OCC and crankcase pressure testing diaries

[Tokay444]

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT SAID THERE WASN'T!!!!!!!!

[KevinK2]

deleted

[Tokay444]

i have never said there wasn't vacuum in the intake. that was you, contradicting YOURself.

Originally Posted by KevinK2 I'm not sure the oem set-up has enough pressure drop across the tee in the intake line to create a vacuum at the valve cover port. Under boost you have high blow-by that flows out the valve cover port ( like on NA engines ) . When at idle, the oem system draws fresh purge air from the valve cover port. On a dedicated dragster, vacuum pumps keep the sump under vacuum for less drag, and purges in the process. The idle purge should remain, and not be blocked as in the nice sketch. .

.

Originally Posted by KevinK2 That port is often noted when you see a write-up on adding a boost controller, and they talk about hooking up a "vacuum line" to it, to carry pressure signal. .

[KevinK2]

You win. I've deleted my posts dealing with you, I suggest you do the same, to keep Matt's great thread on topic.

[Tokay444]

Matt and myself are friends. if he needs them deleted, i will.

[KevinK2]

You don't want to clean-up Matt's thread about vacuum/pressure measurements. So now some explanation is needed from me.



1) I admit that I caused confusion, when you mentioned putting the VC hose to the intake at the compressor. I took it literally, and talked about the boost control port on the boost side of the compressor, which was wrong. Sorry about that.



2) But before you made one comment/reply, I had made it clear that I thought vacuum in the upgraded intake/filter systems was not likely (#31).



3) But as I read it, you were not consistent about this:

Originally Posted by Tokay444 put the outlet of the vent right at the compressor housing. as boost increases, so will vacuum on that vent. (#34)

Rephrased: Vacuum is applied to the VC vent as boost rises. Thus vacuum must exist in the intake pipe's vent line connection.

Originally Posted by Tokay444 vent being the valve cover vent, and it's outlet, being the end of the hose you patch into the intake. i'm speaking to you, saying there is no vacuum in the intake. (#39)

So which is it?



4) Finally, on the later quotes from me that you posted (#43) :

Originally Posted by Tokay444 i have never said there wasn't vacuum in the intake. that was you, contradicting YOURself.

There is no contradiction by me:

In the first quote, I was saying no vacuum at the VC port, when under boost.

In the second, I was talking about the boost control port (my mistake) having pressure in the "vacuum hose" going to the boost controller.


.

[Matt@DamondMotorsports]

I hope this will clear things up a bit, and I've been meaning to update the set-up I'm currently running.

To answer your question Kevin... I think this is what you were asking. I did measure the vacuum pulled from a couple intakes during testing. This was at the port on an aftermarket Cobb SRI, a CS TIP, and an HTP full 3.5" intake. I don't believe I posted those reading, I have them in my notes... somewhere. Generally speaking though the intakes which had the PCV port closer to the turbo itself would pull a stronger vacuum as more air rushed in.

Pressure/vacuum measured at the crankcase was done via an oil cap I modified. I'm looking to get better testing equipment to measure this, along with possibly tapping the breather box, it see if I can get a better reading from lower in the crankcase.

I did have a couple customers run this set-up, with good results.

Originally Posted by Damond Motorsports Stock turbo: At engine idle 20-21in/Hg: 1 to 3in/Hg At full boost WOT 20psi: .5 to 1psi(depending on intake) Big turbo: At engine idle 20-21in/Hg: 1 to 3in/Hg At full boost WOT 28psi: .5 to 1psi Conclusions: this set-up worked the best to evacuate extra pressures on both the ST and BT cars. The slight pressures seen are due to the cracking pressure of the VTA CV and the PCV valve being a restriction. The intake is still in place to pull a vacuum and help to keep pressures down. I believe this to be the best way to relieve excess crankcase pressures on speeds up to 30psi of boost.

However, I did not like the fact for pressure to VTA from the crankcase, it would have to overcome the restriction of the PCV valve. So I've simplified that a little with modifying my PCV box to accept a check valve that will VTA pressure at the crankcase, and only have to overcome the cracking pressure of the check valve.

I've been running this on my car for 7k+ miles so far with no issues, but then again I'm only running 20psi of boost on a K04. I'll be testing this soon on @silvapain; BT MS3, and he has dip stick popping issues. I also have a customer who'll be trying on the CV on his VTA set-up.






If this works out well, I'll start selling it as an add-on for ppl looking to modify their existing PCV box, and a kit for the Perm plate as well. Prices would be $25-30 plus shipping most likely.






And just to confuse everyone, I have my manifold vacuum source to my OCC via the EGR port:

[Tokay444]

Originally Posted by KevinK2 You don't want to clean-up Matt's thread about vacuum/pressure measurements. So now some explanation is needed from me. 1) I admit that I caused confusion, when you mentioned putting the VC hose to the intake at the compressor. I took it literally, and talked about the boost control port on the boost side of the compressor, which was wrong. Sorry about that. 2) But before you made one comment/reply, I had made it clear that I thought vacuum in the upgraded intake/filter systems was not likely (#31). 3) But as I read it, you were not consistent about this: Rephrased: Vacuum is applied to the VC vent as boost rises. Thus vacuum must exist in the intake pipe's vent line connection. So which is it? 4) Finally, on the later quotes from me that you posted (#43) : There is no contradiction by me: In the first quote, I was saying no vacuum at the VC port, when under boost. In the second, I was talking about the boost control port (my mistake) having pressure in the "vacuum hose" going to the boost controller. .

You are a special kind of inept aren't you.
I never said there wasn't any vacuum in the intake. YOU did. I was speaking TO YOU, and YOUR comment about there NOT being enough vacuum.

[btstarcher]

I just don't like getting that shit in my intake.

[Matrix311]

Originally Posted by Damond Motorsports I hope this will clear things up a bit, and I've been meaning to update the set-up I'm currently running. To answer your question Kevin... I think this is what you were asking. I did measure the vacuum pulled from a couple intakes during testing. This was at the port on an aftermarket Cobb SRI, a CS TIP, and an HTP full 3.5" intake. I don't believe I posted those reading, I have them in my notes... somewhere. Generally speaking though the intakes which had the PCV port closer to the turbo itself would pull a stronger vacuum as more air rushed in. Pressure/vacuum measured at the crankcase was done via an oil cap I modified. I'm looking to get better testing equipment to measure this, along with possibly tapping the breather box, it see if I can get a better reading from lower in the crankcase. I did have a couple customers run this set-up, with good results. However, I did not like the fact for pressure to VTA from the crankcase, it would have to overcome the restriction of the PCV valve. So I've simplified that a little with modifying my PCV box to accept a check valve that will VTA pressure at the crankcase, and only have to overcome the cracking pressure of the check valve. I've been running this on my car for 7k+ miles so far with no issues, but then again I'm only running 20psi of boost on a K04. I'll be testing this soon on @silvapain; BT MS3, and he has dip stick popping issues. I also have a customer who'll be trying on the CV on his VTA set-up. If this works out well, I'll start selling it as an add-on for ppl looking to modify their existing PCV box, and a kit for the Perm plate as well. Prices would be $25-30 plus shipping most likely. And just to confuse everyone, I have my manifold vacuum source to my OCC via the EGR port:

Since you have that check valve off the PCV plate going VTA, did this replace the hose in our diagram that goes from the OCC to the "T" with the check valve and breather filter or do you still run that breather filter/check valve which then goes to the IM?

[5LOWMS6]

I'm running the 2nd setup you mentioned with the exception of having the VC breather VTA.
I get very little amounts of oil and crap in the occ every 1000 kms. And the filter on the breather spits out small amounts of oil all around it.
I'm wondering whether my pcv valve is working properly or not since I'm not getting too much crap in the occ. or can my engine be that healthy? Any input is appreciated.

[KevinK2]

Originally Posted by Tokay444 You are a special kind of inept aren't you. I never said there wasn't any vacuum in the intake. YOU did. I was speaking TO YOU, and YOUR comment about there NOT being enough vacuum.

I admitted where I misinterpreted what you meant about a connection at the compressor. That is far from being inept.

Your quote of my comment dopped the quotes of you that had been there. I"ll repeat those quotes with inconsistent answers you had given about vacuum in the intake:


~From my post #46 :


3) But as I read it, you were not consistent about this:


Originally Posted by Tokay444
put the outlet of the vent right at the compressor housing. as boost increases, so will vacuum on that vent. (#34)

Sooo vacuum is applied to the VC vent as boost rises. Thus vacuum must exist in the intake pipe, at the vent line connection?


Originally Posted by Tokay444
vent being the valve cover vent, and it's outlet, being the end of the hose you patch into the intake.
i'm speaking to you, saying there is no vacuum in the intake. (#39)


So you say as boost increases there is vacuum at the VC vent.

And you say there is no vacuum in the intake.


Both can not be true.

.

[KevinK2]

Originally Posted by 5LOWMS6 I'm running the 2nd setup you mentioned with the exception of having the VC breather VTA....

You mean the one after stock, or 2nd after stock with IM port closed?

.

[5LOWMS6]

Originally Posted by KevinK2 You mean the one after stock, or 2nd after stock with IM port closed? .

The 2nd OCC setup, I'm not counting the stock. So yes IM port plugged, pcv to occ to intake.


Sent from my C6903 using Tapatalk

[Tokay444]

Originally Posted by KevinK2 Both can not be true. .

vent being the valve cover vent, and it's outlet, being the end of the hose you patch into the intake.
i'm speaking to you, saying there is no vacuum in the intake. (#39)

This right here, this was me speaking to YOU when YOU had asked who I was answering. Since no actual question was posed from you, I was not answering anything. I was speaking TO YOU about YOU saying there wasn't any vacuum in the intake. YOU said there wasn't. No me.

[lito37]

I have a similar concerns. So I modified the pcv plate from my back up motor and use a pcv from a Nissan 300 zx turbo tap into the intake.

[lito37]

I'm going to run a air pump out of a s10 as a vacuum pump with a pressure switch set at 2psi

[KevinK2]

Tokay, you also said this, which was not an answer to my prior question to Matt regarding his measurments.

put the outlet of the vent right at the compressor housing. as boost increases, so will vacuum on that vent.

You can't ignore it, and it makes no sense. That's all you. Get a grip and stop harrasing to save face.

.

[btstarcher]

What, why wouldn't it? Air is moving through the intake faster, ergo more vacuum.

[KevinK2]

I used a special vacuum gauge to measure the intake on the tracked Rx7, and after eliminating restrictions, the vacuum was negligable. You have a point though. Just need to do a bernulli calc for the change from static atmospheric (neglecting ram, worst case) and then high flow in the ~3.5" intake.

[KevinK2]

Originally Posted by 5LOWMS6 I'm running the 2nd setup you mentioned with the exception of having the VC breather VTA. I get very little amounts of oil and crap in the occ every 1000 kms. And the filter on the breather spits out small amounts of oil all around it. I'm wondering whether my pcv valve is working properly or not since I'm not getting too much crap in the occ. or can my engine be that healthy? Any input is appreciated.

With that set-up, if pressure builds in the cc, it will start to reduce the flow area of the PCV valve. Don't know the numbers, but it's a possible reason the occ does less venting vs the the VC to filter.

Now if you gut the PCV valve and turn it into an elbo (like Matt said) and use a CV, more flow is likely to the OCC.

When you have standard PCV valve routing, you have IM vacuum at idle and at speed as well ... even when the turbo is producing low boost on the highway. The IM will show vacuum, but the charged pipe/hose has pressure, so you get that v8 feel on the highway, with instant boost at tip in, for stock or +1 turbo.

.

[Tokay444]

Originally Posted by KevinK2 Tokay, you also said this, which was not an answer to my prior question to Matt regarding his measurments. You can't ignore it, and it makes no sense. That's all you. Get a grip and stop harrasing to save face. .

I stand by that statement.

[mtosofsky]

However, I did not like the fact for pressure to VTA from the crankcase, it would have to overcome the restriction of the PCV valve. So I've simplified that a little with modifying my PCV box to accept a check valve that will VTA pressure at the crankcase, and only have to overcome the cracking pressure of the check valve

Isn't the idea still better than nothing though? Granted it has to overcome the stock pcv and also crack the 2nd check valve, but with the standard sealed can layout the check valve for the manifold keeps the pcv from venting the block anyway when in boost. I mean i know you know this, but im just figuring its better than nothing. Its easier for those of us who dont want to remove the pcv box to modify it.

[Matt@DamondMotorsports]

Originally Posted by btstarcher I just don't like getting that shit in my intake.

The VC baffling does a pretty good job at this. Unless you have higher amounts of pressure in the crankcase. The main reason I use check valves in my kits, is to prevent BOOST from entering the crankcase, via the prone to leaking PCV valve. So on most applications it works well to keep pressure out of the crankcase, in turn keeping shit out of the intake.

However, one you start upping the BOOOOOOOST, or have more blow-by(larger ring gap, worn rings, broken ringlands, holes in pistons, etc.) then you'll see more pressure in the crankcase, and in turn the intake may get a tad oily.

My TIP is bone dry at 20psi... tehehe

Originally Posted by Matrix311 Since you have that check valve off the PCV plate going VTA, did this replace the hose in our diagram that goes from the OCC to the "T" with the check valve and breather filter or do you still run that breather filter/check valve which then goes to the IM?

It's basically the same as this set-up, just with the box modified:

http://i797.photobucket.com/albums/y...psb22cc64d.png

Originally Posted by 5LOWMS6 I'm running the 2nd setup you mentioned with the exception of having the VC breather VTA. I get very little amounts of oil and crap in the occ every 1000 kms. And the filter on the breather spits out small amounts of oil all around it. I'm wondering whether my pcv valve is working properly or not since I'm not getting too much crap in the occ. or can my engine be that healthy? Any input is appreciated.

It could be a combination of things or a simple thing.

Most of what the OCC will capture is determined by your driving habits, and the temperature of your environment.

Lots of WOT, you'll get more oil. Lots of light cursing and idling you'll get more condensation.

In the cold, you'll collect more condensation.

If your OCC isn't baffled, some of the oil, fuel, condensation may find it's way back in the intake. If you're using a low flowing check valve, or a secondary PCV valve, you way not be pulling a good enough vacuum to evacuate crankcase gasses.

Originally Posted by lito37 I have a similar concerns. So I modified the pcv plate from my back up motor and use a pcv from a Nissan 300 zx turbo tap into the intake.

That's a pretty sweet set-up. Does that PCV valve work well as a check valve too?

Originally Posted by mtosofsky Isn't the idea still better than nothing though? Granted it has to overcome the stock pcv and also crack the 2nd check valve, but with the standard sealed can layout the check valve for the manifold keeps the pcv from venting the block anyway when in boost. I mean i know you know this, but im just figuring its better than nothing. Its easier for those of us who dont want to remove the pcv box to modify it.

I guess, and I have seen success with a customers test running it. I would want to get more testing done myself on this set-up, before selling it. I do have a way of incorporating this set-up into an OCC that I will be testing... hopefully shortly.

The VTA valve and fittings too are bulky and huge since I used plastic components.

[mtosofsky]

I guess, and I have seen success with a customers test running it. I would want to get more testing done myself on this set-up, before selling it. I do have a way of incorporating this set-up into an OCC that I will be testing... hopefully shortly. The VTA valve and fittings too are bulky and huge since I used plastic components.

Im interested to see how it works out. Either way it doesnt seem like it would be any worse off then just sticking with the standard sealed set-up. I'll be checking back in for updates =]

[lito37]

Originally Posted by Damond Motorsports That's a pretty sweet set-up. Does that PCV valve work well as a check valve too?.

Ye. But make sure you get the one from Napa part # 2-9303 it was $9.73 with tax. The one from Auto Zone and Discount auto leaks and to top it off when I try to explain it to the counter person he told me was nothing wrong with that. That way it was only 3.99.

[KevinK2]

Originally Posted by Tokay444 vent being the valve cover vent, and it's outlet, being the end of the hose you patch into the intake. i'm speaking to you, saying there is no vacuum in the intake. (#39)

**** Edited after ToKay's following post ****

I finally get it. Your sentence could have 2 meanings, as it is not correctly written. I confimed this with an english teacher I know. It could mean:

i'm speaking .... saying there is no vacuum in the intake

or

i'm speaking to you, who is saying there is no vacuum in the intake

I assumed the 1st version, you meant the 2nd version.


Despute Closed. Cause of misunderstanding: Tokay's inability to write a sentence with correct grammer.


But to answer your fowl mouthed bashes on my intellegence, you who could not write a correct sentence, feel free to challenge my knowledge on any mechanical subject in the car world or outside.

As one example of MY work, I did the structural design of a light weight, aerodynamic, 3 spoked carbon fiber/epoy bicycle wheel that was used in many pro races. It was used in every time-trial that Lance Armstrong did in all his Tour-de-France victories. Even though I did the work in 1990, it was still used in the TDF bya recent winner .... Cadel Wiggens.

Wiggen's TT Bike

Hed-3 3 Spoke Wheel, aka Specialized tri-spoke wheel

.

[Tokay444]

You are clearly a fucking retard. I was about to get angry, since all you're doing is talking in circles with me, but it would be unbecoming of me to be upset at the mentally challenged.
I stand by my post about vaulcuum increasing at the compressor inlet, as boost rises.
I never stated there wasn't vacuum in the intake. That was you who stated that. I provided a contradictory statement to YOU about YOUR statement. I haven't on e contradicted myself. Only you.
I'll reword this statement for you to better understand.
You had asked "who are you answering?..." And I wrote


Originally Posted by Tokay444
vent being the valve cover vent, and it's outlet, being the end of the hose you patch into the intake.
i'm speaking to you, saying there is no vacuum in the intake. (#39)

What I should have written was, "I'm answering you, even though you hadn't posed a question yet, regarding your statement that there is no vacuum in the intake. I oppose your statement."

[atvfreek]

WOW

[KevinK2]

[quote Tokay] ... What I should have written ...... regarding your statement that there is no vacuum in the intake. ...."

I NEVER made that definitive statement. This is what I asked Matt about:

[quote Kevin] Have you done any intake measurments to see if there really is a vacuum? With most MS3's and MS6's in this crowd having CAI's and open filters, I thought it would be unlikely for an intake vacuum to exist to help pull out crankcase vapors.[/quote].

I asked Matt for a definitive answer based on measurments, and I let him know what I had though, knowing that if he did measure it ( or did a CFD run ), then the intake did have vacuum in it.

Learn English so you don't keep twisting the truth.


.

[KevinK2]

Originally Posted by atvfreek WOW

Well done on your sealed PCV system, good for 27psi plus. Dual CC's, connected like Matt's last configuration, is the way to go.

.

[Tokay444]

Originally Posted by KevinK2 [quote Tokay]] ... What I should have written ...... regarding your statement that there is no vacuum in the intake. ...." I NEVER made that definitive statement. This is what I asked Matt about: [quote Kevin] Have you done any intake measurments to see if there really is a vacuum? With most MS3's and MS6's in this crowd having CAI's and open filters, I thought it would be unlikely for an intake vacuum to exist to help pull out crankcase vapors. . I asked Matt for a definitive answer based on measurments, and I let him know what I had though, knowing that if he did measure it ( or did a CFD run ), then the intake did have vacuum in it. Learn English so you don't keep twisting the truth. .

Makes not a shed of difference whether you said it definitively or not. The point I'VE been trying to make for two pages now, was that I DIDN'T say it. YOU DID.

Originally Posted by KevinK2 **** Edited after ToKay's following post **** I finally get it. Your sentence could have 2 meanings, as it is not correctly written. I confimed this with an english teacher I know. It could mean: i'm speaking .... saying there is no vacuum in the intake or i'm speaking to you, who is saying there is no vacuum in the intake I assumed the 1st version, you meant the 2nd version. Despute Closed. Cause of misunderstanding: Tokay's inability to write a sentence with correct grammer. But to answer your fowl mouthed bashes on my intellegence, you who could not write a correct sentence, feel free to challenge my knowledge on any mechanical subject in the car world or outside. As one example of MY work, I did the structural design of a light weight, aerodynamic, 3 spoked carbon fiber/epoy bicycle wheel that was used in many pro races. It was used in every time-trial that Lance Armstrong did in all his Tour-de-France victories. Even though I did the work in 1990, it was still used in the TDF bya recent winner .... Cadel Wiggens. Wiggen's TT Bike Hed-3 3 Spoke Wheel, aka Specialized tri-spoke wheel .

Tl;dr.
Does the wheel have dimples, like a golfball?

[Tokay444]

Takes Internet posts to English teach.
Wants respect.
Daduq you think this is?

[KevinK2]

Originally Posted by Tokay444 Makes not a shed of difference whether you said it definitively or not. The point I'VE been trying to make for two pages now, was that I DIDN'T say it. YOU DID.

Makes all the difference.

If you could write a correct sentence, 2 pages would not have been wasted with your foul posts based on a vague comment of yours. Have a grade school teacher show you that your comment was ambiguous.

Originally Posted by Tokay Takes Internet posts to English teach. Wants respect. Daduq you think this is?

Talks to himself ........ you need help.

I had to defend my integrity after your crude attack:

Originally Posted by Tokay you can't read You are a special kind of inept aren't you You are clearly a fucking retard mentally challenged.

You have yet to demonstrate trace amounts of intellegence.

.

[Tokay444]

You were the only one who had a problem deciphering my statement.

[KevinK2]

Originally Posted by Damond Motorsports I hope this will clear things up a bit, and I've been meaning to update the set-up I'm currently running. To answer your question Kevin... I think this is what you were asking. I did measure the vacuum pulled from a couple intakes during testing. This was at the port on an aftermarket Cobb SRI, a CS TIP, and an HTP full 3.5" intake. I don't believe I posted those reading, I have them in my notes... somewhere. Generally speaking though the intakes which had the PCV port closer to the turbo itself would pull a stronger vacuum as more air rushed in. ......

Thanks for the reply Damond. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought you were the first to make and sell manual boost controlers back in the 90's ?

Here it sounds like the closer to the compressor inlet, the more the influence of the relatively small inducer dia, relative to the larger funnel section where the inlet coupling hose attaches. So there is some higher velocity flow in this transition, that would drop the ambient air to a vacuum.

Do you remember what the highest vacuum readings were?


Regarding vc and cc pressures, would they be the same, due to the volumes being connected at the timing chain location?

Lastly, rather than adding an extra vented line to the pcv box, add it to the VC that combines with the oem vc line, and to another CC then to the TIP. This would allow a closed system with high boost and low cc pressure. Similar to atvfreek's set-up:

atvfreek's dual can set-up


.

[Tokay444]

Mazda has already moved the port for the valve cover vent from just aft of the maf housing, to turbo inlet pipe to pull more vacuum on the block and help with smoking turbo syndrome.
the system you just posed, is what I have been telling people to run, for a long time now.

[KevinK2]

I guess we agree with vtafreek's sealed system, with an extra vc vent and both going to another occ before connecting to the TIP.

Both Matt's newest version, with an extra CC VTA, and vtafreek's set-up, provides extra venting compared to his 4th & last design shown on page 1, that had reduced cc pressure to .5 to 1.0 psi @ 28 psi on a BT.

Hope he can do more measurements with a 3rd line to vent the cc ... both his open system and vtafreek's sealed system.

Either way, there should be baffeling inboard of the new vent.

.

[KevinK2]

Originally Posted by atvfreek I was originally running your option1 until I cranked boost up to 27psi seeing what this bnr was made of, when my dipstick decided it would rather hang out in my hood scoop and spray oil everywhere. Lol. (Actually wasn't that funny because it sucked to clean up) At that time I decided I would try option 2, in which cs runs a similar method. That worked great at keeping my dipstick at bay, but I started to get an oil leak at my turbo oil return line. Seems these cars definitely like vacuum on the cc whenever possible to help with oil control issues. So on a mission I tried option3 (mind you I've been messing with this since before Xmas). This is what I came up with to run inline with the hose to the IM from the occ I had it long enough so that when cc vapor would escape through my little filter it would sort of get sucked in through my air filter and keep the odor at a minimum. I ran that setup with great success for a couple months. However I wanted to add an occ inline with my vc port. When thinking of a plan, I decided it would be best to run a traditional can like option 1, then add a second vc port to allow additional vapor to find its way out of my cc with ease. So I ordered this from matt. It's a dual occ setup and I now run a fully closed system. This has been working flawlessly with my 2 vc ports going to one can and routed back to the tip. Then the other can is setup like option 1. No dipstick flying out, no odor after hard wot runs, no oil leaks. Happy car!!!

How much oil/krap from the two VC vents get caught in the OCC, that exits to the TIP ?

.

[CosmicArkie]

Matt,

Have you gotten a chance to put together the retrofit VTA kits yet?

Do you have a feel for the actual volume of air being moved from the VC to the TIP in
the case of the stock/sealed system?

TIA