AeroElectric-List Digest Archive

Sun 03/06/16


Total Messages Posted: 13



Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 05:25 AM - Posting order (Bill Schertz)
     2. 07:11 AM - Re: Posting order (Ken Ryan)
     3. 07:24 AM - Re: Posting order (Jared Yates)
     4. 08:09 AM - Re: Posting order (Dj Merrill)
     5. 10:23 AM - Re: Posting order (H. Marvin Haught Jr)
     6. 10:41 AM - Re: Posting order (Dj Merrill)
     7. 10:44 AM - Re: Posting order (Lyle Peterson)
     8. 11:42 AM - Re: Posting order (Jared Yates)
     9. 02:58 PM - Re: Posting order (rayj)
    10. 04:15 PM - Re: Wire length in aluminum airframes (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
    11. 04:19 PM - Re: Posting order (Charlie England)
    12. 05:54 PM - Re: Newbie Wiring Questions (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
    13. 07:31 PM - Re: Newbie Wiring Questions (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: 05:25:45 AM PST US
    From: "Bill Schertz" <wschertz343@gmail.com>
    Subject: Posting order
    BTW, isn't it going to be fun to parse this conversation for someone who comes in at the end, and tries to sort out the posting order? Charlie (Written by someone who despises top-posting. Never seen a book with each succeeding paragraph written above the previous one....) ------------------------- Charlie, I tend to agree with you, however there is a novel that is told in reverse order and works THE OCTOBER LIST by Jeffery Deaver Bill Schertz KIS Cruiser N343BS 13-B rotary (now living in Montana)


    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: 07:11:27 AM PST US
    From: Ken Ryan <keninalaska@gmail.com>
    Subject: Re: Posting order
    Don't most forums allow the user to choose between "oldest first" and "newest first?" On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 4:24 AM, Bill Schertz <wschertz343@gmail.com> wrote: > wschertz343@gmail.com> > > BTW, isn't it going to be fun to parse this conversation for someone who > comes in at the end, and tries to sort out the posting order? > > Charlie > > (Written by someone who despises top-posting. Never seen a book with > each succeeding paragraph written above the previous one....) > ------------------------- > Charlie, > I tend to agree with you, however there is a novel that is told in reverse > order and works > > THE OCTOBER LIST > by > Jeffery Deaver > > Bill Schertz > KIS Cruiser N343BS > 13-B rotary > > (now living in Montana) > >


    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: 07:24:36 AM PST US
    From: Jared Yates <email@jaredyates.com>
    Subject: Re: Posting order
    For those of us who interact via email, your bottom postings aren't as convenient, but I don't go around complaining about it :) Do not archive > On Mar 6, 2016, at 08:24, Bill Schertz <wschertz343@gmail.com> wrote: > > > BTW, isn't it going to be fun to parse this conversation for someone who > comes in at the end, and tries to sort out the posting order? > > Charlie > > (Written by someone who despises top-posting. Never seen a book with > each succeeding paragraph written above the previous one....) > ------------------------- > Charlie, > I tend to agree with you, however there is a novel that is told in reverse order and works > > THE OCTOBER LIST > by > Jeffery Deaver > > Bill Schertz > KIS Cruiser N343BS > 13-B rotary > > (now living in Montana) > > > >


    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: 08:09:55 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Posting order
    From: Dj Merrill <deej@deej.net>
    FWIW, the Internet Etiquette RFC 1855 provides guidelines to crop the text you are replying to just the relevant part, with your reply below that text. "If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just enough text of the original to give a context. This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response." https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt This post sums it up fairly well: https://www.redhat.com/archives/shrike-list/2003-August/msg00529.html Top posting puts things out of order and makes comprehension very difficult IMHO, especially if someone is replying to a specific part of the previous message. Lots of opinions on this topic, even more so than which primer to use... ;-) -Dj, an old fart that has been on the "Internet" longer than it has been called that... :-) -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV - EAA Chapter 87 Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/


    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: 10:23:32 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Posting order
    From: "H. Marvin Haught Jr" <handainc@madisoncounty.net>
    Well.... I for one disagree with all of that and prefer top posting. But I feel no need to tilt windmills or to try to enforce my preferences in life on other folks! I agree with Jared. And I try to keep my obsessive compulsive urges to my private life and out of my interactions with other folks that may not suffer from the same compulsions! I am probably older that you are and long ago learned that life is more fun when I learned to "agree to disagree"! :) Sent from my iPad > On Mar 6, 2016, at 10:08 AM, Dj Merrill <deej@deej.net> wrote: > > > FWIW, the Internet Etiquette RFC 1855 provides guidelines to crop the text you are replying to just the relevant part, with your reply below that text. > > "If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you > summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just > enough text of the original to give a context. This will make > sure readers understand when they start to read your response." > > https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt > > > This post sums it up fairly well: > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/shrike-list/2003-August/msg00529.html > > > Top posting puts things out of order and makes comprehension very difficult IMHO, especially if someone is replying to a specific part of the previous message. > > Lots of opinions on this topic, even more so than which primer to use... ;-) > > -Dj, an old fart that has been on the "Internet" longer than it has been called that... :-) > > -- > Dj Merrill - N1JOV - EAA Chapter 87 > Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ > Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ > > > > >


    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
    Time: 10:41:27 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Posting order
    From: Dj Merrill <deej@deej.net>
    On 3/6/2016 1:22 PM, H. Marvin Haught Jr wrote: > But I feel no need to tilt windmills or to try to enforce my preferences in life on other folks! Excellent! So you'll trim and bottom post from now on so as to not force your behaviour onto others? *wink* Learned a long time ago to "agree to disagree" and tolerate (most of) other people's quirks. The one major pet peeve is people leaving the entire post and not trimming the extra cruft from the message, whether it is on top or bottom. It gets a bit ridiculous when a one line reply is a thousand line email message. There is simply no excuse for that! :-) It also happens to be one of the rules of this Forum: "The following details the official Usage Guidelines for the AeroElectric-List. You are encouraged to read it carefully, and to abide by the rules therein. Failure to use the AeroElectric-List in the manner described below may result in the removal of the subscribers from the List." "When responding, NEVER quote the *entire* original post in your response. DO use lines from the original post to help "tune in" the reader to the topic at hand, but be selective. The impact that quoting the entire original post has on the size of the archive can not be overstated!" http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV - EAA Chapter 87 Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/


    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
    Time: 10:44:34 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Posting order
    From: Lyle Peterson <lyleap@centurylink.net>
    I did prefer top posting but am rethinking that now. What is very annoying and confusing is when someone responds to a thread that has mentioned several possibilities. The response comes several emails later and is something like, "I did that and it worked", or "I use those all the time." Did what? Used what? The post is really pretty useless without some quote from the post being responded to. On 3/6/2016 12:22 PM, H. Marvin Haught Jr wrote: > > Well.... I for one disagree with all of that and prefer top posting. But I feel no need to tilt windmills or to try to enforce my preferences in life on other folks! I agree with Jared. And I try to keep my obsessive compulsive urges to my private life and out of my interactions with other folks that may not suffer from the same compulsions! I am probably older that you are and long ago learned that life is more fun when I learned to "agree to disagree"! :) > > Sent from my iPad > >> On Mar 6, 2016, at 10:08 AM, Dj Merrill <deej@deej.net> wrote: >> >> >> FWIW, the Internet Etiquette RFC 1855 provides guidelines to crop the text you are replying to just the relevant part, with your reply below that text. >> >> "If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you >> summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just >> enough text of the original to give a context. This will make >> sure readers understand when they start to read your response." >> >> https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt >> >> >> This post sums it up fairly well: >> >> https://www.redhat.com/archives/shrike-list/2003-August/msg00529.html >> >> >> Top posting puts things out of order and makes comprehension very difficult IMHO, especially if someone is replying to a specific part of the previous message. >> >> Lots of opinions on this topic, even more so than which primer to use... ;-) >> >> -Dj, an old fart that has been on the "Internet" longer than it has been called that... :-) >> >> -- >> Dj Merrill - N1JOV - EAA Chapter 87 >> Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ >> Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ >> >> >> >> >> > >


    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
    Time: 11:42:44 AM PST US
    From: Jared Yates <email@jaredyates.com>
    Subject: Re: Posting order
    I figure if Matt was really concerned about the size of the archive, he wouldn't append the 20 or so lines that he does to the end of each message. Do not archive > On Mar 6, 2016, at 13:40, Dj Merrill <deej@deej.net> wrote: > > >> On 3/6/2016 1:22 PM, H. Marvin Haught Jr wrote: >> But I feel no need to tilt windmills or to try to enforce my preferences in life on other folks! > > Excellent! So you'll trim and bottom post from now on so as to not force your behaviour onto others? *wink* > > Learned a long time ago to "agree to disagree" and tolerate (most of) other people's quirks. > > The one major pet peeve is people leaving the entire post and not trimming the extra cruft from the message, whether it is on top or bottom. It gets a bit ridiculous when a one line reply is a thousand line email message. There is simply no excuse for that! :-) > > It also happens to be one of the rules of this Forum: > > "The following details the official Usage Guidelines for the AeroElectric-List. You are encouraged to read it carefully, and to abide by the rules therein. Failure to use the AeroElectric-List in the manner described below may result in the removal of the subscribers from the List." > > "When responding, NEVER quote the *entire* original post in your response. DO use lines from the original post to help "tune in" the reader to the topic at hand, but be selective. The impact that quoting the entire original post has on the size of the archive can not be overstated!" > > http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm > > -Dj > > -- > Dj Merrill - N1JOV - EAA Chapter 87 > Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ > Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ > > > > >


    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
    Time: 02:58:21 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Posting order
    From: rayj <raymondj@frontiernet.net>
    I think the choice of where to post depends on whether the exchange is viewed as a conversation or as building an archive. For a conversation, it's not necessary to review everything that has been said each time a reply is made. The latest addition to the conversation is immediately presented. Hence the preference for top posting. For later reading in an archive, bottom posting perhaps makes it more convenient to read. I subscribe to the list as email, so my comments refer to that format. do not archive Raymond Julian Kettle River, MN The things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first they love the produce of the second. -John Steinbeck, novelist, Nobel laureate (1902-1968) On 03/06/2016 12:22 PM, H. Marvin Haught Jr wrote: > > Well.... I for one disagree with all of that and prefer top posting. But I feel no need to tilt windmills or to try to enforce my preferences in life on other folks! I agree with Jared. And I try to keep my obsessive compulsive urges to my private life and out of my interactions with other folks that may not suffer from the same compulsions! I am probably older that you are and long ago learned that life is more fun when I learned to "agree to disagree"! :) > > Sent from my iPad > >> On Mar 6, 2016, at 10:08 AM, Dj Merrill <deej@deej.net> wrote: >> >> >> FWIW, the Internet Etiquette RFC 1855 provides guidelines to crop the text you are replying to just the relevant part, with your reply below that text. >> >> "If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you >> summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just >> enough text of the original to give a context. This will make >> sure readers understand when they start to read your response." >> >> https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt >> >> >> This post sums it up fairly well: >> >> https://www.redhat.com/archives/shrike-list/2003-August/msg00529.html >> >> >> Top posting puts things out of order and makes comprehension very difficult IMHO, especially if someone is replying to a specific part of the previous message. >> >> Lots of opinions on this topic, even more so than which primer to use... ;-) >> >> -Dj, an old fart that has been on the "Internet" longer than it has been called that... :-) >> >> -- >> Dj Merrill - N1JOV - EAA Chapter 87 >> Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ >> Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ >> >> >> >> >> > >


    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
    Time: 04:15:09 PM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
    Subject: Re: Wire length in aluminum airframes
    At 09:40 AM 3/3/2016, you wrote: ><ceengland7@gmail.com> > >Bob, I'm in the midst of wiring my RV-7, & realized that I can't >find an answer in 'the book' for this question. In the book and >articles you've written, you mention total wire distance (out & >back), referencing fiberglass airframes. But how do you compute wire >length when you're using an aluminum airframe for ground return for >things like landing lights, pitot heat, etc? Can the return path be >essentially ignored, since the return 'conductor' is so massively oversized? Yes . . . assume it to be . . . for all practical purposes . . . zero resistance ground. >And just for the sake of discussion, would the answer change if it's >a steel tube fuselage (significantly higher resistance for steel, >but still massive)? Not significantly higher . . . your aluminum airplane might measure a few milliohms stem to stern with steel being perhaps 50% higher. Neigher instance is significant in the grand scheme of things. Having said that, ground currents at engine cranking current levels should be brought to the most significant adjacent structure. 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
    Time: 04:19:49 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Posting order
    From: Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com>
    OK, since I'm the one who kicked the hive, I'll try to explain why I did. As I said, I prefer bottom posting, because top down has been the 'normal' flow of a document in the western world for at least a couple of millennia and when I read a document, I expect to start at the top & read down through the document. However, when I'm responding to an email post & I'm 2nd to respond, I try to conform to the 1st responder's method. If the 1st response was a top post, I'll try to top post, as well. At least someone subsequently reading the thread can start at the bottom & read posts 'bottom up', *in order*. Very inconvenient, but at least doable. My complaint was triggered by the fact that the 1st response (just happened to be mine in this particular case) was a bottom post, and the next response was at the top. When this continues, with each response in the responder's preferred location, we get a completely randomized order to the posts and it becomes very difficult, if not impossible, to sort out what's being said and who's responding to what. As others have mentioned, if the exchange is a conversation, especially between just a couple of people, then it really doesn't matter since neither will be going back to read that conversation later anyway (and probably should have been marked with a 'do not archive' trigger, since it has no lasting value). But when you're archiving actual information that could be useful to others at a later date, you've got an archive with little to no use. I've never been a fan of the forum format, but I'm beginning to see some value in it, because it tends to render this debate moot. My apologies if I offended; my intention was to point out that inconsistent top/bottom posting renders the resulting document, let's just say, less than useful. Charlie On 3/6/2016 4:53 PM, rayj wrote: > > I think the choice of where to post depends on whether the exchange is > viewed as a conversation or as building an archive. > > For a conversation, it's not necessary to review everything that has > been said each time a reply is made. The latest addition to the > conversation is immediately presented. Hence the preference for top > posting. > > For later reading in an archive, bottom posting perhaps makes it more > convenient to read. > > I subscribe to the list as email, so my comments refer to that format. > > do not archive > > Raymond Julian > Kettle River, MN > > The things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, > honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in > our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, > acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest are the traits of > success. And while men admire the quality of the first they love the > produce of the second. -John Steinbeck, novelist, Nobel laureate > (1902-1968) > > On 03/06/2016 12:22 PM, H. Marvin Haught Jr wrote: >> <handainc@madisoncounty.net> >> >> Well.... I for one disagree with all of that and prefer top posting. >> But I feel no need to tilt windmills or to try to enforce my >> preferences in life on other folks! I agree with Jared. And I try >> to keep my obsessive compulsive urges to my private life and out of >> my interactions with other folks that may not suffer from the same >> compulsions! I am probably older that you are and long ago learned >> that life is more fun when I learned to "agree to disagree"! :) >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On Mar 6, 2016, at 10:08 AM, Dj Merrill <deej@deej.net> wrote: >>> >>> >>> FWIW, the Internet Etiquette RFC 1855 provides guidelines to crop >>> the text you are replying to just the relevant part, with your reply >>> below that text. >>> >>> "If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you >>> summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just >>> enough text of the original to give a context. This will make >>> sure readers understand when they start to read your response." >>> >>> https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt >>> >>> >>> This post sums it up fairly well: >>> >>> https://www.redhat.com/archives/shrike-list/2003-August/msg00529.html >>> >>> >>> Top posting puts things out of order and makes comprehension very >>> difficult IMHO, especially if someone is replying to a specific part >>> of the previous message. >>> >>> Lots of opinions on this topic, even more so than which primer to >>> use... ;-) >>> >>> -Dj, an old fart that has been on the "Internet" longer than it has >>> been called that... :-) >>> >>> -- >>> Dj Merrill - N1JOV - EAA Chapter 87 >>> Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ >>> Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >


    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
    Time: 05:54:57 PM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
    Subject: Re: Newbie Wiring Questions
    At 09:39 PM 3/2/2016, you wrote: >Hello, > >I am starting to plan the wiring for my BD-4C. My immediate problem >is that I want to install the wires for things which will go in the >rear of the plane, and near the floor by the back seat, soon so that >I can close up the "tunnel" and (hopefully) not need to get in there again. Why not run a conduit of pex or nylon tubing through the covered tunnel environs? Then you can push/pull wires through at any later time at your convenience . . . after you've crafted wiring diagrams that comport with manufacturer's instructions for each appliance. You can get a LOT of wires into a piece of 1/2 or 3/4" pex. Here's an exemplar 'bundle' of wires in a piece of 5/8" tubing . . . http://tinyurl.com/hez7eat When I install such features, I always pull in one more strand of wire than necessary and secure the pigtails at each end. Then, when you need to add a wire later, use your 'tag wire' to pull in the new wire PLUS a new 'tag wire'. I've got a 20 foot conduit that runs from my desk up the wall an out the roof to my antennas. The pipe already had 4 coax cables in it when I pulled a 5th into the bundle with no sweat. Running the bundle through a secured conduit eliminates concerns for supporting the wires through the inaccessible and invisible tunnel environs. >The autopilot servos and the magnetometer have me wondering what to >do. Each needs power + 4 signal wires. The autopilot servos draw up >to 1.7 A so I think I use larger wire for the power than the >signals. The magnetomer only draws 0.12 A, though, so do I just get >a cable with 5 or 6 conductors in it? Or should the power be a >separate wire from a 4-conductor signal cable? As long as EVERY electron running one way through a bundle is exactly paired with another electron going the other way, there is no coupling of energy from one wire to another. >The rear seat intercomm has me wondering, too. It looks like >4-conductors will do, since there aren't any PTT switches. But >shielded or not? I think not but would like some reassurance. I'd use three conductor shielded where the shield is a fourth, ground conductor for one of the features at the far end. >Finally, an off the wall question: How do you size a fuse for a >circuit? Do you just round up to the next highest integer or do you >go bigger? I'm thinking of the autopilot servos, average current of >0.9 A and max current of 1.71 A. Should I use a 2 A fuse? 3 A? Put >both on a single 5 A fuse? Something else? Does EACH servo get powered from its own bus-power-tap? How many power feeders are depicted on the installation instructions? They probably speak to suggested wire gages too. Unless your wire runs are especially LONG (seldom in OBAM aircraft), then picking wires and their respective protective devices is right out of the book 5A/22AWG, 7A/20AWG, etc. etc. There's no risk for having the wire oversized. There's nearly zero risk for being a little 'undersized' wherein the risk is for nuisance tripping of a fuse or breaker. 20AMPS will not burn a 22AWG wire suspended in free air. See: http://tinyurl.com/6qr72fr So even if you found that some transient load on the end of a 22AWG wire nuisance trips a 5A fuse, then go up to 7A fuse but do not change the wire. 99* percent of wiring failures are open circuits. Wire comes out of terminal, screw comes loose, pin pushes back in a connector, etc. Most of the remaining failures are HARD faults to ground or within loads where the current will be many times higher than the wire's installed protection. In these instances you're interested in fast response that does not overheat the wire. Compared to breakers Fuses are VERY fast. Hence upsizing from 5 to 7A fuse on a 22AWG wire is a yawn. But in any case, begin with the manufacturer's recommendations for the appliance being installed. They SHOULD know more about achieving efficiency and reliability for that device than anyone else. Further, when their product falls short of advertised performance, root cause will most likely be found In shortfalls of quality assurance in production or installation as opposed to design. Please don't take this as any kind of push-back for bringing those questions to the List but understand that some well considered answers require more knowledge than one might be expected to have in their hip pocket. The last two failure analysis programs I participated in started with a study of the prior art. I read the manuals, looked up patents, researched process recommendations for installing the parts. All those references were cited in my report bibliography and became part of a foundation for what turned into as simple, two paragraph conclusion/ recommendation. So like you wife admonished as you struggled with your kid's new bike on Xmas eve, "Gee dear . . . have you read the instructions?" Of course, if they were translated from Chinese by a second year language student . . . oh well . . . bring it to the List and we'll commiserate. How did you happen into the BD-4 project? That was probably uncle Jim's finest contribution to the OBAM aviation community . . . Bob . . .


    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
    Time: 07:31:48 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Newbie Wiring Questions
    From: Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com>
    On 3/6/2016 7:47 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > At 09:39 PM 3/2/2016, you wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I am starting to plan the wiring for my BD-4C. My immediate problem >> is that I want to install the wires for things which will go in the >> rear of the plane, and near the floor by the back seat, soon so that >> I can close up the "tunnel" and (hopefully) not need to get in there >> again. > > Why not run a conduit of pex or nylon tubing through the > covered tunnel environs? Then you can push/pull wires > through at any later time at your convenience . . . after > you've crafted wiring diagrams that comport with manufacturer's > instructions for each appliance. You can get a LOT > of wires into a piece of 1/2 or 3/4" pex. > > Here's an exemplar 'bundle' of wires in a piece of > 5/8" tubing . . . > > http://tinyurl.com/hez7eat <http://tinyurl.com/hez7eat> > > When I install such features, I always pull in one more > strand of wire than necessary and secure the pigtails > at each end. Then, when you need to add a wire later, > use your 'tag wire' to pull in the new wire PLUS > a new 'tag wire'. I've got a 20 foot conduit that > runs from my desk up the wall an out the roof to > my antennas. The pipe already had 4 coax cables in > it when I pulled a 5th into the bundle with no > sweat. > > Running the bundle through a secured conduit eliminates > concerns for supporting the wires through the inaccessible > and invisible tunnel environs. > >> The autopilot servos and the magnetometer have me wondering what to >> do. Each needs power + 4 signal wires. The autopilot servos draw up >> to 1.7 A so I think I use larger wire for the power than the signals. >> The magnetomer only draws 0.12 A, though, so do I just get a cable >> with 5 or 6 conductors in it? Or should the power be a separate wire >> from a 4-conductor signal cable? > > As long as EVERY electron running one way through > a bundle is exactly paired with another electron > going the other way, there is no coupling of energy > from one wire to another. > > >> The rear seat intercomm has me wondering, too. It looks like >> 4-conductors will do, since there aren't any PTT switches. But >> shielded or not? I think not but would like some reassurance. > > I'd use three conductor shielded where the shield is > a fourth, ground conductor for one of the features at the > far end. > > >> Finally, an off the wall question: How do you size a fuse for a >> circuit? Do you just round up to the next highest integer or do you >> go bigger? I'm thinking of the autopilot servos, average current of >> 0.9 A and max current of 1.71 A. Should I use a 2 A fuse? 3 A? Put >> both on a single 5 A fuse? Something else? > > Does EACH servo get powered from its own bus-power-tap? > How many power feeders are depicted on the installation > instructions? They probably speak to suggested wire > gages too. Unless your wire runs are especially LONG > (seldom in OBAM aircraft), then picking wires and > their respective protective devices is right out > of the book 5A/22AWG, 7A/20AWG, etc. etc. There's > no risk for having the wire oversized. There's nearly > zero risk for being a little 'undersized' wherein the > risk is for nuisance tripping of a fuse or breaker. > > 20AMPS will not burn a 22AWG wire suspended in free > air. See: > > http://tinyurl.com/6qr72fr <http://tinyurl.com/6qr72fr> > > So even if you found that some transient load on > the end of a 22AWG wire nuisance trips a 5A fuse, > then go up to 7A fuse but do not change the wire. > > 99* percent of wiring failures are open circuits. > Wire comes out of terminal, screw comes loose, > pin pushes back in a connector, etc. Most of > the remaining failures are HARD faults to ground > or within loads where the current will be many times > higher than the wire's installed protection. In > these instances you're interested in fast response > that does not overheat the wire. Compared to breakers > Fuses are VERY fast. Hence upsizing from 5 to > 7A fuse on a 22AWG wire is a yawn. > > But in any case, begin with the manufacturer's > recommendations for the appliance being installed. > They SHOULD know more about achieving efficiency > and reliability for that device than anyone else. > Further, when their product falls short of advertised > performance, root cause will most likely be found > In shortfalls of quality assurance in production > or installation as opposed to design. > > Please don't take this as any kind of push-back > for bringing those questions to the List but > understand that some well considered answers require > more knowledge than one might be expected to have > in their hip pocket. The last two failure analysis > programs I participated in started with a study of > the prior art. I read the manuals, looked up patents, > researched process recommendations for installing > the parts. All those references were cited in my report > bibliography and became part of a foundation > for what turned into as simple, two paragraph conclusion/ > recommendation. > > So like you wife admonished as you struggled > with your kid's new bike on Xmas eve, "Gee > dear . . . have you read the instructions?" > Of course, if they were translated from Chinese > by a second year language student . . . oh well . . . > bring it to the List and we'll commiserate. > > How did you happen into the BD-4 project? That > was probably uncle Jim's finest contribution > to the OBAM aviation community . . . > > > Bob . . . > For wire raceway, I found this stuff: https://www.techflex.com/prod_ccp.asp and https://www.techflex.com/prod_f6w.asp As long as you leave a bit of extra length, the 1st can expand substantially for future wire additions. The 2nd allows wire to be added without being pulled through the tube, and allows wire to exit at any point along the run without cutting open the tube. Very flexible, can turn sharp corners, weighs next to nothing, very thin 'wall', and good abrasion resistance. I used the split stuff to run down the sides of my RV-7 from behind the instrument panel to the fuel line/cable chase at the main spar. The unsplit stuff I've used to bundle runs from subD connectors behind the panel. The 3/4" diameter version will expand enough to go over a populated subD, if the shell is removed & the wires bent 90 degrees. FWIW... 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! --