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

Contactor question

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

rv(at)thelefflers.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 1:00 pm Post subject: Contactor question

I'm currently planning a VP-200 Config 4 implementation in my RV-10 (similar in concept to Z-14).  

   

I'm at the stage where I need to install any required conduit, so I started some high level physical power wire planning.  

   

If I keep the battery and x-tie contactors in the rear with the batteries, it appears that I have to run 13 wires from the firewall back to the batteries, whereas if I locate the battery and x-tie contactors up front, only 5 wires will need to be run to the batteries.  

   

This appears to be a no-brainer decision to minimize the amount of wire to be installed.  Are there any issues with not having these contactors co-located with the batteries (assuming appropriate wire gauges are used)?   

   

I would be interested in talking with any RV-10 builders that are considering a Config 4 implementation, as well as those that initially thought about a Config 4 then switched to another config.  

   

thanks,  

   

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

nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:07 pm Post subject: Contactor question

At 04:01 PM 7/10/2009, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  I'm currently planning a VP-200 Config 4 implementation in my RV-10 

(similar in concept to Z-14).



I'm at the stage where I need to install any required conduit, so I 

started some high level physical power wire planning.



If I keep the battery and x-tie contactors in the rear with the 

batteries, it appears that I have to run 13 wires from the firewall 

back to the batteries, whereas if I locate the battery and x-tie 

contactors up front, only 5 wires will need to be run to the batteries.


	


   For Z-14 with rear mounted batteries consider

   mounting the contactors aft and the crossfeed

   contactor on the forward side of the firewall.

   This provides a good power distribution location

   for fat wires forward of the firewall.



   If batteries are aft, then you have two fat wires

   coming forward. Batteries are grounded locally.



http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_1.jpg

http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_2.jpg

http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_3.jpg



   This leaves two contactor wires plus what ever

   wires come forward off the battery busses.

        Bob . . .



         ---------------------------------------

        ( . . .  a long habit of not thinking   )

        ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )

        ( appearance of being right . . .       )

        (                                       )

        (                  -Thomas Paine 1776-  )

         ---------------------------------------

- 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

rv(at)thelefflers.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 2:54 am Post subject: Contactor question

Bob,



Thanks for the response, but I was asking a different question.  Since I

wasn't clear, let me restate the question in a different way. I was looking

for feedback as to if there are any issues that would require the contactors

to be in close physical proximity to the batteries.  



Vertical Power's Config 4 has a similar design concept as your Z-14, but is

different due to the utilization of VP's dual control units.  The following

link is a schematic: http://www.verticalpower.com/docs/VP_Config_4.pdf  I

wasn't asking how to run fatwires for Z-14.



Thanks,



bob



--

- 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: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:08 am Post subject: Contactor question

At 05:56 AM 7/11/2009, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



Bob,



Thanks for the response, but I was asking a different question.  Since I

wasn't clear, let me restate the question in a different way. I was looking

for feedback as to if there are any issues that would require the contactors

to be in close physical proximity to the batteries.


	


    For the battery contactors, yes. The legacy responsbility

    for battery contactors is to provide pilot control of battery

    energy as close as practical to each battery. All of the Z-figures

    should have a (*) notation on the battery (+) leadwire that goes

    to the contactor. This symbol suggests "make this wire a short

    as practical".



    The idea is that shutting off the battery contactors makes the

    airplane max-cold with respect to high energy sources.  The feeding

    of "endurance busses" through 20A fuses directly from the battery

    is not in concert with legacy design rules . . . but probably doesn't

    present a serious issue.

 	  Quote: 	
		  Vertical Power's Config 4 has a similar design concept as your Z-14, but is

different due to the utilization of VP's dual control units.  The following

link is a schematic: http://www.verticalpower.com/docs/VP_Config_4.pdf  I

wasn't asking how to run fatwires for Z-14.


	


    . . . and it doesn't matter if it was Z-14 or Config 4 as depicted.

    Recommendations for contactor locations are the same. With no battery

    busses, your wire count to the tail is 2-fat, 4-skinny. I can see where

    your confusion came from. His schematic ties alternators and bus feeds

    to the battery contactors. For rear mounted batteries it should be revised

    to move the ship's fat wire feeds to the OTHER ends of the 4AWG wires

    tied to the cross-feed condtactor on the firewall.



        Bob . . .



         ---------------------------------------

        ( . . .  a long habit of not thinking   )

        ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )

        ( appearance of being right . . .       )

        (                                       )

        (                  -Thomas Paine 1776-  )

         ---------------------------------------

- 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