Real world impact of friction on usable energy

Global energy consumption due to friction in trucks and buses

  • In heavy duty vehicles, 33% of the fuel energy is used to overcome friction in the engine, transmission, tires, auxiliary equipment, and brakes. The parasitic frictional losses, with braking friction excluded, are 26% of the fuel energy. In total, 34% of the fuel energy is used to move the vehicle.

Global energy consumption due to friction in passenger cars

  • In passenger cars, one-third of the fuel energy is used to overcome friction in the engine, transmission, tires, and brakes. The direct frictional losses, with braking friction excluded, are 28% of the fuel energy. In total, 21.5% of the fuel energy is used to move the car.

How effective is my motor oil?

4-Ball Test

A "4-ball test" is a standardized tribological test method that uses four steel balls to evaluate the lubricating properties of a fluid by measuring its ability to reduce friction (coefficient of friction), wear (wear scar size), and sometimes torque, by rotating one ball against three stationary balls under controlled load and speed conditions; a smaller wear scar indicates better anti-wear performance of the lubricant. 

Primarily, the test measures the diameter of the wear scar left on the stationary balls, which is indicative of the lubricant's ability to prevent wear, along with the friction coefficient generated during the test run.

Do I need an oil additive?

 – That depends on the additive!

Many people respond… "I don't need an additive, I already use good oil." 

Keep in mind that motor oil is already full of additives... but additives are expensive and manufacturers are price sensitive.  Predictably, manufacturers use the bare minimum amounts of these expensive additives to pass ASTM and OEM specifications.

why

4 Ball Tests: Pennzoil Synthetic/Mineral Oils with and without and EngeneRx  NOA 

EngeneRx commissioned St. Louis-based Engineered Lubricants (Certifications: ISO 9001:2015|ISO/IEC 17025:2017 |FACTORY MUTUAL 200 SERIES) to perform comparative tests on Pennzoil synthetic and mineral oils with and without EngeneRx Nanoparticle Oil Additive. The results are below.

Coefficient of Friction

This test shows how well a lubricant might perform on a piston and cylinder surface by measuring the friction between multiple steel balls under controlled conditions. This  allows for comparison between balls before and after treatment with EngeneRx NOA.  A lower coefficient of friction in the 4-ball test indicates better lubrication in an engine environment. 

Torque

This test relates to piston and cylinder surfaces by simulating the high-pressure, sliding contact between metal components within an engine. This  allows evaluation of a lubricant's ability to minimize wear and friction under similar conditions, which is crucial for the longevity of piston rings and cylinder liners within an engine. A lower torque reading indicates better wear resistance and reduced friction between these surfaces.  

wear

This test relates to piston and cylinder surfaces by providing a controlled laboratory environment to assess the wear-resistant properties of a lubricant under high friction conditions, similar to the sliding contact between a piston ring and cylinder liner in an engine. This allows us to evaluate how well a lubricant can minimize wear on these critical components by measuring the size of wear scars on the steel balls used in the test. A smaller wear scar indicates better wear protection in a real engine environment.  

EngeneRx Failure Test

National Centre for Tribology Risley Nuclear Laboratories

EngeneRx NOA (T-Lube) was tested at the National Centre for Tribology Risley Nuclear Laboratories (now part of ESR Technology), headquartered in Warrington, Cheshire, United Kingdom.

Failure tests on a lubricant tester showed that:

  • SAE30 straight mineral oil seized at 500 lbs. load

  • 15W/40 oil seized at 1,400 lbs.

  • SAE39 plus EngenRx had not seized at 3,400 lbs.  

Real-world Fuel Economy Test

Motoring News in the United Kingdom performed a real-world fuel economy test with EngeneRx io 1982 on an Audi 100.  This test measured the vehicle's actual fuel efficiency under normal driving conditions, as opposed to the standardized lab tests conducted by the EPA or similar labs which may not fully reflect everyday driving scenarios. 

This test involved driving on different types of roads (city streets, highways, rural roads) to replicate a more realistic driving experience. Unlike lab tests, this real-world test spanned over several weeks, allowing for a more comprehensive evaluation of fuel consumption. 

Vehicle: Audi 100

  • Miles driven before adding EngeneRx: 2,388

  • Fuel used to drive 2,388 miles: 120.25 Gals (four-star gasoline) 

  • Average Milage without EngeneRx: 19.86 MPG. 

  • Miles driven after adding EngeneRx: 3,506

  • Fuel used to drive 3,506 miles: 150.29 Gals (four-star gasoline)

  • Average Milage with EngeneRx: 23.33 MPG

  • Milage Increase: 3.47 MPG

  • Percentage MPG Improvement: 17.47% 

  • Fuel Saved: 26 gallons