Has anyone seen this study? Diesel Fuel Lubricity Additives Study Results
Last edited:
Diesel Fuel Additive Study Results
- Thread starter Rat407
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Link sends me to an error page.
This is the original published by Arlen Spicer @ DieselPlace.
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/showthread.php?t=177728
If you go to DieselPlace.com, there is a whole chain of discussion about it. I think it is interesting and there are some surprises.
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/showthread.php?t=177728
If you go to DieselPlace.com, there is a whole chain of discussion about it. I think it is interesting and there are some surprises.
Given the damage it does to our sponsors selling this stuff (they are clustered near the bottom, with the cheapest additive BioDiesel at the top), I am surprised that this thread has not been sent into limbo or at least purgatory.
This graph on THIS PAGE summarizes the lubricity pretty well. I'm not sure the bottom tier are sponsors here.
I think if you read the whole thread (well two threads) he does say there is more to a diesel additive than improving lubricity. But for sure if that's all you are after, just use biodiesel, that's never been a secret or anything. I also like the use of 2-stroke oil!
I think if you read the whole thread (well two threads) he does say there is more to a diesel additive than improving lubricity. But for sure if that's all you are after, just use biodiesel, that's never been a secret or anything. I also like the use of 2-stroke oil!
The graph is misleading
"The study was conducted in the following manner:
-The independent research firm obtained a quantity of “untreated” ULSD fuel
from a supplier. This fuel was basic ULSD fuel intended for use in diesel
engines. However, this sample was acquired PRIOR to any attempt to
additize the fuel for the purpose of replacing lost lubricity. In other words, it
was a “worst case scenario, very dry diesel fuel” that would likely cause
damage to any fuel delivery system. The fuel was tested using the HFRR
testing facility at the Laboratory. This fuel was determined to have a
very high HFRR score of 636 microns, typical of an untreated ULSD
fuel. It was determined that this batch of fuel would be utilized as the
baseline fuel for testing all of the additives. The baseline fuel HFRR score of
636 would be used as the control sample. All additives tested would be
evaluated on their ability to replace lost lubricity to the fuel by comparing
their scores to the control sample. Any score under 636 shows improvement
to the fuels ability to lubricate the fuel delivery system of a diesel engine."
The whole post needs to read. 550 HFR is what most fuel is or was before USLD . In reality the fuel used for testing was not from a pump or pump grade. In reality the majority of the additives do help
"The study was conducted in the following manner:
-The independent research firm obtained a quantity of “untreated” ULSD fuel
from a supplier. This fuel was basic ULSD fuel intended for use in diesel
engines. However, this sample was acquired PRIOR to any attempt to
additize the fuel for the purpose of replacing lost lubricity. In other words, it
was a “worst case scenario, very dry diesel fuel” that would likely cause
damage to any fuel delivery system. The fuel was tested using the HFRR
testing facility at the Laboratory. This fuel was determined to have a
very high HFRR score of 636 microns, typical of an untreated ULSD
fuel. It was determined that this batch of fuel would be utilized as the
baseline fuel for testing all of the additives. The baseline fuel HFRR score of
636 would be used as the control sample. All additives tested would be
evaluated on their ability to replace lost lubricity to the fuel by comparing
their scores to the control sample. Any score under 636 shows improvement
to the fuels ability to lubricate the fuel delivery system of a diesel engine."
The whole post needs to read. 550 HFR is what most fuel is or was before USLD . In reality the fuel used for testing was not from a pump or pump grade. In reality the majority of the additives do help
I disagree: it clearly states what fuel was used and how it came to the conclusions that it did. The reason for using untreated USLD is probably to eliminate possible interactions with unknown lubricity additives added by the refinery or distributor.
Using a baseline fuel that has no bearing on actual use in the field is standard testing 101 - look at any SAE spec using a fuel as a test medium, it has nothing to do with running an engine or vehicle, it's test medium only.
Using a baseline fuel that has no bearing on actual use in the field is standard testing 101 - look at any SAE spec using a fuel as a test medium, it has nothing to do with running an engine or vehicle, it's test medium only.
- Status