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

[Logic]

Here I am throwing peer reviewed, published research against the wall 'to see what sticks' according to aerohead.
(While his posts have yet to contain a single link to contravening research)

From the lack of comments (vs reads) here by forum members, besides aerohead, it would seem that nothing sticks.
It's seems that all the research is already coated with Boric Acid!?

Or everyone is scared of being banned..?

A novel approach to study the effect of Motor Silk [Boric Acid]-added pyrolysis tire oil on performance and emission characteristics of a diesel engine

In this experimental study, the usability of pyrolyzed tire oil (PRO) supplemented with motor silk (MS) as an alternative fuel for diesel engines was evaluated.
For this purpose, PRO, euro diesel (ED) and MS were tried in a single cylinder engine...

...With the addition of MS, an average of 9% reduction was achieved in BSFC values in all fuels.
In the case of working with EPROMS fuels, it has been determined that emissions of smoke, hydrocarbon (HC) and carbon monoxide (CO) are decreased, and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions are increased.

Compared to the EPRO30 fuel, the EPRO30MS1 test fuel released an average of 23.561% less HC emission...

... According to the experimental results, it was observed that the use of MS increased the brake thermal efficiency (BTHE) values and decreased BSFC values.
The increase in the BTHE values of EPRO10MS1 was found to be approximately 2.184% when the average of all loads was compared to the engine reference fuel..."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...16236120326648

IMHO The harshest conditions for an engine lubricant is for the lubricant on the cylinder walls exposed to combustion during the power stroke.

IF
The effect of adding BA to fuel is this positive
THEN
What are the chances of it causing issues elsewhere in an engine?

[freebeard]

From the lack of comments (vs reads) here by forum members, besides aerohead, it would seem that nothing sticks.

I'm among the reads. I for one appreciate the effort you put into creating the posts. The resized text and indentation. Big fan.

OTOH my interest has been mostly aerodynamics and historical novelties like the Trompfenwagen.

Activity ebbs and flows, lurkers read but can't comment (Currently Active Users: 1558 (2 members and 1556 guests))

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Logic

I assume you are not rabidly opposed to ZDDP in motor oil?

IF:

"1) 'coefficient of friction '
3) 'pin-on-disc' testing"
etc
"have absolutely nothing to do with automotive lubrication"

THEN:

Why does one get 10 pages of (mostly research) results from a search for:
decrease in "coefficient of friction" of ZDDP Supplement (zinc dialkyldithiophosphate)?

https://www.google.com/search?q=decr...&bih=906&dpr=1

Why are there 7 pages of (mostly research) results for:
"pin on disk" tests for ZDDP Supplement (zinc dialkyldithiophosphate)
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22p...&bih=906&dpr=1

Could it be that BEFORE testing things in running engines, tribologists at research institutes first test with the the de facto test equipment found in all such labs?

There are 15 pages of (mostly research) results for:
"pin on disk" test essential initial testing equipment
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22p...&bih=906&dpr=1

IF as you say no one should be testing this in their engines:
WHERE and how would YOU test it with no chance of breaking your daily transport?

I did suggest speaking to your mechanic to find someone who was about to bring in their car to have their old, worn, smokey but otherwise OK engine rebuilt as a means of testing in a real engine with nothing to lose.
I don't recall your your reaction to that?
Most likely ignored? Or rejected for some "certain it wont work" reason?
What was it again?

I have linked tons of peer reviewed, published research pointing to the fact that it is worth trying.
Have you posted one?? Why not?
(IIRC this question got ignored like you have trouble comprehending it!?)

IN OTHER WORDS:
As far as verifiable sources of info on the; 'why try it' vs 'why not' goes:
The score is what?
20+ to 0

Here is what the peer review, before publishing process entails people:
Peer review is the system used to assess the quality of a manuscript before it is published. Independent researchers in the relevant research area assess submitted manuscripts for originality, validity and significance to help editors determine whether a manuscript should be published in their journal.
https://www.biomedcentral.com/getpub...review-process

Peer review is a process used by researchers to evaluate the quality and validity of academic research papers before they are published in a journal. In this process, an author submits their work, which is then evaluated by a panel of experts in the same field, known as peers or referees. These reviewers evaluate the paper based on its scientific quality, novelty, and relevance to the field.
https://www.aje.com/arc/types-of-peer-review/

If anyone looks like they don't know whatTF they are talking about here; it's YOU!
BRING THE RESEARCH!
People are likely wondering if you are capable of such!
You do seem to be having trouble fully reading and comprehending posts like this?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* zinc dialkylphosphorodithioate ( ZDPD )
* zinc dialkyl dithiosphosphate ( ZDDP )
* zinc dithiophosphate ( ZDP )
have all been used as - antioxidant additives
- anticorrosive additives
- extreme-pressure ( EP ) additives
* freebeard touched on an aspect associated with 'zinc' additives, germane to current motor oil research:
Zinc is 'bad' for 'Three-Way Catalytic converters, and tribologists are doing what they can to reduce, or eliminate it, while substituting with some qualified alternate chemistry.
Dapkun Kim et al., at The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA, is presently researching alternatives, after finding that ZDDP is reducing pore size of Palladium-Rhodium-based Three-Way Catalysts ( TWC ) by 20%, while USA regulations demand that the CAT must perform for the entire engineered lifespan of the vehicle.
I shared with you info on 'zinc' months ago.