FINAL PROJECT REPORT

March 17, 2006

PD-5 DIESEL FUEL ADDITIVE EFFECTS ON TORQUE AND ENGINE BRAKE HORSE POWER (BHP)

BY

GREG CLOUSE PROFESSOR DIESEL TECHNOLOGY MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY-NORTHERN COLLEGE OF TECHNICAL SCIENCES

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 1-Introduction Page 2-Materials & Equipment Page 3-Methods Page 6-Results Page ? Conclusion Page ? Acknowledgements Page ? Appendices

Project Title: PD-5 DIESEL FUEL ADDITIVE EFFECTS ON TORQUE AND ENGINE BRAKE HORSE POWER (BHP) Abstract: Problem to be studied: Does the addition of PD-5 fuel additive result in a 15-30% improvement on fuel consumption and power.

Introduction:
MSU-Northern faculty and administration were asked by individuals in Fort Benton MT and Great Falls MT to develop a procedure to test the effects of a diesel fuel additive PD-5 correlated to engine brake horsepower (BHP) and fuel consumption. The individuals hypothesis is, PD-5 fuel additive would have a positive effect on a diesel engines brake horsepower, torque and fuel consumptions. The scope of this project is covered in the following sections, materials, methods, results, and discussion. The funding for the project was primarily provided by MSU-Northerns, College of Technical Science (COTS). The Taylor brothers from Fort Benton MT and Great Falls MT donated $1000.00 to the project. The project was classified as a pilot project under the COTS. The project duration was over two years due to testing equipment procurement issues. Limitations of the Project: Fuel consumption and emission testing were not included in this project due to funding for the equipment. The primary focus of this project was to analyze PD-5 diesel fuel additive effects on torque and engine brake horse power (BHP).

MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT

Test Site: Montana State University-Northern, Farm Mechanics Building, Havre MT Test Engine: Caterpillar (CAT) 3176 turbo-charged, air to air after cooled, electronic controlled 4-stroke, diesel engine. (see manufactures specifications and Engine Test Cell Results appendices I). Test Engine Electrical System: One 8D 12 V battery, One 12 V/110V supply battery charger

Fuel Cooler: L 31, W 33, D1 Standard forced air to air fuel cooler. Fuel Container: Two 55 gal plastic composition fuel drums. Test Dynamometer: Taylor TD-3100 engine dynamometer rated from 0 to 1000 bhp. Dynamometer is a water brake design. Test Engine Monitoring & Control Software: Caterpillar Service Technician Workbench (STW) and Caterpillar Electronic Technician (ET). Caterpillar communication adaptor (part # 7X1700) and cables (part #7X1412 & 7X1688). Taylor Dynamometer electronic control software (DYNO-PRO) system. Data Acquisition & Data Logging: MSU-Northerns data acquisition 16 channel system. Caterpillar ET data logger and Caterpillar communication adaptor. Taylor Dynamometer electronic control software (DYNO-PRO) data logger. Computers: Three PC with the following specification Intel Pentium 2.8 GHz 512 MB RAM 80 GB Hard Drive DVD-ROM/CD-RW 17 Flat Panel Display Floor Fan: Auxiliary Self Contained 46 floor air fan. Auxiliary Fuel Pump: One rotary barrel pump Miscellaneous: General Mechanics Tool Set , 5 gallon calibrated container, 100 ml beaker.

METHODS This discussion includes pretest preparation and test profile (engine duty cycle) for PD-5 fuel additive. The Test Engine: A Caterpillar 3176 diesel engine owned by Montana State University-Northern (MSUN) College of Technical Sciences (COTS), Diesel Technology program was selected for this test. (see appendices I) Pretest Discussion: The test engine was serviced and the injectors and valves were set according to the manufactures specifications. The test engine dynamometer was mounted to the test engine according to the dynamometer manufactures specifications. The dynamometer was zeroed and calibrated according to the manufactures specifications. All pressure and temperature transducers were calibrated. The test engine system status monitoring parameters were selected and operational.

The test engine was run extensively at various engine loads and engine revolutions per minute (RPM) to complete the system and data acquisition integrity assessment. During this portion of the pre-test several issues were discovered and resolved. The issues and solutions are listed in order of occurrence. These issues include: Issue #1: Erratic brake horsepower (BHP) and Torque data occurrence Solution: Installed a micro-Farad capacitor on the signal line of the dynamometer load cell. Issue # 2: Test engine intake manifold air increased to the maximum temperature allowed by the engine parameters and a fault code was logged. Solution: A fabricated water cooler to the air-to-air after cooler was added to reduce intake manifold air to an acceptable temperature. Issue #3: After several full-load test runs the test engines fuel supply reached an unacceptable temperature: Solution: An in-line (return side) air-to-air fuel cooler and a 46 floor fan were added to reduce the test engines fuel temperature to an acceptable level.

The test engine was run through a series of loads and RPM ranges and the data were recorded and analyzed. All the test engines systems and data acquisition programs were checked and working properly. Test profile (duty cycle): The following is a list of test engine systems parameters, which were monitored and logged. Electronic Control Module (ECM) Information Sample Rate = 60/min Duration Time = 6/min Pre-Trigger Time = -1/second Parameter Elapsed Time/Time Stamp Atmospheric Pressure Engine Coolant Engine Oil Engine Speed Estimated Fuel Rate Fuel Temperature Intake Manifold Air Throttle Position Exhaust Temperature Value Each parameter 1/second (psi) Temperature (Deg F) Pressure (psi) (RPM) (GPH) gallons/hr. Temperature (Deg F) Temperature (Deg F) Percent (%) Temperature (Deg F)

Dynamometer (DYNO-PRO) Parameters: Information: Snapshot data 1800 RPM runs sample rate = .01 sec Sweep test data runs sample rate = 5 sec Parameter Raw Torque Engine Speed Step Time Set Point One Test Time Power Torque Avg. Engine Speed Avg. Torque Avg. Power Value (lb-ft) (RPM) (sec) (varies) (sec) (BHP) (lb/ft) (RPM) (lb/ft) (BHP)

PD-5 Fuel Additive Test Profile (Duty Cycle): Sweep tests and 1800 RPM snapshot test profiles were selected. Sweep Test: The sweep test was selected because this test analyzes the engines torque and BHP curves as specified by the engine manufacturer. The sweep test profile is an automated test run. The sweep test begins when the engine reaches 2100 RPM, and then automatically reduces engines RPM to approximately 1300 RPM over a three minute time interval. Next, the engines RPM automatically increases back to the original starting point of approximately 2100 RPM over a three minute interval. Data (BHP, torque, RPM) are logged every five seconds during the sweep test profile. Snap Test: The 1800 RPM snapshot test is a manual test run. In this test, the operator of the dynamometer manually loads the engine to 1800 RPM, and then holds the load at this RPM for stabilization. Data are recorded every .01 seconds during this test. The 1800 RPM snapshot test was selected because the manufacturer rated the test engine at 1800 RPM. #2 Dyed Diesel and PD-5 Fuel Additive mixing: The following methods were used to mix the PD-5 fuel additive with the #2 dyed diesel fuel. The Diesel fuel additive blend followed the PD-5 manufactures recommended ratio of 1:4000. 50 gallons of #2 dyed diesel fuel were mixed with 47.325 ml of PD-5. The fuel was pumped from a supply barrel into a 5 gallon calibrated fuel container. A portion of the 47.325 ml of PD-5 was added to the 5-gallon container and then aggressively agitated by hand. The agitated mixture of #2

dyed diesel fuel plus PD-5 in the 5-gallon container was then poured into a clean, empty 55-gallon plastic composition container. This process was repeated until an agitated mixture of #2 dyed diesel fuel plus PD-5 additive reached exactly 50-gallons. This barrel was marked and placed next to the barrel of 50-gallons of #2 dyed diesel fuel. An empty plastic composition container was also placed adjacent to the other two barrels of fuel for purging the test engines fuel system between test runs. Purging Process: A purging process was employed between runs of #2 dyed diesel fuel and #2 dyed diesel fuel plus PD-5-diesel fuel additive mix. This purging process assures that no residual #2 dyed diesel or the PD-5 additive plus #2 diesel fuel mixture remained in the system. When the test engines fuel system required purging from either PD-5 or #2 dyed diesel, the engine was run (no data recorded) at one half-load for 5 minutes with the fuel returned to an empty barrel. PD-5 Fuel Additive Test Profile Steps: Each step is an engine run or a purge process. Baseline test 1. Test engine warm-up, data acquisition and all systems check. 2. Sweep test #1, baseline 1; #2 dyed diesel. 3. Sweep test #2, baseline 2; #2 dyed diesel. 4. 1800 RPM snapshot test; #2 dyed diesel. 5. Purge the fuel system with a mixture of PD-5 plus #2 dyed diesel fuel. PD-5 and #2 Dyed diesel fuel plus PD-5 additive mixture 6. Sweep test #3, PD-5 plus #2 dyed diesel fuel. 7. Sweep test #4, PD-5 plus #2 dyed diesel fuel. 8. 1800 RPM snapshot test; PD-5 plus #2 dyed diesel fuel. 9. Purge fuel system with #2 dyed diesel fuel. 10. Sweep test #5, base line 3; #2 dyed diesel fuel.

Results: This section explains the graphs and analyzed data found in appendices II through VI. Note: on the graph, engine power is listed as HP instead of BHP Appendix II: Report title, SWP T-1 BAS #2 1017 compared to SWP T-1 2ND BAS #2 1103 The purpose of this analysis is to verify that all conditions remained the same during the entire testing period. The graph on page two compares the first and the final baseline sweep test runs conducted with dyed #2 diesel fuel only. The final base line test run took place after the #2 dyed diesel sweep tests and the #2 dyed diesel fuel plus PD-5 additive sweep tests were completed. The graph on page two indicates that there were no significant changes in conditions between the first and final baseline runs. The results of this run verify that the engines BHP & torque curves remained essentially the same. Pages three to five lists the accompanying data in tabular form. Appendix III: Report title, SWP T-1 BAS #2 1017 compared to SWP T-1 PD-5 & #2 1045 This graph compares the test engines BHP and torque results for the first baseline sweep test run of dyed #2 diesel fuel only with the first base line sweep test run using dyed #2 diesel fuel plus PD-5 fuel additive. The graph on page two indicates that there were no significant changes between the two test runs. The graph also suggests that the engines BHP & torque curves remained essentially the same for both test runs. Pages three to five lists the accompanying data in tabular form. Appendix IV: Report title, SWP T-2 BAS #2 1028 compared to SWP T-2 PD-5 & #2 1052 This graph compares the second baseline sweep test run of dyed #2 diesel fuel with the second sweep test run using dyed #2 diesel fuel plus PD-5 fuel additive. The graph on page two of the report indicates that there were no significant changes between the two test runs. The graph suggests that the engines BHP & torque curves remained essentially the same for both test runs. Pages three to five lists the accompanying data in tabular form. Appendix V: Report title, SWP T-1 BAS #2 1017 compared to SWP T-2 BAS #2 1028 compared to SWP T-1 PD-5 & #2 1045 compared to SWP T-2 PD-5 & #2 1052 This graph compares four different test runs; two baseline sweep test runs using #2 dyed diesel fuel and two sweep test runs using #2 dyed diesel fuel plus PD-5 additive. The purpose of this graph is to analyze and represent all four pertinent

runs simultaneously. Baseline sweep tests 1 and 2 record the results of two test runs using #2 dyed diesel fuel only, while sweep tests 1 and 2 record the results of two test runs using #2 dyed diesel plus PD-5 fuel additive. A review of the graph on page 2 reveals that one cluster of four lines (black, green, brown, yellow) represents the engines power (HP) curve for all four test runs. The other cluster of four lines (pink, navy, light purple, dark purple) represents the engines torque curve for all four test runs. The graph on page two indicates that there were no significant differences in either torque or BHP between the two baseline sweep test runs, each of which used only #2 dyed diesel fuel, and the two sweep test runs, each of which used #2 dyed diesel plus Pd-5 additive. For each run, the engines BHP & torque curves remained essentially the same for both #2 dyed diesel and #2 dyed diesel plus PD-5 fuel additive. Pages three to five lists the accompanying data in tabular form. Appendix VI: Report title, 1800 rpm SNAP #2 2nd compared to 1800 rpm SNAP PD-5 & #2 1100 This is a comparison of two 1800 RPM snapshot test runs. The SNAP #2 2nd snapshot test run used dyed #2 diesel only. The SNAP PD-5&#2 snapshot test run used dyed #2 diesel plus PD-5 fuel additive. The engine manufacturer rates the test engines BHP at 1800 RPM. At the top of the graph, the upper cluster of 2 lines (light purple, brown) represents an engine speed of 1800 rpm for both snapshot tests. The middle two lines (red, blue) of the graph show that the torque for both snapshot tests also remained at approximately 1100 lb/ft for both snapshot runs. The lower cluster of two lines (black, green) on the graph represents BHP at approximately 380 HP for both snapshot runs. These data indicate that there were no significant changes between these two snapshot test runs. Pages 3-53 tabular data are not included with this report.

Conclusions: Analysis of the data generated in this project indicates there was no significant effect on brake horsepower and torque from the addition of PD-5 fuel additive to #2 dyed diesel fuel. There could be some logical hypotheses supporting the fact that no positive effect was produced. These hypotheses would require future testing under similar conditions. As mentioned in the introduction fuel consumption and emission testing were excluded from this project because of funding for the equipment and project.

Both of these tests could be important to the over-all effect of PD-5 on #2 diesel fuel as well as the future of PD-5.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Greg Kegel, Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences MSU-N support and technical assistance Vickie Clouse, Assistant Professor Biology and Earth Science MSU-N support and editorial assistance Steven Don, Instructor in Diesel and Automotive Technology MSU-N technical support Randy Riggen Student and Field Technician for Tractor & Equipment (CAT) technical support Charles Pollington Assistant Professor Mathematics MSU-N statistical analysis Students for the Diesel 272, Diesel Engines Diagnosis and Repair class technical support

10