@EuroFlyer was oil analysis being done every oil change, and if so how long was the history?
Corrosion should pollute the oil and show up in analysis. These guys are very good at knowing where various elements are originating and indicating if further investigation is advised.
Silvaire wrote:
Inspecting the oil filter for metal at each filter change is a very good idea
Just visually or using special chemical tests?
@EuroFlyer Camguard should have prevented corrosion. Did you apply it to the engine oil?
Ibra wrote:
Silvaire wrote:
Inspecting the oil filter for metal at each filter change is a very good ideaJust visually or using special chemical tests?
Its only an opinion but I think visual inspection of the oil filter is a very valuable thing in terms of detecting something imminent and possibly dangerous going on with the engine. Oil analysis is a way to track long term trends of engine wear, unless of course it spikes up in a dramatic way.
I use Camguard because I think all the data I’ve seen says its useful stuff, particularly in terms of corrosion control which is likely to be my larger problem at 50 hrs/year over years and years.
@chflyer: During the disastrous 100hr oil change period, there was no oil analysis done. It was one of the reasons we changed our camo. Now we are doing it.
@Silvaire: no of course there’s no probability behind it. At least not from any data that I know. However, this expensive exercise gave me the final facts, that the only thing that really keeps piston engines safe is to fly them frequently.
During the disastrous 100hr oil change period, there was no oil analysis done. It was one of the reasons we changed our camo. Now we are doing it.
I fully agree, but for every person who thinks oil analysis is worthwhile, you will find a dozen “engineers” who will tell you firmly it is complete bollox – like here. And in the EASA sphere most of these will be connected with a CAMO 
Oil analysis will tell you about corrosion, for sure, and if the corrosion is heavy and is on bearing surfaces then you pick it up right away. That incidentally is why it has been known for a seller to run the engine and change the oil, right before a prebuy, in case the prospective buyer takes an oil sample 
Lots of threads here on oil analysis, camguard, etc.
It sounds like a Conti engine doesn’t have the strainer before the oil pump. This is where large bits end up
Just visually or using special chemical tests?
Cut it open (there is a 100 quid “can opener” tool) and spread the filter element on a newspaper and eyeball it. Bits of aluminium are ok if you have new pistons, but you don’t want a lot of bits which pick up with a magnet. There are articles out there saying that a teaspoon of bits is ok… hmmm… maybe on a badly assembled brand new engine which never had a run on a dyno
It looks like this
There are too many cases of a maintenance company saying they checked the filter but actually did not. It’s a hassle and as I say above most mechanics think it’s a waste of time since no real pilot (i.e. triple-Y-chromosome) is going to have the engine opened on the basis of oil analysis alone. That’s why I do it myself.
Peter wrote:
2019 has clearly been the “year of the engine”.
FWIW on the three C152s flying in our club, each with relatively high usage (800h/year each, give or take) we have had cylinder replacements up the wazoo; I think one is getting all four replaced now (the engine was overhauled early this year) and another had all four done with under 1000h on a rebuilt engine. The third one had issues too, but I don’t remember what they were, and if they were related to the engine. Not ever does anyone in the club remember such mayhem.
Peter wrote:
Cut it open (there is a 100 quid “can opener” tool) and spread the filter element on a newspaper and eyeball it. Bits of aluminium are ok if you have new pistons, but you don’t want a lot of bits which pick up with a magnet. There are articles out there saying that a teaspoon
Thanks, will try this next time, hopefully no teaspoon inside
that’s exactly how ‘our’ chips were found…
Peter wrote:
2019 has clearly been the “year of the engine”.
Maybe just that we heard more than usual as people get more sensitive to them.
Fact is that these engines are totally outdated and it is ridiculous that in this day and age we are still flying with 1950’s technology. It shows the state of the industry better than anything else. Maybe the consequence will be that it sooner or later will die out.
