Quote:
Originally Posted by Logic
Pursuit for Better Fuel Economy
Reducing Engine Friction Helps Maxing out Miles per Gallon
"...In an internal combustion engine, estimat-
ed 10–20% energy is lost due to friction..."
https://www.researchgate.net/profile...X2RpcmVjdCJ9fQ
Friction Modelling for Internal Combustion Engines
D. Dowson, C.M. Taylor and Lisheng Yang
Institute of Tribology, Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT,
United Kingdom.
"...It is well known that only about 12% of the
energy input to an automobile engine is made
available as propulsive energy to overcome tyre
friction and aerodynamic drag [ 1,2]. The indicated
power of about 40%, obtained after deducting the
losses associated with cylinder cooling (.: 30%) and
the exhaust gases (= 30%), is further reduced to an
engine brake power of about 25% due to air
pumping in the engine (=3-6'%0) and friction losses
in the tribological components such as the bearings,
valve train and piston assemblies (~12-9%).It is the
latter quantities that are the subject of this paper
and although they typically represents only about
9% of the initial energy release, they do account for
some 30%-40% of the all important engine brake
power.
Ok, so lets talk about these guys
Who are they..? anl .gov... In the USA.
https://www.anl.gov/
https://www.anl.gov/topic/success-story
These are the people who did and published the initial studies on the tribological properties
of Boric Acid in engine oil etc...
Do look them up!
Decide if they seem like the people who publish BS?
Sometimes during a lifetime new inventions come out.
Fire, the wheel, iron, engines electricity, computers, etc-etc all did.
When someone like them say; this stuff REALLY reduces friction, its like someone saying; this wire makes electricity when you wave magnets at it.
WhoTF woulda believed that!? 
Freshly cut aluminum will quickly form a thin layer of aluminum oxide on the newly exposed surface.
Ceramic...
It stops further attack from the air, etc.
A hard, thin ceramic barrier.
Just air? What can you form if you try some other stuff on metal surfaces?
That's what these guys did.
We as the human race got here by being inquisitive.
It's fun! You learn new stuff!
We owe it to ourselves to check. For the joy of learning.
I checked. It worked. I learned a lot.
|
1) The actual energy loss due to engine friction, at 30-mph is less than 3%.
2) The actual energy loss due to engine friction, at 70-mph is less than 5%.
3) Your first reference isn't acquainted with reality.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) The value of only 12% of energy available at the traction interface of an automobile can only be made within the context of 'well-to-wheels' thermal efficiency, and of 'only' a gasoline-powered automobile.
5) Automobiles of up to 43.2% efficiency are given by your own reporting, at different Forums here at EcoModder.com, a discrepancy of 31.2%. What's it going to be?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6) The University of Leeds is going to have to defend their claim of 9%-to 12% energy loss due to engine friction. I call BS.
7) University of Leeds values for 'pumpimg losses' I also call BS.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8) Do your 'scientists' know that 'Boron-Nitrogen' has been an oil additive since 1977?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9) What possible benefit can accrue to an automobile engine by arbitrarily plating aluminum oxide onto 'any' of it's surfaces ? You still do not comprehend automobile engine lubrication!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10) Anti-oxidant packages have been added to 'motor oil' for over 47-years! What on Earth do you think could be the benefit of a 'ceramic barrier '?
Again, again, you don't seem to the have the vaguest idea how an automotive lubrication system operates. And I'm beginning to believe that a lot of university PhD candidates don't either.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11) I don't recognize any 'science' conducted on your part.
12) I have zero confidence in your claims.
13) My experience is that, you haven't learned anything about the science of Tribology. You just keep offering more and more sophisticated versions of the same falsehoods. I believe it to be of no benefit to the EcoModder community. Dangerous! Fact-averse. 'Disputation' vs scientific debate.