Grease Ver 3 Oil Filter Study Released

Joined
Jan 17, 2003
Messages
3,463
Location
Coastal South Carolina
quote:
Originally posted by edwardh1:
quote:
Originally posted by edwardh1: who know how the SAE tests that purolater mentions are conducted? HS806?
as in - PureOne filters meet the flow requirements of automotive applications. We test our filters per SAE specification HS806 Chapter 1, and the standard flow rate requirement that we follow states that the pressure differential (between inlet and outlet) shall not exceed 3.0 psi at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm. On the PL30001 filters, flow restriction is 0.8 psi (avg) at 3.0 gpm.

 

Grease is the word

Thread starter
Joined
Nov 13, 2003
Messages
314
Location
Cincinnati, OH
For three days this week (starting Monday at noon) it was down. My "economy" host provider had their supplier data center close down w/o telling them [Confused] . It was very frustrating. It is back up now. I'd ask for a refund, but for $1 a month and three days down, I don't think I'll bother [Wink] .
 

TC

Joined
Sep 12, 2003
Messages
1,644
Location
California
Just downloaded the newer version of the Excel spreadsheet -- excellent work, Grease! Very cool. One idea I thought of might be to add in the "Comments" section a note reflecting the significance of pore sizes and micron ratings. Specifically, possibly mention the quote from the ASTM #881825 study by AC/Detroit Diesel which concluded that "Controlling the abrasive contaminants in the range of 2 to 22 microns in the lube oil is necessary for controlling engine wear." This might help provide a yardstick to help judge the filter micron ratings. Similar to choosing among various doses of a vitamin supplement without knowing what the RDA is for that vitamin. http://www.aeromag.net/sae.html [ September 25, 2004, 05:28 PM: Message edited by: TC ]
 
Joined
Oct 3, 2003
Messages
72
Location
Chicago
quote:
Originally posted by Grease is the word: For three days this week (starting Monday at noon) it was down. My "economy" host provider had their supplier data center close down w/o telling them [Confused] . It was very frustrating. It is back up now. I'd ask for a refund, but for $1 a month and three days down, I don't think I'll bother [Wink] .
I think the baldwin filter has a typo for "10psi for 2 min" colum shouldn't it be 47 or 57?
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2003
Messages
159
Location
MI
quote:
I think the baldwin filter has a typo for "10psi for 2 min" colum shouldn't it be 47 or 57?
I double checked my notes and my own spreadsheet, 37grams is the correct number for Baldwin. It's 1min @ 20 psi of 40grams is consitant with the 2min @10 psi number.
 

Grease is the word

Thread starter
Joined
Nov 13, 2003
Messages
314
Location
Cincinnati, OH
I have left a PM for Schultz so we can coordinate the update. Thanks to XS650 for pinning this one down. I'll get the changes posted in the next few days and note a revision.
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2002
Messages
39,802
Location
Pottstown, PA
Gosh [Duh!] ..and you heard it first here on BITOG, folks!! Hey, my hat is off to many here for doing some very outstanding things [HAIL 2 U!] You gotta love the information age!! [Smile]
 
Joined
Jul 4, 2002
Messages
4,107
Location
Savannah, GA
I pinned this topic so that our members can easily find the link to the study. Thanks Grease for all of your hard work, Joe
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2003
Messages
51
Location
MN
Regarding the "mysterious" string on the Purolator filters. I've come to the conclusion that it's purpose is to keep the pleats uniformally separated and to keep them from deforming during use. It appears it may also give added stength to the pleat material and keep the pleats from shifting during use. I've cut open used oil filters for some time and many of them their filter material is deformed or flatened to varying degrees. I've noticed that the used Purolators that I've cut open do not have deformed material and the pleats remain uniformally separated.
 
Joined
Jan 1, 2005
Messages
24
Location
Sonora
This test has great meaning if you use #30 oil at 70 degrees and 10 PSI with a flow rate of less than a quart a minute....Otherwise it is meaningless. In a real car engine at 60-80psi and a flow rate of 3 or 4 gallons a minute, these filters would all be in full by-pass and doing absolutely nothing as far as filtration. For your next test project, try 10/30 oil at 200 degrees fahrenheit with an imput pressure of 50psi....Control outlet restriction so you get a 5psi pressure drop across the filter or the by-pass valve opens....
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2002
Messages
39,802
Location
Pottstown, PA
Caddyman You do like to shoot from the hip, don't you? [Smile] I have a filter with NO BYPASS valve. It has 2psi differential at start up. It has 2psi differential at operating temperature. Suggested reading Take note of the second page. [Smile] If they wanted to simulate 40 weight oil at 100C. They would have used a fluid equivalent to 10 weight.
 
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
99
Location
Henderson, Nevada
quote:
Originally posted by Caddyman: In a real car engine at 60-80psi and a flow rate of 3 or 4 gallons a minute, these filters would all be in full by-pass and doing absolutely nothing as far as filtration.
[Confused] Really? Let's assume the bypass opens at 10 psi. Isn't there still a 10 psi differential across the filter media? So some of the oil is still going through the media and being filtered, correct? It seems to me that the greater the differential between the pressure applied to the filter and the bypass opening pressure, the greater the amount of oil that will bypass the media, but some oil is going to go through the media at all times. The only time all of the flow would go through the bypass is when the filter media is clogged. It's like having two resistors in parallel in an electrical circuit. The larger resistor will flow less electricity, but it will still flow some. [Wink]
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2002
Messages
39,802
Location
Pottstown, PA
Read the suggested material. I have a hydraulic filter sitting right here. It has a Beta 10=2 (10um 50% nominal) the thing is rated at 4 PSID @ 10 gpm of flow with a 150 SSU fluid. Very few oil pumps operate at this rate of flow. I think my HV oil pump is rated at this flow @ 3000 rpm. My 1um cotton wound filter (yes, 1um) has no bypass and only sees 2 PSID whether cold or hot. We grossly, IMHO, overstate the interaction of the bypass valve in the vast % of our daily operational use. When I had my dual Permacool mount on my jeep ..I used Chevy filters (no bypass). I saw the exact same oil pressure on the gauge. When Bob and Grease did their studies, they used 30 weight oil at room temp. If they had used ATF or some light weight ISO fluid (hydraulic oil) it would have more closely resembled operational conditions. We tend to keep looking at the filter as the end all in the pressure/restriction heirarchy ..when I believe it's more something like an intermediate velocity reduction chamber in a long complex fluid circuit. Sorta like a shop vac ...X gpm in ...large chamber the stuff loses its velocity and comes to a relative crawl through it...X gpm out. Look at it this way. Let's evolve the circular oil filter just like the circular air filter evolved to a panel filters. Stretch out your 150 square inches of media into a panel. Pipe in your (for the sake of example) pan sump tube to one side ..and your center threaded ID to the other. How much velocity reduction will occur for all that oil going along a super highway and then coming to a vastly wider set of lanes ..and then bottle necking back on to the super highway?? Remember, it's always bumper to bumper from the time you hit the on ramp ..until you get off.
 

Grease is the word

Thread starter
Joined
Nov 13, 2003
Messages
314
Location
Cincinnati, OH
quote:
Originally posted by Caddyman: This test has great meaning if you use #30 oil at 70 degrees and 10 PSI with a flow rate of less than a quart a minute....Otherwise it is meaningless.
The intent was to compare filters against each other with a constant benchmark. In this case the grade 30 oil was the optimum oil to read with the bubble point tester. The bubble point / pore readings turned out accurate as the parker filter was tested and matched its published ratings. The goal was not to determine the flow of a particular filter in a real world application. You could really take the units off of the spreadsheet flow columns and just use the raw numbers as comparison figures. For this academic exercise I don't really care about absolute values, just relationships to other filters.
 

Grease is the word

Thread starter
Joined
Nov 13, 2003
Messages
314
Location
Cincinnati, OH
quote:
Originally posted by joee12: I pinned this topic so that our members can easily find the link to the study. Thanks Grease for all of your hard work, Joe
Thanks for the "pin", Joe. I am wanting to do another "point" revision on the site by doing some wordsmithing. Now that it has been out for a while there have been some misconceptions and I would like to clear up some things. I saw one post on a boat forum that dismissed the study because we used glycerin mixed with grade 70 oil and "who would use that in an engine?" [I dont know] . I guess I could see how they confused the testing with glycerin in one test and another test with grade 30 oil at 70F [Wink] . It is amazing how things get twisted.
 
Top