What the heck is this?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Pontual
The discussion is about possible division of a buckball.


First, we'd need to talk about the difference between diffraction and division.
 
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
I had a one minute read of this patent and thought meh.

This is a patent for a stable nano-graphite dispersion in what looks like a bog standard engine oil. It's not a nano-graphite dispersant per se. The milled graphite is being kept in suspension by conventional PIB-Succinimide ashless dispersant and Dispersant VII. Without wanting to sound like a smartarse, isn't this sort of what you get in used Heavy Duty Diesel Oil except we call the nano-graphite particles, soot?

It I scanned it properly, the big claim for this invention is that it increases the thermal conductivity of the oil. I can readily accept this but I'm struggling to think why this might be a benefit. I can see that this might possibly make for a cooler engine but the engine's water coolant system is the primary regulator of engine temperature. For the majority of engines, the oil temperature sort of 'floats' and follows.

No doubt someone somewhere will have a go at commercialising this stuff but my gut feel is this one is destined to go the same way as the Sinclair C5...



Mohs_Scale_nocolor2.jpg


Graphite scores a 1-2, soot scores a 6 iirc... soot is harder than steel or iron or any bearingmaterial, while graphite is softer...
 
Jesus [censored], eletricity for that, please. Fuel celula?

Censor over the word Cristo?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Jetronic
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
I had a one minute read of this patent and thought meh.

This is a patent for a stable nano-graphite dispersion in what looks like a bog standard engine oil. It's not a nano-graphite dispersant per se. The milled graphite is being kept in suspension by conventional PIB-Succinimide ashless dispersant and Dispersant VII. Without wanting to sound like a smartarse, isn't this sort of what you get in used Heavy Duty Diesel Oil except we call the nano-graphite particles, soot?

It I scanned it properly, the big claim for this invention is that it increases the thermal conductivity of the oil. I can readily accept this but I'm struggling to think why this might be a benefit. I can see that this might possibly make for a cooler engine but the engine's water coolant system is the primary regulator of engine temperature. For the majority of engines, the oil temperature sort of 'floats' and follows.

No doubt someone somewhere will have a go at commercialising this stuff but my gut feel is this one is destined to go the same way as the Sinclair C5...



Mohs_Scale_nocolor2.jpg


Graphite scores a 1-2, soot scores a 6 iirc... soot is harder than steel or iron or any bearingmaterial, while graphite is softer...



Jetronic is a guy that goes to the point. He doesnt jack threads to impose a childish smartness, unlike others in here, trying to shut people up...
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Pontual
You mean scattering, for atoms, right, since diffraction goes to electron jumping out of p,, orbits...


No.
 
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
I had a one minute read of this patent and thought meh.

This is a patent for a stable nano-graphite dispersion in what looks like a bog standard engine oil. It's not a nano-graphite dispersant per se. The milled graphite is being kept in suspension by conventional PIB-Succinimide ashless dispersant and Dispersant VII. Without wanting to sound like a smartarse, isn't this sort of what you get in used Heavy Duty Diesel Oil except we call the nano-graphite particles, soot?

It I scanned it properly, the big claim for this invention is that it increases the thermal conductivity of the oil. I can readily accept this but I'm struggling to think why this might be a benefit. I can see that this might possibly make for a cooler engine but the engine's water coolant system is the primary regulator of engine temperature. For the majority of engines, the oil temperature sort of 'floats' and follows.

No doubt someone somewhere will have a go at commercialising this stuff but my gut feel is this one is destined to go the same way as the Sinclair C5...


Given that the majority of oil temperature is created through shear in operation, I don't get how thermal conductivity will help, except at the oil cooler.

Seen quite a few studies on the improvement in cooling systems by adding nanoparticales, which appears to increase the localised turbulence at heat exchange faces...but again, bearing temperature rise is internally generated, not "carrying away" heat.

Have seen a few references to Einstein having done calculations of changes in apparent viscosity due to the inclusion of varying sized spherical particles (not found the actual works yet), and am wondering whether these types of particles could be used in increasing HTHS without having a major effect on KV...but that's my pondering.

If you look up nano serpentine, there are additives and claims around them, but I'm not that keen on adding asbestos to my oil.
 
Just a couple more comments/thoughts on this...

First, not all soot is hard. Some are definitely and can cause significant cross-grade wear but not all soots do this.

Two, assuming the ashless dispersants and dispersant VIs are needed to keep the nano-graphite in suspension in the fresh oil, what happens when this oil is run on an engine and the same dispersants are called upon to suspend sludge (in a gasoline engine) and soot (in a diesel engine)? Does one push the other out of suspension causing graphite to blob out in great big gobs in your engine? It's a valid question to ask.

Third, errrr...would the nano-graphite containing fresh oil....errr...be...black??? If yes, might this put people off buying it???
 
well, how do the current oil companies do it that sell graphited/MoS2 oils? these are micron-sized particles.

Elf Molygraphite, Marly black gold, Liqui moly has one too.

While the grapite might be pushed out, that doesn't mean it turns into a blob/gob.

The oil will definitely be black, I don't think the particle size matters here. The above mentioned oils are black.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Jetronic
well, how do the current oil companies do it that sell graphited/MoS2 oils? these are micron-sized particles.

Elf Molygraphite, Marly black gold, Liqui moly has one too.

While the grapite might be pushed out, that doesn't mean it turns into a blob/gob.

The oil will definitely be black, I don't think the particle size matters here. The above mentioned oils are black.




There's a particular class of engine oil additive. Collectively they don't have a name but for the sake of argument, let's called them 'the funnies'.

The purpose of these additives is not specifically to 'do' anything in the way that ZDDP's, antioxidants and detergents self-evidantly do do something. Rather their presence is linked to advertising messages. Doing something, anything, would be useful but it's not an absolute requirement if you're a 'funny'.

When I was a young whippersnapper, Castrol GTX contained 'liquid tungsten'. What did this liquid tungsten actually do? Well no-one seems to know and it's not used anymore so it's probably safe to safe, it didn't do much at all. But boy did it sound good!! Tungsten = Tungsten Carbide = Strength & Durability (or so the narrative auto-suggested). In the same way Graphite and Molybdenum Disulphide can be linked to a 'slippery, natural lubricant' message.

One of the defining features of these 'funnies' is that while they exist in the oil, they are present at concentrations that even a homeopathist would consider tiny! I suspect that the graphited oils on the market contain the tiniest splash of carbon black, just enough to turn the oil dark. Dispersion requirements aren't really such a big deal if you're talking small amounts.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
Just a couple more comments/thoughts on this...

First, not all soot is hard. Some are definitely and can cause significant cross-grade wear but not all soots do this.

Two, assuming the ashless dispersants and dispersant VIs are needed to keep the nano-graphite in suspension in the fresh oil, what happens when this oil is run on an engine and the same dispersants are called upon to suspend sludge (in a gasoline engine) and soot (in a diesel engine)? Does one push the other out of suspension causing graphite to blob out in great big gobs in your engine? It's a valid question to ask.

Third, errrr...would the nano-graphite containing fresh oil....errr...be...black??? If yes, might this put people off buying it???





Gasoline engine oil can handle up to 2% of insolubles, diesel up to 4%. Uoas average here in bitog is below 0.5%. So, there is plenty for handling the soot and the nano graphite (that is also below 1% add) in a new pitch black engine oil. The max average bitog oua will bebelow 1.5% of insolubles in a synthetic not prone to base oxidation EO. And graphite and moly arent cause for deposits, at least below 600F. So not a cause in a engine with our average uoas. Now if insolubles gets much above limits (like in a varnished engine being also cleaned) it will be the not handled soot, that will start to make deposits, they are polar and coke easily, not the graphmoly. The problem arises when the dirty soot/varnish passes way beyond the 0.6% limit. The 1% graphmoly is inert.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Shannow
It was a huge finding...akin to difracting an elephant.


I know you were just throwing the elephant out there as a comparison, but since every thing has a dual wave/particle nature it does have a quantum properties. However, the quantum behavior of a whole elephant cannot be observed since in order to do so the diameter of the elephant would have to be (roughly) equal to or smaller than its de Broglie wavelength. The de Broglie wavelength of an elephant is vanishingly small compared to its diameter. The fullerene molecule however, is near the upper bound and as such its quantum behavior can be observed.

It's also why guests arriving at your house for a party don't create an interference pattern as they walk through the door.
 
Nano graphite, no quatum science happening in op patent mention. Thats how some that dont have nothing to add, but still go jacking up a lot of threads.
 
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: Shannow
It was a huge finding...akin to difracting an elephant.


I know you were just throwing the elephant out there as a comparison, but since every thing has a dual wave/particle nature it does have a quantum properties.


Best teacher I ever had, a crusty ex Calgarian named Jim Rickwood had us calculate the wavelength of an elephant in year 12 physics...I liked the analogy, said buckyball being closer to an elephant than a photon.
 
Originally Posted By: Pontual
Thats how some that dont have nothing to add, but still go jacking up a lot of threads.


LOL, you can read back and see exactly where it started...with a clearly incorrect, off topic statement...

Originally Posted By: Pontual
Nano Buckballs would become graphene by engine milling anyway.
 
Originally Posted By: Jetronic
The oil will definitely be black, I don't think the particle size matters here. The above mentioned oils are black.


JHZR2 did some calculations some time ago on particle size versus terminal velocity for MoS2.

Size matters in these cases, as the bigger particles WILL settle faster. The dispersents role isn't holding them up in the oil, it's providing an environment where they don't want to agglomerate together. Joe90_guy's point is sound, that these additives would use up part of that ability.

But particles will settle anyway.

Smaller particles settle slower, and absolutely tiny particles may be "suspended" by Brownian motion.
 
Originally Posted By: Jake777
Originally Posted By: Padawan
Originally Posted By: Jake777
It's amazing just how much chemistry goes into oil formulation.


Indeed. It's equally amazing how some members are firmly convinced they can do a better job by mixing up a "Frankenbrew" in their garages.


+1


So true on both points.

At 65 I can remember people who thought high detergent oil, multi grade oil and automatic transmissions would bring about the death of autos.

As a kid I remember road signs promoting engine oils good for 1,000 miles.
smile.gif
 
Originally Posted By: GaleHawkins
Originally Posted By: Jake777
Originally Posted By: Padawan
It's amazing just how much chemistry goes into oil formulation.

Indeed. It's equally amazing how some members are firmly convinced they can do a better job by mixing up a "Frankenbrew" in their garages.

So true on both points.


OK but you frequently post about how you are adding stuff to your oil (Archoil, MMO). I'd call that a "frankenbrew", wouldn't you?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
Is this oil mineral or synthetic?
Replies
15
Views
2K
kschachn
Y
ACEA A3/B4 oils still relevant in 2024 for Turbo GDI 'High performance' Engines? - Hyundai ElantraN
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
edyvw
A
Castrol Edge 5W30 vs M1 EP 5W30 - what is the 'better' oil?
2
Replies
29
Views
5K
Thomas Campbell
buster
Oil Specs & Testing Approved Lubricants
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
7K
Nesterenko
AEHaas
The Frequently Quoted “Taxi Study” SAE 2005-01-3818
2
Replies
22
Views
4K
JohnnyO
Back
Top