New Engine on New homebuilt

Jerry Springer wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote

Tie the aircraft to a pole and...

Not a good idea for a new or rebuilt engine. It needs air flowing
to keep cylinders cool. Happened to a local guy who thought it was neat
to taxi all over the area in his new airplane, overheated cylinders and
it burned a lot of oil from the very beginnoing. He had to rebuild the
cylinders.


I can see that happening at idle speeds but if you run the
engine up to full throttle won't the prop wash provide enough
cooling, depending on the cowling of course.

--

FF

wrote:
Jerry Springer wrote:

"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote


Tie the aircraft to a pole and...

Not a good idea for a new or rebuilt engine. It needs air flowing
to keep cylinders cool. Happened to a local guy who thought it was neat
to taxi all over the area in his new airplane, overheated cylinders and
it burned a lot of oil from the very beginnoing. He had to rebuild the
cylinders.



I can see that happening at idle speeds but if you run the
engine up to full throttle won't the prop wash provide enough
cooling, depending on the cowling of course.

Actually it will not, a prop turing at full speed with airplane not
moving is not very efficient at all. It also take forward speed to
create enough airflow for cooling. A lot of homebuilts have very tight
cowlings and need a fair amount of pressure to force the air down and
around the cylinders

Jerry

I would do a few high speed taxi's and fly it. Don't worry that much
about the brakes. Haulting it down after the high speed taxi will do
the job, you can ever leave a bit of power on with brakes to get the
heat up. Make sure you don't have leaks and cooling is good.


David Koehler wrote:
Hi All,
I'm not there yet, but, I have a new Lycoming O-360 and in the process of
building a homebuilt kit. Lycoming says to break in the engine at full power
and gives procedures on how to do it. The kit needs slow taxi, then fast
taxi, glazing of the brakes. After take off there are procedures to do at
lower power.... I know I'm not the FIRST in this dilemma, so what takes a
preference? If you wait to do the full power to seat the rings, is that ok?
Thanks for any response, I'm at a loss,
david

"docrw" wrote in message
oups.com...
I would do a few high speed taxi's and fly it. Don't worry that much
about the brakes. Haulting it down after the high speed taxi will do
the job, you can ever leave a bit of power on with brakes to get the
heat up. Make sure you don't have leaks and cooling is good.


Talk with a flight advisor before doing any high speed taxiing. Many
(most?) discourage it, because it puts you in the neither fish nor foul
situation where the airplane isn't exactly flying and it isn't exactly just
rolling along either. High speed taxi's are an excellent way to lose
control on the ground with an unfamiliar aircraft, to accidentally become
airborne.

Certainly, there are alternate opinions...

On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 20:45:36 -0700, Jerry Springer
wrote:

wrote:
Jerry Springer wrote:

"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote


Tie the aircraft to a pole and...

Not a good idea for a new or rebuilt engine. It needs air flowing
to keep cylinders cool. Happened to a local guy who thought it was neat
to taxi all over the area in his new airplane, overheated cylinders and
it burned a lot of oil from the very beginnoing. He had to rebuild the
cylinders.



I can see that happening at idle speeds but if you run the
engine up to full throttle won't the prop wash provide enough
cooling, depending on the cowling of course.

Actually it will not, a prop turing at full speed with airplane not
moving is not very efficient at all. It also take forward speed to
create enough airflow for cooling. A lot of homebuilts have very tight
cowlings and need a fair amount of pressure to force the air down and
around the cylinders

It depends on how well the engine is cooled. Many "Spam Cans" won't
heat up enough to get the contaminants out of the oil, but new, or
rebuilt engines are a different animal.

OTOH isn't there a requirement for one hour on the engine before it
takes to the air, or is that before the FAA inspection and sign off?

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
Jerry

Greetings All,
First, thank you for all the insight, I've been all over the net, from
Lycoming to Glastar. It seems that the break in is to seat the rings and if
it's not done correctly the cylinder walls will glaze and the rings will
never seat. One can start the engine up for short runs monitoring the
temperature until the "break-in" can be done. We're not talking about 3 or 4
years, just a few runs not to exceed 3 minutes each and turning the engine
off. I believe with smaller engines (rotax) you can tie them to a pole.
Again, Thanks to all, without all the input I would still be going in
circles.
david

"David Koehler" wrote in message
...
Hi All,
I'm not there yet, but, I have a new Lycoming O-360 and in the process of
building a homebuilt kit. Lycoming says to break in the engine at full
power
and gives procedures on how to do it. The kit needs slow taxi, then fast
taxi, glazing of the brakes. After take off there are procedures to do at
lower power.... I know I'm not the FIRST in this dilemma, so what takes a
preference? If you wait to do the full power to seat the rings, is that
ok?
Thanks for any response, I'm at a loss,
david

"Roger" wrote in message
...
snip

OTOH isn't there a requirement for one hour on the engine before it
takes to the air, or is that before the FAA inspection and sign off?

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

I've heard of the 1 hour engine run requirement, but I've never found it in
any official (FAA) or reputable (EAA) source. I am aware of some DAR's who
require it.

My DAR didn't mention it.

Personally, if I had access to a test stand with proper cooling set-up, I'd
run a new engine at least an hour. However, installed on an aircraft, and
without a test club, lengthy engine runs on the ground are not recommended
per Lycoming's new or remanufactured engine break-in procedure.

KB

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 08:03:47 -0400, "Kyle Boatright"
wrote:


"Roger" wrote in message
.. .
snip

OTOH isn't there a requirement for one hour on the engine before it
takes to the air, or is that before the FAA inspection and sign off?

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

I've heard of the 1 hour engine run requirement, but I've never found it in
any official (FAA) or reputable (EAA) source. I am aware of some DAR's who
require it.

My DAR didn't mention it.

Personally, if I had access to a test stand with proper cooling set-up, I'd
run a new engine at least an hour. However, installed on an aircraft, and
without a test club, lengthy engine runs on the ground are not recommended
per Lycoming's new or remanufactured engine break-in procedure.

On my rebuild in the Deb they told me to take minimum taxi time, get
it in the air and run the crap out of it. The first hour was running
80 to 85% with a lot of power changes. The rings seated in just a few
hours. I don't remember just how many now, but it wasn't long.
Although they were concerned with temps (which weren't a problem) in
this particular case it sounded more like they were interested in the
ring seating. It worked. Nearly a 1000 hours later and it still uses
less than a pint in 25 hours.

That puts the way you run the engine at odds with the way you want to
start your test flights, so likewise, I'd prefer to run the engine in
on a test stand, but unfortunately I don't think that is going to
happen.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

KB

David Koehler wrote:
Greetings All,
First, thank you for all the insight, I've been all over the net, from
Lycoming to Glastar. It seems that the break in is to seat the rings and if
it's not done correctly the cylinder walls will glaze and the rings will
never seat. One can start the engine up for short runs monitoring the
temperature until the "break-in" can be done. We're not talking about 3 or 4
years, just a few runs not to exceed 3 minutes each and turning the engine
off. I believe with smaller engines (rotax) you can tie them to a pole.
Again, Thanks to all, without all the input I would still be going in
circles.
david

Yes, with the rotax 2-strokes, the breakin procedure is normally done
with the airplane tied down. It's a little over an hour, but involves
starting slow and gradually increasing the amount of work the motor
does. Overall, there's only about 5 or 6 minutes of full throttle
operation, most of it right at the end. The motor is essentially ready
to fly at the end of it with the rings just about fully seated. In my
experience, though, about 10 hours is needed to fully break it in and
get stable CHT's.

I'm a strong believer in the tied-to-the-pole breakin procedure since it
not only allows a breakin but also proves the motor installation. If
there's a problem with your mounting job, it'll definitely show up
during that screaming breakin.

Also, if there's a fatal, major defect in the motor that'll show up too
as a siezure or explosion or whatever.

The nice thing is, the the plane tied down, all this will happen on the
ground instead of way up in the air......

That's not a hard and fast rule though, as some manufacturers recommend
the breakin be done in the air.....

LS
N646F

"David Koehler" wrote in message
...

Hi All,
I'm not there yet, but, I have a new Lycoming O-360 and in the process of
building a homebuilt kit. Lycoming says to break in the engine at full

power

and gives procedures on how to do it. The kit needs slow taxi, then fast
taxi, glazing of the brakes. After take off there are procedures to do at
lower power.... I know I'm not the FIRST in this dilemma, so what takes a
preference? If you wait to do the full power to seat the rings, is that

ok?

Thanks for any response, I'm at a loss,
david

"ls" wrote in message
.. .
I'm a strong believer in the tied-to-the-pole breakin procedure since it
not only allows a breakin but also proves the motor installation. If
there's a problem with your mounting job, it'll definitely show up during
that screaming breakin.

I can't be the only one who picked up the double entendre about "tying it to
a pole" and "Slusarczyk" in the same post.

Now I'm ROTFLMAO about a "screaming Pole".

Rich "Is that a stall warning horn??" S.