Tracy, Why not just use the "Program" pot for the mixture of one controller say "A" and the Mixture pot for the "B" controller. This way you have true redundancy. I know that you use the program pot now for programming the mixture but that never made much sense to me. If you are going to set the "Mixture" pot to a certain position and then match that same position with the Program pot and read the program pot's postion to set the mixture setting why not just read the Mixture pot's position and use it's value to program the setting. This seems like it would also be more accurate as the two pots at the same position could output slightly different values. This provides true redundancy AND reduces the complexity of tuning. If the engine stumbles or quits just flip the A/B switch which should be second nature anyway. Just an idea for you to ponder. Merry Chistmas
Jim Maher
Tracy Crook <lors01@msn.com> wrote: I have pondered various fail safe strategies for this scenario (for example, make the B controller fixed at midrange mixture) but so far have not been satisfied with any of them. Anyone have other ideas to be considered? Tracy ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 4:50 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Question for Tracy - was: Off Topic "Switch Placements"
This reminds me to ask a question to Tracy that wanders through my brain
when there is no civilization in sight out the cockpit windows.
Tracy: If the mixture pot fails (not all that uncommon to get an open
failure in potentiometers) what does the EC2 firmware do to the mixture?
Perry Casson
--
Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
|