search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Lube-Tech PUBLISHED BY LUBE: THE EUROPEAN LUBRICANTS INDUSTRY MAGAZINE


values to the best synthetic oil, PAO10. Meanwhile, Group III observed the greatest drop in COF over time, but the highest COF range from 0.14 to 0.19 during the first 40 minutes. The increase in COF of Group III is attributed to the abrasive and adhesive interactions between the ball and the significant amount iron oxide debris on the disc, implying Group III’s inefficient surface protection.


Furthermore, each base stock’s wear scar volumes from the ball-on-disc tribo-test were also examined with HQLs exhibiting a 43% reduction in wear compared to Group III. Both Group III and PAO4 were unable to protect their surfaces and produced large wear scars, which were results of high degrees of carbon branching that limited intermolecular forces within alkane chains and incapability of forming a protective layer with small molecules, respectively. However, PAO10 and all HQLs exhibited the lowest wear scars due to their extremely low carbon branching that encouraged methylene interactions in between alkane chains to maintain a protective film. The COF and wear scar volume results highlight HQLs’ comparable tribological property of surface protection to that of industrial grade synthetic oils and both their superior performance over standard mineral oil.


No.156 page 5


Figure 2. COF Changes at 300°C for Group III, PAO4, LLDPE, Bubble Wrap, PAO10, and HDPE[10]


Since HDPEs and PAO10 performed exceptionally well with similar COF results, synergistic interactions between the two were examined. 0, 10, 20, 30, 50, 70, 90, and 100 percent weight of HDPE-derived HQL was added to PAO10 before undergoing friction and wear tests at 25°


C and 100°C. Before the synergy,


virgin HQL presented lower wear scar volume due to its high viscosity and increasing COF from the formation of an iron oxide tribolayer on the test disc at 25°C (Figures 3 and 4). However, virgin HQL obtained much lower COF with increased fluidity and wettability that prevented iron oxide accumulation at 100°C (Figure 5). After the various trials, an optimal 20-30% HQL in PAO10 at 25°C and 100°C demonstrated the most decrease in friction and wear of around 9% and 30%, respectively. The COF and wear scar volume at that concentration are even lower than that achieved by virgin PAO10 due to the addition of linear polymer chains in HQL enhancing the fluidity and polydispersity of bulky PAO10 molecules, creating a finer friction reduction.


Figure 3: Wear Scar Volumes of PAO10 and HQL Concentrations [10]


Figure 2: COF Changes at 300o PAO10, and HDPE [10]


C for Group III, PAO4, LLDPE, Bubble Wrap,


In the end, the performance of HQLs supersedes that of mineral oil and is on par with synthetic oil


LUBE MAGAZINE NO.185 FEBRUARY 2025 35


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68