1 / 17

Summary

Draft Addendum to the Statistical Summary of the Mack T10 Precision/BOI Matrix Including IR Oxidation. Summary. This is a preliminary analysis. Data are not available yet for used oil viscometrics.

miles
Download Presentation

Summary

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Draft Addendum to theStatistical Summary of theMack T10 Precision/BOI MatrixIncluding IR Oxidation

  2. Summary • This is a preliminary analysis. Data are not available yet for used oil viscometrics. • A draft analysis of the IR Oxidation numbers is presented in this draft. It is not a consensus analysis. • Method 2 IR at 300 hours benefits from using the -0.8 power transformation. • Method 5 IR at 300 hours benefits from a natural logarithm transformation. • Both IR measures were strongly correlated with each other and with delta lead.

  3. Summary(continued) • Labs and stands within labs were significant for both IR measures. • Technology had a significant effect for both IR measures. • Base Oil had a significant effect for Method 2 IR. • Observations with large Studentized residuals were seen for both IR measures. • Oil means and standard deviations are given for potential use in LTMS.

  4. Data Set • Table 1 shows the design for the matrix. • All operationally valid data with the exception of CMIR 38815 are included. • The T10 Task Force decided to eliminate CMIR 38815 from the analysis. • This was an early test in Lab B on Oil A which had high silicon and aluminum in the used oil. It also had high ring weight loss with low cylinder liner wear. The lab ran Oil A again with non-anomalous results. The matrix remains intact as planned. • IR Oxidation numbers using Method 2 and Method 5 from the SwRI analyses of samples at 300 hours have been added.

  5. Table 1. Mack T10 Precision Matrix Plan

  6. Table 2. Mack T10 Precision Matrix Datafrom TMC 07/16/01 (IR from Joe Franklin 08/03/01)

  7. Transformations • Box-Cox procedure was applied using all matrix data. • Delta lead benefits from a natural logarithm transformation. • Method 2 IR at 300 hours is best raised to a power of -0.8 for analyses. • Method 5 IR at 300 hours likes a natural logarithm transformation. • No data transformations are indicated for other responses analyzed.

  8. M2IR300-0.8Summary of Model Fit • Model factors include Laboratory (A,B,D,F,G), Stand within Laboratory (A1,A2,G1,G2), Technology (X,Y,Z), Base Oil (1,2,3) and Technology by Base Oil interaction. • Technology, Base Oil, Lab, and Stand within Lab were significant. • Root MSE from the model was 0.000223 (13 df). • The R2 for the model was 0.94. • Figure 1 illustrates the least squares means by oil. • Figure 2 summarizes least squares means for technologies and base oils. • Figure 3 summarizes least squares means for labs and stands within labs. • Stand within Lab significance was driven by the two stands in Lab G which were significantly different from each other. • Power transformation was appropriate. • The test of Oil E in stand G2 had a large Studentized residual.

  9. Figure 2Technology and Base Oil Least Squares Means for tM2IR

  10. Figure 3Lab and Stand within Lab Least Squares Means for tM2IR

  11. Ln(M5IR300)Summary of Model Fit • Model factors include Laboratory (A,B,D,F,G), Stand within Laboratory (A1,A2,G1,G2), Technology (X,Y,Z), Base Oil (1,2,3) and Technology by Base Oil interaction. • Technology, Lab, and Stand within Lab were significant. • Root MSE from the model was .3215 (13 df). • The R2 for the model was 0.91. • Figure 4 illustrates the least squares means by oil. • Figure 5 summarizes least squares means for technologies. • Figure 6 summarizes least squares means for labs and stands within labs. • Stand within Lab significance was driven by the one stand in Lab G which was significantly different from all others. • Natural logarithm transformation was appropriate. • The second test of Oil A in stand G2 had a large Studentized residual.

  12. Figure 5 Technology Least Squaresln(M5IR)

  13. Figure 6 Lab and Stand within Lab Least Squares Means for ln(M5IR)

  14. Correlations Among the Criteria

  15. Oil Least Squares Means and Standard Deviations

More Related