CiES Fuel Senders Resource Thread

[Warren]

On 6/11/2021 at 7:32 PM, fuellevel said:

One - there is an amazing number of variations in aircraft - even between serial numbers.

When we have consistent information we make changes.

But this is on Page 10 

The insert in the box lets the installer know that this document is available online.

In the beginning we make sure we highlight items the installer should pay attention to

This is an industry standard warning - typically found in Garmin install manuals.

 

 

+Great product that works well once installed. 

-Nightmare for the installers to fine tune sender geometry.  It is great to write a caveat to cover all installations that just says “make sure sender is free to move from the top to the bottom.”  It is also great to see this in a cutaway of a tank — much harder in real life where filler ports are one or more ribs aways from the sender ports.  It is impossible to see the installed float in many applications.

The real installation process is:

1.  Look in the installation hole (lights, mirrors, camera,...) and try to guess what the sender might hit.  Then guess if a bend is needed and install the sender.

2.  Start the calibration process by filling the tank and watching the electronic output for sender movement throughout the full tank range.  This requires a full fill of the tank.

3.  If issues arise, the tank now needs to be fully drained.

4.  Try to figure out what the problem is when it is almost impossible to have the sender installed and look for interferences in many installations.  Do whatever you can to fix, bend,... the installation.

5.  Reinstall and repeat.  Then you get to start over on the other side.  Then imagine a bigger plane with two discrete tanks on each side.

As you can see the installation process can be very extended, time consuming and expensive.  We will no longer quote a flat rate for this installation and will coach potential customers that the install process can be difficult and can get expensive.

I don’t want to be too negative, just set realistic expectations for all parties involved.  I will repeat that they are great senders and seem to be very accurate.  It would be great if CIES could find a way to reliably duplicate the geometry of the senders being removed to resolve installation issues.

[fuellevel]

2 hours ago, Warren said:

 It would be great if CIES could find a way to reliably duplicate the geometry of the senders being removed to resolve installation issues.

We need this information and the eyes of people installing the senders as mentioned above  -  We have the ability to make an arm in any manner.   We choose 3003 Aluminum rod for its ability to take and keep a bend and corrosion resistance. 

So here is our favorite Cirrus G2 installer - just to be ecumenical   We get videos and we act on them.    I can't do anything without some documentation,  remember the FAA is always ready to help. 

I have made adjustments only to rub on some sealant somewhere else  

We have a CNC rod bender  - its in our video 

 

https://youtu.be/AzNHs3TEgvs?t=25

[PilotX]

Here is the picture of the original M20M senders if it helps the community to pre-bend new CIES senders. I am still comparing sight gauges on the wing vs digital fuel readouts on the EIS. I understand that the CIES are calibrated for level flight and so when I taxi over to the fuel pit in a bit and put 20 gallons in I hope to see a commensurate increase in the digital readout.

 

[rbp]

I'm just reading up on this, as my avionics installer is asking me if I want these senders.

I have an M with 89gals

For long-range trips, I have used the totalizer that came with the plane with great success. 

I feel comfortable landing with 20 in the tanks and filling up again with 65-70 gals.

What demonstrable benefit (rather than just knowing exactly how much is in the tank) will I get from using these? 

 

[Vance Harral]

1 hour ago, rbp said:

What demonstrable benefit (rather than just knowing exactly how much is in the tank) will I get from using these?

The main benefit of good fuel gauges in an airplane with an accurate fuel totalizer system is to cover failure modes the totalizer can't "see".  The obvious one is failure to program the totalizer correctly.  Another is a bad or missing gas cap that allows fuel to be siphoned out of the tank in flight.  Another that's applicable to Continental fuel injection is a leak in the fuel return system.

It's fair to argue that even the old, original, "inaccurate" senders give you pretty good protection against these sorts of problems.  But some people want better accuracy than those old senders can provide even when they're in good shape.  Longevity is another selling point, though it's unclear to me whether the CIES senders are demonstrably better in that respect.

[rbp]

The estimate I got was $2000 for the senders and $4000 for installation. None of those sound like a $6000 problem

[PilotX]

1 hour ago, rbp said:

The estimate I got was $2000 for the senders and $4000 for installation. None of those sound like a $6000 problem

Well if they do it right the first time (not a knock on my installer - but educate your installer in advance) it should take 8-12 hours which would include R&R, wiring, calibration and I can't see how they would get to 40ish hours. The installer that handled mine said they are not going to bill by the job anymore on these, they have had two very time consuming installs (including mine). 

I have done similar math with speed brakes. How much would it cost me to put in electrics - that stick out over the wing - just to get rid of the remaining 5lb vacuum pump.

[carusoam]

@fuellevel See pic from pilotX…

-a-

8 hours ago, PilotX said:

Here is the picture of the original M20M senders if it helps the community to pre-bend new CIES senders. I am still comparing sight gauges on the wing vs digital fuel readouts on the EIS. I understand that the CIES are calibrated for level flight and so when I taxi over to the fuel pit in a bit and put 20 gallons in I hope to see a commensurate increase in the digital readout.

 

 

[carusoam]

5 hours ago, rbp said:

The estimate I got was $2000 for the senders and $4000 for installation. None of those sound like a $6000 problem

Depends on who you are…

Somebody collected the data that said running out of fuel is still a problem for pilots…

The Ceis sensors connected to a digital display would be a vast improvement over the mechanical gauges in my plane…

It is really easy to not reset the totalizer or know exactly how much fuel is in the tank at the beginning…

So… I mostly use my FF/totalizer to do the dirty work…

Leaves me pretty dependent on that one sensor… that is known to get dirty, or count air bubbles while failing….

Your numbers sound a tad high….  What price would make sense for you to have decent fuel data… 5amu, 4amu, 3amu, 2amu?

Terry did a great job of explaining the instilation a while back…

For a really expensive job… include putting in a JPI or G-EIS… for the data display…  

Best regards,

-a-

[rbp]

I have a backup instrument for the totalizer! 

its called a watch: I allocate a very generous 24gph in the climb @500fpm/120KIAS, and 20gph in fast cruise (based on CHT and TIT). those numbers make the math easy.

[carusoam]

Great set of numbers rbp!

My M20C didn’t have FF/totalizer… it took me dozens of flights to collect actual numbers to go with my time keeper… 

Then I had to take decent notes on leg timing…

Hard to believe the data was so repeatable….  That took dozens of more flights to prove how repeatable it was…

Flying Life before MS was so much more difficult… 

Best regards,

-a-

[Marauder]

The estimate I got was $2000 for the senders and $4000 for installation. None of those sound like a $6000 problem

Where they wearing an eye patch with their mask when they handed you the estimate?

Terry H and I installed mine. In my case, the real work was running new wires to operate the senders in frequency mode. Being a slow and meticulous owner, it took me about 5 hours. There is another 3 hours removing and reinstalling the interior to get to the inboard senders. And then another 3 hours to make the connections and do the calibration. Even doubling that to 22 hours and using a $100/hr shop rate, I’m not sure how they came up with $6,000.

I’ve been flying behind these CiES senders for the past 3.5 years. I actually look at my fuel gauges now. 90% of the fill ups are within 0.5 gallon what the gauges are reading. And when they are off, it is no more than a gallon and it is usually because of the expansion/cooling thing that goes on with fuel. There is a rounding thing going on with the JPI 900 displayed quantity. Bob Belville clued me in to look at the raw data from a JPI download. You can see it to a decimal place.

I have seen and heard comments about problems with their fit. In my case, I needed to install them upside down to make them clear everything. I did speak to Scott a lot through the process and at times it was frustrating because the FAA approved documentation left out details. He explained the challenges of modifying the documentation for every application. I get it.

I can attest they work great in an F model with bladders.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[fuellevel]

On 6/15/2021 at 8:27 PM, carusoam said:

@fuellevel See pic from pilotX…

-a-

 

We have the original factory senders.   We also have some pictures/videos recently from Garmin showing interference, which we are reviewing.   Keeping Garmin and the rest of our customers  happy is a good thing  Our current AML sender update has been with the FAA since January, with no prognosis on completion.    The senders were designed and originated for the current Mooney production   Bill Wheat and Charles Beck worked together to get the initial CiES fuel sender on factory Mooney aircraft.   Charles Beck is the inventor.     I have installed the senders on current Mooney production aircraft with no issue - but I also know how close they can come to structure and I am very careful to put the sender in without bending.  That being true - it isn't a guarantee it will work every time   Even a jigged wing built as well as a Mooney has variations  That is the nature of aircraft production quantities. 

[MironV]

We’re having some trouble with the CIES senders connected to a GI-275 in an M20J and wondering if anyone has ideas.

The issue is that the left sensors read zero until about 13 gallons are added and then they work fine. The installer thought it was a sensor issue but CIES sent new ones and they have the same problem.

The installer checked that they report fine through the full range of motion wired out of the tank. He then installed them and checked that the travel seems fine when they are moved with a string inside the tank. Borescope doesn’t show any obstructions around them, as far as it can see.

However, when actually filling the wing with gas, they don’t seem to read right until you hit several gallons. This means the calibration value is effectively zero for a while, which is not right.

The right tank works fine. We’re at our wits end on this and the installer said CIES doesn’t seem to know what the issue could be.

Any ideas? @fuellevel any chance you could help?

Edited July 23, 2022 by MironV

[Marauder]

We’re having some trouble with the CIES senders connected to a GI-275 in an M20J and wondering if anyone has ideas.
The issue is that the left sensors read zero until about 13 gallons are added and then they work fine. The installer thought it was a sensor issue but CIES sent new ones and they have the same problem.
The installer checked that they report fine through the full range of motion wired out of the tank. He then installed them and checked that the travel seems fine when they are moved with a string inside the tank. Borescope doesn’t show any obstructions around them, as far as it can see.
However, when actually filling the wing with gas, they don’t seem to read right until you hit several gallons. This means the calibration value is effectively zero for a while, which is not right.
The right tank works fine. We’re at our wits end on this and the installer said CIES doesn’t seem to know what the issue could be.
Any ideas? [mention=14420]fuellevel[/mention] any chance you could help?

Have you redone the calibration just on odd chance it didn’t get right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[MironV]

Yes, the calibration has been redone two or three times at this point. It’s very laborious to fill and drain the tanks so trying to avoid more than another redo.

[Marauder]

Yes, the calibration has been redone two or three times at this point. It’s very laborious to fill and drain the tanks so trying to avoid more than another redo.

Considering you have replaced the senders and done multiple calibrations, it really is starting to look like the Garmin. I don’t know what mode the senders are set for a Garmin installation. Can they be run in another mode (resistance versus frequency)?

Hopefully one of the others with the Garmin setup can provide their thoughts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Tom 4536]

12 hours ago, MironV said:

We’re having some trouble with the CIES senders connected to a GI-275 in an M20J and wondering if anyone has ideas.

The issue is that the left sensors read zero until about 13 gallons are added and then they work fine. The installer thought it was a sensor issue but CIES sent new ones and they have the same problem.

The installer checked that they report fine through the full range of motion wired out of the tank. He then installed them and checked that the travel seems fine when they are moved with a string inside the tank. Borescope doesn’t show any obstructions around them, as far as it can see.

However, when actually filling the wing with gas, they don’t seem to read right until you hit several gallons. This means the calibration value is effectively zero for a while, which is not right.

The right tank works fine. We’re at our wits end on this and the installer said CIES doesn’t seem to know what the issue could be.

Any ideas? @fuellevel any chance you could help?

See if the reading changes when rocking the wings while on the ground. In the air, when my tanks are down to about half full, sometimes I need to rock the wings to get a correct reading. 

[MironV]

To clarify, the issue is during calibration not during normal operation. When filling up the left tank, the sender is showing the same signal for no fuel and when we add 13 gallons. After that it works fine.

We haven't flown the plane to see what happens if you below 13 gallons but I assume since the calibration point is the same as zero, the GI-275 may get confused or just show 0.

[MikeOH]

Man, after reading through this thread, and the money involved, I'm glad I'm a just a caveman with a watch, pencil, and paper.

[Marauder]

Man, after reading through this thread, and the money involved, I'm glad I'm a just a caveman with a watch, pencil, and paper.

LOL. As an early adopter, it sure felt that way. But once you get the bugs worked out, the gauges are reallllllly accurate.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[201Mooniac]

I understand from my installer that there is a recent change to the wiring diagram from Garmin for the Cies to the GEA-24 that requires a chassis ground on the signal low side to ensure the probes read correctly.  I don't know if this would cause the issue you are seeing but it might be worth checking to ensure your shop has the latest and greatest wiring diagram.

[MironV]

On 7/24/2022 at 5:26 PM, 201Mooniac said:

I understand from my installer that there is a recent change to the wiring diagram from Garmin for the Cies to the GEA-24 that requires a chassis ground on the signal low side to ensure the probes read correctly.  I don't know if this would cause the issue you are seeing but it might be worth checking to ensure your shop has the latest and greatest wiring diagram.

Unfortunately, looks like they did that.

[201Mooniac]

30 minutes ago, MironV said:

Unfortunately, looks like they did that.

Well hopefully that should be an easy fix and you can be working quickly

[kortopates]

I understand from my installer that there is a recent change to the wiring diagram from Garmin for the Cies to the GEA-24 that requires a chassis ground on the signal low side to ensure the probes read correctly.  I don't know if this would cause the issue you are seeing but it might be worth checking to ensure your shop has the latest and greatest wiring diagram.

Funny, EDM went through the same revision issue years ago. They even started supplying their own harnesses for CIEs, to guarantee good grounding, since so many of us had grounding issues in the early installs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk