Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 09:10 AM - Re: Re: Sifting design goals and establishing protocols (Bill Watson)
2. 11:23 AM - Re: Sifting design goals and establishing protocols (supik)
3. 11:46 AM - Z-12 Aux Alt Question (BMC_Dave)
4. 12:02 PM - Re: Sifting design goals and establishing protocols (supik)
5. 12:24 PM - Re: Re: Sifting design goals and establishing protocols (skywagon185guy)
6. 05:25 PM - Re: Z-12 Aux Alt Question (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 06:22 PM - Re: Z-12 Aux Alt Question (BMC_Dave)
8. 06:38 PM - Re: Re: Z-12 Aux Alt Question (Kelly McMullen)
9. 08:04 PM - Re: Re: Z-12 Aux Alt Question (Charlie England)
10. 08:06 PM - Re: Z-12 Aux Alt Question (BMC_Dave)
11. 10:20 PM - gps cables for stratus ESG (kjlpdx)
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: Sifting design goals and establishing protocols |
On 1/6/2019 8:43 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> Do a Z-14 and make them totally independent
> of each other.
This is what I implemented on my RV-10. I did a very straight up Z-14
with 40 and 20 amp alternators. For the first 500 hours or so I've
flown with the 2 buses interconnected. Regulator voltage levels were
staggered but not on purpose. My usual operational procedure was to
start on 1 battery with my (3) power hungry, unswitched MFDs running on
the other battery. Bob helped me understand that this was exactly the
opposite of the way I should be running things.
After swapping out the light weight starter that came with the Van's
engine package (too high a momentary current draw turning over the
IO540), I began doing all starts with both batteries and buses
interconnected. Then I disconnect them for flight. I've run that way
for the last 600 hours.
Running on 2 separate batteries, alternators and buses makes most any
failure both readily apparent and easily recoverable in flight. At one
point I had a LRC3 fail but the Z-14 made it reasonable for me continue
my multi-leg trip, VFR-only, before returning to my home shop for repair.
The Z-14 is a very robust design and easy to implement in the RV-10.
---
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Sifting design goals and establishing protocols |
Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com wrote:
> On 1/6/2019 8:43 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> >
> > Do a Z-14 and make them totally independent
> > of each other.
> >
> >
>
> This is what I implemented on my RV-10. I did a very straight up Z-14
> with 40 and 20 amp alternators. For the first 500 hours or so I've
> flown with the 2 buses interconnected. Regulator voltage levels were
> staggered but not on purpose. My usual operational procedure was to
> start on 1 battery with my (3) power hungry, unswitched MFDs running on
> the other battery. Bob helped me understand that this was exactly the
> opposite of the way I should be running things.
>
> After swapping out the light weight starter that came with the Van's
> engine package (too high a momentary current draw turning over the
> IO540), I began doing all starts with both batteries and buses
> interconnected. Then I disconnect them for flight. I've run that way
> for the last 600 hours.
>
> Running on 2 separate batteries, alternators and buses makes most any
> failure both readily apparent and easily recoverable in flight. At one
> point I had a LRC3 fail but the Z-14 made it reasonable for me continue
> my multi-leg trip, VFR-only, before returning to my home shop for repair.
>
> The Z-14 is a very robust design and easy to implement in the RV-10.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
While I like the Z-14 architecture (it is very much similar to heavy iron logic)
-it requires 2 batteries. My design goal is 1 batt + 2 alternators.
--------
Igor
RV10 in progress
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=486802#486802
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: | Z-12 Aux Alt Question |
Taking a chance and posting my in-work Z-12 power architecture.
I'm trying to decide what behavior I want from my aux alt. Whether I want it to
remain automatic or be manually switched. Bob had previously suggested using
an additional LR3 regulator for an independently switched aux alt that was connected
directly to the e-bus. I'm wondering if I move the aux alt to the e-bus
can I continue to use the standby regulator provided in the B&C "Complete RV-10
bundle"? What affect will putting it behind the isolating diode from the main
bus have, if any?
Thanks.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=486805#486805
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/z12_pr_1_177.pdf
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: Sifting design goals and establishing protocols |
Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com wrote:
> On 1/6/2019 8:43 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> >
> > Do a Z-14 and make them totally independent
> > of each other.
> >
> >
>
> ... Regulator voltage levels were
> staggered but not on purpose. ..
Thanks for sharing this info, good to know that they don't like to be setup at
same set point if operating on a common bus.
--------
Igor
RV10 in progress
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=486806#486806
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: | Re: Sifting design goals and establishing protocols |
"....When utilizing LR-3 regulators for both alternators set at the same
volts output will they share the loads equally? 50:50?....."
Paralleling/matching the regulators might work "one" time during the
set-up. But, environmental changes will make each reg. system respond
slightly differently. The point is, they will never stay in balance as you
would expect as a 50/50 balance. Then, there is the chance that the one,
low power, system will be handling all or most of the electrical load.
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 9:17 AM Bill Watson <Mauledriver@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> On 1/6/2019 8:43 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> >
> > Do a Z-14 and make them totally independent
> > of each other.
>
> This is what I implemented on my RV-10. I did a very straight up Z-14
> with 40 and 20 amp alternators. For the first 500 hours or so I've
> flown with the 2 buses interconnected. Regulator voltage levels were
> staggered but not on purpose. My usual operational procedure was to
> start on 1 battery with my (3) power hungry, unswitched MFDs running on
> the other battery. Bob helped me understand that this was exactly the
> opposite of the way I should be running things.
>
> After swapping out the light weight starter that came with the Van's
> engine package (too high a momentary current draw turning over the
> IO540), I began doing all starts with both batteries and buses
> interconnected. Then I disconnect them for flight. I've run that way
> for the last 600 hours.
>
> Running on 2 separate batteries, alternators and buses makes most any
> failure both readily apparent and easily recoverable in flight. At one
> point I had a LRC3 fail but the Z-14 made it reasonable for me continue
> my multi-leg trip, VFR-only, before returning to my home shop for repair.
>
> The Z-14 is a very robust design and easy to implement in the RV-10.
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
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: | Re: Z-12 Aux Alt Question |
At 01:45 PM 1/7/2019, you wrote:
>
>Taking a chance and posting my in-work Z-12 power architecture.
>
>I'm trying to decide what behavior I want from my aux alt. Whether I
>want it to remain automatic or be manually switched. Bob had
>previously suggested using an additional LR3 regulator for an
>independently switched aux alt that was connected directly to the
>e-bus. I'm wondering if I move the aux alt to the e-bus can I
>continue to use the standby regulator provided in the B&C "Complete
>RV-10 bundle"? What affect will putting it behind the isolating
>diode from the main bus have, if any?
Why move it to the e-bus? Z-12 allows either alternator
to power the aircraft not unlike the FAA approved
installations in TC aircraft. Given that the standby
alternator is much more robust than the machines available
when the e-bus was combined with the SD-8 for a 'minimalist'
solution, there seems to be little value in putting an
egg-beater to architectures that have proven to meet
design goals for a couple decades now.
What failure is best mitigated by moving the altenrator
to the e-bus than by leaving it on the main bus?
You can use either regulator . . . it's just that the
SB1 running alone does not offer lv warning while
the LR3 does. If you already have an SB1, then
it wall suffice for the purpose of controlling
the standby alternator.
Bob . . .
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: Z-12 Aux Alt Question |
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote:
> At 01:45 PM 1/7/2019, you wrote:
>
> Why move it to the e-bus?
Primarily because the BC410-H standby alternator won't provide the 43.88 amps I
need for IFR cruise for everything on the main bus. It seems reasonable to put
the power generator on the e-bus for my electrically dependent engine as it's
an easy way to isolate those critical components.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=486811#486811
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: Z-12 Aux Alt Question |
That sounds like a fairly high continuous load. If I am in conditions to
need pitot heat, all my avionics, nav lights, strobes and pitot heat
totals about 23-24 amps. Adding landing light, which is not considered a
continuous load only gets me up to 34 amps. That is with certified IFR
GPS/nav/com, second nav com, ADS-B in and out equipment, two 10"
EFIS/MFD screens, 2 axis autopilot, LED nav/strobe lights, 2
incandescent landing lights. My load total includes a couple amps for
charging the EFIS backup batteries. Old incandescent nav lights and tube
type strobes instead of LEDs wouldn't get me to 40 amps.
IF you are into a standby alternator, the second nav/com can be turned
off. The second EFIS screen could be turned off. Etc. A standby should
not have to carry more than your essential load, not a full night-time
IFR deice type of load.
On 1/7/2019 7:21 PM, BMC_Dave wrote:
>
>
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote:
>> At 01:45 PM 1/7/2019, you wrote:
>>
>> Why move it to the e-bus?
>
>
> Primarily because the BC410-H standby alternator won't provide the 43.88 amps
I need for IFR cruise for everything on the main bus. It seems reasonable to
put the power generator on the e-bus for my electrically dependent engine as it's
an easy way to isolate those critical components.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=486811#486811
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Z-12 Aux Alt Question |
I'm not Dave, but one possible reason for the difference could be an
electronic injection engine. The fuel pump alone will be around 6A.
Another amp or two for ignition, and the injectors can peak at several
amps each. Those are likely minimum numbers.
Charlie
On 1/7/2019 8:35 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
> <kellym@aviating.com>
>
> That sounds like a fairly high continuous load. If I am in conditions
> to need pitot heat, all my avionics, nav lights, strobes and pitot
> heat totals about 23-24 amps. Adding landing light, which is not
> considered a continuous load only gets me up to 34 amps. That is with
> certified IFR GPS/nav/com, second nav com, ADS-B in and out equipment,
> two 10" EFIS/MFD screens, 2 axis autopilot, LED nav/strobe lights, 2
> incandescent landing lights. My load total includes a couple amps for
> charging the EFIS backup batteries. Old incandescent nav lights and
> tube type strobes instead of LEDs wouldn't get me to 40 amps.
> IF you are into a standby alternator, the second nav/com can be turned
> off. The second EFIS screen could be turned off. Etc. A standby should
> not have to carry more than your essential load, not a full night-time
> IFR deice type of load.
>
> On 1/7/2019 7:21 PM, BMC_Dave wrote:
>> <bmcdave85@gmail.com>
>>
>>
>> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote:
>>> At 01:45 PM 1/7/2019, you wrote:
>>>
>>> Why move it to the e-bus?
>>
>>
>> Primarily because the BC410-H standby alternator won't provide the
>> 43.88 amps I need for IFR cruise for everything on the main bus. It
>> seems reasonable to put the power generator on the e-bus for my
>> electrically dependent engine as it's an easy way to isolate those
>> critical components.
>>
>>
>>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Z-12 Aux Alt Question |
I agree it is a high continuous load, nevertheless that's what's required. Albeit
with a little headroom on some things (lights, for example).
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=486814#486814
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/load_272.jpg
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 |
|
Subject: | gps cables for stratus ESG |
I spoke with appareo tech support and received this reply. I haven't yet looked
into finding BNC connectors to make up a new cable.
Kevin,
I asked our design engineers for some input and here is what I got in response
from them:
looking at pasternack, RG400 has a cable loss of about 14.7dB per 100ft at 1GHz.
so if I pretend the loss is about 15dB per 100ft at 1575MHz. that is about
1.5dB. Is that what we spec for a minimum loss?
if so if you are to used RG178 which pasternack states it has a cable loss of about
44.41dB per 100 ft at 1GHz. So 3ft 4 in of cable will be more than 1.48dB
of loss.
I would stay away from connectors, they are extra points of failure and reflections.
Kevin,
I would bump the length of RG178 up just a little. Then manuals says 2 db loss
as a minimum and they figured it for 1.5 db loss which is probably still OK.
Greg
--------------- Original Message ---------------
From: Kevin Lane [kevinlane55@gmail.com]
Sent: 1/6/2019 11:48 PM
Subject: Stratus Products that I own
From: Kevin Lane
Subject: Stratus Products that I own
Name: Kevin Lane
Email: Phone:
Message Body:
I installed my ESG with 3' of RG400 gps antenna cable. I know you said 10' minimum,
but I don't want all that cable behind the panel. is there another solution?
I am getting 42db on several satellites. frankly I wonder if this is really
a problem with my VFR only airplane. would the prior RG58 cable work better?
would additional mechanical connectors reduce the signal a bit? I also spray
painted the antenna black with no change in sensitivity. I fly an RV. [experimental
class]
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=486816#486816
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! --
|