Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:45 PM - Latest on Alternators, Regulators, Archives, Etc. (Jared Yates)
2. 02:33 PM - Re: Latest on Alternators, Regulators, Archives, Etc. (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 03:54 PM - Re: Latest on Alternators, Regulators, Archives, Etc. (Jared Yates)
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: | Latest on Alternators, Regulators, Archives, Etc. |
I've been researching the archives with regard to incorporating ND
alternators, and there is a lot of message traffic from the mid 2000s about
the yet to be accomplished load dump research. I didn't really see a
conclusion to that research. Did I miss it, or is it still underway?
It seems that some things have changed over the past few years. It looks
like Niagara isn't selling a kit with the ND alternator anymore? Vans is
only selling a plane power alternator in their store? Should I take any
information from those changes (if they really are changes)?
So what is the latest? Is there anything approaching a consensus that
would lead me towards a plane power package vs a ND system? (especially, has
such a consensus emerged in the past 2 or 3 years, since there obviously
wasn't one back then).
I get the idea from the connection that Bob doesn't find the internal
automotive regulators to be adequate for aviation use. Has anyone heard him
comment specifically about the aviation adequacy of the internal regulator
that plane power uses, supposedly with crowbar overvoltage protection
included?
If this is old news and it has already been covered, feel free to tell me
and I'll try to find it.
The question that I'm researching to answer is "which alternator should I
use?" I like the idea of local replacements for the ND setups, and I
wouldn't mind learning how to use an external regulator and crowbar OV
system on an automotive alternator. I'm also not afraid of a little
fabrication, but I also like the sound of the plane power sales pitch when
it comes to fan rotation direction and long life brushes, with all of the
right brackets and such being a nice bonus. I should say that I'm shopping
for a primary alternator in the 40-60A range to incorporate into Z-13/8 on a
Lycoming 360.
Thanks for your help,
Jared
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: Latest on Alternators, Regulators, Archives, |
Etc.
At 03:42 PM 5/6/2010, you wrote:
I've been researching the archives with regard to incorporating ND
alternators, and there is a lot of message traffic from the mid 2000s
about the yet to be accomplished load dump research. I didn't really
see a conclusion to that research. Did I miss it, or is it still underway?
No, it was something of a red-herring. Any automotive
alternator worth the price of it's brand name will withstand
it's own load-dump transient. See the rev 12 chapter on
alternators in the 'Connection.
http://aeroelectric.com/R12A/03_Alternator_12A1.pdf
I visited a very large scale re-manufacturing operation a
few years ago and witnessed a full load, max rpm, max
temperature load-dump demonstration. The folks doing the
test said that they routinely subjected their products
to 5 such dumps in a row to verify their robustness.
It seems that some things have changed over the past few years. It
looks like Niagara isn't selling a kit with the ND alternator
anymore? Vans is only selling a plane power alternator in their
store? Should I take any information from those changes (if they
really are changes)?
So what is the latest? Is there anything approaching a consensus
that would lead me towards a plane power package vs a ND system?
(especially, has such a consensus emerged in the past 2 or 3 years,
since there obviously wasn't one back then).
The Plane Power IS an ND alternator modified for external
field supply so that an external, crow-bar ov protection
module can be added to the back of the device thus making
it conform to the legacy notions of how generators and
alternators should behave in airplanes.
I get the idea from the connection that Bob doesn't find the internal
automotive regulators to be adequate for aviation use. Has anyone
heard him comment specifically about the aviation adequacy of the
internal regulator that plane power uses, supposedly with crowbar
overvoltage protection included?
Your perception is incorrect. Again referring to chapter
3of the connection, see the passage starting with the
next to last paragraph in second column of page 3-2.
The problem I had with recommending UNMODIFIED automotive
is that the legacy control and ov protection design goals
could not be met. There was never anything wrong with the
capability of the built in regulator. Plane Power uses
the regulator that comes with the commercial off the shelf
alternator and MODIFIES the circuitry to agree with legacy
design goals.
If this is old news and it has already been covered, feel free to
tell me and I'll try to find it.
The question that I'm researching to answer is "which alternator
should I use?" I like the idea of local replacements for the ND
setups, and I wouldn't mind learning how to use an external regulator
and crowbar OV system on an automotive alternator. I'm also not
afraid of a little fabrication, but I also like the sound of the
plane power sales pitch when it comes to fan rotation direction and
long life brushes, with all of the right brackets and such being a
nice bonus. I should say that I'm shopping for a primary alternator
in the 40-60A range to incorporate into Z-13/8 on a Lycoming 360.
Buying a ready-to-bolt-on kit with all the brackets
has its advantages. The Plane Power offering is a
good value. Modifying your own automotive take-off
to run an external regulator, ov protection and
lv monitor is also an opportunity for good value and
better understanding of how it all goes together.
The "long life brushes" and "fan direction" have
not proven to be an issue in thousands of automotive
adaptations to aircraft.
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Latest on Alternators, Regulators, Archives, Etc. |
Thanks! Those are great answers and they move my research along nicely.
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 5:34 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
>
> At 03:42 PM 5/6/2010, you wrote:
> I've been researching the archives with regard to incorporating ND
> alternators, and there is a lot of message traffic from the mid 2000s about
> the yet to be accomplished load dump research. I didn't really see a
> conclusion to that research. Did I miss it, or is it still underway?
>
> No, it was something of a red-herring. Any automotive
> alternator worth the price of it's brand name will withstand
> it's own load-dump transient. See the rev 12 chapter on
> alternators in the 'Connection.
>
> http://aeroelectric.com/R12A/03_Alternator_12A1.pdf
>
> I visited a very large scale re-manufacturing operation a
> few years ago and witnessed a full load, max rpm, max
> temperature load-dump demonstration. The folks doing the
> test said that they routinely subjected their products
> to 5 such dumps in a row to verify their robustness.
>
> It seems that some things have changed over the past few years. It looks
> like Niagara isn't selling a kit with the ND alternator anymore? Vans is
> only selling a plane power alternator in their store? Should I take any
> information from those changes (if they really are changes)?
>
> So what is the latest? Is there anything approaching a consensus that
> would lead me towards a plane power package vs a ND system? (especially, has
> such a consensus emerged in the past 2 or 3 years, since there obviously
> wasn't one back then).
>
> The Plane Power IS an ND alternator modified for external
> field supply so that an external, crow-bar ov protection
> module can be added to the back of the device thus making
> it conform to the legacy notions of how generators and
> alternators should behave in airplanes.
>
> I get the idea from the connection that Bob doesn't find the internal
> automotive regulators to be adequate for aviation use. Has anyone heard him
> comment specifically about the aviation adequacy of the internal regulator
> that plane power uses, supposedly with crowbar overvoltage protection
> included?
>
> Your perception is incorrect. Again referring to chapter
> 3of the connection, see the passage starting with the
> next to last paragraph in second column of page 3-2.
>
> The problem I had with recommending UNMODIFIED automotive
> is that the legacy control and ov protection design goals
> could not be met. There was never anything wrong with the
> capability of the built in regulator. Plane Power uses
> the regulator that comes with the commercial off the shelf
> alternator and MODIFIES the circuitry to agree with legacy
> design goals.
>
> If this is old news and it has already been covered, feel free to tell me
> and I'll try to find it.
>
> The question that I'm researching to answer is "which alternator should I
> use?" I like the idea of local replacements for the ND setups, and I
> wouldn't mind learning how to use an external regulator and crowbar OV
> system on an automotive alternator. I'm also not afraid of a little
> fabrication, but I also like the sound of the plane power sales pitch when
> it comes to fan rotation direction and long life brushes, with all of the
> right brackets and such being a nice bonus. I should say that I'm shopping
> for a primary alternator in the 40-60A range to incorporate into Z-13/8 on a
> Lycoming 360.
>
> Buying a ready-to-bolt-on kit with all the brackets
> has its advantages. The Plane Power offering is a
> good value. Modifying your own automotive take-off
> to run an external regulator, ov protection and
> lv monitor is also an opportunity for good value and
> better understanding of how it all goes together.
>
> The "long life brushes" and "fan direction" have
> not proven to be an issue in thousands of automotive
> adaptations to aircraft.
>
> 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! --
|