Great article on running engines at proper loads from Passagemaker

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Good article but depressing! Always something with every type of engine to worry about.
 
Yep can’t wait until we’re all running electric motors off batteries. Then the only worry will be running out of “fuel”

Maybe in another decade…
 
The article clearly has a number of mistakes. The first one that caught my eye was:

"An older injector will open one time for each cylinder stroke and will always release the same amount of fuel, while a modern, computer-controlled injector might open seven times per cylinder stroke and in varying amounts with each pulse."

For any diesel engine run at a chosen RPM (such as a generator) fuel injected on each stroke is based on load. To say that the injected amount never varies on mechanically injected engines is absurd. My generator burns more fuel when its under load.

Then there's this:

"With a mechanically injected fuel system, the engine may only be capable of running at peak efficiency at around 80 percent load because the cams that control the fuel pump can only be machined with one profile."

Could someone point out to me where any manufacturer says this. Generally best fuel efficiency is around peak torque. At that RPM, with the engine drawing in the same CFM of air, does the engine become inefficient if the fuel requirement drops by 40%? Remember, he wrote load, not RPM.

There's more, but I'm getting ready to come of Lake Okeechobee and need to concentrate.

Ted
 
Last edited:
The amount of fuel injected per cycle varies with load on a mechanical injection setup, but it's all injected in one shot regardless of quantity. Many of the electronic systems inject in multiple pulses, allowing them to get a more complete burn under a wider range of conditions.

As far as load vs efficiency scaling, it varies depending on the engine design and how hard it's being pushed for power output. On a turbocharged engine, the efficiency curve will be flatter than for a naturally aspirated diesel. The turbocharged engine will generally make less boost as load reduces at a given RPM, so air gets reduced. If the engine is somewhat aggressively tuned for power, combustion may not be quite as good when near 100% load (at any given RPM), so efficiency may be somewhat lower than under a moderately heavy load (like 80%).
 
My take away from the article was cheerleading for tier 3 and 4 engines. Don't get me wrong, there are a number of good features for both fuel economy and the environment. But there are / were a huge number of mechanically injected engines in boats that were very efficient at or below 40% of rated power. As an example, a Lehman 120 running at 2 GPH is running below 40%. Find them powering a huge number of trawlers and having very long lives.

Others in that category would be the Cummins 6BT or 6B and the John Deere 4045.

While the article has some good information about running an engine too unloaded, one needs to fact check the information and not follow it as gospel.

Ted
 
My take away from the article was cheerleading for tier 3 and 4 engines. Don't get me wrong, there are a number of good features for both fuel economy and the environment. But there are / were a huge number of mechanically injected engines in boats that were very efficient at or below 40% of rated power. As an example, a Lehman 120 running at 2 GPH is running below 40%. Find them powering a huge number of trawlers and having very long lives.

Others in that category would be the Cummins 6BT or 6B and the John Deere 4045.

While the article has some good information about running an engine too unloaded, one needs to fact check the information and not follow it as gospel.

Ted
Ted: perhaps u were too busy navigating to assimilate all Max’s points. My take- very different from yours. I took away from his article: If you have a mechanically injected diesel, just be sure to check your oil pan temps and run them up to 80-84% load (rpm) for a short while daily if you aren’t reaching optimum temps at slow speeds. Load your generator w never possible. Seems like sound advice. I didn’t see any cheering for Tier 4 personally.
 
The very important info that heat (especially in the ring groves) is necessary to control deposits to permit ring movement. Blowby (rings not sealing) will occur in time. 200 degrees is probably a good lube oil temp. It’s about the same for coolant as I ran my boat.

I’ve always hesitated to base engine load talk around an rpm that is X percentage down from max rpm. Too much variation from rated rpm exists. I think there are still those skippers out there that over prop. And I still think it’s best to actually underprop 2 to 300rpm.

When I repowered my boat I bent over backwards to choose an engine with a rated power that would allow me to run at about a 75% load. I failed. As far as I can tell I ran my engine at 50% load. Things worked out very well but w a fuel burn of 1gph I was not motivated to seek more efficiency.
 
Last edited:
Overall I found the article informative and consistent with what I've learned over the years from knowledgeable engineers. The points I'd make from it are:

1. We must distinguish between generations of marine engines. Everything we assumed as gospel on older engines was superseded by common rail and ECU.

2. The 80% number that OC Diver asked who had recommended it, It was commonly referenced by MAN, MTU and CAT in high hp engines. Many people still quote it as an ideal cruise but we've found numbers vary by boat and engine combination and often the number today is 60-70%. However, in Common Rail, ECU, it's ideal cruise and more a number not to exceed for long periods. It's also not a necessary load to protect an engine. I've heard it often quoted on older engines in reference to opening up every few hours.

3. The article fails to note nuances and degrees. In the real world, there are not a lot of engines damaged by being operated at low load. Why? With engine lives many times greater than most engines are ever run, we never reach the point of damage. Think of how many engines just on this site run regularly at low load. Now, specific engine brands and sizes might have more issues. Diesel engines are extremely tough. Some of the other equipment like turbochargers and heat exchangers not as tough.

4. Manufacturers continue to refine recommendations. I always heard the warnings on generators with people preaching disaster if operated under 50%. Yet, today, no generator manufacturer says that. The common thread is that ideally they should be operated the majority of the time between 25% and 75% load, but even that leaves a lot of latitude.

5. We have high hp engines, right now from 1360 hp to 2600 hp. We do a couple of things long recommended for maximum performance. We vary speeds much as recommended on break in. We also periodically open up. Our normal cruise speeds are at up to (notice the "up to" as even we cruise often at less) 60%, 75% and 70% depending on boat and engines. Above those levels we gain so little speed as load in increased.

6. I believe in lower hp engines, load management is less important. Why? The engines aren't stretched out for maximum hp. Take our MTU 2600's, actually 2650 now. They were maximum of 2400 hp for years and the base engine is 2186 hp. Now, our largest generator uses John Deere as it's basic engine, 130 hp. Most generators are 15-30 hp. No one had to stretch or push to hit those numbers. They are by nature tougher just as the 2186 hp version of our 2650 hp would be. All major engine manufacturers have multiple performance levels and the same basic engines designed for continuous use on commercial vessels will definitely be tougher than the same engine with much higher hp designed for a light performance boat. Our diesel RIB's have 110 and 150 hp Yanmars. We don't worry about load on them. We just jump in and run as needed.

7. I do believe reaching good operating temperatures regularly is still advisable as is proper cool down. However, I cannot point to a single example where in normal usage that not doing so was deadly. I just believe it contributes to better overall performance. However, these dire warnings about 80% or must run at this or that are perhaps toward maximum performance but not key for the average user. Still, lumping all sizes and brands and hp of engines together is dangerous. I was pleased however with one point made and that is the old rules don't apply to Common Rail ECU engines. That's really where my knowledge is as I never owned a pre-Common Rail diesel engine. Some old gas engines, yes.
 
And then there is this

To me, the easiest way to gage whether slow speed running is detrimental over years and years of operation is to look at commercial fishing vessels with older designed engines from Detroit, Cat, Cummins, etc… Revisiting the “Detroit” mystique again, its longevity was built on engines rated to run at 1900-2100 RPM and above, but could only last for 30+ yrs when operated continuously at 1100-1600 RPM (again, well under 50% of rated HP)..These same engines in a “crew” boat used in the off-shore oil industry, would go through “top-ends” (or worse) just about yearly when run at close to their governor settings


..The longest-lived engines that I’ve been involved with (hrs and yrs wise), have been engines in commercial or recreational trawler type applications run at 50% of rated HP or less..

In closing, I’ll mention that although this topic is brought up quite often and many people preach that you’ve got to use a diesel hard if you want it to last, I’m still waiting to find one that was rebuilt before its time due to low speed use..Just the opposite seems to be always the norm

https://www.sbmar.com/articles/low-speed-running-break-in-of-marine-diesels/
 
Simi
Thanks for that SBar marine inclusion. I've followed Tony's writings for decades and feel his take on load and RPM pretty decent advice snd fitting with realities of marine diesels.

The quoted article from Zimmerman is not entirely accurate for my Cat/Perkins Sabre or several other engine brands that have coolant cooled oil coolers. Why not?

With engines that have 180 degree thermostats and suitably sized oil coolers it is nigh impossible to achieve oil temperatures much above the thermostat settings. In my case, full load yields an oil temperature of 190 when coolant is at 185 or so. If one's engine is suffering from cooling issues at high loads, yes the coolant and oil temperatures can get well above the say 180F thermostat settings - but with an engine overheat looming.

Also it is not true that water will not be removed from oil until the oil temperature is above 212F. At say 185F water removal is just slower (but still adequate) not nil. For me the Zimmerman article has enough questionable statements that I'll label it "interesting."

Maybe one of our expert posters with Zimmerman experience could chime in.
 
Ted: perhaps u were too busy navigating to assimilate all Max’s points. My take- very different from yours. I took away from his article: If you have a mechanically injected diesel, just be sure to check your oil pan temps and run them up to 80-84% load (rpm) for a short while daily if you aren’t reaching optimum temps at slow speeds. Load your generator w never possible. Seems like sound advice. I didn’t see any cheering for Tier 4 personally.

I think you should read the article again. You will see where he points out the advantages of common rail over mechanically injected.

I have a Dodge pickup with a Cummins 6BT. It has 10,000 hours and over a half a million miles on the engine. It's never been above 40% of rated HP and has 75% of its time below 25%.

The John Deere 4045 in my trawler has 3,800 hours on it. 99.9% of its time is below 35% of rated HP.

Oil analysis with each oil change shows well below universal averages for water in the oil. It not an issue.

The last engine I ran up to clean it out was a 1940s 6-71 Grey Marine.

Ted
 
Water Evaporation

I don’t think water evaporation is rocket science. Put some water in a pan on the stove and observe the vapor rising from it easily at 160 degrees.

When I warm my coffee in the microwave I can tell if it is over 135 degrees as I can see the whiteish vapor “wafting away” above the coffee.

And if you’ve been to SE Alaska you’ve seen the clouds on the surface of the mountains rising up a bit like smoke from a fire on a hillside.

Evaporation plain and simple. Clearly one dosn’t need 212 degrees to emit water vapor.


The article in question says moisture causes problems. But I don’t think it starts at 212 degrees. Water is present in the air and fuel and how much gets purged is most likely comes from heat. So I’m thinking the lower the temp the more water will be contained in the engine and as temp rises more water will be purged.

To keep water out of the engine while idle one could cover the intake and exhaust keeping most of the moisture in the air out of the engine. Few if any go to that trouble.
 
Last edited:
Even if you keep moist air out while sitting, blowby and combustion products contain moisture. So you get condensation in the oil right after startup, then it burns off once things are warm enough.
 
Even if you keep moist air out while sitting, blowby and combustion products contain moisture. So you get condensation in the oil right after startup, then it burns off once things are warm enough.

Agreed, think of startup on a pea soup foggy day.
My old Dodge/Cummins all mechanical non intercooled old school diesel ran like a scalded ape on foggy drizzly days. It loved that moisture laden air.

Ted, that only had 200K miles on it when I sold it.:lol:
 
Burning any hydrocarbon produces water. Little downside in the engine as it’s clearly vapor there. As long as rings are good it just leaves. Think concern is for exhaust components and lubricants. .

For me still miss NA mechanical engines. Once going problem isn’t keeping it going but stopping. As long as it has air, fuel and compression it goes. When it doesn’t you can generally fix it. At my level of skill once you get past adding turbos I’m lost. Carrying a few injectors, pumps, belts and filters isn’t enough anymore . For the cruising I like to do if I ever do a new build it will have twin Betas or similar for power. Sure our land vehicles have 100k+ with electronic common rail and we don’t worry about failure when in remote areas. But if necessary support is available within a safe timeframe.
 
Last edited:
Burning any hydrocarbon produces water. Little downside in the engine as it’s clearly vapor there as long as rings are good. Think concern is for exhaust components.

For me still miss NA mechanical engines. Once going problem isn’t keeping it going but stopping. As long as it has air, fuel and compression it goes. When it doesn’t you can generally fix it. At my level of skill once you get past adding turbos I’m lost. Carrying a few injectors, pumps, belts and filters isn’t enough. For the cruising I like to do if I ever do a new build it will have twin Betas or similar for power. Sure our land vehicles have 100k+ with electronic common rail and we don’t worry about failure when in remote areas. But if necessary support is available within a safe timeframe.


In my mind, for the more complicated engines that can't be diagnosed with a hint of knowledge and a few hand tools, the key is being able to get your hands on the manuals, documentation, etc. Having the software to talk to the ECU is even better. If you've got the stuff that tells you how it works and how to diagnose it, it'll generally be possible to figure out what's wrong and how to make it work again. If you're stuck trying to figure it out blind, then you're probably screwed.

Simplicity certainly is nice to have, but as long as it's well designed, reliable, and I know I can get a part for it when I need one, I'm not too fussy about how that's achieved.
 
Do you think “right to repair “ and warranty rules will impact marine engines?
 
Does moisture in oil settle to the bottom of the pan? If so that may make it difficult for it to evaporate at lower temps. ??
 
Does moisture in oil settle to the bottom of the pan? If so that may make it difficult for it to evaporate at lower temps. ??

Once the engine is running there's enough oil movement in the pan that water settling is unlikely to be relevant except when the engine is off.
 
Simi
Thanks for that SBar marine inclusion. I've followed Tony's writings for decades and feel his take on load and RPM pretty decent advice snd fitting with realities of marine diesels.

The quoted article from Zimmerman is not entirely accurate for my Cat/Perkins Sabre or several other engine brands that have coolant cooled oil coolers. Why not?

With engines that have 180 degree thermostats and suitably sized oil coolers it is nigh impossible to achieve oil temperatures much above the thermostat settings. In my case, full load yields an oil temperature of 190 when coolant is at 185 or so. If one's engine is suffering from cooling issues at high loads, yes the coolant and oil temperatures can get well above the say 180F thermostat settings - but with an engine overheat looming.

Also it is not true that water will not be removed from oil until the oil temperature is above 212F. At say 185F water removal is just slower (but still adequate) not nil. For me the Zimmerman article has enough questionable statements that I'll label it "interesting."

Maybe one of our expert posters with Zimmerman experience could chime in.

When loaded at or above about 75%, on sea trials I routinely measure oil temperatures above coolant temperature, often 200-220F, which is ideal. On lightly loaded diesels I often see oil temp as low as 150F, which is squarely in sludge generating territory. Oil analyses confirm this. However, you are correct, if the oil uses a jacket water cooler, it will be regulated to emulate that of the coolant, which isn't a bad thing, I lose no sleep over oil running at 190 or 195.

Few diesels have oil thermostats, or jacket water coolers, for those that don't "cold" oil can be an issue in that it is more likely to generate sludge, which over time becomes varnish, which can restrict oil passages.

The article does parrot the line I've been hearing from boat salesmen for years, "modern common rail diesels don't suffer from light-loading issues". I don't believe that's true, as oil temperature, again unless thermostatically controlled, or elevated by jacket water cooling, remains an issue, as does combustion chamber temperature, conventional injection, common rail, tier III, IV, it does not matter. IIs it less of an issue on CR engines, yes, but it is not eliminated. Periodically running up to higher loads, my own guideline is 75% for 15 mins out of every 4 hours, will offset some of these issues.

Quantifying just how much of an issue chronic underloading can cause is challenging. I find it to be far more common on gensets, which are frequently under loaded, especially if sized for HVAC loads, when HVAC is not being used, it's impossible to avoid gross underloading. In these cases I encounter cylinder wall glazing, coking, blow-by and ring clogging, all of which lead to premature death for gensets, which die at 5-8000 rather than the 15-20,000 hours they are capable of. For propulsion engines this happens, more often on sailing vessels as engines are used to charge batteries, a horrible but often unavoidable scenario, but not as often. Most recreational power vessel diesels never reach their full lifespan, they die of accessory failure long before that, while commercial engines actually do reach this stage, "wearing out" the internally lubricated parts, and are often rebuilt because they are still comparatively young, and the bolt on bits are still serviceable and available from the manufacturer.

Finally, I don't believe this line is accurate, "Many passagemakers are fitted with engines that have just enough extra horsepower to stem a tide or buck the wind, and that are never intended to go much faster than their displacement speed. They are fuel-efficient, and they allow for great range. Most of the time, these engines are operating at 70 percent to 80 percent load at cruising speed."

"Many", "Just enough extra...", "70-80%"? More like a very few. Most trawlers and long range cruisers I inspect carry far more HP than they can effectively use.

My take on chronic under-loading https://stevedmarineconsulting.com/the-perils-of-chronic-under-loading/

And related to this, the importance of proper break in https://stevedmarineconsulting.com/properly-breaking-in-your-generator-and-why-this-is-important-2/
 
Last edited:
Why 15m per 4 h? What’s the rationale for those numbers? Also been told beyond those short runs periodically a long run of hours with substantial loading is worthwhile. Is that true? For NA? For CR?
 
I absolutely agree on the oil temp concerns. Even with my gassers I've noted the same low oil temps under light load, particularly in cold water. I've been giving some thought to whether I could reasonably switch to jacket water heat exchangers for the oil or if it would make more sense to just add oil thermostats.


As far as run-ups, you need enough time to get the oil temps up plus a few minutes for things to stay good and warm. Many engines will bring the oil temps up fairly quickly under high loads. How often to do it will depend on whether you're seeing excessive moisture in the oil, fuel dilution, or other concerns (this will vary based on the engine and how cold the oil runs under light load).
 
Is there a thermostat controlled oil bypass, to bypass the heat exchanger until oil is at desired temp.
 
But wish to understand if a longer run periodically is required to burn off carbon and clear sludge entirely. Also whether using full synthetic or doing more frequent oil changes when low loads are more common is helpful.
 
Is there a thermostat controlled oil bypass, to bypass the heat exchanger until oil is at desired temp.

Yup, there are thermostats you can plumb in that bypass most of the flow around the oil cooler until you get up to a given temperature. Many of the common models start to open around 180 degrees, but there are hotter versions available.
 
I am puzzled by all of this...
My V10 NA Mercedes in LIBRA and both of the JD 6081s in DOMINO run coolant temps under all loads in the 160s and I am guessing they were designed this way. Most of the farm tractors we run never get to 180.
I am not sure of what this means for oil temps, but sure expect it is not over 200?
Why is this OK?
We get excellent service life in the farm diesels. I have no test in the marine diesels. Are they about to die?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom