Matronics Email Lists Forum Index Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
 
 Get Email Distribution Too!Get Email Distribution Too!    FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

How about Z102?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:58 am    Post subject: How about Z102? Reply with quote

At 04:58 PM 6/9/2020, you wrote:
Quote:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>

Alec, everything you wrote is true. Keep in mind that I was not necessarily
recommending two batteries. Someone who has an electrically dependent
engine with only one alternator might want to have two batteries. If the
alternator failed a long way from an airport, would that person prefer to have
one 2-year-old battery, or . . one 2-year-old battery plus one 4-year-old
battery? Some pilots do not replace their battery until it will not crank the
engine any more. Many batteries last 5 or more years. The nice thing about
experimental aircraft is that the builder designs the electrical system the way
that they want to.


Let's harken back a few years . . . about
26 to be more exact when the OBAM aviation
community was in similar discussions
about second batteries. Then the triggering
technology was a constellation of electronic ignition
systems being offered to home built aviation.

I wrote an article for SA that massaged some
ideas for managing a second battery in a ship
fitted with dual electronic ignition systems.

https://tinyurl.com/y8cpo3wo

About 10 years later, this product came into being
offering a means for crew selected, manual or
automatic management of a second battery installed
to support flight critical systems in single
alternator aircraft.

https://tinyurl.com/nxmo3us

The adaptation of an automotive engine to
aircraft is unique and not well supported by
the Z101 Tinker-Toy approach to system architecture.

It would seem that neither the endurance bus
nor engine bus are optional. Further, given
the relatively high energy demands of some
engines (10+ Amps), the term 'endurance' is
no longer applicable. The idea of consuming
all fuel aboard during battery-only ops is
simply unrealistic.

Sadly, it seems necessary to apply the term
'emergency' to an alternator-out situation;
reversion to battery-only ops fosters a sense of
urgency to get the wheels on the ground ASAP!

I've massaged Z101 into a proposed Z102
architecture that offers a means for incorporation
of a second battery with a minimum of $time$
expended on monitoring for continued airworthiness.
I've posted the first iteration for the List
to sift . . .

https://tinyurl.com/ybgta8bb

In this proposal, the aux battery is the same
part number as the main battery. It is fitted
with a robust contactor that permits large
current flows to and from the aux battery for
(1) discharge during cranking assist and (2)
un-restricted charging from the ship's
alternator.

Again, all the buses are multiple feed path;
all buses are hot any time the main bus is hot.
This lends itself to single switch activation
of the DC power system.

Depending on flight conditions the aux bus
may be re-configured for main battery only
ops; the engine bus may be re-configured for
aux battery only ops.

As with Z101, no mis-position (aside from
OFF) puts the airframe at risk.

The aux battery is automatically connected to
the main bus any time the bus voltage exceeds
13.5 volts . . . i.e. the alternator is
running. As the most capable battery on
the airplane, the aux battery is dedicated
to engine operations.

Preflight checks are simple: Select aux bus
alt feed before engine start . . . observe
items on that bus are energized . . . all else
is dark. During engine run-up, select ENGINE
BUS AUX feed . . . note that voltage on the
bus rises by approx 0.7 volts while the aux
feed is selected.

With two identical batteries, the preventative
maintenance protocol reduces to periodic
replacement of aux battery with a new one while
moving the seldom taxed device into the main
battery position.

A more modern incarnation of the battery
management module is in the design phase.
It easily fits inside the backshell of a
15-pin d-sub.

https://tinyurl.com/ycr43882




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
Back to top
ceengland7(at)gmail.com
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2020 11:49 am    Post subject: How about Z102? Reply with quote

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 1:06 PM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com (nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com)> wrote:

Quote:
At 04:58 PM 6/9/2020, you wrote:
Quote:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com (fransew(at)gmail.com)>

Alec, everything you wrote is true.  Keep in mind that I was not necessarily
recommending two batteries.  Someone who has an electrically dependent
engine with only one alternator might want to have two batteries.  If the
alternator failed a long way from an airport, would that person prefer to have
one 2-year-old battery, or . . one 2-year-old battery plus one 4-year-old
battery?  Some pilots do not replace their battery until it will not crank the
engine any more.  Many batteries last 5 or more years.  The nice thing about
experimental aircraft is that the builder designs the electrical system the way
that they want to.


   Let's harken back a few years . . . about
   26 to be more exact when the OBAM aviation
   community was in similar discussions
   about second batteries. Then the triggering
   technology was a constellation of electronic ignition
   systems being offered to home built aviation.

   I wrote an article for SA that massaged some
   ideas for managing a second battery in a ship
   fitted with dual electronic ignition systems.

https://tinyurl.com/y8cpo3wo

   About 10 years later, this product came into being
   offering a means for crew selected, manual or
   automatic management of a second battery installed
   to support flight critical systems in single
   alternator aircraft.  

https://tinyurl.com/nxmo3us

   The adaptation of an automotive engine to
   aircraft is unique and not well supported by
   the Z101 Tinker-Toy approach to system architecture.

   It would seem that neither the endurance bus
   nor engine bus are optional. Further, given
   the relatively high energy demands of some
   engines (10+ Amps), the term 'endurance' is
   no longer applicable. The idea of consuming
   all fuel aboard during battery-only ops is
   simply unrealistic.

   Sadly, it seems necessary to apply the term
   'emergency' to an alternator-out situation;
   reversion to battery-only ops fosters a sense of
   urgency to get the wheels on the ground ASAP!

   I've massaged Z101 into a proposed Z102
   architecture that offers a means for incorporation
   of a second battery with a minimum of $time$
   expended on monitoring for continued airworthiness.
   I've posted the first iteration for the List
   to sift . . .

https://tinyurl.com/ybgta8bb

   In this proposal, the aux battery is the same
   part number as the main battery. It is fitted
   with a robust contactor that permits large
   current flows to and from the aux battery for
   (1) discharge during cranking assist and (2)
   un-restricted charging from the ship's
   alternator.

   Again, all the buses are multiple feed path;
   all buses are hot any time the main bus is hot.
   This lends itself to single switch activation
   of the DC power system.

   Depending on flight conditions the aux bus
   may be re-configured for main battery only
   ops; the engine bus may be re-configured for
   aux battery only ops.

   As with Z101, no mis-position (aside from
   OFF) puts the airframe at risk.

   The aux battery is automatically connected to
   the main bus any time the bus voltage exceeds
   13.5 volts . . . i.e. the alternator is
   running. As the most capable battery on
   the airplane, the aux battery is dedicated
   to engine operations.

   Preflight checks are simple: Select aux bus
   alt feed before engine start . . . observe
   items on that bus are energized . . . all else
   is dark. During engine run-up, select ENGINE
   BUS AUX feed . . . note that voltage on the
   bus rises by approx 0.7 volts while the aux
   feed is selected.

   With two identical batteries, the preventative
   maintenance protocol reduces to periodic
   replacement of aux battery with a new one while
   moving the  seldom taxed device into the main
   battery position.

   A more modern incarnation of the battery
   management module is in the design phase.
   It easily fits inside the backshell of a
   15-pin d-sub.

https://tinyurl.com/ycr43882




  Bob . . .


The irony here is that with automotive conversions it's typically much easier to  add a 2nd full size alternator (at less weight penalty than a 2nd equal sized SLA battery), and less money, if you're planning on buying Odyssey branded bats. Very few of us are willing to add air conditioners in light a/c, so there's the hole (and pulley) for a 2nd alt.
Charlie


- 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
Back to top
kenryan



Joined: 20 Oct 2009
Posts: 424

PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2020 12:19 pm    Post subject: How about Z102? Reply with quote

Regarding proposed Z102 thanks for taking time to developing an architecture specific to auto conversion engines. One comment I have after reviewing is that from what I have seen, many (probably most?) auto conversions seem to use denso alternators with internal regulators. I think it may be relatively uncommon that these alternators are modified so that their regulators are moved to the external, or replaced with more conventional aircraft alternators. I therefore wonder if the architecture might be more useful if it also accounted for this idiosyncrasy of using a single internally regulated alternator?

Ken
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 10:06 AM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com (nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com)> wrote:

Quote:
At 04:58 PM 6/9/2020, you wrote:
Quote:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com (fransew(at)gmail.com)>

Alec, everything you wrote is true.  Keep in mind that I was not necessarily
recommending two batteries.  Someone who has an electrically dependent
engine with only one alternator might want to have two batteries.  If the
alternator failed a long way from an airport, would that person prefer to have
one 2-year-old battery, or . . one 2-year-old battery plus one 4-year-old
battery?  Some pilots do not replace their battery until it will not crank the
engine any more.  Many batteries last 5 or more years.  The nice thing about
experimental aircraft is that the builder designs the electrical system the way
that they want to.


   Let's harken back a few years . . . about
   26 to be more exact when the OBAM aviation
   community was in similar discussions
   about second batteries. Then the triggering
   technology was a constellation of electronic ignition
   systems being offered to home built aviation.

   I wrote an article for SA that massaged some
   ideas for managing a second battery in a ship
   fitted with dual electronic ignition systems.

https://tinyurl.com/y8cpo3wo

   About 10 years later, this product came into being
   offering a means for crew selected, manual or
   automatic management of a second battery installed
   to support flight critical systems in single
   alternator aircraft.  

https://tinyurl.com/nxmo3us

   The adaptation of an automotive engine to
   aircraft is unique and not well supported by
   the Z101 Tinker-Toy approach to system architecture.

   It would seem that neither the endurance bus
   nor engine bus are optional. Further, given
   the relatively high energy demands of some
   engines (10+ Amps), the term 'endurance' is
   no longer applicable. The idea of consuming
   all fuel aboard during battery-only ops is
   simply unrealistic.

   Sadly, it seems necessary to apply the term
   'emergency' to an alternator-out situation;
   reversion to battery-only ops fosters a sense of
   urgency to get the wheels on the ground ASAP!

   I've massaged Z101 into a proposed Z102
   architecture that offers a means for incorporation
   of a second battery with a minimum of $time$
   expended on monitoring for continued airworthiness.
   I've posted the first iteration for the List
   to sift . . .

https://tinyurl.com/ybgta8bb

   In this proposal, the aux battery is the same
   part number as the main battery. It is fitted
   with a robust contactor that permits large
   current flows to and from the aux battery for
   (1) discharge during cranking assist and (2)
   un-restricted charging from the ship's
   alternator.

   Again, all the buses are multiple feed path;
   all buses are hot any time the main bus is hot.
   This lends itself to single switch activation
   of the DC power system.

   Depending on flight conditions the aux bus
   may be re-configured for main battery only
   ops; the engine bus may be re-configured for
   aux battery only ops.

   As with Z101, no mis-position (aside from
   OFF) puts the airframe at risk.

   The aux battery is automatically connected to
   the main bus any time the bus voltage exceeds
   13.5 volts . . . i.e. the alternator is
   running. As the most capable battery on
   the airplane, the aux battery is dedicated
   to engine operations.

   Preflight checks are simple: Select aux bus
   alt feed before engine start . . . observe
   items on that bus are energized . . . all else
   is dark. During engine run-up, select ENGINE
   BUS AUX feed . . . note that voltage on the
   bus rises by approx 0.7 volts while the aux
   feed is selected.

   With two identical batteries, the preventative
   maintenance protocol reduces to periodic
   replacement of aux battery with a new one while
   moving the  seldom taxed device into the main
   battery position.

   A more modern incarnation of the battery
   management module is in the design phase.
   It easily fits inside the backshell of a
   15-pin d-sub.

https://tinyurl.com/ycr43882




  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
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
user9253



Joined: 28 Mar 2008
Posts: 1906
Location: Riley TWP Michigan

PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2020 3:05 pm    Post subject: Re: How about Z102? Reply with quote

Bob, if two batteries are connected in parallel and one of the batteries
develops a shorted cell, will the good battery discharge into the bad battery?
If yes, would the rate of discharge be significant enough to quickly reduce
the good battery voltage to that of the bad battery?
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

_________________
Joe Gores
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Jun 11, 2020 6:35 am    Post subject: How about Z102? Reply with quote

At 03:12 PM 6/10/2020, you wrote:
Quote:
Regarding proposed Z102 thanks for taking time to developing an architecture specific to auto conversion engines. One comment I have after reviewing is that from what I have seen, many (probably most?) auto conversions seem to use denso alternators with internal regulators. I think it may be relatively uncommon that these alternators are modified so that their regulators are moved to the external, or replaced with more conventional aircraft alternators. I therefore wonder if the architecture might be more useful if it also accounted for this idiosyncrasy of using a single internally regulated alternator?

Ken

This has been an ongoing debate on these pages
decades. I've sorta taken the tack that we should
strive to publish and recommend the best we know
how to do as opposed to becoming an echo chamber
for concepts from other venues.

To be sure, reliability of COTS alternators
is very high . . . in fact, I've been told there
are STCs now for adapting COTS alternators
to TC aircraft sans ov protection. I've not
seen any such documents but it wouldn't surprise
me.

We'll have to leave adoption of such variants
up to the individual builder. For the foreseeable
future, I'll continue to strive for as much
failure tolerance as the technology and tools
at hand will offer.

Speaking of COTS alternators . . . Lister
Graeme Coates did an excellent piece on ND alternator
modifications published in Kitplanes last year.
You can see a copy of that article here:

https://tinyurl.com/yxmpw3on

. . . along with other writings on the same
subject.




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
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    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


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group