The turbocharger from the Ford Explorer was physically different from the turbocharger in the GMTC test, but enough similarities exist to make meaningful comparisons.
To evaluate whether polymer type has an impact on the formation of turbocharger deposits in the GMTC test, Oil A with a high-level shear stable star-type polymer viscosity modifier was compared to Oil B with a mid-level shear stable olefin copolymer viscosity modifier.
To further evaluate the performance of Oil A and Oil B in the GMTC test, the average turbocharger deposit merit ratings at end of test were compared.
The total acid number (TAN) (ASTM D-664) and oxidation level (DIN 51453) of selected new oil and used oil samples for Oil A and Oil B from the GMTC tests are listed in Table 2.
This antioxidant combination had demonstrated excellent performance in numerous similar formulations in the GMTC. In this test, a change in the percent TCO Temp increase of Oil C started to occur at about 1500 to 1600 cycles, then increased at a slow pace until end of test (see Figure 4).
While both oils passed the GMTC test (the percent TCO temp increase at 1800 cycles was less than 13%), the AO treat rate had a directional impact on the formation of turbocharger deposits.
Knowledge Transfer for the Design Flaw Resolution The design flaws of the ECR model were recognized as the root cause of GMTC's crisis, and hence to identify and resolve all these was essential.
With regard to the implementation of documentation, GMTC has been utilizing an e-Service information system for more than a decade for the purpose of creating, preserving and circulating information and knowledge.
In addition to the use of INIS, GMTC's CM task of signal detection and crisis prevention was facilitated by the functioning of communities of practice.
This structure includes a significant time delay called time for customers to return, which represents the average time needed for a customer to appreciate the importance of having his or her defective ECR fixed, and so return it to one of GMTC's contracted agencies for free repair.
Although in the real world scenario GMTC officially conducted a massive recall, the simulation results support the argument outlined above.
In response to the ECR event, GMTC had three primary goals: to resolve the design flaws of the ECR model, which has been discussed in the previous section; to restore the degree of customer satisfaction that was reduced due to the ECR event and to minimize the time needed for recalling and repairing all the defective ECRs it previously sold in order to end the impact of the crisis as soon as possible.