It was just about a year ago that many fleet managers were looking forward to January 2007 and the new round of emissions regulations that it ushered in with –– what? Dread?
No, too strong, but most certainly with concern. There was concern about high prices and poor performance. There was concern about increased maintenance demands and lower fuel economy. And there was a concern about the possibility of needing two different lubricants: one for pre-’07 engines another for ’07 compliant engines.
So, what happened? It turns out that the whole affair was pretty much a Y2K event –– lots of doomsday predictions, but few with any accuracy. The sky didn’t fall. It didn’t even rain. Quite the opposite, actually. Both engine suppliers and fleet managers who have experience with these engines in service look upon the launch of ’07 compliant engines to be the most successful product introduction in recent memory.
It turns out that such success shouldn’t be too surprising. This time, unlike when the government moved the 2004 regulations forward two years, engine manufacturers had the field-test time they needed to iron out any kinks in original designs. Together, engine builders had hundreds of engines in the field for months before the January 2007 launch date.
Field test programs
Mike Powers, product development manager for on-highway engines at Caterpillar, tells us that Cat had several hundred engines in the field under test in many different applications. Those engines accumulated over 12,000,000 miles. The company now has thousands of engines in the field performing very well. He says, “Considering the anxiety that the market had concerning these engines, we’re very pleased with how they are performing in service. We’ve been told by customers that the performance has been exceeding their expectations.”
Cummins began its field testing of ’07 compliant product in November 2005 with engines running in continuous service preceding the January ’07 start date. Mario Sanchez, Cummins’ heavy-duty product manager for commercial vehicle applications, indicated that across its product line, the company has delivered roughly 30,000 engines with 2007 emission control technology. These, of course, have gone into many different applications. He estimates that during just the first six months of this year, those engines accumulated a combined 68,000,000 miles.
Sanchez says, “Our engines are performing very well. We are delighted with how things are going. In fact, we are beginning to believe that this has been the best launch of new products that we have ever done.”
It was not only engine manufacturers that were involved with early testing of these products. Ryder System took early delivery of ’07 compliant engines for field testing –– a fact that Ty Cross, the company’s vice president of maintenance believes contributed to the success of the launch. He says, “The introduction of ’07 equipment went relatively smoothly. What contributed to that was the fact that we’ve been running an observation fleet comprised of 18 ’07 compliant engines since November of 2005. We took a leading position in the development of this technology and put these test vehicles into real world applications. We made a lot of progress through 2006 and were able to introduce ’07 vehicles to our customers with very few problems.”
Ryder’s fleet currently includes 2,500 ‘07 compliant engines, and Cross expects another 1,000 of these products to be added to the fleet before the end of the year.
Penske Truck Leasing also had some early ’07 engines in field service for evaluation. Ken McKibben, senior vice president for field maintenance, reported his team had no problems at all with those engines. He did say that he was pleased to find that the fuel economy of those units improved compared to production engines purchased earlier. The Penske fleet is now running just about 3,200 ’07 compliant engines, but McKibben points out that these are very young engines having an average of less than 10,000 miles on them. As of now he reports they are performing very well.
Few problems, quickly addressed.
The situation is best summed up by Ryder’s Cross when he says, “We have not had any significant problems with these engines.”
With that said, it needs to be stated that while the report card is very good, it’s not quite straight “A’s.” It seems, however, that most of the problems have been caused by non-hardware issues. For example, Caterpillar’s Powers tells us, “Truck manufacturers have installed dash-mounted switches for the control of the diesel particulate filter (DPF). In Cat’s case, the switch is supposed to be left in the ‘Automatic’ position. Some drivers ran with the switch in the ‘Disable’ mode preventing the DPF from regenerating as it should. An educated driver is the solution to the problem. We tell them, ‘Leave the switch alone. Just drive the truck.’ Another problem was the regeneration system not firing when it was supposed to. This was quickly identified and fixed both on the production line and in the field.”
Cummins reports a similar situation. Sanchez says, “There have been very, very few problems. Most of the problems have been related to the tight controls and high tolerances we put on these products. For example, dash-mounted lamps, designed to alert drivers to an undesirable condition, could turn on when there was no problem. We found that it was our control thresholds that were flagging the alerts when conditions were perfectly normal. We had set the thresholds way too tight. As a result, we released a software update to correct the situation. Since then, everything has been running very well.”
The company is working to make drivers aware of the new lamps and controls on the dash related to the particulate filter. Sanchez says, “In the beginning, drivers were not aware of what the switch was for, but we have addressed that problem with a driver tip card in every truck.”
A driver’s card is only one of many methods that Detroit Diesel is using to train drivers. Tim Tindall, director of component sales at DDC, says, “In the best of all situations we’re able to sit down with the drivers and go through an explanation of what the lights mean, then take them into a truck and show them. When we’re not able to do that, we have videos and CDs available.”
We hear a similar situation described by Ryder’s Cross. He says, “We have not heard any complaints from drivers. One concern is more of a training issue. We need to make sure drivers are made aware of the indicator lights that require driver action. It’s the first time that drivers are part of the emission control system.”
McKibben says that sensor lights in the cab are the only items causing problems, and even these are very few in number. He says, “We have to get more information to the drivers.” Penske is also using CDs and videos supplied by truck builders. When asked if he’s getting enough support from OEMs, he says, “Absolutely!”
He does mention a most unusual problem, which might be a growing situation, about which fleet managers should be aware. He reports that there is a growing number of thefts of the new diesel particulate filters from vehicles parked overnight, particularly from mid-range trucks as these filters are more portable than those used on highway tractors. His belief is that the filters are later being stripped of the precious metals they contain.
Fuel consumption
Because diesel fuel is consumed when the diesel particulate filter goes through an active regeneration cycle, fleet managers feared that fuel economy could take a hit. While it is the case that a small amount of fuel is consumed, it turns out that engine builders have been able to coax a bit more miles per gallon out of the base ’07 engines. As a result, fuel consumption has not suffered. In some cases, depending on the application, it has actually improved. Cat’s Powers says, “In most cases, the fuel economy is significantly better than with ’04 engines. In the worst cases, it is the same.”
Ryder’s Cross says, “Active regeneration does use some fuel, but because of some design improvements in the engines, they were able to pretty well offset the fuel consumed during active regeneration. We’re seeing almost a wash.”
As indicated above, Penske’s McKibben reported that the early ’07 engines he had available for evaluation offered improved fuel economy when compared to earlier models. He has found that the ’07 engines he has added since then have continued this welcome performance. He says that the basic engines are delivering improved fuel mileage, and regeneration is mostly taking place passively so little fuel is being used by the DPF.
’07 engines in the shop
Fleet managers had two major areas of concern regarding these engines. The first was the possibility of having two types of engine lubricants in the shop, one for new engines and another for older models. The latest API diesel oil classification, CJ-4, was developed for ’07 compliant engines with particulate filters included in their exhaust systems. These oils, with their very low sulfated ash content, will maximize the time before an exhaust filter will need to be cleaned.
According to Lubrizol, API CJ-4 represents a major performance upgrade over CI-4 Plus in terms of emissions control system durability as well as additional protection in terms of valve train wear, piston deposit control and soot handling capabilities over the previous categories. It also improves oil consumption characteristics and protection against bearing corrosion.
Early CJ-4 product introductions came with a substantial price premium over even CI-4 Plus lubes. Although that difference has come down somewhat, suppliers are offering it as a premium product and are expecting a premium price for it. Engine manufacturers are not requiring its use in ’07 compliant engines but are strongly recommending it. Cat’s Powers says, “CJ-4 is not required but is highly recommended. It is a better lubricant than CI-4, but more importantly, it has lower ash content, which will lengthen the required cleaning cycle of particulate filters.”
McKibben says that he will continue to use CI-4 in all Penske’s engines.
Is it worth the premium price? That’s a question with an answer that is going to vary for every fleet.
On the other hand, ultra low sulfur diesel fuel (ULSD), diesel fuel containing less that 15 parts per million of sulfur compared with 500 PPM for older fuels, is required for ’07 compliant engines. Unfortunately, this requirement, at the present time, might be causing problems –– not through the fault of fleets or fuel manufacturers. By reading the accompanying sidebar, you will see that the EPA requires all diesel fueling pumps be marked as delivering 500 PPM or 15 PPM fuel, except in California where all diesel must be less than 15 PPM. In some regions of the country, retailers have not posted such labels on fueling pumps. As a result, drivers cannot be certain that they’re getting ULSD. This condition shouldn’t last much longer as the industry is working with the EPA to correct this situation as fast as possible.
The only really new ’07 technology that is causing concern with fleet managers is connected with the exhaust system filters mainly because they will need to be cleaned. The EPA mandated the use of DPFs on ’07 engines but also mandated that these components be designed to be maintenance-free for at lease 150,000 miles or 4,500 hours. It turns out that most engine manufacturers have designed their products to far exceed these figures. For example, filters used on Cat engines are designed to operate with no maintenance for at least 300,000 miles. As a result, cleaning will not be required until mid-2008 or later. Although cleaning machines will be available to fleets, engine dealers will offer the service. DDC’s Tindall tells us his company is setting up a DPF exchange program for when these filters need cleaning. He describes the exchange as a quick 30 minute process.
Ryder likes the exchange idea. Cross says, “Our strategy at this point is to do an exchange until we reach a point where it makes sense to purchase the cleaning equipment. To date we have not had any engines in normal use require cleaning.”
Penske’s McKibben says his fleet will also rely on his engine manufacturers’ exchange program when filters need maintenance.
Darry Stuart, president of DWS Fleet Management Services and the current general chairman of the Technology and Maintenance Council, tells of some comments made by engine dealers on the local level being at odds with manufacturers’ recommendations regarding filter cleaning. His concern is that some fleet managers, possibly out of fear of the unknown, will incur unnecessary expense by following a local dealer’s advice to have DPFs cleaned after 150,000 miles. He advises that we let experience, not fear, guide our decisions.
Most of the concerns of a year ago that fleet managers had relative to ’07 compliant engines –– price, maintenance, fuel economy, lubricant requirement –– never materialized. Well, three out of four isn’t too bad! Yes, price is still a concern. It’s a concern now, and it’s going to be a concern tomorrow. Prices aren’t going to come down, at least not enough to eliminate your concern. One of these days you’re going to have to buy new trucks. Look on the bright side. Now you only have one concern.
Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel
Ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD), sometimes called S15, is defined by the U.S. EPA as diesel fuel with a sulfur content not to exceed 15 parts per million (PPM). In different regions of the world ULSD may refer to different maximum sulfur content values, but ULSD and S15 are often used interchangeably in North America (U.S. and Canada).
The
EPA states that the use of ULSD will significantly reduce nitrous oxides (NOx) and particulate matter emissions to the atmosphere. To attain these emission reductions the EPA has established a comprehensive program to regulate diesel fuel along with the production of diesel engines.
The regulations require:
• Model year 2007 diesel engines are required to use high-efficiency catalytic exhaust emission control devises (or comparably effective technology).
• On-highway diesel fuel sulfur levels be less than 15 PPM.
It is the combination of the 2007 emission regulations and the lower sulfur diesel fuel that the EPA expects to result in reduced emissions to the atmosphere. In addition, federal regulations require the labeling of all diesel fuel pumps to specify the type of fuel dispensed by each pump (except in California where all diesel fuel is ULSD). Similar instrument panel and fuel inlet/fill cap labeling is being mandated for 2007 and later model year highway engines and vehicles that require ULSD fuel. Check the pump and vehicle labels to ensure you are refueling with the proper diesel fuel consistent with their vehicle warranties.
