Technical Support Report for Regulatory Action
In-House Test Program
Report No0 1 -
Vehicle Preconditioning:
AMA+LA-4 vs LA-4
June 1975
Notice
Technical support reports for regulatory action do not
necessarily represent the final EPA decision on regulatory
issues. They are intended to present a technical analysis
of an issue and recommendations resulting from the assumptions
and constraints of that analysis. Agency policy constraints
or data received subsequent to the date of release of this
report may alter the conclusions reached. Readers are cautioned
to seek the latest' analysis from EPA before using the information
contained herein.
Standards Development and Support Branch
Emission Control Technology Division
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Office of Air and Waste Management
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Contents
Page
1. Introduction ,..,..,..,..,.., , , . . 1
2. Summary and Conclusion . , 1
3. Technical Discussion 2
3d Program Objective 3
3.2 Program Design ...,.., 3
3.3 Facilities and Equipment ..... 4
3.3.1 Test Vehicles , . . . 5
3.3.2 Test Fuel 5
3.4 Test Procedures . , 5
3.4.1 Vehicle Preconditioning 7
3.4.2 Evaporative Emission Tests 7
3.4.3 Exhaust Emission Tests 7
4. Test Results 7
401 Canister Weights , 8
4.2 Evaporative Emissions 10
4.3 Exhaust Emissions 10
5. Data Analysis . 13
6. References . , . .... 15
Appendices
Appendix A Individual Test Results
-------
1. Introduction
The purpose of vehicle preconditioning is to provide a relatively
consistent starting base for all vehicles involved in emission testing.
This desired starting base is intended to prepare the vehicle so that it
tends to simulate a real-life condition that an average vehicle would
normally experience in its day-to-day operation. Two basic conditioning
levels are now simulated with the present procedure - the cold-soak,
which allows the vehicle to reach a stabilized ambient temperature; and
the preconditioning drive, which conditions the evaporative control
system (i.e. canister) and flushes out the old fuel. Additionally, this
prep drive may standardize the vehicle if it has not been operated within
a reasonable length of time.
The preconditioning/vehicle operation described in the Federal
Register (1) requires that the test vehicle be driven over a prescribed
mileage accumulation route for a period of one hour (this is usually
called the AMA road route). The fuel tank is then drained and a
specified amount and type of fuel is added. The vehicle is then driven
over a simulated trip on a chassis dynamometer (usually called an LA-4).
In other words, the premise is that the road segment is conducted to
provide controlled, reproducible preconditioning of the evaporative emission
storage device. The dynamometer segment is conducted to load the vehicle
fuel system with test fuel and to assure a consistent vehicle condition.
The natural question that follows, is, Why canlt the dynamometer segment
provide both?
2. Summary and Conclusion
Five vehicles, representing different engine-fuel tank configurations,
were used in evaluating the effect of two vehicle preconditioning
driving sequences on diurnal losses (as measured by the SHED technique)
and exhaust emissions. One prep cycle was that presently required by
the 1975 FTP, consisting of driving the vehicle over a pre-established
road route followed by a dynamometer drive (AMA + LA-4). The other
prep cycle eliminated the road route and consisted of a dynamometer
drive (LA-A) only. Baseline and comparative tests were conducted according
to the procedures described in J171a of the SAE Handbook. Three tests
per sequence per vehicle were conducted. The results of this testing
supports an earlier EPA study with regard to exhaust emissions (2).
Canister weights were measured throughout the test sequence and
although the information is interesting, a chronological plot of weight
v«. time does not conclusively show changing or repeatable weight
levels. It appears from the observed data however, that the differential
weight change of the canister is about the same for either prep cycle.
This is particularly noticaBle in the Vega evaporative control system;
where the basic weight of the canister differed for each prep cycle, yet
the differential weight change is relatively the same. Apparently the
purge rate is such that the canister does not fully purge itself completely
-1-
-------
-2-
(to normal working capacity) with either prep cycle. It was expected
that additional vehicle preconditioning, such as the AMA in addition to
the LA-4, would purge the canister to a lower level, thus allowing
a greater adsorption capacity for the canister during the diurnal heat-
build and thus, reducing the measured amount of diurnal losses. There
was no clear evidence of this and statistically it can be stated that
no significant difference in diurnal emissions was observed.
If any differences in exhaust emissions were to exist, it was thought
they probably would show their greatest influence in bag 1, HC and CO.
The average CO level for all test cars was found to be slightly higher in
bag 1 for the AMA + LA-A prep. This difference was mainly influenced
by one questionable test on the Chrysler. No significant differences
in weighted composite exhaust emissions were detected. This conclusion
supports a previous in-house study (2) where each of three vehicles was
tested ten times with different prep drives. In this study three pre-
conditioning (AMA + LA-4, one LA-4, four LA-4*s) procedures were
evaluated in order to determine their subsequent effect on exhaust emissions,
The conclusion was, "no evidence of a difference in emissions was found
among the three preconditioning procedures." All conclusions related to
the testing involved in this task indicated that the premise of sub-
stituting the LA-4, only, prep for the AMA + LA-4 prep cannot be re-
jected, at a reasonable confidence level, on the basis of significant
differences in diurnal and exhaust emissions. Therefore, based upon
this information and the questionable validity of the AHA as a representa-
tive urban driving cycle, and further, the effective reduction in time
and manpower requirements, it is recommended that the AMA one hour road
route be eliminated as a vehicle preconditioning requirement.
3. Technical Discussion
Generally, a test procedure attempts to typify or simulate an actual
condition. In the case of the Urban Dynamometer Driving Sequence
(UDDS), concerted effort was expended to establish this sequence as an
average driving cycle (3). The AMA road route which is described in the
Federal Register and which is used as the mileage accumulation driving
schedule is also used as a part of the preconditioning procedure for
evaporative emission testing. The inclusion of one hour of AMA driving
as a part of the vehicle preconditioning is scarcely justified, if the
test is to represent typical vehicle use. Of particular interest in
vehicle preconditioning for evaporative determination is the conditioning
of the canister. This conditioning is accomplished by purging (or
loading, pessibly) the canister to its normal working capacity during
the prep drive. This allows the canister to accommodate the evaporative
losses generated by the subsequent diurnal heat-build. If the UDDS is
the typical driving schedule, normal purging or loading of the canister
will occur, juat as it would occur in actual vehicle use. If more
vehicle operation is needed to purge the canister, hydrocarbons adsorbed
during the soak periods are probably not desorbed during test periods of
vehicle operation. If they are not, then this could possibly create
a build-up of hydrocarbons in the canister and a break-through might
eventually occur. This could account for a significant degradation of
-------
-3-
the quality of ambient air, and yet, would not be accounted for in the
actual certification test.
The interrelationship between the generation of evaporative
emissions and purge system characteristics determines whether, for
any given schedule of events, this hydrocarbon build-up will occur.
Conducting some tests with bench purged canisters will establish
the basic adequacy of the storage system.
3.1 Program Objective
The purpose of this study was to examine the need for retaining
the AMA road route as a prerequisite to dynamometer preconditioning.
The objective, is to justify the elimination of extraneous vehicle pre-
conditioning and present a more cost-effective test sequence without
introducing any adverse effects to the overall simulation of vehicle
operation.
3.2 Program Design
This test program was designed to reveal if significant differences
existed in diurnal emissions and exhaust emissions when the vehicle
underwent different preconditioning drives. It was important to determine
that, if significantly different diurnal emissions occurred, such dif-
ferences could or could not be attributed to the canister purge rate.
It was assumed that the LA-4 prep drive would be sufficient to purge
the canister to its normal working capacity, and if not, that the reason
was due to the canister purge rate design. Five vehicles were used in
the .prep evaluation test program and underwent identical test procedures.
Data obtained during these tests included canister weights and measure-
ments for diurnal and exhaust emissions. Because of studies relating
to other items of interest, additional pertinent data were recorded,
which are not presented as part of this report, but will be presented
in future reports.
To determine the storage adequacy of the test vehicle's canister
a controlled diurnal test was conducted. This was accomplished by
installing a pre-purged canister just prior to the diurnal heat-build.
The canister was bench purged with nitrogen (for one hour) to a
nominal operating capacity for each test. The LA-4 prep cycle was
used for this evaluation and only diurnal losses were measured.
-------
-4-
3.3 Facilities and Equipment
The LDV Evaporative Enclosure as shown in Figures 3-1 and 3-2
was used for all evaporative emission tests. The SHED is nominally
8 feet high x 10 feet wide x 20 feet long and has a measured volume
of 15AO ft . Calculation of the enclosure volume with a propane
injection and recovery test compared within +2 percent. Propane re-
tention tests of 2 and A hours were performed periodically and indi-
cated a leakage rate of less than 0.1 g/hr.
Figure 3-1 Evaporative Enclosure (front view)
Figure 3-2 Evaporative Enclosure (rear view)
-------
-5-
3.3.1 Test Vehicles
Five 1975 MY vehicles were used in this evaluation. The criteria
for selecting the vehicles were that they hbd accumulated 4000 miles
and had been is use for over 90 days. Additional criteria were engine-
fuel tank configuration and exhaust control system. Specifics of
each vehicle are shown in Table 3^1.
Hake
Model
VEJ
Dlsp/Cyl
Displacement
Transolsslon
Air Ccnd.
Ign. Timing
Idle KPM
Tires
Carb. Model
Venturis
Fuel Bowl Size
Fuel lank Vol.
Inertia Vt.
Dyno E.P.
Exhaust Sys.
Evap. Sys.
Chevrolet
Vega
IV77B5U113062
140-14
4-speed
no
10'BTDC
700
A78-13
Holley
2
38.5 ce
16.0 gal
2750
9.9
EGR
Catalytic
Reactor
Canister
Chevrolet
Camaro
IQ87H5N511341
350-V8
Automatic
yes
6°BTDC
600
FR-7814
Rochester
2
72 cc
21.0 gal
4000
12.0
EGR
Catalytic
Reactor
Canister
Chrysler
New Yorker
LS23T5C110951
440-V8
Automatic
yes
8'BTDC
750
JR78-15
Carter
4
160 cc
26.5 gal
5000
13.4
EGR
Catalytic
Reactor
(dual)
Canister
AMC
Hatador
A56167P15041
360-V8
Automatic
yes
5'BTDC
700
HR78-14
Motorcraft
4
24.5. gat
4500
12.7
EGR-A1R
Catalytic
Reactor
(dual)
Canister
Volkswagen
Beetle
1352038245
97 - 14
4 - speed
Ho
5» ATDC
875
6.00 - 15L
-
-
-
11.0 gal
2250
8.8
EGR
Fuel Injection
Canister
Table 3-1 Test Vehicle Description
3.3.2 Test Fuel
Indolene Type HO (95.0-98.5 octane) test fuel was used throughout
the program including vehicle preconditioning.
3.4
Test Procedures
For the comparative tests each of five vehicles underwent identical
test sequences. The comparative tests involved changes in the vehicle
preconditioning drive cycle only. The Sequence of Events associated
with this evaluation is shown in Figure 3-1.
-------
OQ
C
i-t
(D
cn
(D
&
CD
3
o
(D
n>
3
rt
CO
PREP CYCLE
1. Drive LA-4 or AMA + LA-4.
Record
canister wt before & after
driving cycle
tank, bowl, underhood temps
after driving cycle
COLD SOAK
1. Drive vehicle to soak area.
2. Soak for 11-20 hrs..
Record
tank, bowl, underhood &
soak area temps for first
2 hrs
TANK FILL
1. Drain fuel.
2. Add fresh fuel to 40Z
capacity.
3. Move vehicle to_ Shed.
Record
tank & fuel temps
time to fuel vehicle
time to move vehicle to
Shed
canister weight
=0
For Controlled
_/ Diurnal Only.
Re-install Canis-j
ter
N^ f For Controlled
^J . Diurnal Only Remove
\ canister and purge
DTTIRNAL
1. Push vehicle into Shed.
2. Heat fuel to 84 +'2°F in
60 minutes.
3. Purge Shed.
Record
HC concentration
time vehicle is in Shed
time of tank heating
tank, tank skin, underhood,
bowl, soak area & Shed temps
canister wt @ end of cycle
EXHAUST
1. Push vehicle onto dyno.
2. Conduct '75 FTP
3. Drive vehicle to_ Shed. .
4. Shut engine off.
Record
time between end diurnal &
start FTP
tank, bowl temp @ end of
cycle
HOT SOAK
1.
2.
Turn off Shed purge.
Push vehicle into Shed &
open windows & trunk.
Record
HC background concentrations
HC concentrations
time between engine shut-
down & start of soak
tank, bowl, underhood, Shed
temps
canister wt @ end of cycle
-------
-7-
Controlled diurnal tests were conducted using the LA-4 prep only.
Canisters were removed, bench-purged for one hour and reinstalled,
just prior to the diurnal heat-build. The evaluation was concluded at
the end of the diurnal test.
3.4.1 Vehicle Preconditioning
All vehicles underwent a preconditioning drive followed by an 11 to
20 hour soak period at a temperature of 76 to 86°F. Since test fuel
was being continuously used for the entire procedure, including the
prep cycle(s), the fuel was not drained and replenished prior to the
dynamometer prep cycle. Two different preconditioning driving cycles
were used (except for controlled diurnal evaluations).
The first method was the 1975 Federal Procedure (1). The second
was a modification of the 1975 Federal Test Procedure such that the one
Hour road route (AMA) was eliminated, leaving only the dynamometer driving
cycle (LA-4).
Canister weights were measured before and after each preconditioning
cycle.
3.4.2 Evaporative Emissions
Evaporative emission measurements were determined using the SHED
technique in accordance with the SAE J171a Recommended Practice with
a few modifications: 1. Vehicle background emissions were considered
negligible, based upon a previous study (4), and were not determined.
All test vehicles were over three months old and had accumulated 4000
miles. 2. The 60 minute heat-build for the diurnal was held to + 2
minutes. 3. For the hot-soak evaluation the vehicle was driven off
the dynamometer at minimum throttle up to the enclosure, and then the
engine was shut dovm. 4. The vehicle was pushed into the enclosure.
3.4.3 Exhaust Emissions
Exhaust emissions were determined using the 1975 Federal Test
Procedure. Since it is intended to integrate the evaporative procedure
along with the exhaust test, it was decided to use the present (cold-
hot) exhaust emission test procedure driving cycle rather than the cycle
proposed in the SAE procedure.
4. Test Results
A total of 33 comparative tests and 17 controlled diurnal tests
were conducted on all five test vehicles. The test results of individual
comparative tests (AMA + LA-4 vs LA-4) for both the evaporative losses
and exhaust emissions are shown in Appendices A-l and A-2, respectively.
Results of the controlled diurnal tests are shown in Appendix A-3.
-------
-8-
4.1 Canister Weights
Table 4-1, which extracts data from the Appendix summarizes the
average net change in canister weight for each prep cycle. One might
expect to see the AMA+LA-4 prep present a greater canister purge oppor-
tunity as compared to the LA-4 prep only; and therefore, possibly
observing a lighter weight canister, or at least a greater weight
change in the canister at the end of vehicle preconditioning. There
was no clear indication that this was the case.
Vehicle
Camaro
Matador
New Yorker
Vega
Beetle
A Canister Weight (g)
AMA+LA-1*
- 1.7
+ 0.3
- 26.7
- 11.3
- 2.7
LA-U
- 5.0
+ 3.3
- 23.5
- 13.3
- 3.7
Table 4-1 Avg. Net Change In Canister Weight From Preconditioning Drive
Figure 4-1 shows the average change in canister weight throughout
the vehicle preconditioning and diurnal segments of the test. The run
numbers shown in Appendix A-l were assigned in chronological order.
Thus, in the case of the Camaro the AMA+LA-4 preps (Run No's. 0011-
0013) were conducted prior to the LA-4 prep evaluation (Run No's. 0014-
0017).
The data show that the basic canister weight increased throughout
the test series, indicating that vehicle operation prior to the test
series had purged the canister to a level well below its nominal
working level.
Figure 4-lb for the Vega shows that the basic canister weight level
increased about 40g between test series. This weight increase occurred
during a three week lapse in vehicle operation which occurred between
testing the two procedures. During this period the vehicle was stored
outside. Yet, the slopes of the curves are similar, indicating similar
weight changes per operation for either prep cycle.
The canister weight for each vehicle throughout the entire test
program did not behave in a really consistent manner. The Madador was
the only vehicle whose canister weight decreased during the cold soak
period (end of prep to start of diurnal).
-------
-9-
Figure 4-lb Vega
1100
S 1090-^
M
£ 1080.
M
OJ
3 1070
ID
to 1060
B
Q
" 1050.
1040
AMA
Prep
Figure 4-la Cafflaro
ILA-4 I
Prep
Soak
' Diurnal
Test
1170 -
I 1160
1150 .
1140
1130
<§ 1120
1110
AMA. I ' LA-4 I SOAK ' DIURNAL
PREP PREP
1130
I 112°"
& 1110-
o! 1090 -
tj
at
H
a 1080
1070
Figure 4-lc New Yorker
AMA ' ' LA-4 I
Prep Prep
Soak
1 Diurnal
Test
1110
1100
1090
1080
o 1070
u
n
| 1060
o
1050
Figure 4-ld Matador
AMA I I LA-4I Soak loiurnal
Prep Prep Test
Figure 4-le Volkswagen
to 1000-
,M 990.
u
§ 980-
S
S 970 H
<0
1 960 H
u
950
AMA
PREP
Tl LA-4
PREP
SOAK I DIURNAL
LA-4 Prep
AMA + LA-4 Prep
Figure 4-1 Mean Canister Weight Changes for Test Sequence
-------
-10-
4.2 Evaporative Diurnal Emissions
The individual test results for evaporative emissions are shown in
Appendix A-l and the means of these data are shown in the bar graph,
Figure 4-2. The LA-4 prep presented slightly higher diurnal emissions
for all vehicles other than the Beetle. Of particular interest shown in
the bar graph, is the low level of losses for the controlled diurnal
(pre-purged canister installed at start of diurnal test). This indi-
cates that a sufficiently purged canister is capable of holding the
diurnal losses.
k\VI LA-4 Prep
I | | AMA + LA-4 Prep
MMMH^
Purged Canister
CO
6
n)
M
M
t
CO
tfl
o
i~H
u
PC
rH
3
M
=>
H
5
4 .
3 .
2 .
1 .
0
FL
l\}
kl
LN
Camaro Matador New
Yorker
Vega Volks-
Wagon
Composite
Figure 4-2 Mean Diurnal Loss Levels
4.3
Exhaust Emissions
The individual test results for exhaust emissions are shown in
Appendix A-2. Figure 4-3 shows the mean exhaust emission levels from
Bag 1 and Figure 4-4 shows the mean composite exhaust emission levels.
The over-all average emissions for the vehicle fleet showed little
difference in either Bag 1 (Figure 4-4) or weighted composite (Figure
4-5). Individually, the AMA+LA-4 prep showed significantly higher
(30%) emission data in bag 1 for both the Vega HC and the New Yorker CO.
Although used in the determination, test no. 0032 for the New Yorker
exhibited unusual results, that on the basis of engineering judgement
looked questionable.
-------
Figure 4-3a HC
Figure 4-3b CO
H-
OQ
i-l
ro
w
w
PJ
09
12.
10.
8.
6-
4
2 .
0 .
\
\
\
\
\
S
\
\
\
T
\
\
\
\
\
s
""
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
I-J~
\
\
\
Camaro Matador New Vega Volks-
Yorker Wagon
,
ps
s
s
s
s
\
s
Composite
160
140-
120.
100,
80.
tn
e
a
40.
8 20
^
\
\
\
\
\
\
S,
j\;
^
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
n?
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
R
vs
\
\
\
\
\
\
Camaro Matador New Vega Volks- Composite
Yorker Wagon
CU
CO
rf
H-
CO
CO
H-
O
0
CO
Figure 4- 3c
Figure 4-3d NOx
4000.
3500.
3000.
w 2500 -
s
ra
&2000.
1500.
0*1000
^
\
S
S
s
s
-^
\
\
K
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
~
m
s
s
RTI RT1 >
Camaro Matador New Vega Volks- Composite
Yorker Wagon
10,
9
8.
to 7.
00 ^
5.
X
2 4
\
S
\
\
s
\
s
\
"^
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
s
\
_r
Camaro Matador New
Yorker
1 ^n
x:
x
X
\
X
-
\
\
\
\
\
\
>
s
\
\
\
\
\
\
s
Vega Volks- Composite
Wagon
LA-4 Prep
f~ | AMA+LA-4 Prep
-------
Figure 4-4a HC
1-2.
1.0
a
H
i -8-
o
Wi f
eo, .6
ttj
H-
Figure 4-4c C02
CO -I
rt
W 800.
H-
% 700.
H-
O
a <»
co ^ 600.
Q
| 500.
CO
M
00
. 400.
300.
CM
° 200
PQ
-5;
\
\
\
S
S
S
S
\
_^
^
\
\
\
\
\
s.
\
\
\
^
\
\
\
\
S
\
s
\
\
\
V.
>
s
\
\
^
Camaro Matador New
Yorker
^
S
e.
\
\.
N
\
s
S
s
^
\
\
s
Vega Volks- Composite
Wagon
rt
G
O
O
14
12
10.
8.
6.
4-
2
0.
rs
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
Figure 4-4b CO
n
R
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
rr;
\
\
\
\
\
X
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
~1
CN
\
\
N
o
_
11
\
\
\
\
X
N
Camaro Matador New Vega Volks- Composite
Yorker Wagon
to
I
3.0
2.5
QJ
3 2-Q
CO
1 1<5
co
. 1-0
.5
&
z.
0
tigure f-rta NOx.
r*z
\
\
\
rq
S
s
\
\
\
s
s
\
\
^s
\
\
s
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
s
\
n
\
\
\
\
\
_
\
\
\
N
\
\
\
Camaro Matador New Vega Volks- Composite
Yorker Wagon
LA-4 Prep
I I AMA+LA-4 Prep
-------
-13-
5. Data Analysis
Diurnal Emissions
The means and standard deviations for the diurnal losses are shown
in Table 5-1. It is of interest to see that the mean loss for the
controlled diurnal (pre-purged canister) is over 83% less than when the
canister is conditioned by the prep cycles. The analysis of the
diurnal losses for the two prep drives is based upon a "t" - test with
the following hypothesis:
HQ - When using the two prep sequences, there is essentially no
difference in diurnal emissions.
Under the hypothesis Ho, "t" calculated is 0.202 and it is determined
that:
We cannot reject H0 at
-------
-14-
Type of
Prep
AMA + LA-«
LA-4
Purged
Cannister
No. of
Tests
3
3
4
Mean
Loss,
(grams)
.54
.92
.25
Standard
Deviation
.06
.52
.03
Std. Dev.
as %
of Mean
11
56
11
Type of
Prep
AMA + LA-4
LA-4
Purged
Cannlster
No. of
Tests
3
3
4
Mean
Loss,
(grams)
; .39
1 >
1
.54
.35
Standard
Deviation
.04
.13
.08
Std. Dev.
as Z
of Mean
11
24
24
Table 5-la Camaro
Table 5-lb Vega
Type of
Prep
\MA + LA-4
J^'4
'urged
lannister
No. of
Tests
4
4
4
Mean
Loss,
(grams)
4.9
5.1
.48
Standard
Deviation
.97
1.8
.13
Std. Dev.
as %
of Mean
20
36
28
Type of
Prep
AMA + LA-4
LA-4
Purged
Cannister
No. of
Tests
3
3
5
Mean
Loss,
(grams)
4.4
4.5
.84
Standard
Deviation
1.6
.46
.06
Std. Dev.
as %
of Mean
36
10
7.1
fable 5-lc New Yorker
Table 5-ld Matador
Type of
Prep
AMA + LA4
LA4
Purged
Canister
No. of
Tests
3
3
Mean
Loss,
(grams)
1.02
.947
Standard
Deviation
.063
.121
Std. Dev
as %
of mean
6
13
Type of
Prep
AMA + LA4
LA4
Purged
Canister
No. of
Tests
16
16
17
Mean
Loss,
(grams)
2.41
2.57
.50
Standard
Deviation
2.21
2.26
.25
Std. Dev.
as %
of mean
92
88
50
Table 5-le Volkswagen
Table 5-lf All 5 Vehicles
Table 5-1 Statistical Data for Diurnal Tests.
-------
-15-
Statistical summaries of the exhaust emission test results from
both Bag 1 and weighted composite emissions are shown in Tables 5-3
through 5-6.
From the "t" - test evaluation above it is determined that:
We cannot reject H at an«<= 0.10 level of significance for the
exhaust emission results.
6. References
1. Federal Register, Vol. 39, No. 133, Section 85.076-12, July
10, 1974.
2. Vehicle Preconditioning Study, EPA-MSAPC In-house study
conducted by MSAPC Ann Arbor, Michigan.
3. R.E. Kruse and T.A. Huls, "Development of the Federal Urban
Driving Schedule." Paper 730553 presented at SAE Automotive Engineering
Meeting, Detroit, May 1973.
4. S.W. Martens and K.W. Thurston, "Measurement of Total Vehicle
Emissions". Paper 680125 presented at SAE Annual Meeting, Detroit,
Michigan, January 1968.
-------
16
Vehicle
Camaro
Camaro
Vega
Vega
Matador
Matador
New Yorker
New Yorker
Volkswagen
_ Volkswagon
Alir.5 Vehicles
All 5 Vehicles
Type of
Prep
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA4
LA-4
AMA+LA4
LA-4
Bag 1 results (grains)
N
3
4
3
3
3
2
4
3
3
3
16
15
X
4.8
4.8
9.95
7.73
3.7
3.4
4.6
5.7
4.61
4.17
5.48
5.26
o
.97
.19
1.18
1.37
.85
.11
.43
2.9
.46
.40
2.36
1.91
o/x
20%
3.9Z
12*
18Z
23Z
3.1Z
9.3Z
512
10Z
9.6Z
43Z
36Z
Composite results (g/mi)
N
3
4
3
3
3
2
4
3
3
3
16
15
X
.47
.50
.76
.71
.26 .
.28
.39
.40
.97
.89
.56
.57
a
.06
.03
.07
.05
.04
.001
.02
.20
.022
,.__.055
.26
.23
a/x
13Z
6.3Z
. 9.0Z
7.2Z
15Z
0.2Z
5.2Z
50Z
2.2Z
-6.1Z
47Z
40Z
Table 5--3 Statistical data for HC exhaust emissions.
Vehicle
Camaro
Camaro
Vega
Vega
Matador
Matador
New Yorker
New Yorker
Volkswagon
Volkswagon
All 5 Vehicles
All 5 Vehicles
Type of
Prep
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
Bag 1 results (grams)
N
3
4
3
3
3
2
4
3
3
3
16
15
x
82
84
109
112
51
49
176
133
36.2
35.2
96.4
84.9
o
21
8.6
16.2
6.43
3.8
.07
9.9
57
.25
1.07
55.0
43.1
a/5
26Z
10Z
15Z "
5.7Z
7.5Z
0.1Z
5.6Z
43Z
.7Z
3Z
55.0
51Z
Composite results (g/mi)
N
3
4
3
3
3
2
4
3
3
3
16
15
X
8.9
9.4
10.4
11.8
3.0
3.0
14
11
4.59
4.32
8.65
8.31
a
1.6
1.5
1.7
1.4
.20
.04
.53
3.5
.17
.06
4.44
3.77
o7x
17Z
16Z
16Z
12Z
6.7Z
1.2Z
3.7Z
32Z
3.8Z
1.4Z
51Z
45Z
Table 54 Statistical data for CO exhaust emissions.
-------
17
Vehicle
Camaro
Camaro
Vega
Vega
Matador
Matador
New Yorker
New Yorker
Volkswagen
Volkswagen
All 5 Vehicles
All 5 Vehicles
Type of
Prep
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
Bag 1 results (grains)
N
3
4
3
3
3
2
4
3
3
3
16
15
X
2247
2319
; 1241
1205
2246
2355
2794
3155
1274
1254
2012
2056
o
198
14
22
16
233
35
346
110
13
40
670
766
o/X
8.8Z
0.6Z
1.8*
1.3%
10 Z
1.5Z
12 Z
3.5Z
l.OZ
3.2Z
33Z
37Z
Composite results (g/mi)
N
3
4
3
3
3
2
4
3
3
3
16
16
X
633
643
364
353
603
643
774
862
364
362
562
573
o
58
4.3
2.5
5.0
61
8.5
74
39
4.2
5.1
176
200
o/x
9.1Z
0.7Z
0.7Z
1.4Z
10 Z
1.3Z
9.5Z
4.5Z
1.1Z
1.4Z
31Z
35Z
Table 5r- 5 Statistical data for C02 exhaust emissions.
Vehicle
Camaro
Camaro
Vega
Vega
Matador
Matador
New Yorker
New Yorker
Volkswagen
Volkswagen
All 5 Vehicles
All 5 Vehicles
Type of
Prep
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
AMA+LA-4
LA-4
Bag 1 results (grams)
N
3
4
3
3
3
2
4
3
3
3
16
15
x"
7.1
7.5
6.42
5.87
7.5
8.9
8.0
9.1
6.47
7.0
7.14
7.59
a
.42
.33
.70
.25
2.6
.35
2.2
.85
.41
.91
1.56
1.32
a/x
6.0Z
4.4Z
11Z
4.2Z
35 Z
4.0Z
28 Z
9.4Z
6.3Z
13 Z
22 Z
17 Z
Composite results (g/mi)
N 1
3
4
3
3
3
2
4
3
3
3
16
15
Tf
1.2
1.2
1.63
1.51
1.86
2.1
2.2
2.2
1.47
1.53
1.72
1.66
a
.04
.09
.22
.08
.70
.20
.13
.40
.085
.23
.46
.42
a/5?
3.7Z
7.6Z
13Z
5.4Z
38 Z
9.3Z
5.7Z
18 Z
5.8Z
15Z
27Z
26Z
Table ST- 6 Statistical data for NOx exhaust emissions.
-------
Teat
No.
0011
0012
0013
0014
0015
0016
0017
0024
0025
0026
0027
0028
0029
0030
0032
0034
Vehicle
Camaro
Camaro
Camaro
Camaro
Camaro
Camaro
Camaro
Matador
Matador
Matador
Matador
Matador
Matador
New Yorker
New Yorker
New Yorker
Type of
Prep Cycle
AMA + LA-<
AMA + LA-4
AMA + LA-<
LA-4
LA-4
LA-4
LA-4
LA-4
LA-4
LA-4
AMA + LA-4
AMA + LA-4
AMA + LA-4
LA-4
LA-4
LA-4
Evaporative Emissions
Diurnal
(grams)
0.50
0.52
0.61
0.47
0.80
1.48
4.19
4.37
5.07
4.19
6.01
2.89
6.49
6.81
3.94
1 Kr. hot
oak (grams)
4.00
4.48
4.86
4.88
5.15
5.28
12.31
13.74
16.81
14.71
17.06
17.59
5.8?
5.15
10.33
2 hr. hot
Soak (grams)
5.86
6.21
6.66
6.74
7.08
7.54
17.87
18.49
23.14
20.32
22.78
23.04
12.32
15.80
18.69
g/nl
0.55
0.62
0.67
0.67
0.71
0.75
1.77
1.97
2.40
2.10
2.46
2.44
0.97
0.89
1.50
Canister Weights (grams)
Initial
AMA
1028
1056
1076
1096
1096
1082
Final
AMA
1022
1051
1060
1073
1075
1078
Initial
LA-4
1029
1056
1063
1080
1088
1080
1088
1078
1086
1085
1073
1078
1083
1090
1108
1108
Final
LA-4
1033
1057
1076
1076
1081
1082
1085
1081
1088
1090
1089
1094
1092
1075
1078
1084
Initial
Diurnal
1046
1067
1075
1079
1081
1084
1092
1078
1078
1082
1083
1085
1088
1094
1104
1108
Final
Diurnal
1059
1086
1094
1096
1084
1103
1109
1102
1103
1105
1106
1109
1109
1116
1124
1128
Final
Rot Soak
1057
1076
1080
1088
1082
1090
1086
1089
1096
1096
1098
1100
1106
1112
(D
3
O
H
OJ
CO
CO
H-
O
3
to
CO
(-
ft
CO
0
H-
CO
n>
H-
09
y
rt
CO
-------
Teat
No.
0036
0038
0039
0041
0042
0094
0096
0097
0098
0099
0101
0102
0103
0105
0107
0114
0117
Vehicle
New Yorker
it
»
H
."
Volkswagen
Vega
Volkswagen
Vega
Vega
Volkswagen
Vega
Volkswagen
ii
n
Vega
M
Type ol
prep cycle
LA4
AHA + LA4
n
11
n
LA4
AMA + LM
LA4
AMA + LA4
n
LA4
LA4
AMA + LM
II
M
LA4
M
Evaporative BalsaAona
Diurnal
(grams)
3.10
4.56
6.25
4.92
3.95
1.075
.40
.931
.444
.320
.835
.692
.950
1.048
1.067
.45
.48
1 hr. hot
soak, g '
9.09
8,15
9.80
9,20
8.07
2.58
2.49
2.38
..690
2.46
2.60
2.32
Z hr, hot
soak, g
14.13
14.08
17.90
16.98
14.10
3.91
3.75
3.59
3.61
3.90
3.53
g/mi
1.31
1,22
1.50
1.38
1.20
.380
.36
.343
.112
.357
.379
.342
Canister Weights (grams)
Initial T
AMA
1107
1101
1112
1111
1132
1133
1117
974
961
961
tlnai
AHA
1077
1086
1081
1081
1117
1117
1115
974
958
957
initial
U4
1110
1087
1092
1088
1084
985
1117
983
1116
1117
978
1167
974
958
955
1168
1161
Tinal
LA4
1085
1078
1087
1079
1080
982
1116
979
1117
1115
974
1157
974
958
956
1150
1149
initial
Diurnal
1092
1093 .
1104
1097
1098
984
979
1128
1128
974
1170
985
969
968
1163
1162
final
Diurnal
1114
1115
1123
1119
1120
996
1140
989
1139
986
1182
1176
1175
final
hot soak
1109
1109
1116
1115
1114
983
1123
977
1123
1123
974
1168
974
960
961
13
n>
n
o
D
g
(D
CL
-------
Test
No.
boil
0012
0013
0014
0015
0016
0017
0024
0026
0027
0028
0029
0030
0032
0036
0038
Vehicle
Camaro
Camaro
Camaro
Camaro
Camaro
Camaro
Camaro
Matador
Matador
Matador
Matador
Matador
New Yorker
New Yorker
New Yorker
New Yorker
Type of
Prep Cycle
AMA ^ LA-4
AMA + LA-4
AMA + LA-4
LA-4
LA-4
LA-4
LA-4
LA-4
LA-4
AMA + LA-4
AMA + LA-4
AMA + LA-4
LA-4
LA-4
LA-4
AMA + LA-4
Bag 1 Exhaust Results (grams)
EC
3.95
5.89
4.72
4.88
4.54
4.83
4.96
3.35
3.50
4.64
3.11
3.23
4.04
9.09
4.06
5.01
CO
62.7
105.0
79.8
84.8
72.6
93.6
84.6
48.9
49.0
55.7
48.4
50.0
173.3
67.1
157.6
180.5
co2
2029
2415
2297
2334
2317
2325
2301
2380
2331
2408
2350
1979
3083
3282
3102
2464
NOX
6.69
7.53
7.01
7.27
7.71
7.22
7.89
9.19
8.69
8.95
9.03
4.42
8.13
9.61
9.61
9.50
Composite Exhaust Results (g/nl)
HC
.409
.528
.464
.528
.459
.524
.507
.284
.283
.304
.224
.262
.210
.607
.372
.373
CO
7.40
10.5
8.84
9.32
7.44
11.10
9.91
3.06
3.01
3.28
2.89
2.98
10.4
7.52
14.5
14.5
C02
571
685
644
647
643
645
637
649
637
641
636
533
818
890
879
714
NOX
1.18
1.27
1.23
1.24
1.38
1.16
1.21
2.27
1.99
2.23
2.29
1.05
1.72
2.33
2.46
2.35
.
a
a
§
a-
W
(U
CO
r»
t-9
rt>
ca
n>
CO
c
i-h
O
OQ
O
I
O
CD
1
\->
n>
CO
-------
Test
No.
0039
0041
0042
0094
0096
0097
0098
0099
0101
0102
0103
0105
0107
0114
0117
Vehicle
New Yorker
ii
it
Volkswagen
Vega
Volkswagen
Vega
Vega
Volkswagen
Vega
Volkswagen
ii
ii
Vega
ii
Type of
prep cycle
AMA + LA4
it
it
LA4
AMA + LA4
LA4
AMA + LA4
AMA + LA4
LA4
LA4
AMA + LA4
ii
ii
LA4
ii
Bag 1 Exhaust Result? (grams)
HC
4.80
4.63
4.02
4.61 .
8.75
3.83
11.1
10.0
4.06
9.27
4.21
5,11
4.50
7.27
6.64
CO
165
188
172
35.4
96.2
36.1
127
103
34.0
117
36.5
36.0
36.2
105
115
O>2
2527
3085
3101
1223
1216
1299
1250
1258
1241
1210
1284
1259
1278
1218
1188
NOx
4.71
8,91
8.89
8,02
7.16
6.26
5.76
6.34
6.71
5.61
6.21
6,26
6.94
6.10
5,89
Composite Exhaust Results Cg/mL)
HC
,417
.382
.377
.892
.711
.832
.833
.720
.941
.765
.944
.987
.966
.675
.679
CO
13.6
14.8
14,6
4.27
9.24
4.39
12.3
9.66
4.31
11.5
4.74
4.40
4.62
10.6
13.3
CO?
716
867
800
361
362
368
364
367
358
358
369
363
361
353
348
NOx
2.05
2.23
2.27
1.79
1.88
1.37
1.47
1.55
1.42
1.46
1.39
1.46
1.56
1.60
1.46
T3
(D
3
(X
n
o
3
n>
-------
Appendix A-3
Test results for tests conducted with purged canister.
Test
Number
0076
0077
0078
0080
0081
0082
0083
0084
0085
0086
0087
0088
0089
0090
0091
0092
0093
Vehicle
Camaro
Matador
Camaro
Matador
Camaro
Matador
Matador
Vega
New Yorker
Vega
New Yorker
Vega
New Yorker
Camaro
Matador
Vega
New Yorker
1 hour
Diurnal
loss, grams
.0.25
0.75
0.29
0.88
0.24
0.91
'0.85
0.44
0.63
0.40
0.39
0.26
0.55
0.23
0.83
0.30
0.35 .
Canister Weight
(grains)
Initial
1058
1049
1056
1054
1054
1056
1056
1132
1079
1133
1072
1124
1066
1057
1057
1124
1061
Final
1079
1079
1077
1086
1083
1081
1147
1107
1146
1100
1138
1097
1077
1082
1137
1091
------- |