corrosion testing with Phillips XC and Anti Rust

[vlittle]

I ran a controlled experiment with Phillips XC 20W50 and Phillips Anti Rust 20W50.

I used a piece of 4130 steel tube and sanded it to expose the raw steel. I put a blob of XC and a blob of Anti Rust on the tube and left it outside in the rain, fog and crappy northwest weather for the last 10 days (test begun Oct 6, 2014 and terminated Oct 16, 2014).

The results speak for themselves.

Phillips recommends up to 10% of your crankase oil can use the Anti Rust for seldom flown aircraft (i.e. Northwest winters).

Start of test, the oil blobs can be seen on the bare steel.



Completion of test. The Anti-Rust blob is relatively clean.



Cheers

[eddieseve]

Wow that's pretty impressive, I wonder how CamGuard compares to the anti rust.

Cheers

[rhill]

I'd love see the same test with XC,anti-rust,and the new super 2F,as well as XC+ Cam Guard as this is an oil you can fly with.Oil is confusing,As I get closer to assembling my engine. I'd like to run it in,store it,then fly it for 10-25 hours to brake it in.The pickling oils say 10 hours max?Whats a poor boy to do?
RHill

[DanH]

Good stuff Vern.

Did something similar a while back, with Camguard mixed into Phillips XC at the recommended rate:

http://www.vansairforce.com/communit...3&postcount=58

[vlittle]

I'm running a new test with XC, Anti-rust, a 10% blend of AR with XC and ACF-50 as a control. Started raining again tonight so my test conditions are similar to last time.

[Kyle Boatright]

Originally Posted by vlittle

I'm running a new test with XC, Anti-rust, a 10% blend of AR with XC and ACF-50 as a control. Started raining again tonight so my test conditions are similar to last time.

Why not put test strips inside your hangar? The outside environment isn't a match for our application - it'll never rain inside our engine cases.

[terrykohler]

Vern is very much on track here. The important point is that all comparative samples be similarly exposed, at the same time.
Yes, the outdoor testing is likely more accelerated/severe than what you'd find inside the engine, but the point is to show differential corrosion. You won't know how long the metal in the engine will "hold up" without a rust inhibitor, but he's certainly showing that there's some benefit to use.
More structured corrosion testing is normally done in a salt spray cabinet under ASTM standards, but this seat of the pants testing is a useful tool.
Thanks Vern.
Terry, CFI
RV9A N323TP

[Walt]

Why not add some Aeroshell W100 plus and 15W-50 to the experiment too

[grubbat]

And some camguard too.........

Originally Posted by Walt

Why not add some Aeroshell W100 plus and 15W-50 to the experiment too

[Kyle Boatright]

Originally Posted by terrykohler

Vern is very much on track here. The important point is that all comparative samples be similarly exposed, at the same time.
Yes, the outdoor testing is likely more accelerated/severe than what you'd find inside the engine, but the point is to show differential corrosion. You won't know how long the metal in the engine will "hold up" without a rust inhibitor, but he's certainly showing that there's some benefit to use.
More structured corrosion testing is normally done in a salt spray cabinet under ASTM standards, but this seat of the pants testing is a useful tool.
Thanks Vern.
Terry, CFI
RV9A N323TP

I understand accelerated testing, but the test should be a reasonable representation of the environment you're trying to test. Outdoor and salt spray testing of items which spend their time outdoors makes sense. It doesn't make sense for us (IMO) because the parts we're trying to protect will never be subject to a large volume of water, which physically removes the residual oil film.