# Diesel Fuel Additive Test



## cssnms (Jan 24, 2011)

I came across this Spicer test of diesel fuel additives. Some of the results esp those from some of the more popular name brand additives was enlightening. I found the narrative to be very informative.

http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/showthread.php?t=177728


----------



## cssnms (Jan 24, 2011)

I tried Power Service Diesel Kleen with Cetane Boost yesterday and so far I have noticed that my engine is a little quiter and smoother feeling. The smoother part might be phsycosemantic, but the quiter part is not. So far liking this product and the fact that it adds extra lubricity to the ULS diesel is a benefit.

http://www.powerservice.com/dk/


----------



## F32Fleet (Jul 14, 2010)

I read/researched that test years ago. Something to keep in mind is that all diesel fuel has slight variations with regards to cetane and lubricity since they all use different additives. That being said not one aftermarket additive will yield same results with different fuels.


----------



## d geek (Nov 26, 2008)

Also note that the test was run on fuel that you'd never be adding aftermarket additives to. Instead of testing fuel as it comes out of the retail pump, they tested fuel as it comes out of the pipeline to the distribution terminal. This fuel MUST have lubricity additives mixed in before going on to the retail outlet in order to meet even the minimum ASTM lubricity levels. Therefore IMO adding aftermarket additives to this fuel is not an accurate evaluation of how they'd perform as designed.


----------



## cssnms (Jan 24, 2011)

d geek said:


> Also note that the test was run on fuel that you'd never be adding aftermarket additives to. Instead of testing fuel as it comes out of the retail pump, they tested fuel as it comes out of the pipeline to the distribution terminal. This fuel MUST have lubricity additives mixed in before going on to the retail outlet in order to meet even the minimum ASTM lubricity levels. Therefore IMO adding aftermarket additives to this fuel is not an accurate evaluation of how they'd perform as designed.


Yes he explains that and the reason for it. I do not think there is a better way to test for a baseline for each product then to add it to a fuel before the refinery adds the lubricity additives. Remember this test is all about how much lubricity each of these products adds to a fuel.


----------



## autoJeff (Oct 1, 2009)

Retail fuel already contains additives. Adding additional additives means mixing additives. I cannot help but wonder if mixing unknown additives could result in a fuel mixture that is in some aspects worse than the base retail fuel. 

I'd be more comfortable purchasing premium retail fuel and adding no additional additives. Unfortunately, no premium fuel is sold through normal retail stations in my region. 

Even so, I am again contemplating trying an additive in my tank.


----------



## d geek (Nov 26, 2008)

cssnms said:


> ...I do not think there is a better way to test for a baseline for each product then to add it to a fuel before the refinery adds the lubricity additives. Remember this test is all about how much lubricity each of these products adds to a fuel.


None of the additives tested were designed to work without the ditstributor applied additives. Why not start the test with a baseline fuel that would represent that which could be expected out of the retail pump, and then use the additives as they were designed to bolster the performance of retail fuel? I believe this would be much more valuable.


----------



## cssnms (Jan 24, 2011)

d geek said:


> *None of the additives tested were designed to work without the ditstributor applied additives*. Why not start the test with a baseline fuel that would represent that which could be expected out of the retail pump, and then use the additives as they were designed to bolster the performance of retail fuel? I believe this would be much more valuable.


But what does that have to do with anything? It's not like the fuel treatments are influenced by the distributor's additves. The distributer supplied additives have nothing to do with the lubricity benefits of each fuel additive. Every fuel has different levels of lubricity, some better than others, and considering nobody knows what and how much were added to the fuel I think there is some benefit in knowing that one is adding a fuel treatment that provides a certain level of lubricity. If a certain fuel provides a certain level of lubricity add the lubricity factor of any one of those tested products on top of that.


----------



## d geek (Nov 26, 2008)

cssnms said:


> But what does that have to do with anything? It's not like the fuel treatments are influenced by the distributor's additves. The distributer supplied additives have nothing to do with the lubricity benefits of each fuel additive. Every fuel has different levels of lubricity, some better than others, and considering nobody knows what and how much were added to the fuel I think there is some benefit in knowing that one is adding a fuel treatment that provides a certain level of lubricity. If a certain fuel provides a certain level of lubricity add the lubricity factor of any one of those tested products on top of that.


Here are my ("armchair" chemist) thoughts:
It's not at all a guarantee that if additive A gives you a gain of 50 microns and additive B gives you 75, that if you use both A and B you will have a total wear scar reduction of 125. Take biodiesel for instance- there is practically no wear scar benefit to be gained by increasing biodiesel concentration from 2% to 100%. If it were a simple algebraic effect, then why doesn't B100 have 50x the lubricity of B2?

If the aftermarket additives chemical composition is designed to work with the additives that are already in the fuel when the fuel is dispensed from a retail pump (those additives applied at the fuel distribution terminal), and instead you add the aftermarket additive to the "raw" fuel, then those aftermarket additives are not being used as they were designed. I believe this could make a significant difference with all of the possible chemical combinations.

Remember that wear scar is an indirect measurement of what effect you are trying to have on the fuel. At a molecular level, you are depending on the additive chemicals to bond to the fuel so that there is a protective "layer" in the chain. At this level, I believe the chemical composition of the aftermarket additive may be designed such that it will only properly attach to the already altered composition (i.e. the fuel*+*distributor additive).

Maybe a real chemist can chime in and disprove this theory. I'd appreciate any expert opinions.


----------



## cssnms (Jan 24, 2011)

That is a well thought out theory although I cannot say that I convinced as to the subject of the best way to conduct such a test and perhaps the simple answer is; there is not a single best way to test the effectiveness. Arguably the test is not infallible and there is more to be learned as to the subject. I will agree with you in that I would like to see another test conducted using a fuel sample containing distributor additives to see if there are any deviations from the initial baseline test(s). I am not even going to pretend that I am smart enough to speak to the subject of chemical engineering or the chemical properties of the various fuel additives (distributor added or otherwise) or how they react with one another and or the diesel fuel.


----------



## Penguin (Aug 31, 2003)

d geek said:


> At a molecular level, you are depending on the additive chemicals to bond to the fuel so that there is a protective "layer" in the chain.


It appears you've been getting your science from TV commercials.


----------



## Snipe656 (Oct 22, 2009)

autoJeff said:


> Retail fuel already contains additives. Adding additional additives means mixing additives. I cannot help but wonder if mixing unknown additives could result in a fuel mixture that is in some aspects worse than the base retail fuel.


I have to wonder the same thing. Luckily in my region I do not need to worry about it. Or I should say everything I found has made me feel confident that I am fine using what I use out of the pump.

Sent from my iPad Nano


----------



## d geek (Nov 26, 2008)

Penguin said:


> It appears you've been getting your science from TV commercials.


Not sure why you'd say that, but as I said- I'd be glad to hear from some real experts on the matter. Do you have anything to add besides snarky comments :dunno:


----------



## Penguin (Aug 31, 2003)

d geek said:


> Not sure why you'd say that


Because "At a molecular level, you are depending on the  additive chemicals to bond to the fuel so that there is a protective 'layer' in the chain" is the sort of gobbly **** pseudo-science you'd hear in a commercial.

"Bond to the fuel?"


The fact is, lubricity additives contain a polar group that is attracted to metal surfaces, causing the additive to form a thin surface film. The film acts as a boundary lubricant when two metal surfaces come in contact. Two additive chemistries, fatty acids and esters, are commonly used. The fatty acid type is typically used in the concentration range of 10 ppm to 50 ppm. Since esters are less polar, they require a higher concentration range of 50 ppm to 250 ppm.


----------



## d geek (Nov 26, 2008)

Penguin said:


> Because "At a molecular level, you are depending on the additive chemicals to bond to the fuel so that there is a protective 'layer' in the chain" is the sort of gobbly **** pseudo-science you'd hear in a commercial.
> 
> "Bond to the fuel?"
> 
> ...


Now that is more helpful, thanks.

As stated previously, I am no chemist, but have tried to figure out how you can add a few ounces of a chemical to several gallons of fuel and have a fuel property be miraculously transformed. That explanation was the best I could come up with, so sorry I don't have a good grasp on the basic terminology and exactly how it is done. The active components certainly do use the fuel as a carrier to reach those metal surfaces in your HPFP, so I figured they had to uniformly attach to the fuel to get there.

So what are your thoughts about testing the aftermarket additives with (or without) the distributor applied additives? Is the Spicer test an accurate representation of the efficacy of the various additives? Or is it flawed because the additives were not used as designed?

Thanks.


----------

