Oil/Air Separator Canister Experiment
 

OCS?

I think that means "oil canister separator"? ...but I'm not sure.

Or maybe OSC: Oil separator canister?

CSC calls it the oil/air separator.

Here's the explanation of what the OCS does according to Joe B. on the CSC Blog.

http://californiascooterco.com/blog/?p=21183

On all my current/previous motorcycles the crankcase vent tube runs directly to the air box.

So at 5,081 miles on my RX3, I changed the oil (20w50 Mobil 1), and replaced the oil/air separator with a hose directly to the air box.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...psxuzsa1xt.jpg


One thousand ten miles later:

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...ps6qrqhnhh.jpg

Another oil change:

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...ps3ns5s1vn.jpg

The good part:

The magnetic drain plug was not full of sludge as on previous oil changes.

Only small particles:

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...psioidl2y9.jpg

The part that has me concerned:

The oil level sight glass (it was at the mid point at the beginning of the experiment):

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...psypzhsadd.jpg

And the air box drain tube:

Previously, since new, this tube has been empty.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...pstjwda69v.jpg


Tomorrow the oil sample goes off to Blackstone.

On a lighter note, the RX3 has been running GREAT!

No stalling, smooth transmission shifting, good stopping brakes, good power and handling on the steep, curvy mountain roads.

Yesterday at Lake Nottley, near Blairsville, North Georgia:

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...psbwsttwlc.jpg

jb

Thanks for the update! I'm also running a direct line to the airbox and have experienced excellent engine performance. But in my case no residue in the airbox catch tube.

Running the crankcase vent line run directly into the airbox, a little oil in the airbox catch tube is 100% normal. I would even say it's a good thing. If oil contaminants get that far, lighter fuel vapors are almost guaranteed to as well.

Your Blackstone results will tell the full story. If the fuel level in your oil is the same or less than other RX3s that were using the OCS (about 4% fuel), then that's a strong argument against using the OCS and pouring out the catch tube all the time.

Nice work jb! I have yet to have any real collection on my drain plug nor anything in my screens. Weird....

Mrs. 2LZ noticed last night that the elbow was kinked running the OCS in the "correct" position....so today I eliminated it all and ran mine to the ground today like the TT250 to completely eliminate the swamp gas going into the intake, then plugged off the air box inlet.

I cleared the ECM and took it out. Yes, it acts generally better, seemed smoother but the most noticeable thing was it has never idled this nicely. No stalling, very stable 1600-1700 rpms.

I'll put on more miles and see how it goes. I can blow up "bin bags" on the run now!

You may want to put a one-way check valve on the end of that line, or at least a filter. Your crankcase sucks air back in when the piston returns to TDC, and you don't want dirty outside air to get sucked back in there.

jbfla, I assume your bike was warm when you took that oil level reading that shows over full? I've found a good difference between a warm bike oil level and a cold and I have to assume must of us are filling the bikes back up with cold oil post oil change.

Yes, the engine was warm, and I added cold oil for the change.

I'm pretty exact on oil level. I use a measuring cup to add oil for an oil change.

And I check the oil level every time I ride, using the method outlined in the CSC Blog.

The level is always between the two marks on the sight glass.....this is the first time it wasn't.

jb

Whoops, double post. Dangit... :-(

This is something Ive tussled over for years. No bike I've ever owned (in the old days, pre-crank gas recirc) had ever even come with anything but a ground vent. I've been through streams and creaks and have never sucked in any water. I may run a filter on the end just because..........

jb, I just changed my oil yesterday and it was slightly higher than the top measurement on the glass...and I'm pretty sure I had it between them. I was wondering if the kink in my OCS line was causing it NOT to evaporate off the gasoline???? It's the main reason I eliminated it all. Now I need to ride and check it.

Not to highjack but here's a pic.

When changing the oil it really makes no difference if the new oil is room temp or not. Yes, it's best to drain the old oil out when the engine is hot so you get all the suspended particles. When it comes to adding oil the volume is what counts and that hardly changes at all between room temp and 250F. One thing that CSC stresses is how to check your oil. I think that's because there is a sump for the transmission. If you drain both the crankcase and tranny sumps you cannot get a correct measurement on the sight glass until you run the engine a bit and thus fill that sump. As you know, we are talking about a very small volume of oil.

Peter Y.

Here's the correct method for measuring the oil level.....direct from the Zong engineers:

http://californiascooterco.com/blog/?p=17257

jb

2LZ,

I didn't mean to imply that my RX3 engine runs any better with the crankcase vent hose running directly to the airbox.

My engine has always run to perfection.

Even when there was the incident with the damaged cam, the engine started with the first push of the starter button, and ran great.

If I could get the fuel/oil business stabilized, and get someone to adjust the exhaust valves for me, I would have nothing to complain about.... :)

....well, maybe that softer spring for the rear shock would help.... :tup:

jb

LOL! No kidding! Maybe someone can put on a 'travelling exhaust valve adjustment" clinic! I'd pay! We ham-fisted mutants aren't as nimble as we once were.

That's been the one thing between my brothers blue bike and mine. His blips to a start each and every time. Mines always cranked a few, has had odd idles on occasion and also stalled once every blue moon. I'm hoping this vent will cure some of that by opening up proper breathing. It sure helped stabilize the idle.

Experiment # 2

Plugged the hose from the separator canister, and opened the drain tube.

Will ride another 1,000 miles in this configuration to see what happens:

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...psfd5g124j.jpg


Plugged the air box:

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...ps9t0kgz3a.jpg


To make Detours happy, I tried to find a filter or PCV valve to put on the end of the drain tube. The only thing I had that would fit was a right angled fuel filter from my TW 200. Have not decided whether or not to keep it on.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...ps9mbb2lr2.jpg

This was the oil level with the engine fully warmed up.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...pskc9xieee.jpg


I noticed the new oil turned milky colored within a few minutes of starting the engine. I hope this is not an indication of a problem.

jb

It should yield the same result as routing the ocs to the breather box...albeit with more emissions since you are venting the vapor. The milky oil is condensation. ..happens in my older volvo sometimes. Run it and it should burn off. Keep us posted.

Looks more frothy than milky to me.

How does it taste?





Cancel that.

Jay, don't tempt me.....I was dumb enough to do the ballon trick... :)

jb

When I put in new oil, it whips it up and fills it with bubbles.

When the plug on my drain hose was leaking it made an oily mess on everything behind it (as when traveling down the road) which then collected a lot of dirt.

While watching some videos I found another interesting variant. Unfortunately I don't understand a word but at second 23:09 an option is shown how to make use of the otherwise useless liquid in the drain tube. I am not sure it is very clever since the liquid is containing fuel but anyhow have a look your self. :hmm:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHsjoHfHyPU

By the way i am eagerly looking forward for the results of all the different upgrades with respect to oil quality. Thanks for making all the efforts especially in documenting everything.:thanks:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHsjoHfHyPU

Very interesting setup, fritz.

It looks like the man in the video is using the crankcase by products to lubricate the chain.

jb

Old Harley trick. My 74 Ironhead came that way. It had a metal vent line coming from the crankcase that had a valve on the end you could open and close that sat right over the chain that would mist it....and people think HD is behind the times. ;-)

But if the gases coming from the crankcase have fuel fumes, as it seems to be due to fuel contaminating oil by blowby... well, I'm not sure if I want fuel residues over my chain o-rings.

Oil Analysis is complete,

And the results are surprising to me.

1% fuel in the oil.

This is with the crankcase vent hose running directly to the airbox.

No other changes to the bike were made.

The roads ridden, and the riding style were the same as the previous analysis.

Here are the comments from Blackstone:

JB: It's great to see fuel lower this time. There's still a little fuel in the oil, but 1.0% is not problematic as you can get this small of an amount simply from normal use. Potassium and sodium dropped this time, so coolant contamination is no longer a concern. The viscosity is still on the thin side for 20W/50, but with less fuel in the oil, it's closer to the should be range than past samples. Air and oil filtration still look good and wear metals are nice and low once again. They are holding pretty steady overall too and that's good. Better overall since fuel is lower.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...psqnvkyvn4.jpg

I realize that one test doesn't prove anything unless it's repeated multiple times with the same results.

But it puts my mind at ease.

However, I've been doing some additional research, and it turns out that routing the crankcase gases directly to the airbox is not really a good thing.

An article in the Sept 2016 issue of Motorcycle Consumer News (p46) on "blow-by gases" going back into the engine intake states:

"the engine ...is inhaling a mixture of ambient air combined with water, burned and unburned fuel, combustion gases, ash and atomized engine oil that together readily form thick carbon deposits on the intake tract walls, and on the backsides of the intake valves....

......the consequences of this buildup: reduced airflow due to rough, narrowed passages caused by crusty surface....

...these oily gases add to the carbon buildup on the piston crowns and combustion chamber walls..."

And quite by accident I was watching the Motorweek TV show when this was mentioned:

http://www.motorweek.org/features/go...-oil-separator

It looks like routing the crankcase gases back to the engine intake (PCV valve) is a good thing for emissions, but not so good for the engine.

I think I will complete my second test with no crankcase gases going to the airbox.

Then install a new air/oil separator from CSC (already ordered), and try one last analysis.

.....That is if I can accumulate the miles here in North Carolina before the riding season ends for me. The RX3 will stay in NC when I return to FL.

jb

Thanks for posting your Blackstone results, JB!

It's great to see less fuel in the oil ... didn't you have 4% before? I was a little worried that fuel would still condense in the airbox line and drip back into the crankcase. Obviously that's not happening, but like you said, a trend is more indicative than an individual test.

Yes.

Here are the fuel/oil percentages of the 4 oil analyses:

The first 3 with the stock air/oil separator in place.

The last with the OCS removed, and crankcase vented directly to the airbox.

1st.....1%
2nd.... 5.5%
3rd......3.8%
4th.......1%

jb

I think it did condense.

But it drained into the air box drain tube, not back into the crankcase.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...pstjwda69v.jpg

jb

Interesting findings. I agree, I don't want that sludgy air/oil/fuel going into my intake. I'm also interested in the findings of those very few that are running stock OCS with a higher temp Tstat. Maybe it's better to vent it to the outside world, with a check valve so nothing gets sucked in, as I am given to understand there is a slight negative pressure (vacuum) on the crankcase vent tube.

The down side to a check valve is that it will create a substantial vacuum in the cases, pulling more combustion gas past the rings.

On a car engine with multiple cylinders and a PCV valve, there is always one piston rising as another is descending, balancing each other out. On a single it's a serious case of inhale-exhale. That's why an open (but filtered) vent is preferable.

Good thinking, Fritz, but the small amount of fuel would not be a big problem. I would be more concerned how much dirt and other matter is getting pulled back in to the hose when the engine breathes in.

Actually, that's good. That tiny amount of oily residue is about what I would expect from blowby, and it's getting caught in the airbox catch tube. The fuel vapor is getting burned the way it's supposed to, instead of condensing and draining back into the catch tube or the crankcase.

As you might Know i'm using an 85c thermostat with a homemade bypass.

As an example, I do 150 miles commuting over 5 days. 10 trips in total.

The amount I collect in the OCS tube varies from about 1/2 to 1 Inch of fluid.

The picture bellow is the fluid (about 2 weeks worth) in a test tube. You can see that the fluid has separated in to three layers.

Layer 1, seems to be fuel

Layer 2, seems to be emulsified oil *

Layer 3, seems to be water *

* like a dick, i went and shook the test tube before taking the photo :doh:. Layer 2 was a bit thicker before and layer 3 was completely clear, no clouding.
:tup:

Attachment 7264

Great results!

On the recirc of gases into the intake and discussing buildup on the walls, that didn't take into account the main reason I vented mine completely out...and that's because in a fuel injection system, there's sensors involved that aren't in a carburated model. I don't want that swamp gas coating any sensor probes.

I have yet to see if the RX3 has any intake sensors but in the injected cars I've wrenched on, there's MAP/BARO or MAF sensors, along with intake air temp and density sensors that would be subject to this gunk.

There is a reason vehicle manufactures have those "recommended cleaning services" at so many mile intervals :hehe:

Every so many thousand miles (depending on the vehicle it can be as much as 10,000 miles) I do a "4 stage cleaning process"... involves cleaning the sensors, cleaning the TB and Induction chamber, cleaning the fuel system, and cleaning the piston also...

Really easy to do with a can of Electrical/Contact Cleaner to clean all the sensors,

A can of Berryman, Gumout, BG44K or Techron or Reline SI-1, or (you get the idea...) every 3 or 4 full tanks of gas usually keeps the Fuel System/Injectors clean,

And the rest can easily be taken care of with an Air Compressor, a Fuel Induction Canister/Tool (or a can of Asmoil Power Foam) and your favorite can of cleaner for that service... try some AC Delco Upper Engine Cleaner, BG ISC, Penray, Pyroil, 3M, Wynns, or maybe some "SeaFoam" if you feel like wasting some $$ while still getting a smoke show.

Keep everything running like new for years, and you get to keep the Tree Huggers happy by routing your evil emissions back into your engine even tho it gums up sensors and other parts :hehe:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfNTZp6OrQ0

After reading Dave Searle's Open Road column in the Oct 2016 issue of Motorcycle Consumer News (and his Sept column) I am convinced that I want the OSC in place, with the long side on the top.

I install a fuel line shutoff (as suggested by someone) to make it easy to drain the collector tube. I had to "shim" it with a piece of fuel line.

Dan, I tend to agree that there is a good purpose for the OSC.

(Just received the digital version of Oct MCN)

I am going to complete the 1,000 miles experiment, then reinstall the OSC to stock configuration, along with the higher temp thermostat.

jb

OCS is an acronym for Oil Contaminant Separator.

without fully understanding it, and not being an engineer, it "seems" that open to the atmosphere has a downside of increased emissions, but a positive of: lower amounts (by a lot) of fuel in the oil, less viscosity breakdown and better for the engine. Why did you go back to stock with these readings?

FWIW, this experiment proves the benefit of paying for an oil analysis. We are using what is, for us, a new engine. CSC has been super conservative in their maintenance schedule. The question is 'what is reasonable' for oil changes and what kind of wear will be seeing in an engine that lives at 7K rpm or more. I saw a similar benefit from using a higher temp thermostat, less fuel in the oil and better viscosity. As far as I am concerned this was $25 well spent. If others can benefit from these results, that's OK with me. Now I'm ready to go 2K miles between oil changes and if the next analysis is good I'll be ready to extend that interval. Heck, Joe and his gang go 5K miles without a problem so why can't I?

IMO, having the crankcase vented directly to the atmosphere is the best for the engine.

In the October issue of MCN, the article on blowby gases says 60% of those gases are oil mist, which increases the carbon buildup inside the engine.

The TW200 has the crankcase gases go directly into the airbox.

Here's the result: (the photo was taken after I had scraped off about half of the carbon deposits)

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...psc8oio0tv.jpg


This leads me to believe that venting the crankcase directly back to the airbox is the worst for the engine.

I think using the OCS is a compromise, although if the fluids deposited in the OCS drain tube leak out on the ground, it's nearly the same as venting to the atmosphere.



I reinstalled the OCS to the stock configuration because I want to try the higher temperature thermostat, and see what difference that makes.

Depending on the results, I will probably change back to venting to the atmosphere (technically illegal is the US).

jb