Polarized Refrigerant Oil Additives 6

[rhpe]

I have ran across replacement refrig oil lubricants called Polarized Refrigerant Oil Additives (PROA). From the Federal Technology bulletins, the field data seems impressive, i.e., 10% savings or more and longer life of the compressor. It works by removing the sticking oil out of the loop and therby increasing heat transfer capabilities and reducing friction in the moveing parts of the compressor. In my research I have yet to run across anyone actually using the product, which is stange, given that the ROI should be very good.

Does anyone else have any experience here?

Thanks

 

[absrbrtek]

Snake Oil!!! If the manufacturers could squeeze out another 10% by adding a magic bullit, dont you think they would all be on the band wagon? This has been around for years under various scemes, it always comes back to Snake Oil!!!

 

[imok2]

Post this question here:

http://hvac-talk.com/

You may get more responses

 

[rhpe]

I tend to be very skeptical of these sorts of things also but this has DOE testing to support it. The document was produced by the DOE Federal Energy Management Program titled, "Polarized Refrigerant Oil Additive, Technology for Improved Compressor and Heat Exchanger Efficiency".

I have installed this type of product in three Kramer Refrigeration units and I am taking data (amp readings).

I will report my findings over about three months.

Thanks

 

[IRstuff]

Two things:

>> The so-called study at Oak Ridge was a single system with no control comparison and no indication of the true condition of the equipment prior to the additive. They simply added PROA to the system and compared before/after. One question would be whether a simple oil change might have produced the same results.

>> There is no hint of PROA or "Polarized Refrigerant Oil Additive" on the ORNL website.

TTFN

 

[rhpe]

FYI, The report I am referencing was produced for the U.S. Department of Energy by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory under contract DE-AC06-76RLO 1830, Sept 1995. In the report the ORL data was not impressive (1.8% drop in consumption)and the testing process was deemed not reflecting actual operating conditions.

Thanks for your input.

 

[ClydeMule]

There is a Copeland application bulletin regarding this.

Basically they say they are always getting requests for performance analysis of PROAs with their compressors. All of the calorimeter tests have shown no benefit.

Of course they are not a "disinterested 3rd party," but they might do a better job of testing under real world conditions than the DOE.

Clyde

 

[rhpe]

Thanks Clyde--FYI The data I've taken so far show about 1.5 amp drop per leg. I am taking the data versus outside air temp and cooler temp and will regress the data over time to see if it moves up or down with application time.

 

[IRstuff]

But are you doing a side-by-side comparison against a similar machine with only a lubricant change?

TTFN

 

[rhpe]

No--the measurements are fairly simple. This motor is 3 phase pulling about 20 amps. I have put power factor correction so the real power amps is about 15. Of the fifteen, I am now generally seeing about 13-13.5. This compressor did not get an oil change but we removed 10% and added in 10% PROA. Do you think that is enough oil change to be significant?

Thanks for your reply IRstuff.

 

[IRstuff]

I'm afraid I don't have enough knowledge in the field to give an assessment. My take is simply from the pure engineering and science rout of how does one attempt to eliminate variability in a comparison.

One of the things that I see with the PROA "hype" is that it's very similar to the hype that surrounded Slick50.

So, with such change in the system, you have to consider all the possibilities like whether there's some sort of change in apparent viscosity or whether it is indeed working as advertised.

It just would be nice to see a rigorous and controlled experiment to answer the nagging questions.

TTFN

 

[rjhpe]

I agree--my test is anecdotal. But I will continue to monitor and let everyone know what I see. I was directed to an HVAC forum and got mostly negative responses but I think it was also anecdotal information. They claimed compressor failures etc., which could be from contaminated oil, air, etc. I believe this oil hyrgoscopic and is unless a container is refill with an inert gas could leave to problems. There also seems to be debate over whether the DOE document is bogus or not--I'll try to chase that down. FYI to all--this product is in my own equipment for the test--

Thanks

 

[IRstuff]

The document appears to have existed at one point in time:

http://www.eere.energy.gov/femp/technologies/techdemo_retiredpubs.cfm

But, it's been "retired." with no indication of why.

TTFN

 

[rhpe]

I have found one good test done by the Florida Solar Energy Center done on PolarShield. Study reports no savings.

There are other brands that are formulated differently so I will look into them.

Randy

 

[hvachelper]

I had a rep from Compress Shield give me these two reports and they are good tests done by an independent engineering firm and one by the Florida DOE.

http://www.compressshield.com/v2/files/enduserreports/Mobil_Orlando.pdf

http://www.compressshield.com/v2/files/Superdome Report for CS Treatments 012204.pdf

Good Luck

 

[IRstuff]

And again, where was the control experiment?

If I leave my car's oil in for 50,000 miles and then change oil to Slick50, it's going to behave radically differently. Does that prove Slick50 is great?

The claims presented have no controls, and no comparison against what the machines are supposed to be capable of doing.

The only real test is if thay can prove that a brand-new machine operating to factory specs gets 30% improvement, then we're talking.



TTFN

 

[hvachelper]

The point of the product is to restore lost efficiency. A new system is more efficient brand new. Over time heat transfer units lose capacity to transfer heat, thereby causing the compressor to work longer and harder. The older the machine, the less efficient. As for comparison, what else would you compare it to? The way it was presented to me was a comparison against the equipment's log books.

http://www.compressshield.com/v2/files/enduserreports/Universal Studios.pdf

I'm looking for a reason to say no. It just seems to good to be true, but all the evidence I've seen shows that it is that good.

 

[IRstuff]

So why didn't they compare against a chiller with just a straight change-out of oil?

The point being that NOT ONE of these "tests" ever show that the new additive performs better than a change-out of conventional oil. Therefore, none of these tests are truly unbiased, controlled and scientific. ONLY, when they can show that barring ANY other factor, they get a significant improvement will it be a conclusive proof.



TTFN

 

[Centrif]

This is most definitely snake oil. I get this sales pitch many times a year from all sorts of companies touting truly impossible claims.

With out a plausible scientific explanation of how the system performance is improved it would not be prudent to endorse the use of these products. If the chiller operates with lower kW/Ton after the addition of the juice then there was something else wrong in the chiller. How are they measuring the power difference? What was the control group? Is the data statistically significant? The oil polarization explanation is insufficient to account for the claims of efficiency improvement. It would take a low charge level or air in the condenser (or a combination of both) to make that kind of difference in the chiller, in my opinion.

There are several additional issues to consider when evaluating the veracity of an oil or refrigerant additive.

First -- isn't it interesting that these snake oil companies can never seem to get a respectable HVAC manufacturer to endorse it? That is because when the HVAC manufacturer tests a chiller in a controlled environment there is no improvement. All of these snake oil companies prey on the end user and on installed units where water flow rates, power measurements and chiller capacities cannot be accurately measured. Do these snake oil companies ever explain the details of how this miraculous improvement was obtained? For instance… did they forget to mention that they put in fresh refrigerant or oil charge or removed air or moisture from the system just "coincidently" at the same time they added their magic juice?

Second – Compressor bearings (and screw rotors or gears) operate with an oil film…there is almost no surface friction effects from metal to metal contact….so this supposed “reduced friction” benefit is bogus.

Third – Anything that is some sort of a surface treatment will most likely have negative effects on shaft seal faces, bearing surfaces and perhaps even on the heat exchanger tubes as well. What does this stuff do to elastomers?

Close scrutiny of the test results with special attention to real engineering principles will always reveal the "slight of hand". As stated before...Not once have any of these products been tested in a true back-to-back comparison with standard lubricants.

When one of these snake oil companies tells me their story, I ask them to back up their claims financially. If the product does not perform in a true ARI certified test environment, then the additive manufacturer has to pay me all of my testing costs. With all of the claims I would think they would line up at my door for certification. As of yet, not a single one has taken me up on the offer. Everyone wants to take the magic elixir to fix the problems in their chiller. There is no magic. Simple maintenance, and proper operation of the chiller is all that is required for a machine to operate at its full potential.

Lastly, just because some government agency has "endorsed" it doesn't add too much credibility. In fact it makes me wonder about the people who supposedly endorsed it. This is the same government that at one time granted patents for perpetual motion machines and overbalanced wheels.

Sorry for the long winded message.

Centrif

 

[sonofachem]

SNAKE OIL EXPOSED!

The truth of the matter is that Proa oil has some benefiting factors, but the claims that these companies preach are in technical terms..."insane"...."lies"...and "deceitful".

About 4 years ago I was approached to fund one of these "snake oil" companies. What I found out in the discussions frightened me. The handful of Proa companies all originated from one group of egger business men trying to strike it rich. The primary owner of the then polar shield company is now resting in jail for the next ten years. When the company dismantled six partners went their separate ways. If you haven't noticed all these companies seem to have the same pictures and almost identical literature. How ironic. Besides the fraudulent owners, the Proa oil they use is a simple additive to standard refrigerant oil. What these guys did is simply add Chlorowax to the compound; this is their special magic trick. The link below will tell you in depth what actually that chemical does.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FVP/is_24_261/ai_87532478

Proa oil simply creates a lubricant in the tubing that allows the materials to move less restricted and can clean up built up corrosion. This is great if you want to keep up an outdated HVAC system. All the claims of huge success are simply old systems that needed and change of oil or cleansing. This however has nothing to due with heat transfer. The reports you see on the brochures about "1500%" gained efficiency is related to a study of Chlorowax and oxidation. Again, nothing to due with heat transfer.

The good news is that Proa will not damage your system. The future in this concept of synthetic products is slowly improving though. I know that there is another manufacturer that is using a completely different chemical than Chlorowax that is fully synthetic and does provide heat transfer. The Heat Transfer Research Institute is going to be confirming the new product as well as test and possibly ASHRAE. From what I have heard this new product will not be on the market for another two to three years. Here are some links supporting the theory for the new-age product from Purdue University and Spartacus Group.

http://www.arti-21cr.org/research/completed/finalreports/50035-final.pdf

http://www.arti-21cr.org/research/completed/finalreports/20080-final.pdf

The next generation snake oil is going to be highly soluble to water to help remove any unwanted moisture, lubricate tube lining similar to Proa, but also react with the Freon to increase heat transfer through high flux nucleate boiling. But of course....I will believe it when I see it.

Until the new fully synthetic products hit the market I would not advise on buying any snake oil.

The truth hurts

And always remember, believe nothing you hear, and half of what you see.