Sand and engine damage
- Thread starter paulri
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Rand
The fram toughguard has oil wetted media. Its kinda gimmicky but I could see it working well in very dusty areas.
Gimmicky? Many OEMs do this.
The fram toughguard has oil wetted media. Its kinda gimmicky but I could see it working well in very dusty areas.
Gimmicky? Many OEMs do this.
Originally Posted By: Rand
The fram toughguard has oil wetted media. Its kinda gimmicky but I could see it working well in very dusty areas.
I was thinking about using that air filter, but then I came across a lot of cautions about oil media in the air filter, and problems that it caused. I don't know if this was specifically related to filters that you would oil yourself, or the TG air filter that comes pre-oiled, but I figured better safe than sorry.
The fram toughguard has oil wetted media. Its kinda gimmicky but I could see it working well in very dusty areas.
I was thinking about using that air filter, but then I came across a lot of cautions about oil media in the air filter, and problems that it caused. I don't know if this was specifically related to filters that you would oil yourself, or the TG air filter that comes pre-oiled, but I figured better safe than sorry.
Nick1994
$100 site donor 2024
Originally Posted By: Kira
Hey Nick, Is the photo you posted Phoenix or a generic dust storm picture?
I can imagine houses with "retrofitted" automotive air filters (bought at junkyards) fitted to each window--the outside of the window for a classy look, of course. Kira
It's Phoenix. Google search yourself, they're wild!
I took these 2 pictures less than 5 minutes apart. This was about 5 years ago.
Hey Nick, Is the photo you posted Phoenix or a generic dust storm picture?
I can imagine houses with "retrofitted" automotive air filters (bought at junkyards) fitted to each window--the outside of the window for a classy look, of course. Kira
It's Phoenix. Google search yourself, they're wild!
I took these 2 pictures less than 5 minutes apart. This was about 5 years ago.
Originally Posted By: Ducked
Originally Posted By: paulri
I’d like someone to explain contamination of oil due to sand.
After doing a little reading, I’m a bit confused. On the one hand, an article like this (http://www.ennyman.com/syn-dirt.html) makes it look like the danger from sand is from an individual particle of sand, that will cause damage to all the parts of an engine that it touches, until it is either caught up in the oil filter, or perhaps (not sure if this happens) is pulverized by the moving parts of the engine. If this is how sand can damage an engine—one particle at a time—it seems rather silly to change the oil at 4000 or 5000 miles, to eliminate sand, as that would be like locking the barn door after the horse has escaped. If small particles of sand are going to cycle through the engine a few times, or hundreds of times, I’m not sure that changing the oil--after the particle of sand has already cycled through the engine dozens if not hundreds of times--will do much to prevent engine damage and wear.
On the other hand, articles like this one http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/830/silica-contamination--see esp. Figure 2--make it look like you can safely accumulate sand in small amounts, but once it reaches 20-25 ppm, then engine wear takes off. This makes it look like it is more the combination of lots of sand that hurts your engine, rather just than one particle in particular. And if this is the case, then changing your oil early, before the silicon gets to 20-25 ppm, makes a lot of sense to me.
Which of these is the case? Or is there some other factor I’m not considering?
Neither of your interpretations seem to make any sense.
IF accumulated silica particles in the oil are causing damage, changing the oil gets rid of most of them, (perhaps about 80%) so it reduces the ongoing damage. OF COURSE it doesn't reverse the damage that's already happened. Nothing short of a rebuild does that.
How and why would 20-25 ppm of silicon be a magic cutoff below which no damage occurred? If silica is damaging, then assuming the particle size is constant, damage will be proportional to the amount in circulation. There's no obvious reason to expect a cutoff.
There is reason to believe there might be a cutoff in particle size relative to, say bearing clearances, below which wear is much reduced, but thats a different thing, and controversial anyway.
Silicon is part of the additive package for some oils, but I've never seen more than 20ppm of it. That's likely why there's a cutoff...
Originally Posted By: paulri
I’d like someone to explain contamination of oil due to sand.
After doing a little reading, I’m a bit confused. On the one hand, an article like this (http://www.ennyman.com/syn-dirt.html) makes it look like the danger from sand is from an individual particle of sand, that will cause damage to all the parts of an engine that it touches, until it is either caught up in the oil filter, or perhaps (not sure if this happens) is pulverized by the moving parts of the engine. If this is how sand can damage an engine—one particle at a time—it seems rather silly to change the oil at 4000 or 5000 miles, to eliminate sand, as that would be like locking the barn door after the horse has escaped. If small particles of sand are going to cycle through the engine a few times, or hundreds of times, I’m not sure that changing the oil--after the particle of sand has already cycled through the engine dozens if not hundreds of times--will do much to prevent engine damage and wear.
On the other hand, articles like this one http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/830/silica-contamination--see esp. Figure 2--make it look like you can safely accumulate sand in small amounts, but once it reaches 20-25 ppm, then engine wear takes off. This makes it look like it is more the combination of lots of sand that hurts your engine, rather just than one particle in particular. And if this is the case, then changing your oil early, before the silicon gets to 20-25 ppm, makes a lot of sense to me.
Which of these is the case? Or is there some other factor I’m not considering?
Neither of your interpretations seem to make any sense.
IF accumulated silica particles in the oil are causing damage, changing the oil gets rid of most of them, (perhaps about 80%) so it reduces the ongoing damage. OF COURSE it doesn't reverse the damage that's already happened. Nothing short of a rebuild does that.
How and why would 20-25 ppm of silicon be a magic cutoff below which no damage occurred? If silica is damaging, then assuming the particle size is constant, damage will be proportional to the amount in circulation. There's no obvious reason to expect a cutoff.
There is reason to believe there might be a cutoff in particle size relative to, say bearing clearances, below which wear is much reduced, but thats a different thing, and controversial anyway.
Silicon is part of the additive package for some oils, but I've never seen more than 20ppm of it. That's likely why there's a cutoff...
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
How is sand supposed to get into the oil?
this is one way it can get it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GN34HtldLUE&list=PL12C0C916CECEA3BC&index=29
want proof?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qI0ve18j0TQ&list=PL12C0C916CECEA3BC&index=21
skip ahead to about 17:40 if you don't enjoy the show, but as they continue to remove the engine more and more sand shows up. hard to imagine that it didn't get in the crankcase somehow.
can't imagine who wouldn't like roadkill, but, you know ... communists are everywhere theses days ....
How is sand supposed to get into the oil?
this is one way it can get it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GN34HtldLUE&list=PL12C0C916CECEA3BC&index=29
want proof?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qI0ve18j0TQ&list=PL12C0C916CECEA3BC&index=21
skip ahead to about 17:40 if you don't enjoy the show, but as they continue to remove the engine more and more sand shows up. hard to imagine that it didn't get in the crankcase somehow.
can't imagine who wouldn't like roadkill, but, you know ... communists are everywhere theses days ....
This scenario that you've described...
Originally Posted By: Ducked
IF accumulated silica particles in the oil are causing damage, changing the oil gets rid of most of them, (perhaps about 80%) so it reduces the ongoing damage. OF COURSE it doesn't reverse the damage that's already happened. Nothing short of a rebuild does that.
... would pretty much mean that sand isn't going to be captured by the filter, or crushed by any moving parts in the engine--but will simply circulate from the moment it is brought into the engine, until the oil is drained.
Is this in fact what happens? Fram tech support told me that the TG and Ultra are efficient at 40% down to 5 microns. So regardless of whether that was single or multi pass, the bottom line is that at some point, those filters could be expected to pick up a fair amount of particles down to 5 microns. It won't be the first pass through the filter, but on the other hand, statistically speaking, one wouldn't expect these particles to circulate through the engine dozens or hundreds of times, until the oil is drained.
Or is there something I'm leaving out here? That is highly possible, which is why I posted this question.
Originally Posted By: Ducked
IF accumulated silica particles in the oil are causing damage, changing the oil gets rid of most of them, (perhaps about 80%) so it reduces the ongoing damage. OF COURSE it doesn't reverse the damage that's already happened. Nothing short of a rebuild does that.
... would pretty much mean that sand isn't going to be captured by the filter, or crushed by any moving parts in the engine--but will simply circulate from the moment it is brought into the engine, until the oil is drained.
Is this in fact what happens? Fram tech support told me that the TG and Ultra are efficient at 40% down to 5 microns. So regardless of whether that was single or multi pass, the bottom line is that at some point, those filters could be expected to pick up a fair amount of particles down to 5 microns. It won't be the first pass through the filter, but on the other hand, statistically speaking, one wouldn't expect these particles to circulate through the engine dozens or hundreds of times, until the oil is drained.
Or is there something I'm leaving out here? That is highly possible, which is why I posted this question.
I would imagine, if the particles are small enough to pass the pickup screen, but still large enough to create damage, that the oil pump would take the brunt of the blow.
The filter would catch whatever the pump passes through, at least anything large enough to destroy bearings. Not sure what the oil film thickness is on camshaft lobes, but with a few minutes the oil would have circulated enough times to get 90% of the particles larger than the oil film. Anything smaller than that interface is unlikely to cause harm in any concentration whatsoever.
The filter would catch whatever the pump passes through, at least anything large enough to destroy bearings. Not sure what the oil film thickness is on camshaft lobes, but with a few minutes the oil would have circulated enough times to get 90% of the particles larger than the oil film. Anything smaller than that interface is unlikely to cause harm in any concentration whatsoever.
Originally Posted By: paulri
This scenario that you've described...
Originally Posted By: Ducked
IF accumulated silica particles in the oil are causing damage, changing the oil gets rid of most of them, (perhaps about 80%) so it reduces the ongoing damage. OF COURSE it doesn't reverse the damage that's already happened. Nothing short of a rebuild does that.
... would pretty much mean that sand isn't going to be captured by the filter, or crushed by any moving parts in the engine--but will simply circulate from the moment it is brought into the engine, until the oil is drained.
Is this in fact what happens? Fram tech support told me that the TG and Ultra are efficient at 40% down to 5 microns. So regardless of whether that was single or multi pass, the bottom line is that at some point, those filters could be expected to pick up a fair amount of particles down to 5 microns. It won't be the first pass through the filter, but on the other hand, statistically speaking, one wouldn't expect these particles to circulate through the engine dozens or hundreds of times, until the oil is drained.
Or is there something I'm leaving out here? That is highly possible, which is why I posted this question.
As I said, particle size effect is a different question, and didn't feature in your original post. If the particles get taken out by the filter, they are of much less concern, but IIRC 20 microns is often quoted as a general lower limit for filter performance. This is used as a justification for bypass filters, though people argue about whether the smaller particles are in fact much of a problem.
I doubt sand grains get pulverised much in an engine. They are much harder than the materials in the moving surfaces, especially the bearing shells, in which sand particles may become embedded.
This scenario that you've described...
Originally Posted By: Ducked
IF accumulated silica particles in the oil are causing damage, changing the oil gets rid of most of them, (perhaps about 80%) so it reduces the ongoing damage. OF COURSE it doesn't reverse the damage that's already happened. Nothing short of a rebuild does that.
... would pretty much mean that sand isn't going to be captured by the filter, or crushed by any moving parts in the engine--but will simply circulate from the moment it is brought into the engine, until the oil is drained.
Is this in fact what happens? Fram tech support told me that the TG and Ultra are efficient at 40% down to 5 microns. So regardless of whether that was single or multi pass, the bottom line is that at some point, those filters could be expected to pick up a fair amount of particles down to 5 microns. It won't be the first pass through the filter, but on the other hand, statistically speaking, one wouldn't expect these particles to circulate through the engine dozens or hundreds of times, until the oil is drained.
Or is there something I'm leaving out here? That is highly possible, which is why I posted this question.
As I said, particle size effect is a different question, and didn't feature in your original post. If the particles get taken out by the filter, they are of much less concern, but IIRC 20 microns is often quoted as a general lower limit for filter performance. This is used as a justification for bypass filters, though people argue about whether the smaller particles are in fact much of a problem.
I doubt sand grains get pulverised much in an engine. They are much harder than the materials in the moving surfaces, especially the bearing shells, in which sand particles may become embedded.
Originally Posted By: KingCake
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
Originally Posted By: KingCake
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
How is sand supposed to get into the oil?
Your engine is literally an air pump. That's why the air filter is the most important filter. Grit in the air is sucked in and is responsible for most of the wear metals found in engine oil.
Maybe for cars without air filters.
THAT'S WHY I SAID THE AIR FILTER IS THE MOST IMPORTANT
And after stating that the air filter is the most important filter....you followed up with an incorrect statement that grit from the air is responsible for most of engine wear metals. Certainly not true in cars with tight air filters, which probably accounts for the majority of vehicles. Most engine wear comes from corrosion occurring during the engine warmup phase from ambient to oil temp of approx 170 deg as well as the reduced protection from the additive package until at normal temps. It's not from grit or sand from the air intake.
If grit is really the culprit of most engine wear, start using an SA certified SAE 30 motor oil during a 3 to 5 month sub-30 deg F. winter. The grit from air will be the least of your worries.
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
Originally Posted By: KingCake
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
How is sand supposed to get into the oil?
Your engine is literally an air pump. That's why the air filter is the most important filter. Grit in the air is sucked in and is responsible for most of the wear metals found in engine oil.
Maybe for cars without air filters.
THAT'S WHY I SAID THE AIR FILTER IS THE MOST IMPORTANT
And after stating that the air filter is the most important filter....you followed up with an incorrect statement that grit from the air is responsible for most of engine wear metals. Certainly not true in cars with tight air filters, which probably accounts for the majority of vehicles. Most engine wear comes from corrosion occurring during the engine warmup phase from ambient to oil temp of approx 170 deg as well as the reduced protection from the additive package until at normal temps. It's not from grit or sand from the air intake.
If grit is really the culprit of most engine wear, start using an SA certified SAE 30 motor oil during a 3 to 5 month sub-30 deg F. winter. The grit from air will be the least of your worries.
Originally Posted By: 69GTX
If grit is really the culprit of most engine wear, start using an SA certified SAE 30 motor oil during a 3 to 5 month sub-30 deg F. winter. The grit from air will be the least of your worries.
Other than the SA part, why would that cause wear? Hard or impossible starting perhaps due to drag, but why wear?
And no one is running SA oil in this thread.
If grit is really the culprit of most engine wear, start using an SA certified SAE 30 motor oil during a 3 to 5 month sub-30 deg F. winter. The grit from air will be the least of your worries.
Other than the SA part, why would that cause wear? Hard or impossible starting perhaps due to drag, but why wear?
And no one is running SA oil in this thread.
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: 69GTX
If grit is really the culprit of most engine wear, start using an SA certified SAE 30 motor oil during a 3 to 5 month sub-30 deg F. winter. The grit from air will be the least of your worries.
Why would that cause wear? Hard or impossible starting perhaps due to drag, but why wear?
The oil be so thick from the below freezing temps it most likely will not move from the sump to the oil pump, so the engine will not be lubricated. With out oil to keep the parts separated there will be ugly things happening to the engine.
Originally Posted By: 69GTX
If grit is really the culprit of most engine wear, start using an SA certified SAE 30 motor oil during a 3 to 5 month sub-30 deg F. winter. The grit from air will be the least of your worries.
Why would that cause wear? Hard or impossible starting perhaps due to drag, but why wear?
The oil be so thick from the below freezing temps it most likely will not move from the sump to the oil pump, so the engine will not be lubricated. With out oil to keep the parts separated there will be ugly things happening to the engine.
Well, no one is doing that anyway so the whole argument is a red herring. He might be correct that it would be bad, but that's not a valid argument.
So once again we get to another opinion-swap on another basic question (What is the source of most engine wear?) and once again there isn't much evidence in sight.
I had a quick Google. Wasn't expecting to find much, and I didn't.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-causes-engine-wear-amsoil-alex-farkas
"Automotive experts agree dirt is the number-one cause of engine wear. In fact, analysis by Federal-Mogul Corporation reveals that 43.4 percent of all engine bearing distress is caused by dirt."
So there you go. If you don't agree (with Amsoil) you can't be an "automotive expert".
Judging by the abstract, there might be a bit more evidence available here, but I don't currently have access to the full paper.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0043164875901088
Fodor, J.(1975 October) A practical method for testing the abrasive wear protection of an internal combustion engine. Wear 34(3), 419-425.
"Abrasive wear is the most decisive factor in determining the life of internal combustion engines."
Abrasive wear isn't necessarily due to silica in dirt, but the rest of the abstract suggests that is the focus of the paper.
"Methods based on radioactive tracers have been developed and are outlined for assessing the efficiency and selection of oil and air filters. Use of these methods would help to improve the life of internal combustion engines by better protection against abrasive wear."
I had a quick Google. Wasn't expecting to find much, and I didn't.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-causes-engine-wear-amsoil-alex-farkas
"Automotive experts agree dirt is the number-one cause of engine wear. In fact, analysis by Federal-Mogul Corporation reveals that 43.4 percent of all engine bearing distress is caused by dirt."
So there you go. If you don't agree (with Amsoil) you can't be an "automotive expert".
Judging by the abstract, there might be a bit more evidence available here, but I don't currently have access to the full paper.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0043164875901088
Fodor, J.(1975 October) A practical method for testing the abrasive wear protection of an internal combustion engine. Wear 34(3), 419-425.
"Abrasive wear is the most decisive factor in determining the life of internal combustion engines."
Abrasive wear isn't necessarily due to silica in dirt, but the rest of the abstract suggests that is the focus of the paper.
"Methods based on radioactive tracers have been developed and are outlined for assessing the efficiency and selection of oil and air filters. Use of these methods would help to improve the life of internal combustion engines by better protection against abrasive wear."
Originally Posted By: Ducked
I doubt sand grains get pulverised much in an engine.
Seems I'm wrong about that.
https://books.google.com/books?id=sXMsN8Jx7NQC
I doubt sand grains get pulverised much in an engine.
Seems I'm wrong about that.
https://books.google.com/books?id=sXMsN8Jx7NQC
- Status
Similar threads
