Home

Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components

Posted By: Shannow

Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/15/18 04:51 AM

https://www.researchgate.net/public...t_on_heavy_duty_diesel_engine_components

Not a bad paper, exploring the wear behaviour between
15W-40 and 0W-40 HDMOs
15W40 and 10W-30 low HTHS oils, and some material changes to work around the increases in wear.
Posted By: JLTD

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/15/18 01:44 PM

Sounds fascinating, marked for later reading.
Posted By: tig1

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/15/18 02:26 PM

yep, gotta use the right oil.
Posted By: BrocLuno

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/15/18 05:37 PM

Thanks, very interesting, but dropping from XW-40 to 10W-30 is not terribly radical. Good 10W-30's may be approaching SAE 30 HD straight grades for performance ...
Posted By: benjy

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/15/18 05:43 PM

from reading it seems that the ONLY way thinner oils work is with newer coatings + metallurgy + although 500 hrs is a good test the "real world" coulh have different results! like drug manufactures that test their own drugs that always work i am skeptical of what oil manufacturers are "trying" to make us believe!!
Posted By: Cujet

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/15/18 07:28 PM

Exactly, a 0W oil increases liner wear by 100%, but, but, but, we have newly developed components that will live a long time with that thin oil.

Of course they do. We've had very long life components for decades now. Good luck getting manufacturers to employ such expensive technology.

One interesting example includes Nikasil cylinder liners plated on to steel. It's a very robust combo (as long as there is no sulfur in the fuel) , and with the use of moly faced rings and moly coated or anodized piston skirts and other DLC coated parts, will outlast a "conventional" cast iron bore with chrome rings, about 2 to 1.

For double or triple the cost.
Posted By: Garak

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/15/18 10:01 PM

Originally Posted by BrocLuno
Thanks, very interesting, but dropping from XW-40 to 10W-30 is not terribly radical. Good 10W-30's may be approaching SAE 30 HD straight grades for performance ...

They were using a 10w-30 with an HTHS of 2.9, though, not a traditional HDEO 10w-30 of 3.5. I was confused until I saw that.
Posted By: Kamele0N

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/23/18 06:35 AM

I am waiting for StevieC to chime in smile
Posted By: StevieC

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/25/18 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by Kamele0N
I am waiting for StevieC to chime in smile


This isn't a smoking gun either because it's not all engines under all applications tested with every oil formulation possible. I think that if the engineer that designed the engine properly with the use of a thinner viscosity in mind for normal operating conditions then it should serve the user quite well to far past expectations as I said previously. Are there going to be occasions where a thicker would perform better? Sure. Should we run a thicker oil all the time out of fear because we think we know better? Nope. That is what I was arguing in the other threads.

The answer at the end of the day is there is too many variables and we have missing information from the engineers that made said engine and said oil in use and what their take would be and reading world wide owners manuals is not the smoking gun folks think it is.

cheers

Posted By: Shannow

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/26/18 04:02 AM

Yeah, you stated in the other thread(s) that as the studies aren't all engines and all circumstances, that they were equivalent to wild suppositions based on imagined engines, and imagined operational circumstances.

I disagree.
Posted By: JAG

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/26/18 12:01 PM

It’s like not accepting Newton’s laws of motion because testing hasn’t been done on every mass and every net force.
Posted By: Shannow

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/26/18 12:26 PM

Originally Posted by JAG
It’s like not accepting Newton’s laws of motion because testing hasn’t been done on every mass and every net force.


And the completely ridiculous to the posted topic "not the smoking gun" "all engines all circumstances" "world wide owners manuals" "too many variables"

Is akin the "protesteth too much" from Hamlet....
Posted By: JAG

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/26/18 01:03 PM

Haha. The thoughts are more twisted than Gumby. I know not to argue with people on subjects in which they know more than I do.
Posted By: StevieC

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/26/18 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by Shannow
Yeah, you stated in the other thread(s) that as the studies aren't all engines and all circumstances, that they were equivalent to wild suppositions based on imagined engines, and imagined operational circumstances.

I disagree.


As I said in the other thread. Does it warrant more investigation sure, is it a smoking gun for all situation absolutely not.
Posted By: Shannow

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/26/18 09:07 PM

Smoking gun for what ?

The paper is about..."the effects of Viscosity on Heavy Duty Engine Components"...it IS the investigation on the stated topic, not the subject of investigation.

By qualified people, not zealots whose understanding of science, engineering, and the scientific method asymptotically approaches zero.


Posted By: StevieC

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/27/18 01:30 AM

*Yawn* You done yet?
Posted By: Shannow

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/27/18 01:53 AM

I'll re-iterate....smoking gun for what...?

The paper is about..."the effects of Viscosity on Heavy Duty Engine Components".
Posted By: nap

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/27/18 02:12 AM

Here’s a different one

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301679X15003709

that may have the effect of rejoicing the thin camp. The thicker oil produced less iron but sensibly more lead in the UOA.



Attached picture B4654F36-CBDE-462F-960A-D6566CE7477E.jpeg
Posted By: ZeeOSix

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/27/18 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by Shannow
Yeah, you stated in the other thread(s) that as the studies aren't all engines and all circumstances, that they were equivalent to wild suppositions based on imagined engines, and imagined operational circumstances.

I disagree.

As I said in the other thread. Does it warrant more investigation sure, is it a smoking gun for all situation absolutely not.


It doesn't need "more investigation" ... it's been studied and tested for decades and the conclusion is still pretty much the same - higher viscosity/higher HTHS typically gives better wear protection.

Saying that the studies and their conclusions don't have any merit because it hasnt been "tested in every engine in every circumstances" known to exist in the world is another strawman argument.
Posted By: ZeeOSix

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/27/18 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by nap
Here’s a different one

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301679X15003709

that may have the effect of rejoicing the thin camp. The thicker oil produced less iron but sensibly more lead in the UOA.


Lots of miles (km) on those oil runs - and the wear deviation starts showing up after 10 km. Did they take KV100 and HTHS readings as the miles piled up to see if the 10W-40 sheared down below the 5W-30? Lead wear would be journal bearings I would assume.
Posted By: nap

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/27/18 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix

Lots of miles (km) on those oil runs - and the wear deviation starts showing up after 10 km. Did they take KV100 and HTHS readings as the miles piled up to see if the 10W-40 sheared down below the 5W-30? Lead wear would be journal bearings I would assume.


The explanation offered by the authors is "The most feasible explanation could be linked to additive depletion. For oil B, after 20,000 km anti‐wear additives have been almost absolutely depleted (FT‐IR measurements have been performed to assess this situation) and an acidic attack against Babbitt metals appears leading to the situation previously mentioned. In the case of the LVO, the higher content of anti‐wear additives, let to obtain a longer period of usage where this corrosive wear is under control, obtaining very low lead wear rates."

Which may lead someone to be cautious with the latest iterations of consumer oil standards.... laugh


Posted By: Shannow

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 09/27/18 09:08 PM

nap, really good dot point that...additives at work.

It's consistent with the start-up wear statements here
https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-papers/content/600190/

Predominantly corrosion, not "flow"

I've posted stuff on hastening warmup before, think this, but will have to scout through the library over the weekend.
https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-papers/content/2011-01-0318/

(But suffice to say that thicker oil will heat faster...LOL)
Posted By: Silk

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 10/08/18 06:26 AM

So, would the oil heat up faster in say a 7 bearing 6, as opposed to a 3 bearing crank 4 cyl of similar capacity ? Of course the 4 cyl is going to have larger journals which could just make it the same anyway.
Posted By: Shannow

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 10/10/18 08:24 AM

Would say so...look at the bottom end of a slant 6, or 4 main ford versus the 7 bearings, and the mains aren't materially larger in total dimension than the 7s.

But the piston skirt area is a pretty big "bearing" area for heat to e generated, diminishing the effect of the mains.
Posted By: CR94

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 10/10/18 07:52 PM

Uh ... haven't 4-bearing in-line Sixes been obsolete for a very long time (a little less long for the Slant Six)? 3-bearing in-line Fours, too? GM, Ford, and AMC all switched to then-new 7-bearing Sixes in the early- to mid-1960s in the US.
Posted By: Shannow

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 10/10/18 11:31 PM

Was still a valid question, worth answering...
Posted By: Silk

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 10/11/18 07:04 AM

In my mind I had a 149 Holden and a large British 4 cyl...large BMC, Rootes and Standard were still made at that time the 7 bearing Holden came out. There just seems to be a lot more going on in an inline 6 than a 3 bearing 4 to heat up oil. What's obsolete got to do with anything ?
Posted By: Cujet

Re: Low Viscosity Effect on Heavy Duty Engine Components - 10/21/18 01:36 PM

Decades ago, engineers learned that direct measurement was required when testing wear rates. UOA's, while helpful, do not reflect individual wear rates.

I worked for Mobil OIl in their flight department. I worked with the Mobil engineers on SHC100 grease testing and on Mobil 245 turbine engine oil. This was real world testing on Mobil Oil's flight department fleet. With very specific testing protocols. The scanning electron microscope and other forms of very precise measurement were the best ways to determine wear rates.

I was a young guy and always found time to chat with the engineers about the processes and results. It was amazing to see how they could accurately determine bearing wear rates on perfectly serviceable bearings.

What we consider UOA; mass spectrometry, was interesting information, but did not reflect real world wear, and especially wear of individual components.
© 2019 Bob Is The Oil Guy