X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from ms-smtp-04.southeast.rr.com ([24.25.9.103] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.10) with ESMTP id 2156186 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:55:33 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.103; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from edward2 (cpe-024-074-103-061.carolina.res.rr.com [24.74.103.61]) by ms-smtp-04.southeast.rr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id l63IrxT6017703 for ; Tue, 3 Jul 2007 14:53:59 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <000901c7bda3$858c93d0$2402a8c0@edward2> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: FW: Phase 1 completion Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 14:54:01 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01C7BD81.FE250BA0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C7BD81.FE250BA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sometimes winning the "prize" is not all that desirable. Well, that's = the only thing I can think of unique to controller A other than its = pressure transducer. I might expect a pressure transducer case leak - = but, with their outputs the same at different altitudes, that sort of = rules that out.=20 The same approx. output indicates to me that the pressure transducers = appear to be doing identical functions with changing altitude/ambient = pressure. So I would normally say the problem has to be down stream of = the pressure transducer output, but I'm sure Tracy has chased that = rabbit. It is a puzzle If the pressure transducer were causing the problem (and nothing else), = its hard to work up a scenario that fits the symptoms. If there output = varied with altitude then clearly it would indicate a bad transducer - = but, their output tracks with each other. If their outputs are nearly = the same and controller B runs find with that output from its transducer = then why not A. Again, it leads me to suspect something down stream of = the transducer. =20 But, hopefully a new transducer will cure the problem - be interesting = to find out what the problem was. Ed ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C7BD81.FE250BA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sometimes winning the "prize" is not all that=20 desirable.  Well, that's the only  thing I can think of unique = to=20 controller A other than its pressure transducer. I might expect a = pressure=20 transducer case leak - but, with their outputs the same at different = altitudes,=20 that sort of rules that out. 
 
 The same approx. output indicates to me = that the=20 pressure transducers appear to be doing identical functions with = changing=20 altitude/ambient pressure.  So I would normally say the problem has = to be=20 down stream of the pressure transducer output, but I'm sure Tracy has = chased=20 that rabbit.  It is a puzzle
 
 If the pressure transducer were causing = the problem=20 (and nothing else), its hard to work up a scenario that fits the = symptoms. =20 If there output varied with altitude then clearly it would indicate a = bad=20 transducer - but, their output tracks with each other.  If their = outputs=20 are nearly the same and controller B runs find with that output from its = transducer then why not A.  Again, it leads me to suspect something = down=20 stream of the transducer. 
 
But, hopefully a new transducer will cure the = problem - be=20 interesting to find out what the problem was.
 
Ed
 
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C7BD81.FE250BA0--