Abstract
Soot is known to induce high wear in engine components. The mechanism by which soot induces wear is not well understood. Although several mechanisms have been suggested, there is still no consensus. This study aims to investigate the most likely mechanism responsible for soot-induced wear in the boundary lubrication regime. Results from this study have shown that previously suggested mechanisms such as abrasion and additive adsorption do not fully explain the high wear observed when soot is present. Based on the results obtained from tests conducted at varying temperature and soot levels, it has been proven that the corrosive–abrasive mechanism was responsible for high wear that occurred in boundary lubrication conditions.
Highlights
1.1 Competitive AdsorptionIn recent years, diesel engines have become more popular due to their higher fuel efficiency and lower running costs compared to gasoline engines
Based on the results obtained from tests conducted at varying temperature and soot levels, it has been proven that the corrosive–abrasive mechanism was responsible for high wear that occurred in boundary lubrication conditions
As we have shown in the above sections, the high wear induced by CB in fully formulated oil (FFO) cannot be explained by either abrasion or additive adsorption
Summary
1.1 Competitive AdsorptionIn recent years, diesel engines have become more popular due to their higher fuel efficiency and lower running costs compared to gasoline engines. As emissions regulations have become stricter, there is an increasing demand for reduction in nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from engines [1]. Exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) is believed to be the most effective means of reducing NOx emissions in diesel engines. It has been suggested that soot competes with antiwear additives in adsorbing on surfaces. It is believed that soot could restrict the amount of additives reaching the contact area. It has been suggested that the adsorption of soot on surfaces can limit the amount of oxygen reaching the contact surface resulting in the formation of FeO oxide instead of Fe3O4 [6]. Unlike Fe3O4, FeO does not have antiwear properties and as such promotes wear of the metallic surfaces in contact
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
