EPA-AA-EOD-81-3
Technical Report
Ford - EPA
1981 Light Duty Vehicle
Diesel Correlation
By
William W. Watson
May, 1981
Correlation Group
Testing Programs Branch
Engineering Operations Division
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
In a letter from Ford Motor Company dated March 2, 1981, Ford
requested a special correlation program with EPA. This special
program would allow Ford to evaluate the sensitivity of two new
diesel powered vehicles, with different engine configurations,
on the Ford and EPA diesel emission measurement systems.
II. SUMMARY OF RESULTS
There are some differences between diesel gaseous and particulate
results, between Ford and EPA. The results are as follows:
Average of all FTP's on Ford Escort (#313W767)
# HC (HFID) CO
of Tests (
EPA
FORD
2
8
.24
.21
.70
.69
NOx
-G/mi-
C02 Particulate FE
) (MPG)
.74
.74
273
279
.184
.145
37.1
36.4
Average of all FTP's on Mazda Proceed Pickup (#12263)
of Tests
EPA 2
FORD 8
c (HFID;
.20
.17
) CO
1.10
1.08
NOx
— r Imi —
1.32
1.48
C02 P
374
380
articulate
.325
.328
FE
\ /MTJP
) ^rLrO
27.1
26.6
III. TEST PROGRAM DESIGN
A. Test Vehicles
The following vehicles were used:
Vehicle
Type
Ford Escort
(Front Wheel
Drive)
Mazda Proceed
Pickup Truck
Engine
Type & Size
2.0L
Toyo Kogyo
Diesel
2.2L
Toyo Kogyo
Diesel
Transmission
5 spd.
Manual
5 spd.
Manual*
Inertia Actual
Weight Dyno H.P.
2750 Ibs. 6.7 A.H.P.
3250 Ibs. 12.1 A.H.P,
* Tested as 4 speed manual only.
-------
B. Test Procedures and Sequences
The following procedures and sequences were used at Ford
and EPA on both test vehicles.
- Vehicle Delivery
- Drain Fuel
- Fuel with 40% diesel test fuel
(Diesel fuel was Phillips D-2
Special Control Fuel, supplied by Ford)
- Prep LA-4
- Soak (Minimum 11 hours)
- FTP Emission Test*
(Includes gaseous and particulates)
- Highway Fuel Economy Test .
(Includes gaseous and particulates)
- 3 PAU Quick Check Coastdowns
- Add fuel to bring fuel level in vehicle to 40%
- Soak (Minimum 11 hours)
* Gaseous analysis on the vehicles consisted of all 3 bags analyzed
at the end of the FTP test.
EPA performed standard bag analysis (analysis of bags after
filling per 40 CFR 86.137-78 (b) 11, 13, 18) in conjunction with
the aforementioned analysis at end of FTP test. Ford also per-
formed the same procedure, (incorporating all bag analysis at end
of test with standard bag analysis) on all post-EPA testing per-
formed at Ford.
The previous procedures and sequences were performed for two days
of back-to-back testing. The dynamometer tests performed on the
vehicles were used as preconditioning for the next day's sequence
of tests.
IV. TEST RESULTS
All test results (gaseous and particulate) are summarized in
Attachments A thru F. Attachments A and B are Lab Correlation
Summaries of test results generated for both test vehicles
using the standard bag analysis.
Attachments C and D are Lab Correlation Summaries of test
results for both vehicles, where all the bags were analyzed at
the end of each test. Also, Attachments C and D have all
gaseous and particulate data (pre-EPA and post-EPA data sup-
plied by Ford) combined, rather than performing seperate
Pre-EPA and Post-EPA analysis. Attachments E and F consist of
Highway Fuel Economy Data for both vehicles.
Attachment G is a brief summary of all PAU quick check coast-
down times (55 MPH to 45 MPH) recorded for both test vehicles.
-------
V. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
A. Ford Escort (Vehicle 313W767)
There appears to be no significant difference between
analyzing all bags at the end of the test (See Attachment
C), versus standard bag analysis (See Attachment A).
Significant percent differences may exist between Ford and
EPA, where EPA measures HC (HFID) 12-17% higher, and
measures particulates 16-21% higher. A high degree of
confidence is lacking, however, because only two tests
were performed at EPA. Therefore, to have a significant
degree of confidence that an offset exists, more data
(test results) would be needed from EPA.
Highway Fuel Economy Results (See Attachment E) appear to
show no significant offsets in fuel economy. But there
possibly is a 16% offset (with EPA measuring higher) in HC
(HFID), which may reinforce that a HC (HFID) measuring
offset does exist between Ford and EPA. Particulates how-
ever, reversed the offset indicated in the FTP results,
which might require some investigation.
B. Mazda Proceed Pickup Truck (Vehicle #12263).
Here again, there appears to be no significant difference
between analyzing all bags at the end of the test (See
Attachment D), versus standard bag analysis (See
Attachment B).
Significant differences may exist, where EPA measures HC
(HFID) 15-18% higher than Ford, and Ford measures NOx
9-12% higher than EPA. But, in contrast to the Ford
Escort, there appears to be good agreement in particulate
measurement on this vehicle. Here again, to have a sig-
nificant degree of confidence that an offset exists, more
data (test results) would be needed from EPA. Highway
Fuel Economy results (See Attachment F) appear to show a
good agreement in fuel economy. The large offset in HC
(HFID) is not significant, due to the low level of HC
(HFID) emissions.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
The purpose of this program was outlined as a special correla-
tion program, to allow Ford a preview of these new diesel
vehicles. It is regrettable that more data could not have
been generated at EPA, but due to test load and scheduling it
was not possible. However, some inferences can be drawn from
this program, in that some offsets in measuring HC (HFID),
particulate and NOx may exist between EPA and Ford on diesel
powered light duty vehicles.
-------
LAM COUWtLATION SUMNArfT - rtSI IIATA
>vosu-Fo«uii2ai UNI 3l3w7«<7
PHOCtSStOI «PH 21< |9«l
*TI ?rso ACTUAL HPI ».T
UATt UsTtiO TrPE "Flo CO *0« C02 re DHIVEN Dr NO UOON IMP
HUM N«FC pAKT
03-2»-a| bOHlh? FTP O.WJ U.70 0.76 275. J6.B 36MS HOOT 1167.9 4.1 it. ?.0 4S.99 0.88 .JO*
OJ-26-ol BU83W M« 0.26U u.7U O.It 271. J7.3 3661 i UU07 1207.1 «.l 2V. |4 *3.BB 0.07 ./ft
!«...„..(,. /HI). ---- >| IMPM UN-HGI (Gw.lNS
/Lbl
C.V.»
U.24I 0.7(1 0.75 273. JT.I
OEv. .U^r>.22'j 0.267 0.206
bt»l0AU() HFV. (l.Oll U.OPS U.020
C.v.t K.7 Y.b 11.7
LABI FOP.D VEHI 7<>o5D-Fum)D2Bl
O.H2 0.66 0.70 0.70
(ALL 0/Ml)
•*.!
O.Bi 0.67 0.67 0.7U
0.00 0.01 0.04 0.01
4.2 1.1 6.1 1.0
VINI 3|J»767
O.BI 0.72 2B4. 2BO. 25B. 3S.6
1 <«-(
0.80 0.69 2Mb. 27B. 255. 35.4
0.01 0.04 1. J. S. 0.2
1.8 6.2 O.i 1.0 1.9 0.6
INEWTIA NTI 27SO
IHPGt— >l .
\G /ntXj
36.4 34.9 .214 .lit
0.4 O.H , ot .ej
1.0 2.0 7./ to.
ACTUAL "pl 6.V
.2^
.2f£
.0$
2».
OlTC 7E5INO TYPE HFIO CO NOX CO U.72 l (H^.i)
1 H01« 1272.0 «.<> 28.79 69.41 0.97 ,/6i
1 llOlo U^.u ft.b i!V.27 37.b<> O.B5 ./V6
HEAN o.<;ot u.73 u.76 2/». 3t>.3
blANUAKU UtV.. .U 0.047 .064 S. V.b
C.V.» lo.d 13.2 tt.3 1.8 l.B
oirr. » -17. s. 2. 2. -<;.
29.03 S3.»/ 0.91 ./^
0.334 12. S3* .U«S ,0//
1.2 fc2.l 9.6 1.3
-o. i*. <.. -/e.s
BAG DATA
OAU TESTNO TYPE DYNU SITE MfJD
CO
r02
fE
03-30-BI «6 FTP 1)0 1 i AUK U.Ha 0.261 0.160 1.0.1 0.7b 0.7J 0.7B 0.87 0.71 ?V6. 287. 262. 3*.i 3S.2 38.5
OJ-JI-B1 53 ffl> 001» AUK 0.172 0.1VJ 0.16J O.M1 0.62 0.6S 0.7u 0.77 0.6* 310. 2'2. 2i5. 3i
PAUT f.
,2<7 .//?
.202 .///
/<; / \
Jit
,/fp
ML »N
bTANOAUO OEV.
C.V.t
UIFf. »
O.lrtS 0.2. DKv./ 'I
-------
LAB COMPILATION SUK'IAHY ' TEST l>«!« PROCESSED I «P« l6« 1981
LABI EPA 'VIMI 7voSU-»OMDU2el VINI 12263 INEHTlA «TI 3250 ACTUAL HPI II.I
UATE TESTl'O TTPE KF1U CO NO* C02 ft OftlvCH OrNO OOOH IMP BAW.O HUM NXFC P*«f
OJ-26-BI BOBJ9S fT" 0.! IMHGI (IN-HUHGHAlNS fc t \
/LB> ( AlJ
ME»N (,.200 1.10 1.39 373. 27.1 29.IS *7.0S 0.88 .JZf
5TAIIUAPO UtV. .Ulkl O.lkl .177 ». 0.3 O.lll* 1.039 .00* .»¥*
C.i/.4 /.I 12. V 12.11 1.1 I.U 0.6 2.2 0.4
BAG DATA
UATt TESTNO TYPE UYNU SITE HFIU 2 J CO ? 3 "Ox 2 3 C02 2 3 FE 2 3 PART • •> a
03-26-BI BOUJV5 FTP UU07 »UOk 0.22k 0.2J7 0.160 1.51 1.08 1.08 1.51.1.60 1.32 399. 381.'349. 25.3 26.6 29.0 .ISf .Ho .321
03-27-81 808346 FTP 01,07 (UOk 0.200 0.207 0.161 1.26 1.00 0.97 1.25 1.31 1.16 386. 377. 3*5. 26.2 26.9 29.3 .Jfo .lit .ZIS
"LL°""' "•- (Ut)
«l«'< . 0.212 0.222 0.160 1.38 1.0* 1.03 1.38 1.45 1.24 393. 379. 347. 25.8 26.8 2V. 1 ,*lfl .VI .307
SIANUAUU lit*. 0.01/ 0.02I O.UOI O.U O.OS 0.06 0.18 0.21 0.11 9. 3. 3. 0.6 0.2 0.2 ./ .03 .03
C.v.» 4.0 9.6 0.4 12.4 5.2 7.6 13.3 14.1 9.1 2.3 0.7 0.8 2.% 0.8 0.7 }j.0 lt>.+ 4.9
LABI FOHU ~ " VEHI 7905D-FOHOD281 VINI 12263 INERTIA Hi I 3250 ACTUAL HP I 12.5
DATE TESTNO TYPE HF1D CO NO* C02 FE UHIVEH OYNO ODOH IMP HANO HUM NXFC P*Rr
03-31-BI 20 FTP U.174 1.03 1.49 388. 26.1 1 DO Ik 4802.0 9.5 29.10 44.52 0.87 .322
03-31-01 23 FTP 0.171 1.10 1.52 JB1. 26.6 I 1)014 4B3B.O 9.5 29.18 52.92 0.91 ,3/«
Ok-ol-81 26 FTP O.lkO 1.13 1.50 3Bb. 26.3 1 1)014 4H7B.I) V.b 29.00 Za.OI O.B2 ,J2*
K—-— Id/Ml) »l (MPG) (IN-HGMGPAtNS
MEAN O.lOk 1.09 1.50 3dS. 2t>.3 29.09 kl.B2 O.D7 .3tl
sTANOAHD DEV. .0154 0.051 .015 4. 0.3 0.088 12.673 .044 .OO3
C.v.» v.k k./ 1.0 U.9 1.0 O.J 30.J 5.1 /.
DIFF. « -lo. -I. 9. 3. -3. -0. -II. -2. -/.2
DAG DATA
UATE TESTNO TYPE OTNO SITE HFIU 2 3 CO 2 3 U0« 2 3 C02 2 3 FF 2 3 fAUT 2. 3
OJ-Jl-Bl 20 FTP 001k AOlk 0.203 0.1BJ 0.12k 1.28 0.96 0.98 1.42 1.63 1.28 422. 3BB. 361. 23.» 26.0 28.0 . V/O .i<*> -M9
OJ-31-B1 23 FIP OUI» AU14 0.174 0.1VO 0.130 1.33 0.49 1.15 1.44 1.62 1.36 kOu. 3rtb. 353. 25.2 26.1 2B.6 .V»J -7*3 ,3lf
Ok-01-Bl 26 FTP Uolk ,101k 0.178 O.Ik6 0.121 1.31 1.06 l.|2 1.44 1.61 1.32 405. 393. 354. 24.9 25.7 26.6 . VoS .Z»< .121
(ALL G/HI) l<
HEAN 0.1B7 0.179 0.125 1.31 1.00 1.06 1.47 1.62 1.32 409. 390. 356. 24.7 25.4 28.4 .Vff7 .fit .tlf
STANOAHO DEV. 0.01k 0.025 O.OU5 0.02 O.US 0.04 0.0k 0.01 0.0k 12. 3. k. 0.7 0.2 (1.3 .•C'f .61 .01
C.V.t 7.6 14.k 3.7 1.9 5.1 B.5 2.B 0.6 3.0 2.8 0.7 1.2 2.0 0.8 1.2 .9 3, if,f
UIFF. * -12. -21. -22. -6. -k. i. 6. II. 6. 4. 3. 3. -4. -J. -3. -J.{ -£.j g^f
C.V.t IS THE COEFFICIENT Of V»«lATION. (SIU. UEV./-
-------
LtU COliHEl.ATION SUMMAMY - TtSt U»T«
>'HUCCSSIOI APM 16. 19*1
"" *•** Vthl 7VC»)U-FU«UU1BI VINI 3131767 INExTlA wtl 275(1 ACTUAL MPI 6.T
0«TE TESTNO TYPE HFIU CO N0» C02 FE DRIVER OTNO ODOM IMP BAMO HUM NKFC fAKT
03-24-BI 801162 FTW U.22J 0.70 0.76 275. J6.8 366)5 OOOT 1167.9 4.1 19.10 45.99 0.08 .2<*
03-26-81 HOB363 FTP 0.26U 0.70 0.7J 271. 37.3 36615 0007 1207.1 4.1 29.14 »3.l)8 0.87 ./.TT
I, ------ to/Hi) ----- >| (MPGI (1N-MO) (GRAINS
MtiN
STANDARD Dtv.
C.V..
U.241 0.7U 0.7* 2/3. 37.1
.UIM 0.001 .021 3. 0.*
lu.d u.i 2.a i.o l.o
29.17 44.93 O.BS
0.0*0 1.492 .005
O.I 3.3 0.6
II.
BAO OAT*
U«TE TISTNO f»HF Ori.o SITE HflU 2
CO
3 MO» 2 3 C02 2
OJ-2*-t>l 8UB362 FTP
OJ-26-BI BU836J FTH
DUO/ 4U
04 0.202 0.24V 0 1B9
UU07 /IU04 0.24V 0.28b 0.223
0.82
O.BH
0.66
0.66
0.70 0.70
0.64 0.71
0.81 0.72 284.
O.ra 0.66 287.
280.
274.
258. 35. 6
251. 35.2
(ALL 0/MII )<..
MtJN .
SIxiUAuO U[y.
C.*.»
LAUI FUI-U
OAfE . TES'NO T»P
OJ-I6-BI 26 FT
03-17-81 29 FT
U3-IB-B1 33 F 1
OJ-IV-Bl 3h FT
OJ-20-BI 3V FT
03-^U-B1 42 M
OJ-30-81 4B Fl
03-31-81 53 FT
E HFIU
0.233
0.222
V.tlC
U .24/
O.ln*
u.lbb
U.222
0.18U
0.22b 0.267 0.2U6
O.UJJ O.U2S 0.024
U.7 v.i 11.7
VtHI 7VObu-FUMUUlBl
O.H1
0.04
4.7
CO HO* C02 Ft DRIVER
0.69 0.79 300. 33.7
0.72 0.72 2BO. Jb.l
U.6V 0.72 2/2. J7.3
U.69 0.71 273. 37.1
0.62 0.71 2/3. 37.1
U.63 0.7b 2/i. 36.9
U.HO 0.80 282. 35. 0
U.f.9 0.72 274. 36.9
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0.66
0.00
0.2
VINI
OTNO
D014
UOU
0014
UOU
UOU
0014
0014
0014
0.67 0.70
0.04 0.01
6.1 1.0
313*767
DOOM IHP
883.0 4.
915.0
9b4.0 .
984.0 .
1020.0
10b2.0 .
1272.0
1329.0 4.
0.79 0.6V 286.
0.02 0.04 2.
2.7 6.2 0.7
2T7.
4.
I.S
255. 35.4
5. 0.3
1.4 0.8
INtMTlA DTI f'M)
BAMO HUM
b 29.22 18.54
!> 2H.89 24.47
S 28.9.4 |7.45
5 28.92 17.48
5 28.94 19.97
b 29.07 26. 2b
5 28.80 69.39
5 29.31 37.45
N«rc
0.79
0.81
0.79
0./9
0.79
O.B1
0.97
0.85
PAKT
"wv"
'.Hi
.iff
,/2f-
.IJ£
.1+1
./**
.Ht
36.2 39,2 .Zf»
37.0 40.3 .Z/7
,/7J
./JO
MP<" (%,;
36.6 39.8 •"?
0.6 0.8 .01
I.S 2.0 7./
ACTUAL MPI ».V
./r«
• 03
ze.
^
.lf¥
• no
.211
,ot
20.
|< (,,/Hll—-->| IMPG)
Mt>N 0.2IJ 0.6V U.74 279. 36.4
STt'iDAoU OFV. .U2'>2 0.014 .036 9. 1.2
C.V.t 12. J 7.H 4.V 3.4 3.3
uirr. i -12. -I. -l. 2. -2.
3V.01 28.87 (I.8J ,/fJ"
0.1T1 I7
ft
3J
ih
J'<
42
*«B
S3
FTf
FTf
F'f
F If
FTc
f IV
FTM
Fit-
IJUU
LiUI4
liuU
I>OU
UUlo
I)UI>>
UUI4
uuu
UU (J.220
Ulo O.HJ
UU U.(*tln
UU U.^lb
UU II. 11V
UU U.U*
UU U.1VB
UU U.172
0.2f>V 0.17S
U.2~>2 U.1B4
0.;">2 O.IVJ
(l.'fnl 0.2U2
0.Ji. ?74. 2b4 . 34. «• 37.0 «0.0
O.S6 0.73 O.HO O.bb JU3. 274. 2S6. 33.5 36. V 3V. 6
0.74 0.76 O.Bb 0.7U 2V6. 2B8. 261. 34.2 35.2 38.5
0.64 0.71 0.7U 0.63 J9H. 27S. 2S4. 34.0 36.7 39.6
(ALL G/MI; I««IMPGI— >l
.ZZI
.It*
.IBS
. /So
.Its-
.163
.*H
.2»2
.m
.let
.131
.III
.m
.Iff
.111
.III
./•ft
./•TV
./f f
.130
.1*?
.131
. /
-------
L«U COKWILATION SUMNAUr - TEST DAT*
HNOCCbSLOl
Iti 1*11
LABI in vtm fvoiO-fuMoolsi VINI 12*63 INEHTIA »fi 3*10
UATE ItSlNO TrPE Hflu CO N0« C02 ft OHIVtH OYNO DOOM InP BAKO HUN N»FC
ACTUAL H»l If.I
03-26-Mi 8o!• (HPG) HN-Mlil (CHAINS
/LBI
C.V.4
U.20U 1.10 1<32 J7*. 27.1
OEV. .01*1 0.1*1 .26V 5. 0.*
'.1 12.V 20.* 1.3 1.3
•
/fc /
I '""
2V.IS »7.0S 0.88 •324'
0.18* 1.039 .00* .««»
0.6 2.2 0.4 IJ.f
BAG OAT»
L * 1
U»'L TEST'.O TTi-f UT'iU MIL HF1D
03-26-81
OJ-27-BI
BOH3J* f TP 1100' AOUk 0.22*
BOB335 FTf- U
110' Mil
* 0.200
2
0.2J' 0.
0.207 0.
3 CO
160 I.*V
161 1.26
2
l.od
1.00
3 N0«
1.08 1.
0.97 0.
52 1
97 1
2 3 C02
.61 1.32 *00.
.18 1.16 385.
2
382.
378.
(ALL G/Hll
Mt»N
S T Mi
DAPU UFV.
C.v.»
LAbl FORD
DATE
03-16-81
03-1 '-81
OJ-18-ol
03-H-Bl
03-20-bl
OJ-Jl-bl
OJ-3I-HI
0 -.-01-81
b.212
0.017
B.i)
0.222 0.
0.021 0.
V.6
IbO I.3/*"
001 0.17
0.* 12.2
VLHI 7VOSU-FOHDOIB1
TESTNO TvPE
1 FTP
* FTP
7 FTP
13 FTP
16 FTP
20 1 TP
23 FT.»
26 FTP
STANDARD DEV.
C.V.
OIFF
*
. »
HFIO
3.17S
0.176
O.IBO
0.170
0.162
0.17*
0.171
0.1*6
O.lbV
.0108
D.«
-15.
CO NO* C02
0.96
.16
.02
.1*
.05
.03
.11
.15
l.OB 1
0.072 .
6.6
-2.
.52 375.
.*6 372.
.*! JM.
.*8 JttO.
.47 381.
.*o JVO.
.51 JB*.
,*V 383.
.*8 3BO.
03* 6.
2.3 1.7
12. 2.
FE OHIVEK
26.9 1
27.2 1
27.2 0
26.6 0
26.5 0
25.9 1
26.3 1
26.* 1
t HHGI
26.6
0.5
1.7
-2.
1.0*
0.05
5.2
1.03 1.
0.08 0.
7.6 31
2* 1
3V 0
.39 1.2* 393.
. 30 Q.ll 11.
.2 21. B 9.1 2.7
VINI 12263
OYNO
1)01*
U01*
uoi*
IJ01*
I'l) 1*
UOI*
UOI*
UOI*
ODOM
*390.0
***a.o
",1.70.0
*5**.0
*582.0
*{502.0
*fl3B.o
*878.0
IMP
9.S
V.S
V.5
V.5
9.5'
V.5
9.5
9.5
380.
0.7
3 'E 2 3 PART Z
3*9. 25. J 26.5 2V. 0 •*/r '3tt
3*5. 26.3 26.8 29.3 • &* • *>•
|<..(HPG>— >l ('*/'"*)
3*7. 25. 8 26.6 29.1 -T'» •"•
0.8 2.7 0.8 0.7 Zl.B 10.)
INEHTIA KTl 3250 ACTUAL HP! 12. *
BAHO HUH
29.20 1*.99
28.73 25.32
28.93 17. *S
28. V6 33.02
28. V* 28.1*
2V. 12 **.*V
2V. 18 52.92
NAFC
0.78
O.HI
0.79
0.8*
O.d2
0.87
0.91
29.00 28.0* 0.82
29.01 30.55 0.83
0.152 12.6*0
0.5 *2.0
-0. -35.
.0*3
S.I
-6.
f**r
.III
.Slo
.SSI
••Ji*
.1/1
.MX
.tit
.«*
.ilt,
.Oil
3.6
• tl
.93
DATE TESTNO TYPE
03-16-81
03-1 '-81
03-lS-B)
OJ-1V-8I
0 J-20-81
OJ-Jl-81
03-31-BI
0«»-0 1-dl
1 FTP
* FTP
7 FTP
13 FIP
16 FIH
20 FTP
23 FIP
26 FIP
OYNO
Uul*
001*
Dot*
DUI*
Oul*
Out*
OOU
001.
5ITE HF11)
A01* 0.1BJ
A01* 0.172
AOI* 0.18*
AOI. O.lbj
AOI* 0.166
ADI* 0.203
AOI* 0.17V
AOI. 0.178
2
0.1V6
0.200
0.20'
0. '
0. *'
0. V
0. 0
0. b
3 CO
0.131
0.136
0.127
O.U3
0.119
0.12*
0.130
0.121
.13,
.3* '
.20
.4b
.27
.28
.33
.3b
BAG
2
0.93
1.11
0.99
1.0V
O.V6
O.V8
1.01
1.08
DAI A
3 M>» 2 3 C02 2 3 FE 2 3 f>»T
o.vi
1.13
0.93
1.U2
1.06
0.96
1.13
1.13
.5V
.*5
.35
.37
.*S
.*0
.*8
.*'
.56 .37 *06. 377. 350. 2*.V 26.9 29.0
.51 .37 399. 371. 352. 2b.3 27.3 28.7
.5* .21 391. 375. 3*9. 25. V 26. V 2V. 0
.63 .28 *00. 387. 353. 25.2 26.1 20. 7
.56 .32 *UI. 316. J56. 25.2 26.2 28.*
.62 .27 *1V. 3V*. 360. 2*.l 25.6 28. 0
.60 .36 *03. 3V2. 35*. 25.1 25.8 2B.*
.bV .32 *II2. 392. J52. 25.1 irS.8 10. t
,«f
.lot
.VIA"
.vet
. vtiA
.•4to
• V o3
,f e?
(ALL li/MIl |«..|MP6I— >l /
MEAN
5TANOAWO
C.V.»
U1FF. t
UEV.
0.178
0.012
7.0
-16.
0.18V
0.01V
9.V
-15.
0.126 1.29
O.Ooo 0.10
*.b 7.6
-21. '6.
1.02
0.07
6.5
-2.
1.03 1.** 1.5B 1.31 *03. 38*. 353. 25.1 26.3 28.6
0.09 0.06 0.0* 0.06 8. 9. 3. 0.5 0.6 0.3
R.8 b.2 2.6 *.3 2.0 2.3 1.0 2.0 2.* 1.2
1. 16. 13. 6. 3. 1. 2. -3. -1. -2.
.Vjo
.of
II. 1
.nr
.110
.too
.111
.211
e.i
o
C.V.t IS THE CUEFFICItNT Or VAHlATION. (STU. OEV./MEAN MOO).
UIFF. * IS THE nlFFEHENCE UF THE MEANS HLl.tEN THE MFx ANO EPA LAB. IMFP.-EPA/EPA *100).
NOTEI THE COMMENTS PEHIlNENT TO Intbt TESTS ARE LOCATED IN THE LAST TABLE OF THIS APPENUlA.
ATTACHMENT '. D
Mazda Proceed Pickup FTP data performing all bag analysis at end of test.
£
.lor
.tei
.sii
.3ol
'.HB
.3of
.01
•f.I
'•7
-------
LAH CORRELATION SUMMARY - TEST DATA
PROCESSED! APR !*>•
LAB: EPA
DATE
03-24-81
03-2«>-81
Vtn: 7905D-FOROD181 VIN
TESTNO
808364-1
808365-1
TYPE
MFtT
MFET
HF10
0.158
0.164
CO NOX
0.36 0.55
0.3H 0.54
C02
197.
197.
FE DRIVER
51.5 36615
51.4 36615
DYNO
D007
0007
: 313W767
ODOM IMP
1177.5 4.1
1216.6 4.1
BARO
29.20
29.08
INERTIA WTl 2750
HUM NXFC P/?8T
47.38 0.89 ./O/
47.71 0.89
ACTUAL MPt 6.7
UN-HG) (GRAINS
/LB)
MEAN
STANDARD DEV.
C.V.*
0.1M 0.3/ 0.54 197. 51.4
.UU42 0.014 .007 0. 0.1
2.0 3.9 1.3 0.0 0.1
29.14 47.54 0.89
0.084 0.234 .001
0.3 0.5 0.2
« 10 1
LAB CORRELATION SUMMARY - TEST DATA
PROCESSED! APR 16. 1981
-
LAH: FORD
DaTE
03-16-81
03-1 '-81
03-18-81
03-19-81
03-20-81
03-20-81
03-23-81
03-30-81
03-31-81
VtH: 79050-FORD0181 VIN: 313W767
TESTNO TYRE
27-
30-
34-
37-
40-
43-
46-
49-
54-
HFKT
HFr. T
HF^- T
MFKf
HFf- T
HFK T
MFtT
HFET
HFtT
HFID
0.133
0. 140
0.141
0.14/
0.131
0.132
0. 129
0.137
0.129
CO
O.ol
0.4'J
O..V-*
0.42
0 . 3rt
0.3?
0.38
0.40
0.40
NOX
0.54
0.54
0.50
0.51
0.54
0.55
0.5<*
0.60
0.55
C02
204.
211.
200.
1VH.
194.
197.
198.
200.
198.
1 < (<>/MI ) > I
MEAN
0. I3b
STANDARD DEV. .0062
C.V.
OIFF
*
• %
4.6
-1ft.
0.40
0.020
5. (>
9.
0.54
.028
5.2
-1.
200.
tj.
2.5
2.
FE DRIVER
<*9. H
48.1
50.6
51.1
52.4
51.6
51.3
bU.b
51.1
(MPG)
50.8
1.2
2.4
-1.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
DYNO
0014
D014
0014
D014
0014
0014
0014
0014
0014
OOOM
892.0
923.0
963.0
994.0
1030.0
1063.0
1118.0
1282.0
1339.0
I HP
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
8.RO
29.23
26.93
28.96
2H.91
28.94
29.11
29.47
28.82
29.32
(IN-HG)
29.08
0.217
0.7
-0.
INERTIA WT: 2750 ACTUAL MPI 6.9
HUM NXFC
16.90 0.79
2^.54 (1.81
15.41 0.78
17.48 0.79
21.11 O.HO
26.16 0.81
25.45 0.81
64.62 fi.95
43.15 0.87
(GRAINS
28.54 0.82
15.890 .055
55.7 6.7
-40. -7.
PART
.106
.113
. 100
. loo
. lol
• in
.in
.nz.
.12,6
(%r)
.III
.008
7t &
q'q
w
H
W
CO
O
O
c
O
u
(U
•a
O
a
ca
w
-------
LAB CORRELATION SUMMAKY - TEST DATA
PROCESSED! APK 16. 1981
LAb: EPA
VtH: A905U-FORDD181
VIN: 12363
INERTIA WTZ 3250
ACTUAL HP: 12.2
UATE TESTNO TYPE HFID CO NOX C02 FE DRIVER DYNO ODOM IHP BARO HUM NXFC
03-26-81 808336-1 HFET 0.109
03-27-81 808337-1 HFET 0.090
MEAN
STANDARD DEV.
C.V.*
0.58 1.24 280. 36.2 36615 0007 4702.5
0.54 1.03 283. 35.9 36615 0007 4739.3
(G/MI) ----- >| (MPG)
0.100 0.56 1.13 282. 36.0
.0134 0.029 .148 2. 0.2
13.b 5.2 13.1 0.8 0.6
9.S 29.02 51.75 0.90
9.5 29.31 44.13 0.87
29.16 47.94 O.H9 ,"2.2.1
0.205 5.388 .020 .02 /
0.7 11.2 2.2 T
HFET
HFtiT
MFET
HFET
HFK.T
HF-:T
HFET
HFtT
HFET
DEV.
HFIO
0 Oh<.
O.U7b
0.0/0
O.OH7
0 . On<*
0.077
O.OhO
0 .06<*
0.068
O.OrtO
0.073
.OOV2
1^.6
-27.
CO
0.4J
O.S8
0.4S
0.60
0 . b7
0.^7
0.39
0 ,<»2
0.55
0 .s9
NOX
0.94
1.21
0.95
1.15
1.16
1.80
0.91
1.03
1.28
1.16
0.52
0.081
15.7
-8.
1.16
.258
22.2
2.
C02
267.
2d4.
270.
279.
282.
276.
271.
276.
281.
281.
277.
6.
2.1
-2.
FE
37.9
35.6
37.7
36.3
36.0
36.8
37.4
36.7
36.2
36.0
DRIVER
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
VIN: 12263
DYNO
0014
0014
0014
0014
0014
0014
0014
0014
0014
D014
DOOM
4398.0
4443.0
4481.0
4519.0
4555.0
4593.0
4615.0
4814.0
4838.0
4889.0
IHP
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.5
(MPG)
36.7
0.8
2.1
2.
UAWO
29.16
28.86
28.93
28.93
28.95
28.94
28.96
29.18
29.15
29.00
(IN-HG)
29.01
0.112
0.4
-1.
INERTIA «T: 325o ACTUAL HPJ 12.5
HUM
15.06
24. b4
17.45
22.77
21.11
123.92
24.83
45.99
53.00
28.04
(GRAINS
/Lb)
37.67
32.642
86.7
-21.
NXFC p^r
0.78 .'vr
0.81 ;23?
0.79 .nz
0.80 ,2¥g
0.80 .237
1.30 .23*
0.81 .I2> +
0.88 ''1°
0.91 -2J7
0.82 *2ze>
fo
18.0 J9.3
-2. 1.2.
0)
60
•H
33
a,
^
a
•H
0)
OJ
a
o
n
PM
CO
13
N
-------
PAU Quick Check Coastdown Times
Ford Escort //313 W 767
Pre-EPA *
Ford Site
14
14.00
14.10
14.16
14.00
14.35
14.00
14.10
EPA Site *
07
13.96
14.02
Post-EPA *
Ford Site
14
14.02
13.81
13.99
13.92
Mazda Proceed Pickup //12263
Pre-EPA *
Ford Site
14
12.79
12.69
12.84
12.69
12.44
EPA Site *
07
12.43
12.38
x
12.69
12.41
Post-EPA *
Ford Site
14
12.39
12.61
12.65
12.55
* The above coastdown times are averages of 3 consecutive coastdowns.
ATTACHMENT G
------- |