Please note that the details of this Challenge are no longer open. This challenge is under evaluation and is no longer accepting new submissions. You can:
Challenge How to Improve the Performance of Marine Lubricant Formulations That Use Group II Base Oils?

How to Improve the Performance of Marine Lubricant Formulations That Use Group II Base Oils?

Award: $15,000 USD
STATUS: Under Eval
Active Solvers: 72
Posted: Oct 11 2018
Challenge ID: 9934180
 
Team Project Rooms are available on this Challenge. Team Share Challenge Share
Abstract

Group II base oils are a higher grade of oils that, with its increasing availability and affordability, are being considered for substitution of lower grade oils in marine lubricants. However, its use poses challenges – low solvency of additives present in the formulation and incompatibility with marine fuels that lead to the formation of a black sludge (asphaltenes) and possible saturation of the engine filters. The challenge is enhanced by the fact that there is still a poor understanding of the underlying chemistry.

Hence, the Seeker is interested in new proposals for additives that can prevent these limitations and allow for the use of Group II base oils in the preparation of marine lubricants.

This Theoretical Challenge requires only a written proposal.

Overview

It is well known that not all base oils have similar physical or chemical properties or provide equivalent engine oil performance. The American Petroleum Institute (API) created five categories to highlight the differences in base oils (I to V). Until the last decade marine lubricants have been mainly blended using Group I base oil, because there was no technical or economic reasons for the use of alternative base oils. However, the rapid changes undergoing in the base oil world market and the increasing availability and affordability of Group II base oil means that the opportunity to use these higher grade oil must be considered when developing new formulations.

However, the use of Group II base oils in four-stroke trunk piston engine oils (TPEO) is fairly recent and largely poorly understood. It is recognized that its use, to date, has many challenges such as low solvency of other additives present in the formulation and incompatibility with Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO). Hence, what is expected and observed is that use of Group II oils leads to the formation of asphaltene deposits and possible saturation of the engine filters. In order to overcome this problem, the Seeker is interested in new proposals for formulation additives that can prevent it and allow for the use of Group II base oils in the preparation of these marine lubricants, TPEO. Since this is a new area of research, it is highly important that the Solver’s proposal is well-supported by a description of the underlying phenomena and science that i) identifies the reason why Group II base oils cannot perform as well as Group I base oils and 2) describes how the proposed additive and formulation solves the problem.

To receive an award, the Solvers will have to transfer to the Seeker their exclusive Intellectual Property (IP) rights to the solution. 

Submissions to this Challenge must be received by 11:59 PM (US Eastern Time) on November 11, 2018. 

Late submissions will not be considered.

What is InnoCentive?
InnoCentive is the global innovation marketplace where creative minds solve some of the world's most important problems for cash awards up to $1 million. Commercial, governmental and humanitarian organizations engage with InnoCentive to solve problems that can impact humankind in areas ranging from the environment to medical advancements.

What is a Theoretical IP Transfer Challenge?

An InnoCentive Theoretical Challenge builds upon an idea but is not yet a proof of concept. A solution to a Theoretical Challenge will solidify the Solver's concept with detailed descriptions, specifications and requirements necessary to bringing a good idea closer to becoming an actual product or service.

This Challenge is a Theoretical-IP Transfer Challenge, meaning that Solvers must relinquish all rights to the Intellectual Property (IP) for which they are awarded. By contrast, Theoretical-Licensing means that the Seeker is requesting non-exclusive rights to use the winning solution. For these forms of a Theoretical Challenge, Solvers that do not win retain the rights to their solution after the evaluation period is complete. The Seeker retains no rights to any IP not awarded.

Share This Challenge