Fuel gauges

[Guest Redair]

Well, while I'm on here, I might as well ask for more help!!! So, I am puzzled by the range, and choice of fuel gauge & sender units available, and would like to know is one type better than any other? I'm thinking for ease of installation, operational accuracy and cost. Also, with regard to fitting in a high wing aircraft, would the best option be to fit gauges that are at the wing root, (i.e. above the doors) or in the instrument panel? Any and all advice from those in the know, will be gratefully received as always.

 

Regards, Redair.

 

 

[Timm427]

I speak from limited experience only having flown high wing planes and only with wing mounted gauges.

 

One of the planes uses simple clear level tubes mounted on an alloy block. As the Avgas is greyish in colour I find it sometimes hard to tell at a glance where the fuel level is

 

The other plane uses wing mounted gauges white background and red hand. This is more definite, however the other problem I have with both planes is more to do with my eyes. I use reading glasses and when checking the fuel levels over my left shoulder I find it hard to quickly focus and have to stare at it for a while. Not really where I want to be looking when in the circuit.

 

I would prefer fuel gauges near the engine gauges.

 

Tim

 

 

[Guest Redair]

Thanks for that. I've seen the tube type gauges, but thought the same as you, that it can be difficult to see the level. I'm hoping to install some dial type gauges, but not sure on the best locations, or for that matter, the best type of sender units, as well as their fittment.

 

Redair.

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

My view is that if you can have them on the panel, along with the other engine gauges, then that's the best place for them. We all try to get a scan going and having to screw our heads around to look at hard-to-read tubes or dial gauges that are too close/too far away is not good.

 

Have you looked at this page:

 

http://www.aircraftspruce.com/menus/in/fuelinstrumentation.html

 

The ones that I've sat behind in the past are VDO I think. As reliable and easy to read as anything else....and they're cheap.

 

Regards

 

Mike

 

 

[facthunter]

Fuel gauges.

 

The most important thing is reliability. The DIRECT float operated gauges are so reliable that you don't have to dip the tanks on the Citabria, (which has aluminium tanks). With rubber tanks, an incorrectly fitted fuel cap can deform the tank, (by suction) so that you get an invalid reading. It can read FULL when you have nothing. There are plenty of set-ups that I would never rely on.. Nev

 

 

[tangocharlie123]

Retro Fitting Senders

 

Has anybody retofitted fuel senders into a fiberglass tank if so what is the best way to accomplish this and any suggestion on which type of sender to use..

 

thanks for the help in advance..

 

Peter

 

 

[Guest Redair]

Thanks for the help, I figure the best course of action will be to wait until the kit turns up, and then see what options will best suit the tanks and panel. I tried to get as much as I can sorted in advance, but things don't always go to plan:loopy:.

 

Redair.

 

 

[bushcaddy105]

Simple V complex?

 

Gooday again from a close neighbour (give me a ring sometime!)

 

Having been through this decision, my answer was the KISS principle. Having fitted

 

after-market VDO fuel gauges to auxilliary tanks in various 4WD's, the calibration process and the lack of consistent readings made me question the reliability of this process.

 

On the BC I chose to use a sight gauge on each wing tank, with the proviso that there is a restrictor in the tube to dampen the effect of surging. It is then very easy to calibrate - with the airframe propped up in level flying attitude, add a measured 5 litres at a time to the tank and mark the level on a paper temporary scale behind the sight tube. When finished, get an engraved plastic scale made. No problems with linearity, accurately calibrated for your particular tank shape, no moving parts, no electrical requirements, easy to establish unusable fuel quantity, easy to read with a contrasting background colour, etc.

 

Remember that whether you use a float gauge or a capacitive gauge, there is no surge damping and the readings will wander according to attitude.

 

How's that for an opinion?

 

 

[BigPete]

Spot On - I recon.

 

regards

 

:big_grin::big_grin:

 

 

[Tq2Jetman]

KISS is good but do not trade off KISS for accuracy. Keep in mind the recommended standard for fuel tank calibration is CAO 108.56 para 3.4 (For normal aircraft). It is however a good target to aim for I would suggest. Actual systems will depend on your depth of pocket and the length of the piece of string you are looking at. I wouldn't mind betting that a good google search would net some good ideas.;)

 

 

[Guest Redair]

How's that for an opinion?

In the words of Mr C. Montgomery Burns.... EXCELLENT!

 

Redair.

 

 

[sain]

There is always a build-it-yourself option for fuel gauges. Check out John Weir's (he writes the electronics articles for Kitplanes) Capacitive Fuel Gauge Articles from June and July of 2000:

 

http://www.rst-engr.com/kitplanes/KP0006/KP0006.htm

 

and

 

http://www.rst-engr.com/kitplanes/KP0007/KP0007.htm

 

both free to download.

 

 

[Yenn]

If you go to a sight tube type of gauge the way to make it easier to read is to have a yellow and black diagonal striped background behind the tubes. the liquid will alter the visible angle of the stripes, making it an instantly decipherable view.

 

 

[Guest Redair]

Yenn, thanks for that. I knew that if I asked the question I would get the answers I needed, and more information than expected, for which I am always grateful:clap:.

 

Redair.