![]() |
IFD540/440 Integrations with Aspen EFDs and ACUs |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page <12 |
Author | ||
B2C2 ![]() Groupie ![]() ![]() Joined: 05 Mar 2015 Location: california Status: Offline Points: 56 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
I don't have a good picture of how these two are wired together, so maybe the following doesn't make sense but here goes. It sounds like the 429 data passes from the Aspen through the ACU or ACU2 if there is one present, and at that point some of the data is stripped off before it is passed along to the IFD540. Presumably there is firmware in the ACU that is doing this stripping function. Isn't there another option where a firmware upgrade to the ACU allows passage of the data of interest? If a software change to the EFD1000 is contemplated as a fix for the resolver data problem, why not change the ACU firmware at the same time if this is needed to allow for the data to pass through to the IFD540 along the common data bus, which seems like the most logical way to do this?
|
||
![]() |
||
oskrypuch ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 09 Nov 2012 Location: CYFD Status: Offline Points: 3060 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
It is a certification issue, the acu's purposely limit the data tags passed. The 540 would have no trouble with the data, but some equipment could. To add more data tags would require more testing and $$.
That is the same reason that the Aspen uses an external sono alert, instead of an audio out to the audio panel, it would have taken more testing/certification. * Orest |
||
![]() |
||
ddgates ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 12 Aug 2011 Location: Deer Valley Status: Offline Points: 1100 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Aspen's IM (Rev. BD), Figure 9-28A now has a footnote regarding Digital Heading Outputs:
"If ACU is installed parallel this EFD output with ACU and other device requiring A429 and/or Air Data" The EFD output referenced is pins 26 and 27, the ARINC 429 output from the EFD. I interpret this footnote to permit installation of the ACU in parallel on the 429 output. That should allow use of the ACU, but also connection of the 540(s) to pins 26 and 27, parallel to the ACU.
|
||
David Gates
|
||
![]() |
||
oskrypuch ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 09 Nov 2012 Location: CYFD Status: Offline Points: 3060 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
My shop was now convinced to mod the install to have the ACU and 540 in parallel. The 540 is now getting all the datatags.
* Orest |
||
![]() |
||
n7ifr ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 05 Aug 2013 Location: Scottsdale, Az Status: Offline Points: 470 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Somewhat in reverse logic, does anybody know if it is possible -
To tie into a pin on the 540 (429-output) from a specific 540 "data-block" like Nearest Apt to display on the Aspen RMI input? What a great intuitive and useful data point to extract for situational awareness from the 540 to display on the Aspen PFD. Tom Wolf
|
||
![]() |
||
ddgates ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 12 Aug 2011 Location: Deer Valley Status: Offline Points: 1100 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
I just had my shop in Scottsdale do the ACU workaround.
I haven't seen it yet but they tell me all is working with no problems. I hope that's true. EDIT: Another Bonanza pilot did this workaround today with his shop; doesn't seem like a huge process to make this change. By what he reports, the parallel installation is working. Edited by ddgates - 27 Aug 2015 at 4:54pm |
||
David Gates
|
||
![]() |
||
GMSutton ![]() Groupie ![]() Joined: 24 Apr 2012 Location: KMRY Status: Offline Points: 65 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
What data are you seeing on your IFD540 after the "ACU workaround" that you weren't getting before?
My IFD540 is connected to an Aspen EFD1000Pro with ACU1. After the 10.1.0 software upgrade, I'm getting all datablocks including VSR, EXCEPT the winds aloft, which still won't populate (shows blank). I was under the impression that this would be resolved by 10.1.0 but apparently not. My ARINC 429 Config page is set up as follows: In 1: Honeywell EFIS, Speed Low In 2: Garmin GTX 330 w/Traffic, Speed High Out 1: GAMA 429 Graphics w/Int, Speed Low Out 2: ARINC 743A, Speed Low Do I need to ask my installer to perform the "ACU workaround" in order to see Winds Aloft data on my IFD540? Mike
< ="cosymantecnisbfw" co="cs" id="SILOBFWID" style="width: 0px; height: 0px; display: block;"> |
||
![]() |
||
ddgates ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 12 Aug 2011 Location: Deer Valley Status: Offline Points: 1100 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
If you have an ACU1, TAS and BaroAlt don't get through. 540 needs those data pieces for winds etc.
You can get VSR because 10.1 allows the use of GPSAlt if no BaroAlt is available. You won't get selected heading bug on the 540 because the ACU1 doesn't pass that through. I just had my shop put the ACU1 and 540 in parallel for 429 output from the Aspen. Doesn't take a lot of work and I think it is worth it.
|
||
David Gates
|
||
![]() |
||
GMSutton ![]() Groupie ![]() Joined: 24 Apr 2012 Location: KMRY Status: Offline Points: 65 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Now I'm really confused! Despite having an Aspen with ACU1, my IFD540 has always displayed the heading selected on the Aspen. I don't remember whether it displays TAS but will check. According to Steve, software update 10.1.0 was supposed to substitute GPS data for BARO input as follows:
By that logic, I should be seeing the wind vector in my IFD540, but I'm not! Mike
< ="cosymantecnisbfw" co="cs" id="SILOBFWID" style="width: 0px; height: 0px; display: block;">Edited by GMSutton - 06 Sep 2015 at 3:49pm |
||
![]() |
||
ddgates ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 12 Aug 2011 Location: Deer Valley Status: Offline Points: 1100 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
With your ACU1, TAS isn't getting through the ACU1 and that is needed for wind vectors.
|
||
David Gates
|
||
![]() |
||
oskrypuch ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 09 Nov 2012 Location: CYFD Status: Offline Points: 3060 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
If Mike has had the heading bug displayed on his IFD540, then he must be bypassing the ACU, in the 429 feed to the IFD540. If so then I'm curious why he doesn't have wind vector as well.
BUT, if he is just seeing the aircraft heading on the IFD540, that doesn't correlate with the extra data fields that are stripped by the ACU.
* Orest |
||
![]() |
||
GMSutton ![]() Groupie ![]() Joined: 24 Apr 2012 Location: KMRY Status: Offline Points: 65 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Good point. It may simply be the aircraft heading that I'm seeing on the IFD540. Mike
|
||
![]() |
||
ddgates ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 12 Aug 2011 Location: Deer Valley Status: Offline Points: 1100 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
I think you want to parallel the ACU1 and the IFD540.
|
||
David Gates
|
||
![]() |
||
oskrypuch ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 09 Nov 2012 Location: CYFD Status: Offline Points: 3060 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
In the previously STC limited setup, the 429 feed to the IFD540 would first go through the ACU, you really want to bypass the ACU on that connection. So, yes, instead both the ACU and the IFD540 should get parallel, direct 429 feeds from the ASPEN. The ACU itself needs the 429 data as well, independent of considerations of what it passes on. * Orest Edited by oskrypuch - 06 Sep 2015 at 6:19pm |
||
![]() |
||
ddgates ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 12 Aug 2011 Location: Deer Valley Status: Offline Points: 1100 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
But just for clarity if the ACU1 is feeding something else, say an autopilot, want to maintain its connection.
|
||
David Gates
|
||
![]() |
||
oskrypuch ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 09 Nov 2012 Location: CYFD Status: Offline Points: 3060 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Yes for sure. If you have an ACU in there, it is serving some sort of linkage function.
* Orest |
||
![]() |
||
Craig767 ![]() Groupie ![]() Joined: 17 Dec 2014 Location: Gainesville, FL Status: Offline Points: 98 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Bringing this back to life because I don't think there ever was a resolution for getting baro alt from Aspen ACU to the 540. Was suggested that maybe possible to tap pins 26 & 27 off the Aspen to get the info into the 540.
Did anyone ever try this? Was it very complicated or expensive to rewire? Reason I maybe interested is that the GPS alt works for most everything I want except the manual sequencing on missed apps. My understanding is that if I had baro alt reference into the 540 would not have the manual sequence issue on the missed app. |
||
![]() |
||
oskrypuch ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 09 Nov 2012 Location: CYFD Status: Offline Points: 3060 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Actually, it is resolved.
You just need to "Y" the 429 output from the ASPEN, and bypass the ACU with one leg sending it direct to the IFD540, the other leg reconnect to the ACU as the ACU itself needs the 429 input independently as well. Very simple, takes maybe 30 minutes. All described upthread.
* Orest Edited by oskrypuch - 29 Jan 2016 at 3:05pm |
||
![]() |
||
ddgates ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 12 Aug 2011 Location: Deer Valley Status: Offline Points: 1100 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Yes. What we did was have the shop do a Y connection (parallel), to the ACU and to the IFD.
The IFD now gets all the labels the ACU truncates. Works fine. Understanding is some wording change in the Aspen IM allows this.
|
||
David Gates
|
||
![]() |
||
Craig767 ![]() Groupie ![]() Joined: 17 Dec 2014 Location: Gainesville, FL Status: Offline Points: 98 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Some how missed the part of the thread about setting up the ACU to run in parallel with the 540. Sounds like that is the best way to go to get that info into the 540.
Is everyone who had this done still happy with the outcome.
|
||
![]() |
||
oskrypuch ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 09 Nov 2012 Location: CYFD Status: Offline Points: 3060 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Well, we could sound off, I'm very happy. Even have the HDG BUG now, on the IFD540.
* Orest Edited by oskrypuch - 29 Jan 2016 at 3:10pm |
||
![]() |
||
Craig767 ![]() Groupie ![]() Joined: 17 Dec 2014 Location: Gainesville, FL Status: Offline Points: 98 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Thanks of the replies. Will go over this with the shop and see if we can it it done.
|
||
![]() |
||
safari ![]() Groupie ![]() Joined: 28 Apr 2014 Location: Sedona Status: Offline Points: 55 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Very happy it works great.
|
||
Dave
|
||
![]() |
||
DavidBunin ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 20 May 2015 Location: Rockwall, TX Status: Offline Points: 742 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
If the 540 can accept the 429 data directly from the PFD, what is the purpose of the ACU? Is that an autopilot interface device?
David Bunin |
||
![]() |
||
ddgates ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 12 Aug 2011 Location: Deer Valley Status: Offline Points: 1100 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Essentially yes.
An ACU is not needed if all the devices attached take a 429 input, but a number of nav radios and autopilots don't. I could get rid of my ACU except for my non-digital autopilot. |
||
David Gates
|
||
![]() |
||
AzAv8r ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 06 Dec 2011 Location: Arizona Status: Offline Points: 154 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
The Aspen IM change that allows the direct ADC connection to the 440/540 (well, any device needing Air Data) is Note 2 of figure 9-28A. There are other weasel-words elsewhere in the document that might call into question that interpretation, probably left over from before they made that update. Just point out that note and diagram, redline it with the corresponding IFD440/540 inputs, and say "that's what I want". Note 5 requires that they verify it works. But based on what you see here, there is a VERY high probability of that being successful...
|
||
![]() |
||
ddgates ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 12 Aug 2011 Location: Deer Valley Status: Offline Points: 1100 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
IIRC after you wire this up, the 429 config has to br Honeywell EFIS on the IFD.
Edited by ddgates - 30 Jan 2016 at 7:25pm |
||
David Gates
|
||
![]() |
||
mfb ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 20 Dec 2014 Location: KATW Status: Offline Points: 293 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Our shop installed an Aspen and an IFD540 in our C-182 last spring, before Aspen revised its manual to allow the 429 bus Y connection. So our 429 is wired from the Aspen through the ACU to the Avidyne.
This week I asked the shop to install the parallel 429 connection from the Aspen directly to the IFD540. They just quoted my $640 plus parts for the job. I know aviation is crazy but that seems high for running a wire between two boxes that are next to each other. Do you guys think it's reasonable? As I understand it, if I spent the $$ I would get a heading bug, baro altitude, and winds aloft on the IFD540. Is that correct? Is that stuff worth $640+?? This seems to be one of the costs of being an early adopter. If it had been wired that way to start with the cost would have been minimal. Thanks Mike |
||
![]() |
||
oskrypuch ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 09 Nov 2012 Location: CYFD Status: Offline Points: 3060 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
That is a lot of $$, unless maybe the ACU is buried somewhere? There is no behind the panel access required, just access to the ACU.
I would ask them to review that quote. * Orest Edited by oskrypuch - 01 Mar 2016 at 3:35pm |
||
![]() |
||
mfb ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 20 Dec 2014 Location: KATW Status: Offline Points: 293 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
I squawked and they cut the price to $400. Still high but better.
All they're doing is moving the 429 lines going to the IFD540 from the output side of the ACU to the input side of the ACU, where the 429 bus from the Aspen comes in. So the IFD540 and the ACU will be wired in parallel. The IFD540 will get its 429 data directly from the Aspen and will no longer be connected to the ACU 429 output. Hope it works. Mike
|
||
![]() |
||
ddgates ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 12 Aug 2011 Location: Deer Valley Status: Offline Points: 1100 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
I think $400 is reasonable, and I also think it is worth it.
I did the same on my install and am happy with it. |
||
David Gates
|
||
![]() |
||
mfb ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 20 Dec 2014 Location: KATW Status: Offline Points: 293 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Thanks for the PIREP. I told them to go ahead. It's only 0.4 AUs!! Mike Edited by mfb - 01 Mar 2016 at 5:07pm |
||
![]() |
||
B2C2 ![]() Groupie ![]() ![]() Joined: 05 Mar 2015 Location: california Status: Offline Points: 56 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Hi I see on Aspens page that software version 2.9 is now out, or at least they have updated their manuals section to cover release 2.9. Has anyone installed this and can you validate that the VOR line functionality we were discussing on this topic has in fact been enabled? (Aspen resolver output now sent to the IFD540)
|
||
![]() |
||
n7ifr ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 05 Aug 2013 Location: Scottsdale, Az Status: Offline Points: 470 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Yes, that would be great if the new Aspen v2.9 finally allows "resolver" output from its HSI to display the VOR-radials on our 540's...
Tom W.
|
||
![]() |
||
ddgates ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 12 Aug 2011 Location: Deer Valley Status: Offline Points: 1100 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
I looked at the Aspen documentation which is immediately available re: 2.9, and it mostly speaks to integration with the STEC 55X. Didn't see any mention of other changes, doesn't mean it's not there - just didn't see it.
|
||
David Gates
|
||
![]() |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page <12 |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |