Thread: Gas-in-Oil Scientific Approach
09-16-2007, 12:52 PM #1
Gas-in-Oil Scientific Approach
Guys; I'm trying to use our collective genius and experience here to figure out the gas in oil issue. I am suggesting we use the scientific method to come to a good conclusion. Read more about the scientific method here, it's worth your time:
1. Define the question
2. Gather information and resources (observe)
3. Form hypothesis
4. Perform experiment and collect data
5. Analyze data
6. Interpret data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypotheses
7. Publish results
8. Retest (frequently done by other scientists)
To begin, I have listed the following theories of this problem below. I have briefly summarized to make this simple and accurate. Please review and post feedback on the descriptions only for now; please don't begin debating the details or theory vs. theory so that we can keep this on track. Once we have solid descriptions of the problem; we'll gather stats and go into further analysis. I appreciate your help; I love my 250; have had no problems other than this and would like to take a positive attack using facts here vs. slamming each other into submission.
WOT during break-in resulted in bad ring seating, resulting in excess blow-by.
Ring Problem Theory:
Rings were not engineered correctly, excessive blow-by.
R&D's / "rain cloud" Theory:
Crankcase vent design inefficient, gas is condensating into oil. We'll learn more about this when their kit comes out.
Gas Cap Theory:
Gas tank design results in constant pressure on injectors, forces fuel into cylinders when stored or transported.
Wrong mix = over rich + supercharging + inefficient vent design = fuel in oil.
Silicone Blockage in Hose Theory:
Excess silicone in intercooler / catch can lines results in inefficient venting.
09-16-2007, 05:01 PM #2
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Cairns, Australia Summer all year round!
Good idea and the best approach to solving a problem with unknown cause. It's what Kawa should (and might ) be doing right now.
However a truly scientific approach requires the same measurement tools and techniques to be used throughout and the experiment should be repeatable with pretty much the same results. I would think by 'descriptions only' we are gathering the info? Someones boat is gonna have to serve as the test bed and we're going to need funds to test each of the theories one at a time. To be sure to be sure, it should be done on the same boat really, and a new one at that. I would think so we eliminate all other variables. It's gonna take some time. Just my thoughts as a scientist.
If we weren't too worried about it being strictly scientific and so on. We could possibly get one used boat to be the test boat for each theory?
09-16-2007, 05:33 PM #3
That's the idea.. We would try our best to standardize / baseline, or maybe we would all perform the same tests simultaneously and compare notes.
09-16-2007, 05:57 PM #4SeaDoocerGuest
Start by maybe questioning the Kawi theory about WOT. Too many of us have broke the skis in with no WOT and still have the problem. We could maybe get feedback from those who have the blow by and whether they did or didnot do WOT. Good start. jmho.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By SeaDoocer in forum Kawasaki Open DiscussionReplies: 145Last Post: 09-25-2007, 08:23 AM
By allan in forum Kawasaki Open DiscussionReplies: 63Last Post: 09-10-2007, 12:36 AM
By john87rico in forum Kawasaki PWC Performance (4-stroke)Replies: 0Last Post: 09-06-2007, 05:20 PM
By mugmainer in forum Kawasaki PWC Performance (4-stroke)Replies: 2Last Post: 08-08-2007, 05:03 PM
By Hecyan in forum 4-Tec PerformanceReplies: 9Last Post: 03-14-2007, 07:06 PM