Petromax Grease & Lubricants Industries FZC

19/11/2017

https://fuelsandlubes.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=1127adfd27d40d5540a859c13&id=b4434789db&e=fa1be27797

The next global engine oil specification to be released is ILSAC GF-6. However, delays to GF-6 are well documented, with the first licensing date, although still unconfirmed, appearing to be at least two years away.…

26/10/2017

Mazda Motor Corp. has unveiled two concept models, the Mazda KAI CONCEPT and the Mazda VISION COUPE, at the 45th Tokyo Motor Show which is organized by the Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association (JAMA). The Mazda KAI CONCEPT compact hatchback heralds a new generation of Mazda cars. Featuring the...

18/10/2017

Volkswagen Truck & Bus GmbH, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, said that it is focusing on three trend-setting fields, namely automated driving, connectivity and alternative drive systems that are friendly to the environment.

14/10/2017

Autonomous truck study predicts major fuel savings

A new report by the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), the statistical and analytical agency within the US Department of Energy, has found that autonomous technology could deliver fuel economy increases as early as this year.

According to the report, vehicles equipped for assisted-platooning technology could almost instantly result in fuel savings for the industry, with 4.5 percent increases possible by 2030 and 13.9 percent by 2040, and 18.6 percent by 2050 “due to Level 1-3 technology alone” (see background below).

The report noted, however, that it is also likely that as autonomous technology increased overall vehicle safety and reduced accidents, speed limits may increase to around 80 mph (ca. 130 km/h), which could reduce the predicted fuel economy numbers somewhat.

The report also found that most insurance industry executives in the US currently do not believe autonomous technology will have an impact on their businesses in the short term.
“Despite an apparently clear awareness that a significant impact on the insurance business is looming and that automated driving safety features are indeed helping to reduce insurance claims, … survey respondents do not plan to address the impact of driverless vehicles over the next 12–18 months,” the report said.

Another finding was that 94 percent of respondents expect liability to change, while 52 percent expect property damage coverage to change. Additionally, 84 percent of respondents expect insurance claim frequency to decrease, and 71 percent expect premium per policy to decrease because of driverless vehicles.
The full report can be found here.

Background:
According to the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), the autonomy of a vehicle can be measured on a scale from 0-5, with level 5 describing full autonomy.
At level 0, a human is in full control of steering, brakes, throttle, and power output.
Driver-assistance level 1 means that while most functions are still controlled by a person, a specific function – such as steering or accelerating – can be handled automatically by the vehicle.
At level 2, at least one driver assistance system of “both steering and acceleration/ deceleration using information about the driving environment” is automated, such as cruise control or lane-centring. The driver is “disengaged from physically operating the vehicle by having his or her hands off the steering wheel and feet off the pedals at the same time,” according to the SAE.
Freightliner's Inspiration truck, unveiled in 2015, was a level 3 autonomous vehicle. Here, drivers are still necessary, but able to completely shift safety-critical functions to the machine if traffic or environmental conditions allow. The driver is still present and will intervene if necessary.
Level 4 is what is typically meant by ‘fully autonomous’ – the vehicle is able to perform all safety-critical driving functions itself and monitor road conditions for an entire trip.
However, only the behavior of level 5 vehicles is expected to equal that of a human driver in every driving scenario – including extreme environments like dirt roads, for example.

12/10/2017

Automakers have made it clear that their main goal is still to get the ILSAC GF-6 engine oil upgrade in place as soon as possible.

08/10/2017

Why Not Passenger Car Engine Oils?

In the ideal world, stakeholders in the lubricant business and users would relish the opportunity for commonality between passenger car engine oils (PCEO) and motorcycle engine oils (MCEO). However, in reality, there are fundamental, unique lubricating challenges that exist for 4-stroke (4T) motorcycles, compared to passenger cars. These issues have clearly demonstrated the need for a dedicated 4T MCEO in place of standard PCEO.

At the heart of the matter are the architectural differences between key components in the two vehicle types. In 4-stroke motorcycles, the engine, the wet clutch and the gearbox are all housed in a singular unit and, as a result, all three components are lubricated by the same oil. However, a glance at a passenger car engine immediately shows that it is separated from the gearbox, as well as the clutch. As a result, different lubricants are used, each of which is specific to a particular mechanical unit.

Engine differences
Four-stroke motorcycle engines also operate at higher speeds, compared to their passenger car counterparts. They have much higher power density ratings, which cause more stress on the motorcycle oil.

Cooling systems of the two types can also influence the decision on which type of oil is best to use. Many 4-stroke motorcycles are air cooled, especially smaller models with fewer cylinders, and therefore operate over a higher range of temperatures.

On the other hand, passenger car engines employ liquid cooling and are therefore able to maintain better temperature stability, generally operating within a lower temperature window. In particular, air-cooled motorcycles are more prone to temperature swings at the higher end of the scale.

Finally, a motorcycle’s oil sump is generally smaller than that found on a passenger car. This means that less lubricant is carried, and what oil there is onboard reaches a higher temperature than in a passenger car application.

The differences mentioned above contribute to making the 4-stroke motorcycle operating environment more severe than that of passenger cars, reaffirming the assertion that motorcycles are a unique application from a lubrication point of view.

Motorcycle oil challenges
The right formulation of motorcycle oils is important because they inherently need to perform under extremely severe operating conditions. The oils must provide engine durability under high operating temperatures, gear durability and rapid shifts, while preventing clutch slippage and improving/maintaining fuel economy.

While modern PCEOs are friction modified in order to meet fuel economy requirements, the friction modifiers employed can adversely impact clutch performance. As a result, they are not suitable for use in motorcycle applications with a wet clutch configuration.

MCEO, not PCEO
There are three key reasons why PCEO lubricants continue to be used for 4-stroke motorcycle engines: lack of awareness of the technical issues involved, logistic simplicity, and cost considerations.

As illustrated, these three reasons do not outweigh the fact that PCEO lubricants do not provide the optimum performance needed for 4-stroke motorcycle engines.

Using a dedicated 4-stroke motorcycle lubricant is the right way to ensure a satisfactory riding experience and longer equipment life.

07/10/2017

SAE J306 Explained


The need to ensure adequate lifetime protection of transmission and driveline equipment is an increasing challenge for manufacturers. With ever-tightening fuel economy regulations requiring engineers to explore every avenue to reduce weight and mechanical losses in their products, lubricant volume and viscosity require special attention.
At the same time, the market imperative to offer products with reduced total cost of ownership requires that the fluids are specified to offer protection at extended service intervals. It is crucial, therefore, that manufacturers can have confidence that the fluids they specify will afford the required performance and reliability. Standards defining the rheology of lubricants are fundamental to effective Driveline equipment design, so that it operates with the performance and durability that customers demand.

The name SAE — the widely recognized acronym of the Society of Automotive Engineers — has long been synonymous within the lubricants industry as the internationally recognized and popularly accepted classification and categorization system for lubricants. While the SAE J300 and SAE J306 Standards may at first glance appear broadly similar, SAE J300 is for motor oils and SAE J306 is for automotive gear oils; the latter comprises both axle and manual transmission lubricants.

These applications represent product categories that are clearly very different and which fulfill completely different sets of requirements. It is therefore essential that the grade scales defined under each standard are not confused or compared, as the use of an inappropriate fluid can lead to catastrophic and highly expensive equipment failure.

Under the SAE J306 standard, lubricants are defined in terms of a grade denoting their minimum kinematic viscosity at 100˚C, as measured according to ASTM D445, while also demonstrating shear stability over 20 hours using CEC L-45-A-99 (Method C). Some lubricants are further designated with the letter “W” (Winter), signifying a low-temperature viscosity grade. In addition to their high-temperature definition, these “W” grades are further defined as providing a maximum temperature — ranging from -12 to -55˚C — at which they retain a threshold level of viscosity.


Balancing blends for performance

Achieving the optimal lubricant for a given driveline application requires a thorough understanding of both the equipment application and the properties of the base fluid and additive package. Even for a comparatively simple SAE J306-compliant monograde lubricant, performance additives will be used. The additive mix will seek to reduce friction and remove heat, and will include extreme pressure anti-wear additives to prevent wear, pitting, spalling, scoring, scuffing and other types of distress that can result in equipment failure and downtime. Protection against oxidation, thermal degradation, rust, copper corrosion and foaming also must be provided.

The viscosity of lubricants tends to decrease with increasing operating temperature. At elevated temperatures, the liquid becomes increasingly thin, providing a lower level of protection. Conversely, at lower temperatures the fluid thickens; the increased viscosity reduces the efficiency of the equipment it is protecting. It follows, then, that for a driveline required to operate only at moderate temperatures, a monograde product may provide adequate protection at an optimal price point. However, for operation across wider temperature extremes, a multigrade fluid engineered for a more balanced viscosity profile is required.

To achieve the required performance, multigrade fluids need additional additive components. For example, depending on the extent of cold-temperature operation, multigrade lubricants will require the addition of a pour point depressant, and in the most extreme cases, additional viscosity modifier. The chart below provides an example of a range of typical formulations and properties of SAE 90 from monograde to a wide-span multigrade SAE 75W-90.


Pour point depressants and viscosity modifiers

In cold temperatures, the wax in base oil tends to separate out and form crystals that interlock and lead to fluid thickening. As the fluid drops below the pour point, this thickening increases significantly, leading to increased mechanical losses in the equipment as well as reduced lubricant effectiveness. Pour point depressants modify the shape of the wax crystals that form at low temperature, preventing them from interlocking and thus reducing the pour point by as much as 40˚C.

The selection of the correct pour point depressant will be influenced by the choice of base oil, the potential interaction with the performance additive package and any viscosity modifier used, and the performance requirements and operating environment of the equipment.

The viscosity modifier must also be selected to ensure compatibility with the other lubricant components. For many specific applications, a range of polymer structures have been developed to provide the desired viscosity modifier performance. Selection of the right product for the right application is crucial in order to avoid compromising equipment performance and durability.

Shear stability

Shear stability is a key aspect of SAE J306 compliance. Lubricants must “stay in grade” after testing for 20 hours in order to confirm adequate shear stability. With the increasing popularity of wide-span multigrade lubricants that require the use of viscosity modifiers, some equipment manufacturers are specifying extended-hour testing as a part of their approval process. This is because some viscosity modifier technologies can continue to shear beyond the 20 hours specified under the SAE J306 standard.

Reflecting changing demands

SAE J306 was originally defined in 1991 but was extensively revised in 2005 to provide new grades and tighter classifications. These changes reflected the increasing requirements for fuel economy and the trends for increased numbers of gears in manual transmissions and for longer service drain intervals.

For further information or inquiries, please contact us at [email protected]

07/10/2017

REFORMULATING ENGINE OILS COULD HAVE LIMITED BENEFIT IN REDUCING CO2 EMISSIONS
Reformulating engine oils could have limited benefit in reducing CO2 emissions
By Aaron Stone

“Any commitment to reduce CO2 emissions from the 2020 target… can only be met through a rise in the market share of alternative powertrain cars.” This strong statement, from the European Automotive Manufacturers Association (ACEA) as part of a paper entitled “Tackling CO2 Emissions: An Overview,” implies that from 2020 onwards optimisation of the internal combustion engine (ICE) alone is not going to get us there.

Presenting at F+L Week 2017 on Reformulating Engine Oils to Meet the CO2 Challenge – A Narrowing Window of Opportunity, Petronas Lubricants International‘s Director, Research & Technology, Andrew Holmes, suggests we are faced with a “severe challenge to reduce emissions,” and that the opportunity for engine oils to make a dramatic new contribution is limited, with the automotive industry already looking to alternative solutions.

Andrew Holmes of Petronas Lubricants International, presenting at F+L Week 2017Increasingly, worldwide governmental regulations requiring reductions in greenhouse gasses and emissions, with large financial penalties for non-compliance, are prompting significant change in vehicle technology. Holmes says some of this change is evolutionary — automotive OEMs optimising existing engine drivetrain technology, either through downsizing or new design features; the rest of the change is revolutionary. Certainly, OEMs are diverting increasing resources to new or alternative vehicle technologies to support these developments.

More than USD100 billion is invested globally each year in automotive research and development, the equivalent of USD1,200 per vehicle. Indeed, we are beginning to witness key players make multi-billion dollar announcements in alternative powertrains, moving resources away from the ICE, signaling the increasing difficulty
of achieving incremental improvements in the combustion engine.

Leading the influx of announcements is Daimler, with a reported USD11 billion investment in alternative powertrains by 2025. Ford Motor Company has confirmed USD4.5 billion by 2020, and Toyota has created a separate new electric vehicle division in the company; these, alongside fuel cell and electric vehicle announcements from Honda, GM and Hitachi.

Despite widespread transfer of resources into this area, there remains tremendous diversity in forecast uptake of automotive vehicle powertrains. It’s impossible to locate a single forecast, or collective opinion, that provides any level of confidence we know where this industry is going. Holmes attests, there seem to be two extremes in forecast changes in powertrains, one that follows legislative or aspirational targets, and the other more conservative, following industry projections for substantive change through increasing electrification and the improvement of existing technologies.

Holmes believes “even allowing for a quickening pace of electric vehicle availability and adoption — change will still be a protracted process.”

When discussing the role of new vehicle technology in achieving emissions targets, automotive manufacturers are quick to stipulate that new vehicle technologies are only part of a bigger picture. Achieving success in the post 2020 emissions era requires a collective effort which includes a variety of inputs. Smarter transport infrastructure, retiring older vehicles from the global car parc, eco-friendly driving, evolution of alternate fuels, and connected cars all play a vital role.

Clearly, new vehicle technology will eventually yield a step change in emissions. However, according to Holmes, the relatively slow growth in alternative powertrains and fuels, and challenging emissions targets in 2020 and 2025 means the short to medium term solution to our emissions challenge is still the optimisation of the ICE. Alongside this are improvements in engine lubricants to reduce emissions through a variety of means.

F+L Week 2017 Attendees listening to Andrew Holmes present on reducing CO2 emissions with lubricant formulation.

Friction reduction strategies are a key component of optimising engine performance and, in particular, fuel economy. This approach has accelerated the adoption of 0WXX low viscosity lubricants, and is driving a requirement for high performing Group III+ and PAO base stocks to meet formulation challenges.

To complicate matters further, Group III+ and PAO base stocks are in short supply, with a limited number of suppliers worldwide. Despite investment plans and growing availability, it is a challenge already to supply the market. Holmes predicts strong demand for Group III+ and low viscosity PAO to 2020 and beyond.

Irrespective of their critical contribution to helping reduce global CO2 emissions, there may be a small window for new advancements in low viscosity and low volatility lubricants. Holmes questions how long the window of opportunity will remain open given developments diversion of OEM resources from the conventional ICE to alternative powertrains. There is no doubting that full-scale electric vehicles have a very limited requirement for lubricants – and widespread adoption will ultimately deliver a dramatic impact on lubricant consumption patterns, although legacy vehicle requirements will persist for a protracted period.

To maximise the efficiency of the ICE and overcome key obstacles with today’s technology, Holmes suggests that strategic partnerships are essential in moving forward. He says “OEMs, Tier 1 suppliers, and the lubricants industry must partner now to maximise the efficiency of the ICE,” asserting that the opportunity to reduce CO2 emissions can only happen by developing the chemistry, tribology and hardware in partnership. Although he warns, we shouldn’t expect to see massive generational improvements in CO2 reduction in the engine to replicate developments over the last five to 10 years.

F&L Asia OCTOBER 3, 2017