Matronics Email Lists Forum Index Matronics Email Lists
BBS Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
 
 Get Email Distribution Too!Get Email Distribution Too!    FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Standby batteries vs. alternators

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Aug 30, 2018 11:36 am    Post subject: Standby batteries vs. alternators Reply with quote

At 01:55 PM 8/30/2018, you wrote:
Quote:
Bob

The man behind the IBBS and all other TcwTech products is an RV-10 builder, so perhaps he will chime in.

Carlos

Understand. I've studied the patents and
product brochures. Aside from brown-out
protection, I'm still not seeing a cost/
benefit ratio in favor of 'standby' batteries
of this or any flavor.

They have a periodic maintenance burden that
lasts the lifetime of the airplane and
costs money to replace/refurbish when cells
reach end of life. Their energy content
is limited.

Z-13/8 offers a standby power source that
has no endurance limit. Low parts count.
No periodic maintenance. Unlike batteries
with a service life, the PM alternator should
run lifetime of the airplane. Weighs
less than a battery capable of supporting
8A of endurance load for three hours.




Bob . . .


- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Aug 30, 2018 2:52 pm    Post subject: Standby batteries vs. alternators Reply with quote

I may be able to add something here.† I have a straight by the book Z-14 (2 Batts, 2 Alts) in my RV10 along with (3) GRT HX EFIS units.† I've been flying it for 7 years and 1,050 hours.††† Given that the Z-14 is probably overkill† for such a ship (Bob, I think you've referred to it as 'everything including the kitchen sink'), it should be no surprise that it seems bullet proof to me.† But I go into IFR night missions with a great deal of confidence in my 2-mag fired IO-540 and a dual buss electrical system.† I fly the out islands of the Bahamas confident that I can get back or at least to a repair shop with any sort of single electrical failure.† I like it a lot.

However, some specific details of my RV-10 configuration and some evolving characteristics of the GRT HX EFISs have presented me with some challenges that have made the Z-14 particularly valuable.† And while I don't have an IBBS, I would suggest that TCW's IPS (Intelligent Power Stabilizer) may have some value in a GRT EFIS installation.

Why the IPS?† The GRTs do not incorporate any kind of power on/off switch and I chose not to add any.† Every and all instruments are displayed on any of the (3) units so it is reasonable to think of the plane as not operational unless they are lit up.† The (3) I have installed represent a significant (unmeasured) load and they are susceptible to brown-outs (aka re-boots or IPLs)† during engine start with the (2) Odyssey 680s I have mounted behind the baggage compartment.† The IPS has completely eliminated brown-outs with the added benefit that it is not a 3rd battery requiring ongoing maintenance.† I would recommend this over the IBBS for an RV10 with multiple GRTs suffering from brown-outs.† More specifically I think one big battery, 2 alternators and an IPS may make a lot of sense for an RV10 with multiple GRTs.

Some background on my RV10 configuration:
  • I killed a couple of Odyssey 680 batteries during the first couple of years.† The reason was 2-fold; 1) I was charging the batteries at too low a voltage (<14volts) and 2) the GRTs put a small load from an internal clock on one battery when powered off.† A contributing factor included the inaccessible location of my B&C regulators discouraged me from adjusting the charging voltage.† Later the internal clock was disconnected and replaced by a GPS clock signal.† I finally got to the regulators with a custom built screwdriver and started charging the batts at max charging voltage - 14.7 volts (read the spec sheet - it's accurate).
  • Engine starts with both batteries tended to cause GRT re-boots.† Early on, it seems that interrupted IPLs corrupted 2 of my GRT units according to the factory.† It appears that they made some changes to prevent the corruption and this problem has not reoccurred in the last 5 years.† These re-boots reduced me to watching the oil pressure warning ligh during starts.† Since I had the starter and the GRTs on different buses, I began to do single battery starts but they always felt marginal at best.† An underlying problem turned out to be the lightweight starter that was the default unit for RV10 IO-540s thru Vans.† I finally replaced the starter with the standard model and starts are now consistently solid even though the engine turns over more slowly.
  • The enhanced kitchen sink (EKS) system proved it's worth a couple of weeks ago departing out of Farmingdale Republic Airport in Long Island.† I got the expected 5 waypoint/2 airway clearance for departure to the west.† I dutifully loaded the whole thing into Foreflight for decoding the airway waypoints.† Then loaded the flight plan into the Garmin 430.† Normally I would have put the first few points in confident that things would change as the flight progressed but conditions encouraged me to keep the workload aloft to a minimum.† By the time I got it all set up and taxiid out, a storm cell formed out of the blue directly overhead causing me to go back to the tie down to wait it out.†

    Here's where the 2 batts come in handy.† I confidently left the G430 and the (3) GRT EFISs lit up though I dimmed the screens for energy conservation.† Close to an hour later I returned, cross fed the 2 buses,† started up and asked for an update on my clearance.† "If you still have the old one, use it, cleared to runway xx".† It didn't matter much, I was held for release for over 20 minutes until I finally requested a VFR departure with the intent to pickup my IFR in the air.† Not so coincidentally I was cleared for the original plan before 200' feet off the ground.† NYC controllers respond best to a beep of the horn.
Bill "Considering installation of† a Z.30-06 for the deer population on our runway" Watson


On 8/30/2018 3:36 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:

Quote:
At 01:55 PM 8/30/2018, you wrote:
Quote:
Bob

The man behind the IBBS and all other TcwTech products is an RV-10 builder, so perhaps he will chime in.

Carlos†

† Understand. I've studied the patents and
† product brochures. Aside from brown-out
† protection, I'm still not seeing a cost/
† benefit ratio in favor of 'standby' batteries
† of this or any flavor.

† They have a periodic maintenance burden that
† lasts the lifetime of the airplane and
† costs money to replace/refurbish when cells
† reach end of life. Their energy content
† is limited.

† Z-13/8 offers a standby power source that
† has no endurance limit. Low parts count.
† No periodic maintenance. Unlike batteries
† with a service life, the PM alternator should
† run lifetime of the airplane. Weighs
† less than a battery capable of supporting
† 8A of endurance load for three hours.




† Bob . . .



This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com [url=#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2] [/url]


- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
rnewman(at)tcwtech.com
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2018 1:17 am    Post subject: Standby batteries vs. alternators Reply with quote

The IBBS system provides brownout protection during engine starting, which with all efis systems today is highly desirable. Additionally, the ibbs system provides a redundant path of power to the connected load. The major efis systems these days all provide dual inputs for power. One is provided via the main ships power source, the other from a second source, such as our ibbs unit. In the event of any failure of the primary source, the ibbs will take over and continue to power the efis. The ibbs system also includes a low voltage warning indicator function that may be used to annunciate a lv condition of the main bus. Additionally , the IBBS system includes over voltage protection devices to help protect the connected equipment from high voltage transients.

Many of our customers tell us they enjoy the benefit of being able to get in their plane and just turn on the ibbs system only to do flight planing and pre-flight inspection without yet having to turn on the ships main battery. † Then, when finally ready to go, they engage the main contractor and fire up the engine.
Lastly, the Ibbs family includes experimental models and certified models. All of which have enjoyed the rigor of testing to DO-160 and DO-311
and DO-347.
One of the great advantage of experimental aircraft is that you get to decide for yourself how to architect your electrical system. You can roll your own in every way or purchase pre engineered solutions. There’s no wrong answer.


Bob NewmanTCW Technologies, LLC
610-928-3420
On Aug 30, 2018, at 20:36, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com (nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com)> wrote:
Quote:
At 01:55 PM 8/30/2018, you wrote:
Quote:
Bob

The man behind the IBBS and all other TcwTech products is an RV-10 builder, so perhaps he will chime in.

Carlos

Understand. I've studied the patents and
product brochures. Aside from brown-out
protection, I'm still not seeing a cost/
benefit ratio in favor of 'standby' batteries
of this or any flavor.

They have a periodic maintenance burden that
lasts the lifetime of the airplane and
costs money to replace/refurbish when cells
reach end of life. Their energy content
is limited.

Z-13/8 offers a standby power source that
has no endurance limit. Low parts count.
No periodic maintenance. Unlike batteries
with a service life, the PM alternator should
run lifetime of the airplane. Weighs
less than a battery capable of supporting
8A of endurance load for three hours.




Bob . . .


- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group