Testing to optimize MWF formulation efficiency and performance
Apr 14, 2020
One of the outcomes of the automotive industry’s continued focus on operational efficiency and technological advancement is a growing trend toward sustainable innovation for lighter vehicle design. This shift has led to an increased demand for more dynamic metalworking fluids (MWFs) that perform well on lighter weight aluminium alloys for vehicle components and new machining tools. Evaluating the relative effectiveness of metalworking additives is critical in the optimization of a commercial fluid and the development of new formulations. This means systematic, efficient MWF formulation techniques and rapid, flexible test methods that correlate well with field performance, are more important than ever.
An array of American Standard Test Method (ASTM) tests exists to effectively determine additive effects on MWFs, including the twist compression test (TCT) and tapping torque test (TTT). These ASTM methods are designed to evaluate lubricity additives by measuring coefficient of friction (COF) or torque under variable conditions.
Tom Sisson and Tevin Proctor from Ingevity recently worked with Ted McClure at Sea-Land Chemical to provide a comparative analysis using a simple straight-oil MWF to determine the relative performance of multiple lubricity additives per test method and to discover whether a correlation between the two methodologies exists.
Why should you care?
Formulators today desire lubricity additives that are effective in various applications and fluid types. By using both the TCT and TTT methods, lubricity additives’ performance ranges can be determined, leading to the development of optimal MWFs.