Hello...does anyone know of a manufacture that lists the TBN number on the container of oil? I know you can get it off the internet from the manfactures data sheet but I am looking for the TBN number printed on the container. Thanks Ed
TBN number on oil container?
- Thread starter edc123
- Start date
- Status
Besides the 44653 BITOG members, how many people know what TBN is? Does your indy mechanic? Jiffy Lube guy? Dealer service manager? NAPA parts guy?
Originally Posted By: edc123
Hello...does anyone know of a manufacture that lists the TBN number on the container of oil? I know you can get it off the internet from the manfactures data sheet but I am looking for the TBN number printed on the container. Thanks Ed
No.
Hello...does anyone know of a manufacture that lists the TBN number on the container of oil? I know you can get it off the internet from the manfactures data sheet but I am looking for the TBN number printed on the container. Thanks Ed
No.
What good would this do?
Take a look at some virgin TBNs vs residual TBNs in UOAs.
Plenty of oils that offer healthy starting TBNs show rapid TBN depletion in service.
If you're going to have TBN on the bottle, then how about HTHSV, NOACK and dynamic cold specs?
Most people would have no clue, just as most people would have no clue as to the significance of TBN.
TMI for 99% of motor oil shoppers.
Take a look at some virgin TBNs vs residual TBNs in UOAs.
Plenty of oils that offer healthy starting TBNs show rapid TBN depletion in service.
If you're going to have TBN on the bottle, then how about HTHSV, NOACK and dynamic cold specs?
Most people would have no clue, just as most people would have no clue as to the significance of TBN.
TMI for 99% of motor oil shoppers.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
What good would this do?
Take a look at some virgin TBNs vs residual TBNs in UOAs.
Plenty of oils that offer healthy starting TBNs show rapid TBN depletion in service.
If you're going to have TBN on the bottle, then how about HTHSV, NOACK and dynamic cold specs?
Most people would have no clue, just as most people would have no clue as to the significance of TBN.
TMI for 99% of motor oil shoppers.
This is exactly right. As said, if tbn starts at 10 on one brand but depletes rapidly, and another brand starts with tbn of 8... and doesnt deplete rapidly how can you compare?
What good would this do?
Take a look at some virgin TBNs vs residual TBNs in UOAs.
Plenty of oils that offer healthy starting TBNs show rapid TBN depletion in service.
If you're going to have TBN on the bottle, then how about HTHSV, NOACK and dynamic cold specs?
Most people would have no clue, just as most people would have no clue as to the significance of TBN.
TMI for 99% of motor oil shoppers.
This is exactly right. As said, if tbn starts at 10 on one brand but depletes rapidly, and another brand starts with tbn of 8... and doesnt deplete rapidly how can you compare?
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2010
- Messages
- 2,451
The TBN relates to the additives in the blend which is company confidential, I doubt many besides BITOG members know what it even is or gives a rats behind.
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
What good would this do?
Take a look at some virgin TBNs vs residual TBNs in UOAs.
Plenty of oils that offer healthy starting TBNs show rapid TBN depletion in service.
If you're going to have TBN on the bottle, then how about HTHSV, NOACK and dynamic cold specs?
Most people would have no clue, just as most people would have no clue as to the significance of TBN.
TMI for 99% of motor oil shoppers.
In a similar fashion people mix oil of various viscosity to come up with the perfect viscosity oil. But how long does it stay that viscosity?
What good would this do?
Take a look at some virgin TBNs vs residual TBNs in UOAs.
Plenty of oils that offer healthy starting TBNs show rapid TBN depletion in service.
If you're going to have TBN on the bottle, then how about HTHSV, NOACK and dynamic cold specs?
Most people would have no clue, just as most people would have no clue as to the significance of TBN.
TMI for 99% of motor oil shoppers.
In a similar fashion people mix oil of various viscosity to come up with the perfect viscosity oil. But how long does it stay that viscosity?
In a similar fashion people mix oil of various viscosity to come up with the perfect viscosity oil. But how long does it stay that viscosity? [/quote]
That is a good question
That is a good question
Some Amsoil oils list it on the bottle: http://www.amsoil.com/shop/by-product/motor-oil/diesel/synthetic-sae-10w-30-sae-30-heavy-duty-motor-oil/?page=%2Fstorefront%2Facd.aspx
I think Amsoil advertises its TBN on one of its high TBN HDEOs, but you'd have to confirm that with Pablo. But their target customers are those going for extended OCIs and know what TBN means.
dnewton3
Staff member
DA Lubes has two HDEOs with TBN in the title; their CJ-4 lubes I refer to are "J-4 8" and "J-4 10". The 8 and 10 refer to the TBN.
Most lube makers don't put it on the bottle. Most folks (out in the uninformed non-BITOG world) don't know and therefore don't care.
And I'd have to agree that for an estimated 99% of most applications, folks don't need to know. Their OCIs are not anywhere long enough to deplete TBN enough to matter. So why put it on the bottle? It's moot to the world at large. And to be perfectly honest, too many BITOGers worry about TBN, don't know their TAN, and yet still change oil too often ...
Most lube makers don't put it on the bottle. Most folks (out in the uninformed non-BITOG world) don't know and therefore don't care.
And I'd have to agree that for an estimated 99% of most applications, folks don't need to know. Their OCIs are not anywhere long enough to deplete TBN enough to matter. So why put it on the bottle? It's moot to the world at large. And to be perfectly honest, too many BITOGers worry about TBN, don't know their TAN, and yet still change oil too often ...
Last edited:
I'd hazard a guess that many BITOGers who think they know what TBN is, probably know only the basics and possibly not enough to actually know how to interpret VOA/UOAs.
TBN is not TBN. Yes, yes, we all know that it is the measure of an oil's alkaline reserve, which is used to neutralise acids and protect the engine. But there are various sources of TBN, and it isn't all freely available to do acid neutralisation.
TBN typically comes from:
1) Detergents
In fact the TBN contribution of detergents is, itself, in two parts. There's the natural TBN of the detergent molecule itself, typically quite low (up to around 25 mgKOH/g). But there's also the main TBN contributor, the so-called "overbasing". This is typically calcium carbonate which is 'dispersed' throughout the detergents as "micelles". Since CaCO3 is not oil-soluble, it has to be carried around in the oil by the detergents molecules. Overbased detergents are in the region 200-400 mgKOH/g.
2) Dispersants
Dispersants, dependent on their type, can contribute a reasonable level of TBN. However this TBN is "ashless", in other words no metal salts but all from organic molecules. This kind of TBN is not as ready to neutralise acids as the overbasing above.
3) Antioxidants
These are used in small amounts, but can have high individual TBNs. Again they are ashless and not highly neutralising.
Furthermore, some types of TBN react only with stronger acids (mineral acids derived from combustion of sulphur and nitrogen compounds in air) and not with weaker ones (organic acids derived from oxidation of the base oil and other components). So the type of TBN is as important as the amount.
Next there's how to measure it. There are several TBN measuring techniques. The typically-used one in motor oil is by potentiometric titration, almost always by automatic titrators. However, the specific methods used to get a TBN number differ depending on the material you are testing.
Here's the rub: fresh/virgin oil TBN is measured by ASTM D2896, which is quite an aggressive method that titrates almost all of the alkaline material, thus giving a relatively high result. However, used oil TBN is almost always done by ASTM D4739, which is less aggressive and doesn't titrate all alkaline materials, particularly the less-reactive stuff. If you run these two TBN methods on the same sample of oil, you will get two different results - which one is right?
In order to make a meaningful conclusion you need to use the same method for all samples, so you need to make sure you get a VOA at the start of your oil monitoring period, and not just rely on a technical data sheet for the start point.
You also have to realise that there may be some TBN you will never 'get at', so a residual TBN may always show up in a used oil, regardless of how used it is.
Finally, a particular bug-bear of mine, is this notion that TAN/TBN crossover is a reliable end point. TAN and TBN numbers are not linked on a see-saw and the numbers from the tests are almost arbitrary. There's no magical 'switch' from good to bad at this cross-over point; the oil doesn't suddenly change from being alkaline to acidic. It is, for sure, a handy and easy-to-explain point which, in the absence of any other data, may as well be used, but you have to take an holistic approach to UOA and look at factors like wear metals and viscosity to see whether the oil's TBN reserve is exhausted.
So, back to the original question - since TBN is not any kind of proxy for quality or performance, there's no benefit to putting it on the label. Total performance of the oil is conveyed in the performance specifications (API, ACEA, OEM etc).
TBN is not TBN. Yes, yes, we all know that it is the measure of an oil's alkaline reserve, which is used to neutralise acids and protect the engine. But there are various sources of TBN, and it isn't all freely available to do acid neutralisation.
TBN typically comes from:
1) Detergents
In fact the TBN contribution of detergents is, itself, in two parts. There's the natural TBN of the detergent molecule itself, typically quite low (up to around 25 mgKOH/g). But there's also the main TBN contributor, the so-called "overbasing". This is typically calcium carbonate which is 'dispersed' throughout the detergents as "micelles". Since CaCO3 is not oil-soluble, it has to be carried around in the oil by the detergents molecules. Overbased detergents are in the region 200-400 mgKOH/g.
2) Dispersants
Dispersants, dependent on their type, can contribute a reasonable level of TBN. However this TBN is "ashless", in other words no metal salts but all from organic molecules. This kind of TBN is not as ready to neutralise acids as the overbasing above.
3) Antioxidants
These are used in small amounts, but can have high individual TBNs. Again they are ashless and not highly neutralising.
Furthermore, some types of TBN react only with stronger acids (mineral acids derived from combustion of sulphur and nitrogen compounds in air) and not with weaker ones (organic acids derived from oxidation of the base oil and other components). So the type of TBN is as important as the amount.
Next there's how to measure it. There are several TBN measuring techniques. The typically-used one in motor oil is by potentiometric titration, almost always by automatic titrators. However, the specific methods used to get a TBN number differ depending on the material you are testing.
Here's the rub: fresh/virgin oil TBN is measured by ASTM D2896, which is quite an aggressive method that titrates almost all of the alkaline material, thus giving a relatively high result. However, used oil TBN is almost always done by ASTM D4739, which is less aggressive and doesn't titrate all alkaline materials, particularly the less-reactive stuff. If you run these two TBN methods on the same sample of oil, you will get two different results - which one is right?
In order to make a meaningful conclusion you need to use the same method for all samples, so you need to make sure you get a VOA at the start of your oil monitoring period, and not just rely on a technical data sheet for the start point.
You also have to realise that there may be some TBN you will never 'get at', so a residual TBN may always show up in a used oil, regardless of how used it is.
Finally, a particular bug-bear of mine, is this notion that TAN/TBN crossover is a reliable end point. TAN and TBN numbers are not linked on a see-saw and the numbers from the tests are almost arbitrary. There's no magical 'switch' from good to bad at this cross-over point; the oil doesn't suddenly change from being alkaline to acidic. It is, for sure, a handy and easy-to-explain point which, in the absence of any other data, may as well be used, but you have to take an holistic approach to UOA and look at factors like wear metals and viscosity to see whether the oil's TBN reserve is exhausted.
So, back to the original question - since TBN is not any kind of proxy for quality or performance, there's no benefit to putting it on the label. Total performance of the oil is conveyed in the performance specifications (API, ACEA, OEM etc).
Originally Posted By: weasley
I'd hazard a guess that many BITOGers who think they know what TBN is, probably know only the basics and possibly not enough to actually know how to interpret VOA/UOAs.
TBN is not TBN. Yes, yes, we all know that it is the measure of an oil's alkaline reserve, which is used to neutralise acids and protect the engine. But there are various sources of TBN, and it isn't all freely available to do acid neutralisation.
TBN typically comes from:
1) Detergents
In fact the TBN contribution of detergents is, itself, in two parts. There's the natural TBN of the detergent molecule itself, typically quite low (up to around 25 mgKOH/g). But there's also the main TBN contributor, the so-called "overbasing". This is typically calcium carbonate which is 'dispersed' throughout the detergents as "micelles". Since CaCO3 is not oil-soluble, it has to be carried around in the oil by the detergents molecules. Overbased detergents are in the region 200-400 mgKOH/g.
2) Dispersants
Dispersants, dependent on their type, can contribute a reasonable level of TBN. However this TBN is "ashless", in other words no metal salts but all from organic molecules. This kind of TBN is not as ready to neutralise acids as the overbasing above.
3) Antioxidants
These are used in small amounts, but can have high individual TBNs. Again they are ashless and not highly neutralising.
Furthermore, some types of TBN react only with stronger acids (mineral acids derived from combustion of sulphur and nitrogen compounds in air) and not with weaker ones (organic acids derived from oxidation of the base oil and other components). So the type of TBN is as important as the amount.
Next there's how to measure it. There are several TBN measuring techniques. The typically-used one in motor oil is by potentiometric titration, almost always by automatic titrators. However, the specific methods used to get a TBN number differ depending on the material you are testing.
Here's the rub: fresh/virgin oil TBN is measured by ASTM D2896, which is quite an aggressive method that titrates almost all of the alkaline material, thus giving a relatively high result. However, used oil TBN is almost always done by ASTM D4739, which is less aggressive and doesn't titrate all alkaline materials, particularly the less-reactive stuff. If you run these two TBN methods on the same sample of oil, you will get two different results - which one is right?
In order to make a meaningful conclusion you need to use the same method for all samples, so you need to make sure you get a VOA at the start of your oil monitoring period, and not just rely on a technical data sheet for the start point.
You also have to realise that there may be some TBN you will never 'get at', so a residual TBN may always show up in a used oil, regardless of how used it is.
Finally, a particular bug-bear of mine, is this notion that TAN/TBN crossover is a reliable end point. TAN and TBN numbers are not linked on a see-saw and the numbers from the tests are almost arbitrary. There's no magical 'switch' from good to bad at this cross-over point; the oil doesn't suddenly change from being alkaline to acidic. It is, for sure, a handy and easy-to-explain point which, in the absence of any other data, may as well be used, but you have to take an holistic approach to UOA and look at factors like wear metals and viscosity to see whether the oil's TBN reserve is exhausted.
So, back to the original question - since TBN is not any kind of proxy for quality or performance, there's no benefit to putting it on the label. Total performance of the oil is conveyed in the performance specifications (API, ACEA, OEM etc).
Well said! Been said before here but it deserves restatement once in a while, especially when restated so well. I think I have a little more faith in the TAN/TBN crossover point as a rule-of-thumb marker than you do, especially with diesels, but you covered this well. You must come to BITOG with some prior oil experience.
I'd hazard a guess that many BITOGers who think they know what TBN is, probably know only the basics and possibly not enough to actually know how to interpret VOA/UOAs.
TBN is not TBN. Yes, yes, we all know that it is the measure of an oil's alkaline reserve, which is used to neutralise acids and protect the engine. But there are various sources of TBN, and it isn't all freely available to do acid neutralisation.
TBN typically comes from:
1) Detergents
In fact the TBN contribution of detergents is, itself, in two parts. There's the natural TBN of the detergent molecule itself, typically quite low (up to around 25 mgKOH/g). But there's also the main TBN contributor, the so-called "overbasing". This is typically calcium carbonate which is 'dispersed' throughout the detergents as "micelles". Since CaCO3 is not oil-soluble, it has to be carried around in the oil by the detergents molecules. Overbased detergents are in the region 200-400 mgKOH/g.
2) Dispersants
Dispersants, dependent on their type, can contribute a reasonable level of TBN. However this TBN is "ashless", in other words no metal salts but all from organic molecules. This kind of TBN is not as ready to neutralise acids as the overbasing above.
3) Antioxidants
These are used in small amounts, but can have high individual TBNs. Again they are ashless and not highly neutralising.
Furthermore, some types of TBN react only with stronger acids (mineral acids derived from combustion of sulphur and nitrogen compounds in air) and not with weaker ones (organic acids derived from oxidation of the base oil and other components). So the type of TBN is as important as the amount.
Next there's how to measure it. There are several TBN measuring techniques. The typically-used one in motor oil is by potentiometric titration, almost always by automatic titrators. However, the specific methods used to get a TBN number differ depending on the material you are testing.
Here's the rub: fresh/virgin oil TBN is measured by ASTM D2896, which is quite an aggressive method that titrates almost all of the alkaline material, thus giving a relatively high result. However, used oil TBN is almost always done by ASTM D4739, which is less aggressive and doesn't titrate all alkaline materials, particularly the less-reactive stuff. If you run these two TBN methods on the same sample of oil, you will get two different results - which one is right?
In order to make a meaningful conclusion you need to use the same method for all samples, so you need to make sure you get a VOA at the start of your oil monitoring period, and not just rely on a technical data sheet for the start point.
You also have to realise that there may be some TBN you will never 'get at', so a residual TBN may always show up in a used oil, regardless of how used it is.
Finally, a particular bug-bear of mine, is this notion that TAN/TBN crossover is a reliable end point. TAN and TBN numbers are not linked on a see-saw and the numbers from the tests are almost arbitrary. There's no magical 'switch' from good to bad at this cross-over point; the oil doesn't suddenly change from being alkaline to acidic. It is, for sure, a handy and easy-to-explain point which, in the absence of any other data, may as well be used, but you have to take an holistic approach to UOA and look at factors like wear metals and viscosity to see whether the oil's TBN reserve is exhausted.
So, back to the original question - since TBN is not any kind of proxy for quality or performance, there's no benefit to putting it on the label. Total performance of the oil is conveyed in the performance specifications (API, ACEA, OEM etc).
Well said! Been said before here but it deserves restatement once in a while, especially when restated so well. I think I have a little more faith in the TAN/TBN crossover point as a rule-of-thumb marker than you do, especially with diesels, but you covered this well. You must come to BITOG with some prior oil experience.
Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
Well said! Been said before here but it deserves restatement once in a while, especially when restated so well.
Thank you!
Quote:
I think I have a little more faith in the TAN/TBN crossover point as a rule-of-thumb marker than you do, especially with diesels, but you covered this well.
To each, their own!
Quote:
You must come to BITOG with some prior oil experience.
20 years and counting, including product development, technical support and managing an analytical laboratory.
Well said! Been said before here but it deserves restatement once in a while, especially when restated so well.
Thank you!
Quote:
I think I have a little more faith in the TAN/TBN crossover point as a rule-of-thumb marker than you do, especially with diesels, but you covered this well.
To each, their own!
Quote:
You must come to BITOG with some prior oil experience.
20 years and counting, including product development, technical support and managing an analytical laboratory.
Originally Posted By: weasley
...but you have to take an holistic approach to UOA and look at factors like wear metals and viscosity to see whether the oil's TBN reserve is exhausted.
Thank you for your informative post. Perhaps you can answer a question that I have about oil analyses. I have done virgin analysis on the oils that I am using, and the lab recommends changing the oil when TBN drops to 35% of virgin, so if it starts out at 10, the oil is considered done at 3.5. Other labs will say to run an oil until TBN is down to 1.0. Does this mean that they are using one or the other of the ASTM methods? Is 35% a condemnation level that allows the user to get all of the usable life out of the oil with a reasonable margin of safety?
...but you have to take an holistic approach to UOA and look at factors like wear metals and viscosity to see whether the oil's TBN reserve is exhausted.
Thank you for your informative post. Perhaps you can answer a question that I have about oil analyses. I have done virgin analysis on the oils that I am using, and the lab recommends changing the oil when TBN drops to 35% of virgin, so if it starts out at 10, the oil is considered done at 3.5. Other labs will say to run an oil until TBN is down to 1.0. Does this mean that they are using one or the other of the ASTM methods? Is 35% a condemnation level that allows the user to get all of the usable life out of the oil with a reasonable margin of safety?
Originally Posted By: weasley
20 years and counting, including product development, technical support and managing an analytical laboratory.
Good. Expanding the knowledge base of our membership is great!
20 years and counting, including product development, technical support and managing an analytical laboratory.
Good. Expanding the knowledge base of our membership is great!
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
I have done virgin analysis on the oils that I am using, and the lab recommends changing the oil when TBN drops to 35% of virgin, so if it starts out at 10, the oil is considered done at 3.5. Other labs will say to run an oil until TBN is down to 1.0. Does this mean that they are using one or the other of the ASTM methods? Is 35% a condemnation level that allows the user to get all of the usable life out of the oil with a reasonable margin of safety?
I'll have a go at this, but want to add that whatever I say is personal opinion based on experience, it is not in any way endorsed by my employer (who I haven't revealed, but it may come up one day).
With that caveat done, sadly I'm going to have to play the "it depends" card. It depends on the oil, on the service type and duty cycle, fuel quality etc etc. If your wear metals are holding steady and viscosity is under control there is always a case to take it to the next UOA and see. Of course you can't keep doing this and at some point you have to blow the whistle, although 35% of remaining TBN does sound a little high (so would provide a decent safety margin, yes).
I can't say what TBN method they will have used without seeing a report (assuming they provide the method in the report), but I would assume that they would use the same method on all samples you send them, so the VOA would be the same method as the UOAs (and so suitable for trend analysis). As to whether different labs are using different methods - again, I can't say but I would doubt it as these things are fairly industry standard. My comment about fresh oil TBN is that at production QC testing, the D2896 method will be used as one way of confirming that the right additive mix is in there.
I have done virgin analysis on the oils that I am using, and the lab recommends changing the oil when TBN drops to 35% of virgin, so if it starts out at 10, the oil is considered done at 3.5. Other labs will say to run an oil until TBN is down to 1.0. Does this mean that they are using one or the other of the ASTM methods? Is 35% a condemnation level that allows the user to get all of the usable life out of the oil with a reasonable margin of safety?
I'll have a go at this, but want to add that whatever I say is personal opinion based on experience, it is not in any way endorsed by my employer (who I haven't revealed, but it may come up one day).
With that caveat done, sadly I'm going to have to play the "it depends" card. It depends on the oil, on the service type and duty cycle, fuel quality etc etc. If your wear metals are holding steady and viscosity is under control there is always a case to take it to the next UOA and see. Of course you can't keep doing this and at some point you have to blow the whistle, although 35% of remaining TBN does sound a little high (so would provide a decent safety margin, yes).
I can't say what TBN method they will have used without seeing a report (assuming they provide the method in the report), but I would assume that they would use the same method on all samples you send them, so the VOA would be the same method as the UOAs (and so suitable for trend analysis). As to whether different labs are using different methods - again, I can't say but I would doubt it as these things are fairly industry standard. My comment about fresh oil TBN is that at production QC testing, the D2896 method will be used as one way of confirming that the right additive mix is in there.
- Status
