Emission Characterization of an Alcohol/Diesel-Pilot Fueled Compression-Ignition Engine and Its Heavy-Duty Diesel Counterpart

United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control Emission Control Technology Division 2565 Plymouth Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105 EPA-460/3-81-023 August 1981 Air c/EPA Emission Characterization of an Alcohol/Diesel-Pilot Fueled Compression-Ignition Engine and Its Heavy-Duty Diesel Counterpart ------- EPA-460/3-81-023 Emission Characterization of an Alcohol/Diesel-Pilot Fueled Compression-Ignition Engine and Its Heavy-Duty Diesel Counterpart by Terry L. Ullman and Charles T. Hare Southwest Research Institute 6220 Culebra Road San Antonio, Texas 78284 Contract No. 68-03-2884 Task Specification 6 EPA Project Officer: Robert J. Garbe Task Branch Technical Representative: Thomas M. Baines Prepared for ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control Emission Control Technology Division 2565 Plymouth Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105 August 1981 ------- This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to report technical data of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies are available free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors and grantees, and nonprofit organizations - in limited quantities - from the Library Services Office (MD-33), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; or, for a fee, from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161. This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by Southwest Research Institute, 6220 Culebra Road, San Antonio, Texas, in fulfillment of Task Specification 6 of Contract No. 68-03-2884. The contents of this report are reproduced herein as received from Southwest Research Institute. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Environmental Protection Agency. Mention of company or product names is not to be considered as an endorsement by the Environmental Protection Agency. Publication Mo. EPA-460/3-81-023 11 ------- FOREWORD The project on which this report is based was initiated by Task Specification No. 6 of EPA Contract 68-03-2884, received by SwRI on August 1, 1980. The contract was for "Basic Characterization Support for the Emission Control Technology Division." Task Specification No. 6 of that contract was specifically for the "Characterization of Emis- sions from Volvo Heavy-Duty Diesel and Diesel/Alcohol Engines." The work was identified within SwRI as Project No. 11-5830-006. The Project Officer and the Branch Technical Representative for EPA's Technology Assessment Branch during the Task Specification were Mr. Robert J. Garbe and Mr. Thomas M. Baines, respectively. SwRI Pro- ject Director was Mr. Karl J. Springer, and SwRI Project Manager was Mr. Charles T. Hare. The SwRI Task Leader and principal investigator for the Task Specification No. 6 effort was Mr. Terry L. Ullman. Lead technical personnel were Mr. Richard L. Mechler and Mr. Clay D. Suhler. We would like to express our appreciation to Volvo Truck Corporation of Sweden for supplying both the production diesel engine and the proto- type alcohol engine, with diesel pilot injection. We especially appre- ciate the direction and assistance of Mr. Ernst Holmer and Mr. Bert-Inge Bertilsson of Volvo. 111 ------- ABSTRACT The uncertainty of petroleum-based fuel availability has created a need for diversifying into alternative fuels. Volvo Truck Corporation of Sweden has developed a prototype dual-fuel truck-size diesel engine with diesel fuel pilot injection for compression-ignition and subsequent alcohol injection for main combustion. This approach is attractive because it requires no new technology, and because the energy efficiency of the engine is retained essentially intact while consuming low-octane fuels. Exhaust emissions from this prototype dual-fuel engine were characterized with methanol, ethanol, and ethanol with 30 percent water (wt%). In addition, the effects of an oxidation catalyst on methanol and ethanol exhaust were investigated. Emissions were also measured for a heavy-duty diesel engine of similar design. Emission characterization included regulated emissions (HC, CO, and NOX) along with total particulate, unburned alcohols, individual hydro- carbons, aldehydes, phenols, and odor. The particulate matter was charac- terized in terms of particle size distribution, sulfate content, C, H, S, metal content, and soluble organic fraction. The soluble organic frac- tion was further studied by determining its elemental composition (C,H, S,N), boiling point distribution, BaP content, relative make-up of polar compounds, and bioactivity by Ames testing. Exhaust emissions from the various test configurations were charac- terized over the 1979 13-mode Federal Test Procedure (FTP), or shorter versions of this modal test, and over the 1984 Transient FTP- In addi- tion, regulated gaseous and particulate emissions were determined over an experimental bus cycle developed from CAPE-21 bus data. Particulate and NOX emissions were significantly reduced; whereas hydrocarbons and CO increased with the use of the alcohol fuels as com- pared to the diesel engine. Levels of aldehyde emissions were also higher with the alcohol fuel, and significant quantities of unburned alcohol were detected. The catalyst reduced unburned alcohols, HC, and CO emis- sions, but had little effect on total particulate as compared to levels noted for the alcohol test configurations (methanol and ethanol) without catalyst. The catalyst caused substantial conversion of the fuel sulfur (in the pilot injected diesel fuel) to sulfate. Emission levels and trends for the ethanol+water configuration were similar to those for the methanol configuration. IV ------- TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD iii ABSTRACT iv LIST OF FIGURES vii LIST OF TABLES ix I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. SUMMARY 3 III. TEST PLANS AND DESCRIPTION OF ENGINES, FUELS AND PROCEDURES 9 A. Proposed Test Plan 9 B. Description of Test Engines 11 C. Description of Test Fuels 16 D. Test Procedures 20 E. Analytical Procedures 28 1. Gaseous Emissions 28 2. Particulate Emissions 33 3. Soluble Organic 35 IV. RESULTS 39 A. Preliminary Results and General Test Notes 39 B. Gaseous Emissions 46 1. HC, CO, and NOX 47 a. 13-mode FTP 47 b. Transient FTP 51 c. Bus Cycle 53 2. Selected Individual Hydrocarbons 53 3. Unburned Alcohols 59 4. Aldehydes 59 5. Phenols 62 6. Total Hydrocarbons - FID Response 69 7. Odor - TIA 78 C. Particulate Emissions 78 1. Total Particulate 81 2. Smoke 85 3. Sulfate 87 4. Elemental Composition 91 5. Particle Size Distribution 94 6. Soluble Organic Fraction 95 v ------- TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) a. Elemental Composition b. Boiling Point Distribution c. Fractionation by Relative Polarity d. Benzo(a)pyrene e. Ames Response REFERENCES APPENDICES 102 102 103 109 110 116 A. Thirteen-Mode FTP Test B. Transient Test Results C. Transient Test Results D. Transient Test Results Configuration E. Transient Test Results F. Transient Test Results Configuration Results - All Configurations from the Diesel Configuration from the Methanol Configuration from the Methanol-Catalyst from the Ethanol Configuration from the Ethanol-Catalyst VI ------- LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Volvo TD-100C Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck Engine 12 2 Volvo TD-100A Heavy-Duty Dual-Fuel Truck Engine 12 3 Arrangement of the Injection Pumps on the Dual-Fuel Volvo TD-100A 13 4 The Cylinder Head with Two Injectors 13 5 The Fuel Jets in the Combustion Chamber 14 6 Installation of Catalyst with Backpressure Device 15 7 Volvo Exhaust Backpressure Device used with Catalyst 17 8 Graphic Representation of Torque and Speed Commands for the 1984 Transient FTP Cycle based on a Power Map of the Volvo TD-100C Diesel Engine 23 9 Graphic Representation of Torque and Speed Commands for the Bus Cycle based on a Power Map of the Volvo TD-100C Diesel Engine 25 10 Basic Layout of Transient Cycle Heavy-Duty Diesel CVS with Large Double Dilution Sampler for Three 20x20 Inch Filters 26 11 Sample Collection End of Large Single Dilution CVS Tunnel 27 12 Soxhlet Extraction of Particulate for Soluble Organic Fraction 36 13 Catalyst Warm-up Profiles With and Without a Backpressure Device During Transient FTP Operation 45 14 illustration of Diesel Pilot and Alcohol Fuel Injection Schedules Measured During 13-Mode FTP 50 15 Modal Particulate from the Volvo Test Engines 83 16 Modal Sulfate Rates from the Volvo Test Engines 89 17 Particle Size Distribution from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine on Methanol 96 VI1 ------- LIST OF FIGURES (Cont'd) Figure 18 Particle Size Distribution from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Methanol and Catalyst 97 19 Average of Particle Size Distribution from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine on Methanol and Methanol with Catalyst 98 20 Particle Size Distribution from Transient Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine 99 21 HPLC Response to Cold-Start Diesel Transient SOF 104 22 HPLC Response to Hot-Start Diesel Transient SOF 104 23 HPLC Response to Cold-Start Methanol Transient SOF 105 24 HPLC Response to Hot-Start Methanol Transient SOF 105 25 HPLC Response to Cold-Start Methanol-Catalyst Transient SOF 106 26 HPLC Response to Hot-Start Methanol-Catalyst Transient SOF 106 27 HPLC Response to Hot-Start Ethanol-Catalyst Transient SOF 107 Vlll ------- LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Summary of Composite Emission Rates from the Volvo- TD-100C Diesel Engine and the Volvo TD-100A Diesel Pilot/Alcohol Engine 4 2 Planned Emission Measurements for Characterization of Volvo Test Engine 10 3 Specifications for the Volvo Series TD-100 Engine 11 4 Analysis of Amoco 2D Emissions Fuel, EM-465-F 18 5 Dupont Specification and Typical Analysis of Methanol Fuel, EM-469-F 19 6 "Synasol" Solvent Union Carbide Specification and Analysis of Ethanol Fuel, EM-466-F 19 7 Properties of Fuels Used in the Volvo Program 20 8 Listing of 13-Mode and 7-Mode Weighting Factors 21 9 FID Relative Sensitivities 30 10 Preliminary Test Results from Volvo TD-100A Dual- Fuel Engine 41 11 Heavy-Duty Diesel Regulated Emission Limits, 1979-1986 47 12 Gaseous Emission Summary from 13-Mode Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 48 13 Regulated Emissions Summary from Transient FTP Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 52 14 Transient Emissions Summary from Bus Cycle Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 54 15 Percent of Fuel Carbon Calculated from Transient Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine 55 16 Individual Hydrocarbons from Transient Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 56 17 Individual Hydrocarbons from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100C Diesel Engine 57 IX ------- Table LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd) Page 18 Individual Hydrocarbons from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Methanol 57 19 Individual Hydrocarbons from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Methanol and Catalyst 58 20 Individual Hydrocarbons from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Ethanol + Water 58 21 Unburned Alcohol Summary from Transient Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine 60 22 Unburned Alcohol Summary from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine 61 23 Summary of Aldehydes from Transient Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 63 24 Summary of Aldehydes from Bus Cycle Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 64 25 Summary of Aldehydes from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100C Diesel Engine 65 26 Summary of Aldehydes from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Methanol 66 27 Summary of Aldehdyes from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Methanol and Catalyst 67 28 Summary of Aldehydes from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Ethanol + Water 68 29 Summary of Phenols (Filtered) from Transient Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine 70 30 Summary of Phenols (Filtered) from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Diesel Engine 71 31 Summary of Phenols (Filtered) from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Methanol 72 32 Summary of Phenols (Filtered) from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Methanol and Catalyst 73 ------- LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd) Table 33 Summary of Phenols (Unfiltered) from Transient Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine 74 34 Summary of Phenols (Unfiltered) from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Methanol 75 35 Summary of Phenols (Unfiltered) from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Methanol and Catalyst 76 36 Summary/Comparison of "Total" Unregulated Hydrocarbons and Hydrocarbons Measured by Continuous HFID During Transient Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine 77 37 Summary of TIA by DOAS from Transient Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine 79 38 Summary of TIA by DOAS from Modal Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine and the TD-100C Diesel Engine 80 39 Particulate Emission Summary from Modal Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 82 40 Particulate Summary from Transient Operation of the Volvo Test Engine 84 41 Composite Particulate Rates from Modal and Transient Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 85 42 Summary of Smoke Opacity from the Volvo Test Engines 86 43 Sulfate Emissions Summary from Modal Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 88 44 Sulfate Emission Summary from Transient FTP Operation from the Volvo Test Engines 90 45 Composite Sulfate Rates from Modal and Transient Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 91 46 Summary of Elemental Analysis of Total Particulate from Modal Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 92 47 Summary of Elemental Analysis of Total Particulate from Transient Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 93 XI ------- LIST OF TABLES Table Page 48 Summary of Soluble Organic Fraction from Modal Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 100 49 Summary of Soluble Organic Fraction from Transient Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 100 50 Elemental Composition of Soluble Organic Fraction from Transient Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 102 51 Boiling Point Distribution of Soluble.Organic Fraction from Transient Operation of the Volvo Test Engines 103 52 Summary of Transient Composite and 7-Mode Composite Benzo(a)pyrene Emissions from the Volvo Test Engines 109 53 Summary of Ames Response to Transient Composite and Modal Composite SOF from the Volvo Test Engines 112 54 Summary of Ames Response to Individual Modal Samples of SOF from the Volvo Test Engines 113 Xll ------- I. INTRODUCTION Worldwide dependence on petroleum products and associated economic problems have become quite apparent over the last decade. The uncertainty of petroleum-based fuel availability for transportation and production of goods and services has created a need for diversifying into alternate fuels. Alcohols constitute a renewable fuel source which has been available for years, but which has not been used as primary engine fuel because petroleum distillates were less expensive to produce. The Volvo Truck Corporation of Sweden has developed a pilot-injected diesel/alcohol engine which can utilize a broad variety of alternative fuels. The approach represented by this engine is attractive because it requires no new technology, and because the energy efficiency of the engine is retained essentially in- tact. Up to 85 percent of diesel fuel normally used can be replaced by an alternative fuel, depending on the load factor. The prototype dual-fuel engine was made from a standard diesel engine by adding a small diesel injection pump and injectors for pilot injection of diesel fuel, and adjusting the standard diesel injection pump to inject alcohol fuels through the injectors normally used. Pilot injection of diesel fuel allows efficient use of low cetane fuels such as methanol, ethanol or even ethanol mixed with water, d-i The prototype engine has been operated successfully in heavy-duty truck and bus applications, with only minor mechanical problems. It is uncertain what effects the use of alternative fuels will have on mobile source emissions, particularly those which are currently unregulated. Lower emissions of smoke and NOX, already reported in the literature, make alcohol fuels appear to be a viable diesel fuel supplement. The objective of this work was to characterize the emissions behavior of a Volvo truck-size (186 kW at.2200 rpm) turbocharged diesel engine, equipped with diesel fuel pilot injection for ignition and alcohol for main combustion. The emissions of this engine were compared to those from a similar conventional diesel engine. The diesel pilot/alcohol engine emis- sions were characterized during operation with neat methanol, neat ethanol, and ethanol mixed with water. The effects of an oxidation catalyst on meth- anol- and ethanol-fueled engine exhaust were also studied. Ethanol with 30 percent (by weight) water (140 proof) was studied as an alternative fuel, because direct use of ethanol containing substantial amounts of water achieves a higher total energy balance from raw material to useful work output than use of more completely distilled ethanol (near 200 proof). Emission characterization included regulated emissions (HC,CO and Superscript numbers in parentheses designate references at end of report. ------- along with total particulate, unburned alcohols, individual hydro- carbons, aldehydes, phenols, and odor. In addition to these items, the particulate matter was characterized in terms of particle size distribution, sulfate content, C,H,S, and metals content, and soluble organic fraction. The soluble organic fraction was further studied by determining its ele- mental content (C,H,S,N), boiling point distribution, BaP content, rela- tive make-up of polar compounds, and bioactivity by Ames testing. Exhaust emissions from the various test configurations were charac- terized over the 1979 13-mode Federal Test Procedure (FTP), or shorter versions of this modal test, and over the 1984 Transient FTP. In addi- tion, regulated gaseous and particulate emissions were determined over an experimental bus cycle developed from data derived by the Coordinating Research Council CAPE-21 project. In this CRC study, trucks and buses were instrumented and operated in typical use in Los Angeles and New York City. The 13-mode FTP is currently used for regulatory purposes of heavy- duty diesel emissions. The transient FTP will be optional for the 1984 model year, and will be mandatory by 1985. The 1986 proposed transient FTP includes both gaseous and particulate emission measurement/regulation. Thirteen-mode FTP emission measurements were conducted during individual modes of steady-state operation. Transient FTP emission measurements were conducted during both cold-start and hot-start cycles. ------- II. SUMMARY Volvo Truck Corporation of Sweden has developed a prototype dual- fuel Volvo truck-size (186 kW at 2200 rpm) engine equipped with diesel fuel pilot injection for ignition and subsequent alcohol injection for main combustion. Pilot injection of diesel fuel allowed efficient use of low-cetane fuels, while providing good performance over the entire operating range from cold start-up and idle to maximum power at rated speed. The prototype dual-fuel engine consumed only diesel fuel during light load conditions. The low-cetane, main energy fuel was added as output power demand increased. Emissions from the dual-fuel engine were characterized during opera- tion with neat methanol, neat ethanol, and ethanol mixed with water. The effects of an oxidation catalyst on the exhaust of the methanol- and ethanol-fueled engine was also studied. The Volvo TD-100C diesel engine was used for emission comparisons and was of the same basic model as that modified to build the dual-fuel engine (Volvo designation TD-100A). Exhaust emissions from the various test configurations were characterized over the 1979 13-mode Federal Test Procedure (FTP), or shorter versions of this modal test, and over the 1984 Transient FTP. Table 1 summarizes the composite results from six test configurations, which include diesel, methanol, methanol with catalyst, ethanol, ethanol with catalyst, and ethanol with 30 percent water (wt %). Seven-mode com- posite results given in the table are from an abbreviated version of the 13-mode test procedure which does not include some of the intermediate load conditions. Detailed test results may be found in the Results sec- tion of this report (Section IV). With such a broad variety of emission measurements available for six test configurations, the level of effort alloted for sample collection and sample analysis was based on importance of useful information obtained and similarities in measured emission trends. For the Volvo TD-100C diesel engine, both the 13-mode composite and the transient composite gaseous emission rates, as well as fuel consumption and unregulated emissions, all appear to be in ranges typical of direct- injected, turbocharged, truck-sized diesel engines. The NOX emissions reported during this program were not corrected for engine intake air humidity due to uncertainty about validity of the correction when oxygen- containing fuels (such as alcohols) were used. For comparison purposes, NOX values for the diesel configuration given in the table have not been corrected for intake humidity. The emission levels were similar for both transient and steady-state test procedures, but tend to be slightly higher for the transient test procedure. Emission results from the Volvo TD-100C diesel engine serve as reference, since the Volvo TD-100A dual-fuel engine was of the same ------- TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF COMPOSITE EMISSION RATES FROM THE VOLVO-TD-100C DIESEL ENGINE AND THE VOLVO TD-100A DIESEL PILOT/ALCOHOL ENGINE Composite Emission Rates Federal Teat Procedure (FTP) hydrocarbon, HCb g/kw-hr, (g/hp-hr) Carbon Monoxide t CO g/kw-hr, (g/hp-hr) Oxides of Nitrogen, NOXC y/kw-hr, (g/hp-hr) Brake Specific Fuel Consump.d kg fuel/kw-hr, (Ib fuel/hp-hr) Test Cycle Total Individual HC mg/kw-hr Total Unburned Alcohols mg/kw-hr Total Aldehydes8 mg/kw-hr Total Phenols mg/kw-hr Total Particulato g/kw-hr, (g/hp-hr) Sulfate, S04" mg/kw-hr, (% of ParticuJate) Soluble Organic Fraction (SOP) mg/kw-hr, (% of Particulate) BaP ug/kw-hr Ames Response 3 (revertant/plate x!03)/kw-hr Engine Test Configuration Diesel Volvo TD-100C 13-mode 1.05 (0.78) 3.18 (2.37) ll.SBf (8.86) 0.262 (0.431) 7 -mode 100 Does Mot Apply 19 Mot Run 0.69 (0.52) 45 (6.5%) 200 (28%) 0.64 490 Transient 1.15 (0.85) 4.04 (3.01) 11.19 (8.34) 0.288 (0.473) Transient 130 Does Not Apply 14 35 0.70 (0.52) 38 (5.4%) • 220 (32%) 3.7 580 Methanol Volvo TD-100A 13-mode 1.45 (1.08) 9. 55 (7.12) 5.26 (3.92) 0.486 (0.799) 7 -mode 67 2200 88 17 0.30 (0.23) 14 (4.6%) 200 (66%) 0.86 310 Transient 1.95 (1.45) 10.29 (7.67) 7.31 (5.45) 0.531 (0.873) Transient 180 4900 250 24 0.39 (0.30) 16 (4.1%) 280 (73%) 1.7 510 180 Methanol-Catalyst Volvo TD-100A 13-fflodeh 0.16 (0.12) 0.83 (0.62) 6.79 (5.06) 0.482 (0.792) 7 -mode 32 950 140 14 0.51 (0.38) 220 (43%) 70 (14%) 0.08 120 Trans lent* 0.22 (0.16) 3.74 (2.79) 7.89 (5.89) 0.547 (0.900) Transient 66 890 260 48 0.37 (0.27) 98 (27%) 60 (16%) 0.33 710 Ethanol Volvo TD-100A 13 mode 1.65 (1.23) 10.52 (7.84) 6.85 (5.11) 0.395 (0.650) 7-mode Not Run Transient 2.27 (1.69) 12.89 (9.61) 7.38 (5.50) 0.435 (0.715) Transient 600 2300 240 44 0.35 (0.26) 14 (4.0%) 190 (53%) 0.32 790 E thanol -Ca ta lys t « Volvo TD-100A 13 mode 0.60 (0.45) 3.10 (2.31) 7.98 (5.95) 0.400 (0.657) 7-mode Not Run Transient 0.63 (0.47) 4.24 (3.16) 8.62 (6.43) 0.448 (0.737) Transient 220 480 250 33 0.38 (0.28) 89 (23%) 40 (11%) 3.7 2900 Bthanol+30* Mater Volvo TD-100A 13-mode 1.89 (1.41) 9.99 (7.45) 4.46 (3.32) 0.495 (0.814) 7-mode 220 860 91 Not Run 0.33 (0.24) 17 (5.2%) 190 (58%) 1.2 90 Transient Not Run Transient Not Run with backpressure device engaged during idle and motoring. HC value reported here is based on measurements by HFID. FID response is very low for unburned alcohols and other species of unregulated emissions 13-mode NO* correction factor for intake humidity was computed but not .applied Computed on the basis of measured diesel consumption and alcohol consumption combined TBenealdehyde was not included in the total composite value NOX value is reduced to 10.89 gAw-hr (8.12 g/hp-hr) when the intake humidity correction for NOX is applied ^Phenols were determined from only selected modes VWithout backpressure device at idle .Average of data with and without backpressure device Average of brake specific response with and without metabolic activation from all 5 strains Results from first and second group respectively ------- basic design. Methanol The dual-fuel engine was operated on methanol with no engine performance problems during either the steady-state or transient testing. The only adjustments made after initial set-up were adjustments of the alcohol injection pump to compensate for differing volumetric heating values of the alcohol fuels tested. Maximum power with methanol was set to 186 kW (250 hp) at 2200 rpm. The maximum torque obtained after adjust- ment was similar to that obtained from the diesel engine. Gaseous emis- sions of HC and CO were greater for the dual-fuel engine on methanol than for the diesel engine. Total hydrocarbon values given in Table 1 for alcohol fuel configurations are low due to low response of the HC instru- ments to unburned alcohols, aldehydes, and other species. Use of methanol in the dual-fuel engine increased CO by 60 percent over the diesel version. Compared to the diesel engine, NOX emissions were reduced by 56 percent for the 13-mode cycle, and 35 percent for the transient. Brake specific fuel consumption was higher for alcohols due to the greater mass of alco- hol needed to achieve power output comparable to diesel fuel. Emission of total particulate matter dropped by approximately 50 percent when methanol was used. With less diesel fuel consumed due to substitution of methanol, total sulfur entering the engine was reduced, causing sulfate to decrease about 60 percent compared to that from the diesel engine. A significant portion of the total particulate from the methanol configuration (about 70 percent) was soluble using methylene chloride for extraction of the soluble organic fraction (SOP). As with the other configurations tested, the brake specific benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) was significantly higher for the transient composite than for the 7-mode composite. Brake specific BaP from transient operation with methanol was lower than for the diesel engine, but the BaP from the 7-mode composite was higher with the methanol than with the diesel. The average brake specific Ames response from the five strains tested with and without meta- bolic activation was lower for the methanol configuration than for the diesel configuration. Methanol-Catalyst An oxidation catalyst was also tested with the methyl alcohol as an exhaust aftertreatment device to reduce unburned alcohol and other emissions. The catalyst, manufactured by Unikat of Sweden and designated as a Type U210, was added to the engine and was not specifically optimized for the application. As expected, the catalyst reduced HC and CO emissions substantially from the levels noted in the methanol configuration. The indicated total hydrocarbons were very low for both test procedures. The catalyst was very effective in reducing unburned alcohols and some indi- vidual hydrocarbons, but appeared to have little effect on the aldehyde emissions. The CO level was reduced substantially during the 13-mode procedure, due to significant reductions in CO during the maximum torque condition and other heavy load conditions. The CO level from the trans- ------- lent FTP was not reduced as much, because during the transient cycle the engine is not as heavily loaded (time-weighted basis). NOx emissions appear to have increased when the catalyst was used with methanol. Some of the additional NOx emission noted from the transient composite was due to the use of an exhaust backpressure-increasing device, but the back- pressure device was not used during the 13-mode test. The exhaust back- pressure device operated during closed rack conditions. It was used as a fast warm-up aid, and to maintain higher catalyst temperature during idling or motoring conditions, by increasing the exhaust backpressure at these conditions. Transient composite fuel consumption was also increased, because the backpressure device required more diesel fuel to maintain idle speed when engaged. Although the catalyst reduced unburned fuel-like matter and CO, the total particulate level was about the same as for the methanol con- figuration and 50 percent lower than the diesel particulate levels for the transient procedure. Seven-mode composite particulate actually increased by 67 percent over the methanol configuration, but was still 26 percent lower than the diesel 7-mode particulate level. Analysis of particulate composition showed that 7-mode sulfate had been increased by a factor of five over the diesel engine level, and to 15 times that of the methanol configuration. Increases in transient composite sulfate were also noted, but not to the same extent because the catalyst was cooler during the cold- and hot-start transient tests. As with hydrocarbons, the soluble organic fraction of the particulate was substantially reduced by the cata- lyst. The catalyst also reduced the level of BaP compared to the methanol configuration. Although reductions in SOF and BaP occurred with the cata- lyst, the average brake specific Ames response was significantly increased over the transient composite, where the catalyst heat may have been minimal. The Ames response for the 7-mode composite SOF was relatively low with the catalyst. Ethanol Methanol (CH3OH) and ethanol (C^OH) are somewhat similar alco- hols, but ethanol has a higher volumetric heating value. The dual-fuel engine's alcohol fuel injection pump was adjusted to obtain 186 kW maximum power on each alcohol. At these settings, maximum torque was about 5 per- cent lower with ethanol than with methanol due to the volumetric charac- teristics of the injection pump. Based on similar 13-mode emission trends between methanol and ethanol, only transient operation was characterized extensively. With ethanol, HC and CO emissions were slightly higher than for the methanol configuration, but considerably higher than the diesel config- uration. Aldehyde emissions were at about the same level as for methanol Unburned alcohols were lower with ethanol, but individual hydrocarbons were about 3 times those of either the diesel or the methanol configura- tion. The 13-mode composite NOx emission with ethanol was 24 percent higher than for methanol due to substantially higher NOX emissions in the maximum power mode. Brake specific fuel consumption reflects the differ- ------- ences in heating values. The total particulate and sulfate emission rates from transient operation with ethanol were about 10 percent lower than from the methanol configuration. The soluble organic fraction was also somewhat lower, and the brake specific BaP level was about one fifth that of the methanol configuration. Although the BaP level was lower, the brake specific Ames response was about twice that from transient operation in the methanol configuration, and was similar to the level noted for the methanol-catalyst configuration. Ethanol-Catalyst When the catalyst was used with ethanol, HC and CO were reduced, but not to the same extent as for the methanol-catalyst configuration. The catalyst reduced the unburned alcohol and individual hydrocarbon levels substantially, but little effect on total aldehyde emissions was noted. The transient composite NOx emission increased 14 percent over that from the ethanol configuration, when the catalyst and backpressure device were used. Similar to the methanol-catalyst configuration, the fuel consump- tion increased in the ethanol-catalyst configuration due to use of the backpressure device. Total particulate, sulfate, and SOP emissions fol- lowed the same trends as noted for the methanol-catalyst configuration. The brake specific BaP level was almost 10 times that of the methanol- catalyst configuration and was the same level as obtained from the diesel engine. The transient Ames response was the highest of any of the test configurations. Ethanol + Water Emissions with ethanol and 30 percent water (wt %) were very similar to emissions with methanol. If equal volumes of ethanol with 30 percent water (wt %) and methanol were injected into separate combus- tion chambers, the mass of individual carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen atoms in the chamber would be very nearly equivalent. Changing to ethanol with 30 percent water, from methanol, required only minor adjustments of the maximum rack stop (although a slight reduction in maximum torque was noted similar to when ethanol alone was used). This net energy-to-volume simi- larity would allow eaey interchangeability between neat methanol and ethanol by adjusting the ethanol water content to about 30 percent (wt %). Based on 13-mode composite emissions, ethanol+water produced slightly higher HC and CO, but lower NOX emissions than the methanol configuration. Aldehydes were about the same, but unburned ethanol was lower and IHC was higher than with the ethanol configuration. The 13-mode NOX from the ethanol+water configuration was lowest of the six configurations tested. Thirteen-mode composite particulate emissions were very similar to the methanol configuration, and were about 50 percent lower than from the diesel configuration. The sulfate and SOF portions of the total particu- late were essentially the same as for methanol. BaP content was higher than for the methanol configuration, but the 7-mode composite Ames response was lowest of all the configurations tested. ------- Bus Cycle As mentioned earlier, regulated gaseous and particulate emissions were also measured during a transient bus cycle. The bus cycle includes more accelerations and decelerations, and produces 50 percent less work in 30 percent less time than the transient cycle. Emissions from the bus cycle were generally higher than those from the transient composite FTP. Bus cycle emissions followed the same trends as indicated for the transient composite results. Details of the bus cycle emissions are given in the text of the Results section of this report. ------- III. TEST PLAN AND DESCRIPTION OF ENGINES, FUELS, AND PROCEDURES The intent of this program was to characterize regulated gaseous emissions along with particulate and unregulated emissions from a Volvo diesel pilot/alcohol engine run on several alcohol fuels and using an oxidation catalyst as an aftertreatment. In addition, a conventional Volvo diesel engine of similar design was to be characterized for emission comparison. This section describes the proposed test plan which was used as a guide in the program. The diesel pilot/alcohol engine and its diesel counterpart are also described. Some discussion is given to explain the operation and interaction of the diesel pilot/alcohol injection systems. Specifications for the diesel fuel and the alcohols are given along with some of their properties. Procedures are described, including the tests used to generate and acquire the emission samples, and the analytical procedures used to characterize the emission samples. A. Proposed Test Plan A test plan was conceived for operating both the prototype dual- fuel engine and its conventional diesel counterpart. Proposed engine/ control/fuel test configurations planned for testing included the follow- ing: Proposed Test Configurations Engine Diesel/Alcohol Diesel Fuel Methanol + pilot diesel Ethanol + pilot diesel Ethanol(70)/water(30) + pilot diesel Ethanol (70) /water (30) + pilot diesel Ethanol + pilot diesel Methanol + pilot diesel Diesel Aftertreatment None None None Oxidation catalyst Oxidation catalyst Oxidation catalyst None The planned program included emission measurements of both regulated and unregulated emissions for each of the test configurations shown above. Each test configuration was to be tested over both steady-state and tran- sient operation. Table 2 shows the maximum potential extent of emission characterizations. Delays, additions, and modifications occurred due to needs for preliminary data, engine operational changes, and equipment utili- zation. Thus, the level of effort applied to emission characterization under some test configurations was modified. Flexibility in the test plan was utilized to reduce the number of emission measurements required in some configurations, on the basis of useful emission information obtained, and similarities of measured emissions trends. ------- TABLE 2. PLANNED EMISSION MEASUREMENTS FOR CHARACTERIZATION OF VOLVO TEST ENGINE Exhaust Constituent (s) Measured or Characterized Visible Smoke, 2 meters3 Regulated Gaseous Emissions 02 Unburned Alcohols Individual Hydrocarbons Aldehydes Phenols Odor Index, DOAS Particulate Characterization Mass Size Distribution C, H, N, S, & O Metal content Sulfate Characterization of Solubles in Particulate Mass Boiling Range BaP Ames Bioassay HPLC Fractionation0 C, H, N, S, & 0 Test Sequences Transients Cold 1 / , / / / • / / • / / / / / / ' 2 / / / • / / Hot 1 / / / / • / / / / / • / / / / / 2 / / / / • / 13-Mode 1 / / / 2 / / Seven (7) Extended Modes / / /b /b / / /b / / /b /b • b / / V / ' (Full) Power Curve / Bus Transients 1 / / , / • / 2 / / v ^should run Federal Smoke, too, if a part of testing done on appropriate dvno also measured during other six modes of 13-mode, not on extended basis d to Quantitative determinations of aromatic, transitional, and oxygenated fractions 10 ------- All the planned test configurations were characterized to some ex- tent, except ethanol and water with pilot diesel and oxidation catalyst. Emission characterization included regulated emissions (HC,CO and NOX) along with total particulate, unburned alcohols, individual hydrocarbons, aldehydes, phenols, and odor. In addition to these items, the particu- late matter was characterized in terms of particle size distribution, sulfate content, C,H,S, and metals content, and soluble organic fractions. The soluble organic fraction was further characterized by determining its elemental content (C,H,S,N), boiling point distribution, BaP content, relative make-up of polar compounds, and its bioactivity by Ames testing. B. Description of Test Engines The diesel engine, shown in Figure 1, was designated as a Volvo TD- 100C. It is a direct-injected, turbocharged diesel engine which produces 186 kW (250 hp) at 2200 rpm. Figure 2 shows the diesel pilot/alcohol engine, or dual-fuel engine, which was designated as a Volvo TD-100A. The dual-fuel engine is essentially a TD-100 series modified to accept low- cetane fuels by utilizing pilot injection of diesel fuel. Some of the specifications common to both engines are given in Table 3. TABLE 3. SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE VOLVO SERIES TD-100 ENGINE Maximum Output Maximum Torque No. Cylinders Bore Stroke Displacement Compression Ratio Maximum Idle Minimum Idle Turbocharger Boost Firing Sequence Direction of Rotation (250 hp) at 2200 rpm (686 ft Ibs) at 1400 rpm 186 kW 915 N'm 6 120.65 mm (4.750 inches) 140.00 mm (4.112 inches) 9.6 liters (586 in.3) 15:1 2400 - 2500 rpm 475 - 525 rpm 80 - 100 kPa (11.5 - 14.2 psi) 1-5-3-6-2-4 Clockwise (from front) The pilot diesel fuel is injected through an additional fuel system. This pilot diesel fuel system consists of a relatively small distributor- type injection pump (shown on the left side of Figure 3) and single hole injectors, one for each cylinder, oriented at the outer limit of the com- bustion chamber in the piston crown as shown in Figure 4. The main fuel, a low-cetane fuel like methanol, is injected through the "original fuel system," utilizing an inline injection pump and four-hole injectors cen- trally located in the combustion chambers. The "original fuel system" has been modified to provide for the necessary capacity to inject fuel with lower energy per unit volume and still obtain rated power. 11 ------- Figure 1. Volvl TD-100C heavy-duty diesel truck engine Figure 2. Volvo TD-100A heavy-duty dual-fuel truck engine ------- Figure 3. Arrangement of the injection pumps on the dual fuel Volvo TD-100A Figure 4. The cylinder head with two injectors 13 ------- The fuel rate is controlled by an aneroid which senses the inlet manifold pressure, to avoid overfueling at low engine speeds. At low loads, only diesel fuel is injected. A critical point is that at which the alcohol fuel begins to be injected as the load is increased. If the quantity of diesel fuel injected is too low, HC emissions will be high. Too much diesel fuel, however, will result in smoke. The diesel fuel is injected against the air swirl so that the fuel droplets are picked up and carried around the center of the cylinder by the air, forming a rich air/fuel zone and preventing the fuel from hitting the wall of the combus- tion chamber in the piston (Figure 5).(D Figure 5. The fuel jets in the combustion chamber The dual-fuel engine is operated in a manner similar to a conven- tional diesel engine. Cold start-up operation calls for the use of a pre- heater in the intake air system, prior to and after cold-start cranking. Activating the ignition switch energizes the preheater for 50 seconds before the engine is cranked. The preheater is located in the connecting pipe between the turbocharger and the intake manifold. Upon starting, the preheater is re-energized for 50 seconds or until the water tempera- ture reaches 50°C (122°F), whichever occurs first. Solenoid actuators are used on both fuel injection pumps, as shown in Figure 3. During the preheat mode and cranking, the alcohol fuel pump is held to the "OFF" fuel position to prevent quenching of cold-start combustion by the alcohol, Simultaneously, the diesel pump is held to "ON", or to the "high flow" position. After the engine has started and the second phase of preheat has expired, the alcohol fuel pump is switched to the "ON" fuel position and will deliver fuel on rack demand. As soon as the rack (located on the alcohol pump) is moved from the idle position, electrical contact is broken and the diesel pump is switched to "OFF", or to the "low flow" position, in anticipation of demand for alcohol injection. Variations of this "recommended cold-start procedure" were used during emission test work. These variations will be described later in the report. 14 ------- An oxidation catalyst, manufactured by Unikat AB of Sweden, was supplied in order to investigate its effect on emissions, especially unburned fuel and particulate. The catalyst, which weighed 41 kg and contained 15dm3 (915 in.3) of catalytic compound, was designated as a Type U210. The catalyst had been chassis tested for about 50 hours of operation prior to use in this program. The catalyst was installed approx- imately 61 cm (2 ft) downstream of the turbocharger exhaust outlet. After part of the planned testing had been completed, it was decided that a backpressure-increasing device should be used to promote faster catalyst warm-up during the transient cycle test work. Figure 6 shows the instal- lation of the catalyst along with the backpressure device, which is moun- ted on the turbocharger outlet. The pipe connecting the backpressure device to the catalyst was insulated in order to retain as much exhaust heat at the catalyst as possible. Figure 6. Installation of catalyst with backpressure device 15 ------- The backpressure device, illustrated in Figure 7, is typically instal- led as a fast warm-up device for cold start-up, and is also used as an exhaust brake. For test purposes with the catalyst, the device was acti- vated by electrical contact only during closed rack operation, which in- cluded idle conditions during steady-state operation and idle plus "cut throttle" operation during transient testing. When activated, the device restricts exhaust flow, forcing the engine to work against a backpressure and reducing air intake so that combustion temperature and exhaust temper- ature rise. Activation of the device increases the backpressure at idle from virtually atmospheric pressure to 50 kPa (7 psig) and increases the maximum backpressure from 13 kPa (2 psig) to 150 kPa ("21 psig) at "high idle" speed/2) C. Descriptions of Test Fuels Fuels required for the Volvo characterization program included No. 2 diesel fuel, commercial methanol, and commercial (denatured) ethanol. Analyses of the three fuels are given in Tables 4 through 6. The diesel fuel used throughout the test work was a 2D Emissions Test fuel, meeting the specifications found in the Federal Register for such fuels.(3) The methanol was obtained commercially from DuPont in drums, and was at least 99.9 percent methanol. The commercial ethanol used was composed of about 1 part methyl isobutyl ketone, 1.4 parts ethyl acetate, and 1 part unleaded gasoline per 100 parts "alcohol" (predominantly ethanol). A sample of this commercial mixture was checked for miscibility with water at water levels exceeding 35% by volume, with good results. This denatured etha- nol was procured in drums. The dual-fuel engine was also operated on ethanol and 30 percent water (by weight). The ethanol and water blend was mixed in 50 gallon batches, consisting of 106.0 Ibs of water to 249.5 Ibs of ethanol, and mechanically agitated for 15 minutes. This fuel blend will be referred to in this text as "ethanol + water". Table 7 compares some of the properties of the various fuels used in this program. Properties for diesel fuel, methanol, and ethanol are docu- mented in various sources. Properties of "ethanol + water" were calcu- lated on the assumption that the ethanol and water were consumed in the combustion chamber in the same manner as if the fuel blend were introduced as a fuel compound. Of the four fuels listed, diesel fuel has the highest heating value and cetane number, followed by ethanol, then methanol. Simi- larly, diesel fuel has the highest stoichiometric A/F ratio, follow d h ethanol, methanol, and ethanol + water. This order of fuel'properties ^ can also be seen for flash point, heat of vaporization, H/C mole ratio 0/C ratio, and percent of fuel carbon. The properties of methanol and' "ethanol + water" are very similar. The four fuels all have different liquid densities, and this property should be noted in that some of the emissions will be presented in terms of measured fuel usage 16 ------- 1,234 667 18 17 16 15 14 Seal Cooling air discharge Bushings Return spring Piston rod Piston sealing ring Washer Nut 0-ring Lock nut Cylinder head Seal Nipple Piston Cylinder Wear washer Bearing housing Shutter housing cover Shutter Shutter housing Hole for tow speeds Drffusor Exhaust Pressure governor A. From exhaust turbine B. To catalyst C. Throttle position actuated 390 kPa (55 psig) compressed air connection Figure 7. Volvo exhaust backpressure device used with catalyst 17 ------- TABLE 4. ANALYSIS OF AMOCO 2D EMISSIONS FUEL, EM-465-F Cetane Number Cetane Index Gravity, "API D-86 50% pt. °F Density, g/mJl Cloud point, °C (°F) Flash point, °C (°F) Viscosity, cs Gum, mg/100 mi Total solids, mg/mJZ, Metals in fuel, X-ray Carbon, % Hydrogen, % Nitrogen, ppm Sulfur, % Aromatics, % Olefins, % Saturates, % Distillation, D86, °C IBP 5% point 10% point 20% point 40% point 60% point 80% point 90% point 95% point EP 44. 45.8 34.5 498 0.852 58 (136) 2.42 13.6 87.0 12.7 166 0.24 28.4 1.0 70.6 168 (334) 200 (392) 213 (416) 229 (444) 250 (482) 270 (518) 296 (564) 313 (596) 329 (624) 342 (648) 18 ------- TABLE 5. DUPONT SPECIFICATION AND TYPICAL ANALYSIS OF METHANOL FUEL, EM-469-F Comments Methanol, wt % Specific gravity (25/25C) Distillation range (1 atm) First drop to dry, C Nonvolatiles, wt % Acetone, wt % Acidity (as acetic acid), wt % Alkalinity (as ammonia), wt % Carbonizable substances, platinum cobalt scale (APHA) Permaganate test, minutes Color, platinum cobalt scale (APHA) Hydrocarbon test, clouding when diluted with 2 parts water Specification min. 99.85 max. 1.0 max. 0.0005 max. 0.002 max. 0.0020 max. 0.00030 max. 35 min. 50 max. 5 none Typical Analysis 99.98 0.78891 0.5 <0.0001 <0.0014 0.0013 <0.00005 10 56 0 Passes TABLE 6. "SYNASOL" SOLVENT UNION CARBIDE SPECIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF ETHANOL FUEL, EM-466-F Comments Specific gravity Distillation, 760 mm Acidity Ethyl Acetate Water Color Odor Suspended Matter Specification 0.789-0.793 @ 20/20°C IBP 74.5 °C minimum DP 79.5 °C maximum 0.005% wt. max., calc. as acetic acid 1.15 to 1.45% wt. 0.50% wt. max. 15 platinum-cobalt, max. Mild and non-residual Substantially free Analysis 0.7911 76.4 78.7 0.002 20/20°C °C °C WTP 1.45 WTP 0.08 WTP 5 PTC "APPROVED" "APPROVED" 19 ------- TABLE 7. PROPERTIES OF FUELS USED IN THE VOLVO PROGRAM Property Liquid Density Boiling Point(s) Flash Point Lower Heating Value Heat of Vaporization Stiochiometric A/F Ratio Cetane Number Lower Heat Values H/C Mole Ratio O/C Mole Ratio Percent Fuel Carbon Units kg/m3 °C °C MJAg KJ/kcj 1 MJ/dm3 Diesel 852 168 - 342 58 42.8 300 14.6 45 36.5 1.66-1.85 0 86-88 Methanol 796 65 11 19.7 1100 6.4 3 15.7 4.00 1.00 37 Ethanol 794 78 21 27.0 840 9.0 8 21.4 3.00 0.50 52 Ethanol + Watera 868b N.D.C N.D. 18.9 1260 6.3 N.D. 16.2 4.10 1.05 37 a"Ethanol + water" represents neat ethanol mixed with 30 percent by weight water Properties calculated on the assumption that the ethanol + water mixture is consumed as a compound calculated from API gravity not determined D. Test Procedures Emissions from the Volvo TD-100C diesel engine and the Volvo TD-100A dual-fuel engine were measured during both steady-state and transient engine exercises. Steady-state operation and measurement techniques were based on the 1979 13-mode Federal Test Procedure (FTP). Transient operation and measurement techniques were based on the 1984 FTP and 1986 Proposed FTP, which includes particulate. The 13-mode test procedure is an engine exercise which consists of 13 individual modes of steady-state operation. Starting with a fully warmed engine, the first mode is an idle condition. This idle is then followed by 2, 25, 50, 75, and 100 percent load at intermediate speed followed by another idle mode, then to rated speed - 100, 75, 50, 25, and 2 percent of full load, followed by a final idle mode. Intake air, fuel, and power output are monitored along with other data to be used in calcu- lating modal emission rates. A 13-mode composite emission rate is calcu- lated on the basis of modal weighting factors as specified in the Federal Register. (4) Most unregulated emissions were measured over 7 modes of steady-state operation instead of 13 modes. This 7-mode procedure is a variation of the 13-mode procedure and consists of only the 2, 50, and 100 percent loads at intermediate and rated speeds, plus one idle condition. On the basis of the 13-mode FTP weighting factors, 7-mode composite emissions were computed using weighted factors. Table 8 shows the respec- 20 ------- tive weighting factors used. As the number of modes decreases, each modal point represents more time in mode and a wider range of power; thus the weighting for each of the 7 modes must be increased compared to its factor for 13-mode use. For both the 13-mode and the 7-mode procedures, the idle condition accounts for 20 percent of the composite value (equivalent to 20 percent of operating time). TABLE 8. LISTING OF 13-MODE AND 7-MODE WEIGHTING FACTORS Mode 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 13-Mode Enqine Speed/Load, % Idle Intermediate/2 Intermediate/25 Intermediate/50 Intermediate/75 Intermediate/100 Idle Rated/100 Rated/75 Rated/50 Rated/25 Rated/ 2 Idle Composite 7 -Mode Wt. Factor 0.067 0.080 0.080 0.080 0.080 0.080 0.067 0.080 0.080 0.080 0.080 0.080 0.067 1.000 Mode 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Composite Wt. Factor 0.12 0.16 0.12 0.20 0.12 0.16 0.12 1.00 Transient engine operation was performed in accordance with the 1984 Transient FTP for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines.' ' The procedure specifies a transient engine exercise of variable speed and load, depending on the power output capabilities of the test engine. The cycle requires rela- tively rapid dynamometer control, capable of loading the engine one moment and motoring it the next. The system used in this program consisted of a GE 200 hp motoring/250 hp absorbing dynamometer coupled to a Midwest 500 hp eddy current (absorbing) dynamometer, with a suitable control sys- tem fabricated in-house. The 1984 Transient cycle is described in the Federal Register by means of percent maximum torque and percent rated speed for each one-second in- terval, for a test cycle of 1199 seconds duration. The 20-minute transient cycle, developed from heavy-duty truck data, is composed for four five- minute segments. The four segments are described below: Transient Cycle Segment Time, sec. New York Non-Freeway (NYNF) 297. Los Angeles Non-Freeway (LANF) 300. Los Angeles Freeway (LAP) 305. New York Non-Freeway (NYNF) 297- In order to generate the transient cycle for the Volvo engine, the engine's full power curve was obtained from 400 rpm to maximum no load engine speed. 21 ------- Fre e suiting cycle work was 11.68 kW hr (15.66 hp ™**** on a £ak torque of 880 N-m (650 ft Ibs) and a rated speed <™°^ The relatively large negative torque commands shown in the figure are to insure that the "throttle," or rack control, goes closed for motoring operation. A Transient FTP Test consists of a cold-start transient cycle and a hot-start transient cycle. The same engine control or command cycle is used in both cases. For the cold-start, the diesel engine was operated over a "prep" cycle, then allowed to stand overnight in an ambient soak temperature of 20 to 30°C (68 to 86°F). The cold-start transient cycle begins when the engine is cranked for cold start-up. Upon completion of the cold-start transient cycle, the engine is shut down and allowed to stand for 20 minutes. After this hot soak period, the hot-start cycle begins with engine cranking. All engines react somewhat differently to the transient cycle com- mands due to both cycle and engine characteristics. In order to judge how well the engine follows the transient cycle command, engine responses are compared to engine commands and several statistics are computed. According to the Federal Register, the following regression line tolerances should be met: REGRESSION LINE TOLERANCES Standard Error of Estimate (SE) of Y on X Slop of ttt* Regression Lint, H Coefficient of Determination, R Y Intercept of the Regression Line, B _!/ Minimum Speed 100 rp» 0.970 1.030 0.970O_1/ 150 rpei Torque 13» of Maxinvn Engine Torque 0.83-1.03 Hot 0.77-1.03 Cold 0.8800 (Hot)J/ 0.8500 (Cold)_l/ ±15 ft lb» Brake Horsepower Bt of MaxlBun Brake Horsepower 0.89-1.03 (Hot) 0.87-1.03 (Cold) 0.9100 _!/ 15.0 of brake horsepower In addition to these statistical parameters, the actual cycle work pro- duced should not be more than 5 percent above, or 15 percent below, the work requested by the command cycle. If the statistical criteria are not met, then adjustments to throttle servo linkage, torque span points, speed span points, and gain to and from error feedback circuits can be made in order to modify both the engine out- put and the dynamometer loading/motoring characteristics. After completion of the cold-start and the hot-start transient cycles, transient composite 22 ------- Cr NJ LO 2500 r NYNF 297 sec. LAP 305 sec. LANF 300 sec, NYNF 297 sec. Jiu J_ 1200 1100 1000 900 300 700 600 500 TIME, SECONDS 400 300 200 100 Figure 8. Graphic representation of torque and speed commands for the 1984 Transient FTP cycle based on a power map of the Volvo TD100C diesel engine 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 -100 -200 -300 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 ------- emission results are computed by the following: Brake Specific _ 1/7 (Mass Emission, Cold) + 6/7 (Mass Emission, Hot) Emissions ~ 1/7 (Cycle Work, Cold) + 6/7 (Cycle Work, Hot) Similar to the 1984 Transient FTP cycle which was developed from heavy-duty truck data, a bus cycle was developed from CAPE-21 bus data. The bus cycle was first introduced as a research test cycle during the heavy-duty diesel baseline test work. (15^ It was used in this program to indicate emission trends from the Volvo test engines in city bus applications. The 833 second transient bus cycle is composed of three segments, as shown below. A listing of the speed and torque cycle sched- ule is given in Reference 15. A graphic presentation of the speed and torque commands which constitute the bus cycle used for the Volvo TD-100C Bus Cycle Segment Time, seconds. New York Combined 273 Los Angeles Combined 287 New York Combined 273 diesel engine is given in Figure 9. The resulting cycle work was 5.57 kW hr (7.47 hp hr) based on a peak torque of 880 N«m (650 ft Ibs) and a rated speed of 2200 rpm. The bus cycle was run only as a hot-start test cycle, and was always preceded by a 20-minute soak. The engine was also operated over the 1979 Smoke FTP exercise.4^ It essentially consists of a 5-minute idle followed by full throttle ac- celeration to rated speed, and finally, a full throttle lug-down from rated speed to intermediate speed. This transient smoke test cycle was run only for the measurement of smoke emissions. During steady-state or modal engine exercises, regulated and some un- regulated gaseous emissions can be sampled from the raw exhaust stream since a representative and proportional sample can be obtained. Obtain- ing proportional samples during transient engine operation requires the use of a constant volume sampler (CVS). Figure 10 shows the basic layout of the double-dilution CVS used to comply with the 1984 Transient FTP and the 1986 Proposed Transient FTP<5>, which includes the measurement of particulate. All transient cycle test work during this program was conducted with a main dilution tunnel flow of 2000 SCFM, which provided approximately a 4:1 cycle dilution ratio of the total exhaust introduced Regulated and unregulated gaseous emission samples were taken from the main dilution flow. Particulate-related samples required that a portion in^ S exhaust from ^e ™in tunnel be diluted further, to an over- all dilution of 12:1. The small double-dilution tunnel was operated at approximately 4 SCFM total flow in order to collect particulate on two 90 mm TA60A20 Pallflex filters in series. Weight gains from these Zo filters were used to determine the total particulate mass emission from : dOUf e-dilUti°n tu-e* -s operated at approximately in order to accumulate large particulate samples on 24 ------- o o o ------- Muffler* Filter Box (290 SCTM) Double Dilution Tunnel (1.76 I.D.) 379 SCPM Double Dilution- Tunnel (16 inch Di«.) 0 leal* 100 inch»i -Transfer Tube (129 SCTH) filter Holder (20 x 20) riou Bequletlng Section (3 at 12SECTH) H««t Puap (3758CTM) 'T~h Muffler Q Figure 10. Basic layout of transient cycle heavy-duty diesel CVS with large double dilution sampler for three 20x20 inch filters 26 ------- three 20x20 inch filters. It also provided auxiliary particulate sampling stations for smaller 47 mm filters. This same CVS system was used to col- lect particulate samples from steady-state operation of the Volvo diesel engine, by altering the main dilution tunnel flow to accommodate the total exhaust from the engine without exceeding 52°C (125°F) at the particu- late filter face. Particulate samples and other emission measurements from steady-state operation of the Volvo dual-fuel engine were obtained from a steady-state test facility which utilizes a single-dilution CVS having a capacity rang- ing from 1,000 to 12,000 SCFM. Figure 11 shows the sample collection end of this 1.16 m (46 in.) diameter, 17.4 m (57 ft) long stainless steel single-dilution CVS tunnel. The steady-state facility also incorporates an exhaust diverter valve which allows the engine operating condition to be stabilized before the exhaust is diverted to the CVS for particulate collection. Power absorption is provided by a Midwest 500 hp eddy current dynamometer and its associated controller. The controller was needed in order to maintain steady-state operation, especially at the 1400 rpm maxi- mum torque condition since the dual-fuel engine's torque curve fell off sharply below 1500 rpm. Figure 11. Sample collection end of large single dilution CVS tunnel 27 ------- E, Analytical Procedures The analytical systems used for each category of emission measure- ments are described in this section. The section is divided into two groups, the first dealing with gaseous emissions characterization and the second with total particulate emissions and the constituents of the total parti culate. Gaseous emission included HC, CO, CO2, NOx, and some un- regulated pollutants. Unregulated gaseous emissions include individual hydrocarbons, aldehydes, phenols, unbumed fuel, and odor. Particulate emissions included determination of the total particulate rate, and its content of sulfate, metals, carbon and hydrogen. The size distribution of the particles was measured, as well as the fraction soluble in methy- lene chloride. This soluble fraction was characterized for carbon, hydro- gen, sulfur, nitrogen, BaP content, boiling point distribution, fraction- ation (by relative molecular polarity) , and bioactivity by the Ames test. 1. Gaseous Emissions Regulated gaseous emissions of HC, CO, and NOX were measured ac- cording to the 1979 13-mode FTP and the 1984 transient FTP- The regulated emissions along with CO2 were determined from raw exhaust samples taken during the 13-mode steady-state procedure. These same four constituents were determined in dilute exhaust samples taken during the transient pro~ cedure. The transient procedure requires that CO and C02 be determined from bag samples of dilute exhaust, and, provides that NOx niay be deter- mined from the same dilute sample bags or from integration of continuous NOX concentration monitoring. For this program, the continuous NOX, measured by chemi luminescence, was used to determine the NOxemissions . The same instrument was used for both the 13-mode raw exhaust measurement and for the transient continuous dilute sample taken from the main dilu- tion tunnel. Although the transient procedure only specifies one dilute exhaust Tedlar sample bag, the system used in this program uses one sample bag for each segment. This allows a better understanding of individual cycle segment contributions to the total emissions measured. Another CL instrument was used to measure NOx from the dilute bag sample, but this reading has typically been 10 percent lower than indicated by continuous measurement technig^ies. ^^' Carbon monoxide and CO2 were measured during both engine test pro- cedures using non-dispersive infrared detector (NDIR) instruments. The CO measurement is of interest in both procedures because it is a regulated pollutant. The CO2 measurement is of interest because it is used in the calculation of fuel usage by carbon balance along with the CO and the HC emissions. Both CO and CO2 are determined from the raw exhaust during the 13-mode procedure and are determined from dilute exhaust bag samples during the transient test procedures. 28 ------- Hydrocarbons were measured during both test procedures using the specified heated sample train and heated flame ionization detector (HFID), a Beckman 402 HFID. As with other gaseous emissions, HC measurements during steady-state procedures were taken from raw exhaust, and measure- ments during transient procedures were taken from the dilute exhaust. During transient test procedures, a continuous dilute sample taken from the main dilution tunnel was integrated for total hydrocarbons. The heated HC probe and overflow calibration technique used in total HC measurements are unique to the heavy-duty transient FTP. Details as to the measurement of the regulated gaseous emissions may be found in Reference 4 for the 13-mode procedure, and in Reference 3 for the trans- ient procedure. The intent of both procedures is to determine the "total" HC emis- sions from the test engines. It is generally assumed that the exhaust hydro- carbons emitted from a diesel engine are of the same general composition as the parent fuel. The total is based on the indication from HFID instru- ments. It has been shown in References 6 and 7 that FID response to vari- ous species of alcohols, individual hydrocarbons, aldehydes, and phenols often differs from response to fuel-like constituents, and is affected by oxygen synergism and physical construction of the FID. Some reported FID response factors given in Reference 6 are repeated in Table 9. Both Federal Test Procedures mentioned above also specify methods of emissions computations. In making accommodations for this project, modi- fication to these emissions computations had to be incorporated in order to account for the dual-fuel combustion. The 13-mode data reduction calcu- lations involve intake airflow rate and both measured and computed fuel rate, with measured emissions, to compute composite emissions rates. Equa- tions for calculation of fuel/air ratio are based on the combustion of diesel fuel with a H/C mole ratio of approximately 1.8. The H/C ratio of methanol is 4.0 and that of ethanol is 3.0. The other major difference was that the alcohol fuels contain oxygen. Complicating the 13-mode emis- sion calculations was the fact that the engine consumes varying relative amounts of diesel fuel and alcohol fuel, depending on load condition. The 13-mode computer program was modified to take these variations into account. In addition to f/a ratios calculated from the carbon balance of emission measurements and from measured fuel and air quantities, the f/a ratio was calculated on a "diesel fuel equivalent" basis. The "diesel fuel equivalent" was based on converting the measured portion of alcohol into a mass of diesel fuel on the basis of heating value. The diesel equi- valent of the alcohol fuel was added to the measured diesel fuel, and this "total diesel fuel" was used to calculate the diesel equivalent f/a ratio. This diesel f/a equivalent ratio was used to compute the NOX correction factor. The NOX correction factor was computed and is given in the printout, but was not applied to the NOX emissions measured be- cause it is uncertain that the computed correction factor has any valid- ity for engines not operated solely on diesel fuel. For this program, 29 ------- TABLE 9. FID RELATIVE SENSITIVITIES (6) RELATIVE COMPOUND SENSmvrry Normal Parafflni Methane 0.97 Ethane 0.97 Propane 0. 98 Butane 1.09 Pentane 1.04 Hexane 1. 03 Heptane 1. 00 Octane 0. 97 Nonane 0. 98 Aldehydes Butyraldehyde 0. 62 Heptanolc aldehyde 0. 77 COMPOS 3»^Y Aromatlcs (cont.) 1,2.4-Trl- methylbenzene 0. 97 1,3.5-TH- methylbenzene 0. 98 Isopropylbenzene 0. 97 n-Propylbenzene 1.01 lM2-Iaopropyl- benzene 0. 99 lM3-Iaopropyl- benzene 1.01 !M4-lBopropyl- benzene 0. 99 sec. -Butylbenzene 1. 00 tert. -Butylbenzene 1.02 n-Butylbenzene o. 98 Unaaturates Acetylene 1.07 Ethylene 1.02 Hexene-1 0. 99 Octene-1 1.03 Decene-1 1.01 Alcohols Methanol 0. 23 Ethanol 0. 46 n-Propanol 0. 60 laopropanol 0. 53 n-Butanol 0. 66 Isobutanol 0. 68 aec.-Butanol 0.63 tert. -Butanol 0. 74 Amyl alcohol 0.71 Methyllsobutyl- carbinol o. 74 MethyUmyl alcohol 0. 65 Hexyl alcohol 0. 74 Octyl alcohol 0. 85 Decyl alcohol 0. 84 era. »SS£ Aldehydes (coat.) Octaldehyde Caprlc aldehyde Aromatlcs Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene para-Xylene meta-Xylene ortho-Xylene lM2-Ethylbenzene IMS-Ethylbenzene lM4-Ethylbenzene 1,2.3-Trl- methylbenzene 0.78 0.80 1.12 1.07 1.03 1.00 1.04 1.02 1.02 1.01 1.00 0.98 ~> ,JESJ£ Aclda Formic Acetic Propionlc Butyric Hexanolc Heptanolc Octanolc Eaters Methylacetate Ethylacetate Isopropylacetate aec. -Butylacetate Isobutylacetate n-Butylacetate leoamylacetate Methylamylacetate Ethyl -(2)- ethylhexanoate Hexylcaproate Celiosolve acetate Nitrogen Compound AcetonitrUe Trlmethylareine tert. -Butylamlne Diethylamlne Aniline dl-n-Butylamine Ketonea Acetone Methylethylketone Methyllsobutyl- ketone Ethylbutylketone Dllsobutylketone Ethylamylketone Cyclohexanone 0.01 0.24 0.40 0.48 0.63 0.61 0.65 0.20 0.38 0.49 0.52 0.54 0.55 0.62 0.63 0.72 0.78 0.50 0.39 0.46 0.54 0.61 0.75 0.75 0.49 0.61 0.71 0.71 0.72 0.80 0.72 30 ------- the diesel H/C ratio was entered as 1.85, corresponding to a hydrocarbon molecular weight (per carbon atom) of 13.8759. Additional 13-mode infor- mation regarding dual-fuel usage, the various f/a ratios, and exhaust oxy- gen was printed out for each of the 13 modes and will be discussed in the Results, Section VI. As with the 13-mode procedure, certain program modifications were necessary in order to compute the 1984 Transient FTP and bus cycle emis- sions. The modifications concerned the computations of fuel consumption on the basis of carbon balance via HC, CO, and CO2 emissions. Additional calculations were included to compute the percent of fuel carbon for each segment of the transient test, based on actual measured diesel and alcohol fuel usage during that segment. The computed percent fuel carbon was then used in calculating the fuel consumption reported as brake specific fuel consumption (BFSC). This fuel calculation used a fuel carbon fraction of 0.866 as a multiplier for the HC mass emission. HC mass emission was computed using an exhaust HC density of 0.5768 kg/in3 (16.33 g/ft3) ^3^ on the basis of a H/C ratio of 1.85. For comparison, the percent of fuel carbon for diesel, methanol, and ethanol are 87, 38, and 26, respectively. As with the 13-mode procedure, no NOx correction for humidity was applied to the transient results. In the case of transient test operation, the engine intake humidity and temperature were controlled to 60 - 90 grains/ Ib of dry air and 68 - 86°F, so a correction factor of 1 was actually used. Some selected individual hydrocarbons (IHC) were determined from dilute exhaust samples using a CVS. Samples were taken over seven indi- vidual modes of steady-state operation and over the cold-start and hot- start transient cycles. A portion of the dilute exhaust sample collected in a Tedlar bag was injected into a four-column gas chromatograph using a single flame ionization detector and dual sampling valves. The timed sequence selection valves allowed the baseline separation of air, methane, ethane, ethylene, acetylene, propane, propylene, benzene, and toluene.(8) Aldehydes and ketones were determined by using the 2,4-dinitrophenyl- hydrazine (DNPH) method.(8) Raw exhaust samples were taken during steady- state operation; whereas dilute samples were taken from the main CVS dilu- tion tunnel during transient testing. In both cases a heated sample line and filter were maintained at 190°C (375°F) . The procedure consists of bubbling filtered exhaust gases, dilute or raw, through glass impinger traps containing a solution of DNPH and HC1 kept at 0°C. The aldehydes and ketones (also known as carbonyl compounds) react with the DNPH to form their respective phenylhydrazone derivatives (precipitates). These derivatives are removed by filtration followed by pentane extractions evaporated in a vacuum oven. The remaining dried extract, which contains the phenylhydrazone derivatives, is dissolved in a specific volume of toluene with anthracene internal standard. A portion of this dissolved extract is injected into a gas chromatograph and analyzed using a flame ionization detector to separate formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acetone, iso- butyraldehyde, methylethylketone, crotonaldehyde, hexanaldehyde, and benzaldehyde. 31 ------- Phenols, which differ from alcohols in having the hydroxyl group (-CH) attached directly to an aromatic ring, were measured using an ether extraction procedure detailed in Reference 8. Raw exhaust samples were taken during steady-state operation, and dilute samples were taken from the main CVS dilution tunnel during transient operation. Exhaust samples were collected in impingers containing aqueous potassium hydroxide. The contents of the impingers were acidified with sulfuric acid, then extract- ed with ethyl ether. This extract was injected into a gas chromatograph equipped with an FID for the determination of various phenols as follows: Molecular "Phenol" Weight Phenol 94.11 Salicyaldehyde 122.13 m-Cresol 108.15 p-Cresol 108.15 2,3-xylenol I22.il 3,5-xylenol 122.17 p-ethylphenol 122.17 2-isopropylphenol 136.20 2,4,6-trimethylphenol 136.20 2,3,5-trimethylphenol 136.20 2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol 150.22 At the start of the program, both filtered and unfiltered exhaust samples were analyzed. The unfiltered exhaust samples appeared to indicate the same trends but with lower response than obtained using a filtered sample. The unfiltered exhaust sample was dropped in favor of the filtered ex- haust sample on the basis of better recovery.(8)' Unburned fuel quantities were also determined for both modal and transient operation. In most cases, unburned fuel includes aldehydes, phenols, and specific hydrocarbons along with the actual aerosols and/or gas phase evaporated fuel. Unburned fuel, for this program, meant speci- fically unburned alcohol. For unburned methanol, dilute or raw exhaust (depending on engine operation) was drawn through glass bubblers contain- ing distilled water at 0°C in order to condense out and collect unburned methanol S^ The level of methanol collected was determined by gas chrom- atograph using an FID. Unburned ethanol was determined by collecting a dilute exhaust gas sample in a Tedlar bag and processing a small portion of this sample through a gas chromatograph procedure described in Refer- ence 9. Total intensity of aroma (TIA) was quantified by using the Coor- dinating Research Council Diesel Odor Analytical System (DOAS). Dilute or raw sample, depending on engine operation, was drawn off through a heated sample train and into a trap containing Chromosorb 102. The trap was later 32 ------- eluted and injected by syringe into the DOAS instrument, which is a liquid chromatograph that separates an oxygenate fraction (liquid column oxygenates, LCO) and an aromatic fraction (liquid column aromatics, LCA). The TIA values are defined as TLA = 1. + logio (LCO, yg/£) or TIA = 0.4 + 0.7 log1Q (LCA, yg/£) (TIA by LCO preferred). A.D. Little, the developer of the DOAS instrument, has related this fraction to TIA sensory measurement by the A.D. Little odor panel. (10> The system was intended for raw exhaust sam- ples from steady-state operating conditions, but for this program, dilute samples of exhaust were taken in order to determine a TIA value for trans- ient operation. Where dilute samples were taken, the corresponding TIA values were increased proportional to the dilution ratio. 2. Particulate Emissions Particulate emissions were determined from dilute exhaust samples utilizing various collection media and apparatus, depending on the analy- sis to be performed. Particulate has been defined as any material col- lected on a fluorocarbon-coated glass fiber filter at or below a tempera- ture of 51.7 °C (125 °F), excluding condensed water.^ The 125 °F tem- perature limit and the absence of condensed water dictates that the raw exhaust be diluted, irrespective of engine operating mode. The tempera- ture limit generally required dilution ratios of approximately 12:1 (total mixture:raw exhaust). Total particulate-rate samples were collected on 90 mm or 47 mm Pallflex TA60A20 fluorocarbon-coated glass fiber filter media by means of double dilution or single dilution techniques. Gravimetric weight gain, representing collected particulate, was determined to the nearest microgram after the filter temperature and humidity were stabilized. This weight gain along with CVS flow parameters and engine data were used to calculate the total particulate mass emission of the engine under test. Smoke and total particulate are related in that the relative level of smoke opacity indicates the relative level of particulate. The ab- sence of smoke, however, does not indicate the absence of particulate. Smoke was determined by the end-of-stack EPA-PHS smokemeter which moni- tored the opacity of the raw exhaust plume as it issued from the exhaust pipe. Smoke opacity was determined for the 13-mode operation, power curve operation, and for the smoke FTP.^ ' Since total particulate, by definition, includes anything collected on fluorocarbon-coated glass fiber filter media, there has always been an interest to find out what constitutes the "total particulate ." The following paragraphs describe the methods and analysis used to determine some of the properties of the total particulate. 33 ------- Particle size distributions were determined using a Sierra Series 220 cascade inertial impactor. Dilute exhaust particles having a variety of shapes and densities were fractionated and collected according to their aerodynamic characteristics. The aerodynamic size gives information re- lating to the physical size, shape and density of the particulate, indi- cating how the particles may behave in the environment. Pre-weighed stainless steel impactor discs were used for stage collection, and a pre- weighed fluorocarbon-coated glass fiber filter was used as a back-up filter to collect all particulate aerodynamically smaller than the lowest cut-off (0.11 microns Effective Cut-Off Diameter, or BCD). Impactor flow- rate was selected to provide individual stage separation from 7.4 to 0.11 microns ECD. Sulfate, orignating from the combustion of sulfur-containing fuel, was collected as part of the particulate matter in the form of sulfate salts or sulfuric acid aerosols. A 47 mm Fluoropore (Millipore Corp.) fluorocarbon membrane filter with 0.5 micron pore size was used to collect the sample. This total particulate sample is ammoniated to "fix" the sulfate portion of the particulate. Using the barium chloranilate (BCA) analytical method, the sulfates are leached from the filter with an isopropyl alcohol - water solution (60% IPA). This extract is injected into a high pressure liquid chromatograph (HPLC) and pumped through a column to scrub out the cations and convert the sulfate to sulfuric acid. Passage through a reactor column of barium chloranilate crystals precipi- tates out barium sulfate and releases the highly UV absorbing chloranilate ions. The amount of chloranilate ion released is determined by a sensi- tive liquid chromatograph UV detector at 310-313 nanometers. "Sulfate" should be understood to mean 804= as measured by the BCA methodS8^ Carbon, hydrogen, metals, and other elements that make up the to- tal particulate are also of interest. A sample of "total particulate" was collected on 47 mm Type A (Gelman) glass fiber filter media for the pur- pose of determining the carbon and hydrogen weight percentages. This analysis was performed by Galbraith Laboratories using a Perkin-Elmer Model 240B automated thermal conductivity CHN analyzer. This instrument was designed for analysis of liquid samples. In order to accommodate the particulate sample on a filter, the filter must be folded or rolled over itself. As the temperature is increased, the glass fiber media collapses on itself, sometimes locking in some of the particulate. For this reason significant inaccuracies can occur. One of the ways to im- prove the accuracy was to collect relatively high particulate loadings. This was possible for steady-state operation but difficult for transient testing. A sample of total particulate matter was also collected on a 47 mm Fluoropore filter for the determination of trace elements such as calcium aluminum, phosphorus, and sulfur by X-ray fluorescence. This analysis was conducted at the EPA, ORD laboratories in Research Triangle Park, N.C. using a Siemens NRS-3 X-ray fluorescence spectrometer. 34 ------- 3. Soluble Organics Carbon has long been recognized as an excellent adsorbing medium for hydrocarbon aerosols. Similarly, it has been recognized that carbonaceous particulate could readily adsorb hydrocarbons present in the exhaust. In order to determine to what extent total particulate contains these vari- ous hydrocarbons, particulate filter samples were washed with an organic solvent, methylene chloride. The dissolved portion of the "total particu- late" carried off with the methylene chloride solvent has been referred to as the "soluble organic fraction" (SOF). As with total particulate the SOF may be composed of anything carried over by the extraction process, so its composition is also of interest. Generally the SOF contains numer- ous organic compounds, many of which are difficult to isolate and to quan- tify. Some SOF has been shown to be mutagenic using the Ames test. Relatively large amounts of soluble organic fraction (some 300 mg) are generally needed for elemental characterization and Ames testing. Large 500 x 500 mm (20x20 in.) Pallflex filters were used to collect correspondingly large amounts of total particulate for extraction. As mentioned earlier, both CVS units used in this program can collect three 20x20 particulate samples simultaneously. These filters are weighed to determine the particulate loading, then stored in glassine bags within a brown paper envelope. Several of these envelopes are grouped and sealed in a Tedlar bag purged with nitrogen. The Tedlar bags are then stored in a freezer until needed for extraction. These steps generally take place within a few hours of sample collection, and are carried out under yellow light (ultraviolet light filtered out using Kodak "yellow chrome II" film). When specific total particulate samples are selected for extractions, the corresponding filters are pulled from freezer storage and extracted in soxhlet extractors as shown in Figure 12. After adequate cycling time, the solvent (methylene chloride) containing the extractables is filtered, then evaporated to "dryness" in a preweighed vial using blown-in nitrogen. The weight of the "dried" extract is determined, and the SOF percent of total particulate calculated. "Dried" refers to the complete removal of the solvent. The vial contents are either distributed for analysis or stored in the freezer for subsequent analysis or shipment. As with fil- ter handling, all extraction steps were carried out under yellow light. Carbon, hydrogen, sulfur, and nitrogen were determined for the SOF. Carbon and hydrogen content of the "dried" extract was determined by Galbraith Laboratories using a Perkin-Elmer Model 240B automated thermal conductivity CHN analyzer. A portion of the extract was submitted to SvRI's Mobile Energy Division for nitrogen analysis by chemiluminescence and sulfur analysis by X-ray fluorescence. 35 ------- Figure 12. Soxhlet Extraction of particulate for soluble organic fraction The boiling range of the SOF was determined by SwRI's Mobile Energy Division using a high-temperature variation of ASTM-D2887-73. Approxi- mately 50 mg of the SOF was dissolved in solvent and an internal standard (Cg to GH compounds) was added. This sample was then submitted for instrumental analysis of boiling point distribution. Another portion of the SOF sample was submitted for fractional sep- aration. The method involves separation of the extractables into a series of fractions of increasing polarity. A high performance liquid chroma- tographic procedure which utilizes a variable solvent program is used to elute increasingly polar compounds. BaP, 9-flurorenone and acridine standards are injected to indicate the types of compounds eluted in each region of the chromatogram. BaP is considered to be an elementary indicator of the relative PNA content of the SOF. The analytical method used for the determination of BaP is described in Reference 12. The procedure is based on high-perfor- mance liquid chromatography to separate BaP from other organic solubles in particulate matter, and it incorporates fluroescence detection to measure BaP. The instrument used was a Perkin-Elmer 3B liquid chromatograph equip- ped with a MPF-44 fluorescence spectrophotometer. Excitation was at a wavelength of 383 run, and emission was read at 430 nm. 36 ------- As mentioned earlier, there is concern about the potential health effects impact that diesel exhaust may have. The emphasis of this concern has been placed on the SOF which was submitted for Ames testing. The Ames test,as employed in this program, refers to a bacterial mutagenesis plate assay with Salmonella typhimurium according to the method of Ames.(13) This bioassay determines the ability of chemical compounds or mixtures to cause mutation of DMA in the bacteria, positive results occurring when histidine-dependent strains of bacteria revert (or are mutated) geneti- cally to forms which can synthesize histidine on their own. Samples of SOF were shipped under dry ice to EG&G for Ames test response. Details of this procedure can be found in References 13 and 14. 37 ------- IV. RESULTS This section describes the results obtained from numerous emission measurements and sample analysis conducted on both the Volvo TD-100C diesel engine and the Volvo TD-100A dual-fuel engine. It is divided into three parts. The first part gives preliminary emission test re- sults used to decide on engine timing and cold start-up procedures, along with general test notes which describe some of the pertinent details and the chronology of the accumulated test results. The next two parts de- tail the accumulated gaseous and particulate data, respectively. Over- all emission trends, comparisons of data, and general remarks are given along with the results. A. Preliminary Results and General Test Notes The dual-fuel engine was installed in the SwRI transient test facility which includes a 28-170 m3/minute (1000-6000SCFM) double- dilution CVS and a transient-capable dynamometer and control system. All transient work and some selected steady-state work were conducted in this test facility. This is the same facility used for the EPA "Baseline" Contract 68-03-2603, "Emissions from Heavy-Duty Gasoline and Diesel Engines Used in Vehicles Above 8,500 Pounds Gross Vehicle Weight." Extensive steady-state characterization was conducted in SwRl's steady-state test facility which utilizes a 28 to 340 m3/minute (1,000 to 12,000 SCFM) single dilution CVS. Following initial setup and operational checkout of the engine, Mr. Bert-Inge Bertilsson (of Volvo) adjusted the linkage connecting the rack of the diesel pump to the alcohol pump, changing the low flow stop setting of the diesel pump on the basis of HC and smoke emissions at 1400 rpm motoring and full load conditions. Static engine timing of the alco- hol fuel injection pump was not changed from the "as-received" setting of 24°BTDC. Using the rack stop adjustment inside the alcohol pump, the maximum power was set to 186.5 kW (250 hp) at 2200 rpm, with methyl alco- hol as the main fuel and using 13-mode intake and exhaust restrictions. Intake restriction and exhaust backpressure used in this emission charac- terization program are listed below. The 13-mode restrictions were based on certification data for a diesel TD-100C engine, and transient restric- tions were based on "typical" limits for intake and exhaust restrictions. Restrictions at Maximum Power Intake, mm 1^0 Cin H2O) Exhaust, mm Hg (in Hg) 13-Mode 660 (26.0) 91 (3.6) Transient 300 (11.8) 74 (2.9) 39 ------- Preliminary test results were requested by the Project Officer in order to choose between a static timing of 24° or 19°BTDC for alcohol injection timing. Information was also requested in order to establish a cold-start procedure which would be suitable for use with the trans- ient cycle FTP. Following several delays related to dynamometer control, torque transducer, and driveline vibration (near idle speed of 500 rpm) problems; the engine was mapped under transient conditions according to the 1984 FTP, and a transient cycle control tape was generated. The same engine control tape for the transient cycle, based on the 24°BTDC map, was used for both 24°BTDC and 19eBTDC transient tests. Results from these preliminary transient tests are given in Table 10. The 13-mode results were processed per the 1979 procedure, which utilized the carbon balance and measured fuel to determine the regulated emission rates. Methanol fuel consumption was converted to "equivalent diesel fuel" on the basis of heating value. This "equivalent diesel fuel" was added to the measured diesel fuel used, and the emissions data pro- cessed through the 13-mode computer program normally used for diesel engines. Humidity corrections for NOX were_ applied to the preliminary data. Thirteen-mode HC and NC^ emissions were about as expected, but CO levels were significantly higher than those obtained by Volvo. Several checks, including CO instrument calibration and methanol interference, were made. An additional ice trap was used to assure a dry CO measure- ment. No cause for the relatively high CO was found. "HC" represents total hydrocarbons indicated using a Beckman 402 heated flame ionization detector (HFID). The transient results were quite repeatable. Run 3 of the transient test cycle was run with the cycle control tape started 25 seconds after the engine was started. The 25 second delay was to allow time for the preheat cycle to expire and for the alcohol fuel pump to be "ON" during the first active engine demand which occurs at 23 seconds from the start of the cold-start transient cycle. The engine, as received, had a shorter preheat cycle after start-up than anticipated. The preheat cycle expired automatically between 30 and 40 seconds. No significant difference be- tween the third cold-start and the other two cold-starts at 24°BTDC can be attributed to the 25 second delay of the cycle. The timing of the alcohol injection pump was changed from the as- received 24°BTDC to 19°BTDC. Both steady-state and transient test data showed definite changes due to 5° timing retardation of the alcohol in- jection pump. The most notable and expected results were a reduction in NOx emissions and an increase in fuel consumption. In addition, the particulate emissions, which were already relatively low at 24°BTDC, de- creased even further with retarded timing of alcohol injection. It was noted that the cold-start, with either timing, had slightly lower particu- late emissions than the hot-start transient. These relatively low particu- late rates were determined, as usual, from collection by two 90 mm filters in series. Filter efficiency averaged about 83 percent, which is lower than for most diesel-only engines tested.^5) Based on these results, 40 ------- TABLE 10. PRELIMINARY TEST RESULTS FROM VOLVO TD-100A DUAL FUEL ENGINE Run 1 HC, g/bhp-hrd CO , g/bhp-hr CO2 i g/bhp-hr NOx, g/bhp-hr Part . , g/bhp-hr BSFC, lb/bhp-hrc Cycle Power, hp-hr Run 2 HC, g/bhp-hrd CO , g/bhp-hr CO 2> g/bhp-hr NOX , g/bhp-hr Part . , g/bhp-hr BSFC, Ib/bhp-hr Cycle Power, hp-hr Run 3a HC, g/bhp-hrd CO, g/bhp-hr CO2, g/bhp-hr NOX, g/bhp-hr Part., g/bhp-hr BSFC, Ib/bhp-hr Cycle Power, hp-hr Cold Trans 1.45 7.08 659. 5.73 0.27 0.886 15.52 1.62 7.69 647. 5.83 0.26 0.905 15.25 1.38 7.47 646. 5.64 0.28 0.873 15.16 24°BTDC Hot Trans 1.34 6.19 629. 5.70 0.30 0.842 15.43 1.33 7.09 627. 5.72 0.28 0.840 15.37 1.32 6.48 619. 5.67 0.32 0.835 14.96 13-modeb 1.239 7.289 — 5.553 — 1.273 7.434 — 5.487 — 19°BTDC v Cold Trans 1.43 8.37 707. 4.92 0.22 0.980 15.37 1.43 8.67 705. 4.84 0.22 0.960 15.42 Hot Trans 1.34 7.79 684. 4.88 0.24 0.930 15.62 1.38 7.86 690. 4.75 0.25 0.934 15.50 13 -mode 1.123 7.559 — 4.143 — 1.065 7.484 — 4.156 — Run 3 was to determine if there was a significant difference in cold-start procedure, namely, the cycle control tape was delayed by 25 sec. from engine start-up 13-mode results are reported from calculations based on equivalent diesel fuel- NOX correction applied BSFC was calculated from carbon balance - utilizing a calculated percent carbon in the dual fuel HC as indicated by Sectarian 402 HFID ------- it was decided by the Project Officer that emissions characterization whould be pursued with static timing of the alcohol injection at 19° BTDC due to lower emissions of NOx and particulate. As mentioned above, the second preheat cycle was running approximately 30 to 40 seconds. Additional checks into the circuitry were made, and it was discovered that the engine cooling water temperature sensor was defec- tive. An additional cold-start procedure was run, manually holding the alcohol pump to "OFF" for 50 seconds. The result was that the engine could not follow the first active portion of the transient cycle, as anticipated, and also that it produced slightly higher HC emissions as noted from continuous HC traces. Since after only 25 seconds of idle from cold start-up the alcohol was undergoing combustion, it was decided that the preheat would be terminated manually 23 to 25 seconds after en- gine and test cycle start. Details of the cold-start sequence were de- scribed in Section III.B., page 14. Having completed the preliminary tests, the dual-fuel engine was mapped in the "methanol" test configuration with the alcohol pump set to 19°BTDC. Methanol configuration refers to the dual-fuel diesel engine adjusted to operate on methanol (main fuel) , with pilot injection of diesel fuel in varying proportions depending on speed and load. Both a 1984 transient FTP control tape and a bus cycle control tape were gen- erated. Chronologically, the methanol configuration was run first. The engine operated well, and appeared to follow the active portions of the transient cycle. Several initial tests were repeated for various reasons which included incomplete data recovery, or void sample collection along with some engine-related solenoid actuation problems. Optimization of the dynamometer controls continued in an attempt to stay within statis- tical requirements. As testing progressed, it appeared that engine- driveline vibration began to interfere with torque measurement at idle. This caused the rack position to vary slightly, which broke the electrical contact activating the diesel pump solenoid, switching it from "high" flow to "low" flow. This situation appeared to have no effect on steady- state engine operation, but it was uncertain what effect it might have on transient operation and emissions. On the basis of information received at the time, switching of the diesel pump solenoid was of little or no consequence and testing continued. The driveline vibration resonance occurred around 800 rpm, but the fringe of the vibration began around the 500 rpm engine idle speed. Dynamometer control and statistical results were somewhat uncertain from day to day because of the engine idle, dyna- mometer control, and dynamometer driveline vibration interaction. Following completion of transient testing in the methanol configuration, an oxidation catalyst was installed in the exhaust system about 0.6 m (2 ft) from the turbocharger outlet. No adjustment to the alcohol in- jection pump was made. This test configuration was referred to as the "methanol-catalyst" configuration. Several transient tests were conducted 42 ------- in this configuration while striving to obtain the best statistical results with closed rack during idle. In the meantime, Volvo requested that the rack be fully closed during idle to insure electrical contact for the diesel solenoid operation. In order to assure throttle closure, a large negative torque command was issued during idle commands. With the throttle fully closed, the engine may have been motored more than for previous runs. Results from these runs did not appear to be representa- tive, and were not used. Other methods of dynamometer control were pur^ sued. As testing of the methanol-catalyst configuration was being completed, a conference was held with Mr, Ernst Holmer of Volvo. It was decided that the dual-fuel engine should be operated with the diesel pump set to "low" flow, after cold start-up using "high" flow. This meant that the problem with intermittent solenoid actuation during idling periods could be by- passed. He also requested that a backpressure device be used with future catalyst testing in order to reduce warm-up time of both the engine and the catalyst. Additional transient tests were requested to verify the influence of the "high" flow diesel actuation and the influence of the actual start-up "puff" on particulate measurements. The catalyst was removed from the dual-fuel engine exhaust system and the alcohol fuel was changed from methanol to ethanol. Due to the significantly greater heating value of ethanol, the alcohol injection pump was adjusted to account for the difference. The injection pump was adjusted to obtain 186.5 kW at 2200 rpm. This configuration was referred to as the "ethanol" test configuration. Following the completion of 13-mode FTP gaseous emission testing, the additional hot-start transient runs requested by Volvo were conducted. To insure positive rack closure, a large negative torque command was issued during idle commands. The first test was conducted with particulate sampling as normal, and with the diesel fuel flow switched to "high" flow at closed rack conditions. The second hot-start transient used the identical command program, but the 90 mm particulate sample activation was delayed by 10 seconds in order to miss the engine start-up "puff." The third hot-start transient was conducted with particulate sampling as normal, but with the diesel fuel flow switched to "low" flow throughout the test. Detailed results of these three runs are given in Appendix E as Tables E-2, E-3, and E-4. Essentially no difference between the three tests could be attributed to the variables intentionally changed. Volvo preferred that the "low" flow setting be used on subsequent transient tests, including cold-starts. Following these special tests, normal command tapes were once again used. Initial cold-start transient tests, run with the diesel fuel set to "low." caused the engine to false start. It was agreed that the "high" diesel flow would be used for the first 23 seconds, and that the pump would then be switched to "low" flow. Vibration during idle conditions continued to cause problems with meeting statistical requirements, but were not thought to have any substantial effect on the emissions. While testing was being completed for the ethanol configuration, a backpressure device to be us«d with the catalyst was received. 43 ------- Following completion of the ethanol configuration, the catalyst and the backpressure device were installed on the dual-fuel engine. This configuration was referred to as the "ethanol-catalyst-backpressure" configuration. The backpressure device was activated by closed rack con- ditions such as motoring or idle. The device is described in Section III. B Diesel fuel consumption had to be increased by means of adjustment to the diesel pump and the linkage connecting the diesel and alcohol injection pumps in order to maintain 500 rpm idle speed. Driveline vibra- tion still continued to be an annoyance, so in order to change the reso- nant frequency, a stiffer torque meter was installed (100K in Ib) . Following the completion of transient tests in the ethanol-catalyst- backpressure configuration, the alcohol fuel was changed from ethanol to methanol. A few transient tests were conducted in this "methanol-catalyst- backpressure" configuration in order to see what effect the backpressure device might have. No 13-mode FTP emission tests were conducted in this configuration, but idle emissions were measured with the device engaged. The intent of the backpressure device was to increase and help main- tain catalyst temperature, thereby decreasing the catalyst warm-up time during the cold-start. Figure 13 shows catalyst inlet and outlet temperature profiles during cold- and hot-start transient operation with and without the backpressure device. The backpressure device caused the catalyst inlet temperature profile to appear more erratic and to attain higher peak values. The catalyst inlet gas temperature profile from both the cold-start and the hot-start transient overlapped after 500 seconds with the backpressure device. This overlap occurred after only 375 seconds without the back- pressure device. Similarly, the catalyst outlet temperature overlapped earlier (490 seconds) without the backpressure device than with the de- vice (650 seconds). Without the backpressure device, the catalyst outlet temperature reached 200°C after 415 seconds, whereas it took 450 seconds with the device. Both catalyst inlet and outlet temperatures were in- creased after 900 seconds of the transient cycle with the use of the back- pressure device. Overall, the backpressure device appears to have rela- tively minor influence on the warm-up profile of the catalyst. Following completion of the tests with methanol-catalyst-backpressure, the catalyst was removed and the backpressure device disabled. Some additional runs were made in the methanol and ethanol fuel configurations in order to repeat part of the unregulated sample collection. Upon com- pletion of these runs, the engine was moved to the steady-state, single- dilution CVS test facility to undergo extended steady-state emissions testing. The engine was adjusted to the methanol configuration. Aldehydes were taken over 11 modes of the 13-mode procedure, including all 10 of the intermediate and rated speed power modes along with one idle mode. Samples for particulates, individual hydrocarbons, unburned methanol, and odor index were taken for seven modes of operation (they included 44 ------- . ct> Q CO 500 400 300 200 100 0 500 400 300 200 100 L WITH BACKPRESSURE DEVICE Cold Start Catalyst In Tenperature Cold Start Catalyst Out Tenpenature Hot Start Catalyst In Terrperature Hot Start Catalyst Out Terrperoture WITHOUT BACKPRESSURE DEVICE 1000 800 600 '400 200 0 1000 800 600 400 200 n> CD 1 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 Time, Seconds 500 '(00 300 200 100 Figure 13. Catalyst warm-up profiles with and without a backpressure device during transient FTP operation ------- the 2, 50, and 100 percent load conditions at both rated and intermediate speeds, plus an idle mode). Similar samples were collected with the dual-fuel engine in the methanol-catalyst configuration. In order to collect sufficient particu- late sample at idle, as well as for other modes, sample times of up to one hour were required. Following light engine load conditions, the engine was operated at high power to burn off any raw fuel or oils which might have accumulated in the exhaust system. An additional idle mode was run in the methanol-catalyst-backpressure configuration in order to determine what effect the backpressure device had on emissions. In the course of the program, it was decided not to conduct steady- state testing of the dual-fuel engine in either the ethanol or the etha- nol-catalyst-backpressure configurations. Since no data had been collec- ted using ethanol and 30 percent water by mass, it was decided that some steady-state characterization should be conducted. Changing from the methanol to the "ethanol+water" configuration required only minimal ad- justments to the alcohol injection pump since both "fuels" have similar heating values on a volume basis. Aldehydes, individual hydrocarbons, unburned ethanol and particulate were measured for seven modes of operation. Test modes included the 2, 50, and 100 percent load conditions at both rated and intermediate speeds. Idle data from the dual-fuel engine in the methanol fuel configuration were used for the ethanol+water configuration, since no fuel other than diesel was consumed at idle. Fuel measurements at the 1400 rpm/2 percent load condition also indicated that only diesel fuel was consumed at this condition, but it was nevertheless repeated because it was near the point at which the alcohol fuel was added. There were significant similarities in regulated as well as unregulated emissions between the ethanol+water configuration and the methanol configuration. Due to these similarities, transient testing in the ethanol+water configuration was not conducted in favor of obtaining transient diesel engine data. While the steady-states were underway, an EPA correlation program had been completed in the transient facility. The diesel Volvo TD-100C was installed in the transient test facility. Once the transient FTP testing was completed, the engine remained in the facility for steady- state characterization similar to that conducted on the dual-fuel engine. Upon completion of sample collection, the test phase of the program ended. B. Gaseous Emissions The term "gaseous emissions" usually refers to HC, CO, and NOX, which are currently regulated emissions. This section presents the results of emission measurements which include not only these regulated gaseous emis- sions, but also individual hydrocarbons, unburned alcohols, aldehydes, and phenols. These additional species are generally included in a quali- tative way as part of the "total hydrocarbon." Odor intensity, which has been shown to correlate with the presence of these and other gas phase 46 ------- emissions, is also presented. 1. HC, CO, and NOX These regulated pollutants were measured over the 1979 FTP as well as the 1984 Transient FTP. In 1984, the transient test procedure will be optional in lieu of the 13-mode test procedure. In 1985, the transient test procedure will become mandatory, and in 1986 the trans- ient test procedure will include particulate measurement and regulation. For perspective, some of the proposed standards, beyond 1979, are listed in Table 11. TABLE 11. HEAVY-DUTY DIESEL REGULATED EMISSION LIMITS, 1979-1986 Regulated Emissions (g/hp-hr) FTP HC CO NOX Particulate 1979 13-mode 1.5 25. 10.0 Nonea 13-mode (opt.) — 25. 5.0 Nonea 1984 13-modeb 0.5 15.5 9.0 None3 Transient13 1.3 15.5 10.7 Nonea 1985 Transient 1.3 15.5 10.7 Nonea 1986 Transient 1.3 15.5 4.0 .25 ^Federal Smoke Regulations Manufacturer may certify by either procedure a. 13-mode FTP Two 1979 13-mode Federal Test Procedures for gaseous emis- sions were conducted in six test configurations. The six included the Volvo TD-100C diesel engine as received, and the Volvo TD-100A dual-fuel engine in the methanol, methanol-catalyst, ethanol, ethanol-catalyst- backpressure and ethanol+water test configurations. A summary of aver- age 13-mode gaseous emissions from the six test configurations is given in Table 12. Copies of the individual 13-mode computer printouts are given in Appendix A, providing detailed information on a modal basis. The diesel engine had slightly lower HC and substantially lower CO than did the alcohol-fueled configurations without catalyst, all of which had very similar HC and CO emissions. As expected, the cata- lyst was most effective with methanol, reducing the HC and CO by 90 per- cent; whereas with ethanol the catalyst reduced HC and CO levels by about 65 percent. Although CO levels from the alcohol configurations with cata- lyst were three times those of the diesel engine, they were still below the 1984 limit. It should be noted that the HC values reported here are based on measurements by HFID. The FID response is very low for unburned alcohols and some other species of unregulated emissions. The diesel configuration had the highest emission of NOV. A. The NOX emission rates shown in Table 12 are without the usual correction for 47 ------- TABLE 12. GASEOUS EMISSION SUMMARY FROM 13-MODE OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES 13-Mode Test Configuration Diesel Methanol Methanol -Catalyst0 Ethanol Ethanol -Cat.-Bp.d Ethanol + Water Emissions3 , HC 1.05 (0.78) 1.45f (1.08) 0.16f (0.12) 1.65* (1.23) 0.60f (0.45) 1.89f (1.41) gAw-hr CO 3.18 (2.37) 0.55 (7.12) 0.83 (0.62) 10.52 (7.84) 3.10 (2.31) 9.99 (7.45) (g/hp-hr) NOX 11.886 (8.86) 5.26 (3,92) 6.79 (5.06 6.85 (5.11) 7.98 (5.95) 4,46 (3.32) BSFC? kg/kw-hr (Ib/hp-hr) 0.262 (0.431) 0.486 (0.799) 0.482 (0.792) 0.395 (0.650) 0.400 (0.657) 0.495 (0.814) Computed on the basis of molecular weight of the fuel or fuel combination used NOX correction factor for intake humidity was computed but not applied Without backpressure device with backpressure (Bp.) device - engaged only at idle NOX value is reduced to 10.89 gAW-hr (8.12 g/hp-hr) fwhen the intake humidity correction for NC^c is applied HC values reported here are based on measurements by HFID. FID response is very low for unburned alcohols and some other species of unregulated emissions 9BSFC is in terms of dual fuel rather than diesel fuel where applicable 46 ------- intake air humidity. The correction was omitted to facilitate compari- sons between the diesel fuel configuration and the alcohol configurations. NOX correction for intake air humidity was not applied to any of the alco- hol configuration results, because of the uncertainties in computation of such a correction factor where fuels containing water and oxygen are involved. Copies of the computer printouts, with the humidity correction applied to the diesel engine's emissions, are given in Appendix A, Tables A-l and A-2. Considering only the alcohol-fueled configurations without catalyst, ethanol had the highest NOX emissions, followed by methanol, then ethanol+water. It appears that the catalyst was associated with increased NOX emissions, although emission levels before and after the catalyst showed only minor increases in NOx- The ethanol-catalyst con- figuration was run using a backpressure device active during idle. NOX emissions at idle increased by about 30 percent with the device engaged. The backpressure device was not used for the methanol-catalyst configura- tion during the 13-mode FTP. Brake specific fuel consumptions for the various configura- tions are also given in Table 12. As discussed in Section III.D., fuel consumption was computed on the basis of the measured mass of combined fuel. The relatively high BSFC values for alcohols can be ranked accord- ing to their heating value on a mass basis. The amounts of diesel fuel and alcohol fuel usage were dependent on the load condition. Figure 14 illustrates graphically the variable fueling schedule used for the metha- nol, ethanol, and ethanol+water configurations. The amount of diesel fuel injected is constant at each engine speed, whereas the alcohol portion changes with load. The relative amount of alcohol consumed during a given mode is proportional to the heating value of the alcohol used. Diesel fuel consumed by the Volvo die- sel TD-100C is also shown in order to indicate the amount of diesel fuel replaced by alcohol. Variation in alcohol consumption during the 2200 rpm/2 percent load condition (mode 12) was due to difficulty in measuring low fuel flow with a relatively large meter. In addition, it appears that "neat" ethanol can be conserved by consuming ethanol mixed with water. This trend may be due to ignition timing effects, or improved turbocharger performance which could improve engine efficiency. The ethanol+water was measured as a mixture, and the water content was calculated assuming 30 percent by mass. The measured density of the ethanol+water mixture indi- cated that the actual water content was 29 percent by mass. On a 13-mode composite basis, diesel fuel consumption was reduced from 0.28 kg/min with the diesel engine, to 0.097 kg/min with the dual-fuel engine. This represents a 65 percent substitution of alcohol for diesel fuel over the 13-mode composite. Details of 13-mode fuel con- sumption may be found in the reduced copies of the computer printouts which are given in Appendix A. Fuel molecular weight was also computed on a modal basis, and is given in these printouts. 49 ------- 1 .60 1.50 1 -10 1 . 30 I.JO 1 . 10 1.00 c; 2- 11.90 E? "0.80 rt ™ 0.70 ?r J3 \ 0. 00 a e 3 0.50 0.40 0. JO O.JO 0. 10 0 . 00 ""• — \| . t>0 Y/\ Diesel _ \^?\ Methanol \|# Ethanol FsN Water ts ~ ^ ^1 7 / / ', \ / / V / / / '< ^ ; ^ ; j - -. :- --. / s s, y '. 7 /{ 7 / / / '-'; f'f f^ '<• '' -- ^ ^ /• * - '> / y • •- v ;• P / S V \ \ \ i^ •.- '; 7 / r? s / / / / 2. i' ,s '* ss sS ^ ' • fS ' ' . / "ff -X -': ',f ^ :: '? f -.- ^ / .- . - '/ '. ^ \ V O \ S S '- * - -'• / / v< n rt 3" 3 O » W + D rt ft H- 3" 3" I O DP pi Pi in 3 3 ft re o o o t— ' t— ' ( — ' N o o n n o o o o 3333 r* htj r-h hti H- H- t— H- i£J lO ifl \Q C B C C K M H H B PI PI U rt rt rt rt H- h^ h~ H- O O O 0 3333 ^ / ' '. / / / f ^ ^ / / / ,/ ?; X1 / ( -• '.; \' •-: ;- ~r \~ •\ / j rq \ \ \ \ \ \ \ s s s, s ^ .. • f \ ' .'. :•: .,•. - . ,-. .. ; ''"' ^ — / / / ^ / / '; /x ^ f "- ; f ' V- / / •T- ; •'•, . j •.'' .N_ ': / / / f \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ < ,'* •<> ,'• T ,1 7 / / / — _ r~ s / j r / /. /. -r\ t / X s* »x ^ ^ '^ ^ ^•' / / \ ^' ^- % • r •'. ^ 0 \ \ \ \ •; ;•• t' 1 7~ - ^; N > ^ - i . -.'• _„ / ^-' .-'.- ' j l.SO 1.40 1 . 3n 1.20 1.10 1.00 0.90 o.en O.TO 0.60 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 10 11 12 13 Mode Figure 14. Illustration of diesel pilot and alcohol fuel injection schedules measured during 13-mode FTP ------- b. Transient FTP The transient test procedure was run with the engine on the transient-controlled stationary dynamometer, the total exhaust trans- ferred to a double-dilution CVS, and primary dilution at a nominal flow rate of 2000 CFM. Transient cycle particulate emissions were determined via a 4 CFM (total flow) secondary dilution system using 90 mm Pallflex filters. Transient cycle gaseous emissions of CO and CC>2 were determined from proportional bag samples of the primary dilution flow. Integrations of individual analyzer outputs were used to determine emissions of HC and NOX. The transient test consists of a cold-start cycle, 20 minute soak, then a hot-start cycle. The results from these cycles are combined into a composite transient result as described in Section III.C. A summary of the average gaseous emission results obtained from transient testing is given in Table 13. The results from the cold- start and the hot-start represent averages of several individual tests. Reduced copies of computer printouts for these individual tests are given in Appendices B, C, D, E, and F; for diesel, methanol, methanol-catalyst (including methanol-catalyst-backpressure), ethanol, and ethanol-catalyst- backpressure configurations, respectively. Appendix Tables B-l, C-l, D-l, E-l, and F-l give additional qualifying information for individual tests, and indicate whether or not the results were included in the aver- age values in Table 13. Transient FTP composite values given in Table 13 were computed using the average cold and hot FTP values. Particulate emis- sion rates are also given in Table 13, but discussion of these data will be reserved for the particulate section of the report. The HC values given in this report represent the total hy- drocarbons indicated by the Beckman Model 402 HFID, It has been noted that the FID has low response to some species of oxygenated hydrocarbons, such as alcohols and aldehydes. In addition, NOX values reported for transient operation in this section were not corrected for engine intake air humidity due to the use of a humidity- and temperature-controlled intake air system. Both the diesel engine and the dual-fuel engine appear to be slightly cold-start sensitive in regard to HC, CO, and NOx emissions. All these gaseous emissions and the calculated BSFC were higher for the cold-start than for the hot-start transient test. Comparing transient composite results, emissions of both HC and CO were higher with the alco- hol-fueled engine configuration than for the diesel configuration. HC and CO were highest with ethanol, although CO levels were still below the proposed 1984 standard. NOx emissions were similar for both alcohols, and were relatively low compared to the diesel configuration. The oxida- tion catalyst with the backpressure device appears to have reduced emis- sion of HC and CO as expected, and to have increased NOX somewhat. From steady-state data, some increase in NOX occurred during idle when the backpressure device was operating. The catalyst appeared to be more active in the methanol configuration. 51 ------- TABLE 13. REGULATED EMISSIONS6 SUMMARY FROM TRANSIENT FTP OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Test Configuration Diesel Methanol Hethanol -Catalyst Methanol -Cat. Bp.c Ethanol Ethanol cycle Type Cold Start Sot Start Transient Composite Cold Start Hot Start Transient Composite Cold Start Hot Start Transient Conpoaite Cold Start Hot Start Transient Composite Cold Start Hot Start Transient Composite Cold Start Hot Start Transient Composite Regulated ^/kw-hr, HCd 1.58 (1.18) 1.08 (0.80) 1.15 (0.85) 1.98 (1.48) 1.94 (1.45) 1.95 (1.45) 0.36 (0.27) 0.13 (0.10) 0.16 (0.12) 0.62 (0.46) 0.21 (0.16) 0.27 (0.20) 2.28 (1.70) 2.27 (1.69) 2.27 (1.69) 0.79 (0.59) 0.60 (0.45) 0.63 (0.47) CO 4.84 (3.61) 3.90 (2.91) 4.04 (3.01) 11.85 (8.84) 10.03 (7.48) 10.29 (7.67) 5.54 (4.13) 3.29 (2.45) 3.61 (2.69) 6.09 (4.54) 3.49 (2.60) 3.86 (2.88) 13.29 (9.91) 12.82 (9.56) 12.89 (9.61) 5.65 (4.21) 4.01 (2.99) 4.24 (3.16) Emissions", (q/hp-hr) NOxP 11.78 (8.79) 11.09 (8.27) 11.19 (8.34) 7.55 (5.63J 7.27 (5.42) 7.31 (5.45) 7.44 (5.55) 7.38 (5.50) 7.39 (5.51) 8.90 (6.64) 8.31 (6.20) 8.39 (6.26) 7.48 (5.58) 7.36 (5.49) 7.38 (5.50) 8.77 (6.54) 8.60 (6.41) 8.62 (6.43) Part. 0.80 (0.60) 0.68 (0.51) 0.70 (0.52) 0.36 (0.37) 0.40 (0.30) 0.39 (0.30) 0.26 (0.19) 0.34 (0.25) 0.33 (0.24) 0.28 (0.21) 0.42 (0.31) 0.40 (0.30) 0.34 (0.25) 0.35 (0.26) 0.35 (0.26) 0.34 (0.25) 0.39 (0.29) 0.38 (0.28) cycle BSFC" kg/kw-hr (Ib/hp-hr) 0.306 (0.502) 0.284 (0.468) 0.288 (0.473) 0.561 (0.922) 0.526 (0.873) 0.531 (0.873) 0.538 (o.aesr 0.515 (0.946) 0.518 (0.852) 0.622 (1.022) 0.567 (0.933) 0.575 (0.946) 0.451 (0.742) 0.432 (0.711) 0.435 (0.715) 0.465 (0.764) 0.445 0.732) 0.448 (0.737) Cycla work kw-hr (hp-hr) 10.29 (13.79) 10.54 (14.13) 10.50 (14.08) 11.27 (15.10) 11.27 (15.11) 11.27 (15.11) 11.13 (14.92) 11.19 (15.01) 11.19 (15.00) 10.62 (14.24) 11.37 (15.24) 11.26 (15.10) 11.45 (15.36) 11.38 (15.26) 11.39 (15.27) 10.95 (14.67) 11.01 (14.76) 11.00 (14.75) is in terms of dual fuel rather than dieael fuel where applicable. Approximately 80%, by mass, of the fuel consumed during a transient cycle was alcohol. Heating values arei diesel at 42.90 KJAg (18,400 BTO/lb), methanol at 19.88 MJAg (8,550 BTO/lb), and ethanol at 27.01 KJAg (11,600 BTO/lb) NO, values presented here are based on continuous measurement by chemiluminescence. NO, values for some runs were also computed from bag sample measurement by CL and are reported in the corresponding Appendix. Intake humidity was controlled - NOjj correction of 1.00 used in all cases for transient NO. jBp. stands for backpressure device TIC values reported here are based on indication by HFID (Beckman 402) . FID response has been reported to be very low for unburned alcohols and (scae other species Regulated emissions include HC, CO, NO,, and partlculate aa proposed for 1986 Transient FTP 52 ------- c. Bus Cycle Emission levels were also determined for the transient bus cycle. The bus cycle was run 20 minutes after completing the hot-start transient cycle, or 20 minutes after completing another hot-start bus cycle. A summary of the average gaseous emissions results is given in Table 14. Reduced copies of these bus cycle tests are presented in Ap- pendices which correspond to the fuel configurations listed for trans- ient FTP results. Generally, all the HC, CO, and NOX emissions were higher for the bus cycle than for the transient FTP. The most significant difference between the two cycles appears to be the increase in CO emis- sions from the alcohol-fueled configurations. A significant increase in CO was not observed in the diesel configuration, although diesel HC and NOX were somewhat higher. The BSFC's were higher for the bus cycle than for corres- ponding transient FTP's. Fuel consumption has been reported in terms of "dual" fuel which has a significantly lower heating value per unit mass than does No. 2 diesel fuel. The BSFC data given in Tables 13 and 14 are computed on the basis of carbon balance. They are somewhat dependent on measured alcohol and diesel fuel consumed during the test, in that a ''percent fuel carbon" is calculated from the measurements and used in the carbon balance computations for fuel consumption. The percent of fuel carbon for No. 2 diesel is usually around 87 percent. Some of the calculated "percent of fuel carbon" values, by fuel and by bag of the transient test, are given in Table 15. The per- cent fuel carbon values for methanol and ethanol are 38 and 52 weight per- cent, respectively. In general, calculated percent of fuel carbon ranged from a low of 46 to a high of 66, depending on the type of alcohol used, the cycle activity and loading, and the amount of diesel fuel used. Higher percentages of alcohol by weight were used in the methanol configuration, due to the lower heating value of methanol as compared to ethanol. Overall, the results from the transient test agree fairly well with those of the 13-mode test procedure. HC emissions were only slightly higher from the transient FTP. Thirteen-mode CO emissions were higher for the transient procedure, especially with methanol-catalyst- backpressure configuration. The diesel configuration had higher NOX for the 13-mode than for the transient FTP, but dual-fuel engine configura- tions had higher NOX for the transient FTP than for the 13-mode. The NOX reduction using alcohols may be cycle-sensitive, due to NOX reduction during the high-power steady-state modes. BSFC was consistently higher on the transient procedure, for reasons already explained. 2. Selected Individual Hydrocarbons Some individual hydrocarbons were determined from dilute exhaust samples and processed by chromatographic techniques to separate methane, ethylene, ethane, acetylene, propylene, propane, benzene and toluene. Higher molecular weight hydrocarbons were not measured. Samples were 53 ------- TABLE 14. TRANSIENT EMISSIONS SUMMARY FROM BUS CYCLE OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Test Cycle Configuration Type Diesel Bus Methanol Bus Methanol Bus -Catalyst Methanol Bus -Cat.-Bp.c Ethanol Bus Ethanol Bus Transient Emissions q/kW-hr, (q/ho-hr) HC° CO 1.34 (1.00) 1.96 (1.46) 0.38 (0.28) 0.31 (0.23) 2.94 (2.19) 0.86 (0.64) 4.59 (3.42) 25.56 (19.06) 10.43 (7.78) 9.21 (6.87) 24.23 (18.07) 8.15 (6.08) N0xb 12.44 (9.28) 8.46 (6.31) 8.00 (5.97) 9.20 (6.86) 8.11 (6.05) 10.42 (7.77) Part 0.82 (0.62) 0.60 (0.45) 0.22 (0.16) 0.24 (0.18) 0.60 (0.45) 0.38 (0.28) Cycle BSFCa Cycle Work kgAW-hr kW-hr (IbAp-hr) (hp-hr) 0.294 (0.484) 0.566 (0.931) 0.548 (0.901) 0.591 (0.971) 0.453 (0.745) 0.478 (0.786) 4.64 (6.21) 5.29 (7.10) 4.98 (6.68) 4.84 (6.49) 4.88 (6.54) 4.51 (6.05) BSFC is in terms of dual fuel rather than diesel fuel where applicable. Approximately 80%, by mass, of the fuel consumed during a transient cycle was alcohol. Relative heating values are: diesel at 42.90 MJ/kg (18,400 BTU/lb) , methanol at 19.88 MJAg (8,550 BTU/lb) , and ethanol at 27.01 MJAg (11,600 BTU/lb) NOX values presented here are based on continuous measurement by chemiluminescence. NOX values for some runs '.:ere also computed from bag sample measurement by CL and are reported in the corresponding Appendix. Intake air humidity was controlled - NOX correction of 1.00 need in all cases of transient NO,, c ^ Bp. stands for backpressure device HC values reported here are based on indication by HFID (Beckman 402). FID response has been reported to be very low for unburned alcohols and some other species. 54 ------- TABLE 15. PERCENT OP FUEL CARBON CALCULATED FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE Fuel Configuration Methanol Methanol -Cat.-Bp. Trans. Bus Trans. Bus Test Segment, Percent Fuel Carbona 50 49 50 50 47 46 48 47 44 48 45 51 51 51 Alcohol Portion Used, % Wt. 81.6 79.3 80.6 77.3 Ethanol Ethanol -Cat.-Bp. Trans. Bus Trans. Bus 65 63 68 66 60 60 61 60 58 62 58 64 63 65 77.6 73.9 76.3 69.1 ^Percent fuel carbon of: No. 2 Diesel is typically 87 percent by wt. Methanol = 38% Ethanol - 52% processed from cold- and hot-start transient operation, and from seven individual modes of steady-state operation. Results from transient operation in the diesel, methanol, methanol-catalyst, ethanol, and etha- nol-catalyst configurations are summarized in Table 16. Steady-state results are given in Tables 17, 18, 19 and 20 for the diesel, methanol, methanol-catalyst and ethanol+water configurations, respectively. Of all the individual hydrocarbons mentioned above, methane and ethylene were predominant. Relatively small concentrations of ethane, acetylene, pro- pylene, and benzene were indicated by the procedure. No propane was de<- tected. In most cases toluene was detected, but chromatographic inter- ference, thought to be caused by unburned fuel, makes it difficult to verify the presence of benzene and toluene. As a matter of convenience for comparison purposes, "total" individual hydrocarbons are given for transient operation in Table 16 and are merely the sum of the individual hydrocarbon concentrations, excluding toluene. There is little or no difference between cold-start and hot-start transients, except where the catalyst was used. 55 ------- TABLE 16. INDIVIDUAL HYDROCARBONSb FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES T»at Con fig . Diesel Hethanol Hethanol -Catalyst Ethanol Ethanol -Cat.-Bp. Trans Cycle" Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Individual Hydrocarbon Units rig/teat mgAW-hr mgAg mg/test mgAW-hr mgAg mg/test mg/kW-hr ngAg mg/test mgAW-hr mgAg mg/test mgAW-hr mgAg mg/test mgAW-hr mgAg mg/teBt mgAW-hr mgAg mg/test ragAW-hr mgAg mg/test mgAW-hr mgAg mg/test mgAW-hr mgAg >'.<.- thane 220 21 69 150 14 49 360 33 59 400 35 66 440 40 70 300 27 48 1200 110 240 1200 100 240 1200 120 250 1000 98 220 Ethylene 1600 160 520 1000 95 330 840 76 140 1200 100 200 550 50 87 300 27 48 4300 370 830 4600 400 950 1300 120 270 1100 100 230 Ethane Acetylene Propylene 46 4.5 15 — 20° 1.8 3.2 24" 2.1 4.0 17a 1.5 2.8 53 4.6 10 64 5.6 13 69 6.6 14 52 4.9 11 240 23 75 — 7.5° .7 1.2 2.1° .2 .4 — 420 37 82 440 39 91 120 12 25 84 8.0 18 530 52 170 — 360 33 59 470 41 79 120 11 20 41 3.7 6.9 480 42 93 480 42 99 — — Benzene Toluene 180 18 59 — 140 13 23 68 5.9 11 23" 2.1 3.9 — 320 28 63 160 14 33 — _- — 1600 140 250 800 70 130 450 41 72 150 13 24 500 44 98 260 23 54 230 22 47 200 19 44 IHC j "Total" 2800 280 910 1150 110 380 1700 160 290 2200 180 360 1100 100 180 660 60 110 6800 600 1300 6900 600 1426 2700 260 560 220O 210 479 °Trace amounts, relative to resolution of procedure. Presence is questionable No propane detected CThese values are likely to vary as much as ± 500 mg/test. It is doubtful that toluene was formed and these values were likely caused by unknown interference Toluene was not used in the "Total," due to the significant uncertainty of its presence. ------- TABLE 17. INDIVIDUAL HYDROCARBONS FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100C DIESEL ENGINEa RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE Methane Ethylene Acetylene Propylene Units rag/hr mgAW-hr mgAg fuel mg/hr mgAW-hr mg/kg fuel 1400 2% 1400 50* 1400 100% Idle 2200 100% 2200 50% 690 340 180 2500 1200 640 2100 24 83 2200 2% mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel mg/hr mgAW-hr rag/kg fuel 1200 600 310 6900 3400 1800 — 2000 31 130 — 2500 19 86 980 830 1800 — 1500 — 6500 36 150 — 5700 64 230 2100 620 230 17000 5000 1900 2000 590 220 6500 1900 710 IHC procedure also separates ethane, propane, benzene and toluene. No propane, acetylene, or toluene were detected. Dilute exhaust samples were taken with CVS flowrates of 2000 CFM for Idle and the 2* loads, 3000 CFM for the 50% loads, and 5000 CFM for 100% loads. TABLE 18. INDIVIDUAL HYDROCARBONS FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH METHANOL b RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE Methane Units mg/hr mgAW-hr mg/kg fuel Ethylene mg/hr mgAg fuel Acetylene mg/hr fuel Propylene mg/hr mgAW-hr mgAg fuel 1400 2% a 4800 1700 1200 370 130 89 1100 390 260 1400 1400 50% 100* — a 1500 11 25 1100 1400 16 100 40 23 — — — 2200 Idle 100% 240 — 3 — 210 740 7400 41 630 88 370 2 4 2300 13 27 2200 2200 50% 2* — a 620 150 71 2200 7400 24 1800 49 850 400 98 46 2400 590 280 Background levels exceeded sample levels bIHC procedure also separated ethane, propane, benzene and toluene. Small concentrations, near the limits of detectability, of ethane, benzene and toluene were noted, but their presence is doubtful. Propane was not detected. Dilute exhaust samples were taken with CVS flowrate of 3000 CFM, nominal. 57 ------- TABLE 19 INDIVIDUAL HYDROCARBONS FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH METHANOL AND CATALYST* RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE Methane Ethylene Acetylene Propylene Units mg/hr mgAg fuel mg/hr mgAW-hr mgAg fuel mg/hr mgAW-hr mgAg fuel mg/hr mgAW-hr mgAg fuel 1400 2* 1200 430 270 2200 790 500 — — 1400 50* 1300 19 47 363 5 13 — — 1400 100* 970 7 16 181 1 3 — — 2200 Idle 100* 210 880 5 170 11 410 570 3 340 7 __ — 2200 50* 800 9 18 620 7 14 — — 2200 2* 3100 820 310 2700 710 270 — 440 120 43 IHC procedure also separates ethane, propane, benzene and toluene. No propane, acetylene, benzene or toluene were detected during operation with catalyst. This idle condition was run without the backpressure device. Another sample from idle with the backpressure device operable was taken but none of these species were detected. TABLE 20. INDIVIDUAL HYDROCARBONS FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO Methane Ethylene Ethane Acetylene Propylene TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH ETHANOL + WATERb RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE Units mg/hr mgAW-hr mgAg f ue 1 mgA'T mgAW-hr mgAg fuel mg/hr mgAW-hr mgAg fuel mg/hr mg/hW-hr mgAg fuel mg/hr mgAW-hr mgAg fuel 1400 1400 2* 50* — * 7100 110 270 5000 6400 1800 96 1200 240 440 7 16 1200 17 43 1200 450 310 1400 100* Idle0 24000 240 180 400 210 22000 740 160 370 630 850 6 14 1600 12 28 2200 100* 2900 15 31 9200 49 100 390 2 4 __ __ 2200 2200 50* 2* 5500 2500 58 650 120 270 3200 12000 34 3000 68 1300 410 110 45 1300 340 140 2900 760 320 ^Background level exceeded sample level IHC procedure also separates propane, benzene and toluene, but none of these were detected. Dilute samples were taken with CVS flowrates of 6000 CFM at =100\ conditions and 2000 CFM at all other conditions Idle data duplicated from methanol configuration 58 ------- In comparing the diesel engine to the dual-fuel engine, it should be noted that the diesel engine uses direct injection of diesel fuel into the center of the combustion chamber; whereas, the dual-fuel engine uses the smaller pilot injection of diesel tangent to the swirl of the combustion chamber. This point is especially important in com- paring emissions at idle, and at light load conditions like 1400 rpm/2 percent load, where only diesel fuel is consumed. The diesel engine shows higher emissions of methane and ethylene at idle and light loads than the dual-fuel configuration. From the transient data, the ethanol configura- tion produced the highest "total" individual hydrocarbons, primarily due to the high emission rates of ethylene. The catalyst had little effect on methane, but it reduced ethylene significantly. Most levels of the individual hydrocarbons were relatively low, except that the ethanol+water configuration showed high levels of methane and ethylene. 3. Unburned Alcohols Since the FID response is typically low for alcohols, it was important to determine the quantity of unburned alcohol in the exhaust by another procedure. Table 21 summarizes the results from analysis of unburned alcohols during both transient FTP and bus cycle testing. Re- sults of modal testing are given in Table 22. Unburned methanol was trapped in a wet bubbler containing water, and unburned ethanol was deter- mined from dilute exhaust bag samples. Both samples were processed through the appropriate GC procedure. There was not much difference in alcohol emissions between the cold-start and hot-start transients. The catalyst reduced the unburned alcohol for both fuels. There was more unburned alcohol from the metha- nol configuration than from the ethanol configuration. In steady-state testing, the bulk of the unburned alcohol occurred at 50 percent load conditions and at the 2200 rpm/2 percent load condition. The catalyst was very effective in oxidizing the unburned alcohols at the 100 percent load conditions and at the 2200 rpm/50 percent load condition. No alcohol consumption was noted during idle or during the 1400 rpm/2 percent load condition. Considering both test procedures, transient and steady-state, less unburned ethanol was emitted (in ethanol-fueled configurations) than unburned methanol (in methanol-fueled configurations). 4. Aldehydes Aldehydes were determined by the DNPH procedure, which detects formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acetone, isobutyraldehyde, methylethylketone, crotonaldehyde, hexanaldehyde, and benzaldehyde. Samples were taken from dilute exhaust during transient operation, while samples of raw exhaust were taken during steady-state operation. The procedure was intended for use with raw exhaust, and it is difficult to obtain a concentrated sam- ple from the dilute exhaust within the 20 minute duration of the trans- ient cycle or the 14-minute bus cycle. Samples were taken over 11 modes 59 ------- TABLE 21. UNBURNED ALCOHOL SUMMARY FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE Test Configuration Methanol Methanol -Catalyst Ethanol Ethanol -Catalyst Transient Cycle Cold Start Hot Start Composite Bus Cold Start Hot Start Composite Bus Cold Start Hot Start Composite Bus Cold Start Hot Start Composite Bus mg/test 52000 56000 55000 19000 13000 9600 10000 4300 25000 26000 26000 11000 7000 4700 5000 3900 mg/kw-hr 4700 4900 4900 4100 1200 840 890 890 2200 2300 2300 2300 670 450 480 860 mg/kg fuel 8400 9300 9200 6900 2200 1500 1600 1500 4900 5400 5300 5000 1400 1000 1100 1800 Fuel refers to dual fuel used, which has a lower heating value than diesel fuel alone 60 ------- TABLE 22. UNBURNED ALCOHOL SUMMARY FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE Test Con fig. Methanol Methanol -Catalyst Ethanol + Water Units yg/m exh. mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuelc / 3 yg/m exh. mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel yg/m exh. mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg f ue 1 1400a 2% 1100 380 140 91 5700 2000 710 160 1400 50% 300000 130000 1900 4700 250000d 110000 1600 4000 250000 110000 1600 4000 1400 100% 16000b 9400 69 150 780 460 3.3 7.7 31000 18000 130 4000 2200 Idle3 100% 160000 150000 830 1800 1400e 32000 150 30000 170 120 360 f 52000 51000 270 560 2200 100% 700000 500000 5300 1000 250000 180000 1900 4100 140000 100000 1100 2200 2200 2% 370000 200000 49000 23000 180000 94000 25000 9300 210000 120000 31000 13000 bNo alcohol consumption was noted during idle or during 1400/2% condition This value was based on an incomplete sample (1 of 2 bubblers), and may be atypically low Computed on the basis of dual fuel, including water This value was much larger than expected on the basis of 13-mode HC emissions, and should be interpreted with caution No methanol is introduced during idle, so it is assumed that this value is a result of uncertainty in the quantitative procedure near the detection limit Idle data duplicated from methanol configuration ------- of the 13-mode steady-state procedure (idle was only sampled once) in the methanol and the methanol-catalyst configurations. An additional aldehyde sample was taken at idle with the dual-fuel engine backpressure device engaged. Based on the accuracy of the DNPH procedure and the level of effort required to process the samples, steady-state charac- terization of aldehydes was reduced to include 7 modes of steady-state operation of the diesel and the ethanol+water test configurations. Of the compounds detectable by the DNPH procedure, only formal- dehyde, acetaldehyde, hexanaldehyde and benzaldehyde were prevalent. The presence of benzaldehyde is suspect, in that it is often found as an arti- fact of the procedure itself. Summaries of the aldehyde results from transient cycle and bus cycle operation are given in Tables 23 and 24, respectively. Summaries of aldehyde results from steady-state operation in diesel, methanol, methanol-catalyst and ethanol+water configurations are given in Tables 25, 26, 27, and 28, respectively. For a given test configuration, there is little or no differ- ence in aldehyde emissions between the cold-start and the hot-start transient cycles conducted without the catalyst. The diesel configura- tion emitted relatively low levels of aldehydes. The methanol configura- tion had higher aldehydes, primarily higher formaldehyde, than the diesel configuration. The ethanol configuration also had higher aldehydes than the diesel configuration, the major differences being higher formaldehyde and acetaldehyde. With methanol, the catalyst reduced acetaldehyde dur- ing transient operation, but tended to increase formaldehyde. With etha- nol, the catalyst reduced the levels of transient cycle formaldehyde, but increased acetaldehyde. The same trends can be noted for bus cycle operation. During steady-state operation, aldehydes were higher with the dual-fuel engine on methanol than with the diesel engine. With ethanol+ water, formaldehyde was formed in about the same amounts as with the methanol configuration, but more acetaldehyde was produced. The effects of the catalyst were mixed on steady-states run with methanol. Aldehydes were increased at the light loads and idle, but were reduced at the high loads where the catalyst temperature was sufficient to oxidize the un- burned fuel species. Use of the backpressure device at idle, in con- junction with the catalyst, appears to have reduced the levels of alde- hydes detected. 5. Phenols Phenols were determined using a wet chemistry procedure as out- lined in Section III.E.I and described in detail in Reference 8. The detection of individual phenols in either dilute or raw engine exhaust appears to be quite variable. In the early stages of this program, it was uncertain whether better results would be obtained from the filtered sample procedure or from the unfiltered sample procedure. It was reasoned that filtering the particulate out of the exhaust sample at 190°C (375°F) could keep the sample clear of particulate, causing less interference. ------- TABLE 23 . SUMMARY OF ALDEHYDESa FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Test Con fig. Diesel Methanol Methanol -Cat.-Bp. Ethanol Ethanol -Cat.-Bp. Trans. Cycle Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Units mg/test mgAw-hr mg/kg fuel mg/test mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel mg/test mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel mg/test mg/kW-hr mgAg fuel mg/test mg/kW-hr mgAg fuel mg/test mgAW-hr mgAg fuel mg/test mgAW-hr mgAg fuel mg/test mgAU-hr mgAg fuel mg/test mgAw-hr mgAg fuel mg/test mg/kw-hr mgAg fuel Formalde- hyde 180 18 59 140 13 46 1900 190 330 2400 230 430 2600 250 400 3000 260 470 2000 170 380 1700 150 350 820 80 170 370 33 75 Acetalde- hyde — — 490 48 84 210 21 38 120d 11 18 20d 1.8 3.2 1500 130 280 900 80 180 3200 300 660 2200 200 440 Benzalde- hydeb j. ~ 76 7.4 24 d o yy 9-j . 3 33 2900 280 490 1600 160 290 750 73 120 160 14 24 2500 210 480 3000 260 610 __ — — 360 32 73 "Total"0 Al HphvH^1^ i-t-'-iCJ.i_y utJo 180 18 59 140 13 46 2400 240 414 2600 250 470 2700 260 420 3000 260 470 3500 300 660 2600 230 530 4200 380 830 2600 230 520 a DNPH procedure also separates acetone, isobutyraldehyde, methylethylketone crotonaldehyde, and hexanaldehyde. No methylethylketone, crotonaldehyde or hexanaldehyde were found. Acetone and isobutryaldehyde appeared sporadically and were very low. The presence of acetone is also difficult to assess because bof the potential for contamination of the DNPH procedure by acetone background cBenzaldehyde may be an artifict of the DNPH procedure and it appeared sporadically Benzaldehyde is not included in the "total" because of the uncertainty of its presence Trace amounts relative to the resolution of this procedure. 63 ------- TABLE 24. SUMMARY OF ALDEHYDES3 FROM BUS CYCLE OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Test Config. Cycle Diesel Bus Methanol Bus Methanol Bus -Cat.-Bp. Ethanol Bus Ethanol Bus -Cat.-Bp. Units mg/test mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel mg/test mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel mg/test mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel mg/test mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel mg/test mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel Formalde- hyde 96 21 70 1300 280 460 1800 370 620 2400 490 1100 590 140 270 Acetalde- hyde — — — — 840 180 310 — — — 1500 310 680 1100 250 510 Benzalde- hyde — — __ 3400 740 1200 — — 2700 540 1200 — — __ — "Total" Q Aldehydes 96 21 70 2100 i 460 770 1801 i 370 i 620 3900 800 1800 1700 380 780 DPHN procedure also separates acetone, isobutyraldehyde, methylethylketone, crotonaldehyde, and hexanaldehyde. No methylethylketone, crotonaldehyde or hexanaldehyde were found. Acetone and isobutryaldehyde appeared sporadically and were very low. The presence of acetone is also dif- icult to assess because of the potential for contamination , of the DNPH procedure by acetone background. Benzaldehyde may be an artifact of the DNPH procedure and it appeared sporadically Benzaldehyde is not included in the "total" because of the uncertainty of its presence 64 ------- TABLE 25 . SUMMARY OF ALDEHYDES FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO VD-IOOC DIL'SEL ENGINE3 RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE CTl Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde Hexanaldehyde Benzaldehydec Units yg/m exh. mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel yg/m exh. mg/hr mg/kW-hr mgAg fuel yg/m exh. mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel yg/m exh. mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel 1400 2% 3400 1200 600 310 190 68 34 17 400 140 70 36 1400 50% 1800 720 11 48 — — T- 370 150 2.3 10 240 96 1.5 6.4 1400 100% 1200 630 4.9 22 180 94 0.72 3.2 310 160 1.2 5.5 2200 Idle 100% 3100 780 360 750 4.2 310 17 _„ 270 260 1.5 5.9 400 47 40 2200 50% 1300 980 11 39 ___ 420 320 3.6 13 2200 2% 3800 2200 650 240 19b 11 3.2 1.2 640 370 110 40 No acetone or methylethylketone was noted for either fuel configuration Isobutyraldehyde, crotonaldehyde and hexanaldehyde appeared sporadically, at low levels Trace amounts, relative to the resolution of this procedure and 'Benzaldehyde may be an artifact of the DNPH procedure ------- TABLE 26. SUMMARY OF ALDEHYDES FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH METHANOL3 RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE en Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde Benzaldehyde0 Units yg/m exh. mg/hr mg/kw-hr mg/kg fuel yg/m exh. mg/hr mgAW-hr mg/kg fuel yg/m exh . mg/hr mg/kw~hr mg/kg fuel 1400 2% 2400 820 290 200 690 240 86 56 1400 25% 3800 1400 41 89 29b 11 0.31 0.70 2600 1000 29 64 1400 50% 10000 4200 62 150 260 110 1.6 4.0 860 360 5.3 13 1400 75% 7100 3800 36 81 350 180 1.7 3.8 900 480 4.6 10 1400 100% 3000 1800 13 30 140 82 0.60 1.3 Idle 730 85 73 — — 800 93 70 2200 100% 2000 1900 10 23 17b 16 0.09 0.19 2200 75% 17000 15000 110 210 100 80 0.62 1.2 1300 1100 7.7 15 2200 50% 32000 23000 250 520 600 440 4.7 10 900 660 7..1 15 2200 25% 35000 2300 490 730 810 520 11 17 4500 2900 61 93 2200 2% 10000 5300 1300 600 1100 600 150 69 1600 850 200 98 ^o acetone or methylethyIketone was noted for either fuel configuration Isobutyraldehyde, crotonaldehyde and hexanaldehyde appeared sporadically, and at low levels Trace amounts, relative to the resolution of this procedure CBenzaldehyde may be an artifact of the DNPH procedure ------- TABLE 27. SUMMARY OF ALDEHYDES FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH METHANOL AND CATALYSTa RPM and. PERCENT LOAD IN MODE Formaldehyde Ace t aldehyde Benzaldehydec Units yg/m exh. mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel 3 yg/m exh. mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel yg/m exh. mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel 1400 2% 3000 1000 360 230 140 48 17 11 620 210 75 47 1400 25% 3000 1100 31 69 b 63 24 0.69 1.5 650 250 7.1 16 1400 50% 3700 1600 23 57 320 140 2.1 5.0 1400 1400 75% 100% 1500 1100 790 650 7.5 4.7 18 11 230 140 1.0 2.4 Idle 2700 300 250 150 17 14 1200 130 110 2200 100% 2600 2500 14 30 , 63 60 0.33 0.72 290 270 1.5 3.2 2200 75% 45000 40000 280 580 230 200 1.4 2.9 5400 4800 34 70 2200 50% 61000 45000 480 1000 340 250 2.7 5.7 1700 1200 13 27 2200 25% 59000 38000 810 1300 460 300 6.4 10 3900 2500 53 87 2200 2% 17000 8800 2300 870 3600 1900 500 190 2100 1100 290 110 Idle w/Bp. 1900 170 98 b 33 2.9 1.7 140 13 7.5 NO acetone or methylethyUtetone was noted for either fuel configuration Isobutyraldehyde, crotonaldehyde and hexanaldehyde appeared sporadically, and , at low levels b Trace amounts, relative to the resolution of this procedure Benzaldehyde may be an artifact of the DNPH procedure ------- 00 TABLE 28. SUMMARY OF ALDEHYDES FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH ETHANOL + WATER RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde He xan a 1 dehy de Benzaldehyde Units yg/m exh. mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel yg/m exh. mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel 3 yg/m exh . mg/hr mgAw-hr mg/kg fuel yg/m exh. mg/hr mgAW-hr mg/kg fuel 1400 2% 3800 1300 470 320 900 320 110 78 — 400 140 50 35 1400 50% 2000 830 13 31 380 1600 24 59 210 87 1.3 3.3 — 1400 100% Idlea 5200 730 2000 85 22 51 73 510 300 2.2 5.0 310 180 1.3 3.1 100 800 61 93 0.45 1.0 79 2200 100% 11000 11000 60 12 13000 13000 68 140 170 170 0.92 1.9 110 110 0.59 1.2 2200 50% 14000 10000 110 220 16000 1200 120 250 110 78 0.82 1.6 240 180 1.9 3.8 2200 2% 48000 2600 700 290 2800 1600 410 170 — 170 92 24 10 Idle data duplicated from methanol configuration ------- The unfiltered sample was also considered because it was thought that the phenols might be attached to the particulate, and would be extracted in the collection bubbler. Both filtered and unfiltered samples were pro- cessed in the methanol and methanol-catalyst configurations, for both transient and steady-state operation. Based on similarities between the methanol configuration and the ethanol+water configuration, no samples were processed for the ethanol+water configuration. By the time the diesel engine was to be characterized, it was decided to process only filtered phenol samples, on the basis that the filtered phenol procedure had been shown to have higher recovery factors during qualification experiments. ' ' Summaries of filtered phenol results are given in Table 29 for transient operation, and in Tables 30, 31, and 32 for steady-state opera- tion. Results from the unfiltered procedure are given in Table 33 for transient operation, and in Tables 34 and 35 for steady-state operation. Fewer "total" phenols were generated with methanol than with either etha- nol or diesel during transient operation. The filtered phenol data in- dicate that more highly substituted phenols may be formed with the cata- lyst. At idle, the catalyst appears to have little effect. Using the backpressure device and catalyst at idle, the phenols were reduced slight- ly. It is difficult to decide whether to attribute changes in emissions to the back-pressure on the engine, or to its effect of slightly raising the temperature of the catalyst. Considering the relatively uncertain accuracy of the phenol procedure, it is difficult to establish trends from the data. 6. Total Hydrocarbons - FID Response As mentioned in several places throughout this report, total hydrocarbons were measured using a Beckman Model 402 heated flame ioni- zation detector. References (6 and 7) have shown that the FID response to unburned alcohols and some species of unregulated emissions is quite variable, depending on FID construction. The reported FID response fac- tors, given in Table 9 of Section III.E.I from Reference 6, were used in conjunction with transient cycle "total" emission rates of unburned alco- hols, individual hydrocarbons, individual aldehydes, and individual phe- nols to compute a "total" hydrocarbon emission rate. These "total" hydro- carbons , along with the hydrocarbons measured by continuous HFID during transient testing, are given in Table 36. For the diesel configuration, unburned fuel was not measured directly as it was for the unburned alcohols. However, the HFID response to unburned diesel fuel-like constituents is assumed to be 1.0 by design; and unburned fuel is therefore accounted for in the continuous measurement of total hydrocarbons by HFID. The "total" (unregulated) hydrocarbons for the diesel configuration are substantially lower than the HFID total hydrocarbons due to the absence of a "total unburned fuel" in the sum- mation. This would imply that levels of unburned diesel fuel-like con- stituents could be about 1200 mg/kW-hr for the cold-start, and about 950 69 ------- TABLE 2'J. SUMMARY OF PHENOLS (FILTERED) FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE m-cresol Teat Con fig. Diesel Methanol Methanol -Cat.-Bp. Ethanol Ethanol -Cat.-Bp. Trans. Cycle Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Salicyl- Units Phenol aldehyde Big/test — 240 ngAW-hr 23 mgAg 75 mg/test — 32 ngAW-hr 2.9 ngAg 10 mg/test — mgAW-hr mgAg mg/test — mgAW-hr mgAg mg/test ngAW-hr ngAg mg/teBt mgAW-hr mgAg mg/test 3?.. 38 mgAW-hr 2.8 3.4 ngAg 6 • 2 7.5 mg/test 27 — mgAW-hr 2 . 4 mgAg 5.5 mg/test — mgAW-hr mgAg mg/test — — mgAW-hr mgAg + p-cresol 120 12 39 — 64 6.2 12 170 16 26 200 18 31 13d 1.1 2.5 — 230 22 48 100 9.8 22 5" 26 2.5 8.1 __ 120 11 18 71 6.3 11 190 17 37 110 9.6 22 34 3.2 6.9 — 2,3,5 tri- ne thy Iphenol 57 5.5 18 12 1.1 3.9 19d 1.8 3.2 — — 8.4d 0.7 1.6 12 1.0 2.4 — 2,3,5,6^ 23 2.2 7.2 14d 1.4 2.6 — — 630 56 120 280 24 57 — 35 3.4 7.7 2nppC 490 48 156 230 21 75 170 16 29 180 17 32 440 42 67 230 20 35 23d 2.0 4.5 — 620 59 130 120 11 25 "Total" Phenol 960 93 300 270 25 89 190 18 32 260 25 47 730 69 110 500 44 77 930 83 180 430 37 87 880 84 100 260 24 55 p-ethylphenol, 2-isopropylphenol, 2,3-xylenol, 3,5-xylenol, 2,4,6-trimethylphenol 2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol 2-n-propylphenol The»e levels are very low and are close to the ninimum detectable level; their presence and quantity »re difficult to insens. ------- TABLE 30. SUMMARY OF PHENOLS (FILTERED) FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100C DIESEL ENGINE RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE Phenol Salicyl- aldehyde m-cresol + p-cresol a. 5 2,3,5 tri- methyl phenol 2,3,5,6° d 2 npp p-ethylphenol Units yg/m3 mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel yg/m mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel yg/m mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel 3 yg/m mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel yg/m mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel , 3 yg/m mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel yg/m mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel 1400 50% Idle 130 52 0.81 3.5 190 200 76 23 1.2 5.1 19 140 56 0.87 3.7 — 240 61 96 7.2 1.5 6.4 6.1 __ __ 7300 310 2900 36 45 190 31 , 2-isopropylphenol, 2,3-xylenol, 2200 100%_ 80 76 0.42 1.7 160 150 0.84 3.4 — 36 34 0.19 0.78 9700 9300 52 210 3 , 5-xylenol, 2,4, 6- trimethylphenol These levels are very low and are close to the detectable level; their presence and quantity to assess. minimum are difficult °2 , 3 , 5 , 6-tetramethylphenol 2-n-propylphenol 71 ------- TABLE 31. SUMMARY OF PHENOLS (FILTERED) FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH METHANOL RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE -J to Phanol Salicyl- aldohyde m-cresol + p-cresol 5b 2,3,5 tri- oethyl phenol 2,3,5,6° a 2 nDD * "fr Units ug/m mg/hr mgA-hr mgAg fuel pg/m mg/hr mgAW-hr ngAg fuel ug/» mg/hr mgAH-hr mgAg fuel ug/m mg/hr mgAW-hr mgAg fuel ug/m mg/hr mgAH-hr mgAg fuel ug/ra mg/hr mgAw-hr mgAg fuel \ tff /in uy/B mg/hr mgAW-hr mgAg fuel 1400 2% 120 42 15 10 250 87 31 21 220 76 27 18 570 200 71 48 84 29 10 7.0 3400 1200 430 290 1400 50 140 59 0.87 2.1 — 2ia 8.9 0.31 0.69 240 100 1.5 3.6 33a 14 0.21 0.51 2800 1200 18 43 1400 100% 70 41 0.3O 0.67 — 71 42 0.31 0.69 92 54 0.39 0.89 _— , — 3300 1900 14 31 Idle .. 60 7. a — 6.0 85 10 — 8.5 270 31 26 42' 4.9 — 4.2 26a 3.0 — 2.6 2500 290 — 250 2200 loot 44* 42 0.23 0.50 34a 33 0.18 0.39 61 59 0.33 0.70 — 640 620 3.4 7.4 2200 50% 65 48 0.51 1.1 „ 47 34 0.36 0.76 .. 7.2a 5.3 0.06 0.12 42" 31 0.33 0.69 1500 1100 12 25 2200 2% 72 38 9.3 4.4 130 69 17 7.9 83 44 11 5.1 300 160 39 18 36 a 19 4.6 2.2 12B 6.4 1.6 0.7 780 420 102 48 These levels are very low and are close to the minimum detectable level; their presence and quantity are difficult to assess. p-othylphenol, 2-isopropylphcnol, 2,3-xylenol, 3,5-xylenol, 2,4,6-trimethylphenol 2, 3,5,C-tetramcthylpheiioi ' 2-n-propylphenol ------- TABLE 32 . SUMMARY OF PHENOLS (FILTERED) FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH METHANOL AND CATALYST RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE Phenol Salicyl- aldehyde m-cresol + p-cresol 5b 2,3,5 tri- methyl phenol 2,3,5,6° 2 npp Units Ug/m mg/hr mgAH-hr mgAg fuel Vig/m mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel ug/m mg/hr mgAW-hr mgAg fuel Vjg/m mg/hr mgAW-hr mgAg fuel VJg/m mg/hr mg/kW-hr mgAg fuel pg/m rog/hr mgAW-hr mgAg fuel Vig/m mg/hr mgAH-hr mgAg fuel 1400 2% 27° 9.3 3.3 2.1 79 27 10 6.1 98 34 12 7.7 240 83 30 19 393 13 4.6 2.9 34S 12 4.3 2.7 2000 690 250 160 1AQO 50% 80 34 0.50 1.2 — 75 32 0.47 1,1 — 2ia 9.0 0.13 0.32 — 2200 950 14 34 1400 100% 57a 34 0.25 0.57 — 54a 32 0.23 0.54 230 — — —— 31° 18 0.13 0.30 — 1200 710 5.2 12 Idle 220 24 — 20 71 7.8 — 6.4 49a 5.4 — 4.5 230 25 — 21 54a 6.0 — 5.0 — 1700 190 — 160 2200 2200a 100* 50% 35a 33 0.18 0.40 — — — — 32a 30 0.17 0.36 61 58 -.32 0.69 — — — — — — 1600 1500 8.3 18 2200 Idle + 2% B. P. 76 6.8 — 3.9 __ 110 9.8 — 5.6 . 170 89 88 80 23 8.7 4.6 13a 52a 6.8 4.6 1.8 — 0.67 2.6 1300 650 680 58 180 67 33 Sample void These levels are very low and are close to the minimum detectable level; their presence and quantity are difficult to assess. p-ethylphenol, 2-isopropylphenol, 2,3-xylenol, 3,5-xylenol, 2,4,6-trimethylphenol 2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol 2-n-propylphenol ------- TABLE 33. SUMMARY OF PHENOLS (UNFILTERED) FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE Test Config. Me th anal Methanol -Cat.-Bp. Ethanol Ethanol -Cat.-Bp. Trans. Cycle Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Units mg/test mgA^-hr «gAg mg/test mgA*~hr mgAg mg/test mgAW-hr mgAg mg/test mgAW-hr »gAg mg/test mgAW-hr mgAg mg/test mgAw-nr mgAg mg/test mgAW-hr mgAg mg/test mgAW-hr mgAg Salicyl- Phenol aldehyde — 15 d 1.5 2.6 — — — — 11 d - 1.0 2.1 6.3 d 70 .6 6.2 1.3 14 — — 23 2.2 4.9 m—cresol + p-cresol 5 a — 20 d 1.9 3.4 20 37 1.9 3.6 3.5 6.7 — 17 1.6 2.5 — 70 20 6.1 1.7 14 3.8 8.0 0.7 1.6 — 18 1.7 3.7 7.2 d 220 0.7 21 1.5 48 2,3,5 tri- nethylphenol 2,3,5,6 9.6 d 0.9 1.6 20 — 2.0 3.7 — — 4.8d 170 .4 15 .9 34 — 270 24 55 — — 7.2d 19 0.7 1.8 1.5 4.1 c 120 11 20 220 21 39 230 22 36 370 33 58 — — 130 12 27 380 36 81 "Total" 160 15 28 300 28 53 250 24 39 370 33 58 280 24 55 350 32 72 150 14 31 660 62 140 ap-ethylphenol, 2-isopropylphenol, 2,3-xylenol, 3,5-xylenol, 2,4,6-trimethylphenol b2,3,5,6-tetromethylphenol ^2-n-propylphenol These levels are very low and are close to the minimum detectable levels; their presence and quantity are difficult to assess. ------- TABLE 34. SUMMARY OF PHENOLS (UNFILTERED) FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH METHANOL '" RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE Phenol Salicyl- aldehyde m-cresol + p-cresol 5b 2,3,5 tri- methyl phenol 2,3,5,6° 2 npp Units yg/m rog/hr mgAW-hr mgAg fuel yg/m rog/hr ragAW-hr mgAg fuel yg/m mg/hr rogAW-hr mgAg fuel yg/m rog/hr mgAW-hr mgAg fuel yg/m mg/hr mg/fcw-hr mgAg fuel yg/m mg/hr mgAW-hr mgAg fuel yg/m mg/hr mg/kH-hr ragAg fuel 1400 2% 98 34 12 8.2 140 49 18 12 140 49 18 12 490 170 61 41 550 190 68 46 2000 700 250 200 1400 50% 140 59 0.87 2.1 — 99 42 0.62 1.5 210 89 1.3 3.2 19" 8 0.12 0.29 1900 800 12 29 1400 100% — 48a 28 0.20 0.46 57 34 0.25 0.56 — _. 1500 880 6.4 14 Idle 65 7.6 — 6.5 98 11 — 9.4 14S 1.6 1.4 320 37 — 32 30° 3 ~~ 2.6 91 9 A • 1 1800 210 — 180 2200 100% 74 71 0.39 0.85 — 25fl 24 0.13 9.29 — — — 1700 1600 8.8 19 2200 50% 120 88 0.94 2.0 — 39° 29 0.02 0.65 — 29a 21 0.22 0.47 48a OR J3 0.37 0.47 1500 1100 12 25 2200 2% 67 36 8.8 4.1 130 69 17 7.9 150 80 20 9.2 360 190 46 22 26° 14 3.4 1.6 — 1100 590 140 68 These levels are very low and are close to the minimum detectable level; their presence and quantity are difficult to assess p-ethylphenol, 2-isopropylphenol, 2,3-xylenol, 3,5-xylenol, 2,4,6-triraethylphenol 2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol 2-n-propylphenol ------- TABLE 35. SUMMARY OF PHENOLS (UNFILTERED) FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH METHANOL AND CATALYST RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE CTl Phenol Salicyl- aldehyde rr.-cresol + p-cresol 5b 2,3,5 tri- ne thy 1 phenol 2,3,5,6° 2 npp Units ug/m mg/hr mg/kw-hr mg/kg fuel Mg/m mg/hr mg/kw-hr mg/kg fuel ug/m mg/hr mg/kK-hr mg/kg fuel 1'9/m mg/hr mg/kw-hr mg/kg fuel \|jg/m mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel . 3 pg/m mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel , 3 pg/m mg/hr mg/kW-hr mg/kg fuel 1400 2% 41a 14 5.0 3.2 — 18a 6.2 2.2 1.4 130 45 16 10 26a 0.9 3.2 2.0 810 280 100 63 1400 1400 50* 100% -. 29a 12 0.18 0.43 90 243 39 14 0.57 0.10 .1.4 0.24 — 1300 960 560 570 a.; 4.1 20 9.6 2200 Idle 100% 740 700 3.9 8.3 140 130 0.72 1.6 260 250 1.4 0.3 130 120 0.66 1.4 150 140 0.78 1.7 1100 700 120 660 3.7 99 7.9 2200 50% 1200 880 9.4 20 91 70 0.5 1.6 __ ioa 7.3 0.08 0.17 1300 950 10 21 2200 2% 9.4 4.9 1.3 0.48 __ __ 130 68 18 6.7 25a 13 3.. 4 1.3 1600 830 220 82 Idla-f B. P. SI 7.2 — 4.1 .. 140 12 — 6.9 130 12 — 6.7 36a 3.2 — 1.8 __ 860 77 — 44 aThese levels are very low ancl arc close to the minimum detectable level; their presence and quantity rir<- difficult to assess p-ethylplienol, 2-isopropyJphpnol, 2,3-xylenol, 3,5-xylenol, 2,4,6-trimethylphenol ..?, 3,5,6-tetramethylphenol 'J-n-propylphenol ------- TABLE 36. SUMMARY/COMPARISON OF "TOTAL" UNREGULATED HYDROCARBONS AND HYDROCARBONS MEASURED BY CONTINUOUS HFID DURING TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE Configuration Diesel FID Response Fact.b Cold Meas. Total Cold Adj. Total Hot Meas. Total Hot Adj. Total Methanol FID Response Fact.b Cold Meas. Total Cold Au]. Total Hot Meas. Total Hot Adj. Total Methanol + Cat. FID Response Fact.b Cold Meas. Total Cold Adj. Total Hot Meas . Total Hot Adj . Total Ethanol FID Response Fact.b Cold Meas. Total Cold Adj. Total Hot Meas. Total Hot Adj. Total Ethanol + Cat. FID Response Fact.b Cold Meas. Total Cold Adj. Total Hot Meas. Total Hot Adj. Total "Total" "Total" Unbumed Individual Alcohol Hydrocarbons mgAw-hr mgAw-hr N.A. 0.23 4700 1080 4900 1130 0.23 0.46 2200 1010 2300 1060 0.46 670 310 450 207 1.00 1.00 160 160 180 180 1.00 1.00 600 600 600 600 1.00 260 260 210 210 "Total" Individual Aldehydes rogAw-hr 0.05 0.12 240 29 250 30 0.06e 0.15f 300 45 230 35 0.249 380 91 230 55 "Total" Individual Phenols3 mgAw-hr 0.75 0.75 18 13 25 19 0.75 1200 280 840 190 100 100 60 60 260 16 260 16 69 52 44 33 0.75 83 62 37 28 0.75 84 33 24 18 Sum of "Totals" gAw-hr 5.12 1.28 5.36 1.36 1.63 0.46 1.20 0.30 3.18 1.72 3.17 1.72 1.39 0.69 0.91 0.54 Hydrocarbons Measured by Cont. HFID g/kw-iu: 280 280 110 110 18 0.9 13 0.7 93 70 25 19 0.39 0.35 0.15 0.13 1.58 __ 1.08 1.98 1.96 0.49'' 0.17 2.28 2.27 0.79 0.60 a Total phenols were based on "filtered" phenols procedure which has shown better recovery than the unfiltered phenol procedure during' procedural qualifications fc FID response factors are on a weight basis and were taken directly from reference or interpolated from FID responses given for species of similar molecular structure C Acetaldehyde has al[ interpolated response of about 0.30, whereas formaldehyde has a response estimated to be about .05 d FID response based on 25% acetaldehyde + 75% formaldehyde - weighted for a sum of 0.12 e FID response based on 2% acetaldehyde + 98% formaldehyde weighted for a sum of 0.06 fFID response based on 40% acetaldehyde + 98% formaldehyde - weighted for a sum of 0.15 gFID response based on 75% acetaldehyde + 25% formaldehyde - weighted for a sum of 0.24 hAverage of methanol + Cat. and methanol + Cat. + B.P. 77 ------- mgAW-hr from the hot-start transient cycles. Considering the alcohol fuel configurations, the "total" (unregulated) hydrocarbons were approxi- mately double the hydrocarbons indicated by the continuous HFID measure- ment. The most significant contribution to the "total" (unregulated) hydrocarbons was the unbumed alcohol emissions followed by the IHC emis- sions. Contribution of the aldehydes to "total" (unregulated) hydrocar- bons was moderate, and the contribution of phenols was insignificant. The "total" hydrocarbons were significantly reduced by the catalyst, which appears to have significantly reduced the unburned alcohol and the IHC emitted by the non-catalyst configurations. 7. Odor-TIA TIA results were determined using the DOAS analysis of traps which collected compounds related to odor intensity.(8'1°) This chroma- tographic procedure separates an oxygenate fraction (liquid column oxy- genates, LCD) and an aromatic fraction (liquid column aromatics, LCA) . The TIA values are defined as TIA = 1 + Iog10 (LCO, yg/&) or TIA = 0.4 + 0.7 logic (LCA U9/^) » (TIA by LCO preferred). The procedure was developed for steady-state raw exhaust samples, but was adapted to transient dilute exhaust samples by use of the CVS. Table 37 summarizes the results from transient test operation. TIA results from the diesel transient operation were high for the cold-start, and low for the hot-start. Very little difference in TIA exists between methanol- and ethanol-fueled configura- tions, with or without catalyst. The catalyst reduced LCA significantly for both methanol and ethanol. TIA results from steady-state test configurations are given in Table 38, and include 7 modes of methanol and methanol-catalyst opera- tion along with three modes of diesel operation. The TIA values for die- sel operation were slightly higher than those for the methanol configura- tion. TIA values for idle, and for 1400 rpm at 2 percent load, were rela- tively high for the methanol fuel configuration. The odor index values at these and other modes were significantly reduced with the catalyst, ex- cept for the condition at 2200 rpm and 2 percent load, for which an in- crease was noted. C. Particulate Emissions Although heavy-duty diesel particulate emissions are not scheduled to be regulated until 1986, they have been measured for some time and have been recognized as a potential problem in the application of diesel engines. In order to determine particulate emission rates and to charac- terize the total particulate, samples were collected on several filter media for a variety of analyses which included total mass, sulfate, ele- mental analysis, particle sizing, and organic extractables. Particulate samples were always taken from the dilute exhaust using a CVS. 76 ------- TABLE 37. SUMMARY OF TIA BY DOASa PROM TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD100A DUAL FUEL ENGINE Fuel Transient Configuration Cycle Diesel Cold Start Hot Start Composite Bus Methanol Cold Start Hot Start Composite Bus Methanol + Cold Start Catalyst Hot Start Composite Bus Ethanol Cold Start Hot Start Composite Bus Ethanol + Cold Start Catalyst Hot Start Composite Bus LCA 29.7 4.24 10.14 2.60 3.70 3.44 - - - - 2.22 1.53 1.63 3.36 - - _ LCO yg/g. 7.20 1.20 2.06 — 3.30 3.50 3.30 4.17 1.59 2.79 2.62 1.14 4.16 3.18 3.32 3.57 3.42 5.04 4.81 5.28 TIA 1.86 1.08 1.19 1.10b 1.47 1.53 1.52 1.61 1.17 1.45 1.41 1.06 1.60 1.50 1.51 1.55 1.53 1.70 1.68 1.72 3These measurements were based on diesel fuel standard. Samples were taken from dilute exhaust of approximately 6:1 for overall transient cycle. Based on TIA = 0.4 + 0.7 log LCA 79 ------- TABLE 38. SUMMARY OF TIA BY DOAS FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE AND THE TD-100C DIESEL ENGINE Modal Condition rpm/load % 1400/2 1400/50 1400/100 Idle 2200/100 2200/50 2200/2 Fuel Configuration Methanol Meth-Cat. Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat.a Methanol Meth-Cat. Diesel Methanol Meth-Cat. Meth-Cat. + BP. Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Methanol Meth + Cat. Methanol Meth-Cat . LCA yg/A 70. 16. 27. 5.6 — 4.3 — 77. 37. 7.7 12. __ 2.4 — 3.9 — 76. 10. LCO yg/& 34. 9.5 8.5 2.7 — 2.5 1.9 33. 18. 6.5 4.1 1.5 3.3 1.0 4.7 0.7 7.3 • 9.9 TIA 2.5 1.4 1.9 1.4 — 1.4 0.8 2.5 2.3 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.0 0.8 1.2 0.6 0.8 1.7 ^Sample void 80 ------- 1. Total Particulate Total particulate emission rates are given in Table 39 for the vari- ous fuel configurations tested under steady-state modal operation. Fig- ure 15 shows the relative total particulate mass rates. Comparison was simplified because both test engines were of similar design and had the same rated speed and power. Particulate emissions from the diesel con- figuration exceeded those of the alcohol configurations except at the 2 percent load conditions. At the 2 percent load conditions, the methanol and the ethanol+water configurations show significantly higher particu- late than either the diesel or the methanol-catalyst-backpressure con- figurations. The backpressure device was engaged only at idle, and re- quired more diesel pilot injection to maintain idle speed. Idle particu- late rate from the diesel engine was greater than for the methanol con- figuration of the dual-fuel engine. Although the dual-fuel used only diesel fuel at idle, there are significant differences in the manner in which the diesel fuel is in- jected. The diesel engine uses a large 4-hole injector mounted in approx- imately the center of the combustion chamber; whereas the dual-fuel engine uses a similar but smaller injector and injects the pilot diesel fuel against the swirl within the combustion chamber (refer to Section III.A.). These differences in diesel fuel injection between engines may explain the significantly different particulate emission rates observed for the 1400 rpm/2 percent load condition, at which only diesel fuel pilot in- jection is active. About 81 percent of the fuel consumed by the dual- fuel engine at 2200 rpm/2 percent load consisted of diesel pilot injec- tion. Idle data from the methanol configuration were also used for the ethanol+water configuration, because they are taken to be identical (only pilot injected diesel fuel is used at idle, so idle emissions should be independent of the alcohol used). Relative to the diesel engine, major particulate reductions with both methanol and ethanol+water configura- tions were noted where substantial amounts of alcohol were substituted for diesel fuel, beyond the 2 percent load conditions. Catalysts are usually considered a method for reducing emissions but total particulates were substantially increased in the alcohol con- figurations when the catalyst was used. Addition of the catalyst in- creased the particulate emissions substantially at the higher load condi- tions where exhaust heat was sufficient to activate the catalyst. The catalyst reduced particulate emissions at idle and light load conditions where exhaust temperature was relatively low. With low-temperature ex- haust from idle and light loads, the catalyst appeared to act as a par- ticulate trap. Above about 25 percent load, catalyst temperatures ele- vated enough to begin oxidation reactions. At this point, the total particulate emission increased sharply. A significant portion of this particulate matter is made up of sulfate generated by the catalyst. Sulfate will be discussed in the next section. 81 ------- TABLE 39. PARTICULATE EMISSION SUMMARY FROM MODAL OPERATIONS OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Engine/Fuel Configuration Condition rpm/load, % 1400/2 1400/50 1400/100 Idle 2200/100 2200/50 2200/2 Units mg/m3 exh. g/hr g/kw-hr g/kg fuela mg/m3 exh. g/hr g/kw-hr g/kg fuela mg/m3 exh. g/hr g/kw-hr g/kg fuel3 mg/m3 exh. g/hr g/kw-hr g/kg fuela mg/m exh. g/hr g/kw-hr g/kg fuela mg/m3 exh. g/hr g/kw-hr g/kg fuela mg/m exh . g/hr g/kw-hr g/kg fuela Diesel 53.53 19.21 9.63 4.93 45.67 18.29 0.28 1.22 134.06 69.87 0.54 2.41 66.92 7.85 — 6.65 81.56 77.97 0.44 1.78 103.83 78.25 0.88 3.11 84.49 49.15 14.49 5.37 Methanol 116.48 40.54 14.48 9.72 21.91 9.30 0.14 0.34 15.61 9.19 0.07 0.15 48.63 5.67 — 4.85 6.79 6.56 0 .04 0.08 23.30 17.10 0.18 0.38 117.44 62.72 15.30 7.20 Methanol -Catalvst 47.10 16.25 5.80 3.66 48.95 21.08 0.31 0.75 89.75 52.98 0.39 0.89 16.68 c l.S4c — 1.52° 72.74 68.96 0.38 0.82 80.70 58.87 0.63 1.33 50.90 26.49 6.97 2.61 Ethanol + Water 91.77 32.42 11.58 7.95 19.62 8.22 0.12 0.31 22.92 13.30 0.10 0.22 48.63b 5.6^ — 4.85b 10.25 10.15 0.05 0.11 34.20 25.27 0.27 0.54 122.42 67.59 17-79 7.37 "Fuel" represents total fuel input to engine and includes water, alcohol, and diesel These values were duplicated from the methanol configuration since only diesel fuel ^is used "Particulate data for Methanol-Catalyst-Backpressure were: 1.18 g/kg fuela 16.01 mg/m6 exh., 1.43 g/hr, 82 ------- 80 100 50 2 Intermediate Speed Idle 2 50 Rated Speed 100 Percent of Full Load Figure 15. Modal p'articulate from the Volvo test engines 83 ------- Cold Start 0.80 0.36 0.26 0.28 0.34 0.34 Hot Start 0.68 0.40 0.34 0.42 0.35 0.39 Composite 0.70 0.39 0.33 0.40 0.35 0.38 Bus Cycle 0.82 0.60 0.22 0.24 0.60 0.38 Particulate rates determined for cold- and hot-start transient cycles and the bus cycle are given in Table 40, along with composite transient results. These particulate emissions were also given along with gaseous emission data in Tables 13 and 14. TABLE 40. PARTICULATE SUMMARY FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Test Transient Particulate g/kW-hr Configuration Diesel Methanol Methanol-Catalyst Methanol-Catalyst- Backpressure Ethanol Ethanol-Catalyst- Backprpssure In the diesel configuration, the cold-start runs produced more par- ticulate than the hot-start runs, which seems to be typical of most of the diesel engines tested under the EPA "Baseline" Contract. The dual- fuel engine configurations gave lower particulate for the cold-start than for the hot-start FTP. The catalyst appears to have reduced par- ticulate from the cold-start, but increased particulate from the hot- start. The catalyst reduced particulate from the bus cycle by about half. Considering the modal information, the catalyst may have reduced particulate from the cold-start by acting as a trap at lower exhaust temperatures. Particulate from the hot-start may have increased be- cause the catalyst was warmer, being able to produce sulfate while oxi- dizing fuel-like constituents which would have condensed as particulate during the cold-start. The reduction of particulate emissions from the bus cycle run with catalyst may be due to the catalyst being able to oxidize a greater mass of organic (fuel-like) particulate matter than it produces as sulfate, or to storage. Table 41 gives the computed 7-mode composite (based on the 13-mode composite weighting factors) and the transient composite particulate rates on a brake specific and a fuel specific basis. There is very good agreement between the 7-mode and the transient composite for the diesel configuration. The transient composite is somewhat higher than the modal composite in the methanol configuration without aftertreatment, but is substantially lower than the modal composite when the catalyst is used. 84 ------- TABLE 41. COMPOSITE PARTICULATE RATES FROM MODAL AND TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Test _7-Mode Composite Transient Composite Configuration g/kW-hr _gAg fuel g/kW-hr gAg fuel Diesel 0.69 2.53 0.70 2.43 Methanol 0.30 0.64 0.39 0.73 Methanol-Catalyst 0.51 1.07 0.33 0.64 Methanol-Catalyst- Backpressure 0.51 1.07 0.40 0.70 Ethanol -NotRun- 0.35 0.81 Ethanol-Catalyst- Backpressure -NotRun- 0.30 0.85 Ethanol+Water 0.33 0.67 -Not Run- The greater disagreement between the modal composite and the transient composite when the catalyst was used is due to the catalyst's heat sen- sivity and the load variations among the cycles. The transient cycle consists of mostly light loads, but the 7-mode composite includes sub- stantial operating time at loads of 50 percent or more (56 percent of the 7-mode composite). 2. Smoke Smoke and particulate emissions are related, smoke level being a measure of the visible portion of particulate matter. Changes in particu- late emissions may be indicated by corresponding changes in smoke opacity, if the levels are high enough. Smoke opacity was determined using an end- of stack PHS smokemeter. Table 42 gives a summary of smoke opacity data collected from all six fuel configurations; namely, diesel, methanol, methanol-catalyst, ethanol, ethanol-catalyst, and ethanol+water. Smoke factors for acceleration, lug, and peak are all well below the 1980 standards, for the dual-fuel engine. In the diesel configuration, there was reasonable agreement with manufacturer's data for the accelera- tion and peak factors, but the lug factor was much higher than the manu- facturer's value of about 7 percent opacity. Examination of the diesel smoke chart indicated that smoke opacity increased sharply in the last four seconds of the lug procedure run under automatic dynamometer/engine control. The lug factor should be about 7-9 percent opacity on the basis of the power curve smoke, which also simulates a maximum rack lug-down from rated speed. 85 ------- TABLE 42. SUMMARY OP SMOKE OPACITY FROM THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Federal Transient Smoke Cycle Opacity' Test Configuration Smoke Opacity, % Accel. Lug Diesel Methanol Methanol - Catalyst Ethanol Ethanol - Catalyst Ethanol + Water 1980 Standard Steady-State 13-Mode FTP Mode 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 RPM Power, % 500 1400 1400 1400 1400 1400 500 2200 2200 2200 2200 2200 500 RPM 2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1300 Idle 2 25 50 75 100 Idle 100 75 50 25 2 Idle Diesel 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.2 7.0 9.0 Peak 15.3 15. Ob 6.0 0.8 2.6 0.7 5.7 1.4 3.6 2.7 — NOT RUN — 20.0 15.0 Smoke Opacity Smoke Opacity, % Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Ethanol 0.4 0.4 0.8 1.2 2.0 6.0 0.5 3.5 5.0 5.3 3.1 1.4 0.2 Power Power 0.1 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.1 0.9 0.1 0.7 0.8 1.1 2.0 2.0 0.1 Curve Curve Methanol Meth.-Cat 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.7 1.0 1.2 0.8 0.9 1.3 2.3 2.2 1.4 0.1 0.2 0.4 1.0 1.4 1.3 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.8 1.9 2.1 0.3 Smoke Opacity Smoke Opacity Ethanol Eth 0.6 0.4 0.5 1.0 2.0 2.4 0.1 0.4 1.1 1.8 2.4 2.3 0.2 1.0 0.7 1.4 3.0 3.1 0.2 .-Cat. 1.0 0.8 0.8 1.0 2.3 2.6 32.6 23.3 6.9 10.9 4.7 50.0 Eth. -Cat. Eth. + Water 0.1 0.2 0.1 1.0 1.7 1.4 0.1 0.9 0.8 1.2 2.2 2.4 0.1 Eth. + Water 0.9 0.8 1.5 2.0 4.0 2.5 0.6 1.1 1.2 1.4 3.0 3.5 0.4 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.1 0.9 0.2 These values were based on a single run of the FTP smoke test This value may be in error and is likely to be 7 - 9 percent opacity on the Kao-lo „<: „ .,-. basis of power curve data 86 ------- The catalyst reduced accel and peak factors on both methanol and ethanol, but the lug factor appeared to increase for the ethanol-catalyst configu- ration. Modal and power curve smoke were all very low for the dual-fuel engine. Most of the smoke opacities listed are considered hardly visible usually below five percent opacity. 3. Sulfate Sulfate was determined from samples of total particulate collected on 47 mm Fluoropore filter media, and processed by the BCA method. Ta- ble 43 summarizes the sulfate results from 7 modes of steady-state opera- tion taken over four test configurations. In order to visualize the trends, Figure 16 shows the relative sulfate mass rates. Taking the diesel configuration as base, the methanol and ethanol+water configura- tions had very low sulfate rates, especially above the 2 percent load condition. These two alcohol configurations showed almost identical sulfate results. Since the sulfate originates from the sulfur in the fuel, less diesel fuel consumed by the dual-fuel engine meant less sul- fur was available to be converted to sulfate. Sulfate rates have been expressed in terms of "mg/kg C fuel" and "mg/kg D fuel." The "C" repre- sents fuel as measured on the combined basis of diesel fuel used for pilot injection and alcohol fuel used for combustion. The "D" repre- sents only the diesel fuel used. The percent of fuel sulfur converted to sulfate was computed on the basis of the diesel fuel used. Probably the most notable sulfate trend was the dramatic increase in sulfate as a result of the catalyst. Tremendous increases in sulfate were noted for the high power modes, where exhaust heat insured that the catalyst was active. The fuel sulfur conversion reached 97 percent at- the maximum power condition. Since the sulfate is collected as part of the total particulates, the sulfate measured at maximum power in the methanol-catalyst-backpressure configuration accounts for 83 percent of the total particulate. The catalyst appeared to reduce sulfate emissions during idle and the 2 percent conditions, possibly due to a sulfate stor- age phenomenon.d^ Sulfate results from transient operation are given in Table 44. The methanol and ethanol configurations emitted similar levels of sul- fate, which were about half that of the diesel engine. Application of the catalyst to the alcohol configurations increased the transient sulfate levels substantially. The transient composite sulfate level from the methanol-catalyst configuration increased sharply again when retested with the backpressure device. Use of the backpressure device required more pilot injection of diesel fuel. Transient composite sul- fate levels from the methanol-catalyst-backpressure configuration were about 30 percent higher than the ethanol-catalyst-backpressure configura- tion. This relatively large difference may be attributed to a slightly greater catalyst activity when methanol is used. 87 ------- TABLE 43. SULFATE EMISSIONS SUMMARY FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Condition 1400/2 1400/50 1400/100 Idle 2200/100 2200/50 2200/2 Test mg/m" priTTfi miration Rfhaust ^V'll J_ -L.M vij. d WA-l Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Eth. + Water Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Eth. + Water Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Eth. + Water Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Eth. + Water6 Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Eth. + Water Diesel Methanol Meth . -Cat . Eth. + Water Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Eth. + Water 3.0 3.1 1.4 3.7 5.4 1.2 20. 1.6 5.6 1.4 41. 1.4 4.7 3.1 0.84 3.1 7.4 1.6 59. 1.7 5.2 1.2 34. 1.6 5.3 3.4 1.5 4.3 mg/hr 1100 1100 510 1300 2100 520 8400 690 2900 850 17000 790 550 370 77 370 7100 1600 57000 1700 3900 860 24000 1200 3100 1800 780 2400 mg/kw-hr 410 390 180 460 33 7.7 120 10 23 6.2 120 5.8 -- — — — 40 8.7 320 8.8 44 9.2 260 12 900 440 210 630 mgAg C Fuelb 280 260 110 330 140 19 300 25 100 14 290 12 470 320 44 320 160 19 680 18 160 19 540 23 330 210 77 250 mg/kg 804 = as % D Fuel0 of Fuel S* 280 260 110 330 140 19 1400 100 100 140 2700 120 470 320 44 320 160 200 7000 200 160 110 3200 150 330 240 110 310 3.9 3.6 1.5 4.6 2.0 1.2 19. 1.4 1.4 1.9 37. 1.7 6.5 4.4 0.61 4.4 2.2 2.8 97. 2.8 2.2 1.5 44. 2.1 4.6 3.3 1.5 4.3 Percent of fuel sulfur converted to sulfate was computed on basis of the diesel fuel alone. The diesel fuel had a reported sulfur content of 0.24 percent by weight. ^ mg/kg C fuel represents sulfate on a combined fuel basis 'mg/kg D fuel represents sulfate on the basis of the diesel portion of ,the combined fuel Data from idle with backpressure device were 0.84 mg/m3, 77 mg/hr, 44 mg/kg D fuel0, and 0.61 percent fuel sulfur conversion These data duplicated from idle condition of methanol configuration 88 ------- 100 50 2 Intermediate Speed Percent of Full Load Figure 16. Modal sulfate r'ates from the Volvo test engines 89 ------- TABLE 44 . SULFATE EMISSION SUMMARY FROM TRANSIENT FTP OPERATION FROM THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Test Config. Diesel Methanol Methanol -Catalyst Methanol -Cat.-Bp. Ethanol Ethanol -Cat.-Bp. Transient Cycle Cold Hot Composite Cold Hot Composite Cold Hot Composite Cold Hot Composite Cold Hot Composite Cold Hot Composite Sulfate Rate mg/test 520 390 410 170 170 170 670 900 870 710 1500 1400 170 160 160 930 1000 990 mg/kw-hr 51 36 38 14 16 16 60 80 77 67 130 120 15 14 14 83 90 89 C fuel0 170 130 140 27 29 29 110 160 150 110 240 220 31 31 31 180 200 200 D fuelc 170 130 140 170 160 160 650 870 840 690 1500 1400 160 150 150 900 1000 990 804 as % of Fuel Sa 2.3 1.8 1.9 2.3 2.3 2.3 9.1. 12. 12. 9.6 20. 19. 2.3 2.1 2.1 13. 14. 14. Average diesel fuel consumption was 1.02 kg/transient cycle for dual fuel applications. The fuel had a reported sulfur content of 0.24 percent by weight DmgAg C fuel represents sulfate on a combined fuel basis "mg/kg D fuel represents sulfate on a diesel fuel basis only 90 ------- Results from 7-mode composite and transient composites are given in Table 45. In non-catalyst configurations, results from 7-mode composites TABLE 45. COMPOSITE SULFATE RATES FROM MODAL AND TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Test 7-Mode Composite Transient Composite Configuration mg/kW-hr" mg/kg C fuela mgAw~hr mgAg C fuela Diesel 145 160 38 140 Methanol 14 30 16 29 Meth.-Cat. 220 470 77 150 Meth.-Cat.-Bp. 220 470 120 220 Ethanol — NOT RUN — 14 31 Eth.-Cat.-Bp. — NOT RUN — 89 200 Eth. + Water 17 35 — NOT RUN -- mg/kg C fuel represents sulfate on the basis of total "combined" fuel input and transient composites were in agreement. When the catalyst was used, the 7-mode composite sulfate level was higher than the transient composite level due to the higher exhaust temperatures and higher loads run during the 7-mode testing. For the methanol configuration, the 7-mode brake specific sulfate increased from 14 to 220 mg/kW-hr with the addition of the catalyst. This 0.2 gAW-hr increase in brake specific sulfate prob- ably accounts for the increase in 7-mode brake specific total particu- late from 0.30 to 0.51 g/kW-hr. 4. Elemental Composition Elemental analysis of the total particulate required two particu- late samples. The carbon and hydrogen content of the total particulate were determined from particulate samples collected on glass fiber filter media by oxidation techniques. Sulfur and metal content were determined from particulate samples collected on Teflon membrane filter media (Fluoro- pore) using X-ray fluorescence techniques. The carbon and hydrogen were determined by Galbraith Laboratories, and the sulfur and metals were deter- mined by EPA-RTP. Tables 46 and 47 give the results from elemental analysis of steady- state and transient particulate samples. The results are presented as 91 ------- TABLE 46. SUMMARY OF ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS OF TOTAL PARTICULATE FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES <£> to Condition rpm/load, * 1400/2 1400/50 1400/100 Idle 2200/100 2200/50 2200/2 Test Configuration Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Eth.+Water Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Eth.+Hater Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Eth.+Water Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Meth.-Cat.Bp Eth.+Water4 Diesel Mothanol tteth.-Cat. Eth.+Water Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Eth.+Water Diesel Methnnol Meth.-Cat. Eth.+Water Element, C 86.8 75.9 75.9 71.0 66.8 47.1 18.8 46.5 91.3 77.2 10.0 54.3 59.1 65.8 40.4 43.5 65.8 63.6 77.4 2.4 48.9 82.7 69.7 19.0 68.6 71.2 69.4 73.9 70.0 H 10.4 10.5 10.4 9.6 7.9 4.5 2.3 4.5 0.9 1.9 1.2 1.2 6.4 8.7 5.8 6.2 8.7 1.7 6.2 1.7 2.5 2.5 3.2 1.5 2.7 8.3 6.5 7.1 8.5 "S" 1.04 0.55 0.72 0.62 2.98 2.92 8.75 2.51 1.26 2.53 9.68 1.54 1.15 1.32 1.34 1.28 1.32 2.73 7.04 10.91 5.26 1.76 1.75 8.38 0.79 0.65 0.53 0.62 0.93 Percent by Weight of "Total Ca 0.09 0.08 0.10 0.07 0.20 0.35 0.15 0.70 0.08 0.52 0.12 0.74 0.27 0.12 a 1.56 0.12 0.40 3.16 0.18 2.82 0.11 0.27 0.06 0.17 0.04 b a 0.43 Na b b b b b b b b b 0.51 b b b b b a b b a a b a a 0.12 0.30 b b b a _Mg_ b a 0.02 b a a 0.01 a b 0.03 a a b 0.02 b b 0.02 0.02 0.11 0.01 a b a 0.01 b b b a a Fe b a b b 0.15 a b b a 1.61 0.11 a b b a b b 0.32 1.58 0.19 0.59 a a 0.08 b b b b b Particulate" Zn a a a a 0.16 0.29 a a a a a b b 0.14 a b 0.14 0.30 1.63 0.09 1.25 0.11 0.20 a b b a a a p 0.05 a a 0.03 n.07 a a a a b a a a a b b a 0.14 0.85 0.06 0.76 0.04 0.10 a a a b b 0.09 Al b a a b b b 0.85 b a b 0.65 b b b b a b 0.04 b 0.36 0.38 0.01 b 0.34 b b b 0.08 b Totnl Ti Met«l,» b a a b b b b a b a a a b b b a b b a 0.01 b b a a b b b b 0.11 0.83 0.08 0.12 0.10 0.63 0.64 0.74 0.70 0.43 2.67 0.88 0.74 1.10 0.28 — 1.56 0.28 1.46 7.33 0.90 5.80 0.30 0.57 0.61 0.47 0.19 — 0.08 0.54 "Element was detected but was below the level of quantisation Element was not detected CTotal metals include all elements listed except C, H, and S Data duplicated from methanol configuration ------- TABLE 47. SUMMARY OP ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS OP TOTAL PARTICULATE FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Test Configuration Diesel Methanol Methanol -Catalyst Methanol -Cat.-Bp. Ethanol Ethanol -Catalyst Trans . Cycle^ Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Cold Start Hot Start Element Percent by Weight of Total Particulate C 70. 70. 44. 52. 24. 25. 31. 27. 63. 57. 43. 35. H 4.7 4.4 5.6 7.0 3.6 3.2 3.7 3.4 6.3 5.6 3.8 2.7 "S" 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.3 7.8 6.2 5.3 9.2 0.80 0.75 5.6 7.2 Ca P 0.27 0.10 0.19 0.08 0.42 0.18 0.34 0.15 0.44 0.14 0.37 0.14 0.31 O.lla 0.15a — -b 0.38 0.14 0.17a b o.na — -b O.lla b Al 0.10a b 0.05a 0.05a 6.8 8.9 2.3 2.1 0.11 0.06a 2.2 2.2 Total0 Metals % 0.38 0.27 0.65 0.54 7.38 9.41 2.72 2.25 0.62 0.23 2.31 2.31 ^These values approach the limits of quantitative analysis by X-ray technique Presence of this element was below the limit of detectability "Total Metals" consists only of Ca, P, and Al 93 ------- percent of each element in the total participate sample analyzed. The total participate sample varies with the filter type used.-1'' Total participate is defined in terms of Teflon-coated glass fiber filter media (Pallflex TA60A20, for this program).(5) Glass fiber filters tended to overestimate the total particulate, while the Teflon membrane filter results correlated well with the Teflon-coated glass fiber values. Of all the elements determined, carbon and hydrogen generally make up the bulk of the total particulate followed by sulfur and oxygen. In addition, trace amounts of a wide variety of elements which range from sodium (23 atomic weight units) to barium (137 atomic weight units). Of the trace elements, calcium, phosphorus, iron, and aluminum were most commonly found in detectable quantities. Carbon and hydrogen content were very similar among the various configurations at light load and at idle, which may be expected since only diesel fuel was consumed at light loads. Methanol and ethanol+water configurations were simi- lar, with lower carbon content than for the diesel configuration at the 50 percent load conditions. Carbon content from full load condi- tions with methanol alone was higher than with ethanol+water. The catalyst was very effective in reducing carbon content of the particu- late from the higher-powered modes of operation, where catalyst heat was sufficient for oxidation to take place. Sulfur content, noted as sulfate earlier, was substantially increased at these same high-heat power modes with the catalyst, otherwise sulfur content of the total particulate was relatively low. The sulfur content was relatively high during the maximum power modes run with methanol and ethanol+water. Similarly, the total of trace materials was relatively high for maximum power operation. It is interesting that a variety of trace elements was detected for both the maximum torque and the maximum power condi- tions where alcohol substitution for diesel fuel was greatest. Many of the trace metals detected by X-ray fluorescence are assumed to have originated from the fuel refining process, engine oil, and engine wear. In comparing results from the transient testing, carbon and hvdro- gen content appear to be independent of cold or hot start-up. Carbon content was lower for the methanol and ethanol configurations. The catalyst reduced carbon content, but not to the extent noted from the modal information. Use of the catalyst significantly increased the aluminum and sulfur levels in the particulate. The use of the backpres- sure device in conjunction with the catalyst appeared to coincide with lower aluminum content. It is assumed that the aluminum may have origi- nated from the catalyst. 5. Particle Size Distribution Particle sizing by the Sierra Model 220 cascade impactor was used to obtain particle size distributions from 7 modes of steady-state operation and from transient cycle operation of the dual-fuel engine. The size distribution plots are influenced strongly by the back-up filter, which generally accounted for approximately 50 percent or more 94 ------- of the particulate collected. Problems with the back-up filter sticking to its 0-ring seal, and with determining the weight gains of the indivi- dual impactor stages were causes for inaccuracies. In order to improve accuracy, the impactor set was operated during several transient cycles, or for one hour of steady-state operation. Due to the level of effort required and the quality of information obtained, particle sizing was limited to the methanol and the methanol-catalyst configurations for modal testing, and to transient testing of the methanol, methanol-catalyst, ethanol, and ethanol-catalyst configurations. Particle size distributions from modal operation are given in Figures 17 and 18 for the methanol and the methanol-catalyst configurations, With the catalyst, the size distribution shifted to larger particles at idle, but shifted toward smaller particles at the higher power modes. The "averages" of the particle size distributions for both configurations are given in Figure 19. The average plot for the methanol configuration included six modes of operation (2200 rpm/2 percent load condition was void). The average plot for the methanol-catalyst configuration included seven modes of operation (idle data with and without the back- pressure device were averaged together and used as one mode). The average particle size distributions indicated that more of the particles tended to be smaller when the catalyst was used. This effect may be due to the increased presence of sulfate particles as a result of the catalyst. Particle size distributions from transient operation are given in Figure 20. In the methanol and ethanol fuel configurations, about 70 percent of the particles were less than 0.11 micron BCD (Effective Cutoff Diameter). Application of the catalyst appears to have reduced the per- centage of particles under 0.11 pm diameter to about 50 percent. It is possible that by eliminating some of the fine aerosols associated with unburned fuel in transient operation, the catalyst eliminates a portion of the smaller particles, which shifts the distribution plot to the left. This process would lead to comparative preponderance of larger particles from the catalyst-equipped configurations. This trend is just opposite of that shown for steady-state operation. The difference may be due to limited sulfate formation in the catalyst during the transient testing, whereas significant sulfate was emitted during high-powered steady-state operation. In addition, sulfate storage and purge may also occur in the catalyst during transient operation. Overall, the particle size distribu- tions from the alcohol-fueled configuration were similar to those commonly reported for diesel engine particulate. (19) 6. Soluble Organic Fraction The soluble organic fraction (SOF) of the total particulate was ob- tained from particulate samples collected on 20x20 inch Pallflex filters with soxhlet extraction procedures using methylene chloride. The SOF has been reported as a percentage of the total particulate, and is refer- red to as percent solubles. This result gives an indication as to the 95 ------- 10 c o Q O W 0) +J ------- 7.4 !=t:E: w c o M U •H g OJ -P 0) •H Q U •H -P .37 gSi .11 20 40 60 80 Cumulative Percent 90 95 98 99 Smaller than BCD 99.9 Figure 18. Particle size distribution from modal operation of the Volvo TD-100A dual-duel engine with methanol and catalyst 97 ------- 7.4 o n o 8 w (U -p p 0) r-t O .11 20 40 60 80 90 95 98 99 Cumulative Percent Smaller than ECD 99.9 Figure 19. Average of particle size distribution from modal operation of the Volvo TD-100A dual-fuel engine on methanol and methanol with catalyst 98 ------- 7.4 g 4.5 2.8 - w C! o n o •r-1 e p o M 0) -P 0) •H Q O •H -P 1.6 .95 .60 .37 .11 20 40 60 80 90 95 98 99 Cumulative Percent Smaller than ECD 99.9 Figure 20. Particle Size distribution from transient operation of the Volvo TD-100A dual-fuel engine 99 ------- nature of the total particulate matter, but it makes it difficult to compare SOF emission rates of the various test configurations. Table 48 TABLE 48. SUMMARY OF SOLUBLE ORGANIC FRACTION FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Percent Solubles in Total Particulate and Condition ran/load, % 1400/2 1400/50 1400/100 Idle 2200/100 2200/50 2200/2 7 -mode Composite (Soluble Particulate Rate (g/n Diesel 90 (17.) 54 (9.9) 6.8 (4.8) 81 (6.4) 9.3 (7.3) 9.7 (7.6) 87 (43.) 0.196 gAW-hr Methanol 91 34 6. 81 21 25 83 0. g/ (37.) (3.2) 2 (0.6) (4.6) (1.4) (4.4) (52.) 201 Meth.-Cat. 93 (15.) 5.5 (1.2) 1.2 (0.6) 66b (1.2) 3.3 (2.3) 3.1 (1.8) 57 (15.) 0.072 gAW-hr r» Eth. + Water 97 (31.) 40 (3.3) 23 (3.1) 81 (4.6) 15 (1.5) 19 (4.8) 73 (49.) 0.3.91 gAW-hr summarizes both the SOF mass emission rates and percent solubles from modal operation, and Table 49 summarizes the results from transient opera- tion. Composite values were computed, and they are also given in the tables. TABLE 49. SUMMARY OF SOLUBLE ORGANIC FRACTION FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Test Percent Solubles in Total Particulatea and (Soluble Particulate Ratio (g/kW-hr)) Configuration Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Ethanol Eth. -Cat. Cold -Start 35 62 19 48 16 (.28) (.22) (.05) (.16) (.05) Hot -Start 31 75 15 53 10 (.21) (.30) (.051) (.19) (.04) Calc. Composite 32 73 16 53 11 (.22) (.29) (.05) (.19) (.04) 39 76 45 65 32 Bus (.32) (.46) (.10) (.39) (.12) Particulate samples collected on 20X20 inch Pallflex filter media and extracted using methylene chloride Idle solubles with backpressure device were 16 percent and (0.23 g/hr) 100 ------- The percent solubles from modal operation of the diesel engine were typical; namely, a relatively high percentage of organic material at low power modes and idle, decreasing as the load was increased. The methanol and the ethanol+water configurations also showed the same trends in regard to the percent solubles, but differed considerably in SOF emission rate. The dual-fuel engine produced less organic solubles than the diesel at idle, but more at the 2 percent load conditions. As mentioned before, this effect may be due to differences in diesel fuel injection geometry between the diesel engine and the dual-fuel engine. The SOF emission rates were similar for both the methanol and ethanol+water configura- tions, except for the maximum torque condition. The catalyst reduced SOF modal emission rates in all cases except the maximum torque and the maximum power conditions. The catalyst was especially effective in reducing SOF emissions during idle and the 2 percent load conditions where exhaust temperature is relatively low, perhaps acting as a trap. Use of the backpressure device at idle re- duced the SOF emissions even further. The 7-mode composites of the solubles were about the same except for the methanol-catalyst configura- tion, which showed significant reductions of SOF emissions from the light loads and idle. Although the 7-mode composite SOF values of the diesel engine and the methanol configuration are similar, their SOF emissions for individual modes were very different. The organic solubles were higher from the cold-start transient than for the hot-start transient in the diesel configuration. This result seems logical, since more unburned diesel fuel-like material would be emitted from a cold engine than from a hot engine; and this material would be collected as total particulates and later be extracted as organic solubles. The SOF emission rates from the methanol and etha- nol configurations were lower for the cold-start than for the hot-start, just the opposite of the diesel engine. If it is assumed that the cold dual-fuel engine emits unburned alcohol-like material, then it is possible that it may be lost in the extraction process by evaporation because of its low boiling point. No difference was noted in the SOF emissions between cold-start and hot-start transients with the catalyst. Although the catalyst is a temperature-sensitive device, the significant reduc- tions noted in the SOF emission rates may be the result of the catalyst's ability to act as a trap. The transient composite SOF emission was highest for the methanol configuration, followed by the diesel and the ethanol configurations. The catalyst reduced the SOF emission by 80 percent in both alcohol fueled configurations. Transient composite SOF emissions were higher from the methanol configuration than from the ethanol configuration, which may be due to different heats of vaporization. The methanol has a higher heat of vaporization, which may have more of a quenching effect on the diesel pilot fuel than does the ethanol. The bus cycle showed the same trends as noted for the transient composite, but with higher overall SOF emission rates. Characterization of the soluble organic fraction is of special interest because it contains a variety of organic compounds which are created through diesel combustion. 101 ------- 0.28 0.21 76.7 77.1 9.6 9.9 0.47 0.37 0.73 0.77 a. Elemental Composition Organic solubles from cold- and hot-start transient oper- ation of the diesel engine and the dual-fuel engine in the methanol and the methanol-catalyst configurations were analyzed for carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, and sulfur content. Table 50 lists the elements as a percent of the soluble organic fraction. Overall, there was no appreciable dif- ference between the three configurations with respect to carbon and hydrogen content. The catalyst appears to have increased the nitrogen content and decreased the sulfur content of the SOF relative to the diesel and methanol configurations. TABLE 50. ELEMENTAL COMPOSITION OF SOLUBLE ORGANIC FRACTION FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Test Test SOF Element, Percent of SOF Configuration Cycle g/kW-hr C H N S_ Diesel Cold Hot Methanol Cold 0.22 84.1 13.1 0.29 0.72 Hot 0.30 84.5 12.9 0.35 0.50 Methanol Cold 0.05 77.9 10.6 0.72 0.50 -Catalyst Hot 0.06 80.0 11.2 0.75 0.60 b. Boiling Point Distribution The organic soluble fraction resembles a very heavy oil or a varnish. A high-temperature GC-simulated boiling point distribution with internal standard (Cg-C^) was conducted on SOF from cold and hot transient operation of the diesel engine, and from the dual-fuel engine in the methanol and the mathanol-catalyst configurations. The boiling point distribution was determined from gas chromatographic output normally used with petroleum oil or fuel samples. The numerical results of these analyses are presented in Table 51. All samples showed rela- tively high levels of "residue," that is about 34 percent of the SOF sample submitted could not be volatilized below 606°C, which was the maximum column equivalent temperature reached during the procedure used. Extracts from the diesel hot-start and the methanol hot-start were very similar. All the boiling point distributions appeared to be similar up to the 40 percent point. The catalyst seems to have reduced some of the middle weight paraffins, in that the 60 percent point is 571°C instead of 518°C for the methanol case. 102 ------- TABLE 51. BOILING POINT DISTRIBUTION OF SOLUBLE ORGANIC FRACTION FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Boiling Temperature at Distillation Point,°C Distillation Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Point Cold Hot Cold Hot Cold Hot IBP 269 292 312 285 285 310 10% point 381 384 389 392 381 387 20% point 414 414 415 415 410 415 30% point 440 436 440 435 436 439 40% point 469 460 471 456 467 469 50% point 502 485 514 482 506 512 60% point 555 519 589 518 558 571 70% point 580 588 80% point 90% point Recovery. % @ 606°C 64 72 61 72 65 63 c. Fractionation by Relative Polarity The composition of the soluble organic fraction of the total particulate is complex, and its separation into individual com- pounds is very difficult. Fractionation of the SOF by high performance liquid chormatography (HPLC) separates the soluble portion into a series of fractions of increasing molecular polarity. Figures 21 through 27 show the HPLC chromatographic outputs for direct comparison of the rela- tive concentration of increasingly polar compounds from cold and hot transient operation of the diesel engine and the dual-fuel engine. Each figure contains three traces, one representing the solvent composition, a second representing the ultraviolet detector response, and the other representing the fluorescence detector response. Initially, the solvent is composed of 95 percent hexane and 5 percent methylene chloride, a relatively non-polar mixture. This solvent mixture is used from the start of the chromatogram to 17 minutes into the elution period. During this period, non-polar compounds elute. BaP elutes at eight minutes into the run. Many non-polar PNA compounds also elute during this period, and give ultraviolet and fluorescence responses. After 17 minutes, the polarity of the solvent is increased at a rate of 5 percent methylene chloride per minute. During this transition period of solvent polarity, more polar compounds are eluted, giving fluorsecence and ultraviolet spectra. At the end of this transition period (36 minutes into the run), the solvent is 100 percent methylene chloride and 9-fluorenone elutes. With 100 percent methylene chloride, even more polar compounds elute. Acridine elutes during this polar period (at about 70 minutes). 103 ------- I 80 1 I /• 1 • 1 . ' 1 - r -. i 4 - ~1~~ — I i i _ i 1 - • H " 1 ': -'.-• - ^ ' 1 " I - t 1 ) -j ! ;- ; .'--. - " ; — ' -1--. _->^ --!-- - — -'" ' __, - -. ULTI A / i \ -_ RAVI : ^— ! i .. .-: . ~;\ 4 -' \| OLE.T /\ ,-• 1 (\ j! -1 I- \ M A / J\J i i i i i 70 60 50 40 • ! - \, V ~ ~ L " SOLA 1 \l ( " - • -• - 1-- "• . f} '•' \= AS V 1 /ENT POLARIC r~ 1. .]_.._ ; r \ T \ -. : - X^- \- \ :\ • j i • • \ \ \ \ \ \ •'- r-r t P¥ . • , • , t- T ' _ ; 1 . ! ( 1 1 -r - i i ~fl "T - i: •;•. . " ; 1 1 30 20 10 0 Time, minutes Figure 21. HPLC response to cold-start diesel transient SOF -- SOLVENT POLARITY i— ULTRAVIOLET JH \| : i 50 40 30 Time, minutes Figure 22. HPLC response to hot-start diesel transient SOF 104 ------- I .80 70 I 60 I 50 40 Time, minutes 30 Figure 23. HPLC response to cold-start methanol transient SOF 80 70 Time, minutes Figure 24. HPLC response to hot-start methanol transient SOF 105 ------- 5 3- SOLVENT 'POLARITY 10 o 50 40 30 Time, minutes Figure 25. HPLC response to cold-start methanol-catalyst transient SOF SOLVENT POLARITY Time, minutes Figure 26. HPLC response to hot-start methanol-catalyst transient SOF 106 ------- Time, minutes Figure 27. HPLC response to hot-start ethanol-catalyst transient SOF Figures 21 and 22 show the chormatograms from the HPLC fractionation of the SOF from the cold-start and hot-start transient tests of the diesel configuration. Fluorescence from the cold-start indicated non-polar PNA compounds (such as BaP) with only slight response at the end of the transition region and some response at 50 minutes, near the end of the polar compound region. Ultraviolet response seemed rela- tively high at the end of the transition region. Fluorescence from the hot-start indicated few non-polar compounds, but did show a peak near the end of the non-polar region. Generally, fluorescence from the tran- sition region was minimal, with some response near the beginning and end of the polar solvent region. For some reason, the ultraviolet response was very high, particularly in the region where BaP elutes and at the beginning of the polar region. HPLC chromatograms for the cold- and hot-start transient tests of the methanol configuration are given in Figures 23 and 24, respectively. Fluorescence from the cold-start with methanol was rela- tively strong in the non-polar PNA region of the chormatogram. No fluorescence was noted in the transition region, but there were definite peaks around 47 and 50 minutes of the polar region. Ultraviolet response 107 ------- was minimal for the cold-start with methanol. Fluorescence from the hot- start with methanol showed some presence of BaP-type compounds, but not to the extent noted from the cold-start. Similar to the cold-start, there was no response in the transitional region for the hot-start methanol sample. Also, there was a relatively strong fluorescence peak around 40 minutes, about the beginning of the polar region, and an absence of the compounds which had been seen around 50 minutes. A significant ultra- violet response was noted at 50 minutes. Results from cold- and hot-start transient tests of the methanol-catalyst configuration are shown in Figures 25 and 26. The fluorescence responses from the cold-start sample were extremely large in the non-polar region. Several compounds were also noted at the end of the transition region. As with the cold-start methanol, there was a definite fluorescence peak around 47 and 50 minutes, but it was signifi- cantly larger when the catalyst was used. The ultraviolet response was fairly significant in the non-polar region as well as near the end of the transition region. As may have been expected with a hot-start catalyst sample, fluorescence in the non-polar region was significantly reduced from that of the cold-start with catalyst. It is interesting that the catalyst seemed to have no effect in reducing the fluorescence peak noted around 40 minutes or the ultraviolet peak around 50 minutes noted for the hot-start methanol configuration. In fact, the traces from the hot-start methanol and the hot-start methanol-catalyst confi- guration are almost identical beyond the non-polar region. A sample from the hot-start ethanol-catalyst configuration was submitted for HPLC fractionation and is shown in Figure 27. The fluorescence emissions were noted early in the non-polar region and in the polar region at about 50 minutes. The ultraviolet response was minimal except for the near transition-polar region, where it was significant. The hot-start results are weighted more heavily than cold in the composite calculations, so they are considered very important in total population exposure. The hot-start sample from the methanol con- figuration had more fluorescence response in the early polar region and less response in the non-polar region than the hot-start sample from the diesel configuration. The catalyst appeared to have little effect on the hot-start methanol fluorescence response, although the catalyst signifi- cantly affected the cold-start results. The response from the ethanol- catalyst hot-start sample was very different from the methanol-catalyst hot-start, in that the ethanol-catalyst sample had strong fluorescence peaks around 3 minutes and 50 minutes, and had a relatively high ultra- violet peak around 40 minutes. 108 ------- d. Benzo(a)pyrene Benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) is often an indicator of PNA content in the soluble organic fraction. BaP content was determined for transient composite SOF from diesel, methanol, ethanol, methanol-catalyst, and ethanol-catalyst test configurations. In addition, BaP content was de- termined for 7-mode composite SOF from diesel, methanol, methanol-catalyst, and ethanol+water test configurations. Transient composite SOF was made up of the organic extract from one cold-start, plus six hot-start total particulate samples collected on 20x20 inch filters. The 7-mode composite SOF was made up by combining portions of individual modal extracts into one common sample on the basis of modal emission rate of total particulate, the modal weighting factor, and the modal percentage of extractables. The BaP results from both the transient composite and the 7-mode composite from the various test configurations are given in Table 52. The brake specific BaP was also computed for comparison purposes, and takes into account the BaP concentration, SOF rate and the work pro- duced. In all cases, the BaP was lower for the 7-mode composite than for the transient composite from a given configuration. TABLE 52. SUMMARY OF TRANSIENT COMPOSITE AND 7-MODE COMPOSITE BENZO(A)PYRENE EMISSIONS FROM THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Test Configuration Diesel Methanol Methanol -Catalyst Ethanol Ethanol -Catalyst Ethanol +Water Cycle Composite Transient 7-Mode Transient 7-Mode Transient 7-Mode Transient 7-Mode Transient 7-Mode Transient 7-Mode Benzo(a)pyrene Emissions BaP/mg SOF yg BaP/kW-hr yg BaP/kg fuel 0.0168 0.0032 0.0061 0.0043 0.0055 0.0011 0.0017 0.0921 0.0064 3.7 0.64 1.7 0.86 0.33 0.08 0.32 3.7 1.2 13. 2.4 3.2 1.8 0.60 0.17 0.74 2.4 109 ------- Generally, unhurried fuel-like matter is emitted during light load operation where the diesel combustion mixture is very lean. Levels of BaP from tran- sient operation in the methanol, methanol-catalyst and ethanol+water con- figuration were all very similar and lower than for the diesel configu- ration. The 7-mode composite BaP level from the diesel and methanol con- figurations were somewhat similar. The catalyst was effective in reducing the 7-mode composite BaP level from the methanol configuration, but had little effect on the transient composite BaP level. In contrast, when ethanol was used, the catalyst significantly increased the transient composite BaP level. The reason for such an increase is puzzling, but may be due to the relative amount of oxygen introduced into the combustion chamber as fuel. e. Ames Response The Ames test, as employed in this program, refers to a bacterial mutagenesis plate assay with Salmonella typhimurium according to the method of Ames.(13) This bioassay determines the ability of chemical compounds or mixtures to cause mutation of DNA in the bacteria, positive results occurring when histidine-dependent strains of bacteria revert (or are mutated) genetically to forms which can synthesize histi- dine on their own. Samples of the soluble organic fraction representing transient composites and 7-mode composites, were submitted for bioassay over five tester strains, TA1535, TA1537, TA1538, TA98 and TA100. All five strains are histidine-dependent cells by virtue of mutations within the histidine functional genetic unit. When these histidine-dependent cells are grown on minimal medium agar plates con- taining a limited amount of histidine, only those cells that revert to histidine independence are able to form colonies. The trace amount of histidine allows all the bacteria plated to undergo a few divisions, which is essential for mutagenesis to occur. It is these histidine- independent revertants which are scored as colonies against a slight background growth consisting of histidine-requiring cells that have depleted the histidine present within the minimal medium. In addition to mutations in the histidine functional genetic unit, all the tester strains have a defective lipopolysaccharide coat which allows large molecules to permeate the bacterial wall, thus increasing bacterial sensitivity to mutagenic aromatic compounds. Furthermore, a U.V. mutation decreases bacterial sensitivity to addi- tional mutagenic agents. TA1535 and its plasmid-containing counterpart, TA100, detect base pair substitutions, while TA1537 (and TA1538 with its plasmid-containing counterpart, TA98) respond to frameshift mutagens. The plasmids present in TA98 and TA100 are believed to cause an increase in error-prone DNA repair which leads to many more mutations. Thus, the five tester strains in tandem provide a very sensitive method for the detection of potential mutagenic environmental samples. 11C ------- Samples of the organic soluble fraction from transient composites and 7-mode composites of the various engine configurations were submitted for bioassay over the five tester strains, with and without metabolic activation. The extractables were tested in two separate groups. The first group consisted of transient composite SOF samples from methanol, methanol-catalyst, ethanol, and ethanol-catalyst configurations. The second group consisted of transient composite samples from methanol and diesel configuration along with 7-mode com- posite samples from the diesel, methanol, methanol-catalyst and the ethanol+water configurations. Results from these tests are given in Table 53. In addition, the second group also contained samples from seven individual steady-state modes from the diesel, methanol and methanol-catalyst configurations. These individual modal SOF samples were tested using only the TA98 tester strain, with and without metabolic activation. Results from these individual modal tests are given in Table 54. Results given in both Tables 53 and 54 include the slope of dose response, which represents the statistically determined slope of the function representing revertants per plate versus micrograms SOF dosage. This result is termed "specific activity," and is an indication of the level of mutagenic potential of the extract. In Table 53, results are also given in terms of brake specific response, which represents the specific activity multiplied by the SOF brake specific emission rate. The units for the brake specific response are then revertants/plate kW-hr The "revertants per plate" per "kW-hr" is useful for comparison purposes, but has no practical meaning. Samples from the first group were tested twice over a period of one and one-half months. The specific activities from these replicate tests are given in Table 53 under the headings, "Test 1" and "Test 2." The average of these specific activities was used in conjunction with the brake specific emission of SOF to calculate the brake specific response. Within the first group, there was good repeatability between the two tests from both the methanol and the ethanol config- urations, but not when the catalyst was used. The ethanol configuration had twice the specific activity of the methanol configuration. The specific activities of both the methanol and ethanol configurations were substantially higher when the catalyst was used. Since the catalyst reduced the SOF emission, the brake specific response from the methanol- catalyst configuration was almost the same as from the methanol configu- ration. The specific activity of the ethanol-catalyst configuration increased greatly, so that the brake specific response was generally greater than from the ethanol configuration, even though the SOF emission was substantially reduced by the catalyst. Ill ------- TABLE 53. SUMMARY OF AMES RESPONSE TO TRANSIENT COMPOSITE AND MODAL COMPOSITE SOF FROM THE VOLVO TEST ENGINESa Total Soluble Strain TA98 Strain TA100 Strain TA1535 Strain TA1537 Strain TA1S38 Engine Test Configuration Methanol Trans -1 Meth-Cat. Trans . 1 Ethanol Trans.1 Eth.-Cat. Trans . 1 Repeat Methanol Trans . 2 Diesel Trans.2 D J.6S6 1 7-Mode Methanol 7-Mode Meth.-Cat. 7-Mode2 Eth.+Water 7-Mode2 Part. Organic Rate Fract. g/kH-hr g/kW-hr 0.39 0.29 0.33 0.05 0.35 0.19 0.38 0.04 0 . 39 0 . 29 0.70 0.22 0.69 0.20 0.30 0.20 0.51 0.07 0.33 0.19 Metab. Activ. Status No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes Specific Activity^ Test 1 Test 2 1.5 2.3 3.4 2.8 21.8 17.2 14.1 19.6 4.3 3.8 6.8 7.0 37.5 42.8 21.8 66.3 0.4 0.6 2.1 2.5 0.9 0.6 2.3 2.8 1.3 2.2 0 . 04 0.06 Brake Specific Responsec 0.55 0.90 0.98 0.84 0.77 1.31 1.61 1.76 0.12 0.17 0.46 0.55 0.18 0.12 0.46 0.56 0.09 0.15 0.08 0.11 Specific Activity13 Test 1 Test 2 3.2 5.1 2.7 2.9 9.3 24.4 8.3 40.1 9.8 11.8 7.8 6.9 4.0 57.7 18.2 141 1.7 2.2 8.8 6.2 16 . 3 3.5 • — 3.9 3.6 4.4 5.2 1.6 1.4 Brake Specific Response0 1.20 0.81 0.84 1.21 2.05 1.40 1.23 3.18 0.49 0.64 1.94 1.36 3.26 0.70 0.78 0.72 0.31 0.36 0.30 0.27 Specific Activity13 Test 1 Test 2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 2.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.0 1.1 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.2 — 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 Brake Specific Response0 0.0 0.04 0.01 0.06 0.01 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.0 0.15 0.0 0.04 0.0 0.06 0.0 0.02 0.0 0.01 0.0 0.02 Specific Activity) Test 1 Test 2 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.6 19.2 10.9 3.0 16.3 1.1 1.0 3.0 1.2 87.4 74.7 33.2 438 0.1 0.1 1.6 1.0 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.1 Brake Specific Response0 0.10 0.19 0.75 0.48 0.20 0.40 3.24 9.42 0.03 0.03 0.35 0.22 0.04 0.12 0.06 0.10 0.04 0.04 0.0 0.02 Specific Activity1* Test 1 Test 2 1.1 0.8 3.4 3.8 35.1 12.5 6.5 22.8 2.3 3.8 5.4 6.0 5.8 51.8 37. 308 0.2 0.4 1.8 2.4 1.2 0.8 1.2 0.8 0.8 2.3 0.2 0.5 Brake Specific Response0 0.28 1.04 1.19 0.73 0.58 1.08 1.15 6.90 0.06 0.12 0.40 0.53 0.24 0.16 0.24 0.16 0.06 0.16 0.04 0.10 °SOF was submitted and tested in two separate groups. The first group is designated by a "1" and the second group is designated by a "2" in the "Engine Test Configuration" column. In the first group, duplicate tests were conducted in order to establish test to test repeatability. Specific activity results from statistical analysis of revertants of bacteria culture per microgram of SOF dose °BraJce specific response has units of: millions of revertants/plate per kilowatt hour ------- TABLE 54. SUMMARY OF AMES RESPONSE TO INDIVIDUAL MODAL SAMPLES OF SOF FROM THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES Sample Test Condition rpm/%load 1400/2 1400/50 1400/100 Idle 2200/100 2200/50 2200/2 7-Mode Composite 7-Mode Brake Spec . TA98 Metabolic Activation Status No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yea No Yes No Yes No Yes Diesel Conf iquration Soluble Fraction g SOF/hr 17.0 9.9 4.8 6.4 7.3 7.6 43. 12. 2d — — Specific Activity3 106rev./)Jg SOF 0.6 0.6 1.7 2.2 2.6 1.2 0.9 2.3 10.6 4.7 2.8 1.6 0.8 0.7 0.9d 0.6d — — Specific Rateb 106rev./hr 10.2 10.2 16.8 21.8 12.5 5.8 5.8 14.7 77.4 34.3 21.3 12.2 34.4 30.1 11.0° 7.3° 0.18d 0.12 Methanol Configuration Soluble Fraction g SOF/hr 37. 3.2 0.6 4.6 1.4 4.4 52. 12. 5d — — Specific Activitya 106rev/ug SDF 0.5 0.5 9.9 9.9 11.0 2.6 0.6 0.6 12.8 12.3 6.9 6.7 0.5 0.7 2.3d 2.8d — Specific Rateb 106rev./hr 18.5 18.5 31.7 31.7 6.6 1.6 2.8 2.8 17.9 17.2 30.4 29.5 26.0 36.4 28. 8C 35.0° 0.46d 0.56d Meth Soluble Organ. Prac. g- SOF/hr 15. 1.2 0.6 1.2 2.3 1.8 15. 4.5d — . -Cat . Conf iguration Specific Activity" 106rev./ugSOF 2.7 2.8 6.8 15.7 1.2 0.9 5.9 6.2 7.9 17.3 6.1 16.5 2.3 4.5 1.3d 2.2d — Specific Rate13 106rev./hr 40.5 42.0 8.2 18.8 0.7 0.5 7.1 7.4 18.2 39.8 11.0 29.7 34.5 67.5 5.8C 9.9C 0.09d 0.16d Specific activity has units of: millions revertants/plate per microgram of SOF dose Specific rate has units of : millions revertants/plate per hour Computed on the basis of 7-mode brake specific response from composite sample and a 7-mode ,composite power output of 62.2kW Data transferred from Table 53. Note: A blank filter was processed, specific activity of TA98 with metabolic activation was 0.2, without metabolic activation was 0.4 10 revertants/plate per microgram dose ------- The second group of SOF samples contained another sample from the methanol configuration in order to tie the two test groups together for comparison purposes. Unfortunately, the Ames test response from the repeat methanol sample did not resemble the results from the first group. The poor "repeatability" could have been due to a change in the bacteria strains which may have occurred during the four-month time period between the testing of the two groups. Within the second group, the diesel transient SOF sample had higher specific activities and brake specific responses than the methanol transient SOF sample. If it could be assumed that the results from both test groups (for the methanol configuration) were equivalent, it would imply that the Ames response to the transient diesel samples would approach the magnitude of the response to the transient samples from the dual-fuel configurations with catalyst. The 7-mode composite SOF samples were tested for Ames response as part of the second group. The modal composite diesel generally had greater specific activity than the modal composite methanol, although this trend varied with tester strain. Strain TA98 indicated that modal composite methanol activity was higher than modal composite diesel activity, whereas strain TA100 indicated an opposite trend and the other strains showed no real difference between the two. Comparisons between specific activities of the modal composites from the methanol and the methanol-catalyst configurations showed minimal differences, but the brake specific response was lower with the catalyst due to the signifi- cant reductions in brake specific SOF emission. Generally, the specific activity from the modal composite of the ethanol+water configuration was lower than from the methanol configuration, at least for strains TA98 and TA100. The individual modal responses using TA98 are given in Table 54 and indicate that the specific activity from idle and the "two percent load" conditions were about the same for both the diesel and the methanol configurations. Above these light-load conditions, the specific activity from the methanol configuration was significantly higher than that of the diesel configuration. These trends in steady-state responses may explain the different trends noted for transient composite and steady- state modal composite samples. Modal composite results, using TA98, indicated greater specific activity for the methanol configuration than for the diesel configuration. Trends from the transient test were just the opposite. Considering the individual modal data, the 7-mode composite results from the methanol configuration would be expected to yield higher activities because the 7-mode composite included more heavily loaded operation than the transient test. The sepcific activity of the transient composite sample from the methanol-catalyst configuration was higher than for the modal composite sample. Individual modal data indicated that the specific activity, with the catalyst, increased during the light loads ------- and decreased during the maximum torque mode, with little or no change during the maximum power mode. Once again, considering the modal data, the more lightly-loaded transient test results would be expected to have a higher specific activity than the more heavily loaded 7-mode composite. Overall, Ames response to transient composite SOP samples indicated that methanol and ethanol configurations had less potential for bioactivity than the diesel configuration, but that the addition of the catalyst may have substantially increased the level of bioactivity above that of the diesel configuration. Seven-mode composite results indicated that the methanol had a higher potential for bioactivity than the diesel, considering only strain TA98, and that the catalyst actually reduced this potential. Individual modal data indicated that the methanol configuration had about the same potential for biological activity as the diesel configuration, at the light load conditions, where only diesel fuel was comsumed. This potential appears to have increased as more methanol was substituted for diesel fuel; yet as more methanol was substituted, the quantity of SOF decreased substantially. Individual modal data indicated that the catalyst significantly increased the potential for bioactivity during the light loads. In addition to testing various soluble organic fractions extracted from particulate samples collected on Pallflex filter media, a blank filter was also extracted using the same procedure. The resulting extract (3.1 mg) was processed for Ames response using strain TA98. The results indicated that some activity was apparent. This response, al- though notable for a blank, may be the result of background activity scaled up by the use of a small sample. 115 ------- REFERENCES 1. Holmer, E., Berg, P. S., and B-I Bertilsson, "The Utilization of Alternative Fuels in a Diesel Engine Using Different Methods", SAE Paper No. 800544, Congress and Exposition, Cobo Hall, Detroit, February 25-29, 1981. 2. Volvo Service Manual - Diesel Engines, Section 2, General. 3. Federal Register, "Gaseous Emission Regulations for 1984 and Later Model Year Heavy-Duty Engines", Vol. 45, No. 14, January 21, 1980. 4. Federal Register, "Heavy-Duty Engines for 1979 and Later Model Years", Thursday, September 8, 1977. 5. Federal Register, "Control of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles and New Motor Vehicle Engines; Particulate Regulation for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines", Wednesday, January 7, 1981. 6. MoNair, H. M., and E.J. Bonelli, "Basic Gas Chromatography." Varian Aerograph, 2700 Mitchell Drive, Walnut Creek, Calif. 94598, February 1965. 7. Canton, E. J., S. S. Lestz and W. E. Meyer, "Lean Combustion of Methanol-Gasoline Blends in a Single-Cylinder SI Engine", SAE Paper 750698 presented at the Fuels and Lubricants Meeting, Houston, Texas, June 1975. 8. Smith L.R., Parness, M. A., Fanick, E. R., and Dietzmann, H. E., "Analytical Procedures for Characterizing Unregulated Emissions from Vehicles Using Middle-Distillate Fuels." Interim Report, Contract 68-02-2497^ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, April 1980. 9. Bykowski, Bruce B., "Gasohol, TEA, MTBE Effects on Light-Duty Emissions", Final Report of Task No. 6, Contract 68-03-2377 for Environmental Protection Agency, October 1979. 10. Levins, P. L., and Kendall, D. A., "Application of Odor Technology to Mobile Source Emission Instrumentation," CRC Project CAPE 7-68 under Contract No. 68-03-0561, September 1973. 11. Information Report of the Measurement and Characterization of Diesel Exhaust Emissions (CRC-APRAC Project No. CAPI-1-64), prepared by the Chemical Characterization Panel of the CRC Program Group on Composition of Diesel Exhaust. 116 ------- REFERENCES (Cont'd) 12. Swarin, S. J., and Williams, R. L., "Liquid Chromatographic Determination of Benzo(a)pyrene in Diesel Exhaust Particulate: Verification of the Collection and Analytical Methods", Research Publication GMR-3127, General Motors Research Laboratories, Warren, Michigan, October 1979. 13. Ames, B., J. McCann and E. Yamasaki, "Methods for Detecting Carcinogens and Mutagens with the Salmonella/Mannalian-Microsome Mutagenicity Test." Mutation Research, 31, pp, 347-364, 1975. 14. McCann, J., et al. "Detection of Carcinogens as Mutagens in the Salmonella/ Microsome Test: Assay of 300 Chemicals." Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., Vol. 72, No. 12:5135-5139, December 1975. 15. Martin, S. P., Urban, C. M., "Emissions from Heavy-Duty Engines Using the 1984 Transient Test Procedure Volume 1 - Gasoline." Draft Final Report being prepared for Environmental Protection Agency under Contract No. 68-03-2603, July 1981. 16. Ingalls, M. N., and Karl J. Springer, "Measurement of Sulfate and Sulfur Dioxide in Automotive Exhaust", Final Report EPA-460/3-76-015 prepared under Contract No. 68-03-2118 for the Environmental Protection Agency, August 1976. 17. Arthur D. Little, Inc., "Evaluation of Filter Media for Quantative Collection of Particulate Matter From Engine Exhaust", Final Report prepared for Environmental Protection Agency under EPA Contract No. 68-02-1211, March 29, 1977. 18. Internal Memo from Terry L. Ullman to Karl J. Springer, Southwest Research Institute, Department of Emissions Research, Pallflex vs. Glass fiber Filter Media, June 1979. 19. Springer, Karl J. , "Characterization of Sulfates, Odor, Smoke, POM and Particulates From Light and Heavy-Duty Engines - Part IX." Final Report EPA 460/3-79-007 prepared under Contract 68-03-2417 for the Environmental Protection Agency, June 1979. 117 ------- APPENDIX A THIRTEEN MODE FTP TEST RESULTS - ALL CONFIGURATIONS ------- TABLE A-I i3-Mor>E FEDERAL nitstu EMISSION trcLE 1979 EMMNEi VOIVO TD-ion C DIFSFL nsTlflb-Ol FUELl FM-HhS-F BAROMETER 29,IS PROJECTi]l-SR10-onb DATFl 03/20/81 •> \ PC f rnNo / I.PM i f i 4 s u 7 H M 10 1 1 12 1 3 JfHF - 2 TNTE R , ?S INTER , Sd TNTFW - »S INTFH - 1 n o INTER , I ' ' I F. / inn PATFD > »S RATFD - V RATED t ?S PAfFD > 2 HATED / roi E > ' SHIP. / 14110. / IH on , / 1 M (JM . ' mno. > 14 fid. ' SOO. ' 22im, ' i?^nn. ' 2 2 tin. ' ??UO. 1 20UM , ' S(lO . OPS N X M I'. 14. 21 7. 439. bhS. R79. 0. 778. 5flh. 388. 118. 1 b. 0. POhER OBS KW .0 2.0 31.8 b4 .4 17.1 128.1 .0 179.4 135,0 B9.4 45, b 3,1 .0 FLOW KG/MIN . n20 . 0 b 5 .115 ,250 , 3bO ,484 ,020 .731 ,5bb ,420 ,270 .153 .020 ATH FLOW KG/MIN ?'.4S 7.15 7.31 7'.Pb 1.01 9.99 2,29 IB. SI 1 b,SS 11.80 12. 9h 11. Sb 2.14 INTAKE HUMID C/Kf, 3.1 3.1 3,1 3.1 3.1 3.9 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1,5 1.5 1.5 NOX CORR MCT .889 ,890 ,899 ,9 1 0 .117 .124 .101 .123 ,919 .115 ,910 ,904 ,ini HC PPM 4BO, 488. 312, 288, IBB. 112. 4R8. 100. 120. 13b. 2on, 49b. 49b, MEASURED CO CO? PPM PCT 15?, 231, 131, HI. HI. 332, 311. 311. 50b. 112, 311, srih, 412, l.bB 1.83 4,2b b.B9 8,79 10, bl 1.59 8,88 7.52 b,21 4.bO 2.71 l.bB NOX PPM 330, 115, blS, 1200, IbSO, 1755, IbO, 1200, 100, 590, 385, 18S, 340, CALCULATED GRAMS / HOUR HC CO NOX 32. 102, bS, bb, SO. 31. 35, 53, 58. 58, 73, Ibb, "• bl, 11, 1 JB , 83, 55, 183. 15, 31b, 157, 331, 224 , 333, 55, bl, 117, 3bb, 778, 12H, 1455, 75, 1794, 1221, 711, 401. 1BO, b7, MODE 1 2 9 4 S b 7 H 9 10 11 12 13 MODE 1 2 3 4 S b 7 9 9 10 11 1? 13 ("Al. CHLATFD C.PAMS/KG.FIIFL GRAMS/KW.HP HC CO 27. S2 SI. 4? Pb. 1 U 25.14 7,49 20.41 4.42 S.S5 ?.11 2.54 1 . 1 h b.29 29. h? 3", 52 1.21 7,22 1.70 13.4? ?.1f) H.27 i fl ! 1 1 3 b .' 3 ? M.47 4b.93 Mnx HC qn ,qq **** '".n4 51.19 42.ni ?.ns 51. HI) 1.01 S K . '» 7 .51 SO. )4 ,?b b3.91 «» 4II.9U .3(1 H S , 9 •{ .S3 F H . 3 ri . b > 24 . 79 1,59 ll.bl) 48. b 7 Sb,94 *** CO NOX ** * 49,7f\| 58, 9) 5,59 11,50 1,29 12,07 .Sb 12,51 1.42 11,29 ** * l,7b 10,00 3,39 9,04 3.74 7.99 4,1] 8,80 97. bl 52, bb ** * F/A F/A DRY MEAS STOICH ,(JORO ,ObB7 ,0091 ,0h87 ,0199 ,0b87 ,0319 ,0h87 ,0401 .ObB7 ,04Sb ^Ob87 ,n08b ,0b87 ,1)397 ,0ti87 ,0344 ,0h87 .0285 '.ObB7 ,0201 .ObH7 ,ni33 .Ob87 ,0084 ,ob87 "PHI" ,117 ,133 ,290 ,4fa5 ,SB4 ,708 ,12b ,578 ,501 ,H5 , JUS ,193 WET HC CORR FACT .983 .182 ,9bl .939 .924 .910 ,9H4 .123 .131 .944 .958 .974 .183 F/A F/A PCT CALC MEAS ,0084 5,0 ,0090 «,9 ,0204 2,3 ,0322 ,9 ,040b 1,3 ,0487 ,1 ,0080 •7,0 ,0411 3,5 ,0351 2.2 ,0292 2,5 ,0218 4,4 ,0133 .3 ,0084 .1 POWER CORR FACT ,987 ,997 ,998 ,998 1.003 1 ,010 ,994 1,055 1 ,042 1,032 1,02? 1.015 ,192 BSFC CORR KG/KW-HR * 1.9b7 .274 .233 .221 .223 * .232 .241 .273 .317 2,b49 *** MODAL WEIGHT FACTOR ,0b7 .080 ,080 ,Q8n ,080 ,080 ,0b7 ,080 ,080 ,OBO ,080 ,080 ,0b7 MODE 1 2 3 4 S b 7 B 9 in 1 1 12 13 CVCLF COMPOSITE USING 13-MODE WEIGHT FACTORS Q cur oon L O f« f f\ BSHC * RSNOX e n CORR . BSFC - n 040 GRAM/KW«HR mrDAU/i/kj»MR oKMM/^Hw^R OPQ rDAUyvbVvHR ,BCi oKflnX"'"'''^ ,Bb9 GRAM/KW-HH ,2b9 KG/KW-HR t \ t \ ( ( 77b 1 * * D ? in i C f J 11 i 6O7R § U f D 8.855 »H2 GRAM/BHP-HR ) GRA-M/BHPHR ) GRAM/BHP«HR ) LBS/BHP-HR ) NOX CORRECTION APPLIED t ------- TABLE A-2. 13.MODE FEDERAL DIESEL EMISSION CYCLE 1179 ENGINI-i VOLVO TD-100 C DIESEL BAROMETER 2S.OH TtSTj (lb-02 FUEL I EM-4b5-F PROJEC T \| 1 l-5830-l)0b DATEl 03/20/81 i U) pnwpH rf\|(;l PCT _ COND / l 2 3 4 5 t 7 8 1 10 11 12 11 2 ?5 SO 75 ino inn 75 5(1 ?5 2 IDI.F / INTER / INTER / INTER / INTER / INTER / IDLE / RATED / RATED / RATED / RATED / RAlfn / IDLE / '•it RPH snn. 141)0. 14 on. 1 400. 1400. 1 4 \) 0 . 5iin. 22on , 2?uo , 22nn. 2?on. 22on, sun. TnRQUfc UBS N M U. 18. 221. 441. bb2. 882. 0. 773. 579. 387. 193. 15. 0. POWER OB3 KW ,0 2,b 3?, 4 b4.b 17,11 121,3 .0 178.1 133,4 81,1 44.4 3.1* ,0 MILL FLOW KG/MIN ,021 ,072 ,150 ,250 .357 .488 ,018 .734 ,5b7 ,41R ,2b2 , 14b ,021 AIR INTAKt FI nw HUMID KG/MIN G/KG 2'. 37 4 b 7'. 13 4 7'. 30 4 7,72 4 8.R5 4 1.17 4 2'.?b 4 18. 41 4 lb.42 4 14. b2 4 12'. 70 4 11 '. 4 9 4 2.30 4 b 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 NOX CORR FACT ,102 ,101 ,110 ,111 ,924 .131 .885 ,117 .112 ,90b ,B98 .BIO ,90b HC PPM 488, 448, 3,1 h. 280, 204, 128, 480, 112, 124. 128, 23b. 4 ?2, 480, MEASURED CO C02 PPM HCT 372. 319, 425, 151, 151, 425, 412, 351, 532, 431, 30b, 425. 385, I,b3 2,02 4,40 7,07 1,01 10, 9b 1,51 8,88 7,52 b,21 4,4b 2,bO 1,51 NOX PPM 340, 240, b45, 1245, 1710, 1785, 340, 1215, 900, 515, 380, 180, 330, CALCULATED GRAMS / HOUR HC CO NOX 37, 14, bb, b3, 52, 38, 32, bO, bO, 54, Bb, 157. 37, 5b, Ibb, 173, fa8, 75, 228, 54, 357, 481, 355, 215, 271, 51, 75, 14b, 310, 715, 1221, 1455, b4, 1B10, 1212, 710, 312, 172, 75, MODE 1 2 i 4 5 b 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 MOOF 1 2 3 4 5 b 7 H 1 10 11 12 13 CALCULATED F/A F/A GMAMs/Kr.-FUfL f.RAMS/KW.HR DRY 2H ? 1 f 4 2 I ?9 1 1 2 5 17 ?1 nr .R1 . 71 . 3b ,?n . >4 3 t 28 .03 • ' " .75 .lb .45 .11 .1)8 CO 43. 73 38.24 11.17 4,51 3.52 7.79 49.50 8.12 14.15 14.14 13. b8 31.88 .4b.33 NOX 5P. 33. 1»3. 52. 57. 41. 59. 41. 35. ?R. 24. 19. 5H. B2 R8 19 93 1)3 b; ni U b2 32 18 (• 1) h7 HC cn NOX MEAS STOICH *** ** * ,0010 . n b B 7 3b.lH b3,74 5b,4? ,11101 .Ob87 2.05 5.34 12,03 ,0207 ,0b87 ,18 1.05 12,21 ,032b .nfa87 .54 .78 12.58 ,0405 ,nh87 ,?1 1.7b 11, 2b ,0492 ,0b87 ** ** * ,0081) .Ob 8 7 .34 2,01 10. H ,04nn '.nb87 .45 3,bl 1.08 ,0347 ^Qb87 ,bl 3.18 7,17 ,02B7 ,nb87 1.13 4.85 8,82 ,0207 ,0h87 45. Rn 81.17 41,12 ,0]?7 '.0^87 ** ** *** ,0092 .Ob87 CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13- 8SHC + BSNOX B 12,007 GRAM/KW-HR CHRR. 8SFC - * ,2b2 KG/KW-HR "PHI" ,130 ,147 ,301 ,474 ,590 , Plb ,117 ,5H 3 ,505 ,4J8 ,302 ,18b ,134 WET HC CORH, FACT .184 .180 ,1bO .937 .121 .907 .984 .123 ,934 ,944 .959 .175 ,984 F/A F/A PCT CALC MEAS ,0082 •8,1 ,0100 .1,1 ,0210 l.b ,0330 1,4 ,0420 3,7 ,0502 2,2 ,0080 -,b ,0411 2,7 ,0351 1,4 ,0212 1,7 ,0212 2,2 ,0127 -.0 ,0080 -13,5 POWER CORR FACT .lib 1,004 1,004 l.OOb 1,010 l.Olb 1,001 I,0b3 1,053 1,043 1,033 1,027 1,001 BSFC CORR KG/KW-HR *** l.bbl ,277 .231 ,218 ,223 * ,233 ,242 ,270 ,343 3,480 *** MODAL HEIGHT FACTOR ,0b7 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,0b7 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,0b? MODE 1 2 3 4 5 b 7 8 1 10 11 1? 13 MODE WEIGHT FACTORS / n U Q rDAUyUUD.UD ^ 1 ( f ( ell U 11 • * ~ 8.170 8.957 ,430 GKAM/BHPHR ) GRAM/BHP»HR ) GRAM/BHP-HR ) LBS/BHP-HR ) NOX CORRECTION APPLIED ------- TABLE A-3. FEOFRAL DIESEL EMISSION CYCLE 1979 EMf.TNEl VOLVO TD-100 C DTE3FL TESTlOb-ni FUELl FM-HfeS-F «,„ 1 f 1 H f, b 7 8 q 10 ll 1 2 1 3 PPA'FR F S PC T CDNn TPLf ? 1 U T F R ?S INTtR Sll UITFR 75 TNTFR inn INTFR TOLE ino RATED 75 RATFO SO RATED ?S RATED I PATFO IDLF T. INF PFHI / son. / nnn. / 1 4 on , / i sun. / JHOO. / I4un. / sun. / 28im. / 2?on , / 2200 . / 2PIIII. / en no. / sun. BAROMETER 29.lt PROJECTl) l-5H30-nOb DATEl 03/20/Kl TnROUE POWER FUEL AIR INTAKt DBS DBS FLOW FLOW HUMID N X M Krt KG/MIN KG/MIN G/KG 0. .0 14. 2.0 217. 31,8 4 J9. b4 ,4 bbS. 97,4 879. 128,9 n, ,o 77H. 179.4 58b. 135.0 3BR. 89.4 19B. 45. b Ib. 3.4 n. ,n ,020 2.45 .ObS 7.)5 .145 7.31 .250 7.8b .31.0 9.01 .484 q.qq .020 2.29 ,731 1 B . S 1 ,5bb lb.55 ,420 14.BO ,270 12. 9b .153 11, Sb .020 2.1 3, 3. 3. 3. 3, 3. 4 ,5 ,5 4.5 4 ,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 NOX COKR FACT .em ,890 ,«qq ,9in .''H ,9?» ,901 ,923 .919 ,915 ,910 ,904 ,9ni MEASURED HC CO C02 NOX PPM PPM PCT PPM 480, 452, 488, 239, 312, 439, 288, 191, 188, 111, 112, 332, 1 488, 319, 100, 319, 120, SOb, 13b, 412, 2UO, 319, 49h, SOh, "»9b, 412, I,b8 330, 1,B3 195, 4,2b b!5. b,R9 1200, B,79 Ib50. O.bl 1755, 1,59 3bP, 8,88 1200, 7,52 900, b,21 590, H.bO 385, 2,71 185, I,b8 340, CALCULATED CRAMS / HOUR HC CO NOX 32. hi. 102, 99, b5, 178, bb, H3, 50, 55, 34. 183. )S, 45, 53. 317, 58, 458, SB, J34, 71, 224, Ibb, 333, 34, 55, 72, 132, 407, 855, 1330, 1575, 84, 1941, 1328, 781, 441, 199, 75, MODE 1 2 3 4 5 t 7 U 9 10 11 12 13 • MOOF i 2 3 4 5 t 7 B q 10 ) 1 12 1 1 f) p A " S / K ' HT _ co ?7.<;2 51 ,4H ah. 10 25. 3S 7.49 20.4 4.42 S.Sh ?.1l 2.54 1 . Ib h.?9 ?q.Kb 3R.S1 1.^1 7.?2 1.70 13.47 ?. 3n 13. ?S 4.49 11.84 1 R. 1 1 3h. 3 3 CALCIH 5-FUFL t.nt hi .27 * 1 3, 74 4h. 72 Sh, 9b bl .bl S4 ,?S ATED GRAMS/KM. HR HC CO NOX *** ** *** SI. 19 49,71 bb.U 2.05 5,59 12,78 1.03 1.29 13,27 .SI ,5b 13, bS .2b 1.42 12, ?2 7n, q* **** ** * 44,30 39,09 11.02 ?7.2b ?l ,h 7 .30 1.7b 10,83 ,43 3.39 9.8H .bS 3,74 8.74 1.59 4.91 9,b7 4n.fa7 97. bS 58,25 ^R.47 4K.95 h?.?! **** i* *** F/A F/A DRY MEAS STOICH ,0080 ',nbB7 ,0091 ,nbB7 ,0199 ,nb87 ,0319 ,0b87 ,0401 ,0b87 ,04Bb ,nbB7 ,OOBb .nb87 ,0397 ,0b87 ,0344 ,0b87 .0285 ,0b87 ,0209 .Ob87 ,0113 ,0b87 .OOH4 .01,87 "PHI" ,117 ,133 ,290 ,4fa5 ,584 ,708 ,12b ,578 ,5U1 ,15 ,305 tl« .123 WFT HC CORR FACT .983 .982 ,9bl .939 ,924 .910 ,984 ,923 .934 ,944 .958 ,974 .983 F/A F/A PCT CALC MEAS .0084 5,0 ,0090 -,9 ,U204 2.3 .0328 .9 ,040b 1,3 .0487 ,1 ,unso »7,B ,0»11 3,5 .0351 2.2 .0292 2.5 ,0218 4,4 ,0133 .3 .UOB4 .,2 POWER CORR FACT ,987 .997 ,998 ,998 1.003 1.010 ,994 1.055 1.042 1.032 1.022 1,015 ,992 BSFC COHR KG/Krt-HH ** I,9h7 ,274 .233 .221 ,223 * .232 .241 .273 .347 2,b49 *** MODAL WEIGHT FACTOR ,0b7 ,080 ,UBO ,080 ,080 ,080 ,0b7 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,0b7 MODE 1 I 3 4 5 k 7 8 9 JO 11 1? 13 CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13-MODE WEIGHT FACTORS BSHC + B3NOX s 1? CORR. B3FC « » 040 GRAM/KW-HR nRQ rDAU/KW^HR ,1109 ij"'^"/""'''" ,813 GRAM/KM-HR .853 GRAM/KH-HR ,2b3 KG/KH-HR f \ t \ ( I ( 7 "3 k 2inj t 3 U C 8.813 9.589 ,»32 GRAM/flHP«HR ' GRAM/BHP«HR ' GRAM/BHP-HR ! GHAH/BHP-HR ] LHS/BHP-HR ) ------- TABLE A-3 (cont'd). U-MODE FEDERAL DIESEL EMISSION CYCLE 1171 EMOINFf VOLVO TD-ion C DIESFL TEsTjOb-ni FUELl EM-H5-F Tom njESFl ALCOHOL MODE 1 2 ) 1 5 t 7 8 q 10 1 1 i a 13 FHH PAKT PART KK/MJN KG/MIM KG/MIN . n 1 1h .01 Pb . ,nh<;n .IIHSO . 14 f. 1 .1451 . . ?5n? ,?5n2 . . JSifl . ^5iR . .H R^R .YR1H , .niqb . n i ib . .7101 ,7jn1 . mil, 1 . ^hh 1 , .1 ni .^115 . .Pbqfi ,?b18 . . 1 5P7 . 1 5?7 . ,nin7 ,0)q? nonn nnno nono noon on on oono nnno nono nonn noon nnnn nono noon WATFR PART KG/MIN .nnno ,0000 ,0000 ,ooon ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,i)onu .nnno .nono ,0000 .0000 ,0000 BAROMETER ?1,15 PROJECTl ll-5830»00h DATEl 03/?0/B1 EQTV. FUEL DIESFL MOLE KG/MIN WE .Ollb 1J, .nbso 13. ,lt51 13. ,?50? 13, ,351R 13, ,i»818 13, .Ollb 13, ,7301 13, ,5bhl 13, ,H115 13, ,?b18 13, ,)5?7 13. .0117 13, IGHT B7bH 87bH R7bH 87bH 87b4 87bt 87b1 87b4 B7b'« B7h'» 87b4 R7bH 87b1 HC KWFT FACTOR ,1835 ,1B33 ,1b01 ,1310 ,1838 ,1015 ,1Rt3 ,15?8 ,113b ,1HHt ,1571 .1748 ,1B34 Y WATER INTAKE ,00b3 ,00b3 ,00b3 ,00b3 ,ntlb3 ,00b3 ,007? ,0072 ,0073 ,007? .007? ,007? ,0073 F/A RATIO MASS FUEL ,0080 ,oon ,0111 ,0311 ,0401 ,048b ,008b ,0317 ,0344 ,0?85 ,0501 ,0133 ,0084 FUEL CARBON ,0080 ,0011 ,0111 ,0311 ,0401 ,048b ,008b ,0317 ,0344 ,0285 ,0?01 ,0133 ,0084 EOIV, DIESEL ,0080 ,0011 ,0111 ,0311 ,0401 ,048b ,D08b ,0317 ,0344 ,0285 ,0201 ,0133 ,0084 tXHAUST OXYGEN PERCENT 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 ------- TABLE A-4. IS-MODI FEDERAL DIESEL EMISSION CYCLI 1979 Nti VOLVO TO-inn c DJESFI TFSTI nh-ti? FIJELI f BAROMETER 29,01 PROJECT\|1l'5B30«Onb OATEl 01/20/11 MOOF I ? i H S h 7 R 9 10 J 1 1<> 1 ) POWFR tNr, irjr s^e ^ r> PfT CMUn / HPM £ ?5 5U 75 [no i n n 75 50 PS ? JHLt / 500. ] tin ft / nuo. IMTFR / UUO. INffR / IHDn. I N T fc R / 1 <4 0 fl . INTER - TOLE RATED RATFl) / RATFO / RATF D - RAfFO / 10LF , i no n. ' sun. ' ??OI). ' 2?no. ' ??on. ' ??nn. ' ??.(IO. ' son. ToRfJHF OHS N X H 0. 18. ??1. mi. hh?. HB?. n. 779. 571. 387. in. 15. 0. POWER ons KW .0 2. fa 3?,* bt ,b 97.0 1?9.3 .0 178.1 133.1 89.1 11.1 3.1 .0 FI/EL FLOW KG/MIN ,o?i ,07? . isn .250 .357 ,188 ,01R .731 ,5h7 .lib .2b? .lib .021 AIR IMTAKF. FLOW HUMID KT./MIN G/KG 2,37 1 b 7,n 1 ^ 7.jn H 5 7,7? 1 5 8.B5 1 5 9,97 1 5 ?:?b 18. Hi " lb.i»2 * 11, b2 * 12.70 » ll.»9 * 2.30 1 t 1 » 1 t 1 » 1 f 1 1 9 NOX CORR FACT ,902 ,90J .110 ,119 ,1?1 .131 .885 .117 ,^12 ,10b .898 .890 ,90h MEASURED HC en co? PPM PPM PCT 188. 37?, HH8, 311, 31b, 125, 280, 159, 2111. 159, 128, 125, 180, 112, 11?. J59, 121, 532. 128, 139, ?3b, 30b, 172, 125, HBO, 38S, J,b3 2,02 H.HO 7,n7 9,09 10, 9b 1.51 8,88 7.52 b,21 1,1b 2,bn 1.59 NOX PPM J10, 210, b15, 1215, 1710, 1785, 3HO, 1215, 900, 595, 380, 180, 330, CALCULATED GRAMS / HOUB HC CO NOX 37, 1«, bb, b3, 52, 38, 32, bO, bO, 51. Bb, 157, 37, Sb, IbS, 173, be. 75, 2?8, 51, 357, H82, 353, 215, 279. 5H, 83, Ib2, 1P8, 8b!>, 1)21, libl, 73, 1971, 1329, 780, 13b, H3, 82, MODE 1 <• ) 4 5 fa 7 H 9 10 11 12 1 i > CALCULATED F/A F/A "DDE GRAM.s/xG-FurL T.HAMS/KW.HR DRV HC co NO* HC co NOX MEAS STOICH i : i H <, h 7 a 9 10 11 12 1« i ?«.RM •!. ?l . 71 IB. 7. ID H. H.PM H. ?.i 3. I.?" 7. pi.ni 11. 1 . 1h 8. 1.75 11. f. IK \|H. 5.15 11. J7.11 11. ?9 , nfl H b , 75 K5.?3 Pt. 17. SH 17 17, H 7 51 57. bl 5? (,1.7J 79 S3. 37 Si h^.bb IP 11. HJ Ih Jl.flH tH 31 ,?? hR P7.7? B9 ?.2.n3 J u L U O 1 J H r» T . H 1 **** ** * ,0090 ,nbB7 3b.l7 b3,75 b2,S7 ,0101 ,0b87 2.05 S.3H 13,22 ,0207 .OhB? .98 1,05 13,39 ,03«b ,ObB7 .51 .78 13. bl ,OH05 .Ob87 .29 1.77 12,10 ,0«»92 ,ObB7 ** ** *** ,0080 .Oh87 ,J1 2.01 11.08 .0100 .Ob87 .15 3,bl 9,9b ,03H7 ,ObB7 ,bl .1b 8,7b ,n,?8S ,nh87 1.93 1.H5 9.83 ,0207 ,0b87 <»5.80 8], 20 5b.ll .0128 ,ObB7 *** ** *** \| U 0 9 c ,pbB7 CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13" BSHC + RSNOX « H.OO? GRAM/KW-HR CORK. BSFC - » ,2bl KG/KH-HR •PHI" ,131 ,117 ,301 ,H7H ,i90 ,71b ,117 ,583 ,505 .lib ,302 ,18b 1 4 U , 1 31 MODE WE ( t \ t \ I ( WFT HC CORR FACT .981 .980 ,1bO .937 .^21 .907 .181 .123 .131 .9H* .959 .175 Q OB . HBt F/A F/A PCT CALC MEAS .008? -8, ,0100 «1, ,0210 1, ,0330 1. .0120 3, .U502 2, ,0080 ., .0111 ?, ,0351 1, ,0292 2, ,0212 2, ,0127 nno n • i ^ i u i j o 1 1 • i j v 9 1 b 1 7 2 b 7 H 3 2 0 POhEH CORR FACT ,91b 1,001 1,001 l.OOb 1.010 l.Olb 1,001 1.0b3 l.ObS 1.0H3 1,033 1,027 In n i , Dill BSFC COHR KG/KW.HH *** l.bhl ,277 ,231 ,218 ,223 * ,?33 ,21? ,?b9 ,313 2,180 *** MODAL HEIGHT FACTOR ,01,7 ,osn ,oao ,080 ,080 ,080 ,0b7 ,080 ,nno ,ORO .080 ,080 ft L. "1 i Ob / MODE 1 2 3 1 5 b ? 8 9 10 11 ia 1^ 3 TGHT FACTORS .787 811 U 1 0 t ~ 3 8q i a • • * * 9,700 ,130 GRAM/BHP-HR GRAM/BHPHR GRAM/BHP'HR GRAM/BHP-HR LBS/BHP-HR ) \ J \ / ) ) ------- TABLE A-4 (cont'd). 13.MODE FEDERAL DIESEL EMISSION CYCLE 1979 ENGTNEj VOLVO TO.viin C OUSEL BAROMETER 29,OH TESTi ob-02 FUELl EM-4h5-F PROJECT ; 1 1.58 30-OOb OATEl 03/20/81 MODE i P 3 '4 5 b 7 B 1 J U 1 J I? > l TOTAL F'llFl K G / ^ T N .0212 ,n7?8 , l^n1* ,?Sn2 .35t,fl .43R3 ,niq i .7311 ,5h(,9 .•Us? ,?l-?3 .14^9 ,n?J2 OIF Stl. P4RT K r, / M i N .02)2 .0718 . 15ns .?Sn? . 35hB . ^ H B 3 ,(U8t .7319 ,5bh9 .^IS? ,?h?3 . 1H51 ,n?)2 ALCOHOL PART KG/MIN .oouo .ounn .nnnn . u ci n n .0000 . o o n D .oonn .oono .oonn .nonn .oono .nonn ,nuon WATFR PART KG/MIN .onnn ,0000 ,0000 .oono ,uooo ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,1)000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 EQIV. DIESEL KG/MIN .02)2 ,0718 ,1504 .P508 ,3Sb8 ,HBR3 .Olfll ,7339 ,5bh9 ,157 ,?b23 . HSI .021? FUEL MOLF WEIGHT 13,87b'» 13,B7bH 13,87ht 11,B7bl» 13,87bH 13,H7bH 13,87bH 13,87bt 13,87bt 13,87bt 13,87bt 13,87bi 13,87faH HC KWtT FACTOR .SBHO ,980* ,H^9b ,937H ,TP12 ,90bb ,S8H3 ,9229 ,9337 ,9HHH ,9592 ,9753 .9843 Y WATER INTAKE ,0073 ,0073 ,0073 ,0073 ,0073 ,0073 ,00bb .OOlib ,00bb ,nObb ,00bb ,nobb ,0079 F/A MASS FUEL ,0090 ,0101 ,0207 ,032b ,005 ,0493 ,0080 ,OHOO ,0347 ,0285 ,0207 ,0128 ,0092 RATIO FUEL CARBON ,0090 ,nini ,0207 ,032b ,0405 ,0492 ,0080 ,0400 ,0347 ,0285 ,0207 ,0128 ,0092 EQIV, DIESEL ,0090 ,0101 ,0207 ,032b ,0405 ,0492 ,0080 ,0400 ,0347 ,0285 ,0207 ,0128 ,0092 EXHAUST OXYGEN PERCENT 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 ------- TABLE A-5. U.MOOE FFHEHAL nitstL {MISSION CYCLE is;s INr.lNFj VOLVO in-innC DIESEL » MtTHANOL TEjT:m-oi Flit i if n IS HTDC PROJFCTi H-So44-oni DATEios/u/an I CD POrtfH fNG INF MnnF gPrfn PCT conn / RP'< l ? i H 5 s 7 H S 10 1 1 1 2 1 9 mi F ! I f" T E R ?5 INIFR SO INTfO 75 TNTFH \|iill II'TER HM.E inn PATEO 75 RATf D sn RATFO ? S H A T F. 0 ? HATtD .IOLE / SJII. / nnn. / Him. / J f uo . / nnu. / Hun. / Sjl'. / ?2IJM. / P8[in. / 2?on. / 82UU. / 2?IIO. / 530. TiiHijllE POWER FUEL AIR INTAKE UBS OHS FLOW FLOW HUMID N < M KW KG/MIN KG/MIN G/KG II. .0 IS. ?,8 cHS. 35,11 4811. 70,4 7i ------- TABLE A-5 (cont'd). U.MODE FEDERAL DIESF.L EMISSION CYCLE 1171 ENGINFi VOLVO TtST\|lH-rH ionc OTESEL + METHANOL FUEL\|EM.Mb5-F 11 BTDC PROJF.CTlll-SOHH-Oni OATElOq/U/80 MODE 1 2 3 H 5 t 7 R q in 1 1 1 3 1 3 TOTAL FlIEl KG/MTN .ninfl .nbh .Pb?1* .4<1<;S . 78-n i . t nui .niRfl 1 .5SH i.iam? ,R??7 .^233 , ? 4 ,-> 1 . .niHR DIFSFL PAKT KT,/MTN .OlflH .nb^b . HI21 .1018 . IM2H . 1 11 3 8 .niRB . lam . 12R 7 . I?t2 . 1 2b3 .1227 .01 8H ALCOHOL PAHT KI-./MIN ,'iono .nnno .ibna ,313b .hfll 1 i .nni i .ounn l.tlR2 1.H555 .bIHS . 3S7D .lllb .nono WATER PART KG/MIN .noon .0000 .0000 ,0000 ,nonn ,0000 ,0000 ,nnno ,0000 ,0000 ,onoo ,0000 ,nono FQIV'. DIESEL KG/MIN .0188 .nb^h .1751 .283U .H1H2 ,Sb45 .niRH .7B77 ,hlH1 .HHSb .3010 ,1778 ,0)88 FUEL MOLE WEIGHT 13,B7b«* 13,87b1* 21 ,2300 25,2>»Sb 27,3tH3 28,5332 13,87bH 28,7b8b 28,052H 2b,75bl« 2t.3503 11,2702 13,B7b1* HC KWtT FACTOR ,1711 ,1751 ,128b ,R8b3 .BSSt ,8321 .1783 ,85bl ,8725 ,B1Hi+ ,11?b ,1>«bb ,171H Y WATER INTAKE ,0lb1 ,01b1 ,01b1 ,01b1 .Olbl ,01h1 ,nibi ,nibi ,01h1 ,01b1 ,01b1 ,01b1 ,01b1 F/A MASS FUEL ,007H ,0013 ,Q3faO ,0bl2 ,OBOb ,0181 ,0075 ,0834 ,0723 ,0583 ,0425 ,0223 ,0075 RAT FUF.L CARBON ,0074 ,0013 ,03bO ,HbU ,080b ,Q1B1 ,0075 ,0834 ,0723 ,0583 ,0425 ,0223 ,0075 10 EQIV, DIESEL ,0074 ,0013 ,0241 ,0350 ,0428 ,0505 ,0075 ,0423 ,0375 ,031b ,0251 ,01b4 ,0075 EXHAUST OXYGEN PERCENT 17,5000 17,2500 13,3700 1,8800 7,2500 5,2500 17,3700 8,2500 1,b300 11,2500 12,7500 15,2500 J7.3700 ------- TABLE A-6. 13.MODE FEDERAL ojEStL EMISSION CYCLE 1979 inc.INF.iVOLVO Tp-ionc DIFSEL * MJTHANOL 19 BTOC lt'ST\|ii)»n4 FULL! fM«4b5-F PROJECT I 11-5044-001 DATEl 09/19/10 > I .„„, 1 t ) V 5 b 7 B q in 1 1 1 1 \ i P'lrtfH F'T.P.'F SPF Fli PCT CO NO / fi P * ini F / s?"i. l INTt-H / 14011. as INTFR / nun. so I NrF.R / ) 4 un , 75 I UTE R l 1H (in . 11)0 I^JTEM / 14UI1. I D\|_ F / 525 . 1 nu H * T ED / ??no . 75 RATED / 22UO. so oAiEO / ??nn. ?s K A T E r> / ? ? u n . ? H4iF.r> / ??un. TliRcjIlf nns N X M n. 19. 219. "77. 71b. 95h'. n. nai . h 1 4 . 4 in. 205. \ b. 0. POWER OPS KW .0 2.8 35.0 70,') 105.0 10.2 .0 189,1 11, b 94 ,4 17.2 3.7 .0 FUEL Fl OH KG/MIN ,nj9 ,nb9 ,237 .19? ,79b 1.081 ,nis 1.559 1.14b , 798 ,471 .151 .Olfl MR FLOW KG/MIN 2,b2 h.qb 7.?5 8,11 9.R? 11.24 2,53 18. 7b lb,?4 11, 3b 12. ?b 10, Bl 2.53 INTAKE NOX HUMID CORR G/KG FACT 10,9 in, 9 in. 9 in,9 in. 9 10,9 12.3 U.5 11.5 11.5 11,5 11,5 11.5 l.OOb l.OOb i.ons l.on4 1.003 l.ons 1.015 I. 010 1.0)1 1.012 1,013 1 ,011 1.U15 HC PPM 200. 45b, 700, 440, 148, 44, 17b, 114, 312, 5ni, blO, 4fa4, 19b. MEASURED CO CO? PPM PCT 30b. 720, 814. 1970, 3444 , 41Sb, ?bb. b53. 359, 4b5, 1153. 922, ?«»Zi l.bfl 2,41 5.19 8,09 9,94 11,12 I,b8 8,90 7.80 b,b3 5,04 2.R1 l.bfl NOX PPM son, 550, SS5, 710,' B80, 480, 3WO, 325, 230, 155, 225, 500, CALCULAHO GRAMS / HOUR HC CO NOX 13, 59, 13b, 98, 11, 14 , 11. 84 , 155, 209, 220, 131, 13, 41, 235, rf99 , 7i2, U40, 22kb, 33, kk2, 315, 71l! 509, 37, 109, 29J, J5b, 405, SS2, 783, 98, 59fc, 4bb, 282, U3, 203, 103, MUDk 1 c! 1 4 5 b 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 CALCULATED HdDF 1 ? 1 s S b 7 8 4 10 1 1 ) ? 1 1 GP»''S/K(..FUFL Mr _ rn 11.77 J^.hT 95 1 H . 14 S7.04 71 9. mi ? 1 .til J?S 1.12 3b,50 13 . Bb 9H . 3? 11 . >i ?4 . B5 I ? in.tn 11,14 91 .90 7.08 b ?.?5 4.59 b 4.17 7. If) 5 7. 7b ?b. 1 9 5 1 4.H 1 55. 9B 22 (1.55 14.09 95 Nnx .15 .ri9 . 09 . '2 ,5'* i '11 ,h8 .3? .78 .R9 .7J ,?9 .?5 r.RAMS/KH.HR HC cn NOX t*«» **** * 21. ?0 84.3? *** 3.R9 B.53 10,17 1 .411 11.17 5,78 ..H 15, b? 5.25 .10 Ib.lb S.5B «»«* **** * .45 3,50 3,15 1.09 ?.?3 3,29 2.52 1.70 2,99 4.b7 15.71 3,45 3-4.93 13S.bb 54,0? tt ** *** F/A F/A OHY MEAS STOICH .0074 '.nb87 .0100 '.nb87 .0310 ,0'''''* .OKU .1217 ,na?o '.J325 ,0975 ,1379 ,0071 ,0h87 .11841 ^I3qt» ,0714 ,1152 ,05b2 .1289 ,0390 ,1155 ,014? .O7b7 .0072 '.Ob87 CYCLE COMPOSITF USING 13- BSHC i BSNOX x (, CORR. RSFC • = ( T t 3 \J\ r ' ' / r\ n — l •'» C J n PDAM/tfW«MR fSCiJ uKAn/^n»n'» ,?55 GRAM/KW-HR ,b7B GRAM/Krt-HR ,478 KG/KW-HR "PHI" ,107 ,145 ,332 ,503 ,blB ,707 ,1U1 ,b03 ,5^8 ,43b ,338 ,1B5 .105 HET HC CORR FACT .98? .974 .933 .88? .849 .B2b .981 .859 ,877 .897 .9?b ,9b8 .98? F/A F/A PCT CALC MEAS .OU82 11,8 ,0121 21.3 ,03b2 9,8 ,0b77 10,4 ,0895 9,2 ,1049 7,b ,008? 15,b ,082b "1,7 ,0709 -,7 ,0584 3,9 .041? 5,5 ,0157 10,9 ,008? 13,8 POWER CORR FACT ,999 1,004 1,005 1,009 1,017 1,024 1,004 1.0b4 1,051 1,039 1,0?9 1.020 1,003 BSFC CORR KG/KW«HR *** 1,473 ,404 .418 ,44R .453 * ,4b5 ,4b2 ,488 ,585 2, J7b *** MODAL WEIGHT MCTOR ,0b7 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,Qb7 .OHO ,OHO ,080 ,080 ,080 ,0b7 MODE 1 t 3 4 5 b 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 MODE WE.IGHT FACTORS / 1 nut rOAU/auo.uD \ l t \ t c ( •"•* 71 n p t 4 U C l\|9B2 .787 nRAM/RHP.HH 1 GR4M/DHP-HR ) GRAM/HhP-HR ) LB3/BHP-HR ) ------- TABLE A-6 (cont d). n-noDE FFDFRAI. DIESEL EMISSION CYTLE i VOL vo TD-mnr DIFSF.I + MFTHANOL is HTOC TESTjOl-04 FUELi EM-4b5-F PROJECT j U-50H 4-001 DATEl Oq/jq/BO MODF 1 2 3 4 5 b 7 8 q ID 11 1? 11 TOTil. FHFl KG/MTM .lllql .ObRb .?3k5 ,49i7 .711, 4 i .nR]* .0178 i .sspq 1 . l'< i, 3 .7S83 .^jpq . 1ST 5 , n i B n HIFSFI PflHT KR/MIN .'Hqi .HhBb .lots . iut.j . 1 OhU . 1U4S ,ni?8 . 1 3^b . 131 ? . 1 570 .1280 . 12?T . n i s o ALCOHOL PART KO/MIN .rmnn .noon . 1 .3 1 7 .3855 ,bSH3 ,q7qn .nnnn 1.H532 1 .01^7 ,b71 9 .3^q .0?8S .nono WATEH PART KG/MIN ,onno ,nnno ,ncinu ,oono ,0000 ,onnu ,noou .nooo ,0000 ,OUOQ .0000 .0000 .nono En TV'. DTFSFL KG/MIN .oiqi .ObRb ,lb5b ,28^b .237 .5550 .017H ,?qob ,59Bb ,H35q ,28h7 ,)3bl ,01BO FUF L MOLF. WEIGHT 13,B7bt ll.B7bH iO,275b 2 ------- TABLE A-7. 13.MODE FEDERAL DIESEL IWISSIUN CYCLE 1979 VOLVO in-moc OIESEL MHHAMOL » CATALYST AT is BTDC TEST\|li?-nl FIIELt EM-Hb5-F PROJECT I 1 I -5(11 1-00 1 ""OF 1 t 5 b 7 fl q in 1 1 1? 1 ) PC T mi 7S 1 ill] 1 nu 75 5d ?S z p f'Jf, II'F SPFF 1; roi t I'm R [MTFR T '. T F I? vi nu - TfHF - PATfH > RATEO / WATED / W A T F 0 > RATEn / IOLF / / 51?. / lion. ' 1400. / lino. ' 1400. ' 5 HI. PPOO. ' 2?un. c>ann. ??nn. ' ??un . ' 5 90. TilRHUK (IMS N J M I'. 21?! 712. 9911. 0. 8?7. b2H. 414. 20b. Ib. 0. POWER OB3 Ktv .0 2.8 3b.2 108.8 1H5.2 .0 190. h 1HJ.B 95.1 47.5 3.7 .0 FUEL FLOW ,01B ,072 ^781 1.117 ,niB 1 , 57B 1,145 ,800 ,480 .18? ,niB AIR FIOH KG/MIN b! 7. 8. 9, U. t . 19. 1 b. 1H. '^f 10. 2. 97 bl 41 90 hi S I 20 14 »b 42 Bfa 50 INTAKt HUMID G/KC. 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 4 4 H 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 HOX CORR FACT ,055 .051 !o?l ,012 ,004 ,055 .013 .019 ,02b ,035 ,04b ,055 HC PPM IOH\| 3h\| 22, 10. 12. 13. 7. 3b. 3, bO, 38. MEASURED CO C0i» PPM PCT is! in. 133, bb. bh. SB, lOb, lOb, 127, 111. 1.78 2, HI S.WS 7,99 9,94 11, HH 1.73 9,23 8.09 b,89 S.3H 3, 30 1.57 NOX PPM 140, 550, 845, 135. 440, b?0 , HBO, 150, 285, 270, 335, CALCULATED GRAMS / HOUR HC CO NOX 1. 11. 13, 1, b, J. 1. 8, 13, is! 17, 3. 5, 8S, 3l\| Si. 7k, a, bb, HI. 78, bfl. 70, 87, 320, 38. S14, b70, 877. 91, 1009, bbB, I^J, 298, 244, MOOF i 4 b b 7 B -1 10 11 12 13 ro MOOF i 2 1 4 <; b 7 B n 10 11 l i 13 T" T CALCULATED GRA"S/KG-FUFL GHAM3/KW.HR nr _ en .HO 5.09 4 . IS 19.74 .77 1.73 .?H 1 . In .19 1 ,?3 .05 J . 14 .70 7.h 7 , nH . 7 n .11 .72 .51 2. 3b 1.57 b.lb ?,44 _ 15. 1 5 Nnx HC Ml, IS *** 74 .1 1 b.7K 23. Be .35 lb.99 .1? ll.?H .Ob 1 l.nB .1)2 R 9.40 **** IH.bb .0* 9.73 .09 1,79 .15 )H. 34 .31 ??, 39 4 ,5b hl.SH **** en NOX ** * 30,57 * ,77 10, b4 .54 7,08 .53 b.lb .43 b,04 ** * .35 5,29 .35 4,bB .82 4.43 1.43 b,27 J8,7b bS,09 ** * F/A F/A DRY MEAS STOICH ,0071 ,0b87 ,0104 ,ObB7 ,0358 ,1037 ,0h05 .1220 ,0800 ,1320 ,0974 ,138? ,0073 ,0b87 ,0811 ,1314 ,0709 ,135? ,05bO .1282 ,0391 .1148 ,01b9 .0811 ,0072 .Ob87 CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13- n cur n5nL acrn Pol- If BSNO BSHC CPRR — 4 BSNOX B b . BSFC - » 14? rPAUykM^HR ,^TC ufTHn^nn^riri 7bl GRAM/KHvHR \|b45 GRAM/KX.HH ,787 GRAM/KW,HR ,181 KG/KW-HR "PHI" ,1U3 , 1S2 ,345 ,49b ,bUb ,704 , 107 ,59b ,5?4 ,437 ,341 ,eu? ,1U5 WET HC CORH FACT .981 .175 ,9?b ,885 .85? .827 .981 ,R55 ,B73 .894 .983 ,9b2 .983 F/A F/A PCT CALC MEAS ,0085 20,1 ,Ullb 11,1 ,0399 11,3 ,0b51 7,b ,OBbl 7,b ,1023 5,0 ,U083 12,8 ,0847 1,9 ,0727 2,b ,0594 b,l ,0118 7,0 ,0187 10,5 ,0075 4,b POWER CORK FACT ,111 ,S97 ,998 1,000 1,008 1,017 1,001 l.OSb 1,043 1,032 1.021 1.013 ,197 BSFC CORR KG/KW-HH * 1,553 ,44U ,4 lh ,428 ,451 * ,470 ,Hbl ,4B9 ,594 2.Bb9 *** MODAL WEIGHT FACTOR ,Db7 ,080 ,080 ,OBO ,OBO ,080 ,0b7 .080 ,080 ,080 ,OHO ,080 ,Ub7 MOUE 1 ? 3 4 5 b 7 B 9 10 11 12 13 MODE WEIGHT FACTORS _ C LO p 3 D O 4.9R7 S.0b3 .79? PRAM/RHP iju ^ GRAM/BHPHR ) GRAM/BHP-HR ) GRAM/BHP-HR ) LBS/8HP-HR ) ------- TABLE A-7 (cont'd). FEDERAL oustl EMISSION cvcit 1979 ENGINE! VULVO TD.UIOC DIESEL + METHANOL CATALYST AT 19 BTDC TFsTtnj-01 FIJELl EM-4h5-F PROJECT \|] l-S044«oni DATEl 10/02/80 HOOF i 2 3 4 5 b 7 B q in 11 i f 1 3 i TOT»L FUEL K&/MTN ,ni7R . n 7 i i ,?bq4 ,rm i . 78?R 1 . 1 U7 .niQi 1 .S?7b 1 . 1 ^lq .PGnS .«8n3 . \ Hi 7 ,nl78 DIF.SFL PAHT KT./MIN .11178 .n?>q .ins? . lH7b .1070 . HIIS . n i B i .1371 . 1 31 b .13)1 . 1 3?8 . 1291) .(1178 ALCOHOL PART KG/MIN .noun .onnn ,)b37 ,3qb5 .b757 1 .0111 .onnn i .^ns i .nm .bbBb . 1H75 .H537 . n i] o a WATER PART KG/MIN ,onoo ,oonn ,0001) , U 0 U U ,nnnu ,onno ,ouno ,oono ,onno ,ooou .oono ,oann ,oono FQIV'. DIF.SFL KG/MIN .0178 ,n?is ,1810 .?qni ,H1RO ,5708 . 0) B 1 .ROOD .5979 .H39b ,?9?7 ,1515 ,0178 FUEL MOLE WEIGHT 13,B7b1* 13,87bt ei.1711* ?S,Oii\|l S7.17B2 2P,S159 13,87bl 28,7702 27,8bS3 2b, 3SbO 23,5251 lb, bl)S2 13,87b1 HC KWET FACTOR ,980b ,9751 ,9259 ,8BH8 ,BS] 9 ,8274 ,9812 .BS^b ,873'* ,8qH5 ,9233 ,9b2t* ,9829 Y WATER INTAKE ,ni83 ,01B3 ,0183 ,01H3 ,nifl3 ,0183 ,0183 ,0183 ,niB3 ,0183 ,0183 ,0183 ,0183 F/A RATIO MAS3 FUEL ,0071 ,0104 ,0358 ,0b05 ,0800 ,nq7>* ,0073 ,OB3l ,0709 ,OBbO ,0391 ,01h9 ,0072 FUEL CARBON ,0071 .0101* ,0158 ,ObOS ,0800 ,0974 ,0073 ,0831 ,0709 ,05bO ,0391 ,0ib9 ,0072 EQIV, DIESEL ,0071 ,0104 ,0241 ,0348 ,0427 ,0498 ,0073 ,0421 ,0370 ,0308 ,0238 ,0143 ,0072 EXHAUST OXYGEN PERCENT 18,b3DO 17,b300 13,2500 9,8750 7,2bOO 5,0750 17,b250 8,2500 9,8750 11,2500 J3.12SO 15,7500 17,8750 Ul ------- TABLE A-8. U.KODF FtntRAL DHSEL MISSION CYCLE 1979 (Nr.lNfi VOLVO TO.inOC DIESEL » MtTHANOL * CATALYST AT 19 BTOC ns'l'i?-n^ FlltLl EM-Hb5-F PROJECT 1 1 l.SOHH-001 OATtl 10/02/10 > i P'V.F w F'lf, 1 UF MfiDF S PCI r ii N n i I nit t S I NT F P i ?> T N T F H H «;o i N T F r> S 7"; JNTFR t \|lin INfFP 7 im F R i nn H A Tfn q 7b 04TEO in 5 u w A T t n 1 1 ?S RATFO 12 2 R»TED i } ir>LF PI ^ n / hPM / im / 2?MO / 2?ilO / 22UO / 2?UO / 510 TnBWlf POWER CiHS N X 0 f . 2H 7 . H 95 7H2 , ISO (1 B?7 . h20 . "li 20h lb i) DBS M K« « .0 2.B 3b,2 . 72 , b 1118.8 1HS.2 1 .0 110, b 1 . 1H2.8 1 15,3 H7.5 3.7 .0 FUEL AIR INTAKE FLOW FLOW HUMJD G/MIN KG/»T'J G/KG .oifl 2.nq 10 ,07? b.90 10 ,2bb 7,51 1U ,5H B.17 10 ,802 9.88 1U .113 1 l^HH 10 ,018 2.H3 10 ,572 1B'.9H 10 .151 1 b . 2 1 10 ,812 1H.J7 10 ,H73 12.30 10 ,1H2 10'.71 10 ,020 2'.Hh 10 .0 .0 ,0 ,0 .0 .0 ,0 .n ,n ." .0 .n ,n NOX CORH FACT l.OOH 1,003 ,198 , 19H ,191 ,989 l.OOH .992 .993 ,115 ,99fl 1 ,001 1.U03 MEASURED HC CO PPM PPM lb, 3H, 108, 2bb, 7k. 7H, 38. 11H, 20. 133, 12. 125, S. 3H, lb, 80, 28, 95, HI, lUh, bb, 159, 72, 13B, HI, 10b, C02 NOX PCT PPM l.bB 3bO, 2.HH SbO, 5, HI bSfl, 7.5H 790, 9,71 870, 11,00 9bO, l.bB HHO, ,15 h20, ,99 H90, ,89 355, ,2b 290, .18 2H5, I,b2 320, CALCULATED GRAMS / HC CO li ^ IS, SH, lb, 21, 10, 5H, b, b7, H, 75, 1. •». S, 80, It, ". 17, 79, IS, 102, 21. 71, 3, 15, HOUR NOX 77. 3??, H 1 3, 581 , 717, 935, s?, lOlb, b95, H33, 30!) , 221, 7b, MODI. i t i » s b 7 8 1 10 11 1? 13 Til CIILATED MOOF GR»MS/KG-FUFL MT co I .17 H.07 2 H. 17 ?! .(,7 i .99 I.BO H .11 1.75 S .12 1 . HO b .nh 1.12 7 ,SH H .OS B .10 .as 9 .PO 1.07 10 .15 1 ,b9 11 ,f,B l.bl 12 I.9H 7.2H H P.5S 1 3.09 NOX 70.17 7H , H5 25, BH ) fl.ll) I1* ,R9 lH.no T.RAMS/KW-HR HC **** b.95 ,HH .13 .1)5 .03 rn NOX ** * 33, b9 * .80 11. H2 ,75 8,11 , b? b, si .5] b.HH Hh.ns ** ** * i o . 7 ? 10. Oh 8.89 10.73 ?0.98 .05 .10 .18 .HI S.bb .H2 5,33 .52 H.B7 ,R3 H.5H ?.is b.n ?1.IO bl,13 bH,H8 ** ** *** F/A F/» ORY MEAS STOICH ,007H j.0b87 ,niOh ,0b87 ,0357 .1038 ,0b2b '.1231 ,0820 '.1121 ,0182 ,1180 ,007H ,ObB7 ,OB3B .1312 ,0717 ,1350 ,0575 ,l28b ,0388 .11? ,0172 '.0822 ,onno .0^87 "PHI ,107 ,15H , 3HH ,5Ql ,b20 ,'18 ,108 ,b02 .531 ,HH7 , 3HO ,aoi ,11' WET HC CORR FACT ,982 ,175 ,921 ,810 ,8S» .833 .182 .BSb ,B75 ,81b .125 ,1bt .183 F/A F/A PCT CALC MEAS ,0080 8,8 .0117 11,2 .0383 7,1 ,0b22 «,7 ,0850 3.7 .0985 ,3 ,0080 fl,l ,0839 ,1 ,0718 ,1 ,OS9b 3,7 ,0410 5,7 ,0181 5,5 ,0078 -3,3 POWER CORR FACT ,115 1,001 1,002 1,005 1,013 1.025 1,009 1.0b2 1.0H7 1,037 l,02b 1,017 ,qqq BSFC CORR KG/KW.HR ***** 1.552 ,H»1 ,27 ,37 ,HH1 *** ,Hbb ,Hb2 ,193 .582 2,BbH *** MODAL WEIGHT FACTOR ,l)b7 ,080 ,neo ,080 ,oso ,080 ,0b7 ,(180 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,Db7 MODt 1 2 3 H 5 h 7 8 q 10 11 12 n CYCLE COMPOSITE MSTNG 13-MODE WEIGHT FACTORS RSHC RSCO PSNO HSHC CORR » BSNOx « 7 , BSFC - s ,lb5 GRAM/KH-HR ,812 GRAM/KH-HR ,121 GRAM/KW.HR ,01H GRAM/KW.HR ,H81 KG/KW-HR ( ,123 ( .bb5 ( S.lbl ( 5.212 ( .791 GRAM/BHP-HR GfiAM/RHP-HH GRAM/BHP-HR GRAM/BHP-HR LBS/BHP-HR . ------- TABLE A-8 (corrt'd). n.MODE FEDERAL DIESEL EMISSION CYCLE 1979 ENGINEt VOLVO TD-100C DIESEL + METHANOL + CATALYST AT 19 BTDC TESTI02-02 FUHl EM-4h5-F PROJECT \| H«5044-001 DATEl 10/02/80 MODE 1 2 1 f 5 b 7 fl 9 1 r\ \ 0 1 1 1 S I 3 TOTaL FHEl KG/MTN .n i a\ .07? I . 3hl,S .c;lg^ . Rfl?4 1 . 1 1 Jt ,ni7f» 1 ."5778 1 . 1 5 l 3 .8121 . H 7?9 .18?! .Hi qfe DIESEL PART KR/MIN .niflj .I>7?1 .1U'43 . inhi .1083 . i o 7 n .ni7« . 1 3B9 . 1 335 .1313 .1317 . i sne . lU 1 b ALCOHOL PART KG/MIN .iinno .uunn .it?? .•»ni .bRHl i .nobn . nnnn i.ta?? 1 ,ni78 .ben? . 3398 .11639 .0000 WATER PART KG/MIN .0000 .onoo ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,oono ,0000 ,nooo ,0000 FOIV. DIESEL KG/MIN ,01Bi ,0721 .17H9 ,P9b? ,H?77 ,57no .0178 ,79H2 ,bO]9 ,''lb .3R98 ,1530 ,ni9b FUEL MOLE WEIGHT 13,87bt 13,B7b1* 21,1885 as, 8805 27,2318 28,1b03 13,87bH 58,7201 27,8197 2b,Hm 23.3855 lb,b7'U 13,87bH HC KWET FACTOR ,9B?2 ,9752 ,9291 ,8901 ,85HO ,8335 ,9838 ,85bS ,8751 ,B9Hb ,9250 ,9b>tll ,9829 Y WATER INTAKE ,nuo ,01bO ,01bO ,QlbO ,01 bO ,01bO ,01bO ,01bO , f ) 1 b 0 ,01bD ,01bO ,01hO ,01bO F/A MASS FUEL .0071 ,010b ,0357 ,Qb2b ,0820 ,0982 ,0074 ,0838 ,0717 ,0575 ,0388 ,0172 ,0080 RAT FUEL CARBON ,0071 ,010b ,0357 ,0b2b ,0820 ,0982 ,0074 ,0838 ,0717 ,0575 ,0388 ,0172 ,0000 10 EQIV, DIESEL ,0074 ,0l0b ,0240 ,0357 ,0437 ,0503 ,0074 ,042b ,0375 ,0315 ,0238 ,0144 ,0080 EXHAUST OXYGEN PERCENT 19,1250 18,0000 13,7500 9,8750 7,3750 5, 1250 18,1200 8,2500 9,8750 11,2500 13,2500 lb,0000 18,0000 Ul ------- TABLE A-9. U-MODE FEDERAL niESEl EMISSION cvcu 1979 DIESFU'ETHANOU AT 19 BTDC F.M.»i,5-F PROJKT I ll-5830«0nt. VOLVO TD-IOP TFsTirn-ni DATEl 10/17/80 pnWFP tNC.INF MnnE S^FEn PCT _ COND / RPH 1 2 9 4 <, b 7 R 9 10 11 12 I 3 jf. MOOF 1 2 3 4 S b 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 TfHE J INTER ?5 INTEH 0 INTER n JNTIR 110 INTER IDLE inn RATED H RATED 10 RATED PS RATED 2 BATED .IDLE / HO / 1»00 / HOO / mno / lino / linn / MO / 22nn / 2200 / 221)0 / 2?on / 2?00 / 6in ToRQUf POWER fUU AIR INTAKE OBS OBS FLO Fi nw HUMID N X M Kft KG/MJN KG/MTN G/KG 0. ,U .Old ?'.35 12 1C. 2,b .074 b'.Hh 12 232. 31.0 .198 7.11 12 Hb4f bB.O .407 R.]B 12 , b^b, 102.0 ,B9b S.«9 1? , 929. I3b,2 ,825 11.08 12 0. ,0 ,020 ? 15 1? 801. 185.0 1.19b 18.71 12 bOI. 138.7 .934 U.71 11 40\|. 92.5 .bib 14.15 12 201. 4b.f .43R )e.bb 12 IB. 4,1 .198 IP, 94 12 . 0. ,0 .019 J,3S if . 1 , 1 1 . 1 . 1 1 . 1 1 1 1 . 1 . 1 , 1 CALCULATED F/A F/A GRAMS/KG. FUEL MC C0 10,81 35.57 ]?.10 51. bS It, )7 25.78 7,10 48.03 ),?? 52.11 , Ib 2b.fio in. 1 1 30.34 .14 Oo 1.V2 in. 13 5.20 15.14 J3,I2 S^.bS ?l .03 59.29 1 j,?7 31 ,nn NOX C.RAMS/KW.HR DRY HC co NOX MEAS STOICH *** ** ** * ,0079 ,nbB7 73. hb 31 ,bb 19. bS H,Db 17.12 ?l.H 93.78 * ,0109 'QbB7 t,2^ 8.99 11,04 ,n2«0 ,0m S.SS 17,25 7, Ob ,0504 ,09bO ,45 18. 2b b,b8 ,0b29 ,1001 .Ob 9,74 b.es ,0754 .1030 95. RO #••* **** *** ,008h '.Ob87 14,04 11 ,60 ^.57 q.Jl 1R.42 .1* 3.80 5,45 ,ObH7 ,1038 ,b\ 4.09 »,b4 ,05b5 ,1025 E.21 b.44 1.07 ,04b3 .0991 7,4$ ?2.5? 5,29 ,n3Sn .O'HS bl.39 173. Hb S3,7b ,01H3 .0800 91,51 **** ** *** ,008J .Ob87 "PHI" ,115 ,15^ .331 .525 ,b2S .732 ,12b ,b23 ,551 ,4b7 .372 ,229 ,11' NOX CORR FACT ,0b3 ,0bn .047 ,034 ,02b .019 .Ob? ,027 ,032 .03R .041 ,055 ,0h3 WET HC CORR FACT ,982 .1" .^2 ^902 .878 ,BbO ,980 J«B1 ,894 .910 ,930 .9b2 .982 MEASURED HC CO C02 PPM PPM PCT 17b, 292, 308, b9b. 93b, 837. 752. J792, IbR. 3881. 24, 2349, 184. 279, 5b, 70b, 184. b39, 504, BOO, 992. 1597, 8)2, 12QR, 208, 2bb, F/A F/A PCT CALC MEAS ,0079 «,b .0122 11. b ,0306 9.0 ,053b b,4 ,0b77 7,b ,0787 4.3 ,OOR8 2.0 ,0b54 1.1 ,0378 2,2 ,0488 5,4 ,0377 7,b ,0194 b.O ,0082 1,9 CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13-MODE WEIGHT FACTORS b * LJ^ _•_•_•_ • 1 U L tBAU«bfU_UD / l »« ^ rBLijnLm_Ljn BSHC * R8NOX 8.619 GRAM/KK-HR CORR. BSFC • .39? KG/KH-HR 1 ( ( ( i . J ------- TABLE A-9 (cont'd). IB-MHOF FEDERAL DHSEL EMISSION CYCLE ENGINEi VOLVd TD-100 A PltSF L+FTHANOL AT 19 HTDC TEST\|U3-01 FUELi EM.b5-F PROJECT \| 1 1-5830-OOb MOOF. i i 3 5 b 7 B 9 10 U 12 13 l ToTiL FilEl KG/MTN .Olpi* ,0739 . 1975 ,070 ,5959 ,8Et;l v ,02QO 1,19«;S ,93Tb .bSfcO ,379 , I97fa ..Pl9' DIESEL PART KG/MIN .OlB* .0739 .1005 ,101 ,10t.b ,10(2 ,0200 . 1 358 ,U70 ,128 .12bb .12** .0187 ALCOHOL PART KG/MIN ,0000 .0000 ,0971 .3029 ,«9J .n<"f .ooon 1.0597 .SObb .SJ?b .3113 .0732 ,0000 WATER PART KG/MIN ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,oono ,oono .DUOU ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 F-QTV'. DIF5EL KG/MIN .nifl ,0739 • Ifcl? ,?9S2 .153 ,559 ,0200 ,80** ,b359 ,b!3 .3230 ,i7nb ,01F7 FUEL MOLE WEIGHT i3.B7b 13,B7b* 17,259 19,7085 2n,b02i 21,Zb7 13,87b* 21,287 21,137 20,3999 19,335 ib,2733 )3,87b HC KWfT FACTOR ,9823 ,970 ,9lb ,902* ,fl7fl* .B5S7 ,980* ,8811 ,891 ,9097 ,9298 t^bl8 ,9Blb Y WATER INTAKE ,DJ03 ,0203 ,0203 ,0203 ,0203 ,n?n3 ,0203 ,0203 ,0203 ,0203 ,0203 ,0203 ,0203 DATE! 10/17/HO F/A MASS FUEL ,0079 ,0109 ,0280 ,050 ,0b29 ,075* .OOSb ,0b7 ,05b5 ,0b3 ,0350 ,0183 ,0081 RATIO FUEL CARBON ,0079 ,0109 ,0280 ,050* ,rib29 ,07S* ,OOBb ,0b7 ,05b5 ,0b3 ,0350 ,0183 ,0081 EQIV, DIESEL .0079 ,o;o9 ,0229 ,03bS ,038 ,0511 ,D08b ,035 ,0385 ,032b ,025B .0158 ,0081 EXHAUST OXYGEN PERCENT 18,b250 18,0000 15,2500 10,0000 7,3750 5,oono 18,0000 8, 3750 9,8750 11 ,b250 13,5000 1 b , 5 1.1 0 0 18,8750 ------- TABLE A-IO. FEDERAL HIFSEL EMISSION CYCLE 1979 VOLVO TD»inn A DIESFLETHANOL AT 19 BTOC TEST\|ni-n2 FUEL I fM.4b5»F PROJE CT ll 1-5830-DOb DATE I 10/22/80 POHFS F NT, INF MOOE SPFFD PCT > rOND / PPM 1 H 5 h 7 R 9 in 1 1 1 1 1 3 r pi 74 i no inn 75 ^0 rt 2 . . . IDLE , INTER - INTER , INTER / INTER > INTER / IDLE i RATED i R A T \ 0 / RATED > RATFD t RATED / IDLE > ' 1400. ' HOP. I 1400, ' MOO. ' 1400. ' 510. ' 2200. ' 2200, ' 2200. ' 2200. ' 2200. ' ?"n' TOROUF OBS N X M o'. ID. 232. 4b4. b9b. 93h. 0. 807. b04. 402, 201. IB, 0. POWER OBS KW .0 2.b 34,0 bB.O 102,0 137.2 ,0 IBfa.O 139,1 92, t 4b,3 H.I .0 FUEL Ft OW Kf./MTN .019 ,5Bb ,R34 .018 1 ,?01 ,909 ,b7(l ,426 .19] ,019 ATR FLOW KG/MIN 7^02 eji7 ll'.50 2,3b 19.18 lb,75 1 4, J 5 12,81 11, 1^ 2.3b INTAKl HUMID (V/KC. 8.1 •.1 8.1 8.1 8,1 1,1 8.1 8.1 1,1 8.1 8.1 8.1 8.1 NOX CORR FACT !ibi \|9bB ,9b9 ,9b4 ,9bB ,9b7 , 9b7 .9bb ,9b& ,9b4 HC PPM 20B, 312. 944. 784, 240, \t , 164 , 48, ISO. 184 , 7bB, bOB, 184, MEASURED CO C02 PPM PCT 279, b93, 841, 3M5\| 2475, 271 , 720, hlH, 814, 1555, 1208, 2bb. s!u 7.71 9,40 11,13 1,81 9,30 8,14 7,07 5,49 3,30 l.bR NOX PPM bis\| 725, BbS, 920, 540, b40, 440, 320, 220, 230. 510, CALCULATED GRAMS / HOUR N(irf HC CO NOX 11, 18o\| 181, bb, 17, lit 27, BB, IbO, 2hS, ISO, 12, 2S3, 30b, 970, 17R2 , 143b, 32, 723. 54b, b?4, 1011. b94 , 3S, 3"! b9o\| 871, 10J, 1049, b14 , 400, 233, 21b, 111. 1 •4 b h 7 a 9 in 11 1 2 1 i > I MODE 1 2 •) 4 5 t 7 R 9 10 11 12 1 3 CALCULATED F/A F/A GoAHS/KG.FUEl GRAMS/KWp-HR DRY Hr JF.bO 33 l?.^9 55 \f.,fl 2S 7,h5 1 1 ,R7 50 .15 28 m.no ?9 , 17 10 1 ,M 10 1.98 15 ?n.41 39 It.hS bO j P. 85^31 CO .55 .49 ,RO .09 .73 ,• 7» in? .no .52 ,bS .40 .13 NOX ** 81 ,b5 31.79 21,13 1 9. b4 17.41 94, R2 l».53 Il.b2 9,95 '.is IB. 79 97,37 HC co NOX MEAS STOJCH ** ** * .0077 '. 0 h 6 7 2J.3b 97,8? *** ,OJ09 'ob87 5,30 B.''9 11,08 ,P?7? 0845 2.bb 1.27 7,34 ,0474 ,0952 ,bS 17.47 b.7b .ObOO .0'' .13 10, 4h b,35 ,0711 ,.1059 ** ** * ,0077 .Ob87 ',15 3.89 5,b4 ,(lb12 .1041 ,bl 3. ^2 »,6b ,0547 ,1021 1.71 b.74 4,32 ,0458 .0993 5.74 Pi, 85 5,04 .0314 ,0935 14.21 170.8? 53, Ob ,017J ^0711 ** ** *** ,0081 .Ob87 •PHI* ,113 .iss .322 ,498 ,b01 .710 .113 ,b08 ,53b ,4bl .357 .219 .118 WFT HC CORR FACT ',983 ,97fc .942 ,90b .883 .8b3 .981 .882 .897 .911 ,932 ,9b3 .983 F/A F/A PCT CALC MtAS .0080 3,0 .0120 9,5 .0307 12,7 ,0517 9,0 ,ObSb 9,1 ,0775 b,0 ,0089 15,2 ,0b53 3,2 ,05bb 3,4 ,0486 5.9 ,03b7 9,8 ,0190 9,7 ,0082 1,2 POWER CORR FACT .992 ,997 ,99fl 1,002 1.010 l,01b 1.000 1.05b 1.040 1.030 1.020 1.012 ,991 BSFC CORR KG/KW-HR *** 1.7b8 .149 ,347 .311 .359 » .3bB .377 .122 ,540 2.791 ***** MODAL WEIGHT FACTOR ,0b7 ,080 ,080 ,OUO ,080 .PRO ,0b7 ,OHO .080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,0h7 MODI 1 2 ) 4 5 b 7 8 9 10 11 12 11 CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13-MODE WEIGHT FACTORS a»ur i cut retuivb-UD t i tea rDAU/IUD_UD ^ B$HC « MNOX l,4bl GRAM/KW>HR CORP. BSFC • ,398 KG/KWHR i t \ ( ( • f 4 ------- TABLE A-IO (cont'd). U.MODF FEDERAL DHSFL EMISSION CYCLE 1171 ENGINEl VOLVO TD-100 A OIESELETHANOL AT 1 1 BTDC PROJfCTlll«5B30OOb DATEl 10/22/80 MODE l 2 3 » 5 b 7 8 1 10 11 12 13 TOT^L DIESEL FUEL PART KG/MTN KG/MIN .OlBb .OIBb ,07(,0 ,07bO ,)175 .1005 .lljb ,10b7 .«!8<;5 .1070 ,Pm .1083 ,nlBl .0181 l.?0t .13H ,1oi» ,1301 ,bbgB ,12M ,J»1 .1213 ,il}3 ,158 .QUO . .0110 ALCOHOL PART KG/MIN ,0000 .0000 .0171 ,38h1 .'OflS .7252 .0000 1.0710 .7713 .SH04 .J1ST .Obit ,0000 WATER PART KG/MIN ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 ,0000 EQIV. DIESEL KG/MIN .OlRb ,n7bO ,IM7 ,»B77 ,HOR1 ,5b51 .nifii .BOfll .bJIB ,1703 ,3158 ,lb71 ,0110 fUfL MOLE WEIGHT 13,B7bH 13,B7b>» 17,Pi«»1 11,5393 2n,«i551 21,?15e 13,67bit 21,'7bO «1 ,OHB1 «0,H303 11,1835 Ib.Obll 13,87tH HC KWET FACTOR ,1831 ,l75b ,1H?6 ,10b5 ,8832 ,Bb?7 ,1810 ,8823 ,8170 ,1111 ,1322 ,Mb33 ,182b Y WATER INTAKE ,0130 ,0130 ,0130 ,0130 ,0130 ,0130 .0130 ,0130 ,0110 ,0130 ,0130 ,0130 ,0130 F/A MASS FUEL ,0077 ,0101 ,0?7P ,OH7H .ObOO ,0731 ,0077 ,0b32 ,05H7 ,oHe ,033H ,0173 ,0081 RATIO FUEL CARBON ,0077 ,0101 ,0272 ,0^7 ,ObOO ,0731 ,0077 ,0b32 ,n5H7 ,0>»SB ,0331 ,0173 ,OOB1 EQIV, DIESEL ,OU77 ,0101 ,0223 ,0317 .n'+n ,OH1b .0077 ,0i25 ,037* .0321 ,0211 ,0151 ,0081 EXHAUST OXYGEN PERCtNT 18,b300 17,7500 li,2500 10,2500 7, 7500 5,2500 17,5000 8.3800 1,8HOO ll,25on 13,1300 lb.2500 IB.bOPO ------- TABLE A-ll. 14-''or>F FFmp»i OHSFI fMtsspn rvcif. 1479 l'if,["\|. V/ni vn T!) pin A DfFSH. * tTHAWIL + CATALYST AT 11 RTDt Hst! MH.MI FijFIt FM-ij hb-FF. TH PPiiJlc f I I 1-SR in-niih DATH ll/Mb/HH P.I . f u r ' r. ' "ciU r, Pi ^ Pf t rntiii / i \b. bq, t. '1 nil , 71?, 1 <)'< , •» •inn. rt'i. 1J9.P son, n, , n FIIU F 1 Ow ,n?i ,11 7 P ,? i q .tup , S9 1 ,RJ? , npq U piii M1H1 / fPilP. glH. 187. b I.PUq q 7 S W A r F n / pi SI. pi t. Tt I) / 'PMII. hill. iHll.h J?mi. '107. 44.7 .qm ,b7n MU Fi.nw 1.K1 7.111 7. HI R'. 4t 9.1, n 11.1? 1 .Pfi H.q5 h.bH t .H? II PS fc'ATfh / PP'IH. ?'H. • b , 9 ,TI5 ?.S7 IP p & a T r o / 1 ) P1LF / >?Mi. IH. 1,1 M:fl. n, ,11 .111 ,030 ri.q? 1.71 INTAKE hux HllMII) fdl.IV HC (,/Kf. FACT PPM 7,1" ,^11 bjj. 7 , » . 9 ? ; i H n , 7M qun M 4 M ?! 7, 7 . 7 , 7, 7, 7, , q Ml ? b •« , i 9S<» HH , ,Hb? ?», .^HS hO, .IS1 lh. .MIR h R , .IIP iSh, ',1 .91 11?, 7,1 ,H?I ibn. 7,1 ,9ph UlR, CO PPM 1HO, »?s. jqq, HOS , 1H9«, SI?.. 171. 141. IHh, 319, Iflb, Illh , 119, fiFD cn? PCT 3.3b P. 39 S , 19 7,?5 q , q>» 11 ,»» 1,b 7 q.Ho 8, PH 7,m b.'jq ?, H 3,30 NOX PPM hJO, blS, bhd. RPS, 10JO, JObS, b7S, 71S, ssn, 190, jnfl, ?H5. 7?S, CAICUL &HAM.S / HC CO J. 19. 41, lb?, 91, Ibl, b7, 377, ?», 5?b, H. 301, 3. 1?, 9. 13H. 33, 1 i 9 , h5, 18H, 107, S>»9, S?, 195, b, ?1, ATtO MOX 108, 371. H33, b3c!, 717. qq i , JOb, 1 ?0 7 , 7qo, >»qii, 3?5, ?qh , 1?7, MO PI 1 f i V 5 t> 7 U q J n 1 1 l f l i i .... ,..............._.__....-_.... «._._. M r k\ r.Ui 4TF 1) F/A ° "l)')F r,pM«3/kf,.Hin r,WA^S/KW.HF< DRV «r f ii !•('> MC en NMX v'F.AS ? 7.S? l^.iil HS.1S R,?? 38, ?b 13, ?b .nplH 3 7.PII IP.?!) IP.Ic1 P. 7? 'l,h\| 1?,«»S ,npq7 4 ^.7^ IS.hS ?b,?H ,<17 5,1? 9, H 8 ,11'IRb S ,t-7\|t.RpPi3.'l7 .pi S.fH 7,h3 ,n(j?l 1. , ) h K.M'l \|1,1li .Mb ?,IH 7.1H ,n74n 111 l.h? •• . r> 7 ?.l? .7" l,9h ''t?? ,fIHSb 11 H.MTI pi . P 4 1.TS P.P" 1.1) ^.93 ,Ml?b IP b.^7 PM.tH 7,\|i'> ^,71 M7.RR 7?,7h .IMP? CYCU r.OMpnSTTF U F/A STOICH ,nh87 .100? • l 'U? .tlhP7 '.nhR7 "PHI" ,?3H \|sin ,bJ9 .'17 ,?39 ,bJH ,S'I \|l7b ,?M1 vI9 ***** \|lb9 .sm 1.91R **** MODAL Ht 1GHT FACTOR ,0h7 ,11 HO ,ORO .OHO ,0h7 .OHO !o«o .OHO , OHO ,0b7 MODI 1 M 5 b 7 8 q 10 1 1 1? 1 4 SING 1 3-Mfjot WLHiHT FACTORS /iM/KW-H» ( ,><55 GWAM/RHP-HH 5 AM/KW-HH ( g.P.?1 GRAM/RHP-HH ) AM/KW-HH ( 5,qR7 KKAM/BHP-HH ) AM/Krt-HR ( b,< ------- TABLE A- 1 I (cont'd). FFIHUL imsu cvu f- iq?q (Nr.TMf; V0\| VC.i TP inn A niKSFI. + HUANML » PATAI VST [Fr,Tj n4-(l) Mlfl; F-H.Hhh-FF.TH PRO.IF Cl ! 1 1 -S H 10-fl Till M (i [c riF 1 M r "Mill Hi'inF- MIH PAK1 (>4WT KI',/"T '•' l< r,/Ml t\ H f, /!•' [ M 1 . Hr10 1 , MPn 1 . Illllll: P .n7?'4 ,il?P'4 .HIMIO 3 . ? 1 i * '+ .''4 I 3,H7h4 ,11(1 no , I 7R5 1 7,3h41 ,nnnn .pqih i9fr.S'm .('lino ,4Uh 2(l,h?P(l ,01111(1 .Shl3 21 ,28114 ,0(1011 .0?q 1 1 3,H7h4 .OII'IO ,R1?7 21,4483 ,0il(l\|) ,h25q PI ,00h7 .OilOO ,47?8 2(l,33t.O ,0(1(1(1 ,3045 !R,qb33 ,0011(1 ,1307 14,1374 .oniin ,n?qi; I3,fl7b4 nr K^r T FAC row .qbfl 1 ,q 7hp. ,q4 n ,qi2R .H?q3 , Rhdfl ,qb5J ,HBP(1 ,Hqb2 ,qi IP , q 140 ,q 757 ,qha? AT Oh Y 14 HTOC D A T K t 11/Oh/HO F/A HATH! rt A T f- R INT AKt t i , i , , • . t , t , t 01 111 0) [1] IM 111 111 0) 01 01 01 0) 01 q q q q 5 5 5 11 15 15 1 5 IS 15 MASS F-UFL . 0 1 h 3 ,0104 ,02q7 ,()4Hb ,0h21 ,0740 ,01h4 ,0h43 ,0552 ,045b ,0325 ,012? , 0 1 h b FUH. CARBON ,OJh3 ,0104 ,0217 ,04Rk ,0h?l ,074(1 ,0lb4 ,0b43 ,0552 ,045h ,0325 ,01?2 , 0 1 h h I QIV, OIESFiL • » 9 • . fl . • . t t ff 1 Olb3 0104 0242 0355 0432 0501 01K4 0432 03 7 H 0321 0244 0120 Olhb tXHAUSI OXYGtN PtHChNT 1 b,8800 1 8,2500 14,2500 10,0100 7, 1 300 4 , 7600 17,0000 R , 2 5 0 0 10,0100 11,3700 1 3, 3700 17,b20Q Ih.BBOO ------- TABLE A- 12. M r ii I :l \| mil VM Hi r L \ r ; 'i * * 1 l LI f / r, i... . i. . . fl ," .' M » l» / 1 'll.il . l(< . rJ-.t, 1 ,"•. »'TH.' / 1 '1 MM . r' H. It . r1 « VI t . J H, / \| \| ^ '1 b b . b 3 , h ', Jr. '. 1 F i* / 1 H '"1 . 7" 1 . 1 II ? . H 1, l nn '• U i/ / M MM . 'i K . 1 '7 . ? 7 "1 F / VHI . 1' . . fl H \| 1 1 ' 1 U r, t f n / ,» P ' ' ' 1 , K't. IH7.S •I 7'. i>A ! F n / rVnP, l,ln. ItO.b in ti « MF 11 / ,Vn'i . Mil 7. q < , ' 1 \| r-S iJA TF !• / ,'Pnll. ,)IH. Mb,1 IP ^ •_• A t Hi / P ,> i ' , t . IK. 3.7 11 1 ni f / Sun. ii. , rj .'OH FMiiPni niFr.FL (rtissTn'« r.Yr.tr iq>« pifi A riTF.stu « F TMAM.M. * r.Ar*LYSt «r iq HTOC FHFll FM-»hh-FLTH PNIIJI f,T\| 1 1-t.H Jii-nni, OATH I FHFl »\|D If'TAKI; Mix F i H'M FI nw HUM] n f.npw Kfi/;'TIJ kf./HfU f./Hf, F»f. T , 0?fl 1 . Rt q , b , H7S ,n7u b.Ri '	n, bR, 1Kb, Ib, 1S4, tfl, IHb, Iflfl, iMi>, ft* , It1,, S^h , t ?«i , Sb. ?!?. me MOK PCT PPM 3 , H 0 b J 0 , e , 3 s SHI, S.HO hRO, B , 1 R R 0 11 , ii).e7 qjs. 11, Sb 1080, J.HII hsn. q , t o 7io, H,18 SSS, 7 , 3M H ) 0 , S.tl «?S, j,q? ?HO , },3h SRH, /07/HII CLCUL»TI 0 GWAM.S / MfillH Hf LO N0> 1, IH, «>7, ?7, nn. 4?,-, HH, 177, til. bt, ^q, ss<., ? l , son, 7?s , jo, nob, nqj, 3, l'i ^t, «», ibo, i ibq. ?0, 1 b 7 , R 1 1 , MB, 17H , SH /, qM , i!7H , H? J , SJ, ?SH, ?77, «., ??, 100. "oni 1 f i t s b ; H q j n 1 1 1 1 1 3 r f t f. ii\| .MF 11 1Jlif>F f.pV" /Kf~,.F llf i i,l'AI'R/K W-HP nr rn .ifn M( r.n NOx " •» .,.4" 11'. >M 7K.t'' III. Ml Sfl,r>fl »»»» 3 K.)B 1 >4 . M 7 P''.Vl c',^7 S.1H JP.OI t ^.Sh 11. ""b P'.'IK . 'I 1 t.HO 8, IIS 'j .^KIl.tK 4,t,h .?fl M.R7 7,115 I. .?! ».lr, •».•"< .(« ?.^b 7,?t H .Ir" ''.f1! K.HV .(i1, ,Pb b,?3 q . 'S ''.''t. t . ^s .It ] . 1 H S,7b n, i .P'I I.'\P •'.it, .•;! i .R1; >,Rt ii i.n ''.HI i.F-1, r1.!!? S.HM H.SR IP K.»C, IJ.K'I ",'JI P'l.RII tR.bq 71. Rt CYCI ( rn ...... _ n.SHC i H-Sf.llx = rn"i'. ILSH: - = F/A F/A «f r HC t)PV "PHJ" TOP.H "FAS STOICH FACT niCP nUUl ?P1 Qkl ('I\|TC B fl " ~ ' t^^^ ( T n / .I'lOt .nhH7 ,lbl .S7F, , fl J ) R .oHbb f^h7 .q^H .nil1; .osbi «^3b ,qo? .ohsi .mm ,hbi ,R7t, . 071 l .109? , 7?H .FtSq MICC nLQJ ?PQ QU1 ,II\|TT .IIKO/ ,rCT .THJ , nhsn . i o?q ,bies , RBI ,05hq .\|0?l ,S5B ,hTH .oso1; .nqqq .^UH .qOH .niRh .nsbs .YOM ,qn 1 1 i L j fif>R7 ? 3 R 9 h fi xpcisiiF USTNT, i i-wnnf- WFIGHT FA( Qq^ rOAMyUM — HR f MM5 l"?llb TBAM K»«-HH f r1 * 191 > q i F, CRAM Kh-HH ( s'qiib ^,'siiq fiwAM/KwIhW ( b'.WH .tic" KG/KM-HH ( ,b>H F/A F/A PC T CALC MtA3 0 J h ? b ^ ,01 1 b 11,3 ,0 3»H q,s .Oljb ) } HSFC MfinAl CflHB f.tl(.HT Kli/KH-HW FACTUH **AA Ob7 1 , bib ,f!HO .ISB .OHO ,3bb .080 .H1 ,OHO ,3S3 ,OHO *** 11 U? • wwww \| ' l D ' .IbO ,080 , 17H ,ORO .MSI .OHO , b f 1 , U fl 11 3.77M ,080 ftft* n u 3 ••••• \| M n ' MflOK P 1 M S b R q 10 ) l i -i 1 J ------- TABLE A-12 (cont'd) .u-* FFPHUI nitsfi MMSSION cvcu lur, tlvf; Vll\| VO TO Kill A MFSF.I + MHAMlL » TATAI.YST AT 19 fiTDC HM: 114-n? FMtLi FM-4hh-FE.TH Ptfl). Till .M Mnnf rut i KG/MT^ i ,n?7 1 f . n ,>n i 1 .P?ib 4 . H i i (~ 5 .hi nS b ,R 1(1,5 7 . n .' o i s? \ .? 1 ?5 9 ,T»i J 1 II . 7 HUH 11 . «; n i- * 1 ? . f1 •* •* n 1 ) . n ? q 7 hO U) ill f :;H M rnnni o ft \|< T ^ A W 1 Ur/'M''! Kf, />MM JV7? .11(11111 .n;ni ,ill"in . Mir, i .\?13 . 1 lit 4 . KIR 7 .HIM? .MM . 1 ill A . ; * 1 ) ,011(10 .5151 2M,55H>* .nodd ,3hii ii.biqo .OIIIHI ,?n3() Ih.^t1? . onnri ,m^7 M,H7bH n (: l : i i-5P3(i»u(ib DATt i HC Y F'/A KWFT WATER MASS ( AflOR JNTAKt FUFL ,qh ;n ,oj 5t .0151" ,4757 .0151 ,010H , ^ 3 1 I , 0 I 5 <» ,0318 ,q(llh ,015H ,0516 ,H753 ,0154 ,0b53 ,R5H4 ,0)51+ ,0751 .^blt ,0154 .0)56 ,RK15 ,0154 ,0b50 ,Rq44 ,0154 ,05b4 ,qn?q ,0154 ,0505 ,7 ,0154 ,03Hb ,9555 ,0154 ,0?23 ,qh?5 ,0154 ,01b3 I 11/07/HO WAT FUtL CARHON ,OI5 ------- TABLE A-13. FEDERAL DIESEL EMISSION CYCLE 1179 ENr.lNFt Vt'LVn TD-IOO A D1ESFLFTHANOL»30PCT WATER TEST nn. 05-01 FIIELj FM-b5-F PROJECTlll-5830-OOb DATEI o3/ob/m MI, or l ? 3 t 5 h 7 fl q 10 1 1 12 1 3 1 •P> MOOF i 2 3 1 5 h 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 12 13 PCT CDND IfLI i T N T F R f S I N T F If Ml p.TFR 75 IN T F P Ptn T'JTER IDLf in ci RATFO 7S RAU.n 6U RATff) PS RATFO ? RATIO _ I OLE • t-T.TMF / I-PM / 5UO. / lion. / i«nn . / Him. / 1 1 u n . / nun. / soo. / 221)11. / f ? n n . / e?2nn. / ??uo. / t ? 0 U . / sun. CAI cm r.pAMs/Kf.-FUFL HT _ co 1 1.1B 31. bl 15.42 bl . Ib 11.77 iR.hh 4. 52 2b,l>l) 1.02 37.1? 1,41 4 b , h7 11. hh 33.11 1.70 1.P9 ?.17 2. hi) 3. PI b.Sb 1.11 25. bl \| 7. 79 17. b? 11.11 3^.94 llfIX TnHOUF POWEH FUEL AIR INTAKE DBS OBS FLOW FLOW HUMID a t M KW KG/MIN KG/MIN o. ,o .11 15 2,11 19. 2,8 ,0b7 b.90 P.iM. 32.7 .212 7.03 lib. bS.1 ,1bb 7.71 b7(J. 98,2 ,735 8,8? 813. 130,9 l.Obfl 10.39 0. ,0 ,015 2.15 111. 187. b 1,578 18.22 bU). llD.b 1.150 15.77 408. 91.1 ,823 13J81 204. 17.0 .190 12.21 17. 3.8 ,155 10. RO 0, .0 ,015 2.14 4TED F/A F/A GRAMS/KW.HH DRY HC cn NOX MEAS STOICH *** ** ** *** ,00b9 .Ob87 75 .94 2?, 51 11. Ob R. 73 b.43 22. 21* 88,20 ***** ,001B ,0b89 S'.23 8,28 10,03 ,0347 .0811 1.93 11.33 1,73 ,0b01 .OH* 1.3b Ib.bB 3,92 ,0831 .0987 '.bl 2?, 85 3.15 ,1035 .1011 99.03 »«*« **** * ,0071 ,0b87 h.MI b.05 5.b7 7. 51 ,8b 2.1h 3,08 ,087? .103H 1.07 1.27 2,17 ,0735 ].inU l.t»1 3,15 2,98 ,0597 ,p18l S.bl 15,99 1,71 ,0401 .0911 2b.98 43.12 115.45 b5,42 ,0144 ,072b 97. Pb ** ** *** ,0073 ,OhB7 G/KG b,2 b,1 b,1 5,1 b.B 7,2 b,8 b.B 7,2 '.2 b,1 7.0 7,0 "PHI* ,101 .in , 310 ,503 ,b33 ,752 ,101 ,bl 3 ,531 ,155 ,315 .187 ,10b NOX CORR FACT .942 .151 ,9sn ,940 .153 .157 .155 ,953 .158 ,158 ,152 .152 .151 WM HC CORK FACT .981 .178 .918 .105 ,B77 .858 .185 .871 .rtl? .908 .933 ,9b9 ,9BS MEASURED HC CO C02 PPM PPM 217, 247, 350, 703, 870, 725, 585, IR77, 525, 3b12, 288, 5503, 208, ?Sb, 215, 111, 330, 211, IIP, 157, 818, 1220, bin, BJ5, 212, 2bB, F/A F/A PCT CALC MEAS ,0075 8,7 ,0110 12,8 ,0303 5.5 ,0501 7,5 .Obbb b,S ,0792 2,7 ,0071 3.3 .ObIS 1,8 ,05b8 5.2 ,0181 7.8 .0311 10. b ,0158 lb.0 ,0071 i.b PCT 1,53 2,20 5,07 7,71 9,bk 11,07 l.SO 1.25 8.28 7. 11* 5,3b 3,00 1,50 NOX PPM 110, S3S, 538, 480, 525, 1b5, IbS, 3bS, 313, 212, 220, 210, IbO, POWER CORR FACT ,18b ,195 .115 ,198 1,00? l.OOi ,9Bb 1,051 1,033 1.022 1,011 1.009 ,981 CALCULATED GRAMS / HOUR HC CO 12, 28, t,?, 21b, 171, 271, lib, 711. 131, lb3B, 10, 2110, 12. il, Ibl, 10b, 150, 179, 159, 321, 2h8, 752, Ib5, 112, 13, 32, BSFC CORR KG/KW-HR *** 1,150 ,41b ,428 ,118 ,4Bb * .480 ,475 ,511 .bib 2,403 *** NOX 10, 305, 3?8, 301, 3B5, "12, 11, 577, 118, 280, 221 , 251, 11, MODAL WEIGHT f ACTOR ,0b7 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,Db7 ,080' ,080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,0b7 MOOE i t ) H s b 7 B 9 in 11 J t 1 4 MODE i 2 3 H 5 fa 7 8 1 in U 15 13 CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13»MQDE WEIGHT FACTORS BSHC i ASNOX s b.513 GRAM/KW.HR CiiRR. B3FC • a ,118 KG/KW-HR ( ( ( ( C 1 ', 1 0 1 7.191 3.111 1.B59 .811 GRAM/BHP-HR GRAM/BHP.HR GRAM/HHP-HR GRAM/BHP-HR LB3/BHP-HR ) ) ) ) ) ------- TABLE A-13 (corrt 'd) . i J-MODK FEDERAL DIESEL EMISSION CYCLE 1179 ENGINE) VOLVO TD»l()n A nUSEL + ETHANOLMOPCT WATtH TF3T NO.nS-.01 FUf.Ll EM-tbS-F PROJECT \| 1 1-5830-OUb D»TEi 03/nb/ai MtiOF 1 ? 3 H 5 b 7 n q 10 H 12 13 Ui TOUL FUEl.' KG/MIN ,nm? ,0ht,9 ,2?2 ,h(,a .73S3 1 ,nb79 ,ni«;? 1 .57«* 1 . 15nl ,B2l* ,tB9b . 157 .nu DIFSEL PART K G / M I N .01* ? ,'ihha . 1 U 2 9 .1107 .me . less .0152 .1395 . i 35n .1319 . i .n 3 . 125U .015* ALCDHDL PAH1 KG/MIN .nnno .OOD5 .0975 .289 ,3hR ,b598 .nnnn 1 .0072 ,710h ,fll .291 .0208 .0000 WATER PART KG/MIN ,0001) ,0002 ,OH18 ,10b7 ,1872 .2828 ,nono ,317 .305 .2075 , 10b9 ,QU89 ,0000 EQIV'. DIESFL KG/MtN . ,ni7 ,nbh5 ,lbH ,2b77 ,3RbB ,5lb .0152 .7750 .5B33 ,373 .2907 .1 3B1 .015* FUEL MOLE WEIGHT 13.87b* 13,9185 17.2059 19,lbl 20,317 20,8395 13,87bH 21,3233 20,8399 20,1831 18,7289 1,7H8 13,B7b HC KWET FACTOR ,983 ,9779 ,922 ,9053 ,8?71 ,B575 ,985 ,n?BD ,892 ,9082 ,933H ,9b8S ,98tS Y WATER INTAKE ,0099 ,0103 ,0199 ,0319 ,052 ,055b ,0109 ,093 ,028 ,0357 ,0253 ,0125 ,0112 F/A MASS FUEL ,00b9 ,0098 ,037 ,0b09 ,0839 ,1035 ,0071 ,0872 .0735 ,0597 ,00 ,01** ,0073 RATIO FUEL CARBON ,00b9 ,0097 ,0287 ,0b9 ,Ob2S ,07bl ,0071 ,0b3 ,050 ,OH7 ,031b ,01 Jb ,0073 EQIV, DIESEL ,00b9 ,0097 ,023S ,039 ,01 ,0525 ,0071 ,028 ,0373 ,0317 ,020 ,0129 ,0073 EXHAUST OXYGEN PERCENT 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 O.OODO 0,0000 ------- TABLE A-14. 13-wnot FEDE»I DIEstL EMISSION CYCLE 1979 L'JOIMF \| VOLVO TD-lnU A DIESF.l «t THANOL +30PCT WATER TtST Np, 115-02 FUFLl EM-1b5-F PHOJfCtJ11-5830-OOb OATEl 3/Ob/il pr>.-.f i' ^ <>r,\m PC T CONn / I.P'1 l ? ) •t s h 7 B q 1 u 1 1 1 ? 1 3 irn.F , i 1 N T F W , ?S IMF B , 111 THUK , 75 INTEP - i no PUf- w , IDLE - i ii (i R A r (• n i 75 R « T E n , SO MATED / i»5 R» TFn t i HATEO , .IDLE , 1 Sun . / 1 "* Mil „ / ri n n . > 1 "4 III) . ' non. ' 11UO. ' sun. ' c?2l)0. > ??on. ' ??Dii. ' /"iN 2 32 b5 98 J JU 187 110 91 1 7 1 ,n ,nii ,B ,0b5 .7 ,212 , M , Ihfl .2 ,73b .9 1,012 .U .015 ,b 1 ,5b9 .b 1.111 ,1 . H23 ,0 ,190 .0 ,lb9 .0 ..013 AIR FLOW KG/MIN 2,19 b.flb 7. in 7,7b 8.R5 10.39 2.15 17.97 15.77 11.23 12.11 1 0.71 INTAKE &/KG 7.J 7,3 7.1 7.8 7.8 7,b 7.b 7.8 " . 3 8.3 B.3 8.3 8,3 NOX COBH HC FAfT PPM .q7S 2JS, ,971 389, ,9bh 855, ,9bfl 5b5, ,9l,h 500, ,9b? SOU. ,9bh 225 , ,9ht> 285, ,973 315, .971 H10, ,97h 8U5, .979 b80, ,981 2U7, MEASURED CO C02 PPM PCT 293, 71h, 7bO, 1H17, 3538, 5501, 2Sb, H9, 219, 170, 1229, 9Sb, 211, l.Sfl 2,28 5. 19 7.81 9,bb 10,97 1.51 9,13 8,30 7,00 5,31 3,03 1,52 NDX PPM 170, S02, 525, IhS, 178, IbO, 175, 350, 300, 230, 205. 237, 105, CALCULATED GRAMS / HOUR HC CO NOX 12, b5, IbS, 1 ? 1 • 128, 91 , 13, 152, 151 , Ib2, 2b1, 191 , 11, 31, 238, 271, 723, IbOO, 2872, 29, 39k, 172, 310, 7bl, 531. 25. "2, ?72, 313, 297, 353, 392 , IB, 539, 185, 271, 207, 215 , MODt 1 ? 3 » 5 b 7 B q 10 1 1 1 1? U i ro l 2 3 H 5 b 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 1 3 TAL CULATED GP4MS/KG-Fllf L GRAMS/KW.HR KT to NOX HC Co ii.n2 3b,?s qi.ns ****** «»»• Ib.hS bH.iS H9.I5 23.19 85,28 i 1 .12 1 9. u 21 .51 5.03 8.19 1.12 25. 71 in. 57 1.H5 1 1.05 1 ,H9 3h.23 7.99 1.30 lb,29 1.15 15, 9 j >.?b ,b9 21, q1 11.111 32.51 9R,SO *** ** 1.K2 i.Pil 5,73 .fll 2,11 ?.Pb 2.59 5.78 1.07 1.23 1.?7 b.BH 5.19 1.72 3.bl 9.00 25.90 7. 05 5.h2 lb.17 \|9.\|H 5?.1b 21.22 18.71 133.89 M.11 11.17 R5.22 ** ** ! • . • • NOX * 97,55 9.57 1,51 3.59 2.99 * 2.87 2,71 2, 88 1.10 51. Ib *** F/A F/A DRY MF:AS STOICH .OObb '.DbB7 , 0 0 q b . n b 8 7 .0311 ,0811 ,0b08 .0931 ,0838 .098b ,1010 .1027 ,0070 ,ObB7 ,0880 .1035 ,0710 ,1012 ,0581 .0981 ,0107 .0911 .0159 .0735 .OOhl .Ob87 •PHI» ,09b .110 .337 ,5f)2 ,b35 ,717 ,1U2 ,bia ,51h ,115 , 11H ,201 ,089 CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13-MOOE WE Dcur _-_-_-— f i o DC roiui/u_UD r BSHC + H9NOX a b CORR. BSFC • 3 go ^3 ijnw^/f\ii^ii'» ,93b GHAM/KW-HK 3OU rDAUyirbhKUD BcDO laK^^r^"""™ .180 GRAM/KW.HR .192 KG/KW-HR 1 ( ( hFT HC CORR FACT .983 .977 ,911 ,901 .877 ,85k .981 ,87b ,89* ,910 .931 ,9bB ,981 F/A F/A PCT CALC MEAS .U07B 17,7 ,0113 18.0 ,0309 8,9 ,0510 8,9 .Ubbl b.l ,0787 b,9 ,007h 8,2 ,ObS7 2,9 ,OS70 9,2 ,0173 8.3 ,0318 9,1 ,Dlb2 9,5 ,0071 22,1 POWER CORK 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 FACT ,988 ,993 ,995 ,999 ,003 ,009 ,988 ,051 ,03b ,027 .017 ,012 ,989 DSFC COHR KG/Krt.HH *** 1,120 .lib ,130 ,119 ,173 *** ,17b ,17 .511 .bll 2.521 **** MODAL WEIGHT FACTOR ,0fa7 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,0b7 ,ORO ,080 ,080 ,080 ,080 ,0b7 MODE 1 2 "i 1 t, b 7 8 9 10 11 1? 13 ICHT FACTORS 1 ui3 ro«u/auD_uo < A . ^ i j 7.112 J\| Q 1 I 1 " t l.blO .809 GRAM/BHP-HR ) GRAM/HHP-HR ) LBS/BHP-HR ) ------- TABLE A-14 (cont'd). 13.MODE FEDERAL DIESEL EMISSION CYCLE 1979 NKi VOL VO TD-lnO * DIESRL + ETHANOL-f 30PCT WATER TEST NU.nS-02 FUELl EM-HbS-F PROJECT\| I I-5BJU-OOb DAU'I 3/Ob/Hl TOTAL MflDF FUEl KG/MTN 1 ,nU3 f .nbc,5 3 .?4?a 4 ,4bp4 •; ,73u> b 1 ,04?(l 7 .0 1 i9 R l.5bq? 1 1 . i Inb JO ,R?q4 11 .4Hqh 12 . 1 bq3 13 ,n np DIESEL PART K r, / M T N ,01«»3 .Ob55 . 1029 .1107 .) 1 34 . i inn .U 14 9 . I3b8 . 1295 .1319 ,1333 . \ 30R .0132 ALCOHOL PART KG/MIN .0000 .0000 .oq7s .2504 .4358 ,b58R .0000 1.002? ,bRb7 .4841 .2494 ,02b9 .oonn WATER PART KG/MIN ,OOOD ,0000 .0418 ,1073 , J 8bB ,2823 ,ooon ,4297 .2943 ,2075 .ICJbq ,0115 .00011 EQIV. DIESEL KG/MTN .0143 ,0b55 .Ib44 ,2bRb , 3B83 ,51b5 .0149 ,7b9 ------- APPENDIX B TRANSIENT TEST RESULTS FROM THE DIESEL CONFIGURATION ------- TABLE B-l. NOTES CONCERNING TEST RESULTS GIVEN IN APPENDIX B Test No. Cold Start B-2 B-3 B-4 Hot Start B-5 B-6 B-7 Bus Cycle B-8 B-9 Notes Passed statistical requirements. Results used for regulated emissions. Passed statistical requirements. Results used for regulated emissions. Passed statistical requirements. Results used for regulated emissions. Passed statistical requirements, emissions. Passed statistical requirements. emissions. Passed statistical requirements. emissions. Results used for regulated Results used for regulated Results used for regulated Failed statistical requirements, torque r2 = .869. Results used for regulated emissions. Passed statistical requirements. Results used for regulated emissions. B-2 ------- TABLE B-2. ENGINE NO.D26 ENGINE MODEL ENGINE 0,0 L( CVS NO, 10 01 VOLVO DIESEL 0, DID) 1-6 CAROMCTER 745,24 MM ME (29 ,34 If! I1G) DRY BULB TEMP, 24,4 DEG C(76,0 DEC F) DAC RESULTS PAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER Dir r MM. M20(IN, 1120) i U) ['LOWER INLET P MM, I-I2QUN, M20) BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F) KLOUER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD, CU, METRES(SCF) MC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM MC DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM CO DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM CO2 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM NOX DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR MC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM 11C MASS GRAMS- CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS CRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LD) KW MR (MP MR) ESI-IC G/KW MR (G/h'P MR) DSCO G/KW MR (G/MP MR) B5C02 D/KW IIR (G/MP MR) DSNOX G/KW MR (G/HP MR) ESrC KG/KW MR (LD/MP MR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW MR (IIP MR) DSI-IC G/KW MR (G/MP MR) PSCO G/KW MR (G/MP MR) CSC02 G/XU MR (G/MP MR) BSNOX C/KW MR (G/MP MR) DSFC KG/KW MR (LD/MP MR) 10.30 ( 1,50 ( 4,70 ( 962, ( 11,92 ( ,307 ( 13,01) 1,10) 3,57) 717.) 0,89) ,505) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS C- TRANS, PROJECT NO. 11 TEST NO.D26-1 DATE 3/24/01 TIME 1135 OYNQ NO, 5 RUN1 DIESEL EM-46S-T DAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY > ENGINE-50, PCT t CVS- 72, PCT ADSQLUTE HUMIDITY 9,0 Gf1/KG< 60,4 GRAINS/UK) NiiX HUMIDITY 1.0000 1 NYNF 751,0 (29,6) 566,4 (22,3) 50,0 (122,0) 6179, 296,0 300,9 (10627,) 40.3/22/ 40, G,4/ 2/ 0, 52, 0/1 3/ -49, ,4/13/ 0, 20, O/ 3/ ,32 2,4/ 3/ ,04 11.4/13/ 34, .7/ 2/ 1, 40,55 32, 47, ,29 33,5 5,53 16,61 1575,2 19,26 ,5.1.1 ( 1 1,22 ( 1 4,56 ( 3 13,59 ( 10 1200,97 ( 961 15,76 ( 11 ,410 < 2 LANF 751,0 (29,6) 566,4 (22,3) 50,0 (122,0) 6262, 300,0 304,9 (10769.) 32,4/22/ 32, 0,9/ 2/ 9, 36.1/13/ 33, ,1/13/ 0, 24. 6/ 3/ ,40 2.5/ 3/ ,04 14.2/13/ 42. ,9/ 3/ 3, 32.91 24, 32, ,36 39,9 4,19 11,47 2030,3 23,25 ,13) ,650 ( 1,43) ,64) 1,95 ( 2,61) ,40) 2,15 ( 1,61) ,14) 5,90 ( 4,40) ,10) 1043,72 ( 770,30) ,75) 11,95 < 0,91) 6S7) ,334 ( ,550) 7, LAF 751,0 (29,6) 566,4 (22,3) 50,0 (122,0) 6360, 305,0 310.1 (10952, 33.0/22/ 33, 9.0/ 2/ 9. 47.0/13/ 44, .2/13/ 0. 54, 21 3/ .95 3,2/ 3/ .05 34.7/13/ 104, .!/ 2/ 0, 14,01 25, 42, ,90 104,0 4.40 15.22 512G.M 61,69 1,629 ( 6,02 ( ,73 ( 2,53 ( 051,49 ( 6 10,24 ( ,271 ( ) 3,59) 0,00) ,54) t , 00 ) 34,95) 7.64) ,4-55) 4 NYN!" 751,!? (29,6) 5/i6,4 (22,3) 50,0 (122,0) 61 99. 297,0 301.0 (10661.) 71.2/22/ 21, 9. 1/ ?..' 9. 19,3/13,' 10. .1/13/ 0. 16,5/ .V .26 31 / ~l / f\£ t -\l -Jf * V-J 11.0/13/ 33, ,7/ 2/ 1. 50,27 12, 17, ,21 32.2 2,14 5,9.7 1170,2 j 1"' , u' fi '^374 ( 1,11 ( 1 1,92 ( 1 5.3f! ( 4 1054,39 ( 7SJ6 16,75 ( 12 ,337 ( , 82 ) ,4?; ,44) .01) .26) .49) 554) PARTICIPATE DATA/ TOTAL FOR 4 DAGG 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SC,M(GCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TE5T MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW MR (G/HP MR) MULTIPLIER FOR 6/KG FUEL (G/Lfi FUEL) ,904 1,347 .130 / "1 '/ ' r "I \ J i . / W .' o ; A (i "J >"-, i u \ * lj ' i .i i ,4256 t .1931) PART. G/KW-HR C6/HP-HR) 0.79 (0.59) 20 X 20 FILTERS CAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 0~> oo { ^ "•'? c / u \ L. V -j ------- r,-/:,!.•.': MOPI.L 01 VOLVO DIEGEL ''';:..;,',•;; o.o it o, CUD 1-6 ..: ,'•:;. 10 r.-FOMETLT, 7-13.46 MM I,'G(29,27 IN IIC) '„(• ::ULD TEMP, 25,0 DEC C(77,0 ULIJ f TABLE B-3. ENGINE GrtlOGION f.'EGULTS C-TRANC, TEST NO.H26-2 RUN1 DAIL 3/25/01 FROJICI COJ :-<'G r^suLTc L'AC WHtCK [iCGCRIPTION f.LOWCR PIP P MM, 1120 (IN, 1-120) r.'LG'U'EP INLET P MM, !I20(IN, M20) f.-.'.OWEr,' INLET IEMP, DEC, C(HEG, F) I.'LOU'ER PEVOLUTIONS TIME rEC'jNIiG TOTtM. FLUW STB, CU. METREG(GCF) IIC CAMPLE METER/RANCE/PPM ,'ic IICKCRB METER/RANGE/PPM CO CAMPLE METER/KANGE/PPM CO BCKORD METER/RANGE/PPM CO 2 CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT C02 I'CKGRC' METER/RANGE/PCT w NOX SAMPLE ME] ER/RANGE/PPM i NOX t.'CKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR IIC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM CO.? CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM MC MAGG GRAMS CO MAD;! CRAMG C02 MAGG GRAMS NOX MACS GRAMS FUEL KG (LIO KW I!R (IIP MR) DC! 1C C/KU' MR (G/!,'P HR) BGCO CAW MR (G/lTP MR) BDC02 C/KU1 IIR (G/IIP HR) BGNOX G/KU MR (G/MP HR) DCFC KG/KW liR (LH/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) 10,20 ( BSMC G/KU MR (G/IIP MR) 1,67 ( BSCO C/KW IIR (G/IIP HR) 5,04 ( BSC02 G/KU MR (G/HP MR) 957, ( BGNOX G/KU MR (G/IIP HR) 11-60 ( BGFC KG/KW HR (LD/MP MR) ,306 ( 13,70) 1,24) 3,76) 714.) 0,65) ,503) riME i;05 DIESEL EM -46: DYNO NO. 5 HAG CAAT NO. RELATIVE HUfJlUTY , ENGINE -52. PCT > CVG-411, PCI ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,6 GM/KG( 73,9 Gfv'AlN5/lJ<) NOX 1 2 A NYNF LANF LA'; 754,4 (29,7) 7a4,4 (29.7) 754,4 (29,7; 584,2 (23,0) 504.2 (23.0) 504,2 (23.0) 49,4 (121,0) 49.4 (321,0) 49,4 (121,0) 6100, 6263, 6369, 296,0 300,0 305,0 300,0 (10597.) 304,1 (10739.) 309,2 (10V21.) 44.7/22/ 45, 32,4/22/ 32, 32,9/22/ 33, 9,0/ 2/ 9, 9,0/ 2/ 9, 0,6/ 2/ ?, 56.6/13/ 54, 37.3/13/ 35, 47.G/13/ 45, .2/1J,/ 0, ,3/13/ 0. ,2/13/ 0, 19, 7/ 3/ ,32 25, 0/ Z/ ,41 54, ?./ 3/ .95 2,9/ 3/ ,04 2,0/ 3/ .04 2./V 3/ ,04 10.G/13/ 32, 14.0/13/ 42, 34.1/13/ 102, 1,3/ 27 1. 1,1/ 2/ 1. 1,1/ 2/ 1, 43,07 32.7,5 14,01 36. 24. ?:i, 53, 34, 43, ,27 ,37 ,?1 31,0 40,0 101,2 6,21 4,14 4,44 10,41 11,09 15,61 1501.5 2030.6 5154,0 17,70 23,75 59,80 ,409 ( 1,00) ,653 ( 1,44) 1,630 ( 3 1,15 ( 1,54) 1,97 ( 2,64) 6,01 ( 8 5,41 ( 4.04) 2,10 ( 1,57) ,74 ( 16.05 ( 11,97) 6,04 ( 4,50) 2,60 ( 1 1300,70 ( 975.96) 1034,69 ( 771,57) 057,63 ( 639 15,50 ( 11,56) 12,06 ( 8,99) 9,96 ( 7 ,426 ( .701) ,331 ( ,545) ,273 ( [•'ARTICULATE DATA* TOTAL FOR 4 BAQ3 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW GCM(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KU HR (0/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR GAG FUEL (G/1.B FUEL; 1 iiuKiiuTi c,r. i .oom- /) .V> 2J U IV 3 !'' ? 10 ,61) ,06) ,55) ,94) ,53) ,43) •44D) ,911 ( 1,332 , 1297 ,4235 4 , ; > ( •> i , () ) 9 , 4 ( I '.! 3,0) 62CO. .:-' 7.0 "-.I (lw.',33,J ,(>/:•?.:/ •::, , 'V ?' V • ,2/l3/ 17, »V13/ 0- , '// j,/ , 2h ,n/ .;/ ,04 ..'j/M/ 32, .'V '.'/ 1. 51' . H'/ 13. 37. 30',"0 2,31 5.92 1143.4 17,75 ,366 ( 1,15 ( 1 2.02 < 1 5,16 ( 3 996,68 ( 743 15,47 ( 11 .319 ( 32,19; < ,0967} ( .1921) ,01) ,54) .bO) ,05) .22) ,54) 524) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) 0.78 (0.58) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCK(SCF) 83,25 (2940,4) ------- TABLE B-4. ENGINE NO.D26 ENGINE MODF.L 01 VOLVO DIESEL ENGINE 0,0 L.( 0, CID) 1-6 cvs NO, 10 BAROMETER 745,24 MM HG(29,34 IN IIG) DRY BULB TEMP, 23,3 DEC C(74,0 BEG F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIF P MM, II20(IN, 1120) BLOWER INLET p MM, H2Q(IN, H20> BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(BL"G, F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW GTD, CU. METRES(SCF) w I Ul HC SAMPLE IIC BCKGRD CO SAMPLE CO BCKGRD C02 SAMPLE CO 2 BCKGRD NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM W.OX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM HETER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METFR/RANGE/PCT rilLUTION FACTOR !-!C CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT MDX CONCENTRATION PPM I-1C MAGG CO MASS 002 MASS NOX FUEL KG ( KW HR (HP GRAMH GRAMS GRAMS GRAMS DSilC G/KW HR (G/HP MR) DGCO G/KW HR (G/HP IIR) DSC02 G/KW IIR (G/MP IIR) DSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP I-IR) BSFC KG/KW IIR (LB/IIP I1R) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS I'OTAL KW I-IR (IIP BSHC B5CO BGCfl? ,%'NO'X BSFC G/KW G/KW R/K'W G/KW KG/KW HR HR. HR I-IR II R IIR) (C/HP (G/HP (G/HP (G/I-IP .(LB/HP IIR) I-IR) HR) MR) IIR) 10.20 ( J ,49 ( 4,69 ( 951, ( 11,03 ( ,304 ( 13,70) 1 .11) 3-49) 709,) 8,02) ,499) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS C-TRANS, PROJECT NO, 11--504'4--001 TEST NO,B26"3 BATE 3/26/81 TIME 9 ,'37 DYNO NO, 5 RUN1 DIESEL EM-46S-F BAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY > ENGINE-62, PCT > CVG-52, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 11,3 GM/KG( 70,9 GRAING/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F, 1,0000 1 2 3 NYNF LANF LAF 756,9 (29,0) 756,9 (29, G) 756,9 (29, B) 576,6 (22,7) 576,6 (22,7) 576,6 (22,7) 49,4 (121,0) 49,4 (121,0) 49,4 (121,0) 6179, 6263, 6367, 296,0 300,0 305,0 300,4 ( 10611.) 304,5 (10755.) 309,6 (10934.) 34,7/22/ 35, 31.9/22/ 32, 32,3/22/ 32, 8,2/ 2/ G, 9,0/ 27 9, ?,0/ 2/ 9, 46.9/13/ 44, 36,6/137 34, 47,6/13/ 45, -5/13/ 0, ,2/13/ 0, ,.1/13/ 0, 19,5/ 3/ ,31 25, I/ 3/ ,41 53, D/ 37 ,94 3,0/ 3/ ,05 3,0/ 3/ ,05 3,17 3/ ,05 11,3/13/ 34, 13,9/137 42, 33,9/137 102, ,77 2/ 1, ,7/27 1, ,9/27 1. 41,75 32,22 14,13 27, 23, 24, 43, 33, 43, ,27 ,36 ,90 33,3 40,9 100,7 4,63 4,07 4,20 14,91 11,67 15,54 1476,4 2034,6 5083,8 19,15 23,05 59,64 ,47G ( 1,05) ,652 ( 1,44) 1,615 ( 3 1,16 ( 1,56) 1,95 ( 2,61) 6,04 ( S 3,99 ( 2,90) 2,09 ( 1,56) ,71 ( 12,85 ( 9,59) 6,00 ( 4,47) 2,57 ( 1 1273, OG ( 949,34) 1045,92 ( 779.94) 842,32 ( 620 16,51 ( 12,31) 12,26 ( 9,14) 9,38 ( 7 ,412 ( ,677) ,335 ( ,551) ,260 ( PARTICULAR DATAr TOTAL FOR 4 BAGG 90MM FILTER G AMPLE FLOW SCM(GCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KU IIR (G/IIP MR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 4 NYNF 756,9 (29,0) 576,6 (22,7) 49.4 (12.1,0) 6200, 297,0 301 ,4 (1.0647, ) 09 ( 9/f.) / I-/ , 0,97 ?./ 9. 19,67137 10, .3/137 0, 16,37 3/ ,26 3.17 37 ,05 11,27137 33, ,77 27 1, 50,l3C 13. 17, ,21 32 , 0 2.34 6.03 1175,3 18,90 ,56) ,376 ( ,09) 1,13 ( 1, ,53) 2,07 ( 1, ,92) 5,32 ( 3, .12) 1035,71 ( 772, .37) 16,65 ( 12, 440) ,331 ( ,5 ,005 ( 31.27) 1,373 .1337 ( ,0997) -4401 ( ,1996) S3) 52) 54) 96) 33) 42) 45) PART. G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) 0.85 (0.63) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(GCF) 81.2P (2C70.S) ------- L'.'CJNE NO.D26 ENGINE MODEL '.'SINE VC NC, 0.0 10 LI 01 VOLVO DIESEL 0. CID) 1-6 TABLE B-5. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS H-TRANS. TEST NO.D26-1 RUN1 DATE 3/24/01 TIME 2,22 DYNO NO, 5 '\r.C»nER 7-J-J.22 MM I!C(29.30 IN KG) ,":r DULD TEMP. 25,6 DEC C(70,0 DEO D PROJECT NO, 11 DIESEL EM-465T CAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY > ENGINE-55, PCT > CVS-72, PCI" ADSOLUTE HUMIDITY 11,4 GM/KG( 00.0 CRAINS/LD) NOX HUMIDITY C,r, 1,0000 W \|:AG NUMDER DESCRIPTION 1XOUCR DIF P IxC'JLR INLET DI.OUER INLt.1 ."LCUER REVOLUTION'S MME SECONDS TOT^-L FLW STD. CU, METRES(SCF) MM, I!20(IN, 1120) P MM. 1120(IN. 1120) 1EMP, DEC, C(DEG, F) HC CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM IK. DC,\GRD METER/RANGE/PPM CO .'.AMPLE METER/RANGC/PPM CO DCKCRO ,1ETER/RANGE/PPM r(i: SAMf'LE METER/RANGE/PCT co 2 IICNGRD METER/RANGE/PCT NOX SAMPLE METER/RANCE/PPM NCX L-CKGRO METER/RANGE/PPM HJLUTION FACTOR 11C CONCENTRATION CO CONCENTRATION C02 CONCENTRATION NOX CONCENTRATION PPM PPM PCT PPM 11C CO CO? NPY MASS GRAMS MASS CRAMS MASS CRAMS MASS GRAMS fUEI. KG (LIO ,VW MR (IIP MR) DSIIC CAW IIR (G/liP IIR) DSCO GAU MR (G/ITP MR) DSC02 G/KW IIR (G/IIP MR) DSNOX GAU IIR (G/IIP MR) PSFC KG/KW IIR (LD/IIP MR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 DAGS TOTAL KW MR (HP IIR) BSMC GAU MR CO/HP HR) PSCO G/KW IIR (G/h'P MR) DSC02 C/KW MR (G/HP HR) P5NOX C/Mv1 IIR (C/IIP HR> DSFC KG/KW !IR (LD/ilP IIR) 10,99 ( 1,01 ( 3,73 ( 075, ( 10.70 ( .279 ( 14,73) ,76) 2,70) 652.) 0,04) ,458) 1 2 3 NYNF LANF LAF 726,4 (23,6) 726,4 (20,6) 726,4 (20,6) 566,4 (22,3) 566,4 (22,3) 566,4 (22,3) 50,0 (122,0) 50.0 (122,0) 50,0 (122,0) 6179, 6262, 6360. 296,0 300,0 305,0 300, a (10623,) 304.0 (10766.) 310,0 (10940.) L'l.0/22/ 22, 24.0/22/ 25. 2S.9/22/ 29, 9, 1/ ?./ 9, 0.9/ 21 9. 0,3/ 2/ 0. 22.B/13/ 21, 30.3/13/ 20, 56.0/13/ 54. ,6/13/ 1, ,0/1J/ 1, 1.0/13/ 1, 17, 2/ 3/ ,27 23, 9/ 3/ ,39 54, 6/ 3/ ,96 2,0/ 3/ ,04 2.7/ 3/ ,04 2.0/ 3/ ,04 10.G/13/ 32, 13.3/13/ 40, 34.0/13/ 102, ,0/ 2/ 1, ,9/ 2/ 1. l.O/ 2/ 1, 40,09 34,04 13,09 13. 16, 21. 20. 26, 51, ,23 ,35 ,92 31.6 39,2 101,1 2,24 2,04 3,79 6,90 9,34 1C, 43 1200,7 1945,0 5203,0 10,19 22,03 59, 92 ,410 ( ,90) ,621 ( 1,37) 1,654 ( 3 1,52 ( 2,04) 2,06 ( 2,76) 6,27 ( 0 1,47 ( 1,10) 1,30 ( 1,03) .60 ( 4,53 ( 3,30) 4,54 ( 3,39) 2,94 ( 2 041.01 ( 627,74) 945.30 ( 704,91) 029,64 ( 610 11,96 ( S.92) 11,10 ( 0.27) 9.55 ( 7 .269 ( ,443) ,302 ( ,496) .264 ( PARTICULATE DATA* TOTAL FOR 4 DAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCM(GCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HR (0/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR C/KG FUEL (C/LB FUEL) N^r.v'l ?"6 , 4 i'i-iii! 566, -1 (LV.J) bO.O (1JJ.O) 6 LCI . i"~'7 ,0 301. e i, > JJ.1/2LV ..'1. o,.?/ :•/ c, 21, 2/1 1; 19, 1,0/13,' 1, IS,?/ 3/ ..::- 2,6/ 3/ .04 10.4/13/ 31, .O/ 21 1, 52.19 13. 1C, ,21 30,3 2,27 6,29 1101,7 17,52 ,65) ,370 ( ,41) 1,13 ( 1 ,45) 2,00 ( 1 ,19) 5,5S ( 4 ,67) 1041,32 ( 776 ,12) 15,44 ( 11 434) ,333 ( ,944 ( 33,34; 1,290 ,1174 ( ,0075) .4211 ( ,1910) ,03) ,52) ,47) ,14) ,56) ,51; 540) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) 0.67 (0.50) 20 X 20 PILTERG SAMPLE FLOW CCH(CCF) 83.C7 (2924.0) ------- TABLE B-6. ENGINE NO,D26 ENGINE MODEt ENGINE 0,0 L( CUB NO, 10 01 VOLVO DIESEL 0, CID) 1-6 BAROMETER 742.95 MM HG(29,25 IN KG) DRY BULK TEMP, 25.0 DEC C(77,0 DEC! F) E'AG RESULTS DAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION DLOWER DIP p MM, H20(IN, 1-120) H20(IN, H20) PEG, C(DEG, F) BLOWER INLET F' MM, BLOIv'ER INLET TEMP, DLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD, CU, METRES(SCF) HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM HC DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM Cf)2 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT W NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM _^i NOX DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LE) KW IIR (IIP MR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP MR) DSCO G/KW IIR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW MR (G/IIP MR) DSNOX G./NU HR (G/IIP MR) DSFC KG/KW MR (LD/IIP IIR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW IIR (IIP MR) 10,52 ( 14,11) BSHC DSCO DSCO? DSNOX DSFC PART. G/KU MR G/KW MR G/KU MR G/KW IIR KG/KW IIR G/KW-HR (G/HP HR) (G/HP HR) (0/1 IP IIR) (G/IIP HR) (LD/IIP MR) (G/HP-HR) 1.10 ( 3,94 ( 092, ( 11, 14 ( .20-1 ( 0.68 (0 ,02) 2,94) 665.) G.31) ,460) .5!) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS H-TRANS, TEST NO.H26-2 RUN1 DATE 3/25/01 TIME 1152 DYNO NO, 5 PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001 DIESEL EM--465-F BAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-52, PCT , CVS-42, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,6 DM/KG( 73,9 GRAINS/IB) NOX HUMIDITY C,F. 1,0000 1 2 3 NYNF LANF LAF 754,4 (29,7) 754,4 (29,7) 754,4 <29,7) 534,2 (23,0) 504.2 (23,0) 504,2 (23,0) 49,4 (121,0) 49,4 (121,0) 49,4 (121,0) 6179, 6263, 6369, 296,0 300,0 305,0 299,8 (10509.) 303,9 (10733,) 309.0 (10914,) 23,3/22/ 23, 25.0/22/ 25, 31,0/227 31, 9,2/ 2/ 9. 9,0/ 2/ 9, 0,9/ 2/ 9, 21.9/13/ 20, 30,0/13/ 28, 56,2/13/ 54, ,1/13/ 0, ,4/13/ 0, .3/137 0, 15,77 3/ ,25 23,77 3/ ,39 53, 4/ 3/ ,93 2,6/ 3/ ,04 2,3/ 3/ ,04 2,4/ 3/ ,04 10,1/137 30, 13.6/13/ 41. 33.7/13/ 101, 1,1/ 2/ 1, 1,0/ 2/ 1. 1,47 2/ 1, 52,01 34,34 14,24 14, 16, 23. 20, 27, 52, ,21 ,35 ,90 29,3 39,9 99,7 2,46 2,84 4,05 6,81 9,43 10,56 1155,4 1953,0 5007,2 16,79 23,21 58,93 ,370 ( ,82) ,623 ( 1,37) 1,618 ( 1,20 ( 1.61) 2,02 ( 2,71) 6,12 ( 2,06 ( 1,53) 1,41 ( 1,05) ,66 ( 5,69 ( 4,24) 4,67 ( 3,40) 3,03 ( 965,19 ( 719,74) 966,76 ( 720,91) 030,88 ( 61 14,03 ( 10,46) 11,49 ( 0,57) 9,62 ( ,309 ( ,508) ,309 ( ,507) ,264 ( PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90MM FILTER- SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KU MR (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) A NYNF' 754,4 (29,7) 584,2 (23.0) 49,4 (121,0) 6200. 297,0 300,8 (10625.) 21.5/22/ 21, 3,77 2/ 9. 21.9/.13/ 2o, .6/13/ J. 15, 7/ 3/ ,25 2,2/ 3/ ,03 11.0/13/ 33, l.l/ 2/ 1. 52,65 13, 19. ,22 31, G 2,25 6,60 1192.6 18,30 3 57) ,382 ( 8 21) 1.10 ( J 49) 1,90 ( 1 2 26) 5,64 ( 4 9 59) 1006,74 ( 750 7 10) 15.44 ( 11 ,434) ,322 ( .940 < 33.4?) 1 , 280 .1216 ( .0707) ,4276 < .1939) ,04) ,59) , 4.1 ) ,21) ,73) ,52) 530) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) F.U.,30 (2942,0) ------- TABLE B-7. w 03 NO.nPA MOFCL 01 VOLVO DIESEL ' VHIMC 0,0 L( 0. CID) I- 6 ''.'J::> NO. 10 Mp.nmnrR 745.24 MM HG(29,34 IN HO r-'a rUJlfl TEMP, 25.0 DEO C(77,0 DEC F) '••ni? RESULTS I'.'iH NUMPCR nrr r MM, H20(iN, 1120) FH.flWCR JWIITT P HM, H20(IN, 1120) m..ou.rR TNLCT TCMP. DEG, CXBEG, F) MOWER Rp.'CiLunoNr. TOTAL n.OW Sin. CM, METRES(SCF) ,'ir SAMPLE MF.TER/RANGE/PPM HP HCKGRP METFR/RANGE/PPM CO SAMPI.F MFTER/RANGE/PPM CO DCKGRP METFR/RANGE/PPM f.02 SAMPLE MFTER/RANGF/PCT C02 HCKBRD MfTTCR/RANGII/PCT NO.V SAMPl F MFTER/RANGE/PPM METFR/RANGfl/PPM PILlirTON FACTOR HC CnNCrNTRATION PPM nn nowct'NTRATinN PPM CO? CONCflNTRATION PCT MX rONi-FNTRATION PPM Hf: MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMD nn? MADS GRAMS NflX MASS fiRAMG FUC! KG (I-D) KW MR (IIP !!R) FiPJIC G/KW JIR (G/IIP I!R) r nnnoa G/MJ IIR (G/HP MR) BSNOX G/KW MR (G/IIP MR) PBFC KB/KU IIR (ID/IIP MR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS FOTAI. KW MR (IIP KSHC B5CO B3CQ2 BSNOX 8SFC PART. G/KU HR G/KU IIR G/KW IIR B/KH HR KG/KW IIR G/KW-HR MR) (G/IIP MR) (G/MP HR) (C/MP MR) (G/MP IIR) (LD/HP IIR) 10.10 ( 1.11 ( 4,02 ( 910, ( 11. U ( ,270 ( C6/HP-HR) 0.7O CO 13,55) ,83) 3.00) 679.) 0.47) ,477) .52) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS H-TRANS, PROJECT NO. 11 5044-001 TEST NO.D2A-3 DATE 3/26/01 TIME 10J20 DYNO NO. 5 RUN! DICGEL EM 465-T DAG CART NO, I RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-53. PCT . CVS-52, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,7 CM/KG( 75,1 GRAINS/LD) NOX HUMIDITY C.F, .0000 1 2 3 NYNF LANF LAF 756,9 (29,8) 756,9 (29.8) 756,9 (29,8) 576.6 (22,7) 576,6 (22,7) 576,6 (22.7) 49,4 (121,0) 49,4 (121,0) 49,4 (121,0) 6179, 6263, 6360, 296,0 300,0 ;505.0 300,4 ( 10600,) 304,4 (10753.) 309,5 (10933.) 21.S/22/ 22. 24.S/22/ 25, 23.0/22/ 29. 9,0/ 2/ 9, 8,3/ 2/ B, 7,9/ 2/ 0, 22.3/13/ 20, 30.2/13/ 28, 54.4/13/ 52. •1/13/ 0, ,1/13/ 0, .1/13/ 0, 15, 9/ 3/ ,25 23, 6/ 3/ ,38 53, 5/ 3/ ,93 3, I/ 3/ ,05 2,9/ 3/ ,04 3, I/ 3/ ,05 9.7/13/ 29, 13.1/13/ 39, 32.7/13/ 98, ,0/12/ 0, ,7/2/1, ,8/2/1, 52.15 34,49 14,21 13. 16, 21, 20, 27, 50, .21 ,34 ,G9 29,2 38,6 97,3 2,25 2,89 3,83 6,93 9,57 17,94 1134,3 1096,9 5050,1 16,75 22,50 57,60 ,363 ( ,80) ,606 ( 1,34) 1,605 ( 3 1.06 ( 1,42) 1,93 ( 2.59) 6,05 ( 0 2.13 ( 1.59) 1,50 ( 1,12) ,63 ( 6.54 ( 4,87) 4,95 ( 3,69) 2,97 ( 2 1070,14 ( 798,01) 901,40 ( 731,83) 035,01 ( 622 15,fll ( 11.79) 11.64 ( 0,68) 9,52 ( 7 ,343 ( ,564) ,313 ( ,515) ,265 ( PARTICIPATE DATA. TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90HM TILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCH(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW MR (G/HP MR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 4 NYNf 756.9 (29,0) 576,6 C??,7> 49.4 (121 ,0) 6199. 297,0 301,3 (10643.) 20./1/22/ 21, 7,0/ 2/ 0, 19.9/13/ 13, ,t/13/ 0, 15. O/ 3/ ,25 3,3/ 3/ ,05 10, A/13/ 32. ,7/ 2/ 1, 52,56 13, 10, ,20 31,0 2.2S 6,19 1112.0 17,88 ,54) ,356 ( ,11) 1,06 ( 1 ,47) 2,12 ( 1 ,21) 5,04 ( 4 .67) 1049,13 ( 782 .10) 16,07 ( 12 ,78) ,42) ,50) ,35) ,34) .58) 436) ,336 ( ,552) ,073 ( 30,82) 1,393 ,1379 ( ,1029) .4754 ( ,2156) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCH(SCF) 81.00 (2061,0) ------- TABLE B-8. ENGINE NO.D26 ENGINE MODEL. ENGINE 0,0 L( CVS NO, 1.0 01 VOLVO DIESEL 0, CID) 1-6 BAROMETER 742,44 MM HG(29,23 IN HG) PRY BULB .TEMP. 22.0 DEG C(73,0 DEO E) DAP RESULTS BAG NUMBER BLOWER BLOWER m nur.o DIE P MM. 1120(IN, 1-120) INI F:T P MM, I!20(IN, H20) INLET TEMP, DEG. C(DEG. E) FLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FI..OW STD, CU, METRES (SCE) HC, HC CO CO SAMP1.F HETER/RANOE/PPM BCKORfi METER/RANGE/PPM SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM DCKGRD MFTFR/RANGE/PPM C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT CO? BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT W NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM ^ NQX CCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS- FUEL KG (LD) KW HR (HP IIR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO 0/KW HR (0/1 IP HR) I'lSCn? G/KW HR (G/HP IIR) BHNOX G/KW IIR (G/HP IIR) nSEC KG/KW IIR (LiVIIP IIR) TOTAL TEST RESI.II TS 3 BAGS TOTAL KW MR (HP BSHC ffSCO P5CD2 FCNOX fiSEC G/KU G/KW G/KW G/KW KG/KW IIR HR HR HR IIR HR ) (d/UP (G/HP (G/HP (G/HP (LB/H IIR) HR) HR) IIR) P HR) 4,63 ( 1 .32 < 4,75 ( 936, ( 12,08 ( ,299 ( 6,20) ,99) 3,54) 690.) 9,01) ,471) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS H-TRANS, TEST NO,D26-1 R'UNl DATE 3/25/31 TIME 2J30 DYNO NO, 5 PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001 DIESEL EM-4^5--E BAG CART NO, J. RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE- -59, PCT » CVC-42. PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,5 GM/KG( 73,4 CRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F, 1.0000 1 754.4 (29,7) 5C4.2 (23,0) 49,4 (121,0) 5697, 272,9 275,8 ( 9742.) 754, 504. ,4 (29,7) ,2 (23,0) 49,4 (121,0) 6010, 207,9 291,0 (10277.) 754,4 (29.7) 504,2 (23,0) 49,4 (121,0) 5693, 272.7 275,6 ( 9735.) 22..1./22/ 8,3/ 2/ 26, 4/137 ,4/13/ 10, 3/ 3/ 2,0/ 37 9,5/137 ,97 2/ 45,05 14, 23, ,25 27,6 2,23 7.50 1268,0 .1.4,57 ,406 1 , 2'-1 1,02 6.14 1037,59 11,92 ,332 22, O U 4 24, 0, ,29 ,04 20, 1, ( ( ( ( ( 77 ( ( ,89) 1,64) 1,36) 4,58) 3,73) 0,09) ,546) 19.9/22/ 9,0/ ?./ 24.3/137 .3/137 22,47 3/ 2,7/ 3/ 15,3/137 ,9/ 2/ 36 , 53 11, 21, ,32 45.0 1 , 06 7,28 1715,4 25,07 ,547 1,97 ,95 3 , 70 072, IB 12,72 .270 20, 9, 22, 0, .36 ,04 46, 1, ( 1 f 1 \ «U ( ( 2 ( 650 ( 9 ( i ,21) ,64) ,71) ,76) ,39) ,49) 457) 21.3/22/ 8,0/ 2/ 25,3/13/ ,3/137 19,27 3/ 2,87 37 10,6/137 ,9/ 2/ 4-2.8S 13, no t.ji- * ,27 30,8 2,03 7,20 1344,0 16,24 , 42? 1,43 1,41 5,02 937,20 11,33 ,299 21, -\ ) i 23. 0. ,31 ,04 32, 1, ( ( ( ( ( 69 ( ( ,95) 1,92) 1,05) 3,74) 0,07) 0,45) -492) PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL EOR 3 PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) 0.83 (0.62) 90MM FILTER- SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER EOR MULTIPLIER FOR 20 X 20 FILTERS SCM(SCE) G/TEST G/KU HR (G/MP HR) G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) ,2774 ( 23,02) .?orn) 4240) SCM(SCF) 1 5S.75 (2004,4) ------- TABLE B-9. NO,H26 MOHEI 0) VOLVO DIESEL 0,0 L( 0, CID) 1-6 fVfi NO, 10 HAROMETER 711,68 MM HG(29,20 IN no DRY : ------- APPENDIX C TRANSIENT TEST RESULTS FROM THE METHANOL CONFIGURATION ------- TABLE C-l. NOTES CONCERNING TEST RESULTS GIVEN IN APPENDIX C Table No. Cold Start C-2 Notes C-3 C-4 C-5 C-6 C-7 C-8 Hot Start C-9 C-10 C-ll C-12 C-13 Uncertain if throttle return spring was connected - this would have allowed the throttle to close slower. Passed statistical requirements. Results used for regulated emissions. Broken throttle return spring was noted prior to run - replaced spring. Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept - 16.7 indicating that engine was being motored during idle. Results used for regulated emissions. NOx by bag measurement was 7.52 g/kW-hr. Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept - 17.7 Results used for regulated emissions. NC^ by bag measurement was 7.40 g/kW-hr. NOX emission estimated to be 7.57 g/kW-hr on the basis of bag NOx measurements. Additional runs were made to optimize dynamometer/engine control prior to this test. Passed statistical requirements. Results used for regulated emissions. NOX by bag measurement was 7.02 g/kW-hr. Passed statistical requirements. Results used for regulated emissions. This test was conducted much later for additional unregulated chemistry data and required the use of a 100K TQ meter. Results not used for regulated emissions. Failed statistical requirements, torque, and power slope were -23 and 5.2 respec- tively. Actual power more than 15 percent below cycle power. Passed statistical requirements but actual power was more than 15 percent below cycle power. Results not used for regulated emissions. Particulate emission void. Same as C-2. Passed statistical requirements. Results used for regulated emissions. NOX bag measurement was 7.29 g/kW-hr. Passed statistical requirements. Results used for regulated emissions. Particulate not taken. NOX by bag measurement was 7.09 g/kw-hr. NOX emission estimated to be 7.24 g/kW-hr on the basis of bag NOx rneasurement. Same as C-5. Sarc as C-5. C-2 ------- TABLE C-1.(CONT'D). NOTES CONCERNING TEST RESULTS GIVEN IN APPENDIX C Table No. Notes C-14 Same as C-7, but passed statistical requirements. C-15 Same as C-7, but passed statistical requirements. Results not used for regulated emissions. Bus Cycle C-lb Same as C-2. NOx by bag measurement was 9.65 g/kW-hr. C-17 Same as C-2. NOx by bag measurement was 9.89 g/kW-hr. C-18 Failed statistical requirements, torque and R2 were low. Results used for regulated emissions. NOx by bag measure- ment was 8.45 g/kW-hr. C-19 NO statistical data. Results used for regulated emissions. C-20 Failed statistical requirements, torque R2 1.4 percent low, Actual power more than 15 percent below cycle power. Results not used for regulated emissions. NOX by bag measurement was 9.26 g/kW-hr. C-3 ------- TABLE C-2. ENGINE NO.D?0 ENGINE MODEL 80 ENGINE 9.6 L(586. CVS NO. 10 VOLVO DUAL CID) L-6 FUEL BAROMFTFR 740.66 MM HG(29.16 IN HG) DRY UULH TEMP. 23.9 DEG C(75.0 DEC F) HAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DTF * MM. H20UN. H20) BLOUER INLET P MM. H20CIN. H20) RLOVFR INLET TEMP. DEG. CCDEG. F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TI1E SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF) HC HC CO CO coa n i SAMPLF OCKGRD SAMPLE BCKGRD SAMPLE COZ HCKGRD NOX SAMPLE NOX IKKGRD METER/RANGE/PPN .1ETER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM NF TER/RANGE/PPN METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT ME TER/RANGE/PPM HE TER/RANGE/PPH DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KU HR (HP H ------- TABLE C-3. ENGINE NO.D20 ENGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.6 LC586. CID) L-6 CVS NO. 10 BAROMETER 740.92 MM HGC29.17 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP. 26.7 DE6 CC80.0 OEG F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER OIF P MM. H20CIN. H20) BLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN- H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. CCDEG. F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. HETRES(SCF) HC SAMPLE HC BCKGRD CO SAMPLE CO BCKGRD C02 SAMPLE C02 BCKGRD O NOX SAMPLE I NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPH DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPH CO CONCENTRATION PPH C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR C6/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX 6/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KU HR (HP HR) BSHC 6/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 6/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (6/HP HR) 10.78 ( 14.46) 2.19 ( 1.63) 11.25 ( 8.39) 941. ( 702.) 7.73 ( 5.77) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) .567 ( .932) PART. G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .44 (.33) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS COLD TRANSIENT TEST NO.20-2 RUN DATE 9/23/80 TIME 09:25 DYNO NO. 5 PROJECT NO. 11-5044-D01 DIESEL EN-465-F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-50. PCT , CVS-55. PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 11.1 6H/KG( 77.6 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0000 1 NYNF 673.1 (26.5) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 6181. 296.0 296.0 (10454.) 2 LANF 673.1 (26.5) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 6264. 300.0 300-0 (10594.) 3 LAF 673.1 (26.5) 523.2 (Z0.6) 48.9 (120.0) 6371. 305.0 305.1 (10775.) 4 NYNF 673.1 (26.5) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120,0) 6202. 297.0 297.0 (10489.) 5 8 .8/22/ .5/ 1/ 54.2/12/ 18 3 9 1 -3/12/ .6/ 3/ .!/ 3/ .0/13/ .O/ 2/ 42.92 21. 113. .25 26.2 3.52 39.02 1363.8 14.82 .777 1.03 3.43 38.00 1328.14 14.43 .757 29. 9. 116. 1. .30 .05 27. 1. ( 1.71) ( 1.38) ( 2.56) ( 28.33) ( 990.39) ( 10.76) ( 1.245) S.6/22/ 8.77 1/ 89.4/13/ .6/13/ 24. 9/ 3/ 2.8/ 3/ 9.5/13/ 1.0/ 2/_ 31.98 35. 87. .36 27.4 5.97 30.56 2001.6 15.72 1.195 1.92 3.11 15.91 1041.99 8.18 .622 43. 9. 90. 1. .41 .04 28. 1. ( 2.63) ( 2.58) ( 2.32) ( 11.86) ( 777.01) ( 6.10) ( 1.022) 14.1/22/ 9.5/ I/ 80.4/13/ .7/13/ 58. 3/ 3/ 2.7/ 3/ 20.9/13/ 1.0/ 2/ 12.83 62. 77. .99 61.8 10.88 27.26 5537.7 36.08 3.444 6.68 1.63 4.08 828.59 5.40 .515 71. 10. 80. 1. 1.03 .04 63. 1. ( 7.59) ( 8.96) ( 1.21) ( 3.04) ( 617.88) ( 4.03) ( .847) S.7/22/ 9.9/ 1/ 74.1/13/ .9/13/ 17. O/ 3/ 2.8/ 3/ 10.1/13/ .9/ 2/ 47.67 19. 71. .23 29.5 3.24 24.50 1246.4 16.77 .694 1.15 2.82 21.29 1083.11 14.57 .603 29. 10. 73. 1. .27 .04 30. 1. ( 1 ( 1 ( 2 ( 15 ( 807 ( 10 ( .53) . 54) . 10) .87) .68) .87) 991) PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90HH FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR scntscF) 6/TEST 6/KU HR (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR 6/KS FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAHPLE FLOW SCH ------- TABLE C-4. ENGINE NO.D?0 r.NGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.6 L(586. CID) L-6 CVS NO. 10 BAROMETER 739.90 MM HG(29.13 IN HG) DRY OULU TEMP. 26.1 DE6 C(79.0 DEC F) BAG RESULTS OAC NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIF P MM. H20UN. H20) BLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN. H20) QLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. CCDEG. BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF) F) O I HC SAMPLE HC GCKGRD CO SAMPLE CO QCKGRD C02 SAMPLE COZ FKKGRO NOX SAMPLE NOX flCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM 1ETER/RANGE/PPM HETER/RANGE/PPH C1ETER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PCT HF TFR/RANGE/PCT MCTER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPN DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (6/HP HR) BSCO G/KU HR (6/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC K6/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) RSC02 G/KW HR (6/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (6/HP HR) BSFC KG/KU HR (LB/HP HR) 10.91 ( 1.92 ( 11.9* ( 929. ( 8.78 ( .561 C 14.6) 1.43) 8.91) 693.) 6.54) .923) Est. BSNOX e/kW-hr (G/hP-hr) 7.57 (5.65) Part. 6/kW-hr (G/hP-hr) .38 (.28) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS COLD TRANSIENT TEST NO.20-3 RUN DATE 9/24/80 TIHE 10:35 DTNO NO. 5 PROJECT NO. 11-5044-001 DIESEL EM-465-F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-50. PCT , CVS-55. »CT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.8 GM/KGC 75.9 6RAINS/L8) NOX HUMIDITY C.F- 1.0000 1 NYNF 650.2 (25.6) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 6181. 297.0 295.6 (10441.) 2 LANF 650.2 (25.6) 523.2 (20.6) 45.9 (120.0) 6262. 299.0 299.4 (10577.) 3 LAP 650.2 (25.6) 523.2 (20.61 48.9 (120.0) 6370. 305.0 304.6 (10759.) 4 NYNF 650.2 (25.6) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 6202. 297.0 296.6 (10476.) 6 11 58 19 3 .0/22/ .21 1/ .8/12/ .4/12/ .4/ 3/ .5/ 3/ 9.5/13/ .71 21 40.98 19. 125. .26 27.8 3.26 42.90 1402.8 15.73 .799 1.04 3.15 41.42 1354.48 15.19 .771 30. 11. 128. 1. .31 .05 29. 1. C 1.76) C 1.39) ( 2.35) ( 30.89) (1010.04) ( 11.33) ( 1.267) 8.17227 11. I/ 1/ 94. 4/ 137 1.0/1J/ 25.37 HI 3.17 37 10.9/137 .8/ 27 31.44 30. 92. .37 32.0 5.17 32.24 2011.9 18.34 1.209 1.96 2.64 16.48 1028.43 9.38 .618 41. 11. 96. 1. .41 .05 33. 1. I 2.67) C 2.62) ( 1.97) C 12.29) ( 766.90) ( 6.99) ( 1.016) 13.5/227 12.87 17 84.2713/ 1.17137 58.17 37 1 2.77 37 25.6/137 .77 21 12.88 55. 80. .99 76.1 9.75 28.55 5507.5 44.35 3.429 6.75 1.44 4.23 815.42 6.57 .508 67. 13. 85. 1. .03 .04 77. 1. ( 7.56) C 9.06) C 1.08) ( 3.15) ( 608.06) ( 4.90) ( .835) 7.1/22/ 19.37 1/ SO.4/13/ 1.5/13/ 16. 5/ 37 2.67 37 10.4/13/ .71 21 48.88 16. 77. .22 30.6 2.82 26.66 1215.7 17.35 .690 1.17 2.41 22.82 1040.43 14.85 .591 35. 19. 80. 1. .26 .04 31. 1. ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 17 ( 775 ( 11 \ .52) .57) .80) .02) .85) .07) 971) PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR SCM(SCF) G/TEST 6/KH HR (6/HP HR) 1.074 ( 37.94> 1.114 .1020 ( .0761) MULTIPLIER FOR G/K6 FUEL (6/LB FUEL) .1818 ( .0825) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCMfSCF) 79.56 (2809.9) ------- TABLE C-5. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS COLD TRANSIENT PROJECT NO. 11-504-001 ENGINE NO.020 ENGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.6 L(586. CID) L-6 CVS NO. 10 TEST N0.20-1C RUN DATE 9/29/80 TIME DYNO NO. 5 DIESEL EM-465-F BAG CART NO. 1 BAROMETFR 739.90 MM HG(29.13 IN HG) DRY BUL3 TEMP. 27.8 DEG C(S7.0 DEC F) RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-44. PCT , CVS-60. PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.4 Kri/KG( 72.8 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0DQO BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIP » MM. H20(IN. H20) BLOWER INLET P MM. H20CIN. H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF) 1 NYNF 660.4 (26.0) 520.7 (20.5) A3.9 (120.0) 61 81. 296.0 295.8 (10448.) LANF 660.4 (26.0) 520.7 (20.5) 48.9 (120.0) 6?62, 299.8 299.7 (10584.) 5 LAP 660.4 (25.0) 520.7 (20.5) 48.9 (120.0) 6371 . 305.0 304.9 (10769.) 4 NYNF 660.4 (26.0) 520.7 (20.5) 48.9 (123.0) 6201. 296.9 296.8 (10481.) o I HC HC CO CO SAMPLE BCKGRD SAMPLE BCKGRD C02 SAMPLE C02 I) C K f, R D NOX SAMPLE NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPH METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPH DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (L8) KV HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (H/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW KR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) 8SC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) 11.38 ( 15.27) 1.85 ( 1.38) 11.47 ( 3.55) 893. ( 666.) 7.55 ( 5.63) ( .892) 6.3/22/ 31. 11 56 18 2 8 .•57 1/ 12. -0/12/ I'M. .4/12/ 1. .6/ 3/ .30 .6/ 3/ .04 .0/13/ 24. .&/ 2/ 1. 42.83 20. 117. .26 23.3 3.44 40.41 1403.8 13.21 .R23 ( 1.81) 1.14 ( 1.53) 3.01 ( 2.24) 35.39 ( 26.39) 1229.33 ( 915.71) 11.57 ( 8.63) .721 ( 1.185) 7.9/227 11. O/ 17 50.2/12/ 1 .4/127 25.07 37 2.4/ 3/ 9.7/13/ .5/ ?/ 31.76 29. • 103. .37 28.6 5.01 35.87 2042.1 16.41 1.235 2.04 2.45 17.54 993.64 8.02 .604 40. 11. 06. 1. .41 .04 29. 1. ( 2.72) t 2.74) ( 1.83) ( 13.08) ( 744.69) ( 5.98) < .993) 13.0/227 10.77 17 90.9/137 .9/13/ 58. 6/ 3/ 1 2.07 3/ 23.7/13/ ,5/ 21 12.76 55. 88. 1.01 70.6 9.72 31.11 5623.0 41.20 3.510 7.01 1.39 4.44 802.05 5.88 .501 65. 11. 92. 1. I .04 .03 71. 1. ( 7.74) C 9.40) ( 1.03) ( 3.31) ( 598.09) ( 4.38) ( .823) 5.5/227 10. 9/ 1/ 70.7/13/ .8/13/ 15.57 3/ 3.07 3/ 9.0/13/ .5/ 21 52.42 17. 67. .20 26.6 2.86 23.20 1092.8 15.08 .607 1.19 2.41 19.56 921.31 12.72 .512 27. 11. 69. 1 . .25 .05 27. 1 . ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 14 ( 637 ( 9 ( .34) .59) . 80) .59) .02) .48) 842) PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FDR 4 BAGS PART. G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .32 (.24) 90MN FILTER SAMPLE FLOU MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 70 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCMCSCF) G/TEST G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 6/K6 FUEL (G/LB FUEL) SCfl(SCF) 1.109 ( 39.16) 1.080 .094? ( .0707) .1749 ( .0793) 80.53 (2844.2) ------- TABLE C-6. FNGtNE EMISSION RESULTS COLD TRANSIENT PROJECT NO, ll»SO-nnl ENGI'IE H( ENGINE MpnFl BU VOL ENT.lNf l.h Lf5Ph. CIO) \|. CVS NO. in FUH OARO'IKTER THl',93 MM HCid'q.dl I'J Hf.) DRY RMLR TfM?. pi.j nfr; Cf?1." HI C F) BAG RESULTS RAT, NtlHflfp PFSCRIPlTON Pi.nrfrp nTF BLOWER n...^- ,..,., . P "M. H?n(iN, U20) HLOWFW TNLFT TEMP. OEI;'. C(OEG. F) BLOWfR BFVnLllTIONS TIME SF.cnNns TOTAl F\| OH Srn. CU. METKE3(SCF) n i CD HC HC CO CO RCKoRD Co? ^^Mp(E MFIERXRANGEXPCT co? HCKC.RD MFTER/RANGEXPCT NOX SAMPLE MrTER/RANGtXPPM NOX BCKfiRO MrTfctf/RANGE'/PPM DILUTION FACTOR Hf CONCENTRATION PPM CO fONr;F MH«TION PPM CO? CONCENTRATION PTT NOX CONeFNrWAI ION PPM HC MASS CO MASS Cn? MASS GRAMS NOX MSs GRAMS FUEL KG fLR) hrt HR (HP HR) HSHC G/KW HR (R/Hp HR) HSCO G/KW HR (r./Hp H«) BSCO? G/Kw HB (GXHP HR) BSNOX G/Hh HP (G/HP HM BSFC KG/KIN HH (LB/HP HP) TOTAL TEST Bt'SMLrS H BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO? G/KW HP (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HP (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HW (LB/HP Hk) 11.59 7.* .5b3 PART. 6/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .35 (.26) 15.19) bBb.) 5.55) TFST N0.20-2C RUN RATE 9X30X80 TIME 0915 DYNO NO, s DIESEL EM«bS-F BAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , fNGINf-57. PCT , CV3-bl, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.5 GMXKGl 73,* GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F, 1,0000 1 ? 3 NYNF LANF LAF bhs'.S (?b.2) bbS.S (2b,2) bbS.S (2b,2) 5P0.7 (20.5) 520.7 (20.5) 520.7 (20,5) B.9 (120,0) H8.9 (120,0) 8.9 (120,0) bl81, b2h3, b370, ?9h.O 299,9 305,0 29b.5 (1073.) 100, (10bl2,) 305, b (10793.) b.3X22X 31, 8,bX22X 3, 13.5X22X b8. 12, IX IX 12, 11. 9X IX 12, 12, SX IX 11, 58.2X12X 127, 9.7XI2X 105, 91,X13X 92, ?.RXl?X 5, 4.5X12X 8, 9.8X13X 9, 19. X 3X ,31 25. 2X 3X ,»1 b0.3X 3X 1,07 1.2X 3X ,05 3, IX 3X ,05 3, IX 3X ,05 7.9XHX 2. 9.2X13X 28, 23,X13X 70. .SX 11 1, ,bX 2X 1, ,HX 2X I, n.98 31, 9 12.3b ?n'. 3i, 5b. 119. **. 81, '.?b .37 1.03 23.? 2b.<' b«».5 3.35 S.5 9,87 0.93 32.98 28,83 131.7 2009.0 5737,7 13'.13 15. HB 0,b '.8b2 ( 1.90) 1.21* ( 2.b8) 3,593 ( 7 T.13 ( 1.52) 1,99 ( 2,b7) b.9b ( 9 2',95 ( 2,20) 2,7* ( 2,0) 1.H2 ( 1 3b.l2 ( 2b,9H) Ib.Sb ( 12,35) ,1* ( 3 I?b3.5b ( 92,23) 1008, b7 ( 752,17) 82H,b5 ( fal 11.59 ( B,b) 7,77 ( 5,80) 5,8 ( * '.7bl ( 1.851) ,blO ( 1,002) ,Slb ( , PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR H BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR GXTEST MULTIPLIER FOR GXKW HR (GXHP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR GXKG FUEL (GXLfl FUEL) » NVNF bbS,5 (2b,2) 520,7 (20,5) 8,9 (120,0) b203, 297,0 297, b (10510.) b,OX22X 3D, 12, OX IX 12, 90,7X11X 92, 8.7X13X 8, 17, 2X 3X ,?7 3, OX 3X ,05 9.1X13X 27, ,7X 2X 1, b,79 IB, 82, ,23 2b,S 3,10 20, 5 1250,7 15,09 ,9?) ,711 ( 1 ,33) 1,25 ( I .Ob) 2,»9 ( 1 ,09) 22,80 ( 17 ,9) 1002,0* ( 77 ,3b) 12,09 ( 9 89) ,b70 ( , t,ObS ( 37, b2) 1,127 ,099» ( ,078) ,17bb ( ,0801) ,57) ,b7) ,85) ,00) ,22) ,02) 93b) 80 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 80,35 (2838,1) ------- ENGINE NO.D20 ENGINE MODEL GO VOLVO DUALEUEL ENGINE 9,6 L(5C6, CID) L-o CVS NO, 10 BAROMETER 747,01 KM I!G(29,41 IN IIG) DRY BULB TEMP, 20.6 DEC C(67,0 DEC F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIP P MM, 1120(IN, H20) BLOWER INLET P MM. 1-120(IN, H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEC, C(DEG, F) BLOWC EVOLUTIONS o i vO TIME SECOND:, TOTAL FLQIJ 3TD. CU, METRES(3CF) HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PFM HC L J3GFC KU HR G/KU G/KL' ? G/KW ; G/KW (IIP HR !IR HR n i \ IIR HR) (G/HP (G/HP (G/HP (C/HP (LB/HP HR) IIR) HR) HR) HR) 10,26 i 2,31 < 10,36 < 964, ( 7,01 ( ,576 < : 13 : i : o ' -7 : s t .76) ,72) ,10) 19,) ,23) 946) PROJECT NO, 11-5044-00; DIESEL EM--465-F SfiG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY ENGINE-5G, F'CT CVE PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 3.? GM/KC< 62,2 GRAING/LB') NOX HUMIDITY C,l 1 NYNF 685,8 (27,0) 530,7 (20,9) 48,9 (120,0) 6102, 296,0 270,4 (10537,) LANF 685,0 (27,0) 530,7 (20,7) 48,9 (120,0) 6265, 299,9 302,4 (10601,) 3 LAF 685,8 (27,0) 530,7 (20,9) 48,9 (120,0) 6371. 305,0 307,5 (10361.) 4 NYNF 685,8 (27,0) 530,7 (20,7) 48,9 (120,0) 6202, '•'96»^ 29?74 (10573.) 6 3 52 18 1 5 ,l/22/ ,7/ I/ .A/12/ ,1/12/ ,0/ 3/ ,7/ 3/ ,9/13/ ,3/ 2/ 44,30 22, 110, ,26 17,5 3,31 33,29 1434.6 10,00 ,330 1.03 3,71 37,25 1395,61 9,72 ,307 31, 9, 112, 0, ,29 ,03 1C, 0, ( 1 ( 1 ( 2 ( 27 (1040 ( 7 ( 1, 8 3 78 1 24 3 7 ,33) ,3C) ,76) ,78) ,70) ,25) 327) PARTICULATE DATA 70.MM FILTER SAMPLE ,2/22/ ,0/ I/ ,0/13/ ,4/13/ ,5/ 3/ ,0/ 3/ ,1/13/ ,3/ 2/ 32,64 33, 75, ,35 21,0 5,77 26,24 1762,7 12,16 1,155 1,CO 3,20 14,55 1030,32 6,75 ,640 f TOTAL FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 41, 0, 77, 1, ,40 ,05 21, 0, ( 2,55) ( 2,42) < 2,38) ( 10,85) ( 311,56) ( 5,03) ( 1,053) FOR 4 DAGS SCH(SCF) G/TE3T G/KU HR 14.0/22/ 3,9/ I/ 68.2/13/ 1.7/13/ 56, 2/ 3/ 3,0/ 3/ 20.5/13/ ,3/ 2/ 13,30 62, 63, ,95 61,2 10,97 22,56 5323,9 36,00 3,263 6 1 u6 1,73 3,55 837,50 5,66 ,514 (G/HP HR) 70, 9, 66, 2, ,99 ,05 61, 0, ( 7 ( 8 ( 1 ( 2 ( 624 ( 4 ( G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 5, 3, 73, 1, 16, 2, 8, , ,20) ,52) ,27) ,65) 3/22/ 5/ I/ 7/13/ 7/13/ 2/ 3/ 7/ 3/ 1/13/ 3/ 2/ 50,09 13, 70. ,21 24,0 3,17 24,32 1174,7 13,75 ,654 1,07 2,75 22,66 .53) 1074,75 ,22) 845) 1,286 ( ,739 ,0915 ( ,1590 ( 12,81 ,60? 45,43) ,0682) ,0721) 27, 7, 72, ••) »_ ,26 ,04 24, 0, ( 1 ( 1 ( 2 ( 16 ( 316 ( 9 ( 1, .44) ,44) .20) ,90) ,36) .55) 001) PAtfT. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .39 (.29) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCH(SCF) 81,43 (2376,0) ------- TABLE C-8. ENGINE NO.020 tNGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.6 L(586. CID) L-6 CVS NO. 10 BAROMETFR 740.66 MM HG(29.16 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP. 26-7 DEC CCJO.O DEC F) BAG RESULTS U A G N UM n E R OESCRIPTION I3LOUER DIF C MH. H20(IN. H?0) BLOWER INLET P MM. H?0(IN. H20) OLOUER INLET TEMP. DFG- C(DEG. F) OLOUER REVOLUTIONS Tint SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT PROJECT MO. 11-5044-001 TF.ST NO.20-1 DATE 9/22/80 TIME 12:17 DYNO NO. 5 RUN 1 DIESEL EM-465-F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-46. PCT , CVS-58. P/C T ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.3 GM/KG( 72.1 6RAINS/LB) NOJt HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0300 1 NYNF 550.2 (25.6) 573.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 6182. 296.0 296.1 (10460.) 2 LANF 650.2 <25.6) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 6264. 300.0 300.1 (10598.) 3 LAF 650.2 (25.6) ,523.2 (20.6) 48.9 C120.0) 6370. 305.0 305.1 (10778.) 4 HYNF 650.2 (25.6) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 6202. 296.9 297.1 (10493.) O I HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM HC nCKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPH CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM CO BCKGRD 1ETER/RANGE/PPM C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT C02 HCKHRD METER/RANGE/PCT NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM NOX fICKGRO METER/RANGE/PPH DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (L3) KU HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) 8SC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KU HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KU HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) 3SCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KU HR (LB/HP HR) 12.02 ( 1.84 ( 10.83 ( 912. ( 7.10 ( 16.12) 1.37) 8.08) 630.) 5.30) .538 ( .884) 5.9/2Z/ 10. O/ 92.5/1 .7/1 18. 1/ 3. 1 / 1/ 37 37 3/ 3/ 8.4/13/ .77 44 2/ .42 30. 10. 94. 1. .29 .05 25. 1. 8 9 .1/22/ .77 1/ 40. 10. 50.77127 108. 28 3 .3/127 .37 37 .47 3A 10.9/137 20. 91. — 24 3 31 131 13 . 1 2 24 10?7 24 .4 .40 .32 8.7 .83 718 .28 .65 .40 .36 10.78 • 559 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 18 ( 766 ( 8 I • .58) .72) .97) .19) .10) .04) 921) PARTICULATE DATA 90MH .77 27 27.92 31. 104. .42 32.0 5.36 36.39 2281.9 18.38 1.310 2.22 2.41 16.38 1027.04 8.27 .589 , TOTAL 1. .47 .05 33. 1. < ( ( { 2.89) 2.98) 1.80) 12.21) ( 765.86) ( ( FOR 6.17) .969) 4 BAGS 13.4/22/ 9.77 I/ 92.2/137 .6/13/ 62. 6/ 3/ 1 3.47 3/ 21.5/13/ .67 2/ 11.85 58. 89. 1.07 63.9 10.19 31.67 5963.2 37.30 3. 656 7.15 1.43 4.43 833.72 5.21 .511 67. 10. 93. 1. 1.11 .05 64. 1. ( 8.06) ( 9.59) ( 1.06) ( 3.30) ( 621.71) ( 3.89) ( .840) S.7/22/ 10-07 1/ 90.87137 .6/137 18. 9/ 3/ 3. I/ 37 9.5/13/ .6/ 21 42.57 19. 89. .26 27.9 3.19 30.81 1396.5 15.87 .782 1.36 2.34 22.60 1024.42 11.65 .574 28. 10. 92. 1. .30 .05 29. 1 . ( 1.73) ( 1.83) ( 1.74) ( 16.86) ( 763.91) ( 8.68) ( .944) FILTER SAMPLE FLOU MULTIPLIER FOR MULTI»LIER FOR SCM(SCF) 67TEST G/KW HR (G7HP HR) 1.054 { 37.23) 1.137 .0946 ( .0705) MULTIPLIER FOR G/K6 FUEL (G/LB FUEL) .1758 ( .0798) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .39 (.29) ?0 X 20 FJLTERS SAMPLE FLOU SCN(SCF) 80.37 (2838.5) ------- TABLE C-9. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT PROJECT NO. 11-5044-001 ENGINE NO.D20 ENGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.6 L(586. CID) L-6 CVS NO. 10 BAROMETER 740.92 HM HGC29.17 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP. 25.6 OEG C(78.0 OEG F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIF P MM. H20CIN. H20) BLOWER INLET P HM. H20CIN. H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP. DE6. CCDEG. F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRESCSCF) HC HC CO CO C02 SAMPLE BCKGRD SAMPLE BCKGRD SAMPLE O I C02 BCKGRD NOX SAMPLE _!_ NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPH HETER/RANGE/PPH METER/RANGE/PPH METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPH METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KU HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX 6/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 10.81 ( 2.07 ( 9.51 ( 893. ( 7.49 ( 14.49) 1.54) 7.09) 666.) 5,59) BSFC KG/KM HR (LB/HP HR) .535 ( .880) PART. G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .46 (.34) TEST NO.20-2 DATE 9/23/80 TIME 10:05 DYNO NO. 5 RUN 1 DIESEL EM-465-F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-50. PCT , CVS-52. PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.5 GM/K6( 73.3 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0DOO 1 NYNF 650.2 (25. 523 48 296 .2 (20. 6) 6) 2 LANF 650.2 (25.6) .9 (120.0) 6181. 296.0 .2 (10463.) 6.1/22/ 9.6/ M 67. m 15. 2. 9. - 2/13/ 6/1 3/ 8/ 3/ 3/ 3/ 0/13/ 8/ 21 51.43 21. 64. .22 26.2 3.59 21.97 1175.4 14.86 .657 1.06 3.38 20.69 1106.49 13.98 .619 30. 10. 66. 1. .25 .04 27. 1. ( 1 ( 1 ( 2 C 15 ( 825 ( 10 ( 1. 523 48 .2 (20.6) .9 (120.0) 6262. 299.9 300.1 (10600.) 7.71221 9.0/ 1/ 82.8/13/ .45) .42) .52) .43) .11) .43) 017) — 23. 2. 9. - PARTICULATE DATA, 90HH 4/13/ 6/ 3/ 4/ 3/ 3/13/ 71 21 33.90 30. 81. .35 27.3 5.18 28.18 1911.2 15.65 1.137 1.96 2.65 14.41 976.92 8.00 .581 TOTAL 39. 9. 83. 0. .38 .04 28. 1. ( 2.51) ( 2.62) C 1.97) ( 10.74) ( 728.49) ( 5.97) ( .955) FOR 4 BAGS 3 LAF 650.2 (25. 523.2 (20. 48.9 (120 6370. 305.0 6) 6) .0) 305.3 (10783.) 13.3/22/ 8.5/ 1/ 81.6/13/ .6/13/ 56. 61 3/ 1 2.6/ 3/ 19.8/13/ .71 21 13.26 58. 78. .96 58.7 10.30 27.81 5361.4 34.28 3.320 6.65 1.55 4.18 806.48 5.16 .499 66. 9. 82. 1. .00 .04 59. 1- < 7 ( 8 ( 1 ( 3 ( 601 ( 3 ( 4 NYNF 650.2 (25. 6) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120 6202. 297.0 .0) 297.2 (10498.) S.6/22/ 9.0/ M 74.6/13/ .6/13/ 16. 4/ 3/ 2.7/ 3/ 9.7/13/ .8/ 2/ 49.43 19. 72. .22 28.5 3.27 24.82 1201 .0 16.18 .32) .674 .92) 1.14 .15) 2.86 .12) 21.74 .39) 1051.74 .85) 14.17 821) .590 28. 9. 74. 1 . .26 .04 29. 1 . ( 1 ( 1 ( 2 ( 16 ( 784 ( 10 ( .49) .53) .13) .21) .29) .56) 970) FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR SCH(SCF) G/TEST G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 1.109 ( 39.17) 1.081 .1000 ( .0746) MULTIPLIER FOR G/K6 FUEL (6/LB FUEL) .1868 ( .0847) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCH(SCF) 80.44 (2841.2) ------- TABLE C-IO. ENGINE NO.020 ENGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.6 L(586. CID) L-6 CVS NO. 10 BAROMETER 70.92 MM H6(29.17 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP. 25.6 DEC C(78.0 DEG F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION DLOUER OIF P MM. H20(IN. H20) BLOWER INLET P MM. H20CIN. H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. CCDEG. F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF) HC SAMPLE HC BCKGRD CO SAMPLE CO BCKGRD C02 SAMPLE C02 BCKGRD <"> NOX SAMPLE — NOX BCKGRD ro METER/RANGE/PPM HETER/RANGE/PPH METER/RANGE/PPH HETER/RANGE/PPH METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANSE/PPH NETER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KU HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) 8SC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KU HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS I BAGS TOTAL KU HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KU HR C6/HP HD) BSNOX G/KU HR (6/HP HR) 10.78 ( 14.46) 2.10 C 1.57) 9.55'( 7.12) 892. ( 665.) 5.68 ( 4.23) 8SFC KG/KU HR (LB/HP HR) .539 ( .887) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) Est. BSNOX g/kW-hr (G/hp-hr) 7.24 (5.40) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT TEST NO.20-2 RUN 2 DATE 9/23/80 TINE 10:45 DYNO NO. 5 PROJECT NO. 11-504-001 DIESEL EM-465-F BAG C1RT NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-51. PCT , CVS-58. PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.7 GM/KG( 74.8 6RAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0000 1 NYNF 647.7 (25.5) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 6181. 296.0 295.8 (10447.) 2 LANF 647.7 (25.5) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.) 6265. 300.0 299.8 (10589.) 3 LAP 647.7 (25.5) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 6370. 305.0 304.8 (10767.) 4 NYNF 647.7 (25.5) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 6201. 297.0 296.7 (10481.) 5 7 67 16 3 6 .8/22/ .11 1/ .5/13/ .6/13/ .3/ 3/ .1/ 3/ -2/13/ .8/ 2/ 49.86 21. 64. .21 17.9 3.66 22.00 1153.3 10.13 .696 1.05 3.47 20.89 1094.83 9.61 .660 29. a. 66. 1. .26 .05 19. 1. ( 1. ( 1. ( 2. ( 15. ( 816. ( 7. 7. 7. 82. . 24. 7/22/ 61 M 5/13/ 4/13/ O/ 3/ 38. 8. 83. * 3.2/ 3/ . 53) 41) 59) 58) 45) 17) 7. - ( 1.086) PARTICULATE DATA, 90HM 1/13/ 8/ 21 33.32 31. 80. .34 20.4 5.37 27.98 1881.7 11.70 1.120 1.96 2.74 14.30 961.84 5.98 .572 TOTAL 0. 39 05 21. ( ( ( ( ( ( ( 1. 2.47) 2.62) 2.05) 10.66) 717.24) 4.46) .941) 13.2/22/ 8.0/ 1/ 82.0/13/ .2/13/ 57. 21 3/ 1 3.1/ 3/ 15.8/13/ 1.0/ 21 13.11 58. 79. .96 46,4 10.28 27.97 5379.9 27.05 3.323 6.64 1.55 4.21 810.34 4.07 .501 66. 8. S.4/22/ 7.8/ 1/ 82. 75.2/13/ 0. .5/13/ .01 16. 71 3/ .05 47. 1. ( 7.33) ( 8.90) ( 1.15) ( 3.14) ( 604.27) ( 3.04) ( .823) 3.0/ 3/ 7.5/13/ .8/ 21 48.54 20. 72. .22 21.8 3.34 24.98 1201.7 12.35 .678 1.13 2.95 22.05 1060.56 10.90 .598 27. 8. 7. 0. .27 .05 23. 1 . ( 1.49) ( 1.52) ( 2.20) ( 16.44) ( 790.86) ( 8.13) ( .983) FOR 4 BASS FILTER SAMPLE FLOU MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR SCM(SCF) G/TEST G/KU HR (6/HP HR) 0.000 0.000 ( 0.00) 0.0000 (0.0000) MULTIPLIER FOR 6/K6 FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 0.0000 (0.0000) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOU SCN(SCF) 79.68 (2814.2) ------- TABLE C-1 I. ENGINE NO.D23 ENGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.6 LCS86. CID) L-6 CVS NO. 10 BAROMETER 739.65 MM HG(29_12 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP. 25.0 DEG CC77.0 DEG F) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT TEST N0.20-1H RUN 1 DATE 9/29/80 TIMF 11:20 DYNO NO. 5 PROJECT NO. 11-5044-001 DIESEL EM-465-F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENSINE-50- PCT , CVS-57. ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.2 GM/KG( 71.1 6RAINS/LB) PCT NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0000 BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIF r 3LOUER INLET BLOWER INLET MM. H20CIN. H20) P MM. H20CIN. H?0) TEMP. DFG. C(DEG, F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF) HC SAMPLE HC BCKGRD CO SAMPLE CO BCKGRD C02 SAMPLE C02 BCKGRD I NOX SAMPLE r~. NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM HETER/RANGE/PPN METER/RANGE/PPH 1ETER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM HETER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS CO? MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG CLB) KU HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) USCO G/KU HR CG/HP HR) BSC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR CLR/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KU HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW IIR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 11.41 ( 15.30) 1.81 ( 1.35) 10.14 ( 7.56) 828. ( 617.) 7.13 ( 5.32) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) .502 ( .826) PART. G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .38 (.28) 560 520 48 295 6. 13. 85. — 16. 2. 8. 1. 1 NYNF .4 (26. .7 (20. 0) 5) .9 (120.0) 6182. 296.0 .5 (10437.) 71221 O/ 1/ 2/13/ 4/13/ 1/ 11 71 If 0/13/ 21 21 50.04 21. S3. .22 22.9 ' 3.51 23.67 1166.9 12.95 .664 1.14 3.07 25.10 1021 .89 11 .34 .582 33. 13. 86. 0. .26 .04 24. 1. ( 1 ( 1 660 520 2 LANF .4 (26.0) .7 (20. 5) 48.9 (120.0) 6263. 299.9 299.4 (10574.) 7.71221 .46) .53) 12. 91. , 23. 2- 9. 1. ( 2.29) ( 18 ( 762 ( 8 ( .72) .02) .46) 957) PARTICULATE DATA, 90HH O/ 1/ 7/13/ 5/13/ 5/ It 8/ If 1/13/ 4/ 21 33.97 27. 90. .34 26.0 4.62 31.38 1864.2 14.90 1.123 2.08 2.22 15.08 896.14 7.16 .540 TOTAL 38. 12, 93. 0. .38 .04 27. 1. ( 2.48) ( 2.79) ( 1.66) ( 11.25) ( 668.25) ( 5.34) ( .887) FOR 4 BAGS 3 LAF 660.4 (25. 520.7 (23. 48.9 (120 6369. 305.0 0) 5) .0) 304.4 (10753.) 13.1/22/ 12. 8/ 1 / 84.1/13/ .7/13/ 56. 21 11 3.0/ 11 23.2/13/ 1.7/ 21 13.37 54. 81. .95 68.0 9.40 28.61 5270. 8 39.59 3.291 6.97 1.35 4.11 756.58 5. 68 .472 65. 13. 84. 1. .99 .05 70. 2. ( 7 ( 9 ( 1 ( 3 ( 564 ( 4 ( 4 NYNF 660.4 (26.0) 520.7 (20.5) 48.9 (120.0) 6200. 297.0 296.4 (10468.) 6.0/22/ 30. 11. 9/ I/ 12. 80.8/13/ 81. .7/13/ 1. 16. 1/ 11 .26 3.0/ 11 .05 8.8/13/ 26. 1.7/ 21 2. 50.20 18. 78. .21 24.7 3.10 27.01 1145.7 13.98 .26) .654 ( .34) 1.22 ( .01) 2.54 ( .06) 22.11 ( 1 1.44) 1.64) 1.89) 6.49) .18) 937.87 ( 699.37) .24) 11.44 ( 777) .535 ( 8.53) .880) F ILTER SAMPLE MULTIPL FLOW IER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR SCM(SCF) G/TEST G/KW HR (6/HP HR) 1.1D2 ( 38.93) 1.085 .0951 ( .0709) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL CG/L8 FUEL) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) .1892 ( .0858) 79.55 (2809.9) ------- TABLE C-12. ING P.F nn'. ENGINE MOnFl RO VOLV" PHIAL FUPL E NG1NF l.i, LfSPh. CH>) I -h CVS rJO. m DRY l? TN HG) TJ.MP. ph'.l DFC, r.(7i.n nrr, BAG RfSHLTs RAT, MIIMRFR O I HLOWFH DTF P MM. H?0(1N. M?0) HtOUFR TNLFT F MM. li?fl(IN. H?ll) HLOWfR INLFT TtMP. nE(,'. C(OE.G. F) HiHrtFR RFVOLnTIONS Tl^f SECONDS TOTAL FLOU STII. CM'. ".E TI- NT SAMPLE MMKR/R.ANGI /PPH HC RCKr.PD MF n R/RANGt/PP' CO SAMpLF MFTFH/RAMGt/PPM CO RCKftRO MF TER/RAMGf /PPM CO? SAMpi E MF TEH/RANGE/FCT co? rirKcan MFTFR/RANGE/per NOX SAMPLt MpTE.K/RANGKXPPM MF TER/RANGL/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC fONcFNTRJTION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM CO? f.ONCFMTRsTION PCT NO* CONCENTRATION PPM HC CO MASs GRAMS CO? MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GPAMS FUEL KG tin) KW HP (HP HR) B3HC G/KH HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO? G/KW HR (G/HP HP) BSNOX G/KW HR (f./HP HR) BSFC KG/KW MR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TF3T RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KM HR (HP HR) BSHC r,/Kw HR (G/HP HR) PSCO G/KN HR (G/HP HH) BSCO? G/KW HR (G/HP HR) G/KW HR (G/HH HR) H3FC 11.31 ( 15.17) 1.10 ( 1.43) in.II ( 7,54) B51. ( b34.) 7.4? ( 5.53) HH fLH/HP HK) .515 { .87) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT TEST NO,?0«2H RUN g DATE q/2S/80 TIME DYNO NO, 5 DIESEL t BAG CART NO, PROJECT NO, U-50M-001 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-tB. PCT , CVS-57, PCT ABSOLUTE-. HUMIDITY 10,5 r,M/KG( 73,3 GRAIN3/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000 1 NYNF bbn.4 (?b.O) 51R,2 (?0,4) 48.1 (120,0) blBH, ?.m.o 215.3 (10430,) b,l/22/ iO, in.b/ i/ 11, 83.7/13X 84, .7/13/ 1, lb,2/ 3/ ,2b 3,0/ 3/ ,05 8.1XUX 24, 1.2/ 2/ 1. 41.82 ?n, 81. .21 23.? 3.41 28.00 1150. b 13.10 .h57 ( 1.45) l.lb ( l.Sb) P.14 ( 2,11) 24.15 ( 18.01) 112,20 ( 731,88) 11.30 ( 8,43) '.5b7 ( ,131) 2 LANF bhO.4 (2b, 518,2 (20. 48,1 (120 b2bl , 211,1 0) 4) .0) 211,2 (lOSbb,) 7.S/2?/ I.I/ I/ 8i,n/l3/ ,B/13/ 23, B/ J/ 3, I/ 3/ 1.5/13/ l.l/ 2/ 33, 5b 28, 87, .34 27,3 4,85 30, 2b 18bb,8 15,b3 1,120 2,02 2.40 14.11 124,13 7,74 .555 38. 10, 10, 1. .31 .05 28, 1. 2.47) 2,71) 1.71) 11,18) b81,72) 5,77) ( ,113) 3 LAF bbO.4 (2b,0) 518,2 (20,4) 48,1 (120,0) b3h1, 305.0 304,3 (10741.) 12.1/22X b4, 1.4X IX 1, B4.7X13X 85, ,bX13X 1, 57, 5X 3X 1,01 3, IX 3X ,05 23.4X13X 70, i,ox ax i , 11,03 5b, 81. ." b1,3 1,71 28,85 5403,1 40, 3b 3,3bb ( 7,42) b,12 ( 1,28) 1,41 1,05) H.17 3,11) 780, bS 582,13) 5,83 4,35) ,4Bb ,711) 4 NYNF bbO,4 (2b,0) 518,2 (20,4) 48,1 (120,0) b200, 2lb,1 21b,2 (1041,3, ) 5,8X22X 21, 1.0X IX 1, 81,S/13X 82, ,b/13X 1, 17, IX 3/ ,27 3,4X 3/ ,05 1.1/13X 27, l.OX 2X 1, 47,2b 20, ", .?? 2b,2 3,43 27,21 1203,2 14, Rb ,b8H ( 1 1,21 ( 1 2,82 ( 2 22,50 ( lb 112,13 ( 731 12, 2b ( 1 ,5b4 ( , .51) ,b3) ,u> ,78) .83) • 1«> 127) PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL FOR » BAGS FILTER SAMPLF FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR SCM(SCF) GXTEST GXKW HR (GXHP HR) G/KG FUEL (GXLB FUEL) PART. 6/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .39 (.29) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) l,07b ( 37,111 1.111 ,0182 ( .0732) ,110b ( ,08b5) 78.80 (2783,3) ------- TABLE C-13. ENGINE NO.D20 ENGINE MODEL GO VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.6 L(586, DID) L~6 CV3 NG, 10 BAROMETER 752,0s1 MM 110(29,61 IN H6> DRY BULK TEMP, 17,2 DEC C(63,0 BEG F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER BECCRIPTION BLOWER DIP p MM, I!20(IN, H2H) BLOWER IMLET ? MM, H20dN, 1120) BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEC, CfDFfi, D BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW 31 D, CU, METRES (3CF) METER7RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/FCT METER/RANCE/FCT METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM LILUTION FACTOR i-IC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS CRAMS CO MASS CRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NDX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LEO KW HR (iiP HR) BSIIC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) DGCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) B3C02 G/KW HR (G/liP HR) BONCX G/KW HR (G/HP IIR) DSFC KQ/KW IIR (LB/HP HR) 1QTAL TEST RESULTS A DAGS o 1 HC HC CO CO C02 C02 NOX NCX SAMPLE BCKGRD SAMPLE BCKCRD SAMPLE BCKCRLi SAMPLE BCKGRD TOTAL KU IIR (HP BSKC BSCO E3C02 BSN'OX BSFC G/KW G/KW G/KW G/KW KG/KW HR HR IIR IIR IIR HR) (G/HP (G/HP (G/HP (G/HP (LD/HP HR ) HR) HR) HR) HR) 10,38 ( 2.5''. ( 0,89 ( 731, ( 7,67 ( ,560 ( 13,92) 1,91) 6.63) 694.) 5,72) ,921) C-TRANS, TEST NO.D20-2 RUN DATE 11/10/00 TIME DYNO NO, 5 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY PROJECT NO, 11- 5044-00 DIESEL EM-465-r BAG CART NO, 1 -53, PCT , CVS-20, PCT 6,5 GM/KG( 45,7 GRAIN3/LD) NOX HUMIDITY C, ', 1,0000 PART. VOID 1 2 3 NYNF LANF LAF 685, 8 (27,0) 685, S (27,0) 685,8 (27,0) 530,9 (20,9) 530,9 (20,9) 530,9 (20,9) 48,9 (120.0) 48,9 (120,0) 40,9 (120,0) 6101, 6266, 6372. 296,0 300,0 305.0 300,9 (10620.) 305,1 (10774,) 310,2 (10957.) 9.1/22/ 46, B.6/22/ 43, 14.4/22/ 72, 9,6/ I/ 10, 9,3/ I/ 10, 11, O/ I/ 11, 71.9/13/ 70, 72.B/13/ 71. 62.3/13/ 60, ,6/13/ 1, ,5/13/ 0, ,6/13/ 1, 17, 7/ 3/ ,20 24, U 3/ ,40 55, 3/ 3/ ,97 3,0/ 3/ ,06 3, I/ 3/ ,05 3,1/ 3/ ,05 6.8/13/ 20, 8.1/13/ 24, 22.2/13/ 67, >2/ 2/ 0, ,!/ 2/ 0, ,2/ 2/ 0, 45,53 32,53 13,63 36, 33, 62. 69. 70, 58, ,23 ,35 ,93 20,1 24,2 66,5 6,31 5,89 11.02 24,13 24,78 20,91 1244,4 1901,2 5261.0 11,56 14,14 39.40 .754 ( 1,66) 1.176 ( 2,59) 3,233 ( 7 1,00 ( 1,34) 1,07 ( 2,50) 6,42 ( 8 6,30 ( 4,70) 3,15 ( 2,35) 1,72 ( 1 24,10 ( 17,97) 13,23 ( 9,90) 3,26 ( 2 1243,27 ( 927,11) 1061,48 ( 791,54) 819,58 ( 611 11,55 ( 3,62) 7,53 ( 5,65) 6,15 ( 4 ,753 ( 1,239) ,630 ( 1.036) ,504 ( PARTICULATE DATA? TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW 3CWSCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEGT MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HR (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 4 NYNP 685,8 (27,0) 530,9 (20,9) 48,9 (120,0) 6202, 296,9 301,9 (10664.) 5.S/22/ 29- 10. 2/ I.' 10. 67.1/13/ 65. ,5/13/ 0, 16.4/ 3/ ,26 3 1 2/ 3/ > 05 D — / 1 7 1 O<~ O.w'/ll-/ i^tj» .!/ 2/ 0. 49,55 1 1 i / 64, •"> 1 t _ -L 24,9 3.3^ 22. 4n 117D.2 14,40 ,14) .640 ( 1 ,/.!) 1,09 ( 1 .20) 3,05 ( 2 ,43) 20,57 ( 15 .16) 1079,85 ( 805 ,59) 13,20 ( 7 G2?) ,594 ( 1,332 ( 47,03) ,915 ,0031 ( ,0657) ,1573 ( ,0713) B3.49 (294S.O) ,43) ,46) .27) ,34) ,24) ,04) 977) ------- TABLE C-14. VGT>,E NO.D20 ".CDCL 9,6 L 10 'v'Olv'O DUAL FUEL CIIO L--6 :::«RJ,-1ETER 752.07 MM ;,'C(2'?,61 IN HG) DRY 3UL[! Tu-P. 20.0 M.3 C(60,0 DEG F) FAG RESULTS SAG NUriDCn _ .-:;'5uER' Dir'Y' MM, H20(IN. 1120) L'Li.'WER INLET P MM, H20UN. H20) BLCWER INLET TEriP, DEG, C(DEG, F) lOjUTR REVOLUTIONS lIhC SECONDS TQr, ------- TABLE C-15. ENGINE NO, 20 ENGINE MODEL ENGINE CVS NO, 10 GO VOLVO DUALrUEL LC06. CID> L-i BAROMETER 751.84 MM I IS(29,60 IN 11C) 1'iRY DULL1 TEMP, 20,6 DfG C(69,0 DEG F) BAG RESULT;; BAG NUMDER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIP P MM, M2C(IN, 1120) b'LGUL'R INLET P MM, I,'2G(!N, 1120) BLOu'Ef; INLET TEMP. DEC, CdEC, F) KLOUER REVOLUTIONS TIKE SECONDS TOTAL fLCL! GTD, CU, METRES(SCF) HC SAMPLE KETER/RANGE/PPM HC E'CKGRD METER/RftNCE/PPM CO SfiMPLE METER/RnNGE/PPI-l CO CCKGRD METE1YRANGE/PFM L02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PC I SG2 PCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT o i^'iX oAMPLE fiETER/RANGE/PPM 1 hOX HCKGRD METLP/Rr:NGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM CG2 CONCENTRATION PL" f NOX CONCENTRATION PPii HC MASS GRAMS- CO MAES GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LID KU IIR (HP HR) f.'CHC G/KU HR (G/HP ;,'R) BSCO b/KW IIR (G/IIP !:R) KCG2 G/KU HR (C/HP .HR) DGNOX C/KU MR (G/HP MR) Ff£FC KG/KW HR (LL7HP HR) OTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BfiCE TOTAL KU HR (HP HR) 10,30 ( DSHC G/KU !!R (G/MP HR) 2,30 ( £!£CO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) 0,68 ( FSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP IIR) 907, ( I-fpNOX G/KU IIR (G/MP HR) 7,05 ( ir'iFC KG/KU IIR (LH/HP HR)' ,542 ( 13.81) 1.71) 6,47) 676.) 5,26) .891 ) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS H- TRANS, PROJECT NO, 11-5044-OOJ TEST N0.20-2M DATE 11/1G/80 TIME DYNO NO, 5 RUN RELATIVE HUMIDITY ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY DIESEL EM-465-F BAC CART NO, 1 , ENGINE-43, PCT » CV3-20, PCT 7,3 GM/KG( 51,0 GRAINS/LI;/ NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1.0000 1 2 3 NYNF LANF LAF 6C5.G (27.0) 605,0 (27.0) 6G5.G (27.0) 528,3 (20, S) 523,3 (20,8) 52C,3 (20,8) 40.9 (120.0) 40.7 (120.0) 40.9 (120.0) 6102, 6263, 6371, 296.0 299,9 305,0 301,0 (10630.) 304,9 (10769,) 310,2 (10955.) S.7/22/ 28. 7.3/22/ 37, 13, A/22/ 60. 6,3/ I/ 6. 6.B/ I/ 7, X.4/ I/ 7. 72.9/13/ 71, 71.9/13/ 70, 7Q.3/13/ 70, -9/13/ 1, 5.2/13/ 5, 18.D/13/ 17, 15. 4/ 3/ ,24 22,7 / 3/ ,37 55, 4/ 3/ .97 2,9/ It ,04 3, I/ 3/ ,05 3. I/ 3/ ,05 6.6/13/ 20, 7.7/13/ 23, 20.1/13/ 60, ,5/2/1, ,4/2/0, ,6/ 2/ 1, 52,68 35,41 13,58 22, 30, 61, 70, 65, iO, . 20 , 32 . 93 19,4 22.8 59.8 3,87 5,30 10,98 24,43 22,98 21,72 1107,5 1796,2 5272,1 11,14 13,30 35,47 ,640 ( 1,41) 1,058 ( 2,33) 3,241 ( 7 1,06 ( 1,43) 1,04 ( 2.47) 6,37 ( 0 3,63 ( 2,71) 2,88 ( 2,15) 1,72 ( 1 22,96 ( 17.12) 12,50 ( 9.32) 3,41 ( 2 1040,80 ( 776,19) 976,40 ( 728,16) 020,17 ( 617 10,47 ( 7,31) 7.23 ( 5.39) 5,57 ( 4 ,602 ( ,990) ,575 ( ,946) ,509 ( PART 1CUL ATE DATA* TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCM(GCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KU HR (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LD FUEL) 4 NYNF 605,3 (27,0) 520,3 (20,0 40,9 (120,0) 6200, 296,9 301.0 (10661.) S.4/22/ 27, 7,0/ I/ 7, 71.0/13/ 70. 13.2/13/ 12. 16, 3/ 3/ ,26 3,3/ 3/ ,05 7.5/13/ 22, ,5/ 2/' 1, 49,30 20, 5G , ,21 21.9 3,53 20,27 1160,2 12.65 ,15) ,639 ( 1 ,54) 1,03 ( 1 ,29) 3,44 ( 2 .54) 19,72 ( 14 ,57) 1128,65 ( C41 ,15) 12,31 ( 9 037) ,622 ( 1, 1.324 ( 46.73) ,920 ,0093 ( .0666) ,1640 ( .0748) .41) .30) ,56) .70) ,63) .10) 022) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .39 (.29) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 83,59 (2952,5) ------- TABLE C-16. fNGlNE NO-D20 FNGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUFL CNG1NC V.6 L(586. CID) 1-6 CVS NO. 10 BAROMETER 740.66 MM HGC29.16 IN H6) DRY OUL9 TFMP. 23.9 DEC CC75.0 OEG F) BAG RESULTS 3AG NUMBER BLOWER OIF f MM. H20(IN. H20) OLOUFR INLET P MM. H20UN. H20) BLOWER INLET TFMP. DEG. C(DE6. F) ULOWfR REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT? TEST NO.20-1 RUN 2 DATF 9/22/80 TIME 12:53 DYNO NO. 5 PROJECT NO. 11-5044-001 DIESEL EH-465-F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENSINE-53. PCT , CVS-54. ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.1 6H/KGC 70.4 GRAINS/LB) PCT NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1-0300 1 647.7 (?5.5) 5?3.2 (20.61 48.9 (120.0) 569t. 272.3 272.7 ( 9632.) 447.7 (25.5) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 6005. 287.6 287.6 (10158.) 647.7 (25.5) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 5695. 272.8 272.8 ( 9634.) n i CD HC SAMPLE HC 3CKGRD CO SAMPLE CO BCKGRD C02 SAMPLE CO? aCKGRD NOX SAMPLE NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM MtTER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LO) KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 8SCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LO/HP HR) 6.7/221 9.7/ 1/ 64.1/12/ .2/127 21.07 3/ 2.4/ 3/ 9.9/13/ .6/ 27 37.65 24. 139. .30 29.2 3.76 44.10 1513.1 15.25 .868 1.57 2.40 28.15 965.69 9.74 .554 33. 10. 143. 0. .34 .04 30. 1. ( 1.91) ( 2.10) ( 1.79) ( 20.99) ( 720.12) ( 7.26) ( .911) 6.8/227 8.77 17 74.8/127 1 .17127 26.87 3/ 2.17 37 12.87137 .97 21 29.17 25. 169. .41 37.6 4.21 56.47 2149.5 20.68 1.295 2.39 1.76 23.63 899.36 8.65 .542 34. 9. 73. 0. .44 .03 38. 1. t 2.86) ( 3.21) ( 1.31) ( 17.62) ( 670.65) t 6.45) < .891) 6.2/227 8.97 17 56.97127 1 .17127 21.47 37 2.37 3/ 10.7/137 .37 27 37.15 22. 120. .31 31.9 3.54 38.19 1555.0 16.62 .883 1.60 2.21 23.84 970.55 10.37 .551 31. 9. 23. 0. .35 .04 32. 0. ( < ( ( 1.95V 2.15) 1.65) 17.78) ( 723.74) ( ( 7.74) .906) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) OSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) 5.56 ( 2.07 ( 24.96 ( 939. ( 9.45 ( 7.45) 1.54) 18.61) 700.) 7.05) .548 ( .901) PART. G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .64 (.43) PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 3 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR SCMCSCF) G/TEST 6/KW HR (G7HP HR)* MULTIPLIER FOR 6/KG FUEL (67L3 FUEL) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) .735 ( 25.96) 1.133 .2039 ( k1520) .3720 ( .1687) 55.63 (1965.0) ------- TABLE C-17. ENGINE NO.D20 ENGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.6 L(S86. CID) 1-6 CVS NO. 10 BAROMETER 740.66 MM HGC29.16 IN MG) DRY 8ULO TEMP. 24.4 DEC C(76.0 DEC F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER BLOWER DIF f MM. H20(IN. H20) BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF) HC HC CO CO C02 o I SAMPLE BCKGRD SAMPLE BCKGRD SAMPLE C02 BCKGRD NOX SAMPLE NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM Mfc TER/RANGE/PPM METER/RAN6F./PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM HETER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPH C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPH HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 BAGS TOTAL KU HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 5.51 ( 2.12 ( 24.94 ( 964. ( 7.64 < 7.40) 1.58) 18.59) 719. ) 5.69) BSFC K6/KU HR (LB/HP HR) .575 ( .945) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .63 (.47) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT? TEST NO-20-1 RUN 3 DATF 9/22/80 TIME 1:29 DYNO NO. 5 PROJECT NO. 11-5044-001 DIESEL EN-465-F BAG C4RT NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , EN6INE-52. PCT , CVS-54. PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.2 6M/KG( 71.4 GRAINS/LD) NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0DOO 1 47.7 (25.5) 5?3.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 5696. 272.8 272.8 ( 9635.) 6.7/227 33. 9.7/ 1/ 10. 61.9/127 137. .1/12/ 0. 21. 3/ 3/ .34 2.5/ 3/ .04 R.0/13/ 24. .5/ 27 1. 37.18 24. 133. .31 23.6 3.75 42.31 1531 .7 12.31 .877 ( 1.93) 1 .57 ( 2.10) ?.39 ( 1.78) 27.00 ( 20.14) 977.59 ( 728.99) 7.85 ( 5.86) .560 ( .920) 647.7 (25^.5) 523.2 (20.6) 48. 9 (120-0) 6005. 287.7 287.6 (10158.) 6.9/22/ 34. 9.07 17 9. 74.3/127 17?. .1/127 0. 27.37 37 .45 2.1/ 37 .03 10.2/137 30. .57 21 1. 28.63 26. 167. .42 30.0 4.25 55.97 21 95.8 16.50 1.318 ( 2.91) 2.37 ( 3.18) 1.79 { 1.33) 23.59 C 17.59> 925.57 ( 690.19) 6.96 ( 5.19) .555 ( .913) 647.7 (25.5) 523. 2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 5695. 272.7 272.7 ( 9633.) 6.3/227 31. 8.27 17 8. 58.2/127 127. .17127 0. 21.77 37 .35 2.27 37 .03 8.7/137 26. .57 27 1. 36.60 23. 124. .32 25.5 3.69 39.24 1588.1 1S. 30 .974 ( 2 1.58 ( 2 2.34 ( 1 24.90 ( 18 1007.89 ( 751 8.44 ( 6 .618 ( 1. .15) .11) .75) .57) .59) .29) 017) PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 3 BA6S 90HN FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR SCMCSCF) G/TEST G/KU HR (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR 6/K6 FUEL (67LB FUEL) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOU SCH(SCF) .737 ( 26.03) 1.130 .2050 ( .1528) .3567 ( .1618) 55.58 C1963.1) ------- TABLE C-18. ENGINE NO.D20 FNGINE KODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.6 L(586. CIO) L-6 CVS NO. 10 QAROMETER /59.U MM HGC29.10 IN HG) DRY BULH TEMP. 28.3 DEC C(83.0 OFG F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER OLOUER DIF P MM. H?0(IN. H20) BLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN. H20) OLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. CCDEG. BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOU STD. CU. NETRES(SCF) F) HC HC CO CO o i ro o SAMPLE UCKGRD SAMPLE OCKGRD C02 SAMPLE C02 BCKGRD NOX SAMPLE NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPH METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM HETER/RANGE/PPH METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENT RATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GR^MS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KU HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KU HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 BAGS TOTAL KU HR (HP BSHC BSCO 6SC02 BSNOX BSFC G/KU G/KU G/KU G/KU KG7KU HR HR HR HR HR HR) (G/HP (G7HP (G/HP (G/HP (LB/HP HR) HR) HR) HR) HR) 5.01 ( 1.83 1 27.18 ( 949. ( 7.77 ( .595 ( : 6.72) : 1.37) : ?0.27) : 708.) : 5.79) : .978) FNGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT TEST N0.20-2B RUN 3 DATE 9/29/80 TIME DYNO NO. 5 PROJECT NO. 11-5044-001 DIESEL EH-465-F BAG CART MO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENSINE-42.'PCT , CVS-60. PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.3 GH7KG( 71.8 GRAINS7LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0300 1 660. (26.0) 513.2 (20.) 48.9 (120.0) 5694. 272.7 272.0 ( 9605.) 660.4 (26.0) 518.2 (20.4) 4.9 (120.0) 6010. 287.9 237.1 (10139.) 660.4 (26.0) 518.2 120.4) 48.9 (120.0) 5695. 272.8 272.0 ( 9608.) 5.9/227 9. 52. O/ 1/ 6/12/ 1 .47127 20. 3. 5/ 1 / 7.7/1 - 11 38 ? 3/ 3/ 3/ 2/ .66 30. 9. 39. 1. .33 .05 23. 1. 5. 9. 75. . 24. 2. 9. • 134. m 22 3 42 141 11 . 1 2 28 .4 .26 .53 4.1 .68 855 .41 .32 30.21 1004 8 * .71 .30 608 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 .89) .89) .73) ( 22.53) ( 749 ( 6 \ • .21) .19) 999) PARTICULAR DATA, 90MH 47227 I/ 17 37127 1 7/127 5/ 37 87 37 0/137 77 27 32.01 18. 169. .36 26.2 3.01 56.43 1579.1 14.38 1.249 2.20 1.37 25.70 855.95 6.55 .569 TOTAL 27. 9. 75. 1. .40 .04 27. 1. 5.67227 10.0/ 17 28. 10. 57.1/127 124. 2.75) 2.94) 1.02) 19.17) 638.28) FOR 4.38) .935) 3 BAGS 1.8/127 20.87 37 2.87 37 8.5/137 .87 27 38.27 19. 118. .29 24.7 2.90 37.23 1462.4 12.86 .878 1.41 2.06 26.45 1038.99 9.14 .624 3. .34 .04 25. 1. ( 1 C 1 C 1 t 19 ( 774 ( 6 ( 1. .93) .89) .54) .72) .77) .81) 025) FILTER SAMPLE FLOU MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR SCM(SCF) G7TEST G7KU HR (6/HP HR) 6/K6 FUEL (G/LB FUEL) .750 ( 26.50) 1.108 .2211 ( .1649) .3715 ( .1685) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .55 (.4!) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOU SCM(SCF) 55.12 (1946.9) ------- TABLE C-19. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT PROJECT NO. 11-5044-001 ENGINE NO.020 ENGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.6 L(586. CID) L-6 CVS NO. 10 BAROMETER 741.93 MM HG(?9.21 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP. 25.0 DEG C(77.0 DEG F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER BLOWER DIF f MM. H20CIN- H20) BLOWER INLET P MM. H20CIN. H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SF CONOS TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF) TFST N0.20-1R RUN BATE 9/30/80 TIME 11:20 RYNO NO. 5 DIESEL EH-465-F BAG CRT NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-52. PCT , CVS-60. ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.5 GN/KG( 73-7 6RAINS/LB) PCT NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0300 1 670.6 (26.4) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 5693. 272.3 272.8 ( 9635.) 670.6 (2<.4) 5?3.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 601 0. 2B7.S 288.0 (10171.) 670.6 (26.4) 523.2 (20.6) 48.9 (120.0) 5693. 272.6 272.8 ( 9635.) o I HC HC CO CO SAMPLE BCKGRD SAMPLE BCKGRD C02 SAMPLE C02 BCKGRD NOX SAMPLE NOX BCKGRD METF.R/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM HETER/RANGE/PPH METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS CO? MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KV HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW IIR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KU HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) 5.08 ( 1.79 ( 6.81) 1.34) 25.17 ( 13.77) 905. ( 675.) 9.00 ( 6.71) .548 ( .901) PART. G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .58 (.43) 6. 9. 61. 3. 20. 3. 9. • 0/22/ 8/ 1/ 6/12/ 1 7/12/ 6/ 3/ 4/ 3/ 3/13/ 9/ 21 38.50 20. 126. .28 26.9 3.20 39.94 1404.2 14.03 .844 1.43 2.23 27.85 979.21 9.78 .589 30. 10. 36. 7. .33 .05 ?8. 1. ( 1.86) ( 1.92) ( 1.66) ( 20.77) ( 730.20) ( ' 7.30) ( .968) 5.5/227 9.2/ M 72-9/12/ 1 3.3/12/ 24. 4/ 3/ 3.3/ 3/ 10.4/13/ .87 21 32.19 19. 157. .35 30-4 3.09 52.73 1836.3 16.77 1.1 50 2.22 1.39 23.73 826.46 7.55 .518 28. 9. 68. 6. .40 .05 31. 1. ( 2.54) ( 2.98) t 1.04J ( 17.70) ( 616.29) ( 5.63) ( .851) S.5/22/ 10. O/ M 55.7/12/ 1 3.5/12/ 20. 4/ 3/ 3.8/ 3/ 9.8/13/ .9/ 21 39.08 18. 111. .27 28.6 2.83 35.24 1357.0 14.92 .789 1.43 1.99 24.73 952.14 10.47 .554 28. 10. 20. 7. .33 .06 29. 1. ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 18 ( 710 ( 7 ( .74) .91) .48) .44) .01) .81) 910) PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 3 BASS 90HH FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR SCH(SCF) G/TEST G/KU HR (6/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR 6/K6 FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCH(SCF) .764 ( 27.00) 1.090 .2146 ( .1600) .3917 C .1777) 55.28 (1952.3) ------- TABLE C-20. ENGINE NO.1'20 ENCll'.E 'v'.^LC ov'S ;;o, 10 X' VOLVO DUALFUEL j, CIJ) I- 6 i' A i \ C.'' _ i r. R / 311 o 4 M h PRY DULB TEMP. 22.2 PAG :;C(27,40 IN HG) DCG C(72,0 DEG F) BAG NUMDER PLOUER DIF P iVI, BLOUER INLET P MM BLOWER INLET TEMP BLOWER REVOLUTION TIM: SECONDS H20(IN, H20) . M20(IN, 1120) . PEG, C(DEG, F) S rjfAL FLOU STIi. CU, METRES (SCF) HC SAMPLE METER/ RANGE/PPM HC PCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM CO SAMPLE METER/ RANCE/PPM CO PCKGRP METER/RANGE/PPM n i fv> ro C02 SAMPLE METER/ R,tNGE/PCT CL'2 PCKGRD METER/PANGE/PCT NOX SAMPLE ilETER/ r/CX L'CKGRJ.i MEIER/, DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION CO CONCENTRATION C02 CONCENTRATION NCX CONCENTRATION HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS CRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX ,ViSS CRAMS RnNGE/PPM RV.i/b'E/PPM PPM PPM PCT PPM FUEL ,\G (LP) KU IIR (HP MR) BSKC G/KU h'R (G/HP IIR) S'JCO C/KU MR (G/HP MR) F3C02 G/KU D3NOX G/KU HSFC KG/KU R (G/I,'P IIR) R (G/HP HR) R (LB/IIP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 DAGS TOTAL ,\U h'R (JIP HR) USMC G/KU HR (G/IIP HR) FSCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSCQ2 C/KU I!R (G/HP IIR) BSNOX G/KU HR (G/KP MR) I-'SFC NG/'KW HR (LB/IIP HR) 4,59 ( 6,15) 2,26 ( 1,69) 19,21 ( 14,32) 713.) 7,95) 963, 10,66 ( ,597 ( ,982) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS H-TRANS, PROJECT NC, 11-3044-001 TEST NO,20-IB BATE 11/13/30 TIME DYNO NO, 5 RUN DIESEL EM-465-F RELATIVE HUMIDITY r ENGINE-37, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 6.2 GM/KG( 43,5 GRAINS/LP) BAG CART NO, CVS-20, PCT 1 NOX HUMIDITY C.F, 1,0000 603.3 (27,0) 528,3 (20,0) 43,? (120,0) 5694, 272,6 277.2 ( 7792.) 605,8 (27,0) 528,3 (20,8) 40,? (120,0) 6011, 237,8 292,7 (10337,) 635,3 (27,0) 52G.3 (20,8) 43,9 (120,0) 5692, 272,6 277,1 ( 9789.) 5,5/22/ 6,5/ I/ 91.5/13/ 5.4/13/ 10, 4/ 3/ 2,6/ 3/ 7.5/13/ ,4/ 2/ 43,72 21, 36, ,26 23,0 3,42 27,39 1290,5 14,04 ,776 1,29 2,65 21,63 1007,05 11,51 .602 28, 5,6/22/ 23, 5,4/22/ 27, 7, 6,5/ I/ 7, 6,5/ I/ 7. 92, 50.0/12/ 106, 33.3/13/ 83, 5, 1.7/12/ 3, 2.5/13/ 2, ,29 23, O/ 3/ ,37 19, 4/ 3/ ,31 .04 2,e/ 3/ ,04 3, I/ 3/ .05 28, 11.0/13/ 33, 10.1/13/ 30, 0, ,4/ 2/ 0, ,4/ 2/ 0, 34,70 -11,57 22, 21. 101, 80, ,33 ,27 32,5 30,0 3,66 3,29 34,56 25,71 1776,1 1245, C 10.19 15.72 ( 1,71) 1,164 ( 1,73) 2,06 ( 1,98) 1,78 ( 16,13) 16,31 ( 750.96) 863,92 ( 8,58) 0,35 ( ,989) ,566 PARTICIPATE DATA TOTAL 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR ( 2,57) ( 2,76) ( 1,33) ( 12,54) ( 644,23) ( 6,60) ( .931) FOR 3 BAGS SCM(SCF) G/TEST ,801 ( 1,24 ( 2,65 ( 20,66 ( 1,77) 1,67) 1,97) 15,41) 1081,52 ( 806,49) 12,80 ( ,644 ( G/KU HR (G/HP HR) G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 9,54) 1,058) ,71 ,92 ,20: ,33' PART. 6/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .60 (.45) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) ,711 ( 32,19) 9 25 ( ,1510) 91 ( ,1530) 58.25 (2057.4) ------- APPENDIX D TRANSIENT TEST RESULTS FROM THE METHANOL-CATALYST CONFIGURATION ------- TABLE D-l. NOTES CONCERNING TEST RESULTS GIVEN IN APPENDIX D Table No. Methanol & Catalyst Cold Start D-2 D-3 D-4 Notes Hot Start D-5 D-6 D-7 Bus Cycle D-8 rvg Passed statistical requirements. Results used for regulated emissions. NOX by bag measurement was 7.12 g/kW-hr. Failed statistical requirements TQ intercept - 18.6. Results used for regulated emissions. NOX by bag measurement was 7.43 g/kW-hr. Volvo requested that throttle be fully closed during idle to insure electrical contact for solenoid operation. In order to assure throttle closure large negative torque command was generated by the control tape. With the throttle fully closed the engine may have been motored more than for previous runs. Results from these tests were not used for regulated emissions. Failed statistical requirements, TQ intercept -18.8, torque and power slope about 4% high. Further runs for record with negative TQ command were discontinued and other methods of dynamometer control were pursued. Failed statistical requirements, TQ intercept -16.4. Results used for regulated emissions. Passed statistical requirements. Results used for regulated emissions. Same as D-4 but test passed statistical requirements. Results not used for regulated emissions. Failed statistical requirements, TQ intercept -16.8. Results used for regulated emissions. NOX by bag measurement was 7.76 g/kW-hr. 2 Failed statistical requirements, TQ R 3 percent low. Results used for regulated emissions. NOX by bag measurement was 7.81 g/kW-hr. NOX emission estimated to be 8.03 g/kW-hr on the basis of bag NOX. D-2 ------- TABLE D-l (CONT'D). NOTES CONCERNING TEST RESULTS GIVEN IN APPENDIX D Table No. Methanol & Catalyst & Back Pressure Device Cold Start D-10 Notes D-ll Hot Start D-12 D-13 Bus Cycle D-14 Volvo requested that a backpressure device be used in conjunction with the catalyst. The device is only effective at closed throttle conditions such as motoring and at idle and serves as a "fast engine and catalyst warm-up device." Idle diesel fuel rate was increased to maintain curb idle speed. Results used for regulated emission. Failed statis- tical requirements, torque, and power slope about 2 percent high, torque and power intercept - 29.5 and -5.3 respectively. measurement was 8.18 g/kW-hr. Failed statistical requirements, TQ intercept - 24.8%. Cycle power >15 percent below cycle command power. Results used for regulated emissions. NOX by bag measurement was 8.47 g/kW-hr. Failed statistical requirements,- TQ and Power intercept were -32.9 and -6.6, torque and power slope were '^6 percent high. Results used for regulated emissions. Failed statistical requirements, TQ and power slope were 1 percent and 4 percent high, respectively. Results used for regulated emissions. Failed statistical requirements, TQ R slightly low. Results used for regulated emissions. D-3 ------- TABLE D-2. ENGINE NO.D20 ENGINE MOOFL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.6 LC>86. CID) L-6 CVS NO. 10 BAROMETER 747.?7 MM HG(?9.4? IN HG) DRY OULF1 TEMP. 25.6 DEG CC78.0 DEG F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DfSCR IPTION BLOWER DIF P MM. H20CIN. H20) BLOWFR INLET P HH. H20CIN. H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP. DFG. CCDEG. F) BLOWFR REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. HETRES(SCF) HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPH CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPH C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT C02 BCKGRD METFR/RANGE/PCT , NOX SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPH NOX BCKGRD ^ETER/RANGE/PPH DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPH HC MASS GRAHS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW H3 (G/HP HR) BSCO? G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) 11.08 ( BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) .30 ( BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 5.36 ( BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 910. ( BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 7.72 ( BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP.HR) .538 ( 14.86) .23) 4.00) 679.) 5.76) .885) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS COLD TRANSIENT TFST N0.21-1C RUN DATE 10/ 3/80 TIME DYNO NO. 5 PROJECT NO. 11-5J44-001 DIESEL EH-465-F BAG CIRT NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGTNE-49. PCT , CVS-61. PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.2 6M/KG( 71.2 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0000 1 NYNF 670.6 (26.4) 520.7 (20.5) 48.9 (120.0) 6182. 296.0 299.1 (10563.) LAl 670.6 (26.) 520.7 (20.5) 48.9 (120.0) 6262. 299.9 303.0 (10700.) 3 LAF 670.6 (24.) 520.7 (20.5) 48.9 (120.0) 6371. 305.0 308.2 (10886.) NYNF 470.& (26.4) 520.7 (20.5) 48.9 (120.0) 6201. 297.0 300.0 (1059i.) 4 9 57 .3/22/ . 4/ 1/ .2/12/ 1 3.5/12/ 19 3 7 1 ' .O/ . 21 .8/1 .O/ 42 1 11 B 22 2 39 3/ 3/ 3/ 21 .01 2. 5. 26 .5 .15 .96 22. 9. 24. 7. .30 .05 23. 1. 1406.9 12 . 1 1 35 1251 11 » .88 810 .12 .91 .55 .46 .46 720 ( 1. ( 1. ( 1. ( 26. ( 933. ( 8. 79) 51) 43) 51) 22) 55) ( 1.184) 2.9/227 8.9/ M 50.87137 7.27137 25.77 37 3.27 37 9.1/13/ .9/ 27 31.46 6. 41. .37 26.5 1.05 14.35 2065.9 15.36 1.208 2.01 .52 7.14 1028.09 7.64 .601 PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL 90MM 15. 9. 48. 6. .42 .05 27. 1 . t 2 ( 2 ( ( 5 t 766 < 5 ( FOR 4 .66). .69) .39) .32) .65) .70) 988) BAGS 1.8/227 7.67 17 13.3/137 7.6/137 57.07 37 1 3.17 37 25.4/13/ .8/ 21 13.32 2. 5. .96 75.3 .39 1.8S 5417.1 44.41 3.314 6.85 .06 .27 790.64 6.48 .484 9. 8. 12. 1 7. 1.5/22/ 7. 8.77 17 9. 6.8/13/ 15. 6.3/13/ 5. .00 16.57 3/ .26 .05 76. 1. ( 7.31) ( 9.19) ( .04) ( .20) ( 589.58) ( 4.83) ( .795) 3.07 3/ .05 7.8/1J/ 23. .87 21 1. 50.58 -1. 9. .22 22.5 -.22 3.22 1196.3 12.91 .636 ( 1.10 ( -.20 ( 2.93 ( 1089.87 ( 81 11.76 ( .579 ( 1.40) 1.47) -.15) 2.19) 2.72) 8.77) .953) FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR SCM(SCF) G/TEST S/KW HR (G7HP HR) 1.279 .946 ( 45.18) .085* ( .0637) MULTIPLIER FOR G/K6 FUEL (6/LB FUEL) .1585 ( .0719) PART. 6/KV/-HR (6/HP-HR) .25 (.19) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 81.88 (2892.0) ------- ENGINE NO.DSf] ENGINE MODEL so VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE R.b L(58b. CIO) l.-b CVS NO, 10 BAROMETfR 717.7P MM HG(?9.H1 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP, S5,n DE5 C(77,n DtG F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER OIF P MM. HaotlN, H20) BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN. H?0) BLQWER INLET TEMP, DEG. CCDEG, F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW 3TD. CU. METRES(SCF) TABLE D-3. ENGINE EMISSION RtsuiT3 COLO TRANSIENT TEST N0.21-2C RUN DATE 10X 7/80 TIME DYNO NO, 5 PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001 HC HC CO CO SAMPLE BCKGRO SAMPLE BCKGRD COS SAMPLE COS BCKGPO NO* SAMPLE NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT M E T F R / R 4 N G E / P P M METER/RANGE/PPM j DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM COS CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS COS MASS GRAM3 NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KW HR (HP HR) 8SHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) HSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HP) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS t HAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HP) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 11.Ib ( 14,97) .HI ( .31) 5.7) ( 4.2b) 115. ( bBS.) 7.1b ( 5,34) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR1 .538 ( ,88H) PART. G/KV/-HR (6/HP-HR) .25 (.19) DIESEL EM-HbS-F BAG CART NO, i RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-SI, PCT , cvs-47. PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,2 GM/KGC 71,7 GRAIN3/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F, 1,0000 b?0 520 48 299 23. q 54. f 18. 2. b. t NYNF .b (2b .7 (20 ,4) .5) ,9 (120,0) blBl, 29b.O .5 (10577.) 3/11/ 8X IX OX12X b/lSX BX 3X 7X 3X bX13X 7X ?X 42,54 1^.. 112. .2b 19.2 2.37 39.21 1431.4 10,98 .754 1.12 2.13 35.15 1283,38 9,84 .b7b 23. 10, lib. 1, .30 .04 20, 1. ( 1 C 1 ( 1 ( 2b ( 957 ( 7 C 1. LANF b70,b (2b, 520.7 (20. 48,9 (120 b2b4. 300,0 4) 5) ,0) 303.5 (10719 Ib.SXilX 9.2X IX 52.7X13X 1.5X13X 25, 2X 3X 2,bX 3X 7.9X13X ,8X 2X 32,09 7. 48. .37 22.8 1.29 lb.81 2070.7 13, 8b ,bb) 1,215 ,50) 2,02 ,59) ,b4 .21) 8.33 ,01) 1025.97 ,34) b.57 111) ,b02 PARTICULATE DATAi TOTAL 90MM 20 X FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW Ib 9 50 1 ,* .) t t t f 1 .04 24 1 ( ( ( ( ( ( ( • • 2,bB) • 2,71) .48) b,21) 7b5,07) 4,90) ,990) 3 LAP b70.b (2b. 520.7 (20, 48,9 (120 b370, 305,0 4) S) ,0) 308, b (10900.) 11.1X11X 7,bX IX 9.7X13X 1.4X13X 57.0X 3X 1 2.7X 3X 23.9X13X l.OX 2X 13,33 4, 7, .97 70.7 ,72 2,55 545b,2 41, 7b 3,34b b.8b .11 .37 795,33 b,09 ,488 11. 8. 8, 1. ,00 .04 72. 1. ( 7 ( 9 ( ( ( 593 ( 4 ( 4 NYNF b70,b (?b,4) 520,7 (20,5) 48,9 (120,n) k?OE , 297,0 300,5 (10bl3,) 9.2X11X 9, B,3X IX 8, 18.5X13X Ib. 1.5X13X 1. lb,8X 3/ ,2? 2,7/ 3/ ,04 8.3/13/ 25, ,8/ 2/ 1, 49,58 1, 15, ,23 24.2 ,19 5,18 1250,8 13,93 ,38) ,b8b ( 1 ,20) 1,17 t 1 ,08) ,lb ( ,28) 4.14 ( 3 ,08) 1070.45 ( 798 .54) 11,92 ( 8 802) ,587 ( , .51) ,57) ,12) .31) ,24) ,89) 9bb) FOR 4 BAGS SCM(SCF) GXTEST GXKW HR (GXHP HR) GXKG FUEL (GXLB FUEL) SCM(SCF) 1.243 ( 43,92) .975 .0873 ( ,0b51) ,lb24 ( .0737) 82.82 (2925.1) ------- tNCIM NO.D20 ENGlNt MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL INGINE 9.f, L(586. CID) L-6 CVS NO. 10 BAKOMEUR 734.90 Mn HGI29.13 IN HG ) UkY BULd TEMP, 26.7 DEC CI80.0 DEC F} BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DE SCRIPT ION BLOWER DIP P MM. H20UN. H20 ) BLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN. H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF) METfcR/RANGE/PPM METER/HANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPH METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT MfcTER/RANGE/PPM METER/HANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CU MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS t-UEL KG (LB) KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (C/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (C/HP Hk) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR I BSFC KC/KW HR (LB/HP HK) NEGATIVE TORaUE COMAND TABLE D-4. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS COLD TRANSIENT TEST N0.21-4C RUN DATE 10/ 9/80 TIME DYNO NO. 5 PROJECT NO. 11-5044-001 t) 1 o HC HC CO CO C02 C02 NOX NOX SAMPLE BCKGRD SAMPLE BCKGRD SAMPLE BCKGRD SAMPLE BCKGRD TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL Kh HR (HP HR) 12.14 BSHC G/Kh HR (C/HP HR) .68 BSCO C/KH HR (G/HP HR) 7.09 BSC02 C/KW HK IG/HP HR) 838. BSNOX C/KW HR (C/HP HR) 6.57 BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) .526 16.27) .51) 5.28) 625.) 4.90) .865) DIESEL EM-465-F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY t ENCINE-46. PCT , CVS- 0. PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.2 CM/KG! 71.3 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0000 1 NYNF 670.6 (26.4) 520.7 (20.5) 48.9 (120.0) 6205. 297.0 296.7 (10481.) 2 LANF 670.6 (26.4) 520.7 (20.5) 48.9 (120.0) 6267. 300.0 299.7 (10586.) 3 LAF 670.6 (26.4) 520.7 (20.5) 48.9 (120.0) 6372. 305.0 304.7 (10763.) 4 NYNF 670.6 (26.4) 520.7 (20.5) 46.9 (120.0) 6204. 297.0 296.7 (10479.) 28. 9/ 2/ 39. 23. 8/ 2/ 11. 21 21 11. 11. 7/ 21 64.9/12/ 15. 61.7/13/ .3/12/ I. .8/13/ 17. 9/ 3/ .29 25. 4/ 3/ 2.2/ 3/ .03 2.4/ 3/ 20. I/ 21 20. 25. 5/ 21 l.O/ 2/ 1. l.l/ 2/ 44.16 31.69 18. 12. 144. 58. .25 .38 19.1 24.4 3.07 2.16 49.59 20.40 1376.8 2080.6 10.85 14.01 .846 1.18 2.61 42.12 1169.43 9.22 .718 1 1.86) 1.285 ( 1.58) 2.21 1.95) .97 31.41) 9.22 872.05) 940.15 6.88) 6.33 1.181) .581 PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL 90HH FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 24. 20. 9/ 21 21. 12. 10. 5/ 21 11. 60. 18.9/13/ 17. 1. 1.1/13/ 1. .41 57. 8/ 3/ 1.02 .04 2.21 3/ .03 26. 73. 21 21 73. 1. 2. I/ 21 2. 13.10 11. 16. .99 71.3 1.97 5.52 5515.7 41.54 2.83) 2.97) .73) 6.87) 701.07) 4.72) .955) FOR 4 BAGS SCM(SCF) G/TEST 3.556 7 7.52 10 .26 .73 733.05 546 5.52 4 .473 G/KW HR (C/HP HR) G/KG FUEL (C/L8 FUEL) 16 10 34 1 15 2 25 1 .84) .09) .20) .55) .63) .12) 777) 1.219 ( .983 .0810 .1540 .BX 21 17. .7/ 21 11. .9/13/ 32. .6/13/ I. .9/ 3/ .25 .!/ 3/ .03 .I/ 21 25. .7/ 21 i. 52.02 6. 30. .22 23.4 1,08 10.49 1202.6 13.30 .698 1.22 .88 8.59 984.45 10.89 .571 43.04) ( .0604) 1 .0696) 1.54) 1.64) .66) 6.40) 734.11) 8.12) .939) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .20 (.15) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 80.10 (2829.0) ------- - TABLE D-5. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT PROJECT NO. 11-5944-301 ENGINE NO.D20 ENGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.6 l_(586. CIO) L-6 CVS NO. 10 BAROMETER 747.37 MM HGC29.42 IN HG) DRY BULH TEMP. 27.8 DEC C(82.0 DEG F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRI PTION BLOWER DIP P MM- H20(IN. H20) BLOUER INLET P MH. H20UN. H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F) BLOUER RESOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOU STD. CU. METRES(SCF) TEST N0.21-1H DATF 10/ 3/80 TINE DYNO NO. 5 RUN 1 DIESEL -EH-465-F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , EN6INE-43. PCT , CVS-56. PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.2 SM/KG( 71.2 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.DDOO 1 NYNF 670.6 (26.A) 520.7 (?0-5) 48.9 (120.0) 6181. 296.0 298.9 (10556.) LANF 670.6 (26.4) 5?0.7 (20.5) 48.9 (120.0) 6262. 299.9 302.8 (10695.) 3 LAF 670.6 (26.4) 520.7 (20.5) 48.9 (120.0) 6370. 305.0 308.0 (13879.) 4 NYNF 670.5 (26.4) 520.7 (20.5) 48.9 (120.0) 62Q1 . 297.0 299.8 (10591.) W i -vl HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM HC 8CKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPM CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH CO BCKGRD NETER/RANGE/PPM C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 NOX CONCENTRATION PCT CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KW HR (HP HR) \| BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KU HR (6/HP HR) BSFC KG/KU HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KU HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KU HR (G/HP HR) 11.15 ( 14.96) .15 ( .11 ) 2.97 ( 2-21) 879. ( 656.) 7.57 ( 5.64) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) .517 ( .849) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .3! (.23) 14 9 50 1 16 2 7 1 .1/11/ .9/ I/ .1/13/ .6/13/ .3/ 3/ .8/ 3/ -0/13/ .1/ 21 50.48 4. 45. .22 19.9 .76 15.59 1190.2 11.40 .645 1.12 .68 13.87 1058.66 10.14 .574 14. 10. 47. 1. .26 .04 21. 1. ( 1.4Z) ( 1.51) ( .50) ( 10.34) ( 789.44) ( 7.56) ( .944) 13.1/11/ 9.5/ I/ 38.4/13/ 1.2/13/ 24. 6/ 3/ 2.8/ 3/ 9.1/13/ .9/ 2/ 33.05 4. 35. .36 26.5 .68 11.78 1991.4 15.35 1.156 2.03 .34 5.81 982.36 7.57 .570 1 3. 10. 35. 1. .40 .04 27. 1. ( 2.55) ( 2.72) ( .25) ( 4.33) ( 732.55) ( 5.65) ( .937) 9.3/11/ 9. 8.3/ I/ 8. 8.6/13/ 8. 1.0/13/ 1. 56. 7/ 3/ 1.00 2.8/ 3/ .04 25.4/13/ 76. 1.0/ 21 1. 13.41 2. 6. .96 75.3 .30 2.31 5404.2 44.35 3.309 (. 7.29) 6.90 ( 9.25) .04 ( .03) .34 ( .25) 783.73 ( 584.40) 6.43 I 4.80) .480 ( .789) 7.6/11/ 8.1/ 1/ 12.1/13/ .8/13/ 16. 6/ 3/ 2.8/ 3/ 8.0/13/ 1.0/ 2/ 50.34 -0. 10. .22 23.2 -.06 3. 39 1221.5 13.29 .651 1.11 -.05 3.07 1103.90 12.01 .588 8. 8. 11. 1 . .26 .04 24. 1 . ( 1.44) ( 1.48) ( -.04) ( 2.29) ( 823.18) ( 8.95) ( .967) PARTICULATE DATA,'TOTAL FOff 4 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOkl SCHCSCF) SCH(SCF) G/TEST G/KW HR (G/HP HR) G/KG FUEL (G/LQ FUEL) 1.293 ( 45.68) .935 .0839 ( .0625) .1623 ( .0736) 81.24 (2869.5) ------- TABLE D-6. ENGINE N0.n?0 ENGINE MODEL BO VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9,b L(58b. cio) L»B CV3 NO, 10 BAROMETER 7t7,78 MM Hr,(?9.44 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP. 24. •» DEC c(?b.o DEC FJ BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBFR DtSCRIPTTON BLOWER njF P MM a i CO HC HC CO CO CO? CO? NOX NOX SAMPLE hCKRRD SAMPLE BCKGBO SAMPLE BCKGRO SAMPLE BCKGRO H?0(IN, H?0) BLOWER INLET P MM, HJotiN, H?O) BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(D£G. F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOVi STD. CU. METRES(SCF) METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METEH/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/R4NGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR MC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM COS CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM MC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS CO? MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG fLB) KW HR fHP HR) BSHC G/KH HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC03 G/KW HR CG/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KN HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO? G/KW HR (G/HP HR) B3NOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 11,19 ( IS.OS) .ID ( .08) 3.72 ( 2.78) 8fa7. ( b47.) 7.17 ( S.3S) BSFC KG/KW HS (LB/HP HR) ,613 ( .843) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .36 (.27) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT TEST N0.21-2H RUN DATE 10X 7/80 TIME DYNO NO. 5 PROJECT NO, 11-S044«001 DIESEL EM-4bS-F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-SB, PCT , CV3-47, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.1 GMXKGt 70,7 GRAIN5/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F, 1.0000 1 2 3 NYNF LANF LAF b?0.b (2b.4) b70,b (2b.4) b70.b (2b,4) 520.7 (20.5) 520,7 (20,5) 520.7 (20,5) 48.9 (120,0) 48.9 (120,0) 48,9 (120,0) b!03. b2b4, b370. 297,0 300.0 305,0 300.4 (10bl2,) 303,4 (1071b») 308,5 (10898.) 13.5X11X 13, 12.8X11X 13. 10.4X11X 10, 12. SX IX 13, 11. OX IX 11, B.9X IX 9. b5.9X13X b4, 4B.7X13X 4b. 13,bX13X 12, 5.7X13X 6, 5.9X13X 5. 5.2X13X 5. lb.7X 3X ,27 23, bX 3X ,38 Sb.lX 3X .99 2.9X 3X .04 2,7X 3X .04 2.7X 3X ,04 b.5X13X 20. 8.5X13X 2b, 24.7X13X 74. 1.3X 2X 1, 1.3X 2X 1. l.SX 2X 2. »8.9b 34.44 13, Sb 1. 2. 2. 58. 40, ?. .22 .34 ,95 18.4 24,4 72.8 .?! .37 .IB 20.32 14,07 2,b7 1224.9 1907,1 5354,5 10.55 14,14 42, 9B ,b7S 1,49) 1.117 ( 2.4b) 3,27b 7 1.20 l.bl) 2.02 ( 2,71) b,83 9 .18 .13) .19 ,14) ,0b lb.88 12.59) b,97 5,20) .39 1017.49 758.74) 944,93 704. b3) 783,54 584 8.77 b,54) 7,01 5,23) b.29 4 •5bO ,921) ,553 ,910) ,479 ( PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR GXTE8T MULTIPLIER FOR GXKW HR (GXHP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (CXLB FUEL) 4 NYNF b?o,b (eb,4) 520.7 (?0,S) 48,9 (120.0) b201, 297,0 300,4 (lObOB,) 9.2X11/ 9, B,3X I/ B, 20.0X13/ 18, 4,b/13/ 4, lb,7X 3/ ,27 2,bX 3/ ,04 7.9X13/ 24, l.SX ?/ 2, 49, 8b 1, It, .23 22,2 ,n 4,74 1249.4 12,78 .22) ,b87 ( 1 .Ib) 1,17 ( 1 .04) ,lb ( .29) 4. Ob ( 3 .28} 10b9,25 ( 797 ,b9) 10,94 ( B 788) .588 ( , 1.289 ( 45.54) ,941 .0838 ( .OfaeS) ,lb3S ( ,0741) tfl> ,S7) .12) ,02) • a) ,15) 9bb) ZO X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 82.55 (2915,5) ------- NEGATIVE TORSUE COW1AND TABLE D-7. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT PROJECT NO. 11-5044-001 ENGINE NO.020 ENGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.6 L(586. CID) L-6 CVS NO. 10 BAROMETER 739.90 MM HGI29.13 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP. 27.8 DEC C182.0 DEC F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER OIF P HP. H20UN. H2U ) SLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN. H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. CIDEG. F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. Cu. METRES(SCF) HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM HC BCKGRD METtR/RANGE/PPM CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM CO BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM NOX BCKGRD METEK/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS CRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KW HR (HP hR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW Hk (G/HP HR) BSNUX G/KH HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KM Hk (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) 11.66 BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) .59 6SCO G/KW HR {G/HP HR) 4.93 BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 809. BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 6.74 BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) .506 15.63) 3.67) 603. ) 5.03) .832) TEST NO. 2 DATE 10/ 1-bH RUN 9/80 TIME 03: 35 DYNO NO RELATI VE ABSOLUTE 1 NYNF 670.6 (26. 520.7 (20. 48.9 (120 6182. 296.0 . 5 HUMIDITY , ENCINE-43. PCT t DIESEL Ett-465-F BAG CART NO. CVS- 0. PCT HUMIDITY 10.3 GM/KG( 72.0 GRAINS/LB) NOX 2 LANF 4) 670.6 (26.4) 5) 520.7 (20.5) .0) 48.9 (120.0) 6265. 300.0 295.5 (10436.) 299.4 (10576.) 20. 9/ 2/ 10. I/ 2/ 74.7/13/ 2.1/13/ 16. 11 3/ 2.4/ 3/ 21. 7/ 2/ l.O/ 2/ 48.63 11. 72. .23 20.7 1.88 24.69 1245.5 11.71 .745 1.34 1.40 18.47 931.83 8. 76 .557 PART 21. 19. 6/ 2/ 20. 10. 9.6/ 2/ 10. 74. 52.0/13/ 49. 2. 2.3/13/ 2. .27 22. 9/ 3/ .37 .04 2.5/ 3/ .04 22. 25. 4/ 2/ 25. 1. l.l/ 2/ 1. 35.44 10. 47. .33 24.3 1.77 16.36 1832.2 13.94 1.64) 1.130 2.49) 1.79) 2.11 2.83) 1.05) .84 .63) 13.78) 7.77 5.79) 694.86) 869.68 648.52) 6.53) 6.62 4.93) .916) .536 .882) ICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF» MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR C/KW HR 3 LAF 670.6 (26.4) 520.7 (20.5) 48.9 (120.0) 6371. 305.0 304.5 (10755.) 21.17 2/ 21. 9.6/ 2/ 10. 21.2/13/ 19. 2.4/13/ 2. 54. 9/ 3/ .96 2.3/ 3/ .04 70. O/ 2/ 70. l.l/ 2/ 1. 13.87 12. 17. .93 69.0 2.14 5.88 5184.9 40.18 3.344 7. 7.00 9. .31 .84 740.49 552. 5.74 4. 1 HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0000 4 NYNF 670.6 (26.4) 520.7 (20.5) 48.9 (120.0) 6203. 297.0 296.5 (10472.) 15. 6/ 2/ 16. 9.5/ 21 10. 35.5/13/ 32. 2.3/13/ 2. 15. 8/ 3/ .25 2.4/ 3/ .04 23. 5/ 2/ 24. l.O/ 2/ 1. 52.37 6. 30. .22 22.5 1.07 10.48 1168.1 12.77 37) .678 1 39) 1.21 1 23) .89 63) 8.64 6 18) 963.21 718 28) 10.53 { 7 .478 .785) .559 ( 1 1 (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (C/LB FUEL) .183 ( 41.79) .011 .0867 ( .0647) .1714 ( .0778) .49) .63) .66) .44) .27) .85) 919) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .25 (.\|9) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 79.45 (2806.0) ------- ENGINE N ENGINE MUOEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE t.b LCS«i>. CID) L-b CVS NO, 10 TABLE D-8. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT TEST N0.21-1B RUN 2 DATE 10/ 3/80 TIME DYNO NO. 9 PROJtCT NO, 11-5044-001 ER 747,87 MM HG^.HS IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP. ?7.J PFG C(81.0 DEC F) BAG RfSULTS BAG NUMRER BLOwER OIF P MM. H20CIN. H20) BLOWER INLET P MM, HSOCIN, HSO) BLOrtER INLET TEMP, OEG. C(DEG. F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME 3ECON03 TOTAL FLOW 3TO. CU. METRES(SCF) METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM a i HC HC CO CO COS C02 NOX NOX SAMPLE BCKGRO SAMPLE BCKGRO SAMPLE BCKGRO SAMPLE RCKGBO METER/RANGE/PPM METER/HANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM COS CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAM3 COS MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB> KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HS) BSC02 G/K* HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/K* HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 SAGS TOTAL KW HH (HP HP) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) PSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/Krt HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/Krf HR (LB/HP HR) »,94 { .37 ( 9.97 ( 95», ( 7. '8 ( ,5Sb ( b.b2) .28) 711.) 5,15) DIESEL EM.«»b5.F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-»5. PCT , CVS-b5, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,3 GM/KGC 72,2 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C,F. 1,0000 b70.b (2b,4) b70.b (2b.4) b70,b (2b,H) 520.7 (20.5) 520.7 (20,5) 520,7 (20,5) 48.9 (120.0) 4B.9 (120.0) 48,9 (120,0) Sb94, bD09, Sb92, 272,7 287,8 272, b 275. 0 ( 9713.) 290,2 (10250.) 274.9 ( 9709.) 11.7XMX 12. 9.9X11/ 10, 8,5/llX 8, b,5X IX 7, b.SX IX 7. b,2X IX fa, bb.b/lSX bS, b2,9/13X bl, 34,bX13X 32, 1.0X13X 1. 1.0X13X 1, 1.1X13X i, 19, BX 3X .32 24, 5X 3X ,40 19, SX 3X ,31 2,bX 3X ,04 2.7X 3X ,04 2.4X 3X ,04 7,bX13X 23. 9.7X13X 29. 8.2X13X 25. 1.3X 2X 1. 1.2X 2X 1, ,7X 2X 1. 41.14 33.02 42, 2b 5, », if b2, 58, 30, .28 .3b ,28 21.5 88. 0 23.9 ,85 .59 ,38 19.97 l«T,7i 9,55 1407,4 1907,3 139b,4 11.33 15, Si 12, Sb .801 ( l,7b) 1.158 ( 2,55) .788 ( 1 1.39 ( l.Bb) 2,19 ( 2,93) l,3b ( 1 .bl ( ,4b) .27 ( ,20) ,28 ( 14.37 ( 10,76) 9.02 ( b,72) 7,00 ( 5 1012.71 ( 755,18) 872,33 ( bSO.SQ) 1024.30 ( 7b3 8.15 ( b.OB) 7.10 ( 5,29) 9.21 ( b ,57b ( .947} .530 ( ,871) ,578 ( PARTICUIATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 3 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW 8CMC8CF) MULTIPLIER FOR GXTEST MULTIPLIER FOR GXKW HR (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL CGXLB FUEL) .74) .83) .21) .22) .82) .87) 950) .895 ( ,938 ,1900 ,341b 31, bj) ( .117) ( .1550) PART. G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .2! (.16) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOM SCM(SCF) 55,HI (115^,8) ------- TABLE D-9. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS TRANSIENT PROJECT NO, ll-SOtt-Ol a i ENGINE NO.D2P ENGINE MODEL 8n VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE l.b LCSBb. CIP) L-b CVS NO, 10 BAROMETER 7H7.01 MM HGO1.H1 IN HG) D"Y BULB TEMP, 25.b OF.G C(7B,0 DEC F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER BLOwER DIP P MM. HJOUN. H20) BLOWER INLET P MM, HJOCIN, H2o) BLOivER TNLET TEMP, DEB. CtDEG. F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD, CU. METRES(SCF) HC HC CO CO SAMPLE RCKGRD SAMPLE RCKGRD cna SAMPLE CO? 8CKGRD NO SAMPLE NOX BCKGRO METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PCT METER/PANGF,/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM CO? CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C05 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (L9) Kw HR (HP HR) B3HC G/KW HR fG/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC03 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HP) 8SFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) 8SHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (L8/HP HR) ,3h ( 1U.11 ( 7.04 ( .S40 ( b.73) .27) 8.13) bB3.) 5.25) .888) Part. 6/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .21 (.16) Est. BSNOX G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) 8.03 (5.99) TEST N0.21-2B RUN DATE 10/ 3/80 TIME DYNO NO, 5 DIESEL EM-HbS-F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-41, PCT , CVS-58, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,2 GM/KGC 71,3 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F, 1,0000 b70 520 48 273 13. b. 81. , 11. 2, b, • .b (2b. .7 (20, .1 (120 5b55. 272,8 .3 ( 1b b/11/ B/ I/ 3/13/ 8/13/ 5/ 3/ 7/ 3/ 7/13/ 8/ 2/ 41,5b 7, 71. .27 11.3 1,10 25,02 13b5.5 10,10 ,807 i.ts .77 17,55 158.15 7.01 .Sbb 4) 5) ,°) 52.) It, 7, 81, 1. .31 ,ot 20. 1, ( 1 ( 1 ( ( 13 ( 71H ( 5 ( , ,78) .11) .58) .01) .tl) .21) 131) b70 520 48 210 1, b , b4, , 23, 2, B, 1 PARTICULATE DATA, 9QMM ,b (2b. .7 (20, ,1 (120 bOll, 287,1 4) 5) .0) ,4 (10258 S/ll/ 7/ I/ 3/13/ 1/13/ 5/ 3/ S/ 3/ b/13/ b/ 2/ 34,48 3, bO. ,34 25.1 .41 20,31 1832,3 13,13 l.llb . 2.21 ,22 1.18 827. 1b b,30 .504. TOTAL 1 7 b2 1 .) 1 • t t .38 ,04 2b 1 ( ( ( ( ( C C t • 2.4b) 2,17) ,17) bninn t.bl) .821) b?0 520 48 275 B. 7. 33. , 11. 2. 7. t ,b (2b, .7 (20. ,1 (180 Sb14, 272,7 4) 5) ,0) .1 ( 1717.) S/ll/ O/ I/ B/13/ 8/13/ b/ 3/ 5/ 3/ 4/13/ 7/ 2/ 42.05 1. 21. .28 21.5 .21 l.tl 1318,4 11,31 ,7Bb 1,38 ,lb b!ee 1012, b? 8,11 ,5b1 8, 7. 31. 1, ,31 ,04 22. 1. ( 1 ( 1 ( ( 5 ( 755 ( b \ • ,73) .85) .12) ,08) .15) .11) 13b) FOR 3 BAGS FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR SCM(SCF) G/TEST G/KW HR (0/HP HR) G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) .81 .13 .18 .818 ( 31,72) ,134 ,18bl ( ,1388) 80 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 5b,15 (1183,3) ------- TABLE D-IO. ENGINE NO.D20 tNO INC MODEL 00 VOLVO DUALFUEL ENGINE 9,6 1(506, CUD L-6 CYS NO, 10 N.VcCMETER 739.65 MM HG(29,12 IN M6) DRY BULB TEMP, 21,7 DEC C(71,0 DEO F) I'f.G RESULTS HAG NUMF'ER FLOWER filf P MM, 1 120 (IN, H20) HLOU'tk INLET P MM, 1120 (IN, H20) MOWER INLET TEMP, DEB, C(flEG« D [iLOUER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW 3TD, CU, METRES(SCF) HC !IC CO CO CO.? co: NiJX NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM I'CKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM CAHPLE METER/RANGE/PCT BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM [(CKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR ,'IC CONCENTRATION PPM LO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM MC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS CO: MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KU HR (IIP liR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP MR) MCO G/KW HR (G/MP HR) LSC02 G/KU MR (G/MP HR) H3NOX G/KW MR (G/MP MR) KSFC KG/KW HR (LB/IIP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 DAGS TOTAL KU ;,'R (HP MR) 10,09 ( 14.41) I;1:; ic LTCO ssco: /KU (G/MP MR) G/KU HR (G/HP HR) G/KU MR (G/HP HR) tJ/KW HR (G/HP HR) KG/KW MR (LC/HP MR) MFC PART. 6/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) ,51 ( 6,1? ( 1056, ( 9.19 ( ,626 ( .38) 4,62) 783.) 6,85) 1,030) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS C-TRANS, PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001 TEST NO.D21-1 RUN1 DATE 11/14/80 TIME 10JOO DYNO NO, 5 DIESEL EM-465-F SAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY » ENGINE-65, PCT » CVS-45, FCT ASSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,0 GM/KG( 75,6 GRAINS/LS) NOX HUMIDITY C.F 1,0000 1 2 3 NYNF LANF LAF 680,7 (26,8) 680,7 (26,8) 680,7 (26,0) 525,0 (20,7) 525,0 (20,7) 525,0 (20,7) 48,9 (120,0) 48,9 (120,0) 48,9 (120,0) 6103, 6264, 6371, 296,0 300,0 305,0 275,6 (10440.) 279,4 (10577.) 304.6 (10757.) 24.3/21/ 24, 19.6/21/ 20, 19.0/21/ 20, 12, 3/ I/ 12. 12, 2/ I/ 12, 12, O/ I/ 12, 52.6/12/ 112, 46.7/13/ 44, 19.6/13/ 18, 1.0/12/ 2, 2.2/13/ 2, 2.0/13/ 2, 20, 6/ 3/ ,33 27, 6/ 3/ ,45 62, 2/ 3/ 1,11 3,6/ 3/ .06 3,5/ 3/ ,05 3,l/'3/ ,05 B.G/13/ 26. 10.5/13/ 31, 27.6/13/ 83, ,6/ 2/ 1. ,5/ 2/ 1, ,5/ 2/ 1. 38, Cl 29,17 12,07 12, 3, 9, 108, 41, 16, ,28 ,40 1,06 25,8 30,9 82,4 2,10 1,35 1,55 37.26 14,28 5,52 1505,2 2200,9 5930,5 14,61 17,71 48,01 ,872 ( 1,92) 1,263 ( 2,79) 3,629 ( 8 1,09 ( 1,46) 1,98 ( 2,66) 6,76 ( 9 1,92 ( 1,43) ,68 ( ,51) ,23 ( 34,15 ( 25.47) 7,20 ( 5.37) ,02 ( 1379,58 (1020,75) 1109,46 ( 827,32) 076.94 ( 653 13.39 ( 7. 90) 0,73 ( 6,66) 7,10 ( 5 ,799 ( 1.313) .637 ( 1,047) ,537 ( PARTICULATE DATAi TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW MR (G/MP MR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) A NYNF 600,7 C;.C) 525,3 (20,7) 48,9 (120,0) 6202. 297,0 296,5 (10472.) 13.6/21/ 14, 10, 7/ I/ 11. 34.8/13/ 32, 1.7/13/ 2, 24, I/ 3/ ,39 3,2/ 3/ ,05 11.7/13/ 35, ,4/ 2/ 0, uw » wO 3, 30. ,34 34, C trrr 4 Ow 10,36 1070,1 19,74 ,00) 1.059 ( 2 .07) 1,05 ( 1 ,17) ,52 ( ,61) ?,82 ( 7 ,94) 1772,61 (1321 ,27) 10,71 ( 13 C82) 1,003 ( 1. 1,223 ( 43,21) ,578 ,0870 ( ,0669) ,1433 ( ,0650) ,33) ,41) ,39) ,32) ,04) ,76) 650) .30 (.22) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 91,09 (2864.0, ------- TABLE IM I. ENGINE NO.D20 ENGINE MODEL 00 VOLVO DUALFUEL ENGINE 9,6 L(506, CID) L-6 CVS NO, 10 BAROMETER 747,52 MM I!G(29,43 IN HC) DRY DULB TEMP- 10,3 DEC C(65,0 DEO F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER L'LDUEF DIF r 3LOUEF INLET HLOWEf INLET I'LGUEf REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLGJ CTD, MM. 1120(IN, 1120) P MM. i 120(IN. H20) BEG, C(DEO, F) METRES(GCF TEMP. HC CAMPLE L!) CO C02 CO 2 SAMPLE L;CKGRD SAMPLE DCKORD NOX SAMPLE UJ METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PF'M METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANCE/PPM METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM ; i-n PPM PCT PPM DILUTIDN1 FACTOR !!C CONCENTRATION CC CONCENTRATION C02 CONCENTRATION N'JX CONCENTRATION HC MASS CRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KU HR (HP IIR) B3HC G/KW IIR (G/HP IIR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BGC02 G/KW IIR (0/1 IP IIR) BCNOX G/KU IIR (G/HP HR) TGTAL TEST RESULTS 4 DAGJ TOTAL BSHC BZCQ BSC02 BGNOX BSFC KM HR G/KW G/KW G/KW G/KW KC/KW (HP MR IIR IIR HR IIR HR) (G/HP (G/HP (G/IIP (G/HP (LB/HP HR) HR) IIR) HR) IIR) 10 5 10 0 , 1 j , 33 ( 71 ( ?0 ( 5H , ( 1 6 60 ( 16 ( 13.36) ,53) 4,46) 759,) 6,42) 1,013) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS C-TRANS, TEST N0.21-2C RUN1 DATE 11/17/00 TIME 10147 PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001 DYNO NO, 5 BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY r ENGINE-72. PCT , CVS-25, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 9,6 GM/KG( 67,3 GRAINS/LLO NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000 1234 NYNF LANF LAF 685,0 (27,0) 605.G (27,0) 635, S (27,0) 530,9 (20.9) 530,9 (20,9) 530,9 (20,9) 47,0 (110,0) 47,0 (110,0) 47,C (113,0) 6100, 6265, 6372, 295,9 300,0 305.0 299.5 (10500.) 303,7 (10725.) 300.3 (10903.) 21, A/21/ 22, 18.9/21/ 19. 20.3/21/ 20, 6,6/ I/ 7. 3,3/ I/ 3, 3,3/ I/ G, 49, A/12/ 105. 40.C/13/ 3D, 16.6/13/ 15. -2/12/ 0, -7/13/ 1, ,G/13/ 1, 20, 4/ 3/ ,33 29, I/ 3/ ,40 57, 4/ 3/ 1,01 2,7/ 3/ ,04 2,7/ 3/ ,04 ' 2,0/ 3/ .04 B.l/13/ 24, 10.3/13/ 31. 24.7/13/ 74, 1,1/ 2/ 1, ,9/ 2/ 1, ,7/ 2/' 1, 39,30 27,61 13,20 15, 11, 13, 103. 37, 14, ,29 .44 ,97 23,3 30,1 73,4 2,61 1,90 2,24 35,94 12,99 5,03 1581,0 2446,1 5497.0 13,36 17,43 43, 3B ,095 ( 1,97) 1,412 ( 3,11) 3,327 ( 7 ,99 ( 1,33) 1,05 ( 2,40) 6,44 ( S 2,63 ( 1.96) 1,03 ( ,77) ,35 ( 36,24 ( 27,02) 7,03 ( 5,24) ,70 ( 1593,92 (1100,59) 1323,31 ( 906,79) 053,02 ( 636 13,47 ( 10,04) 9,46 ( 7,05) 6,74 ( 5 ,902 ( 1,403) ,764 ( 1,255) .517 ( PARTICULATE DATA; TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCMCSCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW IIR (G/HP !!R) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) NYNT 635. G (27,0) 530.9 (20,9) 47, D (118,0) 6203, 297,0 300,7 (10619.) 11.4/21/ 11, G-,3/ I/ 3, 25.5/13/ 23, , B/13/ 1 < 13. C/ I/ ,30 3,0/ 3/ ,05 b',C/13/ 26, ,0/ 2/ 1. 43,97 3, 22, , 26 25,5 .57 7,01 1412,1 14,69 ,34) ,734 ( 1 ,63) 1,05 ( 1 ,26) ,54 ( ,5S) 7,40 ( 5 .69) 1330,47 ( 993 .02) 13,93 ( 10 550) ,695 ( i, 1.2C6 ( 45,41) • 943 ,0913 ( ,0631) ,1431 ( ,0672,' ,62) .41) .40) .52) ,10) ,3S) 143) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .27 (.20) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) (2721.2) ------- TABLE B-12. FJ.'CINE NO.D20 ENGINE MODEL oo VOLVO DUALFUEL HIGINE 9,6 L(5B6, CUD L-6 C'.1: NO. 10 BAROMETER 739.14 MM HG(29,10 IN IIG) DRY 3ULD TCMP. 20.3 DEC C(33,0 DEG F) BAG RESULTS PAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION KLCWER DIT P MM, ['LOWER HLOUER 20(IN. H20) INLET P MM, II20(IN, H20) INLET TEMP, DEC. C(DEG, F) ['LOUCR REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STLi, HC CU. METRES (3CF) CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM IIC DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM CO CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM CO 3CKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT CO2 I'CKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT 0 NdX CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM A NOX I'CKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM IIC MAS3 GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MAG3 CRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KU IIR (IIP HR) 3311C G/KW HR (G/IIP IIR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 33C02 G/KW HR (G/IIP IIR) BSNOX G/KU IIR (G/HP HR) B3FC KG/KU IIR (LB/HP HR) TCJTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KU IIR (IIP IIR) 11,3? ( 15,25) BSMC B3CO v^co^ 33NOX BSFC G/KW G/,l\W G/KU G/KU KG/KU IIR IIR HR IIR IIR (G/IIP (G/I!P (G/HP (G/HP (LB/HP HR) HR) HR) HR) IIR) ,21 ( 3,6 996 3.6 • •"} \j 3 i , ( ? ( 7 ( .16) 2,71) 743.) 6,43) ,964) ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS H-TRANS, TEST NO.D21--1 RUN1 DATE 11/14/30 TIME 10J50 DYNO NO, 5 PROJECT NO, 11 5044-001 DIESEL EM-465-F DAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY » ENGINE-43, PCT , CVS-45, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,6 GM/KG( 74,4 GRAING/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000 1 2 3 NYNF LANF LAF 680,7 (26, G) 680,7 (26,8) 680,7 (26. G) 525,0 (20,7) 525,3 (20,7) 525,3 (20.7) 48,9 (120,0) 48,9 (120.0) 48,9 (120,0) 6130, 6265, 6371. 296,0 300,0 305,0 295,1 (10421.) 299,1 (10565.) 304,2 (10743.) 15.3/21/ 15, 15.1/21/ 15, 18.2/21/ 10, 12,07 I/ 13, 12, 3/ I/ 12, 11,37 I/ 12, 51.B/13/ 49, 34.3/13/ 32, 19.2/13/ 17, 1.1/13/ 1. 1.1/13/ 1, 1.0/13/ 1, 19, ?/ 3/ ,32 27,47 3/ .45 62,97 37 1,12 3,07 3/ ,05 2,97 37 .04 3,07 3/ ,05 8.4/13/ 25, 10.C/13/ 32, 28.0/13/ 04, ,7/ 27 1, ,67 2/ 1. ,7/ 27 1. 41,50 29,50 11,92 3, 3, 7, 47, 30, 16, ,27 .41 1,08 24.4 31,7 83.2 .47 .56 1,30 16.16 10.45 5.67 1463,4 2223,1 6009,1 13,78 18,12 48,42 ,304 ( 1,775 1,236 ( 2,33) 3,701 ( 3 1,16 ( 1,56) 2,04 ( 2,73) 7,00 ( 9 .41 ( ,30) .27 ( ,20) ,19 ( 13,89 ( 10,36) 5,13 ( 3,82) .81 ( 1262,30 ( 941.35) 1093,37 ( 015,32) 053,30 ( 640 11,05 ( G.S4) 8,89 ( 6,63) 6,92 ( 5 ,691 ( 1,136) ,631 ( 1,037) ,529 ( PARTICULATE DATAr TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KU HR (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/L3 FUEL) 4 NYNF 680,7 (26,0) 525,3 (20,7) 40.9 (120,0) 6202, 297,0 296.1 110459,) 12.3/21/ 12, 12.17 I/ 12, 30,1/137 20, 1,1/M/ 1, 21.77 3/ .35 3,3/ 3/ ,05 11.1/13/ 33, ,6/ 2/' 1, 37.79 0. 26, .30 32,6 ,08 9,01 1610,2 1C. 45 .16) ,379 ( 1,94) ,3C) 1.17 ( 1,57) ,14) .0? ( .05) ,60) 7,69 ( 5,73) ,41) 1380,44 (1029,40) .16) 15,74 ( 11,74) 870) ,750 ( 1,233) 1,236 ( 43,67) .966 ,0850 ( ,0634) ,1440 ( ,0657; PART. 6/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .40 (.3»> 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCH(SCF) 80,39 (2039,4. ------- ENGINE NC.MO ENGINE MODEL CO VOLVO DUALFUEL ENGINE v\o LdOo, GIL) 1.-6 BAROMETER 740,16 MM HG(29,14 IN HG) DRY DULL; TE;" HC SAMPLE h:r:R/R;:KCc/PPM HC DCKORH HrTfR/R.-iNGE/PPM CL' SAMPLE fiETEr;/Rr 1 J t OU ,758 ( 1 1,13 ( 1 ,01 ( 6,73 ( 5 1220,69 ( 910 13,44 ( 10 .642 ( 1, ,67) .52) .01) .1?) .27) ,02) 055) PART1CULATE DATAr TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS PART. 6/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .42 (.31) 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOU MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOU SCM(SCF) SCM(SCF) G/TEST G/KU HR (G/IIP HR) G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 1,242 ( 43,36.) ,961 ,0046 ( ,0631) ,1543 ( ,0700) 79,94 (2823,5) ------- TABLE D-14. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS PROJECT NO, 11- 5044-001 ."''CINE NO.DSO Ff.'OINE rtGLT.L '30 VOLVO DUALFUEL ENC I.'.'E 9..: L'.Sfii. CI.'O L L • /.'C NO. 10 PAROMETER 7J9.6C MM IIGC?9,12 IN IIG) HRY SULP TEMP, 26.7 DEG C(00,0 DEG F) I-'AC RESULTS SLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN, 1120) SLOWER INLET P MM, 1120(IN, H20) DLCiWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F) fcLOUHR REVOLUTIONS TIME SECOND1! ilJfAL FLOW STD, CU, METRES (SCF) HC SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM HC DCKGRD hETER/RANGE/PPM CO SAMPLE METER/RANCE/PPM CO DCKCRD MlTER/RhNGE/r-PH CJ2 SAMPLE METER/R.VJGE/PCT tt NCX SAMPLE riETEP/RANCE/PPM J. NCX DCKjaLi MLTEii/RANCE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR ;IL CONCENTRATION PPM ro2 cc.va.rRA/ioN TCT NGX CuNCENTRATIC'N PPM HC MASS Gr.'Ai-lS CO MASS CI/AMC CC2 rIAKS CRAMS NOX MASS CRAMS FUEL KG (Lf:) KU !IR (IIP IIR) !':S1,'S 5/KU HP (G/HP I!R) [;SCO G/Kiv' IIR (G/HP HR) M:C02 G/KU HR (G/HP IIR) BSNJX G/KU HR (G/HP IIR) FSFC KS/KW HR (LD/HP IIR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 SMS TOTAL MJ HR (HP i!R) 4,84 ( rOi.'C G/KU HR (C/HP IIR) .31 ( SECO bVMv' IIR (G/HP HR) 9,21 ( BSC32 G/.\U' HP (G/HP IIR) 1037, ( .'•IWOX C/K'X' HR (G/HP HR) 9,20 ( iC.rC KC/K HR (LB/HP HR) .590 ( PART. G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .24 (.18) 6.49) ,23) 774.) 6,86) TEST NO.D21-1 RUN1 DATE 11/14/00 TIME 12J30 DYNO NO. 5 PIESEL EM-465-F &AG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENOINE-40. PCT , CVC-45, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,3 GH/KG( 75,4 GRAINS/LIO NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000 1 630,7 (26.0) 525,8 (20,7) 50,0 (122.0) 5694, 272,6 271,3 ( 95C2.) 630,7 (26,8) 525,8 (20,7) 50,0 (122,0) 6011, 237,8 286,4 (10116.) 680.7 (26,8) 525,8 (20,7) 50,0 (122.0) 5694. 272,7 271,3 ( 9582,) 14.2/21/ 9 64 1 21 3 3 ,3/ I/ ,0/13/ ,9/13/ ,0/ 3/ ,fi/ 3/ ,2/13/ ,97 27 37,24 5, 60, ,30 23,7 ,80 18,32 1468,7 12,29 ,836 1,34 ,59 14,01 1093,18 7,15 ,623 14, 9, 63, 2, ,35 .06 25, 1, ( 1 ( 1 ( ( 10 ( 815 ( 6 ( 1. .84) ,30) ,44) ,45) .1C) .32) 023) 11 8 54 2 26 3 11 1 ,67217 ,37 I/ ,0/137 ,0/137 ,67 3/ ,57 3/ ,6/137 ,0/ 2/ 30,34 4. 43, ,38 33,7 ,50 16,13 2012,4 10,47 1.189 2,16 ,27 7,45 929,92 Q.53 ,550 12, 8, 51, 2, ,44 ,05 35, 1, ( 2 ( 2 ( ( 5 ( 693 ( 6 ( ,62) ,90) ,20) ,56) ,44) ,36) 903) 9 8 35 2 22 3 7 1 ,2/21/ ,77 I/ ,6/13/ ,0/13/ ,4/ 3/ ,5/ 37 .2/137 ,07 27 36,54 1, 31, ,31 26,6 ,11 9,64 1542,5 13,30 .033 1.33 ,09 7,22 1155,85 10,34 ,624 7, 9, 33, 2, .36 ,05 28, 1. ( 1 ( 1 ( ( 5 ( 861 ( 7 ( 1, ,84) ,7?) ,06) ,39) ,92) ,71) 026) PARTICULATE DATA. TOTAL FOR 3 BAGS 90NM FILTER SAMPLE FLOU MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOU SCM(SCF) G/TEST G/KU HR (G/HP HR) G/KG FUEL (G/LE FUEL) SCM(SCF) ,066 ( 30.58) 958 !l97Q ( ,1475) ,3350 ( .1519) 55,51 (1960,7) ------- APPENDIX E TRANSIENT TEST RESULTS FROM THE ETHANOL CONFIGURATION ------- TABLE E- 1. NOTES CONCERNING TEST RESULTS GIVEN IN APPENDIX Table No. Ethanol Notes E-2 E-3 E-4 Cold Start E-b E-6 E-7 E-B E>9 Volvo requested runs to verify the influence of high flow diesel actuation and the influence of the actual start up "puff" on particulate measurement. E-l, E-2 and E-3 are a very limited series and were conducted using a negative torque command to insure reliable diesel solenoid operation. Passed statistical requirements. Particulate sampling conducted as normal. Diesel fuel flow would switch to "high" flow at closed throttle conditions. Particulate rate by 90mm and by 20X20 inch filter samples yielded 0.30 and 0.27 g/bhp-hr respectively. Results not used for regulated emissions. Passed statistical requirements. The 90mm particulate system was activated 10 seconds after engine start-up/cycle start-up. Particulate rate by 90 mm and by 20X20 inch filter sample yielded 0.25 and 0.26 g/bhp-hr, respecitvely. Results not used for regulated emissions. Passed statistical requirements. Particulate sampling conducted as normal but the diesel fuel flow was switched to "low" flow throughout the test. Particulate rate by 90mm and by 20X20 inch filter samples yielded 0.30 and 0.26 g/bhp-hr, respectively. Results not used for regulated emissions. Volvo perferred that the "low" flow setting be used on subsequent runs. Failed statistical requirements. Used standard "0" torque command control. Torque intercept, -15.5. Results used for emissions. Volvo requested that diesel fuel flow be set to "low" flow even for cold start-up. Engine false started on "low11 fuel flow, dynamometer engaged. Passed statistical requirements. Results used for regulated emissions. NOX by bag measurement was 7.20 g/kW-hr. It was agreed that "high" flow diesel would be used for the first 23 seconds then switched to low flow. Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -15.4. Results used for regulated emissions. Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -18.1, power slope 1.4 percent high. Results used for regulated emissions. NOX by bag measurement was 7.09 gAW-hr. Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -20.8. Results used for regulated enissions E-2 ------- TABLE E-1 (CONT'D) . NOTES CONCERNING TEST RESULTS GIVEN IN APPENDIX E Table No. E-10 Hot Start E-ll E-12 E-13 E-14 E-15 E-16 Bus Cycle E-17 E-18 E-19 E-20 Notes Failed statistical requirements, torque and power slope .5 and 4.4 percent high. Run primarily for additional chemistry samples. Results used for regulated emissions. Same as E-5, but passed statistical requirements. Results used for regulated emissions. Same as E-6, but failed statistical requirements - torque r^ 2 percent low. Results used for regulated emissions. Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -16.1. Results used for regulated emissions. Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -18.1 and power slope 1.4 percent high. Results used for regulated emissions. Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -20.2. Results used for regulated emissions. NOX by bag measure- ment was 7.12 g/kW-hr. Passed statistical requirements. Run primarily for additional chemistry samples. Results used-for regulated emissions. NOX by bag measurement was 7.20 g/kW-hr. Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -16.4. Results used for regulated emissions. NOX by bag measure- ment was 8.39 g/kW-hr. 9 Failed statistical requirements, torque r 4 percent low. Results used for regulated emissions; NOX by bag measure- ment was 8.22 g/kW-hr. 2 Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept and r were -17.6 and .816, respectively. Results used for regulated emissions. 2 Failed statistical requirements, torque r 1 percent low. Run primarily for chemistry samples. Results used for regulated emissions. E-3 ------- fNG Plf FNr.INf CVS NO. FUEL HG) HULH BAG RESULTS BAT, m qn VOLVO OU»l LfSPK. CIO) 1 -b OFT, HLOrtFH nlF P MM. H?nriN. H?0) BLOHFR INIFT p MM. Hi?n(lN. H2n) BLOWFR TNLFT TEMP. DF(j'. C(n£G, F) BI.OWFR RFVnLnTIONS TIMF SECONDS TOTAi FLnw 3TO. Cu. MfTKESfSCF) HC SAMp\| E MfTEH/RANGt/PPM HC RCKr.Rn MFTER/RAMGF/PPM Cn SAMpt E MFTF. R/RANGL/PPM cn RCKRBD MFTF W/RANGF./PPM Cn<> SAMpLE 'MFTFH'WA'sr.f- /MCT CO? HCKr.RQ MFTEP/HANGF/PCT Nnx sAMpi f MF r[R/R4i,r,[/PPM /PPM TABLE E-2 FNGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT TEST N0.28-1H RUN PATE in/lS/UO TIMF DYNn NO, 5 PROJECT NO. H«b011-(i01 Nnx RCKr.cn M* u DiuiTTfiN F«CTIIR HC rONrFMTH/sT ION PpM cn roN^rNTR^rION PPM cna roNrFNTrfATinN NflX (.ONrfNTRA f TUN HC MASS CRAMS cn MASS GRAMS cn? MASS GRAMS Nnx MASS GRAMS FIIFL KG fL«) KW HP (HP HSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP MR) KSCO? G/KW HP (G/HP HP> BSNOX G/K^J HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LH/HP hfi) TOTAL TEST RF3HLTS H RAGS TOTAL KW H« (HP HR) BSHf r./Krt HR (G/HP HR) HSCi) r,/KW HR (G/HP HR) HSCO? G/KW HP (G/HP HR) BSNfiX c/KM wR (G/HP HR) BSFC KR/KW HP (LB/HP HR) 11.13 ( 1».12> 2.IS ( I.b3) 13.»1 ( 10.00) ( bas.) ,M9S ( ,711) DIESEL EM-»fc5-F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINF-H8, PCT , CVS-H8, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,b GM/KG( 73,8 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F, l.OOHU 1 NYNF b73,l (2b,5) 520,7 (20.5) »B,9 (120,0) hlP?, 89h'.n 292.9 (10315,1 b.7/28/ 31, 9. I/ I/ 9, 9b.9/l3/ SB, .7/13' 1, lb.1/ 3/ ,2b 8.7/ 3/ ,01 b.1/13/ IS, .b/ 8/ J, 18. SO 81 '. 95. .82 IB. 5 »'.12 32.51 1181.5 in. 38 .53b 1 I'.nfa l 3.87 8 30, h3 88 1111.17 830 9.77 7 '.501 8 LANF b73.l (2b.S) 520.7 (20.5) 1H.9 (180.0 h8b3. 899,7 8Sb,7 (10181 8.1/88/ 11 7, I/ I/ 7 51.3/18/ 117 .1/18X 1 8b,2/ 3/ ,1 2,;/ s/ ,0 8.1/13/ 21 ,7/ 8/ 1 30,18 33, 113, .3S 23,7 5.72 39,12 8111.9 13,11 ,1») ,997 ( .12) 2,07 ( ,89) 8,7b ( .81) 18.89 ( .81) 1019,55 ( .89) b,19 ( 889) ,181 ( ) .) . , , , 3 1 , • 8.80) 8,78) 8. Ob) 11,08) 7bO,8R) 1,81) ,791) 3 LAP b73.1 (2b,5) 520.7 (20,5) 18,9 (120,0) b371, 305,0 301.9 (lOfabl.) 13.7/88/ b9, 7,5/ I/ 8, b5,8/12/ 117, .1/18/ 1, bO.1/ 3/ 1,07 8,7/ 3/ ,01 20.3/13/ bl, ,8/ 8/ 1, 18,87 b2, 11. 1,03 faO,8 in,7b 19, bB 5710,3 31,71 8,785 b b,90 9 l,5b 1 7,81 5 828,08 b!7 5,01 3 ,395 , 1 NYNF b73,l (8b,5) 580,7 (20,5) IB, 9 (180,0) b201, 297,0 893,8 (10377.) S.fi/82/ 89, 7,n/ i/ 7, 83,7/lJ/ 81, ,9/13/ 1, lb,7/ 3/ ,27 2,b/ 3/ ,01 b,9/13/ 81, ,B/ 8/ 1, 18,31 82. 81, ,23 19,9 3,77 27,88 1888,3 11,17 ,01) ,551 ( 1 ,8?) 1,10 ( 1 ,lb) 3,13 ( 8 ,37) 85,10 ( 18 .50) 1113,51 ( 830 ,7b) 10,17 ( 7 b50) ,501 ( , .28) ,H7) ,5h) ,91) .35) ,59) 889) PARTICULME DATA, TOTAL FOR 1 BAGS 90MM FILTER 8AMPLF FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR SCM(SCF) G/TE3T G/KW HR (G/HP HR) G/KG FUEL CG/LB FUEL) 1.838 ( 13,71) .'57 ,08faO ( ,0b11) ,1989 ( ,0908) PART. 6/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .40 (.30) 80 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 79.01 (8790,5) ------- BO VOLVO DUAL CTD) i -b ENGINE MO.nan FNGINF MOoFL ENGINE 9l(, L( CVS NO. In BAROMETER 7 3 Vr B i MM HRfSrt.89 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP. ?b.t HER C(79.0 OfG F) BAG RFSUl TS BAG NllMRf-R DESCRIPTION BLOWER nu~ P MM. H?O(IN. nao) BLOWER INLFT P MM. HPoriN. 1120) BLOWFR INLFT TEMP. DFG'. C ------- N0'.n?n Mnnri. Bfi vouvn DUAI FNGINF 9.k l.fSHb. CIH) I -b CVS NO. In Fun. TABLE E-4. FNGTNE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT TEST Nn,?2-JH RUN DATE 10/15/80 TIME DYNO NO, 5 BAH('uETrR 71l'.8l DRY RIJLH Tfl. cu. H?ntIM. M?0) . H?drIN. M?0) TEMP. OEG'. unpc. m i HC HC Cn CO CO? CO? RCKr.BD Nnx SAMp\| £ NOX PCKr.no MFTFH/RANGK/PPM SAMpi t MFTFH/RANGK/PPM RCKGRO MFTFR/PANGE/PPM MFTF.W/RANGF /PPM . /PCM /PC r /PCT xri'M FACTIlR HC co'Jr.r NTrtiTloN PPM CO fONcFNTRrtTION PPM CO? ClINCF NTR4TION PCT NOX CflNCFNTRiT ION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS cn? MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG fLR) Kw HR (HP HHI BSHC G/Krt HR (G/HP MR) BSCO G/KW HR fG/Hp HR) BSCO? G/K« HP (G/HP HFO BSNOX G/Krt HP (G/HP HK) BSFC KG/KW HP (LR/HP HR TOTAL TEST RESULTS » TOTAL KH HR (HP HR) BSHC G'Kw MB (G/HP MR) HSro G/KW HR (G/HP MR) BSCO? G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNQX r,/K uR (G/HP MR) BSFC KG/HW HR (Lfl/HP Hh) 11.21 f 15.03) 2.16 ( l.bl) 13.3b ins. l.lb) ,H?B ( .703) PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001 DIESEL E BAG CART NO. RELATIVE HUMIDITY , F.NGINE-HB, PCT , CVS-bQ, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.1 GM/KG( 73,8 GHAJNS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000 1 NYNF b45.? (25. 4) 5 18'. 2 (20.H) HB.1 (120,0) blR2. ?1h'.0 213.3 (I03b0,) 7 10 1b Ib 2 h 1 ,)/? ,8/ ?/ I/ .4/13/ .1/1 .3/ ,7/ .4/1 ,0/ 41 ? q • IB 4 3? 3/ 3/ 3/ 3/ ?/ .>' 5. 5. 22 .3 ," > 3b, U. IB. 1. ,2b ,04 11. 1. 2 LANF b45,? (25, 518,? (20, 48,1 (120 H2b4, 3nn,o 217,2 (104 7 9 54 2b 3 B 117b'.2 10 • 1 3 30 1018 1 • .2b 511 .07 .1» ,3* ,15 .58 Hlb ( 1 ( 1 2 22 818 7 , .17) .44) .1») .bl) .81) .14) Bib) pARTICULATE DATA 10MM FILTER SAMPLE ,8/23/ ,3/ I/ 4) 4) .0) 17.) 31, 1. ,b/12/ 117, ,2/12/ ,!/ 3/ ,U/ V ,1/13/ ,1/ 2/ 30. Jl 30. 11. .38 23,3 S.lb 31,55 2081,3 13, 2b ,180 2,01 2,47 18,13 lib, 28 fa, 35 n, ,t3 .05 24. 1, ( 2. ( i. I 1. ( I. ( 742, ( H, 3 L»F b45.2 (25,4) 518,2 (20,4) 48,1 (120,0) b371, 305,0 302,3 (10b7b,) 13 7 b5 bO 2 20 Ib) 80) 84) 1?) 13) 73) ,4b1 ( ,771) , TOTAL FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR FOR 4 BAGS ,8/22/ bl, ,B/ I/ B, ,4/12/ 14b, ,2/12/ 0, ,1/ 3/ 1,08 ,1/ 3/ ,04 ,1/13/ bO, .I/ 2/ 1, 12, Ib b2, 14J, 1,04 51,4 10, Bl 41, 4b 5758.0 34,33 2,751 ( b b,12 ( 1 l,5b ( 1 7,15 ( 5 831,80 ( b20 4,1b C 3 ,31'7 ( SCM(SCF) G/TtST G/KW G/KG HR (G/HP HR) FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 4 NYNF b45,2 (25,4) 518,2 (?U,4) 48,1 (120,0) b?ni, 217,0 214,2 (10312.) b 8 84 Ib 3 b ,0b) .28) .Ib) .33) .27) ,70) b53) 1,131 ( 1,050 ,0137 ,2110 ,3/22/ 32, ,4/ I/ B, ,3/13/ 85, ,7/13/ 1, ,4/ 3/ ,?b ,0/ 3/ ,05 ,1/13/ 21, .I/ 2/ 1, 41,17 ?3. 82, .22 11,8 3,15 28,11 Ilb4,4 11,13 ,531 ( 1 1,12 ( 1 3,51 ( 2 25,07 ( 18 1035,74 ( 772 1,10 ( 7 .H72 ( , 31,14) ( ,0b11) ( ,0113) .17) .51) ,k?) .70) ,35) .38) 777) PART. 6/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .40 (.30) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 71,21 (8717,b) ------- ENGINE Nn'.nen FNGINE MODEL «n voi.vn IHIAI. FUEL ENGINE i'. b I f Sfih. CTPM l.,b cvs MO. m BAROMETER DRY BULB c MM HG(?fl.11 I PH.1* f)Ff, C(7b.O TABLE E-5. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS COLO TRANSIENT TEST Nn,22-JC RUN DATE in/17/811 TIME OHIO DYNO NO, b F) PROJECT NO, 11-50HH-001 DIESFL E BAG CART NO. RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-58, PCT , CVS-57, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 11.5 GM/KG( BQ.b GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1.0000 m i BAG RFSHI.TS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER OIF P MM. H?onN. BLOWER INLFT p MM. HPOUN. H?O) BLOWER TNl.FT TEMP. HFG'. C(DEG. F) Bl OWE R REVOLUTIONS TIME SEcofjns TOTAL FLOW STD. Cll'. MFTPFS(SCF) HC SAMpLfc MpTER/RANGF/F'PM HC BCKGRD MFTEP/RANGE/FPH CO SAMPLE MpTER/RANGEXPPM CO BCKr,HD MpTER/RANGE/PPM CO? SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PCT CO? BCKr.RD MpTER/RANGt/PCT NOX SAMPLE MFTEH/RANGE/PPM NOX BCKfiRD MpTER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS co MASS GRAMS CO? MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS KW HR (HP HH1 BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) B.SC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HP,) BSFC KG/KW HP (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS H BARS TOTAL KW HR (HP HP) BSHC G/KW HK (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HP) BSCO? G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .36 (.27) 11.30 ( 15.15) 2.15 ( l.bO) 13.17 ( Ibl. ( 7.15 ( 7lb.) 5.33) 1 NYNF b5n'.2 (25. b) 518'.e (2CI.H) HB'.S (120,0) bi an, 215.1 pqn'.b (10H05,) b,H/S2/ 32, 1 , 7 / 1 / IKt SO.7/1?/ 108. ,3/12/ it 11. 0/ 3/ ,30 3,H/ 3/ ,115 7.7/13/ 23, .7/ 2/ 1, H?.t)8 23'. inn'. '.25 22. •» 3.B5 3S.H5 13bq.5 12. hi '.h33 ( 1 1'. 12 ( 1 3.H5 ( 2 32. 1H C 23 1227. H3 ( 115 11,31 ( 8 '.5b8 ( , 2 LANF b50,2 (25, b) 518.2 (20. H) H8.1 (120, D) b2b3, 211,1 21B.S (105H5.) H.B/22/ HH, 1,7/ J/ 10, 53.7/12/ 115, ,3/12/ 1, 57, 1/ 3/ ,Hb 3,5/ 3/ ,05 B.1/13/ 27, ,H/ 2/ 1, 28,27 J5, 112, .tl 25.1 5.15 38,77 2223,5 1H,78 .HO) 1.0H7 ( 2,31) ,50) 2,10 ( 2,81) ,57) 2.BH ( 2.123 ,S7) 1B.H8 ( 13,78) ,51) 10B1.R2 ( 710.31) ,H3) 7, OH ( 5.25) 133) .HIS ( ,82U) J LAP b50,2 (25, b) 518.2 (20, H) H8.1 (120,0) b370, 305,0 303, b (10725,) 1H.1/22/ 70, 8,5/ I/ 1, b2,0/12/ 137, ,2/12/ n, b3,5/ 3/ 1,13 3,5/ 3/ ,05 22.7/13/ bB, ,8/ 2/ 1, 11, b2 b3. 131. 1,08 b7,H 10, 1b Hfa,35 b02b,B 31,15 2,885 ( b b,1S ( 1 1,58 ( 1 b,b7 ( H 8b7,30 ( bHb 5,b3 ( H ,ns ( H NYNF b50,2 (25, b) 518,2 (20, H) H8.1 (J20.0) b202, 217,0 215, b (10HH2.) 5.1/22/ 21, 1,0/ I/ 1, 83,0/13/ 83, ,5/13/ 0, 17, b/ 3/ ,28 3,b/ 3/ ,0b 8.7/13/ 2b, i, ox ex i, H5,Bb 21, 81, ,23 25,2 3,50 27,81 1221,8 1H.25 ,3b) ,b5B ( 1 ,32) 1,13 ( 1 .18) 3,01 ( 2 .17) 2H,^,5 ( 18 ,75) 10BS, HO ( 801 ,20) 12,58 ( 1 b83) ,H12 ( , ,23) .52) ,30) ,30) ,3S) ,38) 801) PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL FOR H BAGS 10MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HH (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) en x 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 1.21H ( H2.87) ,182 ,0870 ( .ObHI) ,1118 ( ,0870) 80,75 (2852,2) ------- ENGINE NO.D20 ENGINE HODEL 00 VOLVO DUALFUEL ENGINE 9,6 L(506, CID) L--6 CVS NO, 10 BAROMETER 746,76 MM HG(29,40 IN HG) DRY HULK TEHP, 21,7 DEC C(71,0 DEC F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOUER DIP P MM, H20(IN, H20) BLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F) DLOUER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD, CU, HETRES(SCF) HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT C02 BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PCT NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM TABLE E-6. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS C TRANS. TEST NO,22-2C RUN1 DATE 10/20/80 TIME 11105 DYNO NO, 5 PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001 m i oo DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LED KM HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW MR (G/HP MR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) DSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP BSHC G/KU HR BSCO G/KW HR PSC02 G/KW HR BSNOX G/KW HR BSFC KG/KW HR PART. 6/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .34 (.25) HR) (G/HP HR) (G/HP HR) (G/HP HR) (G/HP HR) (LB/HP HR) 11.51 ( 15,43) 2.27 ( 1.69) 13,68 ( 10.20) 991. ( 739.) 7,48 ( 5,58) ,465 ( ,765) DIESEL EM-465-F BAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY t ENGINE-69, PCT , CVS-41, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 11,4 GM/KG( 79,9 GRAINS/LLO NOX HUMIDITY C.F, 1,0000 1 2 3 NYNF LANP LAP 678,2 (26,7) 678,2 (26,7) 670,2 (26,7) 520,7 (20,5) 520,7 (20,5) 520,7 (20,5) 48,9(120,0) 48,9(120,0) 40,9(120,0) 6177, 6262, 6371, 295,3 299,9 305,0 298,7 (10549.) 302,8 (10694.) 308,0 (10880.) 7.3/22/ 36, 9.7/22/ 48, 14.7/22/ 73. 11, 5/ I/ 12, 11. I/ I/ 11. 9,9/ I/ 10. 52.5/12/ 112, 54.2/12/ 116, 66.1/12/ 148, ,7/12/ 1. ,7/12/ 1, .7/12X 1, 19, 3/ 3/ ,31 26, 9/ 3/ ,44 66, 2/ 3/ 1.19 2,6/ 3/ ,04 2,8/ 3/ ,04 3,0/ 3/ ,05 7.8/13/ 23, 9.1/13/ 27, 24.3/13/ 73, ,5/ 2/ 1, .5/2/1, l.O/ 2/ 1, 41,31 29,32 11,09 25, 38, 64, 109, 113, 142, ,27 ,40 1,15 22,9 26,9 71,9 4,31 6,55 11.44 37.82 39.74 50,82 1432,3 2215,0 6461,6 13,07 15,57 42.36 ,642 ( 1.41) 1,040 ( 2,29) 3,105 ( 6 1,16 ( 1.56) 2,14 ( 2,87) 6,97 ( 9 3,72 ( 2,77) 3.06 ( 2,28) 1,64 ( 1 32,62 ( 24.32) 18,55 ( 13,83) 7.30 ( 5 1270.22 ( 953.17) 1033.96 ( 771.02) 927.51 ( 691 11,27 ( 8,41) 7,27 ( 5,42) 6,08 ( 4 ,553 ( ,910) ,435 ( .793) ,446 ( PARTICULATE DATA; TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HR (D/KP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KO FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 4 NYNF 670.2 (26.7) 520,7 (20,5) 48,9 (120,0) 6201, 296,9 299,8 (10590.) 6,7/22/ 34, 12, O/ I/ 12, 85.D/13/ 86, 1.9/13/ 2, 16. 9/ 3/ ,27 2,0/ 3/ ,0-1 9.0/13/ 27, ,7/ 2/ 1. 47,64 22. 83, ,23 26,2 3,80 29,03 1249,2 15,05 ,85) ,569 ( 1 ,34) 1,24 ( 1 ,22) 3.06 ( 2 ,44) 23,42 ( 17 ,65) 1007,98 ( 751 ,53) 12,14 ( 9 733) ,459 ( 1,239 ( 43,78) ,976 ,0848 ( ,0632) ,1822 ( ,0826; ,25) ,66) .29) .46) ,65) ,05) 754) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCH(SCF) 82.41 (2910.6) ------- TABLE E-7. EMISSION RESULTS COtn TRANSIENT PROJECT NO, U-50HY-001 ENGINE. NO'.DPn ENG1MF MOnFL BO VOLVO DUAL FIIFl ENGINE q.h L(5Rb. CIO) L.I, CVS NO. )n HG(2q.23 IN HG) l)t G C(7?.n DEG F) BAROMETER ^?'si DRY BULB TpMP. ? BAG RESULTS BAG NIIMRFR DESCRIPTION BLOWER OIF P MM. H20(IN. H?0) BLOWER INLFT P MM. H?OUN. nan) BLOWfR JMLFT TEMP. nEG-. C(DEG. F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME. SECONDS TOTAL FLOW s-fn. cu. METRESCSCF) HC sAMptf MFTER/RANGE/PPM HC BCKr,RD MFTEH/RANGE./PPM CO SAMPLE MFTFR/HANGE/PPM CO BCKp,RD MpTERXRANGEXPPM CO? SAMpi E MFTER/RANGE/PCT co? HCKGRD M'FTERXRANGF/PCT NOX SAMPLE MpTER/RANGEXPPM NOX BCKGHD MFTF.R/P.ANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM CO? CONCENTRATION PcT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS CO? MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LR) KW HR (HP HR} BSHC G/KW HP (G/HP HP) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO? G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) m i vO TOTAL TEST RESULTS <* RAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP MR) BSHC R/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCQ G/KW HR (G/HP HR) G/KW HR (G/HP HP) G/KW HP BSCO? RSNOX BSFC (G/HP HR) Kr,/KW HR (Lrt/HP HR) 7.37 I . M H 5 ( . b8) 0b.) .50) 731) TEST N0.22-2C HUNR HATF 10X22XBO TIME 10148 DIESEL EM.4bS-F OYNO NO, 5 BAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-bl, PCT , CVS-42, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.5 GM/KG( 73. f GRAIMS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C 1 2 3 NYNF b52 523 48 2q? b. q. 52. 1 18. ?. 7. • ' B '? r.q bi ?qs '. i (25. (20. (120 RO, .q 7) b) ,0) LANF b52,8 (25 5?3,? (20 4B,q (12 b2bl. 3011,0 .7) .b) 0.0) (I0tq5.) 301,0 (10b33,) b/??/ 33, ?/ ?>/! ?/l a/ q/ b/i t/ ?. 2 I/ ?/ 1 ?/ 3/ 3X 3/ ?/ .!»b t. 1, 12. o. ,30 ,C1H 23. 0. q, 1/22/ B,8/ I/ sq.n/ia/ ,2/l?/ Sb.q/ 3/ 3,0/ 3/ q,b/13/ ,s/ e/ 2q,r?b 37, 4b, 1, i2q, o. ,14 ,05 21. 1. MO'. 12b, 1 • a? 4 37 140 12 f 1 '4 37 3qj 12 • 2h .•» '.13 .," 4.0 '.72 (.20 '.nl .ns .58 .2H .bl bis ( 1,37) ( 1,35) ( 3.05) ( 2H.03) (1037, HS) ( q.to) ( 1,010) ,0 28,2 b,* HH ,07 21H5.8 lb,22 1,028 2,oq 3,08 31, oq 10tb,?R 7.77 ,tq2 LAF bSe.8 (25 523,2 (20 ,F, it 1,0000 NYNF ,7) .b) b52,8 523,2 48. q (120,0) 48, q b370, 305,0 (25, (20, (120 7) b) ,0) b201, 30b,3 (10B1B.) 15.0/22/ 7,3/ IX b7,OX12X ,3/12/ bi.q/ s/ 2,q/ 3/ 23, a/13/ ,7/ ?/ 11,13 bB, 145, I.Ob bq,o 12,04 51,70 75, 7. 151, 1. 1,10 ,04 70, 1, 2q? 2R8.1 ,o (10531,) b,q/22/ H,3/ Bb,2/l ,4/1 17, 4/ 3.2X 8,7/1 ,b/ 4b 2 I/ 3/ 3/ 3/ 3/ 3/ a/ ,2b t. 35, 11, 87, 0, ,28 ,05 2b, 1, 85, , 25 4 2q 23 ,b ,0b ,^ &q4b,3 1255,0 ( 2,27) C 2.80) ( 2,30) C 15.73) ( 780.21) ( 5,?q) ( ,80R) 40,45 2,848 7,11 l.bS 7,27 83b,S4 s.bq ,401 ( b.2B) ( 1,53) ( 1.2b) ( 5,42) ( baj.81) ( 4,g4) ( ,bsq) 14 , 1 3 24 1058 12 , ,bO sbq ,n .^ ,81 ,02 ,31 480 C 1 ( 1 ( 2 C 18 ( 788 ( q ( , ,25) ,sq) ,55) ,50) ,Sfa) ,18) ?sq) PART. 6/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .35 (.26) qoMM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 20 X £0 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) G/TFST G/KW HR (G/HP HH) G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) SCM(SCF) 1,238 ( ^3,71) .172 ,0853 C ,0b3h) [ ,0870) 81,80 (2889,?) ------- ENGINf NO.D20 ENGINt MIJDf-L HO ENGINE <>.i, L(5«6. CVS NO. 10 BAROMt rt R 7V). 55 MM (JkY BULb TFflP. 22. H VOLVU DUAL FUtL C1D) L-6 HG(.?f.51 l.N H&) DEC C(73.0 DtG F> TABLE E-8. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS COLO TRANSIENT TEST N0.22-1C RUN DATE lG/29/oO TIME 2:47 DYNO NO. 5 PKOJttl Nil. 11-tM .-oil m 0 HC HC CO CO C02 C02 NOX NOX SAMPLE HCKGRD SAMPLE 8CKGRD SAMPLT BCKGHD SAMPLE HCKGRD BAG RESULTS BAG NUMRtR DESCRIPTION BLOWER OIF P MM. H20IIN. H20) P.LOWCP INLET P rH. H20IIN. H20) BLOWCR INLET TFKP. DEC. ClUtG. f} BLOWfP RtVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STO. CU. MtTREStSCF) Mt TbR/RAN&t/PPM Mt TLk/KANOL/PPM fFHC/RANGt/PPM Mf Ttrt/RANOE/PPM MTTEf/RANGt/PCT ft TEH/RANGE/PCT METfK/HANGC/PPM KkTlk/RANGt/PPM DILUTION FACTO HC CUNCrNTRAIION PPM CO CONCt NTWAUUN PPM C02 CONCCNTKATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS co MASS GRAMS C02 MASS CRAMS MIX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KW MR (HP MR) BSHC C/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HK1 BSC02 G/KW HK (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HK (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KH HR (LH/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW HK (HP Hk) 11.55 BSHC G/KU HK (G/HP HK) 2.06 BSCD G/KK HR (G/HP HR) 12. b7 BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 948. BSNOX G/KH HR (G/HP HR ) 8.00 BSFC KG/KW H« (LB/HP HR) .445 15.49) 1.53) 9.60) 707. ) 5.97) .731) DIESFL FM-465-F BAG CA^T NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-55. PCT , CVS-20. PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 9.5 GM/KC1 66.8 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.f-. 1..IUOO 1 NYNF 685.8 (27.0) 530.9 C20.9) 46. 9 (120.0) 6180. 295.9 300.0 ( 10597. ) 6.0/22/ 30. 9.4/ I/ 9. 48.0/12/ 101. .9/12/ 2. 18. 4/ 3/ .29 2.9/ 3/ .0* 8.3/13/ 25. .6/ 2/ 1. 43.57 21. 9b. .25 24.2 3.63 34.29 1380.5 13.91 .587 1.30) 1.06 1.42) 3.42 2.55) 32.28 24.07) 1299.58 969.10) 13.09 9.76) .553 .90') 2 LANF 685.8 (27.0) 530.9 (20.9) 48.9 (120.0) 6265. 300.0 304.2 (10743.) B.5/22/ 42. 10. O/ I/ 10. 50.B/12/ 108. .7/12/ 1. 26. I/ 3/ .43 2.5/ 3/ .04 10.3/13/ 31. .67 2/ 1. 30.34 33. 105. .39 30.2 5.76 37.21 2171.6 17.59 1.027 2.26) 2.15 2.88) 2.68 2.00) 17.30 12.90) 1009.55 752.82) 8.18 6.10) .477 .785) 3 LAF 685.8 (27.0) 530.9 (20. '» 48.9 (120.0) 6371. 305. 1 309.3 (10925.) 13.8/22/ 69. 9 . 2 / 1 / '1. 63.7/12/ 142. .6/12/ I. 63. 3/ 3/ 1.13 3. 1/ 3/ .05 25.9/13/ 78. 1.2/ 2/ I. 11.66 61. 137. 1.09 76.5 10. d4 49.18 6148.5 45.26 2.957 1 6.52) 7.20 ( 9.65) 1.51 ( 1.12) 6.63 ( 5.1U) 854.35 ( 637.09) 6.29 ( 4.69) .411 I .675) 4 NYNF 68 5. H (27.0) 5JO.V (.J. l.H/ 1 J/ / . 17.0/ J/ . ..'/ 3.U/ 'i/ .10 9.5/ 1 V ?N . I.// 11 1 . 4 7 . 4 1, iO. ad. .2 J 27.-; 3. ^ 2H.02 1246.9 l'j.(,6 .b6h ( 1.14 ( 3 . 0 b ( 24. b4 ( 10V1.91 I a 13.72 I . 4 1 •> ( ) 1 .04) .0)t2',) 84.33 (2978.5) ------- TABLE E-9, ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS COLD TRANSIENT PROJECT NO, U-S044-001 ENGINE NO'.DSO ENGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.i LfSab. CID) L-b CVS NO, In BAROMETER ?S3'.3b MM HG(29',bb IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP. ?a'.a DEC c(72.o DEC F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIF P MM, H20UN. H20) BLOWER JNLET P MM, HJOCIN, H2p) BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F) BLOWER DEVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. cu. METRES(SCF) HC SAMPLE MFTER/RANGE/PPM HC BCKQRD MFTER/RANGE/PPM CO SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM co BCKGRD MPTER/RANGE/PPM CO? SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PCT COS BCKGBD MFTER/RANGE/PCT NOX SAMpLE MfTER/RANGE/PPM NOX BCKGRD MpTER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MAS? GRAMS CO MAS? GRAMS COS MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KW HR (HP HR1 BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) Bsco2 G£KW HB (G/HP HR) BSNOX GXKW HR (G/HP HP) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) m I TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP MR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G'KW HR (G/HP HR) 2.55 13.27 981. 7.95 ( 14.985 ( 1.90) ( 9.90) J 733.) < 5.93) TEST N0.22-2C DATE 10/30/80 TIME 10159 OYNO NO, 5 RUN DIESEL EM-HbS-F BAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGlNE-bl. PCT , CVS-24, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIpITY 10.3 GM/KG( 72,3 GRAINS/LB) NOX 1 NYNF bBS^B (27,0) 530.9 (20,9) 48.9 (120,0) L 1 D 1 D 1 B i % 29b'.0 301. b (10b52,) b,8/22/ 34, ST y i y 9 . . f / 4 ' ^ • 99 , 2/13/ 101 g 1.5/13/ 1. 18, b/ 3/ ,30 Sn / a / QH • ' 3* $ u1* 8,3/13/ 25, 197/ 8/ 2, 43',, 04 2t' Bbf qa. i ?° . 3b »eo 23'.2 H' 45 ^ 34,51 1 4 5 h . 2 A T 3 p a •• 13. 3b ',b33 ( 1 i'0ns C i 4 37 C 3 33,90 ( 25 1430,45 ClObb 13.12 C 9 '.b22 C 1, 2 3 LANF LAF bBS.8 (27.0) bSS.B (27,0) 530.9 (20.9) 530,9 (20,9) 48,9 (120,0) 48,9 (J20.0) b2b4, b370. 299,9 305. b (10795 9.S/22/ 48 8,5/ I/ 9 50,8/12/ 108 .7/12/ J 2b,9/ 3/ ,4 ?,8/ 3/ ,0 9.9/13/ 30 1,7/ 2/ 5 £9,3? 39S 105, ,40 28,0 fa, 93 37,34 2235, 9 lb,39 ,40) 1,05S C ,37) 2, Ob { ,2b) 3,3b C .28) 18,10 ( ,b9) iOB4,OS C ,78) 7,95 I 022) »510 C 305,0 ,) 310,8 U097B.) , lb,0/22/ 80, , 10, O/ I/ 10, , b2,7/12/ 139, , ,7/12/ i, * bl,b/ 3/ 1,09 * S,S/ 3/ ,D4 „ 2S.O/13/ 75, , 1,5X S/ 2. ie,oo 71, i348 I.Ob 73,7 IS.bb 48,33 b032,S 43,82 2,325 2,893 C b 2,773 b,93 { 9 2,513 1.83 C 1 13,50) b,98 ( 5 808,38) 870,34 ( b49 5,933 b,32 ( 4 0839J ,417 ( , HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000 4 NYNF bS5,8 (27,0) 530.9 (20,9) 48,9 (120,0) b202, 297,0 302, b (10b89,) 7.0/22/ 35, 10, 0/ I/ 10, 81.8X13X 82, 1.5/13/ 1, lb,3X 3/ ,2b 2,2/ 3/ ,03 9.3/13/ 28, l,5X 2/ 2, 49,45 85, 80, ,23 2b,3 4,43 28,04 1255,3 15,23 ,38) ,5b9 ( 1 ,29) l,lb ( 1 ,3b) 3,82 ( i ,20) 24,18 { IB ,02) 1082,52 ( 807 ,71) 13,14 ( S b8b) ,491 ( , ,25) ,5b) ,85) ,03) ,24) ,79) 807) pARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR <* BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR SCM(SCF) G/TEST G/KW HR (G/HP HR) G/KG FUEL CGXLB FUEL) 1,321 ( 4b,hb) ,924 ,0827 ( ,0bl7) ,1795 ( ,0814) BSFC" KG)KW HR (LB/HP HR) PART. 6/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .34 (.25) 80 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW S6MJSCF3 84.25 (2975,7) ------- TABLE E-IO. ENGINE: EMISSION RESULTS C-TRANS, PROJECT NO, ll-;044-0i. ENGINE NQ.D20 ENGINE MODEL 00 VOLVO DUALFUEL L'NGJNE 9,6 L(586, CIH) L-6 CVS Nfi, 10 BARChETER 751,08 MM HG(29,57 IN HG) DRY BULK TEMP, 23.? DUG C(75,0 DEC F) DAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER to BLCUER DIF P MM, H20CIN, H20) &LOIO INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F) PLOUER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD« CU, METRES(SCF) HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM CO BCKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPM C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT C02 BCKGRD METER/RAN6E/PCT NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS CRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KU Hft (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSCO C/KU HR (G/HP HR) FSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KQ/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 DAGS TOTAL KU HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KU HR (G/HP HR) &SFC KG/KU HR (LB/HP HR) 11,78 ( 15,79) 2,34 ( 1,75) 9,28) 690,) 5,14) 12,45 ( ( 925. 6,90 ( ,440 ( ,723) TEST N0.22-1C RUN DATE 11/19/80 TIME 11J03 DYNO NO, 5 DIESEL EM-465-F DAO CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-49, PCT , CVS-17, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIBITY 9,2 GM/KG( 64,1 GRAINS/LEO NOX HUMIDITY C,F, ),0000 1 2 3 NYNF LANF LAF 688,3 (27,1) 688,3 (27,1) 688,3 (27,1) 530,9 (20,9) 530,9 (20,9) 530,9 (20,9) 48,9 (120,0) 48.9 (120,0) 48,9 (120,0) 6133, 6267, 6372, 296,0 300,0 305,0 300,4 (10608.) 304,4 (10753.) 309,5 (10933,) 7,2/22/ 36, 9,2/22/ 46, 15.2/22/ 76, 9,8/ I/ 10, 8,5/ I/ 9, 8,6/ I/ 9, 57.7/12/ 125, 48.3/12/ 102, 50.6/12/ 107. 17^7/ 3/ ,28 26,0/ 3/ ,43 62',7/ 3/ 1,12 3,0/ 3/ ,05 2,5/ 3/ ,04 2,7/ 3/ ,04 5.3/13/ 16, 7.8/13/ 23, 25.0/13/ 75, ,3/ 2/ 0, ,3/ 2/ 0, ,4/ 2/ 0, 44.84 30,48 11,81 27, 38, 68, 123, 99, 103, .24 ,39 1,08 15,6 23,2 74,6 4.62 6,61 12.12 42,97 35.13 37,18 1308,7 2163,7 6116,5 8,97 13,50 44,15 ,616 ( 1,36) 1,023 ( 2,26) 2,941 ( 6 1,10 ( 1,48) 2,15 ( 2,88) 7,40 ( 9 4,20 ( 3,13) 3,08 ( 2,30) 1,64 ( 1 39,07 ( 29,13) 16,37 ( 12,21) 5,02 ( 3 1189,70 ( 887,16) 1008,25 ( 751,85) 826,23 ( 616 8,16 ( 6,08) 6,29 ( 4.69) 5,96 ( 4 ,560 ( ,920) ,477 ( ,784) ,397 < PARTICULATE DATAi TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCH(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KU HR (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 4 NYNF 688,3 (27,1) 530,9 (20,9) 48,9 (120,0) 6202, 296 , 9 301,3 (106-11.) /»,5/22/ 32, 8,2/ I/ 8, 90.7/13/ 91. 17,3/ 3/ ,28 2.6/ 3/ ,04 8.6/13/ 26, ,4/ 2/ 0. 46,47 24, 89, .24 25,4 4,21 31,27 1308,9 14. 6? ,48) ,600 ( 1 ,93) 1,13 ( 1 ,22) 3,74 ( 2 ,75) 27,74 ( 20 ,12) 1161,27 ( 865 ,45) 12,97 ( 9 653) ,532 ( 1,303 ( 46,03) ,933 ,0792 ( ,0591) ,1801 ( ,0817) ,32) .51) ,79) ,69) ,96) ,67) 875) PART. 6/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .30 (.22) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOU SCH(SCF) 82.64 (2918.9) ------- TABLE E-l ENGINE N0'.n?n ENGINE MODEL RO VOLVn ENGIME S'.b L(5Hh. CIO) L-b CVS NO. In FUEL BAROMFTFK ?3h'3t, MM HGCOB.99 IN 116) DRY BULB TEMP. ?M.4 DEG Cf7t.ll DEC F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMRFR DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIF P MM. HJOUN. H20) BLOWER T.NLFT P MM. HSOCIN. no) BLOWER 1NLFT TEMP. DFG'. CtDEG. F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD'. cuf. METKES(SCF) HC SAMPLE MFTER/RANGE/PPM HC RCKGRD MFTER/RANGE/PPM CO SAMPIE MFIER/RANGE/PPM CO BCKr,RD MpTER/RANGE/PPM C02 SAMPLE MFTER/RANGE/PCT co? BCKRRO MFTER/RANGE/PCT Nnx SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM NQX BCKcRD MFTER/RNGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MAS3 GRAMS CO MASs GRAMS CO? MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KW HR (HP MR) BSHC G/KW HR (K/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR «7/H> HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HP (G/HP HP) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HIV) m Ul TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) 11 BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 2 BSCO G/KW UK (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) bSNOX G/Kw HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) ,39 C ,15 ( ,5b ( < ( ( .28) .bO) 100. 7.01 5.22) KNRTNE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT PROJECT NO, 11-5QHH-001 TEST NO^-1H DATE in/17/BG TIME oiasu DVNO NO, S RUN DIESEL EM-»bS-F BAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-SB, PCT , CVS-bO, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 11,5 GM/KC( 80,b GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000 I NYNF b5n'.2 (25. b) 518.2 (20.4) 48.9 (120,0) bl82, 29b.O 294.7 (104Q7.) b.7/22/ 33, 10, 7/ I/ 11, 91.2/13/ 92, .4/13/ 0, lb.8/ 3/ ,27 3,b/ 3/ ,0b 7.7/13/ 23, ,8/ 2/ 1, 4/.S4 23, 9n. ,21 22'. 3 3,88 30.77 1153.3 12. Sb .509 ( 1 1,13 ( 1 3.43 £ 2 27. Ib ( 20 1017,82 ( 758 ll. na ( B ',449 ( e 2 LANF b50.2 (25, b) SJB, 2 (20,4) 48,9 uao.o) b2b3, 300,0 298,5 (10544,3 B.5/22/ 43, 10,2/ ]/ 10, 50.5/12/ 107, ,J/12/ 0, 2b,0/ 3/ ,43 3,5/ 3/ ,05 B.9/13/ 27, ,?/ 2/ 1, 30,4? 33. 104. ,37 2b,0 5,bb 3b,lb 2040,1 14,83 ,12) ,9bi S,li) ,52) 2,12 2,84) 85b) 2,b7 1,995 ,25) 17,09 1(2,753 ,995 9b4,28 7J9,Ob5 o2»>S 7,ni 5,23) 7385 ,454 ,747J J LAP faSO,2 (25, b) 518,2 (20,4) 48,9 (120,0) b372. 305,0 303,7 (10727,) 14.2/22/ 71, %?/ I/ 9, bH,S/12/ 14H, ,2/l?/ 0, bl.B/ 3/ 1,10 3, I/ }/ ,05 22.2/13/ b7, 88/ B/ 1, 11,9? b3, 138, I.Ob bb,0 10,97 48, b7 58b9,7 38,33 2,807 ( b 7,01 ( 9 l,5b ( 1 b,94 ( 5 837,24 { b24 5.47 ( 4 ,400 C , 4 NYNF faSO,2 (25, b) 518,2 (20, ») 48,9 (150,0) b2Q3, 297,0 295,7 (10443.) b,4/22/ 32, 9,0/ I/ 9, 81.9/13/ 82, ,3/13/ 0, lb,B/ 3/ ,27 3,e/ 3/ ,05 8.5/13/ 2b, ,7/ 2/ 1, 4R.04 23, BO, ,e? 24,9 3,95 27,45 11SO.D 14,09 ,19) ,542 ( 1 ,40) 1,13 ( 1 ,17) 3,49 ( 2 ,18) 24,22 ( 18 ,33) 1050,23 ( 783 ,08) 12,44 ( 9 bSB) ,479 { , ,20) .5?) ,bO) ,0b) ,lb) ,27) 787) PARTICULAR DATA,, TOTAL FOR » BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/7EST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HR CG/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 1,249 ( 44, IS) ,955 ,0838 ( ,Ob2E>) ,1981 ( ,0899) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) ,36 (,27) 20 X 50 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM ------- TABLE E-12. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS _. HOT TRANSIENT PROJECT NO, ll-SOiH-OOl ENGINE NO',020 ENGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 1,fc LfSib. CIO) L-b CVS NO. in BAROMETER f»b",7b MM HG(21>0 IN HG) DRV BULB TfMP. ps'.l DEC CfBI.O DEC F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIF P HM. H20(IN. H20) BLOWER JNLET P MM, HZO^IN. H2p) BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. CCDEG. F) BLOWER DEVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS, TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRESfSCF) HC HC CO CO SAMpLE BCKG'RD SAMPLE BCKQRD CO? SAMpLE C02 BCKQRD NOX SAMpLE NOX BCKGRD MFTER/RANGE/PPM MpTER/RANGE/PPM MfTER/RANGE/PPM MpTER/'RANGE/PPM MPTER/RANGE/PCT MFTER/RANGE/PCT MpTER/RANGE/PPM MFTER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FA.CIOR HC CONgENT,R\|TION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KM HR (HP HR1 BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR* (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG>KW HP (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST (irSULTS 1 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/Hp HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO? G/KW MR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KQ/KW HR (LB/HP HR) 11.11 ( 11.13) 2,«1 ( l.bb) 11.10 ( 4.11) Ml.) .OS) h.77 ( '.HI J ,717) PART. 6/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .35 (.26) TEST N0.22-2H RUN DATE 10/20/80 TIME DVNO NO, S DIESEL E BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGlNE-^3. PCT , CV3-3k, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.8 6M/KG( 75.5 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000 1 NYNF 8 (2b,7) 520'.7 (20.5) 18.1 (120,0) blBO, 2 LANF b78.2 Ob.7) 520.7 (20.5) 18.4 (120.0) LAF b78,2 (2b.7) (20.7 (20. S) 18,4 (120,0) JS8.S (105C7.) 902,4 (10b48.) 305,0 108.1 (10883,) NVNF b78,2 (2b,7) 520,7 (20,b) HB,4 (UO.O) b202, 247,0 211,1 (10511,) 7.1/22/ 35, 10. 1/ }/ 10, 11. B/13/ 13. l.B/ll/ 1. 11. I/ I/ ,25 2.B/ I/ ,01 b.7/13/ 20, ,7/ 2/ 1. to, 11 25, 40. •?l 11.3 i;i2 31.37 1181.8 ll'.OI ,»31 1.14) r.os i.ii) 1.10 3. Ob) 24,78 22.20) 1045.27 lib. 71) 10,48 7.81) '.512 .841) 8.S/22/ 12, 1.B/ I/ 10. S0,b/12/ 107, ,1/12/ 2, 21, 1/ I/ ,10 2, I/ I/ ,01 B.l/13/ 21. ,7/ 2/ 1, 31.44 33. 101, .3b 23,7 5.72 3b,58 2003,1 13,71 ,412 t.OB) 1.48 2,bb) 2.84 2.15) 18,15 13, 7b5 1010,24 751,37) b,42 S.lb) .175 ,781) 11.3/22/ b7. B.7/ I/ 4, b8,4/12/ lib, ,4/12/ 2, b1,4/ I/ l.lb 1,2/ I/ ,01 21,b/ll/ b6, .•/ 2/ I, 11,33 54, 111. 1,1« b1,0 10,12 53,55 b21B,B 37,72 3.034 b 7,00 1 1,11 1 7,bS 5 144,57 b70 5,34 4 .433 . .bl) .34) .11) .70) .Bl) ,02) 712) b.b/22/ B,2/ I/ B2.0/13/ 1.6/13/ lb,7/ 3/ 3,2/ 3/ 7.7/13/ ,7/ 2/ 48,30 25, 74, ,22 22,4 4,31 27,75 1148,0 12,88 ,513 1.10 3,13 25,28 1041,44 11,73 ,415 33, B, ««, 1, ,27 ,05 «3, 1, 1,20) 1,47) 2,43) 18,85) 813,84) 8,75) ,813) PARTICULATI DATA, TOTAL FOR 1 BAGS 40MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR SCM(SCF) G/TEST C/KM HR (G/HP HR) l,27b ( 15,08) .418 ,0851 ( ,0bl5) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) .1871 ( ,0850) 20 X CO FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 82,bb (2111,1) ------- ENGINE NO',D30 ENGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL fUEL ENGINE l.b LfSnb. CID) L-fa CVS NO'. lo TA-RI P F-l^ 'ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS ._._._._"_ HOT TRANSIENT TEST N0.22-2H RUNR DATE 10/22/80 TIME 11132 DYNO NO, 5 PROJECT NO. U«5044-00i BAROMETER HG(31,23 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP. PB'.I DEG c(84.o DEC BAG RESULTS BAG NUM6ER DESCRIPTION BLOWER D!F P MM, H30(IN. H20) BLOWER JNLET P MM, H20(IN. H20) BLOWER INLF.T TEMP. DEG'. CtDEG. F) BLOWER DEVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF) HC SAMPLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM HC BCKjjRD MpTER/RANGE/PPM CO SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM CO BCKQRD MpTER/RANGE/PPM C03 SAMpUE MpTER/RANGE/PCT C02 BCKjjRD MpTER/RANGE/PCT NOX SAMPLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM NOX BCKGRD MpTEP/RANGE/PPM m ui DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PpM COP CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS CQ2 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG fLB) KW HR (HP HR1 BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCQ2 GfcKW Hp (G/HP HR) BSNOX G?KW HP, (G>HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 8SCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) 11.41 ( IS, Hi) 13. is ( . '.»! ( bb8.) 5.311 DIESEL EM.4b5«F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE"?. PCT , CVS-HO, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.7 GM/KG( 75.1 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000 J NYNF b5n.2 (25. b) 620.7 (20'.5) 48.1 (120,0) blB2. 3 q k n C T a 9 U 31?'.3 (10411.) 7,4/22/ 37, 10. 3/ I/ 10, 1?,0/13/ 13, 1.0/13/ 1, lb,2/ 3/ ,2b Z.7/ I/ .04 K. § r r 3' 1™" B.0/13/ 24, ,4/ J/ 0, 41' 52 9 i 37. f r 11. '.32 33'05 4.b5 3! .37 11B3.1 13,31 ',518 ( 1. l'.U ( 1, 4'.20 ( 3, 38'835 ( 21. lQbl'.Q7 { 717, 12.10 ( 1, .4b8 ( .7 3 3 LANF LAF b50.2 (35. b) b50.2 (35, b) 520,7 (20,5) 530.7 (20,5) 48,1 (130,0) 48,1 (130,0) b2b4, b37l. 300,0 301,3 U0b38 B.8/32/ 44 B,8/ I/ 1 S2.3/12/ 112 ,5/12/ 1 24, 8/ 3/ ,4 2, I/ 3/ ,0 1.2/13/ 28 ,S/ 2/ 1 31,15 35, 10B, .3b 27BD b.lS 38,03 1112,0 15,57 14) ,138 ( 4B) 2,10 ( 13) 3.13 ( 14) 18.13 J 51) 141.52 ( 035 ?,l2 { bIS ,447 { 305,0 „} 30b,3 (10830.) , 14.7/32/ 73, , B.2/ I/ 8, , bb,7/13/ 150, , ,b/13/ 1, 0 bl,b/ 3/ 1,01 4 3,7/ 3/ ,04 , 22,b/13/ bS, ,s/ e/ i, 12,00 fab, 144. l.Ob b7,2 11, bH 51,28 5121,8 31,41 2.07) S.B37 ( b 2,813 7,13 ( 1 2.11) I,b3 ( 1 13,533 7,20 ( 5 708,0b) 832,14 ( b30 5,53) 5,53 ( 4 ,735J .318 { . 4 NYNF b50,2 (25, b) 520,7 (20,5) 48,1 (120,0) b202, 217,0 298,2 (10533.) 7,3/32/ 3b, 7,h/ I/ 8, 82, a/13/ 82, 1.2/13/ i, lb,2/ 3/ ,2b 2,b/ 3/ ,04 8.7/13/ 2b, ,5/ 2/ 1, 41,73 21, BO, ,22 25,7 4,17 27,72 1115,0 14,fab .25) ,52 ( 1 ,5b) l.lb ( 1 .22) 4,21 ( 3 .37) 23,10 ( 17 .53) 1030,50 ( 7b8 .12) 12. b4 ( 1 b55) -,4bB ( , .20) ,5b) ,20) ,82) .45) ,42) 7b1) pARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 10MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 3CM(SCn CUTEST G/KW HR «G/HP HR) G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 1,355 ( 44,33) ,158 ,0834 ( ,0b22) ,1182 ( .0811) PART. G/KW-HR (G.HP-HR) .36 (.27) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCMCSCF) 81,4b (2877,0) ------- ENGINE NO'.Dan ENGINE MODEL BO VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE S.I LfSQb. CIO) L-b CVS NO. lo TABLE E-14. ENGINE EMISSION RISULTS HOT TRANSIENT TEST N0.22-1H RUN DATE 10/21/80 TIME OYNO NO, 5 PROJECT NO, )l"5044»001 BAROMETER 741,$5 MM HG(21.51 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP. ?7.2 DEC C(B1,0 DEG F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER pIF P MM. H?n(IN, H20) BLOWER JNLFT P MM], H?O(IN, H2o) BLOWER INLFT TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F) BLOWER DEVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF) HC SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM HC BCKQRD MpTER/RANGE/PPM CO SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM CO BCKfjRD MpTER/RANGE/PPM C02 SAMPLE MpTER/RANGE^PCT C02 BCKcBD MpTER/RANCE/PCT m NOX SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM _!_ NOX BCKGRO MFTER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACJOR HC CONfPNTRjTlON PPM CO CONrENTR\|TION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MA3\| GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KW HR (HP HR> B3HC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO? GIKW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KM HR (HP HR) 11.bO ( BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) ] BSCO J5/KW HR (0/HP HR) 11 BSCO? (J^KW HR (G/HP HR) ' BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 7.81 BSFC K6>KW HR (LB/HP HR) .411 DIESEL EM.HbS.F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-%3, PCT , CVS-JO, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY S.9 GM/KG( H,0 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000 1 NYNF (37.0) LANF bBS.B (J7.0) 430. 9 (?0,1) . (10514.) b2b«». 300,0 304,0 (10738,) 3 LAF b8S.8 (87,0) (30,1 (20.S) 18.S (120,0) b371, 305,0 301.2 (10122.) NYNF bBS.B (27,0) 530,1 (20,1) 48,1 (120.0) b201, 217,0 301,0 (10b30,) b 10 15 1 1? 3 B ,3/22/ .?/ \/ .B/13/ .B/13/ .6/ 3/ ,3/ 3/ ,b/ll/ ,8/ \|/ 45'.8b 21J IB. .23 2s!o 3'. 70 33.03 12bl.5 14'.37 '.868 i!i« i'.2* 21.38 1123,12 12.71 ,4lb 31, 7,8/22/ 10, B.2/ I/ 17, Sl.3/12/ 2, ,B/12/ ,28 2b,0/ 3/ ,05 3.4/ 3/ 2b, 10.0/13/ 1. .B/ 2/ 30.48 31. lOfa, .37 21,2 6,43 37,57 208b,0 lb,17 1.11) .Mb i.ii) a. 13 2.4b) 2,54 21.11) 17, bl 838.10) 177.81 1.63) 7,15 ,816) ,4b2 ". B, 101, 1. .»3 ,06 30, 1. 2,17) 2.8b) 1.10) 13,13) 781,15) 5.13) ,7bO) 13.1/22/ bb, 11, 3/ I/ 11, b5,1/12/ 14b, ,7/12/ 1, b2,b/ 3/ 1,11 3,0/ 3/ ,05 24.1/13/ 75, ,B/ 2/ 1, 11,80 65, l»»i 1,07 74,1 1,8b S0,7b b075,0 43,80 2, lib b,43) 7,11 1,b4) 1,37 1.02) 7. Ob 5,27) •45, Ib b30,a4) b.01 4,54) ,40b ,bb7) 5,7/22/ B,B/ I/ 8?,3/13/ 2.2/13/ 17, 0/ 3/ 3,4/ 3/ 1,2/U/ ,B/ 2/ 47,51 20, 80. .22 2b,7 3,43 27, HI 1213,1 15,38 ,551 1.15 2,18 24,24 1054,11 13, Ib ,478 28. 1, 82, 2, .27 ,05 27, 1. ( 1 ( 1 ( 2 ( IB ( 78b ( 1 ( , ,21) ,54) ,22) ,07) ,11) ,1b) 78b) PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 15,55) 1.44) l.bO) bB4.) 5.B2) .710) PART. S/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .32 (.24) 10MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 10 X CO FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) G/TE8T G/KW HR (6/HP HR) G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) SCM(SCF) 1,300 ( 45.12) ,134 ,0805 ( .Obfll) ,18b4 ( ,084b) •3.1b (21bS,S) ------- ENGINE NO.D20 ENGINE MODEL 30 VOLVO DUALFUEL ENGINE 9,6 L(586, CIH) L-6 CVS NO, 10 BAROMETER 753,11 MM h'G(29,65 IN HG> DRY BULB TEHP, 22.2 DEG C<72,0 DEG F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIP P MM, H20(IN, H20) BLOWER INLET P MM, H20UN, H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STIU CU, METRES(SCF) TABLE E-15. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS H-TRANS, TEST NO,22~2H RUN1 DATE 10/30/80 TIME 0 DYNO NO, 5 PROJECT NO, 11-504-4-001 SAMPLE BCKGRD m HC HC CO SAMPLE CO BCKGRD C02 SAMPLE C02 BCKGRD NOX' SAMPLE NOX BCKGRD METER./RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS 6RAHS FUEL KG (LB) KW MR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW MR <0/HP MR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KU HR (G/MP HR) BSNOX G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KU HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 DAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW MR (G/HP HR) BGCO G/KU MR (C/HP HR) BSC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX C/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KU lift (LB/HP HR) 11,20 ( 1502) 2,40 ( 1.05) 12,39 ( 9.41) 918, < 685,) Q.02 ,430 s, v t!; ,707) DIESEL EM-465-F BAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-SB, PCT 7 CVS-22, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 9,3 GM/KG( 63,4 GRAIN3/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C..F, 1,0000 1 NYNF 685,G (27,0) 525,8 (20.7) 48,9 (120,0) 6181. 296,0 301,3 (10653,) LANF 685,8 (27,0) 525,8 (20.7) 48,9 (120,0) 6264, 299,9 305,3 (10801,; 3 LAF 685,0 (27,0) 525,0 (20,7) 48,9 (120,0) 6370, 305,0 311,0 (10934,) 4 NYNF 685,8 (27,0) 525,8 (20,7) 48,9 (120,0) 6202, 297,0 302,3 (10694.) 7, A/22/ 9,5/ I/ 91.4/13/ 1.3/13/ 16, 6/ 3/ 3,4/ 3/ B,6/13/ 1,3/ 2/ 48,33 28, 90, ,21 24,6 4,32 31,71 1179,3 14,18 ,513 1,11 4,35 28,66 1065,80 12,81 ,460 37, 10, 92, 1, ,26 ,05 26, 1, ( ( ( 1,14) 1,48) 3,25) 9 9 47 24 3 10 1 < 21,37) ( 794,77) ( 9,55) ,770) ,0/22/ ,3/ I/ ,6/1'V ,9/ 3/ ,!/ 3/ , 1/13/ ,3/ 2/ 31,88 36, 98, ,36 29,0 6,33 34,96 2015,6 16,96 ,946 2,07 3,06 16,88 973,05 8,19 ,457 45, 9, 101, 1, ,41 ,05 30, 1, < 2 { 2 ( 2 < 12 ( 725 ( 6 ,09) ,78) ,28) ,59) ,61) ,11) 7S<) 15,7/22/ 78, 9,5/ I/ 10, 64.6/12/ 144, ,7/12/ 1, 59, 7/ 3/ 1,06 2,3/ 3/ ,04 24,4/13/ 73, 1,2/ 2/ 1, 12,42 70, 139, 1,02 72,0 12,49 50,29 5795,6 42,82 2,774 ( 6,83 ( 1,83 ( 7,36 ( 843,03 ( 63 6,27 { ,406 ( 6,12) 9,16) 1,36) 5,49) 2,41) 4,67) ,667) 6,4/22/ 8,5/ I/ 79.3/13/ ,6/13/ 17, 3/ 3/ 2,9/ 3/ 9,5/13/ 1,2/ 2/ 46,67 23, 78, ,23 27,3 4,09 27,35 1290,3 15,83 ,579 1,19 3,45 23,06 1007,81 13,35 ,483 32, 9, 79, 1, ,28 ,04 29, 1. ( ( ( 1,28) 1,59) 2.57) ( 17,20) ( 811,18) 9,95) ,803) PARTICULATE DATAr TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS PART. G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .35 (.26) 90MM FILTER- SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCN(SCF) G/TEST G/KW HR (G/HP HR) G/KG FUEL (G/LD FUEL) SCM(SCF) 1,375 ( 48,56) ,C88 .0793 ( ,0592) ,1344 < ,0036) 84,62 (2988,7) ------- TABLE E-16. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS H-TRANS, PROJECT NO. 11-50')-1-001 ENGINE NO.D20 ENGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9,6 L(586, CID) L-6 CVS NO, 10 BAROMETER 751,08 MM HG(29,57 IN HG) DRY BIO TEMP, 25,6 DEG C(78,0 DEC F) PAG RESULTS PAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIF P MM, H20UN, H20) DLOWER INLET P MM, H20UN. H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F) BLOUER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD, CU, METRES(SCF) HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM NOX BCKGICD METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS CRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) 6SCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) m i oo TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) [(SCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KU HR (LB/HP HR) 11,45 ( 15,36) 2,42 12,28 930, 7.36 .436 1,81) 9.16) 693.) 5,49) ,717) TEST N0.22-1H RUN DATE 11/19/80 TIME 11{43 DYNO NO, 5 DIESEL EM-465-F BAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY » ENGINE-45, PCT r CVS-22. PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 9,3 GM/KG( 65,0 GRAINS/LID NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000 1 2 3 NYNF LANF LAF 688,3 (27,1) 688,3 (27,1) 688,3 (27,1) 533,4 (21,0) 533,4 (21,0) 533,4 (21,0) 48.9 (120,0) 48,9 (120,0) 48,9 (120,0) 6182, 6265, 6371, 296,0 300,0 305.0 300,6 (10618, > 304,7 (10761.) 309,8 (10943,) 7.4/22X 37, B.6/22/ 43, 14.9/22/ 75, 7,7/ I/ 8, 7,5/ I/ 8. 8,5/ I/ 9, 51.0/12/ 108, 47.2/12/ 99, 52.1/12/ 111, ,6/12/ 1, ,7/l2/ 1, ,8/12/ 1. 17. I/ 3/ ,27 26, I/ 3/ ,43 61, I/ 3/ 1,08 2,8/ 3/ ,04 2,8/ 3/ ,04 2,5/ 3/ ,04 7.2/13/ 22, 8.7/13/ 26, 24.3/13/ 73, ,5/ If 1, ,5/2/1, ,5/ 2/ 1, 46,66 30,39 12,15 29, 36, 67, 106, 96, 107, ,23 ,39 1,05 21,3 25,6 72,5 5,10 6,32 11,94 37.10 34,17 38,49 1271,0 2150,2 5956,3 12,22 14,91 42.96 ,564 ( 1.24) 1,011 ( 2,23) 2,841 ( 6 1,11 ( 1,49) 2,11 ( 2,83) 7,12 ( 9 4,60 ( 3,43) 2,99 ( 2.23) 1,68 ( 1 33,45 ( 24,95) 16,19 ( 12.07) 5,40 ( 4 1146,00 ( 854.57) 1019.06 ( 759,92) 836,16 ( 623 11,02 ( 8,22) 7,07 ( 5,27) 6.03 ( 4 ,509 ( ,836) ,479 ( ,788) ,399 ( , PARTICULATE DATA; TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90MH FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW Hft (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 4 NYNF 688,3 (27,1) 533,4 (21,0) 48,9 (120,0) 6202, 297,0 301,6 (10652.) 6,4/22/ 32, 7,2/ I/ 7, 89.8/13/ 90, 1.5/13/ 1, 16, 7/ 3/ ,27 2,4/ 3/ ,04 8.3/13/ 25, .5/ 2/ 1, 48.16 25, 88, .23 24,5 4,38 30,87 1271,4 14,15 ,26) .581 ( 1 .55) 1,11 ( 1 ,25) 3,95 ( 2 ,03) 27,83 ( 20 ,52) 1146,33 ( 054 .50) 12,76 ( 9 656) .524 ( 1,375 ( 48,56) ,885 ,0773 ( .0576) ,1771 ( ,0803) ,28) ,49) ,95) ,75) ,82) ,51) 861) PART. S/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .31 (.23) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 84.17 (2972,0) ------- TABLE E-17. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT PROJECT NO, U-Stnm-OOl ENGINE NO'.D20 ENGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE S.b LfStib. CID) L-b CVS NO. lo BAROMETER Jlb'bn MM HG(2q'.OP IN HO) DRY BULB TEMP. ?s'.0 DEC C(77'.0 DEG F) BAG RESULTS' BAG NUM&ER BLOWER DIF p MM. naodN. H20) BLOWER JNLET P MM, H20(IN, H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG'. C(DEG. F5 BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW SID'. CU. METRES(SCF) HC SAMpLE HC BCKQRD CO SAMPLE CO BCKrjftD C02 SAMPLE C02 BCKGRD rn NOX SAMPLE _ NOX BCKGRD MfTER/RANGE/PPM MpTER/RANGE/PPM MpTER/RANGE/PPM MfTER/RANGE/PPM MpTER/RANGE/PCT MpTER/RANGE/PCT MFTER/RANGE/PPM MFTER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM COS CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS COS MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LR) KW HR (HP HFM BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HRJ BSNOX G/KW Hp (G/HP HR) BSFC KGVKW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 BAG3 TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) ..-- . -,--- BSHC d/KW HR (G/HP HR) S. ,1S .H3 ,859 ( 30,34) . ------- ENGINE NC ENGINE MOoEL 80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL ENGINE 9.b LfSHb. CIO) Lb CVS NO. lb BAROMETER 73blbQ MM HG(29'.00 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP. pb'.l DEG C(79.0 DEC F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER BLOWER 6IF P MM. H20(IN. H20) BLOWER INLET P MM, H2onN, H20) BLOWER JNLET TEMP. DEG'. C(D£6. F) BLOWER DEVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS. . TOTAL FLOW STD. cu. METRES(SCF) HC SAMpLE MFTER/RANGE/PPM HC BCKGRD MFTER/RANGE/PPM co SAMPLE MFTER/RANGE/PPM co BCKKRD MFTER/RANGE/PPM co2 SAMPLE MFTER/RANGE^PCT co2 BCKQRD MFTER/RANGE/PCT m NOX SAMPLE MFTER/RANGE/PPM i NOX RCKGRD MFTER/RANGE/PPM o DILUTION FACJOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONpENT.R\|TlON PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MAS) GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASj GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KW HR (HP HR1 BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G;KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW H§ (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 BAGS TOTAL KM HR (HP HR) 1,92 ( BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 2,85 ( BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 23.** ( BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 411. ( BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 7.39 ( BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) '.lib I Part. G/KW-HR (6/HP-Hr) .63 (.47) TABLE E-18. ENGTNE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT TEST N0.22-2B RUN DATE 10/17/80 TIME 11110 DYNO NO, S PROJECT NO, H-S011-001 DIESEL EM.<»b(-F BA6 CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-SJ, PCT , CVS-faO, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 11.b GM/KG( 81.3 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F, 1.0000 b'.bO) 2.11) 5.51) ,7lb) bSOJ2 (25. b) 518,2 {20.1) 18.9 (120.0) Sb95, 272,7 271.3 t 1581.) t.7/22/ 38, B.7/ I/ S, 5S.1/1/ 120, ,5/lfc/ 1, 20, 7/ ]/ .33 3. I/ I/ ,05 7,1/13/ 22, ,9/ I/ 1. 38. 3 30, lib- .28 21^3 l',bb 3b.SO 1101.9 ij'.os .b13 ( 1 1.12 ( 1 3'29 2 25.77 19 991.91 739 7.80 5 '.151 , b50.2 (25. b) 518.2 (20.1) 11.9 (120.0) bOlO. 287,8 28b,3 (10111.) 7,b/22/ 38, B,b/ I/ 9, bS,l/12/ 115, .S/12/ 1, 23, 7/ 3/ .39 1.5/ 3/ ,05 B.1/13/ 25. ,B/ 2/ 1. 31,25 2. HI, ,33 2»,3 I.Bb 1b,88 1715.9 13.30 .12) .813 ( I.Bb) .90) 2.11 ( 9.81) ,1b) 2,31 { 1.72) .22) 22,26 ( lb,S9) ,b9) 828, bB ( bl7,95) .82) b,31 ( 1,71) 717) ,100 ( ,fa57) bS0.2 (25, b) 518,2 (20,1) 18.9 (120,0) Ib95, 272,7 271,1 ( 9SB1.) 7,3/22/ 17. B,l/ I/ 8. 51.1/12/ 109, ,5/12/ 1. 21, O/ M ,31 3, I/ 3/ .05 8.0/13/ 21, ,B/ 2/ 1, 37, 9b 2^, lOb, ,29 21,1 SSI 13,38 1130.1 12,01 ,bS7 1 1.10 1 3.22 2 23, 8b 17 1022,72 7b2 8.59 b ,'»70 .»5) .88) .10) .80) .bS) .10) 773) PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 3 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HA (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/Kfl FUEL (0/LB FUEL) ,8b ,9b ,1^ .»» 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLO SCM(SCF) ,8b2 ( 30,»3) ( ,157) ( ,203b) 56,21 (1951,2) ------- TABLE E-19. ENGINE NO.020 ENGINE MODEL rtO VOLVU DUAL t:ULL ENGINE 9.6 L (5B6. CIO) L-6 CVS NO. 10 BAROMETER 7S3.ll MM HG129.65 IN MG) DRY UUIR TFMP. 24.4 OEC CI76.U OFG F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBFR BLOWER DIF ¥ BLOWER INLET BLOWER INLET MM. H201IN. H20) P MM. ri20( IN. H2U) TEMP. DEC. CtUtG. F) BLOVtER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STO. CU. KETRES(SCF) m ro HC HC CO CO C02 C02 NOX NOX SAMPLE BCKGRD SAMPLE BCKGRO SAMPLE BCKGRD SAMPLE BCKGRD KtTEK/RANGE/PPM METER/KANGE/PPM METER/kANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM MEHK/RANGE/PCT METER/KANGE/PCT METER/RANGt/PPM METER/kANGE/PPM ~ DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (Lfi) KW HR (HP HR) BSHC C/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX C/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW M (LB/HP Hk) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP Hk ) 4.81 ESHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 2.92 BSCO G/KVi HR (G/HP HR) 23,77 BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 9B4. BSNOX G/Kb Hk (G/HP HRJ 8.74 BSFC KG/KH HR ILB/HP HR) .461 6.45! 2.18} 17.739 734. ) 6.52! .7573 ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS HOT TRANSIENT PROJECT NO. 11-5044-001 TEST DATE TIME OYNO N0.22-2H RUN 10/30/aO NO. 5 DIESEL EM-465-F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY t ENGINE-54. PCT , CVS-20. PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.4 GM/KGl 72.9 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0000 685.8 127.0) 525.8 (20.7) 48.9 (120.0) 5694. 272.7 277.6 ( 9803.) 2 685.8 127.0) 525.8 (20.7) 48.9 (120.0) 6011. 287.8 293.0 (10349.) 685.8 (27.0) 525.8 (20.7) 48.9 (120.0) 5693. 272.7 277.5 ( 9802.1 7.2/22X 36. 8.3/ I/ 8. 53.3/12/ 114. .5/12/ 1. 20. 21 3/ .33 2.7/ 3/ .04 7.7/13/ 23. .9/ 21 I. 39.42 28. 112. .28 22.1 4. 45 36.14 1447.7 11.73 ,674 J 1,49) 1.41 « 1,89) 3,16 2.36) 25.68 19.15) 1028.55 766. 99 j 8.33 6.2U .479 .7881 7.4/22/ 37. 7.7/ I/ 8. 62.6/12/ 139. .5/12/ 1. 23. 1/ 3/ .37 2.3/ 3/ .04 9.5/13/ 28. .!/ 21 0. 34.18 30. 136. .34 28.3 4.99 46. 32 1827.6 15.85 .879 1,949 2,05 2.75J 2.43 1,81J 22.56 16.82) 889.92 663.6XJ 7.72 5.75) .428 ,703) 7.3/22X 8.0/ I/ 47.9/12/ .6/12/ 20. I/ 3/ 2.5/ 3/ 9.1/13/ .21 21 39.77 29. 98. .29 27.2 4.58 31.80 1454.0 14.45 .661 1.35 3.41 23.63 1080.62 10.74 .491 36. B. 101. 1. .32 .04 27. 0. 1.46) 1.80) 2.54) 17.62) 805.82) 8.01) .807) PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 3 BAGS PART. 6/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .60 (.45) 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) SCMJSCF) G/TEST G/KW HR 4G/HP HR) G/KG FUEL JG/LB FUEL) .917 ( 32.37) .925 .1925 ( .1436) .4180 ( .1896) 57.59 (2033.9) ------- NE NO.D2C ENGINE KOHn. 80 VOLVO DUALFUEL FNIilNE 9, A I. (506, ClfD L-6 CV'J NO. 10 BAROMETER 74U.54 nh UG<29,47 IN KG) DRY BULB TchP, 22,0 flUC C(73,0 DEG F) DAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER BLOWER DIF P MM, H2CMIN, H20) £ ------- APPENDIX F TRANSIENT TEST RESULTS FROM THE ETHANOL-CATALYST CONFIGURATION ------- TABLE F-l. NOTES CONCERNING TEST RESULTS GIVEN IN APPENDIX F Table No. Ethanol & Catalyst & B.P. Notes Cold Start F-2 F-3 F-4 Hot Start F-5 F-6 F-7 Bus Cycle F-8 F-9 Preparations for runs with ethanol with catalyst and back- pressure device, included, resetting of diesel fuel flow at idle and efforts to reduce the driveline vibration which had increased significantly from the start of test work on this engine.. As a result of severe driveline vibration a larger torque meter (100K) was installed. Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -23.6 and power slope was 9 percent high. Results used for regulated emission. NOX by bag measurement was 7.51 g/kW-hr. Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -25.5. Cycle power was 15 percent below command cycle power. Results used for regulated emissions, NOx by bag measure- ment was 7.98 gAw-hr. Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -24.1. Results used for regulated emissions. NOx by bag measure- ment was 8.04 g/kW-hr. Failed statistical requirements, torque slope 1.086 and power slope 1.117. Results used for regulated emissions. NOx by bag measurement was 7.24 g/kW-hr. Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -15.7. Results used for regulated emissions. NOx by bag measurement was 7.59 gAW-hr. Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -18.0. torque and power R were .86 and .89 respectively. Results used for regulated emissions. Failed statistical requirements, torque R 0.872. Results used for regulated emissions. Failed statistical requirements, torque R2 0.0866. Results used for regulated emissions. F-2 ------- ENGINE NO.D23 ENGINE MODEL GO VOLVO HUALFUEL ENGINE 9,6 L(5G6, CUD L-6 CVS NO, 10 •BAROMETER 744,90 MM HG(29,33 IN HG5 DRY BULB TEMP, 22,2 DEO C(72,0 DEC F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIP P MM, H2CKIN, H20) BLOUER INLET P MM, 1120(IN, M20) BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEC, C(DEG, F) BLOUER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STB, CU, METRES(3CF) HC HC CO CO SAMPLE BCKGRD SAMPLE BCKGRD C02 SAMPLE C02 BCKGRD NOX-SAMPLE NGX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (L3) KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/MP HR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) B3C02 G/KW MR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KU HR (G/HP HR) B3FC KG/KU HR (LB/HP MR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 DAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP -HR) B3CO G/KU HR (G/HP MR) G/KW HR (G/HP HR) G/KU •- "•• BSC02 BSNOX BSFC (G/HP HR) KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) 11.62 ( ,67 ( 5,87 ( 1017, ( 7,70 ( ,466 ( TABLE F-2. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS -C-TRANS, TEST NQ.23-3C RUN1 DATE ll/ 6/30 TIME {!{}} DYNO NO. 5 PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001 15,5?) ,50) 4,37) 75B.) 5,74). ,766) DIESEL EH-465-F DAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY » EN6INE-60, PCT , CVS--32, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,2 GM/KG( 71,6 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000 1 NYNF 680,7 (26.8) 523,3 (20,3) 48,9 (120,0) 6102, 296,0 273,2 (10532.) 5.3/227 27, 9,0/ I/ 10., 49,2/127 104, ,5/12/ 1, 20, A/ 3/ ,33 3,2/ 3/ ,05 8,3/13/ 25, ,9/ 2/ 1, 38, C7 17. 101, ,28 23,9 2,92 35,17 1551,4 13,65 ,653 ( 1.44) 1,02 ( 1,37) 2,07 ( 2,14) 34,55 ( 25,77) 1523,96 (1136,42) 13,41 ( 10,00) ,642 ( 1,055) 2 LANF 680,7 (26, B) 523,3 (20,8) 42,9 (120,0) 6265, 300,0 302,2 (10673,) 4,3/22/ 22, 9,4/ I/ 9. 49.9/13/ 47, 1,1/137 1, 29,07 37 ,4D 3,07 37 .05 9.9/13/ 30, 1,0/27 1. 27,65 13, 45, ,43 28,7 2.19 15,90 2397,7 16,59 1,097 ( 2,42) 2,06 ( 2,77) 1,06 ( ,79) 7,71 ( 5,75). 1163,48 < 867,61) 8,04 ( 6,00) ,532 < .875) 3 LAF 680,7 (24.8) 528.3 (20,8) 48,9 (120,0) 6371. 305,0 307,3 (10354.) 4,2/227 21. 10. 0/ I/' 10, 29.2/13/ 26, i.1/13/ 1, 66, I/ 3/ 1.19' 2,97 37 ,04 25,0717V 75, l.O/ 2/ 1, 11,26 12, 25, 1.14 74,2 2,07 8,82 6442,0 43,59 3,051 ( 6,73) 7,39 < 9,91) ,23 ( ,21) 1,19 ( ,89) 871,54 ( 649,71) 5,90 ( 4,40) ,413 (. ,678) 4 NYNF 680,7 (26,8) 523,3 (20,0) 43,9 (120,0) 6202, 297,0 279,1 (10566.) 2.7/22/ 13, 7,37 17 10, 28.1/13/ 25, 1,47137 1, 19,07 3/ .30 3,07 37 ,05 9.5/13/ 28, l.l/ 2/ 1, 43,43 4. 24, ,26 27,3 i r.- t G.J 8,27 1423,6 15,62 ,615 ( 1 1,15 ( 1 ,56 ( 7,19 ( 5 1237,04 ( 922 13,57 ( 10 ,535 ( ,36) .54) ,42) ,36) ,46) .12) 879) PARTICULATE DATA TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90HM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST . MULTIPLIER FOR G/KU HR (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 1,237 ( 43,71) ,975 ,0839 ( ,0626) ( ,( ,1800 ,0017) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .34 (.25) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 83,40 (2945,6) ------- ENGINE NO.D20 ENGINE MODEL 30 VOLVO DUALFUEL ENGINE 9.6 L(506, CUD L-6 CVS NO, 10 BAROMETER 742,19 MM liG(29,22 IN HG) DRY SULB TEMP, 20,0 DUG C(43,0 DEC F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN, H20) BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN. H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F) SLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIhE SECONDS TOTAL FLDU STD. CU, METRES(SCF) TABLE F-3. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS C-TRANS, TEST NO.D23-1 RUN1 DATE 11/10/30 TIME jjjjj DYNO NO, 5 PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001 HC CAMPLE !!C BCKGRD CO CAMPLE CO DCKCRD C02 SAMPLE C02 BCKCRD NOX SAMPLE -n NOX EtCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANCE/PPM METLR/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM " DILUTION FACTOR IIC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMC C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KU HR (HP MR) BSHC G/KU h'R (G/HP HR) BSCO C/KU MR (G/HP HR) PSC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR) DSNOX G/KW IIR (G/HP HR) FSFC KG/KM HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TECT RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KU h'R (IIP HR) D5IIC G/KU HR (G/HP MR) BSCO G/KU h'R (G/HP KR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) PSNOX G/KW h'R (G/HP HR) HGFC KG/KU H.r< (LB/HP HR) 10,42 ( 13,98) ,81 ( ,61) 5.67 ( 4,23) 1036, ( 773.) 9.74 ( 7.26) .467 ( .767) DIECEL EM--465--F BAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY i ENGINE--62, PCT , CVS-46, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 9,2 GM/KG( 64,7 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000 1 NYNF 713,7 (28,1) 546,1 (21,5) 37,8 (100,0) 6130, 296,0 304,0 (10736,) 24,2/H/ 24, 9,3/ I/ 10, B7.9/13/ 89, 1.3/13/ 1, 19, O/ 3/ ,30 3, I/ 3/ ,05 9,6/13/ 29, ,0/ 2/ 1, 42,43 15, 86, ,26 28,0 2,56 30,34 1433,2 16.26 ,581 ( 1.28) ,96 ( 1,29) 2,65 ( 1,90) 31,45 ( 23,45) 1490,67 (1111,59) 16,86 ( 12,57) ,602 ( ,990) 2 LANF 713,7 (28,1) 546,1 (21,5) 37,8 (100,0) 6264, 300,0 308,1 (10382,) 22,B/11/ 23, 9,2/ I/ 9, 43.3/13/ 40, 1.1/13/ 1, 26, I/ 3/ ,43 2.0/ 3/ ,04 11.2/13/ 34, ,7/ 2/ 1, 30,95 14, 38, ,39 33,0 2,46 13,78 2174,2 19,46 ,980 ( 2.16) 1.90 ( 2,55) 1.29 ( .96) 7,24 ( 5,40) 1142,79 ( S52.18) 10,23 ( 7,63) ,515 ( ,847) 3 LAF 713,7 (28,1) 546,1 (21,5) 37,8 (100,0) 6370, 305,0 313,3 (11066.) 24,1/H/ 24, 9,3/ I/ 9, 26.2/13/ 24, 1.3/13/ 1, 59, 6/ 3/ 1,06 2,3/ 3/ ,04 27.5/13/ 82, ,6/ 2/ 1, 12,60 16, 22, 1,02 81,9 2,80 7,91 5849,9 49,07 2,735 ( 6,03) 6,55 ( S,7Q) ,43 ( ,32) 1,21 ( ,90) 893,62 ( 666,37) 7,56 ( 5,59) ,410 I ,607) 4 NYNF 713,7 (28,1) 546,1 (21,5) 37,8 (100,0) 6201, 296,9 305,0 (10772.) 12.3/11/ 12, 3,8/ I/ 9, 24.0/13/ 21, 1.4/13/ 1, 17, 7/ 3/ ,28 2,9/ 3/ ,04 9.7/13/ 29, ,6/ 2/ 1, 46,83 4, 20, ,24 28,7 ,64 7,06 1337,2 16,72 ,568 ( 1 1,01 ( 1 ,64 ( 6.99 ( 5 1324,05 ( 987 16,56 ( 12 ,563 ( ,25) ,35) ,48) ,21) ,34) ,35) 925) PARTICULATE DATAi TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS PART. G/KW-HR (S/HP-HR) .31 (.23) 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOU MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOU SCM(SCF) G/TEST G/KW HR (G/HP HR) G/KG FUEL (G/L£ FUEL) SCM(SCF) 1,234 ( 43,59) ,997 ,0956 ( ,0713) ,2049 ( ,0930) 82.10 (2899,9) ------- ENGINE NO.D20 ENGINE MODEL 80 VOLVO BUALFUEL ENGINE: 9,6 L(5S6, cno L-6 CVS NO, 10 BAROMETER 744,73 MM HC(29,32 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP, 21.1 DEG C(70,0 DEC F) BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIP P MM, H20(IN, H20) BLOWER INLET P MM, 1-120(IN, H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F) ELOUER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD, CU, METRES(SCF) HC HC CO CO METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM DCKGRD SAMPLE BCKGRD C02 SAMPLE C02 BCKGRB NOX SAMPLE NQX PCKGRD DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) ' KU HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP MR) BSCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) DSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KU HR (LB/MP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS A DAGS TOTAL KU HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KU KR (G/HP HR) BGNOX G/KW HR (G/HP MR) BSFC KG/KU HR (LE/HP HR) TABLE F-4. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS C-TK'ANS, TEST NO.D23-2 RUN1 DATE 11/11/00 TIME 9MO DYNQ NO, 5 PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001 10,73 ( 14,45) ,89 ( 5,42 ( 1022, ( 8,08 ( ,462 ( ,66) 4,04) 762.) (5,42) ,759) DIESEL EM-465-F BAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY r ENGINE-64, PCT > CVS--51. PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,1 GM/KG( 70,3 GRAING/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F, 1,0000 1 2 3 NYNF LANF LAF 678,2 (26,7) 670,2 (26,7) 678,2 (26,7) 525,3 (20,7) 525,3 (20,7) 525,3 (20.7) 51,7 (125,0) 51,7 (125,0) 51,7 (125,0) 6182, 6266, 6371. 295,9 299,9 305,0 296,0 (10456.) 300,0 (10593.) 305,1 (10775,) 27.8/21/ 28, 25.4/21/ 25, 25,9/217 26, 10,47 I/ 10, 10, O/ I/ 10, 10, 3/ I/ 10, 91.3/13/ 92, 42.4/13/ 39, 24.1/13/ 22, 1.0/13/ 1, 1,0/13/ 1. 1.0/137 1, 19,67 3/ ,31 26, 9/ 3/ ,44 61.7/.3/ 1,10 2,7/ 3/ ,04 2,7/ 3/ ,04 2,7/ 3/ ,04 8.6/13/ 26, 10,4/13/ 31, 27,5/13/ 83, ,Q/ 2/ 1, ,7/ 2/ 1, ,6/ 2/ 1, 41,02 29,96 12,17 13, 16, 16, 89, 38, 20, ,27 ,40 1,06 25,1 30,4 82,0 3,01 2,73 2,39 30,04 13,11 7,10 1438,6 2203,0 5916,2 14,19 17,47 47,87 ,613 ( 1,35) ,994 ( 2,19) 2,771 ( 6 ,99 ( 1,33) 1,97 ( 2,65) 6,77 ( 9 3,04 ( 2,26) 1,33 ( 1,03) ,43 ( 31,09 ( 23,18) 6,64 ( 4,95) 1,05 ( 1500,77 (1119,12) 1115,60 ( 831,90) 873,67 ( 651 14,31 ( 10,67) 8,05 ( 6,60) 7,07 ( 5 ,618 ( . 1,016) ,503 ( ,028) ,409 ( PARTI CULATE DATA? TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 70MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HR (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL) 4 NYNF 67B.2 (26,7) 525,8 (20,7) 51,7 (125,0) 6204, 296,0 297,1 (10492,) 15.1/21/ 15, 10, O/ I/ 10, 25.0/13/ 22, ,9/13/ 1, 1B,7/ 3/ ,30 2,8/ 3/ ,04 9.7/13/ 29. ,6/ 2/ 1, 44,18 IT O , 21, ,26 28,5 ,92 7,32 1402,4 16,17 ,11) ,597 ( 1 ,08) 1,04 ( 1 ,32) ,39 ( ,70) 7,06 ( 5 ,49) 1352,44 (1003 ,27) 15,59 ( 11 673) ,576 ( 1,250 ( 44,15) ,958 ,0890 ( ,0663) ,1926 ( ,0874) ,32) ,39) ,66) ,26) ,51) ,63) 947) PART. G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .38 (.28) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 81,60 (2882,2) ------- TABLE F-5. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS H-TRANS, PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001 ENGINE NO,H23 ENGINE MODEL 00 VOLVO DUALFUEL ENGINE 9,6 L(58i. CID) L-6 CVG NO, 10 PAROMETER 744,98 MM KG(29,33 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP, 26,7 DEG C(80.0 DEG F) BAG RESULTS HAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOUER DIF P MM, H20CJN, H20) BLOWER INLET P MM, II20(IN. H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD, CU. METRES(SCF) HC HC CO CO SAMPLE EiCKGRD SAMPLE BCKGRD C02 SAMPLE C02 BCKORD NOX SAMPLE NOX DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR ,'!C CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM MASS CRAMS c; HC CO C02 MASG GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS- FUEL KG (LB) KW IIR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/KP MR) BSCO G/KW MR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 DAGS 'OTAL KM HR (HP BSHC G/KW HR BSCO G/KU HR BSC02 G/KW HR BSNOX G/KU HR BGFC KG/KW IIR HR) (G/HP MR) (5/HP HR) (C/MP HR) (G/HP HR) (LB/HP HR) 11,95 ( ,46 < 4,12 ( 964, ( 8,19 < ,443 ( : 16,03) : ,34) , 3,07) : 719,) : 6,11) : ,727) TEST N0.23-5H DATE ll/ 6/30 TIME !,'::; DYNO NO, 5 RUN1 DIESEL EM--465--F SAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY t ENGINE-47, PCT i CVS-32, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,3 GM/KG< 72,4 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000 PART. 6/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .38 (.28) 1 2 3 NYNF LANF LAF 683,3 (26,9) 683,3 (26,9) 683,3 (26,9) 523,3 (20,8) 523,3 (20,3) 523,3 (20,8) 50,0 (122,0) 50,0 (122,0) 50,0 (122,0) 6131, 6264, 6372, 297,0 300,0 305.0 297,4 (10505.) 301,4 (10645,) 306,6 (10329.) 18.5/21/ 18, 17,0/21/ 17, 18.6/21/ 19, 10, O/ I/ 10, 9,0/ I/ 9, 8,2/ I/ 8, 59.2/13/ 57, 41.3/13/ 38, 30.1/13/ 27, •9/13/ 1, ,7/13/ 1, tG/13/ 1, 18, 8/ 3/ ,30 28, 1/ 3/ ,46 65, 0/ 3/ 1,18 3,2/ 3/ ,05 3,0/ 3/ ,05 2,Q/ 3/ ,04 7.6/13/ 23, 10.6/13/ 32, 30.6/13/ 92, 1,0/ 2/ 1. 1,0/ 2/ 1, 1,0/ 2/ 1, 43,40 28,67 11,32 9, 3, 11, 55, 37, 26, ,25 ,42 1,14 21,9 30,9 90,9 1,49 1,44 1,98 19,12 12,95 9,18 1330,5 2305,2 6401,0 12.44 17,79 53.29 .585 ( 1,29) 1,056 ( 2,33) 3,029 ( 6 1,15 ( 1,54) 2,20 ( 2,94) 7,44 ( 9 1,30 ( ,97) .66 ( ,49) ,27 ( 16,62 ( 12,39) 5.90 ( 4,40) 1,23 ( 1199,64 ( 894,58) 1050.06 ( 783,03) 859,81 ( 641 10,81 ( 0.06) 3,10 ( 6,04) 7,16 ( 5 ,508 ( ,835) ,481 ( ,791) ,407 ( PARTICULATE DATAr TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HR (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (6/LB FUEL) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 4 NYNF 683,3 (26, 528,3 (20, 50,0 (122 6202, 296,9 9) 3) ,0) 293,4 (10540.) 11.4/21/ 3, I/ I/ 26.S/13/ •9/13/ 19, O/ 3/ 2,3/ 3/ 8.7/13/ 1,0/ 2/ 43,48 3, 23, ,26 25,2 .60 7,98 1436,5 14,39 ,68) ,618 ,90) 1,16 ,20) ,52 ,92) 6,88 ,16) 1238,79 ,34) 12,41 669) ,533 1,261 ( 44,52) ,955 ,0799 < ,0596) ,1006 < ,0819) 83,26 (2940,6) 11, 3, 24, 1, ,30 ,04 26, 1, ( 1,36) ( 1,56) ( ,39) ( 5,13) ( 923,77) ( 9,26) ( ,877) ------- ENGINE NO,D20 ENGINE MODEL 00 VOLVO DUALFUEL ENGINE 9,6 L(536, CIB) 1-6 CVS NO, 10 BAROMETER 742,44 MM MG(29.23 IN HG) DRY BULB TEHP, 25,0 DEG C(77,0 DE6 F) DAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER .DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIP P MM, H20(IN, H20) BLOWER INLET P MM, 1120(IN, M20) BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW 3TD, CU, METREG(SCF) HC HC CO CO SAMPLE BCKGRD SAMPLE BCKGRD C02 SAMPLE CO2 BCKGRD NOX SAMPLE NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PF'M METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM ^ DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CD CONCENTRATION PPM C02.CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LD) KU MR (HP HR) ESHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) B3CO G/KU MR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 3SNOX G/KW MR (G/HP MR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) B3HC G/KU MR (G/HP MR) BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP MR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) D3FC KG/KU HR (LB/HP MR) TABLE F-6. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS - - H-TRANS, TEST NO.D23--1 RUN! DATE 11/10/30 TIME 15!,'} DYNO NO, 5 PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001 10,49 ( 14.04) ,64 ( 3,92 ( 994, ( 8,87 ( ,446 ( ,47) 2,92) 741.) 6,61) ,733) DIESEL EM-465-F BAG CART NO, 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY » ENDINE-52, PCT i CVS-17, PCT ABSOLUTE MUMIDITY 10,5 GM/KG( 73,7 GRAINS/LS) NOX MUMIDITY C.F, 1,0000 706 546 51 295 18, 9, 47, 1, 17, 3, 7, d 1 NYNF ,1 (27, ,1 (21, ,7 (125 6202, 297,0 8) 5) ,0) ,1 (10424.) A/117 67 I/ 0/13/ 7/13/ 4/ 3/ I/ 3/ B/13/ 17 2/ 47,18 9, 42, ,23 23,3 1,57 14,47 1250,4 13,17 ,485 1,03 1,53 14,08 1216,41 12,31 ,472 19, 10, 44, 1, ,28 ,05 23, 0, ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 10 ( 907 ( 9 ( 9 LANF 706,1 (27, 546,1 (21, C) 5) 51,7 (125,0) 6265, 300,0 298,1 (10530.) 20,7/117 9,4/ 17 37.6/13/ 1,6/137 25,47 37 2,37 37 10.2/13/ ,!/ 2/ 31,90 12, 33, ,37 30,6 2,00 11,36 2037,0 17,44 ,07) ,915 ,33) 1,91 ,14) 1,05 .50) 5,94 ,08) 1065,61 ,55) 9,12 776) ,479 PARTICIPATE DATA TOTAL 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 21, 9, 35, 1, ,41 ,04 31, 0, ( 2,02) ( 2,56) ( ,78) ( 4,43) ( 794,62) ( 6,80) < ,707) FOR 4 BAGS SCMCSCF) G/TEST G/KU HR 3 LAF 706,1 (27,0) 546,1 (21 ,5) 4 NYNF 706,1 (27, 546,1 (21, 51,7 (125,0) 6371, 305,0 303,2 (10703.) 23.7/11/ 10, O/ I/ 27,3/13/ 1.3/13/ 60, S/ 3/ 2,0/ 3/ 27.1/13/ ,!/ 2/ 12,37 15, 23, 1,04 81,4 2,55 0,08 5771,6 47,18 2,696 6,54 ,39 1,24 802,87 7i 22 ,412 (G/HP MR) 24, 10, 25, 1, 1.08 - ,04 81, 0, ( 5 ( 3 ( ( ( 658 ( 5 ( , ,94) ,77) ,29) ,92) ,36) ,30) 678) 1,267 ,941 51 ,7 (125 6203, 296,9 8) 5) ,0) 295,2 (10426,) 12, 9, 24, 1, 18, 2, 9, 4 9/117 9/ 11 9/1 3/ 3/137 37 37 7/ 3/ 0/13/ I/ 2/ 45,21 3, 21, ,25 27,0 ,56 7,21 1365,1 15,23 ,579 1,01 ,55 7,14 1351,76 ( ,0897 ( G/KG FUEL (G/LE FUEL) ,2013 ( 15,03 ,573 44,73) ,0669) ,0913) 13, 10, 22, 1, ,29 ,04 27, 0, ( 1 ( 1 ( ( 5 (1008 ( 11 C t ,28) ,35) ,41) ,32) ,01) ,24) 942) PART. G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .39 (.29) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 81,58 (2801,2) ------- ENGINE NO,020 ENGINE MODEL 00 VOLVO DUALFUEL ENGINE 9,6 L(586, CUD L-6 CVS NO, 10 BAROMETER 744,73 MM HG(29,32 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP, 25,6 DEC C(7G,0 DEC F) BAG RESULTS FAG NUMBER DESCRIPTION BLOWER DIF P MM, H20(IN, M20) BLOWER INLET P MM, !I20(IN, M20) BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F) BLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW CTD, CU, METRES(SCF) HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM HC BCKCRD METER/RAMGE/PF'M CO .SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM CO BCKCRD METER/RANCE/PPM C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT ^ NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM 7 NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM IIC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KU HR (HP MR) BSHC 6/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW MR (G/HP IIR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) PSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TABLE F-7. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS H-TRANS, TEST NO.D23-2 RUN1 DATE 11/11/30 TIME 10J25 DYNO NO. 5 PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001 oo TOTAL TEST RESULTS A BAGS TOTAL KU MR (HP HR) BSCO BSC02 BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR) G/KW HR (G/KP HR) G/KW H,r< (G/HP HR) G/KW HR (G/HP HR) 10.58 ( 14,18) ,70 ( 4.00 ( 994. 8.74 ( ,449 < i K'C/KW IIR (LD/HP HR) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .39 (.29) .53) 2.99) 741.) 6.52) .737) DIESEL EM-465-F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-50. PCT » CVS--43, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.3 GM/KG( 72.2 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0000 1 2 3 NYNF LANF LAF 680,7 (26,8) 680,7 (26,0) 680,7 (26,0) 525.8 (20,7) 525.3 (20,7) 525.8 (20,7) 51.7 (125.0) 51,7 (125.0) 51,7 (125,0) 6132, 6266, 6372, 296.0 300.0 305,0 295,9 (10452.) 299,9 (10594.) 305,0 (10773.) 20.1/21/ 20. 21.9/21/ 22. 25.0/21/ 25, 10, I/ I/ 10, 9,9/ I/ 10, 10, O/ I/ 10, 51.0/13/ 48, 37.2/13/ 34. 26.2/13/ 24. 1.0/13/ 1. 1.3/13/ 1. 1.5/13/ 1, 17, 8/ 3/ ,28 24, 9/ 3/ ,41 61, 2/ 3/ 1,09 3. 1/ 3/ ,05 2,7/ 3/ .04 2,7/ 3/ .04 7.6/13/ 23, 9.8/13/ 30, 27,3/13/ 82, ,8/ 2/ 1. .6/2/1, ,6/ 2/ 1, 46,01 32,57 12,28 10, 12, 16, 46, 32, 22, ,24 ,37 1,05 22,1 28,9 81,5 1,74 2,13 2.78 15,99 11,29 7,65 1290,2 2009,6 5859,2 12,53 16,60 47,53 ,533 ( 1,17) ,898 ( 1,98) 2,736 ( 6 1.06 < 1.43) 1.85 ( 2.48) 6,65 ( 3 1,64 ( 1.22) 1.15 ( ,86) .42 ( 15.03 ( /11.21) 6.11 ( 4.55) 1,15 ( 1212.62 ( 904.25) 1087.17 ( 810.70) 880,49 ( 656 11,77 ( 8,73) 0,93 ( 6,70) 7,14 ( 5 ,501 ( ,823) .406 ( .799) ,411 ( PARTICULATE DATA. TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS 90MM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW SCH(SCF) MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HR (G/HP HR) MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LE FUEL) 4 NYNF 680.7 (26,8) 525,3 (20,7) 51,7 (125,0) 6203, 297,0 296,9 (10488.) 14.2/21/ 14. 9.7/ I/ 10, 26.0/13/ 23, 1.7/13/ 1, 18, O/ 3/ ,29 2,6/ 3/ ,04 9.4/13/ 20, ,5/ 2/ 1, 45.96 5, 21, ,25 27,7 ,31 7,43 1353,9 15,75 ,03) ,577 ( 1,27) ,92) 1,01 ( 1,35) ,31) ,80 ( ,60) .86) 7,35 ( 5,48) ,50) 1340,64 ( 999,72) ,33) 15,60 ( 11,63) 676) ,571 ( ,939) 1,274 ( 45.01) ,940 ,0839 ( .0663) .1981 ( ,0899) 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) 81,28 (2870.9) ------- ENGINE NO.D20 ENGINE MODEL 30 VOLVO DUALFUEL ENGINE 9,6 L(5Gi, CUD L--6 CVS NO, 10 BAROMETER 742,44 MM HG(29,23 IN HG) DRY BULB TEMP, 23,? DEC C(75,0 DEC F! BAG RESULTS BAG NUMBER BLOWER DIP P MM, H20(IN, H20) BLOWER INLET P MM, 1120(IN, K20) BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEO, C£> HC SAMPLE HC BCKGRI'i CO SAMPLE CO BCKGRD C02 SAMPLE C02 BCKGRD NOX SAMPLE NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM METER7RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANCE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS CRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KW .HR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KU MR (G/MP MR) BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP MR) 3SNOX G/KW MR (G/HP MR) BSFC KG/KW HR 6000, 207,7 286,4 U0114.) 600,7 (26,0) 525,8 (20,7) 51,7 (125,0) 5693, 272,6 271,3 ( 9584,) 17, 8, 42, 20'! 2, S, 1, 7/n/ 9/ I/ Q/13/ 3/13/ 9/ 3/ B/ 3/ 9/13/ 3/ 2/ 18, 40, 0, ,34 ,04 27, 1, 17 9 46 2o 11 1 ,9/li/ ,?/ I/ ,9/13/ .,1/13/ ,9/ 3/ ,S/ 3/ ,3/13/ ,3/ 2/ 10, 44, 0, .,41 ,04 34, 1, 31 21 •j 9 !?/13/ l6/ 3/ ,8/ 3/ ,9/13/ ,3/ 2/ 10, 29, 0, ,34 ,04- 30, 39,11 32,5 39,05 39, ,30 25,4 1,42 12,22 1467,5 13,16 ,614 ( 1,27 < i , 1 1 ( 9,61 ( 1154,28 ( 10,37 < .483 ( 1,33) 1,70) ,83) 7,16) 860,74) 7,73) ,794) 43, ,36 32,7 1,37 14,29 1910,8 17,90 ,876 ( 1,93 ( ,69 ( 7,20 ( 963,21 ( 9,02 ( ,441 < 1,93) 2,66) ,52) 5,37) 718,27) 6,73) ,726) 23, ,30 23,4 1,07 3. 93 1475,5 14,72 ,637 ( 1,25 ( ,85 ( 7,13 ( 1177,27 ( 11,75 < .508 ( 1,40) 1,63) ,63) 5,32) 877,39) 8,76) .835) PARTICULATE DATA* TOTAL FOR 3 BAGS PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) ,38 (=283 90MM FILTER- SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) SCM(SCF) G/TEST G/KW HR (G/HP HR) B/KG FUEL {0/LB FUEL) ,877 ( 30,96) ,946 ,2093 ( ,1565) ,4449 < ,2018) 55,52 (1961,0) ------- ENGINE NO.D20 ENGINE MODEL 30 VOLVO DUALFUEL ENGINE 9,6 LC5C6, CID) L~4 CVS NO, 10 BAROMETER 742,44 MM HG(29,23 IN HG) DRY SULB TEMP, 26.7 DEC C<30<0 DEC F) PAG RESULTS PAG NUMBER ['LOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN, 1120) BLOWER INLET P MM. II20CIN, H20) BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC, C(DEG, F) FLOWER REVOLUTIONS TIME SECONDS TOTAL FLOW STD, CD, METRES(SCF) HC SAMPLE HC BCKGRD CO SAMPLE CO BCKGRD C02 SAMPLE C02 BCKGRD NOX SAMPLE NOX DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM METERVRANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PCT METER/RANGE/PPM METER/RANGE/PPM 0 DILUTION FACTOR HC CONCENTRATION PPM CO CONCENTRATION PPM C02 CONCENTRATION PCT NOX CONCENTRATION PPM HC MASS GRAMS CO MASS GRAMS C02 MASS GRAMS NOX MASS GRAMS FUEL KG (LB) KU IIR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/KP HR) BSCO G/KU IIR (G/HP IIR) BSC02 G/KW IIR (G/HP HR) B3NOX G/KW HR (G/MP HR) BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 BAGS TOTAL KU MR (HP HR) BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR) BSCO G/KW IIR (G/KP HR) BCC02 G/K'J lift (G/MP HR) PSNOX G/KU HR (G/HP HR) BSrC KG/KW MR (LB/MP HR) PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) .36 4,51 ,84 8,44 1097, 10,68 i ,405 (.27) TABLE F-9. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS H-TRANS, TEST NO.D23-2L' RUN1 DATE 11/10/30 TIME jj.'j; BYNO NO, 5 PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001 6,05) ,43) 6,29) 020.) 7,96) ,797) DIESEL EM-465-F BAG CART NO. 1 RELATIVE HUMIDITY » ENGINE-4G, PCT > CVC-45, PCT ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,i GH/KB( 74,3 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C,F. 1.0000 1 430.7 (26,8) 525.8 (20.7) 51,7 (125,0) 5694, 272,6 271.4 ( 9587.) 480,7 (26.3) 525,8 (20.7) 51,7 (125.0) 6008, 287,7 284,4 (10116.) 3 430.7 (24,8) 525,G (20.7) 51,7 (125.0) 5694. 272.7 271,4 ( 9507.) 18 9 50 21 3 9 1 ,6/1 I/ ,0/ I/ ,4/13/ ,3/ 3/ ,2/ 3/ ,2/13/ ,5/ 2/ 38.25 10, 44, ,30 24,1 1,55 14>52 1471,7 13,56 ,629 1,23 1,21 11,34 1149,38 10,59 ,491 19, 9, 47, 1, ,34 ,05 23, 2, ( 1 ', 1 ( ( 8 ( 857 ( 7 ,39) ,72) ,90) ,46) ,09) ,90) 17 9 49 25 £. 12 1 ( ,807) ,1/11/ ,B/ I/ ivi3/ >5/ 3/ • 8/ 3/ ,0/13/ ,4/ 2/ 31,71 8, 45. ,37 34,5 1,25 14,98 1966,0 13,92 ,900 1,97 ,63 7,59 995,59 9,53 ,456 17, 10, 46, 0. ,42 ,04 36, 1, ( 1 ( 2 / I 5 i 742 ( 7 / , ,98) ,65) ,47) ,44) ,41) ,14) 749) 14 8 30 21 2 10 1 ,2/ll/ ,0/ I/ »Q/13/ ,4/13/ ,5/ 3/ ,8/ 3/ ,5/13/ ,4/ 2/ 33,14 6, 27, ,31 30,2 1,00 3,53 1518,6 15,46 ,657 1,25 ,80 6,80 1211,42 12,50 ,524 14, 8, 28, 0, .35 ,04 32, 1, I ( ( ( 1,45) 1,68) ,40) 5,07) I 903,51) ( 9,32) ,862) PARTICULATE DATA* TOTAL FOR 3 BAGS 90HM FILTER SAMPLE FLOW MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR MULTIPLIER FOR 20 X 20 FILTERS SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF) G/TEST G/KW HR (G/HP HR) G/KB FUEL (G/LB FUEL). SCM(SCF) ,001 ( 31,11) ,941 ,2033 ( ,1557) ,4307 ( ,1954) 55,43 (1965,0) ------- TECHNICAL REPORT DATA (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing) 1. REPORT NO. EPA '460/3-81-023 2. 3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO. 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Emission Characterization of an Alcohol/Diesel-Pilot Fueled Compression Ignition Engine and its Heavy-Duty Diesel Counterpart 5. REPORT DATE August 1981 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE 7. AUTHOR(S) Terry L.Oilman and Charles T. Hare 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO. 9. PERFORMING ORG "VNIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS Southwest Research Institute 6220 Culebra Road San Antonio, Texas 78285 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO. 11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO. 68-03-2884 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS Environmental Protection Agency Mobile Source Air Pollution Control 2565 Plymouth Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105 13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED Final (Aug. 1980 - Aug. 198H 14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 16. ABSTRACT This report describes results from emissions testing of a prototype diesel engine, developed by Volvo Truck Corporation of Sweden, which uses pilot injection of diesel fuel for compression ignition of alcohol fuel injected for main combustion. In addition to this dual-fuel engine, emission testing was also conducted on a heavy-duty diesel engine of similar design. Both engines were tested over the 1979 13-mode FTP, or shorter versions of this modal test, and over the 1984 Transient FTP as well as an experimental bus cycle. The dual-fuel engine was characterized with methanol, ethanol and ethanol with 30 percent water (wt %) . An oxidation catalyst was also used with methanol and ethanol. Emission characterization included regulated emissions (HC, CO, and NOx) along with total particulate, unburned alcohols, individual hydrocarbons, aldehydes, phenols, and odor. The particulate matter was characterized in terms of particle size distribution, sulfate content, C, H, S, metal content, and soluble organic fraction. The soluble organic fraction was studied by determining its elemental composition (C,H,S,N), boiling point distribution, BaP content, relative make-up of polar compounds, and bioactivity by Ames testing. 17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS DESCRIPTORS b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS c. COSATI Field/Group Air Pollution Alcohol-Diesel Exhaust Emissions Methanol-Diesel Ethanol-Diesel Oxidation-Catalyst Heavy-Duty Diesel Exhaust Emissions Transient Test Federal Test Procedure Pilot Injection Bus Cycle 13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT Release Unlimited 19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report) Unclassified 21. NO. OF PAGES 235 20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage) Unclassified 22. PRICE EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73) -------

            United States
            Environmental Protection
            Agency
               Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
               Emission Control Technology Division
               2565 Plymouth Road
               Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
EPA-460/3-81-023
August 1981
            Air
c/EPA
Emission  Characterization of an
Alcohol/Diesel-Pilot Fueled
Compression-Ignition  Engine and
Its Heavy-Duty Diesel Counterpart

-------
                               EPA-460/3-81-023
  Emission Characterization of an
    Alcohol/Diesel-Pilot Fueled
 Compression-Ignition  Engine and
Its Heavy-Duty Diesel Counterpart
                      by

              Terry L. Ullman and Charles T. Hare

               Southwest Research Institute
                  6220 Culebra Road
                San Antonio, Texas 78284

                 Contract No. 68-03-2884
                  Task Specification 6

              EPA Project Officer: Robert J. Garbe
        Task Branch Technical Representative: Thomas M. Baines


                    Prepared for

            ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
            Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
              Emission Control Technology Division
                  2565 Plymouth Road
                Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105


                    August 1981

-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to report
technical data of interest to a limited number of readers.   Copies are
available free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors and
grantees, and nonprofit organizations - in limited quantities - from
the Library Services Office (MD-33),  Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711; or, for a fee, from the National Technical  Information
Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by
Southwest Research Institute, 6220 Culebra Road,  San Antonio,  Texas, in
fulfillment of Task Specification 6 of Contract No.  68-03-2884.  The
contents of this report are reproduced herein as  received from Southwest
Research Institute.  The opinions, findings,  and  conclusions expressed
are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Environmental
Protection Agency.  Mention of company or product names is not to be
considered as an endorsement by the Environmental Protection Agency.
                    Publication Mo.  EPA-460/3-81-023
                                   11

-------
                                FOREWORD

     The project on which this report is based was initiated by Task
Specification No. 6 of EPA Contract 68-03-2884, received by SwRI on
August 1, 1980.  The contract was for "Basic Characterization Support
for the Emission Control Technology Division."  Task Specification No.
6 of that contract was specifically for the "Characterization of Emis-
sions from Volvo Heavy-Duty Diesel and Diesel/Alcohol Engines."  The
work was identified within SwRI as Project No. 11-5830-006.

     The Project Officer and the Branch Technical Representative for
EPA's Technology Assessment Branch during the Task Specification were
Mr. Robert J. Garbe and Mr. Thomas M. Baines, respectively.  SwRI Pro-
ject Director was Mr. Karl J. Springer, and SwRI Project Manager was
Mr. Charles T. Hare.  The SwRI Task Leader and principal investigator
for the Task Specification No. 6 effort was Mr. Terry L. Ullman.  Lead
technical personnel were Mr. Richard L. Mechler and Mr. Clay D. Suhler.

     We would like to express our appreciation to Volvo Truck Corporation
of Sweden for supplying both the production diesel engine and the proto-
type alcohol engine, with diesel pilot injection.  We especially appre-
ciate the direction and assistance of Mr. Ernst Holmer and Mr. Bert-Inge
Bertilsson of Volvo.
                                   111

-------
                                ABSTRACT

      The uncertainty  of petroleum-based fuel availability has created  a
 need for diversifying  into alternative fuels.  Volvo Truck Corporation
 of Sweden has  developed a prototype dual-fuel truck-size diesel engine
 with diesel  fuel pilot injection for compression-ignition and subsequent
 alcohol  injection  for  main combustion.  This approach is attractive because
 it requires  no new technology, and because the energy efficiency of the
 engine  is retained essentially intact while consuming low-octane fuels.
 Exhaust  emissions  from this prototype dual-fuel engine were characterized
 with methanol,  ethanol, and ethanol with 30 percent water (wt%).  In
 addition,  the  effects  of an oxidation catalyst on methanol and ethanol
 exhaust  were investigated.  Emissions were also measured for a heavy-duty
 diesel engine  of similar design.

      Emission  characterization included regulated emissions (HC, CO, and
 NOX)  along with total  particulate, unburned alcohols, individual hydro-
 carbons,  aldehydes, phenols, and odor.  The particulate matter was charac-
 terized  in terms of particle size distribution, sulfate content, C, H,
 S, metal  content,  and  soluble organic fraction.  The soluble organic frac-
 tion  was  further studied by determining its elemental composition  (C,H,
 S,N), boiling point distribution, BaP content, relative make-up of polar
 compounds, and bioactivity by Ames testing.

      Exhaust emissions from the various test configurations were charac-
 terized over the 1979  13-mode Federal Test Procedure (FTP), or shorter
 versions of this modal test, and over the 1984 Transient FTP-  In addi-
 tion, regulated gaseous and particulate emissions were determined over  an
 experimental bus cycle developed from CAPE-21 bus data.

     Particulate and NOX emissions were significantly reduced; whereas
 hydrocarbons and CO increased with the use of the alcohol fuels as com-
pared to the diesel engine.  Levels of aldehyde emissions were also higher
with the alcohol fuel,  and significant quantities of unburned alcohol
were detected.   The catalyst reduced unburned alcohols, HC, and CO emis-
 sions, but had little effect on total particulate as compared to levels
 noted for the alcohol test configurations (methanol and ethanol) without
 catalyst.  The catalyst caused substantial conversion of the fuel sulfur
 (in the pilot injected diesel fuel)  to sulfate.  Emission levels and trends
 for the ethanol+water configuration were similar to those for the methanol
 configuration.
                                   IV

-------
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD                                                             iii

ABSTRACT                                                              iv

LIST OF FIGURES                                                      vii

LIST OF TABLES                                                        ix

I.     INTRODUCTION                                                    1

II.    SUMMARY                                                         3

III.   TEST PLANS AND DESCRIPTION OF ENGINES, FUELS AND PROCEDURES     9

       A.   Proposed Test Plan                                         9
       B.   Description of Test Engines                               11
       C.   Description of Test Fuels                                 16
       D.   Test Procedures                                           20
       E.   Analytical Procedures                                     28
            1.   Gaseous Emissions                                    28
            2.   Particulate Emissions                                33
            3.   Soluble Organic                                      35

IV.    RESULTS                                                        39

       A.   Preliminary Results and General Test Notes                39
       B.   Gaseous Emissions                                         46
            1.   HC, CO, and NOX                                      47
                 a.   13-mode FTP                                     47
                 b.   Transient FTP                                   51
                 c.   Bus Cycle                                       53
            2.   Selected Individual Hydrocarbons                     53
            3.   Unburned Alcohols                                    59
            4.   Aldehydes                                            59
            5.   Phenols                                              62
            6.   Total Hydrocarbons - FID Response                    69
            7.   Odor - TIA                                           78
       C.   Particulate Emissions                                     78
            1.   Total Particulate                                    81
            2.   Smoke                                                85
            3.   Sulfate                                              87
            4.   Elemental Composition                                91
            5.   Particle Size Distribution                           94
            6.   Soluble Organic Fraction                             95
                                  v

-------
                        TABLE  OF  CONTENTS (Cont'd)
                 a.    Elemental Composition
                 b.    Boiling  Point  Distribution
                 c.    Fractionation  by Relative Polarity
                 d.    Benzo(a)pyrene
                 e.    Ames  Response
REFERENCES

APPENDICES
                                   102
                                   102
                                   103
                                   109
                                   110

                                   116
       A.    Thirteen-Mode  FTP Test
       B.    Transient Test Results
       C.    Transient Test Results
       D.    Transient Test Results
            Configuration
       E.    Transient Test Results
       F.    Transient Test Results
            Configuration
Results - All Configurations
from the Diesel Configuration
from the Methanol Configuration
from the Methanol-Catalyst

from the Ethanol Configuration
from the Ethanol-Catalyst
                                  VI

-------
                              LIST OF FIGURES

Figure                                                            Page

  1       Volvo TD-100C Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck Engine              12

  2       Volvo TD-100A Heavy-Duty Dual-Fuel Truck Engine           12

  3       Arrangement of the Injection Pumps on the Dual-Fuel
          Volvo TD-100A                                             13

  4       The Cylinder Head with Two Injectors                      13

  5       The Fuel Jets in the Combustion Chamber                   14

  6       Installation of Catalyst with Backpressure Device         15

  7       Volvo Exhaust Backpressure Device used with Catalyst      17

  8       Graphic Representation of Torque and Speed Commands for
          the 1984 Transient FTP Cycle based on a Power Map of the
          Volvo TD-100C Diesel  Engine                               23

  9       Graphic Representation of Torque and Speed Commands for
          the Bus Cycle based on a Power Map of the Volvo TD-100C
          Diesel Engine                                             25

 10       Basic Layout of Transient Cycle Heavy-Duty Diesel CVS
          with Large Double Dilution Sampler for Three 20x20
          Inch Filters                                              26

 11       Sample Collection End of Large Single Dilution CVS
          Tunnel                                                    27

 12       Soxhlet Extraction of Particulate for Soluble Organic
          Fraction                                                  36

 13       Catalyst Warm-up Profiles With and Without a Backpressure
          Device During Transient FTP Operation                     45

 14       illustration of Diesel Pilot and Alcohol Fuel Injection
          Schedules Measured During 13-Mode FTP                     50

 15       Modal Particulate from the Volvo Test Engines             83

 16       Modal Sulfate Rates from the Volvo Test Engines           89

 17       Particle Size Distribution from Modal Operation of the
          Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine on Methanol                96
                                  VI1

-------
                        LIST OF  FIGURES (Cont'd)
Figure
 18       Particle Size  Distribution from Modal Operation of the
          Volvo TD-100A  Dual-Fuel  Engine  with Methanol and
          Catalyst                                                  97

 19       Average of Particle  Size Distribution from Modal
          Operation of the  Volvo TD-100A  Dual-Fuel Engine on
          Methanol and Methanol with Catalyst                       98

 20       Particle Size  Distribution from Transient Operation of
          the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine                         99

 21       HPLC Response  to  Cold-Start Diesel  Transient SOF         104

 22       HPLC Response  to  Hot-Start Diesel Transient SOF          104

 23       HPLC Response  to  Cold-Start Methanol Transient SOF       105

 24       HPLC Response  to  Hot-Start Methanol Transient SOF        105

 25       HPLC Response  to  Cold-Start Methanol-Catalyst Transient
          SOF                                                      106

 26       HPLC Response  to  Hot-Start Methanol-Catalyst Transient
          SOF                                                      106

 27       HPLC Response  to  Hot-Start Ethanol-Catalyst Transient
          SOF                                                      107
                                 Vlll

-------
                              LIST OF TABLES

Table                                                              Page

  1       Summary of Composite Emission Rates from the Volvo-
          TD-100C Diesel Engine and the Volvo TD-100A Diesel
          Pilot/Alcohol Engine                                       4

  2       Planned Emission Measurements for Characterization of
          Volvo Test Engine                                         10

  3       Specifications for the Volvo Series TD-100 Engine         11

  4       Analysis of Amoco 2D Emissions Fuel, EM-465-F             18

  5       Dupont Specification and Typical Analysis of
          Methanol Fuel, EM-469-F                                   19

  6       "Synasol" Solvent Union Carbide Specification and
          Analysis of Ethanol Fuel, EM-466-F                        19

  7       Properties of Fuels Used in the Volvo Program             20

  8       Listing of 13-Mode and 7-Mode Weighting Factors            21

  9       FID Relative Sensitivities                                30

 10       Preliminary Test Results from Volvo TD-100A Dual-
          Fuel Engine                                               41

 11       Heavy-Duty Diesel Regulated Emission Limits,  1979-1986     47

 12       Gaseous Emission Summary from 13-Mode Operation  of the
          Volvo Test Engines                                        48

 13       Regulated Emissions Summary from Transient FTP
          Operation of the Volvo Test Engines                       52

 14       Transient Emissions Summary from Bus Cycle Operation
          of the Volvo Test Engines                                 54

 15       Percent of Fuel Carbon Calculated from Transient
          Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine            55

 16       Individual Hydrocarbons from Transient Operation of
          the Volvo Test Engines                                    56

 17       Individual Hydrocarbons from Modal Operation of  the
          Volvo TD-100C Diesel Engine                               57
                                  IX

-------
Table
                          LIST OF TABLES  (Cont'd)

                                                                  Page
 18       Individual Hydrocarbons  from Modal  Operation of the
          Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel  Engine  with Methanol              57

 19       Individual Hydrocarbons  from Modal  Operation of the
          Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel  Engine  with Methanol and
          Catalyst                                                  58

 20       Individual Hydrocarbons  from Modal  Operation of the
          Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel  Engine  with Ethanol  + Water       58

 21       Unburned Alcohol  Summary from Transient  Operation of
          the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel  Engine                         60

 22       Unburned Alcohol  Summary from Modal Operation of the
          Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel  Engine                             61

 23       Summary of Aldehydes  from Transient Operation of the
          Volvo Test Engines                                        63

 24       Summary of Aldehydes  from Bus Cycle Operation of the
          Volvo Test Engines                                        64

 25       Summary of Aldehydes  from Modal Operation of the Volvo
          TD-100C Diesel Engine                                     65

 26       Summary of Aldehydes  from Modal Operation of the Volvo
          TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Methanol                     66

 27       Summary of Aldehdyes  from Modal Operation of the Volvo
          TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Methanol and Catalyst       67

 28       Summary of Aldehydes  from Modal Operation of the Volvo
          TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Ethanol +  Water             68

 29       Summary of Phenols (Filtered) from  Transient Operation
          of  the Volvo  TD-100A  Dual-Fuel  Engine                      70

 30       Summary of Phenols (Filtered) from  Modal Operation of
          the Volvo TD-100A Diesel Engine                           71

 31       Summary of Phenols (Filtered) from  Modal Operation of
          the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel  Engine  with  Methanol          72

 32       Summary of Phenols (Filtered) from  Modal Operation of
          the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel  Engine  with  Methanol and
          Catalyst                                                  73

-------
                          LIST OF TABLES  (Cont'd)

Table

 33       Summary of Phenols  (Unfiltered) from Transient
          Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine           74

 34       Summary of Phenols  (Unfiltered) from Modal Operation
          of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Methanol       75

 35       Summary of Phenols  (Unfiltered) from Modal Operation
          of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine with Methanol
          and Catalyst                                              76

 36       Summary/Comparison of "Total" Unregulated Hydrocarbons
          and Hydrocarbons Measured by Continuous HFID During
          Transient Operation of the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel
          Engine                                                    77

 37       Summary of TIA by DOAS from Transient Operation of
          the Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine                        79

 38       Summary of TIA by DOAS from Modal Operation of the
          Volvo TD-100A Dual-Fuel Engine and the TD-100C Diesel
          Engine                                                    80

 39       Particulate Emission Summary from Modal Operation of
          the Volvo Test Engines                                    82

 40       Particulate Summary from Transient Operation of the
          Volvo Test Engine                                         84

 41       Composite Particulate Rates from Modal and Transient
          Operation of the Volvo Test Engines                       85

 42       Summary of Smoke Opacity from the Volvo Test Engines      86

 43       Sulfate Emissions Summary from Modal Operation of the
          Volvo Test Engines                                        88

 44       Sulfate Emission Summary from Transient FTP Operation
          from the Volvo Test Engines                               90

 45       Composite Sulfate Rates from Modal and Transient
          Operation of the Volvo Test Engines                       91

 46       Summary of Elemental Analysis of Total Particulate from
          Modal Operation of the Volvo Test Engines                 92

 47       Summary of Elemental Analysis of Total Particulate from
          Transient Operation of the Volvo Test Engines             93
                                   XI

-------
                          LIST  OF TABLES

Table                                                             Page

 48       Summary of Soluble  Organic Fraction  from Modal
          Operation of the Volvo Test Engines                       100

 49       Summary of Soluble  Organic Fraction  from Transient
          Operation of the Volvo Test Engines                       100

 50       Elemental Composition of Soluble Organic Fraction  from
          Transient Operation of the Volvo Test Engines             102

 51       Boiling Point Distribution of Soluble.Organic Fraction
          from Transient Operation of the Volvo Test Engines        103

 52       Summary of Transient  Composite and 7-Mode Composite
          Benzo(a)pyrene Emissions from the Volvo Test Engines      109

 53       Summary of Ames  Response to Transient Composite and
          Modal Composite  SOF from the Volvo Test Engines           112

 54       Summary of Ames  Response to Individual Modal Samples
          of SOF  from the  Volvo Test Engines                        113
                                 Xll

-------
                             I.   INTRODUCTION

     Worldwide dependence on petroleum products and associated economic
problems have become quite  apparent over the last decade.  The uncertainty
of petroleum-based  fuel  availability for transportation and production of
goods and  services  has created a need for diversifying into alternate fuels.
Alcohols constitute a renewable  fuel source which has been available for
years, but which has not been used as primary engine fuel because petroleum
distillates were less expensive  to produce.  The Volvo Truck Corporation
of Sweden  has developed  a pilot-injected diesel/alcohol engine which can
utilize a  broad variety  of  alternative fuels.  The approach represented
by this engine is attractive because it requires no new technology, and
because the energy  efficiency of the engine is retained essentially in-
tact.  Up  to 85 percent  of  diesel fuel normally used can be replaced by
an alternative fuel, depending on the load factor.

     The prototype  dual-fuel engine was made from a standard diesel engine
by adding  a small diesel injection pump and injectors for pilot injection
of diesel  fuel, and adjusting the standard diesel injection pump to inject
alcohol fuels through the injectors normally used.  Pilot injection of
diesel fuel  allows efficient use of low cetane fuels such as methanol,
ethanol or even ethanol  mixed with water, d-i   The prototype engine has
been operated successfully  in heavy-duty truck and bus applications, with
only minor mechanical problems.  It is uncertain what effects the use of
alternative fuels will have on mobile source emissions, particularly those
which are  currently unregulated.  Lower emissions of smoke and NOX, already
reported in the literature,  make alcohol fuels appear to be a viable diesel
fuel supplement.

     The objective  of this  work  was to characterize the emissions behavior
of a Volvo truck-size  (186  kW at.2200 rpm) turbocharged diesel engine,
equipped with diesel fuel pilot  injection for ignition and alcohol for main
combustion.  The emissions  of this engine were compared to those from a
similar conventional diesel engine.  The diesel pilot/alcohol engine emis-
sions were characterized during  operation with neat methanol, neat ethanol,
and ethanol mixed with water.  The effects of an oxidation catalyst on meth-
anol- and  ethanol-fueled engine  exhaust were also studied.  Ethanol with
30 percent (by weight) water (140 proof) was studied as an alternative fuel,
because direct use  of ethanol containing substantial amounts of water
achieves a higher total  energy balance from raw material to useful work
output than use of  more  completely distilled ethanol (near 200 proof).

     Emission characterization included regulated emissions (HC,CO and
*Superscript numbers in parentheses designate references at end of report.

-------
      along with  total particulate, unburned alcohols, individual  hydro-
 carbons, aldehydes, phenols, and odor.  In addition to these  items,  the
 particulate matter was characterized in terms of particle size distribution,
 sulfate content, C,H,S, and metals content, and soluble organic fraction.
 The  soluble organic fraction was further studied by determining its  ele-
 mental content (C,H,S,N), boiling point distribution, BaP content, rela-
 tive  make-up of polar compounds, and bioactivity by Ames testing.

      Exhaust emissions from the various test configurations were charac-
 terized over the 1979 13-mode Federal Test Procedure (FTP),  or shorter
 versions of this modal test, and over the 1984 Transient FTP.   In addi-
 tion, regulated gaseous and particulate emissions were determined over an
 experimental bus cycle developed from data derived by the Coordinating
 Research Council CAPE-21 project.   In this CRC study,  trucks and buses
 were  instrumented and operated in typical use  in Los Angeles and New York
 City.

     The 13-mode FTP is currently used for regulatory purposes of heavy-
 duty diesel emissions.   The transient FTP will be optional  for the 1984
model year, and will be mandatory by  1985.   The 1986 proposed  transient
FTP includes both gaseous  and particulate emission measurement/regulation.
Thirteen-mode FTP emission measurements were conducted during  individual
modes of steady-state  operation.   Transient FTP emission  measurements
were conducted during  both cold-start and hot-start cycles.

-------
                               II.  SUMMARY

     Volvo  Truck  Corporation of  Sweden  has  developed  a prototype dual-
 fuel Volvo  truck-size  (186  kW at 2200 rpm)  engine equipped with diesel
 fuel pilot  injection for ignition and subsequent alcohol  injection for
 main combustion.   Pilot injection of diesel fuel allowed  efficient use
 of  low-cetane  fuels, while  providing good performance over the entire
 operating range from cold start-up and  idle to maximum power at rated
 speed.   The prototype  dual-fuel  engine  consumed only  diesel fuel during
 light  load  conditions.   The low-cetane, main energy fuel  was added as
 output power demand increased.

     Emissions from the dual-fuel engine were characterized during opera-
 tion with neat methanol,  neat ethanol,  and  ethanol mixed  with water.  The
 effects  of  an  oxidation catalyst on the exhaust of the methanol- and
 ethanol-fueled engine  was also studied.  The Volvo TD-100C diesel engine
 was used for emission  comparisons and was of the same basic model as that
 modified to build the  dual-fuel  engine  (Volvo designation TD-100A).
 Exhaust  emissions from the  various test configurations were characterized
 over the 1979  13-mode  Federal Test Procedure (FTP), or shorter versions of
 this modal  test,  and over the 1984 Transient FTP.

     Table  1 summarizes the composite results from six test configurations,
 which  include  diesel,  methanol,  methanol with catalyst, ethanol, ethanol
 with catalyst, and ethanol  with  30 percent  water (wt  %).  Seven-mode com-
 posite results given in the table are from  an abbreviated version of the
 13-mode  test procedure  which does not include some of the intermediate
 load conditions.   Detailed  test  results may be found  in the Results sec-
 tion of  this report (Section IV).   With such a broad  variety of emission
 measurements available  for  six test configurations, the level of effort
 alloted  for sample collection and sample analysis was based on importance
 of  useful information  obtained and similarities in measured emission trends.

     For the Volvo TD-100C  diesel  engine, both the 13-mode composite and
 the transient  composite gaseous  emission rates, as well as fuel consumption
 and unregulated emissions,  all appear to be in ranges typical of direct-
 injected, turbocharged,  truck-sized diesel  engines.   The  NOX emissions
 reported during this program were  not corrected for engine intake air
 humidity due to uncertainty about  validity  of the correction when oxygen-
 containing  fuels  (such  as alcohols) were used.  For comparison purposes,
NOX values  for the  diesel configuration given in the  table have not been
 corrected for  intake humidity.

     The emission  levels were similar for both transient  and steady-state
test procedures,  but tend to be  slightly higher for the transient test
procedure.   Emission results from  the Volvo TD-100C diesel engine serve
as reference, since the Volvo TD-100A dual-fuel engine was of the same

-------
            TABLE  1.   SUMMARY OF  COMPOSITE EMISSION  RATES  FROM  THE VOLVO-TD-100C DIESEL
                         ENGINE  AND THE  VOLVO TD-100A DIESEL PILOT/ALCOHOL  ENGINE

Composite Emission Rates
Federal Teat Procedure (FTP)
hydrocarbon, HCb
g/kw-hr, (g/hp-hr)
Carbon Monoxide t CO
g/kw-hr, (g/hp-hr)
Oxides of Nitrogen, NOXC
y/kw-hr, (g/hp-hr)
Brake Specific Fuel Consump.d
kg fuel/kw-hr, (Ib fuel/hp-hr)
Test Cycle
Total Individual HC
mg/kw-hr
Total Unburned Alcohols
mg/kw-hr
Total Aldehydes8
mg/kw-hr
Total Phenols
mg/kw-hr
Total Particulato
g/kw-hr, (g/hp-hr)
Sulfate, S04"
mg/kw-hr, (% of ParticuJate)
Soluble Organic Fraction (SOP)
mg/kw-hr, (% of Particulate)
BaP
ug/kw-hr
Ames Response 3
(revertant/plate x!03)/kw-hr
Engine Test Configuration
Diesel
Volvo TD-100C
13-mode
1.05
(0.78)
3.18
(2.37)
ll.SBf
(8.86)
0.262
(0.431)
7 -mode
100
Does Mot
Apply
19
Mot
Run
0.69
(0.52)
45
(6.5%)
200
(28%)
0.64
490
Transient
1.15
(0.85)
4.04
(3.01)
11.19
(8.34)
0.288
(0.473)
Transient
130
Does Not
Apply
14
35
0.70
(0.52)
38
(5.4%) •
220
(32%)
3.7
580
Methanol
Volvo TD-100A
13-mode
1.45
(1.08)
9. 55
(7.12)
5.26
(3.92)
0.486
(0.799)
7 -mode
67
2200
88
17
0.30
(0.23)
14
(4.6%)
200
(66%)
0.86
310
Transient
1.95
(1.45)
10.29
(7.67)
7.31
(5.45)
0.531
(0.873)
Transient
180
4900
250
24
0.39
(0.30)
16
(4.1%)
280
(73%)
1.7
510*
180
Methanol-Catalyst
Volvo TD-100A
13-fflodeh
0.16
(0.12)
0.83
(0.62)
6.79
(5.06)
0.482
(0.792)
7 -mode
32
950
140
14
0.51
(0.38)
220
(43%)
70
(14%)
0.08
120
Trans lent*
0.22
(0.16)
3.74
(2.79)
7.89
(5.89)
0.547
(0.900)
Transient
66
890
260
48
0.37
(0.27)
98
(27%)
60
(16%)
0.33
710
Ethanol
Volvo TD-100A
13 mode
1.65
(1.23)
10.52
(7.84)
6.85
(5.11)
0.395
(0.650)
7-mode
Not
Run








Transient
2.27
(1.69)
12.89
(9.61)
7.38
(5.50)
0.435
(0.715)
Transient
600
2300
240
44
0.35
(0.26)
14
(4.0%)
190
(53%)
0.32
790
E thanol -Ca ta lys t «
Volvo TD-100A
13 mode
0.60
(0.45)
3.10
(2.31)
7.98
(5.95)
0.400
(0.657)
7-mode
Not
Run








Transient
0.63
(0.47)
4.24
(3.16)
8.62
(6.43)
0.448
(0.737)
Transient
220
480
250
33
0.38
(0.28)
89
(23%)
40
(11%)
3.7
2900
Bthanol+30* Mater
Volvo TD-100A
13-mode
1.89
(1.41)
9.99
(7.45)
4.46
(3.32)
0.495
(0.814)
7-mode
220
860
91
Not
Run
0.33
(0.24)
17
(5.2%)
190
(58%)
1.2
90
Transient
Not
Run



Transient
Not
Run








     with backpressure device engaged during idle and motoring.
 HC value reported here is based on measurements by HFID.  FID response is
 very low for unburned alcohols and other species of unregulated emissions
 13-mode NO* correction factor for intake humidity was computed but not
.applied
 Computed on the basis of measured diesel consumption and alcohol consumption
 combined
TBenealdehyde was not included in the total composite value
 NOX value is reduced to 10.89 gAw-hr  (8.12 g/hp-hr) when the intake
 humidity correction for NOX is applied
^Phenols were determined from only selected modes
VWithout backpressure device at idle
.Average of data with and without backpressure device
 Average of brake specific response with and without metabolic
 activation from all 5 strains
 Results from first and second group respectively

-------
basic design.

     Methanol

          The dual-fuel  engine was operated on methanol with no engine
performance problems  during  either the  steady-state or transient testing.
The only adjustments  made  after  initial set-up were adjustments of the
alcohol injection pump to  compensate  for differing volumetric heating
values of the alcohol fuels  tested.   Maximum power with methanol was set
to 186 kW  (250  hp)  at 2200 rpm.  The  maximum torque obtained after adjust-
ment was similar to that obtained from  the diesel engine.  Gaseous emis-
sions of HC and CO  were  greater  for the dual-fuel engine on methanol than
for the diesel  engine.   Total hydrocarbon values given in Table 1 for
alcohol fuel configurations  are  low due to low response of the HC instru-
ments to unburned alcohols,  aldehydes,  and other species.  Use of methanol
in the dual-fuel engine  increased CO  by 60 percent over the diesel version.
Compared to the diesel engine, NOX emissions were reduced by 56 percent
for the 13-mode cycle, and 35 percent for the transient.  Brake specific
fuel consumption was  higher  for  alcohols due to the greater mass of alco-
hol needed to achieve power  output comparable to diesel fuel.

          Emission  of total  particulate matter dropped by approximately
50 percent when methanol was used.  With less diesel fuel consumed due
to substitution of  methanol, total sulfur entering the engine was reduced,
causing sulfate to  decrease  about 60  percent compared to that from the
diesel engine.  A significant portion of the total particulate from the
methanol configuration  (about 70 percent) was soluble using methylene
chloride for extraction  of the soluble  organic fraction (SOP).  As with
the other configurations tested, the  brake specific benzo(a)pyrene (BaP)
was significantly higher for the transient composite than for the 7-mode
composite.  Brake specific BaP from transient operation with methanol was
lower than for  the  diesel  engine, but the BaP from the 7-mode composite
was higher with the methanol than with  the diesel.  The average brake
specific Ames response from  the  five  strains tested with and without meta-
bolic activation was  lower for the methanol configuration than for the
diesel configuration.

     Methanol-Catalyst

          An oxidation catalyst  was also tested with the methyl alcohol
as an exhaust aftertreatment device to  reduce unburned alcohol and other
emissions.  The catalyst,  manufactured  by Unikat of Sweden and designated
as a Type U210, was added  to the engine and was not specifically optimized
for the application.  As expected, the  catalyst reduced HC and CO emissions
substantially from  the levels noted in  the methanol configuration.  The
indicated total hydrocarbons were very  low for both test procedures.  The
catalyst was very effective  in reducing unburned alcohols and some indi-
vidual hydrocarbons,  but appeared to  have little effect on the aldehyde
emissions.  The CO  level was reduced  substantially during the 13-mode
procedure, due  to significant reductions in CO during the maximum torque
condition and other heavy  load conditions.  The CO level from the trans-

-------
lent FTP was not reduced as much, because during the transient cycle
the engine is not as heavily loaded (time-weighted basis).  NOx emissions
appear to have increased when the catalyst was used with methanol.  Some
of the additional NOx emission noted from the transient composite was due
to the use of an exhaust backpressure-increasing device, but the back-
pressure device was not used during the 13-mode test.  The exhaust back-
pressure device operated during closed rack conditions.  It was used as
a fast warm-up aid, and to maintain higher catalyst temperature during
idling or motoring conditions, by increasing the exhaust backpressure at
these conditions.  Transient composite fuel consumption was also increased,
because the backpressure device required more diesel fuel to maintain idle
speed when engaged.

          Although the catalyst reduced unburned fuel-like matter and CO,
the total particulate level was about the same as for the methanol con-
figuration and 50 percent lower than the diesel particulate levels for the
transient procedure.  Seven-mode composite particulate actually increased
by 67 percent over the methanol configuration, but was still 26 percent
lower than the diesel 7-mode particulate level.  Analysis of particulate
composition showed that 7-mode sulfate had been increased by a factor of
five over the diesel engine level, and to 15 times that of the methanol
configuration.  Increases in transient composite sulfate were also noted,
but not to the same extent because the catalyst was cooler during the
cold- and hot-start transient tests.  As with hydrocarbons,  the soluble
organic fraction of the particulate was substantially reduced by the cata-
lyst.  The catalyst also reduced the level of BaP compared to the methanol
configuration.  Although reductions in SOF and BaP occurred with the cata-
lyst, the average brake specific Ames response was significantly increased
over the transient composite, where the catalyst heat may have been minimal.
The Ames response for the 7-mode composite SOF was relatively low with the
catalyst.

     Ethanol
          Methanol (CH3OH) and ethanol (C^OH)  are somewhat similar alco-
hols, but ethanol has a higher volumetric heating value.  The dual-fuel
engine's alcohol fuel injection pump was adjusted to obtain 186 kW maximum
power on each alcohol.  At these settings, maximum torque was about 5 per-
cent lower with ethanol than with methanol due to the volumetric charac-
teristics of the injection pump.  Based on similar 13-mode emission trends
between methanol and ethanol, only transient operation was characterized
extensively.

          With ethanol, HC and CO emissions were slightly higher than for
the methanol configuration, but considerably higher than the diesel config-
uration.  Aldehyde emissions were at about the same level as for methanol
Unburned alcohols were lower with ethanol, but individual hydrocarbons
were about 3 times those of either the diesel or the methanol configura-
tion.  The 13-mode composite NOx emission with ethanol was 24 percent
higher than for methanol due to substantially higher NOX emissions in the
maximum power mode.  Brake specific fuel consumption reflects the differ-

-------
ences in heating values.   The  total particulate and  sulfate emission rates
from transient operation with  ethanol were  about  10  percent lower than
from the methanol  configuration.   The soluble organic fraction was also
somewhat lower, and  the brake  specific BaP  level  was about one fifth that
of the methanol configuration.  Although  the BaP  level was lower, the
brake specific Ames  response was  about twice that from transient operation
in the methanol configuration,  and was similar to the level noted for the
methanol-catalyst  configuration.

     Ethanol-Catalyst

          When the catalyst was used with ethanol, HC and CO were reduced,
but not to  the same  extent as  for the methanol-catalyst configuration.
The catalyst  reduced the unburned alcohol and individual hydrocarbon levels
substantially, but little  effect  on total aldehyde emissions was noted.
The transient composite NOx emission increased 14 percent over that from
the ethanol configuration, when the catalyst and  backpressure device were
used.  Similar to  the methanol-catalyst configuration, the fuel consump-
tion increased in  the ethanol-catalyst configuration due to use of the
backpressure  device.  Total particulate,  sulfate,  and SOP emissions fol-
lowed the same trends as noted for the methanol-catalyst configuration.
The brake specific BaP level was  almost 10  times  that of the methanol-
catalyst configuration and was the same level as  obtained from the diesel
engine.  The  transient Ames response was  the highest of any of the test
configurations.

     Ethanol  + Water
          Emissions with  ethanol  and  30 percent water  (wt %) were very
similar to  emissions with methanol.   If equal volumes of ethanol with
30 percent  water  (wt %) and methanol  were  injected into separate combus-
tion chambers,  the mass of individual carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen atoms
in the chamber  would be very  nearly equivalent.  Changing to ethanol with
30 percent  water, from methanol,  required  only minor adjustments of the
maximum rack  stop  (although a slight  reduction in maximum torque was noted
similar to  when ethanol alone was used).   This net energy-to-volume simi-
larity would  allow eaey interchangeability between neat methanol and
ethanol by  adjusting the  ethanol  water content to about 30 percent (wt %).
Based on 13-mode composite emissions,  ethanol+water produced slightly
higher HC and CO, but lower NOX emissions  than the methanol configuration.
Aldehydes were  about the  same, but unburned ethanol was lower and IHC was
higher than with the ethanol  configuration.  The 13-mode NOX from the
ethanol+water configuration was lowest of  the six configurations tested.
Thirteen-mode composite particulate emissions were very similar to the
methanol configuration, and were  about 50  percent lower than from the
diesel configuration.  The sulfate and SOF portions of the total particu-
late were essentially the same as for methanol.  BaP content was higher
than for the  methanol configuration,  but the 7-mode composite Ames response
was lowest  of all the configurations  tested.

-------
     Bus Cycle

          As mentioned earlier,  regulated gaseous and particulate emissions
were also measured during a transient bus cycle.  The bus cycle includes
more accelerations and decelerations, and produces 50 percent less work
in 30 percent less time than the transient cycle.  Emissions from the
bus cycle were generally higher  than those from the transient composite
FTP.  Bus cycle emissions followed the same trends as indicated for the
transient composite results.  Details of the bus cycle emissions are given
in the text of the Results section of this report.

-------
    III.  TEST PLAN AND DESCRIPTION OF ENGINES, FUELS, AND PROCEDURES
     The intent of this program was to characterize regulated gaseous
emissions along with particulate and unregulated emissions from a Volvo
diesel pilot/alcohol engine run on several alcohol fuels and using an
oxidation catalyst as an aftertreatment.  In addition, a conventional
Volvo diesel engine of similar design was to be characterized for emission
comparison.  This section describes the proposed test plan which was used
as a guide in  the program.  The diesel pilot/alcohol engine and its diesel
counterpart are also described.  Some discussion is given to explain the
operation and  interaction of  the diesel pilot/alcohol injection systems.
Specifications for the diesel fuel and the alcohols are given along with
some of their  properties.  Procedures are described, including the tests
used to generate and acquire  the emission samples, and the analytical
procedures used to characterize the emission samples.

A.   Proposed  Test Plan

     A test plan was conceived for operating both the prototype dual-
fuel engine and its conventional diesel counterpart.  Proposed engine/
control/fuel test configurations planned for testing included the follow-
ing:

                        Proposed Test Configurations
Engine
Diesel/Alcohol





Diesel
Fuel
Methanol + pilot diesel
Ethanol + pilot diesel
Ethanol(70)/water(30) + pilot diesel
Ethanol (70) /water (30) + pilot diesel
Ethanol + pilot diesel
Methanol + pilot diesel
Diesel
Aftertreatment
None
None
None
Oxidation catalyst
Oxidation catalyst
Oxidation catalyst
None
     The planned program included emission measurements of both regulated
and unregulated emissions for each of the test configurations shown above.
Each test configuration was to be tested over both steady-state and tran-
sient operation.  Table 2 shows the maximum potential extent of emission
characterizations.  Delays, additions, and modifications occurred due to
needs for preliminary data, engine operational changes, and equipment utili-
zation.  Thus, the level of effort applied to emission characterization
under some test configurations was modified.  Flexibility in the test plan
was utilized to reduce the number of emission measurements required in some
configurations, on the basis of useful emission information obtained, and
similarities of measured emissions trends.

-------
                         TABLE 2.  PLANNED EMISSION MEASUREMENTS FOR
                           CHARACTERIZATION OF VOLVO TEST ENGINE
Exhaust Constituent (s)
Measured or Characterized
Visible Smoke, 2 meters3
Regulated Gaseous Emissions
02
Unburned Alcohols
Individual Hydrocarbons
Aldehydes
Phenols
Odor Index, DOAS
Particulate Characterization
Mass
Size Distribution
C, H, N, S, & O
Metal content
Sulfate
Characterization of
Solubles in Particulate
Mass
Boiling Range
BaP
Ames Bioassay
HPLC Fractionation0
C, H, N, S, & 0
Test Sequences
Transients
Cold
1

/

,
/
/
/

•
/
/
•
/


/
/
/
/
/
'
2

/


/



/






•

/
/


Hot
1

/

/
/
/
•

/
/
/
/
/


•
/
/
/
/
/
2

/


/



/






/

•
/


13-Mode
1
/
/
/


















2

/
/


















Seven (7)
Extended
Modes

/
/
/b
/b
/
/

/b
/
/
/b
/b


• b
/
/
V
/
'

(Full)
Power
Curve
/





















Bus
Transients
1

/

/
,

/

•






/





2

/






/






v





^should run Federal Smoke, too, if a part of testing done on appropriate dvno
 also measured during other six modes of 13-mode,  not on extended basis
       d to Quantitative determinations of aromatic,  transitional,  and oxygenated fractions
                                              10

-------
     All the planned test configurations were characterized to some ex-
tent, except ethanol and water with pilot diesel and oxidation catalyst.
Emission characterization included regulated emissions (HC,CO and NOX)
along with total particulate, unburned alcohols, individual hydrocarbons,
aldehydes, phenols, and odor.  In addition to these items, the particu-
late matter was characterized in terms of particle size distribution,
sulfate content, C,H,S, and metals content, and soluble organic fractions.
The soluble organic fraction was further characterized by determining its
elemental content  (C,H,S,N), boiling point distribution,  BaP content,
relative make-up of polar compounds, and its bioactivity by Ames testing.

B.   Description of Test Engines

     The diesel engine, shown in Figure 1, was designated as a Volvo TD-
100C.  It is a direct-injected, turbocharged diesel engine which produces
186 kW (250 hp) at 2200 rpm.  Figure 2 shows the diesel pilot/alcohol
engine, or dual-fuel engine, which was designated as a Volvo TD-100A.  The
dual-fuel engine is essentially a TD-100 series modified to accept low-
cetane fuels by utilizing pilot injection of diesel fuel.  Some of the
specifications common to both engines are given in Table 3.
                TABLE 3.  SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE VOLVO
                         SERIES TD-100 ENGINE
 Maximum Output
 Maximum Torque
 No. Cylinders
 Bore
 Stroke
 Displacement
 Compression Ratio
 Maximum Idle
 Minimum Idle
 Turbocharger Boost
 Firing Sequence
 Direction of Rotation
(250 hp) at 2200  rpm
(686 ft Ibs)  at  1400  rpm
186 kW
915 N'm
6
120.65 mm (4.750 inches)
140.00 mm (4.112 inches)
9.6 liters (586 in.3)
15:1
2400 - 2500 rpm
475 - 525 rpm
80 - 100 kPa  (11.5 - 14.2 psi)
1-5-3-6-2-4
Clockwise (from front)
     The pilot diesel fuel is injected through an additional fuel system.
This pilot diesel fuel system consists of a relatively small distributor-
type injection pump  (shown on the  left side of Figure 3) and single hole
injectors, one for each cylinder,  oriented at the outer limit of the com-
bustion chamber in the piston crown as shown in Figure 4.  The main fuel,
a low-cetane fuel like methanol, is injected through the "original fuel
system," utilizing an inline injection pump and four-hole  injectors cen-
trally located in the combustion chambers.  The "original  fuel system"
has been modified to provide for the necessary capacity to inject fuel
with lower energy per unit volume  and still obtain  rated power.
                                    11

-------

Figure 1.  Volvl TD-100C heavy-duty
        diesel truck engine
Figure 2.  Volvo TD-100A heavy-duty
      dual-fuel truck engine

-------
Figure 3.  Arrangement of the injection pumps on the dual fuel Volvo TD-100A
             Figure 4.  The cylinder head with two injectors
                                    13

-------
     The fuel rate is controlled by an aneroid which senses the inlet
manifold pressure, to avoid overfueling at low engine speeds.  At low
loads, only diesel fuel is injected.  A critical point is that at which
the alcohol fuel begins to be injected as the load is increased.  If the
quantity of diesel fuel injected is too low, HC emissions will be high.
Too much diesel fuel, however, will result in smoke.  The diesel fuel  is
injected against the air swirl so that the fuel droplets are picked up
and carried around the center of the cylinder by the air, forming a rich
air/fuel zone and preventing the fuel from hitting the wall of the combus-
tion  chamber in the piston  (Figure 5).(D
            Figure 5.  The fuel jets in the combustion chamber
      The dual-fuel engine is operated in a manner similar to  a conven-
 tional diesel engine.  Cold start-up operation calls for the  use of a pre-
 heater in the intake air system,  prior to and after cold-start cranking.
 Activating the ignition switch energizes the preheater for 50 seconds
 before the engine is cranked.  The preheater is located in the connecting
 pipe between the turbocharger and the intake manifold.  Upon  starting,
 the preheater is re-energized for 50 seconds or until the water tempera-
 ture reaches 50°C (122°F),  whichever occurs first.  Solenoid  actuators
 are used on both fuel injection pumps, as shown in Figure 3.   During the
 preheat mode and cranking,  the alcohol fuel pump is held to the "OFF"
 fuel position to prevent quenching of cold-start combustion by the alcohol,
 Simultaneously, the diesel pump is held to "ON", or to the "high flow"
 position.  After the engine has started and the second phase  of preheat
 has expired, the alcohol fuel pump is switched to the "ON" fuel position
 and will  deliver  fuel  on rack  demand.   As  soon  as the rack (located  on
 the alcohol  pump) is moved  from  the  idle position,  electrical  contact is
 broken  and  the  diesel  pump  is  switched  to  "OFF",  or to  the "low flow"
 position, in anticipation of demand  for alcohol injection.   Variations of
 this  "recommended cold-start procedure" were used during emission test
 work.   These variations  will be  described  later in the report.

                                     14

-------
     An oxidation catalyst, manufactured by Unikat AB of Sweden, was
supplied in order to investigate its effect on emissions, especially
unburned fuel and particulate.  The catalyst, which weighed 41 kg and
contained 15dm3 (915 in.3) of catalytic compound, was designated as a
Type U210.  The catalyst had been chassis tested for about 50 hours of
operation prior to use in this program.  The catalyst was installed approx-
imately 61 cm (2 ft) downstream of the turbocharger exhaust outlet.  After
part of the planned testing had been completed, it was decided that a
backpressure-increasing device should be used to promote faster catalyst
warm-up during the transient cycle test work.  Figure 6 shows the instal-
lation of the catalyst along with the backpressure device, which is moun-
ted on the turbocharger outlet.  The pipe connecting the backpressure
device to the catalyst was insulated in order to retain as much exhaust
heat at the catalyst as possible.
          Figure  6.   Installation of catalyst with backpressure device
                                       15

-------
     The backpressure device, illustrated in Figure 7, is typically  instal-
 led as a fast warm-up device for cold start-up, and is also used  as  an
 exhaust brake.  For test purposes with the catalyst, the device was  acti-
 vated by electrical contact only during closed rack operation, which in-
 cluded idle conditions during steady-state operation and idle plus "cut
 throttle" operation during transient testing.  When activated, the device
 restricts exhaust flow, forcing the engine to work against a backpressure
 and reducing air intake so that combustion temperature and exhaust temper-
 ature rise.  Activation of the device increases the backpressure  at  idle
 from virtually atmospheric pressure to 50 kPa (7 psig)  and increases  the
 maximum backpressure from 13 kPa (2 psig)  to 150 kPa ("21 psig) at "high
 idle" speed/2)

 C.   Descriptions of Test Fuels

     Fuels required for the Volvo characterization program included No.
 2 diesel fuel, commercial methanol,  and commercial (denatured)  ethanol.
 Analyses of the three fuels are given in Tables 4 through 6.  The diesel
 fuel used throughout the test work was a 2D Emissions Test fuel,  meeting
 the specifications found in the Federal Register for such fuels.(3)    The
 methanol was obtained commercially from DuPont in drums,  and was  at least
 99.9 percent methanol.  The commercial ethanol used was composed of about
 1 part methyl isobutyl ketone, 1.4 parts ethyl acetate, and 1 part unleaded
 gasoline per 100 parts "alcohol" (predominantly ethanol).   A sample  of
 this commercial mixture was checked for miscibility with water at water
 levels exceeding 35% by volume, with good results.  This denatured etha-
 nol was procured in drums.  The dual-fuel engine was also operated on
 ethanol and 30 percent water (by weight).  The ethanol and water  blend
 was mixed in 50 gallon batches, consisting of 106.0 Ibs of water  to 249.5
 Ibs of ethanol, and mechanically agitated for 15 minutes.  This fuel blend
 will be referred to in this text as "ethanol + water".

     Table 7 compares some of the properties of the various fuels used in
 this program.  Properties for diesel fuel, methanol,  and ethanol  are docu-
 mented in various sources.  Properties of "ethanol + water" were  calcu-
 lated on the assumption that the ethanol and water were consumed  in the
 combustion chamber in the same manner as if the fuel blend were introduced
 as a fuel compound.  Of the four fuels listed, diesel fuel has  the highest
 heating value and cetane number, followed by ethanol,  then methanol.   Simi-
 larly,  diesel fuel has the highest stoichiometric A/F ratio,  follow d h
 ethanol,  methanol, and ethanol + water.  This order of fuel'properties ^
 can also be seen for flash point, heat of vaporization, H/C mole  ratio
0/C ratio,  and percent of fuel carbon.  The properties of methanol and'
 "ethanol + water" are very similar.   The four fuels all have different
 liquid densities, and this property should be noted in that some  of the
emissions will be presented in terms of measured fuel usage
                                    16

-------
                           1,234
667
                                    18    17    16   15   14
                        Seal
                        Cooling air discharge
                        Bushings
                        Return spring
                        Piston rod
                        Piston sealing ring
                        Washer
                        Nut
                        0-ring
                        Lock  nut
                        Cylinder head
                        Seal
                        Nipple
                        Piston
                        Cylinder
                        Wear washer
                        Bearing housing
                        Shutter housing cover
                        Shutter
                        Shutter housing
                        Hole for tow speeds
                        Drffusor
                             Exhaust Pressure governor

                             A.   From exhaust turbine
                             B.   To catalyst
                             C.   Throttle position  actuated 390  kPa  (55 psig)
                                  compressed air connection
Figure 7.   Volvo exhaust  backpressure device used with catalyst
                                      17

-------
TABLE 4.  ANALYSIS OF AMOCO  2D  EMISSIONS FUEL, EM-465-F
Cetane Number
Cetane Index
Gravity, "API
D-86 50% pt. °F
Density, g/mJl
Cloud point, °C  (°F)
Flash point, °C  (°F)
Viscosity, cs
Gum, mg/100 mi
Total solids, mg/mJZ,
Metals in fuel, X-ray

Carbon, %
Hydrogen, %
Nitrogen, ppm
Sulfur, %

Aromatics, %
Olefins, %
Saturates, %

Distillation, D86,  °C
   IBP
    5% point
   10% point
   20% point
   40% point
   60% point
   80% point
   90% point
   95% point
   EP
                                     44.
                                     45.8
                                     34.5
                                    498
                                      0.852

                                     58  (136)
                                      2.42
                                     13.6
                                     87.0
                                     12.7
                                    166
                                      0.24

                                     28.4
                                      1.0
                                     70.6
                                    168  (334)
                                    200  (392)
                                    213  (416)
                                    229  (444)
                                    250  (482)
                                    270  (518)
                                    296  (564)
                                    313  (596)
                                    329  (624)
                                    342  (648)
                            18

-------
          TABLE 5.   DUPONT SPECIFICATION AND TYPICAL ANALYSIS OF
                          METHANOL FUEL, EM-469-F
            Comments
     Methanol, wt %
     Specific gravity  (25/25C)
     Distillation range  (1 atm)
       First drop to dry, C
     Nonvolatiles, wt  %
     Acetone, wt  %
     Acidity  (as  acetic  acid),
       wt %
     Alkalinity  (as ammonia),
       wt %
     Carbonizable substances,
       platinum cobalt scale
        (APHA)
     Permaganate  test,
       minutes
     Color, platinum cobalt
       scale  (APHA)
     Hydrocarbon  test, clouding
       when diluted with
       2 parts water
           Specification

           min. 99.85


           max. 1.0
           max. 0.0005
           max. 0.002

           max. 0.0020

           max. 0.00030


           max. 35

           min. 50

           max. 5


             none
 Typical Analysis

    99.98
     0.78891

     0.5
    <0.0001
    <0.0014

     0.0013

    <0.00005
    10

    56

     0


     Passes
   TABLE 6.   "SYNASOL"  SOLVENT UNION CARBIDE SPECIFICATION AND ANALYSIS
                         OF ETHANOL FUEL,  EM-466-F
    Comments
Specific gravity
Distillation, 760 mm

Acidity

Ethyl Acetate
Water
Color
Odor
Suspended Matter
     Specification
0.789-0.793 @ 20/20°C
IBP 74.5 °C minimum
 DP 79.5 °C maximum
0.005% wt.  max., calc.
  as acetic acid
1.15 to 1.45% wt.
0.50% wt. max.
15 platinum-cobalt, max.
Mild and non-residual
Substantially free
      Analysis
 0.7911
76.4
78.7
 0.002
20/20°C
  °C
  °C
 WTP
 1.45      WTP
 0.08      WTP
 5         PTC
   "APPROVED"
   "APPROVED"
                                    19

-------
         TABLE  7.  PROPERTIES OF FUELS USED IN THE VOLVO PROGRAM
        Property
  Liquid Density
  Boiling Point(s)
  Flash Point
  Lower Heating Value
  Heat of Vaporization
  Stiochiometric  A/F Ratio
  Cetane Number
  Lower Heat  Values
  H/C Mole Ratio
  O/C Mole Ratio
  Percent Fuel Carbon
Units
kg/m3
°C
°C
MJAg
KJ/kcj
1

MJ/dm3



Diesel
852
168 - 342
58
42.8
300
14.6
45
36.5
1.66-1.85
0
86-88
Methanol
796
65
11
19.7
1100
6.4
3
15.7
4.00
1.00
37
Ethanol
794
78
21
27.0
840
9.0
8
21.4
3.00
0.50
52
Ethanol
+ Watera
868b
N.D.C
N.D.
18.9
1260
6.3
N.D.
16.2
4.10
1.05
37
  a"Ethanol  + water" represents neat ethanol mixed with 30 percent by
    weight water
   Properties calculated on the assumption that the ethanol + water
    mixture  is consumed as a compound
   calculated from API gravity
   not determined
 D.   Test Procedures

     Emissions from the Volvo TD-100C diesel engine and the Volvo TD-100A
 dual-fuel engine were measured during both steady-state and transient
 engine exercises.  Steady-state operation and measurement techniques
 were based on the 1979 13-mode Federal Test Procedure (FTP).  Transient
 operation and measurement techniques were based on the 1984 FTP and 1986
 Proposed FTP, which includes particulate.

     The 13-mode test procedure is an engine exercise which consists of
 13 individual modes of steady-state operation.  Starting with a fully
warmed engine, the first mode is an idle condition.  This idle is then
 followed by 2, 25, 50, 75, and 100 percent load at intermediate speed
 followed by another idle mode, then to rated speed - 100, 75, 50, 25, and
 2 percent of full load, followed by a final idle mode.  Intake air, fuel,
and power output are monitored along with other data to be used in calcu-
lating modal emission rates.  A 13-mode composite emission rate is calcu-
lated on the basis of modal weighting factors as specified in the Federal
Register.
         (4)
     Most unregulated emissions were measured over 7 modes of steady-state
operation instead of 13 modes.  This 7-mode procedure is a variation of
the 13-mode procedure and consists of only the 2, 50, and 100 percent
loads at intermediate and rated speeds, plus one idle condition.

     On the basis of the 13-mode FTP weighting factors, 7-mode composite
emissions were computed using weighted factors.  Table 8 shows the respec-
                                    20

-------
tive weighting factors used.  As the number of modes decreases, each modal
point represents more time in mode and a wider range of power; thus the
weighting for each of the 7 modes must be increased compared to its factor
for 13-mode use.  For both the 13-mode and the 7-mode procedures, the idle
condition accounts for 20 percent of the composite value  (equivalent to
20 percent of operating time).
        TABLE 8.  LISTING OF 13-MODE AND 7-MODE WEIGHTING FACTORS

Mode
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

13-Mode
Enqine Speed/Load, %
Idle
Intermediate/2
Intermediate/25
Intermediate/50
Intermediate/75
Intermediate/100
Idle
Rated/100
Rated/75
Rated/50
Rated/25
Rated/ 2
Idle
Composite
7 -Mode
Wt. Factor
0.067
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.067
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.067
1.000
Mode

1

2

3
4
5

6

7

Composite
Wt. Factor

0.12

0.16

0.12
0.20
0.12

0.16

0.12

1.00
     Transient engine operation was performed in accordance with the 1984
Transient FTP for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines.' '  The procedure specifies
a transient engine exercise of variable speed and load, depending on the
power output capabilities of the test engine.  The cycle requires rela-
tively rapid dynamometer control, capable of loading the engine one moment
and motoring it the next.  The system used in this program consisted of
a GE 200 hp motoring/250 hp absorbing dynamometer coupled to a Midwest
500 hp eddy current (absorbing) dynamometer, with a suitable control sys-
tem fabricated in-house.
     The 1984 Transient cycle is described in the Federal Register by means
of percent maximum torque and percent rated speed for each one-second in-
terval, for a test cycle of 1199 seconds duration.  The 20-minute transient
cycle, developed from heavy-duty truck data, is composed for four five-
minute segments.  The four segments are described below:
                             Transient Cycle
                  Segment                         Time, sec.
          New York Non-Freeway (NYNF)                 297.
          Los Angeles Non-Freeway (LANF)              300.
          Los Angeles Freeway (LAP)                    305.
          New York Non-Freeway (NYNF)                 297-

In order to generate the transient cycle for the Volvo engine, the engine's
full power curve was obtained from 400 rpm to maximum no load engine speed.
                                    21

-------
    Fre       e    suiting cycle work was 11.68 kW hr  (15.66  hp ™****
 on a £ak torque of  880 N-m  (650 ft Ibs) and a rated  speed <*™°^
 The relatively large negative  torque commands shown in  the figure are to
 insure that the "throttle," or rack control, goes closed  for motoring
 operation.

      A Transient FTP Test  consists of a  cold-start transient cycle and a
 hot-start transient  cycle.  The same engine control or  command cycle is
 used in both cases.   For the cold-start, the diesel engine was operated
 over a "prep" cycle, then  allowed to stand overnight  in an ambient soak
 temperature of 20  to 30°C   (68 to 86°F).   The cold-start transient cycle
 begins when the engine is  cranked for cold start-up.  Upon completion of
 the cold-start transient cycle, the engine is shut down and allowed to
 stand for 20 minutes.  After this hot soak period, the  hot-start cycle
 begins with engine cranking.

      All engines react somewhat differently to the transient cycle com-
 mands due to both  cycle and engine characteristics.   In order  to judge
 how well the engine  follows the transient cycle command,  engine responses
 are compared to engine commands and several statistics  are computed.
 According to the Federal Register, the following regression line tolerances
 should be met:

                        REGRESSION LINE TOLERANCES

Standard Error of
Estimate (SE) of Y on X
Slop* of ttt*
Regression Lint, H
Coefficient of
Determination, R
Y Intercept of the
Regression Line, B

_!/ Minimum
Speed

100 rp»
0.970
1.030

0.970O_1/

150 rpei


Torque
13» of Maxinvn
Engine Torque
0.83-1.03 Hot
0.77-1.03 Cold
0.8800 (Hot)J/
0.8500 (Cold)_l/

±15 ft lb»


Brake Horsepower
Bt of MaxlBun
Brake Horsepower
0.89-1.03 (Hot)
0.87-1.03 (Cold)

0.9100 _!/

15.0 of brake
horsepower

In addition to these statistical parameters, the actual cycle work pro-
duced should not be more than 5 percent above, or 15 percent below,  the
work requested by the command cycle.

     If the statistical criteria are not met, then adjustments to throttle
servo linkage, torque span points, speed span points, and gain to and  from
error feedback circuits can be made in order to modify both the engine out-
put and the dynamometer loading/motoring characteristics.  After completion
of the cold-start and the hot-start transient cycles, transient composite
                                    22

-------
  Cr
NJ
LO
      2500  r
                     NYNF
                   297  sec.
  LAP
305  sec.
  LANF
300  sec,
   NYNF
 297  sec.
                                               Jiu
                    J_
          1200     1100    1000     900     300      700     600     500
                                                       TIME, SECONDS
                              400
              300
200
100
                    Figure 8.  Graphic representation of  torque and speed commands for the 1984
                    Transient FTP  cycle based on a power  map of the Volvo TD100C diesel engine
                                           700
                                           600
                                           500
                                           400
                                           300
                                           200
                                           100
                                            0
                                          -100
                                          -200
                                          -300

                                          2500

                                          2000

                                          1500

                                          1000

                                           500

-------
  emission results  are  computed by the following:

  Brake  Specific  _  1/7  (Mass Emission, Cold) + 6/7  (Mass Emission,  Hot)
    Emissions     ~  1/7  (Cycle Work, Cold) + 6/7  (Cycle Work, Hot)

      Similar  to the 1984 Transient FTP cycle which was developed from
  heavy-duty truck  data, a bus cycle was developed from CAPE-21 bus data.
  The  bus  cycle was first introduced as a research test cycle during  the
  heavy-duty diesel baseline test work. (15^ It was used in this program
  to indicate emission  trends from the Volvo test engines in city bus
  applications.  The  833 second transient bus cycle is composed of three
  segments, as  shown  below.  A listing of the speed and torque cycle  sched-
  ule  is given  in Reference 15.  A graphic presentation of the speed and
  torque commands which constitute the bus cycle used for the Volvo TD-100C

                              Bus Cycle
           	Segment	          Time,  seconds.
           New York Combined                  273
           Los Angeles Combined               287
           New York Combined                  273
 diesel engine is given in Figure 9.   The resulting cycle work was 5.57 kW
 hr (7.47 hp hr)  based on a peak torque of 880 N«m (650 ft Ibs) and a rated
 speed of 2200 rpm.  The bus cycle was run only as a hot-start test cycle,
 and was always preceded by a 20-minute soak.

      The engine  was also operated over the 1979 Smoke  FTP exercise.*4^
 It essentially consists of a 5-minute idle followed by full throttle ac-
 celeration to rated speed,  and finally,  a full throttle lug-down from
 rated speed to intermediate speed.  This transient smoke test cycle was
 run only for the measurement of smoke emissions.

      During steady-state or modal  engine exercises,  regulated and some un-
 regulated gaseous  emissions can be sampled from the  raw exhaust stream
 since  a  representative  and  proportional  sample can be  obtained.   Obtain-
 ing proportional samples  during transient engine  operation requires the
 use of a  constant  volume sampler (CVS).   Figure 10 shows the basic layout
 of the double-dilution CVS  used to comply with the 1984 Transient FTP
 and the 1986 Proposed Transient FTP<5>,  which  includes  the measurement
 of particulate.  All transient  cycle  test work during  this program was
 conducted with a main dilution  tunnel flow of  2000 SCFM, which provided
 approximately a 4:1 cycle dilution ratio  of the total exhaust introduced
 Regulated and unregulated gaseous emission samples were taken from the
main dilution flow.  Particulate-related  samples  required  that a  portion
 in^     S exhaust from ^e ™*in tunnel be  diluted further, to an  over-
all dilution of 12:1.  The small double-dilution  tunnel was  operated  at
approximately 4 SCFM total flow in order to collect particulate on two
90 mm TA60A20 Pallflex filters in series.  Weight gains  from these Zo
filters were used to determine the total particulate mass  emission from
                     : dOUf e-dilUti°n tu-e* -s operated  at  approximately
                     in order to accumulate large particulate  samples  on
                                    24

-------
o
o
o
-------
                                                     Muffler*
                                                                         Filter
                                                                  Box (290 SCTM)
                                                 Double Dilution
                                              Tunnel (1.76 I.D.)
                                           379 SCPM Double Dilution-
                                            Tunnel (16 inch Di«.)
                0   leal*
                             100 inch»i
                                                                 -Transfer Tube
                                                                   (129 SCTH)
                                               filter Holder
                                                 (20 x 20)
                                            riou Bequletlng
                                         Section (3 at 12SECTH)
                                               H««t
                                               Puap (3758CTM)	'T~h



                                                  Muffler	Q
Figure  10.   Basic layout of  transient cycle  heavy-duty  diesel  CVS  with
       large  double  dilution  sampler for three 20x20 inch filters
                                           26
-------
three 20x20 inch filters.  It also provided auxiliary particulate sampling
stations for smaller 47 mm filters.  This same CVS system was used to col-
lect particulate samples from steady-state operation of the Volvo diesel
engine, by altering the main dilution tunnel flow to accommodate the total
exhaust from the engine without exceeding  52°C  (125°F)  at  the particu-
late filter face.

     Particulate samples and other emission measurements from steady-state
operation of the Volvo dual-fuel engine were obtained from a steady-state
test facility which utilizes a single-dilution CVS having a capacity rang-
ing from 1,000 to 12,000 SCFM.  Figure 11 shows the sample collection end
of this 1.16 m (46 in.) diameter, 17.4 m  (57 ft) long stainless steel
single-dilution CVS tunnel.  The steady-state facility also incorporates
an exhaust diverter valve which allows the engine operating condition to
be stabilized before the exhaust is diverted to the CVS for particulate
collection.  Power absorption is provided by a Midwest 500 hp eddy current
dynamometer and its associated controller.  The controller was needed in
order to maintain steady-state operation, especially at the 1400 rpm  maxi-
mum torque condition since the dual-fuel engine's torque curve fell off
sharply below 1500 rpm.
     Figure 11.  Sample collection end of large single dilution CVS tunnel
                                       27
-------
E,   Analytical Procedures

     The analytical systems used for each category of emission measure-
ments are described in this section.  The section is divided into two
groups, the first dealing with gaseous emissions characterization and the
second with total particulate emissions and the constituents of the total
parti culate.  Gaseous emission included HC, CO, CO2, NOx, and some un-
regulated pollutants.  Unregulated gaseous emissions include individual
hydrocarbons, aldehydes, phenols, unbumed fuel, and odor.  Particulate
emissions included determination of the total particulate rate, and its
content of sulfate, metals, carbon and hydrogen.  The size distribution
of the particles was measured, as well as the fraction soluble in methy-
lene chloride.  This soluble fraction was characterized for carbon, hydro-
gen, sulfur, nitrogen, BaP content, boiling point distribution, fraction-
ation  (by relative molecular polarity) , and bioactivity by the Ames test.

     1.   Gaseous Emissions

          Regulated gaseous emissions of HC, CO, and NOX were measured ac-
cording to the 1979 13-mode FTP and the 1984 transient FTP-  The regulated
emissions along with CO2 were determined from raw exhaust samples taken
during the 13-mode steady-state procedure.  These same four constituents
were determined in dilute exhaust samples taken during the transient pro~
cedure.  The transient procedure requires that CO and C02 be determined
from bag samples of dilute exhaust, and, provides that NOx niay be deter-
mined from the same dilute sample bags or from integration of continuous
NOX concentration monitoring.  For this program, the continuous NOX,
measured by chemi luminescence, was used to determine the NOxemissions .
The same instrument was used for both the 13-mode raw exhaust measurement
and for the transient continuous dilute sample taken from the main dilu-
tion tunnel.  Although the transient procedure only specifies one dilute
exhaust Tedlar sample bag, the system used in this program uses one sample
bag for each segment.  This allows a better understanding of individual
cycle segment contributions to the total emissions measured.  Another CL
instrument was used to measure NOx from the dilute bag sample, but this
reading has typically been 10 percent lower than indicated by continuous
    measurement technig^ies. ^^'
          Carbon monoxide and CO2 were measured during both engine test pro-
cedures using non-dispersive infrared detector (NDIR) instruments.  The CO
measurement is of interest in both procedures because it is a regulated
pollutant.  The CO2 measurement is of interest because it is used in the
calculation of fuel usage by carbon balance along with the CO and the HC
emissions.  Both CO and CO2 are determined from the raw exhaust during
the 13-mode procedure and are determined from dilute exhaust bag samples
during the transient test procedures.
                                    28
-------
           Hydrocarbons were measured during both test procedures  using the
specified heated sample train and heated flame ionization detector  (HFID),
a Beckman 402 HFID.  As with other gaseous  emissions, HC measurements
during steady-state procedures were  taken from raw exhaust, and measure-
ments during transient procedures were taken from the dilute exhaust.
During transient test procedures, a  continuous dilute sample taken from
the main dilution tunnel was integrated for total hydrocarbons.

          The heated HC probe and overflow  calibration technique used in
total HC measurements are unique to  the heavy-duty transient FTP.  Details
as to the measurement of the regulated gaseous emissions may be found in
Reference 4 for the 13-mode procedure, and  in Reference 3 for the trans-
ient procedure.

           The intent of both procedures is  to determine the "total" HC  emis-
sions  from the  test engines.  It  is  generally assumed that the exhaust  hydro-
carbons  emitted from a diesel engine are of the  same  general composition
as the parent fuel.  The total is based on  the indication from HFID instru-
ments.   It has  been shown in References 6 and 7  that  FID response to vari-
ous species of  alcohols, individual  hydrocarbons, aldehydes, and phenols
often  differs from response to fuel-like constituents, and is affected by
oxygen synergism and physical construction  of the FID.  Some reported FID
response factors given in Reference  6 are repeated in Table 9.

           Both  Federal Test Procedures mentioned above also specify methods
of emissions computations.   In making accommodations  for this project, modi-
fication to these emissions computations had to  be incorporated in order
to account for  the dual-fuel combustion.  The 13-mode data reduction calcu-
lations  involve intake airflow rate  and both measured and computed fuel
rate, with measured emissions, to compute composite emissions rates.  Equa-
tions  for  calculation  of fuel/air ratio are based on  the combustion of
diesel fuel with a H/C mole ratio of approximately 1.8.  The H/C ratio of
methanol is 4.0 and that of ethanol  is 3.0.  The other major difference
was that the alcohol fuels  contain oxygen.   Complicating the 13-mode emis-
sion calculations was  the fact that  the engine consumes varying relative
amounts  of  diesel fuel and  alcohol fuel, depending on load condition.
The 13-mode computer program was modified to take these variations into
account.   In addition  to f/a ratios  calculated from the carbon balance of
emission measurements  and from measured fuel and air  quantities, the f/a
ratio was  calculated on a "diesel fuel equivalent" basis.  The "diesel
fuel equivalent" was based  on converting the measured portion of alcohol
into a mass of  diesel  fuel  on the basis of  heating value.  The diesel equi-
valent of  the alcohol  fuel  was added to the measured  diesel fuel, and
this "total diesel fuel" was used to calculate the diesel equivalent f/a
ratio.   This diesel f/a equivalent ratio was used to  compute the NOX
correction  factor.  The NOX correction factor was computed and is given
in the printout, but was not applied to the NOX  emissions measured be-
cause  it is uncertain  that  the computed correction factor has any valid-
ity  for engines not operated solely on diesel fuel.  For this program,
                                    29
-------
TABLE 9.  FID RELATIVE SENSITIVITIES
                                      (6)
RELATIVE
COMPOUND SENSmvrry
Normal Parafflni
Methane 0.97
Ethane 0.97
Propane 0. 98
Butane 1.09
Pentane 1.04
Hexane 1. 03
Heptane 1. 00
Octane 0. 97
Nonane 0. 98
Aldehydes
Butyraldehyde 0. 62
Heptanolc aldehyde 0. 77
COMPOS 3»^Y
Aromatlcs (cont.)
1,2.4-Trl-
methylbenzene 0. 97
1,3.5-TH-
methylbenzene 0. 98
Isopropylbenzene 0. 97
n-Propylbenzene 1.01
lM2-Iaopropyl-
benzene 0. 99
lM3-Iaopropyl-
benzene 1.01
!M4-lBopropyl-
benzene 0. 99
sec. -Butylbenzene 1. 00
tert. -Butylbenzene 1.02
n-Butylbenzene o. 98
Unaaturates
Acetylene 1.07
Ethylene 1.02
Hexene-1 0. 99
Octene-1 1.03
Decene-1 1.01
Alcohols
Methanol 0. 23
Ethanol 0. 46
n-Propanol 0. 60
laopropanol 0. 53
n-Butanol 0. 66
Isobutanol 0. 68
aec.-Butanol 0.63
tert. -Butanol 0. 74
Amyl alcohol 0.71
Methyllsobutyl-
carbinol o. 74
MethyUmyl alcohol 0. 65
Hexyl alcohol 0. 74
Octyl alcohol 0. 85
Decyl alcohol 0. 84
era*. »SS£
Aldehydes (coat.)
Octaldehyde
Caprlc aldehyde
Aromatlcs
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
para-Xylene
meta-Xylene
ortho-Xylene
lM2-Ethylbenzene
IMS-Ethylbenzene
lM4-Ethylbenzene
1,2.3-Trl-
methylbenzene
0.78
0.80
1.12
1.07
1.03
1.00
1.04
1.02
1.02
1.01
1.00
0.98
~> ,JESJ£
Aclda
Formic
Acetic
Propionlc
Butyric
Hexanolc
Heptanolc
Octanolc
Eaters
Methylacetate
Ethylacetate
Isopropylacetate
aec. -Butylacetate
Isobutylacetate
n-Butylacetate
leoamylacetate
Methylamylacetate
Ethyl -(2)-
ethylhexanoate
Hexylcaproate
Celiosolve acetate
Nitrogen Compound
AcetonitrUe
Trlmethylareine
tert. -Butylamlne
Diethylamlne
Aniline
dl-n-Butylamine
Ketonea
Acetone
Methylethylketone
Methyllsobutyl-
ketone
Ethylbutylketone
Dllsobutylketone
Ethylamylketone
Cyclohexanone
0.01
0.24
0.40
0.48
0.63
0.61
0.65
0.20
0.38
0.49
0.52
0.54
0.55
0.62
0.63
0.72
0.78
0.50
0.39
0.46
0.54
0.61
0.75
0.75
0.49
0.61
0.71
0.71
0.72
0.80
0.72
                   30
-------
the diesel H/C ratio was  entered  as  1.85,  corresponding  to  a  hydrocarbon
molecular weight  (per  carbon  atom) of  13.8759.  Additional  13-mode  infor-
mation regarding  dual-fuel usage,  the  various  f/a  ratios, and exhaust oxy-
gen was printed out for each  of the  13 modes and will be discussed  in the
Results, Section  VI.

          As with the  13-mode procedure,  certain program modifications were
necessary in order to  compute the 1984 Transient FTP and bus  cycle  emis-
sions.  The modifications concerned  the computations of  fuel  consumption
on the basis of carbon balance via HC, CO,  and CO2 emissions.  Additional
calculations were included to compute  the  percent  of fuel carbon  for each
segment of the transient  test, based on actual measured  diesel and  alcohol
fuel usage during that segment.   The computed  percent fuel  carbon was then
used in calculating the fuel  consumption  reported  as brake  specific fuel
consumption  (BFSC).  This fuel calculation used a  fuel carbon fraction
of 0.866 as a multiplier  for  the  HC  mass  emission.  HC mass emission was
computed using an exhaust HC  density of 0.5768 kg/in3  (16.33 g/ft3) ^3^ on
the basis of a H/C ratio  of 1.85.  For comparison,  the percent of fuel
carbon for diesel, methanol,  and  ethanol are 87, 38, and 26,  respectively.
As with the 13-mode procedure, no NOx  correction for humidity was applied
to the transient  results.  In the case of  transient test operation, the
engine intake humidity and temperature were controlled to 60  - 90 grains/
Ib of dry air and 68 - 86°F,  so a correction factor of 1 was  actually used.

          Some selected individual hydrocarbons (IHC) were  determined from
dilute exhaust samples using  a CVS.  Samples were  taken over  seven  indi-
vidual modes of steady-state  operation and over the cold-start and  hot-
start transient cycles.   A portion of  the  dilute exhaust sample collected
in a Tedlar bag was injected  into a  four-column gas chromatograph using
a single flame ionization detector and dual sampling valves.   The timed
sequence selection valves allowed the  baseline  separation of  air, methane,
ethane, ethylene,  acetylene,  propane,  propylene, benzene, and  toluene.(8)

          Aldehydes and ketones were  determined by using the  2,4-dinitrophenyl-
hydrazine (DNPH)  method.(8)     Raw exhaust  samples  were taken  during steady-
state operation;  whereas  dilute samples were taken from the main  CVS dilu-
tion tunnel during transient  testing.  In  both  cases a heated  sample line
and filter were maintained at 190°C (375°F) .   The procedure  consists of
bubbling filtered exhaust gases,  dilute or raw, through glass  impinger
traps containing  a solution of DNPH  and HC1 kept at 0°C.   The aldehydes
and ketones  (also known as carbonyl  compounds)  react with the  DNPH  to
form their respective  phenylhydrazone  derivatives  (precipitates).   These
derivatives are removed by filtration  followed  by  pentane extractions
evaporated in a vacuum oven.   The  remaining dried  extract, which  contains
the phenylhydrazone derivatives,  is  dissolved  in a specific volume  of
toluene with anthracene internal  standard.  A portion of this  dissolved
extract is injected into  a gas chromatograph and analyzed using a flame
ionization detector to separate formaldehyde,  acetaldehyde, acetone, iso-
butyraldehyde, methylethylketone,  crotonaldehyde,  hexanaldehyde,  and
benzaldehyde.
                                    31
-------
          Phenols,  which differ from alcohols in having the hydroxyl group
(-CH) attached directly to an aromatic ring, were measured using an ether
extraction procedure detailed in Reference 8.   Raw exhaust samples were
taken during steady-state operation,  and dilute samples were taken from
the main CVS dilution tunnel during transient operation.  Exhaust samples
were collected in impingers containing aqueous potassium hydroxide.  The
contents of the impingers were acidified with sulfuric acid, then extract-
ed with ethyl ether.  This extract was injected into a gas chromatograph
equipped with an FID for the determination of various phenols as follows:

                                              Molecular
                        "Phenol"               Weight
                  Phenol                        94.11
                  Salicyaldehyde               122.13
                  m-Cresol                     108.15
                  p-Cresol                     108.15
                  2,3-xylenol                  I22.il
                  3,5-xylenol                  122.17
                  p-ethylphenol                122.17
                  2-isopropylphenol            136.20
                  2,4,6-trimethylphenol        136.20
                  2,3,5-trimethylphenol        136.20
                  2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol    150.22

At the start of the program, both filtered and unfiltered exhaust samples
were analyzed.  The unfiltered exhaust samples appeared to indicate the
same trends but with lower response than obtained using a filtered sample.
The unfiltered exhaust sample was dropped in favor of the filtered ex-
haust sample on the basis of better recovery.(8)'

          Unburned fuel quantities were also determined for both modal and
transient operation.  In most cases, unburned fuel includes aldehydes,
phenols, and specific hydrocarbons along with the actual aerosols and/or
gas phase evaporated fuel.  Unburned fuel, for this program, meant speci-
fically unburned alcohol.  For unburned methanol, dilute or raw exhaust
(depending on engine operation) was drawn through glass bubblers contain-
ing distilled water at  0°C  in order to condense out and collect unburned
methanol S^   The level of methanol collected was determined by gas chrom-
atograph using an FID.  Unburned ethanol was determined by collecting a
dilute exhaust gas sample in a Tedlar bag and processing a small portion
of this sample through a gas chromatograph procedure described in Refer-
ence 9.

          Total intensity of aroma (TIA)  was quantified by using the Coor-
dinating Research Council Diesel Odor Analytical System (DOAS).   Dilute or
raw sample,  depending on engine operation, was drawn off through a heated
sample train and into a trap containing Chromosorb 102.  The trap was later
                                    32
-------
eluted  and  injected by syringe  into the DOAS  instrument,  which is  a liquid
chromatograph  that  separates  an oxygenate  fraction (liquid  column  oxygenates,
LCO) and an aromatic fraction (liquid column  aromatics, LCA).   The TIA
values  are  defined  as TLA  = 1. + logio (LCO, yg/£)  or  TIA  =  0.4 + 0.7  log1Q
 (LCA, yg/£)  (TIA by  LCO preferred).   A.D. Little,  the  developer of  the DOAS
instrument,  has related this  fraction to TIA  sensory  measurement by the
A.D. Little odor panel.  (10>  The system was intended  for  raw exhaust  sam-
ples from steady-state operating conditions,  but  for  this program,  dilute
samples of  exhaust  were taken in order to  determine a TIA value for trans-
ient operation.  Where dilute samples were taken,  the corresponding TIA
values  were increased proportional  to the  dilution ratio.


     2.   Particulate Emissions

          Particulate emissions  were  determined from  dilute exhaust samples
utilizing various collection  media  and apparatus,  depending on  the  analy-
sis to  be performed.   Particulate has been defined as  any material  col-
lected  on a fluorocarbon-coated  glass fiber filter at  or below  a tempera-
ture of 51.7 °C (125  °F),  excluding condensed water.^  The 125 °F tem-
perature limit and  the absence of condensed water  dictates that the raw
exhaust be  diluted,  irrespective of engine operating mode.  The tempera-
ture limit  generally required dilution ratios of approximately  12:1
 (total  mixture:raw  exhaust).

          Total particulate-rate samples were collected on 90 mm or 47 mm
Pallflex TA60A20 fluorocarbon-coated  glass fiber filter media by means
of double dilution  or single  dilution techniques.  Gravimetric weight
gain, representing  collected  particulate,  was determined to the nearest
microgram after the filter temperature  and humidity were stabilized.  This
weight  gain along with CVS flow  parameters and engine  data were used to
calculate the total particulate  mass  emission of the  engine under test.

          Smoke and total  particulate are related in that the relative level
of smoke opacity indicates the relative level of particulate.   The ab-
sence of smoke, however, does not indicate the absence of particulate.
Smoke was determined  by  the end-of-stack EPA-PHS smokemeter which moni-
tored the opacity of  the raw  exhaust  plume as it issued from the exhaust
pipe.   Smoke opacity  was determined for the 13-mode operation, power
curve operation, and  for the  smoke  FTP.^ '

          Since total particulate, by definition, includes  anything  collected
on fluorocarbon-coated glass  fiber  filter  media, there has always been
an interest to find out what  constitutes the  "total particulate ."   The
following paragraphs  describe the methods  and analysis used to  determine
some of the properties of  the total particulate.
                                    33
-------
           Particle size distributions were determined using a Sierra Series
 220 cascade  inertial impactor.  Dilute exhaust particles  having a variety
 of  shapes  and densities were fractionated and collected according to their
 aerodynamic  characteristics.  The aerodynamic size gives  information re-
 lating  to  the physical size, shape and density of the  particulate,  indi-
 cating  how the particles may behave in the environment.   Pre-weighed
 stainless  steel  impactor discs were used for stage collection,  and a pre-
 weighed fluorocarbon-coated glass fiber filter was used as  a back-up
 filter  to  collect all particulate aerodynamically smaller than  the  lowest
 cut-off (0.11 microns Effective Cut-Off Diameter, or BCD).  Impactor flow-
 rate was selected to provide individual stage separation  from 7.4 to 0.11
 microns ECD.

           Sulfate, orignating from the combustion of sulfur-containing fuel,
 was collected as part of the particulate matter in the form of  sulfate
 salts or sulfuric acid aerosols.  A 47 mm Fluoropore  (Millipore  Corp.)
 fluorocarbon membrane filter with 0.5 micron pore size was used  to  collect
 the sample.  This total particulate sample is ammoniated  to "fix" the
 sulfate portion  of the particulate.  Using the barium  chloranilate  (BCA)
 analytical method, the sulfates are leached from the filter with an
 isopropyl  alcohol - water solution (60% IPA).  This extract is  injected
 into a  high  pressure liquid chromatograph (HPLC)  and pumped through a
 column  to  scrub  out the cations and convert the sulfate to sulfuric acid.
 Passage through  a reactor column of barium chloranilate crystals  precipi-
 tates out  barium sulfate and releases the highly UV absorbing chloranilate
 ions.   The amount of chloranilate ion released is determined by  a sensi-
 tive liquid  chromatograph UV detector at 310-313 nanometers.  "Sulfate"
 should  be  understood to mean 804= as measured by the BCA methodS8^

         Carbon, hydrogen, metals, and other elements that make  up  the to-
tal particulate are also of interest.   A sample of "total particulate" was
 collected  on 47  mm Type A (Gelman) glass fiber filter media for  the pur-
 pose of determining the carbon and hydrogen weight percentages.   This
 analysis was performed by Galbraith Laboratories using a Perkin-Elmer
 Model 240B automated thermal conductivity CHN analyzer.  This instrument
was  designed for analysis of liquid samples.   In order to accommodate
 the  particulate  sample on a filter, the filter must be folded or  rolled
over  itself.  As the temperature is increased,  the glass fiber media
collapses  on itself,  sometimes locking in some of the particulate.  For
this reason significant inaccuracies can occur.  One of the ways  to im-
prove the  accuracy was to collect relatively high particulate loadings.
This was possible for steady-state operation but difficult for transient
testing.

         A sample of total particulate matter was also collected on a 47 mm
Fluoropore  filter for  the determination of trace  elements such as calcium
aluminum, phosphorus,  and sulfur by X-ray fluorescence.  This analysis
was conducted at the EPA, ORD laboratories in Research Triangle Park,
N.C. using  a Siemens  NRS-3 X-ray fluorescence spectrometer.
                                    34
-------
      3.    Soluble Organics

           Carbon has  long been recognized as an excellent adsorbing medium for
hydrocarbon aerosols.   Similarly,  it has been recognized that carbonaceous
particulate could readily adsorb hydrocarbons present in the  exhaust.   In
order to  determine to what extent total particulate  contains  these vari-
ous  hydrocarbons, particulate filter samples were  washed with an  organic
solvent,  methylene chloride.   The dissolved portion  of the  "total particu-
late" carried off with the methylene chloride solvent has been referred
to as the "soluble organic fraction" (SOF).   As with total  particulate
the  SOF may be composed of anything carried over by  the extraction process,
so its composition is also of interest.   Generally the SOF  contains numer-
ous  organic compounds,  many of which are difficult to isolate and to quan-
tify. Some SOF has been shown to be mutagenic using the Ames test.

          Relatively large amounts of soluble organic fraction (some 300 mg)
are  generally needed  for elemental characterization  and Ames  testing.
Large 500 x 500 mm (20x20 in.)  Pallflex filters were used to  collect
correspondingly large amounts of total  particulate for extraction.  As
mentioned earlier, both CVS units used  in this program can  collect three
20x20 particulate samples simultaneously.   These filters are  weighed to
determine the particulate loading,  then stored in  glassine  bags within
a brown paper envelope.  Several of these envelopes  are grouped and sealed
in a Tedlar bag purged with nitrogen.   The  Tedlar  bags are  then stored
in a freezer until needed for extraction.   These steps generally  take
place within a few hours of sample collection,  and are carried out under
yellow light (ultraviolet light filtered out using Kodak "yellow  chrome
II"  film).

          When specific total particulate samples are  selected for  extractions,
the  corresponding filters are pulled from freezer  storage and extracted
in soxhlet extractors as shown in Figure 12.   After  adequate  cycling time,
the  solvent (methylene chloride)  containing the extractables  is filtered,
then evaporated to "dryness"  in a preweighed vial  using blown-in  nitrogen.
The  weight of the "dried" extract is determined, and the SOF  percent of
total particulate calculated.   "Dried"  refers to the complete removal of
the  solvent.   The vial contents are either  distributed for  analysis or
stored in the freezer  for subsequent analysis or shipment.  As with fil-
ter  handling,  all extraction steps were  carried out  under yellow  light.


          Carbon,  hydrogen,  sulfur,  and nitrogen were  determined for the  SOF.
Carbon and hydrogen content of  the  "dried" extract was determined by
Galbraith Laboratories  using a  Perkin-Elmer Model  240B  automated thermal
conductivity CHN  analyzer.  A portion of the  extract was  submitted to
SvRI's Mobile Energy Division for nitrogen analysis by  chemiluminescence
and sulfur analysis by  X-ray fluorescence.
                                   35
-------

   Figure 12.   Soxhlet Extraction of particulate  for  soluble organic  fraction
         The boiling range of the SOF was determined by SwRI's Mobile Energy
Division using a high-temperature variation of ASTM-D2887-73.  Approxi-
mately 50 mg of the SOF was dissolved in solvent and an internal standard
(Cg to GH compounds)  was added.  This sample was then submitted for
instrumental analysis of boiling point distribution.

         Another portion of the SOF sample was submitted for fractional sep-
aration.  The method involves separation of the extractables into a series
of fractions of increasing polarity.  A high performance liquid chroma-
tographic procedure which utilizes a variable solvent program is used to elute
increasingly polar compounds.  BaP, 9-flurorenone and acridine standards
are injected to indicate the types of compounds eluted in each region of
the chromatogram.

         BaP is considered to be an elementary indicator of the relative PNA
content of the SOF.  The analytical method used for the determination of
BaP is described in Reference 12.  The procedure is based on high-perfor-
mance liquid chromatography to separate BaP from other organic solubles in
particulate matter, and it incorporates fluroescence detection to measure
BaP.  The instrument used was a Perkin-Elmer 3B liquid chromatograph equip-
ped with a MPF-44  fluorescence spectrophotometer.  Excitation was  at  a
wavelength of  383  run, and emission  was  read  at  430 nm.
                                      36
-------
          As mentioned earlier, there is concern about the potential health
effects impact that diesel exhaust may have.  The emphasis of this concern
has been placed on the SOF which was submitted for Ames testing.

          The Ames test,as employed in this program, refers to a bacterial
mutagenesis plate assay with Salmonella typhimurium according to the method
of Ames.(13)  This bioassay determines the ability of chemical compounds or
mixtures to cause mutation of DMA in the bacteria, positive results occurring
when histidine-dependent strains of bacteria revert (or are mutated) geneti-
cally to forms which can synthesize histidine on their own.  Samples of SOF
were shipped under dry ice to EG&G for Ames test response.  Details of this
procedure can be found in References 13 and 14.
                                  37
-------
                              IV.  RESULTS

     This section describes the results obtained from numerous emission
measurements and sample analysis conducted on both the Volvo TD-100C
diesel engine and the Volvo TD-100A dual-fuel engine.  It is divided
into three parts.  The first  part gives preliminary emission test re-
sults used to decide on engine timing and cold start-up procedures, along
with general test notes which describe some of the pertinent details and
the chronology of the accumulated test results.  The next two parts de-
tail the accumulated gaseous  and particulate data, respectively.  Over-
all emission trends, comparisons of data, and general remarks are given
along with the results.

A.   Preliminary Results and  General Test Notes

     The dual-fuel engine was installed in the SwRI transient test
facility which includes a 28-170 m3/minute (1000-6000SCFM) double-
dilution CVS and a transient-capable dynamometer and control system.  All
transient work and some selected steady-state work were conducted in this
test facility.  This is the same facility used for the EPA "Baseline"
Contract 68-03-2603, "Emissions from Heavy-Duty Gasoline and Diesel Engines
Used in Vehicles Above 8,500  Pounds Gross Vehicle Weight."  Extensive
steady-state characterization was conducted in SwRl's steady-state test
facility which utilizes a 28  to 340 m3/minute (1,000 to 12,000 SCFM)
single dilution CVS.

     Following initial setup  and operational checkout of the engine,
Mr. Bert-Inge Bertilsson (of  Volvo) adjusted the linkage connecting the
rack of the diesel pump to the alcohol pump,  changing the low flow stop
setting of the diesel pump on the basis of HC and smoke emissions at 1400
rpm motoring and full load conditions.  Static engine timing of the alco-
hol fuel injection pump was not changed from the "as-received" setting
of 24°BTDC.  Using the rack stop adjustment inside the alcohol pump, the
maximum power was set to 186.5 kW (250 hp) at 2200 rpm, with methyl alco-
hol as the main fuel and using 13-mode intake and exhaust restrictions.
Intake restriction and exhaust backpressure used in this emission charac-
terization program are listed below.  The 13-mode restrictions were based
on certification data for a diesel TD-100C engine, and transient restric-
tions were based on "typical" limits for intake and exhaust restrictions.

                                Restrictions at Maximum Power
                          Intake, mm 1^0  Cin H2O)   Exhaust, mm Hg  (in Hg)

          13-Mode                660 (26.0)              91  (3.6)

          Transient              300 (11.8)              74  (2.9)
                                   39
-------
      Preliminary  test  results were requested by the Project Officer in
 order to choose between  a  static timing of 24° or  19°BTDC  for alcohol
 injection timing.   Information was also requested  in  order to establish
 a cold-start procedure which would be  suitable for use with the trans-
 ient cycle FTP.   Following several delays related  to  dynamometer control,
 torque transducer, and  driveline vibration (near idle  speed of 500 rpm)
 problems;  the engine was mapped under  transient conditions according to
 the 1984 FTP, and a transient cycle control tape was  generated.

      The same engine control tape for  the transient cycle,  based on the
 24°BTDC map,  was  used  for  both 24°BTDC and 19eBTDC transient tests.
 Results from these preliminary transient tests are given in Table 10.

      The 13-mode  results were processed per the 1979  procedure,  which
 utilized the carbon balance and measured fuel to determine the regulated
 emission rates.   Methanol  fuel consumption was converted to "equivalent
 diesel fuel" on the basis  of heating value.  This  "equivalent diesel fuel"
 was added to the  measured  diesel fuel  used, and the emissions data pro-
 cessed through the 13-mode computer program normally  used  for diesel
 engines.  Humidity corrections for NOX were_ applied to the preliminary
 data.   Thirteen-mode HC  and NC^ emissions were about  as expected,  but
 CO levels were significantly higher than those obtained by Volvo.   Several
 checks, including  CO instrument calibration and methanol interference,
 were made.   An additional  ice trap was used to assure a dry CO measure-
 ment.   No cause for the  relatively high CO was found.  "HC"  represents
 total  hydrocarbons indicated using a Beckman 402 heated flame ionization
 detector (HFID).

     The transient results were quite  repeatable.  Run 3 of the  transient
 test cycle was run  with  the cycle control tape started 25  seconds  after
 the  engine was started.  The 25 second delay was to allow  time for the
 preheat cycle  to expire  and for the alcohol fuel pump to be  "ON"  during
 the  first active engine  demand which occurs at 23  seconds  from the start
 of the  cold-start  transient cycle.   The engine, as received,  had  a shorter
 preheat cycle after start-up than anticipated.    The preheat cycle expired
 automatically between  30 and 40 seconds.  No significant difference  be-
 tween the third cold-start and the other two cold-starts at 24°BTDC  can
 be attributed to the 25  second delay of the cycle.

     The timing of the alcohol injection pump was  changed  from the as-
 received 24°BTDC to 19°BTDC.  Both steady-state and transient test data
 showed  definite changes due to 5° timing retardation of the  alcohol  in-
 jection pump.  The most notable and expected results were  a  reduction  in
NOx emissions and  an increase in fuel consumption.  In addition,  the
particulate emissions,  which were already relatively  low at  24°BTDC, de-
creased even further with retarded timing of alcohol  injection.   It  was
noted that the cold-start,  with either timing,  had slightly  lower  particu-
late emissions than the hot-start transient.   These relatively low particu-
late rates were determined, as usual,  from collection by two  90 mm filters
in series.  Filter efficiency averaged about 83 percent,  which is  lower
than for most diesel-only engines tested.^5)   Based on these results,


                                  40
-------
             TABLE 10.   PRELIMINARY TEST RESULTS FROM VOLVO TD-100A DUAL FUEL ENGINE
Run 1
HC, g/bhp-hrd
CO , g/bhp-hr
CO2 i g/bhp-hr
NOx, g/bhp-hr
Part . , g/bhp-hr
BSFC, lb/bhp-hrc
Cycle Power, hp-hr
Run 2
HC, g/bhp-hrd
CO , g/bhp-hr
CO 2> g/bhp-hr
NOX , g/bhp-hr
Part . , g/bhp-hr
BSFC, Ib/bhp-hr
Cycle Power, hp-hr
Run 3a
HC, g/bhp-hrd
CO, g/bhp-hr
CO2, g/bhp-hr
NOX, g/bhp-hr
Part., g/bhp-hr
BSFC, Ib/bhp-hr
Cycle Power, hp-hr

Cold Trans
1.45
7.08
659.
5.73
0.27
0.886
15.52

1.62
7.69
647.
5.83
0.26
0.905
15.25

1.38
7.47
646.
5.64
0.28
0.873
15.16
24°BTDC
Hot Trans
1.34
6.19
629.
5.70
0.30
0.842
15.43

1.33
7.09
627.
5.72
0.28
0.840
15.37

1.32
6.48
619.
5.67
0.32
0.835
14.96

13-modeb
1.239
7.289
—
5.553
—



1.273
7.434
—
5.487
—










19°BTDC v
Cold Trans
1.43
8.37
707.
4.92
0.22
0.980
15.37
1.43
8.67
705.
4.84
0.22
0.960
15.42
Hot Trans
1.34
7.79
684.
4.88
0.24
0.930
15.62
1.38
7.86
690.
4.75
0.25
0.934
15.50
13 -mode
1.123
7.559
—
4.143
—


1.065
7.484
—
4.156
—


Run 3 was to determine if there was a significant difference in cold-start procedure,
namely, the cycle control tape was delayed by 25 sec. from engine start-up
13-mode results are reported from calculations based on equivalent diesel fuel- NOX correction
applied
BSFC was calculated from carbon balance - utilizing a calculated percent carbon in the dual fuel
HC as indicated by Sectarian 402 HFID
-------
 it was decided by  the  Project Officer that emissions  characterization
 whould be pursued  with static timing of the alcohol injection at 19°
 BTDC due to lower  emissions of NOx and particulate.
      As mentioned above,  the  second preheat cycle was  running approximately
 30 to 40 seconds.  Additional checks into the circuitry were  made,  and it
 was discovered that the  engine  cooling water temperature  sensor was defec-
 tive.  An additional cold-start procedure was run, manually holding the
 alcohol pump to "OFF"  for 50  seconds.  The result was  that the engine
 could not follow the first active portion of the transient cycle,  as
 anticipated,  and also  that it produced slightly higher HC emissions as
 noted from continuous  HC traces.  Since after only 25  seconds of idle
 from cold start-up the alcohol  was undergoing combustion, it  was decided
 that the preheat would be terminated manually 23 to 25 seconds after en-
 gine and test cycle start.  Details of the cold-start  sequence were de-
 scribed in Section III.B.,  page 14.

      Having completed  the preliminary tests, the dual-fuel engine was
 mapped in the "methanol"  test configuration with the alcohol  pump  set
 to 19°BTDC.   Methanol  configuration refers to the dual-fuel diesel  engine
 adjusted to operate on methanol (main fuel) , with pilot injection of
 diesel fuel in varying proportions depending on speed  and load.  Both
 a 1984 transient FTP control  tape and a bus cycle control tape were gen-
 erated.

      Chronologically,  the methanol configuration was run  first.  The
 engine operated  well,  and appeared to follow the active portions of the
 transient cycle.   Several initial tests were repeated  for various reasons
 which included incomplete data  recovery, or void sample collection  along
 with  some engine-related  solenoid actuation problems.  Optimization of
 the dynamometer  controls continued in an attempt to stay  within statis-
 tical  requirements.  As testing progressed, it appeared that  engine-
 driveline  vibration  began to  interfere with torque measurement at idle.
 This  caused the  rack position to vary slightly, which  broke the electrical
 contact activating the diesel pump solenoid,  switching it from "high"
 flow to "low"  flow.  This situation appeared to have no effect on steady-
 state  engine operation, but it was uncertain what effect  it might have on
 transient operation and emissions.  On the basis of information received
 at the time, switching of the diesel pump solenoid was of little or no
 consequence and testing continued.  The driveline vibration resonance
 occurred around 800 rpm,  but the fringe of the vibration began around the
 500 rpm engine idle speed.  Dynamometer control and statistical  results
were somewhat uncertain from day to day because of the engine  idle,  dyna-
mometer control, and dynamometer driveline vibration interaction.

     Following completion of transient testing in the methanol configuration,
an oxidation catalyst was installed in the exhaust system about 0.6 m
 (2 ft) from the turbocharger outlet.   No adjustment to the alcohol  in-
jection pump was made.   This test configuration was referred  to as  the
 "methanol-catalyst" configuration.  Several transient  tests were conducted
                                  42
-------
in this configuration while  striving to obtain the best  statistical
results with closed rack during idle.  In the meantime,  Volvo requested
that the rack be fully closed during idle to insure electrical contact
for the diesel solenoid operation.  In order to assure throttle closure,
a large negative torque command was issued during idle commands.  With
the throttle fully closed, the engine may have been motored more than for
previous runs.  Results from these runs did not appear to be representa-
tive, and were not used.  Other methods of dynamometer control were pur^
sued.

     As testing of the methanol-catalyst configuration was being completed,
a conference was held with Mr, Ernst Holmer of Volvo.  It was decided that
the dual-fuel engine should  be operated with the diesel  pump set to "low"
flow, after cold start-up using "high" flow.  This meant that the problem
with intermittent solenoid actuation during idling periods could be by-
passed.  He also requested that a backpressure device be used with future
catalyst testing in order to reduce warm-up time of both the engine and
the catalyst.  Additional transient tests were requested to verify the
influence of the "high" flow diesel actuation and the influence of the
actual start-up "puff" on particulate measurements.

     The catalyst was removed from the dual-fuel engine  exhaust system
and the alcohol fuel was changed from methanol to ethanol.  Due to the
significantly greater heating value of ethanol, the alcohol injection
pump was adjusted to account for the difference.  The injection pump was
adjusted to obtain 186.5 kW  at 2200 rpm.   This configuration was referred
to as the "ethanol" test configuration.  Following the completion of
13-mode FTP gaseous emission testing, the additional hot-start transient
runs requested by Volvo were conducted.  To insure positive rack closure,
a large negative torque command was issued during idle commands.  The first
test was conducted with particulate sampling as normal,  and with the
diesel fuel flow switched to "high" flow at closed rack  conditions.  The
second hot-start transient used the identical command program, but the
90 mm particulate sample activation was delayed by 10 seconds in order
to miss the engine start-up  "puff."  The third hot-start transient was
conducted with particulate sampling as normal, but with  the diesel fuel
flow switched to "low" flow  throughout the test.  Detailed results of
these three runs are given in Appendix E as Tables E-2,  E-3, and E-4.
Essentially no difference between the three tests could  be attributed to
the variables intentionally  changed.  Volvo preferred that the "low" flow
setting be used on subsequent transient tests, including cold-starts.
Following these special tests, normal command tapes were once again used.

     Initial cold-start transient tests, run with the diesel fuel set to
"low." caused the engine to  false start.  It was agreed  that the "high"
diesel flow would be used for the first 23 seconds, and  that the pump
would then be switched to "low" flow.  Vibration during  idle conditions
continued to cause problems  with meeting statistical requirements, but
were not thought to have any substantial effect on the emissions.  While
testing was being completed  for the ethanol configuration, a backpressure
device to be us«d with the catalyst was received.
                                   43
-------
      Following completion of the ethanol configuration,  the  catalyst and
 the backpressure device were installed on the dual-fuel  engine.   This
 configuration was referred  to as the  "ethanol-catalyst-backpressure"
 configuration.  The  backpressure device was activated by closed  rack con-
 ditions such as motoring or idle.  The device is described in Section III.
 B   Diesel fuel consumption had to be increased by means of  adjustment
 to the diesel pump and the  linkage connecting the diesel and alcohol
 injection pumps in order to maintain  500 rpm idle speed.  Driveline vibra-
 tion still continued to be  an annoyance, so in order to  change the reso-
 nant frequency, a stiffer torque meter was installed  (100K in Ib) .

      Following the completion of transient tests in the  ethanol-catalyst-
 backpressure configuration, the alcohol fuel was changed from ethanol to
 methanol.  A few transient  tests were conducted in this  "methanol-catalyst-
 backpressure" configuration in order  to see what effect  the  backpressure
 device might have.  No 13-mode FTP emission tests were conducted in this
 configuration, but idle emissions were measured with the device  engaged.

      The intent of the backpressure device was to increase and help main-
 tain catalyst temperature,  thereby decreasing the catalyst warm-up time
 during the cold-start.  Figure 13 shows catalyst inlet and outlet  temperature
 profiles during cold-  and hot-start transient operation  with and without
 the backpressure device.  The backpressure device caused the catalyst inlet
 temperature profile  to appear more erratic and to attain higher  peak values.
 The catalyst inlet gas temperature profile from both the  cold-start and the
 hot-start transient  overlapped after  500 seconds with the backpressure
 device.   This overlap  occurred after  only 375 seconds without the  back-
 pressure device.   Similarly, the catalyst outlet temperature overlapped
 earlier  (490 seconds)  without the backpressure device than with  the de-
 vice  (650 seconds).  Without the backpressure device, the catalyst outlet
 temperature reached  200°C after 415 seconds, whereas it  took 450 seconds
 with  the device.   Both catalyst inlet and outlet temperatures were in-
 creased  after  900  seconds of the transient cycle with the use of the back-
 pressure device.   Overall,   the backpressure device appears to have rela-
 tively minor  influence on the warm-up profile of the catalyst.

     Following  completion of the tests with methanol-catalyst-backpressure,
 the catalyst was removed and the backpressure device disabled.   Some
 additional  runs were  made in the methanol and ethanol fuel configurations
 in order  to repeat part of the unregulated sample collection.  Upon com-
pletion  of  these runs, the engine was moved to the steady-state, single-
dilution CVS test facility to undergo extended steady-state  emissions
testing.

     The engine was adjusted to the methanol configuration.   Aldehydes
were taken over 11 modes  of  the 13-mode procedure,  including  all 10 of
the intermediate and  rated  speed power modes along with one  idle mode.
Samples for particulates,  individual hydrocarbons,  unburned  methanol,
and odor index were taken for seven modes of operation (they  included
                                   44
-------
*.
     ct>
     Q
     CO
500


400


300


 200


 100


   0




 500


 400


 300


 200


 100
               L
                                                   WITH BACKPRESSURE DEVICE
                                   Cold Start Catalyst In Tenperature
                                   Cold Start Catalyst Out Tenpenature
                                   Hot Start Catalyst In Terrperature
                                   Hot Start Catalyst Out Terrperoture
                                                  WITHOUT BACKPRESSURE DEVICE
                                                                                 1000


                                                                                  800


                                                                                  600


                                                                                  '400


                                                                                  200


                                                                                    0


                                                                                 1000


                                                                                  800


                                                                                  600


                                                                                  400


                                                                                  200
                                                                                                                              n>
                                                                                                                              CD
                                                 1
             1200    1100
                       1000
900     800      700     600
                 Time,  Seconds
                                                                         500
                                                                          '(00
300
200
100
                       Figure  13.
                             Catalyst warm-up profiles  with and without a backpressure
                                 device  during  transient FTP operation
-------
 the 2,  50,  and 100 percent load conditions at both rated  and  intermediate
 speeds,  plus an idle mode).

      Similar samples were collected with the dual-fuel engine in the
 methanol-catalyst configuration.  In order to collect sufficient particu-
 late sample at idle, as well as for other modes, sample times of up to
 one hour were required.  Following light engine  load conditions, the
 engine  was  operated at high power to burn off any raw fuel  or oils  which
 might have  accumulated in the exhaust system.  An additional  idle mode
 was run in  the methanol-catalyst-backpressure configuration in order to
 determine what effect the backpressure device had on emissions.

      In the course of the program, it was decided not to  conduct steady-
 state testing of the dual-fuel engine in either  the ethanol or the  etha-
 nol-catalyst-backpressure configurations.  Since no data  had  been collec-
 ted using ethanol and 30 percent water by mass,  it was decided that some
 steady-state characterization should be conducted.  Changing  from the
 methanol to the "ethanol+water" configuration required only minimal ad-
 justments to the alcohol injection pump since both "fuels"  have  similar
 heating values on a volume basis.

      Aldehydes,  individual hydrocarbons, unburned ethanol and particulate
 were measured for seven modes of operation.  Test modes included the  2,
 50,  and  100 percent load conditions at both rated and intermediate  speeds.
 Idle data from the dual-fuel engine in the methanol fuel  configuration
 were used for the ethanol+water configuration, since no fuel  other  than
 diesel was  consumed at idle.  Fuel measurements  at the 1400 rpm/2 percent
 load condition also indicated that only diesel fuel was consumed at this
 condition,  but it was nevertheless repeated because it was  near  the point
 at  which the  alcohol fuel was added.  There were significant  similarities
 in  regulated  as well as unregulated emissions between the ethanol+water
 configuration  and the methanol configuration.  Due to these similarities,
 transient testing in the ethanol+water configuration was  not  conducted in
 favor of obtaining transient diesel engine data.

     While  the  steady-states were underway, an EPA correlation program
 had  been completed in the transient facility.  The diesel Volvo  TD-100C
 was  installed  in  the transient test facility.  Once the transient FTP
 testing  was completed,  the engine remained in the facility  for steady-
 state characterization similar to that conducted on the dual-fuel engine.
 Upon completion of sample collection,  the test phase of the program ended.

 B.   Gaseous Emissions

     The term  "gaseous emissions" usually refers to HC, CO, and  NOX,  which
 are currently regulated emissions.   This section presents the  results of
 emission measurements  which include not only these regulated  gaseous  emis-
 sions, but also individual hydrocarbons,  unburned alcohols, aldehydes,
 and phenols.  These  additional species are generally included  in a  quali-
 tative way as part of  the "total hydrocarbon."   Odor intensity,  which has
been shown to correlate with the presence of these and other  gas phase

                                  46
-------
emissions,  is  also  presented.

      1.   HC,  CO, and  NOX

          These  regulated pollutants  were measured  over  the  1979 FTP  as
well  as  the 1984 Transient FTP.   In 1984, the  transient  test procedure
will  be  optional in lieu of the  13-mode  test procedure.   In  1985, the
transient test procedure will  become  mandatory,  and in 1986  the trans-
ient  test procedure will include particulate measurement and regulation.
For perspective, some  of the proposed standards, beyond  1979, are listed
in Table 11.

       TABLE 11. HEAVY-DUTY DIESEL REGULATED  EMISSION LIMITS, 1979-1986

                                   Regulated Emissions (g/hp-hr)
                 FTP            HC     CO      NOX     Particulate
      1979     13-mode             1.5    25.      10.0       Nonea
              13-mode  (opt.)      —     25.       5.0       Nonea
      1984     13-modeb            0.5    15.5      9.0       None3
              Transient13          1.3    15.5     10.7       Nonea
      1985     Transient           1.3    15.5     10.7       Nonea
      1986     Transient           1.3    15.5      4.0         .25
      ^Federal Smoke Regulations
       Manufacturer may certify by either procedure
           a.    13-mode FTP

                Two  1979  13-mode Federal Test Procedures for gaseous emis-
sions were conducted  in  six  test  configurations.  The six included the
Volvo TD-100C diesel  engine  as received, and the Volvo TD-100A dual-fuel
engine in the methanol,  methanol-catalyst, ethanol, ethanol-catalyst-
backpressure and  ethanol+water test configurations.  A summary of aver-
age 13-mode gaseous emissions from the six test configurations is given
in Table 12.  Copies  of  the  individual 13-mode computer printouts are
given in Appendix A,  providing detailed information on a modal basis.

                The diesel engine  had slightly lower HC and substantially
lower CO than did the alcohol-fueled configurations without catalyst,
all of which had  very similar HC  and CO emissions.  As expected, the cata-
lyst was most effective  with methanol, reducing the HC and CO by 90 per-
cent; whereas with ethanol the catalyst reduced HC and CO levels by about
65 percent.  Although CO levels from the alcohol configurations with cata-
lyst were three times those  of the diesel engine, they were still below
the 1984 limit.   It should be noted that the HC values reported here are
based on measurements by HFID.  The FID response is very low for unburned
alcohols and some other  species of unregulated emissions.

                The diesel configuration had the highest emission of NOV.
                                                                      A.
The NOX emission  rates shown  in Table 12 are without the usual correction for
                                   47
-------
            TABLE 12.  GASEOUS EMISSION SUMMARY FROM 13-MODE
                   OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES
                                   13-Mode
Test
Configuration
Diesel
Methanol
Methanol
-Catalyst0
Ethanol

Ethanol
-Cat.-Bp.d
Ethanol
+ Water
Emissions3 ,
HC
1.05
(0.78)
1.45f
(1.08)
0.16f
(0.12)
1.65*
(1.23)
0.60f
(0.45)
1.89f
(1.41)
gAw-hr
CO
3.18
(2.37)
0.55
(7.12)
0.83
(0.62)
10.52
(7.84)
3.10
(2.31)
9.99
(7.45)
(g/hp-hr)
NOX
11.886
(8.86)
5.26
(3,92)
6.79
(5.06
6.85
(5.11)
7.98
(5.95)
4,46
(3.32)
BSFC?
kg/kw-hr
(Ib/hp-hr)
0.262
(0.431)
0.486
(0.799)
0.482
(0.792)
0.395
(0.650)
0.400
(0.657)
0.495
(0.814)
 Computed on the basis of molecular weight of the
 fuel or fuel combination used
 NOX correction factor for intake humidity was
 computed but not applied
 Without backpressure device
 with backpressure (Bp.)  device - engaged only at idle
 NOX value is reduced to 10.89 gAW-hr (8.12 g/hp-hr)
fwhen the intake humidity correction for NC^c is applied
 HC values reported here are based on measurements
 by HFID.  FID response is very low for unburned
 alcohols and some other species of unregulated emissions
9BSFC is in terms of dual fuel rather than diesel fuel
 where applicable
                                   46
-------
intake air humidity.  The correction was omitted to facilitate compari-
sons between the diesel fuel configuration and the alcohol configurations.
NOX correction for intake air humidity was not applied to any of the alco-
hol configuration results, because of the uncertainties in computation
of such a correction  factor where fuels containing water and oxygen are
involved.  Copies of  the computer printouts, with the humidity correction
applied to the diesel engine's  emissions, are given in Appendix A, Tables
A-l and A-2.

               Considering only the alcohol-fueled configurations without
catalyst, ethanol had the highest NOX emissions, followed by methanol,
then ethanol+water.   It appears that the catalyst was associated with
increased NOX emissions, although emission levels before and after the
catalyst showed only  minor increases in NOx-  The ethanol-catalyst con-
figuration was run using a backpressure device active during idle.  NOX
emissions at idle increased by  about 30 percent with the device engaged.
The backpressure device was not used for the methanol-catalyst configura-
tion during the 13-mode FTP.

               Brake  specific fuel consumptions for the various configura-
tions are also given  in Table 12.  As discussed in Section III.D., fuel
consumption was computed on the basis of the measured mass of combined
fuel.  The relatively high BSFC values for alcohols can be ranked accord-
ing to their heating  value on a mass basis.  The amounts of diesel fuel
and alcohol fuel usage were dependent on the load condition.  Figure 14
illustrates graphically the variable fueling schedule used for the metha-
nol, ethanol, and ethanol+water configurations.

               The amount of diesel fuel injected is constant at each
engine speed, whereas the alcohol portion changes with load.  The relative
amount of alcohol consumed during a given mode is proportional to the
heating value of the  alcohol used.  Diesel fuel consumed by the Volvo die-
sel TD-100C is also shown in order to indicate the amount of diesel fuel
replaced by alcohol.  Variation in alcohol consumption during the 2200
rpm/2 percent load condition  (mode 12) was due to difficulty in measuring
low fuel flow with a  relatively large meter.  In addition, it appears
that "neat" ethanol can be conserved by consuming ethanol mixed with water.
This trend may be due to ignition timing effects, or improved turbocharger
performance which could improve engine efficiency.  The ethanol+water was
measured as a mixture, and the  water content was calculated assuming 30
percent by mass.  The measured  density of the ethanol+water mixture indi-
cated that the actual water content was 29 percent by mass.

               On a 13-mode composite basis, diesel fuel consumption was
reduced from 0.28 kg/min with the diesel engine, to 0.097 kg/min with the
dual-fuel engine.  This represents a 65 percent substitution of alcohol
for diesel fuel over  the 13-mode composite.  Details of 13-mode fuel con-
sumption may be found in the reduced copies of the computer printouts which
are given in Appendix A.  Fuel  molecular weight was also computed on a
modal basis, and is given in these printouts.
                                   49
-------
1 .60

1.50

1 -10


1 . 30


I.JO
1 . 10

1.00
c;
2-
11.90
E?
"0.80
rt
™ 0.70

?r
J3
\ 0. 00
a
e
3
0.50


0.40

0. JO


O.JO
0. 10
0 . 00
""•

















— | . t>0

Y/\ Diesel










_ \^?\ Methanol


|#










Ethanol








FsN Water
ts
~


























^





















































^1


























7
/



























/



























',

























\

/
/




















































V
/
/
/
'<

^
;
^
;



j



-

-.


:-
--.
/
s
s,
y




'.
7
/{






























7


/
/
/
'-';
f'f

f^
'<•


''

--
^
^
/• *


*-
'>
/
y







•


•-

v



;•
P
/
S
V
\
\
\
i^



•.-





';
7
/








r?
s
/
/
/


/
2.
i*'
,s
'*
ss
sS
^
' *•

fS
' '

. /
"ff

-X
-':
',f
^


::
'?
f






-.-


^
/




.-

*.
-


'/
'.

^
\
V
O
\
S
S









'-

*



-
-'•
/
/
v<







n
rt
3"
3
O

» W +
D rt ft
H- 3" 3" I
O DP pi Pi
in 3 3 ft
re o o o
t— ' t— ' ( — ' N
o o n n
o o o o
3333
r* htj r-h hti
H- H- t— H-
i£J lO ifl \Q
C B C C
K M H H
B PI PI U
rt rt rt rt
H- h^ h~ H-
O O O 0
3333
^
/

'
'.


/

/
/
f
^


^
/
/
/
,/
?;

































X1
/









(






-•
'.;


\'
•-:


;-

~r

\~



•\

/
j
rq
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
s
s
s,
s
^

.. •

f

\ '
.'.
:•:
.,•.

- .
,-.




..


;


''"'

^

	


—
































/

/

/
^


/
/
';
/x

^
f
"-
;
f
'















V-
/
/





•T-
;
•'•,
. j






•.''

.N_





':

/
/
/
f
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\

<



,'*


•<>

,'•


T

,1


7
/
/
/
—
_






















r~
s
/

j
r
/
/.
/.
-r\
t /
X


s*
»x


^

^
'^
*^




^•'
/
/









\
^'
^-

% •


r
•'.
^
0
\
\
\
\






•;


;••


t'
1
7~
-









^; N
> ^ -

i . -.'• _„


/ ^-' .-'.-
' j



l.SO


1.40

1 . 3n


1.20

1.10
1.00


0.90

o.en
O.TO



0.60


0.50


0.40

0.30


0.20
0.10
0.00
                                                           10
                                                                  11
                                                                         12
                                                                                13
                                   Mode
Figure 14.  Illustration of diesel pilot  and  alcohol  fuel  injection
              schedules measured during 13-mode  FTP
-------
           b.    Transient  FTP

                The  transient  test  procedure was  run  with  the  engine on
the transient-controlled  stationary  dynamometer,  the total  exhaust trans-
ferred  to  a double-dilution CVS, and primary  dilution at  a  nominal flow
rate of 2000  CFM.   Transient  cycle particulate emissions  were determined
via a 4 CFM  (total  flow)  secondary dilution system using  90 mm Pallflex
filters.   Transient cycle gaseous  emissions of CO and CC>2 were determined
from proportional bag  samples of the primary  dilution flow.   Integrations
of individual analyzer outputs were  used  to determine emissions of HC and
NOX.  The  transient test  consists  of a  cold-start cycle,  20 minute soak,
then a  hot-start cycle.   The  results from these  cycles are  combined into
a composite transient  result  as described in  Section III.C.

                A summary  of the average gaseous  emission  results obtained
from transient testing is given in Table  13.  The results from the cold-
start and  the hot-start represent  averages of several individual tests.
Reduced copies of computer printouts for  these individual tests are given
in Appendices B, C,  D,  E,  and F; for diesel,  methanol, methanol-catalyst
 (including methanol-catalyst-backpressure), ethanol,  and  ethanol-catalyst-
backpressure  configurations,  respectively.  Appendix Tables B-l, C-l,
D-l, E-l,  and F-l give  additional  qualifying  information  for  individual
tests,  and indicate whether or not the  results were  included  in the aver-
age values in Table 13.   Transient FTP  composite  values given in Table 13
were computed using the average cold and  hot  FTP  values.  Particulate emis-
sion rates are also given in  Table 13,  but discussion of  these data will be
reserved for  the particulate  section of the report.

                The  HC  values  given in this report represent the total hy-
drocarbons indicated by the Beckman  Model 402 HFID,   It has been noted
that the FID  has low response to some species of  oxygenated hydrocarbons,
such as alcohols and aldehydes.  In  addition, NOX values  reported for
transient  operation in  this section  were  not  corrected for  engine intake
air humidity  due to the use of a humidity- and temperature-controlled
intake  air system.

                Both the diesel engine and the dual-fuel engine appear to
be slightly cold-start  sensitive in  regard to HC, CO,  and NOx emissions.
All these  gaseous emissions and the  calculated BSFC  were  higher for the
cold-start than for the hot-start  transient test.  Comparing  transient
composite  results,  emissions  of both HC and CO were  higher with the alco-
hol-fueled engine configuration than for  the  diesel  configuration.  HC
and CO  were highest  with  ethanol,  although CO levels  were still below
the proposed  1984 standard.   NOx emissions were similar for both alcohols,
and were relatively  low compared to  the diesel configuration.  The oxida-
tion catalyst  with  the backpressure  device appears to have reduced emis-
sion of HC and CO as expected,  and to have increased  NOX  somewhat.  From
steady-state data,  some increase in  NOX occurred  during idle  when the
backpressure device was operating.   The catalyst  appeared to  be more active
in the methanol configuration.
                                   51
-------
           TABLE 13.   REGULATED EMISSIONS6  SUMMARY FROM TRANSIENT
                     FTP OPERATION  OF  THE  VOLVO  TEST ENGINES
Test
Configuration
Diesel
Methanol

Hethanol
-Catalyst

Methanol
-Cat. Bp.c


Ethanol


Ethanol


cycle
Type
Cold
Start
Sot
Start
Transient
Composite
Cold
Start
Hot
Start
Transient
Composite
Cold
Start
Hot
Start
Transient
Conpoaite
Cold
Start
Hot
Start
Transient
Composite
Cold
Start
Hot
Start
Transient
Composite
Cold
Start
Hot
Start
Transient
Composite
Regulated
^/kw-hr,
HCd
1.58
(1.18)
1.08
(0.80)
1.15
(0.85)
1.98
(1.48)
1.94
(1.45)
1.95
(1.45)
0.36
(0.27)
0.13
(0.10)
0.16
(0.12)
0.62
(0.46)
0.21
(0.16)
0.27
(0.20)
2.28
(1.70)
2.27
(1.69)
2.27
(1.69)
0.79
(0.59)
0.60
(0.45)
0.63
(0.47)
CO
4.84
(3.61)
3.90
(2.91)
4.04
(3.01)
11.85
(8.84)
10.03
(7.48)
10.29
(7.67)
5.54
(4.13)
3.29
(2.45)
3.61
(2.69)
6.09
(4.54)
3.49
(2.60)
3.86
(2.88)
13.29
(9.91)
12.82
(9.56)
12.89
(9.61)
5.65
(4.21)
4.01
(2.99)
4.24
(3.16)
Emissions",
(q/hp-hr)
NOxP
11.78
(8.79)
11.09
(8.27)
11.19
(8.34)
7.55
(5.63J
7.27
(5.42)
7.31
(5.45)
7.44
(5.55)
7.38
(5.50)
7.39
(5.51)
8.90
(6.64)
8.31
(6.20)
8.39
(6.26)
7.48
(5.58)
7.36
(5.49)
7.38
(5.50)
8.77
(6.54)
8.60
(6.41)
8.62
(6.43)
Part.
0.80
(0.60)
0.68
(0.51)
0.70
(0.52)
0.36
(0.37)
0.40
(0.30)
0.39
(0.30)
0.26
(0.19)
0.34
(0.25)
0.33
(0.24)
0.28
(0.21)
0.42
(0.31)
0.40
(0.30)
0.34
(0.25)
0.35
(0.26)
0.35
(0.26)
0.34
(0.25)
0.39
(0.29)
0.38
(0.28)
cycle BSFC"
kg/kw-hr
(Ib/hp-hr)
0.306
(0.502)
0.284
(0.468)
0.288
(0.473)
0.561
(0.922)
0.526
(0.873)
0.531
(0.873)
0.538
(o.aesr
0.515
(0.946)
0.518
(0.852)
0.622
(1.022)
0.567
(0.933)
0.575
(0.946)
0.451
(0.742)
0.432
(0.711)
0.435
(0.715)
0.465
(0.764)
0.445
0.732)
0.448
(0.737)
Cycla work
kw-hr
(hp-hr)
10.29
(13.79)
10.54
(14.13)
10.50
(14.08)
11.27
(15.10)
11.27
(15.11)
11.27
(15.11)
11.13
(14.92)
11.19
(15.01)
11.19
(15.00)
10.62
(14.24)
11.37
(15.24)
11.26
(15.10)
11.45
(15.36)
11.38
(15.26)
11.39
(15.27)
10.95
(14.67)
11.01
(14.76)
11.00
(14.75)
      is  in terms of dual fuel  rather than dieael fuel where applicable.
 Approximately 80%, by mass,  of the fuel consumed during a transient
 cycle was alcohol.  Heating  values arei  diesel at 42.90 KJAg (18,400
 BTO/lb), methanol at 19.88 MJAg  (8,550 BTO/lb), and ethanol at 27.01
 KJAg (11,600 BTO/lb)
 NO, values presented here are  based on continuous measurement by
 chemiluminescence.  NO, values for some runs were also computed from
 bag sample measurement by CL and  are reported in the corresponding
 Appendix.  Intake humidity was controlled - NOjj correction of 1.00
 used in  all cases for transient NO*.
jBp. stands for backpressure  device
TIC values reported here are  based on indication by HFID (Beckman 402) .
 FID response has been reported to be very low for unburned alcohols and
(scae other species
 Regulated emissions include  HC, CO, NO,, and partlculate aa proposed
 for 1986 Transient FTP
                                           52
-------
           c.  Bus Cycle

               Emission levels were also determined for the transient bus
cycle.  The bus cycle was run 20 minutes after completing the hot-start
transient cycle, or 20 minutes after completing another hot-start bus
cycle.  A summary of the average gaseous emissions results is given in
Table 14.  Reduced copies of these bus cycle tests are presented in Ap-
pendices which correspond to the fuel configurations listed for trans-
ient FTP results.  Generally, all the HC, CO, and NOX emissions were
higher for the bus cycle than for the transient FTP.  The most significant
difference between the two cycles appears to be the increase in CO emis-
sions from the alcohol-fueled configurations.  A significant increase in
CO was not observed in the diesel configuration, although diesel HC and
NOX were somewhat higher.

               The BSFC's were higher for the bus cycle than for corres-
ponding transient FTP's.  Fuel consumption has been reported in terms
of "dual" fuel which has a significantly lower heating value per unit mass
than does No. 2 diesel fuel.  The BSFC data given in Tables 13 and 14
are computed on the basis of carbon balance.  They are somewhat dependent
on measured alcohol and diesel fuel consumed during the test, in that a
''percent fuel carbon" is calculated from the measurements and used in the
carbon balance computations for fuel consumption.

               The percent of fuel carbon for No. 2 diesel is usually
around 87 percent.  Some of the calculated "percent of fuel carbon" values,
by fuel and by bag of the transient test, are given in Table 15.  The per-
cent fuel carbon values for methanol and ethanol are 38 and 52 weight per-
cent, respectively.  In general, calculated percent of fuel carbon ranged
from a low of 46 to a high of 66, depending on the type of alcohol used,
the cycle activity and loading, and the amount of diesel fuel used.  Higher
percentages of alcohol by weight were used in the methanol configuration,
due to the lower heating value of methanol as compared to ethanol.

               Overall, the results from the transient test agree fairly
well with those of the 13-mode test procedure.  HC emissions were only
slightly higher from the transient FTP.  Thirteen-mode CO emissions were
higher for the transient procedure, especially with methanol-catalyst-
backpressure configuration.  The diesel configuration had higher NOX for
the 13-mode than for the transient FTP, but dual-fuel engine configura-
tions had higher NOX for the transient FTP than for the 13-mode.  The NOX
reduction using alcohols may be cycle-sensitive, due to NOX reduction during
the high-power steady-state modes.  BSFC was consistently higher on the
transient procedure, for reasons already explained.

     2.   Selected Individual Hydrocarbons

          Some individual hydrocarbons were determined from dilute exhaust
samples and processed by chromatographic techniques to separate methane,
ethylene, ethane, acetylene, propylene, propane, benzene and toluene.
Higher molecular weight hydrocarbons were not measured.  Samples were


                                    53
-------
         TABLE 14.  TRANSIENT EMISSIONS SUMMARY FROM BUS CYCLE
                  OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES
Test Cycle
Configuration Type
Diesel Bus
Methanol Bus
Methanol Bus
-Catalyst
Methanol Bus
-Cat.-Bp.c
Ethanol Bus
Ethanol Bus
Transient Emissions
q/kW-hr, (q/ho-hr)
HC° CO
1.34
(1.00)
1.96
(1.46)
0.38
(0.28)
0.31
(0.23)
2.94
(2.19)
0.86
(0.64)
4.59
(3.42)
25.56
(19.06)
10.43
(7.78)
9.21
(6.87)
24.23
(18.07)
8.15
(6.08)
N0xb
12.44
(9.28)
8.46
(6.31)
8.00
(5.97)
9.20
(6.86)
8.11
(6.05)
10.42
(7.77)
Part
0.82
(0.62)
0.60
(0.45)
0.22
(0.16)
0.24
(0.18)
0.60
(0.45)
0.38
(0.28)
Cycle BSFCa Cycle Work
kgAW-hr kW-hr
(IbAp-hr) (hp-hr)
0.294
(0.484)
0.566
(0.931)
0.548
(0.901)
0.591
(0.971)
0.453
(0.745)
0.478
(0.786)
4.64
(6.21)
5.29
(7.10)
4.98
(6.68)
4.84
(6.49)
4.88
(6.54)
4.51
(6.05)
 BSFC is in terms of dual fuel rather than diesel fuel
 where applicable.  Approximately 80%, by mass, of the
 fuel consumed during a transient cycle was alcohol.
 Relative heating values are:  diesel at 42.90 MJ/kg
 (18,400 BTU/lb) , methanol at 19.88 MJAg (8,550 BTU/lb) ,
 and ethanol at 27.01 MJAg (11,600 BTU/lb)
 NOX values presented here are based on continuous
 measurement by chemiluminescence.   NOX values for some
 runs '.:ere also computed from bag sample measurement by
 CL and are reported in the corresponding Appendix.  Intake
 air humidity was controlled - NOX correction of 1.00 need
 in all cases of transient NO,,
c                            ^
 Bp. stands for backpressure device
 HC values reported here are based on indication by HFID
 (Beckman 402).   FID response has been reported to be very
 low for unburned alcohols and some other species.
                                   54
-------
        TABLE  15.  PERCENT OP FUEL CARBON  CALCULATED FROM  TRANSIENT
               OPERATION OF THE VOLVO  TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE
    Fuel
Configuration

Methanol
Methanol
-Cat.-Bp.
Trans.
Bus

Trans.
Bus
                 Test Segment,
             Percent Fuel Carbona
50
49

50
50
47
46

48
47
44
48

45
51
                                                   51
51
Alcohol Portion
  Used, % Wt.

     81.6
     79.3

     80.6
     77.3
Ethanol
Ethanol
-Cat.-Bp.
Trans.
Bus

Trans.
Bus
65
63

68
66
60
60

61
60
58
62

58
64
                                                   63
65
     77.6
     73.9

     76.3
     69.1
^Percent fuel carbon of:  No. 2 Diesel is typically 87 percent by wt.
                          Methanol   = 38%
                          Ethanol    - 52%
processed from cold- and hot-start transient operation, and from seven
individual modes of steady-state operation.  Results from transient
operation in the diesel, methanol, methanol-catalyst, ethanol, and etha-
nol-catalyst configurations are summarized in Table 16.  Steady-state
results are given  in Tables 17, 18, 19 and 20 for the diesel, methanol,
methanol-catalyst  and ethanol+water configurations, respectively.  Of all
the individual hydrocarbons mentioned above, methane and ethylene were
predominant.  Relatively small concentrations of ethane, acetylene, pro-
pylene, and benzene were indicated by the procedure.  No propane was de<-
tected.  In most cases toluene was detected, but chromatographic inter-
ference, thought to be caused by unburned fuel, makes it difficult to
verify the presence of benzene and toluene.  As a matter of convenience
for comparison purposes, "total" individual hydrocarbons are given for
transient operation in Table 16 and are merely the sum of the individual
hydrocarbon concentrations, excluding toluene.  There is little or no
difference between cold-start and hot-start transients, except where the
catalyst was used.
                                   55
-------
               TABLE  16.   INDIVIDUAL  HYDROCARBONSb FROM  TRANSIENT OPERATION
                                    OF THE VOLVO  TEST ENGINES
T»at
Con fig .
Diesel





Hethanol





Hethanol
-Catalyst




Ethanol





Ethanol
-Cat.-Bp.




Trans
Cycle"
Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Individual Hydrocarbon
Units
rig/teat
mgAW-hr
mgAg
mg/test
mgAW-hr
mgAg
mg/test
mg/kW-hr
ngAg
mg/test
mgAW-hr
mgAg
mg/test
mgAW-hr
mgAg
mg/test
mgAW-hr
mgAg
mg/teBt
mgAW-hr
mgAg
mg/test
ragAW-hr
mgAg
mg/test
mgAW-hr
mgAg
mg/test
mgAW-hr
mgAg
>'.<.- thane
220
21
69
150
14
49
360
33
59
400
35
66
440
40
70
300
27
48
1200
110
240
1200
100
240
1200
120
250
1000
98
220
Ethylene
1600
160
520
1000
95
330
840
76
140
1200
100
200
550
50
87
300
27
48
4300
370
830
4600
400
950
1300
120
270
1100
100
230
Ethane Acetylene Propylene
46
4.5
15
—


20°
1.8
3.2
24"
2.1
4.0
	


17a
1.5
2.8
53
4.6
10
64
5.6
13
69
6.6
14
52
4.9
11
240
23
75
—


7.5°
.7
1.2
2.1°
.2
.4
	


—


420
37
82
440
39
91
120
12
25
84
8.0
18
530
52
170
—


360
33
59
470
41
79
120
11
20
41
3.7
6.9
480
42
93
480
42
99
—


—


Benzene Toluene
180
18
59
—


140
13
23
68
5.9
11
23"
2.1
3.9
—


320
28
63
160
14
33
—


_-


	


—


1600
140
250
800
70
130
450
41
72
150
13
24
500
44
98
260
23
54
230
22
47
200
19
44
IHC j
"Total"
2800
280
910
1150
110
380
1700
160
290
2200
180
360
1100
100
180
660
60
110
6800
600
1300
6900
600
1426
2700
260
560
220O
210
479
°Trace amounts, relative to resolution of procedure.  Presence is questionable
 No propane detected
CThese values are likely to vary as much as ± 500 mg/test.  It is doubtful that
 toluene was formed and these  values were likely caused by unknown interference
 Toluene was not used in the "Total," due to the significant uncertainty of
 its presence.
-------
  TABLE 17.   INDIVIDUAL  HYDROCARBONS  FROM MODAL  OPERATION
             OF THE  VOLVO  TD-100C  DIESEL ENGINEa
                                   RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE
Methane
Ethylene
Acetylene
Propylene
              Units
           rag/hr
           mgAW-hr
           mgAg fuel

           mg/hr
           mgAW-hr
           mg/kg fuel
                         1400
                          2%
                                1400
                                 50*
               1400
               100%
                                               Idle
2200
100%
2200
 50%
 690
 340
 180

2500
1200
 640
       2100
         24
         83
2200
 2%
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
mg/hr
mgAW-hr
rag/kg fuel
1200
600
310
6900
3400
1800
—

2000
31
130
—

2500
19
86
980
830
1800
—
1500
—

6500
36
150
—

5700
64
230
2100
620
230
17000
5000
1900
       2000
        590
        220

       6500
       1900
        710
 IHC procedure also separates ethane, propane, benzene  and toluene.
 No propane,  acetylene, or toluene were detected.  Dilute exhaust
 samples were taken with CVS flowrates of  2000 CFM for  Idle and the
 2* loads,  3000 CFM for the 50% loads, and 5000 CFM for 100% loads.
TABLE  18.   INDIVIDUAL HYDROCARBONS FROM MODAL OPERATION
   OF  THE  VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL  ENGINE WITH  METHANOL
                                                                   b
                                  RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE
Methane
              Units
            mg/hr
            mgAW-hr
            mg/kg fuel
Ethylene    mg/hr

            mgAg fuel

Acetylene   mg/hr

                 fuel
Propylene   mg/hr
            mgAW-hr
            mgAg fuel
1400
2%
a


4800
1700
1200
370
130
89
1100
390
260
1400 1400
50% 100*
— a 1500
11
25
1100 1400
16 100
40 23
	 —


— —


2200
Idle 100%
240 — 3
—
210
740 7400
41
630 88
370
2
4
2300
13
27
2200 2200
50% 2*
— a 620
150
71
2200 7400
24 1800
49 850
400
98
46
2400
590
280
Background levels exceeded sample levels
bIHC procedure also separated ethane, propane, benzene and toluene.   Small
 concentrations, near the limits of detectability, of ethane, benzene and
 toluene were noted, but their presence is  doubtful.  Propane was not
 detected.   Dilute exhaust samples were taken with CVS flowrate of 3000 CFM,
 nominal.
                                  57
-------
       TABLE  19    INDIVIDUAL HYDROCARBONS FROM MODAL  OPERATION
OF  THE VOLVO TD-100A  DUAL-FUEL  ENGINE WITH METHANOL  AND  CATALYST*

                                      RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE


Methane

Ethylene


Acetylene


Propylene



Units
mg/hr
mgAg fuel
mg/hr
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
mg/hr
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
mg/hr
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
1400
2*
1200
430
270
2200
790
500
—


—


1400
50*
1300
19
47
363
5
13
—


—


1400
100*
970
7
16
181
1
3
—


—


2200
Idle 100*
210 880
5
170 11
410 570
3
340 7
__


—


2200
50*
800
9
18
620
7
14
—


—


2200
2*
3100
820
310
2700
710
270
—


440
120
43
       IHC procedure also separates ethane, propane, benzene and toluene.   No
       propane,  acetylene,  benzene or toluene were detected during operation
       with catalyst.
       This idle condition  was run without the  backpressure device. Another
       sample from  idle with  the backpressure device operable was taken but  none
       of these  species were  detected.
   TABLE  20.   INDIVIDUAL HYDROCARBONS FROM MODAL  OPERATION OF THE
VOLVO


Methane


Ethylene


Ethane


Acetylene


Propylene


TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH ETHANOL + WATERb
RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE

Units
mg/hr
mgAW-hr
mgAg f ue 1
mgA'T
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
mg/hr
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
mg/hr
mg/hW-hr
mgAg fuel
mg/hr
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
1400 1400
2* 50*
— * 7100
110
270
5000 6400
1800 96
1200 240
440
7
16
1200
17
43
1200
450
310
1400
100* Idle0
24000 240
180
400 210
22000 740
160
370 630
850
6
14
1600
12
28
	 	


2200
100*
2900
15
31
9200
49
100
390
2
4
__


__


2200 2200
50* 2*
5500 2500
58 650
120 270
3200 12000
34 3000
68 1300
410
110
45
1300
340
140
2900
760
320
      ^Background level exceeded sample level
       IHC procedure  also separates propane, benzene and toluene, but none of these
       were detected.  Dilute samples were taken with CVS flowrates of 6000 CFM at
      =100\ conditions and 2000  CFM at all other conditions
       Idle data duplicated from methanol configuration
                                        58
-------
          In comparing the diesel engine to the dual-fuel engine, it
should be noted that the diesel engine uses direct injection of diesel
fuel into the center of the combustion chamber; whereas, the dual-fuel
engine uses the smaller pilot injection of diesel tangent to the swirl
of the combustion chamber.  This point is especially important in com-
paring emissions at idle, and at light load conditions like 1400 rpm/2
percent load, where only diesel fuel is consumed.  The diesel engine shows
higher emissions of methane and ethylene at idle and light loads than the
dual-fuel configuration.  From the transient data, the ethanol configura-
tion produced the highest "total" individual hydrocarbons, primarily due
to the high emission rates of ethylene.  The catalyst had little effect
on methane, but it reduced ethylene significantly.  Most levels of the
individual hydrocarbons were relatively low, except that the ethanol+water
configuration showed high levels of methane and ethylene.

     3.   Unburned Alcohols

          Since the FID response is typically low for alcohols, it was
important to determine the quantity of unburned alcohol in the exhaust
by another procedure.  Table 21 summarizes the results from analysis of
unburned alcohols during both transient FTP and bus cycle testing.  Re-
sults of modal testing are given in Table 22.  Unburned methanol was
trapped in a wet bubbler containing water, and unburned ethanol was deter-
mined from dilute exhaust bag samples.  Both samples were processed through
the appropriate GC procedure.

          There was not much difference in alcohol emissions between the
cold-start and hot-start transients.  The catalyst reduced the unburned
alcohol for both fuels.  There was more unburned alcohol from the metha-
nol configuration than from the ethanol configuration.  In steady-state
testing, the bulk of the unburned alcohol occurred at 50 percent load
conditions and at the 2200 rpm/2 percent load condition.  The catalyst
was very effective in oxidizing the unburned alcohols at the 100 percent
load conditions and at the 2200 rpm/50 percent load condition.  No
alcohol consumption was noted during idle or during the 1400 rpm/2
percent load condition.  Considering both test procedures, transient
and steady-state, less unburned ethanol was emitted (in ethanol-fueled
configurations) than unburned methanol (in methanol-fueled configurations).

     4.   Aldehydes

          Aldehydes were determined by the DNPH procedure, which detects
formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acetone, isobutyraldehyde, methylethylketone,
crotonaldehyde, hexanaldehyde, and benzaldehyde.  Samples were taken from
dilute exhaust during transient operation, while samples of raw exhaust
were taken during steady-state operation.  The procedure was intended for
use with raw exhaust, and it is difficult to obtain a concentrated sam-
ple from the dilute exhaust within the 20 minute duration of the trans-
ient cycle or the 14-minute bus cycle.  Samples were taken over 11 modes
                                   59
-------
     TABLE 21.  UNBURNED ALCOHOL SUMMARY FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION
                 OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE
Test
Configuration
Methanol


Methanol
-Catalyst


Ethanol


Ethanol
-Catalyst


Transient
Cycle
Cold Start
Hot Start
Composite
Bus
Cold Start
Hot Start
Composite
Bus
Cold Start
Hot Start
Composite
Bus
Cold Start
Hot Start
Composite
Bus
mg/test
52000
56000
55000
19000
13000
9600
10000
4300
25000
26000
26000
11000
7000
4700
5000
3900
mg/kw-hr
4700
4900
4900
4100
1200
840
890
890
2200
2300
2300
2300
670
450
480
860
mg/kg fuel
8400
9300
9200
6900
2200
1500
1600
1500
4900
5400
5300
5000
1400
1000
1100
1800
Fuel refers to dual fuel used,  which has
a lower heating value than diesel fuel alone
                                  60
-------
                             TABLE 22.  UNBURNED ALCOHOL SUMMARY FROM MODAL
                             OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE

                                       RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE
Test
Con fig.
Methanol



Methanol
-Catalyst


Ethanol
+ Water



Units
yg/m exh.
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuelc
/ 3
yg/m exh.
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
yg/m exh.
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg f ue 1
1400a
2%
1100
380
140
91
5700
2000
710
160




1400
50%
300000
130000
1900
4700
250000d
110000
1600
4000
250000
110000
1600
4000
1400
100%
16000b
9400
69
150
780
460
3.3
7.7
31000
18000
130
4000
2200
Idle3 100%
	 160000
150000
830
1800
1400e 32000
150 30000
	 170
120 360
	 f 52000
51000
270
560
2200
100%
700000
500000
5300
1000
250000
180000
1900
4100
140000
100000
1100
2200
2200
2%
370000
200000
49000
23000
180000
94000
25000
9300
210000
120000
31000
13000
bNo alcohol consumption was noted during idle or during 1400/2% condition
 This value was based on an incomplete sample (1 of 2 bubblers),  and may
 be atypically low
 Computed on the basis of dual fuel, including water
 This value was much larger than expected on the basis of 13-mode HC emissions,
 and should be interpreted with caution
 No methanol is introduced during idle, so it is assumed that this value is a
 result of uncertainty in the quantitative procedure near the detection limit
 Idle data duplicated from methanol configuration
-------
 of the  13-mode  steady-state procedure  (idle was only  sampled once)  in
 the methanol  and the methanol-catalyst configurations.  An  additional
 aldehyde  sample was taken at idle with the dual-fuel  engine backpressure
 device  engaged.  Based on the accuracy of the DNPH procedure and the
 level of  effort required to process the samples, steady-state charac-
 terization of aldehydes was reduced to include 7 modes of steady-state
 operation of  the diesel and the ethanol+water test configurations.

          Of  the compounds detectable by the DNPH procedure,  only formal-
 dehyde, acetaldehyde, hexanaldehyde and benzaldehyde  were prevalent.   The
 presence  of benzaldehyde is suspect, in that it is often found as an arti-
 fact of the procedure itself.  Summaries of the aldehyde results from
 transient cycle and bus cycle operation are given in  Tables 23 and 24,
 respectively.  Summaries of aldehyde results from steady-state operation
 in diesel, methanol, methanol-catalyst and ethanol+water configurations
 are given in  Tables 25, 26, 27, and 28, respectively.

          For a given test configuration, there is little or no  differ-
 ence in aldehyde emissions between the cold-start and the hot-start
 transient cycles conducted without the catalyst.  The diesel  configura-
 tion emitted  relatively low levels of aldehydes.  The methanol configura-
 tion had  higher aldehydes, primarily higher formaldehyde, than the  diesel
 configuration.  The ethanol configuration also had higher aldehydes than
 the diesel configuration, the major differences being higher  formaldehyde
 and acetaldehyde.  With methanol, the catalyst reduced acetaldehyde dur-
 ing transient operation,  but tended to increase formaldehyde.  With etha-
 nol, the  catalyst reduced the levels of transient cycle formaldehyde,
 but increased acetaldehyde.  The same trends can be noted for  bus  cycle
 operation.

          During steady-state operation,  aldehydes were higher with the
 dual-fuel engine on methanol than with the diesel engine.   With  ethanol+
 water,  formaldehyde was formed in about the same amounts as with  the
 methanol  configuration, but more acetaldehyde was produced.  The  effects
 of  the catalyst were mixed on steady-states run with methanol.  Aldehydes
 were increased at the light loads and idle,  but were reduced at the high
 loads where the catalyst  temperature was  sufficient to oxidize the  un-
 burned fuel species.   Use of the backpressure device at idle,  in  con-
 junction with the catalyst,  appears to have reduced the levels of alde-
 hydes detected.

     5.    Phenols

          Phenols were determined using a wet chemistry procedure as  out-
 lined in Section III.E.I  and described in detail in Reference  8.  The
 detection  of  individual phenols in either dilute or raw engine exhaust
 appears  to be quite variable.   In the early stages of this program, it
was uncertain whether better results would be obtained from the  filtered
 sample  procedure or from  the unfiltered sample procedure.   It was reasoned
 that filtering the  particulate out of the exhaust sample at 190°C  (375°F)
 could keep the sample clear of particulate,  causing less interference.
-------
               TABLE 23 .  SUMMARY OF ALDEHYDESa FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION
                               OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES
Test
Con fig.
Diesel





Methanol



Methanol
-Cat.-Bp.




Ethanol





Ethanol
-Cat.-Bp.




Trans.
Cycle
Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Units
mg/test
mgAw-hr
mg/kg fuel
mg/test
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
mg/test
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
mg/test
mg/kW-hr
mgAg fuel
mg/test
mg/kW-hr
mgAg fuel
mg/test
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
mg/test
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
mg/test
mgAU-hr
mgAg fuel
mg/test
mgAw-hr
mgAg fuel
mg/test
mg/kw-hr
mgAg fuel
Formalde-
hyde
180
18
59
140
13
46
1900
190
330
2400
230
430
2600
250
400
3000
260
470
2000
170
380
1700
150
350
820
80
170
370
33
75
Acetalde-
hyde


—


—
490
48
84
210
21
38
120d
11
18
20d
1.8
3.2
1500
130
280
900
80
180
3200
300
660
2200
200
440
Benzalde-
hydeb
j. *~
76
7.4
24
d o
yy
9-j
. 3
33
2900
280
490
1600
160
290
750
73
120
160
14
24
2500
210
480
3000
260
610
	 __
—
—
360
32
73
"Total"0
Al HphvH^1^
*i-t-'-iCJ.i_y utJo
180
18
59

140
13
46
2400
240
414
2600
250
470
2700
260
420
3000
260
470
3500
300
660
2600
230
530
4200
380
830
2600
230
520
a
 DNPH procedure also  separates  acetone,  isobutyraldehyde, methylethylketone
 crotonaldehyde, and  hexanaldehyde.  No  methylethylketone, crotonaldehyde or
 hexanaldehyde were found.  Acetone and  isobutryaldehyde appeared sporadically
 and were very low.   The presence of acetone is also difficult to assess because
bof the potential for contamination of the DNPH procedure by acetone background
cBenzaldehyde may be  an artifict of the  DNPH procedure and it appeared sporadically
 Benzaldehyde is not  included in the "total" because of the uncertainty of its
 presence
 Trace amounts relative to the resolution of this procedure.

                                         63
-------
           TABLE  24.  SUMMARY OF ALDEHYDES3 FROM BUS CYCLE OPERATION
                         OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES
Test
Config. Cycle
Diesel Bus


Methanol Bus


Methanol Bus
-Cat.-Bp.

Ethanol Bus


Ethanol Bus
-Cat.-Bp.


Units
mg/test
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
mg/test
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
mg/test
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
mg/test
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
mg/test
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
Formalde-
hyde
96
21
70
1300
280
460
1800
370
620
2400
490
1100
590
140
270
Acetalde-
hyde
—
—
— —
840
180
310
—
—
—
1500
310
680
1100
250
510
Benzalde-
hyde
—
—
_*_*
3400
740
1200
—

—
2700
540
1200
—
—
__ —
"Total"
Q
Aldehydes
96
21
70
2100
i 460
770
1801
i 370
i 620
3900
800
1800
1700
380
780
 DPHN procedure also separates acetone, isobutyraldehyde,
 methylethylketone, crotonaldehyde, and hexanaldehyde.  No
 methylethylketone, crotonaldehyde or hexanaldehyde were
 found.  Acetone and isobutryaldehyde appeared sporadically
 and were very low.  The presence of acetone is also dif-
 icult to assess because of the potential for contamination
, of the DNPH procedure by acetone background.
 Benzaldehyde may be an artifact of the DNPH procedure and
 it appeared sporadically
 Benzaldehyde is not included in the "total" because of the
 uncertainty of its presence
                                    64
-------
                                   TABLE 25 .   SUMMARY OF ALDEHYDES FROM MODAL
                                   OPERATION OF THE VOLVO VD-IOOC DIL'SEL ENGINE3
                                                            RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE
CTl


Formaldehyde



Acetaldehyde



Hexanaldehyde



Benzaldehydec




Units
yg/m exh.
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
yg/m exh.
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mgAg fuel
yg/m exh.
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
yg/m exh.
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
1400
2%
3400
1200
600
310
190
68
34
17
	



400
140
70
36
1400
50%
1800
720
11
48
— — T-



370
150
2.3
10
240
96
1.5
6.4
1400
100%
1200
630
4.9
22
	



180
94
0.72
3.2
310
160
1.2
5.5
2200
Idle 100%
3100 780
360 750
	 4.2
310 17
_„



	 270
260
1.5
5.9
400 	
47
	
40
2200
50%
1300
980
11
39
___







420
320
3.6
13
2200
2%
3800
2200
650
240
19b
11
3.2
1.2
	



640
370
110
40
         No acetone  or  methylethylketone was noted for either fuel configuration
         Isobutyraldehyde,  crotonaldehyde and hexanaldehyde appeared sporadically,
         at low  levels
         Trace amounts, relative  to  the  resolution of  this  procedure
and
         'Benzaldehyde may be  an  artifact  of  the  DNPH  procedure
-------
                                TABLE 26. SUMMARY OF ALDEHYDES FROM MODAL OPERATION OF
                                   THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH METHANOL3

                                                          RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE
en


Formaldehyde



Acetaldehyde



Benzaldehyde0




Units
yg/m exh.
mg/hr
mg/kw-hr
mg/kg fuel
yg/m exh.
mg/hr
mgAW-hr
mg/kg fuel
yg/m exh .
mg/hr
mg/kw~hr
mg/kg fuel
1400
2%
2400
820
290
200
690
240
86
56
	



1400
25%
3800
1400
41
89
29b
11
0.31
0.70
2600
1000
29
64
1400
50%
10000
4200
62
150
260
110
1.6
4.0
860
360
5.3
13
1400
75%
7100
3800
36
81
350
180
1.7
3.8
900
480
4.6
10
1400
100%
3000
1800
13
30
	



140
82
0.60
1.3

Idle
730
85
	
73
— —



800
93
	
70
2200
100%
2000
1900
10
23
	



17b
16
0.09
0.19
2200
75%
17000
15000
110
210
100
80
0.62
1.2
1300
1100
7.7
15
2200
50%
32000
23000
250
520
600
440
4.7
10
900
660
7..1
15
2200
25%
35000
2300
490
730
810
520
11
17
4500
2900
61
93
2200
2%
10000
5300
1300
600
1100
600
150
69
1600
850
200
98
     ^o acetone or methylethyIketone  was noted for either fuel configuration
      Isobutyraldehyde, crotonaldehyde  and hexanaldehyde appeared sporadically, and
      at low levels
      Trace amounts, relative to the resolution of  this procedure
     CBenzaldehyde may be an artifact of  the  DNPH procedure
-------
                     TABLE 27.   SUMMARY OF ALDEHYDES FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE
                      VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH METHANOL AND CATALYSTa

                                                  RPM and. PERCENT LOAD IN MODE


Formaldehyde




Ace t aldehyde



Benzaldehydec




Units
yg/m exh.
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
3
yg/m exh.
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
yg/m exh.
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
1400
2%
3000
1000
360
230

140
48
17
11
620
210
75
47
1400
25%
3000
1100
31
69
b
63
24
0.69
1.5
650
250
7.1
16
1400
50%
3700
1600
23
57

	



320
140
2.1
5.0
1400 1400
75% 100%
1500 1100
790 650
7.5 4.7
18 11

	 	



	 230
140
1.0
2.4

Idle
2700
300
	
250

150
17
	
14
1200
130
	
110
2200
100%
2600
2500
14
30
,
63
60
0.33
0.72
290
270
1.5
3.2
2200
75%
45000
40000
280
580

230
200
1.4
2.9
5400
4800
34
70
2200
50%
61000
45000
480
1000

340
250
2.7
5.7
1700
1200
13
27
2200
25%
59000
38000
810
1300

460
300
6.4
10
3900
2500
53
87
2200
2%
17000
8800
2300
870

3600
1900
500
190
2100
1100
290
110
Idle
w/Bp.
1900
170
	
98
b
33
2.9
	
1.7
140
13
	
7.5
 NO acetone or methylethyUtetone was noted for either fuel configuration
 Isobutyraldehyde, crotonaldehyde and hexanaldehyde appeared sporadically, and
, at low levels
b
 Trace amounts, relative to the resolution of this procedure
 Benzaldehyde may be an artifact of the DNPH procedure
-------
00
                              TABLE 28.  SUMMARY OF  ALDEHYDES FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE
                                  VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH ETHANOL  + WATER

                                                                  RPM and PERCENT  LOAD IN MODE


Formaldehyde



Acetaldehyde




He xan a 1 dehy de



Benzaldehyde




Units
yg/m exh.
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
yg/m exh.
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
3
yg/m exh .
mg/hr
mgAw-hr
mg/kg fuel
yg/m exh.
mg/hr
mgAW-hr
mg/kg fuel
1400
2%
3800
1300
470
320
900
320
110
78

—



400
140
50
35
1400
50%
2000
830
13
31
380
1600
24
59

210
87
1.3
3.3
—



1400
100% Idlea
5200 730
2000 85
22
51 73
510
300
2.2
5.0

310
180
1.3
3.1
100 800
61 93
0.45
1.0 79
2200
100%
11000
11000
60
12
13000
13000
68
140

170
170
0.92
1.9
110
110
0.59
1.2
2200
50%
14000
10000
110
220
16000
1200
120
250

110
78
0.82
1.6
240
180
1.9
3.8
2200
2%
48000
2600
700
290
2800
1600
410
170

—



170
92
24
10
Idle data duplicated from methanol configuration
-------
The unfiltered sample was also  considered because  it was thought that the
phenols might be attached to  the particulate,  and  would be extracted in
the collection bubbler.  Both filtered  and unfiltered  samples were pro-
cessed in the methanol and methanol-catalyst configurations, for both
transient and steady-state operation.   Based on  similarities between the
methanol configuration and the  ethanol+water configuration, no samples
were processed for the ethanol+water configuration.  By the time the
diesel engine was to be  characterized,  it was  decided  to process only
filtered phenol samples, on the basis that the filtered phenol procedure
had been shown to have higher recovery  factors during  qualification
experiments.  ' '

          Summaries of filtered phenol  results are given in Table 29 for
transient operation, and in Tables  30,  31, and 32  for  steady-state opera-
tion.  Results from the  unfiltered  procedure are given in Table 33 for
transient operation, and in Tables  34 and 35 for steady-state operation.
Fewer "total" phenols were generated with methanol than with either etha-
nol or diesel during transient  operation.  The filtered phenol data in-
dicate that more highly  substituted phenols may be formed with the cata-
lyst.  At idle, the catalyst  appears to have little effect.  Using the
backpressure device and  catalyst at idle, the  phenols  were reduced slight-
ly.  It is difficult to  decide  whether  to attribute changes in emissions
to the back-pressure on  the engine, or  to its  effect of slightly raising
the temperature of the catalyst.  Considering  the  relatively uncertain
accuracy of the phenol procedure, it is difficult  to establish trends
from the data.

     6.   Total Hydrocarbons  -  FID  Response

          As mentioned in several places throughout this report,  total
hydrocarbons were measured using a  Beckman Model 402 heated flame ioni-
zation detector.  References  (6 and 7)  have shown  that the FID response
to unburned alcohols and some species of unregulated emissions is quite
variable, depending on FID construction.  The  reported FID response fac-
tors, given in Table 9 of Section III.E.I from Reference 6, were used in
conjunction with transient cycle "total" emission  rates of unburned alco-
hols, individual hydrocarbons,  individual aldehydes, and individual phe-
nols to compute a "total" hydrocarbon emission rate.   These "total" hydro-
carbons , along with the  hydrocarbons measured  by continuous HFID during
transient testing, are given  in Table 36.

           For the diesel configuration, unburned  fuel was not measured
directly as it was for the unburned alcohols.  However, the HFID response
to unburned diesel fuel-like  constituents is assumed to be 1.0 by design;
and unburned fuel is therefore  accounted for in the continuous measurement
of total hydrocarbons by HFID.  The "total" (unregulated)  hydrocarbons
for the diesel configuration  are substantially lower than the HFID total
hydrocarbons due to the  absence of  a "total unburned fuel" in the sum-
mation.   This would imply that  levels of unburned  diesel fuel-like con-
stituents could be about 1200 mg/kW-hr  for the cold-start, and about 950
                                 69
-------
           TABLE 2'J.   SUMMARY OF PHENOLS  (FILTERED)  FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION
                            OF  THE  VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL  ENGINE
                                               m-cresol
Teat
Con fig.
Diesel





Methanol





Methanol
-Cat.-Bp.




Ethanol





Ethanol
-Cat.-Bp.




Trans.
Cycle
Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Salicyl-
Units Phenol aldehyde
Big/test — 240
ngAW-hr 23
mgAg 75
mg/test — 32
ngAW-hr 2.9
ngAg 10
mg/test —
mgAW-hr
mgAg
mg/test —
mgAW-hr
mgAg
mg/test
ngAW-hr
ngAg
mg/teBt
mgAW-hr
mgAg
mg/test 3?.. 38
mgAW-hr 2.8 3.4
ngAg 6 • 2 7.5
mg/test 27 —
mgAW-hr 2 . 4
mgAg 5.5
mg/test —
mgAW-hr
mgAg
mg/test — —
mgAW-hr
mgAg
+
p-cresol
120
12
39
—


	


64
6.2
12
170
16
26
200
18
31
13d
1.1
2.5
—


230
22
48
100
9.8
22

5"
26
2.5
8.1
	


	


__


120
11
18
71
6.3
11
190
17
37
110
9.6
22
34
3.2
6.9
—


2,3,5 tri-
ne thy Iphenol
57
5.5
18
12
1.1
3.9
19d
1.8
3.2
	


—


—


8.4d
0.7
1.6
12
1.0
2.4
	


—



2,3,5,6^
23
2.2
7.2
	


	


14d
1.4
2.6
—


—


630
56
120
280
24
57
—


35
3.4
7.7

2nppC
490
48
156
230
21
75
170
16
29
180
17
32
440
42
67
230
20
35
23d
2.0
4.5
—


620
59
130
120
11
25
"Total"
Phenol
960
93
300
270
25
89
190
18
32
260
25
47
730
69
110
500
44
77
930
83
180
430
37
87
880
84
100
260
24
55
*p-ethylphenol, 2-isopropylphenol, 2,3-xylenol, 3,5-xylenol, 2,4,6-trimethylphenol
 2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol
 2-n-propylphenol
The»e levels are very low and are close  to the ninimum detectable level; their presence  and
 quantity »re difficult to insens.
-------
TABLE 30.  SUMMARY  OF  PHENOLS (FILTERED)  FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE
                    VOLVO TD-100C DIESEL ENGINE
                             RPM  and  PERCENT  LOAD IN MODE


Phenol



Salicyl-
aldehyde


m-cresol +
p-cresol


a.
5



2,3,5 tri-
methyl
phenol

2,3,5,6°



d
2 npp



p-ethylphenol

Units
yg/m3
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
yg/m
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
yg/m
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
3
yg/m
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
yg/m
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
, 3
yg/m
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
yg/m
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
1400
50% Idle
130
52
0.81
3.5
190 200
76 23
1.2
5.1 19
140
56
0.87
3.7

—



240 61
96 7.2
1.5
6.4 6.1
__ __



7300 310
2900 36
45
190 31
, 2-isopropylphenol, 2,3-xylenol,
2200
100%_




80
76
0.42
1.7
160
150
0.84
3.4

—



36*
34
0.19
0.78
	 	



9700
9300
52
210
3 , 5-xylenol,
2,4, 6- trimethylphenol
These levels
are very low
and are close to the
detectable level; their presence and quantity
to assess.


minimum
are difficult

°2 , 3 , 5 , 6-tetramethylphenol
2-n-propylphenol
                                  71
-------
                            TABLE 31.    SUMMARY OF PHENOLS  (FILTERED)  FROM MODAL OPERATION
                                   OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH  METHANOL
                                                                RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE
-J
to


Phanol



Salicyl-
aldohyde


m-cresol +
p-cresol


5b



2,3,5 tri-
oethyl
phenol

2,3,5,6°



a
2 nDD
* "fr



Units
ug/m
mg/hr
mgA*-hr
mgAg fuel
pg/m
mg/hr
mgAW-hr
ngAg fuel
ug/»
mg/hr
mgAH-hr
mgAg fuel
ug/m
mg/hr
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
ug/m
mg/hr
mgAH-hr
mgAg fuel
ug/ra
mg/hr
mgAw-hr
mgAg fuel
\ tff /in
uy/B
mg/hr
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
1400
2%
120
42
15
10
250
87
31
21
220
76
27
18
570
200
71
48
84
29
10
7.0
	



3400
1200
430
290
1400
50*
140
59
0.87
2.1
—



2ia
8.9
0.31
0.69
240
100
1.5
3.6
	



33a
14
0.21
0.51
2800
1200
18
43
1400
100%
70
41
0.3O
0.67
—



71
42
0.31
0.69
92
54
0.39
0.89
_—



, —



3300
1900
14
31

Idle
..



60
7. a
—
6.0
85
10
—
8.5
270
31

26
42'
4.9
—
4.2
26a
3.0
—
2.6
2500
290
—
250
2200
loot
44*
42
0.23
0.50
	



34a
33
0.18
0.39
61
59
0.33
0.70
	



—



640
620
3.4
7.4
2200
50%
65
48
0.51
1.1
„



47
34
0.36
0.76
..



7.2a
5.3
0.06
0.12
42"
31
0.33
0.69
1500
1100
12
25
2200
2%
72
38
9.3
4.4
130
69
17
7.9
83
44
11
5.1
300
160
39
18
36 a
19
4.6
2.2
12B
6.4
1.6
0.7
780
420
102
48
                      These levels are very  low and are close to the minimum detectable level;
                      their presence and  quantity  are difficult to assess.
                      p-othylphenol, 2-isopropylphcnol, 2,3-xylenol, 3,5-xylenol, 2,4,6-trimethylphenol
                      2, 3,5,C-tetramcthylpheiioi
                      ' 2-n-propylphenol
-------
      TABLE  32 .     SUMMARY OF PHENOLS  (FILTERED)  FROM MODAL  OPERATION OF
        THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE WITH METHANOL AND CATALYST
                                           RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE


Phenol



Salicyl-
aldehyde


m-cresol +
p-cresol


5b



2,3,5 tri-
methyl
phenol

2,3,5,6°



2 npp




Units
Ug/m
mg/hr
mgAH-hr
mgAg fuel
Vig/m
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
ug/m
mg/hr
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
Vjg/m
mg/hr
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
VJg/m
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mgAg fuel
pg/m
rog/hr
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
Vig/m
mg/hr
mgAH-hr
mgAg fuel
1400
2%
27°
9.3
3.3
2.1
79
27
10
6.1
98
34
12
7.7
240
83
30
19
393
13
4.6
2.9
34S
12
4.3
2.7
2000
690
250
160
1AQO
50%
80
34
0.50
1.2
—



75
32
0.47
1,1
—



2ia
9.0
0.13
0.32
—



2200
950
14
34
1400
100%
57a
34
0.25
0.57
—



54a
32
0.23
0.54
230
—
—
——
31°
18
0.13
0.30
—



1200
710
5.2
12

Idle
220
24
—
20
71
7.8
—
6.4
49a
5.4
—
4.5
230
25
—
21
54a
6.0
—
5.0
—



1700
190
—
160
2200 2200a
100* 50%
35a
33
0.18
0.40
—
—
—
—
32a
30
0.17
0.36
61
58
-.32
0.69
—
—
—

	 	
—
—
—
1600
1500
8.3
18
2200 Idle +
2% B. P.
76
6.8
—
3.9
__



110
9.8
—
5.6 .
170 89
88 80
23
8.7 4.6
13a 52a
6.8 4.6
1.8 —
0.67 2.6
	 	



1300 650
680 58
180
67 33
Sample void
These levels are very low and are close to the minimum detectable level;
their presence and quantity are difficult to assess.
p-ethylphenol, 2-isopropylphenol,   2,3-xylenol, 3,5-xylenol,  2,4,6-trimethylphenol
2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol
2-n-propylphenol
-------
         TABLE 33.   SUMMARY OF PHENOLS (UNFILTERED)  FROM TRANSIENT  OPERATION
                         OF  THE  VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE

Test
Config.
Me th anal





Methanol
-Cat.-Bp.




Ethanol





Ethanol
-Cat.-Bp.





Trans.
Cycle
Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Cold
Start

Hot
Start

Cold
Start

Hot
Start



Units
mg/test
mgA^-hr
«gAg
mg/test
mgA**~hr
mgAg
mg/test
mgAW-hr
mgAg
mg/test
mgAW-hr
»gAg
mg/test
mgAW-hr
mgAg
mg/test
mgAw-nr
mgAg
mg/test
mgAW-hr
mgAg
mg/test
mgAW-hr
mgAg

Salicyl-
Phenol aldehyde
— 15 d
1.5
2.6
— —


—


—


11 d -
1.0
2.1
6.3 d 70
.6 6.2
1.3 14
—


— 23
2.2
4.9
m—cresol
+
p-cresol 5 a
— 20 d
1.9
3.4
20 37
1.9 3.6
3.5 6.7
— 17
1.6
2.5
—


70 20
6.1 1.7
14 3.8
8.0*
0.7
1.6
— 18
1.7
3.7
7.2 d 220
0.7 21
1.5 48

2,3,5 tri-
nethylphenol 2,3,5,6
9.6 d
0.9
1.6
20 —
2.0
3.7
— 	


— 	


4.8d 170
.4 15
.9 34
— 270
24
55
— —


7.2d 19
0.7 1.8
1.5 4.1


c
120
11
20
220
21
39
230
22
36
370
33
58
—


—


130
12
27
380
36
81


"Total"
160
15
28
300
28
53
250
24
39
370
33
58
280
24
55
350
32
72
150
14
31
660
62
140
ap-ethylphenol,  2-isopropylphenol,   2,3-xylenol,  3,5-xylenol,  2,4,6-trimethylphenol
b2,3,5,6-tetromethylphenol
^2-n-propylphenol
These levels are very low and are close  to the minimum detectable levels; their presence
 and quantity are difficult to assess.
-------
     TABLE  34.   SUMMARY  OF PHENOLS  (UNFILTERED)  FROM MODAL  OPERATION
           OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL  ENGINE WITH METHANOL '"
                                              RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE


Phenol



Salicyl-
aldehyde


m-cresol +
p-cresol


5b



2,3,5 tri-
methyl
phenol

2,3,5,6°



2 npp




Units
yg/m
rog/hr
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
yg/m
rog/hr
ragAW-hr
mgAg fuel
yg/m
mg/hr
rogAW-hr
mgAg fuel
yg/m
rog/hr
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
yg/m
mg/hr
mg/fcw-hr
mgAg fuel
yg/m
mg/hr
mgAW-hr
mgAg fuel
yg/m
mg/hr
mg/kH-hr
ragAg fuel
1400
2%
98
34
12
8.2
140
49
18
12
140
49
18
12
490
170
61
41
550
190
68
46




2000
700
250
200
1400
50%
140
59
0.87
2.1
—



99
42
0.62
1.5
210
89
1.3
3.2
19"
8
0.12
0.29




1900
800
12
29
1400
100%
	



—



48a
28
0.20
0.46
57
34
0.25
0.56
—



_.



1500
880
6.4
14

Idle
65
7.6
—
6.5
98
11
—
9.4
14S
1.6
	
1.4
320
37
—
32
30°
3
~~
2.6
91

9 A
• 1
1800
210
—
180
2200
100%
74
71
0.39
0.85
—



25fl
24
0.13
9.29
—



—



—



1700
1600
8.8
19
2200
50%
120
88
0.94
2.0
—



39°
29
0.02
0.65
—



29a
21
0.22
0.47
48a
OR
J3
0.37
0.47

1500
1100
12
25
2200
2%
67
36
8.8
4.1
130
69
17
7.9
150
80
20
9.2
360
190
46
22
26°
14
3.4
1.6
—



1100
590
140
68
These levels are very low and  are close  to the minimum detectable level;
their presence and quantity are difficult to assess
p-ethylphenol, 2-isopropylphenol, 2,3-xylenol, 3,5-xylenol,  2,4,6-triraethylphenol
2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol
2-n-propylphenol
-------
                          TABLE  35.   SUMMARY OF PHENOLS  (UNFILTERED)  FROM MODAL OPERATION OF THE
                                  VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE  WITH  METHANOL  AND  CATALYST
                                                                RPM and PERCENT LOAD IN MODE
CTl


Phenol



Salicyl-
aldehyde


rr.-cresol +
p-cresol


5b



2,3,5 tri-
ne thy 1
phenol

2,3,5,6°



2 npp




Units
ug/m
mg/hr
mg/kw-hr
mg/kg fuel
Mg/m
mg/hr
mg/kw-hr
mg/kg fuel
ug/m
mg/hr
mg/kK-hr
mg/kg fuel
1'9/m
mg/hr
mg/kw-hr
mg/kg fuel
|jg/m
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
. 3
pg/m
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
, 3
pg/m
mg/hr
mg/kW-hr
mg/kg fuel
1400
2%
41a
14
5.0
3.2
—



18a
6.2
2.2
1.4
130
45
16
10
26a
0.9
3.2
2.0
	



810
280
100
63
1400 1400
50* 100%
-.



	 	



29a
12
0.18
0.43
90 243
39 14
0.57 0.10
.1.4 0.24




	 —



1300 960
560 570
a.; 4.1
20 9.6
2200
Idle 100%
740
700
3.9
8.3
140
130
0.72
1.6
260
250
1.4
0.3
	 	



130
120
0.66
1.4
150
140
0.78
1.7
1100 700
120 660
3.7
99 7.9
2200
50%
1200
880
9.4
20




91
70
0.5
1.6
__



ioa
7.3
0.08
0.17
	



1300
950
10
21
2200
2%
9.4
4.9
1.3
0.48
__



__



130
68
18
6.7




25a
13
3.. 4
1.3
1600
830
220
82
Idla-f
B. P.
SI
7.2
—
4.1
..



140
12
—
6.9
130
12
—
6.7
36a
3.2
—
1.8
__



860
77
—
44
                aThese  levels are very low ancl arc close to the minimum detectable level;
                 their  presence and quantity rir<- difficult to assess
                 p-ethylplienol, 2-isopropyJphpnol, 2,3-xylenol, 3,5-xylenol,  2,4,6-trimethylphenol
                ..?, 3,5,6-tetramethylphenol
                 'J-n-propylphenol
-------
   TABLE  36.   SUMMARY/COMPARISON OF "TOTAL" UNREGULATED  HYDROCARBONS  AND
         HYDROCARBONS MEASURED BY CONTINUOUS HFID  DURING  TRANSIENT
                OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE
   Configuration

 Diesel
 FID  Response Fact.b
 Cold Meas. Total
 Cold Adj. Total
 Hot  Meas. Total
 Hot  Adj. Total

 Methanol
 FID  Response Fact.b
 Cold Meas. Total
 Cold Au].  Total
 Hot  Meas. Total
 Hot  Adj.  Total

 Methanol + Cat.
 FID  Response Fact.b
 Cold Meas. Total
 Cold Adj.  Total
 Hot  Meas . Total
 Hot  Adj .  Total

 Ethanol
 FID  Response Fact.b

 Cold Meas. Total
 Cold Adj.  Total
 Hot  Meas. Total
 Hot   Adj. Total

 Ethanol  + Cat.
 FID  Response Fact.b

 Cold Meas. Total
 Cold Adj.  Total
 Hot  Meas. Total
 Hot   Adj. Total
"Total"       "Total"
Unbumed    Individual
Alcohol     Hydrocarbons
mgAw-hr     mgAw-hr
  N.A.
  0.23

  4700
  1080
  4900
  1130
  0.23
  0.46
  2200
  1010
  2300
  1060
 0.46

  670
  310
  450
  207
              1.00
1.00
 160
 160
 180
 180
              1.00
1.00

 600
 600
 600
 600
1.00

 260
 260
 210
 210
            "Total"
           Individual
           Aldehydes
            rogAw-hr
                            0.05
0.12

 240
  29
 250
  30
                            0.06e
0.15f
 300
  45
 230
  35
0.249

 380
  91
 230
  55
           "Total"
          Individual
           Phenols3
           mgAw-hr


             0.75
0.75
 18
 13
 25
 19
                                        0.75
1200
280
840
190
100
100
60
60
260
16
260
16
69
52
44
33
0.75
 83
 62
 37
 28
0.75
 84
 33
 24
 18
               Sum
                of
             "Totals"
             gAw-hr
5.12
1.28
5.36
1.36
                                                      1.63
                                                      0.46
                                                      1.20
                                                      0.30
3.18
1.72
3.17
1.72
1.39
0.69
0.91
0.54
           Hydrocarbons
            Measured by
            Cont. HFID
              g/kw-iu:
280
280
110
110
18
0.9
13
0.7
93
70
25
19
0.39
0.35
0.15
0.13
	
1.58
__
1.08
1.98

1.96
                                                      0.49''
                                                                    0.17
2.28

2.27
0.79

0.60
a Total phenols were based  on  "filtered" phenols  procedure which has shown better recovery than  the
  unfiltered phenol procedure  during' procedural qualifications
fc FID response factors are  on  a weight basis and  were taken directly from reference or interpolated
  from FID responses given  for species of similar molecular structure
C Acetaldehyde   has al[ interpolated response of  about 0.30, whereas formaldehyde has a response
  estimated to be about .05
d FID response based on 25% acetaldehyde + 75% formaldehyde - weighted for a sum of 0.12
e FID response based on 2%  acetaldehyde + 98% formaldehyde   weighted for a sum of 0.06

fFID response based on 40%  acetaldehyde + 98% formaldehyde - weighted for a sum of 0.15
gFID response based on 75%  acetaldehyde + 25% formaldehyde - weighted for a sum of 0.24
hAverage of methanol + Cat. and methanol + Cat. + B.P.
                                                77
-------
 mgAW-hr  from the hot-start transient cycles.  Considering  the  alcohol
 fuel  configurations, the "total"  (unregulated) hydrocarbons were  approxi-
 mately double the hydrocarbons indicated by the continuous  HFID measure-
 ment.  The most significant contribution to the "total"  (unregulated)
 hydrocarbons was the unbumed alcohol emissions followed by the IHC emis-
 sions.  Contribution of the aldehydes to "total"  (unregulated)  hydrocar-
 bons  was  moderate, and the contribution of phenols was insignificant.
 The  "total" hydrocarbons were significantly reduced by the  catalyst, which
 appears to have significantly reduced the unburned alcohol  and  the  IHC
 emitted by the non-catalyst configurations.

      7.   Odor-TIA

           TIA results were determined using the DOAS analysis of traps
 which collected compounds related to odor intensity.(8'1°)  This chroma-
 tographic procedure separates  an oxygenate fraction (liquid column oxy-
 genates, LCD)  and an aromatic  fraction (liquid column aromatics, LCA) .
 The TIA values are defined as TIA = 1 + Iog10  (LCO, yg/&) or TIA  =  0.4 +
 0.7 logic  (LCA U9/^) »   (TIA by LCO preferred).  The procedure  was  developed
 for steady-state raw exhaust samples,  but was adapted to transient dilute
 exhaust samples by use of the  CVS.  Table 37 summarizes the results from
 transient test operation.   TIA results from the diesel transient operation
 were high for  the cold-start,  and low for the hot-start.   Very little
 difference in  TIA exists  between methanol- and ethanol-fueled configura-
 tions, with or without catalyst.   The catalyst reduced LCA significantly
 for both methanol and ethanol.

           TIA results from steady-state  test configurations are given
 in Table 38, and include  7  modes  of methanol and methanol-catalyst opera-
 tion along with  three modes of  diesel operation.   The TIA values for die-
 sel operation  were slightly higher than those for  the methanol configura-
 tion.   TIA values for idle, and for 1400  rpm at 2  percent load,  were rela-
 tively high for  the  methanol fuel configuration.   The odor index values
at these and other modes  were  significantly reduced with the catalyst,  ex-
cept for the condition at 2200  rpm and 2  percent load,  for which an in-
crease was noted.
 C.   Particulate Emissions

     Although heavy-duty diesel particulate emissions are  not  scheduled
 to be regulated until 1986, they have been measured for  some time  and
 have been recognized as a potential problem in the application of  diesel
 engines.  In order to determine particulate emission rates and to  charac-
 terize the total particulate, samples were collected on  several filter
 media for a variety of analyses which included total mass,  sulfate,  ele-
 mental analysis, particle sizing, and organic extractables.  Particulate
 samples were always taken from the dilute exhaust using  a  CVS.
                                  76
-------
       TABLE 37.  SUMMARY OF TIA BY DOASa PROM TRANSIENT OPERATION
                   OF THE VOLVO TD100A DUAL FUEL ENGINE
Fuel Transient
Configuration Cycle
Diesel Cold Start
Hot Start
Composite
Bus
Methanol Cold Start
Hot Start
Composite
Bus
Methanol + Cold Start
Catalyst Hot Start
Composite
Bus
Ethanol Cold Start
Hot Start
Composite
Bus
Ethanol + Cold Start
Catalyst Hot Start
Composite
Bus
LCA
29.7
4.24
10.14
2.60
3.70
3.44
-
-
-
-
2.22
1.53
1.63
3.36
-
-
_
LCO
yg/g.
7.20
1.20
2.06
—
3.30
3.50
3.30
4.17
1.59
2.79
2.62
1.14
4.16
3.18
3.32
3.57
3.42
5.04
4.81
5.28
TIA
1.86
1.08
1.19
1.10b
1.47
1.53
1.52
1.61
1.17
1.45
1.41
1.06
1.60
1.50
1.51
1.55
1.53
1.70
1.68
1.72
3These measurements were based on diesel fuel standard.
 Samples were taken from dilute exhaust of approximately
 6:1 for overall transient cycle.
 Based on TIA
                 = 0.4 + 0.7 log LCA
                                      79
-------
       TABLE 38.  SUMMARY OF TIA BY DOAS FROM MODAL OPERATION OF  THE
       VOLVO TD-100A DUAL-FUEL ENGINE AND THE  TD-100C DIESEL  ENGINE
Modal
Condition
rpm/load %
1400/2

1400/50


1400/100

Idle



2200/100


2200/50

2200/2


Fuel
Configuration
Methanol
Meth-Cat.
Diesel
Methanol
Meth.-Cat.a
Methanol
Meth-Cat.
Diesel
Methanol
Meth-Cat.
Meth-Cat. + BP.
Diesel
Methanol
Meth.-Cat.
Methanol
Meth + Cat.
Methanol
Meth-Cat .

LCA
yg/A
70.
16.
27.
5.6
—
4.3
—
77.
37.
7.7
12.
__
2.4
—
3.9
—
76.
10.

LCO
yg/&
34.
9.5
8.5
2.7
—
2.5
1.9
33.
18.
6.5
4.1
1.5
3.3
1.0
4.7
0.7
7.3 •
9.9


TIA
2.5
1.4
1.9
1.4
—
1.4
0.8
2.5
2.3
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.0
0.8
1.2
0.6
0.8
1.7
^Sample  void
                                     80
-------
     1.   Total Particulate

          Total particulate emission rates are given in Table 39 for the vari-
ous fuel configurations tested under steady-state modal operation.  Fig-
ure 15 shows the relative total particulate mass rates.  Comparison was
simplified because both test engines were of similar design and had the
same rated speed and power.  Particulate emissions from the diesel con-
figuration exceeded those of the alcohol configurations except at the 2
percent load conditions.  At the 2 percent load conditions, the methanol
and the ethanol+water configurations show significantly higher particu-
late than either the diesel or the methanol-catalyst-backpressure con-
figurations.  The backpressure device was engaged only at idle, and re-
quired more diesel pilot injection to maintain idle speed.  Idle particu-
late rate from the diesel engine was greater than for the methanol con-
figuration of the dual-fuel engine.

          Although the dual-fuel used only diesel fuel at idle,  there are
significant differences in the manner in which the diesel fuel is in-
jected.  The diesel engine uses a large 4-hole injector mounted in approx-
imately the center of the combustion chamber; whereas the dual-fuel engine
uses a similar but smaller injector and injects the pilot diesel fuel
against the swirl within the combustion chamber (refer to Section III.A.).
These differences in diesel fuel injection between engines may explain
the significantly different particulate emission rates observed for the
1400 rpm/2 percent load condition, at which only diesel fuel pilot in-
jection is active.  About 81 percent of the fuel consumed by the dual-
fuel engine at 2200 rpm/2 percent load consisted of diesel pilot injec-
tion.  Idle data from the methanol configuration were also used for the
ethanol+water configuration, because they are taken to be identical (only
pilot injected diesel fuel is used at idle, so idle emissions should be
independent of the alcohol used).  Relative to the diesel engine, major
particulate reductions with both methanol and ethanol+water configura-
tions were noted where substantial amounts of alcohol were substituted
for diesel fuel, beyond the 2 percent load conditions.

           Catalysts are usually  considered a method  for  reducing emissions
but total particulates were substantially increased in the alcohol con-
figurations when the catalyst was used.  Addition of the catalyst in-
creased the particulate emissions substantially at the higher load condi-
tions where exhaust heat was sufficient to activate the catalyst.  The
catalyst reduced particulate emissions at idle and light load conditions
where exhaust temperature was relatively low.  With low-temperature ex-
haust from idle and light loads, the catalyst appeared to act as a par-
ticulate trap.  Above about 25 percent load, catalyst temperatures ele-
vated enough to begin oxidation reactions.  At this point, the total
particulate emission increased sharply.  A significant portion of this
particulate matter is made up of sulfate generated by the catalyst.
Sulfate will be discussed in the next section.
                                   81
-------
                       TABLE 39. PARTICULATE EMISSION SUMMARY FROM

                        MODAL OPERATIONS OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES

                                    Engine/Fuel Configuration
Condition
rpm/load, %
1400/2



1400/50



1400/100



Idle



2200/100



2200/50



2200/2




Units
mg/m3 exh.
g/hr
g/kw-hr
g/kg fuela
mg/m3 exh.
g/hr
g/kw-hr
g/kg fuela
mg/m3 exh.
g/hr
g/kw-hr
g/kg fuel3
mg/m3 exh.
g/hr
g/kw-hr
g/kg fuela
mg/m exh.
g/hr
g/kw-hr
g/kg fuela
mg/m3 exh.
g/hr
g/kw-hr
g/kg fuela
mg/m exh .
g/hr
g/kw-hr
g/kg fuela

Diesel
53.53
19.21
9.63
4.93
45.67
18.29
0.28
1.22
134.06
69.87
0.54
2.41
66.92
7.85
—
6.65
81.56
77.97
0.44
1.78
103.83
78.25
0.88
3.11
84.49
49.15
14.49
5.37

Methanol
116.48
40.54
14.48
9.72
21.91
9.30
0.14
0.34
15.61
9.19
0.07
0.15
48.63
5.67
—
4.85
6.79
6.56
0 .04
0.08
23.30
17.10
0.18
0.38
117.44
62.72
15.30
7.20
Methanol
-Catalvst
47.10
16.25
5.80
3.66
48.95
21.08
0.31
0.75
89.75
52.98
0.39
0.89
16.68 c
l.S4c
—
1.52°
72.74
68.96
0.38
0.82
80.70
58.87
0.63
1.33
50.90
26.49
6.97
2.61
Ethanol
+ Water
91.77
32.42
11.58
7.95
19.62
8.22
0.12
0.31
22.92
13.30
0.10
0.22
48.63b
5.6^
—
4.85b
10.25
10.15
0.05
0.11
34.20
25.27
0.27
0.54
122.42
67.59
17-79
7.37
 "Fuel"  represents total  fuel input to engine and  includes  water,  alcohol,  and diesel
 These values were duplicated from the methanol  configuration  since only diesel fuel
^is  used
"Particulate data  for Methanol-Catalyst-Backpressure were:
 1.18 g/kg fuela
16.01 mg/m6 exh., 1.43 g/hr,
                                            82
-------
80
        100        50        2
          Intermediate Speed
Idle
2         50
 Rated Speed
                                                                 100
                           Percent  of  Full  Load
        Figure  15.   Modal p'articulate from the  Volvo  test  engines
                              83
-------
Cold Start
0.80
0.36
0.26
0.28
0.34
0.34
Hot Start
0.68
0.40
0.34
0.42
0.35
0.39
Composite
0.70
0.39
0.33
0.40
0.35
0.38
Bus Cycle
0.82
0.60
0.22
0.24
0.60
0.38
          Particulate rates determined for cold- and hot-start transient
cycles and the bus cycle are given in Table 40,  along with composite
transient results.  These particulate emissions  were also given along
with gaseous emission data in Tables 13 and 14.
       TABLE 40.  PARTICULATE SUMMARY FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION
                      OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES

     Test             	Transient Particulate g/kW-hr
 Configuration

 Diesel

 Methanol

 Methanol-Catalyst

 Methanol-Catalyst-
  Backpressure
 Ethanol

 Ethanol-Catalyst-
  Backprpssure
          In the diesel configuration, the cold-start runs produced more par-
ticulate than the hot-start runs,  which seems to be typical of most of
the diesel engines tested under the EPA "Baseline" Contract.  The dual-
fuel engine configurations gave lower particulate for the  cold-start
than for the hot-start FTP.  The catalyst appears to have  reduced par-
ticulate from the cold-start,  but increased particulate from the hot-
start.  The catalyst reduced particulate from the bus cycle by about
half.  Considering the modal information, the catalyst may have reduced
particulate from the cold-start by acting as a trap at lower exhaust
temperatures.  Particulate from the hot-start may have increased be-
cause the catalyst was warmer,  being able to produce sulfate while oxi-
dizing fuel-like constituents which would have condensed as particulate
during the cold-start.  The reduction of particulate emissions from the
bus cycle run with catalyst may be due to the catalyst being able to
oxidize a greater mass of organic (fuel-like) particulate  matter than
it produces  as sulfate,  or to storage.

          Table 41 gives the computed 7-mode composite (based on the 13-mode
composite weighting factors)  and the transient composite particulate
rates on a brake specific and a fuel specific basis.  There is very good
agreement between the 7-mode and the transient composite for the diesel
configuration.  The transient composite is somewhat higher  than the modal
composite in the methanol configuration without aftertreatment, but is
substantially lower than the modal composite when the catalyst is used.
                                 84
-------
         TABLE 41.  COMPOSITE PARTICULATE RATES FROM MODAL AND
             TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES

    Test                _7-Mode Composite            Transient Composite
Configuration           g/kW-hr   _gAg fuel        g/kW-hr       gAg fuel

Diesel                    0.69        2.53            0.70          2.43

Methanol                  0.30        0.64            0.39          0.73

Methanol-Catalyst         0.51        1.07            0.33          0.64

Methanol-Catalyst-
  Backpressure            0.51        1.07            0.40          0.70

Ethanol                   -NotRun-            0.35          0.81

Ethanol-Catalyst-
  Backpressure            -NotRun-            0.30          0.85

Ethanol+Water             0.33        0.67            -Not   Run-
The greater disagreement between the modal composite and the transient
composite when the catalyst was used is due to the catalyst's heat sen-
sivity and the load variations among the cycles.  The transient cycle
consists of mostly light loads, but the 7-mode composite includes sub-
stantial operating time at loads of 50 percent or more (56 percent of
the 7-mode composite).

     2.   Smoke

          Smoke and particulate emissions are related, smoke level being a
measure of the visible portion of particulate matter.  Changes in particu-
late emissions may be indicated by corresponding changes in smoke opacity,
if the levels are high enough.  Smoke opacity was determined using an end-
of stack PHS smokemeter.  Table 42 gives a summary of smoke opacity data
collected from all six fuel configurations; namely, diesel, methanol,
methanol-catalyst, ethanol, ethanol-catalyst, and ethanol+water.

          Smoke factors for acceleration, lug, and peak are all well below
the 1980 standards, for the dual-fuel engine.  In the diesel configuration,
there was reasonable agreement with manufacturer's data for the accelera-
tion and peak factors, but the lug factor was much higher than the manu-
facturer's value of about 7 percent opacity.  Examination of the diesel
smoke chart indicated that smoke opacity increased sharply in the last four
seconds of the lug procedure run under automatic dynamometer/engine control.
The lug factor should be about 7-9 percent opacity on the basis of the power
curve smoke, which also simulates a maximum rack lug-down from rated speed.
                                   85
-------
         TABLE 42.   SUMMARY OP SMOKE OPACITY FROM THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES
                     Federal Transient Smoke Cycle Opacity'
Test
Configuration
Smoke Opacity, %
Accel. Lug
Diesel
Methanol
Methanol - Catalyst
Ethanol
Ethanol - Catalyst
Ethanol + Water
1980 Standard
Steady-State
13-Mode FTP
Mode
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13







RPM Power, %
500
1400
1400
1400
1400
1400
500
2200
2200
2200
2200
2200
500


RPM
2200
2000
1800
1600
1400
1300
Idle
2
25
50
75
100
Idle
100
75
50
25
2
Idle


Diesel
4.0
4.0
4.0
5.2
7.0
9.0
Peak
15.3 15. Ob
6.0 0.8
2.6 0.7
5.7 1.4
3.6 2.7
— NOT RUN —
20.0 15.0
Smoke Opacity
Smoke Opacity, %
Diesel Methanol Meth.-Cat. Ethanol
0.4
0.4
0.8
1.2
2.0
6.0
0.5
3.5
5.0
5.3
3.1
1.4
0.2
Power
Power
0.1
0.6
0.9
1.2
1.1
0.9
0.1
0.7
0.8
1.1
2.0
2.0
0.1
Curve
Curve
Methanol Meth.-Cat
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.7
1.0
1.2
0.8
0.9
1.3
2.3
2.2
1.4
0.1
0.2
0.4
1.0
1.4
1.3
0.6
0.7
0.5
0.8
1.9
2.1
0.3
Smoke Opacity
Smoke Opacity
Ethanol Eth
0.6
0.4
0.5
1.0
2.0
2.4
0.1
0.4
1.1
1.8
2.4
2.3
0.2
1.0
0.7
1.4
3.0
3.1
0.2


.-Cat.
1.0
0.8
0.8
1.0
2.3
2.6
32.6
23.3
6.9
10.9
4.7
50.0

Eth. -Cat. Eth. + Water
0.1
0.2
0.1
1.0
1.7
1.4
0.1
0.9
0.8
1.2
2.2
2.4
0.1


Eth. + Water
0.9
0.8
1.5
2.0
4.0
2.5
0.6
1.1
1.2
1.4
3.0
3.5
0.4
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.1
0.9
0.2







These values were based on a single run of the FTP smoke test

This value may  be in error and is likely to be 7 - 9 percent opacity on  the
Kao-lo „<: „	  	 .,-.
basis of power  curve data
                                      86
-------
The catalyst reduced  accel and peak  factors on both methanol  and ethanol,
but the lug factor appeared  to increase  for the  ethanol-catalyst configu-
ration.  Modal and power  curve smoke were  all very low  for  the  dual-fuel
engine.  Most of  the  smoke opacities listed are  considered  hardly visible
usually below five percent opacity.

     3.   Sulfate

          Sulfate was determined from samples of total particulate collected
on 47 mm Fluoropore filter media, and processed by the BCA method.  Ta-
ble 43 summarizes the sulfate results from 7 modes of steady-state opera-
tion taken over four  test configurations.  In order to visualize the
trends, Figure 16 shows the  relative sulfate mass rates.  Taking the
diesel configuration  as base, the methanol and ethanol+water configura-
tions had very low sulfate rates, especially above the 2 percent load
condition.  These two alcohol configurations showed almost identical
sulfate results.  Since the  sulfate  originates from the sulfur in the
fuel, less diesel fuel consumed by the dual-fuel engine meant less sul-
fur was available to  be converted to sulfate.  Sulfate rates have been
expressed in terms of "mg/kg C fuel" and "mg/kg D fuel."  The "C" repre-
sents  fuel as measured on the combined basis of diesel fuel used for
pilot  injection and alcohol  fuel used for combustion.  The "D" repre-
sents only the diesel fuel used.  The percent of fuel sulfur converted
to sulfate was computed on the basis of the diesel fuel used.

          Probably the most notable sulfate trend was the dramatic increase
in sulfate as a result of the catalyst.  Tremendous increases in sulfate
were noted for the high power modes, where exhaust heat insured that the
catalyst was active.  The fuel sulfur conversion reached 97 percent at-
the maximum power condition.  Since  the sulfate is collected as part of
the total particulates, the  sulfate measured at maximum power in the
methanol-catalyst-backpressure configuration accounts for 83 percent of
the total particulate.  The  catalyst appeared to reduce sulfate emissions
during idle and the 2 percent conditions, possibly due to a sulfate stor-
age phenomenon.d^


          Sulfate results from transient operation are given in Table 44.
The  methanol  and  ethanol  configurations  emitted  similar levels  of sul-
fate,  which were  about  half  that of  the  diesel engine.   Application of
the  catalyst  to the  alcohol  configurations increased  the transient
sulfate  levels  substantially.  The  transient  composite  sulfate  level
from the  methanol-catalyst configuration increased sharply  again when
retested  with the backpressure device.   Use of the backpressure device
required  more pilot  injection of diesel  fuel.  Transient composite  sul-
fate levels  from  the  methanol-catalyst-backpressure configuration were
about 30  percent  higher than the ethanol-catalyst-backpressure  configura-
tion.  This relatively  large difference  may be attributed  to  a  slightly
greater catalyst  activity when methanol  is used.
                                   87
-------
             TABLE 43.   SULFATE  EMISSIONS  SUMMARY  FROM MODAL OPERATION
                             OF  THE VOLVO  TEST  ENGINES
Condition
 1400/2
 1400/50
 1400/100
  Idle
  2200/100
  2200/50
  2200/2
Test mg/m"
priTTfi miration Rfhaust
^V'll J_ -L.M vij. d WA*-**l *
Diesel
Methanol
Meth.-Cat.
Eth. + Water
Diesel
Methanol
Meth.-Cat.
Eth. + Water
Diesel
Methanol
Meth.-Cat.
Eth. + Water
Diesel
Methanol
Meth.-Cat.
Eth. + Water6
Diesel
Methanol
Meth.-Cat.
Eth. + Water
Diesel
Methanol
Meth . -Cat .
Eth. + Water
Diesel
Methanol
Meth.-Cat.
Eth. + Water
3.0
3.1
1.4
3.7
5.4
1.2
20.
1.6
5.6
1.4
41.
1.4
4.7
3.1
0.84
3.1
7.4
1.6
59.
1.7
5.2
1.2
34.
1.6
5.3
3.4
1.5
4.3
mg/hr
1100
1100
510
1300
2100
520
8400
690
2900
850
17000
790
550
370
77
370
7100
1600
57000
1700
3900
860
24000
1200
3100
1800
780
2400
mg/kw-hr
410
390
180
460
33
7.7
120
10
23
6.2
120
5.8
--
—
—
—
40
8.7
320
8.8
44
9.2
260
12
900
440
210
630
mgAg
C Fuelb
280
260
110
330
140
19
300
25
100
14
290
12
470
320
44
320
160
19
680
18
160
19
540
23
330
210
77
250
mg/kg 804 = as %
D Fuel0 of Fuel S*
280
260
110
330
140
19
1400
100
100
140
2700
120
470
320
44
320
160
200
7000
200
160
110
3200
150
330
240
110
310
3.9
3.6
1.5
4.6
2.0
1.2
19.
1.4
1.4
1.9
37.
1.7
6.5
4.4
0.61
4.4
2.2
2.8
97.
2.8
2.2
1.5
44.
2.1
4.6
3.3
1.5
4.3
   Percent of fuel sulfur converted to sulfate was  computed
   on  basis of the diesel fuel alone.  The diesel fuel  had
   a reported sulfur content of 0.24 percent by weight.
  ^ mg/kg  C fuel represents sulfate on a combined fuel basis
  'mg/kg  D fuel represents sulfate on the basis of  the  diesel portion of
  ,the combined fuel
   Data from idle with  backpressure device were  0.84 mg/m3, 77 mg/hr, 44 mg/kg D fuel0,
   and 0.61  percent  fuel  sulfur conversion
   These  data duplicated  from idle condition of methanol configuration
                                           88
-------
  100       50       2
      Intermediate Speed
                      Percent of Full Load
Figure 16.  Modal sulfate r'ates from the Volvo test engines
                        89
-------
       TABLE 44 .   SULFATE EMISSION SUMMARY FROM TRANSIENT FTP OPERATION
                           FROM THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES
 Test
Config.

Diesel
Methanol
Methanol
  -Catalyst
Methanol
  -Cat.-Bp.
Ethanol
Ethanol
  -Cat.-Bp.
Transient
  Cycle

Cold
Hot
Composite

Cold
Hot
Composite

Cold
Hot
Composite

Cold
Hot
Composite

Cold
Hot
Composite

Cold
Hot
Composite
                                         Sulfate Rate
mg/test
520
390
410
170
170
170
670
900
870
710
1500
1400
170
160
160
930
1000
990
mg/kw-hr
51
36
38
14
16
16
60
80
77
67
130
120
15
14
14
83
90
89
C fuel0
170
130
140
27
29
29
110
160
150
110
240
220
31
31
31
180
200
200
D fuelc
170
130
140
170
160
160
650
870
840
690
1500
1400
160
150
150
900
1000
990
804   as  %
of Fuel Sa

    2.3
    1.8
    1.9

    2.3
    2.3
    2.3
    9.1.
   12.
   12.

    9.6
   20.
   19.

    2.3
    2.1
    2.1

   13.
   14.
   14.
 Average diesel fuel consumption was 1.02 kg/transient cycle for dual fuel
 applications.   The fuel had a reported sulfur content of 0.24 percent by weight
DmgAg C fuel represents sulfate on a combined fuel basis
"mg/kg D fuel represents sulfate on a diesel fuel basis only
                                       90
-------
              Results from 7-mode composite and transient composites are given
    in  Table 45.   In non-catalyst configurations,  results from 7-mode composites
      TABLE 45.  COMPOSITE SULFATE RATES FROM MODAL AND TRANSIENT OPERATION
                            OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES

    Test           	7-Mode Composite	       Transient Composite	
Configuration      mg/kW-hr"     mg/kg C fuela    mgAw~hr      mgAg C fuela

Diesel               145              160             38             140

Methanol              14              30             16              29

Meth.-Cat.           220              470             77             150

Meth.-Cat.-Bp.       220              470             120             220

Ethanol                 —  NOT  RUN —               14              31

Eth.-Cat.-Bp.           —  NOT  RUN —               89             200

Eth. + Water          17              35                 — NOT RUN --
 mg/kg C fuel represents sulfate on the basis
 of total "combined" fuel input

    and transient composites were in agreement.  When the catalyst was used,
    the 7-mode  composite sulfate level was higher than the transient composite
    level due to the higher exhaust temperatures and higher loads run during
    the 7-mode  testing.  For the methanol configuration, the 7-mode brake
    specific sulfate increased  from 14 to 220 mg/kW-hr with the addition of
    the catalyst.   This 0.2 gAW-hr increase in brake specific sulfate prob-
    ably accounts for  the increase in 7-mode brake  specific total particu-
    late from 0.30  to  0.51 g/kW-hr.

         4.   Elemental Composition

              Elemental analysis of the total particulate required two particu-
    late samples.   The carbon and hydrogen content  of the total particulate
    were determined from particulate samples collected on glass fiber filter
    media by oxidation techniques.  Sulfur and metal content were determined
    from particulate samples collected on Teflon membrane filter media  (Fluoro-
    pore) using X-ray  fluorescence techniques.  The carbon and hydrogen were
    determined  by Galbraith Laboratories, and the sulfur and metals were deter-
    mined by EPA-RTP.

              Tables 46 and 47 give the results from elemental analysis of steady-
    state and transient particulate samples.  The results are presented as
                                       91
-------
                          TABLE  46.   SUMMARY OF ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS OF TOTAL PARTICULATE  FROM
                                          MODAL OPERATION  OF THE VOLVO TEST  ENGINES
<£>
to
Condition
rpm/load, *
1400/2



1400/50



1400/100



Idle



2200/100



2200/50



2200/2



Test
Configuration
Diesel
Methanol
Meth.-Cat.
Eth.+Water
Diesel
Methanol
Meth.-Cat.
Eth.+Hater
Diesel
Methanol
Meth.-Cat.
Eth.+Water
Diesel
Methanol
Meth.-Cat.
Meth.-Cat.Bp
Eth.+Water4
Diesel
Mothanol
tteth.-Cat.
Eth.+Water
Diesel
Methanol
Meth.-Cat.
Eth.+Water
Diesel
Methnnol
Meth.-Cat.
Eth.+Water
Element,
C
86.8
75.9
75.9
71.0
66.8
47.1
18.8
46.5
91.3
77.2
10.0
54.3
59.1
65.8
40.4
43.5
65.8
63.6
77.4
2.4
48.9
82.7
69.7
19.0
68.6
71.2
69.4
73.9
70.0
H
10.4
10.5
10.4
9.6
7.9
4.5
2.3
4.5
0.9
1.9
1.2
1.2
6.4
8.7
5.8
6.2
8.7
1.7
6.2
1.7
2.5
2.5
3.2
1.5
2.7
8.3
6.5
7.1
8.5
"S"
1.04
0.55
0.72
0.62
2.98
2.92
8.75
2.51
1.26
2.53
9.68
1.54
1.15
1.32
1.34
1.28
1.32
2.73
7.04
10.91
5.26
1.76
1.75
8.38
0.79
0.65
0.53
0.62
0.93
Percent by Weight of "Total
Ca
0.09
0.08
0.10
0.07
0.20
0.35
0.15
0.70
0.08
0.52
0.12
0.74
0.27
0.12
a
1.56
0.12
0.40
3.16
0.18
2.82
0.11
0.27
0.06
0.17
0.04
b
a
0.43
Na
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
0.51
b
b
b
b
b
a
b
b
a
a
b
a
a
0.12
0.30
b
b
b
a
_Mg_
b
a
0.02
b
a
a
0.01
a
b
0.03
a
a
b
0.02
b
b
0.02
0.02
0.11
0.01
a
b
a
0.01
b
b
b
a
a
Fe
b
a
b
b
0.15
a
b
b
a
1.61
0.11
a
b
b
a
b
b
0.32
1.58
0.19
0.59
a
a
0.08
b
b
b
b
b
Particulate"
Zn
a
a
a
a
0.16
0.29
a
a
a
a
a
b
b
0.14
a
b
0.14
0.30
1.63
0.09
1.25
0.11
0.20
a
b
b
a
a
a
p
0.05
a
a
0.03
n.07
a
a
a
a
b
a
a
a
a
b
b
a
0.14
0.85
0.06
0.76
0.04
0.10
a
a
a
b
b
0.09
Al
b
a
a
b
b
b
0.85
b
a
b
0.65
b
b
b
b
a
b
0.04
b
0.36
0.38
0.01
b
0.34
b
b
b
0.08
b
Totnl
Ti Met«l,»
b
a
a
b
b
b
b
a
b
a
a
a
b
b
b
a
b
b
a
0.01
b
b
a
a
b
b
b
b
0.11
0.83
0.08
0.12
0.10
0.63
0.64
0.74
0.70
0.43
2.67
0.88
0.74
1.10
0.28
—
1.56
0.28
1.46
7.33
0.90
5.80
0.30
0.57
0.61
0.47
0.19
—
0.08
0.54
                 "Element  was detected but was below the level of quantisation
                  Element  was not detected
                 CTotal metals include all elements listed except C, H, and S
                  Data duplicated from methanol configuration
-------
           TABLE 47.  SUMMARY  OP ELEMENTAL  ANALYSIS  OP  TOTAL  PARTICULATE
                  FROM  TRANSIENT OPERATION OF  THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES
Test
Configuration
Diesel



Methanol



Methanol
-Catalyst


Methanol
-Cat.-Bp.


Ethanol



Ethanol
-Catalyst


Trans .
Cycle^
Cold
Start
Hot
Start
Cold
Start
Hot
Start
Cold
Start
Hot
Start
Cold
Start
Hot
Start
Cold
Start
Hot
Start
Cold
Start
Hot
Start
Element Percent by Weight of Total Particulate
C
70.

70.

44.

52.

24.

25.

31.

27.

63.

57.

43.

35.

H
4.7

4.4

5.6

7.0

3.6

3.2

3.7

3.4

6.3

5.6

3.8

2.7

"S"
2.0

1.7

1.4

1.3

7.8

6.2

5.3

9.2

0.80

0.75

5.6

7.2

Ca P
0.27 0.10

0.19 0.08

0.42 0.18

0.34 0.15

0.44 0.14

0.37 0.14

0.31 O.lla

0.15a — -b

0.38 0.14

0.17a 	 b

o.na — -b

O.lla 	 b

Al
0.10a

b

0.05a

0.05a

6.8

8.9

2.3

2.1

0.11

0.06a

2.2

2.2

Total0
Metals %
0.38

0.27

0.65

0.54

7.38

9.41

2.72

2.25

0.62

0.23

2.31

2.31

^These values approach the  limits of quantitative analysis by X-ray technique
 Presence of this element was below the  limit of detectability
 "Total Metals"  consists only of Ca, P,  and Al
                                        93
-------
percent of each element in the total participate sample analyzed.  The
total participate sample varies with the filter type used.*-1''  Total
participate is defined in terms of Teflon-coated glass fiber filter media
(Pallflex TA60A20, for this program).(5)  Glass fiber filters tended to
overestimate the total particulate, while the Teflon membrane filter
results correlated well with the Teflon-coated glass fiber values.

          Of all the elements determined, carbon and hydrogen generally
make up the bulk of the total particulate followed by sulfur and oxygen.
In addition, trace amounts of a wide variety of elements which range from
sodium  (23 atomic weight units)  to barium (137 atomic weight units).  Of
the trace elements, calcium, phosphorus, iron, and aluminum were most
commonly found in detectable quantities.  Carbon and hydrogen content
were very similar among the various configurations at light load and
at idle, which may be expected since only diesel fuel was consumed
at light loads.  Methanol and ethanol+water configurations were simi-
lar, with lower carbon content than for the diesel configuration at
the 50 percent load conditions.  Carbon content from full load condi-
tions with methanol alone was higher than with ethanol+water.  The
catalyst was very effective in reducing carbon content of the particu-
late from the higher-powered modes of operation, where catalyst heat
was sufficient for oxidation to take place.  Sulfur content, noted as
sulfate earlier, was substantially increased at these same high-heat
power modes with the catalyst, otherwise sulfur content of the total
particulate was relatively low.  The sulfur content was relatively high
during the maximum power modes run with methanol and ethanol+water.
Similarly, the total of trace materials was relatively high for maximum
power operation.  It is interesting that a variety of trace elements
was detected for both the maximum torque and the maximum power condi-
tions where alcohol substitution for diesel fuel was greatest.  Many
of the trace metals detected by X-ray fluorescence are assumed to have
originated from the fuel refining process, engine oil, and engine wear.

          In comparing results from the transient testing, carbon and hvdro-
gen content appear to be independent of cold or hot start-up.  Carbon
content was lower for the methanol and ethanol configurations.  The
catalyst reduced carbon content,  but not to the extent noted from the
modal information.  Use of the catalyst significantly increased the
aluminum and sulfur levels in the particulate.  The use of the backpres-
sure device in conjunction with the catalyst appeared to coincide with
lower aluminum content.  It is assumed that the aluminum may have origi-
nated from the catalyst.

     5.    Particle Size Distribution

          Particle sizing by the Sierra Model 220 cascade impactor was used
to obtain particle size distributions from 7 modes of steady-state
operation and from transient cycle operation of the dual-fuel engine.
The size distribution plots are influenced strongly by the back-up
filter,  which generally accounted for approximately 50 percent or more
                                  94
-------
of the particulate collected.  Problems with the back-up filter sticking
to its 0-ring seal, and with determining the weight gains of the indivi-
dual impactor stages were causes for inaccuracies.  In order to improve
accuracy, the impactor set was operated during several transient cycles,
or for one hour of steady-state operation.  Due to the level of effort
required and the quality of information obtained, particle sizing was
limited to the methanol and the methanol-catalyst configurations for
modal testing, and to transient testing of the methanol, methanol-catalyst,
ethanol, and ethanol-catalyst configurations.

          Particle size distributions from modal operation are given in
Figures 17 and 18 for the methanol and the methanol-catalyst configurations,
With the catalyst, the size distribution shifted to larger particles at
idle, but shifted toward smaller particles at the higher power modes.  The
"averages" of the particle size distributions for both configurations
are given in Figure 19.  The average plot for the methanol configuration
included six modes of operation  (2200 rpm/2 percent load condition
was void).  The average plot for the methanol-catalyst configuration
included seven modes of operation  (idle data with and without the back-
pressure device were averaged together and used as one mode).  The
average particle size distributions indicated that more of the particles
tended to be smaller when the catalyst was used.  This effect may be due
to the increased presence of sulfate particles as a result of the catalyst.

          Particle  size distributions from transient operation are given in
Figure 20.  In the methanol and ethanol fuel configurations,  about 70
percent of the particles were less than 0.11 micron BCD (Effective Cutoff
Diameter).  Application of the catalyst appears to have reduced the per-
centage of particles under 0.11 pm diameter to about 50 percent.  It is
possible that by eliminating some of the fine aerosols associated with
unburned fuel in transient operation, the catalyst eliminates a portion
of the smaller particles, which shifts the distribution plot to the left.
This process would lead to comparative preponderance of larger particles
from the catalyst-equipped configurations.  This trend is just opposite
of that shown for steady-state operation.  The difference may be due to
limited sulfate formation in the catalyst during the transient testing,
whereas significant sulfate was emitted during high-powered steady-state
operation.  In addition, sulfate storage and purge may also occur in the
catalyst during transient operation.  Overall, the particle size distribu-
tions from the alcohol-fueled configuration were similar to those commonly
reported for diesel engine particulate. (19)

     6.   Soluble Organic Fraction

           The  soluble  organic  fraction (SOF)  of the total particulate was  ob-
tained from particulate samples collected on 20x20 inch Pallflex filters
with soxhlet extraction procedures using methylene chloride.   The SOF
has been reported as a percentage of the total particulate, and is refer-
red to as percent solubles.  This result gives an indication as to the
                                  95
-------
10
c
o
Q

O
W
0)

+J

-------
   7.4  !=t:E:
w
c
o
M
U
•H
g
OJ
-P
0)
•H
Q
 U
•H
-P
    .37  gSi
    .11
             20
40     60       80


Cumulative Percent
    90    95     98   99


Smaller than BCD
                                                                        99.9
         Figure 18.  Particle size distribution  from modal  operation of the

              Volvo TD-100A dual-duel engine with methanol  and catalyst
                                  97
-------
    7.4
 o
 n
 o
 8
 w
 (U
 -p
 p



 0)

 r-t

 O
    .11
            20       40      60       80    90   95     98  99



                     Cumulative Percent Smaller  than ECD
99.9
Figure 19.   Average of particle size distribution from modal operation of the

      Volvo TD-100A dual-fuel engine on methanol and methanol with catalyst
                                  98
-------
    7.4  g
    4.5
    2.8  -
w
C!
o
n
o
•r-1
e
p
o
M
0)
-P
0)
•H
Q
O
•H
-P
1.6
.95
.60
    .37
    .11
              20       40      60       80     90   95    98  99

                            Cumulative Percent Smaller than ECD
                                                                     99.9
        Figure 20.   Particle Size distribution from transient operation
                   of the Volvo TD-100A dual-fuel engine
                                   99
-------
nature of the total particulate matter, but it makes it difficult to
compare SOF emission rates of the various test configurations.  Table 48


  TABLE 48.  SUMMARY OF SOLUBLE ORGANIC FRACTION FROM MODAL OPERATION
                      OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES

                     Percent Solubles in Total Particulate   and
Condition
ran/load, %
1400/2
1400/50
1400/100
Idle
2200/100
2200/50
2200/2
7 -mode
Composite
(Soluble Particulate Rate (g/n
Diesel
90 (17.)
54 (9.9)
6.8 (4.8)
81 (6.4)
9.3 (7.3)
9.7 (7.6)
87 (43.)
0.196
gAW-hr
Methanol
91
34
6.
81
21
25
83
0.
g/
(37.)
(3.2)
2 (0.6)
(4.6)
(1.4)
(4.4)
(52.)
201
Meth.-Cat.
93 (15.)
5.5 (1.2)
1.2 (0.6)
66b (1.2)
3.3 (2.3)
3.1 (1.8)
57 (15.)
0.072
gAW-hr
r»
Eth. + Water
97 (31.)
40 (3.3)
23 (3.1)
81 (4.6)
15 (1.5)
19 (4.8)
73 (49.)
0.3.91
gAW-hr
summarizes both the SOF mass emission rates and percent solubles from
modal operation, and Table 49 summarizes the results from transient opera-
tion.  Composite values were computed,  and they are also given in the tables.

   TABLE 49.  SUMMARY OF SOLUBLE ORGANIC FRACTION FROM TRANSIENT
                OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES
       Test
Percent Solubles in Total Particulatea and
    (Soluble Particulate Ratio (g/kW-hr))
Configuration
Diesel
Methanol
Meth.-Cat.
Ethanol
Eth. -Cat.
Cold -Start
35
62
19
48
16
(.28)
(.22)
(.05)
(.16)
(.05)
Hot -Start
31
75
15
53
10
(.21)
(.30)
(.051)
(.19)
(.04)
Calc. Composite
32
73
16
53
11
(.22)
(.29)
(.05)
(.19)
(.04)
39
76
45
65
32
Bus
(.32)
(.46)
(.10)
(.39)
(.12)
    Particulate samples collected on 20X20 inch Pallflex filter media and
    extracted using methylene chloride
    Idle solubles with backpressure device were 16 percent and (0.23 g/hr)
                                 100
-------
          The percent solubles from modal operation of the diesel engine were
typical; namely, a relatively high percentage of organic material at  low
power modes  and idle, decreasing  as the load was increased.  The methanol
and the ethanol+water configurations also showed the same trends in regard
to the percent solubles, but differed considerably  in SOF emission rate.
The dual-fuel engine produced less organic  solubles than the diesel at
idle, but more at the 2 percent load conditions.  As mentioned before,
this effect  may be due to differences in diesel fuel injection geometry
between the  diesel engine and the dual-fuel engine.  The SOF emission
rates were  similar  for both the methanol and  ethanol+water  configura-
tions,  except for the maximum  torque condition.

          The catalyst reduced SOF modal emission  rates  in  all  cases  except
the maximum torque  and the  maximum power conditions.  The catalyst
was especially  effective  in reducing SOF emissions  during idle and the
2 percent load  conditions where exhaust temperature is  relatively low,
perhaps  acting  as a  trap.   Use of the backpressure  device at idle re-
duced the SOF emissions even further.   The  7-mode composites of the
solubles  were about  the same except for the methanol-catalyst configura-
tion, which showed  significant reductions of  SOF emissions  from the light
loads and idle.  Although the  7-mode composite SOF  values of the diesel
engine  and  the methanol configuration are similar,  their SOF emissions
for individual modes were very different.

           The organic solubles were  higher  from the cold-start transient
than for  the hot-start transient  in the diesel configuration.  This
result  seems logical, since more  unburned diesel fuel-like  material
would be  emitted from a cold engine than from a hot engine; and this
material  would be collected as total particulates and later be extracted
as organic  solubles.  The SOF emission  rates  from the methanol and etha-
nol configurations were lower for the cold-start than for the hot-start,
just the  opposite of the diesel engine.  If it is assumed that the cold
dual-fuel engine emits unburned alcohol-like material,  then it is possible
that it may be lost  in the  extraction process by evaporation because of
its low boiling point.  No  difference was noted in  the  SOF  emissions
between cold-start and hot-start  transients with the catalyst.  Although
the catalyst is a temperature-sensitive device, the significant reduc-
tions noted in the SOF emission rates may be the result of  the catalyst's
ability to  act as a trap.

           The transient  composite SOF  emission  was  highest  for the methanol
configuration, followed by  the diesel and the ethanol configurations.
The catalyst reduced the SOF emission by 80 percent in both alcohol
fueled configurations.  Transient composite SOF emissions were higher
from the methanol configuration than from the ethanol configuration,
which may be due to different heats of  vaporization.  The methanol has
a higher heat of vaporization, which may have more  of a quenching effect
on the diesel pilot fuel than does the  ethanol.  The bus cycle showed
the same trends as noted for the  transient  composite, but with higher
overall SOF  emission rates.  Characterization of the soluble organic
fraction is  of special interest because it  contains a variety of organic
compounds which are created through diesel  combustion.

                                  101
-------
0.28
0.21
76.7
77.1
9.6
9.9
0.47
0.37
0.73
0.77
          a.   Elemental Composition

               Organic solubles from cold- and hot-start transient oper-
ation of the diesel engine and the dual-fuel engine in the methanol and
the methanol-catalyst configurations were analyzed for carbon, hydrogen,
nitrogen, and sulfur content.  Table 50 lists the elements as a percent
of the soluble organic fraction.  Overall, there was no appreciable dif-
ference between the three configurations with respect to carbon and
hydrogen content.  The catalyst appears to have increased the nitrogen
content and decreased the sulfur content of the SOF relative to the diesel
and methanol configurations.

       TABLE 50.  ELEMENTAL COMPOSITION OF SOLUBLE ORGANIC FRACTION
            FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES

        Test         Test       SOF        Element, Percent of SOF
    Configuration    Cycle    g/kW-hr     C        H       N      	S_

      Diesel         Cold
                     Hot

      Methanol       Cold       0.22     84.1    13.1    0.29    0.72
                     Hot        0.30     84.5    12.9    0.35    0.50

      Methanol       Cold       0.05     77.9    10.6    0.72    0.50
      -Catalyst      Hot        0.06     80.0    11.2    0.75    0.60
          b.   Boiling Point Distribution

               The organic soluble fraction resembles a very heavy oil
or a varnish.  A high-temperature GC-simulated boiling point distribution
with internal standard (Cg-C^)  was conducted on SOF from cold and hot
transient operation of the diesel engine, and from the dual-fuel engine
in the methanol and the mathanol-catalyst configurations.  The boiling
point distribution was determined from gas chromatographic output
normally used with petroleum oil or fuel samples.   The numerical results
of these analyses are presented in Table 51.   All samples showed rela-
tively high levels of "residue," that is about 34 percent of the SOF
sample submitted could not be volatilized below 606°C, which was the
maximum column equivalent temperature reached during the procedure used.
Extracts from the diesel hot-start and the methanol hot-start were very
similar.  All the boiling point distributions appeared to be similar
up to the 40 percent point.  The catalyst seems to have reduced some
of the middle weight paraffins,  in that the 60 percent point is 571°C
instead of 518°C for the methanol case.
                                   102
-------
   TABLE 51.   BOILING POINT DISTRIBUTION OF SOLUBLE ORGANIC FRACTION
            FROM TRANSIENT OPERATION OF THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES

                      Boiling  Temperature at  Distillation Point,°C
   Distillation         Diesel           Methanol         Meth.-Cat.
     Point           Cold    Hot       Cold     Hot      Cold     Hot
   IBP                269     292       312     285       285     310
   10% point          381     384       389     392       381     387
   20% point          414     414       415     415       410     415
   30% point          440     436       440     435       436     439
   40% point          469     460       471     456       467     469
   50% point          502     485       514     482       506     512
   60% point          555     519       589     518       558     571
   70% point          	     580       	     588       	     	
   80% point          	     	       	     	       	     	
   90% point          	     	       	     	       	     	


   Recovery. %
    @ 606°C            64      72        61      72        65     63

           c.   Fractionation by  Relative Polarity

               The  composition of the soluble organic fraction of the
total particulate is  complex, and its separation into individual com-
pounds is  very difficult.  Fractionation of the SOF by high performance
liquid chormatography (HPLC) separates the soluble portion into a series
of fractions  of increasing molecular polarity.  Figures 21 through 27
show the HPLC chromatographic outputs for direct comparison of the rela-
tive concentration  of increasingly polar compounds from cold and hot
transient  operation of the diesel engine and the dual-fuel engine.

               Each figure contains three traces, one representing the
solvent composition,  a second representing the ultraviolet detector
response,  and the other  representing the fluorescence detector response.
Initially,  the solvent is composed of 95 percent hexane and 5 percent
methylene  chloride, a relatively non-polar mixture.  This solvent mixture
is used from  the start of the chromatogram to 17 minutes into the elution
period.  During this  period, non-polar compounds elute.  BaP elutes at
eight minutes into  the run.  Many non-polar PNA compounds also elute
during this period, and  give ultraviolet and fluorescence responses.
After 17 minutes, the polarity of the solvent is increased at a rate of
5 percent methylene chloride per minute.  During this transition period
of solvent polarity,  more polar  compounds are eluted, giving fluorsecence
and ultraviolet spectra.  At the end of this transition period (36 minutes
into the run), the  solvent is 100 percent methylene chloride and 9-fluorenone
elutes.  With 100 percent methylene chloride, even more polar compounds
elute.  Acridine elutes  during this polar period (at about 70 minutes).
                                    103
-------
 I
80
1
I
/•
1


• 1 .
'


1
- r
-. i
4 -
~1~~





— I
i


i
_ i








1
- • H
" 1




':
-'.-•
-




^ '
1 "
I -






t
1

)
-j




!
;- ;
.'--.
- "








;








— '





-1--.





_->^




--!--





-

— -'"






' __,




- -.







ULTI


A

/



i \






-_

RAVI
:


^—


!

i
.. .-:




. ~;\
4 -'



|




OLE.T


/\


,-• 	
1






(\
j!
-1
I-



\
M

A /
J\J

i

i i i i
70 60 50 40
• ! -

\,
V
~ ~ L "

SOLA
1
\l
(

"

- • -•
- 1--
"• .

f} '•'
\=
AS
V

1







/ENT POLARIC
r~
1. .]_.._
; r
\ T
\

-.



: -


X^-








\-
\
:\

• j
i


• •

\
\
\
\










\


\

•'- r-r
t
P¥



. • ,


•



,






t-
T '
_ ;
1






. !




(

1

1

-r
-
i
i






~fl
"T




-





i:

	 •;•.
.

" ;





1 1
30 20 10 0
                             Time, minutes
   Figure 21.   HPLC  response  to  cold-start  diesel  transient SOF
                                         -- SOLVENT  POLARITY
                      i— ULTRAVIOLET JH
                      	|	:
                                            i
                         50       40      30
                           Time, minutes
  Figure 22.  HPLC response to hot-start diesel transient SOF
                                  104
-------
 I
.80
70
 I
60
 I
50
       40

Time, minutes
30
    Figure 23.  HPLC response to cold-start methanol transient SOF
  80    70
                             Time, minutes


     Figure 24.  HPLC response to hot-start methanol transient SOF


                                  105
-------
                                         5 3- SOLVENT 'POLARITY
                                                              10
o
                        50        40        30
                             Time, minutes
Figure 25.   HPLC response  to cold-start methanol-catalyst transient SOF
                                           SOLVENT POLARITY
                              Time, minutes
Figure 26.   HPLC response to hot-start methanol-catalyst transient SOF

                                   106
-------
                               Time, minutes

 Figure 27.  HPLC response to hot-start ethanol-catalyst transient SOF
               Figures  21 and 22 show the chormatograms from the HPLC
fractionation of the SOF from the cold-start and hot-start transient
tests of the diesel configuration.  Fluorescence from the cold-start
indicated non-polar PNA compounds (such as BaP) with only slight response
at the end of the transition region and some response at 50 minutes, near
the end of the polar compound region.  Ultraviolet response seemed rela-
tively high at the end  of the transition region.  Fluorescence from the
hot-start indicated few non-polar compounds, but did show a peak near
the end of the non-polar region.  Generally, fluorescence from the tran-
sition region was minimal, with some response near the beginning and end
of the polar solvent region.  For some reason, the ultraviolet response
was very high, particularly in the region where BaP elutes and at the
beginning of the polar  region.

               HPLC chromatograms for the cold- and hot-start transient
tests of the methanol configuration are given in Figures 23 and 24,
respectively.  Fluorescence from the cold-start with methanol was rela-
tively strong in the non-polar PNA region of the chormatogram.  No
fluorescence was noted  in the transition region, but there were definite
peaks around 47 and 50  minutes of the polar region.  Ultraviolet response
                                   107
-------
was minimal for the cold-start with methanol.  Fluorescence from the hot-
start with methanol showed some presence of BaP-type compounds, but not to
the extent noted from the cold-start.  Similar to the cold-start, there
was no response in the transitional region for the hot-start methanol
sample.  Also, there was a relatively strong fluorescence peak around
40 minutes, about the beginning of the polar region, and an absence of
the compounds which had been seen around 50 minutes.  A significant ultra-
violet response was noted at 50 minutes.

               Results from cold- and hot-start transient tests of the
methanol-catalyst configuration are shown in Figures 25 and 26.  The
fluorescence responses from the cold-start sample were extremely large
in the non-polar region.  Several compounds were also noted at the end
of the transition region.  As with the cold-start methanol, there was a
definite fluorescence peak around 47 and 50 minutes, but it was signifi-
cantly larger when the catalyst was used.  The ultraviolet response was
fairly significant in the non-polar region as well as near the end of
the transition region.  As may have been expected with a hot-start
catalyst sample, fluorescence in the non-polar region was significantly
reduced from that of the cold-start with catalyst.  It is interesting
that the catalyst seemed to have no effect in reducing the fluorescence
peak noted around 40 minutes or the ultraviolet peak around 50 minutes
noted for the hot-start methanol configuration.  In fact, the traces
from the hot-start methanol and the hot-start methanol-catalyst confi-
guration are almost identical beyond the non-polar region.

               A sample from the hot-start ethanol-catalyst configuration
was submitted for HPLC fractionation and is shown in Figure 27.  The
fluorescence emissions were noted early in the non-polar region and in
the polar region at about 50 minutes.  The ultraviolet response was
minimal except for the near transition-polar region, where it was
significant.

               The hot-start results are weighted more heavily than cold
in the composite calculations, so they are considered very important in
total population exposure.  The hot-start sample from the methanol con-
figuration had more fluorescence response in the early polar region and
less response in the non-polar region than the hot-start sample from the
diesel configuration.   The catalyst appeared to have little effect on the
hot-start methanol fluorescence response, although the catalyst signifi-
cantly affected the cold-start results.  The response from the ethanol-
catalyst hot-start sample was very different from the methanol-catalyst
hot-start,  in that the ethanol-catalyst sample had strong fluorescence
peaks around 3 minutes and 50 minutes, and had a relatively high ultra-
violet peak around 40 minutes.
                                   108
-------
          d.   Benzo(a)pyrene

               Benzo(a)pyrene  (BaP) is often an indicator of PNA content
in the soluble organic fraction.  BaP content was determined for transient
composite SOF from diesel, methanol, ethanol, methanol-catalyst, and
ethanol-catalyst test configurations.  In addition, BaP content was de-
termined for 7-mode composite  SOF from diesel, methanol, methanol-catalyst,
and ethanol+water test configurations.  Transient composite SOF was made
up of the organic extract from one cold-start, plus six hot-start total
particulate samples collected  on 20x20 inch filters.  The 7-mode composite
SOF was made up by combining portions of individual modal extracts into
one common sample on the basis of modal emission rate of total particulate,
the modal weighting factor, and the modal percentage of extractables.

               The BaP results from both the transient composite and the
7-mode composite from the various test configurations are given in Table
52.  The brake specific BaP was also computed for comparison purposes,
and takes into account the BaP concentration, SOF rate and the work pro-
duced.  In all cases, the BaP  was lower for the 7-mode composite than for
the transient composite from a given configuration.
     TABLE 52.  SUMMARY OF TRANSIENT COMPOSITE AND 7-MODE  COMPOSITE
          BENZO(A)PYRENE EMISSIONS FROM THE VOLVO TEST ENGINES
     Test
 Configuration

    Diesel
    Methanol
    Methanol
    -Catalyst

    Ethanol
    Ethanol
    -Catalyst

    Ethanol
    +Water
  Cycle
Composite

Transient
7-Mode

Transient
7-Mode

Transient
7-Mode

Transient
7-Mode

Transient
7-Mode

Transient
7-Mode
      Benzo(a)pyrene Emissions
BaP/mg SOF yg BaP/kW-hr  yg BaP/kg  fuel
0.0168
0.0032

0.0061
0.0043

0.0055
0.0011

0.0017
                                    0.0921
0.0064
3.7
0.64

1.7
0.86

0.33
0.08

0.32
               3.7
1.2
13.
 2.4

 3.2
 1.8

 0.60
 0.17

 0.74
 2.4
                                    109
-------
Generally, unhurried fuel-like matter is emitted during light load operation
where the diesel combustion mixture is  very lean.   Levels of BaP from tran-
sient operation in the methanol,  methanol-catalyst and ethanol+water con-
figuration were all very similar  and lower than for the diesel configu-
ration.  The 7-mode composite BaP level from the diesel and methanol con-
figurations were somewhat similar.   The catalyst was effective in reducing
the 7-mode composite BaP level from the methanol configuration, but had
little effect on the transient composite BaP level.   In contrast, when
ethanol was used, the catalyst significantly increased the transient
composite BaP level.  The reason  for such an increase is puzzling, but
may be due to the relative amount of oxygen introduced into the combustion
chamber as fuel.

          e.   Ames Response

               The Ames test, as  employed in this program, refers to a
bacterial mutagenesis plate assay with  Salmonella typhimurium according
to the method of Ames.(13)  This  bioassay determines the ability of
chemical compounds or mixtures to cause mutation of DNA in the bacteria,
positive results occurring when histidine-dependent strains of bacteria
revert (or are mutated)  genetically to  forms which can synthesize histi-
dine on their own.  Samples of the soluble organic fraction representing
transient composites and 7-mode composites, were submitted for bioassay
over five tester strains, TA1535, TA1537, TA1538,  TA98 and TA100.

               All five strains are histidine-dependent cells by virtue
of mutations within the histidine functional genetic unit.  When these
histidine-dependent cells are grown on  minimal medium agar plates con-
taining a limited amount of histidine,  only those cells that revert to
histidine independence are able to form colonies.   The trace amount of
histidine allows all the bacteria plated to undergo a few divisions,
which is essential for mutagenesis to occur.  It is these histidine-
independent revertants which are  scored as colonies against a slight
background growth consisting of histidine-requiring cells that have
depleted the histidine present within the minimal medium.

               In addition to mutations in the histidine functional
genetic unit, all the tester strains have a defective lipopolysaccharide
coat which allows large molecules to permeate the bacterial wall, thus
increasing bacterial sensitivity  to mutagenic aromatic compounds.
Furthermore, a U.V. mutation decreases  bacterial sensitivity to addi-
tional mutagenic agents.  TA1535  and its plasmid-containing counterpart,
TA100, detect base pair substitutions,  while TA1537 (and TA1538 with its
plasmid-containing counterpart, TA98) respond to frameshift mutagens.
The plasmids present in TA98 and  TA100  are believed to cause an increase
in error-prone DNA repair which leads to many more mutations.  Thus, the
five tester strains in tandem provide a very sensitive method for the
detection of potential mutagenic  environmental samples.
                                   11C
-------
               Samples of the organic soluble fraction from transient
composites and 7-mode composites of the various engine configurations
were submitted for bioassay over the five  tester strains, with and
without metabolic activation.  The extractables were tested in two
separate groups.  The first group consisted of transient composite SOF
samples from methanol, methanol-catalyst, ethanol, and ethanol-catalyst
configurations.  The second group consisted of transient composite
samples from methanol and diesel configuration along with 7-mode com-
posite samples from the diesel, methanol, methanol-catalyst and the
ethanol+water configurations.  Results from these tests are given in
Table 53.  In addition, the second group also contained samples from
seven individual steady-state modes from the diesel, methanol and
methanol-catalyst configurations.  These individual modal SOF samples
were tested using only the TA98 tester strain, with and without metabolic
activation.  Results from these individual modal tests are given in
Table 54.

               Results given in both Tables 53 and 54 include the slope
of dose response, which represents the statistically determined slope of
the function representing revertants per plate versus micrograms SOF
dosage.  This result is termed "specific activity," and is an indication
of the level of mutagenic potential of the extract.  In Table 53, results
are also given in terms of brake specific response, which represents the
specific activity multiplied by the SOF brake specific emission rate.
The units  for the brake specific response are then

                           revertants/plate
                                kW-hr

The "revertants per plate" per "kW-hr" is useful for comparison purposes,
but has no practical meaning.  Samples from the first group were tested
twice over a period of one and one-half months.  The specific activities
from these replicate tests are given in Table 53 under the headings,
"Test 1" and "Test 2."  The average of these specific activities was
used in conjunction with the brake specific emission of SOF to calculate
the brake  specific response.

               Within the first group, there was good repeatability
between the two tests from both the methanol and the ethanol config-
urations,  but not when the catalyst was used.  The ethanol configuration
had twice  the specific activity of the methanol configuration.  The
specific activities of both the methanol and ethanol configurations were
substantially higher when the catalyst was used.  Since the catalyst
reduced the SOF emission, the brake specific response from the methanol-
catalyst configuration was almost the same as from the methanol configu-
ration.  The specific activity of the ethanol-catalyst configuration
increased  greatly, so that the brake specific response was generally
greater than from the ethanol configuration, even though the SOF emission
was substantially reduced by the catalyst.
                                    Ill
-------
                               TABLE  53.   SUMMARY OF  AMES RESPONSE  TO TRANSIENT COMPOSITE
                                   AND MODAL COMPOSITE SOF FROM  THE  VOLVO TEST ENGINESa
             Total  Soluble
                                       Strain TA98
                                                              Strain TA100
                                                                                    Strain TA1535
                                                                                                          Strain TA1537
                                                                                                                                 Strain  TA1S38
Engine Test
Configuration
Methanol
Trans -1
Meth-Cat.
Trans . 1
Ethanol
Trans.1
Eth.-Cat.
Trans . 1
Repeat
Methanol
Trans . 2
Diesel
Trans.2
D J.6S6 1

7-Mode
Methanol
7-Mode
Meth.-Cat.
7-Mode2
Eth.+Water
7-Mode2
Part. Organic
Rate Fract.
g/kH-hr g/kW-hr
0.39 0.29

0.33 0.05

0.35 0.19

0.38 0.04


0 . 39 0 . 29

0.70 0.22


0.69 0.20

0.30 0.20

0.51 0.07

0.33 0.19

Metab.
Activ.
Status
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes

No
Yes
No
Yes

No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Specific
Activity^
Test 1 Test 2
1.5 2.3
3.4 2.8
21.8 17.2
14.1 19.6
4.3 3.8
6.8 7.0
37.5 42.8
21.8 66.3

0.4
0.6
2.1
2.5

0.9
0.6
2.3
2.8
1.3
2.2
0 . 04
0.06
Brake
Specific
Responsec
0.55
0.90
0.98
0.84
0.77
1.31
1.61
1.76

0.12
0.17
0.46
0.55

0.18
0.12
0.46
0.56
0.09
0.15
0.08
0.11
Specific
Activity13
Test 1 Test 2
3.2 5.1
2.7 2.9
9.3 24.4
8.3 40.1
9.8 11.8
7.8 6.9
4.0 57.7
18.2 141

1.7
2.2
8.8
6.2

16 . 3
3.5 • —
3.9
3.6
4.4
5.2
1.6
1.4
Brake
Specific
Response0
1.20
0.81
0.84
1.21
2.05
1.40
1.23
3.18

0.49
0.64
1.94
1.36

3.26
0.70
0.78
0.72
0.31
0.36
0.30
0.27
Specific
Activity13
Test 1 Test 2
0.0 0.0
0.2 0.1
0.0 0.2
0.4 2.1
0.0 0.1
0.2 0.4
0.0 1.1
0.2 0.6

0.0
0.5
0.0
0.2 —

0.0
0.3
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
Brake
Specific
Response0
0.0
0.04
0.01
0.06
0.01
0.06
0.02
0.02

0.0
0.15
0.0
0.04

0.0
0.06
0.0
0.02
0.0
0.01
0.0
0.02
Specific
Activity*)
Test 1 Test 2
0.3 0.4
0.7 0.6
19.2 10.9
3.0 16.3
1.1 1.0
3.0 1.2
87.4 74.7
33.2 438

0.1
0.1
1.6
1.0

0.2
0.6
0.3
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.0
0.1
Brake
Specific
Response0
0.10
0.19
0.75
0.48
0.20
0.40
3.24
9.42

0.03
0.03
0.35
0.22

0.04
0.12
0.06
0.10
0.04
0.04
0.0
0.02
Specific
Activity1*
Test 1 Test 2
1.1 0.8
3.4 3.8
35.1 12.5
6.5 22.8
2.3 3.8
5.4 6.0
5.8 51.8
37. 308

0.2
0.4
1.8
2.4

1.2
0.8
1.2
0.8
0.8
2.3
0.2
0.5
Brake
Specific
Response0
0.28
1.04
1.19
0.73
0.58
1.08
1.15
6.90

0.06
0.12
0.40
0.53

0.24
0.16
0.24
0.16
0.06
0.16
0.04
0.10
°SOF was submitted and tested in two separate groups.  The first  group is designated by a "1" and the second group is
 designated by a "2" in the "Engine Test Configuration" column.   In the first group, duplicate tests were conducted
 in order to establish test to test repeatability.
 Specific activity results  from statistical analysis of revertants of bacteria culture per microgram of SOF dose
°BraJce  specific response has units of:   millions of revertants/plate per kilowatt hour
-------
                            TABLE 54.   SUMMARY  OF  AMES RESPONSE  TO  INDIVIDUAL MODAL  SAMPLES
                                              OF SOF FROM THE VOLVO  TEST ENGINES
Sample
Test
Condition
rpm/%load
1400/2

1400/50

1400/100

Idle

2200/100

2200/50

2200/2

7-Mode
Composite
7-Mode
Brake Spec .

TA98
Metabolic
Activation
Status
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yea
No
Yes
No
Yes

No
Yes
Diesel Conf iquration
Soluble
Fraction
g SOF/hr
17.0

9.9

4.8

6.4

7.3

7.6

43.

12. 2d


—
—
Specific
Activity3
106rev./)Jg SOF
0.6
0.6
1.7
2.2
2.6
1.2
0.9
2.3
10.6
4.7
2.8
1.6
0.8
0.7
0.9d
0.6d

—
—
Specific
Rateb
106rev./hr
10.2
10.2
16.8
21.8
12.5
5.8
5.8
14.7
77.4
34.3
21.3
12.2
34.4
30.1
11.0°
7.3°

0.18d
0.12
Methanol Configuration
Soluble
Fraction
g SOF/hr
37.

3.2

0.6

4.6

1.4

4.4

52.

12. 5d


—
—
Specific
Activitya
106rev/ug SDF
0.5
0.5
9.9
9.9
11.0
2.6
0.6
0.6
12.8
12.3
6.9
6.7
0.5
0.7
2.3d
2.8d

	
—
Specific
Rateb
106rev./hr
18.5
18.5
31.7
31.7
6.6
1.6
2.8
2.8
17.9
17.2
30.4
29.5
26.0
36.4
28. 8C
35.0°

0.46d
0.56d
Meth
Soluble
Organ. Prac.
g- SOF/hr
15.

1.2

0.6

1.2

2.3

1.8

15.

4.5d


	
—
. -Cat . Conf iguration
Specific
Activity"
106rev./ugSOF
2.7
2.8
6.8
15.7
1.2
0.9
5.9
6.2
7.9
17.3
6.1
16.5
2.3
4.5
1.3d
2.2d

	
—
Specific
Rate13
106rev./hr
40.5
42.0
8.2
18.8
0.7
0.5
7.1
7.4
18.2
39.8
11.0
29.7
34.5
67.5
5.8C
9.9C

0.09d
0.16d
 Specific activity has  units of: millions revertants/plate per microgram of SOF dose
 Specific rate has units of : millions revertants/plate per hour
 Computed on the basis  of 7-mode brake specific response  from composite  sample and a 7-mode
,composite power output of 62.2kW
 Data transferred from  Table 53.
Note:  A blank filter was  processed, specific activity of TA98 with metabolic  activation
was 0.2, without metabolic  activation was 0.4 10  revertants/plate per microgram dose
-------
               The second group of SOF samples contained another sample
from the methanol configuration in order to tie the two test groups
together for comparison purposes.   Unfortunately,  the Ames test response
from the repeat methanol sample did not resemble the results from the
first group.  The poor "repeatability" could have been due to a change
in the bacteria strains which may  have occurred during the four-month
time period between the testing of the two groups.   Within the second
group, the diesel transient SOF sample had higher specific activities
and brake specific responses than  the methanol transient SOF sample.
If it could be assumed that the results from both test groups (for the
methanol configuration) were equivalent, it would imply that the Ames
response to the transient diesel samples would approach the magnitude
of the response to the transient samples from the dual-fuel configurations
with catalyst.

               The 7-mode composite SOF samples were tested for Ames
response as part of the second group.  The modal composite diesel generally
had greater specific activity than the modal composite methanol, although
this trend varied with tester strain.  Strain TA98  indicated that modal
composite methanol activity was higher than modal composite diesel
activity, whereas strain TA100 indicated an opposite trend and the other
strains showed no real difference  between the two.   Comparisons between
specific activities of the modal composites from the methanol and the
methanol-catalyst configurations showed minimal differences, but the
brake specific response was lower  with the catalyst due to the signifi-
cant reductions in brake specific  SOF emission.  Generally, the specific
activity from the modal composite  of the ethanol+water configuration
was lower than from the methanol configuration, at least for strains
TA98 and TA100.

               The individual modal responses using TA98 are given in
Table 54 and indicate that the specific activity from idle and the "two
percent load" conditions were about the same for both the diesel and  the
methanol configurations.  Above these light-load conditions, the specific
activity from the methanol configuration was significantly higher than
that of the diesel configuration.   These trends in steady-state responses
may explain the different trends noted for transient composite and steady-
state modal composite samples.  Modal composite results, using TA98,
indicated greater specific activity for the methanol configuration than
for the diesel configuration.  Trends from the transient test were just
the opposite.  Considering the individual modal data, the 7-mode composite
results from the methanol configuration would be expected to yield higher
activities because the 7-mode composite included more heavily loaded
operation than the transient test.  The sepcific activity of the transient
composite sample from the methanol-catalyst configuration was higher than
for the modal composite sample.  Individual modal data indicated that the
specific activity, with the catalyst, increased during the light loads
-------
and decreased during the maximum torque mode, with little or no change
during the maximum power mode.  Once again, considering the modal data,
the more lightly-loaded transient test results would be expected to have
a higher specific activity than the more heavily loaded 7-mode composite.

               Overall, Ames response to transient composite SOP samples
indicated that methanol and ethanol configurations had less potential
for bioactivity than the diesel configuration, but that the addition of
the catalyst may have substantially increased the level of bioactivity
above that of the diesel configuration.  Seven-mode composite results
indicated that the methanol had a higher potential for bioactivity than
the diesel, considering only strain TA98, and that the catalyst actually
reduced this potential.  Individual modal data indicated that the methanol
configuration had about the same potential for biological activity as the
diesel configuration, at the light load conditions, where only diesel fuel
was comsumed.  This potential appears to have increased as more methanol
was substituted for diesel fuel; yet as more methanol was substituted,
the quantity of SOF decreased substantially.  Individual modal data
indicated that the catalyst significantly increased the potential for
bioactivity during the light loads.

               In addition to testing various soluble organic fractions
extracted from particulate samples collected on Pallflex filter media, a
blank filter was also extracted using the same procedure.  The resulting
extract  (3.1 mg) was processed for Ames response using strain TA98.  The
results indicated that some activity was apparent.  This response, al-
though notable for a blank, may be the result of background activity
scaled up by the use of a small sample.
                                    115
-------
                                 REFERENCES
1.    Holmer,  E.,  Berg,  P.  S.,  and  B-I Bertilsson,  "The Utilization of
     Alternative  Fuels  in  a  Diesel Engine Using  Different Methods",
     SAE Paper No.  800544, Congress and  Exposition,  Cobo Hall,  Detroit,
     February 25-29,  1981.

2.    Volvo Service  Manual  -  Diesel Engines,  Section  2, General.

3.    Federal Register,  "Gaseous  Emission Regulations for 1984 and Later
     Model Year Heavy-Duty Engines", Vol. 45,  No.  14,  January 21, 1980.

4.    Federal Register,  "Heavy-Duty Engines  for 1979  and Later Model Years",
     Thursday, September 8,  1977.

5.    Federal Register,  "Control  of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles
     and New Motor  Vehicle Engines; Particulate  Regulation for Heavy-Duty
     Diesel Engines", Wednesday, January 7,  1981.

6.    MoNair,  H. M., and E.J. Bonelli,  "Basic Gas Chromatography."  Varian
     Aerograph, 2700 Mitchell Drive, Walnut Creek, Calif. 94598, February 1965.

7.    Canton,  E. J., S.  S.  Lestz  and W. E. Meyer, "Lean Combustion of
     Methanol-Gasoline Blends in a Single-Cylinder SI Engine",  SAE Paper
     750698 presented at the Fuels and Lubricants Meeting, Houston, Texas,
     June 1975.

8.    Smith L.R.,  Parness,  M. A., Fanick, E.  R.,  and  Dietzmann,  H. E.,
     "Analytical Procedures  for  Characterizing Unregulated Emissions from
     Vehicles Using Middle-Distillate Fuels."  Interim Report,  Contract
     68-02-2497^  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research
     and Development, April  1980.

9.    Bykowski, Bruce B., "Gasohol, TEA,  MTBE Effects on Light-Duty Emissions",
     Final Report of Task  No.  6, Contract 68-03-2377 for Environmental
     Protection Agency, October  1979.

10.  Levins,  P. L., and Kendall, D. A.,  "Application of Odor Technology
     to Mobile Source Emission Instrumentation,"  CRC Project CAPE 7-68
     under Contract No. 68-03-0561, September 1973.

11.  Information Report of the Measurement  and Characterization of Diesel
     Exhaust Emissions (CRC-APRAC  Project  No. CAPI-1-64), prepared by the
     Chemical Characterization Panel of  the CRC Program Group on Composition
     of Diesel Exhaust.
                                     116
-------
                            REFERENCES  (Cont'd)


12.  Swarin, S. J., and Williams, R. L., "Liquid Chromatographic Determination
     of Benzo(a)pyrene in Diesel Exhaust Particulate:  Verification of the
     Collection and Analytical Methods", Research Publication GMR-3127,
     General Motors Research Laboratories, Warren, Michigan, October 1979.

13.  Ames, B., J. McCann and E. Yamasaki, "Methods for Detecting Carcinogens
     and Mutagens with the Salmonella/Mannalian-Microsome Mutagenicity Test."
     Mutation Research, 31, pp, 347-364, 1975.

14.  McCann, J., et al. "Detection of Carcinogens as Mutagens in the Salmonella/
     Microsome Test:  Assay of 300 Chemicals."  Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.,
     Vol. 72, No. 12:5135-5139, December 1975.

15.  Martin, S. P., Urban, C. M., "Emissions  from Heavy-Duty Engines
     Using  the 1984 Transient Test Procedure  Volume  1 - Gasoline."
     Draft  Final Report being prepared  for Environmental Protection
     Agency under Contract No. 68-03-2603, July 1981.

16.  Ingalls, M. N.,  and Karl J. Springer, "Measurement of Sulfate and
     Sulfur Dioxide in Automotive Exhaust", Final Report EPA-460/3-76-015
     prepared under Contract No. 68-03-2118 for the  Environmental Protection
     Agency, August 1976.

17.  Arthur D. Little, Inc.,  "Evaluation of Filter Media for Quantative
     Collection of Particulate Matter From Engine Exhaust", Final Report
     prepared for Environmental Protection Agency under EPA Contract No.
     68-02-1211, March 29, 1977.

18.  Internal Memo from Terry L. Ullman to Karl J. Springer, Southwest
     Research Institute, Department of  Emissions Research, Pallflex vs.
     Glass  fiber Filter Media, June 1979.

19.  Springer, Karl J. , "Characterization of  Sulfates, Odor, Smoke, POM
     and  Particulates From Light and Heavy-Duty Engines - Part  IX."
     Final  Report EPA 460/3-79-007 prepared under Contract 68-03-2417
     for  the Environmental Protection Agency,  June 1979.
                                     117
-------
                     APPENDIX A





THIRTEEN  MODE FTP TEST RESULTS - ALL CONFIGURATIONS
-------
                                TABLE A-I
                                               i3-Mor>E  FEDERAL  nitstu  EMISSION  trcLE  1979
                               EMMNEi VOIVO  TD-ion  C   DIFSFL
                               nsTlflb-Ol         FUELl  FM-HhS-F
                    BAROMETER 29,IS
PROJECTi]l-SR10-onb           DATFl 03/20/81
•>
 \
PC f rnNo / I.PM
i
f
i
4
s
u
7
H
M
10
1 1
12
1 3
JfHF -
2 TNTE R ,
?S INTER ,
Sd TNTFW -
»S INTFH -
1 n o INTER ,
I ' ' I F. /
inn PATFD >
»S RATFD -
V RATED t
?S PAfFD >
2 HATED /
roi E >
' SHIP.
/ 14110.
/ IH on ,
/ 1 M (JM .
' mno.
> 14 fid.
' SOO.
' 22im,
' i?^nn.
' 2 2 tin.
' ??UO.
1 20UM ,
' S(lO .
OPS
N X M
I'.
14.
21 7.
439.
bhS.
R79.
0.
778.
5flh.
388.
118.
1 b.
0.
POhER
OBS
KW
.0
2.0
31.8
b4 .4
17.1
128.1
.0
179.4
135,0
B9.4
45, b
3,1
.0
FLOW
KG/MIN
. n20
. 0 b 5
.115
,250
, 3bO
,484
,020
.731
,5bb
,420
,270
.153
.020
ATH
FLOW
KG/MIN
?'.4S
7.15
7.31
7'.Pb
1.01
9.99
2,29
IB. SI
1 b,SS
11.80
12. 9h
11. Sb
2.14
INTAKE
HUMID
C/Kf,
3.1
3.1
3,1
3.1
3.1
3.9
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1,5
1.5
1.5
NOX
CORR
MCT
.889
,890
,899
,9 1 0
.117
.124
.101
.123
,919
.115
,910
,904
,ini
HC
PPM
4BO,
488.
312,
288,
IBB.
112.
4R8.
100.
120.
13b.
2on,
49b.
49b,
MEASURED
CO CO?
PPM PCT
15?,
231,
131,
HI.
HI.
332,
311.
311.
50b.
112,
311,
srih,
412,
l.bB
1.83
4,2b
b.B9
8,79
10, bl
1.59
8,88
7.52
b,21
4.bO
2.71
l.bB
NOX
PPM
330,
115,
blS,
1200,
IbSO,
1755,
IbO,
1200,
100,
590,
385,
18S,
340,
CALCULATED
GRAMS / HOUR
HC CO NOX
32.
102,
bS,
bb,
SO.
31.
35,
53,
58.
58,
73,
Ibb,
"•
bl,
11,
1 JB ,
83,
55,
183.
15,
31b,
157,
331,
224 ,
333,
55,
bl,
117,
3bb,
778,
12H,
1455,
75,
1794,
1221,
711,
401.
1BO,
b7,
MODE
1
2
9
4
S
b
7
H
9
10
11
12
13
MODE

1
2
3
4
S
b
7
9
9
10
11
1?
13
("Al. CHLATFD
C.PAMS/KG.FIIFL GRAMS/KW.HP
HC CO
27. S2 SI. 4?
Pb. 1 U 25.14
7,49 20.41
4.42 S.S5
?.11 2.54
1 . 1 h b.29
29. h? 3", 52
1.21 7,22
1.70 13.4?
?.1f) H.27

i fl ! 1 1 3 b .' 3 ?
M.47 4b.93
Mnx HC
qn ,qq ******
'".n4 51.19
42.ni ?.ns
51. HI) 1.01
S K . '» 7 .51
SO. )4 ,?b
b3.91 «***»*
4II.9U .3(1
H S , 9 •{ .S3
F H . 3 ri . b *>
24 . 79 1,59
ll.bl) 48. b 7
Sb,94 ******
CO NOX
****** *****
49,7f| 58, 9)
5,59 11,50
1,29 12,07
.Sb 12,51
1.42 11,29
****** *****
l,7b 10,00
3,39 9,04
3.74 7.99
4,1] 8,80
97. bl 52, bb
****** *****
F/A F/A
DRY
MEAS STOICH
,(JORO ,ObB7
,0091 ,0h87
,0199 ,0b87
,0319 ,0h87
,0401 .ObB7
,04Sb ^Ob87
,n08b ,0b87
,1)397 ,0ti87
,0344 ,0h87
.0285 '.ObB7
,0201 .ObH7
,ni33 .Ob87
,0084 ,ob87
"PHI"

,117
,133
,290
,4fa5
,SB4
,708
,12b
,578
,501
,H5
, JUS
,193

WET HC
CORR
FACT
.983
.182
,9bl
.939
.924
.910
,9H4
.123
.131
.944
.958
.974
.183
F/A F/A
PCT
CALC MEAS
,0084 5,0
,0090 «,9
,0204 2,3
,0322 ,9
,040b 1,3
,0487 ,1
,0080 •7,0
,0411 3,5
,0351 2.2
,0292 2,5
,0218 4,4
,0133 .3
,0084 .1
POWER
CORR
FACT
,987
,997
,998
,998
1.003
1 ,010
,994
1,055
1 ,042
1,032
1,02?
1.015
,192
BSFC
CORR
KG/KW-HR
*****
1.9b7
.274
.233
.221
.223
*****
.232
.241
.273
.317
2,b49
*****
MODAL
WEIGHT
FACTOR
,0b7
.080
,080
,Q8n
,080
,080
,0b7
,080
,080
,OBO
,080
,080
,0b7
MODE

1
2
3
4
S
b
7
B
9
in
1 1
12
13
CVCLF COMPOSITE USING 13-MODE WEIGHT FACTORS




Q cur
oon L
O f« f f\



BSHC * RSNOX e n


CORR
. BSFC - n
040 GRAM/KW«HR
mrDAU/i/kj»MR
oKMM/^Hw^R
OPQ rDAUyvbVvHR
,BCi oKflnX"'"'''^
,Bb9 GRAM/KW-HH
,2b9 KG/KW-HR
t
\
t
\
(
(
77b
1 * * D
? in i
C f J 11 i
6O7R
§ U f D
8.855
»H2
GRAM/BHP-HR )
GRA-M/BHP*HR )

GRAM/BHP«HR )
LBS/BHP-HR )








NOX CORRECTION APPLIED

t



-------
                               TABLE A-2.   13.MODE  FEDERAL  DIESEL  EMISSION CYCLE 1179
                             ENGINI-i  VOLVO  TD-100  C   DIESEL                           BAROMETER 2S.OH
                             TtSTj  (lb-02        FUEL I  EM-4b5-F     PROJEC T | 1 l-5830-l)0b           DATEl 03/20/81
 i
U)
pnwpH rf|(;l
PCT _ COND /
l
2
3
4
5
t
7
8
1
10
11
12
11

2
?5
SO
75
ino

inn
75
5(1
?5
2

IDI.F /
INTER /
INTER /
INTER /
INTER /
INTER /
IDLE /
RATED /
RATED /
RATED /
RATED /
RAlfn /
IDLE /
'•it
RPH
snn.
141)0.
14 on.
1 400.
1400.
1 4 \) 0 .
5iin.
22on ,
2?uo ,
22nn.
2?on.
22on,
sun.
TnRQUfc
UBS
N * M
U.
18.
221.
441.
bb2.
882.
0.
773.
579.
387.
193.
15.
0.
POWER
OB3
KW
,0
2,b
3?, 4
b4.b
17,11
121,3
.0
178.1
133,4
81,1
44.4
3.1*
,0
MILL
FLOW
KG/MIN
,021
,072
,150
,250
.357
.488
,018
.734
,5b7
,41R
,2b2
, 14b
,021
AIR INTAKt
FI nw HUMID
KG/MIN G/KG
2'. 37 4 b
7'. 13 4
7'. 30 4
7,72 4
8.R5 4
1.17 4
2'.?b 4
18*. 41 4
lb.42 4
14. b2 4
12'. 70 4
11 '. 4 9 4
2.30 4
b
5
5
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
NOX
CORR
FACT
,102
,101
,110
,111
,924
.131
.885
,117
.112
,90b
,B98
.BIO
,90b
HC
PPM
488,
448,
3,1 h.
280,
204,
128,
480,
112,
124.
128,
23b.
4 ?2,
480,
MEASURED
CO C02
PPM HCT
372.
319,
425,
151,
151,
425,
412,
351,
532,
431,
30b,
425.
385,
I,b3
2,02
4,40
7,07
1,01
10, 9b
1,51
8,88
7,52
b,21
4,4b
2,bO
1,51
NOX
PPM
340,
240,
b45,
1245,
1710,
1785,
340,
1215,
900,
515,
380,
180,
330,
CALCULATED
GRAMS / HOUR
HC CO NOX
37,
14,
bb,
b3,
52,
38,
32,
bO,
bO,
54,
Bb,
157.
37,
5b,
Ibb,
173,
fa8,
75,
228,
54,
357,
481,
355,
215,
271,
51,
75,
14b,
310,
715,
1221,
1455,
b4,
1B10,
1212,
710,
312,
172,
75,
MODE
1
2
i
4
5
b
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
MOOF

1
2
3
4
5
b
7
H
1
10
11
12
13





CALCULATED F/A F/A
GMAMs/Kr.-FUfL f.RAMS/KW.HR DRY

2H
? 1
f
4
2
I
?9
1
1
2
5
17
?1





nr
.R1
. 71
. 3b
,?n
. >4 3
t 28
.03
• ' "
.75
.lb
.45
.11
.1)8





CO
43. 73
38.24
11.17
4,51
3.52
7.79
49.50
8.12
14.15
14.14
13. b8
31.88
.4b.33





NOX
5P.
33.
1»3.
52.
57.
41.
59.
41.
35.
?R.
24.
19.
5H.





B2
R8
19
93
1)3
b;
ni
U
b2
32
18
(• 1)
h7





HC cn NOX MEAS STOICH
****** ****** ***** ,0010 . n b B 7
3b.lH b3,74 5b,4? ,11101 .Ob87
2.05 5.34 12,03 ,0207 ,0b87
,18 1.05 12,21 ,032b .nfa87
.54 .78 12.58 ,0405 ,nh87
,?1 1.7b 11, 2b ,0492 ,0b87
****** ****** ***** ,0081) .Ob 8 7
.34 2,01 10. H ,04nn '.nb87
.45 3,bl 1.08 ,0347 ^Qb87
,bl 3.18 7,17 ,02B7 ,nb87
1.13 4.85 8,82 ,0207 ,0h87
45. Rn 81.17 41,12 ,0]?7 '.0^87
****** ****** ***** ,0092 .Ob87
CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13-



8SHC + BSNOX B 12,007 GRAM/KW-HR
CHRR. 8SFC - * ,2b2 KG/KW-HR
"PHI"

,130
,147
,301
,474
,590
, Plb
,117
,5H 3
,505
,4J8
,302
,18b
,134
WET HC
CORH,
FACT
.184
.180
,1bO
.937
.121
.907
.984
.123
,934
,944
.959
.175
,984
F/A F/A
PCT
CALC MEAS
,0082 •8,1
,0100 .1,1
,0210 l.b
,0330 1,4
,0420 3,7
,0502 2,2
,0080 -,b
,0411 2,7
,0351 1,4
,0212 1,7
,0212 2,2
,0127 -.0
,0080 -13,5
POWER
CORR
FACT
.lib
1,004
1,004
l.OOb
1,010
l.Olb
1,001
I,0b3
1,053
1,043
1,033
1,027
1,001
BSFC
CORR
KG/KW-HR
*****
l.bbl
,277
.231
,218
,223
*****
,233
,242
,270
,343
3,480
*****
MODAL
HEIGHT
FACTOR
,0b7
,080
,080
,080
,080
,080
,0b7
,080
,080
,080
,080
,080
,0b?
MODE

1
2
3
4
5
b
7
8
1
10
11
1?
13
MODE WEIGHT FACTORS
/ n U Q rDAUyUUD.UD ^
1
(
f
(
ell U 11
• * ~
8.170
8.957
,430
GKAM/BHP*HR )
GRAM/BHP»HR )
GRAM/BHP-HR )
LBS/BHP-HR )




NOX CORRECTION APPLIED








-------
TABLE  A-3.
                     FEOFRAL DIESEL EMISSION CYCLE  1979
EMf.TNEl VOLVO TD-100 C DTE3FL
TESTlOb-ni FUELl FM-HfeS-F
«,„
1
f
1
H
f,
b
7
8
q
10
ll
1 2
1 3
PPA'FR F
S
PC T CDNn
TPLf
? 1 U T F R
?S INTtR
Sll UITFR
75 TNTFR
inn INTFR
TOLE
ino RATED
75 RATFO
SO RATED
?S RATED
I PATFO
IDLF
T. INF
PFHI
/ son.
/ nnn.
/ 1 4 on ,
/ i sun.
/ JHOO.
/ I4un.
/ sun.
/ 28im.
/ 2?on ,
/ 2200 .
/ 2PIIII.
/ en no.
/ sun.
BAROMETER 29.lt
PROJECTl) l-5H30-nOb DATEl 03/20/Kl
TnROUE POWER FUEL AIR INTAKt
DBS DBS FLOW FLOW HUMID
N X M Krt KG/MIN KG/MIN G/KG
0. .0
14. 2.0
217. 31,8
4 J9. b4 ,4
bbS. 97,4
879. 128,9
n, ,o
77H. 179.4
58b. 135.0
3BR. 89.4
19B. 45. b
Ib. 3.4
n. ,n
,020 2.45
.ObS 7.)5
.145 7.31
.250 7.8b
.31.0 9.01
.484 q.qq
.020 2.29
,731 1 B . S 1
,5bb lb.55
,420 14.BO
,270 12. 9b
.153 11, Sb
.020 2.1*
3,
3.
3.
3.
3,
3.
4 ,5
*,5
4.5
4 ,5
4,5
4.5
4,5
NOX
COKR
FACT
.em
,890
,«qq
,9in
.''H
,9?»
,901
,923
.919
,915
,910
,904
,9ni
MEASURED
HC CO C02 NOX
PPM PPM PCT PPM
480, 452,
488, 239,
312, 439,
288, 191,
188, 111,
112, 332, 1
488, 319,
100, 319,
120, SOb,
13b, 412,
2UO, 319,
49h, SOh,
"»9b, 412,
I,b8 330,
1,B3 195,
4,2b b!5.
b,R9 1200,
B,79 Ib50.
O.bl 1755,
1,59 3bP,
8,88 1200,
7,52 900,
b,21 590,
H.bO 385,
2,71 185,
I,b8 340,
CALCULATED
CRAMS / HOUR
HC CO NOX
32. hi.
102, 99,
b5, 178,
bb, H3,
50, 55,
34. 183.
)S, 45,
53. 317,
58, 458,
SB, J34,
71, 224,
Ibb, 333,
34, 55,
72,
132,
407,
855,
1330,
1575,
84,
1941,
1328,
781,
441,
199,
75,
MODE
1
2
3
4
5
t
7
U
9
10
11
12
13
•

MOOF

i
2
3
4
5
t
7
B
q
10
) 1
12
1 1

f) p A " S / K '
HT _ co
?7.<;2 51 ,4H
ah. 10 25. 3S
7.49 20.4*
4.42 S.Sh
?.1l 2.54
1 . Ib h.?9
?q.Kb 3R.S1
1.^1 7.?2
1.70 13.47
?. 3n 13. ?S
4.49 11.84
1 R. 1 1 3h. 3 3
CALCIH
5-FUFL
t.nt
hi .27 *
1 3, 74
4h. 72
Sh, 9b
bl .bl
S4 ,?S
ATED
GRAMS/KM. HR
HC CO NOX
***** ****** *****
SI. 19 49,71 bb.U
2.05 5,59 12,78
1.03 1.29 13,27
.SI ,5b 13, bS
.2b 1.42 12, ?2
7n, q* ****** ****** *****
44,30
39,09
11.02
?7.2b
?l ,h 7
.30 1.7b 10,83
,43 3.39 9.8H
.bS 3,74 8.74
1.59 4.91 9,b7
4n.fa7 97. bS 58,25
^R.47 4K.95 h?.?! ****** *i**** *****
F/A F/A
DRY
MEAS STOICH
,0080 ',nbB7
,0091 ,nbB7
,0199 ,nb87
,0319 ,0b87
,0401 ,0b87
,04Bb ,nbB7
,OOBb .nb87
,0397 ,0b87
,0344 ,0b87
.0285 ,0b87
,0209 .Ob87
,0113 ,0b87
.OOH4 .01,87

"PHI"

,117
,133
,290
,4fa5
,584
,708
,12b
,578
,5U1
,*15
,305
tl«
.123
WFT HC
CORR
FACT
.983
.982
,9bl
.939
,924
.910
,984
,923
.934
,944
.958
,974
.983
F/A F/A
PCT
CALC MEAS
.0084 5,0
,0090 -,9
,U204 2.3
.0328 .9
,040b 1,3
.0487 ,1
,unso »7,B
,0»11 3,5
.0351 2.2
.0292 2.5
,0218 4,4
,0133 .3
.UOB4 .,2
POWER
CORR
FACT
,987
.997
,998
,998
1.003
1.010
,994
1.055
1.042
1.032
1.022
1,015
,992
BSFC
COHR
KG/Krt-HH
*****
I,9h7
,274
.233
.221
,223
*****
.232
.241
.273
.347
2,b49
*****
MODAL
WEIGHT
FACTOR
,0b7
,080
,UBO
,080
,080
,080
,0b7
,080
,080
,080
,080
,080
,0b7

MODE

1
I
3
4
5
k
7
8
9
JO
11
1?
13
CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13-MODE WEIGHT FACTORS



















BSHC + B3NOX s 1?
CORR. B3FC « »
040 GRAM/KW-HR
nRQ rDAU/KW^HR
,1109 ij"'^"/""*'''"
,813 GRAM/KM-HR
.853 GRAM/KH-HR
,2b3 KG/KH-HR
f
\
t
\
(
I
(
7 "3 k
2inj
t 3 U C
8.813
9.589
,»32
GRAM/flHP«HR '
GRAM/BHP«HR '
GRAM/BHP-HR !
GHAH/BHP-HR ]
LHS/BHP-HR )




















-------
TABLE A-3  (cont'd). U-MODE FEDERAL DIESEL  EMISSION CYCLE 1171
EMOINFf VOLVO TD-ion C DIESFL
TEsTjOb-ni FUELl EM-H5-F
Tom njESFl ALCOHOL
MODE

1
2
)
1
5
t
7
8
q
10
1 1
i a
13

FHH PAKT PART
KK/MJN KG/MIM KG/MIN
. n 1 1h .01 Pb .
,nh<;n .IIHSO
. 14 f. 1 .1451 .
. ?5n? ,?5n2 .
. JSifl . ^5iR .
.H R^R .YR1H ,
.niqb . n i ib .
.7101 ,7jn1
. mil, 1 . ^hh 1 ,
.1 ni .^115 .
.Pbqfi ,?b18 .
. 1 5P7 . 1 5?7 .
,nin7 ,0)q?

nonn
nnno
nono
noon
on on
oono
nnno
nono
nonn
noon
nnnn
nono
noon

WATFR
PART
KG/MIN
.nnno
,0000
,0000
,ooon
,0000
,0000
,0000
,i)onu
.nnno
.nono
,0000
.0000
,0000

BAROMETER ?1,15
PROJECTl ll-5830»00h DATEl 03/?0/B1
EQTV. FUEL
DIESFL MOLE
KG/MIN WE
.Ollb 1J,
.nbso 13.
,lt51 13.
,?50? 13,
,351R 13,
,i»818 13,
.Ollb 13,
,7301 13,
,5bhl 13,
,H115 13,
,?b18 13,
,)5?7 13.
.0117 13,

IGHT
B7bH
87bH
R7bH
87bH
87b4
87bt
87b1*
87b4
B7b'«
B7h'»
87b4
R7bH
87b1

HC
KWFT
FACTOR
,1835
,1B33
,1b01
,1310
,1838
,1015
,1Rt3
,15?8
,113b
,1HHt
,1571
.1748
,1B34

Y
WATER
INTAKE
,00b3
,00b3
,00b3
,00b3
,ntlb3
,00b3
,007?
,0072
,0073
,007?
.007?
,007?
,0073

F/A RATIO
MASS
FUEL
,0080
,oon
,0111
,0311
,0401
,048b
,008b
,0317
,0344
,0?85
,0501
,0133
,0084

FUEL
CARBON
,0080
,0011
,0111
,0311
,0401
,048b
,008b
,0317
,0344
,0285
,0?01
,0133
,0084

EOIV,
DIESEL
,0080
,0011
,0111
,0311
,0401
,048b
,D08b
,0317
,0344
,0285
,0201
,0133
,0084

tXHAUST
OXYGEN
PERCENT
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000

-------
                                 TABLE A-4.   IS-MODI  FEDERAL  DIESEL  EMISSION  CYCLI  1979
                                   Nti VOLVO  TO-inn  c   DJESFI
                               TFSTI nh-ti?        FIJELI  f
                    BAROMETER 29,01
PROJECT|1l'5B30«Onb           OATEl 01/20/11
MOOF
I
?
i
H
S
h
7
R
9
10
J 1
1<>
1 )
POWFR tNr, irjr
s^e ^ r>
PfT CMUn / HPM
£
?5
5U
75
[no

i n n
75
50
PS
?

JHLt / 500.
] tin ft / nuo.
IMTFR / UUO.
INffR / IHDn.
I N T fc R / 1 <4 0 fl .
INTER -
TOLE
RATED
RATFl) /
RATFO /
RATF D -
RAfFO /
10LF ,
i no n.
' sun.
' ??OI).
' 2?no.
' ??on.
' ??nn.
' ??.(IO.
' son.
ToRfJHF
OHS
N X H
0.
18.
??1.
mi.
hh?.
HB?.
n.
779.
571.
387.
in.
15.
0.
POWER
ons
KW
.0
2. fa
3?,*
bt ,b
97.0
1?9.3
.0
178.1
133.1
89.1
11.1
3.1
.0
FI/EL
FLOW
KG/MIN
,o?i
,07?
. isn
.250
.357
,188
,01R
.731
,5h7
.lib
.2b?
.lib
.021
AIR IMTAKF.
FLOW HUMID
KT./MIN G/KG
2,37 1 b
7,n 1 ^
7.jn H 5
7,7? 1 5
8.B5 1 5
9,97 1 5
?:?b
18. Hi "
lb.i»2 *
11, b2 *
12.70 »
ll.»9 *
2.30 1
t 1
» 1
t 1
» 1
f 1
1
9
NOX
CORR
FACT
,902
,90J
.110
,119
,1?1
.131
.885
.117
,^12
,10b
.898
.890
,90h
MEASURED
HC en co?
PPM PPM PCT
188. 37?,
HH8, 311,
31b, 125,
280, 159,
2111. 159,
128, 125,
180, 112,
11?. J59,
121, 532.
128, 139,
?3b, 30b,
172, 125,
HBO, 38S,
J,b3
2,02
H.HO
7,n7
9,09
10, 9b
1.51
8,88
7.52
b,21
1,1b
2,bn
1.59
NOX
PPM
J10,
210,
b15,
1215,
1710,
1785,
3HO,
1215,
900,
595,
380,
180,
330,
CALCULATED
GRAMS / HOUB
HC CO NOX
37,
1«,
bb,
b3,
52,
38,
32,
bO,
bO,
51.
Bb,
157,
37,
Sb,
IbS,
173,
be.
75,
2?8,
51,
357,
H82,
353,
215,
279.
5H,
83,
Ib2,
1P8,
8b!>,
1)21,
libl,
73,
1971,
1329,
780,
13b,
H3,
82,
MODE
1
<•
)
4
5
fa
7
H
9
10
11
12
1 i
>
CALCULATED F/A F/A
"DDE GRAM.s/xG-FurL T.HAMS/KW.HR DRV
HC co NO* HC co NOX MEAS STOICH
i
:
i
H
<,
h
7
a
9
10
11
12
1«
i






?«.RM •*!.
?l . 71 IB.
7. ID H.
H.PM H.
?.*i 3.
I.?" 7.
pi.ni 11.
1 . 1h 8.
1.75 11.
f. IK |H.
5.15 11.
J7.11 11.
?9 , nfl H b ,






75 K5.?3
Pt. 17. SH
17 17, H 7
51 57. bl
5? (,1.7J
79 S3. 37
Si h^.bb
IP 11. HJ
Ih Jl.flH
tH 31 ,??
hR P7.7?
B9 ?.2.n3
J u L U O 1
J H r» T . H 1






****** ****** ***** ,0090 ,nbB7
3b.l7 b3,75 b2,S7 ,0101 ,0b87
2.05 S.3H 13,22 ,0207 .OhB?
.98 1,05 13,39 ,03«b ,ObB7
.51 .78 13. bl ,OH05 .Ob87
.29 1.77 12,10 ,0«»92 ,ObB7
****** ****** ***** ,0080 .Oh87
,J1 2.01 11.08 .0100 .Ob87
.15 3,bl 9,9b ,03H7 ,ObB7
,bl *.1b 8,7b ,n,?8S ,nh87
1.93 1.H5 9.83 ,0207 ,0b87
<»5.80 8], 20 5b.ll .0128 ,ObB7
****** ****** ***** | U 0 9 c ,pbB7
CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13"




BSHC + RSNOX « H.OO? GRAM/KW-HR
CORK. BSFC - » ,2bl KG/KH-HR
•PHI"
,131
,117
,301
,H7H
,i90
,71b
,117
,583
,505
.lib
,302
,18b
1 4 U
, 1 31
MODE WE
(
t
\
t
\
I
(
WFT HC
CORR
FACT
.981
.980
,1bO
.937
.^21
.907
.181
.123
.131
.9H*
.959
.175
Q OB
. HBt
F/A F/A
PCT
CALC MEAS
.008? -8,
,0100 «1,
,0210 1,
,0330 1.
.0120 3,
.U502 2,
,0080 .,
.0111 ?,
,0351 1,
,0292 2,
,0212 2,
,0127
nno n • i ^
i u i j o 1 1 • i j v
9
1
b
1
7
2
b
7
H
3
2
0

POhEH
CORR
FACT
,91b
1,001
1,001
l.OOb
1.010
l.Olb
1,001
1.0b3
l.ObS
1.0H3
1,033
1,027
In n i
, Dill
BSFC
COHR
KG/KW.HH
*****
l.bhl
,277
,231
,218
,223
*****
,?33
,21?
,?b9
,313
2,180
*****
MODAL
HEIGHT
FACTOR
,01,7
,osn
,oao
,080
,080
,080
,0b7
,080
,nno
,ORO
.080
,080
ft L. "1
i Ob /
MODE
1
2
3
1
5
b
?
8
9
10
11
ia
1^
3
TGHT FACTORS
.787
811 U 1
0 t ~ 3
8q i a
• • * *
9,700
,130
GRAM/BHP-HR
GRAM/BHP*HR
GRAM/BHP'HR
GRAM/BHP-HR
LBS/BHP-HR
)
\
J
\
/
)
)




















-------
TABLE  A-4 (cont'd).  13.MODE FEDERAL DIESEL EMISSION CYCLE 1979

        ENGTNEj  VOLVO TO.viin C  OUSEL                          BAROMETER  29,OH
        TESTi  ob-02       FUELl EM-4h5-F    PROJECT ; 1 1.58 30-OOb            OATEl  03/20/81

MODE

i
P
3
'4
5
b
7
B
1
J U
1 J
I?
> l*

TOTAL
F'llFl
K G / ^ T N
.0212
,n7?8
, l^n1*
,?Sn2
.35t,fl
.43R3
,niq i
.7311
,5h(,9
.•Us?
,?l-?3
.14^9
,n?J2

OIF Stl.
P4RT
K r, / M i N
.02)2
.0718
. 15ns
.?Sn?
. 35hB
. ^ H B 3
,(U8t
.7319
,5bh9
.^IS?
,?h?3
. 1H51
,n?)2

ALCOHOL
PART
KG/MIN
.oouo
.ounn
.nnnn
. u ci n n
.0000
. o o n D
.oonn
.oono
.oonn
.nonn
.oono
.nonn
,nuon

WATFR
PART
KG/MIN
.onnn
,0000
,0000
.oono
,uooo
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,1)000
,0000
,0000
,0000

EQIV.
DIESEL
KG/MIN
.02)2
,0718
,1504
.P508
,3Sb8
,HBR3
.Olfll
,7339
,5bh9
,*157
,?b23
. HSI
.021?

FUEL
MOLF
WEIGHT
13,87b'»
13,B7bH
13,87ht
11,B7bl»
13,87bH
13,H7bH
13,87bH
13,87bt
13,87bt
13,87bt
13,87bt
13,87bi*
13,87faH

HC
KWtT
FACTOR
.SBHO
,980*
,H^9b
,937H
,TP12
,90bb
,S8H3
,9229
,9337
,9HHH
,9592
,9753
.9843

Y
WATER
INTAKE
,0073
,0073
,0073
,0073
,0073
,0073
,00bb
.OOlib
,00bb
,nObb
,00bb
,nobb
,0079

F/A
MASS
FUEL
,0090
,0101
,0207
,032b
,0*05
,0493
,0080
,OHOO
,0347
,0285
,0207
,0128
,0092

RATIO
FUEL
CARBON
,0090
,nini
,0207
,032b
,0405
,0492
,0080
,0400
,0347
,0285
,0207
,0128
,0092


EQIV,
DIESEL
,0090
,0101
,0207
,032b
,0405
,0492
,0080
,0400
,0347
,0285
,0207
,0128
,0092

EXHAUST
OXYGEN
PERCENT
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000

-------
                                  TABLE  A-5.  U.MOOE  FFHEHAL  nitstL {MISSION CYCLE is;s
                                INr.lNFj  VOLVO  in-innC  DIESEL  »  MtTHANOL
                                TEjT:m-oi         Flit i if n
IS HTDC
PROJFCTi H-So44-oni
DATEios/u/an
 I
CD
POrtfH fNG INF
MnnF gPrfn
PCT conn / RP'<
l
?
i
H
5
s
7
H
S
10
1 1
1 2
1 9
mi F
! I f" T E R
?5 INIFR
SO INTfO
75 TNTFH
|iill II'TER
HM.E
inn PATEO
75 RATf D
sn RATFO
? S H A T F. 0
? HATtD
.IOLE
/ SJII.
/ nnn.
/ Him.
/ J f uo .
/ nnu.
/ Hun.
/ Sjl'.
/ ?2IJM.
/ P8[in.
/ 2?on.
/ 82UU.
/ 2?IIO.
/ 530.
TiiHijllE POWER FUEL AIR INTAKE
UBS OHS FLOW FLOW HUMID
N < M KW KG/MIN KG/MIN G/KG
II. .0
IS. ?,8
cHS. 35,11
4811. 70,4
7i
-------
TABLE A-5 (cont'd).  U.MODE  FEDERAL  DIESF.L  EMISSION CYCLE  1171
        ENGINFi  VOLVO
        TtST|lH-rH
ionc  OTESEL  +  METHANOL
 FUEL|EM.Mb5-F
11 BTDC
PROJF.CTlll-SOHH-Oni
                                                                          OATElOq/U/80

MODE

1
2
3
H
5
t
7
R
q
in
1 1
1 3
1 3
TOTAL
FlIEl
KG/MTN
.ninfl
.nb*h
.Pb?1*
.4<1<;S
. 78-n
i . t nui
.niRfl
1 .5SH
i.iam?
,R??7
.^233
, ? 4 ,-> 1
. .niHR
DIFSFL
PAKT
KT,/MTN
.OlflH
.nb^b
. HI21
.1018
. IM2H
. 1 11 3 8
.niRB
. lam
. 12R 7
. I?t2
. 1 2b3
.1227
.01 8H
ALCOHOL
PAHT
KI-./MIN
,'iono
.nnno
.ibna
,313b
.hfll 1
i .nni i
.ounn
l.tlR2
1.H555
.bIHS
. 3S7D
.lllb
.nono
WATER
PART
KG/MIN
.noon
.0000
.0000
,0000
,nonn
,0000
,0000
,nnno
,0000
,0000
,onoo
,0000
,nono
FQIV'.
DIESEL
KG/MIN
.0188
.nb^h
.1751
.283U
.H1H2
,Sb45
.niRH
.7B77
,hlH1
.HHSb
.3010
,1778
,0)88
FUEL
MOLE
WEIGHT
13,B7b«*
13,87b1*
21 ,2300
25,2>»Sb
27,3tH3
28,5332
13,87bH
28,7b8b
28,052H
2b,75bl«
2t.3503
11,2702
13,B7b1*
HC
KWtT
FACTOR
,1711
,1751
,128b
,R8b3
.BSSt
,8321
.1783
,85bl
,8725
,B1Hi+
,11?b
,1>«bb
,171H
Y
WATER
INTAKE
,0lb1
,01b1
,01b1
,01b1
.Olbl
,01h1
,nibi
,nibi
,01h1
,01b1
,01b1
,01b1
,01b1
F/A
MASS
FUEL
,007H
,0013
,Q3faO
,0bl2
,OBOb
,0181
,0075
,0834
,0723
,0583
,0425
,0223
,0075
RAT
FUF.L
CARBON
,0074
,0013
,03bO
,HbU
,080b
,Q1B1
,0075
,0834
,0723
,0583
,0425
,0223
,0075
10
EQIV,
DIESEL
,0074
,0013
,0241
,0350
,0428
,0505
,0075
,0423
,0375
,031b
,0251
,01b4
,0075
EXHAUST
OXYGEN
PERCENT
17,5000
17,2500
13,3700
1,8800
7,2500
5,2500
17,3700
8,2500
1,b300
11,2500
12,7500
15,2500
J7.3700
-------
                                TABLE A-6.   13.MODE FEDERAL ojEStL EMISSION CYCLE 1979
inc.INF.iVOLVO Tp-ionc DIFSEL * MJTHANOL    19 BTOC

lt'ST|ii)»n4        FULL! fM«4b5-F    PROJECT I 11-5044-001
                                                                                                 DATEl 09/19/10
>
 I
.„„,
1
t
)
V
5
b
7
B
q
in
1 1
1 1
\ i
P'lrtfH F'T.P.'F
SPF Fli
PCT CO NO / fi P *
ini F / s?"i.
l INTt-H / 14011.
as INTFR / nun.
so I NrF.R / ) 4 un ,
75 I UTE R l 1H (in .
11)0 I^JTEM / 14UI1.
I D|_ F / 525 .
1 nu H * T ED / ??no .
75 RATED / 22UO.
so oAiEO / ??nn.
?s K A T E r> / ? ? u n .
? H4iF.r> / ??un.

TliRcjIlf
nns
N X M
n.
19.
219.
"77.
71b.
95h'.
n.
nai .
h 1 4 .
4 in.
205.
\ b.
0.
POWER
OPS
KW
.0
2.8
35.0
70,')
105.0
1*0.2
.0
189,1
1*1, b
94 ,4
17.2
3.7
.0
FUEL
Fl OH
KG/MIN
,nj9
,nb9
,237
.19?
,79b
1.081
,nis
1.559
1.14b
, 798
,471
.151
.Olfl
MR
FLOW
KG/MIN
2,b2
h.qb
7.?5
8,11
9.R?
11.24
2,53
18. 7b
lb,?4
11, 3b
12. ?b
10, Bl
2.53
INTAKE NOX
HUMID CORR
G/KG FACT
10,9
in, 9
in. 9
in,9
in. 9
10,9
12.3
U.5
11.5
11.5
11,5
11,5
11.5
l.OOb
l.OOb
i.ons
l.on4
1.003
l.ons
1.015
I. 010
1.0)1
1.012
1,013
1 ,011
1.U15
HC
PPM
200.
45b,
700,
440,
148,
44,
17b,
114,
312,
5ni,
blO,
4fa4,
19b.
MEASURED
CO CO?
PPM PCT
30b.
720,
814.
1970,
3444 ,
41Sb,
?bb.
b53.
359,
4b5,
1153.
922,
?«»Zi
l.bfl
2,41
5.19
8,09
9,94
11,12
I,b8
8,90
7.80
b,b3
5,04
2.R1
l.bfl
NOX
PPM
son,
550,
SS5,

710,'
B80,
480,
3WO,
325,
230,
155,
225,
500,
CALCULAHO
GRAMS / HOUR
HC CO NOX
13,
59,
13b,
98,
11,
14 ,
11.
84 ,
155,
209,
220,
131,
13,
41,
235,
rf99 ,
7i2,
U40,
22kb,
33,
kk2,
315,

71l!
509,
37,
109,
29J,
J5b,
405,
SS2,
783,
98,
59fc,
4bb,
282,
U3,
203,
103,
MUDk
1
c!
1
4
5
b
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
CALCULATED
HdDF

1
?
1
s
S
b
7
8
4
10
1 1
) ?
1 1
GP»''S/K(..FUFL
Mr _ rn
11.77 J^.hT 95
1 H . 14 S7.04 71
9. mi ? 1 .til J?S
1.12 3b,50 13
. Bb 9H . 3? 11
. >i ?4 . B5 I ?
in.tn 11,14 91
.90 7.08 b
?.?5 4.59 b
4.17 7. If) 5
7. 7b ?b. 1 9 5
1 4.H 1 55. 9B 22
(1.55 14.09 95
Nnx
.15
.ri9
. 09
. '2
,5'*
i '11
,h8
.3?
.78
.R9
.7J
,?9
.?5
r.RAMS/KH.HR
HC cn NOX
t**«»* ****** *****
21. ?0 84.3? *****
3.R9 B.53 10,17
1 .411 11.17 5,78
..H 15, b? 5.25
.10 Ib.lb S.5B
«»*«** ****** *****
.45 3,50 3,15
1.09 ?.?3 3,29
2.52 1.70 2,99
4.b7 15.71 3,45
3-4.93 13S.bb 54,0?
**tt** ****** *****
F/A F/A
OHY
MEAS STOICH
.0074 '.nb87
.0100 '.nb87
.0310 ,0'''''*
.OKU .1217
,na?o '.J325
,0975 ,1379
,0071 ,0h87
.11841 ^I3qt»
,0714 ,1152
,05b2 .1289
,0390 ,1155
,014? .O7b7
.0072 '.Ob87
CYCLE COMPOSITF USING 13-















BSHC i BSNOX x (,
CORR. RSFC • =
( T t 3 \J*\ r* ' ' / r\ n — l •'»
C J n PDAM/tfW«MR
fSCiJ uKAn/^n»n'»
,?55 GRAM/KW-HR
,b7B GRAM/Krt-HR
,478 KG/KW-HR

"PHI"

,107
,145
,332
,503
,blB
,707
,1U1
,b03
,5^8
,43b
,338
,1B5
.105
HET HC
CORR
FACT
.98?
.974
.933
.88?
.849
.B2b
.981
.859
,877
.897
.9?b
,9b8
.98?
F/A F/A
PCT
CALC MEAS
.OU82 11,8
,0121 21.3
,03b2 9,8
,0b77 10,4
,0895 9,2
,1049 7,b
,008? 15,b
,082b "1,7
,0709 -,7
,0584 3,9
.041? 5,5
,0157 10,9
,008? 13,8
POWER
CORR
FACT
,999
1,004
1,005
1,009
1,017
1,024
1,004
1.0b4
1,051
1,039
1,0?9
1.020
1,003
BSFC
CORR
KG/KW«HR
*****
1,473
,404
.418
,44R
.453
*****
,4b5
,4b2
,488
,585
2, J7b
*****
MODAL
WEIGHT
MCTOR
,0b7
,080
,080
,080
,080
,080
,Qb7
.OHO
,OHO
,080
,080
,080
,0b7

MODE

1
t
3
4
5
b
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
MODE WE.IGHT FACTORS
/ 1 nut rOAU/auo.uD \
l
t
\
t
c
(
*•"•**
71 n p
t 4 U C
l|9B2
.787
nRAM/RHP.HH 1
GR4M/DHP-HR )
GRAM/HhP-HR )
LB3/BHP-HR )
















-------
TABLE  A-6 (cont  d).  n-noDE  FFDFRAI. DIESEL EMISSION CYTLE
              i VOL vo TD-mnr  DIFSF.I  + MFTHANOL   is HTOC
        TESTjOl-04         FUELi  EM-4b5-F    PROJECT j U-50H 4-001
DATEl  Oq/jq/BO

MODF

1
2
3
4
5
b
7
8
q
ID
11
1?
11

TOTil.
FHFl
KG/MTM
.lllql
.ObRb
.?3k5
,49i7
.711, 4
i .nR]*
.0178
i .sspq
1 . l'< i, 3
.7S83
.^jpq
. 1ST 5
, n i B n

HIFSFI
PflHT
KR/MIN
.'Hqi
.HhBb
.lots
. iut.j
. 1 OhU
. 1U4S
,ni?8
. 1 3^b
. 131 ?
. 1 570
.1280
. 12?T
. n i s o

ALCOHOL
PART
KO/MIN
.rmnn
.noon
. 1 .3 1 7
.3855
,bSH3
,q7qn
.nnnn
1.H532
1 .01^7
,b71 9
.3^q
.0?8S
.nono

WATEH
PART
KG/MIN
,onno
,nnno
,ncinu
,oono
,0000
,onnu
,noou
.nooo
,0000
,OUOQ
.0000
.0000
.nono

En TV'.
DTFSFL
KG/MIN
.oiqi
.ObRb
,lb5b
,28^b
.*237
.5550
.017H
,?qob
,59Bb
,H35q
,28h7
,)3bl
,01BO

FUF L
MOLF.
WEIGHT
13,B7bt
ll.B7bH
iO,275b
2
-------
TABLE  A-7.   13.MODE FEDERAL DIESEL IWISSIUN CYCLE 1979
       VOLVO in-moc OIESEL * MHHAMOL » CATALYST AT is BTDC
TEST|li?-nl
FIIELt EM-Hb5-F
                                   PROJECT I 1 I -5(11 1-00 1
""OF
1
t
5
b
7
fl
q
in
1 1
1?
1 )
PC T
mi
7S
1 ill]

1 nu
75
5d
?S
z

p f'Jf, II'F
SPFF 1;
roi t
I'm R
[MTFR
T '. T F I?
vi nu -
TfHF -
PATfH >
RATEO /
WATED /
W A T F 0 >
RATEn /
IOLF /
/ 51?.
/ lion.
' 1400.
/ lino.
' 1400.
' 5 HI.
PPOO.
' 2?un.
c>ann.
??nn.
' ??un .
' 5 90.
TilRHUK
(IMS
N J M
I'.
21?!
712.
9911.
0.
8?7.
b2H.
414.
20b.
Ib.
0.
POWER
OB3
Ktv
.0
2.8
3b.2
108.8
1H5.2
.0
190. h
1HJ.B
95.1
47.5
3.7
.0
FUEL
FLOW
,01B
,072
^781
1.117
,niB
1 , 57B
1,145
,800
,480
.18?
,niB
AIR
FIOH
KG/MIN
b!
7.
8.
9,
U.
t .
19.
1 b.
1H.
'^f
10.
2.
97
bl
41
90
hi
S I
20
14
»b
42
Bfa
50
INTAKt
HUMID
G/KC.
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
4
4
H
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
HOX
CORR
FACT
,055
.051
!o?l
,012
,004
,055
.013
.019
,02b
,035
,04b
,055
HC
PPM
IOH|
3h|
22,
10.
12.
13.
*7.
3b.
*3,
bO,
38.
MEASURED
CO C0i»
PPM PCT
is!
in.
133,
bb.
bh.
SB,
lOb,
lOb,
127,
111.
1.78
2, HI
S.WS
7,99
9,94
11, HH
1.73
9,23
8.09
b,89
S.3H
3, 30
1.57
NOX
PPM
140,
550,
845,
135.
440,
b?0 ,
HBO,
150,
285,
270,
335,
CALCULATED
GRAMS / HOUR
HC CO NOX
1.
11.
13,
1,
b,
J.
1.
8,
13,

is!
17,
3.
5,
8S,
3l|
Si.
7k,
a,
bb,
HI.
78,
bfl.
70,

87,
320,
38*.
S14,
b70,
877.
91,
1009,
bbB,
I^J,
298,
244,

MOOF
i
4
b
b
7
B
-1
10
11
12
13

ro
MOOF

i
2
1
4
<;
b
7
B
n
10
11
l i
13
T" T


CALCULATED
GRA"S/KG-FUFL GHAM3/KW.HR
nr _ en
.HO 5.09
4 . IS 19.74
.77 1.73
.?H 1 . In
.19 1 ,?3
.05 J . 14
.70 7.h 7
, nH . 7 n
.11 .72

.51 2. 3b
1.57 b.lb
?,44 _ 15. 1 5
Nnx HC
Ml, IS ******
74 .1 1 b.7K
23. Be .35
lb.99 .1?
ll.?H .Ob
1 l.nB .1)2
R 9.40 ******
IH.bb .0*
9.73 .09
1,79 .15
)H. 34 .31
??, 39 4 ,5b
hl.SH ******
en NOX
****** *****
30,57 *****
,77 10, b4
.54 7,08
.53 b.lb
.43 b,04
****** *****
.35 5,29
.35 4,bB
.82 4.43
1.43 b,27
J8,7b bS,09
****** *****

F/A F/A
DRY
MEAS STOICH
,0071 ,0b87
,0104 ,ObB7
,0358 ,1037
,0h05 .1220
,0800 ,1320
,0974 ,138?
,0073 ,0b87
,0811 ,1314
,0709 ,135?
,05bO .1282
,0391 .1148
,01b9 .0811
,0072 .Ob87
CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13-










n cur
n5nL
acrn
Pol- If
BSNO
BSHC
CPRR
—



4 BSNOX B b
. BSFC - »
14? rPAUykM^HR
,^TC ufTHn^nn^riri
7bl GRAM/KHvHR
|b45 GRAM/KX.HH
,787 GRAM/KW,HR
,181 KG/KW-HR

"PHI"

,1U3
, 1S2
,345
,49b
,bUb
,704
, 107
,59b
,5?4
,437
,341
,eu?
,1U5

WET HC
CORH
FACT
.981
.175
,9?b
,885
.85?
.827
.981
,R55
,B73
.894
.983
,9b2
.983

F/A F/A
PCT
CALC MEAS
,0085 20,1
,Ullb 11,1
,0399 11,3
,0b51 7,b
,OBbl 7,b
,1023 5,0
,U083 12,8
,0847 1,9
,0727 2,b
,0594 b,l
,0118 7,0
,0187 10,5
,0075 4,b

POWER
CORK
FACT
,111
,S97
,998
1,000
1,008
1,017
1,001
l.OSb
1,043
1,032
1.021
1.013
,197

BSFC
CORR
KG/KW-HH
*****
1,553
,44U
,4 lh
,428
,451
*****
,470
,Hbl
,4B9
,594
2.Bb9
*****

MODAL
WEIGHT
FACTOR
,Db7
,080
,080
,OBO
,OBO
,080
,0b7
.080
,080
,080
,OHO
,080
,Ub7

MOUE

1
?
3
4
5
b
7
B
9
10
11
12
13
MODE WEIGHT FACTORS






_
C LO
p 3 D O
4.9R7
S.0b3
.79?
PRAM/RHP iju ^
GRAM/BHP*HR )
GRAM/BHP-HR )
GRAM/BHP-HR )
LBS/8HP-HR )




















-------
                    TABLE A-7  (cont'd).
                                                   FEDERAL oustl EMISSION  cvcit  1979
                            ENGINE! VULVO TD.UIOC DIESEL + METHANOL *  CATALYST  AT  19  BTDC
                            TFsTtnj-01        FIJELl EM-4h5-F    PROJECT |] l-S044«oni
DATEl  10/02/80

HOOF

i
2
3
4
5
b
7
B
q
in
11
i f
1 3
i
TOT»L
FUEL
K&/MTN
,ni7R
. n 7 i i
,?bq4
,*rm i
. 78?R
1 . 1 U7
.niQi
1 .S?7b
1 . 1 ^l*q
.PGnS
.«8n3
. \ Hi 7
,nl78

DIF.SFL
PAHT
KT./MIN
.11178
.n?>q
.ins?
. lH7b
.1070
. HIIS
. n i B i
.1371
. 1 31 b
.13)1
. 1 3?8
. 1291)
.(1178

ALCOHOL
PART
KG/MIN
.noun
.onnn
,)b37
,3qb5
.b757
1 .0111
.onnn
i .^ns
i .nm
.bbBb
. 1H75
.H537
. n i] o a

WATER
PART
KG/MIN
,onoo
,oonn
,0001)
, U 0 U U
,nnnu
,onno
,ouno
,oono
,onno
,ooou
.oono
,oann
,oono

FQIV'.
DIF.SFL
KG/MIN
.0178
,n?is
,1810
.?qni
,H1RO
,5708
. 0) B 1
.ROOD
.5979
.H39b
,?9?7
,1515
,0178

FUEL
MOLE
WEIGHT
13,B7b1*
13,87bt
ei.1711*
?S,Oi*i|l
S7.17B2
2P,S159
13,87bl*
28,7702
27,8bS3
2b, 3SbO
23,5251
lb, bl)S2
13,87b1

HC
KWET
FACTOR
,980b
,9751
,9259
,8BH8
,BS] 9
,8274
,9812
.BS^b
,873'*
,8qH5
,9233
,9b2t*
,9829

Y
WATER
INTAKE
,ni83
,01B3
,0183
,01H3
,nifl3
,0183
,0183
,0183
,niB3
,0183
,0183
,0183
,0183

F/A RATIO
MAS3
FUEL
,0071
,0104
,0358
,0b05
,0800
,nq7>*
,0073
,OB3l
,0709
,OBbO
,0391
,01h9
,0072

FUEL
CARBON
,0071
.0101*
,0158
,ObOS
,0800
,0974
,0073
,0831
,0709
,05bO
,0391
,0ib9
,0072

EQIV,
DIESEL
,0071
,0104
,0241
,0348
,0427
,0498
,0073
,0421
,0370
,0308
,0238
,0143
,0072

EXHAUST
OXYGEN
PERCENT
18,b3DO
17,b300
13,2500
9,8750
7,2bOO
5,0750
17,b250
8,2500
9,8750
11,2500
J3.12SO
15,7500
17,8750

Ul
-------
                                TABLE A-8.   U.KODF FtntRAL DHSEL MISSION CYCLE 1979
                               (Nr.lNfi  VOLVO TO.inOC DIESEL » MtTHANOL * CATALYST AT 19 BTOC

                               ns'l'i?-n^        FlltLl EM-Hb5-F    PROJECT 1 1 l.SOHH-001
OATtl 10/02/10
>
 i
P'V.F w F'lf, 1 UF
MfiDF S
PCI r ii N n
i I nit
t S I NT F P
i ?*> T N T F H
H «;o i N T F r>
S 7"; JNTFR
t |lin INfFP
7 im F
R i nn H A Tfn
q 7b 04TEO
in 5 u w A T t n
1 1 ?S RATFO
12 2 R»TED
i } ir>LF
PI ^ n
/ hPM
/ im
/ 2?MO
/ 2?ilO
/ 22UO
/ 2?UO
/ 510
TnBWlf POWER
CiHS
N X
0
f
. 2H 7
. H 95
7H2
, ISO
(1
B?7
. h20
. "li
20h
lb
i)
DBS
M K« «
.0
2.B
3b,2
. 72 , b
1118.8
1HS.2 1
.0
110, b 1
. 1H2.8 1
15,3
H7.5
3.7
.0
FUEL AIR INTAKE
FLOW FLOW HUMJD
G/MIN KG/»T'J G/KG
.oifl 2.nq 10
,07? b.90 10
,2bb 7,51 1U
,5H B.17 10
,802 9.88 1U
.113 1 l^HH 10
,018 2.H3 10
,572 1B'.9H 10
.151 1 b . 2 1 10
,812 1H.J7 10
,H73 12.30 10
,1H2 10'.71 10
,020 2'.Hh 10
.0
.0
,0
,0
.0
.0
,0
.n
,n
."
.0
.n
,n
NOX
CORH
FACT
l.OOH
1,003
,198
, 19H
,191
,989
l.OOH
.992
.993
,115
,99fl
1 ,001
1.U03
MEASURED
HC CO
PPM PPM
lb, 3H,
108, 2bb,
7k. 7H,
38. 11H,
20. 133,
12. 125,
S. 3H,
lb, 80,
28, 95,
HI, lUh,
bb, 159,
72, 13B,
HI, 10b,
C02 NOX
PCT PPM
l.bB 3bO,
2.HH SbO,
5, HI bSfl,
7.5H 790,
9,71 870,
11,00 9bO,
l.bB HHO,
,15 h20,
,99 H90,
,89 355,
,2b 290,
.18 2H5,
I,b2 320,
CALCULATED
GRAMS /
HC CO
li ^
IS, SH,
lb, 21,
10, 5H,
b, b7,
H, 75,
1. •».
S, 80,
It, ".
17, 79,
IS, 102,
21. 71,
3, 15,
HOUR
NOX
77.
3??,
H 1 3,
581 ,
717,
935,
s?,
lOlb,
b95,
H33,
30!) ,
221,
7b,
MODI.

i
t
i
»
s
b
7
8
1
10
11
1?
13

Til CIILATED
MOOF GR»MS/KG-FUFL
MT co
I .17 H.07
2 H. 1*7 ?! .(,7
i .99 I.BO
H .11 1.75
S .12 1 . HO
b .nh 1.12
7 ,SH H .OS
B .10 .as
9 .PO 1.07
10 .15 1 ,b9
11 ,f,B l.bl
12 I.9H 7.2H
H P.5S 1 3.09
NOX
70.17
7H , H5
25, BH
) fl.ll)
I1* ,R9
lH.no
T.RAMS/KW-HR
HC
******
b.95
,HH
.13
.1)5
.03
rn NOX
****** *****
33, b9 *****
.80 11. H2
,75 8,11
, b? b, si
.5] b.HH
Hh.ns ****** ****** *****
i o . 7 ?
10. Oh
8.89
10.73
?0.98
.05
.10
.18
.HI
S.bb
.H2 5,33
.52 H.B7
,R3 H.5H
?.is b.n
?1.IO bl,13
bH,H8 ****** ****** *****
F/A F/»
ORY
MEAS STOICH
,007H j.0b87
,niOh ,0b87
,0357 .1038
,0b2b '.1231
,0820 '.1121
,0182 ,1180
,007H ,ObB7
,OB3B .1312
,0717 ,1350
,0575 ,l28b
,0388 .11*?
,0172 '.0822
,onno .0^87

"PHI*

,107
,15H
, 3HH
,5Ql
,b20
,'18
,108
,b02
.531
,HH7
, 3HO
,aoi
,11'
WET HC
CORR
FACT
,982
,175
,921
,810
,8S»
.833
.182
.BSb
,B75
,81b
.125
,1bt
.183
F/A F/A
PCT
CALC MEAS
,0080 8,8
.0117 11,2
.0383 7,1
,0b22 «,7
,0850 3.7
.0985 ,3
,0080 fl,l
,0839 ,1
,0718 ,1
,OS9b 3,7
,0410 5,7
,0181 5,5
,0078 -3,3
POWER
CORR
FACT
,115
1,001
1,002
1,005
1,013
1.025
1,009
1.0b2
1.0H7
1,037
l,02b
1,017
,qqq
BSFC
CORR
KG/KW.HR
*****
1.552
,H»1
,*27
,*37
,HH1
*****
,Hbb
,Hb2
,193
.582
2,BbH
*****
MODAL
WEIGHT
FACTOR
,l)b7
,080
,neo
,080
,oso
,080
,0b7
,(180
,080
,080
,080
,080
,Db7

MODt

1
2
3
H
5
h
7
8
q
10
11
12
n
CYCLE COMPOSITE MSTNG 13-MODE WEIGHT FACTORS










RSHC
RSCO
PSNO
HSHC
CORR






» BSNOx « 7
, BSFC - s
,lb5 GRAM/KH-HR
,812 GRAM/KH-HR
,121 GRAM/KW.HR
,01H GRAM/KW.HR
,H81 KG/KW-HR





( ,123
( .bb5
( S.lbl
( 5.212
( .791
GRAM/BHP-HR
GfiAM/RHP-HH
GRAM/BHP-HR
GRAM/BHP-HR
LBS/BHP-HR








.











-------
                     TABLE A-8 (corrt'd).   n.MODE FEDERAL DIESEL EMISSION CYCLE 1979

                             ENGINEt VOLVO TD-100C DIESEL + METHANOL + CATALYST AT 19 BTDC
                             TESTI02-02        FUHl EM-4h5-F    PROJECT | H«5044-001            DATEl  10/02/80
MODE

1
2
1
f
5
b
7
fl
9
1 r\
\ 0
1 1
1 S
I 3

TOTaL
FHEl
KG/MTN
.n i a\
.07? I
. 3hl,S
.c;lg^
. Rfl?4
1 . 1 1 Jt
,ni7f»
1 ."5778
1 . 1 5 l 3
.8121
. H 7?9
.18?!
.Hi qfe

DIESEL
PART
KR/MIN
.niflj
.I>7?1
.1U'43
. inhi
.1083
. i o 7 n
.ni7«
. 1 3B9
. 1 335
.1313
.1317
. i sne
. lU 1 b

ALCOHOL
PART
KG/MIN
.iinno
.uunn
.it??
.•»ni
.bRHl
i .nobn
. nnnn
i.ta??
1 ,ni78
.ben?
. 3398
.11639
.0000

WATER
PART
KG/MIN
.0000
.onoo
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,oono
,0000
,nooo
,0000

FOIV*.
DIESEL
KG/MIN
,01Bi
,0721
.17H9
,P9b?
,H?77
,57no
.0178
,79H2
,bO]9
,'*'*l*b
.3R98
,1530
,ni9b

FUEL
MOLE
WEIGHT
13,87bt
13,B7b1*
21,1885
as, 8805
27,2318
28,1b03
13,87bH
58,7201
27,8197
2b,Hm
23.3855
lb,b7'*U
13,87bH

HC
KWET
FACTOR
,9B?2
,9752
,9291
,8901
,85HO
,8335
,9838
,85bS
,8751
,B9Hb
,9250
,9b>tll
,9829

Y
WATER
INTAKE
,nuo
,01bO
,01bO
,QlbO
,01 bO
,01bO
,01bO
,01bO
, f ) 1 b 0
,01bD
,01bO
,01hO
,01bO

F/A
MASS
FUEL
.0071*
,010b
,0357
,Qb2b
,0820
,0982
,0074
,0838
,0717
,0575
,0388
,0172
,0080

RAT
FUEL
CARBON
,0071
,010b
,0357
,0b2b
,0820
,0982
,0074
,0838
,0717
,0575
,0388
,0172
,0000

10
EQIV,
DIESEL
,0074
,0l0b
,0240
,0357
,0437
,0503
,0074
,042b
,0375
,0315
,0238
,0144
,0080

EXHAUST
OXYGEN
PERCENT
19,1250
18,0000
13,7500
9,8750
7,3750
5, 1250
18,1200
8,2500
9,8750
11,2500
13,2500
lb,0000
18,0000

Ul
-------
TABLE A-9.   U-MODE FEDERAL niESEl EMISSION cvcu 1979

                       DIESFU'ETHANOU  AT 19 BTDC
                       F.M.»i,5-F    PROJKT I ll-5830«0nt.
        VOLVO TD-IOP
TFsTirn-ni
                                                                  DATEl 10/17/80
pnWFP tNC.INF
MnnE S^FEn
PCT _ COND / RPH
1
2
9
4
<,
b
7
R
9
10
11
12
I 3

j*f.
* MOOF

1
2
3
4
S
b
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
TfHE
J INTER
?5 INTEH
*0 INTER
n JNTIR
110 INTER
IDLE
inn RATED
H RATED
10 RATED
PS RATED
2 BATED
.IDLE

/ HO
/ 1»00
/ HOO
/ mno
/ lino
/ linn
/ MO
/ 22nn
/ 2200
/ 221)0
/ 2?on
/ 2?00
/ 6in

ToRQUf POWER fUU AIR INTAKE
OBS OBS FLO* Fi nw HUMID
N X M Kft KG/MJN KG/MTN G/KG
0. ,U .Old ?'.35 12
1C. 2,b .074 b'.Hh 12
232. 31.0 .198 7.11 12
Hb4f bB.O .407 R.]B 12
, b^b, 102.0 ,B9b S.«9 1?
, 929. I3b,2 ,825 11.08 12
0. ,0 ,020 ? 15 1?
801. 185.0 1.19b 18.71 12
bOI. 138.7 .934 U.71 11
40|. 92.5 .bib 14.15 12
201. 4b.f .43R )e.bb 12
IB. 4,1 .198 IP, 94 12
. 0. ,0 .019 J,3S if

. 1
, 1
1
. 1
. 1
1
. 1
1
1
1
. 1
. 1
, 1

CALCULATED F/A F/A
GRAMS/KG. FUEL
MC C0
10,81 35.57
]?.10 51. bS
It, )7 25.78
7,10 48.03
),?? 52.11
, Ib 2b.fio
in. 1 1 30.34
.14 Oo
1.V2 in. 13
5.20 15.14
J3,I2 S^.bS
?l .03 59.29
1 j,?7 31 ,nn
NOX
C.RAMS/KW.HR DRY
HC co NOX MEAS STOICH
***** ****** ****** ***** ,0079 ,nbB7
73. hb
31 ,bb
19. bS
H,Db
17.12
?l.H 93.78 ***** ,0109 'QbB7
t,2^ 8.99 11,04 ,n2«0 ,0m
S.SS 17,25 7, Ob ,0504 ,09bO
,45 18. 2b b,b8 ,0b29 ,1001
.Ob 9,74 b.es ,0754 .1030
95. RO **#••* ****** ***** ,008h '.Ob87
14,04
11 ,60
^.57
q.Jl
1R.42
.1* 3.80 5,45 ,ObH7 ,1038
,b\ 4.09 »,b4 ,05b5 ,1025
E.21 b.44 1.07 ,04b3 .0991
7,4$ ?2.5? 5,29 ,n3Sn .O'HS
bl.39 173. Hb S3,7b ,01H3 .0800
91,51 ****** ****** ***** ,008J .Ob87
"PHI"

,115
,15^
.331
.525
,b2S
.732
,12b
,b23
,551
,4b7
.372
,229
,11'
NOX
CORR
FACT
,0b3
,0bn
.047
,034
,02b
.019
.Ob?
,027
,032
.03R
.041
,055
,0h3

WET HC
CORR
FACT
,982
.1"
.^2
^902
.878
,BbO
,980
J«B1
,894
.910
,930
.9b2
.982
MEASURED
HC CO C02
PPM PPM PCT
17b, 292,
308, b9b.
93b, 837.
752. J792,
IbR. 3881.
24, 2349,
184. 279,
5b, 70b,
184. b39,
504, BOO,
992. 1597,
8)2, 12QR,
208, 2bb,

F/A F/A
PCT
CALC MEAS
,0079 «,b
.0122 11. b
,0306 9.0
,053b b,4
,0b77 7,b
,0787 4.3
,OOR8 2.0
,0b54 1.1
,0378 2,2
,0488 5,4
,0377 7,b
,0194 b.O
,0082 1,9
CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13-MODE WEIGHT FACTORS
b * LJ^ _*•_•_•_ • 1 U L t*BAU«bfU_UD / l »« ^ r*B*LijnLm_Ljn











BSHC * R8NOX 8.619 GRAM/KK-HR
CORR. BSFC • .39? KG/KH-HR
1
(
(
(
i . J
-------
TABLE A-9  (cont'd).  IB-MHOF  FEDERAL DHSEL  EMISSION CYCLE
ENGINEi VOLVd TD-100 A PltSF L+FTHANOL AT 19 HTDC
TEST|U3-01 FUELi EM.*b5-F PROJECT | 1 1-5830-OOb

MOOF.

i
i
3
*
5
b
7
B
9
10
U
12
13
l
ToTiL
FilEl
KG/MTN
.Olpi*
,0739
. 1975
,*070
,5959
,8Et;l
v ,02QO
1,19«;S
,93Tb
.bSfcO
,*379
, I97fa
..Pl9'

DIESEL
PART
KG/MIN
.OlB*
.0739
.1005
,10*1
,10t.b
,10(2
,0200
. 1 358
,U70
,128*
.12bb
.12**
.0187

ALCOHOL
PART
KG/MIN
,0000
.0000
,0971
.3029
,*«9J
.n<"f
.ooon
1.0597
.SObb
.SJ?b
.3113
.0732
,0000

WATER
PART
KG/MIN
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,oono
,oono
.DUOU
,0000
,0000
,0000

F-QTV'.
DIF5EL
KG/MIN
.nifl*
,0739
• Ifcl?
,?9S2
.*153
,559*
,0200
,80**
,b359
,*b!3
.3230
,i7nb
,01F7

FUEL
MOLE
WEIGHT
i3.B7b*
13,B7b*
17,2*59
19,7085
2n,b02i
21,Z*b7
13,87b*
21,*287
21,137*
20,3999
19,3*35
ib,2733
)3,87b*

HC
KWfT
FACTOR
,9823
,97*0
,9*lb
,902*
,fl7fl*
.B5S7
,980*
,8811
,89*1
,9097
,9298
t^bl8
,9Blb

Y
WATER
INTAKE
,DJ03
,0203
,0203
,0203
,0203
,n?n3
,0203
,0203
,0203
,0203
,0203
,0203
,0203

DATE! 10/17/HO
F/A
MASS
FUEL
,0079
,0109
,0280
,050*
,0b29
,075*
.OOSb
,0b*7
,05b5
,0*b3
,0350
,0183
,0081

RATIO
FUEL
CARBON
,0079
,0109
,0280
,050*
,rib29
,07S*
,OOBb
,0b*7
,05b5
,0*b3
,0350
,0183
,0081


EQIV,
DIESEL
.0079
,o;o9
,0229
,03bS
,0*38
,0511
,D08b
,0*35
,0385
,032b
,025B
.0158
,0081

EXHAUST
OXYGEN
PERCENT
18,b250
18,0000
15,2500
10,0000
7,3750
5,oono
18,0000
8, 3750
9,8750
11 ,b250
13,5000
1 b , 5 1.1 0 0
18,8750

-------
TABLE  A-IO.
                                                     FEDERAL  HIFSEL  EMISSION CYCLE 1979
                                      VOLVO TD»inn  A   DIESFL*ETHANOL   AT  19 BTOC

                              TEST|ni-n2        FUEL I  fM.4b5»F     PROJE CT ll 1-5830-DOb
                                                                 DATE I  10/22/80
POHFS F NT, INF
MOOE SPFFD
PCT > rOND / PPM
1
H
5
h
7
R
9
in
1 1
1 1
1 3
r
pi
74
i no

inn
75
^0
rt
2
. . .
IDLE ,
INTER -
INTER ,
INTER /
INTER >
INTER /
IDLE i
RATED i
R A T \ 0 /
RATED >
RATFD t
RATED /
IDLE >
' 1400.
' HOP.
I 1400,
' MOO.
' 1400.
' 510.
' 2200.
' 2200,
' 2200.
' 2200.
' 2200.
' *?"n'
TOROUF
OBS
N X M
o'.
ID.
232.
4b4.
b9b.
93h.
0.
807.
b04.
402,
201.
IB,
0.
POWER
OBS
KW
.0
2.b
34,0
bB.O
102,0
137.2
,0
IBfa.O
139,1
92, t
4b,3
H.I
.0
FUEL
Ft OW
Kf./MTN
.019
,5Bb
,R34
.018
1 ,?01
,909
,b7(l
,426
.19]
,019
ATR
FLOW
KG/MIN
7^02
eji7

ll'.50
2,3b
19.18
lb,75
1 4, J 5
12,81
11, 1^
2.3b
INTAKl
HUMID
(V/KC.
8.1
•.1
8.1
8.1
8,1
1,1
8.1
8.1
1,1
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.1
NOX
CORR
FACT
!ibi
|9bB
,9b9
,9b4
,9bB
,9b7
, 9b7
.9bb
,9b&
,9b4
HC
PPM
20B,
312.
944.
784,
240,
\t ,
164 ,
48,
ISO.
184 ,
7bB,
bOB,
184,
MEASURED
CO C02
PPM PCT
279,
b93,
841,
3M5|
2475,
271 ,
720,
hlH,
814,
1555,
1208,
2bb.
s!u
7.71
9,40
11,13
1,81
9,30
8,14
7,07
5,49
3,30
l.bR
NOX
PPM
bis|
725,
BbS,
920,
540,
b40,
440,
320,
220,
230.
510,
CALCULATED
GRAMS / HOUR N(irf
HC CO NOX
11,
18o|
181,
bb,
17,
lit
27,
BB,
IbO,
2hS,
ISO,
12,
2S3,
30b,
970,
17R2 ,
143b,
32,
723.
54b,
b?4,
1011.
b94 ,
3S,
3"!
b9o|
871,
10J,
1049,
b14 ,
400,
233,
21b,
111.
1
•4
b
h
7
a
9
in
11
1 2
1 i
>
 I
MODE

1
2
•)
4
5
t
7
R
9
10
11
12
1 3
CALCULATED F/A F/A
GoAHS/KG.FUEl GRAMS/KWp-HR DRY
Hr
JF.bO 33
l?.^9 55
\f.,fl 2S
7,h5 *1
1 ,R7 50
.15 28
m.no ?9
, 17 10
1 ,M 10
1.98 15
?n.41 39
It.hS bO
j P. 85^31
CO
.55
.49
,RO
.09
.73
,• 7»

in?
.no
.52
,bS
.40
.13
NOX
*****
81 ,b5
31.79
21,13
1 9. b4
17.41
94, R2
l».53
Il.b2
9,95
'.is
IB. 79
97,37
HC co NOX MEAS STOJCH
****** ****** ***** .0077 '. 0 h 6 7
2J.3b 97,8? ***** ,OJ09 'ob87
5,30 B.''9 11,08 ,P?7? 0845
2.bb 1*.27 7,34 ,0474 ,0952
,bS 17.47 b.7b .ObOO .0'*'**
.13 10, 4h b,35 ,0711 ,.1059
****** ****** ***** ,0077 .Ob87
',15 3.89 5,b4 ,(lb12 .1041
,bl 3. ^2 »,6b ,0547 ,1021
1.71 b.74 4,32 ,0458 .0993
5.74 Pi, 85 5,04 .0314 ,0935
14.21 170.8? 53, Ob ,017J ^0711
****** ****** ***** ,0081 .Ob87
•PHI*

,113
.iss
.322
,498
,b01
.710
.113
,b08
,53b
,4bl
.357
.219
.118
WFT HC
CORR
FACT
',983
,97fc
.942
,90b
.883
.8b3
.981
.882
.897
.911
,932
,9b3
.983
F/A F/A
PCT
CALC MtAS
.0080 3,0
.0120 9,5
.0307 12,7
,0517 9,0
,ObSb 9,1
,0775 b,0
,0089 15,2
,0b53 3,2
,05bb 3,4
,0486 5.9
,03b7 9,8
,0190 9,7
,0082 1,2
POWER
CORR
FACT
.992
,997
,99fl
1,002
1.010
l,01b
1.000
1.05b
1.040
1.030
1.020
1.012
,991
BSFC
CORR
KG/KW-HR
*****
1.7b8
.149
,347
.311
.359
** *» *
.3bB
.377
.122
,540
2.791
*****
MODAL
WEIGHT
FACTOR
,0b7
,080
,080
,OUO
,080
.PRO
,0b7
,OHO
.080
,080
,080
,080
,0h7
MODI

1
2
)
4
5
b
7
8
9
10
11
12
11
CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13-MODE WEIGHT FACTORS
a»ur 	 	 i cut retuivb-UD t i tea rDAU/IUD_UD ^



















B$HC « MNOX l,4bl GRAM/KW*>HR
CORP. BSFC • ,398 KG/KW*HR
i
t
\
(
(
• f 4 
-------
TABLE  A-IO (cont'd).  U.MODF FEDERAL DHSFL EMISSION CYCLE 1171
        ENGINEl  VOLVO  TD-100 A  OIESEL*ETHANOL  AT 1 1 BTDC
                                           PROJfCTlll«5B30*OOb
DATEl  10/22/80

MODE

l
2
3
»
5
b
7
8
1
10
11
12
13

TOT^L DIESEL
FUEL PART
KG/MTN KG/MIN
.OlBb .OIBb
,07(,0 ,07bO
,)175 .1005
.lljb ,10b7
.«!8<;5 .1070
,Pm .1083
,nlBl .0181
l.?0*t .13*H
,1oi» ,1301
,bbgB ,12M
,*J»1 .1213
,il}3 ,1*58
.QUO . .0110

ALCOHOL
PART
KG/MIN
,0000
.0000
.0171
,38h1
.'OflS
.7252
.0000
1.0710
.7713
.SH04
.J1ST
.Obit
,0000

WATER
PART
KG/MIN
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
,0000

EQIV.
DIESEL
KG/MIN
.OlRb
,n7bO
,IM7
,»B77
,HOR1
,5b51
.nifii
.BOfll
.bJIB
,1703
,3158
,lb71
,0110

fUfL
MOLE
WEIGHT
13,B7bH
13,B7b>»
17,Pi*«»1
11,5393
2n,«i551
21,?15e
13,67bit
21,'*7bO
«1 ,OHB1
«0,H303
11,1835
Ib.Obll
13,87tH

HC
KWET
FACTOR
,1831
,l75b
,1H?6
,10b5
,8832
,Bb?7
,1810
,8823
,8170
,1111
,1322
,Mb33
,182b

Y
WATER
INTAKE
,0130
,0130
,0130
,0130
,0130
,0130
.0130
,0130
,0110
,0130
,0130
,0130
,0130

F/A
MASS
FUEL
,0077
,0101
,0?7P
,OH7H
.ObOO
,0731
,0077
,0b32
,05H7
,oH*e
,033H
,0173
,0081

RATIO
FUEL
CARBON
,0077
,0101
,0272
,0^7*
,ObOO
,0731
,0077
,0b32
,n5H7
,0>»SB
,0331
,0173
,OOB1


EQIV,
DIESEL
,OU77
,0101
,0223
,031*7
.n'+n
,OH1b
.0077
,0i*25
,037*
.0321
,021*1
,0151
,0081

EXHAUST
OXYGEN
PERCtNT
18,b300
17,7500
li*,2500
10,2500
7, 7500
5,2500
17,5000
8.3800
1,8HOO
ll,25on
13,1300
lb.2500
IB.bOPO

-------
TABLE A-ll.  14-''or>F FFmp»i OHSFI  fMtsspn rvcif.  1479
l'if,["|. V/ni vn  T!) pin A  DfFSH.  *  tTHAWIL + CATALYST   AT 11 RTDt
Hst! MH.MI        FijFIt FM-ij hb-FF. TH PPiiJlc f I I 1-SR in-niih
                                                                    DATH  ll/Mb/HH
P.I . f u r ' r. '
"ciU r, Pi ^
Pf t rntiii /
i \b. bq, t.
'1 nil , 71?, 1 <)'< , •»
•inn. rt'i. 1J9.P
son, n, , n
FIIU
F 1 Ow
,n?i
,11 7 P
,? i q
.tup
, S9 1
,RJ?
, npq
U piii M1H1 / fPilP. glH. 187. b I.PUq
q 7 S W A r F n /
pi SI. pi t. Tt I) /
'PMII. hill. iHll.h
J?mi. '107. 44.7
.qm
,b7n
MU
Fi.nw
1.K1
7.111
7. HI
R'. 4t
9.1, n
11.1?
1 .Pfi
H.q5
h.bH
t .H?
II PS fc'ATfh / PP'IH. ?'H. *• b , 9 ,TI5 ?.S7
IP p & a T r o /
1 ) P1LF /
>?Mi. IH. 1,1
M:fl. n, ,11
.111
,030
ri.q?
1.71
INTAKE hux
HllMII) fdl.IV HC
(,/Kf. FACT PPM
7,1" ,^11 bjj.
7 , » . 9 ? ; i H n ,
7M qun M 4 M
?!
7,
7 .
7 ,
7,
7,
7,
, q Ml ? b •« ,
i 9S<» HH ,
,Hb? ?»,
.^HS hO,
.IS1* lh.
.MIR h R ,
.IIP iSh,
',1 .9*1 11?,
7,1 ,H?I ibn.
7,1 ,9ph UlR,
CO
PPM
1HO,
»?s.
jqq,
HOS ,
1H9«,
SI?..
171.
141.
IHh,
319,
Iflb,
Illh ,
119,
fiFD
cn?
PCT
3.3b
P. 39
S , 19
7,?5
q , q>»
11 ,»»
1,b 7
q.Ho
8, PH
7,m
b.'jq
?, H*
3,30
NOX
PPM
hJO,
blS,
bhd.
RPS,
10JO,
JObS,
b7S,
71S,
ssn,
190,
jnfl,
?H5.
7?S,
CAICUL
&HAM.S /
HC CO
J. 19.
41, lb?,
91, Ibl,
b7, 377,
?», 5?b,
H. 301,
3. 1?,
9. 13H.
33, 1 i 9 ,
h5, 18H,
107, S>»9,
S?, 195,
b, ?1,
ATtO
MOX
108,
371.
H33,
b3c!,
717.
qq i ,
JOb,
1 ?0 7 ,
7qo,
>»qii,
3?5,
?qh ,
1?7,
MO PI
1
f
i
V
5
t>
7
U
q
J n
1 1
l f
l i
i 	 .... 	 ,..............._.__....-_.... «._._.
M r k\ r.Ui 4TF 1) F/A
° "l)')F r,pM«3/kf,.Hin r,WA^S/KW.HF< DRV
«r f ii !•('> MC en NMX v'F.AS

? 7.S? l^.iil HS.1S R,?? 38, ?b 13, ?b .nplH
3 7.PII IP.?!) IP.Ic1 P. 7? 'l,h| 1?,«»S ,npq7
4 ^.7^ IS.hS ?b,?H ,<17 5,1*? 9, H 8 ,11'IRb
S ,t-7|t.RpPi3.'l7 .pi S.fH 7,h3 ,n(j?l
1. , ) h K.M'l |1,1li .Mb ?,IH 7.1H ,n74n
111 l.h? •• . r> 7 ?.l? .7" l,9h ''t?? ,fIHSb
11 H.MTI pi . P 4 1.TS P.P" 1.1) ^.93 ,Ml?b
IP b.^7 PM.tH 7,|i'> ^,71 M7.RR 7?,7h .IMP?

CYCU r.OMpnSTTF U



F/A
STOICH
,nh87
.100?
• l 'U?
.tlhP7
'.nhR7
"PHI"
,?3H
|sin
,bJ9
.'17
,?39
,bJH
,S'*I
|l7b
,?M1
vI9
*****
|lb9
*.sm
1.91R
*****
MODAL
Ht 1GHT
FACTOR
,0h7
,11 HO
,ORO
.OHO
,0h7
.OHO
!o«o
.OHO
, OHO
,0b7
MODI
1
M
5
b
7
8
q
10
1 1
1?
1 4
SING 1 3-Mfjot WLHiHT FACTORS
/iM/KW-H» ( ,><55 GWAM/RHP-HH 5
AM/KW-HH ( g.P.?1 GRAM/RHP-HH )
AM/KW-HH ( 5,qR7 KKAM/BHP-HH )
AM/Krt-HR ( b,<
-------
TABLE A- 1 I  (cont'd).
FFIHUL imsu
                                                  cvu f- iq?q
(Nr.TMf; V0| VC.i TP inn A niKSFI. + HUANML » PATAI VST
[Fr,Tj n4-(l) Mlfl; F-H.Hhh-FF.TH PRO.IF Cl ! 1 1 -S H 10-fl
Till M (i [c riF 1 M r "Mill
Hi'inF- MIH PAK1 (>4WT
KI',/"T '•' l< r,/Ml t\ H f, /!•' [ M
1 . Hr10 1 , MPn 1 . Illllll:
P .n7?'4 ,il?P'4 .HIMIO
3 . ? 1 i *
'+ .''4 I 3,H7h4
,11(1 no , I 7R5 1 7,3h41
,nnnn .pqih i9fr.S'm
.('lino ,4Uh 2(l,h?P(l
,01111(1 .Shl3 21 ,28114
,0(1011 .0?q 1 1 3,H7h4
.OII'IO ,R1?7 21,4483
,0il(l|) ,h25q PI ,00h7
.OilOO ,47?8 2(l,33t.O
,0(1(1(1 ,3045 !R,qb33
,0011(1 ,1307 14,1374
.oniin ,n?qi; I3,fl7b4


nr
K^r T
FAC row
.qbfl 1
,q 7hp.
,q4 n
,qi2R
.H?q3
, Rhdfl
,qb5J
,HBP(1
,Hqb2
,qi IP
, q 140
,q 757
,qha?



AT
Oh
Y
14 HTOC
D A T K t 11/Oh/HO
F/A HATH!
rt A T f- R
INT AKt
t
i
,
i
,
,
•
.
t
,
t
,
t


01
111
0)
[1]
IM
111
111
0)
01
01
01
0)
01


q
q
q
q
5
5
5
11
15
15
1 5
IS
15


MASS
F-UFL
. 0 1 h 3
,0104
,02q7
,()4Hb
,0h21
,0740
,01h4
,0h43
,0552
,045b
,0325
,012?
, 0 1 h b


FUH.
CARBON
,OJh3
,0104
,0217
,04Rk
,0h?l
,074(1
,0lb4
,0b43
,0552
,045h
,0325
,01?2
, 0 1 h h


I
QIV,
OIESFiL
•
»
9
•
.
fl
.
•
.
t
t
ff
1


Olb3
0104
0242
0355
0432
0501
01K4
0432
03 7 H
0321
0244
0120
Olhb


tXHAUSI
OXYGtN
PtHChNT
1 b,8800
1 8,2500
14,2500
10,0100
7, 1 300
4 , 7600
17,0000
R , 2 5 0 0
10,0100
11,3700
1 3, 3700
17,b20Q
Ih.BBOO


-------
TABLE A- 12. M
r ii I :l | mil VM Hi
r L \ r ;  'i * *
1 l LI f / r, i... . i. . . fl
," .' M » l» / 1 'll.il . l(< . rJ-.t,
1 ,"•. »'TH.' / 1 '1 MM . r' H. It . r1
« VI t . J H, / | 	 | ^ '1 b b . b 3 , h
', Jr. '. 1 F i* / 1 H '"1 . 7" 1 . 1 II ? . H
1, l nn '• U i/ / M MM . 'i *K . 1 '7 . ?
7 "1 F / VHI . 1' . . fl
H | 1 1 ' 1 U r, t f n / ,» P ' ' ' 1 , K't. IH7.S
•I 7'. i>A ! F n / rVnP, l,ln. ItO.b
in ti « MF 11 / ,Vn'i . Mil 7. q < , '
1 | r-S iJA TF !• / ,'Pnll. ,)IH. Mb,1*
IP ^ •_• A t Hi / P ,> i ' , t . IK. 3.7
11 1 ni f / Sun. ii. , rj
.'OH FMiiPni niFr.FL (rtissTn'« r.Yr.tr iq>«
pifi A riTF.stu « F TMAM.M. * r.Ar*LYSt «r iq HTOC
FHFll FM-»hh-FLTH PNIIJI f,T| 1 1-t.H Jii-nni, OATH I
FHFl »|D If'TAKI; Mix
F i H'M FI nw HUM] n f.npw
Kfi/;'TIJ kf./HfU f./Hf, F»f. T
, 0?fl 1 . Rt q , b , H7S
,n7u b.Ri '

n, bR, 1Kb, Ib, 1S4, tfl, IHb, Iflfl, iMi>, ft* , It1,, S^h , t ?«i , Sb. ?!?. me MOK PCT PPM 3 , H 0 b J 0 , e , 3 s SHI, S.HO hRO, B , 1 R R 0 11 , ii).e7 qjs. 11, Sb 1080, J.HII hsn. q , t o 7io, H,18 SSS, 7 , 3M H ) 0 , S.tl «?S, j,q? ?HO , },3h SRH, /07/HII C*LCUL»TI 0 GWAM.S / MfillH Hf LO N0> 1, IH, «>7, ?7, nn. 4?,-, HH, 177, til. bt, ^q, ss<., ? l , son, 7?s , jo, nob, nqj, 3, l'i ^t, «», ibo, i ibq. ?0, 1 b 7 , R 1 1 , MB, 17H , SH /, qM , i!7H , H? J , SJ, ?SH, ?77, «., ??, 100. "oni 1 f i t s b ; H q j n 1 1 1 1 1 3 r f t f. ii| .MF 11 1Jlif>F f.pV" /Kf~,.F llf i i,l'AI'R/K W-HP nr rn .ifn M( r.n NOx " •» .,.4" 11'. >M 7K.t'' III. Ml Sfl,r>fl »*»»» 3 K.)B 1 >4 . M 7 P''.Vl c',^7 S.1H JP.OI t ^.Sh 11. ""b P'.'IK . 'I 1 t.HO 8, IIS 'j .^KIl.tK 4,t,h .?fl M.R7 7,115 I. .?! ».lr, •».•"< .(« ?.^b 7,?t H .Ir" ''.f1! K.HV .(i1, ,Pb b,?3 q . 'S ''.''t. t . ^s .It ] . 1 H S,7b n, i .P'I I.'\P •'.it, .•;! i .R1; *>,Rt ii i.n ''.HI i.F-1, r1.!!? S.HM H.SR IP K.»C, IJ.K'I ",'JI P'l.RII tR.bq 71. Rt CYCI ( rn ...... _ n.SHC i H-Sf.llx = rn"i'. ILSH: - = F/A F/A «f r HC t)PV "PHJ" TOP.H "FAS STOICH FACT niCP nUUl ?P1 Qkl ('I|TC B fl " ~ ' t^^^ ( T n / .I'lOt .nhH7 ,lbl .S7F, , fl J ) R .oHbb f^h7 .q^H .nil1; .osbi «^3b ,qo? .ohsi .mm ,hbi ,R7t, . 071 l .109? , 7?H .FtSq MICC nLQJ ?PQ QU1 ,II|TT .IIKO/ ,rCT .THJ , nhsn . i o?q ,bies , RBI ,05hq .|0?l ,S5B ,hTH .oso1; .nqqq .^UH .qOH .niRh .nsbs .YOM ,qn 1 1 i L j fif>R7 ? 3 R 9 h fi xpcisiiF USTNT, i i-wnnf- WFIGHT FA( Qq^ rOAMyUM — HR f MM*5 l"?llb TBAM K»«-HH f r1 * 191 > q i F, CRAM Kh-HH ( s'qiib ^,'siiq fiwAM/KwIhW ( b'.WH .tic" KG/KM-HH ( ,b>H F/A F/A PC T CALC MtA3 0 J h ? b ^ ,01 1 b 11,3 ,0 3»H q,s .Oljb ) } HSFC MfinAl CflHB f.tl(.HT Kli/KH-HW FACTUH ***AA Ob7 1 , bib ,f!HO .ISB .OHO ,3bb .080 .H1* ,OHO ,3S3 ,OHO ***** 11 U? • wwww | ' l D ' .IbO ,080 , 17H ,ORO .MSI .OHO , b f 1 , U fl 11 3.77M ,080 ftft*** n u 3 ••••• | M n ' MflOK P 1 M S b R q 10 ) l i -i 1 J

-------
TABLE A-12 (cont'd) .u-*
FFPHUI  nitsfi MMSSION cvcu
lur, tlvf; Vll| VO TO Kill A MFSF.I + MHAMlL » TATAI.YST AT 19 fiTDC
HM: 114-n? FMtLi FM-4hh-FE.TH Ptfl).
Till .M
Mnnf rut i
KG/MT^
i ,n?7 1
f . n ,>n i
1 .P?ib
4 . H i i (~
5 .hi nS
b ,R 1(1,5
7 . n .' o i
s? \ .? 1 ?5
9 ,T»i J
1 II . 7 HUH
11 . «; n i- *
1 ? . f1 •* •* n
1 ) . n ? q 7
hO
U)
ill f :;H M rnnni
o ft |< T ^ A W 1
Ur/'M''! Kf, />MM
JV7? .11(11111
.n;ni ,ill"in
. Mir, i .\?13
. 1 lit 4 . KIR 7
.HIM? .MM
. 1 ill A . ; * 1 )
,011(10 .5151 2M,55H>*
.nodd ,3hii ii.biqo
.OIIIHI ,?n3() Ih.^t1*?
. onnri ,m^7 M,H7bH


n (: l : i i-5P3(i»u(ib DATt i
HC Y F'/A
KWFT WATER MASS
( AflOR JNTAKt FUFL
,qh ;n ,oj 5t .0151"
,4757 .0151* ,010H
, ^ 3 1 I , 0 I 5 <» ,0318
,q(llh ,015H ,0516
,H753 ,0154 ,0b53
,R5H4 ,0)51+ ,0751
.^blt ,0154 .0)56
,RK15 ,0154 ,0b50
,Rq44 ,0154 ,05b4
,qn?q ,0154 ,0505
,7 ,0154 ,03Hb
,9555 ,0154 ,0?23
,qh?5 ,0154 ,01b3


I 11/07/HO
WAT
FUtL
CARHON
,OI5
-------
TABLE A-13.
                       FEDERAL DIESEL EMISSION CYCLE 1179
ENr.lNFt Vt'LVn TD-IOO A  D1ESFL*FTHANOL»30PCT WATER
TEST nn. 05-01     FIIELj FM-*b5-F    PROJECTlll-5830-OOb
                                                                 DATEI o3/ob/m
MI, or

l
?
3
t
5
h
7
fl
q
10
1 1
12
1 3

1
•P> MOOF

i
2
3
1
5
h
7
8
9
1 0
1 1
12
13

PCT CDND
IfLI
i T N T F R
f S I N T F If
Ml p.TFR
75 IN T F P
Ptn T'JTER
IDLf
in ci RATFO
7S RAU.n
6U RATff)
PS RATFO
? RATIO
_ I OLE
•

t-T.TMF
/ I-PM
/ 5UO.
/ lion.
/ i«nn .
/ Him.
/ 1 1 u n .
/ nun.
/ soo.
/ 221)11.
/ f ? n n .
/ e?2nn.
/ ??uo.
/ t ? 0 U .
/ sun.

CAI cm
r.pAMs/Kf.-FUFL
HT _ co
1 1.1B 31. bl
15.42 bl . Ib
11.77 iR.hh
4. 52 2b,l>l)
1.02 37.1?
1,41 4 b , h7
11. hh 33.11
1.70 1.P9
?.17 2. hi)
3. PI b.Sb
1.11 25. bl
| 7. 79 17. b?
11.11 3^.94
llfIX
TnHOUF POWEH FUEL AIR INTAKE
DBS OBS FLOW FLOW HUMID
a t M KW KG/MIN KG/MIN
o. ,o .11 15 2,11
19. 2,8 ,0b7 b.90
P.iM. 32.7 .212 7.03
lib. bS.1 ,1bb 7.71
b7(J. 98,2 ,735 8,8?
813. 130,9 l.Obfl 10.39
0. ,0 ,015 2.15
111. 187. b 1,578 18.22
bU). llD.b 1.150 15.77
408. 91.1 ,823 13J81
204. 17.0 .190 12.21
17. 3.8 ,155 10. RO
0, .0 ,015 2.14

4TED F/A F/A
GRAMS/KW.HH DRY
HC cn NOX MEAS STOICH
***** ****** ****** ***** ,00b9 .Ob87
75 .94
2?, 51
11. Ob
R. 73
b.43
22. 21* 88,20 ***** ,001B ,0b89
S'.23 8,28 10,03 ,0347 .0811
1.93 11.33 1,73 ,0b01 .OH*
1.3b Ib.bB 3,92 ,0831 .0987
'.bl 2?, 85 3.15 ,1035 .1011
99.03 »«**«* ****** ***** ,0071 ,0b87
h.MI
b.05
5.b7
7. 51
,8b 2.1h 3,08 ,087? .103H
1.07 1.27 2,17 ,0735 ].inU
l.t»1 3,15 2,98 ,0597 ,p18l
S.bl 15,99 1,71 ,0401 .0911
2b.98 43.12 115.45 b5,42 ,0144 ,072b
97. Pb ****** ****** ***** ,0073 ,OhB7
G/KG
b,2
b,1
b,1
5,1
b.B
7,2
b,8
b.B
7,2
'.2
b,1
7.0
7,0


"PHI*

,101
.in
, 310
,503
,b33
,752
,101
,bl 3
,531
,155
,315
.187
,10b
NOX
CORR
FACT
.942
.151
,9sn
,940
.153
.157
.155
,953
.158
,158
,152
.152
.151

WM HC
CORK
FACT
.981
.178
.918
.105
,B77
.858
.185
.871
.rtl?
.908
.933
,9b9
,9BS
MEASURED
HC CO C02
PPM PPM
217, 247,
350, 703,
870, 725,
585, IR77,
525, 3b12,
288, 5503,
208, ?Sb,
215, 111,
330, 211,
IIP, 157,
818, 1220,
bin, BJ5,
212, 2bB,

F/A F/A
PCT
CALC MEAS
,0075 8,7
,0110 12,8
,0303 5.5
,0501 7,5
.Obbb b,S
,0792 2,7
,0071 3.3
.ObIS 1,8
,05b8 5.2
,0181 7.8
.0311 10. b
,0158 lb.0
,0071 i.b
PCT
1,53
2,20
5,07
7,71
9,bk
11,07
l.SO
1.25
8.28
7. 11*
5,3b
3,00
1,50

















NOX
PPM
110,
S3S,
538,
480,
525,
1b5,
IbS,
3bS,
313,
212,
220,
210,
IbO,

POWER
CORR
FACT
,18b
,195
.115
,198
1,00?
l.OOi
,9Bb
1,051
1,033
1.022
1,011
1.009
,981
CALCULATED
GRAMS / HOUR
HC CO
12, 28,
t,?, 21b,
171, 271,
lib, 711.
131, lb3B,
10, 2110,
12. il,
Ibl, 10b,
150, 179,
159, 321,
2h8, 752,
Ib5, 112,
13, 32,

BSFC
CORR
KG/KW-HR
*****
1,150
,41b
,428
,118
,4Bb
*****
.480
,475
,511
.bib
2,403
*****
NOX
10,
305,
3?8,
301,
3B5,
"12,
11,
577,
118,
280,
221 ,
251,
11,

MODAL
WEIGHT
f ACTOR
,0b7
,080
,080
,080
,080
,080
,Db7
,080'
,080
,080
,080
,080
,0b7
MOOE

i
t
)
H
s
b
7
B
9
in
11
J t
1 4


MODE

i
2
3
H
5
fa
7
8
1
in
U
15
13
CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13»MQDE WEIGHT FACTORS





















BSHC i ASNOX s b.513 GRAM/KW.HR
CiiRR. B3FC • a ,118 KG/KW-HR
(
(
(
(
C
1 ', 1 0 1
7.191
3.111
1.B59
.811
GRAM/BHP-HR
GRAM/BHP.HR
GRAM/HHP-HR
GRAM/BHP-HR
LB3/BHP-HR
)
)
)
)
)




















-------
TABLE A-13  (corrt 'd) . i J-MODK FEDERAL DIESEL EMISSION CYCLE 1179
        ENGINE)  VOLVO TD»l()n A  nUSEL + ETHANOLMOPCT WATtH
        TF3T NO.nS-.01     FUf.Ll EM-tbS-F    PROJECT | 1 1-5830-OUb
D»TEi 03/nb/ai

MtiOF

1
?
3
H
5
b
7
n
q
10
H
12
13

Ui
TOUL
FUEl.'
KG/MIN
,nm?
,0ht,9
,2*?2
,*h(,a
.73S3
1 ,nb79
,ni«;?
1 .57«*
1 . 15nl
,B2l*
,tB9b
. 15*7
.nu*


DIFSEL
PART
K G / M I N
.01* ?
,'ihha
. 1 U 2 9
.1107
.me
. less
.0152
.1395
. i 35n
.1319
. i .n 3
. 125U
.015*


ALCDHDL
PAH1
KG/MIN
.nnno
.OOD5
.0975
.2*89
,*3hR
,b598
.nnnn
1 .0072
,710h
,*fl*l
.2*91*
.0208
.0000


WATER
PART
KG/MIN
,0001)
,0002
,OH18
,10b7
,1872
.2828
,nono
,*317
.30*5
.2075
, 10b9
,QU89
,0000


EQIV'.
DIESFL
KG/MtN
. ,ni*7
,nbh5
,lbH*
,2b77
,3RbB
,5*lb
.0152
.7750
.5B33
,*373
.2907
.1 3B1
.015*


FUEL
MOLE
WEIGHT
13.87b*
13,9185
17.2059
19,l*bl
20,31*7
20,8395
13,87bH
21,3233
20,8399
20,1831
18,7289
1*,7H8
13,B7b*


HC
KWET
FACTOR
,98*3
,9779
,9*22
,9053
,8?71
,B575
,98*5
,n?BD
,892*
,9082
,933H
,9b8S
,98tS


Y
WATER
INTAKE
,0099
,0103
,0199
,0319
,0*52
,055b
,0109
,0*93
,0*28
,0357
,0253
,0125
,0112


F/A
MASS
FUEL
,00b9
,0098
,03*7
,0b09
,0839
,1035
,0071
,0872
.0735
,0597
,0*0*
,01**
,0073


RATIO
FUEL
CARBON
,00b9
,0097
,0287
,0*b9
,Ob2S
,07bl
,0071
,0b3*
,05*0
,OH*7
,031b
,01 Jb
,0073



EQIV,
DIESEL
,00b9
,0097
,023S
,03*9
,0**1
,0525
,0071
,0*28
,0373
,0317
,02*0
,0129
,0073


EXHAUST
OXYGEN
PERCENT
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
0,0000
O.OODO
0,0000


-------
 TABLE A-14.  13-wnot FEDE»*I DIEstL EMISSION CYCLE  1979

L'JOIMF | VOLVO TD-lnU A   DIESF.l «t THANOL +30PCT WATER
TtST Np, 115-02     FUFLl EM-1b5-F    PHOJfCtJ11-5830-OOb
OATEl  3/Ob/il
pr>.-.f i' ^ <>r,\m
PC T CONn / I.P'1
l
?
)
•t
s
h
7
B
q
1 u
1 1
1 ?
1 3
irn.F ,
i 1 N T F W ,
?S IMF B ,
111 THUK ,
75 INTEP -
i no PUf- w ,
IDLE -
i ii (i R A r (• n i
75 R « T E n ,
SO MATED /
i»5 R» TFn t
i HATEO ,
.IDLE ,
1 Sun .
/ 1 "* Mil „
/ ri n n .
> 1 "4 III) .
' non.
' 11UO.
' sun.
' c?2l)0.
> ??on.
' ??Dii.
' /"iN

2
32
b5
98
J JU

187
110
91
1 7
1

,n ,nii
,B ,0b5
.7 ,212
, M , Ihfl
.2 ,73b
.9 1,012
.U .015
,b 1 ,5b9
.b 1.111
,1 . H23
,0 ,190
.0 ,lb9
.0 ..013
AIR
FLOW
KG/MIN
2,19
b.flb
7. in
7,7b
8.R5
10.39
2.15
17.97
15.77
11.23
12.11
1 0.71

INTAKE
&/KG
7.J
7,3
7.1
7.8
7.8
7,b
7.b
7.8
" . 3
8.3
B.3
8.3
8,3
NOX
COBH HC
FAfT PPM
.q7S 2JS,
,971 389,
,9bh 855,
,9bfl 5b5,
,9l,h 500,
,9b? SOU.
,9bh 225 ,
,9ht> 285,
,973 315,
.971 H10,
,97h 8U5,
.979 b80,
,981 2U7,
MEASURED
CO C02
PPM PCT
293,
71h,
7bO,
1H17,
3538,
5501,
2Sb,
H9,
219,
170,
1229,
9Sb,
211,
l.Sfl
2,28
5. 19
7.81
9,bb
10,97
1.51
9,13
8,30
7,00
5,31
3,03
1,52
NDX
PPM
170,
S02,
525,
IhS,
178,
IbO,
175,
350,
300,
230,
205.
237,
105,
CALCULATED
GRAMS / HOUR
HC CO NOX
12,
b5,
IbS,
1 ? 1 •
128,
91 ,
13,
152,
151 ,
Ib2,
2b1,
191 ,
11,
31,
238,
271,
723,
IbOO,
2872,
29,
39k,
172,
310,
7bl,
531.
25.
"2,
?72,
313,
297,
353,
392 ,
IB,
539,
185,
271,
207,
215 ,

MODt
1
?
3
»
5
b
7
B
q
10
1 1
1 1?
U
i
ro

l
2
3
H
5
b
7
8
9
10
11
1 2
1 3
TAL CULATED
GP4MS/KG-Fllf L GRAMS/KW.HR
KT to NOX HC Co
ii.n2 3b,?s qi.ns ****** «*»»•*
Ib.hS bH.iS H9.I5 23.19 85,28
i 1 .12 1 9. u 21 .51 5.03 8.19
1.12 25. 71 in. 57 1.H5 1 1.05
1 ,H9 3h.23 7.99 1.30 lb,29
1.15 15, 9 j *>.?b ,b9 21, q1
11.111 32.51 9R,SO ****** ******
1.K2 i.Pil 5,73 .fll 2,11
?.Pb 2.59 5.78 1.07 1.23
1.?7 b.BH 5.19 1.72 3.bl
9.00 25.90 7. 05 5.h2 lb.17
|9.|H 5?.1b 21.22 18.71 133.89
M.11 11.17 R5.22 ****** ******
! • . • •
NOX
*****
97,55
9.57
1,51
3.59
2.99
*****
2.87
2,71
2, 88
1.10
51. Ib
*****
F/A F/A
DRY
MF:AS STOICH
.OObb '.DbB7
, 0 0 q b . n b 8 7
.0311 ,0811
,0b08 .0931
,0838 .098b
,1010 .1027
,0070 ,ObB7
,0880 .1035
,0710 ,1012
,0581 .0981
,0107 .0911
.0159 .0735
.OOhl .Ob87
•PHI»

,09b
.110
.337
,5f)2
,b35
,717
,1U2
,bia
,51h
,115
, 11H
,201
,089
CYCLE COMPOSITE USING 13-MOOE WE
Dcur _-_-_-— f i o DC roiu*i/u_UD r





BSHC + H9NOX a b

CORR. BSFC
• 3
go ^3 ijnw^/f\ii^ii'»
,93b GHAM/KW-HK
3OU rDAUyirbhKUD
BcDO laK^^r^"""™
.180 GRAM/KW.HR
.192 KG/KW-HR
1
(
(
hFT HC
CORR
FACT
.983
.977
,911
,901
.877
,85k
.98*1
,87b
,89*
,910
.931
,9bB
,981
F/A F/A
PCT
CALC MEAS
.U07B 17,7
,0113 18.0
,0309 8,9
,0510 8,9
.Ubbl b.l
,0787 b,9
,007h 8,2
,ObS7 2,9
,OS70 9,2
,0173 8.3
,0318 9,1
,Dlb2 9,5
,0071 22,1
POWER
CORK





1
1

1
1
1
1
1

FACT
,988
,993
,995
,999
,003
,009
,988
,051
,03b
,027
.017
,012
,989
DSFC
COHR
KG/Krt.HH
*****
1,120
.lib
,130
,119
,173
*****
,17b
,1*7
.511
.bll
2.521
*****
MODAL
WEIGHT
FACTOR
,0fa7
,080
,080
,080
,080
,080
,0b7
,ORO
,080
,080
,080
,080
,0b7
MODE

1
2
"i
1
t,
b
7
8
9
10
11
1?
13
ICHT FACTORS
1 ui3 ro«u/auD_uo <
A . ^ i j
7.112
J| Q 1
I 1 " t
l.blO
.809
GRAM/BHP-HR )
GRAM/HHP-HR )
LBS/BHP-HR )















-------
TABLE  A-14  (cont'd). 13.MODE FEDERAL DIESEL  EMISSION  CYCLE  1979
            NKi VOL VO TD-lnO *   DIESRL + ETHANOL-f 30PCT  WATER
        TEST NU.nS-02     FUELl EM-HbS-F    PROJECT| I I-5BJU-OOb
DAU'I   3/Ob/Hl
TOTAL
MflDF FUEl
KG/MTN
1 ,nU3
f .nbc,5
3 .?4?a
4 ,4bp4
•; ,73u>
b 1 ,04?(l
7 .0 1 i*9
R l.5bq?
1 1 . i Inb
JO ,R?q4
11 .4Hqh
12 . 1 bq3
13 ,n np
DIESEL
PART
K r, / M T N
,01«»3
.Ob55
. 1029
.1107
.) 1 34
. i inn
.U 14 9
. I3b8
. 1295
.1319
,1333
. \ 30R
.0132
ALCOHOL
PART
KG/MIN
.0000
.0000
.oq7s
.2504
.4358
,b58R
.0000
1.002?
,bRb7
.4841
.2494
,02b9
.oonn
WATER
PART
KG/MIN
,OOOD
,0000
.0418
,1073
, J 8bB
,2823
,ooon
,4297
.2943
,2075
.ICJbq
,0115
.00011
EQIV.
DIESEL
KG/MTN
.0143
,0b55
.Ib44
,2bRb
, 3B83
,51b5
.0149
,7b9
-------
                     APPENDIX B





TRANSIENT TEST RESULTS FROM  THE  DIESEL CONFIGURATION
-------
          TABLE B-l.  NOTES CONCERNING TEST RESULTS GIVEN IN APPENDIX B
Test No.
Cold Start
    B-2
    B-3


    B-4


Hot Start

    B-5


    B-6


    B-7


Bus Cycle

    B-8


    B-9
                                               Notes
Passed statistical requirements. Results used  for regulated
emissions.

Passed statistical requirements.  Results used for regulated
emissions.

Passed statistical requirements.  Results used for regulated
emissions.
Passed statistical requirements,
emissions.

Passed statistical requirements.
emissions.

Passed statistical requirements.
emissions.
Results used for regulated
Results used for regulated
Results used for regulated
Failed statistical requirements, torque r2 = .869.  Results
used for regulated emissions.

Passed statistical requirements.  Results used for regulated
emissions.
                                        B-2
-------
                                         TABLE B-2.
ENGINE  NO.D26
ENGINE  MODEL
ENGINE  0,0 L(
CVS NO,  10
                01  VOLVO DIESEL
                0,  DID)  1-6
CAROMCTER 745,24 MM ME (29 ,34  If!  I1G)
DRY BULB TEMP, 24,4 DEG C(76,0  DEC  F)
DAC RESULTS
   PAG NUMBER
   DESCRIPTION
   BLOWER Dir r
                MM.  M20(IN,  1120)
 i
U)
   ['LOWER INLET P MM, I-I2QUN, M20)
   BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F)
   KLOUER REVOLUTIONS
   TIME SECONDS
   TOTAL FLOW STD, CU, METRES(SCF)

   MC  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
   MC  DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
   CO  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
   CO  DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
   CO2 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
   C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
   NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
   NOX DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM

   DILUTION FACTOR
   MC  CONCENTRATION  PPM
   CO  CONCENTRATION  PPM
   C02 CONCENTRATION  PCT
   NOX CONCENTRATION  PPM

   11C  MASS GRAMS-
   CO  MASS GRAMS
   C02 MASS CRAMS
   NOX MASS GRAMS
   FUEL KG  (LD)
   KW MR  (MP MR)
ESI-IC G/KW MR (G/h'P MR)
DSCO G/KW MR (G/MP MR)
B5C02 D/KW IIR (G/MP MR)
DSNOX G/KW MR (G/HP MR)
ESrC KG/KW MR (LD/MP MR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
TOTAL KW MR (IIP MR)
DSI-IC G/KW MR (G/MP MR)
PSCO G/KW MR (G/MP MR)
CSC02 G/XU MR (G/MP MR)
BSNOX C/KW MR (G/MP MR)
DSFC KG/KW MR (LD/MP MR)






10.30 (
1,50 (
4,70 (
962, (
11,92 (
,307 (






13,01)
1,10)
3,57)
717.)
0,89)
,505)
                                                       ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                             C- TRANS,
                                                                                                           PROJECT NO.  11
TEST NO.D26-1
DATE  3/24/01
TIME 1135
  OYNQ NO,  5
                                                                    RUN1
DIESEL   EM-46S-T
  DAG CART NO,   1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY >   ENGINE-50, PCT t   CVS- 72, PCT
ADSQLUTE HUMIDITY  9,0 Gf1/KG< 60,4 GRAINS/UK)
                                                                                                        NiiX HUMIDITY
                             1.0000
1
NYNF
751,0 (29,6)
566,4 (22,3)
50,0 (122,0)
6179,
296,0
300,9 (10627,)
40.3/22/ 40,
G,4/ 2/ 0,
52, 0/1 3/ -49,
,4/13/ 0,
20, O/ 3/ ,32
2,4/ 3/ ,04
11.4/13/ 34,
.7/ 2/ 1,
40,55
32,
47,
,29
33,5
5,53
16,61
1575,2
19,26
,5.1.1 ( 1
1,22 ( 1
4,56 ( 3
13,59 ( 10
1200,97 ( 961
15,76 ( 11
,410 <
2
LANF
751,0 (29,6)
566,4 (22,3)
50,0 (122,0)
6262,
300,0
304,9 (10769.)
32,4/22/ 32,
0,9/ 2/ 9,
36.1/13/ 33,
,1/13/ 0,
24. 6/ 3/ ,40
2.5/ 3/ ,04
14.2/13/ 42.
,9/ 3/ 3,
32.91
24,
32,
,36
39,9
4,19
11,47
2030,3
23,25
,13) ,650 ( 1,43)
,64) 1,95 ( 2,61)
,40) 2,15 ( 1,61)
,14) 5,90 ( 4,40)
,10) 1043,72 ( 770,30)
,75) 11,95 < 0,91)
6S7) ,334 ( ,550)
7,
LAF
751,0 (29,6)
566,4 (22,3)
50,0 (122,0)
6360,
305,0
310.1 (10952,
33.0/22/ 33,
9.0/ 2/ 9.
47.0/13/ 44,
.2/13/ 0.
54, 21 3/ .95
3,2/ 3/ .05
34.7/13/ 104,
.!/ 2/ 0,
14,01
25,
42,
,90
104,0
4.40
15.22
512G.M
61,69
1,629 (
6,02 (
,73 (
2,53 (
051,49 ( 6
10,24 (
,271 (







)

















3,59)
0,00)
,54)
t , 00 )
34,95)
7.64)
,4-55)
4
NYN!"
751,!? (29,6)
5/i6,4 (22,3)
50,0 (122,0)
61 99.
297,0
301.0 (10661.)
71.2/22/ 21,
9. 1/ ?..' 9.
19,3/13,' 10.
.1/13/ 0.
16,5/ .V .26
3*1 / ~l / f\£
t -\l -Jf * V-J
11.0/13/ 33,
,7/ 2/ 1.
50,27
12,
17,
,21
32.2
2,14
5,9.7
1170,2
j 1"' , u' fi
'^374 (
1,11 ( 1
1,92 ( 1
5.3f! ( 4
1054,39 ( 7SJ6
16,75 ( 12
,337 (

























, 82 )
,4?;
,44)
.01)
.26)
.49)
554)
PARTICIPATE DATA/ TOTAL FOR 4 DAGG
90MM



FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SC,M(GCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TE5T
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW MR



(G/HP MR)
MULTIPLIER FOR 6/KG FUEL (G/Lfi FUEL)

,904
1,347
.130

/ "1 '/ ' r "I
\ J i . / W .'

o ; A (i "J >"-, i
u \ * lj ' i *.i i




,4256 t .1931)
    PART. G/KW-HR C6/HP-HR)  0.79  (0.59)
                                                                20 X  20  FILTERS
                                                                   CAMPLE  FLOW
                                                                                   SCM(SCF)
                                                       0~>  oo  { ^ "•'?
                                                       c * / u  \ L. V -j
-------
r,-/:,!.•.':  MOPI.L   01 VOLVO  DIEGEL
''';:..;,',•;;  o.o it  o, CUD 1-6
..: ,'•:;.  10

r.-FOMETLT, 7-13.46 MM I,'G(29,27  IN IIC)
'„(• ::ULD TEMP, 25,0 DEC C(77,0 ULIJ f
TABLE  B-3.   ENGINE GrtlOGION f.'EGULTS
                    C-TRANC,

            TEST NO.H26-2  RUN1
            DAIL  3/25/01
                                                                                                            FROJICI
                                                                 COJ
:-<'G r^suLTc
L'AC WHtCK
[iCGCRIPTION
f.LOWCR PIP P MM, 1120 (IN, 1-120)
r.'LG'U'EP INLET P MM, !I20(IN, M20)
f.-.'.OWEr,' INLET IEMP, DEC, C(HEG, F)
I.'LOU'ER PEVOLUTIONS
TIME rEC'jNIiG
TOTtM. FLUW STB, CU. METREG(GCF)
IIC CAMPLE METER/RANCE/PPM
,'ic IICKCRB METER/RANGE/PPM
CO CAMPLE METER/KANGE/PPM
CO BCKORD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO 2 CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 I'CKGRC' METER/RANGE/PCT
w NOX SAMPLE ME] ER/RANGE/PPM
i NOX t.'CKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
IIC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
CO.? CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
MC MAGG GRAMS
CO MAD;! CRAMG
C02 MAGG GRAMS
NOX MACS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LIO
KW I!R (IIP MR)
DC! 1C C/KU' MR (G/!,'P HR)
BGCO CAW MR (G/lTP MR)
BDC02 C/KU1 IIR (G/IIP HR)
BGNOX G/KU MR (G/MP HR)
DCFC KG/KW liR (LH/HP HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
TOTAL KW HR (HP HR) 10,20 (
BSMC G/KU MR (G/IIP MR) 1,67 (
BSCO C/KW IIR (G/IIP HR) 5,04 (
BSC02 G/KU MR (G/HP MR) 957, (
BGNOX G/KU MR (G/IIP HR) 11-60 (
BGFC KG/KW HR (LD/MP MR) ,306 (


































13,70)
1,24)
3,76)
714.)
0,65)
,503)
riME i;05 DIESEL EM -46:
DYNO NO. 5 HAG CAAT NO.
RELATIVE HUfJlUTY , ENGINE -52. PCT > CVG-411, PCI
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,6 GM/KG( 73,9 Gfv'AlN5/lJ<) NOX
1 2 A
NYNF LANF LA';
754,4 (29,7) 7a4,4 (29.7) 754,4 (29,7;
584,2 (23,0) 504.2 (23.0) 504,2 (23.0)
49,4 (121,0) 49.4 (321,0) 49,4 (121,0)
6100, 6263, 6369,
296,0 300,0 305,0
300,0 (10597.) 304,1 (10739.) 309,2 (10V21.)
44.7/22/ 45, 32,4/22/ 32, 32,9/22/ 33,
9,0/ 2/ 9, 9,0/ 2/ 9, 0,6/ 2/ ?,
56.6/13/ 54, 37.3/13/ 35, 47.G/13/ 45,
.2/1J,/ 0, ,3/13/ 0. ,2/13/ 0,
19, 7/ 3/ ,32 25, 0/ Z/ ,41 54, ?./ 3/ .95
2,9/ 3/ ,04 2,0/ 3/ .04 2./V 3/ ,04
10.G/13/ 32, 14.0/13/ 42, 34.1/13/ 102,
1,3/ 27 1. 1,1/ 2/ 1. 1,1/ 2/ 1,
43,07 32.7,5 14,01
36. 24. ?:i,
53, 34, 43,
,27 ,37 ,?1
31,0 40,0 101,2
6,21 4,14 4,44
10,41 11,09 15,61
1501.5 2030.6 5154,0
17,70 23,75 59,80
,409 ( 1,00) ,653 ( 1,44) 1,630 ( 3
1,15 ( 1,54) 1,97 ( 2,64) 6,01 ( 8
5,41 ( 4.04) 2,10 ( 1,57) ,74 (
16.05 ( 11,97) 6,04 ( 4,50) 2,60 ( 1
1300,70 ( 975.96) 1034,69 ( 771,57) 057,63 ( 639
15,50 ( 11,56) 12,06 ( 8,99) 9,96 ( 7
,426 ( .701) ,331 ( ,545) ,273 (
[•'ARTICULATE DATA* TOTAL FOR 4 BAQ3
90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW GCM(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KU HR (0/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR GAG FUEL (G/1.B FUEL;
1
iiuKiiuTi c,r. i .oom-

/)


.V>
2J
U
IV

3 !''
?
10










,61)
,06)
,55)
,94)
,53)
,43)
•44D)


,911 (
1,332
, 1297
,4235
4 , ; > ( •> i , () )
9 , 4 ( I '.! 3,0)
62CO.
.:-' 7.0
"-.I (lw.',33,J
,(>/:•?.:/ •::,
, 'V ?' V •
,2/l3/ 17,
»V13/ 0-
, '// j,/ , 2h
,n/ .;/ ,04
..'j/M/ 32,
.'V '.'/ 1.
51' . H'/
13.
37.

30',"0
2,31
5.92
1143.4
17,75
,366 (
1,15 ( 1
2.02 < 1
5,16 ( 3
996,68 ( 743
15,47 ( 11
.319 (


32,19;

< ,0967}
( .1921)






















,01)
,54)
.bO)
,05)
.22)
,54)
524)






  PART.  G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) 0.78 (0.58)
20 X 20 FILTERS
    SAMPLE FLOW
                                          SCK(SCF)
83,25 (2940,4)
-------
                                          TABLE B-4.
ENGINE  NO.D26
ENGINE  MODF.L    01  VOLVO DIESEL
ENGINE  0,0 L.(   0,  CID)  1-6
cvs  NO,   10

BAROMETER 745,24 MM HG(29,34 IN IIG)
DRY  BULB  TEMP,  23,3 DEC C(74,0 BEG F)

BAG  RESULTS
    BAG  NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER DIF  P MM, II20(IN, 1120)
    BLOWER INLET p MM, H2Q(IN, H20>
    BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG,  C(BL"G, F)
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW  GTD,  CU. METRES(SCF)
 w
  I
 Ul
HC  SAMPLE
IIC  BCKGRD
CO  SAMPLE
CO  BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
CO 2 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
W.OX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
               HETER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METFR/RANGE/PCT
    rilLUTION FACTOR
    !-!C  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    MDX CONCENTRATION PPM
I-1C  MAGG
CO  MASS
002 MASS
NOX
FUEL KG (
KW HR (HP
             GRAMH
             GRAMS
             GRAMS
             GRAMS
    DSilC G/KW HR (G/HP MR)
    DGCO G/KW HR (G/HP IIR)
    DSC02 G/KW IIR (G/MP IIR)
    DSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP I-IR)
    BSFC KG/KW IIR (LB/IIP I1R)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
I'OTAL KW I-IR (IIP
BSHC
B5CO
BGCfl?
,%'NO'X
BSFC
G/KW
G/KW
R/K'W
G/KW
KG/KW
HR
HR.
HR
I-IR
II R
IIR)
(C/HP
(G/HP
(G/HP
(G/I-IP
.(LB/HP

IIR)
I-IR)
HR)
MR)
IIR)
10.20 (
J ,49 (
4,69 (
951, (
11,03 (
,304 (
13,70)
1 .11)
3-49)
709,)
8,02)
,499)
                                                    ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                          C-TRANS,
                                                                                                           PROJECT NO,  11--504'4--001
                                                  TEST NO,B26"3
                                                  BATE  3/26/81
                                                  TIME 9 ,'37
                                                    DYNO NO,  5
RUN1
                         DIESEL   EM-46S-F
                           BAG CART NO,  1
                                                  RELATIVE HUMIDITY >  ENGINE-62, PCT  >  CVG-52, PCT
                                                  ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 11,3 GM/KG( 70,9 GRAING/LB)      NOX HUMIDITY  C.F, 1,0000
1 2 3
NYNF LANF LAF
756,9 (29,0) 756,9 (29, G) 756,9 (29, B)
576,6 (22,7) 576,6 (22,7) 576,6 (22,7)
49,4 (121,0) 49,4 (121,0) 49,4 (121,0)
6179, 6263, 6367,
296,0 300,0 305,0
300,4 ( 10611.) 304,5 (10755.) 309,6 (10934.)
34,7/22/ 35, 31.9/22/ 32, 32,3/22/ 32,
8,2/ 2/ G, 9,0/ 27 9, ?,0/ 2/ 9,
46.9/13/ 44, 36,6/137 34, 47,6/13/ 45,
-5/13/ 0, ,2/13/ 0, ,.1/13/ 0,
19,5/ 3/ ,31 25, I/ 3/ ,41 53, D/ 37 ,94
3,0/ 3/ ,05 3,0/ 3/ ,05 3,17 3/ ,05
11,3/13/ 34, 13,9/137 42, 33,9/137 102,
,77 2/ 1, ,7/27 1, ,9/27 1.
41,75 32,22 14,13
27, 23, 24,
43, 33, 43,
,27 ,36 ,90
33,3 40,9 100,7
4,63 4,07 4,20
14,91 11,67 15,54
1476,4 2034,6 5083,8
19,15 23,05 59,64
,47G ( 1,05) ,652 ( 1,44) 1,615 ( 3
1,16 ( 1,56) 1,95 ( 2,61) 6,04 ( S
3,99 ( 2,90) 2,09 ( 1,56) ,71 (
12,85 ( 9,59) 6,00 ( 4,47) 2,57 ( 1
1273, OG ( 949,34) 1045,92 ( 779.94) 842,32 ( 620
16,51 ( 12,31) 12,26 ( 9,14) 9,38 ( 7
,412 ( ,677) ,335 ( ,551) ,260 (
PARTICULAR DATAr TOTAL FOR 4 BAGG
90MM FILTER
G AMPLE FLOW SCM(GCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KU IIR (G/IIP MR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
4
NYNF
756,9 (29,0)
576,6 (22,7)
49.4 (12.1,0)
6200,
297,0
301 ,4 (1.0647, )
09 ( 9/f.) / I-/ ,
0,97 ?./ 9.
19,67137 10,
.3/137 0,
16,37 3/ ,26
3.17 37 ,05
11,27137 33,
,77 27 1,
50,l3C
13.
17,
,21
32 , 0
2.34
6.03
1175,3
18,90
,56) ,376 (
,09) 1,13 ( 1,
,53) 2,07 ( 1,
,92) 5,32 ( 3,
.12) 1035,71 ( 772,
.37) 16,65 ( 12,
440) ,331 ( ,5


,005 ( 31.27)
1,373
.1337 ( ,0997)
-4401 ( ,1996)

























S3)
52)
54)
96)
33)
42)
45)






    PART.  G/KW-HR  (6/HP-HR)  0.85 (0.63)
                                                            20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                SAMPLE FLOW
               SCM(GCF)
81.2P (2C70.S)
-------
 L'.'CJNE  NO.D26
 ENGINE  MODEL
'.'SINE
VC NC,
0.0
 10
             LI
01 VOLVO DIESEL
0. CID) 1-6
TABLE B-5.    ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                     H-TRANS.

             TEST  NO.D26-1  RUN1
             DATE   3/24/01
             TIME  2,22
               DYNO NO,  5
  '\r.C»nER 7-J-J.22 MM I!C(29.30 IN KG)
  ,":r DULD TEMP. 25,6 DEC C(70,0 DEO D
                                                                                                            PROJECT NO, 11
                                                                                           DIESEL   EM-465T
                                                                                             CAG CART NO,  1
                                                   RELATIVE HUMIDITY >   ENGINE-55, PCT >  CVS-72, PCI"
                                                   ADSOLUTE HUMIDITY 11,4 GM/KG( 00.0 CRAINS/LD)      NOX HUMIDITY C,r,  1,0000
W
    |:AG NUMDER
    DESCRIPTION
    1XOUCR DIF P
    IxC'JLR INLET
    DI.OUER INLt.1
    ."LCUER REVOLUTION'S
    MME SECONDS
    TOT^-L FLW STD. CU, METRES(SCF)
             MM,  I!20(IN,  1120)
             P  MM.  1120(IN.  1120)
             1EMP,  DEC,  C(DEG, F)
HC  CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
IK.  DC,\GRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO  .'.AMPLE METER/RANGC/PPM
CO  DCKCRO ,1ETER/RANGE/PPM
r(i: SAMf'LE METER/RANGE/PCT
co 2 IICNGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANCE/PPM
NCX L-CKGRO METER/RANGE/PPM
    HJLUTION FACTOR
    11C   CONCENTRATION
    CO   CONCENTRATION
    C02 CONCENTRATION
    NOX CONCENTRATION
                  PPM
                  PPM
                  PCT
                  PPM
   11C
   CO
   CO?
   NPY
    MASS GRAMS
    MASS CRAMS
    MASS CRAMS
    MASS GRAMS
   fUEI.  KG  (LIO
   ,VW MR (IIP  MR)

   DSIIC  CAW  IIR  (G/liP IIR)
DSCO GAU MR (G/ITP MR)
DSC02 G/KW IIR (G/IIP MR)
DSNOX GAU IIR (G/IIP MR)
PSFC KG/KW IIR (LD/IIP MR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 DAGS
TOTAL KW MR (HP IIR)
BSMC GAU MR CO/HP HR)
PSCO G/KW IIR (G/h'P MR)
DSC02 C/KW MR (G/HP HR)
P5NOX C/Mv1 IIR (C/IIP HR>
DSFC KG/KW !IR (LD/ilP IIR)





10,99 (
1,01 (
3,73 (
075, (
10.70 (
.279 (





14,73)
,76)
2,70)
652.)
0,04)
,458)
1 2 3
NYNF LANF LAF
726,4 (23,6) 726,4 (20,6) 726,4 (20,6)
566,4 (22,3) 566,4 (22,3) 566,4 (22,3)
50,0 (122,0) 50.0 (122,0) 50,0 (122,0)
6179, 6262, 6360.
296,0 300,0 305,0
300, a (10623,) 304.0 (10766.) 310,0 (10940.)
L'l.0/22/ 22, 24.0/22/ 25. 2S.9/22/ 29,
9, 1/ ?./ 9, 0.9/ 21 9. 0,3/ 2/ 0.
22.B/13/ 21, 30.3/13/ 20, 56.0/13/ 54.
,6/13/ 1, ,0/1J/ 1, 1.0/13/ 1,
17, 2/ 3/ ,27 23, 9/ 3/ ,39 54, 6/ 3/ ,96
2,0/ 3/ ,04 2.7/ 3/ ,04 2.0/ 3/ ,04
10.G/13/ 32, 13.3/13/ 40, 34.0/13/ 102,
,0/ 2/ 1, ,9/ 2/ 1. l.O/ 2/ 1,
40,09 34,04 13,09
13. 16, 21.
20. 26, 51,
,23 ,35 ,92
31.6 39,2 101,1
2,24 2,04 3,79
6,90 9,34 1C, 43
1200,7 1945,0 5203,0
10,19 22,03 59, 92
,410 ( ,90) ,621 ( 1,37) 1,654 ( 3
1,52 ( 2,04) 2,06 ( 2,76) 6,27 ( 0
1,47 ( 1,10) 1,30 ( 1,03) .60 (
4,53 ( 3,30) 4,54 ( 3,39) 2,94 ( 2
041.01 ( 627,74) 945.30 ( 704,91) 029,64 ( 610
11,96 ( S.92) 11,10 ( 0.27) 9.55 ( 7
.269 ( ,443) ,302 ( ,496) .264 (
PARTICULATE DATA* TOTAL FOR 4 DAGS
90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(GCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HR (0/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR C/KG FUEL (C/LB FUEL)
N^r.v'l
?"*6 , 4 i'i-iii!
566, -1 (LV.J)
bO.O (1JJ.O)
6 LCI .
i"~'7 ,0
301. e i, >
JJ.1/2LV ..'1.
o,.?/ :•/ c,
21, 2/1 1; 19,
1,0/13,' 1,
IS,?/ 3/ ..::-
2,6/ 3/ .04
10.4/13/ 31,
.O/ 21 1,
52.19
13.
1C,
,21
30,3
2,27
6,29
1101,7
17,52
,65) ,370 (
,41) 1,13 ( 1
,45) 2,00 ( 1
,19) 5,5S ( 4
,67) 1041,32 ( 776
,12) 15,44 ( 11
434) ,333 (


,944 ( 33,34;
1,290
,1174 ( ,0075)
.4211 ( ,1910)
























,03)
,52)
,47)
,14)
,56)
,51;
540)






   PART.  G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) 0.67  (0.50)
                                                                20 X 20 PILTERG
                                                                    SAMPLE  FLOW
                                                                                 CCH(CCF)
                                                                                                           83.C7  (2924.0)
-------
                                          TABLE B-6.
ENGINE  NO,D26
ENGINE  MODEt
ENGINE  0,0 L(
CUB NO,  10
                 01 VOLVO DIESEL
                 0, CID) 1-6
BAROMETER 742.95 MM HG(29,25  IN  KG)
DRY BULK TEMP, 25.0 DEC  C(77,0 DEC!  F)
E'AG RESULTS
   DAG NUMBER
   DESCRIPTION
   DLOWER DIP p
                 MM,  H20(IN, 1-120)
                       H20(IN,  H20)
                       PEG,  C(DEG, F)
    BLOWER INLET F' MM,
    BLOIv'ER INLET TEMP,
    DLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD, CU, METRES(SCF)
    HC  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
    HC  DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
    CO  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
    CO  BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
    Cf)2 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
    C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
W  NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
_^i  NOX DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM

    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAMS
    C02 MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LE)
    KW IIR (IIP MR)

    BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP MR)
    DSCO G/KW IIR (G/HP HR)
    BSC02 G/KW MR (G/IIP MR)
    DSNOX G./NU HR (G/IIP MR)
    DSFC KG/KW MR (LD/IIP IIR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS

   TOTAL KW IIR (IIP MR)
                               10,52 (  14,11)
BSHC
DSCO
DSCO?
DSNOX
DSFC
PART.
G/KU MR
G/KW MR
G/KU MR
G/KW IIR
KG/KW IIR
G/KW-HR
(G/HP HR)
(G/HP HR)
(0/1 IP IIR)
(G/IIP HR)
(LD/IIP MR)
(G/HP-HR)
1.10 (
3,94 (
092, (
11, 14 (
.20-1 (
0.68 (0
,02)
2,94)
665.)
G.31)
,460)
.5!)
  ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
        H-TRANS,

TEST NO.H26-2  RUN1
DATE  3/25/01
TIME 1152
  DYNO NO,  5
                                                                                                           PROJECT NO,  11-5044-001
DIESEL   EM--465-F
  BAG CART NO,  1
                                                      RELATIVE HUMIDITY  ,   ENGINE-52, PCT  ,   CVS-42,  PCT
                                                      ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  10,6  DM/KG(  73,9 GRAINS/IB)       NOX HUMIDITY C,F. 1,0000
1 2 3
NYNF LANF LAF
754,4 (29,7) 754,4 (29,7) 754,4 <29,7)
534,2 (23,0) 504.2 (23,0) 504,2 (23,0)
49,4 (121,0) 49,4 (121,0) 49,4 (121,0)
6179, 6263, 6369,
296,0 300,0 305,0
299,8 (10509.) 303,9 (10733,) 309.0 (10914,)
23,3/22/ 23, 25.0/22/ 25, 31,0/227 31,
9,2/ 2/ 9. 9,0/ 2/ 9, 0,9/ 2/ 9,
21.9/13/ 20, 30,0/13/ 28, 56,2/13/ 54,
,1/13/ 0, ,4/13/ 0, .3/137 0,
15,77 3/ ,25 23,77 3/ ,39 53, 4/ 3/ ,93
2,6/ 3/ ,04 2,3/ 3/ ,04 2,4/ 3/ ,04
10,1/137 30, 13.6/13/ 41. 33.7/13/ 101,
1,1/ 2/ 1, 1,0/ 2/ 1. 1,47 2/ 1,
52,01 34,34 14,24
14, 16, 23.
20, 27, 52,
,21 ,35 ,90
29,3 39,9 99,7
2,46 2,84 4,05
6,81 9,43 10,56
1155,4 1953,0 5007,2
16,79 23,21 58,93
,370 ( ,82) ,623 ( 1,37) 1,618 (
1,20 ( 1.61) 2,02 ( 2,71) 6,12 (
2,06 ( 1,53) 1,41 ( 1,05) ,66 (
5,69 ( 4,24) 4,67 ( 3,40) 3,03 (
965,19 ( 719,74) 966,76 ( 720,91) 030,88 ( 61
14,03 ( 10,46) 11,49 ( 0,57) 9,62 (
,309 ( ,508) ,309 ( ,507) ,264 (
PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90MM FILTER-
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KU MR (G/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
A
NYNF'
754,4 (29,7)
584,2 (23.0)
49,4 (121,0)
6200.
297,0
300,8 (10625.)
21.5/22/ 21,
3,77 2/ 9.
21.9/.13/ 2o,
.6/13/ J.
15, 7/ 3/ ,25
2,2/ 3/ ,03
11.0/13/ 33,
l.l/ 2/ 1.
52,65
13,
19.
,22
31, G
2,25
6,60
1192.6
18,30
3 57) ,382 (
8 21) 1.10 ( J
49) 1,90 ( 1
2 26) 5,64 ( 4
9 59) 1006,74 ( 750
7 10) 15.44 ( 11
,434) ,322 (


.940 < 33.4?)
1 , 280
.1216 ( .0707)
,4276 < .1939)

























,04)
,59)
, 4.1 )
,21)
,73)
,52)
530)






                                                                20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                    SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                                    SCM(SCF)
                                                      F.U.,30 (2942,0)
-------
                                           TABLE B-7.
 w
 03
        NO.nPA
        MOFCL   01 VOLVO  DIESEL
' VHIMC  0,0 L(  0. CID) I- 6
''.'J::> NO.  10

Mp.nmnrR 745.24 MM HG(29,34  IN HO
r-'a rUJlfl TEMP, 25.0 DEO C(77,0  DEC  F)

'••ni? RESULTS
   I'.'iH NUMPCR
            nrr r MM, H20(iN, 1120)
     FH.flWCR JWIITT P HM, H20(IN, 1120)
     m..ou.rR TNLCT TCMP. DEG, CXBEG, F)
     MOWER Rp.'CiLunoNr.
TOTAL n.OW Sin. CM, METRES(SCF)

,'ir  SAMPLE MF.TER/RANGE/PPM
HP  HCKGRP METFR/RANGE/PPM
CO  SAMPI.F MFTER/RANGE/PPM
CO  DCKGRP METFR/RANGE/PPM
f.02 SAMPLE MFTER/RANGF/PCT
C02 HCKBRD MfTTCR/RANGII/PCT
NO.V SAMPl F MFTER/RANGE/PPM
           METFR/RANGfl/PPM
     PILlirTON FACTOR
     HC   CnNCrNTRATION PPM
     nn   nowct'NTRATinN PPM
     CO?  CONCflNTRATION PCT
     MX  rONi-FNTRATION PPM
    Hf:  MASS  GRAMS
    CO  MASS  GRAMD
    nn? MADS  GRAMS
    NflX MASS  fiRAMG
    FUC!  KG (I-D)
    KW MR  (IIP !!R)

    FiPJIC G/KW JIR  (G/IIP I!R)
    r
    nnnoa G/MJ IIR  (G/HP MR)
    BSNOX G/KW MR  (G/IIP MR)
    PBFC KB/KU IIR  (ID/IIP MR)

TOTAL  TEST RESULTS 4  BAGS
   FOTAI. KW MR (IIP
    KSHC
    B5CO
    B3CQ2
    BSNOX
    8SFC
    PART.
      G/KU  HR
      G/KU  IIR
      G/KW  IIR
      B/KH  HR
     KG/KW  IIR
      G/KW-HR
                  MR)
                  (G/IIP MR)
                  (G/MP HR)
                  (C/MP MR)
                  (G/MP IIR)
                  (LD/HP IIR)
10.10 (
 1.11 (
 4,02 (
 910, (
11. U (
 ,270 (
                  C6/HP-HR) 0.7O CO
 13,55)
   ,83)
  3.00)
  679.)
  0.47)
  ,477)
.52)
                                                     ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                           H-TRANS,
                                                                                                             PROJECT  NO.  11  5044-001
                                                        TEST NO.D2A-3
                                                        DATE  3/26/01
                                                        TIME 10J20
                                                          DYNO NO.  5
                                                                  RUN!
                                                                                            DICGEL    EM  465-T
                                                                                              DAG CART NO,   I
                                                   RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,  ENGINE-53. PCT  .   CVS-52,  PCT
                                                   ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,7 CM/KG(  75,1 GRAINS/LD)       NOX HUMIDITY C.F,
                                                                                                                               .0000
1 2 3
NYNF LANF LAF
756,9 (29,8) 756,9 (29.8) 756,9 (29,8)
576.6 (22,7) 576,6 (22,7) 576,6 (22.7)
49,4 (121,0) 49,4 (121,0) 49,4 (121,0)
6179, 6263, 6360,
296,0 300,0 ;505.0
300,4 ( 10600,) 304,4 (10753.) 309,5 (10933.)
21.S/22/ 22. 24.S/22/ 25, 23.0/22/ 29.
9,0/ 2/ 9, 8,3/ 2/ B, 7,9/ 2/ 0,
22.3/13/ 20, 30.2/13/ 28, 54.4/13/ 52.
•1/13/ 0, ,1/13/ 0, .1/13/ 0,
15, 9/ 3/ ,25 23, 6/ 3/ ,38 53, 5/ 3/ ,93
3, I/ 3/ ,05 2,9/ 3/ ,04 3, I/ 3/ ,05
9.7/13/ 29, 13.1/13/ 39, 32.7/13/ 98,
,0/12/ 0, ,7/2/1, ,8/2/1,
52.15 34,49 14,21
13. 16, 21,
20, 27, 50,
.21 ,34 ,G9
29,2 38,6 97,3
2,25 2,89 3,83
6,93 9,57 17,94
1134,3 1096,9 5050,1
16,75 22,50 57,60
,363 ( ,80) ,606 ( 1,34) 1,605 ( 3
1.06 ( 1,42) 1,93 ( 2.59) 6,05 ( 0
2.13 ( 1.59) 1,50 ( 1,12) ,63 (
6.54 ( 4,87) 4,95 ( 3,69) 2,97 ( 2
1070,14 ( 798,01) 901,40 ( 731,83) 035,01 ( 622
15,fll ( 11.79) 11.64 ( 0,68) 9,52 ( 7
,343 ( ,564) ,313 ( ,515) ,265 (
PARTICIPATE DATA. TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90HM TILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCH(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW MR (G/HP MR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
4
NYNf
756.9 (29,0)
576,6 C??,7>
49.4 (121 ,0)
6199.
297,0
301,3 (10643.)
20./1/22/ 21,
7,0/ 2/ 0,
19.9/13/ 13,
,t/13/ 0,
15. O/ 3/ ,25
3,3/ 3/ ,05
10, A/13/ 32.
,7/ 2/ 1,
52,56
13,
10,
,20
31,0
2.2S
6,19
1112.0
17,88
,54) ,356 (
,11) 1,06 ( 1
,47) 2,12 ( 1
,21) 5,04 ( 4
.67) 1049,13 ( 782
.10) 16,07 ( 12

























,78)
,42)
,50)
,35)
,34)
.58)
436) ,336 ( ,552)


,073 ( 30,82)
1,393
,1379 ( ,1029)
.4754 ( ,2156)






                                  20 X 20 FILTERS
                                      SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                                      SCH(SCF)
                                                                                                          81.00 (2061,0)
-------
                                      TABLE B-8.
 ENGINE   NO.D26
 ENGINE   MODEL.
 ENGINE   0,0 L(
 CVS NO,   1.0
01 VOLVO DIESEL
0, CID) 1-6
 BAROMETER 742,44 MM HG(29,23 IN HG)
 PRY BULB .TEMP.  22.0 DEG C(73,0 DEO E)

 DAP RESULTS
    BAG NUMBER
BLOWER
BLOWER
m nur.o
           DIE P MM. 1120(IN, 1-120)
           INI F:T P MM, I!20(IN, H20)
           INLET TEMP, DEG. C(DEG. E)
    FLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FI..OW STD, CU, METRES (SCE)
HC,
HC
CO
CO
        SAMP1.F HETER/RANOE/PPM
        BCKORfi METER/RANGE/PPM
        SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
        DCKGRD MFTFR/RANGE/PPM
    C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
    CO? BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
 W  NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
 ^  NQX CCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM

    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAMS
    C02 MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS-
    FUEL KG (LD)
    KW HR (HP IIR)

    BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO 0/KW HR (0/1 IP HR)
    I'lSCn? G/KW HR (G/HP IIR)
    BHNOX G/KW IIR (G/HP IIR)
    nSEC KG/KW IIR (LiVIIP IIR)

TOTAL TEST RESI.II TS 3 BAGS
TOTAL KW MR (HP
BSHC
ffSCO
P5CD2
FCNOX
fiSEC
G/KU
G/KW
G/KW
G/KW
KG/KW
IIR
HR
HR
HR
IIR
HR )
(d/UP
(G/HP
(G/HP
(G/HP
(LB/H

IIR)
HR)
HR)
IIR)
P HR)
4,63 (
1 .32 <
4,75 (
936, (
12,08 (
,299 (
6,20)
,99)
3,54)
690.)
9,01)
,471)
  ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
        H-TRANS,

TEST NO,D26-1  R'UNl
DATE  3/25/31
TIME 2J30
  DYNO NO,  5
                                                                                                        PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001
                                                                                           DIESEL   EM-4^5--E
                                                                                             BAG CART NO,   J.
                                                  RELATIVE HUMIDITY  ,   ENGINE- -59,  PCT  »   CVC-42.  PCT
                                                  ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  10,5  GM/KG(  73,4 CRAINS/LB)
                                                                                         NOX HUMIDITY C.F, 1.0000
                                            1
                                     754.4  (29,7)
                                     5C4.2  (23,0)
                                      49,4  (121,0)
                                         5697,
                                        272,9
                                     275,8  (    9742.)
                   754,
                   504.
    ,4 (29,7)
    ,2 (23,0)
  49,4 (121,0)
     6010,
    207,9
291,0  (10277.)
 754,4 (29.7)
 504,2 (23,0)
  49,4 (121,0)
     5693,
    272.7
275,6 (  9735.)
22..1./22/
8,3/ 2/
26, 4/137
,4/13/
10, 3/ 3/
2,0/ 37
9,5/137
,97 2/
45,05
14,
23,
,25
27,6
2,23
7.50
1268,0
.1.4,57
,406
1 , 2'-1
1,02
6.14
1037,59
11,92
,332
22,
O
U 4
24,
0,
,29
,04
20,
1,









(
(
(
(
( 77
(
(

















,89)
1,64)
1,36)
4,58)
3,73)
0,09)
,546)
19.9/22/
9,0/ ?./
24.3/137
.3/137
22,47 3/
2,7/ 3/
15,3/137
,9/ 2/
36 , 53
11,
21,
,32
45.0
1 , 06
7,28
1715,4
25,07
,547
1,97
,95
3 , 70
072, IB
12,72
.270
20,
9,
22,
0,
.36
,04
46,
1,









( 1
f 1
\ «U
(
( 2
( 650
( 9
( i

















,21)
,64)
,71)
,76)
,39)
,49)
457)
21.3/22/
8,0/ 2/
25,3/13/
,3/137
19,27 3/
2,87 37
10,6/137
,9/ 2/
4-2.8S
13,
no
t*.ji- *
,27
30,8
2,03
7,20
1344,0
16,24
, 42?
1,43
1,41
5,02
937,20
11,33
,299
21,
-\
) i
23.
0.
,31
,04
32,
1,









(
(
(
(
( 69
(
(

















,95)
1,92)
1,05)
3,74)
0,07)
0,45)
-492)
                                                       PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL EOR 3
    PART.  G/KW-HR  (G/HP-HR)  0.83 (0.62)
                                                            90MM FILTER-
                                                                 SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                 MULTIPLIER FOR
                                                                 MULTIPLIER EOR
                                                                 MULTIPLIER FOR

                                                            20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                                     SCM(SCE)
                                                                                     G/TEST
                                                                                     G/KU HR  (G/MP HR)
                                                                                     G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
                                                       ,2774
                                                                                                  (  23,02)

                                                                                                      .?orn)
                                                                                                      4240)
                                                                                SCM(SCF)
                                                      1
                                                                                           5S.75  (2004,4)
-------
                                           TABLE B-9.
        NO,H26
        MOHEI    0)  VOLVO  DIESEL
        0,0  L(   0,  CID)  1-6
fVfi NO,  10

HAROMETER 711,68 MM HG(29,20  IN no
DRY :
-------
                       APPENDIX C





TRANSIENT TEST RESULTS FROM THE METHANOL CONFIGURATION
-------
          TABLE C-l.  NOTES CONCERNING TEST RESULTS GIVEN IN APPENDIX C
Table No.

Cold Start

    C-2
                         Notes
    C-3
    C-4
    C-5
    C-6
    C-7
    C-8



Hot Start

    C-9

    C-10


    C-ll
    C-12

    C-13
Uncertain if throttle return spring was connected - this
would have allowed the throttle to close slower.  Passed
statistical requirements.  Results used for regulated
emissions.

Broken throttle return spring was noted prior to run -
replaced spring.  Failed statistical requirements, torque
intercept - 16.7 indicating that engine was being motored
during idle.  Results used for regulated emissions.  NOx
by bag measurement was 7.52 g/kW-hr.

Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept - 17.7
Results used for regulated emissions.  NC^ by bag measurement
was 7.40 g/kW-hr.  NOX emission estimated to be 7.57 g/kW-hr
on the basis of bag NOx measurements.

Additional runs were made to optimize dynamometer/engine
control prior to this test.  Passed statistical requirements.
Results used for regulated emissions.  NOX by bag measurement
was 7.02 g/kW-hr.

Passed statistical requirements.  Results used for regulated
emissions.

This test was conducted much later for additional unregulated
chemistry data and required the use of a 100K TQ meter.
Results not used for regulated emissions.  Failed statistical
requirements, torque, and power slope were -23 and 5.2 respec-
tively.  Actual power more than 15 percent below cycle power.

Passed statistical requirements but actual power was more
than 15 percent below cycle power.  Results not used for
regulated emissions.  Particulate emission void.
Same as C-2.

Passed statistical requirements.  Results used for regulated
emissions.  NOX bag measurement was 7.29 g/kW-hr.

Passed statistical requirements.  Results used for regulated
emissions.  Particulate not taken.  NOX by bag measurement
was 7.09 g/kw-hr.  NOX emission estimated to be 7.24 g/kW-hr
on the basis of bag NOx rneasurement.

Same as C-5.
Sarc as C-5.
                                          C-2
-------
  TABLE C-1.(CONT'D).   NOTES  CONCERNING TEST RESULTS GIVEN IN  APPENDIX  C


Table No.         	Notes	

    C-14          Same  as  C-7, but passed statistical requirements.

    C-15          Same  as  C-7, but passed statistical requirements.   Results
                  not used for regulated emissions.

Bus Cycle

    C-lb          Same  as  C-2.  NOx by bag measurement was 9.65  g/kW-hr.

    C-17          Same  as  C-2.  NOx by bag measurement was 9.89  g/kW-hr.

    C-18          Failed statistical requirements,  torque and  R2 were low.
                  Results  used for regulated emissions.  NOx by  bag  measure-
                  ment  was 8.45 g/kW-hr.

    C-19          NO statistical data.  Results used for regulated emissions.

    C-20          Failed statistical requirements,  torque R2 1.4 percent  low,
                  Actual power more than 15 percent below cycle  power.  Results
                  not used for regulated emissions.   NOX by bag  measurement
                  was 9.26 g/kW-hr.
                                         C-3
-------
                                           TABLE  C-2.
 ENGINE   NO.D?0
 ENGINE   MODEL    80
 ENGINE   9.6  L(586.
 CVS NO.   10
                 VOLVO  DUAL
                 CID) L-6
                            FUEL
 BAROMFTFR  740.66  MM  HG(29.16  IN HG)
 DRY UULH TEMP.  23.9  DEG  C(75.0 DEC F)

 HAG RESULTS
    BAG NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER  DTF * MM.  H20UN.  H20)
    BLOUER  INLET P MM.  H20CIN.  H20)
    RLOVFR  INLET TEMP.  DEG.  CCDEG.  F)
    BLOWER  REVOLUTIONS
    TI1E SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
    HC
    HC
    CO
    CO
    coa
 n
 i
    SAMPLF
    OCKGRD
    SAMPLE
    BCKGRD
    SAMPLE
COZ HCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX IKKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPN
.1ETER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
NF TER/RANGE/PPN
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
ME TER/RANGE/PPM
HE TER/RANGE/PPH
    DILUTION  FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS  GRAMS
    CO  MASS  GRAMS
    C02 MASS  GRAMS
    NOX MASS  GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KU HR (HP H
-------
                                          TABLE C-3.
 ENGINE   NO.D20
 ENGINE   MODEL   80 VOLVO DUAL  FUEL
 ENGINE   9.6 LC586. CID) L-6
 CVS NO.  10

 BAROMETER 740.92 MM HGC29.17  IN  HG)
 DRY BULB TEMP. 26.7 DE6 CC80.0 OEG  F)

 BAG RESULTS
    BAG  NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER OIF P MM. H20CIN.  H20)
    BLOWER INLET P MM.  H20UN-  H20)
    BLOWER INLET TEMP.  DEG.  CCDEG.  F)
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD. CU.  HETRES(SCF)
    HC   SAMPLE
    HC   BCKGRD
    CO   SAMPLE
    CO   BCKGRD
    C02  SAMPLE
    C02  BCKGRD
O  NOX  SAMPLE
 I   NOX  BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPH
    DILUTION  FACTOR
    HC   CONCENTRATION PPH
    CO   CONCENTRATION PPH
    C02  CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX  CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC   MASS  GRAMS
    CO   MASS  GRAMS
    C02  MASS  GRAMS
    NOX  MASS  GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KW HR  (HP HR)

    BSHC G/KW HR  (G/HP  HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR  C6/HP  HR)
    BSC02  G/KW HR  (G/HP  HR)
    BSNOX  6/KW HR  (G/HP  HR)
    BSFC KG/KW HR  (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS  4  BAGS

   TOTAL KU HR (HP  HR)
    BSHC   6/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSCO   G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSC02  6/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX  G/KW HR  (6/HP HR)
                10.78 ( 14.46)
                 2.19 (  1.63)
                11.25 (  8.39)
                 941. (  702.)
                 7.73 (  5.77)
    BSFC  KG/KW HR  (LB/HP  HR)    .567  (   .932)
   PART. G/KW-HR  (6/HP-HR)  .44 (.33)
                                          ENGINE  EMISSION RESULTS
                                                COLD TRANSIENT

                                       TEST  NO.20-2   RUN
                                       DATE   9/23/80
                                       TIME  09:25
                                          DYNO NO.   5
                                                                                                              PROJECT  NO.  11-5044-D01
                               DIESEL   EN-465-F
                                 BAG CART NO.  1
                                        RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,  ENGINE-50. PCT ,   CVS-55.  PCT
                                        ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 11.1 6H/KG( 77.6 GRAINS/LB)       NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0000
                                              1
                                            NYNF
                                       673.1  (26.5)
                                       523.2 (20.6)
                                        48.9 (120.0)
                                           6181.
                                          296.0
                                       296.0 (10454.)
                 2
              LANF
         673.1  (26.5)
         523.2  (20.6)
          48.9  (120.0)
             6264.
            300.0
         300-0  (10594.)
               3
              LAF
        673.1 (26.5)
        523.2 (Z0.6)
         48.9 (120.0)
            6371.
           305.0
        305.1 (10775.)
            4
          NYNF
     673.1  (26.5)
     523.2  (20.6)
      48.9  (120,0)
         6202.
        297.0
     297.0  (10489.)
5
8
.8/22/
.5/ 1/
54.2/12/

18
3
9
1
















-3/12/
.6/ 3/
.!/ 3/
.0/13/
.O/ 2/
42.92
21.
113.
.25
26.2
3.52
39.02
1363.8
14.82
.777
1.03
3.43
38.00
1328.14
14.43
.757
29.
9.
116.
1.
.30
.05
27.
1.









( 1.71)
( 1.38)
( 2.56)
( 28.33)
( 990.39)
( 10.76)
( 1.245)
S.6/22/
8.77 1/
89.4/13/
.6/13/
24. 9/ 3/
2.8/ 3/
9.5/13/
1.0/ 2/_
31.98
35.
87.
.36
27.4
5.97
30.56
2001.6
15.72
1.195
1.92
3.11
15.91
1041.99
8.18
.622
43.
9.
90.
1.
.41
.04
28.
1.









( 2.63)
( 2.58)
( 2.32)
( 11.86)
( 777.01)
( 6.10)
( 1.022)
14.1/22/
9.5/ I/
80.4/13/
.7/13/
58. 3/ 3/
2.7/ 3/
20.9/13/
1.0/ 2/
12.83
62.
77.
.99
61.8
10.88
27.26
5537.7
36.08
3.444
6.68
1.63
4.08
828.59
5.40
.515
71.
10.
80.
1.
1.03
.04
63.
1.









( 7.59)
( 8.96)
( 1.21)
( 3.04)
( 617.88)
( 4.03)
( .847)
S.7/22/
9.9/ 1/
74.1/13/
.9/13/
17. O/ 3/
2.8/ 3/
10.1/13/
.9/ 2/
47.67
19.
71.
.23
29.5
3.24
24.50
1246.4
16.77
.694
1.15
2.82
21.29
1083.11
14.57
.603
29.
10.
73.
1.
.27
.04
30.
1.









( 1
( 1
( 2
( 15
( 807
( 10
(

















.53)
. 54)
. 10)
.87)
.68)
.87)
991)
                                             PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90HH FILTER
     SAMPLE FLOW
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR
scntscF)
6/TEST
6/KU HR (G/HP HR)
     MULTIPLIER FOR  6/KS FUEL  (G/LB  FUEL)
                                                                 20 X 20  FILTERS
                                                                     SAHPLE  FLOW
                                                                      SCH
-------
                                          TABLE C-4.
 ENGINE  NO.D?0
 r.NGINE  MODEL   80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL
 ENGINE  9.6 L(586. CID) L-6
 CVS NO.  10

 BAROMETER 739.90 MM HG(29.13 IN HG)
 DRY OULU TEMP. 26.1 DE6 C(79.0 DEC F)

 BAG RESULTS
    OAC NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER DIF P MM. H20UN. H20)
    BLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN. H20)
    QLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. CCDEG.
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
                               F)
O
 I
HC  SAMPLE
HC  GCKGRD
CO  SAMPLE
CO  QCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
COZ FKKGRO
NOX SAMPLE
NOX flCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
1ETER/RANGE/PPM
HETER/RANGE/PPH
C1ETER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
HF TFR/RANGE/PCT
MCTER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPN
    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAMS
    C02 MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KW HR (HP HR)

    BSHC G/KW HR  (6/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KU HR  (6/HP HR)
    BSC02 G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSFC K6/KW HR  (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL  TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS

   TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
    BSHC   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO   G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    RSC02   G/KW HR (6/HP HR)
    BSNOX   G/KW HR (6/HP HR)
    BSFC  KG/KU HR (LB/HP HR)
                           10.91  (
                            1.92  (
                           11.9*  (
                            929.  (
                            8.78  (
                            .561  C
                        14.6*)
                         1.43)
                         8.91)
                         693.)
                         6.54)*
                         .923)
    *Est.  BSNOX  e/kW-hr  (G/hP-hr) 7.57 (5.65)
     Part. 6/kW-hr (G/hP-hr)  .38 (.28)
                                                    ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                          COLD TRANSIENT

                                                  TEST NO.20-3   RUN
                                                  DATE  9/24/80
                                                  TIHE 10:35
                                                    DTNO NO.  5
                                                                                                            PROJECT  NO.  11-5044-001
                                                                                DIESEL   EM-465-F
                                                                                 BAG CART NO.   1
                                                  RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,  ENGINE-50. PCT ,  CVS-55. »CT
                                                  ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.8 GM/KGC 75.9 6RAINS/L8)      NOX  HUMIDITY  C.F-  1.0000
                                             1
                                           NYNF
                                      650.2 (25.6)
                                      523.2 (20.6)
                                       48.9 (120.0)
                                          6181.
                                         297.0
                                      295.6 (10441.)
                2
              LANF
         650.2 (25.6)
         523.2 (20.6)
          45.9 (120.0)
             6262.
            299.0
         299.4 (10577.)
               3
              LAP
        650.2 (25.6)
        523.2 (20.61
         48.9 (120.0)
            6370.
           305.0
        304.6 (10759.)
            4
          NYNF
     650.2 (25.6)
     523.2 (20.6)
      48.9 (120.0)
         6202.
        297.0
     296.6 (10476.)
6
11
58

19
3
.0/22/
.21 1/
.8/12/
.4/12/
.4/ 3/
.5/ 3/
9.5/13/

















.71 21
40.98
19.
125.
.26
27.8
3.26
42.90
1402.8
15.73
.799
1.04
3.15
41.42
1354.48
15.19
.771
30.
11.
128.
1.
.31
.05
29.
1.









C 1.76)
C 1.39)
( 2.35)
( 30.89)
(1010.04)
( 11.33)
( 1.267)
8.17227
11. I/ 1/
94. 4/ 137
1.0/1J/
25.37 HI
3.17 37
10.9/137
.8/ 27
31.44
30.
92.
.37
32.0
5.17
32.24
2011.9
18.34
1.209
1.96
2.64
16.48
1028.43
9.38
.618
41.
11.
96.
1.
.41
.05
33.
1.









I 2.67)
C 2.62)
( 1.97)
C 12.29)
( 766.90)
( 6.99)
( 1.016)
13.5/227
12.87 17
84.2713/
1.17137
58.17 37 1
2.77 37
25.6/137
.77 21
12.88
55.
80.
.99
76.1
9.75
28.55
5507.5
44.35
3.429
6.75
1.44
4.23
815.42
6.57
.508
67.
13.
85.
1.
.03
.04
77.
1.









( 7.56)
C 9.06)
C 1.08)
( 3.15)
( 608.06)
( 4.90)
( .835)
7.1/22/
19.37 1/
SO.4/13/
1.5/13/
16. 5/ 37
2.67 37
10.4/13/
.71 21
48.88
16.
77.
.22
30.6
2.82
26.66
1215.7
17.35
.690
1.17
2.41
22.82
1040.43
14.85
.591
35.
19.
80.
1.
.26
.04
31.
1.









( 1
( 1
( 1
( 17
( 775
( 11
\ *

















.52)
.57)
.80)
.02)
.85)
.07)
971)
                                                       PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90MM FILTER
     SAMPLE FLOW
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR
SCM(SCF)
G/TEST
6/KH HR (6/HP HR)
1.074 ( 37.94>
1.114
 .1020 ( .0761)
     MULTIPLIER FOR  G/K6 FUEL (6/LB  FUEL)    .1818  (  .0825)
                                                            20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                     SCMfSCF)
                                                                                                         79.56 (2809.9)
-------
                                         TABLE C-5.
                                                     ENGINE  EMISSION RESULTS
                                                           COLD TRANSIENT
                                                                                                             PROJECT NO.  11-50*4-001
 ENGINE   NO.020
 ENGINE   MODEL   80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL
 ENGINE   9.6  L(586. CID) L-6
 CVS  NO.   10
                                                   TEST  N0.20-1C  RUN
                                                   DATE   9/29/80
                                                   TIME
                                                     DYNO NO.   5
                                                                                 DIESEL    EM-465-F
                                                                                  BAG CART  NO.   1
 BAROMETFR 739.90 MM HG(29.13  IN HG)
 DRY  BUL3 TEMP. 27.8 DEG C(S7.0 DEC F)
                                                   RELATIVE  HUMIDITY ,  ENGINE-44. PCT ,   CVS-60.  PCT
                                                   ABSOLUTE  HUMIDITY 10.4 Kri/KG( 72.8 GRAINS/LB)       NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0DQO
 BAG RESULTS
    BAG NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER DIP »  MM. H20(IN. H20)
    BLOWER INLET P MM. H20CIN.  H20)
    BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG.  C(DEG.  F)
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD.  CU.  METRES(SCF)
                                                         1
                                                       NYNF
                                                  660.4 (26.0)
                                                  520.7 (20.5)
                                                   A3.9 (120.0)
                                                      61 81.
                                                     296.0
                                                  295.8 (10448.)
                                                                LANF
                                                           660.4 (26.0)
                                                           520.7 (20.5)
                                                            48.9 (120.0)
                                                               6?62,
                                                              299.8
                                                           299.7 (10584.)
               5
              LAP
        660.4 (25.0)
        520.7 (20.5)
         48.9 (120.0)
            6371 .
           305.0
        304.9 (10769.)
            4
          NYNF
     660.4  (26.0)
     520.7  (20.5)
      48.9  (123.0)
         6201.
        296.9
     296.8  (10481.)
 o
 I
    HC
    HC
    CO
    CO
    SAMPLE
    BCKGRD
    SAMPLE
    BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
C02 I) C K f, R D
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPH
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPH
    DILUTION  FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION  PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION  PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION  PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION  PPM

    HC  MASS  GRAMS
    CO  MASS  GRAMS
    C02 MASS  GRAMS
    NOX MASS  GRAMS
    FUEL KG (L8)
    KV HR (HP HR)

    BSHC G/KW HR  (H/HP  HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR  (G/HP  HR)
    BSC02 G/KW KR (G/HP  HR)
    BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP  HR)
    BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS

   TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
    BSHC   G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO   G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    8SC02  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC  KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
                           11.38  (  15.27)
                            1.85  (   1.38)
                           11.47  (   3.55)
                            893.  (   666.)
                            7.55  (   5.63)
                                  (   .892)
6.3/22/ 31.
11
56

18
2
8

















.•57 1/ 12.
-0/12/ I'M.
.4/12/ 1.
.6/ 3/ .30
.6/ 3/ .04
.0/13/ 24.
.&/ 2/ 1.
42.83
20.
117.
.26
23.3
3.44
40.41
1403.8
13.21
.R23 ( 1.81)
1.14 ( 1.53)
3.01 ( 2.24)
35.39 ( 26.39)
1229.33 ( 915.71)
11.57 ( 8.63)
.721 ( 1.185)
7.9/227
11. O/ 17
50.2/12/ 1
.4/127
25.07 37
2.4/ 3/
9.7/13/
.5/ ?/
31.76
29.
• 103.
.37
28.6
5.01
35.87
2042.1
16.41
1.235
2.04
2.45
17.54
993.64
8.02
.604
40.
11.
06.
1.
.41
.04
29.
1.









( 2.72)
t 2.74)
( 1.83)
( 13.08)
( 744.69)
( 5.98)
< .993)
13.0/227
10.77 17
90.9/137
.9/13/
58. 6/ 3/ 1
2.07 3/
23.7/13/
,5/ 21
12.76
55.
88.
1.01
70.6
9.72
31.11
5623.0
41.20
3.510
7.01
1.39
4.44
802.05
5.88
.501
65.
11.
92.
1.
I .04
.03
71.
1.









( 7.74)
C 9.40)
( 1.03)
( 3.31)
( 598.09)
( 4.38)
( .823)
5.5/227
10. 9/ 1/
70.7/13/
.8/13/
15.57 3/
3.07 3/
9.0/13/
.5/ 21
52.42
17.
67.
.20
26.6
2.86
23.20
1092.8
15.08
.607
1.19
2.41
19.56
921.31
12.72
.512
27.
11.
69.
1 .
.25
.05
27.
1 .









( 1
( 1
( 1
( 14
( 637
( 9
(

















.34)
.59)
. 80)
.59)
.02)
.48)
842)
                                                        PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FDR 4 BAGS
  PART.  G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR)  .32 (.24)
                                                  90MN  FILTER
                                                       SAMPLE FLOU
                                                       MULTIPLIER FOR
                                                       MULTIPLIER FOR
                                                       MULTIPLIER FOR

                                                  70  X  20 FILTERS
                                                      SAMPLE FLOW
SCMCSCF)
G/TEST
G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
6/K6 FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
                                                                                      SCfl(SCF)
1.109 ( 39.16)
1.080
 .094? ( .0707)
 .1749 ( .0793)
                                                                                                              80.53 (2844.2)
-------
                                           TABLE C-6.
                                                         FNGtNE  EMISSION  RESULTS
                                                              COLD  TRANSIENT
                                                                                                             PROJECT NO, ll»SO**-nnl
ENGI'IE  H(
ENGINE  MpnFl   BU VOL
ENT.lNf  l.h Lf5Ph. CIO) |.
CVS NO.   in
                                FUH
 OARO'IKTER  THl',93 MM  HCid'q.dl  I'J  Hf.)
 DRY RMLR TfM?.  pi.j  nfr;  Cf?1*."  HI C F)
 BAG RESULTS
    RAT, NtlHflfp
    PFSCRIPlTON
    Pi.nrfrp nTF
    BLOWER
    n...^-  ,..,., .  P "M. H?n(iN, U20)
    HLOWFW  TNLFT  TEMP. OEI;'. C(OEG. F)
    BLOWfR  BFVnLllTIONS
    TIME SF.cnNns
    TOTAl  F| OH Srn. CU. METKE3(SCF)
 n
  i
 CD
    HC
    HC
    CO
    CO  RCKoRD
    Co? ^^Mp(E MFIERXRANGEXPCT
    co? HCKC.RD MFTER/RANGEXPCT
    NOX SAMPLE MrTER/RANGtXPPM
    NOX BCKfiRO MrTfctf/RANGE'/PPM

    DILUTION FACTOR
    Hf  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  fONr;F MH«TION PPM
    CO? CONCENTRATION PTT
    NOX CONeFNrWAI ION PPM
    HC  MASS
    CO  MASS
    Cn? MASS GRAMS
    NOX M*Ss GRAMS
    FUEL KG fLR)
    hrt HR (HP HR)

    HSHC G/KW HR  (R/Hp HR)
    HSCO G/KW HR  (r./Hp H«)
    BSCO? G/Kw HB  (GXHP HR)
    BSNOX G/Hh HP  (G/HP HM
    BSFC KG/KIN HH  (LB/HP HP)

TOTAL  TEST Bt'SMLrS H BAGS

   TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
    BSHC   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO?  G/KW HP (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX  G/KW HP (G/HP HR)
    BSFC  KG/KW HW (LB/HP Hk)
                                11.59
                                 7.**
                                 .5b3
PART.  6/KW-HR (G/HP-HR)  .35 (.26)
                                        15.19)
                                        bBb.)
                                        5.55)
                                                       TFST  N0.20-2C   RUN
                                                       RATE   9X30X80
                                                       TIME  091*5
                                                         DYNO NO,   s
                                                                                               DIESEL    EM«*bS-F
                                                                                                 BAG CART  NO,   1
                                                       RELATIVE  HUMIDITY  ,   fNGINf-57.  PCT ,   CV3-bl, PCT
                                                       ABSOLUTE  HUMIDITY  10.5  GMXKGl  73,* GRAINS/LB)      NOX HUMIDITY C.F,  1,0000
1 ? 3
NYNF LANF LAF
bhs'.S (?b.2) bbS.S (2b,2) bbS.S (2b,2)
5P0.7 (20.5) 520.7 (20.5) 520.7 (20,5)
*B.9 (120,0) H8.9 (120,0) *8.9 (120,0)
bl81, b2h3, b370,
?9h.O 299,9 305,0
29b.5 (10*73.) 100,* (10bl2,) 305, b (10793.)
b.3X22X 31, 8,bX22X *3, 13.5X22X b8.
12, IX IX 12, 11. 9X IX 12, 12, SX IX 11,
58.2X12X 127, *9.7XI2X 105, 91,*X13X 92,
?.RXl?X 5, 4.5X12X 8, 9.8X13X 9,
19. *X 3X ,31 25. 2X 3X ,»1 b0.3X 3X 1,07
1.2X 3X ,05 3, IX 3X ,05 3, IX 3X ,05
7.9XHX 2*. 9.2X13X 28, 23,*X13X 70.
.SX 11 1, ,bX 2X 1, ,HX 2X I,
*n.98 31, *9 12.3b
?n'. 3i, 5b.
119. ***. 81,
'.?b .37 1.03
23.? 2b.<' b«».5
3.35 S.*5 9,87
*0.93 32.98 28,83
1*31.7 2009.0 5737,7
13'.13 15. HB *0,b*
'.8b2 ( 1.90) 1.21* ( 2.b8) 3,593 ( 7
T.13 ( 1.52) 1,99 ( 2,b7) b.9b ( 9
2',95 ( 2,20) 2,7* ( 2,0*) 1.H2 ( 1
3b.l2 ( 2b,9H) Ib.Sb ( 12,35) *,1* ( 3
I?b3.5b ( 9*2,23) 1008, b7 ( 752,17) 82H,b5 ( fal*
11.59 ( B,b*) 7,77 ( 5,80) 5,8* ( *
'.7bl ( 1.851) ,blO ( 1,002) ,Slb ( ,
PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR H BAGS
90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR GXTEST
MULTIPLIER FOR GXKW HR (GXHP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR GXKG FUEL (GXLfl FUEL)
»
NVNF
bbS,5 (2b,2)
520,7 (20,5)
*8,9 (120,0)
b203,
297,0
297, b (10510.)
b,OX22X 3D,
12, OX IX 12,
90,7X11X 92,
8.7X13X 8,
17, 2X 3X ,?7
3, OX 3X ,05
9.1X13X 27,
,7X 2X 1,
*b,79
IB,
82,
,23
2b,S
3,10
20, *5
1250,7
15,09
,9?) ,711 ( 1
,33) 1,25 ( I
.Ob) 2,»9 ( 1
,09) 22,80 ( 17
,9*) 1002,0* ( 7*7
,3b) 12,09 ( 9
8*9) ,b70 ( ,


t,ObS ( 37, b2)
1,127
,099» ( ,07*8)
,17bb ( ,0801)
























,57)
,b7)
,85)
,00)
,22)
,02)
93b)






                                                                 80 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                     SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                                     SCM(SCF)
80,35 (2838,1)
-------
 ENGINE  NO.D20
 ENGINE  MODEL   GO VOLVO DUALEUEL
 ENGINE  9,6 L(5C6, CID) L-o
 CVS NO,  10

 BAROMETER 747,01 KM I!G(29,41 IN IIG)
 DRY BULB TEMP, 20.6 DEC C(67,0 DEC F)

 BAG RESULTS
    BAG NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER DIP P MM, 1120(IN, H20)
    BLOWER INLET P MM. 1-120(IN, H20)
    BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEC,  C(DEG, F)
    BLOWC
             EVOLUTIONS
o
 i
vO
     TIME SECOND:,
     TOTAL FLQIJ 3TD. CU, METRES(3CF)

     HC  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PFM
     HC  L
J3GFC
KU HR
G/KU
G/KL'
? G/KW
; G/KW

(IIP
HR
!IR
HR
n i \
IIR
HR)
(G/HP
(G/HP
(G/HP
(C/HP
(LB/HP

HR)
IIR)
HR)
HR)
HR)
10,26 i
2,31 <
10,36 <
964, (
7,01 (
,576 <
: 13
: i
: o
' -7
: s
t
.76)
,72)
,10)
19,)
,23)
946)
                                                                                                            PROJECT  NO,  11-5044-00;
                                         DIESEL   EM--465-F
                                           SfiG CART NO,  1
                                                       RELATIVE HUMIDITY
                      ENGINE-5G, F'CT
                    CVE
        PCT
                                                       ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  3.? GM/KC< 62,2 GRAING/LB')
                                                    NOX HUMIDITY C,l
       1
     NYNF
685,8 (27,0)
530,7 (20,9)
 48,9 (120,0)
    6102,
   296,0
270,4 (10537,)
     LANF
685,0 (27,0)
530,7 (20,7)
 48,9 (120,0)
    6265,
   299,9
302,4 (10601,)
       3
      LAF
685,8 (27,0)
530,7 (20,9)
 48,9 (120,0)
    6371.
   305,0
307,5 (10361.)
       4
     NYNF
685,8 (27,0)
530,7 (20,7)
 48,9 (120,0)
    6202,
   '•'96»^
29?74 (10573.)
6
3
52

18
1
5

















,l/22/
,7/ I/
.A/12/
,1/12/
,0/ 3/
,7/ 3/
,9/13/
,3/ 2/
44,30
22,
110,
,26
17,5
3,31
33,29
1434.6
10,00
,330
1.03
3,71
37,25
1395,61
9,72
,307
31,
9,
112,
0,
,29
,03
1C,
0,









( 1
( 1
( 2
( 27
(1040
( 7
( 1,
8
3
78
1
24
3
7










,33)
,3C)
,76)
,78)
,70)
,25)
327)
PARTICULATE DATA




70.MM

FILTER
SAMPLE
,2/22/
,0/ I/
,0/13/
,4/13/
,5/ 3/
,0/ 3/
,1/13/
,3/ 2/
32,64
33,
75,
,35
21,0
5,77
26,24
1762,7
12,16
1,155
1,CO
3,20
14,55
1030,32
6,75
,640
f TOTAL

FLOW
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
41,
0,
77,
1,
,40
,05
21,
0,









( 2,55)
( 2,42)
< 2,38)
( 10,85)
( 311,56)
( 5,03)
( 1,053)
FOR 4 DAGS

SCH(SCF)
G/TE3T
G/KU HR
14.0/22/
3,9/ I/
68.2/13/
1.7/13/
56, 2/ 3/
3,0/ 3/
20.5/13/
,3/ 2/
13,30
62,
63,
,95
61,2
10,97
22,56
5323,9
36,00
3,263
6 1 u6
1,73
3,55
837,50
5,66
,514




(G/HP HR)
70,
9,
66,
2,
,99
,05
61,
0,









( 7
( 8
( 1
( 2
( 624
( 4
(





G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
5,
3,
73,
1,
16,
2,
8,
,









,20)
,52)
,27)
,65)
3/22/
5/ I/
7/13/
7/13/
2/ 3/
7/ 3/
1/13/
3/ 2/
50,09
13,
70.
,21
24,0
3,17
24,32
1174,7
13,75
,654
1,07
2,75
22,66
.53) 1074,75
,22)
845)


1,286 (
,739
,0915 (
,1590 (
12,81
,60?


45,43)

,0682)
,0721)
27,
7,
72,
••)
»_ *
,26
,04
24,
0,









( 1
( 1
( 2
( 16
( 316
( 9
( 1,























.44)
,44)
.20)
,90)
,36)
.55)
001)






PAtfT. G/KW-HR
               (G/HP-HR)  .39  (.29)
           20 X 20 FILTERS
               SAMPLE FLOW
           SCH(SCF)
               81,43 (2376,0)
-------
                                            TABLE C-8.
 ENGINE  NO.020
 tNGINE  MODEL   80  VOLVO  DUAL  FUEL
 ENGINE  9.6 L(586.  CID)  L-6
 CVS NO.  10

 BAROMETFR  740.66  MM  HG(29.16  IN HG)
 DRY BULB TEMP. 26-7  DEC  CCJO.O DEC  F)

 BAG RESULTS
    U A G N UM n E R
    OESCRIPTION
    I3LOUER  DIF C MH.  H20(IN.  H?0)
    BLOWER  INLET P MM.  H?0(IN.  H20)
    OLOUER  INLET TEMP.  DFG-  C(DEG.  F)
    OLOUER  REVOLUTIONS
    Tint SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD.  CU.  METRES(SCF)
                                                     ENGINE EMISSION  RESULTS
                                                            HOT TRANSIENT
                                                                                                             PROJECT MO.  11-5044-001
                                                   TF.ST NO.20-1
                                                   DATE  9/22/80
                                                   TIME 12:17
                                                     DYNO NO.  5
                               RUN  1
                                                        DIESEL   EM-465-F
                                                          BAG CART NO.   1
                                                   RELATIVE HUMIDITY  ,   ENGINE-46.  PCT ,   CVS-58.  P/C T
                                                   ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  10.3  GM/KG(  72.1  6RAINS/LB)       NOJt HUMIDITY C.F.  1.0300
                                                         1
                                                       NYNF
                                                  550.2  (25.6)
                                                  573.2  (20.6)
                                                   48.9  (120.0)
                                                      6182.
                                                     296.0
                                                  296.1  (10460.)
                                          2
                                        LANF
                                   650.2 <25.6)
                                   523.2 (20.6)
                                    48.9 (120.0)
                                       6264.
                                      300.0
                                   300.1 (10598.)
                                3
                              LAF
                        650.2 (25.6)
                        ,523.2 (20.6)
                         48.9 C120.0)
                            6370.
                           305.0
                        305.1 (10778.)
       4
     HYNF
650.2 (25.6)
523.2 (20.6)
 48.9 (120.0)
    6202.
   296.9
297.1 (10493.)
O
 I
HC  SAMPLE  METER/RANGE/PPM
HC  nCKGRD  HETER/RANGE/PPH
CO  SAMPLE  METER/RANGE/PPM
CO  BCKGRD  1ETER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE  METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 HCKHRD  METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE  METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX fICKGRO  METER/RANGE/PPH

DILUTION  FACTOR
HC  CONCENTRATION  PPM
CO  CONCENTRATION  PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION  PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION  PPM

HC  MASS  GRAMS
CO  MASS  GRAMS
C02 MASS  GRAMS
NOX MASS  GRAMS
FUEL KG (L3)
KU HR (HP HR)

BSHC G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
8SC02 G/KU  HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KU  HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KU  HR (LB/HP HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS

   TOTAL KU HR (HP HR)
    BSHC   G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    3SCO   G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    BSC02  G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX  G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC  KG/KU HR (LB/HP HR)
                            12.02  (
                             1.84  (
                            10.83  (
                             912.  (
                             7.10  (
16.12)
 1.37)
 8.08)
 630.)
 5.30)
                             .538  (   .884)
5.9/2Z/
10. O/
92.5/1
.7/1
18. 1/
3. 1 /
1/
37
37
3/
3/
8.4/13/
.77
44
2/
.42
30.
10.
94.
1.
.29
.05
25.
1.



8
9
.1/22/
.77 1/
40.
10.


50.77127 108.




28
3
.3/127
.37 37
.47 3A
10.9/137




20.
91.
—
24
3
31
131
13
.
1
2
24
10?7
24
.4
.40
.32
8.7
.83
718
.28
.65
.40
.36
10.78
•
559






( 1
( 1
( 1
( 18
( 766
( 8
I •






.58)
.72)
.97)
.19)
.10)
.04)
921)













PARTICULATE DATA


90MH
.77 27
27.92
31.
104.
.42
32.0
5.36
36.39
2281.9
18.38
1.310
2.22
2.41
16.38
1027.04
8.27
.589
, TOTAL
1.
.47
.05
33.
1.









<
(
(
{














2.89)
2.98)
1.80)
12.21)
( 765.86)
(
(
FOR
6.17)
.969)
4 BAGS
13.4/22/
9.77 I/
92.2/137
.6/13/
62. 6/ 3/ 1
3.47 3/
21.5/13/
.67 2/
11.85
58.
89.
1.07
63.9
10.19
31.67
5963.2
37.30
3. 656
7.15
1.43
4.43
833.72
5.21
.511

67.
10.
93.
1.
1.11
.05
64.
1.









( 8.06)
( 9.59)
( 1.06)
( 3.30)
( 621.71)
( 3.89)
( .840)

S.7/22/
10-07 1/
90.87137
.6/137
18. 9/ 3/
3. I/ 37
9.5/13/
.6/ 21
42.57
19.
89.
.26
27.9
3.19
30.81
1396.5
15.87
.782
1.36
2.34
22.60
1024.42
11.65
.574

28.
10.
92.
1.
.30
.05
29.
1 .









( 1.73)
( 1.83)
( 1.74)
( 16.86)
( 763.91)
( 8.68)
( .944)

FILTER
SAMPLE
FLOU
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTI»LIER FOR
SCM(SCF)
67TEST
G/KW HR
(G7HP HR)
1.054 { 37.23)
1.137
.0946 ( .0705)
MULTIPLIER  FOR  G/K6  FUEL  (G/LB FUEL)   .1758 ( .0798)
  PART.  G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR)  .39  (.29)
                                                                 ?0 X  20  FJLTERS
                                                                     SAMPLE FLOU
                                                                                  SCN(SCF)
                                                                                                               80.37 (2838.5)
-------
                                            TABLE C-9.  ENGINE  EMISSION RESULTS
                                                                 HOT  TRANSIENT
                                                                                                     PROJECT NO.  11-5044-001
 ENGINE   NO.D20
 ENGINE   MODEL   80 VOLVO  DUAL  FUEL
 ENGINE   9.6 L(586. CID) L-6
 CVS NO.   10

 BAROMETER 740.92 HM HGC29.17  IN HG)
 DRY BULB TEMP. 25.6 OEG  C(78.0 OEG F)

 BAG RESULTS
    BAG NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER DIF P MM. H20CIN.  H20)
    BLOWER INLET P  HM.  H20CIN.  H20)
    BLOWER INLET TEMP.  DE6.  CCDEG. F)
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME  SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD. CU.  METRESCSCF)
    HC
    HC
    CO
    CO
    C02
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
 O
 I
     C02  BCKGRD
     NOX  SAMPLE
 _!_   NOX  BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPH
HETER/RANGE/PPH
METER/RANGE/PPH
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPH
METER/RANGE/PPM
     DILUTION FACTOR
     HC   CONCENTRATION PPM
     CO   CONCENTRATION PPM
     C02  CONCENTRATION PCT
     NOX  CONCENTRATION PPM

     HC   MASS GRAMS
     CO   MASS GRAMS
     C02  MASS GRAMS
     NOX  MASS GRAMS
     FUEL  KG  (LB)
     KU HR  (HP HR)

     BSHC  G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
     BSCO  G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
     BSC02  G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
     BSNOX  6/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
     BSFC  KG/KW HR  (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4  BAGS

   TOTAL  KW  HR (HP HR)
     BSHC   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
     BSCO   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
     BSC02  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
     BSNOX  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
                       10.81  (
                        2.07  (
                        9.51  (
                        893.  (
                        7.49  (
                         14.49)
                          1.54)
                          7.09)
                          666.)
                          5,59)
    BSFC  KG/KM  HR  (LB/HP HR)    .535 (  .880)

PART.  G/KW-HR  (6/HP-HR)  .46  (.34)
                                               TEST NO.20-2
                                               DATE  9/23/80
                                               TIME 10:05
                                                 DYNO NO.  5
                                                       RUN 1
                                                                                 DIESEL   EM-465-F
                                                                                   BAG CART NO.  1
                                               RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,  ENGINE-50.  PCT  ,   CVS-52. PCT
                                               ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.5 GM/K6(  73.3  GRAINS/LB)       NOX HUMIDITY  C.F.  1.0DOO

1
NYNF
650.2 (25.
523
48


296
.2 (20.

6)
6)


2
LANF

650.2 (25.6)

.9 (120.0)
6181.
296.0




.2 (10463.)
6.1/22/
9.6/ M
67.
m
15.
2.
9.
-













2/13/
6/1 3/
8/ 3/
3/ 3/
0/13/
8/ 21
51.43
21.
64.
.22
26.2
3.59
21.97
1175.4
14.86
.657
1.06
3.38
20.69
1106.49


13.98
.619
30.
10.
66.
1.
.25
.04
27.
1.









( 1
( 1
( 2
C 15
( 825
( 10
( 1.
523
48


.2 (20.6)
.9 (120.0)
6262.
299.9


300.1 (10600.)
7.71221
9.0/ 1/
82.8/13/














.45)
.42)
.52)
.43)
.11)
.43)
017)
—
23.
2.
9.
-
















PARTICULATE DATA,


90HH
4/13/
6/ 3/
4/ 3/
3/13/
71 21
33.90
30.
81.
.35
27.3
5.18
28.18
1911.2
15.65
1.137
1.96
2.65
14.41
976.92
8.00
.581
TOTAL
39.
9.
83.
0.
.38
.04
28.
1.









( 2.51)
( 2.62)
C 1.97)
( 10.74)
( 728.49)
( 5.97)
( .955)
FOR 4 BAGS
3
LAF
650.2 (25.
523.2 (20.
48.9 (120
6370.
305.0

6)
6)
.0)


305.3 (10783.)
13.3/22/
8.5/ 1/
81.6/13/
.6/13/
56. 61 3/ 1
2.6/ 3/
19.8/13/
.71 21
13.26
58.
78.
.96
58.7
10.30
27.81
5361.4
34.28
3.320
6.65
1.55
4.18
806.48
5.16
.499

66.
9.
82.
1.
.00
.04
59.
1-









< 7
( 8
( 1
( 3
( 601
( 3
(

4
NYNF
650.2 (25.

6)


523.2 (20.6)
48.9 (120
6202.
297.0
.0)





297.2 (10498.)
S.6/22/
9.0/ M
74.6/13/
.6/13/
16. 4/ 3/
2.7/ 3/
9.7/13/
.8/ 2/
49.43
19.
72.
.22
28.5
3.27
24.82
1201 .0
16.18
.32) .674
.92) 1.14
.15) 2.86
.12) 21.74
.39) 1051.74
.85) 14.17
821) .590

28.
9.
74.
1 .
.26
.04
29.
1 .









( 1
( 1
( 2
( 16
( 784
( 10
(


















.49)
.53)
.13)
.21)
.29)
.56)
970)

FILTER
SAMPLE
FLOW
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
SCH(SCF)
G/TEST
G/KW HR


(G/HP HR)



1.109 ( 39.17)
1.081
.1000 ( .0746)






MULTIPLIER FOR  G/K6 FUEL  (6/LB  FUEL)    .1868 ( .0847)
                                                         20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                             SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                      SCH(SCF)
                                                                                                      80.44 (2841.2)
-------
                                          TABLE C-IO.
  ENGINE   NO.020
  ENGINE   MODEL   80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL
  ENGINE   9.6  L(586. CID)  L-6
  CVS  NO.   10

  BAROMETER 7*0.92  MM H6(29.17 IN HG)
  DRY  BULB TEMP.  25.6 DEC  C(78.0 DEG F)

  BAG  RESULTS
    BAG  NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    DLOUER OIF P  MM. H20(IN. H20)
    BLOWER INLET  P MM.  H20CIN. H20)
    BLOWER INLET  TEMP.  DEG.  CCDEG.  F)
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME  SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD. CU.  METRES(SCF)
     HC   SAMPLE
     HC   BCKGRD
     CO   SAMPLE
     CO   BCKGRD
     C02  SAMPLE
     C02  BCKGRD
 <">  NOX  SAMPLE
 —  NOX  BCKGRD
 ro
METER/RANGE/PPM
HETER/RANGE/PPH
METER/RANGE/PPH
HETER/RANGE/PPH
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANSE/PPH
NETER/RANGE/PPM
     DILUTION FACTOR
     HC   CONCENTRATION PPM
     CO   CONCENTRATION PPM
     C02  CONCENTRATION PCT
     NOX  CONCENTRATION PPM

     HC   MASS GRAMS
     CO   MASS GRAMS
     C02  MASS GRAMS
     NOX  MASS GRAMS
     FUEL  KG  (LB)
     KU HR  (HP HR)

     BSHC  G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
     BSCO  G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
     8SC02  G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
     BSNOX  G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
     BSFC  KG/KU HR  (LB/HP  HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS  I  BAGS

   TOTAL  KU  HR (HP  HR)
     BSHC   G/KU HR  (G/HP  HR)
     BSCO   G/KU HR  (G/HP  HR)
     BSC02  G/KU HR  C6/HP  HD)
     BSNOX  G/KU HR  (6/HP  HR)
                10.78 (  14.46)
                 2.10 C   1.57)
                 9.55'(   7.12)
                 892. (   665.)
                 5.68 (   4.23)
    8SFC  KG/KU HR  (LB/HP  HR)    .539  (   .887)

 PART.  G/KW-HR  (G/HP-HR)
*Est.  BSNOX g/kW-hr (G/hp-hr) 7.24  (5.40)
                                         ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                HOT TRANSIENT

                                       TEST NO.20-2   RUN 2
                                       DATE  9/23/80
                                       TINE 10:45
                                         DYNO NO.  5
                                                                                                            PROJECT NO. 11-50*4-001
                         DIESEL   EM-465-F
                           BAG C1RT NO.  1
                                       RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,  ENGINE-51. PCT ,  CVS-58. PCT
                                       ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.7 GM/KG( 74.8 6RAINS/LB)      NOX  HUMIDITY  C.F.  1.0000
                                             1
                                           NYNF
                                      647.7 (25.5)
                                      523.2 (20.6)
                                       48.9 (120.0)
                                          6181.
                                         296.0
                                      295.8 (10447.)
           2
         LANF
    647.7 (25.5)
    523.2 (20.6)
     48.9 (120.*)
        6265.
       300.0
    299.8 (10589.)
       3
      LAP
647.7 (25.5)
523.2 (20.6)
 48.9 (120.0)
    6370.
   305.0
304.8 (10767.)
       4
     NYNF
647.7 (25.5)
523.2 (20.6)
 48.9 (120.0)
    6201.
   297.0
296.7 (10481.)
5
7
67

16
3
6

















.8/22/
.11 1/
.5/13/
.6/13/
.3/ 3/
.1/ 3/
-2/13/
.8/ 2/
49.86
21.
64.
.21
17.9
3.66
22.00
1153.3
10.13
.696
1.05
3.47
20.89
1094.83
9.61
.660
29.
a.
66.
1.
.26
.05
19.
1.









( 1.
( 1.
( 2.
( 15.
( 816.
( 7.





7.
7.
82.
.
24.
7/22/
61 M
5/13/
4/13/
O/ 3/
38.

8.
83.

*
3.2/ 3/ .











53)
41)
59)
58)
45)
17)
7.
-















( 1.086)
PARTICULATE DATA,


90HM
1/13/
8/ 21
33.32
31.
80.
.34
20.4
5.37
27.98
1881.7
11.70
1.120
1.96
2.74
14.30
961.84
5.98
.572
TOTAL
0.
39
05
21.










(
(
(
(
(
(
(
1.









2.47)
2.62)
2.05)
10.66)
717.24)
4.46)
.941)
13.2/22/
8.0/ 1/
82.0/13/
.2/13/
57. 21 3/ 1
3.1/ 3/
15.8/13/
1.0/ 21
13.11
58.
79.
.96
46,4
10.28
27.97
5379.9
27.05
3.323
6.64
1.55
4.21
810.34
4.07
.501
66.
8.
S.4/22/
7.8/ 1/
82. 75.2/13/
0.
.5/13/
.01 16. 71 3/
.05
47.
1.









( 7.33)
( 8.90)
( 1.15)
( 3.14)
( 604.27)
( 3.04)
( .823)
3.0/ 3/
7.5/13/
.8/ 21
48.54
20.
72.
.22
21.8
3.34
24.98
1201.7
12.35
.678
1.13
2.95
22.05
1060.56
10.90
.598
27.
8.
7*.
0.
.27
.05
23.
1 .









( 1.49)
( 1.52)
( 2.20)
( 16.44)
( 790.86)
( 8.13)
( .983)
FOR 4 BASS
FILTER
SAMPLE
FLOU

MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
SCM(SCF)
G/TEST
G/KU HR


(6/HP HR)
0.000
0.000
( 0.00)



0.0000 (0.0000)
MULTIPLIER FOR  6/K6 FUEL (G/LB FUEL)   0.0000  (0.0000)
                                                 20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                     SAMPLE FLOU
               SCN(SCF)
                                                                                              79.68  (2814.2)
-------
                                          TABLE  C-1 I.
ENGINE   NO.D23
ENGINE   MODEL    80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL
ENGINE   9.6  LCS86. CID) L-6
CVS  NO.   10

BAROMETER 739.65 MM HG(29_12 IN HG)
DRY  BULB TEMP.  25.0 DEG CC77.0 DEG F)
                                                        ENGINE  EMISSION RESULTS
                                                               HOT TRANSIENT

                                                      TEST N0.20-1H  RUN 1
                                                      DATE  9/29/80
                                                      TIMF 11:20
                                                        DYNO NO.  5
                                                                                                             PROJECT  NO.  11-5044-001
                          DIESEL    EM-465-F
                            BAG  CART NO.  1
                                                      RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,  ENSINE-50-  PCT  ,   CVS-57.
                                                      ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.2 GM/KG(  71.1 6RAINS/LB)
                                 PCT
                                     NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0000
 BAG RESULTS
    BAG  NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER DIF r
    3LOUER INLET
    BLOWER INLET
                MM.  H20CIN. H20)
                P  MM.  H20CIN. H?0)
                TEMP.  DFG. C(DEG, F)
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD. CU.
                        METRES(SCF)
   HC   SAMPLE
   HC   BCKGRD
   CO   SAMPLE
   CO   BCKGRD
   C02  SAMPLE
   C02  BCKGRD
 I  NOX  SAMPLE
r~. NOX  BCKGRD
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               HETER/RANGE/PPN
               METER/RANGE/PPH
               1ETER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PCT
               METER/RANGE/PCT
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               HETER/RANGE/PPM
    DILUTION  FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION  PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION  PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION  PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION  PPM

    HC  MASS  GRAMS
    CO  MASS  GRAMS
    CO? MASS  GRAMS
    NOX MASS  GRAMS
    FUEL KG CLB)
    KU HR (HP HR)

    BSHC G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    USCO G/KU HR  CG/HP HR)
    BSC02 G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSFC KG/KW HR  CLR/HP  HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4  BAGS

   TOTAL KU HR (HP HR)
    BSHC   G/KU HR (G/HP  HR)
    BSCO   G/KW IIR (G/HP  HR)
    BSC02  G/KW HR (G/HP  HR)
    BSNOX  G/KW HR (G/HP  HR)
                               11.41  (  15.30)
                                1.81  (   1.35)
                               10.14  (   7.56)
                                828.  (   617.)
                                7.13  (   5.32)
    BSFC  KG/KW HR  (LB/HP  HR)    .502  (   .826)

 PART. G/KW-HR  (6/HP-HR) .38 (.28)

560
520
48


295
6.
13.
85.
—
16.
2.
8.
1.













1
NYNF
.4 (26.
.7 (20.

0)
5)



.9 (120.0)
6182.
296.0




.5 (10437.)
71221
O/ 1/
2/13/
4/13/
1/ 11
71 If
0/13/
21 21
50.04
21.
S3.
.22
22.9
' 3.51
23.67
1166.9
12.95
.664
1.14
3.07
25.10
1021 .89


11 .34
.582
33.
13.
86.
0.
.26
.04
24.
1.









( 1
( 1

660
520
2
LANF

.4 (26.0)
.7 (20.
5)
48.9 (120.0)


6263.
299.9


299.4 (10574.)
7.71221
















.46)
.53)
12.
91.
,
23.
2-
9.
1.











( 2.29)
( 18
( 762
( 8
(
.72)
.02)
.46)
957)




PARTICULATE DATA,


90HH
O/ 1/
7/13/
5/13/
5/ It
8/ If
1/13/
4/ 21
33.97
27.
90.
.34
26.0
4.62
31.38
1864.2
14.90
1.123
2.08
2.22
15.08
896.14
7.16
.540
TOTAL
38.
12,
93.
0.
.38
.04
27.
1.









( 2.48)
( 2.79)
( 1.66)
( 11.25)
( 668.25)
( 5.34)
( .887)
FOR 4 BAGS
3
LAF
660.4 (25.
520.7 (23.
48.9 (120
6369.
305.0

0)
5)
.0)


304.4 (10753.)
13.1/22/
12. 8/ 1 /
84.1/13/
.7/13/
56. 21 11
3.0/ 11
23.2/13/
1.7/ 21
13.37
54.
81.
.95
68.0
9.40
28.61
5270. 8
39.59
3.291
6.97
1.35
4.11
756.58
5. 68
.472

65.
13.
84.
1.
.99
.05
70.
2.









( 7
( 9
( 1
( 3
( 564
( 4
(

4
NYNF
660.4 (26.0)
520.7 (20.5)
48.9 (120.0)
6200.
297.0
296.4 (10468.)
6.0/22/ 30.
11. 9/ I/ 12.
80.8/13/ 81.
.7/13/ 1.
16. 1/ 11 .26
3.0/ 11 .05
8.8/13/ 26.
1.7/ 21 2.
50.20
18.
78.
.21
24.7
3.10
27.01
1145.7
13.98
.26) .654 (
.34) 1.22 (
.01) 2.54 (
.06) 22.11 ( 1
























1.44)
1.64)
1.89)
6.49)
.18) 937.87 ( 699.37)
.24) 11.44 (
777) .535 (

8.53)
.880)

F ILTER
SAMPLE
MULTIPL
FLOW
IER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
SCM(SCF)
G/TEST
G/KW HR


(6/HP HR)



1.1D2 ( 38.93)
1.085
.0951 ( .0709)



MULTIPLIER FOR  G/KG FUEL CG/L8  FUEL)
                                                                20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                    SAMPLE FLOW
               SCM(SCF)
 .1892 ( .0858)
79.55 (2809.9)
-------
                                          TABLE C-12.
 ING P.F  nn'.
 ENGINE  MOnFl    RO  VOLV"  PHIAL  FUPL
 E NG1NF  l.i,  LfSPh.  CH>) I -h
 CVS rJO.   m
 DRY
                            l?  TN HG)
           TJ.MP.  ph'.l  DFC,  r.(7i.n nrr,
 BAG RfSHLTs
    RAT, MIIMRFR
 O
  I
    HLOWFH DTF P MM. H?0(1N. M?0)
    HtOUFR TNLFT F MM. li?fl(IN.  H?ll)
    HLOWfR INLFT TtMP. nE(,'. C(OE.G. F)
    HiHrtFR RFVOLnTIONS
    Tl^f SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOU STII. CM'. ".E TI-

    NT   SAMPLE MMKR/R.ANGI /PPH
    HC   RCKr.PD MF n R/RANGt/PP'*
    CO   SAMpLF MFTFH/RAMGt/PPM
    CO   RCKftRO MF TER/RAMGf /PPM
    CO? SAMpi E MF TEH/RANGE/FCT
    co? rirKcan MFTFR/RANGE/per
    NOX SAMPLt MpTE.K/RANGKXPPM
               MF TER/RANGL/PPM
    DILUTION  FACTOR
    HC  fONcFNTRJTION  PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION  PPM
    CO? f.ONCFMTRsTION  PCT
    NO* CONCENTRATION  PPM
    HC
    CO  MASs GRAMS
    CO? MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GPAMS
    FUEL KG tin)
    KW HP (HP HR)

    B3HC G/KH HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO? G/KW HR (G/HP HP)
    BSNOX G/KW HR (f./HP HR)
    BSFC KG/KW MR (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL  TF3T RESULTS 4 BAGS

   TOTAL KM HR (HP HR)
    BSHC   r,/Kw HR (G/HP HR)
    PSCO   G/KN HR (G/HP HH)
    BSCO?  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
           G/KW HR (G/HH HR)
    H3FC
                                11.31  (  15.17)
                                 1.10  (   1.43)
                                in.II  (   7,54)
                                 B51.  (   b34.)
                                 7.4?  (   5.53)
                HH fLH/HP HK)    .515  {   .8*7)
                                                         ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                                HOT TRANSIENT

                                                       TEST NO,?0«2H  RUN g
                                                       DATE  q/2S/80
                                                       TIME
                                                         DYNO NO,   5
         DIESEL   t
           BAG CART NO,
                                                                                                             PROJECT NO, U-50M-001
                                                         1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,  ENGINE-tB. PCT ,  CVS-57, PCT
ABSOLUTE-. HUMIDITY 10,5 r,M/KG( 73,3 GRAIN3/LB)       NOX  HUMIDITY  C,F,  1,0000
1
NYNF
bbn.4 (?b.O)
51R,2 (?0,4)
48.1 (120,0)
blBH,
?.m.o
215.3 (10430,)
b,l/22/ iO,
in.b/ i/ 11,
83.7/13X 84,
.7/13/ 1,
lb,2/ 3/ ,2b
3,0/ 3/ ,05
8.1XUX 24,
1.2/ 2/ 1.
41.82
?n,
81.
.21
23.?
3.41
28.00
1150. b
13.10
.h57 ( 1.45)
l.lb ( l.Sb)
P.14 ( 2,11)
24.15 ( 18.01)
112,20 ( 731,88)
11.30 ( 8,43)
'.5b7 ( ,131)
2
LANF
bhO.4 (2b,
518,2 (20.
48,1 (120
b2bl ,
211,1


0)
4)
.0)


211,2 (lOSbb,)
7.S/2?/
I.I/ I/
8i,n/l3/
,B/13/
23, B/ J/
3, I/ 3/
1.5/13/
l.l/ 2/
33, 5b
28,
87,
.34
27,3
4,85
30, 2b
18bb,8
15,b3
1,120
2,02
2.40
14.11
124,13
7,74
.555
38.
10,
10,
1.
.31
.05
28,
1.









2.47)
2,71)
1.71)
11,18)
b81,72)
5,77)
( ,113)
3
LAF
bbO.4 (2b,0)
518,2 (20,4)
48,1 (120,0)
b3h1,
305.0
304,3 (10741.)
12.1/22X b4,
1.4X IX 1,
B4.7X13X 85,
,bX13X 1,
57, 5X 3X 1,01
3, IX 3X ,05
23.4X13X 70,
i,ox ax i ,
11,03
5b,
81.
."
b1,3
1,71
28,85
5403,1
40, 3b
3,3bb ( 7,42)
b,12 ( 1,28)
1,41 1,05)
H.17 3,11)
780, bS 582,13)
5,83 4,35)
,4Bb ,711)
4
NYNF
bbO,4 (2b,0)
518,2 (20,4)
48,1 (120,0)
b200,
2lb,1
21b,2 (1041,3, )
5,8X22X 21,
1.0X IX 1,
81,S/13X 82,
,b/13X 1,
17, IX 3/ ,27
3,4X 3/ ,05
1.1/13X 27,
l.OX 2X 1,
47,2b
20,
",
.??
2b,2
3,43
27,21
1203,2
14, Rb
,b8H ( 1
1,21 ( 1
2,82 ( 2
22,50 ( lb
112,13 ( 731
12, 2b ( 1
,5b4 ( ,

























.51)
,b3)
,u>
,78)
.83)
• 1«>
127)
                                                            PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL FOR  »  BAGS
               FILTER
               SAMPLF FLOW
               MULTIPLIER FOR
               MULTIPLIER FOR
               MULTIPLIER FOR
SCM(SCF)
GXTEST
GXKW HR (GXHP HR)
G/KG FUEL (GXLB FUEL)
PART.  6/KW-HR (6/HP-HR)  .39 (.29)
                                                                 20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                     SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                                      SCM(SCF)
l,07b ( 37,111
1.111
 ,0182 ( .0732)
 ,110b ( ,08b5)
                                                       78.80 (2783,3)
-------
                                             TABLE C-13.
    ENGINE   NO.D20
    ENGINE   MODEL   GO VOLVO DUAL FUEL
    ENGINE   9.6 L(586, DID)  L~6
    CV3 NG,   10

    BAROMETER 752,0s1 MM 110(29,61 IN H6>
    DRY BULK TEMP,  17,2 DEC  C(63,0 BEG F)

    BAG RESULTS
       BAG NUMBER
       BECCRIPTION
       BLOWER DIP p MM, I!20(IN, H2H)
       BLOWER IMLET ? MM, H20dN, 1120)
       BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEC, CfDFfi, D
       BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
       TIME SECONDS
       TOTAL FLOW 31 D, CU, METRES (3CF)
                  METER7RANGE/PPM
                  METER/RANGE/PPM
                  METER/RANGE/PPM
                  METER/RANGE/PPM
                  METER/RANGE/FCT
                  METER/RANCE/FCT
                  METER/RANGE/PPM
                  METER/RANGE/PPM
       LILUTION FACTOR
       i-IC  CONCENTRATION PPM
       CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
       C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
       NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

       HC  MASS CRAMS
       CO  MASS CRAMS
       C02 MASS GRAMS
       NDX MASS GRAMS
       FUEL KG (LEO
       KW HR (iiP HR)

       BSIIC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
       DGCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
       B3C02 G/KW HR (G/liP HR)
       BONCX G/KW HR (G/HP IIR)
       DSFC KQ/KW IIR (LB/HP HR)

   1QTAL  TEST RESULTS A DAGS
o
1
HC
HC
CO
CO
C02
C02
NOX
NCX
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKCRD
SAMPLE
BCKCRLi
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
TOTAL KU IIR (HP
BSKC
BSCO
E3C02
BSN'OX
BSFC
G/KW
G/KW
G/KW
G/KW
KG/KW
HR
HR
IIR
IIR
IIR
HR)
(G/HP
(G/HP
(G/HP
(G/HP
(LD/HP

HR )
HR)
HR)
HR)
HR)
10,38 (
2.5''. (
0,89 (
731, (
7,67 (
,560 (
13,92)
1,91)
6.63)
694.)
5,72)
,921)
        C-TRANS,

TEST NO.D20-2  RUN
DATE 11/10/00
TIME
  DYNO NO,  5

RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY
                                                                                                              PROJECT NO, 11- 5044-00
                     DIESEL   EM-465-r
                       BAG CART NO,  1

        -53, PCT ,   CVS-20, PCT
6,5 GM/KG( 45,7 GRAIN3/LD)      NOX HUMIDITY C,
                                                                                                          ', 1,0000
PART.
VOID
1 2 3
NYNF LANF LAF
685, 8 (27,0) 685, S (27,0) 685,8 (27,0)
530,9 (20,9) 530,9 (20,9) 530,9 (20,9)
48,9 (120.0) 48,9 (120,0) 40,9 (120,0)
6101, 6266, 6372.
296,0 300,0 305.0
300,9 (10620.) 305,1 (10774,) 310,2 (10957.)
9.1/22/ 46, B.6/22/ 43, 14.4/22/ 72,
9,6/ I/ 10, 9,3/ I/ 10, 11, O/ I/ 11,
71.9/13/ 70, 72.B/13/ 71. 62.3/13/ 60,
,6/13/ 1, ,5/13/ 0, ,6/13/ 1,
17, 7/ 3/ ,20 24, U 3/ ,40 55, 3/ 3/ ,97
3,0/ 3/ ,06 3, I/ 3/ ,05 3,1/ 3/ ,05
6.8/13/ 20, 8.1/13/ 24, 22.2/13/ 67,
>2/ 2/ 0, ,!/ 2/ 0, ,2/ 2/ 0,
45,53 32,53 13,63
36, 33, 62.
69. 70, 58,
,23 ,35 ,93
20,1 24,2 66,5
6,31 5,89 11.02
24,13 24,78 20,91
1244,4 1901,2 5261.0
11,56 14,14 39.40
.754 ( 1,66) 1.176 ( 2,59) 3,233 ( 7
1,00 ( 1,34) 1,07 ( 2,50) 6,42 ( 8
6,30 ( 4,70) 3,15 ( 2,35) 1,72 ( 1
24,10 ( 17,97) 13,23 ( 9,90) 3,26 ( 2
1243,27 ( 927,11) 1061,48 ( 791,54) 819,58 ( 611
11,55 ( 3,62) 7,53 ( 5,65) 6,15 ( 4
,753 ( 1,239) ,630 ( 1.036) ,504 (
PARTICULATE DATA? TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW 3CWSCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEGT
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
20 X 20 FILTERS
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF)
4
NYNP
685,8 (27,0)
530,9 (20,9)
48,9 (120,0)
6202,
296,9
301,9 (10664.)
5.S/22/ 29-
10. 2/ I.' 10.
67.1/13/ 65.
,5/13/ 0,
16.4/ 3/ ,26
3 1 2/ 3/ > 05
D — / 1 7 1 O<~
O.w'/ll-/ i^tj»
.!/ 2/ 0.
49,55
1 1
i / *
64,
•"> 1
t _ -L
24,9
3.3^
22. 4n
117D.2
14,40
,14) .640 ( 1
,/.!) 1,09 ( 1
.20) 3,05 ( 2
,43) 20,57 ( 15
.16) 1079,85 ( 805
,59) 13,20 ( 7
G2?) ,594 (


1,332 ( 47,03)
,915
,0031 ( ,0657)
,1573 ( ,0713)

B3.49 (294S.O)

























,43)
,46)
.27)
,34)
,24)
,04)
977)








-------
                                           TABLE C-14.
VGT>,E
         NO.D20
         ".CDCL
         9,6 L
          10
'v'Olv'O DUAL  FUEL
CIIO L--6
:::«RJ,-1ETER  752.07  MM  ;,'C(2'?,61 IN HG)
DRY 3UL[! Tu-P.  20.0  M.3 C(60,0 DEG F)

FAG RESULTS
   SAG NUriDCn _

   .-:;'5uER'  Dir'Y' MM,  H20(IN. 1120)
   L'Li.'WER  INLET P MM,  H20UN. H20)
   BLCWER  INLET TEriP,  DEG, C(DEG, F)
   lOjUTR  REVOLUTIONS
   lIhC SECONDS
   TQr,
-------
                                         TABLE C-15.
ENGINE  NO, 20
ENGINE  MODEL
ENGINE
CVS NO,  10
                GO VOLVO DUALrUEL
            LC06. CID> L-i
BAROMETER 751.84 MM I IS(29,60 IN 11C)
1'iRY DULL1 TEMP, 20,6 DfG C(69,0 DEG F)

BAG RESULT;;
   BAG NUMDER
   DESCRIPTION
   BLOWER DIP P MM, M2C(IN, 1120)
   b'LGUL'R INLET P MM, I,'2G(!N, 1120)
   BLOu'Ef; INLET TEMP. DEC, CdEC, F)
   KLOUER REVOLUTIONS
   TIKE SECONDS
   TOTAL fLCL! GTD, CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE KETER/RANGE/PPM
HC E'CKGRD METER/RftNCE/PPM
CO SfiMPLE METER/RnNGE/PPI-l
CO CCKGRD METE1YRANGE/PFM
L02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PC I
SG2 PCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
o i^'iX oAMPLE fiETER/RANGE/PPM
1 hOX HCKGRD METLP/Rr:NGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
CG2 CONCENTRATION PL" f
NOX CONCENTRATION PPii
HC MASS GRAMS-
CO MAES GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LID
KU IIR (HP HR)
f.'CHC G/KU HR (G/HP ;,'R)
BSCO b/KW IIR (G/IIP !:R)
KCG2 G/KU HR (C/HP .HR)
DGNOX C/KU MR (G/HP MR)
Ff£FC KG/KW HR (LL7HP HR)
OTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BfiCE
TOTAL KU HR (HP HR) 10,30 (
DSHC G/KU !!R (G/MP HR) 2,30 (
£!£CO G/KU HR (G/HP HR) 0,68 (
FSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP IIR) 907, (
I-fpNOX G/KU IIR (G/MP HR) 7,05 (
ir'iFC KG/KU IIR (LH/HP HR)' ,542 (

























13.81)
1.71)
6,47)
676.)
5,26)
.891 )
                                                       ENGINE EMISSION  RESULTS
                                                             H-  TRANS,
                                                                                                           PROJECT NO, 11-5044-OOJ
TEST N0.20-2M
DATE 11/1G/80
TIME
  DYNO NO,   5
                                                                    RUN
                                                     RELATIVE  HUMIDITY
                                                     ABSOLUTE  HUMIDITY
                      DIESEL   EM-465-F
                        BAC CART NO,  1

,   ENGINE-43,  PCT »   CV3-20, PCT
 7,3  GM/KG(  51,0 GRAINS/LI;/      NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1.0000
1 2 3
NYNF LANF LAF
6C5.G (27.0) 605,0 (27.0) 6G5.G (27.0)
528,3 (20, S) 523,3 (20,8) 52C,3 (20,8)
40.9 (120.0) 40.7 (120.0) 40.9 (120.0)
6102, 6263, 6371,
296.0 299,9 305,0
301,0 (10630.) 304,9 (10769,) 310,2 (10955.)
S.7/22/ 28. 7.3/22/ 37, 13, A/22/ 60.
6,3/ I/ 6. 6.B/ I/ 7, X.4/ I/ 7.
72.9/13/ 71, 71.9/13/ 70, 7Q.3/13/ 70,
-9/13/ 1, 5.2/13/ 5, 18.D/13/ 17,
15. 4/ 3/ ,24 22,7 / 3/ ,37 55, 4/ 3/ .97
2,9/ It ,04 3, I/ 3/ ,05 3. I/ 3/ ,05
6.6/13/ 20, 7.7/13/ 23, 20.1/13/ 60,
,5/2/1, ,4/2/0, ,6/ 2/ 1,
52,68 35,41 13,58
22, 30, 61,
70, 65, iO,
. 20 , 32 . 93
19,4 22.8 59.8
3,87 5,30 10,98
24,43 22,98 21,72
1107,5 1796,2 5272,1
11,14 13,30 35,47
,640 ( 1,41) 1,058 ( 2,33) 3,241 ( 7
1,06 ( 1,43) 1,04 ( 2.47) 6,37 ( 0
3,63 ( 2,71) 2,88 ( 2,15) 1,72 ( 1
22,96 ( 17.12) 12,50 ( 9.32) 3,41 ( 2
1040,80 ( 776,19) 976,40 ( 728,16) 020,17 ( 617
10,47 ( 7,31) 7.23 ( 5.39) 5,57 ( 4
,602 ( ,990) ,575 ( ,946) ,509 (
PART 1CUL ATE DATA* TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(GCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LD FUEL)
4
NYNF
605,3 (27,0)
520,3 (20,0
40,9 (120,0)
6200,
296,9
301.0 (10661.)
S.4/22/ 27,
7,0/ I/ 7,
71.0/13/ 70.
13.2/13/ 12.
16, 3/ 3/ ,26
3,3/ 3/ ,05
7.5/13/ 22,
,5/ 2/' 1,
49,30
20,
5G ,
,21
21.9
3,53
20,27
1160,2
12.65
,15) ,639 ( 1
,54) 1,03 ( 1
,29) 3,44 ( 2
.54) 19,72 ( 14
,57) 1128,65 ( C41
,15) 12,31 ( 9
037) ,622 ( 1,


1.324 ( 46.73)
,920
,0093 ( .0666)
,1640 ( .0748)

























.41)
.30)
,56)
.70)
,63)
.10)
022)






PART.  G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR)   .39  (.29)
                                                               20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                   SAMPLE FLOW
                              SCM(SCF)
                                    83,59  (2952,5)
-------
                                         TABLE C-16.
 fNGlNE   NO-D20
 FNGINE   MODEL   80 VOLVO DUAL FUFL
 CNG1NC   V.6 L(586. CID) 1-6
 CVS NO.  10

 BAROMETER 740.66 MM HGC29.16 IN H6)
 DRY OUL9 TFMP. 23.9 DEC CC75.0 OEG F)

 BAG RESULTS
    3AG  NUMBER
    BLOWER OIF f MM. H20(IN. H20)
    OLOUFR INLET P MM. H20UN. H20)
    BLOWER INLET TFMP. DEG. C(DE6. F)
    ULOWfR REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
                                                     ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                            HOT TRANSIENT?

                                                   TEST NO.20-1   RUN 2
                                                   DATF  9/22/80
                                                   TIME 12:53
                                                     DYNO NO.  5
                                                                                                            PROJECT NO.  11-5044-001
                                                        DIESEL    EH-465-F
                                                          BAG  CART NO.  1
               RELATIVE HUMIDITY  ,   ENSINE-53.  PCT  ,   CVS-54.
               ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  10.1  6H/KGC  70.4 GRAINS/LB)
                                                                                                  PCT
                                                                                                      NOX  HUMIDITY  C.F.  1-0300
                                                         1
                                                  647.7 (?5.5)
                                                  5?3.2 (20.61
                                                   48.9 (120.0)
                                                      569t.
                                                     272.3
                                                  272.7 (  9632.)
                                   447.7  (25.5)
                                   523.2  (20.6)
                                    48.9  (120.0)
                                       6005.
                                      287.6
                                   287.6  (10158.)
                             647.7  (25.5)
                             523.2  (20.6)
                              48.9  (120.0)
                                  5695.
                                272.8
                             272.8  ( 9634.)
 n
 i
 CD
    HC  SAMPLE
    HC  3CKGRD
    CO  SAMPLE
    CO  BCKGRD
    C02 SAMPLE
    CO? aCKGRD
    NOX SAMPLE
    NOX BCKGRD
           METER/RANGE/PPM
           METER/RANGE/PPM
           METER/RANGE/PPM
           METER/RANGE/PPM
           MtTER/RANGE/PCT
           METER/RANGE/PCT
           METER/RANGE/PPM
           METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

HC  MASS GRAMS
CO  MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LO)
KW HR (HP HR)

BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
8SCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LO/HP HR)
6.7/221
9.7/ 1/
64.1/12/
.2/127
21.07 3/
2.4/ 3/
9.9/13/
.6/ 27
37.65
24.
139.
.30
29.2
3.76
44.10
1513.1
15.25
.868
1.57
2.40
28.15
965.69
9.74
.554
33.
10.
143.
0.
.34
.04
30.
1.









( 1.91)
( 2.10)
( 1.79)
( 20.99)
( 720.12)
( 7.26)
( .911)
6.8/227
8.77 17
74.8/127 1
.17127
26.87 3/
2.17 37
12.87137
.97 21
29.17
25.
169.
.41
37.6
4.21
56.47
2149.5
20.68
1.295
2.39
1.76
23.63
899.36
8.65
.542
34.
9.
73.
0.
.44
.03
38.
1.









t 2.86)
( 3.21)
( 1.31)
( 17.62)
( 670.65)
t 6.45)
< .891)
6.2/227
8.97 17
56.97127 1
.17127
21.47 37
2.37 3/
10.7/137
.37 27
37.15
22.
120.
.31
31.9
3.54
38.19
1555.0
16.62
.883
1.60
2.21
23.84
970.55
10.37
.551
31.
9.
23.
0.
.35
.04
32.
0.









(
<
(
(

















1.95V
2.15)
1.65)
17.78)
( 723.74)
(
(
7.74)
.906)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 BAGS

   TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
    OSHC   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSC02  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC  KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
                            5.56 (
                            2.07 (
                           24.96 (
                            939. (
                            9.45 (
 7.45)
 1.54)
18.61)
 700.)
 7.05)
                            .548  (   .901)
PART.  G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR)   .64  (.43)
                                                        PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 3 BAGS
90MM FILTER
     SAMPLE FLOW
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR
SCMCSCF)
G/TEST
6/KW HR (G7HP HR)*
     MULTIPLIER FOR  6/KG  FUEL  (67L3  FUEL)
                                                                 20  X  20 FILTERS
                                                                     SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                                 SCM(SCF)
 .735 ( 25.96)
1.133
 .2039 (  k1520)
 .3720 (  .1687)
                                                                      55.63 (1965.0)
-------
                                          TABLE C-17.
 ENGINE   NO.D20
 ENGINE   MODEL   80 VOLVO DUAL  FUEL
 ENGINE   9.6 L(S86. CID) 1-6
 CVS  NO.   10

 BAROMETER 740.66 MM HGC29.16  IN  MG)
 DRY  8ULO TEMP. 24.4 DEC C(76.0 DEC  F)

 BAG  RESULTS
    BAG  NUMBER
    BLOWER DIF f MM. H20(IN.  H20)
    BLOWER INLET P MM.  H20(IN.  H20)
    BLOWER INLET TEMP.  DEG.  C(DEG.  F)
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME  SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD.  CU.  METRES(SCF)
    HC
    HC
    CO
    CO
    C02
 o
  I
    SAMPLE
    BCKGRD
    SAMPLE
    BCKGRD
    SAMPLE
C02 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
Mfc TER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RAN6F./PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
HETER/RANGE/PPM
    DILUTION  FACTOR
    HC   CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO   CONCENTRATION PPH
    C02  CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX  CONCENTRATION PPH

    HC   MASS  GRAMS
    CO   MASS  GRAMS
    C02  MASS  GRAMS
    NOX  MASS  GRAMS
    FUEL  KG  (LB)
    KW HR  (HP  HR)

    BSHC  G/KU  HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSCO  G/KU  HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSC02  G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX  G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSFC  KG/KW HR  (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS  3  BAGS

   TOTAL  KU  HR (HP  HR)
    BSHC   G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSCO   G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSC02  G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX  G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
                             5.51  (
                             2.12  (
                            24.94  (
                             964.  (
                             7.64  <
                          7.40)
                          1.58)
                         18.59)
                          719. )
                          5.69)
    BSFC  K6/KU HR  (LB/HP  HR)    .575 (  .945)

 PART.  G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR)   .63  (.47)
                                                     ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                            HOT TRANSIENT?

                                                   TEST NO-20-1   RUN 3
                                                   DATF  9/22/80
                                                   TIME  1:29
                                                     DYNO NO.  5
                                                                                                              PROJECT NO. 11-5044-001
                                                                                 DIESEL   EN-465-F
                                                                                   BAG  C4RT NO.  1
                                                   RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,  EN6INE-52.  PCT  ,   CVS-54. PCT
                                                   ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.2 6M/KG(  71.4  GRAINS/LD)      NOX  HUMIDITY  C.F.  1.0DOO
1
*47.7 (25.5)
5?3.2 (20.6)
48.9 (120.0)
5696.
272.8
272.8 ( 9635.)
6.7/227 33.
9.7/ 1/ 10.
61.9/127 137.
.1/12/ 0.
21. 3/ 3/ .34
2.5/ 3/ .04
R.0/13/ 24.
.5/ 27 1.
37.18
24.
133.
.31
23.6
3.75
42.31
1531 .7
12.31
.877 ( 1.93)
1 .57 ( 2.10)
?.39 ( 1.78)
27.00 ( 20.14)
977.59 ( 728.99)
7.85 ( 5.86)
.560 ( .920)
647.7 (25^.5)
523.2 (20.6)
48. 9 (120-0)
6005.
287.7
287.6 (10158.)
6.9/22/ 34.
9.07 17 9.
74.3/127 17?.
.1/127 0.
27.37 37 .45
2.1/ 37 .03
10.2/137 30.
.57 21 1.
28.63
26.
167.
.42
30.0
4.25
55.97
21 95.8
16.50
1.318 ( 2.91)
2.37 ( 3.18)
1.79 { 1.33)
23.59 C 17.59>
925.57 ( 690.19)
6.96 ( 5.19)
.555 ( .913)
647.7 (25.5)
523. 2 (20.6)
48.9 (120.0)
5695.
272.7
272.7 ( 9633.)
6.3/227 31.
8.27 17 8.
58.2/127 127.
.17127 0.
21.77 37 .35
2.27 37 .03
8.7/137 26.
.57 27 1.
36.60
23.
124.
.32
25.5
3.69
39.24
1588.1
1S. 30
.974 ( 2
1.58 ( 2
2.34 ( 1
24.90 ( 18
1007.89 ( 751
8.44 ( 6
.618 ( 1.























.15)
.11)
.75)
.57)
.59)
.29)
017)
                                                        PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL  FOR  3  BA6S
90HN FILTER
     SAMPLE FLOW
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR
SCMCSCF)
G/TEST
G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
     MULTIPLIER FOR  6/K6 FUEL  (67LB  FUEL)
                                                             20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                 SAMPLE FLOU
                                                                      SCH(SCF)
 .737 ( 26.03)
1.130
 .2050 ( .1528)
 .3567 ( .1618)
                                                                                                          55.58 C1963.1)
-------
                                          TABLE C-18.
 ENGINE  NO.D20
 FNGINE  KODEL   80 VOLVO  DUAL  FUEL
 ENGINE  9.6 L(586. CIO) L-6
 CVS NO.  10

 QAROMETER /59.U MM HGC29.10  IN  HG)
 DRY BULH TEMP. 28.3 DEC C(83.0 OFG  F)

 BAG RESULTS
    BAG NUMBER
    OLOUER DIF P MM. H?0(IN.  H20)
    BLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN.  H20)
    OLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG.  CCDEG.
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOU STD.  CU. NETRES(SCF)
                                F)
    HC
    HC
    CO
    CO
 o
 i
 ro
 o
    SAMPLE
    UCKGRD
    SAMPLE
    OCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
C02 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPH
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
HETER/RANGE/PPH
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENT RATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAMS
    C02 MASS GR^MS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KU HR (HP HR)

    BSHC G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC KG/KU HR (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 BAGS
TOTAL KU HR (HP
BSHC
BSCO
6SC02
BSNOX
BSFC
G/KU
G/KU
G/KU
G/KU
KG7KU
HR
HR
HR
HR
HR
HR)
(G/HP
(G7HP
(G/HP
(G/HP
(LB/HP

HR)
HR)
HR)
HR)
HR)
5.01 (
1.83 1
27.18 (
949. (
7.77 (
.595 (
: 6.72)
: 1.37)
: ?0.27)
: 708.)
: 5.79)
: .978)
                                                     FNGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                            HOT TRANSIENT

                                                   TEST N0.20-2B  RUN 3
                                                   DATE  9/29/80
                                                   TIME
                                                     DYNO NO.  5
                                                                                                             PROJECT NO.  11-5044-001
                                                                                 DIESEL    EH-465-F
                                                                                   BAG CART MO.   1
                                                   RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,  ENSINE-42.'PCT  ,   CVS-60.  PCT
                                                   ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.3 GH7KG(  71.8 GRAINS7LB)       NOX HUMIDITY C.F.  1.0300
                                              1
                                       660.* (26.0)
                                       513.2 (20.*)
                                        48.9 (120.0)
                                           5694.
                                          272.7
                                       272.0 ( 9605.)
660.4 (26.0)
518.2 (20.4)
 4*.9 (120.0)
    6010.
   287.9
237.1 (10139.)
660.4 (26.0)
518.2 120.4)
 48.9 (120.0)
    5695.
   272.8
272.0 ( 9608.)
5.9/227
9.
52.
O/
1/
6/12/ 1
.47127
20.
3.
5/
1 /
7.7/1
-


11
38
?
3/
3/
3/
2/
.66

30.
9.
39.
1.
.33
.05
23.
1.












5.
9.
75.
.
24.
2.
9.
•


134.









m
22
3
42
141
11
.
1
2
28
.4
.26
.53
4.1
.68
855
.41
.32
30.21
1004


8
*
.71
.30
608






( 1
( 1
( 1






.89)
.89)
.73)









( 22.53)
( 749
( 6
\ •
.21)
.19)
999)



PARTICULAR DATA,



90MH
47227
I/ 17
37127 1
7/127
5/ 37
87 37
0/137
77 27
32.01
18.
169.
.36
26.2
3.01
56.43
1579.1
14.38
1.249
2.20
1.37
25.70
855.95
6.55
.569
TOTAL
27.
9.
75.
1.
.40
.04
27.
1.















5.67227
10.0/ 17
28.
10.


57.1/127 124.














2.75)
2.94)
1.02)
19.17)
638.28)


FOR
4.38)
.935)
3 BAGS
1.8/127
20.87 37
2.87 37
8.5/137
.87 27
38.27
19.
118.
.29
24.7
2.90
37.23
1462.4
12.86
.878
1.41
2.06
26.45
1038.99
9.14
.624

3.
.34
.04
25.
1.









( 1
C 1
C 1
t 19
( 774
( 6
( 1.















.93)
.89)
.54)
.72)
.77)
.81)
025)

FILTER
SAMPLE
FLOU
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
SCM(SCF)
G7TEST
G7KU HR
(6/HP HR)

6/K6 FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
.750 ( 26.50)
1.108
.2211 ( .1649)
.3715 ( .1685)
PART.  G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR)   .55  (.4!)
                                                             20 X 20  FILTERS
                                                                 SAMPLE  FLOU
                                                                       SCM(SCF)
                                    55.12 (1946.9)
-------
                                          TABLE C-19.   ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                                HOT TRANSIENT
                                                                                                          PROJECT  NO.  11-5044-001
ENGINE  NO.020
ENGINE  MODEL    80  VOLVO DUAL FUEL
ENGINE  9.6  L(586.  CID)  L-6
CVS NO.   10

BAROMETER 741.93 MM HG(?9.21 IN HG)
DRY BULB  TEMP.  25.0 DEG C(77.0 DEG F)

BAG RESULTS
   BAG  NUMBER
   BLOWER DIF  f MM. H20CIN- H20)
   BLOWER INLET P MM. H20CIN. H20)
   BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG.  C(DEG.  F)
   BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
   TIME SF CONOS
   TOTAL  FLOW  STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
                                                   TFST N0.20-1R  RUN
                                                   BATE  9/30/80
                                                   TIME 11:20
                                                     RYNO NO.  5
                                                                                 DIESEL   EH-465-F
                                                                                   BAG C*RT NO.   1
                                                   RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,  ENGINE-52.  PCT  ,   CVS-60.
                                                   ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.5 GN/KG(  73-7  6RAINS/LB)
                                                                                                   PCT
                                                                                            NOX HUMIDITY  C.F.  1.0300
                                                         1
                                                  670.6 (26.4)
                                                  523.2 (20.6)
                                                   48.9 (120.0)
                                                      5693.
                                                     272.3
                                                  272.8 ( 9635.)
                                                           670.6  (2<.4)
                                                           5?3.2  (20.6)
                                                            48.9  (120.0)
                                                               601 0.
                                                              2B7.S
                                                           288.0  (10171.)
                              670.6 (26.4)
                              523.2 (20.6)
                               48.9 (120.0)
                                  5693.
                                 272.6
                              272.8 (  9635.)
 o
 I
    HC
    HC
    CO
    CO
    SAMPLE
    BCKGRD
    SAMPLE
    BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
C02 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METF.R/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
HETER/RANGE/PPH
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
    DILUTION  FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION  PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION  PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION  PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION  PPM

    HC  MASS  GRAMS
    CO  MASS  GRAMS
    CO? MASS  GRAMS
    NOX MASS  GRAMS
    FUEL KG  (LB)
    KW HR (HP HR)

    BSHC G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KV HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSC02 G/KU HR  (G/HP  HR)
    BSNOX G/KW IIR  (G/HP  HR)
    BSFC KG/KU HR  (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 BAGS

   TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
    BSHC   G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSC02  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC  KG/KW HR (LB/HP  HR)
                             5.08  (
                             1.79  (
                          6.81)
                          1.34)
                            25.17  (  13.77)
                             905.  (   675.)
                             9.00  (   6.71)
                             .548  (   .901)
 PART.  G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR)  .58  (.43)
6.
9.
61.
3.
20.
3.
9.
•
















0/22/
8/ 1/
6/12/ 1
7/12/
6/ 3/
4/ 3/
3/13/
9/ 21
38.50
20.
126.
.28
26.9
3.20
39.94
1404.2
14.03
.844
1.43
2.23
27.85
979.21
9.78
.589
30.
10.
36.
7.
.33
.05
?8.
1.









( 1.86)
( 1.92)
( 1.66)
( 20.77)
( 730.20)
( ' 7.30)
( .968)
5.5/227
9.2/ M
72-9/12/ 1
3.3/12/
24. 4/ 3/
3.3/ 3/
10.4/13/
.87 21
32.19
19.
157.
.35
30-4
3.09
52.73
1836.3
16.77
1.1 50
2.22
1.39
23.73
826.46
7.55
.518
28.
9.
68.
6.
.40
.05
31.
1.









( 2.54)
( 2.98)
t 1.04J
( 17.70)
( 616.29)
( 5.63)
( .851)
S.5/22/
10. O/ M
55.7/12/ 1
3.5/12/
20. 4/ 3/
3.8/ 3/
9.8/13/
.9/ 21
39.08
18.
111.
.27
28.6
2.83
35.24
1357.0
14.92
.789
1.43
1.99
24.73
952.14
10.47
.554
28.
10.
20.
7.
.33
.06
29.
1.









( 1
( 1
( 1
( 18
( 710
( 7
(

















.74)
.91)
.48)
.44)
.01)
.81)
910)
                                                        PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL  FOR  3  BASS
90HH FILTER
     SAMPLE FLOW
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR
SCH(SCF)
G/TEST
G/KU HR (6/HP HR)
     MULTIPLIER FOR  6/K6  FUEL  (G/LB  FUEL)
                                                                 20 X 20  FILTERS
                                                                     SAMPLE  FLOW
                                                                                  SCH(SCF)
                                                                                                .764 ( 27.00)
                                                                                               1.090
                                                                                                .2146 ( .1600)
                                                                                                .3917 C .1777)
                                                                                               55.28 (1952.3)
-------
                                          TABLE C-20.
ENGINE  NO.1'20

ENCll'.E  'v'.^LC
ov'S ;;o,  10
                  X'  VOLVO DUALFUEL
                  j,  CIJ)  I- 6
i' A i \ C.'' _ i r. R / 311 o 4 M h
PRY DULB TEMP. 22.2

PAG
                      :;C(27,40 IN HG)
                      DCG C(72,0 DEG F)






BAG NUMDER
PLOUER DIF P iVI,
BLOUER INLET P MM
BLOWER INLET TEMP
BLOWER REVOLUTION
TIM: SECONDS

H20(IN, H20)
. M20(IN, 1120)
. PEG, C(DEG, F)
S

rjfAL FLOU STIi. CU, METRES (SCF)

HC SAMPLE METER/
RANGE/PPM
HC PCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM

CO SAMPLE METER/
RANCE/PPM
CO PCKGRP METER/RANGE/PPM

n
i
fv>
ro









C02 SAMPLE METER/
R,tNGE/PCT
CL'2 PCKGRD METER/PANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE ilETER/
r/CX L'CKGRJ.i MEIER/,
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION
CO CONCENTRATION
C02 CONCENTRATION
NCX CONCENTRATION
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS CRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX ,ViSS CRAMS
RnNGE/PPM
RV.i/b'E/PPM

PPM
PPM
PCT
PPM




    FUEL ,\G (LP)
    KU IIR (HP MR)

    BSKC G/KU h'R (G/HP IIR)
    S'JCO C/KU MR (G/HP MR)
F3C02 G/KU
D3NOX G/KU
HSFC KG/KU
                R (G/I,'P IIR)
                R (G/HP HR)
                R (LB/IIP HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 DAGS

   TOTAL ,\U h'R (JIP HR)
    USMC   G/KU HR (G/IIP HR)
    FSCO   G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCQ2  C/KU I!R (G/HP IIR)
    BSNOX  G/KU HR (G/KP MR)
    I-'SFC  NG/'KW HR (LB/IIP HR)
                            4,59  (  6,15)
                            2,26  (  1,69)
                           19,21  ( 14,32)
                                    713.)
                                    7,95)
 963,
10,66 (
 ,597 (
                                     ,982)
                                                     ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                           H-TRANS,
                                                                                                             PROJECT NC,  11-3044-001
                                                   TEST NO,20-IB
                                                   BATE 11/13/30
                                                   TIME
                                                     DYNO NO,  5
                                                                      RUN
                                                                DIESEL   EM-465-F
                                                   RELATIVE HUMIDITY r  ENGINE-37, PCT
                                                   ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  6.2 GM/KG( 43,5 GRAINS/LP)
                                                                  BAG CART NO,

                                                               CVS-20, PCT
                                                                                                                1
                                                                           NOX HUMIDITY C.F,  1,0000
                                                      603.3 (27,0)
                                                      528,3 (20,0)
                                                       43,? (120,0)
                                                          5694,
                                                         272,6
                                                      277.2 (  7792.)
                                                                      605,8 (27,0)
                                                                      528,3 (20,8)
                                                                       40,? (120,0)
                                                                          6011,
                                                                         237,8
                                                                      292,7 (10337,)
                                                               635,3 (27,0)
                                                               52G.3 (20,8)
                                                                43,9 (120,0)
                                                                   5692,
                                                                  272,6
                                                               277,1 (  9789.)
5,5/22/
6,5/ I/
91.5/13/
5.4/13/
10, 4/ 3/
2,6/ 3/
7.5/13/
,4/ 2/
43,72
21,
36,
,26
23,0
3,42
27,39
1290,5
14,04
,776
1,29
2,65
21,63
1007,05
11,51
.602
28, 5,6/22/ 23, 5,4/22/ 27,
7, 6,5/ I/ 7, 6,5/ I/ 7.
92, 50.0/12/ 106, 33.3/13/ 83,
5, 1.7/12/ 3, 2.5/13/ 2,
,29 23, O/ 3/ ,37 19, 4/ 3/ ,31
.04 2,e/ 3/ ,04 3, I/ 3/ .05
28, 11.0/13/ 33, 10.1/13/ 30,
0, ,4/ 2/ 0, ,4/ 2/ 0,
34,70 -11,57
22, 21.
101, 80,
,33 ,27
32,5 30,0
3,66 3,29
34,56 25,71
1776,1 1245, C
10.19 15.72
( 1,71) 1,164
( 1,73) 2,06
( 1,98) 1,78
( 16,13) 16,31
( 750.96) 863,92
( 8,58) 0,35
( ,989) ,566
PARTICIPATE DATA* TOTAL





90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
( 2,57)
( 2,76)
( 1,33)
( 12,54)
( 644,23)
( 6,60)
( .931)
FOR 3 BAGS

SCM(SCF)
G/TEST
,801 (
1,24 (
2,65 (
20,66 (
1,77)
1,67)
1,97)
15,41)
1081,52 ( 806,49)
12,80 (
,644 (




G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
G/KG FUEL
(G/LB FUEL)
9,54)
1,058)


,71
,92
,20:
,33'
 PART. 6/KW-HR (G/HP-HR)  .60  (.45)
                                                             20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                 SAMPLE FLOW
                                                      SCM(SCF)
                                                                                                              ,711  (  32,19)
                                                                                                                 9
                                                                                                                 25 (  ,1510)
                                                                                                                 91 (  ,1530)


                                                                                                            58.25  (2057.4)
-------
                            APPENDIX D





TRANSIENT  TEST RESULTS FROM THE METHANOL-CATALYST CONFIGURATION
-------
             TABLE D-l.  NOTES CONCERNING TEST RESULTS GIVEN IN APPENDIX D
Table No.

Methanol &
Catalyst

Cold Start

   D-2


   D-3



   D-4
                            Notes
Hot Start

   D-5


   D-6


   D-7


Bus Cycle

   D-8



   rvg
Passed statistical requirements.  Results used for regulated
emissions.  NOX by bag measurement was 7.12 g/kW-hr.

Failed statistical requirements TQ intercept - 18.6.  Results
used for regulated emissions.  NOX by bag measurement was 7.43
g/kW-hr.

Volvo requested that throttle be fully closed during idle
to insure electrical contact for solenoid operation.  In order
to assure throttle closure large negative torque command was
generated by the control tape.  With the throttle fully
closed the engine may have been motored more than for previous
runs.  Results from these tests were not used for regulated
emissions.  Failed statistical requirements, TQ intercept
-18.8, torque and power slope about 4% high.  Further runs
for record with negative TQ command were discontinued and
other methods of dynamometer control were pursued.
Failed statistical requirements, TQ intercept -16.4.  Results
used for regulated emissions.

Passed statistical requirements.  Results used for regulated
emissions.

Same as D-4 but test passed statistical requirements.  Results
not used for regulated emissions.
Failed statistical requirements, TQ intercept -16.8.  Results
used for regulated emissions. NOX by bag measurement was 7.76
g/kW-hr.
                                     2
Failed statistical requirements, TQ R  3 percent low.  Results
used for regulated emissions.  NOX by bag measurement was 7.81
g/kW-hr.  NOX emission estimated to be 8.03 g/kW-hr on the basis
of bag NOX.
                                         D-2
-------
   TABLE D-l  (CONT'D).  NOTES  CONCERNING  TEST  RESULTS  GIVEN  IN  APPENDIX  D
Table No.

Methanol &
Catalyst &
Back Pressure
Device

Cold Start

   D-10
                         Notes
    D-ll
Hot Start

    D-12



    D-13



Bus Cycle

    D-14
Volvo requested that a backpressure device be used in
conjunction with the catalyst.  The device is only effective
at closed throttle conditions such as motoring and at idle
and serves as a "fast engine and catalyst warm-up device."
Idle diesel fuel rate was increased to maintain curb idle
speed.  Results used for regulated emission.  Failed statis-
tical requirements, torque, and power slope about 2 percent
high, torque and power intercept - 29.5 and -5.3 respectively.
    measurement was 8.18 g/kW-hr.
Failed statistical requirements, TQ intercept - 24.8%.  Cycle
power  >15 percent below cycle command power.  Results used
for regulated emissions.  NOX by bag measurement was 8.47
g/kW-hr.
Failed statistical requirements,- TQ and Power intercept were
-32.9 and -6.6, torque and power slope were '^6 percent high.
Results used for regulated emissions.

Failed statistical requirements, TQ and power slope were
1 percent and 4 percent high, respectively.  Results used
for regulated emissions.
Failed statistical requirements, TQ R  slightly low.  Results
used for regulated emissions.
                                         D-3
-------
                                           TABLE D-2.
  ENGINE  NO.D20
  ENGINE  MOOFL   80 VOLVO  DUAL  FUEL
  ENGINE  9.6 LC>86. CID) L-6
  CVS NO.   10

  BAROMETER 747.?7 MM HG(?9.4?  IN  HG)
  DRY OULF1 TEMP. 25.6 DEG CC78.0 DEG  F)

  BAG RESULTS
     BAG NUMBER
     DfSCR IPTION
     BLOWER DIF P MM. H20CIN. H20)
     BLOWFR INLET P HH. H20CIN.  H20)
     BLOWER INLET TEMP. DFG. CCDEG. F)
     BLOWFR REVOLUTIONS
     TIME SECONDS
     TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. HETRES(SCF)

     HC  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH
     HC  BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPH
     CO  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH
     CO  BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPH
     C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
     C02 BCKGRD METFR/RANGE/PCT
,     NOX SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPH
     NOX BCKGRD ^ETER/RANGE/PPH

     DILUTION FACTOR
     HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
     CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
     C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
     NOX CONCENTRATION PPH

     HC  MASS GRAHS
     CO  MASS GRAMS
     C02 MASS GRAMS
     NOX MASS GRAMS
     FUEL  KG (LB)
     KW HR  (HP HR)

     BSHC  G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
     BSCO  G/KW H3  (G/HP HR)
     BSCO?  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
     BSNOX  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
     BSFC  KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)

 TOTAL  TEST RESULTS  4 BAGS

    TOTAL  KW HR  (HP  HR)          11.08 (
     BSHC    G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)      .30 (
     BSCO    G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)    5.36 (
     BSC02   G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)    910. (
     BSNOX   G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)    7.72 (
     BSFC   KG/KW HR  (LB/HP.HR)    .538 (
                                        14.86)
                                          .23)
                                         4.00)
                                         679.)
                                         5.76)
                                         .885)
  ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
        COLD TRANSIENT

TFST N0.21-1C  RUN
DATE 10/ 3/80
TIME
  DYNO NO.  5
                                                                                                              PROJECT  NO.  11-5J44-001
                                                                                                DIESEL   EH-465-F
                                                                                                  BAG CIRT NO.   1
                                                       RELATIVE  HUMIDITY  ,   ENGTNE-49. PCT ,  CVS-61. PCT
                                                       ABSOLUTE  HUMIDITY  10.2 6M/KG(  71.2 GRAINS/LB)      NOX  HUMIDITY  C.F.
                                                                       1.0000
                                                              1
                                                            NYNF
                                                      670.6  (26.4)
                                                      520.7  (20.5)
                                                       48.9  (120.0)
                                                           6182.
                                                          296.0
                                                      299.1  (10563.)
                        LAl
                   670.6  (26.*)
                   520.7  (20.5)
                    48.9  (120.0)
                       6262.
                      299.9
                   303.0  (10700.)
       3
      LAF
670.6 (24.*)
520.7 (20.5)
 48.9 (120.0)
    6371.
   305.0
308.2 (10886.)
     NYNF
470.& (26.4)
520.7 (20.5)
 48.9 (120.0)
    6201.
   297.0
300.0 (1059i.)
4
9
57
.3/22/
. 4/
1/
.2/12/ 1
3.5/12/
19
3
7
1



'



.O/
. 21
.8/1
.O/
42
1
11
B
22
2
39
3/
3/
3/
21
.01
2.
5.
26
.5
.15
.96
22.
9.
24.
7.
.30
.05
23.
1.






















1406.9








12
.
1
1
35
1251
11
»
.88
810
.12
.91
.55
.46
.46
720

( 1.
( 1.
( 1.
( 26.
( 933.
( 8.

79)
51)
43)
51)
22)
55)
( 1.184)
2.9/227
8.9/ M
50.87137
7.27137
25.77 37
3.27 37
9.1/13/
.9/ 27
31.46
6.
41.
.37
26.5
1.05
14.35
2065.9
15.36
1.208
2.01
.52
7.14
1028.09
7.64
.601
PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL



90MM
15.
9.
48.
6.
.42
.05
27.
1 .









t 2
( 2
(
( 5
t 766
< 5
(
FOR 4

















.66).
.69)
.39)
.32)
.65)
.70)
988)
BAGS
1.8/227
7.67 17
13.3/137
7.6/137
57.07 37 1
3.17 37
25.4/13/
.8/ 21
13.32
2.
5.
.96
75.3
.39
1.8S
5417.1
44.41
3.314
6.85
.06
.27
790.64
6.48
.484

9.
8.
12. 1
7.
1.5/22/ 7.
8.77 17 9.
6.8/13/ 15.
6.3/13/ 5.




.00 16.57 3/ .26
.05
76.
1.









( 7.31)
( 9.19)
( .04)
( .20)
( 589.58)
( 4.83)
( .795)

3.07 3/ .05
7.8/1J/ 23.
.87 21 1.
50.58
-1.
9.
.22
22.5
-.22
3.22
1196.3
12.91
.636 (
1.10 (
-.20 (
2.93 (
1089.87 ( 81
11.76 (
.579 (













1.40)
1.47)
-.15)
2.19)
2.72)
8.77)
.953)

FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
SCM(SCF)
G/TEST
S/KW HR
(G7HP HR)
1.279
.946
( 45.18)



.085* ( .0637)
               MULTIPLIER  FOR   G/K6 FUEL (6/LB FUEL)    .1585  (  .0719)
PART.  6/KV/-HR (6/HP-HR)   .25  (.19)
                                                                 20 X  20  FILTERS
                                                                     SAMPLE FLOW
                               SCM(SCF)
                                                       81.88  (2892.0)
-------
 ENGINE  NO.DSf]
 ENGINE  MODEL    so  VOLVO  DUAL  FUEL
 ENGINE  R.b L(58b.  CIO) l.-b
 CVS  NO,   10

 BAROMETfR  717.7P  MM HG(?9.H1  IN  HG)
 DRY  BULB  TEMP,  S5,n DE5 C(77,n DtG  F)

 BAG  RESULTS
    BAG  NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER  OIF  P MM. HaotlN,  H20)
    BLOWER  INLET P MM,  H20(IN.  H?0)
    BLQWER  INLET TEMP,  DEG.  CCDEG,  F)
    BLOWER  REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL  FLOW  3TD.  CU. METRES(SCF)
                                          TABLE D-3.   ENGINE EMISSION RtsuiT3
                                                              COLO TRANSIENT

                                                      TEST N0.21-2C  RUN
                                                      DATE 10X 7/80
                                                      TIME
                                                        DYNO NO,  5
                                                                                                           PROJECT  NO,  11-5044-001
    HC
    HC
    CO
    CO
        SAMPLE
        BCKGRO
        SAMPLE
        BCKGRD
    COS SAMPLE
    COS BCKGPO
    NO* SAMPLE
    NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
M E T F R / R 4 N G E / P P M
METER/RANGE/PPM
j     DILUTION  FACTOR
     HC   CONCENTRATION  PPM
     CO   CONCENTRATION  PPM
     COS  CONCENTRATION  PCT
     NOX  CONCENTRATION  PPM

     HC   MASS  GRAMS
     CO   MASS  GRAMS
     COS  MASS  GRAM3
     NOX  MASS  GRAMS
     FUEL  KG  (LB)
     KW HR  (HP  HR)

     8SHC  G/KW  HR  (G/HP  HR)
     BSCO  G/KW  HR  (G/HP  HR)
     HSC02  G/KW HR  (G/HP  HR)
     BSNOX  G/KW HR  (G/HP  HP)
     BSFC  KG/KW HR  (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS t HAGS

    TOTAL  KW HR (HP HR)
     BSHC   G/KW HR (G/HP HP)
     BSCO   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
     BSC02  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
     BSNOX  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
                               11.Ib (  14,97)
                                 .HI (    .31)
                                5.7) (   4.2b)
                                115. (   bBS.)
                                7.1b (   5,34)
    BSFC  KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR1   .538 (   ,88H)

PART.  G/KV/-HR (6/HP-HR)   .25  (.19)
                                                                               DIESEL    EM-HbS-F
                                                                                 BAG CART  NO,   i
                                                      RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,   ENGINE-SI, PCT ,   cvs-47. PCT
                                                      ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,2 GM/KGC 71,7 GRAIN3/LB)      NOX HUMIDITY C.F, 1,0000

b?0
520
48


299
23.
q
54.
f
18.
2.
b.
t













NYNF
.b (2b
.7 (20

,4)
.5)
,9 (120,0)
blBl,
29b.O


.5 (10577.)
3/11/
8X IX
OX12X
b/lSX
BX 3X
7X 3X
bX13X
7X ?X
42,54
1^..
112.
.2b
19.2
2.37
39.21
1431.4
10,98
.754
1.12
2.13
35.15
1283,38


9,84
.b7b
23.
10,
lib.
1,
.30
.04
20,
1.









( 1
C 1
( 1
( 2b
( 957
( 7
C 1.
LANF
b70,b (2b,
520.7 (20.
48,9 (120
b2b4.
300,0

4)
5)



,0)


303.5 (10719
Ib.SXilX
9.2X IX
52.7X13X
1.5X13X
25, 2X 3X
2,bX 3X
7.9X13X
,8X 2X
32,09
7.
48.
.37
22.8
1.29
lb.81
2070.7
13, 8b
,bb) 1,215
,50) 2,02
,59) ,b4
.21) 8.33
,01) 1025.97
,34) b.57
111) ,b02
PARTICULATE DATAi TOTAL














90MM




20 X

FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
20 FILTERS
SAMPLE FLOW
Ib
9
50
1
,*


.)
t
t
t
f
1
.04
24
1









(
(
(
(
(
(
(
•
•









2,bB) •
2,71)
.48)
b,21)
7b5,07)
4,90)
,990)
3
LAP
b70.b (2b.
520.7 (20,
48,9 (120
b370,
305,0

4)
S)
,0)


308, b (10900.)
11.1X11X
7,bX IX
9.7X13X
1.4X13X
57.0X 3X 1
2.7X 3X
23.9X13X
l.OX 2X
13,33
4,
7,
.97
70.7
,72
2,55
545b,2
41, 7b
3,34b
b.8b
.11
.37
795,33
b,09
,488
11.
8.
8,
1.
,00
.04
72.
1.









( 7
( 9
(
(
( 593
( 4
(
4
NYNF
b70,b (?b,4)
520,7 (20,5)
48,9 (120,n)
k?OE ,
297,0
300,5 (10bl3,)
9.2X11X 9,
B,3X IX 8,
18.5X13X Ib.
1.5X13X 1.
lb,8X 3/ ,2?
2,7/ 3/ ,04
8.3/13/ 25,
,8/ 2/ 1,
49,58
1,
15,
,23
24.2
,19
5,18
1250,8
13,93
,38) ,b8b ( 1
,20) 1,17 t 1
,08) ,lb (
,28) 4.14 ( 3
,08) 1070.45 ( 798
.54) 11,92 ( 8
802) ,587 ( ,
























.51)
,57)
,12)
.31)
,24)
,89)
9bb)
FOR 4 BAGS





SCM(SCF)
GXTEST
GXKW HR



(GXHP HR)




GXKG FUEL (GXLB FUEL)




SCM(SCF)

1.243 ( 43,92)
.975
.0873 ( ,0b51)
,lb24 ( .0737)

82.82 (2925.1)







-------
 tNCIM  NO.D20
 ENGlNt  MODEL   80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL
 INGINE  9.f, L(586. CID) L-6
 CVS NO.  10

 BAKOMEUR 734.90 Mn HGI29.13 IN HG )
 UkY BULd TEMP, 26.7 DEC CI80.0 DEC F}

 BAG RESULTS
    BAG NUMBER
    DE SCRIPT ION
    BLOWER DIP P MM. H20UN. H20 )
    BLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN. H20)
    BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F)
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
               METfcR/RANGE/PPM
               METER/HANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPH
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PCT
               METER/RANGE/PCT
               MfcTER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/HANGE/PPM
    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CU  MASS GRAMS
    C02 MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    t-UEL KG (LB)
    KW HR (HP HR)

    BSHC G/KW HR  (C/HP  HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR  (C/HP  Hk)
    BSC02 G/KW HR  (G/HP  HR)
    BSNOX G/KW HR  (G/HP  HR I
    BSFC KC/KW HR  (LB/HP HK)
          NEGATIVE TORaUE COMAND
  TABLE D-4.    ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                       COLD TRANSIENT

               TEST N0.21-4C  RUN
               DATE 10/ 9/80
               TIME
                 DYNO NO.  5
                                                                                                           PROJECT  NO.  11-5044-001
t)
1
o
HC
HC
CO
CO
C02
C02
NOX
NOX
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
TOTAL  TEST  RESULTS  4  BAGS

   TOTAL  Kh HR  (HP  HR)          12.14
    BSHC    G/Kh  HR  (C/HP HR)      .68
    BSCO    C/KH  HR  (G/HP HR)     7.09
    BSC02   C/KW  HK  IG/HP HR)     838.
    BSNOX   C/KW  HR  (C/HP HR)     6.57
    BSFC  KG/KW  HR  (LB/HP  HR)    .526
16.27)
  .51)
 5.28)
 625.)
 4.90)
 .865)
                     DIESEL   EM-465-F
                       BAG CART NO.  1
               RELATIVE HUMIDITY t  ENCINE-46. PCT ,  CVS- 0. PCT
               ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.2 CM/KG!  71.3 GRAINS/LB)      NOX HUMIDITY  C.F.  1.0000
                     1
                   NYNF
              670.6  (26.4)
              520.7  (20.5)
               48.9  (120.0)
                  6205.
                 297.0
              296.7  (10481.)
       2
     LANF
670.6 (26.4)
520.7 (20.5)
 48.9 (120.0)
    6267.
   300.0
299.7 (10586.)
       3
      LAF
670.6 (26.4)
520.7 (20.5)
 48.9 (120.0)
    6372.
   305.0
304.7 (10763.)
       4
     NYNF
670.6 (26.4)
520.7 (20.5)
 46.9 (120.0)
    6204.
   297.0
296.7 (10479.)
28. 9/ 2/ 39. 23. 8/ 2/
11. 21 21 11. 11. 7/ 21
64.9/12/ 1*5. 61.7/13/
.3/12/ I. .8/13/
17. 9/ 3/ .29 25. 4/ 3/
2.2/ 3/ .03 2.4/ 3/
20. I/ 21 20. 25. 5/ 21
l.O/ 2/ 1. l.l/ 2/
44.16 31.69
18. 12.
144. 58.
.25 .38
19.1 24.4
3.07 2.16
49.59 20.40
1376.8 2080.6
10.85 14.01
.846
1.18
2.61
42.12
1169.43
9.22
.718
1 1.86) 1.285
( 1.58) 2.21
1.95) .97
31.41) 9.22
872.05) 940.15
6.88) 6.33
1.181) .581
PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL





90HH FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
24. 20. 9/ 21 21.
12. 10. 5/ 21 11.
60. 18.9/13/ 17.
1. 1.1/13/ 1.
.41 57. 8/ 3/ 1.02
.04 2.21 3/ .03
26. 73. 21 21 73.
1. 2. I/ 21 2.
13.10
11.
16.
.99
71.3
1.97
5.52
5515.7
41.54
2.83)
2.97)
.73)
6.87)
701.07)
4.72)
.955)
FOR 4 BAGS

SCM(SCF)
G/TEST
3.556 7
7.52 10
.26
.73
733.05 546
5.52 4
.473




G/KW HR (C/HP HR)
G/KG FUEL
(C/L8 FUEL)
16
10
34
1
15
2
25
1
.84)
.09)
.20)
.55)
.63)
.12)
777)


1.219 (
.983
.0810
.1540
.BX 21 17.
.7/ 21 11.
.9/13/ 32.
.6/13/ I.
.9/ 3/ .25
.!/ 3/ .03
.I/ 21 25.
.7/ 21 i.
52.02
6.
30.
.22
23.4
1,08
10.49
1202.6
13.30
.698
1.22
.88
8.59
984.45
10.89
.571


43.04)

( .0604)
1 .0696)
1.54)
1.64)
.66)
6.40)
734.11)
8.12)
.939)






PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR)   .20  (.15)
                                                                20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                    SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                                    SCM(SCF)
                                                                      80.10 (2829.0)
-------
                                           -  TABLE  D-5.
                                                     ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                            HOT TRANSIENT
                                                                                                                 PROJECT NO. 11-5944-301
   ENGINE   NO.D20
   ENGINE   MODEL   80 VOLVO DUAL  FUEL
   ENGINE   9.6 l_(586. CIO) L-6
   CVS  NO.   10

   BAROMETER 747.37 MM HGC29.42  IN  HG)
    DRY  BULH TEMP. 27.8 DEC C(82.0 DEG  F)

   BAG  RESULTS
       BAG  NUMBER
       DESCRI PTION
       BLOWER DIP P MM- H20(IN. H20)
       BLOUER INLET P MH.  H20UN.  H20)
       BLOWER INLET TEMP.  DEG.  C(DEG.  F)
       BLOUER RESOLUTIONS
       TIME  SECONDS
       TOTAL FLOU STD. CU.  METRES(SCF)
                                                   TEST N0.21-1H
                                                   DATF 10/ 3/80
                                                   TINE
                                                     DYNO NO.  5
                                                                          RUN  1
                               DIESEL   -EH-465-F
                                 BAG CART NO.   1
                                                   RELATIVE HUMIDITY  ,   EN6INE-43.  PCT ,   CVS-56. PCT
                                                   ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  10.2  SM/KG(  71.2 GRAINS/LB)       NOX  HUMIDITY  C.F.  1.DDOO
                                                         1
                                                       NYNF
                                                  670.6 (26.A)
                                                  520.7 (?0-5)
                                                   48.9 (120.0)
                                                      6181.
                                                     296.0
                                                  298.9 (10556.)
              LANF
         670.6 (26.4)
         5?0.7 (20.5)
          48.9 (120.0)
             6262.
            299.9
         302.8 (10695.)
                3
               LAF
        670.6  (26.4)
        520.7  (20.5)
         48.9  (120.0)
             6370.
            305.0
        308.0  (13879.)
            4
          NYNF
     670.5 (26.4)
     520.7 (20.5)
      48.9 (120.0)
         62Q1 .
        297.0
     299.8 (10591.)
W
 i
-vl
HC  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC  8CKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPM
CO  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH
CO  BCKGRD NETER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM

DILUTION  FACTOR
HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
       C02
       NOX
    CONCENTRATION  PCT
    CONCENTRATION  PPM
       HC  MASS  GRAMS
       CO  MASS  GRAMS
       C02 MASS  GRAMS
       NOX MASS  GRAMS
       FUEL KG  (LB)
       KW HR  (HP HR)

  |     BSHC G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
       BSCO G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
       BSC02  G/KW  HR  (G/HP HR)
       BSNOX  G/KU  HR  (6/HP HR)
       BSFC KG/KU  HR  (LB/HP HR)

   TOTAL TEST RESULTS  4  BAGS

      TOTAL KU  HR  (HP  HR)
       BSHC   G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
       BSCO   G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
       BSC02  G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
       BSNOX  G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
                            11.15  (  14.96)
                              .15  (    .11 )
                             2.97  (   2-21)
                             879.  (   656.)
                             7.57  (   5.64)
       BSFC  KG/KW HR  (LB/HP  HR)    .517 (  .849)
     PART.  G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR)  .3!  (.23)
14
9
50
1
16
2
7
1
















.1/11/
.9/ I/
.1/13/
.6/13/
.3/ 3/
.8/ 3/
-0/13/
.1/ 21
50.48
4.
45.
.22
19.9
.76
15.59
1190.2
11.40
.645
1.12
.68
13.87
1058.66
10.14
.574
14.
10.
47.
1.
.26
.04
21.
1.









( 1.4Z)
( 1.51)
( .50)
( 10.34)
( 789.44)
( 7.56)
( .944)
13.1/11/
9.5/ I/
38.4/13/
1.2/13/
24. 6/ 3/
2.8/ 3/
9.1/13/
.9/ 2/
33.05
4.
35.
.36
26.5
.68
11.78
1991.4
15.35
1.156
2.03
.34
5.81
982.36
7.57
.570
1 3.
10.
35.
1.
.40
.04
27.
1.









( 2.55)
( 2.72)
( .25)
( 4.33)
( 732.55)
( 5.65)
( .937)
9.3/11/ 9.
8.3/ I/ 8.
8.6/13/ 8.
1.0/13/ 1.
56. 7/ 3/ 1.00
2.8/ 3/ .04
25.4/13/ 76.
1.0/ 21 1.
13.41
2.
6.
.96
75.3
.30
2.31
5404.2
44.35
3.309 (. 7.29)
6.90 ( 9.25)
.04 ( .03)
.34 ( .25)
783.73 ( 584.40)
6.43 I 4.80)
.480 ( .789)
7.6/11/
8.1/ 1/
12.1/13/
.8/13/
16. 6/ 3/
2.8/ 3/
8.0/13/
1.0/ 2/
50.34
-0.
10.
.22
23.2
-.06
3. 39
1221.5
13.29
.651
1.11
-.05
3.07
1103.90
12.01
.588
8.
8.
11.
1 .
.26
.04
24.
1 .









( 1.44)
( 1.48)
( -.04)
( 2.29)
( 823.18)
( 8.95)
( .967)
                                                        PARTICULATE DATA,'TOTAL  FOff 4  BAGS
90MM FILTER
     SAMPLE FLOW
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR

20 X 20 FILTERS
    SAMPLE FLOkl     SCHCSCF)
SCH(SCF)
G/TEST
G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
G/KG FUEL (G/LQ  FUEL)
1.293 ( 45.68)
 .935
 .0839 (  .0625)
 .1623 (  .0736)
                                                                                                                  81.24  (2869.5)
-------
                                         TABLE D-6.
ENGINE  N0.n?0
ENGINE  MODEL   BO VOLVO DUAL FUEL
ENGINE  9,b L(58b. cio) L»B
CV3 NO,  10

BAROMETER 7t7,78 MM Hr,(?9.44 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. 24. •» DEC c(?b.o DEC FJ

BAG RESULTS
   BAG NUMBFR
   DtSCRIPTTON
   BLOWER njF P MM
a
i
CO
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO?
CO?
NOX
NOX
SAMPLE
hCKRRD
SAMPLE
BCKGBO
SAMPLE
BCKGRO
SAMPLE
BCKGRO
                     H?0(IN, H?0)
    BLOWER INLET P MM, HJotiN, H?O)
    BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(D£G. F)
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOVi STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METEH/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PCT
               METER/RANGE/PCT
               METER/R4NGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPM
    DILUTION FACTOR
    MC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    COS CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    MC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAMS
    CO? MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG fLB)
    KW HR fHP HR)

    BSHC G/KH HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSC03 G/KW  HR  CG/HP HR)
    BSNOX G/KW  HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSFC KG/KN  HR  (LB/HP HR)
TOTAL  TEST  RESULTS  4  BAGS

   TOTAL  KW HR  (HP  HR)
    BSHC    G/KW  HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSCO    G/KW  HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSCO?   G/KW  HR  (G/HP HR)
    B3NOX   G/KW  HR  (G/HP HR)
                              11,19  (  IS.OS)
                                .ID  (    .08)
                               3.72  (   2.78)
                               8fa7.  (   b47.)
                               7.17  (   S.3S)
   BSFC  KG/KW HS  (LB/HP  HR)    ,613  (   .843)

 PART. G/KW-HR  (G/HP-HR)   .36  (.27)
  ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
         HOT TRANSIENT

TEST N0.21-2H  RUN
DATE 10X 7/80
TIME
  DYNO NO.   5
                                                                                                           PROJECT  NO,  11-S044«001
                                                                                              DIESEL    EM-4bS-F
                                                                                                BAG CART NO.   1
                                                      RELATIVE  HUMIDITY  ,   ENGINE-SB,  PCT  ,  CV3-47, PCT
                                                      ABSOLUTE  HUMIDITY  10.1  GMXKGt  70,7 GRAIN5/LB)      NOX HUMIDITY C.F,  1.0000
1 2 3
NYNF LANF LAF
b?0.b (2b.4) b70,b (2b.4) b70.b (2b,4)
520.7 (20.5) 520,7 (20,5) 520.7 (20,5)
48.9 (120,0) 48.9 (120,0) 48,9 (120,0)
b!03. b2b4, b370.
297,0 300.0 305,0
300.4 (10bl2,) 303,4 (1071b») 308,5 (10898.)
13.5X11X 13, 12.8X11X 13. 10.4X11X 10,
12. SX IX 13, 11. OX IX 11, B.9X IX 9.
b5.9X13X b4, 4B.7X13X 4b. 13,bX13X 12,
5.7X13X 6, 5.9X13X 5. 5.2X13X 5.
lb.7X 3X ,27 23, bX 3X ,38 Sb.lX 3X .99
2.9X 3X .04 2,7X 3X .04 2.7X 3X ,04
b.5X13X 20. 8.5X13X 2b, 24.7X13X 74.
1.3X 2X 1, 1.3X 2X 1. l.SX 2X 2.
»8.9b 34.44 13, Sb
1. 2. 2.
58. 40, ?.
.22 .34 ,95
18.4 24,4 72.8
.?! .37 .IB
20.32 14,07 2,b7
1224.9 1907,1 5354,5
10.55 14,14 42, 9B
,b7S 1,49) 1.117 ( 2.4b) 3,27b 7
1.20 l.bl) 2.02 ( 2,71) b,83 9
.18 .13) .19 ,14) ,0b
lb.88 12.59) b,97 5,20) .39
1017.49 758.74) 944,93 704. b3) 783,54 584
8.77 b,54) 7,01 5,23) b.29 4
•5bO ,921) ,553 ,910) ,479 (
PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR GXTE8T
MULTIPLIER FOR GXKW HR (GXHP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (CXLB FUEL)
4
NYNF
b?o,b (eb,4)
520.7 (?0,S)
48,9 (120.0)
b201,
297,0
300,4 (lObOB,)
9.2X11/ 9,
B,3X I/ B,
20.0X13/ 18,
4,b/13/ 4,
lb,7X 3/ ,27
2,bX 3/ ,04
7.9X13/ 24,
l.SX ?/ 2,
49, 8b
1,
It,
.23
22,2
,n
4,74
1249.4
12,78
.22) ,b87 ( 1
.Ib) 1,17 ( 1
.04) ,lb (
.29) 4. Ob ( 3
.28} 10b9,25 ( 797
,b9) 10,94 ( B
788) .588 ( ,


1.289 ( 45.54)
,941
.0838 ( .OfaeS)
,lb3S ( ,0741)

























tfl>
,S7)
.12)
,02)
• a*)
,15)
9bb)






                                                               ZO  X  20  FILTERS
                                                                  SAMPLE  FLOW
                              SCM(SCF)
82.55 (2915,5)
-------
                                               NEGATIVE TORSUE  COW1AND
                                       TABLE D-7.    ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                             HOT TRANSIENT
                                                                                                          PROJECT  NO.  11-5044-001
 ENGINE  NO.020
 ENGINE  MODEL    80  VOLVO DUAL FUEL
 ENGINE  9.6 L(586.  CID) L-6
 CVS  NO.   10

 BAROMETER  739.90 MM HGI29.13  IN HG)
 DRY  BULB  TEMP.  27.8 DEC C182.0  DEC  F)

 BAG  RESULTS
    BAG  NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER  OIF  P HP. H20UN.  H2U )
    SLOWER  INLET P MM.  H20UN. H20)
    BLOWER  INLET TEMP.  DEC.  CIDEG. F)
    BLOWER  REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL  FLOW  STD.  Cu.  METRES(SCF)

    HC  SAMPLE  METER/RANGE/PPM
    HC  BCKGRD  METtR/RANGE/PPM
    CO  SAMPLE  METER/RANGE/PPM
    CO  BCKCRD  METER/RANGE/PPM
    C02  SAMPLE  METER/RANGE/PCT
    C02  BCKGRD  METER/RANGE/PCT
    NOX  SAMPLE  METER/RANGE/PPM
    NOX  BCKGRD  METEK/RANGE/PPM

    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION  PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION  PPM
    C02  CONCENTRATION  PCT
    NOX  CONCENTRATION  PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS CRAMS
    C02  MASS GRAMS
    NOX  MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KW HR (HP  hR)

    BSHC G/KW  HR (G/HP  HR)
    BSCO G/KW  HR (G/HP  HR)
    BSC02 G/KW  Hk (G/HP HR)
    BSNUX G/KH  HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC KG/KM  Hk (LB/HP  HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS

   TOTAL KW HR  (HP HR)          11.66
    BSHC   G/KW HR (G/HP  HR)      .59
    6SCO   G/KW HR {G/HP  HR)     4.93
    BSC02   G/KW HR (G/HP  HR)     809.
    BSNOX   G/KW HR (G/HP  HR)     6.74
    BSFC  KG/KW HR (LB/HP  HR)    .506
                                      15.63)
                                       3.67)
                                       603. )
                                       5.03)
                                       .832)
TEST NO. 2
DATE 10/
1-bH RUN
9/80
TIME 03: 35
DYNO NO
RELATI VE
ABSOLUTE
1
NYNF
670.6 (26.
520.7 (20.
48.9 (120
6182.
296.0
. 5
HUMIDITY , ENCINE-43. PCT t



DIESEL Ett-465-F
BAG CART NO.
CVS- 0. PCT
HUMIDITY 10.3 GM/KG( 72.0 GRAINS/LB) NOX
2
LANF
4) 670.6 (26.4)
5) 520.7 (20.5)
.0) 48.9 (120.0)
6265.
300.0
295.5 (10436.) 299.4 (10576.)
20. 9/ 2/
10. I/ 2/
74.7/13/
2.1/13/
16. 11 3/
2.4/ 3/
21. 7/ 2/
l.O/ 2/
48.63
11.
72.
.23
20.7
1.88
24.69
1245.5
11.71
.745
1.34
1.40
18.47
931.83
8. 76
.557
PART




21. 19. 6/ 2/ 20.
10. 9.6/ 2/ 10.
74. 52.0/13/ 49.
2. 2.3/13/ 2.
.27 22. 9/ 3/ .37
.04 2.5/ 3/ .04
22. 25. 4/ 2/ 25.
1. l.l/ 2/ 1.
35.44
10.
47.
.33
24.3
1.77
16.36
1832.2
13.94
1.64) 1.130 2.49)
1.79) 2.11 2.83)
1.05) .84 .63)
13.78) 7.77 5.79)
694.86) 869.68 648.52)
6.53) 6.62 4.93)
.916) .536 .882)
ICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF»
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR C/KW HR
3
LAF
670.6 (26.4)
520.7 (20.5)
48.9 (120.0)
6371.
305.0
304.5 (10755.)
21.17 2/ 21.
9.6/ 2/ 10.
21.2/13/ 19.
2.4/13/ 2.
54. 9/ 3/ .96
2.3/ 3/ .04
70. O/ 2/ 70.
l.l/ 2/ 1.
13.87
12.
17.
.93
69.0
2.14
5.88
5184.9
40.18
3.344 7.
7.00 9.
.31
.84
740.49 552.
5.74 4.
1



HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0000
4
NYNF
670.6 (26.4)
520.7 (20.5)
48.9 (120.0)
6203.
297.0
296.5 (10472.)
15. 6/ 2/ 16.
9.5/ 21 10.
35.5/13/ 32.
2.3/13/ 2.
15. 8/ 3/ .25
2.4/ 3/ .04
23. 5/ 2/ 24.
l.O/ 2/ 1.
52.37
6.
30.
.22
22.5
1.07
10.48
1168.1
12.77
37) .678 1
39) 1.21 1
23) .89
63) 8.64 6
18) 963.21 718
28) 10.53 { 7
.478 .785) .559 (


1
1
(G/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (C/LB FUEL)


.183 ( 41.79)
.011
.0867 ( .0647)
.1714 ( .0778)

























.49)
.63)
.66)
.44)
.27)
.85)
919)






PART.   G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR)   .25 (.|9)
                                                                20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                   SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                                   SCM(SCF)
                                                                                                           79.45 (2806.0)
-------
 ENGINE  N
 ENGINE  MUOEL   80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL
 ENGINE  t.b LCS«i>. CID) L-b
 CVS NO,  10
                                          TABLE D-8.   ENGINE  EMISSION  RESULTS
                                                               HOT  TRANSIENT

                                                      TEST N0.21-1B  RUN 2
                                                      DATE 10/  3/80
                                                      TIME
                                                        DYNO  NO.  9
                                                                                                           PROJtCT  NO,  11-5044-001
        ER 747,87 MM HG^.HS IN HG)
 DRY BULB TEMP. ?7.J PFG C(81.0 DEC F)

 BAG RfSULTS
    BAG NUMRER
    BLOwER OIF P MM. H20CIN. H20)
    BLOWER INLET P MM, HSOCIN, HSO)
    BLOrtER INLET TEMP, OEG. C(DEG. F)
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME 3ECON03
    TOTAL FLOW 3TO. CU. METRES(SCF)
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPM
a
i
HC
HC
CO
CO
COS
C02
NOX
NOX
SAMPLE
BCKGRO
SAMPLE
BCKGRO
SAMPLE
BCKGRO
SAMPLE
RCKGBO
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/HANGE/PCT
               METER/RANGE/PCT
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPM
    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    COS CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAM3
    COS MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LB>
    KW HR (HP HR)

    BSHC G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR  (G/HP HS)
    BSC02 G/K*  HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX G/KW  HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSFC KG/K*  HR  (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL  TEST RESULTS 3  SAGS

   TOTAL KW HH  (HP HP)
    BSHC   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    PSCO   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSC02  G/Krt HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC   KG/Krf HR (LB/HP HR)
                                »,94 {
                                 .37 (
                                9.97 (
                                95», (
                                7. '8 (
                                ,5Sb (
b.b2)
 .28)
711.)
5,15)
                                                      DIESEL   EM.«»b5.F
                                                        BAG  CART  NO.   1
                                                      RELATIVE  HUMIDITY  ,   ENGINE-»5.  PCT  ,  CVS-b5, PCT
                                                      ABSOLUTE  HUMIDITY  10,3  GM/KGC  72,2 GRAINS/LB)      NOX HUMIDITY C,F.  1,0000
b70.b (2b,4) b70.b (2b.4) b70,b (2b,H)
520.7 (20.5) 520.7 (20,5) 520,7 (20,5)
48.9 (120.0) 4B.9 (120.0) 48,9 (120,0)
Sb94, bD09, Sb92,
272,7 287,8 272, b
275. 0 ( 9713.) 290,2 (10250.) 274.9 ( 9709.)
11.7XMX 12. 9.9X11/ 10, 8,5/llX 8,
b,5X IX 7, b.SX IX 7. b,2X IX fa,
bb.b/lSX bS, b2,9/13X bl, 34,bX13X 32,
1.0X13X 1. 1.0X13X 1, 1.1X13X i,
19, BX 3X .32 24, 5X 3X ,40 19, SX 3X ,31
2,bX 3X ,04 2.7X 3X ,04 2.4X 3X ,04
7,bX13X 23. 9.7X13X 29. 8.2X13X 25.
1.3X 2X 1. 1.2X 2X 1, ,7X 2X 1.
41.14 33.02 42, 2b
5, », if
b2, 58, 30,
.28 .3b ,28
21.5 88. 0 23.9
,85 .59 ,38
19.97 l«T,7i 9,55
1407,4 1907,3 139b,4
11.33 15, Si 12, Sb
.801 ( l,7b) 1.158 ( 2,55) .788 ( 1
1.39 ( l.Bb) 2,19 ( 2,93) l,3b ( 1
.bl ( ,4b) .27 ( ,20) ,28 (
14.37 ( 10,76) 9.02 ( b,72) 7,00 ( 5
1012.71 ( 755,18) 872,33 ( bSO.SQ) 1024.30 ( 7b3
8.15 ( b.OB) 7.10 ( 5,29) 9.21 ( b
,57b ( .947} .530 ( ,871) ,578 (
PARTICUIATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 3 BAGS
90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW 8CMC8CF)
MULTIPLIER FOR GXTEST
MULTIPLIER FOR GXKW HR (G/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL CGXLB FUEL)























.74)
.83)
.21)
.22)
.82)
.87)
950)


.895 (
,938
,1900
,341b
































31, bj)

( .1*17)
( .1550)
PART.  G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR)   .2!  (.16)
                                                                20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                    SAMPLE FLOM
                                                                                    SCM(SCF)
                                                                    55,HI (115^,8)
-------
                                               TABLE  D-9.
                                                       ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                                  TRANSIENT
                                                                                                                PROJECT  NO,  ll-SOtt-Ol
a
 i
      ENGINE   NO.D2P
      ENGINE   MODEL   8n VOLVO DUAL FUEL
      ENGINE   l.b LCSBb. CIP)  L-b
      CVS NO,   10

      BAROMETER 7H7.01 MM HGO1.H1  IN HG)
      D"Y BULB TEMP, 25.b OF.G  C(7B,0 DEC F)
      BAG RESULTS
         BAG NUMBER
         BLOwER DIP
               P  MM. HJOUN. H20)
         BLOWER INLET P MM, HJOCIN, H2o)
         BLOivER TNLET TEMP, DEB. CtDEG. F)
         BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
         TIME SECONDS
         TOTAL FLOW STD, CU. METRES(SCF)
         HC
         HC
         CO
         CO
        SAMPLE
        RCKGRD
        SAMPLE
        RCKGRD
    cna SAMPLE
    CO? 8CKGRD
    NO* SAMPLE
    NOX BCKGRO
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/PANGF,/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO? CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAMS
    C05 MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (L9)
    Kw HR (HP HR)

    B3HC G/KW HR  fG/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSC03 G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX G/KW HR  (G/HP HP)
    8SFC KG/KW HR  (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL  TEST RESULTS 3 BAGS

   TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
    8SHC   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSC02  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC  KG/KW HR (L8/HP HR)
                                      ,3h (
                                    1U.11 (
                                     7.04 (
                                     .S40 (
                         b.73)
                          .27)
                         8.13)
                         bB3.)
                         5.25)
                         .888)
      Part.  6/KW-HR  (G/HP-HR)    .21  (.16)
      *Est.  BSNOX  G/KW-HR  (6/HP-HR)  8.03 (5.99)
                                                     TEST N0.21-2B  RUN
                                                     DATE 10/ 3/80
                                                     TIME
                                                       DYNO NO,  5
                                                                              DIESEL   EM-HbS-F
                                                                                BAG CART NO.  1
                                                     RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,   ENGINE-41, PCT ,   CVS-58, PCT
                                                     ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,2 GM/KGC 71,3 GRAINS/LB)      NOX HUMIDITY C.F,  1,0000
b70
520
48


273
13.
b.
81.
,
11.
2,
b,
•
















.b (2b.
.7 (20,
.1 (120
5b55.
272,8
.3 ( 1b
b/11/
B/ I/
3/13/
8/13/
5/ 3/
7/ 3/
7/13/
8/ 2/
41,5b
7,
71.
.27
11.3
1,10
25,02
13b5.5
10,10
,807
i.ts
.77
17,55
158.15
7.01
.Sbb
4)
5)
,°)


52.)
It,
7,
81,
1.
.31
,ot
20.
1,









( 1
( 1
(
( 13
( 71H
( 5
( ,























,78)
.11)
.58)
.01)
.tl)
.21)
131)
b70
520
48


210
1,
b ,
b4,
,
23,
2,
B,
1
















PARTICULATE DATA,


9QMM
,b (2b.
.7 (20,
,1 (120
bOll,
287,1
4)
5)


.0)


,4 (10258
S/ll/
7/ I/
3/13/
1/13/
5/ 3/
S/ 3/
b/13/
b/ 2/
34,48
3,
bO.
,34
25.1
.41
20,31
1832,3
13,13
l.llb .
2.21
,22
1.18
827. 1b
b,30
.504.
TOTAL
1
7
b2
1


.)
1
•
t
t
.38
,04
2b
1









(
(
(
(
(
C
C
t
•









2.4b)
2,17)
,17)

bninn
t.bl)
.821)
b?0
520
48


275
B.
7.
33.
,
11.
2.
7.
t













,b (2b,
.7 (20.
,1 (180
Sb14,
272,7
4)
5)
,0)







.1 ( 1717.)
S/ll/
O/ I/
B/13/
8/13/
b/ 3/
5/ 3/
4/13/
7/ 2/
42.05
1.
21.
.28
21.5
.21
l.tl
1318,4
11,31
,7Bb
1,38
,lb
b!ee
1012, b?


8,11
,5b1
8,
7.
31.
1,
,31
,04
22.
1.









( 1
( 1
(
( 5
( 755
( b
\ •

















,73)
.85)
.12)
,08)
.15)
.11)
13b)
FOR 3 BAGS
FILTER
SAMPLE
FLOW

MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
SCM(SCF)
G/TEST
G/KW HR






(0/HP HR)
G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
.81
.13
.18

.818 (  31,72)
,134
,18bl  (  ,1388)
                                                               80 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                   SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                    SCM(SCF)
                                                                                                           5b,15  (1183,3)
-------
                                          TABLE  D-IO.
ENGINE  NO.D20
tNO INC  MODEL   00 VOLVO DUALFUEL
ENGINE  9,6 1(506, CUD L-6
CYS NO,  10
N.VcCMETER 739.65 MM HG(29,12 IN M6)
DRY BULB TEMP, 21,7 DEC C(71,0 DEO F)

I'f.G RESULTS
   HAG NUMF'ER
   FLOWER filf P MM, 1 120 (IN, H20)
   HLOU'tk INLET P MM, 1120 (IN, H20)
   MOWER INLET TEMP, DEB,  C(flEG« D
   [iLOUER REVOLUTIONS
   TIME SECONDS
   TOTAL FLOW 3TD, CU, METRES(SCF)
   HC
   !IC
   CO
   CO
   CO.?
   co:
   NiJX
   NOX
        SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
        BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
        SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
        I'CKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
        CAHPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
        BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
        SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
        [(CKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
    DILUTION FACTOR
    ,'IC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    LO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    MC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAMS
    CO: MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KU HR (IIP liR)

    BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP MR)
    MCO G/KW HR (G/MP HR)
    LSC02 G/KU MR (G/MP HR)
    H3NOX G/KW MR (G/MP MR)
    KSFC KG/KW HR (LB/IIP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4  DAGS

   TOTAL KU ;,'R (HP MR)
                              10,09 (  14.41)
    I;1:; ic
    LTCO
    ssco:
            /KU
                  (G/MP MR)
          G/KU  HR  (G/HP HR)
          G/KU  MR  (G/HP HR)
          tJ/KW  HR  (G/HP HR)
        KG/KW  MR  (LC/HP MR)
    MFC

PART.  6/KW-HR  (6/HP-HR)
  ,51 (
 6,1? (
1056, (
 9.19 (
 ,626 (
  .38)
 4,62)
 783.)
 6,85)
1,030)
                                                         ENGINE  EMISSION RESULTS
                                                              C-TRANS,
                                                                                                           PROJECT NO,  11-5044-001
                                                       TEST  NO.D21-1   RUN1
                                                       DATE  11/14/80
                                                       TIME  10JOO
                                                         DYNO  NO,   5
                                                                DIESEL    EM-465-F
                                                                  SAG CART NO,   1
                                                       RELATIVE  HUMIDITY  »   ENGINE-65,  PCT »   CVS-45,  FCT
                                                       ASSOLUTE  HUMIDITY  10,0  GM/KG(  75,6  GRAINS/LS)       NOX HUMIDITY C.F
                                                                                             1,0000
1 2 3
NYNF LANF LAF
680,7 (26,8) 680,7 (26,8) 680,7 (26,0)
525,0 (20,7) 525,0 (20,7) 525,0 (20,7)
48,9 (120,0) 48,9 (120,0) 48,9 (120,0)
6103, 6264, 6371,
296,0 300,0 305,0
275,6 (10440.) 279,4 (10577.) 304.6 (10757.)
24.3/21/ 24, 19.6/21/ 20, 19.0/21/ 20,
12, 3/ I/ 12. 12, 2/ I/ 12, 12, O/ I/ 12,
52.6/12/ 112, 46.7/13/ 44, 19.6/13/ 18,
1.0/12/ 2, 2.2/13/ 2, 2.0/13/ 2,
20, 6/ 3/ ,33 27, 6/ 3/ ,45 62, 2/ 3/ 1,11
3,6/ 3/ .06 3,5/ 3/ ,05 3,l/'3/ ,05
B.G/13/ 26. 10.5/13/ 31, 27.6/13/ 83,
,6/ 2/ 1. ,5/ 2/ 1, ,5/ 2/ 1.
38, Cl 29,17 12,07
12, 3, 9,
108, 41, 16,
,28 ,40 1,06
25,8 30,9 82,4
2,10 1,35 1,55
37.26 14,28 5,52
1505,2 2200,9 5930,5
14,61 17,71 48,01
,872 ( 1,92) 1,263 ( 2,79) 3,629 ( 8
1,09 ( 1,46) 1,98 ( 2,66) 6,76 ( 9
1,92 ( 1,43) ,68 ( ,51) ,23 (
34,15 ( 25.47) 7,20 ( 5.37) ,02 (
1379,58 (1020,75) 1109,46 ( 827,32) 076.94 ( 653
13.39 ( 7. 90) 0,73 ( 6,66) 7,10 ( 5
,799 ( 1.313) .637 ( 1,047) ,537 (
PARTICULATE DATAi TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW MR (G/MP MR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
A
NYNF
600,7 C;.C)
525,3 (20,7)
48,9 (120,0)
6202.
297,0
296,5 (10472.)
13.6/21/ 14,
10, 7/ I/ 11.
34.8/13/ 32,
1.7/13/ 2,
24, I/ 3/ ,39
3,2/ 3/ ,05
11.7/13/ 35,
,4/ 2/ 0,
uw » wO
3,
30.
,34
34, C
trrr
4 Ow
10,36
1070,1
19,74
,00) 1.059 ( 2
.07) 1,05 ( 1
,17) ,52 (
,61) ?,82 ( 7
,94) 1772,61 (1321
,27) 10,71 ( 13
C82) 1,003 ( 1.


1,223 ( 43,21)
,578
,0870 ( ,0669)
,1433 ( ,0650)

























,33)
,41)
,39)
,32)
,04)
,76)
650)






                          .30 (.22)
                                                                20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                    SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                                   SCM(SCF)
                                                                              91,09 (2864.0,
-------
                                          TABLE IM I.
 ENGINE  NO.D20
 ENGINE  MODEL   00 VOLVO DUALFUEL
 ENGINE  9,6 L(506, CID) L-6
 CVS NO,  10

 BAROMETER 747,52 MM I!G(29,43 IN HC)
 DRY DULB TEMP- 10,3 DEC C(65,0 DEO F)

 BAG RESULTS
    BAG NUMBER
     L'LDUEF  DIF  r
     3LOUEF  INLET
     HLOWEf  INLET
     I'LGUEf  REVOLUTIONS
     TIME SECONDS
     TOTAL FLGJ  CTD,
  MM.  1120(IN,  1120)
  P MM.  i 120(IN.  H20)
        BEG,  C(DEO,  F)
                        METRES(GCF
                  TEMP.
    HC  CAMPLE
    L!)
    CO
    C02
    CO 2
         SAMPLE
         L;CKGRD
         SAMPLE
         DCKORD
     NOX SAMPLE
UJ
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PF'M
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANCE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
                      ; i-n
                      PPM
                      PCT
                      PPM
     DILUTIDN1 FACTOR
     !!C  CONCENTRATION
     CC  CONCENTRATION
     C02 CONCENTRATION
     N'JX CONCENTRATION

     HC  MASS CRAMS
     CO  MASS GRAMS
     C02 MASS GRAMS
     NOX MASS GRAMS
     FUEL KG (LB)
     KU HR (HP IIR)
    B3HC G/KW IIR  (G/HP IIR)
    BSCO G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BGC02 G/KW IIR  (0/1 IP IIR)
    BCNOX G/KU IIR  (G/HP HR)
TGTAL TEST RESULTS 4 DAGJ
TOTAL
BSHC
BZCQ
BSC02
BGNOX
BSFC
KM HR
G/KW
G/KW
G/KW
G/KW
KC/KW
(HP
MR
IIR
IIR
HR
IIR
HR)
(G/HP
(G/HP
(G/IIP
(G/HP
(LB/HP

HR)
HR)
IIR)
HR)
IIR)
10

5
10
0
,
1
j
,
33 (
71 (
?0 (
5H , (
1
6
60 (
16 (
13.36)
,53)
4,46)
759,)
6,42)
1,013)
                                                         ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                               C-TRANS,

                                                       TEST N0.21-2C  RUN1
                                                       DATE 11/17/00
                                                       TIME 10147
                                                                                                            PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001
DYNO NO, 5 BAG CART NO. 1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY r ENGINE-72. PCT , CVS-25, PCT
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 9,6 GM/KG( 67,3 GRAINS/LLO NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000
1234
NYNF LANF LAF
685,0 (27,0) 605.G (27,0) 635, S (27,0)
530,9 (20.9) 530,9 (20,9) 530,9 (20,9)
47,0 (110,0) 47,0 (110,0) 47,C (113,0)
6100, 6265, 6372,
295,9 300,0 305.0
299.5 (10500.) 303,7 (10725.) 300.3 (10903.)
21, A/21/ 22, 18.9/21/ 19. 20.3/21/ 20,
6,6/ I/ 7. 3,3/ I/ 3, 3,3/ I/ G,
49, A/12/ 105. 40.C/13/ 3D, 16.6/13/ 15.
-2/12/ 0, -7/13/ 1, ,G/13/ 1,
20, 4/ 3/ ,33 29, I/ 3/ ,40 57, 4/ 3/ 1,01
2,7/ 3/ ,04 2,7/ 3/ ,04 ' 2,0/ 3/ .04
B.l/13/ 24, 10.3/13/ 31. 24.7/13/ 74,
1,1/ 2/ 1, ,9/ 2/ 1, ,7/ 2/' 1,
39,30 27,61 13,20
15, 11, 13,
103. 37, 14,
,29 .44 ,97
23,3 30,1 73,4
2,61 1,90 2,24
35,94 12,99 5,03
1581,0 2446,1 5497.0
13,36 17,43 43, 3B
,095 ( 1,97) 1,412 ( 3,11) 3,327 ( 7
,99 ( 1,33) 1,05 ( 2,40) 6,44 ( S
2,63 ( 1.96) 1,03 ( ,77) ,35 (
36,24 ( 27,02) 7,03 ( 5,24) ,70 (
1593,92 (1100,59) 1323,31 ( 906,79) 053,02 ( 636
13,47 ( 10,04) 9,46 ( 7,05) 6,74 ( 5
,902 ( 1,403) ,764 ( 1,255) .517 (
PARTICULATE DATA; TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCMCSCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW IIR (G/HP !!R)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
NYNT
635. G (27,0)
530.9 (20,9)
47, D (118,0)
6203,
297,0
300,7 (10619.)
11.4/21/ 11,
G-,3/ I/ 3,
25.5/13/ 23,
, B/13/ 1 <
13. C/ I/ ,30
3,0/ 3/ ,05
b',C/13/ 26,
,0/ 2/ 1.
43,97
3,
22,
, 26
25,5
.57
7,01
1412,1
14,69
,34) ,734 ( 1
,63) 1,05 ( 1
,26) ,54 (
,5S) 7,40 ( 5
.69) 1330,47 ( 993
.02) 13,93 ( 10
550) ,695 ( i,


1.2C6 ( 45,41)
• 943
,0913 ( ,0631)
,1431 ( ,0672,'
























,62)
.41)
.40)
.52)
,10)
,3S)
143)






PART.  G/KW-HR  (G/HP-HR)
                            .27  (.20)
                                                 20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                     SAMPLE FLOW
SCM(SCF)
(2721.2)
-------
                                           TABLE B-12.
 FJ.'CINE  NO.D20
 ENGINE  MODEL    oo  VOLVO  DUALFUEL
 HIGINE  9,6 L(5B6,  CUD L-6
 C'.1: NO.   10

 BAROMETER  739.14  MM HG(29,10  IN IIG)
 DRY 3ULD  TCMP.  20.3 DEC C(33,0 DEG F)

 BAG RESULTS
    PAG NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    KLCWER  DIT P MM,
    ['LOWER
    HLOUER
                       20(IN.  H20)
            INLET P MM,  II20(IN,  H20)
            INLET TEMP,  DEC.  C(DEG,  F)
     ['LOUCR REVOLUTIONS
     TIME  SECONDS
     TOTAL FLOW  STLi,
     HC
                     CU.  METRES (3CF)
         CAMPLE  METER/RANGE/PPM
     IIC   DCKGRD  METER/RANGE/PPM
     CO   CAMPLE  METER/RANGE/PPM
     CO   3CKGRD  METER/RANGE/PPM
     C02  SAMPLE  METER/RANGE/PCT
     CO2  I'CKGRD  METER/RANGE/PCT
0    NdX  CAMPLE  METER/RANGE/PPM
A    NOX  I'CKGRD  METER/RANGE/PPM

     DILUTION  FACTOR
     HC   CONCENTRATION  PPM
     CO   CONCENTRATION  PPM
     C02  CONCENTRATION  PCT
     NOX  CONCENTRATION  PPM

     IIC   MAS3  GRAMS
     CO   MASS  GRAMS
     C02  MAG3  CRAMS
     NOX  MASS  GRAMS
     FUEL KG (LB)
     KU IIR (IIP HR)

     3311C G/KW HR (G/IIP IIR)
     BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
     33C02 G/KW HR (G/IIP IIR)
     BSNOX G/KU IIR (G/HP HR)
     B3FC KG/KU IIR (LB/HP HR)

TCJTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS

   TOTAL KU IIR (IIP IIR)
                                11,3?  (  15,25)
BSMC
B3CO
v^co^
33NOX
BSFC
G/KW
G/,l\W
G/KU
G/KU
KG/KU
IIR
IIR
HR
IIR
IIR
(G/IIP
(G/I!P
(G/HP
(G/HP
(LB/HP
HR)
HR)
HR)
HR)
IIR)
,21 (
3,6
996
3.6
• •"} \j
3 i
, (
? (
7 (
.16)
2,71)
743.)
6,43)
,964)
  ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
        H-TRANS,

TEST NO.D21--1  RUN1
DATE 11/14/30
TIME 10J50
  DYNO NO,  5
                                                                                                             PROJECT NO, 11 5044-001
                                                                                                DIESEL    EM-465-F
                                                                                                  DAG CART  NO,   1
                                                       RELATIVE HUMIDITY  »  ENGINE-43, PCT  ,   CVS-45,  PCT
                                                       ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  10,6 GM/KG( 74,4 GRAING/LB)       NOX  HUMIDITY C,F,  1,0000
1 2 3
NYNF LANF LAF
680,7 (26, G) 680,7 (26,8) 680,7 (26. G)
525,0 (20,7) 525,3 (20,7) 525,3 (20.7)
48,9 (120,0) 48,9 (120.0) 48,9 (120,0)
6130, 6265, 6371.
296,0 300,0 305,0
295,1 (10421.) 299,1 (10565.) 304,2 (10743.)
15.3/21/ 15, 15.1/21/ 15, 18.2/21/ 10,
12,07 I/ 13, 12, 3/ I/ 12, 11,37 I/ 12,
51.B/13/ 49, 34.3/13/ 32, 19.2/13/ 17,
1.1/13/ 1. 1.1/13/ 1, 1.0/13/ 1,
19, ?/ 3/ ,32 27,47 3/ .45 62,97 37 1,12
3,07 3/ ,05 2,97 37 .04 3,07 3/ ,05
8.4/13/ 25, 10.C/13/ 32, 28.0/13/ 04,
,7/ 27 1, ,67 2/ 1. ,7/ 27 1.
41,50 29,50 11,92
3, 3, 7,
47, 30, 16,
,27 .41 1,08
24.4 31,7 83.2
.47 .56 1,30
16.16 10.45 5.67
1463,4 2223,1 6009,1
13,78 18,12 48,42
,304 ( 1,775 1,236 ( 2,33) 3,701 ( 3
1,16 ( 1,56) 2,04 ( 2,73) 7,00 ( 9
.41 ( ,30) .27 ( ,20) ,19 (
13,89 ( 10,36) 5,13 ( 3,82) .81 (
1262,30 ( 941.35) 1093,37 ( 015,32) 053,30 ( 640
11,05 ( G.S4) 8,89 ( 6,63) 6,92 ( 5
,691 ( 1,136) ,631 ( 1,037) ,529 (
PARTICULATE DATAr TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/L3 FUEL)
4
NYNF
680,7 (26,0)
525,3 (20,7)
40.9 (120,0)
6202,
297,0
296.1 110459,)
12.3/21/ 12,
12.17 I/ 12,
30,1/137 20,
1,1/M/ 1,
21.77 3/ .35
3,3/ 3/ ,05
11.1/13/ 33,
,6/ 2/' 1,
37.79
0.
26,
.30
32,6
,08
9,01
1610,2
1C. 45
.16) ,379 ( 1,94)
,3C) 1.17 ( 1,57)
,14) .0? ( .05)
,60) 7,69 ( 5,73)
,41) 1380,44 (1029,40)
.16) 15,74 ( 11,74)
870) ,750 ( 1,233)


1,236 ( 43,67)
.966
,0850 ( ,0634)
,1440 ( ,0657;
PART.  6/KW-HR  (G/HP-HR)   .40 (.3»>
                                                                 20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                     SAMPLE FLOW
                              SCH(SCF)
80,39 (2039,4.
-------
ENGINE  NC.MO
ENGINE  MODEL   CO VOLVO  DUALFUEL
ENGINE  v\o LdOo, GIL) 1.-6
BAROMETER 740,16 MM  HG(29,14  IN HG)
DRY DULL; TE;"
   HC  SAMPLE  h:r:R/R;:KCc/PPM
   HC  DCKORH  HrTfR/R.-iNGE/PPM
   CL'  SAMPLE  fiETEr;/Rr
1 J t OU
,758 ( 1
1,13 ( 1
,01 (
6,73 ( 5
1220,69 ( 910
13,44 ( 10
.642 ( 1,
























,67)
.52)
.01)
.1?)
.27)
,02)
055)
                                                            PART1CULATE DATAr  TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
PART.  6/KW-HR (6/HP-HR)   .42  (.31)
90MM FILTER
     SAMPLE FLOU
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR

20 X 20 FILTERS
    SAMPLE FLOU     SCM(SCF)
SCM(SCF)
G/TEST
G/KU HR (G/IIP HR)
G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
1,242 (  43,36.)
 ,961
 ,0046 (  ,0631)
 ,1543 (  ,0700)
                                                                                                             79,94  (2823,5)
-------
  TABLE D-14.   ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                                     PROJECT NO, 11- 5044-001
."''CINE  NO.DSO
Ff.'OINE  rtGLT.L    '30  VOLVO  DUALFUEL
ENC I.'.'E  9..: L'.Sfii.  CI.'O L L
• /.'C NO.   10

PAROMETER 7J9.6C  MM  IIGC?9,12  IN IIG)
HRY SULP TEMP,  26.7  DEG C(00,0  DEG F)

I-'AC RESULTS

   SLOWER DIP P  MM.  H20(IN, 1120)
   SLOWER INLET  P MM,  1120(IN, H20)
   DLCiWER INLET  TEMP,  DEG,  C(DEG, F)
   fcLOUHR REVOLUTIONS
   TIME SECOND1!
   ilJfAL FLOW STD,  CU, METRES (SCF)

   HC  SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
   HC  DCKGRD hETER/RANGE/PPM
   CO  SAMPLE METER/RANCE/PPM
   CO  DCKCRD MlTER/RhNGE/r-PH
   CJ2 SAMPLE METER/R.VJGE/PCT
tt   NCX SAMPLE riETEP/RANCE/PPM
J.   NCX DCKjaLi MLTEii/RANCE/PPM

    DILUTION FACTOR
    ;IL  CONCENTRATION  PPM

    ro2 cc.va.rRA/ioN  TCT
    NGX CuNCENTRATIC'N  PPM

    HC  MASS Gr.'Ai-lS
    CO  MASS CI/AMC
    CC2 rIAKS CRAMS
    NOX MASS CRAMS
    FUEL KG (Lf:)
    KU !IR (IIP IIR)

    !':S1,'S 5/KU HP  (G/HP I!R)
    [;SCO G/Kiv' IIR  (G/HP HR)
    M:C02 G/KU HR (G/HP IIR)
    BSNJX G/KU HR (G/HP IIR)
    FSFC KS/KW HR (LD/HP IIR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 SMS

   TOTAL MJ HR (HP i!R)           4,84  (
    rOi.'C   G/KU HR (C/HP IIR)     .31  (
    SECO   bVMv' IIR (G/HP HR)    9,21  (
    BSC32   G/.\U' HP (G/HP IIR)   1037,  (
    .'•IWOX   C/K'X' HR (G/HP HR)    9,20  (
    iC.rC   KC/K* HR (LB/HP HR)   .590  (

PART. G/KW-HR (6/HP-HR)  .24 (.18)
6.49)
 ,23)
774.)
6,86)
               TEST NO.D21-1  RUN1
               DATE 11/14/00
               TIME 12J30
                 DYNO NO.  5
                               PIESEL   EM-465-F
                                 &AG CART NO,  1
               RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,  ENOINE-40. PCT  ,  CVC-45,  PCT
               ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,3 GH/KG( 75,4 GRAINS/LIO       NOX  HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000
                     1
              630,7 (26.0)
              525,8 (20,7)
               50,0 (122.0)
                  5694,
                 272,6
              271,3 (  95C2.)
          630,7  (26,8)
          525,8  (20,7)
           50,0  (122,0)
              6011,
             237,8
          286,4  (10116.)
         680.7  (26,8)
         525,8  (20,7)
          50,0  (122.0)
             5694.
            272,7
         271,3  ( 9582,)
14.2/21/
9
64
1
21
3
3

















,3/ I/
,0/13/
,9/13/
,0/ 3/
,fi/ 3/
,2/13/
,97 27
37,24
5,
60,
,30
23,7
,80
18,32
1468,7
12,29
,836
1,34
,59
14,01
1093,18
7,15
,623
14,
9,
63,
2,
,35
.06
25,
1,









( 1
( 1
(
( 10
( 815
( 6
( 1.

















.84)
,30)
,44)
,45)
.1C)
.32)
023)
11
8
54
2
26
3
11
1
















,67217
,37 I/
,0/137
,0/137
,67 3/
,57 3/
,6/137
,0/ 2/
30,34
4.
43,
,38
33,7
,50
16,13
2012,4
10,47
1.189
2,16
,27
7,45
929,92
Q.53
,550
12,
8,
51,
2,
,44
,05
35,
1,









( 2
( 2
(
( 5
( 693
( 6
(

















,62)
,90)
,20)
,56)
,44)
,36)
903)
9
8
35
2
22
3
7
1
















,2/21/
,77 I/
,6/13/
,0/13/
,4/ 3/
,5/ 37
.2/137
,07 27
36,54
1,
31,
,31
26,6
,11
9,64
1542,5
13,30
.033
1.33
,09
7,22
1155,85
10,34
,624
7,
9,
33,
2,
.36
,05
28,
1.









( 1
( 1
(
( 5
( 861
( 7
( 1,

















,84)
,7?)
,06)
,39)
,92)
,71)
026)
                    PARTICULATE DATA. TOTAL FOR 3 BAGS
90NM FILTER
     SAMPLE FLOU
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR

20 X 20 FILTERS
    SAMPLE FLOU
 SCM(SCF)
 G/TEST
 G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
 G/KG FUEL  (G/LE FUEL)


SCM(SCF)
                                                                                                              ,066 ( 30.58)
                                                                                                               958
                                                                                                              !l97Q  (  ,1475)
                                                                                                              ,3350  (  .1519)


                                                                                                             55,51 (1960,7)
-------
                      APPENDIX E





TRANSIENT TEST RESULTS FROM THE ETHANOL CONFIGURATION
-------
      TABLE E- 1.  NOTES CONCERNING TEST RESULTS GIVEN IN APPENDIX
Table No.
Ethanol
                           Notes
  E-2
  E-3
  E-4
Cold Start

  E-b



  E-6
 E-7
 E-B
 E>9
Volvo requested runs to verify the influence of high flow
diesel actuation and the influence of the actual start up
"puff" on particulate measurement.  E-l, E-2 and E-3 are
a very limited series and were conducted using a negative
torque command to insure reliable diesel solenoid operation.

Passed statistical requirements.  Particulate sampling
conducted as normal.  Diesel fuel flow would switch to
"high" flow at closed throttle conditions.  Particulate
rate by 90mm and by 20X20 inch filter samples yielded
0.30 and 0.27 g/bhp-hr respectively.  Results not used for
regulated emissions.

Passed statistical requirements.  The 90mm particulate
system was activated 10 seconds after engine start-up/cycle
start-up.  Particulate rate by 90 mm and by 20X20 inch
filter sample yielded 0.25 and 0.26 g/bhp-hr, respecitvely.
Results not used for regulated emissions.

Passed statistical requirements.  Particulate sampling
conducted as normal but the diesel fuel flow was switched
to "low" flow throughout the test.  Particulate rate by
90mm and by 20X20 inch filter samples yielded 0.30 and
0.26 g/bhp-hr, respectively.  Results not used for regulated
emissions.  Volvo perferred that the "low" flow setting be
used on subsequent runs.
Failed statistical requirements.  Used standard "0" torque
command control.  Torque intercept, -15.5.  Results used
for emissions.

Volvo requested that diesel fuel flow be set to "low"
flow even for cold start-up.  Engine false started on
"low11 fuel flow, dynamometer engaged.  Passed statistical
requirements.  Results used for regulated emissions. NOX
by bag measurement was 7.20 g/kW-hr.

It was agreed that "high" flow diesel would be used for the
first 23 seconds then switched to low flow.  Failed
statistical requirements, torque intercept -15.4.  Results
used for regulated emissions.

Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -18.1,
power slope 1.4 percent high.  Results used for regulated
emissions.  NOX by bag measurement was 7.09 gAW-hr.

Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -20.8.
Results used for regulated enissions

                      E-2
-------
  TABLE E-1 (CONT'D) .  NOTES CONCERNING TEST RESULTS GIVEN IN APPENDIX E
Table No.

 E-10



Hot Start

 E-ll


 E-12


 E-13


 E-14




 E-15




 E-16




Bus Cycle

 E-17



 E-18




 E-19



 E-20
                           Notes
Failed statistical requirements, torque and power slope
.5 and 4.4 percent high.  Run primarily for additional
chemistry samples.  Results used for regulated emissions.
Same as E-5, but passed statistical requirements.  Results
used for regulated emissions.

Same as E-6, but failed statistical requirements - torque r^
2 percent low.  Results used for regulated emissions.

Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -16.1.
Results used for regulated emissions.

Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -18.1
and power slope 1.4 percent high.  Results used for regulated
emissions.

Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -20.2.
Results used for regulated emissions.  NOX by bag measure-
ment was 7.12 g/kW-hr.

Passed statistical requirements.  Run primarily for
additional chemistry samples.  Results used-for regulated
emissions.  NOX by bag measurement was 7.20 g/kW-hr.
Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -16.4.
Results used for regulated emissions.  NOX by bag measure-
ment was 8.39 g/kW-hr.
                                         9
Failed statistical requirements, torque r  4 percent low.
Results used for regulated emissions;  NOX by bag measure-
ment was 8.22 g/kW-hr.

                                                       2
Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept and r
were -17.6 and  .816, respectively.  Results used for
regulated emissions.
                                         2
Failed statistical requirements, torque r  1 percent low.
Run primarily for chemistry samples.  Results used for
regulated emissions.
                                   E-3
-------
fNG Plf
FNr.INf
CVS NO.
                                FUEL
                                   HG)
     HULH
  BAG RESULTS
     BAT,
  m
                  qn VOLVO  OU»l
              LfSPK. CIO) 1  -b
                      OFT,
    HLOrtFH nlF P MM. H?nriN.  H?0)
    BLOHFR INIFT p MM.  Hi?n(lN.  H2n)
    BLOWFR TNLFT TEMP.  DF(j'.  C(n£G,  F)
    BI.OWFR RFVnLnTIONS
    TIMF SECONDS
    TOTAi FLnw 3TO. Cu.  MfTKESfSCF)

    HC   SAMp| E MfTEH/RANGt/PPM
    HC   RCKr.Rn MFTER/RAMGF/PPM
    Cn   SAMpt E MFTF. R/RANGL/PPM
    cn   RCKRBD MFTF W/RANGF./PPM
    Cn<>  SAMpLE 'MFTFH'WA'sr.f- /MCT
    CO?  HCKr.RQ MFTEP/HANGF/PCT
    Nnx  sAMpi f MF r[R/R4i,r,[/PPM
                           /PPM
TABLE E-2    FNGINE  EMISSION RESULTS
                     HOT  TRANSIENT

            TEST  N0.28-1H  RUN
            PATE  in/lS/UO
            TIMF
              DYNn NO,   5
                                                                                                              PROJECT  NO.  H«b011-(i01
     Nnx RCKr.cn  M* u

     DiuiTTfiN  F«CTIIR
     HC  rONrFMTH/sT ION  PpM
     cn  roN^rNTR^rION  PPM
     cna roNrFNTrfATinN
     NflX (.ONrfNTRA f TUN

     HC  MASS CRAMS
     cn  MASS GRAMS
     cn? MASS GRAMS
     Nnx MASS GRAMS
     FIIFL KG fL«)
     KW HP  (HP
    HSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP MR)
    KSCO? G/KW HP (G/HP HP>
    BSNOX G/K^J HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC KG/KW HR (LH/HP hfi)

TOTAL TEST RF3HLTS  H RAGS

   TOTAL KW H« (HP  HR)
    BSHf   r./Krt HR  (G/HP HR)
    HSCi)   r,/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    HSCO?  G/KW HP  (G/HP HR)
    BSNfiX  c/KM wR  (G/HP HR)
    BSFC   KR/KW HP  (LB/HP HR)
                                11.13  (  1».12>
                                 2.IS  (   I.b3)
                                13.»1  (  10.00)
                                       (   bas.)
                                 ,M9S  (   ,711)
                                                                                               DIESEL    EM-»fc5-F
                                                                                                 BAG CART  NO.   1
                                                      RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,  ENGINF-H8, PCT  ,  CVS-H8,  PCT
                                                      ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,b GM/KG( 73,8 GRAINS/LB)       NOX  HUMIDITY C.F,  l.OOHU
1
NYNF
b73,l (2b,5)
520,7 (20.5)
»B,9 (120,0)
hlP?,
89h'.n
292.9 (10315,1
b.7/28/ 31,
9. I/ I/ 9,
9b.9/l3/ SB,
.7/13' 1,
lb.1/ 3/ ,2b
8.7/ 3/ ,01
b.1/13/ IS,
.b/ 8/ J,
18. SO
81 '.
95.
.82
IB. 5
»'.12
32.51
1181.5
in. 38
.53b 1
I'.nfa l
3.87 8
30, h3 88
1111.17 830
9.77 7
'.501
8
LANF
b73.l (2b.S)
520.7 (20.5)
1H.9 (180.0
h8b3.
899,7
8Sb,7 (10181
8.1/88/ 11
7, I/ I/ 7
51.3/18/ 117
.1/18X 1
8b,2/ 3/ ,1
2,;/ s/ ,0
8.1/13/ 21
,7/ 8/ 1
30,18
33,
113,
.3S
23,7
5.72
39,12
8111.9
13,11
,1») ,997 (
.12) 2,07 (
,89) 8,7b (
.81) 18.89 (
.81) 1019,55 (
.89) b,19 (
889) ,181 (



)


.)
.
,
,
,
3
1
,
•









8.80)
8,78)
8. Ob)
11,08)
7bO,8R)
1,81)
,791)
3
LAP
b73.1 (2b,5)
520.7 (20,5)
18,9 (120,0)
b371,
305,0
301.9 (lOfabl.)
13.7/88/ b9,
7,5/ I/ 8,
b5,8/12/ 117,
.1/18/ 1,
bO.1/ 3/ 1,07
8,7/ 3/ ,01
20.3/13/ bl,
,8/ 8/ 1,
18,87
b2,
1*1.
1,03
faO,8
in,7b
19, bB
5710,3
31,71
8,785 b
b,90 9
l,5b 1
7,81 5
828,08 b!7
5,01 3
,395 ,
1
NYNF
b73,l (8b,5)
580,7 (20,5)
IB, 9 (180,0)
b201,
297,0
893,8 (10377.)
S.fi/82/ 89,
7,n/ i/ 7,
83,7/lJ/ 81,
,9/13/ 1,
lb,7/ 3/ ,27
2,b/ 3/ ,01
b,9/13/ 81,
,B/ 8/ 1,
18,31
82.
81,
,23
19,9
3,77
27,88
1888,3
11,17
,01) ,551 ( 1
,8?) 1,10 ( 1
,lb) 3,13 ( 8
,37) 85,10 ( 18
.50) 1113,51 ( 830
,7b) 10,17 ( 7
b50) ,501 ( ,
























.28)
,H7)
,5h)
,91)
.35)
,59)
889)
PARTICULME DATA, TOTAL FOR 1 BAGS
90MM




FILTER
8AMPLF FLOW
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR

SCM(SCF)
G/TE3T
G/KW HR



(G/HP HR)
G/KG FUEL CG/LB FUEL)

1.838 ( 13,71)
.'57
,08faO ( ,0b11)
,1989 ( ,0908)





PART.  6/KW-HR (G/HP-HR)  .40 (.30)
                                                                 80 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                     SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                                      SCM(SCF)
                                                                                                             79.01 (8790,5)
-------
                BO VOLVO DUAL
                   CTD) i -b
ENGINE  MO.nan
FNGINF  MOoFL
ENGINE  9l(,  L(
CVS NO.  In

BAROMETER 7 3 Vr B i MM HRfSrt.89 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. ?b.t HER C(79.0 OfG F)

BAG RFSUl TS
   BAG NllMRf-R
   DESCRIPTION
   BLOWER nu~ P MM. H?O(IN.  nao)
   BLOWER INLFT P  MM.  HPoriN.  1120)
   BLOWFR INLFT TEMP.  DFG'.  C
-------
         N0'.n?n
         Mnnri.   Bfi vouvn  DUAI
 FNGINF  9.k l.fSHb. CIH) I -b
 CVS NO.   In
                              Fun.
  TABLE E-4.   FNGTNE EMISSION RESULTS
                       HOT TRANSIENT

              TEST Nn,?2-JH  RUN
              DATE 10/15/80
              TIME
                DYNO NO,  5
BAH('uETrR 71l'.8l
DRY RIJLH Tfl.  cu.
                      H?ntIM.  M?0)
                      .  H?drIN.  M?0)
                  TEMP.  OEG'.  unpc.
 m
 i
   HC
   HC
   Cn
   CO
   CO?
   CO? RCKr.BD
   Nnx SAMp| £
   NOX PCKr.no  MFTFH/RANGK/PPM
         SAMpi t  MFTFH/RANGK/PPM
         RCKGRO  MFTFR/PANGE/PPM
                MFTF.W/RANGF /PPM
                          . /PCM
                           /PC r
                           /PCT
                           xri'M
              FACTIlR
    HC  co'Jr.r NTrtiTloN  PPM
    CO  fONcFNTRrtTION  PPM
    CO? ClINCF NTR4TION  PCT
    NOX CflNCFNTRiT ION  PPM

    HC  MASS  GRAMS
    CO  MASS  GRAMS
    cn? MASS  GRAMS
    NOX MASS  GRAMS
    FUEL KG  fLR)
    Kw HR (HP HHI

    BSHC G/Krt HR (G/HP MR)
    BSCO G/KW HR fG/Hp HR)
    BSCO? G/K« HP (G/HP HFO
    BSNOX G/Krt HP (G/HP HK)
    BSFC KG/KW HP (LR/HP HR
TOTAL TEST RESULTS »
  TOTAL KH HR (HP HR)
   BSHC   G'Kw MB (G/HP MR)
   HSro   G/KW HR (G/HP MR)
   BSCO?  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
   BSNQX  r,/K* uR (G/HP MR)
   BSFC  KG/HW HR (Lfl/HP Hh)
                                11.21  f  15.03)
                                2.16  (   l.bl)
                               13.3b
                                ins.
l.lb)
                                 ,H?B  (   .703)
                                                                                                            PROJECT  NO,  11-5044-001
                                                                                              DIESEL   E
                                                                                                BAG CART NO.
              RELATIVE HUMIDITY  ,  F.NGINE-HB,  PCT  ,   CVS-bQ,  PCT
              ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  10.1 GM/KG(  73,8 GHAJNS/LB)       NOX  HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000
1
NYNF
b45.? (25. 4)
5 18'. 2 (20.H)
HB.1 (120,0)
blR2.
?1h'.0
213.3 (I03b0,)
7
10
1b

Ib
2
h
1







,)/?
,8/
?/
I/
.4/13/
.1/1
.3/
,7/
.4/1
,0/
41
?
q
•
IB
4
3?
3/
3/
3/
3/
?/
.>'
5.
5.
22
.3
,"
>
3b,
U.
IB.
1.
,2b
,04
11.
1.







2
LANF
b45,? (25,
518,? (20,
48,1 (120
H2b4,
3nn,o
217,2 (104
7
9
54

2b
3
B








117b'.2








10
•
1
3
30
1018
1
•
.2b
511
.07
.1»
,3*
,15
.58
Hlb

( 1
( 1
2
22
818
7
,

.17)
.44)
.1»)
.bl)
.81)
.14)
Bib)
pARTICULATE DATA






10MM

FILTER
SAMPLE
,8/23/
,3/ I/
4)
4)
.0)
17.)
31,
1.
,b/12/ 117,
,2/12/
,!/ 3/
,U/ V
,1/13/
,1/ 2/
30. Jl
30.
11*.
.38
23,3
S.lb
31,55
2081,3
13, 2b
,180
2,01
2,47
18,13
lib, 28
fa, 35
n,
,t3
.05
24.
1,









( 2.
( i.
I 1.
( I*.
( 742,
( H,
3
L»F
b45.2 (25,4)
518,2 (20,4)
48,1 (120,0)
b371,
305,0
302,3 (10b7b,)
13
7
b5

bO
2
20










Ib)
80)
84)
1?)
13)
73)
,4b1 ( ,771)
, TOTAL

FLOW
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
FOR 4

BAGS

,8/22/ bl,
,B/ I/ B,
,4/12/ 14b,
,2/12/ 0,
,1/ 3/ 1,08
,1/ 3/ ,04
,1/13/ bO,
.I/ 2/ 1,
12, Ib
b2,
14J,
1,04
51,4
10, Bl
41, 4b
5758.0
34,33
2,751 ( b
b,12 ( 1
l,5b ( 1
7,15 ( 5
831,80 ( b20
4,1b C 3
,31'7 (


SCM(SCF)
G/TtST
G/KW
G/KG
HR (G/HP HR)
FUEL
(G/LB FUEL)
4
NYNF
b45,2 (25,4)
518,2 (?U,4)
48,1 (120,0)
b?ni,
217,0
214,2 (10312.)
b
8
84

Ib
3
b










,0b)
.28)
.Ib)
.33)
.27)
,70)
b53)


1,131 (
1,050
,0137
,2110
,3/22/ 32,
,4/ I/ B,
,3/13/ 85,
,7/13/ 1,
,4/ 3/ ,?b
,0/ 3/ ,05
,1/13/ 21,
.I/ 2/ 1,
41,17
?3.
82,
.22
11,8
3,15
28,11
Ilb4,4
11,13
,531 ( 1
1,12 ( 1
3,51 ( 2
25,07 ( 18
1035,74 ( 772
1,10 ( 7
.H72 ( ,


31,14)

( ,0b11)
( ,0113)

















.17)
.51)
,k?)
.70)
,35)
.38)
777)






PART.  6/KW-HR (6/HP-HR)  .40 (.30)
                                                                20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                    SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                                     SCM(SCF)
                                                                     71,21 (8717,b)
-------
ENGINE  Nn'.nen
FNGINE  MODEL   «n voi.vn IHIAI. FUEL
ENGINE  i'. b I f Sfih. CTPM l.,b
cvs MO.   m
BAROMETER
DRY BULB
               c MM HG(?fl.11 I
               PH.1* f)Ff, C(7b.O
                                          TABLE E-5.  ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                             COLO TRANSIENT

                                                     TEST Nn,22-JC  RUN
                                                     DATE in/17/811
                                                     TIME OHIO
                                                       DYNO NO,  b
                                    F)
                                                                                                           PROJECT NO, 11-50HH-001
                                                                                              DIESFL    E
                                                                                                BAG CART  NO.
                                                      RELATIVE  HUMIDITY ,   ENGINE-58, PCT ,   CVS-57, PCT
                                                      ABSOLUTE  HUMIDITY 11.5 GM/KG( BQ.b GRAINS/LB)      NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1.0000
m
 i
 BAG RFSHI.TS
   BAG  NUMBER
   DESCRIPTION
   BLOWER  OIF  P  MM.  H?onN.
   BLOWER  INLFT  p  MM.  HPOUN.  H?O)
   BLOWER  TNl.FT  TEMP.  HFG'.  C(DEG.  F)
   Bl OWE R  REVOLUTIONS
   TIME SEcofjns
   TOTAL  FLOW STD. Cll'. MFTPFS(SCF)
    HC  SAMpLfc MpTER/RANGF/F'PM
    HC  BCKGRD MFTEP/RANGE/FPH
    CO  SAMPLE MpTER/RANGEXPPM
    CO  BCKr,HD MpTER/RANGE/PPM
    CO? SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PCT
    CO? BCKr.RD MpTER/RANGt/PCT
    NOX SAMPLE MFTEH/RANGE/PPM
    NOX BCKfiRD MpTER/RANGE/PPM
    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    co  MASS GRAMS
    CO? MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    KW HR (HP HH1


    BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    B.SC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HP,)
    BSFC KG/KW HP (LB/HP HR)


TOTAL TEST RESULTS H BARS


   TOTAL KW HR (HP HP)
    BSHC   G/KW HK (G/HP HR)
    BSCO   G/KW HR (G/HP HP)
    BSCO?  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC  KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)

PART. G/KW-HR  (G/HP-HR)  .36  (.27)
                               11.30 (  15.15)
                                2.15 (   l.bO)
                               13.17 (
                                Ibl. (
                                7.15 (
                                        7lb.)
                                        5.33)
1
NYNF
b5n'.2 (25. b)
518'.e (2CI.H)
HB'.S (120,0)
bi an,
215.1
pqn'.b (10H05,)
b,H/S2/ 32,
1 , 7 / 1 / IKt
SO.7/1?/ 108.
,3/12/ it
11. 0/ 3/ ,30
3,H/ 3/ ,115
7.7/13/ 23,
.7/ 2/ 1,
H?.t)8
23'.
inn'.
'.25
22. •»
3.B5
3S.H5
13bq.5
12. hi
'.h33 ( 1
1'. 12 ( 1
3.H5 ( 2
32. 1H C 23
1227. H3 ( 115
11,31 ( 8
'.5b8 ( ,
2
LANF
b50,2 (25, b)
518.2 (20. H)
H8.1 (120, D)
b2b3,
211,1
21B.S (105H5.)
H.B/22/ HH,
1,7/ J/ 10,
53.7/12/ 115,
,3/12/ 1,
57, 1/ 3/ ,Hb
3,5/ 3/ ,05
B.1/13/ 27,
,H/ 2/ 1,
28,27
J5,
112,
.tl
25.1
5.15
38,77
2223,5
1H,78
.HO) 1.0H7 ( 2,31)
,50) 2,10 ( 2,81)
,57) 2.BH ( 2.123
,S7) 1B.H8 ( 13,78)
,51) 10B1.R2 ( 710.31)
,H3) 7, OH ( 5.25)
133) .HIS ( ,82U)
J
LAP
b50,2 (25, b)
518.2 (20, H)
H8.1 (120,0)
b370,
305,0
303, b (10725,)
1H.1/22/ 70,
8,5/ I/ 1,
b2,0/12/ 137,
,2/12/ n,
b3,5/ 3/ 1,13
3,5/ 3/ ,05
22.7/13/ bB,
,8/ 2/ 1,
11, b2
b3.
131.
1,08
b7,H
10, 1b
Hfa,35
b02b,B
31,15
2,885 ( b
b,1S ( 1
1,58 ( 1
b,b7 ( H
8b7,30 ( bHb
5,b3 ( H
,ns (
H
NYNF
b50,2 (25, b)
518,2 (20, H)
H8.1 (J20.0)
b202,
217,0
215, b (10HH2.)
5.1/22/ 21,
1,0/ I/ 1,
83,0/13/ 83,
,5/13/ 0,
17, b/ 3/ ,28
3,b/ 3/ ,0b
8.7/13/ 2b,
i, ox ex i,
H5,Bb
21,
81,
,23
25,2
3,50
27,81
1221,8
1H.25
,3b) ,b5B ( 1
,32) 1,13 ( 1
.18) 3,01 ( 2
.17) 2H,^,5 ( 18
,75) 10BS, HO ( 801
,20) 12,58 ( 1
b83) ,H12 ( ,























,23)
.52)
,30)
,30)
,3S)
,38)
801)
PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL FOR H BAGS
10MM



FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HH



(G/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
en x

20 FILTERS
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF)



1.21H ( H2.87)
,182
,0870 ( .ObHI)
,1118 ( ,0870)

80,75 (2852,2)







-------
 ENGINE  NO.D20
 ENGINE  HODEL   00 VOLVO DUALFUEL
 ENGINE  9,6 L(506, CID) L--6
 CVS NO,  10

 BAROMETER 746,76 MM HG(29,40 IN HG)
 DRY HULK TEHP, 21,7 DEC C(71,0 DEC F)

 BAG RESULTS
    BAG NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOUER DIP P MM, H20(IN, H20)
    BLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
    BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F)
    DLOUER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD, CU, HETRES(SCF)
    HC  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
    HC  BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
    CO  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
    CO  BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
    C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
    C02 BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PCT
    NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
    NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
                                           TABLE E-6. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                             C TRANS.

                                                     TEST NO,22-2C  RUN1
                                                     DATE 10/20/80
                                                     TIME 11105
                                                       DYNO NO,  5
                                                                                                           PROJECT  NO,  11-5044-001
m
 i
oo
    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAMS
    C02 MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LED
    KM HR (HP HR)

    BSHC G/KW MR (G/HP MR)
    BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    DSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4  BAGS
   TOTAL KW HR (HP
    BSHC   G/KU HR
    BSCO   G/KW HR
    PSC02   G/KW HR
    BSNOX   G/KW HR
    BSFC  KG/KW HR
  PART.  6/KW-HR  (6/HP-HR)   .34 (.25)
HR)
(G/HP HR)
(G/HP HR)
(G/HP HR)
(G/HP HR)
(LB/HP HR)
11.51 ( 15,43)
2.27 ( 1.69)
13,68 ( 10.20)
991. ( 739.)
7,48 ( 5,58)
,465 ( ,765)
DIESEL   EM-465-F
  BAG CART NO,   1
                                                     RELATIVE HUMIDITY t   ENGINE-69,  PCT  ,   CVS-41, PCT
                                                     ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 11,4 GM/KG(  79,9 GRAINS/LLO      NOX HUMIDITY C.F,  1,0000
1 2 3
NYNF LANP LAP
678,2 (26,7) 678,2 (26,7) 670,2 (26,7)
520,7 (20,5) 520,7 (20,5) 520,7 (20,5)
48,9(120,0) 48,9(120,0) 40,9(120,0)
6177, 6262, 6371,
295,3 299,9 305,0
298,7 (10549.) 302,8 (10694.) 308,0 (10880.)
7.3/22/ 36, 9.7/22/ 48, 14.7/22/ 73.
11, 5/ I/ 12, 11. I/ I/ 11. 9,9/ I/ 10.
52.5/12/ 112, 54.2/12/ 116, 66.1/12/ 148,
,7/12/ 1. ,7/12/ 1, .7/12X 1,
19, 3/ 3/ ,31 26, 9/ 3/ ,44 66, 2/ 3/ 1.19
2,6/ 3/ ,04 2,8/ 3/ ,04 3,0/ 3/ ,05
7.8/13/ 23, 9.1/13/ 27, 24.3/13/ 73,
,5/ 2/ 1, .5/2/1, l.O/ 2/ 1,
41,31 29,32 11,09
25, 38, 64,
109, 113, 142,
,27 ,40 1,15
22,9 26,9 71,9
4,31 6,55 11.44
37.82 39.74 50,82
1432,3 2215,0 6461,6
13,07 15,57 42.36
,642 ( 1.41) 1,040 ( 2,29) 3,105 ( 6
1,16 ( 1.56) 2,14 ( 2,87) 6,97 ( 9
3,72 ( 2,77) 3.06 ( 2,28) 1,64 ( 1
32,62 ( 24.32) 18,55 ( 13,83) 7.30 ( 5
1270.22 ( 953.17) 1033.96 ( 771.02) 927.51 ( 691
11,27 ( 8,41) 7,27 ( 5,42) 6,08 ( 4
,553 ( ,910) ,435 ( .793) ,446 (
PARTICULATE DATA; TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HR (D/KP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KO FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
4
NYNF
670.2 (26.7)
520,7 (20,5)
48,9 (120,0)
6201,
296,9
299,8 (10590.)
6,7/22/ 34,
12, O/ I/ 12,
85.D/13/ 86,
1.9/13/ 2,
16. 9/ 3/ ,27
2,0/ 3/ ,0-1
9.0/13/ 27,
,7/ 2/ 1.
47,64
22.
83,
,23
26,2
3,80
29,03
1249,2
15,05
,85) ,569 ( 1
,34) 1,24 ( 1
,22) 3.06 ( 2
,44) 23,42 ( 17
,65) 1007,98 ( 751
,53) 12,14 ( 9
733) ,459 (


1,239 ( 43,78)
,976
,0848 ( ,0632)
,1822 ( ,0826;
























,25)
,66)
.29)
.46)
,65)
,05)
754)






                                                                20  X  20  FILTERS
                                                                   SAMPLE  FLOW
                                                                                  SCH(SCF)
              82.41 (2910.6)
-------
                                           TABLE E-7.
                                                              EMISSION RESULTS
                                                             COtn TRANSIENT
                                                                                                           PROJECT NO,  U-50HY-001
 ENGINE.   NO'.DPn
 ENG1MF   MOnFL    BO  VOLVO DUAL  FIIFl
 ENGINE   q.h  L(5Rb.  CIO)  L.I,
 CVS NO.   )n
                    HG(2q.23  IN HG)
                    l)t G C(7?.n DEG F)
 BAROMETER ^?'si
 DRY BULB TpMP. ?
BAG RESULTS
   BAG NIIMRFR
   DESCRIPTION
   BLOWER OIF P MM. H20(IN. H?0)
   BLOWER INLFT P MM. H?OUN. nan)
   BLOWfR JMLFT TEMP. nEG-. C(DEG. F)
   BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
   TIME. SECONDS
   TOTAL FLOW s-fn. cu. METRESCSCF)

   HC  sAMptf MFTER/RANGE/PPM
   HC  BCKr,RD MFTEH/RANGE./PPM
   CO  SAMPLE MFTFR/HANGE/PPM
   CO  BCKp,RD MpTERXRANGEXPPM
   CO? SAMpi E MFTER/RANGE/PCT
   co? HCKGRD M'FTERXRANGF/PCT
   NOX SAMPLE MpTER/RANGEXPPM
   NOX BCKGHD MFTF.R/P.ANGE/PPM

   DILUTION  FACTOR
   HC  CONCENTRATION  PPM
   CO  CONCENTRATION  PPM
   CO? CONCENTRATION  PcT
   NOX CONCENTRATION  PPM

   HC  MASS  GRAMS
   CO  MASS  GRAMS
   CO? MASS  GRAMS
   NOX MASS  GRAMS
   FUEL KG  (LR)
   KW HR (HP  HR}

   BSHC G/KW  HP  (G/HP HP)
   BSCO G/KW  HR  (G/HP HR)
   BSCO? G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
   BSNOX G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
   BSFC KG/KW HR  (LB/HP HR)
 m
  i
 vO
TOTAL TEST RESULTS <* RAGS


   TOTAL KW HR (HP MR)
    BSHC   R/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCQ   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
           G/KW HR (G/HP HP)
           G/KW HP
   BSCO?
   RSNOX
   BSFC
                    (G/HP  HR)
          Kr,/KW HR  (Lrt/HP  HR)
7.37 I
. M H 5 (
. b8)
0b.)
.50)
731)
TEST N0.22-2C HUNR
HATF 10X22XBO
TIME 10148 DIESEL EM.4bS-F
OYNO NO, 5 BAG CART NO, 1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-bl, PCT , CVS-42, PCT
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.5 GM/KG( 73. f GRAIMS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C
1 2 3
NYNF
b52
523
48


2q?
b.
q.
52.
1
18.
?.
7.
•


' B
'?
r.q
bi
?qs
'. i
(25.
(20.
(120
RO,
.q
7)
b)
,0)


LANF
b52,8 (25
5?3,? (20
4B,q (12
b2bl.
3011,0

.7)
.b)
0.0)


(I0tq5.) 301,0 (10b33,)
b/??/ 33,
?/
?>/!
?/l
a/
q/
b/i
t/
*?.
2
I/
?/ 1
?/
3/
3X
3/
?/
.!»b
t.
1,
12.
o.
,30
,C1H
23.
0.


q, 1/22/
B,8/ I/
sq.n/ia/
,2/l?/
Sb.q/ 3/
3,0/ 3/
q,b/13/
,s/ e/
2q,r?b
37,
4b,
1,
i2q,
o.
,14
,05
21.
1.


MO'. 12b,










1


•
a?
4
37
140
12
f
*
1
'4
37
3qj
12
•
2h
.•»
'.13
.,"
4.0
'.72
(.20
'.nl
.ns
.58
.2H
.bl
bis






( 1,37)
( 1,35)
( 3.05)
( 2H.03)
(1037, HS)
( q.to)
( 1,010)
,*0
28,2
b,**
HH ,07
21H5.8
lb,22
1,028
2,oq
3,08
31, oq
10tb,?R
7.77
,tq2




LAF
bSe.8 (25
523,2 (20
,F,
it
1,0000
NYNF
,7)
.b)
b52,8
523,2
48. q (120,0) 48, q
b370,
305,0
(25,
(20,
(120
7)
b)
,0)



b201,

30b,3 (10B1B.)
15.0/22/
7,3/ IX
b7,OX12X
,3/12/
bi.q/ s/
2,q/ 3/
23, a/13/
,7/ ?/
11,13
bB,
145,
I.Ob
bq,o
12,04
51,70
75,
7.
151,
1.
1,10
,04
70,
1,


2q?
2R8.1
,o


(10531,)
b,q/22/
H,3/
Bb,2/l
,4/1
17, 4/
3.2X
8,7/1
,b/
4b
2
I/
3/
3/
3/
3/
3/
a/
,2b
t.
35,
11,
87,
0,
,28
,05
2b,
1,












85,




,
25
4
2q
23
,b
,0b
,^








&q4b,3 1255,0

( 2,27)
C 2.80)
( 2,30)
C 15.73)
( 780.21)
( 5,?q)
( ,80R)
40,45
2,848
7,11
l.bS
7,27
83b,S4
s.bq
,401

( b.2B)
( 1,53)
( 1.2b)
( 5,42)
( baj.81)
( 4,g4)
( ,bsq)
14
,
1
3
24
1058
12
,
,bO
sbq
,n
.^
,81
,02
,31
480

C 1
( 1
( 2
C 18
( 788
( q
( ,

,25)
,sq)
,55)
,50)
,Sfa)
,18)
?sq)
PART.  6/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .35  (.26)
qoMM FILTER
     SAMPLE FLOW
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR

20 X £0 FILTERS
    SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                                     SCM(SCF)
                                                                                     G/TFST
                                                                                     G/KW HR (G/HP HH)
                                                                                     G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
                                                                                    SCM(SCF)
1,238 (  ^3,71)
 .172
 ,0853 C  ,0b3h)
       [  ,0870)
                                                                                                           81,80 (2889,?)
-------
 ENGINf  NO.D20
 ENGINt  MIJDf-L    HO
 ENGINE  <>.i, L(5«6.
 CVS NO.  10

 BAROMt rt R 7V). 55  MM
 (JkY BULb TFflP.  22. H
VOLVU DUAL FUtL
C1D) L-6
 HG(.?f*.51 l.N H&)
 DEC C(73.0 DtG F>
TABLE E-8.  ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                   COLO TRANSIENT

           TEST N0.22-1C  RUN
           DATE lG/29/oO
           TIME  2:47
             DYNO NO.  5
                                                                                                              PKOJttl  Nil. 11-tM
                                                                                                                                 .-oil






m

0
HC
HC
CO
CO
C02
C02
NOX
NOX

SAMPLE
HCKGRD
SAMPLE
8CKGRD
SAMPLT
BCKGHD
SAMPLE
HCKGRD

 BAG RESULTS
    BAG NUMRtR
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER OIF P  MM.  H20IIN.  H20)
    P.LOWCP INLET  P  rH.  H20IIN.  H20)
    BLOWCR INLET  TFKP.  DEC.  ClUtG. f}
    BLOWfP RtVOLUTIONS
    TIME  SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STO.  CU.  MtTREStSCF)
                Mt TbR/RAN&t/PPM
                Mt TLk/KANOL/PPM
                fFHC/RANGt/PPM
                Mf Ttrt/RANOE/PPM
                MTTEf/RANGt/PCT
                ft TEH/RANGE/PCT
                METfK/HANGC/PPM
                KkTlk/RANGt/PPM
    DILUTION  FACTO*
    HC  CUNCrNTRAIION  PPM
    CO  CONCt NTWAUUN  PPM
    C02 CONCCNTKATION  PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION  PPM

    HC  MASS  GRAMS
    co  MASS  GRAMS
    C02 MASS  CRAMS
    MIX MASS  GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KW MR (HP MR)

    BSHC C/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR  (G/HP HK1
    BSC02 G/KW HK (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX G/KW HK (G/HP HR)
    BSFC KG/KH HR (LH/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS

   TOTAL KW HK (HP Hk)          11.55
    BSHC   G/KU HK (G/HP HK)     2.06
    BSCD   G/KK HR (G/HP HR)    12. b7
    BSC02   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)     948.
    BSNOX   G/KH HR (G/HP HR )     8.00
    BSFC  KG/KW H« (LB/HP HR)    .445
                   15.49)
                    1.53)
                    9.60)
                    707. )
                    5.97)
                    .731)
         DIESFL    FM-465-F
           BAG CA^T  NO.   1
           RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,  ENGINE-55.  PCT  ,   CVS-20.  PCT
           ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  9.5 GM/KC1  66.8 GRAINS/LB)       NOX HUMIDITY C.f-.  1..IUOO
1
NYNF
685.8 (27.0)
530.9 C20.9)
46. 9 (120.0)
6180.
295.9
300.0 ( 10597. )
6.0/22/ 30.
9.4/ I/ 9.
48.0/12/ 101.
.9/12/ 2.
18. 4/ 3/ .29
2.9/ 3/ .0*
8.3/13/ 25.
.6/ 2/ 1.
43.57
21.
9b.
.25
24.2
3.63
34.29
1380.5
13.91
.587 1.30)
1.06 1.42)
3.42 2.55)
32.28 24.07)
1299.58 969.10)
13.09 9.76)
.553 .90'*)
2
LANF
685.8 (27.0)
530.9 (20.9)
48.9 (120.0)
6265.
300.0
304.2 (10743.)
B.5/22/ 42.
10. O/ I/ 10.
50.B/12/ 108.
.7/12/ 1.
26. I/ 3/ .43
2.5/ 3/ .04
10.3/13/ 31.
.67 2/ 1.
30.34
33.
105.
.39
30.2
5.76
37.21
2171.6
17.59
1.027 2.26)
2.15 2.88)
2.68 2.00)
17.30 12.90)
1009.55 752.82)
8.18 6.10)
.477 .785)
3
LAF
685.8 (27.0)
530.9 (20. '»
48.9 (120.0)
6371.
305. 1
309.3 (10925.)
13.8/22/ 69.
9 . 2 / 1 / '1.
63.7/12/ 142.
.6/12/ I.
63. 3/ 3/ 1.13
3. 1/ 3/ .05
25.9/13/ 78.
1.2/ 2/ I.
11.66
61.
137.
1.09
76.5
10. d4
49.18
6148.5
45.26
2.957 1 6.52)
7.20 ( 9.65)
1.51 ( 1.12)
6.63 ( 5.1U)
854.35 ( 637.09)
6.29 ( 4.69)
.411 I .675)
4
NYNF
68 5. H (27.0)
5JO.V (.J.
l.H/ 1 J/ / .
17.0/ J/ . ..'/
3.U/ 'i/ .10
9.5/ 1 V ?N .
I.// 11 1 .
4 7 . 4 1,
iO.
ad.
.2 J
27.-;
3. ^
2H.02
1246.9
l'j.(,6
.b6h (
1.14 (
3 . 0 b (
24. b4 (
10V1.91 I a
13.72 I
. 4 1 •> (







)

















1 .04)
.0)t2',)
                                                                                          84.33  (2978.5)
-------
                                           TABLE E-9, ENGINE  EMISSION  RESULTS
                                                            COLD  TRANSIENT
                                                                                                         PROJECT NO, U-S044-001
ENGINE  NO'.DSO
ENGINE  MODEL   80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL
ENGINE  9.i LfSab. CID)  L-b
CVS NO,  In

BAROMETER ?S3'.3b MM HG(29',bb IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. ?a'.a DEC c(72.o DEC F)

BAG RESULTS
   BAG NUMBER
   DESCRIPTION
   BLOWER  DIF P MM, H20UN.  H20)
   BLOWER  JNLET P  MM, HJOCIN, H2p)
   BLOWER  INLET TEMP. DEG.  C(DEG.  F)
   BLOWER  DEVOLUTIONS
    TIME  SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD. cu.  METRES(SCF)
    HC  SAMPLE MFTER/RANGE/PPM
    HC  BCKQRD MFTER/RANGE/PPM
    CO  SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM
    co  BCKGRD MPTER/RANGE/PPM
    CO? SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PCT
    COS BCKGBD MFTER/RANGE/PCT
    NOX SAMpLE MfTER/RANGE/PPM
    NOX BCKGRD MpTER/RANGE/PPM

    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MAS? GRAMS
    CO  MAS? GRAMS
    COS MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KW HR (HP HR1

    BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    Bsco2 G£KW HB  (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX GXKW HR  (G/HP HP)
    BSFC KG/KW HR  (LB/HP HR)
m
 I
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS

   TOTAL KW HR  (HP HR)
    BSHC   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO   G/KW HR (G/HP MR)
    BSC02  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX  G'KW HR (G/HP HR)
                                2.55
                               13.27
                                981.
                                7.95
(  14.985
(   1.90)
(   9.90)
J   733.)
<   5.93)
TEST N0.22-2C
DATE 10/30/80
TIME 10159
OYNO NO, 5
RUN
DIESEL EM-HbS-F
BAG CART NO, 1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGlNE-bl. PCT , CVS-24, PCT
ABSOLUTE HUMIpITY 10.3 GM/KG( 72,3 GRAINS/LB) NOX
1
NYNF
bBS^B (27,0)
530.9 (20,9)
48.9 (120,0)
L 1 D 1
D 1 B i %
29b'.0
301. b (10b52,)
b,8/22/ 34,
ST y i y 9 .
. f / 4 ' ^ •
99 , 2/13/ 101 g
1.5/13/ 1.
18, b/ 3/ ,30
Sn / a / QH
• *' 3* $ u1*
8,3/13/ 25,
197/ 8/ 2,
43',, 04
2t'
Bbf
qa.
i ?°
. 3b
»eo
23'.2
H' 45
^
34,51
1 4 5 h . 2
A T 3 p a ••
13. 3b
',b33 ( 1
i'0ns C i
4 37 C 3
33,90 ( 25
1430,45 ClObb
13.12 C 9
'.b22 C 1,
2 3
LANF LAF
bBS.8 (27.0) bSS.B (27,0)
530.9 (20.9) 530,9 (20,9)
48,9 (120,0) 48,9 (J20.0)
b2b4, b370.
299,9
305. b (10795
9.S/22/ 48
8,5/ I/ 9
50,8/12/ 108
.7/12/ J
2b,9/ 3/ ,4
?,8/ 3/ ,0
9.9/13/ 30
1,7/ 2/ 5
£9,3?
39S
105,
,40
28,0
fa, 93
37,34
2235, 9
lb,39
,40) 1,05S C
,37) 2, Ob {
,2b) 3,3b C
.28) 18,10 (
,b9) iOB4,OS C
,78) 7,95 I
022) »510 C
305,0
,) 310,8 U097B.)
, lb,0/22/ 80,
, 10, O/ I/ 10,
, b2,7/12/ 139,
, ,7/12/ i,
* bl,b/ 3/ 1,09
* S,S/ 3/ ,D4
„ 2S.O/13/ 75,
, 1,5X S/ 2.
ie,oo
71,
i348
I.Ob
73,7
IS.bb
48,33
b032,S
43,82
2,325 2,893 C b
2,773 b,93 { 9
2,513 1.83 C 1
13,50) b,98 ( 5
808,38) 870,34 ( b49
5,933 b,32 ( 4
0839J ,417 ( ,
HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000
4
NYNF
bS5,8 (27,0)
530.9 (20,9)
48,9 (120,0)
b202,
297,0
302, b (10b89,)
7.0/22/ 35,
10, 0/ I/ 10,
81.8X13X 82,
1.5/13/ 1,
lb,3X 3/ ,2b
2,2/ 3/ ,03
9.3/13/ 28,
l,5X 2/ 2,
49,45
85,
80,
,23
2b,3
4,43
28,04
1255,3
15,23
,38) ,5b9 ( 1
,29) l,lb ( 1
,3b) 3,82 ( i
,20) 24,18 { IB
,02) 1082,52 ( 807
,71) 13,14 ( S
b8b) ,491 ( ,















,25)
,5b)
,85)
,03)
,24)
,79)
807)
pARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR <* BAGS
90MM




FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR

SCM(SCF)
G/TEST
G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
G/KG FUEL CGXLB FUEL)

1,321 ( 4b,hb)
,924
,0827 ( ,0bl7)
,1795 ( ,0814)





    BSFC" KG)KW HR (LB/HP HR)

PART.  6/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .34  (.25)
                                                                80 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                    SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                                   S6MJSCF3
                                                                      84.25 (2975,7)
-------
                                          TABLE  E-IO.
                                                       ENGINE: EMISSION  RESULTS
                                                             C-TRANS,
                                                                                                          PROJECT  NO,  ll-;044-0i.
ENGINE  NQ.D20
ENGINE  MODEL   00 VOLVO DUALFUEL
L'NGJNE  9,6 L(586, CIH) L-6
CVS Nfi,  10

BARChETER 751,08 MM HG(29,57 IN HG)
DRY BULK TEMP, 23.? DUG C(75,0 DEC F)

DAG RESULTS
   BAG NUMBER
to
   BLCUER DIF P MM, H20CIN, H20)
   &LOIO INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
   BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F)
   PLOUER REVOLUTIONS
   TIME SECONDS
   TOTAL FLOW STD« CU, METRES(SCF)

   HC  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
   HC  BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
   CO  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
   CO  BCKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPM
   C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
   C02 BCKGRD METER/RAN6E/PCT
   NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
   NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM

   DILUTION FACTOR
   HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
   CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
   C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
   NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

   HC  MASS GRAMS
   CO  MASS GRAMS
   C02 MASS GRAMS
   NOX MASS CRAMS
   FUEL KG (LB)
   KU Hft (HP HR)

   BSHC G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
   BSCO C/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
   FSC02 G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
   BSNOX G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
   BSFC KQ/KW HR  (LB/HP  HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS  4  DAGS

   TOTAL  KU HR  (HP  HR)
    BSHC    G/KU  HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSCO    G/KU  HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSC02   G/KU  HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX   G/KU  HR  (G/HP HR)
    &SFC   KG/KU  HR  (LB/HP  HR)
                              11,78  (  15,79)
                               2,34  (   1,75)
                                       9,28)
                                       690,)
                                       5,14)
                             12,45  (
                                    (
925.
6,90 (
,440 (
                                       ,723)
                                                     TEST N0.22-1C  RUN
                                                     DATE 11/19/80
                                                     TIME 11J03
                                                       DYNO NO,   5
                                                              DIESEL   EM-465-F
                                                                DAO CART NO,  1
                                                     RELATIVE  HUMIDITY  ,   ENGINE-49, PCT  ,  CVS-17, PCT
                                                     ABSOLUTE  HUMIBITY  9,2  GM/KG(  64,1 GRAINS/LEO      NOX HUMIDITY C,F,
                                                                                           ),0000
1 2 3
NYNF LANF LAF
688,3 (27,1) 688,3 (27,1) 688,3 (27,1)
530,9 (20,9) 530,9 (20,9) 530,9 (20,9)
48,9 (120,0) 48.9 (120,0) 48,9 (120,0)
6133, 6267, 6372,
296,0 300,0 305,0
300,4 (10608.) 304,4 (10753.) 309,5 (10933,)
7,2/22/ 36, 9,2/22/ 46, 15.2/22/ 76,
9,8/ I/ 10, 8,5/ I/ 9, 8,6/ I/ 9,
57.7/12/ 125, 48.3/12/ 102, 50.6/12/ 107.
17^7/ 3/ ,28 26*,0/ 3/ ,43 62',7/ 3/ 1,12
3,0/ 3/ ,05 2,5/ 3/ ,04 2,7/ 3/ ,04
5.3/13/ 16, 7.8/13/ 23, 25.0/13/ 75,
,3/ 2/ 0, ,3/ 2/ 0, ,4/ 2/ 0,
44.84 30,48 11,81
27, 38, 68,
123, 99, 103,
.24 ,39 1,08
15,6 23,2 74,6
4.62 6,61 12.12
42,97 35.13 37,18
1308,7 2163,7 6116,5
8,97 13,50 44,15
,616 ( 1,36) 1,023 ( 2,26) 2,941 ( 6
1,10 ( 1,48) 2,15 ( 2,88) 7,40 ( 9
4,20 ( 3,13) 3,08 ( 2,30) 1,64 ( 1
39,07 ( 29,13) 16,37 ( 12,21) 5,02 ( 3
1189,70 ( 887,16) 1008,25 ( 751,85) 826,23 ( 616
8,16 ( 6,08) 6,29 ( 4.69) 5,96 ( 4
,560 ( ,920) ,477 ( ,784) ,397 <
PARTICULATE DATAi TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCH(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
4
NYNF
688,3 (27,1)
530,9 (20,9)
48,9 (120,0)
6202,
296 , 9
301,3 (106-11.)
/»,5/22/ 32,
8,2/ I/ 8,
90.7/13/ 91.
17*,3/ 3/ ,28
2.6/ 3/ ,04
8.6/13/ 26,
,4/ 2/ 0.
46,47
24,
89,
.24
25,4
4,21
31,27
1308,9
14. 6?
,48) ,600 ( 1
,93) 1,13 ( 1
,22) 3,74 ( 2
,75) 27,74 ( 20
,12) 1161,27 ( 865
,45) 12,97 ( 9
653) ,532 (


1,303 ( 46,03)
,933
,0792 ( ,0591)
,1801 ( ,0817)
























,32)
.51)
,79)
,69)
,96)
,67)
875)






 PART. 6/KW-HR (G/HP-HR)   .30 (.22)
                                                              20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                  SAMPLE FLOU
                                                    SCH(SCF)
                                                                                                            82.64  (2918.9)
-------
                                         TABLE E-l
 ENGINE  N0'.n?n
 ENGINE  MODEL   RO VOLVn
 ENGIME  S'.b L(5Hh. CIO) L-b
 CVS NO.  In
                              FUEL
 BAROMFTFK ?3h'3t, MM HGCOB.99 IN 116)
 DRY BULB TEMP. ?M.4 DEG Cf7t.ll DEC F)

 BAG RESULTS
    BAG NUMRFR
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER DIF P MM. HJOUN. H20)
    BLOWER T.NLFT P MM. HSOCIN. n*o)
    BLOWER 1NLFT TEMP. DFG'. CtDEG. F)
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD'. cuf. METKES(SCF)
    HC  SAMPLE MFTER/RANGE/PPM
    HC  RCKGRD MFTER/RANGE/PPM
    CO  SAMPIE MFIER/RANGE/PPM
    CO  BCKr,RD MpTER/RANGE/PPM
    C02 SAMPLE MFTER/RANGE/PCT
    co? BCKRRO MFTER/RANGE/PCT
    Nnx SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM
    NQX BCKcRD MFTER/R*NGE/PPM

    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MAS3 GRAMS
    CO  MASs GRAMS
    CO? MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KW HR (HP MR)

    BSHC G/KW HR (K/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR «7/H> HR)
    BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX G/KW HP (G/HP HP)
    BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HIV)
m

Ul
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS

   TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)         11
    BSHC   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)    2
    BSCO   G/KW UK (G/HP HR)
    BSC02  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    bSNOX  G/Kw HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC  KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
,39  C
,15  (
,5b  (
    <
    (
    (
                                        .28)
                                        .bO)
                               100.
                               7.01
5.22)
                                                        KNRTNE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                               HOT TRANSIENT
                                                                                                           PROJECT  NO,  11-5QHH-001
                     TEST NO^-1H
                     DATE in/17/BG
                     TIME oiasu
                       DVNO NO,  S
                                                                     RUN
                                                                                              DIESEL    EM-»bS-F
                                                                                                BAG CART  NO,   1
                                                     RELATIVE HUMIDITY  ,   ENGINE-SB,  PCT  ,   CVS-bO,  PCT
                                                     ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  11,5  GM/KC(  80,b GRAINS/LB)       NOX  HUMIDITY  C,F,  1,0000
I
NYNF
b5n'.2 (25. b)
518.2 (20.4)
48.9 (120,0)
bl82,
29b.O
294.7 (104Q7.)
b.7/22/ 33,
10, 7/ I/ 11,
91.2/13/ 92,
.4/13/ 0,
lb.8/ 3/ ,27
3,b/ 3/ ,0b
7.7/13/ 23,
,8/ 2/ 1,
4/.S4
23,
9n.
,21
22'. 3
3,88
30.77
1153.3
12. Sb
.509 ( 1
1,13 ( 1
3.43 £ 2
27. Ib ( 20
1017,82 ( 758
ll. na ( B
',449 ( e
2
LANF
b50.2 (25, b)
SJB, 2 (20,4)
48,9 uao.o)
b2b3,
300,0
298,5 (10544,3
B.5/22/ 43,
10,2/ ]/ 10,
50.5/12/ 107,
,J/12/ 0,
2b,0/ 3/ ,43
3,5/ 3/ ,05
B.9/13/ 27,
,?/ 2/ 1,
30,4?
33.
104.
,37
2b,0
5,bb
3b,lb
2040,1
14,83
,12) ,9bi S,li)
,52) 2,12 2,84)
85b) 2,b7 1,995
,25) 17,09 1(2,753
,995 9b4,28 7J9,Ob5
o2»>S 7,ni 5,23)
7385 ,454 ,747J
J
LAP
faSO,2 (25, b)
518,2 (20,4)
48,9 (120,0)
b372.
305,0
303,7 (10727,)
14.2/22/ 71,
%?/ I/ 9,
bH,S/12/ 14H,
,2/l?/ 0,
bl.B/ 3/ 1,10
3, I/ }/ ,05
22.2/13/ b7,
88/ B/ 1,
11,9?
b3,
138,
I.Ob
bb,0
10,97
48, b7
58b9,7
38,33
2,807 ( b
7,01 ( 9
l,5b ( 1
b,94 ( 5
837,24 { b24
5.47 ( 4
,400 C ,
4
NYNF
faSO,2 (25, b)
518,2 (20, »)
48,9 (150,0)
b2Q3,
297,0
295,7 (10443.)
b,4/22/ 32,
9,0/ I/ 9,
81.9/13/ 82,
,3/13/ 0,
lb,B/ 3/ ,27
3,e/ 3/ ,05
8.5/13/ 2b,
,7/ 2/ 1,
4R.04
23,
BO,
,e?
24,9
3,95
27,45
11SO.D
14,09
,19) ,542 ( 1
,40) 1,13 ( 1
,17) 3,49 ( 2
,18) 24,22 ( 18
,33) 1050,23 ( 783
,08) 12,44 ( 9
bSB) ,479 { ,
























,20)
.5?)
,bO)
,0b)
,lb)
,27)
787)
PARTICULAR DATA,, TOTAL FOR » BAGS
90MM

FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/7EST


MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HR CG/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)

1,249 ( 44, IS)
,955
,0838 ( ,Ob2E>)
,1981 ( ,0899)



PART.  G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR) ,36  (,27)
                                                                20  X  50  FILTERS
                                                                   SAMPLE  FLOW
                                                  SCM
-------
                                          TABLE E-12.  ENGINE  EMISSION  RESULTS
                                             	  _.           HOT  TRANSIENT
                                                                                                      PROJECT NO,  ll-SOiH-OOl
 ENGINE   NO',020
 ENGINE   MODEL   80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL
 ENGINE   1,fc LfSib. CIO)  L-b
 CVS NO.   in

 BAROMETER f»b",7b MM HG(21>0 IN HG)
 DRV BULB TfMP. ps'.l DEC  CfBI.O DEC F)

 BAG RESULTS
    BAG  NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER DIF P HM. H20(IN. H20)
    BLOWER JNLET P MM, HZO^IN. H2p)
    BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. CCDEG. F)
    BLOWER DEVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS,
    TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRESfSCF)
HC
HC
CO
CO
        SAMpLE
        BCKG'RD
        SAMPLE
        BCKQRD
    CO? SAMpLE
    C02 BCKQRD
    NOX SAMpLE
    NOX BCKGRD
MFTER/RANGE/PPM
MpTER/RANGE/PPM
MfTER/RANGE/PPM
MpTER/'RANGE/PPM
MPTER/RANGE/PCT
MFTER/RANGE/PCT
MpTER/RANGE/PPM
MFTER/RANGE/PPM
    DILUTION FA.CIOR
    HC  CONgENT,R|TION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAMS
    C02 MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KM HR (HP HR1

    BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSC02 G/KW HR* (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC KG>KW HP (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST (irSULTS 1 BAGS

   TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
    BSHC   G/KW HR (G/Hp HR)
    BSCO   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO?  G/KW MR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC  KQ/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
                           11.11 ( 11.13)
                            2,«1 (  l.bb)
                           11.10 (  4.11)
                                    Ml.)
                                    *.OS)
                 h.77 (
                 '.HI J
                                    ,717)
PART.  6/KW-HR (6/HP-HR) .35  (.26)
                                                  TEST  N0.22-2H   RUN
                                                  DATE  10/20/80
                                                  TIME
                                                    DVNO  NO,   S
                                         DIESEL    E
                                           BAG CART  NO.
                                                                                               1
                                                  RELATIVE  HUMIDITY  ,   ENGlNE-^3. PCT  ,  CV3-3k, PCT
                                                  ABSOLUTE  HUMIDITY  10.8  6M/KG(  75.5 GRAINS/LB)      NOX HUMIDITY C,F,  1,0000
       1
     NYNF
    8 (2b,7)
520'.7 (20.5)
 18.1 (120,0)
    blBO,
                                                                            2
                                                                          LANF
                                                                     b78.2 Ob.7)
                                                                     520.7 (20.5)
                                                                      18.4 (120.0)
                                                                                   LAF
                                                                             b78,2 (2b.7)
                                                                             (20.7 (20. S)
                                                                              18,4 (120,0)
                                                 JS8.S (105C7.)
                                                          902,4  (10b48.)
                                           305,0
                                        108.1  (10883,)
         NVNF
    b78,2  (2b,7)
    520,7  (20,b)
     HB,4  (UO.O)
        b202,
       247,0
    211,1  (10511*,)
7.1/22/ 35,
10. 1/ }/ 10,
11. B/13/ 13.
l.B/ll/ 1.
11. I/ I/ ,25
2.B/ I/ ,01
b.7/13/ 20,
,7/ 2/ 1.
to, 11
25,
40.
•?l
11.3
i;i2
31.37
1181.8
ll'.OI
,»31 1.14)
r.os i.ii)
1.10 3. Ob)
24,78 22.20)
1045.27 lib. 71)
10,48 7.81)
'.512 .841)
8.S/22/ 12,
1.B/ I/ 10.
S0,b/12/ 107,
,1/12/ 2,
21, 1/ I/ ,10
2, I/ I/ ,01
B.l/13/ 21.
,7/ 2/ 1,
31.44
33.
101,
.3b
23,7
5.72
3b,58
2003,1
13,71
,412 t.OB)
1.48 2,bb)
2.84 2.15)
18,15 13, 7b5
1010,24 751,37)
b,42 S.lb)
.175 ,781)
11.3/22/ b7.
B.7/ I/ 4,
b8,4/12/ lib,
,4/12/ 2,
b1,4/ I/ l.lb
1,2/ I/ ,01
21,b/ll/ b6,
.•/ 2/ I,
11,33
54,
111.
1,1«
b1,0
10,12
53,55
b21B,B
37,72
3.034 b
7,00 1
1,11 1
7,bS 5
144,57 b70
5,34 4
.433 .

















.bl)
.34)
.11)
.70)
.Bl)
,02)
712)
b.b/22/
B,2/ I/
B2.0/13/
1.6/13/
lb,7/ 3/
3,2/ 3/
7.7/13/
,7/ 2/
48,30
25,
74,
,22
22,4
4,31
27,75
1148,0
12,88
,513
1.10
3,13
25,28
1041,44
11,73
,415
33,
B,
««,
1,
,27
,05
«3,
1,









1,20)
1,47)
2,43)
18,85)
813,84)
8,75)
,813)
                                                       PARTICULATI  DATA,  TOTAL  FOR  1  BAGS
                                                 40MM FILTER
                                                      SAMPLE FLOW
                                                      MULTIPLIER FOR
                                                      MULTIPLIER FOR
                                SCM(SCF)
                                G/TEST
                                C/KM HR (G/HP HR)
l,27b (  15,08)
 .418
 ,0851 ( ,0bl5)
                MULTIPLIER FOR  G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)   .1871 ( ,0850)
                                                            20 X CO FILTERS
                                                                SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                     SCM(SCF)
                                                       82,bb (2111,1)
-------
ENGINE  NO',D30
ENGINE  MODEL   80 VOLVO DUAL fUEL
ENGINE  l.b LfSnb. CID) L-fa
CVS NO'.  lo
                                          TA-RI P F-l^  'ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                         ._._._._"_       HOT TRANSIENT

                                                      TEST N0.22-2H  RUNR
                                                      DATE 10/22/80
                                                      TIME 11132
                                                        DYNO  NO,   5
                                                                                                          PROJECT NO. U«5044-00i
 BAROMETER
                    HG(31,23 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. PB'.I DEG c(84.o DEC
BAG RESULTS
   BAG  NUM6ER
   DESCRIPTION
   BLOWER  D!F P  MM, H30(IN.  H20)
   BLOWER  JNLET  P  MM,  H20(IN.  H20)
   BLOWER  INLF.T  TEMP.  DEG'.  CtDEG.  F)
   BLOWER  DEVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW  STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
    HC  SAMPLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM
    HC  BCKjjRD MpTER/RANGE/PPM
    CO  SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM
    CO  BCKQRD MpTER/RANGE/PPM
    C03 SAMpUE MpTER/RANGE/PCT
    C02 BCKjjRD MpTER/RANGE/PCT
    NOX SAMPLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM
    NOX BCKGRD MpTEP/RANGE/PPM
m

ui
    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PpM
    COP CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAMS
    CQ2 MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG fLB)
    KW HR (HP HR1

    BSHC G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSCQ2 GfcKW Hp (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX G?KW HP, (G>HP HR)
    BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS

   TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
    BSHC   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    8SCO   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSC02  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC  KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
                                11.41  (  IS, Hi)
                                13. is  (
                                  .
                                 '.»*!  (
                                         bb8.)
                                         5.311
                                        DIESEL   EM.4b5«F
                                          BAG CART NO.  1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,   ENGINE"*?. PCT ,   CVS-HO, PCT
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10.7 GM/KG( 75.1 GRAINS/LB)      NOX HUMIDITY C,F,  1,0000
J
NYNF
b5n.2 (25. b)
620.7 (20'.5)
48.1 (120,0)
blB2.
3 q k n
C T a 9 U
31?'.3 (10411.)
7,4/22/ 37,
10. 3/ I/ 10,
1?,0/13/ 13,
1.0/13/ 1,
lb,2/ 3/ ,2b
Z.7/ I/ .04
K. § r r 3' 1™"
B.0/13/ 24,
,4/ J/ 0,
41' 52
9 i
37.
f r
11.
'.32
33'05
4.b5
3! .37
11B3.1
13,31
',518 ( 1.
l'.U ( 1,
4'.20 ( 3,
38'835 ( 21.
lQbl'.Q7 { 717,
12.10 ( 1,
.4b8 ( .7
3
3
LANF LAF
b50.2 (35. b) b50.2 (35, b)
520,7 (20,5) 530.7 (20,5)
48,1 (130,0) 48,1 (130,0)
b2b4, b37l.
300,0
301,3 U0b38
B.8/32/ 44
B,8/ I/ 1
S2.3/12/ 112
,5/12/ 1
24, 8/ 3/ ,4
2, I/ 3/ ,0
1.2/13/ 28
,S/ 2/ 1
31,15
35,
10B,
.3b
27BD
b.lS
38,03
1112,0
15,57
14) ,138 (
4B) 2,10 (
13) 3.13 (
14) 18.13 J
51) 141.52 (
035 ?,l*2 {
bIS ,447 {
305,0
„} 30b,3 (10830.)
, 14.7/32/ 73,
, B.2/ I/ 8,
, bb,7/13/ 150,
, ,b/13/ 1,
0 bl,b/ 3/ 1,01
4 3,7/ 3/ ,04
, 22,b/13/ bS,
,s/ e/ i,
12,00
fab,
144.
l.Ob
b7,2
11, bH
51,28
5121,8
31,41
2.07) S.B37 ( b
2,813 7,13 ( 1
2.11) I,b3 ( 1
13,533 7,20 ( 5
708,0b) 832,14 ( b30
5,53) 5,53 ( 4
,735J .318 { .
4
NYNF
b50,2 (25, b)
520,7 (20,5)
48,1 (120,0)
b202,
217,0
298,2 (10533.)
7,3/32/ 3b,
7,h/ I/ 8,
82, a/13/ 82,
1.2/13/ i,
lb,2/ 3/ ,2b
2,b/ 3/ ,04
8.7/13/ 2b,
,5/ 2/ 1,
41,73
21,
BO,
,22
25,7
4,17
27,72
1115,0
14,fab
.25) ,5*2 ( 1
,5b) l.lb ( 1
.22) 4,21 ( 3
.37) 23,10 ( 17
.53) 1030,50 ( 7b8
.12) 12. b4 ( 1
b55) -,4bB ( ,


















.20)
,5b)
,20)
,82)
.45)
,42)
7b1)
pARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
10MM




FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR

3CM(SCn
CUTEST
G/KW HR «G/HP HR)
G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)

1,355 ( 44,33)
,158
,0834 ( ,0b22)
,1182 ( .0811)





PART. G/KW-HR (G.HP-HR)  .36 (.27)
                                                                20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                    SAMPLE FLOW
                               SCMCSCF)
81,4b (2877,0)
-------
ENGINE  NO'.Dan
ENGINE  MODEL   BO VOLVO DUAL FUEL
ENGINE  S.I LfSQb. CIO) L-b
CVS NO.  lo
TABLE E-14. ENGINE EMISSION RISULTS
                    HOT TRANSIENT

           TEST N0.22-1H  RUN
           DATE 10/21/80
           TIME
             OYNO NO,  5
                                                                                                          PROJECT NO,  )l"5044»001
 BAROMETER  741,$5  MM HG(21.51  IN HG)
 DRY  BULB  TEMP.  ?7.2 DEC C(B1,0 DEG F)

 BAG  RESULTS
    BAG NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER  pIF P MM. H?n(IN,  H20)
    BLOWER  JNLFT P MM], H?O(IN,  H2o)
    BLOWER  INLFT TEMP. DEC.  C(DEG.  F)
    BLOWER  DEVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL  FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)

    HC  SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM
    HC  BCKQRD MpTER/RANGE/PPM
    CO  SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM
    CO  BCKfjRD MpTER/RANGE/PPM
    C02 SAMPLE MpTER/RANGE^PCT
    C02 BCKcBD MpTER/RANCE/PCT
 m  NOX SAMpLE MpTER/RANGE/PPM
 _!_  NOX BCKGRO MFTER/RANGE/PPM

    DILUTION FACJOR
    HC  CONfPNTRjTlON PPM
    CO  CONrENTR|TION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAMS
    C02 MASS GRAMS
    NOX MA3| GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KW HR  (HP HR>

    B3HC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO?  GIKW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX  G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSFC KG/KW HR  (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST  RESULTS 4 BAGS

   TOTAL KM HR (HP HR)         11.bO (
    BSHC   G/KW  HR (G/HP HR)     ]
    BSCO   J5/KW  HR (0/HP HR)    11
    BSCO?   (J^KW  HR (G/HP HR)     '
    BSNOX   G/KW  HR (G/HP HR)     7.81
    BSFC K6>KW  HR (LB/HP HR)    .411
                              DIESEL    EM.HbS.F
                                BAG CART  NO.   1
                                                     RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,  ENGINE-%3, PCT ,   CVS-JO,  PCT
                                                     ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  S.9 GM/KG( H,0 GRAINS/LB)       NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000
                                                           1
                                                         NYNF
                                                          (37.0)
                                   LANF
                              bBS.B (J7.0)
                              430. 9 (?0,1)
                                                          .
                                                          (10514.)
                                  b2b«».
                                 300,0
                              304,0 (10738,)
                                    3
                                   LAF
                             b8S.8  (87,0)
                             (30,1  (20.S)
                              18.S  (120,0)
                                b371,
                                305,0
                             301.2  (10122.)
         NYNF
    bBS.B  (27,0)
    530,1  (20,1)
     48,1  (120.0)
        b201,
       217,0
    301,0  (10b30,)
b
10
15
1
1?
3
B

















,3/22/
.?/ \/
.B/13/
.B/13/
.6/ 3/
,3/ 3/
,b/ll/
,8/ |/
45'.8b
21J
IB.
.23
2s!o
3'. 70
33.03
12bl.5
14'.37
'.868
i!i«
i'.2*
21.38
1123,12
12.71
,4lb
31, 7,8/22/
10, B.2/ I/
17, Sl.3/12/
2, ,B/12/
,28 2b,0/ 3/
,05 3.4/ 3/
2b, 10.0/13/
1. .B/ 2/
30.48
31.
lOfa,
.37
21,2
6,43
37,57
208b,0
lb,17
1.11) .Mb
i.ii) a. 13
2.4b) 2,54
21.11) 17, bl
838.10) 177.81
1.63) 7,15
,816) ,4b2
".
B,
101,
1.
.»3
,06
30,
1.









2,17)
2.8b)
1.10)
13,13)
781,15)
5.13)
,7bO)
13.1/22/ bb,
11, 3/ I/ 11,
b5,1/12/ 14b,
,7/12/ 1,
b2,b/ 3/ 1,11
3,0/ 3/ ,05
24.1/13/ 75,
,B/ 2/ 1,
11,80
65,
l»»i
1,07
74,1
1,8b
S0,7b
b075,0
43,80
2, lib b,43)
7,11 1,b4)
1,37 1.02)
7. Ob 5,27)
•45, Ib b30,a4)
b.01 4,54)
,40b ,bb7)
5,7/22/
B,B/ I/
8?,3/13/
2.2/13/
17, 0/ 3/
3,4/ 3/
1,2/U/
,B/ 2/
47,51
20,
80.
.22
2b,7
3,43
27, HI
1213,1
15,38
,551
1.15
2,18
24,24
1054,11
13, Ib
,478
28.
1,
82,
2,
.27
,05
27,
1.









( 1
( 1
( 2
( IB
( 78b
( 1
( ,

















,21)
,54)
,22)
,07)
,11)
,1b)
78b)
                                                          PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
                                      15,55)
                                       1.44)
                                       l.bO)
                                       bB4.)
                                       5.B2)
                                       .710)
PART.  S/KW-HR (G/HP-HR)  .32 (.24)
10MM FILTER
     SAMPLE FLOW
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR

10 X CO FILTERS
    SAMPLE FLOW
                                          SCM(SCF)
                                          G/TE8T
                                          G/KW HR (6/HP HR)
                                          G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
                                                                                   SCM(SCF)
1,300 ( 45.12)
 ,134
 ,0805 ( .Obfll)
 ,18b4 ( ,084b)
                                                                 •3.1b  (21bS,S)
-------
 ENGINE  NO.D20
 ENGINE  MODEL   30 VOLVO DUALFUEL
 ENGINE  9,6 L(586, CIH) L-6
 CVS NO,  10

 BAROMETER 753,11 MM h'G(29,65 IN HG>
 DRY BULB TEHP, 22.2 DEG C<72,0 DEG F)

 BAG RESULTS
    BAG NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER DIP P MM, H20(IN, H20)
    BLOWER INLET P MM,  H20UN, H20)
    BLOWER INLET TEMP,  DEG, C(DEG, F)
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME  SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STIU  CU,  METRES(SCF)
                                       TABLE  E-15. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                      	      H-TRANS,

                                                  TEST NO,22~2H  RUN1
                                                  DATE 10/30/80
                                                  TIME 0
                                                   DYNO  NO,   5
                                                                                                           PROJECT NO, 11-504-4-001
         SAMPLE
         BCKGRD
 m
HC
HC
CO  SAMPLE
CO  BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
C02 BCKGRD
NOX' SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METER./RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
    DILUTION  FACTOR
    HC   CONCENTRATION  PPM
    CO   CONCENTRATION  PPM
    C02  CONCENTRATION  PCT
    NOX  CONCENTRATION  PPM

    HC   MASS  GRAMS
    CO   MASS  GRAMS
    C02  MASS  GRAMS
    NOX  MASS  6RAHS
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KW MR  (HP HR)

    BSHC G/KW MR  <0/HP MR)
    BSCO G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSC02 G/KU HR (G/MP HR)
    BSNOX G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC KG/KU HR (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 DAGS

   TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
    BSHC   G/KW MR (G/HP HR)
    BGCO   G/KU MR (C/HP HR)
    BSC02  G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX  C/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC  KG/KU lift (LB/HP HR)
                           11,20 (  15*02)
                            2,40 (   1.05)
                           12,39 (   9.41)
                            918,  <   685,)
                            Q.02
                            ,430
                         s, v t!;
                         ,707)
                                                                               DIESEL    EM-465-F
                                                                                 BAG CART  NO,   1
                                                 RELATIVE HUMIDITY  ,  ENGINE-SB,  PCT  7   CVS-22,  PCT
                                                 ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  9,3  GM/KG(  63,4 GRAIN3/LB)       NOX  HUMIDITY C..F, 1,0000
                                                        1
                                                      NYNF
                                                 685,G (27,0)
                                                 525,8 (20.7)
                                                  48,9 (120,0)
                                                    6181.
                                                    296,0
                                                 301,3 (10653,)
                                                              LANF
                                                         685,8  (27,0)
                                                         525,8  (20.7)
                                                          48,9  (120,0)
                                                             6264,
                                                            299,9
                                                         305,3  (10801,;
                                    3
                                   LAF
                             685,0 (27,0)
                             525,0 (20,7)
                              48,9 (120,0)
                                 6370,
                                305,0
                             311,0 (10934,)
                                   4
                                 NYNF
                            685,8 (27,0)
                            525,8 (20,7)
                             48,9 (120,0)
                                6202,
                               297,0
                            302,3 (10694.)
7, A/22/
9,5/ I/
91.4/13/
1.3/13/
16, 6/ 3/
3,4/ 3/
B,6/13/
1,3/ 2/
48,33
28,
90,
,21
24,6
4,32
31,71
1179,3
14,18
,513
1,11
4,35
28,66
1065,80
12,81
,460
37,
10,
92,
1,
,26
,05
26,
1,









(
(
(

















1,14)
1,48)
3,25)
9
9
47

24
3
10
1












< 21,37)
( 794,77)
(
9,55)
,770)

,0/22/
,3/ I/

,6/1'V
,9/ 3/
,!/ 3/
, 1/13/
,3/ 2/
31,88
36,
98,
,36
29,0
6,33
34,96
2015,6
16,96
,946
2,07
3,06
16,88
973,05
8,19
,457
45,
9,
101,
1,
,41
,05
30,
1,









< 2
{ 2
( 2
< 12
( 725
( 6

















,09)
,78)
,28)
,59)
,61)
,11)
7S<)
15,7/22/ 78,
9,5/ I/ 10,
64.6/12/ 144,
,7/12/ 1,
59, 7/ 3/ 1,06
2,3/ 3/ ,04
24,4/13/ 73,
1,2/ 2/ 1,
12,42
70,
139,
1,02
72,0
12,49
50,29
5795,6
42,82
2,774 (
6,83 (
1,83 (
7,36 (
843,03 ( 63
6,27 {
,406 (

















6,12)
9,16)
1,36)
5,49)
2,41)
4,67)
,667)
6,4/22/
8,5/ I/
79.3/13/
,6/13/
17, 3/ 3/
2,9/ 3/
9,5/13/
1,2/ 2/
46,67
23,
78,
,23
27,3
4,09
27,35
1290,3
15,83
,579
1,19
3,45
23,06
1007,81
13,35
,483
32,
9,
79,
1,
,28
,04
29,
1.









(
(
(

















1,28)
1,59)
2.57)
( 17,20)
( 811,18)

9,95)
,803)
                                                      PARTICULATE DATAr TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
  PART.  G/KW-HR  (6/HP-HR)   .35 (.26)
90MM FILTER-
     SAMPLE FLOW
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR

20 X 20 FILTERS
    SAMPLE FLOW
SCN(SCF)
G/TEST
G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
G/KG FUEL (G/LD FUEL)
                                                                               SCM(SCF)
1,375 (  48,56)
 ,C88
 .0793 ( ,0592)
 ,1344 < ,0036)
                                                                                            84,62 (2988,7)
-------
                                          TABLE E-16.
                                                        ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                              H-TRANS,
                                                                                                         PROJECT  NO.  11-50')-1-001
ENGINE  NO.D20
ENGINE  MODEL   80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL
ENGINE  9,6 L(586, CID) L-6
CVS NO,  10

BAROMETER 751,08 MM HG(29,57 IN HG)
DRY BIO TEMP, 25,6 DEG C(78,0 DEC F)

PAG RESULTS
   PAG NUMBER
   DESCRIPTION
   BLOWER DIF P MM, H20UN, H20)
   DLOWER INLET P MM, H20UN. H20)
   BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F)
   BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
   TIME SECONDS
   TOTAL FLOW STD, CU, METRES(SCF)

   HC  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
   HC  BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
   CO  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
   CO  BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
   C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
   C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
   NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
   NOX BCKGICD METER/RANGE/PPM

   DILUTION FACTOR
   HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
   CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
   C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
   NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

   HC  MASS GRAMS
   CO  MASS GRAMS
   C02 MASS CRAMS
   NOX MASS GRAMS
   FUEL KG (LB)
   KW HR (HP HR)

   BSHC G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
   6SCO G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
   BSC02 G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
   BSNOX G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
   BSFC KG/KW HR  (LB/HP HR)
 m
 i
 oo
TOTAL TEST RESULTS  4  BAGS

   TOTAL  KW HR  (HP  HR)
    BSHC    G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
    [(SCO    G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSC02   G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX   G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSFC   KG/KU HR  (LB/HP HR)
                              11,45  (  15,36)
                              2,42
                              12,28
                              930,
                              7.36
                              .436
1,81)
9.16)
693.)
5,49)
,717)
                                                      TEST N0.22-1H  RUN
                                                      DATE 11/19/80
                                                      TIME 11{43
                                                        DYNO NO,  5
                                                      DIESEL   EM-465-F
                                                        BAG CART NO,   1
                                                      RELATIVE HUMIDITY »   ENGINE-45,  PCT  r   CVS-22.  PCT
                                                      ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  9,3 GM/KG(  65,0 GRAINS/LID      NOX HUMIDITY C,F,  1,0000
1 2 3
NYNF LANF LAF
688,3 (27,1) 688,3 (27,1) 688,3 (27,1)
533,4 (21,0) 533,4 (21,0) 533,4 (21,0)
48.9 (120,0) 48,9 (120,0) 48,9 (120,0)
6182, 6265, 6371,
296,0 300,0 305.0
300,6 (10618, > 304,7 (10761.) 309,8 (10943,)
7.4/22X 37, B.6/22/ 43, 14.9/22/ 75,
7,7/ I/ 8, 7,5/ I/ 8. 8,5/ I/ 9,
51.0/12/ 108, 47.2/12/ 99, 52.1/12/ 111,
,6/12/ 1, ,7/l2/ 1, ,8/12/ 1.
17. I/ 3/ ,27 26, I/ 3/ ,43 61, I/ 3/ 1,08
2,8/ 3/ ,04 2,8/ 3/ ,04 2,5/ 3/ ,04
7.2/13/ 22, 8.7/13/ 26, 24.3/13/ 73,
,5/ If 1, ,5/2/1, ,5/ 2/ 1,
46,66 30,39 12,15
29, 36, 67,
106, 96, 107,
,23 ,39 1,05
21,3 25,6 72,5
5,10 6,32 11,94
37.10 34,17 38,49
1271,0 2150,2 5956,3
12,22 14,91 42.96
,564 ( 1.24) 1,011 ( 2,23) 2,841 ( 6
1,11 ( 1,49) 2,11 ( 2,83) 7,12 ( 9
4,60 ( 3,43) 2,99 ( 2.23) 1,68 ( 1
33,45 ( 24,95) 16,19 ( 12.07) 5,40 ( 4
1146,00 ( 854.57) 1019.06 ( 759,92) 836,16 ( 623
11,02 ( 8,22) 7,07 ( 5,27) 6.03 ( 4
,509 ( ,836) ,479 ( ,788) ,399 ( ,
PARTICULATE DATA; TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90MH FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW Hft (G/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
4
NYNF
688,3 (27,1)
533,4 (21,0)
48,9 (120,0)
6202,
297,0
301,6 (10652.)
6,4/22/ 32,
7,2/ I/ 7,
89.8/13/ 90,
1.5/13/ 1,
16, 7/ 3/ ,27
2,4/ 3/ ,04
8.3/13/ 25,
.5/ 2/ 1,
48.16
25,
88,
.23
24,5
4,38
30,87
1271,4
14,15
,26) .581 ( 1
.55) 1,11 ( 1
,25) 3,95 ( 2
,03) 27,83 ( 20
,52) 1146,33 ( 054
.50) 12,76 ( 9
656) .524 (


1,375 ( 48,56)
,885
,0773 ( .0576)
,1771 ( ,0803)

























,28)
,49)
,95)
,75)
,82)
,51)
861)






PART.  S/KW-HR  (6/HP-HR)   .31  (.23)
                                                              20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                  SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                                    SCM(SCF)
                                                                    84.17 (2972,0)
-------
                                          TABLE E-17. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                     	       HOT TRANSIENT
                                                                                                          PROJECT NO,  U-Stnm-OOl
ENGINE  NO'.D20
ENGINE  MODEL   80 VOLVO DUAL FUEL
ENGINE  S.b LfStib. CID) L-b
CVS NO.  lo

BAROMETER Jlb'bn MM HG(2q'.OP IN HO)
DRY BULB TEMP. ?s'.0 DEC C(77'.0 DEG F)

BAG RESULTS'
   BAG  NUM&ER
   BLOWER DIF  p MM. naodN. H20)
   BLOWER JNLET P  MM,  H20(IN, H20)
   BLOWER  INLET TEMP.  DEG'. C(DEG.  F5
   BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
   TIME SECONDS
   TOTAL FLOW SID'. CU. METRES(SCF)
    HC  SAMpLE
    HC  BCKQRD
    CO  SAMPLE
    CO  BCKrjftD
    C02 SAMPLE
    C02 BCKGRD
rn   NOX SAMPLE
_   NOX BCKGRD
               MfTER/RANGE/PPM
               MpTER/RANGE/PPM
               MpTER/RANGE/PPM
               MfTER/RANGE/PPM
               MpTER/RANGE/PCT
               MpTER/RANGE/PCT
               MFTER/RANGE/PPM
               MFTER/RANGE/PPM
    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    COS CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAMS
    COS MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LR)
    KW HR (HP HFM

    BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HRJ
    BSNOX G/KW Hp (G/HP HR)
    BSFC KGVKW HR (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 BAG3
TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)          ..-- .  -,---
 BSHC   d/KW HR (G/HP HR)    S.
,1S
.H3
                                                                                                             ,859  (  30,34)
                                                                                                             .
-------
  ENGINE   NC
  ENGINE   MOoEL    80  VOLVO  DUAL  FUEL
  ENGINE   9.b  LfSHb.  CIO) L*b
  CVS  NO.   lb

  BAROMETER  73blbQ  MM HG(29'.00  IN  HG)
  DRY  BULB TEMP.  pb'.l DEG C(79.0 DEC F)

  BAG  RESULTS
    BAG  NUMBER
    BLOWER  6IF  P MM. H20(IN. H20)
    BLOWER  INLET P MM,  H2onN,  H20)
    BLOWER  JNLET TEMP.  DEG'. C(D£6. F)
    BLOWER  DEVOLUTIONS
    TIME  SECONDS.  .
    TOTAL FLOW  STD.  cu. METRES(SCF)

    HC   SAMpLE  MFTER/RANGE/PPM
    HC   BCKGRD  MFTER/RANGE/PPM
    co   SAMPLE  MFTER/RANGE/PPM
    co   BCKKRD  MFTER/RANGE/PPM
    co2  SAMPLE  MFTER/RANGE^PCT
    co2  BCKQRD  MFTER/RANGE/PCT
 m NOX  SAMPLE  MFTER/RANGE/PPM
  i  NOX  RCKGRD  MFTER/RANGE/PPM
 o
    DILUTION  FACJOR
    HC   CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO   CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02  CONpENT.R|TlON PCT
    NOX  CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC   MASS  GRAMS
    CO   MAS)  GRAMS
    C02  MASS  GRAMS
    NOX  MASj  GRAMS
    FUEL  KG (LB)
    KW HR (HP HR1

    BSHC  G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSCO  G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSC02 G;KW HR  (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX G/KW H§  (G/HP HR)
    BSFC  KG/KW HR  (LB/HP HR)

 TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3  BAGS

    TOTAL  KM HR (HP HR)          1,92 (
    BSHC   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)    2,85 (
    BSCO   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)    23.** (
    BSC02  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)    411. (
    BSNOX  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)    7.39 (
    BSFC  KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)    '.lib I

Part. G/KW-HR  (6/HP-Hr)  .63  (.47)
   TABLE E-18. ENGTNE EMISSION RESULTS
                       HOT TRANSIENT

              TEST N0.22-2B  RUN
              DATE 10/17/80
              TIME 11110
                DYNO NO,  S
                                           PROJECT NO,  H-S011-001
                              DIESEL   EM.<»b(-F
                                BA6 CART NO,   1
              RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,  ENGINE-SJ,  PCT ,   CVS-faO,  PCT
              ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 11.b GM/KG( 81.3 GRAINS/LB)       NOX  HUMIDITY  C.F,  1.0000
b'.bO)
2.11)
5.51)
,7lb)
bSOJ2 (25. b)
518,2 {20.1)
18.9 (120.0)
Sb95,
272,7
271.3 t 1581.)
t.7/22/ 38,
B.7/ I/ S,
5S.1/1*/ 120,
,5/lfc/ 1,
20, 7/ ]/ .33
3. I/ I/ ,05
7,1/13/ 22,
,9/ I/ 1.
38. 3*
30,
lib-
.28
21^3
l',bb
3b.SO
1101.9
ij'.os
.b13 ( 1
1.12 ( 1
3'29 2
25.77 19
991.91 739
7.80 5
'.151 ,
b50.2 (25. b)
518.2 (20.1)
11.9 (120.0)
bOlO.
287,8
28b,3 (10111.)
7,b/22/ 38,
B,b/ I/ 9,
bS,l/12/ 115,
.S/12/ 1,
23, 7/ 3/ .39
1.5/ 3/ ,05
B.1/13/ 25.
,B/ 2/ 1.
31,25
2*.
HI,
,33
2»,3
I.Bb
1b,88
1715.9
13.30
.12) .813 ( I.Bb)
.90) 2.11 ( 9.81)
,1b) 2,31 { 1.72)
.22) 22,26 ( lb,S9)
,b9) 828, bB ( bl7,95)
.82) b,31 ( 1,71)
717) ,100 ( ,fa57)
bS0.2 (25, b)
518,2 (20,1)
18.9 (120,0)
Ib95,
272,7
271,1 ( 9SB1.)
7,3/22/ 17.
B,l/ I/ 8.
51.1/12/ 109,
,5/12/ 1.
21, O/ M ,31
3, I/ 3/ .05
8.0/13/ 21,
,B/ 2/ 1,
37, 9b
2^,
lOb,
,29
21,1
SSI
13,38
1130.1
12,01
,bS7 1
1.10 1
3.22 2
23, 8b 17
1022,72 7b2
8.59 b
,'»70























.»5)
.88)
.10)
.80)
.bS)
.10)
773)
PARTICIPATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 3 BAGS
90MM



FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HA



(G/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/Kfl FUEL (0/LB FUEL)

,8b
,9b
,1^
.»»
20 X 20 FILTERS
    SAMPLE FLO*
                                            SCM(SCF)
                                             ,8b2 (  30,»3)

                                                   ( ,1*57)
                                                   ( ,203b)
                                                                                                            56,21 (1951,2)
-------
                                         TABLE E-19.
 ENGINE   NO.020
 ENGINE   MODEL   rtO VOLVU DUAL t:ULL
 ENGINE   9.6  L (5B6. CIO) L-6
 CVS NO.  10

 BAROMETER 7S3.ll MM HG129.65 IN MG)
 DRY UUIR TFMP. 24.4 OEC CI76.U OFG F)
 BAG RESULTS
    BAG NUMBFR
    BLOWER DIF ¥
    BLOWER INLET
    BLOWER INLET
MM.  H201IN. H20)
P MM.  ri20( IN. H2U)
TEMP.  DEC. CtUtG. F)
     BLOVtER REVOLUTIONS
     TIME  SECONDS
     TOTAL FLOW  STO.  CU.
                         KETRES(SCF)
m
ro
HC
HC
CO
CO
C02
C02
NOX
NOX
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRO
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
                KtTEK/RANGE/PPM
                METER/KANGE/PPM
                METER/kANGE/PPM
                METER/RANGE/PPM
                MEHK/RANGE/PCT
                METER/KANGE/PCT
                METER/RANGt/PPM
                METER/kANGE/PPM
~   DILUTION  FACTOR
     HC   CONCENTRATION  PPM
     CO   CONCENTRATION  PPM
     C02  CONCENTRATION  PCT
     NOX  CONCENTRATION  PPM

     HC   MASS  GRAMS
     CO   MASS  GRAMS
     C02  MASS  GRAMS
     NOX  MASS  GRAMS
     FUEL  KG  (Lfi)
     KW HR  (HP  HR)

     BSHC  C/KW  HR  (G/HP  HR)
     BSCO  G/KW  HR  (G/HP  HR)
     BSC02  G/KW  HR (G/HP HR)
     BSNOX  C/KW  HR (G/HP HR)
     BSFC  KG/KW  M (LB/HP Hk)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 BAGS

   TOTAL KW HR  (HP Hk )          4.81
     ESHC   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)    2.92
     BSCO   G/KVi HR (G/HP HR)   23,77
     BSC02  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)    9B4.
     BSNOX  G/Kb Hk (G/HP HRJ    8.74
     BSFC  KG/KH HR ILB/HP HR)   .461
                       6.45!
                       2.18}
                      17.739
                       734. )
                       6.52!
                       .7573
                                       ENGINE EMISSION  RESULTS
                                              HOT  TRANSIENT
                                                                                                             PROJECT  NO.  11-5044-001
                                     TEST
                                     DATE
                                     TIME
                                       OYNO
      N0.22-2H  RUN
      10/30/aO

        NO.  5
                     DIESEL    EM-465-F
                        BAG CART  NO.   1
                                     RELATIVE HUMIDITY  t   ENGINE-54.  PCT ,   CVS-20. PCT
                                     ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  10.4  GM/KGl  72.9 GRAINS/LB)      NOX HUMIDITY C.F. 1.0000
685.8 127.0)
525.8 (20.7)
 48.9 (120.0)
    5694.
   272.7
277.6 (  9803.)
       2
685.8 127.0)
525.8 (20.7)
 48.9 (120.0)
    6011.
   287.8
293.0 (10349.)
685.8 (27.0)
525.8 (20.7)
 48.9 (120.0)
    5693.
   272.7
277.5 (  9802.1
7.2/22X 36.
8.3/ I/ 8.
53.3/12/ 114.
.5/12/ 1.
20. 21 3/ .33
2.7/ 3/ .04
7.7/13/ 23.
.9/ 21 I.
39.42
28.
112.
.28
22.1
4. 45
36.14
1447.7
11.73
,674 J 1,49)
1.41 « 1,89)
3,16 2.36)
25.68 19.15)
1028.55 766. 99 j
8.33 6.2U
.479 .7881
7.4/22/ 37.
7.7/ I/ 8.
62.6/12/ 139.
.5/12/ 1.
23. 1/ 3/ .37
2.3/ 3/ .04
9.5/13/ 28.
.!/ 21 0.
34.18
30.
136.
.34
28.3
4.99
46. 32
1827.6
15.85
.879 1,949
2,05 2.75J
2.43 1,81J
22.56 16.82)
889.92 663.6XJ
7.72 5.75)
.428 ,703)
7.3/22X
8.0/ I/
47.9/12/
.6/12/
20. I/ 3/
2.5/ 3/
9.1/13/
.21 21
39.77
29.
98.
.29
27.2
4.58
31.80
1454.0
14.45
.661
1.35
3.41
23.63
1080.62
10.74
.491
36.
B.
101.
1.
.32
.04
27.
0.









1.46)
1.80)
2.54)
17.62)
805.82)
8.01)
.807)
                                          PARTICULATE DATA, TOTAL FOR 3 BAGS
 PART. 6/KW-HR  (G/HP-HR)   .60  (.45)
           90MM FILTER
                SAMPLE FLOW
                MULTIPLIER FOR
                MULTIPLIER FOR
                MULTIPLIER FOR

           20 X 20 FILTERS
               SAMPLE FLOW     SCM(SCF)
            SCMJSCF)
            G/TEST
            G/KW HR 4G/HP HR)
            G/KG FUEL JG/LB FUEL)
                .917 (  32.37)
                .925
                .1925 (  .1436)
                .4180 (  .1896)
                                                                                            57.59  (2033.9)
-------
    NE  NO.D2C
ENGINE  KOHn.   80 VOLVO DUALFUEL
FNIilNE  9, A I. (506, ClfD L-6
CV'J NO.   10

BAROMETER 74U.54 nh UG<29,47 IN KG)
DRY BULB TchP,  22,0 flUC C(73,0 DEG F)

DAG RESULTS
   BAG NUMBER
   BLOWER DIF P MM, H2CMIN, H20)
   £
-------
                          APPENDIX F





TRANSIENT TEST RESULTS FROM THE  ETHANOL-CATALYST CONFIGURATION
-------
      TABLE F-l.  NOTES CONCERNING TEST RESULTS GIVEN IN APPENDIX F
Table No.

Ethanol &
Catalyst
& B.P.
                         Notes
Cold Start

  F-2



  F-3
  F-4



Hot Start

  F-5



  F-6



  F-7



Bus Cycle

  F-8


  F-9
Preparations for runs with ethanol with catalyst and back-
pressure device, included, resetting of diesel fuel flow
at idle and efforts to reduce the driveline vibration which
had increased significantly from the start of test work on
this engine..  As a result of severe driveline vibration
a larger torque meter (100K) was installed.
Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -23.6
and power slope was 9 percent high.  Results used for
regulated emission.  NOX by bag measurement was 7.51 g/kW-hr.

Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -25.5.
Cycle power was  15 percent below command cycle power.
Results used for regulated emissions,  NOx by bag measure-
ment was 7.98 gAw-hr.

Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -24.1.
Results used for regulated emissions.  NOx by bag measure-
ment was 8.04 g/kW-hr.
Failed statistical requirements, torque slope 1.086 and power
slope 1.117.  Results used for regulated emissions.  NOx by bag
measurement was 7.24 g/kW-hr.

Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -15.7.
Results used for regulated emissions.  NOx by bag measurement
was 7.59 gAW-hr.

Failed statistical requirements, torque intercept -18.0.
torque and power R  were .86 and .89 respectively.  Results
used for regulated emissions.
Failed statistical requirements, torque R  0.872.  Results
used for regulated emissions.

Failed statistical requirements, torque R2 0.0866.  Results
used for regulated emissions.
                                         F-2
-------
ENGINE  NO.D23
ENGINE  MODEL   GO VOLVO HUALFUEL
ENGINE  9,6 L(5G6, CUD L-6
CVS  NO,   10

•BAROMETER 744,90 MM HG(29,33 IN HG5
DRY  BULB  TEMP,  22,2 DEO C(72,0 DEC F)

BAG  RESULTS
   BAG  NUMBER
   DESCRIPTION
   BLOWER DIP P MM, H2CKIN,  H20)
    BLOUER INLET P  MM,  1120(IN, M20)
   BLOWER INLET TEMP,  DEC,  C(DEG, F)
    BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
   TIME SECONDS
   TOTAL FLOW  STB,  CU,  METRES(3CF)
    HC
    HC
    CO
    CO
    SAMPLE
    BCKGRD
    SAMPLE
    BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
C02 BCKGRD
NOX-SAMPLE
NGX BCKGRD
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PCT
               METER/RANGE/PCT
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPM
    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAMS
    C02 MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (L3)
    KW HR (HP HR)

    BSHC G/KU HR (G/MP HR)
    BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    B3C02 G/KW MR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    B3FC KG/KU HR (LB/HP MR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 DAGS

   TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
    BSHC   G/KU HR (G/HP -HR)
    B3CO   G/KU HR (G/HP MR)
           G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
           G/KU •- 	 "••
    BSC02
    BSNOX
    BSFC
               (G/HP  HR)
      KG/KW  HR  (LB/HP HR)
                               11.62  (
                                 ,67  (
                               5,87  (
                               1017,  (
                               7,70  (
                               ,466  (
                                            TABLE  F-2.  ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                           	        -C-TRANS,

                                                      TEST NQ.23-3C  RUN1
                                                      DATE ll/ 6/30
                                                      TIME {!{}}
                                                        DYNO NO.   5
                                                                                                      PROJECT NO,  11-5044-001
15,5?)
  ,50)
 4,37)
 75B.)
 5,74).
 ,766)
                                                                                          DIESEL   EH-465-F
                                                                                            DAG CART NO,   1
                                                      RELATIVE HUMIDITY »   EN6INE-60,  PCT ,   CVS--32,  PCT
                                                      ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,2 GM/KG(  71,6 GRAINS/LB)
                                                                                                    NOX HUMIDITY C,F, 1,0000
1
NYNF
680,7 (26.8)
523,3 (20,3)
48,9 (120,0)
6102,
296,0
273,2 (10532.)
5.3/227 27,
9,0/ I/ 10.,
49,2/127 104,
,5/12/ 1,
20, A/ 3/ ,33
3,2/ 3/ ,05
8,3/13/ 25,
,9/ 2/ 1,
38, C7
17.
101,
,28
23,9
2,92
35,17
1551,4
13,65
,653 ( 1.44)
1,02 ( 1,37)
2,07 ( 2,14)
34,55 ( 25,77)
1523,96 (1136,42)
13,41 ( 10,00)
,642 ( 1,055)
2
LANF
680,7 (26, B)
523,3 (20,8)
42,9 (120,0)
6265,
300,0
302,2 (10673,)
4,3/22/ 22,
9,4/ I/ 9.
49.9/13/ 47,
1,1/137 1,
29,07 37 ,4D
3,07 37 .05
9.9/13/ 30,
1,0/27 1.
27,65
13,
45,
,43
28,7
2.19
15,90
2397,7
16,59
1,097 ( 2,42)
2,06 ( 2,77)
1,06 ( ,79)
7,71 ( 5,75).
1163,48 < 867,61)
8,04 ( 6,00)
,532 < .875)
3
LAF
680,7 (24.8)
528.3 (20,8)
48,9 (120,0)
6371.
305,0
307,3 (10354.)
4,2/227 21.
10. 0/ I/' 10,
29.2/13/ 26,
i.1/13/ 1,
66, I/ 3/ 1.19'
2,97 37 ,04
25,0717V 75,
l.O/ 2/ 1,
11,26
12,
25,
1.14
74,2
2,07
8,82
6442,0
43,59
3,051 ( 6,73)
7,39 < 9,91)
,23 ( ,21)
1,19 ( ,89)
871,54 ( 649,71)
5,90 ( 4,40)
,413 (. ,678)
4
NYNF
680,7 (26,8)
523,3 (20,0)
43,9 (120,0)
6202,
297,0
279,1 (10566.)
2.7/22/ 13,
7,37 17 10,
28.1/13/ 25,
1,47137 1,
19,07 3/ .30
3,07 37 ,05
9.5/13/ 28,
l.l/ 2/ 1,
43,43
4.
24,
,26
27,3
i r.-
t G.J
8,27
1423,6
15,62
,615 ( 1
1,15 ( 1
,56 (
7,19 ( 5
1237,04 ( 922
13,57 ( 10
,535 (

























,36)
.54)
,42)
,36)
,46)
.12)
879)
PARTICULATE DATA*  TOTAL  FOR  4  BAGS

     90HM FILTER
          SAMPLE FLOW     SCM(SCF)
          MULTIPLIER FOR  G/TEST  .
          MULTIPLIER FOR  G/KU HR (G/HP  HR)
          MULTIPLIER FOR  G/KG FUEL  (G/LB  FUEL)
1,237 (  43,71)
 ,975
 ,0839 (  ,0626)
       (  ,(
,1800
,0017)
PART.  G/KW-HR  (G/HP-HR)   .34 (.25)
                                                           20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                               SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                                   SCM(SCF)
                                                                    83,40 (2945,6)
-------
 ENGINE  NO.D20
 ENGINE  MODEL   30 VOLVO DUALFUEL
 ENGINE  9.6 L(506, CUD L-6
 CVS NO,  10

 BAROMETER 742,19 MM liG(29,22 IN HG)
 DRY SULB TEMP, 20,0 DUG C(43,0 DEC F)

 BAG RESULTS
    BAG NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN, H20)
    BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN. H20)
    BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F)
    SLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIhE SECONDS
    TOTAL FLDU STD. CU, METRES(SCF)
                             TABLE  F-3.  ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                              	       C-TRANS,

                                       TEST NO.D23-1  RUN1
                                       DATE 11/10/30
                                       TIME jjjjj
                                         DYNO NO,   5
                                                                                                           PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001
    HC  CAMPLE
    !!C  BCKGRD
    CO  CAMPLE
    CO  DCKCRD
    C02 SAMPLE
    C02 BCKCRD
    NOX SAMPLE
  -n NOX EtCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANCE/PPM
METLR/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
  *" DILUTION FACTOR
    IIC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAMC
    C02 MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KU HR (HP MR)

    BSHC G/KU h'R (G/HP HR)
    BSCO C/KU MR (G/HP HR)
    PSC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    DSNOX G/KW IIR (G/HP HR)
    FSFC KG/KM HR (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TECT RESULTS 4 BAGS

   TOTAL KU h'R (IIP HR)
    D5IIC   G/KU HR (G/HP MR)
    BSCO   G/KU h'R (G/HP KR)
    BSC02  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    PSNOX  G/KW h'R (G/HP HR)
    HGFC  KG/KU H.r< (LB/HP HR)
10,42 (  13,98)
  ,81 (    ,61)
 5.67 (   4,23)
1036, (   773.)
 9.74 (   7.26)
 .467 (   .767)
          DIECEL   EM--465--F
            BAG CART NO,  1
                                       RELATIVE HUMIDITY i   ENGINE--62,  PCT ,   CVS-46,  PCT
                                       ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY  9,2 GM/KG(  64,7 GRAINS/LB)       NOX HUMIDITY C,F,  1,0000
1
NYNF
713,7 (28,1)
546,1 (21,5)
37,8 (100,0)
6130,
296,0
304,0 (10736,)
24,2/H/ 24,
9,3/ I/ 10,
B7.9/13/ 89,
1.3/13/ 1,
19, O/ 3/ ,30
3, I/ 3/ ,05
9,6/13/ 29,
,0/ 2/ 1,
42,43
15,
86,
,26
28,0
2,56
30,34
1433,2
16.26
,581 ( 1.28)
,96 ( 1,29)
2,65 ( 1,90)
31,45 ( 23,45)
1490,67 (1111,59)
16,86 ( 12,57)
,602 ( ,990)
2
LANF
713,7 (28,1)
546,1 (21,5)
37,8 (100,0)
6264,
300,0
308,1 (10382,)
22,B/11/ 23,
9,2/ I/ 9,
43.3/13/ 40,
1.1/13/ 1,
26, I/ 3/ ,43
2.0/ 3/ ,04
11.2/13/ 34,
,7/ 2/ 1,
30,95
14,
38,
,39
33,0
2,46
13,78
2174,2
19,46
,980 ( 2.16)
1.90 ( 2,55)
1.29 ( .96)
7,24 ( 5,40)
1142,79 ( S52.18)
10,23 ( 7,63)
,515 ( ,847)
3
LAF
713,7 (28,1)
546,1 (21,5)
37,8 (100,0)
6370,
305,0
313,3 (11066.)
24,1/H/ 24,
9,3/ I/ 9,
26.2/13/ 24,
1.3/13/ 1,
59, 6/ 3/ 1,06
2,3/ 3/ ,04
27.5/13/ 82,
,6/ 2/ 1,
12,60
16,
22,
1,02
81,9
2,80
7,91
5849,9
49,07
2,735 ( 6,03)
6,55 ( S,7Q)
,43 ( ,32)
1,21 ( ,90)
893,62 ( 666,37)
7,56 ( 5,59)
,410 I ,607)
4
NYNF
713,7 (28,1)
546,1 (21,5)
37,8 (100,0)
6201,
296,9
305,0 (10772.)
12.3/11/ 12,
3,8/ I/ 9,
24.0/13/ 21,
1.4/13/ 1,
17, 7/ 3/ ,28
2,9/ 3/ ,04
9.7/13/ 29,
,6/ 2/ 1,
46,83
4,
20,
,24
28,7
,64
7,06
1337,2
16,72
,568 ( 1
1,01 ( 1
,64 (
6.99 ( 5
1324,05 ( 987
16,56 ( 12
,563 (

























,25)
,35)
,48)
,21)
,34)
,35)
925)
                                            PARTICULATE DATAi  TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
PART.  G/KW-HR  (S/HP-HR)   .31  (.23)
                                                 90MM  FILTER
                                                      SAMPLE FLOU
                                                      MULTIPLIER FOR
                                                      MULTIPLIER FOR
                                                      MULTIPLIER FOR

                                                 20  X  20  FILTERS
                                                    SAMPLE FLOU
 SCM(SCF)
 G/TEST
 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
 G/KG FUEL (G/L£ FUEL)
SCM(SCF)
1,234 ( 43,59)
 ,997
 ,0956 ( ,0713)
 ,2049 ( ,0930)


82.10 (2899,9)
-------
 ENGINE  NO.D20
 ENGINE  MODEL   80 VOLVO BUALFUEL
 ENGINE:  9,6 L(5S6, cno L-6
 CVS NO,  10

 BAROMETER 744,73 MM HC(29,32 IN HG)
 DRY BULB TEMP, 21.1 DEG C(70,0 DEC F)

 BAG RESULTS
    BAG NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER  DIP P MM, H20(IN, H20)
    BLOWER  INLET P  MM,  1-120(IN, H20)
    BLOWER  INLET TEMP,  DEG, C(DEG, F)
    ELOUER  REVOLUTIONS
    TIME  SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD,  CU,  METRES(SCF)
     HC
     HC
     CO
     CO
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
    DCKGRD
    SAMPLE
    BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
C02 BCKGRB
NOX SAMPLE
NQX PCKGRD
     DILUTION FACTOR
     HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
     CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
     C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
     NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

     HC  MASS GRAMS
     CO  MASS GRAMS
     C02 MASS GRAMS
     NOX MASS GRAMS
     FUEL KG  (LB) '
     KU HR (HP HR)

     BSHC G/KU HR  (G/HP MR)
     BSCO G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
     DSC02 G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
     BSNOX G/KU HR  (G/HP HR)
     BSFC KG/KU HR  (LB/MP HR)

TOTAL  TEST RESULTS A  DAGS

   TOTAL KU  HR (HP HR)
     BSHC  G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
     BSCO  G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
     BSC02 G/KU KR (G/HP HR)
     BGNOX G/KW HR (G/HP MR)
     BSFC  KG/KU HR (LE/HP HR)
                                       TABLE  F-4.  ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                         C-TK'ANS,

                                                 TEST NO.D23-2  RUN1
                                                 DATE 11/11/00
                                                 TIME 9MO
                                                   DYNQ NO,  5
                                                                                                           PROJECT NO,  11-5044-001
                           10,73 (  14,45)
                             ,89  (
                            5,42  (
                           1022,  (
                            8,08  (
                            ,462  (
                          ,66)
                         4,04)
                         762.)
                         (5,42)
                         ,759)
                                                                              DIESEL   EM-465-F
                                                                                BAG CART NO,  1
                                                 RELATIVE HUMIDITY r  ENGINE-64, PCT >  CVS--51. PCT
                                                 ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,1 GM/KG( 70,3 GRAING/LB)      NOX HUMIDITY C.F,  1,0000
1 2 3
NYNF LANF LAF
678,2 (26,7) 670,2 (26,7) 678,2 (26,7)
525,3 (20,7) 525,3 (20,7) 525,3 (20.7)
51,7 (125,0) 51,7 (125,0) 51,7 (125,0)
6182, 6266, 6371.
295,9 299,9 305,0
296,0 (10456.) 300,0 (10593.) 305,1 (10775,)
27.8/21/ 28, 25.4/21/ 25, 25,9/217 26,
10,47 I/ 10, 10, O/ I/ 10, 10, 3/ I/ 10,
91.3/13/ 92, 42.4/13/ 39, 24.1/13/ 22,
1.0/13/ 1, 1,0/13/ 1. 1.0/137 1,
19,67 3/ ,31 26, 9/ 3/ ,44 61.7/.3/ 1,10
2,7/ 3/ ,04 2,7/ 3/ ,04 2,7/ 3/ ,04
8.6/13/ 26, 10,4/13/ 31, 27,5/13/ 83,
,Q/ 2/ 1, ,7/ 2/ 1, ,6/ 2/ 1,
41,02 29,96 12,17
13, 16, 16,
89, 38, 20,
,27 ,40 1,06
25,1 30,4 82,0
3,01 2,73 2,39
30,04 13,11 7,10
1438,6 2203,0 5916,2
14,19 17,47 47,87
,613 ( 1,35) ,994 ( 2,19) 2,771 ( 6
,99 ( 1,33) 1,97 ( 2,65) 6,77 ( 9
3,04 ( 2,26) 1,33 ( 1,03) ,43 (
31,09 ( 23,18) 6,64 ( 4,95) 1,05 (
1500,77 (1119,12) 1115,60 ( 831,90) 873,67 ( 651
14,31 ( 10,67) 8,05 ( 6,60) 7,07 ( 5
,618 ( . 1,016) ,503 ( ,028) ,409 (
PARTI CULATE DATA? TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
70MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LB FUEL)
4
NYNF
67B.2 (26,7)
525,8 (20,7)
51,7 (125,0)
6204,
296,0
297,1 (10492,)
15.1/21/ 15,
10, O/ I/ 10,
25.0/13/ 22,
,9/13/ 1,
1B,7/ 3/ ,30
2,8/ 3/ ,04
9.7/13/ 29.
,6/ 2/ 1,
44,18
IT
O ,
21,
,26
28,5
,92
7,32
1402,4
16,17
,11) ,597 ( 1
,08) 1,04 ( 1
,32) ,39 (
,70) 7,06 ( 5
,49) 1352,44 (1003
,27) 15,59 ( 11
673) ,576 (


1,250 ( 44,15)
,958
,0890 ( ,0663)
,1926 ( ,0874)

























,32)
,39)
,66)
,26)
,51)
,63)
947)






PART.  G/KW-HR  (6/HP-HR)  .38  (.28)
                                                           20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                               SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                    SCM(SCF)
81,60 (2882,2)
-------
                                            TABLE F-5. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                                              H-TRANS,
                                                                                                           PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001
 ENGINE  NO,H23
 ENGINE  MODEL   00 VOLVO DUALFUEL
 ENGINE  9,6 L(58i. CID) L-6
 CVG NO,  10

 PAROMETER 744,98 MM KG(29,33 IN HG)
 DRY BULB TEMP, 26,7 DEG C(80.0 DEG F)

 BAG RESULTS
    HAG NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOUER DIF P MM, H20CJN, H20)
    BLOWER INLET P MM,  II20(IN. H20)
    BLOWER INLET TEMP,  DEG, C(DEG, F)
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW STD, CU. METRES(SCF)
    HC
    HC
    CO
    CO
        SAMPLE
        EiCKGRD
        SAMPLE
        BCKGRD
    C02 SAMPLE
    C02 BCKORD
    NOX SAMPLE
    NOX DCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
    DILUTION FACTOR
    ,'!C  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
        MASS CRAMS
                 c;
    HC
    CO
    C02 MASG GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS-
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KW IIR (HP HR)

    BSHC G/KW HR (G/KP MR)
    BSCO G/KW MR (G/HP HR)
    BSC02 G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4  DAGS
'OTAL KM HR (HP
BSHC G/KW HR
BSCO G/KU HR
BSC02 G/KW HR
BSNOX G/KU HR
BGFC KG/KW IIR
HR)
(G/HP MR)
(5/HP HR)
(C/MP HR)
(G/HP HR)
(LB/HP HR)
11,95 (
,46 <
4,12 (
964, (
8,19 <
,443 (
: 16,03)
: ,34)
, 3,07)
: 719,)
: 6,11)
: ,727)
                                                      TEST N0.23-5H
                                                      DATE ll/ 6/30
                                                      TIME !,'::;
                                                        DYNO NO,  5
                                                      RUN1
                                                                               DIESEL    EM--465--F
                                                                                 SAG CART  NO,   1
                                                      RELATIVE HUMIDITY t  ENGINE-47, PCT i  CVS-32,  PCT
                                                      ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,3 GM/KG< 72,4 GRAINS/LB)      NOX HUMIDITY C,F,  1,0000
PART.  6/KW-HR (G/HP-HR)   .38  (.28)
1 2 3
NYNF LANF LAF
683,3 (26,9) 683,3 (26,9) 683,3 (26,9)
523,3 (20,8) 523,3 (20,3) 523,3 (20,8)
50,0 (122,0) 50,0 (122,0) 50,0 (122,0)
6131, 6264, 6372,
297,0 300,0 305.0
297,4 (10505.) 301,4 (10645,) 306,6 (10329.)
18.5/21/ 18, 17,0/21/ 17, 18.6/21/ 19,
10, O/ I/ 10, 9,0/ I/ 9, 8,2/ I/ 8,
59.2/13/ 57, 41.3/13/ 38, 30.1/13/ 27,
•9/13/ 1, ,7/13/ 1, tG/13/ 1,
18, 8/ 3/ ,30 28, 1/ 3/ ,46 65, 0/ 3/ 1,18
3,2/ 3/ ,05 3,0/ 3/ ,05 2,Q/ 3/ ,04
7.6/13/ 23, 10.6/13/ 32, 30.6/13/ 92,
1,0/ 2/ 1. 1,0/ 2/ 1, 1,0/ 2/ 1,
43,40 28,67 11,32
9, 3, 11,
55, 37, 26,
,25 ,42 1,14
21,9 30,9 90,9
1,49 1,44 1,98
19,12 12,95 9,18
1330,5 2305,2 6401,0
12.44 17,79 53.29
.585 ( 1,29) 1,056 ( 2,33) 3,029 ( 6
1,15 ( 1,54) 2,20 ( 2,94) 7,44 ( 9
1,30 ( ,97) .66 ( ,49) ,27 (
16,62 ( 12,39) 5.90 ( 4,40) 1,23 (
1199,64 ( 894,58) 1050.06 ( 783,03) 859,81 ( 641
10,81 ( 0.06) 3,10 ( 6,04) 7,16 ( 5
,508 ( ,835) ,481 ( ,791) ,407 (
PARTICULATE DATAr TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (6/LB FUEL)
20 X 20 FILTERS
SAMPLE FLOW SCM(SCF)
4
NYNF
683,3 (26,
528,3 (20,
50,0 (122
6202,
296,9
9)
3)
,0)
293,4 (10540.)
11.4/21/
3, I/ I/
26.S/13/
•9/13/
19, O/ 3/
2,3/ 3/
8.7/13/
1,0/ 2/
43,48
3,
23,
,26
25,2
.60
7,98
1436,5
14,39
,68) ,618
,90) 1,16
,20) ,52
,92) 6,88
,16) 1238,79
,34) 12,41
669) ,533


1,261 ( 44,52)
,955
,0799 < ,0596)
,1006 < ,0819)

83,26 (2940,6)
11,
3,
24,
1,
,30
,04
26,
1,









( 1,36)
( 1,56)
( ,39)
( 5,13)
( 923,77)
( 9,26)
( ,877)








-------
 ENGINE  NO,D20
 ENGINE  MODEL   00 VOLVO DUALFUEL
 ENGINE  9,6 L(536, CIB)  1-6
 CVS NO,  10

 BAROMETER 742,44 MM MG(29.23 IN HG)
 DRY BULB TEHP, 25,0 DEG C(77,0 DE6 F)

 DAG RESULTS
    BAG NUMBER
    .DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER DIP P MM, H20(IN, H20)
    BLOWER INLET P MM, 1120(IN, M20)
    BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG,  C(DEG, F)
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW 3TD, CU, METREG(SCF)
    HC
    HC
    CO
    CO
         SAMPLE
         BCKGRD
         SAMPLE
         BCKGRD
    C02 SAMPLE
    CO2 BCKGRD
    NOX SAMPLE
    NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PF'M
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
  ^ DILUTION  FACTOR
     HC   CONCENTRATION PPM
     CD   CONCENTRATION PPM
     C02.CONCENTRATION PCT
     NOX  CONCENTRATION PPM

     HC   MASS  GRAMS
     CO   MASS  GRAMS
     C02  MASS  GRAMS
     NOX  MASS  GRAMS
     FUEL KG (LD)
     KU MR  (HP HR)

     ESHC G/KW HR  (G/HP HR)
     B3CO G/KU MR  (G/HP HR)
     BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
     3SNOX G/KW MR (G/HP MR)
     BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS

   TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
    B3HC   G/KU MR (G/HP MR)
    BSCO   G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSC02  G/KW HR (G/HP MR)
    BSNOX  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    D3FC  KG/KU HR (LB/HP MR)
                             TABLE F-6. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                   -  -       H-TRANS,

                                      TEST NO.D23--1  RUN!
                                      DATE 11/10/30
                                      TIME 15!,'}
                                        DYNO  NO,  5
                                                                                                          PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001
                               10,49 (  14.04)
                                 ,64 (
                                3,92 (
                                994, (
                                8,87 (
                                ,446 (
                          ,47)
                        2,92)
                        741.)
                        6,61)
                        ,733)
                                                                                              DIESEL   EM-465-F
                                                                                                BAG CART NO,   1
                                      RELATIVE HUMIDITY  »  ENDINE-52, PCT i  CVS-17, PCT
                                      ABSOLUTE MUMIDITY  10,5 GM/KG( 73,7 GRAINS/LS)
                                                                                                         NOX MUMIDITY C.F,  1,0000
706
546
51


295
18,
9,
47,
1,
17,
3,
7,
d













1
NYNF
,1 (27,
,1 (21,
,7 (125
6202,
297,0
8)
5)
,0)


,1 (10424.)
A/117
67 I/
0/13/
7/13/
4/ 3/
I/ 3/
B/13/
17 2/
47,18
9,
42,
,23
23,3
1,57
14,47
1250,4
13,17
,485
1,03
1,53
14,08
1216,41


12,31
,472
19,
10,
44,
1,
,28
,05
23,
0,









( 1
( 1
( 1
( 10
( 907
( 9
( 9
LANF
706,1 (27,
546,1 (21,
C)
5)
51,7 (125,0)
6265,
300,0


298,1 (10530.)
20,7/117
9,4/ 17
37.6/13/
1,6/137
25,47 37
2,37 37
10.2/13/
,!/ 2/
31,90
12,
33,
,37
30,6
2,00
11,36
2037,0
17,44
,07) ,915
,33) 1,91
,14) 1,05
.50) 5,94
,08) 1065,61
,55) 9,12
776) ,479
PARTICIPATE DATA* TOTAL










90MM




FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
MULTIPLIER FOR
21,
9,
35,
1,
,41
,04
31,
0,









( 2,02)
( 2,56)
( ,78)
( 4,43)
( 794,62)
( 6,80)
< ,707)
FOR 4 BAGS

SCMCSCF)
G/TEST
G/KU HR
3
LAF
706,1 (27,0)
546,1 (21
,5)
4
NYNF
706,1 (27,
546,1 (21,
51,7 (125,0)
6371,
305,0




303,2 (10703.)
23.7/11/
10, O/ I/
27,3/13/
1.3/13/
60, S/ 3/
2,0/ 3/
27.1/13/
,!/ 2/
12,37
15,
23,
1,04
81,4
2,55
0,08
5771,6
47,18
2,696
6,54
,39
1,24
802,87
7i 22
,412




(G/HP MR)
24,
10,
25,
1,
1.08 -
,04
81,
0,









( 5
( 3
(
(
( 658
( 5
( ,





















,94)
,77)
,29)
,92)
,36)
,30)
678)


1,267
,941
51


,7 (125
6203,
296,9
8)
5)
,0)







295,2 (10426,)
12,
9,
24,
1,
18,
2,
9,
4













9/117
9/ 11
9/1 3/
3/137
37 37
7/ 3/
0/13/
I/ 2/
45,21
3,
21,
,25
27,0
,56
7,21
1365,1
15,23
,579
1,01
,55
7,14
1351,76




(

,0897 (
G/KG FUEL (G/LE FUEL)
,2013 (
15,03
,573


44,73)

,0669)
,0913)
13,
10,
22,
1,
,29
,04
27,
0,









( 1
( 1
(
( 5
(1008
( 11
C t























,28)
,35)
,41)
,32)
,01)
,24)
942)






PART.  G/KW-HR  (6/HP-HR)  .39  (.29)
                                                20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                    SAMPLE FLOW
                                                                                    SCM(SCF)
                                                                                                           81,58 (2801,2)
-------
 ENGINE  NO,020
 ENGINE  MODEL   00 VOLVO DUALFUEL
 ENGINE  9,6 L(586, CUD L-6
 CVS NO,  10

 BAROMETER 744,73 MM HG(29,32 IN HG)
 DRY BULB TEMP, 25,6 DEC C(7G,0 DEC F)

 BAG RESULTS
    FAG NUMBER
    DESCRIPTION
    BLOWER DIF P MM, H20(IN, M20)
    BLOWER INLET P MM, !I20(IN, M20)
    BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F)
    BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
    TIME SECONDS
    TOTAL FLOW CTD, CU, METRES(SCF)

    HC  SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
    HC  BCKCRD METER/RAMGE/PF'M
    CO  .SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
    CO  BCKCRD METER/RANCE/PPM
    C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
    C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
 ^ NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
 7 NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM

    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    IIC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS GRAMS
    C02 MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KU HR (HP MR)

    BSHC 6/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KW MR (G/HP IIR)
    BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    PSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
                                           TABLE  F-7. ENGINE  EMISSION  RESULTS
                                                            H-TRANS,

                                                     TEST  NO.D23-2   RUN1
                                                     DATE  11/11/30
                                                     TIME  10J25
                                                       DYNO  NO.   5
                                                                                                           PROJECT NO,  11-5044-001
oo
TOTAL TEST RESULTS  A  BAGS

   TOTAL  KU MR  (HP  HR)
    BSCO
    BSC02
    BSNOX
         G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
         G/KW HR (G/KP HR)
         G/KW H,r< (G/HP HR)
         G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
                             10.58 ( 14,18)
 ,70 (
4.00 (
994.
8.74 (
,449 <
i
         K'C/KW  IIR  (LD/HP  HR)

PART.  G/KW-HR  (G/HP-HR) .39  (.29)
 .53)
2.99)
741.)
6.52)
.737)
                                                              DIESEL   EM-465-F
                                                                BAG CART NO.  1
                                                     RELATIVE  HUMIDITY  ,  ENGINE-50. PCT  »   CVS--43, PCT
                                                     ABSOLUTE  HUMIDITY  10.3  GM/KG(  72.2 GRAINS/LB)      NOX HUMIDITY C.F.  1.0000
1 2 3
NYNF LANF LAF
680,7 (26,8) 680,7 (26,0) 680,7 (26,0)
525.8 (20,7) 525.3 (20,7) 525.8 (20,7)
51.7 (125.0) 51,7 (125.0) 51,7 (125,0)
6132, 6266, 6372,
296.0 300.0 305,0
295,9 (10452.) 299,9 (10594.) 305,0 (10773.)
20.1/21/ 20. 21.9/21/ 22. 25.0/21/ 25,
10, I/ I/ 10, 9,9/ I/ 10, 10, O/ I/ 10,
51.0/13/ 48, 37.2/13/ 34. 26.2/13/ 24.
1.0/13/ 1. 1.3/13/ 1. 1.5/13/ 1,
17, 8/ 3/ ,28 24, 9/ 3/ ,41 61, 2/ 3/ 1,09
3. 1/ 3/ ,05 2,7/ 3/ .04 2,7/ 3/ .04
7.6/13/ 23, 9.8/13/ 30, 27,3/13/ 82,
,8/ 2/ 1. .6/2/1, ,6/ 2/ 1,
46,01 32,57 12,28
10, 12, 16,
46, 32, 22,
,24 ,37 1,05
22,1 28,9 81,5
1,74 2,13 2.78
15,99 11,29 7,65
1290,2 2009,6 5859,2
12,53 16,60 47,53
,533 ( 1,17) ,898 ( 1,98) 2,736 ( 6
1.06 < 1.43) 1.85 ( 2.48) 6,65 ( 3
1,64 ( 1.22) 1.15 ( ,86) .42 (
15.03 ( /11.21) 6.11 ( 4.55) 1,15 (
1212.62 ( 904.25) 1087.17 ( 810.70) 880,49 ( 656
11,77 ( 8,73) 0,93 ( 6,70) 7,14 ( 5
,501 ( ,823) .406 ( .799) ,411 (
PARTICULATE DATA. TOTAL FOR 4 BAGS
90MM FILTER
SAMPLE FLOW SCH(SCF)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/TEST
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
MULTIPLIER FOR G/KG FUEL (G/LE FUEL)
4
NYNF
680.7 (26,8)
525,3 (20,7)
51,7 (125,0)
6203,
297,0
296,9 (10488.)
14.2/21/ 14.
9.7/ I/ 10,
26.0/13/ 23,
1.7/13/ 1,
18, O/ 3/ ,29
2,6/ 3/ ,04
9.4/13/ 20,
,5/ 2/ 1,
45.96
5,
21,
,25
27,7
,31
7,43
1353,9
15,75
,03) ,577 ( 1,27)
,92) 1,01 ( 1,35)
,31) ,80 ( ,60)
.86) 7,35 ( 5,48)
,50) 1340,64 ( 999,72)
,33) 15,60 ( 11,63)
676) ,571 ( ,939)


1,274 ( 45.01)
,940
,0839 ( .0663)
.1981 ( ,0899)
                                                              20 X 20 FILTERS
                                                                  SAMPLE FLOW
                                                    SCM(SCF)
                                                                       81,28 (2870.9)
-------
 ENGINE   NO.D20
 ENGINE   MODEL   30 VOLVO DUALFUEL
 ENGINE   9,6 L(5Gi, CUD  L--6
 CVS NO,   10

 BAROMETER 742,44 MM HG(29,23 IN HG)
 DRY BULB TEMP, 23,? DEC  C(75,0 DEC F!

 BAG RESULTS
    BAG  NUMBER
    BLOWER DIP P MM, H20(IN, H20)
    BLOWER INLET P MM,  1120(IN, K20)
    BLOWER INLET TEMP,  DEO,  C£>
HC  SAMPLE
HC  BCKGRI'i
CO  SAMPLE
CO  BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
C02 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER7RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANCE/PCT
               METER/RANGE/PCT
               METER/RANGE/PPM
               METER/RANGE/PPM
    DILUTION FACTOR
    HC  CONCENTRATION PPM
    CO  CONCENTRATION PPM
    C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
    NOX CONCENTRATION PPM

    HC  MASS GRAMS
    CO  MASS CRAMS
    C02 MASS GRAMS
    NOX MASS GRAMS
    FUEL KG (LB)
    KW .HR (HP HR)

    BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
    BSCO G/KU MR (G/MP MR)
    BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP MR)
    3SNOX G/KW MR (G/HP MR)
    BSFC KG/KW HR 
                                                                             6000,
                                                                            207,7
                                                                         286,4 U0114.)
                                    600,7 (26,0)
                                    525,8 (20,7)
                                     51,7 (125,0)
                                        5693,
                                       272,6
                                    271,3 (  9584,)
17,
8,
42,
20'!
2,
S,
1,
7/n/
9/ I/
Q/13/
3/13/
9/ 3/
B/ 3/
9/13/
3/ 2/
18,
40,
0,
,34
,04
27,
1,
17
9
46
2o
11
1
,9/li/
,?/ I/
,9/13/
.,1/13/
,9/ 3/
,S/ 3/
,3/13/
,3/ 2/
10,
44,
0,
.,41
,04
34,
1,
31
21
•j
9
!?/13/
l6/ 3/
,8/ 3/
,9/13/
,3/ 2/
10,
29,
0,
,34
,04-
30,
39,11
                                                                             32,5
                                                                                             39,05
39,
,30
25,4
1,42
12,22
1467,5
13,16
,614 (
1,27 <
i , 1 1 (
9,61 (
1154,28 (
10,37 <
.483 (







1,33)
1,70)
,83)
7,16)
860,74)
7,73)
,794)
43,
,36
32,7
1,37
14,29
1910,8
17,90
,876 (
1,93 (
,69 (
7,20 (
963,21 (
9,02 (
,441 <







1,93)
2,66)
,52)
5,37)
718,27)
6,73)
,726)
23,
,30
23,4
1,07
3. 93
1475,5
14,72
,637 (
1,25 (
,85 (
7,13 (
1177,27 (
11,75 <
.508 (







1,40)
1,63)
,63)
5,32)
877,39)
8,76)
.835)
                                                           PARTICULATE  DATA*  TOTAL  FOR  3  BAGS
PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR)   ,38  (=283
       90MM FILTER-
            SAMPLE FLOW
            MULTIPLIER  FOR
            MULTIPLIER  FOR
            MULTIPLIER  FOR

       20 X 20  FILTERS
           SAMPLE  FLOW      SCM(SCF)
SCM(SCF)
G/TEST
G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
B/KG FUEL {0/LB FUEL)
,877 (  30,96)
,946
,2093 ( ,1565)
,4449 < ,2018)
                                                                                                       55,52 (1961,0)
-------
ENGINE  NO.D20
ENGINE  MODEL   30 VOLVO DUALFUEL
ENGINE  9,6 LC5C6, CID) L~4
CVS NO,   10

BAROMETER 742,44 MM HG(29,23 IN HG)
DRY SULB TEMP, 26.7 DEC C<30<0 DEC F)

PAG RESULTS
   PAG NUMBER
   ['LOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN, 1120)
   BLOWER INLET P MM.  II20CIN, H20)
   BLOWER INLET TEMP.  DEC, C(DEG, F)
   FLOWER REVOLUTIONS
   TIME SECONDS
   TOTAL FLOW STD, CD, METRES(SCF)
   HC  SAMPLE
   HC  BCKGRD
   CO  SAMPLE
   CO  BCKGRD
   C02 SAMPLE
   C02 BCKGRD
   NOX SAMPLE
   NOX DCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METERVRANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
  0  DILUTION  FACTOR
     HC   CONCENTRATION  PPM
     CO   CONCENTRATION  PPM
     C02  CONCENTRATION  PCT
     NOX  CONCENTRATION  PPM

     HC   MASS  GRAMS
     CO   MASS  GRAMS
     C02  MASS  GRAMS
     NOX  MASS  GRAMS
     FUEL KG (LB)
     KU IIR (HP HR)

     BSHC G/KW HR  (G/KP HR)
     BSCO G/KU IIR  (G/HP IIR)
     BSC02 G/KW IIR (G/HP HR)
     B3NOX G/KW HR (G/MP HR)
     BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)

TOTAL TEST RESULTS 3 BAGS

   TOTAL KU MR (HP HR)
     BSHC  G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
     BSCO  G/KW IIR (G/KP HR)
     BCC02  G/K'J lift (G/MP HR)
    PSNOX  G/KU HR (G/HP HR)
    BSrC   KG/KW MR (LB/MP HR)

PART. G/KW-HR (G/HP-HR)   .36
                               4,51
                                ,84
                               8,44
                              1097,
                             10,68  i
                               ,405
                               (.27)
                              TABLE  F-9. ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
                                   	        H-TRANS,

                                       TEST NO.D23-2L' RUN1
                                       DATE 11/10/30
                                       TIME jj.'j;
                                         BYNO NO,  5
                                                                                                          PROJECT NO, 11-5044-001
                         6,05)
                          ,43)
                         6,29)
                         020.)
                         7,96)
                         ,797)
                                                                                               DIESEL   EM-465-F
                                                                                                 BAG CART NO.   1
                                       RELATIVE HUMIDITY »  ENGINE-4G, PCT >  CVC-45, PCT
                                       ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 10,i GH/KB( 74,3 GRAINS/LB)      NOX HUMIDITY C,F. 1.0000
                                             1
                                      430.7 (26,8)
                                      525.8 (20.7)
                                       51,7 (125,0)
                                          5694,
                                         272,6
                                      271.4 ( 9587.)
                                                                          480,7 (26.3)
                                                                          525,8 (20.7)
                                                                           51,7 (125.0)
                                                                              6008,
                                                                             287,7
                                                                          284,4 (10116.)
                                    3
                             430.7 (24,8)
                             525,G (20.7)
                              51,7 (125.0)
                                 5694.
                                272.7
                             271,4 ( 9507.)
18
9
50

21
3
9
1













,6/1 I/
,0/ I/

,4/13/
,3/ 3/
,2/ 3/
,2/13/
,5/ 2/
38.25
10,
44,
,30
24,1
1,55
14>52
1471,7
13,56
,629
1,23
1,21
11,34
1149,38


10,59
,491
19,
9,
47,
1,
,34
,05
23,
2,









( 1
', 1
(
( 8
( 857
( 7

















,39)
,72)
,90)
,46)
,09)
,90)
17
9
49

25
£.
12
1















( ,807)
,1/11/
,B/ I/

ivi3/
>5/ 3/
• 8/ 3/
,0/13/
,4/ 2/
31,71
8,
45.
,37
34,5
1,25
14,98
1966,0
13,92
,900
1,97
,63
7,59
995,59
9,53
,456
17,
10,
46,
0.
,42
,04
36,
1,









( 1
( 2
/
I 5
i 742
( 7
/ ,

















,98)
,65)
,47)
,44)
,41)
,14)
749)
14
8
30

21
2
10
1
















,2/ll/
,0/ I/
»Q/13/
,4/13/
,5/ 3/
,8/ 3/
,5/13/
,4/ 2/
33,14
6,
27,
,31
30,2
1,00
3,53
1518,6
15,46
,657
1,25
,80
6,80
1211,42
12,50
,524
14,
8,
28,
0,
.35
,04
32,
1,









I
(
(
(

















1,45)
1,68)
,40)
5,07)
I 903,51)

(
9,32)
,862)
                                                          PARTICULATE DATA* TOTAL FOR 3 BAGS
90HM FILTER
     SAMPLE FLOW
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR
     MULTIPLIER FOR

20 X 20 FILTERS
    SAMPLE FLOW
 SCM(SCF)
 G/TEST
 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
 G/KB FUEL (G/LB FUEL).


SCM(SCF)
 ,001 ( 31,11)
 ,941
 ,2033 ( ,1557)
 ,4307 ( ,1954)


55,43 (1965,0)
-------
                                   TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                            (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
  EPA '460/3-81-023
2.
                                                           3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
  Emission Characterization of  an Alcohol/Diesel-Pilot
  Fueled Compression Ignition Engine and its Heavy-Duty
  Diesel Counterpart
                             5. REPORT DATE
                                  August 1981
                             6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
  Terry L.Oilman and Charles T.  Hare
                                                           8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORG "VNIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
  Southwest Research Institute
  6220  Culebra Road
  San Antonio,  Texas  78285
                                                           10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
                              11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

                                   68-03-2884
 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
  Environmental Protection Agency
  Mobile Source Air Pollution  Control
  2565  Plymouth Road
  Ann Arbor,  Michigan  48105
                              13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                              Final (Aug.  1980 - Aug.  198H
                              14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
 16. ABSTRACT
   This  report describes results  from emissions testing of a prototype diesel engine,
   developed by Volvo Truck Corporation of Sweden, which uses pilot injection of
   diesel fuel for compression  ignition of alcohol fuel injected for main combustion.
   In  addition to this dual-fuel  engine,  emission testing was also conducted on a
   heavy-duty diesel engine of  similar design.   Both engines were tested over the
   1979  13-mode FTP, or shorter versions  of this modal test, and over the 1984
   Transient FTP as well as an  experimental bus cycle.  The dual-fuel engine was
   characterized with methanol, ethanol and ethanol with 30 percent water  (wt %) .
   An  oxidation catalyst was also used with methanol and ethanol.

   Emission characterization included regulated emissions  (HC, CO, and NOx) along
   with  total particulate, unburned alcohols, individual hydrocarbons, aldehydes,
   phenols, and odor.  The particulate matter was characterized in terms of particle
   size  distribution, sulfate content, C, H, S, metal content, and soluble organic
   fraction.  The soluble organic fraction was studied by determining its elemental
   composition (C,H,S,N), boiling point distribution, BaP content, relative make-up
   of  polar compounds, and bioactivity by Ames testing.
17.
                                KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
                                              b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
                                           c.  COSATI Field/Group
  Air  Pollution
  Alcohol-Diesel Exhaust Emissions
  Methanol-Diesel
  Ethanol-Diesel
  Oxidation-Catalyst
  Heavy-Duty Diesel Exhaust Emissions
                Transient  Test
                Federal  Test  Procedure
                Pilot  Injection
                Bus Cycle
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

      Release Unlimited
                19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
                    Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
    235
                                              20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
                                                  Unclassified
                                           22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
-------