Subaru Oil Pump Specs as Relates to Filter Bypass

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote:
My claim is THAT THE FLOW THROUGH THE FILTER CAUSES A PRESSURE DROP ACROSS THE FILTER EMEMENT.


Only in exceptional circumstances. You some how "use" this to bolster the notion that it applies up and down the line. I assure you, it does not.

A filter is a virtual "still well" compared to the screaming galleries and passages. It crawls through the filter.

With a two lane road with a single lane exit as it's only outlet, how much does a section of 28 lane road inhibit traffic? A: Only when the 28 lane road is taxed by the rate of speed and number of cars. 99 44/100th % of those out see next to nothing.

You're finding physics that rarely applies and pretending, because you wish it to be true, that it works in all instances. It does not.


The Basic Test Fixture
The basic test fixture is made up of a positive displacement pump drawing oil from a
resevoir thru a test plate that can accommodate different modular adapters that the filter
will attach to and then discharging the oil back to the resevoir. The fixture has a pressure
gage on the inlet side of the filter and one on the outlet side of the filter. This setup is not
unlike the situation with a real oil pump in the motorcyle drawing oil from the sump, thru
the filter and then back to the sump. The inlet and outlet pressure gages would allow the
calculation of pressure drop across the filter and would also allow the calibration of the
outlet pressure gage to indicate flow rates.
Refer to APP I for a drawing of the test fixture and APP II for a photograph.


I don't quite get how the discharge tube simulates an engine.
54.gif


Suppose the maximum oil flow was 1.1gpm?
 
LoneRanger,
When you cut apart the OE filter and the 1365, could you discern any difference in the bypass valves? Is there a way to determine if one is "stiffer" just by feel?

One would think that UOA's would detect more wear if a filter was in bypass a lot. But, that does not appear to be the case as there is no additional apparent wear on these engines with a non-spec filter that I can tell just by looking at UOAs. The 2.5 NA engine just has good numbers with good oils.
 
Yes, the Wix's bypass spring was easier to compress. Quite a bit easier. In order to compress the Wix's bypass valve I had to slip a socket fitting into it that was large enough to catch the bypass spring.
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
My claim is THAT THE FLOW THROUGH THE FILTER CAUSES A PRESSURE DROP ACROSS THE FILTER ELEMENT.


Only in exceptional circumstances. You some how "use" this to bolster the notion that it applies up and down the line. I assure you, it does not.

A filter is a virtual "still well" compared to the screaming galleries and passages. It crawls through the filter.

You're finding physics that rarely applies and pretending, because you wish it to be true, that it works in all instances. It does not.


I really wouldn't go as far as saying the flow always "crawls" through an oil filter. Again, it all depends on what flow rate and viscosity of oil is going through the filter, the total surface area for that flow to go through, as well as the filter element resistance to flow. These are the parameters that will define what PSID is produced by across an oil filter.

The physics are there if you choose to believe it or not. For some reason you believe that every filter is a "still well" of oil where the oil if hardly moving through the filter ... I don't see it that way, because it's not always that way. If you actually flowed 12 gpm (even 6 gpm) of oil through a filter don't you think that is a pretty significant flow? - of course remember the viscosity factor has an effect too. I can agree that if it's a 1 or 2 gpm, then it's a whole different story then 6 or 12 gpm; but the fact remains that any flow will technically produce a corresponding PSID, even if it's a small one. There are certainly conditions where the filter PSID is significant ... you can't argue that fact.

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

The Basic Test Fixture
The basic test fixture is made up of a positive displacement pump drawing oil from a resevoir thru a test plate that can accommodate different modular adapters that the filter will attach to and then discharging the oil back to the resevoir. The fixture has a pressure gage on the inlet side of the filter and one on the outlet side of the filter. This setup is not unlike the situation with a real oil pump in the motorcyle drawing oil from the sump, thru the filter and then back to the sump. The inlet and outlet pressure gages would allow the calculation of pressure drop across the filter and would also allow the calibration of the outlet pressure gage to indicate flow rates.
Refer to APP I for a drawing of the test fixture and APP II for a photograph.


I don't quite get how the discharge tube simulates an engine.
54.gif


Suppose the maximum oil flow was 1.1gpm?


In that filter test, the objective was to compare the flow characteristics of various filters by looking at their PSID while flowing the same oil volume and viscosity through each filter. As you can see, there were some significant PSIDs (up to 16 psi) while flowing just about 1.3 gpm (5.25 liter/min). The oil was 10w-30 and only at 10 deg C, so it was relatively viscous. Sure, if the oil was hot and thin, then the PSID might have only been 1~2 psi instead of 16 psi.

The test setup was not meant to simulate and engine, but it really doesn't matter because if you flowed 1.3 gpm through those filters regardless if they were on a test rig like that, or actually on an engine, then there would still be 1.3 gpm going through them which would give you the same PSID he saw. The PSID produced by the filter was solely a function of the oil volume and viscosity of the oil going through it ... and of course the total design of the filter assembly. Not all filters flow the same while under the same exact flow conditions - this test proved that.

Link to reference test:
http://www.geocities.com/rfpxj/Oil_Filter_Experiment.pdf
 
Quote:
If you actually flowed 12 gpm (even 6 gpm)


Both of which are extremes for most engines.

IF your aunt had testicles, she'd be your uncle. You default to the extreme because it supports your assumptions about filters that don't apply more than they ever could apply.

When you're average stroke says that he chose a given filter because it was more "free flowing" ..he's not talking about flat shifting @ 7000 rpm or running flat out on the track.

You have to be young or living out of some Jeg's catalog.

Quote:
I really wouldn't go as far as saying the flow always "crawls" through an oil filter.


..and I will not require you to...

Relative to the velocity out of the pump and through to the main gallery, it is a crawl. Now you can cite the squeezing through the pores in the media ..but there is a tremendous deceleration of fluid that enters the filter (on average, anyway). I'm pretty sure that it shears as it descends into the filter (spinflow's excluded).

60mph is crawling on the autobahn.

Quote:
In that filter test, the objective was to compare the flow characteristics of various filters by looking at their PSID while flowing the same oil volume and viscosity through each filter.


You're giving too much credit to filter resistance since you can't seem to see how much the reactive component of viscosity plays in the picture. A filter can (probably) be reduced to one larger orifice. The turbulent pressure alterations on the companded (compressed and expanded) flow squeezing through it are not linear and have some disproportionate impact on PSID as either flow increases or viscosity is high. Most of this is still a non-factor in many more instances than not since the viscosity also increases the apparent resistance of the engine, which the filter must be subordinate to in total circuit resistance.

Under this filter's testing:

18-Oct-03 10 Fram PH30 20 13.25 6.75 5.26 1.4444 2.024 New

..the engine would always be 2/3 of the relative resistance to the filter. Choke the outlet at the same volume to where the downstream pressure was 9/10th of the supply pressure ..and those figures would not be the same.

That is, whatever pressure is developed in the acceleration of the oil through the collective orifices of the filter, generally speaking, is minor to what pressure is developed accelerating the oil through the engine. You can probably exchange "power required as evidenced by pressure alterations" if you'll entertain the notion. In a positive displacement environment, nothing flows faster. It may flow easier.

Again, while not specifically manipulated for proving your point, it's misleading. It can only be used in a comparative manner for most sensible views.

It's not that simple.
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

You're giving too much credit to filter resistance since you can't seem to see how much the reactive component of viscosity plays in the picture. A filter can (probably) be reduced to one larger orifice. The turbulent pressure alterations on the companded (compressed and expanded) flow squeezing through it are not linear and have some disproportionate impact on PSID as either flow increases or viscosity is high. Most of this is still a non-factor in many more instances than not since the viscosity also increases the apparent resistance of the engine, which the filter must be subordinate to in total circuit resistance.


When you flow oil through a filter and measure the flow rate and PSID, whatever that (supposed) phenomena you tried to describe above is contributing to the PSID generated. Flow is flow ... PSID is PSID ... it doesn't matter how the PSID is generated. The flow and PSID are directly related to each other through the flow characteristics of the fluid and filter. This holds true for any other restriction a fluid flows through - orifice, venturi tube, small tubes, main bearing, etc, etc.

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Under this filter's testing:

18-Oct-03 10 Fram PH30 20 13.25 6.75 5.26 1.4444 2.024 New

..the engine would always be 2/3 of the relative resistance to the filter. Choke the outlet at the same volume to where the downstream pressure was 9/10th of the supply pressure ..and those figures would not be the same.


Well of course not. If you choke the flow down to a trickle then you essentially make every pressure drop a very small amount. And if you plugged the outlet all together there would be zero pressure drop anywhere because the flow would be zero. So what's the point? Don't you believe a filter can flow 1.3 gpm of cold oil?

I really want to know how you came up with the theory that:

"Under this filter's testing:

18-Oct-03 10 Fram PH30 20 13.25 6.75 5.26 1.4444 2.024 New

..the engine would always be 2/3 of the relative resistance to the filter."


Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
That is, whatever pressure is developed in the acceleration of the oil through the collective orifices of the filter, generally speaking, is minor to what pressure is developed accelerating the oil through the engine. You can probably exchange "power required as evidenced by pressure alterations" if you'll entertain the notion.


Pressure is not developed by accelerating the oil. Is that what you really mean? Are you saying that when a fluid goes through something like a small orifice that more pressure is created out of magic somehow? It's just a strange way to word something. In actuality, pressure is produced solely by the pump based on how much flow is being forced through a fixed resistance path. As the flow progresses through the flow path, pressure is being lost all along the path from start to finish. Each pressure drop along the way is dependent on each specific restriction found throughout the flow path. As you know, all the specific pressure drops must at up to the supply pressure since the flow is exiting at ATM pressure (0 gauge psi). A filter drops the pressure slightly, the main bearings drop the pressure a lot, lifters drop is some, cam bearings, etc, until the oil exits out into the engine's sump where the pressure is zero psi.

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
In a positive displacement environment, nothing flows faster. It may flow easier.


Not real sure what you're after with that statement. The positive displacement flow will change velocity accordingly as it goes through small or large cross sectional areas throughout the flow path. When it goes into a small tube it's flow speed increases (it will be "screaming" as you've said before) ... when it goes in a big cavity the flow speed decreases (in to a big oil filter can for instance). Isn't this basically what you've described before? Guess what ... this is exactly Bernoulli's effect. I knew you'd like that tid-bit.
wink.gif


Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Again, while not specifically manipulated for proving your point, it's misleading. It can only be used in a comparative manner for most sensible views.


Yes, that filter test was for "comparative purposes". I don't think it's misleading at all. The fact is, oil filters create a pressure drop across them with flow - it is that simple. And actually, flowing 1.3 gpm of 10w-30 oil at 10 deg C through an oil filter does seem pretty realistic to me. Until you can rig up an accurate flow meter and filter delta-P gauge on a car that puts out some decent oil pump volume, and show me the actual oil flow rate and corresponding PSID with engine at high RPM with cold oil ... only then I might say the pressure drop across an oil filter is negligible IF the PSID is small. Otherwise, I'm betting it's going to be much more than you think it is.
 
Quote:
If you choke the flow down to a trickle then you essentially make every pressure drop a very small amount. And if you plugged the outlet all together there would be zero pressure drop anywhere because the flow would be zero. So what's the point? Don't you believe a filter can flow 1.3 gpm of cold oil?


Did I say reduce flow? A river, traveling through a rapids or flat, has no change in flow rate. The velocity, and the "choke" is altered.

Quote:
I really want to know how you came up with the theory that:

"Under this filter's testing:

18-Oct-03 10 Fram PH30 20 13.25 6.75 5.26 1.4444 2.024 New

..the engine would always be 2/3 of the relative resistance to the filter."


How hard is it for you to understand that you have two resistors in a ratio to each other. Apply any pressure you want ...pass any current and the ratio will be the same (reactive elements, if any, ignored for the moment).

(applying your style) Anyone knows that. Are you saying that this is something new to you? The model the tester presented had 2/3 pressure down stream of the filter ...or (would be) engine.

Now, add a substantial restriction to the downstream (no difference in flow) ..and that PSID will compress. The pressure dissipated accelerating the oil through the orifice of the filter will be minor compared to the pressure dissipated over the engine accelerating the oil through it.

Under your universal model, if there was no outlet restriction, while the input pressure would be reduced, the input pressure would also be the PSID. Let's say it was 5. Are you saying that, as you kept the flow state constant, that THAT 5PSID would be maintained ..regardless of how you effected total pressure by reducing the cross section of the outlet (or lengthened it)??

Flow is flow, right? No. Those pressure alterations would be in ratio to each other.

Quote:
Pressure is not developed by accelerating the oil. Is that what you really mean?


Are you saying that you ARE this one dimensional and can't think one inch outside the box in alternative thinking?

Drop or develop ..it's the same thing. The difference is that in a positive displacement situation it's more indicative of the physical events taking place. As you add restriction, through viscosity ..the pressure is "backed up". YES ..the internal pump pressure (A VARIABLE AMOUNT DEPENDING ON WHAT RESISTANCE IT SEES) is "developed" over the restriction. This is a common term with high impedance inputs and whatnot. It would be hard to imagine that you're this educated without integrating this.

Stating it this way you avoid looking at it like a water faucet or garden hose. You merely regard it as a flow dictated circuit ..which it is. Everything else will be variable ..but NOT THE FLOW. Resistance will be variable with viscosity ..pressure will vary with resistance. FLOW is the only fundamental that alters the other two ..the other two cannot alter flow. Here's where you're seeing what you want to see. 1 gpm is still 1 gpm. The pressure and resistance will vary ..but 1 gpm is still 1 gpm. It never changes from one gpm (use whatever number you please). When I say flow dictated circuit ..it is at any flow rate. Take any rate you please, just consider it a constant in THAT moment. The pressure, a component of resistance under flow, will VARY. The flow, will not change and will be the ULTIMATE determining factor of WHAT pressure is seen based on the FLOW passing through the resistance AT THAT TIME.

Quote:
As the flow progresses through the flow path, pressure is being lost all along the path from start to finish.


Sure, you can state it this way, except that if you added additional resistance, you would also add additional pressure. Hence the concept of "loss" is not indicative of the physical events taking place. You're "adding" resistance ..and therefore, adding additional pressure to the circuit.

If I add resistance, does the supply pressure approach closer the the relief limit ..ie GO UP? YES OR NO? See how easy that was to see?? Did I, in doing so, "develop" more pressure?? YES OR NO?

This is not all that hard to grip. You can cite anything you please, but there is nothing "wrong" with using those terms ..which MUCH more clearly show the physical events as they occur. You can complicate it if it makes you feel better.

Quote:
Not real sure what you're after with that statement.


It's very simple. 1 gpm is 1 gpm. The difference will be the power required to move it. That stress, power, pressure, force ..may vary. The flow does not. Got an argument with that?

Quote:
Until you can rig up an accurate flow meter and filter delta-P gauge on a car that puts out some decent oil pump volume, and show me the actual oil flow rate and corresponding PSID with engine at high RPM with cold oil ... only then I might say the pressure drop across an oil filter is negligible IF the PSID is small. Otherwise, I'm betting it's going to be much more than you think it is.


Ah ..so I need an accurate flow meter to be "true", huh?
LOL.gif


Normal differential gauges and upstream downstream pressures won't be valid on any engine ..under any conditions ..and even if they were, would be in no way indicative of what any engine/filter combination sees at any time.


I see
LOL.gif


Next!



The only time a filter can be a factor in terms of resistance is at the extremes. Take any size conduit that you want ..make it as big as you want. Move ENOUGH stuff through it and it will eventually become a factor. The likelihood of this occurring in the vast majority of engine/filter combo's is nil.

There will always be exceptions. Unless your exceptional ..or special ..(along with your education) ..I doubt you'll ever need to worry about it.
 
Quote:
Pressure is not developed by accelerating the oil. Is that what you really mean?


Let me expand on this a moment (edit time - I need to do this pony style).

Let's go back here:

1gpm passing through a 1/2" pipe
1gpm passing through a 1/4" pipe

What's the difference?

Velocity and pressure (I'll leave it in your terms)

Got that?

Good.

Now put the 1/4" pipe on the end of the 1/2" pipe. What MUST the fluid do upon encountering the 1/4" pipe? Hint: It ACCELERATES!!!!!. Now it has about 3X the velocity. The pressure reading, at the point of transition, is the force/power/whatever required to accelerate the fluid to that flow rate ..over that length of conduit ...because ..it's a flow dictated circuit of 1gpm (for no other reason that I say so for this demonstration). The velocity will vary ..the pressure will vary ..but the flow will be constant. Now apply any flow rate you want, and the view is the same. The pressure is how velocity and/or acceleration is expressed in a positive displacement environment.

Tell me you've never used analogs? This is no more or less than that.

You can view it in your terms if you please, but there's nothing wrong with what I just said. It's far more indicative of the physical events as they occur.

Simple enough??
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

How hard is it for you to understand that you have two resistors in a ratio to each other. Apply any pressure you want ...pass any current and the ratio will be the same (reactive elements, if any, ignored for the moment).

(applying your style) Anyone knows that. Are you saying that this is something new to you? The model the tester presented had 2/3 pressure down stream of the filter ...or (would be) engine.

Now, add a substantial restriction to the downstream (no difference in flow) ..and that PSID will compress. The pressure dissipated accelerating the oil through the orifice of the filter will be minor compared to the pressure dissipated over the engine accelerating the oil through it.


I’m really getting tired of going round-n-round with you on the same old bullsheeeet.
LOL.gif
Seems you are all over the place with your thinking at times. Makes it real hard to have any kind of constructive discussion.

So, let’s use your system “resistance ratio” thoughts. Yeah, I agree and fully understand that there is a total resistance of the flow path which is the sum of the filter resistance plus the engine resistance. If you don’t agree with that, then you don’t agree with yourself, which actually has happened in these discussions because you’ve contradicted yourself more than a few times.
wink.gif


So, let’s say an oil pump has a relief valve setting of 120 psi. Let’s say the pump is supplying oil flow at 100 psi (it’s not in relief). Let’s say that the engine’s flow path is 9/10 ths of the total system flow restriction, and the oil filter is only 1/10 th. So, that means there would be 10 PSID across the filter and 90 PSID across the engine in this particular case ... for a total pressure loss = 100 psi, which is the difference between the pump supply pressure and the exit pressure of 0 psi at the sump.

The 10 PSID across the filter in this case is certainly measureable and could be significant IF the filter’s bypass was not set correctly for a particular vehicle application.

Let’s go a step further and look at this Subaru oiling system in this case. Since the oil system specs say that it can flow 12.4 gpm at 43 psi with 176 deg F oil, this tells me right off that the engine’s flow path is not very restrictive. Let’s say it is 4/5 ths the total system restriction, and the filter is 1/5 th. So the max flow and hence max pressure drops throughout the system will occur when the oil pump is in relief mode – 85 psi in this case. So we have 85 psi to dissipate from inlet to outlet of the oil flow path. So, if 4/5 ths of the flow is dissipated in the engine, then 1/5 th is dissipated in the filter. This means there is a 17 PSID across the filter and a 68 PSID across the engine flow circuit in this particular flow case. In the Subaru example, the estimated 17 PSID is only 6 psi below the filter’s bypass setting of 23 psi.

The bottom line is still the fact that the more flow you put through a fixed flow resistance (including an oil filter – crazy isn’t it that even a filter must obey the laws of fluid flow
wink.gif
), the more pressure drop (PSID) you will see. In the case of the Subaru example, it can be seen that the more free flowing the system is (less restriction), and higher volume output the oil pump has, the more filter PSID you will achieve. Again, that is why Subaru has specified a 23 psi bypass valve on their oil filter for this car.

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

Under your universal model, if there was no outlet restriction, while the input pressure would be reduced, the input pressure would also be the PSID. Let's say it was 5. Are you saying that, as you kept the flow state constant, that THAT 5PSID would be maintained ..regardless of how you effected total pressure by reducing the cross section of the outlet (or lengthened it)??

Flow is flow, right? No. Those pressure alterations would be in ratio to each other.


No, I’m not saying what’s shown in red text in your quote. IF you “reduced the cross section of the outlet” then you have INCREASED the resistance to flow. When you increase the resistance to flow but DON’T CHANGE the flow rate, the ONLY thing that can happen is a HIGHER PSID will be produced. This is exactly why a filter with a more resistive element produces a higher PSID with the same flow conditions. That is exactly what that motorcycle filter test proved.

Anyway ... can’t address everything you’ve spit back at this point. I spend way too much time going “round ‘n round” with this stuff as it is.
18.gif
crazy2.gif
LOL.gif
grin2.gif
 
Quote:
So, let’s use your system “resistance ratio” thoughts. Yeah, I agree and fully understand that there is a total resistance of the flow path which is the sum of the filter resistance plus the engine resistance. If you don’t agree with that, then you don’t agree with yourself, which actually has happened in these discussions because you’ve contradicted yourself more than a few times. ;\)


No problem.

Quote:
So, let’s say an oil pump has a relief valve setting of 120 psi. Let’s say the pump is supplying oil flow at 100 psi (it’s not in relief). Let’s say that the engine’s flow path is 9/10 ths of the total system flow restriction, and the oil filter is only 1/10 th. So, that means there would be 10 PSID across the filter and 90 PSID across the engine in this particular case ... for a total pressure loss = 100 psi, which is the difference between the pump supply pressure and the exit pressure of 0 psi at the sump.


No problem.

Quote:
The 10 PSID across the filter in this case is certainly measureable and could be significant IF the filter’s bypass was not set correctly for a particular vehicle application.


No problem if that's what it is.

So? You've just magically produced a scenario where you have 10 PSID across the filter. Why not 20..30..40?

(sigh) ....How do I know that 100 psi applied to a given filter will produce the 9/10 split between the engine and the filter? How do you know it? You don't. My point was in regard to the test that you cited as living proof of your assertions was setup in a manner where there would always be a sizable PSID across the filter since the downstream pressure (with all the usual caveats) was always going to be around 65%. Raise or lower volume to produce a bypass event. Very easy to produce PSID ..and therefore easy to "make" a bypass event.

Quote:
Let’s go a step further and look at this Subaru oiling system in this case. Since the oil system specs say that it can flow 12.4 gpm at 43 psi with 176 deg F oil, this tells me right off that the engine’s flow path is not very restrictive.


No problem ..so far.. again, you default at the extreme for whatever reason you need to. I can't quite figure how this applies to too much outside of that narrow confine ..but let's go back and rehash it. I tend to agree with this, but with you it's merely a setup for something that won't necessarily flush.

Quote:
Let’s say it is 4/5 ths the total system restriction, and the filter is 1/5 th.


When? I see you constructing a given pre-packaged scenario here. Try and define the difference between revealing something, and configuring something to work out the way you want it to.
56.gif



Quote:
So the max flow and hence max pressure drops throughout the system will occur when the oil pump is in relief mode – 85 psi in this case.


How do you figure? In relief mode:

A: You have less than max flow
54.gif

B: You DO have max pressure applied
C: You can have 85lb and be in relief at virtually NO VOLUME to the engine (startup and until the fluid gets moving).

You haven't qualified the conditions well enough. You've just stated that something is so without thinking it out too far.

Maximum possible flow will go to the engine (whatever that may be). Maximum pressure is applied (and can be exceeded). The difference between flow at 85lb in relief and 85lb out of relief will be the difference between the flow seen by the engine vs. the total flow output of the pump. The difference in pressure (drop, if you must) across the engine (due to the flow passing through it) and the pressure applied will determine the pressure differential across the filter. Once the flow is unified (a single flow) the engine will drop (if you insist) more pressure due to more flow going through it (buffoons will admit this) ..YET THE APPLIED PRESSURE WILL REMAIN THE SAME @ 85LB OUT OF RELIEF.


The differential across the filter will evaporate to next to nothing.

A CHILD CAN REASON THIS (at this point, anyway).

None of the above has once challenged the flow limitations of the filter. You seem to obsess on this aspect of the filter that is so rare ..all for what?



That's enough for now. Yes, if he's going to operate @ 5000 rpm ..he'll need a higher bypass rated filter just as much as he does while he's in relief (many ..many..many more times) at cold start and through the warm up process ...and most of it from idle through the point of dropping below 85lb of pressure regardless of the volume output of the pump for a goooooooood long way up to peak volume capability.
 
Let me give you this last demonstration here

We'll use the following givens (adjust as needed)

85lb relief limit
23lb bypass valve setting


85lbs in relief

Maximum differential across filter 23lb

Readings (not given for the truth in a Subaru - only stating it for a generic 85lb relief limit pump and "a filter" with a 23lb bypass valve:

Reading above/below filter

85 - 23 = 62lb across engine. Got that? Good.

Now what occurs when MORE flow is channeled to the engine as less flow exits the relief port returning to either the sump or the suction side of the pump

85lb - (?) = MORE THAN 62lb due to more flow - filter can NO LONGER DROP 23lb
Increase flow

85lb - (?)= EVEN CLOSER TO 85lb due to even more flow through the engine. Filter drops even less than before.

85lb -(?) engine pressure drop increases EVEN MORE and approaches EVEN closer to the PEAKED 85 EFFFIN POUNDS

AND THE SUPPLY IS STILL 85 EFFIN Pounds!!! Where did the PSID go? It evaporated!!!!!!


QED

Please ..no more ..
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

So? You've just magically produced a scenario where you have 10 PSID across the filter. Why not 20..30..40?

(sigh) ....How do I know that 100 psi applied to a given filter will produce the 9/10 split between the engine and the filter? How do you know it? You don't.


Agreed ... NOBODY knows unless they do some flow vs. pressure testing with instrumentation on an actual vehicle’s oiling system – so neither one of us can claim they know the real split. You have “guesstimated” a few times yourself. But at least the example gives an ideal of how the filter vs. engine resistance ratio to oil flow will play a part on how an oil filter


Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

My point was in regard to the test that you cited as living proof of your assertions was setup in a manner where there would always be a sizable PSID across the filter since the downstream pressure (with all the usual caveats) was always going to be around 65%. Raise or lower volume to produce a bypass event. Very easy to produce PSID ..and therefore easy to "make" a bypass event.


The key to all of these discussions is that certainly are instances when there can be enough PSID across a filter to create unwanted bypass events. This is why it’s so important that an oil filter has a bypass setting designed adequately for the application the filter is for. Subaru specifying a 23 psi bypass valve reflects just that ... because if it was set much lower (like 8-10 psi), then there are going to be WAY more bypass events going on, which could be detrimental in the long run.

The cycle filter testing IMO wasn’t so far removed for practicality. Do you think an engine could flow 1.3 gpm of cold (10 deg C) 10w-30 oil during a cold start/run use? I think it could ... and therefore, any of those tested oil filters on an engine that could produce that same flow would show the same PSID as in that bench test. Some of those PSIDs were probably up at or very close to the bypass setting. So, there really isn’t a big surprise there, as I’m sure there are thousands of oil filters in use that go into bypass mode to some degree during cold start/run use. The frequency and level of the bypass events is still dependant on the overall flow design of the oil filter AND engine’s oiling system, and how they both work together as a system.


Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

Quote:
Let’s go a step further and look at this Subaru oiling system in this case. Since the oil system specs say that it can flow 12.4 gpm at 43 psi with 176 deg F oil, this tells me right off that the engine’s flow path is not very restrictive.


No problem ..so far.. again, you default at the extreme for whatever reason you need to. I can't quite figure how this applies to too much outside of that narrow confine ..but let's go back and rehash it. I tend to agree with this, but with you it's merely a setup for something that won't necessarily flush.


LOL.gif


Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

Quote:
Let’s say it is 4/5 ths the total system restriction, and the filter is 1/5 th.


When? I see you constructing a given pre-packaged scenario here. Try and define the difference between revealing something, and configuring something to work out the way you want it to.
56.gif



You’re kind of paranoid I see.
wink.gif
Of course a scenario has to be “constructed” to get point across. You do it all the time too. I don’t think it’s that unrealistic. It doesn’t have to be 100% realistic to describe the physics.


Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

Quote:
So the max flow and hence max pressure drops throughout the system will occur when the oil pump is in relief mode – 85 psi in this case.


How do you figure? In relief mode:

A: You have less than max flow
54.gif

B: You DO have max pressure applied
C: You can have 85lb and be in relief at virtually NO VOLUME to the engine (startup and until the fluid gets moving).

You haven't qualified the conditions well enough. You've just stated that something is so without thinking it out too far.


OK, let me explain. Please realize that anytime the oil pump is in relief mode that this point is where the max flow to the filter/engine circuit occurs – depending on the oil viscosity of course. This is kind of tricky to comprehend (and describe too), so stay with me.

Your item A) above. Yes, when the oil pump is in relief mode “you have less than max flow” ... BUT really only less than the possible max the pump could have produced IF it wasn’t in relief mode. Since it IS in relief mode, then the oil volume that actually goes through the filter/engine flow path IS the maximum you can ever achieve (with xyz oil viscosity of course) because this is the maximum pressure that can ever be put on the system. With higher pressure you get more flow. So, max flow ALWAYS happens when the oil pump is putting out max pressure at its relief setting. Keep in mind that the oil pump COULD produce more pressure and flow if it could go above the relief point.

Your item B) above. Yes, agreed. And just as I explained above, this also correlates to having the max possible flow going to the filter/engine. The pump DOES put out more flow, but the excess volume gets spit back to the sump, and the volume going to the filter/engine remains constant at the pumps relief pressure point.

Your item C) above. Same principle. In the case you site in item C), you are still at the max flow that is POSSIBLE under those conditions. In other words, you can NOT flow more than what will flow with 85 psi trying to push the oil through the flow path. We both know that as the oil starts warming up, the then the actual flow VOLUME will also increase. Imagine the oil pump is in relief mode at 85 psi instantly from cold start to full oil temp. Of course the flow volume will be a lot smaller at cold start then at full operating temperature ... BUT, during the whole warm-up period, the MAX POSSIBLE flow to the filter/engine was always maxed out because the oil supply pressure was always at the max possible of 85 psi. Look at it from the supply pressure point just downstream of the relief valve. Look at the pressure and flow volume at that point, not at the point between the oil pump and relief valve.


Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

Maximum possible flow will go to the engine (whatever that may be). Maximum pressure is applied (and can be exceeded). The difference between flow at 85lb in relief and 85lb out of relief will be the difference between the flow seen by the engine vs. the total flow output of the pump.


Well, IMO ... “technically”, the flow coming out of the pump right at the 85 psi relief point is just on the verge of splitting between the filter/engine and sump. This is a bad pressure to talk about flow split because the spit is ill defined right at the relief setting. We both know and could say that if the pump outlet was say between 1 and 80 psi then there should be no slit, and all the pump’s output volume goes to the filter/engine. But if the pump’s output pressure hit 85 psi, and the pump’s RPM was then still increasing at this point, (remember that a PD pump’s RPM is key here), then the oil pump WILL put out more volume, but any volume in excess of what can be pushed through at 85 psi to the filter/engine will be spit out the relief valve to the sump.


Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

The difference in pressure (drop, if you must) across the engine (due to the flow passing through it) and the pressure applied will determine the pressure differential across the filter. Once the flow is unified (a single flow) the engine will drop (if you insist) more pressure due to more flow going through it (buffoons will admit this) ..YET THE APPLIED PRESSURE WILL REMAIN THE SAME @ 85LB OUT OF RELIEF.

The differential across the filter will evaporate to next to nothing.

A CHILD CAN REASON THIS (at this point, anyway).

None of the above has once challenged the flow limitations of the filter. You seem to obsess on this aspect of the filter that is so rare ..all for what?


Now, now ... I’m sure a child would actually have no idea whatsoever what any of this discussion means. I haven’t seen but a few comments made from other members here with regards to our detailed discussions, so apparently either everyone else besides you and me fully understand it, or else they don’t want to even get involved because they don’t understand it.

I think you’ve mis-read or misinterpreted (“read between the lines”) some things I’ve tired to say in some of these discussions. All of my discussions and examples are assumed to be after the engine has started and the oil pressure has come up and has filled every nook and cranny of the oiling system with flowing oil – ie, “steady oil flow” conditions. I really don’t care about the instantaneous physics going on here – ie, starting a cold engine with a dry filter and engine galleys not filled up.

You think that “the difference across the filter will evaporate to next to nothing”. Well, it really DEPENDS on a number of things. As we have hashed over more than once on this, the engine’s oil flow path resistance will dominate in determining exactly what flow rate goes through the filter/engine flow path. No agreement there ... and YES, the engine flow path WILL be more restrictive than the oil filter ... BUT, just how much more? This is the KEY to this whole discussion. Not every engine will have the same flow resistance. The Subaru in question obviously seems to have an oiling system that is quite a bit less restrictive than most cars on the road, and this DOES play a part on how the oil filter must be designed for an engine application like this. That has been my main focus in these discussions all along. Yeah, it might be it a so called “rare case”, so why always try to divert from this and always assume it’s like all the other cars on the road? – I’m not claiming that EVERY oil filter might have some flow/PSID/bypass issue.

But in a “rare case” like this, the flow limitations of the filter could certainly be “challenged” by the application – that specifically being that using a filter with the wrong bypass setting on an engine like the Subaru could certainly cause excessive bypass events, which could lead to other problems as one member posted about (debris in the turbo oil line screen filter that eventually chokes oil to the turbo and smokes it.).


Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

That's enough for now. Yes, if he's going to operate @ 5000 rpm ..he'll need a higher bypass rated filter just as much as he does while he's in relief (many ..many..many more times) at cold start and through the warm up process ...and most of it from idle through the point of dropping below 85lb of pressure regardless of the volume output of the pump for a goooooooood long way up to peak volume capability.



***? ... I can’t believe it, after all of that. You’ve just confirmed what I’ve been claiming (and have said) all along! It’s a miracle!
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Let me give you this last demonstration here

We'll use the following givens (adjust as needed)

85lb relief limit
23lb bypass valve setting

85lbs in relief

Maximum differential across filter 23lb

Readings (not given for the truth in a Subaru - only stating it for a generic 85lb relief limit pump and "a filter" with a 23lb bypass valve:

Reading above/below filter

85 - 23 = 62lb across engine. Got that? Good.

Now what occurs when MORE flow is channeled to the engine as less flow exits the relief port returning to either the sump or the suction side of the pump


Gotta jump in right here. Here’s the clincher. There can NOT be more flow going to the filter/engine if the pump goes below relief pressure and puts out less pressure than 85 psi – it is impossible. The basic phenomena that causes the pump to go into bypass is the fact that the pump’s outlet pressure is increasing (due to trying to force the oil down a path of resistance) as the pump's output volume increases due to running it at a higher and higher RPM. That's the whole principle behind a PD pump ... it's output volume is basically a liner function of the RPM it is driven at.

This could be were some of you thinking is off. You see, the more supply pressure there is coming out of an oil pump, then the more flow there will be due to running it at higher and higher RPM (everything else being constant – keep that in mind). There can NOT be more oil flow at a supply pressure of say 70 psi (pump out of relief mode) than at 85 psi (pump at or well into relief mode). This is because (read carefully) as the pump goes below 85 psi, the flow will also decrease accordingly (assuming everything else is constant like the circuit resistance and oil viscosity). Remember with a PD pump, the output volume is a function of it’s RPM.

The oil pump can NOT force any more flow down a fixed resistance path when it’s output pressure is below the relief pressure. The max oil flow through a fixed resistance path will ALWAYS occur when the oil pump is in relief mode. The max flow volume through the filter/engine circuit occurs at pump relief and that volume will remain CONSTANT from that RPM and above because the pump output pressure is constant at 85 psi. The rest of the EXCESS PUMP VOLUME (created from higher PRM) is spit back to the sump by the relief valve, and that volume of spit back oil is the only stream in the total pump output that increases with increased engine RPMs. Think about it ... you will see it.

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

85lb - (?) = MORE THAN 62lb due to more flow - filter can NO LONGER DROP 23lb
Increase flow

85lb - (?)= EVEN CLOSER TO 85lb due to even more flow through the engine. Filter drops even less than before.

85lb -(?) engine pressure drop increases EVEN MORE and approaches EVEN closer to the PEAKED 85 EFFFIN POUNDS

AND THE SUPPLY IS STILL 85 EFFIN Pounds!!! Where did the PSID go? It evaporated!!!!!!

QED

Please ..no more ..


I really didn’t quite follow your thoughts on the rest here – I think you derailed some on this one. Based on what I wrote above, the ONLY time the supply pressure can be at 85 psi is when the oil pump in relief mode. And as described above, if the filter/engine circuit and oil viscosity remain constant, then so does the oil volume going through the filter/engine if the pump is always in relief mode. If the supply pressure is in relief mode at 85 psi, then the flow through the filter/engine is the highest possible (for any given constant visosity of course). If the supply pressure is say 40 psi (due to lower RPM), then the flow through the filter/engine is less. There is WAY LESS oil volume going through the filter/engine at idle or low RPM (WAY below pump relief) than at redline when the pump maybe WELL INTO relief mode.

Are we converging yet? ... does your head hurt?
wink.gif
Man, this is getting way down into grass roots ... something has to come out of it.
grin2.gif
 
Quote:
Please realize that anytime the oil pump is in relief mode that this point is where the max flow to the filter/engine circuit occurs


Well, I fully realize what occurs when a pump is in relief, I've observed it first hand personally
grin2.gif
I'll assume that you're not qualifying this (left it out) that we're not only fully enveloped, but that all effects of taking a static oil column to max flow capability has been achieved.

Quote:
This is kind of tricky to comprehend (and describe too), so stay with me.


No chit. I've been trying to get you up to speed from the beginning. You continue to be a very stubborn student.

Quote:
Your item A) above. Yes, when the oil pump is in relief mode “you have less than max flow” ... BUT really only less than the possible max the pump could have produced IF it wasn’t in relief mode.


Oh, really? So you've got a scenario where you're at an attenuated pressure and a reduced flow? ..and the pressure (drop) seen across the engine will be less than the (at the moment) FIXED system pressure, right? SP - Ep= ^across the filter, right?? Good ..now you're finally figuring it out!!
thumbsup2.gif



Quote:
With higher pressure you get more flow.


54.gif
You're at an attenuated pressure
54.gif



You can't concede to the obvious. Let's abandon this whole conceptual thing and focus on ultra high volume stuff as it relates to taxing max flow capacity in filters.

Deckard: Bad joke. No really. Bad joke. Go home.


The basement always comes up to meet the ceiling. As that occurs there is no way to maintain a differential across the filter. You get reduced to (what might be described as something like) a valve constant. These relief event scenarios create the most frequent elevated PSID events BY FAR in ANY engine and therefore create the greatest potential for filter bypass events.

I'm getting tired....but I'm in conflict with the Black Knight in Monty Python's The Holy Grail.

You can call it a draw, if you want ..anytime.
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
Your item A) above. Yes, when the oil pump is in relief mode “you have less than max flow” ... BUT really only less than the possible max the pump could have produced IF it wasn’t in relief mode.


Oh, really? So you've got a scenario where you're at an attenuated pressure and a reduced flow? ..and the pressure (drop) seen across the engine will be less than the (at the moment) FIXED system pressure, right? SP - Ep= ^across the filter, right?? Good ..now you're finally figuring it out!!
thumbsup2.gif



I don't think you quite followed me on that one ... probably my fault for not writing is clearly. Let elaborate ... this stuff really is tricky to get across; we BOTH know.

I think I tried to explain it in the last post above also, but here it is again. What I meant by the statement,

"Yes, when the oil pump is in relief mode “you have less than max flow” ... BUT really only less than the possible max the pump could have produced IF it wasn’t in relief mode."

is that the oil pump WILL put out more volume (beyond what it produces right at the 85 psi relief setting) only IF the PRM goes higher, and ONLY the excess output volume produced by the pump beyond the relief point is NOT going to flow through the filter/engine, but only back to the sump. So in essence, when in relief mode "you would have less than (the POSSIBLE) max flow" being produced by the pump actually going to the filter/engine. You are still putting the MAX amount of flow that the filter/engine flow path CAN TAKE at 85 psi, even though you are relieving the EXCESS volume that the oil pump is producing and sending back to the sump via the relief valve. See it?

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
I'm getting tired....but I'm in conflict with the Black Knight in Monty Python's The Holy Grail.

You can call it a draw, if you want ..anytime.


LOL.gif
... yeah, this is one wild arsed discussion. I can go on for a good long time, and we probably are at the "draw" point. With time, some of this stuff will sink in and we can discuss later as it comes up in other threads. You were a difficult but honorable student, grasshopper.
LOL.gif
grin2.gif
11.gif
19.gif
 
Originally Posted By: WagonBoss
After lurking around this site for several years and recently registering I'm compelled to make my first post. I have 2 Subies to maintain and found this a very interesting discussion, though much was far over my head.

I wrote to customer service at Hastings and this is the reply, though not technically helpful I found it to be an honest statement FWIW.

Recently there has been a bit of discussion on Subaru lube filters and the Subaru oil system on enthusiasts forums. The gist is that Subaru recently announced a new filter which the user community believes is produced by Honeywell (Fram) to Subaru specifications. Frankly, there is not much happiness in this new product. The discussion on the oil system indicates that Subaru uses a high volume oil pump and specifies a 23 PSID pressure relief valve.
I have two Subaru cars with the 4 cylinder 2.5 liter non-turbo engine. Both use a LF113 (or the longer LF240). My search through the various filter manufacturers' sites (Hastings/Baldwin, Wix, Fram, and Purolator) reveals that no filters, searched for my application, contains the 23 PSID pressure relief valve as specified. My primary concern is cold flow on startup as these are daily drivers - not a performance application. I use 5w-30 oil as recommended by the owners manual.
Should I be concerned about the difference between the 14 PSID spec on the LF113 and the factory spec of 23 PSID? Is there any technical reason the correct pressure relief is not available? Are there any plans to offer a filter with the correct specification?

Thanks in advance for your help. It is quite bewildering to have this great a variance in specifications.


REPLY:
Thank you for using Hastings Filters. I do not recommend using a filter with a 14-16 psi bypass valve in an application which calls for a filter with a 23 psi by-pass valve. We design our filters with a 3 psi maximum tolerance with regards to bypass valves. Therefore, I doubt that we would cross the new Subaru number to either the LF113 or the LF240. We do have a very similar filter with a 20 psi bypass valve. This is the LF491. If you have further questions, please feel free to contact me.
Cordially,

TRAVIS R. WINBERG
SUPERVISOR OF SERVICE ENGINEERING


I just followed your lead and sent a similar inquiry to WIX. I even went as far as asking them to consider increasing the bypass spring rate to meet the OEM specification if after they have confirmed the 8~11psi spec is indeed accurate. I may have to consider using Purolator if I don't use an OEM filter based on my limit research as they seem to be the closest to matching Subaru's spec: http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/en-us/resources/Popup/Pages/PartDetailPopup.aspx?partnum=PL14612
 
Last edited:
I sent an inquiry a few days ago regarding the Wix recommended filter not meeting the 23psi bypass the manufacturer wants. I asked them to recommend a Wix filter that would work.

Being in Canada, it looks like my question was redirected to "Affinia Group, Wix Division" I responded to the email by sending a link to this thread, and mentioning that the 23psi spec is from factory service manuals. At some point I'll get the Subaru part number for them as well, though really, that should be their job.
_______________________________
Here was the answer

Unfortunatly we are not aware of a 23 psi setting on the valve for that filter and we have a not had any problems or complaints about some one having an H6 and using this filter.
do you happen to have the oe part number so that we can check the valve settings and then we can go from there to find out if it could be a problem.

Thanks
*name edited*
AFFINIA Group Canada, WIX Division
(519) 622-4545 *277
*email edited*
 
Last edited:
Thanks rcy. Looks like you beat me to it :)

The OEM part number (as well as other mfg p/n's) is in this link. Since you already have dialog with WIX, would you mind forwarding this to them? When WIX responds to me, I'll do the same. I just hope we get lucky and get the attention of that one engineer that actually cares to research more into this and provide a technically sound reponse or convince WIX purchasing/planning dept to make a unique application for Subaru.

http://www.bescaredracing.com/sti/oil/filters/sti_oil_filters.xls
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top