Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

r33_racers post does explain his view with pressure in relation to motor clearance etc

Aside from that - Drag cars are not neccesarily a good example. You rarely would take a 8/9 sec drag car up into the hills for a 10min squirt on a Sunday :)

This is what daily drivers tend to do, it's certainly closer to track than it is to drag IMO (when you talk about a daily/street car), because lets face it - Nothing more entertaining than a nice bendy piece of road in a GTR/Skyline.

10 seconds is not the same as 10 mins. This is where oil pressure is certainly as important, if not more so.

You'd need to talk with your engine builder and workout what the desired oil pressure should be in relation to use of the car, and the assembly of the motor itself.

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

R31Nismoid is right in that its more application/motor setup specific. That last post I was being quite negative about it and didnt quite explain everything properly. Ill try to do it now as best as i can.

The usual rule is fine if your revs are kept to around standard. When you start going high with them, say 7000rpm and upwards you generally need higher pressures. This is due to the poor design of the nissan cranks oiling system. The crankshaft utilises cross drilled mains and big ends inorder to feed oil to the rods. With this design, as the revs climb so does the centrifugal force which acts against the oil. I think I read somewhere that this force starts to have an impact on the oil feed once you get over 5000-6000rpm. What happens is the oil starts to seperate and froth/foam up inside the crank as oil pressure is trying to send it to the big end, but the centrifugal force is trying to send it back to the main journal.

Since pump manufacturers needs to cover bases for all setups in one hit they make the pump capable of the worst case scenario. I can only assume thats why Nitto have two springs, one for 70psi and the other for 120psi. Now if you are building a wild high reving engine, then you would need the higher spring pressure to make sure you have more oil pressure then centrifugal force acting against it so your big ends dont suffer oil starvation. The unfortunate part of a cross drilled crank is that the only way to overcome that force is by increased oil pressure. The ideal crank oil system is a straight shoot gallery. You can find this on pretty well any v8 crankshaft. Its just one hole that goes from your main journal to the big end journal and with this style you dont need big oil pressure as it doesnt have anywhere near as much centrifugal force acting against it.

But everything plays a part in oiling system setup, main and big end clearances, conrod side clearance, oil viscosity choice and oil hole sizes in your block and crankshaft. There are probably more variables that make an impact on this setup too that I havent listed. Now the obvious drawbacks are what I spelled out last time in that post ages ago. However, in the perfect setup, everything would be worked out so you would only run just the right amount of oil pressure for your setup(revs, clearances blah blah) and nothing would be in excess so you have minimal negatives/losses.

Hopefully that makes enough sense and anyone with a better understanding please feel free to clarify any of my errors :)

120 psi at 3000rpm thats way to much the pump should have two springs in the bottom where the nut is. remove the smaller one and it will drop to about 70 psi at full nosie but you do have to remove the sump

Totally agree. Have to do the same thing. Have a Reinmax pump running 8bar above 3000rpm. Will aim for 80-85psi max

Stock is 4bar

N1 is 5bar

Matt

Edited by BoostdR

sorry to bring up an old thread, but im trying to get my head around the whole oil pressure deal with rbs. i get that the aftermarket pumps may have better quality components, but as r33_racer states theres no need for extra pressure. so why is every1 so keen on really high oil pressure?? i understand for track cars u want all the pressure u can, but im talking street driven and occassional track work. my understanding of the topic is not great but ive ot this far.

the rb twin cams have a big problem with oil return from the head so oil restrictors are used. but how do you know what the restrictor size should be with such various oil pressures?? my understanding is the components of the head require a certain amount of litres/min of oil to prevent wear. does anyone know how much this is?? cos this would be the key factor in working out what size restrictor to use. different pressures will give different amounts of oil through the same restrictors, so can somebody expalin how they came up with the restrictor sizes and at what oil pressure they were used??

so then we look at the requirements of the bottom end. the rb30 bottom end is propably the most used and abused 6cyl engine in this country. there are literally 100s of single cam 30s built over the last decade punching out 8s, 9s, 10s, 11s as well as ridiculus burnouts all running stock rb30 oil pumps. but you dont hear about many if any failures.

so this being the case why such high oil pressure?? wouldnt all this extra pressure thats going to waste just wear out the pump faster???

Yes! a good point here regarding restrictors, they will flow varied amounts proportional to oil pressure. So they -all- need to be changed to reflect your pump pressure.

Not sure why CRD made this comment because it doesn't hold true for a higher pressure pump. I can understand it is rarely an issue however---the head is much more sensitive

"Hey Waza_GTR

Turbos normally have a 0.8 - 1.0mm oil restrictor in them restricting oil flow / pressure through them so this should not have been a drama.

What turbos were they?"

I had a long chat with Keir at Willall regarding this exact issue. To run a higher pressure higher flow pump 7bar or above the head restrictor needs to be 1.2mm in an RB26. Granted the turbo's are less sensitive to this issue but some can have induced turbine ring leakage with increased oil pressure and no other change. Some cases require a regulator or a modified turbo oil line restrictor. The turbo oil feed banjo bolt from the block has one...also the turbo inlet on the ball bearing cartridge turbo's should have a .85mm restrictor fitted.

So high pressure is fine. Just get your restrictors right

or

Reduce the pressure and use the std turbo restrictors and tomei 1.5mm block restrictor( for over 4bar and track use)

*of note the MInes triple flow cam baffles don't do a great job of returning oil to the head after it gets in the baffles. If you have to much oil in the head from the wrong restrictor and pressure these will make the problem worse. The std items have drain back provisioned.

Matt

Thanks for clearing that up guys! very helpful! :) i still have a few questions though. if the high oil pressure is required due to poor crank oiling, is it the same story for aftermarket cranks?? or have these issues been addressed??

is there a rough way to work out what grade of oil you should be using at a given pressure to ensure ur not making the foaming of the oil worse??

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • First up, I wouldn't use PID straight up for boost control. There's also other control techniques that can be implemented. And as I said, and you keep missing the point. It's not the ONE thing, it's the wrapping it up together with everything else in the one system that starts to unravel the problem. It's why there are people who can work in a certain field as a generalist, IE a IT person, and then there are specialists. IE, an SQL database specialist. Sure the IT person can build and run a database, and it'll work, however theyll likely never be as good as a specialist.   So, as said, it's not as simple as you're thinking. And yes, there's a limit to the number of everything's in MCUs, and they run out far to freaking fast when you're designing a complex system, which means you have to make compromises. Add to that, you'll have a limited team working on it, so fixing / tweaking some features means some features are a higher priority than others. Add to that, someone might fix a problem around a certain unrelated feature, and that change due to other complexities in the system design, can now cause a new, unforseen bug in something else.   The whole thing is, as said, sometimes split systems can work as good, and if not better. Plus when there's no need to spend $4k on an all in one solution, to meet the needs of a $200 system, maybe don't just spout off things others have said / you've read. There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, including in translated service manuals, and data sheets. Going and doing, so that you know, is better than stating something you read. Stating something that has been read, is about as useful as an engineering graduate, as all they know is what they've read. And trust me, nearly every engineering graduate is useless in the real world. And add to that, if you don't know this stuff, and just have an opinion, maybe accept what people with experience are telling you as information, and don't keep reciting the exact same thing over and over in response.
    • How complicated is PID boost control? To me it really doesn't seem that difficult. I'm not disputing the core assertion (specialization can be better than general purpose solutions), I'm just saying we're 30+ years removed from the days when transistor budgets were in the thousands and we had to hem and haw about whether there's enough ECC DRAM or enough clock cycles or the interrupt handler can respond fast enough to handle another task. I really struggle to see how a Greddy Profec or an HKS EVC7 or whatever else is somehow a far superior solution to what you get in a Haltech Nexus/Elite ECU. I don't see OEMs spending time on dedicated boost control modules in any car I've ever touched. Is there value to separating out a motor controller or engine controller vs an infotainment module? Of course, those are two completely different tasks with highly divergent requirements. The reason why I cite data sheets, service manuals, etc is because as you have clearly suggested I don't know what I'm doing, can't learn how to do anything correctly, and have never actually done anything myself. So when I do offer advice to people I like to use sources that are not just based off of taking my word for it and can be independently verified by others so it's not just my misinterpretation of a primary source.
    • That's awesome, well done! Love all these older Datsun / Nissans so rare now
    • As I said, there's trade offs to jamming EVERYTHING in. Timing, resources etc, being the huge ones. Calling out the factory ECU has nothing to do with it, as it doesn't do any form of fancy boost control. It's all open loop boost control. You mention the Haltech Nexus, that's effectively two separate devices jammed into one box. What you quote about it, is proof for that. So now you've lost flexibility as a product too...   A product designed to do one thing really well, will always beat other products doing multiple things. Also, I wouldn't knock COTS stuff, you'd be surprised how many things are using it, that you're probably totally in love with As for the SpaceX comment that we're working directly with them, it's about the type of stuff we're doing. We're doing design work, and breaking world firsts. If you can't understand that I have real world hands on experience, including in very modern tech, and actually understand this stuff, then to avoid useless debates where you just won't accept fact and experience, from here on, it seems you'd be be happy I (and possibly anyone with knowledge really) not reply to your questions, or input, no matter how much help you could be given to help you, or let you learn. It seems you're happy reading your data sheets, factory service manuals, and only want people to reinforce your thoughts and points of view. 
    • I don't really understand because clearly it's possible. The factory ECU is running on like a 4 MHz 16-bit processor. Modern GDI ECUs have like 200 MHz superscalar cores with floating point units too. The Haltech Nexus has two 240 MHz CPU cores. The Elite 2500 is a single 80 MHz core. Surely 20x the compute means adding some PID boost control logic isn't that complicated. I'm not saying clock speed is everything, but the requirements to add boost control to a port injection 6 cylinder ECU are really not that difficult. More I/O, more interrupt handlers, more working memory, etc isn't that crazy to figure out. SpaceX if anything shows just how far you can get arguably doing things the "wrong" way, ie x86 COTS running C++ on Linux. That is about as far away from the "correct" architecture as it gets for a real time system, but it works anyways. 
×
×
  • Create New...