X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from email2k3.itlnet.net ([64.19.112.12] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.4) with ESMTP id 986754 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 06 Jun 2005 20:10:32 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.19.112.12; envelope-from=jwvoto@itlnet.net Received: from rav.itlnet.net (unverified [192.168.10.149]) by itlnet.net (Rockliffe SMTPRA 6.1.17) with SMTP id for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2005 19:09:47 -0500 Received: from JWVOTO (unverified [64.19.114.202]) by itlnet.net (Rockliffe SMTPRA 6.1.17) with SMTP id for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2005 19:09:44 -0500 Message-ID: <00d701c56af5$8dabb760$0100007f@JWVOTO> From: "Wendell Voto" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: EC2 dual power feeds Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 19:07:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00C5_01C56ACA.F38D7800" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00C5_01C56ACA.F38D7800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Russell Duffy=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 5:12 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EC2 dual power feeds Finally got around to seeing what it would take to retrofit separate = power feeds to the two controllers. It can be done but obviously it was = not high on my list of concerns. But, if this is bothering any = builders, I can do this rework for a cost of $110.00 + shipping. =20 Hi Tracy, I wasn't trying to guilt you into this, particularly since it's been = so ineffective with the datalogging request :-) =20 So with this mod, would pins 33 and 34 be split internally, so that = one goes to A, and the other to B? =20 How much other circuitry is shared? Obviously, all the control panel = functions have to be shared, so would that be powered by both = controllers, or just one or the other? If the control panel lost power, = would the controller just continue with it's last known settings? =20 I presume there's some switching inside for all the various wires that = are used by the EC-2 for input and output functions. What would power = that circuitry? =20 I'm sure there are factors that I haven't even thought of, which make = this dual power feed a can of worms. In my post, I really wasn't = picking on the EC-2, but rather saying that I agreed it was probably as = good as it can get in one unit. If you don't think the dual power feed = adds significantly to the safety of the unit, then I'm going to say = that's good enough for me. =20 I've actually thought of using two MicroTech controllers, but haven't = been able to figure out exactly how you'd make the switch between the = two. At some point, there has to be something common between the two, = even if it's the switching circuitry to chose one or the other. Best = I've been able to come up with was to mount the boxes in reach, and then = physically swap the main cable if you need to switch controller. = Clearly, that would suck in a crisis :-) Thanks very much for the offer to make this mod. Depending on the = answer to some of the above, I'll decide if it will ease my mind any. =20 Cheers, Rusty (trying to remember if I actually ran two wires to the = connector) =20 In order to have truly redundant EC2s would require a 3rd CPU to = monitor the two controllers and automatically switch the failed unit = off. Then what is going to monitor the 3rd computer? Wendell ------=_NextPart_000_00C5_01C56ACA.F38D7800 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Russell=20 Duffy
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 = 5:12 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EC2 = dual power=20 feeds

Finally = got around to=20 seeing what it would take to retrofit separate power feeds to the = two=20 controllers.  It can be done but obviously it was not high on my = list of=20 concerns.   But, if this is bothering any builders, I can do = this=20 rework for a cost of $110.00 + shipping.   
 
Hi=20 Tracy,
 
I wasn't trying = to guilt you=20 into this, particularly since it's been so ineffective with = the=20 datalogging request :-)   =
 
So with this mod, = would pins 33=20 and 34 be split internally, so that one goes to A, = and the=20 other to B?  
 
How much other circuitry is shared?  = Obviously,=20 all the control panel functions have to be shared, so would = that be=20 powered by both controllers, or just one or the other?  = If the=20 control panel lost power, would the controller just continue with = it's=20 last known settings?  
 
I presume there's some switching inside for = all the=20 various wires that are used by the EC-2 for input and output=20 functions.  What would power that=20 circuitry?  
 
I'm sure there are factors that I = haven't even=20 thought of, which make this dual power feed a can of = worms.  In=20 my post, I really wasn't picking on the EC-2, but rather saying that I = agreed=20 it was probably as good as it can get in one unit.   If = you=20 don't think the dual power feed adds significantly to=20 the safety of the unit, then I'm going to say that's = good=20 enough for me. 
 
I've actually thought of using two = MicroTech=20 controllers, but haven't been able to figure out exactly how you'd = make the=20 switch between the two.  At some point, there has to be something = common=20 between the two, even if it's the switching circuitry to chose one = or the=20 other.  Best I've been able to come up with was to mount the=20 boxes in reach, and then physically swap the main cable = if you=20 need to switch controller.  Clearly, that would suck in a = crisis=20  :-)
 
Thanks very much for the offer to make this = mod.  Depending on the answer to some of the above, I'll decide = if it=20 will ease my mind any.  
 
Cheers,
Rusty (trying to remember if I actually ran = two wires=20 to the connector)   
=
 
In order to have truly redundant EC2s would = require a=20 3rd CPU to monitor the two controllers and = automatically switch the failed unit off.  Then what is going to = monitor=20 the 3rd computer?
Wendell
------=_NextPart_000_00C5_01C56ACA.F38D7800--