Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:07 PM - Re: Re: Z101 in an RV-10 (Sebastien)
2. 02:07 PM - Re: Z101 in an RV-10 (A Lumley)
3. 02:48 PM - Re: Re: Z101 in an RV-10 (Sebastien)
4. 03:49 PM - Re: Z101 in an RV-10 (Kelly McMullen)
5. 05:08 PM - Re: Z101 in an RV-10 (A Lumley)
6. 06:32 PM - Re: Re: Z101 in an RV-10 (Kelly McMullen)
7. 06:42 PM - Re: Re: Z101 in an RV-10 (Matthew S. Whiting)
8. 07:49 PM - Re: Re: Z101 in an RV-10 (Sebastien)
9. 08:46 PM - Re: Z101 in an RV-10 (Voyager)
10. 08:47 PM - Re: Re: Z101 in an RV-10 (Kelly McMullen)
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: Z101 in an RV-10 |
Hi Andrew, where in Canada? I'm in Vancouver.
Have you done an Electrical Load Analysis on your hot battery loads? I'm
finding it hard to believe that you would need anything close to 2 AWG for
those combined loads. What continuous load are we talking about here?
On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 5:57 PM A Lumley <andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca>
>
> Hey Jeff, I am in Canada. That is my plan for the loads downstream of the
> battery contactor. But the Z-101 schematic also has several loads connected
> to the battery side of the battery contactor (hot battery bus and alternate
> feeds for the aux and engine busses). It's these loads that I'm trying to
> prevent running a second 2AWG cable for.
>
> Andrew
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503041#503041
>
>
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: Z101 in an RV-10 |
I'm in Belleville, 2 hours from Toronto.
The hot battery bus itself is only about 0.5 amps for a few overhead lights. The
issue is that the Z-101 schematic has the ability to power the aux and engine
busses through relays attached to the battery side of the battery contactor.
My engine bus will draw 15-20 amps (SDS EFI) when both fuel pumps are running.
The Aux bus includes the PFD, GPS, pitot heat, autopilot, and a few other small
loads that will total another 15-20 amps with the pitot heat operating.
I'm thinking I'll need a separate cable of about 4 AWG running forward from the
battery in addition to the 2 AWG starter cable. Just wondering if there is a
better way, perhaps not.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503043#503043
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: Z101 in an RV-10 |
I think you could get away with 8AWG rather than 4 AWG for the loads you
describe but let's think about this another way.
In case of a forced landing, we want to be able to disconnect the 2 AWG
cable from the battery so that when we hit a fence post we don't have a
leaking fuel line and a big spark 5 feet from our asses. Putting the relay
as close to the battery accomplishes this. If we then run a 4 AWG wire
along the same route with no way to disconnect it from the battery, are we
any better off? If you're going to accept a large live wire running along
the fuselage, will it help that the 2 AWG is cold and the 4 AWG is hot?
Might as well just leave the 2 AWG hot and move the relay to the front as
you first described.
The only other solutions I can think of are
1. Relays on both wires and dual fed engine and aux busses. In a forced
landing you shut off both relays.
2. A second battery in the engine compartment.
3. A second alternator and feed your dual fed engine and aux busses from
each alternator, dropping the battery feed.
On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 2:10 PM A Lumley <andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca>
>
> I'm in Belleville, 2 hours from Toronto.
>
> The hot battery bus itself is only about 0.5 amps for a few overhead
> lights. The issue is that the Z-101 schematic has the ability to power the
> aux and engine busses through relays attached to the battery side of the
> battery contactor. My engine bus will draw 15-20 amps (SDS EFI) when both
> fuel pumps are running. The Aux bus includes the PFD, GPS, pitot heat,
> autopilot, and a few other small loads that will total another 15-20 amps
> with the pitot heat operating.
>
> I'm thinking I'll need a separate cable of about 4 AWG running forward
> from the battery in addition to the 2 AWG starter cable. Just wondering if
> there is a better way, perhaps not.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503043#503043
>
>
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: Z101 in an RV-10 |
I think the real analysis is that you need two separate power sources
for the fuel injection and the ignition. Using a single battery does not
accomplish that, no matter how you wire it. I believe you would have to
have two batteries, and probably should have two alternators.
However, that gets back to why do you want an aircraft for IFR that
requires the complexity of two separate electrical systems and the
electrical components to allow them to operate separately?
Simplicity is your friend, especially when IFR.
Regardless of advertising claims, a port fuel injection system with 6
individual electrically operated solenoids does not significantly
improve power or fuel economy over the mechanical fuel injection system
the IO-540 is designed with or the Air Flow performance experimental
fuel injection. They also eliminate the need for electrical fuel pumps
to operate continuously, as the stock mechanical pump is adequate for
almost all in-flight situations.
Having both ignitions systems electrically dependent again introduces
complexity. You really want your engine to be able to run indefinitely
without external power if all electrics fail.
You can still have the benefits of electronic ignition without the need
for external power if you install 2 PMag systems, and they only need
external power for starting.
Even if the full SDS system gets you an extra 10 kts (unlikely) it
only reduces the time to fly a 500nm flight by perhaps 10-15 minutes.
If you eliminate the need for external power for the engine to run, you
can have adequate backup power for avionics without having to install
dual electrical systems. Most EFIS have backup battery systems that
allow shutting of the master and will continue to operate for 45 min or
more. You can equip a Nav/com with similar backup battery.
Just my opinion with 40+ yrs of IFR flying and 5 years of flying my IFR
RV-10.
Kelly
On 9/4/2021 2:47 PM, Sebastien wrote:
> I think you could get away with 8AWG rather than 4 AWG for the loads you
> describe but let's think about this another way.
>
> In case of a forced landing, we want to be able to disconnect the 2 AWG
> cable from the battery so that when we hit a fence post we don't have a
> leaking fuel line and a big spark 5 feet from our asses. Putting the
> relay as close to the battery accomplishes this. If we then run a 4 AWG
> wire along the same route with no way to disconnect it from the battery,
> are we any better off? If you're going to accept a large live wire
> running along the fuselage, will it help that the 2 AWG is cold and the
> 4 AWG is hot? Might as well just leave the 2 AWG hot and move the relay
> to the front as you first described.
>
> The only other solutions I can think of are
>
> 1. Relays on both wires and dual fed engine and aux busses. In a forced
> landing you shut off both relays.
> 2. A second battery in the engine compartment.
> 3. A second alternator and feed your dual fed engine and aux busses from
> each alternator, dropping the battery feed.
>
> On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 2:10 PM A Lumley <andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca
> <mailto:andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca>> wrote:
>
> <andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca <mailto:andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca>>
>
> I'm in Belleville, 2 hours from Toronto.
>
> The hot battery bus itself is only about 0.5 amps for a few overhead
> lights. The issue is that the Z-101 schematic has the ability to
> power the aux and engine busses through relays attached to the
> battery side of the battery contactor. My engine bus will draw 15-20
> amps (SDS EFI) when both fuel pumps are running. The Aux bus
> includes the PFD, GPS, pitot heat, autopilot, and a few other small
> loads that will total another 15-20 amps with the pitot heat operating.
>
> I'm thinking I'll need a separate cable of about 4 AWG running
> forward from the battery in addition to the 2 AWG starter cable.
> Just wondering if there is a better way, perhaps not.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503043#503043
> <http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503043#503043>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ==========
> -
> 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 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: Z101 in an RV-10 |
Thanks for the comments Kelly. For starters while I am planning for a single battery,
I am definitely installing dual alternators. I believe a second battery
would be of marginal benefit given the chance of dual alternator failure and
subsequent battery failure.
I do appreciate the comments on the electronic fuel injection though. I'm quite
set on electronic ignition but I'm not 100% set on electronic injection to go
with it. I'll have to do some more research. It would certainly give me less
electrical concerns to install a mechanical injection system.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503046#503046
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: Z101 in an RV-10 |
I agree with the electronic ignition. There are definite advantages.
However, there are trade-offs. AFAIK, only P Mag offers electronic
ignition that isn't dependent on ship's power.
Electrical systems come down to what can fail that takes the system
down. It takes effort to design a system that can't be brought down by
say failure of the master relay, master switch, etc. There is a recent
article of an RV-10 that was grounded by ignition switch failure,
fortunately on the ground.
Kelly
On 9/4/2021 5:07 PM, A Lumley wrote:
>
> Thanks for the comments Kelly. For starters while I am planning for a single
battery, I am definitely installing dual alternators. I believe a second battery
would be of marginal benefit given the chance of dual alternator failure and
subsequent battery failure.
>
> I do appreciate the comments on the electronic fuel injection though. I'm quite
set on electronic ignition but I'm not 100% set on electronic injection to
go with it. I'll have to do some more research. It would certainly give me less
electrical concerns to install a mechanical injection system.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503046#503046
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Z101 in an RV-10 |
I am currently finalizing my schematics for my S-21 and I am building a system
based mostly on the Z-14 system. I am planning on dual 40 amp alternators and
two independent buses, but with crossfeed so that both batteries can be used
for engine start and in the case that one alternator or battery fails I can run
everything on the remaining battery or alternator.
I plan to run two fat wires from the baggage floor mounted batteries to the firewall.
I will probably use 2 AWG, but RANS lists 4 AWG in their schematic (for
a single battery installation) so that may be adequate since the batteries share
current during starting. Since I will have two battery buses in addition
to the two main buses, I will probably run 14 AWG for each of those as that will
handle 15 amps each and 30 amps is more than enough for the always hot accessories.
I am also leaning towards SDS for both ignition and EFI. I have owned and driven
a variety of cars and trucks and off-road and OTR equipment since the early
70s and I will tell you that magnetos, carbs, mechanical FI and mechanical fuel
pumps are no more reliable than modern EFI and electronic ignition systems
and I would argue much less reliable. I have not had nearly the trouble with
any of my cars in the last 20 years that have had EFI and EI as I had with cars
equipped with carbs and points ignition or my 182 with carb and mags. An SDS
system with dual ECUs, and dual electric fuel pumps operated by two alternators
and two batteries is probably 10X more reliable than a magneto equipped airplane
with mechanical FI and mechanical fuel pump. Id love to see some real
statistics from the aviation world, but using the auto world as a benchmark gives
me good confidence that my 10X estimate isnt far off.
Sent from my iPad
> On Sep 4, 2021, at 8:11 PM, A Lumley <andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks for the comments Kelly. For starters while I am planning for a single
battery, I am definitely installing dual alternators. I believe a second battery
would be of marginal benefit given the chance of dual alternator failure and
subsequent battery failure.
>
> I do appreciate the comments on the electronic fuel injection though. I'm quite
set on electronic ignition but I'm not 100% set on electronic injection to
go with it. I'll have to do some more research. It would certainly give me less
electrical concerns to install a mechanical injection system.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503046#503046
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Z101 in an RV-10 |
Kelly it's not a single battery, it's a single battery and an alternator.
If the alternator quits the battery gets you on the ground. Failures of
properly maintained batteries are very rare, but if the battery fails in
flight you won't notice because the alternator keeps going. A second
alternator can greatly extend the time in the air, but most second
alternators are 20A at most so for Andrew's requirements not enough for
indefinite flight.
Where are you getting your data that EFI does not reduce fuel consumption?
I haven't seen any real world data but the advertising shows significant
reductions (though at $2.00 / liter, not enough to offset the purchase
price)
On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 7:17 PM Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com> wrote:
> kellym@aviating.com>
>
> I think the real analysis is that you need two separate power sources
> for the fuel injection and the ignition. Using a single battery does not
> accomplish that, no matter how you wire it. I believe you would have to
> have two batteries, and probably should have two alternators.
> However, that gets back to why do you want an aircraft for IFR that
> requires the complexity of two separate electrical systems and the
> electrical components to allow them to operate separately?
> Simplicity is your friend, especially when IFR.
> Regardless of advertising claims, a port fuel injection system with 6
> individual electrically operated solenoids does not significantly
> improve power or fuel economy over the mechanical fuel injection system
> the IO-540 is designed with or the Air Flow performance experimental
> fuel injection. They also eliminate the need for electrical fuel pumps
> to operate continuously, as the stock mechanical pump is adequate for
> almost all in-flight situations.
> Having both ignitions systems electrically dependent again introduces
> complexity. You really want your engine to be able to run indefinitely
> without external power if all electrics fail.
> You can still have the benefits of electronic ignition without the need
> for external power if you install 2 PMag systems, and they only need
> external power for starting.
> Even if the full SDS system gets you an extra 10 kts (unlikely) it
> only reduces the time to fly a 500nm flight by perhaps 10-15 minutes.
>
> If you eliminate the need for external power for the engine to run, you
> can have adequate backup power for avionics without having to install
> dual electrical systems. Most EFIS have backup battery systems that
> allow shutting of the master and will continue to operate for 45 min or
> more. You can equip a Nav/com with similar backup battery.
>
> Just my opinion with 40+ yrs of IFR flying and 5 years of flying my IFR
> RV-10.
> Kelly
>
> On 9/4/2021 2:47 PM, Sebastien wrote:
> > I think you could get away with 8AWG rather than 4 AWG for the loads you
> > describe but let's think about this another way.
> >
> > In case of a forced landing, we want to be able to disconnect the 2 AWG
> > cable from the battery so that when we hit a fence post we don't have a
> > leaking fuel line and a big spark 5 feet from our asses. Putting the
> > relay as close to the battery accomplishes this. If we then run a 4 AWG
> > wire along the same route with no way to disconnect it from the battery,
> > are we any better off? If you're going to accept a large live wire
> > running along the fuselage, will it help that the 2 AWG is cold and the
> > 4 AWG is hot? Might as well just leave the 2 AWG hot and move the relay
> > to the front as you first described.
> >
> > The only other solutions I can think of are
> >
> > 1. Relays on both wires and dual fed engine and aux busses. In a forced
> > landing you shut off both relays.
> > 2. A second battery in the engine compartment.
> > 3. A second alternator and feed your dual fed engine and aux busses from
> > each alternator, dropping the battery feed.
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 2:10 PM A Lumley <andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca
> > <mailto:andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca>> wrote:
> >
> > <andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca <mailto:andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca>>
> >
> > I'm in Belleville, 2 hours from Toronto.
> >
> > The hot battery bus itself is only about 0.5 amps for a few overhead
> > lights. The issue is that the Z-101 schematic has the ability to
> > power the aux and engine busses through relays attached to the
> > battery side of the battery contactor. My engine bus will draw 15-20
> > amps (SDS EFI) when both fuel pumps are running. The Aux bus
> > includes the PFD, GPS, pitot heat, autopilot, and a few other small
> > loads that will total another 15-20 amps with the pitot heat
> operating.
> >
> > I'm thinking I'll need a separate cable of about 4 AWG running
> > forward from the battery in addition to the 2 AWG starter cable.
> > Just wondering if there is a better way, perhaps not.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503043#503043
> > <http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503043#503043>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ==========
> > -
> > 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 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: Z101 in an RV-10 |
I will argue that the folks at GAMI have provided this data for many years now.
What they do in tuning injectors in mechanical systems is essentially what the
ECU can do in real-time in an EFI system. Now, I dont know if the SDS ECU
is that a sophisticated, but auto EFI systems can adjust the PWM of each individual
injector to optimized each cylinder. This absolutely improves both fuel
economy and emissions performance.
So, if you believe GAMIs data in regard to balancing mechanical injectors then
you should believe that EFI will bring similar performance improvements if properly
implemented.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503050#503050
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: Z101 in an RV-10 |
I did not say that EFI did not reduce fuel consumption or increase
power. What I said was electronically controlled port fuel injection is
not going to reduce fuel consumption or increase power enough to give up
the reliability of mechanical fuel injection. Electronic fuel injection
is very reliable in cars, where an electrical failure just causes the
engine to die. In an aircraft the electronic controller and injectors
are a single point of failure. Electronic fuel injection has almost zero
operating experience in aircraft, compared to 60 years of mechanical
fuel injection. When Lycoming or Continental adopt electronic fuel
injection, I might think about it. Aircraft applications are very
different from automotive engines operating characteristics.
A single battery is a single battery no matter how many alternators you
have. No different than a single master relay.
On 9/4/2021 7:48 PM, Sebastien wrote:
> Kelly it's not a single battery, it's a single battery and an
> alternator. If the alternator quits the battery gets you on the ground.
> Failures of properly maintained batteries are very rare, but if the
> battery fails in flight you won't notice because the alternator keeps
> going. A second alternator can greatly extend the time in the air, but
> most second alternators are 20A at most so for Andrew's requirements not
> enough for indefinite flight.
>
> Where are you getting your data that EFI does not reduce fuel
> consumption? I haven't seen any real world data but the advertising
> shows significant reductions (though at $2.00 / liter, not enough to
> offset the purchase price)
>
> On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 7:17 PM Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com
> <mailto:kellym@aviating.com>> wrote:
>
> <kellym@aviating.com <mailto:kellym@aviating.com>>
>
> I think the real analysis is that you need two separate power sources
> for the fuel injection and the ignition. Using a single battery does
> not
> accomplish that, no matter how you wire it. I believe you would have to
> have two batteries, and probably should have two alternators.
> However, that gets back to why do you want an aircraft for IFR that
> requires the complexity of two separate electrical systems and the
> electrical components to allow them to operate separately?
> Simplicity is your friend, especially when IFR.
> Regardless of advertising claims, a port fuel injection system with 6
> individual electrically operated solenoids does not significantly
> improve power or fuel economy over the mechanical fuel injection system
> the IO-540 is designed with or the Air Flow performance experimental
> fuel injection. They also eliminate the need for electrical fuel pumps
> to operate continuously, as the stock mechanical pump is adequate for
> almost all in-flight situations.
> Having both ignitions systems electrically dependent again introduces
> complexity. You really want your engine to be able to run indefinitely
> without external power if all electrics fail.
> You can still have the benefits of electronic ignition without the need
> for external power if you install 2 PMag systems, and they only need
> external power for starting.
> Even if the full SDS system gets you an extra 10 kts (unlikely) it
> only reduces the time to fly a 500nm flight by perhaps 10-15 minutes.
>
> If you eliminate the need for external power for the engine to run, you
> can have adequate backup power for avionics without having to install
> dual electrical systems. Most EFIS have backup battery systems that
> allow shutting of the master and will continue to operate for 45 min or
> more. You can equip a Nav/com with similar backup battery.
>
> Just my opinion with 40+ yrs of IFR flying and 5 years of flying my IFR
> RV-10.
> Kelly
>
> On 9/4/2021 2:47 PM, Sebastien wrote:
> > I think you could get away with 8AWG rather than 4 AWG for the
> loads you
> > describe but let's think about this another way.
> >
> > In case of a forced landing, we want to be able to disconnect the
> 2 AWG
> > cable from the battery so that when we hit a fence post we don't
> have a
> > leaking fuel line and a big spark 5 feet from our asses. Putting the
> > relay as close to the battery accomplishes this. If we then run a
> 4 AWG
> > wire along the same route with no way to disconnect it from the
> battery,
> > are we any better off? If you're going to accept a large live wire
> > running along the fuselage, will it help that the 2 AWG is cold
> and the
> > 4 AWG is hot? Might as well just leave the 2 AWG hot and move the
> relay
> > to the front as you first described.
> >
> > The only other solutions I can think of are
> >
> > 1. Relays on both wires and dual fed engine and aux busses. In a
> forced
> > landing you shut off both relays.
> > 2. A second battery in the engine compartment.
> > 3. A second alternator and feed your dual fed engine and aux
> busses from
> > each alternator, dropping the battery feed.
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 2:10 PM A Lumley
> <andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca <mailto:andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca>
> > <mailto:andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca
> <mailto:andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca>>> wrote:
> >
> > <andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca
> <mailto:andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca>
> <mailto:andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca <mailto:andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca>>>
> >
> > I'm in Belleville, 2 hours from Toronto.
> >
> > The hot battery bus itself is only about 0.5 amps for a few
> overhead
> > lights. The issue is that the Z-101 schematic has the ability to
> > power the aux and engine busses through relays attached to the
> > battery side of the battery contactor. My engine bus will
> draw 15-20
> > amps (SDS EFI) when both fuel pumps are running. The Aux bus
> > includes the PFD, GPS, pitot heat, autopilot, and a few other
> small
> > loads that will total another 15-20 amps with the pitot heat
> operating.
> >
> > I'm thinking I'll need a separate cable of about 4 AWG running
> > forward from the battery in addition to the 2 AWG starter cable.
> > Just wondering if there is a better way, perhaps not.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503043#503043
> <http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503043#503043>
> > <http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503043#503043
> <http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503043#503043>>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ==========
> > -
> > Electric-List" rel="noreferrer"
> >
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List>
> > ==========
> > FORUMS -
> > eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
> <http://forums.matronics.com>
> > ==========
> > WIKI -
> > errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
> <http://wiki.matronics.com>
> > ==========
> > b Site -
> > -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> > rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
> > ==========
> >
> >
> >
> ==========
> -
> 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
> ==========
>
>
>
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! --
|