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 Engine Oil Industry Base Oil Interchange (BOI) and Viscosity Grade Read Across (VGRA) guidelines developed by the American Petroleum Institute (API) provide a means to significantly reduce the time to market for current technology engine oils. This process has several advantages including the public display of data and a consensus evaluation of the submitted data. The process also has several limitations including timeliness of the consensus process, and the applicability and flexibility of an all-encompassing, industry-wide guideline. An enhancement to the all-encompassing, industry-wide consensus process is the Single Technology Matrix (STM). The idea behind this approach is to use sufficient data from a single technology to develop and use BOI for that specific technology. The advantages of the STM include improved technical merit, timeliness and flexibility in establishing BOI.

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.

Multigrade automotive lubricants contain polymeric viscosity modifiers which enable the oil to provide adequate hydrodynamic lubrication at high temperatures and good starting/pumping performance at low temperatures. Under operating conditions in engines, transmissions and gear boxes, polymeric additives undergo both temporary and permanent viscosity loss. The former is caused by flow orientation and the latter by molecular chain scission. Whatever the mechanism, original equipment manufacturers are interested in maintaining a minimum level of hydrodynamic viscosity from oil change to oil change. This is often expressed as a “stay-in-grade” requirement. Commercial viscosity modifiers (VM) span a wide range of chemistries and molecular architectures.

Laboratory testing is an essential part of product development. However, it usually only reflects a small portion of the experience that a lubricant may see in actual service conditions. Many laboratory tests are designed to only address one or two facets of what is deemed to be critical performance areas. Since it is difficult to cover all of the critical performance conditions problems sometimes arise in service that were not anticipated by the laboratory test. Or, conversely, some above average performance evolves during service that was not observed in a specific laboratory test. This paper highlights the overall performance of four manual transmission fluids approved or accepted by the manufacturer for this application. The evaluations were conducted in a city bus fleet with the test buses assigned to the same route for approximately 300,000 km over 30 months.

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.

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.

A 100-hour engine dynamometer test for intake valve deposits (IVD) which uses a Ford 2.3L engine was developed by the Coordinating Research Council (CRC). Recently, this test has been approved by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) as Test Method D 6201-97. Since this test offers improvements in test variability, duration, and cost, it is expected to replace ASTM D 5500-94, a 16,000-km vehicle test run using a BMW 318i, as the key performance test for the Certification of Gasoline Deposit Control Additives by the EPA Final Rule. As a step in the replacement process, a correlation between valve deposit levels for the CRC 2.3L Ford IVD test and ASTM D 5500 BMW IVD test must be determined. This paper provides a statistical review of available data in an attempt to provide such a correlation.