Engine Trouble

[Nev]

John Bickham Regarding the oil leak from my Prop Governor, there was a bulletin about it from 2016. I had it serviced in July, and knowing what I know now I think that problem has been fixed. However the oil leak from the cylinder flange fitted neatly time-wise with the governor leak, so I attributed it to the governor not being repaired properly and didn't search further at that time.

We didn't find any evidence of paint or contamination between the cylinder flange and the crankcase. That area appears to be clean. Because of this we don't plan to remove other cylinders unnecessarily.

We did find very visible evidence on the outside face of the cylinder flange, and under the hold-down plates. It appears that this is probably the cause of the problem. Fortunately, thats easier to access and doesn't require the removal of the cylinder in order to check it. It does require the baffles to be removed, and the cylinder nuts to be removed so that the hold-down plate can be removed. So while it's still a PITA, it's a much preferable alternative to not checking it until the studs shear off. Not only does that make your day overly exciting, it can actually ruin your whole afternoon.

Regarding the through bolts (studs) - (and noting that I'm not an aircraft engineer) - they do go through the case, and hold opposing cylinders onto the case. So some of the cylinder studs are shorter and seat into the crankcase, and the through-studs are longer and screw in from one side. Once seated, each end is threaded and holds opposite cylinders in place. My understanding is that there is a concern because it may also affect the crankcase integrity. On mine, the side of the through bolt that sheared off was also the side that is threaded into the crankcase, so theoretically it shouldn't have affected the opposite side, but I'm well aware that I might be taking an optimistic view here too. We are currently in the process of ordering new studs for the whole #4 cylinder. We will also be removing and cleaning all of the other cylinder flanges.

[svyolo]

I have a similar engine from the same source, except I ordered rebuilt cylinders. Those cylinders came with a nice paint job, including the external flange. I see no sealant weeping out, but I also see no evidence of that cylinder paint being removed from under the plates. And the outside of the double plates also appears to have a thin coat of paint. According to that reference you posted, paint on the external cylinder flange probably isn't a good thing.

This is not an official source, nor do I endorse it. But I asked:

":When installing cylinders on a narrow deck Lycoming engine, it is advisable to remove the paint from the external cylinder flange before installing the doubler plate (also known as "banana plates" or hold-down plates). This practice ensures a proper fit and torque, as paint can interfere with the seating of the doubler plate and potentially lead to under-torquing or loosening of the nuts over time. According to discussions on aviation maintenance forums, the presence of paint on the flange can lead to issues with torque application and maintenance of the engine's structural integrity. Removing the paint helps ensure that the nuts can be properly tightened to the specified torque, maintaining the engine's reliability and performance."

[John Bickham]

Thanks for the update Nev. The report of no evidence of paint or contamination found between the cylinder flange and crankcase is a huge relief. I'm stepping back from the edge of the "cylinder pulling cliff". My cylinders don't have the hold down plates. I'm going seek some help and expertise on "checking torque on cylinder base bolts". I am a Mike Busch fan too. I think I will start another thread on addressing oil leaks in the maintenance section. I know it has been a challenging time for you.Thanks again.

[gregc]

Personally if I suspected an issue with cylinder hold down fasteners I would get help from someone with a lot of Lycoming overhaul experience. I lean to the Mike Busch school of thought on this subject. This is an area where the chances of making it worse are significant.

https://www.savvyaviation.com/wp-content/uploads/articles_eaa/EAA_2014-06_cylinder-work-be-afraid.pdf

I don't know of a foolproof method to check the torque on a previously fastened nut. I have read about different approaches (on-torque, off-torque, marked fastener) but they all depend on assuming the previous coefficient of friction hasn't changed as well as good tool access, a recently calibrated torque wrench etc.

The Lycoming procedure for tightening cylinder fasteners is quite specific in both process and sequence. To me, this feels like something that requires some experience, I certainly wouldn't trust my first attempt!

[Nev]

Thanks Greg. I'm with you on the Mike Busch school of thought - I had hoped to make it through at least a couple of thousand hours without pulling cylinders. In order to inspect the remaining hold down plates we won't actually be removing those cylinders, just the plates themselves, (although that point might be somewhat academic). Fortunately we've got some very experienced Lycoming aircraft engineers (I think in North America you would call them mechanics) here to advise us, and also to do the work.

[Battson]

Excellent comments Greg

[John Bickham]

Since Mike Busch was mentioned. This is the point that Whee was making. Continental engine but same concern.

EAA_2013-04_a-little-dab-ll-do-ya-in.pdf

[Nev]

Since Mike Busch was mentioned. This is the point that Whee was making. Continental engine but same concern.

[ATTACH]n93189[/ATTACH]

That's a very sobering read and makes it clear that the use of paint or sealants when mounting the cylinders is a known issue and not permitted. The last paragraph sums it up with the clear warning :


22E5F68B-FD41-4896-B6F0-6431E66E6590.jpg

[TJ_Slice]

This whole thread really has me contemplating my engine choice. While I know any engine can fail, but I like the peace of mind of having a new engine.

Something like this would surely have an impact on my wife, and I doubt if she would ever feel comfortable flying with the same engine or airplane again.

I would say I am leaning toward going new, and just biting the bullet on cost and acquisition time.

I could divert some of the money planned for an IFR panel, and build a VFR only airplane. I may also be able to absorb the cost over the build time and still get an IFR plane. I would likely plan and wire for the panel I eventually want, and not what I start with, so that would make upgrading sometime in the future much easier.

The big question is whether the peace of mind is worth it? I think I am there.

[Battson]

To be fair, experimental aircraft are not losing cylinders left right and centre. There's probably 10,000 of these engines running globally, year in and out, without cylinder stud issues. The chances of this happening must be rather remote.

Even the biggest names in the business have "Friday afternoon" jobs where things go wrong. It's just a lower probability, but hard to say how much lower... Is that unquantified benefit worth paying between 2x and 4x the price, well that's a personal decision.

Ultimately you have to trust an experienced professional, to do a good job.
The more engines they do, the more confident you can be, but the reliability rates of certified engines aren't that much better than experimental engines, when you considering that the experimental stats includes all comers.

[gregc]

It's a personal call and peace of mind is obviously worth a lot but - are new engines safer/more reliable? Maybe, probably, I don't know. Unfortunately I have never been able to find data that demonstrates unequivocally that a new engine is 'better' than a rebuilt engine. Or that a rebuild is better than an overhaul. Or that a certified engine is more reliable than an experimental. It seems that this kind of data is simply not collected or is never published. My take-away from this thread is that it is a reminder to take every opportunity to look over and listen to the engine you are flying behind. They often give us clues about their overall health and rarely fail without any warning whatsoever. Even Nev's major problem gave him time to safely land the plane. My second take-away would be to strive to do as well as he did managing a major failure. That's something I can control and surely could get better at.

[Steve W]

35+ years ago I had experience with a Saratoga going down in the bush outside Gander NL when I was working in the province. Not me flyin and fortunately no injuries. Was at night though and there is a reason they call the island of Newfoundland the “Rock”. Amazing job by the pilot who was delivering the plane from the factory to Europe. The new engine had a large hole in the side of the crank case.
I have heard similar stories on both sides of the fence with buying new or used. Personally, if all of the reciprocating parts are NDT’d, new cylinders installed, and put together by a reputable shop, I have no hesitation to sit behind a rebuilt engine. They are made, assembled and operated by humans so……. new is no guarantee. Just sayin

[TJ_Slice]

In my heart, I know that to be true, but my head is getting in the way.