UOA elemental analysis...the shortcomings.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 12, 2002
Messages
43,888
Location
'Stralia
http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/477/molecular-spectroscopy-lubrication

Quote:
Perhaps the simplest used oil analysis tool for monitoring additives is elemental analysis. Using either rotating disk electrode (RDE) or inductively coupled plasma (ICP) spectroscopy, elements such as zinc, phosphorus, calcium, barium and magnesium can be measured and trended to provide an indication of additive concentration. However, elemental spectroscopy has two major limitations with respect to tracking additives. First, the technique does not actually measure additives, but rather the individual elements or atoms contained within the additive molecule. While this comment may seem obvious, it has serious implications when talking about trending additive depletion.

To understand the potential problem, consider the fate of one of the most common additives, zinc dialkyl dithiophosphate (ZDDP), an antiwear and antioxidant additive. Depending on formulation, a common AW hydraulic fluid may contain anywhere from 100 ppm to 500 ppm of ZDDP, as measured by the elemental concentrations of zinc and phosphorus. Subjecting an oil containing ZDDP to high temperatures and high levels of moisture will likely result in significant additive depletion due to hydrolysis - a chemical reaction between the ZDDP molecule and water. Under such circumstances, the ultimate by-products of the hydrolysis reaction will likely be zinc salts and phosphates, which although no longer chemically ZDDP, may remain in solution in the oil. The result is that by considering only zinc and phosphorus concentrations, the difference between “good” zinc and phosphorus in the form of ZDDP and “bad” zinc and phosphorus from reaction by-products will be next to impossible to determine.

The second limitation of using elemental spectroscopy for tracking additive depletion is perhaps even more fundamental. Many common additives such as antioxidants, dispersants, VI improvers and some antifoam additives are organic molecules. Simply stated, an organic additive molecule contains carbon, hydrogen and perhaps oxygen, nitrogen or sulfur. Because none of these elements are routinely detected using elemental spectroscopy, ICP or RDE offers little or no help in monitoring organic additive health.


You might have started with 900ppm Zn, and finished with 900ppm, but that doesn't tell you how much of the Zn was still active additive.
 
Great post Shannow!
thumbsup2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Great post Shannow!
thumbsup2.gif



+1

The smartest folks on here have always stressed the limited usefulness of UOAs.
 
Originally Posted By: 69GTX
Which would increase the reliance on Mfg approvals/OCI's.


Exactly, which a number of us has been saying for year now
laugh.gif
 
The only reason to track additive elements is to look for any bulk changes, which might suggest top-up with a different oil, gross contamination/dilution or occasionally concentration through excessive evaporation. Spectroscopic elemental tracking is mostly used for wear metals (Fe, Al, Cu, Pb, Sn etc) and contamination tracking (eg Si, B, Na etc).

There are some electrochemical techniques that purport to track molecular depletion and you can use FTIR for a quick look-see at things like oxidation and nitration, along with additive depletion if the peak is strong enough to see. NMR can be used to follow ZDDP metabolism but this is not a routine technique.

As I have said many times, you have to take an holistic approach to UOA trending (viscs, TBN, TAN, elements etc) and look at it all together, along with any background you can get from the user.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: 69GTX
Which would increase the reliance on Mfg approvals/OCI's.


Exactly, which a number of us has been saying for year now
laugh.gif



Wow, I think I was drunk when I wrote that!
crazy2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: 69GTX
Which would increase the reliance on Mfg approvals/OCI's.


Exactly, which a number of us has been saying for year now
laugh.gif



Totally. Otherwise you don't know what you're getting. That's the point. Use something that was actually TESTED and tested in an engine AND approved for use. LOL.
 
I'm not sure but I think I could probably concoct a mayonnaise recipe that would give the same elemental analysis as the oil, at least for the elements tested. I may not wish to eat it but from the standpoint of that test it would be identical.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/477/molecular-spectroscopy-lubrication

Quote:
Perhaps the simplest used oil analysis tool for monitoring additives is elemental analysis. Using either rotating disk electrode (RDE) or inductively coupled plasma (ICP) spectroscopy, elements such as zinc, phosphorus, calcium, barium and magnesium can be measured and trended to provide an indication of additive concentration. However, elemental spectroscopy has two major limitations with respect to tracking additives. First, the technique does not actually measure additives, but rather the individual elements or atoms contained within the additive molecule. While this comment may seem obvious, it has serious implications when talking about trending additive depletion.

To understand the potential problem, consider the fate of one of the most common additives, zinc dialkyl dithiophosphate (ZDDP), an antiwear and antioxidant additive. Depending on formulation, a common AW hydraulic fluid may contain anywhere from 100 ppm to 500 ppm of ZDDP, as measured by the elemental concentrations of zinc and phosphorus. Subjecting an oil containing ZDDP to high temperatures and high levels of moisture will likely result in significant additive depletion due to hydrolysis - a chemical reaction between the ZDDP molecule and water. Under such circumstances, the ultimate by-products of the hydrolysis reaction will likely be zinc salts and phosphates, which although no longer chemically ZDDP, may remain in solution in the oil. The result is that by considering only zinc and phosphorus concentrations, the difference between “good” zinc and phosphorus in the form of ZDDP and “bad” zinc and phosphorus from reaction by-products will be next to impossible to determine.

The second limitation of using elemental spectroscopy for tracking additive depletion is perhaps even more fundamental. Many common additives such as antioxidants, dispersants, VI improvers and some antifoam additives are organic molecules. Simply stated, an organic additive molecule contains carbon, hydrogen and perhaps oxygen, nitrogen or sulfur. Because none of these elements are routinely detected using elemental spectroscopy, ICP or RDE offers little or no help in monitoring organic additive health.


You might have started with 900ppm Zn, and finished with 900ppm, but that doesn't tell you how much of the Zn was still active additive.


that's why I like TBN most. ZDDP also drives up TBN if it's active.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top