Failed vanos test post Beisan

[Cubieman]

Sapote:
Hub tangs to disc = ~.7mm

Mau:
Beisan disc thickness outside edge = 19.93mm
Beisan disc thickness to "stepped" area = 20.09mm

[sapote]

Sapote:
Hub tangs to disc = ~.7mm

"So if the disc top face is lined up flush with the center shaft, then we have the disc oil holes offset by 10.15 - 9.58 = 0.57mm, rearward (driver vu), and then during operation, the disc further pushed rearward until contacted the hub tabs, and then causing even more offset to the disc oil holes."

So total offset on disc oil holes = 0.57 + 0.7 = 1.27mm 0r 0.050". This is almost the size of the oil holes. Someone should start making 1mm shims that fit over the hub tabs and sell them.

[Cubieman]

I finally got everything back together today, I was let down and confused with my vanos adaptations, before I had about -1.7° inlet and 2.6° exhaust, now I have -.5° inlet and 3.6° exhaust.

This is confusing to me as before the cam bridge pin went in hard on IN cam and on EX cam the bridge was lifted ~.2mm off intake side of head.
This time both pins dropped in on their own weight into the cams and bridge was dead nuts flat.

Oh well I'll have to live with that.

I still have yet to do a pressure test (I will within 1-2 days) but tonight I performed a vanos test after about 20 city miles.

Parts changed:
- OE re-drilled Pump Disc (From Beisan)
- Original S54 diaphragms installed (removed S62's)

When I felt how tight the OE disc was on shaft as compared to Besian disc I thought there must be a difference, but a pressure test is what will matter.

[eacmen]

I finally got everything back together today, I was let down and confused with my vanos adaptations, before I had about -1.7° inlet and 2.6° exhaust, now I have -.5° inlet and 3.6° exhaust.

This is confusing to me as before the cam bridge pin went in hard on IN cam and on EX cam the bridge was lifted ~.2mm off intake side of head.
This time both pins dropped in on their own weight into the cams and bridge was dead nuts flat.

Oh well I'll have to live with that.

I still have yet to do a pressure test (I will within 1-2 days) but tonight I performed a vanos test after about 20 city miles.

Parts changed:
- OE re-drilled Pump Disc (From Beisan)
- Original S54 diaphragms installed (removed S62's)

When I felt how tight the OE disc was on shaft as compared to Besian disc I thought there must be a difference, but a pressure test is what will matter.

So the only things you changed was switching the Beisan disc for OE and switching the S62 hub springs back to the S54?

[maupineda]

I hope you can do the pressure test to close this chapter as it seems you fixed the problem. Though the S62 cup springs and plate would have played a role on adjustment speed, they were designed to work with a 100bar pressure system (that is the pressure on the S62 VANOS). But like you said, the final confirmation will come from pressure test.

FYI, vanos testing on S62 shows their adjustment times are around 200ms also, that is why I don’t think the diaphragms were the cause of 100% of your issue.

[Cubieman]

So the only things you changed was switching the Beisan disc for OE and switching the S62 hub springs back to the S54?

Yes, those were the only 2 items changed, I considered installing a new inlet valve but did not, glad I didn't as I now can send it back and retrieve some much needed money. I made a video of disc fitment but really don't want to post it online but it does show the fitment difference.

I will try to get pressure test done today.

[sapote]

Yes, the disc was your root cause of the issue. We don't know exactly it was due to its side holes for pistons, or the center shaft clearance, or the oil holes offset.

It's interesting to notice that for both IN and EX, your retarding response times are longer than advancing even though during advancing, the hubs need to compress the cup springs more than during retarding. This proves that the cup springs do not have the big impact on the response time.

Btw, did the vanos pistons have the new seals? This is the only thing I can think of why the retarding time is longer than advancing, as you have the same hubs and spline shaft before doing this and the original response time with advancing took longer than retarding.
Did you change the solenoid module or used the same stock old unit?

[maupineda]

Yes, the disc was your root cause of the issue. We don't know exactly it was due to its side holes for pistons, or the center shaft clearance, or the oil holes offset.

It's interesting to notice that for both IN and EX, your retarding response times are longer than advancing even though during advancing, the hubs need to compress the cup springs more than during retarding. This proves that the cup springs do not have the big impact on the response time.

Btw, did the vanos pistons have the new seals? This is the only thing I can think of why the retarding time is longer than advancing, as you have the same hubs and spline shaft before doing this and the original response time with advancing took longer than retarding.
Did you change the solenoid module or used the same stock old unit?

Is normal retarding is “slower” than advancing, that has to do with the surface area available for the oil pressure to displace the pistons. Nothing wrong with his numbers.

[Cubieman]

Just completed pressure test with some interesting results, also before anyone asks why I didnt let it get hotter this is about where the car settled oil temp wise after about 20 minutes and I didn't want to idle it much longer or rev engine as I think the point has been made.
These engine temps are the same as my last pressure test.

Cold idle= 102bar
Hot idle= 100 bar

1500RPM/2000RPM at temperature = 100bar, no change at all, I found that interesting but on the other hand it likely takes more RPM to produce 115bar.
I thought S54 vanos should be 115bar at idle so mine still might be low and I didn't have a pressure test with my original disc so I will never know.

Time from engine shut off to zero bar = 1:20

The bulk of this time was spent going slowly from 100bar to 40bar, once gauge dropped to 40bar it went down very quickly. From 40bar to 0bar took approx 15 seconds.

With Beisan disc the pressure dropped to 0 within about 5 seconds, I didn't time it but I remember once whatever relay clicks loudly when you shut down the vehicle the gauge was at 0.


Cold idle:




Hot idle: I understand it could have gotten warmed up more and it possibly would have dropped pressure but this is a straight comparison to my previous test as far as oil temperature.




So the final results are:
Beisan disc Hot idle = 40bar (failed vanos test)

OE disc Hot idle= 100bar (passed vanos test)

I realize this may not be 100% conclusive to some, but it is to me.

Also, I now passed a vanos test:

[maupineda]

^^^ thanks for posting. This brings so much peace of mind to me as I now know i was not crazy. Unlucky for me I am returning to Mexico and when I get to swap the disc it won’t be as easy to see if I can request an exchange for an OE one to Raj.

btw. The pressure regulator valve can be adjusted to be set at 115 (as long as the pump can deliver it). Since there are official documents stating either value we don’t know for sure. Perhaps during the lifecycle it was adjusted.

FWIW, i installed a new valve, and my cold pressure testing showed 100 bars flat, so even a new out of the box item which you would think is preset to the latest spec delivered 100bar.

so you are good.

[sapote]

"1500RPM/2000RPM at temperature = 100bar, no change at all, I found that interesting but on the other hand it likely takes more RPM to produce 115bar."

Too bad you didn't rev it high enough to see of the pressure got higher, say at 3500 rpm. I think it is at 100 bar due to the relief valve set at 100.

If you don't track, I would leave it at 100 bar for less loading on the engine.

[sapote]

Beisan could rig up a fixture to test all of their new discs outside the engine. Just spin the vanos disc with a strong DC electric motor with oil supplies to the vanos input.

[heinzboehmer]

btw. The pressure regulator valve can be adjusted to be set at 115 (as long as the pump can deliver it). Since there are official documents stating either value we don’t know for sure. Perhaps during the lifecycle it was adjusted.

From what I gathered after speaking to a couple people that is what happened. Original regulators were set to 100 bar, then the part was superceded and those were set to 115 bar.

Also the document that states 100 bar is from 2002 and the one that states 115 bar is from 2005, which supports the theory that the operating pressure of the VANOS was revised during its lifetime.

[sapote]

Is normal retarding is “slower” than advancing, that has to do with the surface area available for the oil pressure to displace the pistons. Nothing wrong with his numbers.

Not only the piston surface area difference, but other factors such as the cam rotation direction also affect the advance vs retard response time.

post #4 show his stock disc with advancing time less than retarding time.

[maupineda]

From what I gathered after speaking to a couple people that is what happened. Original regulators were set to 100 bar, then the part was superceded and those were set to 115 bar.

Also the document that states 100 bar is from 2002 and the one that states 115 bar is from 2005, which supports the theory that the operating pressure of the VANOS was revised during its lifetime.

That was my thinking initially but since a brand new item is capped at 100 bar, that conflicts with the revision theory, otherwise the new part would be calibrated at 115. And it is not.

i did not tamper with the new valve, but with the old I did, and I was able to set it to 115 as when cold my VANOS does reach high pressure. My car is an 07 Z4M, so at least in that application the OE valve was still at 100. So we are entitled to believe what we want on this one. Perhaps on the E46 was set higher at some point, but Real OEM show the same part number for the E86 and the E46. Mystery.

edit. Corrected a typo