Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #56689
From: wrjjrs@aol.com <wrjjrs@aol.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: The good news and the bad news......
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 12:18:16 -0700
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
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 toothed 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 now when you switch sensors the timing is the same. Also the two sensors don't interfere with each other.
Bill Jepson

Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless


-----Original message-----
From: Chad Robinson <crobinson@medialantern.com>
To:
Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
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:
The CAS references the crank, not the rotor.   Is that. It?
I'm still confused about something myself. Everybody keeps talking about 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 wheel on the front shaft. Past that toothed wheel there's a healthy (from memory: 1.5"?) gap from there 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 would be in exactly the same position as the current CAS, just facing backward. Would they interfere with one another? If so, as an alternative, what about using a second toothed wheel either on top of the first and before the alternator pulley, or if side loads were a concern, on the very end of the shaft past the pulley?

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster