DXB Posted August 15, 2015 Report Posted August 15, 2015 Dev, The link went to the web site. I did not see a device, if that is what you were trying to point at. I did find their FAQs. Those people have a sense of humor! Best regards, -a- Not sure - link works for me. Here's the screenshot: Quote
carusoam Posted August 15, 2015 Report Posted August 15, 2015 Nice logical approach to getting a sample from the bulk of the oil. Thank you for the follow-up, -a- Quote
ArtVandelay Posted August 15, 2015 Report Posted August 15, 2015 Sorry for long digression. I've no idea if oil analysis leads to harm in the aviation world. My only point is that non-validated screening tests do certainly have the potential to cause harm; yet external pressures can still keep them in use for a long time. You don't take any extreme actions based on 1 oil analysis, shorten up the oil change interval and borescope the engine is all I would do if I saw an big anomaly otherwise I just look for trends. It's diagnostic tool,that's all. Quote
DXB Posted August 16, 2015 Report Posted August 16, 2015 You don't take any extreme actions based on 1 oil analysis, shorten up the oil change interval and borescope the engine is all I would do if I saw an big anomaly otherwise I just look for trends. It's diagnostic tool,that's all. I agree it's unlikely to cause direct harm as long as you don't do invasive things to an engine because of an oil analysis alone. The only negative things it might cause are unnecessary worry, expense, hassle. Or perhaps an ill-advised complacency to ignore other signs of an issue if analysis comes out ok- but then that's a flaw in the person, not the product. Still I'd be curious to hear any examples from people on here who had serious issues that ultimately required action and were first picked on oil analysis. The key thing is that: (1) nothing else suspicious or concerning was going on at the time (2) the oil analysis led them to take a useful action that they wouldn't have had reason to otherwise (3) doing so clearly contributed to safety. If there was something else of concern at the time of the analysis, then it is being used as a diagnostic test. But If there's nothing wrong, then it's a screening test. I know from experience that it's generally much harder to make a good screening test than a good diagnostic test. So many screening tests for health that seem to make all the sense in the world have failed in real world use. Don't get me wrong- I'm hardly an expert on engines or oil. Perhaps for this very reason, I dutifully send my samples to Blackstone and feel mildly reassured by their congenial, descriptive blurbs at the top of the report. I'm just wondering aloud if it really meets objective muster as a screening test, i.e. usefulness in an engine with no other detectable problems or reasons for concern. Quote
carusoam Posted August 16, 2015 Report Posted August 16, 2015 Check with Byron for an example of oil analysis defining an engine issue. I believe he explained some issues of a relatively new lycoming engine he was familiar with... Some challenges with the numbers.... They are dependent on the number of hours the oil was used. It is possible to get 10% difference in hours between oil changes leading to a 10% difference in numbers. Being able to grab a sample on an exact interval would make this better. Some flights are more stressful than long distance LOP cruising. This can mix up the results a bit. Even being parked outside in dry dusty areas can pick up silicon related numbers. It probably helps to be a mechanic and chemist to get the most out of the oil reports... Best regards, -a- Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.