Dave,
I'd suggest using a switch guard (one of those red spring- loaded types) to
prevent accidental actuation. Just batting it down with your hand would
quickly trigger a manual actuation of the fire suppression system. If an
additional level of protection against accidental actuation is desired, a
second SPST "arm" switch could be added in series with the first one and the
solenoid valve. You'd need to remember to flip it ON, though. There are
always drawbacks to any approach-- it wouldn't be a universal solution to
the fire detection problem. ....just a few ideas.
Regards, Neil Tucson, AZ
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Dahlgren [mailto:ddahlgren@snet.net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 9:53 AM
To: Albaugh, Neil
Subject: Re: Solid suspension and visibility comments
for what it is worth your idea of a SPDT switch is interesting but picture
what
can go wrong will, like mis-triggering the system by a crew member or
accidentally going to manual when taking them off automatic..
Dave
"Albaugh, Neil" wrote:
>
> Skip;
>
> You have good points. I agree with your assesment of the resistance wire
> problems. There is also the problem of delay time-- similar to the
problems
> with fire sensing by thermostats, etc. I did see a couple of UV fire
sensors
> sell on eBay recently for only about $30, so there are some bargains to be
> had if one is lucky enough to find them.
>
> I also agree with your wanting to be able to shut off the fire bottles
> manually. I'd suggest wiring a SPDT (ON- OFF- ON) switch in series with
the
> solenoid valve so that in the center position, the system is "OFF". Flip
> the switch to the "up" position to arm the automatic flame detector and in
> the "down" position the fire bottles are manually activated. I can give
you
> more detail on how that would be wired if you're interested.
>
> Regards, Neil Tucson, AZ
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Skip Higginbotham [mailto:saltrat@pro-blend.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 9:09 AM
> To: Albaugh, Neil; land-speed@autox.team.net
> Subject: RE: Solid suspension and visibility comments
>
> Neil,
> The problem with resistance wire systems is false alarms.......not a good
> idea at 300 MPH +. Too hard on the heart! And IR systems are a little
> pricey for me.
> Auto fire extinguishing is OK if you don't want to control the
extinguisher
> manually. I do. I feel like I can turn on the fire bottles until the fire
> is out and if I'm not stopped yet, I can turn off the fire bottles and
save
> the agent for later in the shut-down if the fire relights or was not out
to
> begin with. Also manual control might let me breathe in the small
> cockpit!!! Too subtile?
> Hard to reason with a fire that is behind you though!!! Auto system might
> be the best in the long run. I worry about false actuation.......
> Skip
>
> At 09:50 AM 10/30/01 -0600, you wrote:
> >Skip;
> >
> >That's a good idea. You could probably wire that into a solenoid-
operated
> >valve to actuate the fire bottles automatically, too.
> >
> >I've seen some aircraft fire detection systems that are based on a wire
> that
> >changes resistance. Some of the newer flame detectors sense ultraviolet
> >radiation so they aren't confused by IR heat radiation from the
collectors
> >or other hot spots.
> >
> >Regards, Neil Tucson, AZ
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Skip Higginbotham [mailto:saltrat@pro-blend.com]
> >Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 5:54 PM
> >To: Albaugh, Neil; land-speed@autox.team.net
> >Subject: RE: Solid suspension and visibility comments
> >
> >
> >Neil,
> >I have a fire detection system in the liner/lakester. Turns a bright red
> >light on in the cockpit. No false alarms yet.
> >Skip
///
/// land-speed@autox.team.net mailing list
/// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// with nothing in it but
///
/// unsubscribe land-speed
///
/// or go to http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
///
///
|