waross – I appreciate you pointing out if something I said sounds wrong. There are many times when I am mistaken, and I'm glad to learn when I am wrong. In this case I don’t see it.
My objection was to the following sentence:
“Ring lubrication indicates to me that you probably don't have forced lubrication from a common sump. If you did, your contamination would be uniform and would be occuring in both bearings.”
I agree there can be different interpretations of the term “forced”.
1 – “Forced” as you are suggesting meaning hydrostatic lubrication (as opposed to hydrodynamic) injected under pressure at the bottom of the bearing such as oil lift system (not common in motors) or turbine hydrostatic lubrication.
2 – “Forced” meaning a pumped supply of oil through an orifice to a vented reservoir.
I assume rmw meant definition #2 and I further clarified my assumption by describing in my reply what I understood him to mean by “forced”. This seems like a safe assumption since #1 is very rare on motors. If rmw thinks I am using the wrong meaning, he is free to correct me.
Either way, the main point of his comment had nothing to do with the lubrication method but whether or not there was a common lubrication sump. Once again, I do not agree that the presence of oil rings means there is no common sump. Do you agree?
=====================================
Eng-tips forums: The best place on the web for engineering discussions.