Hmm, no minumum flow rates indicated on the Racor site specifications page
for water separator filters.

--
Roger Long

On Jul 29, 5:17 am, "Roger Long" wrote:
Hmm, no minumum flow rates indicated on the Racor site specifications page
for water separator filters.

--
Roger Long

I found info on the larger units Roger, but I feel you are going to
have to call Parker/Racor and ask an application engineer for the info
on the older systems.
I'd be interested myself to the flow ratings on the old 2000 filter
housings.

V -- How to Order
The example below illustrates how part numbers are constructed.
1000MA M P 2
Specify Model
(see chart below):
500MA1
900MA2
1000MA2
75500MAX1
75900MAX3
751000MAX3
731000MA4
771000MA5
791000MAV4
Add M for a metal bowl
instead of the standard
see--thru polymer bowl.
(Omit if not desired)
Add P for a water
sensor probe6
(Omit if not desired)
Add a micron rating:
2, 10, or 30
(The smaller the
number in micron rating,
the more contaminates
the filter will take out of
the fuel. A 2 micron
filter will take out more
contaminates than a 10
micron filter will.)
Standard fuel ports a 1 3/4"--16 UNF (SAE J1926), 2 7/8"--14 UNF
(SAE J1926), 3 7/8"--14 UNF (SAE
J514), 4 3/4"--14 NPT (SAE J476) and 5 1" NPT (SAE J476). 6 Must be
used withWater DetectionModule.
Fittings are available from Racor -- call technical support at
800.344.3286 for assistance.
Single
Duplex
Triplex
With Isolation Valves
Without Isolation Valves
75500MAX (60 GPH with one unit
on--line, 120 GPH with both units on--line)
500MA (60 GPH)
900MA (90 GPH)
1000MA (180 GPH)
731000MA (360 GPH)
75900MAX (90 GPH with one unit
on--line, 180 GPH with both units on--line)
751000MAX (180 GPH with one unit
on--line, 360 GPH with both units on--line)
With Isolation Valves
Without Isolation Valves
771000MA (540 GPH)
791000MAV (180 GPH with one unit
on--line, 360 GPH with two units on--line
and 540 GPH with three.

Roger Long wrote:
:Hmm, no minumum flow rates indicated on the Racor site specifications page
:for water separator filters.

Why would there be? The seperation is done by gravity. Diesel floats
on water, so the water collects on the bottom of the bowl, where it
can be drained out the handy valve on the bottom.

"David Scheidt" wrote


Why would there be? The seperation is done by gravity.

Undoubtedly. Someone else raised the minimum flow question which seemed
plausible to me only because of seeing spiral grooves on some of the bowl
housings that looked as if the centrifugal effects of flow might be intended
to assist gravity. Maybe so but it apparently isn't a big enough
contribution for Racor to warn against diminished performance at low flow
rates.

A more likely probabiliy now seems to me to be that the grooves are intended
to slow the flow so that gravity will have more time to do its work. I'm
skeptical now that there is a downside to a large filter.

--
Roger Long

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:33:40 -0400, "Roger Long"
wrote:


"David Scheidt" wrote


Why would there be? The seperation is done by gravity.

Undoubtedly. Someone else raised the minimum flow question which seemed
plausible to me only because of seeing spiral grooves on some of the bowl
housings that looked as if the centrifugal effects of flow might be intended
to assist gravity. Maybe so but it apparently isn't a big enough
contribution for Racor to warn against diminished performance at low flow
rates.

A more likely probabiliy now seems to me to be that the grooves are intended
to slow the flow so that gravity will have more time to do its work. I'm
skeptical now that there is a downside to a large filter.

The flow rate is fixed by the flow rate...as is the "time of flight"
from inlet to outlet. Perhaps they are making a vortex. Just a guess.

"Goofball_star_dot_etal" wrote in message
...
The flow rate is fixed by the flow rate...as is the "time of flight"
from inlet to outlet. Perhaps they are making a vortex. Just a guess.


A vortex is claimed, but whether or not it is actually there, and whether or
not it actually separates water, is another matter entirely.

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:26:10 -0500, "KLC Lewis"
wrote:


"Goofball_star_dot_etal" wrote in message
.. .
The flow rate is fixed by the flow rate...as is the "time of flight"
from inlet to outlet. Perhaps they are making a vortex. Just a guess.


A vortex is claimed, but whether or not it is actually there, and whether or
not it actually separates water, is another matter entirely.


Ask Mr. Dyson..

On Jul 29, 5:33 pm, "Roger Long" wrote:
"David Scheidt" wrote



Why would there be? The seperation is done by gravity.

Undoubtedly. Someone else raised the minimum flow question which seemed
plausible to me only because of seeing spiral grooves on some of the bowl
housings that looked as if the centrifugal effects of flow might be intended
to assist gravity. Maybe so but it apparently isn't a big enough
contribution for Racor to warn against diminished performance at low flow
rates.

A more likely probabiliy now seems to me to be that the grooves are intended
to slow the flow so that gravity will have more time to do its work. I'm
skeptical now that there is a downside to a large filter.

--
Roger Long

Be as skeptical as you want Roger. I even posted the telephone number
to Parker Racor. They are open on Mondays.

For many years I ran crewboats that had from 8 racor filter housing
to 14 housing on a single boat 3-5 mains and 2 gen-sets burning
between 600-900,000 gallons of fuel a year. And I've lived on a boat
I've owned for 13 years now with racor set-ups and have I've changed
at least a thousand Racor filters and supervised several thousand more
changes, and have meet with Racor reps many times.

A vortex is made in the bowl that helps seperate the water from the
fuel. They work best at full flow as the suspended water has more time
spirling in the vortex and with it's higher specific gravity settles
fast, sort of like panning for gold if you can grab that
concept..geeze at they let you on the mir.

BTW Additives are for kids, a waste of money and more often than not
they just
foul things up more than they help.

WWII Corsairs had water injectors..greatly bumped the HP in
combat...but over time (minutes) it turned the valves white hot and
they start dripping on the pistons. Every engine that used a water
booster had to be re-buildt.

Can you get up on plane with your water boosted diesel fuel?

Joe
USMM Master# 607529

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:47:52 -0700, Joe
wrote:

On Jul 29, 5:33 pm, "Roger Long" wrote:
"David Scheidt" wrote



Why would there be? The seperation is done by gravity.

Undoubtedly. Someone else raised the minimum flow question which seemed
plausible to me only because of seeing spiral grooves on some of the bowl
housings that looked as if the centrifugal effects of flow might be intended
to assist gravity. Maybe so but it apparently isn't a big enough
contribution for Racor to warn against diminished performance at low flow
rates.

A more likely probabiliy now seems to me to be that the grooves are intended
to slow the flow so that gravity will have more time to do its work. I'm
skeptical now that there is a downside to a large filter.

--
Roger Long

Be as skeptical as you want Roger. I even posted the telephone number
to Parker Racor. They are open on Mondays.

For many years I ran crewboats that had from 8 racor filter housing
to 14 housing on a single boat 3-5 mains and 2 gen-sets burning
between 600-900,000 gallons of fuel a year. And I've lived on a boat
I've owned for 13 years now with racor set-ups and have I've changed
at least a thousand Racor filters and supervised several thousand more
changes, and have meet with Racor reps many times.

A vortex is made in the bowl that helps seperate the water from the
fuel. They work best at full flow as the suspended water has more time
spirling in the vortex and with it's higher specific gravity settles
fast, sort of like panning for gold if you can grab that
concept..geeze at they let you on the mir.

BTW Additives are for kids, a waste of money and more often than not
they just
foul things up more than they help.

WWII Corsairs had water injectors..greatly bumped the HP in
combat...but over time (minutes) it turned the valves white hot and
they start dripping on the pistons. Every engine that used a water
booster had to be re-buildt.

Can you get up on plane with your water boosted diesel fuel?

Joe
USMM Master# 607529

Sure hate to disagree with you but I used to work on B-50's and
KC-97's. 28 cylinder, turbo charged, water injected, air cooled,
radial engines. 3500 HP dry and 3750 HP wet. The normal procedure was
to use water injection on every takeoff.

I don't ever remember changing a cylinder for low compression, i.e.,
valve, in fact most cylinder changes were for detonation damage caused
by excessively lean mixtures.

At this distance I don't remember the time change on the engines but
it wasn't that much different from the 3350's I worked on which were
not water injected.


Bruce in Bangkok
(brucepaigeATgmailDOTcom)

On Jul 30, 2:26 am, wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:47:52 -0700, Joe
wrote:





On Jul 29, 5:33 pm, "Roger Long" wrote:
"David Scheidt" wrote

Why would there be? The seperation is done by gravity.

Undoubtedly. Someone else raised the minimum flow question which seemed
plausible to me only because of seeing spiral grooves on some of the bowl
housings that looked as if the centrifugal effects of flow might be intended
to assist gravity. Maybe so but it apparently isn't a big enough
contribution for Racor to warn against diminished performance at low flow
rates.

A more likely probabiliy now seems to me to be that the grooves are intended
to slow the flow so that gravity will have more time to do its work. I'm
skeptical now that there is a downside to a large filter.

--
Roger Long

Be as skeptical as you want Roger. I even posted the telephone number
to Parker Racor. They are open on Mondays.

For many years I ran crewboats that had from 8 racor filter housing
to 14 housing on a single boat 3-5 mains and 2 gen-sets burning
between 600-900,000 gallons of fuel a year. And I've lived on a boat
I've owned for 13 years now with racor set-ups and have I've changed
at least a thousand Racor filters and supervised several thousand more
changes, and have meet with Racor reps many times.

A vortex is made in the bowl that helps seperate the water from the
fuel. They work best at full flow as the suspended water has more time
spirling in the vortex and with it's higher specific gravity settles
fast, sort of like panning for gold if you can grab that
concept..geeze at they let you on the mir.

BTW Additives are for kids, a waste of money and more often than not
they just
foul things up more than they help.

WWII Corsairs had water injectors..greatly bumped the HP in
combat...but over time (minutes) it turned the valves white hot and
they start dripping on the pistons. Every engine that used a water
booster had to be re-buildt.

Can you get up on plane with your water boosted diesel fuel?

Joe
USMM Master# 607529

Sure hate to disagree with you but I used to work on B-50's and
KC-97's. 28 cylinder, turbo charged, water injected, air cooled,
radial engines. 3500 HP dry and 3750 HP wet. The normal procedure was
to use water injection on every takeoff.

If it was not a problem to the engine, then why did they not use
water injection full time? Seems the B-50 used more morden engines as
well, and the B-50 has more than one engine to save yer butt if others
fail.

You may be correct, I heard that second hand from a WWII pilot a very
long time ago and was very intrigued by the process. I'm not an
aviator or mechanic. Regardless.. I want no water passing through my
injectors. Imagine shutting down with a drop of water inside the
injector... shutter...

Joe

I don't ever remember changing a cylinder for low compression, i.e.,
valve, in fact most cylinder changes were for detonation damage caused
by excessively lean mixtures.


At this distance I don't remember the time change on the engines but
it wasn't that much different from the 3350's I worked on which were
not water injected.

Bruce in Bangkok
(brucepaigeATgmailDOTcom)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -