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 06:10 AM - Re: Z-14 variations (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 06:37 AM - Re: List decorum (Dan Brown)
8. 06:46 AM - Re: [AeroElectric-List] Questions about circuit protection (tomcostanza)
9. 06:53 AM - Re: List decorum (Carlos Trigo)
10. 06:53 AM - Re: List decorum (Carlos Trigo)
11. 07:37 AM - Reversible electric motors and CBs (ray)
12. 08:03 AM - Re: Reversible electric motors and CBs (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
13. 08:31 AM - Re: Re: [AeroElectric-List] Questions about circuit protection (Jay Hyde)
14. 09:05 AM - Re: Re: [AeroElectric-List] Questions about circuit protectionRe: [AeroElectric-List] Questions aboutRe: [AeroElectric-List] Questions about[AeroElectric-List] Questions about circuit (John Burnaby)
15. 09:17 AM - Re: Reversible electric motors and CBs (ROGER & JEAN CURTIS)
16. 09:33 AM - XeVision DO-160E NOW Certified (XeVision)
17. 09:47 AM - Re: Re: Z-14 variations (Bill Mauledriver Watson)
18. 09:50 AM - Re: Reversible electric motors and CBs (ray)
19. 10:15 AM - Re: Reversible electric motors and CBs (Jay Hyde)
20. 11:08 AM - Re: Reversible electric motors and CBs (Jim Wickert)
21. 11:19 AM - Re: Re: [AeroElectric-List] Questions about circuit protectionRe: [AeroElectric-List] Questions aboutRe: [AeroElectric-List] Questions about[AeroElectric-List] Questions about circuit (Jay Hyde)
22. 11:29 AM - Re: Reversible electric motors and CBs (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
23. 11:36 AM - Re: Z-14 Switch Combos (Perry, Phil)
24. 11:43 AM - Re: Reversible electric motors and CBs (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
25. 12:29 PM - Re: Reversible electric motors and CBs (Jay Hyde)
26. 01:20 PM - planning (Jesse Jenks)
27. 01:28 PM - Re: List decorum (mmayfield)
28. 01:47 PM - Re: Reversible electric motors and CBs (Matt Prather)
29. 03:59 PM - Re: Z-14 Switch Combos (William Slaughter)
30. 09:24 PM - Re: Tachometer problems (geoff winter)
31. 11:13 PM - Re: Reversible electric motors and CBs (Jay Hyde)
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 |
|
Ditto!
Carlos
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: quarta-feira, 6 de Janeiro de 2010 22:04
Subject: AeroElectric-List: List decorum
At 12:55 PM 1/6/2010, you wrote:
P.S. You probably didn=12t read the part of my last comment (the only in
which
I didn=12t panic) when I said I built and fly one airplane with fuses,
one
airplane with circuit breakers, and the one I=12m currently finishing
building
have both. Don=12t loose your time, just hit the delete button
May I suggest
that you finish building your aircraft, using resettable circuit
breakers, since this gives you a greater comfort
level.
Roger
Gentlemen, this isn't about "superiority" of anything over
anything else. It's about meeting design goals for what
we hope will be a failure tolerant system understood by
the pilot and sufficiently fitted to meet the missions
for which the airplane is built.
The pantry of electro-goodies that can be stirred into
a host of recipes for success is huge. Just because any
one of us has a preference over one ingredient vs. another
should not be taken as an invitation to cast disparaging
remarks.
The mission for each of us on the List is to offer/acquire
understanding of how each ingredient functions in
particular situations . . . and not to suggest that anyone
has made a poor choice EXCEPT where we perceive a risk
for not achieving failure tolerance . . . even if the
"preferred" system is heavier, costlier, perhaps more
complex, or uses breakers.
We have a number of folks putting Z-14 into two-place
airplanes with missions that will never tax the system's
ability to mitigate risk. At the same time, for
each individual on the List who has expressed an interest
in exploring the possibilities, there are many, Many,
MANY more who are wiring their airplanes like a 1969
C-172. Are those folks at extra-ordinary risk for a bad
day in the cockpit? No, a modern alternator, active notification
of LV, modern RG battery and a purpose-driven battery
maintenance program makes them 10x better off than we
were in 1950 with generators and lead-acid slop-pots.
The OBAM aviation community, indeed all of light aircraft GA
is under incremental, relentless attack to simply go away.
Our collective future is best served by helping every
OBAM aircraft builder generate and meet design goals consistent
with the best we know how to do . . . while accommodating their
preferences.
Bob . . .
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: Z-14 Switch Combos |
Phil
Even better than a double pole switch might be staying with the SPST
switch and wiring the light to actually show when the crossfeed
contactor is activated. If you implement auto paralleling during
cranking, in addition to showing when the switch is active, the light
will then also confirm auto paralleling. If the engine ever cranks
slowly, you will immediately know whether the crossfeed contactor is
being commanded to close.
Ken
Perry, Phil wrote:
>
> Thanks Bob...
>
> I'll make it a DPDT and use the second pole for a nag-light indicating
> the x-feed switch is closed.
>
> Great design. Thanks for saving us a bunch of work.
>
> Phil
>
>
>> Hey Bob,
>>
>> It looks like the crossfeed switch doubles as a starter switch in your
>> diagram, is that correct?
>
> Yes . . . it's spring loaded out of the start position.
> It offers automatic closure of the cross-feed contactor
> during start.
>
>
>> I'm planning on going with a push button to start, so I'll probably
>> modify the setup slightly. But just want to make sure I'm reading it
>> correctly.
>
> Then the cross-feed switch can be SPST.
>
> 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 |
|
May I suggest
that you finish building your aircraft, using resettable circuit
breakers, since this gives you a greater comfort
level.
Roger
The pantry of electro-goodies that can be stirred into
a host of recipes for success is huge. Just because any
one of us has a preference over one ingredient vs. another
should not be taken as an invitation to cast disparaging
remarks.
Bob . . .
The above statement was NEVER said to "cast disparaging remarks". It
was
only to encourage that we stop the back and forth of the same
statements,
"beating the dead horse", and move on with our learning/teaching
process. I
honestly believe that if he feels more comfortable with circuit
breakers,
then he should install them!
Roger
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: | Z-14 Switch Combos |
At 09:58 PM 1/6/2010, you wrote:
>
>Thanks Bob...
>
>I'll make it a DPDT and use the second pole for a nag-light indicating
>the x-feed switch is closed.
You can wire a lamp across the contactor coil to
do that. Consider an LED indicator with resistors
in BOTH leads located right at the contactor. This
eliminates the need to fuse the wires.
>Great design. Thanks for saving us a bunch of work.
You're welcome.
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 |
|
>
>The above statement was NEVER said to "cast disparaging
>remarks". It was only to encourage that we stop the back and forth
>of the same statements, "beating the dead horse", and move on with
>our learning/teaching process. I honestly believe that if he feels
>more comfortable with circuit breakers, then he should install them!
Which is exactly what he will do with or
without anyone's encouragement. The
"disparaging remark" reference went to
someone's suggestions that perhaps he
"shouldn't be a pilot".
As for beating a dead horse . . . this is
a classroom of 1800+ students and teachers
at last count. We need to keep in mind that
while conversations between individuals may
have been discussed many times in the past,
folks who read them today may have been on
the List a short time.
If we can't make the newbies feel welcome
and well informed then we degrade into
a club of elites that discusses only "new"
topics. The delete button works the same
way on everybody's computer and nobody is
being forced to participate in any conversation.
If anyone is weary of a review of old topics,
they can certainly start a thread on any new
topic of their choice.
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: Z-14 variations |
At 12:13 PM 1/6/2010, you wrote:
><MauleDriver@nc.rr.com>
>
>This fuse versus CB discussion raises this questions with me -
>perhaps someone can clear it up.
>Are any of the current/modern avionic boxes really depen
>depending on the CB or fuse for their internal 'protection' of anything?
I'm not aware of any supplier to the TC aircraft industry
that ADMITS to such a philosophy in print. I seem to recall
a company that offered some little whiz-bang . . . perhaps
a digital Clock/OAT/Timer? I think they asked that their
supply line be protected by a fuse of 1A max.
Further, I've opened up "smoked" accessories where traces
or internal components were burned as a consequence of
some downstream fault. This kind of failure is often not
repairable. Would the customer have been better served
if the bus feeder were less robust?
>I know many units specify a fuse/CB size and sometimes a wire size
>but I just size the fuse to protect the wire and try to use a
>limited number of adequate wire sizes.
Greg suggested a one-size-fits-all approach to selection
of feeder sizes in his proposed power distribution and
control described in
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/richter/response_1.pdf
I think all his PTC's were 20A devices . . . what do
you mean by "limited number of adequate wire sizes"?
Generally MOST of your electronics will fuse at 5 or 7A
You'll have a handful of larger branches like 10A for 100W
landing and taxi lights. Maybe one 20A for a pitot heater.
But I recommend that you not avoid tailoring the size of
individual feeders to their respective tasks.
>My understanding is that various units have various means of
>protecting themselves from spikes, etc. And if any kind of failure
>starts drawing more amps than the wire/fuse/cb can provide, pop goes
>the external protection.
One generally assumes that feeder protection at the
bus has the highest risk of operating from a faulted
wire someplace between the bus and the appliance. The
next risk is generally limited to motor driven devices
where some kind of failure inside the motor draws a
hard-fault level of current.
Beyond this, your fuses/breakers are going to run the
lifetime of the airplane never being called upon to
do their job.
>So I'm thinking that if the radio fails, it fails and I use the backup radio.
Yup.
>If the wire leading to the radio shorts on rough edge or something,
>the radio fails and I use the backup radio.
Yup.
>And since fuses are so cheap, I have a separate circuit for
>practically every unit on the panel so there is a 1:1 ratio between
>units and fuses.
Good lick . . .
>If multiple things fail, then it's an electrical system problem -
>haven't worked out the details yet but I hope on my Z-14, I just
>crossfeed to use the backup Alt/Batt system or otherwise go to the backups.
Likelihood of multiple independent failures in
systems during any single tank full of fuel
is exceedingly rare. So yes, the design goal for
electrical system design is to have no single failure
take down so much bus structure that you loose
so much equipment that the mission is at risk.
Z-11 with the e-bus and a well maintained battery
and a dual feed-path endurance bus was our first
crack at that.
This first step in the evolutionary process was
VERY strong. When the vacuum pump pad opened up,
Z-13/8 increased the continuous load one could
support on the e-bus while holding all the battery
in reserve for approach to landing.
>And if it smokes, open the windows, make sure it stopped smoking or
>hit a master until it does. Land ASAP.
Certainly, smoke in the cockpit calls for killing
the whole electrical system ASAP. Then bring up
the e-bus (and SD-8 if you have it) and see if
you can drop to the get-home mode. If smoke doesn't
come back you're in business. If smoke comes back,
turn everything off and get out the stuff in your
flight bag . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/Vacination_for_Dark_Panel_Syndrom.pdf
You DO plan to carry this kind of capability
in the flight bag . . . right?
With Z-14, smoke still calls for shutting down
everything right now. Then bring up half of the
system at a time. The cross-feed contactor
would probably never be closed after a smoke-
in-the-cockpit event.
>What are the holes in this thinking?
No 'holes'. Continue to think, rethink, and
PLAN how you'll react to any single failure
you can imagine. It's unlikely that you'll
have more than one . . . With Z-14 you have
LOTS of options. Experiments with how those
options best play out should be part of a
plan devised on the ground . . . not in flight.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
Quoting "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>:
> "disparaging remark" reference went to
> someone's suggestions that perhaps he
> "shouldn't be a pilot".
That would be me, and I'm sorry they were taken as disparaging.
Having never met Mr. Trigo, I certainly have no grounds to question
his abilities as a pilot. The questions he was posing, though, (which
I took as hypothetical) sounded very panicky, and such a panicked
reaction to losing only one radio doesn't seem consistent with good
ADM. I was intending to address the hypothetical response he posed; I
didn't (and don't) assume that he would actually respond that way.
--
Dan Brown, KE6MKS, dan@familybrown.org
"Since all the world is but a story, it were well for thee to buy the
more enduring story rather than the story that is less enduring."
-- The Judgment of St. Colum Cille
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: [AeroElectric-List] Questions about circuit protection |
> I even have a light test button
Jay, what if the light test button fails?
-Tom
--------
Clear Skies,
Tom Costanza
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=280497#280497
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 |
|
No hard feelings, Don
Let's proceed with our eternal learning process, listening to Bob and other
good teachers on this List
Carlos
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-
> server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Brown
> Sent: quinta-feira, 7 de Janeiro de 2010 14:28
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: List decorum
>
>
> Quoting "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>:
>
> > "disparaging remark" reference went to
> > someone's suggestions that perhaps he
> > "shouldn't be a pilot".
>
> That would be me, and I'm sorry they were taken as disparaging.
> Having never met Mr. Trigo, I certainly have no grounds to question
> his abilities as a pilot. The questions he was posing, though, (which
> I took as hypothetical) sounded very panicky, and such a panicked
> reaction to losing only one radio doesn't seem consistent with good
> ADM. I was intending to address the hypothetical response he posed; I
> didn't (and don't) assume that he would actually respond that way.
>
> --
> Dan Brown, KE6MKS, dan@familybrown.org
> "Since all the world is but a story, it were well for thee to buy the
> more enduring story rather than the story that is less enduring."
> -- The Judgment of St. Colum Cille
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
_____
From: Carlos Trigo [mailto:trigo@mail.telepac.pt]
Sent: quinta-feira, 7 de Janeiro de 2010 14:52
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: List decorum
No hard feelings, Dan
Let's proceed with our eternal learning process, listening to Bob and other
good teachers on this List
Carlos
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-
> server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Brown
> Sent: quinta-feira, 7 de Janeiro de 2010 14:28
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: List decorum
>
>
> Quoting "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>:
>
> > "disparaging remark" reference went to
> > someone's suggestions that perhaps he
> > "shouldn't be a pilot".
>
> That would be me, and I'm sorry they were taken as disparaging.
> Having never met Mr. Trigo, I certainly have no grounds to question
> his abilities as a pilot. The questions he was posing, though, (which
> I took as hypothetical) sounded very panicky, and such a panicked
> reaction to losing only one radio doesn't seem consistent with good
> ADM. I was intending to address the hypothetical response he posed; I
> didn't (and don't) assume that he would actually respond that way.
>
> --
> Dan Brown, KE6MKS, dan@familybrown.org
> "Since all the world is but a story, it were well for thee to buy the
> more enduring story rather than the story that is less enduring."
> -- The Judgment of St. Colum Cille
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Reversible electric motors and CBs |
Just thinking, would there be any value in having CBs on reversible
motors. I'm considering: flap motors; trim motors; gear motors;
variable pitch electric propellers. Perhaps being able to move the
motor in the other direction might have some value or trying again after
a mistake like deploying at too high a speed or in a condition where ice
might have caused an overload. I recognize the low probability of these
things occurring but thought they deserved mentioning in the current
discussion.
Raymond Julian
Kettle River, MN
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: Reversible electric motors and CBs |
At 09:21 AM 1/7/2010, you wrote:
>
>Just thinking, would there be any value in having CBs on reversible
>motors. I'm considering: flap motors; trim motors; gear motors;
>variable pitch electric propellers. Perhaps being able to move the
>motor in the other direction might have some value or trying again
>after a mistake like deploying at too high a speed or in a condition
>where ice might have caused an overload. I recognize the low
>probability of these things occurring but thought they deserved
>mentioning in the current discussion.
Careful my friend, you'll be accused of doing
FMEA . . . it's addictive.
What you've hypothesized is a potential for
nuisance tripping the circuit protection in
non-normal or extra-ordinary operations.
My sense is that there are very few motors
at risk for jamming due to environmental
conditions. Flaps and trim surfaces are away
from ice-accretion spots. Ice might gather
close to the hub of a prop blade but those
motors tend to be highly geared and capable
of producing much more torque than is necessary
to move the blades. I think virtually all
OBAM aircraft with retractable gear use hydraulics
where the motor is not subject to "overload" . . .
pressure relief valves generally address that
issue. Further, large demand devices like
motor driven hydraulics are protected with very
robust protection devices like current limiters.
Extending flaps against cruise speed air-loads
MIGHT be a case where you could pop a fuse . . .
but loads on most flap systems start out low
and ramp up as the flap extends into the
wind. Behavior of the airplane during the first
few degrees of extension would no doubt get
the pilot's attention long before current
demands by the motor put a fuse at risk.
But one can always UP-size a fuse and feeder
to the flap system. PM motors draw so much
current in a stalled state that if you doubled
the size of the fuse (very fast) to accommodate
some perceived transient overload condition
you would not put the motor at risk for other
fault conditions.
That brings up another thought. We know that
unlike breakers, fuses are subject to "wearing"
caused by short term operations at or just above
the fuse's ratings. So if your flap system normally
calls for a 5 or 7A breaker, you would be on
solid ground for upsizing to 10A.
The goal is to provide a solid, trip free
source of power. PM motor inrush currents
are spectacular. Breakers are much slower
than fuses and are pure I(squared)*R sensors.
Fuses can slowly degrade over time when
hit repeatedly with transient "overloads".
Good thoughts . . .
Bob . . .
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: [AeroElectric-List] Questions about circuit |
protection
That's why you have a parachute... ;-)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
tomcostanza
Sent: 07 January 2010 04:45 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: [AeroElectric-List] Questions about circuit
protection
<Tom@CostanzaAndAssociates.com>
> I even have a light test button
Jay, what if the light test button fails?
-Tom
--------
Clear Skies,
Tom Costanza
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=280497#280497
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: [AeroElectric-List] Questions about circuit |
protectionRE: [AeroElectric-List] Questions aboutRE: [AeroElectric-List] Questions
about[AeroElectric-List] Questions about circuit
Jay,
I am building my electrical system for an all-electric ship and I had
concerns about wanting to know if any of my battery bus fuses had blown.
I didn't want to be merrily flying along on my backup fuel pump or
ignition without knowing it and making a concious decision to continue.
I have LED indicators for my battery bus loads on a visible fuse panel,
but they are at the far right of my cabin so I wanted a
testable/resettable master flashing LED right in front of me. I posed
the this goal to an electrowhizzie forum and got this design and
commentary from a senior member. Hope it helps.
John
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: | Reversible electric motors and CBs |
I think virtually all
OBAM aircraft with retractable gear use hydraulics
where the motor is not subject to "overload" . . .
pressure relief valves generally address that
issue. Further, large demand devices like
motor driven hydraulics are protected with very
robust protection devices like current limiters.
The Falco, which I am building, is one OBAM aircraft which uses a motor and
jack screws to deploy the LG. There have been many complaints of the
breaker popping when raising the gear. Some owners have set the limit
switches so the gear does not retract fully, and finish the last little bit
of retraction with the hand crank. I believe there is a fundamental design
flaw in the retract mechanism, but have not seen a good fix.
Roger
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: | XeVision DO-160E NOW Certified |
We are now Certified (used a documented certified lab) for DO-160E testing standards.
We exceeded the requirements by quite a margin. DO-160E includes a noise
standard for both conducted and radiated emissions among other things. We had
to do this testing for EuroCopter among others, their std was even stricter
than DO-160E. We did both our 50 watt 12 and 24 VDC and our newer (1-year old)
75 watt 12 and 24VDC HID systems. So a total of 4 systems were passed.
Regarding HID ballast output cables needing to be shielded.
Our XeVision cables from Ballast to Bulb are shielded. In fact they are "double"
shielded, both a foil and braided shield under the outer cable jacket (outer
insulation layer). The cables also tie the bulb shielding (metal box around the
igniter) and the ballast case all together. There is continuity in the shielding
from the bulb (igniter box and metal parabolic reflector) to the ballast,
not just the cable is shielded.
We passed all 4 models (systems) on the first try because we had the test equipment
"in house" to prove we were ready to ourselves before we went to the certified
lab and spent the big bucks.
We also received our Patent on Nov, 10, 2009 for our integrated Pulsing system
warm-up for wigwag IP.
Dan
--------
LED still has a long way to go to compete with HID as a landing light. This is
true in terms of total lumens and reach (distance).
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=280520#280520
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: Z-14 variations |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
>
> At 12:13 PM 1/6/2010, you wrote:
>
>> I know many units specify a fuse/CB size and sometimes a wire size
>> but I just size the fuse to protect the wire and try to use a limited
>> number of adequate wire sizes.
> I think all his PTC's were 20A devices . . . what do
> you mean by "limited number of adequate wire sizes"?
I meant essentially what you are saying here. Going back to my diagram
I see that in fact I have 2, 5, 10, and 15 amp circuits and appropriate
wire sizes
>
> Beyond this, your fuses/breakers are going to run the
> lifetime of the airplane never being called upon to
> do their job.
Yep, I've never experienced an electrical failure in a powered aircraft
in 40 years of fun flying (I did smoke a glider's electrical system once).
>> If multiple things fail, then it's an electrical system problem -
>> haven't worked out the details yet but I hope on my Z-14, I just
>> crossfeed to use the backup Alt/Batt system or otherwise go to the
>> backups.
I know the Z-14 is overkill. The peace of mind feature I'm after has
little to do with failure tolerance and everything to do with having a
battery available for running the panel for extended periods (or
charging portable batteries, running lights or whatever) and a separate
battery available for starts. I've found that the peace of mind to stay
on the ground and do whatever I want for as long as I want, valuable in
bad weather flying, especially when FBO facilities aren't available
(e.g. stuck in New Orleans before the terminal was reestablished).
There are many ways to achieve that but the symmetry and robustness of
the Z-14 seduced me.
>>
>>> What are the holes in this thinking?
>> No 'holes'. Continue to think, rethink, and
>> PLAN how you'll react to any single failure
>> you can imagine. It's unlikely that you'll
>> have more than one . . . With Z-14 you have
>> LOTS of options. Experiments with how those
>> options best play out should be part of a
>> plan devised on the ground . . . not in flight.
Good advice, I plan to do that.
>
> Bob . . .
Thanks as always.
Bill
Message 18
| 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: Reversible electric motors and CBs |
I always apply a probability to an adverse event, even if it is a WAG
just to help keep my perspective. You're right, it can be addictive.
Raymond Julian
Kettle River, MN.
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
>
> At 09:21 AM 1/7/2010, you wrote:
>>
>> Just thinking, would there be any value in having CBs on reversible
>> motors. I'm considering: flap motors; trim motors; gear motors;
>> variable pitch electric propellers. Perhaps being able to move the
>> motor in the other direction might have some value or trying again
>> after a mistake like deploying at too high a speed or in a condition
>> where ice might have caused an overload. I recognize the low
>> probability of these things occurring but thought they deserved
>> mentioning in the current discussion.
>
> Careful my friend, you'll be accused of doing
> FMEA . . . it's addictive.
>
> What you've hypothesized is a potential for
> nuisance tripping the circuit protection in
> non-normal or extra-ordinary operations.
>
> My sense is that there are very few motors
> at risk for jamming due to environmental
> conditions. Flaps and trim surfaces are away
> from ice-accretion spots. Ice might gather
> close to the hub of a prop blade but those
> motors tend to be highly geared and capable
> of producing much more torque than is necessary
> to move the blades. I think virtually all
> OBAM aircraft with retractable gear use hydraulics
> where the motor is not subject to "overload" . . .
> pressure relief valves generally address that
> issue. Further, large demand devices like
> motor driven hydraulics are protected with very
> robust protection devices like current limiters.
>
> Extending flaps against cruise speed air-loads
> MIGHT be a case where you could pop a fuse . . .
> but loads on most flap systems start out low
> and ramp up as the flap extends into the
> wind. Behavior of the airplane during the first
> few degrees of extension would no doubt get
> the pilot's attention long before current
> demands by the motor put a fuse at risk.
>
> But one can always UP-size a fuse and feeder
> to the flap system. PM motors draw so much
> current in a stalled state that if you doubled
> the size of the fuse (very fast) to accommodate
> some perceived transient overload condition
> you would not put the motor at risk for other
> fault conditions.
>
> That brings up another thought. We know that
> unlike breakers, fuses are subject to "wearing"
> caused by short term operations at or just above
> the fuse's ratings. So if your flap system normally
> calls for a 5 or 7A breaker, you would be on
> solid ground for upsizing to 10A.
>
> The goal is to provide a solid, trip free
> source of power. PM motor inrush currents
> are spectacular. Breakers are much slower
> than fuses and are pure I(squared)*R sensors.
> Fuses can slowly degrade over time when
> hit repeatedly with transient "overloads".
>
> Good thoughts . . .
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>
Message 19
| 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: | Reversible electric motors and CBs |
This is an area that I have used to 'placate' one of my clients whose
aircraft I am building. He really wants to see breakers but I talked him
around to fuses and non-inflight changeable ones at that... But, to get him
to accept that I agreed that the hydraulic pump might 'overload' and hence
you might want to reset that breaker, so we put in a breaker for that
circuit and fuses for everything else. It's a perception thing, but here
there was a good compromise.
Jay
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ROGER &
JEAN CURTIS
Sent: 07 January 2010 07:11 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Reversible electric motors and CBs
<mrspudandcompany@verizon.net>
I think virtually all
OBAM aircraft with retractable gear use hydraulics
where the motor is not subject to "overload" . . .
pressure relief valves generally address that
issue. Further, large demand devices like
motor driven hydraulics are protected with very
robust protection devices like current limiters.
The Falco, which I am building, is one OBAM aircraft which uses a motor and
jack screws to deploy the LG. There have been many complaints of the
breaker popping when raising the gear. Some owners have set the limit
switches so the gear does not retract fully, and finish the last little bit
of retraction with the hand crank. I believe there is a fundamental design
flaw in the retract mechanism, but have not seen a good fix.
Roger
Message 20
| 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: | Reversible electric motors and CBs |
If you have visual access to your Fuse Block or Blocks, mine I have a light
smoke plex cover indicator led show quite well, with the ATC/ATO fuses and
the Led that lights when fuse is blown you can quite quickly determine,
first something is of malfunction, two its XXXXXX and three where the fuse
is to replace. Quite Quick and cost effective. On pre flight you can
glance at the block or blocks in seconds determine there all functioning.
All for $0.448 cents. You can get them from Wayteck, Digikey, Auto Zone
......etc. Something that gives visual and replace able with no extra
wiring or circuit. This listing is from Wayteck. Just another thought.
Take care.
LED BLADE TYPE FUSE ATO/ATC
Category: Circuit Protection
Sub Category: Blade Fuses And Accessories
Sub-Sub Category: ATO/ATC Fuses-Light When Blown
Description: LED BLADE TYPE FUSE ATO/ATC
10 AMP RED (12 VOLTS)
Selling U/M: EA
Weight: 0.0032
Price: $0.4480
Min Order Qty: 10
Quantity Discounts:
Quantity Price
100.00 0.3808
500.00 0.3360
For larger quantities then shown,
contact Sales at quotes@waytekwire.com.
Qty:
Click here to view catalog.
Comments:
Jim Wickert
Tel 920-467-0219
Cell 920-912-1014
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Hyde
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 12:10 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Reversible electric motors and CBs
This is an area that I have used to 'placate' one of my clients whose
aircraft I am building. He really wants to see breakers but I talked him
around to fuses and non-inflight changeable ones at that... But, to get him
to accept that I agreed that the hydraulic pump might 'overload' and hence
you might want to reset that breaker, so we put in a breaker for that
circuit and fuses for everything else. It's a perception thing, but here
there was a good compromise.
Jay
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ROGER &
JEAN CURTIS
Sent: 07 January 2010 07:11 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Reversible electric motors and CBs
<mrspudandcompany@verizon.net>
I think virtually all
OBAM aircraft with retractable gear use hydraulics
where the motor is not subject to "overload" . . .
pressure relief valves generally address that
issue. Further, large demand devices like
motor driven hydraulics are protected with very
robust protection devices like current limiters.
The Falco, which I am building, is one OBAM aircraft which uses a motor and
jack screws to deploy the LG. There have been many complaints of the
breaker popping when raising the gear. Some owners have set the limit
switches so the gear does not retract fully, and finish the last little bit
of retraction with the hand crank. I believe there is a fundamental design
flaw in the retract mechanism, but have not seen a good fix.
Roger
Message 21
| 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: [AeroElectric-List] Questions about circuit |
protectionRE: [AeroElectric-List] Questions aboutRE: [AeroElectric-List] Questions
about[AeroElectric-List] Questions about circuit
Hey there John,
Thanks very much for this- pretty complex looking for a fuse checker! But I
understand your requirements and they have merit I think. My fuse checker
is very simple and does not give you an alarm when a fuse blows- but this I
think you will figure out when something goes wrong- although if it is on a
cct that feeds an essential item like an ECU, via diodes, you are right in
that you may not know about a single fuse failure. Hmmmm.
Thanks for the info and cct diagrams!
Jay
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John
Burnaby
Sent: 07 January 2010 07:01 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: [AeroElectric-List] Questions about
circuit protectionRE: [AeroElectric-List] Questions aboutRE:
[AeroElectric-List] Questions about[AeroElectric-List] Questions about
circuit
Jay,
I am building my electrical system for an all-electric ship and I had
concerns about wanting to know if any of my battery bus fuses had blown. I
didn't want to be merrily flying along on my backup fuel pump or ignition
without knowing it and making a concious decision to continue. I have LED
indicators for my battery bus loads on a visible fuse panel, but they are at
the far right of my cabin so I wanted a testable/resettable master flashing
LED right in front of me. I posed the this goal to an electrowhizzie forum
and got this design and commentary from a senior member. Hope it helps.
John
Message 22
| 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: | Reversible electric motors and CBs |
At 12:10 PM 1/7/2010, you wrote:
>
>
>This is an area that I have used to 'placate' one of my clients whose
>aircraft I am building. He really wants to see breakers but I talked him
>around to fuses and non-inflight changeable ones at that... But, to get him
>to accept that I agreed that the hydraulic pump might 'overload' and hence
>you might want to reset that breaker, so we put in a breaker for that
>circuit and fuses for everything else. It's a perception thing, but here
>there was a good compromise.
We wouldn't do that on a King Air . . . the motor
supply circuit would be protected with a ROBUST fuse,
i.e. a current limiter.
Besides, how does he get the gear down if the motor
craps?
Bob . . .
Message 23
| 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: | Z-14 Switch Combos |
I think I'll have to fuse them anyway. The wire run length from the
contactor to the panel is pretty lengthy and I'd feel better about
putting a fuse inline.
What's the purpose of the resistors? Is that to encourage the
electrons to flow through the coil instead of the LED?
Phil
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 12:09 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Z-14 Switch Combos
<nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
At 09:58 PM 1/6/2010, you wrote:
<Phil.Perry@netapp.com>
>
>Thanks Bob...
>
>I'll make it a DPDT and use the second pole for a nag-light indicating
>the x-feed switch is closed.
You can wire a lamp across the contactor coil to
do that. Consider an LED indicator with resistors
in BOTH leads located right at the contactor. This
eliminates the need to fuse the wires.
>Great design. Thanks for saving us a bunch of work.
You're welcome.
Bob . . .
Message 24
| 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: | Reversible electric motors and CBs |
At 11:11 AM 1/7/2010, you wrote:
<mrspudandcompany@verizon.net>
I think virtually all
OBAM aircraft with retractable gear use hydraulics
where the motor is not subject to "overload" . . .
pressure relief valves generally address that
issue. Further, large demand devices like
motor driven hydraulics are protected with very
robust protection devices like current limiters.
The Falco, which I am building, is one OBAM aircraft which uses a motor and
jack screws to deploy the LG. There have been many complaints of the
breaker popping when raising the gear. Some owners have set the limit
switches so the gear does not retract fully, and finish the last little bit
of retraction with the hand crank. I believe there is a fundamental design
flaw in the retract mechanism, but have not seen a good fix.
There IS a fix . . . but it's not common to the
OBAM aircraft industry. Some years ago I participated
in the development of a line of electro-mechanical
landing gear actuators. They were controlled over
a serial data line and needed only +28 and a
communications line to hook up. These had micro-
controllers driving brushless dc motors. As "smart"
actuators, they knew when they were approaching
limits and would slow down to a crawl . . . the
stroke drove to hard mechanical limits in the gear
mechanism. The microprocessor sensed the up-tick
in current and shut the motor off. No limit switches
needed.
One of my clients has a line of 'smart actuators'
based on a universal controller with only the motor,
drive transistors, and actuator mechanical details
tailored to the task.
A few years ago, I built some fast electronic
current limiters for a builder who wanted to use
independent actuators at each wheel of a Lancair.
They were not fast and the mechanisms could tolerate
driving to hard stops without tearing up the gear
train. The electronic current limiters prevented
motor inrush and "limit" spikes.
Don't know how that project worked out. Don't even
recall now who was building it.
Bob . . .
Message 25
| 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: | Reversible electric motors and CBs |
He used to fly King Airs.. :-)
The gear comes down without power using a hydraulic release valve- which is
why I say its perception thing- he knows that he has a manual backup but he
wants a breaker or two on the panel; it's a compromise of sorts..
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: 07 January 2010 09:24 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Reversible electric motors and CBs
<nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
At 12:10 PM 1/7/2010, you wrote:
>
>
>This is an area that I have used to 'placate' one of my clients whose
>aircraft I am building. He really wants to see breakers but I talked him
>around to fuses and non-inflight changeable ones at that... But, to get him
>to accept that I agreed that the hydraulic pump might 'overload' and hence
>you might want to reset that breaker, so we put in a breaker for that
>circuit and fuses for everything else. It's a perception thing, but here
>there was a good compromise.
We wouldn't do that on a King Air . . . the motor
supply circuit would be protected with a ROBUST fuse,
i.e. a current limiter.
Besides, how does he get the gear down if the motor
craps?
Bob . . .
Message 26
| 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 |
|
From: jessejenks@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List Digest: 27 Msgs - 01/06/10
> Time: 10:17:27 AM PST US
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls=2C III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electrical System Planning
>
>
> At 11:45 AM 1/6/2010=2C you wrote:
> I'm planning to use Z-11 and have an occasional-IFR panel with a
> Grmin 430 and Dynon EFIS. I'm still at the very basic planning phase.
>
> Do you plan to have vacuum driven instruments?
> If not why not Z13/8?
No=2C I won't have a vacuum pump. I will reconsider Z13/8=2C but I had
deemed it overkill for my mostly VFR bushplane.
I do want to have a "get home" IFR capability=2C but as one who has sp
ent many hours inside clouds in well equipped
airplanes and being scared occasionally=2C mostly by icing=2C I view a
single engine piston airplane without anti-ice systems as a n
ot-very-good IFR platform. Also I like
your philosophy that using a properly maintained RG battery is the sim
plest way to add reliability to the
electrical system. I also have Slick mags=2C and with backup batteries
in the EFIS and a handheld gps/radio=2C
I don't see the electrical system as the most critical system for the
guarantee of a safe landing. I am definitely
willing to change my mind though.
>
> 1)With the P.P. alternator I will obviously not have the separate
> voltage regulator=2C but do I still need the crowbar over voltage protect
ion?
>
> Plane Power INCLUDES crowbar OV protection on their OBAM
> aircraft alternators.
Thank you. Sure enough=2C the schematic that came with my alternator sa
ys right at the top=3B
"12 volt 60 amp experimental alternator w/internal voltage regulator a
nd over voltage protection".
Do you think this system is as good as=2C not as good=2C or better tha
n using an alternator with external regulator
and OV protection? I think I remember you saying in the past that you
tested the Plane Power alternator.
>
> 2)The Skytec starter has it's own contactor to engage the gear=2C and
> apply power to the motor. According to Skytec=2C I don't need a
> separate contactor for the starter if I use a 20+amp starter switch=2C
> which I plan to do (toggle mag switches and separate starter switch)
> Are there any cautions for not using a separate starter contactor?
>
> No.
>
> Bob . . .
I like the simple "NO" answer=2C however now after doing some more read
ing I have a couple more questions=3B
I came across your Z-22=2C fix for run on starters with PM motors=2C wh
ich the Skytec is. You suggest a relay to replace
the contactor. Further Skytec suggests on their website that if wiring
the starter without a seperate contactor=2C to put
a diode at the start switch to lengthen service life of the switch. Thi
s all leaves me a little confused. What is the main
issue here=2C protecting the start switch=2C or preventing possible dam
age to the starter or flywheel gears=2C or both=2C or
something else? Should I use a diode or a relay=2C or both=2C or neithe
r?
And another question=3B I saw your link to the article below. I found th
e philosophical discussion very
interesting=2C I also noticed that in that article you reccomend a 70 or
80 amp fuse in the alternator
B-lead which is different than the Z-figures where an ANL 60 curret limi
ter is shown. Reading note 10 I
see that the current limiter is a modern upgrade to the fuse or breaker
=2C but is 60 amps still the
reccomended rating (not 70 or 80)?
Thanks.
Have you read . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/fusvbkr2.html
>
Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. Sign up now.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Free=2C trusted and rich email service.
Message 27
| 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: List decorum |
There are many ways to skin a cat, I think, and going one way or the other doesn't
make anyone smarter than anyone else.
The chances are that, if the system is designed well and installed well, anyone
using either breakers or fuses will get a relatively long and hassle-free life
out of it. Some want breakers, some want fuses. Tom-ay-to, tom-ah-to.......
Just do it properly and don't keep resetting/replacing them when they pop or blow
without figuring out why they did!
;) Mike
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=280575#280575
Message 28
| 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: | Reversible electric motors and CBs |
I say give him a breaker which powers a switch driving a noise maker of
some sort. Flip the switch up for the light and noise, down for none.
Maybe a "ding alarm." Pull the breaker to disable. Label it "Retro
Encabulator" with apologies to Rockwell Automation...
Matt-
do not archive
>
>
> He used to fly King Airs.. :-)
> The gear comes down without power using a hydraulic release valve- which
> is
> why I say its perception thing- he knows that he has a manual backup but
> he
> wants a breaker or two on the panel; it's a compromise of sorts..
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert
> L.
> Nuckolls, III
> Sent: 07 January 2010 09:24 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Reversible electric motors and CBs
>
> <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
>
> At 12:10 PM 1/7/2010, you wrote:
>> <jay@horriblehyde.com>
>>
>>
>>This is an area that I have used to 'placate' one of my clients whose
>>aircraft I am building. He really wants to see breakers but I talked him
>>around to fuses and non-inflight changeable ones at that... But, to get
>> him
>>to accept that I agreed that the hydraulic pump might 'overload' and
>> hence
>>you might want to reset that breaker, so we put in a breaker for that
>>circuit and fuses for everything else. It's a perception thing, but here
>>there was a good compromise.
>
> We wouldn't do that on a King Air . . . the motor
> supply circuit would be protected with a ROBUST fuse,
> i.e. a current limiter.
>
> Besides, how does he get the gear down if the motor
> craps?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
Message 29
| 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: | Z-14 Switch Combos |
LED's run on about 2-3 volts. The resistors provide voltage drop.
William
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Perry,
Phil
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 1:25 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Z-14 Switch Combos
<Phil.Perry@netapp.com>
I think I'll have to fuse them anyway. The wire run length from the
contactor to the panel is pretty lengthy and I'd feel better about
putting a fuse inline.
What's the purpose of the resistors? Is that to encourage the
electrons to flow through the coil instead of the LED?
Phil
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 12:09 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Z-14 Switch Combos
<nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
At 09:58 PM 1/6/2010, you wrote:
<Phil.Perry@netapp.com>
>
>Thanks Bob...
>
>I'll make it a DPDT and use the second pole for a nag-light indicating
>the x-feed switch is closed.
You can wire a lamp across the contactor coil to
do that. Consider an LED indicator with resistors
in BOTH leads located right at the contactor. This
eliminates the need to fuse the wires.
>Great design. Thanks for saving us a bunch of work.
You're welcome.
Bob . . .
Message 30
| 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: Tachometer problems |
Bob
Thanks very much for that, I appreciate your time. I feared I wasn't
looking at an easy fix. I think I'll revert to the old instrument and have
a ponder.
Best regards
Geoff
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 4:33 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
>
>
> Could anyone suggest some specific combination of capacitor/resistor/diode
>> inline or parallel to the tacho I could try to smooth things out? Failed
>> to get any help from VDO so any advice would be very much appreciated.
>>
>
> It's a WAG. Without knowing how the input circuits
> of the tachometer are crafted, then it's VERY difficult
> to figure out what it doesn't like about the signal
> provided by your magneto p-leads. The fact that
> the reading "drops" suggests a low signal level
> . . . hard to imagine on a p-lead!
>
> However, the VDO input signal conditioning may have
> over-attenuated the incoming signal as a by-product
> of their own design goals for signal conditioning.
>
> In this case, there's not much you can do outside
> the tach short of building some sort of signal-
> conditioning device to satisfy the tachometer's
> demands.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
Message 31
| 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: | Reversible electric motors and CBs |
Actually, what you need is one of these....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z86V_ICUCD4
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Prather
Sent: 07 January 2010 11:37 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Reversible electric motors and CBs
I say give him a breaker which powers a switch driving a noise maker of
some sort. Flip the switch up for the light and noise, down for none.
Maybe a "ding alarm." Pull the breaker to disable. Label it "Retro
Encabulator" with apologies to Rockwell Automation...
Matt-
do not archive
>
>
> He used to fly King Airs.. :-)
> The gear comes down without power using a hydraulic release valve- which
> is
> why I say its perception thing- he knows that he has a manual backup but
> he
> wants a breaker or two on the panel; it's a compromise of sorts..
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert
> L.
> Nuckolls, III
> Sent: 07 January 2010 09:24 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Reversible electric motors and CBs
>
> <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
>
> At 12:10 PM 1/7/2010, you wrote:
>> <jay@horriblehyde.com>
>>
>>
>>This is an area that I have used to 'placate' one of my clients whose
>>aircraft I am building. He really wants to see breakers but I talked him
>>around to fuses and non-inflight changeable ones at that... But, to get
>> him
>>to accept that I agreed that the hydraulic pump might 'overload' and
>> hence
>>you might want to reset that breaker, so we put in a breaker for that
>>circuit and fuses for everything else. It's a perception thing, but here
>>there was a good compromise.
>
> We wouldn't do that on a King Air . . . the motor
> supply circuit would be protected with a ROBUST fuse,
> i.e. a current limiter.
>
> Besides, how does he get the gear down if the motor
> craps?
>
> 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! --
|