EPA/AA/CTAB/88-13
Technical Report
Phase I: Evaluation of Emissions, Fuel Economy,
and Low Ambient Temperature Cold Startability of an
M100 Saab 900S With Direct Ignition
by
Robert I. Bruetsch
December 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 FiADIATION
24 1989
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Exemption From Peer and Administrative Review
FROM: Karl H. Hellman, Chief
Control Technology and Applications Branch
TO: Charles L. Gray, Jr., Director
Emission Control Technology Division
The attached report entitled "Phase I: Evaluation of
Emissions, Fuel Economy, and Low Ambient Temperature Cold
Startability of an M100 Saab 900S With Direct Ignition,"
(EPA/AA/CTAB/88-13) describes testing of a novel M100 cold
start system.
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.
'•-X" /S •' /
Concurrence: , .- /^*,;^tL-r -"', £ -*•/ -, /{ Date: U^-'''< >"
Charles L. Gray, J^/. £/i>. , ECTD
Nonconcurrence : Date :
Charles L. Gray, Jr., Dir., ECTD
cc: E. Burger, ECTD
-------
Table of Contents
Page
Number
I. Introduction 1
II. Technical Approach 1
III. Test Program 4
IV. Baseline Test Results 5
V. Low Ambient Temperature Test Results 8
VI. Conclusions 13
VII. Recommended Future Testing 14
VIII.References 15
APPENDIX A-l
-------
I. Introduction
One of the major obstacles standing in the way of
large-scale utilization of pure methanol (M100) as an
automotive fuel is its relative inability to be cold started in
a spark-ignited engine at low ambient temperatures. As a
result, much of current methanol research and development is
aimed at inventing systems to assist Ml 00 cold starting at
ambient temperatures below about 40°F (4°C).
Current research on methanol cold starting includes design
of catalyzed heat exchangers for methanol dissociation to break
methanol into hydrogen and carbon monoxide before metering it
into an engine.[1]* Another approach involves choosing
catalysts which are selective and active for methanol
dehydration to produce dimethyl ether to feed the engine prior
to cold start.[2] Other projects are underway to evaluate
direct injection of methanol into the combustion chamber with
ignition timing late in the cycle and injectors designed to
finely atomize fuel droplets.[3] Still another approach is the
Saab Direct Ignition system which has recently been developed
and adapted to a naturally aspirated Saab 900S vehicle modified
for use of M100 fuel.[4]
The evaluation of a Saab Direct Ignition equipped vehicle
is currently being performed as part of a two-phase program at
EPA's Motor Vehicle Emission Laboratory (MVEL). Phase I
includes baseline emission testing at 75°F (24°C) and low
ambient temperature testing with and without gasoline injection
at cold start. Phase II will involve vehicle calibration
modifications or other adjustments to improve on the cold start
performance of the SDI system with and without gasoline
assistance.
II. Technical Approach
The methanol cold start system evaluated in this vehicle
test program is the Saab Direct Ignition system. This ignition
system combines high-tension components in a single metal-cased
modular assembly to exclude dirt and moisture, suppress radio
interference, and prevent electrical shock injury from the
40,000 volts generated within. It has no conventional
distributor, and there are individual coils and condensers for
each spark plug. It is a capacitive system rather than the
usual inductive type. The design was aimed at eliminating the
problems caused by damp, dirty or cracked high-tension parts or
poor connections, while achieving very accurate timing that
never needs adjusting. Standard spark plugs are used.[5]
Numbers in brackets denote references in Section VIII.
-------
-2-
The Saab Direct Ignition system isolates all the critical
spark-side components in a four-pronged sealed cartridge. This
allows running the system safely and smoothly at 40,000 V
instead of being restricted by likely flash-over to the usual
25,000 V. Each prong or leg of the assembly contains a
mini-coil and condensor that step up the 12-volt battery supply
in two stages.
The coil first raises the voltage to only 400 V, and the
condensor boosts that to the final spark-firing potential.
Since the initial step-up is very much smaller (less than
one-sixtieth) than that required of a conventional coil, the
Direct Ignition mini-coil winding can have correspondingly
fewer wire turns.
The strike voltage builds up in one-twentieth of the usual
time. Such a time interval would be too short for the current
to leak or flash across any resistive paths, such as a cracked
distributor cap. Thus, all the discharge energy from the
condensor is concentrated at the spark plug gaps.
For passenger car engines, the capacitive discharge system
typically has a spark duration of 0.1 to 0.3 milliseconds.
This short spark duration could possibly lead to unacceptable
misfiring and emissions problems at low speed and part
throttle. Extending the spark time merely by enlarging the
plug gaps is not necessarily the best solution. With
abnormally wide plug gaps the current would tend to follow any
easier discharge path to ground. Severe radio frequency
interference and the shock hazard from 40,000 V were additional
concerns in the design. These limitations have caused
capacitive ignition to be used only for competition, two-stroke
motorcycles and outboards (until now) where its advantages by
high-performance standards outweigh the weaknesses.
The Saab Direct Ignition system handles these difficulties
for cars by handling spark distribution on the low-voltage side
of the circuit, and by the total separation of the high-voltage
elements. Plug electrodes can be set up to 1.4 mm (0.055 in.),
nearly twice the normal gap, to give the required spark
duration. The applied voltage can purportedly fire most fuels
and lean burn mixtures under severe conditions and cold plugs
are said to perform without misfiring in slow urban driving.[5]
The metal cartridge casing is effectively a shield against
both interference and shock injury. The hollow legs fit
directly over the spark plugs with internal rubber sleeves
providing a tight seal around the insulators. A multi-core
12-volt cable is the only external connection. This is wired
to the battery and an electronic control unit.
-------
-3-
A Hall-type sensor and toothed wheel on the crankshaft
nose serve as the distributor. Data on crank position and
rotational speed are sent to the ECU microprocessor which in
turn triggers the low-voltage ignition pulses for the
individual spark coils. Employing the crankshaft as a timing
reference is seen by Saab as more accurate than with the usual
camshaft-driven distributor; since it is more rigid, is linked
directly to the pistons, and is free from any backlash. Saab
claims an angular tolerance within 0.5° of crank rotation
against the usual 3°CA. This remains fixed for the life of the
engine and is set without adjustment when the engine is
assembled.[6]
Ignition timing is regulated by the ECU, which is
programmed with an optimized performance map based on engine
speed and load with the second input from a manifold pressure
sensor (see Appendix). The electronic system is fail-safe in
that the individual coils are energized directly from the
crankshaft sensor in the event of any fault. This occurs
automatically when the engine is started, thereby avoiding a
possible microprocessor malfunction caused by low battery
voltage.
The Saab Direct Ignition system is installed on a 2-liter,
16-valve naturally aspirated 12 to 1 compression ratio engine
in a 1988 Saab 900S. The vehicle inertia weight class is 3,000
Ibs and the actual dynamometer horsepower is 7.9 hp for all
testing. The vehicle has an axle ratio of 3.67, and a
five-speed manual transmission. The vehicle is front-wheel
drive with a standard Bosch fuel system for methanol and an
additional smaller tank for gasoline. The vehicle runs on M100
(if possible) and has two cold start valves, one for methanol
and one for gasoline.
Inside the vehicle, the driver has control of the cold
start valves. When the ignition key is turned on, the methanol
fuel pump starts delivering methanol through the main fueling
system. The driver can add more methanol through the
manifold-mounted methanol cold start valve (MCSV) by actuating
a switch on the driver's console. If ambient conditions
prevent starting with methanol only, another switch mounted in
the dashboard can be activated to turn on the gasoline fuel
pump and a separate control box (see Appendix) is provided to
regulate the use of the gasoline cold start valve (GCSV). The
control box has three dial controls and an LCD for coolant
temperature. An on-off switch controls use of the GCSV which
can also be activated at a preset coolant temperature
automatically by adjusting a temperature control dial. Two
additional dials control the duty cycle (fuel quantity) and
pulse frequency of the injected gasoline.
-------
-4-
III. Test Program
The primary purpose of this test program is to determine
whether the Saab Direct Ignition system delivers any advantages
in cold startability of pure methanol. Cold startability and
emissions performance of the Saab methanol system with its
as-received calibration strategy were investigated. Baseline
Federal Test Procedures (FTPs) and Highway Fuel Economy Tests
(HFETs) were performed at 75°F (24°C), followed by lower
ambient temperature FTPs in the MVEL's controlled environment
test cell (CETC). Minimum cold starting temperature with M100
was determined along with the added cold start
advantage/emission effect with the gasoline assist. Attempts
were made to determine if the high-voltage, multi-restrike Saab
DI system has any cold starting benefits.[7]
A. Baseline Testing at Standard Cell Conditions
Three replicates of the FTP and HFET test cycles were run
on the vehicle as delivered by Saab. These tests were all run
at 75°F (24°C) using the MCSV only at the start of Bag 1. The
MCSV was shut off immediately upon vehicle startup and the GCSV
was not required for any of these tests. These data were
compared to data collected by Saab on similar testing of this
vehicle at their emissions testing facility in Sweden. These
two data sets (as shown in the next section) compare well
indicating no shift in vehicle calibration during overseas
shipment. Therefore, no vehicle adjustments were made and the
test program was continued without modification. Formaldehyde
emissions were measured on these baseline tests as were the
standard regulated emissions of HC, CO, and NOx. Vehicle fuel
economy and C02 emissions were also measured and recorded.
B. Cold Ambient Temperature Testing
Prior to testing the vehicle at low ambient temperatures
in the CETC, the Saab was soaked outdoors overnight and started
the following morning while awaiting test cell availability.
The vehicle did not start at an outdoor air temperature of 28°F
(-2°C) but did start at 37°F (3°C) without the GCSV. Oil and
coolant temperature measurements were not available for these
cold start attempts, but were assumed to be close to air
temperature readings. These outdoor startup tests were used to
estimate what temperature was best to attempt first in the CETC.
The Saab was then soaked at 40°F (4°C) coolant temperature
prior to initiating low ambient testing in the CETC. It was
decided to test the vehicle over the FTP at this initial
temperature if the vehicle could be started without the GCSV.
If so, the vehicle was to be tested at 35°F (2°C) and colder by
5-degree increments until no start could be obtained without
the GCSV. If the vehicle failed to start at 40°F (4°C) without
the GCSV switched on, an FTP would be run with the gasoline
assistance at startup. The vehicle would then be soaked and
-------
-5-
tested over the FTP at 45°F (7°C), and 50°F (10°C) or until
successful cold starting could be obtained without gasoline
assistance. When it was determined that the M100 configuration
had reached its lower limit, the ability of the gasoline cold
start system to lower the successful starting temperature was
investigated down to 20°F (-7°C), the lower ambient limit of
the CETC.
C. Recalibration and Follow-Up Cold Ambient Testing
The above-described test procedure was performed and the
results are reported in this paper and comprise the first phase
of the Saab DI evaluation. The vehicle will be retested after
results are discussed with the Saab representatives and the
data indicates what vehicle modifications are necessary. These
modifications will most likely take the form of adjustments to
the fuel system or fueling strategy and/or changes to the
ignition system such as varying entries to the spark timing
map. If more significant vehicle calibration changes are
warranted, these alterations will also be made. Vehicle retest
(Phase II) shall then include rebaseline testing of the vehicle
at 75°F (24°C) over the FTP and HFET, and similar cold ambient
startup testing with and without the MCSV and GCSV as was
performed in this "Phase I" evaluation reported here.
IV. Baseline Testing
As mentioned in the previous section, the Saab vehicle was
baseline FTP and HFET tested using M100 fuel at 75°F (24°C) and
the calculated test results based on the proposed methanol
rulemaking are listed in Table l.[8] Where possible, emission
test results reported in the body of this report were
calculated based on the calculation methods and test procedures
provided for in the rulemaking for methanol-fueled vehicles and
engines. Bag-by-bag emission test results are listed in Table
2. For the purpose of correlating with emission data generated
by Saab, baseline emission test results calculated according to
the 1975 Federal Test Procedure developed for gasoline-fueled
vehicles are included in Tables A-l and A-2 in the
Appendix.[9] The basic difference in the two procedures is the
way that hydrocarbon emissions and MPG are calculated, and the
procedure used to determine the values reported in Tables 1 and
2 is the most accurate and appropriate for methanol-fueled
vehicles.
• EPA composite FTP and bag-by-bag test results in Table 1
and 2 compare well to the Saab data for non-hydrocarbon
emissions and fuel economy. The first EPA test (No. 890752 in
Tables 1 and 2) was voided due to an error in the HC response
reading on the FID in Bag 1. Though all other emission
measurements were apparently performed correctly, the results
of this test are listed in Table 1, but are not included in the
EPA mean.
-------
-6-
Table 1
M1QO Saab Baseline Test (75°F) Results
FTP
Saab
HO Avg.**
890752***
890754
890766
890768
EPA Avg.
HFET
HO Avg.**
890753
890765
890767
890769
EPA Avg .
HC*
(q/mi)
0.50
0.17
0.08
0.06
0.07
0.06
0.06
HC*
(q/mi)
0.050
0.002
0.001
0.001
0.002
0.002
CO
(q/mi)
2.97
1 .00
2.97
3.08
2.92
2.70
2.90
CO
(q/mi)
0.27
0.09
0.10
0.09
0. 10
0.10
NOX
(q/mi)
0.11
0.21
0.08
0. 13
0. 13
0.11
0.12
NOx
(q/mi)
0.05
0.24
0. 14
0. 16
0.18
0.18
C02
(q/mi)
409
396
398
396
403
401
400
C02
(q/mi)
263
256
247
251
249
251
OMHCE*
(q/mi)
—
0.86
0.68
0.77
0.74
0.76
OMHCE*
( q/mi )
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
CH30H*
(q/mi)
—
1.74
1.36
1.56
1.49
1.47
CH30H*
( q/mi )
—
0.05
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.04
HCHO
(mq/mi)
—
—
69
58
67
65
63
HCHO
(mq/mi)
—
8
5
4
5
6
**
Calculated values based on proposed methanol rulemaking
(except Saab and HO Avg. numbers which are based on
gasoline-fueled vehicle FTP HC calculation procedures.)
Gasoline-fueled (HO) Saab 900 EPA Certification Test Car
List averages.
*** Void test due to error in HC response reading. Not
included in mean.
-------
-7-
Test No:
HC*(q/mi):
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
C0(g/mi):
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
N0x(q/mi):
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
C02(g/mi):
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
HCHO(mq/mi);
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
OMHCE*(q/mi)
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
CH30H*(q/mi)
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
Table 2
M100 Saab Baseline (75°F) FTP Bag Data
EPA
890752** 890754 890766 890768 890770*** Mean
0.30
0.02
0.01
11.98
0.74
0.38
0.06
0.01
0.23
399
427
342
246
28
12
3.42
0.25
0.10
6.94
0.49
0.20
0.27
0.01
0.00
13.17
0.46
0.43
0.11
0.04
0.32
393
426
340
241
13
6
3.08
0.06
0.02
6.24
0.11
0.04
0.31
0.01
0.00
12.08
0.49
0.58
0.14
0.08
0.22
397
438
342
287
13
6
3.51
0.07
0.03
7.08
0.14
0.06
0.30
0.01
0.00
11.45
0.38
0.51
0.12
0.06
0.21
393
431
351
271
14
7
3.37
0.07
0.03
6.81
0.14
0.06
0.39
13.33
0.20
395
268
4.44
9.06
0.29
0.01
0.00
12.17
0.52
0.48
0.11
0.05
0.24
395
430
344
266
17
6
3.32
0.07
0.03
6.71
0.13
0.05
Saab
+2.28
+0.04
+0.02
13.09
0.38
0.17
0.05
0.04
0.29
397
432
364
*
**
Calculated values based on proposed methanol rulemaking.
Void test due to error in HC response reading. Not included in
mean.
*** Only test without methanol assist at cold start. Not included
in mean.
+ Saab HC data are calculated using procedures developed for
gasoline-fueled vehicles (not M100 calculation procedures.)
-------
-8-
Though EPA emission results generally replicated the Saab
baseline data without significant differences, the results of
both Saab and EPA testing indicated a somewhat rich calibration
was employed with CO emissions averaging 2.90 g/mi on the FTP
compared to the EPA Certification Test Car List CO average of
1.00 g/mi for similar gasoline-fueled Saab 900 vehicles. [10]
Saab was contacted at this juncture since the fueling
strategy was apparently richer than anticipated, and emissions
were expected to get much higher at lower ambient tempera-
tures. Our intent was to see if minor adjustments could be
made to ignition timing and/or the fueling strategy to lean out
the calibration for better CO control. Saab explained that in
the development of the cold start calibration, the system was
enriched to improve cold ambient starting and driveability
during warmup.
In an attempt to see if lower baseline FTP emissions could
be obtained while still maintaining acceptable cold
startability and warmup driveability, an additional cold start
Bag 1 of the FTP was run (No. 890770 in Table 2) without adding
additional methanol through the MCSV at startup. This test
showed even higher Bag 1 CO emissions than those with the MCSV
on during startup. Although this one test result is largely
inconclusive, the high Bag 1 emissions may be due to the longer
cranking time required without the MCSV enrichment.
V. Low Ambient Temperature Test Results
Since no vehicle adjustments were recommended by Saab at
this stage of the evaluation, testing was commenced in the CETC
at test cell conditions colder than the standard FTP
temperature range of 68°F to 86°F (20°C to 30°C). As mentioned
above, the vehicle was first soaked outdoors in typical Ann
Arbor, MI December temperatures, 25°F to 40°F (-4°C to 4°C),
while awaiting availability of the CETC for controlled
environment testing. These tests showed no cold start was
obtainable below ambient air temperatures of 37°F (3°C) without
gasoline assistance. As a result, it was felt that the first
CETC test should be scheduled for 40°F (4°C) and the vehicle
was soaked overnight at this temperature.
The following day, a 40°F (4°C) start was attempted in the
CETC. The vehicle was cranked without methanol assist and
failed to start. The MCSV was then switched on, another start
was attempted, but the vehicle still would not start. A start
with gasoline assist was then attempted, but the technican
switched the gasoline fuel pump on without also switching the
GCSV on. This resulted in another no-start situation.
Thinking that the gasoline assist system had failed at this
-------
-9-
temperature, the technician raised the CETC temperature to 45°F
(7°C) to attempt another methanol-only start/FTP. Once the
CETC temperature reached 45°F (7°C), the engine started with
methanol assist only, and the vehicle was prepped with an LA-4
cycle (first 1,372 seconds of FTP) for the following day's
test.[11]
On the second day of low ambient temperature testing, the
CETC was at 40°F (4°C). Rather than wait for it to climb to
45°F (7°C), it was decided to repeat the previous day's test
(at 40°F) to see if the test procedure used the day before had
influenced the no-start result. No start was again obtained
with methanol assist only (without gasoline) after several
20-second crank attempts.
The CETC temperature was raised to 45°F (7°C) and the
vehicle started only with both the MCSV and the GCSV switched
on. Both switches were turned off after 15 seconds and the
vehicle stalled. The vehicle was then restarted with both
valves back on, but the engine lacked power and would not
accelerate enough to match the first "hill" on the FTP driving
trace. Both switches were then turned off, with no subsequent
driveability problems, after the vehicle was shifted into
second gear on the first acceleration of the FTP. Emissions
were recorded over the entire FTP (see Table 3) and this test
was used as a prep for the following day's test. Formaldehyde
emission sampling was unavailable in the CETC, so cold ambient
test data were unable to be accurately calculated by the
procedure for methanol-fueled vehicles.
The next day's test was attempted at 39°F (4°C) and the
technician reported a successful cold start with methanol
assist only. Upon further investigation, however, it was found
that the GCSV switch had actually been in the on position
though the gasoline fuel pump was not on. Therefore, it was
not known whether a successful start had been obtained without
gasoline, or if residual gasoline had been injected (through
the open GCSV) by gravity or pressure built up from previous
gasoline fuel pump use. An FTP was run after this start and
emissions were recorded as shown in Table 3 for this 39°F (4°C)
condition. N
Testing was resumed with additional attempts to start the
vehicle without gasoline assist at 45°F (7°C). Three attempts
were unsuccessful and the CETC temperature was raised to 53°F
(12°C). Unexpectedly, the Saab did not start without gasoline
assist, even at these elevated temperatures. Other M100
vehicles have achieved unassisted cold starts at temperatures
as low as 40°F (4°C).[12] As such, 19 attempts were made to
start the vehicle without gasoline assist in the 50° to 55°F
(10° to 13°C) temperature range. The engine cranked but would
not start though it sounded very close to starting on several
occasions. The fuel tank was checked and found to be half full
-------
-10-
Table 3
M100 Saab Low Ambient
Temperature FTP Test Results
Date
12/09/88
12/02/88
12/01/88
12/07/88
12/08/88
Test No.
891138
890946
890945
890948
890949
CETC
Temp
(°F)
20
39*
45
53
60**
HC
(q/mi)
6.83
2.55
2.85
2.68
0.97
CO
( q/mi )
23.49
11.04
11.31
12.05
5.07
C02
(q/mi)
416
387
368
381
381
NOx
(q/mi)
0.08
0. 16
0. 14
0.14
0.17
GEFE+
(MPG)
17.5
20. 1
20.9
20.3
21. 1
+ Gasoline equivalent fuel economy.
* GCSV on, gasoline fuel pump off.
** GCSV off. MCSV enrichment only at cold start.
Note:FTPs at CETC temperatures not asterisked were started with
both MCSV and GCSV on.
-------
-11-
of M100. Finally, the GCSV was switched on (at 53°F), the
engine started, and another FTP was run. The background CO
alarm sounded in the CETC during Bag 3, so the test was aborted
and this third FTP test became an LA-4 (Bags 1 and 2 only).
At this point, Saab engineers were contacted again to see
if any vehicle adjustments should be made to improve low
ambient temperature startability. While waiting for a
response, another attempt to cold start the vehicle on M100
only was made at 60°F (16°C). This time the vehicle started
with the MCSV switched on, but with no gasoline assist. A
fourth FTP was performed and the results are shown in Table 3.
This test represents the only CETC FTP in Table 3 run without
gasoline assist.
The following day, while waiting for a response from
Sweden on the methanol system, it was decided to continue
fulfilling the test plan. An additional test was run to carry
out the part of the test plan having to do with determining the
ability of the gasoline assist system to improve the low
ambient temperature startability of the vehicle. The lower
limit of the CETC for consistent valid test results is 20°F
(-7°C). The vehicle was soaked and tested at this temperature
as the fifth and final FTP run prior to vehicle modifications.
After several false starts at 20°F (-7°C), the engine
started and idled smoothly. The engine stalled on the first
acceleration. The vehicle was restarted, but would not
accelerate faster than 20 MPH until the first deceleration on
the FTP (after 35 seconds). The GCSV was switched off and on
several times during the first acceleration of the FTP, in an
attempt to improve driveability. The GCSV was switched off and
left off after 125 seconds. The engine ran smoothly after this
through the end of the FTP.
The emissions data from the low ambient temperature
testing in the CETC are shown in Table 3 (composite FTPs) and
Table 4 (bag data). These data show the expected trends
usually seen when varying the soak temperature of the FTP. HC,
CO, and COZ generally increase with decreasing soak
temperature. NOx and MPG generally decrease with decreasing
soak temperature. The 53°F (12°C) test shows higher CO and
C02 emissions and lower NOx and MPG than the above-mentioned
trends. This is probably due to the exorbitant number of crank
attempts (19) which contribute greatly to Bag 1 emissions and
the fact that the background CO in the CETC was so high in Bag
3 that this test became a 2-bag test. The 39°F (4°C) test
shows lower HC and CO emissions and higher NOx emissions than
the expected trend. This is the test that was run with the
GCSV open but the gasoline fuel pump off. It is possible that
enough gasoline was supplied to start the engine, but not
enough to enrich the warmup air/fuel ratio as those tests where
the GCSV and the gasoline fuel pump are left on throughout the
vehicle post-start warmup phase.
-------
-12-
Table 4
M100 Saab Low Ambient Temperature FTP Bag Data
Test No:
CETC Temp(°F) :
HC(q/mi):
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
C0(q/mi):
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
N0x(g/mi) :
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
CO2(q/mi) :
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
891138
20
32.38
0.49
0.22
84.07
11.94
0.93
0.19
0.03
0. 10
498
421
344
890946
39
11.78
0.20
0.06
51.07
0.64
0.61
0.17
0.13
0.22
241
260
202
890945
45
13.31
0.17
0.05
52.44
0.55
0.64
0.12
0.11
0.20
357
402
312
890948
53
5.35
0.23
24.48
0.64
0.11
0.16
358
402
890949
60
4.44
0.08
0.07
21.85
0.64
0.89
0.16
0.14
0.23
382
411
324
-------
-13-
VI. Conclusions
The initial Saab Direct Ignition fueling and ignition
timing strategies do not appear to be optimum for achieving
improved cold starting at low ambient temperatures without
gasoline assistance. The lowest MIOO-only start occurred at
37°F (3°C) outdoor air temperature after a six-hour soak. This
result has not been repeated. The lowest indoor start occurred
(in the CETC) at 45°F (7°C) coolant temperature as the vehicle
was being prepped for the following day's test. As such, no
emissions were recorded and this result could not be repeated.
The lowest CETC successful MIOO-only cold start and FTP
occurred at 60°F (14°C), coolant temperature.
CO emissions average 2.90 g/mi over the FTP at 75°F
(24°F). The estimated methanol emissions average 1.47 g/mi.
FTP NOx emissions average 0.12 g/mi. These results reflect the
somewhat rich calibration strategy employed by Saab to improve
cold start though this was only marginally successful in the
40°F to 60°F (4°C to 14°C) ambient temperature range.
Baseline FTP measured exhaust emissions at 75°F (24°C)
were nearly identical on tests run at Saab in Sweden and at EPA
in Ann Arbor, except for 8 percent higher HC emissions on EPA
tests. These results do not indicate much of a shift in
vehicle calibration during shipment since they could represent
lab to lab variability.
Formaldehyde emissions averaged 63 mg/mi on the FTP and 6
mg/mi on the HFET. These results are in the range observed for
catalyst-equipped M100 vehicles.
CO emissions are nearly 3 times higher from the M100 Saab
900 and NOx emissions barely half those from similarly equipped
gasoline-fueled Saab 900s on the 1988 Certification Test Car
List.[10] Gasoline equivalent city MPG is 9 percent lower and
highway MPG 2 percent lower on M100 (see Appendix: Table A-l).
This loss in MPG is observed even though the M100 Saab 900
compression ratio is 12:1 compared to 10.1:1 on the
gasoline-fueled version.
FTP CO emissions are eight times higher at 20°F (-7°C)
than at 75°F (24°C). In the same temperature interval, NOx
emissions nearly vanish and gasoline equivalent MPG is reduced
with falling temperature by 14 percent. These results are in
the range observed for low soak temperature tests of late model
gasoline-fueled vehicles.
-------
-14-
VII. Recommended Future Testing
Despite possible improvements to the fueling and ignition
timing strategies, it appears that the current vehicle
calibration should be showing better cold start performance
than the data would indicate since other neat methane1-fueled
vehicles have started at lower temperatures unassisted.
Therefore, it may be beneficial to evaluate an additional M100
cold start system developed and tested by Saab and reported on
at the VIII International Symposium on Alcohol Fuels in
November 1988 at Tokyo, Japan. [13] This system uses M100 only
and passes cold start methanol through a vaporizer energized by
six (6) glow plugs connected in series. The plugs together
deliver a heat effect of about 1 kw, and are energized by the
addition of a second 12-volt battery. Saab claims M100 cold
starts down to 18°F (-8°C) with this system preheated for 90
seconds and cranking times of about 5 seconds.
Another test configuration proposed by Saab would involve
connecting the methanol cold start fuel line to the gasoline
cold start valve and disabling the gasoline fuel system and
methanol cold start valve. This setup would allow control of
the duty cycle and pulse frequency of cold start M100 through
the gasoline cold start valve.[14] Duty cycle or fuel quantity
can then be varied at cold start and during vehicle warmup
separately. [ 15] Pulse frequency can be set to only one value
for both cranking and warmup. Saab also indicated that it is
possible to disconnect the electrical signal to the other four
main fuel injectors if only the performance of the methanol
cold start valve is desired to be tested.
After the baseline and low ambient testing reported here,
it was learned that there were separate controls for cold start
and warmup fuel guantity through the GCSV as mentioned above
(see Appendix). EPA had tested the Saab with both controls at
midpoint settings—conditions which should have produced better
cold start performance than was observed. In other words,
gasoline enrichment was probably neither too lean or too rich
and neither control was available for the MCSV for these
tests. A series of tests could be devised to determine the
cold start effects of various combinations of these two fuel
quantity controls of different pulse frequencies.
Phase II testing may also involve modifications to main
fueling and ignition timing calibrations through changes to
electronic control unit chips or input values at various
speed-load combinations. As mentioned earlier, the overall
fuel calibration appears to be rich as witnessed by high HC
emissions though no A/F ratio measurements were taken. Saab
has suggested that ignition timing as late as 5° BTDC at low
engine speeds (e.g., 200 RPM or cranking speeds) may be an
improvement over the existing low speed ignition timing map
values for low ambient cold startability.
-------
-15-
VIII. References
1. "Design and Testing of a Dissociated Methanol
Vehicle," Karpuk, M.E., S.W. Cowley, and M. Ratcliff,
Technology Development Associates, Inc., Colorado School of
Mines, and Solar Energy Research Institute, November 1988.
2. "On Board Dimethyl Ether Generation to Assist
Methanol Engine Cold Starting," Karpuk, M.E., and S.W. Cowley,
SAE Paper No. 881678, presented at the International Fuels and
Lubricants Meeting, Portland, Oregon, October 1988.
3. "Unassisted Cold Starts to -29°C and Steady-State
Tests of a Direct Injection Stratified Charge (DISC) Engine
Operated on Neat Alcohols," Siewert, R.M., and E.G. Groff, SAE
Paper No. 872066, presented at the International Fuels and
Lubricants Meeting, Toronto, Ontario, November 1987.
4. "Saab Direct Ignition," Jones, G.T., press release
from Saab-Scania Technical Services Department, Stockholm,
Sweden, January 1985.
5. "Coil-Per-Plug Ignition Boosts Spark Voltage,"
Scott, D., and J. Yamaguchi, Automotive Engineering, Volume 93,
Number 4, April 1985.
6. Personal notes and conversations with G.T. Jones, M.
Andersson, and O. Nillson, Saab-Scania, November 1988.
7. "Test Plan: Saab MIOO-Fueled Vehicle," Blair, D.M. ,
EPA memorandum to Charles L. Gray, Jr., ECTD, U.S. EPA, April
8, 1988.
8. "Proposed Organic Emission Standards and Test
Procedures for 1988 and Later Methanol Vehicles and Engines,"
Regulatory Support Document, prepared by the Office of Mobile
Sources, Emission Control Technology Division, Standards
Development Support Branch, July 1986.
9. "1975 Federal Test Procedure," Code of Federal
Regulations, Title 40, Part 86, Appendix I(a), Urban
Dynamometer Driving Schedule.
10. "1988 Test Car List - Passenger Cars," Certification
Division, U.S. EPA, Ann Arbor, MI, June 1988.
11. "Emission Factor Data Base for Prototype Light-Duty
Methanol Vehicles," Gold, Michael D., and Charles E. Moulis,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, MI, SAE Paper
No. 872055, International Fuels and Lubricants Meeting and
Exposition, Toronto, Ontario, November 2-5, 1987.
12. Evaluation of Fuel Economy, Exhaust Emissions and
Performance of a Sequentially Fuel-Injected High Compression
Methanol-Fueled 1. 5L Engine in a Light-Duty Diesel Vehicle,"
Bruetsch, R.I., EPA/AA/CTAB/87-06, September 1987.
-------
-16-
13. "Experiences from Construction and Testing of a Saab
16-Valve M100 Car," Laveskog, A., P. Gillbrand, and 0. Nillson,
Swedish Motor Vehicle Inspection, Co., Studsvik, Sweden,
presented at the VIII International Symposium on Alcohol Fuels,
Tokyo, Japan, November 1988.
14. Conversation with Gary Jones, Saab-Scania, regarding
the control of and possible modifications to the cold start
enrichment system, December 12, 1988.
15. Telefax from 0. Nillson, Saab-Scania, to R.I.
Bruetsch, U.S. EPA, Ann Arbor, MI, December 14, 1988.
-------
APPENDIX
-------
EPA MEASURED BASELINE EMISSION RESULTS
-------
Table A-l
M100 Saab Baseline Test (75°F) Results
FTP
Saab
HO Avg.**
890752***
890754
890766
890768
EPA Avg.
HFET
HO Avg.**
890753
890765
890767
890769
EPA Avg.
HC
( q/mi )
0.50
0.17
0.64
0.50
0.57
0.55
0.54
HC
( q/mi)
0.05
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
CO
(q/mi)
2.97
1.00
2.97
3.08
2.92
2.70
2.90
CO
(q/mi)
0.27
0.09
0.10
0.09
0.10
0.10
NOx
(q/mi)
0.11
0.21
0.08
0.13
0.13
0.11
0.12
NOx
(q/mi)
0.05
0.24
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.18
C02
(q/mi)
409
396
398
396
403
401
400
C02
(q/mi)
263
256
247
251
249
251
GEFE*
(MPG)
20.1
22.4
20.5
20.5
20.3
20.3
20.4
GEFE*
(MPG)
33.7
32.4
33.4
33.0
33.2
33.0
HCHO
(mq/mi)
—
69
58
67
65
63
HCHO
(mq/mi)
8
5
4
5
6
* Gasoline equivalent fuel economy.
** Gasoline-fueled Saab 900 EPA Certification Test Car List
averages.
*** Void test due to error in HC response reading. Not
included in mean.
-------
A-r2
Table A-2
(75°F) FTP Bag Data
Test No:
HC(g/mi):
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
C0(q/mi):
Bag l
Bag 2
Bag 3
NOx(g/mi):
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
CO2(g/mi):
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
HCHO(mg/mi)
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
890752* 890754 890766 890768 890770**
2.55
0.18
0.07
11.98
0.74
0.38
0.06
0.01
0.23
399
427
342
106
28
7
2.30
0.04
0.02
13.17
0.46
0.43
0. 11
0.04
0.32
393
426
340
104
13
3
2.61
0.05
0.02
12.08
0.49
0.58
0.14
0.08
0.22
397
438
342
123
13
3
2.50
0.05
0.02
11.45
0.38
0.51
0.12
0.06
0.21
393
431
351
117
14
4
3.34
13.33
0.20
395
115
EPA
Mean
2.47
0.05
0.02
12.17
0.52
0.48
0.11
0.05
0.24
395
430
344
112
17
4
Saab
2.28
0.04
0.02
13.09
0.38
0.17
0.05
0.04
0.29
397
432
364
* Void test due to error in HC response reading. Not included in
mean.
** Only test without methanol assist at cold start. Not included
in mean.
-------
GASOLINE-FUELED SAAB CERTIFICATION TEST RESULTS
-------
• = TEST TYPE 31 DATA
# = TEST TYPE 32 DATA
V.I. REPORT
1988 FUEL ECONOMY PROGRAM
TEST CAR LIST -- PASSENGER CARS
1O:42:2O NOV 6. 1987
NOTE: + INDICATES POLICE DATA
MFR
R-R
R-R
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
CAR LINE NAME
CORNICHE II
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
90O
9OO
90O
90O
9OO
900
90O
9OO
9OO
9OO
9OO
90O
900
900
900
9OO
90O CONVERTIBLE
9OO CONVERTIBLE
90O
9OO CONVERI IBLE
9OOO
9OOO
9OOO
9OOO
9OOO
9000
VEHICLE ID
( 1 I Q D
U 1 or
/CID
B2SOOOOHCH2O013 412
•88-P962
•88-P962
•88-P962
»88-P962
88-P968
88-P968
88-PB7O
88-PB7O
88-PB7O
88-PB7O
88-PB68
88-PB68
•88-P939
•88-P939
88-P939
88-P939
•88-P939
'88-P939
•88-P96O
88-P96O
88-PC38
88-PC38
B8-PC39
88-P724
88-P724
88-P823
121
121
12 1
121
121
121
121
121
12 1
12 1
12 1
121
12 1
121
12 1
12 1
121
121
12 1
12 1
12 1
12 1
12 1
12 1
121
12 1
CARB
WC KIT l~kfi i/
VtrJ 1
/FI HP CONTROL SYSTEM
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI "
F I
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
BASIC ENGINE DESCRIPTOR:
205 EGR/PMP/3CL/ /
BASIC ENGINE DESCRIPTOR:
1 1O 3CL/OTR/ / /
1 10 3CL/OTR/ / /
1 10 3CL/OTR/ / /
1 10 3CL/OTR/ / /
BASIC ENGINE DESCRIPTOR
1 1O 3CL/ / / /
1 10 3CL/ III
BASIC ENGINE DESCRIPTOR
125 3CL/OTR/ / /
125 3CL/OFR/ / /
125 3CL/OTR/ / /
125 3CL/OTR/ / /
BASIC ENGINE DESCRIPTOR
125 3CL/OTR/ / /
125 3CL/OTR/ / /
BASIC ENGINE DESCRIPTOR
160 3CL/OTR/ / /
160 3CL/OTR/ / /
BASIC ENGINE DESCRIPTOR
165 3CL/OTR/ / /
165 3CL/OTR/ / /
BASIC ENGINE DESCRIPTOR
160 3CL/OTR/ / /
160 3CL/OTR/ / /
BASIC ENGINE DESCRIPTOR
160 3CL/OTR/ / /
BASIC ENGINE DESCRIPTOR
160 3CL/OTR/ / /
BASIC ENGINE DESCRIPTOR
125 3CL/OTR/ / /
125 3CL/OTR/ / /
BASIC ENGINE DESCRIPTOR
125 3CL/OTR/ / /
BASIC ENGINE DESCRIPTOR
16O 3CL/OTR/ / /
160 3CL/OTR/ / /
BASIC ENGINE DESCRIPTOR
160 3CL/OTR/ / /
tjn v
SYS
/CAN RWD
(B201)
/CAN FWD
/CAN FWD
/CAN FWD
/CAN FWD
: (B2O1)
/CAN FWD
/CAN FWD
: (B2O2)
/CAN FWD
/CAN FWD
/CAN FWD
/CAN FWD
: (B2O2)
/CAN FWD
/CAN FWD
: (B2O2)
/CAN FWD
/CAN FWD
: (B202)
/CAN FWD
/CAN FWD
: (B202)
/CAN FWD
/CAN FWD
: (B202)
/CAN FWD
: (B2O2)
/CAN FWD
: (B202)
/CAN FWD
/CAN FWD
: (B202)
/CAN FWD
: (B2O2)
/CAN FWD
/CAN FWD
: (8202)
/CAN FWD
TDWQ TDAMQMICC.
• T nft.i f T i.t
IKlNo IKAPJbMIooiur'n C. 1 . w .
0/D DESCRIPTION LBS .
A3- 1
M5-1 SIL
M5- 1
M5-1 SIL
M5-1
A3- 1
A3- 1
M5-1 SIL
M5-1
M5-1 SIL
MS- 1
A3- 1
A3-1
M5-1 SIL
M5- 1
M5-1 SIL
M5- 1
M5-1 SIL
M5-1
A3-1
A3- 1
M5-2 SIL
M5-2
L4-2
M5-2 SIL
M5-2
L4-2
550O
3OOO
3OOO
3OOO
3OOO
3OOO
3125
3125
3125
3125
3125
3125
3125
3125
3125
3250
3250
325O
3250
325O
325O
3375
3375
3375
3375
3375
35OO
RATIOS
COMP AXLE
8.0 2.69
9.3 3.67
9.3 3.67
9.3 3.67
9.3 3.67
9.3 3.67
9.3 3.67
10. 1 3.67
1O. 1 3 .67
1O. 1 3 .67
1O. 1 3.67
1O. 1 3.67
1O. 1 3.67
9.O 3.67
9.O 3.67
9.0 3.67
9.O 3.67
9.O 3.67
9.O 3.67
9.O 3.67
^
9.O 3.67
1O. 1 4 .45
1O. 1 4 .45
1O. 1 4 .28
9.O 4.21
9.O 4.21
9.0 4.28
N/V
33.4
4O.6
4O.6
4O.6
4O.6
52.7
52.7
43.6
43.6
43.6
43.6
52.7
52. 7 >
U)
43.6
43.6
43.9
43.9
43.6
43.6
5O.O
5O.O
44 . 5
44 .5
44.2
4O.9
4O.9
41.3
I FP
-------
* = TEST TYPE 31 DATA
It = TEST TYPE 32 DATA
TESTS REPORT
1988 FUEL ECONOMY PROGRAM
TEST CAR LIST -- PASSENGER CARS
1O:42:2O NOV 6, 1987
NOTE: + INDICATES POLICE DATA.
MFR
R-R
R-R
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
SAAB
VEHICLE ID
A/C
SIM
BZSOOOOHCH2OO13 YES
*8B-P962
»88-P962
•88-P962
*88-P962
88-P96B
8B-P968
B8-PB7O
88-PB70
88-PB70
88-PB7O
B8-PB68
8B-PB68
•88-P939
*88-P939
88-P939
88-P939
•88-P939
»88-P939
*88-P96O
8B-P96O
88-PC38
88-PC3B
B8-PC39
8B-P724
B8-P724
88-P823
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
«v* i .
DYNO AVG CITY
HP CODE WT
14
8
9
9
8
9
8
9
9
8
8
8
9
7
7
8
8
8
8
7
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
B
3
4
4
3
4
3
4
4
3
3
3
4
9
9
7
7
4
4
9
4
4
4
4
O
0
O
B
A
A
B
A
A
B
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
0
0
0
0
o
0
o
o
0
o
0
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
35
65
35
65
57
43
57
43
56
44
56
44
56
44
65
35
47
53
HWY
WT SIL
O
O
0
0
O
o
0
o
0
o
o
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
35 SIL
65
35 SIL
65
57 SIL
43
57 SIL
43
56 SIL
44
56 SIL
44
56 SIL
44
65 SIL
35
47 SIL
53
HC
O
0
0
0
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
o
0
0
0
0
o
0
224
1 17
130
127
128
149
145
226
172
168
220
192
164
2O4
252
179
138
213
189
2O 1
156
202
219
238
242
237
2O7
196
191
237
255
*-*IT CI"ll331urJ3
(GRAMS/MILE) EVAP/ CITY
CO C02 NOX PART MPG
2
1
O
O
O
o
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
t
1
1
2
1
1
1
O
1
1
1
2
05
58
73
48
53
81
62
10
84
86
95
98
94
32
21
10
31
45
38
22
1 1
77
12
24
35
1O
86
01
43
8O
25
854 .
361 .
388.
370.
378.
416.
4 14 .
34 1 .
4O6 .
4O3.
345.
384 .
434.
422.
422.
351 .
39O.
361 .
39O.
352.
397 .
4OO.
4O2 .
369.
361 .
391 .
462.
459.
377 .
40O.
4O8.
O
0
0
0
O
O
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
O
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
66 O
17 O
15 0
19 O
17 O
33 O
28 O
19 O
23 O
25 0
17 O
26 0
24 O
44 O
22 0
12 O
12 O
14 O
15 0
14 O
16 O
36 0
33 O
22 0
31 O
31 0
32 O
45 O
14 O
15 O
34 O
0
0
O
O
O
0
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
O
O
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
o
o
o
0
o
o
o
0
10
24
22
23
23
2 1
21
25
21
22
25
23
20
21
2O
25
22
24
22
25
22
22
21
23
24
22
19
19
23
22
2 1
3
4
7
8
3
1
3
8
8
O
5
O
4
O
9
1
6
4
6
O
2
O
8
9
5
6
2
3
4
1
5
(GRAMS/MILE)
HC CO C02
0
O
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
O
O
0
o
o
o
o
o
0
0
o
0
o
037
031
038
036
O33
051
O41
O57
O44
056
O43
O44
O29
OBI
054
O5O
058
O43
O47
048
02O
O31
O46
O35
O41
072
O61
O76
067
O68
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
12
46
55
50
42
1 1
10
63
29
41
29
48
36
9O
22
24
19
13
16
21
O7
O9
1 1
O9
10
16
14
63
27
24
615
241 .
259.
253.
243.
322.
312.
244.
271 .
249.
266.
328.
320.
325.
252.
252.
258.
26O.
259.
263.
3O5.
312.
26O.
26O.
255.
292.
293.
244 .
245.
265.
NOX
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
o
O
0
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
o
0
66
08
1 1
12
09
O9
08
O5
O7
O6
O5
09
1 1
08
O5
O5
O4
O4
O4
O5
05
O4
1O
1 t
10
O9
O8
O9
1O
18
unnuuua i cu
HWY COMB
MPG MPG
14
36
34
34
36
27
28
36
32
35
33
27
27
27
35
35
34
34
34
33
29
28
34
34
34
3O
30
36
36
33
4
7
1
9
4
4
3
2
8
5
3
1
8
1
1
1
3
1
2
7
1
4
2
2
9
4
3
3
2
4
1 1
28
26
27
27
23
24
29
25
29
26
23
23
28
26
28
26
28
26
24
24
27
26
23
27
26
25
B
7
7
8
8
5
O
6
8
2
7 >
1
3 *>
3
8
9
0
6
4
2
7
3
9
9
O
9
8
6
-------
SAAB TEST RESULTS
-------
SAAB-SCAN
Bi Inummer :NUL113 Branslekod:4
Texts HSU O41
L-.jf Ltryck:754 Temper atur : 23 . 1
IA Av/3asprov
Provtyp:! Provruru:2
PraOnciinnier : 966O
lufifuktishet=41.G
HC CO N0:<
Lcift Bind K.gas Upsp R Luft Bind Lujft Bind K-
2.1 O4.2 Gl 91 3 .1 S4.5 3.3 1O.1 19. G
5 8.4 7 41.41.1 10 .1 3.2 19. S
5.4 U.2 7 41.4 1 .1 7.7 .1 39.7 19. G
C02
Upsp R Luft Bind CVS-v Uagst-r
98 1 1.1 2G-2 76. 3G 57O4
9U.411.1 1O.413O.G1616O
98.2 1 1.2 24.3 7G.O4 5729
Kail Transient
S-L.at>il fas
u Transient
<9>
C«JS — pravresultat.
HC CO NUx
3.17 46.73 O.I9
0.14 1.46 O.14
O.O7 O.G5 1.O4
CQ2
1418
1G72
1300
For L>r ukriing
1/lOkM MPG
2.43 9.7
2.48 v-5
2.O7 11.3
I
en
C«-»3-75 USA (g/mile) O.5O
2.97
O. 11
409
2.36
10.0
UUS-72 Sv
(3/km) O.7O
4. 2O
O.O3
260
2.46
9.6
-------
IGNITION TIMING MAP
-------
A-6
TANDMATRIS SID.l
(« 0.1 deg.) 060 070 100 120
-------
COLD START FUEL CONTROL BOX
-------
A-7
COLD START FUEL CONTROL BOX
OW
2.
V5KIU.
TIO
12.
1
f
5
ii.O
1. On-Off Swi tch
2. LED for Open Cold Start Valve
3. Pulse Frequency Knob
4. Switch for Manual or Automatic Start Program,
5. NA
6. Prestart Pulse Length Knob
7. Warmup Pulse Length Knob
8. NA
9. Cranking RPM Regulator Knob
10. Assist Temperature Select Knob
11. Temperature Display Light
12. Coolant Temperature Display
13. Start Temperature Control Knob
14. Warmup Temperature Control Knob
15. NA
-------
TEST VEHICLE DESCRIPTION
-------
REPORT TIME: 10:4 I :OB
DATE: OCT 28. 1988
VEHICLE SPECIFICATION REPORT
(REPORT)
DATE OF ENTRV
1 U / I' 5 / H U
MANUFACTURER
SAAB
VEHICLE
VEHICLE SPECIFICATIONS
VEHICLE ID / VER REPRESENTED CARHNE MODEL CODE DRIVE CODE SOURCE
88-SI13 0 37010 SEDAN FRONT DRIVE STR. LEFT MANUFACTURER
DRIVE AXL WT EQUIV.
--YEAR-- FULL EMPTY CURB INERTIA TEST
ACTUAL VEHICLE MODEL MDL ACT TANK TANK WEIGHT CLASS WEIGHT H.P. METHOD
TYPE
NON-CER SAAB 900S 3-DOOR/M5 88 88 1694P 1 704P 2814P 3000P 3125P rOASTDOWN
ETW
C . D. SIDE 01) ACT AC RUNNING CHG
VEH FAN CC) ON HP HP NUMBER
1
7.9
ASSIGNED DF OR DURABILITY VEHICLE ID
ALTERNATE MANUFACTURER
ODOMF.TER
CORREC1ION TIRfc 4 RIM
INITIAL FACTOR S I .-: E b
TIRE SPECIFICATIONS
SWL BLT PSI TO
MFR CONSTR N M N M FT RR DP
RATED ENGINE
DISPLACEMENT BORE STROKE HP TYPE
121. IE 3.54E 3.07E OTTO SPARK
*1 *2 DEG TOL . RPM RPM TOL . GEAR LEFT
DRIVE
AXLE N/V A/C
RATIO RATIO ODOMETER INSTALLED EXHAUST TYPE
3.67 43.6 MILES YES SINGLE LEFT REAR
MAIN-TANK AUX.-TANK
CAPACITY VOLUME CAPACITY VOLUME SHIFT
16. 6G 6.6G 1 . 3G 0 . 5G 15 - 25 - 40 -
1 o&/ i-.'iR 1 L> 1 M1CHELIN RADIAL 1 R 3 0 29 30
ENGINE SPECIFICATIONS
ENGINE NO. N(J . IDlAi i-i'l. i. '.VSTEM FUEL TURBO/ SUPER COMP. COAST
CONFIGURATION CYL . CARB'. UBl_:> MfK/MODEL INJ CHARGER . COOL I NG RATIO ON TM
IN-LINE 4 BOM M NONE 12.0 13.95
>
RIGHT COMB TOL. RPM RPM TOL. dfAR FAMILY SYSTEM CODE °°
JSA2 . OV5FNB7
TRAIN AND CONTROL SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS
CRANKCASE -- TRANSMISSION -- SHIFT IND1C. EVAPORATION
SYSTEM CONFIG MODIF CODE LIGHT SYSTEM FUEL TYPE
CLOSED M-S MSN 2-EO-NOT SHF r CANISTER MLTHANOL
SHIFT SCH. ID EVAPORATIVE EMISSION
SPEED CITY HWY FAMILY CODE SALES CLASS
45 J-900-4 El'. 4 NO SALES CLASS SPECIFIED
$ $
CONTROL SYSTEM TYPES
VEHICLE SPECIFICATION COMMENTS • set COMMENTS
NOTE: GALLON FUEL TANK CAPACITY HAS BEEN CONVERTED FROM LITERS
18575 II
-------
DIRECT IGNITION SYSTEM DRAWINGS
-------
A-9
SOI four-plug ignition
cartridge incorporates
ail high-tension parts and
connectors in sealed
metal casina that excludes
dirt and moisture, sup-
presses radio interter-
ence. and prevents elec-
trical shock injury from
the exceptional 40.000 V.
Ignition cartridge slots
between cam banks and
inclined valves of Saab
9000 2-L engine. Rub-
ber sleeve inside hollow
leg seals tiahtly around
plug insulator. Advan-
tages of system are
high spark voltage for
easy cold starts and
lean-burn combustion.
elimination of damp
and dirt problems, and
good cold-plug perfor-
mance in jll driving
conditions.
-------
A-10
Complete high-tension
package in red cas-
ing fits nearly flush with
cylinder head covers
of 20HC turbo engine.
Small projecting grips at
each end allow easy
withdrawal of entire unit
for plug access.
Each leg of cartridge
contains spark coil.
condenser, and spring
connector for one
plug. The compact coil
at top steps up bat-
tery supply to only 400
V. so can be small
with few wire turns, and
thus fast-acting. This
potential charges
capacitor |belowi that
delivers final 40.DUO
V across plug points.
Setting gap at wide 1 5
mm lengthens .spark
duration.
Cutaway section of lt>-
valve cylinder head
shows how SDI cartridge
slots between two
camshaft covers. Single
-------
A-ll
Electronic control unit
has CPL' programmed
u'ith engine performance
data. It optimizes ignition
timing according to
inputs from speed and
load sensors. L'nit
was developed bv Mecel
.\B. a member of Saab-
Scania Combitech Croup.
Layout of SOI installa-
tion. Hiah-tt?njion car-
tridge ill is red with
12 V from battery .ind
electronic control unit UI.
Kail-type »»-nsor i ): .'-"jis-
ters crankshaft .male jnd
rotational speed rrom
toothed ivheei. -^rvns .is
distributor for ;iming
reference. It tnagers basic
ignition pulses sent to
ECU. toaethor '.vith
ipeed intormation. '.vhile
pressure spn.sor :-t.
inputs eniir.e load vlata.
Microprocessor thnii
n'tiuldte-i M.niing accord-
::TJ to i:s :.—r:')rT!.i".ui'
------- |