Quote:
Originally Posted by Dionysius
My question is related to this approach and why is it not used by manf.
Assume car is sitting on level ground and is in a static condition which I will define as car at 70 degF for at least 12 hours without having been energized in any way (engine not run).
In this static state will not all of the draining have reached an equilibrium such that the cold dip reading level can now be accurately stated for a given vehicle type. If I use this method it is much easier to be consistent and accurate.
Why can't the same logic apply to ATF static cold level as is applied to engine oil level. Both pump fluid up into a complex assemblage of components. I have for decades used a cold static dipstick measurement for the engine oil and and it is repeatable from day to day and is very simple.
The fully warmed temp will be a function of ambient plus a whole bunch more. The heat being dissipated by the cooler and tubing; engine temps which will vary with a/c on and off, etc. It is not possible to quote a maximum so a typical is what you get.
This is why I like the idea of a static reading for ATF level but it seems that automotive engineering refuses to go along with the simple idea.
97SL320 makes some very good points but I feel there is more to the story.
|
The main problem with the static level check comes from the torque converter. Unlike an engine, which circulates oil and allows and/or encourages the oil to drain back to the pan quite quickly, an automatic trans mission has a large reservoir in the form of a torque converter. The fluid is pumped up and into the torque converter whenever the engine is running, through passages in the middle of the torque converter. In a perfect world, when the engine is shutdown the fluid would all stay in the converter, however, much like the "frictionless pulley" mentioned in a post above, we don't live in a perfect world.
So fluid drains out.
Slowly.
Or quickly.
Depends on the car.
And not just the make and model of the car, but on the individual car. Wear and manufacturing tolerances, temperatures, just about any variable. And that means that some cars' torque converters drain back in about an half an hour and some cars take weeks.
That pretty much means that a static reading is not practical, if even possible.
Besides, when it comes down to it, the static reading isn't what we're concerned with. What we really care about is the fluid level during operation, which the current method, while a bit time consuming, does a fairly good job of checking.
MV