X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from mail-yx0-f180.google.com ([209.85.213.180] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.1) with ESMTPS id 5126772 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 09:42:29 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.213.180; envelope-from=rwstracy@gmail.com Received: by yxm34 with SMTP id 34so5695746yxm.25 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 06:41:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:references:from:content-type:x-mailer:in-reply-to :message-id:date:to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=aY1eenMtgPjNFjW+OKvODrRUvyxBgDvAlI/RdE5mVn4=; b=JoecCfP7CsQmiIJd0NzBx3BldliCkz5QgwYpKrvj+HVPnh5K8SkypY7zoTE9vb8GxT BPq9UjldGtGtKprmY0iEtz7PEpmws30+0E61Iazq/o77zr5OIHoAHYPB9y7X/VArpGxG IJhiu+S7uovhpdiaaQqdRZ6Sdat1RyigFI0K4= Received: by 10.101.16.6 with SMTP id t6mr2310897ani.141.1316180514313; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 06:41:54 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from [75.220.8.175] (175.sub-75-220-8.myvzw.com [75.220.8.175]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v5sm23435390anc.6.2011.09.16.06.41.51 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 16 Sep 2011 06:41:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: The good news and the bad news...... References: From: Tracy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-20-718379429 X-Mailer: iPad Mail (8F191) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 07:41:49 -0600 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 8F191) --Apple-Mail-20-718379429 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 It would if the amplitude of the CAS signal was not decreased too much. It= would also require that the EC3 have the backup sensor flag set during prog= ramming. Currently it is not set so I would have to reprogram the chips. = No big deal to do that though... Tracy Sent from my iPad On Sep 15, 2011, at 4:00 PM, Chad Robinson wrot= e: > My vision here was to have CAS1 on ECU1 and 2 on 2. So the standard" flip t= o backup on any trouble" would cover this too. If that's possible to wire- T= racy? >=20 > On Sep 15, 2011 5:31 PM, "Tom Walter" wrote: > > Worth a try! > >=20 > > With a gear running in north south orientation, on sensor facing west, t= he other facing east.... Would be simple to rig up > > a test fixture and try it. > >=20 > > Someone asked about installing the two sensors shoulder to shoulder. Wi= th a 8" wheel, a 5 degree offset is about 0.35", which is pretty tight spac= ing. If you went 10 degrees, it would work for that limp home mode functio= n (retarded timing). > >=20 > > A simple two rotor solution, is independent ECU systems for front and re= ar rotors. The two sensors being 180 degrees apart to match rotor faces. > >=20 > > For the Bosch Systems, we had "limp home" built into ignition chip, with= backup from the camshaft sensor. If CAS failed, then cam sensor could be u= se for batch firing fuel injectors, and simple ignition spark. I've told t= he story of having the wrong XTAL filter caps on the module. The Main CPU (= 6805) oscillator didn't start, so the engine went into Limp Home mode... Col= d Weather Emissions Testing facility. I wonder if anyone at Fiat still reme= mbers that one (circa 1985). 25 years later I can chuckle about that one! L= jetronic3.1 was a fun project (hybrid on the top of the airflow meter). =20 > >=20 > >=20 > > Tom > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > ________________________________ > > From: "CozyGirrrl@aol.com" > > To: Rotary motors in aircraft > > Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 4:14 PM > > Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: The good news and the bad news...... > >=20 > >=20 > > Not side by side- > > In the placement described we are talking about them facing each other w= ith=20 > > a gap between the faces of 0.100~0.125 and the wheel face between them l= ike an=20 > > interrupter between optical sense and receive.=20 > > =20 > > Chrissi &=20 > > Randi > > www.CozyGirrrl.com > > CG=20 > > Products, Custom Aircraft Hardware > > Chairwomen, Sun-N-Fun Engine Workshop > >=20 > > =20 > > In a message dated 9/15/2011 4:01:36 P.M. Central Daylight Time,=20 > > alwick@juno.com writes: > > >>=20 > >>Highly unlikely. I have friends who measure integrity of signal with osc= illoscope. Shielded device with highly directional sensitivity. Though they'= ve never measured two side by side. Good theory, though.=20 > >>=20 > >>-al wick > >>----- Original Message -----=20 > >>>From: wrjjrs@aol.com=20 > >>>To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 > >>>Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 12:18 PM > >>>Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: The good news and the bad news...... > >>> > >>> > >>>There is nothing wrong with that idea. The only concern is that the two= sensors may have interference with each other. The idea is to put another t= oothed wheel rotated say a random 33.715 degrees relative to the first wheel= . Now you place the second sensor rotated the same 33.7....etc degrees. So n= ow when you switch sensors the timing is the same. Also the two sensors don'= t interfere with each other. > >>>Bill=20 > > Jepson > >>> > >>>Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless > >>> > >>>-----Original=20 > > message----- > >>> > >>>From: Chad Robinson > >>>>To: Rotary motors in aircraft > >>>>Sent: Thu, Sep 15, 2011 17:45:46 GMT+00:00 > >>>>Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: The good news and the bad news...... > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>On 9/15/2011 1:21 PM, Tracy wrote:=20 > >>>>The CAS references the crank, not the rotor. =C3=82 Is that. It? > >>>>>I'm still confused about something myself. Everybody keeps talking ab= out adding another CAS as requiring it to be "in a different position", with= an offset. My 3rd-gen CAS sits on a small bracket just behind the toothed w= heel on the front shaft. Past that toothed wheel there's a healthy (from mem= ory: 1.5"?) gap from there to the back of the alternator pulley. > >>>> > >>>>What's to stop me from making a=20 > > bracket and putting a second CAS in that gap, facing backward? It would b= e=20 > > in exactly the same position as the current CAS, just facing backward.=20= > > Would they interfere with one another? If so, as an alternative, what=20= > > about using a second toothed wheel either on top of the first and before= =20 > > the alternator pulley, or if side loads were a concern, on the very end o= f=20 > > the shaft past the=20 > > pulley? > >>>> > >>>> --Apple-Mail-20-718379429 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
It would if the amplitude of the CAS si= gnal was not decreased too much.   It would also require that the EC3 h= ave the backup sensor flag set during programming.   Currently it is no= t set so I would have to reprogram the chips.   No big deal to do that t= hough...

Tracy

Sent from my iPad
<= br>On Sep 15, 2011, at 4:00 PM, Chad Robinson <crobinson@medialantern.com> wrote:

<= div>

My vision here was to have CAS1 o= n ECU1 and 2 on 2. So the standard" flip to backup on any trouble" would cov= er this too. If that's possible to wire-  Tracy?

On Sep 15, 2011 5:31 PM, "Tom Walter" <roundrocktom@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Wort= h a try!
>
> With a gear running in north south orientation, on= sensor facing west, the other facing east....  Would be simple to rig u= p
> a test fixture and try it.
>
> Someone asked about install= ing the two sensors shoulder to shoulder.  With a 8" wheel,  a 5 d= egree offset is about 0.35", which is pretty tight spacing.   If y= ou went 10 degrees, it would work for that limp home mode function (retarded= timing).
>
> A simple two rotor solution, is independent ECU systems for fr= ont and rear rotors. The two sensors being 180 degrees apart to match rotor f= aces.
>
> For the Bosch Systems, we had "limp home" built into i= gnition chip, with backup from the camshaft sensor.  If CAS failed, the= n cam sensor could be use for batch firing fuel injectors, and simple igniti= on spark.    I've told the story of having the wrong XTAL fil= ter caps on the module.   The Main CPU (6805) oscillator didn't st= art, so the engine went into Limp Home mode... Cold Weather Emissions Testin= g facility.  I wonder if anyone at Fiat still remembers that one (circa= 1985).  25 years later I can chuckle about that one!  Ljetronic3.= 1 was a fun project (hybrid on the top of the airflow meter). 
>
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> ______________= __________________
> From: "CozyGirrrl@aol.com" <CozyGirrrl= @aol.com>
> To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancairon= line.net>
> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 4:14 PM
&= gt; Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: The good news and the bad news......
>
>
> Not side by side-
> In the placement described w= e are talking about them facing each other with
> a gap between the f= aces of 0.100~0.125 and the wheel face between them like an
> interru= pter between optical sense and receive.
>  
> Chrissi &
> Randi
> www.CozyGirrrl.com<= /a>
> CG
> Products, Custom Aircraft Hardware
> Chair= women, Sun-N-Fun Engine Workshop
>
>  
> In a message dated 9/15/2011 4:01:36 P.M. Central Daylig= ht Time,
> alwick@juno.com writes:
> <concern is that the t= wo sensors may have interference with each other.
>> 
>>Highly unlikely. I have friends who measure integr= ity of signal with oscilloscope. Shielded device with highly directional se= nsitivity. Though they've never measured two side by side. Good theory, tho= ugh.
>> 
>>-al wick
>>----- Original Message ----- <= br>>>>From: wrjjrs@aol.com
>>>To: Rotary motors in air= craft
>>>Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 12:18 PM
>>>Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: The good news and the bad news......>>>
>>>
>>>There is nothing wrong with t= hat idea. The only concern is that the two sensors may have interference wi= th each other. The idea is to put another toothed wheel rotated say a rando= m 33.715 degrees relative to the first wheel. Now you place the second sens= or rotated the same 33.7....etc degrees. So now when you switch sensors the= timing is the same. Also the two sensors don't interfere with each other.<= br> >>>Bill
> Jepson
>>>
>>>Connecte= d by DROID on Verizon Wireless
>>>
>>>-----Original=
> message-----
>>>
>>>From: Chad Robinson &= lt;crobinson@medialantern.com>
>>>>To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrota= ry@lancaironline.net>
>>>>Sent: Thu, Sep 15, 2011= 17:45:46 GMT+00:00
>>>>Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: The good new= s and the bad news......
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On 9/15/2011 1:21 PM= , Tracy wrote:
>>>>The CAS references the crank, not the ro= tor. =C3=82  Is that. It?
>>>>>I'm still confused ab= out something myself. Everybody keeps talking about adding another CAS as r= equiring it to be "in a different position", with an offset. My 3rd-gen CAS= sits on a small bracket just behind the toothed wheel on the front shaft. P= ast that toothed wheel there's a healthy (from memory: 1.5"?) gap from ther= e to the back of the alternator pulley.
>>>>
>>>>What's to stop me from making a
>= bracket and putting a second CAS in that gap, facing backward? It wou= ld be
> in exactly the same position as the current CAS, just f= acing backward.
> Would they interfere with one another? If so, as an alternative, w= hat
> about using a second toothed wheel either on top of the f= irst and before
> the alternator pulley, or if side loads were a= concern, on the very end of
> the shaft past the
> pulley?
>>>>
>&g= t;>>
= --Apple-Mail-20-718379429--