Hartzell Top Prop PIREP

[DonMuncy]

Why does the prop need to be parallel to the crank throws.

 

[testwest]

Joe, you are welcome. In a previous post you said "It's gotta be the prop", and I must re-emphasize that the rotating mass as a whole can and will exhibit different vibrational mode shapes with different props, and you cannot discount an out-of-spec crankshaft counterweight system as being innocent with a "tolerant" prop like the McCauley C212-214 series.

Here is how I would proceed. Figure out a way to record the vibration spectrum in flight, and record the conditions. Data are your friends (because the word "data" is plural). Flip the prop install 180 degrees. Go fly again and duplicate the conditions you flew in (airplane weight, cg, density altitude, MAP, RPM, cowl flap setting, everything else as much the same as possible). If the vibration is changed significantly as shown by your comparative data, your issue may not be the prop, it may be counterweights.

Hartzell's motto is "built on honor". I think they will be helpful. I do know they went through a number of iterations on spinners with this STC, I am sure it was not cheap, but they kept after it.

[Kevin]

Good advice from testwest. Also, you need to remember that if you added/removed weight when you did your dynamic balance, your balance will be off when you re-index the prop. The best thing to do would be to re-dynamic balance your prop first in the new index position, and then take your flight. That way you'd be comparing apples to apples.

[joepilot]

Thanks Kevin. I'm not going to re-index the prop. 

Hartzell has been helpful & great to work with.

At this point I'm going to cut my losses and order an original type McCauley. 

[Mark Lenker]

How much for the blended airfoil?

Mark

[OR75]

Did hartzell look at the vibration track and give an explanation as to why ? 

I wonder how they did their testing to get that prop STC'ed (A1B6, A3B6 or A3B6D ?) 

 

 

[RobertGary1]

Did hartzell look at the vibration track and give an explanation as to why ? 

I wonder how they did their testing to get that prop STC'ed (A1B6, A3B6 or A3B6D ?) 

 

 

Since the prop is explicitly STC'd for each engine type (and may have different limitations) I assume they must physically run it on each. Maybe not???

 

-Robert

 

[OR75]

Maybe not ... I wonder how much read across room they get from the Feds

[joepilot]

Got a brand new (original equipment) McCauley bolted on & test flown today. Smoothness is back!!!!!! YeeHaa! (Plus the white spinner for Gary). 

I haven't heard anything yet from Hartzell (and may never), but for whatever reason, the Hartell was not smooth. 

The indexing SB does not apply to my plane & Hartzell says it was correctly indexed, but the old & new McCauley stops as shown in the pic, and the Hartzell stopped at 12/6. Who knows? But after investing more time & money, I'm happy. 

Thanks for all the input, guys. 

[carusoam]

Great follow up, Joe!

Best regards,

-a-

[Cody Stallings]

Do you still have the Hartzell?

 

[jetdriven]

I think the hartzell was not indexed in the same spot as the McCauley.  It shuts down in a different place for evidence. That would cause the vibration problems the OP was referring to. 

One more thing, why did he replace the McCauley in the first place?

[joepilot]

5 hours ago, jetdriven said:

I think the hartzell was not indexed in the same spot as the McCauley.  It shuts down in a different place for evidence. That would cause the vibration problems the OP was referring to. 

One more thing, why did he replace the McCauley in the first place?

I think this may be true. However, Hartzell says the indexing from the original McCauley does not need to be changed for the Hartzell. While re indexing MAY have helped, path of least resistance with greatest probability of successful outcome was return the Hartzell & install a McCauley. 

Original McCauley was sent in for overhaul but was "downed" for being out of limits. Went with Hartzell due to positive reports & price difference. YMMV. 

[OR75]

I would be very curious to know on what engine did Hartzell test the prop to get the STC . A3B6 ? A1B6 ? A3B6D ? Just one ? All 3 ? 

Joe : 

if your prop was overhaul able , did you try to just do a reseal ? 

 

[joepilot]

2 hours ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

Was the old Mac slinging oil or giving other signs of failure, or did you just send it in for overhaul because of calendar time?

Jim

No oil leaks & was working fine. But was 21 yrs old & had only been resealed. Blades needed some attention, so I erred on the side of safety electing an OH. But prop shop downed it. 

2 hours ago, OR75 said:

I would be very curious to know on what engine did Hartzell test the prop to get the STC . A3B6 ? A1B6 ? A3B6D ? Just one ? All 3 ? 

Joe : 

if your prop was overhaul able , did you try to just do a reseal ? 

 

Prop not overhaulable.

I know nothing about STC's, but I'm willing to bet the bureaucratic, self-preservation FAA was more concerned with paperwork & fees than real test flight data.

Hartzell is a great company, but their Top Prop just didn't agree with my plane. I may be in the minority, but I have heard I'm not the only one with this issue. 

-Joe 

[amillet]

New Hartzell installed on newly factory re-built IO360A3B6.  (One blade of 1800 hr. McCauley not overhaul able).  I was only ale to fly 2 hour break in flight, then 1.3 hours to deliver plane to avionics shop for upgrades.  Prop has not been dynamically balanced yet, but it runs smoother at 2600 than 2500 rpms.

[Cyril Gibb]

On 10/18/2015 at 1:20 PM, Cyril Gibb said:

Mooney SB M20-206 talks about reclocking the prop to reduce vibration.  Additionally, there is a bunch of recommendations from other type specific sites about reclocking.  Even the Skyranch recommendation is consistent with the others. It seems that the current prop clocking was traditional based on the need to hand prop, but doesn't optimise (non-US spelling) the orientation that minimizes vibration.

Apparently, orienting the prop parallel to the #1 crankthrow should be best. Has anyone done the M20-206 Service Bulletin ?  Did it make any difference ?  Has anyone done the recommended prop reclocking to any other engine model with success, or not ?

I'm bringing up this thread again because Hartzell (I think) is going to be at the Mooney Homecoming and perhaps one of you attendees could inquire.  I assume that an unofficial answer would be easier to extract than a formal FAAlike legal CYA response, assuming the Hartzell person is a techie and not a marketing rep. 

Questions:

Does Hartzell do a vibration analysis on different clocking for various combos? or more specifically: does having the prop parallel to the crankthrow reduce vibration for all/most engine prop combos, or just the ones covered in SB M20-206?

If it's "better" vibrationwise, is it legal to reclock another engne/prop combo?  Is the prop clocking part of the Hartzell STC, or is it just left the same as original for installation simplicity.

And for MooneySpacers, has anyone done SB M20-206 and seen a difference or not?

[Cody Stallings]

On 10/18/2015 at 2:57 PM, joepilot said:

He thinks there's a mechanical issue with the new prop. Here's about infant mortality:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathtub_curve

 

No one greased after first run. Not listed in the Prop Manual as recommended action. Had vibration issue on first flight. But thanks, I'll ask. 

It's located in the 115N Manuel that comes with the propeller.

Reads: After a couple hrs of operation the propeller should be re greased to replenish grease that has been centrifuge displaces.

 

 

[joepilot]

Hi! 

The Hartzell vibrated & was louder in the cabin on the first first flight. Not a grease issue. 

On shutdown, the Hartzell stopped in a different place than the McCauley. No coincidence. 

I have 200+ hrs on the new McCauley (factory equipment model) & is smooth and quiet!! Love it. 

YMMV 

-Joe

'94 201J