Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:40 AM - Re: Inflight load return wire size (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
2. 06:30 AM - Re: Inflight load return wire size (Stuart Hutchison)
3. 07:37 AM - Re: Inflight load return wire size (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 01:29 PM - Current advice on Battery charger/tenders? (Radioflyer)
5. 02:14 PM - Re: Current advice on Battery charger/tenders? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 02:59 PM - Re: Current advice on Battery charger/tenders? (David Lloyd)
7. 06:11 PM - Re: Current advice on Battery charger/tenders? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 08:51 PM - Re: Current advice on Battery charger/tenders? (Radioflyer)
9. 11:01 PM - Re: Re: Current advice on Battery charger/tenders? (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: | Inflight load return wire size |
At 11:54 PM 6/13/2011, you wrote:
><stuart@stuarthutchison.com.au>
>
>Thanks Bob,
>
>Yes, I have an IO-540 with the starter about 10 feet ahead of the battery.
>This configuration is needed A) due to space limitations and B) for weight
>and balance. I understand the need for a big cable to carry start current
>and planned to ground this current via the airframe to a local bonding strap
>next to the battery. However, after start, normal inflight currents will
>obviously feed via the same big cable to the hot pole of the starter
>contactor, then to the busses and I would like to ground via a dedicated
>return to the battery post that is only 6 AWG and is insulated from the
>airframe.
Ground what? If the engine is grounded to airframe (at
the firewall ground bus?) and the battery is grounded
to airframe locally, everything else goes to the firewall
ground bus. You don't need any wire going back to the
battery(-) for grounding other things.
> I don't understand why we need an return cable the same size as
>the starter wire when only 60-70A max is passing through this during flight?
>Z-15 shows the engine bonding strap connected to a 2 AWG return all the way
>to the battery,
For a plastic airplane that. That pathway CAN be
eliminated in metal airplanes as described above.
> but I propose not to do this, since high currents are only
>required during start and can be grounded via the airframe for that short
>period. I would have thought any noise generated during start would be
>acceptable, because it is temporary? Perhaps different sized power and
>return wires cause noise regardless of whether they are both quite able to
>carry the current .. I don't know?
This is not a noise issue, only cranking performance.
Do Z-15 with local ground for the battery, single point
firewall ground for everything else (with exceptions
for remotely grounded, non-victims noted) and you're
done.
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: | Inflight load return wire size |
OK, thanks Bob.
I seem to recall reading somewhere ... over the past 3 years ... that
grounding the avionics at the firewall in a metal airframe can lead to
multiple grounds with different potentials. Perhaps I confused this with
grounding the various avionics boxes to the airframe whereever it happened
to be convenient, rather than at a common point.
Kind regards, Stu
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 10:36 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Inflight load return wire size
--> <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
At 11:54 PM 6/13/2011, you wrote:
><stuart@stuarthutchison.com.au>
>
>Thanks Bob,
>
>Yes, I have an IO-540 with the starter about 10 feet ahead of the battery.
>This configuration is needed A) due to space limitations and B) for
>weight and balance. I understand the need for a big cable to carry
>start current and planned to ground this current via the airframe to a
>local bonding strap next to the battery. However, after start, normal
>inflight currents will obviously feed via the same big cable to the hot
>pole of the starter contactor, then to the busses and I would like to
>ground via a dedicated return to the battery post that is only 6 AWG
>and is insulated from the airframe.
Ground what? If the engine is grounded to airframe (at
the firewall ground bus?) and the battery is grounded
to airframe locally, everything else goes to the firewall
ground bus. You don't need any wire going back to the
battery(-) for grounding other things.
> I don't understand why we need an return cable the same size as the
>starter wire when only 60-70A max is passing through this during flight?
>Z-15 shows the engine bonding strap connected to a 2 AWG return all the
>way to the battery,
For a plastic airplane that. That pathway CAN be
eliminated in metal airplanes as described above.
> but I propose not to do this, since high currents are only required
>during start and can be grounded via the airframe for that short
>period. I would have thought any noise generated during start would be
>acceptable, because it is temporary? Perhaps different sized power and
>return wires cause noise regardless of whether they are both quite able
>to carry the current .. I don't know?
This is not a noise issue, only cranking performance.
Do Z-15 with local ground for the battery, single point
firewall ground for everything else (with exceptions
for remotely grounded, non-victims noted) and you're
done.
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: | Inflight load return wire size |
At 09:26 AM 6/14/2011, you wrote:
><stuart@stuarthutchison.com.au>
>
>
>OK, thanks Bob.
>
>I seem to recall reading somewhere ... over the past 3 years ... that
>grounding the avionics at the firewall in a metal airframe can lead to
>multiple grounds with different potentials. Perhaps I confused this with
>grounding the various avionics boxes to the airframe whereever it happened
>to be convenient, rather than at a common point.
Yeah. Lots if not most avionics get grounded to
the airframe locally because their power and signal
grounds are common to chassis. This is what prompted
the idea behind the avionics panel ground bus added
to the Z-figures along with this product to the catalog.
Emacs!
The idea is to take all the potential victims to
ground in a location as local to the avionics
package as practical. Ground-loops on the panel
are short, and VERY weakly excited. Once the
potential victims are fire-walled, you can
take the power grounds off the panel to about
anywhere free of concerns for installation induced
noise.
This is not so much about holding big
risks for noise at bay as it is doing-the-
best-we-know-how-to-do without jacking up
cost of ownership. The local ground bus
on the panel is a great convenience when
assembling the panel that also goes to
risk of noise reduction.
When we put the insulating washers under
headset and mic jacks, THAT activity beat
down most of the risk for noises in the
radios right there. There is still the
occasional strobe noise issue but those
are pretty rare now too.
The point is that after 100 years of
bolting engines to wings and climbing
aboard, our recipe for success is pretty
well refined.
Bob . . .
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: | Current advice on Battery charger/tenders? |
A while ago I purchased a Shumacher 1562A (not the original 1562) battery minder.
I forget the details, but it did not seem to be supplying the correct voltages.
I sent it to Bob K. for investigation, but I doubt that he has had a chance
to look into it.
I think that Schumacher now has a new line of this type of charger. Anybody using
these "Speed Charger" products? What are people using these days to top off
their sealed lead-acid batteries.
--Jose
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=342964#342964
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Current advice on Battery charger/tenders? |
At 04:24 PM 6/14/2011, you wrote:
>
>A while ago I purchased a Shumacher 1562A (not the original 1562)
>battery minder. I forget the details, but it did not seem to be
>supplying the correct voltages. I sent it to Bob K. for
>investigation, but I doubt that he has had a chance to look into it.
???? when did you sent it and to what address. I
don't have it in hand.
>I think that Schumacher now has a new line of this type of charger.
>Anybody using these "Speed Charger" products? What are people using
>these days to top off their sealed lead-acid batteries.
I've purchased a number of 1562's over the years. A couple
for personal use and more for customer applications. I've
only plotted the performance of a couple . . . and they
both plotted out like this
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/schumacher_3.jpg
Schumacher is an old-line charger house with pretty
good credentials and history. What's your application
and what's your budget?
I have a couple of the gee-whiz processor controlled
chargers . . . haven't plugged on in for years. I think
I reduce the inventory to one and put the others in
the next garage sale. I've got several maintainers
that cover 99% of my charging/maintaining needs. Meaning
I almost never plug in a battery where I need to put it
back in service in less than 24-48 hours . . . so the
itty-bitty wall-wart style devices get the job done.
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: Current advice on Battery charger/tenders? |
Bob,
I noted your plotted graph for the 1562 style charger.
How important is it for the charger to top off at the 15v before dropping
down to the 13 volt float range...?
I ask because some of the "itty bitty" lower cost units (Harbor Freight,
etc.) appear to slowly bring the charge up to the 13 volt range and just
float there. Thus, skipping the 'top off' potential. This is referring to
standard or sealed aircraft batteries usage.....
Dave
________________________________________________________
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 2:09 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Current advice on Battery charger/tenders?
> <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
>
> At 04:24 PM 6/14/2011, you wrote:
>><skyeyecorp@airpost.net>
>>
>>A while ago I purchased a Shumacher 1562A (not the original 1562) battery
>>minder. I forget the details, but it did not seem to be supplying the
>>correct voltages. I sent it to Bob K. for investigation, but I doubt that
>>he has had a chance to look into it.
>
> ???? when did you sent it and to what address. I
> don't have it in hand.
>
>>I think that Schumacher now has a new line of this type of charger.
>>Anybody using these "Speed Charger" products? What are people using these
>>days to top off their sealed lead-acid batteries.
>
> I've purchased a number of 1562's over the years. A couple
> for personal use and more for customer applications. I've
> only plotted the performance of a couple . . . and they
> both plotted out like this
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/schumacher_3.jpg
>
> Schumacher is an old-line charger house with pretty
> good credentials and history. What's your application
> and what's your budget?
>
> I have a couple of the gee-whiz processor controlled
> chargers . . . haven't plugged on in for years. I think
> I reduce the inventory to one and put the others in
> the next garage sale. I've got several maintainers
> that cover 99% of my charging/maintaining needs. Meaning
> I almost never plug in a battery where I need to put it
> back in service in less than 24-48 hours . . . so the
> itty-bitty wall-wart style devices get the job done.
>
>
> 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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Current advice on Battery charger/tenders? |
At 05:55 PM 6/14/2011, you wrote:
>
>Bob,
>
>I noted your plotted graph for the 1562 style charger.
>
>How important is it for the charger to top off at the 15v before
>dropping down to the 13 volt float range...?
>
>I ask because some of the "itty bitty" lower cost units (Harbor
>Freight, etc.) appear to slowly bring the charge up to the 13 volt
>range and just float there. Thus, skipping the 'top off'
>potential. This is referring to standard or sealed aircraft
>batteries usage.....
Doesn't matter which type of lead-acid
technology. They all perform best for
accepting and then holding a charge when
treated thusly.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/Ideal_Recharge_Protocol.jpg
The Schumacher curve I cited earlier looks
something like this. You need to discharge the
battery to 'trigger' a top-off on some chargers.
So if you hook some smart-chargers to a fully
charged battery, they'll drop immediately to a
maintenance potential of just over 13 volts.
A battery cannot be charged at 13 volts . . . since
this is close to the battery's open circuit voltage
at rest. That top-off plateau is important if you're
going to get 100% of what the battery can store
stuffed into it.
Go to this directory and you'll find some exemplar
recharge curves taken from Battery Tenders, Battery
> Minders and some Schumacher products.
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/
>
> They don't all offer what appears to be a solid
> top-off protocol. I suspect the best approximations
> are 98% golden. See:
>
>http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/charging_the_lead_acid_battery
Bob . . .
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: Current advice on Battery charger/tenders? |
Hi Bob K.,
I sent the unit to you quite sometime ago maybe spring 2010...I can't recall more
exactly. You acknowledged receipt, but I think it was just prior to your workshop
move/reorganization. You had warned it would be a while before you could
get to it. But, don't worry, no harm done. I'm in need for another unit and
am just wondering what I should be getting. Something like the $20, 1 A Shumacher
"Speed Charger" unit should be fine for topping off my small Concorde and
Odyssey batteries...if the Schumachers are working as they should.
--Jose
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=343008#343008
Message 9
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Current advice on Battery charger/tenders? |
At 11:44 PM 6/14/2011, you wrote:
>
>Hi Bob K.,
>
>I sent the unit to you quite sometime ago maybe spring 2010...I
>can't recall more exactly. You acknowledged receipt, but I think it
>was just prior to your workshop move/reorganization. You had warned
>it would be a while before you could get to it. But, don't worry, no
>harm done. I'm in need for another unit and am just wondering what I
>should be getting. Something like the $20, 1 A Shumacher "Speed
>Charger" unit should be fine for topping off my small Concorde and
>Odyssey batteries...if the Schumachers are working as they should.
Hmmmm . . . my bad. I've still got some totes to unpack.
These are what one generally refers to as 'chaos boxes",
the final dregs of cleaning off the shelves and benches
but still awaiting storage space to unload them into.
Where are you seeing this "speed charger" offered? Which
model? Just curious. If it's got Schumacher's name on it,
the risks for failure to perform as advertised is low.
By the way, if you're storing multiple batteries on a
charger capable of maintenance operations, you can parallel
a number of batteries on a single maintainer.
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! --
|