Possible New Idea for Pressure to Model A Mains?

Will Kimble said:
Thanks for the input everybody - even the guys who say it would never work. :) You may be right, but I am not yet convinced.

I am most concerned about the centrifugal force and I am hoping somebody might be able to help me with some math. Centrifugal force would increase as RPM goes up and as you get farther away from the centerline of the crank. So the centrifugal force would be highest at the rod journal, and lowest at the main journal. By using the throw of the crank we should be able to calculate the centrifugal force at a given RPM - let's say 2,000 since we have already mentioned it.

I would like to know what PSI would be required to overcome that amount of centrifugal force? If it is 150 PSI then we know it is impossible. If it is 20 PSI then it might be possible and we shouldn't rule the idea out because of centrifugal force.

I have a feeling this equation is too complicated for me to sort out, can anybody help with this? Does anybody know the throw of the crank offhand?

Thanks,
Will
Click to expand...

Why not try it and prove some of us wrong. I say no.
 
Tom Wesenberg said:
Why not just pipe the oil from the valve chamber outlet to the 3 tubes to the mains and have a spring loaded bypass to let the overflow go to the valve chamber.

OR.........just wait for the new 5 bearing block to reach production.
Click to expand...


That is what I do, and it works great.
Also the chev dipper was a better dipper, it could trap more oil.
 
Thanks 40 Deluxe, I really like your ideas for testing an engine.

And Tom Wesenberg - I am excited about the possibilities for the Burtz five main bearing block, been getting updates for years.

Here is some math related to centrifugal force... I found a couple websites with calculators that help you determine centrifugal force from RPM, weight and radius. Here is an example that I liked because I could change the parameters from metric to inches and ounces:

http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/newtonian/centrifugal

Since the stroke is 4.25" I used a radius of 2.125". And I decided to use 1 ounce for the weight of the oil, seemed like a reasonable estimate for how much oil would be held in the drilled part of the crank - probably an overestimation since the centrifugal force would go down as the oil approaches the main bearing. Since we have discussed 2,000 RPM earlier, that is what I used, and according to the calculator the centrifugal force would be 15 lbs.

Am I right in thinking that 40 psi of oil pressure would be enough to overcome 15 lbs of centrifugal force? Or am I comparing apples to oranges?

It is beautiful here this morning, hopefully I will get to drive my Model A today instead of just thinking about Model A stuff!

Thanks again everybody,
Will Kimble
 
Will Kimble said:
Thanks 40 Deluxe, I really like your ideas for testing an engine.

And Tom Wesenberg - I am excited about the possibilities for the Burtz five main bearing block, been getting updates for years.

Here is some math related to centrifugal force... I found a couple websites with calculators that help you determine centrifugal force from RPM, weight and radius. Here is an example that I liked because I could change the parameters from metric to inches and ounces:

http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/newtonian/centrifugal

Since the stroke is 4.25" I used a radius of 2.125". And I decided to use 1 ounce for the weight of the oil, seemed like a reasonable estimate for how much oil would be held in the drilled part of the crank - probably an overestimation since the centrifugal force would go down as the oil approaches the main bearing. Since we have discussed 2,000 RPM earlier, that is what I used, and according to the calculator the centrifugal force would be 15 lbs.

Am I right in thinking that 40 psi of oil pressure would be enough to overcome 15 lbs of centrifugal force? Or am I comparing apples to oranges?

It is beautiful here this morning, hopefully I will get to drive my Model A today instead of just thinking about Model A stuff!

Thanks again everybody,
Will Kimble
Click to expand...

The problem is it is not a solid stream of oil. There will be air in there, which will compress.
 
You would have more luck reversing a Fart, then to send oil up a Spinning crank throe, you wouldn't get it close enough to the cheeks to make them Rosy!

Common sense will work a lot better then any math that you can use on this idea.

Dipper pressure on a Rod, no matter how much, doesn't pressurize the Rod, as any, and all Pressure at the Dipper point of entry, Dies there, and the oil grooves pick up the oil after the Dipper has filled the hole, the Dipper Pressure does, NOT go around the rod, but Centrifugal force slings oil off the sides of the rod, the relief holes in the web, and also the dipper, as soon as it comes out of the oil!
 
Kohnke Rebabbitting said:
You would have more luck reversing a Fart, then to send oil up a Spinning crank throe, you wouldn't get it close enough to the cheeks to make them Rosy!

Common sense will work a lot better then any math that you can use on this idea.

Dipper pressure on a Rod, no matter how much, doesn't pressurize the Rod, as any, and all Pressure at the Dipper point of entry, Dies there, and the oil grooves pick up the oil after the Dipper has filled the hole, the Dipper Pressure does, NOT go around the rod, but Centrifugal force slings oil off the sides of the rod, the relief holes in the web, and also the dipper, as soon as it comes out of the oil!
Click to expand...

And the laws of physics have now been repealed.
 
Laws of physics is one thing, but there is no way to harness any Pressure off of a Dipper.

This doesn't even require any thought, unless your smoking your socks!
 
Ok, we will get this down to a 1st grade level analogy.
Have you ever seen a PBY scooping water out of a lake on the fly
for forest fire fighting or have you ever seen a steam train in the old days
picking up water from a trough between the tracks on the fly??
The pressure read in the pipes at the time is over 500 psi give or take, depending on speed.
EXACT SAME PRINCIPLE AS OIL DIPPERS ONLY ON A LARGER SCALE.
 
OK, I will take this up to 44 years of studying all types of bearing oiling systems, cars, tractors, and machines!

Boys, there is a reason no one has tried, or made an oiling system from the rod, to the main bearing, could it be its Bassackwards?

That is like trying to pump a tire up, by putting the air on the out side.

The term was used 2000 R.P.M.'s I would think that would be a fast idle speed, or you could be the first one in your club to pile up rubber in your drive way.

The only thing the two dipper examples have in common is just that dippers, nothing else applies, Nothing!

Thank God, that there are some that don't follow the Goat, like a bunch of Sheep, But your only Defence would be, common sense, and Experience!
 
Kohnke Rebabbitting said:
OK, I will take this up to 44 years of studying all types of bearing oiling systems, cars, tractors, and machines!

Boys, there is a reason no one has tried, or made an oiling system from the rod, to the main bearing, could it be its Bassackwards?

That is like trying to pump a tire up, by putting the air on the out side.

The term was used 2000 R.P.M.'s I would think that would be a fast idle speed, or you could be the first one in your club to pile up rubber in your drive way.

The only thing the two dipper examples have in common is just that dippers, nothing else applies, Nothing!

Thank God, that there are some that don't follow the Goat, like a bunch of Sheep, But your only Defence would be, common sense, and Experience!
Click to expand...

In the first post, the guy asked if it would work and yes, it will work.
As far as being practical, NO WAY.
As far as experience, I have you beat by 20 years.
 
What the bearings need is volume, pressure is secondary. Splash to the rods is most efficient at or near idle, at 4,000 you have little to no volume entering the dipper. Even at idle I doubt it there would be enough volume to the mains, plus you need to oil the cam bearings. Race engines run more than average pressure to increase the volume which cools the bearings. Will your system work? Perhaps, although I think not, but is it worth the trouble to find out? Again I think not.
 
If this idea was any good, Ford, and the MANY other car manufacturers of the day would have tried it. If they did try it, they did not use it, and the reason is simple: it will not work, or at the very least, it will not work like pressurizing the crank with a pump. I suspect every idea was tried in the early days of motoring, just look at the sliding sleeve engine as an example. It did not work well enough to keep, just like dipper rods did not work well enough to keep. Notice how wide the bearings are on the rods. When Ford went to pressurized crankshafts with the V8, the rods became half the width, and why? because pressurized rods have less friction than dipper fed rods. All it takes is looking at the history of the progression of engines to see what worked best.
 
You guys are cracking me up! At least my idea is interesting enough to provoke a spirited discussion. :)

Hey Kohnke, I respect your experience but don't understand your negativity. You have expressed your opinion that it won't work and I appreciate that. But you don't need to get upset that some folks think it might work. By the way, I chose 2,000 RPM as a reasonable cruising speed for a stock Model A engine - not an idle speed. It will idle OK on babbit with no pressure, we can agree on that much.

And 2manycars brings up an important point - once you leave dippers and pressurize the mains and rods there is no reason to think about this. By the mid thirties Ford would have had no reason to consider stuff like this.

I also think Jim Brierley brings up a valid point - if this idea worked it would still not be optimal for a performance engine. The traditional oil pump where pressure increase with RPM would be much better. If this system works at all, it might show a little pressure at idle, mediocre pressure at cruising speed and no pressure once the RPMs reach a certain point.

In my opinion, this would be an application for a stockish touring engine. 5-10 psi to the mains could be an improvement over the stock system, and could possibly prolong bearing life and withstand a little more compression. The cool thing is it would only require a drilled crank, specific babbit grooves and probably a modern rear seal - everything else could potentially remain stock.

I talked this afternoon with a good friend whose opinion I really respect. He is an engine builder and teacher, and knows a lot about old Fords as well as modern engines. He thought it could work - with one caveat. He said it is particularly difficult to predict how oil will react in these dynamic situations, and he gave me a few examples.

In other words, he told me I'd have to test it to find out.

I am going to put this on simmer for a while and see what happens. I don't build Model A engines, so I don't know what is to be gained by proving or disproving this idea. I certainly don't need to spend a bunch of money to make a point or for my own ego. But I am a curious person...

Thanks again for all of your thoughts, and best wishes to all of you.

Will Kimble
www.kimblemandolins.com
 
Will Kimble posted a question:
"OK, I have a simple idea for pressure to the mains of an A block and am looking for some input on my idea. Please let me know what you think or if you know anyone who has already tried this."

And then the usual happened……
"What's wrong with the conventional methods for pressuring the rods and mains? It's proven over and over to work very well!
Once again, let's not over think things here!
This just won't work, but I'll stand by and watch someone ruin a nice journal polish and a set of bearings trying." azmodela
"Why do you think that the engine needs an improved oiling system?" Kevin in NJ
"You would have more luck reversing a Fart, then to send oil up a Spinning crank throe, you wouldn't get it close enough to the cheeks to make them Rosy!
This doesn't even require any thought, unless your smoking your socks!
Boys, there is a reason no one has tried, or made an oiling system from the rod, to the main bearing, could it be its Bassackwards?
Thank God, that there are some that don't follow the Goat, like a bunch of Sheep, But your only Defence would be, common sense, and Experience! " Kohnke Rebabbitting
"If this idea was any good, Ford, and the MANY other car manufacturers of the day would have tried it". 2manycars
MY THOUGHTS:
Ah, skeptics and naysayers… what would we do without them. And the more their views are ignored, the more crude they get. Telling Will this stuff reminds me of when they were going to close up the US Patent Office because everything had already been invented. It is a good thing Henry Ford and Thomas Edison didn’t have only nay-sayers for advisers. And what would have happened to Ford if Edsel hadn’t been able to take over from Henry Ford and bring in new ideas?
There were some good positive replies, but the best one was from the old wise man, Rainmaker Ron.
Will,
So far, man has not reached the limits of possibility. Of course it is possible, maybe not exactly as presented here but creative thinkers like yourself could develop some variation that would work. I would submit that the idea may be impractical but certainly not impossible! Rainmaker Ron
Way to hang in there, Will.
 
Pete said:
Ok, we will get this down to a 1st grade level analogy.
Have you ever seen a PBY scooping water out of a lake on the fly
for forest fire fighting or have you ever seen a steam train in the old days
picking up water from a trough between the tracks on the fly??
The pressure read in the pipes at the time is over 500 psi give or take, depending on speed.
EXACT SAME PRINCIPLE AS OIL DIPPERS ONLY ON A LARGER SCALE.
Click to expand...

No it's not the same principle on any scale. Physics and the principles of hydraulics are at work here.
 
Hey Kohnke, I respect your experience but don't understand your negativity. You have expressed your opinion that it won't work and I appreciate that. But you don't need to get upset that some folks think it might work. By the way, I chose 2,000 RPM as a reasonable cruising speed for a stock Model A engine - not an idle speed. It will idle OK on babbit with no pressure, we can agree on that much.

we can agree on that much.

No we can't, If your depending on feeding mains when you have changed a oil system to work in reverse, and it will not, you have nothing to feed the mains, and you can't have oil coming from two directions at once.

Oil can't be made to go towards a spinning force the way you want it to. It would be like trying to get to the center of a spinning Merry-go-round, its not going to happen.

Now as far as negativity, you ask a question, and you want me to say, Ya it should work, and feed the num nuts factory?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top