Lubrizol seem to think that UCLs work...
- Thread starter Shannow
- Start date
- Status
Sorry Lz but this is a fairy tale dreamt up by your Marketing Department to convince the general public you know more than you actually do!
Friction modifiers DO work but as often as not, their effect is so miniscule, it does naff all to improve real life fuel economy.
HTHS and low KV40 have a far bigger effect on overall fuel economy and even then, the impact of dropping down a viscosity grade results in a disappointingly marginal improvement in FE.
Friction modifiers DO work but as often as not, their effect is so miniscule, it does naff all to improve real life fuel economy.
HTHS and low KV40 have a far bigger effect on overall fuel economy and even then, the impact of dropping down a viscosity grade results in a disappointingly marginal improvement in FE.
wemay
Site Donor 2023
I had no idea 25% of fuel burned goes into modifying friction.
wemay
Site Donor 2023
Joe90_guy, how can it be "a fairy tale" and also "work"?
This is interesting.
I've played around with UCL fuel adds and my impression is that they do seem to have some effect, but it's hard to draw any conclusions with street driven daily divers running pump fuel since there are so many uncontrolled variables.
I'd like to say that these variables will wash out over many thousands of miles, but even that is probably not the case, since weather can vary dramatically from one year to the next in terms of winter lows and summer highs observed.
Still, if there is enough validated research to demonstrate that UCLs really do have an effect then we may eventually see them mandated for pump fuel.
I've played around with UCL fuel adds and my impression is that they do seem to have some effect, but it's hard to draw any conclusions with street driven daily divers running pump fuel since there are so many uncontrolled variables.
I'd like to say that these variables will wash out over many thousands of miles, but even that is probably not the case, since weather can vary dramatically from one year to the next in terms of winter lows and summer highs observed.
Still, if there is enough validated research to demonstrate that UCLs really do have an effect then we may eventually see them mandated for pump fuel.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
The soundcard [censored] out on this computer, so I'm not bothering to watch the movie until it's fixed. But I know what my experiences are in friction modified fuels...
The soundcard [censored] out on this computer, so I'm not bothering to watch the movie until it's fixed. But I know what my experiences are in friction modified fuels...
A couple of points...
Most cars after a few thousand miles, give fuel economy that is 'better than new'. It's called the break-in process and the 'sacrificial layer' is the topmost bits of your cylinder honing. Interestingly this has been working quite effectively for over a century without having friction modifiers in the fuel.
Okay, let's say you put friction modifiers in gasoline. Let's assume that this stuff is 100% organic because the OEMs are paranoid about putting anything organo-metallic in fuel because it reminds them too much of TEL. The stuff exists in tiny concentrations in fuel and that fuel is mixed intimately with a lot of air. It's then set on fire! A fair question to ask is just how much of this stuff survives the combustion process intact to get to the wall to lay down this supposed sacrificial layer? Another fair question to ask is, if the FM is partially burnt, does it have a tendency to lay down as deposits in the piston grooves? To be honest, gasolines already contain additives for things like IVD and it's always bothered me as to what their fate is after combustion. Do they all magically burn instantly to H2O, CO2 and NO2 and follow the exhaust stream or do they burn to [censored] and cause oil control ring sticking?
Most cars after a few thousand miles, give fuel economy that is 'better than new'. It's called the break-in process and the 'sacrificial layer' is the topmost bits of your cylinder honing. Interestingly this has been working quite effectively for over a century without having friction modifiers in the fuel.
Okay, let's say you put friction modifiers in gasoline. Let's assume that this stuff is 100% organic because the OEMs are paranoid about putting anything organo-metallic in fuel because it reminds them too much of TEL. The stuff exists in tiny concentrations in fuel and that fuel is mixed intimately with a lot of air. It's then set on fire! A fair question to ask is just how much of this stuff survives the combustion process intact to get to the wall to lay down this supposed sacrificial layer? Another fair question to ask is, if the FM is partially burnt, does it have a tendency to lay down as deposits in the piston grooves? To be honest, gasolines already contain additives for things like IVD and it's always bothered me as to what their fate is after combustion. Do they all magically burn instantly to H2O, CO2 and NO2 and follow the exhaust stream or do they burn to [censored] and cause oil control ring sticking?
MolaKule
Staff member
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
Sorry Lz but this is a fairy tale dreamt up by your Marketing Department to convince the general public you know more than you actually do!
Friction modifiers DO work but as often as not, their effect is so miniscule, it does naff all to improve real life fuel economy.
HTHS and low KV40 have a far bigger effect on overall fuel economy and even then, the impact of dropping down a viscosity grade results in a disappointingly marginal improvement in FE.
...Okay, let's say you put friction modifiers in gasoline. Let's assume that this stuff is 100% organic because the OEMs are paranoid about putting anything organo-metallic in fuel because it reminds them too much of TEL. The stuff exists in tiny concentrations in fuel and that fuel is mixed intimately with a lot of air. It's then set on fire! A fair question to ask is just how much of this stuff survives the combustion process intact to get to the wall to lay down this supposed sacrificial layer? Another fair question to ask is, if the FM is partially burnt, does it have a tendency to lay down as deposits in the piston grooves? To be honest, gasolines already contain additives for things like IVD and it's always bothered me as to what their fate is after combustion. Do they all magically burn instantly to H2O, CO2 and NO2 and follow the exhaust stream or do they burn to [censored] and cause oil control ring sticking?
Quote:
I had no idea 25% of fuel burned goes into modifying friction.
Maybe as in, "Overcoming Friction?"
Sorry Lz but this is a fairy tale dreamt up by your Marketing Department to convince the general public you know more than you actually do!
Friction modifiers DO work but as often as not, their effect is so miniscule, it does naff all to improve real life fuel economy.
HTHS and low KV40 have a far bigger effect on overall fuel economy and even then, the impact of dropping down a viscosity grade results in a disappointingly marginal improvement in FE.
...Okay, let's say you put friction modifiers in gasoline. Let's assume that this stuff is 100% organic because the OEMs are paranoid about putting anything organo-metallic in fuel because it reminds them too much of TEL. The stuff exists in tiny concentrations in fuel and that fuel is mixed intimately with a lot of air. It's then set on fire! A fair question to ask is just how much of this stuff survives the combustion process intact to get to the wall to lay down this supposed sacrificial layer? Another fair question to ask is, if the FM is partially burnt, does it have a tendency to lay down as deposits in the piston grooves? To be honest, gasolines already contain additives for things like IVD and it's always bothered me as to what their fate is after combustion. Do they all magically burn instantly to H2O, CO2 and NO2 and follow the exhaust stream or do they burn to [censored] and cause oil control ring sticking?
Quote:
I had no idea 25% of fuel burned goes into modifying friction.
Maybe as in, "Overcoming Friction?"
Last edited:
wemay
Site Donor 2023
Got it.
I'm pretty sure gasoline contains friction modifiers from the pump. Shell talks about it when talking about V-Power, for example. Exxon has many patents on them, as well.
robert
robert
Shell is the only one up here, on Canadian TV, that I've actually seen advertise friction modifiers. I was a bit surprised.
MolaKule
Staff member
Originally Posted By: robertcope
I'm pretty sure gasoline contains friction modifiers from the pump. Shell talks about it when talking about V-Power, for example. Exxon has many patents on them, as well.
robert
maybe they do advertise FM's in fuel but for what purpose?
I'm pretty sure gasoline contains friction modifiers from the pump. Shell talks about it when talking about V-Power, for example. Exxon has many patents on them, as well.
robert
maybe they do advertise FM's in fuel but for what purpose?
One of the classical (and proven) sources of hydrocarbon emissions from IC engines is that during the compression stroke fuel is absorbed into the oil film on the cylinder walls. During the power and exhaust strokes, it's boiled out, escaping the process of combustion.
So if the fuel IS absorbed into the oil film as is known, then why can't additives be part of the process also ?
Poor delivery mechanism, and in other cases like the mercedes C111 wankel, they had a porous inlet manifold floor that delivered a film of oil to the apex seals rather then injecting oil into the bulk airstream or premix for precisely that reason.
D.I. is supposed to prevent this, plus the HC that escapes in the crevice volumes, so this would be useless.
So if the fuel IS absorbed into the oil film as is known, then why can't additives be part of the process also ?
Poor delivery mechanism, and in other cases like the mercedes C111 wankel, they had a porous inlet manifold floor that delivered a film of oil to the apex seals rather then injecting oil into the bulk airstream or premix for precisely that reason.
D.I. is supposed to prevent this, plus the HC that escapes in the crevice volumes, so this would be useless.
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
maybe they do advertise FM's in fuel but for what purpose?
I was wondering the same thing, in the latest V-Power Nitro+ commercials. I may have an idea what a friction modifier is. You know what friction modifiers are. But, what does this mean to the general populace coming across such a commercial?
maybe they do advertise FM's in fuel but for what purpose?
I was wondering the same thing, in the latest V-Power Nitro+ commercials. I may have an idea what a friction modifier is. You know what friction modifiers are. But, what does this mean to the general populace coming across such a commercial?
Yet more thoughts on this...
I don't know this for a fact but I would hazard a guess that friction between the rings and the bore is highest on the compression down stroke when the peak cylinder pressure gets behind the top ring (and to a lesser extent, the second ring) and forces it out to maximum splay and surface contact pressure.
In theory, this fuel delivered sacrificial layer would be laid down on the fully swept length of the bore on the intake down stroke. If this is so, the sacrificial layer would be 'sacrificed' on the compression up stroke when friction isn't really that high and would be absent on the compression down stroke when it would be most needed. That doesn't sound right to me.
The other thing is that of the three rings that you usually find on a piston, it's the oil control ring that generates most friction over the four strokes of a cycle. I think it's like this because the top two rings are designed to 'retreat' back into their grooves when not under pressure. The oil control ring never gets exposed to high combustion pressure and as such has very little inherent 'flex'. It must be more permanently tensioned towards the bore over all four cycles. Now because the oil control ring is the lowest ring on the piston, it's the ring that gets least exposure to this so called sacrificial layer. Furthermore, because it has two rings sitting above it, the layer is more likely to have been already 'sacrificed' before the oil ring hits the upper portions of the bore. Again, this doesn't sound right to me.
The only way I can see this stuff working is if the friction modifier partially burns to sticky black goo, which ultimately sticks the oil ring flush in its groove (thus totally eliminating OCR friction) which then allows engine oil to enter the combustion chamber and be burnt (it's got a calorific valve so it's fuel right?). Instant fuel economy benefit!! This I can understand.
I don't know this for a fact but I would hazard a guess that friction between the rings and the bore is highest on the compression down stroke when the peak cylinder pressure gets behind the top ring (and to a lesser extent, the second ring) and forces it out to maximum splay and surface contact pressure.
In theory, this fuel delivered sacrificial layer would be laid down on the fully swept length of the bore on the intake down stroke. If this is so, the sacrificial layer would be 'sacrificed' on the compression up stroke when friction isn't really that high and would be absent on the compression down stroke when it would be most needed. That doesn't sound right to me.
The other thing is that of the three rings that you usually find on a piston, it's the oil control ring that generates most friction over the four strokes of a cycle. I think it's like this because the top two rings are designed to 'retreat' back into their grooves when not under pressure. The oil control ring never gets exposed to high combustion pressure and as such has very little inherent 'flex'. It must be more permanently tensioned towards the bore over all four cycles. Now because the oil control ring is the lowest ring on the piston, it's the ring that gets least exposure to this so called sacrificial layer. Furthermore, because it has two rings sitting above it, the layer is more likely to have been already 'sacrificed' before the oil ring hits the upper portions of the bore. Again, this doesn't sound right to me.
The only way I can see this stuff working is if the friction modifier partially burns to sticky black goo, which ultimately sticks the oil ring flush in its groove (thus totally eliminating OCR friction) which then allows engine oil to enter the combustion chamber and be burnt (it's got a calorific valve so it's fuel right?). Instant fuel economy benefit!! This I can understand.
http://papers.sae.org/2001-01-1961/
"The benefit of the gasoline friction modifier fuel additive was generally found at the higher oil temperature conditions. The fuel economy change was immediately measurable and further gains were seen as the friction modifier fuel additive accumulated in the engine oil and reduced friction in oil-wetted parts of the engine. The use of friction modifiers in engine oil formulations did not negate the fuel additive benefit. This program has shown that using the fuel to supply a friction modifier is a practical method to improve vehicle fuel economy."
Interesting.
robert
"The benefit of the gasoline friction modifier fuel additive was generally found at the higher oil temperature conditions. The fuel economy change was immediately measurable and further gains were seen as the friction modifier fuel additive accumulated in the engine oil and reduced friction in oil-wetted parts of the engine. The use of friction modifiers in engine oil formulations did not negate the fuel additive benefit. This program has shown that using the fuel to supply a friction modifier is a practical method to improve vehicle fuel economy."
Interesting.
robert
wemay
Site Donor 2023
Wouldn't another benefit of this "sacrificial layer" be to lessen or restict blowby?
Originally Posted By: wemay
Wouldn't another benefit of this "sacrificial layer" be to lessen or restict blowby?
I would think so, since a UCL is said to make a better ring seal.
Wouldn't another benefit of this "sacrificial layer" be to lessen or restict blowby?
I would think so, since a UCL is said to make a better ring seal.
- Status