Polymers in gas improve octane, FE and emissions

[friendly_jacek]

The hard core BITOG members are familiar with this concept, as we all read the 2000 patent on HMW PIB by professor Paul F. Waters

This full length SAE paper nicely shows his evidence: http://www.eco-conscious.com/sae.htm

This is especially important as he also recently patented similar affects with LMW PIB: http://www.google.com/patents?hl=en&...ncy&f=false

This is reassuring for some of us adding Lucas UCL or TCW3 to gas despite the new BITOG members saying that it's crazy to do so.

The only lingering doubts I have is whether the run without polymer was done on cold engine and the after on hot engine. I hope not as that would really mess up the experiments.

 

[JHZR2]

Lucas ucl and tcw3 aren't polymers.

 

[MolaKule]

Quote:
The only lingering doubts I have is whether the run without polymer was done on cold engine and the after on hot engine. I hope not as that would really mess up the experiments.


From what I read, all experiments were run on a hot engine. You reduce the variables by running on only a hot engine. What siginificant data would be shown by a running it in a cold engine?

After a few comustion cycles, the liner surface and CC get hot anyway, even though the heat may not have migrated out to the fins or coolant.

 

[Qwiky]

The test "FUEL CONSUMPTION-ACCELERATION" wasn't well controlled scientifically.

That test should have been done on an Eddy current engine dyno with computer controlled sweeps on the throttle and dyno loads.

The results are interesting and appear to offer increased efficiencies.

 

[friendly_jacek]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Lucas ucl and tcw3 aren't polymers.


Why do you say that? Do you have some inside info?

PIB is a polymer. Lucas UCL is rumored to be LMW PIB and PIB (not sure what MW) is added in many TCW3 oils. You can google TCW3 and PIB if you don't believe me.

 

[friendly_jacek]

Originally Posted By: MolaKule
What siginificant data would be shown by a running it in a cold engine?

After a few comustion cycles, the liner surface and CC get hot anyway, even though the heat may not have migrated out to the fins or coolant.


Well, If they wanted to cheat and produce bogus results, they could have ran baseline on barely hot engine and the post polymer experiments on well warmed up engine. That would produce decrease in emissions and increase in FE just from the hot engine effects.

And I don't agree with you that it takes only a couple of combustion cycles to warm up the CC, as the liners are water cooled. Besides cold engine oil will produce more drag.

 

[MolaKule]

Quote:
And I don't agree with you that it takes only a couple of combustion cycles to warm up the CC, as the liners are water cooled. Besides cold engine oil will produce more drag.


Cold engines will produce more drag simply because the oil is thicker until the equilibrium temperature is reached.

Dynamic Heat transfer theory says that even though a local surface may be 800F or more, it will take a finite time before the heat energy reaches the cooling jacket.

 

[artificialist]

I can't remember when, but Exxonmobil said that they use polymer additives in their gasoline to improve cleaning of engine parts. After hearing that, I went from Chevron/Texaco to Exxonmobil for gasoline.

I don't know how well one works over the other.

 

[TTK]

Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Quote:
And I don't agree with you that it takes only a couple of combustion cycles to warm up the CC, as the liners are water cooled. Besides cold engine oil will produce more drag.


Cold engines will produce more drag simply because the oil is thicker until the equilibrium temperature is reached.

Dynamic Heat transfer theory says that even though a local surface may be 800F or more, it will take a finite time before the heat energy reaches the cooling jacket.


Actually, there is no such entity as "heat energy". There is thermal energy and heat is the transfer of thermal energy. So heat is not a static entity, but a measure of "energy flow". Never the less, you are correct, of course.

 

[MolaKule]

In daily life we often speak (sometimes colloquially) of sensible and latent forms of internl energy as "heat."

Heat is actually energy transfered from one place to another and is often defined as "the form of energy that is transferred between two systems (or a system and its surroundings) by virtue of a temperature difference."

Saying it another way, "an energy interaction is heat only if it takes place because of a temperature difference."

The direction of energy transfer is always from the higher temperature body to the lower temperature one. For example energy transfer is made from the combustion chamber to the cooling jacket and we see a temperature difference between the combustion chamber's temperature and the coolant's temperature.

I am aware of the various terms often used in physics vs thermodynamics (thermal physics) verses mechanical engineering.

The problem I see is that the Greek prefix Thermo, thermuomta, meaning heat, refers to heat or temperature from its original etymology. So if taken literally, "thermal" energy is heat energy.

I totally agree that when discussing concepts we should use the correct terms as defined in textbooks, and in "most" thermodynamic textbooks, Thermal Energy is the correct term when discussing energy transfer due to temperature deltas.

I sincerely appreciate your comments.

 

[bmwtechguy]

I recently used a fuel additive, testing for potential fuel savings and it claimed in the MSDS to have no solvents, etc. It smelled like a plastic or polymer and was very concentrated. It did consistently improve fuel economy somewhat in my testing. That's all I can really say. I have no idea what it will cost as it was provided to me free for testing purpose.