72-1
Exhaust Emissions From Controlled
and Uncontrolled Vehicles Using
;he "Pollution Master" Emission Control Device
August 1971
John C. Thomson
Office of Air Programs
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-------
Background
The exhaust emission characteristics of the "Pollution Master"
device on both controlled and uncontrolled vehicles have been
requested by Congressional, Federal, and State sources requiring
a repeat of the tests run in 1969 on a Post Office vehicle .
(Appendix A).
Device
The uncontrolled vehicle used for this most recent test was a
Government-owned 1963 Chevrolet V-8 with a manual transmission.
The device used on this vehicle was supplied by Pollution Master
of Kentucky-Tennessee and was installed by Government employees
using the instructions furnished with the kit. The controlled
vehicle used for this test was supplied by the Louisville
Courier-Journal and was a 1968 Ford Falcon. This vehicle used
a 200 cubic-inch six cylinder engine and manual transmission.
The device installation was carried out by an outlet selling
"Pollution Master" in Louisville, Kentucky. It is assumed that
this installation, which was paid for by the newspaper, was a
typical installation and was representative.
The "Pollution Master" is a two part system containing an
"exhaust scavenger" and a "crankcase scavenger". The exhaust
scavenger is a pipe with a one-way valve that is connected to
the exhaust through holes that must be drilled and tapped into
the exhaust manifold. Under any condition of low pressure in
the manifold, air will be drawn through a valve and filter from
the engine compartment into the manifold. The crankcase scavenger
is a large diameter tube containing plates with drilled holes
to allow air passage and -a filter. This unit is installed
in the positive crankcase ventilation (PCV) line with the interior
working parts of the PCV removed. This allows an increase in
air flow at idle as there is no idle restriction in the crank-
case scavenger as is normally found in the PCV system. The
total effect of this device is to admit additional air to the
manifold thus providing a leaner fuel-air mixture to the engine.
Some air is also admitted to the exhaust manifold thus diluting
the exhaust.
In the Government installation of the "Paser Magnum" the only
portion of the emission control system disconnected was the
PCV valve as required in the instructions. On the vehicle
converted by "Pollution Master" the PCV valve was disconnected
and the heat stove that supplies warm air to the carburetor
was cut into to provide clearance for the device. The effect
of this change in the system is unknown but considered minimal.
One advertised purpose of the system is: "To meet and exceed
existing standards for automotive emission control."
-------
2.
Test Program
For evaluation purposes the Federal emission test procedures
for certification of new cars for 1971 and tlie procedure for
1972 certification were used. The 1971 test is the open cycle
7-mode test using infrared (NDIR) instruments as specified in
the Federal Register. In addition a continuous NDIR NO analyzer
was used. The Federal standards for new vehicles using the 1971
test procedure are HC=2.2 grams per vehicle mile (gpm) and
C0=23 gpm. There is no Federal standard for N02. The 1972 test
uses the closed, self-weighting constant volume sampling tech-
nique for sample collection and the exhaust is analyzed using
a flame ionization detector for hydrocarbons, NDIR for CO and
C02, and chemiluminscence for oxides of nitrogen. The Federal
standards for new vehicles using the 1972 test procedure are
HC=3,4 gpm and C0=39 gpm. A standard for N02-3 gpm has been
set for 1973 vehicles. The vehicle was tested alternately with
"Pollution Master" installed and with the vehicle returned to
original condition. In addition, fuel was weighed on three
of the tests using the 1968 Falcon to determine any fuel
economy effect.
Results
The data shown in Table I compares the 1963 Chevy with the
"Pollution Master" device to the same vehicle without the
device using the 1972 test procedure. In this table the results
are listed in the order that the tests were run. The first
two tests were run with "Pollution Master" installed, the next
four with "Pollution Master" removed, the next four with
"Pollution Master" re-installed and the last four with "Pollution
Master" removed. There appears to he a slight reduction of CO
and HC with the "Pollution Master" although the values vary
considerably.
Table II shows the results from "Pollution Master" and the
baseline tests on the 1968 Falcon using the 1972 test procedure.
As on the Chevrolet there appears to be a slight reduction in
emissions from "Pollution Master" although again the results arc
so varied that a percentage reduction cannot be accurately
calculated.
Table III compares the 1968 Falcon with and without "Pollution
Master" using the 1971 test procedure. These results show a
more consistent improvement in emissions with "Pollution Master".
However, it should be remembered that this obsolete test pro-
cedure was dropped as being a less meaningful way of measuring
exhaust emissions.
-------
Conclusions
1. "Pollution Master" emission reductions using the latest
test procedures are minimal.
2. Equivalent results could be obtained by using a very lean
idle setting as shown in .the GM retrofit report #71-2.
3. There was no fuel economy improvement observed with
"Pollution Master" in our limited tests.
-------
Table I
1972 Federal Emission Tests
1963 Chevrolet V-8, Manual Transmission
All Results in Grams Per Mile
NO 2
CI
HC
FID
7.4
7.5
9.8
8.5
8.2
8.4
6.7
8.5
5.9
7.2
7.0
7.8
13.1
7.6
CO
NDIR
Pollution Master
99
94
Stock Vehicle Basel
103
108
98
-96
Pollution Master
81
88
83
88
Stock Vehicle Basel
95
99
43
79
C0?
NDltf
Tests
451
497
ine Tests
446
454
437
465
Tests
446
394
434
434
ine Tests
403
439
464
448
1.3
1.8
1.2
1.3
1.9
2.3
1.8
-------
Table II
1972 Federal Emission Tests
1968 Falcon 6,Manual Transmission
All Emission Results in Grams Per Mile
HC
FID
CO C02
NDIR NDIR
NO 2
CI
Fuel
Used KG
Pollution Master Tests
3.
2.
3.
6
6
1
38 434
24 472
25 509
7.2
5.4
6.6
1.7
1.9
Stock Vehicle Baseline Tests
3.6 32 ' 410 5.2 1.6
3.3 37 479 5.7
-------
Table III
1971 Federal Emission Tests
1968 Falcon 6 Manual Transmission
All Results in Grams Per Mile
HC CO NO
IR IR IR
Pollution Master Tests
2.3 24 3.9
Stock Vehicle Baseline Tests
2.8 29 3.7
3.2 29 4.1
-------
TO :
THROUGH:
FROM :
UNITED-STATES GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WF.LFARf
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
CONSUMER PROTECTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICE
National Air Pollution Control Administration
Bureau of Abatement and Control
Division of Motor Vehicle Pollution Control
Chief, Emission Control Evaluation Branch DATE: February 27, 1969
Chief, Emission Control Evaluation Section
Senior Sanitary Engineer, ECES
SUBJECT : "Pollution Master" Device - Evaluation on a Post Office Vehicle
At the request of NAPCA and the Post Office Department (P.O.D,) the
"Pollution Master System" has been evaluated for control of exhaust
emissionso Pollution Master is manufactured by Automotive Emissions
Control Corp. (AEG) of Louisville, Kentucky.. The system consists of
two parts: one, a replacement for the "PCV" valve, which regulates
the flow of crankcaee blowby gases by a "Venturi" principle; and the
other is a one-way valve which allows air to enter the exhaust
manifold during moments when the pressure there is below atmospheric.
Mr. Jim Patton, Mr. Tony Leone, and Mr. Ron Daley of AEC were in
attendance throughout the testing except for the rerun of the final
baseline. NAPCA was represented by the author and Mr. H.A. Ashby.
Work at the Ann Arbor Post Office Garage was coordinated by Mr. George
Porter of P0O.DC
On Monday, February 3> 19&9» Mr« Ashby and I met with the representatives
of AEC at the Post Office Garage in Ann Arbor to inspect the vehicle and
to obtain some preliminary data. The PoO.Do vehicle was a 1967 Ford
Fairlanc station wagon equipped with a 200 CID, 6 cylinder engine and
automatic transmission.
The vehicle had approximately 37,000 miles at the start of our tests.
In regular service, this vehicle is used for special deliveries, so
that the mileage is accumulated under widely varying conditions. Post
Office records showed the following recent maintenance:
At 29»51^ miles - new spark plugs
30,9^2 miles - tune-up to cpec's
Idle Speed: 500 rpm - drive
Dwell: 38°
Basic Timing: 5° ETC
Spark Adv: 1;2°
A/F (Sun Instr.): lU.0/1
35,11*8 miles (12-31-68) - new ignition points
36,W38 miles ( 1-23-69) ~ new spark plug wires
:LP ELIMINATE WASTE
JTT3TY7-
COST REDUCTION PROGRAM
-------
The following information was obtained on this initial inspection;
Idle Speed: 5^0 rpra - drive
(Sun Instr) A/F: 13»2/1
Compression Pressure (2) Spark Plug Gap
. Cyl. No. 1 173 psi .035" (3)
Cyl. No. 2 160 " .035
" 3 170 " .035 (l>
" 4 130 " , check 135 .036
" 5 178 " .035
11 " 6 130 " , check 150 .036
The original test sequence called for two emission baselines to bracket
the performance with the device installed. The vehicle was at that time
tested in the "as received condition". After the emissions test, the
engine was run for an additional two hours with the device installed, *
Cylinder compression was then checked, with the following results ;'
Cyl.
n
it
it
n
n
No.
n
ii
n
n
n
1
2
3
h
5
6
175
165
175
175
175
165
psi
n
H
II
II
II
Note the compression increase on cylinders k and 6 when compared to initial
compression check » AEC personnel felt this was due to the cleaning effect
of their device. There is the possibility, however, that the hydraulic
valve lifters might have been sticking at the cranking speeds. AEC
personnel objected to this test sequence, since they felt it did not allow
time for mileage accumulation with the device installed. They also felt
this was necessary in order to demonstrate the device's maximum
effectiveness. Two other events, however, cast doubt on the value of the
data obtained in this first sequence. First, the vehicle had a persistent
intermittent misfire which was due to neither the spark plugs nor the
emissions control device. Second, and most important, there was a leak in
the tubing connecting the "Pollution Master" crankcase ventilation system
to the intake manifold which leaned the mixture out significantly,, This
leak was not detected until the second installation of the device. The
data from these first three tests are included in Tables I (Data by 1968
Procedure) and II (Data by 1970 Procedure).
Post Office and NAPCA personnel decided that a second series of tests was
necessary with the misfire cured, which included provision for mileage
accumulation with the device installed. This new test series was discussed
with the AEC representatives. Mr. Patton indicated they would be happy if
they could have the car for one (l) day rather than allow the vehicle to
accumulate the mileage in normal post office usage. A compromise was
reached, AEC personnel would have the vehicle for one (l) day (Saturday)
This spark plug had very heavy deposits
20 psi allowable variation (FOMOCO)
This spark plug had a cracked porcelain and was replaced with a new one
-------
and the following day the vehicle would go into normal post office service.
AEG personnel also requested that they be allowed to adjust the idle air-
fuel ratio (A/F) to approximately lUoO/1 which is where their system was
optimized. This was granted. The new teat sequence was:
1. A new baseline with the misfire cured and the engine operating to
everyone's satisfaction.
2» A test with the device installed and the A/F adjusted to approximately
14.0/1 to AEC's satisfaction.,
3. A second test with device installed after mileage accumulation, as
discussed.
k* A final baseline without the device, but with the same A/F as when
the device was installed
In order to cure the misfire and put the engine in proper operating condition
the following maintenance was performed:
Installed new: Carbon core spark plug wires
distributor cap
vacuum advance mechanism
air filter
ignition points
The distributor was disassembled, cleaned and set to specifications. Idle
A/F was checked but not adjustcclo All this was performed under the
supervision of Mr0 Porter of the Post Office Department. -The vehicle was
now in proper operating condition with no misfireo Except for the number
one spark plug, the original spark plugs were left in the engine. With
the vehicle in this condition, the new baseline emissions test was run.
The device was then installed. At this point the leak was detected and
all new hoses were installed to correct it. The idle A/F was set at
approximately lU.0/1 to the satisfaction of AEG personnel, and tested in
this condition. Mileage was accumulated as discussed earlier, after
which the A/F and idle speed were checked and found to be as set previously.
The number 3 spark plug was examined and the heavy deposit noted earlier
had apparently been removed during operation with the device installed. The
second emissions test with the device was performed. The device was then
removed and the A/F set to approximately lU.O/lo During the final baseline
test the engine stalled at idle voiding the test. Since AEC had an
agreement with PoO.Do to install the device after the testing was completed,
AEC insisted that the car be returned to the P«0e Garage for the
reinstallation. As far as they were concerned the testing was completed.
The vehicle was then returned to the PcO* where the spark plugs were changed,
the carburetor float level reset and a new needle valve installed. The oil
and oil filter were also changed. After this the vehicle went back into
service for the rest of the day and evening. The following day NAPCA
personnel picked up the vehicle, removed the device, adjusted the A/F to
that measured with the device installed and reran the final baseline emissions
test. This final test was to represent the kind of emissions level this
engine is capable of at 37,000 miles when carefully tuned and the carburetor
-------
in good working orders This then could be compared to the emissions level
obtainable with the $35 to $^0 Pollution Master device installed. Unfortunately
this last test is not really representative because on the idle portion
of the last cycle the engine suddenly got rough and the idle hydrocarbon
level increased sharply (see Figure 7> cycles 6 and 7)> while CO remained
essentially the same,, This suggests a misfire or perhaps a stuck valve. In
any case, the resultant Rot Cycle and composite hydrocarbon numbers; are
higher than we feel is representative. The Cold Cyele hydrocarbon level jjs
representative and indicates that the engine is capable of equalling the
hydrocarbon level and, more assuredly, the CO level obtained with the device
installed.
During this testing neither the author nor Mre Ashby detected an appreciable
difference in driveability of the vehicle with or without the device, although
Mr. Porter of PoO.D, apparently felt it was improved somewhat with the device
installed.
In summary, it appears that the device may have a small beneficial effect
on exhaust emissions on this particular vehicle. However, by tuning the
engine with low emissions in mind (lean carburetion) the reduction due to
the device becomes marginal.
Michael A. Caggiano
Attachments
-------
TABLE I
"Pollution Master" Device Evaluation
on a Post Office Vehicle
Conditions
First Series of Tests
* ' As received baseline
(2) As received
Baseline
Device
without
with
without
Cold
Cycle
HC
352
363
32U
CO
1.69
0.58
1-55
Hot
Cycle
HC
328
379
297
CO
1.28
0.28
1.17
Composite
HC
337
37U
307
CO
1.1*2
0.38
1-30
Second Series of Tests
^' Tuned-up baseline
With A/F adjusted to lU.0/1
After mileage accumulation
Baseline with A/F at lU.0/1
without
with
with
without
372
33^
293
325
1.50
1.25
1.10
1.17
338
29U
281
353
1.20
0.83
0.57
0.63
350
308
285
3*3
1.31
0.98
0.76
0.82
(2)
(3)
Vehicle had misfire which was not corrected during the first series of tests.
$1 spark plug was changed at the initial inspection of the vehicle. The rest
of the spark plugs remained in throughout both test series.
Subsequent to this test, a leak was found in the PCV Tubing of the Pollution
Master device which allowed air to enter the intake manifold and lean out the
mixture.
Misfire was corrected and the ignition system was put in proper operating
condition. Still using the original spark plugs. A/F was unchanged fron
first series of tests.
-------
TABLE II
"Pollution Master" Device Evaluation
Test
No.
Conditions
Device
Compos
.. Grams
HC Mile's"
ite No.
-Grams
LU . . . ,
Miles
First Series of Tests
1
2
3
As received baseline
As received
Baseline
without
with
without
3-96.
4.01
3.60
32.9
8.1
30.2
Second Series of Tests
k
5
6
7
Tuned-up baseline
With A/F adjusted to lk.0/1
After mileage accumulation
Baseline with A/F to lk.0/1
1970 Federal
without
with
with
without
Standards are
4.08
3-51
3.23
3.88
2.2
30.0
21.7
16.6
18.0
23
-------
... FIGURE 1
OC-04-69 FAIRLANE STWGN ' 720408 37060 ttXLES C'S0Q
EXPERIMENTAL (BASELINE W/0 DEVICE)
SUM "GYuLES i-4 CYCLES 6-7
354*7851 U7504 " 13»1899 328o5S73 ' Jo?,?67 I3o6681
'T0TAL'WEIGHTED SUM 337c 7370 ' U<3*2S' . J3oS007
HC C0
473.9 9. 07
423.4 4.31
325.5 3.98
694.1 9.35
394.1 5.29
305.8 »'BO
,3288.7 6.15
' T0TAL. CYCLE 1
41 7.1 5.84
283.2. .99
187.1 .16
443.3 5.95
304.8 2.64
193.0 .31
2629.3 4.97
T0TAL CYCLE 2
442.3 6.56
290.4 .98
193.0 .18
354.5 5.00
291.4 2.65
170.2 .33
2259.5 4.70
TOTAL CYCLE 3
424.4 6.51
274.0 .94
184.1 .19
461.2 4.82
28V. 3 2.31
188.1 .32
2203.7 4.70
TOTAL CYCLE 4
381.5 6.30
280.2 1.16
176.1 .85
506.7 4.91
275.0 2.46
205.1 .31
2093.3 4.63
T0TAL CYCLE 6
397.2 6.06
285.3 .99
199.0 .23
518.4 4.88
277.1 3.09
208.1 .39
2231.6 4.62
TOTAL CYCLE 7
C02
8o47
1 lo'67
12.20
"8.79
1 U 60
13.69
' 7c8i
434.9
1 1.23
1 1 .91
12.37
10.27
13.' 32
1 1.93
8.94
343.0
10.77
12. '42
12.67
1 1«07
13.40
12.37
9.28
311 .3
1.0 o 86
12 . 50
12.65
i i .00
13.47
12.37
' 9 o' 4 1
316.9
V0o82
12.65
13.19
10.86
13.32
12.55
" 9.' 17
323. 1
1 1.00
1 2 . 72
13.42
1 1.02
13.08
12.47
9.' 13
334.0
AVERAGE 0F CYCLES 1-4
AVERAGE 0F CYCLES 6-7
WEIGHTED SUM
FACTOR'
.82
.94
.93
.81
. .89
1.'04
94
PPM HC
.88
1.16
1.20
.91
.'94 .
1.23
' .97
PPM HC
.87
1.12
1.17
'.92
.93
1.18
".98
PPM HC
86
1.12
i . I 7
.93 -
.'95
1.16
.'97
PPM KG.
58
1.09
1.12
.93
.95
1.17
1.00
PPM HC
.88 '
1.09
1. 10
".93
.'93
U'17
.99
PPM HC
352
328
WHC
16,3
9 6» 9
35.6
34.8
17.5
144e'0
"89.'S
3.01' C0
! 5i 4
80. '4
2 6." 4
25.0
14.' 3
107.6
"73.9
1.29 C0
" f 6» 1
79.3
26.6
20.2
13.6
91. '4
64. 1
1 .25"C0
"15.4
74. 6
25.'4
26.7
13o'7
1 0 1 » 1
'62. 1
1 . 2 i " C0
14.0
74.2
23.2
29.'3
1 3.' 1
108.8
' 60 . 5
1.27 C0
" 14.7
76.'1
25.8
29. 7
12.9
110.4
64. 3
1.28 C0
.0 PPM
.5 PPM
336.'8 PPM
WC0
..34
.99
.'44
.47
.'23
.38
o 1 7
11." 91 C02
'.22'
.28
.'02
.'34
.12 :
.17
.'14
13.65 C02
" .24
.'27
.02
.'29
.12
.18
.13
13.70 C02
'.24
.'26
.03
.28
.11
.'17
.'13'
13. 73 G02
" .23
.31 .
.'03
.28
.12
.17
VI 3
13.67 C02
'.22
.'26
.03
.28
.'14
.20
.13
13c66 C02
HC ' 1.69 C0 13o25 C02
HC 1.28 C« l"3o'67 C<32
HC 1.42 CO 13° 52 ' C32
-------
FIGURE 2
2°I 448 02-C5-69 .FORD FAIR LANE STWGN 720408
E "XPERXMENTAL 'P0LLUTI0N MASTER EVALUATI0N
37083 MILES 35000
SUM CYCLES 1=4 - CYCLES 6-7
3S9o0629 «6£'i* ' I4.iib4tf .379.2561 "_ «2765 14.6118
' T0TAL: WEIGHTED SUM:' " 372*1885' %3972' 14.4073
HC .
2Q4.1
2 78 VI
276.1
2 77V I.
262V§
222 V2
2 6 1 9 V 7
T0TAL:.
21.8-1.
1.86V 1
149.5
822.'7
247V5
154.4
2381, '3
T0TAL'.
279.1
206.1
.I49V5
1246V3
" 1 8 1 V 1
144.6
2362V5
TOTAL '"
367.0
227.2
.156.4
1271 V3
"L98VO
1 64.2
2268*8
T0TAL'
346.2
214V1
.14 IV &
1 163.6
243V6.
135V8
2185,3
TOTAL =
29.5.6
217.1
.157V3
1221.5
" 1.86. 1
1.58.3
2185V3
T0TAL
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
C0;
.o?3
1V75
2V3?
4V6.9
ivso
" V34
SV02
CYCLE 1.
048
.39
.1.5
.82
.36
..19
1V05
CYCLE 2
.29.
vaa
ViS
V50
V34
V2t -
.V7?
CYCLE 3
.29
.37
VI 8
V44
.28
V20
.. V76
CYCLE .4
.18
.as
VI 6
.'42
.37
VI 7
. V68
CYCLE 6
' .23
V23
VI 7
V41 -
.34
.18
. .68
CYCLE 7.
.C02 .
'.13.21
I3c06
13V34
I1V2?
I 3V Si
13.55
"9V 17
FACTOR
*'.«
XV
»
. »
IV
IV
I.
06
01
?5
93
00
Q8 1
17
WHO
9o
68V
31V
1.6V
1 3V
09.V
89."
WC0
1.
i
1
0
1.
I
a
.336o i '
O i o
20V
95o"
14V
74V
88V
..28
15.
62V
22V
$9V
10V
86V
89V
o28
9
7
7
Q
9
4
7
C0
4
3
6
4
2
<5
8
C0
5
8
4
7
3
7
0
C0
5" '
5
3
2
0
3
4
~C0
4
5
3
7
6
6
3
CO
I ' PPM
3 PPM
W SIGHTED SUM ' 373o6
0
O
o
c
e
o
o
13
O
o
o
o
0
,
14
.
e
e
«
o
e
14
*
o
V
o
e
o
0
14
*
e
*
14
»
.»
14
HC'
HC
04
&3
27
27
Q9'
17
07
.60 C02
02 ' ' "
08
02
06
01
10
04
.56 C02
02 '"
08
03
04
02
11
03
.,56 C02
02
08
03
04
Q2
I 1
03
.58 C02
01
0?
02
03
©2
09
03
.61 C02
or
07
02
03
01
10
03
o6l C02
'.58' C0 14.32
V28 C0 1 4V 61
PPM HC ' .38 ' C0 " T4V5;
C02
C02
I " C02
n c
-------
FIGURE 3
2-145! 02-06-69 FORD FAIRLANE STWGN 720408
E "XPERIMENTAL'BASELINE TW0 WITHOUT DEVICE
37J95 MXLES
SUM
327
CYCLES
.2891
' T0TAL
HC
30.7
372.2
306.9
910.1.
279. I
258.7
35699 1
T0TAL
416.0
277. 1
229.2
403.5
275.0
.166.2
1957,0
T0TAL
367.0
24U4
172.1
389.9.
261 .8
156.4
2029 . 4
T0TAL
381.5
23Q.2
169.2
454.9
261 .8
167.2
2093.3
TOTAL
354.5
229.2
157.3
534.3
245.5
170.2
2102.5
T0TAL .
371. 1
245- 5
167.2
409.7
238.4
1 70*2
2135.3
TOTAL
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
C0
,
3.
3.
9.
5.
.
5.
CYCLE
6.
.
.'
5.
2.
.
4.
CYCLE
6.
.'
4.
. 2.
.
4.'
CYCLE
6.
«,'
.
4.
2.'
,
4.
CYCLE
6.
.'
4.
3.
.
4.'
CYCLE
6.
*
.'
4.'
2.
.'
4.
CYCLE
63
37
81
0.3
83
78
33
I
5i
9.5
16
67
48
27
79
2
QS
84
1.8
81
83
30
58
3
16
74
18
75
47
29
61
4
21
80
17
59
29
28
39
6
15
76
18
68
81
30
30
7.
1
«6105
i-4
" 1
3.3306
1 WEIGHTED SUM'
1
1
1
1
"
1
1
C02
1*56
2.28
2.30
8.61.
1.11
3.53
7.88 .
413,1
0.69"
1.91
12.50
1
1
1
1
i
i
1
1.
l
i
1
i
i
O.'SS
3.32
1.89
9.' 6 9
309.7
1.04
2.32
2 62
1.11
3.19
2. '30
9o'54
281.4
0.98
2.23
2.83
1*00
13,34
i
1.
1
i
l
i
i
i
i
i
i.
i
i
OF CYCLES
0F CYCLES
2.23.
9,43
291 o.5
0.71'
2. "28
2.75
0.'89
2.80
2. 15
9*26
296.6
0.89
2.32
2.'75
1.02
3.03
2.06
9,26 .
298«4
1-4
6-7
FACT0R
6.
.
.'
.'
1.
' .'
PPM
.
1.
U
" .'
.'
1.
" ,'
PPM
.
1.
U
.0
e>
I.'
' .
PPM
..
1 «'
I.
" .'
o
1.'
" ;
PPM
.
1 .
i.
c
.
i .
i.
84
96
9.3
82
89
05
98
HC
87
17
19
91
95
23
96
HC
88
14
n
93
94
19
98
KG
38
1 6
15
94
95
ao
98
HC
39
1 5
16
95
93
21
01
PPM HC
e
1.
1.
' .
*
l..
K
PPM
WEIGHTED SUM
88
15
16
94
95
21
0(
'HC
323
297
306
297«
307.8962 '
WHC
8
87
33
46
12
123
101
2.6
15
78
32
22
13
93
54
»
»
«
ft
ft
»
e
'I
.
e
.
D
o
1«25
"13
67
23
22
12
84
57
1. 1
~ 14
65
.23
26
12
91
59
1. 1
"V3
64
21
31
11
93
61
1. I
"13
68
22
23
11
93
63
1. 1
o
o
.
ft
c
o
8
0
*
9
o'
o
*
ft
4
0
a
.'
,'
.
«
8
C
.'
«
ft
V
f>
6
8
1
7
5
4
4
i
" C0
2
9
1
8
1
4
4
~C0
5
1
S
4
3
7
6
C0
0
0
0
4
4
2
5
C0
2
1
6
5
4
4
3
C0
7
6
9
9
3
0
9
C0
« 9 "PPM
.5
0'7
PPM
PPM
WC0
,
e
,'
.'
.'
.'
.
12
.
.
.'
.'
.'
.
,'
13
" .
;
.'
.'
9
.'
«
13
" *
e
o
c
*
.'
*
13
.
.'
.
.'
.'
;
13
" .
.'
;
,'
.
o
.
13
HC
HC
HC
18
79
42
46
26
37
15
o"28
24
27
02
32
12
15
13
'. 70
22
23
02
28
13
16
13
«77
23
21
02
28
12
16
13
."81
23"
23
02
27
15
15
13
.'76
23
21
02
27
13
16
13
.79
' 1.
I.
I.
4538
CYCLES 6° 7
1.17P.1'
Io3855
13.7738
I3f &I87
C02
C02
C02
C02
C02
C02
55 CO 13.39
17 C0 13.77
30 C0 13.64
C02
C02
C02
-------
>1455 02-07-69 F0RD
^PER I MENTAL WITH 0UT
. SUM . CYCLES
373.0747 . 1.5348
FIGURE
FAIRLANF,
PSLLUTlftM MASTER
1-4
13o4063
' T0TAL WEIGHTED SUM 350o^
HC C0 . C02
389.9 5.16 1.1.44
392.0 3.03 12.55
326.5 3.'68 12.50
847.1 8.74 ".9.00
385.7 5.29 1.1.60
294.5 .47 13.63
3720.6 5.15 "7.'75
T0TAL CYCLE" I 452-4
487.6 6.01 11.07
314.1 .93 12.47
209.1 .19 13.26
439.1 5.81 10.64
31.0.0 3.21 13.' 11
218. 1. .24 12.20
2419,1 4.74 "9.24
T0TAL CYCLE 2 357.7
488.7 6.08 11.04
316.2 .34 12.70
202.J .16 13.11
337.9 5.11 11.20
282.2 3.38 13.06
.225.2 .28 12.62
1947,9 4.61 "9.69
TOTAL CYCLE 3 336.2
451 .7 5.88 11.18
316.2 .95 12.60
2Q2.1 .17. 13.24
397.2 4.98 1.1.1B
291.4 3.05 13.16
234.3 .'30 12.62
1885.1 4.60 9.77
T3TAL CYCLE 4 341.4
398.2 5.72 1K09
291.4. 1.02 12.62
186.1 .17 13.1.9
469.7 4.75 1.1.18
265.8. 3.02 13.19
229.2 .30 12.70
2002.2 4.37 9.65
T0TAL CYCLE 6 334.6
485.5 5.29 11.58
330.6 1.02 1.2 .'83
205.1 .25 1.3. 74
425.5 4.74 11*39
265.8 2.98 13."24
230.2 .33 12.83
1912,0 4. '3 6 9.75.
TOTAL CYCLE 7. 341.9
A/ERAGE 0F CYCLES 1-4
VERAGE 0F CYCLES 6-7
fEIGHTED SUM
FACT0R WHC
.90 1 4 » 8
96 92ol
.93 35.'7
.82 43«"2
.89 17.1
1«06 142.5
".99 107.0
PPM HC 2.37 C0
.88 I8o 0
1.12 85.8
1.'12 27.5
.90 24-4
.'92 14.' 2
1.21 119.6
.97 "68.2
PPM HC 1.24 C0
.88 ' f 8.0
1.11 85.4
1.13 26.9
.'91 19.0
.91 12.9
1.1 6 119.1
.97 "54.8
PPM HC 1. 1'9 C0
.88, "16.7
1.1 I 85.4
1.12 26»"7
"'9 1 22.5
o93 ,13o"5
1.16 123.' 7
".97 52»9
PPM HC U2I C0
.89 T409
1.10 78.2
1.12 24.7
'92 26.'9
.93 12.'3
1.15 120 .'3
.99 ' 57.2
PPM HC 1.21 C0
.89 "I8«l
1.08 87.4
1.07 25.9
.92 24.1
.'92 12.3
1.14 119.5
".98 "54.5
PPM HC 1.20 C0
371.9 PPM
336.2 PPM
350.0 PPM
i.
7204QC
338.2631
472 ' I.
WC0
o20
o'7i
°40
o <55
.23
.23
o IS
12«54 C02
.22
.25
.02
.32
.15
."13
.13
13o71 C02
* . 22 "
.23
c'02
' .29
."15
.15
.'13
13. 76 C02
".22
o26
c"Q2
.38
.14
.16
.13
13o'?5 C02
".21
.27
.02
.'27
. 14
."16
.12
13." 74 C02
".20
.'27
.03
.27
.14
.17
.12
33=75 C02
HC ' l.SO
HC 1.20
HC 1.31
3'l?.Al MILES
CYCLES 6-7
' U2036 13.
.3195" 13; 62)
V
C0 13.44 C02
C0 13. 75 C02
CQ 13. 64 C02
AV
j'
J
\1
-------
FIGURE 5
2=1458 02-08-69
EXPERIMENTAL WI
. SUM
336»945;
T0TAL
HC C0
347o2
375.3
333.7
829o2
359.7
305.8
2775.8
TOTAL
279. 1
236.3
197.0
256.7
242.4
201 .0
2213.0
T0TAL
249.5
228.2
185. 1
238.4
239.4
206. 1
201 1 .3
T0TAL
269.9
254.6
193.0
227.2
244.4
223.2
1929.9
T0TAL
236.3
232.3
1 78. \
306.9
208. 1
204. 1
1947.9
T0TAL
246.5
237.3
195.0
262.8
221 .2
205. 1
2002.2
T0TAL
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
4.83
3.39
4.48
7.49
5.44
78
3.97
CYCLE 1
2.82
.49
.20
3.51
1 .89
.23
2.85
CYCLE 2
2.44
.48
.21
2.63
2.10
.24
2.32
CYCLE 3
2.55
.68
.17
2.72
2.20
.32
2.30
CYCLE 4
2.63
.73
.23
2.47
2.27
.31
2. 1 6
CYCLE 6
2.59
.70
.29
2.55
1 .96
.31
2.02
CYCLE 7
F0RD FAIrtLANE 720408 372B3 MSlES
TH P0LLUTI0N MASTER
CYCLES 1-4 CYCLES 6-7
1,2:30 13.6453 293.7985 -8306 14.
WEIGHTED SUM 308.9000 .9942' 13»95
.C02 FACT3R WHC WC0
1
1
1
1
1
0.
2.
1 .
8.
1 .
3.
8.
98
18
96
57
09
82
57
423.9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 .
2.
3.
1 .
3.
2.
9.
51
62
45
51
11
67
61
307.8
1.
2.
3.
2.
3.
3.
9.
79
95
42
01
QO
13
83
294.8
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 .
3.
3.
1 .
2.
3.
9.
30
1.
3.
3.
1.
2.
3.
9.
29
1 .
3.
3.
1 .
2.
3.
9.
69
13
63
96
80
26
92
5.5
39
13
69
91
65
32
81
1.3
62
16
90
98
93
21
75
296.3
3F CYCLES
0F CYCLES
1
-4
9
9
ft
1.
1 .
PPM
1 .
i .
1.
i.
1.
i.
PPM
1 .
1.
1.
1 .
ft
1.
i ;
PPM
1 .
U
1.
i.
1 .
1.
i .
PPM
1.
i.
i .
i .
i.
i .
i.
PPM
1 .
1.
1.
1.
1.
1 .
1 .
PPM
6-7
LIGHTED SUM
*ST0P*
«-> G
95
96
91
91
91
03 1
06
HC 2
05
1 4
10
99
00
16 1
09
HC
05
12
10
02
99
12 1
12
HC
05
09
09
01
00
10 r
12
HC
07
08
08
03
01
10 1
14
' HC
06
08
06
02
01
1 1 1
16
HC
334.
293.
308.
13
88
35
46
1 6
43
85
A
0
e
«
»
*
»
.62
12
66
25
15
12
06
69
.a
1 1
62
24
15
1 1
05
65
*
l
.
0
0
»
. 74
11
67
24
14
12
12
62
»
«
t>
Q
»
.83
10
61
22
19
10
02
64
.6
10
62
24
16
1 1
03
67
e
*
*
4
«
«
9
.82
3
8
0
8
3
9
6
3
0
0
C0
3
0
6
7
1
3
8
C0
0
2
Q
0
9
1
5
C0
9
5
7
3
2
1
7
C0
6
3
6
6
5
2
5
C0
9
7
3
6
1
5
1
C3
PPM
PPM
PPM
ft
.
12
ft
*
*
14
ft
ft
«
14
ft
ft
ft
*
14
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
14
ft
.
14
HC
HC
HC
19
80
48 .
42
25
36
12
.30 C02
12
14
03
21
09
12
09
. 14 C02
11
13
03
17
10
12
08
.22 C02
11
18
02
17
11
16
07
. 12 C02
12
19
03
16
1 1
15
07
.11 C02
1 1
18
04
1 6
10
16
07
. 13 C02
' 1.25 C0 13.69 C32
.83 C0 14.12 Ci32
.93 C0 13.97 C&2
3500^
1191
-------
FIGURE 6
2-1464 02-J1-69 F0rtD FAIrtLA.ME
EXPERIMENTAL WITH P0LLUTI0^ MASTER
720408
37532 MILES 3500^
3755
SUM
294
HC
293.
328.
2.95.
277.
321.
282.
1 690.
T0TAL
215.
203.
J 72.
233.
1 89.
1 71 .
2020.
T0TAL
293.
220.
1 51 .
39B.
184.
181 .
1920.
T3TAL
251 .
208.
151 .
465.
185.
180.
1 804.
T0TAL
224.
1 99.
143.
520.
1 72.
1 78.
1912.
TOTAL
237.
216.
1 56.
375.
167.
183.
1699.
T0TAL
5
6
6
1
3
2
2
1
1
1
3
0
2
3
5
1
4
2
1
1
9
6
1
4
4
1
1
8
2
0
6
5
1
1
0
3
1
A
3
2
1
0
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
.1678
T0TAL
CO
3. 10
2.83
4.37
6.66
4.80
1. 12
4.46
CYCLE 1
2.51
.56
. 1 9
2. 72
1.22
.20
2.39
CYCLE 2
2.27
.45
.13
1.97
1 .21
. 1 9
2.15
CYCLE 3
2.1 7
.48
.17
1.97
1 .08
. 18
1 .97
CYCLE 4
1 .91
.44
. 13
1 .76
.92
. 1 7
1.84
CYCLE 6
1 .93
.44
. 16
1 .84
1 .37
.22
1 .94
CYCLE 7
C
I
v C/Lt-~
o 1601
i«4
1
3.7920
WEIGHTED SUM
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3'F CYCLES
7>f CYCLES
C92
2.25
2.37
1 .98
0. 19
1.60
3.66
9. 98
330.9
2.40
3. 13
3.50
1 .98
3.42
2.60
9.96
267.3
2. 10
S. 70
2.65
U93
3.42
2.78
9.83
289. 6
2.23
2.88
2c72
1 . 79
3.37
2.78
0.04
284. 1
2.06
2.78
2.83
1 . 69
3.45
2. 78
9.96
237.2
2.25
3. 13
3.06
2.08
3.00
2.88
0.23
274.6
1 -4
6-7
FACT3R
.
' .
ft
ft
ft
1 .
.
PPM
1 .
1 .
.
.
.
.
.
PPM
.
.
.
.
.
o
1.
PPM
1 .
1.
1 .
1.
I .
1 .
1 .
PPM
1 .
1 .
1 .
1 .
1 .
1 .
1 .
PPM
1 .
1 .
1 .
1 .
1.
1.
1 .
PPM
WEIGHTED SUM
93
99
92
88
91
02 1
97
HC 2
Oi
10
10
01
02
17
1 1
HC
04
1 4
1 7
06
03
1 6
1 4
HC
04
12
1 6
07
04
1 6
1 5
HC
07
1 3
1 6
09
04
1 6
1 6
HC
06
SO
1 4
06
04
1 5
14
HC
293.
280o
285.
28
WHC
12o
79.
32.
1 5.
14.
30.
47.
. 51
9.
55.
22.
1 4.
9.
91.
64.
.70
12.
61 .
21.
26.
9.
95.
63.
. 61
1 1.
57.
20.
30.
9.
94.
59.
. 60
20.
55.
19.
35.
9.
93.
64.
. 54
10.
53.
20.
24.
8.
95.
56.
. 60
5-4
720
CYCLES 6-7
280. 7896 e 5706
.7769 1
I 4o
4cl7
WC0
0
1
0
1
7
3
6
C0
1
6
3
6
7
3
8
C3
9
3
0
2
4
3
6
C3
0
0
8
8
6
3
9
C3
1
1
6
2
0
9
3
C0
5
3
9
7
7
4
0
C2
0 PPM
9 PPM
1 PPM
.
*
.
.
.
.
12
ft
«
ft
ft
*'
ft
14
ft
ft
4
ft
ft
V
*
14
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
14
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
»
14
.
.
14
HC
HC
HC
13
68
47
36
22
52
13
.46 C32
1 1
15
02
17
06
1 1
08
.26 C32
10
13
02
13
06
10
07
.34 C02
09
13
02
13
06
10
07
.35 C32
09
12
02
12
05
09
06
.40 C02
09
12
02
12
07
1 1
06
. 35 C32
1.10 C'3 13.85
.57 Cd 1 4. 38
o 76 C3 14. 19
C'32
C32
002
-------
FIGURE 7
:-1475 "!c!-l-^--9 i-').AvO rA!,:L'\Mt: 72040*. 3763.; .MIL!:1S
i-c-M.-.jr.^nL c WITH our ;.):: vie.1-: )
:i:JM CYCLES 1-4 CYCLES 6-7
3 2 7 . rl 6 5 7 1 2 1 2 9 13, 7 4 0 4 -3 5 2 o ? 0 3 4 .6303 1 4. 3 1 S 5
DTU. U'UC-^fSD oJ'-l 343.3635 .8342 14.1161
341 .
360.
301 .
321 .
353.
299.
2423.
T3TAL
335.
277.
1 93.
232.
2 32 .
200.
2203.
TOTAL
399.
2P>7.
1 7 -< .
2 S3.
236.
209.
1 934.
T 3T-V-
373.
2 ;?0 .
1"! .
313.
2>2.
204.
1760.
TTfAL
j 299.
236.
1 63.
34?.
2 0 ~ .
19^.
2 0 5 6 .
TOTAL
^ r,-'\'",.
T 436.
1 .9 4 .
-^-\'?. ").
2 32 .
2 1 > .
! '< '! > .
HML
'V.'.vv'AG
"Wv^v.
'.;': ( :>'{ r
0
0
7
3
4
7
5
"<
1
0
3
3
o
7
3
3
1
2
3
1
1
p
o
1
1
3
1
3
'/
3
5
3
1
0
1
?
0
}
>.
j
1
2
tp
.*_
i-:
c
:>
2
4
7
5
4
CYCL
3
3
1
3
CYCL
3
2
1
.>
CYCL
2
2
I
2
CYCL
2
2
I
y
CYCL
2
, -2
1
2
Ci'CL
J !"
:') ]"
0 :-\ J
]
»
*
*
.
.
tit
.
'«
*
*
*
*
£
*
.
*
T
*
«
»
,
"'
u.
*
.
.
.
.
;'^
c
C
1
"i 1
1 3
32
32
7r->
42
1
53
95
J 7
47
73
21
0 3
2
29
62
1 5
63
37
jp
5 >1
3
94
69
1 5
46
-i3
2 2
41
A
37
47
1 3
14
3 6
19
22
6
35
53
16
32
?7
22
2 7
7
/CL
i'CL
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
*'. >
'.'>
CO 2
2.93
2.75
2 . 42
0 . 40
1 . 77
3.93
9.73
370.9
'5 6 ^ '}
2 . '$0
3. -i^
2.75
3.93
2 . 30
'j . 3 6
309. 6
3 . o n
2 . 7 5
3 . 0 0
2.93
4. i 5
2 . 60
0. 73
3.1 7 0
3". 2 1
2 . 3 5
3.24
3 . 0 -1
4 . 2 9
2. 6'3
1 . 02
305. 1
3 . 1 6
2 . 6 .")
2.75
2.73
3 . ^ 5
2.30
0.27
306.0
2 . 6'.'-::
2 . 40
2 . -1 5
2 . 7 5
3.'.'0
2 . ."> 5
o . r. i
4 ".':>. 6
1 -4
6-7
FAC
* V
e "7
. 9
* j
. 8
1 .0
9
,JO \/,
f * '/
» °
*
1 .0
1 .0
. 9
. 9
1 .2
iTJii
1
4
r;
o
6
HC
1
q
7
f>
6
1
1 .02
JV-M
.9
1 . 1
1 ° 1
.9
, C)
1 . 1
1 .0
iV.)
. 9
1. 1
1 . 1
. 9
. 9
1 . 1
HC
.->
2
Ji
5
7
7
3
HC
3
1
2
5'
5
7
1 . 0 4
P/JM
HC
.97
1 . 1
1 . 1
1.0
.9
1 .2
5
i*
v)
0
9
0
1 . 0 9
iV-1
1 .0
1 . 1
\ . 1
1 .0
. 9
1 . 1
1 .0
tVT
h'C
-?.
6
5
0
?
9
~7
J
1JC
'"i '. 5
1153
.143
1 3 . 5
36. S
32 o 3
1 6. 7
15. 5
138. 5
67. 7
2.32 C'3
12.9
V 3 . ;.>
2 4 . .3
13.2
11.1
109.2
65. 1
. 90 C3
15.4
'/ O* '
/ } » o
':?. 4 . 0
1 6.7
11.4
111.3
59. 5
.73 C.3
1 4 . 6
75. 7
23. 9
lo. 5 -
10,6
103. 7
53.1
. 7 ^ C -)
12.2
66.2
22. 4
~> 1 *"
.<. 1 . o
10.3
10^.2
65.2
. 62 CO
3 6 . 4
1 2 3 . 4
26. 4
2 6 . 0
11.5
i \ ;> . o
37. -1
.6-': w .)
. '.» i * ij ''1
. 3 IV -5
» 6 .'^ '*
»
%
«
»
*
12
V
o
*
»
»
14
e
«
1 4
»
*
C
»
14
t
«
»
»
14
»
*
.
.
.
14
1C
1C
;-ic
,'~\
12
66
4 4
33
23
36
12
. 63 C32
] 4
25
02
20
08
1 1
09
.06 C32
13
1 7
02
16
07
12
03
.22 C32
I 1
19
02
1 5
07
12
07
.23 C32
10
1 3
02
i 3
07
10 .
0 7
. 33 C32
09
i 5
02
12
J6
U>
:)7
.31 CJ2
1.17 Ci) i 3. 79
. 63 CO 1 4. 3..!
. :>2 CJ 1 '.. 1 3
-------
2~!447 02-04°69
EXPERIMENTAL
F0RD FAIRLANE
FIGURE 1A
720408
37060 MILES 3500 <
HC
473.
423.
325.
694.
394.
305.
3288.
T0TAL
41.7.
283.
187.
.443.
304.
193.
2629,
T0TAL
442.
2?0.
193.
354.
291.
. 17Q.
2259,
9
4
5
1.
i
8
7
1
2
1
3
8
0
3
C0
9.
4.
3o
9e
5o
*
6*
CYCLE
5.
e
o
5.
2.
.'
4.'
87
31
98
35
29
SO
15
1
84
99
16
95
64
31
97
I
C02
8c47
I. '67
FACT0R
1.
to
12.20 I.*'
1
i
i
i.
i
i
i
i
CYCLE 2
3
4
0
5
4
2
5
T0TAL
424.
274.
184.
461.
287.
188.
2203.
TOTAL
381
280.
176c
506.'
275.
205.
2093.
4
0
1
2
3
1
7
60
0
fr
5c
2e
.'
4.
CYCLE
6c
*
O
4o'
2.
.
4.
56
98
18
00
65
33
70
3
51
94
19
82
31
32
70
i
8.79
1.'60
3.69
7.81
463»0
1.23
1.91
2 .'37
0.27
3.32
1.93
8.94
346.4
0.77
12.42
1
i
i
i
"
i.
i
1
1
1
i
'
CYCLE 4
5
2
1
7
Q
1
3
T0TAL
397.
285.
199.
518.'
277.
208.
2231.
T0TAL
2
3
0
4
1
1
6
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
6.
1 o
' .
4.
2.
.
4.'
CYCLE
6.
o
.
4.'
3.
e
4.
CYCLE
30
16
25
91
46
31
63
6
06
99
23
88
09
39
62
7
i
i
1
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
0F CYCLES
0F CYCLES
2.67
1.07
3.40
2.37
9.'28
314.3
0^86
2. SO
2.65
1 .00
3.47
2.37
9.41
32 1 ' . 8
0.82
2.65
3.19
0.'S6
3.32
2.55
9o'17
-326.7
1 .00
2.72
3.42.
1 .02
3.08
2.47
9. 13
337.0
1-4
6-7
i.
" .'
1.
U
PPM
.
1.'
1.
I.
*
1.
1.
PPM
1 .
I.
I.'
1.
" .'
1."
1.
PPM
.
1.
1.
1.'
" .
1.
1.
04
02
00
02
99
01
00
. .HC
99
14
15
06
97
18
02
HC
00
10
12
04
96
14
03
HC
9?
09
12
04
97
14
03
PPM HC
1 .
I.
i.
i.'
~ .
i.
i.
PPM
1.
I.
1.
1.
' .
1.
i.
PPM
LIGHTED SUM
01
07
07
05
98
12
05
HC
00
07
05
03
97
12
OS
HC
361
331
342
WHC
20o
104o
"38»
43o'
19.
139=.'
"95o
3.37
17*.
78.'
25c
29.'
14.
103.
77.
1.37
" 1"8.
77.'
25.
22.
14.
88.
67.
1.32
" 17.
?3«'
24.
29.
13.
97.
65.
1..28
T6.
73.
22.
32.
13.
104.
" 64.
1.34
" T6.
74.
24.
33.'
13o
106.
67.
1.34
WC0
7
9
3
9
5
9
8
C0
4
8
3
0
8
6
5
C0
5
7
5
8
1
2
5
C0
7
1
3
8
9
4
5
ca
2
2
3
8
4
7
0
C0
7
6
8
2
5
5
S
C0
.4 PPM
o"9 PPM
.2 PPM
0
1.'
c
0
43
07
Al
S9
.'26
."
12
e
«
.'
c
.'
.
.'
13
*
O
*
0
"
0
e
37
18
o"32 C02
24
28
02
39
13
17
15
i44 C02
27"
26
02
32
13
17
14
13.50 C02
e
c
o
.'
4
0
27
25
03
31
ii
17
14
13.51 C02
ft
e
«"
.'
e
0
«
27"
30
03
32
12
16
14
13.48 C02
e
;
V
.
.
,
»'
13
HC
HC
HC
26
26
03
31
15
20
14
.46 C02
'1.84 C0 13. 19 C02
i.34 C0 13.47 C32
1.52 C0 13.37 C02
AUTOMATIC MASS EMISSI0NS
HC 3.96 GRAMS PER MILE C0 32.9 GRAMS PER MILE
-------
FIGURE 2A
2°1448 02°05
EXPERIMENTAL
HC C0
204.
278-'
276.
277.'
262.
1
i
t
1.
8
228 .'3
2619,
T3TAL
21.8.
18 6.
149.
82 2 c
247.
154.
2381.
T0TAL
279.
206.
149.
1246.
1.81.
144.
2362,
TOTAL
367.
7
i
I
5
7
5
4
3
1
1
5
3
1
6
5
0
. 0
1°
2.
4V
1 «'
o
2.
CYCLE
,
.
0
.'
,
V
J»
CYCLE
«
.'
.
.'
;
.
.
CYCLE
.
227.2
.1 56.
1 2 7 1
198.'
164.
2268t
TOTAL
346.
214.
.141o
1 163.
243.
1.35.
2185.
T0TAL
295.
217.
157.
1221 .
"1.86.
1.58.
2176.
TOTAL
4
3
0
2
8
»
«'
.
e
-69
93
75
39
69
80
34
02
1
48
29
15
82
26
19
05
2
29
28
18
50
34
21
7?
3
29
27
18
44
28
20
76
CYCLE 4
2
1
6
6
6
8
3
.
.'
.
. .
.
.
.
18
25
16
42
27
1 7
68
CYCLE 6
6
1
3
5
1
3
1
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
.
.
.'
.'
.'
.
.'
CYCLE
23
23
17
41
24
18
67
7.
F0RD
U-fitx <.
.C02 .
1.3.21
13c06
1.3.34
llc'27
I3»21
I3.-S5
'9.17
.330. 7
12.1.3
1.2 c J 5
I2o'03
10.82
1.3. 13
12.30
'9.19.
32Q.9
1 1.93
12.55
12.06
10.29
13.00
12.55
8.66
.355*2
1 U60
12.57
1.2 >' 1 5
10»32
f.3»00
12.30
" 8 e 72
.377.5
1 1.60
12.'50
I2o20
10c25
12.78
12.30
~8."76
350.2
1 1.S4
12.47
1.2.30
10.25
12.'95
I2.'30
"8.61
363.5
FAIRLAME
FACT0R
'1 c
lo
o
IV
i 6
ic
I.'
PPM
l.»
U
IV
I*
i..
1 c.'
i.'
PPM
Ic
I.
I «'
I*
i.
1.
I.
PPM
1 «
lo
I.
Ic
I.'
I.
1.
PPM
1 .
U
i.
U
u
i.
I.
PPM
1.
U
1.'
I..'
i.'
IV
1.'
WiJ
02
98
04
01
04
n
"HC
15
1.6
18
20
07
15
18
" HC
17
12
18
22
08
13
25
.HC
19
12
n
22
09
15
26
HC
20
13
17
24
10
16
26
HC
1.8
13
15
23
09
1 5
28
PPM HC
0F CYCLES 1 -4
0F CYCLES 6-7
WEIGHTED SUM
346
356
353
WHC.
a
69
31
17
13
105
'84
e
«
6
O
9
1
8
9
720408 370C3 MILES
WC0
e
o
o
o
.2
.'
o
U37
~ 10
52
20
61
13
81
81
.
e
,'
.'
9
.
,'
.34
13
56
20
94
9
74
85
« 3
I' 8
62
21
96
10
86
82
.
.'
;
.
.
«
«
r
.
0
o
.'
0
o
o
.29
r7
'58
19
89
13
71
80
6
0
.'
C
c"
.
e
.26
14
59
21
93
10
83
81
«,
B
;
o
.'
9
0
.26
.1
.9
.1
0
6 .
C0
5
7
8
0
3
i
5
C0
7
5
8
2
8
5
7
C0
4
1
6
0
7
2
6
C0
5
9
5
3
4
5
2
C0
7
9
4
2
2
2
0
C0
PPM
PPM
PPM
,'
0
13
9
.'
V
.
."
.'
.'
13
" .
.'
.'
.'
.
.'
o
04
43
28
30
09
16
07
.46 C02
02
08
02
06
01
10
04.
.99 C02
01
08
03
04
02
J 1
03
13.96 C02
" .
.
.'
6
,'
C
e
13
".
e
.'
.'
c
.
;
01
07
02
03
01
10
03
c95 C02
01
07
02
03
01
09
02
13.99 C02
" .
.'
o
.
;
.
.'
01
06
02
03
01
09
02
13.98 C02
HC
HC
HC
' c 58 C0 13.84 C02
.26 CO 13.98 C32
e37 C0 13.'93 C02
AUTOMATIC MASS EMISSIONS
HC 4.09 GRAMS PER MILE ' CO
>UST0P *
8« 1 GRAMS PER MILE
-------
FIGURE 3A
2-J451 02-06-69
EXP ER X M EN T A L ' o/<
F0RD FAIRLANE
i. w .20
91.7 .'83
36.1 .45
58. '0 .'58
14.'1 «29
120.'2 .'36
104.'2 .'16
2.87 C0 12i60 C02
17.6 ".28
77.' 3 .'27
30. '6 .'02
26.2 .'37
13.4 .12
89.9 .'1"4
58.0 .'14
1.34 C0 13. 49 C02
'15.4 '.25
65.7 .'23
22.8 .'02
25.'1 .'31
12.7 .'14
81.8 .'16
60.9 .14
1.25 C0 13." 5 7 C02
" 16. 1 '.26
63.4 .'20
22.1 .'02
29.5 .31
12.5 .' 1 2
87.9 .15
62.9 .'14
1.21 C0 13." 58 C02
;i5.'2 ".27
62.7 .'22
20.7 .'02
34.9 .30
12.1 V 1 6
90.0 .15
64.4 .'13
1.25 C3 13."55 C02
T5.7 ".26
66.9 .21
22.0 .'02
26.7 .'30
11.8 .'14
90.6 .16
66.7 .'13
1.23 C0 13." 56 C02
."6 PPM HC ' 1. 66" C0 13.31
.3 PPM HC 1.'24 C0 13.' 56
.'2 PPM HC 1.39 C9 I3.'47
C02
C02
C02
AUTOMATIC MASS EMISSIONS
HC 3.60 GRAMS 'PER MILE . C0
30.2 GRAMS PER MILE
f;
-------
FIGIRE
2-1455 02-07-69
EXPERIMENTAL ,.0
F0RD FAIRLANE
720408
37341 MILES
HC .
389.9
392.0
32 6. 5
847. 1
385.7
294.5
3720,6
T0TAL
487*6
314.1
209. 1
439. 1
31.0.0
218*1
2419. 1
TOTAL
488. 7
31 6.2
202. 1
-337.9
282.'2
225.2
1947,9
TOTAL
451.7
316.2
202. 1
397.2
291.4
234.3
1885, 1
T0TAL
398.2
291 .4
186.1
469.7
265.8
229.2
2002.2
T0TAL
485.5
330. 6
205.1
425.5
265.8
230.2
1912,0
T0TAL
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
C0
5.16
3.03
3.68
8.74
5.29
.47
5.15
CYCLE 1
6.01
.93
.19
5.81
3.21
.24
4.74
CYCLE 2
6.08
.84
.16
5.1 1
3.38
.28
4.61
CYCLE 3
5.88
.95
.17
4.98
3.05
.30
4.60
CYCLE 4
5.72
1 .02
.'17
4.75
3. '02
.30
4o37
CYCLE 6
5.29
1.02
.25
4.74
2.98
.33
4.36
CYCLE 7
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
l
i
l
i
i
i
i
i
i
~
i
1
l
l
l
i
C02
1.44
2o'5S
2 .'50
9° 00
1.'60
3.63
7o'75
468.6
i .07
2.47
3.26
0.'64
3.1 1
2.20
9.24
359.6
1.04
2.70
3. 1 1
K20
3.06
2.62
9. 69
336.7
1.18
2.60
3.24
1.18
3o 16
2.62
9° 77
342.0
U09
2.62
3. 19
1.18
3.19
2.70
9o 65
FACT0R
1.
i;
o
1 o
o
1.
i.'
PPM
e
1,
i.'
i.
i .
i.
PPM
1 .
U
1.
I.
1 .
00
00
99
02
99
02
01
1
1
/.HC 2
99
09
07
03
96
15
02
HC
99
08
08
03
96
1 1
03
PPM HC
1 o
1.
1.
0
1.
i.
99
08
07
03
97
1 1
03
PPM HC
1.
Io
1.
i.
e
1.
01
03
08
03
97
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
~"
1
1
1.04
,3JL§. 7 PPM. HC
1
1
0F CYCLES
0F CYCLES
1 .58
2o83
3. 74
1.39
3.24
2.83
9.75
342.3
1-4
6-7
1.
1.
1.
1.
i.
98
06
03
02
97
10
04
PPM HC
WEIGHTED SUM
376
339
352
1
1
1
WHC
1 60
95o
38 o
53.'
19o'
WC0
4\
7
0
3
I
0
o
o'
o
22
74
43
SS
.26
3 7 o 0 .22
09.
.57
20.
83.
26.
28.
14.'
14.
71.
.32
20.
83.
25.
21.
13.
14o
58.'
.26
18.
83o'
25o'
25.
1 4o'
18.
S6o
.27
'16.
76.
23.
30 o'
12.
15.
60.
1
"C0
3
7
3
2
9
6
5
C0
4
1
3
5
6
2
1
' C0
8
4
5
3
1
7
2
C0
9
7
6
Q
9
5
1
.27 C0
20.
85.
24.
26.
12.
14.'
57.
.25
1
&
9
9
8
7
4
C0
7 PPM
.0 PPM
.'2 PPM
0
12
*
o
0
0
o
13
9
e
e
o
13
0
e
«
c'
e
13
«
«
e
o
13
15
J71 C02
25"
25
02
37
15
13
14
.45 C02
25
22
02
33
16
14
14
e 50 C02
25
25
02
32
15
15
1'4
o"49 C02
24
27
02
30
15
15
13
.50 C32
22
26
03
30
14
16
13
13.50 C02
HC
HC
HC
1.61 C0 13.29
1.26 C0 13.50
1.'38 C0 1 3.' 43
C
-------
2-1458 OC -08-69
F0RD
rr A v D i A \ rr
i ft ir\ »..>! J I1.
EXPERIMENTAL WITH P0LLUTI6N MAS
HC C0
347«2 4o83
375.3 3.39
333e"7 4° 43
829 o 2 7o49
359.7 So 44
305.8 o'7S
2775,8 3°97
T0TAL CYCLE 1
279.1 2.82
2.36.3 o<59
197.0 .80
256.7 3.51
242.4 1.89
201.0 .23
2213.0 2.85
T0TAL CYCLE 2
249..S 2o44
228.2 .48
185.1 .21
. 238«4 2.63
239.4 2.10
206.1 .24
20 11 ,3 2.32
T0TAL. CYCLE 3
269.9 2c55
254o'6 .68
193.0 .57
227.2 2*72
244o4 2o20
O O O O " *^O
(^ C. \J Q <+ O v5>W
1929.9 2«'30
T0TAL CYCLE 4
236.3 2.68
232.3 .73
178°1 »23
306.9 2.47
208.1 2.27
804.1 .31
1947*9 2.16
TOTAL CYCLE 6
246.5 2.59
237.3. .70
195.0 .29
262.8 2.55
221.2 1.96
205.1 .31
2002,2 2«02
TOTAL CYCLE 7
C02
10o98
1 2 o 1 8
c fl ' C> A
& fl 0 /' O
'.80' 57
1 KG9
1 3o'S2
" 8 o' 5 7
447.3
1 1 0 5 1
12.-62
1 3 o' A 5
1 loSl
1 3 o 1 1
12.67
9.61
301 o 7
1 1 . 79'
12.95
13.42
I2o0l
13.'00
13. S3
9. '.83
287.6
1 K69
13=13
13.63
1 1»96
I2o'80
13»26
" 9.92
.29'8o7
1. 1»39
13.13
I3o69
11.91
12.65
13.32
"9.81
285.2
1 1 .62
13. 16
13.90
1 1.98
L2c93
13.21
9. '75
289.3
AVERAGE 0F CYCLES 1-4
AVERAGE 0F CYCLES 6-7
WEIGHTED SUM
FACT0R
1.05
i«.02
l.'OO
I.'IO
1.02
1-00
l.'OV
PPM . HC
ciO
oIO
..05
c07
oOl
i . i i
1 .08
PPM HC
1.09
1.08
Io06
1.07
loOl
Io08
! «'10
PPM KG
K09
1.05
1 .04
1.07
1 .'02
K06
1.10
PPM" HC
1 . 12
K05
1 e04
i cos
Ic04
1.06
Iol2
PPM" HC
1 . 10
1.05
1 .02
1.07
lo"03
1.07
J.-J2
PPM HC
333
720408
fER
UHC WCO
1 5<> 4 o21
93o'0 c'84
39o'R o'53
5 6 o 4 o' 5 1
S8°V) o'28
J38«'8 e'35
"86»S o'12
2 o 84 "GO I2o"60
I2o9 'd3
63»7 o"!3
24.5 .02
IV.'O o23
1 2 . '3 o" 1 0
X02cO el2
'690'3 e'09
.82 C0 13o76
1 1 0 4 0 J 1
60.' 1 o'i3
23.1 c03
15«8 .17
12.1 oil
JOOo'9 .'12
"64c,2 .'07 '
o 74 C0 13.82
I2o4 "el"2
65o'5 .17
23o7 .02
15«1 .18
12oS c'il
10 7.' 8 .15
"61 e 7 .07
o83 C0 I3o76
1 1.1 ".13
'S90'S VI 9
21 «B .'03
20*5 c'16
| 0 .' 8 .'12
98o3 .'iS
63.0 .'07
.84 C0 13.77
11.4 ".12
61.. 0 .18
23.4 .'03
17.4 .'17
11.3 .'10
99.' 5 .'15
65o'l .'07
o82"C0 13*78
.8 PPM HC ' 1.
287.2 PPM HC
303
»S PPM HC 1.
C02
C02
C92
C02
C02
C02
31
83
00
3783 MILES 3SQ00
C0 13.49
C0 13.77
C0 13.67
C02
C32
C02
AUTOMATIC MASS EMISSI0NS
HG 3. Si 'GRAMS PER MILE
C0 21,7 GRAMS PER MILE
MG
-------
FIGURE 6 A
2-1464 02-1 1
EXPERIMENTAL
HC
293.5
328.6
29.5.6
277. 1
321 o3
.282.2
1690,2
T0TAL
215.1
208.1
1 72 . 1
233.3
189.0
1 71.2
2020.3
T0TAL
293.5
220. 1
151.4
398.2
184. 1
181.1
1920,9
TOTAL
251.6
208. 1
151.4
-v 465. 4
185. 1
180. 1
1804.8
T0TAL
224.2
199.0
143,6
-r5'520.5
1 72.1
178. 1
1912,0
TOTAL
237.3
216. 1
1 56.4
375.3
1 67,2
183. 1
1699,0
TOTAL
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
C0
3.
2.
4.
6.
4.
1*
4.
CYCLE
2.
2.
1.'
2.
CYCLE
= 69
>
10
83
37
66
80
12
46
I
51
56
19
72
22
20
39
2
2.27
1 .
45
13
97
1.21
2.
CYCLE
2.
.
1 .
1 .
»
1.
CYCLE
1 .
1 .
1 .
CYCLE
!
1 .
1 .
.
1
19
15
3
1 7
48
17
97
08
18
97
4
91
44
13
76
92
17
84
6
93
44
16
84
37
22
94
CYCLE 7
F0RD
f £>/,',<.
.CO?
12.25
12.37
1 1.98
10.19
1 1 . 60
13.66
9.98
342.8
12.40
13.13
13.50
1 1.98
13.42
12.60
9.96
261.2
12. 10
12.70
12.65
1 1 .93
1 3 . 42
12.78
'9.83
282o3
12.23
12.88
12.72
1.1. 79
13.37
12.78
10o04
"276.9
12.06
12.78
12.83
11.69
13. 45
12.78
" 9.96
279. 1
12.25"
13.13
1.3.06
12.08
1.3.00
12.88
10.23
267.4
FAIRLANC
c
!.
i «'
i.
i.
1 .
le
l»
PPM
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1 .
PPM
1.
1 .
1.
1 .
1.
1.
1.
03
03
00
05
01
00
03
04
06
05
07
02
13
09
07
10
13
09
02
1 1
12
PPM
lo
1.
1.
1.
1.
I .
U
07
09
12
09
03
1 1
12
PPM
1.
1.
1.
1 .
1,
i.
1.
09
10
1 1
10
03
i 1
12
PPM'
1 c
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
08
07
09
08
05
10
i 1
PPM "
0F CYCLES 1-4
0F CYCLES 6-7
WEIGHTED SUM
(TIP
. l-'L'.G
32,
82.
34o
18.
7
2
9
0
16.2
HC
HC
HC
HC
HC
HC
290
273
279
128.
"50.
2.68
'9.
54.
21.
IS.
"9.
87.
63.
.70
13.
59.
20.
26.
9.
91.
62.
. 60
11.
55c
20.
31.
9.'
91 .'
58.
.59
I'O.
53.
18.
35.
8.
90.
62.
.54
I'O.
56.
20.
25.
8.'
91.
54.
.59
2
6
C0
4
0
4
4
6
7
7
C0
2
2
1
8
4
4
2
C0
3
2
0
5
5
0
5
C0
3
3
3
6
9
0
1
"C0
7
3
1
2
7
6
8
C0
.8 PPM
.2 PPM
.4 PPM
l-.'C
0
o
o
.
e
e
o
12
»
.'
t
«
»
*
13
*
13
e
«
e
6
13
*
«
13
c
«
13
HC
HC
HC
720408
n\
13
71
52
43
24
51
13
o79
I'l
15
02
18
06
10
08
.87
I'O
12
02
13
06
10
07
.89
10
13
02
13
06
09
06
.90
09
12
02
12
05
09
06
.93
09
12
02
12
07
1 1
06
.92
1.
»
C02
C02
C02
C02
C02
C02
14
56
77
37532 MILES 3500(3
C0 13.61
C0 13.92
C'2I 13.82
C02
C32
Ci32
AUT0MATIC MASS EMISSIONS
HC 3.23 GRAMS PER MILE C0 16.6 GRAMS PER MILE
-------
FIGURE
2-1475
02-34
EXPERIMENTAL
HC
34J.O
369°'0
301 o 7
321 0'3
353o4
2 99o 7
2428° S
TOTAL .
335.8
277.1
193cO
232.3
232o3
200.0
2203.7
TOTAL
399.3
287*3
178. 1
283.2
236o3
209«>' 1
1984» 1
TOTAL
3 73. .2
28Q.2
181.1.
313.1
222.2
.204, 1
1769.3
TOTAL
299.7
236.3
1 63.2
-->349°3
208. 1
198.0
2056.8
TOTAL
-848.8
436.0
194.0
420.2
232.3
219.1
1849.2
TOTAL
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
C0
2o
2o'
4o'
7o'
So
o
4;
CYCLE
3o
c
.
3.'
1 .
' .
3o
CYCLE
3.
e
*
2.
1.
e
2.
CYCLE
2.
-69
W/0
98
81
13
32
32
78
42
1
58
95
17
47
73
21
03
2
29
62
15
63
37
22
58
.3
94
s
F0RD
DEVICE
C02
C.O ~J u
12 .'75
1
i
I
I
'
2 o 42
Oo40
1.'77
3.98
9. '73
380o5
FA
1RLANE
FACTOR
1
1
\
'p
0
fl*
0
0
0
c
PPM
1.2.88
1.2 o SO I.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.
i
I
I
i
i
3.88
2. 75
3.93
2 .'30
0.36 .
304. 1
3.08
2.75
3.00
2.93
4. 1 5
2.60
0.73
309.4
3.21
.69 12.85
*
2.
1 .
0
2.
15
46
43
22
41
i
i
i
I
1
CYCLE 4
2.
o
2.
1.
.
2.
37
47
13
14
36
19
22
i
i
i
i
1
i
i
CYCLE 6
2.
*
t
2.
1 .
*
2.
CYCLE
05
53
16
02
27
22
27
7
i
1
l
i.
1
i
i
"
0F CYCLES
3.24
3.08
4o29
2.60
1 ,' 02
298.0
3. 16
2.60
2.75
2 .'70
3.85
2.30
Oo27
297.4
2762
2.40
2.85
2. 75
3.90
2.35
0..51
387.0
' 1-4
1
"
1
I
0
o
c
o
o
o
fi
PPM
1
1
1
1
I
o
e
»
o
.
o
0
PPM
1
1
1
1
o
o
G
O
O
o
o
v'B
00
98
01
?8
99
00
HC
96
07
02
98
96
15
02
. HC
96
08
09
00
96
12
02
HC
96
07
07
99
95
12
03
PPM HC
1
i
1
1
1
e
o
o
o
.
o
0
99
1 1
12
02
98
15
07
PPM HC
1
1
1
1
1
1
o
0
#
e
o
o
00
10
10
02
98
14
06
PPM HC
0F CYCLES 6-7
WEIGHTED SUM
323
342
335
WHC
i £*
89
34
20
17
134
"70
e
.
P
o
e
e
o
2.48
rs
72
23
14
11
104
'65
.9
.
o
o
e
«
»
r"
r
16.
76
23
17
11
106
'58
.
e
.
0
0
»'
.73
15
73
22
19
10
104
"52
6
e
0
o
0
9
0
.72
-f 2
63
21
22
10
103
' 63
D
O
.'
»
o
.'
.
.61
35
117
25
26
1 1
113
~S7
.
.
.
.
.
.'
.
. 63
.0
.2
.5
0
7
8
0
3
S
1
~C0
6
2
3
2
2
6
0
C0
0
0
0
5
4
7
9
C0
1
4
9
2
6
1
6
CO
4
9
5
2
2
6
6
C0
5
4
3
6
4
9
0
CO
PPM
PPM
PPM
720408 37638 MILES 3f
WC0
. 12
6s H 1 W OtfiCIAL V/v.;u<>
.48
.'46
.'26
.'35
.'13
I2o'85 C02
'.15 ' '
.'25
.'02
.21
.'08
.11
.Q9"
13. 72 C02
".13
.17
;02
.16
.'07
.11
.08
13.60 C02
".12
.'18
.'02
.'15
.07
.1 1
.07
13.32 C02
'. 10
.'13
.'02
.14
.07
.10
.07
13.87 C02
".09
.'14
.'02
.13
.'06
.'12
.07
13.77 C02
HC ' 1.21 C0 13. 55 C32
HC ".'62 C0 13.'82 C02
HC .83 CO 13.72 C02
AUTOMATIC MASS EMISSIONS
HC 3.88 GRAMS PER MILE
C0 18.0
PER MILE
-------
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION/AND WELFARE
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
T0 : M. Korth DATE: May 8, 1968
Through: D. Hollabaugh FTWrvro
FROM : p. T. wmhite
SUBJECT: Kentucky Vehicle-Air Pollution Test,
A teot vehicle was delivered by Mr. David A. Gravely of the Kentucky
Air Pollution Control CommiBsion on April ?5» 19^8» f°* tasting by
the USPHS laboratories.
Teat Vehicle information:
Year end Make: 1966 Ford
Displacement: 390 cubic inches
Tranoraiooion: Automatic
Licence: Kentucky Kl6-66l
Odometer Mileage: 53,56*4- miles
Tcpt Procedure
The teat procedure followed was the atandard J-raoda exhauot emission
procedure with two exceptions;
1» Since tho vehicle was hot when delivered, no cold ctarte wore
obtained.
2. Macs cmiasiono were obtained concurrently with Scott Cart
emlcoionc.
To properly precondition the test vehicle several cycles were run
utilising Indolcae test fuel. After the vehicle had equilibrated,
eraicoion tceacurcraente wore obtained. The vehicle was baeelined with
the device at the otart and end of the test series. When the device
wae removed the PCV valve was replaced and the exhaust laanifold inlets
were plugged.
Teat Rncmlto
Table 1 indicates the level of eroiseiono of the test vehicle with and
without the device. From this table it is evident that there is an
enlearaicnt occurring when utiing the device* This enlcanmsnt does not
HELP ELIMINATE WASTE ' COST REDUCTION PROGRAM
-------
. - 2 -
bring the car within the present level set for emissions but it does reduce
the quantities of hydrocarbon and CO in the exhaust. However, thio reduction
in emissions is minor in respect to the initial high level of emissions*
PavjLce in Quontjon
Figures 1 and 2 represent the device in question as interpreted by the
writer from discussions with Mr. Gravely. No phyoical examination of the
device was made due to the short testing schedule. The device is believed
to have come from the Automotive Pollution Control Corporation*
Figure 1 represents the attachment made to each exhaust manifold. Figure
2 represents the device inserted in the line from the crankcaae to the
intake manifold instead of the PCV valve.
A$ related to the writer the device functions as follows:
1. Refer to Figure 1 - during various modes of the cycle air is drawn into
the exhaust manifold for further combustion (after burning).
2» Refer to Figure 2 - during all modes of the cycle this device is open for
the passage of crankcaoe vapors to the intake manifold. These vapors
pass through the venturies and impact on the offset venturieo which
causes a further atcnization of the vapors for better combustion.
Writers note - Since this passage is open to the atmosphere
(through the breather cap) during all modes of tha cycle, part or all
of tha cnleanmont rtay be accounted for through Cha addition of air to
the intake manifold from this line.
The uae of tha device on the teat vehicle did reduce emissions. However,
this reduction was oo minor that the c'avice could hardly ba deemed successful
BO an oir pollution control device for thio vehicle.
P. T. Willhite
-------
Table 1
HC(NDIRCg)
ppmCx- gin/mile
1*38
Exhaust Emissions
Average Values
CO
gm/roile %
CO,., NO Air/Fuel
5? K
gra/mile gtn/mile Ratio
Without Device (6 Cyclee)
U.l+3 2.9U 6U.6U 12.02 1*75.83
3.0T
Ull
Device (12 cyclec
2.32 51-93 12.65 509-99 3-32 13-78
Difference-
-O.Ul* -0.62° -12.
0.62°
6.2 9-3
21.1
- $> Difference
19-7 5.0
6.7
7.,6
«Statiotically oignificont at the 95$ level.
-------
ij
; tI.H
tfcr. -
T
M i. f
\
\
>- DEVICE
EXHAUST MANIFOLD
.FIGURE
INTER«RFTirC- VIEW
-------
-4-
\\ v^ 7 N \\
\ s j \» \ \
v ' XA \ '
. r f..-r .. r--x\-
\ -r A I .' \ I ' '\ ! VN
V, r if-'' « i -V:-
"/vv \
_cw
- , ^ -.. --x. PVv ,'j
- ' K' i S.\'
DEVICE
/ ! ;
/
- /
.
' i
'
t
/
i
!
;
1
I
kj
ASE INTAKE
MANIFOLD
FIGURE 2
INTERPRETED VIEW
------- |