Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.93.47.44; envelope-from=clouduster@austin.rr.com
Message-ID: <421E2F13.4060205@austin.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 13:46:27 -0600
From: Dennis Haverlah <clouduster@austin.rr.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: E-shaft permanent magnet alternator
References: <list-757829@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-757829@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I really think dual alternators would be great - especially if one or 
both do not require a belt to operate.  I'm hoping the design will work 
on a Renesis because that is the engine for me and my RV 7A.  BUT -  I 
just received my Renesis (from a wrecked RX-8) and noticed it does not 
use the 13 B crank angel sensor.  The Renesis has a notched wheel on the 
back of the serpentine "E" shaft pulley and a sensor bolted to the block 
aimed at the notched wheel to sense crank angle.  1). The notched wheel 
would have to be fitted to the spinning alternator rotor and pulley 
combination. (This may not be too complicated)   2). Will the 
alternator's spinning rotor with its magnetic pulses mess up the crank 
angle sensor?

Dennis H.

Jim Sower wrote:

> <... eliminate the belt driven alternator entirely ...>
> OK.  That makes sense.  I missed a lot of the discussion.  One at each 
> end would be nice if we can do it.  My inclination would be to stick 
> with the belt driven unit since they're $30 and proven.  Perhaps move 
> to two crank driven units when they're more proven on our application.
>
> I'll just watch you and follow when yours works :o) ... Jim S.
>
> Ernest Christley wrote:
>
>> Jim Sower wrote:
>>
>>> I don't see the point of two primaries (unless you're using 1920s 
>>> era technology like mags).  My notion is to have a good, solid ND 
>>> primary and either a [small] backup battery or [small] backup Alt.  
>>> If I have redundant primaries, I'm probably too heavy, and (just me) 
>>> more tempted to drive around with one failed while I wait on parts 
>>> or something.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jim, my goal is to eliminate the belt driven alternator entirely.  No 
>> belt.  No pulley.  No heavy alternator hanging off the side of the 
>> engine on a heavy cantilevered bracket.  No need for a cowl bump to 
>> give it clearance.
>>
>> I'm looking for at least a 35A primary and 20A secondary.  I'm 
>> actually quite comfortable with the idea of flying with only a 
>> primary, but if you look at these things they are like an alternator 
>> with all of the heavy parts thrown out.  The backup is cheap, weight 
>> wise.  My guess is that the difference between the 20A and 35A unit 
>> is the wire guage used in the coils, and you'd need an ounce scale to 
>> tell the difference.
>>
>>>>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
>>>>  Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>>>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
>>>  Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
>>
>