Tribology International 101 (2016) 43–48

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tribology International
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/triboint

A viscosity modifier solution to reconcile fuel economy and durability

in diesel engines
Jun Cui n, Sonia Oberoi, Stuart Briggs, Isabella Goldmints
Infineum USA, L.P., Linden, NJ, USA

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this paper the design and architectural features of a new viscosity modifier (VM) with the optimal
Received 30 November 2015 balance between fuel economy and durability are explored. The viscometric properties of the new VM
Received in revised form and fuel economy performance are described and demonstrated in a range of diesel engines, both in
30 March 2016
passenger vehicles in the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) and in a mid-size diesel engine under a
Accepted 31 March 2016
Available online 7 April 2016
variety of heavy duty driving conditions. In both FE tests, up to 2% fuel economy improvements were
consistently observed for the lubricant oils formulated with the new FE VM. In addition, the durability in
Keywords: sooted environment is addressed which is now critical for both passenger car and heavy duty diesel oils,
Viscosity modifiers and the VM's role in soot-induced viscosity increase as related to both retained fuel efficiency and soot-
Fuel economy
induced wear is demonstrated. The new VM delivers additional control of soot-induced viscosity control
Durability
in bench screening tests, where the oil viscosity was reduced by an order of magnitude at 9% soot loading
condition. Furthermore, in both Peugeot DV6 and Mack T11 tests the kinematic viscosity of the highly
sooted oils was reduced by more than 50% at the end of the tests after replacing the conventional VM
with the new FE VM. Lastly, wear and durability performance is demonstrated in both engine screening
tests and heavy duty engine tests, where the new FE VM helps maintain the low soot-induced wear and
the outstanding engine cleanliness.
& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
With tightening of emission regulations due to environmental
concerns, the requirements for vehicle fuel efficiency continue to
increase. Meeting these requirements has been a challenging task
for original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) leading to engine
downsizing and introduction of new hardware to improve vehicle
fuel efficiency. However, engine development usually requires
large investment and long cycle time. A complimentary approach
to gaining additional fuel efficiency is in designing lubricants to
minimize frictional energy losses in the engine.
A common route to obtain fuel economy from the lubricant is
to reduce its viscosity [1–5]. However this route leads to concerns
about engine durability and wear protection expected from the
lubricant. To optimize both parameters, fuel efficiency and wear,
lubricant viscosity profiles have been developed using special
Viscosity Modifiers (VM) [6–8]. In these cases viscosity is mini-
mized at the range of temperatures characteristic of a typical
driving cycle. However at the peak temperatures these special VMs
are designed to provide the necessary viscosity boost to protect
n
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jun.cui@infineum.com (J. Cui).
the engine. These enhanced lubricant viscosity profiles have been
shown to result in improved fuel efficiency and excellent wear
protection [6,7] in both gasoline and diesel engines.
However, the viscosity of the lubricant in-service is affected by
many factors, including mechanical shear, fuel dilution, oxidation,
and soot loading. Of these, oxidation and soot in the lubricant can
result in viscosity increase and the loss of lubricant derived fuel
economy [9]. Moreover, it has been shown in multiple studies that
when soot in the lubricant is not properly dispersed it would not
only result in viscosity increase but also in abrasive wear [10–17].
Multiple studies which included engine and field tests have shown
the importance of good soot dispersancy for wear protection in
both heavy duty diesel (HDD) as well as in passenger car diesel
engines [18]. To address this, a number of tests to measure lubri-
cant performance with respect to viscosity increase and soot-
derived wear of the engine parts have been developed.
To prevent soot aggregation and thus viscosity increase and
wear in diesel engines, either traditional dispersants or dispersant
VMs, or both are used. It has been shown that some non-
dispersant VMs containing aromatic functional groups can pro-
vide additional dispersancy to the engine lubricant [19,20]. The
use of these VMs is especially relevant in lower viscosity oils
where the use of high concentrations of traditional dispersants can
be limited by viscometric constraints. Thus the development of a

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2016.03.038
0301-679X/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
44 J. Cui et al. / Tribology International 101 (2016) 43–48

VM that can provide an optimal viscosity–temperature profile for 3

fuel efficiency and have credits in soot-related viscosity increase Conventional HSD
and soot-induced abrasive wear, could be extremely useful in
PMA
balancing fuel economy with diesel engine protection. 2.5

Relative Viscosity
Yet another aspect of the VM performance in diesel engine oil is New FE HSD
in its ability to minimize oil related deposits. In general, polymers
can contribute to deposit formation in the engine, and the higher 2
the concentration of the polymer, the more deposits are expected
to form, provided the additive package is the same. Thus a low
treat rate of the viscosity modifier in the engine lubricant is one of 1.5
the keys to preventing deposit formation. This prevention of
deposit formation [21] from the polymer can potentially enable
lower treat of detergent and other deposit control additives. 1
However, the polymer concentration is not the only parameter 0 50 100 150
that affects lubricant-related deposit formation in the engine. The Temperature (°C)
particular chemistry of the polymer plays a significant role. Fig. 1. Relative viscosity as a function of temperature for oils with conventional
In this paper, a VM polymer design that optimizes the lubricant HSD, PMA, and new FE HSD.
viscosity–temperature profile to minimize the viscosity at in-
service temperatures and to provide necessary viscosity at peak
temperatures is presented. When using a lubricant with this VM, Table 1
Structure and composition of the viscosity modifiers used in the study.
fuel economy improvement of up to 2% can be obtained in both
passenger car and mid-size diesel engines. In addition, this VM can Name Description Architecture
provide credits in soot-related viscosity increase in both passenger
car and HDD engines, as well as play a role in soot-induced wear Conventional HSD Hydrogenated poly(styrene-diene) Star
control. Finally, the low treat rate of this VM allows one to for- New FE HSD Hydrogenated poly(styrene-diene) Star
PMA Polymethacrylate Linear
mulate the oil with good deposit control. FE PMA Polymethacrylate Comb

2. Viscosity modifier design

The hydrodynamic lubrication regime in modern diesel engines
is characterized by a formation of continuous lubricant film
between the surfaces. According to the Stribeck curve the frictional
energy losses in the liquid film are significantly lower than in the
solid to solid contact allowing the engine to operate more effi-
ciently. Without direct contact of the surfaces the energy dis-
sipation happens in the fluid film and is directly related to film
viscosity. Thus the viscosity of the oil at operational temperatures
plays a significant role in improving fuel economy performance in
diesel engines. The viscosity modifier can be used to provide the
ideal viscosity temperature profile for a lubricant to deliver fuel
economy and wear protection at the same time. The ideal VM
would deliver a viscosity–temperature profile that would maintain
the viscosity at high peak temperatures to form sufficient oil film
for engine protection and at the same time it would have lower
viscosity at typical operating temperatures to reduce frictional
energy losses and improve fuel economy.
A new VM based on hydrogenated styrene-diene (HSD) star
chemistry was designed to provide an optimal viscometric beha-
vior for fuel efficiency and durability [22]. The VM is able to
expand at high temperature to have a high viscosity contribution
to the oil and contract as temperature decreases to reduce its
viscosity contribution at lower temperatures.
The viscosity–temperature relationship of this new VM is
shown in Fig. 1, which plots the relative viscosity over a range of
temperatures. Relative viscosity is calculated from the viscosity of
the VM containing oil divided by the viscosity of the base oil. It
describes the viscosity contribution attributable to the VM. For a
conventional HSD VM, relative viscosity decreases as temperature
increases, indicating that at low temperatures VM contributes
more to viscosity in relative terms. For polymethacrylate (PMA)
VM, relative viscosity increases with temperature. This is a unique
behavior for PMA, as its coil size in the oil decreases as tempera-
ture decreases. The new FE HSD behaves similarly to PMA. As
temperature decreases, the coil size and thus hydrodynamic
volume of the new FE HSD VM decreases, leading to lower relative
viscosity at low temperatures. The details of different VMs used in
the study are summarized in Table 1.
To assess the viscometric behavior of the VMs in the finished
lubricant three oils were blended using the same mid-SAPS additive
package in the same base oil. All oils were formulated to the same
high temperature high shear viscosity (HTHS) at 150 °C (3.5 cP) and
the HTHS at lower temperatures as well as kinematic viscosities
(KV) at 100 °C and 40 °C were measured. It is believed that HTHS
viscosity at 150 °C correlates with wear performance at peak tem-
peratures while HTHS viscosity at lower temperatures can be
indicative of the frictional losses and thus fuel efficiency in the
operational temperature range. As shown in Table 2, the oils for-
mulated with different VMs to the same HTHS at 150 °C exhibited
different viscosities at lower temperatures. Both the new FE HSD
and the FE PMA have significantly lower HTHS at 100, 70 and 45 °C
compared to the conventional HSD. The low HTHS is expected to
contribute to fuel economy credit in the engine.
It is also worth noting that to achieve the same viscosity, FE
PMA requires almost three times of the solid VM compared to HSD
(both conventional and the new FE VM). The high polymer treat
rate could be a potential debit in some aspects of engine perfor-
mance such as deposit formation, and thus is not desirable.
3. Fuel economy performance
3.1. Fuel economy measurements in the New European Driving Cycle
(NEDC)
The fuel economy performance of the new FE HSD was first
demonstrated in the NEDC using various diesel engine passenger
vehicles. The NEDC is designed to evaluate the emission levels, or
fuel economy, of passenger cars in Europe. As shown in Fig. 2, the
entire cycle takes 1180 s, and is composed of urban driving stages
from 0 to 780 s and a highway driving stage from 781 to 1180 s.
The cycle starts at room temperature (typically 22 °C) and ends in
 J. Cui et al. / Tribology International 101 (2016) 43–48 45

Table 2 2
Viscometric properties of SAE 5W-30 oils formulated with conventional HSD, FE
New FE HSD

FE (% ) over Reference Oil

PMA, and new FE HSD VMs.

Conventional HSD FE PMA New FE HSD 1.5 Conventional HSD

Solid VM (%) 1.1 2.7 1.1

KV at 100 °C (cSt) 11.9 10.3 11.7
KV at 40 °C (cSt) 67.1 43.1 58.1 1
HTHS at 150 °C (cP) 3.5 3.5 3.5
HTHS at 100 °C (cP) 7.7 6.8 6.9
HTHS at 70 °C (cP) 14.2 12.7 13.1
HTHS at 45 °C (cP) 30.1 27.4 27.8 0.5
KV – Kinematic Viscosity (ASTM D445 [23])
HTHS – High Temperature High Shear Viscosity (ASTM D4683 [24] for 150, 70, and
45 °C; ASTM D6616 [25] for 100 °C) 0
Vehicle 1 Vehicle 2 Vehicle 3
Diesel 2.0L Diesel 3.0L Diesel 2.1L
120 240
Fig. 3. Percentage of fuel economy improvement of the candidate oils over the SAE
Temperature
Oil Sump Temperature (°C)

100 5W-30 reference oil under NEDC in three passenger vehicles with diesel engines.
200
Vehicle Speed (km/h)
Vehicle Speed Note: Vehicle 1 – Opel Insignia with A20DTH engine, 2.0 l; Vehicle 2 – Mercedes-
Benz C 320 CDI, 3.0 l, V6; Vehicle 3 – Mercedes-Benz C 250 CDI, 2.1 l, 4 cylinders.
80 160

60 120 100

40 80
80
20 40

0 0 Load (%) 60
0 500 1000
Time (second)
Fig. 2. NEDC profile – oil sump temperature and vehicle speed over time. 40

the range between 80 and 100 °C. The exact temperature profile
depends upon the vehicle used for testing.
The tests are run on a MAHA 4-wheel-drive chassis dynam-
ometer, with the vehicle exhaust directed through a gas analyzer.
Euro V specified fuel is used for all the tests. Fuel consumption is
calculated by analyzing the carbon dioxide content of the exhaust
gas. The measurement of each candidate oil was repeated four
times and a reference oil (with four repeated runs) was run before
and after the candidate oil to ensure reproducibility of the result.
Fuel economy improvement (FEI) is calculated based on the
average fuel consumption of the candidate oil relative to the
average fuel consumption of the reference oil.
In the chassis dyno NEDC test, a separate study was performed
to investigate the repeatability of the test. Based on regression
analysis, the standard deviation for FEI in this data set is 0.18%. For
the observed difference between two oils to be considered sta-
tistically significant, the FEI must be 0.49% or greater [8].
Three different vehicles were used to measure the fuel econ-
omy performance of the oils with new FE HSD and conventional
HSD. Both oils were formulated with a mid-SAPS additive package
to the same HTHS at 150 °C of 3.5 cP. The fuel economy improve-
ment results are shown in Fig. 3. Compared to the reference oil
(SAE 5W-30 grade, HTHS at 150 °C of 3.5 cP), both oils show
positive fuel economy improvements in all three vehicles, indi-
cating better fuel efficiency of the candidate oils. In addition, by
replacing the conventional HSD with the new FE HSD, more than
0.5% additional fuel economy improvement was observed in all
three vehicles, demonstrating the robustness of the fuel economy
additive technology.
20
0
0 50 100
Speed (%)
Fig. 4. Testing conditions in the 6.5l GM fuel economy engine test.
driving conditions utilized by heavy duty diesel trucks. It consists
of 17 different load/speed/temperature stages (shown in Fig. 4).
The calculation to predict fuel economy improvement (FEI) for
specific driving conditions from the data from the load/speed
stages were developed by selecting the FEI results from particular
stages and multiplying by pre-determined factors. This is also
known as “weighting” and is a common way of predicting FEI from
speed/ load maps. The reference oil was run before and after the
candidate oil. A Newtonian oil with HTHS at 150 °C of 3.5 cP was
chosen as the reference oil. All candidate oils were SAE 5W-40
grade formulated with the same additive package at equal HTHS at
150 °C of 3.5 cP. The fuel economy improvements of the candidate
oils relative to the reference oil are described in Fig. 5.
Compared to the reference oil, all three candidate oils show
positive fuel economy improvements in all three different driving
conditions. Comparing the three VMs, the new FE HSD gave the
highest fuel economy improvements, followed by PMA, while
conventional HSD gave the least. In terms of different driving
conditions, the FE credits of the new FE HSD are more pronounced
in high idle and line haul than off road.

3.2. Fuel economy measurements in 6.5 l GM diesel engine 4. Soot handling and viscosity control

Fuel economy performance was further demonstrated in a 6.5 l To maintain high fuel economy performance in the diesel
GM diesel engine. The engine test was designed to mimic different environment, it is critical to control viscosity not only in the fresh
46 J. Cui et al. / Tribology International 101 (2016) 43–48

2.5 1
New FE HSD
New FE HSD
0.8
FEI (%) over Reference Oil

2 Conventional HSD Conventional HSD

Viscosity (Pa·s)
PMA 0.6 FE PMA
1.5

0.4
1
0.2
0.5
0
10 100 1000
0 Shear Rate (1/s)
High Idle Off Road Line Haul
Fig. 6. Viscosity at 100 °C as a function of shear rate of SAE 5W-30 grade candidate
Fig. 5. Percentage of fuel economy improvement of candidate oils over Newtonian oils blended with 9% carbon black.
reference oil (with HTHS150 at 3.5 cP) under a range of heavy duty driving con-
ditions in the 6.5 l GM engine.
50
oil, but also in the aged oil. In a diesel engine, aged oil can contain Conventional HSD
a significant amount of soot particles due to incomplete combus-
40 New FE HSD
tion. At high soot levels agglomerated soot particles may cause
significant viscosity increase and lead to an undesired drop in fuel

efficiency. As a result, controlling viscosity of the lubricant at high
soot loading conditions is important for consistent delivery of fuel
economy performance.
Unlike dispersant viscosity modifiers which have nitrogen or
oxygen containing dispersant functionalities, the new FE HSD VM
is only comprised of carbon and hydrogen, however, with some
aromatic content that can deliver soot dispersancy credits [19,20].
In this section, these soot handling credits and thus viscosity
and fuel efficiency control of the new HSD VM are demonstrated in
bench screening test, as well as in industry passenger car diesel
and heavy duty diesel engine tests.
4.1. Carbon black Haake rheology measurements
To mimic the highly sooted environment in a diesel engine, a
bench screening test using a Haake rheometer was first performed.
Three oils with different VMs formulated with the same mid-SAPS
additive package to SAE 5W-30 grade at HTHS at 150 °C of 3.5 cP
were evaluated. Carbon black which has similar particle size and
surface properties to soot generated in diesel engine was used in
this experiment. Nine percent of carbon black was loaded into the
oils and mixed overnight at 95 °C to mimic the high soot loading
condition of aged oils. The viscosity of the carbon black containing
oils was measured at 100 °C over a range of shear rates to simulate
the operating conditions in the diesel engine environment. Soot
particles tend to minimize their surface energy by aggregating into
larger entities in the oil. Dispersant is used to cover the surface of
soot particles and thus prevent agglomeration. At high shear rates
there is sufficient external energy input to prevent smaller soot
particles from aggregating even if the surface coverage is low and
there is still potential for aggregation. However, at low shear rates
the energy input might not be sufficient to prevent this aggrega-
tion. A VM with affinity for the soot surface can contribute to
additional surface coverage. While the non-dispersant VM by itself
cannot completely prevent the aggregation it can provide syner-
gistic benefit to the dispersant. The results of the experiments are
shown in Fig. 6.
Oils with conventional HSD and FE PMA both show increasing
viscosity as the shear rate decreases indicating that there is
agglomeration of carbon black particles at the lower shear rate. As
the shear rate increases, the agglomerates break down and visc-
osity decreases. In contrast, for the oil with new FE HSD, viscosity
KV100 (cSt)
30
20
10
0
0 2 4 6 8
Soot (%)
Fig. 7. KV100 change as a function of soot content from Peugeot DV6 light duty
diesel engine test.
remains constant over the range of shear rates, indicating that the
new FE HSD has a significant effect on dispersion of carbon black
particles to prevent the formation of the large agglomeration and
viscosity increase.
4.2. Peugeot DV6 light duty diesel engine test (CEC L-106-14) [26]
The soot credits of the new FE HSD were further tested in an
engine. A Peugeot DV6 light duty diesel engine test was per-
formed, which represents severe diesel engine conditions in pas-
senger vehicles and can generate soot up to 6.5% at the end of the
test. The oils were blended with mid-SAPS experimental passenger
vehicle additive technology and two different VMs to compare the
performance of new FE HSD to conventional HSD.
As shown in Fig. 7, the two oils started at the same KV100 at
the beginning of the test. As the soot level increases, viscosity of
the oil formulated with conventional HSD increases with soot,
while the oil with new FE HSD shows a small increase in viscosity
over the entire test up to 6.5% soot level. This result further con-
firms the soot handling credits of the new FE HSD.
4.3. Mack T11 heavy duty diesel test (ASTM D7156 [27])
In addition the soot credits of the new FE HSD were further
demonstrated under heavy duty diesel conditions with even
higher soot levels in a Mack T11 engine test. To show the effect of
VM we chose an SAE 5W-30 heavy duty diesel engine oil which
demonstrated borderline performance at the API CJ-4 limit in the
Mack T11 test when formulated with conventional HSD VM. We
 J. Cui et al. / Tribology International 101 (2016) 43–48 47

then replaced the VM with the new FE HSD. The results of the 200
Mack T11 test are shown in Fig. 8. The new FE HSD showed better
New FE HSD
control of soot-induced viscosity increase comfortably passing the
test. Thus in both, light duty and heavy duty diesel engine tests, 150 Conventional HSD
the new FE HSD VM provided additional control of soot-induced

Wear (micron)
viscosity increase, which helps to retain the fuel economy benefits
of the fresh oil. 100

5. Soot induced wear 50

In addition to viscosity control and resulting fuel economy

benefits, the new FE HSD can help reduce soot-induced wear. 0
Poorly dispersed, agglomerated soots can cause significant abra- Cam Tappet
sive wear. In this section, the wear performance of the new FE HSD
Fig. 9. Results of cam and tappet wear from the Cummins ISB single cam
is demonstrated using sooted wear screening tests. screening test.

5.1. Sooted wear screening test 200

New FE HSD
The performance of the new FE HSD was investigated in two
engine wear screening tests. Both screening tests were designed to Conventional HSD
150
mimic the performance in the Cummins ISB test. In the single cam

screener a motored single ISB cam lobe and a tappet is used. The
valve train wear screener uses a motored full camshaft and tappet
set in the ISB block. In both tests, candidate oils were aged prior to
testing in the fired heavy duty engine to generate approximately
5% soot. In this study, an experimental heavy duty diesel engine oil
formulation was chosen and the wear performance was compared
when using either the new FE HSD or conventional HSD in both
cam and tappet tests. Both oils were formulated as SAE 5W-30
grade with equal HTHS viscosities at 150 °C of 3.5 cP to eliminate
the impact of viscosity.
The result of the single cam screening test is shown in Fig. 9.
Compared to conventional HSD, the new FE HSD VM shows a
significant cam wear credit, almost one order of magnitude
reduction in cam wear, and it delivers comparable performance in
the tappet wear.
Similarly, in the valve train wear screening test (shown in
Fig. 10), significant cam wear reduction was observed in the oil
with the new FE HSD.
The surface properties of the cam and the tappet are different,
most noticeably in hardness. Because the hardness of the tappet is
usually higher than that of the cam, it is possible that the soot-
induced abrasion affects the cam surface more than the tappet.
When a better soot dispersion system is introduced reducing soot
aggregation, the impact on soot-induced wear is higher on the
40
35 Conventional HSD
Viscosity Increase (cSt)
Wear (micron)
100
50
0
Cam Tappet
Fig. 10. Results of cam and tappet wear from the Cummins ISB valve train
screening test.
cam surface. Quantifying the effect of soot-induced wear on var-
ious surfaces will be subject of future investigations.
Both of the current screening tests indicate that the new FE
HSD can also provide credits in soot-induced wear in a heavy duty
diesel engine.
6. Engine cleanliness performance
In addition to fuel economy and wear control, another impor-
tant function of lubricant oils is to maintain engine cleanliness
during the drain interval. VMs can contribute to deposit formation,
leading to detrimental impact to engine cleanliness. The tendency
of VM to form deposits depends on several factors such as its
chemistry and solubility in the base oil, but mostly depends to the
VM treat rate, or VM concentration in the oil. Higher amounts of

30 New FE HSD VM can lead to more deposit formation, and thus worse piston
cleanliness performance. In this section, engine tests are per-
25 API CJ-4 Limit formed to evaluate the engine cleanliness performance of the new
FE HSD and that no detrimental effects of the VM on engine
20
cleanliness and deposit formation are demonstrated.
15
6.1. Daimler OM501LA Engine Test (CEC L-099-08 [28])
10

5 The piston cleanliness performance of the new VM is first

demonstrated in the Daimler OM501LA diesel engine test. Two oils
0 were blended with the same heavy duty diesel mid-SAPS additive
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 technology to SAE 5W-30 grade with HTHS at 150 °C of 3.5 cP: one
Soot %
oil used the new FE HSD VM and another used conventional HSD.
Fig. 8. Result from Mack T11 test – viscosity increase as a function of soot content. The amount of solid VM in these two oils was comparable to
48 J. Cui et al. / Tribology International 101 (2016) 43–48
Table 3
Performance of oils with new FE HSD in the OM501LA engine test.
ACEA E6 New FE Conventional HSD
limits HSD
Average bore polishing, % o 1.0 0.0 0.0
Average piston cleanliness, 4 26.0 33.4 29.1
merit
Oil consumption, kg/test o 9.0 6.9 6.1
Table 4
Performance of oils new FE HSD in the 1N engine test.
CJ-4 limits New FE HSD
Top land heavy carbon, % o3 1 1
Top groove fill, % o 20 7 19
Weighted demerits o 286.2 273.6
Oil consumption o 0.139 0.12
Ring/liner scuffing None None
eliminate the impact of polymer treat rate. The results are shown
in Table 3. Both oils show excellent performance in piston clean-
liness. The piston cleanliness merits of both oils are significantly
higher than the ACEA E6 limits. In this case the new FE HSD VM
provided comparable cleanliness performance to conventional
HSD VM.
6.2. Caterpillar 1N engine test (ASTM D6750 [29])
An oil with new FE HSD was also evaluated in the Caterpillar
1N engine test, which was developed to evaluate the performance
of engine oils with respect to piston deposits, ring sticking, ring
and cylinder wear, piston, ring and liner scuffing. Two oils were
evaluated in this test. The oil with the new FE HSD was formulated
with heavy duty diesel additive technology to SAE 15W-40 grade,
while the reference oil was formulated with the same additive
package with 25 SSI olefin copolymer (OCP) type VM. The com-
parison VM was chosen to give the similar solid VM treat rates to
eliminate the impact of VM concentration in the oil. The results are
summarized in Table 4. The oil with the new FE HSD passes API CJ-
4 specification limit, while the reference oil with OCP did not meet
the limits of the API CJ-4. The experiment does not conclusively
demonstrate the advantage of new FE HSD. It does however show
that this FE HSD VM performs at least on par with other VMs and
probably better at the similar treat rates. The comparison result
indicates that in addition to polymer treat rate, the VM chemistry
possibly plays a role in the piston cleanliness performance.
7. Conclusions
In this paper a novel VM based on hydrogenated styrene-diene
chemistry was introduced and presented. This new VM gives an
optimum viscosity temperature profile, providing a relatively cost
effective solution to balance fuel economy and durability in diesel
engines. The fuel economy performance of the VM containing
lubricant oil was demonstrated both in passenger diesel vehicles in
the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) and in a mid-size diesel
engine under a variety of heavy duty driving conditions. In both
tests up to 2% FE improvements were observed for the lubricant
oils formulation with the new FE VM. In addition, durability per-
formance of the VM is demonstrated in a range of bench and
engine tests. In both passenger car and heavy duty engine tests,
the new FE VM enables outstanding viscosity control, reducing the
viscosity of the highly sooted oils by more than 50%. The lubricant
oil formulated with the new VM also helps maintain low soot-
induced wear, demonstrated in the engine screening test. Lastly,
the new FE HSD VM is able to control deposit, maintaining engine
cleanliness.
References
[1] Tanaka H, Nagashima T, Sato T, Kawauchi S. The effect of 0W-20 low viscosity
engine oil on fuel economy. SAE Technical Paper 1999-01-3468; 1999.
[2] Okuyama Y, Shimokoji D, Sakurai T, Maruyama M. Study of low-viscosity
engine oil on fuel economy and engine reliability. SAE Technical Paper 2011-
01-1247; 2011.
[3] Covitch M, Brown M, May C, Selby T, Goldmints I, George D. Extending SAE
J300 to viscosity grades below SAE 20. SAE Int J Fuels Lubr 2010;3(2):1030–40.
OCP [4] Ushioda N, Miller T, Sims C, Parsons G, Sztenderowicz M. Effect of low viscosity
passenger car motor oils on fuel economy engine tests. SAE Technical Paper
2013-01-2606; 2013.
[5] Manni M, Florio S. An experimental evaluation of the impact of ultra low
321.3 viscosity engine oils on fuel economy and CO2 emissions. SAE Technical Paper
0.17 2013-01-2566; 2013.
None [6] Oberoi S, Goldmints I, Briggs S, Baxter D. Designing lubricants for superior FE
and wear protection. In: Proceedings of the 19th international colloquium
tribologie. Stuttgart: Technische Akademie Esslingen (TAE); Jan 2014.
[7] Cui J, Oberoi S, Briggs I, Goldmints D, Baxter measuring fuel efficiency in
various driving cycles: how to get maximum fuel economy improvement from
the lubricant. SAE Technical Paper 2015-01-2042; 2015.
[8] Carvalho M, Richard K, Goldmints I, Tomanik E. Impact of lubricant viscosity
and additives on engine fuel economy. SAE Technical Paper 2014-36-0507;
2014.
[9] Covitch M, Humphrey B, Ripple D. Oil thickening in the Mack T-7 engine test—
fuel effects and the influence of lubricant additives on soot aggregation. SAE
Technical Paper 852126; 1985.
[10] Sato H, Tokuoka N, Yamamoto H, Sasaki M. Study on wear mechanism by soot
contaminated in engine oil (first report: relation between characteristics of
used oil and wear). SAE Technical Paper 1999-01-3573; 1999.
[11] Mc Geehan J, Alexander W, Ziemer J, Roby S, Graham J. The pivotal role of
crankcase oil in preventing soot wear and extending filter life in low emission
diesel engines. SAE Technical Paper 1999-01-1525; 1999.
[12] Gauthier A, Delvigne T. Soot induced cam wear in diesel engines: an investi-
gation using thin layer activation. SAE Technical Paper 2000-01-1990; 2000.
[13] Ishiki K, Oshida S, Takiguchi M, Urabe M. A study of abnormal wear in power
cylinder of diesel engine with EGR – wear mechanism of soot contaminated in
lubricating oil. SAE Technical Paper 2000-01-0925; 2000.
[14] Li S, Csontos A, Gable B, Passut C, Jao T. Wear in Cummins M-11/EGR test
engines. SAE Technical Paper 2002-01-1672; 2002.
[15] George Sam, Balla Santhosh, Gautam Mridul. Effect of diesel soot con-
taminated oil on engine wear. Wear 2007;262(9):1113–22.
[16] Duncan D, Rees M, Szabo A., Williams L. Soot related viscosity increase – a
comparison of the Mack T-11 engine test to field performance. SAE Technical
Paper 2004-01-3009; 2004.
[17] Green D, Lewis R. Investigation of soot contaminated lubricant wear
mechanisms. SAE Technical Paper 2007-01-1964; 2007.
[18] Nagai I, Endo H, Nakamura H, Yano H. Soot and valve train wear in passenger
car diesel engines. SAE Technical Paper 831757; 1983.
[19] David J Wedlock, Jong Feike De. Block polymer containing poly (monovinyl
aromatic hydrocarbon) and hydrogenated poly (conjugated diene) as dis-
persant additive. U.S. Patent No. 6,303,550; 16 Oct. 2001.
[20] Ritchie A, Bansal J, Emert J, Fetterman G, Gutierrez A, Irving M, et al.. EGR
equipped diesel engines and lubricating oil compositions. U.S. Patent No.
6,715,473; 6 Apr. 2004.
[21] Hutchings M, Chasan D, Burke R, Odorisio P, Rovani M, Wang W. Heavy duty
diesel deposit control…. prevention as a cure. SAE Technical Paper 972954;
1997.
[22] Oberoi S, Briggs S. Viscosity index improvers for lubricating oil compositions.
U. S. Patent US9133413; 15 Sept. 2015.
[23] ASTM D445-15. Standard test method for kinematic viscosity of transparent
and opaque liquids(and calculation of dynamic viscosity).
[24] ASTM D4683-13. Standard test method for measuring viscosity of new and
used engine oils at high shear rate and high temperature by tapered bearing
simulator viscometer at 150 °C.
[25] ASTM D6616-07. Standard test method for measuring viscosity at high shear
rate by tapered bearing simulator viscometer at 100°C; 2012.
[26] CEC L-106-14. Oil dispersion test at medium temperature for passenger car
direct injection diesel engines.
[27] ASTM D7156-15. Standard test method for evaluation of diesel engine oils in
the t-11 exhaust gas recirculation diesel engine.
[28] CEC L-099-08. The evaluation of engine crankcase lubricants with respect to
low temperature lubricant thickening and wear under severe operating
conditions.
[29] ASTM D6750-15a. Standard test methods for evaluation of engine oils in a
high-speed, single-cylinder diesel engine—1K procedure (0.4% Fuel Sulfur)
and 1N procedure (0.04% Fuel Sulfur).