CP

May I suggest that our moderators put this thread up as a 'sticky'? Not just here but on ALL forums.

This is truely an incredible thread.

Doug, Mr. Hillary, you are a wonderful resource on this subject. Thanks again for your participation.

CP

Crazy Canuck

Doug this is great reading. Thank you for the education.

MANUAL

Hi Doug,

What do you think about the following report which suggests idling, in some diesel engines, may not be as bad as we believe?

http://avt.inel.gov/pdf/bus_idle/bus...ain_report.pdf

Doug Hillary

Hi,
Manual I could not get the link to work..........

This subject is now seriously "off topic" but this information/post may interest you and probably says it all:

From the US EPA:
"The first-of-their-kind grants will conserve fuel and reduce emissions by deploying a wide variety of idle reduction technologies on trucks and at truck stops across the nation. EPA expects direct benefits of the grant program to include:

15 million gallons of diesel fuel savings
$45 million in reduced fuel costs
3,000 tons of nitrogen oxide emission reductions
70 tons of particulate matter emission reductions
125,000 tons of carbon dioxide emission reductions
In addition the grants will spur deployment of idle-reduction technologies that yield even greater indirect benefits as their use becomes more widespread"

Ends

Because of much lower fuel prices in NA, not a lot of serious effort has been made to reduce fuel related operating costs there until recently

I first became involved in greater energy efficiency in Trucking via Mercedes Benz (and Volvo) in 1975!
On behalf of the NZ and Australian Trucking Industries I promoted the fuel efficiency concepts devised primarily by Mercedes Benz and that I had been involved with.

This included training Fleet Managers/Owners, Truck sales personnel and Drivers. It was a hard slug as at that stage fuel was much cheaper at those places than in Europe - fuel prices were about 40c/litre in NZ and around 15c/litre in OZ

The process included;
1 - Conceptual matters
Federal/State Legislative changes (axle/gross mass,length,height,speed, road design and etc)
Better Vehicle Selection/application techniques (engine type, power/torque, gearing and etc)

2 - Innovative Industry measures using;
a) air shields (aerodynamic aids)
b) radial tyres (then about 5% radial - now 100%)
c) closing tractor/trailer air space
d) route planning
e) better Fleet maintenance techniques
f) extending servicing intervals (using UOAs and etc)
g) and etc. etc.

3 - Driver education/training
h) minimising engine idling times
i) using available power/torque correctly
j) pre-trip checking (correct tyre pressures and etc)
k) and etc.etc.

As well there was a number of other significant measures too that would bore readers on this site
Most measures suggested/promoted then are now current practice 30 years later

Of them all, minimising engine idling time, using correct tyre pressures, understanding power/torque/gearing relationships and better route planning could be shown to give an instant return at no cost outlays

Electronically managed engines were being developed then but were not released for another decade. In 1975 high sulphur fuels were used in both NZ and OZ and this had a serious effect on establishing oil change intervals (OCIs). It was especially so with engines that had long idling periods - many trucks were left idling beyong 10 minutes or so while drivers had a chat, filled out paperwork and the like!
I used UOAs extensively to show the economic benefits of using high quality lubricants when extending OCIs and at the same time extending engine life

Sorry for the long winded reply - but like many automotive issues, this one is a little complex too!

Regards
Doug

MANUAL

Doug,

Maybe the link only works with Adobe Reader version 7.0 .

Thank you for the long winded reply. I loved it.

I am currently experimenting with extended OCI's using both mineral and synthetic oil and plan to check with Honda to see if they have any concerns regarding the use of Delvac 1 5w-40.

I also wish to follow your advice on experimenting with blotter tests of new oil and then at 1k intervals as a complement to VOA's and UOA's.

1) Is it ok to use the back of a card-stock, paper, business card or should I buy a different kind of paper such as lab filter paper, coffee filter paper or chromatography paper?

2) Please provide some instructions or a link on how to perform a proper blotter spot test.

Riad

Incredible amount of useful information in this thread, well done Doug.

Doug Hillary

Hi Manual,
you were right, Adobe's 7 fixed it!
A very good test regime and very interesting results too!!

Blotter testing is almost a lost art now but it is useful - this link may help:

http://www.gwrauto.com/One%20Drop.htm

I started off using specially treated blotter paper but just used a good quality blotter in recent years (even used toilet paper when "in-field" testing in the outback).
I suggest that you select a blotter that is readily available and stick with it

Please keep us informed of your test results

Thanks all for the kind remarks - glad to help

Regards
Doug

MANUAL

Hello Doug,

Thank you for the link.

Do you think this paper would qualify as good quality blotter?

http://vwrlabshop.com/product.asp_Q_pn_E_0011101

I will keep you informed of my test results.

Doug Hillary

Hi Manual,
wow - what a range of filtration media at your link!

The blotter you highlight sounds great but that Company Representative's advice would be better than mine. You may even find that they also make the media supplied from the link I provided!

Best of luck
Regards
Doug

MANUAL

Hi Doug,

Good idea. I will speak to the company representative.

For the present, I have run out of questions and am ready and excited to go out and do some experimenting. LOL!

I am overwhelmed with gratitude for your Biblical patience and effort in trying to rescue us from our ignorance. Someday, I would love to hop and skip over the oceans to meet you and your fleet in person. Till that day comes, mate... Cheers!

icon

hi doug,

just caught the neighbor of bert munro post.
did hopkins do a good job of capturing the spirit of the man?
he must have been quite a character!

jeff

Doug Hillary

Hi Jeff,
IMHO Hopkins really did a great job - Bert Munro would probably have chosen him!

He was a character and people like him still exist today - lifting the barriers in unconventional ways

Ford, Benz, Daimler, Porsche, Maybach, Honda, Issigonis, Michelin and etc were probably all judged as "characters" too - thank goodness

Regards
Doug

Kiko

Great Posts!!!

Always nice to get some extra food for thoughts! I personally use Motul 300V Power 5W40 (double Ester) on my mildly modified 996 Turbo but since I track it now and then I felt better safe than sorry. I always change it every 6kmiles (10k km). The added bonus was a 30% decrease on oil consumption corroborating what many have complainted; that Mobil1 seems to "burn" easily...

MANUAL

Hi Doug,

That company's technical representative did not know whether I should use the 0.38 mm paper or the approx. six times thicker (like a paper towel) 2.6 mm paper. Both grades of paper are meant for electrophoresis.

The president of Blackstone Labs, Jim, said the blotter spot test was originally a test for fuels so he thought I should use the thinner paper for engine oil.

Terry Dyson said the thicker grade of paper is better for engine oil but also to keep in mind that he is not a big fan of the test since he does not

use it because it did not provide repeatable results, now even
more so than in days past because of low solvency fuels and new fuel/adds.
Serious blotter use has not occurred since the 1940's.

Terry also said one will not see a problem nor be able to identify corrective action properly until the oil is toasted and still never know what wear levels are.

1) So, the vote is tied between thin and thick grades. What is your vote, Doug?

2) Do you think the $50 Dyson Premium Kit Package, http://www.dysonanalysis.com/servicelist.html, is worth the price premium compared to a $40 Blackstone test, http://www.blackstone-labs.com/tests_price_list.html, which includes TAN and TBN or a $20 Blackstone test without TAN or TBN?

3) Are the comments of a well known oil analyst like Terry worth the extra $10 versus those of an unknown Blackstone lab technician?

Doug Hillary

Hi Manual,
well I feel as if I am in the firing line

Firstly a few comments;
a) the blotter used is less important than the correct use and interpretation of the "oil drop"
Using the same type of blotter each time is best to ensure reliable repeatability. I would opt for an untreated thicker type but I am no blotter expert. Shell used to say "just use an uncoated "calling card" - reading the repeatable results is the name of the game

b) I do not have personal exposure to Blackstone Labs but their published results seem good to me - you get what you pay for of course and I have recommended them to many NA Porsche, Benz and BMW owners

And yes, the blotter test was originally used as a quick fuel dilution test with diesel engines - amongst others

c) Terry Dyson (we know of each other) is in the business of UOA results "interpretation". By all accounts he does a good job and we have only differed on a few minor issues over the years - I respect his comments

His comments on the use of the blotter test is his viewpoint. In reality organisations like Noria still train people in the use of such tests - and so do a number of Oil Companies

However Terry's comment "Serious blotter use has not occured since the 1940s" is simply wrong. These tests are still done daily or as determined etc. at Mine sites and in a variety of applications, and in ever increasing numbers (hence the Noria training)

The test is meaningful as a "between UOA" test and it will show fuel dilution and the level of contaminants (glycol etc.) in the oil. The experience of the user of course is the key to interpreting what information is obtained. It may show that the oil should be changed with the utmost urgency - and that alone will prevent the toast being burnt!

Now to answer your questions with MHOs;
1 - See above
2 - I don't have a strong opinion on either the Blackstone or Terry's tests.
I don't know what Terry's tests include - however for me I will always opt for both the TAN and TBN being documented whenever possible. They tell their own story when used together
3 - This question is quite difficult to answer! $10 is not a lot of money (Mobil and Castrol charge me $A50). I have only differed on minor issues with Terry's comments and findings over the last several years
Unfortunately I do not know the quality of the Blackstone Lab technicians but while the comments on their reports seem to be very good, the next few comments may give an insight into this issue

Difficulties have occurred here in OZ with Lab Techs ((not Blackstone) pushing the "Action" or "Warning" buttons when printing UOA reports!
This may prompt some end users to panic and to open engines up, drain lubricants or to look for non-existent problems and etc. The limits are however usually set by Lubricant Engineers and they need to be current and accurate (formulation/viscosity /application and etc)

In my experience I will never trust the "Alert" messages without further interpretation. The Lubrication Engineers I work with at the highest levels have learnt a lot about this matter over the last decade or two - as I have!
Most Commercial User's reports now go direct to a Senior Lubricants Engineer and a State Engineer in order to ensure the utmost accuracy.
Joint interpretation is then initiated with the end user for a much better and less reactive outcome
This is where trending UOA results against an engine within an engine family is the surest way to get accuracy in this regard

I hope this helps
Regards