1. P Effect on Catalyst – SAE 2007-1072 and 1990
OEMs have been targeting a 0.05%P oil with conventional P
Primary pathway is combusted P
P volatility alone reduces captured P by 39% (reduces volatile P by 50%) when the Low Volatility P was used
More than the reduction of changing P from 0.08% to 0.05% (37% reduction)
Reducing P limit from 0.08% to 0.07% provides no significant benefit due to low capture efficiency in catalyst (0.01/0.08x20%=2.5%)
Design for low bulk/leak oil consumption is the most effective way to prevent catalyst poisoning because of the high capture efficiency of that pathway
Even a 0.05%P oil will behave like a 0.2%P oil

2. PEI165 Is The Best Option for P Volatility
PEI165 provides strong correlation
correlates with fundamental ZnDTP properties
Thermal stability, molecular weight and volatility
PEI165 correlates with field test and dyno tests (IIIG)
PEI165 correlates with TMC reference oils
PEI has the best discrimination among methods evaluated
A robust 6-sigma design (repeatability vs. spread) of reference oils
PEI is cost effective and doesn’t create additional problems
Creates no parts issue for GF-5 and beyond as does IIIG
Low cost bench test is cost effective route
Saves resources and reduces CO2 emissions (compared to IIIG)!
PEI165 provides a comprehensive survey of oils on the market not available with other methods
LCL
UCL
3 s
3 s

3. PEI165: additional support
Correlated with SAE paper field test data with a similar spread
Captured volatile P, g
PEI165, mg/L
IIIG P retention, %
Conventional Zn
9.96
102 72
Low volatility Zn
4.99 54 82

4. Recommendation Maintain GF-4 P chemical limit
P effect on catalyst is not exact science
Improvement from P limit reduction is lost in P volatility data noise
Use PEI165 for P volatility with P/F set around TMC 435
Market survey data will soon follow
Move PEI165 to ASTM to finalize test method and precision statement