---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Wed 11/25/15: 14 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 0. 09:12 AM - What Are You Thankful For...? (Matt Dralle) 1. 06:36 AM - Re: Rotax ignition wiring (user9253) 2. 07:14 AM - Re: Re: Rotax ignition wiring (Charlie England) 3. 08:22 AM - Re: Re: Rotax ignition wiring (John Cox) 4. 09:02 AM - Re: Rotax ignition wiring (user9253) 5. 09:24 AM - Re: Re: Rotax ignition wiring (John Cox) 6. 09:26 AM - Re: Re: Rotax ignition wiring (John Cox) 7. 10:07 AM - Re: Rotax ignition wiring (user9253) 8. 10:36 AM - Re: Re: Rotax ignition wiring (Rick Beebe) 9. 10:54 AM - Re: Re: Rotax ignition wiring (Gerry van Dyk) 10. 03:46 PM - Re: Rotax ignition wiring (user9253) 11. 04:23 PM - Re: Alternator Overvoltage (Ivan) 12. 06:17 PM - Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on C essna 182P (sacha) 13. 10:38 PM - Re: Re: Rotax ignition wiring (John Cox) ________________________________ Message 0 _____________________________________ Time: 09:12:56 AM PST US From: Matt Dralle Subject: AeroElectric-List: What Are You Thankful For...? Dear Listers, Here in the United States, Thursday is our National day of Thanksgiving. Many of us will be traveling to be with our families and friends to share in generous feasts of plenty and giving thanks for the many blessings that have been bestowed upon us. Many Listers have expressed over the last couple of weeks how thankful they are for the Email Lists and Forums here on the Matronics servers and for all of the assistance and comradery they have experienced being a part of the Lists. One of my favorite comments is when someone writes to me and says something like, "Its the first thing I do in the morning while I'm having my morning coffee!". That's a wonderful tribute to the purpose and function of these Lists. Its always great to hear I'm not the only one that jumps out of bed each morning to check my List email!! Won't you take a minute today and show your appreciation for these Lists and for their continued operation and upgrade? The List Contribution Site is: http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, drop a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 USA Thank you in advance for your kind consideration, Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 06:36:33 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax ignition wiring From: "user9253" > is it really necessary to separate the wiring coming from the engine I have a Van's RV-12 registered as an E-LSA. An E-LSA must be built exactly per the plans using only parts purchased from the manufacturer. There are about 500 RV-12s flying with the Rotax 912. All engine wires, including ignition, pass through one grommet in the firewall. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450208#450208 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 07:14:31 AM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax ignition wiring From: Charlie England On 11/25/2015 12:38 AM, jrevens wrote: > > Since there seem to be quite a few Rotax users on this forum, I have another question... is it really necessary to separate the wiring coming from the engine (pressure & temperature sensors, tachometer signal, etc). from the ignition wires when penetrating the firewall. In other words, should the ignition wire have their own penetration, separated from that other wiring? I believe this is what Kitfox recommends. I hope this specific subject hasn't already been discussed on this forum. > > -------- > John Evens > Thorp T-18 N71JE (built & flying) > Kitfox SS7 N27JE (building) > I can't directly address the Rotax question, but 'normal' practice when wires must be near each other that may hav interference issues is to have them cross at as close to 90 degrees as possible. The longer the parallel run, the more likely the interference. Might be worth a try to bundle the noise makers separate from the sensors, and try to make an 'X' at the FW passthrough. Charlie ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 08:22:48 AM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax ignition wiring From: John Cox Does this imply Van's would discourage buying a second pass - thru from them and separating ignition wires from lower voltage signal wires. What does Dynon say? Van's has always supported Safety of Flight issues to the best of my knowledge. John Cox On Nov 25, 2015 06:43, "user9253" wrote: > > > > is it really necessary to separate the wiring coming from the engine > > I have a Van's RV-12 registered as an E-LSA. An E-LSA must be built > exactly per the plans using only parts purchased from the manufacturer. > There are about 500 RV-12s flying with the Rotax 912. All engine wires, > including ignition, pass through one grommet in the firewall. > > -------- > Joe Gores > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450208#450208 > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 09:02:06 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax ignition wiring From: "user9253" > Does this imply Van's would discourage buying a second pass - thru from them and separating ignition wires from lower voltage signal wires. Van's will sell whatever a customer wants to buy. Van's does discourage making changes to their designs. USA government regulations require that aircraft registered as E-LSA be built exactly per the plans. If a builder wanted to install two grommets for wires passing through the firewall, then the aircraft would have to be registered as E-AB, not E-LSA. The majority of RV-12 are registered as E-LSA and are built according to the plans. The point that I was trying to make is that it is OK to bundle all Rotax engine wires together because hundreds of RV-12s are flying with no electrical interference problems. The Rotax has electronic ignition, not magnetos. The Rotax ignition control circuit might not be high voltage like magneto control circuits. I do not know. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450212#450212 ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 09:24:09 AM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax ignition wiring From: John Cox Get with your intended DAR and ask about your "Must" understanding. You might be pleasantly surprised with a safety improvement to boot. I don't see the second pass-thru as a deal killer. John Cox On Nov 25, 2015 09:08, "user9253" wrote: > > > > Does this imply Van's would discourage buying a second pass - thru from > them and separating ignition wires from lower voltage signal wires. > > Van's will sell whatever a customer wants to buy. Van's does discourage > making changes to their designs. USA government regulations require that > aircraft registered as E-LSA be built exactly per the plans. If a builder > wanted to install two grommets for wires passing through the firewall, then > the aircraft would have to be registered as E-AB, not E-LSA. The majority > of RV-12 are registered as E-LSA and are built according to the plans. The > point that I was trying to make is that it is OK to bundle all Rotax engine > wires together because hundreds of RV-12s are flying with no electrical > interference problems. The Rotax has electronic ignition, not magnetos. > The Rotax ignition control circuit might not be high voltage like magneto > control circuits. I do not know. > > -------- > Joe Gores > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450212#450212 > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 09:26:44 AM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax ignition wiring From: John Cox Once certificated E-LSA I would wager the modification would not invalidate your airworthiness and Not trigger a new Phase One. John Cox On Nov 25, 2015 09:08, "user9253" wrote: > > > > Does this imply Van's would discourage buying a second pass - thru from > them and separating ignition wires from lower voltage signal wires. > > Van's will sell whatever a customer wants to buy. Van's does discourage > making changes to their designs. USA government regulations require that > aircraft registered as E-LSA be built exactly per the plans. If a builder > wanted to install two grommets for wires passing through the firewall, then > the aircraft would have to be registered as E-AB, not E-LSA. The majority > of RV-12 are registered as E-LSA and are built according to the plans. The > point that I was trying to make is that it is OK to bundle all Rotax engine > wires together because hundreds of RV-12s are flying with no electrical > interference problems. The Rotax has electronic ignition, not magnetos. > The Rotax ignition control circuit might not be high voltage like magneto > control circuits. I do not know. > > -------- > Joe Gores > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450212#450212 > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 10:07:50 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax ignition wiring From: "user9253" What safety improvement is achieved by drilling another hole through the firewall? -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450294#450294 ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 10:36:11 AM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax ignition wiring From: Rick Beebe Joe is correct that an E-LSA must be built exactly according to factory plans. However, once that's done it can be modified by the owner. If you're building the plane you can ask Vans if they would approve a second pass-thru. If so, then you can add it. If not, then you have to wait until after the plane is certified. Vans is pretty safety conscious so I agree that if they don't have a problem running all the wires through a single pass-thru then I probably wouldn't either. --Rick On 11/25/2015 12:24 PM, John Cox wrote: > Once certificated E-LSA I would wager the modification would not > invalidate your airworthiness and Not trigger a new Phase One. > > John Cox > > On Nov 25, 2015 09:08, "user9253" > wrote: > > > > > > > Does this imply Van's would discourage buying a second pass - > thru from them and separating ignition wires from lower voltage > signal wires. > > Van's will sell whatever a customer wants to buy. Van's does > discourage making changes to their designs. USA government > regulations require that aircraft registered as E-LSA be built > exactly per the plans. If a builder wanted to install two grommets > for wires passing through the firewall, then the aircraft would have > to be registered as E-AB, not E-LSA. The majority of RV-12 are > registered as E-LSA and are built according to the plans. The point > that I was trying to make is that it is OK to bundle all Rotax > engine wires together because hundreds of RV-12s are flying with no > electrical interference problems. The Rotax has electronic > ignition, not magnetos. The Rotax ignition control circuit might > not be high voltage like magneto control circuits. I do not know. > > -------- > Joe Gores ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 10:54:05 AM PST US From: Gerry van Dyk Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax ignition wiring Have the rules for ELSA changed? My understanding was, while a SLSA must conform to the manufacturer's specs throughout its life, after an ELSA has been registered and the test flying restrictions lifted, the owner is free to modify their ELSA as he sees fit, but it must continue to comply with LSA rules. I reference these paragraphs from Kitplanes March 2012 "Understanding Experimental Light Sport Aircraft" by Dave Martin. (The last 5 paragraphs of the article. "I've already alluded to an FAA ruling that makes it legal for the builder of an ELSA to make changes. In the case of a kit such as the RV-12, any change that does not take the aircraft outside of the LSA definition may be made as soon as the pink airworthiness certificate is signed by the FAA's inspector, usually a DAR. Mel Asberry, who writes the "Ask the DAR" column for this magazine, confirms the FAA's point that this feature has been in the plan from the beginning. Its rationale is that ELSA come under the same rules as any other Experimental-category aircraft. "Some of us, myself included, missed this detail in our understanding of ELSA rules, and I found it to be a jaw-dropper. That's because no other Experimental-category aircraft is like a factory-approved ELSA. If I had built my RV-12 as an EAB, I could have modified it however I desired during construction. But as an ELSA, mine was required to be built initially exactly like the SLSA prototype. "In addition to building, all testing was exactly as specified by Van's Aircraft. On the first five flights, I flew as a production test pilot, not as an experimental test pilot as I would in a new EAB. Also, if I had built the RV-12 as an EAB, the builder block on the data plate could read "Martin RV-12." Because my shop was a subset of the kit factory, my data plate lists Van's Aircraft Company as the builder. "The result of this provision is that I could now change my airplane enough to cause it to operate quite differentlyas long as it remains within the LSA definition. It's almost as if Piper and Cessna owners were allowed to make any changes they wanted. "So this provision of ELSA remains, and it may explain the lack of ELSA kits competing with the Van's RV-12. Why should a company take on the additional liability of a customer making changes that are neither authorized nor tested by the factory?" Gerry van Dyk ------ Original Message ------ From: "user9253" Sent: 2015-11-25 7:34:10 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax ignition wiring > > >> is it really necessary to separate the wiring coming from the engine > >I have a Van's RV-12 registered as an E-LSA. An E-LSA must be built >exactly per the plans using only parts purchased from the manufacturer. > There are about 500 RV-12s flying with the Rotax 912. All engine >wires, including ignition, pass through one grommet in the firewall. > >-------- >Joe Gores > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450208#450208 > > ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 03:46:01 PM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax ignition wiring From: "user9253" > Have the rules for ELSA changed? No, the rules have not changed and your understanding is correct. Some builders have made modifications to their E-LSA RV-12 after certification. And Van's has even adopted some of those mods. The originator of this thread asked if it is OK to bundle all engine wires together in his Rotax powered Kitfox. I replied "yes" because that is the way that Van's designed the RV-12, which has the same engine. If it is explained why bundling all engine wires together is unsafe, then I will change my wiring. I do not think that the Kitfox can be registered as an E-LSA. So the Kitfox builder can wire his plane however he thinks is best. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450301#450301 ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 04:23:17 PM PST US From: Ivan Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Alternator Overvoltage I finally got back to my overvoltage problem. Today, I checked to see if the field circuit would trip my breaker with the engine not running. It did not . I decided to to reinstall my original voltage regulator since the VR 440 a ppeared to not be working properly due to the 19+ volts when I ran my last t est. Now, the original regulator functions properly and the regulated voltag e shows 14.6 without the OV module in the circuit throughout the rpm range. W hen I reinstalled the OV module, it tripped the field breaker every time I c ycled it. I now feel I should get the OV module tested to see what it's trip point is as some list responders suggested. My current assumption is that m y OV module has been the culprit all along. When it originally began trippin g in flight, I assumed it was my regulator and bought the replacement unit f rom NAPA. Since it apparently was DOA right out of the box, I mistakenly bla med it for my problem. I really appreciate the help from you guys. Ivan Haecker > On Nov 23, 2015, at 10:15 PM, Charlie England wrote : > > If you're seeing 19V on a regulated 14V system, then either the reg is bad or something isn't hooked up correctly. > > Most auto parts stores will test alternators and regulators for free these days (at least Autozone will). Just take the suspect reg to them & ask them to test it. You may need to tell them what 'car' it was installed on. :-) J ust find a model that used that regulator & tell them that. > > BTW, I'd certainly pull the breakers or fuses on *all* electrical load ite ms in the plane while doing your in-plane testing..... > >> On 11/23/2015 8:57 PM, H. Ivan Haecker wrote: >> Yes, I'm sure it the voltage regulator is wired correctly as I just check ed Bob's Z-11 diagram. I have also checked the alternator with the ov module disconnected and the voltage regulator in the circuit. Still producing abou t 19 volts at 1000 rpm. I haven't tested the ov module trip point, but obvio usly without it in the circuit, the voltage is too high. If it is not the al ternator, I just feel I must have a bad original voltage regulator and a bad new replacement. I don't know how to test a voltage regulator though. >> >> Ivan Haecker >> >>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Charlie England w rote: >>> I'd find the proper hookup diagram for both the alternator that you have , and the regulator that you're using. There's at least an outside chance so mething isn't hooked up correctly, since it's a different model regulator. W hat voltage do you measure if you disable the OV module & leave the regulato r in the circuit? >>> >>>> On 11/23/2015 6:16 PM, Jeff Luckey wrote: >>>> Ivan, >>>> >>>> Could the problem be the over-voltage module? Do you have a way to benc h test the module? >>>> >>>> Using a variable DC power supply you should be able to determine the tr ip point of your OVM. That's where I would start based upon your descriptio n. >>>> >>>> -Jeff >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Monday, November 23, 2015 3:59 PM, Ivan wro te: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On a recent flight in my rv-4, my overvoltage relay (crowbar) apparentl y functioned properly as it tripped my field circuit breaker taking the alte rnator off line. Upon landing and checking, the problem would reoccur whenev er the breaker was reset. I assumed the original voltage regulator had faile d (1990 Van's unit). The alternator is a small 35 amp unit (from a mid 70's Honda Civic I believe). Unable to find an ident ical voltage regulator, I purchased a VR 440 unit from NAPA, and wired as su ggested by previous posts on other lists. The problem reoccurred the same as before. My questions are: could this problem be related to the alternator i tself, or might I have inadvertently purchased a defective voltage regulator . I believe the alternator is functioning because I measured its output wit h the field wired directly to the battery and saw 19+ volts. Any s.matronics .com/contribution" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/connbsp; -Matt Dralle, List Admin.http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElect ric-List<; http://forums.sp; - List Contribution Web Site - >>>> _; &nb://www.matronics.com/contribution" target=" _blank">http://www.matronics.c================ == > ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 06:17:44 PM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on C essna 182P From: "sacha" Jan, I think at this point I would agree with you: the problem is most likely related to the voltage regulator, not to switches. I have ascertained that the noise is entering through the wires, not the antenna as its volume is independent of the radio volume. I also tested the noise suppressor capacitor (cessna part 0770038-2) today with a multi-meter but I could not get it to give a reading so it may be fried. Although I just realized that I did not make sure it was discharged before I attempted to take the reading. I'll have to take that reading again. Nevertheless, the look of the part (an old rusty box), age of the plane (43yrs young) and the fact that I have seen capacitors fail in other equipment makes me think this might be a good candidate for replacement. Regarding insulation of mic/headphone jacks, is it correct that mic jacks must be insulated from the airframe, but the headphone jacks may either be grounded to the airframe or insulated with a separate ground wire running back to the intercom? If it is correct, can someone explain the logic? Happy Thanksgiving Sacha Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450304#450304 ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 10:38:31 PM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax ignition wiring From: John Cox The discussion point should center around "any" advantage of not bundling as a single penetration thru the firewall and the enhancements within E-LSA and the latitude if any to modify within the allowance by the chosen DAR. There are many DARs. I have seen mods. They make sense... In some cases. That is what is great about Amateur built. Happy Holidays! John Cox On Nov 25, 2015 15:50, "user9253" wrote: > > > > Have the rules for ELSA changed? > > No, the rules have not changed and your understanding is correct. Some > builders have made modifications to their E-LSA RV-12 after certification. > And Van's has even adopted some of those mods. > The originator of this thread asked if it is OK to bundle all engine > wires together in his Rotax powered Kitfox. I replied "yes" because that > is the way that Van's designed the RV-12, which has the same engine. If it > is explained why bundling all engine wires together is unsafe, then I will > change my wiring. > I do not think that the Kitfox can be registered as an E-LSA. So the > Kitfox builder can wire his plane however he thinks is best. > > -------- > Joe Gores > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450301#450301 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/aeroelectric-list Browse 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.