| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Materials Forum » Animal Fats Superior To Petroleum Products ???
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| Mark Thorson |
 Posted: Fri Sep 26, 2003 6:18 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
I've been reading a little book THE PRACTICAL COMPOUNDING
OF OILS, TALLOW AND GREASE FOR LUBRICATION, ETC.
(Scott, Greenwood & Son, 1907 reprint of 1898 edition),
and on page 22 it says:
"In spite of the large percentage of mineral oils now
used for machinery, there is still a wide field
wherein animal and fish oils cannot be dispensed
with, especially for leather, and also in the textile
trades, where only saponifiable oil can be
satisfactorily used."
"There are also still many firms who use them
extensively, and will continue to do so if a
thoroughly good oil is supplied, as there is no
doubt they are vastly superior to hydrocarbon
oils for lubrication (cylinders excepted), as their
high flash-point, viscousness and tenacity cause
them to work with greater uniformity and with
considerably less friction, thereby keeping the
machinery cooler."
On page 25:
"When mineral oils were first introduced, it was
presaged that animal and vegetable oils would
become a thing of the past for lubrication."
"This has not by any means been fulfilled, nor
likely to be, as experience shows that, by their
judicious blending with hydrocarbon oils, a greater
uniformity of lubrication is attained, and that less
quantity is required than by the use of a pure
mineral oil alone."
On page 36:
"Pure hydrocarbons are most unsuitable for this
purpose [dynamos and other electrical machines]
unless in conjunction with some fatty oil,
of which the minimum of 15 per cent. and 20 per
cent. maximum have been proved to be the requisite
percentages necessary to effectually stop
carbonisation, which action, when mineral oils alone
are used, speedily takes place."
I'm wondering if this is still true? If I want the best
oil for a race car, robot, or other high-performance,
high-technology machine, will it have lard oil in it? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Uncle Al |
| Posted: Fri Sep 26, 2003 7:13 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Mark Thorson wrote:
Quote:
I've been reading a little book THE PRACTICAL COMPOUNDING
OF OILS, TALLOW AND GREASE FOR LUBRICATION, ETC.
(Scott, Greenwood & Son, 1907 reprint of 1898 edition),
and on page 22 it says:
"In spite of the large percentage of mineral oils now
used for machinery, there is still a wide field
wherein animal and fish oils cannot be dispensed
with, especially for leather, and also in the textile
trades, where only saponifiable oil can be
satisfactorily used."
[snip]
Quote: "Pure hydrocarbons are most unsuitable for this
purpose [dynamos and other electrical machines]
unless in conjunction with some fatty oil,
of which the minimum of 15 per cent. and 20 per
cent. maximum have been proved to be the requisite
percentages necessary to effectually stop
carbonisation, which action, when mineral oils alone
are used, speedily takes place."
I'm wondering if this is still true? If I want the best
oil for a race car, robot, or other high-performance,
high-technology machine, will it have lard oil in it?
The old petroleum base stocks had unsaturation (especially olefinic).
They oxidized, gummed, and carbonized in situ. They also had linear
paraffins (wax) that raised the pour points way high. Winter ate
anything that was so lubricated. Biological oils (glyceryl triesters)
loosened things up and provided polar functionality to grab metal and
oxidized metal.
Mobil 1 hydrocarbon base stock has zero unsaturation and is
tremendously chemically inert (poly(alpha-oelfin). They add something
like 15% low MW polyester for seal swelling and further lubrication,
then finish the package with the usual additives. We know vastly more
know now including detergent/dispersant additives and high pressure
lubes. Pour points are around -40. Canuckistan will have to work it
out.
OTOH, you don't use automotive Mobil 1 in airplane engines. The oil
is OK but the additive package is inappropriate. You wouldn't use it
in a two-cycle engine, either - disaster!
Mobil 1 in your crankcase, distilled/deionized water only to mix 50:50
with your ethylene glycol antifreeze, and check all your fluid levels
monthly. Change your oil and filter every 7500 miles, your antifreeze
every two years. Almost any decent car should last 200K miles.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Bruce Hamilton |
| Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2003 12:09 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Mark Thorson <nospam@sonic.net> wrote:
Quote: I've been reading a little book THE PRACTICAL COMPOUNDING
OF OILS, TALLOW AND GREASE FOR LUBRICATION, ETC.
(Scott, Greenwood & Son, 1907 reprint of 1898 edition),
and on page 22 it says:
"In spite of the large percentage of mineral oils now
used for machinery, there is still a wide field
wherein animal and fish oils cannot be dispensed
with, especially for leather, and also in the textile
trades, where only saponifiable oil can be
satisfactorily used."
Yup. It took a long, long, time to remove light whale
oils from all formulations. The other triglyceride fish
oils mainly provided anticorrosion properties, rather than
lubricity properties. Fisholene products may still be
available, and were very popular here for coating any
metals that might corrode.
Quote: On page 36:
"Pure hydrocarbons are most unsuitable for this
purpose [dynamos and other electrical machines]
unless in conjunction with some fatty oil,
of which the minimum of 15 per cent. and 20 per
cent. maximum have been proved to be the requisite
percentages necessary to effectually stop
carbonisation, which action, when mineral oils alone
are used, speedily takes place."
The petroleum refineries moved to vacuum-distilled
lubricant base grades, along with various treatments
that prolonged their life ( including treatment
at the refinery to remove reactive compounds and
additional antioxidant in the formulations )
- spindle oils replaced most triglyceride and
whale oils in the 1940s.
Quote: I'm wondering if this is still true? If I want the best
oil for a race car, robot, or other high-performance,
high-technology machine, will it have lard oil in it?
Castor oil derivatives are still in racing lubricants,
Castrol R is still produced and still used in racing
- it's legendary.
http://www.castrol.com/products/cars_castrolr.html
Other oils, such as whale oils and fish oils have been
replaced by other petroleum and synthetic components.
There are still triglyceride-derived additives used in
lubricants.
Virtually all modern engine and gearbox lubricants have
around 10 - 20 % of special purpose additives ( extreme
pressure, stabilisers, detergent/dispersant, acid-base
etc. ) added to a mixture of two or three lubricant base
grades to get the desired properties. Different lubricant
base grades can have properties that range from being like
water to a viscous semi-solid syrup.
There are also all the various synthetic and semi-synthetic
substitutes for the petroleum base grades in lubricants, as
used in modern race lubricants and high-end retail lubricants,
eg Mobil 1 etc. In reality, it's the quality of the additives
that determine the quality of lubricants in most applicants.
If you follow the manufacturer's recommendations, you will
get optimum life of equipment.
Bruce Hamilton |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Dr Ivan D. Reid |
| Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2003 3:51 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:13:14 -0700, Uncle Al <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net>
wrote in <3F74E42A.47378E1A@hate.spam.net>:
Quote: Mobil 1 in your crankcase, distilled/deionized water only to mix 50:50
with your ethylene glycol antifreeze, and check all your fluid levels
monthly. Change your oil and filter every 7500 miles, your antifreeze
every two years. Almost any decent car should last 200K miles.
...and change your hygroscopic DoT3 brake fluid every year to
make sure you, and the car, last unscathed that long!
--
Ivan Reid, Electronic & Computer Engineering, ___ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. Ivan.Reid@brunel.ac.uk Room 40-1-B12, CERN
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty". |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Frank Logullo |
| Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2003 5:51 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Any animal fat used in a food contact product, e.g. a plastic approved by
the FDA, would be considered non-Kosher 
Frank |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Steve Turner |
| Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2003 6:42 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Bruce Hamilton <B.Hamilton@irl.cri.nz> wrote:
Two-stroke racing engines in particular used castor oil based lubes
almost exclusively. This lent a very distinctive aroma to the
exhaust.
Steve Turner
Real address contains worldnet instead of spamnet |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Tony |
| Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2003 8:47 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Mark Thorson <nospam@sonic.net> wrote in message news:<3F74D7A1.F0910805@sonic.net>...
Quote: I've been reading a little book THE PRACTICAL COMPOUNDING
OF OILS, TALLOW AND GREASE FOR LUBRICATION, ETC.
(Scott, Greenwood & Son, 1907 reprint of 1898 edition),
That would be the 1898 edition, not the 1998 edition.
Times do change after all. Science marches forward and all that.
An interesting factiod I came across is that animal fat/tallow
type stuff has a small but devoted following in the
black powder/muzzelloading community. Apparently, processes and
procedures were highly optimized over the course of centuries
using what people had. Nowdays, the old smokepoles still
perform best when handled in the old traditional ways.
The claim is that tallow keeps the powder fouling under
control much better than the modern synthetics do, among other things.
As long as there is a need for Model of 1774 Brown Bess muskets
and Kentucky Rifles, there will be a need for tallow.
Cheers,
Tony |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Dr Ivan D. Reid |
| Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2003 10:23 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 27 Sep 2003 07:47:27 -0700, Tony <alapen@ncounty.net>
wrote in <8e4b10ea.0309270647.7e7a91c5@posting.google.com>:
Quote: An interesting factiod I came across is that animal fat/tallow
type stuff has a small but devoted following in the
black powder/muzzelloading community. Apparently, processes and
procedures were highly optimized over the course of centuries
using what people had. Nowdays, the old smokepoles still
perform best when handled in the old traditional ways.
The claim is that tallow keeps the powder fouling under
control much better than the modern synthetics do, among other things.
As long as there is a need for Model of 1774 Brown Bess muskets
and Kentucky Rifles, there will be a need for tallow.
Look up "Sepoy Mutiny"...
--
Ivan Reid, Electronic & Computer Engineering, ___ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. Ivan.Reid@brunel.ac.uk Room 40-1-B12, CERN
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty". |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Thu Jul 24, 2008 5:06 pm
|
|
