Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 10:17 AM - Re: Z14 with SDS EFI... (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
2. 10:19 AM - Re: Re: IVO Prop current limiter (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 12:04 PM - Re: Re: IVO Prop current limiter (Paul A. Fisher)
4. 12:05 PM - Re: Re: IVO Prop current limiter (Paul A. Fisher)
5. 02:38 PM - Relative position of Transponder and DME antennas (Peter Pengilly)
6. 03:06 PM - Z14 with SDS EFI... (Andy Elliott)
7. 03:15 PM - Re: Relative position of Transponder and DME antennas (don van santen)
8. 03:53 PM - Re: Relative position of Transponder and DME antennas (bobsv35b@aol.com)
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: Z14 with SDS EFI... |
At 09:15 AM 7/17/2017, you wrote:
>
>I'm planning on a dual ECU SDS EFI system for my RV-7. I'm also
>planning to (eventually) equip for IFR. Given all that, I'm looking
>strongly at a Z14-based electrical architecture, but I have a few
>questions/concerns about it.
>
>
>My plan was to split the critical engine systems and the PFDs across
>both battery buses, so the aircraft could run solely on one bus or
>the other. I wanted to maintain the ability to fly indefinitely
>after one failure and provide a minimum of two hours on battery power alone.
It seems you have abandoned the fundamental feature
of Z-14 . . .
With two alternators, you should be designing for
continued flight to intended destination using the
energy from only one of the two alternators.
Batteries are there to add stability to the system
dynamics and start the engine.
Recall that the single most reliable sources of
energy on any airplane is the judiciously maintained
battery. Then comes the engine driven alternator . . .
a more prone to failure but still a rare source
of anxiety in the cockpit.
Adding a second alternator not only sidesteps
probability of declaring an emergency because
of one alternator failure, it also reduces the
need for tailoring battery capacity(ies) to
design goals for battery-only endurance.
Have you crafted a load analysis for all electro-
whizzies needed for competent/comfortable termination
of flight?
I'm particularly mystified by the spreading of
engine critical accessories across both systems.
Z-14, as published, offers reliability on the same
order as modern biz-jets . . . better than King Airs.
Spreading things around the bus structures only
adds complexity without reducing risk.
Let's back up. You have two itty-bitty batteries
which, I presume, are used in tandem for cranking.
What size alternators? Suppose your engineering
design manager says, "Okay, load up the 4 busses
with system accessories and explain your decisions."
After you have everything hooked up, then do the
FMEA . . . what kind of failure will cause you to
re-position some switches? After re-configuration,
what new limits (if any) are imposed on the probability
of comfortable termination of flight?
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: IVO Prop current limiter |
> I think the mechanical aspects of the data package are
> now complete. I'll assemble one here as well so we can
> beta-test software and compare notes.
The boards are here. Thought I had all the
parts to stuff one but found a couple
of shortages. On order for delivery by
priority mail . . .
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: IVO Prop current limiter |
Bob and all,
I've got 7 of the PIC chips in inventory today, so I can program them
and send them to people who want to do some beta testing. Or I could
send them all to whomever is going to be putting the kits together. I
would suggest we let Bob assemble one of the boards and do a quick check
of the software before I program the rest of the chips.
Paul Fisher
On 7/16/2017 6:30 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> At 11:36 AM 7/15/2017, you wrote:
>> Bob,
>>
>> I would build one of those Prop limiters for my electric adj. IvoProp.
>>
>> If you need someone to make the initial order for parts, I'd be
>> happy to do that. I could disseminate the parts kits to the
>> interested builders.
>
> I have uploaded an illustrated bill of materials and
> a parts locator to . . .
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yby3waw6
>
> <http://tinyurl.com/yby3waw6> Note that the BOM does not call out a
> mating D-sub
> connector (D15S) since each builder may choose from
> either crimp or solder-cup connectors. Also missing
> is a callout for a D15H hood. The builder will need
> 6-32 hardware to fasten the assembly down to the
> mounting-surface/heat-sink.
>
> A LED travel limit annunciator is also missing from
> the BOM. Something like this might tweak your
> fancy . . .
>
> http://tinyurl.com/y8j6qrva
>
> <http://tinyurl.com/y8j6qrva> Unless the builder has programming
> capability for
> the PIC chip, I'll suggest the chip not be ordered
> from Digikey rather from someone in the project group
> with programming tools.
>
> I think the mechanical aspects of the data package are
> now complete. I'll assemble one here as well so we can
> beta-test software and compare notes.
>
> 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: IVO Prop current limiter |
Bob and all,
I've got 7 of the PIC chips in inventory today, so I can program them
and send them to people who want to do some beta testing. Or I could
send them all to whomever is going to be putting the kits together. I
would suggest we let Bob assemble one of the boards and do a quick check
of the software before I program the rest of the chips.
Paul Fisher
On 7/16/2017 6:30 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> At 11:36 AM 7/15/2017, you wrote:
>> Bob,
>>
>> I would build one of those Prop limiters for my electric adj. IvoProp.
>>
>> If you need someone to make the initial order for parts, I'd be
>> happy to do that. I could disseminate the parts kits to the
>> interested builders.
>
> I have uploaded an illustrated bill of materials and
> a parts locator to . . .
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yby3waw6
>
> <http://tinyurl.com/yby3waw6> Note that the BOM does not call out a
> mating D-sub
> connector (D15S) since each builder may choose from
> either crimp or solder-cup connectors. Also missing
> is a callout for a D15H hood. The builder will need
> 6-32 hardware to fasten the assembly down to the
> mounting-surface/heat-sink.
>
> A LED travel limit annunciator is also missing from
> the BOM. Something like this might tweak your
> fancy . . .
>
> http://tinyurl.com/y8j6qrva
>
> <http://tinyurl.com/y8j6qrva> Unless the builder has programming
> capability for
> the PIC chip, I'll suggest the chip not be ordered
> from Digikey rather from someone in the project group
> with programming tools.
>
> I think the mechanical aspects of the data package are
> now complete. I'll assemble one here as well so we can
> beta-test software and compare notes.
>
> Bob . . .
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Relative position of Transponder and DME antennas |
I am retrofitting a panel mount DME into a low wing metal airplane and
trying to figure out where the antenna should be installed.
There are several complicating factors, particularly that it is very
difficult to route the antenna coax from the panel aft past the spar. The
transponder antenna is already placed under the fuselage between the spar
and the firewall under the passenger's knees with one comm (comm 2) antenna
in a similar position under the pilot's knees. There is a position for the
DMA antenna just ahead of the spar on the center-line, but this puts it
around 15" from both of the other existing antennas. This busts the 36"
between antennas rule of thumb - but so does the existing comm & txpdr
antennas with no apparent ill effect. However, King recommend the DME
antenna should be more than 3ft from a comm antenna and 6ft from a txpdr
antenna. One method to install the antenna towards the rear of the aircraft
could be to route the coax alongside the comm 1 coax (RG400) for 5ft, but
that appears to be poor practice.
The DME is being installed to support IFR operation and will be used only
infrequently, but when it is needed it will during an instrument approach
and so reliable operation from (say) 10 or 15 miles is highly desirable. Any
degradation in the current good comm or txpdr performance is undesirable, no
matter what the phase of flight.
My questions are,
* Will the installed performance of the DME be noticeably degraded if
the antenna is mounted 15" away from an existing comm and txpdr antenna?
* Will the installed performance of the existing comm and txpdr be
noticeably degraded if the DME antenna is mounted 15" away from both of
their existing antennas?
* If the DME & comm RG400 feeders are run in close proximity for 5
feet will they mutually interfere with each other?
Thanks for any advice,
Peter
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: | Z14 with SDS EFI... |
Minor comment in line with some of the others - Why do you have/need main
and aux contactors? I ran an electrically-dependent airplane (for about 5
years before I sold it) with a rock-simple marine battery selector switch
with off-1-2-both positions. Used 1 alternator and 2 pc680's and, IAW group
guidance, changed one battery every year.
That said, that particular airplane had electronic ignition, but did not
have EFI, and would easily run >1 hour on one battery alone. In the case of
the higher loads of EFI, I might agree with using two alternators instead,
one belt drive and one pad-mounted, and one battery.
FWIW,
Andy
--------------------------
Andy Elliott, N127VE, GP-4
CL: 480-695-9568
"If things seem under control, you're just not going fast enough." - Mario
Andretti
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: Relative position of Transponder and DME antennas |
Peter,
In my RV all the antennas cables except
the GPS run together down the cold side of the firewall and back in the
wire tunnel. I had to drill s couple holes in the spar carry through bit
Van's daid this was no issue. All the cables are within an inch of each
other. They are all RG400. The length of the runs where they ate together
is roughly six feet.
Antennas are 2 wingtip (archer) 2 com 1transponder/adsb out 1 adsb in 1aprs
Two GPS, 1xm and the GPS for the aprs are under tbe cowl. All have worked
perfectly for nine years now with the atchers working up to 50 miles if
over 8000 feet altitude.
On Jul 18, 2017 2:43 PM, "Peter Pengilly" <Peter@sportingaero.com> wrote:
I am retrofitting a panel mount DME into a low wing metal airplane and
trying to figure out where the antenna should be installed.
There are several complicating factors, particularly that it is very
difficult to route the antenna coax from the panel aft past the spar. The
transponder antenna is already placed under the fuselage between the spar
and the firewall under the passenger=99s knees with one comm (comm 2)
antenna
in a similar position under the pilot=99s knees. There is a position
for the
DMA antenna just ahead of the spar on the center-line, but this puts it
around 15=9D from both of the other existing antennas. This busts the
36=9D
between antennas rule of thumb =93 but so does the existing comm & tx
pdr
antennas with no apparent ill effect. However, King recommend the DME
antenna should be more than 3ft from a comm antenna and 6ft from a txpdr
antenna. One method to install the antenna towards the rear of the aircraft
could be to route the coax alongside the comm 1 coax (RG400) for 5ft, but
that appears to be poor practice.
The DME is being installed to support IFR operation and will be used only
infrequently, but when it is needed it will during an instrument approach
and so reliable operation from (say) 10 or 15 miles is highly desirable.
Any degradation in the current good comm or txpdr performance is
undesirable, no matter what the phase of flight.
My questions are,
- Will the installed performance of the DME be noticeably degraded if
the antenna is mounted 15=9D away from an existing comm and txpdr
antenna?
- Will the installed performance of the existing comm and txpdr be
noticeably degraded if the DME antenna is mounted 15=9D away from
both of
their existing antennas?
- If the DME & comm RG400 feeders are run in close proximity for 5 feet
will they mutually interfere with each other?
Thanks for any advice,
Peter
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: Relative position of Transponder and DME antennas |
Good Afternoon Peter,
May I ask whether or not you will have an IFR approved GPS in the RV?
If so, why not forget about installing the DME? The GPS can be used as a su
bstitute for ANY DME function. Saves time, money, and weight!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: don van santen <donvansanten@gmail.com>
Sent: Tue, Jul 18, 2017 5:16 pm
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Relative position of Transponder and DME an
tennas
Peter,
In my RV all the antennas cables except
the GPS run together down the cold side of the firewall and back in the wir
e tunnel. I had to drill s couple holes in the spar carry through bit Van's
daid this was no issue. All the cables are within an inch of each other. T
hey are all RG400. The length of the runs where they ate together is roughl
y six feet.
Antennas are 2 wingtip (archer) 2 com 1transponder/adsb out 1 adsb in 1aprs
Two GPS, 1xm and the GPS for the aprs are under tbe cowl. All have worked p
erfectly for nine years now with the atchers working up to 50 miles if over
8000 feet altitude.
On Jul 18, 2017 2:43 PM, "Peter Pengilly" <Peter@sportingaero.com> wrote:
I am retrofitting a panel mount DME into a low wing metal airplane and tryi
ng to figure out where the antenna should be installed.
There are several complicating factors, particularly that it is very diffic
ult to route the antenna coax from the panel aft past the spar. The transpo
nder antenna is already placed under the fuselage between the spar and the
firewall under the passenger=99s knees with one comm (comm 2) antenna
in a similar position under the pilot=99s knees. There is a position
for the DMA antenna just ahead of the spar on the center-line, but this pu
ts it around 15=9D from both of the other existing antennas. This bus
ts the 36=9D between antennas rule of thumb =93 but so does the
existing comm & txpdr antennas with no apparent ill effect. However, King
recommend the DME antenna should be more than 3ft from a comm antenna and 6
ft from a txpdr antenna. One method to install the antenna towards the rear
of the aircraft could be to route the coax alongside the comm 1 coax (RG40
0) for 5ft, but that appears to be poor practice.
The DME is being installed to support IFR operation and will be used only i
nfrequently, but when it is needed it will during an instrument approach an
d so reliable operation from (say) 10 or 15 miles is highly desirable. Any
degradation in the current good comm or txpdr performance is undesirable, n
o matter what the phase of flight.
My questions are,
Will the installed performance of the DME be noticeably degraded if the ant
enna is mounted 15=9D away from an existing comm and txpdr antenna?
Will the installed performance of the existing comm and txpdr be noticeably
degraded if the DME antenna is mounted 15=9D away from both of their
existing antennas?
If the DME & comm RG400 feeders are run in close proximity for 5 feet will
they mutually interfere with each other?
Thanks for any advice,
Peter
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! --
|