X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from mail-ew0-f52.google.com ([209.85.215.52] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c2o) with ESMTPS id 4875631 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 18 Feb 2011 18:50:58 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.215.52; envelope-from=dmlobner@gmail.com Received: by ewy23 with SMTP id 23so1721130ewy.25 for ; Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:50:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=V6VQLH1p/1faGSAFD13OmP6Qd5ZMNo6qN7kaklRuLOc=; b=AxLmm3bwKKpJdeiqhQAVE2MAWdVPGLyCt1UPevPEg0fa9glNLqsdQhAi/eSVcmB+wa e6z+HAhjks25uYpct8XWluc7zKbH1NIW0cazpbsQGo7vNc7iEgicIjVk20ZMR8C8dM9E VlV+ynl03p2pRyr5XAKrx79Y+s7UBF0mDfkXM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=YTbxK46iGML39zt6YYfMKjZEnvxvAY3f57TYmFkPFlfJb+bmF1LTbU78cm+t84Wike Ebhl2BLG3vR+p54M/OvWWKA29BuMwLrjVMkWvioAA1/DPxN+I3gKWtm6gP2ssiR/BQ90 xXe+X/5oasMO/JCCcTHwg0RJixtgu7CDYk//c= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.213.27.136 with SMTP id i8mr1672389ebc.11.1298073020655; Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:50:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.213.26.139 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:50:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 17:50:20 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: - Day dreaming... From: Dustin Lobner To: Rotary motors in aircraft Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015174bdefa49e7e9049c972d30 --0015174bdefa49e7e9049c972d30 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Correct. As I have it drawn now, there are two relays handling each signal in parallel, each driven by it's own transistor. Everything is redundant there. Next, make all relays a NO type, but have one ECU set be NC, so that even with no power to said relay board, one of the computer's signals still gets through. Is it truly 100% redundant? Probably wouldn't be considered as such...it does have a failsafe mode though. Regarding the board itself, just make sure it has more than a screw in each corner holding it down so that it doesn't vibe itself to pieces. Again, not hard. Connectors are a potential place of concern certainly, but I'm going to use MIL-DTL-38999 locking connectors like those from Amphenol and whatnot. If they're good enough for the Space Shuttle, they're good enough for me. On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Ernest Christley wrote: > Dustin Lobner wrote: > >> Sounds good. I'm planning on a pair or maybe even 3 MS3 units with a >> relay board going between them. Basically, said board would distribute any >> and all sensor signals so that all MS3s would see all the signals, but the >> injectors and coils would be run by only one MS3. I don't yet know exactly >> what I'm going to do here, but the MS3 (with the expansion board) can run 8 >> injectors. I'm thinking 2 or 3 per rotor, so that if any one injector goes >> down, it keeps running OK. The MS3 does the whole injector staging thing >> well, so that might work. >> > The goal is to have independent systems. You're description takes two or > three computers that have been used in a variety of situations, and thus are > fairly well shaken down. Then you're going to route them all through a one > off relay board. The systems aren't really independent if they all rely on > a single communication path or resource. > > > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html > --0015174bdefa49e7e9049c972d30 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Correct.=A0 As I have it drawn now, there are two relays handling each sign= al in parallel, each driven by it's own transistor.=A0 Everything is re= dundant there.=A0 Next, make all relays a NO type, but have one ECU set be = NC, so that even with no power to said relay board, one of the computer'= ;s signals still gets through.=A0 Is it truly 100% redundant?=A0 Probably w= ouldn't be considered as such...it does have a failsafe mode though.=A0=

Regarding the board itself, just make sure it has more than a screw in = each corner holding it down so that it doesn't vibe itself to pieces.= =A0 Again, not hard.

Connectors are a potential place of concern cer= tainly, but I'm going to use MIL-DTL-38999 locking connectors like thos= e from Amphenol and whatnot.=A0 If they're good enough for the Space Sh= uttle, they're good enough for me.




On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 9:41 AM,= Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com> wrote:
Dustin Lobner wrote:
Sounds good. =A0I'm planning on a pair or maybe even 3 MS3 units with a= relay board going between them. =A0Basically, said board would distribute = any and all sensor signals so that all MS3s would see all the signals, but = the injectors and coils would be run by only one MS3. =A0I don't yet kn= ow exactly what I'm going to do here, but the MS3 (with the expansion b= oard) can run 8 injectors. =A0I'm thinking 2 or 3 per rotor, so that if= any one injector goes down, it keeps running OK. =A0The MS3 does the whole= injector staging thing well, so that might work.
The goal is to have independent systems. =A0You're description takes tw= o or three computers that have been used in a variety of situations, and th= us are fairly well shaken down. =A0Then you're going to route them all = through a one off relay board. =A0The systems aren't really independent= if they all rely on a single communication path or resource.

--0015174bdefa49e7e9049c972d30--