Search Results

Downsized gasoline engines, coupled with gasoline direct injection (GDI) and turbocharging, have provided an effective means to meet both emissions standards and customers’ drivability expectations. As a result, these engines have become more and more common in the passenger vehicle marketplace over the past 10 years. To maximize fuel economy, these engines are commonly calibrated to operate at low speeds and high engine loads – well into the traditional ‘knock-limited’ region. Advanced engine controls and GDI have effectively suppressed knock and allowed the engines to operate in this high efficiency region more often than was historically possible. Unfortunately, many of these downsized, boosted engines have experienced a different type of uncontrolled combustion. This combustion occurs when the engine is operating under high load and low speed conditions and has been named Low Speed Pre-Ignition (LSPI). LSPI has shown to be very damaging to engine hardware.

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.

With the increasing use of modern, EGR-equipped, heavy-duty diesel engines and the use of lower sulfur and alternate fuels, such as biodiesel, lubricants are being exposed to a range of different compositions of acids. To complement the traditional detergent bases, todays lubricants have evolved to include a higher proportion of basic materials from amine-derived sources to aid in oxidation and soot control. This paper explores the impact of the different sources of acids, some of the issues they create and how they can be addressed, exemplified in a prototype CJ-4 lubricant formulation.