X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 15:29:49 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mail-gh0-f182.google.com ([209.85.160.182] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.5) with ESMTPS id 6394258 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 15:01:18 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.160.182; envelope-from=pjdmiller@gmail.com Received: by mail-gh0-f182.google.com with SMTP id z15so1512816ghb.13 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 12:00:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.236.17.165 with SMTP id j25mr25484708yhj.89.1375038043661; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 12:00:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [192.168.1.144] ([68.202.59.203]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id e69sm79109625yhl.3.2013.07.28.12.00.42 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 28 Jul 2013 12:00:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Potential Problem-Engine Vibration References: From: Paul Miller Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-1A041CB5-B3E6-4BD7-97D7-9EA78E2C3F6D X-Mailer: iPad Mail (10B146) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Message-Id: X-Original-Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 15:00:41 -0400 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) --Apple-Mail-1A041CB5-B3E6-4BD7-97D7-9EA78E2C3F6D Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Agreed, I wouldn't have the nerve to pitch that to hartzell and mr brown. T= hey are not fly by nights at hartzell. The issue is whether a common probl= em exists. I think Hartzell system wide manufacturing defect can be safely m= oved to low priority. Hartzell does a thorough vibration analysis on engine p= rop combinations so I don't see how something new cropped up there. Lyc had the crankshaft issue on the Malibu, I don't recall it being related t= o prop at all. I think it is a mistake to look for hartzell 550 combination as being a fact= or in vibration since the sample is largely hartzell and 550. You need some= other way to differentiate between vibrating and non vibrating installation= s. I can safely say that if I found 20 contact points in the legacy over th= e last four years I would be cataloging those points first and confirming th= ey are not in play. Once those are ruled out then you have something to wo= rk with. A database of 550s with and without problems may not go very far t= o getting a resolution. Paul On 2013-07-28, at 14:37, "Danny" wrote: > WHAT? That makes no sense at all. Where did you ever get such an idea? > =20 > Danny > LNC2-360 Mk-II > Nothing is foolproof to the sufficiently talented fool. > =20 > From: Craig Schulze [mailto:craig@skybolt.net]=20 > Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2013 2:21 PM > To: lml@lancaironline.net > Subject: [LML] Re: Potential Problem-Engine Vibration > =20 > It could be possible for wear or manufacturing process to allow one blade t= o have more play in pitch operation than the others.=20 >=20 > Blue Skies, > Craig Schulze=20 >=20 > On Jul 27, 2013, at 5:36 PM, vtailjeff@aol.com wrote: >=20 > How is that mechanically possible? All blades are attached to the same pit= ch change mechanisms Elton=20 > =20 > J >=20 > Sent from my iPad >=20 > On Jul 27, 2013, at 12:34 PM, Steve Colwell wrote: >=20 > That is a possibility I had not considered, I will ask Hartzell about it. = Another possibility is the movable crankshaft counter weights failing to po= sition correctly. >=20 > Steve Colwell=20 > =20 > =20 > From: Craig Schulze > To: Steve Colwell =20 > Cc: "lml@lancaironline.net" =20 > Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 7:42 AM > Subject: Re: Potential Problem-Engine Vibration >=20 > It sounds to me that you may have an issue with your prop hub not changing= the pitch exactly the same on all the blades. The vibration you are feeli= ng is one blade taking a larger bite of air and then causing everything to w= obble. It settles in sometimes but when you change the power setting the pi= tch on the prop is adjusted by the hub unevenly. =20 >=20 > Blue Skies, > Craig Schulze > Lancair N73S >=20 >=20 > On Jul 25, 2013, at 1:22 PM, "Steve Colwell" wrote:= >=20 > In the first 40 hours I had vibration so severe it caused stick shake. Th= is > has continued intermittently more or less for almost 400 hours. >=20 > First I found and fixed several Cowl Interference locations, then adjusted= > and notched the hat section of the nose gear door. >=20 > At about 50 hours I paid Barrett to tear down the engine to replace the > Performance pistons (prematurely worn top rings) with stock ECI pistons. > Also found a cracked case. >=20 > We had the Kelly Alternator balanced and rebuilt at a shop recommended by > Bill Bainbridge of B & C. Sorry I can't remember the name, the Legacy fil= e > is in Texas.=20 >=20 > I rounded the leading edges of the elevator counter weights when building s= o > I temporarily squared them off to go back to the stock shape for testing. >=20 > All gear doors were checked in flight with video camera.=20 >=20 > The pitch trim hinge pin had play, I replaced it per Chris Zavatson's web > page. >=20 > Along the way the prop was balanced twice. >=20 > I could not get more that the usual vibration (which always seemed to be t= oo > much) on test flights. Then, unpredictably, vibration magnitude would > increase with power reduction on some later flight. I say unpredictably > because I could not get increased vibration by attempting to duplicate > previous conditions. Let's hope a solution surfaces at Airventure. >=20 > Steve Colwell Legacy RG IO550-N with Hartzell 3 Blade >=20 >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Pau= l > Miller > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 7:22 AM > To: lml@lancaironline.net > Subject: [LML] Re: Potential Problem-Engine Vibration >=20 > Ed Martin's legacy is smooth. Mine has had a lot of annoying vibes as you= > describe but virtually all have been removed with lots of cowling > interference fixes and plug change. Many pilots forget the alternator can= > be a wicked source of vibration and it is almost in the same plane as the > prop. >=20 > The problems I had originally were in that freq range and visible at the > wingtip also. >=20 > Paul >=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail-1A041CB5-B3E6-4BD7-97D7-9EA78E2C3F6D Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Agreed, I wouldn't have the nerve to p= itch that to hartzell and mr brown.  They are not fly by nights at hart= zell.   The issue is whether a common problem exists.  I think Har= tzell system wide manufacturing defect can be safely moved to low priority. H= artzell does a thorough vibration analysis on engine prop combinations so I d= on't see how something new cropped up there.

Lyc ha= d the crankshaft issue on the Malibu, I don't recall it being related to pro= p at all.

I think it is a mistake to look for hartz= ell 550 combination as being a factor in vibration since the sample is large= ly hartzell and 550.  You need some other way to differentiate between v= ibrating and non vibrating installations.  I can safely say that if I f= ound 20 contact points in the legacy over the last four years I would be cat= aloging those points first and confirming they are not in play.   Once t= hose are ruled out then you have something to work with.   A database o= f 550s with and without problems may not go very far to getting a resolution= .

Paul

On 2013-07-28, at 14:37, "Danny" <danny@n107sd.com> wrote:

WHAT?  That makes no sense at al= l.  Where did you ever get such an idea?

 

<= p class=3D"MsoNormal">Danny<= /p>

LNC2-360 Mk-II<= /o:p>

Nothing= is foolproof to the sufficiently talented fool.

=

 

From: Craig Schulze [mailto:craig@skyb= olt.net]
Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2013 2:21 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subje= ct: [LML] Re: Potential Problem-Engine Vibration

 

It could be possible for wear or manufacturing process to allow one bl= ade to have more play in pitch operation than the others. 

Blue S= kies,

Craig Schulze 


On Jul 27, 2013, at 5:36 PM, vtail= jeff@aol.com wrote:

How is that mech= anically possible? All blades are attached to the same pitch change mechanis= ms Elton 

 

J

Sent from my iPad


= On Jul 27, 2013, at 12:34 PM, Steve Colwell <mcmess1919@yahoo.com> wrote:

That is a pos= sibility I had not considered, I will ask Hartzell about it.  Another p= ossibility is the movable crankshaft counter weights failing to position cor= rectly.

Steve Colwell 

 <= /o:p>

 

<= b>From: Craig Schulze= <craig@skybolt.net>
To= : Steve Colwell <mcmess1919@y= ahoo.com>
Cc: "lm= l@lancaironline.net" <lml@la= ncaironline.net>
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 7:42 AM
Subject: Re: Potential Problem-Engine Vibration


It so= unds to me that you may have an issue with your prop hub not changing the pi= tch exactly the  same on all the blades.  The vibration you are fe= eling is one blade taking a larger bite of air and then causing everything t= o wobble.  It settles in sometimes but when you change the power settin= g the pitch on the prop is adjusted by the hub unevenly. 

Blue S= kies,
Craig Schulze
Lancair N73S


On Jul 25, 2013, at 1:22 P= M, "Steve Colwell" <mcmess1919@ya= hoo.com> wrote:

In the first 40 hours I had vibration so sever= e it caused stick shake.  This
has continued intermittently more or l= ess for almost 400 hours.

First I found and fixed several Cowl Interf= erence locations, then adjusted
and notched the hat section of the nose g= ear door.

At about 50 hours I paid Barrett to tear down the engine to= replace the
Performance pistons (prematurely worn top rings) with stock E= CI pistons.
Also found a cracked case.

We had the Kelly Alternator= balanced and rebuilt at a shop recommended by
Bill Bainbridge of B &= C.  Sorry I can't remember the name, the Legacy file
is in Texas. <= br>
I rounded the leading edges of the elevator counter weights when buil= ding so
I temporarily squared them off to go back to the stock shape for t= esting.

All gear doors were checked in flight with video camera.
=
The pitch trim hinge pin had play, I replaced it per Chris Zavatson's we= b
page.

Along the way the prop was balanced twice.

I could n= ot get more that the usual vibration (which always seemed to be too
much)= on test flights.  Then, unpredictably, vibration magnitude would
in= crease with power reduction on some later flight.  I say unpredictably<= br>because I could not get increased vibration by attempting to duplicateprevious conditions.  Let's hope a solution surfaces at Airventure.
Steve Colwell  Legacy RG IO550-N with Hartzell 3 Blade


=
-----Original Message-----
From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Pa= ul
Miller
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 7:22 AM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: Po= tential Problem-Engine Vibration

Ed Martin's legacy is smooth.  M= ine has had a lot of annoying vibes as you
describe but virtually all hav= e been removed with lots of cowling
interference fixes and plug change.&n= bsp; Many pilots forget the alternator can
be a wicked source of vibratio= n and it is almost in the same plane as the
prop.

The problems I h= ad originally were in that freq range and visible at the
wingtip also.
Paul


= --Apple-Mail-1A041CB5-B3E6-4BD7-97D7-9EA78E2C3F6D--