Search Results

Gasoline-related factors that affect low-speed pre-ignition (LSPI) include the distillation properties of gasoline, manganese (Mn), ethanol, diesel fuel, detergent for aftermarket, and iron (Fe). The combined effect of Mn with ethanol or high calcium engine oil (high-Ca oil) has not been sufficiently clarified. Therefore, appropriate countermeasures for LSPI have not yet been implemented. To clarify the effect of the gasoline properties and additives on LSPI, engine tests were conducted using gasoline with different “PM Index” values, an indicator of distillation properties, different concentrations of Mn, ethanol, diesel fuel, detergent, Fe, and high-Ca oil. The results showed that the LSPI frequency tended to increase with the PM Index, Mn up to 60 ppm, diesel fuel up to 2 vol.%, and detergent up to three times the standard amount.

The SAE J300 classification was expanded to 0W-12 and 0W-8 viscosity grades in 2015, and lower viscosity engine oils have been studied in the industry. ILSAC GF-6B that will be introduced in 2020 will specify a 0W-16 requirement, but 0W-12 and 0W-8 grades are not considered. Because engine oil equal to or higher than the 0W-20 grade is recommended for almost all engines globally, suitable engine tests for 0W-12 and 0W-8 do not exist. Therefore, the Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association, Petroleum Association of Japan and Society of Automotive Engineers of Japan decided to establish new 0W-12 and 0W-8 low viscosity engine oil specifications. It is referred to as JASO GLV-1, and together with a new fuel economy engine test procedure, these engine oils for better fuel economy will be put on the Japanese market in 2019. Motoring friction torque tests are widely used to ascertain the friction reduction effect of fuel-economy engine oils.

The demands of application of dual-axis chassis dynamometers (4WD-CHDY) have increased recently due to the improvement of performance of 4WD-CHDY and an increase in the number of 4WD vehicles which are difficult to convert to 2WD. However, there are few evaluations of any differences between fuel economy and exhaust emission levels in the case of 2WD-CHDY with conversion from 4WD to 2WD (2WD-mode) and 4WD-CHDY without conversion to 2WD (4WD-mode). Fuel economy and exhaust emission tests of 4WD vehicle equipped with a typical 4WD mechanism were performed to investigate any differences between the case of the 2WD-mode and the 4WD-mode. In these tests, we measured ‘work at wheel’ (wheel-work) using wheel torque meters. A comparison of the 2WD-mode and the 4WD-mode reveals a difference of fuel economy (2WD-mode is 1.5% better than that of 4WD-mode) and wheel-work (2WD-mode is 3.9% less than that of 4WD-mode). However, there are almost no differences of exhaust emission levels.