Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:34 AM - Re: ACF-50 Anti-corrosion between block and alternator mount... (B Tomm)
2. 06:41 AM - Re: Why did this AMP crimp on connection get singed and fail? (Bill Watson)
3. 07:07 AM - Re: Misprint in Z-16, v.12/ OV with Rotax generators? (Ken)
4. 09:44 AM - Re: ACF-50 Anti-corrosion between block and alternator mount... (Michael Burbidge)
5. 10:03 AM - Start Solenoid Orientation (Jeff Luckey)
6. 10:31 AM - Re: ACF-50 Anti-corrosion between block and alternator mount... (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 10:41 AM - Re: What crimper to use for B&C alternator field terminals... (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 11:00 AM - Re: Why did this AMP crimp on connection get singed and fail? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 11:09 AM - Re: pitot tube (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 11:10 AM - Re: Re: Pitot tube slightly plugged... (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 11:13 AM - Re: ACF-50 Anti-corrosion between block and alternator mount... (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
12. 01:31 PM - Re: Start Solenoid Orientation (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
13. 01:38 PM - Re: Misprint in Z-16, v.12/ OV with Rotax generators? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
14. 02:47 PM - Yesterday's Project - Show & Tell (Jeff Luckey)
15. 02:54 PM - Re: Start Solenoid Orientation (Jeff Luckey)
16. 05:10 PM - Re: Re: Pitot tube slightly plugged... (Dj Merrill)
17. 05:41 PM - Re: Re: Pitot tube slightly plugged... (RGent1224@aol.com)
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: | ACF-50 Anti-corrosion between block and alternator |
mount...
Michael,
Since nobody has responded yet...I will offer my .02
It is my understanding that products like ACF-50 are used to prevent
oxidation/corrosion from developing. If the part is already corroded, I
would suggest removing the corrosion and then use the ACF-50 to prevent it
from returning anytime soon. You may also look for a electrically
conductive paste that will seal out the oxygen. There should be plenty of
electrical pathway capacity through the mounting bolts regardless.
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Burbidge
Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 1:03 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: ACF-50 Anti-corrosion between block and
alternator mount...
--> <mburbidg@gmail.com>
When I took the old alternator mount off the engine, I noticed there was
some corrosion on the engine block under the alternator mount. My new
alternator (B&C) gets its ground through the mount. Can I use and
anti-corrosion film such as ACF-50 on the block before bolting the mount to
the engine? Or will that place resistance in the ground path for the
alternator?
Thanks,
Michael-
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: Why did this AMP crimp on connection get singed |
and fail?
Rayj, thanks for that. I found it and it helps.
In the end, I think I'm getting reasonably good crimps given the
equipment and parts I'm using. It's going to be a matter of inspecting
each connection regularly for 'smoking' and to take even more care with
each crimp.
Bill
do not archive
On 9/22/2012 5:08 PM, rayj wrote:
>
> Bill,
>
> Search "switches with faston tabs" in the AeroElectric archives. They
> discuss the discoloration of the faston insulation as the result of
> switch failure. Time frame of sept 08.
>
> Raymond Julian
> Kettle River, MN.
> 9/22/12
>
>
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: Misprint in Z-16, v.12/ OV with Rotax generators? |
Not Ducati but I had a similar John Deere regulator for a 20 amp
permanent magnet alternator fail full on.
My fault as I started the engine with a dead battery. The voltage went
high as the dead battery was not immediately ready to accept current
which is not unusual for a fully discharged AGM battery. The regulator
failed and thereafter let unregulated full alternator output through.
The regulator failed even though the overvoltage disconnect relay was
between the alternator and the regulator so the voltage must have risen
faster than the relay could open when the engine started. I credit Bob's
crowbar ovm for keeping the buss voltage clamped though and preventing
any further damage.
I guess the main point is that sometimes solid state devices can indeed
fail ON instead of OFF.
Ken
On 22/09/2012 5:52 PM, s wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: s<uuccio@gmail.com>
>
> Hello listers,
>
> Seems like there is a small misprint in Z16 v.12: the wire between
> the 5A breaker (or is it a fuse?) and the S1 switch should be 18AWG
> not 22AWG since its the same size as the fuse link.
>
> I was chatting to my favorite automotive mechanic the other day and
> telling him I was planning to include an alternator disconnect relay
> (as per Z16 or maybe Z17) in my electrical system. He said that he's
> never heard of a Ducati regulator going in over voltage, he says they
> usually just stop working. Does anyone know of anyone who's
> experienced an OV problem with the inbuilt Rotax generator?
>
> Another question: can anyone explain why the alternator disconnect
> wiring is more complex in Z16 than in Z17? What is the advantage of
> doing it the Z16 way?
>
> Sacha Rebuilding a Kitfox IV with Rotax 80hp, almost there Sicily,
> Italy
>
>
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: | Re: ACF-50 Anti-corrosion between block and alternator |
mount...
That's what I did. I cleaned off the corrosion and then put ACF-50 in between before
bolting the new mount to the block.
Sounds like that should be ok.
Mike
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 23, 2012, at 1:32 AM, "B Tomm" <fvalarm@rapidnet.net> wrote:
>
> Michael,
>
> Since nobody has responded yet...I will offer my .02
>
> It is my understanding that products like ACF-50 are used to prevent
> oxidation/corrosion from developing. If the part is already corroded, I
> would suggest removing the corrosion and then use the ACF-50 to prevent it
> from returning anytime soon. You may also look for a electrically
> conductive paste that will seal out the oxygen. There should be plenty of
> electrical pathway capacity through the mounting bolts regardless.
>
> Bevan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
> Burbidge
> Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 1:03 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: ACF-50 Anti-corrosion between block and
> alternator mount...
>
> --> <mburbidg@gmail.com>
>
> When I took the old alternator mount off the engine, I noticed there was
> some corrosion on the engine block under the alternator mount. My new
> alternator (B&C) gets its ground through the mount. Can I use and
> anti-corrosion film such as ACF-50 on the block before bolting the mount to
> the engine? Or will that place resistance in the ground path for the
> alternator?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael-
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Start Solenoid Orientation |
Group,
I'm preparing some electrical hardware for my RV7 & this question came up:
How should I orient the start solenoid, terminals up or down? I'm curious
how G loading will affect the plunger.
I'm planning to use this solenoid
http://www.autopartswarehouse.com/sku/Standard/Starter_Solenoid/SISS581.html
(a generic automotive type) because it is inexpensive & should be easily
found in the future.
In the picture at the above link, the solenoid appears "terminals down". Is
that how it should be mounted in the airframe? In that orientation, any
positive G loading will try to keep the contacts apart or open which is what
I want. (don't want starter to inadvertently engage at the bottom of a hard
pull).
I think that the return spring in this device is pretty strong therefore it
would take more than 6 Gs to get it to move but I thought I would pose the
question to the group.
Also, this solenoid has an "I" terminal which gets B+ when the solenoid is
energized. (I think it is used to bypass an ignition ballast resistor in
older cars) Does anyone have a schematic of the wiring inside this device?
I'm curious how this "I" terminal is wired internally. ( I googled for
about 20 minutes but could not find any info on this, which I though was odd
)
So, I'm looking specifically for feedback on the following 2 questions:
1. applicability of this device for cranking a Lycoming
2. mounting orientation
3. internal schematic
TIA,
Jeff Luckey
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: ACF-50 Anti-corrosion between block and alternator |
mount...
At 03:03 PM 9/22/2012, you wrote:
When I took the old alternator mount off the engine, I noticed there
was some corrosion on the engine block under the alternator mount. My
new alternator (B&C) gets its ground through the mount. Can I use and
anti-corrosion film such as ACF-50 on the block before bolting the
mount to the engine? Or will that place resistance in the ground path
for the alternator?
The only way to you add resistance to the joint with such
treatments is when the higher resistance contaminant is
as hard or harder than base materials (alternator bracket
and engine crankcase).
For example, we've discussed the manner in which anti-corrosion
dopes work in crimped terminals on aluminum wire. A wire
grip and wire strands might appear to be full of dope but
after the crimp, the PRESSURES applied to deform metal parts
with intent to create gas-tight junctures is so much
higher the compression strength of the 'contaminant' that
it's extruded out of spaces where the metal hits the road.
As you transition out of those metal upset spaces, the
remaining dopant is squished out and remains in the voids
becomes a barrier to moisture laden air.
Back in my two-way-radio-days we used to pack coax cable
connectors on tower joints with Dow Corning DC-4, a
silicone grease the consistency of wheel-bearing grease.
The connectors were then wrapped with 3+ layers of
plastic tape (which would only stick to itself due
to slickness of the coax and connectors underneath!),
Such joints opened years later might have the tape
nearly falling off due to UV and weather effects but
the joints inside were as-new pristine.
Suitable dopant used on the brightly cleaned and ready to mate
surfaces of your alternator bracket and engine is
incapable of raising joint resistance where adequate
metal-to-metal contact and pressures are achieved.
Remnants of the dopant not extruded out of the
joint remain in non-contact areas and provide the
desired barrier for ingress of moisture.
There's a host of suitable materials. Electronic
grade RTV (no corrosive type) comes to mind as a
material with high operating temperatures but soft
enough not to 'glue' things together. Chemical
conversion coatings will only protect a surface and
have no ability to fill gaps and preclude moisture
incursion. You use those chemical conversion before
assembly then use gap-filing dopants on top of that
for the golden joint.
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: What crimper to use for B&C alternator field |
terminals...
At 03:06 PM 9/22/2012, you wrote:
>
>Does anyone know what kind of crimper I use for the terminals used
>on the field wire for the B&C alternators? Does one of the crimpers
>from B&C work? Which one?
>
>Thanks,
>Michael-
Those are b-crimp terminals
http://tinyurl.com/8j73sbp
http://tinyurl.com/8hf6mo9
applied with a tool like the one shown
from B&C
I discovered this tool on eBay which appears
to be the right one but there's not enough
details in the ad to be sure.
http://tinyurl.com/8hn8vxe
I've ordered one for evaluation and will
report my findings here on the List.
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: Why did this AMP crimp on connection get singed |
and fail?
At 04:08 PM 9/22/2012, you wrote:
>
>Bill,
>
>Search "switches with faston tabs" in the AeroElectric archives.
>They discuss the discoloration of the faston insulation as the
>result of switch failure. Time frame of sept 08.
Yes . . . there was a 'rash' of failures manifesting
in 'smoked joints' that started with loose rivets on
the Carling switches. This prompted a lot of discussion
and failure-analysis/tear-downs back about that
time. Something to keep in mind as folks are unhappily
blessed with such events.
Look for a the loci of failure . . . sorta like a
arson investigation. See which parts got hottest.
These usually point to the area off poor connection
where the degradation of the joints began. Several
examples of over-heating in poor conduction areas
are explored here:
http://tinyurl.com/8d63v8x
http://tinyurl.com/8zzkfbb
http://tinyurl.com/8zzkfbb
Whether bolting alternator brackets to crank-cases
or keeping all the connections tight through
a switch, the path to failure is the same. Increase
in resistance increases heating and VOLTAGE DROP
across a joint These two antagonists team up
regeneratively to damage and perhaps fail the
joint.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
At 06:58 PM 9/22/2012, you wrote:
>
>Bob,
>
> I'm interested, but I'm unwilling to take on any more projects
> at this time. Maybe a couple of years down the road. When I
> decide to take on another project I'll drop you a note.
>
>Just a couple of quick questions How many amps at what voltage would
>be available and what would you imagine the overall dimensions to be?
>
>I'll keep my eyes out for stainless steel electrical properties and
>drop you a note if I see anything that might be useful.
Good. I've got about 100 back-burner projects, some
of which get tid-bits of useful information added
from time to time. It's that expansion of situational
awareness that contributes to understanding of the
whole . . . holler if you get either inspired or
motivated . . . and thanks for the offer.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Pitot tube slightly plugged... |
>
>Stick the "V" end up in the hole in the fuel drain, gascolator, fuel
>vent, etc, with the legs sticking out to the side.
>
>Remove before flight, but in theory air would be able to pass if you
>accidentally left them in the fuel vent.
>
>Been doing this for a few years now and no more bug problem in the
>fuel drains.
An elegant solution Dj . . . how about some photos
of these critters in place. Let's do a little one-pager
for the AEC website archives.
Bob . . .
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: | ACF-50 Anti-corrosion between block and alternator |
mount...
At 03:32 AM 9/23/2012, you wrote:
>
>Michael,
>
>Since nobody has responded yet...I will offer my .02
>
>It is my understanding that products like ACF-50 are used to prevent
>oxidation/corrosion from developing. If the part is already corroded, I
>would suggest removing the corrosion and then use the ACF-50 to prevent it
>from returning anytime soon. You may also look for a electrically
>conductive paste that will seal out the oxygen. There should be plenty of
>electrical pathway capacity through the mounting bolts regardless.
>
>Bevan
Bingo! You get the gold star for this topic
my friend. The paste or "dopant" need not be
conductive for reasons I cited in the other posting.
But their function is necessary to joint longevity
and goes beyond repairs and protection of surfaces.
Chemical treatment thicknesses are measured in
diameters of molecules. Gap fillers have a much
larger and equally important role to play . . .
Bob . . .
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: Start Solenoid Orientation |
At 12:02 PM 9/23/2012, you wrote:
Group,
I'm preparing some electrical hardware for my RV7 & this question came up:
How should I orient the start solenoid, terminals up or down? I'm
curious how G loading will affect the plunger.
I'm planning to use this solenoid
http://www.autopartswarehouse.com/sku/Standard/Starter_Solenoid/SISS581.html
(a generic automotive type) because it is inexpensive & should be
easily found in the future.
In the picture at the above link, the solenoid appears "terminals
down". Is that how it should be mounted in the airframe? In that
orientation, any positive G loading will try to keep the contacts
apart or open which is what I want. (don't want starter to
inadvertently engage at the bottom of a hard pull).
I think that the return spring in this device is pretty strong
therefore it would take more than 6 Gs to get it to move but I
thought I would pose the question to the group.
Exactly. The g-load closing of starter contactors
is one of those hanagar myths that has been around
for a very long time . . . and repeated often enough
it morphs into fact.
That contactor mounted on the firewall orients the
the terminals forward. A study of these pieces and
parts http://tinyurl.com/96wy5mq shows that the
contact bar is pushed against the insulated lid
which retains the terminals. G-forces tending to
close the contacts in this orientation would be
achieved only if you flew into a mountainside.
When oriented on a horizontal surface, you'd have
to be in a wing-stripping push-over to close
the contacts.
I was working the B&C booth at OSH when one of the
air-show famous showed up to buy a new starter and
a starter contactor. After completing a performance
it was discovered that his starter ring gear was
trashed and the pinion on the starter damaged. The
starter contactor was "stuck shut" which common
wisdom of excited moment suggest was victim of
daring-do g-loads.
I didn't get to see the as-installed carcasses
nor were we asked to do autopsies on the damaged
parts.
After some reflection in following months I
concluded that he most likely suffered a stuck
contactor at engine start up. But given the cockpit
noise of these hi-performance machines and attention
to upcoming demands on pilotage, the event went
unnoticed. He probably flew his routine with a
starter engaged and running.
Also, this solenoid has an "I" terminal which gets B+ when the
solenoid is energized. (I think it is used to bypass an ignition
ballast resistor in older cars) Does anyone have a schematic of the
wiring inside this device? I'm curious how this "I" terminal is
wired internally. ( I googled for about 20 minutes but could not
find any info on this, which I though was odd )
You're correct. This feature isn't used in cars
with electronic ignition but would still be useful
on a '57 Chevy. Few cognizant enthusiasts today
are even aware of this feature or its significance.
There are two popular form factors for this contactor.
http://tinyurl.com/8my46tv
There's a number of I-terminal references in this
document
http://tinyurl.com/9looejm
So, I'm looking specifically for feedback on the following 2 questions:
applicability of this device for cranking a Lycoming
Works good, lasts a long time
mounting orientation
Doesn't really matter much but you'd have to
go out of your way to mount it such that
flight g-loads tended to close contacts. This
is unlike popular starter contactors of
yesteryear
http://tinyurl.com/8fwygp4
which featured large area, low pressure contacts
and massive solenoid armatures. Even in the
"continuous duty" versions were not well suited
to high-inrush duty of spinning up cranking motors.
That's the best we had in 1960 but have not been
seen in that service for many decades. But even
these parts are exceedingly unlike to get closed
under g-loads of flight. Now, there WAS a good
reason for mounting them upside down on the firewall
but that was for moisture reasons . . . that's
another story of a CFD and hat-dance carried out
at the Cessna Single Engine facility about 1980.
internal schematic
See figure 11-21 in the 'Connection. Functionally
accurate. The "I" terminal in modern incarnations
of a starter contactor is bridged in one stroke with
the main terminals of the device. In this
picture http://tinyurl.com/96wy5mq the "thin and
light moving contacts" are propped up on a spring
strut at right angles to the main current pathway.
The end of this strut contacts the "I" terminal
simultaneously with closure of the main terminals.
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: Misprint in Z-16, v.12/ OV with Rotax generators? |
At 11:18 PM 9/22/2012, you wrote:
Thanks Bob,
I almost didn't mention it as I thought it was
"obviously wrongh but now I'm glad I did as I
learnt something! (Is there a detailed
discussion of how each Z figure works somewhere
that beginners can read?). Still wondering about
the diff between the Z16 and Z17 alternator disconnect wiring.
Just variations on a theme. Primary design
goal is to achieve absolute control over energy
from the alternator as seen by the rest of the
airplane. Opening the DC pathway out of the
rectifier-regulator does that. Opening the AC
power into the regulator does too.
AC is generally easier to control than DC for
considerations of contact arcing. But given
the low duty cycle of stressful events in these
systems, either will do fine and last a long
time.
As Ken noted, the RR can be placed at risk for
high rpm ops without having the battery connected.
So while the control schemes presented in Z-16/17
are golden for the rest of the airplane, Z-17
carries the protection further back toward the
alternator and would perhaps have saved Ken's
RR from untimely demise due to the unloaded
condition.
I've not taken the time to really thrash through
the physics of a PM regulator. Seems it SHOULD
be designed to handle worst case failures including
unloaded operations. It can probably be done but
Z-17 is a work-around until the golden PM rectifier
regulator comes along.
Bob . . .
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: | Yesterday's Project - Show & Tell |
How about a little show-and-tell. I'm not sure that the embedded picture
will come thru, (if it does not, I will re-post)
Picture of a panel of containing a master solenoid, start solenoid, shunt,
shunt fuses & ANL current limiter for the engine battery in my RV-7.
Design Goals:
1. as compact as practical ( the mounting plate dimensions are 6" wide
x 5.5" tall)
2. easy to install - (mounts to airframe w/ 4 screws)
3. easy to work on (all of the interconnections were made while sitting
at my workbench as opposed to working in-position on the airframe)
4. easy to maintain (all fastenings are tapped into the base-plate thus
not requiring access to the back of the panel after installation for
maintenance)
Mounting:
To be mounted <~12" from the battery on the firewall
Exercise for the reader:
See if you can identify input & all outputs
Any & all questions, comments, & constructive criticisms welcome.
Jeff Luckey
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: | Start Solenoid Orientation |
Thanks Bob for your usual thorough mini-dissertation (I don't know how you
find the time to deliver such thoughtful answers to the group but it is much
appreciated! - If you are ever in Southern California, the cervezas are on
me)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 13:28
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Start Solenoid Orientation
<nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
At 12:02 PM 9/23/2012, you wrote:
Group,
I'm preparing some electrical hardware for my RV7 & this question came up:
How should I orient the start solenoid, terminals up or down? I'm
curious how G loading will affect the plunger.
I'm planning to use this solenoid
http://www.autopartswarehouse.com/sku/Standard/Starter_Solenoid/SISS581.html
(a generic automotive type) because it is inexpensive & should be
easily found in the future.
In the picture at the above link, the solenoid appears "terminals
down". Is that how it should be mounted in the airframe? In that
orientation, any positive G loading will try to keep the contacts
apart or open which is what I want. (don't want starter to
inadvertently engage at the bottom of a hard pull).
I think that the return spring in this device is pretty strong
therefore it would take more than 6 Gs to get it to move but I
thought I would pose the question to the group.
Exactly. The g-load closing of starter contactors
is one of those hanagar myths that has been around
for a very long time . . . and repeated often enough
it morphs into fact.
That contactor mounted on the firewall orients the
the terminals forward. A study of these pieces and
parts http://tinyurl.com/96wy5mq shows that the
contact bar is pushed against the insulated lid
which retains the terminals. G-forces tending to
close the contacts in this orientation would be
achieved only if you flew into a mountainside.
When oriented on a horizontal surface, you'd have
to be in a wing-stripping push-over to close
the contacts.
I was working the B&C booth at OSH when one of the
air-show famous showed up to buy a new starter and
a starter contactor. After completing a performance
it was discovered that his starter ring gear was
trashed and the pinion on the starter damaged. The
starter contactor was "stuck shut" which common
wisdom of excited moment suggest was victim of
daring-do g-loads.
I didn't get to see the as-installed carcasses
nor were we asked to do autopsies on the damaged
parts.
After some reflection in following months I
concluded that he most likely suffered a stuck
contactor at engine start up. But given the cockpit
noise of these hi-performance machines and attention
to upcoming demands on pilotage, the event went
unnoticed. He probably flew his routine with a
starter engaged and running.
Also, this solenoid has an "I" terminal which gets B+ when the
solenoid is energized. (I think it is used to bypass an ignition
ballast resistor in older cars) Does anyone have a schematic of the
wiring inside this device? I'm curious how this "I" terminal is
wired internally. ( I googled for about 20 minutes but could not
find any info on this, which I though was odd )
You're correct. This feature isn't used in cars
with electronic ignition but would still be useful
on a '57 Chevy. Few cognizant enthusiasts today
are even aware of this feature or its significance.
There are two popular form factors for this contactor.
http://tinyurl.com/8my46tv
There's a number of I-terminal references in this
document
http://tinyurl.com/9looejm
So, I'm looking specifically for feedback on the following 2 questions:
applicability of this device for cranking a Lycoming
Works good, lasts a long time
mounting orientation
Doesn't really matter much but you'd have to
go out of your way to mount it such that
flight g-loads tended to close contacts. This
is unlike popular starter contactors of
yesteryear
http://tinyurl.com/8fwygp4
which featured large area, low pressure contacts
and massive solenoid armatures. Even in the
"continuous duty" versions were not well suited
to high-inrush duty of spinning up cranking motors.
That's the best we had in 1960 but have not been
seen in that service for many decades. But even
these parts are exceedingly unlike to get closed
under g-loads of flight. Now, there WAS a good
reason for mounting them upside down on the firewall
but that was for moisture reasons . . . that's
another story of a CFD and hat-dance carried out
at the Cessna Single Engine facility about 1980.
internal schematic
See figure 11-21 in the 'Connection. Functionally
accurate. The "I" terminal in modern incarnations
of a starter contactor is bridged in one stroke with
the main terminals of the device. In this
picture http://tinyurl.com/96wy5mq the "thin and
light moving contacts" are propped up on a spring
strut at right angles to the main current pathway.
The end of this strut contacts the "I" terminal
simultaneously with closure of the main terminals.
Bob . . .
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
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: | Re: Pitot tube slightly plugged... |
On 9/23/2012 2:07 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> An elegant solution Dj . . . how about some photos
> of these critters in place. Let's do a little one-pager
> for the AEC website archives.
>
Hi Bob,
I did a quick little write-up on my website at:
http://deej.net/aviation/bug-plug/
Feel free to use the pictures and info on that page if you want to
put something up on the AEC site.
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/
Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/
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: Pitot tube slightly plugged... |
Can you convert the document to PDF format so it can be easily saved
Thanks,
Dick
In a message dated 9/23/2012 7:11:01 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
deej@deej.net writes:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dj Merrill <deej@deej.net>
On 9/23/2012 2:07 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> An elegant solution Dj . . . how about some photos
> of these critters in place. Let's do a little one-pager
> for the AEC website archives.
>
Hi Bob,
I did a quick little write-up on my website at:
http://deej.net/aviation/bug-plug/
Feel free to use the pictures and info on that page if you want to
put something up on the AEC site.
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/
Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/
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! --
|