  | 
				Matronics Email Lists Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists   
				 | 
			 
		 
		 
	
		| View previous topic :: View next topic   | 
	 
	
	
		| Author | 
		Message | 
	 
	
		nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect Guest
 
 
 
 
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2018 7:16 am    Post subject: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				Okay . . . the resistance of that wire is probably
     100 times higher than the airframe. The wire doesn't
     hurt anything but it adds no value . . .
 
  Isn't the point of having a bus or 'field of tabs' grounded directly to the negative batt terminal to prevent ground loops through the airframe?  If so, why then is the wire of no value, because of its length due to being run from the rear?
 
   From the explanation above, it sounds like both ends (batt neg terminal and ground bus) are also grounded to the airframe, is that correct?
 
  Could you specify which wire is 'adds no value' and how the planned system SHOULD be grounded then?  Thanks!
 
    We're talking two separate issues:
 
    (1) Ground path integrity for DC power
        distribution and . . . 
 
    (2) shared ground paths bet ween potential
        antagonists [alternators, strobe supplies,
        etc] and potential victims [audio systems,
        some avitonics].
 
    This thread is about issue #1. Yes, we'd
    like to achieve the lowest practical path
    resistance between the battery(-) and the
    firewall ground block. For aircraft with the
    battery forward, taking battery(-) directly
    to the stud is ideal and practical.
 
    For batteries mounted aft in a metal aircraft,
    taking battery(-) to structure is the most
    practical.
 
  https://goo.gl/28exWU 
 
    Now, if one were to measure the airframe
    resistance between the battery(-) grounding
    location on the airframe and the firewall
    ground block stud, one would measure some
    exceedingly small resistance . . . generally
    under 0.001 ohms (resistance from nose to
    tailcone on a Beechjet is right at .001 ohms).
 
    Enhancements to conductivity by adding some bit
    of wire in PARALLEL with the structure would
    be very difficult to measure.
 
    GROUND LOOPS are a separate discussion unique
    to managing grounds for potential victims
    and is unrelated to management of DC power.
 
  
    Bob . . .
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		Rocketman1988
 
 
  Joined: 21 Jun 2012 Posts: 63
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2018 11:15 am    Post subject: Re: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				So is running a 2 AWG cable from the aft mounted batteries on an RV 10 to a firewall stud a bad plan?  Would a basic airframe ground be the better option,i.e. ground the batteries at their aft mounted location?
 
 Similar to the Z-15 diagram...
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		BARRY CHECK 6
 
 
  Joined: 15 Mar 2011 Posts: 738
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2018 6:13 pm    Post subject: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				Nothing beats a copper wire ground on a plane.
 There is no reason why you can not do both...  A wire from the battery to the Firewall/Ground Buss and a short Ground wire to the airframe.  
 Barry
 On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Rocketman1988 <Rocketman(at)etczone.com (Rocketman(at)etczone.com)> wrote:
  	  | Quote: | 	 		  --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com (Rocketman(at)etczone.com)>
  
  So is running a 2 AWG cable from the aft mounted batteries on an RV 10 to a firewall stud a bad plan?  Would a basic airframe ground be the better option,i.e. ground the batteries at their aft mounted location?
  
  
  
  
  Read this topic online here:
  
  http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481866#481866
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ====================================
   -
  Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
  ====================================
   FORUMS -
  eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
  ====================================
  WIKI -
  errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
  ====================================
  b Site -
            -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
  rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
  ====================================
  
  
  
   | 	 
 
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		ceengland7(at)gmail.com Guest
 
 
 
 
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2018 6:57 pm    Post subject: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				On 7/26/2018 2:15 PM, Rocketman1988 wrote:
  	  | Quote: | 	 		   
 
  So is running a 2 AWG cable from the aft mounted batteries on an RV 10 to a firewall stud a bad plan?  Would a basic airframe ground be the better option,i.e. ground the batteries at their aft mounted location?
 
 I think the idea is that running the extra ground wire forward is not a 
 | 	  
 *bad* idea; just an unnecessary  one, in a metal a/c. The airframe will 
 be a lower resistance ground path than any practically size wire.
 
 Problems related to the ground loop issue are usually limited to audio 
 gear. I'm sure Bob can give you a better, more precise description of 
 what happens. But my layman's description is this: If a low level 
 signal, like audio, shares its ground return path with much stronger, 
 'noisy' electrical signals, like a strobe, the strobe noise can 
 effectively become part of the audio signal, and you get the noise in 
 the audio system. To prevent that, you use the 'forest of tabs' located 
 somewhere near the audio (and other low signal level) gear, and run all 
 low level signals to that spot instead of through the airframe. That 
 keeps the ground paths of the low level stuff & the 'noisy' stuff separate.
 
 Charlie
 
 ---
 This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
 https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		Rocketman1988
 
 
  Joined: 21 Jun 2012 Posts: 63
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2018 7:38 pm    Post subject: Re: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				If running a large wire ground isn't necessary, how does Z-15 fit in?
 
 Just curious...
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		ceengland7(at)gmail.com Guest
 
 
 
 
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2018 7:57 pm    Post subject: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				On 7/26/2018 10:38 PM, Rocketman1988 wrote:
  	  | Quote: | 	 		   
 
  If running a large wire ground isn't necessary, how does Z-15 fit in?
 
  Just curious...
 Are you asking me? (no context for your question in the email version)
 | 	  
 
 If so, did you read the text (pg z-4) that's associated with the drawing?
 
 ---
 This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
 https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect Guest
 
 
 
 
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 6:54 am    Post subject: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				At 09:13 PM 7/26/2018, you wrote:
   	  | Quote: | 	 		  Nothing beats a copper wire ground on a plane.
  There is no reason why you can not do both...  A wire from the battery to the Firewall/Ground Buss and a short Ground wire to the airframe.   | 	  
    Can you support your assertion with an
    analysis of the physics? Aluminum is not
    a poor conductor. In fact, overhead transmission
    lines for long distance power distribution are
    aluminum over steel cables.
 
    If the resistance between battery ground in
    the tail and a firewall ground block is already
    on the order of .001 ohms, how much of the
    airframe current is shunted off onto a paralleled
    wire? What benefit is realized by this 'sharing'
    of battery current?
 
    Except when cranking the engine, the
    total current flowing through the battery
    ground path will not exceed alternator capacity
    and then only for the minutes needed to top
    of the battery. Battery currents in normal
    operations are essentially zero . . .
 
    
 
  
  
    Bob . . .
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com Guest
 
 
 
 
 
  | 
		 | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		Rocketman1988
 
 
  Joined: 21 Jun 2012 Posts: 63
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 7:01 am    Post subject: Re: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				Bob, so is there anything wrong with a grounding plan similar to the Z-15 for the Rv-10?  It is simple enough to run that 2awg wire now, not so much later. For reference, the main 2awg wire running from the battery to the starter contactor is about 12 feet long. The ground would obviously be about the same. 
 
 Thanks in advance...
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect Guest
 
 
 
 
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 7:02 am    Post subject: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				At 02:15 PM 7/26/2018, you wrote:
   	  | Quote: | 	 		  --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com>
 
  So is running a 2 AWG cable from the aft mounted batteries on an RV 10 to a firewall stud a bad plan?  Would a basic airframe ground be the better option,i.e. ground the batteries at their aft mounted location? | 	  
    It's not 'bad' . . . just unnecessary when
    a lighter alternative is available. Airplanes
    like Beechjets and Hawkers have all manner
    of airframe grounds that carry currents from
    amps to thousands of amps (starter inrush).
 
    There are NO wires installed to avoid running
    ground returns through airframes. Well, almost
    no wires . . . had a case on a T1 trainer (Beechjet)
    in Mississippi where four strands of 2awg were
    routed from tail to nose to carry power and
    ground to a nose mounted air conditioning
    compressor motor (3+ horsepower). This
    antagonist was so profound that running
    motor current over so much of the airframe
    was a noise disaster. But that's another
    story.
 
  
  
    Bob . . .
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		BARRY CHECK 6
 
 
  Joined: 15 Mar 2011 Posts: 738
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 7:07 am    Post subject: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				Charlie:
 How can an aluminum - Riveted skin be a lower resistance than a straight run of copper wire?
 It can't since aluminum has a higher resistance than copper.  To that add the poor connection of riveted panels.
 Also remember aluminum sheeting is clear coat anodized.
 Barry 
 On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:58 PM, Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com (ceengland7(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
  	  | Quote: | 	 		  --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com (ceengland7(at)gmail.com)>
  
  On 7/26/2018 2:15 PM, Rocketman1988 wrote:
   	  | Quote: | 	 		   --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com (Rocketman(at)etczone.com)>
  
  So is running a 2 AWG cable from the aft mounted batteries on an RV 10 to a firewall stud a bad plan?  Would a basic airframe ground be the better option,i.e. ground the batteries at their aft mounted location?
  
   | 	   I think the idea is that running the extra ground wire forward is not a *bad* idea; just an unnecessary  one, in a metal a/c. The airframe will be a lower resistance ground path than any practically size wire.
  
  Problems related to the ground loop issue are usually limited to audio gear. I'm sure Bob can give you a better, more precise description of what happens. But my layman's description is this: If a low level signal, like audio, shares its ground return path with much stronger, 'noisy' electrical signals, like a strobe, the strobe noise can effectively become part of the audio signal, and you get the noise in the audio system. To prevent that, you use the 'forest of tabs' located somewhere near the audio (and other low signal level) gear, and run all low level signals to that spot instead of through the airframe. That keeps the ground paths of the low level stuff & the 'noisy' stuff separate.
  
  Charlie
  
  ---
  This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
  https://www.avast.com/antivirus
  
  ====================================
   -
  Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
  ====================================
   FORUMS -
  eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
  ====================================
  WIKI -
  errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
  ====================================
  b Site -
            -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
  rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
  ====================================
  
  
  
  
 
  | 	 
 
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		alec(at)alecmyers.com Guest
 
 
 
 
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 7:49 am    Post subject: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				Because the cross sectional area of the fuselage is many times greater than the cross section of the putative wire, and rivets are great conductors?
 
 On Jul 27, 2018, at 16:07, FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com (flyadive(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
 Charlie:
 How can an aluminum - Riveted skin be a lower resistance than a straight run of copper wire?
 It can't since aluminum has a higher resistance than copper.  To that add the poor connection of riveted panels.
 Also remember aluminum sheeting is clear coat anodized.
 Barry 
 On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:58 PM, Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com (ceengland7(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
  	  | Quote: | 	 		  --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com (ceengland7(at)gmail.com)>
  
  On 7/26/2018 2:15 PM, Rocketman1988 wrote:
   	  | Quote: | 	 		   --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com (Rocketman(at)etczone.com)>
  
  So is running a 2 AWG cable from the aft mounted batteries on an RV 10 to a firewall stud a bad plan?  Would a basic airframe ground be the better option,i.e. ground the batteries at their aft mounted location?
  
   | 	   I think the idea is that running the extra ground wire forward is not a *bad* idea; just an unnecessary  one, in a metal a/c. The airframe will be a lower resistance ground path than any practically size wire.
  
  Problems related to the ground loop issue are usually limited to audio gear. I'm sure Bob can give you a better, more precise description of what happens. But my layman's description is this: If a low level signal, like audio, shares its ground return path with much stronger, 'noisy' electrical signals, like a strobe, the strobe noise can effectively become part of the audio signal, and you get the noise in the audio system. To prevent that, you use the 'forest of tabs' located somewhere near the audio (and other low signal level) gear, and run all low level signals to that spot instead of through the airframe. That keeps the ground paths of the low level stuff & the 'noisy' stuff separate.
  
  Charlie
  
  ---
  This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
  https://www.avast.com/antivirus
  
  ====================================
   -
  Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
  ====================================
   FORUMS -
  eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
  ====================================
  WIKI -
  errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
  ====================================
  b Site -
            -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
  rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
  ====================================
  
  
  
  
 
  | 	 
 
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		ceengland7(at)gmail.com Guest
 
 
 
 
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 8:48 am    Post subject: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				That, and the unrelated point that no aircraft grade aluminum sheet is anodized, clear or otherwise.
  Barry, where are you getting your misinformation?
  Charlie
  Charlie
  On Jul 27, 2018, at 10:55 AM, Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com (alec(at)alecmyers.com)> wrote: 	  | Quote: | 	 		   
 Because the cross sectional area of the fuselage is many times greater than the cross section of the putative wire, and rivets are great conductors?
 
 On Jul 27, 2018, at 16:07, FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com (flyadive(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
 Charlie:
 How can an aluminum - Riveted skin be a lower resistance than a straight run of copper wire?
 It can't since aluminum has a higher resistance than copper.  To that add the poor connection of riveted panels.
 Also remember aluminum sheeting is clear coat anodized.
 Barry 
 On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:58 PM, Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com (ceengland7(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
  	  | Quote: | 	 		  --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com (ceengland7(at)gmail.com)>
  
  On 7/26/2018 2:15 PM, Rocketman1988 wrote:
   	  | Quote: | 	 		   --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com (Rocketman(at)etczone.com)>
  
  So is running a 2 AWG cable from the aft mounted batteries on an RV 10 to a firewall stud a bad plan?  Would a basic airframe ground be the better option,i.e. ground the batteries at their aft mounted location?
  
   | 	   I think the idea is that running the extra ground wire forward is not a *bad* idea; just an unnecessary  one, in a metal a/c. The airframe will be a lower resistance ground path than any practically size wire.
  
  Problems related to the ground loop issue are usually limited to audio gear. I'm sure Bob can give you a better, more precise description of what happens. But my layman's description is this: If a low level signal, like audio, shares its ground return path with much stronger, 'noisy' electrical signals, like a strobe, the strobe noise can effectively become part of the audio signal, and you get the noise in the audio system. To prevent that, you use the 'forest of tabs' located somewhere near the audio (and other low signal level) gear, and run all low level signals to that spot instead of through the airframe. That keeps the ground paths of the low level stuff & the 'noisy' stuff separate.
  
  Charlie
  
  ---
  This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
  https://www.avast.com/antivirus
  
  ====================================
   -
  Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
  ===========
   FORUMS -
  eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
  ====================================
  WIKI -
  errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
  ====================================
  b Site -
           -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
  rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
  ===========
  
  
  
  
 
  | 	  
  
  | 	 
 
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		alec(at)alecmyers.com Guest
 
 
 
 
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 9:16 am    Post subject: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				right... it’s a strong aluminium alloy clad in pure (soft, but corrosion resistant) aluminium. Hence “Alclad”.
 
 On Jul 27, 2018, at 17:48, Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com (ceengland7(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
 That, and the unrelated point that no aircraft grade aluminum sheet is anodized, clear or otherwise.
  Barry, where are you getting your misinformation?
  Charlie
  Charlie
  On Jul 27, 2018, at 10:55 AM, Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com (alec(at)alecmyers.com)> wrote: 	  | Quote: | 	 		   
 Because the cross sectional area of the fuselage is many times greater than the cross section of the putative wire, and rivets are great conductors?
 
 On Jul 27, 2018, at 16:07, FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com (flyadive(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
 Charlie:
 How can an aluminum - Riveted skin be a lower resistance than a straight run of copper wire?
 It can't since aluminum has a higher resistance than copper.  To that add the poor connection of riveted panels.
 Also remember aluminum sheeting is clear coat anodized.
 Barry 
 On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:58 PM, Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com (ceengland7(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
  	  | Quote: | 	 		  --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com (ceengland7(at)gmail.com)>
  
  On 7/26/2018 2:15 PM, Rocketman1988 wrote:
   	  | Quote: | 	 		   --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com (Rocketman(at)etczone.com)>
  
  So is running a 2 AWG cable from the aft mounted batteries on an RV 10 to a firewall stud a bad plan?  Would a basic airframe ground be the better option,i.e. ground the batteries at their aft mounted location?
  
   | 	   I think the idea is that running the extra ground wire forward is not a *bad* idea; just an unnecessary  one, in a metal a/c. The airframe will be a lower resistance ground path than any practically size wire.
  
  Problems related to the ground loop issue are usually limited to audio gear. I'm sure Bob can give you a better, more precise description of what happens. But my layman's description is this: If a low level signal, like audio, shares its ground return path with much stronger, 'noisy' electrical signals, like a strobe, the strobe noise can effectively become part of the audio signal, and you get the noise in the audio system. To prevent that, you use the 'forest of tabs' located somewhere near the audio (and other low signal level) gear, and run all low level signals to that spot instead of through the airframe. That keeps the ground paths of the low level stuff & the 'noisy' stuff separate.
  
  Charlie
  
  ---
  This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
  https://www.avast.com/antivirus
  
  ====================================
   -
  Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
  ===========
   FORUMS -
  eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
  ====================================
  WIKI -
  errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
  ====================================
  b Site -
            -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
  rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
  ===========
  
  
  
  
 
  | 	  
  
  | 	 
 
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect Guest
 
 
 
 
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 12:57 pm    Post subject: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				At 10:07 AM 7/27/2018, you wrote:
   	  | Quote: | 	 		  Charlie:
 
  How can an aluminum - Riveted skin be a lower resistance than a straight run of copper wire? | 	  
    It's a 'cross section' thing. The square inches of conductor
    cross-section from nose to tail of a metal airplane is
    a whole lot bigger than any practical chunk of wire
    you might choose to run. 
 
   	  | Quote: | 	 		  | It can't since aluminum has a higher resistance than copper. | 	  
    Depending on the alloy, aluminum will present
    a volume resistivity on the order of 2.82x10^-8
    while copper will be about 1.68x10^-8 or 67%
    higher. Given that the cross section of wire
    goes up with the square of diameter, an aluminum
    wire only needs to be about 30% larger. This
    speaks to the success of Eric's offer for copper-
    clad, fine-strand FAT wires.
 
  https://goo.gl/8HTqEV 
 
    In spite of being larger wires, they are lighter
    for the same electrical performance. This also
    speaks to the preference for using aluminum in
    long distance transmission lines . . . the lighter
    wire makes for a smaller steel core in the makeup
    of the strands.
 
  
   	  | Quote: | 	 		  |   To that add the poor connection of riveted panels. | 	  
 
    A properly  sized rivet SWELLS up in the hole
    with such force that a gas-tight connection
    is achieved even when the sheet is coated with
    corrosion preventatives. 
 
   	  | Quote: | 	 		  | Also remember aluminum sheeting is clear coat anodized. | 	  
    Yes, there are come chemical passivation processes
    offered for aluminum sheet . . . which has zero
    influence on the electrical integrity of riveted
    joints.
 
  
    Bob . . .
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect Guest
 
 
 
 
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 1:12 pm    Post subject: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				At 10:01 AM 7/27/2018, you wrote:
   	  | Quote: | 	 		  --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com>
 
  Bob, so is there anything wrong with a grounding plan similar to the Z-15 for the Rv-10?  It is simple enough to run that 2awg wire now, not so much later. For reference, the main 2awg wire running from the battery to the starter contactor is about 12 feet long. The ground would obviously be about the same. | 	  
    If you don't mind the weight penalty and cost
    of installation, no . . . it will perform as
    advertised. 
 
    I've updated View -A- to Z-15 to add a note on
    the battery(-) connection to (1) suggest it
    be used as shown on forward/rear mounted batteries
    in plastic and forward mounted batteries in 
    metal airplanes. It can be replaced with local
    grounding of the battery on a metal airplane.
 
  https://goo.gl/NtQT1P 
 
    We've discussed this on several occasions over
    the years but the conclusions didn't get
    carried over to Z-15.
 
  
 
  
    Bob . . .
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		Kellym
 
 
  Joined: 10 Jan 2006 Posts: 1706 Location: Sun Lakes AZ
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 5:20 pm    Post subject: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				You are comparing 2AWG copper or lesser, to almost infinite size 
 aluminum, which is NOT clear coat anodized, never has been, as far as 
 the common varieties such as 2024T3 or 5056. The 2024 in fact has a thin 
 layer of pure aluminum at the surface, known as alclad. Rivets are in 
 fact gas tight metal to metal connections.
 Have you any data to assert that the copper has less resistance?
 Kelly
 
 On 7/27/2018 10:07 AM, FLYaDIVE wrote:
  	  | Quote: | 	 		   Charlie:
  
  How can an aluminum - Riveted skin be a lower resistance than a straight 
  run of copper wire?
  It can't since aluminum has a higher resistance than copper.  To that 
  add the poor connection of riveted panels.
  Also remember aluminum sheeting is clear coat anodized.
  
  Barry
  
  On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:58 PM, Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com 
  <mailto:ceengland7(at)gmail.com>> wrote:
  
      
      <ceengland7(at)gmail.com <mailto:ceengland7(at)gmail.com>>
  
      On 7/26/2018 2:15 PM, Rocketman1988 wrote:
  
          
          <Rocketman(at)etczone.com <mailto:Rocketman(at)etczone.com>>
  
          So is running a 2 AWG cable from the aft mounted batteries on an
          RV 10 to a firewall stud a bad plan?  Would a basic airframe
          ground be the better option,i.e. ground the batteries at their
          aft mounted location?
  
      I think the idea is that running the extra ground wire forward is
      not a *bad* idea; just an unnecessary  one, in a metal a/c. The
      airframe will be a lower resistance ground path than any practically
      size wire.
  
      Problems related to the ground loop issue are usually limited to
      audio gear. I'm sure Bob can give you a better, more precise
      description of what happens. But my layman's description is this: If
      a low level signal, like audio, shares its ground return path with
      much stronger, 'noisy' electrical signals, like a strobe, the strobe
      noise can effectively become part of the audio signal, and you get
      the noise in the audio system. To prevent that, you use the 'forest
      of tabs' located somewhere near the audio (and other low signal
      level) gear, and run all low level signals to that spot instead of
      through the airframe. That keeps the ground paths of the low level
      stuff & the 'noisy' stuff separate.
  
      Charlie
  
      ---
      This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
      https://www.avast.com/antivirus <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
  
  
      ====================================
      -
      Electric-List" rel="noreferrer"
      target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
      ====================================
      FORUMS -
      eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
      ====================================
      WIKI -
      errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
      ====================================
      b Site -
                 -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
      rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
      ====================================
  
  
  
  
  | 	 
 
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 _________________ Kelly McMullen
 
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
 
KCHD | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect Guest
 
 
 
 
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 6:49 pm    Post subject: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				At 08:19 PM 7/27/2018, you wrote:
   	  | Quote: | 	 		  --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
 
  You are comparing 2AWG copper or lesser, to almost infinite size aluminum, which is NOT clear coat anodized, never has been, as far as the common varieties such as 2024T3 or 5056. The 2024 in fact has a thin layer of pure aluminum at the surface, known as alclad. Rivets are in fact gas tight metal to metal connections.
  Have you any data to assert that the copper has less resistance? | 	  
    It's a fact of physics that copper is
    a better conductor than aluminum in the
    same cross section. The harder thing to
    wrap your arms around is to consider the
    effective cross section of a fuselage
    structure covered in a relatively thin
    layer of aluminum. The path traveled by
    current flows through the airframe do not
    move is straight lines but will concentrate
    over the areas of least resistance.
 
    There have been studies and experiments
    run for effects of direct lightning strikes.
    Intuitively we can assert that small aircraft
    will have higher resistance between similar
    locations on the airframe . . . but for this
    thread, it's sufficient to assert that adding
    an extra wire between battery(-) in the tail
    and firewall ground stud will produce no
    demonstrable benefit.
 
    A 12' run of 22759 2AWG at ~0.28 pounds/ft
    adds about 3.4 pounds to the aircraft's
    empty weight.
 
  
  
    Bob . . .
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		Eric M. Jones
 
  
  Joined: 10 Jan 2006 Posts: 565 Location: Massachusetts
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2018 6:50 am    Post subject: Re: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				Years ago Bob N. put togther a little collection called the "Economics of Weight Reduction", in which he had a piece I had written. It is still on the Aeroelectric Connection, but I attach it here. Good reading.
 
 I too, wonder about using the aluminum skin for a ground conductor...Not that it doesn't work in most cases (it does work), but as the structure ages, and in some special cases, it gives me pause. The rivets could grow weak any you wouldn't even know it.
 
 My guess is that steel airframes are best not used as ground due to magnetization.
 
 Also to be sure, Aluminum is a far better conductor than copper per weight. I also include my piece on the subject.
 
 I sell a lot of Copper Clad Aluminum cable to people who are extremely careful with weight. Drones, NASCAR, EAA aircraft, NASA,Aerovironment, TOP FUEL DRAGSTERS!, Searey, many others. There has never been a problem history with CCA.
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
	
  
	 
	
	
		
	 
	
		|  Description: | 
		
			
		 | 
		  Download | 
	 
	
		|  Filename: | 
		 Copper Cables.pdf | 
	 
	
		|  Filesize: | 
		 286.71 KB | 
	 
	
		|  Downloaded: | 
		 1266 Time(s) | 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	
	
		
	 
	
		|  Description: | 
		
			
		 | 
		  Download | 
	 
	
		|  Filename: | 
		 Economics of Weight Reduction.pdf | 
	 
	
		|  Filesize: | 
		 13.8 KB | 
	 
	
		|  Downloaded: | 
		 703 Time(s) | 
	 
	 
	 
 _________________ Eric M. Jones
 
www.PerihelionDesign.com
 
113 Brentwood Drive
 
Southbridge, MA 01550
 
(508) 764-2072
 
emjones(at)charter.net | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		ceengland7(at)gmail.com Guest
 
 
 
 
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2018 7:11 am    Post subject: Grounding architecture | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				On 7/28/2018 9:50 AM, Eric M. Jones wrote:
  	  | Quote: | 	 		   
 
  Years ago Bob N. put togther a little collection called the "Economics of Weight Reduction", in which he had a piece I had written. It is still on the Aeroelectric Connection, but I attach it here. Good reading.
 
  I too, wonder about using the aluminum skin for a ground conductor...Not that it doesn't work in most cases (it does work), but as the structure ages, and in some special cases, it gives me pause. The rivets could grow weak any you wouldn't even know it.
 
  My guess is that steel airframes are best not used as ground due to magnetization.
 
  Also to be sure, Aluminum is a far better conductor than copper per weight. I also include my piece on the subject.
 
  I sell a lot of Copper Clad Aluminum cable to people who are extremely careful with weight. Drones, NASCAR, EAA aircraft, NASA,Aerovironment, TOP FUEL DRAGSTERS!, Searey, many others. There has never been a problem history with CCA.
 
  --------
  Eric M. Jones
  www.PerihelionDesign.com
  113 Brentwood Drive
  Southbridge, MA 01550
  (508) 764-2072
  emjones(at)charter.net
 
 
 | 	  
 The obvious solution to the unlikely resistance growth issue would be to 
 use a longeron. Obviously won't apply to every a/c design, but the RVs 
 have a continuous longeron from firewall to tail. Tying to a longeron 
 (1/8 thick x 3/4 x 3/4 inches)  would give an unbroken path.
 
 Charlie
 
 ---
 This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
 https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
  |  | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - |  |   |  Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
 
  http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |  
  |  
 
 
 
  
 | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		 | 
	 
 
  
	 
	    
	   | 
	
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
  | 
   
 
  
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
  
		 |