You can type here any text you want

Smoke out the breathers......

Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!
Jim, Im not trying to piss in you or Dave's Wheaties. Im just trying to learn.
The "V" in PCV is for ventilation. The valve pulls the stale air from the crankcase and puts it in the throttle body where it is burned in the combustion process, it is then replaced with fresh air from the breathers on a modified car, or from the turbo inlet bell on a stock car. My question was how does the computer correct for this? In the stock configuration the air has been metered by the MAF (turbo inlet bell is post MAF) After you add the K&N's the air is unmetered. My hunch is that the air leak is learned through the integrator and block learn.
 
By the way, it didn't look like smoke, more like steam because it would evaporate......kinda figures after a couple blast down the road it would get hot in there........

As for the post, guess there's more reason to have one than not.
 
Originally posted by Scott Atk
My question was how does the computer correct for this? In the stock configuration the air has been metered by the MAF (turbo inlet bell is post MAF) After you add the K&N's the air is unmetered. My hunch is that the air leak is learned through the integrator and block learn.

It doesnt "correct" for it, its programmed into the car. Really basically, lets say a perfect car draws 5 grams per second at idle. So thats plugged into the MAF table. Now you start it up, lets say at idle the PCV draws .5gps. Thats unmetered air. Since the car is being fueled for 5gps and not 5.5gps (yes at idle thats a HUGE difference) its not going to inject the proper amount of fuel. So what happens? The BLM rises to add the necessary fuel to bring the car to 14.8:1. I'm talking in a perfect car, with no vacuum leaks, no vacuum brakes etc. Now, if the MAF table was set at that moment for 5.5 gps, you'd have a perfectly centered BLM. Does it really matter? Well, really no, because just the fact that the BLM isnt maxed or bottomed tells you that the ECM has control. BUT! If you were to look at the WHOLE BLM grid as say direct scan displays. Lets say cell 0 (idle no load) learns 135 cuz its compensating for the wrong PCV. CEll 1 (over 800 rpm but under uummm..1300?) learns 127 cuz now the leak isnt such a big deal and the injectors at this pulsewidth might be a little fat anyway, anyway, the transition from 135 to 127 pulls 8% fuel in that TINY amount of pedal movement, well, what happens? You get a tip in hesitation or possible hiccup. See where I'm going? Now we have a driveability problem that the PROPER PCV might not have had. This is why for example the 009's have such tip in problems. They learn low at idle (typically high 1teens to low 120's) and go up off idle (128+), that transition usually causes a RICH sag as when you touch the gas the BLM is ADDING maybe 7+% where the thing was fat already. See this is all why you gotta understand what BLM is, what it tells you and what causes could be. Its VERY important in tuning or just FIXING your car!

If you search the archives on gnttype for example and look for posts on PCV valves, you'll see lots of people say like "Ever since I tuned my car up my BLM is unexplainably high, I changed to an AC delco PCV valve and its OK now. TurboDave was perhaps the first to see the symptom and fix it by using the correct valve. Well, one of the first that I remember. It never happened to me as I always used OE PCV valves cuz I know they arent all created equal.

For you guys driving newer OBDII vehicles, on this PCV thing, I've seen and fixed a few where the PCV vave was wrong, mostly jap cars, where the wrong PCV cause LTFT (long term fuel trim) to hit the failing point of +/- 17% and cause a MULTITUDE of problems. What kind? Well, when the LTFT hits 17% in some cars, this flags a "two trip" trouble code, meaning the ECM has to see this problem twice in 2 consecutive trips to turn the check engine light on. Well, thats no bigie right? Well, lots of times the fault doesnt rear itself twice consectutively, BUT the code remains there in the ECM. No bif deal right? Well, if the code causes the ECM not to perform say a catalyst readiness test and your state (like NJ will be doing soon) tests emissions by checking for codes you will FAIL EMISSIONS for NO APPARENT reason. You didnt know cuz the check engine light wasnt on, but since a code is stored, it means at SOME POINT, the emissions were 1.5x the allowed amount. You failed emissions for that cheap assed PepBoyz one size fits all PCV valve! Crazy huh?

Just food for thought.....
 
No piston ring seals 100% (even total seal rings) the PCV is there to recycle those gases to reduce emissions. It is a metered system but when you replace the turbo/valve cover tube with a little K&N, you've just thrown off the entire metering scheme. Your piston seal has more to do with it than orifice size. That is where all the pressure is generated from, higher pressure means higher mass flow rate. Racers suck on the crankcase to reduce parasitic pumping losses only. Oil has a very low octane so it isn't something you would want to introduce in a race situation.

Condensation will form inside your motor as it cools and draws in outside air which is humid. This condensate will evaporate as the oil gets warm and boils it off, that's normal, that's also steam. If you have breathers that aren't sealed, you will get some blowby, don't worry about a little.

Important for a street car but not for a race car.
 
Originally posted by Nashty
It is a metered system but when you replace the turbo/valve cover tube with a little K&N, you've just thrown off the entire metering scheme. Your piston seal has more to do with it than orifice size.

How you figure you changed metering scheme? Did you change the size of the PCV orifice? Think again about that.

Agreed piston seal has more to do with crankcase pressure than PCV. I never bought that "PCV isnt sealing causing pressure under boost" load of crap.
 
Originally posted by TurboJim


I never bought that "PCV isnt sealing causing pressure under boost" load of crap.

Good point. Folks always seem to think the crankcase is sealed, and thus, any pressure leaking past the PCV (which isn't much really), is somehow going to pressurize the crankcase and ultimately blow out the rear main seal.
Nonsense: Any leakage past the PCV is going to be (at worst) blown out through the valve cover breathers. And even in a stock application, the passenger side breather is still attached directly to the turbo inlet bell. The crankcase is hardly going to be able to build any pressure under those circumstances.
 
so why do our rear main seals blow out? piston blow by?
i was under the impression that most stock cars that had leaky rear seals was do to a faulty pcv vavle,. lots of pressure past a 14 year old pcv valve would make the seal blow out.
 
Hey thank you for taking your time to write that letter Jim:)

I barely passed emmissions, I am going to get the right PCV valve very soon. Hopefully that will solve my problem.

Again, thanx for the help.
 
Originally posted by Quick6'n'-K.C.
so why do our rear main seals blow out? piston blow by?
i was under the impression that most stock cars that had leaky rear seals was do to a faulty pcv vavle,. lots of pressure past a 14 year old pcv valve would make the seal blow out.

Think about it. How can a leaking PCV cause the rear main to blow out? Even blow by (unless there's a hole in a piston)?

Even with the most restrictive stock breather in place, it still provides a HUGE hole by which to vent the crank case. It's what? 3/4" in diameter. Do you know the sheer volume and pressure of air needed to pressurize the crankcase with that device in place? The PCV isn't capable of flowing that much air, even blown completely out.

There are several reasons for rear mains to go as they do.
1. The originals were crap, and didn't take long for them to start leaking.
2. The replacements that get installed WILL leak unless installed under the stricktest of "clean" conditions. Doing under the car with the pan removed and the crank in place will in 99% of case not allow a proper seal install.

Think about all the ways for the crankcase to vent (other than the seal), and you'll see what I mean.
And it's even MORE impossible to pressurize the crankcase if both valve covers have filters installed. That's over 3.5 square inches of breathing capabilities. Even if the PCV were hollowed out and provided NO restriction to flow, it's only about 3/8" in diameter.
 
Originally posted by TurboJim


How you figure you changed metering scheme? Did you change the size of the PCV orifice? Think again about that.

Agreed piston seal has more to do with crankcase pressure than PCV. I never bought that "PCV isnt sealing causing pressure under boost" load of crap.

The orifice in the PVC is passing moving gas volume under pressure, lower pressure and you will lower flow. When you remove the interface of the V/C and inlet bell and replace it with a filter, you are changing the crankcase pressure, you are altering the orifice size of the whole system. You don't have to change the size of the hole to change it's flow, changing pressure will do it just the same.

Remember too that pressure is different throughout the interior of the engine, it will be highest where the pressure is generated and lowest at the farthest point (assuming same X-area). Velocity changes pressure too.

Thanks for the lesson.
 
Oh, so youre telling me 18" of vacuum being pulled thru a 1/8" hole wont be be the same vacuum leak inside or outside the engine? Ok, thank you for the lesson, I didnt know that
 
I'm not positive I understand your statement. I am saying that as far as a metered system goes, that an unaccounted for leak will affect the calibration of the PVC system as far as the computer goes. It can't correct for the PVC system condition.

Am I splitting hairs? Yes. This whole thing is an exercise in theory. It's a guess at best, I'm just trying to apply what I know to this, from a fluid standpoint. If I challenged you or asked for clarification, just give it and spare me the "think again" statements.
 
Originally posted by Nashty
I'm not positive I understand your statement. I am saying that as far as a metered system goes, that an unaccounted for leak will affect the calibration of the PVC system as far as the computer goes. It can't correct for the PVC system condition.

Ok, but the fact you have 10 breathers on the car doesnt change what the PCV valve flows, and doest affect the fact the PCV is designed to, and the ECM is calibrated to flow X amount of air. 1 breather or 20 breathers, if the PCV hole is 1/8, then its only gonna suck 1/8" hole worth of air. Thats whats important. The difference between say a 1/8" hold and a 3/16 hole. Thats where the discrepencies come.


Am I splitting hairs? Yes. This whole thing is an exercise in theory. It's a guess at best, I'm just trying to apply what I know to this, from a fluid standpoint. If I challenged you or asked for clarification, just give it and spare me the "think again" statements.

Splitting hairs is great, I love talking theoretics, but in this case I hate to say it but you had it bass ackwards.
 
Originally posted by TurboJim
Ok, but the fact you have 10 breathers on the car doesnt change what the PCV valve flows, and doest affect the fact the PCV is designed to, and the ECM is calibrated to flow X amount of air. 1 breather or 20 breathers, if the PCV hole is 1/8, then its only gonna suck 1/8" hole worth of air. Thats whats important. The difference between say a 1/8" hold and a 3/16 hole. Thats where the discrepencies come.

Let's say I have 2 orifices. One is at 18" of mercury vacuum. The other has that same 18" on the intake side and the other has say, 15psi positive pressure on the other side. Which one will flow more air? It isn't the 18" you reference but the pressure differential that moves air from one side of the orifice to the other. One valve has only the vacuum, the other valve has a vacuum and and positive pressure on the other side.

Now take a crankcases, one has just the PVC hole in it. The other has a 20 breathers and the PVC valve. The amount of blowby from the rings is constant. Which crankcase will have more pressure at the PVC valve? The one with one hole or 21 holes? Which will have a greater pressure differential across the orifice? Which will flow more air into the engine?
 
Originally posted by Nashty


Let's say I have 2 orifices. One is at 18" of mercury vacuum. The other has that same 18" on the intake side and the other has say, 15psi positive pressure on the other side. Which one will flow more air? It isn't the 18" you reference but the pressure differential that moves air from one side of the orifice to the other. One valve has only the vacuum, the other valve has a vacuum and and positive pressure on the other side.

Now take a crankcases, one has just the PVC hole in it. The other has a 20 breathers and the PVC valve. The amount of blowby from the rings is constant. Which crankcase will have more pressure at the PVC valve? The one with one hole or 21 holes? Which will have a greater pressure differential across the orifice? Which will flow more air into the engine?



But you keep forgetting one small detail. Let me repeat, OUR CRANKCASES ARE NOT SEALED. Not stock, not added breathers, nothing. They are vented to atmposphere. The only difference being the point at which the venting occurs.
Stock vents back to the intake air stream via the turbo inlet.
Non stock vents to atmosphere via breathers. So the crankcase will always be referenced to atmospheric pressure, aprox. 29.92 InHg, or 14.7psia
 
Whew!

I give up. You win! I really dont care, my car runs fine and I dont have smoke out of my valve covers, my BLM's are pretty close and I will continue to use a genuine AC PCV valve despite atmosheric doo-dads and pressure etc whatever.

Least Dave sees it my way....
 
Originally posted by TurboDave




But you keep forgetting one small detail. Let me repeat, OUR CRANKCASES ARE NOT SEALED. Not stock, not added breathers, nothing. They are vented to atmposphere. The only difference being the point at which the venting occurs.
Stock vents back to the intake air stream via the turbo inlet.
Non stock vents to atmosphere via breathers. So the crankcase will always be referenced to atmospheric pressure, aprox. 29.92 InHg, or 14.7psia

That's true, when the engine isn't running. But when the air starts moving, things change. The inlet bell is pulling air into it, air doesn't just wander in there. That is a vacuum source. If you need me to explain that I can. The PVC is also a vacuum source. The air being pulled in isn't referenced to atmospheric unless you open it up with a breather.

My whole point is that this will affect the calibration of the whole system. You talk about the importance of the calibration being correct for it to work effectively. That's what I'm trying to say. But ANY changes will affect it's flow rate to some degree.

Even if it is referenced to atmosphere, there is still a pressure differential or else no air would move at all. It doesn't matter if there is a vent to atmosphere from the factory or not, you are changing the size of that and thus, changing pressure the PVC will effectively see.

Am I being condescending? I'm trying not to be. It seems every damn post I get back is speaking down to me. No wonder people get so pissy on this board. Need I repeat that?
 
Hmmm...this is ALL good stuff.."the stock system vents to atmosphere"...thats why the oil ends up in the intercooler?
 
Originally posted by Nashty


That's true, when the engine isn't running. But when the air starts moving, things change. The inlet bell is pulling air into it, air doesn't just wander in there. That is a vacuum source. If you need me to explain that I can. The PVC is also a vacuum source. The air being pulled in isn't referenced to atmospheric unless you open it up with a breather.

My whole point is that this will affect the calibration of the whole system. You talk about the importance of the calibration being correct for it to work effectively. That's what I'm trying to say. But ANY changes will affect it's flow rate to some degree.

Even if it is referenced to atmosphere, there is still a pressure differential or else no air would move at all. It doesn't matter if there is a vent to atmosphere from the factory or not, you are changing the size of that and thus, changing pressure the PVC will effectively see.

Am I being condescending? I'm trying not to be. It seems every damn post I get back is speaking down to me. No wonder people get so pissy on this board. Need I repeat that?


Even I'm getting confused now :eek:

I look at it this way. The PCV is connected directly to the top of the throttle body. This, during idle for example is a source of pretty strong vacuum (19 InHg on my car), and is pulling this vacuum through the crank case. But since the passenger side valve cover has a vent (tied to the turbo inlet) which is for all intents and purposes at atmospheric pressure (still at idle) because if you were able to look through that tube and take a sharp left when entering the turbo inlet, you'd find your self at the air cleaner. So the air in the inlet (some small portion) is being drawn in through the valve cover, and ends up being pulled through the PCV and dumped in behind the throttle plate.

The other extreme is under heavy boost, the PCV should, realistically stop any pressure at the throttle body from going through the PCV into the crank case.
But as we all know there is some leakage there. So some small portion of the boost pressure (OK medium portion) enters the crank case. Now it has to find a way out by taking the path of least resistance (sort of like electricity), this path is out through the passenger side vent, which just happens to be tied to the turbo inlet. These vapors are how oil ends up in the turbo and intercooler. The vapors are coming out of the crankcase and can be heavilly ladened with oil particulates.

Here's where the problem of the check valve that ATR markets comes into play if you use it to completely replace the PCV. And this is easilly demostrated if you have a check valve in hand, and an 893 PCV. First (if this is a new 893 PCV) blow into the top of the PCV as hard as you can. Some blow by, yes, but not a lot. PCV's that are about a year old will allow considerabley more.
Now blow into the top of the check valve as hard as you can. No blow by. This so far, is a good thing.
Now take a suction on the top of the PCV, and inhale as hard as you can (new PCV!), you will notice some restriciton to the flow (this is the calibration we talk about).
Do the same thing to the check valve. There is absolutely no restiction to the air you're inhaling!! To much of a vacuum leak!

This, for some reason really manifests its self in the Thrasher chips (not all of them), and other brands as well, but not all, and I don't pretend to understand why. But when I was using the check valve and finally got day-to-day scan tool hooked up, the most glaring thing I saw was my O2 drop to neary zero at idle (no I'm not talking about DE or DFCO). Idle was smooth enough, just funky O2's.
Removed the check valve and installed a good PCV, and all was well again.

AT certain vacuum levels (highest) is when this problem occurs the worst. There is much more air entering the engine than the normal 5 grams that the MAF is seeing, and plays tricks on the PCM.
 
wow this is long

Now take a suction on the top of the PCV, and inhale as hard as you can (new PCV!), you will notice some restriciton to the flow (this is the calibration we talk about).
Do the same thing to the check valve. There is absolutely no restiction to the air you're inhaling!! To much of a vacuum leak!
dave-- i just did this and i think you have it backwards-
when i sucked( hack pitewy) on the atr valve, it allows less air to come up through to the t.body when the car is in vacuum-
so it would be less of a vacuum leak. right?

i pulled the check valve off my car( atr's newest one) and did exactly what you have described...
guess you didnt do as you instructed someone else to do..
im actually holding them both in my hands and came up with different results- dont take this as any type of flame- but either you wrote down the wrong results or you dont have the parts in your hands :)
 
Back
Top