Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:52 AM - Re: Re: Z13/8 Rev Q comments (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
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: | Re: Z13/8 Rev Q comments |
At 11:07 PM 11/25/2010, you wrote:
>
>> Okay, 20AWG and no fuses it is.
>
>So assuming all these wires are 6" or less, should I use 20awg and no
>fuses on both the diode and the relay path to the Endurance bus ?
I WAS speaking of just the normal feed path through
the diode . . . and it occurs to me that the "6-inch
rule" would be speaking to TOTAL current pathway at
risk . . . so strict observance of the rule would call
for very short 20AWG conductors totalling 6" or less
to wire the diode up between the main and e-bus.
But then, that "rule" was never codified in any regulatory
document I recall . . . but that doesn't mean it didn't
show up on some FAA offices "green sheets". My citation
of that practices goes back a long way. I think I first
recall discussing it at Cessna when somebody was contemplating
the permanent wiring of a fat zener (50W stud mounted)
to the main bus as a transient suppressor. This was
before the zener market gave birth to the Transorb.
Is the sum total of wire from battery bus to e-bus
through the relay must surely be longer. Further, it's
primary reason for existence is to power a bus from
a battery not being charged by an alternator so we'll
not want to squander energy in voltage drops. But it
seems that the pathway would benefit from the conventional
protection methods at BOTH ends since that wire can be
SOURCED either from the main bus or the battery bus.
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! --
|