76-23       ALW
    An Evaluation of the Ball-Matlc Device,
                a PCV Air Bleed
                  June 1976
 Technology Assessment and Evaluation Branch
     Emission Control Technology Division
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
      Environmental Protection Agency

-------
Background

     The Environmental Protection Agency receives  information about many
devices for which emission reduction or fuel economy improvement claims
are made.  In some cases, both claims are made for a single device.  In
most cases, these devices are being recommended or promoted for retrofit
to existing vehicles although some represent advanced systems for meeting
future standards.

     The EPA is interested in evaluating the validity of the claims for
all such devices, because of the obvious benefits  to the Nation of
identifying devices that live up to their claims.   For that reason the
EPA invites proponents of such devices to provide  to the EPA complete
technical data on the device's principle of operation, together with
test data on the device made by independent laboratories.  In those cases
in which review by EPA technical staff suggests that the data submitted
holds promise of confirming the claims made for the device, confirmatory
tests of the device are scheduled at the EPA Emissions Laboratory at
Ann Arbor, Michigan.  The results of all such confirmatory test projects
are set forth in a series of Technology Assessment and Evaluation Reports,
of which this report is one.

     The conclusions drawn from the EPA confirmatory tests are necessarily
of limited applicability.  A complete evaluation of the effectiveness of
an emission control system in achieving its claimed performance improvements
on the many different types of vehicles that are in actual use requires a
much larger sample of test vehicles than is economically feasible in the
confirmatory test projects conducted by-EPA. I/ For promising devices
it is necessary that more extensive test programs  be carried out.

     The conclusions from the EPA confirmatory tests can be considered
to be quantitatively valid only for the specific type of vehicle used in
the EPA confirmatory test program.  Although it is reasonable to extra-
polate the results from the EPA confirmatory, test  to other types of
vehicles in a directional manner, i.e., to suggest that similar results
are likely to be achieved on other types of vehicles, tests of the device
on such other vehicles would be required to reliably quantify results on
other types of vehicles.

     In summary, a device that lives up to its claims in the EPA confirmatory
test must be further tested according to protocols described in footnote I/,
to quantify its beneficial effects on a broad range of vehicles.  A device
which when tested by EPA does not meet the claimed results would not appear
to be a worthwhile candidate for such further testing from the standpoint
of the likelihood of ultimately validating the claims made.  However, a
definitive quantitative evaluation of its effectiveness on a broad range
of vehicle types would equally require further tests in accordance with
footnote ±/.

I/  See Federal Register 38 FR 11334, 3/27/74, for a description of the
    test protocols proposed for definitive evaluations of the effectiveness
    of retrofit devices.

-------
     Data supplied to the EPA by Ball-Matic, Inc., indicated that their
emission control device (called the Ball-Matic) was capable of reducing
exhaust emissions.  Consequently, an EPA confirmatory test program was
arranged to further investigate the effects of the Ball-Matic on exhaust
emissions.

Test Vehicle and Device Description

     The vehicle used in the test program was a 1970 Plymouth Valiant
powered by a 225 cu in. 6 cylinder engine and equipped with an automatic
transmission.  A tabulation of vehicle statistics is given on the vehicle
description sheet at the end of this report.

     The Ball-Matic is essentially an air-bleed device that is installed
in the PCV line (see Figure 1).  Air enters the top of the Ball-Matic,
passes through a ball-and-spring type valve, and enters the PCV line.
Under conditions of low manifold  vacuum, the ball-and-spring valve is
designed to close, preventing air from being drawn through the Ball-
Matic and into the PCV line.
      Figure 1:  Cross Sectional View of the Ball-Matic

Test Program

     Exhaust emission and fuel economy tests were conducted in accordance
with the 1975 Federal Test Procedure ('75 FTP) and the EPA Highway Fuel
Economy Test (HFET).

     Tests were conducted with and without the Ball-Matic installed on
the test vehicle.  For baseline tests, the vehicle was adjusted according
to the manufacturer's tune-up specifications.  In the baseline configura-
tion the vehicle was tested twice in accordance with the '75 FTP and
HFET.
     After completing the baseline tests, the Ball-Matic was installed
in the PCV line as directed in the instructions supplied with the Ball-
Matic. With the Ball-Matic installed, the vehicle was again tested twice
in accordance with the '75 FTP and HFET.

-------
Test Results
     Exhaust emission data, summarized below, illustrate the effects
of the Ball-Matic.

                      1975 Federal Test Procedure
                           Mass emissions in
                            grams per mile
                         (grams per kilometer)
Baseline - avg.
of 2 tests

Ball-Matic - avg.
of 2 tests

% Change
from baseline
                       HC
-4%
          CO
 -8%
            NOx
2.80
(1.74)
2.68
(1.66)
35.1
(21.8)
32.2
(20.0)
5.52
(3.43)
5.75
(3.58)
+4%
   Fuel Economy
(Fuel Consumption)

  19.1 miles/gal
 (12.3 liters/100 km)

  19.0 miles/gal
 (12.4 liters/100 km)

   -1%
  (+11)
Baseline - avg.
of 2 tests

BallTMatic - avg.
of 2 tes.ts

% Change
from baseline
                       Highway Fuel Economy Test
                           Mass emissions in
                            grams per mile
                         (grams per kilometer)
                       HC
          CO
            NOx
1.29
(0.81)
1.24
(0.77)
8.9
(5.5)
7.7
(4.9)
6.10
(3.79)
6.33
(3.94)
-4%
-13%
+4%
                   Fuel Economy

                 (Fuel Consumption)

                  26.4 miles/gal
                  (8.9 liters/100 km)

                  26.3 miles/gal
                  (8.9 liters/100 km)
     The effects of the Ball-Matic on exhaust emissions are the results of
mixture enleanment caused by bleeding air into the PCV line.  This is
e\fMenced by the decreases in HC and CO emissions coupled with increased
is*,Jox emissions during the '75 FTP and HFET.  Fuel economy was not
atfet-ted by the Ball-Matic.

     A further breakdown of '75 FTP and HFET emissions can be found
in Tables I-111.

-------
Conclusions

     1.  The Ball-Matic caused small reductions in emissions of unburned
hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide due to enleanment of the air-fuel ratio.
A small increase in oxide of nitrogen emissions occurred as a result of
the mixture enleanraent.

     2.  The Ball-Matic had no significant effect on fuel economy.

-------
          Table I
1975 Federal Test Procedure
     mass emissions in
      grams per mile
   (grams per kilometer)
Test //
Baseline
77-1982
77-1863
Average
Ball-Matic
77-1587
77-2047
Average
HC

2.86
(1.78)
2.73
(1.70)
2.80
(1.74)
Installed
2.76
(1.71)
2.59
(1.61)
2.68
(1.66)
CO

35.5
(22.1)
34.7
(21.5)
35.1
(21.8)

33.7
(20.9)
30.7
(19.1)
32.2
(20.0)
co2

400.
(248.)
403.
(250.)
402.
(249.)

417.
(259.)
398.
(247.)
408.
(253.)
NOx

5.43
(3.37)
5.60
(3.48)
5.52
(3.43)

5.90
(3.67)
5.60
(3.48)
5.75
(3.58)
miles/gal, (lit

19.1
(12.3)
19.0
(12.3)
19.1
(12.3)

18.5
(12.7)
19.5
(12.0)
19.0
(12.4)

-------
           Table  II
'75 FTP individual bag emissions in
          grams  per mile
Test //
Baseline
77-1982
77-1863
Ball-Matic
77-1587
77-2047
HC

5.81
5.36
Installed
5.13
4.43
Bag 1:
CO

91.1
89.8

88.9
74.1
Gold
393.
397.

414.
334.
Transit
NOx

5.12
5.28

5.72
4.41
Hit
mpg
16.0
16.0

15.6
19.1
HC

2.25
2.15

2.20
2.20
Bag
CO

23.6
21.9

20.9
20.7
2:
CO
412
416

429
427
Stabilized
NOx
'£
5.09
5.26

5.49
5.50
mpe
19.4
19.4

18.9
19.0
HC

1.80
1.86

2.03
1.96
Bag 3
CO

16.5
17.6

16.5
17.0
: Hot
00^
381.
382.

396.
391.
Transit
NOx

6.32
6.47

6.83
6.71
int
mpg
21.5
21.4

20.7
20.9

-------
              7 '
        Table III  .
Highway Fuel Economy Test
    mass emissions in
     grams per mile
  (grams per kilometer)
Test //
Baseline
77-1983
77-1586
Average
Ball-Ma tic
77-2048
77-2049
Average
HC

1.28
(0.80)
1.30
(0.81)
1.29
(0.81)
Installed
1.22
(0.76)
1.26
(0.78)
1.24
(0.77)
CO

8.8
(5.5)
8.9
(5.5)
8.9
(5.5)

7.3
(4.6)
8.1
(5.1)
7.7
(4.9)
co2

315.
(196.)
322.
(200.)
319.
(198.)

322.
(200.)
321.
(199.)
322.
(200.)
NOx

5.86
(3.64)
6.34
(3.94)
6.10
(3.79)

6.38
(3.97)
6.28
(3.90)
. 6.33
(3.94)
miles/gal, (lite:

26.7
(8.8)
26.1
(9.0)
26.4
(8.9)

26.3
(8.9)
26.3
(8.9)
26.3
(8.9)

-------
                       TEST VEHICLE DESCRIPTION

             Chassis model year/make - 1970 Plymouth Valiant
             Emission control system - Engine Modifications
Engine
type	   4 stroke, Otto  cycle,  1-6,  ohv
bore x stroke	   3.40 x 4.12  in./86.4 x 104.7 mm
displacement	   225 cu in./3688 cc
compression ratio  .......   8.4:1
maximum power at rpm	   145 bhp/108  kW  at 4000 rpm
fuel metering  	   one barrel carburetor
fuel requirement 	   regular  leaded

Drive Train

transmission type  	   3 speed  automatic
final drive ratio  	

Chassis

type	   front engine, rear  wheel drive
tire size  ...........   FR 78x14
curb weight  	
inertia weight	   3000 Ibs.
passenger capacity 	   6

Emission Control System

basic type 	   engine modifications
durability accumulated on system   23000 mi./37000 km
    *U4. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979- 651-112/0119

-------