Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:26 AM - Testing a strobe tube ? (Gilles Thesee)
2. 08:50 AM - Re: Testing a strobe tube ? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 09:30 AM - Re: Z-12 implementation (ron patterson)
4. 09:34 AM - Re: Testing a strobe tube ? (Gilles Thesee)
5. 10:23 AM - Re: Testing a strobe tube ? (Ernest Christley)
6. 01:29 PM - Re: Z-14 for electrically dependent engine (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 01:48 PM - Re: Z-14 for electrically dependent engine (Charlie England)
8. 02:53 PM - Re: Testing a strobe tube ? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 03:04 PM - Re: Z-14 for electrically dependent engine (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 04:59 PM - Re: Z-14 for electrically dependent engine (adamb)
11. 06:42 PM - Re: Re: Z-14 for electrically dependent engine (Charlie England)
12. 06:44 PM - Re: Z-14 for electrically dependent engine (user9253)
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: | Testing a strobe tube ? |
Hi all,
Due to illness, one buddy is selling some hardware.
What would be a simple way to test a Whelen strobe tube he bought some
time ago ?
No strobe power supply available, unfortunately..
Thanks for any input.
--
Best regards,
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
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: Testing a strobe tube ? |
At 05:24 AM 2/4/2020, you wrote:
><gilles@elixir-aircraft.com>
>
>Hi all,
>
>Due to illness, one buddy is selling some hardware.
>What would be a simple way to test a Whelen strobe tube he bought
>some time ago ?
>
>No strobe power supply available, unfortunately..
>
>Thanks for any input.
Used, new old stock? How does the
tube look? Any signs of darkening
glass at the electrodes within
the tube?
These are simply xenon filled tubes
and have a VERY long shelf life.
Unless there are obvious signs of
usage, odds are that the tube
is fine.
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: Z-12 implementation |
Hi Bob,
I am using a VPX sport that I'd like to integrate with your one battery /
two alternator plan. All I need is Comm, garmin 660, one e mag, lemo plug
for headset. Is there a drawing for this idea already (integrating VPX
sport) somewhere? if not, Where do you recommend I go to draft the
schematic?
Thanks
Ron P
On Sun, Feb 2, 2020, 11:55 AM Krea Ellis <krea.ellis@gmail.com> wrote:
> Clearly, my emails are getting through even though I get a reply from the
> server that they are being rejected.
>
> Thanks for all the valuable information and thoughtful responses.
>
>
> *You're not going to be comfortable with your system until you're
> comfortable with it. But it might be worth stepping back and looking 'big
> picture' for a bit. Checking every detail should happen, but sometimes ou
r
> initial premise may need re-evaluation. There are one or two of my basic
> premises I'm currently rethinking a bit.... Charlie*
>
> Agreed and I am stepping back and working hard to overcome the concerns
> about multiple redundancies. Years of flying big iron I guess and a fear
> about new ground (at least for me) with SDS.
>
>
> *How would that happen? EVERY branch feeder in Z-14 is QUAD sourced until
> some component fails in flight (an exceedingly rare event). Two
> distribution busses (main and aux) remain at least DUAL sourced and
> sometimes TRIPLE sourced depending on nature of failure. Complete loss of
> power on either bus just doesn't happen . . . Z-12 (revised) is another
> solid option where a single bus is TRIPLE fed and no less than DUAL fed
> after loss of a single component.*
>
> I need to keep things in perspective. In 1000 hours of GA flying and
> multiple thousands of large airplanes, any electrical problems I have had
> have been totally controllable and I have never had total electrical
> failure - although there are plenty of anecdotal stories of that
> happening. So the risk is probably very small.
>
> I guess things are quad sourced if you assume you can close the cross
> tie contactor. I was hoping to do that only for start and only in a dire
> emergency in flight. But if the only source of power to the injectors has
> failed, not much to lose by closing the cross tie and hope it powers up.
> Screens in front are backed up by an IBBS battery and the G5 has an
> internal battery, so we can keep the shiny side up no matter if we are a
> glider.
>
>
> *Can you suggest that SDS contact me with a goal of collaborating on a
> unified approach to minimizing risks? *
>
> I will absolutely do that a greatly appreciate your willingness to help m
e
> (and others) through this.
>
> I am coming to the conclusion quickly that a single injector bus fed by
> one of the two battery busses and with a good battery and an externally r
egulated
> alternator is probably the best compromise of simplicity and reliability.
> I=99d still like to consider a slightly more redundant approach too
.
>
> Krea
>
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: Testing a strobe tube ? |
Le 04/02/2020 17:44, Robert L. Nuckolls, III a crit:
> /
> Used, new old stock? How does the
> tube look? Any signs of darkening
> glass at the electrodes within
> the tube?
> [...]
> Unless there are obvious signs of
> usage, odds are that the tube
> is fine./
Hi Bob,
Thank you for responding.
Actually - I believe - new old stock.
Did not see the tube myself, however here is a link to the link he -
actually his wife - put on the Web :
https://www.leboncoin.fr/sports_hobbies/1724492264.htm
Thanks again,
--
Best regards,
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
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: Testing a strobe tube ? |
On Tuesday, February 4, 2020, 6:27:02 AM EST, Gilles Thesee <gilles@eli
xir-aircraft.com> wrote:
What would be a simple way to test a Whelen strobe tube he bought some
time ago ?
You need thousands of volts across the terminals.=C2- Do it wrong, and yo
u might not wake up next week.=C2- You might be able to hook it into a sp
ark plugs circuit, counting on the coil to limit the power. . .but I wouldn
't do that unless I was willing to throw it away.
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-14 for electrically dependent engine |
>I am working with the folks at SDS on a scheme for providing a
>passive power path to the injectors with each bank being fed
>independently and alternate paths (using a more complex arrangement)
>to switch all injectors to one bus or the other if needed due to the
>loss of one bus or the other.
Poked around on the SDS website for a few minutes and
found this:
Disadvantages of SDS vs. Conventional
Aircraft Engine Systems
The big disadvantage of EFI compared to a carb or mechanical
injection and magnetos is that electrical power is required for
the pump, computer, ignition and injectors. The likelihood of
both the alternator and battery failing simultaneously is
practically zero with standard aircraft maintenance procedures.
Generally, a good battery will allow you to keep essentials powered
for 20-90 minutes after an alternator failure permitting diversion
to another airport. We consider proper gauges and/or warning
lights to indicate an alternator failure to be very important.
We have an ammeter, voltmeter, low voltage warning light and
buzzer now on our RV6A and also added a backup battery in Feb. 2005.
Emacs!
I don't see anything that argues with the ideas
and architecture philosophies we've been discussing
here over the last week or so.
Their assertions as to component reliability combined
with the block diagram above illustrating everything
running from a 'reliable' bus confirms their
confidence in what's been recommended here on the
List in terms of insuring a supply of DC power.
I think the drawing above could
be 'cleaned up' a tad and may have an error
about the injector selector switch wiring . . .
but I think the spirit and intent of the
SDS is clear and raises no flags at this
time. It also confirms my suggestion that
running the entire SDS system from either
main or aux bus of Z-14 or the main bus
of Z-12 offers a level of redundancy
I think I could sell onto a TC aircraft.
I'm getting ready to hit the asphalt on a trip
to visit family in Cincinatti so I'll be off-line
until Sunday.
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-14 for electrically dependent engine |
On 2/4/2020 3:25 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>> I am working with the folks at SDS on a scheme for providing a
>> passive power path to the injectors with each bank being fed
>> independently and alternate paths (using a more complex arrangement)
>> to switch all injectors to one bus or the other if needed due to the
>> loss of one bus or the other.
>
> Poked around on the SDS website for a few minutes and
> found this:
>
>
> *Disadvantages of SDS vs. Conventional
> Aircraft Engine Systems*
>
> */The big disadvantage of EFI compared to a carb or mechanical
> injection and magnetos is that electrical power is required for
> the pump, computer, ignition and injectors. The likelihood of
> both the alternator and battery failing simultaneously is
> practically zero with standard aircraft maintenance procedures.
> Generally, a good battery will allow you to keep essentials powered
> for 20-90 minutes after an alternator failure permitting diversion
> to another airport. We consider proper gauges and/or warning
> lights to indicate an alternator failure to be very important.
> We have an ammeter, voltmeter, low voltage warning light and
> buzzer now on our RV6A and also added a backup battery in Feb. 2005.
>
> /*Emacs!
>
>
> I don't see anything that argues with the ideas
> and architecture philosophies we've been discussing
> here over the last week or so.
>
> Their assertions as to component reliability combined
> with the block diagram above illustrating everything
> running from a 'reliable' bus confirms their
> confidence in what's been recommended here on the
> List in terms of insuring a supply of DC power.
>
> I think the drawing above could
> be 'cleaned up' a tad and may have an error
> about the injector selector switch wiring . . .
> but I think the spirit and intent of the
> SDS is clear and raises no flags at this
> time. It also confirms my suggestion that
> running the entire SDS system from either
> main or aux bus of Z-14 or the main bus
> of Z-12 offers a level of redundancy
> I think I could sell onto a TC aircraft.
>
> I'm getting ready to hit the asphalt on a trip
> to visit family in Cincinatti so I'll be off-line
> until Sunday.
>
> Bob . . .
>
To (possibly over-) emphasize, quoting from above:
*It also confirms my suggestion that
running the entire SDS system from either
main or aux bus of Z-14 or the main bus
of Z-12 offers a level of redundancy
I think I could sell onto a TC aircraft.
*The injector control scheme, and the fact that the injectors are not
redundant (two injectors per cylinder) seems to be what is creating the
heartburn. I think I've been saying something similar; all engine stuff
on one bus, with controllable redundant sources of power. It is, after
all, what SDS recommends.
Charlie
**
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: Testing a strobe tube ? |
>
>You need thousands of volts across the terminals. Do it wrong,
>and you might not wake up next week. You might be able to hook
>it into a spark plugs circuit, counting on the coil to limit
>the power. . .but I wouldn't do that unless I was willing to
>throw it away.
Few xenon flash tubes operate at such
voltages . . . those are usually
industrial sources of UV light.
Our a/c strobes, vehicle emergency strobes,
camera strobes operated in the 250 to
400v range. To test them, you need both
a steady source of flash-voltage paralleled
with an energy storage capacity -PLUS- a
much higher (1 to 3 kv) trigger pulse
feed to the trigger electrode. In cameras,
this takes two transformers. One to provide
a 200-400v charge on a capacitor . . .
a second to develop the higher voltage
trigger.
One of the simplest strobe circuits was
used in low-cost, timing lights . . .
Emacs!
My first one plugged into the wall and
developed about 350 volts on the energy
storage capacitor. The trigger pulse came
from connection to the engine's #1
plug.
There's no really quick/n/dirty way
to test these critters other than to
plug it into a functioning system.
Given that its an out-of-the-box offering,
the risks are low.
Bob . . .
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-14 for electrically dependent engine |
>
>The injector control scheme, and the fact that the injectors are not
>redundant (two injectors per cylinder) seems to be what is creating
>the heartburn. I think I've been saying something similar; all
>engine stuff on one bus, with controllable redundant sources of
>power. It is, after all, what SDS recommends.
Agreed. No 'enhancements' are recommended
or useful.
Bob . . .
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-14 for electrically dependent engine |
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote:
>
> >
> > The injector control scheme, and the fact that the injectors are not redundant
(two injectors per cylinder) seems to be what is creating the heartburn.
I think I've been saying something similar; all engine stuff on one bus, with
controllable redundant sources of power. It is, after all, what SDS recommends.
>
> Agreed. No 'enhancements' are recommended
> or useful.
>
>
> Bob . . .
So suppose there's smoke in the cockpit, not sure where it's coming from. A trained
response is to shut off the master (both masters in the case of Z14). If
the SDS stuff is on either the main or Aux busses and the masters are switched
off, the engine shuts off...
I'd rather the SDS components be on the battery busses to prevent this.
This is the primary reason for my plan to power the ECUs, Fuel pumps, and Coils
from their respective battery busses (there are 2 of each so one is fed from
main battery bus and the other from aux battery bus). And provide a diode OR'ed
Injector bus from the battery busses to power the injectors.
Others have taken the approach of feeding all components off of a "Engine bus"
redundantly powered from battery busses.
Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm very uncomfortable not being able to shut
off the master switches and keep the engine running.
Adam
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=494643#494643
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: | Re: Z-14 for electrically dependent engine |
On 2/4/2020 6:57 PM, adamb wrote:
>
>
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote:
>>> The injector control scheme, and the fact that the injectors are not redundant
(two injectors per cylinder) seems to be what is creating the heartburn.
I think I've been saying something similar; all engine stuff on one bus, with
controllable redundant sources of power. It is, after all, what SDS recommends.
>> Agreed. No 'enhancements' are recommended
>> or useful.
>>
>>
>> Bob . . .
>
> So suppose there's smoke in the cockpit, not sure where it's coming from. A trained
response is to shut off the master (both masters in the case of Z14). If
the SDS stuff is on either the main or Aux busses and the masters are switched
off, the engine shuts off...
>
> I'd rather the SDS components be on the battery busses to prevent this.
> This is the primary reason for my plan to power the ECUs, Fuel pumps, and Coils
from their respective battery busses (there are 2 of each so one is fed from
main battery bus and the other from aux battery bus). And provide a diode OR'ed
Injector bus from the battery busses to power the injectors.
> Others have taken the approach of feeding all components off of a "Engine bus"
redundantly powered from battery busses.
>
> Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm very uncomfortable not being able to shut
off the master switches and keep the engine running.
>
> Adam
That's what I did, though my system is dual alt/single battery. Engine
(all of it) is on one switched 'hot' bus, that can also be fed from the
main a/c bus. Smoke emergency would be just like a traditional
installation; master off & the motor keeps turning.
Charlie
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 for electrically dependent engine |
I agree with you Adam. The pilot should be able to shut off all sources of
electrical power at the source. Putting relays (independent of the battery
contactor) between the batteries and engine bus accomplishes that. In case
of smoke in the cockpit, most pilots would shut off the master switch first,
expecting the engine to keep running. If the smoke gets bad enough, then
electrical power to the engine bus can be shut off along with the fuel valve.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=494646#494646
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! --
|