Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:38 AM - Re: Re: Oil Filters (Noel Loveys)
2. 06:58 AM - Re: Re: Oil Filters (Tedd McHenry)
3. 07:01 AM - Re: Re: Oil Filters (Doug Dodson)
4. 07:34 AM - Re: Re: Oil Filters (Richard Dudley)
5. 07:46 AM - Re: Oil Filters (Speedy11@aol.com)
6. 10:56 AM - Re: Re: Engines-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 01/17/11 (Gary Vogt)
7. 11:09 AM - Re: Re: Oil Filters (Gary Vogt)
8. 11:11 AM - Re: Re: Oil Filters (Gary Vogt)
9. 11:13 AM - Re: Re: Oil Filters (Gary Vogt)
10. 11:57 AM - Re: Re: Oil Filters (Richard Dudley)
11. 11:59 AM - Re: Re: Oil Filters (Richard Dudley)
12. 07:47 PM - Re: Re: Oil Filters (Gary Vogt)
13. 08:11 PM - Re: Re: Oil Filters (Kelly McMullen)
14. 08:39 PM - Re: Re: Oil Filters (Noel Loveys)
15. 08:51 PM - Re: Re: Oil Filters (Kelly McMullen)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I agree with you Barry except about running the filter for 100 hr. If there
is anything in the filter running it another fifty or in this case 67 hr
won't do anything good for the engine. Change it at the 33 hr with the oil.
In fact if you can't get fresh oil I would recommend changing the filter
anyway.
Oil analysis is something I would recommend for fleet operators... give the
bean counters something to do. As you said without a base line to work form
you won't be able to notice trends in the precipitate. Anyone who is paying
for oil analysis should keep a chart of the results and keep both the chart
and the reports in the engine log. That way as they update the chart after
each report they will have to see if trends continue or if one or more
constituents are increasing.
Noel
From: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of FLYaDIVE
Sent: January 20, 2011 1:39 AM
Subject: Re: Engines-List: Re: Oil Filters
AN OIL ANALYSIS IS A WASTE OF MONEY!
OK, do I have your attention?
Here is why...
Lets say you are running one of the two major manufacture engines and you
have a oil consumption of 1 quart in 10 hours.
This is slightly above average for Lycoming & Continental, usually 1 Qt in 8
to 9 hours is more common.
Next is the quantity of oil your engine holds.
Again for the big two 8 Qts is what is stamped on your dip stick.
BUT! If you put in 8 Qts you are blowing out one Qt in the first hour...
So, 7 Qts is more in line with what you should be using.
So lets use 7 Qts for this exercise.
Now, what kind of oil filter are you using? Lets say you have a Spin On or
ADC filter.
That give you 50 Hours of flight time before you should change your oil.
If you have the standard screen you will be doing an oil change in 25 hours.
But, we will work with 50 hours.
You can do the same math with 25 hours but that will really scare you.
OK, here we go....
50 hours divided by 10 hours per qt = 5 Qts - That means 5 Qts will be added
between oil changes.
If yo want to use 8 hrs per Qt then...
50 / 8 = 6.26 Qts
What does that mean?
Well, When you take your oil sample to ship out for oil analysis you have
already replace ... Wait for it ...
Case #1 --- 5/7ths of your oil capacity. That is 71.4% of the oil capacity
in your engine.
Case #2 --- 6.26/7ths of your oil capacity. That is 89.4% of the oil
capacity in your engine.
SOOoooo What are you really checking? Only the remaining oil after 5/7ths
or 6.26/7ths of the oil has been swapped out.
Now some may say that is OK as long as you always swap out the same amount.
For me that is not good data.
Oh, how much does it cost for oil analysis, I think it is $12 to $15 plus
shipping.
Let's say $15... That is about 1/3 the cost of a case of oil.
Or, 47.6% of the cost of a single oil change. (7 Qts x $4.50/Qt = $31.50)
NOW! You want to do something good for your engine and spend the same
amount of money?
Take that $15 and do an oil change at 33 Hours ... That is 1/3 sooner.
What about the Oil Filter? Change it ONLY at 100 Hour intervals.
You will now have cleaner oil going through your engine AND your filter.
For those of you that are already changing your filter at 100 Hrs ...
Stretch it to 130 Hrs.
One last point. After reading a few oil analysis reports. What one thing
do they all have in common?
There is a statement at the bottom that reads something like this: More
Data is Required for Trend Analysis.
When it comes to this, I have stories for you!
Bottom line: Oil changed regularly does more for an engine and YOUR piece
of mind than any after the fact piece of paper.
Barry
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 8:40 PM, <Speedy11@aol.com> wrote:
Doug,
Nobody is arguing with you. An oil analysis is a great idea. We've all
used the same reasoning you did.
I was offering no technique at all - so there was no anecdotal evidence on
which to base said technique. And I'm not sure what question the word
cautionary begs.
Getting an oil analysis is a great technique. Keep it up.
Stan Sutterfield
Do not archive
In a message dated 1/19/2011 3:06:31 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
engines-list@matronics.com writes:
That technique is based on anecdotal evidence at best. The term
"cautionary" begs the question. You can do what everyone else does, same as
the lemming. Good science is nice, good engineering is even better. Both
require data (or evidence) to in order to follow accepted practice.
Price out for yourself an oil analysis. Familiarize yourself with the
credentials and writings of Mike Busch. Price out an overhaul, then price
out an accident that almost totals the aircraft (assuming you have
insurance). Balance the costs versus the benefits. I have not even asked
you to include an analysis of the cost for injury or death.
Oil analysis can't prevent every bad thing, but knowledge is still power,
and the price of this knowledge is less than that of 3 gallons of fuel. The
science (or engineering) is well founded.
- Doug
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Barry:
By your logic, a person should also self-insure for hull damage, since
they are likely to spend more in the long run by buying insurance.
I'm not saying that's wrong, only pointing out that there are factors
not taken into consideration in your analysis, such as that extra oil
changes give you peace of mind for completely different reasons than
oil analyses do. They're apples and oranges.
Tedd
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I thought it went without saying, but of course oil analysis is about trend
monitoring. A single report has little value. The utility comes by having
a series of reports at regular intervals. The reports are normalized to
account for the makeup oil added between samples. Have a sample analyzed at
each oil change. The trend analysis will show an issue before the oil
filter does.
- Doug
_____
From: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Noel Loveys
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 6:26 AM
Subject: RE: Engines-List: Re: Oil Filters
I agree with you Barry except about running the filter for 100 hr. If there
is anything in the filter running it another fifty or in this case 67 hr
won't do anything good for the engine. Change it at the 33 hr with the oil.
In fact if you can't get fresh oil I would recommend changing the filter
anyway.
Oil analysis is something I would recommend for fleet operators... give the
bean counters something to do. As you said without a base line to work form
you won't be able to notice trends in the precipitate. Anyone who is paying
for oil analysis should keep a chart of the results and keep both the chart
and the reports in the engine log. That way as they update the chart after
each report they will have to see if trends continue or if one or more
constituents are increasing.
Noel
From: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of FLYaDIVE
Sent: January 20, 2011 1:39 AM
Subject: Re: Engines-List: Re: Oil Filters
AN OIL ANALYSIS IS A WASTE OF MONEY!
OK, do I have your attention?
Here is why...
Lets say you are running one of the two major manufacture engines and you
have a oil consumption of 1 quart in 10 hours.
This is slightly above average for Lycoming & Continental, usually 1 Qt in 8
to 9 hours is more common.
Next is the quantity of oil your engine holds.
Again for the big two 8 Qts is what is stamped on your dip stick.
BUT! If you put in 8 Qts you are blowing out one Qt in the first hour...
So, 7 Qts is more in line with what you should be using.
So lets use 7 Qts for this exercise.
Now, what kind of oil filter are you using? Lets say you have a Spin On or
ADC filter.
That give you 50 Hours of flight time before you should change your oil.
If you have the standard screen you will be doing an oil change in 25 hours.
But, we will work with 50 hours.
You can do the same math with 25 hours but that will really scare you.
OK, here we go....
50 hours divided by 10 hours per qt = 5 Qts - That means 5 Qts will be added
between oil changes.
If yo want to use 8 hrs per Qt then...
50 / 8 = 6.26 Qts
What does that mean?
Well, When you take your oil sample to ship out for oil analysis you have
already replace ... Wait for it ...
Case #1 --- 5/7ths of your oil capacity. That is 71.4% of the oil capacity
in your engine.
Case #2 --- 6.26/7ths of your oil capacity. That is 89.4% of the oil
capacity in your engine.
SOOoooo What are you really checking? Only the remaining oil after 5/7ths
or 6.26/7ths of the oil has been swapped out.
Now some may say that is OK as long as you always swap out the same amount.
For me that is not good data.
Oh, how much does it cost for oil analysis, I think it is $12 to $15 plus
shipping.
Let's say $15... That is about 1/3 the cost of a case of oil.
Or, 47.6% of the cost of a single oil change. (7 Qts x $4.50/Qt = $31.50)
NOW! You want to do something good for your engine and spend the same
amount of money?
Take that $15 and do an oil change at 33 Hours ... That is 1/3 sooner.
What about the Oil Filter? Change it ONLY at 100 Hour intervals.
You will now have cleaner oil going through your engine AND your filter.
For those of you that are already changing your filter at 100 Hrs ...
Stretch it to 130 Hrs.
One last point. After reading a few oil analysis reports. What one thing
do they all have in common?
There is a statement at the bottom that reads something like this: More
Data is Required for Trend Analysis.
When it comes to this, I have stories for you!
Bottom line: Oil changed regularly does more for an engine and YOUR piece
of mind than any after the fact piece of paper.
Barry
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 8:40 PM, <Speedy11@aol.com> wrote:
Doug,
Nobody is arguing with you. An oil analysis is a great idea. We've all
used the same reasoning you did.
I was offering no technique at all - so there was no anecdotal evidence on
which to base said technique. And I'm not sure what question the word
cautionary begs.
Getting an oil analysis is a great technique. Keep it up.
Stan Sutterfield
Do not archive
In a message dated 1/19/2011 3:06:31 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
engines-list@matronics.com writes:
That technique is based on anecdotal evidence at best. The term
"cautionary" begs the question. You can do what everyone else does, same as
the lemming. Good science is nice, good engineering is even better. Both
require data (or evidence) to in order to follow accepted practice.
Price out for yourself an oil analysis. Familiarize yourself with the
credentials and writings of Mike Busch. Price out an overhaul, then price
out an accident that almost totals the aircraft (assuming you have
insurance). Balance the costs versus the benefits. I have not even asked
you to include an analysis of the cost for injury or death.
Oil analysis can't prevent every bad thing, but knowledge is still power,
and the price of this knowledge is less than that of 3 gallons of fuel. The
science (or engineering) is well founded.
- Doug
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I've been following the thread with interest and thought that I'd add my
"anecdotal" tidbit.
Some years ago with my jointly owned Cherokee 235 we routinely had oil
analysis done at each oil change. Soon after an oil change, my partner
was away with the plane when I received a phone call from the analysis
company that the results were grossly abnormal. Their conclusion from
the predominant changes in a couple of elements was that there was a
broken ring. I managed to contact my partner with those results. He had
the cylinders bore scoped and found the scored cylinder with the broken
ring. The consensus was that it was safe to return home with the broken
ring. Upon return to home base, the cylinder and piston were replaced.
Without the analysis and until that cylinder showed major loss of
compression, we would not have known of the broken ring. The
implications of continuing to run the engine with broken ring seem
undesirable.
Rich Dudley
On 1/20/2011 9:57 AM, Doug Dodson wrote:
>
> I thought it went without saying, but of course oil analysis is about
> trend monitoring. A single report has little value. The utility
> comes by having a series of reports at regular intervals. The
> reports are normalized to account for the makeup oil added between
> samples. Have a sample analyzed at each oil change. The trend
> analysis will show an issue before the oil filter does.
>
>
> - Doug
>
>
> -------------------------
>
> *From:*owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Noel
> Loveys *Sent:* Thursday, January 20, 2011 6:26 AM *To:*
> engines-list@matronics.com *Subject:* RE: Engines-List: Re: Oil
> Filters
>
>
> I agree with you Barry except about running the filter for 100 hr.
> If there is anything in the filter running it another fifty or in
> this case 67 hr won't do anything good for the engine. Change it at
> the 33 hr with the oil. In fact if you can't get fresh oil I would
> recommend changing the filter anyway.
>
>
> Oil analysis is something I would recommend for fleet operators...
> give the bean counters something to do. As you said without a base
> line to work form you won't be able to notice trends in the
> precipitate. Anyone who is paying for oil analysis should keep a
> chart of the results and keep both the chart and the reports in the
> engine log. That way as they update the chart after each report they
> will have to see if trends continue or if one or more constituents
> are increasing.
>
>
> Noel
>
>
> *From:*owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of
> *FLYaDIVE *Sent:* January 20, 2011 1:39 AM *To:*
> engines-list@matronics.com *Subject:* Re: Engines-List: Re: Oil
> Filters
>
>
> AN OIL ANALYSIS IS A WASTE OF MONEY!
>
>
> OK, do I have your attention?
>
>
> Here is why...
>
>
> Lets say you are running one of the two major manufacture engines and
> you have a oil consumption of 1 quart in 10 hours.
>
> This is slightly above average for Lycoming & Continental, usually 1
> Qt in 8 to 9 hours is more common.
>
>
> Next is the quantity of oil your engine holds.
>
> Again for the big two 8 Qts is what is stamped on your dip stick.
>
> BUT! If you put in 8 Qts you are blowing out one Qt in the first
> hour... So, 7 Qts is more in line with what you should be using.
>
> So lets use 7 Qts for this exercise.
>
> Now, what kind of oil filter are you using? Lets say you have a Spin
> On or ADC filter.
>
> That give you 50 Hours of flight time before you should change your
> oil.
>
> If you have the standard screen you will be doing an oil change in 25
> hours.
>
> But, we will work with 50 hours.
>
> You can do the same math with 25 hours but that will really scare
> you.
>
>
> OK, here we go....
>
> 50 hours divided by 10 hours per qt = 5 Qts - That means 5 Qts will
> be added between oil changes.
>
> If yo want to use 8 hrs per Qt then...
>
> 50 / 8 = 6.26 Qts
>
> What does that mean?
>
> Well, When you take your oil sample to ship out for oil analysis you
> have already replace ... Wait for it ...
>
> Case #1 --- 5/7ths of your oil capacity. That is 71.4% of the oil
> capacity in your engine.
>
> Case #2 --- 6.26/7ths of your oil capacity. That is 89.4% of the oil
> capacity in your engine.
>
>
> SOOoooo What are you really checking? Only the remaining oil after
> 5/7ths or 6.26/7ths of the oil has been swapped out.
>
> Now some may say that is OK as long as you always swap out the same
> amount.
>
> For me that is not good data.
>
>
> Oh, how much does it cost for oil analysis, I think it is $12 to $15
> plus shipping.
>
> Let's say $15... That is about 1/3 the cost of a case of oil.
>
> Or, 47.6% of the cost of a single oil change. (7 Qts x $4.50/Qt
> $31.50)
>
>
> NOW! You want to do something good for your engine and spend the
> same amount of money?
>
> Take that $15 and do an oil change at 33 Hours ... That is 1/3
> sooner.
>
> What about the Oil Filter? Change it ONLY at 100 Hour intervals.
>
> You will now have cleaner oil going through your engine AND your
> filter.
>
> For those of you that are already changing your filter at 100 Hrs ...
> Stretch it to 130 Hrs.
>
>
> One last point. After reading a few oil analysis reports. What one
> thing do they all have in common?
>
> There is a statement at the bottom that reads something like this:
> More Data is Required for Trend Analysis.
>
> When it comes to this, I have stories for you!
>
>
> Bottom line: Oil changed regularly does more for an engine and YOUR
> piece of mind than any after the fact piece of paper.
>
>
> Barry
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 8:40 PM, <Speedy11@aol.com
> <mailto:Speedy11@aol.com>> wrote:
>
> Doug,
>
> Nobody is arguing with you. An oil analysis is a great idea. We've
> all used the same reasoning you did.
>
> I was offering no technique at all - so there was no anecdotal
> evidence on which to base said technique. And I'm not sure what
> question the word cautionary begs.
>
> Getting an oil analysis is a great technique. Keep it up.
>
> Stan Sutterfield
>
> Do not archive
>
>
> In a message dated 1/19/2011 3:06:31 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> engines-list@matronics.com <mailto:engines-list@matronics.com>
> writes:
>
> That technique is based on anecdotal evidence at best. The term
> "cautionary" begs the question. You can do what everyone else does,
> same as the lemming. Good science is nice, good engineering is even
> better. Both require data (or evidence) to in order to follow
> accepted practice.
>
>
> Price out for yourself an oil analysis. Familiarize yourself with
> the credentials and writings of Mike Busch. Price out an overhaul,
> then price out an accident that almost totals the aircraft (assuming
> you have insurance). Balance the costs versus the benefits. I have
> not even asked you to include an analysis of the cost for injury or
> death.
>
>
> Oil analysis can't prevent every bad thing, but knowledge is still
> power, and the price of this knowledge is less than that of 3 gallons
> of fuel. The science (or engineering) is well founded.
>
>
> - Doug
>
> * * * *
> *target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List*
> *tp://forums.matronics.com*
> *_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution* * *
>
>
> * * * * * * *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List* * *
> *http://forums.matronics.com* * *
> *http://www.matronics.com/contribution* * * * * *
>
>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List
>
>
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>
>
*
> *
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Barry,
Allow me to get your attention.
Your opinion is one among many. There's no need to yell your opinion at
the rest of us.
There is nothing wrong with doing an oil analysis. It is not terribly
expensive and gives peace of mind to those who like tracking data.
I am not one who does oil sampling. I agree that regularly changing the
oil is the best means of maintaining an aircraft engine.
Stan Sutterfield
In a message dated 1/20/2011 3:05:24 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
engines-list@matronics.com writes:
AN OIL ANALYSIS IS A WASTE OF MONEY!
OK, do I have your attention?
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engines-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 01/17/11 |
That's the bottom line. It's a waste of time and money.
________________________________
From: Tedd McHenry <tedd@vansairforce.org>
Sent: Wed, January 19, 2011 5:23:01 PM
Subject: Re: Engines-List: Re: Engines-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 01/17/11
On 19-Jan-11, at 11:46AM, Gary Vogt wrote:
I had a customer who, on his second engine (a factory reman), had decided to do
an oil analysis on every oil change.
Gary:
I'm not sure what you're saying here. Is that getting the oil analyzed isn't
worth it?
Tedd
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Quote " Flash forward to 1999. Sure enough, he had 1999 hours on his pla
ne . =0A. . give or take a few. At 1999 hrs, he opted for a LyCon overhau
l. When the =0Aowner brought me his plane, he told me, "This should be an
easy overhaul. I =0Adon't want anything fancy like port and polish or anyt
hing else. Just the basic =0Aoverhaul. I've set aside about $18,000 to co
ver the costs."=0A=0AEngine comes off and goes to Lycon. I told Ken about
the oil analysis and ADC =0Aoil filter and that the owner expects this to b
e a simple overhaul.=0A=0AThe next time I talked to Ken, he told me the eng
ine would need to be aligned =0Abored (the case had been chafing), the cran
k needed to be reground (it was out =0Aof tolerance, the rod bearings were
bad and had chewed up the crank), it would =0Aneed a new cam and lifters (t
his plane was flown over 300 hours a year), and it =0Awould need new cylind
ers (the cylinders had too many cracks in them to repair.) =0A"=0A=0A------
--------=0ABottom line. The oil analysis for the entire time he owned the
plane did not =0Atell him his engine was trashed. =0A=0AOil analysis is a
waste of time and money.=0A=0AAs for fleet operators, they too could save a
lot of money just by inspecting =0Athe oil filter.=0A=0A=0A=0A____________
____________________=0AFrom: Doug Dodson <douglas.dodson@pobox.com>=0ATo: e
ngines-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Thu, January 20, 2011 6:57:07 AM=0ASubjec
t: RE: Engines-List: Re: Oil Filters=0A=0A =0AI thought it went without say
ing, but of course oil analysis is about trend =0Amonitoring. A single rep
ort has little value. The utility comes by having a =0Aseries of reports a
t regular intervals. The reports are normalized to account =0Afor the make
up oil added between samples. Have a sample analyzed at each oil =0Achange
. The trend analysis will show an issue before the oil filter does.=0A =0A
=0A- Doug=0A =0A =0A=0A________________________________=0A =0AFrom:owner-e
ngines-list-server@matronics.com =0A[mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matro
nics.com] On Behalf Of Noel Loveys=0ASent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 6:26
AM=0ATo: engines-list@matronics.com=0ASubject: RE: Engines-List: Re: Oil Fi
lters=0A =0AI agree with you Barry except about running the filter for 100
hr. If there is =0Aanything in the filter running it another fifty or in t
his case 67 hr won=99t do =0Aanything good for the engine. Change it
at the 33 hr with the oil. In fact if =0Ayou can=99t get fresh oil
I would recommend changing the filter anyway.=0A =0AOil analysis is somethi
ng I would recommend for fleet operators... give the =0Abean counters some
thing to do. As you said without a base line to work form you =0Awon
=99t be able to notice trends in the precipitate. Anyone who is paying for
oil =0Aanalysis should keep a chart of the results and keep both the char
t and the =0Areports in the engine log. That way as they update the chart
after each report =0Athey will have to see if trends continue or if one or
more constituents are =0Aincreasing.=0A =0ANoel=0A =0AFrom:owner-engines-li
st-server@matronics.com =0A[mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of FLYaDIVE=0ASent: January 20, 2011 1:39 AM=0ATo: engines-list@
matronics.com=0ASubject: Re: Engines-List: Re: Oil Filters=0A =0AAN OIL ANA
LYSIS IS A WASTE OF MONEY!=0A =0AOK, do I have your attention? =0A =0AHere
is why...=0A =0ALets say you are running one of the two major manufacture
engines and you have a =0Aoil consumption of 1 quart in 10 hours.=0AThis is
slightly above average for Lycoming & Continental, usually 1 Qt in 8 to
=0A9 hours is more common.=0A =0ANext is the quantity of oil your engine ho
lds.=0AAgain for the big two 8 Qts is what is stamped on your dip stick.=0A
BUT! If you put in 8 Qts you are blowing out one Qt in the first hour... S
o, 7 =0AQts is more in line with what you should be using.=0ASo lets use 7
Qts for this exercise.=0ANow, what kind of oil filter are you using? Lets
say you have a Spin On or ADC =0Afilter.=0AThat give you 50 Hours of flight
time before you should change your oil.=0AIf you have the standard screen
you will be doing an oil change in 25 hours.=0ABut, we will work with 50 ho
urs.=0AYou can do the same math with 25 hours but that will really scare yo
u.=0A =0AOK, here we go....=0A50 hours divided by 10 hours per qt = 5 Qts
- That means 5 Qts will be added =0Abetween oil changes.=0AIf yo want to u
se 8 hrs per Qt then...=0A50 / 8 = 6.26 Qts =0AWhat does that mean?=0AWel
l, When you take your oil sample to ship out for oil analysis you =0Ahave a
lready replace ... Wait for it ...=0ACase #1 --- 5/7ths of your oil capacit
y. That is 71.4% of the oil capacity in =0Ayour engine.=0ACase #2 --- 6.26
/7ths of your oil capacity. That is 89.4% of the =0Aoil capacity in your e
ngine.=0A =0ASOOoooo What are you really checking? Only the remaining oil
after 5/7ths or =0A6.26/7ths of the oil has been swapped out.=0ANow some ma
y say that is OK as long as you always swap out the same amount. =0AFor me
that is not good data.=0A =0AOh, how much does it cost for oil analysis, I
think it is $12 to $15 plus =0Ashipping.=0ALet's say $15... That is about
1/3 the cost of a case of oil.=0AOr, 47.6% of the cost of a single oil chan
ge. (7 Qts x $4.50/Qt = $31.50)=0A =0ANOW! You want to do something goo
d for your engine and spend the same amount of =0Amoney?=0ATake that $15 an
d do an oil change at 33 Hours ... That is 1/3 sooner.=0AWhat about the Oil
Filter? Change it ONLY at 100 Hour intervals.=0AYou will now have cleaner
oil going through your engine AND your filter.=0AFor those of you that are
already changing your filter at 100 Hrs ... Stretch it =0Ato 130 Hrs.=0A
=0AOne last point. After reading a few oil analysis reports. What one thi
ng do =0Athey all have in common?=0AThere is a statement at the bottom that
reads something like this: More Data is =0ARequired for Trend Analysis.
=0AWhen it comes to this, I have stories for you! =0A =0ABottom line: Oil
changed regularly does more for an engine and YOUR piece of =0Amind than a
ny after the fact piece of paper.=0A =0ABarry=0A =0A =0A =0A =0AOn Wed, Jan
19, 2011 at 8:40 PM, <Speedy11@aol.com> wrote:=0ADoug,=0ANobody is arguing
with you. An oil analysis is a great idea. We've all used =0Athe same re
asoning you did.=0AI was offering no technique at all - so there was no ane
cdotal evidence on which =0Ato base said technique. And I'm not sure what
question the word cautionary =0Abegs.=0AGetting an oil analysis is a great
technique. Keep it up.=0AStan Sutterfield=0ADo not archive=0A =0A =0AIn a
message dated 1/19/2011 3:06:31 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, =0Aengines-list
@matronics.com writes:=0AThat technique is based on anecdotal evidence at b
est. The term=0A>"cautionary" begs the question. You can do what everyone
else does, same as=0A>the lemming. Good science is nice, good engineering
is even better. Both=0A>require data (or evidence) to in order to follow
accepted practice.=0A>=0A>=0A>Price out for yourself an oil analysis. Fami
liarize yourself with the=0A>credentials and writings of Mike Busch. Price
out an overhaul, then price=0A>out an accident that almost totals the airc
raft (assuming you have=0A>insurance). Balance the costs versus the benefi
ts. I have not even asked=0A>you to include an analysis of the cost for in
jury or death.=0A>=0A>=0A>Oil analysis can't prevent every bad thing, but k
nowledge is still power,=0A>and the price of this knowledge is less than th
at of 3 gallons of fuel. The=0A>science (or engineering) is well founded.
=0A>=0A>=0A>- Doug=0A =0A =0Atarget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?Engines-List=0Atp://forums.matronics.com=0A_blank">http://www.matr
onics.com/contribution=0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0Ahttp://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?Engines-List=0A =0Ahttp://forums.matronics.com=0A =0Ahttp://www.ma
tronics.com/contribution=0A =0A =0A =0Ahref="http://www.matronics.com/Na
vigator?Engines-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-Listhref
="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com=0A href="htt
============ =0A=0A=0A=0A
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
If the engine had a broken ring, a compression test would have picked it up
.=0A=0ABesides, how would a ring break? Detonation? If that's the case, t
here is more =0Adamage than just the ring.=0A=0A=0A=0A_____________________
___________=0AFrom: Richard Dudley <rhdudley1@bellsouth.net>=0ATo: engines-
list@matronics.com=0ASent: Thu, January 20, 2011 7:30:24 AM=0ASubject: Re:
Engines-List: Re: Oil Filters=0A=0AI've been following the thread with inte
rest and thought that I'd add my =0A"anecdotal" tidbit.=0A=0ASome years
ago with my jointly owned Cherokee 235 we routinely had oil =0Aanalysi
s done at each oil change. Soon after an oil change, my partner was =0A
away with the plane when I received a phone call from the analysis comp
any =0Athat the results were grossly abnormal. Their conclusion from th
e =0Apredominant changes in a couple of elements was that there was a b
roken =0Aring. I managed to contact my partner with those results. He h
ad the =0Acylinders bore scoped and found the scored cylinder with the
broken ring. =0AThe consensus was that it was safe to return home with
the broken ring. Upon =0Areturn to home base, the cylinder and piston w
ere replaced. Without the =0Aanalysis and until that cylinder showed ma
jor loss of compression, we would =0Anot have known of the broken ring.
The implications of continuing to run the =0Aengine with broken ring s
eem undesirable.=0A=0ARich Dudley=0A=0AOn 1/20/2011 9:57 AM, Doug Dodson wr
ote:=0A> =0A> I thought it went without saying, but of course oil analysis
is about=0A> trend monitoring. A single report has little value. The
utility=0A> comes by having a series of reports at regular intervals.
The=0A> reports are normalized to account for the makeup oil added b
etween=0A> samples. Have a sample analyzed at each oil change. The trend=0A
> analysis will show an issue before the oil filter does.=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A
> =0A> =0A> - Doug=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> -------------------------
=0A> =0A> *From:*owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com=0A> [mailto:owner-
engines-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Noel=0A> Loveys *Se
nt:* Thursday, January 20, 2011 6:26 AM *To:*=0A> engines-list@matronics.co
m *Subject:* RE: Engines-List: Re: Oil=0A> Filters=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A>
I agree with you Barry except about running the filter for 100 hr.
=0A> If there is anything in the filter running it another fifty or i
n=0A> this case 67 hr won=99t do anything good for the engine. Change
it at=0A> the 33 hr with the oil. In fact if you can=99t get f
resh oil I would=0A> recommend changing the filter anyway.=0A> =0A>
=0A> =0A> Oil analysis is something I would recommend for fleet opera
tors...=0A> give the bean counters something to do. As you said without a
base=0A> line to work form you won=99t be able to notice trends
in the=0A> precipitate. Anyone who is paying for oil analysis should
keep a=0A> chart of the results and keep both the chart and the reports
in the=0A> engine log. That way as they update the chart after each
report they=0A> will have to see if trends continue or if one or more
constituents=0A> are increasing.=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> Noel=0A> =0A> =0A>
=0A> *From:*owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com=0A> [mailto:owner-engin
es-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of=0A> *FLYaDIVE *Sent:* Jan
uary 20, 2011 1:39 AM *To:*=0A> engines-list@matronics.com *Subject:* Re: E
ngines-List: Re: Oil=0A> Filters=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> AN OIL ANALYSIS I
S A WASTE OF MONEY!=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> OK, do I have your attention?=0A>
=0A> =0A> =0A> Here is why...=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> Lets say you are running o
ne of the two major manufacture engines and=0A> you have a oil consum
ption of 1 quart in 10 hours.=0A> =0A> This is slightly above average for L
ycoming & Continental, usually 1=0A> Qt in 8 to 9 hours is more commo
n.=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> Next is the quantity of oil your engine holds.=0A>
=0A> Again for the big two 8 Qts is what is stamped on your dip stick
.=0A> =0A> BUT! If you put in 8 Qts you are blowing out one Qt in the
first=0A> hour... So, 7 Qts is more in line with what you should be
using.=0A> =0A> So lets use 7 Qts for this exercise.=0A> =0A> Now, what kin
d of oil filter are you using? Lets say you have a Spin=0A> On or ADC
filter.=0A> =0A> That give you 50 Hours of flight time before you should
change your=0A> oil.=0A> =0A> If you have the standard screen you will
be doing an oil change in 25=0A> hours.=0A> =0A> But, we will work w
ith 50 hours.=0A> =0A> You can do the same math with 25 hours but that will
really scare=0A> you.=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> OK, here we go....=0A> =0A>
50 hours divided by 10 hours per qt = 5 Qts - That means 5 Qts wil
l=0A> be added between oil changes.=0A> =0A> If yo want to use 8 hrs per Qt
then...=0A> =0A> 50 / 8 = 6.26 Qts=0A> =0A> What does that mean?=0A> =0A
> Well, When you take your oil sample to ship out for oil analysis yo
u=0A> have already replace ... Wait for it ...=0A> =0A> Case #1 --- 5/7ths
of your oil capacity. That is 71.4% of the oil=0A> capacity in your e
ngine.=0A> =0A> Case #2 --- 6.26/7ths of your oil capacity. That is 89.4% o
f the oil=0A> capacity in your engine.=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> SOOoooo Wha
t are you really checking? Only the remaining oil after=0A> 5/7ths or
6.26/7ths of the oil has been swapped out.=0A> =0A> Now some may say that
is OK as long as you always swap out the same=0A> amount.=0A> =0A> Fo
r me that is not good data.=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> Oh, how much does it cost fo
r oil analysis, I think it is $12 to $15=0A> plus shipping.=0A> =0A>
Let's say $15... That is about 1/3 the cost of a case of oil.=0A> =0A> Or,
47.6% of the cost of a single oil change. (7 Qts x $4.50/Qt ==0A> $
31.50)=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> NOW! You want to do something good for your engin
e and spend the=0A> same amount of money?=0A> =0A> Take that $15 and
do an oil change at 33 Hours ... That is 1/3=0A> sooner.=0A> =0A> Wha
t about the Oil Filter? Change it ONLY at 100 Hour intervals.=0A> =0A
> You will now have cleaner oil going through your engine AND your=0A
> filter.=0A> =0A> For those of you that are already changing your filter a
t 100 Hrs ...=0A> Stretch it to 130 Hrs.=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> One last
point. After reading a few oil analysis reports. What one=0A> thing d
o they all have in common?=0A> =0A> There is a statement at the bottom that
reads something like this:=0A> More Data is Required for Trend Analy
sis.=0A> =0A> When it comes to this, I have stories for you!=0A> =0A> =0A>
=0A> Bottom line: Oil changed regularly does more for an engine and Y
OUR=0A> piece of mind than any after the fact piece of paper.=0A> =0A> =0A>
=0A> Barry=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> On Wed, Jan 19
, 2011 at 8:40 PM, <Speedy11@aol.com=0A> <mailto:Speedy11@aol.com>> wrote:
=0A> =0A> Doug,=0A> =0A> Nobody is arguing with you. An oil analysis is a g
reat idea. We've=0A> all used the same reasoning you did.=0A> =0A> I
was offering no technique at all - so there was no anecdotal=0A> evid
ence on which to base said technique. And I'm not sure what=0A> quest
ion the word cautionary begs.=0A> =0A> Getting an oil analysis is a great t
echnique. Keep it up.=0A> =0A> Stan Sutterfield=0A> =0A> Do not archive=0A>
=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> In a message dated 1/19/2011 3:06:31 A.M. Eastern
Standard Time,=0A> engines-list@matronics.com <mailto:engines-list@m
atronics.com>=0A> writes:=0A> =0A> That technique is based on anecdotal evi
dence at best. The term =0A> "cautionary" begs the question. You can
do what everyone else does,=0A> same as the lemming. Good science is
nice, good engineering is even=0A> better. Both require data (or evid
ence) to in order to follow=0A> accepted practice.=0A> =0A> =0A> Price out
for yourself an oil analysis. Familiarize yourself with=0A> the crede
ntials and writings of Mike Busch. Price out an overhaul,=0A> then pr
ice out an accident that almost totals the aircraft (assuming=0A> you
have insurance). Balance the costs versus the benefits. I have=0A> n
ot even asked you to include an analysis of the cost for injury or=0A
> death.=0A> =0A> =0A> Oil analysis can't prevent every bad thing, but know
ledge is still=0A> power, and the price of this knowledge is less tha
n that of 3 gallons=0A> of fuel. The science (or engineering) is well
founded.=0A> =0A> =0A> - Doug=0A> =0A> * * * * =0A> *target="_blan
k">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List* =0A> *tp://forums.matro
nics.com* =0A> *_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution* * *=0A> =0A>
=0A> =0A> * * * * * * *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List* *
* =0A> *http://forums.matronics.com* * * =0A> *http://www.matronics.com/con
tribution* * * * * *=0A> =0A>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Eng
ines-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List=0A>t=0A>=0A> =0A
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com=0A> href
="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c=0A>
=0A> =0A*=0A> *=0A> =0A> Features=0ABrowse, Chat,=0A> available
==== =0A=0A=0A=0A
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
"There is nothing wrong with doing an oil analysis. It is not terribly
expensive and gives peace of mind to those who like tracking data."
Kind of like the TSA. It does nothing for your safety, it just makes you feel
good.
Come to think of it, masturbation does the same thing.
________________________________
From: "Speedy11@aol.com" <Speedy11@aol.com>
Sent: Thu, January 20, 2011 7:44:21 AM
Subject: Engines-List: Re: Oil Filters
Barry,
Allow me to get your attention.
Your opinion is one among many. There's no need to yell your opinion at the
rest of us.
There is nothing wrong with doing an oil analysis. It is not terribly
expensive and gives peace of mind to those who like tracking data.
I am not one who does oil sampling. I agree that regularly changing the oil is
the best means of maintaining an aircraft engine.
Stan Sutterfield
In a message dated 1/20/2011 3:05:24 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
engines-list@matronics.com writes:
AN OIL ANALYSIS IS A WASTE OF MONEY!
>
>OK, do I have your attention?
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
To answer your questions:
1. Possibly, a compression test would pick up a broken ring. But the
next compression test would be done at the next annual which would have
been done months later with the damage continuing.
2. We don't know how what caused the ring to break. The engine had
approximately 700 hours since new.
3. There were no signs of detonation and the problem did not recur.
4. The oil analysis picked up the broken ring because of the scoring of
the cylinder wall and the increased of the elements from the scored
cylinder wall and scored piston. And yes, the cylinder wall was scored
as well as the piston. The damage was enough to replace both the piston
and cylinder. Though it was about 40 years ago, I still have the piston
with its gouges.
4. That experience convinced us that the investments of, whatever,
$10-$15 and a few minutes of our time were worthwhile.
Regards,
Rich
On 1/20/2011 2:09 PM, Gary Vogt wrote:
> If the engine had a broken ring, a compression test would have picked
> it up.
>
> Besides, how would a ring break? Detonation? If that's the case,
> there is more damage than just the ring.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Richard Dudley <rhdudley1@bellsouth.net>
> *To:* engines-list@matronics.com
> *Sent:* Thu, January 20, 2011 7:30:24 AM
> *Subject:* Re: Engines-List: Re: Oil Filters
>
> I've been following the thread with interest and thought that I'd add
> my "anecdotal" tidbit.
>
> Some years ago with my jointly owned Cherokee 235 we routinely had oil
> analysis done at each oil change. Soon after an oil change, my partner
> was away with the plane when I received a phone call from the analysis
> company that the results were grossly abnormal. Their conclusion from
> the predominant changes in a couple of elements was that there was a
> broken ring. I managed to contact my partner with those results. He
> had the cylinders bore scoped and found the scored cylinder with the
> broken ring. The consensus was that it was safe to return home with
> the broken ring. Upon return to home base, the cylinder and piston
> were replaced. Without the analysis and until that cylinder showed
> major loss of compression, we would not have known of the broken ring.
> The implications of continuing to run the engine with broken ring seem
> undesirable.
>
> Rich Dudley
>
> On 1/20/2011 9:57 AM, Doug Dodson wrote:
> >
>
> > I thought it went without saying, but of course oil analysis
> is about
>
> > trend monitoring. A single report has little value. The
> utility
>
> > comes by having a series of reports at regular intervals. The
>
> > reports are normalized to account for the makeup oil added
> between
>
> > samples. Have a sample analyzed at each oil change. The trend
>
> > analysis will show an issue before the oil filter does.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > - Doug
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > -------------------------
>
> >
>
> > *From:*owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com
>
> > [mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf
> Of *Noel
>
> > Loveys *Sent:* Thursday, January 20, 2011 6:26 AM *To:*
>
> > engines-list@matronics.com *Subject:* RE: Engines-List: Re:
> Oil
>
> > Filters
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I agree with you Barry except about running the filter for
> 100 hr.
>
> > If there is anything in the filter running it another fifty
> or in
>
> > this case 67 hr wont do anything good for the engine. Change
> it at
>
> > the 33 hr with the oil. In fact if you cant get fresh oil I
> would
>
> > recommend changing the filter anyway.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Oil analysis is something I would recommend for fleet
> operators...
>
> > give the bean counters something to do. As you said without a
> base
>
> > line to work form you wont be able to notice trends in the
>
> > precipitate. Anyone who is paying for oil analysis should
> keep a
>
> > chart of the results and keep both the chart and the reports
> in the
>
> > engine log. That way as they update the chart after each
> report they
>
> > will have to see if trends continue or if one or more
> constituents
>
> > are increasing.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Noel
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > *From:*owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com
>
> > [mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf
> Of
>
> > *FLYaDIVE *Sent:* January 20, 2011 1:39 AM *To:*
>
> > engines-list@matronics.com *Subject:* Re: Engines-List: Re:
> Oil
>
> > Filters
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > AN OIL ANALYSIS IS A WASTE OF MONEY!
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > OK, do I have your attention?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Here is why...
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Lets say you are running one of the two major manufacture
> engines and
>
> > you have a oil consumption of 1 quart in 10 hours.
>
> >
>
> > This is slightly above average for Lycoming &
> Continental, usually 1
>
> > Qt in 8 to 9 hours is more common.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Next is the quantity of oil your engine holds.
>
> >
>
> > Again for the big two 8 Qts is what is stamped on your dip
> stick.
>
> >
>
> > BUT! If you put in 8 Qts you are blowing out one Qt in the
> first
>
> > hour... So, 7 Qts is more in line with what you should be
> using.
>
> >
>
> > So lets use 7 Qts for this exercise.
>
> >
>
> > Now, what kind of oil filter are you using? Lets say you have
> a Spin
>
> > On or ADC filter.
>
> >
>
> > That give you 50 Hours of flight time before you should
> change your
>
> > oil.
>
> >
>
> > If you have the standard screen you will be doing an oil
> change in 25
>
> > hours.
>
> >
>
> > But, we will work with 50 hours.
>
> >
>
> > You can do the same math with 25 hours but that will really
> scare
>
> > you.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > OK, here we go....
>
> >
>
> > 50 hours divided by 10 hours per qt = 5 Qts - That means 5
> Qts will
>
> > be added between oil changes.
>
> >
>
> > If yo want to use 8 hrs per Qt then...
>
> >
>
> > 50 / 8 = 6.26 Qts
>
> >
>
> > What does that mean?
>
> >
>
> > Well, When you take your oil sample to ship out for oil
> analysis you
>
> > have already replace ... Wait for it ...
>
> >
>
> > Case #1 --- 5/7ths of your oil capacity. That is 71.4% of the
> oil
>
> > capacity in your engine.
>
> >
>
> > Case #2 --- 6.26/7ths of your oil capacity. That is 89.4% of
> the oil
>
> > capacity in your engine.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > SOOoooo What are you really checking? Only the remaining oil
> after
>
> > 5/7ths or 6.26/7ths of the oil has been swapped out.
>
> >
>
> > Now some may say that is OK as long as you always swap out
> the same
>
> > amount.
>
> >
>
> > For me that is not good data.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Oh, how much does it cost for oil analysis, I think it is $12
> to $15
>
> > plus shipping.
>
> >
>
> > Let's say $15... That is about 1/3 the cost of a case of oil.
>
> >
>
> > Or, 47.6% of the cost of a single oil change. (7 Qts x
> $4.50/Qt
>
> > $31.50)
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > NOW! You want to do something good for your engine and spend
> the
>
> > same amount of money?
>
> >
>
> > Take that $15 and do an oil change at 33 Hours ... That is
> 1/3
>
> > sooner.
>
> >
>
> > What about the Oil Filter? Change it ONLY at 100 Hour
> intervals.
>
> >
>
> > You will now have cleaner oil going through your engine AND
> your
>
> > filter.
>
> >
>
> > For those of you that are already changing your filter at 100
> Hrs ...
>
> > Stretch it to 130 Hrs.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > One last point. After reading a few oil analysis reports.
> What one
>
> > thing do they all have in common?
>
> >
>
> > There is a statement at the bottom that reads something like
> this:
>
> > More Data is Required for Trend Analysis.
>
> >
>
> > When it comes to this, I have stories for you!
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Bottom line: Oil changed regularly does more for an engine
> and YOUR
>
> > piece of mind than any after the fact piece of paper.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Barry
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 8:40 PM, <Speedy11@aol.com
>
> > <mailto:Speedy11@aol.com>> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Doug,
>
> >
>
> > Nobody is arguing with you. An oil analysis is a great idea.
> We've
>
> > all used the same reasoning you did.
>
> >
>
> > I was offering no technique at all - so there was no
> anecdotal
>
> > evidence on which to base said technique. And I'm not sure
> what
>
> > question the word cautionary begs.
>
> >
>
> > Getting an oil analysis is a great technique. Keep it up.
>
> >
>
> > Stan Sutterfield
>
> >
>
> > Do not archive
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > In a message dated 1/19/2011 3:06:31 A.M. Eastern Standard
> Time,
>
> > engines-list@matronics.com
> <mailto:engines-list@matronics.com>
>
> > writes:
>
> >
>
> > That technique is based on anecdotal evidence at best. The
> term
>
> > "cautionary" begs the question. You can do what everyone else
> does,
>
> > same as the lemming. Good science is nice, good engineering
> is even
>
> > better. Both require data (or evidence) to in order to follow
>
> > accepted practice.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Price out for yourself an oil analysis. Familiarize yourself
> with
>
> > the credentials and writings of Mike Busch. Price out an
> overhaul,
>
> > then price out an accident that almost totals the aircraft
> (assuming
>
> > you have insurance). Balance the costs versus the benefits. I
> have
>
> > not even asked you to include an analysis of the cost for
> injury or
>
> > death.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Oil analysis can't prevent every bad thing, but knowledge is
> still
>
> > power, and the price of this knowledge is less than that of 3
> gallons
>
> > of fuel. The science (or engineering) is well founded.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > - Doug
>
> >
>
> > * * * *
>
> >
> *target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List*
>
>
> > *tp://forums.matronics.com*
>
> > *_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution* * *
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > * * * * * * *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List*
> * *
>
> > *http://forums.matronics.com* * *
>
> > *http://www.matronics.com/contribution* * * * * *
>
> >
>
> >
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List
>
> >
>
> >
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> >
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>
> >
>
> >
> *
> > *
>
> >
>
> >
> Features
>
> Browse, Chat,
>
> >
> available via
>
> >
> generous
>
> >
> >
>
> >
> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-Listhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution*
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
WOW!
There is more to this than inconvenience when we are subjected to that
kind of diatribe!!!
On 1/20/2011 2:10 PM, Gary Vogt wrote:
> "There is nothing wrong with doing an oil analysis. It is not
> terribly expensive and gives peace of mind to those who like tracking
> data."
>
> Kind of like the TSA. It does nothing for your safety, it just makes
> you feel good.
>
> Come to think of it, masturbation does the same thing.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* "Speedy11@aol.com" <Speedy11@aol.com>
> *To:* engines-list@matronics.com
> *Sent:* Thu, January 20, 2011 7:44:21 AM
> *Subject:* Engines-List: Re: Oil Filters
>
> Barry,
> Allow me to get your attention.
> Your opinion is one among many. There's no need to yell your opinion
> at the rest of us.
> There is nothing wrong with doing an oil analysis. It is not terribly
> expensive and gives peace of mind to those who like tracking data.
> I am not one who does oil sampling. I agree that regularly changing
> the oil is the best means of maintaining an aircraft engine.
> Stan Sutterfield
> In a message dated 1/20/2011 3:05:24 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> engines-list@matronics.com writes:
>
> AN OIL ANALYSIS IS A WASTE OF MONEY!
>
> OK, do I have your attention?
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
what kind of engine?=0A=0APulling the engine through will reveal a weak cyl
inder.=0A=0AFlying a plane with which you are familiar will reveal a weak e
ngine.=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: Richard Dudley <
rhdudley1@bellsouth.net>=0ATo: engines-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Thu, Janu
ary 20, 2011 11:54:29 AM=0ASubject: Re: Engines-List: Re: Oil Filters=0A=0A
To answer your questions:=0A1. Possibly, a compression test w
ould pick up a broken ring. But =0Athe next compression test
would be done at the next annual which =0Awould have been don
e months later with the damage continuing.=0A2. We don't know
how what caused the ring to break. The engine had =0Aapproxi
mately 700 hours since new.=0A3. There were no signs of detonation and the
problem did not =0Arecur.=0A4. The oil analysis picked up the
broken ring because of the =0Ascoring of the cylinder wall a
nd the increased of the elements =0Afrom the scored cylinder
wall and scored piston. And yes, the =0Acylinder wall was sco
red as well as the piston. The damage was =0Aenough to replac
e both the piston and cylinder. Though it was =0Aabout 40 yea
rs ago, I still have the piston with its gouges.=0A4. That ex
perience convinced us that the investments of, whatever, =0A$
10-$15 and a few minutes of our time were worthwhile.=0A=0ARe
gards,=0ARich=0A=0A=0A=0AOn 1/20/2011 2:09 PM, Gary Vogt wrote: =0AIf the e
ngine had a broken ring, a compression test would have picked =0A
it up.=0A>=0A>=0A>Besides, how would a ring break? Detonation? If that's
the case, =0A>there is more damage than just the ring.=0A>=0A>=0A
>=0A________________________________=0AFrom: Richard Dudley <rhdudley1@bell
south.net>=0A>To: engines-list@matronics.com=0A>Sent: Thu, Ja
nuary 20, 2011 7:30:24 AM=0A>Subject: Re: Engines-List: Re: Oil Filters=0A>
=0A>I've been following the thread with interest and thought th
at I'd =0A>add my "anecdotal" tidbit.=0A>=0A>Some years ago with my jointly
owned Cherokee 235 we routinely had =0A>oil analysis done at e
ach oil change. Soon after an oil change, my =0A>partner was aw
ay with the plane when I received a phone call from =0A>the ana
lysis company that the results were grossly abnormal. Their =0A
>conclusion from the predominant changes in a couple of element
s was =0A>that there was a broken ring. I managed to contact my
partner with =0A>those results. He had the cylinders bore scop
ed and found the scored =0A>cylinder with the broken ring. The
consensus was that it was safe to =0A>return home with the brok
en ring. Upon return to home base, the =0A>cylinder and piston
were replaced. Without the analysis and until =0A>that cylinder
showed major loss of compression, we would not have =0A>known
of the broken ring. The implications of continuing to run the
=0A>engine with broken ring seem undesirable.=0A>=0A>Rich Dudle
y=0A>=0A>On 1/20/2011 9:57 AM, Doug Dodson wrote:=0A>> =0A>=0A>> I thought
it went without saying, but of course oil analysis=0A>is abou
t=0A>=0A>> trend monitoring. A single report has little value.
The=0A>utility=0A>=0A>> comes by having a series of reports at regular
intervals. The=0A>=0A>> reports are normalized to account for t
he makeup oil added=0A>between=0A>=0A>> samples. Have a sampl
e analyzed at each oil change. The trend=0A>=0A>> analysis wi
ll show an issue before the oil filter does.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A
>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> - Doug=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>
=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> -------------------------=0A>=0A>> =0A>
=0A>> *From:*owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com=0A>=0A>> [mailto:owner
-engines-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf=0A>Of *Noel=0A
>=0A>> Loveys *Sent:* Thursday, January 20, 2011 6:26 AM *To:
*=0A>=0A>> engines-list@matronics.com *Subject:* RE: Engines-List: Re:=0A>O
il=0A>=0A>> Filters=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> I agree with you
Barry except about running the filter for=0A>100 hr.=0A>=0A>
> If there is anything in the filter running it another fifty
=0A>or in=0A>=0A>> this case 67 hr won=99t do anything good for the
engine. Change=0A>it at=0A>=0A>> the 33 hr with the oil. In fa
ct if you can=99t get fresh oil I=0A>would=0A>=0A>> rec
ommend changing the filter anyway.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> O
il analysis is something I would recommend for fleet=0A>operators...=0A>=0A
>> give the bean counters something to do. As you said withou
t a=0A>base=0A>=0A>> line to work form you won=99t be able to notice
trends in the=0A>=0A>> precipitate. Anyone who is paying for
oil analysis should=0A>keep a=0A>=0A>> chart of the results a
nd keep both the chart and the reports=0A>in the=0A>=0A>> eng
ine log. That way as they update the chart after each=0A>repo
rt they=0A>=0A>> will have to see if trends continue or if one or more=0A>c
onstituents=0A>=0A>> are increasing.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>>
Noel=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> *From:*owner-engines-list-serv
er@matronics.com=0A>=0A>> [mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com]
*On Behalf=0A>Of=0A>=0A>> *FLYaDIVE *Sent:* January 20, 2011
1:39 AM *To:*=0A>=0A>> engines-list@matronics.com *Subject:* Re: Engines-Li
st: Re:=0A>Oil=0A>=0A>> Filters=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> AN O
IL ANALYSIS IS A WASTE OF MONEY!=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> OK,
do I have your attention?=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Here is w
hy...=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Lets say you are running one o
f the two major manufacture=0A>engines and=0A>=0A>> you have
a oil consumption of 1 quart in 10 hours.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> This is slight
ly above average for Lycoming &=0A>Continental, usually 1=0A>=0A>> Qt in 8
to 9 hours is more common.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Next is t
he quantity of oil your engine holds.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Again for the big
two 8 Qts is what is stamped on your dip=0A>stick.=0A>=0A>>
=0A>=0A>> BUT! If you put in 8 Qts you are blowing out one Qt
in the=0A>first=0A>=0A>> hour... So, 7 Qts is more in line with what you
should be=0A>using.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> So lets use 7 Qts for t
his exercise.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Now, what kind of oil filter are you using
? Lets say you have=0A>a Spin=0A>=0A>> On or ADC filter.=0A>
=0A>> =0A>=0A>> That give you 50 Hours of flight time before you
should=0A>change your=0A>=0A>> oil.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> If you have the
standard screen you will be doing an oil=0A>change in 25=0A>
=0A>> hours.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> But, we will work with 50 hours.=0A>=0A>>
=0A>=0A>> You can do the same math with 25 hours but that will
really=0A>scare=0A>=0A>> you.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> OK,
here we go....=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> 50 hours divided by 10 hours per qt = 5
Qts - That means 5=0A>Qts will=0A>=0A>> be added between oil
changes.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> If yo want to use 8 hrs per Qt then...=0A>=0A>
> =0A>=0A>> 50 / 8 = 6.26 Qts=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> What does that mean?=0A>
=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Well, When you take your oil sample to ship out for
oil=0A>analysis you=0A>=0A>> have already replace ... Wait for it ..
.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Case #1 --- 5/7ths of your oil capacity. That is
71.4% of the=0A>oil=0A>=0A>> capacity in your engine.=0A>=0A>> =0A
>=0A>> Case #2 --- 6.26/7ths of your oil capacity. That is 89
.4% of=0A>the oil=0A>=0A>> capacity in your engine.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>
=0A>> =0A>=0A>> SOOoooo What are you really checking? Only the
remaining oil=0A>after=0A>=0A>> 5/7ths or 6.26/7ths of the oil has been s
wapped out.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Now some may say that is OK as long as you a
lways swap out=0A>the same=0A>=0A>> amount.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>
> For me that is not good data.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Oh,
how much does it cost for oil analysis, I think it is $12=0A>
to $15=0A>=0A>> plus shipping.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Let's say $15... That is
about 1/3 the cost of a case of oil.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Or, 4
7.6% of the cost of a single oil change. (7 Qts x=0A>$4.50/Qt
==0A>=0A>> $31.50)=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> NOW! You want
to do something good for your engine and spend=0A>the=0A>=0A>
> same amount of money?=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Take that $15 and do an oil chan
ge at 33 Hours ... That is=0A>1/3=0A>=0A>> sooner.=0A>=0A>>
=0A>=0A>> What about the Oil Filter? Change it ONLY at 100 Hour=0A>interval
s.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> You will now have cleaner oil going through your
engine AND=0A>your=0A>=0A>> filter.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> For those
of you that are already changing your filter at 100=0A>Hrs ..
.=0A>=0A>> Stretch it to 130 Hrs.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> On
e last point. After reading a few oil analysis reports.=0A>Wh
at one=0A>=0A>> thing do they all have in common?=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> There
is a statement at the bottom that reads something like=0A>thi
s:=0A>=0A>> More Data is Required for Trend Analysis.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Wh
en it comes to this, I have stories for you!=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>>
=0A>=0A>> Bottom line: Oil changed regularly does more for an
engine=0A>and YOUR=0A>=0A>> piece of mind than any after the fact piece of
paper.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Barry=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A
>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 8:40 PM, <Speedy11@aol.com=0A>=0A>> <mailto:Speed
y11@aol.com>> wrote:=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Doug,=0A>=0A>> =0A>
=0A>> Nobody is arguing with you. An oil analysis is a great
idea.=0A>We've=0A>=0A>> all used the same reasoning you did.=0A>=0A>> =0A>
=0A>> I was offering no technique at all - so there was no=0A>anecdotal=0A>
=0A>> evidence on which to base said technique. And I'm not s
ure=0A>what=0A>=0A>> question the word cautionary begs.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>>
Getting an oil analysis is a great technique. Keep it up.=0A>
=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Stan Sutterfield=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Do not archive=0A>=0A>>
=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> In a message dated 1/19/
2011 3:06:31 A.M. Eastern Standard=0A>Time,=0A>=0A>> engines-
list@matronics.com=0A><mailto:engines-list@matronics.com>=0A>=0A>> writes:
=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> That technique is based on anecdotal evidence at
best. The=0A>term =0A>=0A>> "cautionary" begs the question. You can
do what everyone else=0A>does,=0A>=0A>> same as the lemming.
Good science is nice, good engineering=0A>is even=0A>=0A>> b
etter. Both require data (or evidence) to in order to follow
=0A>=0A>> accepted practice.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Price out for you
rself an oil analysis. Familiarize yourself=0A>with=0A>=0A>>
the credentials and writings of Mike Busch. Price out an=0A>o
verhaul,=0A>=0A>> then price out an accident that almost totals the
aircraft=0A>(assuming=0A>=0A>> you have insurance). Balance the cost
s versus the benefits. I=0A>have=0A>=0A>> not even asked you
to include an analysis of the cost for=0A>injury or=0A>=0A>>
death.=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> Oil analysis can't prevent every bad th
ing, but knowledge is=0A>still=0A>=0A>> power, and the price
of this knowledge is less than that of 3=0A>gallons=0A>=0A>>
of fuel. The science (or engineering) is well founded.=0A>=0A
>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> - Doug=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> * * * * =0A>=0A>>=0A>*targ
et="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List*=0A>=0A>=0A>>
*tp://forums.matronics.com* =0A>=0A>> *_blank">http://www.matronics.com/co
ntribution* * *=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>> * *
* * * * *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List*=0A>* * =0A>=0A>>
*http://forums.matronics.com* * * =0A>=0A>> *http://www.mat
ronics.com/contribution* * * * * *=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>>=0A>href
="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List">http://www.matronics.c
om/Navigator?Engines-List=0A>=0A>=0A>>=0A>=0A>> =0A>href="http://forums.m
atronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com=0A>>=0A>href="http://www.matron
ics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c=0A>=0A>>=0A>=0A>> =0A>*=0A
>> *=0A>=0A>> =0A>=0A>>=0A>Features=0A>=0A>Browse, Chat,=0A>=0A>>=0A>availa
ble via=0A>=0A>>=0A>generous=0A>=0A>>=0A>> =0A>=0A>>=0A>=0A>http://www.matr
onics.com/Navigator?Engines-Listhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A>
-========================
================== =0A=0A=0A=0A
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
It won't on a engine that has a single break in a compression ring. There
will be very little loss of compression. All that will be found is shavings
in the filter *if* they get by the suction screen, and elevated iron levels.
Rings break from age, piston slap, you name it. I personally experienced
ring breakage on two different O-300s, one on a rental 172, broke rings in 4
cylinders @1500 hours while in cruise flight, one ring in one cylinder in
C170 I owned in the past, cause unknown, 800 SMOH. The later didn't show any
drop in compression as the ring stayed put, just splitting where there was a
ring gap. Just found shavings in the oil screen and elevated iron in oil
analysis.
KM
A&P/IA
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@yahoo.com> wrote:
> what kind of engine?
>
> Pulling the engine through will reveal a weak cylinder.
>
> Flying a plane with which you are familiar will reveal a weak engine.
>
> ------------------------------
> * *
>
> On 1/20/2011 2:09 PM, Gary Vogt wrote:
>
> If the engine had a broken ring, a compression test would have picked it
> up.
>
> Besides, how would a ring break? Detonation? If that's the case, there
> is more damage than just the ring.
>
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
With the damage you describe it would have to show up in an oil
analysis. This is a clear place where charting the results from change
to change would have been helpful.
As for oil analysis being a waste of time and money it sure is, if you
don=99t keep up the schedule and don=99t bother to chart the
results.
Oil analysis will show problems that you won=99t catch in a filter
but what does it hurt to open a filter and have a look at the medium?
If you find anything it could save you lot$ of $$$ before an analysis is
returned.
On oil changes the short of it is more is better but filter changes are
probably more important. Especially if your engine has a pressure by
pass on the filter.
Noel
From: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
Sent: January 20, 2011 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: Engines-List: Re: Oil Filters
Quote " Flash forward to 1999. Sure enough, he had 1999 hours on his
plane . . . give or take a few. At 1999 hrs, he opted for a LyCon
overhaul. When the owner brought me his plane, he told me, "This should
be an easy overhaul. I don't want anything fancy like port and polish
or anything else. Just the basic overhaul. I've set aside about
$18,000 to cover the costs."
Engine comes off and goes to Lycon. I told Ken about the oil analysis
and ADC oil filter and that the owner expects this to be a simple
overhaul.
The next time I talked to Ken, he told me the engine would need to be
aligned bored (the case had been chafing), the crank needed to be
reground (it was out of tolerance, the rod bearings were bad and had
chewed up the crank), it would need a new cam and lifters (this plane
was flown over 300 hours a year), and it would need new cylinders (the
cylinders had too many cracks in them to repair.) "
--------------
Bottom line. The oil analysis for the entire time he owned the plane
did not tell him his engine was trashed.
Oil analysis is a waste of time and money.
As for fleet operators, they too could save a lot of money just by
inspecting the oil filter.
_____
From: Doug Dodson <douglas.dodson@pobox.com>
Sent: Thu, January 20, 2011 6:57:07 AM
Subject: RE: Engines-List: Re: Oil Filters
I thought it went without saying, but of course oil analysis is about
trend monitoring. A single report has little value. The utility comes
by having a series of reports at regular intervals. The reports are
normalized to account for the makeup oil added between samples. Have a
sample analyzed at each oil change. The trend analysis will show an
issue before the oil filter does.
- Doug
_____
From: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Noel
Loveys
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 6:26 AM
Subject: RE: Engines-List: Re: Oil Filters
I agree with you Barry except about running the filter for 100 hr. If
there is anything in the filter running it another fifty or in this case
67 hr won=99t do anything good for the engine. Change it at the
33 hr with the oil. In fact if you can=99t get fresh oil I would
recommend changing the filter anyway.
Oil analysis is something I would recommend for fleet operators... give
the bean counters something to do. As you said without a base line to
work form you won=99t be able to notice trends in the precipitate.
Anyone who is paying for oil analysis should keep a chart of the
results and keep both the chart and the reports in the engine log. That
way as they update the chart after each report they will have to see if
trends continue or if one or more constituents are increasing.
Noel
From: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of FLYaDIVE
Sent: January 20, 2011 1:39 AM
Subject: Re: Engines-List: Re: Oil Filters
AN OIL ANALYSIS IS A WASTE OF MONEY!
OK, do I have your attention?
Here is why...
Lets say you are running one of the two major manufacture engines and
you have a oil consumption of 1 quart in 10 hours.
This is slightly above average for Lycoming & Continental, usually 1 Qt
in 8 to 9 hours is more common.
Next is the quantity of oil your engine holds.
Again for the big two 8 Qts is what is stamped on your dip stick.
BUT! If you put in 8 Qts you are blowing out one Qt in the first
hour... So, 7 Qts is more in line with what you should be using.
So lets use 7 Qts for this exercise.
Now, what kind of oil filter are you using? Lets say you have a Spin On
or ADC filter.
That give you 50 Hours of flight time before you should change your oil.
If you have the standard screen you will be doing an oil change in 25
hours.
But, we will work with 50 hours.
You can do the same math with 25 hours but that will really scare you.
OK, here we go....
50 hours divided by 10 hours per qt = 5 Qts - That means 5 Qts will be
added between oil changes.
If yo want to use 8 hrs per Qt then...
50 / 8 = 6.26 Qts
What does that mean?
Well, When you take your oil sample to ship out for oil analysis you
have already replace ... Wait for it ...
Case #1 --- 5/7ths of your oil capacity. That is 71.4% of the oil
capacity in your engine.
Case #2 --- 6.26/7ths of your oil capacity. That is 89.4% of the oil
capacity in your engine.
SOOoooo What are you really checking? Only the remaining oil after
5/7ths or 6.26/7ths of the oil has been swapped out.
Now some may say that is OK as long as you always swap out the same
amount.
For me that is not good data.
Oh, how much does it cost for oil analysis, I think it is $12 to $15
plus shipping.
Let's say $15... That is about 1/3 the cost of a case of oil.
Or, 47.6% of the cost of a single oil change. (7 Qts x $4.50/Qt =
$31.50)
NOW! You want to do something good for your engine and spend the same
amount of money?
Take that $15 and do an oil change at 33 Hours ... That is 1/3 sooner.
What about the Oil Filter? Change it ONLY at 100 Hour intervals.
You will now have cleaner oil going through your engine AND your filter.
For those of you that are already changing your filter at 100 Hrs ...
Stretch it to 130 Hrs.
One last point. After reading a few oil analysis reports. What one
thing do they all have in common?
There is a statement at the bottom that reads something like this: More
Data is Required for Trend Analysis.
When it comes to this, I have stories for you!
Bottom line: Oil changed regularly does more for an engine and YOUR
piece of mind than any after the fact piece of paper.
Barry
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 8:40 PM, <Speedy11@aol.com> wrote:
Doug,
Nobody is arguing with you. An oil analysis is a great idea. We've all
used the same reasoning you did.
I was offering no technique at all - so there was no anecdotal evidence
on which to base said technique. And I'm not sure what question the
word cautionary begs.
Getting an oil analysis is a great technique. Keep it up.
Stan Sutterfield
Do not archive
In a message dated 1/19/2011 3:06:31 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
engines-list@matronics.com writes:
That technique is based on anecdotal evidence at best. The term
"cautionary" begs the question. You can do what everyone else does,
same as
the lemming. Good science is nice, good engineering is even better.
Both
require data (or evidence) to in order to follow accepted practice.
Price out for yourself an oil analysis. Familiarize yourself with the
credentials and writings of Mike Busch. Price out an overhaul, then
price
out an accident that almost totals the aircraft (assuming you have
insurance). Balance the costs versus the benefits. I have not even
asked
you to include an analysis of the cost for injury or death.
Oil analysis can't prevent every bad thing, but knowledge is still
power,
and the price of this knowledge is less than that of 3 gallons of fuel.
The
science (or engineering) is well founded.
- Doug
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List%22%3ehttp://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Engines-Listhref=%22http://forums.matronics.com%22%3eht
tp://forums.matronics.com>
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-Listhref="http://forums.ma
tronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution
<http://www.matronics.com/contribution%22%3ehttp:/www.matronics.com/c>
">http://www.matronics.com/c
http://www.matro===================
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
A filter will catch things oil analysis wont, and vice versa. Oil analysis
is for microscopic size particles, filter is to get things that are visible
size. Fretting is likely to get some microscopic aluminum in oil. Piston pi
n
may show there but is more likely to spot flakes in filter.
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 9:34 PM, Noel Loveys <noelloveys@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> With the damage you describe it would have to show up in an oil analysis.
> This is a clear place where charting the results from change to change wo
uld
> have been helpful.
>
>
> As for oil analysis being a waste of time and money it sure is, if you
> don=92t keep up the schedule and don=92t bother to chart the results.
>
>
> Oil analysis will show problems that you won=92t catch in a filter but wh
at
> does it hurt to open a filter and have a look at the medium? If you find
> anything it could save you lot$ of $$$ before an analysis is returned.
>
>
> On oil changes the short of it is more is better but filter changes are
> probably more important. Especially if your engine has a pressure by pas
s
> on the filter.
>
>
> Noel
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|