Are Dirt Particles Smaller Than 15 Microns Really Harmful?
- Thread starter TheLoneRanger
- Start date
- Status
Well..
Since I have no experience with engineering.. and think of math as the 3rd possibly 4th ring of ****..
I would have to say that my head hurts after that page.
From what I understand, those equations would be ideal for me to determine the maximum peak and valley in the casting, if I had a way to peak down the cylinder (or any part for that matter) and record the average hight of peaks and valleys.. I could also get a good estimation of where the rings would seat after break in..
Basically, after reading these, I would say that it is a ****-shot on what particles are going to cause wear. Obviously, you could look at an "average" surface roughness in an engine and say, "gee, this is an average size of peaks and valleys, so X particle could cause further wear and damage."
Well ****.. I can see why there is no definitive evidence that X particle can cause damage.. There are far too many variables. I would have to assume enough research COULD be done to determine where the parts fall after break in, but even that is going to be on a case by case basis.
Just going to stick with my ole 2nom 7ab bypass filter and call it good.
Since I have no experience with engineering.. and think of math as the 3rd possibly 4th ring of ****..
I would have to say that my head hurts after that page.
From what I understand, those equations would be ideal for me to determine the maximum peak and valley in the casting, if I had a way to peak down the cylinder (or any part for that matter) and record the average hight of peaks and valleys.. I could also get a good estimation of where the rings would seat after break in..
Basically, after reading these, I would say that it is a ****-shot on what particles are going to cause wear. Obviously, you could look at an "average" surface roughness in an engine and say, "gee, this is an average size of peaks and valleys, so X particle could cause further wear and damage."
Well ****.. I can see why there is no definitive evidence that X particle can cause damage.. There are far too many variables. I would have to assume enough research COULD be done to determine where the parts fall after break in, but even that is going to be on a case by case basis.
Just going to stick with my ole 2nom 7ab bypass filter and call it good.
Interesting. They even use the Gaussian scale for mean probability in the interpretation of charts in futures commodities, like wheat, corn, soybeans, and light sweet crude oil. Even though a surface(s) may have the same Ra, they are effectually different, at least in the 3 examples shown.
Without wading through a lot of the feldercarb, it give a scientific approach of what accuracy means in determining surfaces and how their (base surface, ground, planed or machined) will turn out within a reasonable value. Major peaks and valley, at least the mean 3 values of peaks and the mean 3 values of valleys give an engineer some basis to evaluate the probability of the wear, given a known hardness, and so forth.
It's like knowing within certain values, of a projectile, like a .223 coming out of a rifled barrel of a Colt, and knowing standard pressures and the rifling of this particular barrel, with certain accuracy, if you know the velocity and the pull of gravity you will know the amount of drop at 100 yards, 200 yards, 400 yards and 600 yards of this particular bullet. You also have to know the coefficient of friction and drag through the air of this particular bullet, and you can get very good at dropping them in the right ring at whatever distance you need.
What does all this have to do with oil? Just a figure of how physics and knowing what properties you are dealing with can make all the difference in predicting the near term outcome of a test object. To the majority of oil users (consumers) knowing the microscopic peaks and valleys are not as important is what kind of beer tonight.. Bud or Bud light. But to the people working in the labs of oils and filters, metallurgy takes on a whole new meaning and what can they do given the "known" to make a better product.
Without wading through a lot of the feldercarb, it give a scientific approach of what accuracy means in determining surfaces and how their (base surface, ground, planed or machined) will turn out within a reasonable value. Major peaks and valley, at least the mean 3 values of peaks and the mean 3 values of valleys give an engineer some basis to evaluate the probability of the wear, given a known hardness, and so forth.
It's like knowing within certain values, of a projectile, like a .223 coming out of a rifled barrel of a Colt, and knowing standard pressures and the rifling of this particular barrel, with certain accuracy, if you know the velocity and the pull of gravity you will know the amount of drop at 100 yards, 200 yards, 400 yards and 600 yards of this particular bullet. You also have to know the coefficient of friction and drag through the air of this particular bullet, and you can get very good at dropping them in the right ring at whatever distance you need.
What does all this have to do with oil? Just a figure of how physics and knowing what properties you are dealing with can make all the difference in predicting the near term outcome of a test object. To the majority of oil users (consumers) knowing the microscopic peaks and valleys are not as important is what kind of beer tonight.. Bud or Bud light. But to the people working in the labs of oils and filters, metallurgy takes on a whole new meaning and what can they do given the "known" to make a better product.
A variety of psychological test scores and physical phenomena like photon counts can be well approximated by a Gaussian distribution, also called the Normal distribution. While the mechanisms underlying these phenomena are often unknown, the use of the normal model can be theoretically justified if one assumes many small (independent) effects contribute to each observation in an additive fashion.
As an aside, the fundamental importance of the Gaussian distribution as a model of quantitative phenomena in the natural and behavioral sciences is due to the central limit theorem. In layman terms, if you add up all the probability distributions, you end up with the normal distribution.
Precisely!! But you also undersand the value of a newly compressed and fired piston and the tremendous force it makes on a rod bearing, ESPECIALLY one that has yet to receive a hydrodynamic effect of oil under pressure. Thank goodness for that little bit of film and additive pack! Earlier engine designs seemed to have a lot more compression ratio than the ones in production today, am I wrong on this? Nothing like heavy compression to create a tremendous "bang" of expanding gas and pressure in the cylinder walls. Great for power and torque, but difficult at times to control in wear.
And, like you mentioned earlier, if the particle intoduced against mating surfaces is harder than the surface there's got to be some wear happening.
And, like you mentioned earlier, if the particle intoduced against mating surfaces is harder than the surface there's got to be some wear happening.
Modern engines have higher compresion ratios on average than engines did in the olden daze. And, the compression ratios given for new engines are usualy honest instead of exagerated like they often were in the olden daze.
I have two late model cars, a Corvete and an Acura TL. They have compresion ratios of 10.8:1 and 11.0:1.
A little nit-pick. The hydrodynamic effect of oil in a journal bearing is a function of oil being there, not engine oil pressure. There is still enough residual oil in a journal bearing to do the job until the pump gets more oil there after startup. Journal bearings and other surfaces in an engine aren't nearly as unprotected as common-sense has it. The additives are part of the equation, but without the natural lubricating effects of the residual oil at startup, an engine would die a short ugly death.
Something to ponder is that the oil passage into the journal bearings actually causes the oil pressure to push the loaded side of the bearing together.
Correct XS650. And compression ratio is actually a small player compared to the pressures when the mixture is lit. Further, that's overshadowed by the reciprocating forces at redline RPMs unless you have detonation.
But to get back on topic, yes sub 15-micron particles can cause wear and regularly do. It's one of the reasons parts wear out.
But to get back on topic, yes sub 15-micron particles can cause wear and regularly do. It's one of the reasons parts wear out.
- Status
Similar threads
