I apologize in advance for the length of this post.
Disclaimer: The following is not in support of either side on the topic of discussion in this forum. I do not have a Prime-Loc nor do I have any affiliation with Ash-Land Technologies.
It is said a little knowledge is dangerous. If that's the case, I'm real dangerous.
#ad
Please bear with me when I repeat something that is common knowledge. No slights are intended.
***************************************************************
A question was asked earlier, which is more important, pressure or flow? IMHO, unless the fuel injector pump is a boost pump ( I don't believe it is) , it would stand to reason the requirement would only be that a sufficient volume of fuel be at the injector pump inlet. Therefore, flow is more important than pressure. It is easier to measure pressure than flow as has been noted before.
Resistance to flow (liquid or gas) as we all know is measured as pressure. The trick is being able to obtain an accurate pressure reading when the medium ( in our case a liquid) to be measured is flowing. Obviously, the accuracy of the measuring device is important. Given that the measuring device is accurate , an accurate reading will be made of the pressure only at the internal interface point of the gauge. This may or may not reflect the pressure at the point we are trying to measure. A fluid flowing passed an orifice (port) can induce a low pressure point within the orifice. The faster the fluid flows the lower the pressure. Some old guy
#ad
named Venturi noted this a while ago I believe. Turbulence at any point within the fluid will create a low pressure point. If the measurement point is at the turbulence point or creates the turbulence, the pressure will appear to be lower. I don't know enough about this stuff to know if or how the condition of laminar flowing could be a factor (told you I was dangerous
#ad
)
With that said, I submit the following (has a nice ring to it, doesn't it?
#ad
There maybe problem in obtaining an accurate reading at the stock filer mount when it is under different mechanical configurations. If I understand correctly, the Prime-Loc has a test port for measuring the pressure on the output side. The output is then sent to the output side of stock filter head on its way to the injector pump. Looking at Steve's stock post-filter data w/P-L, we see a trend of dropping pressure as the demand of the injector pump increases. If the stock post-filter data w/P-L is compared to the P-L test port data, there appears to be a fairly constant 3 psi differential. I believe the connection between the two points to be a very short hose. One would not expect a drop of this magnitude in this short of distance. If either a turbulence is created at the stock post-filter port or the flow by the test port has been altered to create a Venturi effect due to the installation of the P-L, the readings might be lower and could account for the drop in pressure over such a short distance. You could also get a negative pressure reading when the pressure is near zero.
Steve's data tends to support P-L's position that there is adequate flow based on the limited flow tests they preformed. That is to say, that at 77mph and 4 psi at the P-L output, there is more fuel than the injector pump and the return line can discharge. If the return line was interrupted near the injector pump in their test to measure the return fuel, this would be a more stringent test than measuring at the tank - less hose = less resistance means easier/more flow out the return line. Since the injector pump will 'suck' whatever it needs from the fuel line first, it would appear that in their test there is ample fuel supplied to the injector since no reduction in volume was noted.
However, the real question (which concerns so many) comes up under WOT. P-L's test did not include this condition which is why I called it limited testing. Zero pressure may only indicate supply = demand. John's negative pressure may mean the injector pump is demanding more than the system can supply or it may be the result due to a limitation in measurement as discussed. Variation in data from different owners could be due different measurement instruments(variation in absolute numbers not the overall effect observed), variations in the hardware (both P-L and stock) on each truck, mounting variations, and any other fuel line modifications that have been done and their variations.
It would take some doing, but measuring the return fuel at WOT under a real or simulated road test would of benefit to all at this point. I hope Ash-Land Technologies will attempt to perform this type of test.
As already been said but worth repeating, be concerned, be cautious. Don't be excited until the situation is thoroughly evaluated and it is determined there is a problem. If the pressure goes to zero and there's a reduction in fuel returning to tank, then we should get excited. Until then, unless someone has taken test data to the contrary or has a specification for the lift pump that indicates the injector pump requires a pressure (numbers we have are for the fuel system) at the inlet to function properly, let's be cool, due the home work, double check the results and come to a sound engineering decision.
------------------
<font color=#990000>
~<font color=#990000> '99 2500 SLT <font color=#990000> ~ QC ~ 4X4 ~ LB ~ Auto ~ 4:10 LSD ~
<font color=#000000>
*<font color=#990000> BD E-brake<font color=#000000>
*<font color=#990000> BD Autolock<font color=#00000>
*<font color=#990000> Gear Vendor OD<font color=#000000>
*<font color=#990000> Jordan Research 2020 T-brake <font color=#000000>
*<font color=#990000> Bullhide spray-in Line <font color=#000000>
*
<font color=#000000>
*<font color=#990000> 2k Komfort 5'er - 9,700 lbs <font color=#000000>
*
<font size=-2>... Lookin' for the 'RE' to go in front of my 'TIRED' so's I got more time to Play!... <font size=-1>
[This message has been edited by Rattlin (edited 12-10-2000). ]