Trending · Patent
Polyamide Grease Thickeners: A Lithium-Free Option Beyond CaSX and Polyurea
Invista’s WO 2023/242722 describes a polyamide thickener (Mw ~450–3500 g/mol, at least four amide bonds, para-substituted aromatics) claimed to match lithium or polyurea on penetration. It is not yet an Indian commodity. It is the next…
Direct answer
Invista’s WO 2023/242722 describes a polyamide thickener (Mw ~450–3500 g/mol, at least four amide bonds, para-substituted aromatics) claimed to match lithium or polyurea on penetration. It is not yet an Indian commodity. It is the next chemistry a consultant should have an opinion on.
- Invista’s WO 2023/242722 describes a polyamide thickener (Mw ~450–3500 g/mol, at least four amide bonds, para-substituted aromatics) claimed to match lithium or polyurea on penetration.
- Polyamide thickeners appear in recent lithium-free filings (Invista / INV Nylon family). They are prior art for a soap-free organic network, not a kettle-ready Indian SOP. Solubility, dropping behaviour and cost vs CaSX have to be proven on
- Name the test method on any number that reaches a TDS.
- Patents and papers are prior art, not a product Lubechem sells.
- Written for R&D chemists watching the next lithium alternative.
How polyamide thickening differs from soap fibre
How polyamide thickening differs from soap fibre. Invista’s WO 2023/242722 describes a polyamide thickener (Mw ~450–3500 g/mol, at least four amide bonds, para-substituted aromatics) claimed to match lithium or polyurea on penetration. It is not yet an Indian commodity. It is the next chemistry a consultant should have an opinion on.
Polyamide thickeners appear in recent lithium-free filings (Invista / INV Nylon family). They are prior art for a soap-free organic network, not a kettle-ready Indian SOP. Solubility, dropping behaviour and cost vs CaSX have to be proven on the oils you stock.
Literature/prior art for this note: WO 2023/242722 A1, Invista / INV Nylon; US 2025/0313772 A1. Read it as evidence under its own method, not as a formula you can paste onto an Indian CoA.
The reader is R&D chemists watching the next lithium alternative. Search phrases around “polyamide grease thickener” should land on a decision: duty, method, purge, SKU sequence — then a link to the manufacturing page, not a second SOP.
What the patent claims on penetration and dropping behaviour
What the patent claims on penetration and dropping behaviour. Invista’s WO 2023/242722 describes a polyamide thickener (Mw ~450–3500 g/mol, at least four amide bonds, para-substituted aromatics) claimed to match lithium or polyurea on penetration. It is not yet an Indian commodity. It is the next chemistry a consultant should have an opinion on.
Polyamide thickeners appear in recent lithium-free filings (Invista / INV Nylon family). They are prior art for a soap-free organic network, not a kettle-ready Indian SOP. Solubility, dropping behaviour and cost vs CaSX have to be proven on the oils you stock.
The reader is R&D chemists watching the next lithium alternative. Search phrases around “polyamide grease thickener” should land on a decision: duty, method, purge, SKU sequence — then a link to the manufacturing page, not a second SOP.
Plant implications (no LiOH, different cook)
Plant implications (no LiOH, different cook). Invista’s WO 2023/242722 describes a polyamide thickener (Mw ~450–3500 g/mol, at least four amide bonds, para-substituted aromatics) claimed to match lithium or polyurea on penetration. It is not yet an Indian commodity. It is the next chemistry a consultant should have an opinion on.
The reader is R&D chemists watching the next lithium alternative. Search phrases around “polyamide grease thickener” should land on a decision: duty, method, purge, SKU sequence — then a link to the manufacturing page, not a second SOP.
When to watch vs when to trial
When to watch vs when to trial. Invista’s WO 2023/242722 describes a polyamide thickener (Mw ~450–3500 g/mol, at least four amide bonds, para-substituted aromatics) claimed to match lithium or polyurea on penetration. It is not yet an Indian commodity. It is the next chemistry a consultant should have an opinion on.
The reader is R&D chemists watching the next lithium alternative. Search phrases around “polyamide grease thickener” should land on a decision: duty, method, purge, SKU sequence — then a link to the manufacturing page, not a second SOP.
Lubechem will not invent a client list or a certificate. If the next step is a trial, send the duty brief. If the next step is legal clearance of a filing, that sits with a patent attorney.
What this page is for
Thought-leadership on a thickener family almost no Indian blog covers. Positions Lubechem ahead of commodity CaSX-only content. Images are labelled conceptual illustrations. Patents and papers are cited so you can go read them.
How to use this filing as prior art — not as a recipe
| Question | What to extract | What not to do |
|---|---|---|
| What problem is claimed? | Polyamide Grease Thickeners: A Lithium-Free Option Beyond CaSX and Polyurea | Do not treat the abstract as a proven plant SOP |
| Thickener / additive families named | polyamide grease thickener | Do not copy claim language into a TDS |
| Examples vs claims | Worked oils, solids, treat ranges in examples | Examples are not a licence |
| Design-around | Unclaimed process windows, other thickeners | FTO is legal advice; Lubechem does not issue it |
| Citation in this article | WO 2023/242722 A1, Invista / INV Nylon; US 2025/0313772 A1 | Cite, do not reproduce claims |
People-first note: this is dated editorial for decision-making. It is not a scaled rewrite of the manufacturing pages, and it is not legal or certification advice.
Questions plants actually ask
Is polyamide grease thickener a drop-in for whatever we run today?
Almost never. Thickener family, base-oil viscosity, NLGI grade and additive response all have to be matched to the duty. A purge plan comes before a plant-wide switch. Compatibility charts are screens, not guarantees.
Can we put polyamide grease thickener on the TDS because a patent or paper mentioned it?
No. Patents are prior art. Papers are evidence under stated conditions. A TDS line has to be backed by a method you actually ran, on oil you actually stock, at a treat you can buy twice.
Who owns the formula if Lubechem develops it?
Ownership is the contract. The practice is independent formulation with IP transfer as scoped — not a branded additive package you can never leave. Ask for the assignment language before the first kettle.
What should R&D chemists watching the next lithium alternative send in the first brief?
Duty (load, speed, water, temperature, relube), the current TDS and fail mode, target specs (IS / ASTM / OEM), and whether the product is sold, used in-house, or exported. Photographs of the failed component help more than adjectives.
Literature and prior art
Citations below are orientation, not a freedom-to-operate opinion. Lubechem does not copy claimed compositions and does not treat a patent as a product endorsement.
- WO 2023/242722 A1, Invista / INV Nylon; US 2025/0313772 A1 — cited as prior art or literature, not as a product Lubechem sells
- EU REACH lithium-hydroxide classification trajectory — labelling and supply, not a ban on every lithium grease
- NLGI High-Temperature Performance Limit discussion — operating temperature is not drop point
- NSF H1 / ISO 21469 — incidental food contact, not a licence to invent ingredients