important test protocols

The Fuelstar product has been exhaustively tested under actual operating conditions in more than 200,000 installations, spanning a period of 20 years, generally with excellent results. These installations have included the fuel types petrol (gasoline), diesel, heavy fuel oil and LPG.

We also have experience with ethanol, methanol, racing fuel, aviation fuel, fuel oil and bunker oil. In addition to internal combustion engines, we also have experience with oil fired furnaces.

These excellent results in actual usage have been confirmed by several formal and extensive laboratory tests. Laboratory testing of this type is repeatable, of course, but the duration required to test Fuelstar adequately and properly renders such testing extremely expensive.

We consider that further testing is unnecessary. However should a prospective Fuelstar user insist on conducting further testing, then so be it. However, the reputation of our product is at stake and we are very concerned to ensure that any such testing be accurate and reliable.

Laboratory testing

While laboratory testing would eliminate variables such as climate variations, differing loads, different drivers and different routes, inaccuracy of fuel measurement etc., there are reasons why such testing may not produce reliable results for the use of Fuelstar, as follows.

1. Established and accepted test protocols involve the use of a chassis or an engine dynamometer. The proper operation of the Fuelstar requires movement and vibration to release the metallic particles from the alloy pellets within the canister. The movement and vibration encountered in actual use in on-road conditions is frequently not adequately replicated in the laboratory. As a consequence, the likelihood of the reactive tin particles reaching the combustion chambers in sufficient quantities, is uncertain. It has been well established that if the metallic particles do not reach the combustion chambers in adequate quantities, there will be no or inadequate improvement in engine performance.

2. The normally accepted test protocols are mostly of insufficient duration. Baseline testing is normally measured in minutes or hours, certainly not greater than one day. Testing after the installation of Fuelstar is normally over the same timeframe. Experience shows that there is a primary and secondary improvement in engine performance following the installation of the Fuelstar. The primary improvement alone may take up to 50 hours of engine running to manifest itself fully. The secondary improvement occurs as the Fuelstar gradually purges deposits of carbon and other “sticky” substances from the internal engine operating surfaces. This may take as long as a further 200 hours of engine running. Obviously, testing for this duration of time in a test laboratory is extremely expensive. Testing carried out in late 2002 in the test laboratory of CEE involved many hundreds of hours of engine running. Anything less than that is simply not a proper test of the Fuelstar product, having regard to its unique manner of functioning and its operation.

For the above reasons, you will see that ‘scientific’ laboratory tests to carry out an adequate test of the Fuelstar product are extremely difficult to design and very expensive to perform. If a laboratory test fails to confirm the results in actual use, then it is the test or test methodology which is at fault, rather than the more obvious conclusion that the product doesn’t work to its expectation.

Previous experience with tests carried out by inexpert people have, on occasion, produced erroneous and inconclusive results. As a consequence, it is important to ensure that we have input into any future testing so as to ensure that it accurate, reliable and conclusive.

Testing in actual use

To test the product properly in actual use, it is important to ensure that -

1. Baseline data has been developed over a period of not less than one nor more than three months prior to the test

2. This baseline data should be examined prior to installing any units for test; first to ensure that reliable data exists and secondly to ensure that it is consistent over time. If the figures vary by more than 5% from month to month, then the engine should be excluded from the test program. Obviously, it is not possible to conclusively confirm a 10% improvement over baseline if the baseline figures themselves vary to this extent or more.

3. The engine should be doing the same work after installation as before. For example, testing on buses that are subjected to different routes, different drivers and different loads is not representative. The only true testing that can be done is (a) in an engine where the operator is the person paying for the fuel and where he and he alone knows the operation of the engine and the true amount of fuel it consumes, (b) a truck or coach running line-haul operations covering the same routes day in and day out, month in and month out, with the same loads and drivers, or (c) an industrial engine such as a genset where the loads and rates of use are much the same all the time.

4. It is important that there are no critical climatic factors present which could affect fuel consumption

5. It is highly desirable that trials be carried out on several units in the same fleet, so that representative figures are obtained and meaningful conclusions reached. Trialling on fewer than five vehicles, representing the majority of the fleet, is generally considered to be less than conclusive.

6. The units must be correctly installed. In particular, it is imperative that the tin particles are released and that they reach the combustion chamber. To achieve this, the installation instructions must be followed exactly. Also, sometimes engines are detuned for some reason, for example if the fuel quality is poor. In these circumstances, it may be necessary to reset the ignition timing, fuel rack settings, turbo boost and air to fuel ratios to manufacturer’s specifications.

7. Results from actual use show a trend towards an immediate improvement in fuel consumption of 6 to 9% over the first 50 engine hours, then a further gradual improvement of an additional 6 to 9% over the next 3 – 4 months of operation. Therefore, simple short-term tests must be interpreted accordingly.

8. Fuel efficiency must be measured in liters per kW per hour. If measuring in liters per hour or liters per km only then it is essential that the power output be the same after installing the Fuelstar as before. If the extra power generated by the Fuelstar is used then it will impact on the extent of the fuel saving. For more information, see less fuel.

With more than 200,000 Fuelstar catalysts fitted and many trials completed we have a wealth of experience to ensure that your trial will be a success. If you do encounter any problems we will be on hand to investigate and help you. Our reputation is at stake so it is essential that we are involved.