Search Results

Historically, vehicle fluid condition has been monitored by measuring miles driven or hours operated. Many current vehicles have more sophisticated monitoring methods that use additional variables such as fuel consumption, engine temperature and engine revolutions to predict fluid condition. None of these monitoring means, however, actually measures a fluid property to determine condition, and that is about to change. New sensors and diagnostic systems are being developed that allow real time measurement of some lubricant physical and/or chemical properties and interpret the results in order to recommend oil change intervals and maximize performance. Many of these new sensors use electrochemical or acoustic wave technologies. This paper examines the use of these two technologies to determine engine oil condition and focuses on the effects of lubricant chemistry on interpreting the results.

With the continued growth of the sport utility vehicle (SUV) market in North America in recent years more emphasis has been placed on fluid performance in these vehicles. In addition to fuel economy the key performance area sought by original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) in general has been temperature reduction in the axle. This is being driven by warranty claims that show that one of the causes of axle failure in these type vehicles is related to overheating. The overheating is, in turn, caused by high load situations, e.g., pulling a large trailer at or near the maximum rated load limit for the vehicle, especially when the vehicle or its main subcomponents are relatively new. The excessive temperature generally leads to premature failure of seals, bearings and gears. The choice of lubricant can have a significant effect on the peak and stabilized operating temperature under these extreme conditions.

It has been recognized for many years that multipurpose axle lubricants give rise to much higher axle break-in temperatures than lead-soap, active-sulfur or sulfur-chlorine-lead lubricants. Evaluation of differences in axle lubricant break-in temperature between the various multipurpose gear lubricants has been complicated by lack of repeatability and reproducibility. The work described in this paper shows that one of the most important variables affecting axle break-in temperature, under the conditions of the test technique used, was torsional axle preload and that control of dimensional preload in itself is not sufficient to ensure good test repeatability. The test technique described here has been used to evaluate the axle lubricant break-in temperature properties of several sulfur-phosphorus multipurpose gear lubricants.

Studies of selected automotive gear lubricants in heavy truck tandem axles and transmissions have revealed improvements in fuel economy associated with the viscosity of lubricants tested (grades 75W, 75W-90, and 80W-140). The testing included a heavy truck on-highway fleet test and test track operation. Standard laboratory gear tests on light viscosity monograde (SAE 75W) oils indicate that oils of this type may be deficient in EP protection. Combined observations show that there may be a critical balance between axle lubricant fuel economy benefits and axle durability in field service.

The engine-out emissions and fuel consumption rates for a modern, heavy-duty diesel engine were compared when fueling with a conventional diesel fuel and three water-blend-fuel emulsions. Four different fuels were studied: (1) a conventional diesel fuel, (2) PuriNOx,™ a water-fuel emulsion using the same conventional diesel fuel, but having 20% water by mass, and (3,4) two other formulations of the PuriNOx™ fuel that contained proprietary chemical additives intended to improve combustion efficiency and emissions characteristics. The emissions data were acquired with three different injection-timing strategies using the AVL 8-Mode steady-state test method in a Caterpillar 3176 engine, which had a calibration that met the 1998 nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions standard.

Light trucks and sport utility vehicles (SUVs) have become extremely popular in the United States in recent years, but this shift to larger passenger vehicles has placed new demands upon the gear lubricant. The key challenge facing vehicle manufacturers in North America is meeting government-mandated fuel economy requirements while maintaining durability. Gear oils must provide long-term durability and operating temperature control in order to increase equipment life under severe conditions while maintaining fuel efficiency. This paper describes the development of a full-scale light duty axle test that simulates a variety of different driving conditions that can be used to measure temperature reduction properties of gear oil formulations. The work presented here outlines a test methodology that allows gear oil formulations to be compared with each other while accounting for axle changes due to wear and conditioning during testing.

Light trucks and sport utility vehicles (SUVs) have become extremely popular in the United States in recent years, but this shift to larger passenger vehicles has placed new demands upon the gear lubricant. The key challenge facing vehicle manufacturers in North America is meeting government-mandated fuel economy requirements while maintaining the durability required for severe service. In light truck/SUV applications, gear oils must provide operating temperature control under extreme conditions such as trailer-towing. Higher operating temperatures for prolonged periods can adversely affect metallurgical properties and reduce fluid film thickness, both of which can lead to premature equipment failures. In our view, operating temperature is an important indicator of durability. Unfortunately, lubricants optimized for temperature control do not always provide the best fuel economy.

The popularity of light trucks and sport utility vehicles (SUVs), coupled with growing consumer demand for vehicles with more size, weight and horsepower, has challenged the original equipment manufacturers' (OEM) ability to meet the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) specifications due to the increased contribution of these vehicle classes on fleet averages. The need for improved fuel economy is also a global issue due to the relationship of reduced fuel consumption to reduced CO2 emissions. Vehicle manufacturers are challenged to match the proper fluid with the application to provide the required durability protection while maximizing fuel efficiency. Recent new viscosity classifications outlined under SAE J306 aid in more tightly defining options for lubricant choice for a given application. Changes to the SAE J306 viscosity classification define new intermediate viscosity grades, SAE 110 and SAE 190.

The growing need for improved fuel economy is a global challenge due to continuously tightening environmental regulations targeting lower CO2 emission levels via reduced fuel consumption in vehicles. In order to reach these fuel efficiency targets, it necessitates improvements in vehicle transmission hardware components by applying advanced technologies in design, materials and surface treatments etc., as well as matching lubricant formulations with appropriate additive chemistry. Axle lubricants have a considerable impact on fuel economy. More importantly, they can be tailored to deliver maximum operational efficiency over specific or wide ranges of operating conditions. The proper lubricant technology with well-balanced chemistries can simultaneously realize both fuel economy and hardware protection, which are perceived to have a trade-off relationship.