Bob - I understand real good....and I will get an answer from Amsoil.
BOBISTHEOILGUY FILTER TESTS
- Thread starter BOBISTHEOILGUY
- Start date
- Status
I think he was reffering to comments about the earlier tests on the Fram (earlier in the thread). It was mentioned that since there was not a significant drop in pressure, the Fram must be in bypass mode.
However KCTOM is saying that the bypass valve inside of the Fram will only go into bypass when there is a pressure drop. He is saying that there is no way to indicate if it is in bypass mode because a pressure differential is needed to bypass........
He is reffering to earlier comments in the thread.....there seem to be many conversations....
Bob, You've got both Dual-Remotes correctly configured. I obtained an older DR (made by perma-cool and embossed PC on bottom) and grilled Amsoils' tech people throughly on it's design, even comparing it to the newer block model. For the unit to work as intended the oil HAS to enter the Bypass filter first, being forced by the (according to Amsoil) 5-7lb spring, then the remainder goes thru the FF and both empty into the same channel to exit whichever way is required. Without the valve (or ball) and spring, fluid would take path of least resistance and BF wouldn't have much to do. (awhile back a poster asked how the low pressure oil from the BF could even enter the return channel with the relatively higher pressure oil from the FF; I know it's a totally different question, but a good one!) Back to this... Amsoil's folks (IIRC I grilled 3 of them in Superior + some high muckity muck distributer in Co) assured me repeatedly that the DR would not lower my oil pressure nor (more importantly IMO) the oil volume. Didn't have any way to confirm the volume, but my Isuzu diesel has both Idiot lite & analog gauge (albiet with only 0,30,55,110lbs marked) and I suffered no loss in operational pressure according to my gauge. I used 13/32" Aeroquip hose but I think you're using Amsoils 1/2" so it ain't the hose! Me thinks you're on the right path with the regulating valve in your pump. Sure would like to see the pressure jacked up to 70-80lbs at inlet to see if the drop is linear!! Good luck, hope this helps.
KcTom, I appologize as my mind was stuck on the dual remote system.Thanks turbo for setting me straight.
TomDieselS,
You bring up some interesting point about the spring. If it is suppose to break open at 5-7lbs of pressure, we had over 40lbs measured going in, why then would it not open up? The pump we are using is a new, never been on an engine ford 302 pump and with the gauge holding a steady 40lb input, this is very representitive of a motors oil system. Given that, This design was starving flow with a 13lb output. Just what kind of vehicle was this designed for if that setup cannot overcome the spring? Add to this, the guys who sent this one and the other one both had indicated some problems.
Ahhh, just found the amsoil diagram of this puppy..
TomDieselS,
You bring up some interesting point about the spring. If it is suppose to break open at 5-7lbs of pressure, we had over 40lbs measured going in, why then would it not open up? The pump we are using is a new, never been on an engine ford 302 pump and with the gauge holding a steady 40lb input, this is very representitive of a motors oil system. Given that, This design was starving flow with a 13lb output. Just what kind of vehicle was this designed for if that setup cannot overcome the spring? Add to this, the guys who sent this one and the other one both had indicated some problems.
Ahhh, just found the amsoil diagram of this puppy..
Yes Bob THAT's the picture (I just thought IT was wrong
)
So now you know what I meant when I wrote:
So now you know what I meant when I wrote:
The question is, just what he!! kinda spring do they have in there........?
Bob, I've no idea about what the DR was designed for but after seeing your results, then posting my comments I could hardly sleep. Here's some questions and observations.
First; as you explained in an easy to understand article, the pump produces flow (GPH), resistance to flow creates the pressure that we measure. I'm wondering what flow your pump is making and how that flow would affect your testing rig? The few times I've gotten data from oil filter mfgs, most info was flow; pressure was only mentioned IRT canister&seam burst strength, bypass opening and drop across media. Maybe your rig is loping along making minimal flow and the DR is the first significant resistance?? It's notable that at least both old&new model are consistant, but I don't understand what happened. As for the pressure your rig is making being "real world", it sounds rational for a warmed up gasser but almost all my last 23yr exp is with diesel. My pump has an 85lb regulating valve that visibly 'kicks in' as the needle pegs the 110lb mark on cold start (below 85*F ambient), then slowly recedes as oil warms. I'll wager that your test pump set to produce the flow the filters are rated at would be producing much more pressure.
Bout the DR, I'm not certain of the 5-7lb figure (ate&slept many times since those 'info sessions' with Amsoil), seem to recall trying to verify the info by carefully measuring the area of the piston/ball then piling on weight till it gave. I am certain of the configuration however; every picture of a DR (old or new) shows the hoses on the BF side. BTW, filters can be swapped using internal pipe wrench,1" nipple has 3/4x16tpi small end, just have to swap the spring& valve also...as you found out! Molakule's unit makes me wonder if the earlist version used the drilled brass plug instead of the ball&spring. The single BF mount (three models,two I've seen) uses the brass plug for the restrictor orifice to control the volume of oil taken 'off line'. I've not seen the brass plug in a DR, but I've only seen 2 DR's, old model I installed and new squared block that I examined.
Geez, I hope this helps. IMO you're doing some of the most important work to allow the 'little guy' to get through the maze of corporate BS!!
Off topic, Schaeffers blend (7k 10w30) is dollar for dollar beating the pants off the full synthetic that it replaced (gasser app), and but for this site and our conversation 2+yr ago I might never have found it, Thanks Bob. Tom
[ May 23, 2003, 04:35 PM: Message edited by: TomdieselS ]
First; as you explained in an easy to understand article, the pump produces flow (GPH), resistance to flow creates the pressure that we measure. I'm wondering what flow your pump is making and how that flow would affect your testing rig? The few times I've gotten data from oil filter mfgs, most info was flow; pressure was only mentioned IRT canister&seam burst strength, bypass opening and drop across media. Maybe your rig is loping along making minimal flow and the DR is the first significant resistance?? It's notable that at least both old&new model are consistant, but I don't understand what happened. As for the pressure your rig is making being "real world", it sounds rational for a warmed up gasser but almost all my last 23yr exp is with diesel. My pump has an 85lb regulating valve that visibly 'kicks in' as the needle pegs the 110lb mark on cold start (below 85*F ambient), then slowly recedes as oil warms. I'll wager that your test pump set to produce the flow the filters are rated at would be producing much more pressure.
Bout the DR, I'm not certain of the 5-7lb figure (ate&slept many times since those 'info sessions' with Amsoil), seem to recall trying to verify the info by carefully measuring the area of the piston/ball then piling on weight till it gave. I am certain of the configuration however; every picture of a DR (old or new) shows the hoses on the BF side. BTW, filters can be swapped using internal pipe wrench,1" nipple has 3/4x16tpi small end, just have to swap the spring& valve also...as you found out! Molakule's unit makes me wonder if the earlist version used the drilled brass plug instead of the ball&spring. The single BF mount (three models,two I've seen) uses the brass plug for the restrictor orifice to control the volume of oil taken 'off line'. I've not seen the brass plug in a DR, but I've only seen 2 DR's, old model I installed and new squared block that I examined.
Geez, I hope this helps. IMO you're doing some of the most important work to allow the 'little guy' to get through the maze of corporate BS!!
Off topic, Schaeffers blend (7k 10w30) is dollar for dollar beating the pants off the full synthetic that it replaced (gasser app), and but for this site and our conversation 2+yr ago I might never have found it, Thanks Bob. Tom
[ May 23, 2003, 04:35 PM: Message edited by: TomdieselS ]
Forgot couple things; I also had a problem with the DR (prior to this thread I thought my only problem) in the delayed initial achievement of pressure (posted awhile back) that I attributed to the 16" hoses and mounting the DR above the motor. In the futile search for remedy I noticed that the fittings on the filter adapter for the Cummins (source of my DR) were 1/2" vs 3/8" for the 'universal adapter' and wondered what effect that choke point had on flow&pressure? In the end I couldn't overcome my early 'diesel' training;"if it don't have 25lb oil in 5 sec shut it down", and removed the unit. Some experiments work out better than others! Again, Good Luck!!
Originally posted by Pablo:
>The question is, just what he!! kinda spring do >they have in there........?
I could be wrong, but it seems like I remember reading somewhere that the spring eases its tension when exposed to higher heat. This is
to limit the exposure of the bypass filter until the oil warms up.
Does that make any sense?
Try doing the same test with heated oil and see if the performance is different.
>The question is, just what he!! kinda spring do >they have in there........?
I could be wrong, but it seems like I remember reading somewhere that the spring eases its tension when exposed to higher heat. This is
to limit the exposure of the bypass filter until the oil warms up.
Does that make any sense?
Try doing the same test with heated oil and see if the performance is different.
I am going to put my two cents in. Look at the pictures. If the picture of where the bypass is on the block is consistent with the picture without the filters showing the internals then I think the bypass and ff filters are reversed, thus giving low pressure results. You want the ff filter on the side of the block where the oil has no restriction between inlet and out. The side with the restrictor is the side the bypass filter should go. Otherwise, the restriciton in the block is BEFORE the ff filter, permanently restricting pressure/flow. ALso, with the bypass filter on the left side of the block it will provide maximum restriction to the oil flow also. Look at the pictures and think about it. I may be wrong, but I think my argument is valid.
Dan Easterling
Dan Easterling
If Slider is right, then this design seems to me to be counterproductive. I think that most of us agree that we want to maximize flow upon startup--when, of course, the oil and engine are cold. This setup appears to severely limit the oil flow when the engine needs it the most.
Also, think about it this way, if the block has 40psi going in, it has that same 40psi pressure everywhere but where a regulator exists. The unrestricted (or left side by the picture) part of the block will be restricted by the bypass filter, the restricted (or right side by the picture) will be restricted by the ball on the spring before it hits the ff filter. With the filters in this position you will get reducted flow and reduced pressure.
I think I have it right. If I am wrong I apologize, just trying to help sort this out.
Dan
I think I have it right. If I am wrong I apologize, just trying to help sort this out.
Dan
Dan, Yes and No to it being right.
From what I can see, the idea behind this design is they want a constant pressure to go through the bypass and if there is no restrictor valve, then oil will take the least path of resistance and would not allow oil to be "pushed" through the bypass.
I like you think that the primary thing that they should have worried about is getting the full flow up to pressure first.
I've been looking at this design and thinking that we know in this application that no oil is passing through the full flow so the 13lbs is coming through the by pass filter. So, my thought is to just pull out the restrictor spring, and let it rip through the full flow, and then when the full flow gets up to full pressure, the excessive pressure from the pump, would be enough to "push" small amounts through the bypass. In this case, you'd be getting some pressure into the bypass but it wouldn't "steal" the full pressure needed to be at the bearings.
I'd have to agree with Vetteman though, that a single bypass system would definatly be better than using a dual remote such as this.
From what I can see, the idea behind this design is they want a constant pressure to go through the bypass and if there is no restrictor valve, then oil will take the least path of resistance and would not allow oil to be "pushed" through the bypass.
I like you think that the primary thing that they should have worried about is getting the full flow up to pressure first.
I've been looking at this design and thinking that we know in this application that no oil is passing through the full flow so the 13lbs is coming through the by pass filter. So, my thought is to just pull out the restrictor spring, and let it rip through the full flow, and then when the full flow gets up to full pressure, the excessive pressure from the pump, would be enough to "push" small amounts through the bypass. In this case, you'd be getting some pressure into the bypass but it wouldn't "steal" the full pressure needed to be at the bearings.
I'd have to agree with Vetteman though, that a single bypass system would definatly be better than using a dual remote such as this.
Bob - exactamundo!!!!!!!! (caffeine kicking in
)
Playing engineer on the 'net:
I think Amsoil should farm this out to a proper design team and the solution, IMHO if they want to keep the dual filter mount: would be to lose the ball and spring, orifice (not too small) control the flow to the bypass side and have a smaller return line (third line) from the post filter side of the fine (bypass) filter to an area with zero oil pressure such as the valve cover or high up in the oil pan.
Playing engineer on the 'net:
I think Amsoil should farm this out to a proper design team and the solution, IMHO if they want to keep the dual filter mount: would be to lose the ball and spring, orifice (not too small) control the flow to the bypass side and have a smaller return line (third line) from the post filter side of the fine (bypass) filter to an area with zero oil pressure such as the valve cover or high up in the oil pan.
********************************
I've been looking at this design and thinking that we know in this application that no oil is passing through the full flow so the 13lbs is coming through the by pass filter. So, my thought is to just pull out the restrictor spring, and let it rip through the full flow, and then when the full flow gets up to full pressure, the excessive pressure from the pump, would be enough to "push" small amounts through the bypass. In this case, you'd be getting some pressure into the bypass but it wouldn't "steal" the full pressure needed to be at the bearings.
******************************************
I agree that the best way would be to pull the pressure spring and just let it rip. then the bypass filter becomes the only restriction in the system. It would stabilize at some oil flowing thru it and most of the flow would go thru the ff filter.
Otherwise I agree about the single bypass. The dual bypass with a spring design seems to have some flaws. The one I like is the orfice type dual bypass. Then no moving parts make it much more reliable.
Dan
[ May 24, 2003, 04:13 PM: Message edited by: Dan4510 ]
I've been looking at this design and thinking that we know in this application that no oil is passing through the full flow so the 13lbs is coming through the by pass filter. So, my thought is to just pull out the restrictor spring, and let it rip through the full flow, and then when the full flow gets up to full pressure, the excessive pressure from the pump, would be enough to "push" small amounts through the bypass. In this case, you'd be getting some pressure into the bypass but it wouldn't "steal" the full pressure needed to be at the bearings.
******************************************
I agree that the best way would be to pull the pressure spring and just let it rip. then the bypass filter becomes the only restriction in the system. It would stabilize at some oil flowing thru it and most of the flow would go thru the ff filter.
Otherwise I agree about the single bypass. The dual bypass with a spring design seems to have some flaws. The one I like is the orfice type dual bypass. Then no moving parts make it much more reliable.
Dan
[ May 24, 2003, 04:13 PM: Message edited by: Dan4510 ]
Folks:
We were SO close nailing this before until Bob did his study:
Dual remote bypass restrictive???
Dual remote chat
Man with a real concern
We were SO close nailing this before until Bob did his study:
Dual remote bypass restrictive???
Dual remote chat
Man with a real concern
Well I was the guy with the concern, and the dual bypass system that Bob tested was the one that was on my truck. Good thing it was only on for a VERY short while. I thought that maybe it was my truck or the way I installed the system, but it now seems that my concerns were genuine and the problem seems to lie with the D.R system not my install of it.I think that these tests are what this site is all about, and getting unbiased testing of products like the Amsoil dual remote bypass system is something that is hard to come by. I can't help but wonder if someone with this system who is getting low UOA results, if the low oil presure is contributing to increased engine wear but the bypass filter is removing the wear metals giving a false reading; who knows maybe your bearings and cams are now in your bypass filter?
Can someone draw up an accurate schematic of the DR? I don't understand where the spring thingy is in the flow.
I believe the pressure circuit is analogous to an electrical circuit. Two filters in parallel are equivalent to two resistors in parallel. If the filters have the same resistance, the same amount of fluid (current) will flow in each. If one filters has more resistance, less current will flow through that one - BUT - the current through the other will not be affected.
So I think the DR will work fine if you throw away the spring doohickey. The higher resistance of the bypass filter will naturally restrict the flow through it, and the flow through the full flow will be unaffected.
Note - the overall resistance as seen by the pump will be LOWER. You have two filters in parallel, the combined resistance is lower than either individually.
The only purpose I can see for a spring restrictor is to lower the flow to the bypass so as to prevent it being overpressured. Nonetheless, if the design is to only have the restrictor in the bypass circuit and not in the full flow circuit, the overall flow resistance will still be lower for the DR than the FF by itself.
Keith.
I believe the pressure circuit is analogous to an electrical circuit. Two filters in parallel are equivalent to two resistors in parallel. If the filters have the same resistance, the same amount of fluid (current) will flow in each. If one filters has more resistance, less current will flow through that one - BUT - the current through the other will not be affected.
So I think the DR will work fine if you throw away the spring doohickey. The higher resistance of the bypass filter will naturally restrict the flow through it, and the flow through the full flow will be unaffected.
Note - the overall resistance as seen by the pump will be LOWER. You have two filters in parallel, the combined resistance is lower than either individually.
The only purpose I can see for a spring restrictor is to lower the flow to the bypass so as to prevent it being overpressured. Nonetheless, if the design is to only have the restrictor in the bypass circuit and not in the full flow circuit, the overall flow resistance will still be lower for the DR than the FF by itself.
Keith.
Guys,
I think I have just figured something out. Look back at the picture that shows the bottom of the bypass set up without the filters on it.
For the setup to work correctly the inlet/outlet hoses and the plugs on the other end need to be swapped end to end.
Why? The spring and ball holds pressure and flow low to accomodate the bypass filter. The way they are set up now, full pressue/flow is going to the bypass filter and its limiting the flow. The ff filter is not getting pressure or flow due to the bypass spring/ball arrangment stopping it.
Just swap ends with the in/out hose and the end caps and I bet it will work like it should and give correct flow and pressure.
If this is correct there is not a design flaw, just installation problems on hoses and plugs.
Dan
[ May 26, 2003, 12:08 AM: Message edited by: Dan4510 ]
I think I have just figured something out. Look back at the picture that shows the bottom of the bypass set up without the filters on it.
For the setup to work correctly the inlet/outlet hoses and the plugs on the other end need to be swapped end to end.
Why? The spring and ball holds pressure and flow low to accomodate the bypass filter. The way they are set up now, full pressue/flow is going to the bypass filter and its limiting the flow. The ff filter is not getting pressure or flow due to the bypass spring/ball arrangment stopping it.
Just swap ends with the in/out hose and the end caps and I bet it will work like it should and give correct flow and pressure.
If this is correct there is not a design flaw, just installation problems on hoses and plugs.
Dan
[ May 26, 2003, 12:08 AM: Message edited by: Dan4510 ]
Dan - it can only be plumbed from the one side as is.
plexx - thank you for weighing back in - I didn't know that was the unit you had (maybe I just didn't pick up on the fact).
Thanks guys - I AM chasing this with Amsoil!
plexx - thank you for weighing back in - I didn't know that was the unit you had (maybe I just didn't pick up on the fact).
Thanks guys - I AM chasing this with Amsoil!
- Status
