Extended sump question

[Dietmar]

John:

First, let me say this. Whether the suggestions come from me or anyone else, they are all considered and weighed equally. No one gets special consideration- or lack of because their name is not familiar to the Committee. So, come up with ideas (about this or anything else you want considered) as we are always looking for new topics for discussion ( as you will see in the Committee News once it is finalized for this month).

The part that is on e-bay is not necessarily a "solution" but rather a different style of oil sump. I believe there is one that I saw at the BD Party that is identical but without the square boss on the side for the drain plug. There are other "styles" too that are available that would meet your needs.

Looking forward to hearing your suggestion(s)

Dietmar

[Bill_Bonow]

OK, pile up your supply of rocks and get one in hand. I know this will get flamed, stoned and trample till the end of time, but.......

A simple dry sump system will solve these very common FV oiling issues. My bet is that the general engine life (time between lower end rebuilds) will go way up.

The first (and most common argument is "that is part of FV, knowing how to baffle and setting the oil level correctly". That is absolute BS, just look at how many newbie guys like John who have blown an engine at their first outing. How is that positive for the future of FV?

The second argument is HP gain. In FST, some made wild claims of 10+ HP would be gained. Not at all. Of all the tests performed, 1 to 2 HP at top end was typical and the best was 3 hp at 6500 rpm. Not the end of the earth by any means.

The last argument is cost. An off the shelf Schadek dry sump pump is $125.00 (with fittings), $300 for a tank and add $100 for hoses, brackets, ect. The one time cost of dry sump is WAY less than the cost to rebuild one blown engine.

You no longer need sump extensions, sump or push rod baffles. Oil level can vary by a quart without issue. The best part is NO MORE OIL LEAKS. The scavenge keeps a very slight vacuum in the case (rather than pressure) and all that FV oily mess goes bye-bye.

I'm not sure why I'm posting this as people frying in hell will be getting refreshing ice water much sooner than dry sump will ever be legal in FV. After using dry sump for a couple of season in FST and our oil related failure rates going ZERO, I guess I just wanted to suggest an alternative.

I've dug a hole, I'm covered in a sheet and burried myself up to my waist. Let the stoning begin.

Bill

[Matt King]

I'll ask again about an Accusump, since it's already legal and cheaper than a dry sump system. Is there any reason NOT to use one? With the external coolers most engines have, plumbing one is simple. The only objection I could see is weight and locating it, but the 1-quart Canton Accusump is about the size of a fire bottle and should not be too hard to squirrel away somewhere. I'd take the weight penalty if it meant not having to worry about blowing up an engine.

[CitationFV21]

[quote="Bill_Bonow"]OK, pile up your supply of rocks and get one in hand. I know this will get flamed, stoned and trample till the end of time, but.......

A simple dry sump system will solve these very common FV oiling issues. My bet is that the general engine life (time between lower end rebuilds) will go way up.

........

Bill[/quote]

Bill,

Let me jump in. I was responsible for getting the Accusump allowed in FV. Not becuase of any performance reason, just becuase I was tired of seeing that it was approved for all classes EXCEPT FV (and SS I think). I did it more as an excercise in learning how the rules change process worked rather than any performance or reliablity change.

Having said that, one of the reasons to like FV is that it has no dry sump, radiators, fuel injection, computer ignition, etc. KISS

Having worked on FFs, dry sump systems do leak, pumps do wear out, hoses break etc. And the less oil we carry, the less is dropped on the track when a valve cover is knocked off, or a pushrod damaged. I have used the same try sump extension that came with my car for almost 30 years and 2 different cars - no problem - no, not completely true - I lost the pickup pipe during a practice at Lime Rock and noticed a drop in oil pressure in the downhill. Dropped the sump, put the pipe back on and asked Dave Carr if there was a problem - he said no - ran another 10 races on that motor - took it apart and was no damage.

Did run synthetic oil and an electric guage so I saw the problem before it got too bad.

BTW, you can run a mechanical guage if you use a 3/16 or bigger ID hose instead of the 1/8" tubing that comes with stock guages, but since we now have to run braided hose in the cockpit, the cost of the electric guage is the same and a wire never leaked on a new driver's suit.

I am sure the suppliers and the engine builders can supply a proper sump for someone building their own motors. If you are not running one - get one - I think less that $50.??? (Jim S - typical price?) The only cars that might need something special are those with a tilted motor (Lazer and XTC?). I am not even sure a windage tray is necessary - engine builders jump in here - it has been 20 years since I saw the inside of mine.

Gene Grimes used to get 25 + races out of a bottom end when he was running with EMRA and if Gene could do it.......<grin>.

Bottom line is that if you can keep the oil in the engine, then what we have right now can work.

Chris Zarzycki
Citation FV21

[brp]

I had already asked the seller (builder) of the sumps on ebay about how deep they were (from case mounting surface to the actual bottom of the sump).. His reply to me was that were a shade over 1 5/8" deep.

I did not ask about the outside diameter of the bottom of the sump where the drain bolt is.

I used to build the 'standard style' steel sumps (cut out the sump plate, weld in a piece of tubing and then weld in the cut out piece of the original sump). The style of this sump and the ones made by Erik Oseth are probably much better at keeping the oil around the pickup tube.

Mike

[hardingfv32-1]

Unless someone can CLEARLY state the reasoning behind the sump rule, it would seem this part should be unrestricted. I cannot envision any circumstance where this area could provide ANY performance gain. But of coarse it has ALWAYS been there, so it must be correct!

Added depth is the best answer for the sump design, but we are restricted by ground clearance. Adding volume through additional width is not the answer unless you provide a very complex trap door baffle system. Added volume just provides space for the oil to flow away from the pickup.

Brian

[SR Racing]

Answers to a couple questions and comments:

Yes, we make our sumps up on demand. So for under $50 we can make you one to any size (depth) you want. (Or slant in the case of Lazers, XTC's etc, with tilted motors.)

Accusump: We carry and sell them, and have the 1 quart (FV size) in stock. They are somewhat problematic with a Vee though.
They are typically configured for either a "pre-oiler" system or a "safety oiler". The first you turn on with a switch and the bearings are pre-oiled. The tank re-fills as soon as you start the engine. The 2nd option works when your oil pressure drops below a pre-determined point, the tank fills the oil gallery with oil pressure for about 5 - 15 seconds when your sump supply dries up. You can plumb the system to do both but it takes more valves and wiring. Even more complicated than a dry sump. The other problem is that when the safety type system kicks in you basically dump another quart of oil in the engine. This is typically going to happen in a corner when you are on and off the brakes. More oil now sloshes forward and with no front seal you just throw out more oil. Every Vee I have seen with a Accusump type system usually comes back pretty oilly. We have them in most of our V8's that don't allow dry sumps, but they of course don't have the oil mess (and usually don't have the corner starvation problems any ways.)

Vee Dry Sumps... Probably not an acceptable solution at this point in the game for Vees, but they are magic... Maintenance is a non issue. There are multiple manufacurers making them We have used 2 types. Both are direct drive off the existing cam system and are 2 stage. (1 large scavange stage and 1 pressure stage.) No belts and it mounts in the same spot as your existing pump.

Maybe a couple extra HP at peak (FST), probably up to a 40 deg drop in oil temps and engines so clean you can eat off them. No dip sticks, no oil filler neck, no blowby and constant oil pressure no matter how bad the corner G forces, no matter how long. Checking oil is as simple as looking in the tank. +/- a quart, no big deal... <g> Since the oil stays much cooler we are running it 3 weekends now.

We have looked at data from Vees and FST's (before dry sumps). They ALL have wild dips in oil pressures under breaking in the corners, etc. The faster you are, the worse the problem. You might not even see it on the gauge since they ar slow to react, but it is not unusual to see under 10lbs of oil pressure at times. A Vee with only 60+ lbs of torque gets hurt, but can survive the season in most cases. We found our FST's didn't like 10 lbs of oil pressure with 100 lbs of torque. (Peak torque is where the engine is hurt. Right where you get on the throttle at corner exit. Right about the time you have all your oil in the valve cover and the sump is emptying)

With a dry sump FST, our oil pressure is 28 to 40 lbs, sees 220 deg max on a warm day and oil related failures are a thing of the past.

This is not any support to change the FV rules, since I don't think I would even support it at this time. It is probably a $600 impact to initial costs. (tank, fittings, pump, etc.) (Allthough pay back might occur in the first year.) I just wanted to tell you how neat they are.

When Vees were out there only turning 1 to 1.2 G corners and 6000 RPM max. the oil system was adequate. At 1.6G's and 6800 RPM, they are way past their safety limit and are always on the hairy edge of turning a bearing. (Not to mention the heat and mess.)

[SR Racing]

I have no idea on why the existing sump volume rule is there. There is not a real "performance"
issue with additional oil in the sump. (Other than maybe being able to finish the race )

That might be a rule that should be looked at. We have some "slim line" aftermarket sumps that can hold about 3/4 quart of oil.

[Matt King]

Jim, I don't completely agree with your description of how an Accusump works, although not being very familiar with Vees, it may very well be that they tend to push some oil out due to the poor sealing. For one thing, the plumbing is the same for either use as a pre oiler or a "safety" device. An Accusump never dumps its full contents into the engine because there is restriction through the oil passages. If you want proof of this, drain all the oil out of the sump and open the valve. It will take quite a while for the contents of the accumulator to drain through the bearings and oil galleys. I have verified this while doing oil changes. It take a couple of minutes for a 3-quart Accusump to drain through a V-8; a 1-quart in a Vee will obviously be quicker, but the principle is the same. The Accusump works on pressure differential between the cylinder and the system oil pressure. If the pressure in the system is the same as in the cylinder, there is equilibrium. If the pressure in the system drops, the cylinder discharges until equilibrium is restored. The only way the Accusump would drain its entire contents into the engine is if oil pressure is lost long enough to consume the capacity of the cylinder.

[SR Racing]

Matt,

The accusump is typically air charged to some predeterminded amount. If the charge is 20lbs, anytime the pressure in the gallery is less than this the accusump will start to dump oil. If the oil pressure in the engine drops to 10 lbs, the accusump will empty its total contents (or until the engine oil pressure comes back to a higher level) Since a vee idles warm at under 10 lbs, most if not all of the accusump oil will be in the engine case. Since most V8's never get that low it never happens.

While the plumbing is the same, different valves are used for the 2 applications. That is what I am referring to. A vee would require the EPC valve and pressure switch which is $185 alone.

A V8 3qt accusump will drain it's contents in about 30 secs or less. A V-10 (Viper) drains in about 20 secs. (with no oil pressure). Certainly if you have oil pressure it won't always drain completely or as fast.

We have installed several of them. (In multiple configurations) You can see the info here.

http://www.accusump.com/accusump_tech.html#Whatvalve

Valve and pricing info is here.

http://www.cantonracingproducts.com/cgi ... egory=2425

They are fine products, and would probably protect a vee engine, but due to the oil level sensitivity, blowby and lack of front seal in a vee they are very messy.

[Matt King]

Canton recommends a base air charge of 5-7 psi. The rest of the pressure in the cylinder is created by the pressure from the oiling system. It may discharge some of the contents at idle, but that's not really what you care about. It's in the high-G corner with a momentary loss of pressure that you care about, and I guarantee that you won't be in that condition long enough to empty the entire cylinder into the sump. With a manual valve you pre-oil by opening the valve with the engien off, firing the motor, then shutting the valve after the pressure builds back to equilibrium. On track, the valve stays open and the Accusump works as an accumulator. There is no reason you couldn't use a manual valve in a Vee, you would just need to either mount the Accusump near the driver or remotely mount the valve, which is easy to do. I guess there isn't much you can do about the oil blowby given the way these engines are sealed.

[SR Racing]

Canton recommends 7-10 lbs. Anything less than that and you won't even get full use of the oil in the canister. And as I mentioned, a warm vee idles at under 10, so the canister will empty at that point. Another draw back to a accusump with manual valve only, is that point when the tank does drop most of it's oil and then needs to be refilled. The engine oil pump now has to put oil into the gallery AND into the canister this is usually occuring at lower RPM near max torque, when the bearings need the most oil. The other problem with a manual valve in a Vee is where to put it and have access to it by the driver.
For most of the above reasons I think there might only be a couple accusumps in RR Vees in the country.

[jpetillo]

Canton recommends 7-10 lbs. Anything less than that and you won't even get full use of the oil in the canister. And as I mentioned, a warm vee idles at under 10, so the canister will empty at that point.

The more pre-pressure, the less of the volume that you can fill at max pressure, which also limits how much you can make use of its volume . I'm not arguing, just trying to understand if I'm thinking of this right.

I agree that the canister will empty at idle. So, using a manual valve you'd shut it after you hold the RPM up high enough after starting and get some oil back into the AccuSump. This may be a pain in the neck to do, but doable.

Another draw back to a accusump with manual valve only, is that point when the tank does drop most of it's oil and then needs to be refilled. The engine oil pump now has to put oil into the gallery AND into the canister this is usually occurring at lower RPM near max torque, when the bearings need the most oil.

Yes, good point - that's right about the oil pump having to provide oil to both the accusump and the engine, and you do want good pressure at low RPM. The accusump would empty using the 7-10 preload when the pressure drops below that for long enough. If the pressure drops only to 14-20, then it's stays 1/2 full. At 60 psi, it's still 1/6th empty. I'm straying... Anyway, it's not clear that this is a problem - that the accusump dumps most it's oil when off the throttle and going into a corner. If it happens during a corner, then I'd take anything it would give me.

A solution to having to fill both the accusump and provide oil pressure would be a damper on the accusump so that it can't fill too fast. I'll have to read up on the accusump. Perhaps they already do this.

The other problem with a manual valve in a Vee is where to put it and have access to it by the driver.
For most of the above reasons I think there might only be a couple accusumps in RR Vees in the country.

Yes, space in a vee is always at a premium.

Like I said - I'm not arguing - just trying to understand and thinking out loud.

[jpetillo]

A solution to having to fill both the accusump and provide oil pressure would be a damper on the accusump so that it can't fill too fast. I'll have to read up on the accusump. Perhaps they already do this.

I was just at the site. Apparently they already do something similar with the basic model. The EPC seems to improve on it, but perhaps it's not imperative to have. This is what they say...
"It should be noted that the standard electric valve units fill slowly. The design of the valve is to ensure that too much oil is not diverted from the engine during refill. These units are recommended for pre-oiling and not for surge control. The EPC electric valve will fill slowly until the pressure threshold is reached at which time it will rapid fill."
John

[SR Racing]

You are correct.

However, the rate of re-fill flow is dictated by the valve (standard pre-oiler or EPC). With a manual valve it fills as fast as the pressure dictates.

[Matt King]

Canton recommends 7-10 lbs. Anything less than that and you won't even get full use of the oil in the canister. And as I mentioned, a warm vee idles at under 10, so the canister will empty at that point. Another draw back to a accusump with manual valve only, is that point when the tank does drop most of it's oil and then needs to be refilled. The engine oil pump now has to put oil into the gallery AND into the canister this is usually occuring at lower RPM near max torque, when the bearings need the most oil. The other problem with a manual valve in a Vee is where to put it and have access to it by the driver.
For most of the above reasons I think there might only be a couple accusumps in RR Vees in the country.

You're overblowing the issue of the cannister emptying at idle; that would never happen in a racing situation unless you starved the engine for upwards of 20-30 seconds or however long it takes to fully empty itself into the engine, but if it did, you'd be glad it did because otherwise your engine would be run completely dry. In actuality, as oil pressure drops, the cannister will slowly discharge and maintain a reserve of oil pressure, which is exactly what it's designed to do. What you're calling a drawback is exactly why oil accumulators were developed in the first place. An Accusump may have other drawbacks in a Vee related to location and oil sealing of the engine, but there is nothing fundamentally different about it than any other car.

[robert]

I can't picture the Accu sump as the solution to the oiling problem with Vee's.

The only time the accusump supplies oil is when oil pressure drops, right? When pressure drops it is due to starvation at the pick up. That means air is being pumped instead of straight oil. If the accusump is recharged with an air/oil mix, it will discharge that foam the next time pressure drops. Not a problem if foam does the job, but I suspect it lubes far less well than straight oil.

The problem that needs addressing (seems to me) is preventing starvation at the pickup in the first place, and I don't think a 250cc sump extension is adequate, even with good baffling. If a quart discharges from an accusump in 5 seconds, then 1/4 of a quart discharges in a bit more than one second. What I'm suggesting is that it probably only takes about a second to suck that 250cc up, and that doesn't sound very good to me.

The argument that limiting oil capacity is needed to reduce the amount of oil dumped on the track when the drain plug falls out is whacko.

With the shortage of motor pieces for a Vee motor, I'd think that any sump design that helped should be readily accepted. Of course a better sump will not be accepted, nor will dry sump. The issue may be that the cost of solving oil problems takes away from the tire and intake budget.

Eventually the costs of finding or replicating half century old stuff that is being slowly destroyed by poor lubrication will qualify FV to apply for a federal bail out.

[SR Racing]

Robert,

You are correct. I don't think the accusump is the best answer either. Although I don't think foam becomes much of an issue. The problem is as you point out: The VW oil system was never meant to run in a high RPM or WOT full torque condition at 1.5 g's. The criticality of precise oil levels is a big problem. That is why the accusump is not a good solution. The accusump was designed for either pre-oiling or a safety device in the rare situation that you lose oil pressure. In a Vee the accusump would be dumping and recovering all the time. (Due to the poor regulation, baffling, temps, etc.) Then the lack of good sealing just put more oil where it's not supposed to be. We have tried of lots of different types of baffling. At best, you can keep them alive, but you are always running on the hairy edge. A larger slim line type sump with 3/4 of a quart or more would probably do the job with some testing. (250cc's = ~ 1/4 quart)
We tried it on the FST in the early days, but did have some problems. We simply gave up on it early. But on paper, it or something like it should work for FV.

[SR Racing]

[quote="Matt King] An Accusump may have other drawbacks in a Vee related to location and oil sealing of the engine, but there is nothing fundamentally different about it than any other car.[/quote]

Matt,

That is the problem. A Vee is signifcantly different that any other car.

It's a flat 4 with open cylinders to the oil sump.
The level of oil is critical. (either to much or to little)
The case was designed for ~.7 G corners.
No front seal.
The engine was designed for under 5000 RPM.
We brake at probably twice the G forces and accelerate at probably 30% greater G's
We have doubled lateral G forces, increased RPM by 25% And we do it 60 to 80 times in 30 minutes at too high a temperature.

And added 1/4 quart of oil volume to address it.

Any other venue that does anything like that runs dry sumps. We don't have that option and a Accusump is a bandaid with it's own problems.

[Matt King]

+++

EVERYTHING you just wrote except the lack of a front seal and being a flat four applies directly to the 302 in my Mustang, or the engine in any other production car that is road raced. The Vee engine is just not that unique of an application that it makes the Accusump ineffective. But I'm done arguing about it. I will consider the evidence and may give one a try. Of course it's not as good as a dry sump, but a dry sump isn't legal.

[brian]

I would think as long as the sump extension does not contain more than the allowable volume, one can make it anyway they want. As long as no part on the engine case is illegally modified to attach the extension, it's legal.

[SR Racing]

EVERYTHING you just wrote except the lack of a front seal and being a flat four applies directly to the 302 in my Mustang, or the engine in any other production car that is road raced. The Vee engine is just not that unique of an application that it makes the Accusump ineffective. But I'm done arguing about it. I will consider the evidence and may give one a try. Of course it's not as good as a dry sump, but a dry sump isn't legal.

Matt,

Your Mustang will NEVER achieve 1.5 lateral G's unless you hit a brick wall. You can add an extra quart of oil and it won't come out every orifrice on the engine. You can be up (or down a quart) and never know it. For racing you can add a 8 quart + pan if you want with active baffling. On a typical lap your accusump will never even dump oil into the case. That is why the Vee application is different. We have built several RR 302 Mustangs. But fine, I too am done arguing? / Discussing.

By all means try an accusump. We have them, I can sell you them at a very good price. With some experimentation you may come up with a good system that works better than ones I have seen others install on Vees in the past. It could be a great asset to the Vee engine.

[Matt King]

I can send you AIM data files showing peaks above 1.4G at several tracks, although it's typically closer to 1.3G, which is plenty to uncover the unbaffled stock pan I was required by rule to run until last season (and still do because I'm satisfied with the Accusump's performance). I also have data that shows the Accusump working in back to back sessions where I forgot to open the valve. It absolutely does discharge oil into the engine in many corners at many tracks.

[brian]

The sump rule was written many years ago when the philosophy was very restrictive. Engines were starving for oil and the sump extension was approved, but with restrictions to adhere with class philosophy. Remember back then we still ran generators, shrouds etc.

[jpetillo]

Jim,

Thanks for your earlier response. Regarding the Accusump, aside from the extra oil that's dumped out from having no front seal, and perhaps the complicated plumbing if you wanted to run the system both ways, what problems have you seen where they are not doing their intended job or causing problems?

I know you mentioned that they can dump too much oil into the accusump when refilling and perhaps causing a significant drop in oil pressure to the bearing during that time. Are you sure that this happens (have you measured it), because their web site says that they restrict the refilling rate so that this doesn't happen in the basic system, even without the extra valving. You mentioned that the refilling rate depends on the pressure, and I agree that this would have to be the case. But, it can be restricted – just don’t know by how much.

I do agree that in the Vee the accusump would be working constantly – just not convinced that it’s a bad thing – not convinced that it’s valved right and does the right thing, either. It seems that the lower pressures that Matt runs may be what solves the problem. It simply would do nothing unless it almost lost pressure. Maybe the piston (if it has one) has too much stiction and won’t reliably move with under 7 lbs of pressure.

Robert, you mentioned foaming. What would the foaming be from? They don't let the preloaded air mix with the oil – it should be in a bladder or behind a piston.

Sorry guys. I don’t mean to drum this into the ground. I’m just trying to understand it. Bear with me.

By the way, I agree with Brian, there should be no restriction in whatever sump it takes to keep the engine from losing oil pressure.

John