Penn and ExxonMobil uncover mechanisms of ZDDP

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Feb 15, 2003
Messages
15,674
Location
Jupiter, Florida
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2015/03/20150313-penn.html

Go to the link for the complete article.

"One of the main modern antiwear lubricant additives is zinc dialkyldithiophosphate (ZDDP)—widely used in automotive lubricants—which forms crucial antiwear tribofilms at sliding interfaces. However, despite its importance in prolonging machinery life and reducing energy use, the mechanisms governing its tribofilm growth are not well-understood. This limits the development of replacements with better performance and catalytic converter compatibility.

Now, in a study published in the journal Science, researchers from the University of Pennsylvania and ExxonMobil, have uncovered the mechanisms governing the growth of ZDDP antiwear tribofilms at sliding interfaces. The study provides a way forward for scientifically testing new anti-wear additives. Being able to pinpoint the level of stress at which they begin to break down and form tribofilms allows researchers to compare various properties in a more rigorous fashion."

6a00d8341c4fbe53ef01b8d0eb8132970c-500wi


ZDDP-derived tribofilms consist of rough, patchy, pad-like features that are composed of pyro- or ortho-phosphate glasses in the bulk with an outer nanoscale-layer of zinc polyphosphates and a sulfur-rich layer near the metal surface. However, the tribochemical film growth pathways are not established, and the factors which determine the film morphology and thickness (which tends to be limited to 50-150 nm) are unknown. Furthermore, ZDDP’s effectiveness as an antiwear additive for advanced engine materials is not yet clear. For low-weight materials (e.g., Al- and Mg-based alloys), ZDDP forms robust tribofilms primarily on load-bearing inclusions, but not on surrounding softer matrices. While ZDDP tribofilms can be formed between other non-ferrous material pairs, e.g., low-friction diamond-like carbon (DLC) films, they are often less durable than those formed when steel or iron is present for reasons not yet understood.

It is desirable to reduce or replace ZDDP as it often increases frictional losses, and produces Zn-, P- and S- containing compounds in the exhaust, reducing the catalytic converter’s efficiency and lifetime. Despite decades of research, no suitable substitute for ZDDP has yet been found, motivating research to understand the beneficial mechanisms underlying the growth and antiwear properties of ZDDP-derived tribofilms."

6a00d8341c4fbe53ef01bb0805d4f8970d-500wi


The researchers also found an explanation to why these films grow to a certain thickness and then stop growing.

It’s essentially a cushion effect. The film that grows is not as stiff as the steel. When you push on a stiff surface, you get a high stress due to the concentration of force. When you push on a less stiff surface, the force is spread out, so the stress is lower. The thicker the film, the more it acts as a cushion to reduce the stress that is needed to cause the chemical reactions needed to keep growing. It’s self-limiting, or in other words, it has a way of cutting off its own growth.
 
Last edited:
Okay, maybe I'm looking at this too simply, but I'm assuming this research will finally answer the age-old question of 'how much ZDDP is enough?' because if they can find the concentration level that supports just enough growth of the film until it stops, they will be able to remove 'excess' ZDDP from oils.

Correct?
 
Originally Posted By: addyguy
Okay, maybe I'm looking at this too simply, but I'm assuming this research will finally answer the age-old question of 'how much ZDDP is enough?' because if they can find the concentration level that supports just enough growth of the film until it stops, they will be able to remove 'excess' ZDDP from oils.

Correct?



Possibly, but wouldn't that also be engine specific b/c of the different amounts of surface area in different engines?
 
I think we actually know what ZDDP quantity is "enough" (for typical automotive applications) through decades of real world experience. The number most often quoted is 1200 PPM.

I found it interesting that ZDDP works on cylinders too.

The exception seems to be motorcycle oils, which often have 1800-2400 PPM ZDDP. Even motorcycle oils designed for engines with roller cams! This might mean the ZDDP is intended to augment protection for parts other than flat tappet camshafts.
 
A lot of talk over the years about ZDDP fouling catalysts, yet looking at a bunch of UOAs shows the amount of Phosphorous staying in the oil. Seems if you have an oil-using engine, then you might have problems with catalyst contamination, otherwise, no problem.

They don't mention temperature much in that article. I've seen other papers where it said you don't get ZDDP tribofilms unless you're at around 100 degC or so. They do talk about how nothing happens until you get some pressure. Castrol has the right approach using moly and titanium to activate at lower temperatures. Maybe I need to read the full article.

Its cool to study ZDDP, yet why? It has "P" in it, which fouls catalysts, we know that. Therefore, spend money and time studying titanium, WS2, moly, boron, other AW or anti friction additives, not ZDDP, which we know is on the way out.
 
Last edited:
I find it interesting that lubrication professionals discovered the effectiveness of ZDDP so long ago and put it to good use, yet its mechanism has eluded them for so long.
 
If you look at the high-tech tools they are using to study this nearly obsolete chemical compound, you see why it took so long to be able to study it. "Atomic Force Microscopes" used here aren't even available in most Star Trek episodes.

Just wish they would study Titanium, Moly, and Boron AW additive tribofilms instead, as thats whats being phased IN.
 
Originally Posted By: addyguy
Okay, maybe I'm looking at this too simply, but I'm assuming this research will finally answer the age-old question of 'how much ZDDP is enough?'


The SAE, based on decades of data, believe that 0.06% (600 ppm) as "P" from ZDDP is sufficient to protect passenger car engines from excessive wear, which is why they set this as a minimum specification level. They also consider this level acceptable for stock flat tappet engines as most of the cam shaft wear issues noted in flat tappet engines using oils with lower ZDDP levels are in rebuilds and modified engines, although this remains controversial.

Back in the old days when 1,200 ppm of "P" was standard, ZDDP was also the primary anti-oxidant and the extra ZDDP was for that purpose. These days supplemental anti-oxidants are used, thus reducing the need for higher levels of ZDDP. Diesel and motorcycles engines apparently need more ZDDP based on their design.

Tom NJ
 
Originally Posted By: ZZBottom

Just wish they would study Titanium, Moly, and Boron AW additive tribofilms instead, as thats whats being phased IN.


But, I think that's the idea here. To find effective alternatives.
 
Originally Posted By: Cujet
Originally Posted By: ZZBottom

Just wish they would study Titanium, Moly, and Boron AW additive tribofilms instead, as thats whats being phased IN.


But, I think that's the idea here. To find effective alternatives.


My thinking is that ZDDP is very unique in how it does creates the tribo surface. All the other compounds that don't have the catalyst problems will work differently. The methods of atomic force microscopy might be what their really perfecting. You might be right to think studying ZDDP in this way helps understanding of other completely different chemistries due to the tool experience.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top