Selda GunselShell Global Solutions, USA
Lubricant Design – Impacts on Energy Efficiency
RSC Additive 2009: Fuels and Lubricants for Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Transport
April 27-30, 2009, York, UK
Outline
• World Energy Outlook
• Trends in Transportation Industry
• Impacts on Lubricant Technology
• Design Options for Improving Energy Efficiency
• Design Tools and Application Examples
• Summary & Recommendations
Disclaimer statementThis presentation contains forward-looking statements concerning the financial condition, results of operations and businesses of Royal Dutch Shell. All statements other than statements of historical fact are, or may be deemed to be, forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are statements of future expectations that are based on management’s current expectations and assumptions and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results, performance or events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in these statements. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning the potential exposure of Royal Dutch Shell to market risks and statements expressing management’s expectations, beliefs, estimates, forecasts, projections and assumptions. These forward-looking statements are identified by their use of terms and phrases such as ‘‘anticipate’’, ‘‘believe’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘estimate’’, ‘‘expect’’, ‘‘intend’’, ‘‘may’’, ‘‘plan’’, ‘‘objectives’’, ‘‘outlook’’, ‘‘probably’’, ‘‘project’’, ‘‘will’’, ‘‘seek’’, ‘‘target’’, ‘‘risks’’, ‘‘goals’’, ‘‘should’’ and similar terms and phrases. There are a number of factors that could affect the future operations of Royal Dutch Shell and could cause those results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements included in this presentations, including (without limitation): (a) price fluctuations in crude oil and natural gas; (b) changes in demand for the Group’s products; (c) currency fluctuations; (d) drilling and production results; (e) reserve estimates; (f) loss of market and industry competition; (g) environmental and physical risks; (h) risks associated with the identification of suitable potential acquisition properties and targets, and successful negotiation and completion of such transactions; (i) the risk of doing business in developing countries and countries subject to international sanctions; (j) legislative, fiscal and regulatory developments including potential litigation and regulatory effects arising from recategorisation of reserves; (k) economic and financial market conditions in various countries and regions; (l) political risks, including the risks of expropriation and renegotiation of the terms of contracts with governmental entities, delays or advancements in the approval of projects and delays in the reimbursement for shared costs; and (m) changes in trading conditions. All forward-looking statements contained in this presentation are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referred to in this section. Readers should not place undue reliance onforward-looking statements. Additional factors that may affect future results are contained in Royal Dutch Shell’s 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2008 (available at www.shell.com/investor and www.sec.gov). These factors also should be considered by the reader. Each forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date of this presentation, 27 April 2009. Neither Royal Dutch Shell nor any of its subsidiaries undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement as a result of new information, future events or other information. In light of these risks, results could differ materially from those stated, implied or inferred from the forward-looking statements contained in this presentation.
• Surging energy demand
• Supply will struggle to keep pace: end of “easy oil”
• Environmental stressesare increasing: CO2, water, resource constraints
These three hard truths These three hard truths will shape the future of will shape the future of the energy systemthe energy system
World energy outlook
Energy demand driven by the population & prosperity of rapidly growing economies
Source: Shell International BV, Oxford Economics and Energy Balances of OECD and Non-OECD Countries © OECD/IEA 2006
bill ion people
North America & Europe Latin AmericaChina & India Asia & OceaniaMiddle East & Africa
0
2
4
6
8
10
1975 2000 2025 2050
Population
0
100
200
300
400
0 10 20 30 40
GDP per capita (PPP, '000 2000 USD)
Energy demand per person -History
gigajouleper capita (primary energy)
USA
Europe (EU15)
SouthKorea
China
Japan
India
1971-2005
Brazil
Heavy industryServicesResidential
Agriculture & other industryTransportNon energy use (e.g. petrochemicals)
World energy demand is on track to double by 2050
“Business as usual” energy consumption by sector
Source: Shell International BV and Energy Balances of OECD and Non-OECD Countries©OECD/IEA 2006
0
200
400
600
800
1975 2000 2025 2050
exajouleper year
Shell’s Energy Scenarios for 2050
0
250
500
750
1000
2000 2050 2050
Oil GasCoal NuclearBiomass SolarWind Other Renewables
0
20
40
2000 2050 2050
Scramble
Blueprints
Direct CO2 emission from energyTotal primary energy
gigatonneCO2 per year
exajouleper year
Source: Shell International BV and Energy Balances of OECD and Non-OECD Countries�OECD/IEA 2006
Scramble Blueprints
• Scramble – supply focus & late response• Blueprints – energy sustainability and early action
1. Increase the efficiency of operations
2. Establish substantial capability in CO2 capture and storage
3. Develop aggressively low-CO2 sources of energy
4. Help manage demand by growing market for products and services
5. Work with governments and advocate need for more effective CO2 regulation
6. Continue research to develop technologies that increase energy efficiency and reduce emissions
Potential pathways for sustainable energy
9
Benefits of energy efficient lubricants
• Energy loss due to friction & wear ~ 10% GNP ; use of good tribological principles ~ 1-2 % GNP (Jost, 1966)
• $ 20 B/yr spent in the US overcoming friction in internal combustion engines (Rabinowicz, 1986)
• For heavy duty vehicles, total energy lost due to friction ~ 160 M barrels diesel fuel/yr (US DoE 1999)
• In the UK, benefit of reducing fuel consumption by 5% would result in 4 M tons of CO2 reduction & € 2 B /yr (R I Taylor, 2005)
Emissions & fuel economy legislations
• For the first time CO2 / FE legislation is being introduced across the world with very challenging targets
Ricardo 2008
•Emission legislations continue to tighten worldwide
Power Train Technology Advancements
Driven by improved fuel efficiency and reduced emissions targets
• Engine Designs– Downsizing & Boosting, GDI,
advanced valve trains – Exhaust Gas Recirculation
• Aftertreatment Devices – Particulate Filters, NOx Traps,
Selective Catalytic Reduction….
• Transmissions – CVT & increased number of forward
gears
• Advanced electronics • Hybrids • Advanced materials
– Lightweight composites and alloys– Coatings & textured surfaces
Ricardo 2006
Base oil & bio-fuels trends
• Base Oils– Group 1- demand declining – Increased supply of Group II & III– Bio-based oils and re-refined base oils – Increased availability of GTL in coming years
� Base Oil composition - important in energy efficient lubricant designs (Gunsel et al, 1999)
• Bio-fuels– Fuels with higher content of biodiesel and ethanol – Development of 2nd generation biofuels
� Lubrication of biofuelled engines –becoming an important area of research
Gasoline Diesel
Food crops1st generationEthanol Bio
-esters
Eco-ethanol
2nd generationCrop waste
Eco-diesel
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
1 10 100 1000 10000
Mean Speed [mm/s]
Coeff
icie
nt
of
fric
tion
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
1 10 100 1000 10000
Mean Speed [mm/s]
Coeff
icie
nt
of
fric
tion
mineral Gp II
mineral Gp III
Shell GTL
PAO
Naphthenic white oil
Gp II
Gp III
GP III
PAOPAO
Naphthenic white oilNaphthenic white oil
Impacts on engine oil technology
Challenges
• Improve energy efficiency, maximize friction reduction, reduce CO2
• Reduce or eliminate detrimental effects of oil on emission systems
• Extended Life
� High temperature stability , deposit control
� Antiwear protection/durability
� Low temperature performance, sludge control
� Soot control
� Fuel economy retention
• Compatibility with biofuels and new materials
13
≤ 0.12--API SJ / GF-2
(’96)
---API SH (’93)
0.05
0.07 - 0.09
0.07 - 0.09
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.8
0.8
ACEA ‘08 C1
C2
C3
≤ 0.08≤ 0.5-API SM / GF-4
(‘04)
≤ 0.1--API SL/GF-3
(’01)
P wt.%S
wt.% Sulfated Ash wt.%
Category
�Achieving improved fuel economy while maintaining good durability -
becoming more challenging due to the legislation of S and P limits
Energy Losses in Vehicles (urban driving)
Lubricant- important design parameter in reducing friction losses,
10% reduction in mechanical losses leads to 1.5% reduction in fuel consumption
100% 25% 13.5% 12%
32 kW 8 kW 4.3 kW 3.8 kW
cooling+exhaust+pumping losses
engine mechanical
lossesTransmission/axle losses
“Useful work”• rolling resistance• air resistance• acceleration
Taylor CM, (1998); Bartz WJ, (2000)
Types of mechanical losses
• Engines & transmissions contain several differing types of contact regimes where energy dissipation occurs
Valve train
Piston Rings
Piston Skirt
Plain
bearings
� Hydrodynamic lubrication� Elastohydrodynamic lubrication� Boundary lubrication� Churning
• Important to minimize friction in all regimes� Lubricant Formulation� Surface Engineering� Component redesign
Relative importanceEngines – Typical Result
Transmissions - Losses are mainly churning and EHD friction
Losses are mainly hydrodynamic and boundary
HTHS Viscosity
Boundary
Bovington & Spikes, 1996
HTHS
48%Traction 15%
Boundary37%
Sequence VI Test, Overall
HTHS
72%Traction 4%
Boundary24%
Sequence VIA Test, OverallSequence VIB Test, Overall
Lacey, 2001
Lubricant Properties that Influence Friction
Film Thickness
Friction Coefficient valve train
piston rings skirt
plain bearings
boundary mixed fluid-film (HD, EHD)
hU
W∝
η0 5.
( )h
U
W
o∝
η α0 7 0 5
01
. .
.
HD film thickness
EHD film thickness
η: η: η: η: viscosity
α: α: α: α: pressure-viscosity
coefficient
Boundary- surface films
Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Use of lower viscosity lubricants
•Reduces friction in HD conditions
•Reduces churning losses
•Lower EHD traction coefficients
Friction c
oeff
icie
nt
Speed
mixed
BL
HD
Korcek & Nakada, 1996
But leads to thinner HD and EHD films; larger proportion of contact operates in mixed regime
Balance of low viscosity with durability and volatility is important
Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Low friction boundary films
Solid-like boundary films reduce shear strength at load-bearing asperity contacts
• Soluble organomolybdenum friction modifiers
• Organic friction modifiers
• Nano-colloidal particles
Surface competition and interaction with other surface active additives- important
Some additives (e.g. ZDDP and detergents) form high friction films
Fri
ctio
n c
oef
fici
ent
Speed
mixed
BL
HD
Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Low friction boundary films (cont.)
Example- MoDTC: widely used in engine oils
- friction reduction results from MoS2 formation in the rubbing contact
0.01
Entrainment speed (m/s)
0
0.04
0.08
0.12
0.16
0.2
0.001
Frictio
n c
oeff
icie
nt
0.1 1 10
Base Oil
+MoDTC
Grossiord et al., 1998
Graham et al. , 2001
Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Viscous boundary films
Boundary films of enhanced viscosity enable transition from BL to mixed at lower speeds
• Functionalized polymers
• Liquid crystals
• Other?
Friction c
oeff
icie
nt
Speed
BL/mixedHD
Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Viscous boundary films (cont.)
Functionalized viscosity
modifier polymers form thick
viscous boundary films
Friction & wear benefits
observed(Gunsel et al, 1996)
120°C
1
10
100
1000
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Entrainment speed (m/s)
Film
th
ickn
ess (
nm
) PMAHIP-SPSBOCP-1OCP-DPMA-OBase oil
At slow speed At high speed
Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Smart viscometrics
Provide high viscosity under low speeds, but lower viscosities at high speeds:
Wright et al. SAE 830027
�shear thinning in mid stroke lowers HD friction
�important in designing fuel efficient lubricants
Shear thinning- viscosity modifier polymers shear
thin under high shear stresses
Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Smart viscometrics
Viscoelasticity- polymer behaviour under transient conditions
Enhanced squeeze behaviour during halting & viscoelastic response to acceleration/deceleration (Gunsel, 98)
With polymer, the film forms much faster during accelaration, and decays more slowly during decelaration
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 50 100 150 200
Time [ms]
Film
th
ickne
ss [
nm
]
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
Speed
[m
/s]
polymer
Speed
[m
/s]
10
20
30
40
50
Film
th
ickne
ss [
nm
]
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25no polymer
Spikes, 2007
film thicknessentrainment speed
Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Surface & Lubricant Design
• Development and application of low friction coatings advancing e.g. DLC, CrN,….
• Requires lubricants compatible with non-ferrous surfaces• Fuel economy improvements > 4% (Fox, 2005)• Very low friction (superlubricity, µ ∼0.01) possible ( J.M.Martin et al, 2005)• Surface texturing - effective in reducing hydrodynamic friction
www.nissan-global.com/en/technology/introduction/details/dlc/index.htmlSinanoğlu, 2005
Design Tools for Developing Energy Efficient Lubricants
• Models for predicting lubricant behavior– Molecular Dynamic simulations– Computational Fluid Dynamics– Mathematical models of individual machine components
– Empirical models
• Laboratory screener tests
• Engine & specialized testing rigse.g. driveline rig - allows contributions from individual drivetrain components to be measured
• Field trials
Engine
Gearbox
Axle
Dynamometers
27
Examples of energy efficient lubricants in automotive applications
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
Mean truck 1 truck 2 truck 3 truck 4%Im
pro
ve
me
nt
cf
av
era
ge
va
lue
fo
r 1
5W
-40
oil
0W20
0W30
Heavy duty trucks
Passenger cars
Energy efficiency improvements by lubricantdesign in engine tests
Improvements in in heavy duty field trials (5W40 vs 15W40)
R.I Taylor, 2008
28
Examples of energy efficient lubricants in automotive applications
Heavy duty trucks
Energy efficiency improvements by lubricant designindustry standard fuel economy tests
M111 engine test results
0
1
2
3
4
5
2.5 3 3.5 4
HTHS Viscosity (mPa.s)
EF
EI
(%)
No FM
With FM
Taylor & Coy, 2000
M 111 Seq. VIA
R I Taylor, 2008
Examples of energy efficient lubricants in industrial applications
Modeling of energy losses in industrial systems
e.g. Hydraulic Systems
Pipes
Filter
ExitPress Rel
Valve
Control Valve
Pump
Cylinder
Reservoir/
Reference
Filter
Hydraulic
Pump
Hydraulic
Cylinder
Pressure
relief valve
Directional
control valve
Piston,
Gear,
VaneHigh pressure
pipe
Low
pressure pipe
Green, 2009
30
Examples of energy efficient lubricants in industrial applications
70
80
90
100
Mineral Synthetic Mineral SyntheticISO 46ISO 32
19% 8%Lubricant design provides ~ 19% energy savings in hydraulic system (Vickers Vane Pump)
0.0075
0.0080
0.0085
0.0090
0.0095
0.0100
kW
h/C
yc
le
Mineral Hydraulic Fluid Specially Formulated
Synthetic Hydraulic Fluid
Specially Formulated
Synthetic Hydraulic Fluid
with Full Flush
~ 12% energy savings achieved in plastic molding injection machines field trials
Summary / Recommendations
Energy Challenge- the three hard truths are very hard• Surging energy demand
• Supply will struggle to keep pace, end of easy oil
• Increasing environmental stresses
Political and regulatory choices are pivotal
Tackling all three hard truths together is essential for a sustainable future
Technology plays a major role- development of technologies that increase efficiency and reduce emissions
Summary / Recommendations
Key drivers for new technology development in transportation industry : improved resource utilization, environmental protection and customer satisfaction
The ability of the lubricant to reduce overall friction lossin practical systems depends on a number of different properties, depending on the prevailing lubrication regime
In designing energy efficient & sustainable lubricants, it is essential to minimize all types of friction and ensure compatibility with emission systems
Summary / Recommendations
Energy efficient & sustainable lubricant designs require• Lower mechanical friction
– Lowest possible viscosity base oil without volatility and durability issues
– Optimized surface films through carefully balanced additive chemistry; friction modifiers, viscous surface film formers, synergistic additive combinations for combating high friction films
– Optimized rheology of viscosity improver polymers
• Emission system compatibility– Low P, S, Sulfated Ash (low SAPS)– Improved soot tolerance
• Improved oxidation, dispersancy & wear performance
• Higher quality base oils with low volatility, high viscosity index, narrow boiling range & oxidation stability
Summary / Recommendations
Energy efficient & sustainable lubricant designs requirecontinuing research on
• Lubricant/Biofuels Compatibility • Compatibility with non-ferrous surfaces• Surface texturing impacts on lubricant behavior• New additive technologies• Development of screener tests and models – important design tools• Simulations of the lubricated system as a whole that relate lubricant properties to energy efficiency
• Carbon footprint analysis
Energy efficient and sustainable lubricant benefits achievable in both automotive and industrial applications
Thank You