BORPower additive?

[Logic]

Originally Posted by aerohead

So, let's turn things right side up, and look at the fundamentals:
1) Carbon dioxide emissions are driving ( global warming ) climate change.
2) Increasing fuel economy reduces carbon emissions, and by default lowers carbon dioxide emissions .
3) More stringent fuel economy regulations are 'forcing' higher fuel economy requirements, otherwise, automobiles which fail to meet the more stringent standards will not be certified for sale in certain, perhaps, ALL markets.
4) Reducing 'engine friction' is one means of increasing fuel economy without affecting the 'rule of the Paris Dressmakers'.
5) Since 'engine friction' is dominated by engine oil 'VISCOSITY', tribologists have, since 1973's global energy crisis, been working to reduce all lubricant viscosities, without jeopardizing all the other protections lubricants incorporate ( THIS IS WHERE YOU APPEAR TO FAIL TO UNDERSTAND WHAT AUTOMOTIVE LUBRICATION ACTUALLY ENTAILS ).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6) You don't seem to understand :
* Temperature
* Pressure
* Surface distance per unit time domain
* Engineered lubricants that 'ALREADY' satisfy all the 'NEEDS' of extant, mass-produced engine designs which can be 'RUINED' if 'additives' are randomly introduced to an existing motor oil without first investigating the ramifications to all the other chemicals already 'IN' the motor oil
* Nomenclature used by tribologists, which when read by peers would inform them that, they are not reading about 'science' which 'could EVER be' germane to automotive lubrication ( which includes most of your 'supporting scientific evidence )
* Engineered surface finishes and materials technology
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7) It is 'BECAUSE' tribologists want to 'LOWER' viscosity of engine oil, transmission oil, and differential lube, that they 'NEED' to investigate protection 'AGAINST' surface contact ( which does 'NOT' occur inside engines if the viscosity is kept above known thresholds derived under the most extreme SAE, API, ASME, testing protocols which go 'lightyears' beyond the 'pin-on-disc' testing you appear so enamored of.
8) I get that 'something' rudimentary can be experienced with 'pin-on-disc' investigations, but for you to imply that we can accept that data as some sort of analogue to what would be experienced in a 100-hour SAE dynamometer engine test cell under 'road load' conditions constitutes intellectual dishonesty, and a complete disservice to members and guests.
9) Physicist Richard Feynman used to admonish graduate students at CALTECH to hold their tongues ( and pens ) about any ' conclusions or attributions ' about phenomena they experienced, until after they'd made every effort beforehand to find out where they could be wrong about their conclusions.
10)- 'Oiliness' is not important when lubrication is 'perfect', since film lubrication arises mainly from hydrodynamic forces.' PhD Edward F. Obert, Professor of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Wisconsin, author, 'INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES', 44-pages on automotive tribology.
- ' chemically balanced motor oil products receive no benefit from aftermarket additives ', General Motors Research Laboratories
- boric acid suspended in the lubricants,' which do not react with boric acid.' PhD Ari Erdemir, Arch Development Corporation.
11) ' 10 pages', ' 7 pages', ' 15 pages ' :
As I've said, this page fetish is just a more sophisticated version of the same falsehood.
12) Zinc dialkylphosphorodithioate was one of six motor oil additives used in commercial motor oils since at least 1973, along with Boron Nitrogen compounds.
13) If one is going to 'test' an oil additive, they should satisfy all the methodologies and conditions already established in the industry, with all scientific rigor spelled out in the test methodologies, including a pre-test engine teardown with micrometer/Plastigauge measurements, and post-test engine teardown measurements. Otherwise we're just looking at subjective, anecdotal, non-quantitative information which offers no 'proof' ( If you can't measure it you can't improve it ', Lake Speed Jr., Joe Gibbs Racing ( NASCAR )/ LUBRISOL )
14) As to 'old smoky engine' testing, George Soros says he's not interested in underwriting the costs of the investigation on the grounds that internal combustion engines are on the way out, so we'd be addressing a problem that nobody would have in the near future, so it would be 'folly'. Living on Social Security in a county that practices economic rape/sodomy/and cannibalism precludes me as a candidate for 'validating' or 'invalidating' your hypothesis. Nice try!
15) What was is that I didn't comprehend? That you continue to throw stuff at a wall hoping that some of it might stick? I 'know' what automotive tribologists 'do.' When I 'see' something that's 'actionable' to the EcoModder community in what you've shared I'll let you know. You've given us nothing that I can see. If people run the recommended grade of oil in their engine, then, they can expect the vehicle to perform beyond its engineered life expectancy ( I have 719,378-km on my Toyota, and it runs like new ).

I'll get to your wall of text, sans a single link to any contravening evidence,
but have a question:

Lets imagine we are back before ZDDP was added to engine oils.
Somebody says you should try this stuff (ZDDP) in your engine/oil.
How do you do it?

Remember that, by your rules; you cant use lab test equipment like this:

As none of the results can be trusted.

(That looks like a reciprocating ring on liner and piston skirt on liner etc testing machine,
which I am even more enamored with than the pin on disk machine used by these same labs for initial testing)

You also, by your rules, CAN NOT test it in an engine.
Not even an old smokey one that about to be rebuilt anyway.

So; how do you test this new 'mouse milk'?

[freebeard]

Lets imagine we are back before before ZDDP was added to engine oils.

I tend to imagine back before ZDPP was removed from engine oil. It's a big Catalytic Conspiracy.

[Logic]

Originally Posted by freebeard

I tend to imagine back before ZDPP was removed from engine oil. It's a big Catalytic Conspiracy.

Maybe.
But way off subject freebeard.

I want to know how one goes about getting the most famous engine oil additive into every engine oil out there (until recently) with out any lab testing or 'in engine' testing?

Any ideas?

[Logic]

Investigation of effects of boron additives on performance of cam
mechanisms

In many applications like gears, cams, valves, the operating conditions warrant the operation to liein the mixed lubrication regime [1].
Besides, under very heavy loads, slow relative speed, insufficient surface area and scarcity of lubricant, the formation of the thick film necessary for hydrodynamic lubrication become difficult and interacting surfaces contact each other at several locations and tribo–pairs operate in mixed lubrication...

... In an actual engine, the lubricating oil film thickness will range from a continuous film of oil in hydrodynamic lubrication, as in crankshaft bearings, to a trapped and thinner film in
elastohydrodynamic lubrication and boundary or mixed lubrication [4], as in cam-follower mechanisms...

...As shown in Fig. 6, it was observed that, reducing effect on the friction, addition of 4% hBN and 4% BA compounds to the base oil, was 7% and 12% at 212 N preload, and 7.7% and 13.2% at 412 N preload, respectively.
These results indicate that the friction reduction effects of boron additives on the contact loads exist, and these additives improved the antiwear property of base engine oil..."

https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download...e-file/1456555

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Logic

I'll get to your wall of text, sans a single link to any contravening evidence,
but have a question:

Lets imagine we are back before ZDDP was added to engine oils.
Somebody says you should try this stuff (ZDDP) in your engine/oil.
How do you do it?

Remember that, by your rules; you cant use lab test equipment like this:

As none of the results can be trusted.

(That looks like a reciprocating ring on liner and piston skirt on liner etc testing machine,
which I am even more enamored with than the pin on disk machine used by these same labs for initial testing)

You also, by your rules, CAN NOT test it in an engine.
Not even an old smokey one that about to be rebuilt anyway.

So; how do you test this new 'mouse milk'?

I wouldn't !
I've never, ever, suffered a camshaft / tappet valvetrain failure in over 57-years of driving, so 'I' would have no 'need', necessary to 'motivate' me to do anything.
Camshaft / tappet valvetrain failure in race cars was the motivating factor in the search for anti-wear / extreme-pressure additives.
Specifically in 'drafting' situations of NASCAR and FORMULA-I, where the trailing vehicle's radiator was occulted from the airstream, the engines overheated, and the oil thinned below it's critical viscosity, causing actual contact between moving parts.
If you want to add some additional context to your hypothetical rabbit hole I'll be happy to participate, 'AFTER' you've addressed my 'wall of text'.
And consider a one-hour minimum, at $270/hour, a fair compensation for my time.
You need to learn something about 'costs' and 'prices' for specialized information.
Tribologists are currently paid an average $ 171,428- year salary, up to $ 237,765 / year, and they're 'provided a laboratory and equipment free of charge.
Please be mindful of this when you contact Dr. Erdemir.

[Logic]

Originally Posted by aerohead

I wouldn't !
I've never, ever, suffered a camshaft / tappet valvetrain failure in over 57-years of driving, so 'I' would have no 'need', necessary to 'motivate' me to do anything.
Camshaft / tappet valvetrain failure in race cars was the motivating factor in the search for anti-wear / extreme-pressure additives.
Specifically in 'drafting' situations of NASCAR and FORMULA-I, where the trailing vehicle's radiator was occulted from the airstream, the engines overheated, and the oil thinned below it's critical viscosity, causing actual contact between moving parts.
If you want to add some additional context to your hypothetical rabbit hole I'll be happy to participate, 'AFTER' you've addressed my 'wall of text'.
And consider a one-hour minimum, at $270/hour, a fair compensation for my time.
You need to learn something about 'costs' and 'prices' for specialized information.
Tribologists are currently paid an average $ 171,428- year salary, up to $ 237,765 / year, and they're 'provided a laboratory and equipment free of charge.
Please be mindful of this when you contact Dr. Erdemir.

What?

The Question:
Imagine before ZDDP was added to engine oils:

How do YOU get it into engine oils WITHOUT being allowed to lab test or field test???


IF
You cant read
THEN
HowTH can anyone trust ANYTHING you say!???

[Logic]

Pay you:
Despite you NOT being anybody of note in the Tribology research field;
you have offered ....'advice' FREELY on NOT trying BA, either in a lab or in field Tests.

Now you want me to pay you to tell me the secret of oil additive testing without being allowed to lab or field test things like SDDP.
LOL!


That's been carefully worded to make me lose my temper and it's becoming more and more apparent why you'd want that...
You've not provided one link to contravening evidence...

You were trying to convince the world that Dr Ali Erdimer of Argonne National Labs, owned by the US Dept of Energy was a snake oil salesman from some fly by night lab.
Now you're quoting him...!?
I suppose you want 275 USD to explain that too!?

Originally Posted by aerohead

- boric acid suspended in the lubricants,' which do not react with boric acid.' PhD Ari Erdemir, Arch Development Corporation.

People:

The Global Automotive Industry Market Size was valued at USD 3,564.67 Billion in 2023.
The global market value of lubricants and fuel additives amounted to approximately 19.6 billion U.S. dollars in 2023


IF
There were some miracle product that cut that number by just 50% that's a whole lot of billionaires who cant buy a bigger yacht, learjet and island this month.
THEN
said industries might be inclined to dissuade people from implementing said metal bearing surface and/or oil treatments.

Don't believe me:
Send me half your income for the rest of your life.
How did that make you feel..?

On every forum about car lubrication, the mention of BA will cause someone to jump up and, like a television evangelist, take a loud dump on BA with ...'great authority' and 'big words', but not one contravening paper.

Check out the Bob the Oil Guy forum for eg.

It's almost as if these industries pay moles to build reps on likely forums and to set up Google Alerts for any posts on BA (and similar), so they can squash them.

They certainly have the 'fear of change' and:
"if it's so good; why isn't the motor industry doing it?"
type thinking on their side.

But seriously:
If
you stand by aeroheads:
"no lab testing allowed"
and
"no field testing allowed"
Then
How did ZDDP ever end up in engine oils..?

The history and mechanisms of ZDDP
Tribology Section, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College, London SW7 2AZ, UK

"...The development of the use and research into ZDDP is first charted historically, starting with the additive’s first introduction in engine oils in the late 1930s...

...ZDDPs first appeared
formally on the lubricant additive stage in 1941 with
the filing of four patents...

...The antiwear properties of ZDDP remained appar-
ently un-noticed throughout the 1940s...

...This led to major cam and follower wear problems
throughout the US...

...in 1955 it was found that oils
which contained ZDDP generally gave less wear than
those without it... The result was a very rapid
adoption of ZDDP within the automobile industry
and, by 1958, as reported by Larson [14]; The com-
pound type zinc dialkyl dithiophosphate has gained
wide acceptance in the United States for high quality
motor oils...

...The pace of additive development...can
be gauged from an address by Boehm to the API
Annual Meeting Marketing Division in 1948 [6]; ‘‘Ten
years ago additives were looked upon by lubricating-oil
manufacturers as costly gadgets, and it was not unusual
to hear them disparagingly referred to as ‘‘mouse milk.’’
However much has happened in the past 10 years..."
https://sci-hub.ru/https://link.spri...44495.26882.b5

(That above is a link to research aerohead. You copy the URL and paste it in here to provide clickable links to white papers and research etc.
That's a far superior way to making a point than standing on a soap box shouting authoritatively and waving your arms)

NB that it took 17 years from patent to widespread use and probably 2 to 3 years to research, if not longer.
Lets call it 20+ years...

Seems that, with the exception of some Indians, I only have 19 and a half years to go!
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techn...ngine-oil.html