IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant

Status
Not open for further replies.
I was thinking about end-user products for graphite. Many do. I understand that graphite is a bad thing to be used in a high pressure interface between stainless and aluminum. A galling issue. The base I was talking about was the grease/oil it is suspended in. I was looking for a MoS2 without graphite for a while. That is the investigation that led me to WS2 then IF WS2. As my wife will gladly explain, I just never know when to stop. I have an information gathering disease and and an annoying habit of wanting an optimal technical solution. She is silly though. She objects to having to dance naked widdershins on the first Tuesday of the month before an alter with burned bacon to get the heating system, house lights, and VOIP telephones to function simultaneously.

Anything interesting that may be a good match for IF WS2?

So far, still no IF WS2 source.
 
WS2 is an excellent solid lube on par with MoS2. It was used in some older lube formulations. I'm guessing WS2 fell out of favor as an additive when the price of Mo came down some 30 years ago.

A new Mo mine was discovered I think in S. America. The Climax Molybdenum Research facility of AMAX in Ann Arbor closed down at that time when the price of Mo dropped significantly. The AMAX Mo mine in Colorado was idled about the same time. Many of my colleagues had to look elsewhere for work.
 
I just can't get any vendors in Asia to answer any queries about buying a small quantity of IF WS2. I have been using Alibaba and a couple of direct emails. Anyone have suggestions about getting their attention?
 
Inorganic Fullerenes (IFs) are synthesized chemically. They are not milled or ground.

IFs of WS2 or even multilayered WS2/MoS2 IFs appear to work through three mechanisms.

Under low loads (especially as a dry lubricant), with smooth surfaces of even clearances, they simply roll. This action appears to be hindered when suspended in fluids due to local molecular interactions. The down side of nanoparticles in fluids is that they begin to act more like solutes instead of particles. Brownian motion alone can keep particles of this size in suspension. In other words, the vibration of molecules is enough to keep these particles "mixed up" in the fluid.

Under medium loads, they can be begin to provide lubrication through deformation. This action is practical in fluids and because of the difficulty in maintaining sphericity and narrow size distribution during synthesis, it more practical in general.

Lastly,under high loads (and more important in PCMO applications) multilayered IFs can act through exfoliation, much like MoS2. In other words, the layers peel off and are deposited onto the surface. Think deck of cards.

Since the surface layers that are formed from exfoliation are very similar to those formed from soluble Zn, Mo, Ti, etc, the soluble additives have tremendous cost advantages for essentially very similar end-results.

The big question is whether large quantities of similar sized, primarily spherical IFs ca be made economically and whether the physical ball bearing effects can be routinely observed in a fluid carrier.

Personally, I don't think that plating through simple surface interactions or even through van der waals forces can hold IFs on surfaces within a liquid and more importantly if these forces can hold the particles on sliding surfaces.

I search on google scholar with the terms "IF WS2" will yield a lot of papers on synthesis.

http://scholar.google.com/schhp?hl=en

If you add the term "friction" you will get a lot of papers about the topic at hand.
 
Thanks for the info. I have seen the one feature you mention discussed in terms of cost savings because of IF WS2 being able to provide proper surface adhesion without additional additives needed to create deposits with just WS2. There are a bunch of reports on WS2 in oil and grease that show significant lubricity improvements.

I believe I saw a statement in one paper that the effects are actually enhanced in fluid. That did not seem quite right to me, but this is not what I do. If I got inexpensive enough nano scale powder I will probably try some in engines. I have ordered some at around 600nm and much of that will probably wind up in engines and less critical operations. At the very least it will be somewhat better than MoS2 in the same applications. With powder, I can choose my own carriers. Some of the applications have specialized lubricants already available and I can use the WS2 to enhance them. The solutions hitting the market are all of unspecified (secret)fluids. The base fluid may simply not be the best solution for specialized applications.

There are at least two products that appear to be bringing IF WS2 to engine oil additives at your neighborhood parts store. But I have found no sources. I am guessing that the manufacturing process probably has not reached high volume/yield yet (or just recently).

The uses I want to try with IF WS2 will mostly involve non-suspended operation. Alcohol (or a solvent without water content) and the powder. Possibly just burnished on.

Do you perhaps have any ideas of where I might source some IF WS2? Please PM me if you can help. My wife keeps wandering by mumbling obsessive compulsiveness. She has other projects identified.
 
Millers do indeed procure "Nano" oils for racing.

Big dosh but can be found on Opieoils.

With any new technology somebody has to either go first or be the first to take it main stream.

The oil meets lots of stringent Acea specs so can't be bad.

I wouldn't think a company with the reputation of Millers Oils would be trying to sell snake oil.

There are some very good oil firms that have little presence in the US.

In the same way as some US companies have little presence in the UK and Europe.

Comma and Morris oils are two off the top of my head.
 
Most everyone that has examined the WS2 "powders" has come away buying, and then subsequently using, this.

IMG_1744.JPG


It is at NAPA, and online (Amazon.com)
 
Gearhead - why do they subsequently switch to less lubricious MoS2? Where have they been finding WS2 powders to examine? Particularly any that might be the desired IF WS2.

I am really only interested in the IF WS2 and possibly some normal structured particles below 100nm.
 
Originally Posted By: bigjl
Millers do indeed procure "Nano" oils for racing.

Big dosh but can be found on Opieoils.

With any new technology somebody has to either go first or be the first to take it main stream.

The oil meets lots of stringent Acea specs so can't be bad.

I wouldn't think a company with the reputation of Millers Oils would be trying to sell snake oil.

There are some very good oil firms that have little presence in the US.

In the same way as some US companies have little presence in the UK and Europe.

Comma and Morris oils are two off the top of my head.


There IS one distributor stateside who will be carrying Millers oils (and their Nanodrive racing) in the spring.

My question was NOT where/how to get it, but whether or not they use this IF WS2 as their primary, nano sized, AW agent.
wink.gif


We may NEVER know without a FULL VOA, and gas chromatography performed on it, as I'm SURE that they will plead the old, tired, tried and true, "propriatary info" if asked.
frown.gif
 
alternety wrote: "I am really only interested in the IF WS2 and possibly some normal structured particles below 100nm."

The link I provided above is for a mean size of 90nm.

I don't recommend either product.
 
GMorg - I have sent an email to them asking what they are actually selling. They are small particles, but they say nearly spherical. Spherical sort of indicates IF. I believe non-IF appears as a planar material. Pricing is in the range of IF. So I am waiting for a response from them. Non IF at that price is not necessarily a good deal. I believe that the characteristics are sufficiently different to try real hard for IF.

I am interested in your comment about not recommending either product. Technical reason or just CYA?

dailydriver - I looked at Opieoils and Miller. Not any indication of WS let alone nano particles. The point with those is I DO NOT WANT OIL. I need powder or an evaporating carrier.

Thanks for all the responses. Any assistance appreciated. I am going out now to seriously annoy some local windmills.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: bigjl
Millers do indeed procure "Nano" oils for racing.

Big dosh but can be found on Opieoils.

With any new technology somebody has to either go first or be the first to take it main stream.

The oil meets lots of stringent Acea specs so can't be bad.

I wouldn't think a company with the reputation of Millers Oils would be trying to sell snake oil.

There are some very good oil firms that have little presence in the US.

In the same way as some US companies have little presence in the UK and Europe.

Comma and Morris oils are two off the top of my head.


There IS one distributor stateside who will be carrying Millers oils (and their Nanodrive racing) in the spring.

My question was NOT where/how to get it, but whether or not they use this IF WS2 as their primary, nano sized, AW agent.
wink.gif


We may NEVER know without a FULL VOA, and gas chromatography performed on it, as I'm SURE that they will plead the old, tired, tried and true, "propriatary info" if asked.
frown.gif



A few points. I'm with the US distributor of Millers. Have been meaning to get on there and seek out threads about Millers, but have been pretty slammed with several things.

First thing I want to address is Millers, itself. You are indeed correct about the company. Millers is about 130 years old, having started out making industrial lubricants. It has resisted the consolidation that the industry has seen over the years, and to this day remains in control of the Millers family. bigjl obviously gets that, but I know that Millers is unknown to the majority of folks here. I could keep going on about this, but I'd point to the recent technical development partnership Millers and Bryan Herta Autosports (Barracuda Racing) have formed. Not a sponsorship, MIllers is developing some proprietary oils for their IndyCar efforts, and will be supplying their lower tier teams, as well. But no, not snake oil.

On to the oil, itself. The NT content and additives are proprietary. I apologize that we can't make this info public, but given the performance capabilities, it is indeed a valuable technology. The gear oils have been out since 2008, and the motorsports users in places like WRC and BTCC are seeing 3-4 times the life out of it. The F1 team that has been working with Millers for the past couple of years has seen the wear after a 5 Grand Prix simulation on a dyno fall off drastically (they were slated to bring it in this year, but due to the tight points race, waited, and should be using it next year). There are efficiencies gained, as well. So teams are seeing gearbox oil temperatures in closed systems drop 20-25 degrees F.

Second point is that the engine oils took years to develop. The same technology won a pretty prestigous award in 2009. It has been nominated for the 2012 award which will be presented next month at teh World Motorsport Symposium in the UK. Point with that is that it took years to develop the oil, even though Millers had a very strong fully synthetic racing engine oil with which to start. I know most folks here are smart enough than to think that they could just get this stuff and add it in, but to end up with a truly optimized blend takes a long time, with a lot of resources. And again, the base oil is very robust, so that is more than half of the story.

The NT additives serve very, very well as an EP additive, which is why Millers set out to develop the gear oils first. The main benefit seen in engine oils is in boundary lubrication, so primarily near TDC and BDC on the cylinders. Valvetrain, as well. But its mechanisms are more similar to an EP additive than to ZDDP (note that the racing oil still contains high levels of ZDDP, too high to meet SN ratings - the NT did enable Millers to reduce it by about 10%, but it is still about 1100ppm).

We actually currently have the motorsports stuff in stock. Have had it for several months. We are setting up some dealer networks, and are starting to see more and more interest. We hvae recieved very good feedback, particularly with the gear oil. Yes, the motorsports stuff is very expensive, but it is not out of line with other high end motorsports oils. Most is $20/L, just like Motul 300V or Joe Gibbs XP#. The 0W20 and 0W30 are $22.50/L. But the important thing to note here is that it isn't the NT additives that drive up the cost, it is the good, high quality base stock (again, just like some of the better racing oils out there). While the road oils will command a premium when they come out, they won't be priced at the same kind of levels as the Motorsports stuff. The current longlife road oils are priced pretty close to Motul 8100.

Will try to start watching stuff here and answer questions as they arise. Feel free to shoot me an e-mail at [email protected] if you would like to know some stuff. I can post some more info on the oils, but I don't want to come across as advertising it.
 
^^^THANK YOU for finally coming on here!
thumbsup2.gif


Do you have spec sheets for any of these products yet (ESPECIALLY the gear oils and the 0W-XX egine oils)???

What weights are the gear oils offered in?

ANY speculation on the weights the street oils are going to be released in, and is there ANY possibility they will have higher VIs than the race oils??

Sadly, from what I remember you had told me during our phone conversation, many on here will BLAST/DISS the engine oils for having a low VI, even though they are made for RACING, and labelled as such.
Some on here feel that the VI spec is the be all, end all of ANY premium synthetic oil, EVEN racing oils, especially in this price range, and they even have me half convinced about this.
frown.gif
 
Originally Posted By: dailydriver


Sadly, from what I remember you had told me during our phone conversation, many on here will BLAST/DISS the engine oils for having a low VI, even though they are made for RACING, and labelled as such.
Some on here feel that the VI spec is the be all, end all of ANY premium synthetic oil, EVEN racing oils, especially in this price range, and they even have me half convinced about this.
frown.gif



I'm no longer buying into the "VI spec" as the "be all, end all" either.
 
The magic material in Millers appears likely to be IF WS2. Look at the paragraph under the picture in the first post in this thread. http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/ra...nsor-intro.html Reference to the soccer ball form points to IF WS2. I could be carbon, but for hi temp and pressure I would lean toward WS2. I have seen advertising for additives based on diamond. I don't think Moly comes in this structure; but could very well be wrong. Some potions use hexagonal Boron Nitride and refer to ceramic.

Overall the picture and text make me think IF WS2. I may get some and play with it, but I still really want powder.

There is a product called NanoLube that appears to be sort of on the market. I have found no sources and the manufacturer/distributor/? in Singapore does not answer my emails. I am fairly certain it is IF WS2.

For use in engines, something like Millers NT is just what you want. I do not believe there is anything with better lubricant properties on the horizon. You can put powder in your regular oil if you just get an additive version.

I also found this in the same thread - http://www.motoiq.com/magazine_articles/...-a-bottle.aspx. Performance would be consistent with IF WS2 but could also be just nano WS2 or some other nano material.
 
From the link above:
"The nanoparticles in the Millers Oils have multiple layers of nested spheres, and are less than 1/10th of a micron in size (0.000004”). The nested spheres resemble onion layers, which can exfoliate under extreme pressure and form a protective tribofilm on the metal surfaces. Due to the tremendous surface area, the nanospheres will migrate to and “stick” to the walls of lubricated components."


This discription sounds like fullerenes to me. If the core technology is not a buckey ball, then they should get some sort of award for marketing speak.

As for my lack of recommendation for sheet type-solid additives (MoS2 or WS2), it is not a CYA. I don't care for the idea of a suspended solid that can aggregate within all of the other material that collects in heat damaged oils. In addition, planar crystals can also approach wear surfaces on the perpendicular. Some graphite preparations can increase wear in certain circumstances by this mechanism. The analogy with playing cards still holds up, but instead of making contact on the flat side and sliding, the particles hit edgewise and create the equivalent to a paper cut.

I'm intrigued with the fullerenes. However, I am concerned that with extended use, disturbed spheres will become sheets. Luckily, they will still be much smaller than anything that starts as a sheet-type crystal.
 
Thanks GMorg. When I first found these things, I saw the issue of "peeling the onion" but more research resolved that question. What I have seen about the Buckyballs behavior in this environment is that they do indeed laminate (if that is really the proper term) in high pressure service. But what they are saying is that these "onion" shells form much smaller particles that are more effective at bonding to the surface of the target material and are more likely to penetrate into the pores of the substrate. With the Buckyball already around 60nm, they can be quite petite (and possibly pretty in pink if they could be made pink).

The indications I had were that starting with Fullerenes, the overall lubrication effect was significantly enhanced.Non-Fullerene products would need something else for surface imbedding for similar (but less effective) results.

As I think I mentioned much earlier in this thread, it is really interesting searching through threads from various interest groups. There is a whole lot of "snake oil" references and there is no way in *ell that can be true even though they provided test results. They are clearly lying scum bags.

To this I answer with a quote from one of the great SciFi writers: Technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from magic. Nano tech is the closest thing for a while that embodies that statement. Ignoring things like quantum phenomenon (which could include this) and 50 billion transistors on 1/4 sq in.
 
Originally Posted By: alternety
The magic material in Millers appears likely to be IF WS2. Look at the paragraph under the picture in the first post in this thread. http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/ra...nsor-intro.html Reference to the soccer ball form points to IF WS2. I could be carbon, but for hi temp and pressure I would lean toward WS2. I have seen advertising for additives based on diamond. I don't think Moly comes in this structure; but could very well be wrong. Some potions use hexagonal Boron Nitride and refer to ceramic.

Overall the picture and text make me think IF WS2.



I may just have to tear away from the "VI is EVERYTHING" crew, and try their 0W-30 Racing for the spring/summer OCI, despite the low VI.
wink.gif
thumbsup2.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top