AndyH
Registered Vendor , w/Business number
The use of RNT - radionuclide wear testing - by VW in newer oil specifications comes up here from time to time. Some suggest it proves that the 506.0x oils are better than 505.01 - based on the use of the test.
I'd like to suggest that the use of a test - even RNT - doesn't prove the superiority (or inferiority) of a lubricant. Knowing the results of RNT testing for different formulas can, but we don't have the test results (or VW's limits for the different specs) - we just know the test is used.
Why is it used? Because it allows a lab test to give wear feedback in a shorter time than doing long-term fleet testing. In other words - it's less expensive, and can give faster feedback.
From one lab's web page:
"The 2007 and 2010 diesel engine emissions regulations are causing diesel engine manufacturers to use nonconventional engine control strategies that employ heavy exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) and include early and late fuel injection. Because these strategies might have a negative effect on engine wear and, subsequently, blow-by and loss of oil control, manufacturers need to assess their impact before engines are put into production. Using radioactive tracer technology, these assessments can be obtained in weeks rather than months or years."
According to the articles I've found, RNT is at least a 50 year old process. The Southwest Research Institute has been using it for about 50 years.
Here's some info from SwRI:
RNT Overview webpage:
http://www.swri.edu/4org/d03/vehsys/radtrace/default.htm
And a more in-depth paper:
http://www.swri.org/4org/d03/vehsys/radtrace/RadioactiveTracerTechnology.pdf
And an overview of one of the processes:
http://www.swri.edu/4org/d03/vehsys/radtrace/rattpaper.pdf
Andy
I'd like to suggest that the use of a test - even RNT - doesn't prove the superiority (or inferiority) of a lubricant. Knowing the results of RNT testing for different formulas can, but we don't have the test results (or VW's limits for the different specs) - we just know the test is used.
Why is it used? Because it allows a lab test to give wear feedback in a shorter time than doing long-term fleet testing. In other words - it's less expensive, and can give faster feedback.
From one lab's web page:
"The 2007 and 2010 diesel engine emissions regulations are causing diesel engine manufacturers to use nonconventional engine control strategies that employ heavy exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) and include early and late fuel injection. Because these strategies might have a negative effect on engine wear and, subsequently, blow-by and loss of oil control, manufacturers need to assess their impact before engines are put into production. Using radioactive tracer technology, these assessments can be obtained in weeks rather than months or years."
According to the articles I've found, RNT is at least a 50 year old process. The Southwest Research Institute has been using it for about 50 years.
Here's some info from SwRI:
RNT Overview webpage:
http://www.swri.edu/4org/d03/vehsys/radtrace/default.htm
And a more in-depth paper:
http://www.swri.org/4org/d03/vehsys/radtrace/RadioactiveTracerTechnology.pdf
And an overview of one of the processes:
http://www.swri.edu/4org/d03/vehsys/radtrace/rattpaper.pdf
Andy
Last edited: