AeroElectric-List Digest Archive

Mon 09/25/17


Total Messages Posted: 4



Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 08:09 AM - Re: Unsupported coax length (Paul Eckenroth)
     2. 08:48 AM - Re: Unsupported coax length (Charlie England)
     3. 08:52 AM - Re: Unsupported coax length (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
     4. 09:36 AM - Re: Unsupported coax length (Paul Eckenroth)
 
 
 


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: 08:09:29 AM PST US
    From: Paul Eckenroth <N509RV@eckenroth.com>
    Subject: Re: Unsupported coax length
    Bill Thanks for your reply. I was hoping for a more definitive statement from one of the very experienced technicians on the list. Your reply mirrors what my intuition tells me. Paul On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 7:05 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver@nc.rr.com> wrote: > Mauledriver@nc.rr.com> > > No answers here, just what I did: I ran my RG400 through grommets but also > ran several other wires along with it. They were bound together with the > waxed thread stuff at roughly 12" to 18" intervals. It seems to me that > combining wires in a bundle provided a certain level of support. I think > some of the written guidelines suggest the same. > > My guess is that RG400 alone thru grommets is just fine as well. > > > On 9/23/2017 8:58 PM, Paul Eckenroth wrote: > >> Looking for advise on what the max acceptable unsupported horizontal >> length of RG400 coax might be. I have 23" between fuselage ribs and was >> planning on running the coax through a grommet in the tooling holes but >> then started questioning if this was good practice. So opinions are >> requested. >> >> Thanks >> Paul >> > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > >


    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: 08:48:07 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Unsupported coax length
    From: Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com>
    From FAA maintenance doc AC 43.13-1B section 8 (downloadable for free, if you don't have a copy): /*a.*//* *//*Wires and cables are supported by suitable clamps, grommets, or other devices at intervals of not more than 24 inches, except when contained in troughs, ducts, or conduits. The supporting devices should be of a suitable size and type, with the wires and cables held securely in place without damage to the insulation.*/ That help? Charlie On 9/25/2017 10:07 AM, Paul Eckenroth wrote: > Bill > > Thanks for your reply. I was hoping for a more definitive statement > from one of the very experienced technicians on the list. Your reply > mirrors what my intuition tells me. > > Paul > > On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 7:05 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver@nc.rr.com > <mailto:Mauledriver@nc.rr.com>> wrote: > > <Mauledriver@nc.rr.com <mailto:Mauledriver@nc.rr.com>> > > No answers here, just what I did: I ran my RG400 through grommets > but also ran several other wires along with it. They were bound > together with the waxed thread stuff at roughly 12" to 18" > intervals. It seems to me that combining wires in a bundle > provided a certain level of support. I think some of the written > guidelines suggest the same. > > My guess is that RG400 alone thru grommets is just fine as well. > > > On 9/23/2017 8:58 PM, Paul Eckenroth wrote: > > Looking for advise on what the max acceptable unsupported > horizontal length of RG400 coax might be. I have 23" between > fuselage ribs and was planning on running the coax through a > grommet in the tooling holes but then started questioning if > this was good practice. So opinions are requested. > > Thanks > Paul > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus <https://www.avast.com/antivirus> > > =================================== > - > Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" > target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List > =================================== > FORUMS - > eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com > =================================== > WIKI - > errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com > =================================== > b Site - > -Matt Dralle, List Admin. > rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution > =================================== > >


    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: 08:52:11 AM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
    Subject: Re: Unsupported coax length
    > >On 9/23/2017 8:58 PM, Paul Eckenroth wrote: >Looking for advise on what the max acceptable >unsupported horizontal length of RG400 coax >might be.=C2 I have 23" between fuselage ribs and >was planning on running the coax through a >grommet in the tooling holes but then started >questioning if this was good practice.=C2 So opinions are requested. I seem to recall that AC43-13 used to quote a 24" max, unsupported span . . . waaayyyy back when. But I don't find it in my latest copy. Unless you're into energetic aerobatics, I suspect that 24" is fine. Alternatively, you could add some 'bond studs' to the inside of the skin at the half-way points. http://tinyurl.com/hxczu3r 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
    Time: 09:36:26 AM PST US
    From: Paul Eckenroth <N509RV@eckenroth.com>
    Subject: Re: Unsupported coax length
    Charlie and Bob. Thanks for info. I'm right at the limit but don't think I will be doing energetic aerobatics. Paul On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com> wrote: > From FAA maintenance doc AC 43.13-1B section 8 (downloadable for free, if > you don't have a copy): > > *a.* > *Wires and cables are supported by suitable clamps, grommets, or other > devices at intervals of not more than 24 inches, except when contained in > troughs, ducts, or conduits. The supporting devices should be of a suitable > size and type, with the wires and cables held securely in place without > damage to the insulation.* > > That help? > > Charlie > On 9/25/2017 10:07 AM, Paul Eckenroth wrote: > > Bill > > Thanks for your reply. I was hoping for a more definitive statement from > one of the very experienced technicians on the list. Your reply mirrors > what my intuition tells me. > > Paul > > On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 7:05 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver@nc.rr.com> > wrote: > >> Mauledriver@nc.rr.com> >> >> No answers here, just what I did: I ran my RG400 through grommets but >> also ran several other wires along with it. They were bound together with >> the waxed thread stuff at roughly 12" to 18" intervals. It seems to me >> that combining wires in a bundle provided a certain level of support. I >> think some of the written guidelines suggest the same. >> >> My guess is that RG400 alone thru grommets is just fine as well. >> >> >> On 9/23/2017 8:58 PM, Paul Eckenroth wrote: >> >>> Looking for advise on what the max acceptable unsupported horizontal >>> length of RG400 coax might be. I have 23" between fuselage ribs and was >>> planning on running the coax through a grommet in the tooling holes but >>> then started questioning if this was good practice. So opinions are >>> requested. >>> >>> Thanks >>> Paul >>> >> >> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> >> =================================== >> - >> Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www. >> matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List >> =================================== >> FORUMS - >> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com >> =================================== >> WIKI - >> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com >> =================================== >> b Site - >> -Matt Dralle, List Admin. >> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> =================================== >> >> >> >> > > > <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon> Virus-free. > www.avast.com > <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=link> > <#m_1130766257584959573_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> >




    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! --