Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

New Z-figure

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2018 10:48 am Post subject: New Z-figure

 	  Quote: 	
		    	  Quote: 	
		    The proposed new z-figure will offer all the advantages

   of Z-12 (originally designed for TC aircraft) and

   Z-13 combined. 	


 What's the timeframe on this being published?



 --Rick 	




   I've been stirring that pot for several weeks and

   I think I'm getting close. Here's revision 3

   to the drawing . . .



  http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z02P3_Preliminary.pdf 



   Critical review most welcome . . .



 

 

   Bob . . .

markwheelermd(at)icloud.c
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2018 11:46 am Post subject: New Z-figure

Bob,Is it possible to obtain a software version of your electric symbols if we want to spin our own variant of your z-diagrams?

Mark



Sent from my iPhone



On Oct 18, 2018, at 11:47 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com (nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com)> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		     	  Quote: 	
		    	  Quote: 	
		    The proposed new z-figure will offer all the advantages

   of Z-12 (originally designed for TC aircraft) and

   Z-13 combined. 	


 What's the timeframe on this being published?



 --Rick 	




   I've been stirring that pot for several weeks and

   I think I'm getting close. Here's revision 3

   to the drawing . . .



  http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z02P3_Preliminary.pdf 



   Critical review most welcome . . .



 

 

   Bob . . .

nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2018 12:32 pm Post subject: New Z-figure

At 02:46 PM 10/18/2018, you wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  Bob,

 Is it possible to obtain a software version of your electric symbols if we want to spin our own variant of your z-diagrams?

 Mark 	




  https://tinyurl.com/og7ztjl



 



 

   Bob . . .

markwheelermd(at)icloud.c
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2018 1:22 pm Post subject: New Z-figure

Thank you!! 	  Quote: 	
		  On Oct 18, 2018, at 1:31 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com (nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com)> wrote:

  At 02:46 PM 10/18/2018, you wrote:  	  Quote: 	
		  Bob, Is it possible to obtain a software version of your electric symbols if we want to spin our own variant of your z-diagrams? Mark 	
  https://tinyurl.com/og7ztjl  

   Bob . . .

ceengland7(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2018 6:32 pm Post subject: New Z-figure

On 10/18/2018 1:47 PM, Robert L.       Nuckolls, III wrote:

     

      	  Quote: 	
		                 	  Quote: 	
		            	  Quote: 	
		                The proposed             new z-figure will offer all the advantages

               of Z-12 (originally designed for TC aircraft) and

               Z-13 combined. 	
         

           What's the timeframe on this being published?

           

           --Rick 	
       

       

         I've been stirring that pot for several weeks and

         I think I'm getting close. Here's revision 3

         to the drawing . . .

       

        http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z02P3_Preliminary.pdf       

       

         Critical review most welcome . . .

       

       

                

             Bob . . .                     	
     Assuming this the one for electronic injection electrically     dependent engines, is there any merit in a separate bus for the     engine? I'm trying to do this in my auto-conversion powered RV-7.      My desire and logic (or what I hope is logic  ) is that the     airframe can go dark and the engine will still run, with an     alternator charging the battery. I'm trying to mimic what you see in     a 'typical' airframe with a magneto ignition a/c engine, where the     master can be flipped off and the engine still runs.

     

     I have a high current  'engine master' switch that directly connects     the battery to the engine bus, and a conventional looking master     contactor that feeds the 'aircraft bus'. Only the starter is fed by     the master contactor; all other engine functions are fed by the     engine master switch. One alternator conventionally feeds the load     side of the master contactor; the other (identical model) alternator     feeds through its alternator contactor to the battery side of the     master contactor.  There is a high current crossfeed switch between     the two buses, to cover the possibility of 'engine master' switch     failure.

     

     Am I overthinking it?

     

     Charlie

     	          		Virus-free. www.avast.com 		 	 [url=#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2] [/url]

nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:00 pm Post subject: New Z-figure

 	  Quote: 	
		  I have a high current  'engine master' switch that directly connects the battery to the engine bus, and a conventional looking master contactor that feeds the 'aircraft bus'. Only the starter is fed by the master contactor; all other engine functions are fed by the engine master switch. One alternator conventionally feeds the load side of the master contactor; the other (identical model) alternator feeds through its alternator contactor to the battery side of the master contactor.  There is a high current crossfeed switch between the two buses, to cover the possibility of 'engine master' switch failure.



 	


  

 If it were my airplane, I'd run engine critical loads

 directly from the battery bus with each of those loads

 enjoying it's own feeder protection and switch. This

 keeps the engine running with all other switches off.

 No relays or contactors in series with the feeders. The

 Z02 battery bus enjoys THREE energy sources with minimal

 sharing of hardware. All three sources are pre-flight

 testable.`



 

 

   Bob . . .

Av8rrob

Joined: 24 Mar 2017
Posts: 7

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2018 3:42 am Post subject: Re: New Z-figure

Bob, is is possible to change the switch configuration from off/bat/ bat+ pri alt , to off/batt/ batt +alt; then change the second switch to selecting either primary or secondary alternator?  It would seem to be a bit easier operationaly that way. What do you think?



Rob

nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2018 4:28 am Post subject: New Z-figure

At 06:42 AM 10/19/2018, you wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Av8rrob" <av8rrob(at)gmail.com>



 Bob, is is possible to change the switch configuration from off/bat/ bat+ pri alt , to off/batt/ batt +alt; then change the second switch to selecting either primary or secondary alternator?  It would seem to be a bit easier operationaly that way. What do you think? 	


   That 'mixes' controls between two systems which,

   by legacy design goals, should be as independent

   from each other as possible.



 

 

   Bob . . .

nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2018 4:29 am Post subject: New Z-figure

At 10:59 PM 10/18/2018, you wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		    	  Quote: 	
		  I have a high current  'engine master' switch that directly connects the battery to the engine bus, and a conventional looking master contactor that feeds the 'aircraft bus'. Only the starter is fed by the master contactor; all other engine functions are fed by the engine master switch. One alternator conventionally feeds the load side of the master contactor; the other (identical model) alternator feeds through its alternator contactor to the battery side of the master contactor.  There is a high current crossfeed switch between the two buses, to cover the possibility of 'engine master' switch failure.

 	


  

 If it were my airplane, I'd run engine critical loads

 directly from the battery bus with each of those loads

 enjoying it's own feeder protection and switch. This

 keeps the engine running with all other switches off.

 No relays or contactors in series with the feeders. The

 Z02 battery bus enjoys THREE energy sources with minimal

 sharing of hardware. All three sources are pre-flight

 testable.` 	


   Can you describe the engine's electrical

   feeders?



   Does the system have any redundant features

   like pri/sec ECU, dual fuel pumps, etc?



 

   Bob . . .

Tundra10

Joined: 14 Jun 2010
Posts: 102
Location: Scarborough, Ontario

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2018 5:07 am Post subject: New Z-figure

Bob,



I have always wondered why the feed to the main alternator field  

breaker are different sizes on each side of the breaker.  This is  

unchanged from earlier versions.



I assume the Ebus brown out booster is significantly cheaper than the  

TCW Intelligent Power Stabilizer ?

I don't know what the internal failure modes are, but their wiring  

diagram shows it directly wired in at all times, rather than being  

switched out with a relay.

The think the biggest advantage of the IPS is that it boosts the  

voltage as the battery sags after an alternator failure, which doesn't  

apply to this architecture, but it does supply a boost during starting.



Jeff Page

Dream Aircraft Tundra #10

 	  Quote: 	
		   Time: 11:48:16 AM PST US

 From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

 Subject: New Z-figure

>>   The proposed new z-figure will offer all the advantages

>>   of Z-12 (originally designed for TC aircraft) and

>>   Z-13 combined.

>

> What's the timeframe on this being published?

>

> --Rick

    I've been stirring that pot for several weeks and

    I think I'm getting close. Here's revision 3

    to the drawing . . .



 http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z02P3_Preliminary.pdf



    Critical review most welcome . . .

    Bob . . .

ceengland7(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2018 5:38 am Post subject: New Z-figure

On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 7:33 AM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com (nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com)> wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		    At 10:59 PM 10/18/2018, you wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		    	  Quote: 	
		  I have a high currentÂ  'engine master' switch that directly connects the battery to the engine bus, and a conventional looking master contactor that feeds the 'aircraft bus'. Only the starter is fed by the master contactor; all other engine functions are fed by the engine master switch. One alternator conventionally feeds the load side of the master contactor; the other (identical model) alternator feeds through its alternator contactor to the battery side of the master contactor.Â  There is a high current crossfeed switch between the two buses, to cover the possibility of 'engine master' switch failure.

 	


 Â 

 If it were my airplane, I'd run engine critical loads

 directly from the battery bus with each of those loads

 enjoying it's own feeder protection and switch. This

 keeps the engine running with all other switches off.

 No relays or contactors in series with the feeders. The

 Z02 battery bus enjoys THREE energy sources with minimal

 sharing of hardware. All three sources are pre-flight

 testable.` 	


 Â  Can you describe the engine's electrical

 Â  feeders?



 Â  Does the system have any redundant features

 Â  like pri/sec ECU, dual fuel pumps, etc?



 

 Â  Bob . . .

	
Please forgive the rough looking drawing; I've never had time to learn a cad program, so I tweaked a z drawing with MS Paint to create the attached.Â Ignore the fused feeder values on the engine bus; most are artifacts from my cut & paste operation. Both alternators in the drawing are auto-style internally regulated; the engine comes with an IR alternator, and I just hung a 2nd where the air conditioner compressor used to reside. As yet unresolved in this draft is the fact that both OV modules can 'see' both alternators. My original intent was to run both alternators all the time, but I may modify that idea to primary/backup.

My controller (from Real World Solutions, specifically for Mazda rotary engines) does have primary/secondary controllers in one box, but a single power feed to the controllers.Â The RWS controllers have been set up this way for over 20 years. Over the years, multiple fliers have had controller issues requiring switching to the backup controller, but none have ever had a power supply failure to the box caused by an issue with one controller.Â If the controller box had separate power feeds to each controller, it would obviously beg for running one from the a/c bus, but I'm not sure that would be a good thing, from the standpoint of trying to keep the systemsÂ  similar (as possible) to old habit driven pilots. The controllers' control of the injectors & ignition coils is switched by an external control, which drives a bank of internal relays to do the switching (I believe this is how the ones for a/c engines do it, as well). Power to each injector & coil is individually fused; the controller switches the ground side of the injectors/coils.Â  Â There are dual Walbro high pressure fuel pumps, each with it's own fuse/switch.Â 

The choice to have an engine master was driven by the same logic mentioned earlier. Just as the airframe can go dark without affecting the engine, a typical a/c can shut off the engine by turning a key or flipping a pair of mag switches. The engine master switch is my 'mag switch'. But I'm not married to this, is there good reason to change?

If the above isn't clear, I can try to do a rough drawing of power flow to the engine's power feeders.

Charlie

2alt_draft.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

141.24 KB

Viewed:

12460 Time(s)

nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2018 5:48 am Post subject: New Z-figure

At 08:06 AM 10/19/2018, you wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jeff Page <jpx(at)qenesis.com>



 Bob,



 I have always wondered why the feed to the main alternator field  

 breaker are different sizes on each side of the breaker.  This is  

 unchanged from earlier versions. 	


   Because the hot side is a bus extension with recommended

   protection. 20AWG fuselinkwire is readily available now

   so a 20GFLW followed by a 16AWG extension is called for

   up to the breaker. After that, it's just alternator field

   loads.



  	  Quote: 	
		  I assume the Ebus brown out booster is significantly cheaper than the  

 TCW Intelligent Power Stabilizer 	


   Yes . . . $10 vs. $hundreds$



  	  Quote: 	
		  I don't know what the internal failure modes are, but their wiring  

 diagram shows it directly wired in at all times, rather than being  

 switched out with a relay. 	


   ? It's expected to funtion and powered only while

   the starter button is depressed. Given that it functions

   ONLY during cranking, then there are no significant

   failure modes. It gets pre-flight tested but is not

   needed in flight. If it craps, there are no safety

   implications to the rest of the ship's electro-whizzies

   or comfortable termination of flight.



  	  Quote: 	
		  The think the biggest advantage of the IPS is that it boosts the  

 voltage as the battery sags after an alternator failure, which doesn't  

 apply to this architecture, but it does supply a boost during starting. 	


   Yes . . . and why do you want to boost the voltage with

   a dead alternator?  Recall that the brown-out issue is

   based on battery voltage sagging BELOW a brown-out threshold

   of the electro-whizzy during starter inrush. Except while

   cranking, the battery is expected to supply the legacy

   adopted and understood supply voltage of 10-12 volts.



   By the time a battery drops to 10.5 or thereabouts, it's

   95% used up. All electro-whizzies qualified for aircraft

   operate quite happily down to 10.5 and usually below . . .

   so boosting bus voltage during alternator out conditions

   only adds complexity and increased energy consumption.



   When the brown-out issue first reared its ugly head

   about 10 years ago, the energy budget for preventing

   brown-out reset was small. The resourceful Eric Jones

   crafted an array of super-caps that would grunt loads

   to the victimized devices for the few milliseconds that

   the battery was suffering starter-sag.



   But it seems that more and more devices are being

   offered to the OBAM aviation community that suffer

   the same short coming. So assuming the builder objects

   to brown-out resets. then its left to us to craft

   a band-aid to accomplish a design goal that should

   have been built into the electro-whizzy in the first

   place. The capacitor array is less practical and

   more expensive than the architecture proposed in

   Z02. MUCH less expensive than the TCW approach.



 

   Bob . . .

ceengland7(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2018 5:51 am Post subject: New Z-figure

Jeff, that 'after alternator failure' voltage boost might buy you a few seconds (as in less than 10) longer operation beyond typical low voltage shutdown. When the energy is depleted from the battery, it's gone. Using a 'switcher' on a virtually dead battery when it's down to 9 or 10 volts will just drive it down to low single digit volts almost instantly.

On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 8:13 AM Jeff Page <jpx(at)qenesis.com (jpx(at)qenesis.com)> wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		  --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jeff Page <jpx(at)qenesis.com (jpx(at)qenesis.com)>

 

 Bob,

 

 I have always wondered why the feed to the main alternator fieldÂ  

 breaker are different sizes on each side of the breaker.Â  This isÂ  

 unchanged from earlier versions.

 

 I assume the Ebus brown out booster is significantly cheaper than theÂ  

 TCW Intelligent Power Stabilizer ?

 I don't know what the internal failure modes are, but their wiringÂ  

 diagram shows it directly wired in at all times, rather than beingÂ  

 switched out with a relay.

 The think the biggest advantage of the IPS is that it boosts theÂ  

 voltage as the battery sags after an alternator failure, which doesn'tÂ  

 apply to this architecture, but it does supply a boost during starting.

 

 Jeff Page

 Dream Aircraft Tundra #10

 

 

 > Time: 11:48:16 AM PST US

 > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com (nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com)>

 > Subject: New Z-figure

 >

 >

 >>>Â  Â The proposed new z-figure will offer all the advantages

 >>>Â  Â of Z-12 (originally designed for TC aircraft) and

 >>>Â  Â Z-13 combined.

 >>

 >> What's the timeframe on this being published?

 >>

 >> --Rick

 >

 >

 >Â  Â  I've been stirring that pot for several weeks and

 >Â  Â  I think I'm getting close. Here's revision 3

 >Â  Â  to the drawing . . .

 >

 > http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z02P3_Preliminary.pdf

 >

 >Â  Â  Critical review most welcome . . .

 >

 >

 >Â  Â  Bob . . .

 

 

 ===========

  -

 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 -

 Â  Â  Â  Â  Â  -Matt Dralle, List Admin.

 rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution

 ===========

user9253

Joined: 28 Mar 2008
Posts: 1924
Location: Riley TWP Michigan

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2018 7:19 am Post subject: Re: New Z-figure

Charlie,

I suggest that the bus tie-switch be replaced by a DPDT  switch.

Connect the  N.C. second half of the switch in series with the start push

button.  Doing that will disable the starter if the bus-tie switch is turned on.

The purpose is to prevent starter current from taking a parallel path from 

the battery to the engine bus to the main bus to the starter.

_________________
Joe Gores

Last edited by user9253 on Fri Oct 19, 2018 7:36 am; edited 1 time in total

user9253

Joined: 28 Mar 2008
Posts: 1924
Location: Riley TWP Michigan

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2018 7:35 am Post subject: Re: New Z-figure

Jeff, the brownout booster (DC-DC converter) is only energized while the relay

is energized (except for milliseconds through diode).  The relay is only 

energized while the start button is pressed (except for milliseconds dropout delay).

_________________
Joe Gores

ceengland7(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2018 8:40 am Post subject: New Z-figure

On 10/19/2018 10:19 AM, user9253 wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   



 Charlie,

 I suggest that the bus tie-switch be replaced by a DPDT  switch.  Connect the  N.C. second half of the switch in series with the start push button.  Doing that will disable the starter if the bus-tie switch is turned on.  The purpose is to prevent starter current from taking a parallel path from the battery to the engine bus to the main bus to the starter.



 --------

 Joe Gores

Hi Joe,
	




Good idea. I think we may have discussed that issue in the past; I just 

haven't revised the rough draft. The -7 project has been stagnant for 

several months while I dealt with family illnesses and built a hangar door.



Thanks,



Charlie



---

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.

https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum