What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Anybody using one of these? Lycoming Balancer

It looks like a remake of the Mark Landoll Harmonic Balancer Ring sold about a decade ago.
 
LifeofReiley said:
Not even near the same... it is a sleeve that goes on the front of the flywheel. :)
Click to expand...

Same principal, just a smaller diameter, about 8 inches diameter rather than the Lycoming flywheel that is about 11 to 12 inch diameter.

I wouldn't describe it as a sleeve, more like a spacer between the prop flange and the prop. and held on by the prop bolts.

lycoming.jpg


The larger diameter Landoll one, bolted on to the flywheel -

CrushPlate.jpg
 
I just bought one !

I ordered one last Tuesday and it arrived today 3-24-14 , I will post what I can feel different as soon as possiable " It is COLD here in the Pittsburgh area " :( . It is Sold with a 100 day money back Guarantee ! That I intend to use if nessary , A bit expensive at $375.00 but if it does what I want it to do ??? BTW it fits All Lycomings with the same crank centering hole for the prop the 6 bolt holes are made for the IO-360 but will work with the smaller bolts on the o-320 . To be continued . :D
 
HIIFLY said:
I ordered one last Tuesday and it arrived today 3-24-14 , I will post what I can feel different as soon as possiable " It is COLD here in the Pittsburgh area " :( . It is Sold with a 100 day money back Guarantee ! That I intend to use if nessary , A bit expensive at $375.00 but if it does what I want it to do ??? BTW it fits All Lycomings with the same crank centering hole for the prop the 6 bolt holes are made for the IO-360 but will work with the smaller bolts on the o-320 . To be continued . :D
Click to expand...

How thick is it?

It will move the spinner away from the cowl - do you think a thinner prop spacer will be needed?
 
How it works

http://balancemasters.com/howtheywork.html

My (airplane) partner and I are considering one of these. Looking forward to the PIREP.

As much as I like the guy, I always gotta clarify that he is only my airplane partner. We've had a few strange looks at fly-ins when we forget that part. :)
 
1.01 lbs. on my fish scale ! Good for Hartzel Props too ! Not Good for additional Nose weight .
 
az_gila said:
It looks like a remake of the Mark Landoll Harmonic Balancer Ring sold about a decade ago.
Click to expand...

I could be mistaken, but they appear to be two different operating principles for two different purposes.

The Landoll is a heavy steel ring inside an aluminum ring, in a bath of viscous silicone fluid. It is a true torsional vibration damper.

The Balancemaster is basically a hollow tube at the perimeter of a disk. The tube contains a small amount of mercury. Its purpose is radial balance.
 
DanH said:
I could be mistaken, but they appear to be two different operating principles for two different purposes.

The Landoll is a heavy steel ring inside an aluminum ring, in a bath of viscous silicone fluid. It is a true torsional vibration damper.

The Balancemaster is basically a hollow tube at the perimeter of a disk. The tube contains a small amount of mercury. Its purpose is radial balance.
Click to expand...

Yep...I think you're right in the fact that there is almost nothing I find similar about them at all...other than they both bolt somewhere forward of the firewall onto a rotating part of the engine, and both are round.

Having actually installed a number of them, I'd say the Landoll rings (both the solid/fixed and the viscous ones) are quite nice for light nosed airplanes that need a few pounds on the nose (and by some accounts for vibration). This new little widget looks like it might be kind of a neat piece of work - though as noted quite different from the Landoll weight. I too will be interested in seeing the real world reports of this from those of you putting one on. Neat to see new products that people are able to come up with.

At .040" think I'm not sure it'd be much of a concern for anyone other than those on their last prop bolt thread - I doubt it'd be noticed on most any typical RV installation.

Cheers,
Stein

Cheers,
Stein
 
Some maybe 20 years ago I had a small hobby store right by "Balance Masters" and got to know the owner a bit. At one point he asked me to be a financial investor in this concept - which he said was already used on VW's and several big rigs for balancing... he was about to branch off into Harleys too. The concept looked compelling, and simple too, but just didn't get excited about it. a few years after that I looked around and saw/heard nothing more about "dynamic balancers" figured the idea had died but here it is once again. No actual experience one way or the other on how well it works but interesting to see it's back. I do question why it's been some 20 or so years to rear it's head if the concept is one of usefulness as this should be used on ALL car tires, crankshafts, props (full sized and models), most anything that has rotational mass and needs balancing
 
Now is a great time to get some real data. Take balance before installation at various RPM and then after at the same RPM. If it works well, then the IPS linear vibration due to spinner/prop imbalance should be reduced by some amount that can be measured. Maybe they will give you one to become a spokesperson!

Is it less costly than a good balance job? (or several?)
 
Last edited:
dpansier said:
If you are looking to collect some before and after data, a low cost vibration spectrum analyzer is available for the iPhone linked here: https://itunes.apple.com/app/vibration/id301097580?mt=8
Click to expand...

The manual for this app says to place your iPhone on the test article for measurement. This is poor practice in the vibration measurement world and usually gives bad data. Accelerometer mounting is extremely critcal.

If you want any kind of good and repeatable data measurements, you should at least use bees wax to attach the iPhone to the test article, assuming the environment temperature will not soften or melt the wax. Otherwise, use cyanoacrylate adhesives (I know, no one wants to do this to their phone :eek:).

I actually have some knowledge to contribute to VAF!!! I guess all those times I accidentally glued my fingers together in the dyno cell wasn't for nothing. ;)
 
Since the above link to my BalanceMaster results is no longer active, and because I've had several folks ask, here is my experience and comments from 2014, for what it's worth, with some recent edits:

I have completed a test of the Balancemaster prop balance product on my AFP vertical injection, ECI 360, with Whirlwind RV200 prop, on my RV-7A with 380 hours.

First, thanks to Roger Lee, and A.J. Pawloski, for their great help in conducting this test. The Balance Master product may be obtained from Mark at Checkered Flag Restorations, (http://www.checkeredflagrestorations.com/distributors.html).

The following results were done with ACES equipment and prop at takeoff pitch (ie. fine pitch with RPMs controlled by the throttle).

First we completed a new conventional balance just prior to installing the Balancemaster. The results:
Without conventional balance weights at 2300 rpm: 0.17 ips.
After a new conventional balance at 2300 rpm: 0.12 ips.

Next, we removed the conventional balance weights and installed the Balance Master. The results:
2300 rpm: 0.11 ips.
2000 rpm: 0.11 ips.
1500 rpm: 0.11 ips.
1000 rpm: 0.11 ips.

Results and Comments:
1. The cost of the Balance Master, at $350 (not including costs associated with prop removal and re-installation), was over twice what it cost me to get a conventional balance ($125).
2. Unlike a conventional balance, installation of the Balance Master requires removal and re-installation of the propeller.
3. Except for prop removal and installation, installation of the Balance Master was very easy. It fits directly on the front face of the ring gear flywheel. Existing propeller bolts were able to be reused.
4. Since I have a lightweight propeller, the added weight of the Balance Master (about 1.3 lbs) was not a concern for me.
5. Looking only at the vibration numbers, the Balance Master (0.11 ips) did not appear to be significantly better than a conventional balance (0.12 ips).
6. Notice the consistent vibration numbers at each rpm. This is one of the reported advantages of the Balance Master.
7. Unlike a conventional balance, use of the Balance Master should not require a re-balance every few years.
8. Though not listed here, the differences in vibration levels at various rpm's with the conventional balance was no more than 0.03 ips. I don't claim to be able to 'feel' differences this small, however, as soon as I started the engine with the Balance Master product, I did 'intuitively believe' that the prop/engine was smoother. Attribute that to wishful thinking if you will.
9. I was never completely confident in these test numbers. I would like to see results from additional testing.

Should I keep the Balance Master or return to the conventional method? I look forward to your comments.

About a month later, I returned the Balancemaster and completed another conventional balance with a different person doing the balancing. The results, at 2300 rpm were:
without any balance weights, 0.66 ips
after conventional balance, 0.02 ips.
 
Roger, just some thoughts here, having done a lot of prop blances myself. Your initail balance at .11 seems high to me. I usually get them down to .01-.04 IPS and certianly never stop at .11. Your final balance at .01 is in line with that, so I would stick with it.
Your starting balance of .66 is really high, though and may be what's causing the lower results with the balancer.

Vic
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top