DATE:
SUBJECT
FROM
TO
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
February 18, 1981
Release of Reports - Information Memorandum
/ . /? ^
^^?
u
Charles L. Gray, Director, ECTD
Edward Anthony Barth,
THRU: F. Peter Hutchins, Project Manager, TEB
Ralph C. Stahman, Chief, TEB /^
The following engineering test report has been prepared by the Test and
Evaluation Branch of the Emission Control Technology Division, Office of
Mobile Source Air Pollution Control, and is transmitted for your review
and clearance.
Number and Title
Evaluation of Gastell, a Device to Modify Driving Habits, EPA-AA-TEB-81-13
Subject Matter
The Gastell device senses vehicle manifold vacuum. The device emits an
audible and visual signal when manifold vacuum drops to a preset, pre-
sumed inefficient, level. The driver responds by easing off the acceler-
ator thereby achieving a higher manifold vacuum and turning the device
off. EPA tested this device because it appeared to offer a benefit. The
test program was conducted over an extended time period and consisted of
two dynamometer test phases followed by a road test phase.
The initial dynamometer phase consisted of FTP and HFET tests with the
Gastell Device on three late model vehicles.
In order to more fully understand the Phase I results, a dynamometer
study of the effects of acceleration rate, Phase II was undertaken with-
out using the Gastell Device. A more aggressive (greater acceleration
rates) driving cycle was developed to aid in evaluating the effects of
such driving behavior on fuel economy. This short test program consisted
of FTP and hot start LA~4 tests on two vehicles using the standard and
"modified" driving cycles. Also, a test cycle consisting predominately
of accelerations was also used to evaluate the effects of acceleration
rate on vehicle fuel economy. Five late model vehicles were tested at
various acceleration rates.
The third test phase consisted of road tests with the
under carefully controlled test conditions. Two drivers
test vehicles over a specified road route in San Antonio.
Gastell Device
drove the four
F PA Forn 1320-6 (Rev. 376)
-------
Conclusions
In the initial phase of testing, the use of the Gastell device to modify
driving habits did not show a significant positive or negative effect on
either emissions or fuel economy.
The overall analysis of the Phase II effort (without the device)1 to
develop a modified FTP to evaluate the effects of more aggressive driving
behavior on fuel economy was that any of the cycles developed woul.d
probably have little or no effect on fuel economy. Therefore, the Gastell
device was not tested with these more agressive driving cycles.
The Phase II test cycle (without the Gastell Device) consisting predomi-
nantly of accelerations gave an average of 14.6% improvement in fuel
economy between the lowest acceleration rates and the highest accelera-
tion rates used. When these acceleration fuel economy improvements are
adjusted for the portion of typical driving time actually devoted to
acceleration, the maximum fuel economy savings would be 1.9%; but, in
consideration of the constraints of actual driving conditions, a more
realistic potential savings would be less than 1/2%. A similar analysis
based on fuel consumed during acceleration modes yielded an estimated
improvement potential of 1.3%.
Having found no fuel economy effects in Phases I and II using the vehicle
dynamometer, a road test program was undertaken with the Gastell Device.
For the six combinations of vehicle and operator, in only one case did
the use of the Gastell Device cause an improvement in vehicle fuel econ-
omy greater than 1%. The amount of the fuel economy improvement for this
one case was 5%. It is interesting to note that even for this one case,
the other less aggressive driver's fuel economy in this vehicle was the
same with or without the device and 4% better than the driver who saw an
improvement.
Approved:
Date: ?._/>..-
Disapproved:
Date:
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
OFFICE OF
AIR, NOISE, AND RADIATION
Date:
Subject: Announcement of Fuel Economy Retrofit Device. Evaluation
ACTION MEMORANDUM
From: Michael P. Walsh, Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Mobile Source Air Pollution Control (ANK-455)
To: Edward F. Tuerk, Acting Assistant Administrator
for Air, Noise, and Radiation IANR-443)
Summary
The attached document has been prepared for publication in the
Federal Register to announce the completion of the evaluation for the
retrofit device.
"Gastell" - a driver's aid fuel
economy
Background
Section 511 of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act (15
USC 2011 (b)) requires EPA to evaluate fuel economy retrofit devices with
regard both to emissions and to fuel economy, and to publish the results
of the evaluation in the Federal Register.
Discussion
The appended final evaluation report for the "Gastell" driver's aid
fuel economy retrofit device was prepared in Ann Arbor. The attached
Federal Register notice announces the availability of the evaluation
report and summarizes the results. This device is designed to provide
the vehicle operator visual and audible indications of inefficient engine
operating conditions so that the fuel conscious drivers can modify their
driving habits to obtain improved efficiency.
Summary of Evaluation
EPA fully considered all of the information submitted by the Device
manufacturer in the Application. The evaluation of the Gastell device
was based on that information and the results of the EPA test program.
The EPA test program was conducted over an extended time period and
consisted of two dynamometer test phases followed by a road test phase.
-------
In general, EPA testing of the Gastell device did not show a positive
benefit from its use. None of the Phase I chassis dynamometer tests with
the Device installed showed a positive fuel economy effect or any effect
on emissions. Four vehicles of varying size and power-to-weight ratio
were road tested in San Antonio (with from one to two drivers each) and
only one vehicle/ driver combination showed a fuel economy improvement
(5%) with the Gastell device. It is concluded from the test data
available that only drivers with aggressive driving behavior (or other
driving habits that involve excessive throttle manipulation) could
benefit from use of this Device and then only if; (1) their vehicle
happened to have the fuel economy response characteristics that favorably
matched the activation setting of the device and (2) the driver
consistently responded to the device signal and refrained from such
aggressive driving.
Re commendat ion
I recommend that you sign the attached Federal Register notice.
Approved:
Disapproved: '
Date:
Attachment
-------
PEDEHAL REGISTER 'nTESETTIiMG REQUEST
i o t
1. 2. 7. 0. 'J. !3. 1 1 and 12. rt.T-.™,
copy n'umb-»r 7 cncJ t'jLimfr t.T*
bil.inc* wi;S •m.inui.-.rior cod-/ to
no x:•:o•*.nAi_ .Trv.-iar-.ir?
r!CEi Cor^pla:* i5>rr» 3. •*, fi
i. rO »1V* A.'IO.-. O TO Ci A. CIA.':3—i:i.N ATO^i
OATr
f u j 3OC'j:-i r ;:T j
\ T J CONT.TO!- tie,. 1
ci—\-
(v)
| CT3 •:-.
j«J3Jc!rlv;|j|io[:i|ici!; M.-. j; a j»s|i7 j; .ijut [
_,
^/ certify tliat the fundj titZid abou4 crt auoitaiiv and
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105
OFFICE OF
AIR. NOISE AND RADIATION
March 12, 1981
Mr. Ray P. Smith, Jr
Automotive Devices, Inc.
129 Susquehanna Street
Williarasport, PA 17701
Dear Mr. Smith:
This is in response to your November 17, 1979 letter which submitted an
application for an evaluation by EPA of the "Gastell" device under Sec-
tion 511 of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act and your
November 3 and November 12, 1980 letters in which you question the appro-
priateness of the EPA testing of your device.
In consideration of your concerns about the adequacy of the EPA chassis
dynamometer tests for evaluating your device, a third test phase was
conducted in San Antonio, Texas using road test procedures under typical
urban driving conditions. The results of that test phase were used to
quantify our conclusions with regard to the fuel economy improvement
attributable to your device.
The EPA evaluation of your Device has been completed and a copy of the
final report is enclosed. Also enclosed, as a courtesy to you, is a copy
of the summary which is expected to be published in the Federal Regis—
t e r. This final report entitled "EPA Evaluation of the Gastell Device
Under Section 511 of'the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act"
will be made available to the public. If you have any questions con-
cerning this report, please contact Mr. Merrill W. Korth of my staff at
313-668-4299.
Sincerely,
Charles L. Gray, Director
Emission Control Technology Division
Enclosures
-------
6560-26
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[40 CFR Part 610]
[FRL AMS-
FUEL ECONOMY RETROFIT DEVICES
Announcement of Fuel Economy Retrofit Device Evaluation
for "GASTELL"
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of Fuel Economy Retrofit Device Evaluation.
SUMMARY: This document announces the conclusions of the EPA evaluation
of the "Gastell" device under provisions of Section 511 of the
Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act.
-------
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Merrill W. Korth, Emission Control
Technology Division, Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control,
Environmental Protection Agency, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan
48105, 313-668-4299.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Section 5U(b)(l) and Section 5ll(c) of the
Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act (15 U.S.C. 201l(b))
requires that:
(b)(l) "Upon application of any manufacturer of a retrofit device (or
prototype thereof), upon the request of the Federal Trade Commission
pursuant to subsection (a), or upon his own motion, the EPA Administrator
shall evaluate, in accordance with rules prescribed under subsection (d),
any retrofit device to determine whether the retrofit device increases
fuel economy and to determine whether the representations (if any) made
with respect to such retrofit devices are accurate."
(c) "The EPA Administrator shall publisn in the Federal Register a
summary of the results of all tests conducted under this section,
together with the EPA Administrator's conclusions as to -
(.1) the effect of any retrofit device on fuel economy;
(2) the effect of any such device on emissions of ait-
pollutants; and
(3) any other information which the Administrator determines to
be relevant in evaluating such device."
-2-
-------
EPA published final regulations establishing procedures for
conducting fuel economy retrofit device evaluations on March 23, 1979
[44 FR 17946].
ORIGIN OF REQUEST FOR EVALUATION: On November II, 1979, the EPA received
a request from Automotive Devices, Inc. for evaluation of a fuel saving
device termed "Gastell." This Device is designed to provide the vehicle
operator visual and audible indications of inefficient engine operating
conditions so that the fuel-conscious drivers can modify their driving
habits to obtain improved efficiency. An evaluation has been made and
the results are described completely in a report entitled: EPA Evalua-
tion of the Gastell Device Under Section 511 of the Motor Vehicle Infor-
mation and Cost Savings Act. Copies of this report are available upon
request.
Summary of Evaluation
EPA fully considered all of the information submitted by the Device
manufacturer in the Application. The evaluation of the Gastell
device was based on that information and the results of the EPA test
program.
The EPA test.program was conducted over an extended time period and
consisted of two dynamometer test phases followed by a road test
phase. The testing performed by EPA showed:
-3-
-------
A. The Phase I testing consisted of FTP and HFET dynamometer tests
of the Gastell device. Overall, the use of the Gastell device
as a driving aid did not show a significant effect on the
vehicle's fuel economy or emissions for either the FTP or HFET.
B. The Phase II testing consisted of modified LA-4's (FTP) and
acceleration rate studies conducted on the vehicle chassis
dynamometer without using the Gastell device.
The more aggressive (greater acceleration rates) modifications
of the LA-4 cycle developed showed no change in fuel economy
when compared to the standard FTP (LA-4). Therefore, since the
preceding tests with the Gastell device did not show an
improvement in the vehicles' fuel economy for either the FTP or
HFET, the Gastell device was not tested with these more
aggressive driving cycles.
Evaluation of five vehicles on a test cycle consisting
predominately of accelerations did show that during accelera-
tion there was an average 14.6% improvement in fuel economy
between a very low acceleration rate (1 mph/sec.) and the
highest acceleration rates used (up to 5 mph/sec.). There was
an average 8.5% improvement in fuel economy between the
moderate (2 mph/sec) and highest acceleration rates. Tnis
indicates that reduced vehicle acceleration rates can improve
fuel economy for some vehicle operating conditions. However,
when these acceleration fuel economy improvements are adjusted
-------
for the average portion of driving time actually devoted to
acceleration, the maximum fuel economy savings would be 1.9%;
but, in consideration of the constraints of actual driving, a
more realistic potential saving would be less than 0.5%. A
similar analysis based on fuel consumed during acceleration
modes yielded an average estimated improvement potential of
1.3%.
C. Having found no appreciable fuel economy effects in Phases I
and II using the vehicle dynamometer, a road test program,
Phase III, was undertaken with the Gastell device. For the six
combinations of vehicle and operator, in only one case did the
use of the Gastell device cause an improvement in vehicle fuel
economy greater than 1%. The amount of fuel economy improve-
ment for this one case was 5% with the Gastell device. It is
interesting to note that even for this one case, the other less
aggressive driver's fuel economy in this vehicle was the same
with or without the Device and 4% better than the driver who
showed an improvement.
In general, the EPA testing of the Gastell device did not show a
positive benefit from its use. None of the Phase I chassis
dynamometer tests with the Device installed showed a positive fuel
economy effect. Four vehicles of varying size and power-to-weight
ratio were road tested in San Antonio (with from one to two drivers
each) and only one vehicle/driver combination showed a fuel economy
improvement (5%) with the Gastell device. It is concluded from the
•O-
-------
test data available that only drivers with aggressive driving
behavior (or other driving habits that involve excessive throttle
manipulation) could benefit from use of this Device and then only if:
(1) their vehicle happened to have the fuel economy response
characteristics that favorably matched the activation setting of the
Device and (2) the driver consistently responded to the Device's
signal and refrained from such aggressive driving.
Intuitively, many people might expect the principles behind the Gastell
device to produce an improvement in fuel economy. In fact, at the
beginning of the program, EPA evaluation engineers involved in the
evaluation expected the device to produce significant benefits and were
surprised when the early data showed no effect on fuel economy. There-
fore, this evaluation has been more extensive and time consuming than
most such projects at EPA. At this time, our test results support the
foregoing evaluation.
Date Edward F. Tuerk
Acting Assistant' Administrator
for Air, Noise, and Radiation
-6-
-------
EPA Evaluation of the Gastell Device under Section 311 of the Motor
Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act
The following is a summary of the information on tne device as supplied
by the Applicant and the resulting hPA analysis and conclusions.
1. Marketing identification of the Device:
"The trade name of the device is GASTELL". "There are four different
models available, marked:
2004 four cylinder engines
2U05 five cylinder engines
2006 six cylinder engines
2008 eight cylinder engines
Also, if the letter (S) follows the model number, switch is provided
to shut off the audible signal; this is optional only."
2. Inventor of the Device and Patents:
Inventor
A. Raymond P. Smith Jr.
2521 Linn Street
Williamsport, PA L7701
Patent
B. ".Patents are pending on the device, application is considered
to be confidential until patent issues, I have enclosed a copy
of this application marked "Priviledged and Confidential." "
3. Manufacturer of the Device:
Automotive Devices, Inc.
129 Susquehanna Street
Williamsport, PA 17701
4. Manufacturing Organization Principals:
Ray P. Smith Jr., President
Robert Flemming, Secretary-Treasurer
5. Marketing Organization in U. S.:
For catalogue sales:
Sun Hill Industries
Glenbrook Industrial Park
652 Glenbrook Rd.
Stamford, CT 0690t>
All other distributing and marketing by the manufacturer:
Automotive Devices, Inc.
129 Susquehanna Street
Williamsport, PA L770L
-------
-2-
"toe sell to department stores, automotive warehouses, garages, etc."
Marketing Organization in U.S. making Application:
Automotive Devices, Inc.
129 Susquehanna Street
Williamsport, PA 17701
Applying Organization Principals:
Ray P. Smith, Jr., President
Robert A. Flemraing, Secretary-Treasurer
Description of Device:
A. "Purpose of the Device (as supplied by Applicant):
(L). "To provide my energy-starved nation with a product that
can assist in the effort to conserve gasoline. For the fuel
conscious driver, GASTELL is a constant and reliable source of
fuel conserving information. The device will teach any driver
on an ongoing basis how to apply proper acceleration of a
vehicle with the gasoline internal combustion engine, and
obtain top efficiency"
(2). "My -second objective of course, is to secure an income
through the sale and use of GASTELL."
B. Theory of Operation (as supplied by Applicant):
(1). "GASTELL uses the theory that maintaining the vacuum
within the intake manifold of the gasoline internal,
engine,
(2). "In operation, GASTELL measures the vacuum within the
intake manifold, and converts those readings into audible and
visual indicators. The audible indicator is seen to have an
advantage over the common vacuum gauge in that (. I) you do not
have to take your eyes from the road to read its signals and;
(2) you don't have to be an engineer to interpret its signals.
See Patent Application enclosed, defining operation in detail
as well as schematics, defining different methods .of
construction, and lastly, see the spec sheet." The patent
application is Attachment A.
9. Applicability of the Device (as supplied by Applicant):
"GASTELL can be installed on all cars and trucks,
models, with gasoline internal combustion engines.
There are presently four models available.
regardless of
-------
The 20U4 application for 4 cylinder engines
The 2005 application for 5 cylinder engines
The 2006 application for o cylinder engines
The 2008 application for 8 cylinder engines
The present calibration settings are: 4 cyls. 3.5 inches of mercury;
5 cyls. 4.0 inches; 6 cyls. 5.0 inches, V-8's 7.0 inches. Some cars
and trucks will allow or require slightly higher or lower settings,
we suggest the vphi'f]p owner contact dealer or factory,
There is no
Therefore,
10. Costs (as supplied by Applicant):
"The suggested retail price of GASTELL is $39.00. The installation
cost should be under $10.00."
11. Device Installation - Tools and Expertise Required (as supplied by
Applicant):
"Installation instructions for GASTELL are enclosed." See
Attachment B.
12. Device Operation (as supplied by Applicant):
"Operator's Manual enclosed with application." See Attachment B.
13. Maintenance (claimed):
"There are no maintenance procedures required. GASTELL
to be more or less sensitive for different engines or
vehicles."
14. Effects on Vehicle Emissions (non-regulated) (claimed):
"With the use of GASTELL, the average driver will reduce emission
considerably because they are burning up the fuel consumed to a
greater extent.. I have no scientific fact to substantiate this
claim, however, after just a few days of driving with GASTELL, the
inside of the tailpipe on the vehicle will turn from black to white.
It is concluded from this, that the polluted emissions are reduced
significantly from that of the automobile without the device."
15. Effects on Vehicle Safety (claimed):
"GASTELL1" can in no way endanger the driver or occupant of a vehicle
in use. The device will make a car safer in driving, in that the
driver's eyes never have to leave the road to use same. Computers,
Flow Scan, and other competing devices all distract the operator from
his normal driving, and are a safety hazard in use."
-------
-4-
16. Test Results (Regulated Emissions and Fuel Economy) (claimed):
".... the GASTELL principal is a proven concept. The theory behind it
has been tested' by our own Government. (Sec. Entitled Driver Aid and
Education Project, prepared by the United States Department of Energy,
wherein extensive studies were done and have established that a
manifold vacuum gauge can improve mileage statistically. (See Page
XIV of that report.)" DOE/CS-0043, UC-96, July 1978 "Further, on
page XX of the report, last paragraph, the suggestion that a device
like GASTELL should be developed and would be an improvement over the
common vacuum gauge, in fact would eliminate most of the educational
problems experienced with the use of a vacuum gauge, throughout this
report. GASTELL, when installed in a car and used properly, would
eliminate programs needed to teach people how to use a vacuum gauge.
It also would eliminate the need to train over 100 million people in a
different method of driving. GASTELL takes the guesswork out of what
is too much acceleration when starting out and what is not enough. No
two cars are alike." Page XIV is Attachment J-l, Page xx is
Attachment J-2.
"Finally, both Automotive Devices and myself have contacted many
testing laboratories to attempt to have GASTELL tested. Most have
flatly turned us down with reluctance in giving us this in writing.
They are all concerned about an area that Government has already
clouded the water. A copy of a letter from one of those testing
laboratories is enclosed." See Attachment C.
17. Testing by EPA:
A detailed report of the testing performed by the EPA is given in EPA
report, EPA-AA-TEB-8.1-13, "Evaluation of Gastell, A Device to Modify
Driving Habits," provided as Attachment B. The test program was
conducted over an extended time period and consisted of two
dynamometer test phases followed by a road test phase. A brief
description of this testing effort is given below:
A. In Phase I, chassis dynamometer tests were conducted according to
the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) and the Highway Fuel Economy Test
Procedure (HFET). The test program consisted of baseline tests and
Gastell tests. The Gastell tests consisted of a standard test
procedure (FTP or HFET) which was altered by having the operator back
off the accelerator, as necessary, to silence the audible and visual
Gastell vacuum alarms. The vehicles tested were:
(1). A 1979 Buick Regal was tested using the procedures
cited in 17. A. above. A total of four FTP's and four
HFET's were used for this evaluation. Five Hot Start LA-4
tests (first 1372 seconds of the FTP starting with a
warmed-up stabilized vehicle) were also conducted using the
-------
-5-
baseline, Gastell.and a Gastell "modified"^'"'. These test
data are detailed in Attachment B.
(2). A 1979 Chevrolet Impala was tested using the procedures
cited in 17. A. above. A total of five FTP ' s and six HFET's
were used for this evaluation. These test data are detailed
in Attachment B.
(3). A 1975 Dodge Dart was tested using the procedures cited
in 17. A. above and the Gastell (frozen)^'. A total of
six FTP's and six HFET's were used for this evaluation.
These test data are detailed in Attachment B.
B. The Phase II testing consisted of modified LA-4's (FTP) and
acceleration rate studies conducted on the vehicle chassis dynamometer
without using the Gastell device. The testing performed and vehicles
used were:
(1) Two more aggressive (greater acceleration rates)
driving cycles were developed to further aid in evaluating
the Device. The test program consisted of hot start LA-4
tests using the standard driving cycle and these two "new"
cycles' '. A total of nine LA-4 tests were conducted on a
1980 Chevrolet Citation. A total of three FTP tests were
conducted on a 1975 Chevrolet Nova. These test data are
detailed in Attachment B.
(2) A 1980 Chevrolet Citation, 1980 Dodge Aspen, 1979 Ford
Pinto, 1979 Mercury Zephyr and a 1979 Oldsmobile Cutlass
were used in a test program designed to quantify the effects
of acceleration rate on vehicle fuel economy. The test
cycles used consisted of a series of accelerations. For
these tests, the vehicles were accelerated at a fixed rate
to a cruise speed, cruised for a few seconds, and then
decelerated at the fixed rate of 2 mph/sec. The cruise time
was chosen so that all tests to a selected cruise speed
would be of equal distance. This sequence was repeated 4
^ ' A second Gastell procedure, "modified" was also used. For this
procedure the FTP (LA-4) dr.iving cycle was modified by reducing the
vehicle accleration rate to a level just below that at which the Device
would signal. This smoothed the cycle and would be representative of a
very experienced driver's use of the Device.
/ o \
*• ' A third Gastell procedure, "frozen accelerator" was also used. For
this procedure the operator again backed off the accelerator to shut off
the Gastell alarms. The operator then held his foot fixed in this
position until the vehicle's speed matched the driving cycle.
^ ' The LA-4 cycle was modified by increasing the acceleration rates at
speeds below 25 mph. Two cycles were used - Mod. 1 which used slightly
increased acceleration rates and Mod. 2 which used nearly wide-open
throttle (WOT) accelerations.
-------
-6-
tiraes (5 total cycles). This test sequence was repeated tor
each combination of acceleration rate and final cruise speed
(14 total test sequences) for each vehicle.
C. The third test phase consisted of road tests with the Gastell
device under carefully controlled test conditions. Two drivers
drove the four test vehicles over a specified road route in San
Antonio. The vehicles were:
A 1980 Chevrolet Citation, 1975 Chevrolet Nova, a 1980
Mercury Cougar XR-7, and a 1979 Mercury Marquis were used in
the San Antonio road test program. A total of two hundred
and thirty road tests were conducted using these vehicles.
18. Analysis
A. Description of the Device:
(1). The primary purpose of GASTELL (as stated in 8. A. 1.), is
to save fuel. The operator's manual (see Attachment B), GASTELL
sales literature provided with the application (see Attachment
D), and ADI's GASTELL information letter provided to EPA (see
Attachment E) also state that by functioning as a preset manifold
vacuum gauge, GASTELL is able to warn the fuel conscious operator
of potential vehicle problems. Insofar as it functions as a
preset indicator of manifold vacuum and thereby as a vacuum
gauge, this claimed ability to point to problems appears
reasonable.
(2). The theory of operation given in 8. B. is in agreement with
the functions the device described in the patent application (see
Attachment B) would be able to provide — namely audible and
visual indications of vacuum levels above or below a preset level.
(3). The GASTELL device was not described in detail in the
application itself. The Device was described in more detail in
the sales literature for the device as marketed (see Attachment
E) and the patent application. (See Attachment A).
(4). The patent application describes a device incorporating
several features not incorporated in the units described in the
installation instructions (see Attachment B) and operator's
manual (see Attachment B), sales literature (see Attachment D),
and GASTELL packaging carton (see Attachment E). These
features/functions were:
(a), "a time delay circuit between the alarm circuit and the
audio signal generator, prevents the audio alarm from being
prematurely actuated during necessary periods of inefficient
fuel usage, such as those which occur during the emergency
handling of the motor vehicle."
(b). an automatic throttle control "connected to the time
delay circuit of the alarm circuit, so that the throttle
control, like the audio alarm generator, becomes actuated
-------
-7-
only if the inefficient fuel consumption condition last
beyond a preset amount of time.."
(c). a switch to override the throttle control by means of
"a micrcswitch mounted under the gas pedal for breaking the
connection between the relay and the time delay circuit
when the gas pedal is pressed to the floor of the motor
vehicle."
(d). "an electronic counter may be connected to the time
delay circuit of tne alarm circuit for counting and
displaying the number of times a gas wastage condition
occured which lasted beyond the preset delay period of the
time delay circuit."
The lack of these features/functions was judged to have no
material adverse bearing on the GASTELL testing conducted by EPA.
B. Applicability of the Device:
The applicability of the Device stated in the Application
(Section 9) appears to be correct for most gasoline engines.
However, turbocharged gasoline engines are not specifically
addressed. Turbocharged gasoline engines have different
manifold vacuum characteristics from their naturally aspirated
counterparts and therefore would rec
>
Section 9 also notes that some vehicles will require the Gastell
device to be recalibrated to adjust its |£ei^^^^^ty. Although
i be a
straigntrorwara procedureforsomeone who understands" the
principal of operation, knows the amount of change required, and
has the necessary tools.
C. Costs:
The Device installation appears simple and should be able to be
accomplished in a minimum amount of time. The installation cost
estimate of §10 appears reasonable for those purchasers who do
not choose to install the Device themselves.
D. Device Installation ~ Tools and Expertise Required:
The GASTELL instructions (see Attachment B) appear to be
complete for the physical installation of the Device.
These instructions imply that installation is a do-it-yourself
job. The sales literature (Attachment D) says it is a "do-it-
yourself installation." The carton (see Attachment E) in which
the Device is sold says that the "detailed instructions enclosed
with GASTELL allow most drivers to make installaton without
professional help." These statements, implied and specified
about the level of expertise required for device installation,
appear to be correct.
-------
-8-
The installation instructions specify only coinmon tools (drill,
knife, pliers, ana screwdriver) are required for installation.
These tool requirements appear to be correct.
The packaging carton states "GASTELL is available in four
models. Each is "pre-set" to perform effectively in the engine
indicated. It is important to match the correct GASTELL model
to the number of cylinders in your engine. No adjustment of
GASTELL is necessary." Section 9 notes that the calibration
settings may require changes on some vehicles and suggests
contacting the dealer or factory. However, there is no
reference to the possible need for adjustement of the Gastell
calibration given in the installation instructions.
As noted in 18. B. , EPA anticipates recalibration should be a
straight forward procedure, however it would require some
expertise and special tools. Specifically:
(I). understanding the Gastell principal of operation and
how the Device was constructed to put this theory into
practice
(2). data or factory recommendations as to the necessary
amount of change in the calibration required for each model
for each condition (too sensitive or .not sensitive.
enough). This information was not provided in the
application nor in any of the ADI/GASTELL literature.
(3). vacuum gauge, vacuum source (if vehicle's vacuum
source is unable to be used), ohmmeter or voltmeter (if
unit is not hooked up to vehicle's 12 volt power).
E. Device Operation:
The Gastell device appears to function as described in
8. B. 1,2). That is, it converts a vacuum level to an audible and
visual signal of that vacuum -level. The Device appears to be
calibrated to the vacuum levels specified in 9. (see Attachment
B, Discussion of Results, 4. Post-Test Gastell Checkout).
The operator's manual (see Attachment B) appears to properly
cover the operator's use of the device. However, like the
installation instructions (see Attachment B), and packaging (see
Attachment E), the operator's manual makes no reference to the
possible requirement for recalibration that might be required
(see Section 9) to change the Device's sensitivity.
F. Device Maintenance:
The application specifies that no maintenance is required for
the Gastell device. Although this appears true in the general
usage of the word maintenance, the vacuum lines, electrical
lines, and fittings installed would require normally the
periodic, albeit infrequent, inspection accorded similiar
components in the vehicle.
-------
-9--
Th e application also again notes that the Device can be
recalibrated. See 18. D. for discussion.
G. Effects on Vehicle Emissions (non-regulated):
Non-regulated emissions were not assessed as part of this
evaluation. However, since the Device I) does not modify the
vehicle's emission control system or powertrain, .2) did not
significantly change the test vehicles' fuel economy or emissions
(see Attachment B), it appears reasonable to assume that the
device would not significantly affect a vehicle's non-regulated
emissions.
H. Effects on Vehicle Safety:
When properly installed, it appears unlikely that the Device
would adversely affect vehicle safety. Also, the Applicant's
claim "that the driver's eyes never have to leave the road to use
same" is judged to be correct.
I. Test Results Supplied by Applicant:
Applicant did not submit any test data per the Federal Test
Procedure or Highway Fuel Economy Test. These are the only EPA
recognized test procedures^ '. This requirement for test data
following these procedures is stated in the application test
policy documents that EPA sends to potential applicants. The
test data submitted by the Applicant are listed below and
evaluated.
(4)
From EPA 511 Application test policy documents:
Test Results (Regulated Emissions and Fuel Economy):
Provide all test information which is available on the effects of
the device on vehicle emissions and fuel economy.
The Federal Test Procedure (40 CFR Part 86) is the only test
which is recognized by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
for the evaluation of vehicle emissions. The Federal Test
Procedure and the Highway Fuel Economy Test (40 CFR Part 600) are
the only tests which are normally recognized by the U.S. EPA for
evaluating vehicle fuel economy. Data which have been collected
in accordance with other standardized fuel economy measuring
procedures (e.g. Society of Automotive Engineers) are acceptable
as supplemental data to the Federal Test Procedure and Highway
Fuel Economy Data will be used, if provided, in the preliminary
evaluation of the device. Data are required from the test
vehicle(s) in both baseline (all parameters set to manufacturer's
specifications) and modified forms (with device installed).
-------
-10-
(a). The Applicant stated "The GASTELL is a proven concept.
The theory behind it has been tested by our own government"
and refers to report "Driver Education and Test Project."
DOE/CS-0043.
(i). as noted by the Applicant this report does not
test GASTELL but only vacuum gauges.
(ii). the data shows a significant shift in fuel
economy for all test vehicles (control, operator
trained, and vacuum gauge aided) as soon as the testing
with the driving aids was initiated. The cause in the
shift for the control group is not explained nor
discernable from the data.
(iii). the data report notes that there is less confi-
dence in the urban (city segment) than there is in the
highway segment.
(iv). the analysis in the report shows that the conclu-
sions are very sensitive to the method of analysis, i.e.
for control group 1, highway segment, the piston vacuum
guage shows a 3.7% improvement over the control fleet
when average group fuel economy is compared. But tne
same data shows 0.0% improvement if fuel weighted
average group fuel economy is compared'-3''.
(v). the largest fuel economy required a gauge plus
formal driver training (2 hours classroom plus 2 hours
vehicle training).
(vi). the report notes "that while the test results
support the hypothesis that use of driver energy
conservation training and/or use of a vacuum gauge can
result in meaningful improvements in fuel economy, these
findings do not conclusively prove that such a relation-
ship exists. While such a relationship appears to have
existed in the test under consideration the results
obtained do not warrant generalization to all fleets and
all driving conditions."
(vii). therefore the above report does not prove nor
disprove the Gastell concept or the amount of any fuel
economy benefit.
(b). A letter from the National Bureau of Standards (NBS)
(Attachment C) summarizes the NBS evaluation of the Gastell
invention.
(->) "Average Group fuel economy assumes that each monthly vehicle fuel
economy reading (monthly miles/monthly gallons) is equally important.
Fuel Weighted Average Group Fuel economy assumes that each gallon of fuel
is equally important."
-------
-11-
. (i). The letter states that "Manifold vacuum is a
recognized reliable measure for indicating engine opera-
tion efficiency. Devices to enable drivers to make
beneficial use of the measure have been, as you know, on
the market for a long time. Such devices can certainly
be of significant value in enabling motivated drivers to
reduce fuel usage by increasing operating efficiency."
".... this letter will attest to our opinion that your
device is technically sound and commercially competi-
tive, and that its installation and use in automobiles
.can lead to significant fuel savings by drivers of such
vehicles."
(ii). This NBS testimony provides no data nor analysis
to support the claims that drivers can expect to obtain
increased fuel economy with the aid of manifold vacuum
devices. Also there is no reference to the operating
conditions or test procedures for which these claims are
made.
(iii). Therefore, this letter does not provide informa-
tion with which to evaluate the effectiveness of GASTELL.
(c). Six testimonial letters (Attachments G-l • thru G-6)
were submitted with the application. The writers
undoubtedly felt they had achieved significant fuel economy
benefits with Gastell. However, these were uncontrolled
tests of the Device and therefore cannot be used to evaluate
the Gastell device.
(d). A set of data dated il/12/79 (Attachment H) was also
submitted with the application. Some of these tests do show
an improvement in fuel economy and the Applicant apparently
was able to control some of the test variables. However,
these are still relatively uncontrolled tests and therefore
cannot be used to evaluate the Gastell Device.
(e). Two additional letters (Attachments 1-1, 1-2) were
also submitted with ' the application which were not
applicable to this evaluation.
J. Test Results Obtained by EPA:
The tests conducted by EPA are discussed in detail in Attach-
ment B. The test program was conducted over an extended time
period and consisted of two dynamometer test phases followed by a
road test phase. The testing performed by EPA showed:
(1). The Phase I testing consisted of FTP and HFET dynamometer
tests of the Gastell device. Overall, the use of the
Gastell device as a driving aid did not show a significant
effect on the vehicle's fuel economy or emissions for either
the FTP or HFET.
-------
-12-
(2). The Phase II testing consisted of modified LA-4's (FTP) and
acceleration rate studies conducted on the vehicle chassis
dynamometer without using the Gastell device.
The more aggressive (greater acceleration rates) modifica-
tions of the LA-4 cycle developed showed no change in fuel
economy when compared to the standard FTP (LA-4).
Therefore, since the preceding tests with the Gastell device
did not show an improvement in the vehicles' fuel economy
for either the FTP or HFET, the Gastell device was not
tested with these more agressive driving cycles.
Evaluation of five vehicles on a test cycle consisting
predominately of accelerations did show that during
acceleration there was an average 14.6% improvement in fuel
economy between a very low acceleration rate (1 mph/sec.)
and the highe-st acceleration rates used (up to 5 mph/sec.).
There was an average 8.5% improvement in fuel economy
between the moderate (2 mph/sec) and highest acceleration
rates. This indicates that reduced vehicle acceleration
rates can improve fuel economy for some vehicle operating
conditions. However, when these acceleration fuel economy
improvements are adjusted for the average portion of driving
time actually devoted to acceleration, the maximum fuel
economy savings would be 1.9%; but, in consideration of the
constraints of actual driving conditions, a more realistic
potential saving would be less than 1/2%. A similar
analysis based on fuel consumed during acceleration modes
yielded an average estimated improvement potential of 1.3%.
(3). Having found no appreciable fuel economy effects in Phases I
and II using the vehicle dynamometer, a road test program,
Phase III, was undertaken with the Gastell device. For the
six combinations of vehicle and operator, in only one case
did the use of the Gastell device cause an improvement in
vehicle fuel economy greater than 1%. The amount of fuel
economy improvement for this one case was 5%. It is
interesting to note that even for this one case, the other
less aggressive driver's fuel economy in this vehicle was
the same with or without the Device and 4% better than the
driver who showed an improvement.
19. Conelusions
EPA fully considered all of the information submitted by the Device
manufacturer in the Application. The evaluation of the Gastell
device was based on that information and the results of the EPA test
program. In general, the EPA testing of the Gastell device did not
show a positive benefit from its use. None of the Phase I chassis
dynamometer tests with the Device installed showed a positive fuel
economy effect. Four vehicles of varying size and power-to-weight
ratio were road tested in San Antonio (with from one to two drivers
-------
-13-
each) and only one vehicle/driver combination showed a fuel economy
improvement (5%) with the Gasteli device. It is concluded from the.
test data available that only drivers with aggressive driving
behavior (or other driving habits that involve excessive throttle
manipulation) could benefit from use of this Device and then only if;
(1) their vehicle happened to have the fuel economy response
characteristics that favorably matched the activation setting of the
Device and (2) the driver consistently responded to the device signal
and refrained from such aggressive driving.
Intuitively, many people might expect the principles behind the
Gasteli device to produce an improvement in fuel economy. in fact,
at the beginning of the program, EPA evaluation engineers involved in
the evaluation expected the device to produce significant benefits
and were surprised when the early data showed no effect on fuel
economy. This evaluation has been more extensive than most such
projects at EPA, but as a result, we are comfortable in supporting
this evaluation.
-------
Attachment A
Attachment B
Attachment C
Attachemnt D
Attachment E
Attachment F
Attachment G-l thru G-6
Attachment H
Attachments 1-1, 1-2
Operators Manual
Installation Instructions
Attachment J-l
Attachment J~2
-14-
List of Attachments
Patent Application (provided with 511 Applica-
tion)
TEB Report EPA-AA-TEB-81-13, "Evaluation of
Gastell, A Device to Modify Driving Habits"
Letter dated October 29, 1979 from National
Bureau of Standards to Mr. Ray P. Smith, Jr.
(provided with 511 application)
Gastell Sales Literature (provided with 511
application)
Copy of GASTELL Packaging Carton
Automotive Devices Inc. Information Letter
Gastell Testimonial Letters (provided with 511
application)
Gastell testing conducted on 11/12/79 (provided
in 511 application)
Letters provided with 5li application that were
not pertinent to evaluation
Provided in 511 application, copy incorporated
in Attachment B
Provided in 511 application, copy incorporated
in Attachment B
Page XIV of DOE/CS-0043, UC-96, July 1978
(provided with application)
Page XX of DOE/CS-0043, UC-96, July 1978
(provided with application)
-------
Attachment A
FUEL CONSUMPTION SIGNALLING SYSTEM
Invented by:
. Raymond P. Smith, Jr.
Propri^.ory to C._:.'- ' ". S--H f.cj be
rcprcduccd or cc-!:-: "' ••-••: "-;-;;n pcrmis-
t!cn nor used in r- . r -r.r.cr ccl.'i.rcntol to its
hJ il.-:i fj r=^'n:d upon n
-------
ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE
A fuel consumption signalling system for signalling both
efficient and inefficient fuel consumption conditions in the
engine of a motor vehicle is herein disclosed. The system
cocprises an alarm circuit connected in series with an. indicator
circuit including an indicator light connected in parallel
with a vacuum operated switch pneumatically connected to the
engine manifold. An electric potential sufficient to actuate
Che alarm circuit, but insufficient to actuate both the indicator
light and the alarm circuit is applied across the series connected
indicator and alam circuits. When the engine is consuming
fuel efficiently, the vacuum switch is open, and the electric
potential is divided between the indicator circuit and the
alarm circuit. The divided potential is sufficient to illuminate
the indicator light, but insufficient to actuate the alarm
circuit. However, when the engine consumes fuel ineffi-
ciently, the vacuum switch closes, shunting the entire electric
potential across the alarm circuit, thereby actuating it.
The signalling system may also include an automatic throttle
plate control.
-------
BACKGROUND OF THE IJJVENTION
In recent years, the rising cost of fuel has sharply
.increased the need for more efficient consumption of fuel. One
well known, but little used nethod of efficient fuel consumption
.n a motor vehicle lies in the conscientious use of fuel saving
driving techniques. In fact, a .1978 United States government
publication entitled "Driver Aid and Education Test Project"
(DOE/CS-0043) and prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy
states, on page 1, that it is "...not unusual to find a variatio:
of 30 to 50 percent in fuel economy among a group of non-
nrofessional drivers operating under identical and controlled
test conditions...", the difference being attributable solely to
individual driving techniques. Thus, it is clear that significa:
amounts of fuel could be saved by the widespread adoption of
fuel efficient driving techniques by the motor vehicle
operators of this country.
To encourage the use of. such efficient driving techniques,
a variety of fuel consumption gauges and indicators.have been
provided by the prior art. .Such prior art fuel consumption
gauges have typically utilized a vacuum operated sensor to
monitor the manifold pressure of the engine, as the manifold
pressure is one of the best over all indicators of efficient
fuel use. A high vacuum pressure in the engine manifold indi-
cates that the fuel is being burned in a fuel to air ratio
which results in complete, and hence efficient, combustion.
By contrast, a low vacuum pressure in the manifold indicates
that the fuel is being burned in an overly rich fuel to .air
ratio which results in incomplete, and hence inefficient,
combustion. In operation, the vacuum operated sensor of
-2-
I:
!t
-------
typical prior art devices senses whether the pressure of the
engine manifold is in a high or low vacuum state, and transmits
this information to an indicator which in turn indicates to the
driver whether or not the motor vehicle is being driven in a
fuel efficient fashion.
Unfortunately, each of the prior art fuel consumption.
indicators has, thus far, been attended by a variety of technical
drawbacks which in turn has discouraged its general use among
the motor vehicle operators of this country. For example,
Polyaeros patent 2,666,197 discloses a vacuun operated signal
device having a vacuum operated switch adapted to be mounted on
the instrument panel of an automobile. However, the single
pilot light of Polymeros' invention only gives a. visual
Indication of an inefficient fuel consumption condition in
the engine which is easily overlooked by a driver observing
the road. Further, the suggested location of the single
pilot light of this invention between other lights and
indicators on the instrument panel of the automobile makes
installation difficult, and renders the single pilot light
less perceptible to the driver than if the signal light were
mounted away from the other lights and dials of the instrument
panel. Finally, because- the pilot light is actuated only
during a fuel wastage condition in the engine, it is difficult
to tell at any given tine whether or not the invention is
operative.
While Corsseu patent 2,633.782, Shuck patent 2.870,753.
and Platt patent 2,692,930 each disclose manifold pressure
indicators utilizing two separate signalling devices for
signalling both efficient and inefficient fuel consumption
conditions in an internal combustion engine, they suffer
-3-
-------
from the drawback of utilizing relatively intricate and expensive
single pole, double throw or double pole vacuum operated
switches. ..Additionally, each of these devices utilizes only a
pilot light for indicating an inefficient fuel consumption
condition which again can be easily overlooked by an operator wic
his full attention on the road.
Finally, although the manifold pressure indicator
disclosed in Australian patent 114,535 suggests the use of
an audio signal to signal an inefficient fuel condition,
this device, like the Polymeros invention, is capable of
signalling only an inefficient fuel consumption condition,.
Additionally, no suggestion is made as to how to conveniently
taount this device in the cockpit of a conventional motor vehicle.
Clearly the need exists for a conveniently installable,
simple, effective and inexpensive fuel consumption signalling.
system 'which has at least two separate signalling devices for
positively signalling both efficient and inefficient fuel
consumption conditions.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The invention relates to a fuel consumption signalling
system which is conveniently installable within a conventional
motor vehicle and which has two separate signalling devices for
signalling both efficient and .inefficient fuel consumption
conditions in the engine of a cotor vehicle without any. of
the drawbacks associated with prior art devices of this
type. Basically, the signalling system comprises an alarm
circuit for indicating an inefficient fuel consumption
condition which is connected in series with an indicator circuit
for indicating an efficient fuel consumption condition. The
alarm circuit includes an alarm light, a resistor, and a time
-4-
-------
delay circuit having an audio alarm generator, each of which
is connected to the other in parallel. The indicator circuit
includes an indicator light and a normally open vacuum operated
switch connected together in parallel. The-vacuum operated
switch is pneumatically connected to the engine manifold of the
notor vehicle. A source of electrical potential sufficient
enough to actuate the alarm circuit, but insufficient to actuate
both the alarm circuit and the indicator light of the indicator
circuit is applied across the series connected alam and
indicator circuits.
In operation, the vacuum operated switch closes when the
manifold pressure attains a value indicative of inefficient fuel
consumption, thereby shunting the entire electrical potential
around the indicator light and across the alarm circuit. Thus,
the indicator light is extinguished and the alarm circuit is
actuated,•perceptibly illuminating the alarm light and
triggering the tine delay circuit. If the inefficient.fuel
consumption condition lasts beyond a preset amount of time,
the time delay circuit then actuates an audio alara generator.
Both the series circuit and the vacuum operated switch
are counted in a box-like housing which is conveniently install-
able either above or below the instrument panel of a conventional
notor vehicle by ceans of simple brackets.
Thus, the invention provides an easily installable, simple,
effective and inexpensive fuel consumption signalling device
having two separate indicators for positively signalling
both efficient and inefficient fuel consumption conditions
in an engine. The use of a simple, single pole, vacuum
operated switch in a dual signalling system instead of the
intricate and core expensive cultipole vacuum switches
frequently associated with the prior art devices significantly
-5-
-------
reduces costs while increasing reliability. More particularly,
the use of a sir.ple, single pole vacuum sv;itch in combination
with an indicator light: which serves the dual function of
indicating a fuel efficient condition while providing a
voltage divider along the series circuit constitutes a
significant improvement over the prior art, providing riaximum
of performance with a minimum of parts.
Finally, the use of a time delay circuit between the alarm
circuit and the audio signal generator prevents the audio alarm
from being prematurely actuated during necessary periods of
inefficient fuel usage, such as those which occur during the
emergency handling of the motor vehicle.
The fuel consumption signalling system may also include an
automatic throttle control for automatically eliminating
inefficient fuel consumption condition. The automatic throttle
control basically comprises a lever connected to the carburetor
throttle blade rod of the motor vehicle engine, and a solenoid
having an extensible plunger for limiting the movement of this
lever. The solenoid is actuated by a relay connected to the tim
delay circuit of the alarm circuit, so that the throttle control
like the audio alarm generator^ becomes actuated only if the
inefficient fuel consumption condition last beyond a preset
amount of time.
The system also includes -a means for overriding the throttl
control including a microswitch mounted under the gas pedal for
breaking the connection between the relay and the time delay
c'ircuit when the gas pedal is pressed to the floor of the
cotor vehicle.
Additionally, ar. electronic counter may be connected to
the time delay circuit of the alarm circuit for counting and
displaying the number of times a gas wastage condition
occured which lasted beyond the preset delay period of the
time delay circuit.
-6-
-------
-11-
volunteered the availability of 20 of their vehicles, 10 of which could
be used as test cars and 10 for control. After an appropriate interval,
the control and test fleets could be reversed. It was recognized that
the vehicle operation would not be representative of private owner usage
and most importantly, that test variability involving fleet tests is
generally very high. Estimates of the average effectiveness of the
device documented in Section .7 above indicated that a more controlled
road test might be necessary so the Park Police fleet test was deferred.
A pilot test program was run over a route in Ann Arbor which had previ-
ously been selected for durability testing. The route, which had been
approved for the EPA durability driving schedule, is approximately 30
miles long with an average speed of 34 miles per hour. An available EPA
test vehicle (a 1980 Citation - see vehicle description in Appendix D)
was instrumented with a Fluidyne fuel flow meter and driven repeatedly
over the route. Fuel flow was totaled over each circuit of the 29.5 mile
route and the data with and without the device is plotted in Figure 1.
Data variability was high and at least part of the variability was
attributed to the late autumn weather conditions with frequent rain,
variable winds, and wide temperature excursions. Because of this vari-
ability, it was decided that a road test program should be conducted in
the southwestern United States where more temperate weather conditions
are available.
San Antonio, Texas was selected as the test site for two major reasons.
An urban road route had been defined there several years ago for use in
an emission factors program which has traffic conditions known to be
representative of most cities. Southwest Research Institute is also
there and offered the use of their laboratory facilities for any work
which needed to be done on test cars. Two EPA technicians drove the
instrumented Citation to San Antonio and rented a late model full-sized
car with a V-8 engine (1980 Cougar - see vehicle description in Appen-
dix D) as a second test car. Each driver took turns driving the two cars
with and without the Gastell Device installed over the San Antonio road
route. Sufficient driving was done prior to the test to familiarize the
drivers with the route and with tho test vehicles. The Ann Arbor
experience had suggested that such familiarization would enhance repeat-
ability during a test. Further information on the driving route and the
tost procedures used are given in Appendix D.
Results of the tests are shown in Figures 2 through- 5. These figures
illustrate that only one of the four vehicle/driver combinations showed a
significant positive result with tho devices. OIK: driver had better fuel
economy on both cars without the driver's aid than the other driver had
on either car with the driver's aid. The data suggest two things. One,
that the effectiveness of the device is highly dependent on the driving
technique or "agressiveness" of the driver and two, that effectiveness is
also a function of characteristics associated with the vehicle.
At the conclusion of this test series the drivers returned to Ann Arbor
and the data were, analyzed. Table III provides the results of that
analysis. Since the device had shown a positive effect on the Cougar and
Mr. Smith had suggested that more effectiveness should be found on large
cars than small cars like the Citation, a second road test program was
-------
ri rnnT]n\! nnrr
,. -.. L L L K n I I u IN r\ h L
$ KM
i^lP
^Mm
f/^O >X;i v'^
<>ii te>] v&l
^- -^j V^-C-j
I l^i ^
'$M$
f&mm
m
KM
m
^
fx^xS
^
s
t^>3 t<\j
f^<^ ^
^
m
^
^
*^
^
R^
m
¥<
^m
n
p
^
<"vv iSAj *'"x M
^ ES ^
^ ^ m
t ;<> fv$i k*->?
'.:&..
RUN NUMBER
ss. a
TUP S/IB/HI
-------
z
z
n
n
in
z
n
j
u
13
^ rr r-r r>
: u .-.I •'.!
BEH
M7J
ijij
H.0
I—; r r i— i i— i—i j—i
FKCELLkh
RFTE 5TJDY
DUERR-5RN RNTDN i D - B R L L R
Without Device
! \
< ; * 1 !
Device
i
Without
Device
RUN N LJ M B E R
With
Device
3S.S
-------
z
z
D
h
0.
> i
H
in
z
a
j
LJ
3
L
-------
Z
n
DL
Ul
z
n
j
u
u
L
.RCCELERflT
J
RUN NUMBER
TUP
-------
z
z
n
o_
z
u
in
z
n
j
u
i]
L
n
FL
FH
1— !
L_L_L
: DN-
1
R M
n> i
!\
Ul\
HN
KH
T D N
E 5T
D
R
F
RN
—1 n r»nr
E33
V.'ithout Device
With Device.
H33
B
n.
n
r-j
r
1
r
r
1
—1
1
r~i
i 1
i |
1
~1
1
1
r
i
i
i
i
i
t
i
r
i
i
r
1
i
ill
ill
p
88 Si
n.n
RUN NUMBER
Figure /-!5
H2.3
TUP ::/ i B/H i
-------
-17-
initiated. Carl Baler, the more aggressive driver, Cook another EPA test
car, a 1975 Nova (see vehicle description in Appendix Dj with a 350
engine, to San Antonio and ran the same test sequences run on the
previous cars. The baseline was 'run with no problem and good repeat-
ability, but with the Gastell Device installed it was found that the
device never actuated under normal traffic conditions. After making
several checks to make sure the device was properly calibrated and that
the manifold vacuum tap was correctly installed, it was decided that a
test would be run with the calibration changed to actuate on at 9" Kg,
off at 10" Hg instead of on at 7" Hg, off at 8" Hg as specified by the
manufacturer. This is a two inch change, from the. normal Gastell V-8
calibration. The tests were resumed and it was found that again the
device did not actuate on the test route. Further adjustment was made
until the device would actuate on a number of accelerations but the
acceleration rates were so limited at these settings (on at 12.5" Hg, off
at 13.5" Hg or on at 11.5" Hg, off at 12.5" Hg) that the vehicle could
not be driven onto the freeway safely. No setting was found that seemed
satisfactory on this high power to weight car.
Furthermore, these tests on the Nova demonstrated that the Gastell
Device's calibration needs to be very carefully matched to the specific
vehicle. At the manufacturer's calibration setting, the Gastell never
signaled. At the calibration settings at which the Gastnil signaled, the
vehicles fuel economy was altered. The results of both tests were
significant, however, at one setting there was a 2.49% fuel economy
penalty while the other showed a .96% fuel economy improvement.
The Cougar driven in the earlier test program was rerun to confirm the
data previously collected. The results of this retesting showed good
agreement with the previous improvement in fuel economy. The results are
given in Figure 6.
Another car was sought that would be more representative of high
production power-to-weight ratio vehicles. A 1979 Mercury with a 351 C1D
engine (see vehicle description in Appendix D) was obtained. This has
approximately the same power-to-weight as the other high production Ford
and General Motors full sized cars. Figure 7 presents the data on the
Mercury. The average improvement of .85% was statistically significant.
Tables III and IV present the statistical analysis of all of the road
test data. A total of two hundred and thirty road tests were conducted
using these vehicles. At the 90% confidence level (-. = .U two vehicle/
driver combinations showed statistically significant iuel economy
improvements. However, at the bO% confidence lovol ( "- = .2) 4 vehicle/
driver combinations showed statistically significant fuel economy
changes'. Two showed a statistically significant fuel economy improvement
and two showed statistically significant fuel economy penalt ins with the
use of the Gastell Device.
Conclusion
In general, the EPA testing of the Cautell Device did not show a positive
benefit from its use. None of the Phase 1 chassis dynamometer tests with
the device installed showed a positive fuel economy effect. Four
vehicles of varying size and power-to-veight ratio were road tested in
-------
-18-
Antonio (with from one to two drivers eacn) and only one vehicle/
driver combination showed an appreciable fuel economy improvement (5%)
with the Gastell Device. It is concluded from the test data available
that only drivers with aggressive driving behavior (or other driving
habits that involve excessive throttle manipulation) could benefit from
use of this device and then only if (1) their vehicle happened to have
the fuel economy response characteristics that favorably matched the
activation setting of the device and (2) the driver consistently
responded to the device signal and refrained from such aggressive driving.
Hone of the Phase I chassis dynamometer tests with the device installed
showed a positive or negative effect on emissions.
Intuitively, many people might expect the principles behind the Gastell
device .to produce an improvement in fuel economy. In fact, at the
beginning of the program, EPA evaluation engineers involved in the
evaluation expected the device to produce significant benefits and were
surprised when the early data showed no effect on fuel economy. This
evaluation has been more extensive than most such projects at EPA, but as
a result, we are comfortable in supporting this evaluation.
-------
FCCELER
•
Device Device
1
n-, m
3 rJfetf-Jl f
:
S!vjaffl^MMKf!.?M^
^iSBii I^Riiill Wl^^t^iili
"uS>lf->L^?fy;;-f}£j-j:i^^Slpf|^;g-
?|j: jlj ?|MS|i| ^Jmpliyfll
V{:^.t":I-:i:4i-"|iiij.vj/il^ij-li|.5|::pi"
^I'^irJ^j r:Vi3i~47^^1H-M^l?i4=IS^---
•if. j -"21;^ .f i? I J. =!"! 1 7?.] -^ !iri-T=i^i i=5 -vj^iri
{/TlT^tVfHrSf^-i-VlrJ-i^jSlSiiSiIVfS:;^
i
1
i
i
1
t
1: fl ":; : -E^fi-'-If Trlivii—T^n^lfi-f^iSi ~ ff 3
i-Ti^i -^7:" --V i"?J • ;" : ^ .? --r-T:: : ^-jSvS S j-1 HV J ;Vv|
r'i: ."- rv^-.-Ji ':: : :~- r.'- : .-".:i".L-"£7rj7~-iV.--;..r.f\l
1 -.':• '•"• : :- :" £ : : ':' : 7 • I- j.' : j vi -" • TTTTrH; "-?=;— Trr^
?
i
i.
ili^3?K(llRl|illlllll^
t~J."J'."U"— ."-i .; Si."~t.i.t — I~ ; ~ 7 _--_;T- "T, _~7 _TL~* .^
I
l"-^fVr^5?">'l':r\i\"J^.-!--l"tM':^r^Sj;3:"5j
Without
Device
^ ^.Viij-fri '::': >"V* f
Hi^Uf^ili^loliy
|i|p||j|OT
riFSI^^iV;].';!-^*
Sl'^l-1.1 'M^i-ly '"• ^ '--!•
llTJ^jglfifi-^lB:
|7lJ:ri7=£i ?i 7: : H: _;'{ r 'LC^
^IrlJlfiltli^Tifil
i. ;iTh7^.7j :;i"t H-f :-;:::--^¥;j
pfiHIKlSi
. v £^" i T?;; : ;J\".v" v^-'- VtTi I;i S-'i~
r
0.0
RUN NUMBER
E0.0
TUP 2/lD/H
-------
z
z
n
CL
yi
z
D
J
U
I]
L
RC
F
RRT
RRTE 5
FDN ! D-
rw
1)
u i
ER
Without Device
Without
Device
MED
D
r
s.a
15.WI <-'/li\
w M
II
'4 I
m
til
^
I
m'i
%
»
1
?/•)» r)' ^M
IS!
iSl
p«^
P I«
I ii
«ss
RUN NUMBER
31.3
TUP 2/IQ/BI
i
NJ
C
I
-------
-21-
Tablc III
Results of San Antonio Road Route Testing
1. Vehicle
2. Driver
3. With or without
device
Cougar
Citation
Cougar
Mercury Marquis
Baler
Karapman
Baler
Kampman
Baler (2nd time) Baler
w/o
with
12
»87.23 cc
4. Number of tests 20
5. Average fuel
consumption (cc) 1742.5 1655.3
6. Standard
Deviation 29.07 67.35
7. Variance 845.05 4603.6
8. Difference between
v;ith and v//o
testing fuel
consumption
9. % difference
fuel consumption <
10. Ave. number of
signals per cycle
11. Calculated T
Statistic
12. Calculated degrees
of Freedom
13. Tablulated T
Statistics
for
-------
-22-
Table IV
Results of Sar. Antonio Road Route Testing on Chevrolet Nova
Vehicle Nova
Driver Baler .
Calibration -
" Hg, Off" Hg N/A
With or without
vice without
Number of tests 16
Average fuel
n sumption (cc) ' 1793.5
Standard Dev. 23.94
Variance 837 .52
Difference between
th and w/o testing
el consumption
. % difference
el consumption
. Ave . nur.be r of
gnals per cycle
. Calculated T
at ist ic.
. Calculated degrees
Freedcn
Nova
Baler
7"Kg, S-'Hgd)
with
11
1790.7
24.99
624.50
(+)2.80
( + ) .167,
0.0
.268
26
Kova
Baler
' 9"Hg, 10"Hg
with
5
1782.9
23.45
549.90
(+)10.60
(+) .59%
0.0
.332
10
Nova
Baler
12.5"Hg,
with
4
1838.7
29.85
891.02
(-)45.20
(-)2.49%
17.4
2.725
6
Baler
11.5"Hg, 12.5"KS(3)
with
2
1776.3
3.50
12.25
(O17.20
( + ) .96%
8.5
2.203
18
-------
-23-
14. Tablulatcd T
Statistics
for c\
for *
15. Sign
at
-------
r.M. Appendix A (cont.)
INSTALLATION
H ?\ ^ t7*™
UiM -s-
u il -J
a ;\ -
- -
'0
£ AUTOMOTIVE DEI/ICES, INC:
For Models 2004, 2005. 2005. 2003
Your car or truck should be tuned before installation.
Read ALL instructions before starting installation. All necessary hardware
to install Gastell is included in hardware kit.
Select location for Gastell, preferably centered under dash (fig. 1), but make
sure that the chosen location will not interfere with the operation of your
vehicle. Attach mounting brackets to Gasieil. Note that 'he brackets are re-
versible for either under—or above—dash mounting (fig. 4). Use the two hex head sheet metal screws furnished with inter-
nal-tooth lock washers. DO NOT OVER TIGHTEN.
Most American-made cars hava ashtrays held by two sheet metal screws. Often the spacing of these screws is equal to
th?.t of the Gastell brackets. So before you drill, try to use the ashtray mounting screws. If you find that you must drill, posi-
tion Gastell to dash and hold firmly. Use lead pencil to mark hole locations, then driM V holes where the marks are. The
hex head sheet metal screws furnished will work in plastic or metal. Use
them to fasten the Gastell to the dash. Do not over tighten.
Choose desired routing for Gastell vacuum hose and electrical wiring. Do
not make electrical or hose connection yet. The vacuum hose must go
through the firewall without pinching or chaffing. Try to locate an existing
hole that has a rubber grommet. On most vehicles, the emergency brake,
speedometer, and gas pedal cables pass through a rubbor grornmet in the
firewall. If you can, enlarge this grommet to accept vacuum line. If this can-
not be done, drill '/»" hole in a nearby location. Install furnished rubber
grommet; then insert rubber hose from Gastell through firewall to engine
compartment. Do not stretch or pull Gastell hose. The electrical wiring
from Gastell may be connected to the fuse panel or ignition switch. The
v/iroa should be routed along the path of existing auto wiring. Use wire ties furnished.
of all sharp surfaces and clear of clutch, brake, accelerator, and other moving parts.
VACUUM
(CUT)
INTAKE MANIF
3'j sure that wires and hose an? clear
Attach Gastell vacuum line to engine intake manifold system. To loccite the proper vacuum line on the intoke manifold,
start engine. Keep hands and loose clothing free of fan blade or moving parts. Disconnect a Vr*1" or'/," (inside diameter)
hose from the intake manifold while engine is running (see fig. 2). When the
propyr vacuum hose is removed, there will be a distinct change in idle
spn&cl. Once proper vacuum line is identified, turn off engine, and recon-
nect vacuum line to manifold. Then cut the vacuum line in on appropriate
locntion, preferably 5" to 6" from a connection; insert "T" fitting furnished.
Attach Gastell vacuum line securely to remaining branch of "T" (fig. 2). 3e
sure Gastell vacuum tine is away from all moving parts. Using wire tie fur-
nished, secure vacuum line to existing wiring on hoses.
Locatu your vehicle's fuse panel and wiring, and identify a source of elec-
tricity that has current only when the key is in the "on" position: this may
be a -wire that runs to any accessory (hot is activated by turning on the key.
To this wire, the red wire from Gastell (with Electro T-Tap splicer) is con--.
nected (fig. 3). Use standard pliers for installing T-Tap splicer. Wrap around
a wire from 14 to 20 gauge. Apply pliers, and squeeze until TTap locks. Con-
nect the remaining black wire with the eyelet to a suitable ground. If exist-
ing ground screw is not available, drill '/." hols in sheet metal near (use
panel. U?e hex head sheet metal screw furnished with interns! tooth lock
washers. Do not over tighten. Wrap up any extra wire and secure to exist-
ing wiring with wire tie furnished. Do not shorten wiring or hoses: your next
vehicle may require the extra length.
Now your Gastell is ready to operate. Start engine. When the key is turned
on, reel light and audible tone will operate. As soon as trv; engine starts,
tho light and tone will cease to operate, and.the green light will go on. Keep
your Gaslell operating in the green for maximum mileage.
Sea operating manual for operation.
GROUND
SCREW
AL7EKNATE GROUND
(M = TAL SUHFACE)
PELOW-DA3H MOUNT ABOVE-DASH MOUNT
.Viirninrj: When drilling holes anywhere in your vehicle, make sure your drill does not come in contact with wiring or
loses. Common sense and caution should be exercised in drilling. Electrical damage could result if you ignore this
hose
warning.
cof ffCur c!979
'//4U lOMOTlVE DE'/JCES, INC. 129 Susquehanna Street, P.O. Box 3513, Williamsport, PA 1770T
-------
-25-
Appendix A
Test Vehicle Description
Chassis model year/make-1979 Buick Regal
Vehicle ID 4J47A9H.123351
Engine
type Otto Spark, V-6
bore x stroke 3.8 x 3.4 in.
displacement 3.8 liter/231 CID
compression ratio 8.0:1
maximum power @ rpm 115 hp/86 KW Q 4800 rpm
fuel'metering 2 Venturi carburetor
fuel requirement ...... unleaded, tested with indolene HO unleaded
Drive Train
transmission type 3 speed automatic
final drive ratio 2.40
Chassis
type 2 Dr. Sedan
tire size P 195/75 R 14
curb weight.. 3312 lb/1502 kg.
passenger capacity 5
Emission Control System
basic type EGR
Oxidation Catalyst
Vehicle Odometer mileage at
start of program 14950 miles
-------
-26-
Appencli:-: A (cont.)
Test Vehicle Description
. Chassis model year/rvike-1979 Chevrolet
Vehicle I.D. lL47L
Engine
type . Otto Spark, V-8
bore x stroke 4.00 y. 3.48 in/lOl.G x 88.4 nun
displacement 350 ClO/5.7 liter
compression ratio 8.3:1
maximum power Q rpm 170 hp/126 kW
fuel metering 4 venturi carburetor
fuel requirement Unleaded, tested with inclolene HO unleaded
Drive Train
transmission type. ...... 3 speed automatic
final drive ratio 2.41
Chassis
type 2 door sedan
tire size. FR 78 x 15
curb veight 3840 lb/1742 kg
inertia weight ....... 4000 lb.
passenger capacity 6
Emission Control System
basic type ., EGR
Oxidation Catalyst
Vehicle mileage at start of
test program 12,700 wiles
-------
-27-
Appendix A (cont.)
Test Vehicle; Description
Chassis model year/mp.ke-1975 Dodge Dart
Emission Control Systta-Air Pump, Catalyst, EGR
Vehicle I.D. LH41C5B290359
Engine
type ' Inline 6, 4 cycle
bore x. stroke 3.40 x 4.125 in.
displacement 225 CID/3687 cc
compression ratio 8.4:1 fuel metering
carburetor 1 Venturi
fuel requirement unleaded, tested with Indolene HO unleaded
Drive Train
transmission type 3 speed automatic
final drive ratio 2.75
Chassis
type 4 door sedan
tire size ..' D78 x 14
inertia weight 3500 Ibs.
passenger capacity 6
Emission Control System
basic type air pump
oxidation catalyst
EGR
calibrated to 1975 California standards
Vehicle Odometer mileage at . '
start of test 21,500 miles
-------
Test Condition
-28-
Appendix A Ccont.)
Table A-l
FIT Mass Emissions
grains per inile
Tost No.
KC
CO
CO-.
KOx
HPG
Buick Regal
baseline
baseline
Castell
Gastell
Chevrolet Impala
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Gastell
Gastell
Uod,';e Dart
Baseline
Baseline
Gastell .
Gastell
Gastell (Fro/.en )
Gastell (Accelerator)
80-0453
80-0567
80-0455
80-0569
80-0573
80-0575
80-0446
80-0578
80-0576
80-0246
80-0735
79-4788 .
80-0244
80-0579
80-0581
.76
.68
1.45
.69
.72
.59
.58
.59
•53
.38
.50
.29
.47
.59
.47
8.03
7.75
' 8.82
6.60
4.85
4 . 54
5.01
5.59
3.84
6.06
7.00
5.20
6.51
7.61
5.90
465
453
467
46 i
569
565
560
561
565
547
553
553
557
574
563
1.24
1.24
.SO
1.11
1.29
1.29
1.23
1.43
1.24
1.99
2.11
1.85
1.81
1.73
1.91
18.5
19.0
18.3
18.7
15.3
15.5
15.6
15.5
15.5
15.9
15.7
15.8
15.6
15.1
15.5
-------
High-.
-29-
Appenuix A (cont.)
Table A-II
iy Fuel Economy Test Mass Emissions
granis per mile
Test Condition
Test Ho.
CO
CO 7
KOx
MFC
Buick Regal
Baseline
Baseline
Castell
Castell
Chevrolet Itnpala
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Gastell
Gastell
Dodge Dart
Baseline
Baseline
Gastell
Gastell
Castell (Frozen )
Gastell (Accelerator)
80-0454
80-0568
80-0456
80-0570
80-0438
80-0445
80-0574
80-0886
80-0831
80-0577
80-0316
80-0734
79-4789
80-0245
79-0580
79-0582
.06
.07
.07
.06
.10
.12
.12
.11
.09
.09
.03
.06
.05
.05
.05
.10
.32
.45
.78
.18
.54
.72
.69
.08
.05
.08
.19
.22
.18
.13
.24
.00
351
345
354
347
402
410
415
414
403
404
356
362
358
361
363
362
1.29
1.30
1.59
1.29
1.55
1.51
1.52
1.55
1.56
1.55
.2.78
3.48
2.59
1.81
2.88
2.79
25.2
25.6
24.9
25.5
2 .
2i.o
21. .3
21.9
22.0
21.9
24.9
24.5
24.8
24.6
24.4
24.4
Table A-III
LA-4 Mass Emissions
grams per mile
Test Condition
Buick Rej;al
Baseline
Gastell
Gastell
Castell (modified)
Gastell (modified)
Dodge Dart
Test No.
80-0663
80-066.1
80-0662
80-0571
80-:0572
HC
.44
.19
.21
.23
.23
CO
1.75
1.04
1.11
1.12
1.07
C02
432
433
434
428
426
NOx
.72
1.01
1.03
.96
.93
MPG
20.3
20.4
20.3
20.6
20.7
Castell
79-4790
.64
13.72 572
1.82
14.9
-------
-30-
AppendLx B
Development of A More Aggressive Driving Cycle.
In order to evaluate the effects ot more aggressive driving behavior on
fuel economy, EPA modified the standard FTP (LA~
-------
-31-
Table B-I
Composite FTP and Hoc Start LA-4 Emissions
grams per mile.
Test Test
Number Type
Roll •
HC
CO CO2 NOx MPG
1980 Citation with P 185/80 R 13 radial tire, 7.3 hp, 2750 Ib. inertia weight
2-7-80
2-7-80
2-7-80
2-7-80
80-1475
80-1476
80-1477
80-1478
Hot LA-4
Hot LA-4
Hot LA-4
Hot LA-4
Mod #1
Stand.
Mod #1
Stand.
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
2-7-80
80-1480 Hot LA-4 Mod
Standard
2-22-80
2-22-80
2-22-80
2-22-80
80-1543
80-1544
80-1545
80-1546
Hot LA-4
Hot LA-4
Hot LA-4
Hot LA-4
Stand.
Mod #2
Stand.
Mod #2
Coupled
Coupled
Coupled
Coupled
.06
.04
.05
.04
.84
.58
1.14
.67
370
370
369
368
.34
.34
.37
.43
23.9
23.9
23.9
24.0
.09
3.58 367 .33 23.8
.07 1.63 385
.13 10.51 376
.07 1.85 385
.16 8.64 378
.35 22.9
.26 22.6
.35 22.8
.25 22.6
1975 Nova with ER 78 x 14 radial tires, 12.0 hp, 4000 Ib. inertia weight
*2-22-80 80-1365 FTP
*2-26-80 80-1367 FTP
*3-01-80 80-1796 FTP
Baseline
Baseline
Mod #2
Standard
Standard
Coupled
.66 2.34 697
.60 2.08 704
1.43 23.44 721
1.31 12.6
1.37 12.5
1.49 11.6
Note: Acceleration type standard is LA-4 cycle prescribed for the FTP.
Mod. #1 modifies the LA-4 cycle by using slightly greater acceleration
rates at speeds below 25 raph.
Mod. #2 modifies the LA-4 cycle by using much greater acceleration rates
at speeds below 25 mph.
"•^Results questionable see preceding text
-------
-32-
Appendix C
Acceleration Rate vs. Fuel Economy Test
Since the Gastell and modified cycle test programs (Appendix A and B)
showed little effect on emissions or fuel economy, EPA undertook a small
test program to further investigate the fuel economy effects of reduced
acceleration.
A test program was devised consisting predominately of accelerations.
The test cycles used a sequence of accelerations to a cruise speed,
cruise for a few seconds, and then deceleration at a fixed, moderate
rate. The cruise times were chosen so that all tests to a selected
cruise speed would be of equal distance. This sequence was repeated 4
times (5 total cycles). The cycle was run for each combination of
acceleration rate and final cruise speed.
A similar sequence between two vehicle speeds was performed to evaluate
passing manuever fuel economy. As a control, vehicles were also tested
several times for .steady state fuel economy.
The testing was performed in randomized order to minimize any systematic
test effects (see Acceleration Rate vs. Fuel Economy test sequence). A
fuel flowmeter was used to measure fuel consumed (no gaseous emission
data was taken). The dynamometer rolls were coupled together to minimize
tire slippage.
The maximum and minimum acceleration rates were chosen to bracket the
acceleration rates most current vehicles are capable of achieving.
The complete test matrix was:
MPH Acceleration, rate
1 2 3.3 4 5
0-35 x x xxx
0-45 x x x Q @
20-35 x xx x x
30-45 x x x 0 @
@ Most vehicles unable to follow the driving traces at this
acceleration rate/speed combination.
A 1980 Chevrolet Citation, 1980 Dodge Aspen, 1979 Ford Pinto, 1979
Mercury Zephyr, and a 1979 Pldsmobile Cutlass were used in this accelera-
tion test program. A description of these vehicles is given in Table
C-I. Each vehicle was checked for agreement with manufacturer's
specifications and inspected. All vehicles were in satisfactory condi-
tion.
-------
-33-
Tabel C-l
Phase 3 Acceleration Kate vs. Fuel Economy Testing
Test Vehicle Description
Vehicle ID
Engine
Type
Displacement
Carburetor
Transmission
Test Weight
Dynamometer HP
Tire Type
Tire Size
Emission Control
1980
Chevrolet
Citation
1X687AW1 19256
V-6
2.8 Liter
2 Venturi
3 Speed
Automatic
3000 Ib
10.3 hp
Radial
P185/80R13
EGR
Air Pump
Oxidation
Catalyst
1980
Dodge
Aspen
NE29CAB11858B
Inline 6
225 CID
1 Venturi
3 Speed
Lockup
Automatic
4000 Ib
12.0 hp
BIAS
D78xl4
EGR
Pulsating Air
Oxidation
Catalyst
1979
Ford
Pinto
9TUY186L65
Inline 4
140 CID
I Venturi
3 Speed
Automatic
3000 Ib
10.3 hp
BIAS
B78xl3
EGR
Pulsating Air
Oxidat ion
Catalyst
1979
Mercury
Zephyr
9E35F621630
V-8
302 CID
I Venturi
3 Speed
Automatic
3500 Ib
11.2
Radial
CR78xl4
EGR
Air Purap
Oxidat ion
Catalyst
1979
Oldsmobile
Cutlass
3R47A9M523280
V-6
3.8 Liter
2 Venturi
3 Speed
Automatic
4000 Ib
12.0
Radial
P195R/75
EGR
Air Pump
Oxidation
Cata lyst
-------
-34-
Appendix C
Acceleration Rate vs. Fuel Economy
Test Sequence
Fuel Economy
Sample Speed
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
50 mph
35 mph
35 mph
0 mph
0-35 mph
0 mph
0-35 mph
35 mph
35 mph
0 mph
0-35 mph
0 mph
0-35 mph
0 mph
0-35 mph
0 mph
35 mph
35 mph
0 mph
0 mph
45 mph
45 mph
0 mph
0-45 mph
0 mph
0-45 mph
0 mph
0-45 mph
0 mph
45 mph
45 tnph
0 mph
20 mph
20 mph
35 mph
35 mph
20 mph
20-35 mph
20 mph
20-35 mph
20 mph
20-35 mph
20 mph
20-35 mph
20 mph
Comments
initial vehicle warm up for 30 minutes
warm up for 2 minutes
steady state fuel economy for 103 seconds
idle (drive) for 30 seconds
accelerations at I mph/sec.
idle (drive) for 30 seconds
accelerations at 4 mph/sec.
warm up for 2 minutes
steady state fuel economy for 103 seconds
idle (drive) for 30 seconds
acceleration @ 3.3 mph/sec.
idle (drive) for 30 seconds
acceleration $ 2 mph/sec.
idle (drive) for 30 second
accelerations @ 5mph/sec.
idle (drive) for 30 seconds
warm up for 2 minutes
steady state fuel economy for 103 seconds
idle (drive) for I minute
idle (drive) fuel consumption for 3 minutes
warm up for 2 minutes
steady state fuel economy for 80 seconds
idle (drive) for 30 seconds
accelerations @ 1 raph/sec.
idle (drive) for 30 seconds
accelerations @ 3.3 mph/sec.
idle (drive) for 30 seconds
accelerations @ 2 mph/snc.
idle (drive) for 30 seconds
warm up for 2 minutes
steady state fuel economy for 80 seconds
idle (drive) for 30 seconds
warm up for 2 minutes
steady state fuel economy for 3 minutes
warm up for 2 minutes
steady state fuel economy for 103 seconds
warm up for 2 minutes
accelerations @ 1 mph/sec.
warm up for 30 seconds
accelerations Q 4 mph/sec.
warm up for 30 seconds
accelerations (? 3.3 mph/sec.
warm up for 30 seconds
accelerations @ 2 mph/sec.
warm up for 30 seconds
-------
-35-
X 20-35 raph acceleration @ 5 tnph/sec.
20 mph warm up for 2 minutes
X 20 mph fuel economy for 3 minutes
35 mph warm up for 2 minutes
X 35 mph fuel economy fo 103 seconds
0 mph idle (drive)., for I minute
X 0 raph idle (drive) fuel consumption for 3 minutes
30 mph warm up for 2 minutes
X 30 mph fuel economy for 2 minutes
45 mph warm up for 2 minutes
X 45 mph fuel economy for 80 seconds
30 mph warm up for 2 minutes
X . 30-45 mph accelerations y 1 mph/sec.
30 mph warm up for 2 minutes
X 30-45 mph accelerations Q 3.3 mph/sec. .
30 mph warm up for 30 seconds
X 30-45 mph accelerations @ 2 mph/sec.
30 mph warm up for 2 minutes
X 30 raph fuel economy for 2 minutes
45 mph warm up for 2 minutes
X 45 mph fuel economy for 80 seconds.
-------
-36-
Tablc C-II
Acceleration Rate Fuel Economy
miles per gallon
Chevrolet Dodge Ford Mercury Oldsraobile
Citation Aspen Pinto Zephyr Cutlass
2.8 liter 225 CID 140 C1D 302 CID 3.8 liter
0-35 mph
1 mph/sec.
2 mph/sec.
3 . 3 mph /sec.
4 mph/sec.
5 mph/sec.
19.3
19.7
19.4
18.6
18.2
16.8
16.0
15.6
14.1
14.3
21.8
21.4
20.4
19.3
19.1
16.0
15.8
15.3
15.0
14.7
17.4
17.5
16.9
16.2
15.2
0-45 mph
1 mph/sec.
2 mph/sec.
3.3 mph/sec.
20.7
20.4
19.5
17.9
16.1
15.8
22.1
21.6
20.6
17.3
16.9
16.1
18.6
17.9
16.3
20-35 mph
1 mph/sec.
2 mph/sec.
3.3 mph/sec.
4 mph/sec.
5 mph/sec.
25.0
23.2
22.4
22.0
20.8
22.3
19.7
18.0
17.4
17.3
27.3
24.9
23.6
22.4
22.6
20,1
18.9
18.3
18.2
17.9
21.8
20.2
18.9
18.2
18.4
30-45 mph
1 mph/sec.
2 mph/sec.
3.3 mph/sec.
25.6
23.1
20.9
22.6
20.0
19.4
26.8
25.1
24.1
21.5
19.6
18.7
23.0
20.9
18.1
-------
-37-
'lable C-III
Acceleration Rate Fuel Economy
Percentage Improvement from Highest Acceleration
Rate to 1 mph/sec. Acceleration Rate
0-35 mph
0-45 inph
20-35 mph
30-45 mph
combined average
Chevrolet
Citation
2.8 liter
6.0%
6.1%
20.1%
22.5%
for all
Dodge
Aspen
225 CID
17.5%
13.3%
28.9%
16.5%
vehicles is 14
Ford Mercury Oldsmobile
Pinto Zephyr Cutlass
140 CID 302 CID 3.8 liter
14.1% 8.8Z 14.4%
7.3% 7.5% 14.1%
20. 8Z 12.3% 18.5%
11.2% 15.0% • 27.1%
.6%
Table C-IV
Percentage Rate Fuel Economy
Percentage Improvement from Highest: Acceleration
Rate to 2 mph/sec. Acceleration Rate
0-35 mph
0-45 mph
20-35 raph
30-45 niph
Chevrolet
Citation
2.8 liter
8.2%
4.6%
11.5%
10.5%
Dodge
Aspen
225 CID
11.8%
1/J%
13.9%
3.1%
Ford Mercury Olds' mobile
Pinto Zephyr Cutlass
140 CIU 302 CID 3.8 liter
12.0% 7.5% 15.1%
4.9% 5.0% 9.8%
10.2% 5.6% 9.8%
4.6% 4.8% 15.5%
combined average for all vehicles is 8.5%
-------
Cruise
Speed-mph
Idle (drive)"
20
30
35
45
Chevrolet
Citation
2.8 liter
.35
30.8
32.2
32.6
30.7
-38-
Tcble
Cruise Fuel
miles per
. Dodge
Aspen
223 CID
.56
33.5
36.0
35.3
31.0
c-v
Economy
gallon
Ford
Pinto
140 CID
.31
35.5
35.0
35.3
33.3
Mercury
Zeptiyr
302 CID
.70
26.2
28.0
28.0
26.9
Oldsmobile.
Cutlass
3.8 liter
.45
36.4
37.1
34.3
30.4
*Idle fuel consumption is expressed in gallons per hour
-------
F.EL E
-35 M
H
5 R
RCCELERRT
r' TRP
L L r\ n
DN
Q- 2E.0
'j
—1 2-1. E
C
iJG
22.0
LJ
CL
Ul
Ld
J
Z
23. H
IB.2
IM.B
X
A
H
CITFJTIQN 2 . (3 LITE8?
PIGPEN 225
2ECF-HYR 322 C ! O
C'JTLri^E 2 . FJ LITER
0.02 I.03 2.00 3.20
RCCELERRTIDN RRTE
H.E3
MPH/SEC
F-.'-fjurc C-l
-------
ECDNDVY V5 RCCE.ERRT UN
1Z3-H5 MPH RCCELERRTI DN5
Z
D
CE
LD
[I
i »
Lij
n
ui
u
j
E
25.2
IG.D
IH.B
2H.H
4- CITRTIDN 2.5 LITER
X PEPSIN r£2S CID
A FINTD I -IS3 C ! D
Lij ZEPHYR 322 C ! D
<•> CUTLREa 3.1-3 LITER
H3.H0 I .EH 2.00 2. EH H. 03
RCCELERRT1DN RRTE MPH/EEC
o
i
Figure C-2
-------
L
r
L(DNDVY V5 -R
L_l\l 1 i i
1 !—]
i i t
M P H ' R C C E L E R R T I D N 5
Z
D
J
J
CL
in
r/
LJ
n
ui
LJ
2B.0
25.
22.3
1:0.53
IB.a
IH.J3
X
A
a
o
CITRTIDN 2.B LITER
R5F-EN 22E CID
PINTD I HCI C I t>
ZEPHYR 302 CID
CUTLRSS 3.3 LITER
0.D3 ! .33 . 2.02 3.E3
R
-------
!F!
ONOMY
3(3 -HE MPH RCC
V5 RCCL..LRRT EN
-ERRTIDN5
Z
D
J
J
CL
in
u
n
in
u
j
i:
•a.0
25. 0
2H.F3
23.0
B.0
IS.0
0. HO i. 0n
RCCELERR
CITRTIDN 2.0 LITER
RSPEN 22S CID
PINTD IHEI CID
2EPHYR 3£52 CID
CUTLR5E 3.B LITER
2.03 3.H0
DN RRTE
H.0H S.K0
M-PH/5EC
N>
I
-------
RJ
I
\/
z
n
j
j
\r
LD
[I
m
u
j
E
35.0
37.2
35.3
3S.0
7.H.0
33.0
32.2
31 .0
3B.0
29.3
2S.0
S.0
X
A
m
o
C I TRT I DN 2 . n LI TETR
RBPEN 22£ CID
PINTD IMC! CID
ZEPHYR jfcJS CID
CUTLR5S 3.Q LITER
23.0 2S.0 3B.H 35.0 M0.H
VEHICLE BREED MPH
MS. a
Figure C-5
-------
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL DRAWINGS
Figure 1 is an electromechanical diagram of the circuit
of the fuel consumption signalling system installed in a
conventional motor vehicle;
Figure 2 illustrates a cross sectional side view of the
vacuum operated switch of the fuel consumption signalling
system;
Figure 3 illustrates a cross sectional side view of the
tnicroswitch of the throttle control override means as it would
appear counted in a conventional motor vehicle; and
Figure 4 is a schematic of the time delay circuit of the
invention.
-7-
-------
DETAILED DESCRIPTION 07 THE IWENTION
With reference to "Figure 1, the system 1 basically
comprises an alarm circuit 3 connected in scries vith an
indicator circuit .
/
The alarm circuit includes an alarm light 5, a resistor
7 and a time delay circuit 9 including an audio alarm generator
10,-each of which is connected to the other in parallel as
indicated. In the preferred embodiment, alam light 5 com-
prises a red GE #18 miniature lamp having an electrical resis-
tance of approximately 30 ohms, resistor 1 has a resistance of
approximately 75 ohms, and time delay circuit 9 has a resistance
of over 300 ohms, such that the entire alarm circuit has a
resistance of about 20 ohms. Time delay circuit 9 serves as a
time delay switch delaying the actuation of the audio alarm
generator 10, the counter 11 aad the throttle plate control 40
for a period of about three seconds to allow for short,
necessary periods of fuel wastage, such as might occur in
emergency handling situations. Additionally, time delay circuit
9 is preferably adjustable so that drivers driving in hilly
terrain or other conditions which regularly demand unusually
long periods of gas wastage may adjust the time delay for a
period over three seconds. Time delay circuit 9 is described
more particularly hereafter. A variety of prior art audio
signal generators may comprise the audio signal generator 10
[of the invention, such as the-Mallory "Son Alert" (part number
SC 62S) or Edwards "Lumatone" (part number E 101). Finally,
a number of prior art electric counters.and display devices
cay likewise comprise the counter 11 of the invention, such as
AMP thumbwheel switch number .300 (7.62), which is connected
to the time delay circuit 9 and counts and displays the
number of fuel wastage occasions lasting longer than the
time delay of the time delay circuit 9.
-8-
-------
The indicator circuit 15 includes an indicator light 17
connected in parallel to a normally open, vacuum operated switch
20. In the preferred embodiment, indicator light 17 is a green,
GE £73 light bulb having a resistance of approximately 30 ohms.
A 12 volt source of potential difference is connected at
points 2 and 18 of the series circuit, as shown. In the pre-
ferred embodiment this source of potential difference comprises
the ignition system-of the vehicle, rather than the car battery,
so that the system will automatically turn on and off with the
engine of the vehicle.
With reference now to Figure 2, the normally open vacuum
operated switch 20 of the system 1 includes a housing divided
into two noncommunicating pneumatic chambers 2Sa, 28b by a
resilient diaphram 27 as shown. The upper surface of diaphragm
27 is placed in pneumatic communication with the ambient
atmosphere by aperture 24. The bottom surface of diaphragm
27 is placed in pneumatic communication with the engine .
manifold (not shown) by means of a vacuum line 21 terminating
in a "T" joint which is preferably conveniently connected to
the pneumatic circuit powering the intake manifold of the
vehicle, although any point will do. A plunger menber 29
having a pair of bimetallic electrical contacts 30a, b is
biased against the lower surface of diaphragm 27 by means of
coil spring 31. A complementary pair of contacts 33a, b
connected in parallel with indicator light 17 is placed
above the contacts 30a, b. Adjustment screw 35 balances
the spring biasing force exerted on the underside of diaphragm
27 against the pneumatic force exerted on the top surface of
diaphragm 27 by the atmosphere. More particularly, the adjust-
ment .screw 35 balances the spring and the pneircatic forces so
that the contacts 30a, b and 33a, b remain out of conductive
-9-
-------
engagement when a fuel efficient, high vacuum is present in the
manifold, but come together in conductive engagement when a
fuel wasting low vacuum is present in the manifold. For &
V-8 engine, adjustment screw 35 is adjusted so that the
contacts 30a, b and 33a, b do not come into conducting
engagement until the manifold pressure falls to about seven
inches of mercury. For six and four cylinder cars, the
screw is adjusted to a setting corresponding to about six
and three and a half inches of mercury, respectively.
In operation, a 12 volt potential difference is connected
across the series circuit comprising alarm circuit 3 and
indicator circuit 15 at points 2 and 18 when the'engine of
the vehicle.is started.
If the vacuun pressure in the engine manifold is high enough
to keep contacts 30a, b and 33a, b from coming into conductive
engagement, the 12 volt potential is divided between the
indicator light 17 of the indicator circuit 15 and the alara
circuit 3. The divided potential across the indicator light 17
is sufficient to perceptibly illuminate it. By contrast, the
potential divided across the alarm circuit 3 is insufficient to
either trigger time delay circuit 9, which does not become
actuated before a certain threshold voltage is attained, or
perceptibly illuminate alarm light 3. due to the effect of
resistor 7 in dropping some of the potential across the
incandescent element of light 3.
However, if the manifold pressure falls below an appropriat
preset value, the contacts 30a, b and 33a, b come into c-: nductin
engagement, extinguishing indicator light 17 and shunting the
entire potential difference between points 2 and 18 across alarm
circuit 3, actuating it. It should be noted in closing that
indicator light serves to provide a voltage divider betrween
-10-
-------
the source of electric potential and the alam circuit 15 so
that the latter is not actuated until the engine is operated
in a fuel wasteful fashion, as well as an indicator for
positively indicating when the vehicle is being operated in
a fuel efficient manner. The indicator light 17 also serves
as a positive indicator that, the invention is functioning
properly.
With reference again to Figure 1, the systen may also
include a throttle plate control 40 comprising a relay 12
which is connected to tine delay circuit for actuating a
solenoid 42 having a plunger 44 for limiting the notion of a
lever connected to the throttle plate rod of the carburetor 50
of the engine of the motor vehicle. The throttle plate control
also includes an override control comprised of a nicroswitch 13
for breaking the electrical connection between relay 12 and
tine delay circuic 9, which in turn disconnects solenoid 42
from the ignition system of the vehicle, retracting plunger 44
from lever 46 and allowing free movement of the throttle plate
52 of the carburetor 50.
With reference now to Figure 3, microswitch comprises a
plunger 60 slidably mounted in a housing 61 having a pair of
contacts 62a, b noroally biased against a pair of complementary
contacts 63a, b by a leaf spring 65. Leaf spring 65 serves to
[bias contacts 62a, b against complementary contacts 63a, b
I such that relay 12 is normally electrically connected to time
delay circuit 9. Leaf spring 65 also serves to provide an
audible and tactile indicator of when the throttle plate control
is overriden by providing an audible and tactile "click" when
the operator floors gas pedal 70 against plunger 60 of nicro-
switch 13, as is discussed in detail hereafter.
In operation, 'the throttle plate control 42 is actuated by
time delay circuit 9, which closes relay 12 a preset tine after
alarm circuit 3 is actuated. Relay 12 connects solenoid 42 to
-11-
-------
the ignition system of the vehicle, which in turn forcibly
extends plunger 44 to a position which limits the movement of
lever 46. This action in turn obstructs the carburetor throttle
plate from assuming an angular position which would lower the
manifold vacuum pressure and result in fuel wastage. If the
operator of the vehicle needs to temporarily override the
throttle plate control 40, as could occur in emergency driving
conditions, the driver floors the gas pedal 70 of the vehicle,
thereby depressing plunger 60 into leaf, spring 65. The leaf
spring 65 yields much the same way the metal blister structure
on the bottom of a conventional oil can does, thereby disengaging
contacts 62a, b and 63a, b with both an audible and a tactile
click. The contact arm of relay 12 returns to its normal
position, disconnecting solenoid 42 fron the ignition system of
the .vehicle. Solenoid 42 then retracts plunger 44, which in
turn frees lever arm 42.
Referring finally to Figure 4, the time delay circuit 9 of
the invention ccnprises a series connected thermal element 83
and potentiometer 86 which in turn is connected in parallel with
the alarn circuit 3 at points 82 and 84. The thermal element.
88 regulates switching contact points 89a and 89b. When the
alarm circuit is actuated, the theraal element 83 expands after
a tine delay to lose switching contact points 82 and 84, thereby
actuating the audio signal generator 10, the electric counter
11, and throttle plate control relay 12. The duration of the
tine delay is controlled by potentiometer 86.
All of the aforementioned components of the system, with
the exception of the throttle plate control 40 and override
switch 13, cay be counted in a single, conveniently installable
box-like housing (not shown) which may be attached either on
-12-
-------
the top or the beacon of the instrument panel by any suitable
means, such as brackets.
Having particularly pointed out ny invention in such full,
clear, and concise and exact terns as to enable any person skille
in the pertinent arc to cake and use the saae, I claim:
-13-
-------
10
15
20
25
1. A fuel consumption signalling system for signalling
both efficient and inefficient fuel consumption conditions
in the engine of a motor vehicle, comprising: •
(a) an alarm circuit including, connected in parallel<
an alarm light and a resistor, said alarm circuit being
actuatable by a predetermined potential difference;
(b) an indicator circuit connected to said alarm circuit in
series to fora a series circuit, said indicator circuit
including, connected in parallel,
(i) an indicator light for indicating an
efficient operating condition in the motor vehicle
engine and for serving as a voltage divider for any
potential applied across said series circuit, and
(ii) a vacuum operated, normally open switch
pneumatically connected to the engine manifold for
shunting any electric potential applied across said
indicator larr.p around said indicator 'lamp when the
manifold_pressure closes said switch, and
(c) means for applying a potential difference across-
the series circuit, said applied potential being greater
than the potential necessary to actuate the alarm circuit
when said potenti-al is shunted around the indicator light
when the vacuum operated switch is closed, but less than the
potential necessary to actuate the alarm circuit when the
switch is open and the applied potential is divided between
the indicator light and the alarm circuit.
2. The fuel consumption signalling system of claim 1.
wherein said alarm circuit further includes, connected in
parallel, a time delay circuit for actuating an audio
alarm generator a preset time after said alarm circuit is
actuated.
-------
10
3. The fuel consumption signalling system of claim 2 furthei
including a digital counting means connected to said tine
delay circuit for counting and displaying the number of
occasions the engine was .run in inefficient fuel consumption
condition for a period of tine greater than the tine delay of
said time delay circuit.
A. The fuel consumption signalling systen of clain 3
further including a relay connected to the tine delay circuit
for actuating a throttle plate control 'a preset.time
after said alarm circuit is actuated.
5. The fuel consumption signalling systen of claim 4,
wherein said throttle plate control comprises:
(a) a lever connected to the carburetor throttle
blade rod of the engine of the motor vehicle, and
(b) a solenoid actuatable by said relay and having an
extensible plunger for limiting the motion of said lever
when said solenoid is actuated, whereby the position of the
throttle plate is automatically confined to an angular position
consistent with efficient fuel consumption a preset time
after said alarm circuit is actuated.
6. The fuel consumption signalling system of claim 5,
further including means for overriding said throttle plate
control including a microswitch mounted under the accelerator
pedal of the motor vehicle for electrically disconnecting
said relay from said time delay circuit when said accelerator
is pressed to the floor of the vehicle,
whereby said extensible solenoid plunger retracts to
allow free movement of said lever connected to said throttle
plate rod.
-------
13. The fuel consumption signalling systeca of clain
12, further including means for overriding said throttle
plate control including a nicrosuitch mounted under the
accelerator pedal of the r.otor vehicle for electrically
disconnecting said relay from said tine delay circuit vhen
said accelerator is pressed to the floor of the vehicle.
14. The fuel consumption signalling system of claim 13,
wherein said aicroswitch includes a tactile indicating
means for indicating when said switch is operated to
disconnect said relay from said tine delay circuit.
-------
10
15
20
7. The fuel consumption signalling system of claim 6.
vherein said microswitch includes a tactile indicating
means for indicating when said switch is operated to
disconnect said relay from said time delay circuit.
;
8. The fuel consumption signalling systen of clain 7,
wherein said time delay circuit is adjustable to actuate
said audio alarm generator, said counter, and said
throttle plate control at a variety of times after said
alarm circuit is actuated.
9. A fuel consumption signalling system for signalling
both efficient and inefficient fuel consumption conditions in
the engine of a motor vehicle, comprising:
(a) an alarm circuit including, connected in parallel, an
alarm light, a resistor, and a time delay circuit having an
audio alarm generator, said alarm circuit being actuatable by
a predetermined potential difference;
(b) an indicator'circuit connected in series with said
alarm circuit to form a series circuit, said indicator circuit
including, connected in parallel,
(I) an indicator light for indicating an efficient:
operating condition in the engine of the motor vehicle
and for serving as a voltage divider for any potential
applied across said series circuit, and
(ii) a vacuum operated, normally open switch
pneumatically connected to the engine manifold of the
motor vehicle for shunting any electric potential
applied across said indicator lamp around said lamp
when a predetermined manifold pressure indicative
of a fuel waste condition closes said switch, and
-------
I
20
N
-------
\
88-
ri i—r
61;
I
I
-------
f
COMBINED DECLARATION' AND PC'A'ER Or ATTOFLN'EY
IK ORIGINAL ATPL'.CATION
As J below nimed ir.ver.'.o:, I hereby declare th:t:
my Itsidence. pc;'. office address j,-.d citi::r.sru? a.-c as stated below next to rr.y r.i--r.;; that
1 verily beleve that 1 im the o.-.pr.:!, first and soie inventor (:f only one r.ime is listed below) or a jo:--.t
Inventor (if pluri! inventor; are ram;; beiow) of the invention er.tit'.ed:
fuel Cor.su-ption Signalling System .
described md claimed in the attaches specification, that 1 ur.ce:st:r.d the cor.te.-.t of the attached specification,
that I do nol know ir.d do not b:lie--e the ram.c wis ever known o: used in ihe U.-Jted States of America be-
fore my or ou: invention thereof, or patented or described in my prL-.ted publication in any country before
my or our invention hereof o: rr.ore tncn on: year pr.or to Oxij application, L~.H the sirr.e was not in public
use or on sale Li the Ur-ited States of Arr.:r.:a more O-J-T on: year pnor to this appuca-uon. C-.at the vnventicn
has not been patented o: rr.ad: the subject of in inventor's cenificcve issued before the date of this applica-
tion in my ccu.-.try foreign to -J-; Urj::d States of A-er.ca on aji :pplic:ticn fued by rte c: my h^il rcpre-
jentativej or ci'.ip.s more tha.T twe:v; —or.ths prior to th;s ;ppijca:;on, that 1 3cV'_-.owied« rr.y duty to dis-
close inforrrution of which 1 :n-. aware \vhich is material to the exi-Tlnition of this appliciaon. ir.d that no
application for patent or inventor's c:.t::"icat: en this invention liii been fJeJ Ln my country (oreijn ;o the
United States of America pr.or to this a;;'ucjtion by me or rr.y letii rcp:es:r.t;::ves o: a;s:p-.s, except ai
follo»v ... - -
1 hereby appoint the follow.' i:torp.:y($) ;r.d,'o: a;en:(s) to p:cs;c_:: tius ipplicivlon md to t::r.sict
all bujiniJi LT LhV Paten: i.nd Trjc:r-.:r'< Offici cor_-.;et:d th:r-\«ih: ~ho^3S «:."Cole, Rsg. j?2S,290;
Donald E. Stout, Reg. 026.422 and Jares ?.. Laracie, Reg. i'26,934 .
Address ill telephone cilis to Tf-.o^s w. Cole ^ a: telephone r.o.202-465-5200 j
Address al! correspondence to Ihorus W. Cole, 1301 K. St., ".W. v.'ashir.5rori. D.C."20C06
I hereby declare that ill str.emer.ts —.:c: herein cf rr.y own kno-iedze i:e true and that all siiterr.er.vs
made on informction ir.d beiief are believed to be true; :r.d fur.'ner that these statements were made \vith
the knowledge --.at w-iful false statements and the like so made it: punishable by fine o: irr.pnsorjnent. or
both, under Section 1001 of Title IS of the United St.te: Code anc th;t such w-iiiful fahe stitemer.ti may
jeopardize the validity of the application or any patent issued therecrs.
Ravnond P. S~tth, Jr.
2521 Lir.n Street, Williac^port, Pennsylvania 17701
T _K
•-—.J^l
U.S.A.
P.O. Box 294, 129 Susquehanna Street, Wlllia=s?orc, Pennsylvania i7?0\
O.Ct^Ct
TM Off.;« - L.S. CGV.M-O.C.
-------
SPECIFICATION
/ ~~
Be it known that, I, Raymond P. Smith, Jr., a citizen of
the United States of America, residing at 2521 Linn Street,
Williamsport, Pennsylvania 17701, have invented a new, original
design for an
AUTOMOTIVE' FUEL' CONSUMPTION ALARM
*
of which the following in a specification, reference being had
to the accompanying drawings, forming a part hereof.
Fig. 1 in a front .perspective view of an automotive fuel
consumption alarm showing my new design;
Fig. 2 is a front elevation thereof;
Fig. 3 is a top plan thereof;
Fig. 4 is a bottom plan thereof;
Fig. 5 is a rear elevation thereof; and
Fig. 6 is a right side elevation thereof.
I claim: The ornamental design for an Automotive Fuel
Consumption Alarm as shown.
ixciv.-or.c'.J '+ . Scni.cn, Jr.
Proprietary to Cr;.':.-.-- • .'::c. :h;!l not be
reproduced or cr-'--.1 --• ..-;.;. n P;rmis-
sion ncr us; J : •• . :. -•..::.- i.'::.-::r.cnral to irs
Interest cr-J -' ' f -. >--_ : ,.-,-, r -.
-------
F/6.1
F/G.2
E
X
-------
/^.-;^;.'iV •;.-'.->>-.<> ^
ff
-------
-t-V-U "»'-/ w-
F
o
F/G.3
FIG. 6
-------
<
r
COMBINED DECLARATION AND PO'.VSROF ATTORNEY
LN' ORIGINAL APPLICATION
As i below named inventor, !'hereby dec'.;:: that:
my residence, post office a
dose information of which I ira aware which is material to the exarriiatjan of this application, ir.d Out rsc»
application for patent or L-.vento.-'s certificate on this L-.vi A TM Oi'f.ct - t/'i. CO.V-"'O.C.
-------
Attachment t>
EPA-AA-TEB-81-L3
Evaluation of Gastell
A Device Co Modify Driving Habits
February 1981
by
Edward Anthony Earth
Test and Evaluation Branch
Emission Control Technology Division
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control-
Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Background
The Envi.Tonir.rtnt; a 1 Protection Agency receives infornation about many
systems which appear to offer potential for emission reduction and/or
fuel economy improvement compared to conventional engines and vehicles.
EPA's Emission Control Technology Division is interested in evaluating
all such systems because of the obvious benefits to the Nation from the
identification of systems that can reduce emissions, improve fuel econ-
omy, or both. EPA invites developers of such systems to provide complete
technical information on the system's principle of operation, together
with available test data on the system. In those cases for which review
by EPA technical staff suggests that the data available shows promise,
confirmatory tests are run at the EPA Motor Vehicle Emission Laboratory
at Ann Arbor, Michigan. The results of all such test projects are set
forth in a series of Test and Evaluation Reports, of which this report is
one.
EPA received an application from Automotive Devices Inc. (ADI) to perform
an evaluation of the Gastell Device. Section 5L1 of the Motor Vehicle
Information and Cost Savings Act (15 DSC 2011) requires EPA to evaluate
fuel economy retrofit devices with regard to both emissions and fuel
economy, and to publish the results in the Federal Register. Such an
evaluation is based upon valid test data submitted by the manufacturer
and, if required, EPA testing.
Gastell is a device that senses vehicle manifold vacuum. The device is
preset to give audible and visual signals to the driver so that the
driver can efficiently modify his driving habits. Data submitted by ADI
showed fuel economy benefits for some drivers and some vehicles.
Because of these apparent benefits, EPA decided to conduct confirmatory
tests as part of the evaluation. This test program was conducted over an
extended time period and consisted of three distinct test phases. This
report details the results of this three phase confirmatory test program.
The conclusions drawn from the EPA evaluation tests are necessarily of
limited applicability. A complete evaluation of the effectiveness of a
concept in achieving performance improvements on the many different types
of vehicles that are in actual use requires a much larger sample of test
vehicles than is economically feasible in tiie evaluation test projects
conducted by EPA. The conclusions frora the EPA evaluation test can be
considered to be quantitatively valid only for the specific test cars
used; however, it is reasonable to extrapolate the results from the EPA
test to other types of vehicles in a directional manner, i.e., to suggest
that similar results are likely to be achieved on other types of vehicles.
Summary of Findings (test vehicles grouped together)
The Phase I testing consisted of FTP and KFET dynamometer tests of the
Castell Device. Overall, the use of the Gastell Device as a driving aid
did not show a significant effect on the vehicles' fuel economy or emis-
sions for either the FTP or HKET.
The Phase II testing consisted of modified LA-4's (FTP) and acceleration
rate studies conducted on the vehicle chassis dynamometer without using
the Gastell Device.
-------
The more aggressive (greater acceleration rales) modifications of the
LA-4 cycle developed showed no change in fuel economy when compared
to the standard FTP (LA-4). Therefore, since the preceding tests
with the Gastell Device did not show an improvement in the vehicles'
fuel economy for either the FTP or hFET, the Gastell Device was not
tested with these more aggressive driving cycles.
Evaluation of five vehicles on a test cycle consisting predominately
of accelerations did show that there was an average 14.b% improvement
in fuel economy between a very low acceleration rate (I mph/sec.) and
the highest acceleration rates used (up to 5 mph/sec.). There was an
average 8.5% improvement in fuel economy between the moderate (2
mph/sec) and highest acceleration rates. This indicates that reduced
vehicle acceleration rates can improve fuel economy for some ve.hiclp.
operating conditions. However, when these acceleration fuel economy
improvements are adjusted for the average portion of driving time
actually devoted to acceleration, the maximum fuel economy savings
would be 1.9%; but, in consideration of the constraints of actual
driving conditions, a more realistic potential saving would be less
than 1/2%. A similar analysis based on fuel consumed during acceler-
ation modes yielded an average estimated improvement potential of
1.3%.
Having found no appreciable fuel economy effects in Phases I and II using
the vehicle dynamometer, a road test program, Phase HI, .was undertaken
with the Gastell Device. For the six combinations of vehicle" and opera-
tor, in only one case did the use of the Gastell Device cause an improve-
ment in vehicle fuel economy greater than 1%. The amount of the fuel
economy improvement for this one case was.5%. It is interesting to note
that even for this one case, the other less aggressive driver's fuel
economy in this vehicle was the same with or without the device and 4%
better than the driver who showed an improvement.
In general, the EPA testing of the Gastell Device did not show a positive
benefit from its use. None of the Phase I chassis dynamometer tests with
the device installed showed a positive fuel economy effect. Four
vehicles of varying size and power-to-weight ratio were road tested in
San Antonio (with from one to two drivers each) and only one vehicle/
driver combination showed a fuel economy improvement (5%). It is
concluded from the test data available that only drivers with aggressive
driving behavior (or other driving habits that involve excessive throttle
manipulation) could benefit from use of this device and then only if: (1)
their vehicle happened to have the fuel economy response characteristics
that favorably matched the activation setting of the device and (2) the
driver consistently responded to the device signal and refrained from
such aggressive driving.
Description of Device
Caste 11 is an add-on device developed and marketed by Automotive Devices,
Inc. of Williamsport, Pennsylvania. The device senses vehicle manifold
vacuum and emits an audible and visual signal when the manifold vacuum
drops below a preset level. The driver responds by easing off the
accelerator, thereby achieving a higher manifold vacuura which turns these
signals off. The vehicle is thus operated at a higher manifold vacuum
-------
Level which the manufacturer claims is more fuel efficient.
Tne manufacturer claims the following benefits for Gastell:
1. Fuel economy savings of up to 30%, depending on driving habits.
2. Indicates engine problems when the alarm and light are on more
frequently than usual (i.e., functions as a vacuum gauge).
The unit is packaged in a 4 inch by 3 inch by 2 inch case that mounts to
the vehicle dash panel. A picture of the unit and operating instructions
are contained in the "Gastell Operator's Manual" in Appendix A.
The unit is easily installed. A vacuum line is attached to a source' of
manifold vacuum and the electrical connections are attached to the
vehicle's 12 volt power. A copy of the manufacturer's installation
instructions is given in Appendix A.
Test Vehicle Description
Phase I: FTP and HFET chassis dynamometer testing with the Gastell
Device used the following three test vehicles:
A 1979 Buick Regal equipped with a 3.8 liter V-b engine and an auto-
matic transmission. This'vehicle used EGk and an oxidation catalyst
for emission control.
A 1979 Chevrolet Impala equipped with a 5.7 liter V-8 engine and an
automatic transmission. This vehicle also used EGR and an oxidation
catalyst for emission control.
A 1975 Dodge Dart equipped with a 225 cubic inch inline 6~cylinder
engine and an automatic transmission. This vehicle was calibrated to
meet the 1975 California emission standards. This vehicle used an
air pump, EGR, and an oxidation catalyst for emission control.
A complete description of these vehicles is given in the test vehicle
descriptions in Appendix A.
Phase II: Modified LA-4, modified FTP, and acceleration rate chassis
dynamometer testing without the device:
A 1980 Chevrolet Citation and a 1975 Chevrolet Nova were used in the
development of the more aggressive driving cycles. A more detailed
description of these vehicles is given in Appendix B, "Development of
a More Aggressive Driving Cycle."
A 19SO Chevrolet Citation, 1980 Dodge Aspen, 1979 Ford Pin.to, L979
Mercury Zephyr and a 1979 Oldsmobile Cutlass were used in the Accel-
eration Test Program. A more detailed description of these vehicles
is given in Appendix C, "Fuel Economy vs. Acceleration Rate."
-------
T
Phase III: Road testing with^ the. Gastell Device.:
A 1980 Chevrolet Citation, 1975 Chevrolet iNova, a 1980 Mercury Cougar
XR-7, and a 1979 Mercury Marquis were useci in the San Antonio road
test program. A more detailed description of. thfjse vehicles is given
in Appendix D, "Road Testing with the Castell Device."
Test Procedures
Phase I: FTP and HFET dynamometer testing with the Gastell Device:
Exhaust emission tests were conducted according to the 1977 Federal
Test Procedure (FTP) described in the Federal Register of June 26,
1977, and the EPA Highway Fuel Economy Test (HFET), described in the
Federal Register of September 10, 1976. The vehicles were not tested
for evaporative emissions. Additional tests were conducted as an
evaluation tool. These tests consisted of hot start LA-4 cycles.
This driving cycle is the basic cycle used in the FTP and the results
of these tests are similar to bags 2 and 3 of the FTP.
Prior to initial testing, each vehicle was given a specification
check and inspection. The ignition timing, idle speed, and fast idle
speed were checked for agreement with the manufacturer's specifica-
tions given on the Vehicle Emission Control Information label affixed
to the engine compartment. Each vehicle met its manufacturer's
specifications and, therefore, no adjustments wp.re required.
The vehicles were inspected for engine vacuum leaks, proper connec-
tion of vacuum hoses, functioning PCV valve, oil and water levels,
and general condition of the engine compartment. Each test vehicle
was in satisfactory condition.
The test program consisted of baseline tests and Castell tests. The
Gastell tests consisted of a standard test procedure (FTP or HFET)
which was altered by having the operator back off the accelerator, as
necessary, to silence the audible and visual Gastell vacuum alarms.
At each test condition a minimum of two FTP and two HFET tests were
conducted.
A second Gastell procedure, "modified" was also used. For this
procedure the FTP (LA-4) driving cycle war, modified by reducing the
vehicle acceleration rate to a It-wel just below that at which the
device would signal. This smoothed the cycle and would be represen-
tative of a very experienced drivr-r's use of the device.
A third Gastell procedure, "frozen accelerator" was also used. For
this procedure the operator again backed off the accelerator to shut
off the Gastell alarms. The operator then held his foot fixed in
this position until the vehicle's speed matched the driving cycle.
Phase II: Modified LA-4, modified FT?, and acceleration rate chassis
dynamometer testing without the Gautfll Device:
-------
-5-
After the conclusion of the Phase I Gastoll test program, two
additional dynamometer test programs were conducted to further^
evaluate the effect of acceleration rate on vehicle fuel economy.
These test programs and a detailed description of the test procedures
are contained in Appendices B and C of this report.
"Development of a More. Aggressive Driving Cycle," Appendix B, was a
short test program in which the basic FTP driving cycle, the LA-4 was
modified. The LA-4 cycle was modified by increasing the acceleration
rates at speeds below 25 mph. Two cycles were used - Mod. I which
used slightly increased acceleration rates and Mod. 2 which used
nearly wide-open-throttle (WOT) accelerations.
"Fuel Economy vs. Acceleration Rate," Appendix C, was a short test
program which used a test cycle consisting of a series of accelera-
tions. The vehicle was accelerated at a fixed rate to a cruise
speed, cruised for a few seconds, and then decelerated at a fixed
rate of 2 mph/sec. The cruise time was chosen so that all tests to a
selected cruise speed would be of equal distance. This sequence was
repeated 4 times (5 total cycles). This test sequence was done for
each combination of acceleration rate and final cruise speed.
The complete test matrix used was:
Acceleration Rate mph/sec
Vehicle Speed 1.0 2.0 . 3.3 4.0 5.0
cha'nge mph
0-35 x x x x x
0-45 xxx
20-35 x x . x x x
30-45 xxx
The dynamometer rolls were coupled to minimize tire slippage. Funl
consumption was measured with a fuel flowmeter. N'o gaseous emission
data was taken.
Phase III: Road Testing with the Castell Device procedures:
"Road Testing with the Gastell D-nvi.ce," Appendix D, was a carefully
controlled road test with the Gastell Device. The drivers drove the
vehicles over a specified road route in San Antonio. Testing was
done, both with and without (baseline) the Gastell Device. Details of
the test program and the San Antonio test route are given in Appendix
D.
Discussion of Results
The FTP and HFET test results are summarized in Tables I and II below.
The test results of individual tests are given in Tables A-I, A-II, and
-------
-6-
A-III in Appendix A. Results of the tests using the not?, aggressive
driving cycle are. given in Table li~ I Appendix E. Results of the accel-
eration rate tests are given in Tables Oil thru C-V of 'Appendix C.
Results of the road tests are given in Table III.
I. Federal Test Procedure Results - Phase I dynamometftr testing with
Gastell
The test results are summarized in Table I below:
Table I
Average Vehicle FTP Emissions
grams per mile
Test Condition HC_ C£ C02 NOx HPG
Buick Regal-FTP
Baseline Avg. (2 tests) .72 7.89 459 1.24 18.8
Gastell Avg. (2 tests) 1.07 7.71 464 1.01 18.5
Chevrolet Impala-FTP
Baseline Avg. (3 tests) .63 4.80 565 1.27 15.i
Gastell Avg. (2 tests) .56 4.72 563 1.34 15.5
Dodge Dart-FTP
Baseline Avg. (2 tests) .44 6.53 550 2.05 15.8
Gastell Avg. (2 tests) .38 5.86 555 1.83 15.7
Gastell Frozen Accelerator
Avg. (2 tests) .53 6.76 569 1.82 15.3
Overall the Gastell Device did not show a significant positive or nega-
tive effect on vehicle FTP emissions or fuel economy.
The use of the Gastell Device as a driver's aid did not significantly
affect the vehicle's HC emissions.
The vehicle's CO emissions were also not significantly affected by the
use of the Gastell Device.
Castell caused mixed effects on N'Ox emissions. The Buick's and Dart's
FTP NOx emissions were significantly lowered. The Impala's NOx emissions
were judged to be unchanged.
The amount the Gastell Device required the driving cycle to be modified
varied appreciably between vehicles. The Gastell Device typically
sounded^g^g^gg^g3es during the standard FTP cycle for the Buick.
However, the easing otf of the acc^lerator only caused the driving cycle
to be appreciably altered during the long hard acceleration occurring at
195 seconds in bags 1 and 3 of Che FTP for the Buick. For the Isnpala,
the device rarely sounded, and Lhe device only caused the driving cycle
to be appreciably modified at 195 seconds in bag 1 of the FTP. For the
l)art, the device soundejj^jj^S^s during the FTP and appreciably altered
the driving cycle most or the. Li;::e.
-------
-7-
2. Highway Fuel Economy Test Results - Phase I dynamometer testing with
Gastell
The test results are summarized in Table II below:
Table II
Average Vehicle HFET Emissions
grams per mile
Test Condition
HC
Buick Regal-HFET
Baseline Avg. (2 tests) .07
Gastell Avg. (2 tests) .07
Chevrolet Impala~HFET
Baseline Avg. (4 tests) .11
Gastell Avg. (2 tests ) .09
Dodge Dart-HFET
Baseline Avg. (2 tests) .05
Gastell Avg. (2 tests) .05
Gastell Frozen Accelerator
Avg. (2 tests) .08
CO
.39
.48
.59
.07
.21
.16
.12
348
351
410
404
359
359
NOx
1.30
1.44
1.51
1.56
3.13
2.20
2.84
MPG
25.4
25.2
21.6
22.0
24.7
24.7
24.7
Overall the use of the Gastell Device as a driver's aid did not show a
significant positive or negative effect on vehicle HFET emissions or fuel
economy.
The Gastell device did not significantly affect the vehicle's HC emis-
sions. The HC emissions were at relatively low levels both with and
without the usage of the device.
Although one vehicle's CO decreased, overall the average emissions were
not significantly affected by the usr: of the Gastell Device. However,
these changes were not significant. The change in the Impala's CO emis-
sions was judged to be not caused by the use of Gastell.
Overall, the vehicle's NOx emissions were unaffected by using Gastell.
The amount the Gastell Device required the driving cycle to be modified
varied appreciably between vehicles. The device typically signalled
during the initial long acceleration and the acceleration midway through
the cycle. The Buick's, Impala's and Dart's highway driving cycle were
only slightly modified at these points.
3. Alternative Driving Cycles Results - Phase I dynamometer testing with
Gastell
Because in the initial EPA tests Gastell had, in general, shown no
effects on emissions or fuel economy, alternative tests were conducted in
an effort to confirm the manufacturer's claimed benefits. Since the
-------
continual modulation of the throttle in response to the device could
potentially adversely" af~fe:ct vf;~hic~le -emissions and/or fuel economy, two
alternative cycles were
accelerator" cycles.
tried. These were the "modified" and "frozen
The "modified" driving cycle was an FTP (LA~4) cycle in which the vehicle
acceleration rate was reduced to a level just below the level at which
the device would signal. This smoothed the cycle and would be represen-
tative of a very experienced driver's use of the device. A "modified"
LA-4 cycle was conducted using the Buick Regal (see Table A-1II). These
"modified" LA-4 tests showed no improvement in emissions or fuel economy
over the Gastell LA-4 tests.
The "frozen accelerator" cycle was an FTP or HFET in which the driver
backed off the accelerator sufficiently to silence the Gastell Device.
The driver then held the accelerator frozen at that setting until the
vehicle speed matched the driving trace. Frozen accelerator tests were
done for the FTP and HFET for the Dart. These tests (see Tables I and
II) showed no significant improvement in emissions or fuel economy for
either the FTP or HFET.
4. Post Test Gastell Checkout - Phase I
The Gastell units tested were provided by the manufacturer and therefore
presumed to function properly. However, since no benefits were perceived
in the test results, the units were checked at the conclusion of
testing. The vacuum specifications for the devices and the results of
these checks were:
Gastell Vacuum Checks
Inches Hg
Gastell
Cyl. Vehicle
On Off
Unit
Gastell
Cyl. Vehicle Unit
On Off
Mfg. Spec.
Test Unit 1
Test Unit 2
5
5.3
5.1
6
5.7
5.9
7
6.7
7.3
Therefore, all units were found to function properly.
5. Post Test Vehicle Inspection ~ Phase I
All vehicles were inspected at the conclusion of testing. The Impala and
Dart were acceptable. However, the buick Regal had a noticeable vacuum
leak at the throttle shaft. The shaft had considerable lateral play.
When the shaft was sprayed with a carburetor cleaner, the engine idle
speed noticeably increased.
Since the effect of the leak would be lowered manifold vacuum, the leak
would tend to trigger the Castell device sooner. Therefore, on a Buick
-------
-9-
without the leak, Gastell would trigger less often and have an expected
lesser effect. Thus, since there was a negligible Gastell effect on the
test vehicle's emissions or fuel economy, it is reasonable to assume that
the Gastell would show a lesser benefit on another similar vehicle.
Therefore, the Buick data is included in this report.
6. Development of a More Aggressive Driving Cycle - Phase II modified
LA-4 and modified FTP dynamometer testing without Gastell
The original test program for the Gastell Device was based on the use of
the FTP and KFET cycles and the results showed no significant negative or
positive effect on either emissions or fuel economy. Since an accelera-
tion limiting device was expected to reduce fuel consumption, additional
testing to investigate the effects of acceleration was undertaken.
Two altered LA-4 cycles were devised with greater acceleration rates at
the lower vehicle speeds. A small test sequence was run to evaluate the
suitability of these cycles for testing the Gastell Device. For this
study several available EPA test vehicles underwent a variety of emission
tests with modified cycles and emission tests using dynamometer coupled
rolls. Results of these tests are given in Table B-I of Appendix B. The
results are also summarized in Appendix B.
An analysis of the data from these tests indicated that the fuel economy
with the more aggressive cycles was not measurably different from that on
the standard FTP. Since the Gastell device had made no measurable fuel
economy difference on the FTP, it was concluded that the same result
would be found with the revised cycles and no tests were run with the
device installed.
7. Fuel Economy vs. Acceleration Rate Tests - Phase II dynamometer
acceleration testing without Gastell
Since the net result of the preceding studies was that, for the cycles
used, there was no effect .on fuel economy, a test cycle consisting
predominantly of accelerations was developed to directly quantify the
effect of fuel economy versus acceleration rate. For this study five
available EPA test vehicles were usod. Results of these tests are given
in Tables Oil thru C~V of Appendix C and these results are plotted in
Figures C-l thru C~5 of Appendix C.
Vehicle manifold vacuum -was measured during these acceleration tests.
Based on the vacuum levels at which the. Gastell device would function for
4, 6, and 8 cylinder engines - all five of these vehicles would have
given signals at very low acceleration rates. The Citation would have
signaled at acceleration rates slightly less than 2 mph/sec. The Aspen,
Cougar, Zephyr, Pinto and Cutlass at rates near 1 mph/sec.
For this acceleration study, the average improvement in vehicle fuel
economy between worst case (greatest acceleration rate) and the lowest
acceleration rate (1 mph/snc.) was 14.6%. The improvements ranged from
6.0 to 28.9% (see Table C-I1I). The average improvement in vehicle fuel
economy between worst cas^ and 2 mph/sec. was 8.5%. This improvement
ranged from 1.9% to 15.5% (see Table C-IV).
-------
-iO-
The above effects - no discernable improvement: in transient: (.i.e. FTP)
fuel economy even though the preceding acceleration stuay shows differ-
ences in fuel economy - is explained by considering available data on
vehicle' operating characteristics^L'. In these chase car studies, it
was found that less than 13% of vehicle operating time is spent accel-
erating and only 34% of these accelerations occur at rates above 2.2
mph/sec. Even if the 14% improvement in fuel economy was applied to all
the 13% of vehicle operation involving acceleration, the maximum possible
fuel savings would be 1.9%. To achieve these savings would require that
the driver always reduced acceleration to a level on the order of one
mph/sec. when signalled by the device. More realistically the fuel
economy improvement should only be applied to the accelerations above 2.2
mph/sec. since accelerations at rates as low as one mph/sec. would many
times be unsafe. Combining the potential fuel economy improvement
(8.5%), the percentage of time accelerating (13%) and the percentage of
time at accelerations above 2.2 mph/sec. (34%), gives an overall antici-
pated improvement of .4%. Such a fuel economy increment is below the
threshold of sensitivity for all but the most highly controlled tests.
A similar analysis can be applied to the fuel consumption data from the
GM study. It was found in that study that 20.8% of total fuel used per
trip is consumed during acceleration modes. Again, if the Gastell Device
would reduce all acceleration rates down to the order of one mph/sec.,
the maximum potential sa.vings would be L4.6% of 20.8% which is equal to
3%. If the Gastell device alerts the driver to only those accelerations
above two mph/sec., then only the fuel consumption during accelerations
at rates above two mph/sec. would be reduced. This yields a potential
savings of 14.6% of (37.5% of 20.8%) equals 1.3%. Validation of this
potential improvement would also require a large number of controlled
tests.
8. Road Tests with the Gastell Device - Phase III
During the course of the various phases of the chassis dynamometer test
program, the developer of the device, Mr. Ray Smith, was kept abreast of
the results. As more and more of the testing continued to yield negative
results, he became critical of the chassis dynamometer procedure and made
a number of suggestions, primarily directed toward road testing of the
device. In an effort to try every reasonable possibility in evaluating
thf- device, 'his suggestion was pursued.
EPA first looked into the feasibility of a road test program in some type
of fleet operation. The basic approach was for the selection of govern-
ment owned vehicles which are operated by the same driver over essen-
tially the same route every day. After investigating several options,
the particular fleet considered was that of the United States Park Police
which operates in the metropolitan Washington DC area. The Park Police
"Measurement of Motor Vehicle Operation Pertinent to Fuel Economy"
(CM Chase Car Study), SAE Paper 750003, February, 1975
-------
Appendix D
Road Testing with the Gastell Device
SAN ANTONIO ROAD ROUTE TEST PROCEDURE
A. The general procedure is as follows:
1. Drive test vehicle from Southwest Research Institute to Layover Point.
2. Start Vehicle
3. Start Fluidyne Recorder, wait 60 seconds. Then drive road course.
Use normal driving techniques.
4. Return to Layover Point, shift into park, idle for 60 seconds. At 60
sees, stop Fluidyne totalizer and hit print button. Record fuel and
temperature readings on work sheet.
5. Shut engine off, zero and start Fluidyne timer.
6. At 500 seconds, start vehicle using hot start procedure.
7. At 560 seconds shift into drive and drive road course using r.ornal
driving technique. (Go to Step 4 - repeat as many times as possible
.before 3:00 p.m.).
Dote: The Mercury Marquis was run with 60 second layovers instead of 500
seconds.
15. General Test Requirements
1. The first test run of each day was considered warm up and the data
was not used in any subsequent calculations.
2. Only tests run between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. were used due to San
Antonio traffic considerations.
3. Only tests run on weekdays, Monday through Friday, were used due to
San Antonio traffic considerations.
4. Temperature, humidity, barometer, wind speed and direction were taken
at 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.
5. All test fuel was from a single batch, of Gulf pride -unleaded fuel
provided by Southwest designated EM-356.
6. All test vehicle fuel tank;-, were drained prior to start of testing to
avoid fuel mixing.
7. All vehicles were specification checked and examined for proper
vacuum line routing and evidence of tampering.
8. The Chevrolet Citation and Mova were extensively checked out to
manufacturers specifications at tho EPA-MVEL prior to being driven to
San Antonio.
-------
-45-
9. Fuel Tanks on each vehicle were filled with KM-356 fuel each
morning. Vehicles used about: 1/4 tank each, testing cay.
10. Tire pressure of all test vehicle tires was checked and set to
manufacturer's specifications each morning prior to leaving Southwest
Research.
11. Test runs with abnormal time, fuel consumption, or circumstances were
deleted from consideration. Examples of such circumstances were
funeral processions (3 occurences) and could not exit highway due to
traffic (1 time).
12. In all test days where the Gastell Device was to be used, the device
calibration was checked prior to leaving Southwest using the
following procedure.
An 8" diameter pressure gauge that was previously checked versus
a mercury manometer in Ann Arbor was attached to a hand vacuum
pump which was then connected to the device. Ray Smith of
Gastell had transmitted the following device specifications:
ON_ OFF
4 cylinder vehicles 3.5" Hg 4.5" Hg
6 cylinder vehicles 5.0" Hg 6" Hg
8 cylinder vehicles 7.0" Hg 8"Hg
The devices did not need calibration until the setpointis were
modified on the Nova. The calibration checks of the 8 cylinder
devices were about on at 7.0" Hg. Since these devices were
submitted by' Ray Smith with the 511 Application for evaluation
and the specifications given in the application only specified
the ON set point, the devices were deemed acceptable.
13. Testing run when the pavement was wot was not used in the analysis.
When pavement was damp the results were used if they appeared in-line
with other measurements.
14. A minimum of 5 tests were run with ;;;ost vehicles to familiarize the
driver with the vehicle and route. Data was not collected during
driver familarization.
i
15. The fuel totalizer display was located in the vehicle so that the
driver could not see the display while driving.
16. The Fluidyne flovmetors were calibrated in July, 1930 and checked for
calibration in December 1(JSO.
-------
-46-
Table D-I
Phase 4 Gastcll Ronci Testing
Test Vehicle Description
V*hicle_ iU
Engine
type
Displacement
Carburetor
Transmission
axle ratio
Tire Ty pe
Ti re Size
Emission Control
1980
Citation
Citation
1X685AW15057
inline, 4 cylinder
2.5 liters
2 venturi
3 speed
automatic
2.53
radial
P185xRl3
EGR
1975
Chevrolet
Nova
1X27L5L115735
V-S
350 CID
4 venturi
3 spaed
automatic
3.08
radial
ER78xU
air injection
19 SO
Mercury
Cougar XR-7
OH93D626537
V-o
255 CID
2 venturi
3 speed
automatic
2.50
radial
P195/75R14
ECU
1979
Mercury
Marquis
9Z6ZU6 19190
V-8
351
2 venturi
3 speed
automatic
2.30
radial
CR7bxl4
air injecti
closed loop
3 way catalyst
pump
oxidation catalyst
oxidation catalyst oxidation cataly
-------
Scin "Antonio Iloncl Route
Number of Stop Si.gns: 0
Number of Stop Lights: 28
.Average Distance: 7.2 miles
Average Speed: 19.6 npb
Maximum Speed: 55 nph
Stops/Mile: 3.9
N
=3 0.=? u.sn;-:.?
LIGHT
SCHOOL ZONi£
Figure D-l San Anconio V.oad Route.
-------
October 29, 1979
Attachment C
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMENCE
National Bureau of Standards
Washington. D.C. 20234
Mr. Ray P. Smith, Jr.
P.O. Box 294
Williamsport, PA 17701
Dear Mr. Smith:
We have completed evaluation of your invention entitled "Gastell" which
you submitted for evaluation in accordance with Section 14 of the Federal
Nonnuclear Energy Research and Development Act of 1974.
Your invention is a manifold vacuum monitoring device that signals
inefficient vehicle operation by both manual and audible indicators.
Manifold vacuum is a recognized reliable measure for indicating engine
operating efficiency. Devices to enable drivers to make beneficial
use of the measure have been, as you know, on the market for a long
time. Such devices can certainly be of significant value in enabling
motivated drivers to reduce fuel usage by increasing operating efficiency.
We wish to encourage use of engine efficiency indicators as a means
to reduce automotive fuel consumption. While there have been recent
warnings by such Federal agencies as the Federal Trade Commission,
against use of automotive devices which purport to save energy, devices
such as .yours should not be included in the warned-against class.
Your particular device is seen to have special 'value in view of the
audible signaling feature. Nevertheless, this engineering improvement
does not' constitute new technology of the type appropriate for support
under this program. We regret, therefore, we are unable to justify
a recommendation to the Department of Energy.
While "Gastell" does not qualify for support under this program, you
may wish to contact the Small Business Administration (SBA) for assis-
tance under their loan or other programs. A district office of the
SBA is located at:
Perm Place
20 N. Pennsylvania Avenue
Wilkes-Barre, PA 18702
(717) 826-6497
If you do contact the SBA, this letter will attest to our opinion that
your device is technically sound and commercially competitive, and that
its installation and use in automobiles can lead to significant fuel
savings by the drivers of such vehicles.
-------
Page 2
We wish you success in your marketing efforts.
interest in our program.
Sincerely,
ThanH you for your
/'
/CI
.-0_ _ . Lew art
lief, Office of Energy-Related Inventions
-------
Attachment D
-------
T.M.
.GASTELL PRE-SET MODELS.
MODEL
2004
2003
2006
2008
FOR:
4 cylinder engine
5 cylinder engine
fa cylinder engine
fi cylinder engine
DON'T WASTE
ANOTHER
DROP OF GAS
GASTELL
SENSES
MANIFOLD CONDITIONS
DRIVE WITH THE GREEN
AND SAVE UP TO 30%
AT THE GAS PUMP!
DO-IT-YOURSELF
INSTALLATION
Any mechanic will tell you that the best measure of an engine's fuel efficiency
is its ratio of fuel-to-air intake. And the best way to measure this efficiency is
the GASTELL. Gastell is the revolutionary electronic sensor that converts its
signals to instant visual and audible indicators. This alerts you automatically
and your eyes never have to leave the road.
Simply stated . . . the lower the intake manifold pressure, the more fuel and
less air the engine takes in. Pressure must be maintained at sufficient levels.
When your car is running properly, getting optimum mileage and has suffic-
ient pressure, a green light will show on Gastell. A red light and audible tone
will tell you when you're wasting gas, by improper acceleration, or even
because of faulty ignition, carburction or spark plug performance. There is
no simpler, better way to know at every moment whether your car is getting
its top mileage.
Gastell will help you train your foot to maintain the most efficient level of
fuel intake, and can signal waste caused by other unseen engine problems.
It will not alter engine performance bv itself like some other so-called gas
saving devices and accessories which can be expensive, can actually reduce
efficiency, shorten spark plug life, even void manufacturers' warranties. Gas-
tell is completely safe for your engine -- and makes you a smarter driver!
Gastell installs in three easy steps. 1)Two connections are simply inserted
into an electrical circuit. 2) The third connection, a "T" connection, is spliced
into the auto's common vacuum system. 3) The attractive, compact (4" \ 3!/,"
x2/«") unit is then mounted on or under the dash panel, where its wood-
grain finish coordinates beautifully with most auto interiors.
^jm^^&?&$
»-iSSSeS*S^i<2£s3g3i-ilSsl^iilS''
(Detailed installation instruction^ included with each CASTE'LL!
r>
\a
AUTOMOTIVE DEI/ICES, INC.
129 Susquehanna Street, P.O. Box 35 13, \Villiamsport, PA 17701
(~y-b.MPL FORM C.20I
-------
&ifciyttS:Tl\fawJ«Mttu.'!lkM
-------
Attachment F
AUTOMOTIVE DEI/ICES, INC
'29 Susquehanna St.. P.O. Box 3513. Williamsport, PA 17701 Phone 717-326-5278
FROM THE DESK OF RAY P. SMITH, JR., PRESIDENT
GASTELL can give advance warning of other mechanical defects which
could cause breakdowns:
1. Faulty emissions system.
2. Intake manifold leaking.
3. Burned valves.
4. Spark plugs fouling.
5. Accelerator pump malfunctioning.
6. Carbuerator malfunctioning.
7. Carbuerator flange gasket leaking.
8. Engine timing off.
9. Brakes hanging up.
10. Tires air pressure too low.
11. Hill tell you if engine is running.
-------
Attachment G-2
Telephone 717
323-0343
Telex: 64-U24
INTERNATIONAL MARKETING CONSULTANTS, INC.
441 HEPBURN STREET
P.O. BOX 1383
WILLIAMSPORT. PA 17701
June 18, 1979
Automotive Devices Inc.
1311 Washington Blvd.
P.O. Box 294
Williamsport, Pa. 17701
Attn: Raymond Smith
Dear Mr. Smith:
I thought I would let you know how my Gastell has been working out. I
have been using it for about 10,000 miles now and it has given me no
trouble at all , and I am very pleased with it.
Before I received the Gastell I had always considered myself to be a
very conservative driver, careful not to overaccelerate and waste gas.
However, after installing the Gastell, I received a real surprise. I
found that my "easy" accelerations were actually sounding the buzzer,
and I learned quickly how to efficiently depart from a light or stop
sign.
What came as a real shock was the results in hilly country. I was a-
mazed at the tremendous gas waste when trying to maintain speed on hills.
1 have since changed my habits to go slower up hills and use the lower
gears of my automatic transmission, then speed up on the downside. I
get to my destination about the same time, but with a lot more gas left
than before.
I really appreciate my Gastell; it has paid for itself several times over.
Sincerely,
David C. Reynolds ,j
Vice-President of Operations
/gs
-------
Attachment G-l
WILLIAM R. SIMONS, SR.. President
HENRY J. STUTZ. Vice President
TERRY L. NEUBOLD, Treosurer
Insurance for Every Purpose
420 WILLIAM STREET • WILLIAMSPORT, PA. 17701
Phone 326-7241
June 15, 1979
Automotive Devices, Inc.
Box.3513
129 Susquehanna Street
Williamsport, Pa. 17701
Attention: Mr. Ray Smith
RE: Gastell
Dear Ray:
When I had a Gastell installed in my car, I had explained to
you that it probably wouldn't make much difference in my gas
consumption, since I was such a conservative driver.
How wrong I was! I have increased my mileage by 1\Q%\ \ Maybe
I am doing better than most because I have really started
watching my driving since I got the Gastell installed. I'm
keeping highway speed down to 55 miles per hour. At the
lower speeds, Gastell keeps me in line. You have turned a
cynic into a believer. Three tanks of gas have paid for
the Gastell. I have enclosed a check for another unit.
I am going to put a Gastell on my wife's car.
afford not to.
I can't
Thanks for developing such a great product, especially since
we all need to conserve on our gas usage.
Sincerely yours,
WILLIAM R. SIMONS
President
WRS/ms
encl.
-------
Attachment G-3
LTH»» >•! »w>i]»i>»p , ( ' j * • nn L»
^/\Afr A - A- FT-IT
A\vi L MrneinseaBi /%air LLaS-
COMPANY INC..GENERAL OFFICE
215 CENTRAL AVENUE. LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY 40277
REPLY TO:
BUFFALO BRANCH OFFICE
P. O. BOX 169
42M-S6 NORTH BUFFALO STREET
ORCHARD PARK, NEW YORK 14127
June 19 1979 TELEPHONE: (7is> 662-3331
Automotive Devices Inc.
Box 3513
Williamsport, PA 17701
Gentlemen:
In an effort to "beat the Arabs" my wife sold her 8MPG Ford LTD
station wagon and bought a Ford Fiesta. The first few tankfuls
of gas got about 28 MPG. The difference between the Fiesta and
the LTD was so striking that it became a game to see just how
much mileage could be wrung out of the Fiesta. Careful driving
would yield about 32 MPG in town, and about 37 MPG on the highway.
In April of this year we installed a "Gastell." Since the installa-
tion of this unit, we have never gotten less than 38 MPG in town,
and on a recent trip on the open road, we got 43 MPG.
By this letter, I wish to order two (2) "Gastells" for the Company
cars in the Buffalo Sales Office. I have calculated that if we
get the same percentage increase in our mileage, we will save from
$450 to $500 per year.
The cars are both Chevrolet Chevelles with V-8 engines. Please
bill to the above address.
Sincerely,
Robert C. Bradshaw,
Branch Manager/Buffalo Sales Office
RCB/k
-------
Attachment G-4
COUNTY NATIONAL BANK
Clear-field, Pa. 16830
CLEARFIEID, KARTHAUS. MADERA, OSCEOIA MltlS. PHILIPSBURG AND ^RIVE-IN AT CIE.ARFIEID
June 19, 1979
DAVID M. RODGERS
Vies Preiident
Automotive Devices, Inc.
P.- O. Box 3513
Williamsport, Pa. 17701
Gentlemen:
I drive a 1978 Chrysler LeBaron with a 318 8-cylinder
engine.
It is a pleasure to tell you that by adjusting my
f
driving to your "Gastell," I know my gas mileage has improved
by more than the 30% you suggested I might get.
DMR/wcc
-------
Attachment G-5
FACTORY TRAINED EQUIPMENT DEALER FOR p c YEARS
GE.RALD F..YDDER
Box 203, R.D.S2
LINDEN, PENNA. 1^7744
PHONE AREA CODE 717 : ••••••.•_- AQA Q293
JUne 30, 1979
DEAR SIR:
I am well pleased with my gas saver.
I have a 1974 International truck with 8 cylinder, 345 engine. I have'checked
carefully and found that I have saved over 14% on ray gas.
I would like to see every car and truck use a gas saver.
Yours truly,
Gerald F.
R.D.#2
Box 203,
Linden, Pa. 17744
phone 494-0293
-------
Attachment G-6
El L Testing Laboratories, Inc.
Formerly Electrical Testing Laboratories, Inc.
Industrial Park Cortland, New York 13045 Telephone 607-753-6711 TWX 510 252 0792
Testing Inspection Certification
Acoustical o Air Conditioning & Refrigeration • Chemical o Electrical • Mechanical e Photometric
September 5, 1979
Mr. Ray P. Smith, Jr.
President
AUTOMOTIVE DEVICES, INC.
129 Susquehanna Street
P. 0. Box 3513
Williatnsport, PA 17701
Dear Mr. Smith:
In reviewing your letter regarding testing of your product,
GASTELL, to substantiate claims made by your company, we have
come to the conclusion that we do not have the expertise nor
facilities to conduct such a program. On a subject that is
quite controversial these days, we feel that you require a lab-
oratory that has more versatility with gasoline engines than
we have here at ETL.
In view of the above, ETL is respectfully submitting a
"No Bid" to your letter request. We wish to thank you for the
opportunity to review your requirements and we are sorry we
could not be of assistance to you.
Very truly yours,
v
C. F. Robb
Manager
Mechanical Division
CFR/cks
An independent, employee-owned organization testing for safety and performance.
-------
Attachment H
11/12/79
TEST VEHICLE: 1978 Mercury Cougar; V-8; -
352; automatic transmission
OUTSIDE TEMPERATURE: 51 degrees
WIND VELOCITY: 0 M.P.H.
HUMIDITY: 80%
EACH TEST HAD TWO (2) PASSENGERS, ONE DRIVER PLUS TEST INSTRUCTOR.
Gas mileage tests v/ere conducted on seven individuals; three
of the seven had prior knowledge of GASTELL. The four participants
who did not, were told they were being tested to see how many miles
per gallon they could get on the vehicle they were to drive. The
course length was 2.5 miles and consisted of start/stop driving and
also hills with very moderate elevations. All test applicants were
'given 2/10 of a gallon of gas to run the course.
'It is my impression that the fact that individuals knew they
were being tested had some bearing on their driving behavior, in
other words, the Hawthorne effect.
On the first test run, the drivers were instructed to drive just
as they would with their own vehicles. The GASTELL was turned off
and it could not be seen. Each applicant's test sheet is marked
W/ GASTELL and W/0 GASTELL.
The Course was run one time with each individual without GASTELL
the mileage being recorded. Then GASTELL was turned on and each
person was instructed to ease up on the accelerator each time they
heard a beeping sound from GASTELL. Mileage again was recorded at the
end of the 2.5 miles. With the exception of one applicant, each re-
ceived significant improvement in mileage. The applicant who did not
-------
had bsen driving with the use of a GASTELL for almost two years
and had therefore established good driving habits. Test participant
number 2 was the same applicant as number 1, but was accelerating
"briskly" upon acceleration, driving the same course as that of
test (1). The difference in mileage from "moderate" acceleration
to "briskly" amounted to 10% loss in fuel economy.
Test participant Number 7 had a different driving course which
was all up hill. Acceleration for the distance 2.35, was "briskly"
at times on the first run. The second test was with "moderation".
-------
Multiply distance traveled by 10.
Divide by 2. = Miles per Gallon
First test without GASTELL
Second test with GASTELL
Take lowest figure(miles per gallon), subtract from maximum mileage
obtained with use of GASTELL to determine miles per gallon improvement.
Divide lowest m.p.g. into improved percentage
Ex.. TO.9 miles per gallon
1.7 miles per gallon improvement
divide 10.9 into 1.7 = 15.5
-------
OCR # 1
W/ GASTELL
W/0 GASTELL
%=.33
2.19
2.52
2.19
.33
12.6
10.95
1.7 m.
15% improvement
OCR # 2
W/ GASTELL
W/0 GASTELL
%= .40
1.85
2.25 11.25
1.85 9.25
.40 2.0 M.
21% improvement
-------
S. B. ir3
W/ GASTELL
W/0 GASTELL
% inc. = .35
"ZTZ5"
2.60 13.0
2.25 11.25
.35 1.8 m.
15% improvement
A.B. #4
W/GASTELL
W/0 GASTELL
%inc. = .55
2.05
2/10 of gallon used
2.60 13.0 mpg
2.05 10.25 mpg
n ' •
.55 2.7 m
26% improvement
-------
J.M. #5
W/ GASTELL 2.34 11.7
W/0 GASTELL 1.93 9.65
.41 2.05 m.
21% improvement
%= .41
1.93
B.R. #6
W/ GASTELL 2.52 12'.6
W/0 GASTELL 2.52 12.6
% = 0%
Subject had approximately 2 years driving with GASTELL
-------
R.S. #7 2/10 gallon used
W/ GASTELL 2.35 11.75 mpg
W/0 GASTELL 1.72. 8.6 mpg
.63 3.1
36% improvement
% Inc.= .63
1.72
-------
••AIJ-EN E. ERTEU
Attachment 1-1
COMMrrnX ON PUBLIC WORKS
AND TRANSPORTATION
COM MrTTEE ON SCIENCE
A>tO TECHNOLOGY
Congress of tlje Unite* States
"*Wi _>
ir)0tl£>2
^«
o.«n«cromcw.
M*«««u«, EA^T MAU.
PAXTOW STHSCT
. PCXNSYI.VA.SIA 17Ut
, 53.C, 20515
oltOIMO
WUJJAMWOHT. PEx/HSTt-VANiA 17731
(717)326-2314
1730t
April 10, 1979
Mr. Ray P. Smith, Jr. ' : ''• '''-" '..•'• .' '.'.:':> - • -- : ,
Automotive Devices, Inc. ' .
129 Susquehanna Street . : . . '--' :-
P.O. Box 3513 !
Williamsport, PA 17701 . .
Dear Ray:' •.;-",''•••'..'.. . '':-.'•. ..•.......•..-••;,•,.-•;/ "••.-- ........ . .
Thank you for your very powerful letter regarding your recom-
mendations for energy policy in general and automobile fuel
efficiency in particular.
I am well acquainted with 'your expertise in the area of auto-
mobile technology, and with your opinion of the catalytic con-
verter as well. As a matter of fact, I credit the informa-
tion which you and a handful of other constituents have pro-
vided me oh the subject of improving the car with (if you'll
pardon the expression) "sparking" the idea for a radio show.
I recently interviewed a member of my subcommittee's staff
whose expertise is in this area (even though my subcommittee—
Energy Development and Applications of the Science and Tech-
nology Committee no longer has jurisdiction over automobile
technology R&D). • He provided some interesting data on the
status of the turbine and Stirling engines research and de-
velopment programs. ..;.-. .. ., '.. •-'- - ': ,.. '• : >
Of equal-importance, as you pointed out, are the questions of
fuel economy and emissions control, which seem to be working
at cross.purposes. Are clean air standards being achieved at
the expense of mileage performance, and.if this is the case,
is it necessary and/or desirable? Fuel efficiency gains to
date have been achieved more through making cars smaller and
lighter rather than through any actual improvements in tech-
nology. : .These are all difficult issues, a review of which a
number "of congressional committees have already undertaken.
I think Secretary Adams' call to "reinvent the car" has real-
ly breathed new life into the quest for more fuel efficient
and cleaner cars. The question is now, how do we translate
this into actual products? - ..",,. : . .-/
I certainly appreciate your keeping in touch with me on this
issue. Your input has been extremely helpful. -
THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE WITH RECYCLED FIBERS
-------
•1
MR. RAY P. SMITH, JR.
April 10, 1979
page 2
Enclosed please find a copy of an Environmental Study Confer-
ence Report on "fuel switching" (mentioned" in your letter)
which I thought might be of some interest to you. . :
E. Ertel
MEMBER OF CONGRESS / ;/. .. .
AEE/nb j;-^!
• r..-'> . f'-J •'.- *f~.-. "-',"• .. • ' -."-..-).«'"•. • -
. •(• " r" •.' ,''.' • ".V'.'-~ •' • - • " • """"•". "p
-------
Attachment 1-2
November 8, 1979
George P. Lewett, Chief
Office of OERI
U.S. Department of Commerce
National Bureau of Standards
Washington, DC 20234
Dear Mr. Lewett:
This 1s in regard to the evaluation of the invention entitled
GASTELL. Thank you so much for the.-favorable comments in re-
gard to feasibility and technical- soundness. I am somewhat
disappointed inasmuch as the evaluation only considered the
aspect of the vacuum monitoring device:'/ Obviously, when I
presented the idea to OERI, this aspect and operation concept
had already been designed and was-being marketed. If you read
the patent application submitted with the evaluation application,
you will notice there v/as the automatic version of GASTELL that
needed further research and development. It 1s the automatic
version that would r.ost qualify under your program as an energy
saving invention., Your evaluators researching this aspect of ;
the device have failed to recognize the most important part of ;
the application. It is.in this area that I needed research and
development technical expertise and funds to do the same.
In your letter, you recognized that the manifold vacuum is a !
reliable measure for indicating engine operating efficiency. I -;•
disagree with your statement that infers devices like GASTELL •
•have been- on..the market for a long time. Detroit builds -into :-'.' /
some automobiles as an option, fuel useage lights. There are ' '
other devices on the market that are similar in the sense that they
use lamps, but they all differ dramatically from that of GASTELL.
Hone of the competing devices work the same as GASTELL or are as.:
simplified, in a compact one-piece unit. Your evaluators failed'
to recognize these points; also. , y .
= " \ '
Further, you state this device does not constitute new technology
of the type appropriate for support under this program. You regret,
therefore, you are unable to justify a recofrrcendation to the
Department of Energy. You further state your letter will attest'. \
to your opinion that our device 1s technically sound and comnerc1al7y.
...2
-------
Mr. George Lev/ett, Chief
November 8, 1979
Page 2
competitive in that its installation and use in automobiles
can lead to significant fuel savings, by the driver of such
vehicle. If such is the case, why shouldn't OERI recomend
the device to the Department of Energy without financial sup-
port? It would seem to me that this is a function of OERI, to
to pass on the latest State-of-the-Art in energyjproducing or
saving technology to the Department of Energy.
Finally, the letter to me regarding the complete^ evaluation
is of no use to me to show a potential,buyer who, assa.. result of
the Government publicity, hesitates" to .buy any gas-sav.fng device.
If at all possible, I would appreciate very much if you could
write a letter to me extracting .from the evaluation the good
points which would be of interest to potential buyers.
Sincerely,
AUTOMOTIVE DEVICES, /INC
:Ray P.
President/'/ /
RPS,Jri/dwt
V
;-i
-------
Attachment J-l
occurred during the same time span under the same conditions. Thus, if the
results from any of the treatment groups in Phase II are significantly different
from the results from any other group, these differences can be justifiably
assigned to the treatment effects.
Comparing each treatment group to the control group in this manner
will determine whether the test treatment has a significant effect. In
addition, using the analysis of variance, it is possible to determine whether
one treatment had a significantly different effect than another treatment.
Therefore, this method is the only valid way to compare treatment effects.
RESULTS
The test data were aggregated, using two different methods.. The first
method, termed "Average Croup Fuel Economy" assumes that each monthly vehicle
fuel economy reading (monthly miles/monthly gallons) is- equally important. In
essence, this method gives equal weight to each vehicle. The second method,
termed "Fuel-Weighted Average Group Fuel Economy," assumes that each gallon of .
fuel is equally important. The results are presented, using both methods, in
Tables S.I and S.2, respectively.
The Average Croup Fuel Economy data were subjected to statistical analysis
in order to determine whether real (i.e., non-random) fuel economy improvements
had occurred. This analysis indicated that five of the eight treatment groups
experienced statistically significant improvements. Although both urban and
highway segment test groups met the statistical requirements for significance,
the highway segment improvements are considered more reliable due to the
existence of several factors which complicated the statistical analysis
performed on the urban fleet.
xiv
-------
Attachment J-2
stopping, hill climbing and hili descending should be investigated to
determine the optimum techniques for use in driver energy awareness
training curricula. This type of research activity has two-fold
importance: the research can provide useful information for energy
conservation and policy decisions using existing technology, and the
interest in fuel economy exemplified by the projects will provide an
example of energy conservation activities which could be pursued
by other vehicle fleet operators.
o Further analysis of the data collected during this test project is
recommended, specifically in the areas of statistical methods, driver
characteristics, vehicle characteristics, the Hawthorne effect,
correlation of fuel economy with driver characteristics and job
assignments, and other parameters that nay assist in explaining data
inconsistencies or observed anomalies.
o It is recommended that the Federal Government consider institution of
the requirement that all applicants for federal driver's licenses
(both government employees and government contractors) complete
training in driver energy conservation awareness prior to licensure.
o It is recommended that a teaching textbook be prepared for vehicle
fleet operators. This text should also be suitable for use by the
public school system and the general motoring public.
o It is recommended that further research in human factors be initiated
in order to develop more effective methods of providing audio/visual/
tactile feedback to the vehicle driver, facilitating fuel-efficient
driving behaviors.
------- |