CiES Fuel Senders Resource Thread

[Marauder]

Hi All,

I am starting this thread to help those who have made the decision to upgrade their fuel senders to the CiES units and like me are starting to look for information on how to install them. First, thanks to Bob Belville and Terry Heim for agreeing to the CiES mug shots so I could obtain the Oshkosh show prices. Also, thanks to Bob S-50 for confirming my decision to make the purchase.

I will be working with Terry to install these in his Mooney and mine. Terry is an IA and I agreed to start sourcing the necessary supplies to do the installs. I am currently looking for suppliers for the wiring, connectors and mounting hardware. The instruction manual does provide specific mil-spec numbers for the wiring. The mounting hardware shows a washer NAS number but I only have a partial description for the sender mounting screws. When I nail down what is needed, I will provide details on the components. My senders will be connected to an O&N Bladder System and a JPI 900. I intend to use them in "frequency" mode (advantage of working with electrical engineers to understand what this means).  

There are some differences in the installations based on whether your plane requires two or four senders. Terry's plane only has two senders, mine has four. In my installation, the two senders per wing will communicate with each other and the output will go to the JPI. There is also a requirement to calibrate the JPI and I will describe this process as we get to it. Right now, my priority is obtaining the hardware and burning down the fuel in my tanks so I can drain the rest of the fuel and begin the installation.

For those of you who have already installed these, please share what you can on what you uncovered during the process.

 

 

[Bob_Belville]

Chris, Lee Fox also bought 4 unit CiES for his J at KOSH. He should have the units by now. He decided to stay with the resistive protocol based on conversations with CiES and JPI who told him they would have to have his EDM 9?0 back for conversion and it would cost him $350. CiES told him the accuracy would be the same for resistive vs. freq.

I have had my old units off a couple of times. I would think the gasket and screws would be the same as for the CiES, at least for the 2 unit system which mounts through the cabin wall.  

[Marauder]

8 minutes ago, Bob_Belville said:

Chris, Lee Fox also bought 4 unit CiES for his J at KOSH. He should have the units by now. He decided to stay with the resistive protocol based on conversations with CiES and JPI who told him they would have to have his EDM 9?0 back for conversion and it would cost him $350. CiES told him the accuracy would be the same for resistive vs. freq.

I have had my old units off a couple of times. I would think the gasket and screws would be the same as for the CiES, at least for the 2 unit system which mounts through the cabin wall.  

Lee's issue may be the age of the firmware. Mine was back late last year and had a firmware update. Once I understand the details on the JPI situation I will post it. I was told by our electrical engineers that frequency is a better way to go over resistive. Perhaps the difference is negligible but it is my understanding that to keep it resistive, Lee will need to install a resistor in the circuit. 

[Oscar Avalle]

Thanks for the update. I am also looking at these fuel senders. I was told that if I replaced my fuel senders with the Cies ones I had to send my JPI to the factory. So I decided not to do it. But if that is not the case let me know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fly By]

Since my name has been dragged into this discussion....  I am still waiting for the CiES hardware to arrive.  I'm told it will be any day.  I installed a JPI 900 recently and attached the "legacy" gauges which were of dubious accuracy.  Seems that the fuel totalizer was unhappy with the legacy sending units' accuracy also as I began to see "Fuel Mismatch" alerts frequently.  This means that there existed a difference between the reported fuel quantity (sending units) and the computed fuel remaining (totalizer) of more than 5 gallons.  So either I needed to have my 40 year old sending units rebuilt or go with improved technology.  But then the JPI rep at OSH alerted me to the fact that there are two different ways for the JPI and the CiES to communicate.  CiES tells me that the difference in accuracy between the "EI Voltage" and the "Digital Frequency Hz" is negligible except for the last few drops of fuel.  Since my comfort level is well above that  risky range I figured that I'm good with the ones that were plug 'n play and save the $350 plus shipping and down-time to send the JPI unit back to CA for the conversion that would have been required to allow it to accept the latter method.

[Bob - S50]

OK, here are some tips from our install.  All problems were fixed with a quick call to Cies.  They always answered the phone so there was little or no delay.

1.  We used our existing resistance based FL202 gauge.  When the manual came, it gave directions for hooking up either voltage or frequency based gauges, but not resistance based gauges.  A quick call to Scott confirmed it should be hooked up like the voltage system.

2.  The floats were marked with which side goes up.  However, doing that, the holes in the float did not match the bolt pattern on our plane.  Another quick call to Scott confirmed that he was aware of that, had programmed the floats to work upside down and that we should mount them upside down.

3.  When you install them, there is a small amount of side play in the float and arm.  Be sure when you place the float into the tank that side play will not allow the float to wedge up against a rib (runner?) inside the tank.  I slightly bent one arm to ensure that float sat on top of the runner and could not wedge in beside it.

4.  Once the tank was calibrated and we started flying the plane, I noticed that the gauge changes in approximately 0.3 gallon increments.  That is, the fuel level will go from 15.0 to 14.7 to 14.4 as opposed to stepping down in 0.1 gallon increments.  No big deal.  I suspect this is a product of the size of voltage change for each 2 gallons I added during calibration.

5.  It took our mechanic about 6 hours to do the install with us running the extra power wire to the outboard float while he worked elsewhere.  It then took me about 3 or 4 hours to calibrate the gauge by myself because none of my partners were available to help.

6.  We have been using them for a couple months now and are very happy with accuracy.

[kortopates]

For frequency mode, it took JPI a few iterations to get the firmware to work properly. The last fix I am aware of that is working for me wasn't till this spring. I think that's why many went with the resistive mode installs because of the issues JPI was having with the frequency mode. Oddly JPI had it working on the 930 much sooner than the 900 and I have no idea why the 900 gave them so many problems with the freq interface but it did. But to me, the big benefits of this technology was greater accuracy in fuel level based on the frequency mode use; so I don't understand the comment there is not much difference other than that all the dissatisfied 900 users having problems as JPI worked to provide updates. But I haven't worked with both kinds of installations either to really quantify the difference between resistance and frequency modes.

The screws for the senders, being smaller than the holes in the senders, require plastic tubular inserts to make up the size and seal. I'd recommend you build a test harness to ensure all works fine and you get stable outputs at the JPI - that could save a lot of trouble shooting time avoiding wiring issues after everything is installed. We had enough problems that in the end, my installer pulled the ground all way back to the cockpit as well as ground locally as shown in Scott's diagram; probably because Scott always would say make sure its adequately grounded when there was an issue.

You'll notice the Mooney outboard sensors have a big bend in them so as to not hit the front of the tank. The CIES outboard senders did not clear the front of the tank. To make sure exactly why we opened the tank from above (right above the sender) and bent the arm to clear the tank with about an inch of clearance. You can probably do that in the blind just repeatedly bending a little at a time - but we wanted to be sure. But also note our senders were installed upside down relative the CIES labeling. Maybe some of these things are no longer relevant if Scott has made changes to make the install more straightforward. 

Mine were installed in what Scott's instructions referred to as a master-slave wiring. I recommend using smaller gauge Deutch 20G connectors, here is 4 pin example off amazon  https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01CUCA9GA/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 

Calibrating just takes a little time and JPI limit of 5 readings pretty much narrows down what you need to do. We started with the plane leveled and added the same amount of fuel to each side to keep it level. What I didn't quite expect is that it tool 2-3 minutes for the frequency output to stop changing - not in truly fluctuating way, but it would change by a number or 2 even after the first minute or so;  so suggest giving it a couple minutes to stabilize before you record the value. 

Edited August 17, 2017 by kortopates

[Marauder]

For frequency mode, it took JPI a few iterations to get the firmware to work properly. The last fix I am aware of that is working for me wasn't till this spring. I think that's why many went with the resistive mode installs because of the issues JPI was having with the frequency mode. Oddly JPI had it working on the 930 much sooner than the 900 and I have no idea why the 900 gave them so many problems with the freq interface but it did. But to me, the big benefits of this technology was greater accuracy in fuel level based on the frequency mode use; so I don't understand the comment there is not much difference other than that all the dissatisfied 900 users having problems as JPI worked to provide updates. But I haven't worked with both kinds of installations either to really quantify the difference between resistance and frequency modes.
The screws for the senders, being smaller than the holes in the senders, require plastic tubular inserts to make up the size and seal. I'd recommend you build a test harness to ensure all works fine and you get stable outputs at the JPI - that could save a lot of trouble shooting time avoiding wiring issues after everything is installed. We had enough problems that in the end, my installer pulled the ground all way back to the cockpit as well as ground locally as shown in Scott's diagram; probably because Scott always would say make sure its adequately grounded when there was an issue.
You'll notice the Mooney outboard sensors have a big bend in them so as to not hit the front of the tank. The CIES outboard senders did not clear the front of the tank. To make sure exactly why we opened the tank from above (right above the sender) and bent the arm to clear the tank with about an inch of clearance. You can probably do that in the blind just repeatedly bending a little at a time - but we wanted to be sure. But also note our senders were installed upside down relative the CIES labeling. Maybe some of these things are no longer relevant if Scott has made changes to make the install more straightforward. 
Mine were installed in what Scott's instructions referred to as a master-slave wiring. I recommend using smaller gauge Deutch 20G connectors, here is 4 pin example off amazon  https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01CUCA9GA/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 
Calibrating just takes a little time and JPI limit of 5 readings pretty much narrows down what you need to do. We started with the plane leveled and added the same amount of fuel to each side to keep it level. What I didn't quite expect is that it tool 2-3 minutes for the frequency output to stop changing - not in truly fluctuating way, but it would change by a number or 2 even after the first minute or so;  so suggest giving it a couple minutes to stabilize before you record the value. 

Paul - thanks for the detailed response. One thing I need to confirm tonight is which of these units is supposed to be the master and which is supposed to be the slave. The drawing makes it appear that the outboard sender is the slave and that it should have 3 wires. The sender I have labeled as outboard has 4 wires. What wire configuration did your senders have?

Also - have you or anyone else installed these in bladder equipped planes? Wonder if there will be an issue.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Marauder]

Paul - one other question. Do you have a source for the attachment hardware? Screws, washers, sleeves, etc.?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[jamesm]

So does  all the M20J's have two floats in a wing  tank ?   or is there a extended/extra  wing tank option

James '67C

[Marauder]

So does  all the M20J's have two floats in a wing  tank ?   or is there a extended/extra  wing tank option

James '67C

 

The F, J & Ks have 4. I know the Cs have 2 and believe the Es do as well.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[KSMooniac]

 
The F, J & Ks have 4. I know the Cs have 2 and believe the Es do as well.
 
 
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

That is my understanding as well, and the extended fuel option doesn't add any senders, so you only know you have more than XX gallons until you burn down past the stock capacity.

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

[N6758N]

Chris,

I just got back home today and saw the senders had arrived, I also got all the remaining parts from Griggs for my bladder install. I didn't look at the senders but do we need to purchase any wire or is it all included with the sender as I'd hoped? Looking forward to getting this project started with you, I'm hoping to send some time over at N57 if you're around this weekend.

[kortopates]

4 hours ago, Marauder said:

 

Paul - thanks for the detailed response. One thing I need to confirm tonight is which of these units is supposed to be the master and which is supposed to be the slave. The drawing makes it appear that the outboard sender is the slave and that it should have 3 wires. The sender I have labeled as outboard has 4 wires. What wire configuration did your senders have?

Also - have you or anyone else installed these in bladder equipped planes? Wonder if there will be an issue.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

Its been too many months now to recall with certainty so I would recommend chatting with Scott, he was generally very available by phone. But what I recall is that the inboard was master and I thought I recalled both senders having 4 wires - that I don't recall them being different. But its been awhile.

4 hours ago, Marauder said:

Paul - one other question. Do you have a source for the attachment hardware? Screws, washers, sleeves, etc.?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

The proper term I was trying to recall is plastic bushings for the sleeves. I'll have to see if I can dig that part up. The rest of the hardware to my recollection was unchanged from the original removed hardware and thus whats in your Mooney IPC.

[kortopates]

55 minutes ago, KSMooniac said:

That is my understanding as well, and the extended fuel option doesn't add any senders, so you only know you have more than XX gallons until you burn down past the stock capacity.

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk
 

Correct, you will still have the extended tank without a sender. But with the CIES senders you will do much better than what you had with the OEM gauges. For starters, before CIES you only knew full main tank condition after filling the mains when there was no fuel in the outboards. Then, soon as the fuel settled into the extended tanks, your OEM gauges would read somweher around 2/3 full and your OEM gauges never correctly indicated the right amount of fuel till each side was down to about half way - which on mine was ~18gal.

Now once you calibrate with the CIES, you will have no problem reading full main tanks properly, and since full main tank quantity isn't actually to the top of the mains after the fuel settles into the outboards, you can continue to add a substantial amount more of the extended tank volume and continue to accurately indicate these gallons above the main tank capacity. But somewhere between 1/2 to 2/3's of the extended tank capacity the main tanks do become full to the top and senders can no longer sense any added fuel to the extended tanks (sorry I don't recall the exact amount - its written down in the hangar). So although without a 3rd sender in the extended tank area we still don't get accurate fuel indications all the way to maximum capacity it's still a tremendous improvement in that we do get accurate fuel indications not only to full main capacity but quite a ways past it.  I rarely ever fill the extended tanks anyway. But my big complaint has always been having no accurate indication till about half of main capacity; so the biggest issues IMO have been solved by these.

Edited August 18, 2017 by kortopates

[KSMooniac]

Great info...and of course a totalizer should back up the gauges and provide the rest of the story.

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

[kortopates]

20 minutes ago, N6758N said:

Chris,

I just got back home today and saw the senders had arrived, I also got all the remaining parts from Griggs for my bladder install. I didn't look at the senders but do we need to purchase any wire or is it all included with the sender as I'd hoped? Looking forward to getting this project started with you, I'm hoping to send some time over at N57 if you're around this weekend.

Just like any other electrical accessory, you'll be making up your own harness. Besides you'll have to pull the wires through the wing to the outboard senders and you couldn't really do that with the connectors already crimped on the wires because of the clearance issues. 

[gsxrpilot]

I've got the CiES senders in my 252 along with the EDM-900. The trick is getting the EDM and the CiES on the same protocol. You don't seem to have a green wire so that means your senders are not resistive. Rather they are digital/frequency mode senders. You need to make sure your EDM-900 is set up to match.

I have resistive senders and had to send my EDM-900 back to JPI for reprogramming. It only took a couple of days and no cost other than the shipping.

[gsxrpilot]

The inboard senders are definitely the Master.

[Marauder]

I've got the CiES senders in my 252 along with the EDM-900. The trick is getting the EDM and the CiES on the same protocol. You don't seem to have a green wire so that means your senders are not resistive. Rather they are digital/frequency mode senders. You need to make sure your EDM-900 is set up to match.
I have resistive senders and had to send my EDM-900 back to JPI for reprogramming. It only took a couple of days and no cost other than the shipping.

Hmmm. According to the installation manual, the user can select which mode the sender operates in. Frequency, resistive or voltage. I'll call them tomorrow and get clarity. I did read the JPI is able to handle these as well, but as others have discovered, only if the firmware is correct.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Marauder]

Chris,

I just got back home today and saw the senders had arrived, I also got all the remaining parts from Griggs for my bladder install. I didn't look at the senders but do we need to purchase any wire or is it all included with the sender as I'd hoped? Looking forward to getting this project started with you, I'm hoping to send some time over at N57 if you're around this weekend.

 

We will need to purchase wire, connectors and shrink wrap along with the mounting screws. There is a notation in the manual that indicates we could have purchased them with connectors. I have the mil-spec on the wiring stuff and will order it.

 

Would appreciate help getting the mounting screws identified. They provide the NAS number for the washers on the mounting screws but there is no number for the actual screw.

 

I don't intend of reusing any of the factory tefzel wiring even if it already there. Since I will have the panels out for the coax I am running, I'm going to run all new wires to the senders.

 

The manual also indicates we will need to level the planes. Let me know if you have jacks. If not, I'll get my buddy's (the ones we used last winter).

 

I will also call JPI and get the firmware number for determining whether we can run these senders in frequency mode. My EE friends tell me running in frequency mode is less likely to be interfered with from anything else in the plane.

 

I'll be around this weekend for the air show (the C54 showed up today and most of the rest will be coming tomorrow morning. They also will be practicing their routines tomorrow afternoon).

 

I have flown half of my fuel out and will try to fly it down tomorrow morning to VFR mins so I don't have a lot of pumping to do later.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[jamesm]

So if you have two sending units per tank .... is there 4 gauges or some sort of rotary selectors Fuel gauge reading.  if not I wonder how does the  fuel sending unit signal is summed  from the 2 sending units on one tank?   So is the M20J's fuel gauge any more accurate then say M20F  (assuming the M20J and M20F has the same fuel capacity)  when tanks are top off?  seems a lot more work adding additional sending unit for 7 or 8  more gallons or what ever the difference between M20J   say the M20C (26 gal).

[Marauder]

So if you have two sending units per tank .... is there 4 gauges or some sort of rotary selectors Fuel gauge reading.  if not I wonder how does the  fuel sending unit signal is summed  from the 2 sending units on one tank?   So is the M20J's fuel gauge any more accurate then say M20F  (assuming the M20J and M20F has the same fuel capacity)  when tanks are top off?  seems a lot more work adding additional sending unit for 7 or 8  more gallons or what ever the difference between M20J   say the M20C (26 gal).

The explanation I received was the original planes had 2 senders. The second set was added to the F, J and K models reportedly not to specifically address the 7 more gallons per side but to improve the accuracy by averaging the 2 sender readings in each tank. Hopefully someone can confirm this.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Bob - S50]

I'm guessing that when they increased fuel capacity, they came to a point when the inboard float hit the top of the wing but there was still room in the tank for fuel so they added a float at the outboard end.

[Bob - S50]

10 hours ago, jamesm said:

So if you have two sending units per tank .... is there 4 gauges or some sort of rotary selectors Fuel gauge reading.  if not I wonder how does the  fuel sending unit signal is summed  from the 2 sending units on one tank?   So is the M20J's fuel gauge any more accurate then say M20F  (assuming the M20J and M20F has the same fuel capacity)  when tanks are top off?  seems a lot more work adding additional sending unit for 7 or 8  more gallons or what ever the difference between M20J   say the M20C (26 gal).

It only takes one indicator/tank.  Original floats are set up in series (as opposed to parallel).  The Cies floats talk to each other.  You take the output from one (slave) and connect it to the input of the other (master).  The master circuitry takes the input from the slave and from its own float position and computes a total which it then sends to the gauge.

Even though I have 4 floats and 2 tanks, I only need one gauge which indicates the level of both tanks.