Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Sae Technical Paper Series: Edward R. Eaton and Scott Mccracken
Sae Technical Paper Series: Edward R. Eaton and Scott Mccracken
Sae Technical Paper Series: Edward R. Eaton and Scott Mccracken
Mary Ranger
Ford Motor Company
David Turcotte
The Valvoline Co.
400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760
The appearance of this ISSN code at the bottom of this page indicates SAE’s consent that copies of the
paper may be made for personal or internal use of specific clients. This consent is given on the condition,
however, that the copier pay a $7.00 per article copy fee through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc.
Operations Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 for copying beyond that permitted by Sec-
tions 107 or 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying such as
copying for general distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes, for creating new collective works,
or for resale.
SAE routinely stocks printed papers for a period of three years following date of publication. Direct your
orders to SAE Customer Sales and Satisfaction Department.
Quantity reprint rates can be obtained from the Customer Sales and Satisfaction Department.
To request permission to reprint a technical paper or permission to use copyrighted SAE publications in
other works, contact the SAE Publications Group.
No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of the publisher.
ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright 2001 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.
Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The author is solely
responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions will be printed with the paper if it is published in
SAE Transactions. For permission to publish this paper in full or in part, contact the SAE Publications Group.
Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication through SAE should send the manuscript or a 300
word abstract of a proposed manuscript to: Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.
Printed in USA
2001-01-1181
David Turcotte
The Valvoline Company
ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION
The ASTM D 2809 test method, “Standard Test Method The ASTM D 2809 test method was developed to
For Cavitation Corrosion and Erosion-Corrosion distinguish between coolants that do or don’t protect cast
Characteristics of Aluminum Pumps With Engine aluminum water pumps against cavitation corrosion and
1
Coolants” was first published in 1969 . The method erosion-corrosion. A rating system was developed that
involves a copper-pipe circuit through which coolant grades pumps on a scale of 1 (low) to 10 (high) after the
solution, heated to 113°C, is pumped at 103 kPa for 100 test is completed. The rating system involves the
hours. The method was modified to change the pump measurement of damaged areas, permitting objective
used in the test in 1989. It was updated in 1994 to and repeatable interpretations of the pumps used in
accommodate a change in the cleaning procedure and testing. Most specifications require a rating of “8”, or
was subsequently reapproved by the ASTM D-15 higher, to pass. The rating system was originally
2
Committee on Engine Coolants in 1999. supposed to relate to a certain predicted pump durability
measured in miles-to-failure, but current pump
Tests recently conducted on several modern coolants technologies do not seem to correlate to the rating
have produced “failing” results, but the coolants are system.
performing well in the field. Further, the repeatability and
reproducibility of the method have been questioned. A New coolant technologies introduced in the last decade
round-robin series of tests sponsored by the Ford Motor of the twentieth century offered consumers the promise
Company revealed significant variations and cause for of dramatically lower cost-of-operation through less
concern. The authors herein report research, performed frequent and simplified maintenance. Consumer
at Amalgatech, that offers insight into the strengths and experiences usually lived up to expectations; but the
weakness of the method, and offers possible coolants performed inconsistently on the ASTM D2809
modifications that will improve the value of the method, test, resulting in what later proved to be contoversy that
offering better prediction of service experience. the technologies may damage water pumps. A review of
the test equipment used at several laboratories resulted
This paper discusses the value of the test method, offers in some modifications to standardize the laboratories’
an analysis of its strengths and shortcomings, and equipment. In the second quarter of the year 2000, Ford
suggests possible modifications to improve repeatability Motor Company sponsored a round-robin test involving
3
and reproducibility. It reviews the development of a new six facilities, testing GM 6038 ‘low silicate’ antifreeze
prototype instrument, possible future applications and from a single batch, provided to each laboratory from the
predictive capabilities of an updated method. blender.
Results of the round robin testing (Appendix “A”) laboratories, the manufacturer visited and audited the
suggested problems in the repeatability and D2809 test stands that were in use and did find, most
reproducibility of the method. This information, presented interestingly, that significant hardware variations existed.
to the ASTM D15 Committee on Engine Coolants, The laboratories each addressed variations identified, in
prompted support for research to better understand the some cases scrapping existing machines and replacing
effects of various parameters on results, and to offer them with new ones. (Figure 1) It was further revealed at
ideas that will improve the method. a subsequent meeting of the ASTM D15 Committee that
some laboratories were not measuring damaged areas
DISCUSSION to pumps but were visually evaluating and assigning
ratings. The authors point out that the criteria for
BACKGROUND - Today’s laboratory research and “passing” the D2809 as published in the D3306 Coolant
testing methods have been changed to accommodate standard, is damage not exceeding 0.4 mm. It was
contemporary discoveries regarding the effects of long- suggested that visual determination of 0.4 to 0.5 mm is
term exposure to chemicals and other health hazards. exceeding difficult without the use of appropriate
4
Some of the groups of tests so affected have been measurement instrumentation.
engine coolant performance test methods. Early in the
history of coolant testing, and in particular the subject
method of this paper, a thorough and complete cleaning
of the test apparatus was routinely accomplished using
chromic acid solutions. These solutions provided the test
facility with consistently clean and predicable surfaces
upon which the coolant would act. As chromic acid
proved to present a liability from both health and financial
points-of-view, it was replaced in these methods with a
significantly more expensive, and perhaps less efficient,
cleaning method. The new method employs oxalic and
citric acids to clean the test apparatus. These changes
were written into the 1994 revision of the D2809 test
method and remain current through 2000.
DISCOVERIES - Research
The Ford Round-Robin Data – In 1999 Ford Motor ! System Pressure downstream of the pump
Company, as part of its continuous improvement
research, evaluated a number of coolant technologies. ! Main Flow Rate
Ford employed the traditional and proven tools of the
trade; the ASTM D3306 engine coolant specification ! Deaeration Loop (Bypass) Flow Rate
performance evaluation methods, including the D2809.
As the evaluations proceeded, the data provided All of the data may be continuously collected through
evidence of repeatability problems from lab-to-lab, a data acquisition electronics either over the course of the
situation that could affect the decision-making process in test or for a finite period, if the research so dictates. The
selecting new coolant technologies. Main Flow Rate and Bypass Flow Rate can be
independently controlled.
In order to determine the value of the D 2809 method for Temperature effects – Temperature changes can be
its new coolant selection criteria, Ford conducted a round directly related to changes of the pump inlet pressure
robin of the test method involving seven laboratories (PIP). As the temperature increases, the PIP increases
each conducting two tests. All of the tests were exponentially, approaching the asymptote defined by the
conducted on GM 6038 antifreeze distributed from a vapor pressure curve (Figure 6). It is accepted that the
single batch to each of the participating laboratories. In PIP is a very important and influential parameter of the
addition, all of the pumps were procured at one time, flow test conditions. High PIP should decrease the severity of
tested to eliminate those that varied obviously from the the test, so careful and accurate control of temperature,
mean, and uniformly deburred and prepared for the so as to permit a stable PIP as prescribed by the test
testing. As much as possible. The test stands had been method, is critical. The curve in Figure 6 is generated
made uniform, the pumps had been made uniform, and from the electronically sampled data input into the
the coolant to be tested was uniform. The data, however, improved test rig’s computer using data acquisition
were not uniform as illustrated in the histogram (Figure 5) hardware and software. The data has been plotted
and data spreadsheet (Appendix “A”). directly by the program and annotated by the authors.
10
Gauge Pressure PS
-2
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240
After more than ten evaluations the improved test rig was
subjected to repeated attempts at cleaning. The first
attempt was consistent with the D 2809 cleaning
procedure. The procedure, upon inspection, failed to
Figure 7: PIP is not affected by Pump Flow Rate clean the apparatus. Next, a cleaner specifically
In addition to the effect on PIP, temperature effects on designed for use in EG systems, and recommended in
the main flow can be plotted. The main flow rate some earlier ASTM standard test procedures, was tried
decreases as temperature increases. It is possible to with modest improvement. Finally, a solution of sulfuric
represent both the main flow rate and PIP as functions of acid was introduced. The sulfuric acid quickly and easily
temperature in one graph, illustrating the inverse effect cleaned all of the visible deposits, restoring a fresh, clean
that temperature has on these. (Figure 8) surface after each test. The experiment was repeated on
the standard D 2809. The results were exactly the same;
The Difficulty of Cleaning the D 2809 Test Apparatus – sulfuric acid cheaply and thoroughly cleaned the system.
The authors have noticed that the safety-mandated
change in the cleaning procedure compromised the Additional Experiments:
effectiveness thereof. In fact, the abandonment of the
chromic acid cleaning procedure resulted in poorer Several companies have contributed funds to permit the
cleaning of the copper and cast iron parts in the D 2809, execution of a test matrix on the improved test rig that
includes 5 repetitions of a hybrid coolant at standard
12 40
10 35
Main Flow 30
8
Pump Inlet Pressure - PSI
25
6
20
4
Pump Inlet Pressure Curve 15
2
10
0
5
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
-2 0
Tem perature, Degrees F
Figure 8
settings (as currently specified) and five more at a REFERENCES
recommended standard flow rate. The authors
hypothesize that the holding of the flow steady for the 1. Clark, John SAE Technical Paper 680498, Society of
duration of the test will result in improved repeatability Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA 1968
and reproducibility. 2. Engine Coolants, Halogenated Organic Solvents and
Fire Extinguishing Agents; Industrial and Specialty
Chemicals, ISBN 0-2037-2833-9, American Society
for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA,
CONCLUSION vol 15.05, 2000 Specification D-2809
3. General Motors Antifreeze/Coolant Specification
A significant effort to understand the causes of recently 6038 for low-silicate antifreeze requiring a pre-
observed variation in data generated by the ASTM D charge of supplemental coolant additive, General
2809 standard test method has been made. Many Motors Corp, Detroit, MI
possible factors have been investigated using an 4. Minutes, ASTM D-15 Committee on Engine
updated, computerized test rig. The data have suggested Coolants, October 2000. American Society for
a significant modification of the existing procedure may Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA
be justified to improve the repeatability and 5. Engine Coolants, Halogenated Organic Solvents and
reproducibility of the test. The modifications are also Fire Extinguishing Agents; Industrial and Specialty
justified in the attempt to more correctly predict the ability Chemicals, ISBN 0-2037-2833-9, American Society
of coolants to perform and protect coolant systems in the for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA,
field. vol 15.05, 2000 Specification D-3306
a. Clarifying the exact Genuine GM cast Dave Turcotte, The Valvoline Company, 3499 Blazer
aluminum pump that is to be used. Parkway, Lexington, KY 40512; e-mail:
deturcotte@ashland.com
b. Maintaining constant main flow for the
duration of the test.
ASTM D2809 Water Pump Testing - Round Robin Testing with Eight Laboratories
GM6038 Engine Coolant
May 15, 2000
B2615-054 GM-6038 1 ATI PFT 040500-1/29.25 GPM 9.72 9.19 16.7 2 Pit all the way through the impeller
D B2615-054 GM-6038 2 ATI PFT 040500-2/29.5 GPM 9.8 9.15 16.7 2 Pit all the way through the impeller
B2615-054 GM-6038 1 ATI PFT 0412200-1/29.0GPM 10 9.2 n/a 9 10 9 Slight attack of pump
E B2615-054 GM-6038 2 ATI PFT 0412200-2/29.5GPM 10.2 9.3 n/a 7 10 7 0.7mm depth of attack of pump
* Pump was either ATI PFT 041200-3/28.75 GPM or ATI PFT 041200-4/32.25 GPM.
** By Karl Fisher method.
Notes:
. Amalgamated test stand was built and ran a couple of times with conventional and GM6038 coolants prior to use in this series of tests.
. GM6038 was formulated by Amalgamated. (GM6038 run suggested by Prestone; seen as a negative control.)