That still leaves open the alternatives even if it's an issue: secon= d toothed wheel behind or after the alternator pulley...

On Sep 15, 2011 5:15 PM, <CozyGirrrl@aol.com> wrote:
> Not side by side-
> In the placement described we are talking= about them facing each other with
> a gap between the faces of 0.100~0.125 and the wheel face between the= m
> like an interrupter between optical sense and receive.
>=
> Chrissi & Randi
> _www.CozyGirrrl.com_ (http://www.cozygirrrl.com/)
> CG Products, Custom Aircraft Hardware
> Chairwomen, Sun-N-Fun E= ngine Workshop
>
>
> In a message dated 9/15/2011 4:01:= 36 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
> alwick@juno.com writes:
>
> <concern is that the two sensors may have interference wi= th each other.
>
> Highly unlikely. I have friends who measur= e integrity of signal with
> oscilloscope. Shielded device with hig= hly directional sensitivity. Though
> they've never measured two side by side. Good theory, though. >
> -al wick
>
> ----- Original Message -----
&= gt; From: _wrjjrs@aol.com_ (mailto:wrjjr= s@aol.com)
> To: _Rotary motors in aircraft_ (mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net)
> Sent: Thursday= , September 15, 2011 12:18 PM
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: The good ne= ws and the bad news......
>
>
> There is nothing wrong with that idea. The only con= cern is that the two
> sensors may have interference with each othe= r. The idea is to put another
> toothed wheel rotated say a random = _33.715_ (tel:33715) 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.<= br> > Bill Jepson
>
> Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless<= br>>
>
> -----Original message-----
>
> From= : Chad Robinson <crobinso= n@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 an= d the bad news......
>
>
>
> On 9/15/2011 1:21 PM, Tracy wrote:
>= ; The CAS references the crank, not the rotor. =C2 Is that. It?
> =
> I'm still confused about something myself. Everybody keeps ta= lking about
> adding another CAS as requiring it to be "in a different positio= n", with an
> offset. My 3rd-gen CAS sits on a small bracket j= ust behind the toothed
> wheel on the front shaft. Past that toothe= d wheel there's a healthy (from
> memory: 1.5"?) gap from there to the back of the alternator pull= ey.
>
> What's to stop me from making a bracket and putti= ng a second CAS in that
> gap, facing backward? It would be in exac= tly the same position as the
> current CAS, just facing backward. Would they interfere with one anot= her? 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?
>
&= gt;
>
>
>
>
>