Bypass Filter Test/Particle Count

[Bio-T]

I am running a bypass filter on my 95 PSD. This summer before I do my 3K TP filter change, I am going to take a sample of the oil and do a UOA and a particle count. We had an excellent test done by EkPolk with a particle count. I want to see if the bypass is reducing the particles under 25 micron by a substantial amount. This is a picture of a used TP filter showing the top where the debris is collected. Notice, contrary to some sales pitches by a MFG. of another brand that uses cotton wound filters, the lack of channeling as they claim.

Bottom of a Frantz TP element

[ January 28, 2005, 04:25 PM: Message edited by: rugerman1 ]

 

[msparks]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 59 Vetteman:
[QB]I want to see if the bypass is reducing the particles under 25 micron by a substantial amount.

---

I would hope so. on my sample after about 20,000 on the oil.

My ISO code was 23/21/13.

I had

57,307 ppm @ 2 micron
16,625 ppm @ 5 micron
0 ppm @15 micron
0 ppm @ 25
0 ppm @ 50
0 ppm @ 100

I need to get another one of these done. Do you have a source?

 

[msparks]

FYI,

Here is some info on Partcle counts:
http://www.particle.com/applications_hiac/app213.htm

quote:

---

For many years particle counters have been used to monitor contamination levels in hydraulic fluids in military aircraft. Because of this, many standards have been developed to judge test results. One of the most commonly used standards is IS04406, which was recently updated. Previously, this standard was a two-digit code representing the cumulative particle counts/ml at 5 and 15 µm. These two sizes were selected because it was felt that particles larger than 5 µm would settle and coat the surfaces of the parts, while particles larger than 15 µm could cause excessive wear on machine parts. The new update adds a third digit to the code. The use of this number, representing particles larger than 2 µm, is not mandatory.

Once a sample has been analyzed the ISO code can be applied in two ways. The first method, which is the most commonly used, involves simply reading the code level off the table. First the code for 5 µm is determined, then the code for 15 µm; the two numbers are written separated by a slash. The second method involves plotting the results at 5 and 15 µm on a graph, which has the ISO code overlayed on it. While this method is slightly more involved, it provides more information since it shows the actual distribution curve.

---

 

[oldman]

Blackstone

 

[msparks]

This three-part number is an International Standards Organization Code to illustrate the level of cleanliness of the hydraulic fluid in the unit. The numbers are logarithmic representations of the total number of particles greater than two (2) microns (first number), greater than five (5) microns (second number), and greater than 15 microns (third number) in a one milliliter sample. The larger the ISO Code, the more contaminants, the more potential for wear.

IN ORDER TO INSURE PEAK PERFORMANCE AND EXTENDED OPERATING LIFE OF THE MACHINES, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT AN ISO CODE CLEANLINESS CODE OF 16/14/11, OR BETTER, BE MAINTAINED REGARDLESS OF SYSTEM PRESSURE. THE OIL CANNOT BE TOO CLEAN.

added in edit: Note the above statement is for hydraulic sytems which are about 100 times cleaner than combustion engine. Hence the reason my ISO code is higher than the recommended. I feel that my ISO code is very good as it's pretty darned close to the "standard" for a hydraulic system.

 

[Bio-T]

quote:

---

Originally posted by oldman:
Blackstone

---

Actually, I am going to send it to two labs, Blackstone and one other.

 

[John K]

When I worked at the power plant we monitored the turbine oil and hydraulic fluid for particle counts. When I started we sent them to a lab and they counted them under a microscope. Later we got our own HIAC particle counter. I have trouble remembering for sure, but I thought we ran 50 ml and then doubled the number to express them as particles per 100 ml. GE specs were hard to meet in a coal fired plant, and sampling was a critical step, contamination was very hard to eliminate, and comparing two samples - well, if you were good they'd be close. We'd collect enough to run the test twice on the same sample, and they would usually be close. I seem to remember a SAE Grade 5 or 6?? The ISO method was just starting to be used about the time I retired. MSparks - Don't think expressing the results in ppm is correct..it is the number of particles per the sample size. The standards we were comparing to were expressed as #/100 ml, but I don't remember the ranges....>250, 100, 50, 25, 10 and 5????? They used to sell specially cleaned glass containers to sample them in, you could reuse them if you used specially filtered solvent for cleaning... If we ever got a out of limit result we'd resample and run it again. Lot of resampling was eliminated with the special containers.....

 

[msparks]

quote:

---

Originally posted by John K:
MSparks - Don't think expressing the results in ppm is correct..it is the number of particles per the sample size. The standards we were comparing to were expressed as #/100 ml, but I don't remember the ranges....>250, 100, 50, 25, 10 and 5?????

---

I think your right. I really don't understand the test that well since someone else ran it for me.
I did look at the chart again and one column say's particles per ml and the other is particle size in microns. It's then graphed out for me.

I plan to get another one done someday when I have a little extra money.

I can tell you it won't be this month!!

 

[msparks]

On my graph they compare it to the ISO target numbers. Which I'm just above on the 2 and 5, then for the 10 micron I'm way below the target they have for 15 microns.

Basically my ISO for 15 microns is ISO code 2 which I mistated above at 13.

 

[aldive]

How do you order this test from Blackstone? Cost?

Thanks ....

 

[Bio-T]

quote:

---

Originally posted by aldive:
How do you order this test from Blackstone? Cost?

Thanks ....

---

Go to this link and you should get the answer. It looks like $20 for the oil analysis and $19.50 for the particle count. These are flat rate charges off their site:

http://www.blackstone-labs.com/free_test_kit.html

 

[Tommy]

If your lab is reporting percentage of solids, you are already getting a "particle count" at no extra cost - keep it at 0.1 or lower and you are there!

 

[SPICER]

quote:

---

Originally posted by msparks:

quote:

---

Originally posted by 59 Vetteman:
[QB]I want to see if the bypass is reducing the particles under 25 micron by a substantial amount.

---

I would hope so. on my sample after about 20,000 on the oil.

My ISO code was 23/21/13.

I had

57,307 ppm @ 2 micron
16,625 ppm @ 5 micron
0 ppm @15 micron
0 ppm @ 25
0 ppm @ 50
0 ppm @ 100

I need to get another one of these done. Do you have a source?

---

Is this WITH bypass? Sounds REALLY high! I just got my particle count back. Chevy Duramax Diesel, 38,000 on truck, 16,000 on oil (Delvac 1), Oilguard bypass. ISO 15/14/11. 163 particles at >4 micron, 89 particles at >6 micron, 15 particles at >14 micron. This exceeds hydraulic specs. Your particle count at 5 microns (16,625) is 100 times dirtier than mine at 4 microns (163). SPICER

 

[msparks]

quote:

---

Originally posted by SPICER:
Is this WITH bypass? Sounds REALLY high! I just got my particle count back. Chevy Duramax Diesel, 38,000 on truck, 16,000 on oil (Delvac 1), Oilguard bypass. ISO 15/14/11. 163 particles at >4 micron, 89 particles at >6 micron, 15 particles at >14 micron. This exceeds hydraulic specs. Your particle count at 5 microns (16,625) is 100 times dirtier than mine at 4 microns (163). SPICER

---

I don't know if they were measured the same. I had it done from someone who works a manufacuting facility for free. I really don't know if it was done to any "standard" method or not.

I suppose I'll have to break down and get an offical one next time.

 

[SPICER]

avlube.com now has spectro AND particle count available on their website for $35 for both. George also will follow up with ANY questions you have regarding your analysis. Excellent analysis, excellent follow up service, excellent price, and avlube IS a BITOG supporting vendor. A win win win win. SPICER