10 Micron or 30 Micron Fuel Filter?
- Thread starter McIntoshUSA
- Start date
I'll say thank you from me and anyone who ever finds this via search. Very detailed and usable.What Jibes said,For engines with mechanical lift pumps, the vac gage can go anywhere between the.........
Yanmar diesels usually come with a built in secondary cartridge filter located between the lift pump and the high pressure pump. This filter being closest to the engine and the last line of defense should be a 10 micron. The primary filter coming off the fuel tank is usually a water separator and to avoid undue clogging a 30 micron is usually used. You seem to have a third filter and was wondering where is it located. The fuel injection high pressure pump is quite sensitive to contaminants in the fuel which is why the secondary filter should provide the most degree of protection. These pumps are not cheap and not economically rebuildable.
Benny, I actually only have the two filters. The previous owner left me two new filters (one a ten and one a thirty micron) that fits the first filter. The Puralator filter I posted a picture of is one I bought after removing the current filter to see what part number it was.
as Rich noted you should use the 10 micron and keep the 30 micron as an emergency spare. If you have a Facet cylindrical fuel pump there is also a coarse screen type filter in them about 80 microns. This should be after your primary filter but some builders put them first after the tank. If you have one of these you can clean and replace that filter element. NAPA sells the parts.
Let me please repeat .... 30µM (optional)--> 10µM --> 15-18µM engine guard filter ---> engine.
Filters for oil, fuel and other automotive fluids are NOT 'screen doors' that remove ALL the particles at that arbitrary µM rating. All filters, including those discussed here, have efficiencies .... the 'good' automotive filters are typically between 95-97% efficient at their arbitrary 'µM rating'. This implies that a LOT of 'crap' is NOT captured and therefore the downstream filters must be selected on a 'statistical basis' to 'narrow down' that removal to 'acceptable'.
In the case of the 10µM Racor-type filter (@ ~95-97% efficiency.), for every 100,000 10µM particles filtered, 3000 10µM particles will pass through !!!!!!!!! and probably in the order of 500 to 1000 20µM and LARGER µM particles will go through that 10µM 'filter'.
To redfine the NEED of that 15-18µM downstream filter: The reason for that 'small surface area' LARGER µM filter (... besides being there in case one of the upstream filters 'unloads' / breaks, etc.) is that it too will on a statistical basis remove 'most' of those remaining 10µM and a high degree of those 20µM particles that didnt become captured by the upstream 10µM.
Sorry folks, filtration is not selected based on µM ratings but the statistical removal efficiencies (over the entire range of possible particle sizes), the viscosity of the fluid, the amount of fluid flow per surface area, the 'dwell time' that the fluid remains inside that filter material, etc. etc. etc. ..... STATISTICS!!!!! not only 'micron' / micrometer ratings.
The current spec. for most small marine diesel engines still remains 20µM and such a fuel filtration sequence is OPTIMIZED for the reduction/removal of that 20µM 'most damaging' particle and that recommended sequence still remains: 30µM (optional) --> 10µM --> 15-18µM engine mounted 'guard' filter.
Yes indeed many of the newer modern engines are trending towards a 10µM spec. because of the tighter 'clearances' inside these newer engines .... yet, very few of these are on recreational boats at this time. If your engine was designed around the 20µM spec., using filtration based on the newer 10µM spec. can result in LESS total efficiency and LESS removal ..... all based on the 'statistics' involved with filtration.
Here's an elemental layman's (with working math background) write-up on whats known as filtration "Beta Ratio" - one of the first things a filtration engineer looks at when specifying and applying any filter. Its the 'key' data plot that opens that statistical door of filtration efficiency in order to apply the 'correct' filter and filter 'µM rating': http://machinerylubrication.com/Read/564/filter-beta-ratios
Rx: 30µM (optional) --> 10µM --> 15-18µM engine mounted 'guard' filter .... for probably 98+% of the small diesel engines found in recreational boats.
I keep referring to Wix Filters ... the company that 'invented' spin-on automotive filters and are probably the main automotive filter manufacturer including the private label filters used by engine car truck manufacturers, automotive parts distributors, etc. They have a 'wonderful database' that includes the µM (~97% eff) rating on virtually ALL automotive engines.
wixfilters.com --> filter lookup --> vehicle lookup ---> Off Highway ---> marine engines .... etc. Use this data as a cross-reference for ANY other filter manufacturer, including OEM private label / OEM branded filters.
Hope this helps.
Filters for oil, fuel and other automotive fluids are NOT 'screen doors' that remove ALL the particles at that arbitrary µM rating. All filters, including those discussed here, have efficiencies .... the 'good' automotive filters are typically between 95-97% efficient at their arbitrary 'µM rating'. This implies that a LOT of 'crap' is NOT captured and therefore the downstream filters must be selected on a 'statistical basis' to 'narrow down' that removal to 'acceptable'.
In the case of the 10µM Racor-type filter (@ ~95-97% efficiency.), for every 100,000 10µM particles filtered, 3000 10µM particles will pass through !!!!!!!!! and probably in the order of 500 to 1000 20µM and LARGER µM particles will go through that 10µM 'filter'.
To redfine the NEED of that 15-18µM downstream filter: The reason for that 'small surface area' LARGER µM filter (... besides being there in case one of the upstream filters 'unloads' / breaks, etc.) is that it too will on a statistical basis remove 'most' of those remaining 10µM and a high degree of those 20µM particles that didnt become captured by the upstream 10µM.
Sorry folks, filtration is not selected based on µM ratings but the statistical removal efficiencies (over the entire range of possible particle sizes), the viscosity of the fluid, the amount of fluid flow per surface area, the 'dwell time' that the fluid remains inside that filter material, etc. etc. etc. ..... STATISTICS!!!!! not only 'micron' / micrometer ratings.
The current spec. for most small marine diesel engines still remains 20µM and such a fuel filtration sequence is OPTIMIZED for the reduction/removal of that 20µM 'most damaging' particle and that recommended sequence still remains: 30µM (optional) --> 10µM --> 15-18µM engine mounted 'guard' filter.
Yes indeed many of the newer modern engines are trending towards a 10µM spec. because of the tighter 'clearances' inside these newer engines .... yet, very few of these are on recreational boats at this time. If your engine was designed around the 20µM spec., using filtration based on the newer 10µM spec. can result in LESS total efficiency and LESS removal ..... all based on the 'statistics' involved with filtration.
Here's an elemental layman's (with working math background) write-up on whats known as filtration "Beta Ratio" - one of the first things a filtration engineer looks at when specifying and applying any filter. Its the 'key' data plot that opens that statistical door of filtration efficiency in order to apply the 'correct' filter and filter 'µM rating': http://machinerylubrication.com/Read/564/filter-beta-ratios
Rx: 30µM (optional) --> 10µM --> 15-18µM engine mounted 'guard' filter .... for probably 98+% of the small diesel engines found in recreational boats.
I keep referring to Wix Filters ... the company that 'invented' spin-on automotive filters and are probably the main automotive filter manufacturer including the private label filters used by engine car truck manufacturers, automotive parts distributors, etc. They have a 'wonderful database' that includes the µM (~97% eff) rating on virtually ALL automotive engines.
wixfilters.com --> filter lookup --> vehicle lookup ---> Off Highway ---> marine engines .... etc. Use this data as a cross-reference for ANY other filter manufacturer, including OEM private label / OEM branded filters.
Hope this helps.
Rich, to simplify your technical submittal for the OP based on his actual setup on his boat and original request for a recommendation on which Racor spin on element to use. The OP does not have the 30uM filter you recommend as an optional primary filter. He only has two filters, a Racor primary and a spin on engine mounted filter that is currently a Purolator. His question was which of two Racor elements to use, a 10uM or a 30uM that he already has in his possession. So taking your input and ignoring the 30uM (optional) that leaves a 10uM and the engine mounted filter that we will assume is the 15 to 18uM in the absence of any other information. Thus he should use the 10uM filter as the replacement for the Racor primary filter, agree?
Theyre both the same nominal *µM nominal rating10µM --> F50262 --> engine
F50262 --->
Principle Application: Allis-Chalmers, Hino, Hitachi, John Deere, Kubota, Other (10 Micron)
Applications
Style: Spin-On Fuel Filter
Service: Fuel
Type:
Media:
Height: 3.194
Outer Diameter Top: 3.234
Outer Diameter Bottom: Closed:
Thread Size: 20X1.5 MM
Burst Pressure-PSI: 370
Max Flow Rate: 9-11 GPM
Nominal Micron Rating: 10
Gasket Diameters
Number O.D. I.D. Thk.
Attached 2.475 2.173 0.233
So, he doesnt have to go out and buy another, etc., Id recommend
10µM RACOR --> F50262 (10µM) --> engine
In-other-words the smaller surface area filter goes "last".
;-) thanks for the 'translation' into normal human-speak.
F50262 --->
Principle Application: Allis-Chalmers, Hino, Hitachi, John Deere, Kubota, Other (10 Micron)
Applications
Style: Spin-On Fuel Filter
Service: Fuel
Type:
Media:
Height: 3.194
Outer Diameter Top: 3.234
Outer Diameter Bottom: Closed:
Thread Size: 20X1.5 MM
Burst Pressure-PSI: 370
Max Flow Rate: 9-11 GPM
Nominal Micron Rating: 10
Gasket Diameters
Number O.D. I.D. Thk.
Attached 2.475 2.173 0.233
So, he doesnt have to go out and buy another, etc., Id recommend
10µM RACOR --> F50262 (10µM) --> engine
In-other-words the smaller surface area filter goes "last".
;-) thanks for the 'translation' into normal human-speak.
Rich
So you recommend using the Racor 10 Micron (not the 30 micron) and the Puralator 10 Micron? It currently has a 30 mircon Racor on it.
Thanks, Mike
Rich
One point of confusion for me. My understanding from Racor is that you us the 30 micron on the Racor fg500 between the tank and electric pump. A finer filter inhibits the water separator from working on the Racor filter.
Thanks
DaveM
One point of confusion for me. My understanding from Racor is that you us the 30 micron on the Racor fg500 between the tank and electric pump. A finer filter inhibits the water separator from working on the Racor filter.
Thanks
DaveM
Rich
A point of confusion for me. My understanding from Racor is that you use the 30 micron on the fg500 primary filter. Any finer filter will degrade the water separation ability of the Racor fg500.
Thank
DaveM
A point of confusion for me. My understanding from Racor is that you use the 30 micron on the fg500 primary filter. Any finer filter will degrade the water separation ability of the Racor fg500.
Thank
DaveM
Wow, you really have to be careful what you buy. Rich's technical info states the Purolator f50262 is 10 Micron, this ad on Amazon for a third party replacement states 17 Micron. The efficiency rating is highly suspect as well. Buyer beware!
Reference:
F50262 PUROLATOR filter element replacement - pack of 4
Killer Filter products put quality above the rest. Our USA made filters and parts use only the highest quality material available in the market and are manufactured to the highest standards.
Each Filter is guaranteed to meet or surpass the original equipment manufacture specifications.
All items marked "Replacement" or "Equivalent" are not affiliated with the original manufacture where names and part numbers are for cross reference only.
Q: What is the micron filtering spec
A:Efficiency 99%: 17 Micron
Reference:
F50262 PUROLATOR filter element replacement - pack of 4
Killer Filter products put quality above the rest. Our USA made filters and parts use only the highest quality material available in the market and are manufactured to the highest standards.
Each Filter is guaranteed to meet or surpass the original equipment manufacture specifications.
All items marked "Replacement" or "Equivalent" are not affiliated with the original manufacture where names and part numbers are for cross reference only.
Q: What is the micron filtering spec
A:Efficiency 99%: 17 Micron
Not really so & for several reasons: These 500 series filters remove/extract water by several mechanisms -
1. centrifugal action; but, if only if the flow rate demand of the engine is 'close' to the flow rate requirement of the filter. Eg. if the engine demand flow rate is much less than (say) 50% of the design flow rate of the filter, centrifugal action will be MUCH less. The efficiency of centrifugal action rapidly reduces at flow below ~80% of filter design in just about all 'centrifugal' filtration (and mechanical spinning centrifuges, too).
2. Parker/Racor has available a water shedding hydrophobic (does not 'wet' with water) filter media - separates the two 'intermixed liquid phases' of the water from the fuel - "AquaBlock". Water coming in contact to the hydrophobic filter material surface doesnt pass through the filter material, but oil does ... the water is ejected from the fluid flow and then settles in the clear bowl 'sump'.
3. Coalesing .... where the very small distributed and distinct 'particles' of water mixed in the oil are 'forced together' inside the filter material, thus (due to surface tension effects) forming progressively larger and larger 'droplets' of free water and which are then forced together with more particles and which form larger and larger 'distinct' water particles ... until 'heavy enough' to settle out of the mixture and into the sump of that 'bowl' on the bottom of the filter housing. With respect to 'coalescing', the finer the filter's µM 'rating' the more efficient the coalescing effect .... but 'finer' filter ratings comes with a penalty - faster 'plugging' and less on-stream filter life due to the 'hard' particles being deeply driven into the filter material/media. With the 'finer' µM ratings the 'faster' the fluid travels through the filter material (higher pressure drop).
Your choice: longer on stream service life with 'more open' µM or better water removal with 'tighter' µM rating and the LESS total 'throughput' and less 'flow rate'.
My preference is to remove water in the very 'first' filter, as water will eventually 'digest' and weaken the downstream filter material, then you risk one of the more important, downstream filter(s) to 'breach'/break upon increasing 'differential pressure'.
hope this helps.
