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

Question

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

n801bh(at)NetZero.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:17 pm Post subject: Question

I will chime in here as I built and fly a V-8 alternative engine experimental...

Mine is a V-8 347 cu in stroker Ford using MSD ignition and a carb... I also run a Holley "red": fuel pump that delivers 6 PSI...

 

The OP has a LS-1 that needs a high pressure fuel pump running ALL the time so power demands are higher, but not out of sight..

 

My motor needs 1 amp for every 1000 rpms to run the ignition system and 4 amps for the Holley fuel boost pump I ran for take offs and landings..  I run a Optima Red Top 1000CCA battery for both rear weight ballast and longevity in case of an alternator failure. The DAR that inspected my plane asked that particular question and by my calculations I figured I had enough spare power in the battery alone to fly 7 hours, land, refuel, fly another 7 hours. land, refuel, fly another 7 hours and by that time I would be getting close to the point of ignition misfire from low power..

 

I told him if I was stupid enough to take off 3 times with a known failed alternator I deserve to crash.... He agreed and signed off my plane... 500+ hours later the V-8 runs perfectly.. In fact my plane is on the top of the front cover of this months Kitplanes magazine... <GG>

 

As for the OP's question.. Your answer is in the capacity or your battery... IMHO

 

Ben Haas.

www.haaspowerair.com

 

 

Ben Haas

N801BH

www.haaspowerair.com



--------

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2014 2:43 am Post subject: Question

At 08:14 PM 3/10/2014, you wrote:

 I will chime in here as I built and fly a V-8 alternative engine experimental...

 Mine is a V-8 347 cu in stroker Ford using MSD ignition and a carb... I also run a Holley "red": fuel pump that delivers 6 PSI...

  

 The OP has a LS-1 that needs a high pressure fuel pump running ALL the time so power demands are higher, but not out of sight..

  

 My motor needs 1 amp for every 1000 rpms to run the ignition system and 4 amps for the Holley fuel boost pump I ran for take offs and landings..  I run a Optima Red Top 1000CCA battery for both rear weight ballast and longevity in case of an alternator failure. The DAR that inspected my plane asked that particular question and by my calculations I figured I had enough spare power in the battery alone to fly 7 hours, land, refuel, fly another 7 hours. land, refuel, fly another 7 hours and by that time I would be getting close to the point of ignition misfire from low power...

  

 I told him if I was stupid enough to take off 3 times with a known failed alternator I deserve to crash.... He agreed and signed off my plane... 500+ hours later the V-8 runs perfectly.. In fact my plane is on the top of the front cover of this months Kitplanes magazine... <GG>

  

 As for the OP's question.. Your answer is in the capacity or your battery... IMHO



    Agreed.  I know it's difficult to put down the

    hammers and saws and get out the pencils to

    craft a cogent requirements document to confidently

    guide future hammer'n and saw'n.



    I'm working on a pamphlet to be shared with my

    present benefactors for gainful activity entitled

    "The Quest for Elegant Requirements". The premise

    of my offering suggests that much of what are

    dubbed 'requirements' are in fact 'intellectual

    band-aids' put in place to hide the fact that

    there are many features for which the real

    reliability requirements are not well known.



    Another burden on $time$ to market cycle arises

    when we do whizzy things simply because we can. Those

    impressive features really look good in the marketing

    brochures but fly in the face of simple-ideas that

    go back hundreds of years. 



    7 centuries ago, William of Ockham posited the

    idea, "Entia non sunt  multiplicanda sine necessitate".

    The statement translates roughly into the notion that

    one should not multiply complexity un necessarily.



    Similarly, Thomas Paine wrote only 2 centuries ago,

    "The more simple any thing is, the less liable it is

    to be disordered, and the easier repaired when disordered."



    These ideas are core to the crafting of any system

    and especially useful when failure of the system under

    study has high risk implications. These are time-honored,

    well demonstrated processes such as those described

    in Ben's missive about his approach to system

    reliability.



    Ben's numbers may not translate directly into OP's

    solution but the process by which they are deduced

    and satisfied are the same.



 

 

   Bob . . .    [quote][b]

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

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