---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sun 01/28/18: 10 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 10:47 AM - Re: Re: Starter Contactor location on a Long-EZ (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 2. 10:47 AM - Re: Re: Starter Contactor location on a Long-EZ (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 3. 11:47 AM - Re:RCA video camera feed splitter (CORRECTION) (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 4. 11:56 AM - Re: Fund Raiser Behind By 31% - Please Contribute Today! (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 5. 01:33 PM - Re: Starter Contactor location on a Long-EZ (Steve Stearns) 6. 02:09 PM - Re: Fund Raiser Behind By 31% - Please Contribute Today! (Art Zemon) 7. 02:17 PM - Re: Fund Raiser Behind By 31% - Please Contribute Today! (Alec Myers) 8. 02:37 PM - Re: Fund Raiser Behind By 31% - Please Contribute Today! (Art Zemon) 9. 03:12 PM - Re: Fund Raiser Behind By 31% - Please Contribute Today! (Sebastien) 10. 03:58 PM - Re: Fund Raiser Behind By 31% - Please Contribute Today! (Art Zemon) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 10:47:15 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Starter Contactor location on a Long-EZ At 05:43 AM 1/27/2018, you wrote: >Bob, >There is an account of the incident on Brian >Deford=99s website located at >http://deford.com/cozy/fire.html. > >I am also considering installing the starter >solenoid on the inside (cabin side) of the >firewall. I also plan on protecting alternator B >leads with fusible links sized to protect the >wire ( larger than the alternator capacity). In >this way, any wire crossing the firewall will be protected. "The close ups of the engine/firewall show where the fire originated, but have not yielded any clues to me on the exact component that failed. I'm more convinced as time has gone on and I've had a chance to think about the failure modes that a failure of one of the contactors, particularly the starter contactor, is the most likely cause of the electrical fire and not a short circuit of the cable to the firewall. However, it can likely never be proved." It's unfortunate that the remains around the fire's origin were not examined more closely. I cannot imagine how a contactor would fail and release energy to ignite adjacent flammables. Correct me if in error. It seems that airplanes of these materials have a structurally composite firewall with a thin, steel sheet on the engine side. If point of origin was the fat-wire's firewall penetration, arc damage to the wire's stranding at the edge of the firewall sheet would be a tell. He said the initial smoke was light colored which does suggest burning insulation . . . but changed to black no doubt when structural plastics began to burn. It is VERY difficult to burn the insulation on a fat wire, that's why light aircraft generally do not 'protect' fat wires . . . they don't develop the kind of hard fault necessary conduct current that would heat the wire to levels that damage the insulation. Fat wires that rub grounded airframe are 'soft' faults that arc away and generally erodes the airframe with only localized heating. In this case, the localized heating may have been sandwiched tightly with the composite structure of the firewall which became initiation-fuel for what followed. Beech failure analysis files include an incident in New Mexico on a King Air that experienced sudden disconnect of elevator cables while on final. The pilot did a go around and managed to fly the airplane using only pitch trim and accomplished a safe landing. Inspection revealed that a windshield de-ice inverter's 6AWG DC power wires were misplaced during a maintenance event and had been rubbing on the elevator cable. Motion of the cable eventually wore through the insulation and intermittent arcing ensued. I forget how many flight hours between the service and the incident . . . but it was a lot! It took a long time to eat through the strands of the control cable . . . but the copper wire was hardly damaged, nor was there a lot of damage to the wire's insulation. No smoke was detected by crew. This but one example of a 'soft' fault that did not open the breaker protecting the wire but ultimately parted the elevator control cable. I'm unable to hypothesize a chain of events that migrated from a stable condition at the time of battery removal and a high-energy release of battery energy within minutes of battery replacement. If the point of origin was at the edge of the firewall sheet, this may well have been another example of soft-fault that had been going on for some time but, like those elevator cables, too small to be noticed. Brian's story is certainly sad and distressing to contemplate. But I don't think there is enough data to suggest that any re-arrangement of hardware will make this already rare event even less probable. No process provides more confidence in a design than on-the-fly-failure-mode- effects-analysis . . . as every part is installed, be constantly aware of ways that part can be compromised with unhappy if not dangerous consequences. Proximity of combustibles (firewall honeycomb?) with potential arc generators (firewall steel sheet) are combinations worthy of extra attention. Being a low risk pilot calls for situational awareness and staying ahead of the airplane. Low risk fabrication is no different. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 10:47:19 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Starter Contactor location on a Long-EZ > >Not to be critical of Brian in any way, and in the discussion I >discovered in support of placing the starter solenoid on the cold >side of the firewall, was a point made that he "didn't turn off the >master" which controls the power flow through the big power cable, >as is a prominent feature of #2 above. I understand doing analysis >on past events, and looking at standard practices in an attempt to >mitigate potential issues (which is exactly what I'm attempting >here), but Brian's scenario isn't the only reported instance of >smoking wires in a pusher, it's simply the most tragic (that I know of). But has there been any forensic analysis of cause/effect in any of these incidents? If wires 'smoked', were they small wires improperly protected or fat wires improperly installed? Did quantitative analysis show that the 'incidents' were more prevalent in pushers as opposed to tractor airframes? I think the problem is being over-worried . . . concerns which are certainly understandable but for reasons based more on lack of information than from rational actions to reduce risk. To be sure, fire wall penetrations of all stripe have figured in failures. I recall one incident on a tractor airplane where a bulkhead fitting on a fuel line did not receive the benefit of safety-wired flare-nuts. The line leaked and an in-flight, fuel-fed fire ensued. I can recall dozens of articles in the aviation mags and publications by Tony B et. als. where reliable fire wall penetration is discuesed in detail. The air framers I've worked for had books of process and practice specifications for such things . . . books that have seen only minor revision over decades . . . As a class of incident, these are way down the charts in frequency of occurrence. Virtually all such events have root cause in failure to observe legacy design rules that have served well on hundreds of millions of vehicles of all kind for over a century . . . not the least of which are airplanes. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 11:47:16 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re:RCA video camera feed splitter (CORRECTION) At 06:00 PM 12/4/2017, you wrote: > > >nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote: > > A D-sub housing I've found quite useful is the 956 series devices > from NorComp. They have an inside height of 0.570 and will allow > you to socket a chip on the far end . . . the board deflects off > centerline by about 0.050. > >Bob, your timing is impeccable. I turned on the computer to order >some parts and saw your post. I'll get the 956-series backshell. I >was looking at NorComp's 983-series, but yours looks nearly >identical for interior volume and is 1/4 the cost. > >Once I have the parts I'll do a quick cardboard template of the PCB >before I order those, to be sure they'll fit. the optimum board size is 1.175 x 0.830 for the 15-pin shells. Let me know what you find for 25-pin . . . if you need to go that big. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 11:56:24 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fund Raiser Behind By 31% - Please Contribute Today! At 09:12 AM 11/27/2017, you wrote: > >Dear Listers, > >The percentage of members making a Contribution to support the Lists >this year is currently behind last year by at this time by roughly >31%. Please take this opportunity to show your support for the >Matronics Lists and Forums! Some of my favorite sources on the 'net have been offering 'add-free-passes' that allow you to access their content offerings without having to hat-dance through the weeds . . . I'm really enjoying it and the cost is trivial. Let's not abuse time time, talent and resources Matt has dedicated to this endeavor for all these years. Come on folks! There ain't no such thing as a free lunch . . . you can't eat ice cream every day if you don't feed the cow . . . somebody pays for it some where along the line. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 01:33:37 PM PST US From: Steve Stearns Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Starter Contactor location on a Long-EZ Hi Wade, I've got O235 Longeze N45FC. It's coming up on 1400 hrs or so but only 400 hrs of that is after I purchased it and completely rewired it (along with quite a bit of other work). I thought long and hard about the battery, alternator, starter and associated contactors issue before I made my decisions. This included reviewing the Bob N. wiring architecture diagrams, searching forum archives and posting my own questions. >From this work I concluded that Bob's preference (IIRC) was to run a fat wire from master contactor (up front) to starter contactor (in back) and then have the alternator B+ "piggy back" on the same wire (i.e. it goes from alternator to starter contactor). This eliminates the weight of one wire of sufficient gauge for the alternator current (in my case #8 for a 40A alternator) but, in trade, you have a fat wire that is hot whenever the master contactor is enabled running the full length of the fuselage. Bob provided referenced as to why this was considered acceptable. My own cost/benefit analysis led me to buck the aeroelectric conventional wisdom and do it different. In my bird the B+ gets its own #8 wire from the alternator in back to a 40A ANL in front and from there to the master contactor. I've reserved room for a starter contactor up front, next to the master contactor for the starter contactors. I will pull a new + fat wire for the starter should I reinstall it (I took it out when I overhauled everything and haven't seen it worth reinstalling). I will also have to replace my existing #8 ground wire from the front to the back with a fat wire should I want the starter. (Truth be told, I will also have to install a new flywheel as I removed the ring gear and supporting metal to reduce weight). In my mind, the advantage of eliminating a single #8 wire in trade for a hot-whenever-the-master-is-on and otherwise totally unprotected fat wire running the full length of my aircraft just wasn't worth it. It was well after that conclusion that I also concluded that the convenience of a starter wasn't worth the weight and additional failure modes. If I was running a high-compression O320 or O360, I might have come to a different conclusion on this point, but not the previous one. I encourage you to gather all the input you can and consider all your own tradeoffs, which it appears is exactly what you are doing. Best of luck! And I look forward to meeting you at a canard fly-in one of these days! Steve Stearns O235 Longeze N45FC Boulder/Longmont CO ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 02:09:25 PM PST US From: Art Zemon Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fund Raiser Behind By 31% - Please Contribute Today! I wrote to Matt but never got a reply. I suggested switched to Google Groups, which are 100% free. Not even ads. Do you know if he received my note? -- Art Z. On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote: > At 09:12 AM 11/27/2017, you wrote: > > > > > Dear Listers, > > The percentage of members making a Contribution to support the Lists this > year is currently behind last year by at this time by roughly 31%. Please > take this opportunity to show your support for the Matronics Lists and > Forums! > > > Some of my favorite sources on the 'net have > been offering 'add-free-passes' that allow you > to access their content offerings without having > to hat-dance through the weeds . . . I'm really > enjoying it and the cost is trivial. > > Let's not abuse time time, talent and resources > Matt has dedicated to this endeavor for all these > years. Come on folks! There ain't no such thing > as a free lunch . . . you can't eat ice cream every > day if you don't feed the cow . . . somebody pays > for it some where along the line. > > > Bob . . . > -- https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/ *"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel* ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 02:17:51 PM PST US From: Alec Myers Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fund Raiser Behind By 31% - Please Contribute Today! You don=99t pay money for it, but you do have to give G**gle your soul . So it=99s not free.... On Jan 28, 2018, at 17:04, Art Zemon wrote: I wrote to Matt but never got a reply. I suggested switched to Google Groups , which are 100% free. Not even ads. Do you know if he received my note? -- Art Z. > On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > At 09:12 AM 11/27/2017, you wrote: m> >> >> Dear Listers, >> >> The percentage of members making a Contribution to support the Lists this year is currently behind last year by at this time by roughly 31%. Please t ake this opportunity to show your support for the Matronics Lists and Forums ! > > Some of my favorite sources on the 'net have > been offering 'add-free-passes' that allow you > to access their content offerings without having > to hat-dance through the weeds . . . I'm really > enjoying it and the cost is trivial. > > Let's not abuse time time, talent and resources > Matt has dedicated to this endeavor for all these > years. Come on folks! There ain't no such thing > as a free lunch . . . you can't eat ice cream every > day if you don't feed the cow . . . somebody pays > for it some where along the line. > > > > Bob . . . > -- https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/ "If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 02:37:19 PM PST US From: Art Zemon Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fund Raiser Behind By 31% - Please Contribute Today! Well, if you don't want to be the product then you can be a paying customer. Cost is a measly $50 per year for a paid G Suite account and it includes an unlimited number of Google Groups. That's darned close to free and a helluva lot less than the cost of running a server and possibly paying for bandwidth. Beats begging for dollars. -- Art Z. On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 4:13 PM, Alec Myers wrote: > You don=99t pay money for it, but you do have to give G**gle your s oul. So > it=99s not free.... > > On Jan 28, 2018, at 17:04, Art Zemon wrote: > > I wrote to Matt but never got a reply. I suggested switched to Google > Groups, which are 100% free. Not even ads. Do you know if he received my > note? > > -- Art Z. > > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < > nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote: > >> At 09:12 AM 11/27/2017, you wrote: >> >> dralle@matronics.com> >> >> Dear Listers, >> >> The percentage of members making a Contribution to support the Lists thi s >> year is currently behind last year by at this time by roughly 31%. Plea se >> take this opportunity to show your support for the Matronics Lists and >> Forums! >> >> >> Some of my favorite sources on the 'net have >> been offering 'add-free-passes' that allow you >> to access their content offerings without having >> to hat-dance through the weeds . . . I'm really >> enjoying it and the cost is trivial. >> >> Let's not abuse time time, talent and resources >> Matt has dedicated to this endeavor for all these >> years. Come on folks! There ain't no such thing >> as a free lunch . . . you can't eat ice cream every >> day if you don't feed the cow . . . somebody pays >> for it some where along the line. >> >> >> >> Bob . . . >> > > > -- > https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/ > > *"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, wha t > am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel* > -- https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/ *"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel* ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 03:12:08 PM PST US From: Sebastien Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fund Raiser Behind By 31% - Please Contribute Today! I take it you could only join this Google Group if you already have a google social media account? On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Art Zemon wrote: > Well, if you don't want to be the product then you can be a paying > customer. Cost is a measly $50 per year for a paid G Suite account and it > includes an unlimited number of Google Groups. That's darned close to fre e > and a helluva lot less than the cost of running a server and possibly > paying for bandwidth. Beats begging for dollars. > > -- Art Z. > > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 4:13 PM, Alec Myers wrote: > >> You don=99t pay money for it, but you do have to give G**gle your soul. So >> it=99s not free.... >> >> On Jan 28, 2018, at 17:04, Art Zemon wrote: >> >> I wrote to Matt but never got a reply. I suggested switched to Google >> Groups, which are 100% free. Not even ads. Do you know if he received my >> note? >> >> -- Art Z. >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < >> nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote: >> >>> At 09:12 AM 11/27/2017, you wrote: >>> >>> dralle@matronics.com> >>> >>> Dear Listers, >>> >>> The percentage of members making a Contribution to support the Lists >>> this year is currently behind last year by at this time by roughly 31%. >>> Please take this opportunity to show your support for the Matronics Lis ts >>> and Forums! >>> >>> >>> Some of my favorite sources on the 'net have >>> been offering 'add-free-passes' that allow you >>> to access their content offerings without having >>> to hat-dance through the weeds . . . I'm really >>> enjoying it and the cost is trivial. >>> >>> Let's not abuse time time, talent and resources >>> Matt has dedicated to this endeavor for all these >>> years. Come on folks! There ain't no such thing >>> as a free lunch . . . you can't eat ice cream every >>> day if you don't feed the cow . . . somebody pays >>> for it some where along the line. >>> >>> >>> >>> Bob . . . >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/ >> >> *"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, >> what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel* >> > > > -- > https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/ > > *"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, wha t > am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel* > ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 03:58:04 PM PST US From: Art Zemon Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fund Raiser Behind By 31% - Please Contribute Today! No. Any email works -- Art Z. Sent from my phone. Please excuse brevity and bizarre typos. On Jan 28, 2018 5:33 PM, "Sebastien" wrote: > I take it you could only join this Google Group if you already have a > google social media account? > > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Art Zemon wrote: > >> Well, if you don't want to be the product then you can be a paying >> customer. Cost is a measly $50 per year for a paid G Suite account and i t >> includes an unlimited number of Google Groups. That's darned close to fr ee >> and a helluva lot less than the cost of running a server and possibly >> paying for bandwidth. Beats begging for dollars. >> >> -- Art Z. >> >> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 4:13 PM, Alec Myers wrote: >> >>> You don=99t pay money for it, but you do have to give G**gle your soul. So >>> it=99s not free.... >>> >>> On Jan 28, 2018, at 17:04, Art Zemon wrote: >>> >>> I wrote to Matt but never got a reply. I suggested switched to Google >>> Groups, which are 100% free. Not even ads. Do you know if he received m y >>> note? >>> >>> -- Art Z. >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < >>> nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote: >>> >>>> At 09:12 AM 11/27/2017, you wrote: >>>> >>>> dralle@matronics.com> >>>> >>>> Dear Listers, >>>> >>>> The percentage of members making a Contribution to support the Lists >>>> this year is currently behind last year by at this time by roughly 31% .. >>>> Please take this opportunity to show your support for the Matronics Li sts >>>> and Forums! >>>> >>>> >>>> Some of my favorite sources on the 'net have >>>> been offering 'add-free-passes' that allow you >>>> to access their content offerings without having >>>> to hat-dance through the weeds . . . I'm really >>>> enjoying it and the cost is trivial. >>>> >>>> Let's not abuse time time, talent and resources >>>> Matt has dedicated to this endeavor for all these >>>> years. Come on folks! There ain't no such thing >>>> as a free lunch . . . you can't eat ice cream every >>>> day if you don't feed the cow . . . somebody pays >>>> for it some where along the line. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Bob . . . >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/ >>> >>> *"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, >>> what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel* >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/ >> >> *"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, >> what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel* >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.