Diamond Lube

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by DIMS

It seems this could be tested on an air cooled lawn mower engine. I think it would easy to test.
1: Before & after torque required to turn motor with & without plug.
2: Measure idle Rpm before & after
3: measure Oil temp before & after
4: measure head temperature before & after


Just an idea to throw out there.

I was thinking along the same lines. However, the sample size of just a few cc's may not be effective in a simple bath addition. It may take a bit of doing to burnish the material into the cylinder walls and bearing surfaces.

Another solution is to get the raw material from a manufacturer. A kilogram can be purchased for 100 dollars US in various grades. This however would not be a test of DiamondLube products but a generic test of nano diamonds.

[DiamondLube]

You can't just dip them, they must be rubbed with a patch to coat the copper with the nanomaterial. This is being done by David Honeycutt who has recently won 3 F Opens in NC. As he tested this, the muzzle velocity increased about 3% and he got a foot rise at 200 yards. Honeycutt also went from expert to high master using DiamondLube, and the top three shooters use it too. Much testing along with knee jerking rejection happened on M4Carbine and thefiringline groups, now it has US Army approval.

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

Dip your projectiles in it and test the difference in velocity with a chronograph.

regards
Mech

[DiamondLube]

Adding detonation nanodiamond (invented about 25 years ago in Russia) is known to improve oil performance, increase fuel economy slightly and about double part life. The particles are slightly abrasive but better than oil alone. Under extremely high magnification they have sharp edges and flat faces, but because they are about 10nm they work pretty well for lubrication. The particles in my product, I manufacture and invented, but they are different than the known abrasive material because the particles are smaller and have smooth surfaces. The material behaves very differently than any other known nanomaterial, and they stick like glue to steel. There are new ways to increase fuel economy and efficiency.

A one time engine treatment for a semi runs $1200, but the oil lasts several times longer and soot in the oil drops 50% to 80% as seen in multiple oil analysis on our testing page. The new particulate semi filters cost about $15,000 and fuel economy drops. Spending more to get less is a poor option.

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

I was thinking along the same lines. However, the sample size of just a few cc's may not be effective in a simple bath addition. It may take a bit of doing to burnish the material into the cylinder walls and bearing surfaces.

Another solution is to get the raw material from a manufacturer. A kilogram can be purchased for 100 dollars US in various grades. This however would not be a test of DiamondLube products but a generic test of nano diamonds.

[redneck]

I went to your site to find out what sort of testing was used.

This is what I found.

Testing

Testing

Scope of other testing: SAE, ASTM, SEM, TEM, X-Ray Diffraction, Raman Spectra and use in RailRoad, Electrical Power company, Industrial and Semi equipment.

Slideshow has a dynamometer test showing 20% increase in HP, a write-up from Chemical Engineering, Oil Analysis, ASTM, Industrial Test report, etc.


Substantial ASTM test results provided initial proof of superiority of protection in 2006, and are available for review by pre-qualified industrial customers.

Industrial testing which NanoLube, Inc. arranged - proved that NanoLube TM and Quicken tm nanolubrication protected bearing surfaces from showing "any" wear, galling or scoring, while running without additional lubricant being applied. There was no lubricant breakdown during the entire test, and no measurable wear to the treated friction plates.

Why are the ASTM test results only "available for review by pre-qualified industrial customers"...???

If the testing was "arranged - proved". Then why is it not freely provided...???


In the slide show there are papers shown, but without context they are totally meaningless. Also, when you click on a document to view, it can't be enlarged easily.

I'm not trying to beat you up here. I'm trying to understand why you say your product is the best thing out there.

Please show your proof. (testing, including context). Not Testimonials.

>

[JRMichler]

Nissan Motor Co. was just granted Patent 8,598,098 for "A lubricant composition ... to significantly lower a friction coefficient ... diamond nano-particle"

The patent lists some test results where adding diamond nanoparticles reduced coefficients of friction. BUT, those results only apply to boundary layer lubrication. They do not apply to engine components which have fluid film lubrication. The improved friction may apply to cam lobes, especially at low RPM. Most engine components have fluid film lubrication, where the friction losses are proportional to lubricant viscosity. Since only a small part of engine friction is caused by boundary lubrication, the end result of adding the diamond nanoparticles will be only a small reduction in total engine friction. A small reduction in engine friction is an even improvement in gas mileage.

All of which is why he did not respond to my challenge to test his additive and pay double or nothing depending on the results.

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by DiamondLube

Adding detonation nanodiamond (invented about 25 years ago in Russia) is known to improve oil performance, increase fuel economy slightly and about double part life. The particles are slightly abrasive but better than oil alone. Under extremely high magnification they have sharp edges and flat faces, but because they are about 10nm they work pretty well for lubrication. The particles in my product, I manufacture and invented, but they are different than the known abrasive material because the particles are smaller and have smooth surfaces. The material behaves very differently than any other known nanomaterial, and they stick like glue to steel. There are new ways to increase fuel economy and efficiency.

A one time engine treatment for a semi runs $1200, but the oil lasts several times longer and soot in the oil drops 50% to 80% as seen in multiple oil analysis on our testing page. The new particulate semi filters cost about $15,000 and fuel economy drops. Spending more to get less is a poor option.

I am interested as I do find uses for high pressure lubricants in the course of my work. I would just like to know how your product differs from others. I can find dozens of manufacturers and sources for nano scale diamonds. I regularly use diamond "polishing and lapping powders" that are in the micro meter grade and I understand the difficulty in grading and size purity and nano scale diamonds are probably no different. It seems manufacturers call a diamond under 30 nanometers as a "lubricant" but there seems to be varied theories on how it works as a lubricant. How does your product differ from the varieties I can purchase in raw form for 100 dollars US per kilogram? Your claim of a "spherical crystal" seem impossible considering the face-centered-cubic (FCC) structure of diamonds. Of the several "habits" or configurations diamond can form, only a rounded edge structure could be formed and that would not approach anything spherical in geometry.

I can pull up research papers that go back 10 to 15 years that back up your claim of improved lubrication in engines. But the gains to be found in improvements to a Class 8 tractor trailer ( "semi truck") do not seem to support a 20% increase in fuel efficiency. Your Ebay sites claim 30 and 35%. Removal of ALL frictional losses would not give you such gains as hydrodynamic lubrication (slang for fluid film lubrication) is unaffected by a nano diamond coating. I can see a valid path to your claims. I am just leery of the magnitude of your claims.

And as a side note, your reference to the use of expensive diesel particulate filters (DPF) in modern diesel engines is neither here nor there in this discussion. I can see improved lubrication reducing load and thus the production of particulates, but, as of now, we need a DPF to keep our air healthy.

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by JRMichler

Nissan Motor Co. was just granted Patent 8,598,098 for "A lubricant composition ... to significantly lower a friction coefficient ... diamond nano-particle"

The patent lists some test results where adding diamond nanoparticles reduced coefficients of friction. BUT, those results only apply to boundary layer lubrication. They do not apply to engine components which have fluid film lubrication. The improved friction may apply to cam lobes, especially at low RPM. Most engine components have fluid film lubrication, where the friction losses are proportional to lubricant viscosity. Since only a small part of engine friction is caused by boundary lubrication, the end result of adding the diamond nanoparticles will be only a small reduction in total engine friction. A small reduction in engine friction is an even improvement in gas mileage.

All of which is why he did not respond to my challenge to test his additive and pay double or nothing depending on the results.

. . . If you used a 5% gain as your target. In our testing of a 2.2L diesel and gasoline engine who's bores were coated with a nano lubricant (not diamond ) after the engines had been run and broken in, the ring drag reduction resulted in an improvement of 5% for the gasoline engine and 7% in the diesel in BSFC (brake-specific-fuel-consumption) on the average. As load increased, so did the ring pressure and so did the efficiency gains. The engines were torn down for inspection and the nano lubricant applied to the bores. This pattern of tear-down and application was done several times starting with the bores, crank bearings, connection rod bearings then cam and lifters. The roller timing chain was coated in the diesel. All to identify the most promising areas to reduce friction in an engine and improve lubrication. This was part of the effort of a former Xprize team. Our tests support your conclusion that the nano lubricants would not help the areas where a fluid film lubrication mode is used and only the ring-bore has any measurable benefit.

The Nissan patent is not surprising. Manufacturers have picked over the low hanging fruit as far as efficiency gains for their engines. Modern manufacturing technology now allows engine bore treatments to be realized as most new engines need little to no break in period. Alloy liners have been used in the past. BMW uses laser fused bores on some of their engines. If Nissan has found a way to apply nano diamonds in a production setting, it can only help their engine efficiency and longevity.

[DiamondLube]

You missed the whole point, it applies to all friction barriers. Those Japs are sure smart to have invented this all on their own with a 2008 filing date, but I filed in 2006 and am still waiting. I suggest demanding Nissan give you all the nanodiamond you require for your tests as just because they are claiming something similar as I, they are probably mistaken. After all they are just a automobile company with little expertise in engine mechanics

Originally Posted by JRMichler

Nissan Motor Co. was just granted Patent 8,598,098 for "A lubricant composition ... to significantly lower a friction coefficient ... diamond nano-particle"

The patent lists some test results where adding diamond nanoparticles reduced coefficients of friction. BUT, those results only apply to boundary layer lubrication. They do not apply to engine components which have fluid film lubrication. The improved friction may apply to cam lobes, especially at low RPM. Most engine components have fluid film lubrication, where the friction losses are proportional to lubricant viscosity. Since only a small part of engine friction is caused by boundary lubrication, the end result of adding the diamond nanoparticles will be only a small reduction in total engine friction. A small reduction in engine friction is an even improvement in gas mileage.

All of which is why he did not respond to my challenge to test his additive and pay double or nothing depending on the results.

[JRMichler]

Originally Posted by DiamondLube

...with a 2008 filing date, but I filed in 2006 and am still waiting.

What's the application number or the publication number? I'd like to read your patent application.

[DiamondLube]

You must wait until its published, but the new technology is superior to old detonation nanodiamond and it does unexpected things in all mechanical systems.

Originally Posted by JRMichler

What's the application number or the publication number? I'd like to read your patent application.