Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:00 AM - Cross feed contactor current (Dan Charrois)
2. 05:16 AM - Re: Cross feed contactor current (Ken)
3. 07:41 AM - Re: Cross feed contactor current (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 08:28 AM - Re: Cross feed contactor current (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 03:12 PM - contactor not contacting! (R. curtis)
6. 03:34 PM - Re: Cross feed contactor current (R. curtis)
7. 03:48 PM - Re: contactor not contacting! (Jeff Luckey)
8. 04:17 PM - Re: contactor not contacting! (R. curtis)
9. 06:13 PM - Re: contactor not contacting! (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 06:27 PM - Re: Cross feed contactor current (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: | Cross feed contactor current |
Hi everyone.
I'm working on an RV-10 and am considering something like a Z14 configuration with
one battery (PC680) behind the baggage compartment in the rear as per plans
and another PC680 firewall forward (As a fairly electric-heavy plane intended
for light IFR, I plan to have two alternators anyway, and I like the idea of
being able to use the rear battery to power up avionics to plan flight plans,
listen to radios, etc. while not worrying about draining the battery in the front
for starting the engine, not having issues with EFIS reboots while starting,
and having the option of closing the cross feed for more power during cold
engine starts - a reality sometimes of living in northern Canada).
I have a question though. Say in a worst case scenario I drain the rear battery
pretty much dead and then close the cross feed contactor. What kind of current
would be trying to flow from the good battery to the depleted one? I'm suspecting
that if the charge difference between the two batteries is pretty large,
that current could end up being significant. Is the 4 AWG specified in Z14
between the batteries and respective contactors, not to mention the current
rating on the contactors themselves, sufficient in such a scenario, considering
that as far as I understand it, the current would only be limited by the batteries'
internal resistance? Or if the charge difference is large would it instead
be advisable to charge the batteries independently from their respective
alternators until the differential is smaller before closing the cross feed contactor?
Thanks for any insight!
Dan
--
Syzygy Research & Technology
Box 83, Legal, AB T0G 1L0 Canada
Phone: 780-961-2213
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: Cross feed contactor current |
Engine off, the voltage on the good battery is not high enough to charge
the depleted battery so the highest current possible is what that
alternator can output after startup minus other loads.
Closing the crossfeed prior to start should not be a problem regardless
of charge state and it will be helpful even with a partially discharged
second battery.
If the second alternator is a small unit I'd leave the crossfeed open
after startup as a means of limiting the current into a discharged
second battery and extending the battery life. I don't like really fast
charging. In fact even in your scenario I'd wire for automatic crossfeed
closure during cranking which works well for me. One less thing to think
about as it closes and then opens automatically and it opens before the
alternator is up to speed.
Ken
On 10/03/2013 6:59 AM, Dan Charrois wrote:
> <danlist@syz.com>
>
> Hi everyone.
>
> I'm working on an RV-10 and am considering something like a Z14
> configuration with one battery (PC680) behind the baggage compartment
> in the rear as per plans and another PC680 firewall forward (As a
> fairly electric-heavy plane intended for light IFR, I plan to have
> two alternators anyway, and I like the idea of being able to use the
> rear battery to power up avionics to plan flight plans, listen to
> radios, etc. while not worrying about draining the battery in the
> front for starting the engine, not having issues with EFIS reboots
> while starting, and having the option of closing the cross feed for
> more power during cold engine starts - a reality sometimes of living
> in northern Canada).
>
> I have a question though. Say in a worst case scenario I drain the
> rear battery pretty much dead and then close the cross feed
> contactor. What kind of current would be trying to flow from the
> good battery to the depleted one? I'm suspecting that if the charge
> difference between the two batteries is pretty large, that current
> could end up being significant. Is the 4 AWG specified in Z14
> between the batteries and respective contactors, not to mention the
> current rating on the contactors themselves, sufficient in such a
> scenario, considering that as far as I understand it, the current
> would only be limited by the batteries' internal resistance? Or if
> the charge difference is large would it instead be advisable to
> charge the batteries independently from their respective alternators
> until the differential is smaller before closing the cross feed
> contactor?
>
> Thanks for any insight!
>
> Dan -- Syzygy Research & Technology Box 83, Legal, AB T0G 1L0
> Canada Phone: 780-961-2213
>
>
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: Cross feed contactor current |
>Closing the crossfeed prior to start should not be a problem
>regardless of charge state and it will be helpful even with a
>partially discharged second battery.
Good answer. Old timers on the List may recall some
discussion we had on this topic many moons back. A
List reader opined that energy was exchanged in
significant amounts when one connected a charged
battery to a dead one. He bolstered the argument
with anecdotal observations of the sparks that
happen when one hooks up jumper cables between
vehicles. He also claimed to have measured significant
current flows in a charged-to-dead battery
connection.
I went to the bench and repeated the experiment.
Yes, there WAS a spark when I connected a fully
charged battery to a dead battery. Yes, the initial
current flow was substantial . . . about 40A as
I recall . . . but it fell off very quickly as
the dead-battery's chemistry quickly adjusted to
a new terminal voltage based on a source voltage
too low to significantly charge the dead battery.
Later on I offered a revision to the ol' mechanic's
tale that a battery was one of the 'best filters of
noise' on the bus. I used to subscribe to that
notion myself. My colleagues believed it.
But consider that a battery has three states of
existence in the properly functioning system.
We KNOW that an engine driven power source must
be adjusted for at LEAST 13.8 volts in order to
fully charge a battery at 20C. Setting it somewhat
higher, say 14.2 to 14.6 overs a faster replenishment
of charge after cranking the engine and perhaps
a prolonged battery-only pre-flight activity.
At the same time, we know that turning the
alternator off allows system voltage to fall
quickly to 12.5v or so . . . it marches downward
from there with time.
So what happens in the range of 12.5 to 13.8
volts? Not much. The battery is incapable of
taking on significant energy below 13.5 and
doesn't start delivering significant energy
at more than 12.5 volts. I.e. the battery becomes
'unhooked'. The idea that it takes on the role
of some 'super capacitor' for the smoothing
of noise is without foundation. I've verified
this both on cars and airplanes where disconnection
of the battery while the alternator is running
produces a only a small rise in bus noise.
A 14v alternator is a low impedance source with
about 1.5v pk-pk ripple built in as an artifact
of 3-phase rectification. This is a given that
drives DO-160/Mil-STD-704 requirements that
qualified devices be designed to function
as advertised in the presence of such noise.
The noise spectrum to be tolerated is plotted
here . . .
http://tinyurl.com/b3rhjwq
This is a 28v system plot where worst case
noise is 1Vrms over the range of 1 to 5KHz
and falls off on each side. 1Vrms sine wave
is 2.8Vpk-pk. Any departure from sine wave
allows the pk-pk values to rise markedly. In
short, the battery is not an effective filter
for anything except gross brown-out events and
standing off a runaway alternator for tens
of milliseconds required for the ov protection
system to assert system shutdown.
This ol' dog didn't learn it until about half
way through a 40+ year career. Not that it
was hard to figure out . . . just didn't have
a reason to question what was proffered as
common sense.
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: | Re: Cross feed contactor current |
At 05:59 AM 3/10/2013, you wrote:
Hi everyone.
I'm working on an RV-10 and am considering something like a Z14
configuration with one battery (PC680) behind the baggage compartment
in the rear as per plans and another PC680 firewall forward (As a
fairly electric-heavy plane intended for light IFR, I plan to have
two alternators anyway, and I like the idea of being able to use the
rear battery to power up avionics to plan flight plans, listen to
radios, etc. while not worrying about draining the battery in the
front for starting the engine, not having issues with EFIS reboots
while starting, and having the option of closing the cross feed for
more power during cold engine starts - a reality sometimes of living
in northern Canada).
Have you conducted an energy study on your
anticipated operational needs? Certainly
a panel full of electro-whizzies drives notions
of extra-ordinary electrical system demands
but have you worked out the numbers?
What is passed around as common sense often
misses the mark for calculated reality. For
example, at a lunch time learning session at
HBC I put this plot up on the screen . . .
Emacs!
This is an exemplar voltage-current plot for getting
the first engine started on a Beechjet. As you can see,
current flows are substantial and the duration is
considerably longer that what it takes to get your
4-banger lit. The battery that produced this
performance curve was rated at 35 a.h.
My question to those in attendance was, "What percentage
of battery capacity is expended in this event?" Guesses
were all over the place but I don't think anyone guessed
less than 25%. In fact, this event consumed about 6%
of total battery capacity.
I offer this anecdote to support the notion that the
perceived magnitude of a condition is often far removed
from reality.
My question about an energy study goes to your decision
to install 2 batteries and 2 alternators of significant
capacity in an RV. . . even if it does have a lot of
electro-whizzies.
The load well crafted load analysis will drive good
decisions on sizing batteries, alternators and crafting
a pre-flight check list that puts real numbers to
battery only ops before the engine is started. It
also encourages you to craft a plan-B condition where
en route endurance loads do not exceed 8A thus saving
a fully charged battery for approach to landing where
you can turn on anything you like.
I have yet to see a study for a configuration in an
RV that truly taxes a system to the extent that Z-14
yields a good return on investment. That's a
substantial increment in initial costs, weight,
and cost of operation as opposed to a Z-13/8 system
that offers nearly equal system reliability with
a much lower cost of ownership. You might find
it more attractive to trade empty weight for
fuel and/or baggage.
I suggest you run the exercise to prove to yourself
that Z-13/8 is indeed inadequate to your design
goals based on the numbers as opposed to square
inches of glass on the panel.
There are a number of exemplar exercises posted
at http://tinyurl.com/9rt6ymn along with a blank
form that can be used to put your arms around
the answer.
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: | contactor not contacting! |
I have a 1977 Cessna Cardinal, and recently it is necessary to flip the mas
ter on and off several times in order to power up the panel. It seems that
the master is OK because I can hear the contactor activating and deactivat
ing as the master is turned on and off. After several tries it will finall
y power up the panel. Once the contactor has activated and supplying power
, I have never lost power again until physically turning the master off. I
am making a wild assumption that the problem is due to a faulty contactor,
perhaps corrosion or some kind of crud (technical term used extensively by
electrical engineers) on the contacts. Is this a common problem=3F Is chan
ging the contactor the right way to fix it=3F Comments, suggestions, please!
!
Thanks,
Roger
--
Do you have a slow PC=3F Try a Free scan http://www.spamfighter.com/SLOW-PCfi
ghter=3Fcid=sigen
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: Cross feed contactor current |
> We KNOW that an engine driven power source must
> be adjusted for at LEAST 13.8 volts in order to
> fully charge a battery at 20C. Setting it somewhat
> higher, say 14.2 to 14.6 overs a faster replenishment
> of charge after cranking the engine and perhaps
> a prolonged battery-only pre-flight activity.
Bob,
Do you recall what we should expect for an
alternator output voltage when using a gereric
Ford Voltage Regulator? I believe these are
factory set and cannot be changed. However
I think I read that You can drop the sense
voltage through a diode and increase the alternator
output voltage. Is this correct and useful?
Roger
--
Do you have a slow PC? Try a Free scan http://www.spamfighter.com/SLOW-PCfighter?cid=sigen
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: | contactor not contacting! |
May I suggest a little testing.
The next time you turn-on the master and hear it click (or clunk as you case
may be) but the panel does not "power up", take a voltmeter and see if there
is voltage on the load side of the contactor. If not, then you've got some
form of contact failure.
If you have power on the load side then your problem is elsewhere - I'd
start looking for loose connections by putting a wrench on the connections
down stream of the contactor to make sure they are tight.
Then report your findings here for more assistance based on your test
results.
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of R. curtis
Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 14:11
Subject: AeroElectric-List: contactor not contacting!
I have a 1977 Cessna Cardinal, and recently it is necessary to flip the
master on and off several times in order to power up the panel. It seems
that the master is OK because I can hear the contactor activating and
deactivating as the master is turned on and off. After several tries it
will finally power up the panel. Once the contactor has activated and
supplying power, I have never lost power again until physically turning the
master off. I am making a wild assumption that the problem is due to a
faulty contactor, perhaps corrosion or some kind of crud (technical term
used extensively by electrical engineers) on the contacts. Is this a common
problem? Is changing the contactor the right way to fix it? Comments,
suggestions, please!!
Thanks,
Roger
_____
.
Do you have a slow <http://www.spamfighter.com/SLOW-PCfighter?cid=sigen>
PC? Try a free scan!
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
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: contactor not contacting! |
The next time you turn-on the master and hear it click (or clunk as you c
ase may be) but the panel does not =22power up=22, take a voltmeter and see if
there is voltage on the load side of the contactor. If not, then you've go
t some form of contact failure.
There seems to be no intermittent connections because once it is on it
stays on, and the starter cranks the engine just fine. I'll put a meter on
it next time I'm at the airport, but highly suspect the contactor.
Roger
If you have power on the load side then your problem is elsewhere - I'd s
tart looking for loose connections by putting a wrench on the connections d
own stream of the contactor to make sure they are tight.
--
Do you have a slow PC=3F Try a Free scan http://www.spamfighter.com/SLOW-PCfi
ghter=3Fcid=sigen
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: contactor not contacting! |
At 05:10 PM 3/10/2013, you wrote:
>I have a 1977 Cessna Cardinal, and recently it is necessary to flip
>the master on and off several times in order to power up the
>panel. It seems that the master is OK because I can hear the
>contactor activating and deactivating as the master is turned on and
>off. After several tries it will finally power up the panel. Once
>the contactor has activated and supplying power, I have never lost
>power again until physically turning the master off. I am making a
>wild assumption that the problem is due to a faulty contactor,
>perhaps corrosion or some kind of crud (technical term used
>extensively by electrical engineers) on the contacts. Is this a
>common problem? Is changing the contactor the right way to fix
>it? Comments, suggestions, please!!
Based on the facts (1) you can hear it operate
whether it connects or not and (2) once connected
it stays connected is a strong indicator of a
bad contactor. I believe all the Pawnee Plant
aircraft went 28v in '78 so your airplane probably
has the legacy 12v PMB/Stancore/White-Rogers contactor.
Does it look like this?
WHITE RODGERS70-902
If so, you could get a 'test' replacement from
Newark for about $25. (Cat# 35M2084 which is a
4-terminal device. You'll have to add your own
jumper between coil-hot and BAT terminal)If
that 'cures' the problem, you can go for the
holy-watered part.
If it's some other part, post a picture of
it and we can probably identify it's generic
roots.
I'd like to have your failed part to do a tear
down inspection and report to be posted her
on the List and archived on the website.
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: Cross feed contactor current |
At 05:33 PM 3/10/2013, you wrote:
<mrspudandcompany@verizon.net>
Bob,
Do you recall what we should expect for an
alternator output voltage when using a generic
Ford Voltage Regulator? I believe these are
factory set and cannot be changed.
Yes. When I was working there they were set
for 14.2 volts. I'm not aware of any reason
to have changed it.
However, I think I read that You can drop
the sense voltage through a diode and increase
the alternator output voltage. Is this correct
and useful?
The original regulators sensed bus voltage
alternator through the field source lead.
This shared duty is a set-up for the famous
"dancing ammeter syndrome" common to many SE
aircraft including the Cessnas. Search for
dancing AND ammeter on the AeroElectric-List
forum.
Anything you put in series with that wire
increases changes for regulation instability.
I suspect that modern replacements are
all solid state even if they look like the
old electro-mechanical products. They might
have a pot on the board if you can get he
cover off.
Bob . . .
Roger
--
Do you have a slow PC? Try a Free scan
http://www.spamfighter.com/SLOW-PCfighter?cid=sigen
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
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! --
|