MAXR 100 Product Overview

Technology for Improved Compressor
and Heat Exchange Efficiency

Historical Background:

During the normal operation of air conditioning and refrigeration systems, compressor oil migrates through the system coating the interior surfaces of condensing and evaporator coils. Over time, an insulative oil barrier forms causing a loss of efficiency. This build-up typically begins to affect the system as early as the 6th month of operation. By the 24th month there’s a notable increase in noise due to loss of lubricity and of heat exchange efficiency. The result: longer and more frequent run cycles, a significant increase in the operating power, and increased maintenance.

The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRE) have published a study reporting that systems can degrade as much as 30% due to the build-up of deposits on the internal surfaces of the system. The report concludes the following: Oil Fouling of the heat transfer surfaces of air conditioning and refrigeration systems will cause a loss of about 7% efficiency the first year and an additional 2% per year in each of the following years. As commercial and residential power cost continues to rise, consumers are looking for ways to save money while maintaining operating efficiencies.

Refrigerant oil additives are a simple, effective way to increase the efficiency of compressors and heat exchangers in air-conditioning and refrigeration systems. The idea of oil additives certainly is not a new technology and in fact some products were introduced as far back as the mid 1980’s. Over the years new technologies were developed and products were categorized in to one of two groups: Refrigerant Oil Additives and Polarized Refrigerant Oil Additives (PROA).

Products marketed strictly as “oil additives” were blended into the systems existing refrigerant to supplement the systems cooling efficiencies. Polarized Refrigerant Oil Additives, or PROA’s, introduced the use of a negatively charged molecule to the blend that was attracted to the metal surface of the compressor and condenser coils. These early polarized additives performed better than standard refrigerants as they provided a coating to exposed metal surfaces and increased efficiency by reducing operating friction, but the technology was fundamentally flawed.

Until July of 1996, the only PROA’s available were produced and marketed from the same formula and patent. Several companies were licensed to use the patent and yielded a number of seemingly independent companies. Each licensee was responsible for its own manufacturing procedures. Finished products were private labeled and marketed under several different trade names. This falsely created the appearance of competitive products developed with competitive technologies. The inherent lack of compound and production controls produced an assorted range of products that performed in an equally varied manner. To complicate matters even more was that the patent under which each of these products was produced was not a product patent or a formula patent, but an application patent for the introduction of commercially available Chlorinated a-Olefin or Chlorinated Paraffin lubricant into air conditioning and refrigeration systems.

The transfer of technology turned out not to be a simple matter. Prior to this point, Chlorinated a-Olefin lubricant incorporating the use of PROA technology, was used for high stress metal working such as roll-forming of steel, steel stamping and high speed machining. Chlorinated a-Olefin was not manufactured by chemical companies to perform as a PROA, and when used as such, created an environment within the system that resulted in a number of serious consequences. The most serious problem associated with using a Chlorinated a-Olefin as a PROA was its corrosive potential and the release of free chlorine into the system.

Ultimately customers believed that they had a choice of competitive products independently developed and tested to some kind of demanding standard. In fact these “competitive products” were founded with the same technology and rushed to market without the benefit of either an adequate experience curve or sufficient field testing. The result: an industry shrouded in confusion, misinformation, false claims, skepticism and lost confidence.