GeeBee Posted September 26, 2020 Author Report Posted September 26, 2020 17 minutes ago, EricJ said: ACs are always advisory, not regulatory. They provide accepted data and methods but are neither limiting nor regulatory. AC 43.13 is a little unusual in that it can also be used as approved data under the conditions described on the cover page. I think you'd be surprised what goes in many avionics shops and maintenance hangars when it comes to terminals and wiring, etc., etc. The Battery Minder kit and instructions specifically use ring terminals, which are the type of terminal that should be used, according to 43.13 and other FAA documents. And now you're saying connecting directly to the battery is allowed, and I was responding specifically to you saying: "Mine will make you remove it. His point is by AC 43.13 that there can be no direct connection to the battery terminals other than the one main wire. Battery Tender installation requires you to place the connection to the hot side of the solenoid rather than the battery terminals." So I guess we've come full circle and neither of those things appear to be true. Nooooo, I don't think you're getting it. You are allowed to connect directly to the terminal because: 1. You are using materials in compliance with FAR 21.9 2. You are complying with a set of engineered instructions. 3. While the instructions mention a lack of battery bus as a reason to go direct to the battery terminal AC43.13 says you have to have a relay and that is where the instructions say to connect to the battery. In addition it says it should be mounted as close as possible to battery. I guess you would have a hard time in an electrical fire situation explaining why you did not follow the mfr suggestion rather than your own when the relay is so close. Quote
EricJ Posted September 26, 2020 Report Posted September 26, 2020 8 minutes ago, GeeBee said: Nooooo, I don't think you're getting it. You are allowed to connect directly to the terminal because: 1. You are using materials in compliance with FAR 21.9 2. You are complying with a set of engineered instructions. 3. While the instructions mention a lack of battery bus as a reason to go direct to the battery terminal AC43.13 says you have to have a relay and that is where the instructions say to connect to the battery. In addition it says it should be mounted as close as possible to battery. I guess you would have a hard time in an electrical fire situation explaining why you did not follow the mfr suggestion rather than your own when the relay is so close. Back to square one. I've no idea what you're trying to argue now and you seem to have taken both sides. Again, I was only responding to: "His point is by AC 43.13 that there can be no direct connection to the battery terminals other than the one main wire. Battery Tender installation requires you to place the connection to the hot side of the solenoid rather than the battery terminals." I have not found and you have not cited anything in AC 43.13 regarding a limitation in that document of only the main wire being connected at the battery terminal. The Battery Tender instructions similarly do not make such a limitation and suggest connecting to the solenoid/relay as a convenience measure to make battery installation and removal easier. It does say, "Plastic or composite airframes that do not have battery busses may require direct connection to battery terminals. The best method to access the battery varies by aircraft type and must be determined by the installing mechanic." It's really a small point, and most folks probably connect to the battery supply terminal on the master relay, but I don't see anything in AC 43.13 or the Battery Minder airframe kit prohibiting connection to the battery. Quote
GeeBee Posted September 27, 2020 Author Report Posted September 27, 2020 1 hour ago, EricJ said: Back to square one. I've no idea what you're trying to argue now and you seem to have taken both sides. Again, I was only responding to: "His point is by AC 43.13 that there can be no direct connection to the battery terminals other than the one main wire. Battery Tender installation requires you to place the connection to the hot side of the solenoid rather than the battery terminals." I have not found and you have not cited anything in AC 43.13 regarding a limitation in that document of only the main wire being connected at the battery terminal. The Battery Tender instructions similarly do not make such a limitation and suggest connecting to the solenoid/relay as a convenience measure to make battery installation and removal easier. It does say, "Plastic or composite airframes that do not have battery busses may require direct connection to battery terminals. The best method to access the battery varies by aircraft type and must be determined by the installing mechanic." It's really a small point, and most folks probably connect to the battery supply terminal on the master relay, but I don't see anything in AC 43.13 or the Battery Minder airframe kit prohibiting connection to the battery. Please feel free to ignore the installation recommendations. I know I can say mine was installed in accordance with the instruction recommendations and practices. I'm comfortable with that standard. From the instruction manual: "we recommend attaching the positive ring terminal to the battery relay post or stud that is connected to the positive battery cable and the negative to a convenient airframe ground (see Figure 1). " Quote
EricJ Posted September 27, 2020 Report Posted September 27, 2020 21 minutes ago, GeeBee said: Please feel free to ignore the installation recommendations. I know I can say mine was installed in accordance with the instruction recommendations and practices. I'm comfortable with that standard. From the instruction manual: "we recommend attaching the positive ring terminal to the battery relay post or stud that is connected to the positive battery cable and the negative to a convenient airframe ground (see Figure 1). " Yes, it is a recommendation, not a requirement, and the recommendation clearly states that it is to facilitate easier battery maintenance such as removal and installation. "Determine best electrical access to the aircraft battery. See installation examples in a variety of airframes at www.audioauthority.com/BM-AIK2A. Since batteries are regularly removed for inspection, maintenance and replacement, we recommend attaching the positive ring terminal to the battery relay post or stud that is connected to the positive battery cable and the negative to a convenient airframe ground (see Figure 1). Plastic or composite airframes that do not have battery busses may require direct connection to battery terminals. The best method to access the battery varies by aircraft type and must be determined by the installing mechanic." I think it is important to distinguish requirements and recommendations. You had stated previously that it was a requirement and that your IA had said it is a requirement per AC 43.13. It appears that it is not a requirement. As an EE and an A&P I am perfectly comfortable understanding and addressing the tradeoff between the two approaches. It is not a big thing at all. Either way should work just fine. 2 Quote
GeeBee Posted September 27, 2020 Author Report Posted September 27, 2020 As an AE I can tell you that unless the battery cable was fused, you would never get a TCDS. The FAA requires any unprotected cable, such as a battery cable to be run solo and without any adjacent cables. Indeed 43.13 also mentions this. So unless you ran that battery charging cable up and away from the terminal and you did not tie wrap or otherwise attach to the battery cable as it exited the battery (which seems unlikely) it is not an accepted practice. "Wires not protected by a circuit-protective device, such as a circuit breaker or fuse, should be routed separately from all other wiring." AC43.13 11.105 Quote
jaylw314 Posted September 28, 2020 Report Posted September 28, 2020 On 9/26/2020 at 1:05 PM, GeeBee said: It does say about the materials required in the modification as does FAR 21.9. If you're using SAE wire with non conformal insulation, that is not allowed on a certified aircraft. FAR 21.9 (a) 3 spells it out. I don't understand, I thought 21.9 applies to the requirements for PMA, e.g. the ability of someone to sell something as an aviation part. My understanding is that it has no specific regulatory limitation on how you can modify anything (especially for aircraft flown under part 91) Quote
GeeBee Posted September 28, 2020 Author Report Posted September 28, 2020 Well, hell's bells, let's use Home Depot for bolts and nuts too! FAR 21.9 (a)5 applies and the materials must meet the requirements of 43.13 (b) Quote
EricJ Posted September 28, 2020 Report Posted September 28, 2020 9 hours ago, GeeBee said: Well, hell's bells, let's use Home Depot for bolts and nuts too! You could under 21.9 (a) 4. Quote
RobertGary1 Posted September 28, 2020 Report Posted September 28, 2020 I'll just go on record to say I think Battery Minder's are a bad idea on the aircraft. A healthy battery will hold charge for over a month of non-flying. Beyond that you should remove the battery. If the battery is starting to not hold a good charge I want to find out little by little each time I start it not after sitting overnight when I'm away on a trip. I don't see the advantage. -Robert 2 Quote
hypertech Posted September 28, 2020 Report Posted September 28, 2020 11 minutes ago, RobertGary1 said: I'll just go on record to say I think Battery Minder's are a bad idea on the aircraft. A healthy battery will hold charge for over a month of non-flying. Beyond that you should remove the battery. If the battery is starting to not hold a good charge I want to find out little by little each time I start it not after sitting overnight when I'm away on a trip. I don't see the advantage. -Robert A Concorde battery is $6-700 and I have two of them. If keeping them on the battery minder helps the batteries last a little longer, its worth it. 1 Quote
RobertGary1 Posted September 28, 2020 Report Posted September 28, 2020 6 minutes ago, hypertech said: A Concorde battery is $6-700 and I have two of them. If keeping them on the battery minder helps the batteries last a little longer, its worth it. Part of the calculous is probably if the places you go are likely to have an GPU if your battery dies over night. If you go to remote places you want to have confidence your battery will hold charge on its own overnight. If you do use a Battery Minder I'd recommend doing a load test on the batteries at each oil change. -Robert Quote
GeeBee Posted September 28, 2020 Author Report Posted September 28, 2020 2 hours ago, EricJ said: You could under 21.9 (a) 4. Only if it meets the requirements of 21.1 (b)3. Not a lot of HD stuff in ICAs that I have seen. Quote
EricJ Posted September 28, 2020 Report Posted September 28, 2020 1 hour ago, hypertech said: A Concorde battery is $6-700 and I have two of them. If keeping them on the battery minder helps the batteries last a little longer, its worth it. I attended a session put on by Concorde at an IA seminar a while back and they recommended the use of a Battery Minder, but only the specific ones they list on their site. There was some discussion about why automotive tenders and other tenders/minders are not a good idea but I don't recall the details. They did explain why the desulfating cycles are useful to extend battery life, and the battery won't get that from normal use with the aircraft charging system.http://concordebattery.com/accessories.php 2 Quote
GeeBee Posted September 28, 2020 Author Report Posted September 28, 2020 1 hour ago, RobertGary1 said: I'll just go on record to say I think Battery Minder's are a bad idea on the aircraft. A healthy battery will hold charge for over a month of non-flying. Beyond that you should remove the battery. If the battery is starting to not hold a good charge I want to find out little by little each time I start it not after sitting overnight when I'm away on a trip. I don't see the advantage. -Robert I can only relate my marine experience with AGM batteries on boats. Those that are on a charger 24/7 last 6 years, those that are not last 3. I agree that a capacity check is in order, but I have found leaving them on a charger keeps them from sulfating giving longer life to perform to capacity. The lower the charge level, the more this sulfation occurs. If there is charge going in, there is little to no chance for sulfation. We had a guy from the Concorde factory (it is just a few miles from us) give a presentation at our EAA meeting and he told is that keeping a charger on them will not hurt and will in fact extend the life of the battery. Just make sure you do capacity checks at appropriate intervals but at least yearly. Quote
RobertGary1 Posted September 28, 2020 Report Posted September 28, 2020 45 minutes ago, GeeBee said: I can only relate my marine experience with AGM batteries on boats. Those that are on a charger 24/7 last 6 years, those that are not last 3. My experience with AGM is much better than yours but that wasn't really my point. My point is that the Battery Minder makes the failure mode far worse. It will hide the fact that a battery is going bad. If you fly out to the mountains to go camping you don't want to discover the next morning the Battery Minder was the only reason your battery held a charge over night. -Robert Quote
GeeBee Posted September 28, 2020 Author Report Posted September 28, 2020 I understand that, but that is why you do capacity checks. I do them on my plane, I do them on my boat, I even do them on my diesel truck. I've always got plenty of warning. I've never seen a sudden capacity failure, but rather the decline is both apparent and well announced. Quote
RobertGary1 Posted September 28, 2020 Report Posted September 28, 2020 1 hour ago, GeeBee said: I understand that, but that is why you do capacity checks. I do them on my plane, I do them on my boat, I even do them on my diesel truck. I've always got plenty of warning. I've never seen a sudden capacity failure, but rather the decline is both apparent and well announced. Yea, like I said if you're doing regular capacity tests you should be ok. Just a warning not to get surprised by an unnoticed gradual reduction in capacity. -Robert Quote
N201MKTurbo Posted September 28, 2020 Report Posted September 28, 2020 So this whole thing about modifying your plane is in the grey area. Especially with avionics installs. When it comes to a battery minder connector, you can make an argument that it is legal and be right and that it is not and probably be right. I asked the FSDO inspector about this and he said, off the record, that they are not out looking for this stuff and won't go out of their way bust you for it. But on the other hand. If there was an accident caused by a short in the battery minder wiring, there would be so splaining to do. But another inspector at another session at the IA refresher, chided an IA who said if it looked "Air crafty" he would sign it off. Well, the reality is if it does look aircrafty you are on the right tract, but you should at least size your wires and circuit protectors according to 43.13-1b. As far as running unfused wires with other wires, that makes a lot of sense so a short will not fry the whole bundle. I doubt they were referring to the short little pig tail from the fuse to the battery post. Quote
GeeBee Posted September 28, 2020 Author Report Posted September 28, 2020 But they were referring to the battery cable itself. It is not fused, so no wire should be run with it, attached to it. Quote
larryb Posted September 29, 2020 Report Posted September 29, 2020 So in my aircraft the battery is not in a box. It has a manifold connection for the vent hose directly on the battery. What this means is that the battery minder wire does not run next to the main battery wire and is not attached to it. That said, and after reading this thread, I do like the idea of attaching the wire to the solenoid instead. With fewer wires attached to the battery fewer wires will be disturbed when the battery is changed. I may just have mine changed. It would only take a few minutes and is not a big deal. 2 Quote
rbp Posted January 30, 2022 Report Posted January 30, 2022 On 9/26/2020 at 5:29 PM, carusoam said: I bought the certified plane kit from the battery minder people... With the Tefzel coated wires.... The experimental kit is less expensive... With the PVC coated wires... Best regards, -a- if you have two batteries, do you need 2 kits? Quote
carusoam Posted January 31, 2022 Report Posted January 31, 2022 2 hours ago, rbp said: if you have two batteries, do you need 2 kits? Check the BatteryMinder site… Essentially Two wires, one for each battery, and a ‘Y’ to combine them together… While you are there, select the type of socket you want to use if mounting on the back wall of the baggage area…. Or just bringing it out to the O2 door or GPU door… The experimental guys use the PVC option…. The certified use the more expensive, last forever, Tefzel… Their customer service is pretty good at answering questions… then they pass you off to whatever sales organization you want to buy it from… There is a lot of unease created by this small manufacturer…. They know their stuff, and are willing to share… PP thoughts only, mostly old fuzzy memory… -a- Quote
rbp Posted January 31, 2022 Report Posted January 31, 2022 47 minutes ago, carusoam said: Check the BatteryMinder site… Essentially Two wires, one for each battery, and a ‘Y’ to combine them together… While you are there, select the type of socket you want to use if mounting on the back wall of the baggage area…. Or just bringing it out to the O2 door or GPU door… The experimental guys use the PVC option…. The certified use the more expensive, last forever, Tefzel… Their customer service is pretty good at answering questions… then they pass you off to whatever sales organization you want to buy it from… There is a lot of unease created by this small manufacturer…. They know their stuff, and are willing to share… PP thoughts only, mostly old fuzzy memory… -a- This doesn’t really answer the question. Is that a yes or a no, or are you just telling me to contact them? Quote
carusoam Posted January 31, 2022 Report Posted January 31, 2022 3 minutes ago, rbp said: This doesn’t really answer the question. Is that a yes or a no, or are you just telling me to contact them? Do you think I’m holding back on you? one battery gets one wire… one kit Two individual batteries get two wires… two kits A two battery system gets two wires and a Y…. More than two kits If you followed me this far… I think it is more than two kits…. You didn’t give me the right answer to offer you a yes/no answer… I’m a PP working on my writing skills… not a mind reader… I offered you my experience from purchasing the BatteryMinder for my two battery system… I have no idea if what I bought meets your expectations… So… I offered you where to find the options you may want to consider… It isn’t rocket science, nor is it simple one size fits all… If you are on the CB scale… you may not want to connect both batteries together… If you can easily afford to replace a battery… connect them both together… If you keep your plane in a hangar a charging socket in the baggage compartment makes sense… If you use the charger from the outside because you lock the plane up… bring the socket to GPU door… If you need a contact for BatteryMinder…. I can find that too… There is only so much I can do for ya… -a- Quote
carusoam Posted January 31, 2022 Report Posted January 31, 2022 Check out all of the options that are available… There is even a plug for the long body cigarette lighter socket… if you want to directly connect to the 28V socket…. For battery #1. https://www.batteryminders.com/aircraft-accessories/ Contact them directly to discuss what YOU want… There are sooooo many right ways to do this. Best regards, -a- Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.