EPA/AA/CTAB/TA/82-1
                      Knock Sensor
                  Vehicle Test Program
                           by

                    Larry C. Landman




                      October,  1981
          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
           Office of Air, Noise and Radiation
      Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
          Emission Control Technology Division
Control Technology Assessment and Characterization Branch
                   2565 Plymouth Road
               Ann Arbor, Michigan  48105

-------
Background

This test  program  was  designed to explore the  impact  of an ignition  system
with  spark knock  sensing  and spark  retard  on regulated  emissions,  fuel
economy, and power as a function  of  the research octane number (RON)  of  the
test fuel.

Currently, General Motors (GM)  incorporates  a  spark knock sensor in a feed-
back  ignition  system on  their turbocharged  vehicles.   This  type  of  spark
timing system is well  suited to  turbocharged  engines  because  of their  wide
range of spark timing requirements.

GM  and others  are  also  currently  producing  naturally  aspirated engines
equipped with knock  sensors.   The feedback aspect  of  this type of  ignition
system  could  allow the vehicle to  automatically compensate  the timing  for
the octane of the  fuel being  consumed.   This  technology could improve  fuel
economy of vehicles in service.

It  is  conceivable that  some  vehicles  incorporating a  knock  sensor  timing
system could have  lower exhaust emissions and higher fuel economy using  EPA
standard test fuel (Indolene HO III) compared  to operating with lower  octane
commercial unleaded  gasolines.  The knock  sensor  can  be  integrated  into  a
spark  timing  system  in  a  variety  of  fashions.   This  design variability
precludes any generalized conclusions  about  the effects of varying the  fuel
octane rating.

Conclusions

Comparing the data generated  using  the standard test fuel  (97  RON) to  that
generated by  using a lower octane fuel (90 RON or 91 RON),  from  the  data
generated in this program we find:

    1.   A slight reduction in HC  emissions on the FTP and HFET with reduced
         octane (down 1.1 and 7.5% respectively),

-------
                                 -2-
    2.   A  statistically  significant  increase in  CO emissions  on the HFET
         (up 567%)  and  a less significant  increase  in CO on  the FTP  cycle
         (up 1.8%) going from the standard test fuel  to lower octane fuel,

    3.   Slight increases in  FTP and HFET  NOx emissions resulting from  the
         use of lower octane fuel, and

    4.   Virtually no effect on fuel economy.

Based on the GM and Chrysler certification data  and octane reductions from
97 to 91 RON, we find:

    1.   Increases in HC  emissions  for  both the FTP  and HFET.  The maximum
         increases were 50.9% on the FTP and about  1500% on the HFET.

    2.   Increases  in  CO emissions  on  both the FTP  and HFET.  Maximum
         increases were 154% and 378% respectively.

    3.   Both increases and decreases in  NOx  emissions on the FTP and  HFET.
         Changes in FTP NOx emissions ranged from  -19.2% to 29.5%.

    4.   Little  effect   on  fuel  economy.  The  biggest  change  was  a 5.1%
         decrease.

Test Program

This  program  tested a single production  vehicle,  a  turbocharged  1980  Buick
Regal  equipped  with  a  knock, sensor.   A complete  description  of the' test
vehicle can  be  found in Table 1.  Testing  included  several test  fuels with
an octane range inclusive of  the  majority of  commercially available unleaded
gasolines.   The test cycles which were performed are:

         1.   The 75 FTP,

-------
                                  -3-

         2.   The  "undipped"  cold  start  LA-4  (a  cycle  with
              slightly higher maximum acceleration rates  than the
              75 FTP,  this  cycle  is designated  "BBB"  in  Appendix
              A, and a  comparison between this cycle and the FTP
              can be found in Appendix D),

         3.   The highway cycle (HFET),  and

         4.   50 MPH steady state at wide open throttle (WOT).

Five different test fuels were used:

    1.   Indolene  HO  III   standard  test  fuel  with  a  research
         octane  number  (RON)  of   97.00  and  with  motor  octane
         number (MON) of 86.66,

    2.   Indolene HO III blended with heptane  to  produce a'  fuel
         with 90.35 RON,

    3.   Indolene HO III blended with heptane  to  produce a  fuel
         with 82.10 RON,

    4.   Commercial premium unleaded,  and

    5.   Commercial unleaded regular.

Although  the octane  of  the  commerical  fuels  was  not  measured,  we  have
estimated, based on survey data (17)*, that for  the  premium fuel  the RON was
96, and 94 for  the  regular.   Also,  it is possible that the Indolene/Heptane
blends  did not have  the sensitivity  that would  be  expected  from typical
commercial  fuels.   Finally,  calculating  fuel   economy  from  emission  data
requires  detailed  analysis  of  the individual  fuels.   Therefore,  the  fuel
economy results of tests using the commercial fuels  (Appendix  A) are not
*Numbers in parentheses designate References at  the end  of  this  paper.

-------
                                      -4-
                                   Table  1
                          TEST VEHICLE DESCRIPTION
                        1980  TURBOCHARGED BUICK REGAL
                    VEHICLE SERIAL  NUMBER - 4K473AH105868
Engine

type	Otto Cycle,  90°  V-6
bore x stroke	3.8 x 3.40 in.
displacement   	3.8 Liter/ 231 CID
compression ratio   	 8.0:1
maximum power @ rpm	170 horsepower @ 4000  rpm
fuel metering	4 venturi open-loop
                                                   carburetor

Drive Train

transmission type   	 3 speed automatic*

Chassis

type	2 door sport  coupe*
tire size	P205/70R14*
test weight	3625 pounds
dynamometer horsepower 	 11.6

Emission Control System

basic type   	air injection
                                                   back pressure EGR
                                                   oxidation catalyst
*  This  information was  obtained from  a visual  inspection;   the remaining
data were obtained from GM's Application for Certification for engine family
04E4BD.

-------
                                     -5-

accurate.  Additionally,  because  of  different  hydrogen/carbon ratios,  the
fuel economies of  tests  using the Indolene/Heptane blends  (Appendix A)  must
be reduced by 0.5% and 1.2% for the 90 RON and 82 RON fuels respectively.
        •
It  should  be noted  that  this  test  vehicle,  unlike vehicles  used in  other
studies, was not optimized (e.g., compression ratio changed) for each fuel.

The  number  of combinations  of  test  cycles  and fuels  which  were  actually
performed (excluding voided tests) are detailed below in Table  2.
                                   Table 2
                          Number of Tests Performed
                                               Commercial  Commercial
Test Cycle
FTP
Undipped
LA-4 N
HFET
97 RON
3
1
3
90 RON
3
2
3
82 RON
3
1
3
Regular
2
1
2
Premium
2
1
2
    WOT at
       50 MPH         1         01         1           0
In addition to this  test  program,  the  Certification Division  of  EPA's  Office
of Mobile  Source Air Pollution Control  had requested several manufacturers
(including  GM and  Chrysler)   to perform  testing,   during   the  spring  and
summer of  1980,  with both the standard  test fuel  and lower octane (91  RON)
fuel  on  several of  their 1981 model  year emission  data vehicles equipped
with  knock  sensors.   These additional test data have also been included  in
this  report.

Test Vehicle Spark Timing Control System Description

The  test  vehicle,  a 1980 model  year turbocharged  231  C.I.D.  Buick  Regal
(described  in Table  1)  was  equipped with a  closed-loop electronic  spark
control (ESC)  system that was developed by GM to meet  the requirements  of
detonation  control  by  spark  timing  adjustments.    There  are  three   basic
components in this system:
    1.   Detonation Sensor
    2.   Turbo Control Center
    3.   High Energy Ignition (HEI) Distributor

-------
                                  -6-
                                         HOUSING
         MAGNETOSTRICTIVE CORE
           (HIGH NICKEL ALLOY)
The  knock  sensor  (Figure  1)  used  in this  vehicle  is  a magnetostrictive
transducer with  an output voltage that is proportional to  the vibration
level   at   the   "knock   fre-
quency."  The  sensor reacts  to
all  inlet manifold  vibrations,
such as  those  caused by  normal
engine cylinder firings,  valve
closing,  and  push  rod  opera-
tion.   These  would  appear  as
background  noise.   When  deto-
nation   (i.e.   knock)   occurs,
the   sensor   output    voltage
increases  over  the background
noise signal.  (4)(6)
                                                           \
                   PERMANENT MAGNET
                                                            COIL
                                             INNER SHELL
                                         Fig. 1 - Detonation Sensor  (6)
The turbo  control center processes  the sensor signal,  filters the signal  to
remove  some  of  the  background  noise,  and  then  provides  an  appropriate
command  signal  to  the  distributor  to  determine  actual spark  timing.  The
electronic logic is  illustrated below (Figure 2).  (4)
By  design,  the ESC  system has  a maximum limit  of spark  retard capability.
The final centrifugal  spark advance curve (Figure 3) appears below:
OETONi
SCN8O
I

j mr
U1ON
n


IIMF X




f^f^
i
•



mm^m^m t
DETONATION

CONTINUOUSLY
MONITORED
BACKGROUND
NOISE

                       CONTROLLER
Figure 2. Electronic Logic  (4)(6)
                                                DEGREES SPARK ADVANCE VS. E.R.P.M.
                                              K 40
                                              13
                                                "
                                              ft 10
      PART THROTTLE
     — AND ROAO
    - LOAD RANGE
             [•—WIDE OPEN THROTTLE RANGE 	
                                                           MAXIMUM SPARK
                                                           RETARD REQUIRED
                                                                            CENTRIFUGAL
                                                                            CURVE
                                                               TURBO WORST CASE DETONATION
                                                      1000   7300   3000
                                                             E.R.P.M
Figure 3. Final Centrifugal
spark advance configuration  (4)

-------
                                 -7-
This knock  control  system quickly retards  the  spark advance to  limit  knock
and then  readvances the  spark  at a  much slower rate.   It is important  to
note that  this  system only retards from  the  spark  curve of  the  distributor
and does not advance timing to seek out knock.  (6)

Summary of the Test Results

The emissions and fuel economy data generated in the previously mentioned  13
FTPs, 6 undipped LA-4s, and 13 HFETs  can be  found  in Appendix  A.  Graphical
representations of  these  data  appear in  Figures 4  through 7.  Two  variable
linear  regression  analyses indicate  that as the octane level  of  the  fuel
decreased from 97 to 82 RON:

              1.   HC emissions decreased,
              2.   CO  emissions  decreased  (except  on the  HFET  cycle  which
                   exhibited a small absolute increase),
              3.   NOx emissions increased, and
              4.   Fuel economy  increased on the FTP and  decreased on  the
                   undipped LA-4  cycle.   In  order  to compute  fuel  economy,
                   from the emission values, we must know the  density  and
                   hydrogen/carbon  ratio   of  the fuel;   thus,  fuel  economy
                   results for the commercial fuels  were not plotted.

However, the differences among most of the measurements of HC, CO,  NOx, and
MPG using  the  five different fuels  were  not significant  at  the  95  percent
confidence  level (applying  Student's  t-test).  The  sample means  which  could
be distinguished at the 95 percent confidence level  are:

    1.   For  the  FTP  tests,  the  mean of the  HC  emissions  from
         using the 82 RON  fuel is  significantly  different from  the
         means using the other four fuels.

    2.   For  the  undipped LA-4  tests   (using  as  variance  the
         pooled  estimate   of  the  variance  of   the  FTP  and LA-4
         samples),   the  means of  the  HC  emissions  for the RON 82
         and  90 RON  fuels  were  distinctly  different  from  each
         other and from the remaining three fuels.

-------
                                    figure 4
                H
-------
                                    Figure 5
                
-------
                                     Figure 6
               NDX   EM I  55 I  DN5   V5   D 
-------
                                         Figure 7
                FUEL    ECDNDMY   V5    D ~    2!.0
x
n    20.0
7.
n    19.0
IB.0




17.0




IE.0




IS.0
-B-
                        =B=
                                                                            HFET
                                                          FTP
                                               Undipped

                                                LA-4
             B0
                      BS
                         90
100
                RE5ERRCH   DCTRNE    NUMBER

-------
                                -12-

    3.   For the HFET:

         a)   The  means  of  the  HC  emissions  from  using   the
              commercial unleaded  and 82  RON  fuels  are  distinct
              from each other and from the remaining three fuels.

         b)   The means of  the  CO  emissions from using the 97  RON
              and 90  RON  fuels are  distinct from  each other  but
              not from the other three fuels.

         c)   The  means  of  the  NOx  emissions  from using   the
              commercial  premium  fuel  is  distinct   from  using
              either the 90 RON or  82 RON fuels.

Interestingly enough,  fuel economy  is  missing from  the  above list.  Thus,
for any given test cycle,  we  cannot  state (with even 90  percent  confidence)
that  the  mean of the  fuel economy results with one  fuel is different  from
that of any other fuel.

Wide  open  throttle  (WOT)  testing indicated a  loss  in power associated  with
reduced octane levels.  Data from the WOT testing is summarized in Table  3.

                                   Table 3
                  Horsepower at Wide Open Throttle at 50  MPH
              Vehicle        Engine            Horse-     Audible
    Fuel      Speed (MPH)    Speed (RPM)        Power      Knock  ?
    RON 97       50            2900              90         No
                                                 67          Yes
                                                 71          Yes
During the  spring  and  summer of 1980, and at  the request  of  EPA,  GM  tested
five of  its  passenger  cars and two of its light duty trucks  on both  97 RON
and 91 RON fuels.  (See Appendix B.)  Similarly, Chrysler tested five  of its
passenger cars  on  both 97  RON and 91 RON fuels.    (See Appendix  C.)  The
Commerical
Unleaded
RON 82

52
50

2800
2750

-------
                                 -13-

results of  those  tests  are  summarized  in Tables  4 and 5.  At  the  90 percent
confidence  level, the increases in CO  emissions  for  GM's five passenger cars
are significant on both the FTP  and HFET test cycles.   Also,  for  Chrysler's

five  passenger  cars, the  increases  in  HC  and CO emissions  on the  highway
cycle are significant at the 90 percent confidence level.


In a series of letters  sent  to the Certification Division of  EPA's Office of

Mobile Air  Pollution Control,  GM stated  that, with  respect to  Buick's 1978
model year ESC system:
    The electronic  spark control system is designed to  operate  only
    when  engine  detonation  is  detected.   The  latest  design  and
    calibration parameters  are  such that engine detonation will  not
    occur  during  the  Federal  test  procedure  [when  using  91  RON
    fuel].  (19)

And, similarily, for their 1979 model year system,  GM stated:

    General  Motors  Corporation  believes  that  Buick's  Electronic
    Spark   Control  will   also   not   affect  the   fuel   economy
    representativity  for  1979   [as  they  believed  for  1978] .    As
    before,  the  ESC  is   designed  to   operate   only   when   engine
    detonation is  detected.   The 1979 calibrations will  not  produce
    sufficient detonation  to  cause the ESC to retard the spark  with
    91 RON fuel during FTP conditions.  (20)

Other Studies
GM conducted a study (6) in which a 4000 pound  inertia weight  vehicle  with a

305  CID  engine  with  a  8.4:1  compression   ratio  was   equipped  with  a

closed-loop  knock  control  system.   The  vehicle  was  then tested  using  a

number of fuels from 82 to 100 RON.  Comparing  the test  results using  91  and

98 RON fuel, GM reported:
    [This] vehicle  did not have  significant  spark retard  [with  the
    91 RON fuel]  during  the EPA test;   therefore, no change  in  fuel
    economy would be  expected due to increasing fuel octane  over 91
    RON.

          The   performance  [as  measured  by   a  zero  to   60   MPH
    acceleration  time] was not affected greatly  by  a decrease  from
    100 to 90  RON fuel.    Below 90  RON the acceleration times began
    to increase markedly.

-------
.7*
PERCENTAGE INCREASE
FOR 1981 MODEL YEAR GM
TESTED AT GM
VEHICLE
I.D. F
PASSENGER
B5083
B80116
B80117
P0775
P0794
MEAN
ST.D.
TRUCKS:
COC215
COK169
MEAN
ST.D.
CARS:
36
-19
7
21
32
15
22

22
1
12
14
HC
TP

.0
.1
.4
.3
.4
.6
.4

.4
.8
.1
.6
HFET

10.7
6.7
50.9
18.8
-4.3
16.6
20.9

12.5
0.0
6.2
8.8
---• -14-
TAB]TE~~4
IN GOING FROM RON 97 TO RON
EMISSION DATA VEHICLES AND
•S EMISSION LABORATORY
CO
FTP
-
34.0
38.4
84.2
43.2
154.2
70.8
50.7

37.0
2.4
19.7
24.5
HFET

300.0
134.8
378.9
31.8
175.0
214.1
122.3

22.6
0.0
11.3
16.0
NOX
FTP

0.0
8.3
-6.7
2.7
0.0
0.9
5.4

-19.2
-1.7
-10.4
12.4
HFET

-1.
0.
0.
0.
7.
1.
3.

-14.
2.
-6.
11.

4
0
0
0
9
3
7

5
3
1
9
FTP

-2.4
1.7
-2.4
1.7
-2.0
-0.7
2.2

-1.8
-0.6
-1.2
0.8
91
TRUCKS
MPG
HFET

-1.3
1.1
-0.4
0.3
-0.9
-0.2
1.0

-3.0
4.1
0.6
5.0

COMB.

-2.0
1.5
-1.7
1.2
-1.6
"-0.5
1.7

-2.3
1.1
-0.6
2.4
FOR COMPARISON:
  IN-HOUSE TEST VEHICLE:  »4K473AH105868
          -1.1  -7.5    1.8  566.6    2.4   4.2    0.8  -0.4   0.3

-------
                             TABLE 5
VEHICLE
I.D.
D250
0254-
D280
D282
F180
MEAN
ST.D.
PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN GOING FROM RON 97 TO RON 91
FOR 1981 MODEL YEAR CHRYSLER EMISSION DATA VEHICLES
TESTED AT CHRYSLER'S EMISSION LABORATORY
HC CO NOX MPG
FTP
50.9
45.0
1.6
35.0
-10.4
24.4
27.2
HFET
1566.7
54.5
53.6
43.8
20.0
43.0*
16.1*
FTP
23.7
50.0
-13.2
100.0
3.6
32.8
44.3
HFET
116.7
33.3
24.3
56.1
45.2
55.1
36.5
FTP
29.5
-13.1
-6.4
20.0
4.8
7.0
17.8
HFET
-28.1
11.1
23.3
18.6
0.0
5.0
20.5
FTP
0.6
-0.6
-1.2
-1.9
-0.7
-0.8
0.9
HFET
2.1
-3.2
-1.2
-0.8
-5.1
-1.6
2.7
COMB.
1.1
-1.5
-1.2
-1.5
-2.3
-1.1
1.3
 * EXCLUDING D250
FOR COMPARISON:
  IN-HOUSE TEST VEHICLE:  »4K473AH105868
          -1.1    -7.5    1.8  566.6    2.4
4.2
0.8  -0.4
0.3

-------
                                     -16-
    ...  Based  on  both  full  throttle  and  part  throttle  octane
    requirements,   the   system   can  reduce   the  vehicle   octane
    requirement for trace knock levels by 8 to 10 RON.
An Exxon study (2) (18), funded by EPA, in which a GM vehicle with  a 350  CID
engine  was  equipped with  a closed-loop knock  control  system, reached much
the same conclusion:

    Emissions  and  fuel economy  testing  using fuel  that  produces
    trace knock  on  WOT  accelerations does not  cause spark  retard  on
    the  FTP and  HFET  cycles,  thus  not affecting  fuel  economy  or
    emissions for normal driving.

Finally, in a  Department  of  Energy (DOE) study (14),  a 1977  Volvo 242  DL
with a  2.1-liter  engine equipped with a K-Jetronic fuel injection  system,  a
Lambda-Sond  system,  and a  three-way  catalyst which  was fitted with Buick's
knock-control system was tested  using  84,  92,  and 101 RON  fuels.   The  study
found that as the octane level of the fuel decreased:

    1.   Both FTP and HFET  fuel  economy increased slightly with most of  the
         increase coming with the change from 92 to 84 RON  fuel.

    2.   The FTP NOx emissions had  an increase  of between 15 and 45 percent
         going from the 101 to 92 RON fuels.

The HFET  emissions  were not  reported in  the  DOE study, and  the  other  FTP
emissions displayed no consistent trends.

These  preceding  studies appear  to  be in agreement with   the  data in this
report.  That is:

    1.   As  the  research octane  number of the  fuel  decreases  from  about  97
         to 90 RON,  there are only  slight  changes  (in absolute value, not  in
         percent  change)  in fuel  economy.   This result is probably due  to
         the small  amount   of  timing retard (both  in  time  and  in  degrees)
         that  occurs on  the  EPA  test  cycles  using  approximately 90  RON
         fuel.

-------
                            -17-
As the octane level of  the  fuel drops below 90 RON,  the  occurrence
of knock may increase on the EPA  test  cycles,  and  thus  necessitate
some  spark retard.   Since  this  knock-control  system  has  a  limit
(23°) to the amount of retard from the basic spark timing curve,  it
is possible that a low level of knock may be present when using  82
RON fuel.  This trace knock could possibly account for  the increase
in fuel economy (5) with 82 RON fuel as well as the slight increase
in HC emissions (1).

-------
                                     -18-
                                 REFEKENCES

1.  L.C. Duke, et al.,  "The  Relation Between Knock and Exhaust  Emissions  of
    a Spark Ignition Engine," SAE Paper No. 700062,  January 1970.

2.  B.J. Kraus,  et  al.,  "Reduction of  Octane Requirement  by  Knock  Sensor
    Spark Retard System," SAE Paper No. 780155, February-March 1978.

3.  J.  Lappington  and  L.A.  Caron,  "Chrysler Microprocessor  Spark  Advance
    Control," SAE Paper No. 780177, February-March 1978.

4.  T.F. Wallace, "Buick's Turbocharged V-6 Powertrain for 1978," SAE  Paper
    No. 780413, February-March 1978.

5.  J.L. Bascunana and  R.C.  Stahman,  "Impact of Gasoline  Characteristics  on
    Fuel Economy," SAE Paper  No. 780628,  June 1978.

6.  J.H. Currie,  et  al.,  "Energy  Conservation with  Increased  Compression
    Ratio and  Electronic  Knock  Control,"  SAE Paper  No.  790173, February-
    March 1979.

7.  R.A. Grimm, et al.,  "GM Micro-Computer  Engine Control  System," SAE  Paper
    No. 800053, February 1980.

8.  Per  Gillbrand,   "Knock  Detector  System Controlling  Turbocharger  Boost
    Pressure," SAE Paper No.  800833, June  1980.

9.  L.B. Graiff, et  al., "A  Device and Technique for Determining the Octane
    Requirements  of   Individual  Cylinders  of  an  Engine,"  SAE Paper No.
    801353,  October 1980.

10. Daisaku  Sawada  and  Takashi  Shigematsu, "Improvement  of  Spark  Ignition
    Knock Detector Performance  by  Learning Control,"  SAE  Paper No.  810057,
    February 1981.

-------
11. I.  Glaser  and  J.D.  Powell,  "Optimal Closed-Loop  Spark Control  of  an
    Automotive Engine," SAE Paper No.  810058,  February 1981.

12. G.  Honig,   et   al.,  "Electronic  Spark   Control  Systems       Part  I:
    Microcomputer-Controlled  Ignition  System       Part   II:    Bosch   Knock
    Control," SAE Paper No. 810059, February  1981.

13. J.E.  Rydquist,  "A  Turbocharged  Engine  with  Microprocessor  Controlled
    Boost Pressure," SAE Paper No. 810060, February 1981.

14. D.E.  Koehler  and  W.F. Marshall,  "Maximizing  Efficiency  of  Fuel  Pro-
    duction and Utilization,"  SAE Paper No. 810062, February  1981.

15. "The  Effect of  Ignition  Timing   Modifications on  Emissions  and  Fuel
    Economy," U.S. EPA, Office of  Mobile  Source Air Pollution Control,  Emis-
    sion  Control  Technology Division, Technology  Assessment and  Evaluation
    Branch, Paper No.  76-4 AW, October 1975.

16. R.J.  Hosey  and J.D. Powell,  "Closed Loop, Knock Adaptive Spark  Timing
    Control Based on Cylinder Pressure," ASME Publication  78-WA/DSC-15.

17. "MVMA  National Gasoline  Survey",  Summer  Season -  October  15,   1980,
    Sampling Date - July 15, 1980.

18. United  States  Patent   number  4,153,020,  Assignee:   U.S.  Environmental
    Protection Agency, May 8,  1979.

19. Letter to J.M.  Marzen, Chief,  Light-Duty Vehicle Certification Branch,
    EPA,  From  D.A. Olds,   Current Product  Engineering,  GM,  letter  number
    ML-8G129, dated June 28, 1977.

20. Letter   to   J.H.   Murphy,   Acting   Team   Leader,   Light-Duty  Vehicle
    Certification  Branch,  EPA,  from  D.A. Olds,  Field Product  Engineering,
    GM, letter number  ML-9G229, dated  September 20, 1978.

-------
                            -20-
                        APPENDIX A
                    In-House Test Data
Due to changes in  the  hydrogen/carbon ratio and the density of  the
fuels, the calculated fuel economy (FE):

     1.   Should be reduced by 0.5% for 90 RON fuel,

     2.   Should be reduced by 1.2% for 82 RON fuel,  and

     3.   Is  not   accurate  for  either the  commercial  regular   or
          commercial premium unleaded fuels.

-------
                                               TUKHO BUICK  TEST DATA
                                            PROCESSED:  SEP lit i9no
jKMMdsa- Kuicui.fuiza.Hi.abi 	 j^uy .u...^..^ . . utajy _ .
Q*IE. ItSI_NUMB£S tl£ 	 CQ
5/30/80 803504
6/ 3/80 803506
8/ 6/80 804930
MEAN
STO. DEVIATION
MAX. 95* ERROR
0.627
0.564
0.460
O.bSO
0.064
0.155
4.780
4.566
4.215
	 NIQA
1.438
1.443
2.216
4.519 1.698
0.285 0.447
0.523 0.822
_._ CQ2-
532.570
523.520
511.510
522.533
10.559
19.398
E.fc
16.3
16.6
17,1
16.67
0.40
0.74
iMPftt
UltJQ
0208
0208
0002

..QpOMETEg^ 	 ^dfcL ^QAHy,
4126.0 8.9 28.85
4166.0 8.9 28.90
4757.0 9.3 29.10
28.95
0.13
0.24
1 IW-MfH
	 SiIE.i_Qfi!
-IEUB
72.5
70.5
74.0


69.52
72.58
55.00
65.70
9.39
17.25
ir.o/i tii
Q2 _ .

^Q2i_£lML
0.97
0.98
0.91
0.954
0.039
0.073
• • • -
.
36603
22136
36603

DATE                TEST NUMBER
5/30/80     803504'           BAG 1
                             BAG 2
                             BAG 3

6/ 3/80     803506           BAG 1
                             HAG 2
                             BAG 3

8/ 6/80     804930           BAG 1
                             BAG 2
                             BAG 3
 HG
2.216
0.179
0.236

2.044
0.174
0.193

1.457
0.171
0.253
FTP  BAG OATA

        CO
 NOX
                                                                      •(GRAMS/MILE)
CO?
      22.457
       0.0
       0.588

      21.4b8
       0.0
       0.529

      19.061
       0.079.
       0.842
2.539
0.880
1.673

2.342
0.996
1.612

2.159
2.293
2.113
  540.2
  554.6
  484.9

  536.0
  5««2.8
  477.3

  535.3
  520.0
  477.4
 FE
CMPG)

15.2
16.0
18.2

15,4
16.3
18.5

15.6
17.0
18.5

-------
                                               TURBO  BUICK  TEST  DATA
                                                                              PHOCESSEO:  SEP  11,  1980
5/30/80 803505
6/ 3/80 803507
.8/ 7/80 804931
MEAN
STD. DEVIATION
MAX. 95* ERftOR
	 ac 	
0.069
0.068
0.066
0.067
0.002
0.004
	 CQ
NO*
0.025 1.226
0.009 1.256
0.047 1.050
0.026 1.177
0.0*18 0.110
0.034 0.203
_ CQ2_ .
374.310
369.640
354.940
366.296
10.107
18.569
	 -__* i
_ E£
23.7
24.0
25.0
24.23
0.68
1.25
iuor.\
UitlQ
0208
0208
0002
                                                                               4147.0
                                                                               4197.0
                                                                               4769.0
                                                            .LOB.	BAEQ.
                                                             8.9   28.85
                                                             8.9   28.90
                                                             9.3   29.05

                                                                   28.93
                                                                    0.10
                                                                    0.19
                                                                  (IN-HO)
                                                         72.5  69.52  0.97
                                                         68.5  66.59  0.96
                                                         74.2  57.9*  0.92

                                                               64.68  0.949
                                                                6.02  0.025
                                                               11.06  0.047
                                                              (GR/LB)
                                                                                                                36603
                                                                                                                22136
                                                                                                                36603
DATE


5/30/80

6/ 3/80

8/ 7/80
        TEST NUMBER
803505

803507

804931
                  HC
             HFET BAG DATA

                     CO
                   NOX
dAG 1

BAG 1

BAG 1
0.069

0.068

0.066
	(GRAMS/MILE)	

 0.025             1.226

 0.009             1.256

 0.047             1.050
C02
  374.3

  369.6

  354.9
 FE

-------
                                              TUHBO BUICK TEST DATA
                                                                             PROCESSED: SEP u,

fu

_QA
6/
6/
EL EQtl=97_ ¥Edlt

IL_ I£SI_tiU^aEB
6/80 803508
9/80 803509
• MEAN
STD. DEVIATION
MAX. 95* ERROR
L£i_»ftl
-------
                                                TURBO 8UICK TEST DATA
                                             PROCESSED:  SEP  u,  1980
F_UEI_PQN=<>0 YEHI'C-LI

6/10/80 803510
6/11/80 803881
8/ 8/80 805270
: i F
MEAN
STD. DEVIATION
MAX. 95* ERROR
£i_±ft£4l
H£
.0.525
0.559
0.549
O.S44
0.017
0.031
2A.tua5.afca.

CO '


_ NQ4
4.386 1,597
4.562 1.676
4.855 . 1.956
4.601 1.743
0.237 0.188
0.435 0.345
	 -inaAM^/MIl P\ 	
ItlESILA k

	 £Q2_
517.390
520.760
509.920
516.023
5.537
10.173
jT • Ti

_EE
16.9
16.7
17.1
16.90
0.20
P. 37
IMPftl


	 QXdQ. 	 fiQQbEJEB_.
0208 4239.0
0208 4281.4
0208 4812.0
r . ffp

IbE BfiBQ 	
8.9 28.97
8.9 29.32
8.7 29.02
29.10
0.19
0.35
1 TKI_Mftt


-IEB
71.
72.
68.
^illE*" Q2i

5~73.12~
3 77.45
9 64.27
71.61
6.72
12.34
fftD/l Ul


JQi_£&£_
0.99
1.01
0.95
0.980
0.029
0.054
	 *
. . ,.
36603~
36603
36603
DATE                TEST NUMBER
6/10/aO     803510           BAG 1
                             BAG 2
                             BAG 3

6/11/80     803881           BAG 1
                             BAG 2
                             BAG 3

8/ 8/bO     805270           BAG 1
                             BAG 2
                             BAG 3
                                               HC
1.851
0.173
0.198

2.029
0.171
0.190

1.865
0.172
0.280
                                                          FTP  BAG DATA
                     CO
                   NOX
C02
                                                                      •(GRAMS/MILE)
20.220
 0.048
 0.748

21.444
 U.08B
 0.376

21.768
 0.0
 1.431
2.318
1.255
1.708
2.452
1.372
1.672
2.252
1.962
1.721
— — — - — > I
525.3
539.2
469.8
530.4
537.3
481.9
525.7
525.0
469.2
 FE
(MPG)

15.8
16.4
18.8

15.5
16.5
18.4

15.7
16.9
18.8

-------
                                                TUKBO HUICK TEST DATA
                                                                               PROCESSED: SEP 11, 1980
^tL-wtiU-^ttmiu^aatmtsut 	 ufiaii-«ii_j»a 	 IXEUJKI 	 , 	 UICUKU 	 :___.
"6/TO/80 803511
6/11/80 803B82
8/ 8/80 805269
MEAN
STD. DEVIATION
MAX. 95% ERROR
~b"
0
0
0
0
0
.064
.059
.066
.062
.004
.007
_CQ__ .
0.151
0.0
0.241
tifii
1.208
1.260
1.212
0.196 1.226
0.063 0.028
0.192 0.053
CO?
365.350
364.840
368.360
366.183
1.914
3.517
______-» i
££
24.
24.
24.
24.
0.
0.
IMP
_ __Q*UQ _
3 0208
3 D208
1 0208
23
11
21
QQQMETER JH.P BARO
4260.0 8.9 28.97
4291.0 8.9 29.32
4832.0 6.7 28.93
29.07
0.21
0.39
1 TKJ-HRl
_I£I4P 	 tiUM 	 1
67.8 66.17
70.3 75.88
67.8 65.84
69.30
5.70
10.47
/r.o/i 14 1
^IQX_EAC_
«NONE«
1.00
«NONE«
0.970
0.025
0.046
36603
36603
36603

DATE




6/10/80



6/11/80


8/ 8/80
        TEST NUMBER
803511


803882


805269
                  HO
             HFET BAG DATA


                     CO
                                                       NOX
BAG 1


BAG 1



BAG 1
0.064



0.059



0.066
	(GRAMS/MILE)	



 0.152             1.20B



 0.0               1.260



 0.241        .     1.212
                                                                                          C02
365.4


364.8



368.4
 FE

(MPG)



24.2


24.3



24,0
                                                                                                                                   ro
                                                                                                                                   Cn
                                                                                                                                   I

-------
                                                TUKBO BUICK TEST DATA
                                                                                            PROCESSEDJ  SEP 11. 1980
_EL&L_PQUE2Q
                                                                                            ___________ SiIE.i_Q2Qa_
6/12/80  803863
6/13/80  803864
      •MEAN
      STD. DEVIATION
      MAX. 95* ER80R
0.943
0.983

0.962
0.027
0.084
  CQ
10.101
 9.384
1.870
1.871
                     533.330
                     529.470
    9.742     1.B70  531.399
    0.506     0.005    2,738
    1.540     0.015    8.332
     (GRAMS/MILE)- -------- >|
                                                             16.1
                                                             16.2

                                                             16.15
                                                              0.07
                                                              0.21
                                                             (MPG)
D208      4301.9     8.9   29.36  71.5  71.93  0.98    22136
0208      4309.0     8.9   29.24  71.2  74.67  0.99    36603
                                                     29.30
                                                      0.08
                                                      0.25
                                                    (IN-HG)
                                                                             73.30  0.987
                                                                              1.93 ^0.008
                                                                              5.88^. 0.025
                                                                            (GR/LB)
DATE


6/12/80

6/13/80
                     TEST NUMBER
                  HC
             803863

             803864
BAG 1

BAG 1
   0.943

   0.983
                BBS  BAG DATA

                        CO
                                                    NOX
                                                                              C02
                                	(GRAMS/MILE)	

                                 10.101            1.870

                                  9.385            1.871
                                                                                533.3

                                                                                529.5
                                                    FE
                                                   
-------
                                               TUHBO BUICK TEST DATA
                                            PROCESSED:  SEP  lit  1980
jw.jma—icaiui^iuaiausu* 	 i«uujai_»H 	 	 iie^Up_.-._ 	 siiujia. 	 __::r
"7/22/60 803878
7/23/80 804874
8/12/80 805356

MEAN
STD. DEVIATION
MAX. 95% ERftOft
n£
0.447
0.420
0.477
0.448
0.028
0.052
l<- — --
£Q
4.308
4.115
5.029
. NQ*. CQ" EE QKMQ ODOMETER IHP BARO TEMP HUM NOX F4C _D8iyE"y
1.821
1.889
1.937
4.4B3 1.882
0.481 0.058
0.884 0.106
510.150
512.610
462.460
495.073
28.269
51.934
— _ 	 > i
17.1 0208
17.0 0208
18.8 0208
17.63
1.01
1.86

-------
                                               TURbO BUICK TEST DATA
                                                                              PrtOCESSFO: SEP  lit-  1980
_EU£L_EQt£a2 	 V.EBIQ.E
. DilE ItSI_L!Lliia£a __ .
7/22/60 803879
7/23/80 804875
8/12/80 805357
MEAN
STD. DEVIATION
MAX. 95% ERROR
': •ftujt

._H£ 	
0.052
0.047
0.049
0.049
0.003
0.006


	 QQ


NOX
0.012 1.299
0.0 1.268
0.155 1.120
0.083 1.229
0.101 0.095
0.307 0.175
1NE.RI1' u]

CQ2
369.240
357.940
353.740
360.306
8.020
14.735
	 --•> i
Li __3*25__

jTfr
24.0
24.8
25.0
24.60
0.53
0.97
f MPftl


QltJQ _ £
D208
0208
.0208
IIPLL

459^.9
4626.0
4873.0
HF_EJ;_

ItiE
8.7
8.7
8.7



28.94
29.06
29.05
29.0?
0.07
0.12


_!£«£
71.5
68.5
67.5
SHE8 Il2i

~~75.6.2


  357.9


  353.7
                                                                                                                                   I
                                                                                                                                  to
                                                                                                                                  oo
 FE

(MPG)



24.0


24.8



25.0

-------
                                                lUKHD bUlCK  ItST OATA                       PHOCESSFl)*  SEP 11* 1980
                   	H£	GQ	NQi	CO?	E£	QXN.Q	O.QQyEI£B	ItiS.	B42Q-
7/24/80  804924         0.764    9.932     2.062  530.177    16.2     D208       4637.7      8.7    29.14  71.0  68.73  0.97    36603

      MEAN              0.764    9.932     2,062  530.177    16,20                                29.14        68.73  0.966
              j          |<:	(GRAMS/MILE)	-> I    (MPG)                               (IN-HG)       (GR/LB)
                                                           BBB   BAG  OATA                                                          to
                                                                                                                                  vo
DATE                TEST NUMBER                HC                  CO                NOX                C02                FE       '
                                              |<	.	(GRAMS/MILE)	—;	rr> I            (MPG)

7/24/80     804924           BAG 1             0.764                9.932             2.062     .           530.2            16.2

-------
                                               TURBO BUICK TEST DATA
                       PROCESSED: SEP 11, i9ao
                                                        t_iiIi ___ 3.625 __________ IIEEi_EIE
7/16/80 803873
7/17/80 803875
> , MEAN
•STO. DEVIATION
MAX. 95* ERROR
tiC
0.605
0.578
Q.S91
0.019
0.068
_CQ
_ NQX
5.208 1.571
4.742 1.605
4.975 1.588
0.329 0.023
1.002 6.070
— (GDAM5/MII Ft —
£02
520.150
517.730
518.939
1.732
5.270
. — — >i
££
16.7
16.8
16.75
0.07
0.21
(MPGl
0208'
0208
                                                                         :	QDQMEIEtL
                                                                               4493.6
                                                                               4527.0
  »	BABQ_
8.7   2R.85
8.7   28.94

      28.89
       0.06
       0.19
     (IN-HG)
                                    72.5
                                    73.0
                         69.52
                         73.18
              0.97
              0.99
22136
22136
                                                                                                             71.35  0.978
                                                                                                              2.59  0.011
                                                                                                              7.88  0.034
                                                                                                            (GR/LB)
                                                           FTP  BAG DATA
DATE                TEST NUMBER
7/16/80     803873           BAG 1
                             BAG 2
                             HAG 3

7/17/80     803875           BAG 1
                             BAG 2
                             BAG 3
                                               HC
CO
NOX
C02
2.091
0.149
0.364
1.925
0.144
0.395
23.148
0.0
1.706
21.073
0.0
1.505
                                                                       (GRAMS/MILE)
2.431
1.260
1.523
2.464
1.296
1.548
533.4
533.1
485.3
541.3
528.7
478.9
                                     FE
                                    (MPG)

                                    15.4
                                    16.6
                                    18.1

                                    15.3
                                    16.B
                                    18.4

-------
                                                     HUICK TtST DATA
                                                                              PROCESSED:  btK lit
QAIE. T_ESl_M4> fcjEti HC CO
7/16/BO H03B74
0
.070
7/17/80 803876 0.0b4
•MEAN
STD.
MAX.

DEVIATION
95* ERROR
0
0
0
1
.067
.005
.015
0.002
0.040
0.061
0.029
MQX
0.9HO
0.993
0.986
O.OOH
0.090 0.026
. ££>£_ .
1H1.200
371.910
376.554
6.564
19.973
... 	 > 1
FE QXtJil QQQ
MFTEP- IbP BARU
23.3 D208 4515.7 8.7 2B.H4
23. rt 0208 4547.8 8.7, 29. H5
23.55
0 . .15
1.07
(MPftt
29.34
0.71
2.17
( TM-HRI
                                                         72.5
                                                         71.5
                                                                                69.55
                                                                                72.83
                                                                                                        0.97
                                                                                                        0.9^9
                                                                                                                            22136
                                                                                                                            22136
                                                                                                             71.19  0.977
                                                                                                              2.32  0.010
                                                                                                              7.06  0.031
DATE


7/16/80

7/17/80
        TEST NUMrtEK
                  HC
             HFET BAG DATA

                     CO
                   NOX
C02
803874

803876
HAG 1

bAG 1
0.070

0.064
	(GRAMS/MILF)	

 0.082             0.980

 0.040             0.993
  381.2

  371.9
 FE
(MPG)

23.2

23.8

-------
                                               TURBO BUICK TEST DATA                      PROCESSED: SEP 11* 1980
                       __BC	CQ	
7/18/80  803877         1.180   11.721     1.885  544.734   15.6     0208      4565.0     8.9   29.10  70.0  70.45  0.97     36603

      MEAN              1.180   11.721     1.885  544.733   15.60                               29.10        70.45  0.974
                        j<—_	(GRAMS/MILE)	•	>l   (MPG)                              (IN-HG)      (GR/LB)
                                                           BBB  BAG DATA                                                         dj

DATE                TEST NUMBER                HC                  CO               NOx               C02                FE      '
                                             «	(GRAMS/MILE)	:*•	1	—;->!            (MPG)

7/18/80     803877           BAG 1            1.180              11.721            1.885                544.7            15.6

-------
                                               TURBO BUICK TEST DATA
                                                                             PROCESSED! SEP lit 1980


7/30/faO 804925
7/31/80 804927
MEAN
STD. DEVIATION
MAX. 95* ERROR
Lti
0
Q
0
Q
0
I
"ftKftl

.620
.576
.598
.030
.093
2A.tna5a&a
_ £Q
4.745
4.885


UQ&-
2.014
1.958
4.815 1.985
0.098 0.038
0.300 0.118

. _£0_2_
503.170
501.820
502.494
0.935
2.846
Uli__
££
17.
^17.
17.
0.
0.
IMP
36.25 	

Q1N.Q
3 D006
3 0006
30
01
03
f.> S
TYPf: ETP SITE; DQQ6 _'•'"'

_QiiQjiE.i£a 	 J.UE 	 e&ao__
4460.0 9.2 29.00
4692.0 9.2 28.88
28.94
O.OP
0.26
( TM-Hfil

_iEcie — bua_i
75.0 58.15
75.0 58.50
58.32
0.24
0.74
(RB/I H»

tJQX_£AC_
0.92
0.92
0.921
0.002
0,008
	
36603
36603

DATE


7/30/80



7/31/80
        TEST NUMBER
804925
804927
BAG 1
BAG 2
BAG 3

BAG 1
BAG 2
BAG 3
                  HC
FTP  BAG DATA

        CO
NOX
C02
2.064
0.196
0.336
1.835
0.183
0.368
19.992
0.225
1.827
22.019
0.0
1.159
                                                           (GRAMS/MILE)
2.336
2.015
1.767
2.263
1.979
1.690
____________
528f7
514.7
461.8
524.6
513.4
462.8
 FE
(MPG)

15.7
17.2
19.0

15.7
17.3
19.0
                                                                                                                               &

-------
                                                     bllICK TEST DATA
                                                                              PROCESSED:  SEP 11, 1980
7/30/80  804926
7/31/80  804928
      MEAN
      STD. DEVIATION
      MAX. 95% ERROR
-b£ ______ £Q
 0.079     0.077
 0.081     0.089
                               CJQX. ______ £02
                               1.116  362.560
                               1.100  365.710
            0.080    0.083     1.107  364,135
            0.003    0.006     0.010    2.215
            0.010    6.026     0.031    6.739
            |<, -------- (GRAMS/MILE) --------- >l
.„££	
  24.4
  24.2

  24.30
   0.14
   0.43
  (MPG)
0006
0006
4681.0
4707.0
                         9.2
                         9.2
                                                  29.02  7S.O  5H.10  0.92    36603
                                                  28.85  74.5  61.66  0.94    36603
                                                                         2H.93
                                                                          0.12
                                                                          0.36
                                                                        (IN-MG)
                                                               59.88  0.928
                                                                2.52  0.009
                                                                7.68  0.030
                                                              (GR/LB)
DATE


7/30/80

7/31/80
        TEST NUMBER
80^926-

604928
                        HC
             HFET BAG DATA

                     CO
                                                                                                                                  to
                   NOX
      BAG 1

      BAG 1
0.079

0.081
	(GRAMS/MILE)	

 0.077             1.116

 0.089             1.100
                       C02
                         362.6

                         365.7
                                                    FE
                                                   (MPG)

                                                   24.4

                                                   24.2

-------
                                               Tl/KBO BUlCK TEST DATA
                                                                                           PROCESSED:  SEP 11. 1980
                                                            i	36,25	
8/ 1/80  804929

      MEAN
                 a _____ HC ______ QQ ______ uQi. _______
1.039

1.039
                                                       .. ____ EE _____ Q*UQ ___ QQQMEJE.B ____ itte ___ BASQ _ lEtie ___ BUM— UQ&.EA.C  n
                                11.297     3.140  518.753    16.4     D006      4723.0     9.2   28.95  75.5  59.77  0.93    36603
                                11.297     2.140  518.752    16.40
                                   (GRAMS/MILE)	> I    (MPG)
                                                                                                 28.95
                                                                                                (iN-Hff)
                                                               59.77   0.927
                                                               (GR/LB)
DATE                TEST NUMBER


8/ 1/80     804929           BAG 1
                                               HC
                                              KT-
             flBB  BAG DATA

                     CO
                                                            NOX
C02
     	.	(GRAMS/MILE)	

1.039              11.297           ' 2.140
                                                                                                         518.8
 FE
(MPG)

16.4
                                                                                                                                   LO
                                                                                                                                   Ul
                                                                                                                                    I

-------
      -36-
 APPENDIX B
GM Test Data

-------
                                                               VEHICLE TEST DATA LOG
  o
  ©
  o
                       MANUFACTURE*
                             VEHICLE ID
       SC        CARLINE
          CONTROL SYSTEMS
       EMISSION           EVAP  DISPLACEMENT
                 GENERAL MOTORS
                           P077S
       bV  (V)FI«£f)IKD

     ACTIVE YEAR  MODEL YEA*
       EGR/PMP/OXD/3CL/
CAN
4.9 L
                                                                           1901
       DATE
       TEST  OUOM  SYST  IDLE AMB
TEST U CYCLE MILtS MILES RPM  TEMP
   EMISSION K'ESULTS
MC    CO    CO^    NOX
      FUEL
EVAP  ECON  FUEL TYPE
«-ENG FAM
3-25-80
6- 3-80
b- 3-80
6- 4-ao
6- 4-80
:l2S4At
12981
12982
18844
18845
1B846
18847
3
FTP
HFtT
FTP
HFET
FTP
HFdT

3790
3801
42S9
4270
4302.
4313

03787
03/96
U4256
04267
04299
04310
EVAP FAM
73.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
70.5
70.5
„*«
00.210
00.049
00.255
00.052
00.282
00.060

02.38
00.24
02.55
00.20
03.53
00.40
ENG
0571.
0404.
0589.
0417.
0569.
0409.
CODE: 3
00.40
00.29
00.34
00.27
00.38
00.28

01.20 15
21
14
21
15
21

.4
.9
.9
.2
.4
.6.
ETW: 4000 DYNO H.P.108.6
THANSSL3 0/DSl AXLO3.0R N/Vt 39.1
STANDARD TEST FUEL
STANDARD TEST FUEL
STANDARD TEST FUEL
STANDARD TEST FUEL
LOW OCTANE FUEL I
LOW OCTANE FUEL ^
'  o
•'  ©

-------
                                                               VEHICLE IEST DATA LOG
©


$
©
©
©
                      MANUFACTUHER
                                           VEHICLE  10
                                                     SC        CAKLINE
                                                                             CONTROL SYSTEMS
                                                                          EMISSION           EVAP  DISPLACEMENT
                GENERAL MOTORS
                                                           FV  (V)MONTE CARLO

                                                         ACTIVE YEAH  MODEL YEAR
                                                                              EGR/PMP/OXD/3CL/
                                                                                              CAN
                                                                      3.8 L
1981 1981
DATE
TEST OUOM SYST IDLE AMd
TEST H CYCLE MILES MILES WPM TEMP
EMISSION RESULTS
HC CO C02 NOX
FUEL
EVAP ECON
FUEL TYPE
            FAM:14E4NBD   (TUP.BO)
b-26-
b-26-

6-24-
6-24-

6-i?6-
6-26-
-80   16611  FTP
•80   16612  HFtT

•80   18019  FTP
•80   1H020  HFET

•80   18021  FTP
•80   18022  HFET
                              3909  03791
                              3920  03801
                              ^271
                                   EVAP t-An:!B4-4
                                                       ENG CODEU
                                   0<«196
73.0  00.300 02.82 046b.  00.66
73.0  00.048 00.00 0322.  00.36

72.0  00.341 02.79 0471.  00.66
71.0  00.055 00.01 0323.  00.35

.73.0  00.436 03.76 0476.  00.66
72.5  00.057 00.02 0327.  00.35
            ETW: 3750 DYNO H.P.U0.6
            TrtANStL3 0/DJl AXLES2.73 N/V» 37.4

01.32 18.9  STANDARD TEST FUEL
      27.5  STANDARD TEST FUEL

01.44 18.6  STANDARD TEST FUEL
      27.4  STANDARD TEST FUEL

      18.3  LOW OCTANE FUEL
      27.1- LOW OCTANE FUEL
                                                                                                                                  00
  0
  o

  ©
;  ©

-------
o
                                                             VEHICLE TEST DATA LOG
©


©


©
               MANUFACTURE
                            VEHICLE IU
                          SC        CAHLINE
                 CONTROL SYSTEMS
              EMISSION           EVAP
                                                           DISPLACEMENT
         GENERAL MOTORS
                          BB0116
©

O

O
                          FV  (V)EtECTRA

                        ACTIVE YEAR  MODEL YEAR
              EGR/PMP/OXD/3CL/
                                                      CAN
                                                                     4.1 L
1981 1981
DATE
TEST OUOM SYST IDLE AMB
TEST # CYCLE MILES MILES RPM TEMP
EMISSION KESULTS
HC CO C02 NOX
FUtL
EVAP ECON
FUEL TYPE
                                         EVAP
5-36-HO

6-PS-BO
16613 FTP
1661<» HFET

1H8^2 FTP
168^3 HFET
                                 03V68
                            37b3 03799
   11 <»
0<»1<»5
72.0
72.0

73.0
71.5
00.383 01.73 0512.
00.060 00.23 0312.

00.229 02. 38 0501.
00.06
-------
!  $
                                                               VEHICLE  TEST  DATA  LOG
  0
  G
  O
                       MANllFACTUKEK
               VEHICLE ID
               sc        CARLINE
                                     CONTROL SYSTEMS
                                  EMISSION           EVAP  DISPLACEMENT
                 GENEKAL  MOTOKS
             B80117
                       TEST   DOOM   SYST   IDLE  AMB
       DATE     TEST  tl  CYCLE  MILES  MILLS  RPM  TEMP
  CV  (VJOEVILLE/UHOUGHAM

ACTIVE YEAR  MODEL YEAR

                19bl


                    EVAP
                                  EGR/PMP/OXO/3CL/
                                                            CAN
                           EMISSION RESULTS
                        HC    CO    C02    NO*
                                       FUEL
                                       ECON
                                       FUEL TYPE
       »-ENG FAM:UF<»AEJ
        6-  5-80   17044  FTP
        6-  5-80   17045  HFET

        6-2t>-80   18831  FTP
        6-26-80   18832  HFET
             EVAP
3BJO 03828
3841 03839

40*3 04091
     04102
71.0
72.0

72.0
72.0
                     ENG cob£:3
00.269 02.53 0523.  00.60
00.055 00.38 0346.  00.27

00.289 04.66 0532.  00.56
00.083 01.82 0344.  00.27
                    01.35 16.8
                          25.6
     4250 DYNO H.P.111.3
TRANS:L4 0/DJ2 AXLE«3.23 N/VI 27.1

STANDARD TEST FUEL
STANDARD TEST FUEL
                          16.4  LOW OCTANE FUEL
                          25.5  LOW OCTANE FUEL
  ©
                                                                                                                                 ?
  O

-------
  ©


  ©
MANUFACTURED
VEHICLE ID
                                                               VEHICLE TEST DATA LOG
SC        CAHLlNE
                                           CONTROL SYSTEMS
                                        EMISSION           EVAP  DISPLACEMENT
                 GENEWAL  MOTORS
                    P0794
                bV  (V)FIREBIKO

              ACTIVE YEAR  MODEL YEAR
                         EGK/PMP/OXD/3CL/
                                                            CAN
                                           4.9 L
                                                              1981
                                                    19al
                       TEST   ODOM  SYST  IDLE AMB
       DATE      TEST  f  CYCLE  MILES MILES RPM  TEMP
                                  EMISSION WESULTS
                               HC    CO    CO?    NOX
                                        FUEL
                                  EVAP  ECON  FUEL TYPE
  ©
       o-ENG  F*M:12S<«AbO  (TUKbO)
        7-23-dO   19612 HFET
        7-25-bO   27366 FTP

        d-  6-80   20188 FTP
        8-  6-bO   20189 HFET
       3810 036^7
            03dl*l
       40V6 0<»1J6
            0^*147
                    F:VAP FAM:
72.0  00.070 00.04
71.0  00.278 00.72 0585.

72.0  00.368 01.83 0596.
73.0  00.067 00.11
                      ENG CODE:I
00.38
00.59

00.59
00.41
                                    .   21.5
                                  01.16 15.1
                              ETWt 4000 DYNO H.P.tOB.6
                              THANS:L3 0/0:1 AXLE13.03 N/Vt 39.1

                              STANDARD TEST FUEL
                              STANDARD TEST FUEL
                                        14.8  LOW OCTANE FUEL
                                        21.3  LOW OCTANE FUEL
•  (D

-------
                                                               VEHICLE  TEST  DATA  LOG
  o
  ©
                       MANUFACTURER

                 GENERAL  MOTORS
                                      VEHICLE 10

                                    COC215
                TEST  OUOM  SYST  IOLE AMU
DATE     TEST # CYCLE MILES MILES RPM  TEMP
       SC        CARLINE

       FT  (T>C10 P/U 3*10

     ACTIVE YEAR  MODEL YEAH

        19ril         1981
   EMISSION RESULTS
HC    CO    C02    NOX   EVAP
    CONTROL SYSTEMS
 EMISSION           EVAP  DISPLACEMENT
 EGR/OXO/
FUEL
ECON  FUEL TYPE
CAN
S.O L
             FAMS18Y4HGN  (TRUCK)
                                    EVAP FAM:lD4D-8
             ENG CODE:2


©


©


©
6-30-dO
b-30-bO

7-11-80
7-11-80

V- 15-80
7-15-80

18319
18320

18716
18717

18929
1H930

FTP
HFET

FTP
HFET

FTP
HFET

3757
3768

3898
3909

3953-
3904

0378b
03799

03*30
03941

03985
03v97

72.0
72.0

73.0
73.0

72.0
73.0

                                                    00.530 05.80 0523.   02.18
                                                    00.070 01.10 0364.   03.05

                                                    00.630 06.90 Ob29.   01.93
                                                    00.090 02.00 0382.   02.80

                                                    00.710 Ott.70 0530.   01.66
                                                    00.090 01.90 0394.   02.50
      ETW: 4500 DYNO H.P.116.6
      TRANS:L3 0/o:l AXLE12.56 N/VJ 33.2

16.6  STANDARD TEST FUEL
23.0  STANDARD TEST FUEL

16.4  STANDARD TEST FUEL
23.0  STANDARD TEST FUEL

16.2  LOW OCTANE FUEL
22.3  LOW OCTANE FUEL
                                                                                                                          ro
                                                                                                                          I
  0
  0

  G
>  €>
f

.  ©

-------
©

o

0

©

©

0

0

O

©

©

©
                MANUFACTURED
               VEHICLE ID
                                                        VEHICLE. TEST DATA LOG
                                                      sc        CAPLINE
                                   CONTROL SYSTEMS
                                EMISSION           EVAP  DISPLACEMENT
          GENERAL MOTORS
             COM69
                                                      FT  (T)K10 P/U 4wD

                                                    ACTIVE YEAH  MODEL YEAR
                                EGR/PMP/OXD/
CAN
                                                                                     5.0 L
                                                       19al
                                             1961
DATE
                TEST  OUOM  SYST  IDLE «MB
         TEST * CYCLE MlLtS MILES KHM  TEMP
   EMISSION RESULTS            FUEL
HC    CO    C0£    NOX   EVAP  ECON
                                                             FUEL TYPE
«-£NG FAM: IRL^HANA
 6-?6-ttO  18210 FTH
 6-2d-80  18
-------
         -44-
    APPENDIX C
Chrysler Test Data

-------
                                                             VEHICLE  TEST  DATA  LOG
©
a
©
©
                    MANUFACTURER
                             VEHICLE 10
SC
                                         CARLINE
                CONTROL SYSTEMS
             EMISSION           EVAP  DISPLACEMENT
    DATE
              CHRYSLER
       TEST  OOOM  SYST  IDLE AMU
TEST # CYCl.E MILES MILES RPM  TEMP
                                             BV  (V)NEWHORT/NEW YORK

                                           ACTIVE YEAR  MODEL YEAR

                                              19U1         1981
                           EMISSION RESULTS            FUEL
                        HC    CO    C02    NOX   EVAP  ECON
                                                        EGH/PMP/OXD/3CL/
                                             CAN
                                          318.
                              COMMENTS
     5-TJ-dO
     S-13-ttO

     b-15-BO
 16153 FTP
 16159 HFET

 16160 FTP
 16161 HFET
                                         EVAP  FAM:BCRKF
3712  3b02  650 74.    0.110  1.56
37<;3  3B13      73.    0.012  0.06

3/V6  3btt8  670 7<*.    0.166  1.93
3607  3900      73.    0.20   0.13
                                                   ENG CODE:A-3
                                                             ETWt 4250 DYNO H.P.112.1
                                                             TRANS:L3 0/OU AXLE«2.45 N/VI 31.6
     556.
     36S,

     550.
     3-J7,
0.61
0.89

0.79
0.64
1.15 15.9  STANDARD TEST FUEL
     24.3  STANDARD TEST FUEL

0.97 16.0  LOrf OCTANE FUEL
     24.8  LOW OCTANE FUEL
o
©
©
o
o
o

-------
  0
                                                               VEHICLE  TEST DATA LOG
                       MANUFACTURE*
                             VEHICLE ID
       SC        CAHLINt
          CONTROL SYSTEMS
       EMISSION           EVAP  DISPLACEMENT
                                                             8V   (V)OIPLOMAT

                                                           ACTIVE  YEAR   MODEL  YEAH

                                                              1981          1981
                                                                      EGH/PMP/OXD/3CL/
                                                    CAN
                                    318.
  ©
      DATE
       TEST  ODOM  SYST  IDLE AMH
TEST 0 CYCLE MILtS MILES RPM  TEMP
   EMISSION RESULTS
HC    CO    C02-    NOX
EVAP
FUEL
ECON
COMMENTS
                                           EVAP  FAM:bCRKF
                                                   ENG CODESA-1
                                     ETW: 387S DYNO H.P.111.5
                                     THANSIL3 0/DJl AXLEIZ.45 N/VJ 32.1
5-24-80
5-24-80
5-28-80
16814
16815
lfoB16
16817
FTP
Hr ET
FTP
HFET
3807
381H
3dbO
3dbl
3813
J824
3867
710

710
75.
74.
80.
82.
0.109
0.022
0.158
0.034
1.98
0.21
2.97
0.28
546.
359.
370.
0.61
0.27
0.53
0.30
16.1
24.7
. \1 6 . 0
23 v9
                                                                                           STANDARD  TEST  FUEL
                                                                                           STANDARD  TEST  FUEL

                                                                                           LOW  OCTANE  FUEL
                                                                                           LOW  OCTANE  FUEL
  •©
;  ©


\  &

-------
                                                               VEHICLE TEST DATA LOG


                                                                                         CONTROL SYSTEMS
                       MANUFACTURER           VEHICLE ID      SC        CARLINE        EMISSION           EVAP  DISPLACEMENT

                 CHRYSLER                  D280              FV  (VtIMPERIAL          EGR/PMP/OXD/3CL/    CAN      318.

                                                           ACTIVE YEAR  MODEL YEAR
  ©
                                                              1961          19»1

  i£)                   TEST  ODOM  SYST  IDLE AMB        EMISSION RESULTS            FUEL
       DATE     TEST # CYClE MILLS MILES RPM  TEMP    HC    CO    C02    NO*   EVAP  ECON  COMMENTS

  ©
       »-ENG FAM:BCR5.2v9F/vx               EVAP FAM:BCRKG          ENG coDE«A-2            ETW:  4250 OYNO H.P.ill.3
  _                                                                                       TRANSIL3 0/0»1 AXLE12.24 N/VI 28.7
\  ©
  ©
  Q
        7- 3-80  19157 FTP    46^3  4V4b  570 77.     .127  2.04  532.    .78    .   16.6  STANDARD TEST FUEL
  ©    7- 3-80  19158 HFE.T   4634  4759      77.     .028   .70  343.    .43    .   25.8  STANDARD TEST FUEL
        7- 7-80   19159 FTP    4663  4789  580 76.     .129  1.77  53H.    .73    .   16.4  LOW OCTANE FUEL
  ©    7- 7-00   19160 HFtT   <»b74  4BOO      75.     .043   .87  346.    .53    .   25.5  LOW OCTANE FUEL

-------
MANUFACTUKEH
VEHICLE ID
                                                             VEHICLE TEST  DATA LOG
                                             SC        CARLlNE
                                                                                       CONTROL SYSTEMS
                                                                                    EMISSION           EVAP  DISPLACEMENT
    DATE
              CHRYSLER
       TEST  OOOM  SYbT  IDLE AMk3
TEST # CYCLE MILLS MILES HPM  TEMP
                                             cv   
-------
   ©
    o
    ©
                        MANllFACTUKER
  VEHICLE 10
                                                                VEHICLE  TEST DATA LOG
  SC        CAKLINE
   CONTKOL SYSTEMS
EMISSION           EVAP  DISPLACEMENT
                  CHRYSLER
F180
  BV  (V)SPECIAL

ACTIVE YEAR  MODEL YEAR
EGR/PMP/OXD/3CL/
CAN
318.
©

o
DATE


TEST
TEST * CYCLE


ODOM
MILtS


SrST
MILES


IDLE
KPM


AM8
TEMP

19H2 19t
EMISSION RESULTS
HC CO C0<; NOX

12
FUEL
EVAP ECON



COMMENTS
»-£NG FAM

4- 2-81
4- 2-81
4- 6-81
4- 6-81
:CCR5.2V4H4Ll

2f>058
26059
26200
26201

FTP
HFET
FTP
HFET

3864
38/6
3910

3787
3798
3832
3843
EVAP FAM:CCRKE

660 75.
71.
650 75.
74.

.182
.035
.163
.042

1.92
.42
1.99
.61
ENG CODE: A- i

660.
446.
664.
470.

.42
.37
,44
.37
I

1.17 13.4
19.6
13.3
Id. 8
ET*: 4250 OYNO H. P. 112.0
THANS:L3 0/n«l AXLEI2.94 N/V» 38.0
STANDARD TEST FUEL
STANDARD TEST FUEL
LOW OCTANE FUEL
LOW OCTANE FUEL ,
    Q
    ©
4  ®

-------
                                      -50-
                                 APPENDIX D
                     Comparison between Undipped LA-4*

                        and Bags 1 and 2 of the FTP
* A description  (speed  versus  time)  of the undipped  LA-4  was published in
the Federal Register of July 15,  1970 (35  FR 11357).

-------
                            BflSIC FTP(SOLID)
                                                                      1IUM  1700 M (MM  IWtBQ  IKOM
                             UNCLIPPED FTP (POINTS NOT  CONNECTED)
S*:
         1MH  KIN  !••
                             V

                             .•
                      BON  ntm SHH  n«M
\  f \ -•  A   f  •  A

•  '   '. •  J '.   '  '  : -
S:   • •' •  :  .*  •  • •
 \-   • •.;  '. /   •  ' '
 inOH ~ 1M8I  l»5  IKOM IJOOM IMO
                             BRSIC FTP(SOLIO)  UNCLIPPFD FTPC'-i")

-------