tigers
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: O-Rings

To: Steve Laifman <SLaifman@socal.rr.com>
Subject: Re: O-Rings
From: Craig Wright <cwright@pdghightower.com>
Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2003 16:57:43 -0700
This is a timely discussion for me. I removed my adapter a couple of 
weeks ago to have the block boiled out and rebuild the engine. The 
gasket on my adapter looked like a square rubber seal (maybe from and 
oil filter) and it was torn. Does anyone have the specs or source for a 
replacement "O" ring? Is the Ford # Tom mentioned the right one?

Craig Wright



Steve Laifman wrote:

> O-rings:
>
> How they are supposed to work, and why they sometimes fail.  The 
> results of my participation in our own and the Shuttle mishap on 
> O-rings engineering design practice, and the modes of failure.
>
> 1) O-rings are round in cross section, which is why they are called 
> "O" rings.
> 2) There are other rubber seals, even of the same materials, that are 
> NOT round, and do not physically function in the same manner as an 
> O-ring.
> 3) An example of such a seal is right on the end of most oil filters. 
> The seal is a rectangular, or square cross section rubber like 
> (neoprene, typically) material.  As are O-rings.  But these are 
> crimped in place on three sides, and a small amount sticks out as the 
> sealing face against a machined surface. The crimping physically seals 
> three of the sides, and the compression against the block, or holder, 
> the first pressure seal.  There is no dynamic energization as a result 
> of increasing pressure, as an O-ring design. It is strictly a 
> compression seal, like your head gasket and valve cover.
> 4) The TRUE O-ring is designed in accordance, at least in military and 
> commercial applications, against JANNAF  (Joint Army, Navy, Air Force) 
> standards.  The dimensions of the o-ring groove, relative to the 
> application, the clearances between the walls and the o-ring, the 
> compression forces, an the amount of pressure it is rated at, along 
> with the temperature operating range are variables in the design and 
> result in a different product.
>
> Typically, the O-ring is in a square groove, and does NOT fill the 
> groove.  It is sealed at the low and high pressure side operating on 
> opposite sides of the ring, and groove, "across" the top. -|_O_|- 
> (close as I could get, imagine a top that squeezes the o-ring, but 
> does not touch the opposite metal.
>
> The instant pressure is applied, the true o-ring physically moves 
> across the o-ring groove and the pressures try to force it out the 
> small gap on the low pressure side.  Of course it gets squeezed into 
> that groove "gap" harder, the more the pressure increases, sealing all 
> the harder. Which is why it is a good design.
>
> It can be "killed", of course, by poor material choices, incorrect 
> clearances or clamping forces, damaged grooves or rings, environmental 
> extremes beyond design parameters.
>
> Most of you know about the Shuttle disaster. This 3 back-up ring 
> design was based upon the very successful Titan rocket design with 
> only one O-ring in each 10 foot DIAMETER joint, sometimes 7 on each 
> side of each launch.  In the shuttle case, only one parameter was not 
> adequately monitored, the O-ring material temperature.  It was so cold 
> on launch day that icicles were hanging from the joints.
>
> Need you imagine just how flexible these huge rings were when they 
> were so cold. On energization, they simply did not have the plasticity 
> to deform around the groove opening, and seal tighter the harder it 
> was pushed. It leaked, just a little.  Well, a little leak of 6,000 
> deg gases does not bode well for a rubber ring.
>
> So, how does this relate to Tigers.
>
> Here is how.  If you do NOT have a SQUARE o-ring groove, you cannot 
> use an O-ring.  The FoMoCo 6880 had such a groove between the adapter 
> and the block (flat surface), and does use an O-ring for this seal. 
> The O-ring does NOT fill the groove, per design practice, and does not 
> leak. The gasket on the filter is a 3 sided captured square rubber 
> seal, not an o-ring, and also does not need another gasket.  There is 
> another O-ring on the enter holding bolt for the block mount.
>
> Older right angle adapters did NOT have O-rings, and relied on flat 
> surface seals, much like your head gasket or valve cover.
>
> Well, you wanted to know about O-rings.  Those were the opening 
> remarks of the tech eval team on the first day.  4 months later, we 
> REALLY understood the issue.
>
> Steve
>
> Tom Witt wrote:
>
>>  I know that this has been touched on before and that Jim Boynton has an
>> article relating to the matter at Tigers United, but my problem has a 
>> bit of a
>> twist. My oil filter adapter (part # E5TE-6884-BA) came off a late 
>> 70's thru
>> early 80's Ford Van. The O-Ring slot is square cut. The van this came 
>> off of
>> simply had a similar sized round O-Ring with silicone put on it. I 
>> went to the
>> dealer (taking the adapter) and asked for the proper replacement. I 
>> was given
>> (without looking anything up) a very thin, round O-Ring FCM 87147S91 
>> and was
>> told that "it would work." I questioned the fact that the O-Ring was 
>> so thin
>> (and round), and that it slopped around in the square groove, but was 
>> told "it
>> would work."
>>  Well, after I bought it ($4.59 at Ford, O-Rings everywhere else --- .99
>> cents)  I still had my doubts and opted not to use it. To add insult 
>> to injury
>> my wife took it back while out shopping and Mr. Parts Expert "it will 
>> fit"
>> wasn't bright enough to refund her the $4.59, but instead gave her 
>> back $1.43
>> on the fiber washer price! I know it's only three bucks, but it is 
>> the point
>> that counts. As far as I'm concern this guy has now made two mistakes 
>> on a
>> simple transaction. So that I might properly correct "Mr. Parts 
>> Expert" could
>> anyone tell me if the Ford Motorsports oil filter adapter has a 
>> square cut for
>> the O-Ring and if, in fact the O-Ring itself is square(ish). From 
>> what I can
>> see in the pictures it appears to be and I suspect that the 
>> FMS-M6880A50 might
>> be what I need.
>>
>>  By the way, is it just that I'm a walking crash test dummy for 
>> Murphy's law
>> or do you, like my wife and I, find it takes the time of nearly an 
>> eight hour
>> day each and every week just to correct for people unable to do their 
>> job
>> properly. I know that we all make mistakes, but for us this nonsense 
>> happens
>> ALL the time.
>>
>> Tom Witt B9470101

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: O-Rings, Steve Laifman
    • Re: O-Rings, Craig Wright <=