Valid 3 Labs and Oils

1. Valid 3Labs and Oils Presented to Cummins ISM Task Force 09 November 2004 Columbus, IN jar

2. Modeling Approach • All 12 valid tests (Matrix 3 plus tests with lower soot target) • With and without outlier correction (where applicable) • With and without soot adjustment (where applicable)

3. Crosshead Wear • Significant effect of average soot (p=0.01) for raw wear numbers, marginally significant (p=0.09) for outlier corrected wear. • Looks like transformation needed but natural log didn’t help much • Always significant oil differences. • Marginally significant lab differences (p=0.08) only when Lab D included and no outlier correction. • Lab D included in analyses increased estimated mean for all three oils. • Latter test on 1004-3 at Lab B (35313) outlier from model without outlier correction, latter test on 830-2 at Lab B (52996) outlier from model with outlier correction

4. Predicted mean crosshead wear at 4.0% average soot shifted levels and pairwise significance patterns with outlier correction. They shifted levels with deletion of Lab D. Tukey Group: Oils that share a capital letter were not significantly different from each other. Oils that share a lower case letter were marginally significantly different from each other. Oils that don’t share a letter were significantly different.

5. FPD – Filter Plugging • No significant lab, oil, or soot effects. • Two tests with ISMA outliers from model – they were too far apart. • When ln(FDP) was analyzed, oils became marginally significant (p=0.06), but the two outliers diverged even further from the model.

6. ASR – Average Sludge Rating • No significant lab, oil, or soot effects. • Early test on 1004-3 at Lab A (51225) was an outlier from the model.

7. TRWL – Top Ring Weight Loss • No significant lab, oil, or soot effects.

8. AVGIAS – Average Injector Adjusting Screw Weight Loss • Marginally significant effect of average soot (p=0.07) for raw wear numbers, marginally significant (p=0.05) for outlier corrected wear. • Marginally significant oil effect (p=0.08) for raw wear numbers,

9. Predicted mean injector adjustment screw wear at 4.0% average soot shifted slightly for ISMA with outlier correction. Tukey Group: Oils that share a capital letter were not significantly different from each other. Oils that share a lower case letter were marginally significantly different from each other. Oils that don’t share a letter were significantly different.

10. VSWL – Valve Screw Weight Loss • Marginally significant effect of average soot (p=0.09) for raw wear numbers, not significant (p=0.16) for outlier corrected wear • No significant lab, or oil effects. • Two tests with ISMA outliers from model – they were too far apart.

11. RHWL – Rocker Hat Weight Loss • No significant lab, oil, or soot effects.

12. ALW – Average Liner Wear (Wear Step) • No significant lab, oil, or soot effects. • Early test on 1004-3 at Lab G high outlier from model.

13. TOTOCON – Total Oil Consumption • Significant (p=0.02) Lab effect. • No significant oil or soot effect. • Test on 830-2 at Lab A (50224) high outlier from model.

14. Lab A generally higher total oil consumption. Tukey Group: Oils that share a capital letter were not significantly different from each other. Oils that share a lower case letter were marginally significantly different from each other. Oils that don’t share a letter were significantly different.