AeroElectric-List Digest Archive

Sun 05/25/14


Total Messages Posted: 5



Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 04:27 AM - Re: Battery choice (Ron Burnett)
     2. 10:14 AM - Alternate batteries (GLEN MATEJCEK)
     3. 12:04 PM - Re: Alternate batteries (Charlie England)
     4. 07:37 PM - Re: Wire tag ID needed (Eric M. Jones)
     5. 08:39 PM - Re: Re: Wire tag ID needed (Charlie England)
 
 
 


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
    Time: 04:27:48 AM PST US
    From: Ron Burnett <ronburnett@charter.net>
    Subject: Re: Battery choice
    I buy my Odessey 680 at Wholesale Battery and the,last one was $110. See if there is one near you. They have good alkaline batts at good prices also, AA 9 volt, etc. Ron Burnett STL area Sent from my iPad May you have the blessings of the Lord today. > On May 22, 2014, at 12:13 PM, Dj Merrill <deej@deej.net> wrote: > > > I'm trying to decide on a battery. Many people are using the Odyssey > PC680 with good results. It is a somewhat expensive battery: > > http://www.apexbattery.com/odyssey-pc680-marine-battery-marine-batteries-odyssey-marine-batteries.html?utm_source=googlepepla&utm_medium=adwords&id=18283950120&gclid=CIaiifviv74CFXRo7AodqxYANA > > In our UPS units we use a UB12180 battery (or equivalent), which is 1/3 > the cost of the PC680 and has better specs: > > http://www.apexbattery.com/abiomed-bvs-5000-biventricular-support-battery-sealed-lead-acid-batteries-abiomed-batteries.html > > Are there any reasons why I should not be using this battery in my > aircraft? > > My battery is mounted in the tail section, and it is not exposed to the > direct heat and vibration of the engine compartment, if that makes any > difference. > > -Dj > > -- > Dj Merrill - N1JOV - VP EAA Chapter 87 > Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ > Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ > > > >


    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
    Time: 10:14:52 AM PST US
    Subject: Alternate batteries
    From: GLEN MATEJCEK <fly4grins@gmail.com>
    Howdy- Perhaps I phrased my question poorly. Were reliable internal impedance numbers consistently and readily available, identifying viable alternate batteries would be a snap. However, and as noted, finding the internal impedance of a battery can turn into a time consuming wild goose chase pretty quickly. If there were an accepted performance standard or threshold for so-called "jump start batteries", our task would be greatly simplified. ***snip*** > > > > I happened to be exploring some alternate battery battery options > > on the 'net just yesterday, when something interesting popped out > > at me. Only one referenced being a replacement for portable jump > > start units, and was marketed under the Schumacher label. Does > > anyone know if there is some difference in these batteries that > > might make them more appropriate for engine cranking service, or > > is it all just advertising? > > > > > Look at internal impedance/resistance numbers. Easy to find for PC680; > sometimes harder to find for brand x. Comparing batteries with the same > ampere-hour ratings, batteries intended for relatively low current, long > term discharge will have higher internal impedance than batteries > intended for starting. Bob alluded to this in a recent post about a new > battery he tested, that would last almost 'forever' running avionics, > but couldn't supply enough power to start an engine. > ***snip***


    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
    Time: 12:04:55 PM PST US
    From: Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com>
    Subject: Re: Alternate batteries
    On 5/25/2014 12:09 PM, GLEN MATEJCEK wrote: > Howdy- > > Perhaps I phrased my question poorly. Were reliable internal > impedance numbers consistently and readily available, identifying > viable alternate batteries would be a snap. However, and as noted, > finding the internal impedance of a battery can turn into a time > consuming wild goose chase pretty quickly. If there were an accepted > performance standard or threshold for so-called "jump start > batteries", our task would be greatly simplified. > > ***snip*** > > > > I happened to be exploring some alternate battery battery > options > > on the 'net just yesterday, when something interesting > popped out > > at me. Only one referenced being a replacement for portable > jump > > start units, and was marketed under the Schumacher label. Does > > anyone know if there is some difference in these batteries that > > might make them more appropriate for engine cranking service, or > > is it all just advertising? > > > > > Look at internal impedance/resistance numbers. Easy to find for PC680; > sometimes harder to find for brand x. Comparing batteries with the > same > ampere-hour ratings, batteries intended for relatively low > current, long > term discharge will have higher internal impedance than batteries > intended for starting. Bob alluded to this in a recent post about > a new > battery he tested, that would last almost 'forever' running avionics, > but couldn't supply enough power to start an engine. > > > ***snip*** > Your followup question folds back on itself, and is basically unanswerable. Marketers say whatever they want to say, within the confines of their bosses at that particular company. There have been 'jump start' *assemblies* on the market that contained batteries labeled, for example, as 18 AH, that had guts in the battery that were really only around 12 AH. So 'suitability' is whatever the bosses say is suitable, when you're reading a spec sheet or advertising brochure. There are batteries designed for starting, and there are batteries designed for sustained loading at a much lower rate, as in a UPS or scooter. Some of the 'lower rate' type batteries will actually work fine for starting. The only way to know for sure on any particular battery is to test for yourself, or trust the word of someone who's already 'been there & done that'. I've used 'brand x' 18 AH & 22 AH batteries of both known & unknown internal impedances for over a decade with good service, in the deep south, with temps ranging from below freezing to over 100 degrees F. Most of that time, the battery was on the hot side of the firewall(s). Someone else has posted that he didn't have good service at temps that might have been 5-10 degrees higher. Don't forget that there are many many factors affecting whether a product works well. I try to find the internal impedance number if I can before I buy a particular battery, but I've bought them without knowing, & have usually gotten good service. As I said in an earlier post, the best inexpensive battery I've found is labeled **12220, with various prefixes depending on the seller. It's the same form factor as the 18 AH Odyssey. Bonus is an extra 4 AH if you have an electrically dependent a/c. Charlie


    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
    Time: 07:37:52 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Wire tag ID needed
    From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
    That looks like a ScotchCode STD-TAG Grainger 2FYR9 See http://www.grainger.com/product/3M-Wire-Marker-Refill-Roll-3-2FYR9?s_pp=false -------- 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=423790#423790


    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
    Time: 08:39:15 PM PST US
    From: Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com>
    Subject: Re: Wire tag ID needed
    On 5/25/2014 9:36 PM, Eric M. Jones wrote: > > That looks like a ScotchCode STD-TAG > Grainger 2FYR9 > > See http://www.grainger.com/product/3M-Wire-Marker-Refill-Roll-3-2FYR9?s_pp=false > > -------- > Eric M. Jones > www.PerihelionDesign.com > 113 Brentwood Drive > Southbridge, MA 01550 > (508) 764-2072 > emjones(at)charter.net Excellent! Many thanks, Charlie




    Other Matronics Email List Services

  • Post A New Message
  •   aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
  • UN/SUBSCRIBE
  •   http://www.matronics.com/subscription
  • List FAQ
  •   http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
  • Web Forum Interface To Lists
  •   http://forums.matronics.com
  • Matronics List Wiki
  •   http://wiki.matronics.com
  • 7-Day List Browse
  •   http://www.matronics.com/browse/aeroelectric-list
  • Browse AeroElectric-List Digests
  •   http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list
  • Browse Other Lists
  •   http://www.matronics.com/browse
  • Live Online Chat!
  •   http://www.matronics.com/chat
  • Archive Downloading
  •   http://www.matronics.com/archives
  • Photo Share
  •   http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
  • Other Email Lists
  •   http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
  • Contributions
  •   http://www.matronics.com/contribution

    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! --