[分享]API SN即將登場...

ICEDEN · 2010-7-3 22:14

API SN Crosses Finish Line
By George Gill

API’s Lubricants Committee approved the SN and SN Resource Conserving passenger car engine oil categories, with first licensing Oct. 1, 2010, launching alongside ILSAC GF-5. The thumbs-up came in spite of continued opposition from automakers.

API SN will be an upgrade of the current API SM category, identified by the API Donut trademark. It aims to address the full spectrum of engine oil viscosity grades, including those not covered under the ILSAC specification, such as SAE 10W-40. SN Resource Conserving (which will replace the current SM Energy Conserving designation) has additional requirements covering fuel economy improvement and vehicle emissions systems protection.

Feedback from automakers, who have no vote on the American Petroleum Institute’s categories, had been uniformly negative over a series of meetings in recent months. Some OEMs threatened to withdraw support for API licensed oils entirely if the SN category was not aligned to GF-5 in areas such as phosphorus content and deposit control.

“They [automakers] definitely didn’t approve it,” API engine oil licensing manager Kevin Ferrick confirmed to Lube Report. “The OEMs commented that had there been a separate ballot item for SN Resource Conserving, they would have approved that. But for practical purposes, we didn’t feel it was necessary to change the ballot and issue it again. That was enough for us, that they approved of SN Resource Conserving. It makes sense because it’s an exact duplicate of GF-5.”

GF-5 oils are identified by API’s Starburst trademark, and were developed jointly by ILSAC, representing North American and Japanese automakers, and oil and additive companies. The S-series of engine oil categories belong to API alone, and are referenced worldwide.

Ferrick noted that while the automakers are probably not happy with API SN in its final form, the Lubricants Committee felt strongly they needed SN to have some ability to meet what they perceived as a global need outside North America and Japan.

“Here in North America, the automakers are essentially recommending GF-5,” he noted. “So SN Resource Conserving would give a clear signal to a consumer that they’re getting a GF-5 product. API and the Lubes Committee agreed that they will do more to make sure the message gets out, that if an OEM is using GF-5, then you need to use GF-5 – that an SN oil by itself is not going to be enough. That you then have to do SN Resource Conserving. But then SN is available for places where GF-5 performance isn’t recommended.”

Washington, D.C.-based API withdrew an initial Jan. 8 ballot on SN and SN Resource Conserving. A new ballot went out March 31 and technically closed on April 16. On that same date, Ferrick said, the issue went before an Administrative Guidance Panel. “The recommendations that came out of there were similar to the ones found in the ballot,” he noted. The 15-member Lubricants Committee worked out final definitions and user language for API SN and SN Resource Conserving during an April 23 conference call to review ballot comments.

OEMs had suggested additions to SN requirements, including an 800 ppm phosphorus limit, requiring the TEOST 33C test for high-temperature turbocharger deposits, and testing emulsion retention in all SN oil viscosities. The revised ballot addressed the issues to some extent, though not across the board for all viscosity grades.

“A lot of the comments we had from the automakers had to do with concerns about misapplication,” Ferrick explained. “There was concern SN oils could end up in their cars when they need to be GF-5 or SN with Resource Conserving. The committee discussed that and did agree they need to do significantly more consumer education to make sure that there’s not a misapplication.”

In response to automaker’s concerns, the Lubricants Committee agreed to add a sentence to the SN service recommendation, “Vehicle owners and operators should follow their vehicle manufacturer’s recommendations on engine oil viscosity and performance standard.” They hope this will help ensure that the oils recommended by engine manufacturers are used, especially in newer model-year vehicles.

轉貼自
http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article001747038.cfm?x=bgSkfQK,b8BM07MW

看來主題還是著重在省油跟磷的量

Ferrick noted that while the automakers are probably not happy with API SN in its final form, the Lubricants Committee felt strongly they needed SN to have some ability to meet what they perceived as a global need outside North America and Japan.

希望他也可以加入一些熱帶地區

想多暸解內容可以上它的網站用谷歌大神翻譯

ben18185 · 2010-7-3 22:37

幫忙貼中文的

___________________________________________________________________________________________________
空氣污染指數 SN的雜交終點線
由喬治吉爾

API的潤滑油委員會批准的Sn和Sn資源節約型轎車發動機油的分類，先發牌2010年10月1日，發射一道ILSAC石墨5。該豎起大拇指來儘管從汽車製造商繼續反對。

空氣污染指數 SN的將是提高現時空氣污染指數動向類別，確定了空氣污染指數甜甜圈的商標。它的目標是解決全譜機油粘度等級，包括不包括以ILSAC規範，如SAE 10W的，40。 SN的資源節約（這將取代目前的動向能源節約指定）的額外要求，包括改善燃油經濟性和車輛排放系統的保護。

汽車製造商的反饋意見，誰沒有投票權的美國石油學會的類別，已一致否定了一系列的會議，最近幾個月。有些原始設備製造商威脅要撤回支持的API許可油如果SN的類別完全不相一致的石墨等領域的5磷含量和沉積物控制。

“他們 [汽車]絕對不同意的，”空氣污染指數機油許可經理凱文里克證實潤滑油報告。 “的原始設備製造商評論說當時有一個單獨的投票項目為 SN的資源節約型，他們會批准的。但是，出於實用的目的，我們並不覺得有必要改變選票和問題一遍。這對我們來說已經足夠，他們通過對 SN資源節約。這是有道理的，因為它是一個精確複製的石墨5。“

石墨是確定了5個油API的斯塔伯斯特商標，並共同開發由ILSAC，代表北美和日本的汽車，石油和添加劑公司。在S系列發動機油分類屬於單獨的API，並參照世界各地。

里克指出，雖然汽車製造商可能不樂意與 API錫其最後的形式，潤滑油委員會強烈，他們需要有一些SN的能力，以滿足他們被視為一個全球性的需要外界的北美和日本。

“在這裡，在北美，汽車製造商基本上建議石墨5，”他說。 “因此，SN的資源節約將給出一個明確的信號，消費者認為他們得到的是綠 - 5產品。 API和潤滑劑委員會同意，他們將加倍努力，確保信息的失控，如果使用的OEM綠 - 5，那麼你需要使用石墨5 - 一個 SN的石油本身是不會有足夠。然後，你必須做SN的資源節約。但是SN的地方是供綠表- 5的業績並不建議這麼做。“

華盛頓特區的空氣污染指數收回了最初的1月8日投票的Sn和Sn資源節約。一種新的選票出去3月31日和4月16日收盤技術上。在同一天，里克說，事情鬧到了前一行政指導小組。 “的建議，走出有類似的發現在投票中，”他說。由15名成員潤滑劑委員會制定了最後的定義和用戶語言對 API Sn和Sn資源節約 4月23日在一次電話會議，檢討選票意見。

原始設備製造商所建議的補充，以SN的要求，其中包括1 800 ppm的磷限制，要求TEOST 33C條測試高溫渦輪增壓器的存款，並保留所有測試乳化油粘度SN的。修訂後的選票處理的問題在一定程度上，雖然不是一刀切地對所有粘度等級。

“很多的評論，我們已經從汽車製造商都和關切誤用，”里克解釋。 “有人擔心 SN的油可能最終在他們的汽車時，他們需要石墨5或SN與資源節約。該委員會討論時指出，也同意他們需要做更多的消費者教育顯著，以確保有不誤。“

為響應汽車製造商的關注，潤滑油委員會同意加入一句話，SN的服務建議，“車主和經營者應按照他們的汽車製造商的建議對發動機油的粘度和性能標準。”他們希望這將有助於確保油建議由發動機製造商使用，特別是在新的車型。