Author Topic: B29 lubrication  (Read 752 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Alan

  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Apr 2004
  • Posts: 167
  • Location: Australia
B29 lubrication
« on: 25 Oct 2022 at 02:54 »
A question I should have asked when I had one but which has confused me ever since !   The B29 was advertised as “ dry sump”, but the oil sat below the engine in a large finned sump and there is no seperate oil tank to receive scavenged oil ( restoration assist.....my engine came in bits with no pump but a spare pump found  in a pile of  early 30’s cross frame engine bits dropped straight in)..
My question is how does the engine qualify as dry sump ? Or am I misunderstanding the definition?

Offline douglas1947

  • Master Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Feb 2014
  • Posts: 518
  • Location: Germany
Re: B29 lubrication
« Reply #1 on: 25 Oct 2022 at 06:14 »
Alan,

I think the defination "dry sump" for the engine is not well chosen from Douglas.
I would call it "wet sump".

Michael

Offline cardan

  • Master Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Jul 2007
  • Posts: 1547
  • Location: Adelaide, South Australia
    • Leon's Vintage Motorcycle Page
Re: B29 lubrication
« Reply #2 on: 25 Oct 2022 at 09:33 »
sump
noun: sump; plural noun: sumps

    1.  a pit or hollow in which liquid collects

From the 1890s until the mid 1920s, almost all motorcycle engines were lubricated by dripping or pumping (by hand or by mechanical pump) oil into the crankcase of the engine. The oil that made it in was splashed around by the flywheels or crankshaft until it was burned or leaked onto the road. We now call this "total loss" - I don't think this term was used in the day, nor was the term "wet sump".

Most engines (not Douglas!) used internal flywheels, so oil inside the crankcase caused drag as the flywheels pushed through the puddle of oil at the bottom and threw it around everywhere. You'll know what this feels like if you've ever over-oiled a total-loss bike!

Lots of bikes in the twenties had mechanical oil pumps, but these were more like "mechanical oil meters" as they simply delivered oil in regular quantities to the engine. The oiling was still "total loss".

It wasn't until the mid 1920s that a few bikes - mostly racers - started using the "dry sump" system in which any extra oil in the crank case was removed back to the oil tank (instead of ending up as smoke or on the road). On conventional motors, there was a scavenge pump to pick up excess oil from the bottom of the crank case and send it back to the oil tank, but Douglas had enough room to put the oil tank underneath the engine so that oil could drain directly back into the "tank".

Dry sump engines had less drag so they ran better. The also recirculated the oil.

So is the thing under the engine of some Douglas models an "oil tank" or an "oil sump"?

For some models - the RA - it's just a tank. Oil gets pumped out of it, but never returns. The engine is "total loss".

On other models - like the TT, and the B29 I think? - it's a sump. Oil gets pumped out to the engine, but there is an opening in the bottom of the crankcase through which the oil drains back into this tank/sump. .

By 1930 all but the cheapest models were using the "dry sump" system.

Cheers

Leon

Offline Alan

  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Apr 2004
  • Posts: 167
  • Location: Australia
Re: B29 lubrication
« Reply #3 on: 26 Oct 2022 at 00:40 »
Leon’s comment re over-oiling reminds me of the curse of many British bikes ( except Triumphs which had a plunger piston type oil pump) .
If not used regularly, the oil tank slowly leaked oil into the sump, turning a dry sump into a wet nuisance. A cheap cure was to fit a manual valve in the oil tank outlet and inevitably one day you forget and drove off until a nasty noise started. Self warning notes usually fell off your seat or handlebars so a chain and padlock between the valve and the kickstart or gear levers was often used....who needs high tech !