Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:32 AM - Re: Clarify Z101 (user9253)
2. 03:36 AM - 'Homebuilt' voltage regulator as battery charging controller (Bob Verwey)
3. 03:39 AM - Re: 'Homebuilt' voltage regulator to replace old unsafetied regulators? (Bob Verwey)
4. 05:54 AM - Re: Clarify Z101 (wsimpso1)
5. 07:37 AM - Re: Re: Clarify Z101 (Charlie England)
6. 09:03 AM - Re: Re: Clarify Z101 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 09:06 AM - Re: Re: Clarify Z101 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 09:57 AM - Re: 'Homebuilt' voltage regulator to replace old unsafetied regulators? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 02:26 PM - Re: Clarify Z101 (bcone1381)
10. 05:27 PM - Re: 'Homebuilt' voltage regulator to replace old unsafetied regulators? (Charlie England)
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: Clarify Z101 |
The simpler the electrical system is, the less chance of pilot error.
I would wire one ignition to the either the battery terminal or to the battery
side of the battery contactor.
Wire the second ignition to the main power bus.
In the unlikely event that the battery contactor or battery itself fails, there
are two alternators that can power the second ignition.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=508125#508125
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: | 'Homebuilt' voltage regulator as battery charging controller |
Speaking of regulators..sorry for the thread hijack Charlie...
Is there a way to use an old school Ford style regulator as a battery
charging device / controller id you have 16v DC input from a transformer,
say?
On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 at 01:52, Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com> wrote:
> ceengland7@gmail.com>
>
> On 10/20/2022 4:16 PM, Charlie England wrote:
> > <ceengland7@gmail.com>
> >
> > Just saw this article about the L9918 alternator regulator from ST
> > Microelectronics. I'm curious about whether it might be viable as a
> > replacement for the unprotected regulators still found in some of the
> > older 'one wire' alternators many of us still use, or perhaps, even
> > for an externally regulated alternator.
> >
> > It has a lot of sophisticated features we'd likely never use, but a
> > quick stroll through the data sheet (link in the article) makes it
> > sound as if it will function just fine in standalone mode. Five
> > terminal device, but the 5th terminal is basically a 'comm' terminal,
> > which the data sheet implies can be lost and the regulator will still
> > function properly. It does have OV & UV protection built in. At a
> > onesies cost of <$10, it certainly looks tempting to try.
> >
> > Charlie
> >
> Well shucks. For some reason, the link didn't 'take'. Here's the full lin
k:
>
> https://www.electronicdesign.com/markets/automotive/article/21252965/elec
tronic-design-automotivealternator-regulator-embeds-advanced-functionality-
lin-interface?utm_source=EG+ED+Analog+%26+Power+Source&utm_medium=email
&utm_campaign=CPS221013058&o_eid=0371F5910123I6U&rdx.ident[pull]=omed
a|0371F5910123I6U&oly_enc_id=0371F5910123I6U
> <https://www.electronicdesign.com/markets/automotive/article/21252965/ele
ctronic-design-automotivealternator-regulator-embeds-advanced-functionality
-lin-interface?utm_source=EG+ED+Analog+%26+Power+Source&utm_medium=emai
l&utm_campaign=CPS221013058&o_eid=0371F5910123I6U&rdx.ident[pull]=ome
da%7C0371F5910123I6U&oly_enc_id=0371F5910123I6U>
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
--
Best Regards,
Bob Verwey
082 331 2727
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: 'Homebuilt' voltage regulator to replace old unsafetied |
regulators?
Actually looks amazing Charlie!
I am rebuilding a Luscombe at the moment and its" engine time" so I will be
watching this space.
On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 at 01:52, Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com> wrote:
> ceengland7@gmail.com>
>
> On 10/20/2022 4:16 PM, Charlie England wrote:
> > <ceengland7@gmail.com>
> >
> > Just saw this article about the L9918 alternator regulator from ST
> > Microelectronics. I'm curious about whether it might be viable as a
> > replacement for the unprotected regulators still found in some of the
> > older 'one wire' alternators many of us still use, or perhaps, even
> > for an externally regulated alternator.
> >
> > It has a lot of sophisticated features we'd likely never use, but a
> > quick stroll through the data sheet (link in the article) makes it
> > sound as if it will function just fine in standalone mode. Five
> > terminal device, but the 5th terminal is basically a 'comm' terminal,
> > which the data sheet implies can be lost and the regulator will still
> > function properly. It does have OV & UV protection built in. At a
> > onesies cost of <$10, it certainly looks tempting to try.
> >
> > Charlie
> >
> Well shucks. For some reason, the link didn't 'take'. Here's the full lin
k:
>
> https://www.electronicdesign.com/markets/automotive/article/21252965/elec
tronic-design-automotivealternator-regulator-embeds-advanced-functionality-
lin-interface?utm_source=EG+ED+Analog+%26+Power+Source&utm_medium=email
&utm_campaign=CPS221013058&o_eid=0371F5910123I6U&rdx.ident[pull]=omed
a|0371F5910123I6U&oly_enc_id=0371F5910123I6U
> <https://www.electronicdesign.com/markets/automotive/article/21252965/ele
ctronic-design-automotivealternator-regulator-embeds-advanced-functionality
-lin-interface?utm_source=EG+ED+Analog+%26+Power+Source&utm_medium=emai
l&utm_campaign=CPS221013058&o_eid=0371F5910123I6U&rdx.ident[pull]=ome
da%7C0371F5910123I6U&oly_enc_id=0371F5910123I6U>
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
--
Best Regards,
Bob Verwey
082 331 2727
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: Clarify Z101 |
Answering the OP questions in order:
1) The CB is usually part of the crowbar over voltage protection for the alternator.
If it is fed by a long wire, it can be shorted without tripping the downstream
CB. we usually find it appropriate to protect the plane from burning with
a fuse or fusible link. Makes me wonder if the CB should be closer to the battery...
2) Brownout preventer keeps the volatile memory alive through engine start. Cranking
usually draws circuits to 10 Volts or below, which usually causes electronics
to reboot. These gadgets keep the navigator alive through cranking so you
can program routes, etc before engine start. Evaluate the need based upon your
use, programming, etc.
3) Don't know that gadget, but others already have responded
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=508128#508128
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: Clarify Z101 |
On 10/21/2022 7:53 AM, wsimpso1 wrote:
>
> Answering the OP questions in order:
>
> 1) The CB is usually part of the crowbar over voltage protection for the alternator.
If it is fed by a long wire, it can be shorted without tripping the downstream
CB. we usually find it appropriate to protect the plane from burning
with a fuse or fusible link. Makes me wonder if the CB should be closer to the
battery...
>
By design, the alt field breaker needs to be pilot-accessible while in
flight, in consideration of a potential 'nuisance trip' (reset *one*
time if it trips in flight). Having it closer to the battery would mean
having the battery close to the instrument panel....
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
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: Clarify Z101 |
At 04:23 PM 10/20/2022, you wrote:
>
>If the battery contactor fails open during flight (unlikely), how
>will the pilot know it?
in vast majority of instances, he wouldn't until
dropping to taxi rpms after landing whereupon
the bus voltage might drop.
Bob . . .
Un impeachable logic: George Carlin asked, "If black boxes
survive crashes, why don't they make the whole airplane
out of that stuff?"
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: Clarify Z101 |
At 04:58 PM 10/20/2022, you wrote:
>
>
>user9253 wrote:
> > If the battery contactor fails open during flight (unlikely), how
> will the pilot know it?
>
>Haha! Good point, Joe. I was looking at the AUX ALT B lead
>(connected to the hot side of the contactor), since that was the
>switch involved in the OP's question. Obviously the MAIN ALT will
>keep everything powered even if the contactor fails open, and the
>failure will only be evident once the engine is shut down.
Correct! The Beech Bonanzas and Barons do
NOT link battery master to the alternator
switch(es). In fact, alternator-only ops
are not prohibited in the flight manuals.
Bob . . .
Un impeachable logic: George Carlin asked, "If black boxes
survive crashes, why don't they make the whole airplane
out of that stuff?"
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: 'Homebuilt' voltage regulator to replace old |
unsafetied regulators?
>>Just saw this article about the L9918 alternator regulator from ST
>>Microelectronics. I'm curious about whether it might be viable as a
>>replacement for the unprotected regulators still found in some of
>>the older 'one wire' alternators many of us still use, or perhaps,
>>even for an externally regulated alternator.
You're correct but with a couple of factors unique
to our applications:
I looked at the ancestors for this device while
still at Electro-Mech, circa 1980. The functional
'stumbling' block was feature called 'phase sample'.
The chip needs manage field excitation and shut
it down if the alternator is not rotating.
When the vehicle has systematic control over
field excitation (like an alternator field switch),
field current is shut off externally. In a one-wire
alternator, some internal means for field excitation
management is needed. The two diagrams I've attached
show the connector to one phase of the stator winding
where presence of an AC voltage annunciates alternator
rotation.
Early alternators utilized the
AUX terminal driving the "S" terminal (field
excitation relay) in the alternator to effect
field control.
One wire alternators would generally be discourage
under legacy aircraft system design rules calling
for absolute pilot control of all power sources.
Automatic spool up of an alternator based on
engine operation would not have been certifiable
. . . at least during my tenure in the business.
Additionally, emergency warning and automatic
reaction systems (of which OV is one such
system) had to completely independent of the
device over which they had authority. Combining
both control and ov shutdown onto a single chip
of silicon would not have been certifiable.
For example, I did a pitch system controller
for LearJets way back when. While the controller
and over-speed warning systems were in the same
enclosure BUT wiring, functionality and physical separation
of the two features had to be demonstrated.
Bob . . .
Un impeachable logic: George Carlin asked, "If black boxes
survive crashes, why don't they make the whole airplane
out of that stuff?"
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: Clarify Z101 |
Regarding my 3 Original question in post 1....
1) I understand now why we fuselink the ALT FLD wire at the main bus. Thank you
for helping me understand.
2) I understand now why the B.O. Bus exists, and how it is powered, and how it
is to be used during the preflight, under normal circumstances, and after a Main
Alternator fails. I also now understand how the Brown Out preventer helps
keep voltage up during engine start.
3) I learned from another user that this engine monitor I hav chosen stays on line
during engine starts.
--------
Brooks Cone
Bearhawk Patrol Kit Build
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=508135#508135
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/screen_shot_2022_10_21_at_40056_pm_197.png
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: 'Homebuilt' voltage regulator to replace old unsafetied |
regulators?
On 10/21/2022 11:52 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>>> Just saw this article about the L9918 alternator regulator from ST
>>> Microelectronics. I'm curious about whether it might be viable as a
>>> replacement for the unprotected regulators still found in some of
>>> the older 'one wire' alternators many of us still use, or perhaps,
>>> even for an externally regulated alternator.
>
> You're correct but with a couple of factors unique
> to our applications:
>
> I looked at the ancestors for this device while
> still at Electro-Mech, circa 1980. The functional
> 'stumbling' block was feature called 'phase sample'.
> The chip needs manage field excitation and shut
> it down if the alternator is not rotating.
>
> When the vehicle has systematic control over
> field excitation (like an alternator field switch),
> field current is shut off externally. In a one-wire
> alternator, some internal means for field excitation
> management is needed. The two diagrams I've attached
> show the connector to one phase of the stator winding
> where presence of an AC voltage annunciates alternator
> rotation.
>
> Early alternators utilized the
> AUX terminal driving the "S" terminal (field
> excitation relay) in the alternator to effect
> field control.
>
> One wire alternators would generally be discourage
> under legacy aircraft system design rules calling
> for absolute pilot control of all power sources.
> Automatic spool up of an alternator based on
> engine operation would not have been certifiable
> . . . at least during my tenure in the business.
>
> Additionally, emergency warning and automatic
> reaction systems (of which OV is one such
> system) had to completely independent of the
> device over which they had authority. Combining
> both control and ov shutdown onto a single chip
> of silicon would not have been certifiable.
>
> For example, I did a pitch system controller
> for LearJets way back when. While the controller
> and over-speed warning systems were in the same
> enclosure BUT wiring, functionality and physical separation
> of the two features had to be demonstrated.
>
> Bob . . .
>
Thanks, Bob; very educational.
I saw the 'PH' terminal, but in my quick stroll through the pdf I didn't
really pick up on what it was used for. I did do a little googling for
'traditional' IR alternator regulators, & saw the same terminal being
used in them. That's what got me thinking using it as a substitute.
I do understand the reasoning about having OV protection handled by an
independent circuit. Having said that... I'm wondering about whether
improvements in 'modern tech' with its much higher reliability might
allow us to modify the philosophy a bit. I don't follow the automotive
industry closely, but I don't recall hearing about an OV event in a car
for a very long time.
Since the B+ terminal powering the regulator is available to us, it
would seem that we could handle the overall control of the regulator by
powering that terminal via our field breaker (which, if desired, would
allow implementing separate OV protection). (Bringing regulator's power
terminal out to a 'field' CB is a relatively common mod used in
homebuilts that run IR alternators.) I'm speculating on the possibility
to use this device (or something similar) for either internal mounting,
or perhaps better, remote mounting just like a traditional external
regulator.
Is this water too deep for wading, or might it be worth getting our feet
wet?
Thanks,
Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
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! --
|