Why diesel oil turns black immediately after chang

[CT8]

What pollution comes from the manufacture and transport of the solar panels?

 

[CT8]

Originally Posted By: SilverC6

Originally Posted By: Olas

Originally Posted By: Claud

Originally Posted By: Olas

There is no reason to want to reduce NOX, it comes from cylinder pressure and cylinder temperature which are directly related to cylinder filling and torque.

Introducing nitric acid into the atmosphere strikes me as a good reason. Claud

Then ride a bike everywhere, otherwise drop the holier-than-thou act. You drive a car, use electricity, buy stuff from multinationals, all of which are extremely damaging to the environment. A few ppm NOX with the consequence of better power, better torque and NOT having to clean carbon/soot from the inlet tract is more than worth it.

+1 Green intiatives are always for other folks to follow. I attended a water quality conference a short time ago and it was a bit of a chuckle to see the tree hugger bumper stickers on the SUVs in the parking lot. I'd venture a guess that purchasing goods produced in emerging markets like Mexico and China is the worst possible choice someone could make for our planet.

Enlightened thinkers?

 

[bullwinkle]

Soot is also present in pre-EGR diesel engines, just not as much of it. Modern diesel motor oils are designed to agglomerate, i.e bunch together, tiny soot particles into bigger ones so that the oil filter can catch them. That's why I have a Fleetguard Stratapore Venturi oil filter on the Ram, it's better at catching soot than a standard filter.

 

[Reg# 43897]

Originally Posted By: bullwinkle

Soot is also present in pre-EGR diesel engines, just not as much of it. Modern diesel motor oils are designed to agglomerate, i.e bunch together, tiny soot particles into bigger ones so that the oil filter can catch them. That's why I have a Fleetguard Stratapore Venturi oil filter on the Ram, it's better at catching soot than a standard filter.

Isn't that specifically NOT applicable to the road-going ISB? Doesn't Cummins say to use a normal, full-flow Fleetguard LF3972? I remember looking into those when I saw them on their website. Might it be that they are for non-motive applications (power generation, etc)? John.

 

[DesertDually]

Originally Posted By: Reg# 43897

Originally Posted By: bullwinkle

Soot is also present in pre-EGR diesel engines, just not as much of it. Modern diesel motor oils are designed to agglomerate, i.e bunch together, tiny soot particles into bigger ones so that the oil filter can catch them. That's why I have a Fleetguard Stratapore Venturi oil filter on the Ram, it's better at catching soot than a standard filter.

Isn't that specifically NOT applicable to the road-going ISB? Doesn't Cummins say to use a normal, full-flow Fleetguard LF3972? I remember looking into those when I saw them on their website. Might it be that they are for non-motive applications (power generation, etc)? John.

I hadn't even heard about these filters. Am just curious why the filter wouldn't be spec'd for road-going equipment instead of stationary?

 

[riggaz]

Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker

yep. The EGR is the culprit. That is why many heavy commercial trucks are having bypass oil filters or centrifuge systems put on by owners. Soot loading is horrendous. How one can figure that feeding a motor its own feces can make things better is beyond me. If that is true, then go out tonight and have a fine meal at a 1st class restaurant, come home and when you take that next dump, grab a handful and eat it and then see if the next dump is cleaner than the first.

Diesel oil goes black quickly on trucks with no EGR valves... Eating your own grot will make you want to eat less therefor produce less grot the next time, you'll lose weight and feel great. Don't tell Hollywood though as they love a new fad diet.

 

[TiredTrucker]

Originally Posted By: Claud

Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker

How one can figure that feeding a motor its own feces can make things better is beyond me.

EGR results in less oxides of nitrogen being produced as a product of combustion. This is because combustion temperature spikes are reduced. I believe this was pioneered in air cooled VW engines, where such spikes could be more harmful than conventional water cooled iron engines. Incidentally rabbits and I dare say other animals eat their own feces to get full benefit from the nutrients in their diet. Ruminants also recycle their digestive systems. I don't want to be a rabbit or a cow!. Claud.

yes, EGR does reduce the level of NOx. But at what cost? Substantially greater soot levels, including substantial increases in soot out the exhaust which probably did more harm to people than NOx every did. So they had to put on DPF units to capture the soot. Oh wait, those have to cook off occasionally and really nasty up the area when they do it. OEM's were well on their way to reducing fuel consumption in heavy diesels, and cleaning them up. But then came the EPA in all their wisdom. SCR to limit NOx should have been the initial approach, as it does the best job. But once EGR got put on diesels, it is like getting blood from a turnip to change to not using EGR.

 

[userfriendly]

What are you suggesting T_trucker? Put the oil companies out of business?

 

[Doug Hillary]

Originally Posted By: bullwinkle

Soot is also present in pre-EGR diesel engines, just not as much of it. Modern diesel motor oils are designed to agglomerate, i.e bunch together, tiny soot particles into bigger ones so that the oil filter can catch them. That's why I have a Fleetguard Stratapore Venturi oil filter on the Ram, it's better at catching soot than a standard filter.

Hi Bullwinkle, correct and some lubricants are better at agglomerating soot than others (and some synthetic HDEOs) and some synthetic FF filters do a great job too - well, just from my experience anyway!

 

[BrocLuno]

Black = soot. Why the motor soots up the oil is another matter... Reducing NOX is the first step in minimizing photo-chemical SMOG (the brown hazy stuff). Those of us old enough to remember LA in the 1970's now that it alone would cause "unhealthy air days" where kids had to stay indoors and old folks died. Not good, and more trees won't do it. Now days the LA Air Basin is pretty remarkable. You can see further than a block and most days even as far as the hills. So NOX reduction does work. Even with 100% more vehicles on the roads in the area... The regulators don't demand a single technology, they demand testable results. How the MFG's get there is usually by consensus and the 3rd party market for supplied equipment (in the beginning) until their own R&D departments can find better solutions. We're just getting started on diesel technology. I'd love to be able to run an 8v92 into town like the old days. But it ain't going to happen... I kid my buddies who are still trucking to get a pre-1974 gas rig (CA Smog Exempt) to go into the Port of Oakland to pick-up containers (a diesel regulated site). The gate inspectors wouldn't know what to do with you... The truck would not be diesel, so it should be exempt and could idle right in. But in reality, if it was not on an "approved list" it still wouldn't happen. But it'd be fun to bring a nice 549 IH V model into the port to see what they'd say. Especially if it was on Propane

 

[TiredTrucker]

I have no issue with the NOx cleanup, I just feel that SCR should have been the primary methodology right out of the gate instead of EGR. EGR was not nearly the issue on gasoline engines as opposed to diesels. Diesels do much better when emissions cleanup is downstream rather that being on the engine like EGR. To wit, now that SCR has become the major emissions system to cleaning up NOx, EGR, while still used, has been dialed back considerably, up to 75% reduced, from days when it was the only NOx reduction technology on diesels. One of the reasons that folks like Detroit Diesel have been able to extend recommended drain intervals from the 25K mile interval of the Detroit 60 EGR only to 50K miles on the current DD15 engine with same sump capacity and same CJ-4 93K218 oil. But I took advantage of loopholes in EPA regulations and bought a 2013 Freightliner without a motor and dropped in a pre-emission factory rebuilt MY2000 Detroit 60 12.7L. Far less maintenance cost and less downtime with 476K miles on the truck now. And getting as good or better average fuel economy than most of the new engines. EPA regs allow dropping in any engine in a new truck as long as the truck did not come with a motor and the engine met the emissions of the year the engine was built. Emissions on motor only tied to year of vehicle when motor installed as part of build at factory. What a country! Saved $40K on the price of the total truck, ready to work, compared to a new production truck with new motor and emissions junk. Even got to avoid the 15.5% Federal Excise Tax on new equipment doing this. Took advantage of the IRS loophole also! But I don't live or operate in the LA basin. Just the upper Midwest where there are no emissions testing done on any vehicle, personal or commercial. But the truck is legal for all but California. I have no interest is going west of I-25 for any reason. Been there, done that, got the worn out T shirt.

 

[m37charlie]

Originally Posted By: Claud

Originally Posted By: Olas

Originally Posted By: Claud

Originally Posted By: Olas

There is no reason to want to reduce NOX, it comes from cylinder pressure and cylinder temperature which are directly related to cylinder filling and torque.

Introducing nitric acid into the atmosphere strikes me as a good reason. Claud

Then ride a bike everywhere, otherwise drop the holier-than-thou act. You drive a car, use electricity, buy stuff from multinationals, all of which are extremely damaging to the environment. A few ppm NOX with the consequence of better power, better torque and NOT having to clean carbon/soot from the inlet tract is more than worth it.

I'm not trying to be holier than thou, maybe I should just drop litter in the street and dump waste oil down a drain because I'm too lazy to make any effort to do anything other than act in my own short term self interest. Claud.

Claud, Nitrogen oxides quickly decompose to harmless components, i.e. N2 and O2. In the process, some of them do react with unburnt hydrocarbons to make smog, but only in large cities - not where Tired Trucker and I live. Smog itself has a very short "half life" - look at Beijing when they decide to get rid of the smog - it only takes a day or 2; and the planetary atmosphere as a whole isn't smoggy after decades of smog in big cities. Like wise soot (basically pure carbon particles) settles to the ground and becomes part of the food (carbon) chain. Yes, soot from Indonesian forest fires spreads widely; do you think if diesel soot spread widely knowledge of it would be suppressed? There IS one tailpipe emission that DOES persist in the atmosphere for a long time: CO2. Personally I think we are counteracting natural global cooling caused by the well known Milankovitch cycles (i.e. slowly sliding into the next ice age) but regardless of one's feelings about climate change I accept that man caused CO2 is superimposed on natural changes. And what do we do about CO2 emissions vis-a-vis IC engines in the short and medium term? BETTER FUEL MILEAGE!!!! So considering where I live (no smog) should I feel guilty about "loosing" EGR and DPF (with its' fuel consuming regen cycles). Should Tired Trucker feel bad about buying a glider? We are actually doing the atmosphere a favor, no kidding. Like TT said, they should have gone with SCR/urea from the beginning. No EGR=less soot=less or no need for DPF/regens. The Europeans did a much better job with Euro5 and 6 than the EPA. Subtle differences re NOx/soot ratios made a huge difference in emission strategies resulting in significantly better fuel economy in Euro spec vehicles vs EPA. Charlie

 

[chrisri]

Great post Charlie. There's a way to meet Euro 6 without using EGR. www​.iveco.com/.../stralis-hi-way-hi-escr

 

[DoubleWasp]

Originally Posted By: bullwinkle

Soot is also present in pre-EGR diesel engines, just not as much of it. Modern diesel motor oils are designed to agglomerate, i.e bunch together, tiny soot particles into bigger ones so that the oil filter can catch them. That's why I have a Fleetguard Stratapore Venturi oil filter on the Ram, it's better at catching soot than a standard filter.

I use the same filter.

 

[Dyusik]

Originally Posted By: pitzel

I think the consensus is that EGR causes soot to get into the oil in diesels. In applications where it is possible to delete the EGR, soot loading appears to be substantially reduced. Engines with aggressive EGR designs (ie: the newer EPA-spec Tier diesels) tend to place the greatest demands on the soot suspension characteristics of motor oil. As others have stated, not a problem if both the oil and the filtering system have been appropriately engineered, and fluid maintenance done appropriately.

My buddy has a 6.7 Cummins with EGR delete and straight pipe and is convinced that the AMSoil is "cleaner" than the DELO he was running because the oil is now clear. My explanation was that the soot finally cleared out after so many changes, and is not loading as it used to. But he stands by his belief. Sadly he isn't gaining much (if any) in cost as his 10-15k oci were bumped to 25k.