BORPower additive?

[freebeard]

The one time I took it to Bonneville, I had to ford streams of brine. I pressure washed it in downtown Wendover each night, but the steering box froze up afterward. It was fixed once, but it's really stiff again.

Maybe it can be reconditioned, it hasn't been diagnosed -- maybe it's a frozen ball joint? I'm budgeting for worst case.

[Logic]

Originally Posted by aerohead

1) 'Scientific' testing of a 'smoky' engine would be oxymoronic.

When the wheel was invented no one did any 'Energy required to move a load of x kg y km before/after tests.
Why; because it was so much of an improvement that it was obvious to all.

I tested on a seized engine that had been 'quick fixed' by hammering the pistons out, honing the sleeves and slapping the whole mess back together.

Before the BA the car could do 80 km/h and you could not see out the rear-view mirror for smoke.
After; speed increased to ~140 km/h (rev limited) and you had to tailgate the car (driven hard) and look closely to see any smoke.

The car continued in this state for years and was eventually stolen in Cape Town.

Perhaps you have some insight into some other miraculous reason this happened as I was driving the car?

There are similar accounts by others here:
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techn...ngine-oil.html


What I find... 'interesting' is your seeming opposition to people trying this in a car whose engine is about to be rebuilt anyway.
What's that about..?

What do you have to loose from that happening?
vs
What you, and everyone, has to gain if, by some miracle of science, it does work??
I really don't get it.
Anyone..??

[Logic]

Originally Posted by freebeard

In January I'm going to get the Superbeetle steering gearbox replaced.

The steering box may be a good candidate for testing BA freebeard.
The layer formed on the metal would take a bit of the play out of the bearings and worm gear.

I'd just make a paste with about the same consistency as the grease; mix the 2 well and give it a long time to do its thing.

If you wanted to speed up the process you'd want to heat the box to around boiling point while turning it constantly.
That could be done somehow I suppose, with boiling water heating oil, heating the box maybe.
Doesn't seem worth the trouble..

You come across a someone who swings his own spanners and has a compression tester and timing light etc.
I was surprised to find you take the car to others for this type of thing..?

[freebeard]

I was surprised to find you take the car to others for this type of thing..?

Same mechanic since the mid-90s (four locations). He has a two-post lift.

[Logic]

Originally Posted by 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.

I did what I did and explained what I did and observed as I explained it.
Done.

If I were being paid to promote BA I might take the time to play 'court case - court case'.
But I'm done with all that.

To me it seems like nothing more than an attempt to get me to say something bannable and/or that can be nit picked at, wasting my time and causing confusion and/or information overload in anyone reading all this.

Time better spent finding a filter that blocks and hides all posts made by you.
A modification of this looks promising:
https://www.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigi..._a_particular/
I suggest you do the same.

I will however take the time to contact Dr Ali Erdemir, and other researchers, making him/them aware of this thread and quote some of the content.
I have 2 Email addresses for him so far and am in the process of writing the Email.

With any luck you might have the honour of arguing all the little details in all the correct scientific terms, with people as qualified, or more so, than your esteemed self.
Possibly even in court.

[Logic]

Not real piston rings but whats interesting here is you can see the blowby in the circumferential movement in the oil between each ring.
Faster between the top and middle ring than between the middle and lower ring.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvMcFQqhbpM

So I went and looked for research.

Consequence of Blowby Flow and Idling Time on Oil Consumption and Particulate Emissions in Gasoline Engine

1.2l 3cyl 4-stroke Blowby flow measurement for the engine at full load.

rpm l.min−1
1000 31
1500 52
2000 51
2500 52
3000 51
3500 49
4000 49
4500 49
5000 51
5500 49
6000 47
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/22/8772

The paper shows it's important to have the ring gaps 180 degrees from each other too.
How long and if they will stay that way I don't know.

Assuming a 0.5 micron thick layer on metal surfaces, you lose 2 microns (0.002 mm) of space between piston and sleeve,
And 0.007mm off the ring gap of the 75mm bore of the engine used above.
I don't think that would make much difference to blowby, but don't know enough on the subject to judge..?
Interesting non the less.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Logic

When the wheel was invented no one did any 'Energy required to move a load of x kg y km before/after tests.
Why; because it was so much of an improvement that it was obvious to all.

I tested on a seized engine that had been 'quick fixed' by hammering the pistons out, honing the sleeves and slapping the whole mess back together.

Before the BA the car could do 80 km/h and you could not see out the rear-view mirror for smoke.
After; speed increased to ~140 km/h (rev limited) and you had to tailgate the car (driven hard) and look closely to see any smoke.

The car continued in this state for years and was eventually stolen in Cape Town.

Perhaps you have some insight into some other miraculous reason this happened as I was driving the car?

There are similar accounts by others here:
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techn...ngine-oil.html


What I find... 'interesting' is your seeming opposition to people trying this in a car whose engine is about to be rebuilt anyway.
What's that about..?

What do you have to loose from that happening?
vs
What you, and everyone, has to gain if, by some miracle of science, it does work??
I really don't get it.
Anyone..??

1) So, every time you post, you provide additional snippets of your original experiment, and after many weeks now, I still do not have a clear and total accounting of the conditions under which you experienced whatever you experienced.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) You had some worn-out, 1,200cc Toyota, 'blue-smoker' with low compression, that couldn't do any more than 80-km/h, on a rough tar road, somewhere in South Africa, No date, No time of day, no weather data.
3) We don't know anything about your tires, or cold inflation pressure, how you drove the car, how long you drove the car. SAE 20W-40 is Toyota's recommended engine oil?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) You ridge-reamed the cylinders, banged out the seized pistons, took a hone and properly cross-hatched the cylinder walls, with the proper 'grit' stones.
5) Did you install new piston rings?
6) Did you perform a 600-mile ( 965-km ) engine break-in on the new rings?
7) Did you perform the recommended break-in oil change @ 965-km?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8) Are you aware yet that, the surface 'slipperiness' under the oil film makes no difference to 'engine friction'?
9) Did you 'talk' to your boric acid, and instruct it to form 'only' the micron thickness you speak of, when 'plating' the cylinder walls and piston?
10) Do you not think that the 'new' piston rings and honing had something to do with restoring the mechanical efficiency, volumetric efficiency, and brake enthalpy efficiency of the engine, and the oil consumption?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11) The engine performance held for 'years.' Then car was stolen in Cape Town, so data ended there.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12) We're looking at, at least five (5) unknowns for the project:
A- original compression ratio.
B- compression ratio after 'overhaul'.
C- effect of boric acid additive.
D- seasonal effects of atmospheric differences to the performance of the Toyota during the span of the 'project.'
E- Testing methodology.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13) In a 'perfectly' operating vehicle, even switching to an ideal, Pascal lubricant, of 'zero' engine friction, the car's performance could not be altered by more than, less than 3%.
14) The Toyota's mpg, alone, will vary by 20% on any given day, without making 'any' modifications at all to the car.
15) 'Closing' down the internal clearances of the cylinder / piston / by a few microns would be insufficient to alter the engines compression ratio enough to increase torque or horsepower, such to 'explain' a higher top speed.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you kept a journal of the Toyota's 'testing' parameters, we might be able to reconstruct the 'conditions' under which you experienced your 'results.'
Presently, there are just too many unknowns in existence, making it impossible to prove 'causality', one way or another.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The 'pin-on-disc' lubricant tests have no bearing on automotive lubrication.
* 'Nano-boric acid / carbon nanotube / carboxylic acid / pin-on-disc / bronze specimens' have nothing to do with automotive lubrication.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Logic

I did what I did and explained what I did and observed as I explained it.
Done.

If I were being paid to promote BA I might take the time to play 'court case - court case'.
But I'm done with all that.

To me it seems like nothing more than an attempt to get me to say something bannable and/or that can be nit picked at, wasting my time and causing confusion and/or information overload in anyone reading all this.

Time better spent finding a filter that blocks and hides all posts made by you.
A modification of this looks promising:
https://www.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigi..._a_particular/
I suggest you do the same.

I will however take the time to contact Dr Ali Erdemir, and other researchers, making him/them aware of this thread and quote some of the content.
I have 2 Email addresses for him so far and am in the process of writing the Email.

With any luck you might have the honour of arguing all the little details in all the correct scientific terms, with people as qualified, or more so, than your esteemed self.
Possibly even in court.

* I'll be dead in about seven years.
* Until then, as long as what you post remains a potential threat to the property of our members and guests I'll continue to throw caution flags onto the field.
* It would be a joy to go to 'court' and adjudicate tribology. In London, cases in the British Royal Society have been decided by 'lay people.'
* Once 'facts' are established, they cannot be argued.
* Dr. Erdemir is going to tell you exactly the same things I've been telling you. He'll have no options. Tribological 'facts' are not negotiable.

[Logic]

No time: Read just the bold text.
Then see the pretty pictures in the link.

Investigation of the Effects of Boron Additives on the Performance of Engine Oil

...Chemically, boric acid is a very mild, nontoxic acid. It is water soluble (about 6 wt% at room temperature). The layered crystal structures of boric acid, boron, oxygen, and hydrogen atoms are strongly bonded to one another to form extensive atomic layers.
Note that each boron atom is bonded to three oxygen atoms to form triangular BO3 groups. Hydrogen links the planar BO 3 groups to one another.
Bonding within the layers is mainly covalent, ionic, and hydrogen, but between the layers, it is [weak] van der Waals type.
The layers are 0.318 nm apart (Erdemir (6)).
Micro to nanoscale boric acid particles can be prepared using a variety of methods and mixed with oils and greases to achieve higher degrees of lubricity.
In fact, such mixtures have been prepared in the past and their very unique lubrication capacities have been demonstrated (Erdemir (6)).
Just like other solid lubricants (such as MoS 2 , graphite, hexagonal boron nitride), boric acid owes its lubricity to a lamellar or layered crystal structure.
In general, all of these lubricants are able to shear very easily along their crystalline shear planes and thus provide low friction.
The atoms lying on each layer are closely packed and strongly bonded to one another, whereas the layers themselves are wide apart, and the forces that hold them together are weak van der Waals type (Erdemir (6), (15)).
Without the boric acid particles, the friction coefficient of base oil is around ∼0.15. When base oil is blended with nanoscale boric acid particles, the friction coefficient is reduced to 0.04.
The effect of sliding velocity on lubricity of nano boric acid–containing oils is provided.
As is clear, the beneficial effect of nano-boric acid powders on friction becomes very clear
even at very low sliding velocities.
Because of their layered structure, they can shear easily to provide low friction (Erdemir (6)).
In D ¨uzc ¨uko ˘glu and Acaro ˘glu’s study (D ¨uzc ¨uko ˘glu and Acaro ˘glu (18)), vegetable oil–based canola oil and boric acid were combined and their wear performance was investigated. In the experiments, the wear performance of commercial mineral
oil, pure canola oil, and a combination of canola oil and boric acid were compared using a pin-on-disc test apparatus (at a constant speed of 1.5 m/s and under various weights of 60, 120, and 180 N).
It was found that the layered structure of crystalline boric acid particles enables them to slide over each other with relative ease and can reduce friction and wear...

Diesel Engine Test Results
...Experiments were also carried out for both optimum concentration ratios using a 170-kVA alternator John Deere diesel engine.
This is a heavy-duty diesel engine and has a four-stroke, water-cooled, direct injection fuel system.
It has flexible fuel connection hoses and a sump oil drain valve.
Moreover, a control supervision and protection panel was mounted on the generator set
base frame.
The control panel was equipped with the following instruments: three ammeters, run meter hours, a volt–frequency meter (by LED) and selector switch, engine oil pressure gauge,
engine coolant temperature gauge, etc.
Fig. 5 shows fuel consumption as a function of engine speed during lubrication by 4 wt% hBN and 4 wt% BA additives running idle (under a load condition of 7%).
The effect of boric acid and boron nitride additives on the amount of fuel consumption was compared with the base oil, as seen in Fig. 5.
Diesel engine tests were performed during 1 h of work for base oil and boron additives, and fuel consumption as a function of diesel engine speed was recorded.
The results indicated that the fuel consumption increased with increasing rotational speed
of the engine as expected.
In addition, the boron compound had a greater reducing effect on the fuel consumption at relatively higher speeds.
To compare with the base oil, additives had a decreasing effect on the fuel consumption.
In addition, 4 wt% BA had a greater reducing effect on the fuel consumption than that
4 wt% hBN.
As shown in Fig. 5, using the base oil in the diesel engine alone, the average fuel consumption at all test speeds was 17.315 L/h.
For the 4 wt% hBN and 4 wt% BA additives, those values were 16,864 and 16.696 L/h, respectively.
It can be seen that with the addition of 4 wt% hBN and 4 wt% BA, the fuel
consumption was reduced to 2.7 and 3.6%, respectively...

https://sci-hub.ru/10.1080/10402004.2014.909549

[freebeard]

Thanks for taking the time for this. Have you heard from Dr Erdemir yet?