| Author |
Message |
    
M1combat
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 28, 2004 - 06:01 pm: | 
|
http://www.israel21c.org/bin/en.jsp?enDispWho=Articles%5El866&enPage=BlankPage&e nDisplay=view&enDispWhat=object&enVersion=0&enZone=Technology |
Fullpower
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 28, 2004 - 06:40 pm: |
|
wow, finally a colon friendly synthetic lubricant. |
M1combat
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 28, 2004 - 07:02 pm: |
|
Hey... Whatever floats your boat Dean  . |
Charlieboy6649
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 01:18 am: |
|
Damnit! They took my idea! |
Thunderbox
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 02:32 pm: |
|
If the stock were available I would buy some. This thing could be really big. Unfortunately it is a privately owned company. Maybe we should bring the Borg here and use some of their nano technology. |
M1combat
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 02:50 pm: |
|
ME too... I think that money could be made investing in their partners as well. |
Hans
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 04:37 pm: |
|
Am very sceptical (as usual):
Oil does lubricate, sure, but it works also as sealing, it transports heat, dampens vibrations and sound, transports rest products of an suboptimal mixture. It sticks to the surfaces in high pressure areas. It protects surfaces against corrosion. And what more? Yeah, it smells nice.
Hans  |
Thunderbox
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 04:42 pm: |
|
It would have to be used in some sort of medium, like an oil as it would be very hard to pump an ultra fine powder properly. I think this is just the first of many new lubricants that will soon be available. I can hardly wait till I can get some for the machine. I believe that we have not reached anywhere near what we will when it comes to lubricants. Why so sceptical Hans. |
M1combat
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 05:04 pm: |
|
I agree, and they won't be made out of black gold... That'll •••• off the Arabs . |
Lake_bueller
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 05:10 pm: |
|
I think the last 2 posts are missing the boat. Yes, oil does all these things and more. But think outside the box for just 1 second.
I'm not an engineer but here's the scenario I see for this product (in relation to the internal combustion engine).
1) Because this product does not deteriorate, there is no need to make an open system (i.e. pump & oil tank). The engine is built with the lubricant intrigrated in the construction. Then the entire system is sealed. This eliminates the need to pump anything. It also eliminates the need for corrosion protection.
2) You solve the heat transfer by making a better water cooling systems. How much of the heat from a radiator-using motor is transfered from the motor oil? I guessing it is a VERY small percentage.
3) How much dampening of vibration and sound is really solved by the oil? We don't know enough about this substance to say it doesn't do a better job. There will always be better ways to mount engines to help with the vibration. And who really cares how "loud" their motorcycle is?
This stuff sounds AWESOME to me. Just think of the long term economic and environmental savings. All I can say is "sign me up"! |
M1combat
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 05:34 pm: |
|
You would still need to pump it. The "oil" would still need to be cooled but not for the oil's sake, but as an aid to water/air cooling. The filter (if the application was an IC engine) would still need to be changed. The EPA cares how loud your motorcycle is. I don't though...
On the subject of "thinking outside the box"... Your first point is brought up on the website I linked to...
Your second point... That depends on if your cooling system uses oil to cool the engine. More cooling is better if you ask me.
When it comes to "Just think of the long term economic and environmental savings", why do you suppose I mentioned Ahab? |
Lake_bueller
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 06:12 pm: |
|
M1....I was typing my post when your went up.
Here's some other points from the article that may explain the need for less cooling..staying cooler and maintaining their function longer and Finally, as inorganic material, NanoLub performs beautifully even in extremely harsh environments.
On the downside....this product would probably eliminate the oil/air cooled motors as we know them. That would be the only application I can think of that would require "oil" to be moved for the sake of cooling.
And...yup, the Arabs would be pissed!!! |
Hans
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 06:14 pm: |
|
At first reading I was just as enthusiast as the author of the article. But thinking about the micro ball bearings idea: The particles are so small that they can creep into tiniest holes: Yes, but they will roll out as easily.They have to stick on the high pressure surfaces and then you have to lock them up there: Just as the balls in a ball bearing. Maybe you have to use sticky grease for that purpose. Yes, then you are just were we were already with graphite or molybdenum disulfide. Also very slippery, but dry only usable in some instruments like door locks were lubrication is important but not critical. In our engines we get sludge from bypass gases: Water, coal, and partly burned gas. Most parts evaporate again via the carter ventilation, but you can`t close the system. The dampening is more important for the high frequency vibrations (or (supersonic?) sounds). Protection against corrosion is very important: Our bikes are resting and rusting engines with short brakes of activity. I think that you can`t find big fishes in new lubricants: the modern oil is already wonderful stuff (but not so much better than the dinosaur oil). The powder ends up maybe in gyroscopes: High spinning low pressure things. No, it will not, as those instruments have contact free air bearings. Just as dentist drills. Disappointing. Would have been more promising when they took other examples than dirty combustion engines.
Hans |
Fullpower
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 07:14 pm: |
|
is it a Kosher Lubricant then? |
M1combat
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 10:56 pm: |
|
He he . |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, December 30, 2004 - 12:10 am: |
|
I'm with you Hans. I don't see nano-sized ball bearings working in an engine. Graphite lubricates via flat sliding crystaline form. Little tiny balls are problematic in anything other than very very smooth sufaces in contact. The idea in the bearings of IC engines is to keep all bearing surfaces from making any contact.
Still interesting stuff that may have other great potential in other applications, like maybe hard disk drives and such? |
Thunderbox
| | Posted on Thursday, December 30, 2004 - 08:30 am: |
|
I remember when the laser was first invented and it was thought that it was only really valuable as a weapon. Now everybody has at least one device with a laser in it. Everyday use includes measuring, leveling, CDs, DVDs, printing, pointing, device control and lastly the original idea weapons. Who would have known. And Blake you of all people should know better than to think inside the box. Great strides have been made in lubricants and this idea rocks. |
X1tx
| | Posted on Thursday, December 30, 2004 - 08:50 am: |
|
Some of the blurb on their web site says it's to be used "as an additive" to liquid lubricants, much like graphite and moly. But the HQ for ApNano is in NYC. But oil basically serves three primary functions: 1: Lubrication 2: Heat dissipation/transfer and 3: Corrosion protection. Oil is good at 1 and 3, so-so for use as a coolant.
ApNano has some interesting claims on their web site, but I too am skeptical. Ball bearings weakness is normally the galling when the balls skid under heavy loading. Time will tell if their claims bear the scrutiny. If not, look for this stuff on "The Home Shopping Network" in about a year. If their claims are true, I'll have some. |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Thursday, December 30, 2004 - 12:04 pm: |
|
"is it a Kosher Lubricant then?"
Don't laugh. My company employs Rabbis in our PAO processing facilities. Gotta lube the meat grinders with something, and that something has to be Kosher. |
X1tx
| | Posted on Thursday, December 30, 2004 - 01:06 pm: |
|
EVERY restaurant in Israel has to have a Kosher license. They even have Kosher McDonald's. Can't get a cheeseburger in the whole country.  |
Thunderbox
| | Posted on Thursday, December 30, 2004 - 04:08 pm: |
|
I don't think bacon is very Kosher and you can buy a BLT Sandwich at Bernies Bottle Club it is in Tel Aviv. Or sweet an sour pork at a Chinese place by the Maxim Hotel also. Just to let you know all are not Kosher Restaurants. |
X1tx
| | Posted on Thursday, December 30, 2004 - 04:12 pm: |
|
Wish I could have found that on my trip. No bacon, no cheeseburgers. History of the place is amazing, the food leaves a LOT to be desired... |
Ocbueller
| | Posted on Thursday, December 30, 2004 - 06:56 pm: |
|
If that nano lube is blessed by rabbi's, then I gotta get me some. I believe the kosher for passover lube would be the slickest.
SteveH |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, December 30, 2004 - 07:02 pm: |
|
Thunderbox,
I of all people think I know a thing two about the lubrication of internal combustion engines and the properties of metals. But hey I'm always up for an education, so please do tell how you imagine that tiny minuscule nano-meter sized ball bearings that are smaller than the size of surface imperfections of top quality metal bearing surfaces will be beneficial to an IC engine?
Here's how I see the situation...
For a ball bearing to work, it needs to roll between two opposing surfaces. If the surface is not sufficiently smooth relative to the diameter of the ball bearings, the bearings will not perform their intended mission, reducing friction, and in fact will most likely fail and cause catastrophic failure of the bearing surfaces they were intended to serve.
If the intended means of deployment within a conventional IC engine or any other hydrodynamic lubrication scenario is to be suspended within and carried by oil, any nano-sized ball bearings would never get a chance to operate. They would be ineffectual as ball bearings as the film thickness of hydrodynamically lubricated bearing surfaces far exceeds the nano scale dimensions of the nano-ball bearings.
To be efficient at such a minuscule bearing separation, any hydrodynamic lubricant carrier of the nano bearings would necessarily need to be of extremely low viscosity, on the order of water or even less.
Employing conventional engine oil at such small film thicknesses would generate immense frictional losses and subsequently a lot of heat.
The friction within a viscous fluid trapped between two opposing surfaces increases with decreasing film thickness. That is to say that if the separation distance between the opposing surfaces decreases by half the friction then increases two fold, assuming all else remains equal, namely the viscosity of the liquid lubricant.
The physical equation of equilibrium for simple hydrodynamic lubrication is as follows...
friction (F) = VAh/t
where:
V is the relative sliding velocity between the two opposing bearing surfaces,
A is the wetted bearing area,
h is the viscosity of the fluid, and
t is the film thickness or separation distance between the two opposing bearing surfaces.
First off, the nano-ball bearing lube sounds like snake oil to me.
Secondly, if it is an honest to goodness for true fact, while offering possible benefits in some lubrication/bearing scenarios, it doesn't appear applicable to the lubrication of IC engines which must endure impurities, dirt particles and surface imperfections significantly larger than the proposed nano-bearings, not to mention the significantly larger thickness of the conventional hydrodynamic lubricating layer that would render the nano-bearings ineffectual.
I just call it like I see it. That shouldn't surprise you or anyone. |
Thunderbox
| | Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 10:29 am: |
|
Maybe it's just my imagination but I detect some sarcasm in the last post directed at me.
I will also add that the size of the molecules in oil are no smaller than the nano particles we are talking about. They don't seem to cause any damage to the surfaces in an engine. By the way what size are the nano particles the article mentions?
Seems to me that maybe they won't be perfect in our present machines but I can see they may have to redesign engines to take full advantage of these lubricants.
I know for a fact that GM, Ford and Chrysler are working on the sealed engine system. They have been actively developing this for quite a few years now. Nano lubricants are what they have been looking to be developed.
I will also say that when it involves lubrication I have a good understanding of how lubricants work and the worst problem in any engine is in boundary lubrication regime. Seems these little ball bearings of sort would prevent any damage occuring when boundary lubrication becomes a factor. Every time you look at an engine that has been physically damaged it is caused by a lack of boundary lubrication, whether it was caused by heat load or improper lubricants. Just maybe this will be able to prevent this. If the oil would stay between moving parts we would never see any significant wear. But thats not the case. The oil is incapable of maintaining the surface tension to support heavy loads and the damage is obvious. The parts wear because metal touches metal. Enter the nano particles. |
Rek
| | Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 10:58 am: |
|
nano particles=The Borg.
"You will be assimilated."
 |
Jerseyguy
| | Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 11:52 am: |
|
"Resistance is futile" |
Jerseyguy
| | Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 11:56 am: |
|
All kidding aside, I thought synthetic oils needed to be changed due to contamination from blowby impurities and metal particles from normal break in and wear. |
M1combat
| | Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 03:35 pm: |
|
They do. I would imagine that being at a nano-scale... You could use a filter that would catch just about anything else. |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 05:44 pm: |
|
You ask what size? I assume no larger than something on a nano-meter scale, say no more than 100 nanometers in diameter or 100-9m or in more familiar terms, 0.1 microns, roughly 0.000004" (4 millionths of an inch).
Recall that the best oil filters are rated to filter out particles as small as 10 microns. Ten microns is one hundred times bigger than 100 nanometers.
Right, the molecules comprising lubricating oil are indeed sub nanometer in size. But they are liquid, fluid, not solid, and not purporting to act as ball bearings nor do they require such minuscule clearances between bearing surfaces to be effective. In fact lubricating oil works best with significant film thickness, and thus a significant separation between bearing surfaces.
Surely you can see the difference between how conventional hydrodynamic lubrication and tiny little minuscule ball bearings might accommodate factors such as surface roughness, dirt particles, heat, and other important factors.
In the surface over which it must traverse how much surface roughness, relative to a ball bearing's diameter, will a ball bearing tolerate while still performing efficiently and reliably?
Then what would be the surface roughness requirements for nanometer sized ball bearings?
Boundary lubrication should only occur in engines upon start up. If it is occurring otherwise, your engine has a serious problem.
Yeah, I got a bit sarcastic. I'll often get that way when faced with what I perceive as condescension. |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 05:48 pm: |
|
For those who are interested, some good reference material on lubrication...
http://www.tech.plymouth.ac.uk/sme/desnotes/lube1.htm
http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/15/2/7/1
http://www.threebond.co.jp/en/technical/technicalnews/pdf/tech09.pdf
http://depts.washington.edu/nanolab/ChemE554/Summaries%20ChemE%20554/Introductio n%20Tribology.htm |
Grt
| | Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 12:34 am: |
|
Thirty years ago ceramic ball bearing were thought to be impractical because the ceramic materials were "too fragile or too costly".
In the box thinking.
G. |
|