I don't notice many oils using sodium, is it for cost reasons that Valvoline uses it? I was looking over some UOA's from different labs and some actually classify sodium as a contaminant..
What's the reason Valvoline uses sodium?
- Thread starter jdavis
- Start date
- Status
I get that all the time with Red Line UOA's, I don't know the exact reason for it I thought it was for anti-foaming but I could be wrong. Red Line definitely has high levels of sodium and their break-in additive is high in it as well.
I don't think it's a contaminant, potassium maybe. Valvoline uses it because it works better and does what moly and other additives do Chris from Valvoline tech told me 5months ago
Sodium is listed as a containment because it is found in some types of antifreeze. As for why Valvoline uses it, I don't know.
Originally Posted By: car51
I don't think it's a contaminant, potassium maybe. Valvoline uses it because it works better and does what moly and other additives do Chris from Valvoline tech told me 5months ago
Here's one example of a report showing it this way:
I don't think it's a contaminant, potassium maybe. Valvoline uses it because it works better and does what moly and other additives do Chris from Valvoline tech told me 5months ago
Here's one example of a report showing it this way:
Originally Posted By: artificialist
Sodium is listed as a containment because it is found in some types of antifreeze. As for why Valvoline uses it, I don't know.
It is used for the dispersant/detergent package. According to many publications it is more cost effective versus calcium and magnesium.
Sodium is listed as a containment because it is found in some types of antifreeze. As for why Valvoline uses it, I don't know.
It is used for the dispersant/detergent package. According to many publications it is more cost effective versus calcium and magnesium.
Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: artificialist
Sodium is listed as a containment because it is found in some types of antifreeze. As for why Valvoline uses it, I don't know.
It is used for the dispersant/detergent package. According to many publications it is more cost effective versus calcium and magnesium.
That's what I read somewhere, it's a cheaper alternative to calcium and magnesium.
Originally Posted By: artificialist
Sodium is listed as a containment because it is found in some types of antifreeze. As for why Valvoline uses it, I don't know.
It is used for the dispersant/detergent package. According to many publications it is more cost effective versus calcium and magnesium.
That's what I read somewhere, it's a cheaper alternative to calcium and magnesium.
Royal Purple's line of API-spec oils have an additive package nearly identical to Valvoline's. About 440 ppm of Sodium. Only Valvoline is cheaper than RP, so anytime someone asks about RP street oils, we tell them to buy Valvoline. If you look at the oil analysis results on the PQIA website, you'll see that some other oils have similar amounts of Sodium as Valvoline.
MolaKule
Staff member
Originally Posted By: jdavis
I don't notice many oils using sodium, is it for cost reasons that Valvoline uses it? I was looking over some UOA's from different labs and some actually classify sodium as a contaminant..
Believe it or not folks there are many papers here on BITOG that answers many of your questions.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2764914
I don't notice many oils using sodium, is it for cost reasons that Valvoline uses it? I was looking over some UOA's from different labs and some actually classify sodium as a contaminant..
Believe it or not folks there are many papers here on BITOG that answers many of your questions.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2764914
Last edited:
Dispersant / Detergent packages often contain Ca, Mg or Na. Yes Valvoline use Sodium, I don't know their reason or exact chemistry, but I do think they make a very good product. They are not the only one to use Sodium, but some UOA people confuse it with coolant contamination. The real test is a VOA followed by a UOA from the same company, so you are working off a solid baseline.
It's a few years old, but here are some PQIA 5W30 Synthetic VOA's
PQIA-VirginOilAnalysis-2013
It's a few years old, but here are some PQIA 5W30 Synthetic VOA's
PQIA-VirginOilAnalysis-2013
Sodium is a flavor enhancer; just like pepper is.
The principle purpose of "salt" additives in engine oils is for a "detergent" action...think of it like grains of sand sloshing about and "scrubbing" surfaces and "preventing" carbon detritus deposits from caking up... Valvoline works, Thats why its in my cars and trucks.
I never got to play around with sodium additives directly but I'd offer up the following thoughts...
Sodium sulphonates are as old as the hills. Back in the 20's & 30's it was common practice to react raw base oil with sulphuric acid/SO2/oleum. Some of the more reactive aromatics in the base oil would form sulphonic acids which could then be reacted with caustic soda (sodium hydroxide) to give so-called 'natural' sodium sulphonate. I may be wrong but I can't think why anyone would put sodium sulphonate in a modern US engine oil. It's TBN is extremely low and although I'm no chemist, I'd have thought it would be quite difficult to over-base sodium sulphonate to give it appreciable TBN. From a TBN point if view, it would make far more sense to get your TBN from calcium or magnesium (plus the tiny contributions you get from diphenyl amine AO and ashless dispersant).
Putting sodium alkyl thio-carbamates in modern oils as friction modifiers might make more sense assuming they do indeed function as friction modifiers. Molybdenum dithio-carbamates are proven, effective friction modifiers. They are however 'locked in' by various patents and are eye-wateringly expendive to buy. If the corresponding sodium analogue showed some friction reduction performance, even if it was worse than that of Moly, it might give you more IP 'freedom to practice' and be way cheaper. These additives can't be particularly complicated to make and sodium salts are generally cheaper than moly salts. The same goes for potassium and lithium salts.
Having said that, I might have concerns about putting sodium salts in oil. Sodium is far more polar and reactive than calcium, magnesium and molybdenum. I might worry about how the oil interacts with water (which inevitably you get in your sump) and the potential for forming emulsions. I might also be concerned about how this stuff might interact with the other additives in the oil. Presumably Valvoline had checked all of this out as part of the oil approval process but if I've learnt one thing over the years, it's that the approval tests do not guarantee the absence of problems in the field, so I personally might avoid such oils.
Sodium sulphonates are as old as the hills. Back in the 20's & 30's it was common practice to react raw base oil with sulphuric acid/SO2/oleum. Some of the more reactive aromatics in the base oil would form sulphonic acids which could then be reacted with caustic soda (sodium hydroxide) to give so-called 'natural' sodium sulphonate. I may be wrong but I can't think why anyone would put sodium sulphonate in a modern US engine oil. It's TBN is extremely low and although I'm no chemist, I'd have thought it would be quite difficult to over-base sodium sulphonate to give it appreciable TBN. From a TBN point if view, it would make far more sense to get your TBN from calcium or magnesium (plus the tiny contributions you get from diphenyl amine AO and ashless dispersant).
Putting sodium alkyl thio-carbamates in modern oils as friction modifiers might make more sense assuming they do indeed function as friction modifiers. Molybdenum dithio-carbamates are proven, effective friction modifiers. They are however 'locked in' by various patents and are eye-wateringly expendive to buy. If the corresponding sodium analogue showed some friction reduction performance, even if it was worse than that of Moly, it might give you more IP 'freedom to practice' and be way cheaper. These additives can't be particularly complicated to make and sodium salts are generally cheaper than moly salts. The same goes for potassium and lithium salts.
Having said that, I might have concerns about putting sodium salts in oil. Sodium is far more polar and reactive than calcium, magnesium and molybdenum. I might worry about how the oil interacts with water (which inevitably you get in your sump) and the potential for forming emulsions. I might also be concerned about how this stuff might interact with the other additives in the oil. Presumably Valvoline had checked all of this out as part of the oil approval process but if I've learnt one thing over the years, it's that the approval tests do not guarantee the absence of problems in the field, so I personally might avoid such oils.
Joe, always good to hear from you.
In the PQIA VOA analysis above Valvoline SynPower has 2100 ppm Ca, 460 ppm Na, and no Mg or Mo. So much more Ca than Na. The Royal Purple is much the same.
So do you think the Na is a friction modifier or part of the TBN over base ?
These VOA are 3 years old, and I suspect both Valvoline and RP have been using Na for much longer than that, so it must be sorted to some degree.
The rep that valvoline has on the street around me is that it's slippery/low friction oil, but the TBN depletes a bit quicker than most.
In the PQIA VOA analysis above Valvoline SynPower has 2100 ppm Ca, 460 ppm Na, and no Mg or Mo. So much more Ca than Na. The Royal Purple is much the same.
So do you think the Na is a friction modifier or part of the TBN over base ?
These VOA are 3 years old, and I suspect both Valvoline and RP have been using Na for much longer than that, so it must be sorted to some degree.
The rep that valvoline has on the street around me is that it's slippery/low friction oil, but the TBN depletes a bit quicker than most.
My experience of sodium detergents mirrors Joe's postulation - they are far less hydrolytically stable than Mg (better) and Ca (best). In ship engine oils, especially any that go through a centrifugal separator using water, this is a problem. In regulr engine oils there is less direct contact with water, but still plenty of opportunity with blow-by and condensation.
Very nice paper Shannow, thanks for that.
Please give me a minute as I read through 21 pages of organic chemistry.
Please give me a minute as I read through 21 pages of organic chemistry.
Originally Posted By: KingCake
Keep in mind the oil contains a sodium containing compound. It's not table salt. The spectroscopy done by UOA just looks for that one atom.
Table Salt is Sodium Chloride ... about half sodium and half chloride (the exact ratio varies, 45~55 to 55~45). So a teaspoon of table salt is about a half teaspoon of Sodium. And that sodium is the same as the additive.
Chloride, by the way, has no recommended daily allowance; apparently you can have as much as you want. Sodium, on the other hand, isn't so free and easy.
Keep in mind the oil contains a sodium containing compound. It's not table salt. The spectroscopy done by UOA just looks for that one atom.
Table Salt is Sodium Chloride ... about half sodium and half chloride (the exact ratio varies, 45~55 to 55~45). So a teaspoon of table salt is about a half teaspoon of Sodium. And that sodium is the same as the additive.
Chloride, by the way, has no recommended daily allowance; apparently you can have as much as you want. Sodium, on the other hand, isn't so free and easy.
- Status