Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 08:51 AM - Re: Re: New role for the E-Bus? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
2. 08:57 AM - Re: Re: New role for the E-Bus? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 10:17 AM - Re: Re: New role for the E-Bus? (Sebastien)
4. 10:46 AM - Re: Z11 "Generic Electrical system" with Dual Electron (bcone1381)
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: New role for the E-Bus? |
At 07:30 AM 4/4/2020, you wrote:
>
>
>nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote:
> >
> >
> > If the List is willing, I'd like to continue
> > to refine this configuration with an eye
> > to retiring Z12 and probably Z14 as well.
>
>
>I would rather you not "retire" Z14. I like it and am planning on
>using it in my bird - wiring has commenced. My bird is single engine
>with EFII, glass panel, IFR, night, whole continent capability. Two
>batteries, two masters, cross-feed, and very low probability of
>finding myself dark. I am rather attached to that scheme.
Don't get wrapped around any axles-of-
authority for what's published in the
'Connection. It's your airplane and if
it's performing as-advertised combined
with your complete understanding of it's
operation, then there's no risk for
Our mission here is a compilation
of the best-we-know how to do. To
refine design goals that minimize
complexity, weight, cost of ownership
while minimizing risk.
I suggest that no airplane, motorcycle,
4-wheeler, bass boat or any other high
energy endeavor can be made SAFE.
We can reduce risk through though attention
to history, reverence for good physics,
pride of craftsmanship, a quest for
understanding by all participants and
responsible operation by the pilot.
>Even if it progresses no more because you have a single battery
>scheme that looks more reliable,
>I would like to see it remain on-line, perhaps with the caution that
>another scheme now scores better on FMEA.
. . . not 'more' reliable from a performance
perspective but from a cost of ownership
and operations perspective. I don't think I've
every heard of a systems guy getting hammered
'cause he took out things that reduced weight,
cost of ownership and/or simplified system
operation . . . you won't have a failure or
maintenance burden from a part that isn't
installed!
Z-14 performs as advertised but in my never
humble opinion, it is too complex. It served a
purpose of limited utility that is quickly
passing. Electrical power needs are changing
while the reliability of all components
is going up. If N811HB had been fitted with
Z01PX . . . that fine machine might still
be in service with nobody getting hurt.
Revision 12 is in wide distribution both
in print and digitally. Z14 isn't 'going
away.' But if it can be replaced with greater
elegance of design and purpose, then so be it.
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: New role for the E-Bus? |
At 10:12 AM 4/4/2020, you wrote:
>
>Bob,
>I've resumed my build after a 10-year layoff and had installed the
>13/8 architecture. Turns our the engine I bought to hand on the
>firewall already had a B&C 20 Amp alternator hanging on the
>accessory case. So I've opted to leave it there but keep the 13/8
>architecture. I like the Z99 architecture because I can adopt it
>with very little change to what I've already installed.
>
>Dan
Watch this space. From my current digs which
I refer to as '100 miles from everywhere', I
have a lot of opportunity for what I call
'asphalt engineering'. Did about 6 hours
of that exercise over the past week.
Had a bit of an epiphany about the evolution
of Z01 (the technical term is brain f@&t).
I'm working on the next submission for
everyone's input . . . I think you'll
find it compatible with your desires
cited above.
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: New role for the E-Bus? |
Bob from what I have seen Z01 would be exactly what I would be looking for
on my next aircraft.
1. Z-14 is too complex for me from a cost, weight, and maintenance point of
view.
2. I have no need for an e-bus since an alternator failure will be detected
right away and after switching to the SD-8 there is plenty of time to shut
down individual loads that aren't required at that time if the flight time
remaining deems it necessary.
3. Since both Garmin and Dynon have excellent backup batteries that will
power essential systems only for flight and navigation, I was never
interested in a brownout bus. Last year I discovered that if you program
your flight plan into the GPS navigator with the engine shut down it's
usually fine but every once in a while the engine cranking takes a bit too
long and the navigator resets, clearing out the flight plan. Preventing
this would be useful so now I'm a fan of the brownout bus. Having the nav
lights, one COM and the GPS navigator on that bus with a clearance delivery
switch to power it by itself would be something I would use just about
every flight.
4. I think electrically dependent engines are becoming the norm rather than
the exception for new amateur built aircraft.
Regards,
Sebastien
On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 9:02 AM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 10:12 AM 4/4/2020, you wrote:
>
>
> Bob,
> I've resumed my build after a 10-year layoff and had installed the 13/8
> architecture. Turns our the engine I bought to hand on the firewall
> already had a B&C 20 Amp alternator hanging on the accessory case. So I've
> opted to leave it there but keep the 13/8 architecture. I like the Z99
> architecture because I can adopt it with very little change to what I've
> already installed.
>
> Dan
>
>
> Watch this space. From my current digs which
> I refer to as '100 miles from everywhere', I
> have a lot of opportunity for what I call
> 'asphalt engineering'. Did about 6 hours
> of that exercise over the past week.
>
> Had a bit of an epiphany about the evolution
> of Z01 (the technical term is brain f@&t).
> I'm working on the next submission for
> everyone's input . . . I think you'll
> find it compatible with your desires
> cited above.
>
>
> 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: Z11 "Generic Electrical system" with Dual Electron |
In Post #20, I ask myself about resolution to Smoke in Cockpit due to electrical,
bus failure. I am offering a diagram with the solution that I think I like.
Its a simplified Z13/8 architecture with one ignition powered from the battery
terminal and the other powered from the Battery side of the Master Solenoid.
Should the Circuit from the Battery to the E-Bus have a fuse-link? I ask because
the Z-13/8 diagrams the Main bus and E-Bus circuit does not.
--------
Brooks Cone
Bearhawk Patrol Kit Build
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=495625#495625
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! --
|