Jump to content

Yesterday's Flight KTUS-KPGA 146 TAS


Recommended Posts

Came back from TUS yesterday 8500', DA close to 8500', full throttle, 2550 RPM, leaned to 9.8 GPH.

Smooth conditions, TAS 145-146 for quite some time for a good check (used a wiz wheel). 64 D/C 

1200 hrs on engine, 3 blade prop, very smooth engine with no 3 blade vibration issues. Day before had to go to 13,500 

for a short while to get over cloud deck. The short body works just fine for us.   

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, par said:

I attempted a full power run like you are describing and I also have a 3 blade prop. I noted an increased amount of vibration at full power. Is this a common issue with a 3 blade prop? If so, what is the solution?

Most (not all) three blade props on four cylinder engines seem to vibrate more than their two blade counterparts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Power strokes vs number of blades causes a bit of vibration under certain conditions...

Combine that with blade angle and air speed while the plane is moving or accelerating through the air.  Where does the power stroke occur compared to the angle of attack/attitude of the airplane...?

If there is a solution, add a pair of cylinders to go with the fancy prop... :)

keep in mind that some vibrations may be caused by something else like worn or broken parts.

PP thoughts only, not a mechanic...

Best regards,

-a-

Edited by carusoam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Hyett6420 said:

How can that be so if the diametric distances between the blades is the same and rhey are dynamically balanced?

All crankshafts bend and twist during normal operation.  Typically in a 4 cylinder car engine there are 5 main bearings. (each crank throw is supported on both sides).  On a 4 cylinder aircraft engine, there are only 3 main bearings.  That allows much more flex in the crank.  Depending on the orientation of the prop blades to the crank throws, there can be more (or less) twisting which causes vibration.  If the vibration is a crank/prop resonant frequency under high power,  things can break.  That's why we usually have an rpm range we should avoid.

Propellers don't act like a flywheel.  I'm still trying to get an opinion from Lycoming or Hartzell if it's advisable to reclock the prop on my F to reduce vibration as specified in SB M20-206 for early Js.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, TTaylor said:

I have found the opposite, most 3 bladed I have flown have been smoother.

Digging through my logs during annual last weekend, I found that my 3-blade Hartzell was last balanced in June 2002, when it was installed. My new IA (2nd annual with him) has a side business balancing props, so we checked mine. Cold start on a 70° day, hasn't run in a couple of weeks, fired off and running on the 2nd blade. Warmed at 1000, then 1200, 1500, 2000 and 2700. Needed more braking pressure for the last.

Found my mechanical tach (replaced at the same time as the prop by the PO) was reading low by 22 RPMs, and the balance read 0.01, so I shut down, pushed her back inside and started greasing and lubing under the belly.

Not bad for an old, shaky 3-blade prop!  :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.