EPA/AA/CTAB/88-10
                        Technical Report
              Methanol Vehicle Catalyst Evaluation:
                            Phase III
                               by
                      Gregory K.  Piotrowski
                          November 1988
                             NOTICE

     Technical  Reports  do  not  necessarily represent  final  EPA
decisions or positions.   They are  intended  to  present technical
analysis  of  issues  using  data which  are  currently  available.
The purpose in the release of such reports  is  to facilitate  the
exchange  of  technical information and  to inform the  public  of
technical developments which may form the basis  for a final  EPA
decision, position or regulatory action.

             U.  S. Environmental Protection Agency
                  Office of Air and Radiation
                    Office of Mobile Sources
              Emission Control Technology Division
           Control Technology and Applications  Branch
                       2565 Plymouth Road
                   Ann Arbor,  Michigan  48105

-------
   \   UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

   /                ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105
                                                        OFFICE OF
                                                     AIR AND RADIATION
"FC 1 9 1989

•1BMORANDUM


SUBJECT:   Exemption  From  Peer  and  Administrative Review
FROM
TO:
Karl H. Kellman, Chief
Control Technology and Applications Branch

Charles L. Gray, Jr., Director
Emission Control Technology Division
     The  attached  report  entitled  "Methanol  Vehicle  Catalyst
Evaluation:    Phase  III,"  (EPA/AA/CTAB/88-10)   describes  the
evaluation   of   several   noble   and   base   metal   catalyst
technologies  for   their  use  as  neat  methanol-fueled  vehicle
catalysts.

     Since  this  report is  concerned  only with the  presentation
of data and  its  analysis  and does not involve  matters  of policy
or   regulations,   your   concurrence  is   requested   to   waive
administrative review  according to  the  policy outlined  in your
directive of April  22, 1982.
   Concurrence:
                                    Date
               Caa-fles L. Gray, xJr/,  Dir.,  ECTD
Nonconcurrence:
                                    Date:
               Charles L. Gray, Jr., Dir.,  ECTD

cc:  E. Burger, ECTD

-------
 I.   Summary

     The   methanol  catalyst  testing   reported  on  here  was
 conducted  as  a follow-up to an earlier  EPA catalyst  evaluation
 program.[1,2,3,4]   The purpose of the testing described here  in
 Part   1,   Section   V   was  to  evaluate  noble  metal  catalysts
 suggested  by   researchers  to  be  particularly  effective  for
 methanol-vehicle  applications.[5,6]   The purpose of the testing
 described  in  Part  2,   Section V  was to  evaluate selected base
 metals  and  other  specific  catalyst  technologies   for  use   as
 methanol-vehicle catalysts.

     Both  of  the  configurations  tested in Part 1, Ag:Pd(50) and
 Pt(50), were  effective when tested as  three-way catalysts over
 the  Federal  test   procedure  (FTP).   The  formaldehyde emission
 level  was  only 5.9 milligrams per  mile  over  the  FTP  in  the
 three-way  mode  with  the  Pt(50)   catalyst.    The  simulated
 oxidation  catalyst  mode was not preferred  to the three-way mode
 because of considerably higher NOx  and formaldehyde  emissions.
 Both  catalysts had good  HC,  CO,  and  formaldehyde  conversion
 efficiencies over the  highway fuel economy test (HFET) cycle.

     The   base  metal/palladium  and  platinum/palladium/unique
 washcoat configurations discussed in  Part  2 had HC  efficiencies
 greater than  90  percent  over the  FTP.   CO emissions from the
 test vehicle were  low, only 0.73 grams  per mile over the FTP,
 when the base  metal/palladium  catalyst was used.  NOx emissions
 with  these catalysts  were relatively  unchanged from baseline
 levels.    Both  base   metal-containing   catalysts   also   had
 formaldehyde  conversion efficiencies  greater  than 90  percent
 over the FTP.

 II.  Introduction

     Section  211  of the  Clean Air  Act  [7]  requires the  U.S.
 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to play a key role  in the
 introduction of new motor vehicle fuels.   EPA  studies [8]  have
 suggested  that  methanol  stands   out  from  other   alternative
 transportation  fuels   from  an environmental perspective.   The
 use of  alcohol fuels  can  also play a  significant  role in  the
 reduction  of  the  foreign trade  deficit  and  aid  the security
 interests   of  the  United States by  reducing U.S. dependence  on
 imported petroleum.[9]

     The  use  of  methanol  fuel  rather  than  gasoline  may  be
 expected to benefit the performance of a catalytic  converter  in
 two  ways.    First,  pure  methanol  contains   low  levels   of
 substances  such  as sulfur  and  lead  which  act  as   catalyst
poisons.   Second,  reduced  exhaust   gas  temperatures  at   the
catalyst  inlet  should  reduce  thermal   degradation  over   an
extended period of vehicle operation.

-------
                       Table of Contents

                                                          Page
                                                         Number
I.    Summary	    1
II.  Introduction  	    1
III. Vehicle Descriptions  	    2
IV.  Test Facilities and Analytical Methods  	    3
V.    Part 1:  Noble Metal Catalyst Screening 	    4
     A.    Program Design  	    4
     B.    Catalysts Tested  	    4
     C.    FTP Test Discussion	    4
     D.    HFET Test Discussion	    8
VI.  Part 2:  Base Metal/Alternative Technology
     Catalyst Screening  	    9
     A.    Program Design  	    9
     B.    Catalysts Tested  	    9
     C.    FTP Test Discussion	   10
     D.    HFET Test Discussion	   12
VII.Test Highlights  	   13
     A.    Part 1	   13
     B.    Part 2	   13
VIII.Acknowledgments 	   14
IX.  References	   15

APPENDIX A - Specifications For Volkswagen Test Vehicle.   A-l
APPENDIX B - Specifications For Toyota Test Vehicle   .  .   B-l

-------
                              -3-

     The emission control  system was  modified by EPA to include
an air  injection pump  which can inject air into  the  exhaust  at
a  location  approximately  1  foot  downstream  from  the  oxygen
sensor.  A manually  adjustable  valve  was  installed in  the line
between  the  diverter  valve and the  exhaust  inlet.   The  valve
permits the oxygen concentration over the  catalyst  to be varied
while operating the engine  in the closed-loop  mode.

     A detailed description of  the  vehicle and special methanol
modifications is provided in Appendix A.

     The test  vehicle  referred to  in Part 2,  Section V  was  a
1986 Toyota  Carina,  a vehicle  sold in Japan  but currently not
exported to  the United  States.  The  powerplant  is  a  1587  cc
displacement,  4-cylinder,  single-overhead  camshaft  engine.  The
engine  has  been modified  for  operation  on methanol  in a lean
burn mode,  incorporating  the  lean  mixture  sensor, swirl control
valve  and  timed sequential fuel  injection found on  the Toyota
lean  combustion  system  (T-LCS).   Modifications  to the  fuel
system included the  substitution of parts  resistant to methanol
corrosion for stock parts.

     A detailed description of  the  vehicle and special methanol
modifications is provided in Appendix B.

IV.  Test Facilities and Analytical Methods

     Emissions testing at  EPA was  conducted on  a Clayton  Model
ECE-50  double-roll  chassis dynamometer,   using  a  direct-drive
variable  inertia   flywheel  unit  and   road load  power  control
unit.   The  Philco  Ford CVS used has  a nominal capacity of 350
cfm.

     Exhaust  HC emissions  were  measured  by   flame  ionization
detection  (FID)  using  a  Beckman Model   400.   This  FID  was
calibrated with propane;  no attempt was  made to  adjust  for FID
response factor  to methanol.   No corrections  were  made for the
difference   in  hydrocarbon  composition   due   to  the  use  of
methanol rather than unleaded gasoline for fuel.  NOx emissions
were measured by chemiluminescent technique utilizing a Beckman
Model 8501-5CA.

     Exhaust formaldehyde is measured using a dinitrophenyl-
hydrazine  (DNPH) technique.[12,13]  Exhaust carbonyls including
formaldehyde  are  reacted  with  DNPH  solution  forming hydrazone
derivatives.   These derivatives  are  separated  from the  DNPH
solution  by  means  of high  performance   liquid  chromatography
(HPLC).   Quantization is  accomplished  by  spectrophotometric
analysis of  the LC effluent stream.

     HC  test   results  in  the  text  are  presented  without
accounting for FID response to  methanol or  the difference  in HC
composition  because  of the use of  methanol fuel.  The emission
values  presented   in  this  report   were  also   calculated  using
proposed methanol-fueled vehicle test procedures.

-------
                               -2-

     The  Emission  Control  Technology Division  (ECTD)  of  the
 Office  of Mobile Sources,  EPA,  assesses technology  that  could
 be  used  to  reduce mobile  source emissions.  One  part of  this
 assessment  has  been  a  program to   evaluate  various  exhaust
 catalysts   at  low  mileage   on  neat  methanol-fueled   (M100)
 vehicles.   Test results  from  this  program have  been published
 in   a  variety  of  EPA   and   other   professional   literature
 sources.[1,2,3,4]

     The  testing discussed  in this  report  has been divided  into
 two   separate  sections.   The   first  section  discusses   the
 evaluation  of two noble  metal   catalysts:   1)  Platinum,  at  50
 grams   per   cubic   foot   of    substrate   volume,   and   2)   a
 silver/palladium  mixture,  also  at  50  grams  per  cubic  foot  of
 substrate  volume.   These  catalysts   were  supplied  to  EPA  by
 Engelhard  Industries;  specifications  are provided  in  Section  V
 of this report.

     Two  different  catalyst operating  modes  were chosen  for
 Part   1.    The  catalysts  were  first   tested   as   three-way
 converters, to  oxidize unburned fuel,  aldehydes,  and CO as  well
 as to  reduce  NOx emissions.  An air pump which supplied air  to
 the exhaust ahead of  the catalyst but downstream of the exhaust
 oxygen  sensor was  then used  to evaluate  the catalysts  in  a
 simulated  oxidation mode.  The  driving  cycles tested were  the
 Federal test  procedure (FTP)  [10] and the  highway  fuel economy
 test (HFET) [11] cycles.

     Part   2   of  Section  V   in  this   report   discusses   the
 evaluation of three catalysts obtained from Automotive Catalyst
 Company,   a   subsidiary  of  Allied-Signal.   These   catalysts
 utilized in turn:

     l.    A base-metal only technology;

     2.    A mixture of base metal and palladium;  and

     3.    A  platinum-palladium  mixture   utilizing   a  unique
           washeoat.

     The  details  of  the catalyst  formulation and application
 are proprietary to Allied-Signal.

 III.  Vehicle Descriptions

     The  vehicle  used  for  the  noble  metal  catalyst  screening
described  in  Part  l,  Section V was   a  1981 Volkswagen  Rabbit
4-door  sedan,   equipped   with   automatic   transmission,   air
conditioning,  and radial  tires.   The  1.6-liter engine is  rated
at maximum  power output  of 88  horsepower at  5,600   rpm.   The
vehicle was tested  at 2,500 Ibs inertia weight  and  7.3  actual
dynamometer horsepower.

-------
                               -4-

V.   Part 1:  Noble Metal Catalyst Screening

     A.    Program Design

     The  evaluation  of  a  catalyst  during  this  phase was  a
three-step    process.     First,    the    test    vehicle    was
emission-tested on  a chassis  dynamometer  without the catalytic
converter present  in the exhaust stream  and with  the  air  pump
rendered  inoperable.   The  driving  cycles  tested were  the  FTP
and HFET.

     Following  these   baseline   tests,   the  catalyst   to   be
evaluated  was  attached under   the  vehicle  in  the  exhaust
stream.  The  catalyst was evaluated in an  underfloor location.
The  second step  of  the process was  to  repeat  the  series  of
tests  described  above with  the  air pump still  disabled.   The
catalyst was evaluated  in the  "three-way" mode in this test.

     In  the third  step,  the  air pump  was enabled and  air  was
added  at  a  predetermined rate to the exhaust directly  in front
of  the  catalyst  but  downstream of  the  oxygen  sensor.   This
action simulated  the operation of the catalyst as  an oxidation
catalyst.   The amount  of air supplied  by the air  pump during
testing  was the  amount  of  necessary makeup  air  to obtain  3
percent  oxygen in the  vehicle exhaust  (at  the catalyst inlet)
at 30 MPH steady-state conditions as measured with  a  Sun oxygen
analyzer.  The car  was  then tested over the FTP and HFET cycles
in this  configuration.   Following this oxidation catalyst  mode
testing  the  converter was  removed  from  the exhaust stream,  the
air pump was disabled,  and the car was again baseline tested.

     B.    Catalysts Tested:   Part 1

     The  catalysts  reported   on  here used ceramic  monolithic
substrates  which  contained  400  square  cells  per  square inch.
The  substrates   were   cylindrically  shaped,  4.0   inches   in
diameter and 6.0  inches  in length.

     The  catalyst   descriptions   indicate  the  ratio  of  the
constituents  by  weight,  and  the number  in parentheses  at  the
end  of the description gives  the catalyst  loading  in grams  per
cubic  foot.   Constituents   are   identified by  their  chemical
abbreviations.

     Other  details  of   catalyst formulation,  application  and
structure are considered  proprietary to Engelhard Industries.

     C.    FTP Test Discussion

     FTP  test  results are  presented and  analyzed  here  in  two
formats.   Table   1  details  emission  levels from the evaluated
converters   obtained   over    two   catalyst  operating   modes,
three-way  and oxidation  catalyst,  respectively.    Baseline  (no
catalyst) results with the  air pump  disabled are  also presented
for  each pollutant  category.   The  discussion below  includes  a
determination  of  the most  effective operating  mode  for these
catalysts.

-------
                               -5-



                              Table 1


                       Emissions Test Results


                VW Rabbit  Vehicle, M100  Fuel,  FTP Cvcle
               Number   HC    HC*   CO   NOx  CH30H* OMHCE*  Aide.
  Configuration of Tests  (q/mi)  (g/mi)  (g/mi)  (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) (mg/mi)
  Baseline         3


  Ag:Pd(50) 3-way  3


  Ag:Pd(50) Oxid.  3


  Pt(50) 3-way     3


  Pt(50) Oxid.     2
1.02   0.12   6.45   1.67   2.78   1.47   302.0


0.18   0.02   0.68   0.96   0.48   0.24    17.6


0.25   0.03   0.48   1.82   0.68   0.38   115.0


0.18   0.02   0.45   0.95   0.49   0.24     5.9


0.16   0.02   0.34   1.84   0.42   0.21     8.9
      Calculated values per proposed rulemaking.
     HC  and CO  emissions  were  0.18  and  0.68  grams  per  mile
respectively  over the  FTP with  the Ag:Pd  (50)  catalyst  in the
three-way mode.   HC increased to  0.25 grams per  mile when the
catalyst was  tested in the  oxidation mode.  The addition of air
assisted the oxidation of CO,  however;  CO  dropped to  0.48 grams
per mile over  the FTP  with the air  pump  on.   HC  emissions from
the  Pt(50)  converter  were  a  similar   0.18  and 0.16  grams  per
mile  respectively  over  the  three-way  and  oxidation  catalyst
modes.   The addition  of  air  appeared to  assist   the  conversion
of  CO with the  Pt(50)  converter,  as  was  the   case with the
Ag:Pd(50) catalyst;  CO dropped to 0.34 grams per  mile with the
air pump on, versus  0.45  grams per mile in the three-way mode.

     NOx emission levels were similar for both catalysts in the
three-way  mode  over  the  FTP,   approximately  0.95   grams  per
mile.   The  addition  of  air  caused  NOx  emissions  from  both
catalysts to  rise to  similar  levels of  approximately 1.8 grams
per   mile.    The   Pt(50)    catalyst    reduced   emissions   of
formaldehyde  to  5.9  milligrams  per  mile over  the FTP  in the
three-way mode;  formaldehyde  emissions were 17.6  milligrams per
mile with the Ag:Pd(50)  catalyst in the same mode.   The  use of
additional   air   caused   formaldehyde   levels    to    increase
substantially  with both  catalysts;  formaldehyde  levels  of  115
milligrams  per mile over the FTP  were noted with the Ag:Pd(50)
catalyst  in the  oxidation mode.   The  increase  in  formaldehyde
emissions from the Pt(50)  catalyst, from 5.9 (three-way)  to 8.9
milligrams  per  mile  when  tested  in  the  oxidation  mode  was
substantial;   however,  the  efficiency of  the  Pt(50)  catalyst
exceeded 97 percent  in the oxidation mode.

-------
                               -6-

     The  three-way catalyst  mode appears  to  be  the  preferred
operating  mode when  all  pollutants  are  considered  to  be  of
equal concern.   HC levels  were determined  to  be  approximately
0.16  to  0.18  grams  per  mile  for  each  configuration with  the
exception of 0.25 grams per mile  from the Ag:Pd(50)  catalyst  in
the  oxidation  mode.    The oxidation  mode  was  preferred  for  CO
conversion,  increasing   conversion   efficiency  by   25   to   30
percent  for  the  catalysts evaluated.   The  three-way mode  was
clearly preferred  for  NOx and  formaldehyde, however.   Overall,
despite  the  suggestion  that  CO  conversion  is assisted  by  the
addition  of  excess  air,  the  three-way mode,  because  of  its
simplicity  and  superiority  in  reducing  formaldehyde and  NOx
emissions  and  the   lack  of   convincing   evidence  that   HC
efficiency was  significantly  improved by the  addition of  excess
air, was preferred.

     Figures  1 and  2  compare  the  results from  the  evaluated
catalysts over  the three-way  mode to  heavily  loaded noble metal
catalyst  test   results  obtained  [4]  with  this  vehicle.   The
catalysts  used   for   this  comparison  were  5Pt:Rh(80)   and
Ag:Rh(300) coated ceramic monoliths  of  the  same  physical  size
and exhaust stream location as  the catalysts evaluated here.
                     CATALYST EFFICIENCIES
                          FTP CYCLE
     CATALYST COMPOSITION


               5PT:RH(80)



              10AG:RH(300)



                AG:PD(50)



                  PT(50)
                              HC EFFICIENCY
CO EFFICIENCY
                                  40   60   80
                                   % EFFICIENCY
     100   120
                           FIGURE 1

-------
                               -7-
                      CATALYST EFFICIENCIES
                           FTP CYCLE
                            I NOx EFFICIENCY  MS ALDY. EFFICIENCY
      CATALYST COMPOSITION


                5PT:RH(80)



              10AG:RH(300)



                 AG:PD(50)



                   PT(50)
 98.2
93.6
94.2
                              20    40    60   80   100  120
                                    % EFFICIENCY

                            FIGURE 2
     Both  of  the evaluated catalysts  had  HC  efficiencies of
82.4 percent,  slightly  lower  than the  89.2 percent  efficiency
obtained with  the more heavily  loaded 5Pt:Rh(80) catalyst.  The
use  of  palladium  rather  than   rhodium,   at   least   in  the
proportions  tested  here,  appeared  to  be  preferred  when  used
with silver for  HC conversion.   The  evaluated  catalysts  also
had  CO  conversion   efficiencies  slightly  higher  than   that
previously   experienced  with  the   5Pt:Rh(80)   catalyst.   The
increase in  efficiencies was marginal,  however;  Ag:Pd(50) had a
89.6  percent  efficiency  compared  with  89.3  percent  for  5
Pt:Rh(80).

     NOx efficiencies  for the evaluated catalysts were similar,
42.5 and 43.1 percent  respectively for  the  Ag:Pd(50)  and Pt(50)
catalysts.    These were  slightly  lower than  the  50.9  percent
efficiency  from  the  5Pt:Rh(80)  catalyst,  yet  a  substantial
improvement   from  the   28.1   percent   from  the  10Ag:Rh(300)
catalyst.   Both   evaluated  catalysts  had  NOx  levels  which
approximated the  current 1 gram  per  mile light-duty vehicle NOx
standard.

-------
                                -8-

     Forraaldehyde efficiencies  for  all  catalysts  referred  to
here   were  uniformly   high;   however,  the   silver-containing
catalysts  performed  less efficiently  than the  platinum-
containing   catalysts.     Silver-containing     catalysts    had
formaldehyde   conversion   efficiencies  of  94   percent;   these
efficiencies   were   consistent   despite   the   widely   varying
formulations  between the catalysts  because of  the  addition  of
other  noble  metals.   The  platinum-containing  catalysts had  a
consistent 98 percent  formaldehyde efficiency;  platinum  appears
to  be a  very  good  catalyst  for  conversion of  formaldehyde  in
vehicle exhaust.

     The   three-way  operating  mode   was   preferable   to   the
oxidation  mode for  the catalysts  evaluated, when the  pollutants
measured   are  considered  to  be  equally  undesirable.    Similar
catalyst  efficiencies  were noted  for HC and  NOx conversion  for
both  the  Ag:Pd(50)  and Pt(50)  catalysts.   The  Pt(50)  catalyst
was  slightly  more   efficient   than  * Ag:Pd(50)   at  controlling
formaldehyde  and CO  emissions.

     D.     HFET Test Discussion

     HFET  results are  presented in  Table  2.   The  same  format
that was used in Table 1, FTP Results,  is used here.
                            Table  2


                      Emissions Test Results


              VW Rabbit Vehicle. M100 Fuel, HFET Cycle



             Number    HC     HC*    CO   NOx  CH30H* OMHCE*  Aide.
Configuration of Tests (q/mi) (q/mi) (q/mi)  (q/mi) (q/mi) (q/mi)  (mq/mi)


Baseline         1    0.56    .07   5.30   2.81   1.53   0.79  128.0


Aq:Pd(50) 3-way   3    0.01    --    0.01   1.53   0.03   0.02    3.6


Ag:Pd(50) Oxid.   3    0.01    --     --   2.78   0.04   0.02    9.4


Pt(50) 3-way      3    0.01    —     --   1.43   0.02   0.01    1.9


Pt(50) Oxid.      2    0.01    --     --   2.91   0.03   0.01    1.6
*    Calculated values per proposed rulemaking.

     No detectable levels.

-------
                              -9-

     All of  the  catalysts tested  reduced  HC emissions  to  very
low levels over both  operating  modes.   This was  not  unexpected
due  to  the  high  speed driving  characteristics  of  the  cycle
which caused catalysts  to  light-off  very early.   The oxidation
reactions which  produced  lower  aldehyde and CO  emissions  were
similarly affected.  The Ag:Pd(50) catalyst  had a substantially
lower formaldehyde  conversion efficiency in  the oxidation mode
than  in the three-way  mode.    NOx levels  from  both evaluated
catalysts  approximated  baseline  levels  when  tested  in  the
oxidation mode.  NOx  efficiencies  approximated  47  percent  from
both catalysts  when tested in the three-way mode.

VI.   Part   2:    Base   Metal/Alternative   Technology  Catalyst
     Screening

     A.     Program Design

     The evaluation  of  the catalysts  during this  phase was  a
three-step  process.   First,  the car  was  emission tested  on  a
chassis  dynamometer  with  an  uncatalyzed  substrate  present  in
the stock catalytic  converter can  on the vehicle.  This testing
was defined  as baseline testing for  this report.   The original
equipment  (OEM)   converter for  the  MIOO-fueled Toyota  Carina
vehicle  used in  this testing is  close-coupled to the  exhaust
manifold, rather  than  located  underfloor.  The driving cycles
were the FTP and HFET cycles.

     Following these  baseline tests,  the  uncatalyzed substrate
was  replaced with the  OEM Pt:Rh catalyzed substrate  and the
vehicle was  tested over FTP  and HFET cycles.   This  testing is
referred to  later in the  discussion as OEM manifold converter
testing.

     The candidate catalysts  were then  mounted  in the  exhaust
stream  in  an underfloor  location  and separately evaluated over
FTP  and HFET cycles.   The uncatalyzed  substrate was placed in
the  exhaust   at   the  exhaust   manifold  location   during  the
separate underfloor catalyst evaluations.

     The  catalysts were  not  evaluated  here  in the oxidation
mode  for two  reasons.   First,  we believed that the three-way
mode was preferable for the reasons given  in Section  V,  Part 1
of  this report.   Second,  the  test  vehicle  operates  lean  of
stoichiometric by design.[14]

     B.    Catalysts Tested:  Part 2

     The  catalysts  reported  on  here used ceramic  monolithic
substrates  of  the  same dimensions as the  substrates described
in  Part 1.   The  three  catalysts  reported  on   in  this  section
made use of:

-------
                                -10-

     1.     Base-metal-only  technology;

     2.     A mixture of base metal and palladium;  and

     3.     A  platinum-palladium   mixture  utilizing  a   unique
            washcoat.

     The   third  technology   is  referred  to   as  Pt/Pd/coat  in
Figures 3  and 4.

     The  details  of  the catalyst formulations are proprietary
to Allied-Signal.

     C.     FTP Test Discussion

     Results  of  testing  over  the FTP  cycle  are  presented  in
Table 3 and Figures 3 and 4.

                             Table 3

                      Emissions Test  Results

                Toyota Carina, M100 Fuel,  FTP Cycle
             Number   HC    HC*    CO    NOx   CH30H* OMHCE*  Aide.
Configuration o£ Tests  (q/mi)  (q/mi)  (q/mi) (q/mi) (q/mi) (q/mi) (mq/tni)


Baseline         4     1.67   0.200   4.26   1.11   4.55   2.36   419.


OEM manifold     3     0.07   0.008   1.84   0.73   0.19   0.09    11.
converter


Base metal       3     0.38   0.044   1.08   1.24   1.02   0.50    34.
converter


Base metal       3     0.14   0.017   0.73   1.16   0.39   0.20    30.

and Pd


Pt/Pd, unique    2     0.13   0.016  1.62   1.01   0.36   0.19    56.
washcoat
     Calculated values per proposed rulemaking.
     HC  levels from  the OEM manifold converter were  0.07  grams
per  mile  for  an  efficiency  of  almost  96  percent.   The  noble
metal-containing  catalysts had  similar  efficiencies  exceeding
90  percent,  yet  the  weight  per mile  of  HC  allowed  by  these
catalysts  was  almost twice  the  level  from  the OEM  converter.
The  efficiency of  the  base  metal  converter  was  considerably
lower at 77 percent.

-------
                              -11-

     CO levels from  the  OEM converter exceeded  those from  each
underfloor  catalyst  tested.   The  base  metal   and  palladium
configuration had a CO efficiency  at 82.9 percent, considerably
higher  than  the  OEM  converter.   The  base  metal  converter
reduced CO emissions  by  almost  75  percent,  better  than the  62
percent decrease in CO with the platinum/palladium catalyst.

     NOx levels  in  some  cases exceeded baseline emissions.   The
OEM converter  had the lowest  NOx levels,  0.73 grams  per  mile
over  the  FTP  for  an efficiency  of 34  percent.   Each of  the
evaluated converters had NOx emissions  in excess of the current
1  gram  per   mile   light-duty  vehicle  standard,   though  the
platinum/palladium catalyst  came  close to meeting the  standard
at  1.01  grams   per   mile  NOx.    The  base  metal  containing
catalysts each had NOx levels  exceeding baseline  levels;  Figure
4 does not reflect this negative efficiency, however.

     Aldehyde  efficiencies  from  each of the evaluated catalysts
were  uniformly high,  exceeding  85  percent.   The OEM  manifold
close-coupled  converter  had the  highest efficiency though,  97.4
percent.  This high efficiency  was  probably the  result of  the
catalysts'  location close  to the  engine,  allowing  for a  very
fast   warmup  and   hence,   guick   light   off.     Both   base
metal-containing   catalysts   tested   here    had  formaldehyde
efficiencies  greater  than  90  percent;  even  at   these   high
conversion   efficiencies,   however,   these   catalysts   allowed
almost  three  times  the  mass of  formaldehyde  emitted   over  the
FTP when compared to the manifold close-coupled converter.
                     CATALYST EFFICIENCIES
                          FTP CYCLE
                             I HC EFFICIENCY  Sffl CO EFFICIENCY
     CATALYST COMPOSITION


                    OEM



              BASE METAL



              PT/PD/COAT



          BASE METAL + PD
                            20    40    60    80   100   120
                                   % EFFICIENCY

                           FIGURE 3

-------
                                 -12-
CAT;
CATALYST COMPOSITION
OEM
BASE METAL
PT/PD/COAT
BASE METAL * PD
C
ILYST EFFICIENCIES
FTP CYCLE
•1 NOx EFFICIENCY Sffl ALDY. EFFICIENCY

MMIM! 34.2
^^^^^^•^^•^•BB^BBJ .97.4

^•^^•JSBSBBSB^^^H 91.9
[
SJiiMtaBK^^^ 86.6

^•^•••MSS^MMMBB^ 92.8
' - ; i l
|

) 20 40 60 80 100 120
% EFFICIENCY
FIGURE 4
      D.      HFET  Test Discussion

      HFET  test results  are given  in Table 4.

                                Table 4

                        Emissions Test Results

                 Toyota Carina, M100 Fuel,  HFET Cycle
               Number    HC     HC*    CO    NOx   CH30H* OMHCE*  Aide.
Configuration of  Tests  (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi)  (g/mi)  (g/mi) (g/mi)  (mg/mi)
Baseline

OEM manifold
converter

Base metal
converter

Base metal
and Pd

Pt/Pd, unique
washcoat
0.94    0.11    1.65   0.83   2.57   1.29   134.

0.005   0.001   0.13   0.83   0.01   0.01     8.
0.007   0.001   0.01   1.05   0.02   0.01     3.
0.003
1.05   0.01    0.01     3.
0.003   0.001   0.09   0.94   0.01   0.01     6.
*    Calculated values  per proposed rulemaking.
     No detectable levels.

-------
                              -13-

     HC, CO  and  formaldehyde emission levels were uniformly  low
when  compared  to baseline  levels.   The  base metal-containing
catalyst had higher CO  and formaldehyde efficiencies  than  the
manifold   close-coupled   and   platinum/palladium   underfloor
catalysts.   The  base metal-containing catalysts  had NOx levels
of 1.05 grams per mile, however, which exceeded baseline  levels.

VII. Test Highlights

     A.    Part  1

     1.    Both  Ag:Pd(50)   and  Pt(50)  configurations   in   the
three-way  mode  had   similar  HC   and  NOx  efficiencies  from
baseline   levels   over   the  FTP   of   82  and   43  percent,
respectively.  A more  heavily loaded platinum/rhodium converter
had HC  and NOx efficiencies from baseline of 89 and  51 percent,
respectively, in the same mode.

     2.    Formaldehyde  levels  over  the FTP  were  lowest  (5.9
mg/mi)   from    the   Pt(50)   catalyst   in   the   three-way
configuration.   Formaldehyde and NOx levels generally increased
from all catalysts when the  oxidation mode was used.

     3.    CO  levels  over  the FTP  were   generally lower  in
oxidation  mode   testing.    In   the  three-way  mode,   the  CO
emissions from  the Ag:Pd(50) and Pt(50) catalysts  of  0.68  and
0.45 grams per mile approximated  levels from the  more heavily
loaded 5Pt:Rh(80) converter.

     4.    The   three-way   catalyst  mode   is   the  preferred
operating  configuration   when   all  measured  pollutants    are
considered to be of equal concern.

     5.    HC, CO,  and formaldehyde efficiencies  over  the HFET
cycle  were   generally  very  high from  both catalysts   in  the
three-way mode.   NOx efficiencies  approximated 47  percent from
both  catalyts  in  the  three-way  mode;  NOx  emissions  rose  to
baseline  levels   from  both  catalysts  when  tested   in  the
oxidation mode, however.

     B.    Part 2

     1.    The lowest HC  emissions  over the  FTP,  approximately
0.13  grams  per  mile,   were  obtained  from  the   two   noble
metal-containing  catalysts.    The   OEM  converter   had   an  HC
emission level  of 0.07  grams per mile;  the difference  may  be
due to quicker light-off of the OEM converter, which is  located
closer to the engine.

     2.    All    three   evaluated   catalysts  had   higher   CO
efficiencies   over the  FTP  than  the  manifold   closed-coupled
converter.

-------
                              -14-

     3.    All   three   evaluated  catalysts   had   lower   NOx
efficiencies  than  the manifold  close-coupled converter.   NOx
levels  with  each  evaluated  catalyst  slightly  exceeded  the
current 1 gram per mile light-duty vehicle standard for NOx.

     4.    The base metal-containing  catalysts had formaldehyde
efficiencies  exceeding 90 percent over the  FTP.   The levels of
formaldehyde  emissions were  approximately 30-34 grams  per  mile
over the FTP  for these two catalysts.

     5.    HC, CO,  and formaldehyde  levels  from  each evaluated
catalyst were low over the  HFET cycle.  NOx  levels  from  each
catalyst exceeded baseline amounts over the HFET,  however.

VIII.Acknowledgment s

     The  catalysts  described  in Section  V,  Part  1 of  this
report   were   provided   by    Engelhard    Industries.     The
methanol-fueled  vehicle  used for this testing was  supplied to
EPA by Volkswagen AG.   The  catalysts  described  in  Section V,
Part   2   were  provided  by  Automotive  Catalyst  Company,  a
subsidiary of Allied-Signal.  These catalysts  were evaluated on
a  methanol-fueled  vehicle  supplied  by  the   Toyota   Motor
Corporation.

     The author  appreciates  the efforts of  Ernestine Buiifant,
Robert Moss,  and  Stephen Halfyard of the Test and Evaluation
Branch, Emission Control  Technology Division,  who  conducted the
driving cycle tests  and  prepared the  formaldehyde  samples for
analysis.

     In  addition,  the   author  appreciates  the   efforts  of
Jennifer Criss  and Marilyn Alff  of  the Control Technology and
Applications Branch, ECTD, whose  attention to  detail  during the
typing of the text and the tables was greatly appreciated.

-------
                              -15-

IX.  References

     1.     "Low    Mileage    Catalyst    Evaluation    With    a
Methanol-Fueled  Rabbit  -  Interim  Report,"  Wagner,  R.  and  L.
Landman, EPA-AA-CTAB-83/05,  May 1983.

     2.     "Low    Mileage    Catalyst    Evaluation    With    a
Methanol-Fueled Rabbit - Second  Interim Report," Wagner, R. and
L. Landman, EPA-AA-CTAB-84/03,  June 1984.

     3.     "Evaluation of Catalyst  for  Methanol-Fueled Vehicles
Using a Volkswagen  Rabbit Test Vehicle," presented at the Joint
Conference On  the Introduction and  Development of Methanol  As
An Alternate Fuel, Columbus, OH,  June 26-27,  1986, ASME.

     4.     "Catalysts for Methanol  Vehicles",  Piotrowski, G.  K.
and J.  D.  Murrell, SAE Paper 872052, November,  1987.

     5.     "Kinetics   and   Reaction   Pathways   of   Methanol
Oxidation  on  Platinum,"  McCabe,  R.  W.  and  D.   F.  McCready,
Journal of Physical Chemistry,  1986, Vol. 90, pp. 1428-1435.

     6.     "Exhaust-Catalyst   Development  For  Methanol-Fueled
Vehicles:    A  Comparative  Study  of  Methanol  Oxidation  Over
Alumina-Supported  Catalysts Containing Group  9,  10,   and  11
Metals,"  McCabe,  R.  W.  and P.J.  Mitchell,  Applied  Catalysis,
Vol. 27, 1986, pp. 83-98.

     7.     The  Clean Air  Act  As  Amended   Through  July 1981,
Section 211(c)(l).

     8.     Speech  by Charles  L.  Gray,  Jr.,  EPA,  QMS,  OAR,  to
1983 Midyear Refining Meeting of the API, May 11, 1983.

     9.     Policy  Statement to Vice President  of  the   U.S.A.,
George Bush, March 6, 1987.

     10.   1975   Federal   Test   Procedure,   Code  of   Federal
Regulations,   Title  40,   Part   86,    Appendix   l(a),   Urban
Dynamometer Driving Schedule.

     11.   Highway   Fuel   Economy   Driving   Schedule,   Federal
Register,  Vol. 41, No. 100,  May 21, 1976, Appendix l.

     12.   Formaldehyde Measurement  In  Vehicle Exhaust At MVEL,
Memorandum, Gilkey, R. L., OAR, OMS, EOD, Ann Arbor, MI,  1981.

     13.   "Formaldehyde  Sampling  From Automobile Exhaust:   A
Hardware Approach," Pigeon,  W., EPA-AA-TEB-88/01, July, 1988.

     14.   "Development  of  Methanol Lean  Burn  System,"  Katoh,
K., Y.  Imamura and T. Inoue, SAE Paper 860247,  February,  1986.

-------
                      APPENDIX A (conr'd)
            Methanol-Powered Volkswagen Test Vehicle
    Soecifications and Chanaes To Accommodate Methanol Fuel
     Vehicle Item
  Idle Setting


PCV:


Ignition:

  Distributor
  Spark Plugs

Transmission:

  General


  Torque Converter Ratio

  Stall Speed

  Gear Ratios:

    1

    2

    3

    Axle

Fuel Tank:

  Material

  Coating

  Seams and Fittings

  Cap

  Fuel
      Specification/Change
Specific to methanol
calibration.

PCV valve with calibrated
plunger—no orifice.
Slightly reduced maximum
centrifugal advance and
slightly modified vacuum
advance/retard characteristics

Bosch W260T2
1981 production automatic
3-speed.

2.44

2000-2200 RPM
2.55

1.45

1.00

3.57



Steel

Phosphated steel

Brazed

European neck and locking cap

Neat methanol (M100)

-------
                           APPENDIX A

            Methanol-Powered Volkswagen Test Vehicle
    Specifications  and Changes To Accommodate Methanol Fuel
     Vehicle Item
Engine:

  Displacement
  Bore
  Stroke
  Compression Ratio
  Valvetrain
  Basic Engine
Fuel System:

  General



  Pump Life
  Accumulator-Maximum Holding
  Pressure

  Fuel Filter
  Fuel Distributor
      Specification/Change
  Air Sensor


  Fuel Injectors



  Cold Start Injectors



  Fuel Injection Wiring
1.6 liter
7.95 cm
8.00 cm
12.5:1
Overhead camshaft
GTI basic engine - European
high performance engine to
withstand higher loads - U.S.
cylinder head
Bosch CIS fuel injection with
Lambda feedback control, cali-
brated for methanol operation

1 year due to corrosiveness of
methanol.  Improved insulation
on wiring exposed to fuel

3.0 Bar
One-way check valve deleted
because of fuel incompatibility

5.0-5.3 bar system pressure,
calibration optimized for
methanol, material changes for
fuel compatibility

Modified air flow
characteristics.

Material changes for fuel
compatibility, plastic screen
replaced by metal screen

2 injectors, valves pulse for 8
seconds beyond start mode below
zero degrees centrigrade

Modified for cold start pulse
function and to accommodate
relays and thermo switch

-------
                    APPENDIX B (cont'd)

          Description of Toyota LCS-M Test Vehicle
Ignition Timing
Engine Oil
Fuel Injectors
Fuel Pump
Fuel Lines and Filter
Catalytic Converter
With check connector shorted,
ignition timing should be set
to 10°BTDC at idle.  With check
connector unshorted, ignition
timing advance should be set to
15°BTDC at idle.  Idle speed is
approximately 550-700 rpm

10W-30(SF).  Toyota recommends
oil change interval of 3,000
miles

Fuel injectors (main and cold
start) capable of high fuel
flow rates.  The fuel injector
bodies have been nickel-plated,
and the adjusting pipes are
stainless steel.

In-tank electric fuel pump with
brushless motor to prevent
corrosion.  The body is nickel
plated and its capacity to
deliver fuel (flow rate) has
been increased.

The tube running from the fuel
tank to the fuel filter has
been nickel plated.  The fuel
filter, located in the engine
compartment, has also been
nickel plated.  The fuel
delivery rail has been plated
with nickel-phosphorus.

1 liter total volume, Pt:Rh
loaded.  Catalyst is close
coupled to the exhaust manifold.

-------
                           APPENDIX B
            Description of Toyota LCS-M Test Vehicle
Vehicle Identification Number:
  Curb Weight
  Inertia Weight
  Odometer at Delivery
  Transmission
  Shift Speed Code
  Dynamometer Horsepower

Engine:
  Fuel
  Number of Cylinders
  Displacement
  Camshaft
  Compression Ratio
  Combustion Chamber
  Fuel Metering
  Bore
  Stroke
  Fuel tank

  Ignition
AT15102264700000
2015 Ibs
2250 Ibs
1358 miles
Manual,  5 speed
15-25-40-45 mph
8 HP
M100 neat methanol
4, in-line
97 cubic inches
Single, overhead camshaft
11.5, pistons with flat heads
are used
Wedge shape
Electronic port fuel injection
3.19 inches
3.03 inches
Stainless steel construction,
capacity 14.5 gallons
Spark ignition; spark plugs are
NDW27ESR-U, gapped at .8 mm,
torqued to 13 ft-lb.  Toyota
recommends changing spark plugs
after 9,000 miles of vehicle
operation

-------