United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Emission Control Technology Division
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
EPA 460/3-83-008
August 1983
Air
c/EPA
Characterization of Exhaust
Emissions from Operation of a Light
Duty Gasoline Vehicle on Alternate
Source Gasoline Fuels
-------
EPA 460/3-83-008
Characterization of Exhaust Emissions from
Operation of a Light-Duty Gasoline Vehicle on
Alternate-Source Gasoline Fuels
by
Lawrence R. Smith
Southwest Research Institute
6220 Culebra Road
San Antonio, Texas 78284
Contract No. 68-03-2377
EPA Project Officer: Robert J. Garbe
Prepared for
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Emission Control Technology Division
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
August 1983
-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to report
technical data of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies are
available free of charge to Federal employees? current contractors and
grantees, and nonprofit organizations - in limited quantities - from
the Library Services Office, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105.
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by
Southwest Research Institute, 6220 Culebra Road, San Antonio, Texas,
in fulfillment of Contract 68-03-2377. The contents of this report
are produced herein as received from Southwest Research Institute.
The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed are those of the
author and not necessarily those of the Environmental Protection Agency.
Mention of company or product names is not to be considered as an
endorsement by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Publication No. EPA 460/3-83-008
-------
FOREWORD
The original purpose of Contract 68-03-2377, begun in 1976, was to
determine emission effects of gasolines made from coal and oil shale. The
fuels themselves were unavailable at the time, but probable fuel compositions
were estimated from data on crude stocks made from coal and oil shale. Task
One of the project resulted in the December, 1976 EPA-460/3-76-035 report,
"Impact of Coal and Oil Shale Products on Gasoline Composition, 1976-2000."
Due to test fuel unavailability, work was deferred until 1978, at
which time some of the efforts were redirected into determining the
emissions effects of alcohol-gasoline mixtures. This Task Six project
resulted in the October, 1979 report, "Gasohol, TEA, MTBE Effects on
Light-Duty Emissions,"
Beginning in 1981 and ending in 1983, several alternate-source gasolines
became available which permitted the completion of the program on the
subject originally intended, resulting in this report. The entire Contract
was performed for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2565 Plymouth
Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48105. The EPA Project Officer was Mr. Robert
J. Garbe, and SwRI Principal Investigators were Messrs. Charles T. Hare,
Bruce B. Bykowski, John A. Russell, and Dr. Lawrence R. Smith. The project
was identified within SwRI as (initially) 11-4493 and (later) 05-4493.
111
-------
ABSTRACT
This report describes the laboratory effort to characterize regulated
and unregulated exhaust emissions from a 1981 Volkswagen Rabbit operating on
Amoco Indolene gasoline and five alternate-source fuels or fuel blends.
These five alternate-source fuels included Mobil MTG gasoline, Simulated
Coal gasoline, EDS Naphtha blend, Sasol blend (lead chemically removed), and
H-Coal Naphtha blend. The test vehicle was operated over the Light-Duty
Federal Test Procedure (FTP) and the Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule
(HFET). Exhaust constituents measured, in addition to the regulated emissions,
included aldehydes and ketones, particulate, individual hydrocarbons, sulfate,
ammonia, cyanide, organic amines, organic sulfides, phenols, nitrosamines,
benzo(a)pyrene and major elements in particulate.
IV
-------
SUMMARY
The major objective of this program was to evaluate the effects of
available alternate-source fuels or fuel blends on the exhaust emissions of
a gasoline-powered 1981 Volkswagen Rabbit. The fuels tested in this program
included: Amoco Indolene as a baseline reference fuel, Mobil MTG gasoline,
Simulated Coal gasoline, EDS and H-Coal Naphtha gasoline blends, and a de-leaded
Sasol gasoline blend. The test vehicle was operated over two driving schedules,
the Light-Duty Federal Test Procedure (FTP), and the Highway Fuel Economy Test
(HFET). Additional multiple Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule (UDDS) and
multiple HFET tests were used to generate particulate samples for extractions
of organic soluble material.
The exhaust emissions evaluated in this program included the regulated
emissions (hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and oxides of nitrogen), parti-
culate, aldehydes and ketones, selected individual hydrocarbons, sulfate,
ammonia, cyanide, organic amines, organic sulfides, phenols, nitrosamines,
benzo(a)pyrene, and elemental constituents of particulate.
The most important observations and conclusions reached as a result
of this project (not necessarily in order) are listed below. Unless stated
otherwise, all fuels will be compared to the base fuel.
1) The test car met the 1981 Federal Emission Standards for hydro-
carbons, carbon monoxide, and oxides of nitrogen with all six test
fuels.
2) The five alternate fuels all gave higher NOX emission rates than
the base fuel. However, the NOX emission rates also appeared to
increase with time, with each subsequent test fuel evaluated
giving equivalent or slightly higher NOX emissions than the
previous fuel, indicating the possibility of a drift in the
vehicle emission control system.
3) In general, the fuel consumption rate did not vary from fuel to
fuel more than three percent, the nominal value for test-to-test
repeatability using the same fuel. The Simulated Coal gasoline,
however, gave the largest deviation from the base fuel in fuel
consumption (7 percent lower than the base fuel for the FTP test
cycle). This lower rate may be due to the higher density and
carbon percentage of the Simulated Coal gasoline, resulting in a
higher energy density for the fuel.
4) Hydrocarbon emissions varied from fuel to fuel and from cycle to
cycle with no apparent relationship to fuel properties.
5) Both Naphtha blends (EDS and H-Coal) gave higher carbon monoxide
emissions than the base fuel, while the Simulated Coal gasoline
gave lower emissions than the base fuel. The reasons for these
variations are not readily apparent.
v
-------
6) The Sasol blend fuel gave exceedingly high particulate emission
rates. The major portion of this particulate was found to be
chlorine and bromine by trace element analysis. The Sasol gaso-
line used in this program originally contained lead, which was
chemically removed before the fuel was used in the test program.
The lead removal process, however, did not remove the halogens,
chlorine and bromine, which are normally found in leaded fuels.
The high particulate emission rate for the Sasol blend was found
to be a direct result of the halogen content in the fuel.
7) The unregulated emissions were, in general, similar to those
recorded in previous programs, which evaluated vehicles with
emission control systems similar to the test car used in'this
program.
8) Fuel nitrogen content appears to have had little effect on the
nitrogen-containing unregulated emissions, in that the EDS and
H-Coal Naphtha blends, which had high fuel nitrogen content as
compared to the other test fuels (>10 fold higher), gave ammonia
and cyanide emission rates equal to or lower than the other test
fuels. The only fuel to produce a noticeable higher nitrogen
content than the remaining fuels in the organic extractable
portion of the particulate was the Mobil MTG gasoline, which had
a comparatively low level of fuel nitrogen.
9) Fuel sulfur content appeared to have little or no effect on the
sulfate emissions, with the high sulfur content fuels giving
sulfate emissions equivalent to the other fuels.
VI
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
FOREWORD iii
ABSTRACT iv
SUMMARY v
LIST OF FIGURES viii
LIST OF TABLES ix
I. INTRODUCTION 1
A. Project Objective 1
B. Emission Measurement Procedures 1
C. Test Vehicle 2
D. Fuels Evaluated 2
E. Vehicle Testing 2
II. GENERAL EQUIPMENT, INSTRUMENTS, PREPARATIONS AND PROCEDURES 3
A. Automobi1e 3
B. Fuel Source, Fuel Properties and Blending Details 4
C. Dynamometer and CVS System 6
D. Exhaust Sampling and Analysis 8
E. Instrumentation and Regulated Emissions 8
F. Large Filter Samples 8
G. Emissions Test Procedures 10
H. Test Numbering System 14
I. Computational Methods 15
III. ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES FOR UNREGULATED EMISSIONS 17
A. Description of the Analytical Procedures 17
B. Validation and Qualification of the Analytical Procedures 21
C. Accuracy of the Analytical Procedures 21
IV. VEHICLE TESTING 27
A. Vehicle - Fuel Evaluations 27
B. Regulated and Unregulated Emission Tests Results 29
C. Large Filter Sampling and Results 29
V. ANALYSES OF THE RESULTS 33
A. Regulated Emissions and Fuel Consumption 33
B. Individual Hydrocarbon Emissions Data 35
C. Aldehyde and Ketone, Particualte, Sulfate, Ammonia, and 35
Cyanide Emissions
D. Trace Element Emissions 38
E. Other Unregulated Emissions 40
REFERENCES 41
APPENDICES
vii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 1981 Volkswagen Rabbit used in fuel evaluations 3
2 Views of the emissions sampling system 7
3 Emissions sampling system 9
4 Driving cycle speed vs time traces 14
Vlll
-------
LIST OP TABLES
Table Page
1 Test Vehicle Description 3
2 Properties of Test Fuels 5
3 Description of Four-Cycle FTP 10
4 Test Sequence for Each Fuel Evaluated 12
5 Laboratory Test Sequence 12
6 Laboratory Test Sequence for Multiple UDDS Tests 13
7 Laboratory Test Sequence for Multiple HFET Tests 13
8 Summary of Driving Schedule Parameters 14
9 Sampling and Analysis Methodology for Unregulated Emissions 18
10 Procedural Validation and Qualification 22
11 Emission Procedural Sample Rates and Accuracy 24
12 Project Test Matrix 28
13 Baseline Emissions and Fuel Consumption 27
14 Particulate and Organic Extractables from Large 31
Filter Sampling
15 Benzo(a)pyrene and Major Elements in Organic Solubles 31
from Particulate Matter
16 Summary of the Average Regulated Emissions and Fuel 33
Consumption Data
17 Fuel Densities and Carbon Percentages for the Six Fuels 34
18 Summary of the Average Individual Hydrocarbon Data 36
19 Summary of Particulate, Sulfate, Ammonia, Cyanide, and 37
Aldehyde and Ketone Emissions
20 Trace Element Emissions - Sasol and H-Coal Naphtha 39
Blends Only
21 Trace Element Emissions - All Fuels 39
IX
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
Due to concerns over this country's dependence on foreign suppliers
for its petroleum fuels supply, interest in alternate-source fuels, such
as those derived from coal and shale oil, has increased. Because the alter-
nate-source fuels differ in origin and processing from standard petroleum-
derived gasolines, the exhaust emissions from automobiles fueled with the
alternate-source materials may differ from the emissions produced by
automobiles fueled with petroleum-based gasoline. This report describes
the effort to characterize regulated and unregulated exhaust emissions from
a 1981 Volkswagen Rabbit operating on Amoco Indolene gasoline and five
alternate-source fuels or fuel blends. This program parallels a similar
program conducted at SwRI involving the evaluation of emissions from a 1980
diesel-powered Volkswagen Rabbit, fueled with eight alternate-source diesel
fuels. (D*
This is one of several programs to be completed at SwRI involving a
large number of unregulated emissions from automobiles. The previous
projects involved malfunctioning automobiles(2,3,4,5)f automobiles designed
for low-NOx operation^), high mileage catalyst-equipped automobiles^),
automobiles fueled with methanolW, and automobiles operating at idle and
at low speeds.' '
A. Project Objective
The primary objective of this project was to evaluate regulated and
unregulated exhaust emissions from a 1981 Volkswagen Rabbit operating on
various alternate-soruce fuels or fuel blends. A total of 6 fuels including
Amoco Indolene as a base fuel were evaluated in this program.
B. Emission Measurement Procedures
The compounds or groups of compounds evaluated, along with the sampling
methods used, were as follows:
Sampling
Methods Compounds Evaluated
Bags HC, CO, NOX, CO2, individual HC
Filter Particulates, sulfate, metals and other elements,
organic soluble fraction of particulates for
carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen analysis,
and benzo(a)pyrene determinations.
Impinger Cyanides, aldehydes, ammonia, organic amines, and
phenols
Trap Nitrosamines and organic sulfides.
*Numbers in parentheses designate references at the end of this report.
-------
Several of these procedures for measuring the unregulated emissions were
developed in another project and reported in a widely distributed interim
report.(10)
C. Test Vehicle
The 1981 VW Rabbit used in this program was fuel-injected and equipped
with a three-way catalyst. The vehicle was obtained through the EPA Project
Officer on loan from Volkswagen of America (Mr. Dan Hardin and Mr. Larry Nutson
are among those responsible for this loan).
D. Fuels Evaluated
Six fuels were evaluated in this program, five alternate source fuels
or fuel blends and Amoco Indolene as a base fuel. The five alternate-
source fuels or fuel blends included: Simulated coal Gasoline, EM-468-F;
EDS Naphtha Blend, EM-488-F; H-Coal Naphtha Blend, EM-543-F; Mobil "MTG"
(Methanol-to-Gasoline} Gasoline, EM-486-F; and Sasol Coal Gasoline Blend,
EM-542-F. These fuels are described in detail in Section II-B.
E. Vehicle Testing
The VW Rabbit was tested with each fuel in duplicate over the Light-Duty
Federal Test Procedure (FTP)(H), and once over the Highway Fuel Economy
Driving Schedule (HFET). '-^Additional multiple Urban Dynamometer Driving
Scheldues (UDDS) and HFET runs were used to generate particulate samples for
subsequent carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen and oxygen analysis, and benzo(a)pyrene
determinations.
-------
II. GENERAL EQUIPMENT, INSTRUMENTS, PREPARATIONS AND PROCEDURES
This section describes the automobile, the fuels, the facilities, and
the general instrumentation and procedures utilized in this project. The
overall sampling systems for the unregulated emissions are also discussed.
A. Automobile
A 1981 Volkswagen Rabbit was used for all fuel evaluations performed
in this program. The automobile is described in detail in Table 1, and
is shown in Figure 1. The automobile was obtained through the project
TABLE 1. TEST VEHICLE DESCRIPTION
Vehicle Model
Model Year
Body Type
VIN
Engine Disp.
Cylinders
Fuel Delivery
Transmission
Volkswagen Rabbit
1981
4-dr
IVWGB9171BY085460
1.65,
4
Injected
Auto-3
Chassis Dynamometer - Inertia Setting 1134 kg (2500 Ibs.)
Chassis Dynamometer - Power Setting 5.7 kilowatts (7.7 Hp)
officer and had been used in two other EPA contracts at SwRI; EPA contracts
68-03-2884 (Task Specifications 11 and 12) and 68-03-3073 (Work Assignments
1 and 4).
Figure 1. 1981 Volkswagen Rabbit used in fuel evaluations
-------
B. Fuel Sources, Fuel Properties and Blending Details
Including the base fuel, six materials were tested in the emissions
evaluation phase of the program. Table 2 lists the fuel properties for
each of the materials tested in the program. A brief history of each fuel,
and blending steps used to formulate it, if any, are given below:
1. Base Petroleum Gasoline, Fuel Code No. EM-338-F
The base fuel, also used as a blend stock for several of the
test fuels, was Amoco "Indolene" emission test gasoline. The
particular lot used was received in 1978, stored in an underground
tank, and analyzed periodically to make sure it did not deteriorate.
Its research octane number was 97.7, and its RVP was 9.0 psi.
2. Simulated Coal Gasoline, Fuel Code No. EM-468-F
In response to the needs of this project as well as those of a
program for DOE being performed by another SwRI Department, a
gasoline was formulated by SwRI to contain approximately 58%
simulated H-coal reformate and 42% petroleum derived components.
This material was blended late in 1980, and was kept in cold
storage until needed. Since this fuel was blended to approximate
commercial gasoline specifications, it was not necessary to add
base gasoline to it for acceptable performance. Sources for the
blending components included DuPont, Koppers, and Howell Hydro-
carbons .
3. EDS Naphtha Blend, Fuel Code No. EM-488-F
The EDS (Exxon Donor Solvent) Naphtha itself, coded EM-481-F, was
received in July of 1981. The material was obtained by Mr. Joe
McSorely of EPA-IERC at the request of the Project Officer. Naphtha
from the EDS process, like that from other solvent refining processes,
is more a byproduct than a main stream product. This particular
material was made at Exxon's Baytown plant. Properties of the EDS
Naphtha are listed in Appendix A-l. The decision to use only 25%
EDS Naphtha in the blend was made in order to prevent depressing
the blend octane number and RVP too severely. AK it turned out,
it was necessary to add 6% 'Low-boiling components to the 25/75 blend
to boost the RVP just above 9.2 psi, and the octane number came
in just about as expected at 92.3 (RON).
4. H-Coal Naphtha Blend, Fuel Code No. EM-543-F
The neat H-Coal Naphtha was received in April of 1982, and was
coded EM-513-F. This liquid was also obtained for us by Mr. Joe
McSoreley of EPA-IERL at the request of the Project Officer.
Properties of the Naphtha can be found in Appendix A-l. In this
case, we were able to use 37% H-Coal Naphtha with 5% n-butane
-------
TABLE 2. PROPERTIES OF TEST FUELS
Fuel Code
Description
Gravity, "API
Density, g/m£
Octane, research (RON)
Octane, motor (MON)
RVP, psi
Carbon , %
Hydrogen, %
Nitrogen , ppm
Sulfur, %
Lead, g/gal
Aromatics , %
Saturates , %
Olefins, %
Oxid. Stability, min
Gum, unwashed,
mg/100 m£
Gum, washed, mg/100 mil
Distillation - D86
°C (°F)
IBP
5%
10%
15%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
95%
EP
Recovery, %
Residue, %
EM-338-F
Base
Petroleum
Gasoline
60.6
0.737
97.7
89.5
8.9
85. 66 ±0.28
13. 81 ±0.07
0.009
<0.002
22.8
75.2
2.0
600.
2.2
0.7
33(92)
39(103)
49(121)
69(156)
87(188)
97(206)
103(217
108(226)
114(237)
125(257)
154(309)
168(334)
208(406)
95.0
EM-486-F
Mobil "MTG"
Gasoline
from Coal
58.8
0.744
92.7
82.8
9.7
86.42+0.09
13.65±0.06
<10
<0.001
<0.001
33.3
64.4
2.3
480.
1.2
0.2
31(88)
39(103)
47(116)
57(135)
69(156)
82(180)
100(212)
120(248)
138(280)
153(307)
166(330)
178(352)
204(400)
1.2
EM-468-F
Simulated
Coal
Gasoline
53.6
0.764
91.3
81.8
10.7
87.23
12.66
no data
0.007
35.41
64.59
>1440.
8.3
3.3
27(81)
38(101)
49(120)
58(136)
67(152)
83(182)
97(206)
108(227)
119(246)
132(270)
150(302)
181(358)
199(390)
213(416)
98.5
1.0
EM- 4 88- F
EDS
Naphtha
Blend
56.7
0.7559
92.3
84.2
9.2
85.11±0.11
13.61±0.03
115
0.13
<0.005
21.26
78.74
0.00
>1440.
14.2
14.2
32(90)
39(102)
56(133)
70(158)
83(180)
100(212)
109(227)
114(237)
121(252)
133(272)
150(302)
166(330)
178(352)
201(394)
95.0
1.5
EM-542-F
Unleaded
Sasol
Blend
62.5
0.7294
90.0
81.6
10.3
35.77+0.04
14.00±0.07
4±1
<0.01
<0.01
21.0
68.4
10.6
>1440.
18.3
13.4
27(81)
39(102)
48(119)
56(133)
64(148)
81(178)
94(202)
106(222)
114(238)
124(255)
138(281)
159(318)
171(340)
207(404)
99.0
1.0
EM-543-F
H-Coal
Naphtha
Blend
54.0
0.7628
90.7
82.7
10.3
85.47+0.17
13.61±0.06
727
0.12
<0.01
24.8
73.3
1.9
>1440.
60.1
58.7
29(84)
43(110)
55(131)
68(154)
82(179)
99(211)
109(229)
117(242)
126(258)
139(282)
158(316)
178(352)
206(403)
213(416)
96.0
1.0
-------
and 58% EM-338-F base fuel, because the effective blending octane
number of this Naphtha was higher than that of the EDS Naphtha.
The H-Coal Naphtha blend ended up with an RVP of 10.3 psi and an
octane number of 90.7 (RON).
5. Mobil "MTG" Gasoline, Fuel Code No. EM-486-F
This test fuel, named "MTG" for the Mobil "Methanol-to-Gasoline"
process, was the only one of the five coal-derived materials
received as a specification-quality fuel and requiring no
treatment or blending. It was received by SwRI in July of 1981
directly from Mobil, representing part of a pilot plant run made
earlier that year at the Paulsboro, N.J., Research and Development
facility. We requested the fuel through Mr. William Koehl of
Mobil in 1980, and were contacted by Mr. John Warner when it was
ready for shipment.
6. SASOL Coal Gasoline Blend, Fuel Code No. EM-542-F
Attempts to purchase Sasol gasoline began when this project was
initiated in 1975, but were unsuccessful at that time due to
their policy on release of samples for testing. We made contact
with Sasol again in 1980, and succeeded in obtaining one drum of
leaded, coal-derived gasoline and three drums of coal-derived
diesel fuel for use in other projects. Delivery was made late
in 1982 (fuel properties listed in Appendix A-l).
It was necessary to remove the lead antiknock additive from
the gasoline prior to use, and also to blend with n-butane and
base fuel to boost RVP and octane number. The process by which the
lead was removed from the gasoline is described in Appendix A-2.
The blend used was 48.3% de-leaded Sasol, 3.4% n-butane, and 48.3%
base fuel, resulting in an RVP of 10.3 psi and an octane number
of 90.0 (RON).
C. Dynamometer and CVS System
A Clayton Model ECE-50 chassis dynamometer with a direct-drive variable-
inertia flywheel system was utilized for all transient testing. This direct-
drive inertia system simulates equivalent weight of vehicles from 455 kg
(1000 Ib) to 4025 kg (8875 Ib), in 55 kg (125 Ib) increments.
The constant volume sampler (CVS) used for these evaluations was SwRI
CVS Number 2. This unit has a nominal capacity of 9.2 m^/min (325 cfm). A
nominal 460 mm (18 inch) diameter by 5 m (16 foot) long dilution tunnel
was used between the intake filter and "che CVS to enable sampling of parti-
culates.
Partial views of the chassis dynamometer, the dilution tunnel and the
intake to the CVS can be seen in Figure 2. Both the dynamometer and the CVS
-------
CVS Side of System
Dynamometer Side of System
Figure 2. Views of the emissions sampling system
-------
were calibrated, maintained and operated in accordance with the manufacturer's
instructions and the appropriate sections of the Code of Federal Regulations
applicable to light-duty vehicles. ^^
In addition to the 142 m3/min (5000 cfm) cooling fan placed in front
of the automobile, 42 m3/min (1500 cfm) blowers were available to cool each
drive wheel. These additional blowers were used only during the HFET driving
cycle.
D. Exhaust Sampling Analysis
A pictorial schematic of the exhaust and sampling system is shown in
Figure 3. This system is in accordance with the guidelines established in
previous unregulated emission projects conducted at SwRI for the EPA. The
primary feature of this system is the number of sampling probes and systems
necessary to collect all of the required unregulated emission samples. This
complexity is illustrated in the views of the system shown in Figure 2.
This section has described the dilution tunnel and provided some insight
into the overall sampling system assembly. More details on each of the
individual sampling systems for the unregulated emissions are given in
Section III.
E. Instrumentation for Regulated Emissions
Bagged samples of the dilute exhaust were evaluated for HC, CO, NOX,
and CO2 using SwRI Bag Cart Number 1. This bag cart was designed, calibrated
and operated in accordance with the appropriate sections of the Code of
Federal Regulations applicable to light-duty vehicles. ^-D
F. Large Filter Samples
To obtain particulate samples for determining the soluble organic
fraction of particulate, as well as the elemental composition and benzo(a)-
pyrene content of this soluble organic fraction, a system that allows the
simultaneous collection of particulate on four 500 mm by 500 mm (20 inch
by 20 inch) Pallflex filters was used in place of the regular CVS. Due
to the low particulate emission rate of gasoline-fueled automobiles, such
a system is necessary to obtain sufficient quantities of particulate for
extraction and subsequent analyses. This 20x20 filter system permits the
collection of the total particulate generated by the automobile during a
test cycle. The 20x20 filter system is attached to the sampling end of the
dilution tunnel and consists of a positive displacement blower with four
associated in-line 20x20 filters and filter holders, temperature and flow-
rate controllers, and readouts. The nominal flowrate is held at 0.217
m3/s (460 scfm) by maintaining a constant temperature, using a heat exchanger,
and a contant pressure drop across the blower. With this flowrate, there was
no difficulty in maintaining the tunnel temperature below 43°C (110°F).
Maximum temperature was about 35°C (95°F) in most of the cycles.
-------
(Bags)
HC, CO, NOX, CO2,
Individual HC
Exhaust
Out
AP Control
Orifice
CVS
Constant
Volume
Sampler
(Filters)
Particulate
Sulfate
Metals and Other Elements
Filtered
Air In
460 mm (18")I.D.
Orifice Mixing
Plate
(Traps and Impingers)
HCN & C2N2
Amines
Ammonia
Aldehydes & Ketones
Organic Amines
Nitrosamines
Organic Sulfides
Phenols
Exhaust
from
Automobile
Figure 3. Emissions sampling system
-------
G. Emissions Test Procedures
The primary procedures and driving schedules utilized in this project
are defined as follows:
FTP - 1981 Federal Test Procedure(11)
(uses the Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule)
HFET - Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule ^-2)
Each of the two primary procedures and schedules requiring emissions testing
in this project (FTP and HFET), utilized bagged samples for evaluation of
regulated emissions and fuel consumption.
The HFET is a hot-start, single-segment driving cycle. The FTP, however,
involved cold-start and hot-start, multi-cycle with multi-segment operation.
In addition, in this project, a four-bag FTP was utilized for most of the
unregulated emissions, rather than the three-bag FTP specified in the Federal
Test Procedure. Therefore, before proceeding, it is important to clarify
the meaning of FTP as used in this project.
FTP - The FTP uses the Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule (UDDS) which
is 1372 seconds in duration. The UDDS, in turn, is divided into two
segments: A "transient" phase of 505 seconds, and a "stabilized" phase
of 867 seconds. The 1975 Federal Test Procedure consists of cold-start
"transient" and "stabilized" phases, followed by a hot-start "transient.1
In this project, the hot-start "transient" was followed by a hot-start
"stabilized." For the remainder of this discussion, and throughout this
report, the four-cycle FTP will be identified as presented in Table 3.
TABLE 3. DESCRIPTION OF FOUR-CYCLE FTP
Four-Cycle FTP
Cold UDDS Hot UDDS
Cycle 12 34
Duration, seconds 505 867 505 867
Regulated Emissions, 3-Bag XX X
Regulated Emissions, 4-Qag XX XX
Unregulated Emissions:
Bag XX XX
Impinger (aldehydes, phenols) X X
Filter (sulfate, metals,
particulate) X X
Trap (organic sulfides) X X
Impinger (cyanide, ammonia, amines) -X •—-
Trap (nitrosamines) X
NOTE: X designates a sample taken
10
-------
A composite value in mass per distance for the three-cycle, three
sample FTP regulated emissions is calculated using the following formula:
MASS
_ 0.43X(MASS 1 + MASS 2) + 0.5?x(MASS 3 + MASS 2)
DISTANCE (DIST. 1 + DIST. 2 (DIST. 3 + DIST. 2)
For the four-cycle FTP, two-sample composite values determined in this
project, the following formula was used:
MASS 0.43XM(1 + 2) 0.57XM(3 + 4)
T
DISTANCE (Dl + D2) (D3 + D4)
For both the three- and four-cycle FTP's, actual measured distances
are used for each cycle in the calculations.
To illustrate the similarity of the three- and four-cycle FTP's, the
following assumptions are made. Since the same driving cycle is
involved, Distance 3 is essentially equal to Distance 1, and Distance 4
is essentially equal to Distance 2, therefore, these equations can be
reduced to:
3-FTP M/D
4-FTP M/D
„ 0.43x(Ml H
0.43XM(1 H
1- M2) + 0.57x(M3
Dl + D2
H 2) + 0.57XM(3 +
Dl + D2
+ M2)
4)
Therefore, with the assumption that the changes in distance traveled are
negligible, the composite results with the four-cycle FTP relative to
results with the three-cycl6 FTP will differ only as the mass emissions
emitted during Cycle 4 differ from those emitted during Cycle 2. For
the regulated emissions, the differences during Cycles 2 and 4 were small,
and the overall effects of such differences were essentially negligible.
The test sequence followed for each fuel is given in Table 4. The
sequence followed in the laboratory for running one set of emissions tests
(FTP and HFET) is given in Table 5. The sequence followed in the laboratory
for running each multiple UDDS sequence is given in Table 6, and the sequence
followed for running each multiple HFET sequence is given in Table 7.
The parameters of the two primary driving schedules are summarized in
Table 8, and these schedules are illustrated in Figure 4. Other driving
schedule designations frequently used are as follows:
Driving Schedule Other Common
Designation Used Designations
FTP LA-4 and UDDS
HFET FET
11
-------
TABLE 4. TEST SEQUENCE FOR EACH FUEL EVALUATED
Sequence Operation Performed with each Fuel
Upon Receipt Drain and fill test vehicle with appropriate fuel,
precondition with 2 UDDS
1 Run FTP, HFET - Sample and analyze emissionsa
2 Run FTP - Sample and analyze emissions
3 Run multiple UDDS sequences (nine) - Sample with
20x20 Pallflex filters for soluble organic fraction
analyses
4 Run multiple HFET sequences (eight) - Sample with
20x20 Pallflex filters for soluble organic fraction
analyses
Three FTP, HFET sequences were run for Fuel EM-338-F
TABLE 5. LABORATORY TEST SEQUENCE
1. Precondition, UDDS
2. Soak 12 to 20 hours
3. FTP - 4 bags for gaseous emissions
2 filters or impinger samples*
4. Engine Off - 10 minutes - Fan Off
5. HFET - 1 bag sample
1 filter or impinger sample
* 1 impinger or trap for some samples
NOTE: 5000 cfm fan on during all car operation.
Additional tire and fuel tank cooling
blowers on during all HFET operation.
12
-------
TABLE 6. LABORATORY TEST SEQUENCE FOR MULTIPLE UDDS TESTS
1. Precondition,'UDDS
2. Soak 12 to 20 hours
3. Cold Start UDDS
4. Engine Off - 10 minutes - Fan Off
5. Hot Start UDDS
6. Engine Off - 10 minutes - Fan Off
7. Repeat Steps 5 and 6
8. Repeat Steps 5 and 6
9. Repeat Steps 5 and 6
10. Force cooled cold start UDDS
11. Engine Off - 10 minutes - Fan Off
12. Repeat Steps 5 and 6
13. Repeat Steps 5 and 6
14. Repeat Steps 5 and 6
TABLE 7. LABORATORY TEST SEQUENCE FOR MULTIPLE HFET TESTS
1. Precondition, HFET
2. Engine off - 10-minutes - Fan Off - Load filters
3. HFET
4. Engine Off - 10-minutes - Fan Off
5. Repeat Steps 3 and 4
6. Repeat Steps 3 and 4
7. Repeat Steps 3 and 4
8. Repeat Steps 3 and 4
9. Repeat Steps 3 and 4
10. Repeat Steps 3 and 4
11. Repeat Step 3
13
-------
TABLE 8. SUMMARY OP DRIVING SCHEDULE PARAMETERS
Schedule
FTP:
HFET
505
867
UDDS
Duration,
Seconds
505
867
1372
765
Distance,
Kilometers
5.8
6.2
12.0
16.5
Average Speed
km/hr mph
—
—
31.4 19.5
77.6 48.2
100
80
60
40
20
.TRANSIENT
PHASE
STABILIZED
PHASE
200
400
600 800
TINE, sec
1000
1200
1371
100
80
60
40
20
0
60
•
40
' JS
X
, Is
20
•
0
200
400
TIME, sec
600
765
Figure 4. Driving cycle speed vs time traces
H. Test Numbering System
The numbering system used in this project consists of three digits plus
a cycle abbreviation. The designation used for all automobile testing was
14
-------
"VFD", followed by the individual test cycle abbreviation FTP or HFET. The
meaning of each letter is described as follows:
As Used in
Code Description This Project
V Vehicle Designation 8
FD Fuel Designation 51 thru 64
I. Computational Methods
The methods used for calculating the unregulated emissions results are
given in Appendix A-3. All regulated emissions were calculated using the
methods prescribed in the Code of Federal Regulations for Light-Duty
Vehicles.(ID On the computer printouts for the regulated emissions
(Appendix D), all items of potential interest are identified by descriptive
headings. Items on the computer sheet identified only by abbreviated
headings are used in calculating the unregulated emissions.
15
-------
III. ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES FOR UNREGULATED EMISSIONS
The analytical procedures used to measure the unregulated emissions
are summarized in this section. A detailed description of most of the
procedures, along with the discussion of their development, validation, and
qualification, is available in Interim Report II, "Analytical Procedures
for Characterizing Unregulated Pollutant Emissions from Motor Vehicles,"
developed in a related EPA Project.(10)
A. Description of the Analytical Procedures
The unregulated emissions evaluated in this project, along with the
methods for sampling and the procedures used in the analyses, are listed
in Table 9. Organic amines, aldehydes and ketones, organic sulfides,
individual hydrocarbons, metals and other elements, and phenols represent
groups of compounds. The respective procedures separate and identify a
number of individual compounds within each of these groups. The analytical
procedures involved in this project are briefly described as follows:
Organic Amines - The collection of organic amines (monomethylamine,
monoethylamine and dimethylamine, trimethylamine, diethylamine, and
triethylamine) is accomplished by bubbling CVS-diluted exhaust through
glass impingers containing dilute sulfuric acid. The amines are complexed
by the acid to form stable sulfate salts which remain in solution. A
portion of this solution is then injected into a gas chromatograph equipped
with an ascarite loaded pre-column and a nitrogen-phosphorus detector (NPD).
External amine standards in dilute sulfuric acid are used to quantify the
results.
Ammonia - Ammonia in CVS-diluted automotive exhaust is measured in
the protonated form, NH4+, after collection in dilute H^SO^ The acidi-
fication is carried out in a glass impinger maintained at ice bath tem-
perature . A sample from the impinger is then analyzed for ammonia in an
Ion Chromatograph and the concentration in the exhaust is calculated by
comparison to an ammonium sulfate standard solution.
Aldehydes and Ketones - The collection of aldehydes (formaldehyde,
acetaldehyde and hexanaldehyde) and ketones (acetone and methylethylketone)
is accomplished by bubbling CVS-diluted exhaust through glass impingers
containing 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH) in dilute hydrochloric acid.
The aldehydes and ketones (also known as carbonyl compounds) react with the
DNPH to form their respective phenylhydrazone derivatives. These derivatives
are insoluble or only slightly soluble in the DNPH/HC1 solution and are
removed by filtration followed by pentane extractions. The filtered
precipitate and the pentane extracts are combined and then the pentane
is evaporated in a vacuum oven. The remaining dried extract contains the
phenylhydrazone derivatives. The extract is dissolved in a quantitative
volume of toluene containing a known amount of anthracene as an internal
standard. A portion of this dissolved extract is injected into a gas
chromatograph and analyzed for several individual aldehydes and ketones,
using a flame ionization detector.
17
-------
TABLE 9. SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY FOR UNREGULATED EMISSIONS
Compound
Sampling
Method of Analysis
Organic Amines Impinger
Ammonia (NH-) Impinger
Aldehydes & Ketones Impinger
Total Cyanide [Hydrogen Impinger
Cyanide (HCN) and
Cyanogen (C N )]
Carbonyl Sulfide (COS) Trap
and Organic Sulfides
Individual Hydrocarbons Bag
Metals and Other Elements Filter
Particulates Filter
Sulfate Filter
Nitrosamines Trap
Phenols Impinger
BaP Filter
Gas chromatograph with ascarite
pre-column and nitrogen-phosphorus
detector (GC-NPD).
Ion chromatograph.
Dinitrophenylhydrazone derivative.
Gas chromatograph with flame ioni-
zation detector (GC-FID).
Cyanogen chloride derivative. Gas
chromatograph with electron capture
detector (GC-ECD).
Gas chromatograph with flame
photometric detector (GC-FPD).
Gas chromatograph with flame ioniza-
tion detector (GC-FID).
Weighed using microbalance. Spectral
X-ray analysis at RTP.
Weighed using microbalance.
Barium chloranilate derivative (BCA).
Liquid chromatograph with ultra-
violet detector.
Gas chromatograph with TEA detector.
Gas chromatograph with flame ioniza-
tion detector (GC-FID).
Soxhlet extraction with methylene
chloride. Liquid chromatograph
with fluorescence detector.
18
-------
Total Cyanide (Hydrogen Cyanide plus Cyanogen) - The collection of
total cyanide is accomplished by bubbling CVS-diluted exhaust through glass
impingers containing a 1.0 N potassium hydroxide absorbing solution. This
solution is maintained at ice bath temperature. An aliquot of the absorbing
reagent is then treated with KH2PC>4 and Chloramine-T. A portion of the
resulting cyanogen chloride is injected into a gas chromatograph equipped
with an electron capture detector (ECD). External CN~ standards are used to
quantify the results.
Carbonyl and Organic Sulfides - The collection of carbonyl sulfide
(COS) and the organic sulfides, methyl sulfide (dimethysulfide, (CH3)2S),
ethyl sulfide (diethylsulfide, (C2H^)->S) and methyl disulfide (dimethyldi-
sulfide, (CH3)2S2), is accomplished by passing CVS-diluted exhaust through
Tenax GC traps at -76°C. At this temperature the traps remove the organic
sulfides from the dilute exhaust. The organic sulfides are thermally de-
sorbed from the traps into a gas chromatograph sampling system and in-
jected into a gas chromatograph equipped with a flame photometric detector
for analysis. External organic sulfide standards generated from permea-
tion tubes are used to quantify the results.
Individual Hydrocarbons - For measurement of the selected individual
hydrocarbons, methane (CH4), ethane (C2Hg), ethylene (C2H4), acetylene
(C2H2) , propane (C3Hg) , propylene (C3H6) , benzene (C^Hg) , and toluene
(CyHg), a sample of CVS-diluted exhaust is collected in a Tedlar bag.
This bagged sample is then analyzed for individual hydrocarbons using a
gas chromatographic system containing four separate columns and a flame
ionization detector. The peak areas are compared to an external calibra-
tion blend and the individual hydrocarbon concentrations are obtained
using a Hewlett-Packard 3353 computer system.
Metals and Other Elements - The metals are collected as particulate
on a 47 mm Fluoropore filter, which is then sent to Research Triangle Park
(RTP) for analysis by X-ray spectroscopy. The diluted exhaust sample is
taken from within the dilution tunnel. Weight gain on the filter is determined
by weighing the filter on a microbalance before and after sampling.
Particulate - The particulate is collected on 47 mm Pallflex filters.
The amount of "particulate" collected is determined by weighing the filter
on a microbalance before and after sampling.
Sulfate - Automotive exhaust is vented into a dilution tunnel where
it is mixed with a flowing stream of filtered room air. In the tunnel,
the S03 reacts rapidly with water in the exhaust to form sulfuric acid
aerosols. The aerosols grow to a filterable size range within the tunnel
and are collected on a fluorocarbon membrane filter. Particulate sulfate
salts are also collected on the filter.
Sulfuric acid collected on the filter is then converted to ammonium
sulfate by exposure to ammonia vapor. The soluble sulfates are leached
from a filter with a measured volume of an isopropyl alcohol - water
solution (60% IPA). A fixed volume of the sample extract is injected into
19
-------
a high pressure liquid chromatograph (HPLC) and pumped through a column of
strong cation exchange resin in Ag+ form to scrub out the halides (Cl~, Br~)
and then through a column of strong cation exchange resin in H+ form to
scrub out the cations and convert the sulfate to sulfuric acid. Passage
through a reactor column of barium chloranilate crystals precipitates out
barium sulfate and releases the highly UV-absorbing chloranilate ions.
The amount of chloranilate ions released is proportional to the sulfate in
the sample and is measured by a sensitive liquid chromatograph UV detector
at 310-313 nanometers. All the reactions and measurement take place in a
flowing steam of 60% IPA. The scrubber and reactor columns also function
as efficient filter media for any solid reaction products formed during
passage of the sample through the column system.
Nitrosamines - The collection of nitrosamines (N-nitrosodimethylamine,
N-nitrosodiethylamine., N-nitrosodipropylamine, N-nitrosodibutylamine,
N-nitrosopiperidine, and N-nitrosopyrrolidine) is accomplished by passing
CVS-diluted exhaust through ThermoSorb/N traps at a flow rate of 2 liters
per minute. One sample is taken over several FTP test cycles to improve
the detection limits. After sample collection, the ThermoSorb/N traps are
sent to the Thermo Electron Corporation for analysis. At Thermo Electron
the traps are backflushed with a 25/75 solution of methanol in dichloro-
methane. The first 1.5 to 1.8 m£ of this eluant are saved for GC-TEA
analysis. The GC-TEA instrument detection limits range from 5 ng for
N-nitrosodimethylamine to 10 ng for N-nitrosodibutylamine. Additional
information on the ThermoSorb/N traps and the GC-TEA analyzer can be found
in the Task 2 Final Report of EPA Contract 68-03-2884, "Nitrosamines in
Vehicle Interiors. " (13)
Phenols - Phenols (phenol; salicylaldehyde; m-cresol/p-cresol; p-ethyl-
phenol/2-isopropylphenol/ 2,3-xylenol/3,5-xylenol/2,4,6-trimethylphenol;
2,3,5-trimethylphenol; and 2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol) in automotive exhaust
are sampled and quantitatively analyzed with a gas chromatograph (GC) equipped
with a flame ionization detector.(14) Dilute exhaust is passed through two
Greenburg-Smith impingers in series, each containing 200 m£ of 1 N KOH
chilled in an ice bath. The contents of each impinger are acidified and
extracted with ethyl ether. The samples are partially concentrated com-
bined and then further concentrated to about 1 m£. An interal standard
is added and the volume is adjusted to 2 m£. The final sample is analyzed
by the use of the GC, and concentrations of individual phenols are determined
by comparison to external and internal standards. The minimum detection
limit is about 1 yg/m£.
Benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) - Benzo(a)pyrene is collected as particulate on
20"X20" Pallflex filters. The BaP is removed from the particulate by Soxhlet
extraction with methylene chloride. The solvent is then evaporated and the
sample is redissolved in acetonitrile for analysis. BaP is analyzed
with the use of a HPLC system coupled to a fluorescence detector. The BaP
collection and analytical method used at SwRI followed closely those used
in General Motors Research Laboratories.
20
-------
B. Validation and Qualification of the Analytical Procedures
Several of the procedures used in this project were subjected to a
series of validation and qualification experiments in previous projects.
Validation experiments included checks for sample stability, sample collec-
tion efficiency, detector linearity, interferences,and analysis repeatability.
Qualification experiments included the injection of the compound of interest
into the dilution tunnel with and without the presence of exhaust and the
subsequent recovery of that compound at the procedure sampling point.
Sample stability checks were performed using repeated analyses of the
same sample at intervals over a specified period of time, and comparing the
results to the initial analysis. Organic amines, aldehydes and ketones,
ammonia, total cyanide, phenols and individual hydrocarbon samples
were found to be stable for several days. Carbonyl and organic sulfides
samples were found to be stable for approximately one day.
Sample collection efficiency experiments were performed by passing a
known concentration of sample through a series of impingers or traps and
analyzing each impinger or trap individually for the compound of interest.
All of these procedures used in this project had a collection efficiency of
98% or better. Detector linearity experiments were performed by preparing
several samples of various known concentrations and plotting the resulting
peak areas versus the concentrations. The procedures had linear response
over the range of interest in this project.
To determine interferences from other compounds, for each procedure,
known exhaust components were introduced into the sample to determine their
effect on the resultant measurements. To determine analysis repeatability,
several samples of known concentrations were prepared and a number of com-
plete analyses were performed at each concentration. The results of these
tests were then compared to determine analysis repeatability.
The qualification experiments were performed to determine if the com-
pounds of interest could travel the length of the dilution tunnel in the
presence of dilute exhaust without significant loss by reaction with exhaust
or the tunnel itself. The compounds were introduced where the exhaust enters
the tunnel and were sampled at the normal sampling point. Table 10 lists
the procedures for which validation and qualification experiments have been
performed.
C. Accuracy of the Analytical Procedures
A difficult, but very important endeavor was the determination of
procedural accuracy for each analytical method. The primary difficulty
involved those procedures in which the exhaust compounds are trapped or
absorbed, an extraction or subsequent reaction is performed, and then a
portion of the extract is analyzed. After much consideration, in previous
unregulated emission projects, the decision was reached to initially define
the accuracy in terms of a "minimum detection value" (MDV). The MDV, as
21
-------
TABLE 10. PROCEDURAL VALIDATION AND QUALIFICATION
Compound or Compound Group
Organic Amines
Ammonia
Aldehydes & Ketones
Total Cyanide
Carbonyl Sulfide and
Organic Sulfides
Individual Hydrocarbons
Metals and Other Elements
Particulates
Sulfate
Nitrosamines
Phenols
BaP
Validation
Conducted
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Noa
Noa
Noa
Noa
Yes
No3
Qualification Conducted
Yes (significant tunnel losses)
Yes (significant tunnel losses)
Yes
Yes
Yes (significant tunnel losses)
Noa
Noa
Noa
Noa
Noa
Yes
No
Established procedure
22
-------
used in this report, is defined as the value above which it can be said
that the compound has been detected in the exhaust (i.e., at a measured
value equal to the MDV, the accuracy is equal to plus or minus the MDV).
Determination of accuracy over the entire range of each procedure was
beyond the scope of these projects.
For compounds collected by bag samples, the MDV was determined from
the instrument detection limits only, and is independent of the sampling
rate and duration. For compounds which are concentrated in impingers or
traps, the MDV is dependent on the instrument detection limit, chemical
workup, sampling rate and sampling duration. The MDV's listed in Table 11
were derived using the listed sampling rate and a 23-minute sampling period.
23
-------
TABLE 11. EMISSION PROCEDURAL SAMPLE RATES AND ACCURACY
Test Number,
Barometer,
Humidity,
Temperature,
Mol.
Weight
VFD
mm Hg
g/kg
Sample
Flow
yg/m
per
PPi"
Procedural
Minimum
Detection
Values
ppm yg/i
MDV
for
FTP
mg/km
Carbon Dioxide,
Fuel Cons.,
g/km
£/100 km
44.01
Bag
Regulated Emissions
Hydrocarbons (THC)
Carbon Monoxide
Oxides of Nitrogen
11.88
28.01
46.01
Bag
Bag
Bag
575
1165
1915
c
2:0c
0.5C
575
2330
958
10
40
16
Particulates
Total Particulates
Sulfate
96.01
14.0
14.0
4000
<0.01
<50
6
0.1
Compound Group Totals
Aldehydes & Ketones
Individual Hydrocarbons
Organic Sulfides
Organic Amines
Phenols
Nitrosamines
4.0
Bag
0.13
4.0
22.0
2.0
-0.5
-0.5
-0.05
=0.1
-0.8
<0.001
Other Compounds
Ammonia
Cyanide & Cyanogen
17.03
26.02
4.0
4.0
710
1080
0.01
0.01
7
11
0.1
0.2
Based on a 23-minute sampling period at the specified flow rate for all
impinger, filter and trap collected samples.
Based on yg/m3 in the diluted exhaust and typical UDDS (FTP 505 and 867)
parameters (1372 seconds, 206 m3 CVS flow, 12.07 km, 0.98 DSFC) mg/km for
FTP - yg/m3 x 206 T 12.07 x 0.98 x 0.001= 0.0168 x yg/m3.
Based on the lowest instrument ranges used in this project.
24
-------
TABLE 11 (Cont'd). EMISSION PROCEDURAL SAMPLE RATES AND ACCURACY
Aldehydes and Ketones
Fo rmaldehyde
Ac etaldehyde
Acetone
Methylethylketone
Hexanaldehyde
Procedural
Mol.
Weight
30.03
44.05
58.08
72.12
100.16
CRCd
Synonym
__
—
2-Propanone
2-Butanone
Hexanal
jg/m
per
ppm
1250
1-830
2415
3000
4165
Minimum
Detection
a
Values ,
ppm
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
yg/m
15
20
25
30
40
MDV
for
FTP,b
mg/km
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.7
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
16.04
28.05
30.07
26.04
44.11
42.08
78.12
92.15
—
Ethene
—
Ethyne
,__
Propene
—
— —
665
1165
1250
1085
.1835
1750
3245
3830
0.05
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
.0.5
Organic Sulfides
Carbonyl Sulfide '
Methyl Sulfide
Ethyl Sulfide
Me thy 1 Di s ul f i de
Organic Amines
Monome thy1amine
Monoe thy 1 ami ne
Trimethylamine
Diethylamine
Triethylamine
Phenols
Phenol
S al i cy al dehy de
m- and p-cresol
Five9
2-n-propylphenol
2,3,5 trimethylphenol
2,3,5,6 tetramethylphenol
60.08
62.13
90.19
94.20
31.06
45.09
59.11
73.14
101.19
—
Dimethyl
Diethyl
Dimethyl
Amino- Me th ane
Amino- Eth ane
—
—
—
2500
2585
3750
3915
1290
1875
2460
3040
4205
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.002
0.002
0.002
0,002
0.002
3
3
4
4
3
4
5
6
8
0.04
0.04
0.06
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.08
0.10
0.14
94.11
122.13
108.15
g
136.20
136.20
155.22
3915
5080
4500
-5315
5665
5665
6250
0.014
0.013
0.010
0.021
0.006
0.004
0.002
55
65
45
110
35
20
10
0.92
1.09
0.76
1.85
0.59
0.34
0.17
a & b
See initial page of this table.
flandbook of Chemistry and Physics, 54th Edition.
Includes Acrolein - 56.07 and Propionaldehyde - 58.08 (CRC - Propenal
and Propanal, respectively).
Includes Dimethylamine - 45.09
Includes p-ethylphenol - 122.17; 2-isopropylphenol - 136.20;
3,5-xylenol - 122.17; 2,4,6-trimethylphenol - 136.20.
2, 3-xylenol - 122.17;
25
-------
IV. VEHICLE TESTING
Regulated and unregulated exhaust emissions were evaluated for a
1981 Volkswagen Rabbit operating on five alternate source fuels and on
Amoco Indolene as a base fuel.
A. Vehicle - Fuel Evaluations
The vehicle - fuel evaluations conducted in this program are listed
in Table 12 along with the number and types of emission tests performed.
In general, each fuel was evaluated over duplicate FTP and single HFET
test cycles. The base fuel, EM-338-F, however, was evaluated over four FTP
and HFET tests, three FTP and HFET tests in November 1981 and one FTP
and HFET test in February 1983. The tests in November 1981 were run in
conjunction with another EPA program, Task Specifications 11 and 12 of
Contract 68-03-2884, which monitored similar emissions for fuel EM-338-F.
The Simulated Coal gasoline, the Mobil MTG gasoline, and the EDS Naphtha
gasoline blend were evaluated in subsequent months in early 1982. Due
to the lack of available test fuels, no additional testing was conducted
for this program until February 1983, when the Sasol and H-Coal Naphtha
gasoline blends became available for testing. Before emission tests were
conducted with the Sasol and H-Coal Naphtha blends, the Volkswagen Rabbit
was rerun with the base fuel in February 1983 (only regulated gaseous
and particulate emission were sampled). Table 13 lists the average
emissions and fuel consumption values for the baseline tests conducted
in November 1981, along with the values obtained during February 1983.
As can be seen in the Table, the February 1983 baseline fuel consumption
rate decreased approximately 8 percent from the November 1981 values.
During the time between testing in early 1982 and the baseline tests in
February 1983, the test vehicle was "malfunctioned" (rich base idle -
disconnected oxygen sensor) and run at idle and low speed conditions in
TABLE 13. BASELINE EMISSIONS AND FUEL CONSUMPTION
Feb. 1983 Nov. 1981
FTP
HC, g/km 0.08 0.07
CO, g/km 0.76 0.67
NOX, g/km 0.24 0.10
Fuel Cons., £/100km 9.10 9.90
Particulates, mg/km 14.66 7.30
HFET
HC, g/km 0.06 0.07
CO, g/km 0.45 0.78
NOX, g/km 0.08 0.04
Fuel Cons., £/100 km 7.14 7.73
Particulates, mg/km 9.81 19.96
27
-------
TABLE 12. PROJECT TEST MATRIX
FTP Tests Conducted
to
CO
Emissions Characterized
Regulated Gaseous, Fuel Cons.
Individual Hydrocarbons
Aldehydes
Phenols
Particualte Mass
Sulfate
Metals and Other Elements
Organic Sulfides
Ammonia
Cyanide
Organic Amines
Nitrosamines
Particulate Organic Soluble Fraction
C,H,N,O Composition of Organic Solubles
Benzoca)pyrene in Organic Solubles
Regulated Gaseous, Fuel Cons.
Individual Hydrocarbons
Aldehydes
Phenols
Particulate Mass
Sulfate
Metals and Other Elements
Particulate Organic Sol. Frac.
C,H,N,O Comp of Org. Sol.
Benzo(a)pyrene in Org. Sol.
Fuel
Base
EM-338-F
4
3
3
1
4
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
Mobil
MTG
EM-486-F
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
Simulated
Coal
EM-468-F'
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
EDS
Naphtha
Blend
EM-488-F
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
a
1
1
1
1
Unleaded
Sasol
Blend
EM-542-F
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1.
-— b
1
H-Coal
Naphtha
Blend
EM-543-F
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
a
1,
b
1
HFET Tests Conducted
Base
EM-338-F
4
3
3
1
4
2
1
1
1
1
Mobil
MTG
EM-486-F
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Simulated
Coal
EM-468-F
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Fuel
EDS
Blend
EM-488-F
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Unleaded
Sasol
Blend
EM-542-F
1
1
1
1
1
1
1,
b
1
H-Coal
Naphtha
Blend
EM-543-F
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
fo
1
Sample collected-no data due to instrument malfunction
Sample collected-sample lost in transit for analysis
-------
yet another EPA contract, Work Assignment 4 of EPA Contract 68-03-3073.
Following emission testing in this program the vehicle was returned to
manufacturer's specifications. It appears that, as a result of these
adjustments, the vehicle was running slightly leaner in February 1983
than in November 1981 (HFET decrease in CO and increase in NOX). However,
it must be noted that the 8 percent deviation in fuel consumption from the
November 1981 tests to the February 1983 tests is only 4 1/2 percent more
than the test-to-test variations in fuel consumption experienced in
November 1981. The unleaded Sasol gasoline and the H-Coal Naphtha blends
were evaluated in the months following the February 1983 baseline testing.
As can be seen in Table 12, only selected unregulated emissions were
evaluated for each fuel. The emissions selected were based on emission
results obtained from previous EPA unregulated emission programs and on
individual fuel properties. Multiple UDDS (nine) and HFET (eight) tests
were run to generate single FTP and HFET particulate samples for subsequent
extraction to determine soluble organic fraction of particulate, major
element composition of extract (carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen)
and benzo(a)pyrene emissions. An attempt was made to collect particulate
on glass fiber filters for particulate carbon and hydrogen analyses;
however, due to the low particulate emission rates and the fragile nature
of the glass fiber filters, very low, and in several cases, apparent
negative particulate weights were obtained. Because of these problems,
it was not possible to obtain suitable samples for the carbon and hydrogen
analyses.
B. Regulated and Unregulated Emission Test Results
Summaries of the test results are included in Appendix B. Indivi-
dual sample data for the FTP evaluations are included in Appendix C and
the computer printouts for the regulated emissions are included in
Appendix D. The analyses and discussion of these test results are included
in Section V of this report. Aldehydes & ketones, individual hydrocarbons,
organic sulfides, phenols, particulates, sulfate, and metals emissions data
are based on appropriately weighted four-cycle FTP results. Cyanide, ammonia,
amines, and nitrosamines emissions data are based on unweighted four-cycle
FTP results (i.e., one sample taken over an entire four-cycle test for the
cyanide, ammonia, and amines, and one sample taken over two or three four-
cycle tests for the nitrosamines.)
In these data tables, a double dash (—) has been used when no test
data were available. This occurs for the unregulated emissions when valid
test data could not be obtained due to instrument malfunction or loss of
the sample. Blanks are left in the tables where the analyses were excluded
in accordance with the program scope of work.
C. Large Filter Sampling and Results
As described in Section II-F and Tables 6 and 7 of this report, 20 inch
by 20 inch Pallflex filters were used to collect particulate for extraction
29
-------
and subsequent analyses. The Volkswagen Rabbit was operated over multiple
UDDS (nine) and HFET (eight) test cycles with the six test fuels to generate
the particulate. The soluble organic fraction of the particulate was removed
by Soxhlet extraction procedures (16) using methylene chloride as an extracting
solvent. Particulate and extractable organic data for the six test fuels are
listed in Table 14. The Sasol and H-coal Naphtha gasoline blends gave the
largest amounts of particulate for both the UDDS and HFET cycles. Both these
fuels, however, had a low percentage of organic extractables. Because of these
low percentages for the Sasol and H-Coal Naphtha blends, all six fuels gave
approximately the same emission levels of organic extractables (0.38 to 0.72 mg
extract/km) for both the UDDS and the HFET test cycles.
The organic extracts from the multiple UDDS and HFET cycles were
analyzed for benzo(a)pyrene and for major elemental composition (carbon/
hydrogen, nitrogen, and oxygen). Table 15 lists the results of the benzo-
(a)pyrene and major element analyses. The elemental analysis samples for
the Sasol and H-Coal Naphtha blends were lost in transit to Galbraith
Laboratories for analysis, therefore, no such data are available for these
fuels. Of the six fuels, the Simulated Coal gasoline gave the highest
levels of benzo(a)pyrene, while the base fuel gave the lowest levels.
Of the fuel extracts analyzed for major elements, the Mobil MTG gasoline
extract gave the highest levels of elemental nitrogen and oxygen.
30
-------
TABLE 14. PARTICULATE MUD ORGANIC EXTRACTABtES
FROM LARGE FILTER SAMPLING
Multiple UDDS Cycles
Fuel
Base Fuel
Mobil MTG
Simulated Coal Fuel
EDS Naphtha Blend
Sasol Blend
H-Coal Naphtha Blend
Base Fuel
Mobil MTG
Simulated Coal Fuel
EDS Naphtha Blend
Sasol Blend
H-Coal Naphtha Blend
Particulate
Sample Weight, mg
211
157
454
214
3583
1034
221
211
396
286
6212
1469
Vehicle Emission
Rate , mg/km
1.95
1.45
4.20
1.98
33.18
9.57
Multiple HFET
1.67
1.60
3.00
2.17
47.06
11.03
Extractable Organics
Percent of
Particulate
19
32
17
21
1
5
Cycles
23
31
13
20
1
4
Vehicle Emission
Rate , mg/km
0.38
0.47
0.72
0.43
0.48
0.44
0.39
0.49
0.40
0.42
0.32
0.40
TABLE 15. BENZO(a)PYRENE AND MAJOR ELEMENTS IN
ORGANIC SOLUBLES FROM PARTICULATE MATTER
Multiple UDDS CYCLES
Base Fuel
Mobil MTG
Simulated Coal Fuel
EDS Naphtha Blend
Sasol Blend
H-Coal Naphtha Blend
Base Fuel
Mobil MTG
Simulated Coal Fuel
EDS Naphtha Blend
Sasol Blend
H-Coal Naphtha Blend
Benzo (a) pyrene
Ug/km
0.018
0.091
0.118
0.119
0.051
0.076
Weight
Carbon
81.35
76.55
80.68
80.42
a
"
Percent Elements in
Hydrogen
12.42
11.70
12.49
12.61
Multiple HFET
0.056
0.076
0.119
0.082
0.026
0.045
82.41
74.09
81.74
80.90
a
—
12.99
10.89
12.19
12.20
—
Nitrogen
1.15
2.08
1.26
0.54
Cycles
1.22
2.39
1.18
1.07
—
Organic
Oxygen
4.75
7.53
4.29
6.03
3.18
12.55
2.87
2.84
—
Solubles
ZCHNO
99.67
97.86
98.72
99.60
99.80
99.92
97.98
97.01
—
Samples lost in transit to Galbraith Laboratories for analysis
31
-------
V. ANALYSES OF THE RESULTS
This section reports the analysis performed on the emissions data
generated in this project. The analysis involved averaging and refor-
matting the data to enable making various comparisons. Due to the very
limited nuniber of data points for each pollutant at each specific condi-
tion, advanced statistical analyses were judged to be inapplicable.
A. Regulated Emissions and Fuel Consumption
The initial analysis of the data involved averaging the results for
the duplicate or triplicate emission tests. These averages are included
with the individual test data in Appendix B. A summary of the average
regulated emissions and fuel consumption data is presented in Table 16.
TABLE 16. SUMMARY OF THE AVERAGE REGULATED EMISSIONS AND FUEL
CONSUMPTION DATA
FTP
Base Fuel, EM-338-F (Nov., 1981)
Mobil MTG, EM-486-F
Simulated Coal Fuel, EM-468-F
EDS Naphtha Blend, EM-488-F
Base Fuel, EM-338-F (Feb., 1983)
Sasol Blend, EM-542-F
H-Coal Naphtha Blend, EM-543-F
1981 Federal Emissions Std.
Base Fuel, EM-338-F (Nov., 1981)
Mobil MTG, EM-486-F
Simulated Coal Fuel, EM-468-F
EDS Naphtha Blend, EM-488-F
Base Fuel, EM-338-F (Feb., 1983)
Sasol Blend, EM-542-F
H-Coal Naphtha Blend, EM-543-F
HC (g/km)
0.07
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.08
0.15
0.13
0.25
HC (g/km)
0.07
0.03
0.04
0.08
0.08
0.07
0.06
CO (g/km)
0.67
0.69
0.35
0.78
0.86
0.93
1.47
2.11
HFET
CO (g/km)
0.78
0.43
0.62
1.56
0.45
0.42
0.84
0.10
0.15
0.14
0.18
0.24
0.53
0.47
0.62
NOX (g/km)
0.04
0.05
0.08
0.10
0.08
0.18
0.25
Fuel Cons.
(VlOOkm)
9.90
9.74
9.24
9.64
9.10
9.20
9.34
Fuel Cons.
(VlOOkm)
7.73
7.63
7.66
7.28
7.14
7.00
6.92
To enable comparisons with the baseline fuel, the results for the Mobil MTG
the Simulated Coal Fuel and the EDS Naphtha blend fuel (which were tested in
early 1982) are grouped with the November 1981 baseline test results;
while the results for the Sasol and H-Coal Naphtha blends (which were
33
-------
tested in early 1983) are grouped with the February 1983 baseline test
results. The 1981 Federal Emission Standards for HC, CO, and NO have
also been included in the table for comparison. As can be seen in the
table, all six fuels gave emissions which met the 1981 standards.
All five alternate fuels gave higher NOX emission rates than the
base fuel for both the FTP and the HFET test cycles, with the Sasol and
the H-Coal Naphtha blends giving the highest NOX emission rates. It must
be noted however, that the NOX emission rates appeared to increase with
time, with each subsequent test series giving equivalent or slightly higher
emission rates than the previous test series regardless of fuel type.
Therefore, the possibility exists that the increase in NOX emissions may
have been due to a slight but constant drift in the feedback control
system of the vehicle and not due to fuel properties.
With the exception of the FTP Simulated Coal Fuel tests and the HFET
EDS Naphtha blend test, the alternate fuels had fuel consumption rates that
did not vary more than three percent from the corresponding baseline rates.
Three percent is a nominal value for test-to-test repeatability using the
same test fuel. The lower fuel consumption rate for the FTP Simulated
Coal Fuel tests (7 percent lower than the baseline tests) may be due to
its higher density (highest of the six fuels, Table 17) and higher percen-
tage carbon in the fuel (also highest of the six fuels), as the actual
densities and carbon percentages were used in the carbon balance method for
determining fuel consumption. While the EDS Naphtha blend also has a higher
density than the base fuel, it does not have a corresponding higher percen-
tage of carbon in the fuel. The lower HFET fuel consumption (6 percent
lower than the base fuel) may be due to the lack of multiple test points for
comparison as only one HFET test was run for each alternate fuel.
Both Naphtha blends (EDS and H-Coal) gave higher carbon monoxide
emissions than the base fuel for both the FTP and HFET test cycles, while
TABLE 17. FUEL DENSITIES AND CARBON PERCENTAGES FOR THE SIX FUELS
Density g/m& Percent Carbon
Base Fuel 0.737 85.66
Mobil, MTG 0.744 86.42
Simulated Coal Fuel 0.764 87.23
EDS Naphtha Blend 0.756 85.11
Sasol Blend 0.729 85.77
H-Coal Naphtha Blend 0.763 85.47
the Simulated Coal gasoline gave lower carbon monoxide emissions than the
base fuel for both cycles. The Mobil MTG gasoline gave lower carbon
monoxide emissions for the HFET cycle only. The emissions for the Sasol
blend (FTP and HFET) and the Mobil MTG gasoline (FTP) were within 10 percent
of the baseline results. The Sasol and H-Coal Naphtha blends gave hydrocarbon
emissions significantly higher than the base fuel for the FTP cycle (88 and 63
34
-------
percent respectively), but their HFET hydrocarbon emissions were similar to
the base fuel. The reverse was true for the Mobil MTG and the Simulated
Coal gasolines, which gave FTP emissions similar to the base fuel and HFET
emissions lower than the base fuel.
B. Individual Hydrocarbon Emissions Data
The emissions of eight individual hydrocarbons (IHC); methane, ethylene,
ethane, acetylene, propane, propylene, benzene, and toluene; were measured in
this project. Table 18 lists the FTP and HFET emissions for the eight com-
pounds. The IHC emissions in general parallel the total hydrocarbon emissions
found in Table 16. The base fuel, the EDS Naphtha blend, the Sasol Blend and
the H-Coal Naphtha Blend all gave similar HFET IHC emissions, while the Mobil
MTG and the Simulated Coal gasolines had HFET methane, ethylene, ethane, pro-
pylene, and toluene emissions that were lower than the other four fuels. The
Sasol and H-Coal Naphtha blends had the highest FTP methane, ethylene, ethane,
propylene, and toluene emissions of the six fuels tested. The EDS Naphtha
blend also had high FTP methane emissions with respect to the base fuel, how-
ever the emissions for the remaining seven IHC compounds were similar to the
base fuel.
C. Aldehyde and Ketone, Particulate, Sulfate, Ammonia, and Cyanide Emissions
Aldehydes and ketones, and particulate emissions were determined for
both the FTP and HFET test cycles for all six fuels. Sulfate was monitored
for both the FTP and HFET test cycles for all fuels except the Simulated Coal
gasoline. Ammonia and cyanide emissions were evaluated only for selected fuels
over the FTP test cycle. The results of these evaluations are included in
Table 19.
Fuel nitrogen content appears to have had little effect on the FTP
ammonia and cyanide emissions from the EDS and H-Coal Naphtha Blends,
which both have high fuel nitrogen content as compared to the other fuels
(115 and 727ppm respectively versus less than 10 ppm for the other fuels).
The EDS and H-coal Naphtha Blends gave FTP ammonia and cyanide emissions
equal to or lower than the other test fuels. The ammonia and cyanide emissions
are similar to those obtained in previous EPA programs for properly tuned
3-way catalyst equipped vehicles,(3,4,6,7) approximately 20 mg/km for ammonia
and less than 1 mg/km for cyanide.
Fuel sulfur content also appears to have had little effect on the sulfate
emissions. Both the EDS and H-Coal Naphtha blends have sulfur concentrations
10 times higher than the base fuel, however, only minor differences occur in
both the FTP and HFET sulfate emission rates. Both the FTP and HFET sulfate
emissions are typical of 3-way catalyst equipped vehicles.(3»4,6,7)
The various fuels tested in this program gave little or no aldehyde and
ketone emissions differences. Of the five aldehydes and ketones analyzed for,
only methyethylketone and acetaldehyde were detected in the exhaust. Methyl-
ethylketone was detected only in the MTG gasoline tests and acetaldehyde was
detected only in the Sasol blend tests. Low aldehyde and ketone emissions are
typical of late model 3-way catalyst equipped vehicles.^3'^'6'7'
35
-------
TABLE 18. SUMMARY OF THE AVERAGE INDIVIDUAL HYDROCARBON DATA
FTP Emissions, mg/km
U)
Base Fuel
Mobil MTG
Simulated Coal Fuel
EDS Naphtha Blend
Sasol Blend
H-Coal Naphtha Blend
Methane
8.70
7.93
6.33
16.60
23.18
21.92
Ethylene
3.00
3.02
3.93
3.49
7.43
6.04
Ethane
1.59
0.88
1.13
2.78
6.87
4.29
Acetylene
1.08
1.22
1.37
1.08
0.92
1.02
Propane
0.00
0.14
0.00
0.00
0.11
0.16
Propylene
2.62
1.76
1.91
2.50
5.24
3.13
Benzene
3.30
1.34
3.23
2.15
3.97
3.44
Toluene
5.73
0.57
5.58
4.09
7.06
5.77
HFET Emissions, mg/km
Base Fuel
Mobil MTG
Simulated Coal Fuel
EDS Naphtha Blend
Sasol Blend
H-Coal Naphtha Blend
17.07
6.93
8.21
18.96
14.73
15.22
2.58
0.92
2.01
3.95
3.55
2.81
3.89
1.38
2.16
4.98
3.00
3.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.21
0.00
0.00
2.39
3.63
0.00
6.41
3.89
5.36
4.70
3.15
3.02
4.61
0.00
0.00
3.94
2.14
1.43
-------
TABLE 19.
SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE, SULFATE, AMMONIA, CYANIDE, AND
ALDEHYDE AND KETONE EMISSIONS
FTP Emissions, mg/km
Fuel
Base Fuel
Mobil MTG
Simulated Coal Fuel
EDS Naphtha Blend
Sasol Blend
w H-Coal Naphtha Blend
Base Fuel
Mobil MTG
Simulated Coal Fuel
EDS Naphtha Blend
Sasol Blend
H-Coal Naphtha Blend
Particulates
7.30
3.27
3.92
2.00
35.26
24.23
19.96
2.73
4.49
3.19
94.22
26.09
Sulfate
0.41
0.44
0.65
0.52
0.70
HFET
1.58
0.55
0.52
0.40
1.78
Ammonia Cyanide
17.00 0.02
11.18 a
1.15 0.27
10.43 0.32
14.24 0.06
Emissions, mg/km
Total Aldehydes
and Ketones
0.00
0.09
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.83
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Blanks appear in the table where analyses were excluded in accordance with the program
scope of work.
-------
Particulate emissions varied considerably for the six fuels, with the Sasol
blend having both the highest FTP and HFET emissions, followed by the H-Coal
Naphtha blend. Three-way catalyst equipped vehicles normally have FTP particu-
late emissions on the order of 9 mg/km.'') With the exception of the Sasol and
H-Coal Naphtha blends, the fuels tested in this program gave particulate emis-
sions equivalent to or lower than this value. The Sasol blend originally con-
tained lead, which was subsequently removed for testing in this program. This
lead removal process, however, did not remove the halogens, chlorine and bromine,
which are normally associated with leaded fuel. Trace element analyses (dis-
cussed in the following subsection) indicated approximately 65 percent of the
particulate in the FTP cycle and 80 percent of the particulate in the HFET cycle
consisted of chlorine and bromine for the Sasol blend fuel. Substantial amounts
of chlorine and bromine were also found in the particulate from the H-Coal
Naphtha blend,indicating the possibility of carry-over from the previously-
tested Sasol fuel. If the bromine and chlorine are disregarded, then the par-
ticulate mass emissions for the Sasol and H-Coal blends are similar to the
remaining fuels.
D. Trace Element Emissions
Trace element analyses were conducted on particulate collected during
testing of the six fuels. Each filter was analyzed for a total of thirty-
one elements by x-ray fluorescence. Vanadium, nickel, cadmium, tin,
potassium, antimony, selenium, titanium, cobalt, and platinum were analyzed
for, but werenot detected above 0.02 mg/km for any filter analyzed in the
program. Sodium, mercury, magnesium, chrominum, copper, lead, manganese,
silicon, tungsten, arsenic, and bromine were detected only in the particulate
from the Sasol and/or the H-Coal Naphtha blends. The emissions for these
elements are listed in Table 20.
The remaining ten elements (sulfur, chlorinfe, aluminum, zinc, calcium,
iron, barium, phosphorus, strontium, and molybdenum) were, for the most part,
detected in the particulate from all six test fuels. The emissions for these
ten elements are summarized in Table 21.
As discussed in the previous section, the Sasol blend contained chlorine
and bromine, which were detected in the particulate at levels much higher
than those for the other test fuels. The H-Coal Naphtha blend particulate
also contained bromine and chlorine, but at levels significantly lower than
the Sasol blend, indicating the possibility of carry-over from the previously-
tested Sasol blend. These elements may have originated from the H-Coal
Naphtha blend, however, because low levels of lead were also detected in
the particulate. The Sasol blend particulate contained only 0.02 mg/km of
lead for the HFET cycle and only 0.02 mg/km of tin for the FTP cycles, in-
dicating the successful removal of the lead from the leaded Sasol fuel and
the near-absence of tin (which was used in the lead removal process).
There is no other apparent relationship of the trace elements in the
particulate to the test fuels except for the larger number and slightly
higher levels of trace elements in the particulate from the Sasol and
H-Coal Naphtha blends. As was the case for the sulfate emissions, there
is no apparent relationship between the particulate sulfur emission levels
and the sulfur content in the fuel.
38
-------
TABLE 20. TRACE ELEMENT EMISSIONS - SASOL AND H-COAL NAPHTHA BLENDS ONLY
FTP Emissions, mg/km
HFET Emissions, mg/km
Sodium
Mercury
Magnesium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Manganese
Tungsten
Silicon
Arsenic
Bromine
Sulfur
Chlorine
Aluminum
Zinc
Calcium
Iron
Barium
Phosphorus
Strontium
Molybdenum
Sulfur
Chlorine
Aluminum
Zinc
Calcium
Iron
Barium
Phosphorum
Strontium
Molybdenum
Sasol Blend H-Coal Naphtha Blend Sasol
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.96
TABLE 21.
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.65
0.01
0.00
0.04
0.01
0.33
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
10.
Blend H-Coal Naphtha Blend
11
01
03
00
01
02
02
04
02
05
94
0.05
0.06
0.01
0.04
0.02
0.46
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.00
2.27
TRACE ELEMENT EMISSIONS - ALL FUELS
FTP Emissions, mg/km
Base Fuel
0.03
0.02
0.10
0.03
0.08
0.91
0.05
0.02
0.33
0.56
0.07
0.41
0.03
0.00
0.03
0.27
0.02
0.00
0.26
0.48
Mobil
MTG
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.07
0.03
0.01
0.24
0.39
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
0.00
Simulated
Coal
0.01
0.28
0.01
0.02
0.07
0.09
0.04
0.01
0.15
0.29
HFET
0.01
0.51
0.01
0.04
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.01
0.00
0.00
EDS Naphtha
Blend
0.04
0.05
0.02
0.03
0.11
0.17
0.07
0.04
0.00
0.00
Emiss ions , mg/km
0.03
0.19
0.01
0.03
0.07
0.15
0.04
0.02
0.00
0.00
Sasol
Blend
0.15
22.23
0.21
0.02
0.13
3.28
0.07
0.05
0.04
0.06
0.16
64.81
0.19
0.04
0.11
2.56
0.07
0.04
0.14
0.16
H-Coal Naphtha
Blend
0.26
2.05
0.14
0.08
0.16
2.19
0.10
0.07
0.11
0.18
0.36
8.49
0.07
0.05
0.10
1.09
0.06
0.04
0.05
0.00
39
-------
E. Other Unregulated Emissions
Selected analyses were performed for N-nitrosamines, organic sulfides,
organic amines, and phenols. There was no apparent relationship of fuel
properties to emission levels for these compounds. The high nitrogen content
in the EDS Naphtha blend (115 ppm nitrogen) had no measureable effect on the
nitrosamine emissions, with both the base fuel and the EDS Naphtha blend
giving no detectable levels of nitrosamines. Inconsistant organic sulfide
results were obtained from the two high-sulfur-content fuels, one giving higher
organic sulfide emissions than the base fuel and the other giving lower levels
(base fuel, 0.11 mg/km; EDS Naphtha blend, 0.00 mg/km; H-Coal Naphtha blend,
0.66 mg/km). The EDS Naphtha blend gave lower total phenol emissions than
the base fuel (3.07 mg/km versus 11.58 mg/km). Trimethylamine (0.01 mg/km) was
the only organic amine detected in a FTP exhaust sample for the base fuel.
40
-------
REFERENCES
1. Bykowski, B.B., "Characterization of Diesel Emissions from Operation
of a Light-Duty Diesel Vehicle on Alternate Source Diesel Fuels,"
Final Report EPA 460/3-82-002 prepared under Task Specification 2
of Contract 68-03-2884, November 1981.
2. Urban, C.M., "Regulated and Unregulated Exhaust Emissions from Mal-
functioning Non-Catalyst and Oxidation Catalyst Gasoline Automobiles,"
Final Report EPA 460/3-80-003 prepared under Contract No. 68-03-2499,
January 1980.
3. Urban, C.M., "Regulated and Unregulated Exhaust Emissions from Mal-
functioning Three-Way Catalyst Gasoline Automobiles," Final Report
EPA 460/3-80-004 prepared under Contract No. 68-03-2588, January 1980.
4. Urban, C.M., "Regulated and Unregulated Exhaust Emissions from a Mal-
functionong Three-Way Catalyst Gasoline Automobile," Final Report
EPA 460/3-80-005 prepared under Contract No. 68-03-2692, January 1980.
5. Urban, C.M., "Unregulated Exhaust Emissions from Non-Catalyst Baseline
Cars Under Malfunction Conditions," Final Report EPA 460/3-81-020
prepared under Tasks 4 and 5 of Contract No. 68-03-2884, 1981.
6. Smith, L.R., "Characterization of Emissions from Motor Vehicles
Designed for Low NOX Emissions," Final Report EPA 600/2-80-176
prepared under Contract No. 68-02-2497, July 1980.
7. Smith, L.R., "Characterization of Exhaust Emissions from High Mileage
Catalyst-Equipped Automobiles," Final Report EPA 460/3-81-024 prepared
under Tasks 7 and 10 of Contract No. 68-03-2884, September 1981.
8. Smith, L.R., and Urban, C.M., "Characterization of Exhaust Emissions
from Methanol- and Gasoline-Fueled Automobiles," Final Report
EPA 460/3-82-004 prepared under Tasks 11 and 12 of contract No.
68-03-2884 and Work Assignments 1 and 3 of Contract No. 68-03-3072,
August 1982.
9. Smith, L.R., "Unregulated Emissions for Vehicles Operated Under Low
Speed Conditions," Final Report EPA 460/3-83-006 prepared under Work
Assignment 4 of Contract No. 68-03-3073, May 1983.
10. Dietzmann, H.E., et al, "Analytical Procedures for Characterizing
Unregulated Pollutant Emissions from Motor Vehicles," Report EPA
600/2-79-017, prepared under Contract No. 68-02-2497, February 1979.
11. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 85, Subpart H,
Sections applicable to Light-Duty Vehicles.
12. Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule (Federal Register, Vol. 41,
No. 100, May 21, 1976, Appendix 1.).
41
-------
REFERENCES ( Cont ' d . )
13. Smith, L.R., "Nitrosamines in Vehicle Interiors," Final Report to
Environmental Protection Agency under Task 2 of Contract No.
68-03-2884, September 1981.
14. Smith, L.R., et al, "Analytical Procedures for Characterizing Unregulated
Emissions from Vehicles Using Middle-Distillate Fuels," Interim Report
EPA 600/2-80-068, prepared under Contract No. 68-02-2703, April 1980.
15. Swarin, S.J. and Williraas, R.L., "Liquid Chromatograph Determination
of Benzo(a)pyrene in Diesel Exhaust Particulate: Verification of the
Collection and Analytical Methods," Research Publication GMR-3127,
GMRL, Warren, Michigan, October 23, 1979.
16. Warner, M.A., "Filter Extraction Procedures and Results for Various
EPA/ECTD Particulate Samples," Final Report to Environmental Protection
Agency under Task Specification 9 of Contract No. 68-03-2884, August
1982.
42
-------
APPENDICES
A - General Information
B - Individual and Average Test Results Summary Tables
C - FTP Individual Sample Results
D - Computer Printouts of the Regulated Emissions Test Results
-------
APPENDIX A
GENERAL INFORMATION
A-l - Properties of Stock Fuels
A-2 - Lead Removal Process for Sasol Gasoline
A-3 - Calculations for Unregulated Emissions
-------
APPENDIX A-l. PROPERTIES OF STOCK FUELS
Fuel Code
Description
Gravity, "API
Density, g/m&
Octane, research (RON)
Octane, motor (MON)
RVP, psi
Carbon , %
Hydrogen, %
Nitrogen , ppm
Sulfur, %
Lead, g/gal
Aromatics , %
Saturates , %
Olefins, %
Oxid, stability, min
Gum, unwashed, mg/100 m£
Gum, washed, mg/100 mil
Distillation - D86
°C (°F)
IBP
5%
10%
15%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
30%
95%
EP
EM-338-F
base
petroleum
gasoline
60 ;6
0.737
97.7
89.5
8.9
85.66±0.28
13.81±0.07
0.009
<0.002
22.8
75.2
2.0
600.
2.2
0..7
33(92)
39(103)
49(121)
69(156)
87(188)
97(206)
103(217)
108(226)
114(237)
125(257)
154(309)
168(334)
208(406)
EM-481-F
"EDS Naphtha
from coal tar
43.1
0.810
71.2
65.2
-0.5
85.20±0.21
13.12±0.06
-500
0.45
25.9
72.6
1.5
86(186)
109(228)
114(238)
119(246)
124(256)
133(271)
140(284)
148(298)
156(312)
162(324)
169(336)
176(348)
181(358)
201(394)
EM-540-F
"Leaded"
Sasol Gasoline
Coal Derived
62.3
0.7301
92.7
81.0
7.8
1.97
1
1
!
i
(
EM-513-F
H-Coal
Naphtha
43.4
80.0
73.5
4.4
0.27
31.1
67.8
1.1
49(121)
75(167)
88(191)
97(207)
104(220)
116(240)
127(261)
139(283)
152(305)
163(325)
173(344)
186(366)
198(398)
215(419)
Recovery , %
Residue, %
95.0
0.5
i
t 98
: 0.8
i,
A-2
-------
APPENDIX A-2. LEAD REMOVAL PROCESS FOR SASOL GASOLINE
As received at SwRI, the Sasol gasoline contained 1.97 g/gal lead.
Because of this lead content, the fuel was not compatible with the catalyst-
equipped test vehicle. In order to test the fuel in the vehicle, the Project
Officer requested that an attempt be made to remove the lead from the fuel.
Based on discussions with the Project Officer and with Dr. Jim Hincap of
Ethyl Corporation, it was determined that a method involving stannic chloride
would be the most practical to remove the lead from the fuel. This method
involves stirring 5 gallons of leaded fuel with 100 ml of anhydrous stannic
chloride for 10 minutes, followed by a water wash to remove the lead and tin
salts. The fuel, upon separation from the water and filtration to remove
any solid material, is ready to be used as an unleaded fuel.
In order to determine the applicability of the stannic chloride method
to the Sasol gasoline, one gallon of Sasol gasoline was reacted with 20 ml
of stannic chloride. The resulting unleaded fuel was analyzed and found to
contain less than 0.02 g/gal of lead. The process was scaled up to produce
five gallons of de-leaded Sasol gasoline. The research octane number (RON)
of the Sasol gasoline, however, was also lowered from 92.7 to 81 with the
removal of the lead. To prepare a suitable test fuel, the de-leaded Sasol
gasoline was blended with the base fuel and n-butane. The fuel blend consisted
of 48.3% de-leaded Sasol gasoline, 48.3% base fuel, and 3.4% n-butane. The
fuel properties of this blend can be found in Table 2 of the text.
A-3
-------
APPENDIX A- 3. CALCULATIONS FOR UNREGULATED EMISSIONS
This appendix documents the calculational methods used for the un-
regulated emissions. All values not defined (i.e., CVS FLOW, VOL, etc.)
are obtained from the computer printouts for the regulated emissions.
Example printout is included as Table 1.
A. Individual Hydrocarbons
1. For FTP Evaluations only, convert 2-Bag UDDS to Equivalent
1-Bag UDDS:
PPM 12 = PPMl x CVS FLOWl + PPM? X CVS FLOW2
CVS FLOW! + CVS FLOW2
PPM 34 = PPM3 x CVS FLOW3 + PPM4 x CVS FLOW4
CVS FLOW 3 + PPM FLOW4
2. Convert PPM to yg/m
3
pg/m = 35.32 x DENSITY x PPM
Density, g/ft
Methane CH4 - 18.86 Propane C3Hg - 17.29
Ethylene C2H4 - 16.50 Propylene C3H6 - 16.50
Ethane C2H6 - 17.68 Benzene C6H6 - 15.33
Acetylene C2H2 - 15.33 Toluene C7H8 - 15.49
B. Calculation of mg/km
mg/km = [(EXH x SCF - BG x DFC) x VOL T KM] v 1000
Calculations were performed using a Hewlett-Packard HP-65 Program-
mable Calculator. Dry (DVC) and (SFC) were used for all unregulated
emissions except IHC. DFC and SFC are obtained from the computer printout
for regulated emissions. (See Tables 1 and 2).
C. Calculation for 4-FTP (Aldehydes, Phenols, Organic Sulfides,
Individual Hydrocarbons, Particulates, and Sulfate)
Composite 4-FTP = 0.43 x (value for 1 & 2) + 0.57 x (Value for 3 & 4).
Only one sample was taken over the entire 4-Bag FTP for nitrosamines, ammonia,
total cyanide, and organic amines; therefore, calculations were performed
as in B.
A-4
-------
APPENDIX A-3 (Cont'd). CALCULATIONS FOR UNREGULATED EMISSIONS
TABLE 1. COMPUTER PRINTOUT NOMENCLATURE FOR FOUR-BAG FTP
FTP - VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS -
PROJECT
RUN
IN H6)
TEST NO.
VEHICLE MODEL
ENGINE
TRANSMISSION
BAROMETER MM H6<
RELATIVE HUMIDITY PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C
-------
APPENDIX A-3 (CONT'D). CALCULATIONS FOR UNREGULATED EM-SSIONS
TABLE 2. DEFINITION OF COMPUTER PRINTOUT NOMENCLATURE
FOR FOUR-BAG AND SINGLE-BAG
REGULATED EMISSIONS
The following are primarily exerpts taken from the computer program:
C DFC = DILUTION FACTOR CORRECTION DFC = FOR WET SAMPLES DFCD = FOR DRY
DF(J)=13.4/( YC2(2,J) +(( YH(2,J) + CC(2,J))/10000.))
DFC(J) = 1 - 1/DF(J)
C CALCULATE DFC, VOL. KM FOR BAGS 1+2 AND 3+4
C DF = TOTAL CVS FLOW / EXHAUST FLOW = AIR + EXH / EXH
C DFC = 1 - 1/DF = 1 - EXH/(AIR+EXH) = AIR/(AIR+EXH)
DFC12 =(DFC(1)*VMIX(1) + DFC(2)*VMIX(2)) / (VMIX{1) + VMIX(2))
DFC34 = (DFC(3)*VMIX(3) + DFC(4)*VMIX(4)) / (VMIX(3) + VMIX(4))
IF(RH.LT.20) RH = 20
DFCD12 = DFC12 * (1.0 - 0.000323MRH - 20))
DFCD34 = DFC34 * (1.0 - 0.000323*(RH - 20))
C SCF = SAMPLE CORRECTION FACTOR FOR WATER REMOVAL SCF = FOR WET SCFD^DRY
SCF12 = 1.000
SCF34 = 1.000
SCFD12 = (SCFD(1)*VMIX(1)+SCFD(2)+VMIX(2)) / (VMIX(l) + VMIX(2))
SCFD34 = (SCFD(3)*VMIX(3)+SCFD(4)*VMIX(4)) / (VMIX(3) + VMIX(4))
C
C
CALCULATE 4-BAG EMISSIONS AND FUEL CONSUMPTION
4-BAG = 0.43*(BAG1+BAG2)/(MILES1+MILES2)+0.57*(BAG3+BAG4)/(MILES3+MILES4)
DISTA=MILES(1) + MILES(2)
DISTB=MILES(2) + MILES(3)
DISTC=MILES(3) + MILES(4)
HCWM4 =
COWM4 =
C02WM4=
NOXWM4=
CBFE4 =
0.43*((HCM(1)+HCM(2)) / DISTA)
0.43*((COM(1)+COM(2)) / DISTA)
0.43*((C02M(1)+C02M(2))/DISTA)
0.43*((NOXM(1)+NOXM(2))/DISTA)
2421. / (.866*HCWM4 + .429*COWM4 +
.57*((HCM(3)+HCM(4)) / DISTC)
-57*((COM(3)+COM(4)) / DISTC)
.57*((C02M(3)+CO2M(4)) / DISTC)
,57*((NOXM(3)+NOXM(4)) / DISTC)
.273*C02WM4)
A-6
-------
APPENDIX B
INDIVIDUAL AND AVERAGE TEST RESULTS SUMMARY TABLES
Table B- Test No. Fuel Fuel Code
1
2
3
4
5
851-3
854-5
856-7
858-9
861-2
Base
Mobil "MTG"
Simulated Coal
EDS Naphtha Blend
Sasol Blend
EM-338-F
EM-486-F
EM-468-F
EM-488-F
EM- 54 2 -F
863-4 H-Coal Naphtha Blend EM-543-F
-------
TABLE B-l. SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-338-F BASE PETROLEUM GASOLINE
EMISSION RATE, mg/km (Except as Noted)
Test Number, VFD
Barometer, mm Hg
Humidity, g/kg
Carbon Dioxide, g/km
Fuel Consumption, £/100 km
Regulated Emissions
Hydrocarbons, (THC) , g/km
Carbon Monoxide, g/km
Oxides of Nitrogen, g/km
Particulates
Total Particulates
ro Sulfate
i
to
Compound Group Totals
Aldehydes & Ketones
Individual Hydrocarbons
Organic Sulfides
Organic Amines
Phenols
Nitrosamines
Other Compounds
Ammonia
Total Cyanide
Aldehydes & Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methylethylketone
Hexanaldehyde
851
751.6
5.7
226.7
9.73
0.07
0.59
0.11
9.73
0.0
25.8
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
FTP
852
739.6
12.0
236.9
10.17
0.07
0.72
0.09
7.39
0.51
0.0
28.5
0.08
0.00
11.58
12.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
HFET
853
743.5
9.0
228.6
9.81
0.06
0.71
0.11
4.78
0.30
0.0
21.2
0.13
0.01
21.97
0.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Average
744.9
8.9
230.7
9.90
0.07
0.67
0.10
7.30
0.41
0.0
25.2
0.11
0.01
0.000
17.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
851
751.6
5.8
177.5
7.64
0.07
0.78
0.04
23.56
0.0
38.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
852
739.1
11.8
184.2
7.93
0.07
0.80
0.05
25.03
1.98
0.0
39.2
5.96
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
853
743.7
9.5
177.3
7.63
0.06
0.75
0.03
11.29
1.18
0.0
33.1
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 '
Average
744.8
9.0
179.7
7.73
0.07
0.78
0.04
19.96
1.58
0.0
36.8
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-------
TABLE B-l (Cont'd). SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-338-F BASE PETROLEUM GASOLINE
EMISSION RATE, mg/km (Except as Noted)
Test Number,
VFD
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Organic Sulfides
Carbonyl Sulfide
Methyl Sulfide
Ethyl Sulfide
Methyl Disulfide
Organic Amines
Monomethylamine
Monoethylamine
Trimethylamine
Diethylamine
Triethylamine
Phenols
Phenol
Salicyaldehyde
m- and p-cresol
Five*
2-n-propylphenol
2,3,5-trimethylphenol
2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol
FTP
851 852
8.36 9.34
2.72 3.40
1.55 1.62
0.97 1.20
0.00 0.00
2.43 2.80
3.88 4.15
5.86 5.98
0.02
0.04
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.00
0.04
853
8.40
2.87
1.61
1.08
0.00
—
1.88
5.36
0.00
0.08
0.04
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
Average
8.70
3.00
1.59
1.08
0.00
2.62
3.30
5.73
0.01
0.06
0.03
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
HFET
851 852
17.25 17.81
2.57 2.84
4.08 4.06
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
3.36 3.05
6.28 6.51
4.45 4.91
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
853 Average
16.14 17.07
2.33 2.58
3.53 3.89
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
3.21
6.59 6.46
4.47 4.61
11.15
5.96
*Five = p-ethylphenol; 2-isopropylphenol; 2,3-xylenol; 3,4-xylenol; 2,4,5-trimethylphenol
-------
TABLE B-l (Cont'd). SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-338-F BASE PETROLEUM GASOLINE
EMISSION RATE, mg/km (Except as Noted)
Test Number,
Trace Elements
Sodium
Sulfur
Vanadium
Mercury
Magnesium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Aluminum
Manganese
Zinc
Tungsten
Silicon
Calcium
Iron
Barium
Arsenic
Phosphorus
Bromine
Strontium
Molybdenum
VFD
FTP
851 852 853 Average
0.00
0.03
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.10
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.01
0.08
0.91
0.05
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.33
0.56
HFET
851 852 853 Average
0.00
0.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.41
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.27
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.26
0.48
Note: Nickel, Cadmium, Tin, Potassium, Antimony, Selenium, Titanium, Cobalt, and Platinum were also
analyzed for, but were detected at or below 0.02 mg/km for all filters analyzed in this pr6gram
-------
TABLE B-2 . SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS PROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-486-F MOBIL "MTG" GASOLINE
Test Number,
VFD
Barometer, mm Hg
Humidity, 9/kg
Carbon Dioxide, g/km
Fuel Consumption, £/100 km
Regulated Emissions
Hydrocarbons, (THC), g/km
Carbon Monoxide, g/km
Oxides of Nitrogen, g/km
Partlculates
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Compound Group Totals
Aldehydes & Ketones
Individual Hydrocarbons
Organic Sulfides
Organic Amines
Phenols
Nitrosamines
854
741.7
6.3
226.4
9.73
FTP
855
738.9
12.0
226.6
9.75
HFET
Average
740.3
9.2
226.5
9.74
854
741.2
6.7
177.5
7.63
Average
0.06
0.63
0.18
3.21
0.44
0.2
16.6
0.05
0.74
0.12
3.32
0.0
17.1
0.06
0.69
0.15
3.27
0.44
0.1
16.9
0.03
0.43
0.05
2.83
0.55
0.8
13.1
Other Compounds
Ammonia
Total Cyanide
Aldehydes & Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methylethylketone
Hexanaldehyde
11.18
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.17
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11.18
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.09
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.83
0.00
-------
TABLE B-2 (Cont'd). SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-486-F MOBIL "MTG" GASOLINE
EMISSION RATE, mg/km (Except as Noted)
Test Number,
VFD
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Organic Sulfides
Carbonyl Sulfide
Methyl Sulfide
Ethyl Sulfide
Methyl Disulfide
Organic Amines
Monomethylamine
Monoethylamine
Trimethylamine
Diethylamine
Triethylamine
Phenols
Phenol
Salicyaldehyde
m- and p-cresol
Five*
2-n-propyIphenol
2,3,5-trimethyIphenol
2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol
854
44
78
0.76
1.20
0.27
67
32
1.13
FTP
855
8.42
3.26
0.99
1.23
0.00
1.84
1.35
0.00
Average
7.93
3.02
0.88
1.22
0.14
1.76
1.34
0.57
HFET
854
6.93
0.92
1.38
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.89
0.00
Average
*Five = p-ethylphenol; 2-isopropyIphenol; 2,3-xylenol; 3,4-xylenol; 2,4,5-trimethylphenol
-------
TABLE B-2 (Cont'd). SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-486-F MOBIL "MTG" GASOLINE
EMISSION RATE, mg/km (Except as Noted)
w
Test Number,
Trace Elements
Sodium
Sulfur
Vanadium
Mercury
Magnesium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Aluminum
Manganese
Zinc
Tungsten
Silicon
Calcium
Iron
Barium
Arsenic
Phosphorus
Bromine
Strontium
Molybdenum
VFD
FTP
854 858
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.05
0.07
0.03
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.24
0.39
HFET
Average 854 855 Average
0.00 ,
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
Note: Nickel, Cadmium, Tin, Potassium, Antimony, Selenium, Titanium, Cobalt, and Platinum were also
analyzed for, but were detected at or below 0.02 mg/km for all filters analyzed in this program
-------
TABLE B-3. SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-468-F SIMULATED COAL GASOLINE
Test Number.
VFD
Barometer, mm Hg
Humidity, 9/kg
Carbon Dioxide, g/km
Fuel Consumption, &/100 km
Regulated Emissions
Hydrocarbons, (THC), g/km
Carbon Monoxide, g/km
Oxides of Nitrogen, g/km
856
747.5
4.5
223.4
9.18
FTP
857
747.0
3.2
225.9
9.29
Average
747.3
3.9
224.7
9.24
HFET
856
748.5
3.5
185.8
7.66
Average
0.06
0.34
0.13
0.08
0.35
0.14
0.07
0.35
0.14
0.04
0.62
0.08
ro
oo
Particulates
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Compound Group Totals
Aldehydes & Ketones
Individual Hydrocarbons
Organic Sulfides
Organic Amines
Phenols
Nitrosamines
2.80
0.0
20.8
5.04
0.0
26.1
3.92
0.0
23.5
4.49
0.0
17.7
Other Compounds
Ammonia
Total Cyanide
Aldehydes & Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methylethylketone
Hexanaldehyde
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-------
TABLE B-3 (Cont'd). SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-468-F SIMULATED COAL GASOLINE
EMISSION RATE, mg/km (Except as Noted)
Test Number, VFD
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Organic Sulfides
Carbonyl Sulfide
Methyl Sulfide
Ethyl Sulfide
Methyl Disulfide
Organic Amines
Monomethylamine
Monoethylamine
Trimethylamine
Diethylamine
Triethylamine
Phenols
Phenol
Salicyaldehyde
m- and p-cresol
Five*
2-n-propylphenol
2,3,5-trimethylphenol
2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol
856
6.02
36
41
21
0.00
1.74
2.62
4.48
FTP
857
6.64
4.49
0.85
1.53
0.00
08
83
6.67
Average
6.33
3.93
1.13
1.37
0.00
1.91
3.23
5.58
HFET
856
8.21
2.01
2.16
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.36
0.00
Average
*Five = p-ethylphenol; 2-isopropylphenol; 2,3-xylenol; 3,4-xylenol; 2,4,5-trimethylphenol
-------
TABLE B-3 (Cont'd). SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-468-F SIMULATED COAL GASOLINE
EMISSION RATE, mg/km (Except as Noted)
Test Number,
Trace Elements
Sodium
Sulfur
Vanadium
Mercury
Magnesium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Aluminum
Manganese
Zinc
Tungsten
Silicon
Calcium
Iron
Barium
Arsenic
Phosphorus
Bromine
Strontium
Molybdenum
VFD
FTP
856 857
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.07
0.09
0.04
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.15
0.29
HFET
Average 856 857 Average
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.51
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.04
0.00
0.00
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
Note: Nickel, Cadmium, Tin, Potassium, Antimony, Selenium, Titanium, Cobalt, and Platinum were also
analyzed for, but were detected at or below 0.02 mg/km for all filters analyzed in this program
-------
TABLE B-4. SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-488-F EDS NAPHTHA BLEND
EMISSION RATE, mg/km (Except as Noted)
Test Number,
Barometer,
Humidity,
Carbon Dioxide,
Fuel Consumption,
VFD
mm Hg
g/kg
g/km
V100 km
Regulated Emissions
Hydrocarbons, (THC), g/km
Carbon Monoxide, g/km
Oxides of Nitrogen, g/km
Particulates
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Compound Group Totals
Aldehydes & Ketones
Individual Hydrocarbons
Organic Sulfides
Organic Amines
Phenols
Nitrosamines
Other Compounds
Ammonia
Total Cyanide
Aldehydes & Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
MethylethyIketone
Hexanaldehyde
858
736.6
5.4
216.0
9.23
0.09
0.80
0.18
3.64
0.65
0.0
26.1
FTP
859
748.0
6.0
225.6
9.64
0.08
0.78
0.18
2.99
0.0
32.7
0.00
Average
742.3
5.7
220.8.
9.44
0.09
0.79
0.18
3.32
0.0
29.4
HFET
858 Average
737.1
5.7
168.9
7.28
0.08
1.56
0.10
3.19
0.52
0.0
38.9
3.07
1.15
0.27
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.06
0.000
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-------
TABLE B-4 (Cont'd). SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-488-F EDS NAPHTHA BLEND
EMISSION RATE, rug/km (Except as Noted)
Test Number,
VFD
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Organic Sulfides
Carbonyl Sulfide
Methyl Sulfide
Ethyl Sulfide
Methyl Disulfide
Organic Amines
Monomethylamine
Monoethylamine
Trimethylamine
Diethylamine
Triethylamine
Phenols
Phenol
Salicyaldehyde
m- and p-cresol
Five*
2-n-propylphenol
2,3,5-trimethylphenol
2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol
858
7.10
4.46
3.58
1.30
0.00
2.68
2.30
4.71
FTP
859
16.60
3.49
2.78
1.08
0.00
2.50
2.15
4.09
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Average
11.85
3.98
3.18
1.19
0.00
2.59
2.23
4.40
HFET
858 Average
18.96
3.95
4.98
0.00
0.00
2.39
4.70
3.94
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.06
*Five = p-ethylphenol; 2-isopropylphenol; 2,3-xylenol; 3,4-xylenol; 2,4,5-trimethylphenol
-------
TABLE B-4 (Cont'd). SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-488-F EDS NAPHTHA BLEND
EMISSION RATE, mg/km (Except as Noted)
w
H
OJ
Test Number,
Trace Elements
Sodium
Sulfur
Vanadium
Mercury
Magnesium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Aluminum
Manganese
Zinc
Tungsten
Silicon
Calcium
Iron
Barium
Arsenic
Phosphorus
Bromine
Strontium
Molybdenum
FTP
858 859
0.00
0.04
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.05 '
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.00
0.11
0.17
0.07
0.00
0.04
0.00
0.00
0.00
HFET
Average 858 859 Average
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.19
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.00
0.07
0.15
0.04
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
Note: Nickel, Cadmium, Tin, Potassium, Antimony, Selenium, Titanium, Cobalt, and Platinum were also
analyzed for, but were detected at or below 0.02 mg/km for all filters analyzed in this program
-------
TABLE B-5. SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-542-F SASOL BLEND
EMISSION RATE, mg/km (Except as Noted)
Test Number, VFD
Barometer, nun Hg
Humidity, 9/kg
Carbon Dioxide, g/km
Fuel Consumption, H/100 km
Regulated Emissions
Hydrocarbons, (THC) , g/km
Carbon Monoxide, g/km
Oxides of Nitrogen, g/km
Particulates
Total Particulates
w Sulfate
i
*" Compound Group Totals
Aldehydes & Ketones
Individual Hydrocarbons
861
740.7
5.0
207.7
9.14
0.14
0.90
0.51
35.88
0.52
0.2
56.5
FTP
862
740.4
5.8
210.2
9.26
0.16
0.95
0.55
34.64
0.0
53.0
Average
740.6
5.4
209.0
9.20
0.15
0.93
0.53
35.26
0.1
54.8
HFET
861 Average
740.2
5.0
159.5
7.00
0.07
0.42
0.18
94.22
0.40
0.0
30.2
Organic Sulfides
Organic Amines
Phenols
Nitrosamines
Other Compounds
Ammonia
Total Cyanide
10.43
0.32
Aldehydes & Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methylethylketone
Hexanaldehyde
0.00
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-------
TABLE B-5 (Cont'd).
SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-542-F SASOL BLEND
EMISSION RATE, mg/km (Except as Noted)
Test Number,
VFD
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Organic Sulfides
Carbonyl Sulfide
f Methyl Sulfide
£ Ethyl Sulfide
Methyl Disulfide
Organic Amines
Monomethylamine
Monoethylamine
Trimethylamine
Diethylamine
Tr i ethylamine
Phenols
Phenol
Salicyaldehyde
m- and p-cresol
Five*
2-n-propyIphenol
2,3,5-trimethylphenol
2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol
861
24.73
7.76
6.83
0.93
0.22
86
88
6.27
FTP
HFET
862
21.57
7.10
6.91
0.91
0.00
4.61
4.06
7.84
Average
23.18
7.43
6.87
0.92
0.11
5.24
3.97
7.06
861
14.73
3.55
3.00
0.00
0.00
3.63
3.15
2.14
Average
*Five = p-ethylphenol; 2-isopropyIphenol; 2,3-xylenol; 3,4-xylenol; 2,4,5-trimethylphenol
-------
TABLE B-5 (Cont'd). SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-542-F SASOL BLEND
EMISSION RATE, mg/km (Except as Noted)
to
H
cn
Test Number,
Trace Elements
Sodium
Sulfur
Vanadium
Mercury
Magnesium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Aluminum
Manganese
Zinc
Tungsten
Silicon
Calcium
Iron
Barium
Arsenic
Phosphorus
Bromine
Strontium
Molybdenum
VFD
FTP
861 862
0.01
0.15
0.00
0.00
0.01
22.23
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.21
0.03
0.03
0.00
0.02
0.13
3.28
0.07
0.04
0.05
0.96
0.04
0.06
HFET
Average 861 862 Average
0.11
0.16
0.00
0.01
0.03
64.81
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.19
0.02
0.04
0.04
0.02
0.11
2.56
0.07
0.05
0.04
10.94
0.14
0.16
Note: Nickel, Cadmium, Tin, Potassium, Antimony, Selenium, Titanium, Cobalt, and Platinum were also
analyzed for, but were detected at or below 0.02 mg/km for all filters analyzed in this program
-------
TABLE B-6. SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-543-F H-COAL NAPHTHA BLEND
EMISSION RATE, mg/km (Except as Noted)
Test Number.
VFD
Barometer, mm Hg
Humidity, 9/kg
Carbon Dioxide, g/km
Fuel Consumption, Jl/100 km
Regulated Emissions
Hydrocarbons, (THC), g/km
Carbon Monoxide, g/km
Oxides of Nitrogen, g/km
Particulates
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Compound Group Totals
Aldehydes & Ketones
Individual Hydrocarbons
Organic Sulfides
Organic Amines
Phenols
Nitrosamines
Other Compounds
Ammonia
Total Cyanide
Aldehydes S Ketones
FormaIdehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methylethylketone
Hexanaldehyde
863
740.4
9.1
220.3
9.32
0.14
1.17
0.38
14.91
0.70
0.0
47.0
0.66
14.24
0.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
FTP
864
732.0
9.9
220.2
9.35
0.12
1.76
0.55
33.54
0.0
44.6
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Average
736.2
9.5
220.3
9.34
0.13
1.47
0.47
24.23
0.0
45.8
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
HFET
863 Average
740.4
8.2
163.7
6.92
0.06
0.84
0.25
26.09
1.78
0.0
25.6
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-------
TABLE B-6 (Cont'd). SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-543-F H-COAL NAPHTHA BLEND
EMISSION RATE, mg/km (Except as Noted)
Test Number,
VFD
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Organic Sulfides
Carbonyl Sulfide
Methyl Sulfide
Ethyl Sulfide
Methyl Disulfide
Organic Amines
Monomethylamine
Monoethylamine
Trimethylamine
Diethylamine
Triethylamine
Phenols
Phenol
Salicyaldehyde
m- and p-cresol
Five*
2-n-propylphenol
2,3,5-trimethylphenol
2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol
863
21.76
6.30
3.94
1.11
0.31
3.06
3.47
7.00
0.64
0.00
0.01
0.01
FTP
864
22.08
5.78
4.64
0.93
0.00
3.19
3.41
4.54
Average
21.92
6.04
4.29
1.02
0.16
3.13
3.44
5.77
HFET
863 Average
15.22
2.81
3.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.02
1.43
*Five = p-ethylphenol; 2-isopropylphenol; 2,3-xylenol; 3,4-xylenol; 2,4,5-trimethylphenol
-------
TABLE B-6 (Cont'd). SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM 1981 VW RABBIT,
EM-543-F H-COAL NAPHTHA BLEND
EMISSION RATE, mg/km (Except as Noted)
m
Test Number,
Trace Elements
Sodium
Sulfur
Vanadium
Mercury
Magnesium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Aluminum
Manganese
Zinc
Tungsten
Silicon
Calcium
Iron
Barium
Arsenic
Phosphorus
Bromine
Strontium
Molybdenum
VFD
FTP
863 864
0.02
0.26
0.00
0.02
0.01
2.05
0.02
0.03
0.65
0.14
0.01
0.08
0.00
0.04
0.16
2.19
0.10
0.01
0.07
0.33
0.11
0.18
HFET
Average 863 864 Average
0.05
0.36
0.00
0.06
0.01
8.49
0.04
0.02
0.46
0.07
0.01
0.05
0.00
0.01
0.10
1.09
0.06
0.00
0.04
2.27
0.05
0.00
Note: Nickel, Cadmium, Tin, Potassium, Antimony, Selenium, Titanium, Cobalt, and Platinum were also
analyzed for, but were detected at or below 0.02 mg/km for all filters analyzed in this program
-------
Appendix C
FTP Individual Sample Results
Table C- Test No. Fuel Fuel Code
1-3
4-5
6-7
8-9
10-11
851-3
854-5
856-7
858-9
861-2
Base
Mobil "MTG"
Simulated Coal
EDS Naphtha Blend
Sasol Blend
EM-338-F
EM-486-F
EM-468-F
EM-488-F
EM-542-F
12-13 863-4 H-Coal Naphtha Blend EM-543-F
-------
TABLE C- 1 . FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
Base Fuel EM-338-F
Test 851
Emissions in mg/km
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Aldehydes S Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methyl ethyl ketone
Hexanaldehyde
Cold-UDDS
14.52
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
6.11
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Emissions in ppm
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Cold-UDDS
1.
1.
.90
.69
0.52
0.65
0.00
1.53
0.90
3.27
0.19
0.00
0.04
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.79
0.00
Hot-UDDS
0.80
0.07
0.21
0..00
0.00
0.00
0.28
0.50
0.16
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
C-2
-------
TABLE C-2 . FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
Base Fuel EM-338-F
Test 852
Emissions in mg/km
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Aldehydes & Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methyl ethyl ketone
Hexanaldehyde
Cold-UDDS
9.17
0.77
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
6.05
0.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Emissions in ppm
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Cold-UDDS
Hot-UDDS
2.38
1.91
0.60
0.81
0.16
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.13
0.18
0.26
0.00
0.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.76
0.93
3.14
0.00
0.00
0.79
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.40
0.68
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
C-3
-------
TABLE C-2 (CONT'D.)- FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
Base Fuel EM-338-F
Test 852
Emissions in mg/km
Organic Sulfides
Carbonyl Sulfide
Methyl Sulfide
Ethyl Sulfide
Methyl Disulfide
Phenols
Phenol
Salicyaldehyde
m- and p-eresol
Five*
2-n-propylphenol
2,3,5 trimethylphenol
2,3,5,6 tetramethylphenol
Cold-UDDS
0.04
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
0.00
0.05
0.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.06
0.00
0.00
0.71
19.57
*Five = p-ethylphenol; 2-isopropylphenol; 2,3-xylenol;
3,5-xylenol; 2,4,6 trimethylphenol
C-4
-------
TABLE C-3 . FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
Base Fuel EM-338-F
Test 853
Emissions in mg/km
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Aldehydes & Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methyl ethyl ketone
Hexanaldehyde
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Cold-UDDS
5.95
0.13
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Emissions
Cold-UDDS
2
1
0
0
0
1
1
3
1
.14
.82
.54
.74
.04
.01
.08
.59
2
0.22
0.00
0.05
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
3.89
0.44
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
in ppm
Hot-UDDS
3
0.74 0
0.01 0
0.19 0
0.00 0
0.00 0
0.00 0
0.13 0
0.00 0
4
.05
.00
.01
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
C-5
-------
TABLE C-3 (CONT'D.). FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
Base Fuel EM-338-F
Test 853
Emissions in mg/km
Cold-UDDS Hot-UDDS
Organic Sulfides
Carbonyl Sulfide 0.00 0.00
Methyl Sulfide 0.08 0.08
Ethyl Sulfide 0.03 0.04
Methyl Disulfide 0.00 0.01
Phenols
Phenol
Salicyaldehyde
m- and p-cresol
Five*
2-n-propylphenol
2,3,5 trimethyIphenol
2,3,5,6 tetramethyIphenol
*Five = p-ethyIphenol; 2-isopropyIphenol; 2,3-xylenol;
3,5-xylenol; 2,4,6 trimethylphenol
C-6
-------
TABLE C-4 . FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
Mobil MTG Gasoline EM-486-F
Test 854
Emissions in mg/km
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Aldehydes S Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methyl ethyl ketone
Hexanaldehyde
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Cold-UDDS
Hot-UDDS
3.66 2.87
0.54 0.37
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.30
0.00 0.00
Emissions in ppm
Cold-UDDS
1
1.70
1.80
0.38
0.81
0.15
1.07
0.91
0.76
2
0.29
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
3
0.42
0.00
0.12
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
0.14
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
C-7
-------
TABLE C-5 . FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
Mobil MTG Gasoline EM-486-F
Test 855
Emissions in mg/km
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Aldehydes S Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methyl ethyl ketone
He xanaldehyde
Cold-UDDS
5.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
2.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Emissions in ppm
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Cold-UDDS
1.98
1.97
0.40
0.85
0.00
1.17
0.93
0.00
1.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
1.60
0.08
0.14
0.00
0.00
0.00
0..00
0.00
1.34
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
C-8
-------
TABLE C-6 . FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
Simulated Coal Gasoline EM-468-F
Test 856
Emissions in mg/km
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Aldehydes s Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methyl ethyl ketone
Hexanaldehyde
Cold-UDDS
3.79
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
2.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Emissions in ppm
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Cold-UDDS
Hot-UDDS
1.75
2.14
0.43
0.82
0.07
0.00
0.09
0.00
0.35
0.00
0.19
0.00
0.00
1.10
1.78
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.04
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
C-9
-------
TABLE C-7 . FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
Simulated Coal Gasoline EM-468-F
Test 857
Emissions in
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Aldehydes & Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methyl ethyl ketone
Hexanaldehyde
Cold-UDDS
3.92
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
5.89
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Emissions in ppm
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Cold-UDDS
.78
.49
0.39
1.02
0.00
1.30
2.34
4.46
0.01
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
0.47
0.22
0.16
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.19
0.00
0.10
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
C-10
-------
TABLE C-8 . FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
EDS Naphtha Blend EM-488-F
Test 858
Emissions in mg/km
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Aldehydes S Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methyl ethyl ketone
Hexanaldehyde
Individual Hydrocarbons^
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Cold-UDDS
Hot-UDDS
4.82 2.75
0.70 0.62
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Emissions in ppm
Cold-UDDS
1
2.12
2.52
0.82
0.90
0.00
1.72
1.23
2.86
2
0.00
0.00
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
3
0.87
0.24
0.45
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.26
0.26
4
0.00
0.00
0.17
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
C-ll
-------
TABLE C-8 (CONT'D.). FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
EDS Naphtha Blend EM-488-F
Test 858
Emissions in mg/km
Organic Sulfides
Carbonyl Sulfide
Methyl Sulfide
Ethyl Sulfide
Methyl Disulfide
Phenols
Phenol
Salicyaldehyde
m- and p-cresol
Five*
2-n-propylphenol
2,3,5 trimethylphenol
2,3,5,6 tetramethyIphenol
Cold-UDDS
Hot-UDDS
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4.24
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.18
*Five = p-ethyIphenol; 2-isopropylphenol; 2,3-xylenol;
3,5-xylenol; 2,4,6 trimethylphenol
C-12
-------
TABLE C-9 . FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
EDS Naphtha Blend EM-488-F
Test 859
Emissions in mg/km
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Aldehydes S Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methyl ethyl ketone
Hexanaldehyde
Cold-UDDS
3.84
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
2.35
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Emissions in ppm
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Cold-UDDS
Hot-UDDS
2.76
2.29
0.68
0.74
0.78
0.00
0.09
0.00
1.54
0.12
0.33
0.00
0.87
0.00
0.14
0.00
0.00
1.57
1.16
2.74
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.23
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
C-13
-------
TABLE C-9 (CONT'D.). FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
EDS Naphtha Blend EM-488-F
Test 859
Emissions in rag/km
Organic Sulfides
Carbonyl Sulfide
Methyl Sulfide
Ethyl Sulfide
Methyl Disulfide
Phenols
Phenol
Salicyaldehyde
m- and p-cresol
Five*
2-n-propylphenol
2,3,5 trimethylphenol
2,3,5,6 tetramethylphenol
Cold-UDDS
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*Five = p-ethylphenol; 2-isopropylphenol; 2,3-xylenol;
3,5-xylenol; 2,4,6 trimethylphenol
C-14
-------
TABLE C-10. FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
Sasol Blend EM-542-F
Test 861
Emissions in mg/km
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Aldehydes S Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methyl ethyl ketone
Hexanaldehyde
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Cold-UDDS
35.38
0.85
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Emissions
Cold-UDDS
3
3
1
0
0
2
1
3
1
.77
.08
.04
.64
.13
.22
.68
.45
2
1.70
0.00
0.49
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
36.26
0.27
0.00
0.35
0.00
0.00
0.00
in ppm
Hot-UDDS
3
2.23 1.
1.43 0.
0.72 0.
0.00 0.
0.00 0.
1.16 0.
0.77 0.
0.65 0.
4
56
00
55
00
00
00
00
00
C-15
-------
TABLE C-ll. FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
Sasol Blend EM-542-F
Test 862
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Aldehydes S Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methyl ethyl ketone
Hexanaldehyde
Emissions in mg/km
Cold-UDDS
31.56
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
36.97
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Emissions in ppm
Individual Hydrocarbons^
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Cold-UDDS
3.21
2.54
0.94
0.63
1.34
0.00
0.53
0.00
Hot-UDDS
1.99
1.50
0.73
0.00
0.00
1.90
1.64
3.96
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.78
0.86
1.04
1.40
0.00
0.58
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
C-16
-------
TABLE C-12. FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
H-Coal Naphtha Blend EM-543-F
Test 863
Emissions in mg/km
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Aldehydes & Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methyl ethyl ketone
Hexanaldehyde
Cold-UDDS
18.05
0.63
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDD5
12.54
0.76
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Emissions in ppm
Cold-UDDS
Hot-UDDS
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
3.75
3.46
0.88
0.77
0.19
1.95
1.85
4.17
0.96
0.00
0.19
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.83
0.43
0.44
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.41
0.45
1.39
0.00
0.24
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
C-17
-------
TABLE C-12 (CONT'D.). FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONSRESULTS
H-Coal Naphtha Blend EM-543-F
Test 863
Emissions in mg/km
Organic Sulfides
Carbonyl Sulfide
Methyl Sulfide
Ethyl Sulfide
Methyl Disulfide
Phenols
Phenol
Salicyaldehyde
m- and p-cresol
Five*
2-n-propyIphenol
2,3,5 trimethyIphenol
2,3,5,6 tetramethyIphenol
Cold-UDDS
1.14
0.00
0.02
0.03
Hot-UDDS
0.26
0.00
0.00
0.00
*Five = p-ethyIphenol; 2-isopropylphenol; 2,3-xylenol;
3,5-xylenol; 2,4,6 trimethyIphenol
C-18
-------
TABLE C-13. FTP INDIVIDUAL SAMPLE UNREGULATED EMISSIONS RESULTS
H-Coal Naphtha Blend EM-543-F
Test 864
Emissions in mg/km
Total Particulates
Sulfate
Aldehydes S Ketones
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Methyl ethyl ketone
Hexanaldehyde
Cold-UDDS
56.43
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hot-UDDS
16.27
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Emissions in ppm
Individual Hydrocarbons
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Acetylene
Propane
Propylene
Benzene
Toluene
Cold-UDDS
3.
2.
,29
.90
0.80
0.66
0.00
1.81
1.43
2.74
1.46
0.10
0.29
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.18
0.00
Hot-UDDS
2.14
0.53
0.57
0.00
0.00
0.20
0.48
0.31
1.35
0.00
0.34
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
C-19
-------
APPENDIX D
Computer Printouts
of the
Regulated Emissions Test Results
Table D-
Test No.
1-3
4-5
6-7
8-9
10
11-12
851-3
854-5
856-7
858-9
860
861-2
13-14
863-4
Fuel Fuel Code
Base EM-338-F
Ilobil "MTG" EM-486-F
Simulated Coal EM-468-F
EDS Naphtha Blend EM-488-F
Base EM-338-F
Sasol Blend EM-542-F
H-Coal Naphtha Blend EM-543-F
-------
TABLE D-l. TEST NO. 851 EMISSIONS RESULTS
TEST NO. 851FTP RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L(105. CIO) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 751.59 M
RELATIVE HUMIDITY
SAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
I HG(29.59 IN HG)
27. PCT
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20ON. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(OEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
THC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
THC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
THC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
002 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
THC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
THC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/IOOKM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF, DRY
DFC, WET (DRY)
TOT VOL (SCM) / SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/IOOKM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 851FTP
BAROMETER MM HG 751.6
HUMIDITY G/KG 5.7
TEMPERATURE DEG C 25.6
- VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS -
PROJECT 05-5830-011
VEHICLE NO.85
DATE 11/20/81
BAG CART NO. I / CVS NO. 2
OYNO NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.6 OEG 0(78.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 5.7 GM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1134. KG( 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 5.7 KW( 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-338-F
ODOMETER 12793. KM( 7949. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .86
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
42.8 (109.0)
40453.
76.7 ( 2709.)
38. 6/ 2/ 39.
10. 6/ 2/ 1 1.
77.9/I2/ 183.
2.7/12/ 5.
58. 5/ 3/1.0332
2.8/ 3/ .0428
9.7/ 2/ 9.7
.3/ 2/ .3
12.70
29.
173.
.9938
9.4
1.28
15.43
1396.0
1. 19
.22
2.66
240.8
.20
10.49
504.
5.80
.982 .984
.94K .
208. 9/
12.06
10.08
2
STABILIZED
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
41.7 (107.0)
69561.
132.2 ( 4668.)
10. 4/ 2/ 10.
9.4/ 2/ 9.
5.2/I3/ 5.
4.2/I3/ 4.
37. 4/ 3/ .6297
2.9/ 3/ .0444
2.8/ 2/ 2.8
.2/ 2/ .2
21.23
1.
1.
.5874
2.6
. 1 1
.16
1421.6
.57
.02
.02
227.1
.09
9.70
868.
6.26
.985
933)
0.00
3
HOT TRANSIENT
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
42.2 (108.0)
40425.
76.7 ( 2710.)
16. 9/ 2/ 17.
8.2/ 2/ 8.
I0.4/13/ 9.
2.7/13/ 2.
53. I/ 3/ .9272
2.9/ 3/ .0444
3.7/ 2/ 3.7
.2/ 2/ .2
14.41
9.
7.
.8859
3.5
.41
.62
1244.8
.44
.07
. It
215.3
.08
9.21
505.
5.78
.983 .984
.945( .
208. 8/
12.04
9.38
4
STABILIZED
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
41.7 (107.0)
69476.
132.0 ( 4662.)
8.4/ 2/ 8.
7.5/ 2/ 8.
3.7/I3/ 3.
2.3/13/ 2.
37. O/ 3/ .6223
3.0/ 3/ .0459
3. I/ 2/ 3.1
.2/ 2/ .2
21.49
1.
1.
.5785
2.9
.10
.20
1398.5
.63
.02
.03
223.6
.10
9.55
868.
6.25
.985
937)
0.00
3-BAG (4-3AG)
CARBON
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/IOOKM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
226.7 ( 225
9.73 ( 9.
.07 (
.59 (
.11 (
.7)
68)
07)
59)
11)
TEST NO. 85IFET RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L(105. CIO) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 751.59 MM HGI29.59 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 26. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER OIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
THC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
THC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX 8CKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
THC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
THC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER,
HUMIDITY,
TEMPERATURE,
CARBON DIOXIDE,
FUEL CONSUMPTION,
MM HG
G/KG
OEG C
G/KM
L/IOOKM
HYDROCARBONS, (THC) G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
HFET - VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS -
PROJECT 05-5830-011
VEHICLE NO.85
DATE 11/20/81
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 3
CVS NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP. 26.7 DEG C(80.0 OEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 5.8 GM/KG
HFET
789.9 (31.1)
789.9 (31.1)
42.2 (108.0)
61178.
I 17.9 ( 4163.)
22.4/ 2/ 22.
6.9/ 2/ 7.
96.2/I3/ 98.
2.2/13/ 2.
75.9/ 3/1.3850
2.8/ 3/ .0428
3.9/ 2/ 3.9
.4/ 2/ .4
9.59
16.
92.
1.3466
3.5
1. 10
12.70
2906.9
.69
765.
.896 ( .888)
t.OOO ( .979)
1 17.9
0.00
16.37
851FET
75 1.6
5.8
26.7
177.5
7.64
.07
.78
.04
TEST WEIGHT 1134. KG( 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 5.7 KW( 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-338-F
ODOMETER 12817. XM( 7964. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .86
D-2
-------
TABLE D-2. TEST NO. 852 EMISSIONS RESULTS
TEST NO. 852FTP RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 1(105. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 759.65 MM HG(29.12 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 57. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. Fl
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STO. CU. METRES(SCF)
THC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
THC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX 3CKGRO METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
THC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
THC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
THC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
= UEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/IOOKM
SUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED 01 STANCE KM
SCF, DRY
OFC, WET (DRY)
TOT VOL (SCM) / SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/tOOKM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 852FTP
BAROMETER MM HG 739.6
HUMIDITY G/KG 12.0
TEMPERATURE DEG C 25.6
- VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS -
PROJECT 05-5830-011
VEHICLE NO.85
DATE 11/23/81
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 2
DYNO NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.6 DEG C(78.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 12.0 GM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1134. KG( 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 5.7 KX( 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-338-F
ODOMETER 12845. KM( 7982. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.04
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
42.2 ( 108.0)
40465.
75.7 ( 2672.)
37. 9/ 2/ 38.
9.7/ 2/ 10.
86.7/12/ 210.
.5/12/ 1.
61. 4/ 3/1.0908
2.9/ 3/ .0444
8.6/ 2/ 8.6
.5/ 2/ .5
12.02
29.
201.
1.0502
8. 1
1.27
17.73
1455.0
1.23
.22
3.07
252. 1
.21
1 1.00
505.
5.77
.972 .974
.938< .
205. 9/
1 1.98
10.60
2
STABILIZED
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
41.7 (107.0)
69556.
130.2 ( 4598.)
9.4/ 2/ 9.
9.4/ 2/ 9.
4.1/13/ 4.
1.1/13/ 1.
39. 3/ 3/ .6647
2.8/ 3/ .0428
1.7/ 2/ 1.7
.5/ 2/ .5
20.12
0.
3.
.6240
1.2
.04
.40
1487.6
.32
.01
.06
239.7
.05
10.24
868.
6.21
.976
921)
0.00
CARBON
FUEL C(
HYDROC/
CARBON
OXIDES
3
HOT TRANSIENT
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
41.1 (106.0)
40447.
75.8 ( 2676.)
17. 9/ 2/ 18.
8.9/ 2/ 9.
I6.2/13/ 15.
I.6/I3/ 1.
55. O/ 3/ .9643
3.0/ 3/ .0459
3. I/ 2/ 3.1
.5/ 2/ .5
13.85
10.
13.
.9217
2.6
.42
1.13
1278.9
.40
.07
.20
220.1
.07
9.42
505.
5.81
.973 .975
,942( .
205. 6/
12.09
9.66
DIOXIDE G/KM
3NSUMPTION L/IOOKM
VRBONS (THC) G/KM
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
4
STABILIZED
784.9 (30.9)
784.9 (30.9)
42.2 (108.0)
69418.
129.9 ( 4585.)
9. I/ 2/ 9.
9.2/ 2/ 9.
4.7/I3/ 4.
1.3/13/ 1.
38. 9/ 3/ .6573
3. I/ 3/ .0474
.9/ 2/ .9
.6/ 2/ .6
20.34
0.
3.
.6122
.3
.03
.46
1455.5
.09
.00
.07
231.6
.01
9.89
867.
6.29
.976
925)
0.00
3-BAG (4-BAG)
236.9 ( 234.5)
10.17 ( 10.07)
.07 ( .07)
.72 ( .73)
.09 ( .08)
TEST NO. Sb/FEr RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L(105. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 739.14 MM HG(29.10 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 49. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. OEG. C(D£G. Fl
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STO. CU. METRES(SCF)
THC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
THC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRO METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
THC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PDM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
THC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER,
HUMIDITY,
TEMPERATURE,
CARBON DIOXIDE,
FUEL CONSUMPTION,
MM HG
G/KG
DEG C
G/KM
L/IOOKM
HYDROCARBONS, (THC) G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
HFET - VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS -
PROJECT 05-5830-01 I
VEHICLE NO.85
DATE 11/23/81
BAG CART NO. I
DYNO NO. 3
CVS NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP. 27.8 OEG C(82.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 11.8 GM/KG
HFET
800.1 (31.5)
800.1 (31.5)
42.8 (109.0)
61199.
116.0 ( 4095.)
24. I/ 2/ 24.
9. I/ 2/ 9.
48.5/12/ 102.
. 5 /1 2/ 1.
79.6/ 3/1.4614
2.8/ 3/ .0428
4.0/ 2/ 4.0
.5/ 2/ .5
9.09
16.
97.
1.4233
3.6
1.07
13.09
3022.1
.82
765.
.890 ( .876)
1.000 ( .971)
1 16.0
0.00
16.40
851FET
739. 1
11.8
27.8
134.2
7.93
.07
.80
.05
TEST WEIGHT 1134. KG( 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 5.7 KW( 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-538-F
ODOMETER 12870. KM( 7997. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.04
D-3
-------
TABLE D-3. TEST NO. 853 EMISSIONS RESULTS
- VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS -
PROJECT 05-5830-01 I
TEST NO. 853FTP RUN I
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L
42.8 (109.0)
40398.
76.1 < 2685.)
12. 4/ 2/ 12.
9.9/ 21 10.
I0.6/13/ 10.
2.3/I3/ 2.
53. 2/ 3/ .9291
3.0/ 3/ .0459
3.7/ 21 3.7
.3/ 21 .3
K.39
3.
7.
.8864
3.4
. 14
.65
1234.3
.47
.02
. 1 1
213.8
.08
9.14
504.
5.77
.977 .9
.945<
207. O/
12.
9.
DIOXIDE G/KM
IV. 'MOTION L/IOOKM
irtBONS (THC) G/KM
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
4
STABILIZED
784.9 (30.9)
784.9 (30.9)
42.2 < 108.0)
69501.
131.0 < 4625.)
9.4/ 2/ 9.
9.7/ 21 10.
4.7/13/ 4.
2.1/13/ 2.
37. 4/ 3/ .6297
3.4/ 3/ .0521
.8/ 2/ .8
.7/ 21 .7
21.24
0.
2.
.5800
. 1
.01
.36
1390.8
.03
.00
.06
222.1
.01
9.48
868.
6.26
79 .980
.932)
0.00
04
32
3-BAG (4-BAG)
228.6 ( 226.2)
9.81 ( 9.71)
.06 < .06)
.71 ( .72)
.11 ( .08)
TEST NO. 353FET RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L(105. CIO) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 743.71 MM HG(29.28 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 44. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT -LOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
THC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
THC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRO METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 3CKSRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METEH/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
THC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
THC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
OFC, WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL fSCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER,
HUMIDITY,
TEMPERATURE,
CARBON DIOXIDE,
FUEL CONSUMPTION,
MM HG
G/KG
OEG C
G/KM
L/IOOKM
HFET - VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-5830-011
VEHICLE NO.85
DATE 11/24/81
BAG CART NO. 1
OYNO NO. 3
CVS NO. 2
8.
9s.
1 .
2.7
.7
HYDROCARBONS, (THC) G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
DRY BULB TFMP.
*BS. HUM(0 I 1 "
HFET
300.1 (31.5)
800.1 (31.5)
42.8 ( 109.0)
61205.
116.8 < 4126.)
21.5/ 2/ 22.
7.8/ 2/
93.5/13/
I.3/13/
76.O/ 3/1.
,6/ 3/ .
2.7/ 21
.11 2/
9.58
15.
90.
1.3515
2.1
.98
12.20
2891.0
.44
765.
.896 < .883)
1.000 ( .973)
I 16.B
0.00
16.31
853FET
743.7
9.5
26. 1
177.3
7.63
.06
.75
.03
26. ' ":• f
9.5 GM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1134. K3( 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 5.7 KN< 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-338-F
ODOMETER 12911. KM( 8023. MILES)
.^MlDITY CORRECTION FACTOR
D-4
-------
TABLE D-4. TEST NO. 854 EMISSIONS RESULTS
TEST NO. 894 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L(105. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 741.68 MM HG(29.20 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 32. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER OIF P MM. H20ON. H20)
SLOWER INLET P MM. H20ON. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRO METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF, DRY
DFC, WET (DRY)
TOT VOL (SCM) / SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/IOOKM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 894
BAROMETER MM HG 741.7
HUMIDITY G/KG 6.3
TEMPERATURE DEG C 24.4
FTP - VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS -EM-486-F
PROJECT 05-4493-001
VEHICLE NO.85
DATE 2/ 8/82
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 2
DYNO NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 24.4 DEG C(76.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 6,3 GM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1134. KG( 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAO LOAD 5.7 KW( 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-486-F
ODOMETER 14373. KM( 8931. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
43.3 (110.0)
40432.
75.8 ( 2678.)
37. 2/ 2/ 37.
10. I/ 2/ 10.
79. 6/1 2/ 188.
2.3/12/ 4.
58. 6/ V 1.04
3.2/ 3/ .05
14. 0/ 2/ 14.
.5/ 2/ 1.
12.60
28.
178.
.99
13.5
1.22
15.73
1374.8
1.71
.21
2.70
236.3
.29
10.32
504.
5.82
.980 .982
.940( .
206. 3/
12.05
10.11
2
STABILIZED
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
43.3 (110.0)
69569.
130.5 ( 4608.)
10. 3/ 2/ 10.
9.5/ 2/ 10.
7.3/13/ 7.
4.0/13/ 4.
38. 2/ 3/ .64
2.8/ 3/ .04
5.0/ 2/ 5.
.5/ 2/ 1.
20.61
1.
3.
.60
4.5
.10
.46
1442.2
.99
.02
.07
231.4
.16
9.91
868.
6.23
.984
930)
0.00
CARBON
FUEL C(
HYDROS
CARBON
OXIDES
3
HOT TRANSIENT
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
43.3 (110.0)
40405.
75.8 ( 2676.)
11. 6/ 2/ 12.
9. I/ 2/ 9.
lt.7/13/ 11.
2.8/13/ 3.
53. O/ 3/ .93
3.3/ 3/ .05
7. I/ 2/ 7.
.4/ 2/ 0.
14.36
3.
8.
.88
6.7
.14
.70
1218.5
.85
.02
.12
209.4
.15
8.97
504.
5.82
.981 .983
.945( .
206. 2/
12.09
9.22
DIOXIDE G/KM
^SUMPTION L/IOOKM
IRBONS (THC) G/KM
MONOXIDE GAM
OF NITROGEN GAM
4
STABILIZED
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
43.3 (110.0)
69551.
130.5 ( 4606.)
9.3/ 2/ 9.
9.0/ 2/ 9.
5.3/13/ 5.
2.5/13/ 2.
37. O/ 3/ .62
2.9/ 3/ .04
3.4/ 2/ 3.
.4/ 2/ 0.
21.35
1.
3.
.58
3.0
.05
.39
1385.3
.66
.01
.06
221.0
.10
9.46
868.
6.27
.984
935)
0.00
3-BAG (4-BAG)
226.4 ( 223.3)
9.73 ( 9.60)
.06 ( .06)
.63 ( .63)
.18 ( .17)
TEST NO. 854 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L(105. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 741.17 MM HG(29.18 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 33. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER OIF P
BLOWER INLET P
H20UN. H20)
H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
OFC, WET (DRY)-
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER,
miMtom,
TEMPERATURE,
CARSON DIOXIDE,
FUEL CONSUMPTION,
MM HG
G/KS
DEG C
G/KM
L/IOOKM
HFET - VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS -EM-486-F
PROJECT 05-4493-001
VEHICLE NO. 85
DATE 2/ 8/82
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 3
CVS NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.0 DEG C(77.0 DES F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 6.7 GM/KG
HFET
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
42.8 (109.0)
61162.
116.5 ( 4114.)
15. 4/ 2/ 15.
8.6/ 2/ 9.
58.2/13/ 56.
1.9/13/ 2.
77. I/ 3/ I .
3.5/ 3/
4.5/ ^>
TEST WEIGHT 1134. KG( 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 5.7 KW( 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-486-F
ODOMETER 14397. KM( 8946. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR
.41
.05
5.
0.
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
9.40
8.
52.
1 .36
4.1
.52
7.05
2904.9
.81
764.
.894 ( .884)
1.000 < .976)
116.5
0.00
16.36
854
741 .2
6.7
25.0
177.5
7.63
.03
.43
.05
D-5
-------
TABLE D-5. TEST NO. 855 EMISSIONS RESULTS
TEST NO. 855 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L(105. CIO) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 738.89 MM H6(29.09 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 57. POT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20
784.9 (30.9)
43.3 (110.0)
40331.
75.4 ( 2661.)
51. I/ 2/ 51.
21. 7/ 2/ 22.
88.8/12/ 217.
.2/12/ 0.
59. O/ 3/ 1.04
2.3/ 3/ .04
8.9/ 2/ 9.
.I/ 2/ 0.
12.46
31.
209.
1.01
8.8
1 .36
18.30
1394.6
1.32
.24
3.19
243.5
.23
10.66
504.
5.73
.972 .9
.940<
204. 9/
11.
10.
2
STABILIZED
784.9 (30.9)
784.9 (30.9)
43.3 (110.0)
69424.
129.6 ( 4575.)
19. 3/ 2/ 19.
20. 7/ 2/ 21.
3.9/13/ 4.
.6/13/ 1.
37. 7/ 3/ .64
2.5/ 3/ .04
2. I/ 2/ 2.
.2/ 2/ 0.
20.89
-0.
3.
.60
1.9
-.03
.44
1420.3
.49
-.00
.07
227.1
.08
9.72
867.
6.25
74 .976
.923)
0.00
98
17
CARSON
FUEL C(
3
HOT TRANSIENT
784.9 (30.9)
784.9 (30.9)
43.3 (110.0)
40351.
75.3 ( 2659.)
21. 2/ 2/ 21.
19. 8/ 2/ 20.
12.6/13/ 11.
.6/13/ 1.
53. 8/ 3/ .94
3.0/ 3/ .05
4. 1/ 2/ 4.
.2/ 2/ 0.
14.11
3.
10.
.90
3.9
.12
.92
1238.3
.59
.02
.16
213.1
.10
9.13
504.
5.81
.973 .975
.945( .
204. 9/
12.04
9.24
DIOXIDE G/KM
WSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN 8/KM
4
STABILIZED
784.9 (30.9)
784.9 (30.9)
43.3 (110.0)
69448.
129.6 ( 4576.)
19. 8/ 2/ 20.
20. M 2/ 20.
5.0/13/ 5.
.5/13/ 0,
35. 7/ 3/ .60
t.8/ 3/ .03
1.2/ 2/ 1.
.4/ 2/ 0.
22.16
1 .
4.
.57
.8
.05
.60
1357.9
.21
.01
.10
218.1
.03
9.34
868.
6.23
.976
928)
0.00
3-BAS (4-1
226.6 ( 22:
9.75 ( 9
.05 (
.74 (
.12 (
9.64)
.06)
.74)
.10)
D-6
-------
TABLE D-6. TEST NO. 856 EMISSIONS RESULTS
TEST NO. 656 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 LU05. CIO) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 747.92 MM HG<29.43 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 26. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BA6 NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STO. CU. METRES (SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRO METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF, DRY
DFC, WET (DRY)
TOT VOL (SCM) / SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/1OOKM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 856
BAROMETER MM HG 747.5
HUMIDITY G/KG 4.5
TEMPERATURE DEG C 22.8
FTP - VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS -EM-468-F
PROJECT 05-4493-001
VEHICLE NO.8J
DATE 2/ 9/82
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 2
DYNO NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 22.8 DEG C(73.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 4.5 GM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1134. KG( 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAO LOAD 5.7 KW< 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-468-F
ODOMETER 14458. KM( 8984. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
43.3 (110.0)
40456.
76.4 ( 2699.)
35. 9/ 2/ 36.
6.6/ 2/ 7.
87.2/13/ 87.
.8/12/ 1.
58. I/ 3/ 1.03
2.7/ 3/ .04
13. 3/ 2/ 13.
.3/ 2/ 0.
13.20
30.
84.
.99
13.0
1.30
7.43
1381.3
1.58
.23
1.28
238.4
.27
9.88
504.
5.79
.983 .989
.943( .9
207. 9/ 0
11.99
9.53
2
STABILIZED
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
43.3 (110.0)
69568.
131.4 ( 4641.)
6.8/ 2/ 7.
6.4/ 2/ 6.
4.1/13/ 4.
1.1/13/ 1.
37. O/ 3/ .62
3.0/ 3/ .05
2.7/ 2/ 3.
.2/ 2/ 0.
21.97
1.
3.
.58
2.5
.05
.41
1391.9
.52
.01
.07
224.7
.08
9.21
868.
6.20
.986
35)
.00
CARBON
FUEL C(
3
HOT TRANSIENT
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
43.3 (110.0)
40406.
76.3 ( 2695.)
8.2/ 2/ 8.
5.5/ 2/ 6.
11.3/13/ 10.
.6/13/ 1.
51. 8/ 3/ .90
2.6/ 3/ .04
5.4/ 2/ 5.
.2/ 2/ 0.
15.16
3.
9.
.86
5.2
.13
.84
1208.6
.63
.02
.15
209.8
.11
8.61
504.
5.76
.984 .985
.948< .
207. 8/
11.98
8.71
DIOXIDE GAM
JNSUMPTION L/1 OOKM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) GAM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOX IDE 6/KM
OF NITROGEN GAM
4
STABILIZED
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
42.2 (108.0)
69480.
131.5 ( 4644.)
6.3/ 2/ 6.
3.8/ 2/ 6.
6.9/13/ 6.
2.6/13/ 2.
35. 3/ 3/ .59
2.5/ 3/ .04
1.4/ 2/ 1.
.3/ 2/ 0.
23.12
1.
4.
.55
1.1
.06
.59
1335.4
.23
.01
.10
214.8
.04
8.81
868.
6.22
.986
940)
0.00
3-BAG (4-BA6)
223.4 ( 220.5)
9.18 ( 9.07)
.06 ( .06)
.34 ( .35)
.13 ( .12)
TEST NO. 856 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 LU05. C1D) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 748.54 MM HG(29.47 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 19. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER OIF P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKG'RD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER,
HUMIDITY,
TEMPERATURE,
CARBON DIOXIDE,
FUEL CONSUMPTION,
MM HG
G/KG
OEG C
GAM
L/1OOKM
HYDROCARBONS, GAM
CARBON MONOXIDE, GAM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, GAM
HFET - VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS -EM-468-F
PROJECT 05-4493-001
VEHICLE NO.85
DATE 2/ 9/82
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 3
CVS NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP. 23.9 DEG 0(75.0 DEO F)
A8S. HUMIDITY 3.5 GM/KG
HFET
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
43.3 (110.0)
61219.
117.6 ( 4151.)
15.4/ 2/ 15.
5.9/ 2/ 6.
76.2/13/ 75.
2.5/13/ 2.
76.O/ 3/ 1.39
2.5/ 3/ .04
7.3/ 2/ 7.
.5/ 2/ 1.
9.81
to.
71.
1 .35
6.9
.68
9.65
2911.9
1.25
765.
.898 ( .893)
1.000 ( .982)
117.6
0.00
15.67
856
748.5
3.5
23.9
185.8
7.66
.04
.62
.08
TEST WEIGHT 1134. KG( 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 3.7 KW< 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-468-F
ODOMETER 14482. KM( 8999. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .81
D-7
-------
TABLE D-7. TEST NO. 857 EMISSIONS RESULTS
TEST NO. 957 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L(105. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 747.01 MM HG(29.4t IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 18. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER OIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20ON. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
;IOX CONCENTRATION PPM
hC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/
08)
35)
14)
D-8
-------
TABLE D-8. TEST NO. 858 EMISSIONS RESULTS
FTP - VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS -EDS NAPHTHA BLEND
PROJECT 05-4493-001
TEST NO. 898 RUN I
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 UI05. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 736.60 MM HGI29.00 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 28. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20HN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20IIN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. CCDEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION Br CB L/1OOKM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF, DRV
DFC, WET (DRY)
TOT VOL (SCM) / SAM BLR (SCM>
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/tOOKM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 858
BAROMETER MM HG 736.6
HUMIDITY G/KG 5.4
TEMPERATURE DEG C 23.9
VEHICLE NO.89
DATE 3/ 5/82
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 2
DYNO NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 23.9 DEG C(75.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 5.4 GM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1134. KG( 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 5.7 KW( 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-488-F
ODOMETER 15796. KM( 9815. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .8!
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
42.2 (108.0)
40676.
75.8 ( 2677.)
44. 8/ 2/ 45.
11.4/ 2/ 11.
82.4/12/ 197.
.5/12/ 1.
55. 6/ 3/ .98
3. I/ 3/ .05
17. 5/ 2/ 18.
.8/ 2/ 1.
13.29
34.
190.
.93
16.8
1.52
16.79
1294.0
2.07
.26
2.89
222.5
.36
9.67
507.
5.82
.982 .984
.942( .
205. 7/
12.13
9.49
2
STABILIZED
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
40.6 (105.0)
69470.
129.9 ( 4586.)
12. I/ 2/ 12.
10. O/ 2/ 10.
8.0/13/ 7.
.9/13/ 1.
37. 3/ 3/ .63
3. 1/ 3/ .05
3.8/ 2/ 4.
.8/ 2/ 1.
21.09
3.
6.
.58
3.0
.20
.95
1385.5
.64
.03
.15
219.4
.10
9.32
867.
6.32
.989
934)
0.00
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
42.2 (108.0)
40490.
75.5 ( 2665.)
16. 2/ 2/ 16.
9.0/ 2/ 9.
34. 4/1 3/ 32.
.7/13/ 1.
51 .B/ 3/ .90
2.7/ 3/ .04
9.7/ 2/ 10.
.7/ 2/ 1.
14.65
8.
30.
.86
9.0
.35
2.67
1193.1
1.11
.06
.46
204.7
.19
8.73
505.
5.83
.982 .984
.946( .
205. 2/
12.15
8.93
DIOXIDE GAM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/1 OOKM
HYOROC)
CARBON
OXIDES
tRBONS (THC) G/KM
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
4
STABILIZED
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
41.7 (107.0)
69550.
129.8 ( 4582.)
10. 5/ 2/ 11.
8.3/ 2/ 8.
10.7/13/ 10.
.7/13/ 1.
36. 6/ 3/ .61
3.0/ 3/ .05
2.9/ 2/ 3.
.6/ 2/ 1.
21.53
3.
9.
.57
2.3
.20
1.34
1337.0
.49
.03
.21
214.5
.08
9.12
868.
6.33
.985
937)
0.00
3-BA6 (4-BAG)
216.0 ( 214.6)
9.23 ( 9.17)
.09 ( .09)
.80 ( .82)
.18 ( .17)
HFET - VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS -EOS NAPHTHA BLEND
PROJECT 05-4493-001
TEST NO. 858 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L(105. CIO) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 737.11 MM HGI29.02 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 29. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER OIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET f MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. CCDEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANSE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGftD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER,
HUMIDITY,
TEMPERATURE,
CARBON DIOXIDE,
FUEL CONSUMPTION,
MM HG
G/KG
DEG C
G/KM
L/1OOKM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
VEHICLE NO.85
DATE 3/ 5/82
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 3
CVS NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP. 24.4 OEG CC76.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 5.7 GM/KG
HFET
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
42.2 (108.0)
61243.
116.0 ( 4096.)
25.4/ 2/ 25.
8.0/ 2/ 8.
82.6/12/ 197.
.2/12/ 0.
73.9/ 3/ 1.34
2.8/ 3/ .04
9.I/ 2/ 9.
.6/ 2/ 1.
9.73
18.
190.
1.31
3.6
1.24
25.64
2772.5
1.63
765.
.897 ( .889)
1.000 ( .978)
116.0
0.00
16.42
858
737.1
5.7
24.4
168.9
7.28
.08
1 .56
.10
TEST WEIGHT 1134. KGC 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 5.7 KW< 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-488-F
ODOMETER 15820. KM( 9830. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR
.86
D-9
-------
TABLE D-9. TEST NO. 859 EMISSIONS RESULTS
FTP - VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS -EDS NAPHTHA BLEND
PROJECT 05-4493-001
TEST NO. 859 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 LU05. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 74S.03 MM HG(29.45 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 33. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
SLOWER OIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20IIN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC M*SS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF, DRY
DFC, WET (DRY)
TOT VOL (SCM) / SAM BLR (SC>
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 059
BAROMETER MM HO 748.0
HUMIDITY G/KG 6.0
TEMPERATURE DEG C 23.3
VEHICLE NO.85
DATE 3/ 8/82
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO.
DYNO NO. 3
TEST WEIGHT 1134. KG( 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 5.7 KW( 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-488-F
ODOMETER 15849. KM( 9848. MILES)
DRY BULB TEMP.
ABS. HUMIDITY
23.3 DEB C(74.0 DEG F)
6.0 GH/KG
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR
.87
1
COLD TRANSIENT
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
42.8 (109.0)
40514.
76.1 ( 2686.)
45. 6/ 2X 46.
13. 3/ 2/ 13.
81.0/12/ 192.
1.6/12/ 3.
58. 1/ 3/ 1.03
3.4/ 3/ .05
19. O/ 2/ 19.
.B/ 2/ 1.
12.67
33.
184.
.98
18.3
1.49
16.25
1361 .1
2.30
.26
2.80
234.7
.40
10.18
505.
5. SO
2
STABILIZED
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
41.7 (107.0)
69589.
130.9 ( 4623.)
13. 5/ 2/ 14.
11.6/ 2/ 12.
10.2/13/ 9.
2.7/13/ 2.
38. I/ 3/ .64
3.0/ 3/ .05
3.4/ 2/ 3.
.7/ 2/ 1.
20.60
2.
7.
.60
2.7
.19
1.02
1435.4
.59
.03
.16
230.9
.10
9.81
868.
6.22
.979 .982 .983
.940(
207. O/
12.
9.
.930)
0.00
02
99
CARBON
FUEL C(
3
HOT TRANSIENT
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
42.2 (108.0)
40422.
76.0 < 2682.)
16. 2/ 2/ 16.
10. 3/ 2/ 10.
31.7/13/ 29.
1.8/13/ 2.
52. 5X 3/ .92
3.4/ 3/ .05
8.5/ 2/ 9.
.6/ 2/ 1.
14.44
7.
27.
.87
7.9
.29
2.38
1205.9
1 .00
.05
.41
208.7
.17
8.89
505.
5.78
.980 .982
.94S( .
206. 8/
12.01
9.18
DIOXIDE G/KM
JNSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE Q/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
4
STABILIZED
787.4 (31.0)
787.4 (31.0)
41.7 (107.0)
69528.
130.8 ( 4618.)
11. 8/ 2/ 12.
9.3/ 2/ 9.
V3.7/I3/ 14.
1.5/13/ 1.
37. 3/ 3/ .63
3.4/ 3/ .05
2.2/ 2/ 2.
.6/ 2/ 1.
21 .07
3.
13.
.58
1.6
.23
1 .92
1364.5
.35
.04
.31
222.1
.06
9.45
868.
6.23
.983
934)
0.00
3-BAG (4-BA6)
225.6 223.0)
9.64 9.53)
.08 .08)
.78 .82)
.18 .17)
D-10
-------
TABLE D-10. TEST NO. 860 EMISSIONS RESULTS
TEST NO. 860 RUN I
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L(I05. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 742.70 MM HGI29.24 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 25. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H2CHIN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. CfDEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STO. CU. METRES
-------
TABLE D-ll. TEST NO. 861 EMISSIONS RESULTS
TEST NO. 861 RUN
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L<105. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 740.66 MM HG(29.I6 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 27. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIF P MM. H2CHIN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. CIDEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
THC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
THC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRO METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRO METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
THC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
THC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
THC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
CO 2 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF, DRY
DFC, WET (DRY)
TOT VOL (SCM) / SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/IOOKM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 861
BAROMETER MM HG 740.7
HUMIDITY G/KG 5.0
TEMPERATURE DEG C 23.3
- VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS - EM-542-F
PROJECT 05-4493-001
VEHICLE NO.85
DATE 2/21/83
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 2
DYNO NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 23.3 DEG C(74.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 9.0 GM/KG
TEST HEIGHT 1134. KG( 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 5.7 KW( 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-542-F
ODOMETER 16441. KM<10216. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .8*
1
COLD TRANSIENT
825.9 (32.5)
825.5 (32.5)
43.3 (110.0)
40641.
74.8 ( 2641.)
52. 3/ 2/ 52.
9.0/ 2/ 9.
96.2/12/ 242.
•6/12/ 1.
96. 2/1 1/ .9888
6.9/1I/ .0412
37. 9/ 2/ 37.9
.7/ 2/ .7
12.92
44.
235.
.9507
37.3
1.92
20.42
1301.7
4.48
.33
3.47
221.3
.76
9.95
507.
5.88
2
STABILIZED
825:9 (32.3)
823.5 (32.5)
43.3 (110. 0)
69424.
127.7 ( 4511.)
13. 6/ 2/ 14.
7.9/ 2/ 8.
5.7/13/ 3.
I.3/I3/ 1.
68.4/11/ .3928
6. 8/1 I/ .0406
11. 6/ 2/ 11.6
.8/ 2/ .8
22.11
6.
4.
.9940
10.8
.45
.98
1295.7
2.23
.07
.09
208.4
.36
9.11
868.
6.22
.982 .984 .985
.943(
202. 5/
12.
9.
.933)
0.00
to
52
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
825.5 (32.5)
825.5 (32.9)
43.3 (110.0)
40467.
74.5 ( 2629.)
25. 4/ 2/ 25.
7.9/ 2/ 8.
35.I/13/ 32.
1.4/13/ 1.
88. 4/1 1/ .8637
6. 8/1 I/ .0406
29. I/ 2/ 29.1
.9/ 2/ .9
13.12
18.
30.
.8257
28.3
.78
2.64
1125.7
3.38
.14
.46
195.8
.59
8.60
506.
5.75
.983 .989
4
• STABILIZED
825.5 (32.5)
829.5 (32.5)
43.3 (110.0)
69390.
127.6 ( 4906.)
I3.9/ 2/ 14.
7.7/ 2/ 8.
5.6/13/ 9.
I.O/I3/ 1.
67. 4/1 I/ .5808
6. 8/1 I/ .0406
11. 5/ 2/ 11.9
.9/ 2/ .9
22.96
6.
4.
.9420
10.6
.46
.61
1266.1
2.18
.07
.10
204.0
.35
8.92
867.
6.21
.986
.948( .939)
202. I/ 0
11.95
8.76
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/IOOKM
HYDROO
CARBON
OXIDES
IRBONS (THC) G/KM
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
.00
3-6AG (4-BAG)
207.7 ( 206.4)
9.14 ( 9.09)
.14 ( .14)
.90 ( .90)
.51 ( .50)
TEST NO. 861 RUN
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L(105. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 740.16 MM HG(29.I4 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 27. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H2CHIN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20CIN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
THC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
THC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
THC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
THC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CO2 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
OFC, WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER,
HUMIDITY,
TEMPERATURE,
CARBON DIOXIDE,
FUEL CONSUMPTION,
MM HG
G/KG
OEG C
G/KM
L/IOOKM
FET - VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS - EM-542-F
PROJECT 09-4493-001
VEHICLE NO.89
DATE 2/21/83
BAG CART NO. I
DYNO NO. 3
CVS NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP. 23.3 OEG C(74.0 OEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 5.0 GM/KG
FET
829.5 (32.9)
825.5 (32.5)
43.3 (110.0)
61137.
112.4 ( 3970.)
24. I/ 2/ 24.
7.7/ 2/ 8.
57.3/13/ 59.
.9/13/ I.
72.O/ 3/1.3090
2.9/ 3/ .0382
17.4/ 2/ 17.4
TEST WEIGHT M34. KG( 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 9.7 KM< 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-942-F
ODOMETER 16465. KM(10231. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .84
HYDROCARBONS, (THC) G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
1.0/ 2/
10.01
17.
52.
1 . 2706
16.5
1. 12
6.81
2615.6
2.98
765.
.900 ( .
1.000 ( .
112.4
0.00
16.40
861
740.2
5.0
23.3
159.5
7.00
.07
.42
.18
1.0
892)
978)
D-12
-------
TABLE D-12. TEST NO. 862 EMISSIONS RESULTS
TEST NO. 862 RUN
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L(I05. CIO) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 740.41 MM HG(29.15 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 33. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLONER OIF P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H2O)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. CiOEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
THC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
THC BCKGRO METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRO METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRO METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
THC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
THC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
THC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/tOOKM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF, DRY
DFC, WET (DRY)
TOT VOL (SCM) / SAM BLR
-------
TABLE D-13. TEST NO. 863 EMISSIONS RESULTS
TEST NO. 86J RUN
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L(105. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION A]
BAROMETER 740.41 Ml
RELATIVE HUMIDITY
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
I HG(29.15
48. PCT
IN HG)
BLOWER OIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. OEG. CIDEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
THC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
THC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
THC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
THC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CO2 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
THC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF, DRY
DFC. WET (DRY)
TOT VOL (SCM) / SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/IOOKM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 863
BAROMETER MM HG 740.4
HUMIDITY G/KG 9.1
TEMPERATURE OEG C 23.9
- VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS - EM-543-F
PROJECT 05-4493-001
VEHICLE NO.85
DATE 3/ 1/83
BAG CART NO. I / CVS NO. 2
OYNO NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 23.9 DEC C(75.0 OEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 9.1 GM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1134. KG( 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 5.7 KW( 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-543-F
ODOMETER 17072. KM(10608. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .95
1
COLO TRANSIENT
812.8 (32.0)
812.8 (32.0)
44.4 (112.0)
40461.
74.4 ( 2628.)
70.6/ 2/ 71.
13. I/ 2/ 13.
67. 3/1 I/ 278.
.9/I1/ 3.
58. 5/ 3/1.0332
4. I/ 3/ .0629
28. 7/ 21 28.7
.8/ 2/ .8
12.45
59.
266.
.9753
28.0
2.55
23.04
1329.0
3.78
.44
4.00
231.0
.66
9.99
904.
5.75
.975 .977
2
STABILIZED
825.3 (32.5)
812.8 (32.0)
42.2 (108.0)
69520.
128.3 ( 4531.)
16. 2/ 2/ 16.
I3.3/ 2/ 13.
19.2/13/ 17.
2. 8/13/ 3.
73. 3/1 1/ .6536
10. 5/1 1/ .0643
21. 4/ I/ 6.4
2.7/ I/ .8
20.23
4.
15.
.5926
5.6
.27
2. IB
1392.0
1.31
.04
.33
224.5
.21
9.43
868.
6.20
.978
.939( .925)
202. 11 0
11.95
9.70
.00
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
812.8 (32.0)
812.8 (32.0)
43.9 (ttl.O)
40354.
74.3 ( 2623.)
23.0/ 2/ 23.
I3.2/ 2/ 13.
45.0/13/ 42.
2.9/13/ 3.
92. 2/1 1/ .9229
10. 0/1 1/ .0610
73. 6/ I/ 21.9
3.0/ I/ .9
14.30
11.
38.
.8662
21.1
.47
3.32
1178.2
2.84
.08
.58
204.4
.49
8.61
504.
5.76
.976 .978
4
STABILIZED
825.5 (32.5!)
812.8 (32.0)
42.8 (109.0)
69424.
128.0 ( 4520.)
15. 4/ 2/ 15.
I2.9/ 2/ 13.
33.7/13/ 31.
2.5/13/ 2.
71. 5/1 I/ .6309
9. 7/1 1/ .0590
J1.3/ I/ 9.3
2.6/ I/ .8
20.91
3.
28.
.5747
8.6
.23
4.19
1346.8
1.99
.04
.68
217.3
.32
9.13
868.
6.20
.979
.944( .929)
202. 3/ 0
11.96
8.89
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/IOOKM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
.00
3-BAG (4-BAG)
220.3 ( 218.2)
9.32 ( 9.24)
.14 ( .13)
1.17 ( 1.27)
.38 ( .41)
TEST NO. 863 RUN
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 LOOS. CIO) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 740.41 MM HG(29.I5 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 42. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER OIF P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20ON. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
THC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
THC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRO METER/RANGE/PPM
CO2 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
CO2 BCKGRO METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
THC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
THC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CO2 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER,
HUMIDITY,
TEMPERATURE,
CARBON DIOXIDE,
FUEL CONSUMPTION,
MM HG
G/KG
DEG C
G/KM
L/IOOKM
HYDROCARBONS, (THC) G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
- VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS - EM-S43-F
PROJECT 05-4493-001
VEHICLE NO.85
DATE 3/ 1/83
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 3
CVS NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP. 24.4 DEG C(76.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 8.2 GM/KG
FFT
825.3 (32.5)
825.5 (32.5)
44.4 (112.0)
61207.
112.4 ( 3967.)
25.2/ 2/ 25.
II.8/ 2/ 12.
52.3/12/ 112.
I.O/I2/ 2.
74.O/ 3/1.3459
3.3/ 3/ .0505
70.7/ I/ 21.0
3.0/ I/ .9
9.78
15.
106.
1.3006
20.2
.96
13.81
2675.4
4.01
766.
.898 ( .886)
1.000 ( .974)
112.4
0.00
16.34
863
740.4
8.2
24.4
163.7
6.92
.06
.84
.25
TEST WEIGHT 1134. KG( 2500. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 5.7 KW( 7.7 HP)
GASOLINE EM-545-F
ODOMETER 17094. KM(10622. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .92
D-14
-------
TABLE D-14. TEST NO. 864 EMISSIONS RESULTS
TEST NO. 864 RUN
VEHICLE MODEL 81 VW RABBIT
ENGINE 1.7 L(105. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 732.03 MM HG(28.82 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 52. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER OIF P MM. H2CHIN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20ON. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DE6. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
THC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
THC BCKGRO METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM.
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRO METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRO METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
THC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
THC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
THC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY C8 L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF, DRY
DFC, WET (DRY)
TOT VOL
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA 460/3-83-008
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION>NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Characterization of Exhaust Emissions From Operation of
a Light-Duty Gasoline Vehicle on Alternate Source
Gasoline Fuels
5. REPORT DATE
Auqust 1983
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Lawrence R. Smith
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORG'VNIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Southwest Research Institute
6220 Culebra Road
San Antonio, TX 78284
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-03-2377
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final Report (7/81-6/83)
Office of Mobile Source
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Air Pollution Control
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
This report describes the laboratory effort to characterize regulated and unregulated
exhaust emissions from a 1981 Volkswagen Rabbit operating on Amoco Indolene gasoline
and five alternate-source fuels or fuel blends. These five alternate-source fuels
included Mobil MTG gasoline, Simulated Coal gasoline, EDS Naphtha blend, Sasol
blend (lead chemically removed), and H-Coal Naphtha blend. The test vehicle was
operated over the Light-Duty Federal Test Procedure (FTP) and the Highway Fuel Economy
Driving Schedule (HFET). Exhaust constituents measured, in addition to the regulated
emissions, included aldehydes and ketones, particulate, individual hydrocarbons, sulfa
ammonia, cyanide, organic amines, organic sulfides, phenols, nitrosamines, benzo(a)-
pyrene and major elements in particulate.
:e
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Air Pollution
Exhaust Emissions
Motor Vehicles
Alternate Fuels
Emission Characterization
Emission Test Procedures
Light-Duty Vehicles
Fuel Effects
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
111
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
1. REPORT NUMBER
Insert the EPA report number as it appears on the cover of the publication.
2. LEAVE BLANK
3. RECIPIENTS ACCESSION NUMBER
Reserved for use by each report recipient.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Title should indicate clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, and be displayed prominently. Set subtitle, if used, in smaller
type or otherwise subordinate it to main title. When a report is prepared in more than one volume, repeat the primary title, add volume
number and include subtitle for the specific title.
5. REPORT DATE
Each report shall carry a date indicating at least month and year. Indicate the basis on which tt-w^setected (e.g., date of issue, date of
approval, date of preparation, etc.).
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
Leave blank.
7. AUTHOR(S)
Give name(s) in conventional order (John R. Doe, J. Robert Doe, etc.}. List author's affiliation if it differs from the performing organi-
zation.
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Give name, street, city, state, and ZIP code. List no more than two levels of an organizational hirearchy.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
Use the program element number under which the report was prepared. Subordinate numbers may be included in parentheses.
11. CONTRACT/G RANT NUMBE R
Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Include ZIP code.
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Indicate interim final, etc., and if applicable, dates covered.
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
Leave blank.
IS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Enter information not included elsewhere but useful, such as: Prepared in cooperation with, Translation of, Presented at conference of,
To be published in, Supersedes, Supplements, etc.
16. ABSTRACT
Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summary of the most significant information contained in the report. If the report contains a
significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
(a) DESCRIPTORS - Select from the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms the proper authorized terms that identify the major
concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used as index entries for cataloging.
(b) IDENTIFIERS AND OPEN-ENDED TERMS - Use identifiers for project names, code names, equipment designators, etc. Use open-
ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.
(c) COSATI FIELD GROUP - Field and group assignments are to be taken from the 1965 COS ATI Subject Category List. Since the ma-
jority of documents are multidisciplinary in nature, the Primary Field/Group assignment(s) will be specific discipline, area of human
endeavor, or type of physical object. The application(s) will be cross-referenced with secondary Field/Group assignments that will follow
the primary posting(s).
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Denote releasability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for example "Release Unlimited." Cite any availability to
the public, with address and price.
19. & 20. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
DO NOT submit classified reports to the National Technical Information service.
21. NUMBER OF PAGES
Insert the total number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but exclude distribution list, if any.
22. PRICE
Insert the price set by the National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known.
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73) (Reverse)
------- |