Electronic TE compensation, will this work?

[soaringjac]

I am working through and investigating a leaking TE line in my ship. Leak tested the TE line and it seem to be wide open. Still have some more testing to do but as of now my feeling is the leak is in the fin and completely inaccessible. I think its leaking at the back of the TE port in the fin.

I have an LXNav S100 installed and I am curious if the electronic TE compensation on it might help or work for me. If the leak is at the back of the TE port in the fin then it is basically acting as a static port pulling pressure from the inside of the fin. I read that for electronic TE to work right the static and pitot should be co-located (multiprobe). If the TE line is indeed leaking at the back of the TE port, which is right below the pitot port, then this would be pretty close to a multiprobe setup since the sources are so close and both on the fin.

So, any idea if this will work for me to get at least a somewhat compensated vario?

The plumbing in the ship now for TE line is:
TE line from fin and split under seat pan. One line going to the S100 and the other to a Winter mechanical vario (with flask)

[Tim Taylor]

I was told by one of the top Polish pilots that the ASG-29 used by Polish Team was using electronic compensation and they felt it was as good or better than using a TE probe.

[soaringjac]

That I what I have heard as well, but just don’t know if my leaking TE line acting as a static will give me any reasonably accurate electronic TE compensation

[[email protected]]

That is extremely unlikely to work as even if the TE tube is completely detached in the fin you have no idea how closely the pressure inside the fin is following true static. The reason for having co-located ports is to minimise differences in time response. Electronic TE compensation requires really accurate pitot and static inputs with simultaneous signals to work properly. If you have them there is a better chance getting it to work (even if not well) by using aft fuselage static ports, which are usually fairly accurate, than a completely unknown source inside the fin.

[[email protected]]

I have the same situation with a bad TE line. Not using the TE line, just the static and the pitot on the S-100. They are the standard static and pitot on a DG400, Not in a multi probe.

With the S-100 you can tune the compensation from 0 to 100. Usually 0 for perfect TE set up and 100 for perfect static/ pitot system. You have to adjust it and play with it some, but can get a great result. I am set at about 80.

Kevin
92

[soaringjac]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 3:29:13 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> I have the same situation with a bad TE line. Not using the TE line, just the static and the pitot on the S-100. They are the standard static and pitot on a DG400, Not in a multi probe.
>
> With the S-100 you can tune the compensation from 0 to 100. Usually 0 for perfect TE set up and 100 for perfect static/ pitot system. You have to adjust it and play with it some, but can get a great result. I am set at about 80.
>
> Kevin
> 92

Thanks Kevin! Do you still have the bad/leaking TE line plugged into the S100 or do you just have it open to the cockpit?

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 3:26:42 PM UTC, soaringjac wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 3:29:13 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> > I have the same situation with a bad TE line. Not using the TE line, just the static and the pitot on the S-100. They are the standard static and pitot on a DG400, Not in a multi probe.
> >
> > With the S-100 you can tune the compensation from 0 to 100. Usually 0 for perfect TE set up and 100 for perfect static/ pitot system. You have to adjust it and play with it some, but can get a great result. I am set at about 80.
> >
> > Kevin
> > 92
>
> Thanks Kevin! Do you still have the bad/leaking TE line plugged into the S100 or do you just have it open to the cockpit?

Kevin wrote: "They are the standard static and pitot on a DG400". Forget your original idea - dont waste your time on it

[SoaringXCellence]

Look at the manual!

If you're going to use the electronic compensation you need to plumb the static to both the static port and TE port on the s100, with the Pitot line to the Pitot port.

The ships TE line is not attached to the S100 if you're using electronic compensation.

[Dan Marotta]

In my Stemme I have the ClearNav vario electronically compensated, I
think it's set around 90%, and it uses the fuselage static ports, aft of
the wing, and the pitot tube on the nose.Â* The mechanical variometer
uses the TE probe, also in the nose boom.Â* They both track nicely together.

On 2/12/2020 4:28 AM, wrote:
> I have the same situation with a bad TE line. Not using the TE line, just the static and the pitot on the S-100. They are the standard static and pitot on a DG400, Not in a multi probe.
>
> With the S-100 you can tune the compensation from 0 to 100. Usually 0 for perfect TE set up and 100 for perfect static/ pitot system. You have to adjust it and play with it some, but can get a great result. I am set at about 80.
>
> Kevin
> 92

--
Dan, 5J

[soaringjac]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 8:34:53 AM UTC-8, SoaringXCellence wrote:
> Look at the manual!
>
> If you're going to use the electronic compensation you need to plumb the static to both the static port and TE port on the s100, with the Pitot line to the Pitot port.
>
> The ships TE line is not attached to the S100 if you're using electronic compensation.

I have read it multiple times. My ship is plumbed for pneumatic compensation right now. everything is plumbed correctly. But, since my TE is leaking somewhere in the fin the TE line is no longer working as it should and it is basically acting as a static now. So, with the TE line acting as a static and with it currently being plugged into the TE line in the S100 (like the manual says) it should already be plumbed for electronic compensation. Although, this is not standard or ideal. That all said, I am just wondering what will happen if it go ahead and switch on the electronic compensation. Obviously its not going to be great or super accurate because im not using a proper static in located in the fin or multiprobe in the fin as intended. Basically, I have a TE line in the fin that is leaking and I have zero access too and i am looking for options to get some sort of TE compensation

[soaringjac]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 8:37:42 AM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
> In my Stemme I have the ClearNav vario electronically compensated, I
> think it's set around 90%, and it uses the fuselage static ports, aft of
> the wing, and the pitot tube on the nose.Â* The mechanical variometer
> uses the TE probe, also in the nose boom.Â* They both track nicely together.
>
> On 2/12/2020 4:28 AM, wrote:
> > I have the same situation with a bad TE line. Not using the TE line, just the static and the pitot on the S-100. They are the standard static and pitot on a DG400, Not in a multi probe.
> >
> > With the S-100 you can tune the compensation from 0 to 100. Usually 0 for perfect TE set up and 100 for perfect static/ pitot system. You have to adjust it and play with it some, but can get a great result. I am set at about 80.
> >
> > Kevin
> > 92
>
> --
> Dan, 5J

Interesting. In the S100 manual it is saying that for the electronic TE to be effective the pitot and static should be colocated (ideally in multiprobe). Interesting that you are getting good electronic TE with the sources that far apart. I guess its worth a try for me. I can try using the statics in the tail boom and see what happens.

[Dave Nadler]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 12:12:30 PM UTC-5, soaringjac wrote:
> since my TE is leaking somewhere in the fin the TE line is no longer
> working as it should and it is basically acting as a static now.

The open line is NOT necessarily acting as a static good enough for TE comp.

[Dan Marotta]

** Caution **Â* I'm not competing in world contests, just flying for
fun.Â* That said, it seems to work OK for me.Â* And it's certainly good
enough for Diamond flights.

And how do you know that your TE line is leaking?Â* Have you pressure
checked it?

On 2/12/2020 10:15 AM, soaringjac wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 8:37:42 AM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
>> In my Stemme I have the ClearNav vario electronically compensated, I
>> think it's set around 90%, and it uses the fuselage static ports, aft of
>> the wing, and the pitot tube on the nose.Â* The mechanical variometer
>> uses the TE probe, also in the nose boom.Â* They both track nicely together.
>>
>> On 2/12/2020 4:28 AM, wrote:
>>> I have the same situation with a bad TE line. Not using the TE line, just the static and the pitot on the S-100. They are the standard static and pitot on a DG400, Not in a multi probe.
>>>
>>> With the S-100 you can tune the compensation from 0 to 100. Usually 0 for perfect TE set up and 100 for perfect static/ pitot system. You have to adjust it and play with it some, but can get a great result. I am set at about 80.
>>>
>>> Kevin
>>> 92
>> --
>> Dan, 5J
> Interesting. In the S100 manual it is saying that for the electronic TE to be effective the pitot and static should be colocated (ideally in multiprobe). Interesting that you are getting good electronic TE with the sources that far apart. I guess its worth a try for me. I can try using the statics in the tail boom and see what happens.

--
Dan, 5J

[soaringjac]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 10:21:23 AM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
> ** Caution **Â* I'm not competing in world contests, just flying for
> fun.Â* That said, it seems to work OK for me.Â* And it's certainly good
> enough for Diamond flights.
>
> And how do you know that your TE line is leaking?Â* Have you pressure
> checked it?
>
> On 2/12/2020 10:15 AM, soaringjac wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 8:37:42 AM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
> >> In my Stemme I have the ClearNav vario electronically compensated, I
> >> think it's set around 90%, and it uses the fuselage static ports, aft of
> >> the wing, and the pitot tube on the nose.Â* The mechanical variometer
> >> uses the TE probe, also in the nose boom.Â* They both track nicely together.
> >>
> >> On 2/12/2020 4:28 AM, wrote:
> >>> I have the same situation with a bad TE line. Not using the TE line, just the static and the pitot on the S-100. They are the standard static and pitot on a DG400, Not in a multi probe.
> >>>
> >>> With the S-100 you can tune the compensation from 0 to 100. Usually 0 for perfect TE set up and 100 for perfect static/ pitot system. You have to adjust it and play with it some, but can get a great result. I am set at about 80.
> >>>
> >>> Kevin
> >>> 92
> >> --
> >> Dan, 5J
> > Interesting. In the S100 manual it is saying that for the electronic TE to be effective the pitot and static should be colocated (ideally in multiprobe). Interesting that you are getting good electronic TE with the sources that far apart. I guess its worth a try for me. I can try using the statics in the tail boom and see what happens.
>
> --
> Dan, 5J

Me too. Im just flying for fun locally, have not even done any cross country yet. I am just looking for SOME TE compensation vs the NONE I have right now. Im going to just give it a try and see what happens. Its worth a try at least.

[JS[_5_]]

Sometimes the probe itself can get plugged. If too much or too heavy lubricant has been applied, ports may gum up.
Multiprobes are easily damaged. Borrow someone else's probe and fly with it.
Or test with your own then with the borrowed one.

While fixing problems is more difficult than single probe, testing a multiprobe isn't difficult.
Essentially use a syringe and the ASI alone (as in Reichmann's book) to test each of the isolated lines for leaks, with probe attached and ports sealed.
Check for crosstalk between circuits. Pitot is the thin port at the end, static at the change in tube diameter, TE the hole in the side.

One day in the shop we found two bad multiprobes out of five tested. The other three probes worked on all three gliders. Glad it wasn't the mounting sockets!
It doesn't take much leakage to throw compensation off.

Electronic TE works very well. Personally used it with Cambridge, LX and ClearNav varios. Some varios require TE connection be connected to static. Some (ie: ClearNav) don't, so you can try both settings in the air.
Many of us have used electronic compensation in gliders that don't have a multi-probe. The 302 in my LS6a worked remarkably well with electronic compensation.
Jim

[soaringjac]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 12:57:27 PM UTC-8, JS wrote:
> Sometimes the probe itself can get plugged. If too much or too heavy lubricant has been applied, ports may gum up.
> Multiprobes are easily damaged. Borrow someone else's probe and fly with it.
> Or test with your own then with the borrowed one.
>
> While fixing problems is more difficult than single probe, testing a multiprobe isn't difficult.
> Essentially use a syringe and the ASI alone (as in Reichmann's book) to test each of the isolated lines for leaks, with probe attached and ports sealed.
> Check for crosstalk between circuits. Pitot is the thin port at the end, static at the change in tube diameter, TE the hole in the side.
>
> One day in the shop we found two bad multiprobes out of five tested. The other three probes worked on all three gliders. Glad it wasn't the mounting sockets!
> It doesn't take much leakage to throw compensation off.
>
> Electronic TE works very well. Personally used it with Cambridge, LX and ClearNav varios. Some varios require TE connection be connected to static. Some (ie: ClearNav) don't, so you can try both settings in the air.
> Many of us have used electronic compensation in gliders that don't have a multi-probe. The 302 in my LS6a worked remarkably well with electronic compensation.
> Jim

I did all the leak testing already, but I can't actually pinpoint the exact location of the leak. I stuck a small scope camera down the socket in the fin where the TE prob gets plugged into and this is the photo of it.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/wu5LUibL2KpF9eWZ6

I have no idea what im looking at, but it looks like the thing in the center has broke loose and i have a feeling that is where the leak is coming from. Kind of strange looking. Not sure what that is in the center of the tube.

[soaringjac]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 10:02:55 AM UTC-8, Dave Nadler wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 12:12:30 PM UTC-5, soaringjac wrote:
> > since my TE is leaking somewhere in the fin the TE line is no longer
> > working as it should and it is basically acting as a static now.
>
> The open line is NOT necessarily acting as a static good enough for TE comp.

I know its not ideal at all but im running out of options. I may just do a test flight with all the plumbing as is and turn on electronic TE on the S100 and see what happens.

[Darryl Ramm]

Why not take this glider to an A&P and get their help in solving whatever problem you have properly. Wether that is fixing it for you or helping you learn how to do that under supervision.

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 2:34:56 PM UTC-8, Darryl Ramm wrote:
> Why not take this glider to an A&P and get their help in solving whatever problem you have properly. Wether that is fixing it for you or helping you learn how to do that under supervision.

Too easy. Only the brave get out the sawzall.

[Dave Nadler]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 4:07:53 PM UTC-5, soaringjac wrote:
> https://photos.app.goo.gl/wu5LUibL2KpF9eWZ6
> I have no idea what im looking at...

Clearly a Dr. Who rerun.

[Darryl Ramm]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 5:23:35 PM UTC-8, Dave Nadler wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 4:07:53 PM UTC-5, soaringjac wrote:
> > https://photos.app.goo.gl/wu5LUibL2KpF9eWZ6
> > I have no idea what im looking at...
>
> Clearly a Dr. Who rerun.

Attack of the o-ring men?
The Three o-rings?

---

It's likely an o-ring. But so what. Looking in the hole may not tell you much, well not from a single photo.

Again, take this to an experienced glider A&P and get help. Especially because you are working on a type certificated aircraft and I am guessing you are not qualified to. A competent glider A&P will be able to determine exactly what is going on, what's leaking or cross leaking and then spend time trying to find out where. They should be very experienced at trying to work out if it's a faulty o-ring or probe or mount connection, or whatever and have the right tools to pick out and replace o-rings. maybe correct o-rings on hand, able to cut out and replace the probe mount if that is needed, etc. etc. etc.

You fix problems by fixing them, ideas of leaving TE lines faulty and trying to use them as static are a waste of your time. "running out of time" is the entirely wrong attitude here.

[Eric Munk]

I think the photo shows the back of the TE attachment fittings. I
would say the tubing has come off. Easy fix. Get drawings, drill a
hole in the side of the fin, reattach and repair the hole according
to repair manual. Would require a licensed A&P to sign off.




t 02:27 13 February 2020, Darryl Ramm wrote:
>On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 5:23:35 PM UTC-8, Dave
Nadler wrote:
>> On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 4:07:53 PM UTC-5,
soaringjac wrote:
>> > https://photos.app.goo.gl/wu5LUibL2KpF9eWZ6
>> > I have no idea what im looking at...
>>=20
>> Clearly a Dr. Who rerun.
>
>Attack of the o-ring men?
>The Three o-rings?
>
>---
>
>It's likely an o-ring. But so what. Looking in the hole may not tell
you
>mu=
>ch, well not from a single photo.
>
>Again, take this to an experienced glider A&P and get help.
Especially
>beca=
>use you are working on a type certificated aircraft and I am
guessing you
>a=
>re not qualified to. A competent glider A&P will be able to
determine
>exact=
>ly what is going on, what's leaking or cross leaking and then
spend time
>tr=
>ying to find out where. They should be very experienced at
trying to work
>o=
>ut if it's a faulty o-ring or probe or mount connection, or
whatever and
>ha=
>ve the right tools to pick out and replace o-rings. maybe correct
o-rings
>o=
>n hand, able to cut out and replace the probe mount if that is
needed,
>etc.=
> etc. etc.
>
>You fix problems by fixing them, ideas of leaving TE lines faulty
and
>tryin=
>g to use them as static are a waste of your time. "running out of
time" is
>=
>the entirely wrong attitude here.=20
>
>
>
>
>

[[email protected]]

> Thanks Kevin! Do you still have the bad/leaking TE line plugged into the S100 or do you just have it open to the cockpit?

No don't use anything on the TE port if it is bad

Kevin 92

[krasw]

Just pull the adapter (with tube attached) out of the fin leading edge and install new one:

https://www.esa-systems.com/en/products/details/mounting-adapter-st1r-6-mm/

Should be possible with little effort, the adapter is just glued to place.

[soaringjac]

On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 2:59:36 AM UTC-8, krasw wrote:
> Just pull the adapter (with tube attached) out of the fin leading edge and install new one:
>
> https://www.esa-systems.com/en/products/details/mounting-adapter-st1r-6-mm/
>
> Should be possible with little effort, the adapter is just glued to place..

Thanks Krasw
Just got the drawings from Grob (linder). It does look like there is a barbed fitting at the end of the TE socket, and it seem like that is what has broken off based on the photo i took. Seems like having that whole tube replaced by an A&P isn't going to too bad of a process, but who knows, could turn out to be a pain. Really don't want them to have to cut any holes in the skin or have to do any major composite work. Will chat with the A&P and composite shop about this.

[soaringjac]

On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 12:15:06 AM UTC-8, Eric Munk wrote:
> I think the photo shows the back of the TE attachment fittings. I
> would say the tubing has come off. Easy fix. Get drawings, drill a
> hole in the side of the fin, reattach and repair the hole according
> to repair manual. Would require a licensed A&P to sign off.
>
>
>
>
> t 02:27 13 February 2020, Darryl Ramm wrote:
> >On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 5:23:35 PM UTC-8, Dave
> Nadler wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 4:07:53 PM UTC-5,
> soaringjac wrote:
> >> > https://photos.app.goo.gl/wu5LUibL2KpF9eWZ6
> >> > I have no idea what im looking at...
> >>=20
> >> Clearly a Dr. Who rerun.
> >
> >Attack of the o-ring men?
> >The Three o-rings?
> >
> >---
> >
> >It's likely an o-ring. But so what. Looking in the hole may not tell
> you
> >mu=
> >ch, well not from a single photo.
> >
> >Again, take this to an experienced glider A&P and get help.
> Especially
> >beca=
> >use you are working on a type certificated aircraft and I am
> guessing you
> >a=
> >re not qualified to. A competent glider A&P will be able to
> determine
> >exact=
> >ly what is going on, what's leaking or cross leaking and then
> spend time
> >tr=
> >ying to find out where. They should be very experienced at
> trying to work
> >o=
> >ut if it's a faulty o-ring or probe or mount connection, or
> whatever and
> >ha=
> >ve the right tools to pick out and replace o-rings. maybe correct
> o-rings
> >o=
> >n hand, able to cut out and replace the probe mount if that is
> needed,
> >etc.=
> > etc. etc.
> >
> >You fix problems by fixing them, ideas of leaving TE lines faulty
> and
> >tryin=
> >g to use them as static are a waste of your time. "running out of
> time" is
> >=
> >the entirely wrong attitude here.=20
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

Thank Eric, this does seem like what has happened, although it seems the tubing is still attached to the barbed fitting but the barbed fitting itself broke loose from its connection to the metal TE tube based on drawings from Grob.

[Eric Munk]

At 15:09 13 February 2020, soaringjac A four inch dia hole should
suffice for access. Is not a big deal. Done that before.

>On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 2:59:36 AM UTC-8, krasw
wrote:
>> Just pull the adapter (with tube attached) out of the fin
leading edge
>an=
>d install new one:
>>=20
>>
>https://www.esa-systems.com/en/products/details/mounting-
adapter-st1r-6-m=
>m/
>>=20
>> Should be possible with little effort, the adapter is just glued
to
>place=
>..
>
>Thanks Krasw
>Just got the drawings from Grob (linder). It does look like there
is a
>barb=
>ed fitting at the end of the TE socket, and it seem like that is
what has
>b=
>roken off based on the photo i took. Seems like having that
whole tube
>repl=
>aced by an A&P isn't going to too bad of a process, but who
knows, could
>tu=
>rn out to be a pain. Really don't want them to have to cut any
holes in
>the=
> skin or have to do any major composite work. Will chat with the
A&P and
>co=
>mposite shop about this.
>

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 7:09:25 AM UTC-8, soaringjac wrote:

> ...Really don't want them to have to cut any holes in the skin or have to do any major composite work. Will chat with the A&P and composite shop about this.

Just as an aside, composite repair isn't really all that hard or complicated. My favorite book on the topic is the Ursula Hanle "five P" guide, the "Petite Plastic Plane Patch Primer." You can find it for free on the web.

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 10:44:10 AM UTC-8, Bob Kuykendall wrote:

> Just as an aside, composite repair isn't really all that hard or complicated. My favorite book on the topic is the Ursula Hanle "five P" guide, the "Petite Plastic Plane Patch Primer." You can find it for free on the web.

https://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/12/flickfibel-e.pdf

[[email protected]]

I have a triple probe mount that was removed from a G-103, picture available..........but I don’t know how to post it?
JJ

[Dan Marotta]

Are you anywhere near Moriarty?Â* Either Fidel or Robert Mudd could that
work.

On 2/13/2020 8:09 AM, soaringjac wrote:
> On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 2:59:36 AM UTC-8, krasw wrote:
>> Just pull the adapter (with tube attached) out of the fin leading edge and install new one:
>>
>> https://www.esa-systems.com/en/products/details/mounting-adapter-st1r-6-mm/
>>
>> Should be possible with little effort, the adapter is just glued to place.
> Thanks Krasw
> Just got the drawings from Grob (linder). It does look like there is a barbed fitting at the end of the TE socket, and it seem like that is what has broken off based on the photo i took. Seems like having that whole tube replaced by an A&P isn't going to too bad of a process, but who knows, could turn out to be a pain. Really don't want them to have to cut any holes in the skin or have to do any major composite work. Will chat with the A&P and composite shop about this.

--
Dan, 5J

[soaringjac]

On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 5:05:07 PM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Are you anywhere near Moriarty?Â* Either Fidel or Robert Mudd could that
> work.
>
> On 2/13/2020 8:09 AM, soaringjac wrote:
> > On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 2:59:36 AM UTC-8, krasw wrote:
> >> Just pull the adapter (with tube attached) out of the fin leading edge and install new one:
> >>
> >> https://www.esa-systems.com/en/products/details/mounting-adapter-st1r-6-mm/
> >>
> >> Should be possible with little effort, the adapter is just glued to place.
> > Thanks Krasw
> > Just got the drawings from Grob (linder). It does look like there is a barbed fitting at the end of the TE socket, and it seem like that is what has broken off based on the photo i took. Seems like having that whole tube replaced by an A&P isn't going to too bad of a process, but who knows, could turn out to be a pain. Really don't want them to have to cut any holes in the skin or have to do any major composite work. Will chat with the A&P and composite shop about this.
>
> --
> Dan, 5J

In LA, so pretty far. I have already spoken to Robert about it.

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 1:33:44 AM UTC-5, soaringjac wrote:
> I am working through and investigating a leaking TE line in my ship. Leak tested the TE line and it seem to be wide open. Still have some more testing to do but as of now my feeling is the leak is in the fin and completely inaccessible. I think its leaking at the back of the TE port in the fin.
>
> I have an LXNav S100 installed and I am curious if the electronic TE compensation on it might help or work for me. If the leak is at the back of the TE port in the fin then it is basically acting as a static port pulling pressure from the inside of the fin. I read that for electronic TE to work right the static and pitot should be co-located (multiprobe). If the TE line is indeed leaking at the back of the TE port, which is right below the pitot port, then this would be pretty close to a multiprobe setup since the sources are so close and both on the fin.
>
> So, any idea if this will work for me to get at least a somewhat compensated vario?
>
> The plumbing in the ship now for TE line is:
> TE line from fin and split under seat pan. One line going to the S100 and the other to a Winter mechanical vario (with flask)

All you need to do to try electronic TE is identify the static used for your airspeed indicator. If properly plumbed it will be to the source identified by the manufacturer as the best source they have. The flight manual likely has the error chart for this source.
Connect this static source to your vario, reconfigure as needed , and go fly. If you are satisfied, you are good to go on that vario.
Repairing the TE system is another issue and would be needed to get the mechanical vario working right.
I would bet that your issue is likely either a missing or damaged o-ring if you are using a multi probe, or something funky further forward. I would isolate it at the tee under the seat and check back. Note that you can not do any valid leak checking with bad seal in the socket.
For leak checking I use a small pressure gage reading in inches of water. 5 inches is equal to about 100 mph. You can also rig a water manometer made of instrument tubing to do the same thing.
Good luck
UH

[john firth]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 1:33:44 AM UTC-5, soaringjac wrote:
> I am working through and investigating a leaking TE line in my ship. Leak tested the TE line and it seem to be wide open. Still have some more testing to do but as of now my feeling is the leak is in the fin and completely inaccessible. I think its leaking at the back of the TE port in the fin.
>
> I have an LXNav S100 installed and I am curious if the electronic TE compensation on it might help or work for me. If the leak is at the back of the TE port in the fin then it is basically acting as a static port pulling pressure from the inside of the fin. I read that for electronic TE to work right the static and pitot should be co-located (multiprobe). If the TE line is indeed leaking at the back of the TE port, which is right below the pitot port, then this would be pretty close to a multiprobe setup since the sources are so close and both on the fin.
>
> So, any idea if this will work for me to get at least a somewhat compensated vario?
>
> The plumbing in the ship now for TE line is:
> TE line from fin and split under seat pan. One line going to the S100 and the other to a Winter mechanical vario (with flask)

Take the rudder off; there may be an access hole in the spar.
JMF