71-23
        A
 A Report on.the Emission Performance of the
Army Spo.ns.ored Ford Stratified Charge  Engine
                  April 1971
                John C.  Thomson
    Division of Emission Control Technology
    Mobile Source Pollution Control Program
          Air Pollution Control Office
        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

-------
                                           71-23
 A Report on the Emission Performance of the
Army Sponsored Ford Stratified Charge  Engine
                  April 1971
               John C. Thomson
   Division of Emission Control Technology
   Mobile Source Pollution Control Program
         Air Pollution Control Office
       ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

-------
Vehicle Tested

The vehicle tested during this evaluation was an Army M-151
                                                4
1/4 ton truck.  This was the same vehicle tested in May

1970 with only minor-modifications to the emission control

system.  The M-151 is a general purpose vehicle used through-
             «
out the world by the U. S. Army.  It is equipped with a four

wheel drive system with the front wheel drive portion con-

trolled by the driver.  It is also equipped with a four

speed transmission.  This transmission has a very low first

gear and for normal driving it is not used.  For all of the

emission tests, the transmission was used only in second,

third and fourth.  A modified shift pattern was suggested by

Ford due to the unusual weight to horsepower ratio of this

vehicle.  The Army M-151 is tested with an inertia weight of

3000 pounds calculated from the actual weight of the vehicle.

This vehicle is supplied with a seventy horsepower engine,

and when the friction losses of ^the drive train are taken

into account, can only meet the required accelerations with

difficulty.  In addition, the independent rear suspension

system will not tolerate  the vibration from the four cylinder

engine at low speed,  necessitating more gear changes than

normally required.  As a result, it is difficult to achieve

the best possible emission results from this engine as

installed in the Army vehicle.


The engine used in these tests, a 141 CID four cylinder with

3" bore and 3 7/8" stroke, was developed by the Ford Motor
      e-_
Company through joint U. S. Army - APCO contracts.  This

-------
                           -2-

engine is the "low emission" version of their stratified

charge combustion system and is called the Proco conversion.


The basic stratified charge system used by Ford uses an un-

throttled air intake with fuel injected directly into the

cylinder.  This engine uses a low pressure (600 p.s.i.) mechani-

cal fuel injection pump that is integrated with the ignition

distributor.  The injected fuel mixes with a portion of the

air in the vicinity of the spark plug, where it is ignited.

The combustion system is shown in Figure 1.  The extended tip

spark plug places the spark near the center of the cup combus-

tion chamber.

  j

In"order to provide low emissions from this engine, several

modifications were made in the control systems.  Extensive

dynamometer tests indicated that a very close control over

fuel air ratio was required in order to achieve the emission

values needed to meet 1976 standards.  For this reason an air

throttle system was developed to provide a 17:1 air-fuel

ratio.  In addition exhaust gas recirculation was added to
                                               4
reduce the amount of oxides of nitrogen.  Due to the direct

cylinder injection this exhaust gas recirculation seems to

have no effect on driveability, even at 11% recycle used

during the first three minutes of test.  During the

remainder of the test, about 9-10% recycle was used.


This engine was provided with a thermal reactor.  However,

th'e contribution of the reactor to emission reduction was

minimal according to Ford data.  In addition, an Engelhard

-------
                            -3-



off-the-shelf catalytic reactor was used to reduce the peak



on hydrocarbons arid to encourage a reaction between the CO



and NO in the exhaust.  A lead sterile fuel was used to be



compatible with this reactor.





The air-fuel ratio control was an experimental unit and did



not contain an ambient pressure compensator.  The lack



of pressure compensation made the system dependent on atmos-



pheric pressure and explains some of the variation in test



data.





As this vehicle does not need enrichment during start or



warm-up, there is little change between cold and hot start



data other than that found due to the cold catalyst.  'For



this reason repetitive hot starts were not attempted.





Data on two new standard M-151's is also enclosed for infor-



mation.  A single number has been obtained by averaging 3



tests on each vehicle.





Data from this vehicle was reported in report number 70-4



"Exhaust Emissions from a Stratified Charge Ford Combustion



Process  (FCP) Engine".  In addition, data on another stan-



dard M-151 is in report number 7.0-2 "Emissions from a Standard



M-151 Jeep".





Tests Used



In order to evaluate the emission performance of the vehicles



tested the 1972 LA4-S4 test  cycle was used for all tests.



This is the test cycle that  will be used for certifying all

-------
                            -4-
 new light duty motor vehicles beginning in 1972.   The emis-
 sion standards for various  years  are  shown below,  with the
 1975 standards also shown with  the  emissions data.
              HC      CO     N02
1972
1973
1975
1976
3.4
3.4
.46
.46
39
39
4.7
4.7
—
3
3
*
*The number for 1976 NOx has not been determined although
 present thinking is that it will be  in the range of 0.3 to 0.7,
 Throughout the report,  HC will  be used to abreviate unburned
 hydrocarbons,  CO will be used for carbon monoxide and NOx
 for oxides of  nitrogen.

 For these tests results are reported with HC measured using a
 flame ionization detector, CO and C02 using a non dispersive
 infrared analyzer and oxides of nitrogen using a modified
 Saltzman technique and the chemiluminescent technique.


 Emission Results
 The results of our tests are reported in Tables 1 and 2.  In
 Table 1 a comparison is made between the projected standards,
 the vehicle as tested and the standard M-151.  From this table
                t
 it appears that the vehicle may meet the standards for 1976.
 The emission reduction over the standard vehicle is very
 significant.

-------
                           -5-



Conclusions



The Ford stratified charge system has the potential of meeting



the 1976 emission standards and still maintain the driveability



and fuel economy of the uncontrolled vehicle.

-------
HYBRID COMBUSTION
       SYSTEM
 SPARK PLUG
          CYLINDER HEAD
                  FUEL INJECTOR
                    F I G- • i

-------
                         Table 1

           1972 LA4-S4 Emission Test Comparison

              All Results in Grams Per Mile


                               HC     CO   C02    NOx     NO*
                               FID    IR    IR   Saltz     CI

PROCO (FCP)                   0.3    3.2   439    0.6     0.6

Federal Standards (1976)      0.46   4.7   	    —    .3-.7 (esU

     Standard M-151
(1 of 2 Vehicles, 6 tests)    5.4    122   428    1.8     2.0

-------
           Table 2



1972 LA4 Emission Test Results



 All Results in Grams Per Mile



All Tests on Ford Proco System
Notes
No EGR
EGR Special Shift
EGR Special Shift
EGR Special Shift
EGR Standard Shift
HC
FID
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.6
0.4
CO
IR
0.9
3.2
1.7
1.5
1.7
C02
IR
376
439
412
386
435
NOx
Saltz
1.9
0.6
0.9
1.0
0.5
NO*
CI
1.9
0.6
0.9
1.2
0.7

-------