BOBISTHEOILGUY FILTER TESTS

Status
Not open for further replies.
Were the pressure drop tests ever conducted with oil in the 200 degree range? I'm wondering how the more restrictive filters like the Pure One perform with the oil at normal operating temps?
I never run my car hard until it's fully up to temp, so the pressure drop might not be a bad thing if it's limited to cooler oil.
 
quote:

Originally posted by harrydog:
Since many of us here are so obsessive (at least I am) about doing the best for our engines, I'm wondering if anyone is using one of these filters.
I'm on the verge of buying one but was hoping for some feedback if anyone has any thoughts.
Seems good - filtering down to 8 microns, very high flow, and very high capacity.
http://www.cmfilters.com/


$100 for a filter!? then $11.00 for a replacement element? Holy crap!
They better be good!

gr_eek2.gif
 
get_sum:

After reading your post I remembered the joys of Kirschov's rules (not sure about the spelling) for AC circuits.

Good thing that you noted that Ohms strictly relates to E&M.
smile.gif
 
quote:

Originally posted by digitaldrifter91:
isnt donaldson down to 9 micron and high flow thanks to their media?

Picked up a Donaldson Endurance for my Dodge w/Cummins, the label says efficiency is 98.7% @ 15 microns, 50% @ 4 microns. So, 2 passes through the filter and all the 4 micron stuff is gone!
pat.gif
 
First off, I'm new to the site and would like to say thanks for putting together this test. I try to take care of my car as well as I can, and understand that it all starts with lubricants, so I'm looking forward to learing a lot on this forum.

Also, I have a situation that might shed more light on this-

quote:

Originally posted by Dan4510:
The new filter is allowing more flow thru the system and keeping the lifters pumped up and lubed, so the noise has gone away.

If I am saying this right, lower pressure means a more free flow of oil.

Dan


I have a 95 Camaro with the LT1 engine in it. I ran the ACdelco ultraguard filters until they became too hard to find around here, then switched to the PureOne. I use Mobil 1 10w30. Now as the testing shows, the PureOne filter was fairly restrictive, and the STP showed less drop in pressure.

The last time I changed my oil, that parts store was out of the ACdelco(not ultraguard) filters, and I refuse to pay $12 for a Mobil 1 filter, so I bought an STP. My oil pressure dropped a little, just enough to be noticeable.

I guess I should say now that I'm thoroughly confused about what filter to use..... I really liked the PureOne, but it looks too restrictive(at least in my limited opinion). The STP looks like it flows fine, but how well does it filter? I get the drift that the ACdelco ultraguards were great filters, but have been for the most part discontinued? Oh well, not to get off topic on this, I think I'll just make another thread
grin.gif


John
 
quote:

Picked up a Donaldson Endurance for my Dodge w/Cummins, the label says efficiency is 98.7% @ 15 microns, 50% @ 4 microns. So, 2 passes through the filter and all the 4 micron stuff is gone!

I don't believe two passes of the subject filter will get 100% of the 4 micron stuff out in 2 passes. The rating of 50% @ 4 microns probably means each pass gets 50% out. That would mean 2 passes get 75% out, 3 passes filter out 87.5%, etc.
 
quote:

Originally posted by Brian Barnhart:

quote:

Picked up a Donaldson Endurance for my Dodge w/Cummins, the label says efficiency is 98.7% @ 15 microns, 50% @ 4 microns. So, 2 passes through the filter and all the 4 micron stuff is gone!

I don't believe two passes of the subject filter will get 100% of the 4 micron stuff out in 2 passes. The rating of 50% @ 4 microns probably means each pass gets 50% out. That would mean 2 passes get 75% out, 3 passes filter out 87.5%, etc.


Note the emoticon in the original post smacking itself on the head for being an idiot.
twak.gif


[ July 28, 2003, 07:28 PM: Message edited by: mrchecker ]
 
quote:

Originally posted by Fastzntn:
First off, I'm new to the site and would like to say thanks for putting together this test. I try to take care of my car as well as I can, and understand that it all starts with lubricants, so I'm looking forward to learing a lot on this forum.

Also, I have a situation that might shed more light on this-

quote:

Originally posted by Dan4510:
The new filter is allowing more flow thru the system and keeping the lifters pumped up and lubed, so the noise has gone away.

If I am saying this right, lower pressure means a more free flow of oil.

Dan


I have a 95 Camaro with the LT1 engine in it. I ran the ACdelco ultraguard filters until they became too hard to find around here, then switched to the PureOne. I use Mobil 1 10w30. Now as the testing shows, the PureOne filter was fairly restrictive, and the STP showed less drop in pressure.

The last time I changed my oil, that parts store was out of the ACdelco(not ultraguard) filters, and I refuse to pay $12 for a Mobil 1 filter, so I bought an STP. My oil pressure dropped a little, just enough to be noticeable.

I guess I should say now that I'm thoroughly confused about what filter to use..... I really liked the PureOne, but it looks too restrictive(at least in my limited opinion). The STP looks like it flows fine, but how well does it filter? I get the drift that the ACdelco ultraguards were great filters, but have been for the most part discontinued? Oh well, not to get off topic on this, I think I'll just make another thread
grin.gif


John




[ July 29, 2003, 10:37 AM: Message edited by: VQ35DE ]
 
quote:

Originally posted by Fastzntn:
First off, I'm new to the site and would like to say thanks for putting together this test. I try to take care of my car as well as I can, and understand that it all starts with lubricants, so I'm looking forward to learing a lot on this forum.

Also, I have a situation that might shed more light on this-

quote:

Originally posted by Dan4510:
The new filter is allowing more flow thru the system and keeping the lifters pumped up and lubed, so the noise has gone away.

If I am saying this right, lower pressure means a more free flow of oil.

Dan


I have a 95 Camaro with the LT1 engine in it. I ran the ACdelco ultraguard filters until they became too hard to find around here, then switched to the PureOne. I use Mobil 1 10w30. Now as the testing shows, the PureOne filter was fairly restrictive, and the STP showed less drop in pressure.

The last time I changed my oil, that parts store was out of the ACdelco(not ultraguard) filters, and I refuse to pay $12 for a Mobil 1 filter, so I bought an STP. My oil pressure dropped a little, just enough to be noticeable.

I guess I should say now that I'm thoroughly confused about what filter to use..... I really liked the PureOne, but it looks too restrictive(at least in my limited opinion). The STP looks like it flows fine, but how well does it filter? I get the drift that the ACdelco ultraguards were great filters, but have been for the most part discontinued? Oh well, not to get off topic on this, I think I'll just make another thread
grin.gif


John


You can use www.partsvoice.com to look for the GM part # for the entire U.S. I used this site to locate MANY Ultraguard Gold (UPF) filters and it will be easy to find the UPF-44 if that is the one you use, but REMEMBER to search by the GM part# ( I think it has 7 digits).
 
quote:

Originally posted by sbc350gearhead:
This is not my area of expertise.....so let me see if I understand. Restriction in a filter means nothing as far as oil flow. The bypass is there only to protect the filter. The oil pump will provide the same volume of oil whether it is though the filter or through the bypass.....correct?

I'm no expert either, but I have done some research on the subject.

Pressure is a measure of the fluid's resistance to flow. It is commonly called back pressure. I'll use back pressure to to mean a fluid's resistance to flow including restrictions like a filter or small passage way.

There is also a term called pressure drop. Pressure drop is the difference between two points, one up line, and one down line. Flow results when the upline pressure is greater then the down line pressure. The greater the difference, the greater the flow. This is true for a constant line with no restriction besides the line itself.

For a large hose with little restriction, oil flowing will result in pressure x. Increasing the flow will require more pressure because the oil will have more resistance at the higher flow rate. So, increased flow results in increased back pressure which increases pressure.

When a filter is put in the system, back pressure is increased. The result is either increased pressure or decreased flow. In the case of these test we have maintained inline pressure, so flow is decreased. You can see the decreased flow on the out line represented by the decrease in pressure where the back pressure is relatively unchanged. The resisitance at the out line is always the hose which ends in the five gallon bucket. That is constant, and does not change.

In the case of an by-pass valve you are increasing flow which increases back pressure resulting in increased pressure. The by-pass valve opens when a pressure is exceeded. That will allow flow to continue without an increase in pressure by reducing the increase in back pressure.

So it seems reasonable that the oil pump will provide the same flow rate of oil only at a higher pressure, that is until the relief valve springs to relieve the pressure.
 
If I'm not mistaken, Bob is adjusting the inlet pressure for each filter to reach 40psi and then checking the outlet pressure? If that is the case we are unable to tell what backpressure is present? Am I mistaken Bob or are you not making any adjustments of the inlet pressure?
dunno.gif
 
quote:

In the Amsoil dual installation, there needs to be some way to allow the oil to flow from this high resistance bypass filter into the pressurized oil system. Remember, flow is like a river...it only flows "down hill" to a lower pressure point. So...what Amsoil does is to use that restrictor assembly to reduce the system pressure enough to allow the correct flow from the bypass filter.

This should not be correct. If you have any available flow the flow will be divided proportionally between the two conduits. If you have a 1 guage welding cable as your starter cable ...and run a .00000000001 mm wire in parallel ..that wire will see current (just consider it one of the strands of the bigger cable). This is a basic law of all flows whether electron or fluid.

I don't see why that little pressure valve exists in the dual oil filter/bypass set up. The flow should naturally divide between the two based upon their respective resistance to(or "conductance" for)flow.

This thread was hard to read through in it's entirety ...hence I could have stepped on someone else's revolation here.
 
quote:

If I'm not mistaken, Bob is adjusting the inlet pressure for each filter to reach 40psi and then checking the outlet pressure? If that is the case we are unable to tell what backpressure is present? Am I mistaken Bob or are you not making any adjustments of the inlet pressure?

I wonder what the situation would be if he merely had the same pump output on the various filters. The oil pump is positive displacement. At xxx rpm is will flow so much oil. This would be a better test for filter resistance ...but the reading might be much lower and variable in amplitude and differential making it hard to compare.

The way I guess you could do this is to set up a metered orfice (at the end of the return line) with a fixed oil pump rpm and oil temp that would give you a stable "static baseline flow" (without any filters installed). Then the filter would only "add" inline restriction ...and a subsequent pressure/flow drop.

Right now were providing the same supply pressure ...which could vary considerably on the actual flow through the filter(s).

[ September 02, 2003, 11:04 AM: Message edited by: Gary Allan ]
 
Bob,

I vote for a constant input pressure. The oil pump in the engine is doing that, if we make the assumption that the oil pump's pressure control valve regulates the pressure perfectly (which it doesn't--it'll give slightly higher oil pressure with higher resistance). What would actually happen inside the engine?...at a constant, say, 2000 rpm the oil pump turns 1000 rpm, and the pressure control valve modulates to maintain nearly constant pressure, right? The voltage change on your rig with different rates of flow would correspond to the change in position of the pressure control valve...don't keep it constant. The pressure control valve is just a simple spring-loaded plunger, isn't it? It moves and compresses the spring more with higher pressure, and this movement opens the port to dump more pump output in order to maintain near-constant pressure. This degree of spring compression is a good analog for the difference in voltage in your test rig.

Temperature of the oil is not a direct consideration; the working viscosity is the important factor. Can you find an oil which, at room temperature, has the same viscosity as SAE 30 oil @ 180°?

I'd put an orifice on the outlet side of the test assembly to simulate the resistance to flow the engine's oil has when it enters the oil passages...you'd have to experiment to find the right size orifice to give realistic pressures.

Now, I'd measure the difference between the constant inlet pressure and the actual outlet pressure of each filter element.

And, if your latest iteration of the test rig has some of these features, well, I'm out of date as usual.


Ken

[ September 02, 2003, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: Ken2 ]
 
Gary Allan

I agree with what you say, but in both the electrical example and in the oil flow through both full flow and bypass fiters in parallel, the flow through the high resistance path would be insignicant and do no good. The added wire would not significantly reduce the load on the big wire, and the bypass filter would not get the 5-10% oil flow needed to clean the oil.


Ken
 
quote:

and the pressure control valve modulates to maintain nearly constant pressure, right?

Maybe ...maybe not. When most engines are warm ..they never get close the the pressure relief. If that were the case you would never see anything different when the oil was cold. That is, if you see 25 lb while you're cruising at 65 mph ...and you see 45 when you're stone cold ...you never see the pressure relief in service after warm up ...or else you would be at 45 lb (because that is your pressure relief threshold).

The ideal test would have the pump spinning at the exact same speed. This would provide the exact same volume of oil to every filter (it is assumed that the pressure relief springs on the pump are suffient to remain closed). Higher pressures and subsequent pressure drops would indicate more resistance (and alleged filtration).

Currently you can have a wide variation in volume. I can't quite integrate the voltage drop....current draw would be make a little more sense to me ...but still I'd want some type of tach on the shaft of the pump (a little difficult if you don't have access to an optical tach (little reflector that you put on the shaft and a laser type thingie that reads it). Heck any type of traction tach would due (it doesn't have to be true)...you just need to level the playing field by having the pump at the exact same volume for every filter. This would throw out the voltage/current variable all together ...temp too. You can naturally vary the rpms of the pump to see where all the filter have more or less restriction. ..Heck ...plot a graph for each one just like a hp/rpm chart when dyno testing...
 
yes, I would adjust the input pressure to read the same on all oil filters.

I've sat back and been watching posts and I'm trying to figure which is best as I want to redo this whole thing one last time with hopefully with a better snapshot of what we are looking at.

So several questions are coming to mind, should I preset oil pressure with a blank unit, then leaving everything in place, run each filter measuring output, flow diff between in and out, voltage drop on motor all of which being set for constant. I know that the voltage will change due to different back pressure, so by leaving all set by the blank constant, it should provide a constant reading on each filter. For instance, the higher the input pressure from the normal blank pressure, then the higher the resistance to flow. Even though it might show that there is higher output pressure, then to determine drop, sub the output from the input. Also document measured output of total oil in secondary pan for a preset time.

That seems to be the most logical way or will I be missing something here?
 
As a start, I suggest the following:

1) Use an oil that represents the typical viscosity of engine oil at normal operating temperature. That may mean a “thin” oil, or perhaps warm/hot 10W30 etc.
2) Select a representative flow rate (probably around 3-5 gallons per minute) for initial test stand set-up.

I believe the above are absolutely essential to getting data that will lead to correct conclusions about the oil filters tested.

Setting up the test would go something like:

1) Spin on an empty (no filter element) oil filter.
2) Heat up the oil as necessary.
3) Turn on the pump and set the pump RPM to a reasonable speed (1000 RPM?).
4) Adjust the flow control valve (after the oil filter) to achieve the representative flow rate chosen earlier.
5) Hopefully the filter inlet pressure will be around 40-55 psi. If not, the oil pump RPM and flow control valve can be changed to achieve a reasonable inlet pressure. However, when making adjustments to achieve 40-55 psi inlet pressure, make sure the flow rate is still between 3-5 gallons per minute. The pump RPM may end up well above or below 1000 rpm. That’s OK. Having a representative restriction (flow) is more important than pump RPM.

I believe the initial (empty filter) 3-5 gpm flow rate and 40-55 psi reasonably represent a typical engine running down the road.

Now, to test each filter:

1) Make sure the oil is at proper temperature.
2) Spin on the filter being tested.
3) Turn on the pump and run at the RPM set in step 3/5 above.
4) Measure the filter inlet and outlet pressures
5) Measure the flow
6) Don’t touch the flow control valve or the pump RPM. After all, these things are generally fixed in a given engine (pump gearing and engine passages, bearing clearances etc.). And they were initially set to represent an actual engine operating condition.
7) Go back and repeat steps 1 through 5 for each filter.

What you’ll end up with (I think) is flow and pressure data for each filter at an operating point representative of an actual engine. Different filters will likely show some variation in both flow and pressure, just like they would on an engine. And (I think) the purpose of the test is to measure the affects of different oil filters on pressure and flow in an engine.

After gathering filter data in the above manner, it may be determined that cold oil data, dirty oil data, low flow/pressure data (engine idle), or high flow/pressure data (high engine rpm) is also desired. Appropriate changes to the test set-up can then be made to simulate those conditions and gather more data.

My only concern with the test is that the data might not show much difference between filters. Don’t get me wrong, I fully support the test and would like to see the results. However, I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if the variations in flow and pressure between models and brands of “like” filters prove to be rather insignificant.

Oil filter manufacturers design their filters to flow a given amount of oil at a certain pressure drop, and it’s likely that the design goals are nearly the same for all manufacturers. Therefore, I would expect similar flow and pressure data regardless of model or brand of "like" filters tested. If my expectations are wrong
blush.gif
, well, that'll just prove the test that much more useful
cool.gif
.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top