---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Mon 01/25/10: 14 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 06:55 AM - Re: Re: Battery Cranking Amps (Kevin Klinefelter) 2. 06:56 AM - Encoder Certification () 3. 09:33 AM - Does anyone have a source for these specialized Adel clamps (keithmckinley) 4. 09:45 AM - Re: Avionics-List: Encoder Certification (Kevin Carey) 5. 09:47 AM - Re: Battery Cranking Amps (jonlaury) 6. 09:58 AM - Re: Re: Encoder Certification (John Grosse) 7. 09:59 AM - Z13-8 questions (Tom Barter) 8. 12:01 PM - Re: Re: Battery Cranking Amps (Ken) 9. 04:51 PM - Z-13/8 (Mauri Morin) 10. 05:58 PM - OV Protection for Three-Phase PM Alternator (grnord) 11. 08:35 PM - Battery replacement philosophies . . . (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 12. 09:33 PM - Re: OV Protection for Three-Phase PM Alternator (Etienne Phillips) 13. 09:37 PM - Re: OV Protection for Three-Phase PM Alternator (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 14. 09:37 PM - Re: Z-13/8 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 06:55:01 AM PST US From: "Kevin Klinefelter" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery Cranking Amps I have a two alt one batt(pc680) syatem in my 914 powered Europa. I change out the battery every other year. I modified our Subaru Legacy to take the 680. The two year old 680 cranks the Subaru fine for two years till I get a new one for the plane. Kevin ----- Original Message ----- From: "jonlaury" Sent: Sunday, January 24, 2010 5:01 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery Cranking Amps > > OK I'm abandoning my holy grail search for a lightweight Z-14. I don't > want to spend $300 for 2 PC310's to find out that they won't crank my > engine. I think I'll settle for Z-13/8 (with a 40amp stby; $350 less > money, more amps and a 4.5 # penalty over the B&C PM alts that don't fit > my Franklin engine) and I'll use a single PC680. I have accomodation for > another 680 should I decide that I need the redundancy. A single 680 gives > me about 45 mins with my Ebus load (longer than the dual 310's). I still > save 7+ lbs over Z-19 and I like having the second alternator better than > a second battery. > > No matter how frequently I tested my batteries, I know that with no > alternator, I'm not going to be comfortable with a vague notion of how > long I've got. I would head for an airport immediately. With a second > alternator and battery reserve, a primary alternator failure, becomes a > bother rather than something I have to make a go/no-go decision about. > > Other than the size of the alternator, and using two B&C LR-3 VR's, I see > nothing in Z13/8 that I would change. > > Any observations/refinements appreciated. > > John > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=283291#283291 > > > ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 06:56:30 AM PST US From: Subject: AeroElectric-List: Encoder Certification 1/25/2010 Hello Angier Ames, You wrote 1) 2) and 3) below: 1) "Altitude encoders are required equipment for IFR flight in controlled airspace." {Response} Not true for all controlled airspace -- just that airspace identified in 91.215 (b). Can you show otherwise? 2) "And unless the operation is conducted under part 121 or 135, as per FARS, 14CFR Section215(a), they do NOT need to be certified/ TSO'd." {Response} Not true because 14 CFR Section 215 (a) says exactly the opposite. Read here: "91.215 ATC transponder and altitude reporting equipment and use. (a) All airspace: U.S.-registered civil aircraft. For operations not conducted under part 121 or 135 of this chapter, ATC transponder equipment installed must meet the performance and environmental requirements of any class of TSO-C74b (Mode A) or any class of TSO-C74c (Mode A with altitude reporting capability) as appropriate, or the appropriate class of TSO-C112 (Mode S)." 3) "So, go to your basement and create your own altitude encoder. Your only obligation under Part 91 is to demonstrate that it meets the performance and environmental standards of any class of TSO-C47b or c or TSO-C112." {Response} More than a bit misleading. The FAA requirements of proving "the performance and environmental standards" of a TSO, or an alternate method of complying with the requirements, for avionics are very extensive, demanding, and expensive. This is why most of the altitude encoding EFIS' available to the experimental amateur built community are not TSO'd. There is extensive material in the aeroelectric list archives on the significance of paragraph14 CFR 91.217, particularly 91.217 (b). Just help yourself. 'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and understand knowledge." ======================================================== Time: 07:07:12 AM PST US From: "Greenbacks, UnLtd." Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Encoder Certification Since we are all now exhausted by this subject, lets beat this dead horse one more time. Altitude encoders are required equipment for IFR flight in controlled airspace. And unless the operation is conducted under part 121 or 135, as per FARS, 14CFR Section215(a), they do NOT need to be certified/ TSO'd. So, go to your basement and create your own altitude encoder. Your only obligation under Part 91 is to demonstrate that it meets the performance and environmental standards of any class of TSO-C47b or c or TSO-C112. Angier Ames N4ZQ ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 09:33:40 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Does anyone have a source for these specialized Adel clamps From: "keithmckinley" They are self mounting swivel clamps. http://www.adelwiggins.com/ProdDtl.cfm?pid=109 -------- Keith McKinley 700HS KFIT Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=283357#283357 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/109_210.jpg ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 09:45:16 AM PST US From: Kevin Carey Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Avionics-List: Encoder Certification /set mode = "dead horse" /enable beat On Jan 25, 2010, at 9:35 AM, wrote: > --> Avionics-List message posted by: > > 1/25/2010 > > Hello Angier Ames, You wrote 1) 2) and 3) below: > > 1) "Altitude encoders are required equipment for IFR flight in > controlled airspace." > > {Response} Not true for all controlled airspace -- just that > airspace identified in 91.215 (b). Can you show otherwise? > > 2) "And unless the operation is conducted under part 121 or 135, as > per FARS, 14CFR Section215(a), they do NOT need to be certified/ > TSO'd." > > {Response} Not true because 14 CFR Section 215 (a) says exactly the > opposite. Read here: > > "91.215 ATC transponder and altitude reporting equipment and use. > > (a) All airspace: U.S.-registered civil aircraft. For operations not > conducted under part 121 or 135 of this chapter, ATC transponder > equipment installed must meet the performance and environmental > requirements of any class of TSO-C74b (Mode A) or any class of TSO- > C74c (Mode A with altitude reporting capability) as appropriate, or > the appropriate class of TSO-C112 (Mode S)." > > 3) "So, go to your basement and create your own altitude encoder. > Your only obligation under Part 91 is to demonstrate that it meets > the performance and environmental standards of any class of TSO-C47b > or c or TSO-C112." > > {Response} More than a bit misleading. The FAA requirements of > proving "the performance and environmental standards" of a TSO, or > an alternate method of complying with the requirements, for avionics > are very extensive, demanding, and expensive. This is why most of > the altitude encoding EFIS' available to the experimental amateur > built community are not TSO'd. There is extensive material in the > aeroelectric list archives on the significance of paragraph14 CFR > 91.217, particularly 91.217 (b). Just help yourself. > > 'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather > and understand knowledge." > > ======================================================== > > Time: 07:07:12 AM PST US > From: "Greenbacks, UnLtd." > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Encoder Certification > > Since we are all now exhausted by this subject, lets beat this dead > horse one more time. > Altitude encoders are required equipment for IFR flight in controlled > airspace. And unless the operation is conducted under part 121 or 135, > as per FARS, 14CFR Section215(a), they do NOT need to be certified/ > TSO'd. > > So, go to your basement and create your own altitude encoder. Your > only obligation under Part 91 is to demonstrate that it meets the > performance and environmental standards of any class of TSO-C47b or c > or TSO-C112. > > Angier Ames > N4ZQ > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 09:47:27 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery Cranking Amps From: "jonlaury" kevann(at)gotsky.com wrote: > I have a two alt one batt(pc680) syatem in my 914 powered Europa. I change > out the battery every other year. I modified our Subaru Legacy to take the > 680. The two year old 680 cranks the Subaru fine for two years till I get a > new one for the plane. > > Kevin > --- Thanks Kevin. I've often thought that with the numbers of people that subscribe to the List and who monitor this forum, there's got to be a market for 1 or 2 year old AGM batteries like the Odysseys for those who opt for a two battery system like Z19 or 14 and are in their first year. It always pained me thinking of tossing a perfectly good $100+ battery. Your Subaru adaptation is a good way to get some use out of a normally superfluous batt. J Do not archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=283361#283361 ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 09:58:08 AM PST US From: John Grosse Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: Encoder Certification I agree, Bob, and I thought the first couple of responses pretty well covered the original question. The subsequent discussion has certainly covered the subject of controlled airspace, but reminds me of a favorite quote: "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject"--Winston Churchill John :-) bobsv35b@aol.com wrote: > Good Morning John, > As Always, It All Depends! > I think most of us would agree with your assessment. > The subject came up when a homebuilder wanted to know if he could fly > his transponder equipped airplane to another point to get it certified. > That morphed into a discussion as to where a transponder is required. > While most of us do opt to have an operating transponder on board, the > fact remains that such a unit is NOT required in most of the airspace > utilized by we GA pilots. > Even in areas where a transponder IS required, there are procedures > available that may allow a flight to be made with the transponder > inoperative. > And, why do we care? As OC says, it's all in the spirit of education. > Since there are so many conflicting opinions, it appears that some > education is required. > Does that make any sense at all or do you still feel we were wasting > your time? > Happy Skies, > Old Bob > AKA > Bob Siegfried > Downers Grove, IL > Stearman N3977A (With a transponder) > In a message dated 1/24/2010 12:08:07 A.M. Central Standard Time, > grosseair@comcast.net writes: > > > > This whole discussion has me totally exhausted. I personally don't > understand why you just wouldn't buy a transponder... unless, of > course. > you're smuggling drugs or are flying some WWI vintage rag bag with no > electrical system. Then I get it, and why would you even care? > > John > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 09:59:31 AM PST US From: "Tom Barter" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Z13-8 questions Hi Bob, As I prepare to begin wiring per Z13-8, I have two questions. 1) Using the B&C LR-3 regulator, can the bus voltage sense lead be placed on the E-bus rather than on the main bus? In the very unlikely event of two failures on one tank of fuel, would this also offer low voltage warning in the if something in the SD-8 system would fail? I seem to recall this question being raised some time ago, but could not locate it in the archives. 2) The installation instructions for the SD-8 call for an inline fuse on one of the output leads. I don't see this included in the Z13-8 diagrams. Is there a reason that it is not shown? Thanks, Tom Barter Kesley, IA Avid Magnum ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 12:01:38 PM PST US From: Ken Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery Cranking Amps That is actually a nice thing about z-14 with small batteries such as the Dekka units. Flog them until cranking is noticeably slower. See which one is dead and put the new one on the most critical side. They are still $100. batteries but they are fully consumed when replaced. Ken jonlaury wrote: > > > kevann(at)gotsky.com wrote: >> I have a two alt one batt(pc680) syatem in my 914 powered Europa. I change >> out the battery every other year. I modified our Subaru Legacy to take the >> 680. The two year old 680 cranks the Subaru fine for two years till I get a >> new one for the plane. >> >> Kevin >> --- > > > Thanks Kevin. > I've often thought that with the numbers of people that subscribe to the List and who monitor this forum, there's got to be a market for 1 or 2 year old AGM batteries like the Odysseys for those who opt for a two battery system like Z19 or 14 and are in their first year. > It always pained me thinking of tossing a perfectly good $100+ battery. > Your Subaru adaptation is a good way to get some use out of a normally superfluous batt. > J > > Do not archive > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=283361#283361 > ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 04:51:21 PM PST US From: "Mauri Morin" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Z-13/8 Bob, I'm planning to wire my RV8 with your Z-13/8 configuration. My question is: can I use a single switch (2-3) to replace the two swathes (1-3) Aux Alt on/off and the E-bus alternate feed? I can envision no time when I would have one of those on and the other off. Am I missing something? Mauri Morin ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 05:58:26 PM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: OV Protection for Three-Phase PM Alternator From: "grnord" I've been considering how to use a three-phase permanent-magnet alternator instead of the single-phase units shown in the Z-figures and discussed in the AeroElectric book. I'd like to put overvoltage protection upstream of the regulator-rectifier but the three-phase output is delivered to it via three feed-wires instead of the two from a single-phase PM stator. It seems that OV disconnect relays in any two feed-lines would interrupt current from all three stator-coil sets; the two AEC 9024-20 modules operating the relays would probably be triggered at slightly different voltages due to component tolerances but an OV event in the narrow window between those two voltages seems unlikely. I have three questions: (1) Have I overlooked something that makes the basic concept unworkable? (2) What would be the consequences of an OV event that happened to open one relay but not the other? (3) Is it possible to control two relays with one AEC 9024-20? If necessary I could go with a single OV disconnect relay downstream of the regulator but that would leave that not-cheap regulator-rectifier vulnerable. Twinned OV protection is cheaper than one fried regulator... Rick Nordgarden Council Bluffs IA Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=283444#283444 ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 08:35:53 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery replacement philosophies . . . At 11:43 AM 1/25/2010, you wrote: kevann(at)gotsky.com wrote: > I have a two alt one batt(pc680) syatem in my 914 powered Europa. I change > out the battery every other year. I modified our Subaru Legacy to take the > 680. The two year old 680 cranks the Subaru fine for two years till I get a > new one for the plane. > > Kevin > --- Thanks Kevin. I've often thought that with the numbers of people that subscribe to the List and who monitor this forum, there's got to be a market for 1 or 2 year old AGM batteries like the Odysseys for those who opt for a two battery system like Z19 or 14 and are in their first year. It always pained me thinking of tossing a perfectly good $100+ battery. You don't HAVE to TOSS it if you have a way to TEST it. The yearly rotation thing was suggested for folks who wanted to exploit the low cost batteries while NOT piling on costs of ownership for having to test them. I.e., the $time$ for testing was more than the cost of a replacement battery. The options cited were to add things like an SD-8 and plan an endurance bus that didn't take more than 8A. Then run the battery 'til it craps. Or, invest in some type of battery capacity checker and change out the battery when it's contained energy drops below your design goals for e-bus support. If you're invested in $high$ batteries, then yes . . . yearly change-out policy seems arbitrary and fails to offer the best return on investment. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 09:33:10 PM PST US From: Etienne Phillips Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: OV Protection for Three-Phase PM Alternator Hi Rick Putting an OV module upstream of the regulator when using a permanent magnet alternator is very likely to trip incessantly, as the regulator keeps the voltage correct by dissipating the extra energy as heat, unlike a field-coil alternator that actively modifies the voltage generated by the alternator. For that reason, I wouldn't think that it's possible to have an OV event, other than with a regulator failure, and the only way to catch that would be to stick the OV relay and module downstream of the regulator, after the rectification has happened, and when you're dealing with DC. Now on a different note, wouldn't it be a good idea to stick the OV relay upstream of the smoothing capacitor? I've seen one of those 70,000uF caps explode due to too much juice, and it's quite impressive! My thinking is that if your regulator goes off the hook and supplies the cap with 40V (or whatever the permanent magnet alternator can generate), and that thing explodes in the cockpit, the pilot is going to need a new set of underwear... Thoughts? Thanks Etienne On 26 Jan 2010, at 3:56 AM, grnord wrote: > > > > I've been considering how to use a three-phase permanent-magnet > alternator instead of the single-phase units shown in the Z-figures > and discussed in the AeroElectric book. I'd like to put overvoltage > protection upstream of the regulator-rectifier but the three-phase > output is delivered to it via three feed-wires instead of the two > from a single-phase PM stator. It seems that OV disconnect relays > in any two feed-lines would interrupt current from all three stator- > coil sets; the two AEC 9024-20 modules operating the relays would > probably be triggered at slightly different voltages due to > component tolerances but an OV event in the narrow window between > those two voltages seems unlikely. I have three questions: > > (1) Have I overlooked something that makes the basic concept > unworkable? > > (2) What would be the consequences of an OV event that happened > to open one relay but not the other? > > (3) Is it possible to control two relays with one AEC 9024-20? > > If necessary I could go with a single OV disconnect relay downstream > of the regulator but that would leave that not-cheap regulator- > rectifier vulnerable. Twinned OV protection is cheaper than one > fried regulator... > > > Rick Nordgarden > Council Bluffs IA > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=283444#283444 > > ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 09:37:39 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: OV Protection for Three-Phase PM Alternator At 07:56 PM 1/25/2010, you wrote: I've been considering how to use a three-phase permanent-magnet alternator instead of the single-phase units shown in the Z-figures and discussed in the AeroElectric book. I'd like to put overvoltage protection upstream of the regulator-rectifier but the three-phase output is delivered to it via three feed-wires instead of the two from a single-phase PM stator. It seems that OV disconnect relays in any two feed-lines would interrupt current from all three stator-coil sets; the two AEC 9024-20 modules operating the relays would probably be triggered at slightly different voltages due to component tolerances but an OV event in the narrow window between those two voltages seems unlikely. I have three questions: (1) Have I overlooked something that makes the basic concept unworkable? Don't want 2 ov sensors for reasons cited . . . (2) What would be the consequences of an OV event that happened to open one relay but not the other? Not easily predicted . . . (3) Is it possible to control two relays with one AEC 9024-20? Yes, or get a two-pole relay. But two relays is workable too and probably less expensive. If necessary I could go with a single OV disconnect relay downstream of the regulator but that would leave that not-cheap regulator-rectifier vulnerable. Twinned OV protection is cheaper than one fried regulator... Agreed. Rick Nordgarden Council Bluffs IA Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=283444#283444 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 01/25/10 19:36:00 ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 09:37:52 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Z-13/8 At 06:48 PM 1/25/2010, you wrote: >Bob, >I'm planning to wire my RV8 with your Z-13/8 configuration. >My question is: can I use a single switch (2-3) to replace the two >swathes (1-3) Aux Alt on/off and the E-bus alternate feed? I can >envision no time when I would have one of those on and the other off. Combined switching creates single point of failure for two critical pathways. Suggest you stay with two switches. Bob . . . ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message aeroelectric-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/aeroelectric-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.