X-Junk-Score: 0 [] X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 [] X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=cpHlbGwi c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=xivke4fp8nJ/KrVwOQ8OBQ==:117 a=3JhidrIBZZsA:10 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=DPcQqcAIAAAA:8 a=_6GpL_ENAAAA:8 a=e-XYOwXJeiBOVuRH640A:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=nyTWUAQCpSsA:10 a=7Qvf_UgvWh4A:10 a=A6OciqifySZ1QHl1QmsA:9 a=4TW6_SHcTH0SDDso:21 a=Urk15JJjZg1Xo0ryW_k8:22 a=8T8z6dguDQsxr2U_3ga_:22 From: "Andrew Martin andrew@martinag.com.au" Received: from mail-qt1-f176.google.com ([209.85.160.176] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.2.10) with ESMTPS id 12099328 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 18:37:45 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.160.176; envelope-from=andrew@martinag.com.au Received: by mail-qt1-f176.google.com with SMTP id e5so24723307qtr.12 for ; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 15:37:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=martinag-com-au.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=kh3KjKoyasfyAJwPADAxCTki8JwHRJCxnHZEnwqxEJU=; b=s9VEXr6WAsk3yKl8wRTLXpeh6ety6G4tl11IcQB9OzopxJsSymRJ2uicixHu9bCWvC Y0XuN3opt2EU+wt0lHNEnpbYqteUj5CGOi6qH4AMMTz3LkNBYtbRGpsxm6QxIcp43VjT XSSpWvl5Cj0m6YhbXoO8s5SUZY96udbqCye4YRye7LwWAx98pYX3zp1tT6sxEBPrDgpU 97+6gqM3E2xJ5UZ7GUAfGdqlOyAd9HYs1YUNVBf1lSHtK1de3/eF5O9L4pC5vdFJAzxi +vYAGt5g2J7VO/GR5TVXgkNik15L7E8JC8gKnTz4Xn0GQ2fTbmeqSfGnZ1r0PzESBovj rUNg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=kh3KjKoyasfyAJwPADAxCTki8JwHRJCxnHZEnwqxEJU=; b=HakFa76q/Wo0R/RmF/l0tBeilBozwIcLmbfhhtT5eF82HnJ/yX3Wzzh3feot+KtE2q bIiY0f2J12b1CI54UNfjZPp+GhULPhe31PE3jC6FyrHL/zKkHOtqL579ZDBmW8qwHDRa Oql0E/1I61jcVf2IBwnMfW6iOtujYj/5CJEiS3A3RK28/RgqemDtsmvjzhLX19m9iM0S 53eNXbucSuxHhT6oHK4IEFdMLeOnmiFtfDwT34Excyv3K2XGCw82PjexGT7QAUywksRJ NRp8tT/7HWXOVzL0+o0mISi08YGnghy3/T+eYEch13fE0YA+E+weN44PLWE0tn86lQVB KjTA== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukeCK/iX1N5b4Leb9q2hlTZmlEXe/q78TfxjUzPbz+b8uzt1clvq q2+58OI2yqKDmOVmUldmxATlr+72TQV6wc7y8JDpX58= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN7x7TgVE1/0St5ANT2JDZxktReGls7Co/H0UfdnYsiurB+8OBYeh3xVvwKxgSxqXAFvg7FH2OouHcigoSezMtQ= X-Received: by 2002:aed:2dc5:: with SMTP id i63mr22548021qtd.173.1547422648398; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 15:37:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 07:37:15 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: CofA To: Rotary motors in aircraft Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004688c4057f5f6942" --0000000000004688c4057f5f6942 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Steve The AP=E2=80=99s job is only to ensure you have same weight of approved pap= erwork as your MTOW. They cannot refuse you a CoA if the paperwork is correct, but they can limit the area of your phase 1 to a rediculously small area if they think your a risk to others. Bill Keenher is my AP and I found him extremly helpful as he did not suggest changes as part of his AP role, but rather as a fellow builder & aviator that has seen enough to know whats safe & works. So I think it prudent you listen but ultimately its up to you to build the plane your happy with. I only have 1 battey & 1 alternator, but battery is sized to provide more time on the essential buss than I have time in fuel, so an alternator failure should not cause me too much concern. Alternator is an 80 amp from a subaru, modified to external regulation and I use a B&C linear regulator which has the overvoltage protection and gives complete control over alternator operation. The reasoning behind using a 80 amp alternater was not that I required so much power but that the larger alternators have much better bearings, and according to my sparkie, bearings seem to be the most popular failure mode, the rpm of the rotary is really going to punish a small alternators bearings unless it is really geared down, then that could punish the windings if power demand is close to alternator rating. Andrew On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 at 12:37 am, Charlie England ceengland7@gmail.com < flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote: > On 1/13/2019 9:23 AM, Charlie England ceengland7@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 9:00 AM Stephen Izett stephen.izett@gmail.com < > flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote: > >> Hi there people >> >> We are in the process of getting the Certificate of Airworthiness for ou= r >> Glasair powered by Renesis 4 port. >> >> Our AP is questioning the electrical system and wondering if we should >> have redundant supplies in case of electrical system failure. >> Can any of you make comments on risk or preferred systems. >> >> Our setup has one automotive 40amp alternator and two HC20 (PC680 >> equivalent) paralleled (two batteries are used due to physical location) >> and mounted in tail for W&B and to keep cool. >> >> My planning was: >> 1. Keep battery cool >> 2. Replace every two years >> 3. Battery Failure modes: >> Open circuit cell - Alternator and second battery do the job (No >> indication that one battery has failed) >> Short Circuit cell - Battery voltage drops and overcharges ?? >> 4. Alternator failure modes: >> Open Circuit - Low current and Low voltage alarm with 30min >> electrical reserve capacity >> Short Circuit - Charge circuit fuse blows then same as open >> circuit >> >> I understood that a shorted cell was very low risk in AGM=E2=80=99s if n= ot >> overheated. >> I thought creating redundancy may introduce other failure modes. >> >> Appreciate any feedback. >> Steve >> >> Hi Steve, > > Are you signed up for the Matronics Aeroelectric List, and do you have a > copy of the Aeroelectric Connection book? If not, then stop, do not pass > go, and do both. Those issues are pretty well hashed out there. > > Now to specifics. Have you done a load analysis for your plane? If not, > you might be a bit surprised at how much current can get sucked up by > modern homebuilts, especially running automotive style injection. FWIW, > 55-60 amp alternators are available for very little money (at least here = in > the USA) and likely will weigh no more than your 40A model. The higher > output models will be running a lot farther from their max output (think > heat). > > Failure modes: I'd agree that properly maintained, the battery is one of > the least likely things to have a catastrophic failure. Alternators, not = so > much, though modern ones are pretty tough. You left out one failure mode: > overvoltage due to regulator failure. That is the one that presents the > biggest risk, because it can take out everything electrical in the a/c. > There are simple protections for it, which result in the same plan B as > your other failure modes: get on the ground within 30 minutes. Some have > tested battery life in VFR a/c using Tracy's engine controller & minimal > airframe electrical loads, & saw around 35-40 minutes life with a PC-680 > size SLA battery. > > More later; time for breakfast. > > Charlie > > Ok, refueled. > > The 'simple protections' mentioned earlier are an overvoltage detection > module that monitors bus voltage and if it gets too high, has the power t= o > shut down the alternator. B&C Specialty used to sell a little 'crowbar' > module that did this job. It's fairly simple to fabricate your own, or yo= u > can buy something 'off the shelf' that can work in a similar manner. ex: > https://www.tomtop.com/p-e1021.html > > Here in the USA, inspectors have accepted single alt, single battery, but > most don't even question it; it's 'experimental'. But if you accept the > premise that odds of multiple failures in a single flight *extremely* > unlikely, and battery failures are almost always 'graceful' (meaning > gradual and detectable), then the battery becomes the backup for the > alternator. It's our job to decide how long we need that backup to last i= n > operation, and to do our due diligence in maintaining the battery in good > condition. That does mean doing capacity testing, because battery power a= nd > battery capacity are not the same thing. A very unhealthy battery can sta= rt > an engine, but might have very reduced capacity to keep the electronics > alive for the expected time. In my mind, the biggest risk is the battery= 's > variable capacity as it ages. > > I chose to add a 2nd identical alternator (~10 lb weight penalty), and my > wiring architecture has my engine functions on one bus and the rest of th= e > plane on a separate bus. Either bus can feed the other if there's a power > feed issue to a bus (bad switch or contactor), and the engine will contin= ue > to run if the master must be turned off ('smoke in the cockpit' scenario)= . > > Charlie > > > Virus-free= . > www.avast.com > > <#m_-4106253351756553833_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> > --=20 Regards Andrew Martin Martin Ag --0000000000004688c4057f5f6942 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Steve
The AP=E2=80= =99s job is only to ensure you have same weight of approved paperwork as yo= ur MTOW. They cannot refuse you a CoA if the paperwork is correct, but they= can limit the area of your phase 1 to a rediculously small area if they th= ink your a risk to =C2=A0others.

Bill Keenher is my AP and I found him extremly helpful as he did = not suggest changes as part of his AP role, but rather as a fellow builder = & aviator that has seen enough to know whats safe & works. So I thi= nk it prudent you listen but ultimately its up to you to build the plane yo= ur happy with.

I only ha= ve 1 battey & 1 alternator, but battery is sized to provide more time o= n the essential buss than I have time in fuel, so an alternator failure sho= uld not cause me too much concern. Alternator is an 80 amp from a subaru, m= odified to external regulation and I use a B&C linear regulator which h= as the overvoltage protection and gives complete control over alternator op= eration.

The reasoning b= ehind using a 80 amp alternater was not that I required so much power but t= hat the larger alternators have much better bearings, and according to my s= parkie, bearings seem to be the most popular failure mode, the rpm of the r= otary is really going to punish a small alternators bearings unless it is r= eally geared down, then that could punish the windings if power demand is c= lose to alternator rating.

Andrew

On Mon,= 14 Jan 2019 at 12:37 am, Charlie England ceengland7@gmail.com <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
On 1/13/2019 9:23 = AM, Charlie England ceengland7@gmail.com wrot= e:
=20


On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 9:00 AM Stephen Izett stephen.izett@gm= ail.com <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:
Hi there people=

We are in the process of getting the Certificate of Airworthiness for our Glasair powered by Renesis 4 port.

Our AP is questioning the electrical system and wondering if we should have redundant supplies in case of electrical system failure.
Can any of you make comments on risk or preferred systems.

Our setup has one automotive 40amp alternator and two HC20 (PC680 equivalent) paralleled (two batteries are used due to physical location) and mounted in tail for W&B and to keep cool.

My planning was:
1. Keep battery cool
2. Replace every two years
3. Battery Failure modes:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Open circuit cell - Alternator and = second battery do the job (No indication that one battery has failed)
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Short Circuit cell - Battery voltag= e drops and overcharges ??
4. Alternator failure modes:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Open Circuit - Low current and Low = voltage alarm with 30min electrical reserve capacity
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Short Circuit - Charge circuit fuse= blows then same as open circuit

I understood that a shorted cell was very low risk in AGM=E2=80= =99s if not overheated.
I thought creating redundancy may introduce other failure modes.

Appreciate any feedback.
Steve

Hi Steve,

Are you signed up for the Matronics Aeroelectric List, and do you have a copy of the Aeroelectric Connection book? If not, then stop, do not pass go, and do both. Those issues are pretty well hashed out there.

Now to specifics. Have you done a load analysis for your plane? If not, you might be a bit surprised at how much current can get sucked up by modern homebuilts, especially running automotive style injection. FWIW, 55-60 amp alternators are available for very little money (at least here in the USA) and likely will weigh no more than your 40A model. The higher output models will be running a lot farther from their max output (think heat).

Fail= ure modes: I'd agree that properly maintained, the battery is one of the least likely things to have a catastrophic failure. Alternators, not so much, though modern ones are pretty tough. You left out one failure mode: overvoltage due to regulator failure. That is the one that presents the biggest risk, because it can take out everything electrical in the a/c. There are simple protections for it, which result in the same plan B as your other failure modes: get on the ground within 30 minutes. Some have tested battery life in VFR a/c using Tracy's engine controller & minimal airframe electrical loads, & saw around 35-40 minutes life with a PC-680 size SLA battery.

More later; time for breakfast.

Char= lie

Ok, refueled.

The 'simple protections' mentioned earlier are an overvoltage detection module that monitors bus voltage and if it gets too high, has the power to shut down the alternator. B&C Specialty used to sell a little 'crowbar' module that did this job. It's fair= ly simple to fabricate your own, or you can buy something 'off the shelf'= that can work in a similar manner. ex:
https://www.tomtop.com/p-e= 1021.html

Here in the USA, inspectors have accepted single alt, single battery, but most don't even question it; it's 'experimenta= l'. But if you accept the premise that odds of multiple failures in a single flight *extremely* unlikely, and battery failures are almost always 'graceful' (meaning gradual and detectable), then the battery becomes the backup for the alternator. It's our job to decide how long we need that backup to last in operation, and to do our due diligence in maintaining the battery in good condition. That does mean doing capacity testing, because battery power and battery capacity are not the same thing. A very unhealthy battery can start an engine, but might have very reduced capacity to keep the electronics alive for the expected time. In my mind,=C2=A0 the biggest risk is the battery's variable capacity as it ages.

I chose to add a 2nd identical alternator (~10 lb weight penalty), and my wiring architecture has my engine functions on one bus and the rest of the plane on a separate bus. Either bus can feed the other if there's a power feed issue to a bus (bad switch or contactor), and the engine will continue to run if the master must be turned off ('smoke in the cockpit' scenario).

Charlie
3D"" Virus-free. www.avast.com
--
Regards Andrew Martin Martin Ag
--0000000000004688c4057f5f6942--