X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 21:56:26 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-m26.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.7] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.9) with ESMTP id 1059592 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 05 Apr 2006 19:46:15 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.137.7; envelope-from=Sky2high@aol.com Received: from Sky2high@aol.com by imo-m26.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r7.3.) id q.2a4.8a6d236 (39953) for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2006 19:45:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Sky2high@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: <2a4.8a6d236.3165b097@aol.com> X-Original-Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 19:45:27 EDT Subject: Re: [LML] Flap (Relay) Failure 320 X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1144280727" X-Mailer: 9.0 Security Edition for Windows sub 2340 X-Spam-Flag: NO -------------------------------1144280727 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/5/2006 5:04:06 P.M. Central Daylight Time, n103md@yahoo.com writes: As many have noted, a common failure mode in the LNC2 is the flap's (electromechanical) relay wiring and contacts. Has anyone replaced their flap control relays with solid-state controls? I would expect a considerable increase in reliability if properly designed. Taking that idea a step further, the limit switches could be made latching so that coasting past the switch would no longer be a problem. i.e. when the controller detects that the down limit switch is triggered, it shorts the motor until it detects the up control switch is closed. Has anyone done this already? Or should I go ahead and design it? Bob, The limit switches detect the presence or absence of the stabilizing rod. They are self-latching for any flap motor position at or beyond their limit. The relays work just fine for most everyone. However, Solid state like this: _http://www.periheliondesign.com/powerlinkjr.htm_ (http://www.periheliondesign.com/powerlinkjr.htm) Scott Krueger AKA Grayhawk LNC2 N92EX IO 320 SB 89/96 -------------------------------1144280727 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In a message dated 4/5/2006 5:04:06 P.M. Central Daylight Time,=20 n103md@yahoo.com writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>As many=20 have noted, a common failure mode in the LNC2
is the flap's=20 (electromechanical) relay wiring and contacts.
Has anyone replaced the= ir=20 flap control relays with
solid-state controls? I would expect a=20 considerable
increase in reliability if properly designed.

Taki= ng=20 that idea a step further, the limit switches
could be made latching so= =20 that coasting past the
switch would no longer be a problem. i.e. when=20
the controller detects that the down limit switch
is triggered, it=20 shorts the motor until it detects
the up control switch is closed.=20

Has anyone done this already?
Or should I go ahead and design=20= it?=20
Bob,
 
The limit switches detect the presence or absence of the stabilizing=20 rod.  They are self-latching for any flap motor position at or beyond t= heir=20 limit.
 
The relays work just fine for most everyone.
 
However,  Solid state like this:
 
http://www.periheli= ondesign.com/powerlinkjr.htm
 
 
Scott Krueger=20 AKA Grayhawk
LNC2 N92EX IO 320 SB=20 89/96

-------------------------------1144280727--