ILMA Compoundings – December 2018 - 15

By the time we reach
finalization, almost a
decade of effort and
investment will have
elapsed.
inside turbocharged, direct-injected
gasoline engines, and such engines
have become increasingly prevalent,
since they allow delivery of considerable power in relatively small engines.
The second test (now assigned the
Sequence X designation) aims to
protect timing chains from elongation
arising from soot-induced wear.
Earlier, we saw that the automotive
lubricants industry was concerned
whether each engine test could be
used to qualify the lower-viscosity oils.
As efforts were underway to create a
replacement test for Sequence VID, it
became necessary to create a test that
would better delineate the fuel-economy
benefits of lower-viscosity oils, including 0W-16. And so, Sequence VID had
to be replaced by two tests, Sequence
VIE and Sequence VIF.

A Side Trip: SN PLUS
Throughout GF-6 development, field
issues with LSPI caused headaches to
OEMs and vehicle owners; protection
associated with performance under
Sequence IX was direly needed.
Because delays prevented immediate introduction of GF-6, OEMs
requested the prompt introduction
of a category classification (that is,
an extension of GF-5 protection to
include Sequence IX) in August 2017.

The industry required some time to
align production logistical items such
as the acquisition of new additives,
revised packaging and labels, and
performance testing. However, by
May 2018, the SN PLUS classification
achieved first allowable use.

Back to the Main Road
If you've been keeping count, that
means that GF-6 required development
and acceptance of seven fired-engine
tests: Sequences IIIH, IVB, VH, VIE,
VIF, IX and X. This was unparalleled.
Personally, I hope test development
efforts of this magnitude never happen
again, but earlier this year, the final
test (Sequence IVB) was formally
accepted for inclusion into GF-6. The
industry can now move into precommercialization phases and work
toward actual category launch. By the
time we reach finalization, almost a
decade of effort and investment will
have elapsed. Those companies that
made the investments in time, staff
and financial resources, on what were
expected to be much shorter timelines,
can then hope to recoup the fruits of
their individual labors.
Could it have been a much shorter
saga? Given the magnitude and scope
of test development efforts, and with
the benefit of hindsight, I doubt it.

I've revisited the progress of each test
across the intervening years. There
were plenty of setbacks, unanticipated
snags and dead ends. But that is true
of any R&D activity - it's just that
this time, it was an especially complex
set of R&D projects that all had to
come to fruition. I personally feel that
everyone did the best they could, and I
would take exception with anyone who
questions the motivation of the folks
involved in developing these tests.
There are activities within the
industry intended to design a new
approach, but it's still early.
When the industry started planning
the GF-6 road trip, we found the
industry managing the post-GF-5
tension, financial constraints from the
2008 financial crisis, and a GF-6 that
required unparalleled test-development
efforts. With Sequence IVB adopted,
everyone (and their luggage) has at
last boarded the GF-6 wood-paneled
station wagon. Are there storms on
the horizon as the industry begins to
negotiate limits for all the new tests?
Time will tell. There are a lot of tests,
and within each test, one or more
parameters to worry about. At least,
we're now on the open road.
Girard is president of Sanjuro Consulting Inc.
and an ILMA consultant.

15
ILMA Compoundings – December 2018

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of ILMA Compoundings – December 2018
