Search Results

Diesel fuel requires sufficient lubricity to prevent excessive wear in fuel injection equipment. The processes for removing sulfur from diesel fuel also eliminate compounds that are responsible for its lubricating properties. This phenomenon is counterbalanced by employing lubricity additives to restore fuel lubricity to an acceptable level. The aim of this study was to compare the two different laboratory methods for testing lubricity. The two methods were the EN 590 standard method high frequency reciprocating rig (HFRR) and a less utilized method scuffing load ball-on-cylinder lubricity evaluator (SLBOCLE). Two different commercial lubricity additives were used. In addition, rapeseed methyl ester (RME) was used for lubricity purposes in the same way as the additives. To study the possible effect of the base fuel, the tests were performed with fossil diesel fuel, paraffinic diesel (Hydrotreated vegetable oil, HVO), and a blend of these.

For decades, ENISO12205 test has been used to evaluate the long term storage stability of diesel fuels. Nowadays, new biocomponents especially FAME has increased the need to create faster and more appropriate test method to measure the long term storage stability. Developments in engine technology have also raised the need to create a new method to evaluate the thermal stability of diesel fuels. These new methods should have correlation to field experience. As an example it has been shown that Rancimat (EN15751) and PetroOXY EN16091 have a correlation when fuel contains more than 2% FAME. Rancimat is not applicable for FAME free fuels, so correlation based PetroOXY limit should be limited to fuels containing more than 2 vol% FAME. Study on oxidation stability test methods and their correlation to real life were continued and deepened (part 1: SAE 2013-01-2678). ENISO12205 and PetroOXY EN16091 test methods did not have a correlation according to the earlier studies.