Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 1 of 24

DieselNet Technology Guide

www.DieselNet.com. Copyright Ecopoint Inc. Revision 2009.01b

Crankcase Ventilation
Hannu Jskelinen

Abstract: Crankcase blowby gases can be an important source of particulate emissions, as well as other
regulated and unregulated emissions. They can also contribute to the loss of lubricating oil and to fouling
of surfaces and engine components. A number of crankcase ventilation systems have been developed
which include various types of filters to separate particulate emissions.

Crankcase Blowby

Blowby Emissions

Crankcase Ventilation System Design

Engine Performance Impacts

Performance Tests

Crankcase Blowby

The crankcase of a combustion engine accumulates gases and oil mistcalled blowbythat can leak
from several sources. The most important source of blowby is the combustion chamber, Figure 1
[Avergrd 2003]. Most of the combustion blowby occurs when the combustion chamber pressure
reaches a maximum, during the compression and the expansion strokes. At high pressures, the gases
leak to the crankcase around the piston rings and through the piston ring gap.

Figure 1. Combustion Blowby

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 2 of 24

Other important sources of blowby include the turbocharger shaft, air compressors and in some cases
the valve stems. In total, these components can be responsible for as much as 40% of the crankcase
blowby [Avergrd 2003]. Turbochargers and air compressors are often lubricated with oil supplied by
the engines oil pump and drained back into the engines crankcase. The oil drain line from these
components ensures that gas leaking past the turbocharger shaft and the piston rings of an air
compressor will pass into the engine crankcase contributing to blowby.

Blowby amounts vary greatly depending on engine design, temperature operating conditions and
engine wear. While a number of rules of thumb exist for estimating maximum engine blowby, they
should be used with caution. Some of these estimates are outlined in Table 1.

Table 1
Estimates of Maximum Blowby Rates (Actual Flow Rate)
Engine Blowby Estimate Reference

New engine Blowby [dm3/s]= rated power [kW]/180 [Caterpillar 2000]

Blowby [ft3/min] = rated power [hp]/120
Blowby [dm3/s] = rated power [kW]/90 [Caterpillar 2000]
Blowby [ft3/min] = rated power [hp]/60 [Barris 2000]
Worn engine
Blowby [dm3/s] = rated power [kW]/60 [Parker 2006]
Blowby [ft3/min] = rated power [hp]/40

Figure 2 shows that for a given engine, blowby rates can vary in a very non-linear fashion as the
dynamic sealing characteristics of the engine change [Koszalka 2003]. Additional blowby flow rate
measurement data can be found in the literature [Tatli 2008][Avergrd 2003].

Figure 2. Blowby Rates at Full Load with Different Piston Ring Clearances
2.4 dm3 four cylinder naturally aspirated diesel rated at 51.5 kW at 4200 rpm

To prevent a build-up of pressure in the crankcase, the blowby must be vented. While this can be
accomplished with nothing more than an open vent, such an approach is not always acceptable for
numerous reasons. Blowby contains combustion products such as HC, CO, NOx and PM that are
regulated pollutants. In addition, the blowby gas can entrain a significant amount of oil mist from the

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 3 of 24

crankcase that can be a significant contributor to total PM emissions from the engine. If blowby gas is
not properly handled, it can also foul surfaces, increase engine oil consumption and create a health
hazard if an engine is operated in an enclosed space.

Several factors have driven the development of systems for handling blowby gases from diesel
engines. The most basic factor is a need to eliminate the loss of oil and the subsequent oil drip and
surface fouling associated with a simple open vent from the crankcase. A more recent factor is the
development of regulatory requirements that either require that crankcase gases from new engines not
be vented to the atmosphere or that if they are, they be included in the measurement of total
emissions from the engine for certification purposes. As will be shown later, if crankcase emissions
are not treated, they can easily exceed the most stringent tailpipe emission standards such as those for
EPA 2007 onroad heavy-duty diesel engines.

Crankcase gases and how they are treated can also have a significant impact on oil consumption. In
one case, venting crankcase gases to the atmosphere with no oil recovery contributed an estimated
10-20% to total oil consumption depending on the engine operating condition [Froelund 2004].

Blowby Emissions

The primary constituent of crankcase emissions is the total PM. Emissions of other components such
as THC, NOx and CO are less significant. One study reported these, relative to the overall exhaust
emissions, as 3.7% for THC, 0.1% for NOx and 1.3% for CO [Clark 2006][Tatli 2006].

Table 2 outlines the results from a number of studies that measured crankcase and tailpipe PM
emissions. It should be noted that these results are average results collected over a drive cycle.
Results at individual engine operating points can vary significantly. Under engine idling conditions,
PM emissions from the crankcase have been reported to be as high as 0.7 g/bhp-hr [Jaroszczyk 2006] to
5 g/bhp-hr [Barris 2000].

Table 2
Contribution of Blowby to PM Emissions
PM Emissions
Engine Cycle Study
Unit Blowby Exhaust Total Blowby/Total
Hot start FTP HD g/bhp-
0.009 0.079 0.088 12%
MY 2000 Cummins transient hr
[RTI 2007]
ISM 350 hp Cold start FTP HD g/bhp-
0.005 0.064 0.069 8%
transient hr
Hot start FTP HD g/bhp-
0.014 0.072 0.086 16%
MY 1998 DDC transient hr
[RTI 2003]
Series 60 400 hp Cold start FTP HD g/bhp-
0.009 0.116 0.125 7%
transient hr
Hot start FTP HD g/bhp-
0.006 0.105 0.111 5%
1997 Cummins N- transient hr
[SRI 2005]
14 370 hp Cold start FTP HD g/bhp-
0.003 0.122 0.125 2%
transient hr
MY 1991 DDC g/bhp- [Schmeichel
FTP HD transient 0.018 0.188 0.206 9%
Series 60 350 hp hr 2007]
MY 2000 Cat 3126 g/bhp- [Schmeichel
FTP HD transient 0.036 0.140 0.176 20%
300 hp hr 2007]
Cold start phase of
1996 Dodge RAM g/mile 0.0202 0.0811 0.101 20% [Farmer 2004]
FTP-75 (1st 505 s)

1996 Cat 3406550 UDDS g/mile 0.037 0.58 0.62 6% [Clark 2006]

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 4 of 24

hp
1 - Exhaust PM after installation of CCV
2 - Estimated from the difference in total PM before and after installation of CCV

The above table suggests that the average PM contribution to total emissions for the engines shown
can be from 0.01 to 0.04 g/bhp-hr and represent as much as 20% of total PM emissions. If attempts
were made to only control tailpipe PM emissions to below 0.01 g/bhp-hrthe US EPA 2007 on-
highway standardand nothing was done to lower crankcase emissions, it is apparent that crankcase
emissions could easily exceed the allowable PM emission limit.

The above table also suggests that PM emissions over the cold start FTP are lower than a hot start
FTP. Particle number and size distribution data collected during engine idling and cold and hot start
UDDS cycles suggests that crankcase emissions actually decrease as the engine temperature rises
[Tatli 2008][Clark 2006]. These contradictory results may reflect differences in the testing procedures and
sampling techniques used.

Crankcase PM has been found to be composed in 100% of SOF [SRI 2005]. About 50% of crankcase
PM has been estimated to be derived from lubricating oil [Clark 2006].

Particle number emissions in crankcase blowby are illustrated in Figure 3, which shows particle
numbers in the crankcase blowby and in the diluted exhaust gas over the UDDS drive cycle.
Crankcase particle emissions show the highest concentrations around engine acceleration and
deceleration while tailpipe particle number concentrations are high during engine acceleration and
loaded operation. Crankcase particles in this case were centered about 70 nm, while those from the
exhaust were spread out from 20-200 nm [Clark 2006].

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 5 of 24

Figure 3. Particle Number Emissions in Crankcase Blowby

Top: Total Number of Particles in Crankcase Blowby. Middle: Particles in Diluted Exhaust Gas.
Bottom: UDDS Speed Trace.

Testing with other engines by the same group shows that crankcase particle average number-
weighted sizes can reach about 200 nm and assume a bimodal distribution in some cases [Tatli 2008].
Mass-weighted blowby particle distributions show particle sizes well in excess of 1 m, as illustrated
in Figure 4 [Jaroszczyk 2006][Dollmeyer 2007]. As apparent from the data, blowby gas particle sizes can
vary significantly with operating conditions for a specific engine and also from engine to engine.

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 6 of 24

Figure 4. Blowby Particle Size Distribution for Different Operating Conditions and for Different Engines

Vehicle Self-Pollution. In some cases, crankcase PM emissions can be a significant source of vehicle
self-pollutionthe migration of vehicles own emissions into the passenger compartmentas
discovered in North American studies looking at PM exposures in school buses [Hill 2005][Zielinska
2008]. Crankcase emissions proved to be an extremely strong source of fine particles mass (PM )
2.5
inside the school bus. The PM2.5 concentrations were in fact dominated by particulate emissions from
the crankcase, vented under the hood through the road draft tube. Installing a diesel particulate
filter (DPF) in the vehicle exhaust did not measurably reduce PM2.5 levels inside the busnot due to
a lack of particle removal efficiency, but rather as a result of the strong crankcase PM2.5 source under
the hood of the bus.

Regulatory Requirements. Regulatory requirements related to crankcase emissions vary depending

on the jurisdiction and vehicle class. The US EPA regulations for diesel fueled vehicles reflects a
range of different requirements. For light-duty vehicles complying with Tier 2 emission standards, no
crankcase emissions are allowed to be discharged into the ambient atmosphere from any 2001 and
later model year vehicles. For heavy-duty vehicles complying with EPA 2004 on-highway standards,
only naturally aspirated engines required closed crankcase ventilation (CCV). Turbocharged and
supercharged diesel fueled engines were exempt from requirements to control the discharge of
crankcase emissions. For heavy-duty on-highway engines meeting EPA 2007 requirements the
regulation maintains the crankcase emission control exception for turbocharged heavy-duty diesel
fueled engines but if a CCV system is not used, crankcase emissions must be added to the exhaust
emissions during all testing and that the deterioration of crankcase emissions be accounted for in
exhaust deterioration factors. In Europe, control of crankcase emissions from heavy-duty diesel
engines will likely be introduced with Euro VI regulations.

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 7 of 24

Blowby Emission Control. PM emission control is one of the most important functions of modern
crankcase ventilation systems. One of the system components is the separator, where particles and oil
mist are removedoften with better than 90% efficiencyfrom the crankcase ventilation gases.

Closed crankcase ventilation systems can be included as part of a diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC) or a
DPF retrofit package [SRI 2005][RTI 2007] to provide some additional PM emission reduction, as
illustrated using example data [Schmeichel 2007] in Figure 5. Installing a DOC alone on engine A
provided a total PM reduction (tailpipe + crankcase PM) of 27%. Including a CCV to eliminate the
crankcase PM emissions raised this by 7% to 34%. Fitting a DPF to engine B provided a total PM
reduction of 82%. When a CCV system was included, this increased by 14% to 96%.

Figure 5. Emission Impact of CCV System as Part of DOC or DPF Retrofit

Engine A: MY 1991 DDC Series 60, 350 hp. Engine B: MY 2000 Caterpillar 3126, 300 hp.

Crankcase Ventilation System Design

General System Configuration

There are several system design approaches that can be taken to handle crankcase ventilation gases,
including:

Closed Crankcase Ventilation (CCV): Crankcase gasestypically filtered to remove oil mist
and other particulatesare routed back into the intake system.
Open Crankcase Ventilation (OCV): Crankcase gases (filtered or not) are vented to the
atmosphere.
Exhaust system venting: Crankcase gases are routed into the vehicle exhaust, upstream of the
exhaust aftertreatment system.

The two types of OCV systemwithout and with filtrationand the closed crankcase ventilation
design are shown in Figure 6. The thick black arrows in the schematics represent the flow of blowby
gases.

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 8 of 24

Figure 6. Crankcase Ventilation Systems

(a) Open unfiltered crankcase (road draft tube); (b) Open crankcase filtration system; (c) Closed
crankcase ventilation (CCV)

Routing the crankcase gases back into the intake system has been used with spark ignition since at
least the 1970s. Various designs of oil separators are commonly employed to reduce the amount of
fouling of the intake system with engine oil. The CCV system is attractive since crankcase gases are
returned to the engine and combusted before exiting via the tailpipe.

With diesel engines, such a CCV system can pose some challenges. The particulate matter and oil
mist carried over into the intake system can be a significant problem for some turbocharged diesel

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 9 of 24

engines. Such fouling can impact the performance of the turbocharger and intercooler and have
serious consequences for engine performance and emissions. Oil deposited in the turbocharger can
lead to coking at engine operating conditions where air temperatures after the turbocharger exceed
about 170C. This can rapidly degrade turbocharger performance. Oil and coke on the intercooler can
reduce heat transfer. Thus a high performance filter/separator is an absolute necessity for a CCV
system on many turbocharged diesel engine.

While high performance filters can remove in excess of 90% of the oil and particulates from
crankcase exhaust, a small amount can still reach the turbocharger and intercooler and would be more
than some heavy-duty severe service diesel engines could tolerate. For this reason, many heavy-duty
2007 and later engines for the North American market are fitted with open crankcase ventilation
systems. Since the crankcase gases in an OCV system must be included in the measurement of total
emissions in these engines, a high performance filter is still needed to ensure the engine complies
with emission standards. However, the filter performance required for an OCV system to meet
emission standards is lower than that required to protect the turbocharger and intercooler in a CCV
system [Dollmeyer 2007].

Routing crankcase gases to the exhaust system has also been considered as an option. If the engine is
equipped with a DPF and/or DOC, this option could provide an effective means of reducing the
crankcase PM contribution if the gases are introduced upstream of these aftertreatment devices. If the
crankcase gases were vented upstream of a DPF, the pressure in the exhaust system at this point can
be higher than the crankcase pressure and a pump may be required. Also, ash build-up in the DPF
would be higher and the need for DPF service may occur sooner. For systems with a DOC, the need
for a pump may be avoided. An additional issue with all catalytic aftertreatment systems (DPF, DOC,
...) is catalyst poisoning by lubricating oil components. The gases could also be vented downstream
of any aftertreatment devices but would require their own aftertreatment system [Opris 2007].

System Sizing Parameters

In addition to the blowby flow rate and the general system configuration, several other considerations
need to be taken into account in designing a crankcase ventilation system.

A maximum mass concentration of 0.7 g/bhp-hr in the crankcase gases is often assumed for design
purposes. A particle removal efficiency of more than 90% for 1 micron and larger particles should be
used [Jaroszczyk 2006]. Estimates of the level on contaminants that a turbocharger can tolerate range
from less than 0.5 g/h [Barris 2000] to 2-3 g/h [Jaroszczyk 2006].

Another important consideration is the pressure differential that is available to maintain flow through
the crankcase ventilation system. Manufacturer recommended crankcase pressure limits are low in
order to maintain the integrity of seals and gaskets. In some cases these limits are no more than -1 to
+1 kPa (-4 to +4" water). For OCV systems, this will be the maximum pressure difference than would
be available to drive the maximum blowby flow rate through a separator and any associated piping.
For CCV systems, a higher pressure drop may be available as the CCV usually vents into the intake
system downstream of the air filter. Pressure downstream of the air filter is usually less than
atmospheric.

Separator Options
Overview
A number of separation technologies can be used of ranging complexity and PM removal efficiency.
The options include wire mesh, cyclone, centrifuge, impactor, coalescer or electrostatic precipitator.
These technologies can be used individually or in combination to achieve the desired separation

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 10 of 24

efficiency. Figure 7 illustrates the PM removal efficiency of selected separator types [Jaroszczyk 2006].

Figure 7. Removal Efficiency of Crankcase Ventilation Separation Technologies

Electrostatic Precipitators
Large electrostatic precipitators are commonly used in separating particulate matter from gas flows in
industrial applications. Compact designs have also been considered for crankcase ventilation
applications. They can provide high separation efficiency with a very low flow restriction. They were
investigated by Cummins as an option early in the development of engines for use on 2007 and later
US highway truck engines when the performance of standard filtration and separation technologies
was not capable of meeting the demands of these applications. Ultimately passive filtration
technology developed to the point where it replaced electrostatic precipitators as a viable option for
crankcase emissions control [Nelson 2009].

Electrode fouling is a significant challenge when they are used with wet oily aerosols such as those
found in crankcase ventilation gases. The fouling can lead to arcing, unstable operation and
ultimately a decrease in efficiency and stress on the electrical components [Heckel 2006].

Inertial Separators
Inertial separators such as labyrinth separators, cyclones, impactors, and centrifuges utilize particle
inertia to achieve separation. Inertia is a function of fluid and particle density. In the case of solid
mineral particles, the density ratio dust and air is about 2200. Therefore, removal efficiency for solid
particles in these types of separators is high. In the case of oil particles, the ratio is about 700 and
removal efficiency can be lower. On the one hand, solid particles may easily bounce and be re-
entrained, especially at high velocities, while liquid particles remain on collecting surfaces.

Inertial separators require high velocities to achieve high efficiency. Because of the limited pressure
available to drive the flow through the crankcase ventilation system, generating sufficient velocity for
an inertial separator to provide high separation efficiency can be difficult. For this reason, separators
such as impactors that only utilize crankcase pressure offer only limited aerosol efficiency on their
own, if placed ahead of a higher efficiency separator option such as a coalescer, the service life of the
coalescer can be extended.

Centrifuges that use an electric motor or are driven by oil pressure are one available inertial separator

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 11 of 24

option that can provide much higher separation efficiency. Figure 8 (left) illustrates a cone stack
centrifuge design that consists of layers of separation plates combined into a stack [Kissner 2007].
Figure 8 (right) shows the principle of operation one separation channel. The blowby gas flows
radially inward or outward along the separation channels. Droplets first settle on the lower surface of
the upper cone and due to the high centrifugal force generated by the rotating stack, the oil droplets
are forced to move outwards. The flow direction has only a small influence on the separation but is
significant for the resulting pressure drop.

Figure 8. Electrically Driven Cone Stack Centrifugal Separator

Separation efficiency depends of gas flow rate and the rotational speed of the centrifuge, Figure 9.
The size dependant separation efficiency increases with particle size. In one example on a 12 liter test
engine, power consumption was 42 W at 6000 rpm, total efficiency was 88-96% depending on
operating conditions and oil carryover was less than 0.2 g/h [Kissner 2007].

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 12 of 24

Figure 9. Separation Efficiency of Electrically Driven Cone Stack Centrifugal Separator

One unique feature of the cone stack separator is that it can act as a pump at low flow rates if the flow
is from inner radius to outer. In the case illustrated in Figure 10, this was able to generate a pressure
of about 0.5 kPa (2" water) with flow rates less than 20 l/min [Kissner 2007].

Figure 10. Differential Pressure Across Cone Stack Centrifugal Separator For Different Flow
Directions
Centrifugal separator rotational speed of 6000 rpm (negative differential pressure implies that
pressure upstream of the separator is higher that downstream)

Coalescing Filters
Coalescing filters are a common option for separating aerosols from crankcase gases. Coalescing
filters are thick media filters that capture liquid aerosol droplets, cause them to coalesce and then to
drain off. They are very different in design and behavior when compared to thin media filters such as
air filters than only capture particles.

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 13 of 24

Figure 11 is a schematic illustration of how a coalescing medium works [Schwandt 2007]. An incoming
gas flow containing small liquid aerosols, such as that from the crankcase of a diesel engine,
impinges on the inlet side (left) of the media. As these droplets penetrate into the media, they
coalesce together and grow in size until they eventually pool together. These pools reach a size
such that flow and/or gravity forces overcome the adhesion forces of the fibers and the pools drain to
be collected.

Figure 11. Coalescing Medium Schematic

This behavior is very different from that of other types of filters such as air filters that rely on the
impaction of particles to separate the solids from the air stream. Air filters also use the dirt itself to
create a surface cake of particles to increase filtration efficiency.

The coalescing media reaches a saturation level where the average amount of liquid entering the
media equals the average amount drained off. Saturation does not mean that the entire void volume of
the media is filled with oil. At saturation, the element is holding as much oil as it can. With reference
to Figure 11, this would mean that more oil would be present at the bottom and right side than the top
and left side.

An important characteristic of coalescing filters is the pressure drop at saturation. As the media
becomes saturated, the pressure drop increases, Figure 12. When saturation is reached, the pressure
drop reaches a steady-state value that is reflective of the effective porosity of the media [Schwandt
2007]. While the filter in Figure 12 becomes saturated in less than 60 minutes, it may take as long as
15,000 km before saturation is reached in some commercial applications [Dollmeyer 2007].

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 14 of 24

Figure 12. Pressure Drop Characteristics of Coalescing Crankcase Ventilation Filter as Saturation
Proceeds

The crankcase aerosols also contain solid particles such as soot that are not drained off but rather
accumulate in the media. Over time, the accumulation of these solid particles can reach a level where
the pressure drop in the filter becomes excessive. Figure 13 shows that the rate of pressure rise due to
soot plugging is much slower than that due to saturation. In the commercial application just
mentioned, soot plugging of the crankcase filter media can take as long as 200,000 km [Dollmeyer
2007].

Figure 13. Coalescing Crankcase Filter Pressure Drop Characteristic Showing Combined Effects of
Oil Saturation And Soot Plugging

While coalescing a liquid from a gas stream is done in many industrial settings and separation
efficiencies as high as 99.9% are common. In industrial applications, the high separation efficiency is
achieved at relatively high pressure drops in the range of 30 kPa (5 psi). These high pressure drops
allow good drainage of oil from the filter media. In crankcase applications, such high pressure drops
are not acceptable due to need to keep crankcase pressure low and avoid damage to seals and gaskets.
As a result, filtration needs to be done with a media with a low flow restriction making it more

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 15 of 24

challenging to achieve high filtration efficiencies. Despite this challenge, some coalescing filters can
provide efficiencies in excess of 90% when used in crankcase applications.

Aerosol size distribution is an important consideration in order to achieve high filtration efficiency in
a coalescing filter. Several different filtering mechanisms are involved and the relative importance of
each depends on the on the particle size. The hardest to remove particles with a coalescing media are
in the 300 nm size range, Figure 14. This can be considered a disadvantage of coalescing media, as
blowby gases, depending on the engine and the conditions, can contain a significant amount of
particles in the 300 nm size range. However, while Figure 14 shows the efficiency dropping to below
50% around 300 nm, a well designed coalescing filter can keep the minimum efficiency at any
particle size at about 90% or even higher [Dollmeyer 2007].

Figure 14. Filtration Efficiency as Function of Particle Diameter

Another important factor with coalescing filter media is that liquid carry over through the filter is
affected by flow rate. The most common cause of liquid carryover through a coalescing filter is
excessive blowby from the engine, Figure 15. A properly designed filter should take into account the
expected increase in blowby rate of the engine as it ages.

Figure 15. Performance Characteristics of Crankcase Ventilation Filter

Cummins CV51118

The following figures show some common crankcase separators employing coalescing filters. Figure

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 16 of 24

16 shows a design employed by Cummins on new engines [Jaroszczyk 2006][Dollmeyer 2007] and in some
retrofit applications [RTI 2007].

Figure 16. Cummins Crankcase Ventilation Filter Open to Show Race-Track Shaped Coalescing
Filter Elements

Figure 17 shows a design also used in new engines and retrofit applications manufactured by Parker
[Parker 2006]. This design integrates a pressure regulation on the inlet side of the filter and a bypass
valve. The bypass valve will begin to vent blowby gas if the crankcase pressure becomes excessive.
The valve also acts as a pre-separation impactor surface when operating, which processes large
droplet sizes above 10 micron.

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 17 of 24

Figure 17. Coalescing Crankcase Filter With Integral Pressure Regulator And Bypass

Figure 18 shows a two-stage design by Donaldson. The first filter stage employs an impactor for
eliminating larger aerosol particles and can provide an average efficiency around 50%. The second
stage filter uses a coalescing filter for a combined filtration efficiency in the range of 90%. Both filter
stages are integrated into a single, replaceable non-metallic filter cartridge. The pressure regulator on
this design is placed on the outlet of the separator.

Figure 18. Coalescing Crankcase Filter With Impactor And Coalescing Filter Media

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 18 of 24

Additional Components
Another important component of crankcase filtration systems is the pressure regulator. The pressure
regulator can be placed upstream, Figure 19, or downstream, Figure 20, of the separator. The pressure
regulator serves an important function in ensuring that the crankcase pressure does not become too
low or too high and exceed the engine manufacturer limits. Without a regulator, a considerable
vacuum could be experienced by the crankcase as the engines air filter accumulates dirt.

Figure 19. Crankcase Ventilation System with Pressure Regulator Upstream of Filter

Figure 20. Crankcase Ventilation System with Pressure Regulator Downstream of Filter
Mann + Hummel ProVent

Additional components may include a check valve in the oil return line and a relief valve or bypass
valve that vents blowby gas to prevent crankcase over pressurization if the restriction of the separator
become excessive.

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 19 of 24

Some systems can also be provided with a heater for engine applications operating in severe weather.
This can help prevent the condensation of water vapor in the separator and subsequent contamination
of the lubricating oil and/or plugging of the separator.

Engine Performance Impacts

Fuel Economy
Some aftermarket manufacturers of CCV systems claim that their devices can improve fuel efficiency
from a few percent to as much as 30%. However, careful examination of available data shows that
such claims are unfounded and cannot be supported. Engine dynamometer testingwith a sufficient
number of repetitions to provide confidence in the resultshas shown no effect on fuel consumption
[SRI 2005].

Vehicle testing using the SAE J1321 method has suggested that very modest fuel economy
improvement of about 2.5% may be possible [Powell 2007]. However, it should be noted that the limit
of detection of SAE J1321 has been estimated to be 3% and the coefficient of variation (COV)
greater than 5% [Ensfield 2006], making such modest fuel economy improvements difficult to verify
with this procedure.

Turbocharger Impacts
As is apparent from Figure 7, while the separation efficiency of crankcase ventilation separators can
be very high, none are 100% and all the designs allow a small amount of oil carryover. When
integrated over hundreds of thousands of kilometers, the small amounts of carryover can become
significant. While much of this carryover will be ingested by the engine and combusted, some will
inevitably accumulate in the turbocharger and the intercooler. If intake manifold temperatures reach
the cracking temperature of the lubricant, the oily deposits that accumulate in the turbocharger and on
the intercooler can coke and reduce the effectiveness of these engine components. For this reason,
many North American heavy-duty engines intended for severe service applications continue to use
OCV systemalbeit with high efficiency coalescing filters.

Figure 21 shows the impact that turbocharger fouling can have on compressor performance under
high load conditions where coking of the lubricating oil deposits occurs [Dollmeyer 2007].

Figure 21. Effect of CCV on Compressor Efficiency

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 20 of 24

The most critical area of the turbocharger for such coking problems is the diffuser gapthe narrow
gap immediately outside the outer circumference of the compressor wheel. Even a small amount of
deposit in this area can significantly increase flow friction and lower compressor efficiency [Holm
2006][Gray 2004].

While turbocharger and intercooler deposits have the potential to cause serious degradation in engine
performance, this does not by any means preclude the application of CCV to turbocharged diesel
engines. To the contrary, CCV has been successfully applied to may new engines and retrofitted to
existing ones. A number of measures are available to minimize the potential for turbocharger
deposits.

1. An important measure to minimizing turbocharger deposits and thus impacts on performance

are through lubricating oil formulations. For some applications, the lubricating oil can be
formulated so than little or no deposits form in the turbocharger even under high load
conditions when oil contained in the crankcase ventilation gases is deposited on turbocharger
surfaces.

In order to measure the tendency of oil formulations to form performance degrading deposits
in the turbocharger and intercooler in engines equipped with CCV, several tests have been
developed. However, these tests have proven to be inadequate for modern diesel engines and
test development continues to evolve.

One bench test is the Turbocharger/Intercooler (TC/IC) glass wear test (DIN 51535). This
bench test uses simple laboratory glassware to simulate the effect of lubricating oil mist on
deposit formation on hot turbocharger surfaces of large industrial diesel engines.

An engine test that measures a number of parameters related to lubricating oil including boost
pressure loss and the mass of deposits collected in the turbocharger resulting from CCV is the
OM441LA (CEC-L-52-T-97). This uses a turbocharged Daimler EURO II heavy-duty diesel
engine equipped with CCV.

Before 2008, European AECC heavy-duty oil sequences E4, E6 and E7 and Global DHD-1
needed to pass the OM441LA engine test that includes a maximum boost pressure loss of 4%
at 400 hours. The 2008 AECC oil sequences replaced the OM441LA engine test with a more
modern test based on an OM501LA engine. The new OM501LA engine test, however, does
not measure the effect of crankcase ventilation gases on turbocharger performance and the
2008 AECC heavy-duty oil sequences do not specify a minimum level of perfromance related
to turbocharger deposits. While development of a new turbocharger deposit test was initiated
at the Coordinating European Council (CEC) in 2006 (Group TDG-L-100), the test was still
under development in the fall of 2008 [CEC 2008].

In North America, the oil formulated for 2007 and later heavy-duty diesel engines, API-CJ-4,
does not include a test to determine whether the oil is suitable for use in any engine with CCV.
However, some CJ-4 oils meet additional requirements that individual engine manufacturers
feel are important for engine oil used in their products. For example, in addition to meeting the
requirements of API-CJ-4, an engine lubricant meeting Detroit Dieselslubricant specification
DDC 93K218 must meet additional requirements including a the maximum boost pressure loss
of 4% at 400 hours on the OM441LA test.

While the existence of these tests methods may appear to be a useful tool in generating
lubricating oil formulations that are compatible with CCV systems, they are not entirely

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 21 of 24

satisfactory. A comparison of these two test methods [Gray 2004] showed that their precision is
poor and that the correlation between the TC/IC glassware test and the OM441LA is poor.
Even in the parameters measured in the OM441LA test, boost pressure loss and turbocharger
weight gain, the correlation is poor suggesting that the location of deposit formation is critical
in determining changes in turbocharger performance. Additionally, the boost air temperatures
reached in the OM441LA test (165C at 1900 rpm) are lower than those that would be
encountered in some newer engine designs such as those with multiple turbochargers operating
in series and may not adequately protect the turbocharger from deposit formation for all engine
designs.

Viscosity modifiers found in multigrade oils are an important lubricant oil component that
contributes to turbocharger deposit formation in engine equipped with CCV [Gray 2004].
Monograde oils typically do not contain viscosity modifiers and are less likely to form
turbocharger deposits. Lubricant base stock can also have an impact with higher quality Group
III base stocks producing less turbocharger deposits than Group I base stocks [Scott 2003].

2. One approach taken by some engine manufacturers is to limit CCV to engines that will not see
high intake manifold temperatures. For example, on their EPA 07 on-highway engines,
Caterpillar uses a CCV system on their C7 and C9 models that have only one stage of
turbocharging. On the other hand, the C13 and C15 engines that have two stages of
turbocharging and would generate higher boost pressures and temperatures use an OCV
system.

3. Another approach is to design the turbocharger to be more tolerant of contamination. Some

turbochargers can tolerate a contaminant load as high as 2-3 g/h [Jaroszczyk 2006]. Methods that
have been investigated to increase the ability of the turbocharger compressor to deal with
crankcase ventilation aerosols include:

resilient diffuser gap walls that flex slightly under pressure pulsations to loosen any
accumulated deposits [French 2006]
instead of introducing the crankcase gases at the inlet of the compressor, they can be
introduced at a single point in the diffuser gap of the compressor where velocity is
highest and pressure lowest. This minimizes the diffuser gap surface area that is
contacted by the CV containments [Holm 2006]

4. The tolerance of the turbocharger to CCV can also be improved by reducing the oil
consumption of the engineespecially the amount of oil carried past the crankcase ventilation
separator. This is the component of oil consumption that would have most impact on
turbocharger deposit formation. Leakage past the turbochargers compressor oil seal could also
be important in some cases. Other important contributors to oil consumption that would have
less impact on turbocharger deposits include oil passing from the crankcase past the piston and
into the cylinder and oil leakage past the valve stems.

The impact of oil consumption control on turbocharger deposit formation does, however,
depend strongly on the lubricating oil formulation. This is illustrated in Figure 22 for two
different oil formulations. All tests results in Figure 22 were obtained with several different
OM441LA test stands all running the same test sequence. Oil B was formulated to perform
well on this test while Oil A was not. Note that while the boost pressure loss of oil B is almost
independent of oil consumption, even Oil A will perform better and come much closer to
meeting the 4% boost loss criteria under conditions where oil consumption is kept low.

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 22 of 24

Figure 22. Effect of Oil Consumption on Boost Pressure Loss

OM441LA test using two different oil formulations

It should be noted that simply meeting the boost pressure limit does not allow an oil to perform
well on the entire OM441LA test. The test also evaluates bore polish, and piston cleanliness.
Oil A does poorly on piston cleanliness regardless of the oil consumption of the test stand.

While it is not entirely apparent what contributes to the wide range of oil consumption in
Figure 22, carryover past the CCV separator is strongly suggested by the significant
correlation for Oil A. Leakage past the compressor shaft seal is also a possibility. Figure 22
illustrates the following points:

seemingly identical engines performing under identical operating conditions with oil
consumption levels deemed acceptable (the OM441LA test requires oil consumption to
be 40 kg/400 hour test) can produce widely varying turbocharger performance
degradation with some engine oils, that to a large extent can be explained through
differences in oil consumption.
if the engine lubricant is formulated specifically to address turbocharger deposits, oil
consumption, if maintained within specification, can have less impact on turbocharger
deposits in engines equipped with CCV.
with lubricants not specifically formulated to lower turbocharger deposits from CCV, a
further reduction in oil consumption through design changes that reduce the amount of
oil ending up in the intake manifold can significantly reduce the loss in turbocharger
performance.

Performance Tests

Overview
Standard test procedures for crankcase ventilation system performance have been under development.
ISO has been developing ISO/TC22/SC5, Aerosol Separator Performance Test for Diesel and Petrol

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 23 of 24

Engines, for both bench and on-engine testing. However, no standard test has yet been finalized.

The lack of standardized test methods combined with the need to control crankcase emissions in
some juristictions has lead to manufacturers developing their own test methods for measuring the
performance of CCV or OCV systems. Common performance tests for coalescing filter media by one
manufacturer include [Parker 2006]:

Flow Test
Pressure Regulation Test
Gravimetric Efficiency Test
Size Dependant Efficiency Test

Flow Test
This is one of the first tests carried out and is done to ensure that the separator media being
considered is not overly restrictive. It can be done dry as well as with the element saturated with oil.
Figure 23 shows some typical results.

Figure 23. Flow vs. Pressure Drop Curves for Dry and Saturated Crankcase Filter Element
Parker CCV350I unit

Pressure Regulation Test

The function of the crankcase ventilation systems pressure regulator is also tested to determine if the
regulator is functioning to design specifications and that engine manufacturer crankcase pressure
limits are not exceeded at a variety of flow conditions. Figure 24 shows typical results for one
crankcase ventilation system manufacturers products.

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010

Crankcase Ventilation [subscription] Page 24 of 24

Figure 24. Crankcase Pressure as Function of Pressure Between Air Cleaner and Turbocharger
(Turbo Inlet Restriction)
Three trial runs at 3 CFM of Parker CCV350I unit

Total Gravimetric Efficiency and Particle Distribution Analysis

Determination of the total gravimetric efficiency and particle size analysis can be carried out on an
engine to better simulate real operating conditions with an aerosol composed of oil mist and soot
particles. In order to determine the total gravimetric efficiency, separate 50 liter samples of blowby
gas are collected isokinetically upstream and downstream of the separator. Particulates are collected
on PM sampling filters and the mass difference between these sample filters determines the total
gravimetric efficiency. The particle distribution analysis can also be carried out with instruments such
as a laser spectrometer or a coronal cascade impactor using a similar sampling technique on blowby
gas that has been diluted by a dilution factor of about 100.

Size Dependant Efficiency

Size dependant efficiency is carried out with an automated test stand that has a heated, temperature
controlled environment in which aerosols are generated. A particle spectrometer takes upstream and
downstream measurements. The stand has capability to determine the total gravimetric separation
efficiency and the fractional separation efficiency. Figure 25 shows an example for an impactor.

Figure 25. Impactor Efficiency at Three Different Gas Flows

mhtml:file://D:\Meus Documentos\Textos para ler\Crankcase Ventilation [subscription... 17/3/2010