BORPower additive?

[Logic]

aerohead:

It occurs to me that you might locally advertise:

"Looking for 'Old Smokey' car (engine) for science experiment.
If you are planning to have your old smokey worn out car's engine rebuilt...

...NB that this is experimental and may have the opposite of the desired effect...at your own risk... etc"

As a means of finding a car/engine on which to test this with zero risk.

As you are such a 'renowned expert' on all things automotive, you should have little trouble finding a local test subject, from one of your followers, on which to properly and fully test this 'heresy!'

It also occurs to me that:
As you seem intent on NOT following the given science and logic based advice, in an all out attempt to disprove my candid observations; you may not be the best person to suggest this to..?

So:
ANYONE ELSE
here might try this.

[freebeard]

In January I'm going to get the Superbeetle steering gearbox replaced. I can get a compression test then, before one head, pistons and cylinders are inspected.

Aerohead : How's the Karmann Ghia coupé doing?

[Logic]

See attached Thumbnail
Worn surfaces of bronze specimen lubricated with:

• (a) base lubricant: engine oil (SAE20W40)
• (b) base lubricant + 0.5 wt.% boric acid nanolubrican

Assessed on a linear reciprocating ball-on-flat tribometer
https://sci-hub.ru/https://link.spri...665-018-3384-9


Now I'm no tribologist but common sense says to me that a layer of engine oil on the (b) surface is going to lubricate better as there's nowhere for the oil to escape to out the way of another surface sliding/'gliding' over it..?
ie:
We use rough tar roads and treaded tires so that a film of water doesn't form under a moving car's tires, making it lose traction right..?
Similar story, except we WANT to lose traction.

Then... If the surface underneath the oil is super slippery; does it matter if the oil escapes?

Common sense also tells me that if you remove 2 microns of play out of a sleeve bearing; the smaller (much smoother) gap should be better at keeping the oil film doing what it's supposed to be doing: Keeping the surfaces from touching..?

If a piston and rings are 1 micron bigger in diameter and the sleeve 1 micron smaller, due to a super slippery and ...er... squishable layer that fills in pits etc like that, what will happen?
Not only to friction, but to compression too?

Not only that, but isn't an oil that's forced to flow fast over a surface likely to flow faster over a smooth one..?

Then there's the bit of charge that hides in the U-shape between the piston, sleeve and top ring that is an issue for performance/economy and emissions.
Engine builders are trying to put the 1st ring as high up as possible to minimize this.
I would say that that gap is much smaller with 0.5 microns added to each surface.
Wouldn't you..?

[Logic]

Originally Posted by RedDevil

It claims to reduce friction.

It can only raise power by 10% if engines now waste at least 10% of their power to friction at WOT. Which is not the case for almost any engine.
It can only raise fuel efficiency by 15% if engines without it waste at least 15% to friction under light load. Don't think so.

Their claims are extraordinary, but there is no scientific proof for that.
They do provide an angry looking cat and a lot of boll power though.

Wikipedia makes no mention of boron in lubrication appliances, but boron is used in some abrasive materials. Hmmm. Something rhymes.

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

A Boron compound is used in some oils as part of the detergent package.

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

Anything with "nano" in it is bound to be good!

Originally Posted by Viturro

nano particles of banana...

Originally Posted by gone-ot

is this stuff an 'automotive' version/relation to those special, world-reknown, coffee beans that pass through monkeys digestion systems before becoming your morning brew?

Originally Posted by Quezacotl

Yea.. I'm pretty sure i wont test this additive

Guys I'd appreciate it if you took the time to read the preceding arguments for and against Boric Acid in Engine Oil and gave a revised and considered opinion.

But only if you take the time plz.

It'd be interesting to get the opinion of someone other than aerohead for a change!

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

Moved to Unicorn Corral, pending group analysis/discussion...

Given the evidence presented, would you still consider this 'Unicorn'?
Or might it be moved back MetroMPG?

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Logic

Ok... let me get this straight;
You want to make a 50-50 mix of oil and Boric Oxide dissolved in boiling water to form Boric Acid and measure its viscosity?

I assume your chosen number of 50% is taken from the initial patent here:
"... In general, the preferred range for oils is about 0.5 to 50% by weight and for greases is about 1-50% by weight with the most preferred range being 1-15% for oils and 1-20% for greases...'
https://patents.google.com/patent/US5431830A/en

Everyone knows that patents are 'painted with a broad brush' to cover any and all eventualities.
Yet you have chosen a mixture ratio that is NOT in the "most preferred range".
Is that correct???

If so:

Don't bother:
The viscosity will be very similar to a 50-50 mix of oil and water.
At a guess, based on plain old common sense and experience; way too low for properly lubricating an engine.

Which, it is obvious, you have already surmised. As has anyone, with a bit of common sense, reading this.

ie: IF I understand your intent correctly:
The whole experiment is premeditated to fail.
That is perfectly obvious to everyone aerohead.

ie:
An experiment concocted to basically test the viscosity of a 50-50 mix of the equivalent of water and oil is not a dastardly clever plan. (to fool everyone reading this)
It's a patently stupid idea to everyone!
How will that make you look!?

The goal of adding Boric Acid to an engine oil is to expose the bearing surfaces, pistons and sleeves, cams, etc to the Boric Acid for long enough for the desired layer/s to form.
At this point it is desirable for any/most excess water to have boiled/evaporated away, leaving said coating.

"...my initial test of a heaped tablespoon of Boric Acid, stirred into a coffee mug of boiling water...

...I poured it into the pre warmed engine and took off immediately.
I took it very easy as I knew the emulsion was doing nothing for oil thickness..."
https://ecomodder.com/forum/showthre...tml#post695252

ie: A cup full of over saturated Boric Acid in an Engine FULL to the top line on the dipstick of oil.
Nowhere have I recommended a 50-50 mix of oil and water.
You know that right? You did read all that you replied to with the intent to understand rather than simply reply right..!??
Because I, like everyone who has read all this, knows that.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if they are beginning to wonder..!

1) No. Please re-read line #6 at #92 (permalink )
2) No need to 'assume'. It's explained.
3) I'm one of 'everyone', and what you say does not properly characterize how I experience patents, so, you'll need to come up with a different term, like, 'everyone except aerohead.'
4) I chose the exact mixture as tested by Dr. Erdemir, that was the point.
5) No 'water'. It's not germane to Dr Erdemir's research. Any 3rd party laboratory test results you have for your mixture would be for something else.
6) That's why I'll do the test.
7) 'Guessing' and 'good old common sense' aren't part of the scientific method, so I'll go ahead as planned.
8) As to an unacceptable viscosity for a motor oil being obvious to anyone; you're included in the set, 'anyone', and until I mentioned 'viscosity', to my knowledge, you had never used the term, which is counterfactual to your premise.
9) The premise of the experiment is to 'quantify' the viscosity of 'mineral oil ', then 'quantify' the viscosity of the mineral/boric acid colloidal solution. At that point, I will have satisfied the preliminary 'conditions' for Dr. Erdemir's testing.
10) The quanta will also inform me about 'finetuning''s claims about his 'oil / boric acid 'testing' (sic ).
11) Your computer-courage has allowed you to stray beyond civil discourse, and you've already veered into ad hominem territory. If you want to be banned, your doing a pretty good job.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12) The OEM 'surface finishes', and bearing clearances inside commercial, mass-produced passenger cars are 'engineered.'
13) Your mind's inability to move out of a ' boundary lubrication region' paradigm, and into that of 'mixed-film and full hydrodynamic lubrication' is creating a complete intellectual road block to the discussion.
14) And if you'll re-read Dr. Erdemir's list of 'most notable contributions,' you'll notice that any mention of 'automotive tribology' didn't make the cut.
Dr. Erdemir's 'patent', was assigned to Arch Development Corporation. They were working to 'monetize' the oil / boric acid technology. So far, I haven't seen any indication for commercially-available products, and their producers, using, and paying royalties to Arch for the tech..

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Logic

Thats nice!

I
on the other hand
just added an over-saturated solution of Boric Oxide/Acid and hot water to a tired engine's oil
to see what would happen right? No research to speak of right?
And IT WORKED!
It worked extremely, shockingly well! In over 2 dozen engines so far.
Just as Dr. Ali Erdemir 'suspected' it 'might'.

Dr. Ali Erdemir awarded the prestigious 2024 Tribology Gold Medal

date: 11.11.2024

The Institution of Mechanical Engineers is delighted to announce Dr. Ali Erdemir as the recipient of the prestigious 2024 Tribology Gold Medal.

Dr. Erdemir, a globally recognised expert in tribology, has dedicated over 35 years to advancing the design and development of novel materials, coatings, and lubricants aimed at improving the energy efficiency, durability, and environmental impact of mechanical systems.

Dr. Erdemir began his journey in tribology with an undergraduate degree in Metallurgy from Istanbul Technical University, Turkey. He later pursued graduate studies at the Georgia Institute of Technology, where he earned his Master's and PhD in Materials Science and Engineering in 1982 and 1986, respectively. His illustrious career took root at the Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois, where he conducted groundbreaking research from 1987 to 2019.

Throughout his career, Dr. Erdemir has made significant contributions to tribology. Among his most notable achievements are the discovery of near-frictionless carbon films, boron-based solid lubricants, and superlubricious graphene films. His research has pushed the boundaries of energy conservation and environmental sustainability in mechanical systems, from traditional machinery to electric vehicles.

In recognition of his contributions, Dr. Erdemir has received numerous prestigious awards, including election to the National Academy of Engineering (USA) and the National Academy of Inventors. He is also a fellow of several international organizations, such as the European Academy of Sciences, the World Academy of Ceramics, and the Science Academy of Turkey. Dr. Erdemir has also been honored with six R&D 100 Awards, the Mayo D. Hersey Award from ASME, and the International Award from the STLE, among many others.

Beyond his research, Dr. Erdemir has been a dedicated leader in the tribology community, serving as President of the International Tribology Council (2017-2022) and STLE (2016-2017). He has authored over 250 journal articles and holds 36 U.S. patents, a testament to his prolific and influential career.

https://www.itctribology.net/en/news...gy-gold-medal/

I worked a few years with a friend's local moving company. His largest, FORD-based box truck developed a heater-core leak. We drained the radiator, capturing all the coolant. Flushed the system once. Added some portion of boric acid to a freshwater radiator fill, and as the engine approached operational temperature, we could hear the water/acid mix boiling out of the heater core breach.
Over time, metallic salts began forming as the escaping hot vapors were exposed to the air, and in a few minutes, the leak was sealed!
We drained off the solution, and re-filled with the coolant, without flushing remnants of the boric acid solution.
When he retired, and sold the business years later, the heater core was still holding pressure.
If the valve, valve seat sealing was okay, an only the piston rings were shot, I can see how 'plating' could close up piston-to-cylinder 'slop', allowing the compression ratio to recover.
Just don't know about every other 'hot' surface that would also see 'plating.'
If the coating acted as a micro-polished surface, it could destroy the engineered 'porosity' of the fluid-separated surfaces, reducing the oil's ability to adhere, then we'd be looking at 'high-pointing', flash-welding-and fracture' and a death spiral of disintegration.
You'd want a thermocouple on the oil filter, and one on the oil pan. If you saw the filter's temperature begin to exceed that of the pan, you'd want to shut the engine down.
OEM bearing journal surface finish tolerances used to be in the 10-microinch range for anything experiencing above 3,000 psi unit loads.
We can't run a higher viscosity oil, as the increased shearing and churning friction will overheat the oil, which automatically reduces its viscosity, a vicious circle.

[aerohead]

1) 'coefficient of friction' isn't applicable in automotive lubrication.
2) 'slippery' is not a 'metric' used in tribology.
3) You poured your mixture into a 'pre-warmed engine, but a 'Cold' car.
4) You took it 'easy' ( 'easy' is not a quantifiable value which might inform the reader ).
5) Oil 'thickness' wouldn't vary in an automotive engine with 'acceptable clearances', if given its OEM-specified SAE/API motor oil. And even if the rings were shot, I'm not certain that the oil film on the cylinder walls or camshaft lobes would be appreciatively different.
6) 'About 10-km later' ( the car requires 36-km, at 88-km/h constant speed before it will attain thermal equilibrium, at which point 'testing' would be allowed to begin.
7) As I told you elsewhere, the car's fuel economy will 'improve' by 20%, without ever doing a thing to it!
8) You drove the car to 'top speed' while it was still cold, and 'exceeded' the original top speed, which would have been measured fully, thermally equilibrated; a remarkable claim, requiring equally remarkable evidence.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Logic

aerohead:

It occurs to me that you might locally advertise:

"Looking for 'Old Smokey' car (engine) for science experiment.
If you are planning to have your old smokey worn out car's engine rebuilt...

...NB that this is experimental and may have the opposite of the desired effect...at your own risk... etc"

As a means of finding a car/engine on which to test this with zero risk.

As you are such a 'renowned expert' on all things automotive, you should have little trouble finding a local test subject, from one of your followers, on which to properly and fully test this 'heresy!'

It also occurs to me that:
As you seem intent on NOT following the given science and logic based advice, in an all out attempt to disprove my candid observations; you may not be the best person to suggest this to..?

So:
ANYONE ELSE
here might try this.

1) 'Scientific' testing of a 'smoky' engine would be oxymoronic.
2) All official testing is done only after an engine tuneup, new oil filter, and new air cleaner.
3) Oil-fouling of the brand-new sparkplugs would begin immediately, wrecking any chance of limiting test variables to a single value.
4) You wouldn't be able to establish any baseline data for the 'pre-modified; car, used to do the delta-performance comparison with the 'post-modified' car.
5) Typically, only an engine of which all of its specifications were within acceptable tolerances, would even be considered for testing.
6) Both 'proving grounds', and 'engine test-cell, electric dynamometer-tachometer' testing would be done, requiring knowledge of the cars ROAD LOAD, at each test 'speed'.
7) When CAR and DRIVER tested Spindletop at the Chrysler Proving Grounds, East Chelsea, Michigan, in 1991, my cost was $500/hour ( US ). Adjusted for inflation that would be $1,170 /hour. The test requires 12-runs in total, six of them must be 'consecutive.' I have no idea how much time it would take for 'pre-mod, and post-mod, plus the time to do the drain, and flushing operations.
8) If we took a shot in the dark, and presumed that a engine test-cell might also fetch that rate, then a single engine run ( of the two required ), would cost $ 118,170 (US).
9) You'd also have to pay for the time to drain the oil, refill with fresh oil, run it up to 'warmed-up,' shut it down, drain it, then finally fill it with the new, 'experimental oil, and run it up to 'fully-warmed.''
10) Then you could do the final 100-hour test for the comparison. Another $ 118,170.
11) The raw data would undergo statistical analysis, smoothing the scatter-plots to achieve the 'smoothing' necessary for interpolations and extrapolations.
12) Then, everything would be adjusted to SAE/ISO Standard atmospheric conditions. CAR and DRIVER has their own suite of meteorological instruments for the continuous weather monitoring required to be logged, and later used in data reduction. Chrysler has the four-scale weighing system for the four wheels. Daytron Messtechnik Correvet ( sp?) optical 5th-wheel does exact velocity measurements.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's 'pricey'! But good 'science'. And only way to identify the signal-to-noise.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by freebeard

In January I'm going to get the Superbeetle steering gearbox replaced. I can get a compression test then, before one head, pistons and cylinders are inspected.

Aerohead : How's the Karmann Ghia coupé doing?

Right after Christmas, two guys are coming from Arkansas with a truck and trailer, and taking both Volkswagens, and both CRXs. Grandad's '61 Dodge is going to the shredder.

[Piotrsko]

What's wrong the the superbug steering box? You can adjust them generally twice until you run out of sector shaft tolerance, so maybe 300K miles, or at least in my super. Once in the recirculation ball steering box in the F250.