Fuel gauge was going off and on on this to Niagara today, then totally stopped

[Danb]

I have a G-1000 and the right fuel gauge. Xed out I time my fuel anyway and have site windows on wing,

Is this a faulty fuel sender or could it be something else, it started to bounce around about 8 hours ago but I incorrectly thought it was turbulence, any ideas..expensive??

[Will W]

The fuel sensors in the G1000 often go bad. It honestly could be the sender though in the tank or something in the line. Make sure wherever you take it that they know G1000 backwards and forwards. Not your average A&P because they usually don't know how to troubleshoot and order wrong parts.

PS. The fuel gage on the screen is the required one for even VFR day flight. If it's just not working anymore, it's not legal to fly. Wing gauges don't count. Refer to kinds of operation equipment list section 2 of your POH (the early versions of the POH didn't list it but it is also listed in FAR 91.205 if not there. If it's "intermittent" then I'd fly on it but fix it soon.

[ArtVandelay]

Totally stopped is what you want, you can diagnose it. Bad sensor, lose or chafed wire could also cause it.

[Bob - S50]

After we installed our EDM730 we would have similar intermittent oil temperature X outs.  Turned out to be an installation error.  The star washer is supposed to be between the two blades that connect the sensor wiring to the gauge wiring.  The mechanic had installed it as blade-blade-washer-nut.  Should be blade-washer-blade-nut.  Once we fixed that we have had no more problems.

[DonMuncy]

I have seen the "blade washer blade" admonition, and do them that way. But I have real questions about it. It would seem to me that electrical continuity (and lack of resistance) is what we are dealing with, and any method that achieves that would suffice. Perhaps they really mean that "blade washer blade" gives the lowest likelihood of future failure of the connection.

[Will W]

In G1000, it does a systems check constantly. If you had low fuel then the sensor sent the unit that you had full fuel, it will X out. It does this so you don't trust false readings. This is often what causes it to be intermittent.

[Bob - S50]

I have seen the "blade washer blade" admonition, and do them that way. But I have real questions about it. It would seem to me that electrical continuity (and lack of resistance) is what we are dealing with, and any method that achieves that would suffice. Perhaps they really mean that "blade washer blade" gives the lowest likelihood of future failure of the connection.

I suspect they want the star washer in the middle to ensure a good contact.  In that position, when you tighten the nut, the stars will bite into the blades and ensure good contact.  The compression of the stars puts enough tension on the bolt to create enough friction to keep the nut in place.

 

If the star washer is against the nut, it might tend to resist tightening the nut as well and the only thing holding the blades together is bolt tension.  Maybe that doesn't create a consistent contact.

 

Just my guess.

[DonMuncy]

Bob,

I agree. I think my reluctance was the function of the star washer. In my view, the star washer, like any lock washer, in their typical installation, "bites" into both the nut and the flat washer (or whatever surface it abuts), to resist the likelihood of the nut vibrating loose. In the "blade-star washer-blade" configuration, there appears to be no "locking the nut in place" function.

Maybe the best way would be blade-star washer-blade-star washer-nut.

But I still do it the way they say.