EPA-AA-TEB-511-87-1
EPA Evaluation of the Emission Control Device
of DeAcc Devices Inc. (DeAcc BCD) Under
Section 511 of the Motor Vehicle Information
and Cost Savings Act
by
Edward Anthony Earth
June 1987
Test and Evaluation Branch
Emission Control Technology Division
Office of Mobile Sources
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
06560-50]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[40 CFR Part 610]
[AMS-FRL
FUEL ECONOMY RETROFIT DEVICES
Announcement of Fuel Economy Retrofit Device Evaluation
for the "Emission Control Device" of DeAcc Devices, (DeAcc
ECD)
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of Fuel Economy Retrofit Device
Evaluation.
-------
SUMMARY: This document announces the completion of the
EPA evaluation of the DeAcc ECD device under provisions of
Section 511 of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost
Savings Act.. The notice also announ:es our findings,
conclusions, and the availability of the report.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Merrill W. Korth
Emission Control Technology Division
Office of Mobile Sources
Environmental Protection Agency
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
Telephone: (313) 668-4299
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 511(b)(l) and Section 511(c) of the Motor
Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act (15 U.S.C.
2011(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 publish 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 air
pollutants; and
(3) any other information which the Administrator
determines to be relevant in evaluating such
device."
EPA published final regulations establishing procedures
for conducting evaluations of fuel economy retrofit devices
on March 23, 1979 [44 FR 17946].
-------
II. Origin of Request for Evaluation, Device Descriptions
and Report Identification:
On February 7, 1986, the EPA received a request from
DeAcc Devices, Inc. for evaluation of the DeAcc ECD as a
fuel saving device with reduced emissions. This device
consists of a small gas mixing chamber with lines that are
connected to the air intake, exhaust manifold, intake
manifold and PCV valve of the engine. The device is claimed
to reduce emissions and improve fuel economy by completely
burning the blow-by gases.
Report: "EPA Evaluation of the Emission Control Device
of DeAcc Devices, Inc. (DeAcc ECD) Under Section 511 of the
Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act". Report
Number EPA-AA-TEB-511-87-1 contains the analysis and
conclusions and consists of 17 pages plus attachments A-Q."
As part of the evaluation process, the applicant
conducted screening tests at an independent laboratory using
EPA approved protocols. This independent laboratory testing
is described in this report.
-------
Ill. Availability of Evaluation Reports
Copies of this report may be obtained from the National
Technical Information Service by using the above report
numbers. Address requests to:
National Technical Information Service
U.S. Department of Commerce
Springfield, VA 22161
Telephone: (703) 487-4650 cr FTS 737-4650
IV. Summary of Evaluation
EPA fully considered all of the information submitted
by the device manufacturer in the Application. The
evaluation of the DeAcc ECD was based on that information
and the results of the screening tests conducted for the
applicant at an independent laboratory using EPA approved
protocols. These tests consisted of replicate'Federal Test
Procedure (FTP) and Highway Fuel Economy Test (HFET) on two
vehicles both with and without the device.
The FTP and HFET test data were analyzed by the
analysis of variance (ANOVA) technique to determine if the
data indicated that there was a statistically significant
difference in emissions or fuel economy due to the device.
For the FTP and HFET, although the device reduced NOX
emissions, there was an increase in FTP CO emissions and a
-------
fuel economy penalty for the FTP. The HFET CO emissions
indicated an overall improvement; however, one of the two
vehicles showed an increase in CO emissions. The increase
in HC emissions for both driv.ng cycles and changes in HFET
fuel economy for the device were not statistically
significant.
Since vehicles are designed to meet the emission
standards for HC, CO, and NOX, our policy in evaluating
emissions and/or fuel economy devices is that a device must
not show an adverse effect in any emissions and fuel economy
tests and second must shov a significant improvement.
Clearly, the DeAcc device did not pass these criteria and
thus, EPA did not proceed to the in-house testing phase.
The NOX reduction with the device can reasonably be
attributed to the increase in exhaust gas recirculation
(EGR) rather than the postulated catalytic reactions in the
copper line of the device. This effect on NOX could be
achieved by recalibrating the EGR valve.
The overall conclusion is that the DeAcc device did not
improve emissions or fuel economy.
Date J. Craig Potter
Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation
-------
8
EPA Evaluation of the Emission Control Device of DeAcc Devices,
Inc. (DeAcc ECD) Under. Section 511 of the Motor Vehicle
Information and Cost Savings Act
The Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act
requires that EPA evaluate fuel economy retrofit devices and
publish a summary of each evaluation in the Federal Register.
EPA evaluations are originated upon the application of any
manufacturer of a retrofit device, upon the request of the
Federal Trade Commission, or upon the motion of the EPA
Administrator. These studies are designed to determine whether
the retrofit device increases fuel economy and to determine
whether the representations made with respect to the device are
accurate. The results of such studies are set forth in a
series of reports, of which this is one.
The evaluation of the "DeAcc ECD" was conducted upon the
application of the manufacturer. The device is a small gas
mixing chamber with four lines that are connected to the air
filter, exhaust manifold, intake manifold, and PCV valve of the
engine. The device is claimed to improve fuel economy and
control emissions.
1. Title:
Application for Evaluation of the Emission Control
Device of DeAcc Devices, Inc. (DeAcc ECD) Under
Section 511 of the Motor Vehicle Information and
Cost Savings Act
The information contained in sections two through five which
follow, was supplied by the applicant.
2. Identification and Marketing Information:
a. Marketing Identification of the Product:
"Emission Control Device" and DeAcc Devices,
Inc. will be used for manufacturing.
-------
Inventor and Patent Protection:
(1) Inventor
Stephan DePakh, President
DeAcc Devices Inc.
90 Warren Road
Suite 110
Toronto, Canada M4V 2S2
Telephone (416) 923-1248
(2) Patent
US. Patent Number: 4,512,325
Canadian Patent Number: 1,174,920
Applicant:
(1) Name and address
DeAcc Devices, Inc.
90 Warren Road
Toronto, Canada M4V 2S2
(2) Principals
Stephen DePakh, President and owner
(3) Stephen DePakh is authorized to
represent DeAcc Devices Inc. in
communication with EPA
d. . Manufacturer of the Product:
(1) Name and address
DeAcc Devices, Inc.
90 Warren Road, Suite 110
Toronto, Canada M4V 2S2
(2) Principals
Stephen DePakh, President and owner
3. Description of Product:
a. Purpos.e:
Auto emission control and fuel economy
-------
10
b. Applicability:
"The applicability of the device is for all
makes, all models, all engine sizes and
carburetion, all model-years, all transmission
types, all ignition types."
c. Theory of Operation:
The applicant used the US Patent abstract for
the device to explain the device theory of
operation.
"This invention provides the combination of a
gas-mixing chamber, and a first conduit con-
nected to the crankcase of an engine and pass-
ing through the chamber in noncommunicating
fashion, the conduit then extending out of the
chamber and returning to open into the
chamber. The first conduit is of copper or at
least has its inner wall made of copper. A
second conduit leads from the chamber and
connects to the intake manifold of the
engine. A third conduit leads from the
chamber and receives heated gas from the
exhaust pipe or manifold. A fourth conduit
leads from the mixing chamber and is adapted
for connection to the air filter of the
engine."
42
-------
11
d. Construction and Operation:
"The device has a simple design and it can be
affixed anywhere in the engine compartment.
It has no moving parts (see above.) It has
one control valve #42 manually adjustable.
The device allows the engine to operate at
peak capacity with no loss of power. The
performance of the engine is more responsive
and smoother. It does not require additional
fuel to reburn the unused gases and vapours
and operates at peak efficiency, both during
acceleration and deceleration. Due to the
total combustion afforded, the emission of
pollutant reduction is up to total and no
carbon deposits remain on pistons, valves,
etc., automobile and like engines, and there
is fuel saving."
e. Specific Claims for the Product:
This information was not provided with the
application.
f. Cost And Marketing Information:
This information was not provided with the
application.
4. Product Installation, Operation, Safety and
Maintenance:
a. "The first conduit is connected to the crank
case (P.C.V.);
b. The second conduit leads from the device gas
chamber to the intake manifold;
c. The third conduit leads from the device gas
chamber to the exhaust manifold;
d. The fourth conduit leads from the device
mixing gas chamber to the air filter or the
engine;
e. The above installation instruction is for all
make/model/year engine, automobiles and like
engines;
-------
12
£.- Required tools are:
-screw driver
-a clipper for a hole to be clipped on the air
filter for the fourth conduit
-no required equipment to check the
installation
-mechanical efficiency emission test to
balance the carburetion with DeAcc Device
(air fuel, mixture fuel).
-no special skills required with the
installation of the device, a mechanic can
do it."
g. Operation:
"To assure efficiency and mechanical operating
efficiency, instructions will be furnished for
its usage.
(1) Pre-tune the engine to the
manufacturer's requirements,
(2) A lean condition in the engine is caused
by excess air or too little fuel in the
cylinders to promote complete com-
bustion. This condition lowers the
power output of the engine and' that
condition is one of the major sources of
air pollution of an automobile engine,
and there is no gas saving.
(3) Proper vehicle maintenance will decrease
the amount of gasoline that is consumed
and reduce the amount of pollutants and
a DeAcc Device, will also save more fuel
and depollute the engine."
h. Effects on Vehicle Safety:
"The device has no malfunction or unsafe
condition to the automobiles or -its occupants
or persons or property in close proximity to
the automobile."
-------
13
i. Maintenance:
"To ensure continued correct operation, the
DeAcc Device does not require maintenance. At
the regular engine tune up, emission test
required to ensure that there is no lean
condition in the carburetior. system."
5. Effects on Emissions and Fuel Economy:
a. Unregulated Emissions:
This information was not provided with the
application.
b. Regulated Emissions and Fuel Economy:
"The applicant emission control device has no
malfunction to emit pollutant like hydro-
carbons, carbon monoxide, or oxides of
nitrogen. The device treats the "blow-by
gases" to be reburned ar.d therefore normal
atmospheric constituents such as carbon
dioxide-water vapour in a quantity differing
from that emitted in the operation of the
automobile engine without the device."
c. Test Results:
"Provided all information on the effects of
the device on vehicle emissions and fuel
economy.
(1) The technical question of "catalytic
action" of No. '34 (drawing figure)
somewhat more difficult to answer, but I
would like to make the following points:
(2) It was thought at one time that the
"catalytic action" to be due .to
reduction of NOX gases to nitrogen by
Cu-tubing with subsequent oxidation to
CuO or C.u.2 0', thus causing some
decrease in NOX, or interaction
through the loop between HCs and NOX
-------
14
to N.2/S. I would like to point out
that the device, while saving fuel, does
not increase NOX 2/S. My tests for CO
at the exhaust while the engine is in
idle show a large decrease in CO.
(3) The length of No. 28 (drawing figure)
are to control direct flooding and the
air/fuel (blow-by gases) mixture
entering the cylinders has no adverse
effect. Under deceleration and
acceleration of the engine, the length
of No. 28 eliminating direct flooding
and not lower power output of the engine
and show a large decrease of pollutant
emission gases; therefore, it saves
gasoline."
The following Sections are EPA's analysis and conclusions for
the device.
6. Analysis
a. Identification Information:
(1) Marketing Information: The marketing
identification of the product, Emission
Control Device (Section 2a) is a generic
name for a class of products and thus
could lead to confusion. Therefore, to
avoid confusion, EPA will identify the
product as the Emission Control Device
of DeAcc Devices, Inc., or DeAcc ECD.
EPA requested the applicant to clarify
how a vehicle owner would obtain the
device (Attachment F). The applicant
stated that it would be sold through
vehicle service and installation shops
(Attachment G) .
b. Description:
(1) The primary purpose of the device was
clarified to be to improve".... emission
and fuel economy by recycling the so
-------
15
called blow by gases and use it as an
added fuel with the engine system and
reburn it in the combustion process in
the individual cylinders, with the
emission gares: CO, HC, NOX"
(Attachments F ind G).
(2) Applicability. The applicability of the
device, as seated in Section 3b to
essentially all carbureted, gasoline
powered vehicles is judged to be
reasonable. That is, it is possible to
install the device on these vehicles.
(3) The theory of operation given in Section
5(c) describes the device but does not
provide a theory of operation. The US
patent Section 2b(2), Attachment A, and
Construction and Operation Section 3d do
not give a clear and concise explanation
of how the device functions and how it
is an improvement over a PCV valve. EPA
requested additional clarification
(Attachment F). However, the in-
formation provided indicates that the
device functions similar to the standard
PCV valve, i.e., both recyle crankcase
gases into the intake manifold through
the PCV valve (Attachment G) . The
applicant considers catalytic reactions
in the copper tube to be plausible
explanation for the reduction of
nitrogen oxides to nitrogen. However,
the additional EGR obtained by tapping
the exhaust manifold gases and the
possible changes in fuel/air ratio due
to bleed-air of the device are a more
probable cause for any changes in
nitrogen oxides observed.
(4) The description of the device provided
by the patent, figures, and installation
information adequately describes the
device design.
(5) Specific claims for device: The
application made no claims for the
device other than auto emission control
-------
16
and fuel economy. EPA requires this
information in order to judge the
efficacy of a device and develop test
plans. Therefore, we requested the
applicant to state his specific claims
for the device including the improve-
ments in emissions and fuel economy
(Attachment F).
The applicants response:
"The improvements are in emission
and fuel economy by recycling the
so called 'blow by gases' and use
it as an added fuel with the com-
bustion process in the individual
cylinders , with the emission
gases: CO, HC, NOX" (Attachment
G).
did not provide specific criteria to
judge the performance of the device.
However, this was discussed with the
applicant and he stated that he expected
the device to achieve better than a 6
percent improvement in emissions and
fuel economy. The test plan for the
independent laboratory testing of the
device was developed using six percent
as the criteria in selecting the number
of vehicles and number of tests
(Attachment F).
(6) The cost of the device plus install-
ation: In response to the EPA request
for cost information (Attachment F), the
applicant provided a detailed listing of
the manufacturing costs. The retail
cost of the device was projected to be
initially $97, dropping to $78 in volume
production. However, as discussed
further in Section 6c(l) below, the
installation of the device would
probably take several hours rather than
the few minutes the applicant suggests.
Since installation is to be done by a
-------
17
mechanic or service shop, the
installation cost would probably range
from $60 to $90 depending on time and
labor rates.
c. Installation, Operation, Safety and
Maintenance:
(1) Installation - Instructions, Equipment
and Skills Required: The installation
information provided in Section 5c(l) is
only an overview, therefore, additional
and expanded information was requested
and provided (Attachments F and G) .
This information was in much greater
detail and was consistent with earlier
information. However these instructions
present some inherent problems.
First, few vehicles have a convenient
access port to tap as the source of
exhaust gas required by the device.
Only a few older vehicles used the
manifold choke tube suggested as a
source of exhaust gas. The EGR valve
would also be a poor choice because of
the difficulty in tapping into the
exhaust gas at this point and the
adverse effect any added plumbing would
have on the calibration of the valve.
The suggested method of welding a pipe
or fitting to manifold presents several
problems. The applicant provides no
guidance as to the proper functional
(location for proper exhaust gas flow)
or mechanical location of this port. A
poor mechanical choice could lead
to warped/damaged exhaust manifolds.
Drilling an exhaust gas port through the
welded fitting or drilling and tapping
the manifold create a potential problem
with the drill filings if the manifold
is not removed, since the filings could
lodge in the EGR valve and/or enter the
induction system through the EGR valve.
A second problem is the proper
adjustment of the manual valve installed
in the line connecting the device to the
air filter. Any vehicles using
closed-loop (feedback) control of the
-------
18
engine/fuel induction system operating
conditions during idle-deceleration
would tend to automatically compensate
for these adjustments.
The instructions provided in -he
application and correspondence need to
be organized and put into a formal •: et
of installation instructions -"or
enclosure with the device.
In past discussions, the applicant has
indicated that the device could be
installed in a few minutes. EPA judged
this to be unlikely with the
installation and mounting of the jas
mixing chamber, connecting the four
ports of the chamber to the engine
(including the exhaust manifold), and
adjusting the system with an emission
analyzer. Several hours is a more
reasonable estimate and was borne out in
testing (Attachment M).
(2) Operation: The applicant's statement in
Section 4(g) that the device functions
automatically for the driver is judged
to be correct.
(3) Effects on Vehicle Safety: Based on the
patent application description and
installation information provided, it is
possible for the device to be fabricated
and installed so that it is safe in
normal vehicle operation. However, as
noted in Section 6c(l) above, there are
potential problems in obtaining the
source of exhaust gases by tapping or
welding the exhaust manifold that were
not addressed by the applicant.
(4) Maintenance: The maintenance require-
ments of Section 4d was clarified to be
that essentially no maintenance was
required (Attachments F and G). The
applicant anticipated that only the idle
CO emission checks performed during
tune-ups. would insure that the system
-------
19
continued to function properly.
However, this does not address the
possible plugging of the extensions of
the PVC line to the device and the
induction system.
d. Effects on Emissions and Fuel Economy:
(1) Unregulated Emissions: The applicant
submitted no test data and made no
claims regarding unregulated emissions.
The statements and data in Section 5
relate to regulated emissions and fuel
economy only. However, since the design
and installation of the device limits
its effects to moderate changes in
fuel/air ratio, exhaust gas recir-
culation (EGR), or positive crankcase
valve flows, then the device should not
significantly affect a vehicle's
unregulated emissions.
(2) Regulated Emissions and Fuel Economy:
The applicant submitted test data
conducted at an independent laboratory
in accordance with the Federal Test
Procedure and the Highway Fuel Economy
Test. These two test procedures are the
primary ones recognized by EPA for
evaluation of fuel economy and emissions
for light duty vehicles.*
The tests consisted of replicate FTP and
HFET tests on two vehicles both with and
without the device (a total of 8 tests).
*The requirement for test data following these procedures is
stated in the policy documents that EPA sends to each potential
applicant. EPA requires duplicate test sequences before and
after installation of the device on a minimum of two vehicles
in tests conducted by the applicant at an independent
laboratory. A test sequence consists of a cold start FTP plus
a HFET or, as a simplified alternative, a hot start LA-4 plus a
HFET. Other data which have been collected In accordance with
other standardized procedures are acceptable as supplemental
data in EPA's preliminary evaluation of a device.
-------
20
The FTP and HFET test data were analyzed
by the analysis of variance (ANOVA)
technique to determine if the data
indicated that there was a statistically
significant difference in emissions or
fuel economy due to the device
(Attachmert P) . For the FTP and and
HFET, although the device reduced NOX
emissions there was an increase in FTP
CO emissions and a fuel economy penalty
for the FTP. The HFET CO emissions
indicated an overall improvement;
however, one of the two vehicles showed
an increase in CO emissions. The
increase in HC emissions for both
driving cycles and changes in HFET fuel
economy for the device were not
statistically significant.
Since vehicles are designed to meet the
emission standards for HC, CO, and
NOX, our policy in evaluating
emissions and/or fuel economy devices is
that a device must first not show an
adverse effect in any emissions and fuel
economy tests and second must show a
significant improvement. Clearly, the
DeAcc device did not pass these criteria
and; thus, EPA did not proceed to the
in-house testing phase. The NO*
reduction with the device can reasonably
be attributed to the increase in exhaust
gas recirculation (EGR) rather than the
postulated catalytic reactions in the
copper line of the device. This effect
on NOX could be achieved by
recalibrating the EGR valve.
The applicant also submitted lab and
road test data that indicated a benefit
for the device. Although the tests may
have been of value to the applicant, the
tests were conducted under relatively
uncontrolled test conditions.
The overall conclusion is that the DeAcc
did not improve emissions or fuel
economy.
-------
21
8. Conclusions
EPA fully considered all of the information
submitted by the applicant. The evaluation of the
DeAcc ECD device vas based on that information and
the results of the screening tests conducted for the
applicant at an .adependent laboratory using EPA
approved protocols
The overall conclusion is that the DeAcc device did
not improve emissions or fuel economy.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Merrill W. Korth, Emission
Control Technology Division, Office of Mobile Sources,
Environmental Protection Agenjy, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor,
MI 48105, (313) 668-4299.
-------
22
Attachment- A
Attachment B
Attachment C
Attachment D
Attachment E
Attachment F
Attachment G
List of Attachments
US Patent Number 4,512,325 (provided with 511
Application).
Canadian Patent Numbers 1,174,920 (provided
with 511 application).
Letter of July 16, 1985 from EPA to DeAcc
providing information on Section 511 process.
Letter of August 12, 1985 from Stephen DePakh
of DeAcc Devices, Inc. to EPA requesting that
EPA provide test vehicles and announcing this
intention to reapply for evaluation.
Letter of August 19, 1985 from EPA to DeAcc
responding to preceding letter (Attachment D).
Letter of April 30, 1986 from EPA to DeAcc
requesting clarification and additional
information regarding submitted application.
Letter of May 24, 1986 from DeAcc responding
to preceding letter (Attachment F) . Page 2
and the top half of page 3 of Attachment G are
not included since they contained details of
the manufacturing and marketing costs.
Attachment H
Attachment I
Attachment J
Attachment K
Attachment L
Letter of June 11, 1986 from Automated Customs
Systems Inc. to DeAcc discussing independent
lab testing of device.
Letter of July 24, 1986 from Arthur L. Smith,
DeAcc Attorney, discussing independent lab
tests.
Letter of July 9, 1986 from DeAcc to EPA
discussing application clarification and
independent lab testing.
Letter of August 8, 1986 from DeAcc to
Automotive Custom Systems, Inc. (ACS)
discussing their independent lab testing of
the device.
Letter of August 8, 1986 from DeAcc to EPA
discussing the independent lab testing of the
device.
-------
23
Attachment M Letter of September 3, 1986 from ACS to DeAcc
describing the independent lab tests and
providing the data.
Attachment N Letter of October 31, 1986 from DeAcc to EPA
discussing the independent lab testing at ACS.
Attachment 0 Summary tables of ACS lab tests of the DeAcc
Device.
Attachment P Statistical analysis of the emissions and fuel
economy results for the DeAcc Device
Attachment Q Letter of January 13, 1987 from EPA to DeAcc
summarizing the analysis of the test.
-------
Attachment A
States
The Commissioner of Patents
and Trademarks
Has received an application for a patent
for a new and useful invention. The title
and description of the invention are en-
closed. The requirements of law have
been complied with, and it has been de-
termined that a patent on the invention
shall be granted under the law.
Therefore, this
United States Patent
Grants to the person or persons having
title to this patent the right to exclude
others from making, using or selling the
invention throughout the United States
of America for the term of seventeen
years from the date of this patent, sub-
ject to the payment of maintenance fees
as provided by law.
Acting Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks
Attest
a
ft-
-------
United States Patent
DePakh
[ii] Patent Number:
(45] Date of Patent:
4,512,325
Apr. 23, 1985
[54]
[76]
[21]
[22]
[51]
[52]
[58]
[56]
EMISSION CONTROL DEVICE
Inventor:
Stephen DePakh, 90 Warren Rd.,
Suite 110, Toronto, Ontario M4V
2S2, Canada
Appl. No.: 588,739
Filed: Mar. 12, 1984
Int. Q.' F02M 23/06
U.S. 0 123/572; 123/573
Field of Search 123/572. 573, 574, 41.86
Reference* Cited
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
3.362,386 1/1968 McMthon 123/573
3.846,980 11/1974 DePtlma I23/J73
4.269.607 3/1981 Wtlker 123/373
FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
1IJ638 7/1926 Switzerland 123/573
2118861 11/1983 United Kingdom 123/573
Primary Examiner—Ronald H. Lazarus
Attorney, Agent, or Firm—Sim & McBurney
[57] ABSTRACT
This invention provides the combination of a gas-mix-
ing chamber, and a Tint conduit connected to the crank-
case of an engine and passing through the chamber in
non-communicating fashion, the conduit then extending
out of the chamber and returning to open into the cham-
ber. The first conduit is of copper or at least has its inner
wall made of copper. A second conduit leads from the
chamber and connects to the intake manifold of the
engine. A third conduit leads from the chamber and
receives heated gas from the exhaust pipe or manifold.
A fourth conduit leads from the mixing chamber and in
adapted for connection to the air filter of the engine.
8 Claims, 1 Drawing Figure
42
-------
4,512,325
EMISSION CONTROL DEVICE
This invention relates to devices for reducing the
emission of pollutant gases from reciprocating internal 5
combustion engines.
It is well known that one of the major sources of air
pollution from an internal combustion engine, particu*
larly in an automobile, are the emission of gases result-
ing from so called "blow-by" of gases between the 10
cylinder wall and piston rings into the crankcase. Such
gases have commonly been vented to atmosphere
through a suitable vent pipe.
In order to solve the problem of air pollution result-
ing from the above source, it has been proposed to 15
couple the vent pipe leading from an engine crankcase
to the intake manifold where vacuum conditions nor-
mally exist. Thus the pollutant gases are immediately
drawn back into the intake manifold of the engine and
are burned in the combustion process in the cylinders. 20
However, due to varying vacuum conditions in the
intake manifold of an automobile engine, devices of
known type have not proven successful. Typically, for
example, a greater amount of blow-by is liable to occur
during acceleration of the engine. Simultaneously, how- 25
ever, vacuum in the intake manifold decreases thus
reducing the capacity of the engine to draw in the
crankcase emissions. Also the addition of crankcase
gases to the charge fed to the engine disturbs the air/f-
uel mixture entering the cylinders with adverse effects. 30
Further, some prior art devices, in addition to leading
crankcase emissions directly into the intake manifold,
have provided an air intake to the crankcase so that
under condition of high vacuum, air could be drawn.
through the crankcase to ventilate it. However, such 35
systems are considered dangerous due to the possibility
of creating an explosive mixture of gases in the crank-
case.
According to the present invention, in order to ap-
proach a solution to the above problems of prior art 40
devices, there is a provided, in combination: means
defining a gas-mixing chamber, a first conduit having
one end adapted for connection to the crankcase of an
engine, the primary conduit passing in non-com-
municating fashion through said chamber so that gases 45
in said chamber contact the outside of the conduit, the
conduit opening at its other end into said chamber, the
first conduit being such that its inner wall is of copper,
a second conduit leading from said chamber and being
adapted for communication with the intake manifold of 50
the engine, a third conduit leading from said mixing
chamber and receiving a gas which has been heated by
exhaust heat, and a fourth conduit leading from said
mixing chamber and being adapted for connection, to
the air filter of the engine. 55
The invention is illustrated schematically in the at-
tached drawing, which shows an internal combustion
engine in plan, together with the various components of
the accessory provided by this invention.
In the FIGURE, an engine 10 is seen in plan, and 60
includes a head and a crankcase one above the other,
such that they are in alignment in the view of the FIG-
URE. An exhaust manifold 12 and an intake manifold 14
of the usual construction are provided, the exhaust
manifold 12 emptying into an exhaust pipe 16. and the 65
intake manifold 14 being connected by a short pipe 17 to
a carburettor/choke device 18. A line 20 extends from
the choke of a carburettor/choke 18, and passes into
and along the exhaust manifold 12, ultimately opening
at the location 22 through the wall of the exhaust mani-
fold 12. The line 20 draws atmospheric air from the
location 12 into the choke. By drawing it through the
exhaust manifold 12, the atmospheric air is pre-heated..
The accessory provided by this invention is that illus-
trated within the broken-line rectangle in the FIGURE.
This accessory includes, in combination, means 24
defining a gas mixing chamber 26, a first conduit 28
having one end for connection to the crankcase of the
engine 10. and second, third and fourth conduits 30. 31
and 32, respectively. The purposes of all of these con-
duits will become clear subsequently.
Returning to the first conduit 28, it will be seen that
this passes in non-communicating fashion through the
chamber 26 so that any gases in the chamber 26 can
contact the outside of the conduit 28. This arrangement
is made for heat-transfer purposes. The conduit 28 then
has a relatively extended portion 34, the specific length
of which will be dealt with later, following which it
opens at its other end 36 into the chamber 26. The
means defining the chamber 26 would typically be a
metallic wall surrounding the chamber, and therefore
the first conduit 28 opens at its other end through that
wall.
The first conduit is such that its inner wall is of cop-
per, and preferably the entire conduit 28 is of copper.
The second conduit 30 leads from the chamber 26,
and in the FIGURE is connected to the pipe 17 which
is a part of the intake manifold 14.
The third conduit 31 leads from the chamber 26 and
makes a T-connection into the pipe 20 at the location 39.
The fourth conduit 32 leads from the chamber 26 and
is adapted for connection to the standard air filter 40 of
the engine.
Preferably, there is a control valve 42 provided in the
fourth conduit 32.
It has been found that the first conduit 28 should be
substantially about 7 feet (2.2 meters) in total length.
Naturally, some variation from this ideal length is possi-
ble, but a reasonably lengthy first conduit 28 appears to
be beneficial in terms of increasing the mileage of auto-
mobiles to which this accessory device is attached.
The second conduit 30 is that through which the
mixture of gases within the chamber 26 passes into the
pipe 17 and thence into the intake manifold 14. This
conduit may be of rubber, and typically an inside diame-
ter of 8 mm would be satisfactory for the rubber tube
constituting this conduit.
The third conduit 31 is that which M connected to the
engine choke pipe 20 with a T-connection, as aforesaid.
In the solid line connection illustrated, the conduit 31
allows heated air from the pipe 20 to be drawn into the
chamber 26. In certain instances of older engines, the
portion 200 of the pipe 20 within the exhaust manifold
12 is rusted or cracked, and exhaust gase* can be drawn
into the pipe 20. This invention is also directly applica-
ble to such a situation. It is not a disadvantage to draw
exhaust gases into the chamber 26, since the exhaust
gases often include certain unhurried components,
which can be drawn back through the engine and
burned on a second pass. If the pipe 20 is not deterio-
rated in the portion 20a or if the vehicle does not have
such a pipe, then the alternative conduit 310 shown in
broken lines may be employed. Conduit 310 is con-
nected directly to and opens into the exhaust pipe 16
close to the exhaust manifold 12.
-------
4,512,325
EXAMPLE I
10
The third conduit 31 may be of rubber, and may
conveniently be of rubber tubing with a 3 mm inside
diameter. It will be understood that the third conduit 32
is essentially intended to tap a source of heat for the
mixture within the chamber 26, although naturally the
heat must be conveyed in • gas of some kind. The
heated gas, whether air or exhaust fumes, is of course
supplied by the pipe 20 or the conduit 31a.
The fourth conduit 32 is intended to draw filtered
atmospheric air from the air filter 40 of the car, and the
quantity of air being drawn in is intended to be adjusted
by means of the valve 42.
The fourth conduit 32 may again be of a rubber tub-
ing, conveniently having an inside diameter of about 5 15
mm.
A further connection may be made to the mixing
chamber 26, which may be either closed or may be
connected to. a standard emission control device. Such a
connection has not been illustrated in the FIGURE.
Experiments have indicated that the first conduit 28
should be relatively long. A length of about 7 feet (ap-
proximately 2.2 meters) has been found satisfactory, but
is not considered to be strictly limiting. It is considered 25
that this relative length is necessary in order to allow
certain catalytic reactions to take place in the gases
drawn from the crankcase. prior to the admission of
these gases into the chamber 26.
It is contemplated to adapt this invention to make use w
of the EGR (exhaust gases recycling) connection in
some of the more recent vehicle models.
An auxiliary device meeting the above description
was connected to a number of automobiles during 1977
and during 1979. The detailed cases are given below,
and are exemplary of the advantages to be attained by
use of the auxiliary device provided herein.
20
40
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Mononide
% volume grams/mile
pirn per
million
grams/mile
Without device
installed
With device
installed
1.75.
0 13
41.7
226
IM
It
2.1
50
55
EXAMPLE 2
Driving tests were carried out on Nov. 12, 1977 on a
1966 Oldsmobile Delta 88, with and without the instal-
lation of a device meeting the above description. The
test distance was 39 miles along Highway 403 and the
QEW between Hamilton and Oakville. The vehicle
speed was maintained at 50-55 mph. The weather lem-
perature was -1* C. Prior to the test, the automobile
had undergone hydraulic valve lifter replacement and
valve work.
Te«t
Test
distance
On
consumed
Miln/Oil
With device
initialled
Without device
installed
39 0 miln
39 0 miln
215 Imp.
gallons
2 45 Imp.
gallons
18.1
15.9
For this test, a minimum 13% of gas mileage savings
was recorded.
EXAMPLE 3
Driving tests were carried out on Aug. 26, 1979 on a
1967 Cadillac vehicle, 340 cubic inches, with and with-
out the installation of an auxiliary device meeting the
foregoing specifications. The test distance was 93.4
miles and covered the following route in Ontario: High-
way 6 from Dundas to Highway 401, to new Highway
6 bypassing Guelph, to old Highway 6 to about 5 miles
beyond Fergus, and returning along the same route.
The route was travelled twice, once without and once
with the device. The time span for the tests was from
about 2:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. The weather was overcast,
with the temperature varying between 23* and 26* C.
The speed was maintained generally at 50-60 pmh but
included 70 mph for one minute on a stretch of High-
way 401 and idling at a few stoplights. The car under-
went no prior tuneup or carburettor adjustments.
Test
Test
distance
On
consumed
Cost of
gas
Miln
per liter
without device
imlalled
with device
installed
934
934
miln
25.2
liters
19.4
liters
SS.54
$4.26
3.71
4.11
Pollutant emission tests were carried out by the Vehi-
cle Emissions Section of the Ontario Ministry of the
Environment on a 1970 Ford Galaxie 500. The tests
were carried out on the vehicle before and afer installa-
tion of the device constructed in accordance with the 45
foregoing specification.
For this test, the savings in gas consumed and in cost
was 23%.
EXAMPLE 4
On Sept. 2. 1979, a 1968 Buick Riviera (430 cubic
inches) was tested with and without the installation of a
device meeting the foregoing specification. The test
distance as measured by the vehicle odometer was 92.4
miles along the following route in Ontario: Highway 6
from Dundas to Highway 401, to new Highway 6 by-
passing Guelph, to old Highway 6 to about 5 miles
beyond Fergus, and returning along the same route.
The route was travelled twice, once with and once
without the device. The tests were done from 10 a.m. to
4 p.m. The weather was generally overcast with a few
light showers and the temperature was 22"-26* C. The
speed was maintained generally at 50-60 mph but in-
cluded stretches at 40-50 mph due to slow traffic and
also idling at a few stoplights. This vehicle had had a
major tune-up on Aug. 28, 1979, prior to the two tests.
M)
Test
Test Gjs Cost of
Distance Consumed gas
Miln
per liter
With device
installed
Without device
installed
92.4
miles
92.4
miles
209 M.79
liters
2K.O Wi.42
liters
4.42
(19.9 miles/gal)
.»..»(>
(14.9 miles/gal)
-------
4,512,325
For this lest, the savings in gas consumed and in cost
vas 25.4%.
EXAMPLE 5
TeM
With device
initialled
Without device
installed
Te*t
Diuince
»6.ft
mile*
R6.6
milei
Consumed
9 JJ
liter*
19.3
liter*
COM of
S2.IK
S4.4«
Mile*
per liter
9.07
(40.8 mile*/gil)
4.44
(20.0 mile*/gil)
10
15
Driving tests were carried out on Sept. 2, 1979 on a
975 Chrysler Plymouth Fury vehicle (318 cubic
nches). with and without the installation of a device
neeting the above specifications. The lest distance as
neasured by the vehicle odometer was 86.6 miles along
lie following route in Ontario: Highway 6 from Dun-
las to Highway 401. to new Highway 6 bypassing
juelph, to old Highway 6 to about 5 miles beyond
"ergus, and return along the same route. The route was
ravelled twice, once with and once without the device.
The tests were done from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. The weather
was generally overcast with a few light showers and the
iemperature about 22'-25' C. The speed was main-
ained generally at 30-60 mph but included stretches at
40-50 mph due to slow traffic and also idling at a few 20
itoplights. There was no prior tune-up or carburettor
adjustment. The standard auto emission unit was not
altered in any way during the installation of the device
or the first of the two tests below.
25
30
For this test, the savings in gas consumed and in cost
was 51%. 35
I claim:
1. An improved internal combustion engine including
a crankcase ventilation system, an air filter and an intake
manifold, wherein the improvement comprises in com-
bination: 40
means defining a gas-mixing chamber,
45
50
55
a firs) conduit having one end adapted for connection
to the crankcase of the engine and passing in non-
communicating fashion through said chamber so
thai any gases in said chamber contact the outside
of the first conduit, the first conduit opening at its
other end into said chamber and being such that at
least its inner wall is of copper,
a second conduit leading from said chamber and
being adapted for communication with said intake
manifold.
a third conduit leading from said mixing chamber and
receiving a gas which has been heated by exhaust
heat,
and a fourth conduit leading from said mixing cham-
ber and being adapted for connection to the air
filter of the engine.
2. The invention claimed in claim 1. in which the
engine has an automatic choke, and in which said third
conduit connects through a T-connection with a pipe
that extends from the automatic choke, passes through
the exhaust manifold, and opens to the atmosphere.
3. The invention claimed in claim 1, in which said
third conduit connects directly to the exhaust pipe and
allows hot exhaust gases to be drawn into said chamber.
4. The invention claimed in claim 1, claim 2 or claim
3, in which a control valve is provided in said fourth
conduit.
9. The invention claimed in claim 1, claim 2 or claim
3, in which the first conduit is substantially 2.2. meters
in total length.
6. The invention claimed in claim 1, claim 2 or claim
3, in which the second, third and fourth conduits are of
rubber.
7. The invention claimed in claim 1, claim 2 or claim
3, in which the first conduit is of solid copper having an
inside diameter of substantially 6 mm.
8. The invention claimed in claim 1, claim 2 or claim
3, in which the second, third and fourth conduits have
inside diameters of substantially 8 mm, 3 mm and 5 mm
respectively.
60
65
-------
Attachment B
Consumer and
Corporate Affairs Canada
Patent Office
Consommation
et Corporations Canada
Bureau des brevets
Canadian Patent
Brevet canadien
1174920
To all to whom these presents shall come:
Whereas a petition has been presented to the
Commissioner of Patents praying for the grant of
a patent for a new and useful invention, the title
and description of which are contained in the
specification of which a copy is hereunto attached
and made an essential part hereof, and the
requirements of the Patent Act having been
complied with,
Now therefore the present patent grants to the
applicant whose title thereto appears from the
records of the Patent Office and as indicated in
the said copy of the specification attached hereto,
and to the legal representatives of said applicant
for a period of seventeen years from the date of
these presents the exclusive right, privilege and
liberty of making, constructing, using and vending
to others in Canada the invention, subject to
adjudication in respect thereof before any court
of competent jurisdiction.
Provided that the grant hereby made is subject to
the conditions contained in the Act aforesaid.
In testimony whereof, these letters patent bear
the signature of the Commissioner and the seal of
the Patent Office hereunto affixed at Hull, Canada.
A tous ceux qul les presentes verront:
Considerant qu'une requete a et6 presentee au
Commissaire des brevets, demandant la
delivrance d'un brevet pour une invention nouvelle
et utile, dont le titre et la description apparaissent
dans le memoire discriptif dpnt copie est annexee
aux presentes et en fait partie essentielle, et que
ladite requete satisfait aux exigences de la Loi
sur les brevets,
A ces causes, le present brevet confere au
demandeur dont le titre de propriete audit brevet
est etabli d'apres les dossiers du Bureau des
brevets et est indique dans ladite copie du
memoire descriptif ci-annexe, et aux representants
legaux du dit demandeur, pour une periode de
dix-sept ans, d compter de la date des presentes,
le droit, la faculte et le privilege exclusif de
fabriquer, construire, exploiter et vendre £ d'autres
au Canada I'invention, sauf jugement en I'espece
par un tribunal de juridiction competente.
La concession faite par les presentes etant
soumise aux conditions contenues dans la loi
precitee.
En foi de quoi ces lettres patentes portent la
signature du Commissaire ainsi que le sceau du
Bureau des brevets appos6 d Hull, Canada.
I
SEP 15 1984
Commissioner of Patents Commissaire des brevets
Attesting Officer
Certificateur
-------
I—
Consumer and Consommaflon
Corporate Affairs Canada et Corporations Canada
iii> (A) NO. 1 174 920
(45) ISSUED 840925
(52) CLASS 123-37
(51) INT. CL. F02D 33/00
(19) (CA)
CANADIAN PATENT
(12)
(54) Emission Control Device
(72) DePakh, Stephen,
Canada
(21) APPLICATION No. 376,937
(22) FILED 810506
No. OF CLAIMS , 8
Canadat
-------
1174920
i
IMPROVED EMISSION CONTROL DEVICE
This invention relates to devices for reducing the
emission of pollutant gases from reciprocating internal combust-
ion engines.
It is well known that one of the major sources of air
pollution from an internal combustion engine, particularly in an
automobile, are the emission of gases resulting from so called
"blow-by" of gases between the cylinder wall and piston rings
into the crankcase. Such gases have commonly been vented to
atmosphere through a suitable vent pipe.
In order to solve the problem of air pollution result-
ing from the above source, it has been proposed to couple the
vent pipe leading from an engine crankcase to the intake mani-
fold where vacuum conditions normally exist. Thus the pollutant
gases are immediately drawn back into the intake manifold of the
engine and are burned in the combustion process in the cylinders.
However, due to varying vacuum conditions in the
intake manifold of an automobile engine, devices of known type
have not proven successful. Typically, for example, a greater
amount of blow-by is liable to occur during acceleration of the
engine. Simultaneously, however, vacuum in the intake mani-
fold decreases thus reducing the capacity of the engine to
draw in the crankcase emissions. Also the addition of crank-
case gases to the charge fed to the engine disturbs the air/
fuel mixture entering the cylinders with adverse .effects.
Further, some prior art devices, in addition to lead-
Ing crankcase emissions directly into the intake "manifold,
have provided an air intake to the crankcase so that under
condition of high vacuum, air could be drawn through the crank-
case to ventilate it. However, such systems are considered
dangerous due to the possibility of creating an explosive
mixture of gases in the crankcase.
-------
1174920
2
According to the present invention, in order to
approach a solution to the above problems of prior art
devices, there is a provided, in combination: means defining a
gas-mixing chamber, a first conduit having one end adapted for
5 connection to the crankcase of an engine, the primary conduit
passing in non-communicating fashion through said chamber so
that gases in said chamber contact the outside of the conduit,
the conduit opening at its other end into said chamber,
the first conduit being such that its inner wall is of copper,
10 a second conduit leading from said chamber and being adapted
for communication with the intake manifold of the engine,
a third conduit leading from said mixing chamber and
receiving a gas which has been heated by exhaust heat, and
a fourth conduit leading from said mixing chamber and being
15 adapted for connection to the air filter of the engine.
The invention is illustrated schematically in the
attached drawing, which shows an internal combustion engine
in plan, together with the various components of the
accessory provided by this invention.
20 In the figure, an engine 10 is seen in plan, and
includes a head and a crankcase one above the other, such
that they are in alignment in the view of the figure. An
exhaust manifold 12 and an intake manifold 14 of the usual
construction are provided, the exhaust manifold 12 emptying
25 into an exhaust pipe 16, and the intake manifold 14 being
connected by a short pipe 17 to a carburettor/choke device
18. A line 20 extends from the choke of a carburettor/choke
18, and passes into and along the exhaust manifold 12,
ultimately opening at the location 22 through the wall of
30 the exhaust manifold 12. The line 20 draws atmospheric
air from the location 22 into the choke. By drawing it f
through the exhaust manifold 12, the atmospheric air is ;f
pre-heated. ' ':
The accessory provided by this invention is that ;;
35 illustrated within the broken-line rectangle in the figure.
This accessory includes, in combination, means '
24 defining a gas mixing chamber 26, a first conduit 28 having ;
one end for connection to the crankcase of the engine 10, :
-------
1174920
3
and second, third and fourth conduits 30, 31 and 32,
respectively. The purposes of all of these conduits will
become clear subsequently.
Returning to the first conduit 28, it will be seen
5 that this passes in non-communicating fashion through the
chamber 26 so that any gases in the chamber 26 can contact
the outside of the conduit 28. This arrangement is made for
heat-transfer purposes. The conduit 28 then has a relatively
extended portion 34, the specific length of which will be dealt
10 with later, following which it opens at its other end 36 into
the chamber 26. The means defining the chamber 26 would
typically be a metallic wall surrounding the chamber, and
therefore the first conduit 28 opens at its other end through
that wall *
15 The first conduit is such that its inner wall is
of copper, and preferably the entire conduit 28 is of copper.
The second conduit 30 leads from the chamber 26,
and in the figure is connected to the pipe 17 which is a
part of the intake manifold 14.
20 The third conduit 31 leads from the chamber 26 and
makes a T-connection into the pipe 20 at the location 39.
The fourth conduit 32 leads from the chamber 26
and is adapted for connection to the standard air filter
40 of the engine.
25 Preferably, there is a control valve 42 provided
in the fourth conduit 32.
It has been found that the first conduit 28 should
be substantially about 7 feet (2.2 meters) in total length.
Naturally, some variation from this ideal length is possible,
30 but a reasonably lengthy first conduit 28 appears to be
beneficial in terms of increasing the mileage of automobiles
to which this accessory device is attached.
The second conduit 30 is that through which the
mixture of gases within the chamber 26 passes into the pipe
35 17 and thence into the intake manifold 14. This "conduit
may be of rubber, and typically an inside diameter of 8 mm
would be satisfactory for the rubber tube constituting this
conduit.
The third conduit 31 is that which is connected to
40 the engine choke pipe 20 with a T-connection, as aforesaid.
-------
1174920
4
In the solid line connection illustrated, the conduit 31 allows
heated air from the pipe 20 to be drawn into the chamber 26.
In certain instances of older engines, the portion 20a of
the pipe 20 within the exhaust manifold 12 is rusted or
5 cracked, and exhaust gases can be drawn into the pipe 20.
This invention is also directly applicable to such a situation.
It is not a disadvantage to draw exhaust gases into the chamber
26, since the exhaust gases often include certain unburned
components, which can be drawn back through the engine
10 and burned on a second pass. If the pipe 20 is not deteriorated
in the portion 20a, or if the vehicle does not have such a
pipe, then the alternative conduit 31a shown in broken
lines may be employed. Conduit 31a is connected directly
to and opens into the exhaust pipe 16 close to the exhaust
15 manifold 12.
The third conduit 31 may be of rubber, and may
conveniently be of rubber tubing with a 3 mm inside diameter.
It will be understood that the third conduit 31 is essentially
intended to tap a source of heat for the mixture within the
20 chamber 26, although naturally the heat must be conveyed in
a gas of some kind. The heated gas, whether air or exhaust
fumes, is of course supplied by the pipe 20 or the conduit 31a.
The fourth conduit 32 is intended to draw filtered
atmospheric air from the air filterNof the car, and the quantity
25 of air being drawn in is intended to be adjusted by means of
the valve 42.
The fourth conduit 32 may again be of a rubber
tubing, conveniently having an inside diameter of about 5 mm.
A further connection may be made to the mixing
30 chamber 26, which may be either closed or may be connected to
a standard emission control device. Such a connection has not
been illustrated in the figure.
Experiments have indicated that the first conduit
28 should be relatively long. A length of about 7 feet (approx-
35 imately 2.2 meters) has been found satisfactory, hut is not
considered to be strictly limiting. It is considered that
this relative length is necessary in order to allow certain
catalytic reactions to take place in the gases drawn from the
crankcase, prior to the admission of these gases into the
40 chamber 26.
-------
1174920
5
It is contemplated to adapt this invention to
make use of the EGR (exhaust gases recycling) connection
in some of the more recent vehicle models.
An auxiliary device meeting the above description
was connected to a number of automobiles during 1977 and
during 1979. The detailed cases are given below, and are
exemplary of the advantages to be attained by use of the
auxiliary device provided herein.
-------
1174920
Example 1
Pollutant emission tests were carried out by the
Vehicle Emissions Section of the Ontario Ministry of the
Environment on a 1970 Ford Galaxie 500. The tests were
carried out on the vehicle before and after installation of
the device constructed in accordance with the foregoing
specification.
Test
Without device
installed
With device
installed
Carbon Monoxide
% volume
1.75
0.15
ytams/Tiu.le
41.7
3.6
Hydrocarbons
parts per
million
226
163
grams/mile
2.9
2.1
10
15
Example 2
Driving teats were carried out on November 12,
1977 on a 1966 Oldsmobile Delta 88, with and without the
installation of a device meeting the above description. The
test distance was 39 miles along Highway 403 and the QEW
between Hamilton and Oakville. The vehicle speed was maintained
at 50-55 mph. The weather temperature was -1°C. Prior to the
test, the automobile had undergone hydraulic valve lifter
replacement and valve work.
Test
With device
installed
Without device
installed
Test
distance
39.0 miles
39.0 miles
Gas
consumed
2.15 imp.
gallons
2.45 Imp.
gallons
Miles/Gal
18.1
15.9
20
25
For this test, a minimum 13% of gas mileage savings
was recorded. -
Example 3
Driving tests were carried out on August 26, 1979
on a 1967 Cadillac vehicle, 340 cubic inches, with and without
the installation of an auxiliary device meeting the foregoing
specifications. The test distance was 93.4 miles and covered
the following route in Ontario: Highway 6 from Dundas to Highway
K'
I
-------
1174920
* , ii \\\5\Jwn-j 7
\6 bypassing Guelpti, to old Highway 6 to about 5 miles beyond
Fergus, and returning along the same route. The route was
travelled twice, once without and once with the device. The
time span for the tests was from about 2:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.
5 The weather was overcast, with the temperature varying between
23 and 26°C. The speed was maintained generally at 50-60 pmh
but included 70 mph for one minute on a stretch of Highway
401 and idling at a few stoplights. The car underwent no prior
tuneup or carburettor adjustments.
10 Test Test Gas Cost of Miles
distance consumed gas per litre
without device
installed
with device
installed
93.4
miles
93.4
miles
25.2
litres
19.4
litres
$5.54
$4.26
3.71
4.81
For this test, the savings in gas consumed and in
cost was 23%.
Example 4
On September 2, 1979, a 1968 Buick Riviera (430
15 cubic inches) was tested with and without the installation of
a device meeting the foregoing specification. .The test dis-
tance as measured by the vehicle odometer was Ci24- miles
along the following route in Ontario: Highway 6 from Oundas
to Highway 401, to new Highway 6 bypassing Guelph, to old
20 Highway 6 to about 5 miles beyond Fergus, and returning along
the same route. The route was travelled twice, once with and
once without the device. The tests were done from 10 a.m. to
4 p.m. The weather was generally overcast with a few light
showers and the temperature was 22-26°C. The speed was
25 maintained generally at 50-60 mph but included stretches at
40-50 mph due to slow traffic and also idling at a few stop-
lights. This vehicle had had a major tune-up on August 28,
. 1979, prior to the two tests.
-------
Test
With device
installed
Without device
installed
Test
Distance
92.4
miles
92.4
miles
1174920
8
Gas
Censured
20.9
litres
28.0
litres
Cost of
gas
$4.79
$6.42
Miles
per litre
4.42
(19.9 miles/gal)
3.30
(14.9 miles/gal)
For this test, the savings in gas consumed and in cost
was 25.4%.
Example 5
5 Driving tests were carried out on September 2, 1979
on a 1975 Chrysler Plymouth Fury vehicle (318 cubic inches),
with and without the installation of a device meeting the
above specifications. The test distance as measured by the
vehicle odometer was 86.6 miles along the following route in
10 Ontario: Highway 6 from Dundas to Highway 401, to new Highway
6 bypassing Guelph, to old Highway 6 to about 5 miles beyond
Fergus, and return along the same route. The route was travelled
twice, once with and once without the device. The tests were
done from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. The weather was generally over-
15 cast with a few light showers and the temperature about
o -f&—-60
22-25 C. The speed was maintained generally at 50-66 mph
but included stretches at 40-50 mph due to slow traffic and
also idling at a few stoplights. There was no prior tune-
up or carburettor adjustment. The standard auto emission
20 unit was not altered in any way during the installation of
the device for the first of the two tests below.
Test
With device
installed
Without device
installed
Test
Distance
86.6
miles
86.6
miles
Gas
Consumed
9.55
litres
19.5
litres
Cost of
gas
$2.18
$4.46
Miles
per litre
9.07
(40.8 miles/gal)
4.44
(20.0 miles/gal)
For this test, the savings in gas consumed and in
cost was 51%. '
-------
1174920
CLAIMS:
1. In combination:
means defining a gas-mixing chamber,
a first conduit having one end adapted for connection
to the crankcase of an engine of the kind having an air filter,
the primary- conduit passing in non-communicating fashion through
said chamber so that gases in said chamber contact the outside of
the conduit, the conduit opening at its other end into said chamber,
the first conduit being such that at least its inner wall is of
copper,
a second conduit leading from said chamber and being
adapted for communication with the intake manifold of the
engine,
a third conduit leading from said mixing chamber and
receiving a gas which has been heated by exhaust heat,
and a fourth conduit leading from said mixing
chamber and being adapted for connection to the air filter
of the engine.
2. The combination claimed in claim 1, in which the engine
has an automatic choke, and in which said third conduit
connects through a T-connection with a pipe that extends from
the automatic choke, passes through the exhaust manifold,
and opens to the atmosphere.
3. The combination claimed in claim 1, in which said third
conduit connects directly to the exhaust pipe and allows hot
exhaust gases to be drawn into said chamber.
4. The combination claimed in claim 1, claim 2 or
claim 3, in which a control valve is provided in said fourth
conduit.
5. The combination claimed in claim 1, claim 2 or
claim 3, in which the first conduit is substantially 2.2.
meters in total length.
6. The combination claimed in claim 1, claim 2 or
claim 3, in which the second, third and fourth conduits
are of rubber. '
7. The combination claimed in claim 1, cla^m 2 or
claim 3, in which the first conduit is of solid copper having
an inside diameter of substantially 6 mm.
8. The combination claimed in claim 1, claim 2 or
claim 3, in which the second, third and fourth conduits have
inside diameters of substantially 8 mm, 3 mm and 5 mm
respectively.
r
-------
1174920
40
-------
Attachment
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105
July 16, 1985 OFFICE OF
AIR AND RADIATION
Mr. S. DePakh, President
DeAcc Devices, Inc.
90 Warren Road, Suite 110
Toronto, Canada M4V2S2
Dear Mr. DePakh:
Ttiis letter is in response to your inquiry on July 16 regarding an
EPA evaluation of DeAcc Device. The Environmental Protection Agency is
charged by Congressional mandate to evaluate fuel economy and emission
control devices. While the EPA does not actually "approve" such devices,
it does conduct evaluations for the purpose of increasing the common
Knowledge in the area. For this reason, the outcome of any testing by
EPA becomes public information. It is this information which may be
cited, although no claims can be made that any EPA findings constitute
"approval" of the device or system.
Enclosed witn this letter is a packet of materials which you will
need to apply for an EPA evaluation of your device. This packet consists
of 1) an application format, 2) a document entitled "EPA Retrofit and
Emission Control Device Evaluation Test Policy," 3) "Basic Test Plans and
Testing Sequences," 4) a copy of the applicable Federal Regulations, and
5) otner documents that may be of interest.
In order for the EPA to conduct an evaluation of your device, we
must have an application. Once you have reviewed all the documents in
the packet, you should prepare an application in accordance with tne
guidelines of the application format. A critical part of the application
is the substantiating test data. The required test results will have to
be obtained at an independent laboratory of your choice. Such testing
would be conducted at your expense. A list of laboratories which are
willing to contract for testing and are known to have the equipment and
personnel to perform acceptable tests, has been included in the enclosed
packet. Tne laboratory list is revised periodically, so be certain that
the list you are using is current. Please allow EPA to comment on your
test plan before beginning testing at an independent laboratory. If you
desire, we can assist in the development of a satisfactory test plan. In
the evaluation of devices EPA is required to work with the manufacturer
of the product. Applicants such as distributors, retailers and importers
of devices will be asked to obtain written authorization from the
manufacturer to act as his representative.
-------
Retrofit fuel additives are defined as devices in the regulations and
will be evaluated by the same procedures as devices. Engine oils, oil
additives, and other lubricants do not fall under tne provisions of
Section 511 of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act. If
you wish to improve the credibility of claims for your lubricants by
performing tests on your own, we will try to help by commenting on your
test plans, but we cannot accept applications for formal evaluations of
lubricant products.
Before you begin to evaluate your device, there are several aspects
concerning testing at an independent laboratory which I would like to
bring to your attention:
Minimum Test Requirements - Although different types of devices may
require a more complex test plan, the minimum we require involves two
vehicles and with replicate test sequences on each vehicle. The
vehicles should be selected to be representative of the largest
selling engine-transmission combinations in the United States. Each
vehicle is to be set to manufacturer's tune-up specifications for the
baseline tests. Baseline emissions and fuel economy should be near
the levels at wnich the vehicles were certified.
The test sequences are conducted in a "back-to-back" manner;
duplicate with the vehicle in baseline condition, and then duplicate
with the device installed with no vehicle adjustments between tests.
If installation of the device also involves some adjustments, e.g.,
timing, fuel-air mixture, choice or idle speed, another test sequence
with only these adjustments should be inserted between the first and
last. If mileage accumulation is necessary in order to realize the
full benefit, the same number of miles that were accumulated before
the tests with the device must also be accumulated before baseline
tests without the device. In addition, tne method of mileage
accumulation should be Kept constant. Also, as a minimum, tne test
sequence shall consist of a hot-start LA-4 portion (bags 1 and 2) of
the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) and a Highway Fuel Economy Test
(HFET). The details of these tests are contained in the enclosed
packet. Although only a hot-start FTP is required to minimize the
costs to you, you are encouraged to have the entire cold-start test
performed, since any confirmatory testing and evaluation performed by
EPA will be based on the complete FTP, and you may wish to know how a
vehicle with your device performs over this official test. As a
final requirement, the personnel of the independent laboratory you
select should perform every element of your test plan. This includes
preparation of the test vehicle, adjustment of parameters, and
installation of the device.
Submission of Data - We require that all test data obtained from the
independent laboratories in support of your application be submitted
to us. This includes any results you have which were declared void
or invalid by the laboratory. We also ask that you notify us of the
-------
laboratory you nave chosen, wnen testing is scheduled to begin, wnat
tests you have decided to conduct, allow us to maintain contact with
the laboratory during the course of the testing, and allow the test
laboratory to answer any questions directly at any time about the
test program.
Cost of the Testing - The cost of the minimum test plan (two
vehicles,, two test sequences in duplicate) described above should be
less than $3500 per vehicle and less than $7000 for the total test at
any of the laboratories on the list. It should be recognized that
additions to the minimum test plan (such as providing test vehicles,
mileage accumulation, parameter adjustment, or additional testing)
will result in additional costs. In any case, you will have to
contact them individually to obtain their latest prices.
Outcome of the Tests - In order for EPA to best utilize our facil-
ities, confirmatory testing will be performed only on those devices
that demonstrate a statistically significant improvement in fuel
economy or emissions based on data from an EPA-recognized independent
laboratory. We have established some guidelines which will help you
determine whether the test results with your device should be consid-
ered encouraging. Tnese values nave been chosen to assure both of us
that a real difference in fuel economy exists, and that we are not
seeing only the variability in the results. The table below presents
the minimum number of cars that need to be tested for varying degrees
of fuel economy improvement, assuming a typical amount of variability
in fuel economy measurement. For a minimum test plan which was
conducted on a fleet of two cars, the average improvement should be
at least 6 percent. If at least a 6 percent difference in average
fuel economy can be shown, then we would be able to say statistically
at the 80 percent confidence level that there is a real improvement.
Similarly, we would expect a minimum of 3 percent improvement for a
fleet of five vehicles." Test results which display a significant
increase in emission levels should be reason for concern.
Minimum Fuel Economy Improvements versus Size of Test Fleet
Fleet Size Average Improvement Required
2 6%
3 5%
4 4%
5 3%
10 . 27,
Once we receive your application, it will be reviewed to determine if
it meets the requirements listed in the format. The submission of data
or information labeled as confidential or proprietary must be justified
on a case-by-case basis by the applicant. EPA will not treat test
results, including those conducted by independent or other laboratories,
-------
as confidential since Section 5il(c) of the Motor Vehicle Information and
Cost Savings Act requires disclosure of sucn information. Additionally,
EPA may decide not to perform an evaluation of a device if it judges it
canno.t develop a technically sound final report Decause the preliminary
information submitted by the manufacturer was claimed to be
confidential. If your application is not complete, we will asK. you to
submit further information or data. After any missing information has
been submitted, your application will be reconsidered, and once it meets
our requirements, you will be advised of our decision whether or not EPA
will perform any confirmatory testing. You must provide funds to cover
the cost of any testing in the EPA laboratory. You will be given the
opportunity to review our test plan. Once this testing is complete, an
evaluation report will be written. If no further testing is required,
the report will be written solely on the basis of the test data submitted
and our engineering analysis.
EPA intends to process your application in as expeditious a manner as
possible. We have established a goal of twelve weefcs from the receipt of
a complete application to the announcement of our repo'rt. The attainment
of this objective requires very precise scheduling, and we are depending
on the applicant to respond promptly to any questions, or to submit any
requested data. Failure to respond in a timely manner will unduly delay
the process. In the extreme case, we may consider lack of response as a
withdrawal of the application.
I nope the information above and that contained in the enclosed
documents will aid you in the preparation of an acceptable application
for an EPA evaluation of your device. I will be your contact with EPA
during this process and any subsequent EPA evaluation. My address is
EPA, Motor Vehicle Emission Laboratory, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor,
Michigan,. 48105. The telephone number is (313) 668-4299. Please contact
me if you have any questions or require any further information.
Sincerely,
Merrill W. Kortn
Device Evaluation Coordinator
Test and Evaluation Branch
Enclosures
-------
Attachment D
CORPORATE ATTORNEY:
PATENT AOENT:
SIM 8c MCBURNEY
CONSULTANT:
PROFESSOR A. CORSINI. ASSISTANT DEAN
OF SCIENCE (STUDIES) . MCMASTER UNIV.
DeAcc Devices Inc.
DECELERATION •• ACCELERATION
CONTROL SAVE GASOLINE
TELEPHONE (416) 923-1248
TORONTO, ONTARIO, CANADA
PRESIDENT:
STEPHEN DEPAKH
August 12, 1985.
Mr. Merrill W. Korth,
Device Evaluation Co-Ordinator,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
2565 Plymouth Road,
Ann Arbor, Michigan 4810$,
U.S.A.
Dear Mr. Korth:
RE: PLANNED E.P.A. TESTING OF DEACC DEVICE
Thank you for your prompt response to my inquiry o'f July 16/85
and my request for updated information regarding E.P.A. test
procedures.
As indicated to you, Patent protection on my device has now
been finalized and I am in a position to re-submit my E.P.A.
Test application as per your recommendation of November 15/82.
(See Copy letter encl.)
Prior to re-submitting my application and based on the general
material you have recently supplied, the following questions
require clarification/confirmation:
1. Could you supply the following (preferably high mileage)
U.S. vehicles for E.P.A. testing with the DEACC DEVICE:
Test "A" (8 Cyl. Cars/Win. Test Plan)
Projected
Test Costs
1 - 1982 Chevrolet
1 - 1984 Ford
TEST "B" (4 Cyl. Cars/Min. Test Plan)
)E.P.A. supplied cars
) or
)DEACC supplied cars
1 - 1982 (German Make) )E.P.A. supplied cars
) or
1 - 1984 (Japan Make) )DEACC supplied cars
U.S.S
U .'S. $
U.S.S
U.S.S
(Continued
-------
- Page 2 -
2. Or does each test require identical make/year cars?
3. With reference to E.P.A. LISTING OF F.E. DEVICES tested:
Approximately how many of these devices, dealing with re-
cycling of blow by/crankcase gases had Patent protection
prior to E.P.A. testing?
Your early reply will be most appreciated.
Sincerely,
' DEACC
Stephen DePakh,
President,
90 Warren Road,
Suite 110,
Toronto, Ontario,
M4V 2S2.
SD/grh
Encl. - Copy of your letter of Nov.l 15/82
- Ethyl Corp. test documents
-------
Attachment E
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN 48105
August 19, 1985 OFFICE OF
AIR. NOISE AND RADIATION
Mr. Stephen DePakh, President
DeAcc Devices Inc.
90 Warren Road, Suite 110
Toronto, Ontario
CANADA M4V2S2
Dear Mr. DePakh:
This is in response to your letter dated August 12, 1985
discussing your plans for testing of the DeAcc Device. I will
answer the questions listed in your letter and clarify the EPA
policy related to the evaluation of retrofit devices.
EPA evaluates fuel economy retrofit devices under the
authority of Section 511 of the Motor Vehicle Information and
Cost Savings Act (MVICSA). In order to perform these
evaluations at a reasonable cost to. the Government, it is
necessary to require that applicants provide persuasive test
data substantiating their claims. We have established precise
protocols to be followed by EPA and the device manufacturer, in
determining the effectiveness of a device in improving fuel
economy and in improving or degrading air pollution emissions.
These procedures require the device to first be tested in a
commercial laboratory where proficiency has been recognized by
EPA. If the private laboratory data indicate a likely fuel
economy improvement, EPA may choose to perform more thorough
confirmatory testing at the EPA laboratory in Ann Arbor,
Michigan, as part of its evaluation process.
In my letters to you on October 12, 1982 and July 16, 1985
I explained that EPA expects the device manufacturer to obtain
at least a minimum amount of data from an EPA recognized
commercial laboratory before it can be determined if the device
warrants testing in the EPA laboratory. The minimum commercial
laboratory data requirement consists of duplicate back-to-back
tests on each of two vehicles representative of those widely
used by drivers in the United States. The tests on the one
Canadian vehicle that you performed at the Ethyl Corporation do
not meet this minimum data requirement.
-------
Question number 1 in your letter asked if EPA could supply
vehicles for testing of the DeAcc Device. EPA does not supply
vehicles for testing at the commercial laboratory but does
supply the vehicles for testing in the EPA laboratory. The
testing at the commercial laboratory usually costs between
$5000 and $8000 and a rough estimate of the cost for testing in
the EPA laboratory would be $10,000 to 20,000, depending on the
nature of the device.
Question number 2 asked if the cars should be identical.
No, they should be different to provide some indication of the
device being effective on more than one model of car. The
vehicles should be modern (1980 or later model) .popular U.S.
vehicles representative of engine families most widely used in
the U.S. We usually recommend that one four cylinder and one
six cylinder model be tested. I will be happy to work with you
by commenting on the test plan that you arrange for testing at
a private laboratory. Often the private laboratory is able to
obtain the vehicles for you.
Question number 3 in your letter concerned patent
protection for devices being evaluated by EPA. EPA must
understand the operating principle of the device to properly
evaluate it. Our reports also discuss the theory behind the
operation of the device and the results of the EPA evaluation
becomes public information. All of the devices that EPA has
evaluated in the past were not patented, but in those cases the
manufacturer usually feels sufficiently protected that he can
freely discuss the principles by which the device operates.
If there are additional questions concerning these
comments, please call me at (313) 668-4299.
Sincerely,
,«•> . j * •
•\-t~^_jL^~ <-'»—' r—•t-'vct.
Merrill W. Korth
Device Evaluation Coordinator
Test and Evaluation Branch
-------
Attachment F
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105
April 30, 1986 OFFICE OF
AIR AND RADIATION
Mr. Stephan DePakh, President
DeAcc Devices Incorporated
90 Warren Road, Suite 110
Toronto, CANADA M4V 2S2
Dear Mr. DePakh:
We received your letter of February 25 in which you
requested EPA to evaluate your DeAcc Device, Incorporated,
"Emission Control Device" under Section 511 of the Motor
Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act (MVICSA). We have
reviewed your application and determined that, although
additional information/explanation is needed in several areas,
you should be readily able to supply the information and to
proceed with testing at an independent laboratory.
Our comments below address these items and briefly
describe the independent lab testing you will need to conduct.
1. How will the device be marketed? Direct to users?
Through service and installation shops?
2. What is the cost of the device?
3. Neither the application nor the patent gives a clear
or concise explanation of how the device functions. How is
this device an improvement over a PCV valve?
4. Will the use of the three tubes to the induction
system change the overall fuel/air ratio or alter the F/A ratio
of individual cylinders?
5. Additional details are needed for the installation of
the device.
a. Are all parts necessary for installation supplied
with the device?
b. Will the device be installed by the
purchaser/vehicle owner?
-------
c. Does the PCV remain on the engine?
d. Detailed device installation instructions are
needed.
e. The control valve to the air filter is manually
adjustable. How is the proper adjustment determined?
f. Vehicle specific installation instructions are
needed for the tube to be installed on the exhaust manifold or
connected to a choke tube.
6. The section on device operation notes "To assure
efficiency and mechanical operating efficiency, instructions
will be furnished for its usage." Please provide these
instructions.
7. The section on device maintenance refers to an "...
emission test required to ensure that there is no lean
condition in the carburetor system". What is this emission
test and what are the criteria for determining lean operation?
8. What are the specific claims for the device,
anticipated improvements in emissions and fuel economy?
9. Please provide detailed information on the catalytic
action occurring in the seven-foot coiled copper tube that
passes the crankcase vapors through the chamber and then
returns to open into the chamber.
10. From the information provided, it appears that you
expect full benefits to be seen immediately and that there is
no need for mileage accumulation. Please notify us if this is
not the case.
As outlined in the EPA correspondence with DeAcc Devices,
Incorporated, during the past four years, the minimum test
program for any device without mileage accumulation consists of
replicate FTP (or LA-4) tests and replicate HFET tests on at
least two representative vehicles, both with and without the
device, at an independent lab. Thus, the minimum total is
eight FTPs (LA-4) and eight HFETs.
The data you provided consists of highway driving and a
few limited emission tests on Canadian vehicles. These data do
not meet the minimum requirements for independent lab testing
and are considered to be background information only.
Although we will need your response to the preceding to
further process the evaluation of your device, it appears that
you should be able to. promptly conduct the screening testing at
-------
an independent laboratory. Since it appears you expect the
device to improve emissions and fuel economy, do not require
mileage accumulation, require no vehicle parameter adjustments,
and expect at least a six percent improvement, test plan code A
using test sequence code 4 (replicate FTP and HFET tests both
without and with the device on two vehicles) will meet this
need. These tests will probably cost you $6-12,000. I am
enclosing a copy of our recent packet of Section 511 materials
which contains an updated list of recognized labs. Please let
us review your detailed test plan prior to testing so that you
may avoid wasted expenditure of time and money.
If the independent lab data indicate a benefit, EPA will
probably conduct confirmatory testing. These tests are more
extensive than the independent lab tests. Also, we are now
required to recover the direct test costs from the applicant.
For your device the costs wo.uld probably range from $10-15,000.
If I can be of any further assistance, please contact me
at (313) 668-4299.
Sincerely,
Merrill W. Korth
Device Evaluation Coordinator
Test and Evaluation Branch
Enclosure
-------
Attachment G
DeAcc Devices Inc.
PATENT AGENT:
SIM ft MCBURNEY
CONSULTANT:
PROFESSOR A. CORSINI. ASSISTANT DEAN
OF SCIENCE (STUDIES) . MCMASTER UNIV.
DECELERATION ^^B ACCELERATION
CONTROL SAVE GASOLINE
TELEPHONE (416) 923-1248
TORONTO. ONTARIO. CANADA
PRESIDENT:
STEPHEN DE PAKH
24 May 1986
Mr. Merril W. Korth
Device Evaluation Coordinator
U.S.A. Environmental Protection Agency
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
U.S.A.
Dear Mr. Korth:
T received your letter of Way 10, 1986, in which you and your
personnel reviewed my application and determined that, additional infor-
mation/explanation is needed in several areas and I should readily be
able to supply the information to you (E.P.A.) and to proceed with testing
at an independent laboratory recognized as capable of performing E.F.A.
retrofit device emission test for DeAcc Devices Inc.
Tt is outlined in your letter that at least two vehicle tests are
necessary and should consist of the total of eight F.T.P^. (L.A.4) and
eight H.F.E.T/S., and therefore do not have to have mileage accumulation
test, also that you need my response to further process the evaluation
of the DeAcc device, and that I should promptly conduct the screening
testing in a laboratory recognized by E.P.A. Further, T do appreciate
your advice, I do thank you, that T should inform you with the detailed
test plan, prior to testing, so that DeAcc devices Tnc. may avoid wasted
expenditure of time and money.
T wish to inform you that the closest from Toronto, Ontario, to an
independent laboratory is namely: ATOMATES,,CUSTOM SYSTEMS TIC., 645
LUNTJAVE EIK GROVE VTIAGE, Jt~ As they arRecognized by E.P.A. and
their equipment is identical or equivalent to that used by E.P.A.
I do my best Mr. Korth to answer your comments, that additional
information/explanation is needed in several areas, my answers are
below:
1. First - how will the device marketed through service and
installation shops, etc.?
The first answer is that the device will be marketed through
service and installation shops, and hopefully, that through
the Canadian Automobile Association in the U.S.A. and in Canada
will be marketed.
-------
- 2 -
What is the cost of the device?
The answer is prefix, and below the following represents a
short form cost projection for production of the DeAcc device.
Initial production of the economy model will utilize manual
assemble of standard parts, presently available from several
industries at wholesale costs, as set out below, herein.
Future mass production with customized components, assemble
techniques and higher ratio of number of employees versus
basic overhead/equipment cost should reduce the production cost
by up to kQ% in Canada and in U.S.A. approximately up to
A. PRODUCTION COST
Farts
Qty Parts Description Unit Cost Total
7
7
6
1
1
1
3/8 O.D. Copper tubing
3/8 T.D. P.C.V. hose
Hose clamps
3/8 O.D. (male) air valve
3/8 O.D. (male) air filter
F/W clamp W. screws
$0.30
$0.60
$0.17
$3.60
$0.70
$0 . 46
$2.10
$4.20
31.02
$3.60
$0.70
$0.46
Parts Total $12.08
Optional
1 Plastic Casting for Device $3-50
Packaging and Printing
1 Blister pkg/instructions $0-55 $0-55
1/10 Shipping carton/labels/tapes $0.80 $0.08
Equipment (Combined cost per hour)
1/2'hr rental or purchase amort. $3-00/hr $1-50
Labour (including socal contributions)
1/2 hr coil tubing, solder fittings $18.00/hr *9-00
attach hoses and filter test
package.
Overhead (combined cost per hour)
1/2 hr Office/plant facilities $15-00/hr $7-50
services and supplies
legal taxes, insurance
-------
Unit Cost/Retail $78.06
Neither the application nor the patent gives a clear of concise
explanation of how ... etc. This device an improvement ... etc?
The device function is simple. The device has four conduits,
connected to the device gas-mixing chamber.
The first conduit connected to the P.C.V. Valve with a sefc^n,
foot copper tubing to control direct flooding in the intake
manifold, and the other end of it connected to the device
gas chamber.
The second conduit leads from the device gas-chamber to the intake
manifold, where the varying vacuum condition draws the unused
gases, the so called "hot blow by gases" through the seven foot
copper conduit, from the P.C.V. valve to the device gas-mixing
chamber.
-------
The third conduit leads from the device gas-chamber to the exhaust
pipe manifold, and through the vacuum conditions the NOx - H.C. -
C.O. - gases drawn into the device gas-chamber.
The fourth conduit leads from the device gas-chamber to the air
filter of the engine, and through the vacuum conditions oxygen-air
drawn in to the device gas-chamber.
In conclusion of the device functions and the improvement over
the standard P.C.V. valve is the following explanation: The
device recycle the unburd gases through the device gas-chamber,
where mixed with oxygen to be lead into the intake (vacuumed)
manifold to reburn.
The catalytic actions reactions are plausible, it has not been
verified; I do consider it worthwhile to have a test with and
without the 7 foot copper conduit. But it is thought that when
copper oxide is present in the 7 foot copper conduit mixed with
oxygen some conversion of nitrogen oxide to nitrogen will occur.
The driving force of this reaction resides in the high thermo-
dynamic stability of nitrogen gas.
The presence of oxygen in the device gas-mixing chamber may
also cause some conversion of the copper to copper oxide. In
turn, the copper oxide may be reduced, at least in part to copper
by the action of hydrocarbons (H.C.) and carbon monoxide (C.O.).
This two reaction would tend to regenerate the copper while
also reducing the content ratio of C.O. and H.C.
4. >Will the use of the three (four) tubes to the induction system
change ... etc?
The overall fuel/air ratio is altered through the device. The
reason is that the so called "blow by gases" add to the fuel/air
intie and alter for the best, the F/A ratio in the combustion
process in the individual cylinders.
5« Additional details are needed ... etc?
(a) First an emission control test (SCOPE) to balance the
carburator F/A mixture to the U.S.A. or Canadian Government
requirements in idle condition of the engine.
(b) Find a place in the engine compartment 5" by 6" in length,
2" thick where it is safe and secured with a clipper.
(c) Connect the first conduit to the P.C.V. valve, with a hose
c1amp.
Connect the second conduit to the intake manifold, with a
hose clamp.
-------
- 5 -
Connect the third conduit to the exhaust manifold pipe
after an outlet welded out into it, by 3/8"i then has
to weld into the exhaust pipe,"a 8" - 10" heat resistant
steel tube, that the third conduit which is made of rubber
won't burn. (The rubber hose other side is connected
to the device gas-chamber). Tf the engine prior 1964
has an old choke tube so use a T shaped connector (natur-
ally have to cut the choke rubber tube to do this) and
connect the hose from the device gas-chamber with the
T shape connector. The steel tube welded into the
exhaust system for hot-heat into the choke, but after
a short time the "heat resistant" 7" or 8" length tube,
which is connecting a rubber hose directly into the
choke; collapses, and errosion takes place through the
constant high heat from the exhaust system. Therefore
emission gases of 0 C.-H.C.-N.0.x in presence in the
choke, but with the T shape connector, the emission
gases vacuumed into the device gas chamber and reburn
in the process of combustion before entering into the
old choke system.
(d) The fourth conduit is connected to the engine air filter
where a hole of J/5" should be made to lead the rubber
conduit from the device air intake valve into the engine
air filter 1/2" inwardly, and a larger clipper needed
then thejhole, so it should hold inwardly the rubber hose
and it can not slip out from the air filter. The other
end of the fourt conduit is connected to the device manually
adjustable air intake valve and through it the air enters
to the device gas chamber.
(e) As the emission standards is set by the U.S.A. - Canadian
Governments and the requirements in idle engine condition
for example 0.40$ C.O. or 1.003 C..C. or 3.00^ C.C. as it
would register on a "SCOPE" emission test device, then
the manually adjustable air intake valve has to be open
as far or further till the "SCOPE" emission test device
shows 0.00^ C.C. in idle-deceleration.
(a) Are all parts necessary for installation supplied with
the device?
Yes, all parts necessary will be supplied by DeAcc Devices
Inc .
(b) Will the device be installed by the .purchaser/vehicle
owner?
The installation will be, has to be by a specialized
professional.
-------
- 6 -
(c) Does the F.C.V. remain on the engine?
Yes, the P.C.V. remain on the engine. To replace it the
cost of the device would be higher, but not for the auto
leading manufacturers.
(d) Detailed device installation instructions are needed.
The answer is explained from the beginning of question
no. 5 through a,b,c,d,e.
(e) The control valve to the air filter is adjustable,
how is proper ... etc?
The answer is explained through No. 5 (e).
( f) Vehicle specific installation instructions are needed
for the tube ... etc.
The answer is explained through No. 5 (c) "connect the
third conduit."
6. The section on device operation notes "to assure efficiency
and mechanical operating efficiency"... etc.
The answer is explained through f-:o. 5 a,b,c,d,e, - these
instructions will be furnished with the device.
?. The section on device maintenance refers to an ... etc.
The emission test with a "3CCFE" emission test device
would show what are the criteria for determining the
lean condition in the carburator system of an engine.
The emission standards is set by the governments and
the requirements have to be set through the carburator
in idle engine condition to not have lean operation.
8. What are the specific claims for the device, anticipated
. . . etc .
The improvements are in emission and fuel economy by
recycling .the so called "blow by gases" and use it as
an added fuel with the engine system and reburn it in
the combustion process in the individual cylinders, with
the emission gases: C.0.-H.C.-N.0.x.
9- Please provide detailed information on the catalytic
action ... etc.
The role of thejcopper tubing (in the patent No. 3^)
is considered to be as follows. As hot gases are drawn
through Ho. J.k from the crankcase, it is thought that
the concentration of N.C.-x. gas (primarily mono-nitrogen
oxide) in the crankcase gas v.'il] be reduced by the
rf ac t i or;:
-------
-7-
9. Simutaneously, the presence of oxygen may also
cause some conversion of the copper oxide. In
turn the copper oxide may be reduced back in
part to copper by the action of hydrocarbons (H.C.)
and carbon monoxide (C.O.).
C.U.O. + C.O. C.U. + C.O..
C.U.O. + H.C. C.U. H-'C.O.g.' + H20.
This two reaction would tend to regenerate the.
copper while also reducing carbon monoxide (C.O.).
Because the copper is regenerated the term
"cataoy'tic" has been used. Strictly speaking,
however, the copper is not really a cata6ylic
agent because it is produced and regenerated in
two separate reaction.
N.O. + C.U. C.U.O. + 1/2 N2
That is to say, some conversion of nitrogen oxide
to nitrogen will occur, with the simultaneous for-
mation of copper oxide. The driving force for this
reaction resides in the high thermodynamic stabil-
ity of nitrogen gas. (Question No. 3 explained it)
10. From the information provided, it appears that you
expect full benefits ... etc.
Yes, I would like to have full benefits immediately
and as you say that there is no need for mileage
accumulation.
Thank you, Mr. Korth, for your .letter.
Sincerely yours,
S. De Pakh
President
90 Warren Road
Suite 110
Toronto, Ontario
Canada, M4V 2S2
Phone, (416) 923-124-8
-------
Attachment H
4UTOM4TED CUSTOM 5VBTEM5 INC.
1238 West Grove Ave., Orange, CA 92665-4134 (714) 974-5560
June 11, 1986
Mr . Stephan DePakh
DerAcc Devices, Inc.
90 Warren Rd.
Suite 110
Toronto, Canada M4V252
REF: EPA 511 Test Program
Dear Mr. Depakh,
Confirming our telephone conversation of June 11, 1986, en-
closed is our current price schedule reflecting the cost en-
volved to perform a 511 Test Program. For your further ref-
erence, I have also attached an example copy of a completed
511 program, (Highway Fuel Economy Only), computer print out.
Automated Custom Systems presently has in their possession
the following vehicles with over 50,000 miles which may be
used for your program:
TYPE MILES
Olds Custom Wagon 60,153
Lincoln Mark IV 79,281
Olds Cutlass 86,000
The above vehicles may be utilized at a cost of $100.00 each
for your program.
You indicated that milage accumulation would not be required
for your device. Therefore, the program for two vehicles
could be completed in two working days . This test program
could be scheduled immediately with one (1) week advance
notice.
We again thank you for your interest in our company and cap-
abilities and look forward to performing your test requirements
in the future^
Sincerely,
10/um
Loren T. Mathews
Vice President /Gen. Mgr
LTM/jms
Chkifo
B64SLui»tAvt.
Bk Grow
(J12) Mi-1790
lL 60007
Denver
OlB3»)MperS«.
Aurora. CO «0011
(303)3444470
Ft. LaudenUle
D 1000 Wwt Newport Gmter Driw
OwrfttU Bach. to* 33441
(305) 4M-2M3
-------
Attachment I
Arthur L. Smith, BA
Barrister & Solicitor
Suite 1606, 141 Adelaide St. West, Toronto, Ontario M5H 1V7 (416) 864-9677
July 24, 1986
Mr. Merril W. Korth
Device Evaluation Coordinator
U.S.A. Environmental Protection
Agency
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan
48105, U.S.A.
Dear Sir:
Re: DeAcc Devices Inc.
- E.P.A. 511 Test Programme
I have been asked to write to you by my client,
DeAcc Devices Inc., to confirm that Mr. Stephen DePakh will
attend at the office of Automated Custom Systems Inc. on
Monday, August 4, 1986. My client has requested that a
copy of the test results be forwarded to you by Automated
Custom Systems Inc.
My client further instructs me to thank you for
your co-operation and the assistance that you have rendered
to him in arranging for the test programme.
Yours very truly,
Arthur L. Smith
ALSrbr.
-------
Attachment J
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105
-*• OFFICE OF
*• AM AND RADIATION
July 9, 1986
Mr. Stephen DePakh, President
DeAcc Devices Incorporated
90 Warren Road, Suite 110
Toronto, Canada M4V 252
Dear Mr. DePakh:
We received your letter of May 24, in which you responded
to our request for clarification and added information about
your "Emission Control Device." It appears you have addressed
all our questions and are ready to proceed with the independent
laboratory testing.
The test plan we previously suggested (Test Plan Code A
using test sequence code 4, with replicate FTP and HFET tests
both with and without the device on each of two vehicles) still
appears to be the minimum test plan required. FTPs rather than
LA-4s are needed for your device, since the fuel economy
benefits are to achieved principally through an emission
improvement.
Please note this is eight FTPs (3 bag test) and eight
HFETs, not eight LA-4s (2 bag test) with eight HFETs as
suggested in your letter. Again, please let us review your
detailed test plan prior to testing. Also, we would appreciate
knowing your test schedule (dates) prior to testing.
If I can be of any further assistance, please contact me
at (313) 668-4299.
Sincerely,
Merrill W. Korth
Device Evaluation Coordinator
Test and Evaluation Branch
-------
DeAcc Devices Inc.
f-ATENT AGtNT:
SIM a MCBURNEY
CONSULTANT:
PROFESSOR A. CORSINI. ASSISTANT DEAN
Or SCIENCE (STUDIES). M CM ASTER UNIV.
DECELERATION
ACCELERATION
Attachment K
TELEPHONE (416) 923-1248
TORONTO. ONTARIO. CANADA
CONTROL SAVE GASOLINE
PRESIDENT:
STEPHEN DE PAKH
August 8, 1986
Mr. Loren T. Mathews
Vice-President and General Manager
Automated Custom Systems Inc.
645 Lunt Avenue
Elk Grove Village
Chicago, Illinois 60007
U.S.A.
Dear Mr. Mathews:
Further to our meetings in your office in Elk Grove
Village on August 4th last, I wish to confirm what was resolved
during our discussion, as follows:
(a) You had not been advised of the required test
procedure by Mr. Korth of the Environmental
Protection Agency, due to your trip to Korea
from which you returned on August 3rd last;
(b) The E.P.A. requirements are that you conduct
eight F.T.P.'s and eight H.F.E.T.'s (3 bag test);
(c) Your 1982 oldsmobile station wagon (60,153 miles)
and your 1981 Lincoln Mark IV (79,281 miles) are
to be tuned by your master mechanic and soaked
immediately without being driven; "
(d) The carburetion systems of the two cars are to
be set to the manufacturer's specifications;
(e) It is extremely important that the carburetion
systems should not be "leaned", (i.e. not suf-
ficient oxygen or not sufficient fuel);
-------
- 2 - August 8, 1986
(f) The carburetion systems should be rich in order
to create the utmost power efficiency of the
engines;
(g) The cost of the above testing procedures will
be $8,450.00 as confirmed in discussions with
yourself, Mr. Furton and Mr. Korth, and I
shall have with me a certified cheque in payment
of this amount.
(h) The tests on the engines are to be conducted on
August llth and 12th without the device and the
data is to be available on August 13th at 10:00
a.m. when I arrive at your office.
(i) I shall bring two devices with me so that the
hot and cold comparison tests can be done com-
mencing August 13th.
(j) The devices will be put on the engines by your
master mechanic which procedure should take
approximately one minute per engine.
I wish to thank you for your co-operation and look
forward to meeting with you on August 13th next.
Sincerely,
Stephen DePakh
SDePrbr.
-------
Attachment L
CORPORATE ATTORNEY:
R. M. LIEBERMAN
PATENT AGENT:
SIM & McBURNEY
CONSULTANT:
PROFESSOR A. CORSINI, ASSISTANT DEAN
OF SCIENCE (STUDIES). MCMASTER UNIV.
DeAcc Devices Inc.
DECELERATION
ACCELERATION
CONTROL SAVE GASOLINE
TELEPHONE ( 4 I 6 > 923-1 248
TORONTO. ONTARIO, CANADA
PRESIDENT:
STEPHEN DE PAKH
August 8, 1986
Mr. Merril W. Korth
Device Evaluation Co-ordinator
U.S.A. Environmental Protection
Agency
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
U.S.A.
Dear Mr. Korth:
I am pleased to advise that the test plan you sug-
gested will be performed by Automated Custom Systems Inc.
on August llth to 14th next at their laboratory in Elk Grove
Village, Illinois. Please note that eight F.T.P.'s (3 bag
test) and eight H.F.E.T.'s will be performed as suggested in
your letter of July 9, 1986.
I enclose a copy of my letter of August 8, 1986,
to Mr. Mathews confirming the testing procedure. The test
results will be forwarded by Mr. Mathews upon completion of
the tests.
I wish to thank you for the interest you have shown
in my invention.
Yours sincerely,
Stephen DePakh
SDeP:br.
Encl.
-------
CUSTOM SVST6MS INC.
Attachment M
I 1238 West Grove Ave., Orange, CA 92665-4134 (714) 974-5560
DeAcc Devices Inc. September 3, 1986
90 Warren Road
Suite 110
Toronto, M4V 2S2, Ontario,
Canada
Reference: EPA 511 Test Program
Gentlemen,
Confirming our telephone conversation, attached are the original copies
of all the associated test reports covering the above referenced EPA 511
run on 2 ACS provided vehicles. The attached summary sheets detail the
test results.
Several points regarding this test program are clarified and detailed
below:
1. The 1984 Chevrolet Camaro received 2 HFET preps throughout the
program prior to the data acquisition at the end of the third cycle.
2. Both vehicles were baseline tested on 8/12/86 and 8/13/86 after
an LA-4 prep on 8/11/86. One day, 8/14/86, was lost during the
program because Mr. DePakh failed to arrive as scheduled with the
2 devices. Mr. DePakh finally arrived the morning of 8/14/84 with
the devices which were installed as further described below. LA-4
prep cycles were performed on both vehicles and removed for 24 hour
soak. NOTE: It should be noted that the 2 devices were NOT IDENTICAI
in mechanical configuration. Furthermore, ACS was not provided with
a detailed instruction/installation set-up manual. Mr. DePakh
indicated that EPA Ann Arbor had reviewed the manual and he would
instruct our personnel during the installation.
3. INSTALLATION
A. ITEM (j) of Mr. DePakh's 8/8/86 letter indicated that the device
would be installed in the respective vehicles in 'approximately
one minute per engine.' For your reference, the following
describes in detail the installation procedure as supervised by
Mr. DePakh:
B. Completely remove air filter assembly.
C. Remove existing PCV line from intake manifold.
D. Install one line from the device on PCV fitting (Item C)
E. Original PCV line connects to second line on the device.
Ann Arbor CMcago Denver Ft. LaudenUIe
UntA Ol859,..p.rS*. D 1000 W...
-------
>1UTOM>lTeD CUSTOM 5VSTEM5 IIMC.
F. The third line from the device was to be installed in the exhaust
manifold!! To accomplish this, Mr. DePakh advised us to drill a
hole in the exhaust manifold and install a threaded fitting with
a 3 inch 1/4 inch tube to act as a heat sink rubber tubing.
Obviously, ACS refused to alter the provided test vehicles in
this manner. As mutually agreed, the third line was tapped
into a 20 foot rubber hose and terminated at a 1/4 inch fitting
installed in the standard silicon exhaust boot.
G. The fourth line (intake air) was placed randomly within the
engine compartment.
H. Both devices contained a brass needle valve which during idle
was adjusted and set 'by ear' by Mr. DePakh. An LA-4 prep was
performed and the vehicles removed to the soak area.
It should be quite obvious to the most casual observer that the
installation procedure took considerably longer than 'one minute'
as originally indicated!!
INITIAL PREPARATION OF ACS TEST VEHICLES
The ACS provided test vehicles were set-up and prepared for the
test program along the guidelines established by the U.S.E.P.A.
This procedure was set-up over 4 years ago and all 5 locations of
Automated Custom Systems, Inc. have been recognized by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency as having the facilities, equipment
and personnel necessary to conduct exhaust emission tests on light
duty motor vehicles in accordance with the current Federal Test
Procedure. Mr. DePakh made several derogatory statements regarding
our set-up and vehicle qualification procedures which I therefore
feel should again be restated in detail. It should be further
noted that the ACS 'general vehicle procurement procedure' usually
involves local rental vehicles with low milage as detailed in
your original letter from E.P.A. In the case of DeAcc, we were
requested to provide older vehicles with approximately 50,000
miles.
A. Check and set timing to factory specifications.
B. Check spark plugs and replace as required.
C. Check and replace filters as required.
D. Check cap, rotor and wires.
F. Oil change as required.
G. Check idle RPM.
Mr> DePakh's letter also indicated 'carburetion systems should
e rich in order to create the utmost power.' As you know, the
vehicles we provided for test come from the factory with sealed
adjustments, thus preventing tampering. Late model vehicles,
included those fuel injected, include closed loop Lamda systems
which also are not adjustable.
It should be noted that the baseline emission numbers obtained
on the 2 ACS provided test vehicles were found to be acceptable
by EPA during a telephone conversation on 8/15/86 with Mr. Korth.
Mr. Korth further advised that since no adjustments could be
made to the carburetion systems that the devi ting should
precede per our established procedure.
-------
XlUTOM/lTeD CUSTOM SVSTEMS INC.
Based on the above, ACS feels that Mr. DePakh's comments about
the 1982 Oldsmobile are unfounded and the vehicle is certainly
representative of on the road models of this type. However,
ACS will agree to run a third test program oh a late model,
fuel injected, low milage vehicle provided by DeAcc Devices Inc.
The program proposed is as follows:
a) Parameter Check
b) LA-4 Prep
c) 12-36 Hour Soak
d) Cold FTP (3 Bag)
e) HFET Prep
f) HFET with Data
g) 12-36 Hour Soak
h) Cold FTP (3 Bag)
i) HFET Prep
j) HFET with Data
k) Parameter Check
Install device and repeat steps a-k. It is further suggested that
the vehicle provided have provisions to quickly install the third
device line to the exhaust manifold, such as a 1/4 inch capped
Swagelok fitting. A detailed instruction manual will be provided.
COST TO DEACC DEVICES, INC. $3000.00
The program will be completed in 5 days, Monday-Friday and 1 week
notice is required. Payment will be by certified check in U.S.
dollars immediately prior to testing.
Sincerely,
Loren T. Mathews
Vice President
-------
Attachment N
CORPORATE ATTOHNEY;
PATENT AGENT:
SIM & MCBURNEY
CONSULTANT:
PROFESSOR A. CORSINI. ASSISTANT DEAN
OF SCIENCE (STUDIES) . MCMASTER UNIV.
DeAcc Devices Inc.
DECELERATION ^^B ACCELERATION
CONTROL SAVE GASOLINE
TELEPHONE (416) 923-1248
TORONTO, ONTARIO. CANADA
PRESIDENT:
STEPHEN DEPAKH
REGISTERED MAIL
31 October 1986
Mr. Merril W. Korth,
Device Evaluation Coordinator
U.S.A. Environmental Protection Agency
2565 Plymouth Road,
Ann Arbor, Michigan
48105 U.S.A.
Dear Mr. Korth:
Re; DeAcc Devices
?st Programme
During our last telephone conversation, I tried to explain
what occured regarding Automated Custom Systems Inc. in
Chicago.
On Monday, August 4, 1986, I arrived at Chicago with a
certified cheque for $6,000.00 U.S. which was the amount
quoted by Loren T. Mathews to conduct the E.P.A 511 Test
Programme on two different cars.
Mr. Mathews informed me in the morning that he had just
returned from Korea and that he had to leave immediately
for an appointment with his dentist. Mr. Roy D. Sinclair,
the Manager, was left in charge and he informed me that
Automated Custom Systems Inc. does not have a mechanic on
their staff, which comprises three people and a secretary.
At this point, I wanted to leave to return to Toronto, but
Mr. Sinclair asked me to remain and showed me a piece of
paper on which was written, "prepare three bag tests". He
was afraid that if I left he might be blamed and he would
be fired, although Mr. Mathews had not discussed the tests
with him.
I waited for Mr. Mathews until 3:00 p.m. and at which time
I mentioned to him that the cars were not prepared for the
test (they were untuned and thick dust covered the engines)
and that I could not wait for two days, and then I left.
On the way back to Toronto, I stopped at Ann Arbor and met
with the President of Automated Custom Systems Inc., who
telephoned Mr. Mathews in Chicago and he was informed that
the price for future tests had risen from $6,000.00 to
-------
Mr. Merril W. Korth...2 31 October 1986
$8,450.00 U.S. The President of A.C.S.I, apologized to me
and suggested that I make another appointment, which was
made for August 14th. I am enclosing a copy of a letter
dated August 8, 1986 which I sent to Mr. Mathews setting
out my understanding of what had been resolved at our
earlier meeting, as well as what my specific requirements
would be on my return to Chicago on August 14th.
I requested proof that the engines were not leaned down but
running rich, and it was not available. I obtained
information from a mechanic next door to A.C.S.I, that he
had done a minor tune up, that the engines were running
lean and that the carburetion system should be opened up in
order to create power efficiency in the engines.
After I had a lengthy discussion with Mr. Mathews, he
wanted to refund me the sum of $3,500.00 U.S. which I
refused to accept. At that time, I telephoned you and
informed you of the discussion I had with him, and he
assured you that the cars were tuned up rich and I decided
to proceed with the tests. After the tests were conducted,
he informed me: "I have to show the test results to an
expert for him to figure it out". I did not receive his
letter in which he enclosed the results until a month after
the tests.
Mr. Mathews indicated in his letter that the two devices
were not identical. He is wrong in making such a
statement; one of them was packed into a stainless steel
box, but both were the same mechanically. Furthermore, he
stated in his letter that the installation lasted longer
than 1-2 minutes. This is because he did not call in a
mechanic whom I could instruct on the installation, which
should not have taken more than 1-2 minutes. The
Manager, Mr. Sinclair, said: "I am not a mechanic, but I
have to do the installation". As a result, it took
longer. Furthermore, a dealer such as General Motors, who
is familiar with the carburetion system and an engine which
has run over 60,000 miles, should have checked it out. I
suppose Mr. Mathews did not want to incur further expenses
so the mechanic whom he hired did a minor tune up.
I wish to inform you that two cars, an Oldsmobile and a
Camaro, both 305 c.c. V-8 4 barrel engine, had similar
percent emission gases and with the device installed the
-------
Mr. Merril W. Korth...3 31 October 1986
Camaro had over a 60% average reduction of the emission
gases. An Ontario dealer, General Motors, conducted a test
on a 305 c.c. V-8 4 barrel engine, 6221 km. on the
odometer, a 1985 Buick, and the fuel economy improved
21.9%, idle: No C.O. (see copy attached).
I also wish to inform you that a third 5-day test programme
can be conducted by Automated Custom Systems Inc. at the
cost of $3,000.00 U.S.
With your assistance and your prestige, I feel that Mr.
Mathews can be made to realize after your engine analysis
that DeAcc Devices Inc. is entitled, with your approval, to
one E.P.A. 511 Test Programme without cost. In the
alternative, I would prefer to have the test done in the
laboratories of your agency.
Mr. Korth, in Chicago, two cars were tested at the cost of
$8,450.00 U.S. within 5 days. Mr. Mathews is offering a
one car test (511 Programme) for $3,000.00 within 5 days.
Is this generosity to DeAcc Devices Inc. or an admission of
his mistakes?
I wish to take this opportunity to thank you for your
assistance up to the present time and in the future.
Respectfully yours,
-' v. , V •* > ^
Stephen DePakh, President,
DeAcc Devices Inc.
SDP/dr
Encls.
-------
Attachment 0
AUTOMATED CUSTOM SYSTEHS, INC.
ELK 6ROVE, IL. 60007
CUSTOMER: DEACC DEVICES, INC.
TORONTO, CANADA
TEST-TO-TEST VARIABILITY WORKSHEET
TEST WEEK: 8/11/BA
EPA 511 TEST PROGRAM
MMMMMMMMMMMMM
AUTO/YR: 1984 CHEVROLET
MODEL: 2 DOOR CAMARO RED
VIN: 161AP87H2EL105034
DRIVER: RAY SINCLAIR
OPERATOR: CHUCK SHOEMAKER
COMMENTS: BEFORE/AFTER BACK-TO-BACK
BASELINE VEHICLE TPST DflTEs
TEST RUN ODOMETER
1 24,737
2 24,787
MEAN
S.D.
C.V.
FINAL VEHICLE
TEST RUN ODOMETER
I 24,837
2 24,919
MEAN
S.D.
C.V.
PERCENT CHANGE
COLD START FTP
HC
0.294
0.281
0.288
0.009
3.2
tm
TEST DATE
CO
2. 586
2.372
2.479
0.151
6.1
MM
t
COLD START FTP
HC
0.301
0.552
0.427
0.177
41.6
MM
48.35
CO
2.696
2.702
2.699
0.004
0.2
mt
8.87
8/12/86,
C02
638.7
632.1
635.4
4.649
0.7
mm
8/15/86,
C02
636.5
642.5
639.5
4.197
0.7
mm
0.6
8/13/86
NOX
1.126
1.146
1.136
0.014
1.2
MM
8/16/86
NOX
0.747
0.796
0.772
0.035
4.5
MM
-32.09
ENGINE CID: • 305/8 CYLINDER
TRANSMISSION: AUTO
A/C EQUIPPED: YES
CURB MT: 3186
INERTIA NT: 3500
HP ACT/IND: 12.3/10.4
HFET (AFTER
F.E.
13.777
13.927
13.85
0.106
0.8
MM
HC
0.176
0.389
0.283
0.151
53.3
MM
HFET
CO
5
8
7
1
HFET (AFTER
F.E.
13.819
13.676
13.75
0.101
0.7
mt
-0.75
HC
0.107
0.101
0.104
0.004
4.1
MM
-63.19
3
3
3
0
.713
.309
.011
.836
26.2
MM
HFET
CO
.399
.956
.678
.394
10.7
mt
-47.55
PREP)
C02
445.1
442.8
443.9
1.653
0.4
MM
PREP)
C02
440.7
438.2
439.4
1.785
0.4
mt
-1.02
NOX
2.050
2.272
2.161
0.157
7.3
mt
NOX
0.655
0.675
0.665
0.014
2.1
MM
-69.23
F.E.
19.51
19.40
19.45
0.073
0.4
tttt
F.E.
19.87
19.94
19.91
0.052
0.3
tttt
2.32
NOTE 1: Exhaust emissions are in qrais per lile, fuel econoiy is in illes per gallon.
NOTE 2: C.V. is the Coefficient of Variation for the tests.
NOTE 3: C.V. =
STANDARD DEVIATION
MEAN
X 1001
-------
AUTOMATED CUSTOh SYSTEMS, INC.
TEST KEEK: 8/11/86
CLf. DKUVC, JL. OUUU/
CUSTOMER: DEACC DEVICES, INC.
TORONTO, CANADA
TEST-TO-TEST VARIABILITY WORKSHEET
EPA 511 TEST PROGRAM
HHHHHHHHHHHHH
AUTO/YR: 1982 OLDSMQBILE
MODEL: CUSTOM CRUISER BROWN
VIN: 1G3AP35Y6CK 106335
DRIVER: CHUCK SHOEMAKER
OPERATOR: RAY SINCLAIR
COMMENTS: BEFORE/AFTER BACK-TO-BACK
BASELINE VPHTT.IF TFST nATF- fl/17/RA.
TEST RUN
ODOMETER COLD START FTP
HC CO
1
2
MEAN
S.D.
C.V.
FINAL
TEST RUN
1
2
MEAN
S.D.
C.V.
PERCENT
NOTE 1:
NOTE 2:
unit t.
61,567 0.543 2
61,607 0.484 2
0.514 2
0.042 0
8.1
HH
VEHICLE TEST DATE:.
ODOMETER COLD START
HC
61,644 0.592 3
61,696 0.591 3
0.592 3
0.001 0
0.1
HH
.897
.554
.726
.243
8.9
HH
C02
623.
612.
618.
7.
1.
5
5
0
7
3
mm
8/le,/flA.
FTP
CO
.512
.257
.385
.180
5.3
HH
CHANGE 15.19 24.18
Exhaust emissions are in qrais
C.V. is the Coefficient
C02
671.
668.
669.
2.
0.
2
0
6
3
3
HHH
8.
per
4
8/13/86
NOX
1.380
1.313
1.347
0.047
3.5
HH
8/16/86
NOX
0.842
0.794
0.818
0.034
4.1
HH
-39.25
ule, fuel
of Variation
STANDARD DEVI A
p U -
TION
for the
» 1f\M
ENGINE CID: 305/8 CYLINDER
TRANSMISSION: AUTO
A/C EfiUlPPED: YES
CURB HT: 3964
INERTIA HT: 4250
HP ACT/IND: 13.2/11.2
HFET (AFTER HFET
F.E.
14.083
14.348
14.22
0.187
1.3
HH
HC
0.131
0.139
0.135
0.006
4.2
HH
CO
0.359
0.435
0.397
0.054
13.5
HH
HFET (AFTER HFET
F.E.
13.068
13.138
13.10
0.049
0.4
HH
-7.83
econoiy
tests.
HC
0.164
0.167
0.166
0.002
1.3
HH
22.59
is in liles
CO
0.670
0.596
0.633
0.052
8.3
HH
59.45
PREP)
C02'
401.7
388.6
395.1
9.266
2.3
HH
PREP)
CQ2
414.7
416.5
415.6
1.263
0.3
HH
5.19
NOX
1.418
1.335
1.377
0.059
4.3
HH
NOX
0.885
0.864
0.875
0.015
1.7
HH
-36.47
F.E.
22.02
22.76
22.39
0.518
2.3
HH
F.E.
21.30
21.22
21.26
0.060
0.3
HH
-5.05
per gallon.
MEAN
-------
Attachment P
.543
.484
1.027
.592
.591
1.183
2.210
.294
.281
.575
.301
.552
.853
1.428
1.602
2.036
3.638
Detailed Example of Analysis of Variance Calculation
FTP HC Emissions
OLDS CAMERO ROW TOTALS
Baseline
SUM
DeAcc
SUM
TOTALS
r=2 No. of Rows = No. of Configurations (with and w/o Device)
c=2 No. of columns = No. of Vehicles
N=8 Total No. of Tests
n=2 No. of Replications
T= 3.638 sum of X's where X = value of each test
T2/N= 3.6382/8 = 1.654
SX2= Sum of X2 = 1.790
SSC Sum of squares among columns (cars)
= (2.2102 + 1.4282)/ (2x2) - 1.654 = .076
Tc 2 nxc T2/N
SSr= Sum of squares among rows (device vs no device)
(1.6022 + 2.0362)/(2x2) - 1.654 = .024
Tr2 rxc T2/N
SScr= column row interaction = Sum of squares of rows and columns
= (1.0272 + 1.1832 + .5752 +.8532)/2 - 1.654 - .076 -.024 = .0002
Tcr 2 n T2/N SSC SSr
SSt = Sum of squares total
=SX2 T2/N
= 1.790 - 1.654 = .135
-------
FTP HC Emissions
Source
Among col
Cars Effect
Sum
Squares
SJ5
.076
Among Rows .024
Device Effect
Coi/Row
Interaction
.002
Degrees Mean Mean Sq.
Freedom Square Ratio MSR w 90%
DF SS/DF MSR=MS/MSRS Confid. Factor
2-1=1
c-1
2-1=1
r-1
.076
.024
.002
9.175
2.826
.223
4.54
4.54
4.54
Residual
Total
.033
135
Total-Sum
Of Prev
4-3=4
N-l=8-l=7
.008
2.826 is less than 4.54 therefore
no statistically signficant device
effect on emissions
Summary of Statistical Analysis of Device Effects
By Analysis of Variance
FTP
HC Emissions
CO Emissions
NOX Emissions
MPG Economy
Minimum
Mean Square
Ratio
2.826
13.524
333.478
50.175
MSR (4 90%
Confidence
4.54
4.54
4.54
4.54
Conclusion
No Device Effect
Negative Device Effect
Increased CO
Positive Device Effect
Reduced NOX
Negative Device Effect
Reduced Fuel Economy
HFET
HC Emissions
CO Emissions
NOX Emissions
1.927
5.435
280.072
4.54
4.54
4.54
No Device Effect
Positive Device Effect
Reduced CO
Positive Device Effect
Reduced NOV
MPG Economy
3.239
4.54
No Device Effect
-------
Attachment Q
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105
OFFICE OF
AIR AND RADIATION
January 13, 1987
Mr. Stephen DePakh, President
DeAcc Devices Incorporated
90 Warren Road, Suite 110
Toronto, Canada M4V2S2
Dear Mr. DePakh:
We received your letter of October 31, which included the
test packets for independent laboratory testing of your DeAcc
device. We have reviewed the packets and have analyzed the
results.
The test program was conducted in accordance with the test
plan we suggested in our previous correspondence. .The vehicles
and the test variability are acceptable, and there appears to
be no technical reason to rerun tests or conduct tests on
additional vehicles.
The FTP and HFET test data were analyzed by the analysis
of variance (ANOVA) technique to determine if the data
indicated that there was a statistically significant difference
in emissions or fuel economy due to the device. For the FTP
and HFET, although the device reduced NOX emissions, there
was an increase in FTP CO emissions and a fuel economy penalty
for the FTP. The HFET CO emissions indicated an overall
improvement; however, one of the two vehicles showed an
increase in CO emissions. The increase in HC emissions for
both driving cycles and changes in HFET fuel economy for the
device were not statistically significant.
Since vehicles are designed to meet the emission standards
for HC, CO, and NOX, our policy in evaluating emissions
and/or fuel economy devices is that a device must first not
show an adverse effect in any emissions and fuel economy tests
and second must show a significant improvement. - Clearly, the
DeAcc device did not pass these criteria and; thus, we will not
proceed to the in-house testing phase. The NOX reduction
with the device can reasonably be attributed to the increase in
exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) rather than the postulated
catalytic reactions in the copper line.
A section 511 evaluation report on the DeAcc device will
be prepared and a notice published in the Federal Register
-------
announcing the conclusions of our evaluationn and the
availability of the final report. You will be sent a draft
copy of the final report and the notice prior to their
release. Additionally, the DeAcc device will be added to our
list as a device for which an evaluation was performed.
Devices on this list are categorized by device type and
effectiveness. This list is distributed to interested parties
upon request.
Enclosed are the test packets and summary sheets you
provided. If I can be of any further assistance, please
contact me at (313) 668-4299.
Sincerely,
Merrill W. Korth
Device Evaluation Coordinator
Test and Evaluation Branch
------- |