Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 6 – uploaded by Aparecido Carlos Goncalves

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Table 4. Flash point values after contamination.

Table 4 Flash point values after contamination.

Related Figures (19)

Figure 1. Pin on disk equipment.
Figure 1. Pin on disk equipment.
Figure 2. Cup-shaped disk made of SAE 8640 steel, SAE 4140 steel pin and apparatus assembly. ‘The lubricating oil after Pin on disk testing was collected for analysis. One such analysis is analytical ferrography For the analysis of ferromagnetic particles, the PQA (particle quantifier analysis) ferrous particle monitor was used. This equipment is a magnetometer with two coils arranged so that the coil located on the sample part (sensor) and the reference coil are in equilibrium when there is no sample on the sensor or external electromagnetic interference. The
Figure 2. Cup-shaped disk made of SAE 8640 steel, SAE 4140 steel pin and apparatus assembly. ‘The lubricating oil after Pin on disk testing was collected for analysis. One such analysis is analytical ferrography For the analysis of ferromagnetic particles, the PQA (particle quantifier analysis) ferrous particle monitor was used. This equipment is a magnetometer with two coils arranged so that the coil located on the sample part (sensor) and the reference coil are in equilibrium when there is no sample on the sensor or external electromagnetic interference. The
Table 1. Measurements and average values of disk and pin roughness.
Table 1. Measurements and average values of disk and pin roughness.
Table 2. Physical-chemical properties of the lubricant API CF SAE 40
Table 2. Physical-chemical properties of the lubricant API CF SAE 40
Table 3. Saybolt Viscosity Values for Each Contamination Type.
Table 3. Saybolt Viscosity Values for Each Contamination Type.
Figure 4. Slide obtained by RPD assay. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 4. Slide obtained by RPD assay. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 5. Comparison of viscosity indexes. It is observed in this analysis, normal wear for all pictures (Figure 7 to 10). There are some oxides particles (indicated by the arrows) that is normal occurrence when in small amount. There is no evidence of excessive wear.
Figure 5. Comparison of viscosity indexes. It is observed in this analysis, normal wear for all pictures (Figure 7 to 10). There are some oxides particles (indicated by the arrows) that is normal occurrence when in small amount. There is no evidence of excessive wear.
Figure 6. Dispersion test for all contamination.
Figure 6. Dispersion test for all contamination.
Figure 7. Contaminated blade with 2% left and 5% right. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 7. Contaminated blade with 2% left and 5% right. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 8. Contaminated blade with 2% left and 5% right. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 8. Contaminated blade with 2% left and 5% right. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 9. Contaminated blade with 2% left and 5% right. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 9. Contaminated blade with 2% left and 5% right. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 10. Contaminated blade with 2% left and 5% right. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 10. Contaminated blade with 2% left and 5% right. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 11. a) Ferrogram after heating with 2% contamination and 500X zoom on the left side; b) Ferrogram after heating with 5% contamination on the right side and 500X zoom. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 11. a) Ferrogram after heating with 2% contamination and 500X zoom on the left side; b) Ferrogram after heating with 5% contamination on the right side and 500X zoom. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 12. a) Ferrogram after heating with 2% contamination and 500X zoom on the left side; b) Ferrogram after heating with 5% contamination on the right side and 500X zoom. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 12. a) Ferrogram after heating with 2% contamination and 500X zoom on the left side; b) Ferrogram after heating with 5% contamination on the right side and 500X zoom. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 13. a) Ferrogram after heating with 2% contamination and 500X zoom on the left side; b) Ferrogram after heating with 5% contamination on the right side and 500X zoom. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 13. a) Ferrogram after heating with 2% contamination and 500X zoom on the left side; b) Ferrogram after heating with 5% contamination on the right side and 500X zoom. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 14. a) Ferrogram after heating with 2% contamination and 500X zoom on the left side; b) Ferrogram after heating with 5% contamination on the right side and 1000X zoom. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Figure 14. a) Ferrogram after heating with 2% contamination and 500X zoom on the left side; b) Ferrogram after heating with 5% contamination on the right side and 1000X zoom. Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Source: Author’s own elaboration. 5. Conclusion Table 7. TBN value for each sample tested.
Source: Author’s own elaboration. 5. Conclusion Table 7. TBN value for each sample tested.
Source: Author’s own elaboration. Table 6. X-ray spectrometer values.
Source: Author’s own elaboration. Table 6. X-ray spectrometer values.
Table 5. PQA values after all tests.
Table 5. PQA values after all tests.
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved