Home > Best Practices for Fluid Fill and Auditing > Engines
Best Practices for Fluid Fill and Auditing Engines
Outline
I.Overview of fluid filling/leveling methods and their downfalls
II.Overview of the Wilkris fluid filling/leveling method.
III.Summary.
I. Common Fluid Filling Methods
There are four methods historically used to fill and verify engines with oil.
1. The vacuum Straw/vacuum stand pipe method.
2. The volumetric method.
3. The weight method.
4. The dipstick method.
The specification to verify these methods is by measuring the oil level. This is accomplished through the use of a sight gauge or a dip stick.
1. The Vacuum Straw/Stand Pipe method
There are five common reasons the tiny port on the level sensing straw is covered and the fill cycle is stopped:
A. Because the correct level has been reached.
B. Because foam has covered the hole.
C. Because splash has covered the hole.
D. Because turbulence has covered the hole.
E. Because temperature has expanded the oil and it now covers the hole.
The vacuum straw can measure only to one level, the vacuum port on the straw. This limits multiple levels to be set, and limits the number of engine models that can be filled by one set of tooling.
2. The Weight Method
The weight method weighs the engine in order to verify the volume of oil in the engine. This system is very expensive to implement and maintain because it requires tracking the weight of each component of the engine, pallet, and in process dunnage. Once an engine is filled it is extremely difficult to re-fill because of the residual oil contained in a re-operated engine. In addition; The weight of a engine does not have a direct correlation to the level of oil in the case.
3. The Volumetric Method
The volumetric method uses a known volume of oil and fills the engine with the oil. Volumetric fill is not reliable, the internal cavity of engines can vary and affect the oil level considerably. Again; The volume of oil does not have a direct correlation to the level of oil in the case.
4. The Dipstick Method
Reading a Dipstick is subjective, it does not give any comparable data can be seen, and is not automated.
II. The Wilkris Method
The following are a few advantages of the Wilkris Method:
1. The Wilkris method is immune to turbulence, splash, and foam.
2. Level can be set to any set point. Different engine types can be filled by the same system to the required level.
3. Fast response time. With theWilkris method, engines are rapidly filled to a predetermined level and then filling stops. Filling can be stopped at any level within the sensing range of the gauge, +/-1 mm. This can be demonstrated. There is no need to overfill an engine and then bring down the level.
4. Temperature Compensation, expanding hot oil can be normalized to any temperature.
5. Easy to use, the Wilkris Method works like a digital dipstick.
6. Labor is reduced, the Wilkris method can be completely automated.
7. Reworks are reduced due to the precision level signal.
8. Material usage is reduced because there are no overfills with the Wilkris method.
9. Rejections are reduced, the method is accurate to +/-1 mm.
10. The method produces data that can be viewed and compared.
11. The Wilkris method makes engine filling more cost efficient.
III. Summary
1. The specification to verify the correct oil content is by measuring the oil level.
2. The volumetric method does not measure level.
3. The weight method does not measure level.
4. The Standpipe method is rigid and unreliable.
5. The dipstick method is subjective and prone to operator error.
6. The Wilkris method measures oil level accurately to +/-1 mm.
7. Wilkris fill systems are flexible, they can fill to multiple levels.
8. Wilkris fill systems are reliable, the calibration holds for months.
9. Wilkris fill systems are robust, they perform and last in rough manufacturing environments.
10. Wilkris fill systems can be fully automated.