Search Results

The operating conditions of a typical motorcycle are considerably different than those of a typical passenger car and thus require an oil capable of handling the unique demands. One primary difference, wet clutch lubrication, is already addressed by the current JASO four-stroke motorcycle engine oil specification (JASO T 903:2011). Another challenge for the oil is gear box lubrication, which may be addressed in part with the addition of a gear protection test in a future revision to the JASO specification. A third major difference between a motorcycle oil and passenger car oil is the more severe conditions an oil is subjected to within a motorcycle engine, due to higher temperatures, engine speeds and power densities. Scooters, utilizing a transmission not lubricated by the crankcase oil, also place higher demands on an engine oil, once again due to higher temperatures, engine speeds and power densities.

The world is firmly focused on reducing energy consumption and on increasingly stringent regulations on CO2 emissions. Examples of regulatory changes include the new United States Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA) fuel economy test procedures which were required beginning with the 2008 model year for vehicles sold in the US market. These test procedures include testing at higher speeds, more aggressive acceleration and deceleration, and hot-weather and cold-temperature testing. These revised procedures are intended to provide an estimate that more accurately reflects what consumers will experience under real world driving conditions. The U.S.

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.

Consumer demand for size, weight and horsepower has dictated a prominent role for sport utility vehicles and light trucks in the product lines of major North American automobile manufacturers. Inherently less efficient than passenger cars, these vehicles will be facing more stringent light duty CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards beginning in 2005 when mileage targets will be elevated to 21 mpg; this figure will be further increased to 22.2 mpg by 2007. In order to accommodate both public demand and CAFE requirements, vehicle manufacturers are seeking ways to improve fuel economy through design and material modifications as well as through improvements in lubrication. The axle lubricant may have an important impact on fuel economy, and axle lubricants can be tailored to deliver higher levels of operating efficiency over a wide range of conditions.

New technologies are being commercialized across the automotive industry to address demands for improved fuel economy, emissions reductions, and improved customer satisfaction. Push-belt continuously variable transmissions (b-CVTs) are beginning to command a significant percentage of the market now dominated by manual and conventional automatic transmissions. In addition, automobile manufacturers plan to introduce the first traction drive toroidal-CVTs to the market place within the next five years. A review of the relative benefits and limitations of each of these automatic transmissions exists in the literature. In this paper we consider how the performance requirements of each of these automatic transmission systems impact automatic transmission fluid technology. The physical characteristics and screen test performance of two commercial ATFs, a b-CVTF, and two traction fluids were examined.

Increasingly stringent fuel economy and emissions regulations around the world have forced the further optimization of nearly all vehicle systems. Many technologies exist to improve fuel economy; however, only a smaller sub-set are commercially feasible due to the cost of implementation. One system that can provide a small but significant improvement in fuel economy is the lubrication system of an internal combustion engine. Benefits in fuel economy may be realized by the reduction of engine oil viscosity and the addition of friction modifying additives. In both cases, advanced engine oils allow for a reduction of engine friction. Because of differences in engine design and architecture, some engines respond more to changes in oil viscosity or friction modification than others. For example, an engine that is designed for an SAE 0W-16 oil may experience an increase in fuel economy if an SAE 0W-8 is used.

Modern high power density gasoline fueled engines place an ever-increasing demand on the engine lubricant. In this study, it is shown that advances in engine design to increase performance, improve fuel economy and lower emissions have outpaced the development of typical commercial engine lubricants. Advanced designed engines began to experience oil starvation as a result of a combination of driving cycles, oil quality and poor maintenance practices. The cause was traced to excessive increases in borderline pumping viscosity as measured by MRV TP-1 (ASTM D4684). Used oil analysis for MRV TP-1 showed viscosity greatly increased in excess of stay-in-grade requirements and in many cases the crankcase lubricant was solid at the temperature appropriate for its viscosity grade. However, at the same time CCS values were in grade or only slightly (1W grade) elevated.

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.

The tightening legislation in the on-road heavy-duty diesel area means that pollution control systems will soon be widely introduced on such engines. A number of different aftertreatment systems are currently being considered to meet the incoming legislation, including Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF), Diesel Oxidation Catalysts (DOC) and Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) systems. Relatively little is known about the interactions between lubricant-derived species and such aftertreatment systems. This paper describes the results of an experimental program carried out to investigate these interactions within DPF, DOC and SCR systems on a state-of-the-art 9 litre engine. The influence of lubricant composition and lube oil ash level was investigated on the different catalyst systems. In order to reduce costs and to speed up testing, test oil was dosed into the fuel. Tests without dosing lubricant into the fuel were also run.

Requirements to improve vehicle fuel economy continue to increase, spurred on by agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol. Lubricants can play a role in aiding fuel economy, as evidenced by the rise in the number of engine oil specifications that require fuel economy improvements. Part of this improvement is due to achieving suitable viscometric properties in the lubricant, but additional improvements can be made using friction modifier (FM) compounds. The use of FMs in lubricants is not new, with traditional approaches being oleochemical-based derivatives such as glycerol mono-oleate and molybdenum-based compounds. However, to achieve even greater improvements, new new friction modifying compounds are needed to help deliver the full potential required from next generation lubricants. This work looks at the potential improvements available from new FM technology over and above the traditional FM compounds.

The effects of lubricating oil on friction and engine-out emissions in a light-duty 2.2L compression ignition direct injection (CIDI) engine were investigated. A matrix of test oils varying in viscosity (SAE 5W-20 to 10W-40), friction modifier (FM) level and chemistry (MoDTC and organic FM), and basestock chemistry (mineral and synthetic) was investigated. Tests were run in an engine dynamometer according to a simulated, steady state FTP-75 procedure. Low viscosity oils and high levels of organic FM showed benefits in terms of fuel economy, but there were no significant effects observed with the oils with low MoDTC concentration on engine friction run in this program. No significant oil effects were observed on the gaseous emissions of the engine. PM emissions were analyzed for organic solubles and insolubles. The organic soluble fraction was further analyzed for the oil and fuel soluble portions.

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.

Forthcoming on-highway 2005/2007 European and North American emission regulations will require modern diesel engines to be equipped with Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) capable of trapping up to 99% of the exhaust particulate matter. Since diesel particulates (soot) accumulate in the filter over time, the overall system needs to be regenerated by attaining the ignition temperature of soot, which in the presence of oxygen is >600 °C. Catalyzed DPFs regenerate at temperatures as low as ∼300 °C. One of the major issues facing OEMs, aftertreatment system manufacturers, and lubricant formulators is the potential effects of the lubricant-derived ash deposits and their impact on a pressure increase across filters, as well as overall filter performance and its service characteristics.

Global original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) have requested lower viscosity automatic transmission fluid (ATF) for use in conventional and 6-speed automatic transmissions (AT) to meet growing demands for improved fuel economy. While lower-viscosity ATF may provide better fuel economy by reducing churning losses, other key performance attributes must be considered when formulating lower viscosity ATF(1,2). Gear and bearing performance can be key concerns with lower-viscosity ATFs due to reduced film thickness at the surfaces. Long-term anti-shudder performance is also needed to enable the aggressive use of controlled slip torque converter clutches that permit better fuel economy. And, friction characteristics need to be improved for higher clutch holding capacity and good clutch engagement performance. This paper covers the development of next-generation, low-viscosity ATF technology, which provides optimum fuel economy along with wear and friction durability.

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.

The regulatory drive for emission reductions, increased fuel costs, and likely increases in Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) requirements have made fuel efficiency a key issue for North American vehicle manufacturers and marketers. At the same time the popularity of sport utility vehicles and light trucks has made it more difficult to achieve CAFE objectives. In order to accommodate both public vehicle preference and government mandated CAFE requirements automobile manufacturers are seeking all available means to increase fuel economy through advanced system design, engineered materials, and improved lubricant technology. Axle lubricants can have a significant impact on fuel economy; moreover, axle lubricants can be tailored to deliver maximum operating efficiency over either specific or wide ranges of operating conditions.

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.

Motorcycle OEMs faced with stringent global fuel economy and emission regulations are being forced to develop new hardware and emissions control technologies to remain compliant. Motorcycle oils have become an enabling technology for the development of smaller, more efficient engines operating at higher power density. Many OEMs have therefore become reliant on lubricants to not only provide enhanced durability under more extreme operating conditions, but to also provide fuel economy benefits through reduced energy losses. Unlike passenger car oils that only lubricate the engine, motorcycle oils must lubricate both the engine and the drive train. These additional requirements place different performance demands versus a crankcase lubricant. The drive train includes highly loaded gears that are exposed to high pressures, in turn requiring higher levels of oil film strength and antiwear system durability.

Multifunctional or universal lubricating oils which service both gasoline and diesel engines have gained widespread commercial acceptance. Since 1970, numerous changes and additions have altered the performance tests and specifications which define the quality of these lubricants. New parameters include single cylinder and multicylinder diesel engine testing, valve train wear protection, clutch plate friction retention, extended drain interval and lubricant related fuel economy. In response to these requirements, new additive systems were developed. This paper discusses observed base oil-additive-engine test interactions and compares the performance of one of these additive systems to that of the old.