europa-list
[Top] [All Lists]

Re:Wire Sizing

Subject: Re:Wire Sizing
From: Robert L. Nuckolls III <72770.552@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 17:38:11
 /First off, let me say that I always find your posts 
 /to the RV list to be informative, well thought out 
 /and they very clearly explain the topic at hand.  I 
 /have to tell you that I have a special 'Bob Nuckolls' 
 /folder where I keep all of your posts.

   Thank you . . I'll try to remain worthy of your
   attention and trust.

 >>When in doubt as to temperature rise (wire passes though 
 >> a hot section of the airplane or is buried in a bundle 
 >> of wires) pick the next larger AWG number for the circuit.

 /Shouldn't this be a 'smaller' AWG number (larger diameter) 
 /instead of a larger AWG number?

   You are correct of course. I got wrapped around the semantics
   axle there . .  I'm trimming it up for submission to Sport
   Aviation and caught the error too. It has always irritated
   me that both American and British "gages" are reversed . . .
   bigger numbers are smaller products . . . . Of course the
   guy(s) who set that up are all dead now but I's sure like
   to give 'em a piece of my mind!

 /In an aluminum airplane, what is the rule of thumb for 
 /calculating the resistance of the airframe when one 
 /connects the 'ground' of an electrical device to the 
 /airframe.  I know aluminum is not as good a conductor 
 /as copper, but the 'effective' diameter of a fuselage 
 /or a wing is quite large compared to the diameter of  
 /most of the wiring on an airplane.

  A very good question. My experience suggests that using
  the airframe as common ground introduces small and 
  USUALLY insignificant voltage drops for most systems.
  Audio systems are generally the only thing sensitive enough
  to pick up aluminum airframe ground loops . . ya gotta
  INSULATE microphone and headset jacks from airframe where 
  they mount lest you introduce alternator noise into the
  system.

  The biggest problem with using airframe as ground is not
  the gross ability of all that aluminum to carry current.
  I have problems finding places to attach a wire, especially
  in monocoque construction. How do you grab sheet metal
  in a way that will reliably carry 200 amps. Here's a case 
  where a doubler for spreading current out on the skin of 
  a structure is as valid as a doubler for spreading mechanical
  loads! I had one builder try to ground his battery to a 
  longeron behind the seat.  During a cold morning and hard 
  crank, he burned a big hole in longeron and adjacent skin!

  In recent years, the ground systems I've developed for
  composites have been nicely adapted for use in metal 
  ships too. I like to put a big brass bolt through the
  firewall and use it to mount Fast-On tab ground blocks
  for each side. A short jumper braid goes from this bolt
  to crankcase. Battery (-) lead is WIRED to the cabin side
  of bolt.

  In this arrangement, cranking currents do not flow in the
  airframe. All panel mounted equipment grounds to firewall
  where the bolt penetrates it. Only a few items spread out
  on the airplane ground locally . . . landing light, nav
  lights, strobe supply, pitot heat.  Just about every thing
  else goes to the single point on the firewall. Makes for
  a VERY quiet system.

  Rag and tube airplanes benefit too . . . about once a year
  I help some guy de-magnetize parts of his fuselage structure
  so that his compass can be swung . . . keeping large current
  flows out of steel structures is a good idea.  I'm working on
  an STC for total replacement of electrical system in a 
  Tri-Pacer using all of nifty techniques we've developed on
  amateur built ships.  The single point ground system I've just 
  described is part of that design.

 /But on the other hand, priming the aluminum can insulate 
 /two adjoining pieces of the airframe, but on the other 
 /hand, the rivets electrically connect them, but on the 
 /other hand, some rivets have a coating on them (anodizing?,
 /alodine?) that might insulate ...

  RIVET is the keyword here. A properly set rivet swells so
  tightly into drilled holes that no insulating quality
  of any coating is left.  I've never seen a case where
  riveted pieces of aluminum wouldn't pass electrical bond
  tests in spite of primer in holes before rivets were installed.
  But even when the airplane as a whole is pretty well bonded 
  together, there's still the problem of good attachment. 

 /Bottom line, does one ignore the resistance (voltage drop) 
 /on the return path when the return path is the airframe or 
 /is it significant?

  It's major significance is loss in the cranking pathways
  and noises that must exist in the alternator/battery
  charging pathways.  The single point ground system eliminates
  these concerns in all types of construction. Once the starter,
  battery and alternator effects are in control, you can hook
  just about everything else to a local ground with no concerns for
  ground pathway resistance.

 /Any comments on the trick of running a strip of copper foil 
 /up the windshield for a com antenna?  How well does it work?  
 /Any health issues or is the radiated power not significant?

  I've been watching that thread and considering a response. . . 
  . . . and since you asked . . . .

  It's difficult to quantify how well any given antenna arrangement
  works without a lot of testing on an antenna test range with lots
  of expensive equipment. There are plenty of folk who will attest
  to the worth or worthlessness of any given antenna based on
  their personal experiences. These anecdotes are never well
  quantified.  A wet string hung out the window may well be a
  perfectly fine antenna for someone who never talks to anyone outside the
  pattern of his local airport!

  A foil strip on the plexiglass has the potential for being a decent
  radiator.  It's important to remember that the high current
  area of an antenna is where radiation occurs. The first fewinches
  of the antenna's length should route from structure straightaway.
  Once clear of structure, the far end can be folded back, zig-zaged,
  bent off to one side at angle, etc. and have little or no effect on
  antenna performance.

  An antenna analyzer (see MFJ Corporation ads in QST magazine or rent
  mine) should be used to optimize the antenna's length which may or
  may not be the popularized 23" value. Surrounding structure and 
  width of conductor all have the effect of electrically lengthening
  an antenna. The REAL optimum value can be as short as 19 inches or
  so. 

  With respect to health issues, there are millions of folk,including
  yours truly, who have used VHF and UHF handie talkies for over 20 
  years where they're looking right at an antenna inches in front of 
  their face. Both practical experience and watt-density analysis of 
  this scenario suggest that there are no concerns for putting a comm 
  antenna on your canopy.


    Regards,

    Bob . . . 
    AeroElectric Connection
                   ////
                  (o o)
    |                               |
    |  Go ahead, make my day . . .  |
    |   Show me where I'm wrong.    |
    72770.552@compuserve.com
    http://www.aeroelectric.com


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>