Wolfgang writes:
<<<
A simple solution would be to have the
5V regulator with a heat sink feed the LED's. . . . . what I assumed
in the first place.
I like offering a fix rather than just
criticism.
>>>>
You are a smart guy. You can see the deficiencies in a design and
correct them on the fly (npi), but not all builders have that
capability. The problem with the LED power is more a symptom than the
problem. It shows and incomplete understanding of the factors that go
into a reliable design. There are a multitude of things wrong with the
proposed design and the average builder should be aware of these things
in the interest of safety. Hamid pointed out a few of the most
egregious problems. The full list is much longer.
You would not build a device unless you plan to use it. If you use it
you will come to rely on it. If you rely on it and it fails you will
likely be in a worse (perhaps much worse) state than if you did not
have the device in the first place.
This reasoning is why you want to avoid poorly designed and or poorly
tested devices that may effect flight.
FYI, Hamid has been designing electronics for decades and certified
avionics for 12 years. His designs range from simple communication
repeaters to complete, certified Pentium motherboards. His products
are used by the likes of Cobham, Boeing, CMC Electronics, Rockwell
Collins, Honeywell, Liquid Robotics, and on and on. He is wise enough
to know that putting a Band-Aid on a massive blunt force head trauma
will not fix the big picture. Likewise, offering a patch for the LED
problem would be, de facto, approving of the balance of the design.
Do you think the balance if the design is reliable, fail-safe and
unlikely to negatively effect flight? Consider your answer carefully as
it will say a lot about your design skills.
Regards
Brent Regan
|