HPL SAE 40 PCMO

[tired]

What about Blackstone Labs?

We pretend they don’t exist.

They don’t even do gas chromatography. They try to estimate it off of flash point.

 

[Patman]

We pretend they don’t exist.

They don’t even do gas chromatography. They try to estimate it off of flash point.

Their refusal to use the proper method for determining fuel % still baffles me. They must be the most profitable oil analysis company in the world but yet they don’t spend the money needed to have state of the art equipment? Don’t they care about accuracy? They must be reading BITOG and hearing our complaints for all of these years. Give customers what they want

 

[kschachn]

Their refusal to use the proper method for determining fuel % still baffles me. They must be the most profitable oil analysis company in the world but yet they don’t spend the money needed to have state of the art equipment? Don’t they care about accuracy? They must be reading BITOG and hearing our complaints for all of these years. Give customers what they want

It’s somewhat less than a refusal. There is an ASTM method for using flash point to estimate fuel, but the method notes that it is a screening test. It likely has a low accuracy. Nor do we know if Blackstone is even using that particular ASTM test or performing it properly. It would be awesome if these analysis companies would publish the stated accuracy numbers with each test.

Gas chromatographs are expensive, as are properly trained technicians who properly calibrate and operate the machines. Sometimes I wonder if all these analysis companies actually run the ASTM tests exactly as published, end-to-end. As someone who ran many standardized tests in the past that takes a lot of time and careful care. If you’re being paid for each analysis and wish to have competitive pricing it’s a lot of time, materials and labor to do that.

 

[ZeeOSix]

It’s somewhat less than a refusal. There is an ASTM method for using flash point to estimate fuel, but the method notes that it is a screening test. It likely has a low accuracy. Nor do we know if Blackstone is even using that particular ASTM test or performing it properly.

Looks like they use ASTM D92 for the flashpoint and infer fuel dilution from that.

https://www.blackstone-labs.com/standard-oil-testing/
https://www.blackstone-labs.com/about-oil-analysis/

 

[Hohn]

Well, I manage to get some time on the phone with an analyst at Polaris. First, let me say how refreshing it is that, in just a couple minutes, you can get a human being on the phone who is VERY knowledgeable about analysis. Instantly and obviously knew PDSC, GC, and all the relevant technical aspects of analysis. I assume that the person I spoke with is someone who actually runs samples or has in the past.

The analyst told me they did a partial re-run and 2/3 oxidation re-runs confirmed the elevated oxidation, likewise for the fuel dilution. I asked them to re-run KV100 just to be sure because it seems incompatible with the other data points.


But now I'm convinced that I sent them a contaminated sample because I had cleaned the sample pump tube by blowing it out with non-chlorinated brake cleaner and then compressed air. Reading that CRC can, you can see it has Acetone, N-heptane and all kinds of other hydrocarbons that would 100% show up as "fuel" and as oxidation products. The procedure of blowing out the tubing with compressed air probably not only failed to remove heavier solvents, but likely added traces of water and who knows what else.

I think it's the only plausible explanation as to how I ended up with nearly 4% dilution with no proportional change in KV100. It also explains the high oxidation values and nitration values that are simply not realistic.

Thoughts?

I'm going to take another sample here at 2k and use some virgin tubing. We'll see what that sample shows. I'm guessing it shows fuel at closer to 2.5%, oxidation back in the 20s, and nitration barely moved at all.

 

[kschachn]

Well, I manage to get some time on the phone with an analyst at Polaris. First, let me say how refreshing it is that you can get a human being on the phone who is VERY knowledgeable about analysis. Instantly and obviously knew PDSC, GC, and all the relevant technical aspects of analysis.

The Analysis told me they did a partial re-run and 2/3 oxidation re-runs confirmed the elevated oxidation, likewise for the fuel dilution. I asked them to re-run KV100 just to be sure because it seems incompatible with the other data points.


But now I'm convinced that I sent them a contaminated sample because I had cleaned the sample pump tube by blowing it out with non-chlorinated brake cleaner and then compressed air. Reading that CRC can, you can see it has Acetone, N-heptane and all kinds of other hydrocarbons that would 100% show up as "fuel" and as oxidation products. The procedure of blowing out the tubing with compressed air probably not only failed to remove heavier solvents, but likely added traces of water and who knows what else.

I think it's the only plausible explanation as to how I ended up with nearly 4% dilution with no proportional change in KV100. It also explains the high oxidation values and nitration values that are simply not realistic.

Thoughts?

I'm going to take another sample here at 2k and use some virgin tubing. We'll see what that sample shows. I'm guessing it shows fuel at closer to 2.5%, oxidation back in the 20s, and nitration barely moved at all.

Those compounds in the brake cleaner would not show up as the same peaks on a GC analysis. And even if they did, to get to 4% in your sample would mean a hecka lot in there.

 

[Hohn]

Well, Polaris did a partial re-run and the dilution is now showing 3%.

I'm thinking this was a contaminated sample and that the 2000 mile sample with virgin tubing will show considerably different oxidation and dilution values.