Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:24 AM - Re: Fw: Terminal Tool (Eric M. Jones)
2. 06:18 AM - Waiver on Ethanol! (Bill Bradburry)
3. 06:21 AM - Re: Design News note on excessive voltage (Eric M. Jones)
4. 06:46 AM - Re: Re: Design News note on excessive voltage (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 07:03 AM - Re: Switch confusion (plevyakh)
6. 07:54 AM - Wiring advice (Eric Marenyi)
7. 10:43 AM - Re: Need for an Alternator switch (bigginsking)
8. 11:58 AM - AIRCAM Schematic or ideas (Chris)
9. 12:26 PM - Re: Re: Switch confusion (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 01:01 PM - Re: AIRCAM Schematic or ideas (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 01:05 PM - Re: Re: Pitot tube slightly plugged... (Paul Millner)
12. 01:46 PM - Re: Re: Pitot tube slightly plugged... (Mike Wynn)
13. 04:17 PM - Re: AIRCAM Schematic or ideas (Chris)
14. 05:56 PM - Re: AIRCAM Schematic or ideas (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
15. 08:48 PM - Re: AIRCAM Schematic or ideas (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: Fwd: Terminal Tool |
Go to Ebay and search "Hammer Crimper". For big cables they seem ideal. And so
cheap it is hard to believe. Must be Elbonian labor.
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=384015#384015
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: | Waiver on Ethanol! |
The US government, until October 11, 2012, is asking for public comment on
the proposed waiver to the Renewable Fuel Standard, the regulation that
mandates ethanol in U.S. fuel stocks, due to reduced corn crops from this
summer's drought. Go
<http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0632-0001>
HERE on regulations.gov, where you can view the document,
EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0632. Click the "Comment Now!" button to add your comment.
It's easy, so do it now!
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0632-0001
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: Design News note on excessive voltage |
do not archive
There is a note in Design News on how an aircraft electrical system developed very
high voltage: Probably rare but worth knowing. I personally doubt the veracity
of it.
Sherlock Ohms--
Super Mistake Caused Super Voltage
http://tinyurl.com/8ff3hay
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=384021#384021
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: Design News note on excessive voltage |
At 08:21 AM 9/26/2012, you wrote:
do not archive
There is a note in Design News on how an aircraft electrical system
developed very high voltage: Probably rare but worth knowing. I
personally doubt the veracity of it.
Agreed. The energy required to char stuff is significant.
Far greater than the transient energies contained in the
spectrum of relay chatter products. His anecdotal inclusion
of the missing ground on a 3-phase delta was not germane
to the core assertion, nor was the introductory anecdote
about 400Hz 3-phase power.
It would be interesting to see detailed circuitry and
study his FMEA that supports the 'feedback path' to
a 'main power relay'. I know there is a growing notion
that computers, particularly big and hairy byte thrashers
can and should be tasked with controlling everything.
Such thoughts gave rise to DO-178 level A software
certs that give harsh meaning to the "blue screen
of death".
The first time I enjoyed any inside info about the
Eclipse 500, I was told that a systems management
computer was going to 'do everything' . . . even
manage circuit breakers off of the bus. One could
open breakers by means of touch-screen icons.
Which begs the question. If I have flow nearly
1000 hours and never had the slightest inclination
to fiddle with breakers (See chapter 17) then
why on earth would one put a computer in charge
of such decisions and make it 'easier' for me
to do it too? I see CA is now figuring out how
to license driverless cars, yet one more step
toward reducing the human operator to status
of mere passenger in the vehicle of life.
I would rather it not so but the author of that
little tid-bit in Design News sounds like a
'passenger' to me.
Bob . . .
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: Switch confusion |
Folks,
In studying the various Z Architecture diagrams, I notice in some cases the S700-2-3
switch is used and in others the S700-2-10 is used. I understand the functionality
differences.
Can anyone tell me if there are operational reasons for using an S700-2-10 switch
over the S700-2-3 switch? Or vice versa?
S700-2-3 = OFF - BATT + ALT ON
S700-2-10 = OFF - BATT ON - BATT + ALT ON
Right now I have the S700-2-3 switch in my design with the ALT FLD 5A breaker to
. I have a B&C L60amp primary alternator, with LR3C-14 Voltage regulator.
I also have the SD-8 amp as my backup alternator.
Thanks,
Howard
nuckollsr(at)cox.net wrote:
> At 08:26 PM 5/8/2007 -0500, you wrote:
>
> A Back in the "good 'ol days" when airplanes were getting their first
> generators, batteries and a few lights, the battery master and generator control
switches could be and were separate switches. This is because a generator
will start and run by itself whether or not a battery was on
> line to go with it. When alternators came along, they needed (and still do
> need) a battery to get them to come up reliably. Further, alternators do not
run well without a battery on line. None the less, it was desirable to have some
degree of independent control of the battery and alternator
> insofar as system performance requirements would permit. This is when the
> split-rocker master switch was conceived. This switch has acquired almost magical
attributes.
> . . I've seen the red-rocker enshrined in prominent locations on the panels of
many homebuilts even when all other switches were a different style.
>
> A little study of the split rocker shows us that the battery can be on by
> itself, but the alternator cannot. The same functionality is provided by our
DP3T, on-on-on toggle switch (S700-2-10). Lower position is ALL OFF, mid position
is BAT ONLY, upper position is BAT+ALT. It's true that you could replace the
S700-2-10 with an S700-2-3 and turn on BOTH devices with a single throw of
the DC master switch. It's a rare in-flight condition that the
> alternator NEEDS to be off. If you're doing some battery-only ground maintenance,
then you could pull the breaker. We recommend the S700-2-10 as an alternative
to the split-rocker switch to provide equivalent functionality. The three
positions offer ALL OFF, BATTERY ONLY, and BATTERY + ALTERNATOR functionality
while making sure that the alternator is not allowed to be ON when the battery
is OFF - I.e. emulation of the split rocker
> switch.
>
> Bob . . .
--------
Howard Plevyak
GlaStar / North Bend, Ohio
hplevyak@mac.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=384025#384025
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 |
|
I have a question regarding wiring my Sonex/Great Plains VW engine. The
system has 1 battery (PC625 Odyssey) a CD Solenoid, A regulator/rectifier,
and a 3 phase 35 Amp alternator. I am using a MAG and a secondary ignition
and coil system. Instrument panel is rather simple with a Stratomaster
Ultra Horizon, and a Radio (not sure if I will use panel mounted or my Icom
A-22 handheld). I may use a GPS, or might just use my ipad. I plan on
installing a cigarette lighter power outlet or 2 and that is about the
extent of the panel electrics. I have no lights. If I use the panel radio I
will be mounting headset jacks on the panel as well and that might require
me to use a ground isolation, even though it would be easier and probably
more convenient to just ground straight to the firewall without isolation.
I was planning on grounding on the engine side with a bolt through the
firewall (need isolators?) where the negative battery, engine ground strap,
and alternator ground will attach. On the inside I wanted to use a forest
of tabs, but I think I would rather bring a negative buss closer to the
panel and locate it there. I also plan on running a positive buss close to
the panel as well. I have reviewed the appendix from the book and none are
really close to what I am looking for. I am trying to figure out the best
method to do this and also avoid radio noise later as well. The fewer wires
through the firewall the better. Aside from the main power and ground wire
penetrating the firewall I will also have the CD Solenoid power wire, the
starter solenoid wire
Please offer any info/help you can.
Thanks!
Eric M.
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: Need for an Alternator switch |
I've got something similar to Z-8, with the SD-8 section deleted and a diode maintained
emergency battery that feeds the essential bus through a switch labeled
"critical"(actually it is a double pole, paralleled for capacity and reliability).
When I say "diode maintained battery" I mean the battery is fed from the main bus,
through a fuse rated at 150% of the 40A alternator capacity, then a diode
of similar capacity. The essential bus is fed through a second diode at the fuse
diode junction just as shown on Z-8 except for the addition of the already
mentioned fuse between the main and essential buss.
Z-8 switches the main alternator with the master but it seems redundant to have
the main bus switched from the contactor and at the same time switch the field,
especially when you consider they are mechanically tied to each other. With
Z-8, as it is, you're breaking/making the field circuit twice. Why? Didn't make
any sense to me so I deleted the main alternator switch.
I have a 5A pull breaker for the LR-3 regulator. That is the only breaker I have.
If I'm "on short final for the rocks" I just turn off the master and critical switches
that's everything including the alternator field.
I didn't know what that switch would add so I deleted it.
As an FYI, I'm also running dual electronic ignition. Those are fed via fuselink
directly from each battery. I have no vacuum pump, my instruments are electric,
although a GPS and the ADHRS have internal battery backups. I do fly IFR in
this plane.
I don't really care if certified aircraft have the alternator switch or not, the
question for everything I put in my plane is do I need it? What am I getting?
Bill Judge
N84WJ, RV-8 817 hrs
http://rv-8.blogspot.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=384036#384036
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: | AIRCAM Schematic or ideas |
I am beginning to work up an electrical plan for a friends Aircam project, twin
Rotax 912's with single battery. Anybody out there have a schematic they would
like to share for a twin engine rotax or similar to give me a starting point
to look over. I looked at the TECNAM P2006T but I don't think I need the complexity
of its system and I do not quite understand the Cross bus switch logic
they have. I attached for anyone who wants to comment on it.
Thanks
Chris Lucas
N919AR
RV-10 and Aircam helper
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: Switch confusion |
At 09:02 AM 9/26/2012, you wrote:
>
>Folks,
>In studying the various Z Architecture diagrams, I notice in some
>cases the S700-2-3 switch is used and in others the S700-2-10 is
>used. I understand the functionality differences.
>
>Can anyone tell me if there are operational reasons for using an
>S700-2-10 switch over the S700-2-3 switch? Or vice versa?
2-10 is progressive transfer that emulates the split-rocker
functionality. If you use 2-3 switch, then alternator
and battery come on and off together, alternator can only
be turned off by pulling the field breaker.
Either works.
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: AIRCAM Schematic or ideas |
At 01:57 PM 9/26/2012, you wrote:
>I am beginning to work up an electrical plan for a friends Aircam
>project, twin Rotax 912's with single battery. Anybody out there
>have a schematic they would like to share for a twin engine rotax or
>similar to give me a starting point to look over. I looked at the
>TECNAM P2006T but I don't think I need the complexity of its system
>and I do not quite understand the Cross bus switch logic they have.
Obviously, this is a day, fair-weather, vmc fun
machine. There's no obvious value srtiving for
a very failure tolerant system. Suggest you wire
like figure Z16
http://tinyurl.com/7vp9g4e
Except you have two-fat wire feeders to the
starter contactors at the engines. These
same feeders just happen to be a good way
to bring each alternator in to the battery.
Run one alternator at a time with second
for back up.
> I attached for anyone who wants to comment on it.
Busy . . .
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: | Re: Pitot tube slightly plugged... |
>> I'm please to hear that you were able to salvage an otherwise
useless piece of expensive hardware!
Let me warn that there appears to be an error in the repair
description. The OP wrote battery acid, HCl. But of course, battery
acid is H2SO4.
I can believe a weak (3 molar?) solution of HCl, as is often used as
swimming pool acid or brick cleaning acid might dislodge organic
material from a pitot tube without dissolving the pitot tube itself. I
would be very surprised (would not likely believe) that battery acid,
full strength, undiluted sulfuric acid was able to do anything but
significantly dissolve a pitot tube...
Hopefully the OP can clarify what he meant, since his acid description
was internally inconsistent.
Paul
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: Pitot tube slightly plugged... |
Thanks, Paul. I stand corrected. The acid used was obtained directly from a
surplus supply left over from filling a new dry lead-acid car battery. The
container had been capped, but was at least one year old. I do not know the
strength of the solution. FWIW: The vinegar actually brightened the visible
copper more than the battery acid.
And thanks to all who contributed their improvised techniques to thwarting
insects from creating homes in small holes. Especially interesting was the
comment about using different colored tubing. With a bug-plugged
scupper-ring at the fuel fill port on a C337, the rain-water level will rise
above the lip of the fuel cap neck. Until the owner [me] realizes that he
has a plugged scupper vent line, the appearance of water in the fuel
tank/test is an interesting and humbling mystery. My fix in 2001 was to add
2 inches of clear Tygon tubing to each vent outlet. I figured that if the
bugs were there, I'd at least see them the next time. However, they never
returned. Now I know why. Thanks guys.
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Millner" <millner@me.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Pitot tube slightly plugged...
>
> >> I'm please to hear that you were able to salvage an otherwise
> useless piece of expensive hardware!
>
> Let me warn that there appears to be an error in the repair description.
> The OP wrote battery acid, HCl. But of course, battery acid is H2SO4.
>
> I can believe a weak (3 molar?) solution of HCl, as is often used as
> swimming pool acid or brick cleaning acid might dislodge organic material
> from a pitot tube without dissolving the pitot tube itself. I would be
> very surprised (would not likely believe) that battery acid, full
> strength, undiluted sulfuric acid was able to do anything but
> significantly dissolve a pitot tube...
>
> Hopefully the OP can clarify what he meant, since his acid description was
> internally inconsistent.
>
> Paul
>
>
>
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: AIRCAM Schematic or ideas |
Thanks Bob, Z16 is where I was headed but wondered if I was missing something with
"twin engines". Definitely not a machine with a need for complexity.
One clarification... when you say run one alternator at a time do you mean just
switch one of the alternators off? How does keeping the designated backup off
improve system reliability or procedures?
Busy is a good word for the Tecnam.
-Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
Sent: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 16:00:02 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: AIRCAM Schematic or ideas
At 01:57 PM 9/26/2012, you wrote:
>I am beginning to work up an electrical plan for a friends Aircam
>project, twin Rotax 912's with single battery. Anybody out there
>have a schematic they would like to share for a twin engine rotax or
>similar to give me a starting point to look over. I looked at the
>TECNAM P2006T but I don't think I need the complexity of its system
>and I do not quite understand the Cross bus switch logic they have.
Obviously, this is a day, fair-weather, vmc fun
machine. There's no obvious value srtiving for
a very failure tolerant system. Suggest you wire
like figure Z16
http://tinyurl.com/7vp9g4e
Except you have two-fat wire feeders to the
starter contactors at the engines. These
same feeders just happen to be a good way
to bring each alternator in to the battery.
Run one alternator at a time with second
for back up.
> I attached for anyone who wants to comment on it.
Busy . . .
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: | Re: AIRCAM Schematic or ideas |
At 06:14 PM 9/26/2012, you wrote:
>
>Thanks Bob, Z16 is where I was headed but wondered if I was missing
>something with "twin engines". Definitely not a machine with a need
>for complexity.
>One clarification... when you say run one alternator at a time do
>you mean just switch one of the alternators off? How does keeping
>the designated backup off improve system reliability or procedures?
>
>Busy is a good word for the Tecnam.
Those alternators are designed to run in parallel on a
single bus. Given the sledge-hammer approach to voltage
regulation, it probably wouldn't hurt anything. At the
same time, if one alternator crapped and both were on,
you wouldn't get a low voltage warning annunciating
the failure. You might land with a dead alternator
and not know it until next preflight.
Better to run one alternator at a time. If it craps,
you've got a second alternator which you'll turn on
when the low voltage warning light flashes . . .
you DO plane active notification of low voltage?
Bob . . .
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: | Re: AIRCAM Schematic or ideas |
CORRECTION
>Those alternators are NOT designed to run in parallel on a
>single 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! --
|