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

AeroLed noises

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest

Posted: Sun Oct 02, 2011 10:01 am Post subject: AeroLed noises

At 11:13 AM 10/2/2011, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



I sell some LED tail lights and used to supply them with commercial 

constant current supplies--Power Pucks from Luxdrive. But making 

them quiet was another matter. I know Bob N. put together a fix for 

these. It would be interesting to see how they worked in the field...


	


     We've just about used up the initial stocking order of

     filter boards for the AEC9051 filtered driver boards.

     Individuals who ordered boards to add to their existing

     BukPucks never got back to me . . . further, I've not

     had any complaints/returns from customers who ordered the

     fully assembled devices. It's a fair assumption that

     the product is producing the expected result in the

     field.  I did get into the RFI lab to take a peek at

     DO160 conducted emissions for the AEC9051 and found it

     to be well within limits.



     The reason I asked about TSO/STC on the AeroLED products

     is because a holy-watered product would have been tested

     to DO-160 requirements.



Sam Marlow wrote:



No, it's all the time, but worse with the strobes on. And no this is not

an STC'ed or TSO'ed product.



     I'm mystified as to why anyone might offer a non-qualified

     device that is any less capable than their qualified device.

     The delta-dollars to manufacture two different products

     is pretty small . . . further, the risks of having an unhappy

     customer due to "cutting of corners" can be hard on business.

     Nothing travels faster than "bad news" about a product or

     the services of the company that made it.



     Having offered that, the question to be asked and answered

     by AeroLed is, "Is there a difference in electromagnetic

     compatibility between your certificated and non-certificated

     products?"  If the answer is yes, the next question is, "How

     was it determined that the owner of an OBAM aircraft would

     be any more tolerant of noise in the radios than the owner

     of a TC aircraft?"



     Sam, I'm not sure I asked my question of you clearly. You

     spoke of landing lights and strobes. I understand that the

     noise increased with strobes on versus off. But if there

     is some form of noise with the strobes off . . . does this

     noise go away when the landing lights are off?  We need

     to be REALLY sure that the offending noises are coming from

     both products.



     In the unfathomable wisdom of HBC management, they sold

     all their investigative and qualification test facilities

     to Wichita State University. I used to be able to sneak in

     and get a quick look-see on the EMC performance of various

     devices. Now, even though the cost of doing a 5 minute test

     is quite reasonable, the cost and time delays for doing a

     purchase order, awaiting a quote, exercising a contract

     and getting on a schedule has built a very effective

     barrier between WSU as a supplier and myself as a potential

     customer.



     I've got a broad-band receiver and conductive emissions

     pickup transformers to do the work on my bench . . . but

     no time in the foreseeable future to get the setup

     calibrated.



     So tackling the problem before us is reduced to cut-n-try

     processes on the airplane. Fortunately, after 45 years

     of shepherding various products through the labs . . . we're

     not operating completely in the dark. Let's work to identify

     the players first, then the propagation paths, and finally

     some first-pass experiments to identify a solution.



     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: Sun Oct 02, 2011 11:00 am Post subject: AeroLed noises

Sam,



We also need to know what the conditions are for hearing

the noise in the headsets. Does the noise level go up and down

as the VOLUME on a radio is adjusted?



  . . . when the intercom volume is adjusted?



  . . . when the radios are all OFF?



This will give us clues as to whether the noise

problem is RADIATED or CONDUCTED noise. Filters for

these two conditions are different.

        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

sam.marlow

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 99

Posted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 5:47 am Post subject: AeroLed noises

Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>



 At 11:13 AM 10/2/2011, you wrote:

> 

> <emjones(at)charter.net>

>

> I sell some LED tail lights and used to supply them with commercial 

> constant current supplies--Power Pucks from Luxdrive. But making them 

> quiet was another matter. I know Bob N. put together a fix for these. 

> It would be interesting to see how they worked in the field...



     We've just about used up the initial stocking order of

     filter boards for the AEC9051 filtered driver boards.

     Individuals who ordered boards to add to their existing

     BukPucks never got back to me . . . further, I've not

     had any complaints/returns from customers who ordered the

     fully assembled devices. It's a fair assumption that

     the product is producing the expected result in the

     field.  I did get into the RFI lab to take a peek at

     DO160 conducted emissions for the AEC9051 and found it

     to be well within limits.



     The reason I asked about TSO/STC on the AeroLED products

     is because a holy-watered product would have been tested

     to DO-160 requirements.



 Sam Marlow wrote:



 No, it's all the time, but worse with the strobes on. And no this is not

 an STC'ed or TSO'ed product.



     I'm mystified as to why anyone might offer a non-qualified

     device that is any less capable than their qualified device.

     The delta-dollars to manufacture two different products

     is pretty small . . . further, the risks of having an unhappy

     customer due to "cutting of corners" can be hard on business.

     Nothing travels faster than "bad news" about a product or

     the services of the company that made it.



     Having offered that, the question to be asked and answered

     by AeroLed is, "Is there a difference in electromagnetic

     compatibility between your certificated and non-certificated

     products?"  If the answer is yes, the next question is, "How

     was it determined that the owner of an OBAM aircraft would

     be any more tolerant of noise in the radios than the owner

     of a TC aircraft?"



     Sam, I'm not sure I asked my question of you clearly. You

     spoke of landing lights and strobes. I understand that the

     noise increased with strobes on versus off. But if there

     is some form of noise with the strobes off . . . does this

     noise go away when the landing lights are off?  We need

     to be REALLY sure that the offending noises are coming from

     both products.



     In the unfathomable wisdom of HBC management, they sold

     all their investigative and qualification test facilities

     to Wichita State University. I used to be able to sneak in

     and get a quick look-see on the EMC performance of various

     devices. Now, even though the cost of doing a 5 minute test

     is quite reasonable, the cost and time delays for doing a

     purchase order, awaiting a quote, exercising a contract

     and getting on a schedule has built a very effective

     barrier between WSU as a supplier and myself as a potential

     customer.



     I've got a broad-band receiver and conductive emissions

     pickup transformers to do the work on my bench . . . but

     no time in the foreseeable future to get the setup

     calibrated.



     So tackling the problem before us is reduced to cut-n-try

     processes on the airplane. Fortunately, after 45 years

     of shepherding various products through the labs . . . we're

     not operating completely in the dark. Let's work to identify

     the players first, then the propagation paths, and finally

     some first-pass experiments to identify a solution.



     Bob . . .



I'll research further, and get back to you. Thanks.

- 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