Low-cost CCV diverter/trap (CCV DT)

mackruss · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 10:48 am

RJM wrote:

hankdz wrote:

I was meditating last night and the thought came to me that maybe another approach would work.
I started this thread and the diverter because I wanted to find a less expensive and just as good way to rid the intake of the crankcase fumes the way the Provent does. That was just a different way of looking at the way the Provent people solved the problem. What if the Provent model were ignored?
Just to let you know, when I meditate I'm not in a coma. I merely try to rid my mind of the things that have taken space for the previous while and let other things come into it. Here's what happened.
I was lying abed last night about midnight and all of a sudden the thought appeared, "Why not the exhaust instead of the intake?"
Here's as far as I've taken the thought. What if I were to put a hole in the exhaust side, say into the manifold or the exhaust pipe? What if I were to weld a 3/4 inch NPT nipple into that hole? What if I were to connect a piece of low pressure hydraulic hose from the CCV puck to that nipple and that's it? Wouldn't the crap from the CCV puck go into the exhaust and then disappear out the tail pipe?
I know someone would need to design the optimum angle at which the nipple enters the exhaust so there wouldn't be any backup into the puck. I think the exhaust would create enough vacuum to draw the CCV crap out of the puck, but does anyone have any other concerns that might make this idea implausible?
Any thoughts on this?
Love to hear some input.
Hank

This is a an earlier post from gmctd: "Racers do that with free-flowing exhaust piping - tube insertion can be done such that flowing exhaust gasses create a slight vacuum on the "pitot-tube" probe, aiding crankcase blowby - however, there is little danger of burning the effluent that far past the soot trap in the exhaust pipe, as cooling thru the long tubing length prior to insertion cools the vapors, allowing the liquids to separate - could be fairly messy in the long run, considering the high volume of blowby from this 4cyl - closer to the turbine outlet, exhaust back-pressure can become problematical if the soot trap is not removed"

Not a good idea.
_________________

I rememver this coming up before, was told in no uncertain terms that the heat from the exhaust would ignite the unburnt diesel vapours or something to that degree and nuke my CRD.

hankdz · **Posted:** Mon Mar 22, 2010 4:40 pm

Hi, I'm back with more info on the low cost CCV trap. I have made two cleanings since the last post in September 09. I also received an e-mail message from one of the members who uses another method. He pipes a pressure washer water filter to the CCV hose as his accumulator. He used one in his first try, but pondered th idea of using two filter mechanisms. So here's the update.
After three months and about 2000 miles I removed the oil separation chamber device I used. It was well clogged with sooty oil and water. Not full but messy gook all over the insideof the bottle. There was some, although very little, oil in the down stream hose leading to the turbine. So I decided to scrap that design concept and took up the pressure washer filter concept. I opted for two chambers.
I went on line to find pressure washer parts. I found a supplier (APW Distributing) who offered parts with different NPT fitting sizes. The ranged from 1/2 inch to 2 inches. I opted for two of the 3/4 inch fitting-size with solid bowls for $45.95 incl S&H. I bought some galvanized pipe and fittings at Lowe's and made up a dual chamber trap. I used copper wool scouring pads as the adsorption medium stuffed into the stainless steel screens supplied with the filters. The hose I purchased for the previous concept was cut and reused. Due to the filter body being round it does not fit in the old location on the passenger side at the firewall. I nested it in the area among the brake fluid distribution piping and the battery. I installed it in November 09 and just cleaned it this past Sunday after 2400 miles.
It seems to have performed much better than the dual chamber oil bottle I used earlier. There was some, say about a tablespoon of fluid in the first chamber. I used a short galvanized nipple to connect the two filters and that pipe had some coating of oil. The second chamber had even less oil than the first. I estimate a teaspoon maybe less. The adsorption material served its purpose. There was very little oil clinging to the screens or the copper scouring pads. Most of the oil had drained to the bottom of the filter bowls. The truly amazing thing is that there was nil, nada, zilch, no oil in the return hose leading to the turbine.
The clean up process amounted to using one terry cloth shop rag to wipe the bowls clean, to absorb the small amount of oil from the screens and scouring pads, and to wipe everything down before reinstalling. Total time, including refitting the hose by shortening it a little, was less than 20 minutes.
I will post again if I notice any differences in the future.
I'm still investigating going the exhaust route instead of the intake route. Not much progress on that yet.

RJM · **Posted:** Mon Mar 22, 2010 7:41 pm

hankdz wrote:

Hi, I'm back with more info on the low cost CCV trap. I have made two cleanings since the last post in September 09. I also received an e-mail message from one of the members who uses another method. He pipes a pressure washer water filter to the CCV hose as his accumulator. He used one in his first try, but pondered th idea of using two filter mechanisms. So here's the update.
After three months and about 2000 miles I removed the oil separation chamber device I used. It was well clogged with sooty oil and water. Not full but messy gook all over the insideof the bottle. There was some, although very little, oil in the down stream hose leading to the turbine. So I decided to scrap that design concept and took up the pressure washer filter concept. I opted for two chambers.
I went on line to find pressure washer parts. I found a supplier (APW Distributing) who offered parts with different NPT fitting sizes. The ranged from 1/2 inch to 2 inches. I opted for two of the 3/4 inch fitting-size with solid bowls for $45.95 incl S&H. I bought some galvanized pipe and fittings at Lowe's and made up a dual chamber trap. I used copper wool scouring pads as the adsorption medium stuffed into the stainless steel screens supplied with the filters. The hose I purchased for the previous concept was cut and reused. Due to the filter body being round it does not fit in the old location on the passenger side at the firewall. I nested it in the area among the brake fluid distribution piping and the battery. I installed it in November 09 and just cleaned it this past Sunday after 2400 miles.
It seems to have performed much better than the dual chamber oil bottle I used earlier. There was some, say about a tablespoon of fluid in the first chamber. I used a short galvanized nipple to connect the two filters and that pipe had some coating of oil. The second chamber had even less oil than the first. I estimate a teaspoon maybe less. The adsorption material served its purpose. There was very little oil clinging to the screens or the copper scouring pads. Most of the oil had drained to the bottom of the filter bowls. The truly amazing thing is that there was nil, nada, zilch, no oil in the return hose leading to the turbine.
The clean up process amounted to using one terry cloth shop rag to wipe the bowls clean, to absorb the small amount of oil from the screens and scouring pads, and to wipe everything down before reinstalling. Total time, including refitting the hose by shortening it a little, was less than 20 minutes.
I will post again if I notice any differences in the future.
I'm still investigating going the exhaust route instead of the intake route. Not much progress on that yet.

That be me. after much trial and error I am still happy with my set up. 20000 miles and no oil vapor going into the intake. It works much better than the Provent I had installed originally. drain lines still freeze up but I can live with that. Post pictures if possible, I would like to see the mounting location and steal some ideas from you.

hankdz · **Posted:** Tue Mar 23, 2010 3:03 pm

Hi

I have three pictures of the install location. Previous upload instructions included display image then right click then ------- ????? Anyway here's the thing. I'm not too versatile in loading pictures except to e-mail. I can load up a storm there. I use Apple Macintosh soft/hardware. No right click on my PowerBookG4 that I'm using right now. Just click or no click, no right or left. So how do I display the pictures like I did for the ones of the older installation? :?:

Please help.

Hank

hankdz · **Posted:** Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:51 pm

Update to my low-cost CCV DT installation.

I apparently don't drive as much as some of y'all. However, that doesn't stop me from letting you know what has transpired over the course of the past 9 months. Just serviced the KJ CRD and as part of that I cleaned the Low-cost CCV DT.

The last time was 12 March 2010 with 37,300 miles showing on the odometer. This time is 5 January 2011 with 43,400 miles showing on odometer. The mileage difference is approximately 6,000.

Opening the hoses and filter chambers yielded the following. First chamber had about a half inch of gunk at the bottom, or about one ounce liquid. Second chamber had just a light coating of gunk at the base. Hose entering first chamber had a light coating on the bottom surface. It does not coat the hose all around leading me to speculate that the gunk does not travel very fast nor at much pressure otherwise gunk should cover the entire hose. The hose leading out of the second chamber into the turbine intake had almost no gunk. It was a very light coat just where the hose connects to the chamber. The adsorbers were both coated in gunk as would be expected due to there being gunk in both chambers, albeit very little in the second chamber. Either the gunk is in complete suspension of oil/water or the water disappeared as I found no water evident. I did not experience any freezing.

I used a volatile compound (mineral spirits) and rags to clean the hoses, chambers, and adsorbent. They all cleaned up quickly and easily and were reassembled within a half hour from first opening.

All-in-all very pleased that I did not spend the big bucks on the Provent. However, I still want to see if there is a better way to locate the current system inside the engine bay. It would be nice to locate an oval- or rectangular-shaped filter configuration, then it could be located on the opposite side of the bay instead of being within the area of the brake master and the fuel filter. Just wondering.

Low-cost CCV diverter/trap (CCV DT)

Who is online