Proceedings of STLE/ASME International Joint Tribology Conference
IJTC2008
October 20-22, 2008, Miami, Florida USA
Proceedings of the STLE/ASME International Joint Tribology Conference
IJTC2008
October 20-22, 2008, Miami, Florida, USA
ILTC2008-71305
IJTC2008-71305
Hydraulic Fluid Viscosity Selection for Improved Fuel Economy
Paul Michael Steven N. Herzog
Milwaukee School of Engineering, Evonik
Fluid Power Institute, Rohmax Oil Additives
1025 N. Broadway 723 Electronic Drive
Milwaukee, WI, 53202-3109, USA Horsham, PA 19044-2228
2
ABSTRACT viscosity of 13 mm /s under operating conditions and a
2
Fluid properties have a major influence upon the energy maximum start-up viscosity of 860 mm /s (approximately
efficiency of hydraulic equipment. The relationship 750 cP). This data may be used to select the proper
between hydraulic fluid viscosity, shear stability and viscosity fluid using the Temperature Operating Window
system fuel economy has been studied. New viscosity or TOW method shown in Figure 1. When selecting a
selection guidelines for hydraulic pumps and motors are hydraulic fluid using TOW criteria, determine the lowest
proposed. These guidelines provide a means for ambient temperature at start-up and the highest fluid
improving the efficiency of fluid power systems. temperature in use. This defines the temperature
operating range. A fluid that has a Temperature
INTRODUCTION Operating Window that encompasses the temperature
The National Fluid Power Association recommended operating range may be selected for the application.
practice for viscosity selection criteria in hydraulic motors
and pumps was adopted in 2002 [1].This standard was Figure 1 – TOW Chart
the first specification to define a process for selecting the
appropriate hydraulic fluid viscosity based on OEM Temperature Operating Window
minimum and maximum viscosity requirements and the For 13 to 860 cSt
temperature operating window of the hydraulic fluid. It Straight Grade, 100 VI Hydraulic Fluid
also provides background information regarding:
• Viscosity requirements for pumps and motors
• Effects of viscosity on system performance
• Consequences of improper viscosity
• Multigrade hydraulic fluids and shear stability
Temperature, °C
Recent studies have established that hydraulic system
efficiency is dependent on the hydraulic fluid viscosity
after shear [2,3,4]. It was further shown that the amount
of fuel required to do a given amount of work with a
mobile hydraulic system could be reduced by substituting
a high viscosity index (VI) shear stable hydraulic fluid for
an OEM recommended straight-grade hydraulic fluid.
Energy savings of greater than 10% were demonstrated
in the field [5]. Studies also have shown that productivity,
in terms of excavation rate, improved when the proper ISO Viscosity Grade
hydraulic fluid is used. This paper will address the
inclusion of shear stability and energy efficiency criteria
into a revised NFPA recommended practice for hydraulic Many hydraulic applications do not fall within the TOW
fluid viscosity selection. system because of wide operating temperature ranges or
the pump manufacturer recommends a viscosity range of
VISCOSITY SELECTION less than the 13 to 860 cSt range developed for the
Hydraulic pump and motor manufacturers were surveyed TOW system. In these applications the optimum fluid
regarding fluid viscosity requirements [6]. Based upon viscosity may be determined by using the ALTOW
this data, the majority of pumps and motors provide method outlined in NFPA T2.13.13:2002 [1].
satisfactory performance with a fluid that has a minimum
1 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
Copyright © 2008 by ASME
Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/30/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
SHEAR STABILITY
The 2002 NFPA Recommended Practice does not take Fluid testing in the Eaton-Vickers pumps has been used
into consideration the potential for viscosity index to develop models for predicting hydraulic pump
improver breakdown. The loss of fluid viscosity due to efficiency as a function of viscosity. [9] These equations
shear can result in the selection of a fluid that has a used are of the general form shown in equation 1:
oil viscosity that is too low for the required application.
Earlier research found that a 40 minute irradiation time in Eqn. 1 Qa = Qn − k ( P / η )
the ASTM D 5621 sonic shear test can predict the used where
oil viscosity of a hydraulic fluid in a 345 bar (5000 psi)
piston pump [7]. Since a hydraulic pump responds to the
Qa= Actual flow rate
post-shear oil viscosity, the viscosity at 100°C af ter the Qn= Nominal flow rate
40 minute sonic shear test will be used to the describe
the high temperature viscosity in the next incarnation of k= Geometric constant
NFPA T2.13.13 recommended practice as shown in P= Discharge pressure
Table 1.
η= Kinmatic Vis after shear @100C per ASTMD5621
Table 1 – NFPA High Temperature Viscosity Grades
Kinematic Viscosities at 100°C, mm²/s This model predicts that a 179 VI high efficiency
NFPA Grade Minimum Maximum hydraulic fluid would provide 22% higher efficiency than a
15 3.2 <4.0 10W engine oil. To evaluate this model a field trial was
22 4.0 <5.0 conducted in with a medium size excavator. [5] In this
32 5.0 <6.3 field trial, an OEM recommended 10W oil was compared
46 6.3 <8.1 to a 179 VI high efficiency hydraulic fluid at both full
68 8.1 <10.5 throttle and at the 90% throttle detent setting. The work
100 10.5 <14.0 cycle consisted of lifting a full scoop of dirt,
3 3
150 14.0 <18.2 approximately 1 m (1.3 yd ), rotating the cab 180
degrees, traveling 30 m (100 ft) and dumping the load.
ENERGY EFFICIENCY The cab was then rotated 180 degrees and the
There are two elements of hydraulic efficiency; excavator traversed 30 m to repeat the cycle. The fuel
volumetric efficiency and mechanical efficiency. consumption was measures to 0.1 kg and the number of
Mechanical efficiency relates to the frictional losses cycles were recorded. The excavator worked 6 hour per
within a hydraulic component and the amount of energy day. Table 2 shows the results of the field trial that
required to generate fluid flow. Volumetric efficiency compared the OEM 10W oil to the 179 VI HF at both full
relates to the flow losses within a hydraulic component throttle and at the 90% throttle detent setting. The
and the degree to which internal leakage occurs. Both of improvement in efficiency for the 179 VI HF as
these properties are to a large degree viscosity determined by the kg of fuel consumed per work cycle
dependent as can be seen in figure 2 [8]. was 18.4% at full throttle and 26.3% at 90% throttle. The
average gain versus the OEM 10W was 22.4% which is
Figure 2 - Model Hydraulic Pump Efficiency Curves remarkably close to the 22% predicted by the pump test
model.
Volumetric Efficiency η VE Table 2 – Results from the Medium Size Excavator
Field Trial
Fuel Consumption
Per work cycle
Efficiency
M ec
h an kg/cycle Gain versus OEM 10W, %
ic a l
Optimum Operating E ff ic
ie nc
Range Ove y ηM
ec h
ra ll E OEM 10W @ Full Throttle 0.364 ---
f ficie
n cy η
OV
OEM 10W @ 90% Throttle 0.380 ---
Viscosity High VI HF @ Full Throttle 0.297 + 18.4%
A high viscosity index, VI, shear stable hydraulic fluid High VI HF @ 90%Throttle 0.280 + 26.3%
can reduce energy consumption and increase overall
system efficiency because it provides an optimum
operating viscosity at start-up, during normal duty and at POTENTIAL ENERGY AND COST SAVINGS
peak load conditions. These high efficiency hydraulic A cost benefit analysis was performed in order to
fluids also expand the temperature zone in which the compare the value of High Efficiency Hydraulic Fluid to
fluid viscosity is in the optimum operating range. the OEM recommended 10W fluid. A 4,000 hour drain
2 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
Copyright © 2008 by ASME
Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/30/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
interval was assumed with a value of $9.00 per gallon 2. Herzog, S.N., Neveu, C.D., Placek, D.G., Simko,
assigned to the 10W fluid and $13.50 per gallon of the R.P., “Predicting the Pump Efficiency of Hydraulic
High Efficiency Hydraulic Fluid (a 50% premium). The Fluids to Maximize System Performance”, NCFP
cost of diesel fuel at the time of this analysis was $3.15 I02-10.8/SAE OH 2002-01-1430, IFPE April, 2002,
per gallon. To be on the conservative side, a fuel Las Vegas NV, USA.
economy improvement at full throttle of 18.4% was used 3. Herzog, S.N., Neveu, C.D., Placek, D.G., “Influence
instead of the 26% improvement seen at 90% throttle. of Oil Viscosity and Pressure on the Internal leakage
No value was assigned to the approximately 6% of a Gear Pump”, presented at the STLE annual
additional work that the excavator could perform when
meeting (Society of Tribologists and Lubrication
using the 179 VI high efficiency hydraulic fluid. The
Engineers), May 19-24, 2002, Houston, TX, USA
estimated energy and cost savings are show in table 3.
4. Placek, D. G., Herzog, S.N., Neveu, C.D. “Reducing
Energy Consumption with Multigrade Hydraulic
Table 3 – Fuel Savings with High Efficiency
Fluids”, presented at the 9th Annual Fuels & Lubes
Hydraulic Fluid
Asia Conference and Exhibition, January 21-24,
Units OEM 10W 179 VI HF Benefit 2003, Singapore
Hours of Work per drain Hours 4000 4000 5. Neveu, C.D., Herzog, S.N., Hyndman, C.W., Simko,
R.P., “Achieving Efficiency Improvements Through
Hydraulic Fluid Volume Gallons 67.4 67.4
Hydraulic Fluid Price $/gallon 9.00 13.50
Hydraulic Fluid Selection: Laboratory Prediction and
Hydraulic Fluid Cost $ 606.6 909.9 -303.3 Field Evaluation” , presented at the STLE annual
meeting (Society of Tribologists and Lubrication
Work Cycles at 100% throttle cycles 214000 226400 12400
Engineers), May 8, 2007, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Fuel Consumed Gallons 24459 21114 3346 6. IFPE I00-9.12 “Fluid Viscosity Selection Criteria for
Hydraulic Pumps and Motors”. P.W. Michael, S.N.
Fuel Price $/Gallon 3.15 3.15
Herzog, T.E. Marougy. International Fluid Exhibition
Fuel Cost Total $ 77047 66508 10539
for Power Transmission and Technical Conference,
Overall Costs/ Savings Total $ 77654 67418 10236 Chicago, 4-6 April 2000.
7. Sonic Shear Stability of Hydraulic Fluids, Test
This analysis reveals that a High Efficiency HF could Method for, ASTM D 5621 (05.02).
yield fuel savings of $10,000 per drain interval per 8. Totten, G.E., Handbook of Hydraulic Fluid
excavator. Assuming an 18% reduction in fuel Technology, Marcel Dekker, New York, 2000, p 27.
consumption the excavator will also generate 35 metric 9. S.N. Herzog, C.D. Neveu, D.G. Placek, “Predicting
tons less CO2 per drain interval when using the high the Pump Efficiency of Hydraulic Fluids to Maximize
efficiency fluid. System Performance”. NCFP I02-10.8/SAE OH
2002-01-1430 presented at IFPE, March 19-23, 2002
CONCLUSION Las Vegas, NV, USA.
The NFPA recommended practice for viscosity selection
criteria published in 2002 defined a process for selecting
the appropriate hydraulic fluid viscosity based on OEM
minimum and maximum viscosity requirements. It
introduced the concept of temperature operating window
and a viscosity grade defined at 100°C for hydrauli c
fluids. Since that time, studies have established that
hydraulic system efficiency is dependent upon the
hydraulic fluid viscosity after shear, and that productivity
could be increased through utilization of a hydraulic fluid
with a minimum VI of 160. The NFPA Fluids Technical
Committee is proposing modifications to the T2.13.13-
2002 Recommended Practice for the Fluid Viscosity
Selection Criteria that incorporates these findings,
thereby productivity, fuel economy, and emissions in the
fluid power industry.
References
1. NFPA/T2.13.13-2002. Recommended Practice -
Hydraulic fluid power – Fluids - Viscosity selection
criteria for hydraulic motors and pumps.
3 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
Copyright © 2008 by ASME
Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 06/30/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
