... I made my post before I read Subie's post, so we were thinking the same thing.
Purolator BOSS particle count PBL14476
- Thread starter Reloader59
- Start date
- Status
... I made my post before I read Subie's post, so we were thinking the same thing.
Are N52s stronger than samarium cobalt?
If one were so inclined that could even be part of the testing… run filter for say 5k & pull sample; install samarium magnets & run additional 500 miles & pull sample; remove samarium & install N52s and run 500 miles & pull sample. Wait for results & perform OCI as indicated by N52 oil serviceability results.
That way one isn’t waiting until the end of the OCI where the possibility of a loaded filter exists, and it becomes progressively harder for the magnets since part of the ferrous material will already be removed, meaning less circulating material when the N52s are installed therefore a lower likelihood that they will improve the PC unless they’re stronger & doing a better job than the previous magnets. If the PC doesn’t improve, you can conclude the SC magnets are collecting more material than the N52s…. Sound plausible?
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2023
- Messages
- 865
N52 grades have more energy product but in contrast to say N42 or N45, they are more thermally sensitive to magnetic strength loss when heated above their max operating temperature which are typically around 80 Celsius, assuming the average oil temperature is around 100 Celsius plus or minus... Charts are comparison of magnets with the same dimensions but different grade (3/8" diamter x 1/8" thickness)
This is why I avoided using off the shelf common grade Neodymium magnets in favor of N42SH grade and Samarium Cobalt disc.
The more common non high temperature grades will work fine but will overtime permanently loose their strength slowly from repeated heat cycles. N42SH and other related SH grades are typically rated at 150 Celsius in their maximum operating temperature.
Problem is high temp grade magnets aren't cheap and not many online vendors have a wide selection to only a few options available.
The N42SH bars cost me about 4 bucks each at the size of 2" x 1/2" x 1/8". The non SH grades cost around half of that at the same size.
Also another reason to avoid those oil filter magnet vendors as they are making massive profit margins and probably use cheap grades magnets than sourcing your own is miles cheaper with you having an actual choice and shape to pick from for your application...
Last edited:
Thanks! I figured you had done deeper research. IOW there’s somewhat weaker magnets that will live in the environment, or strong ones that will lose their magic when hot.
Great info! BTW is the samarium cobalt the strongest that will live at 150*C, or is it the best balance of price to performance?
A BITOG user did multiple particle counts with and without a Filter Mag, using the same model of oil filter. See this post.
There was no obvious difference in the particle count or the iron content of the oil. Almost all of the iron that gets measured by a spectrometer will be the stuff that's too small to get filtered ( << 5 micron). It would seem that magnets aren't very effective at collecting this stuff.
The stuff that the magnet collects is probably large enough that most of it would just end up in the filter anyway. With no oil filtration, a magnet should make a much bigger difference. This is probably why OEMs will tend to use a magnetic drain plug for a manual gearbox, but not for an engine.
Also, most of the particles measured in a particle count won't be magnetic, so I wouldn't expect a magnet to cause an obvious decrease in the particle count.
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2023
- Messages
- 865
Samarium Cobalt by material properties alone are rated up to 300+ Celsius depending on grade, quality of materials. They're exclusively used in industrial applications due to their corrosion resistance from the cobalt alloying element. From size to size SmCo magnets are more expensive and will provide better magnetic stability in very high temperatures. In terms of overall magnetic strength are considered one tier lower over Neodymium grades.
A BITOG user did multiple particle counts with and without a Filter Mag, using the same model of oil filter. See this post.
His UOA report only shows the ISO particle count code, so guess that's how Blackstone did it back in 2012. There's a pretty big range of particles per ISO 4406 code tier in each particle size of 4+, 6+ and 14+ microns, so it's better to see the actual counts like Blackstone does it these days. It's also helpful to see the other measured particles sizes (21+, 38+ and 70+ microns) in the report.
I'm kind of surprised the use of the Filter Mag didn't show what would be expected, but he points out that the vehicle's use was quite different between those OCIs, so maybe that had some impact. Could be the harder use (Autocross mentioned) caused more wear of both iron and non-ferrous metals, and the Filter Mag picked that up the extra iron wear and resulted in the same 7 ppm of iron, whereas if the Filter Mag wasn't used on the oil run maybe the iron would have been a few counts higher. The higher ISO code for that run could have been the very small non-ferrous particles that couldn't be caught by the blue PureOne. Noticed that the copper, lead and tin were all up a bit on that OCI, but those are non-ferrous.
Also, a UOA ICP Spectrometer test should be able to measure particles even below 1 micron - but how far below? So yes, ICP Spectrometers have a very narrow range of particle size detection. Like lookng at the world through a straw.
Last edited:
Some thoughts on the information here - a blank sample of the actual virgin oil should also have been tested along with the 500 mile oil sample. Note, the final filter micron rating of the oil manufacturing process is also unknown. The lower (under @20 micron) particle data is not meaningful if the oil is processed through 20 um final filtration (as an example) at the manufacturer, without blank sample data.
Additionally, the filtration efficiency of the PBL filter should not be concluded as sub par based on the data. If the nominal micron rating of the filter is 20 um (as an example), then the filter is doing an exceptional job filtering larger particles out and/or the engine is not shedding too many larger particles.
Additionally, the filtration efficiency of the PBL filter should not be concluded as sub par based on the data. If the nominal micron rating of the filter is 20 um (as an example), then the filter is doing an exceptional job filtering larger particles out and/or the engine is not shedding too many larger particles.
The testing done by Ascent Filtration a few years ago to ISO standards showed that the Boss was 99% @ 46u IIRC. Its efficiency curve was quite shocking compared to those that were 99%@20u.
It was 99% @ 35u in Ascent's ISO 4548-12 testing. It drops off to 62% @ 20u. The Purolator Spec Sheet shows 99% >46u.
500 miles with virtually no oil filter would have a low particle count. The longer the oil us ran, the more contaminated it becomes if there was no filter.
It doesn't matter how many of particles there are in the virgin oil, since the oil will get passed through the filter thousands of times in 500 miles. Even a filter that is only 20% efficient will reduce the number of particles in the oil by more than a factor of a million after only 100 passes through the filter.
The particles that end up in the used oil sample are those that have been recently introduced by the engine and haven't had a chance to make many passes through the oiling system. The particle concentration hits an equilibrium based mainly on the rate of introduction of new particles and the efficiency of the oil filter.
Depends on how dirty the virgin oil is, and what sized particles are in it and the efficiency of the filter. I'd imaging most virgin oils from big brand name oil makers is pretty clean out of the bottle, not enough contamination to really worry about. Think there have been a few PCs done on virgin oil in the VOA forum.
Again, depends on the filter's efficiency and the size of the particles. Particles 20u and less actually do the most wear. Filtering out the debris above 20u helps reduce added smaller debris if those got crunched up in the running engine into smaller particles. Inefficient filters are pretty bad capturing and retaining particles less than 20u. Look at the Ascent ISO efficiency test curves - HERE.
The particles in the oil are basically all the particles that the filter can't catch and retain - the oil gets sent through the filter over and over throughout the OCI. As we know based on past discussions, as oil filters get more loaded up with debris and the dP increases, they become less efficient due to debris sloughing. So that, combined with more and more particles being introduced over the OCI results in the oil becoming more dirty the longer the OCI. A high efficiency filter (which do no slough as much - that's part of their high ISO efficiency rating) is most advantageous the longer the OCI is. Last thing someone should do it use a low efficiency filter that has a high mileage use rating.
Don't mean to hijack a post.
Is the efficiency of the Purolator BOSS PBL22500 still around 40 microns?
Is the efficiency of the Purolator BOSS PBL22500 still around 40 microns?
Thank you very much..
That’s not true. Maybe if he’s trying to determine more exactly how efficient the filter is. A particle count can help determine if the oil is remaining clean enough. That lets him know if what he’s doing is working and he says he’s going to do another Particle count later. He can compare it with this one.
Most of the particles in the results are in the 20 um and under range. Does anyone know the particle size range/distribution of the anti-wear additives in oil? Does anyone know the micron rating of the final filtration step of the oil manufacturing process. Can anyone tell definitively that new motor oil does not have any particles (this includes anti wear additive particles) in the under 20 um range. This is why I recommend a virgin control sample of the actual oil tested along with the sample tested. I am not against testing oil samples at all for gathering reference information.
- Status
Similar threads
