EPA-AA-IMS-82-3
Derivation of I/M Benefits for Pre-1981
Light Duty Vehicles for Low Altitude,
Non-California Areas
June, 1982
James Rutherford
Inspection and Maintenance Staff
Emission Control Technology Division
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Office of Air, Noise, and Radiation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
1.2 • Methodological Improvements Over MOBILE1
1.3 Summary
2.0 RESULTS
2.1 Example Results For Archetypical Programs
2.2 Comparison With Previous Estimates
3.0 BACKGROUND AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SIMULATION MODEL
3.1 Data Availability
3.1.1 Operating I/M Programs
3.1.2 Portland Study
3.1.3 Emission Factors Programs
3.2 Alternative Models
3.2.1 Previous Model
3.2.2 Stochastic Models
3.2.3 All Means Models
3.3 General Model Description
3.3.1 Calendar Year - Model Year Relationship
3.3.2 Vehicle Groupings
3.3.3 Initial Adjustment Of Sample
3.3.4 Simulation Cycle
4.0 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF MODEL
4.1 Vehicle Sample
4.2 Adjustment To MOBILE2 Predictions
4.3 Calculation Of Initial Idle Values
4.4 Inspection
4.5 Reductions Due To Maintenance
4.6 Deterioration
4.7 Iterations
4.8 January 1 Percent Reductions
Appendix: Computer Program Listing
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
This report presents the derivation of the Inspection/Maintenance (l/M)
emission reduction benefits for pre-1981 model year vehicles (non-California
low altitude) which were prepared for use in EPA's emission factor model,
MOBILE2.* MOBILE2 is a computer program which estimates fleet average
emissions of the three regulated pollutants (hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide,
and nitrous oxides) at various points in time under varying ambient and
driving conditions. The effects of I/M are applied in MOBILE2 as percent
reductions, or credits, to average emissions for various segments of the
fleet. The I/M benefits for 1981 and later model years were derived
independently and are discussed in a separate report ("Derivation of I/M
Benefits for Post-1980 Light Duty Vehicles for Low Altitude Non-California
Areas", EPA-AA-IMS-81-2).
Although 40 CFR 51 Appendix N — "Emission Reductions Achievable through
Inspection and Maintenance of Light Duty Vehicles, Motorcycles, and Light and
Heavy Duty Trucks" (the codification of EPA's first estimates of I/M credits)
has been obsolete since the release of MOBILE1 (the predecessor to MOBILE2),
many people still refer to whatever is EPA's current set of I/M credits and/or
the methodology used to derive them as "Appendix N".
1.2 Methodological Improvements Over MOBILE1
The I/M credits described here and used in MOBILE2 are the product of a
computerized simulation model as were those used in MOBILE1. As will be seen
in the following, several significant improvements have been made in the
model. A brief listing of the important improvements is given here.
The basic sample of test results from Emission Factor testing used in the
simulation is much larger in MOBILE2. Over five thousand vehicles are
included. MOBILE1 used results from less than eight hundred vehicles.
The most significant improvements come from the analysis of testing of
vehicles involved in real-world I/M programs (Portland Study and New Jersey
test lane data). The information gleaned from these data provide realistic
evaluations of maintenance effects, deterioration following maintenance, the
effect of mechanics' training, the effects of vehicle mileage accumulation,
and the relationships among cutpoints, idle scores, and Federal Test Procedure
(FTP) results.
* The I/M credits documented in this report are not exactly those included in
the original release of the MOBILE2 model. A coding error was made in the
computer program listed in this report and as a result, the I/M credits
originally included in the MOBILE2 model do not give the intended I/M credits,
especially for HC emissions. The error occurred in subroutine DTRATN listed
in pages 57 and 58 of this report. Variable PROJX(2) was inadvertantly coded
PROJX instead of PROJX(P) within the loops. User Information Sheet #6 for
MOBTLE2 presents the corrected I/M credits for these vehicles.
-------
There were also major improvements made in the derivation of credits for 1981
and later vehicles. These improvements are included in the above-mentioned
technical report (EPA-AA-IMS-81-2).
1.3 Summary
Section 2.0 gives a brief discussion of the I/M credits for pre-1981 vehicles
included in MOBILE2. A sample of the credits is presented. The credits are
briefly compared with credits in MOBILE1.
Sections 3.1 and 3.2 indicate the data and types of models, respectively,
which were under consideration in the development of the I/M simulation.
Section 3.3 gives a verbal description of the general model structure and how
it was built.
Section 4.0 presents the simulation model step-by-step with formulae and
parameters given in their entirety.
The Appendix is a listing of the Fortran IV source code for the computer
program which produced the credits.
-------
2.0 RESULTS
2.1 Example Result's for Archetypical Programs
The MOBILE2 computer program references I/M credits for pre-1981 model year
cars on the basis of technology (Technology I refers to pre-1975 model years,
Technology II refers to 1975-1980 model years), pollutant, program stringency,
vehicle age at first inspection, benefit year (i.e., number of inspections),
and presence or absence of mechanic training.* The general trends in the
credits can be seen in Figures 1-8. The figures present all the credits used
by MOBILE2 for pre-1981 model year vehicles for a 20% stringency I/M program.
It can be seen that there is a generally increasing trend in credit with
increasing benefit year for a given age of first inspection. Conversely,
there is a generally increasing trend in credit with increasing age of first
inspection for a given benefit year. However, this later trend is drastically
less significant for Technology II. The incremental benefits due to mechanic
training are small relative to other effects. For HC the increments are on
the order of 0 to 2 percentage points and for CO they are in the range of 0 to
8 percentage points. Although not shown here, the effects of stringency are
also small. Generally, for stringency ranging from 10% to 50%, the
corresponding credits fluctuate by about ten percentage points of credit.
2.2 Comparison With Previous Estimates
Comparison between the I/M credits for pre-1981 model year vehicles in MOBILE1
and MOBILE2 is muddled by changes in the basic emission factors model and .by a
slightly different structure of the I/M credits within the program. For
example, MOBILE2 estimates fleet average emissions as of January 1 of the
evaluation year while MOBILE1 evaluated as of July 1. In terms of structure,
MOBILE2 considers age of vehicle at implementation of the I/M program. In
MOBILE1, vehicles received credits at first inspection based on one year of
age regardless of actual age. This is inaccurate since the older a vehicle is
at first inspection, the greater is the benefit at the first few inspections.
A general comparison of the two sets of credits can be made based on the
effects on the fleet emission levels. Figures 9 and 10 present a comparison
of percent reductions in the pre-1981 model year fleet average emission
estimates for January 1, 1988 from MOBILE1 and MOBILE2 for I/M programs
beginning January 1, 1983. Since MOBILE1 evaluates for July 1 dates and
assumes I/M programs start July 1, interpolation was required for comparison
with MOBHE2. Although this is only one set of examples, the conclusions to
be drawn are generally applicable. For HC (Figure 9) there is very little
effect of mechanic training from MOBILE2. The reductions for both with and
without mechanic training from MOBILE2 are less than those for MOBILE1 with no
mechanic training at all stringencies. For CO (Figure 10), although there is
a greater effect due to mechanic training in MOBILE2 than for HC, both cases
fall between the reductions observed in MOBILE1 for the with and
without-mechanic training cases.
* The I/M credits documented in this report are not exactly those included in
the original release of the MOBILE2 model. Further explanation is presented
in the footnote on page 3 of this report.
-------
3.0 BACKGROUND AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SIMULATION MODEL
3.1 Data Availability
3.1.1 Operating I/M Programs
Although there are a few operating I/M programs, in those where data is
recorded from testing there is generally only idle or other short test data
available.
3.1.2 Portland Study
In order to obtain the necessary data from an actual I/M program, EPA has been
conducting tests in Portland, Oregon through a contractor, Hamilton Test
Systems, since September, 1977. As input for the modeling of the I/M process
EPA has four pertinent data sets from the Portland Study. The first data set,
Element I, is a group of as—received tests on about 2200 1975-77 model year
cars from Portland. Two data sets come from Element II. About 200 cars each
from model years 1972-74 (Technology I) and model years 1975-77 (Technology
II) were tested five or six times using the FTP: as—received, following
maintenance if required by the Portland I/M program, and four times at
quarterly intervals over the year following the initial test. The fourth data
set, Element III, consists of testing similar to that done in Element II on
about 300 1975-77 model year cars.
3.1.3 Emission Factors .
From Emission Factors testing, EPA's ongoing in-use surveillance program,
there are 2678 Technology I and 2456 Technology II cars from the FY71 program
through the FY79 program. These are tests from low-altitude, non-California,
non-Phoenix (where I/M was operating) sites. All tests are as-received.
3.2 Alternate Models
Before arriving at the current model, several alternatives were considered.
EPA began by looking at the previous model to determine whether minor
modifications would suffice. EPA then looked at two more general classes of
models: stochastic models and all means models. Each of these are discussed
below. It will be apparent that the current model is a hybrid of the three.
3.2.1 Previous Model
The previous model was developed before much data was available relative to
I/M. Deterioration was predicted for individual vehicles based on the
relationship between their actual test measurements and MOBILE1 predictions.
The resultant fleetwide deterioration is parallel to the MOBILE1 without-I/M
deterioration. Reductions were determined for individual cars based on single
pollutant regression equations between idle and FTP. Cars designated as
failing only one pollutant were simulated as having maintenance effects only
on that pollutant in the absence of mechanic training. With mechanic training
-------
every failed car was assumed to be emitting at its new car standard after
maintenance.
3.2.2 Stochastic Models
Classical stochastic models were considered. The general approach would be to
determine predictive relationships among variables of interest. The
stochastic element would then enter as individual vehicles' random deviations
from the strict relationships. However, upon examination of available data,
EPA determined that the variance-covariance structures among the variables of
interest were too weak to support this approach. In other words, the data
showed that the relationships among the variables on individual vehicles are
too erratic to provide meaningful individual car predictions.
3.2.3 All Means Models
Given the problems caused by the erratic behavior of individual vehicles as
described above, the next logical approach is an all means model. This
involves the same basic development as the stochastic models (i.e., finding
predictive relationships among the variables of interest), but with the
variables entering as means from a group of vehicles. The variability problem
is reduced. The stochastic element could be minimized or discarded complete-
ly. However, problems arose due to lack of flexibility in determining the
results of inspection. It was not possible to predict group failure rates in
a satisfactory manner without looking at the individual car deterioration and
the relationships between idle and FTP.
3.3 General Model Description
3.3.1 Calendar Year - Model Year Relationship
MOBILE2 requires I/M credits in the. form of individual percent reductions to
each model year's emission factor as of January 1 of a given calendar year.
The credit is further specificed by start date of the I/M program, program
stringency, presence or absence of mechanic's training, and pollutant (HC or
CO). MOBILE2 applies the I/M credit to each model year's emission factor,
then combines the model years to form a composite fleet -emission factor.
In order to derive the credits, the simulation used the entire input sample
for a given technology to produce a twenty-year emissions history for a given
age of first inspection and stringency. The twenty-year histories were used
as described below in Section 4.8 to determine model year credits which are
referenced in MOBILE2 by age of first inspection and benefit year. MOBILE2
uses calendar year, model year, and start date of the I/M program to determine
age of first inspection and benefit year for a given model year at a given
calendar year.
3.3.2 Vehicle Groupings
As discussed in Section 3.2, the production of the twenty-year emissions
histories was accomplished by a hybrid model which contains aspects of the
previous model, stochastic models, and all means models. At the time of
inspection, the simulation fleet was considered on an individual vehicle
-------
8
basis. After maintenance emissions were determined by failure group.(failing
HC, CO, or both). Deterioration was predicted for the mean of the entire
fleet.
3.3.3 Initial Adjustment of Sample
The best sample of vehicle test data available comes from EPA's Emission
Factors Programs from Fiscal Years 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1977, and
1979. Testing under these programs spanned the calendar years 1971 through
1980. To begin each twenty-year fleet emissions history, a group of vehicles
of the same chronological age is required. Rather than search the sample for
vehicles of the required age at time of testing which would yield small or
null samples in many cases, the entire sample of vehicles of the required
technology was used. The sample was adjusted to simulate a sample of vehicles
at the required age of first inspection. Each stratum from a stratification
based on model year and calendar year of the Emission Factor testing was
individually adjusted to obtain a group of vehicles with mean odometer reading
and FTP emissions as predicted by MOBILE2 for the required age of first
inspection. The resulting individually adjusted sample of vehicles then
received adjustments to their idle scores to reflect the adjustments to
mileage and FTP emissions.- The idle adjustments were based on adjusted
mileage and FTP emissions plus engine size (CID) and actual idle
measurements. The simulation of the twenty-year emissions history then began
with the sample of vehicles adjusted to the chronological age when the first
inspection would take place. The history prior to this point is simply that
predicted by MOBHE2 in the absence of an I/M program.
3.3.4 Simulation Cycle
At the first inspection of the twenty-year emissions history, the adjusted
idle scores from the sample were used to determine idle emission cutpoints
which yield the specified failure (stringency) rate. These cutpoints were
retained through the remainder of the twenty-year emissions history. Using
these cutpoints each vehicle was designated as passed, HC failure, CO failure,
or a failure on both pollutants. After maintenance mean emission levels were
predicted for each failure group based on mileage, cutpoints, failure mode,
and presence or absence of mechanic's training. The passed vehicles retained
emission levels from before inspection. The after maintenance emisson levels
were recombined to form fleet emission levels. Deterioration of the fleet
mean emission levels up to the next inspection point was predicted based on
after maintenance fleet mean emissions levels, mileage, and the MOBILE2
prediction of non-I/M fleet emissions. At the- next inspection, each vehicle's
mileage and FTP emissions were adjusted based on the new fleet means. The
idle scores for each vehicle were predicted based on CID and the new mileage
and FTP emissions. The cycle of inspection, emission reduction, and
deterioration was then repeated until the fleet completed the twenty-year
history.
-------
4.0 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF MODEL
This section presents a detailed description of the steps followed in the
simulation. As discussed in Section 3, the model is a 'hybrid containing
aspects of the previous deterministic model (MOBILE1), stochastic models, and
all means models. The sample input consisted of test results and information
on individual vehicles. The individual vehicle variables were initially
adjusted to be consistent with MOBILE2 predictions for the means. Artificial
deviations were added to simulate the stochastic nature of the relationship
among idle scores and other variables. Individual vehicles' idle scores were
used in the inspection process. The effects of maintenance and deterioration
were based on predictions of means. The results from the mean predictions
were translated back to the individual vehicle variables for the purpose of
subsequent inspection simulations.
4.1 Vehicle Sample
The simulation started with a sample from Emission Factors data. These are
data from the same cars which are used in determining the basic emission
factor equations used in MOBILE2. The sample has 2456 Technology II cars and
2678 Technology I cars. For each car the sample contains the vector of
observations:
x'i = (xj.1, xi2, Xi3, xi4, xi5, xig, x£7, xig); i = !,•••, n;
XQ2> X03* To achieve these means in the
simulation sample, the simulation adjusted the sample in the following manner:
Let x*i = X£i (XQI/X^) where, x^ is the mean mileage of those vehicles in
the sample which have a common model year-program year combination.
Then x* = XQI , i.e., the model year-program year adjusted mean is equal
to the MOBILE2 predicted mean. In a similar manner, individual vehicle FTP
emissions were adjusted by
=
Xi2 = X£2(X02/X2^ an(* Xi3 = x£3(xQ3/x3) where X2 and X3
-------
10
are the FTP HC and CO means (before adjustment), respectively, averaged within
the program year-model year groups. The program year-model year designations
were used to maintain appropriate mileage accumulation rates.
There is an implicit assumption that the vehicles are being adjusted to the
same chronological age within about two or three months. For a subsample of
the vehicles, build date was available. In conjunction with test date, build
date allows for slightly increased accuracy in age determination relative to
the program year and model year information. However, when the two methods of
adjustment were compared, no substantial differences in mileage and FTP
emissions distributions were detected.
4.3 Calculation of Initial Idle Values
Regression equations of the form
xij = bjo + bjlxil + bj2Xi2 + bj3Xi3 + bj6Xi6; j-4,5; i - 1, .... n
have been developed* to predict idle scores from the individual vehicle engine
sizes and adjusted mileages and FTP scores. The regression coefficients are
given in Table 1. In order to calculate idle values for the sample after
adjustment of mileages and FTP scores to MOBILE2 predictions, the first
estimate is given by:
xij = bjo + bjlxil + bj2xi2 + bj3xi3 + bj6xi6J J=4.5;
and, if X£4 <" 0, let X£4 = 1.; if £^5 <"0, let x^ = . 1. Then, let
rij = xij/xij> i=l>.«.n; j-4,5. Using the individual deteriorated vectors,
bjo + bjlxil + bj2xi2 + bj3xi3
* * * *
If x4 < 0, let x*4 =1.; if x*5 < 0, let x5 » 1.
Finally, let x£j = x-jjrijj i = l,...,n; j =4,5. Then x^4 and x^5 are
assumed to be the idle "HC and CO values respectively for the cars at first
inspection. They have been adjusted to account for deterioration and have a
synthetic deviation from a perfect regression based on the actual measured
idle scores for each car.
4.4 Inspection
At the point of first inspection, the derived idle scores were used to
determine idle cutpoints. This was done in a manner such that the desired
failure rate was obtained concurrently with one of the the following
conditions**:
* The data base used to derive the regression equations consisted of
as-received test results from 2552 Technology I cars and 2454 Technology II
cars from Emission Factors data.
** These conditions are thought by EPA to result in a reasonable balance of HC
and CO failures. Some such conditions are necessary to establish cutpoints,
since a desired failure rate alone does not determine them uniquely.
-------
11
1) if the CO outpoint is greater than or equal to 3.0, then the HC
cutpoint (in PPM) is 100 times the CO outpoint (in percent); or,
2) if the CO cutpoint is less than 3.0, then the HC cutpoint is 150 plus
fifty times the CO cutpoint.
The derived idle scores were then compared with the outpoints to determine
which cars passed and failed. Since the maintenance effects were to be based
on predictions for means by failure mode (i.e., whether HC or CO or both were
failed), the individual vehicles were assigned a failure mode at inspection.
The respective failure rates and mean FTP emissions were calculated by failure
mode, i.e.,.f£j and FTPjjk, where
i = 1: pass HC,
2: fail HC;
j - 1: pass CO,
2: fail CO; and
k = 2: FTP HC,
3: FTP CO.
4.5 Reductions Due to Maintenance
Overview
The mean FTP emissions for failed cars after maintenance for pollutant k (k =
2:HC, 3:CO) and failure group ij (i = 1;HC pass, 2:HC fail; j = 1:CO pass,
2:CO fail) are given for each Technology (I and II) by
FTPijk • dijko + dijklMij + dijk4 IHCC + dijk5 ICOC
where M^j is mean mileage for the (ij) failure group; IHC^ and ICO^ are
the idle HC and idle CO outpoints respectively; and there is no mechanic
training. The passed cars (i=l, j=l) retained the mean FTP levels
and FTP) observed at inspection.
The mean FTP emissions for the entire fleet (all four failure groups combined)
after maintenance for pollutant k were estimated by;
22 22
^>' "^5"^ f • T?TP- -, / "S""1 ^""" f • •
Z^ 2L_. fij FTPijk/ ^f— . ^— £ij'
where f^j is the proportion of the fleet in each of the failure groups.
-------
12
Detailed Derivation
The d^jk's were derived in a four step process:
1) First, the a^'s were estimated by regression in:
xmk B ako + akixml + ak4 IHCCm + ak5 ICOCmi m • l,...,n; k * 4,5;
where IHCcm is the idle HC outpoint imposed on the mth vehicle by an I/M
program at reinspection following repair and ICQcm is the idle CO cutpoint
applied to the mth vehicle. (Not all vehicles in the regression sample have
the same cutpoints because the sample comes from two I/M programs, and one of
these imposes cutpoints which vary by vehicle make and model.) x^ for k=4
and 5 are the idle HC and CO measurements, respectively, for the mth vehicle
at reinspection. x^ is the odometer reading for the mth vehicle. The
estimates for these equations are given in Table 2. The sample used in
estimating the a^ig consists of after maintenance official reinspection
tests from the Portland and New Jersey I/M programs.* The intention was to
quantify empirically the average margins by which idle emissions after
maintenance fall below the cutpoints in an I/M program. Such margins are
possible because I/M cutpoints are always set well above the idle emissions of
well tuned vehicles. Margins are expected since repair mechanics will tend to
reduce idle emissions well below the program cutpoints to provide a safety
margin to guard against failure at reinspection.
2) Next, the c^j^'s were estimated by regression in
cijko + cijkl*ml + Cijk4*m4 + cijk5xm5J m a If -in; k - 2,3;
from Portland after maintenance and first quarter tests on failed cars.**
This equation predicts individual FTP levels after maintenance from individual
idle levels and mileage. As above, (ij) refers to failure mode. xmi,
x^, and ^3 are mileage, FTP HC, and FTP CO, respectively, x^ and x^
are the idle emissions as above. The coefficients are given in Table 3.
3) A first iteration estimate for after maintenance average FTP emissions as
a function of cutpoints for., each failure group putting together (l) and (2)
above is:
= cijko + C
(340 + a41Mij + a4'4 IHCC + a45
(a50 + a51Mij + a54 IHCC + a55
* From Elements II and III of the Portland Study, 320 tests were used. From
New Jersey, 1333 tests recorded in 1975-1979 were used.
** For Technology I, 159 tests from'Element II were used. For Technology II,
386 tests from Elements II and III were used.
-------
13
4) To insure that the prediction at the mean of the Portland observations is
correct, the following relationship must hold:
Sijk (MijL. IHCCL, ICOCL)FTPijkp/
, ICOCP)
where P refers to Portland and L refers to local, i.e., the program under
consideration.
To achieve this relationship, letting k^jk = FTPijkP/Sijk^MijP> IHCCP>
and reassembling the. above,
dijko = kijk )>
dijkl s *ijk (cijkl + Cijk4 a41 + cijk5 a51),
dijk4 = kijk (cijk4 344 + cijkS 354), and
dijk5 * kijk (Cijk4
As seen in Table 4, the kijk are reasonably close to one (1) indicating
consistency in the model. The dijkm's are presented in Table 5. The
simulation checked whether
xmk = akO * akl Xml * ak4 IHCCm * ak5 ICOCm5 k = 4,5 yields
, or xm5>ICOCm.
Although unlikely, due to the statistical nature of the prediction this may
occur implying the car is above the cutpoints after maintenance. If it did,
the simulation assigned xm4 = IHCcm, or xm5 = ICOcm, respectively.
Then,
FTPijk =-kijk fcijko + Cijkl ftij + Cijk4
Cijk5
-------
14
where dijki is the same as in the without mechanic training case. The
d'ijko> were derived by letting
mean FTP? FTP'ijk(MT)
mean FTPu FTPijk(Mu,
d'ijko + dijklMT
dijko + dijkl MU + dijk4 IHCCu
and solving for d'^j^. T and U refer to (Portland Study) mechanic training
study trained and untrained, respectively. Thus, the ratio of predicted
trained to untrained is the same as the observed ratio at the given levels of
the parameters.
If d'ijko^> dijko + dijk4 IHCCU + dijk5 ICOCD>
d'ijko was set e3ual to c^e right-hand side of the above inequality. There
was a further restriction that FTP'^^ ^ FTP^j^. Both of the
restrictions insure that after maintenance FTP levels are always predicted the
same or lower with training than without. Due to the small sample size in the
Portland mechanic training study, the derivation of d'ko was carried out
without stratification by failure mode for the Technology I vehicles. The
estimates for d's for mechanic training are presented in Table 6.
The mean FTP emissions for the entire fleet (all four failure groups combined)
after maintenance for each pollutant then is estimated by the equation
presented in the overview in Section 4.5.
4.6 Deterioration
Before the first inspection, the fleet's mean FTP emissions deteriorate
according to equations given by MOBILE2.
Following the first inspection we assume that the fleet would be back at the
MOBILE2 FTP line mk (k =» 2: FTP HC, 3; FTP CO) miles after the inspection.
The path of deterioration ^ is then a straight line between the after
maintenance mean and the point on the MOBILE2 line tnk miles after the first
inspection. (See Figure 11.) The mileage intervals required to return to
MOBILE2 lines are given in Table 7. The mileage intervals were predicted
based on the fleetwide means from the total Portland fleets in Elements II and
III of the Portland Study.
After each subsequent annual inspection-and-repair point, fleet deterioration
again follows the path from the after maintenance level to the point mk
miles later on the MOBILE2 line.
If the deterioration path defined by this rule would reach the MOBILE2 line
before the next annual inspection is due (as can occur only for Technology I
vehicles with low age at first inspection) , a different path is taken
instead. This other path is a straight -line connecting the after maintenance
point and the point on the MOBILE2 line at the next inspection point.
-------
15
4.7 Iterations
At the mth inspection, x^i (mean mileage) is given by MOBILE2 and
x*§3 (mean FTP emissions) are given by deterioration following the (m-l)th
inspection. The sample mileages and FTP emissions were adjusted in the
following way:
•yin. a TT* . f»m./v*^ • 1 = 1?'}
xij xij vxoj' xj'' J •L>^>J«
Initial estimates for individual idle values were obtained by
t?j - b'jo + b'jixft + b'j2x?2 + b'J3x»3 + b'j6 x*6;
i = 1,... ,n; j = 4,5. If 3^4 ( 0, let x?4 = 1; if x?5 ^0, let x™5 = .1
These regression coefficients, b'jo,..., b'jg were derived from Elements I
and II of the Portland Study using tests after at least one inspection has
occurred and less than a year has passed since the last inspection. This
sample included 63 Technology I vehicles and 372 Technology II vehicles. The
coefficient estimates are given in Table 1. Synthetic variability around the
regressions was obtained by letting
Xm. = vm....... i = i n • n = A ^
ij Xlj rlj> X is•••!"! J ^> J»
Using the cutpoints determined at the first inspection, inspection and
deterioration were carried out as above and the simulation continued with the
next iteration.
4.8 January 1st Percent Reductions
The twenty-year emissions histories for a given Technology, stringency,
pollutant, and presence or absence of mechanic training were produced for ages
of' first inspection from one to nineteen. The emissions prior to the first
inspection were those predicted by MOBILE2 for the non-I/M fleet. I/M
reductions contained in MOBILE2 are the percent reductions for each model year
.from the non-I/M fleet to the I/M fleet on January 1 of the evaluation year.
The I/M simulation program needed to combine portions of the twenty-year
emissions histories to produce I/M model year average emissions as of January
1. A detailed description of this procedure follows.
Vehicle sales were assumed to be evenly distributed over the model year which
runs from October of the model year minus one through September of the model
year. In this discussion it will be conveninent to refer to new vehicles sold
October 1 through December 31 as "first-quarter vehicles" and those sold
January 1 through September 30 as "last-three-quarters vehicles". To
facilitate this dicussion the following new terminology is defined:
INT = zero mile emission rate as predicted by MOBILE2
AGEIST = age at which first-quarter vehicles are first inspected
E(BY) = mean FTP emissions for model year fleet on January 1 following
BYth inspection of first-quarter vehicles
TFB(BY) = mean FTP emissions immediately before BYth inspection
TFA(BY) = mean FTP emissions immediately after BYth inspection
-------
16
LFB(BY) = mean FTP emissions immediately before BYth inspection for cars
having first inspection at age AGEIST-1
LFA(BY) = mean FTP emissions immediately after BYth inspection for cars
having first inspection at age AGEIST-1
The last four of these values come from the simulated twenty-year emissions
'history.
AGEIST - 1
Figure 12 indicates the pattern o.f emissions for the first-quarter and
last-three-quarters vehicles when the I/M program is in effect before the
first quarter vehicles reach their first anniversary of sales. On January 1
of calendar year MY+1 the first-quarter vehicles are an average of one and
one-half months past their first inspection. The last-three-quarters vehicles
are an average seven and one-half months before their first inspection. The
January 1 I/M fleet mean emission levels for AGEIST=1 were calculated from the
twenty-year emissions histories as follows:
E(l) = .25 [TFA(1)+1.5(TFB(2)-TFA(1))/12]
+ .75 [INT+7.5(TFB(1)-INT)/12],
and, for BY=2 to 19,
E(BY) = .25 [TFA(BY)+1.5(TFB(BY+1)-TFA(BY))/12]
+ .75 [TFA(BY-1)+7.5(TFB(BY)-TFA(BY-1))/12].
AGEIST - 2 to 19
Figure 13 indicates the pattern of emissions for the first-quarter and
last-three-quarters vehicles when the I/M program starts after the
first-quarter vehicles have passed the first anniversary of their original
sale but before the last-three-quarters vehicles have passed their first
anniversary. This case corresponds to AGEIST=2. The first year for which
model year MY would show reductions due to I/M on January 1 would be MY+2. On
that day first-quarter vehicles would be an average of one and one-half months
passed their first inspection. The last-three-quarters vehicles would be an
average of seven and one-half months passed their first inspection. Note that
the age at first inspection for last-three-quarters vehicles is one less than
for first-quarter vehicles. This pattern continues through the I/M history of
all vehicles with AGEIST greater than one. The January 1 I/M fleet mean
emission levels for model years with AGEIST greater than one were calculated
from the twenty-year emissions histories for BY=1 to 20-AGEIST as follows;
E(BY) = .25 [TFA(BY)+1.5(TFB(BY+1)-TFA(BY))/12]
.75 [LFA(BY)+7.5(LFB(BY+1)-LFA(BY))/12]
-------
17
Table 1
Regression Coefficients for Predicting Idle Emissions
Technology I Intercept Miles/lOK FTP HC FTP CO CID
Initial Idle HC
Initial Idle CO
Subsequent Idle HC
Subsequent Idle CO
Technology II
Initial Idle HC
Initial Idle CO
Subsequent Idle HC
Subsequent Idle CO
140.37
2.3937
-131.35
.6558
11.13
.4258
-.1164
.4796
6.17
.0120
24.94
-.0206
-.165
-.0118
-2.18
-.0672
76.22
.0534
28.08
.0382
102.23
.0843
59.22
.0398
-1.18
.0472
11.20
.0642
-.32
.0608
1.31
.0655
-.30
-.0055
-1.00
-.0051
.03
-.0017
.12
-.0011
-------
18
Table 2
Estimated a^1 for Predicting After Maintenance Idle Levels
Technology I (Pre-1975 model years)
Idle HC Idle CO
a40
a41
a44
a45
340
a41
344
a45
59.396
8.2111
0.0
12.106
Technology II (1975-79 model
Idle HC
27.814
4.6612
0.0
15.517
a50
a51
354
a55
years)
Idle
a50
a51
a54
a55
-.65963
.06151
0.0
.46582
CO
-.27163
0.0
0.0
.39050
-------
19
Table 3
Estimated Cjjki's for Predicting After Maintenance FTP Levels
Technology I (Pre-1975 model years)
C2120
C2121
C2124
C2125
C1220
C1221
C1224
C1225
C2220
C2221
C2224
C2225
FTP HC
2.8093
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.4490
-.20922
.012067
0.0
1.0398
.21054
.004185
0.0
Technology II (1975-79
FTP HC
C2120
C2121
C2124
C2125
C1220
C1221
C1224
C1225
C2220
C2221
C2224
C2225
1.0906
0.0
.00464
0.0
.80638
.21934
0.0
0.0
1.0855
.14956
.0014085
0.0
FTP CO
C2120
C2121
C2124
C2125
C1220
C1221
C1224
C1225
C2220
C2221
C2224
C2225
model years)
FTP CO
C2130
C2131
C2134
C2135
'C1230
C1231
C1234
C1235
C2230
C2231
C2234
C2235
41.933
0.0
0.0
0.0
23.007
1.3794
0.0
6.6541
43.096
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.275
0.0
0.0
28.224
14.391
1.3610
0.0
-.021437
16.379
1.7465
0.0
9.6023
-------
20
Table 4
Estimated k^j^'s for Predicting After Maintenance FTP Levels
Technology I (Pre-1975 model years)
FTP HO FTP CO
.96569 k2i3 .65245
k122 1.0647 k123 .99755
k222 1.1575 k223 1.0489
Technology II (1975-79 model years)
FTP HC FTP CO
k212 1.1237 k213 1.0771
k!22 .92395 k123 .91849
k222 1.0792 k223 1.0095
-------
Estimated
21
Table 5
for Predicting After Maintenance FTP Levels
Technology I (Pre-1975 model years)
FTP
d2120
d2121
d2125
d!220
d!221
d!225
d2220
d2221
d2225
HC
2.7129
0.0
0.0
3.3706
-.11727
.15554
1.4913
.28348
.05864
FTP
d2130
d2131
d2135
d!230
d!231
d!235
d2230
d2231
d2235
CO
27.359
0.0
0.0
18.572
1.7843
3.0920
45.203
0.0
0.0
Technology II (1975-79 model years)
FTP HC
d2120
d2121
d2125
d!220
d!221
d!225
d2220
d2221
d2225
1.3705
.02430
.09655
.74506
.20266
0.0
1.2137
.16849
.02815
FTP CO
d2130
d2131
d2135
d!230
d!231
d!235
d2230
d2231
d2235
9.2720
0.0
11.871
13.223
1.2501
-.00769
13.902
1.7631
3.7853
-------
22
Table 6
Estimated d'ij^o's for Predicting After Maintenance FTP Levels
Technology I (Pre-1975 model years)*
FTP HC FTP CO
d'2Q 3.7504 d'30 37.49
Technology II (1975-79 model years)
FTP HC FTP CO
d'2120 1-4671 ^'2130 11.358
d'l220 .32275 d'l230 5.1816
d'2220 1.2418 d'2230 17.687
* As noted above, failure mode stratifications (ij) was dropped for Technology
I.
-------
23
Table 7 ,
Predicted Mileage Intervals (m^) for Fleet Mean FTP Emissions
to Reach Non-I/M Levels Following Maintenance
HC CO
Technology I (Pre-1975 Model Years) 7,400 40,000
Technology II (1975-79 Model Years) 27,000 57,200
-------
24
Figure 1
HC Credits for Technology I Vehicles
for a 20% Stringency I/M Program With No Mechan'ic Training
8
§
s't
§
S"
o 2
* 3
RGE1ST
o 1 * 11
• 12
i 13
*m
A 15
v 16
« 17
A 18
* 19
x 5
• 6
* 7
x 8
z 9
Y 10
2.00 4.00 6.00
3.00 10.00 12.00
BENEFIT YEflR
u.co
16.00
18.00
20.00
-------
25
Figure 2
CO Credits for Technology I Vehicles^
for a 20% Stringency I/M Program With No Mechanic Training
Ss
§a
a
S
RGE1ST
a
0
*
•f
X
»
*
X
z
Y
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
X 11
• 12
x 13
*m
A 15
v is
« 17
A 18
« 19
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.CO IO.CO
BENEFIT
14.00
16.CC
:e.aj
-------
26
Figure 3
HC Credits for Technology I Vehicles,
for a 20% Stringency I/M Program With Mechanic" Training
S
x
•z
a
LU
ce
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00 10.00 12.00.
BENEFIT YEfiR
u.co
16.90
I8.CO
RGE1ST
o
0
A
X
*
*
X
z
Y
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
X 11
i 12
z 13
A 15
v 16
« 17
A 18
« 19
:s.oo
-------
27
Figure 4
CO Credits for Technology I Vehicles
for a 20% Stringency I/M Program With Mechanic^Training
a
u
IT
§
RGE1ST
a 1 - 11
e 2 -12
* 3 x 13
* 4 *m
x 5 A 15
• 6 v 16
* 7 « 17
x 8 A 18
z 9 • 19
Y 10
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.CO 10.00 I2.CO
BENEFIT YEflR
u.oo
16.CO
18.CO
:c.:a
-------
Figure 5
HC Credits for Technology II Vehicles
for a 20^ Stringency I/M Program With No Mecharfic Training
5s
a
LU
ce
2.CO
4.00
s.oo
8.00 10.00 i:.co
BENEFIT YEflR
u.co
I6.CO
18.CC
RGEIST
a 1 x 11
• 12
* 13
14 *i4
* 15
v is
o 17
x 8 A is
z 9 ^ 19
Y 10
e 2
* 3
*
x 5
• 6
» 7
2100
-------
29
Figure 6
' . CO Credits for Technology II Vehicles
for a 20% Stringency I/M Program With No Mechanic Training
SB
5s
a
2.00
4.CO
6.00
3.03 10.00 12.00
BENEFIT YEflR
14.00
IS.OO
18.00
RGE1ST
o
0
*
+
X
*
*
X
z
Y
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
3
9
10
X 11
» 12
x 13
*14
A IS
v 16
9 17
A 18
• 19
20.00
-------
30
Figure 7
HC Credits for Technology II Vehicles
for a 20% Stringency I/M Program With Mechanic* Training
S
g
§
8
gs
a
LJ
cr
RGE1ST
§
3
§
g.
"too
0 1
a 2
* 3
+ 4
x 5
• 6
* 7
x 8
z 9
Y 10
X 11
* 12
i 13
A 15
* 16
o 17
A 18
* 19
2-Cfl
4.00
S.CO
8.00 10.00
BENEFIT YEfiR
u.cc
I6.BO
2c.:o
-------
Figure 8
CO Credits for Technology H Vehicles
for a 20% Stringency I/M Program With Mechanic.Training
3
3
3
5t
§
at
3
St
RGE1ST
o 1
o 2
* 3
x 5
• 6
» 7
x 8
z 9
Y 10
* 11
• 12
x 13
A 15
v 16
* 17
A 18
« 19
§.... -_
"too
2.00
e.co 3.:c •:.:: t:.cc ^.c: is.oc :s.ca
BENEFIT >ESS
-------
32
Figure 9
I/M Percent Reductions from January 1, 1988
HC Emission Levels Without I/M *
MOB1LE1 VS MOBILES
80
75
70
65
u60
««
250
oHO
UJ
(=35
£30
£25
£20
"-15
10
5
0
MOBILE2-NO MT
MOBILE2-MT
M08ILE1-NO MT
MOBILE1-MT
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
10
20 30
STRINGENCY
50
1X3
* Assumes LDV only I/M program beginning January 1, 1983; Percent
reduction in Technology I and II total non-evaporative HC emissions
from LDVs.
-------
33
Figure 10
I/M Percent Reduction from Janury 1, 1988
CO Emission Levels Without I/M*
MOBIIE1 YS HOBILE2
80
75
70
85
o60
u
z55
250
oUO
UJ
<=35
£30
£25
£20
10
5
0
M08ILE2-NO MT
MOBILE2-MT
M081LE1-NO MT
+***- MOBILE1-MT
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
10
20 30
STRINGENCY
50
(X)
* Assumes LDV only I/M program beginning January 1, 1983. Percent
reduction in Technology I and II CO emissions from LDVs.
-------
Figure 11
Fleet Deterioration Methodology
Fleet
FTP
Mean
Reduction
Due to
Maintenance
MOBILE2
(Non-I/M)
CJ
De terioration
Inspections
-------
Figure 12
Emission Histories — Age At First Inspection: 1
Emissions
Last Three
Quarters Vehicles
First
Quarte
X"
Vehicles
CO
01
Time
1/1/MY
1/1/MY+l
l/l/MY+2
-------
Figure 13
Emissions Histories — Age At First Inspection: 2
Emissions
Last Three
Quarter s Vehicles
00
Time
1/1 /MY+2
-------
37
Appendix:
Computer Program Listing
-------
38
C
C THE NEW APPENDIX N PROGRAM
C DESIGNED AND DEVELOPED
C BY THE TECHNICAL AND ANALYTICAL SUPPORT GROUP
C I/M STAFF
C 2565 PLYMOUTH ROAD
C ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN
C
INTEGER FIRST,AGE,ITECH,ISTRIN,MT
C
C TO CREATE A COMPLETE MATRIX OF PERCENT EMISSION REDUCTIONS
C RESULTING FROM AN I/M PROGRAM, THE I/M PORTION OF THE
C VEHICLES' LIFE IS RUN ONCE FOR EACH SETUP OF THE I/M PROGRAM.
C 2 TECHNOLOGIES (ITECH)
C 5 STRINGENCY CUTPOINTS (ISTRIN)
C 0% AND 100% MECHANICS TRAINING (MT)
C 19 VEHICLE AGES OF FIRST I/M INSPECTION (FIRST)
C
DO 30 ITECH=1,2
C
DO 30 ISTRIN=1,5
C
DO 30 MT=1,2
C
DO 30 FIRST=1,19
C ;
C STEP 1
C READ IN AND INITIALIZE VARIABLES
C
CALL INIT(FIRST,MT,ISTRIN,ITECH)
C
C STEP 2
C GO THROUGH THE I/M PORTION OF THE VEHICLES' LIFE
C
DO 20 AGE=FIRST,19
CALL SETUP(FIRST,AGE)
CALL INSPCT(AGE)
CALL MNTNCE(AGE)
CALL DTRATN(AGE) ,
20 CONTINUE
C
C STEP 3
C NOW THAT WE HAVE THE FLEET AVERAGE EMISSIONS FOR EVERY
C YEAR, CALCULATE THE AVERAGE EMISSIONS AND PERCENT
c REDUCTIONS; >ON JANUARY i.
c
CALL GETPR
C STEP 4
C STORE THE JANUARY 1 REDUCTIONS IN THE MATRIX
C FOR INTERFACE WITH MOBILE2
-------
39
C
CALL MATRIX(MT,ISTRIN,ITECH)
C
30 CONTINUE
END
-------
40
SUBROUTINE INIT(FIRST,MT,ISTRIN,ITECH)
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
THE 'SAMPLE1 COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS ALL THE INITIAL VEHICLE DATA
THE MAXIMUM NUMBER
VARIABLE
ODOM(I)
FTP1ST(I,P)
IDLE1ST(I,P)
CID(I)
PY(I)
MY(I)
COMMON/SAMPLE/ODOM,
INTEGER*4 C ID (267 8)
REAL IDL1ST(2678,2)
OF CARS IS 2678
DESCRIPTION '
THE ODOM READING FOR THE ITH CAR
ALL ODOMETER READINGS ARE IN 10K MILES
FTP LEVEL FOR THE ITH CAR, PTH POLLUTANT
IDLE LEVEL FOR THE ITH CAR, PTH POLLUTANT
CID FOR THE ITH CAR
PROGRAM YEAR
MODEL YEAR
FTP1ST,IDL1ST,CID,PY,MY
,PY(2678),MY(2678)
,FTP1ST(2678,2),ODOM(2678)
THE 'CARS' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS ALL THE ADJUSTED VEHICLE DATA
THE MAXIMUM NUMBER
VARIABLE
NCARS
ADJMIL(I)
FTP(I,P)
IDLE(I,P)
IDLRAT(I,P)
AVODOM(PY,MY)
OF CARS IS 2678
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER OF CARS IN THIS SAMPLE
MUST LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 2678
THE ADJUSTED ODOM READING FOR THE ITH CAR
ALL ODOMETER READINGS ARE IN 10K MILES
FTP LEVEL FOR THE ITH CAR, PTH POLLUTANT
IDLE LEVEL FOR THE ITH CAR, PTH POLLUTANT
IDLE RATIO OF (ACTUAL IDLE) /(PREDICTED IDLE)
USING ORIGINAL MILEAGE AND FTP'S
AVERAGE ODOMETER READING MODEL AND PROGRAM YR
THERE ARE A MAXIMUM OF 15 PROGRAM YEARS
AND 8 MODEL YRS
COMMON/CARS/NCARS,ADJMIL,FTP,IDLE,IDLRAT,AVODOM,AVFTP
REAL*4 FTP(2678,2),IDLE(2678,2),ADJMIL(2678),
+AVODOM( 15,8),IDLRAT(2678, 2) ,AVFTP( 15,8, 2)
INTEGER NCARS
C
C THE 'BKGRND' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS BACKGROUND INFORMATION
C NEEDED TO DEFINE THE I/M PROGRAM
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C TECH TECHNOLOGY NUMBER
C AGE1ST AGE OF VEHICLES AT FIRST INSPECTION
C MTP(BY) MECHANIC TRAINING PERCENT AT BENEFIT YEAR 'BY'
C CUTPTS(BY,P) IDLE CUTPOINTS AT BENEFIT YEAR 'BY'
C FOR POLLUTANT 'P'
C ESTSF ESTIMATED STRINGENCY FACTOR
C TABLES LOGICAL VARIABLE TO SUPRESS OUTPUT OF TABLES
C
COMMON/BKGRND/TECH,AGE1ST,MTP,CUTPTS,ESTSF,TABLES
INTEGER*4 TECH,AGE1ST,ESTSF
REAL*4 CUTPTS(2,2,19,5),-MTP(20)
LOGICAL TABLES
-------
41
C
C THE 'MOB' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS THE MOBILE2 .ESTIMATES
C OF MILEAGE AND FTP EMISSION LEVELS
C FOR EACH TECHNOLOGY BY AGE OF VEHICLE
C
C THESE VARIBALES ARE ALL INITIALIZED IN A BLOCK DATA STATEMENT
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C MILES(AGE) ESTIMATED MILEAGE AT AGE 'AGE1
C MOBFTP(AGE,P,TECH) ESTIMATED FTP LEVEL AT AGE 'AGE1,
C TECHNOLOGY 'TECH' AND POLLUTANT 'P'
C JMILES(AGE) MILEAGE ON JAN 1 CY, WHERE AGE=CY-MY
C JFTP(AGE,P,TECH) NON I/M FLEET FTP ON JAN 1
C INT(P,TECH) MOBILE2 INTERCEPTS
C SLOPE(P,TECH) MOBILE2 SLOPES FOR EMISSIONS
C STND(P,TECH) FTP STANDARDS
C
COMMON /MOB/ MILES, MOBFTP, JMILES, JFTP, INT, SLOPE, STND
REAL*4 MILES(20), MOBFTP(20,2,2), JMILES(20), JFTP(20,2,2),
1 INT(2,2), SLOPE(2,2), STND(2,2)
C 'MEANS' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS MEAN MILEAGE,FTPHC ,FTPCO
C WE HAVE TO MAKE OUR SAMPLE AGREE WITH THESE MEANS
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C MODOM MEAN ODOMETER
C MFTP(P) MEAN FTP FOR POLLUTANT 'P'
C • '
COMMON/MEANS /MODOM,MFTP
REAL*4 MODOM,MFTP(2)
C
REAL NOODOM(15,8)
INTEGER FIRST,P,AGE,EVAL,UNIT
C
C STEP 1
AGE1ST=FIRST
IF (.NOT.(dSTRIN.EQ.l)
& .AND.(MT.EQ.1).AND.(AGE1ST.EQ.1))) GO TO 20
C
C READ IN THE INITIAL SAMPLE OF VEHICLES
C THE FIRST TIME THRU
C
C
DO 5 1=1,15
DO 5 J-1,8
AVODOM(I,J)=0
NOODOM(I,J)=0
DO 5 P-1,2
AVFTP(I,J,P) = 0.0
5 CONTINUE
C .
C
READ(6,7) NCARS,TABLES
7 FORMAT(14,L4)
-------
42
C
UNIT=7
. IF(ITECH .EQ. 2) UNIT=8
C
DO 16 I-l.NCARS
READ(UNIT,10) ODOM(I),FTP1ST(I,1),FTP1ST(I,2),
& IDL1ST(I,1),IDL1ST(I,2),
& CID(I),PY(I),MY(I)
C
10 FORMAT(F8.5,F5.2,F6.2,F5.0,F5.2,I3,1X,I1,1X,I1)
C
14 AVODOM(PY(I),MY(I))=AVODOM(PY(I),MY(I))+ODOM(I)
NOODOM(PY(I),MY(I))=NOODOM(PY(I),MY(I))+1
DO 16 P-1,2
AVFTP(PY(I),MY(I),P) = FTP1ST(I,P) + AVFTP(PY(D, MY(D, P)
16 CONTINUE
C
C
C
C
DO 18 1-1,15
DO 18 J-1,8
IF (NOODOM(I,J).EQ.O) GO TO 18
AVODOM(I,J)=AVODOM(I,J)/NOODOM(I,J)
DO 18 P-1,2
AVFTP(I,J,P)=AVFTP(I,J,P)/NOODOM(I,J)
18 CONTINUE
C
C STEP 2
C DEFINE THE BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR THIS I/M PROGRAM
C
20 CONTINUE
DO 21 P=l,2
DO 21 I=1,NCARS
IDLE(I,P) - IDL1ST(I,P)
FTP(I,P) = FTPIST(I.P)
21 CONTINUE
TECH = ITECH
ESTSF = ISTRIN * 10
DO 25 1=1,20
MTP(I) » MT - 1.
25 CONTINUE
30 MODOM=MILES(AGE1ST)
DO 35 P-1,2
35 MFTP(P)=MOBFTP(AGE1ST,P,TECH)
C
C STEP 4
C
C SET UP THE NON I/M PORTION OF THE VEHICLES' LIFE
C AND WRITE OUT ALL THE NON I/M EMISSION VALUES
IF(.NOT.TABLES) GO TO 99
WRITE(1,10 0)TECH,ESTSF
WRITE(2,200)TECH,ESTSF
WRITE(3,300)TECH,ESTSF
-------
43
C IF(AGElST.EQ.l) GO TO 41
C LAST=AGE1ST-1
C DO 40 AGE=1,LAST
C WRITEC1,101)AGE,MILES(AGE),(MOBFTP(AGE,P,TECH),P=1,2)
C WRITE(2,201)AGE
C EVAL=AGE-1
C WRITE(3,301)EVAL,JMILES(AGE),(JFTP(AGE,P,TECH),P=1,2)
C 40 CONTINUE
C 41 AGE=AGE1ST
C EVAL=AGE-1
C WRITE(3,301)EVAL,JMILES(AGE))(JFTP(AGEJP,TECH),P=1,2)
C
100 FOKMATC-' ,T55, 'I/M SIMULATION PROGRAM ' ,T118, 'TECHNOLOGY' ,I3/
&T61,'TABLE 1',T100,'ESTIMATED',13,'% STRINGENCY FACTOR'/,' ',
&T51,'FTP AVERAGES AT EACH INSPECTION1/,'0',
&T40,'I/M FLEET',T64,'PASSED CARS',T89,'FAILED CARS',/
&T1, ' + ' ,T28,34C I),T64,11('_I),T78,34('_1)/
&T53,'REDUCTION'7T103,'REDUCTION %' ,T125, 'IDLE'/
&T17,'NON I/M',T30,'BEFORE',T44,'AFTER',T54,'DUE TO',
&T80,'BEFORE' ,T94, 'AFTER1 ,T104, 'DUE TO1',
&T114,'MECH',T122,'CUTPOINTS'/
&T3,'AGE MILES',T18,'FLEET',T30,'MNTNCE1,T43,'MNTNCE',
&T54,'MNTNCE',T80,'MNTNCE',T93,'MNTNCE',
&T10 4,'MNTNCE TRAINING'/
&T1,'(YRS) (10K)',T15,'HC CO HC CO HC CO',
&4X,'HC CO HC CO HC CO HC CO',
&4X,'HC CO',T123,'HC CO')
C
C101 FORMAT(I4,F7.1,2(3(F7.2,F6.1),I5,I4,2X),F6.2,F8.0,F5.1)
C
C
200 FORMATC-' ,T55, 'I/M SIMULATION PROGRAM' ,T118, 'TECHNOLOGY' ,I2,/
&T61,'TABLE2',T99,'ESTIMATED',13,'% STRINGENCY FACTOR1,/
&T1,' ',T54,'FAILURE AND ERROR RATES'/
&T1,'0',T55,'ERRORS OF',T77,'ERRORS OF',T97,'%',T108,'IDLE',/
&T22,'AGE',T32,'FAILURE RATE',T56,'OMISSION',T77,'COMMISSION',
&T95,'MECH' ,T104, 'CUTPOINTS'/
&T1,'+',T32,12('_'),T54,12('_'),T76,12('_'),/
&T21,'(YRS)',T27,3C HC CO BOTH '),
&T93,'TRAINING',T106,'HC CO1//)
C
C201 FORMAT(T21,I3,3X,3(F7.2,F5.2,F5.2,5X)>F5.2>F10.0,F5.1)
C
C
300 -FORMATC-' ,T55,'I/M SIMULATION PROGRAM ' ,T118, 'TECHNOLOGY' ,13/
&T61,'TABLE 3',T100,'ESTIMATED',13,'% STRINGENCY FACTOR'/,' ',
&T49,'EMISSION INVENTORIES ON JANUARY I'/
&T4 9,'FOR I/M PROGRAM' STARTING JANUARY 1'/, '0 ' ,
&T47,'NO I/M',T69,'I/M',T84,'PERCENT',T103,'%'/
&T25,'AGE',T34,'MILES',T83,'REDUCTION',T101,'MECH'/
&T24,'(YRS)',T33,'(10K)',T46,'HC',T53,'CO',T66,'HC',
&T73,'CO',T83,'HC',T90,'CO1,T100,'TRAINING'/,'+',T24,5('_'),
.&T33,5('_'),T45,4('_' ),T52,4('_'),T65,4('_'),T72,4( '_'),
'&T83,2(I_I),T90,2(I_I),T100,8(I_1))
-------
44
C
C 301 FORMAT(T26,I2,T33,F5.1,T44,F5.2,T51,F5.1,T64,F5.2)
C & T71,F5.1,T81,F4.2,T88,F4.2,T103,F3.2)
C
C
400 FORMATd1 ,T55,'I/M SIMULATION PROGRAM ' ,T118, 'TECHNOLOGY' ,137
&T61,'TABLE 4' ,T100, 'ESTIMATED1 ,13, '7, STRINGENCY FACTOR'/,'0',
&T51,'EMISSION INVENTORIES ON JULY I'/
&T51,'FOR I/M PROGRAM STARTING JULY 1'/,'-',
&T47, 'NO I/M'.Teg, 'I/M',T8-4, 'PERCENT1 ,T103, '%'/
&T25,'AGE',T34,'MILES',T83,'REDUCTION',T101,'MECH'/
&T24,'(YRS)',T33,'(10K)',T46,'HC',T53,'CO',T66,'HC',
&T73,'CO',T83,'HC',T90,'CO1,T100,'TRAINING1/,'+',T24,5('_'),
&T33,5('_' ),T45J4('_'),T52,4('_'),T65,4( '_'),T72,4( '_'),
&T83,2('_I),T90,2(I_'),T100>8(1 '))
C
99 RETURN
C
END
-------
45
SUBROUTINE SETUP(FIRST,AGE)
C
C
C THE 'BKGRND' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS BACKGROUND INFORMATION
C NEEDED TO DEFINE THE I/M PROGRAM
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C TECH TECHNOLOGY NUMBER
C AGE1ST AGE OF VEHICLES AT FIRST INSPECTION
C MTP(BY) MECHANIC TRAINING PERCENT AT BENEFIT YEAR 'BY'
C CUTPTS(BY,P) IDLE CUTPOINTS AT BENEFIT YEAR 'BY'
C FOR POLLUTANT 'P'
C ESTSF ESTIMATED STRINGENCY FACTOR
C TABLES LOGICAL VARIABLE TO SUPRESS OUTPUT OF TABLES
C
COMMON/BKGRND/TECH,AGE1ST,MTP,CUTPTS,ESTSF,TABLES
INTEGER*4 TECH,AGE1ST,ESTSF
REAL*4 CUTPTS(2,2,19,5),MTP(20)
LOGICAL TABLES
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
THE 'CARS
' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS ALL THE ADJUSTED VEHICLE DATA
THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF CARS IS 2678
VARIABLE
NCARS
ADJMIL(I)
FTP(I.P)
IDLE(I,P)
IDLRATd,
AVODOM(PY
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER OF CARS IN THIS SAMPLE
MUST LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 2678
THE ADJUSTED ODOM READING FOR THE ITH CAR
ALL ODOMETER READINGS ARE IN 10K MILES
FTP LEVEL FOR THE ITH CAR, PTH POLLUTANT
IDLE LEVEL FOR THE ITH CAR, PTH POLLUTANT
P) IDLE RATIO OF (ACTUAL IDLE) /(PREDICTED IDLE)
USING ORIGINAL MILEAGE AND FTP'S
,MY) AVERAGE ODOMETER READING MODEL AND PROGRAM YR
THERE ARE A MAXIMUM OF 15 PROGRAM YEARS
AND 8 MODEL YRS
COMMON/CARS/NCARS,ADJMIL,FTP,IDLE,IDLRAT,AVODOM.AVFTP
REAL*4 FTP(2678,2),IDLE(2678,2),ADJMIL(2678),
+AVODOM(15,8),IDLRAT(2678,2),AVFTP(l5,8,2)
INTEGER NCARS
C 'MEANS' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS MEAN MILEAGE,FTPHC ,FTPCO
C WE HAVE TO MAKE OUR SAMPLE AGREE WITH THESE MEANS
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION ., ,
C MODOM MEAN ODOMETER
C MFTP(P) MEAN FTP FOR POLLUTANT 'P'
C
COMMON/MEANS/MODOM,MFTP
REAL*4 MODOM,MFTP(2)
C
C THE 'SAMPLE' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS ALL THE INITIAL VEHICLE DATA
C THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF CARS IS 2678
-------
46
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C ODOM(I) THE ODOM READING FOR THE ITH CAR
C ALL ODOMETER READINGS ARE IN 10K MILES
C FTP1ST(I,P) FTP LEVEL FOR THE ITH CAR, PTH POLLUTANT
C IDLE1ST(I,P) IDLE LEVEL FOR THE ITH CAR, PTH POLLUTANT
C CID(I) CID FOR THE ITH CAR
C PY(I) PROGRAM YEAR
C MY(I) MODEL YEAR
COMMON/SAMPLE/ODOM,FTP1ST, IDL1ST ,"C ID, PY, MY
INTEGER*4 CID(2678),PY(2678),MY(2678)
REAL IDL1ST(2678,2),FTP1ST(2678,2),ODOM(2678)
C
C
C
C
C
C
INTEGER P,FIRST,AGE,T
REAL LEVEL
REAL SMALL(2),RATIO(3),BETA(5,2,2,2)
C BETA(1-5,HC/CO,INITIAL/AFTER MAINTENANCE,TECH)
DATA SMALL/1.0,.01/
C
DATA BE-TA/140.36, 6.17, 76.32, -1.18, -.30,
& 2.3972, .0120, .0532, .0472, -.0055,
& -131.35, 24.94, 28.08, 11.20, -1.00,
& .6558, -.0206, .0382, .0642, -.0051,
& 11.12,-1.65,102.23,-.32,.03,
& .4258,-.0118,.0843,.0681,-.0017,
& -11.64,-2.18,59.22,1.31,.12,
& .4796,-.0672,.0398,.0655,-.001I/
C
C STEP 1
C DO ALL THE INITIAL PROCESSING FOR THE FIRST SETUP
C
IF(FIRST.NE.AGE) GO TO 15
T=l
IF(FIRST .NE. 1) GO TO 11
DO 10 I=1,NCARS
C
DO 10 P-1,2
C
C STEP 1.2
C FIND PREDICTED IDLE BASED ON ACTUAL FTP'S AND MILEAGE
C COMPUTE 'IDLRAT' : ACTUAL/PREDICTED
PREDCT = AMAX1(SMALL(P), ( BETA(1,P,T,TECH) +
& .... BETA(2,P,T,TECH)*ODOM(I) +
& BETA(3,P,T,TECH)*FTP(I,1) +
& BETA(4,P,T,TECH)*FTP(I,2) +
& BETA(5,P,T,TECH)*CID(I) ))
IDLRAT(I,P)= IDLE(I,P) /PREDCT
10 CONTINUE
-------
47
11 DO 12 1=1,NCARS
C STEP 1.1
C ADJUST THE MILEAGES SO THAT THE FLEET AVERAGE ODOM
C EQUALS THE'TARGET MEAN 'MODOM'
ADJMIL(I)=ODOM(I)*MODOM/AVODOM(PY(I),MY(I))
C
DO 12 P=l,2
C STEP 1.3
C ADJUST FTP ACCORDING TO PY, MY STRATIFICATION"
FTP(I,P) » FTP(I.P) * MFTP(P) / AVFTP(PY(l), MY(I), P)
12 CONTINUE
GO TO 31
C
C
C STEP 2
C DO ALL THE PROCESSING NEEDED WHEN ITS NOT THE FIRST TIME THROUGH
15 T=2
C STEP 2.1
C ADJUST THE MILEAGES SO THAT THE FLEET AVERAGE ODOM
C EQUALS THE TARGET MEAN 'MODOM1
RATIO(3)=MODOM/AVER(NCARS,ADJMIL)
20 DO 25 1=1,NCARS
ADJMIL(I)=ADJMIL(I)*RATIO(3)
25 CONTINUE
C
C
C STEP 3
C EVERYBODY GOES THROUGH THIS PART
C STEP 3.1
C ADJUST THE FTP'S SO THAT THE AVERAGE FLEET FTP'S
C EQUAL THE TARGET MEANS 'MFTP'
31 DO 32 P-1,2
32 RATIO(P)=MFTP(P)/AVER(NCARS,FTP(1,P))
DO 35 1=1,NCARS :
DO 35 P-1,2
FTP(I,P)=FTP(I,P)*RATIO(P)
C
C STEP 3.2
C ADUST THE IDLE LEVELS
LEVEL = BETA(1,P,T,TECH) +
& BETA(2,P,T,TECH)*ADJMIL(I) +
& BETA(3,P,T,TECH)*FTP(I,1) +
& BETA(4,P,T,TECH)*FTP(I,2) +
& BETA(5,P,T,TECH)*CID(I)
IF(LEVEL.GT.SMALL(P)) GOTO 33
LEVEL = SMALL(P)
33 CONTINUE
IDLE(I.P) = IDLRAT(I,P) * LEVEL
35 CONTINUE
C
99 RETURN
END
-------
48
SUBROUTINE INSPCT(AGE)
C
C THE 'CARS' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS ALL THE ADJUSTED VEHICLE DATA
C THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF CARS IS 2678
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C NCARS NUMBER OF CARS IN THIS SAMPLE
C MUST LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 2678
C ADJMIL(I) THE ADJUSTED ODOM READING FOR THE ITH CAR
C ALL ODOMETER READINGS ARE IN 10K MILES
C FTP(I,P) FTP LEVEL FOR THE ITH CAR, PTH POLLUTANT
C IDLE(I,P) IDLE LEVEL FOR THE ITH CAR, PTH POLLUTANT
C IDLRAT(I,P) IDLE RATIO OF (ACTUAL IDLE)/(PREDICTED IDLE)
C USING ORIGINAL MILEAGE AND FTP'S
C AVODOM(PY,MY) AVERAGE ODOMETER READING MODEL AND PROGRAM YR
C THERE ARE A MAXIMUM OF 15 PROGRAM YEARS
C AND 8 MODEL YRS
C
COMMON/CARS/NCARS,ADJMIL,FTP,IDLE,IDLRAT,AVODOM.AVFTP
REAL*4 FTP(2678,2),IDLE(2678,2),ADJMIL(2678),
+AVODOM(15,8),IDLRAT(2678,2),AVFTP(15,8,2)
INTEGER NCARS
C 'MEANS' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS MEAN MILEAGE,FTPHC ,FTPCO
C WE HAVE TO MAKE OUR SAMPLE AGREE WITH THESE MEANS
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C MODOM MEAN ODOMETER
C MFTP(P) MEAN FTP FOR POLLUTANT 'P1
C
COMMON/MEANS /MODOM,MFTP
REAL*4 MODOM,MFTP(2)
C
C THE 'BKGRND' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS BACKGROUND INFORMATION
C NEEDED TO DEFINE THE I/M PROGRAM
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C TECH TECHNOLOGY NUMBER
C AGE1ST AGE OF VEHICLES AT FIRST INSPECTION
C MTP(BY) MECHANIC TRAINING PERCENT AT BENEFIT YEAR 'BY'
C CUTPTS(BY.P) IDLE CUTPOINTS AT BENEFIT YEAR 'BY'
C FOR POLLUTANT 'P1
C ESTSF ESTIMATED STRINGENCY FACTOR
C TABLES LOGICAL VARIABLE TO SUPRESS OUTPUT OF TABLES
C
COMMON/BKGRND/TECH.AGEIST,MTP,CUTPTS,ESTSF,TABLES
INTEGER*4 TECH,AGE1ST,ESTSF
REAL*4 CUTPTS(2,2,19,5),MTP(20)
LOGICAL TABLES
C
C THE 'MOB' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS THE MOBILE2 ESTIMATES
C OF MILEAGE AND FTP EMISSION LEVELS
C FOR EACH TECHNOLOGY BY AGE OF VEHICLE
-------
49
C
C THESE VARIBALES ARE ALL INITIALIZED IN A BLOCK DATA STATEMENT
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C MILES(AGE) ESTIMATED MILEAGE AT AGE 'AGE1
C MOBFTPCAGE,P,TECH) ESTIMATED FTP LEVEL AT AGE 'AGE1,
C TECHNOLOGY 'TECH' AND POLLUTANT 'P1
C JMILES(AGE) MILEAGE ON JAN 1 CY, WHERE AGE=CY-MY
C JFTP(AGE,P,TECH) NON I/M FLEET FTP ON JAN 1
C INT(P,TECH) MOBILE2 INTERCEPTS
C SLOPE(P.TECH) MOBILE2 SLOPES FOR EMISSIONS
C STND(P,TECH) FTP STANDARDS
C
COMMON /MOB/ MILES, MOBFTP, JMILES, JFTP, INT, SLOPE, STND
REAL*4 MILES(20), MOBFTP(20,2,2), JMILES(20)j JFTP(20,2,2), •
1 INT(2,2), SLOPE(2,2), STND(2,2)
C
C 'HSTRY1 COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS EMISSION HISTORY THROUGHOUT PROGRAM
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C TFB(AGE,P) .TOTAL FLEET FTP BEFORE INSPECTION
C TFA(AGE.P) TOTAL FLEET FTP AFTER INSPECTION
C F F=l PASSED THE TEST
C =2 FAILED FOR HC ONLY
C . =3 FAILED FOR CO ONLY
C =4 FAILED FOR BOTH
C NF(F) NUMBER IN EACH GROUP
C TOTFTP(P,F) TOTAL FTP IN EACH GROUP
C PR(P,BY) PERCENT REDUCTION ON JANUARY 1ST
C AVGMIL(F) . AVERAGE MILEAGE FOR FAILURE GROUP
C
COMMON/HSTRY/ TFB,TFA,NF,TOTFTP,AVGMIL,PR
REAL*4 TFB(20,2),TFA(20,2),TOTFTP(2,4),AVGMIL(4)
INTEGER*4 NF(4),PR(2,2 0)
C
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
C
LOGICAL*! PASS(2,3)
INTEGER*2 NFAIL(3),NEO(3),NEC(3),FTEST,ITEST,TEST,HC,CO,P,FGRP
INTEGER*4 AGE
REAL*4 FR(3),EC(3),EO(3)
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C PASS(FTEST,HC) TRUE IF CAR PASSES FTP HC
C PASS(ITEST,HC) TRUE IF CAR PASSES IDLE HC •
C PASS(FTEST,CO) TRUE IF CAR PASSES FTP CO
C PASS(ITEST,CO) TRUE IF CAR PASSES IDLE CO
C NFAIL(HC) NUMBER OF CARS FAILING IDLE HC
C NFAIL(CO) NUMBER OF CARS FAILING IDLE CO
C .NFAIL(TEST) NUMBER OF CARS FAILING IDLE TEST
C FR(P) FAILURE RATE P:l HC, 2 CO, 3 OVERALL
C EC(P) ERRORS OF COMMISSION
C EO(P) ERRORS OF OMISSION
-------
50
FTEST=1
ITEST=2
HC-1
C0=2
TEST«=3
C
C STEP 1
C INITIALIZE
ISTRIN=ESTSF/10
DO 10 P-1,3
NFAIL(P)=0
NEC(P)=0
NEO(P)=0
FR(P)=0
EC(P)=0
EO(P)=0
10 CONTINUE
C
DO 11 FGRP-1,4
NF(FGRP)=0
AVGMIL(FGRP) =0.0
DO 11 P-1,2
TOTFTP(P,FGRP)=0
11 CONTINUE
C
C
C STEP 2
C FIND OUT WHO PASSED AND WHO FAILED
DO 29 I=1,NCARS
DO 13 J-1,2
DO 13 K-1,3
13 PASS(J,K) = .TRUE.
FGRP=0
DO 25 P-1,2
C
C DID THEY PASS FTP FOR THIS POLLUTANT?
IF(FTP(I,P).LT.STND(P,TECH))GO TO 22
PAS S (-FTEST, P ) =. FALSE.
PASS(FTEST,TEST) = . FALSE.
C
C DID THEY PASS IDLE FOR THIS POLLUTANT?
22 IF(IDLE(I,P).LE.CUTPTS(P,TECH,AGE1ST,ISTRIN))GO TO 25
FGRP=FGRP+P
NFAIL(P)-NFAIL(P)+1
PASS(ITEST,P)=.FALSE.
PASS(ITEST,TEST) = .FALSE.
C
C
25 CONTINUE
C
-------
51
C ADD FTP'S TO THE PROPER GROUP
FGRP=FGRP+1
AVGMIL(FGRP) = AVGMIL(FGRP) + ADJMIL(I)
NF(FGRP)=NF(FGRP)+1
TOTFTP(HC,FGRP)=TOTFTP(HC,FGRP)+FTP(I,HC)
TOTFTP(CO,FGRP)=TOTFTP(CO,FGRP)+FTP(I,CO)
C
C ANY ERRORS OF COMMISSION OR OMISSION?
DO 27 P-1,3
IF(PASS(ITEST,P) .AND. .NOT.PASS(FTEST,P))
& NEO(P)=NEO(P)+1
IF(.NOT.PASS(ITEST,P) .AND. PASS(FTEST,P))
& NEC(P)=NEC(P)+1
27 CONTINUE
C
29 CONTINUE
C
C STEP' 3
C FIND TOTALS AND FAILURE AND ERROR RATES
NFAIL(TEST)=NCARS - NF(l)
C
C Calculate average mileage in each failure group
DO 34 FGRP=1,4
IF (NF(FGRP) .NE. 0) AVGMIL(FGRP)=AVGMIL(FGRP) / NF(FGRP)
34 CONTINUE
DO 39 P-1,3
FR(P)=1.0*NFAIL(P)/NCARS
EC(P)=1.0*NEC(P)/NCARS
EO(P)=1.0*NEO(P)/NCARS .
39 CONTINUE
C
C STEP 4
C WRITE OUT THE FAILURE AND ERROR RATES
IF (.NOT. TABLES) GOTO 99 .
IMTP^MTP(AGE)*100.+.5
WRITE(2,201)AGE,(FR(P),P-1,3),(EO(P),P-1,3),(EC(P),P-1,3),
+ 'IMTP ,(CUTPTS(P,TECH,AGE1ST,ISTRIN),P=1,2)
C
C
201 FORMAT(T21,13, 4X, 3( F7.2,F5.2,F5.2, 5X), 15,F10.0,F5. 1>-
C
99 RETURN
END
-------
52
SUBROUTINE MNTNCE(AGE)
C
C THE 'BKGRND' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS BACKGROUND INFORMATION
C NEEDED TO DEFINE THE I/M PROGRAM
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C TECH TECHNOLOGY NUMBER
C AGE1ST AGE OF VEHICLES AT FIRST INSPECTION
C MTP(BY) MECHANIC TRAINING PERCENT AT BENEFIT YEAR 'BY1
C CUTPTS(BY,P) IDLE CUTPOINTS AT BENEFIT YEAR 'BY'
C FOR POLLUTANT 'P'
C ESTSF ESTIMATED STRINGENCY FACTOR
C TABLES LOGICAL VARIABLE TO SUPRESS OUTPUT OF TABLES
C
COMMON/BKGRHD/TECH.AGEIST.MTP.CUTPTS,ESTSF,TABLES
INTEGER*4 TECH.AGEIST,ESTSF
REAL*4 CUTPTS(2,2,19,5),MTP(20)
LOGICAL TABLES
C
C 'HSTRY' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS EMISSION HISTORY THROUGHOUT PROGRAM
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C TFB(AGE,P) TOTAL FLEET FTP BEFORE INSPECTION
C TFA(AGE.P) TOTAL FLEET FTP AFTER INSPECTION
C F F*l PASSED THE TEST
C =2 FAILED FOR HC ONLY
C =3 FAILED FOR CO ONLY
C =4 FAILED FOR BOTH
C NF(F.) NUMBER IN EACH GROUP
C TOTFTP(P,F) TOTAL FTP IN EACH GROUP
C PR(P,BY) PERCENT REDUCTION ON JANUARY 1ST
C AVGMIL(F) AVERAGE MILEAGE FOR FAILURE GROUP
C
COMMON/HSTRY/ TFB,TFA,NF,TOTFTP,AVGMIL,PR
REAL*4 TFB(20,2),TFA(20,2),TOTFTP(2,4),AVGMIL(4)
INTEGER*4 NF(4),PR(2,20)
C
C THE 'MOB1 COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS THE MOBILE2 ESTIMATES
C OF MILEAGE AND FTP EMISSION LEVELS
C FOR EACH TECHNOLOGY BY AGE OF VEHICLE
C
C THESE VARIBALES ARE ALL INITIALIZED IN A BLOCK DATA STATEMENT
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C MILES(AGE) ESTIMATED MILEAGE AT AGE 'AGE'
C MOBFTPCAGE,P,TECH) ESTIMATED FTP LEVEL AT AGE 'AGE1,
C TECHNOLOGY 'TECH' AND POLLUTANT 'P1
C JMILES(AGE) MILEAGE ON JAN 1 CY, WHERE AGE=CY-MY
C JFTP(AGE,P,TECH) NON I/M FLEET FTP ON JAN 1
C INT(P,TECH) MOBILE2 INTERCEPTS
C SLOPE(P,TECH) MOBILE2 SLOPES FOR EMISSIONS
C STND(P,TECH) FTP STANDARDS
-------
53
COMMON /MOB/ MILES, MOBFTP, JMILES, JFTP, INT, SLOPE, STND
REAL*4 MILES(20), MOBFTP(20,2,2), JMILES(20), JFTP(20,2,2),
1 INT(2,2), SLOPE(2,2), STND(2,2)
C
C This subroutine performs maintenance on failed cars.
C The after maintenance mean ftp emissions for pollutant p (p=l,hc; p=2,co)
C and failure group (hcpass?, copass?) is given for each technology
C by
C ftp(hcpass,copass,p) = d(hcpass,copass,p,0) + d(hcpass,copass,p,1)*
mean mileage(hepass,copass)
C + d(hcpass,copsas,p,4)* idlehc cutpoints + d(hcpass, copass, p, 5) *
idleco cutpoints
C
C Variables are used as follows:
C amftpChcpass, copass, technology, with without mechanic training)
C is the After Maintenance FTP
C
C
INTEGER*2 P.FGRP
INTEGER*4 TFPR(2) ,FFPR(2) ,AGE
REAL*4 PF(2),FFB(2),FFA(2)
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C
C TFPR(P) TOTAL FLEET % REDUCTION IN FTP
C DUE TO MAINTENANCE
C PF(P) PASSED FLEET EMISSION
C FFB(P) FAILED FLEET FTP BEFORE MNTNCE
C FFA(P) FAILED FLEET FTP AFTER MNTNCE
C FFPR(P) FAILED FLEET % REDUCTION IN FTP
C DUE TO MAINTENANCE
C
C THIS ROUTINE MUST SIMULATE MAINTENANCE
C THE 'FFA'(FAILED FLEET AFTER MAINTENANCE) VARIABLE AND
C 'TFA'(TOTAL FLEET AFTER MAINTENANCE) MUST BE COMPUTED
C
C
C STEP 1
C -
C GRP(FGRP) where GRP =
C 1 if pass idle he and co
C 2 if fail idle he
C 3 if fail idle co
C 4 if fail both idle he and co
C D(hcpass?, copass?, pollutant, tech) and
C are parameters determined from statistical analysis
C DPRIME(hcpass?, copass?, pollutant, tech)
C are parameters determined for calculating after
C maintenance values for cars with mechanic training
C AMFTP(hcpass?, copass?, p, with/without mechanic training
C is the after maintenance FTP level.
-------
54
INTEGER GRP(2
REAL AMFTP(2,
REAL
*
REAL
*0.0,
*0.0,
*0.0,
*0.0,
*0.0,
*0.0,
*0.0,
*0.0,
REAL
*0.0,
*0.0,
REAL
*0.0,
*0.0,
REAL
*0.0,
*0.0,
,2)71, 2,
2, 2, 2)
.A(2, 3,2)7 59.396
C(2,2,2,
2.8093 ,
1.0906 ,
0.0
0.0
0.0 ,
.00464 ,
0.0
0.0
DPRIME (2
3.7504 ,
1.4671 ,
0(2,2,2,
-.0624,
.0243 ,
K(2,2,2,
.96569 ,
1.1237 ,
27.814
2,4)7
2.4490
.80638
-.20922
.21934
.012067
0.0
0.0
0.0
,2,2,2)7
3.7504
.32275
2)7
-.0624 ,
.20266 ,
2)7
1.0647
.92395
,
»
»
>
>
j
,
,
>
,
-
,
>
3, 47
,IREG(2)
, -.6596
, -.2716
1.0398
1.0855
.21054
.14956
.004185
.0014085
0.0
0.0
3.7504
1.2418
.0624 ,0
.16849,0
1.1575
1.0792
}
>
»
>
i
>
i
i
i
>
•
.
»
>
>
j
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
o,
o,
0.
0.
INTEGER BY,HCPASS,COPASS,WITH/1/,
8.
4.
o,
o,
o,
o,
o,
o,
o,
0,
o,
o,
2111 , .0615 , 12.
6612 , 0.
41.933 ,
16.275 ,
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
o?o
28.224 ,
37.49
11.358
.33, .33
0.
o,
0,
0, 1.2501
.65245 ,
1.0771 ,
0 , 18.
23.007 ,
14.391 ,
1.3794 ,
1.3610 ,
0.0
0.0
6.6541 ,
-.021437,
, 37.49
, 5.1816
, .33
, 1.7631
.99755 ,
.91849 ,
106 , .4658 ,
517
43
16
0
1.
0.
0.
0.
9.
>
>
>
7
1.
1.
, .3905 /
.096 ,
.379 ,
•0 ,
7465 ,
o
o
o
6023 /
37.49
17.687 /
0489 ,
0095 7
WTHOUT/2/
IF(AGE .GT. AGE1ST) GO TO 2
DO 1 P-1,2
1 TFB(AGE,P)=MOBFTP(AGE,P,TECH)
2 CONTINUE
ISTRIN=ESTSF/10
BY = AGE - AGE1ST + 1
NUMFLD = NF(2) + NF(3) + NF(4)
C
DO 5 P=l,2
PF(P) = 0
FFB(P) = 0
IF (NF(1) .NE. 0) PF(P) = TOTFTP(P,1) / NF(l)
IF(NUMFLD .NE. 0) FFB(P) =
& (TOTFTP(P,2)+TOTFTP(P,3)+TOTFTP(P,4)) / NUMFLD
5 CONTINUE
C Perform maintenance on failed cars.
DO 11 P-1,2
FFA(P) = 0
FFPR(P) = 0
IF( NUMFLD .EQ. 0) GOTO 14
DO 11 COPASS=1,2
DO 11 HCPASS=1,2
IF( HCPASS.EQ.l .AND. COPASS.EQ.l ) GO TO 11
C
AMFTP(HCPASS,COPASS,P,WITH)=0.0
IF(NF(GRP(HCPASS,COPASS)) .EQ. 0) GO TO 11
DO 12 IP-1,2
-------
55
12 IREG(IP)=AMIN1(CUTPTS(IP,TECH,AGE1ST,ISTRIN),
. & A(IP,1,TECH)
& +A(IP,2,TECH)*AVGMIL(GRP(HCPASS,COPASS))
& +A(IP,3,TECH)*CUTPTS.(2,TECH,AGE1ST,ISTRIN))
C
AMFTP(HCPASS)COPASS,PJWTHOUT)= K(HCPASS,COPASS.P,TECH) *
& ( C(HCPASS,COPASS,P,TECH,1)
& +C(HCPASS,COPASS,P,TECH,2)*AVGMIL(GRP(HCPASS,COPASS))
& +C(HCPASS,COPASS.P,TECH,3)*IREG(1)
& +C(HCPASS,COPASS,P,TECH,4)*IREG(2))
C
AMFTP(HCPASS,COPASS,P,WITH)=AMIN1(AMFTP(HCPASS,COPASS,P,WTHOUT),
& DPRIME (HCPASS , COPASS , P,TECH)
& +D(HCPASS,COPASS,P,TECH)*AVGMIL(GRP(HCPASS,COPASS)))
C
C Calculate after maintenace FTP. If there is no mechanic training,
C then we will just take the 'without' value. If there is a training
C program, then calculate after maintenance emissions with & withoug
C mechanic training and apply the mechanic training percentages to
C the difference
AMFTP(HCPASS,COPASS,P,WITH)-AMPTP(HCPASS,COPASS,P.WTHOUT)
& -(AMFTP(HCPASS,COPASS,P,WTHOUT)-AMFTP(HCPASS.COPASS,P,WITH))
& * MTP(BY)
C
AMFTP(HCPASS, COPASS, P, WITH) = AMINK
* (TOTFTP(P,GRP( HCPASS, COPASS)) / NF (GRP (HCPASS , COPASS))),
* AMFTP(HCPASS, COPASS, P, WITH) )
C
11 CONTINUE
C
14 CONTINUE
C
C Calculate Failed Fleet After maintenace emissions, a composite.
C
DO 20 P-1,2
IF(NUMFLD.LE.O) GO TO 15
FFA(P) = (AMFTP(1,2,P,WITH) * NF(GRP(1,2))+
& AMFTP(2,1,P,WITH)' *'NF(GRP(2,1)) +
& AMFTP(2,2,P,WITH) * NF(GRP(2,2))) / NUMFLD
FFPR(P)= ( FFB(P)-FFA(P) ) / FFB(P) *100.0 + .5
15 TFA(AGE,P)=( PF(P)*NF(1) + FFA(P)*NUMFLD )/ (NF(1)+NUMFLD)
TFPR(P)= ( TFB(AGE,P)-TFA(AGE,P) ) / TFB(AGE,P) *100.0 + .5
20 CONTINUE
C
C
C
C LAST STEP
C WRITE OUT INFORMATION IN TABLE 1
IF(.NOT.TABLES) GO TO 99
IMTP=MTP(AGE)*100.+.5
WRI TE(1,101)AGE,MILES(AGE),(MOBFTP(AGE,P,TECH),P=l,2)
& ,(TFB(AGE,P)',P-1,2),(TFA(AGE,P),P-1,2),(TFPR(P),P-1,2)
& ,(PF(P),P=1,2)}(FFB(P),P=1,2),(FFA(P),P=1,2),(FFPR(P),P=1,2)
& ,IMTPJ(CUTPTS(P,TECH,AGE1ST,ISTRIN),P=1,2)
-------
56
C
C
101 FORMAT(I4,F7.1,2(3(F7.2,F6.1),15,14,2X),I6,F8.0,F5.1)
C
99 RETURN
END
-------
57
SUBROUTINE DTRATN(AGE)
C
C THE 'MOB' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS THE MOBILE2 ESTIMATES
C OF MILEAGE AND FTP EMISSION LEVELS
C FOR EACH TECHNOLOGY BY AGE OF VEHICLE
C
C THESE VARIBALES ARE ALL INITIALIZED IN A BLOCK DATA STATEMENT
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
"C MILES (AGE) ESTIMATED MILEAGE AT AGE 'AGE'
C MOBFTP(AGE,P,TECH) ESTIMATED FTP LEVEL AT AGE 'AGE',
C TECHNOLOGY 'TECH' AND POLLUTANT 'P'
C JMILES(AGE) MILEAGE ON JAN 1 CY, WHERE AGE=CY-MY
C JFTP(AGE,P,TECH) NON I/M FLEET FTP ON JAN 1
C INT(P,TECH) MOBILE2 INTERCEPTS
C SLOPE(P,TECH) MOBILE2 SLOPES FOR EMISSIONS
C STND(P.TECH) FTP STANDARDS
C
COMMON /MOB/ MILES, MOBFTP, JMILES, JFTP, INT, SLOPE, STND
REAL*4 MILES(20), MOBFTP(20,2,2), JMILES(20), JFTP(20,2,2),
1 INT(2,2), SLOPE(2,2), STND(2,2)
C
C THE 'BKGRND1 COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS BACKGROUND INFORMATION
C NEEDED TO DEFINE THE I/M PROGRAM
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C TECH TECHNOLOGY NUMBER
C AGE1ST AGE OF VEHICLES AT FIRST INSPECTION
C MTP(BY) MECHANIC TRAINING PERCENT AT BENEFIT YEAR 'BY'
C CUTPTS(BY,P) IDLE CUTPOINTS AT BENEFIT YEAR 'BY'
C FOR POLLUTANT 'P1
C ESTSF ESTIMATED STRINGENCY FACTOR
C TABLES LOGICAL VARIABLE TO SUPRESS OUTPUT OF TABLES
C
COMMON/BKGRND/TECH,AGE1ST, MTP,CUTPTS,ESTSF,TABLES
INTEGER*4 TECH,AGE1ST,ESTSF
REAL*4 CUTPTS(2,2,19,5),MTP(20)
LOGICAL TABLES .
C 'MEANS' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS MEAN MILEAGE,FTPHC ,FTPCO
C WE HAVE TO MAKE OUR SAMPLE AGREE WITH THESE MEANS
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C MODOM MEAN ODOMETER
C MFTP(P) MEAN FTP FOR POLLUTANT 'P'
C
COMMON/MEANS/MODOM,MFTP
REAL*4 MODOM,MFTP(2)
C
C 'HSTRY1 COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS EMISSION HISTORY THROUGHOUT PROGRAM
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C TFB(AGE,P) TOTAL FLEET FTP BEFORE INSPECTION
C TFA(AGE,P) . TOTAL FLEET FTP AFTER INSPECTION
-------
58
C F F-l PASSED THE TEST
C =2 FAILED FOR HC ONLY
C =3 FAILED FOR CO ONLY
C • =4 FAILED FOR BOTH
C NF(F) NUMBER IN EACH GROUP
C TOTFTP(P,F) TOTAL FTP IN EACH GROUP
C PR(P,BY) PERCENT REDUCTION ON JANUARY 1ST
C AVGMIL(F) AVERAGE MILEAGE FOR FAILURE GROUP
C
COMMON/HSTRY/ TFB,TFA,NF,TOTFTP,AVGMIL,PR
REAL*4 TFB(20,2),TFA(20,2),TOTFTP(2,4),AVGMIL(4)
INTEGER*4 NF(4),PR(2,20)
C
C AFTER A YEAR ON THE ROAD, MILAGE IS EXPECTED TO INCREASE BY
C 'MILE'. PROJECTED MILEAGE IS MILES(AGE) + MILE. PLUG THIS
C INTO THE MOBILE 2 EQUATION TO DETERMINE THE PROJECTED
C EMISSIONS
C
INTEGER AGE, P
REAL PROJYC2), PROJX(2)
REAL MILE(2,2)/.74, 4.0, 2.70, 5.72/
DO 5 P-1,2
PROJX(P) = MILES(AGE) + MILE(P,TECH)
PROJY(P) = PROJX(P) * SLOPE(P, TECH) + INT(P, TECH)
5 CONTINUE
C
C USING THE AFTER MAINTENANCE MEAN FTP EMISSIONS AT THE
C PROJECTED MILEAGE, AND THE EMISSIONS AFTER ONE YEAR AS
C PREDICTED BY MOBILE 2 EQUATIONS (CALCULATED ABOVE),
C COMPUTE THE EQUATION OF 'ACTUAL' DETERIORATION AND
C DETERMINE WHAT THE EMISSIONS ARE AT THE NEXT MILEAGE
C FROM THIS NEW EQUATION
C
C RECALL
C Y - Yl = (Y2 - Yl/ X2 - Xl)*( X - XI)
C WHERE
C Y2 = TFA(AGE,P) Yl = PROJY(P)
C X2 = MILES(AGE) XI =. PROJX(P)
C X = MILES(AGE + 1)
C
DO 10 P-1,2
MFTP(P) = (TFA(AGE,P) - PROJY(P)) / (MILES(AGE) - PROJX(P))
1 * (MILES( AGE + 1 ) -PROJX(P)) + PROJY(P)
MFTP(P)=AMIN1(MFTPOP),MOBFTP(AGE+1,P,TECH))
TFB(AGE+1,P)=MFTP(P)
10 CONTINUE .
C
MODOM = MILES( AGE +1)
RETURN
END
-------
59
SUBROUTINE GETPR.
C
C THE 'BKGRND1 COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS BACKGROUND INFORMATION
C NEEDED TO DEFINE THE I/M PROGRAM
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C TECH TECHNOLOGY NUMBER
C AGE1ST AGE OF VEHICLES AT FIRST INSPECTION
C MTP(BY) MECHANIC TRAINING PERCENT AT BENEFIT YEAR 'BY1
C CUTPTS(BY,P) IDLE CUTPOINTS AT BENEFIT YEAR 'BY'
C FOR POLLUTANT 'P'
C ESTSF ESTIMATED STRINGENCY FACTOR
C TABLES LOGICAL VARIABLE TO SUPRESS OUTPUT OF TABLES
C
COMMON/BKGRND/TECH,AGE1ST,MTP,CUTPTS,ESTSF,TABLES
INTEGER*4 TECH,AGE1ST,ESTSF
REAL*4 CUTPTS(2,2,19,5),MTP(20)
LOGICAL TABLES
C
C THE 'MOB1 COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS THE MOBILE2 ESTIMATES
C OF MILEAGE AND FTP EMISSION LEVELS
C FOR EACH TECHNOLOGY BY AGE OF VEHICLE
C
C THESE VARIBALES ARE ALL INITIALIZED IN A BLOCK DATA STATEMENT
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C MILES(AGE) ESTIMATED MILEAGE AT AGE 'AGE'
C MOBFTP(AGE,P,TECH). ESTIMATED FTP LEVEL AT AGE 'AGE',
C TECHNOLOGY 'TECH1 AND POLLUTANT 'P'
C JMILES(AGE) MILEAGE ON JAN 1 CY, WHERE AGE=CY-MY
C JFTP(AGE,P,TECH) NON I/M FLEET FTP ON JAN 1
C INT(P.TECH) MOBILE2 INTERCEPTS
C SLOPE(P,TECH) MOBILE2 SLOPES FOR EMISSIONS
C STND(P,TECH) FTP STANDARDS
C
COMMON /MOB/ MILES, MOBFTP, JMILES, JFTP, INT, SLOPE, STND
REAL*4 MILESC20), MOBFTP(20,2,2), JMILES(20), JFTP(20,2,2),
1 INT(2,2), SLOPE(2,2), STND(2,2)
C
C 'HSTRY' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS EMISSION HISTORY THROUGHOUT PROGRAM
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C TFB(AGE,P) TOTAL FLEET FTP BEFORE INSPECTION
C TFA(AGE,P) TOTAL FLEET FTP AFTER INSPECTION
C F F=l PASSED THE TEST
C =2 FAILED FOR HC ONLY
C =3 FAILED FOR CO ONLY
C =4 FAILED FOR BOTH
C NF(F) NUMBER IN EACH GROUP
C TOTFTP(P,F) TOTAL FTP IN EACH GROUP
C PR(P,BY) PERCENT REDUCTION ON JANUARY 1ST
C AVGMIL(F) AVERAGE MILEAGE FOR FAILURE GROUP
-------
60
COMMON/HSTRY/ TFB,TFA,NF,TOTFTP,AVGMIL,PR
REAL*4 TFB(20,2),TFA(20,2),TOTFTP(2,4),AVGMIL(4)
INTEGER*4 NF(4),PR(2,20)
C 'MEANS' COMMON BLOCK-CONTAINS MEAN MILEAGE,FTPHC .FTPCO
C WE HAVE TO MAKE OUR SAMPLE AGREE WITH THESE MEANS
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C MODOM MEAN ODOMETER
C MFTP(P) MEAN FTP FOR POLLUTANT 'P'
C
COMMON/MEANS/MODOM,MFTP
REAL*4 MODOM,MFTP(2)
C
C THIS SUBROUTINE CALCULATES THE AVERAGE FLEET EMISSIONS '
C ON JAN 1 FOR EACH CALENDER YEAR STARTING MY+1
C
C
C
C THE 'TFL' COMMON BLOCK HOLDS BEFORE AND AFTER
C FLEET MEAN EMISSIONS FROM THE LAST AGE1ST
C TFAL(BY,P) = TFA(BY.P) FROM THE LAST TIME
C TFBL(BY,P) = TFB(BY,P) FROM THE LAST TIME
C THESE VARIABLES ARE ONLY "COMMON" TO THIS SUBROUTINE I
C
COMMON/TFL/TFAL,TFBL
REAL TFAL(20,2),TFBL(20,2)
C
INTEGER EVAL,AGE,P,BY
REAL EMIS(2,20)
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C EMIS(P.BY) I/M EMISSIONS ON JAN 1ST
C
LAST= 20 - AGE1ST
C
C
C STEP 1 . .
C CALCULATE EMISSIONS OF THE I/M FLEET ON JAN1
IF(AGE1ST .GT. 1) GO TO 11
DO 10 P»l,2
EMIS(P.l) " .75*(.375*INT(P,TECH) + .625*MOBFTP(l,P)TECH)
+ + .25*(.875*TFA(1,P) + .125*TFB(2,P))
DO 10 BY=2,19
AGE=BY
EMIS(P.BY) = .75*(.375*TFA(AGE-1,P) + .625*TFB(AGE,P))
+ + .25*(.875*TFA(AGE,P) + .125*TFB(AGE+1,P))
10 CONTINUE
GO TO 13
11 CONTINUE
DO 12 BY=1,LAST
AGE=BY+AGE1ST-1
-------
61
DO 12 P=l,2
. EMIS(P.BY) = .75*(.375*TFAL(AGE-1,P) + .625*TFBL(AGE,P))
+ + .25*(.875*TFA(AGE,P) + .125*TFB(AGE+1,P))
12 CONTINUE
13 CONTINUE
C
C STEP 2
C CALCULATE PERCENT REDUCTIONS ON JAN1
DO 20 P-1,2
DO 20 BY=1,LAST
AGE=-AGE1ST+BY-1
PR(P,BY)=(JFTP(AGE+1,P,TECH)-EMIS(P,BY))
& / JFTP(AGE+1,P,TECH) *100. +.5
TFAL(AGE,P)=TFA(AGE,P)
TFBL(AGE,P)=TFB(AGE,P)
20 CONTINUE
C
C STEP 3
IF (.NOT.TABLES) GO TO 99
C
C WRITE OUT THE RESULTS ON TABLE 3
DO 30 BY-1.LAST
AGE=AGE1ST+BY-1
IMTP=MTP(AGE)*100.+.5
WRITE(3,301)AGE,JMILES(AGE+1),(JFTP(AGE+1,P,TECH),P=1,2)
& (EMIS(P,BY),P-1,2),(PR(P,BY),P-1,2)>IMTP
30 CONTINUE
C
301 FORMAT(T26,I2,T33,F5.1,T44,F5.2,T51,F5.1,T64,F5.2,
& T71,F5.1,T82,I3,T89,I3,T99,I6)
C
99 RETURN
END
-------
62
FUNCTION AVER(N,ARRAY)
C
REAL ARRAY(2678)
INTEGER N
C
SUM=0
DO 5 1=1,N
5 SUM=SUM+ARRAY(I)
C
AVER=SUM/N
RETURN
END
-------
63
BLOCK DATA
COMMON/MOB/MILES,MFTP1,MFTP2, JMILES,JFTP1,JFTP2,INT1,INT2,SLOPE1,SLOPE2,STND
C
REAL MILES(20),MFTP1(20,2),MFTP2(20,2)
REAL JMILES(20),JFTP1(20,2),JFTP2(20,2)
REAL INT1(2),INT2(2),SLOPE1(2),SLOPE2(2),STND(2,2)
C
C STANDARDS ARE NOT REALLY RIGHT
C WE ARE USING STANDARDS FOR 68-74 FOR TECH 1,
C AND IGNORING PRE 68'S
DATA STND/3.05,34.05,1.55,15.057
DATA MILES/
C MILES BY AGE
& 1.440, 2.830, 4.170, 5.460, 6.690, 7.870, 8.990, 10.060,
& 11.080, 12.040, 12.950, 13.810, 14.610, 15.360, 16.060, 16.700,
& 17.290, 17.830, 18.320, 18.750/
DATA JMILES/
C AVERAGE FLEET MILEAGE ON JAN 1
& 0.180, 1.078, 2.481, 3.833, 5.136, 6.381, 7.573, 8.708,
& 9.791, 10.823, 11.798, 12.721, 13.593, 14.408, 15.171, 15.883,
& 16.538, 17.141, 17.693, 18.196 /
DATA MFTP2/
C FTP HC BY AGE
& 1.51, 1.91, 2.30, 2.67, 3.03, 3.37, 3.70, 4.01, 4.30,
& 4.58, 4.85, 5.09, 5.33, 5.54, 5.75, 5.93, 6.10, 6.26,
& 6.40, 6.53,
C FTP CO BY AGE
& 22.15, 26.12, 29.96, 33.65, 37.16, 40.54, 43.74, 46.80, 49.72,
& 52.46, 55.07, 57.53, 59.81,. 61.96, 63.96, 65.79, 67.48, 69.02,
& 70.43, 71.65/
DATA JFTP2/
C AVERAGE FLEET FTP HC ON JAN 1
& 1.14, 1.40, 1.81, 2.20, 2.58, 2.94, 3.29, 3.62, 3.93,
& 4.23, 4.51, 4.78, 5.03, 5.27, 5.49, 5.70, 5.89, 6.06,
& 6.22, 6.37,
C AVERAGE FLEET FTP CO ON. JAN 1
& 18.54, 21.11, 25.13, 28.99, 32.72, 36.28, 39.69, 42.94, 46.03, „
& 48.98, 51.77, 54.41, 56.91, 59.24, 61.42, 63.46, 65.33, 67.05,
& 68.63, 70.07 /
C
DATA MFTP1/
C FTP HC BY AGE
& 3.60, 3.84, , 4.07, 4.29, 4.50, 4.70, 4.89, 5.07, 5.24,
& 5.41, 5.56, 5.71, 5.84, 5.97, 6.09, 6.20, 6.30, 6.39,
& 6.47, 6.55,
C FTP CO BY AGE
& 44.29, 47.69, 50.95, 54.10, 57.10, 59.98, 62.72, 65.33, 67.82,
& 70.16, 72.38, 74.48, 76.43, 78.26, 79.97, 81.53, 82.97, 84.29,
& 85.48, 86.53/
DATA JFTP1/
-------
4.
5.
3.
5.
23,
81,
31,
94,
4
5
56
77
•44,
•94,
.35,
.80,
4.
6.
59.
79.
65,
06,
26,
53,
4.
6.
62.
81.
84,
17,
03,
13,
5.
6.
64.
82.
02,
27,
67,
60,
AVERAGE FLEET FTP HC ON JAN 1
& 3.39, 3.54, 3.78, 4.01,
& 5.20, 5.37, 5.52, 5.67,
& 6.37, 6.45,
AVERAGE FLEET FTP CO ON JAN 1
& 41.22, 43.41, 46.83, 50.13, !
& 67.19, 69.57, 71.82, 73.95, 1
& 83.95, 85.18 /
DATA IHT1/3.36, 40.78/
DATA SLOPE1/.17, 2.44/
DATA INT2/1.09.18.03/
DATA SLOPE2/.29.2.86/
END
BLOCK DATA
COMMON/BKGRND/TECH,AGE1ST,MTP,
*CUTPT1,CUTPT2,CUTPT3,CUTPT4,CUTPT5,ESTSF.TABLES
INTEGER*4 TECH,AGE1ST,ESTSF
REAL*4 CUTPT1(2,2,19),CUTPT2(2,2,19),CUTPT3(2,2,19),
*CUTPT4(2,2,19),CUTPT5(2,2,19),MTP(20)
LOGICAL TABLES
DATA CUTPT1/ 801.6, 8.02, 590.3, 5.90,
* 854.3, 8.54, 708.1, 7.08, 903.7, 9.04, 824.5, 8.24,
* 951.5, 9.51, 935.3, 9.35,1004.0,10.04,1038.8,10.39,
*1054.4,10.54,1139.9,11.40,1104.4,11.04,1232.6,12.33,
*1148.8,11.49,1316.9,13.17,1193.0,11.93,1398.9,13. 99,
*1223.7,12.24,1477.6,14.78,1252.1,12.52,1563.1,15.63,
*1287.8,12.88,1637.0,16.37,1319.3,13.19,1709.9,17.10,
*1351.2,13.51,1772.2,17.72,1377.9,13.78,1830.6,18.31,
*1406.5,14.07,1883.7,18.84,1424.5,14.24,1932.8,19.33,
*1443.3,14.43,1977.8,19.78,1463.0,14.63,2024.0.20.24/
584.5, 5.85, 388.
68,
DATA CUTPT2/
* 624.3, 6.24, 468.4, 4
* 697.2, 6.97, 617.4, 6
7.64, 758.9, 7
* 763.8,
* 824.2, 8.24,
* 882.6, 8.83,
5,
938.
983.
883.4, 8.83,
993.1, 9.93,
9.38,1091.4,10.91,
661.7,
17, 729.6,
59, 793.9,
854.7,
1, 3.88,
6.62, 545.8, 5.46,
7.30, 689.5, 6.89,
7.94, 822.1, 8.22,
8.55, 939.9, 9.40,
912.0, 9.12,1043.8,10.44,
963.6, 9.64,1135.7,11.36,
5, 9.83,1179.4,11.79,1005.7,10.06,1216.4,12.16,
*1025. 7,10.26,1251. 6,12. 52,1044.8,10.4.5,1290. 5,12. 90,
*1059.0,10.59,1318.5,13.18,1071.2,10.71,1343.9,13.44/
DATA
* 513.
* 575.
* 631.
* 679.
* 725.
* 767.
* 804.
* 834.
* 859.
DATA
* 423.
CUTPT37
1,
4,
3,
3,
7,
1,
1,
1,
3,
5.13,
5.75,
6.31,
6.79,
7.26,
7.67,
8.04,
8.34,
8.59,
303.
398.
483.
562.
636.
700.
755.
804.
851.
9,
1,
5,
9,
o,
6,
8,
1,
2,
3.04,
3.98,
4.84,
5.63,
6.36,
7.01,
7.56,
8.04,
8.51,
CUTPT4/
4,
4.23,
227.
2,
1.54,
478.
543.
604.
655.
703.
748.
786.
820.
847.
870.
395.
449.
1,
8,
5,
4,
3,
1,
9,
4,
6,
o,
2,
6,
4.78,
5.44,
6.04,
6.55,
7.03,
7.48,
7.87,
8.20,
8.48,
8.70,
3.95,
4.50,
272.
350.
440.
523.
599.
669.
728.
783.
825.
868.
209.
247.
2,
5,
2,
2,
o,
3,
8,
3,
3,
o,
7,
6,
2.44,
3.50,
4.40,
5.23,
5.99,
6.69,
7.29,
7.83,
8.25,
8.687
1.19,
1.95,
-------
65
* 475.5, 4.75, 266.8, 2.33, 501.3, 5.01, 284.1, 2.68,
* 522.
* 564.
* 602.
* 640.
* 673.
* 699.
* 720.
DATA
* 336.
* 378.
* 417.
* 450.
* 479.
* 507.
* 529.
* 550.
* 567.
END
9,
7,
4,
6,
4,
5,
3,
5.23,
5.65,
6.02,
6.41,
6.73,
7.00,
7.20,
304.
355.
395.
437.
470.
502.
526.
7,
6,
5,
3,
2,
8,
9,
3.
3.
3.
4.
4.
5.
5.
05,
56,
96,
37,
70,
03,
27,
CUTPT5 /
4,
o,
5,
o,
3,
4,
2,
3,
7,
3.36,
3.78,
4.17,
4.50,
4.79,
5.07,
5.29,
5.50,
5.68,
180.
196.
213.
230.
248.
265.
282.
299.
313.
7,
8,
5,
3,
o,
6,
5,
3,
5,
0.
0.
1.
1.
1.
2.
2.
2.
3.
61,
93,
26,
60,
95,
31,
64,
98,
13,
543.6,
584.4,
621.1,
657.1,
686.9,
710.6,
729.5,
316.1,
355.6,
398.1,
434.7,
464.9,
494.0,
518.2,
540.5,
559.3,
575.4,
5.44,
5.84,
6.21,
6.57,
6.87,
7.11,
7.29,
3.16,
3.56,
3.98,
4.35,
4.65,
4.94,
5.18,
5.40,
5.59,
5.75,
331.
379.
419.
454.
489.
515.
537.
174.
188.
206.
221.
240.
255.
274.
290.
306.
321.
2,
4,
1,
3,
2,
4,
4,
9,
1,
2,
3,
7,
9,
7,
9,
4,
5,
3.31,
3.79,
4.19,
4.54,
4.89,
5.15,
5.37/
0.49,
0.76,
1.12,
1.42,
1.81,
2.11,
2.49,
2.81,
3.06,
3.227
-------
bb
SUBROUTINE MATRIX(MT,ISTRIN,ITECH)
C
C
C 'HSTRY' COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS EMISSION HISTORY THROUGHOUT PROGRAM
C
C VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
C TFB(AGE,P) TOTAL FLEET FTP BEFORE INSPECTION
C TFA(AGE.P) TOTAL FLEET FTP AFTER INSPECTION
C F F-l PASSED THE TEST
C =2 FAILED FOR HC ONLY
C =3 FAILED FOR CO ONLY
C =4 FAILED FOR BOTH
C NF(F) NUMBER IN EACH GROUP
C TOTFTP(P,F) TOTAL FTP IN EACH GROUP
C PR(P,BY) PERCENT REDUCTION ON JANUARY 1ST
C AVGMIL(F) ' AVERAGE MILEAGE FOR FAILURE GROUP
C
COMMON/HSTRY/ TFB,TFA,NF,TOTFTP,AVGMIL,PR
REAL*4 TFB(20,2))TFA(20,2),TOTFTP(2>4),AVGMIL(4)
INTEGER*4 NF(4),PR(2,20)
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
THE 'BKGRND'
COMMON BLOCK CONTAINS BACKGROUND INFORMATION
NEEDED TO DEFINE THE I/M PROGRAM
VARIABLE
TECH
AGE1ST
MTP(BY)
CUTPTS(BY.P)
ESTSF
TABLES
DESCRIPTION
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER
AGE OF VEHICLES AT FIRST INSPECTION
MECHANIC TRAINING PERCENT AT BENEFIT YEAR 'BY1
IDLE CUTPOINTS AT BENEFIT YEAR 'BY'
FOR POLLUTANT 'P1
ESTIMATED STRINGENCY FACTOR
LOGICAL VARIABLE TO SUPRESS OUTPUT OF TABLES
COMMON/BKGRND/TECH,AGE1ST,MTP,CUTPTS,ESTSF,TABLES
INTEGER*4 TECH,AGE1ST,ESTSF
REAL*4 CUTPTS(2,2,19,5),MTP(20)
LOGICAL TABLES
C
INTEGER BY,BYLAST,P,EED(19,20,5,2,2)
C
C , THIS SUBROUTINE FORMS THE JANUARY 1 EMISSION REDUCTION
C MATRIX FOR MOBILE2.
C SINCE THE REDUCTIONS FORM A TRIANGULAR MATRIX, HALF OF IT
C IS STORED IN REVERSE ORDER IN THE LOWER HALF OF THE ARRAY
C TO SAVE SPACE.
C
C STEP 1
C STORE THE CURRENT JANUARY REDUCTIONS IN THE REDUCTION
C MATRIX. IF THERE IS MECHANICS TRAINING, (MT=2), STORE
C THE REDUCTIONS IN THE LOWER HALF OF THE ARRAY.
-------
BYLAST=20-AGE1ST
IF(MT.EQ.2) GO TO 30
C
DO 20 P=l,2
DO 20 BY=1,BYLAST
20 RED(BY,AGE1ST,ISTRIN,ITECH,P)=PR(P,BY)
GO TO 40
C
30 DO *35- P-l, 2
DO 35 BY=1,BYLAST
35 RED(20-BY,21-AGE1ST,ISTRIN,ITECH,P)=PR(P,BY)
C
C STEP 2
C IF THE I/M SEQUENCE IS COMPLETE, WRITE OUT THE MATRIX IN THE
C FORM OF 20 DATA BLOCKS FOR USE BY MOBILE2.
C
40 IF(.NOT.((ITECH.EQ.2).AND.(ISTRIN.EQ.5)
& .AND.(MT.EQ.2).AND.(AGE1ST.EQ.19))) GO TO 99
C
WRITE(5,100)
100 FORMATCC INSPECTION/MA INTENANCE PERCENT REDUCTIONS:')
C
ICOUNT=1
C
DO 90 P=l,2
DO 90 ITECH-1,2
DO 90 ISTRIN=1,5
C
IF(ICOUNT.LT.IO) WHITE(5,150) ICOUNT,
& (RED(BY,1,ISTRIN,ITECH,P),BY='1,19)
IF(ICOUNT.GE.IO) WRITE(5,160) ICOUNT,
& (RED(BY,l,ISTRIN,ITECH,P),BY=l,19)
150 FORMAT(6X,'DATA R1,11,'/',19(12,','))
160 FORMAT(6X,'DATA R',12,'/',19(12,','))
ICOUNT=ICOUNT-t-l
C
DO 60 AGE1ST=2,19
60 WRITE(5,200)(RED(BY,AGE1ST,ISTRIN,ITECH,P), BY=1,19)
200 FORMATC5X,'*',8X,19(12,','))
C
WRITE(5,250)(RED(BY,20,ISTRIN,ITECH,P), BY=1,19)
250 FORMAT(5X,'*',8X,18(12,','),I2,'/')
C
90 CONTINUE
C
99 RETURN
END
------- |