# Liney Radial 'Halo'



## Bogstandard (Mar 21, 2008)

Has anyone seen or used this planset yet.

I don't want to go buying it if it is still in unproven state, as suggested by his web page comments.

John


----------



## Powder keg (Mar 21, 2008)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3E2tv8UgfU[/ame]


----------



## gilessim (Mar 21, 2008)

Hi John, I got the kit a few months ago and I've done some bits, the heads are a bit difficult to get _my_ head around but they are well drawn and all the bits are there, I'm sure it was Lances intention for his plans to be a bit challenging but he is very helpful.

I'm convinced that it will run like the one in the video and I'm sure that it would be a breeze for you! :bow:

I built last year the RV2 and it ran first try!, it was great fun for me to do, here's mine if you didn't already see it.





Giles


----------



## Bogstandard (Mar 21, 2008)

PK,

The one in the vid is in fact his proving prototype, as is the second vid he has released.

Giles,
Do your plans show the supposed square bases to the cylinders?


John


----------



## gilessim (Mar 21, 2008)

John, yes they do and the cylinders are one piece from square bar, which seems a bit odd to me but I guess he has his reasons, the crankcase has square seats milled out and each one has 4 bolts to hold it, looks nice though!

Giles


----------



## Bogstandard (Mar 21, 2008)

Thnks for that Giles, I think I will order the plans.

John


----------



## cfellows (Mar 21, 2008)

gilessim  said:
			
		

> Hi John, I got the kit a few months ago and I've done some bits, the heads are a bit difficult to get _my_ head around but they are well drawn and all the bits are there, I'm sure it was Lances intention for his plans to be a bit challenging but he is very helpful.



Giles,

From looking at the video and pictures, I'm guessing that the intake valve mechanism consists of a round ball valve that get's pushed sideways by the "valve stem". Is that about right?

Chuck


----------



## gilessim (Mar 21, 2008)

Chuck, yes that's just about it, though it seems to be the steam or air that pushes the balls aside and the springs just hold the valve stems out of the way, the plans have a series of printed transparent sheets with the various parts overlaid one on top of the other, if you see what I mean!, it's very well thought out, I'd love to post them but we can't do Lance out of an income can we!, as I said ,I'm still not completely clear about the head/valve mechanism but I'll get there!.

Giles


----------



## cfellows (Mar 27, 2008)

Thanks, Giles. I respect Liney's intellectual property and, no, I wouldn't want to deprive anyone of payment for plans that I know a lot of hard work went in to. I may have to supplement my income with something similar when I retire! I think, from what I can see from the outside of the engine, the spring holds the intake valve ball in the closed position and the valve stem deflects the ball sideways away from the seat (towards the spring). This, of course is just from looking at the way the heads are assembled. Pretty darn clever, actually. I would never have thought of doing it that way.

Chuck


----------



## Bogstandard (Mar 27, 2008)

Plans ordered, waiting in anticipation.

Lance actually said it could be made in any configuration from one to five cylinders.

So it looks like fifteen cylinders are on the cards.

John


----------



## Jack (Mar 27, 2008)

I ordered a set of his plans for the "Halo Engine" they took almost a month to get here. The plans are well done, but don't get in a hurry to get them, he takes his good old time to put them in the mail and they are sent by the slowest and cheapest rate possible.
I have some of the parts made, but there are some parts that will present quite a challenge.


----------



## gilessim (Mar 28, 2008)

Chuck, thanks for the reply! it is pretty clever, he must have lost some sleep thinking that one up!

John, at this point ,why not go for a double row 19 cylinder one?

Jack, mine only took about 10 days to get here to Italy but saying that, the "unknown machinist" in the customers gallery is me and I told him about 6 months ago and he didn't get round to changing it yet!.

Giles


----------



## Bogstandard (Mar 28, 2008)

Giles,

I wasn't talking about making them harder, but one of each, 1,2,3 etc cylinders, a total of 15 cylinders for all 5.
I will learn to walk before running.

John


----------



## Bogstandard (Mar 29, 2008)

I have seen a set of plans, and it all looks pretty straight forwards.

You can see the cnc design in it, and I am sure if you were into cnc, you would be able to bang one out in no time, especially if you had an nc rotary table.

Most of the hard work as I can see is not the heads, they are just a basic milling and drilling exercise. It is the planning of how to hold the bits in the correct sequence for machining. The cylinders spring to mind, with the thin square holdown area, then going to a round to have everthing else done. I can see that being the main stumbling block, maybe making a few drilling jigs will make it easier, with all the finning being done at the end.

John


----------



## Divided He ad (Mar 29, 2008)

Do you know what... ? I've seen that vid on you tube many, many times and I've only just realised that's a chuck as a flywheel!! 
maybe it is just there to demo the speed? but it is strange how I never saw it before?!?!

Still awesome machine!! Don't think I'll ever get one of them made!

Ralph.


----------



## Bogstandard (Mar 30, 2008)

Ralph,

The vids don't show you how small the engine really is. It looks big and beefy, but just to show how it is, the pushrods are 1/16" diameter, and 1.4" long, and all the mounting bolts are 2-56 unc.

John


----------



## JohnS (Mar 30, 2008)

Well as the old saying goes ignorance is bliss  which is probably why I am so happy most of the time. I have just received my set of plans from Lance for the Halo radial with the intention of building just a single cylinder version. I understand Lance built one of these to test out the head arrangement. In my case I was drawn to the design because of its similarity to a 4 stroke I.C. engine without the risk of setting my hair on fire.

Like Gilessim I find the drawings for the head a little tricky to understand though I do rely on photographs to clarify some of the detail. Clearly Bogstandard, like many of you can read plans, as easy as the daily newspaper and foresee machining problems well before the chips start flying. Now with alarm bells ringing at least I can now try and fathom out the problems that lay in wait when it comes to machining the cylinder  any other bogeys in the cupboard John ?

JohnS


----------



## Divided He ad (Mar 30, 2008)

John, Your talking 'old money' hold on a min'.... yep done the conversions, your right it is not that big! :big:
Still looks very intricate though.. .Would it be eaisier if it were larger? 

Ralph.

P.S. I do know a little of this 'Imperial' system.... Just not the threads.... I know totally unacceptable! I blame 'Maggie'! 
Half metric, half imperial, no wonder I can't figure out how long things are! ;D


----------



## Bogstandard (Mar 30, 2008)

John,

We will have a big discussion on this in our usual way.
But planning a machining order is one of the first things to do when starting to make a fairly complicated part, you don't want to get to near the end of the machining, and find out that you can't hold the part or be able to set it up accurately enough to finish the job. As I have said before, I look at the part to be made, and plan the machining sequence out fully, and write it down. An hour or two doing that can save a lot of heartache later.

Ralph,

I am sorry, but if you buy something from the States, say a plan, you will find it is still in imperial. Also because this is mainly an American members site, you will find, even though I work in metric, I convert it to basic imperial so it is understood a lot easier by the majority of the members. Even though a lot of them are now becoming familiar with our metric system.

With reference to threads 2-56UNC is roughly equivalent to 8BA or 2.2MM.

To help you out I will put a little conversion chart in the downloads section so you can print it out and you will know what we are on about.

John


----------



## Divided He ad (Mar 30, 2008)

John, 

Thank you for the chart. It is already printed and scheduled to be laminated and mounted on the wall of my shop asap!
It's not that I'm totally thick (not according to some!!) just I haven't applied myself to the research of the darker depths of the imperial (technical) system. I've never really had to before! I'll pick it up when I have to...easier now I have your chart and I won't have to ask too many more dumb questions ;D (well perhaps a few more!!)

Ralph.


----------



## Bogstandard (Mar 30, 2008)

Ralph,

We all had to start somewhere, so keep asking your questions.
Nothing is too silly, if you don't know, ask.
The members on here love answering questions.

John


----------



## 1hand (Dec 24, 2010)

Bogs;

Would you forsee any problems if a person where to take and double the size of the Halo plans to build, Other than the amount of air required to run it? 

Also; what would be involved to modify their plans and start with just a single cyl in stead of 5?
Would this be more confusing to a novice than just building from the original plans of the 5cyl ?

Thanks
Matt


----------



## cfellows (Dec 24, 2010)

Matt, I am personally aware of a 3 cylinder version of the halo that was built. 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFb9YvBqkDo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFb9YvBqkDo[/ame]

I think also, that Liney built a single cylinder version as a prototype of his new valve arrangement.

I have a single cylinder engine that I adapted Liney's valve arrangement to. It has a bore and stroke of 3/4" x 7/8" which is double the Halo's size.

Here is a link to the video:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTtX6SA9fnc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTtX6SA9fnc[/ame]

Chuck


----------



## 1hand (Dec 24, 2010)

Thanks Chuck,

That's what I was needing to hear. I was wondering if the ball arrangement would work on a larger scale. I'm kinda sceptical on my ability to build a proper poppet valve as of yet, let alone 10 proper ones right off the kick. I love the looks of the push rod and exposed rockerarms of these engines. It gives it a real IC look and feel. This ball style valving seams a bit more forgiving or not?

Matt


----------



## Metal Butcher (Dec 24, 2010)

Very nice Chuck! :bow:

You have all shorts of goodies tucked away that I haven't seen before.

-MB


----------



## cfellows (Dec 24, 2010)

1hand  said:
			
		

> Thanks Chuck,
> 
> That's what I was needing to hear. I was wondering if the ball arrangement would work on a larger scale. I'm kinda sceptical on my ability to build a proper poppet valve as of yet, let alone 10 proper ones right off the kick. I love the looks of the push rod and exposed rockerarms of these engines. It gives it a real IC look and feel. This ball style valving seams a bit more forgiving or not?
> 
> Matt



Matt, I can't really say that the ball valve is more forgiving than the poppet valve, but on a compressed air engine, a tight seal isn't at all critical.

IMHO, doubling the size of the Halo is going to make for a pretty large engine that uses a lot of air, meaning an air compressor somewhere close by is going to be running most of the time that the engine is running. I think a 1/2" bore, which is 25% larger, would be a nice size, but again, that's just my opinion and I've no doubt a double size engine would run fine although you might have to clamp it down! ;D


----------



## cfellows (Dec 24, 2010)

Metal Butcher  said:
			
		

> Very nice Chuck! :bow:
> 
> You have all shorts of goodies tucked away that I haven't seen before.
> 
> -MB



Thanks, MB. That engine was the first proof-of-concept on my slave valve arrangement. Here is a video of the original engine.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmnMIS08vuI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmnMIS08vuI[/ame]

I converted the inlet valve from a poppet valve to the liney valve arrangement but retained the slave valve exhaust. My plan is to some day design and build a 5 cylinder radial which operates as a 4 stroke using the liney inlet valve and the slave exhaust valve design.

Matt, sorry, didn't mean to hijack your thread...

Chuck


----------



## 1hand (Dec 24, 2010)

Really, we are hijacking Bogs thread, but I'm sure he is all right with that being its a question/answer posts.

Yeah I agree with amount of cfm it would take to run a beast like that. Realistically it makes more sense to "up" scale an IC engine verse's a steam just for that simple fact. Its easier to buy more gas than it is to buy more air....lol

Thanks for the info,
Matt


----------



## Blogwitch (Dec 24, 2010)

Matt, and anyone else contemplating building this engine.

I actually started a very warts and all build of this engine over a year ago. But I had to stop when things went pear shaped and both my wifes and my health took a nose dive.

The engine is in fact designed by Lance at Liney Machine to be made by CNC. But with a few jigs and fixtures, the engine can easily be made by manual methods.

I was going to be making a series of six engines, 1 to 5 cylinders, plus another 5 cylinder as well, so maybe I went a bit over the top, because I used production methods to obtain the 20 cylinders I required.

It might help if you read this partial build sequence, which concerns the cylinder itself. To me, the most difficult bit on the build to make.

http://madmodder.net/index.php?topic=1539.0

This post will eventually get picked up again, when we get our lives on track again.

I see Chuck and yourself are in discussion about the head area, and although looking at the plans, it looks complicated, when in fact, once you get your head around it, it is very easy to make. It will work fine doubled up, as when you understand how it works, there is really nothing that can go wrong to stop it working, as long as you get all the holes in the right places and of the correct size you want to build it at.

John


----------



## kvom (Dec 25, 2010)

Having built the Halo, I think a 2x version would be easier given the larger parts. Leaving the bore at .75 with doubled stroke might be reasonable too.

I had access to a CNC lathe for the nose cone, but it should be doable without. You'd have to source bearings. As Bogs says, the heads are not that complex, just lots of drilling. Larger cylinders would mean that normal grooving tools could make the fins.


----------



## 1hand (Dec 27, 2010)

I can't find any info on the springs. Anyone give me an idea on size of the originals, so I have a base point to up scale from?

I picked up some 2" x 2" brass square for the cyl. I thinking of leaving the general outer shape square with the cooling fins. This will give the same over all profile of the shape of the head. Using 2" x 2" 6061 for the heads, but cut cooling fins into the head to give the same contrast of the cyl and a little different look than other Halo's.

Matt


----------



## Blogwitch (Dec 27, 2010)

Matt,

When I contacted Lance at Liney for some, he told me that they were just normal springs out of ballpoint pens and cut in half.

If you are going up in size, don't make them too strong, as all they do is keep the operating rod in contact with the rocker. Something rather fine but the correct ID would be ample.


John


----------



## 1hand (Dec 27, 2010)

Perfect Thanks.

Matt


----------



## 1hand (Jan 1, 2011)

Well my good deal on the 2" brass fell through, "purchased on Ebay for 1/3 of retail, but seller backed out, said it was out of stock" So my next choice for the cyl. is 6061. My question is what should I use for the pistons with the aluminium cyl. and heads?

Matt


----------



## Blogwitch (Jan 1, 2011)

The plans call for brass cylinders with ali pistons. With the wear part of the equation falling onto the softer ali pistons, which is the correct way to do things.

You could just reverse it, but then you would get a heavier reciprocating mass, then that would most probably start to wear away at the cylinders, not an ideal situation.

If I was in your situation, I would sleeve the ali bores with thin wall brass tubing fixed in with loctite and use the original idea of ali pistons.

Or if that doesn't appeal, because it is running on air, you could make both from ali, but you would need to keep the finishes very fine, with no tight fits, with plenty of lube while bedding in, to prevent the parts galling together. Once they have bedded together, and worn each other smooth, they should then be fine. Or even make the pistons a couple of thou smaller and fit an o-ring piston ring to retain the air tight seal required. The engine might not auto start with o-rings fitted, due to the inceased friction, but there would be no problems after a flick to get it running. You would need to try it out.

Just suggestions


----------



## 1hand (Jan 1, 2011)

bogs,

thanks,
Matt


----------



## 1hand (Jan 7, 2011)

Bogstandard  said:
			
		

> If I was in your situation, I would sleeve the ali bores with thin wall brass tubing fixed in with loctite and use the original idea of ali pistons.



I like this Idea. I guess, I would be making these sleeves from brass rod, cause I'm not finding any tube that fits the bill. 

So, in regards to sleeve thickness, what would be satisfactory for a .750" bore? Wall thickness is what I'm asking.

Having not turned any thin brass before, was wondering about some Ideas for doing this. I would image that holding such thin stock when turning the final OD, would be an issue. Not to crush or deform the sleeve.

Matt


----------



## Blogwitch (Jan 8, 2011)

Matt,

Your best bet would be to search bathroom supplies and look for say 3/4" or 19mm chrome plated brass tubing. It is used for shower rails, towel rails etc.

Sometimes DIY stores have it in stock on the shelves.

Or if you want to do it yourself, loctite your brass bar into the pre bored cylinder first, then just treat the cylinder as you would if you were making the whole lot from solid brass. But don't let it overheat, take things steady.
I personally would have a min wall thickness of around 0.010".


Bogs


----------



## 1hand (Jan 8, 2011)

Bogstandard  said:
			
		

> Or if you want to do it yourself, loctite your brass bar into the pre bored cylinder first, then just treat the cylinder as you would if you were making the whole lot from solid brass. But don't let it overheat, take things steady.
> I personally would have a min wall thickness of around 0.010".



You know......Sometimes I'm a real Idiot. I never thought about turning the inner bore of the sleeve while it was already installed in the cyl. Why is it sometimes I can never see the obvious! *club*


Thanks,
Matt


----------



## cfellows (Jan 8, 2011)

You might consider 1/2" brass pipe nipple material for the cylinder. It has on OD of about .815 and an ID of about .625. You can buy these in various lengths in the plumbing section at Home Depot, Lowes, or most any hardware store. I would buy the longest length I could get then cut the lengths you need out of that. As Bogs said, you could then epoxy those into the cylinder block and bore the brass to size.

Chuck


----------



## Blogwitch (Jan 8, 2011)

Matt,

Very few things are obvious, it is only because that I came across the same sort of problem many years ago that I stumbled on doing it that way. 

It goes under the name of experience.

Sometimes we all try a little too hard to achieve simple things.


Bogs


----------

