Comments on: Dirty talk http://www.ret-monitor.com/articles/1962/dirty-talk/ Specific mission-critical info for professionals Fri, 18 May 2012 09:19:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 By: Dax http://www.ret-monitor.com/articles/1962/dirty-talk/comment-page-1/#comment-10817 Dax Fri, 23 Mar 2012 21:28:25 +0000 http://www.ret-monitor.com/articles/1962/dirty-talk/#comment-10817 @Terry, it is my understanding that the average micron rating for oil filters is in the 20-25 um nominal range. This would indicate that there is a high likelihood of passing much larger particles as well. Would this not allow the presence of "dirt" in the filtered lube oil pressure circuit? @Terry, it is my understanding that the average micron rating for oil filters is in the 20-25 um nominal range. This would indicate that there is a high likelihood of passing much larger particles as well.

Would this not allow the presence of “dirt” in the filtered lube oil pressure circuit?

]]> By: Terry http://www.ret-monitor.com/articles/1962/dirty-talk/comment-page-1/#comment-10093 Terry Sat, 07 Jan 2012 06:32:09 +0000 http://www.ret-monitor.com/articles/1962/dirty-talk/#comment-10093 I would disagree with the claim that engine journal bearing failures are mostly due to "dirt". I'd say that corrosion and surface fatigue are more problematic. There is no way for "dirt" to enter the lube oil with current filter designs. Any debris particles in the lube oil pressure circuit would have to come from the engine components themselves. I would disagree with the claim that engine journal bearing failures are mostly due to “dirt”. I’d say that corrosion and surface fatigue are more problematic.

There is no way for “dirt” to enter the lube oil with current filter designs. Any debris particles in the lube oil pressure circuit would have to come from the engine components themselves.

]]>