"TBN Retention - Are we Missing the Point?"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Nov 16, 2002
Messages
42,448
Location
NJ
From a Oronite Paper (may have been posted before?)

Quote:
SUMMARY - It can be concluded that a judgment of
the quality of a lubricant, and especially it’s capabilities
for use as an extended service interval oil, cannot be
based solely on the TBN measurements. Several other
used oil characteristics need to be taken into account to
come to the correct conclusions. In the next sections,
the results of some bench test work,, triggered by ourthe
field test observations, will be discussed.

This paper offers some observations from a field
test, showing that some detergent approaches gave
unacceptable performance even though the TBNs were
at an acceptable level. It is hypothesized that some
detergents do not effectively neutralize all acidic species
present in the lubricant, and thereby thus reservinge
their own base, which shows up as TBN, while in fact
the oil may no longernot provide sufficient any protection
against bearing corrosion.


Quote:
Although the TBN
measurementss are informative, easy, and quick, it can
be misleading to base the judgment of an oil’s
performance solely on onethis one criteriona.



Quote:
www.oil-lab.com/downloads/TBN-1.pdf
 
Originally Posted By: buster
From a Oronite Paper (may have been posted before?)

Quote:
SUMMARY - It can be concluded that a judgment of
the quality of a lubricant, and especially it’s capabilities
for use as an extended service interval oil, cannot be
based solely on the TBN measurements. Several other
used oil characteristics need to be taken into account to
come to the correct conclusions. In the next sections,
the results of some bench test work,, triggered by ourthe
field test observations, will be discussed.

This paper offers some observations from a field
test, showing that some detergent approaches gave
unacceptable performance even though the TBNs were
at an acceptable level. It is hypothesized that some
detergents do not effectively neutralize all acidic species
present in the lubricant, and thereby thus reservinge
their own base, which shows up as TBN, while in fact
the oil may no longernot provide sufficient any protection
against bearing corrosion.


Quote:
Although the TBN
measurementss are informative, easy, and quick, it can
be misleading to base the judgment of an oil’s
performance solely on onethis one criteriona.



Quote:
www.oil-lab.com/downloads/TBN-1.pdf


This has been my experience so far. Not all TBN's are created equally. Some chemistries seem to do a nice job neutralizing harmful acids, and others not so well. It is important to know starting TAN before evaluating effectiveness though.
 
Remember the paper referenced above was written in1997, some 15 years ago. Many things therein may still hold true but it's very likely many have also changed as much as oil chemistry as changed in that time.
 
Last edited:
Hi,
Jim - I agree

Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
Remember the paper referenced above was written in1997, some 15 years ago. Many things therein may still hold true but it's very likely many have also changed as much as oil chemistry as changed in that time.


Some data may be of interest here - oldest record around 1997 and latest around 2005

Lubricants (two Brands) were GL5 synthetic 75W-90 - OTR heavy truck application. Lowest ambient temp around -5C and highest temp around 42C

Highest oil temp recorded = 112C

Starting TBN = 11
Condemnation TBN = 1
Lowest TBN = .10
Highest TAN = 8.4
Average TBN at OC = 33% of new TBN
Average TBN to TAN at OC = 52.4%

Average OCI = 90kkms (56k miles)

No engine problems were encountered in millions of kms of use. At one tear down inspection at 1.1m kms all parts were found suitable for re-use

We should not agonise over too finer details IME
 
Last edited:
I believe TBN is way over rated. I know guys that put 15-20K(you know TBN must be gone by then) on oil changes and their engines last 200-300+K.
 
Tig, you know good and well that its not 100% about the miles but more so about engine hours.

Those 15-20k OCI guys are running mostly highway and rack up the miles quickly.
 
If they were actually running GL5 75W90 in the engine Im somewhat surprised at the results.

At least in the USA that would be a Rear Axle Lube.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: tig1
I believe TBN is way over rated. I know guys that put 15-20K(you know TBN must be gone by then) on oil changes and their engines last 200-300+K.


Not at all true. What about a 30.6 qt sump on a 6.4L engine with a starting TBN of 16? there have been many used oil analysis on truck diesels with 30-40K mi with good TBN left due to large capacity and periodic "refreshing" with makeup oil.

Charlie
 
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
Hi,
Jim - I agree

Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
Remember the paper referenced above was written in1997, some 15 years ago. Many things therein may still hold true but it's very likely many have also changed as much as oil chemistry as changed in that time.


Some data may be of interest here - oldest record around 1997 and latest around 2005

Lubricants (two Brands) were GL5 synthetic 75W-90 - OTR heavy truck application. Lowest ambient temp around -5C and highest temp around 42C

Highest oil temp recorded = 112C

Starting TBN = 11
Condemnation TBN = 1
Lowest TBN = .10
Highest TAN = 8.4
Average TBN at OC = 33% of new TBN
Average TBN to TAN at OC = 52.4%

Average OCI = 90kkms (56k miles)

No engine problems were encountered in millions of kms of use. At one tear down inspection at 1.1m kms all parts were found suitable for re-use

We should not agonise over too finer details IME



Hi,
sorry, my error the prime lubricant was a 5W-40 synthetic. Previously two 15w40 mineral lubricants and one semi-synthetic prototype lubricant were used.

Not GL5 75W-90 as stated!!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom