  | 
				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: Sun Oct 18, 2020 11:23 am    Post subject: "Load Dump" revisited | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				The term is part of the vernacular of both
  automotive and aviation worlds but they
  have similar but not equal definitions.
 
  The term is somewhat self explanatory . . .
  a big alternator load is suddenly removed.
  The resulting event is something akin to
  the ice cream social game of tug-o-war.
 
  Two opposing but relatively equal forces
  compete with each striving to satisfy 
  disparate goals in physics. In this case,
  the ALTERNATOR, under command of a regulator,
  works within its limitations to maintain
  the system bus at some pre-set voltage.
 
  The totality of system loads team up to
  comprise a total LOAD on the alternator.
  Their demand tends to pull bus voltage down
  while the alternator/regulator is working
  to sustain the bus at the regulator's 
  set point.
 
  At such time that total LOAD is very high,
  sometimes equal to the alternator name-plate
  limit, when have the electrical equivalent of
  two teams of individuals pulling on a rope
  from each end.
 
  It's easy to visualize the prospects for
  a sudden change of equilibrium if the LOAD
  should suddenly reduce . . . perhaps even go
  to zero. The rope breaks, load is zero. Half
  of a crew looses traction and fall, the load
  is greatly reduced. In either case, the
  tension impressed on the 'alternator' side
  goes down. The alternator was already balls-to-
  the wall before the reduction. Sudden release
  of tension allows the bus voltage to rise
  suddenly and before the regulator's response
  dynamic can react, the voltage will rise quickly
  to some limit defined by (1) percentage of
  load reduction and (2) time it takes for the
  regulator to regain control.
 
  Now, here's where the automotive and aviation
  communities diverge a little when considering
  the cause/effects of a load-dump.
 
  When one reads the literature for mitigating load
  dump in cars, virtually every condition speaks to
  disconnection of the battery as worst case root
  cause of the voltage transient. For example, suppose
  you've had a hard start on the vehicle and the battery
  is flagging. The car starts and the alternator rises
  to the call and begins the task of recharging the battery.
 
  It's daytime and weather mild . . . no headlights, no
  HVAC motors . . . the BATTERY comprises the greatest
  load on the system because it's being demanding
  replenished from a largely discharged state.
 
  Now, unhook the battery and . . . you got it . . .
  the alternator is now lightly loaded by system accessories
  and the alternator/regulator overshoot/recovery characteristics
  prevail. Further, the system loads are light and the
  PRIMARY load-dump mitigator, the battery, is out to lunch.
 
  This is the automotive description of the perfect
  storm of load dumps and yes, it's the worst
  case scenario for a load dump in a battery-alternator
  DC power system.
 
  But the really BIG question is, how does that battery
  become unhooked? Pretty rare event on a vehicle-by-vehicle
  case . . . but there are tens of millions of them out
  there. It's kinda like lightning strikes . . . doesn't
  happen often but risk is not zero and the quality of
  workmanship for battery installation and maintenance
  is not as rigorous as in airplanes.
 
  In airplanes, we have the perfect configuration for
  generating the ultimate load dump: the battery contactor(s).
  In most piston aircraft, DC power controls are configured
  for BATTERY ON BEFORE ALTERNATOR and ALTERNATOR OFF
  BEFORE BATTERY. It's the legacy split-rocker on many
  production aircraft and the DP3P(progressive) toggle
  switch in a lot of OBAM aircraft.
 
  Except for conditions arising from poor craftsmanship
  or maintenance, the battery is pretty tightly
  wedded to the bus. There ARE still rare disconnects
  with root cause in contactor failure . . . but
  in the whole constellation of contactor failures,
  what proportion occur during a heavy battery recharge
  condition?
 
  Aviation's load-dump events have been extensively
  studied over the last 100 years. MIL-STD-704 and
  DO-160 qualifications combined with sundry TSO
  requirements suggest that power generation and
  control systems be designed and qualified to
  limit load dump excursions to 40/80 Volts (14/28
  Volt systems). Accessories are designed and qualified
  to stand off those same transients.
 
  Just how the system designers choose to meet those
  goals is not dictated. They may use
  a sprinkling of transient voltage suppressors
  or simply configure limit/withstand those levels
  by design.
 
  In any case, the highest risk condition is
  set up by an inadvertent disconnect of a badly
  discharged battery. Folks who travel on the
  ground are many times more likely to experience
  this than folks who fly . . . who are supposed
  to KNOW better!
 
  
   
 
  
    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 | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		bob.verwey(at)gmail.com Guest
 
 
 
 
 
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2020 9:45 pm    Post subject: "Load Dump" revisited | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				Thank you Sir...illucidating as usual!
 
 On Sun, 18 Oct 2020, 21:32 Robert L. Nuckolls, III, <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com (nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com)> wrote:
 
  	  | Quote: | 	 		    The term is part of the vernacular of both
  automotive and aviation worlds but they
  have similar but not equal definitions.
 
  The term is somewhat self explanatory . . .
  a big alternator load is suddenly removed.
  The resulting event is something akin to
  the ice cream social game of tug-o-war.
 
  Two opposing but relatively equal forces
  compete with each striving to satisfy 
  disparate goals in physics. In this case,
  the ALTERNATOR, under command of a regulator,
  works within its limitations to maintain
  the system bus at some pre-set voltage.
 
  The totality of system loads team up to
  comprise a total LOAD on the alternator.
  Their demand tends to pull bus voltage down
  while the alternator/regulator is working
  to sustain the bus at the regulator's 
  set point.
 
  At such time that total LOAD is very high,
  sometimes equal to the alternator name-plate
  limit, when have the electrical equivalent of
  two teams of individuals pulling on a rope
  from each end.
 
  It's easy to visualize the prospects for
  a sudden change of equilibrium if the LOAD
  should suddenly reduce . . . perhaps even go
  to zero. The rope breaks, load is zero. Half
  of a crew looses traction and fall, the load
  is greatly reduced. In either case, the
  tension impressed on the 'alternator' side
  goes down. The alternator was already balls-to-
  the wall before the reduction. Sudden release
  of tension allows the bus voltage to rise
  suddenly and before the regulator's response
  dynamic can react, the voltage will rise quickly
  to some limit defined by (1) percentage of
  load reduction and (2) time it takes for the
  regulator to regain control.
 
  Now, here's where the automotive and aviation
  communities diverge a little when considering
  the cause/effects of a load-dump.
 
  When one reads the literature for mitigating load
  dump in cars, virtually every condition speaks to
  disconnection of the battery as worst case root
  cause of the voltage transient. For example, suppose
  you've had a hard start on the vehicle and the battery
  is flagging. The car starts and the alternator rises
  to the call and begins the task of recharging the battery.
 
  It's daytime and weather mild . . . no headlights, no
  HVAC motors . . . the BATTERY comprises the greatest
  load on the system because it's being demanding
  replenished from a largely discharged state.
 
  Now, unhook the battery and . . . you got it . . .
  the alternator is now lightly loaded by system accessories
  and the alternator/regulator overshoot/recovery characteristics
  prevail. Further, the system loads are light and the
  PRIMARY load-dump mitigator, the battery, is out to lunch.
 
  This is the automotive description of the perfect
  storm of load dumps and yes, it's the worst
  case scenario for a load dump in a battery-alternator
  DC power system.
 
  But the really BIG question is, how does that battery
  become unhooked? Pretty rare event on a vehicle-by-vehicle
  case . . . but there are tens of millions of them out
  there. It's kinda like lightning strikes . . . doesn't
  happen often but risk is not zero and the quality of
  workmanship for battery installation and maintenance
  is not as rigorous as in airplanes.
 
  In airplanes, we have the perfect configuration for
  generating the ultimate load dump: the battery contactor(s).
  In most piston aircraft, DC power controls are configured
  for BATTERY ON BEFORE ALTERNATOR and ALTERNATOR OFF
  BEFORE BATTERY. It's the legacy split-rocker on many
  production aircraft and the DP3P(progressive) toggle
  switch in a lot of OBAM aircraft.
 
  Except for conditions arising from poor craftsmanship
  or maintenance, the battery is pretty tightly
  wedded to the bus. There ARE still rare disconnects
  with root cause in contactor failure . . . but
  in the whole constellation of contactor failures,
  what proportion occur during a heavy battery recharge
  condition?
 
  Aviation's load-dump events have been extensively
  studied over the last 100 years. MIL-STD-704 and
  DO-160 qualifications combined with sundry TSO
  requirements suggest that power generation and
  control systems be designed and qualified to
  limit load dump excursions to 40/80 Volts (14/28
  Volt systems). Accessories are designed and qualified
  to stand off those same transients.
 
  Just how the system designers choose to meet those
  goals is not dictated. They may use
  a sprinkling of transient voltage suppressors
  or simply configure limit/withstand those levels
  by design.
 
  In any case, the highest risk condition is
  set up by an inadvertent disconnect of a badly
  discharged battery. Folks who travel on the
  ground are many times more likely to experience
  this than folks who fly . . . who are supposed
  to KNOW better!
 
  
   
 
  
    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 | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		 | 
	 
 
  
	 
	    
	   | 
	
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
  
		 |