Both engine tests and associated bench tests are within CECs scope (as are, more rarely, tests for marine and two-stroke engine oils). Incorporated in Belgium, it holds most meetings in Brussels. The administrative firm Interlynk, in Leicester, U.K., provides staff support and it also manages an extensive website (www.cectests.org) where all test methodologies are available for purchase and CEC activities and presentations can be tracked. Most essentially, CEC performance tests are the foundation for all European engine oil requirements published and updated every two years in the ACEA European Oil Sequences.

CEC draws its Management Board from four constituent trade associations, each with a fundamental stake in test development for the European and global markets. They are ATIEL, Europes association of lubricant manufacturers; ACEA, the trade group for the continents automakers; ATC, the face of its chemical additives industry, and CONCAWE, the refining industrys health and safety committee.

In early October, LubesnGreases met with CECs Management Board in Brussels to hear how it currently manages engine oil test development. We havent done anything fundamentally different for the last three years, Board member Bob Mainwaring of Shell declared matter-of-factly.

Thats a reassuring statement, because while CEC and its Management Board may not have done anything different lately, theyve done a lot right since climbing out of a deep hole nearly a decade ago, when their organization was widely perceived to be dysfunctional and increasingly marginalized. CECs sponsoring organizations brought the new CEC into existence in 2001, with a honed sense of purpose. It now is widely viewed as highly effective, and solidly positioned at the very center of Europes fuels and lubricants test development.

Its not hard to put your finger on why CEC is now on top: It established and rigorously adheres to the concept of using a single laboratory for each tests development, with voluntary sponsors paying the tab. As noted by Board member Peter Brett of Castrol, Our big breakthrough was to have a single lab do the initial test development work, and then spread out the product to other sites, to secondary labs.

ARE YOU IN?

In a nutshell, CECs progress can be summed up in the phrase pay-to-play. Pay-to-play can have an unsavory odor (especially in the political arena), but CEC has used it successfully since 2001. When a new test is proposed, the CEC Board selects one test lab to lead the development work, based on a rigorous tender process. Individual companies, called test sponsors, are then invited to participate in the test development – attending meetings, providing technical advice and reviewing progress. Only sponsors are permitted to participate in test development at this stage, and each pays a stated fee which can range from 30,000 to 100,000. A unique twist in CECs system is the requirement that the lead test lab also pay the sponsorship fee, so that the lab itself has skin in the game.

CEC feels that this process substantially compresses the time needed to create a new test. Instead of competing

interests and test labs trying to come up with a new procedure, and possibly missing the target, pay-to-play also keeps the test definition clear and its precision under tight control.

The recently completed CEC OM 646 [engine] wear test was a major successful effort for us, commented Lubrizols Derek Mackney. Ten sponsors each paid 80,000 to participate; it was completed on time – in two years – and is a part of the ACEA Oil Sequences.

(In North America, pay-to-play has been tried only once so far, to create the new Sequence VID engine test to measure engine oils contribution to fuel economy. That effort began in January 2006, with two independent test labs – Southwest Research Institute and Intertek, both in San Antonio – collaborating on the lead. Neither was required to pay the sponsors fee, but 10 other sponsoring companies paid $300,000 each to support the tests development, which has taken nearly four years to complete and approve.)

GIVE US YOUR ENGINES!

Competition between vehicle manufacturers is fierce around the world and especially in Europe. Original equipment manufacturers spend vast amounts to create and improve engines and engine control systems, and they guard these trade secrets carefully. That can make them sensitive about offering new engines to CEC for test development efforts.

This is a critical issue that CEC must resolve when it develops tests. Meinrad Signer of Iveco, CECs immediate past chairman, made it a personal project to reassure other OEMs that CECs test development process would not compromise the confidentiality of their engine hardware or software technology.

CECs current chairman, Hans Thomassen of Kuwait Petroleum Research & Development B.V., echoed that theme. He noted that confidentiality is a big deal with CEC, adding, ACEA members have expressed a desire for a wider or more equal spread among OEMs to provide test engines. These companies are under heavy pressure, and it may be more critical for them now to evaluate whats in it for them in providing engines.

He could point to the positive example of the OM 646 engine wear test: Daimler AG was willing to supply the test engine (its advanced 2.2-liter, four-cylinder turbocharged light-duty diesel), and the test was developed successfully without any compromise to the auto giants proprietary information.

BUILDING QUALITY

CEC also plays a role in establishing quality standards for testing laboratories throughout Europe. Mackney noted, There are a lot of countries in Europe and many of these countries may have a test lab. There are a few large labs, half a dozen medium-size ones and a larger number of smaller ones. Not every lab can run every CEC test, but all have to meet stringent quality requirements in order to participate in CEC activities. These are spelled out on the CEC website.

Hans Thomassen pointed out, All labs must have an ISO 9001 equivalent system for the general quality definition and procedures. For engineering tests, an ISO 17025 equivalent system is required. In addition, labs must actively participate in CEC group activities, meetings and referencing protocols.

So that the organization can monitor the severity and precision of its test methods, data from all CEC engine tests run for the ACEA Oil Sequences are reported to the European Registration Centre, under the auspices of ATC, Europes chemical additives association; ASTMs Test Monitoring Center in Pittsburgh, Pa., manages this database.

Complementing this system is the CEC Test Monitor System (TMA), which records the other lubricant tests that may be required, such as laboratory and rig tests. This effort was developed initially in 2005, on a pilot basis, with the U.S.-based Registration Systems Inc. Last year, CEC awarded the management of this function to Project Development Consultants Ltd. in England, and expanded the program to include all its non-ACEA Oil Sequence tests, a total of 18 tests.

In an April presentation to an industry meeting in Moscow, Thomassen pointed out that CECs TMA ensures the validity of test results being used to support fuel and lubricant development and performance claims, as well as providing the test laboratory with insight into its performance relative to the rest of the industry. Importantly, the system is online, providing laboratories an immediate look at their reference testing performance versus all other participating laboratories, on a coded basis.

The Board spoke with pride to LubesnGreases about this on-line system; it is unique in the industry, and provides a clear benefit to participating labs, which no longer have to wait for the outcomes of annual round-robins to see how well they perform a particular test. They can obtain their password- protected results immediately by logging on to www.cec-tma.net. Its a powerful quality management tool, observed Derek Mackney.

LEADERS WANTED

CECs Board also has oversight of numerous Test Development Groups, and takes great care in selecting the group leaders. It recruits engineers, chemists, statisticians and people with other essential skills to participate in the efforts. TDG chairmen must be on top of the technical aspects and, equally important, able to meld other specialists with diverse skills and from companies in three major industries into a functioning team.

Fortunately, the pay-to-play concept gives companies, especially sponsors, a strong incentive to allow their top-level specialists to participate. The payoff for their investment is a quality test, so there are no disincentives to a vigorous level of support for test development.

That pattern extends to the CEC Board itself, where significant time and attention are devoted to selecting individual members and especially the chairman. The Board chairman usually serves for two years and the position rotates among the four industries – vehicle manufacturers, chemical additives, refiners and lubricant manufacturers – that comprise CEC.

Hans Thomassen, representing the lubricants industry, has served for three years now as CEC chairman, reflecting the extensive deliberations within the industries regarding this assignment. Lubrizols Derek Mackney is the chairman-designate for the next two years.

Any organization can get into a rut when, as Bob Mainwaring said, nothing changes for years. But he also pointed out that there have been a number of new Board members joining in the last few years, so new ideas constantly surface and old ones are re-examined through new eyes.