Search Results

The new Beijing Automotive Industry Corporation (BAIC) engine, an evolution of the 2.3L 4-cylinder turbocharged gasoline engine from Saab, was designed, built, and tested with close collaboration between BAIC Motor Powertrain Co., Ltd. and Southwest Research Institute (SwRI®). The upgraded engine was intended to achieve low fuel consumption and a good balance of high performance and compliance with Euro 6 emissions regulations. Low fuel consumption was achieved primarily through utilizing cooled low pressure loop exhaust gas recirculation (LPL-EGR) and dual independent cam phasers. Cooled LPL-EGR helped suppress engine knock and consequently allowed for increased compression ratio and improved thermal efficiency of the new engine. Dual independent cam phasers reduced engine pumping losses and helped increase low-speed torque. Additionally, the intake and exhaust systems were improved along with optimization of the combustion chamber design.

Dual fuel engines have shown significant potential as high efficiency powerplants. In one example, SwRI® has run a high EGR, dual-fuel engine using gasoline as the main fuel and diesel as the ignition source, achieving high thermal efficiencies with near zero NOx and smoke emissions. However, assuming a tank size that could be reasonably packaged, the diesel fuel tank would need to be refilled often due to the relatively high fraction of diesel required. To reduce the refill interval, SwRI investigated various alternative fluids as potential ignition sources. The fluids included: Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD), Biodiesel, NORPAR (a commercially available mixture of normal paraffins: n-pentadecane (normal C15H32), and n-hexadecane (normal C16H34)) and ashless lubrication oil. Lubrication oil was considered due to its high cetane number (CN) and high viscosity, hence high ignitability.

Fuel economy is not an absolute attribute, but is highly dependent on the method used to evaluate it. In this work, two test methods are used to evaluate the differences in fuel economy brought about by changes in engine oil viscosity grade and additive chemistry. The two test methods include a chassis dynamometer vehicle test and an engine dynamometer test. The vehicle testing was conducted using the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) testing protocol while the engine dynamometer test uses the proposed American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Sequence VIE fuel economy improvement 1 (FEI1) testing methodology. In an effort to improve agreement between the two testing methods, the same model engine was used in both test methods, the General Motors (GM) 3.6 L V6 (used in the 2012 model year Chevrolet™ Malibu™ engine). Within the lubricant industry, this choice of engine is reinforced because it has been selected for use in the proposed Sequence VIE fuel economy test.

Chassis dynamometer tests are often used to determine vehicle fuel economy (FE). Since the entire vehicle is used, these methods are generally accepted to be more representative of ‘real-world’ conditions than engine dynamometer tests or small-scale bench tests. Unfortunately, evaluating vehicle fuel economy via this means introduces significant variability that can readily be mitigated with engine dynamometer and bench tests. Recently, improvements to controls and procedures have led to drastically improved test precision in chassis dynamometer testing. Described herein are chassis dynamometer results from five fully formulated engine oils (utilizing improved testing protocols on the Federal Test Procedure (FTP-75) and Highway Fuel Economy Test (HwFET) cycles) which not only show statistically significant FE changes across viscosity grades but also meaningful FE differentiation within a viscosity grade where additive systems have been modified.