Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:26 AM - Re: Re: basic questions on terminal strips (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
2. 06:38 AM - Re: Re: basic questions on terminal strips (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 06:46 AM - Re: Re: Fw: [Bearhawk] Pacer progress (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 07:10 AM - Re: Re: Fw: [Bearhawk] Pacer progress (H. Marvin Haught Jr.)
5. 08:04 AM - Re: Re: basic questions on terminal strips (Ken Ryan)
6. 08:19 AM - Re: Re: Fw: [Bearhawk] Pacer progress (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 08:35 AM - Re: Re: basic questions on terminal strips (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 09:22 AM - Re: basic questions on terminal strips (Dennis Johnson)
9. 09:26 AM - Re: Re: Fw: [Bearhawk] Pacer progress (H. Marvin Haught)
10. 09:41 AM - Re: Re: basic questions on terminal strips (H. Marvin Haught)
11. 10:20 AM - Re: Fw: [Bearhawk] Pacer progress (mmoyle)
12. 10:48 AM - Re: Re: basic questions on terminal strips (Charlie England)
13. 10:51 AM - Re: Re: basic questions on terminal strips (Jared Yates)
14. 04:04 PM - Re: Re: basic questions on terminal strips (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: basic questions on terminal strips |
At 08:10 PM 6/21/2015, you wrote:
>
>I do not see a nut under the ring terminals. Is there one? Ring
>terminals need to be squashed between two nuts, not between a nut
>and plastic because plastic will flow over time, causing the
>connection to loosen.
>Joe
>
>--------
>Joe Gores
>
Good eye . . . I had noticed that but neglected to
articulate it.
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: | Re: basic questions on terminal strips |
At 08:18 PM 6/21/2015, you wrote:
>
>There's a washer under the terminals.
What Joe is referencing is the fact that
'gas tightness' in the interface between
current carrying parts depends on the pressure
established and maintained by either crimping
or, in this case, squeezing between two very
stable forces in the clamping mechanism. Force
from a nut driven down onto the terminals is
reacted by a plastic surface under the stack.
The plastic is not stable under continuous
pressure and will relieve to some degree over
time and temperature cycles.
In your particular application, the currents
and duty-cycles involved do not imposed large
stresses on those interfaces . . . and you'll
be find with what you have. But were you crafting
say, a distribution point for fat wires carrying
tens of amps continuously and perhaps hundreds
of amps cranking . . . the need to bring those
terminals together with TWO nuts is greater.
You can see that the base of these studs is part
of the metal that makes up the stud. Terminals
stacked on these studs can be brought up to
and held at gas-tight pressures without adding
the nut under it. With the DIY terminal block
the bottom nut takes on this duty. You're okay
as is for THIS application but folks reading this
thread later need to be aware of the physics.
Emacs!
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: | Re: Fwd: [Bearhawk] Pacer progress |
At 08:41 PM 6/21/2015, you wrote:
>Marvin Haught" <handainc@madisoncounty.net>
>
>Okay=85.now I understand. Was not comprehending
>how you could NOT have a Master Switch. So
>without an avionics, switch, you have to
>individually switch on or off all electronics
>once the master switch is turned on.
as you do with any appliance that is not
intended to be operated 100% of the time.
The core idea to be considered is whether
or not there is value in making sure any
particular device is OFF during any particular
phase of aircraft operation . . .
The Avionics Master was created based on the
notion that radios were prone to go belly up
due to supposed spikes from the starter . . .
which turned out to be brown-out events and
not spikes.
Adding the switch reduced the risk of pilots
killing radios that were not well crafted to
withstand the brown-out event . . . a condition
that disappeared from the marketplace a few
years after the avionics master became deeply
entrenched in the aviator's psyche.
Some still argue that it's useful to reduce
loads on the battery while cranking . . . again
a condition built on the performance of marginal
batteries miserably maintained.
If you're SVLA battery is watched as closely
as you check your tires, oil, brake fluid,
fuel and nicks on the prop, then there's no
reason to 'relieve' cranking loads. The
avionics are a tiny fraction of cranking loads
and insignificant in the grand energy calculus.
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: Fwd: [Bearhawk] Pacer progress |
And with having only a comm radio (Icom) and a transponder (Sandia), and
a panel mount for an iPad, there is only 3 items to be added to the
before start up checklist. The Pacer I flew (now the one Mark is
rebuilding) had no avionics master, radios are already a part of my
checklist habit.
What regulator do you recommend - I had installed a Zefftronics on the
old Pacer due to a chronic problem with the old Ford Type regulator.
Could never get one to last more than 6 or 8 months. Bought the first 2
from aircraft supply stores (read pricy) and the last two from auto
supply stores,( read crappy rebuilds) , which I suspect was also the
problem with the aircraft supply units, just with 3 times the markup.
The Zefftronics made the charging system trouble free with gel cell
batteries lasting 5 years, and only changing them because of their age
or accidentally leaving the master switch on in sub zero temps, killing
the battery. But generally, I took very good care of my batteries. The
Zeftronics is now over $350.
I see now that I should have been following the list closer, as many of
these things have likely been discussed on here. My plate has stayed
too full as of late, and now these topics are front an foremost in what
I need to accomplish.
M. Haught
On 6/22/2015 8:45 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> At 08:41 PM 6/21/2015, you wrote:
>> <handainc@madisoncounty.net>
>>
>> Okay.now I understand. Was not comprehending how you could NOT have
>> a Master Switch. So without an avionics, switch, you have to
>> individually switch on or off all electronics once the master switch
>> is turned on.
>
> as you do with any appliance that is not
> intended to be operated 100% of the time.
> The core idea to be considered is whether
> or not there is value in making sure any
> particular device is OFF during any particular
> phase of aircraft operation . . .
>
> The Avionics Master was created based on the
> notion that radios were prone to go belly up
> due to supposed spikes from the starter . . .
> which turned out to be brown-out events and
> not spikes.
>
> Adding the switch reduced the risk of pilots
> killing radios that were not well crafted to
> withstand the brown-out event . . . a condition
> that disappeared from the marketplace a few
> years after the avionics master became deeply
> entrenched in the aviator's psyche.
>
> Some still argue that it's useful to reduce
> loads on the battery while cranking . . . again
> a condition built on the performance of marginal
> batteries miserably maintained.
>
> If you're SVLA battery is watched as closely
> as you check your tires, oil, brake fluid,
> fuel and nicks on the prop, then there's no
> reason to 'relieve' cranking loads. The
> avionics are a tiny fraction of cranking loads
> and insignificant in the grand energy calculus.
>
> Bob . . .
>
> *
>
>
> *
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
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: basic questions on terminal strips |
Might have to re-make it. I have doubts that the UHMW will "flow" enough
(with 15 inch-pounds of torque) to loosen connections. Anybody here
qualified to interpreting attached document regarding this question?
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:37 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 08:18 PM 6/21/2015, you wrote:
>
>
> There's a washer under the terminals.
>
>
> What Joe is referencing is the fact that
> 'gas tightness' in the interface between
> current carrying parts depends on the pressure
> established and maintained by either crimping
> or, in this case, squeezing between two very
> stable forces in the clamping mechanism. Force
> from a nut driven down onto the terminals is
> reacted by a plastic surface under the stack.
> The plastic is not stable under continuous
> pressure and will relieve to some degree over
> time and temperature cycles.
>
> In your particular application, the currents
> and duty-cycles involved do not imposed large
> stresses on those interfaces . . . and you'll
> be find with what you have. But were you crafting
> say, a distribution point for fat wires carrying
> tens of amps continuously and perhaps hundreds
> of amps cranking . . . the need to bring those
> terminals together with TWO nuts is greater.
>
> You can see that the base of these studs is part
> of the metal that makes up the stud. Terminals
> stacked on these studs can be brought up to
> and held at gas-tight pressures without adding
> the nut under it. With the DIY terminal block
> the bottom nut takes on this duty. You're okay
> as is for THIS application but folks reading this
> thread later need to be aware of the physics.
>
> [image: Emacs!]
>
>
> 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: Fwd: [Bearhawk] Pacer progress |
At 10:54 PM 6/21/2015, you wrote:
>Great article, provides me with the first goals for my system, and a
>very good understanding of the logic. I have already been studying
>the wire book pages. Will print out each one and start making note
>and additions of my specific components, plus compare them to the
>original schematic.
bingo!
>Question one is: you seemed skeptical about mounting the two
>contractors side by side right at the battery as Mark did. Why is
>that not desirable and what are the problems?
Okay, from the perspective of a clean-piece-of-paper
installation on a homebuilt aircraft, we try to
position items in the airplane to minimize numbers
and lengths of wires. The first goal is battery
contactor next to battery, starter contactor next
to the starter.
In the case of your refurb, the original battery
and starter controls were crew operated switches
one the seat stringer under the pilot's knees
and the battery was under the passenger's seat.
It's not illogical to REPLACE those switches
with contators located more or less in the same
locations as the original switches.
I would write my proposed 337 up to move the
starter contactor to the firewall but if you
wanted to utilize as much of the factory stock
architecture as possible . . . locating
the contactors like Mark did is perfectly
logical. The style of starter contactor
problematic . . . while the Lamar 'works',
upgrading it's technology will improve service
life an reduce risk of sticking the contactor.
By the way, what starter are you contemplating
for this airplane?
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: basic questions on terminal strips |
At 10:01 AM 6/22/2015, you wrote:
>Might have to re-make it. I have doubts that the UHMW will "flow"
>enough (with 15 inch-pounds of torque) to loosen connections.
>Anybody here qualified to interpreting attached document regarding
>this question?
I wouldn't loose any sleep over it. The
argument goes more to support standard practices
based on the full spectrum of stresses.
It is not terribly relevant to your application.
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: basic questions on terminal strips |
I've had good luck using "toilet bolts" for making terminal strips. You can get
them in either stainless steel or brass. The elongated head of the bolt is
thin and fits in a slot, which is sometimes easier to fabricate than a hex shaped
hole.
Here's a link to a photo:
http://www.homedepot.com/p/Everbilt-5-16-in-x-2-1-4-in-Brass-Toilet-Bolts-with-Nuts-10063X/205172289
Dennis
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=443913#443913
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: Fwd: [Bearhawk] Pacer progress |
Well, this discussion is progressing nicely! I spent the evening trying
to decide if I am going to invest in a lightweight starter and
alternator, or save several hundred dollars and use the serviceable
original starter and generators that I have one had (have 3 or 4 of
each, all in good working order). Since this airplane is to resell, I
think at this point, I am going to opt to use the original equipment.
This whole exercise is to turn a project in which I have money tied up
into cash, while getting hours toward my mechanic=99s license
(have tried to sell it for 3 or 4 years as a project with absolutely NO
interest, even at give away prices). I am treading water while waiting
to see if the medical reform passes and is put into effect. If so, my
keeper project is another Pacer that will end up experimental..ve
ry little will be left of the original fuselage, new wing with a
different airfoil, fuselage extension, and otherwise, pretty much your
dream project on big tires. Only 2 seat with large cargo space, built
as lightly as possible.
So your clean piece of paper installation will be the next step in
project evolution, but for now, I want the experience of doing the 337,
and hopefully, getting it approved fairly easily because it will be a
valuable experience in the work I hope to do as a licensed mechanic in
my retirement world. So I like your second and third paragraph as if
fits what I am trying to do, as well as being compatible with my
thinking process. I think the architecture choices should be driven by
feedback from active mechanics as to the prevalent mind set of FAA
inspectors - closed minds as to changes in architecture when reviewing
337=99s in the approval process, or receptive with logical
support, professional wire book and presentation. If the former,
Mark=99s approach wins out - if the latter, firewall location of
the starter contactor.
I have the continuous duty Lamar contactor being delivered today, but
the starter contactor was back ordered, so I canceled that order. Will
likely order the B&C starter contactor at $45 unless you have better and
or cheaper alternative, and will do the same for the Battery contactor.
M. Haught
> On Jun 22, 2015, at 10:17 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III
<nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote:
>
> At 10:54 PM 6/21/2015, you wrote:
>
>> Great article, provides me with the first goals for my system, and a
very good understanding of the logic. I have already been studying the
wire book pages. Will print out each one and start making note and
additions of my specific components, plus compare them to the original
schematic.
>
> bingo!
>
>> Question one is: you seemed skeptical about mounting the two
contractors side by side right at the battery as Mark did. Why is that
not desirable and what are the problems?
>
> Okay, from the perspective of a clean-piece-of-paper
> installation on a homebuilt aircraft, we try to
> position items in the airplane to minimize numbers
> and lengths of wires. The first goal is battery
> contactor next to battery, starter contactor next
> to the starter.
>
> In the case of your refurb, the original battery
> and starter controls were crew operated switches
> one the seat stringer under the pilot's knees
> and the battery was under the passenger's seat.
> It's not illogical to REPLACE those switches
> with contators located more or less in the same
> locations as the original switches.
>
> I would write my proposed 337 up to move the
> starter contactor to the firewall but if you
> wanted to utilize as much of the factory stock
> architecture as possible . . . locating
> the contactors like Mark did is perfectly
> logical. The style of starter contactor
> problematic . . . while the Lamar 'works',
> upgrading it's technology will improve service
> life an reduce risk of sticking the contactor.
>
> By the way, what starter are you contemplating
> for this airplane?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List>
<http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>
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: basic questions on terminal strips |
Using those, you could use a plain nut of the top side of the plastic, inset as
per Bobs example and have eequivalent to the factory unit if you can figure out
some way to tighten the nut on the bolt. Using a larger drill to allow use
of thin walled socket, cinching down the nut tightly, and the anchoring it in
place with epoxy should provide a very serviceable part that achieves the physics
Bob references.
M. Haught
> On Jun 22, 2015, at 11:20 AM, Dennis Johnson <pinetownd@volcano.net> wrote:
>
>
> I've had good luck using "toilet bolts" for making terminal strips. You can
get them in either stainless steel or brass. The elongated head of the bolt is
thin and fits in a slot, which is sometimes easier to fabricate than a hex shaped
hole.
>
> Here's a link to a photo:
>
> http://www.homedepot.com/p/Everbilt-5-16-in-x-2-1-4-in-Brass-Toilet-Bolts-with-Nuts-10063X/205172289
>
> Dennis
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=443913#443913
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Fwd: [Bearhawk] Pacer progress |
Panel is almost ready to instal. Dimmer pot for the Ei hardware should be here
today. Head set jacks extended. A few zip ties remain. On the subject of stuck
starter solenoids. On my list of pros and cons for locating the starter
contactor under the seat... How easy is it to get at if I need to whack it with
something or disconnect it from the battery? Deciding the trade off... More
wire up the firewall to a solenoid location accessible with the cowl open. Or
deal with pulling the seat.
Marv and I spoke yesterday about the avionics master. When the PM3000 and the
Sandia transponder was installed. The avionics guy told Marv and I to pull
the breakers for them before starting the engine. Don't recall the reason. If
the battery is nearly dead, low voltage....start contactor just asking to be
stuck. Or brown out. A good battery shouldn't pull down below 10.8 volts under
a load. What if it does due to poor health or some other reason. Being in
the middle of now where. Many many times waiting for the temperature to reach
25 below zero before the first flight. Decided the avionics master is a good
thing for me.
Some of the other decisions I made... Perhaps due to drain bramage....but. Decided
to go with the Ei amp shunt on the alternator. I'd rather know if the field
voltage reduces as the battery charge state comes up after starting. Or to
discover the ampherage is greater than normal, indicating a possible battery
problem. Monitor the battery health with the voltage meter.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=443920#443920
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_471.jpg
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: basic questions on terminal strips |
On June 22, 2015 11:20:55 AM CDT, Dennis Johnson <pinetownd@volcano.net> wrote:
><pinetownd@volcano.net>
>
>I've had good luck using "toilet bolts" for making terminal strips.
>You can get them in either stainless steel or brass. The elongated
>head of the bolt is thin and fits in a slot, which is sometimes easier
>to fabricate than a hex shaped hole.
>
>Here's a link to a photo:
>
>http://www.homedepot.com/p/Everbilt-5-16-in-x-2-1-4-in-Brass-Toilet-Bolts-with-Nuts-10063X/205172289
>
>Dennis
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=443913#443913
>
>
That's what I did when I made a forest of tabs ground block using a brass switch
plate.
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
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: basic questions on terminal strips |
Around where I live the toilet bolts are brass plated, not solid brass. This may
be worth noting. I used them anyway.
> On Jun 22, 2015, at 12:20, Dennis Johnson <pinetownd@volcano.net> wrote:
>
>
> I've had good luck using "toilet bolts" for making terminal strips. You can
get them in either stainless steel or brass. The elongated head of the bolt is
thin and fits in a slot, which is sometimes easier to fabricate than a hex shaped
hole.
>
> Here's a link to a photo:
>
> http://www.homedepot.com/p/Everbilt-5-16-in-x-2-1-4-in-Brass-Toilet-Bolts-with-Nuts-10063X/205172289
>
> Dennis
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=443913#443913
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: basic questions on terminal strips |
At 11:20 AM 6/22/2015, you wrote:
><pinetownd@volcano.net>
>
>I've had good luck using "toilet bolts" for making terminal
>strips. You can get them in either stainless steel or brass. The
>elongated head of the bolt is thin and fits in a slot, which is
>sometimes easier to fabricate than a hex shaped hole.
>
>Here's a link to a photo:
>
>http://www.homedepot.com/p/Everbilt-5-16-in-x-2-1-4-in-Brass-Toilet-Bolts-with-Nuts-10063X/205172289
But those are 5/16" diam . . . pretty beefy
for terminal. Unless you're bringing 4 AWG or
fatter wires together, 8-32 studs are much
friendlier . . . or even 6-32. You don't
WANT a hex hole, just an undersized round hole
that grabs the hex-corners when the head is pressed
into the counterbore.
Grade 8 steel is the material of choice . . . the
stud has no electrical duties in this application.
The stud and nuts are used to maximize the crush
forces on the terminals . . . so GOOD steel
is the material of choice.
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! --
|