2010 FX4 | PS Fluid | Mercon V | 89,350miles

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
9,807
Sometime ago someone wanted to see a UOA on power steering fluid and I said that I would do one. It took a little longer than I had planned, but here it is. Note the dealer performed the flush and I had them run it a little before capturing the sample, but that does not mean there was no cross contamination in the sample (i.e. this may not be all my fluid, but likely is mostly all mine). For nearly 90K miles, I think it is OK, but what do all of you think?

Blackstone comments below:

We don't have a lot of experience with power steering fluids, but there does seem to be quite a bit of metal (especially aluminum) in this sample. Aluminum could be from the pump or maybe a part wearing against a housing. Iron is from steel parts and copper is from brass/bronze parts. These metals could show a problem, or they could just be accumulated from a long oil run. Insolubles are high at 0.3%. Those are solids from heat, use, and oxidation. It's possible that the solids made the fluid abrasive, causing wear. The TAN was 1.0 showing mild acidity.


Code:


Year: 2010 Make: Ford Model: F-150 FX4

Engine: 5.4L FFV Transmission: 6R80 Axle: 9.75 Ford ELD (3.73)







Date: 11/12

Oil Brand/Type: Motorcraft

Oil Viscosity: Mercon V

API Service: Power Steering

Oil Filter: N/A

Air Filter: N/A

Lab: BLKST





Truck Mileage: 89,350

Oil Mileage: 89,350

Aluminum: 72

Chromium 0

Iron: 19

Copper: 13

Lead: 0

Tin: 1

Molybdenum: 0

Nickel: 3

Manganese: 6

Silver: 0

Titanium: 0

Potassium: 6

Boron: 69

Silicon: 10

Sodium: 13

Calcium: 111

Magnesium: 0

Phosphorus: 226

Zinc: 30

Barium: 0



cSt Visc. @ 100°C (UOA) 4.46

SUS Viscosity @ 210°F 40.9

Flashpoint in °F 445

Fuel % ---

Antifreeze % ---

Water % 0.0

Insolubles % 0.3

TBN ---

TAN 1.0
 
Awesome! I remember mentioning this ages ago, curious what kinda numbers one would get for a UOA on PSF. Thanks for getting that done! Generally doesn't look too bad. Definitely sheared down, too. The pump faces must all be aluminum. For the age of the fluid, its pretty clear why a lot of OEM spec's never call for changing it; it would easily outlast the initial warranty.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for doing this.

I did the PSF change with a (cleaned!) liquid soap pump (can use turkey baster too).

It took 3 cycles, a week or so apart, but I calculated I changed about 90% of the fluid that way.

The gurus on the Ford forums suggest the turkey baster method for really old PSF as it helps to gradually clean the system.

Mine was in good shape when I changed it at 60k. It had slightly browned. By about the 3rd drain and fill, the drained fluid was looking like the new fluid. Others needed double or triple the drain and fill cycles to get it completely clean.

Worth doing yourself instead of at the dealer as it's only your time and a $5 bottle.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: MarkStock
Worth doing yourself instead of at the dealer as it's only your time and a $5 bottle.

True; but time is not always available and thus the reason I allowed the dealer to do it.
 
I used to work at the plant that made your R&P steering gear (Ford chassis and steering in Indy). I left there in 2006, so I cannot comment directly on the gear you have, but I can give you some generalities.

Typically Ford uses tranny fluid for their P/S fluid; it used to be the old Type F, then it was the Mercon, and likely now is the Merc V. Look in your owners manual. While I was at the plant (1990 - 2006) it transitioned into the Mecron shortly after I got there. It probably transitioned to the V after I left.

I think I know where the Al came from; the rack/cyl are steel IIRC. In the "old" days when I started there, the housings were actually fully forged aluminum R&P housings; but the "new" programs like the F-150/Expidition (called the P221/P222) transioned to plated steel tubes pressed onto Al housings. So I suspect that is were a bit of it is from. No need whatsoever to panic about that; it is a one time thing. If you sampled another 90k miles from now, that Al content would be mostly gone; it is essentially residual of the initial machining and assembly process.

You're fine.
 
Last edited:
I am surprised with the viscosity loss. Mercon V product sheets usually claim 7.3-7.4 cst at 100C.
 
I echo DNEWTON3's comments, metals look good for the mileage.

Quote:
I am surprised with the viscosity loss. Mercon V product sheets usually claim 7.3-7.4 cst at 100C.


I am not since the fluid was in there for almost 90,000 miles and went through pump for many many ccyles.
 
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
I am not since the fluid was in there for almost 90,000 miles and went through pump for many many cycles.

In some ways, I wish that I would have changed it at 30K or so, but time is not always on my side.
wink.gif


I may wait until 110K or so and re-sample to see how it is doing just to get an idea.
 
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Fluids can shear due to pump and rack action, they can oxidize and volatize (but not much), their seal swell become ineffective, and they become laden with wear materials.


This is so poorly understood, it's incredible at times.

Being in that industry for 16 years, I was probably more attuned to the power steering systems that most folks.

The number one problem with power steering fluids, and then the subsequent issues with the steering gear itself from degraded fluid, is people overheating the fluid. Overheating it badly; basically destroying it. And it happens every day in every garage and parking lot you enter.

Ever hear a steering pump labor under full turn to the steering stops? While the pumps can take a lot of abuse, they cannot take gross overheating and neither can the fluid. These are simple systems; they are just pumps and cylinders. When people turn the wheel all the way to the stops (left or right), they are causing a dead-head fluid situation. The power steering pump is trying to pump fluid, and the fluid has no where to go. This only happens when you turn the wheel into a condition where the steering valve is open to only the turn circuit, and the bypass circut is closed. You can cook a power steering fluid in very short order. I hear it every time I go into a mall lot. People will turn the wheel all the way to the stop, and then just hold it there, while the pump cries for mercy. The fluid gets destroyed in just a few cycles like this, and yet people will NEVER change their p/s fluid (99.9% of them anyway).

All you have to do to avoid this is simply turn to the stop, and then back the wheel off about 1/8-1/4 turn. If you listen closely, you can hear the significant shift in pump performance when the pressure spike is relieved. Make all the difference in the world. It's just the nature of the game, cannot be avoided. There is no relief valve; if there were, then you'd not have any pressure assist when turning the wheel quickly. And so the fluid just dead-heads, the pump generates WAY too much pressure than cannot be dumped off, and the fluid is cooked.

Food for thought.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for that analysis

I read owners manuals and Lexus advised to never turn to full lock

It made me wonder why they don't just physically stop you from reaching that end point

I learnt to drive without power steering so I virtually never turn the steering wheel without some forward or backward motion. It's how you learn to steer without power steering and I always imagined it would be a strain on various components to turn the wheels with the full weight of the vehicle on them
 
Is there no relief valve at full lock?

I avoid since it just seems like a bad idea, but usually I hear what I assume is a relief valve at full lock.
 
Typically there is no relief in the steering gear system. I can only speak to Ford units as that is where I worked. But I'm pretty sure that's typical of most systems.

There is a small bleed-off at the pump, but it is no where near large enough to provide compensation for the heavy volume the pump is capable of.

Allow me to go into much greater theory and detail; this will take a bit but will help you understand.

I will discuss the typical fluid-pressure type steering, regardless if it's rack-and-pinion or ball-and-nut; does not matter here for this discussion. (I am excluding hydro-boost type units at this point, but they are similar).

First of all, think of the demand upon a typical steering pump. When does a power steering pump have to provide the greatest amount of pressure assist? At parking-lot, slow-manuever speeds. If you've ever driven a manual-steer car, this is incredibly obvious. So, a power steering pump has to provide it's greatest flow and pressue at slow engine speeds which are most often submissive to the slow parking speeds. No one rev's their engine to 5k rpm just to turn into the garage or out of the mall, right? Hence, because the pump is belt driven by the engine, it is slave to the engine rpm. So, slow engine speeds (in the parking mode) equate to low steering pump speeds. But the DEMAND of volume and pressure are greatest at that same time. It's an evil necessity; during low speeds, the pump is being turned slowly, but must match the greatest demand. And therefore, a power steering pump is sized (by volume and pressure capacity) to meet those demands. The pumps (especially in large cars and trucks) is 100% capable at near idle. Ironically, once the car/truck is moving at any decent speed (and subsequently the pump is turning with the engine at 2k or 3k rpm) every bit of pressure and volume is now excess capacity and waste; it's the nature of the beast. They key to understand is that a power-steering system is under it's greatest demand at the slowest of speeds, and therefore is fully capable at near idle. Everything past that is a waste.

OK - to be able to turn the wheels of the Lincoln Town Car or Ram 3500 truck, there has to be full capacity available when the wheel is turned. But what of all that pressure and volume when the wheel is NOT being turned? It's dumped via hydraulic equalization (often called the center circuit) in the steering valve. The steering valves have a "t-bar" (torsion bar) that connects the steering input (a mechanical machined tube with lands and grooves) inside a "sleeve" (a mating part to the input with lands and grooves) while being seated inside a pinion or sector reciever. (You can google the picture for the details). Essentially the t-bar is pinned to both the input and the driver, with the sleeve floating around it.

When the wheel is not being turned, the fluid flows equally through the left/right circuits in the valve, relieving all that high-capacity volume and pressure. However, when you turn the wheel, the t-bar flexes, and allows the input to turn in relation to the sleeve, and closes off one of the two directive paths and fully opens the other one. (Think of it this way; imagine water flowing over a knife blade where the blade is equally splitting the water stream. Once you turn the knife one way or the other, the water will no longer be "split" and instead flow only in one direction, at the expense of the other. In the steering valve, the more you turn, the more the flow is taken from one side, and delivered to the other.) You have to think of the TOTAL flow in relation to the input and the sleeve. (I'll make up some numbers here; these are just bogus but they help with the concept). Think of 100 psi going into the input/sleeve, with 6 gpm entering, and 3 gpm exiting per side. Got it? When you "turn", it flexes the t-bar, diverts some differential to one side, and steals from the other. That now creates a pressure differential, that is sent to the steering gear (be it R&P or Ball/nut). That pressure acts against a piston, which pushes the steering (rack or sector) and turns the wheels.

When you turn the wheel, you typically only turn it some fractional amount of full-lock. If the steering system is capable of 6 total turns left-to-rigth, it might be easily split into 3 left and 3 right turns. So when you go around a corner, you may only use 1/2 rotation of the steering wheel, 1.3 turn, etc. But you typically don't "fuly lock" the steering wheel all the way over.

When you turn the wheel, the effort goes down the column, into the steering valve, and the pressure assists in turning the wheels, but that stops as soon as you stop putting pressure on the wheel. Even if you turn left for 50% of total rotation, the system reaches a "balance" because once you stop turning the wheel, the t-bar eventually evens out the hydraulic circuit. So the wheels stop moving left or right because you quit creating a differential in the input/sleeve circuit (you are no longer flexing the t-bar). The pump will only strain a very short time and then the wheels move to balance out the pressure differential. The system natually hunts out (seeks) a balanced state because the t-bar is trying it's best to even out the flow and "center" the wheels to the hydraulic and mechanical input. Even if you drove around in a circle for three hours, the input is satisfied as long as you don't increase or decrease the input differential. Only when you change the steering wheel position, does the valve have to react to the shift. (To be honest, there is a bit more complication than that, and the components are VERY tight in tolerances down to tenths of thoutandths, but you get the idea, right?).

And remember, the pump is capacitized for full demand, heavy load times.

All is well and good. You steer, the input/sleeve/t-bar react. Until ....

You turn the wheel all the way over 'til the steering linkage hits the steering stops. PANIC TIME! You are now creating a condition where the steering valve cannot equalize the pressure paths, because you're continuing to turn into a postive stop position. The valve cannot balance. Therefore, the pump dead-heads against the flow, and you nearly instantly cook the steering fluid.

But why no pressure relief valve? Now here is where my long diatribe gets to your meaty question (sorry it takes so long) ...


Here's why:
What happens in an emergency when you yank the wheel in avoidance of running into that car that pulled out into your lane, or that child that runs into the street? When you turn the wheel in such a violent manner, you absolutely need the system to react quickly, with no delay. When you turn so abrutly, you need 100% flow and volume to cause immedate reaction in the system. And, don't forget that at "normal" driving speeds, your pump is way over any needed capacity; it is essentially supplying WAY more volume/flow than is needed. So, the system cannot have a "bypass relief valve" in it; or it would relieve at the very time you cannot afford to have it do so. If you had a bypass valve that would safely dump off pressure at idle speeds, it would cause a non-steer condition during an emergency. If there were a bypass valve that was effective at slow speeds, it would cause the system to dump when you need it most, and the system is grossly over-capacitized anyway.

There were a few lame attempts to create some switched valve systems that would deactivate bypass only during emergencies, but those never caught on, and they never were accepted by the government FMVSS committees. (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards). At least not that I'm aware of.


And so, you have a hydraulic system that has two evil conditions. You need it to be fully capable at slow speeds, but it can self-destruct if turned into a positive stop position, and it must be 100% absolutely functional during an emergency, when the system is WAY over capacitized; therefore no relief valve is accpetable to avoid a "loss of asssit" condition.

You still with me, or did I bore you to death?

On your way home tonight (legal disclaimer here; only do this when safe to do so), experiment a bit. In the parking lot, both quickly and slowly turn the wheel and listen to the pump response. And, then, ONLY VERY BRIEFLY - less than 1 second turn it to full lock and hear the pump labor. You can feel the hydraulic power that is present. Then, get up to speed and violently turn the wheel a few times. Feel how much excess is in the system at normal driving speeds speeds. Play with the system a bit, and then consider what I've explained, and it all makes sense. No one would truly want the system to relieve itself at the very moment you need to it function the most.
 
Last edited:
Thanks dnewton3, that was fun. I recently rebuilt a manual steering rack and always wondered about some of the PS details. I'm also fairly diligent at keeping the PS fluid flushed and clean. I hear the moaning (cavitating) PS pumps in the parking-lot all the time.

So this is why electric power-steering is becoming a standard feature. It allows the power delivery (pump) to vary from the engine speed. You can have full assist at any time and you don't end up with a huge waste of power/capacity at elevated engine rpm.

Similar system demands as the rad cooling-fan. With electric you can have cooing on demand and not tied to engine rpm. More control, less waste.
 
Last edited:
Yes - electric steering is finally making big in-roads to the market.

Also, let me be clear here; I am speaking of electric assist steering, and not "steer by wire". The electric assist still has full mechanical redundance, should the electric fail (also true of the old hydraulic systems). That is a FMVSS requirement; has been for years, and I don't see it going away any time soon. The two most important things a car must do are steer and stop; all the rest is secondary. If you cannot avoid collision by steering or braking, you're in trouble. And hence, the FMVSS requirements for redundant steering (mechaical backup) and split braking systems (dual res on the master cylinders and split circuits front to rear). Assisted steering (either electric or hydraulic) still has full mechanical connection should the assist fail; while it might take a lot more effort to steer if assist fails, it can be done with 100% certainty as the mechanical system is completely independent of the asssist. "Steer by wire" is not yet approved (to my knowledge) for mass market use; at least not yet. "Steer by wire" has no mechanical link whatsoever to the steering linkage, and therefore any failure in the system has no back-up; "steer by wire" failure equals total loss of steering control.


My 2010 Fusion has electric steering assist. I like it. I see it as an all-around winner for a few reasons:
1) consumes less power; only on high demand when needed
2) nothing to leak or service
3) upon failure (somewhere way down the road) it's acutally easier to remove/replace (just unbolt, unplug, and replace)

Electric steering can be programmed by the controller to only consume power as needed. The eletric motor that does the actual assist has to be fairly strong, for the high demand at the slow speeds. So at those low speeds, the power consumption is fairly high, and it takes a lot of amps from the system. Those amps must come from a combination of the battery and the alternator. Those amps must be "made up" as the engine spins the alternator.

But the serious advantage to an electric motor is that while the motor can be big, it only draws amps as when the load is high. Once the steering effort is reduced (low demand), the system essentially free-wheels. Just because there is a big electric motor, it does not pull high amps if not called for.

So the benefit to the electric motor is that it ONLY draws heavily at slow speeds, when needed; the rest of the time it's basically coasting along and not demanding much. As opposed to the hydrualic pump which has to be capacitized 100% at slow speeds, and then everything above that is pure waste 100% of the time.

As you state, exactly the same concept as electric cooling fans. Only on high demand when needed. Electric fans have always been a necessity in a FWD car where the engine is transverse (can't have the fan near the wheel well!). But traditional longitudinal engines were very easy to just put a fan on the front pulley drive and run direct. But that makes the fan slave to the engine speed. And some amount of decoupling has helped here (fan clutches). But I now see electric fans even in traditional RWD platforms (for example the CrownVic and the F-150 even have electric fans). I also like electric fans for cooling; much easier to change than pulling a fan out of a shroud and having to disconnect the whole pulley system, etc.

The only downside to electric systems (at least in the past) has been some reluctance of the market to accept them, and the costs had to be brought down to make them appealing. But as fuel economy has become absolutely paramount, even every .1 mpg makes a huge difference in corporate CAFE ratings, electric steering makes sense. And so do electric fans.

Electric components in the engine compartment, while more expensive at times, allow for specific performance programming, and typically can save fuel.
 
Last edited:
Something that my car has is variable power steering. Im not quite certain how it works, I assume it has a valve that bypasses fluid based on computer input. At low speeds it has max assist and it slowly cuts assist as speed rises for more road feel.
CVs got electric fans in '98 and variable electric fan in '03.

This is a very interesting report. I expected more, but thinking about it, I guess that sounds about right. Ive changed mine twice, each time running about a 2 quarts through it. Ive also recently added a magnefine before the cooler.
 
You guys are welcome.

Colt - you are correct.
Ford used "actuators" that bled off some of the flow. They were simply stepper-motors attached to a small bleed port valve. Those were tuned electronically to use full pump pressure and volume at slow speeds, and then "bypass" the steering valve and bleed off some (but not all) hydraulic flow at higher speeds. (Used on vehicles like the SHO, Lincolns, etc). But the pump was never manipulated; it was always pumping full steam ahead, slave to engine rpm. In the actuator, some oil was simply diverted at higher speeds and returned to the pump res rather than going into the steering valve balance system. Those type valves were safe and approved because even it the bypass actuator valve failed, it would (in worst case) fail in a partial diverted mode, still leaving plenty of assist; it never diverted all the fluid, but only part of it. You always had a decent amount of assist, just perhaps not the "easy" full assist at slow speeds. Also, there was no "savings" in energy; the pump was always running as normal. The oil still had to either go into the steering valve, or into the bypass valve, and it always returned to the pump res. The only difference was at upper speeds, the flow was diverted to give more "road feel" to the steering sytsem, so that it was not "over" assisted. By bypassing some of the flow, there was less assist to help turn. Back in the last 1980s and early 1990s Ford used racing celeb's such as Jackie Stewart to help them "tune" chassis systems for greater "feel". And that is one of the many things they came up with in the higher end cars.

I would presume that the other OEMs were similar in concept.
 
Thanks for the good read. Is Ford's way of varying effort similar in nature to GM's "Magnasteer" system? Or is the Magnasteer a very early version of applying an electrical assist to the system?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top