EPA-AA-TSS-I/M-90-7
Technical Report
I/M Test Variability
Observed in the Louisville I/M Program
By
Larry C. Landman
August 1990
NOTICE
Technical Reports do not necessarily represent final EPA
decisions or positions. They are intended to present
technical analysis of issues using data which are
currently available. The purpose in the release of such
reports is to facilitate the exchange of technical
information and to inform the public of technical
developments which may form the basis for a final EPA
decision, position or regulatory action.
Technical Support Staff
Emission Control Technology Division
Office of Mobile,Sources
Office of Air and Radiation
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
ABSTRACT
271 vehicles from the 1981 through 1988 model years that
failed their regularly scheduled I/M test received extra tests
while still in the inspection lane. Those extra tests consisted
of an immediate retest (i.e., a second chance test) and a
similar test preceded by three minutes of 2500 rpm, no-load
operation. Analysis of the test results shows that the
three-minute, 2500 rpm, no-load preconditioning cycle added
very little over simply an immediate retest for most of the
vehicles in this study; however, that preconditioning cycle did
have a significant effect in reducing the failure rate of those
vehicles that exceeded only the HC standard on the initial test.
-i-
-------
Table of Contents
Page
List of Tables iii
1.0 Executive Summary 1
1.1 Objectives of Work 1
1.2 Conclusions Reached 1
2.0 Background and Program Summary 3
3.0 Program Description .... 4
3.1 Objectives and Strategy 4
3.2 Test Fleet Selection 4
3.3 Description of the Official Louisville Program 5
3.4 Description of the Special Test 7
4.0 Test Results 9
4.1 Profile of the Test Fleet 9
4.2 Comparison of Overall Pass/Fail Results . . 14
4.3 Comparison of HC and CO Pass/Fail Results . 17
4.4 Comparison of Magnitude of Changes 22
4.5 Comparison of the Vehicles Which Changed
Pass/Fail Status between the Two Retests . 24
4.6 Vehicles Which Pass Either of the Two Retests 28
4.7 Examination of the 3-Second Emission Data . 28
5.0 Conclusions 31
6.0 Acknowledgements 33
7.0 References 34
Appendices:
A. Description of the 271 Cars Tested A-l
B. Idle Emissions of the Test Vehicles B-l
-11-
-------
List of Tables
Table 3.1
Table 4.1
Table 4.2
Table 4.3
Table 4.4
Table 4.5
Table- 4.6-
Table 4.7
Table 4.8
Table 4.9
Table 4.10
Table 4.11
Table 4.12
Table 4.13
Table 4.14
Table 4.15
Table 4.16
Table 4.17
Idle Emission Cut Points for the Louisville
Program
Distribution of the Test Vehicles
Composition of the Sample Fleet
by Control Configuration and Vehicle Type . .
Composition by Manufacturer of the Truck Sample
Composition by Manufacturer of the Passenger
Car Sample
Distribution of Test Results
Distribution of Test Results by Stratum ....
Distribution of Test Results by Manufacturer
and Vehicle Type
Characterizing I/M Failures by Emission
Component
Percentage of Failures per Test Sequence
by Emission Component
Distribution of Pass/Fail results by Emission
Component
Distribution of Test Results By Initial
I/M Failure Type by Stratum
Distribution of Differences in Idle HC Scores .
Distribution of Differences in Idle CO Scores .
Vehicles Exhibiting Large Changes in Idle
Emissions
Comparison of Vehicles Failing the First Retest
But Passing after Preconditioning Cycle . . .
Comparison of Vehicles Passing the First Retest
But Failing after Preconditioning Cycle . . .
Elapse Time (in seconds) Between Tests
Page
5
9
10
11
12
14
14
17
18
18
19
20
23
23
24
26
27
30
-111-
-------
I/M Test Variability
Observed in the Louisville I/M Program
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 Objectives of Work
The primary objective of this program was to determine the
effect of an immediate second chance test on vehicles which
failed at a centralized I/M test after no more than a short
period of time waiting (i.e., idling) prior to the test.
A secondary objective of this program was to characterize
those vehicles which after failing the Louisville I/M test then
exhibited significant changes in idle emissions on either:
- an immediate retest (i.e., a second chance test) or
- a similar test- preconditioned with three minutes of 2500
rpm, no-load operation.
1.2 Conclusions Reached
An immediate second chance test reduced the number of
failing vehicles by 29 percent (cf. page 14) which is comparable
to what was found in earlier studies. However, the second
chance tests in those earlier studies were not immediate
retests.
The three-minute, 2500 rpm, no-load preconditioning cycle
produced a larger reduction in the I/M failure rate than did
the immediate retest (35 percent versus 29 percent) (cf. pg 14).
The preconditioning cycle had a more significant effect in
reducing the failure rate of those vehicles that exceeded only
the HC standard on the initial I/M test (cf. page 18). The
three minute preconditioning cycle had the greatest effect on
the failure rate of the open-loop carbureted vehicles and the
least effect on the closed-loop fuel injected vehicles (cf. pp.
15 and 16).
The pass/fail results for the individual vehicles were
more variable between the initial test and either of the two
retests than between the retests themselves (i.e., the pass/fail
determinations for the retests agreed more frequently) (cf.
page 14).
Two possible explanations for the variability between the
two retests being smaller than the variability between the
initial test and either of the two retests are:
-------
- The initial I/M test served as a consistent preconditioning
cycle for the first retest, thus, reducing some of the
variability.
- The initial idle test was preconditioned by operating at
approximately one-half throttle while the preconditioning
cycle for both retests was a controlled 2500+300 rpm. (If
this difference in preconditioning cycles does, in fact,
account for some of the differences among the test scores,
then the use of a tachometer might eliminate that portion
of the variability in I/M pass/fail results.)
For about one-sixth of the vehicles in this sample, the
variability in the I/M pass/fail results is apparently due
either to the sensitivity of those vehicles to the sampling
algorithm which determines when the testing is complete or to
the sensitivity of those vehicles to the timing of the insertion
of the probe into the vehicle's tailpipe. In some instances,
the variability resulted from the use of a percent of point
stability check (cf. pages 28-& 29). (Since a fixed percentage
of a low emission value results in a very small level of
variability permitted for a "stable" test. A better approach
would be to include a minimum absolute amount criteria to the
stability decision.)
In future testing programs, it would probably be good to
have the probe in place during the preconditioning for
consistent start of test in order to reduce the instances of
variability which result from the timing of the insertion of
the probe into the vehicle's tailpipe.
-2-
-------
2.0 BACKGROUND AND PROGRAM SUMMARY
In 1985 and 1986, EPA conducted emissions test programs in
Maryland.[1,2]* While performing those studies, we found that
a significant percentage of the 1981 and newer cars that failed
at the Maryland I/M test lanes would pass a similar test
conducted at the Contractor's laboratory. GM has also collected
data on low mileage GM cars which point in the same direction.
Similar results were found in other studies conducted in Cali-
fornia. [3,4] A number of possible causes for this variability
exist, including:
- The time a vehicle spends waiting in line for the I/M test,
a feature of centralized I/M programs, may cause the oxygen
sensor and/or catalyst to cool down so that a subsequent
I/M test would not accurately identify a vehicle's FTP
emissions. (This might explain the variability in a
centralized program such as Maryland's but not in a
decentralized program such as California's.)
- Variations in the preconditioning cycle might account for
some of the variability in the idle test results. (In the
Maryland I/M program, each vehicle operates for fifteen
seconds at an uncontrolled one-third to one-half throttle
prior to conducting the idle test. Thus, the precondi-
tioning cycle might vary between an initial test and an
immediate retest.)
- Variations in the delays between the completion of the
preconditioning mode and the beginning of the measurement
(i.e., idle) mode may result in substantial variations in
the idle emissions.
- The evaporative canister fill levels may vary.
- Some vehicles may be variable due to intermittent problems.
Passing those vehicles that exhibit variable I/M pass/fail
results could be useful since earlier studies have demonstrated
that the FTP emissions of the I/M variable vehicles are
substantially lower than those of the vehicles that consistently
fail I/M tests.[2]
Those vehicles with variable I/M pass/fail scores could be
identified by obtaining passing scores for some of the failing
vehicles. Two possible approaches for obtaining passing scores
for vehicles that initially failed are (1) simply to perform an
immediate retest or (2) to perform a retest that follows some
specified type of preconditioning. With those two approaches
in mind, we designed the program described in Section 3.
Numbers in brackets denote references at the end of this
report (pg. 33).
-3-
-------
3.0 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
3.1 Objectives and Strategy:
The primary objective of this program was to determine the
effect of an immediate second chance test on vehicles which
failed at a centralized I/M test after no more than a short
period of time waiting (i.e., idling) prior to the test. To
accomplish this objective, EPA developed this test program. At
EPA's request, Gordon-Darby Enterprises, the contractor which
operates the I/M testing program in Jefferson County
(Louisville, KY), performed two types of retests on vehicles
which had just failed their initial I/M test. Those two
retests (which are described in detail in Section 3.4) are:
- an immediate retest and
- a retest that was preceded by preconditioning the vehicle
by operating it at 2500 rpm for three minutes with the
vehicle's transmission in either park or neutral. . ..
In this testing program, the target was to recruit and
test approximately 300 late-model year (i.e., 1981 and newer)
cars and light trucks which failed the Louisville I/M program.
This report summarizes the effort to study:
- the variability of the idle emissions of these new
technology cars and
- the effects on I/M emissions of a three-minute, 2500 rpm
preconditioning cycle.
For the vehicles in this program, Gordon-Darby personnel
performed an official Louisville I/M test (described in
Reference 5 and below in Section 3.3) on each of the 271 test
vehicles; they then performed a special test (described in
Section 3.4) on each of those vehicles.
One of the primary reasons we chose to use the Louisville
I/M program for this study was the ease of programming of the
lane analyzers permitted by the centralized mainframe which
controlled the entire system (see Section 3.3).
3.2 Test Fleet Selection:
Every 1981 and newer, gasoline-fueled passenger car and
light truck which failed the official I/M test during specified
times at any one of the four Louisville testing stations was
considered for this program. Gordon-Darby Enterprises
attempted to recruit test vehicles during non-peak periods to
avoid creating long waiting times for the other drivers. Thus,
testing only at non-peak hours removed from this study those
-4-
-------
vehicles which had been idling in line for some time. The
testing began on July 8, 1987 and continued through December
23, 1987.
The incentives for the drivers to participate in this
program were two more opportunities to pass the official I/M
test without any additional inconvenience or fees. (A "pass"
on either the first or second retest in this program, as
described in Steps 2 and 5 in Section 3.4, was treated as a
"pass" on the official test.)
3.3 Description of the Louisville I/M Program:
The Jefferson County Vehicle Exhaust Testing (VET) program
utilizes four centralized, four-lane stations distributed
throughout the county. Approximately 385,000 vehicles are
covered. The Jefferson County program has the broadest vehicle
coverage of any program in the country. All vehicles are
covered except heavy-duty vehicles of more than 18,000 GVWR.
There- are no exemptions for vehicle age or fuel type, although
diesels are reguired to pass only an opacity test. Motorcycles
must also be tested.
The cut points which are used in the Louisville I/M
program are given in Table 3.1. The failure rate for 1981 and
newer passenger cars and light trucks has been averaging
between six and eight percent in the Louisville I/M program.
Table 3.1
Idle Emission Cut Points
for the Louisville Program
Vehicle Type
Passenger Cars
Light Trucks
Model
Year
1981+
1981
1982+
CO
(%)
1.2
1.7
1.2
HC
(ppm)
220
350
220
An unusual feature of the Louisville program is that the
entire system is controlled by a central mainframe computer.
(One of the primary reasons we chose to use the Louisville I/M
program for this study was the ease of programming of the lane
analyzers permitted by the centralized mainframe.) Terminals
at each test lane allow entry of a vehicle's license plate
number by the inspector. This number is used to locate the
registration record for the vehicle so that the car's identity
and its status (i.e., due for test, retest, not due for test,
-5-
-------
etc.) can be confirmed. The information is then stored in the
central computer. The main computer also signals for the
automatic calibration checks and stores results of all
calibrations.
The Louisville program uses an idle test for all vehicles
except diesels (which must pass an opacity test) and two-stroke
motorcycles. The idle test procedure calls for preconditioning
for 10 seconds at half throttle for all vehicles, except 1981
and later model Fords which have a restart, followed by 30
seconds at half throttle. Motorists entering the stations are
asked if the vehicle is warmed up, then advised to put the
vehicle in park (or neutral for manual transmission), set the
emergency brake, and turn off all accessories. The motorist is
then advised to apply half throttle for either ten or 30
seconds, as appropriate. A timed light is used to indicate the
end of the conditioning period. During this time, the analyzer
performs a HC hang-up test. If the HC measurements do not
exceed ten ppm (hexane) (i.e., an HC hang up check), the
computer instructs the tester to insert the~-probe—into-.-the
vehicle's tailpipe, and the readings are taken.
When this program was run, the computer read the analyzer
measurements in three-second blocks of data.* The algorithm
used by the computer required the sum of the readings CO plus
C02 to exceed six percent (i.e., a dilution check). After
the first three-second block in which (CO + C02) > 6%, the
computer averaged the HC and CO readings from three consecutive
three-seconds blocks (a total of nine seconds) separately for
HC and CO. If the emissions in each of the three three-second
blocks:
1. varied by no more than 10% from the average,
2. the HC emissions were within 20 ppm of the average,
3. the CO emissions were within 0.2% of the average, and
4. the COz emissions were within 1% of the average;
then the 9-second averages were reported. Otherwise, the
process continued for up to 30 seconds, at which time either:
1. the computer reported "C02 Failure" if the C0-C02
criterion was not met, or
2. the computer reported the averages of the last nine
seconds.
The analyzer compared the reported reading to the applicable
standard. A "pass" or "fail" certificate was then printed, and
given to the motorist.
Since this test program was completed, changes were made to
the sampling algorithm.
-6-
-------
Observations made by EPA auditors of the inspectors'
performance showed that the specified procedures were followed
routinely by all inspectors, with some variations. One
shortcoming observed in the test procedure was variability in
the preconditioning phase. This consisted of inconsistent
"half throttle" and preconditioning times that were longer than
specified caused by motorists not releasing the throttle when
the light went out. However, the inspectors in most cases did
prompt the motorists to raise or lower the engine speed when it
was clearly too low or high and, overall, the speeds were
controlled reasonably well. The inspectors also were quick to
prompt motorists to release the throttle, and even when
motorists did not follow the light, delays rarely exceeded 10
seconds.
A second source of the variation in test results was
brought about by Louisville's use of a single analyzer in two
adjacent lanes. Preconditioning of a vehicle was sometimes
completed before the probe was made available from the
adjoining lane, resulting in small lags before_the~ idle, testing
could be initiated.
3.4 Description of the Special Test:
The special testing took place immediately following the
initial I/M test failure. (The test vehicles were not moved.)
The special testing consisted of the following six steps:
1. Tachometer Hookup:
The vehicle's hood was opened, and a Sears Engine
Analyzer (model 161.216300) was connected to the
battery terminal, or a handheld Shimpo Digital Tach-
ometer (DT-501) was positioned near a spark plug.
2. "Second Chance" Test:
The standard Louisville I/M test (described in the
preceding section) was rerun with one change.
Rather than asking the driver to operate the engine
at one-half throttle, the I/M inspector had the
driver operate the engine at 2500 +300 rpm (by
using one of the tachometers described in the first
step). This difference might make it difficult to
compare the results from this step (i.e., the
second chance test) with those from the official
(i.e., initial) test; however, it produces a high
degree of consistency between the second and third
tests performed on each of the test vehicles.
The driver was instructed to leave the engine
idling at the end of this step.
— 7 —
-------
3. Extended Preconditioning:
The driver was instructed to increase engine speed
to 2500 (+300) rpm and to maintain that engine
speed for three minutes.
4. Ford/Honda Restart:
If the vehicle was either a Ford or a 1984 Honda
Prelude, the driver was instructed to turn off the
engine and then to restart it after 10 seconds.
Drivers of other models were instructed to return
the car to idle for 10 seconds.
5. "Third Chance" Test:
The modified standard Louisville test (described in
Step 2) was repeated.
6. Test Completion: —
The engine was shut off, the tachometer was removed,
and the vehicle was released.
-8-
-------
4.0 RESULTS
4.1 Profile of the Test Fleet:
A total of 271 l u and newer vehicles were tested in this
program. Two vehicles v.a 1983 Oldsmobile Cutlass Calais and a
1981 Cadillac Eldoradc vehicles 270 and 271, respectively) were
originally diesels bu~ had been converted to gasoline-fueled
vehicles. Since the current owners were unable to provide any
information on the replacement engines and emission control
systems, those two vehicles were dropped from the following
analyses. The distribution of the remaining 269 vehicles by
model year and vehicle type is given below:
Table 4.1
Distribution of the Test Vehicles
Mbdei Passenger Light
Year Cars Trucks
1981 68 3
1982 49 10
1983 28 11
1984 20 5
1985 26 5
1986 26 11
1987 5 1
1988
Totals: 222 47
From the values in this table, we observe that the
majority (52.7%) of the passenger cars fell into only two model
years (1981 and 1982), while over two-thirds (68.1%) of the
light trucks were concentrated in three model years (1982, 83,
and 86). This is not the distribution we would expect from a
random sample of 269 vehicles. Three trucks (vehicles 121,
122, and 222) were 1981 model year vehicles and, thus, were
subject to the less stringent 1981 standards (from Table 3.1).
EPA employed two computer programs to obtain information
from the individual Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs) of
the test vehicles. One program was written for EPA, under an
earlier contract, by Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc.
The second program (named "VINDICATOR") was written by the
Highway Loss Data Institute (Washington, DC) and was made
available to EPA. The results of that decoding are given in
Appendix A. Using the results of those decodings and the
certification records, we obtain the distributions in Table 4.2.
-9-
-------
Table 4.2
Composition of the Sample Fleet
by Control Configuration and Vehicle Type
Vehicle
Type
All
TOTALS :
Pass Cars
TOTALS :
Light Trk
TOTALS :
Fuel
Metering
Garb
FI
Carb
FI
Carb
FI
Open-Loop
with No
AIR
79
0
79
54
0
54
25
0
25
AIR
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
— Closed-Loop -
with No
AIR
114
31
145
103
29
132
11
2
13
AIR
0
41
41
0
33
33
0
8
8
?
0
3
3
0
2
2
0
1
1
Totals
194
75
269
158
64
222
36
11
47
Examining the data in Table 4.2, we observe that the test
vehicles are not evenly distributed among the possible
categories. All of the fuel injected vehicles are closed-loop,
and they are distributed almost equally between vehicles which
are equipped with air injection reaction (AIR) systems (either
pump type or pulse-air type) and those not so equipped. (We
were unable to determine from the VINs whether three of the
fuel injected vehicles were equipped with AIR systems.) While
the carbureted vehicles are almost exclusively equipped with
AIR systems, and they are divided (in a two-to-three ratio)
between open-loop and closed-loop. This distribution of test
vehicles (i.e., the carbureted vehicles being almost
exclusively equipped with AIR and divided between open-loop and
closed-loop, while the fuel-injected vehicles being exclusively
closed-loop and divided between AIR and No AIR) is almost
identical to the distribution in an earlier test program
described in Reference 2.
In a similar fashion, the vehicle data in Appendix A may
be stratified by manufacturer, vehicle type, fuel metering
system, and engine displacement to obtain Tables 4.3 and 4.4.
-10-
-------
Table 4.3
Composition by Manufacturer
of the Truck Sample
Fuel Sample
Manufacturer CID Metering Size
Chrysler 122 Carb. l
135 Carb. 1
Ford 122 Carb. 1
140 Carb. 4
140 F.I. 1
171 Carb. 2
179 F.I. 4
225 Carb. 1
300 Carb. 6
302 Carb. 1
302 F.I. 1
351 Carb. 3
462 Carb. 1
GM 119 Carb. 1
151 F.I. 1
173 Carb. 4
229 Carb. 1
262 F.I. 3
305 Carb. 6
350 Carb. 1
Mitsubishi 122 Carb. 1
Toyota 122 F.I. 1
144 Carb. 1
-11-
-------
Table 4.4
Composition by Manufacturer
of the Passenger Car Sample
Manufacturer
AMC/Renault
Audi
BMW
Chrysler
Fiat
Ford
GM
CID
85
131
136
108
135
135
152
156
318
122
98
113
140
140
152
200
231
231
255
302
302
351
98
110
112
121
151
151
173
173
229
231
231
249
Fuel
Metering
F.I.
F.I.
F.I.
F.I.
Garb.
F.I.
F.I.
Carb.
Carb.
F.I.
Carb.
Carb.
Carb.
F.I.
F.I.
Carb.
Carb.
F.I.
Carb.
Carb.
F.I.
Carb.
Carb.
F.I.
Carb.
F.I.
Carb.
F.I.
Carb.
F.I.
Carb.
Carb.
F.I.
F.I.
Sample
Size
2
1
1
1
10
4
5
3
4
1
23
1
4
10
5
9
4
1
2
5
1
5
10
1
3
1
1
3
7
5
6
21
2
1
— Table 4.4 continued on next page —
-------
Table 4.4 (Continued)
Composition by Manufacturer
of the Passenger Car Sample
Manufacturer
GM ( Cont . )
Honda
•
Isuzu
Jaguar
Mitsubishi
Nissan/Dats
Peugeot
Porsche
TKM (Mazda)
Toyota
Volvo
VW
CID
252
265
305
307
368
91
107
112
119 -
111
258
86
90
156
— *
91
92
98
120
146
181
120
183
91
108
130
105
109
Fuel
Metering
Carb.
Carb.
Carb.
Carb.
F.I.
Carb.
Carb.
Carb.
Carb^
Carb.
F.I.
Carb.
Carb.
Carb.
Carb.
Carb.
F.I.
Carb.
Carb.
F.I.
F.I.
F.I.
F.I.
Carb.
Carb.
F.I.
F.I.
F.I.
Sample
Size
2
2
3
6
2
2
2
4
4
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
2
5
3
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
* A unique determination of the CID
was not available. The possible
displacements of that 4-cylinder
Datsun 210 are 75, 85, or 91 CID.
-13-
-------
4.2 Comparison of Overall Pass/Fail (P/F) Results:
The first level of analysis was simply to observe the
number of vehicles which passed or failed each of the two
retests (without regard to whether the cause of the failure was
HC, CO, or both). From this analysis, we obtain Table 4.5:
Table 4.5
Distribution of Test Results
Second Chance Third Chance Test
Test Pass Fail Totals
Pass: 58 20 78
Fail: 35 156 191
Totals: 93 176 269
Repeating that analysis after stratifying the sample by
vehicle type (passenger car vs. light truck), fuel metering
system (carbureted vs. fuel injected), control of the air/fuel
ratio (open-loop vs. closed-loop), and AIR system (where
applicable) produces Table 4.6.
Table 4.6
Distribution of Test Results by Stratum
Strata Retest Pass/Fail Percentages
Fuel Mixtr Supp. Veh. Strata (Second Chance/Third Chance)
Metr Cntrl AIR ? Type Size P/P P/F F/P F/F
Both Both Both Both 269 21.6% 7.4% 13.0% 58.0%
Garb C/L Yes Car 103 19.4% 4.9% 13.6% 62.1%
Trk 11 18.2% 27.3% 18.2% 36.4%
0/L No Car 1 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0%
Yes Car 54 14.8% 7.4% 16.7% 61.1%
Trk 25 20.0% 4.0% 20.0% 56.0%
FI C/L ? Car 2 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Trk 1 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
No Car 33 30.3% 6.1% 9.1% 54.5%
Trk 8 25.0% 37.5% 0.0% 37.5%
Yes Car 29 27.6% 6.9% 3.4% 62.1%
Trk 2 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%
-14-
-------
From the preceding table, we made the following two
observations:
1. The percent of the vehicles which continued to fail
both retests (even after three minutes of
preconditioning at 2500 rpm, no-load) ranged from
about 50% to 60% for all strata containing at least 20
vehicles.
2. For most strata, more vehicles passed the retest that
followed the three-minute preconditioning cycle than
passed the retest which was not preceded by that
cycle. (Those vehicles, which passed only after
extensive preconditioning, are discussed in Section
4.5.)
The primary exception to the second observation was the group
of 22 closed-loop light trucks. This behavior of the
closed-loop light trucks in this study might be representative-
of those vehicles, or it may simply be an aberration resulting
from the small number of those vehicles in this testing
program. To determine which of these two explanations is
correct, a follow-up testing program would be necessary.
The data in Table 4.6 suggests that the preconditioning
cycle had a more significant effect on the failure rate of the
carbureted vehicles than on the failure rate of the fuel
injected vehicles. We can calculate that essentially the same
percentage of the 194 carbureted vehicles and 75 fuel injected
vehicles passed after the preconditioning cycle (34% and 36%,
respectively). However, the percentages of the vehicles which
passed only after preconditioning are significantly different
(16% of the carbureted vehicles versus only 5% of the fuel
injected vehicles). An equivalent approach to using the data
in Table 4.6 would be to stratify the population of 269
vehicles based on the pass/fail status of each retest (i.e.,
pass the first retest, pass only the first retest, pass the
second retest, pass only the second retest, pass either retest,
and fail both retests), and then to examine the distribution of
vehicle technology groups with those six strata. This approach
also suggests that the three minutes of 2500 rpm operation
appears to be most effective in reducing the failure rate of
the open-loop carbureted vehicles.
To consider the hypothesis that some of the variability
results from a cooling off of the oxygen sensor, we can assume
that the oxygen sensor becomes less effective as it cools off,
and the vehicles equipped with an oxygen sensor (i.e., the
closed-loop vehicles) would then exhibit idle emissions that
are more variable than similar cars without oxygen sensors.
(This assumption does not consider the effects of different
operating strategies in the ECM.) From Tables 4.2 or 4.6, the
-15-
-------
two pairs of strata in which the vehicles differ only by the
existence of an oxygen sensor are the following:
- for the carbureted, light trucks, with AIR: the
25 open-loop versus the 11 closed-loop trucks and
- for the carbureted, passenger cars, with AIR: the
54 open-loop cars versus the 103 closed-loop cars.
Examining the passenger car strata, we observe that the
open-loop passenger cars appear to be slightly more variable
than their closed-loop counterparts. However, the differences
are not statistically significant. Examining the light truck
strata, we observe the opposite result (i.e., the open-loop
light trucks appear to be less variable than the closed-loop
light trucks). However, that may have resulted from the small
size (i.e., 11 vehicles) of the stratum containing the
closed-loop, light trucks, equipped with AIR. Thus, the data
gathered in this program are insufficient to test that
hypothesis. .
To examine the effects of AIR systems, the only comparable
strata are the closed-loop, fuel injected passenger cars with
and without AIR. The data suggest that the fuel-injected
vehicles without AIR are slightly more variable than those with
AIR. However, the differences between the corresponding values
are not significant since they are all within 90 percent
confidence intervals of one another. The data necessary to
compare carbureted vehicles with and without AIR were not
obtained in this study.
Stratifying the sample by vehicle type and manufacturer
combinations (rather than by technology as with Table 4.6) and
then selecting only those combinations that are represented by
at least four vehicles, we obtain Table 4.7 (next page).
From Table 4.7 we observe that, for most of the strata
(including the two largest), more vehicles passed the retest
which followed the three-minute preconditioning cycle (i.e.,
third chance test) than passed the immediate retest that was
not preceded by that cycle (i.e., the second chance test). The
three strata which ran counter to this pattern were the Chrysler
and Nissan cars and the Ford trucks.
-16-
-------
Table 4.7
Distribution of Test Results
by Manufacturer and Vehicle Type
Manufacturer/
Vehicle Type
GM
Ford
Chrysler
Mitsubishi
Nissan
Honda
— Car
Trk
— Car
Trk
— Car
— Car
— Car
— Car
Strata
Size
76
17
70
25
26
4
16
12
(Second Chance/Third Chance)
P/P P/F F/P F/F
26
11
21
20
19
25
25
16
.3%
.8%
.4%
.0%
.2%
.0%
.0%
.7%
5
17
5
16
7
0
12
0
.3%
.6%
.7%
.0%
.7%
.0%
.5%
.0%
13
23
12
12
3
50
0
33
.2%
.5%
.9%
.0%
.8%
.0%...
.0%
.3%
55.
47.
60.
52.
69.
25-.
62.
50.
3%
1%
0%
0%
2%
o%...
5%
0%
4.3 Comparison of HC and CO Pass/Fail Results:
Before examining the relationships among the HC and CO
emission levels of the three tests, let us first consider each
test separately. A distribution of the failures (i.e., failure
due to: HC only, CO only, or both HC and CO) is given in Table
4.8 and in percentage form in Table 4.9 (both on the next
page). From Tables 4.8 and 4.9, we note:
- The failure patterns are fairly consistent among the three
tests. Of the tests that fail, 44% to 50% exhibit failing
levels of HC, and 78% to 85% exhibit failing levels of CO.
Thus, the test failures for exceeding the CO standard are
far more common than for exceeding the HC standard. (In
fact, four-fifths of the failing tests involve a failing CO
score, while only one-half of the failing tests involve a
failing HC score.)
- The only value in Table 4.9 which appears to be out of
place is the 14.8% for the "HC Only" failures on the second
retest (i.e., third chance test). This suggests that the
three minutes of 2500 rpm preconditioning substantially
reduces the number of vehicles that initially failed for
HC only.
-17-
-------
Table 4.8
Characterizing I/M Failures
by Emission Component
Test
Sequence
Initial Test
First Retest
Second Retest
HC
Only
59
39
26
- Fa i 1 -
HC &
CO
67
57
51
CO
Only
143
95
99
Pass
Both
—
78
93
Table 4.9
Percentage of Failures per Test Sequence
by Emission Component
Test
Sequence
Initial Test
First Retest
Second Retest
HC
Only
21.9
20.4
14.8
- Failui
HC &
CO
24.9
29.8
29.0
:e (%) I
CO
Only
53.2
49.7
56.2
)ue To -
HC
46.8
50.3
43.8
CO
78.1
79.6
85.2
The behavior of the individual pollutants (i.e., HC or CO)
is a major factor that the analysis in the Section 4.2 ignores.
In this section, a similar analysis was performed in which
pass/fail for each test was replaced by pass/fail on each
pollutant. From this analysis, we obtained Table 4.10 (next
page).
-18-
-------
Table 4.10
Distribution of Pass/Fail Results by Emission Component
Initial Sample
Failure Size
HC Only 59
HC & CO 67
- -
CO Only 143
Second
Chance
Test
HC Only
HC & CO
CO Only
Neither
HC Only
HC & CO
CO Only
Neither
HC Only
HC & CO
CO Only
Neither
HC
Only
21
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
j-j.uj.trt) on:
Third Chance
HC
& CO
0
2
0
0
1
35
5
1
0
3
2
2
CO
Only
0
0,
0
0
0
8
6
1
0
6
66
12
+- £ie?+-
Neither
16
0
0
16
0
3
0
6
0
0
16
36
From the data in Table 4.10, we observe the following:
1. There is a high degree of consistency among the passing
emissions. Most vehicles which initially passed HC
continued to pass HC on both retests, and most vehicles
which initially passed CO continued to pass CO on both
retests.
2. Considering Table 4.10 as three 4x4 matrices, we note that
the "HC & CO" and the "CO Only" matrices are relatively
symmetric; however, the "HC Only" matrix is not symmetric.
This lack of symmetry is due to the statistically
significant difference between the number of vehicles that
failed the first retest but not the second and those that
failed the second but not the first.
3. The preceding point suggests that the nature of the
vehicles that failed only HC on the initial test are
critical to determining the usefulness of the three
minutes of 2500 rpm preconditioning. To examine the
distribution of the 59 vehicles which initially failed
only the HC standard, we can generate Table 4.11 (next
page) which is similar to Table 4.6 but is also stratified
by the initial I/M failure.
-19-
-------
Table 4.11
Distribution of Test Results
By Initial I/M Failure Type by Stratum
Initial
I/M Fuel
Failure Metr
HC-Only All
Garb
Tsrh
FI
CO-Only All
Garb
Garb
FI
HC & CO All
Garb
Garb
FI
trata -
Mixtr
Cntrl
All
Clsd
Open
Clsd
All
Clsd
Open
Clsd
All
Clsd
Open
Clsd
Veh.
Type
All
All
Car
Trk
All
Car
Trk
All
Car
Trk
All
All
Car
Trk
All
Car
Trk
All
Car
Trk
All
All
Car
Trk
All
Car
Trk
All
Car
Trk
Size
59
21
18
3
24
11
13
14
11
3
143
64
58
6
44
34
10
35
30
5
67
29
27
2
12
10
2
26
23
3
Pass
Immed.
Second
Chance
Test
20
5
4
1
5
3
2
10
8
2
50
23
19
4
13
9
4
14
12
2
8
2
2
0
0
0
0
6
4
2
(34%)
(24%)
(22%)
(33%)
(21%)
(27%)
(15%)
(71%)
(73%)
(67%)
(35%)
(36%)
(33%)
(67%)
(30%)
(26%)
(40%)
(40%)
(40%)
(40%)
(12%)
( 7%)
( 7%)
( 0%)
( 0%)
( 0%)
( 0%)
(23%)
(17%)
(67%)
Pass Only
After
3-Min
2500 RPM
16
8
6
2
6
2
4
2
2
0
16
8
8
0
7
6
1
1
1
0
3
0
0
0
2
2
0
1
1
0
(27%)
(38%)
(33%)
(67%)
(25%)
(18%)
(31%)
(14%)
(18%)
( 0%)
(11%)
(12%)
(14%)
( 0%)
(16%)
(18%)
(10%)
( 3%)
( 3%)
( 0%)
( 5%)
( 0%)
( 0%)
( 0%)
(17%)
(20%)
( 0%)
( 4%)
( 4%)
( 0%)
-20-
-------
From Table 4.11, we can make the following observations:
- Among the 59 v cles that initially failed their I/M
tests for only 1C, the 45 carbureted vehicles (all
equipped with pplementary AIR) exhibited behavior
significantly dir.erent (relative to both retests) from
the 14 fuel injected vehicles (all of which were
closed-loop):
— The proportion (65 to 75 percent) of the fuel
injected vehicles that passed the immediate retest
was significantly larger than the corresponding
proportion (20 to 30 percent) of the carbureted
vehicles (either open-loop or closed-loop).
— The preceding trend was reversed (and less
significant) between the corresponding retests that
passed only after being preconditioned by 3-minutes
of 2500 rpm operation.
— Although a larger proportion of the carbureted
vehicles than the fuel injected vehicles passed
only after being preconditioned by 3-minutes of
2500 rpm operation, that did not offset the larger
proportion of the fuel injected vehicles that
passed the first retest. Thus, the proportion
(about 85 percent) of the fuel injected vehicles
(all closed-loop) that passed either retest was
significantly larger than the corresponding
proportion (about 53 percent) of the carbureted
vehicles (either open-loop or closed-loop).
Among the 67 vehicles that initially failed their I/M
tests for both HC and CO, the 41 carbureted vehicles
(all equipped with supplementary AIR) exhibited
behavior significantly different (relative to the first
retest) from the 26 fuel injected vehicles (all of
which were closed-loop):
— Less than 10 percent of the carbureted vehicles
(either open-loop or closed-loop) passed the
immediate retest, while approximately one-fourth of
the fuel injected vehicles (either open-loop or
closed-loop) passed that retest.
— About 20 percent of the carbureted vehicles (either
open-loop or closed-loop) required the 3-minute
preconditioning cycle to pass the retest, while
less than five percent of the fuel injected
vehicles (either open-loop or closed-loop) required
that precondir:oning cycle to pass the retest.
The only statist ally significant trend exhibited by
the 143 vehicles chat initially failed their I/M tests
-21-
-------
for only CO was that a larger proportion (about 14
percent) of the 108 carbureted vehicles than of the 35
fuel injected vehicles (about 3 percent) passed only
the retest that followed the 3-minutes of 2500 rpm
operation.
4.4 Comparison of Magnitude of Changes:
A third approach to analyzing the data is to study the
magnitude of the change in the emissions. That is, some
vehicles may alternate between "pass" and "fail" simply because
their emissions are near the standards (see Table 3.1), and,
thus, the variability in those vehicles' pass/fail results is
due to slight test-to-test variability. Alternatively, some
vehicles may consistently fail, but the emissions on one
failing test might be only marginally above the standards while
on another failing test the emissions might be guite high.
Most of the vehicles exhibited a decrease in idle emission
scores with each successive test. Summaries of the magnitude
of the changes appear in Tables 4.12 and 4.13 (next page).
Those data suggest that the three minute preconditioning cycle
has a more pronounced effect on the average idle HC emissions
than on the idle CO emissions.
As shown in Tables 4.12 and 4.13, most of the results of
the two retests were close to the initial values. However,
thirteen of the vehicles (4.83% of the sample) exhibited either
HC changes in excess of 800 ppm or CO changes in excess of
5.00% between pairs of tests. Those 13 vehicles are identified
in Table 4.14 (page 24).
By using the vehicle data from Appendix A, we can examine
the distribution of these 13 vehicles by the vehicle parameters
such as control configuration (i.e., open-loop vs closed-loop),
fuel metering (i.e., fuel-injected vs carbureted), and the
possession of a supplementary air system. The distribution of
these 13 vehicles is close to what would be expected from 13
vehicles randomly selected from a population of these 269
vehicles as described in Table 4.2. Hence, the large changes
in idle emissions do not appear to be related to those vehicle
parameters.
From the emissions data in Appendix B, we observe that
some of the changes in the overall pass/fail status were due to
changes to emissions which were close to (i.e., within 10% of)
the standard (i.e., + 22 ppm HC or + 0.12% CO). Fifty-nine
(59) of the test vehicles had emission scores close enough to
the standard so that a change of no more than 10% of the I/M
standard would alter the pass/fail status of the initial test
or of one of the two retests. Other possibilities include
shifting vehicles among the four categories in Table 4.5. No
attempt was made to consider the effects of small changes in
the emission levels of the vehicles which initially passed the
Louisville I/M test.
-22-
-------
Table
4.12
Distributio f Differences in
Percent within 50 ppm
Percent within 100 ppm
Percent within 150 ppm
Percent within 200 ppm
Percent within 250 ppm
Percent between 250 & 550
Percent between 550 & 850
Percent greater .than 850
Mean of Differences (ppm)
Standard Deviations
Table
Initial
Test
minus
First
Retest
52.8%
69.1%
81.8%
87.7%
91.1%
7.1%
0.7%
1.1%
37.8
205.8
4.13
Idle HC Scores
Initial
Test
minus
Second
Retest
42.2%
65.1%
76.6%
83.3%
89.2%
7.1%
3.3%
0.4%
76.3
199.8
First
Retest
minus
Second
Retest
64.3%
75.8%
32.9%
87.7%
90.0%
6.7%
2.6%
0.7%
38.5
189.2
Distribution of Differences in Idle CO Scores
Percent within 0.25% CO
Percent within 0 . 50% CO
Percent Within 0.75% CO
Percent within 1.00% CO
Percent Within 1 . 25% CO
Percent Within 1.50% CO
Percent between 1.5 & 3.5
Percent between 3.5 & 5.5
Percent greater than 5 . 5
Mean of Differences (%CO)
Standard Deviations
Initial
Test
minus
First
Retest
32.0%
48.0%
56.9%
66.9%
71.4%
77.3%
16.4%
5.2%
1.1%
0.534
1.500
Initial
Test
minus
Second
Retest
32.3%
48.3%
56.5%
62.1%
65.8%
73.2%
20.4%
3.7%
2.6%
0.610
1.675
First
Retest
minus
Second
Retest
42.4%
61.7%
71.4%
79.6%
85.9%
88.1%
8.2%
2.6%
1.1%
0.075
1.283
-23-
-------
Table 4.14
Vehicles Exhibiting Large Changes in Idle Emissions
Veh
No.
016
020
022
044
092
139
140
159
172
219
238
252
255
Mdl Yr/Make/
Engine/ (Crb/FI)
82
86
86
82
81
85
84
83
81
83
85
83
85
Chry
Chry
Chry
Ford
Ford
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
Mits
Niss
Niss
2 . 2L/C
2.5L/C
2 . 5L/F
1 . 6L/C
4 . 2L/C
1 . 6L/C
1 . 8L/F
2 . 8L/C
3 . 8L/C
5 . OL/C
1 . 5L/C
2 . 4L/F
3 . OL/F
Initial Test
HC
385
287
2001
646
148
489
564
218
352
978
229
252
1152
CO
9
3
6
6
2
6
5
6
6
-6-
5
.80
.33
.58
.74
.98
.30
.93
.75
.50
.07
_44
.51
.32
First
HC
146
823
24
358
15
29
804
38
1680
1143
89
76
10
Retest
CO
4
8
5
6
1
8
.76
.53
.51
.99
.26
.01
.62
.72
.90
.10
.86
.04
.00
Second
HC
134
178
4
6
225
14
150
22
338
322
80
89
1185
Retest
CO
3.94
7.57
.01
.04
8.45
.01
. 17
.13
4.16
.03
.74
.10
.38
4.5 Comparison of the Vehicles Which Changed Pass/Fail Status
between the Two Retests:
Most of the 55 vehicles which exhibited different results
(i.e., pass/fail) on the two retests are scattered among the 269
vehicles in this study. However, six combinations of manu-
facturer and engine had relatively large percentages of those
vehicles. Specifically:
- Five of the nine (55.6%) 1981-83 Ford 200 cid (3.3
liter), open-loop, carbureted passenger cars failed the
first retest but passed after the preconditioning cycle.
- Three of the four (75.0%) 1983 Ford 231 cid (3.8 liter),
open-loop, carbureted passenger cars passed the first
retest but failed after the preconditioning cycle.
- Two of the four (50.0%) 1986 Ford 179 cid (2.9 liter),
closed-loop, fuel injected trucks passed the first
retest but failed after the preconditioning cycle.
- Two of the five (40.0%) 1985-87 GM 173 cid (2.8 liter),
closed-loop, fuel injected passenger cars failed the
first retest but passed after the preconditioning cycle.
- Two of the three (66.7%) 1982-83 GM 173 cid (2.8
liter), open-loop, carbureted trucks failed the first
retest but passed after the preconditioning cycle.
-24-
-------
- Two of the three (66.7%) 1981-82 Mitsubishi, open-loop,
carbureted passenger cars failed the first retest but
passed after the preconditioning cycle.
Of those six combinations of manufacturer and engine, only two
combinations (both Ford vehicles) passed the first retest but
failed after the preconditioning cycle.
From Table 4.5 (page 14), we observe that 35 vehicles which
failed the first retest passed the second retest after being
preconditioned with 2500 rpm operation for three minutes, and
that 20 vehicles which passed the first retest failed the second
retest after being preconditioned with 2500 rpm operation for
three minutes. The emission changes for these vehicles are
summarized in Tables 4.15 and 4.16, respectively.
From Table 4.15, for the 35 vehicles which failed the
first retest but passed the subsequent retest after being
preconditioned, eight of the 35 status changes were due
primarily to emissions-at or_ near the standard, rather than to
dramatic changes (i.e., reductions) in measured emissions.
(For the vehicles subject to the 1.20%/220 ppm standard,
"emissions at or near the standard" means HC from 208 to 237
ppm, or CO from 1.07% to 1.31%. None of the three 1981 trucks
(vehicles 121, 122, and 222) were in either of these two
categories.) Also, we note that:
- 4 of the vehicles exhibited HC increases of at least
200 ppm after the preconditioning,
- 1 of the vehicles exhibited HC increases between 100
and 200 ppm after the preconditioning,
- 9 of the vehicles exhibited CO increases of at least
1.00% after the preconditioning, and
- 1 of the vehicles exhibited CO increases between 0.55%
and 1.00% after the preconditioning.
From Table 4.16, we note that, for the vehicles which
passed the first retest but failed the subsequent retest after
being preconditioned, nine of the 20 status changes were due
primarily to emissions at or near the standard, rather than to
dramatic changes in measured emissions.
-25-
-------
Table 4.15
Comparison of the 35 Vehicles Failing the First Retest
But Passing after Preconditioning Cycle
Manfr
Chry
Ford
GM
Honda
Isuzu
Kits
TKM
Veh
No.
028
044
054
059
070
078
081
084
085
086
107
109
107
140
149
151
159
163
169
181
182
196
198
209
210
217
218
223
225
229
231
235
237
239
261
First
HC
83
358
67
176
524
231
186
239
150
246
455
289
283
804
256
244
38
181
141
225
356
308
66
89
480
525
390
80
37
232*
42
237*
155
46
109
Retest
CO
2.06
5.99
2.02
4.91
0.16
0.00
2.11
0.93
1.58
3.67
0.76
0.04
0.57
6.62
0.60
0.17
1.72
2.09
2.88
0.08
0.09
1.14
2.06
1.95
0.33
0.06
0.01
1.59
1.25*
0.78
1.34
0.15
3.82
1.37
1.55
Second
HC
51
6
43
39
28
216*
13
208*
124
133
135
188
151
150
141
215*
22
8
87
219*
182
168
16
62
182
35
86
34
6
210*
5
117
83
29
6
Retest
CO
0.80
0.04
1.15*
0.23
0.08
0.01
0.00
1.20
0.82
0.58
1.12
0.03
0.02
0.17
0.62
0.25
0.13
0.01
1.02*
0.41
0.10
0.88
1.14*
1.18*
0.32
0.00
0.00
0.63
0.40
0.60
0.42
0.14
0.02
1.07*
0.35
*Change in status ("fail" to "pass") resulted
from a reduction from "fail" to barely "pass"
or from barely "fail" to "pass"
-26-
-------
Table 4.16
Comparison of the 20 Vehicles Passing the First Retest
But Failing after Preconditioning Cycle
Veh First Retest Second Retest
Manfr No. HC CO HC CO
Chry 007 60 1.20* 109 1.65
031 67 0.79 102 1.44
Ford 088 26 0.60 105 2.49
089 8 0.00 47 3.27
091 9 0.17 27 2.58
092 15 0.26 225* 8.45
108 87 0.71 112 1.71
113 123 1.12* 141 2.18
114 173 0.89 168 1.24*
120 140 1.15* 135 1.31*
GM 146 199 1.15* 245 1.54
160 23 0.01 85 1.68
164 113 0.85 141 1.27*
178 166 0.34 432 0.62
207 199 0.49 335 0.93
208 59 1.09* 60 1.22*
212 102 0.72 324 4.31
Jag 236 5 0.01 26 1.26*
Niss 243 214* 0.19 245 0.21
255 10 0.00 1185 0.38
*Change in status ("pass" to "fail") resulted
from an increase from barely "pass" to "fail"
or from "pass" to barely "fail"
-27-
-------
4.6 Vehicles Which Pass Either of the Two Retests:
In addition to the 55 vehicles discussed in Section 4.5, 58
other vehicles in this study passed both retests; thus, a total
of 113 vehicles passed either the first or the second retest.
Most of those 113 vehicles are scattered among the 269 vehicles
in this study. However, some combinations of manufacturer and
engine had relatively large percentages of those vehicles. In
addition to those six combinations identified in the preceding
section (pages 23 and 24):
- Three of the four (75.0%) 1984-86 Chrysler 135 cid (2.2
liter), closed-loop, fuel-injected passenger cars
passed one or both retests.
- Three of the five (60.0%) 1986-87 Ford 152 cid (2.5
liter), closed-loop, fuel-injected passenger cars
(Taurus) passed both retests.
-Three of tha- four... (75,0%) 1983 Ford 140 cid (2.3
liter), open.-loop, carbureted trucks passed one or both
retests.
- Six of the 10 (60.0%) 1981-85 GM 98 cid (1.6 liter),
closed-loop, carbureted passenger cars (Chevettes)
passed both retests.
- All three (100%) of the 1983-86 GM 151 cid (2.5 liter),
closed-loop, fuel-injected passenger cars passed one or
both retests.
- All five (100%) of the 1985-87 GM 173 cid (2.8 liter),
closed-loop, fuel-injected passenger cars passed one or
both retests.
- All three (100%) of the 1984-87 Nissan 181 cid (3.0
liter), closed-loop, fuel-injected passenger cars
passed one or both retests.
4.7 Examination of the 3-Second Emission Data:
The Louisville I/M program records the emission data in
three-second blocks. (The discussion of the computer algorithm
is on page 6. The emission data are available from the author.)
One criterion of that algorithm is that the emissions in any
one of three consecutive blocks shall vary by no more than 10%
from the average in order to ensure stability. Examining those
data, we observed the following:
1. The stability reguirement can result in the measurements
continuing longer than seemingly necessary when the
emission levels are small since 10% of a small value
produces a very small tolerance.
-28-
-------
2. The stability requirement can result in the measurements
ending "early" (before 30 seconds, in this sample of 807
tests on 269 vehicles, 12 to 18 seconds) while the average
emissions are exceeding the standard, when it is possible
that the vehicle might have passed if the test ended a few
seconds later. Six possible cases (vehicles 147, 120,
188, 198, 208, and 152) of this were observed.
3. Similarly, the stability requirement can result in the
measurements ending while the average emissions are still
below the standard, when it is possible that the vehicle
might have failed if the test ended a few seconds later.
Ten possible cases of this were observed. I/M programs
with algorithms that always take readings at the end of 25
or 30 seconds may fail vehicles that would have passed
earlier.
4. In a fashion similar to the six vehicles in the second
point, four other vehicles exhibited failing but decreasing
emissions on their tests (but, these four tests each
continued for- the entire 30 seconds). These vehicles
might have passed if the start of the 30-second time limit
had simply been delayed three to six seconds by a later
probe insertion.
5. The stability requirement can result in the measurements
continuing until the average emissions are exceeding the
standard, when the vehicle would have passed if the test
had begun a few seconds earlier. Twenty-three (23)
examples of this situation were observed.
The first point was illustrated by 24 tests on 18 vehicles.
Those pass/fail results are relatively insensitive to the choice
of the stability algorithm and to the starting time of the test.
(All of those tests produced passing results; the choice of the
algorithm only resulted in increasing the length of the tests.)
However, the second through fifth points suggest that 51 tests
(6.3% of the sample of 807 tests) on 43 vehicles (16.0% of the
sample of 269 vehicles) were highly sensitive either to the
stability algorithm used or to the timing of the test. (i.e.,
How soon after the 2500 rpm mode do the measurements begin?)
Also, in the fifth point, we note that ten vehicles (i.e.,
077, 087, 091, 098, 113, 116, 138, 159, 220, and 255) exhibited
substantial jumps in their emissions. Those ten represent
different models with the exception of vehicles 113 and 116
which are 1986 Ford 2.9 liter fuel-injected trucks. The other
two 1986 Ford 2.9 liter fuel-injected trucks are vehicles 114
and 115, and the initial tests of both those trucks and the
second retest of 114 exhibits the less distinctive jumps found
in the initial test and second retest of 116. (Ford has
confirmed that the high CO failure rate of these trucks is due
to open-loop operation, which is moderately rich, following a
short period of idle.)
-29-
-------
Since the computer recorded the times at which the emission
measurements began and ended for each test, we can estimate the
time that elapsed between each test. We say "estimate" because
there is no way to determine the exact length of the 10-second
(30 seconds for Ford) 2500rpm/half-throttle mode or the length
of time between the completion of that preconditioning mode and
the beginning of the 30-second idle test. The recorded times
indicate:
Table 4.16
Elapse Time (in seconds) Between Tests
Std.
Elapse Time Between Minimum Maximum Mean Dev.
Initial Test and First Retest 118 995 283.7 82.0
First and Second Retests 141 477 262.5 51.1
If the procedures described in Section 3.4 (pages 7 and 8)
had been precisely followed, the measurement period for the
second retest would have begun in no less than than 200 seconds
(220 for Fords) following the completion of the first retest.
However, as Table 4.16 indicates, one vehicle began its second
retest only 141 seconds following the completion of its first
retest. In fact, a total of 13 vehicles began their second
retest in less than three minutes (i.e., less than 180 seconds)
following the completion of their first retest. Also, for eight
vehicles, at least six minutes had elapsed. For the remaining
248 vehicles, the second retest began in at least three minutes
but less than six minutes after the completion of the first
retest.
However, those differences in elapse times do not appear
to correlate with changes in the vehicles' pass/fail status.
-30-
-------
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
This study suggests that the 3-minute, 2500 rpm, no-load
preconditioning cycle produced a slightly larger reduction in
the I/M failure rate than did an immediate retest (i.e., a
"second chance" test) for most vehicles (35 percent versus 29
percent). However, the small size of this effect might simply
have resulted from the vehicles in this study not necessarily
being subjected to the "cool down" of the catalyst and oxygen
sensor that has been hypothesized to be associated with waiting
in long lines prior to an I/M test at a centralized lane since
testing took place only at non-peak hours. The preconditioning
cycle was most effective in reducing the failure rate for
carbureted vehicles and least effective for fuel injected
vehicles.
The pass/fail results for the individual vehicles were
more variable between the initial test and either of the two
retests than between the retests themselves (i.e., the pass/fail
determinations for the retests agreed more frequently). This
variability might have resulted from either:
- the initial I/M test served as a consistent preconditioning
cycle for the first retest, thus, reducing some of the
variability or
- the initial idle test was preconditioned by operating at
approximately one-half throttle while the preconditioning
cycle for both retests was a controlled 2500+300 rpm.
If this difference in preconditioning cycles does, in fact,
account for some of the differences among the test scores, then
the use of a tachometer (to control the preconditioning cycle)
might eliminate that portion of the variability in I/M pass/fail
results.
Two other sources of variability are the sensitivity of
some vehicles to the algorithm which determines when the testing
is complete and the sensitivity of some vehicles to the timing
of the start of the idle test (relative to the preconditioning
cycle). Approximately one-sixth of the vehicles in this sample
displayed such a sensitivity. In some of those instances, the
variability resulted from the use of a percent of point
stability check. (Since a tolerance based on a fixed
percentage of a low emission value results in only a very small
level of variability permitted for a "stable" test. This
situation could be avoided by establishing a minimum level for
each tolerance value (HC, CO, CO2).)
In future testing programs, it would probably be good to
have the probe in place during the preconditioning for
consistent start of test in order to reduce the instances of
-31-
-------
variability which result from the timing of the insertion of
the probe into the vehicle's tailpipe.
A second chance test reduced the number of failing vehicles
by one-third. Thus, in an I/M program such as Louisville's (in
which the failure rate for 1981 and newer passenger cars and
light trucks averages between six and eight percent), the use
of an immediate retest would result in a reduced failure rate
ranging from 4.3 to 5.7 percent, while the use of an immediate
retest that was preceded by a three minutes of 2500 rpm precon-
ditioning cycle would result in a failure rate averaging 3.9 to
5.2 percent. The effects of such reductions in the failure
rate on reductions in excess FTP emissions have not yet been
determined.
-32-
-------
APPENDIX A
Description <. £ the 271 Vehicles Tested
-------
VEH
NO. VIN
YEAR Mfr CLS MAKE SERIES/MODEL
001 1AMDC9530DK211705 1983 AMC
002 1XMDC9565FK104499 1985 AMC
Car RENA ALLIANCE L
Car RENA ALLIANCE DL
ENGINE
NO. —Disp— Fuel CNTRL SUPP.
Cyl CID Lit Mtr. CNFIG AIR ?
4 85 1.4 FI CLSD NO
4 85 1.4 FI CLSD NO
003 WAUGB0448EA151916 1984 AUDI Car AUDI 5000 S WGN
004 WAUFB0445FN040844 1985 AUDI Car AUDI 5000 S
5 131 2.1 FI CLSD NO
5 136 2.2 FI CLSD NO
005 WBAAG3308C8056848 1982 BMW Car BMW 320 I
108 1.8 FI
CLSD NO
006 1B3BE46D8EC260486
007 1B3BA44D7FG106313
008 1C3BC56D1FF226971
009 1P3BP36DOGF121487
010 1P3BL28B2BD235013
Oil 1P3BK26B5BF230642
012 1P3BL24BXBD336760
013 1P3BL28B8BD235016
014 1P3BL28B5BD234969
015 1P3BP49B6CF232653
016 1B3BD49BOCF205555
017 1C3DC51B5CC166021
018 1C3BC41B1CG106643
019 1B3BZ54C3ED308362
020 1B3BV51KOGG176556
021 1C3BC56K5GF186488
022 1B3BA44K6GG290420
023 1C3BH48KXGN181012
024 1C3BH48K9HN320855
025 1B3BD59G6FF169599
026 1B3BK49D8BF100851
027 1P3BK59D4BF104870
028 2C3BF66K8CR179924
029 1C3BF66P2FX596649
030 1B3BM46N7BG158676
031 1B3BR47M6BA107504
1984
1985
1985
1986
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1982
1982
1982
1982
1984
1986
1986
1986
1986
1987
1985
1981
1981
1982
1985
1981
1981
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
CHRY
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
DODG
DODG
CHRY
PLYM
PLYM
PLYM
PLYM
PLYM
PLYM
PLYM
DODG
CHRY
CHRY
DODG
DODG
CHRY
DODG
CHRY
CHRY
DODG
DODG
PLYM
CHRY
CHRY
DODG
DODG
600
DAYTONA
LE BARON
RELIANT SPECIAL EDITION
HORIZON
RELIANT
HORIZON TC3
HORIZON
HORIZON
RELIANT CUSTOM WAGON
ARIES CUSTOM WGN
LE BARON MEDALLION
LE BARON
OMNI/CHARGER 2.2
600
LE BARON
DAYTONA
LE BARON GTS
LE BARON GTS
ARIES LE WAGON
ARIES CUSTOM WAGON
RELIANT WAGON
NEW YORKER 4D/5TH
NEW YORKER/5TH AVE
DIPLOMAT SALON (hd)
ST. REGIS
4
4
4
8
8
8
8
135
135
135
135
135
135
135
135
135
135
135
135
135
135
152
152
152
152
152
156
156
156
318
318
318
318
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.6
2.6
2.6
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.2
FI
FI
FI
FI
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
4bbl
4bbl
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
OPEN
OPEN
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
?
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
-------
VEH
NO. VIN
YEAR Mfr CLS MAKE SERIES/MODEL
032 JB7FL24D9HP005081 1987 CHRY Trk DODG RAM50/D50 P/U SH 4
033 2P4FH41C4FR102656 1985 CHRY Trk PLYM VOYAGER SE WAGON
ENGINE
No. —Disp— Fuel CNTRL SUPP.
Cyl CID Lit Mtr. CNFIG AIR 7
4 122 2.0 2bbl CLSD YES
4 135 2.2 2bbl OPEN YES
034 ZFAASOOB5E5505188 1984 FIAT Car FIAT 124/SPIDER CONV
122 2.0 FI
CLSD NO
035 1FABP0525BW226782
036 1FABP0822BT132212
037 1FABP0529BT109997
038 1FABP0523BT166292
039 1MEBP6328BW664002
040 1FABP0823BT152100
041 1FABP0525BW158225
042 1FABP0522BW264650
043 1FABP052XBT217514
044 1FABP0527CT101866
045 1MEBP6424CT607233
046 2MEBP6123CX628470
047 1FABP0622CT137351
048 2FABP0123CX173804
049 2FABP0523CX188099
050 2FABP0521CX189283
051 1MEBP6440CW629696
052 2FABP0645DX137866
053 1FABP1542DW137472
054 2FABP0141DX106931
055 2FABP044XDX189013
056 1MEBP6349DW629196
057 1FABP1342EW150047
058 2FABP3197GB126552
059 1MEBP75X6FK634217
060 1FABP19S7FK269338
061 1FABP20X2FK258004
062 1FABP19X8FK269005
063 2FABP22X7FB300707
064 1FABP19S3GK183557
1FABP22X4GK225262
Ov *RP22X1GB164866
06 ' "X7GK258286
066 .4GB207127
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1982
1982
1982
1982
1982
1982
1982
1982
1983
1983
1983
1983
1983
1984
1986
1985
1985
1985
1985
1985
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
MERC
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
MERC
MERC
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
MERC
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
MERC
FORD
' • ;KD
MERC
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
ESCORT
ESCORT WGN
ESCORT
ESCORT
LYNX
ESCORT WGN
ESCORT
ESCORT
ESCORT
ESCORT
LYNX L
LN7
ESCORT
EXP
ESCORT
ESCORT
LYNX L
ESCORT GLX
ESCORT GLX
EXP
ESCORT
LYNX LS WAGON
ESCORT L
ESCORT PONY
TOPAZ GS
TEMPO GL
TEMPO GLX
TEMPO GL
TEMPO GL
TEMPO GL
TEMPO GL
TEMPO GL
TEMPO GL
TEMPO GL
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
113
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.9
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
-------
t
VEH
No.
069
070
071
072
073
074
075
076
077
078
079
080
081
082
083
084
085
086
087
088
089
090
091
092
093
094
095
096
097
098
099
100
101
102
103
104
VIN
1MEBP79A9EF611091
1FABP26A9GF273158
1FABP10A2CF135555
1FABP16A5CF119048
1FABP29D9GA171040
1FABP29D3GA233192
1FABP29D3GA235315
1FABP29D5GA198896
1FABP50D9HA142511
1MEBP71B4BK628856
1FABP23BOBK156646
1MEBP71B1BA617383
1FABP27B2CG105051
1FABP21BOCA100118
1FABP26B2CG177207
1FABP21B5CA109459
1MEBP89X5DG604335
1MEBP86X1DK607 105
1MEBP9239GH619545
1MEBP9030DG657508
1MEBP8938DG604309
1MEBP8936DG610920
1MEBP9235DH627279
1FABP33D3BU155535
1FABP27D6BG136433
1FABP28F8DF130318
1FABP31F3BU133331
1FABP42FXBH182796
1FABP42F9BH141849
1MEBP85FXCZ606873
1FABP16F5CF138971
2FABP31G9CB197521
2FABP43GOFX195179
2FABP43G2FX226559
2FABP43G7FX195146
2FABP72G9HX122561
YEAR
1984
1986
1982
1982
1986
1986
1986
1986
1987
1981
1981
1981
1982
1982
1982
1982
1983
1983
1986
1983
1983
1983
1983
1981
1981
1983
1981
1981
1981
1982
1982
1982
1985
1985
1985
1987
Mfr
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
CLS
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
MAKE
MERC
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
MERC
FORD
MERC
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
MERC
MERC
MERC
MERC
MERC
MERC
MERC
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
MERC
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
SERIES/MODEL
CAPRI
MUSTANG LX
MUSTANG
MUSTANG L
TAURUS L
TAURUS L
TAURUS L
TAURUS L
TAURUS L
ZEPHYR
FAIRMONT WGN
ZEPHYR
GRANADA L
FAIRMONT FUTURA
GRANADA L
FAIRMONT FUTURA
MARQUIS
ZEPHYR
COUGAR
MARQUIS WGN
MARQUIS
MARQUIS
COUGAR
LTD
GRANADA L
MUSTANG GL
LTD S
THUNDERBIRD
THUNDERS IRD
GRAND MARQUIS
MUSTANG L
LTD S
LTD CROWN VICTORIA
LTD CROWN VICTORIA
LTD CROWN VICTORIA
LTD CROWN VICTORIA S
ENGINE
No. —Disp—
Cyl CID Lit
Fuel CNTRL SUPP.
Mtr. CNFIG AIR 7
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
140
140
140
140
152
152
152
152
152
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
231
231
231
231
231
255
255
302
302
302
302
302
302
351
351
351
351
351
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
4.2
4.2
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.8
Ibbl
Ibbl
2bbl
2bbl
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
Ibbl
Ibbl
Ibbl
Ibbl
Ibbl
Ibbl
Ibbl
Ibbl
Ibbl
FI
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
FI
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
CLSD
CLSD
OPEN
OPEN
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
CLSD
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
CLSD
OPEN
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
OPEN
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
-------
VEH
NO. VIN
f
105 1FTBR10C5EUB15739
106 1FTBR10A6GUD33660
107 1FTCR11A1DUB58961
108 1FTCR10A4DUA97199
109 1FTCR10A5DUB11353
110 1FTBR10A1DUA35822
111 1FMBU14S4EUA13053
112 1FTBR10S1FUA23018
113 1FMCU14TOGUA36409
114 1FTBR10T2GUC79632
115 1FTCR14T5GPA48995
116 1FTCR14T1GPA63994
117 1FTCF10D1CNA02416
118 2FTCF10EOCCA66705
119 1FTDF15YXELA82393
120 1FTCF15Y4GNA72266
121 1FTCF10E9BUA61212
122 1FTDF15E8BUA07655
123 1FTCF10Y4DLA80804
124 1FTDE14N4GHB25819
125 1FTDF15F7EPB18547
126 2FTHF25G9CCA70693
127 1FMEU15GOCLA56072
128 1FBHE21G3CHA56715
129 1FTJE34L6CHA71477
YEAR Mfr CLS MAKE SERIES/MODEL
ENGINE
No. --Disp— Fuel CNTRL SUPP.
Cyl CID Lit Mtr. CNFIG AIR 7
1984 FORD Trk FORD RANGER PICKUP 4X2
1986 FORD Trk FORD RANGER PICKUP 4X2
1983 FORD Trk FORD RANGER PICKUP 4X4
1983 FORD Trk FORD RANGER PICKUP 4X2
1983 FORD Trk FORD RANGER PICKUP 4X2
1983 FORD Trk FORD RANGER PICKUP 4X2
1984 FORD Trk FORD BRONCO II 4X4
1985 FORD Trk FORD RANGER PICKUP 4X2
1986 FORD Trk FORD BRONCO II 4X4
1986 FORD Trk FORD RANGER PICKUP 4X2
1986 FORD Trk FORD RANGER SUPER CAB P/U 4X4
1986 FORD Trk FORD RANGER SUPER CAB P/U 4
1982 FORD Trk FORD F100 PICKUP 4X2
1982 FORD Trk FORD F100 PICKUP 4X2
1984 FORD Trk FORD F150 PICKUP 4X2
1986 FORD Trk FORD F150 PICKUP 4X2
1981 FORD Trk FORD FIDO PICKUP 4X2
1981 FORD Trk FORD F150 PICKUP 4X2
1983 FORD Trk FORD FIDO PICKUP 4X2
1986 FORD Trk FORD E150 ECONOLINE CARGO VAN
1984 FORD Trk FORD F150 PICKUP 4X2
1982 FORD Trk FORD F250 PICKUP 4X2
1982 FORD Trk FORD BRONCO 4WD
1982 FORD Trk FORD E250 ECONOLINE CLUB WGN
1982 FORD Trk FORD E350 ECONOLINE CARGO VAN
4
4
4
4
4
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
8
6
6
6
6
6
6
8
8
8
8
8
8
122
140
140
140
140
140
171
171
179
179
179
179
255
300
300
300
300
300
300
302
302
351
351
351
460
2.0
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.8
2.8
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
4.2
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.9
5.0
5.0
5.8
5.8
5.8
7.5
Ibbl
FI
Ibbl
Ibbl
Ibbl
Ibbl
2bbl
2bbl
FI
FI
FI
FI
2bbl
Ibbl
Ibbl
Ibbl
Ibbl
Ibbl
Ibbl
FI
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
4bbl
OPEN
CLSD
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
OPEN
OPEN
CLSD
CLSD
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
CLSD
OPEN
CLSD
CLSD
OPEN
OPEN
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
?
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
130 1G1AJ089XBY210204
131 1G1AB689XBY272640
132 1G2AM6896BA208660
133 1G1AB6897BY205817
134 1G1AB6897BY290626
135 1G1AB08CXCA162643
136 1G2AL08COCY223997
137 1G1AB68CXEY180265
138 1G1TB68C5FA211232
139 1G1TB08C7FA195709
140 1G3AC6907EK379527
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1982
1982
1984
1985
1985
1984
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
CHEV
CHEV
PONT
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
PONT
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
OLDS
CHEVETTE SCOOTER
CHEVETTE
T1000
CHEVETTE
CHEVETTE
CHEVETTE
T1000/1000
CHEVETTE
CHEVETTE
CHEVETTE
FIRENZA
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
4 110
1.6
1.6.
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.8
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
FI
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
-------
VEH
No. VIN
141 1G1AE77G7C7132047
142 1G1AD35G9C7214151
143 1G1AD27G5C7161309
144 1G4AS69P2EK482043
145 1G1AX68R3D6118299
146 1G4AL19R2E6413931
147 1G2PM37R2GP223204
148 1G3AE6959BW180215
149 1G2PG3791FP249279
150 1G2PF3799FP254118
151 1G1AW35W5F6271202
152 2G2AH19W5G9274339
153 1G1AW51W6H6103122
154 1G4AB69X9BT207372
155 1G1AX08XOB6119211
156 1G1AX68X2B6160183
157 1G1AS8718CN136484
158 1G4AC69X4CW492155
159 1G1AW19XOD6832846
160 1G2AS8719EN248516
161 1G1AT27K9BB415445
162 1G1AP87K7BL172848
163 1G1AW69K5BK441861
164 2G1AL69K2C1230689
165 2G1AL69K6C1256227
166 1G1AZ3797DR109758
167 1G4EZ57BXGU407886
168 1G4EZ57B6GU407075
169 1G3AR47A5BM468219
170 1G4AH69A7BH125251
171 1G2AJ37A4BP514191
172 1G4AM47A4BH153463
173 1G4AL69A8BH122471
174 1G3AR69AOBD448257
175 1G3AM69A4BM490008
176 1G3AR69AOBG446815
177 1G2AD69A1BP656021
YEAR Mfr CLS MAKE SERIES/MODEL
1982 GM Car CHEV CAVALIER TYPE 10
1982 GM Car CHEV CAVALIER WGN
1982 GM Car CHEV CAVALIER
1984 GM Car BUIC SKYHAWK CUSTOM
1983 GM Car CHEV CITATION
1984 GM Car BUIC CENTURY LIMITED
1986 GM Car PONT FIERO SPORT
1981 GM Car OLDS OMEGA BROUGHAM
1985 GM Car PONT FIERO GT
1985 GM Car PONT FIERO SE
1985 GM Car CHEV CELEBRITY WGN
1986 GM Car PONT 6000 STE
1987 GM Car CHEV CELEBRITY
1981 GM Car BUIC SKYLARK
1981 GM Car CHEV CITATION
1981 GM Car CHEV CITATION
1982 GM Car CHEV CAMARO BERLINETTA
1982 GM Car BUIC SKYLARK LIMITED
1983 GM Car CHEV CELEBRITY
1984 GM Car PONT FIREBIRD
1981 GM Car CHEV MALIBU
1981 GM Car CHEV CAMARO Z28
1981 GM Car CHEV MALIBU CLASSIC
1982 GM Car CHEV IMPALA
1982 GM Car CHEV IMPALA
1983 GM Car CHEV MONTE CARLO
1986 GM Car BUIC RIVIERA
1986 GM Car BUIC RIVIERA
1981 GM Car OLDS CUTLASS SUPREME
1981 GM Car BUIC CENTURY
1981 GM Car PONT GRAND PRIX
1981 GM Car BUIC REGAL LIMITED
1981 GM Car BUIC CENTURY LIMITED
1981 GM Car OLDS CUTLASS LS
1981 GM Car OLDS CUTLASS SUPREME BROUGHAM
1981 GM Car OLDS CUTLASS LS
1981 GM Car PONT LEMANS
ENGINE
No.
Cyl
4
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
— Disp —
CID
112
112
112
121
151
151
151
151
173
173
173
173
173
173
173
173
173
173
173
173
229
229
229
229
229
229
231
231
231
231
231
231
231
231
231
231
231
Lit
1.8
1.8
1.8
2.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
Fuel CNTRL SUPP.
Mtr. CNFIG AIR 7
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
FI
FI
FI
FI
2bbl
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
FI
FI
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
?
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
-------
VEH
NO. VIN
178 1G2AK37A9BP604191
179 1G2AS87A4BL140943
180 1G3AR47A6BM475180
181 1G4AJ47A7CH188539
182 1G3AR47AXCM545118
183 1G2AN69A2CP617050
184 2G3AR69A3C2319498
185 1G4AM47AXCH103720
186 1G3AN69A1CM285065
187 1G3AR47A2DM422138
188 2G2AJ37AOD2211676
189 1G4AJ47A2DH912607
190 1G6CD4787F4384481
191 1G6AD4743B9141607
192 1G2AN6948CP535060
193 1G4AM47SXBK142169
194 1G2AP37S5BP535851
195 1G2AX87H5CL508904
196 1G1AN35H2CX119808
197 2G2AP37H6E2205233
198 1G4AZ57Y2BE438538
199 1G3AZ57Y3BE321748
200 2G2AN69Y2B1716248
201 1G3AX69Y7BM152462
202 1G3AX69Y4BM233841
203 1G4AN69Y4EH857671
204 1G6AD6990B9106673
205 1G6AS6992BE691088
YEAR Mfr CLS MAKE SERIES/MODEL
ENGINE
No. —Disp— Fuel CNTRL SUPP.
Cyl CID Lit Mtr. CNFIG AIR ?
1981 GM Car PONT GRAND PRIX LJ
1981 GM Car PONT FIREBIRD
1981 GM Car OLDS CUTLASS SUPREME
1982 GM Car BUIC REGAL
1982 GM Car OLDS CUTLASS SUPREME
1982 GM Car PONT BONNEVILLE
1982 GM Car OLDS CUTLASS SUPREME
1982 GM Car BUIC REGAL LIMITED
1982 GM Car OLDS DELTA-88 ROYALE
1983 GM Car OLDS CUTLASS SUPREME
1983 GM Car PONT GRAND PRIX
1983 GM Car BUIC REGAL
1985 GM Car CADI DEVILLE
1981 GM Car CADI DEVILLE RWD
1982 GM Car PONT BONNEVILLE
1981 GM Car BUIC REGAL LIMITED
1981 GM Car PONT GRAND PRIX BROUGHAM
1982 GM Car PONT FIREBIRD SE
1982 GM Car CHEV CAPRICE ESTATE WGN
1984 GM Car PONT GRAND PRIX BROUGHAM
1981 GM Car BUIC RIVIERA
1981 GM Car OLDS TORONADO BROUGHAM
1981 GM Car PONT BONNEVILLE
1981 GM Car OLDS 98 REGENCY
1981 GM Car OLDS 98 REGENCY
1984 GM Car BUIC LESABRE CUSTOM
1981 GM Car CADI DEVILLE RWD
1981 GM Car CADI SEVILLE
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
8
6
6
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
231
231
231
231
231
231
231
231
231
231
231
231
249
252
252
265
265
305
305
305
307
307
307
307
307
307
368
368
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.3
4.3
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0 ,
6.0
6.0
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
FI
4bbl
4bbl
2bbl
2bbl
4bbl
4bbl
4bbl
4bbl
4bbl
4bbl
4bbl
4bbl
4bbl
FI
FI
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
-------
--- ENGINE ----
VEH
No.
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
VIN
1GCBS14A8C0106437
1GCCT14E5F2183411
1G8CS18BXF0188919
1GCBS14B1C8114650
1GTBS14BXC2514595
1GTCS14B1D8508607
1GCCW80A7CR146897
1G8DM15Z1GB154082
1G8CM15Z9GB213794
2GCDC14Z4J1131672
2GCCC14H7G1208028
1GBEG25H3G7134650
2GCDC14H5D1175045
1GCFC24H3DF370150
1GCDC14H7DS126929
1GBEG25H8F7189979
1GCGC24M3BF356439
JHMAK3437FS006135
JHMSR3321CS002408
JHMSM5429BC186241
1HGSZ542XDA001214
JHMAB5225EC009288
JHMAB5229GC012584
1HGAD5324FA130077
1HGAD5322FA128814
1HGBA7425GA061232
1HGBA5430GA078663
1HGBA7436GA040639
JHMBA5324GC038323
YEAR
1982
1985
1985
1982
1982
1983
1982
1986
1986
1988
1986
1986
1983
1983
1983
1985
1981
1985
1982
1981
1983
1984
1986
1985
1985
1986
1986
1986
1986
Mfr
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
GM
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
CLS
Trk
Trk
Trk
Trk
Trk
Trk
Trk
Trk
Trk
Trk
Trk
Trk
Trk
Trk
Trk
Trk
Trk
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
MAKE
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
CMC
CMC
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
HOND
SERIES/MODEL
S10 PICKUP
T10 PICKUP 4X4
S10 BLAZER
S10 PICKUP
S15 PICKUP
S15 PICKUP
EL CAMINO
ASTRO MVP
ASTRO VAN
CIO PICKUP
CIO PICKUP
CHEVY VAN
CIO PICKUP
C20 PICKUP
CIO PICKUP
CHEVY VAN
20 PICKUP
CIVIC CVCC
CIVIC CVCC
ACCORD
ACCORD
PRELUDE
PRELUDE
ACCORD
ACCORD
ACCORD
ACCORD LX
ACCORD LX
ACCORD
VAN
MPV
1/2T
1/2T
3/4T
1/2T
3/4TON
1/2T
3/4T
3/4T
DX
lo. — Disp —
ii
4
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
CID
119
151
173
173
173
173
229
262
262
262
305
305
305
305
305
305
350
91
91
107
107
112
112
112
112
119
119
119
119
Lit
1.9
2.5 ,
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
3.8
4.3
4.3
4.3
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.7
1.5
1.5
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Fuel
Mtr.
2bbl
FI
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
FI
FI
FI
4bbl
4bbl
4bbl
4bbl
4bbl
4bbl
4bbl
3bbl
3bbl
3bbl
3bbl
2bbl
2bbl
3bbl
3bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
CNTRL
CNFIG
OPEN
CLSD
CLSD
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
CLSD
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
SUPP.
AIR ?
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
235 JABAT69B9E0803449 1984 ISUZ Car ISUZ I-MARK (SOHC)
111 1.8 2bbl CLSD YES
236 SAJAV1366DC365119 1983 JAG Car JAG XJ6
258 4.2 FI
CLSD YES
-------
VEH
NO. VIN
00
YEAR Mfr CLS MAKE SERIES/MODEL
237 JB3BE2423BU114511 1981 HITS Car DODG COLT 2D HTCH
238 JB3BA34K3FU717384 1985 HITS Car DODG COLT DL HTCH
239 JB3BD4371BY400930 1981 HITS Car DODG CHALLENGER
240 JB3BD4376CY706071 1982 HITS Car DODG CHALLENGER
241 JB7FP2459DY105151 1983 HITS Trk DODG RAM50/D50 P/U SH 4
242 JN1PB04S889261169
243 JN1PN06S5BM108072
244 JN1PB01S6C9352091
245 JN1CN24S2DM104254
246 JN1MN24S8EM006612
247 JN1PB11S5DU037271
248 JN1HT14S3CT016713
249 JN1HT13SXCT034966
250 JN1HU01S6BT006428
251 JN1HU01SOCT035327
252 JN1HU05S1DX033154
253 JN1HU01S6ET216404
254 JN1HU01S6ET228553
255 JN1HU11SOFT046905
256 JN1HU11S3HT247765
257 JN1HZ14S8EX009072
1981
1981
1982
1983
1984
1983
1982
1982
1981
1982
1983
1984
1984
1985
1987
1984
NISS
HISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
Car
DATS
DATS
DATS
NISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
DATS
DATS
DATS
NISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
NISS
210
310
210 SEDAN
PULSAR (turbo)
PULSAR GX
SENTRA
STANZA
STANZA
810
810
810 WAGON
MAXIMA SEDAN
MAXIMA SEDAN
810/MAXIMA SEDAN
810/MAXIMA SEDAN
300 ZX
ENGINE
No. --Disp-- Fuel CNTRL SUPP.
Cyl CID Lit Mtr. CNFIG AIR ?
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
86
90
156
156
122
*
91
91
92
98
98
120
120
146
146
146
146
146
181
181
181
1.4
1.5
2.6
2.6
2.0
*
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.6
2.0
2.0
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
3.0
3.0
3.0
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
FI
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
2bbl
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
FI
OPEN
CLSD
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
CLSD
CLSD
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
CLSD
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
258 VF3BA11FXFS372706 1985 PEUG Car PEUG 505
4 120 2.0 FI CLSD YES
259 WPOEA0919DS170642 1983 PORS Car PORS 911 TARGA/CABRIOLE
6 183 3.0 FI CLSD NO
260 JM1BD2219D0709658 1983 TOKO Car MAZD GLC SEDAN
261 JM1BD2315E0762275 1984 TOKO Car MAZD GLC
4 91 1.5 2bbl CLSD YES
4 91 1.5 2bbl CLSD YES
The displacement of that Datsun 210 is either 75, 85, or 91 CID.
-------
VEH
Mo. VIN
YEAR Mfr CLS MAKE SERIES/MODEL
262 JT2TE72CXB0568704 1981 TOYO Car TOYO COROLLA DELUXE SPORT
263 JT3YR26V2E5007554 1984 TOYO Trk TOYO VAN 4X2 LUX. ED.
264 JT4RN38DXD0063680 1983 TOYO Trk TOYO PICKUP SH 1/2T 4X4 DELUXE
ENGINE
No. --Disp-- Fuel CNTRL SUPP.
Cyl CID Lit Mtr. CNFIG AIR ?
4 108 1.8 2bbl CLSD YES
4 122 2.0 FI CLSD NO
4 144 2.4 2bbl OPEN YES
265 YV1AX4541B1626327 1981 VOLV Car VOLV 240 DL
266 YV1AX4741D1909973 1983 VOLV Car VOLV 240 WAGON (turbo)
4 130 2.1 FI CLSD NO
4 130 2.1 FI CLSD NO
267 WVWCA053XCK026059 1982 VW
268 1VWGB9173CV043504 1982 VW
269 1VWDC0171DV019909 1983 VW
Car VOLK SCIROCCO
Car VOLK RABBIT SEDAN LS
Car VOLK RABBIT GTI
4 105 1.7 FI
4 105 1.7 FI
4 109 1.8 FI
CLSD NO
CLSD NO
CLSD NO
270 1G3AM19TXDD336927 1983 GM
271 1G6AL57N4BE610776 1981 GM
Car OLDS CUTLASS CIERA
Car CADI ELDORADO
Converted Diesel —
Converted Diesel —
VO
-------
APPENDIX B
Idle Emissions of the Test Vehicles
-------
w
I
veil
NO.
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
010
Oil
012
013
014
015
016
017
018
019
020
021
022
023
024
025
026
027
028
029
030
031
Make
RENA
RENA
AUDI
AUDI
BMW
DODG
DODG
CHRY
PLYM
PLYM
PLYM
PLYM
PLYM
PLYM
PLYM
DODG
CHRY
CHRY
DODG
DODG
CHRY
DODG
CHRY
CHRY
DODG
DODG
PLYM
CHRY
CHRY
DODG
DODG
TO
Yr
83
85
84
85
82
84
85
85
86
81
81
81
81
81
82
82
82
82
84
86
86
86
86
87
85
81
81
82
85
81
81
jesting
Center
Poplar
Outer L
Goose C
22nd St
Goose C
Outer L
Outer L
Goose C
Outer L
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
Goose C
Outer L
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
Outer L
22nd St
Outer L
Goose C
Goose C
22nd St
22nd St
Poplar
22nd St
22nd St
Outer L
Goose C
rest
Date
07-24-87
09-08-87
10-20-87
08-19-87
11-19-87
08-19-87
12-10-87
12-10-87
11-05-87
08-08-87
11-14-87
09-10-87
10-17-87
09-09-87
12-02-87
08-20-87
11-20-87
09-01-87
12-09-87
07-10-87
12-03-87
09-25-87
09-29-87
11-28-87
11-10-87
11-10-87
08-06-87
09-03-87
10-01-87
12-10-87
11-06-87
nrsc
Time
10
09
12
10
12
16
17
10
09
12
10
10
11
17
15
12
14
14
12
10
10
11
09
10
14
16
10
11
12
17
13
:08
:42
:00
:13
:38
:27
:19
:49
:52
:35
:40
:48
:00
:09
:43
:33
:19
:05
:49
:31
:38
:47
:38
:51
:44
:36
:31
:26
:44
:05
:11
xesc
~HC~
0397
0478
0109
0155
0213
0153
0043
0164
0324
0125
0002
0132
0115
0744
0107
0385
0135
0174
0174
0287
0148
2001
0635
0422
0065
0445
0064
0085
0583
0956
0080
F
F
P
P
P
P
P
P
F
P
P
P
P
F
P
F
P
P
P
F
P
F
F
F
P
F
P
P
F
F
P
—CO
7
1
5
8
2
1
1
2
5
5
1
5
5
7
3
9
5
6
2
3
4
6
6
7
1
10
4
2
7
0
1
.77
.82
.16
.49
.08
.70
.41
.90
.03
.42
.32
.56
.36
.70
.48
.80
.37
.63
.69
.33
.72
.58
.76
.78
.54
.01
.11
.33
.96
.18
.54
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
P
F
secona lest —
Time
10:13
09:44
12:03
10:18
12:41
16:31
17:22
10:52
09:56
12:39
10:44
10:53
11:03
17:13
15:47
12:38
14:25
14:10
12:55
10:39
10:42
11:50
09:41
10:54
14:50
16:40
10:37
11:30
12:48
17:10
13:14
--HC—
0331
0644
0095
0139
0054
0040
0060
0064
0727
0144
0060
0148
0123
0967
0106
0146
0140
0150
0145
0823
0001
0024
0680
0375
0062
0328
0104
0083
0312
0852
0067
F
F
P
P
P
P
P
P
F
P
P
P
P
F
P
P
P
P
P
F
P
P
F
F
P
F
P
P
F
F
P
—CO
7
1
4
8
2
0
1
0
7
5
1
5
5
8
1
4
5
5
3
8
0
0
9
7
1
10
5
2
7
0
0
.05
.69
.22
.40
.66
.01
.20
.61
.29
.39
.10
.94
.42
.89
.64
.76
.64
.65
.01
.53
.00
.51
.46
.41
.37
.01
.56
.06
.60
.18
.79
F
F
F
F
F
P
P
P
F
F
P
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
P
P
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
P
P
inira
Time
10
09
12
10
12
16
17
10
10
12
10
10
11
17
15
12
14
14
12
10
10
11
09
10
14
16
10
11
12
17
13
:17
:48
:08
:21
:46
:34
:26
:56
:00
:43
:47
:56
:08
:18
:50
:42
:28
:15
:59
:43
:45
:54
:46
:59
:54
:43
:41
:34
:54
:14
:18
rest
--HC--
0333
0559
0076
0130
0446
0029
0109
0005
0150
0048
0043
0147
0122
1321
0097
0134
0121
0159
0143
0178
0001
0004
0386
0285
0059
0345
0059
0051
0345
0689
0102
F
F
P
P
F
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
F
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
F
F
P
F
P
P
F
F
P
—CO
7
1
1
8
1
0
1
0
8
3
0
6
5
9
1
3
5
6
2
7
0
0
7
6
1
10
4
0
7
0
1
.15 F
.38 F
.83 F
.16 F
.75 F
.01 P
.65 F
.00 P
.32 F
.24 F
.81 P
.07 F
.38 F
.07 F
.24 F
.94 F
.11 F
.25 F
.62 F
.57 F
.00 P
.01 P
.24 F
.23 F
.30 F
.01 F
.07 F
.80 P
.00 F
.17 P
.44 F
-------
Cfl
N)
ven
No.
032
033
034
035
036
037
038
039
040
041
042
043
044
045
046
047
048
049
050
051
052
053
054
055
056
057
058
059
060
061
062
063
064
065
Of*
(.!•
Obfj
Make
DODG
PLYM
FIAT
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
MERC
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
MERC
MERC
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
MERC
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
MERC
FORD
FORD
MERC
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
i-UixiJ
ra
Yr
87
85
84
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
83
83
83
83
83
84
86
85
85
85
85
85
86
86
86
86
86
resting
Center
Outer L
22nd St
Outer L
Poplar
Outer L
22nd St
Outer L
Outer L
Outer L
Goose C
22nd St
Outer L
Goose C
22nd St
Outer L
Outer L
Outer L
Poplar
Outer L
22nd St
Poplar
Goose C
Goose C
Outer L
Outer L
Goose C
Goose C
Outer L
Outer L
22nd St
Outer L
22nd St
Goose C
22nd St
22nd St
Poplar
22nd St
rest
Date
12-05-87
12-12-87
12-03-87
08-13-87
11-11-87
09-11-87
11-12-87
07-23-87
11-11-87
09-10-87
12-10-87
11-20-87
12-12-87
09-02-87
11-11-87
09-25-87
11-04-87
09-03-87
12-04-87
12-23-87
08-07-87
11-21-87
10-16-87
12-08-87
12-08-87
08-18-87
08-07-87
11-06-87
09-23-87
11-07-87
08-26-87
11-04-87
09-11-87
10-21-87
09-08-87
11-06-87
08-27-87
first rest
Time --HC--
10:39 0114 P
09:08 0234 F
12:26 0096 P
14:10 0250 F
08:18 0216 P
09:09 0132 P
14:52 0166 P
12:29 0379 F
12:07 0352 F
16:02 0184 P
12:37 0076 P
11:14 0500 F
12:40 0646 F
14:14 0360 F
15:08 0669 F
10:57 0161 P
10:48 0151 P
14:54 0148 P
12:23 0178 P
15:47 0617 F
10:27 0101 P
12:31 0068 P
18:00 0076 P
13:30 0487 F
12:57 0162 P
09:33 1224 F
15:38 0187 P
10:20 0147 P
12:44 0107 P
10:03 0265 F
14:44 0277 F
11:09 0663 F
14:34 0095 P
15:53 0499 F
10:21 0329 F
13:31 0143 P
12:18 0102 P
—CO
1.28 F
0.01 P
3.27 F
5.04 F
3.61 F
2.63 F
3.64 F
8.31 F
0.22 P
2.82 F
2.20 F
0.01 P
6.74 F
3.45 F
9.32 F
3.29 F
5.38 F
1.69 F
2.36 F
0.27 P
3.79 F
1.71 F
2.99 F
0.07 P
5.62 F
0.05 P
4.17 F
1.22 F
1.40 F
4.91 F
2.69 F
6.89 F
1.86 F
4.96 F
6.32 F
3.96 F
1.31 F
aecona lest
Time — HC—
10:43 0104 P
09:13 0197 P
12:28 0099 P
14:15 0228 F
08:23 0244 F
09:13 0097 P
14:55 0148 P
12:35 0212 P
12:13 0220 P
16:05 0130 P
12:42 0028 P
11:19 0519 F
12:43 0358 F
14:21 0266 F
15:11 0773 F
11:01 0166 P
10:51 0164 P
14:58 0113 P
12:27 0048 P
15:51 0507 F
10:32 0020 P
12:35 0046 P
18:03 0067 P
13:34 0445 F
13:00 0196 P
09:37 1593 F
15:44 0080 P
10:23 0176 P
12:48 0232 F
10:07 0882 F
14:48 0262 F
11:14 0432 F
14:38 0426 F
15:58 0612 F
10:25 0117 P
13:35 0156 P
12:24 0180 P
—CO
1.11 P
0.01 P
3.11 F
4.10 F
4.44 F
1.61 F
3.57 F
7.07 F
0.06 P
1.43 F
0.34 P
0.01 P
5.99 F
1.89 F
9.00 F
3.01 F
6.70 F
0.90 P
0.02 P
0.08 P
0.00 P
0.29 P
2.02 F
0.10 P
7.43 F
0.35 P
0.46 P
4.91 F
1.61 F
7.60 F
1.71 F
6.10 F
5.99 F
8.97 F
1.77 F
4.64 F
2.37 F
xnira Test
Time
10:47
09:16
12:32
14:19
08:27
09:17
14:59
12:40
12:17
16:09
12:45
11:24
12:47
14:24
15:15
11:06
10:56
15:03
12:32
15:54
10:35
12:39
18:08
13:39
13:04
09:41
15:49
10:29
12:52
10:11
14:53
11:17
14:43
16:01
10:29
13:39
12:28
--HC--
0061 P
0179 P
0088 P
0237 F
0176 P
0082 P
0162 P
0214 P
0073 P
0153 P
0041 P
0432 F
0006 P
0289 F
0593 F
0152 P
0181 P
0124 P
0030 P
0338 F
0030 P
0052 P
0043 P
0381 F
0215 P
0810 F
0013 P
0039 P
0147 P
0542 F
0211 P
0392 F
0251 F
0830 F
0100 P
0145 P
0162 P
—CO
1.06 P
0.01 P
2.94 F
4.80 F
2.20 F
1.29 F
3.42 F
6.95 F
0.01 P
2.31 F
0.80 P
0.01 P
0.04 P
1.32 F
9.08 F
2.40 F
7.81 F
1.00 P
0.01 P
0.02 P
0.16 P
0.64 P
1.15 P
0.03 P
8.44 F
0.03 P
0.00 P
0.23 P
2.23 F
5.71 F
2.70 F
4.77 F
4.95 F
8.78 F
1.39 F
4.78 F
1.99 F
-------
CO
ven
No. Make
069 MERC
070 FORD
071 FORD
072 FORD
073 FORD
074 FORD
075 FORD
076 FORD
077 FORD
078 MERC
079 FORD
080 MERC
081 FORD
082 FORD
083 FORD
084 FORD
085 MERC
086 MERC
087 MERC
088 MERC
089 MERC
090 MERC
091 MERC
092 FORD
093 FORD
094 FORD
095 FORD
096 FORD
097 FORD
098 MERC
099 FORD
100 FORD
101 FORD
102 FORD
103 FORD
104 FORD
na
Yr
84
86
82
82
86
86
86
86
87
81
81
81
82
82
82
82
83
83
86
83
83
83
83
81
81
83
81
81
81
82
82
82
85
85
85
87
Testing
Center
Outer L
Poplar
Outer L
22nd St
22nd St
Poplar
22nd St
Outer L
Goose C
22nd St
Outer L
Goose C
22nd St
22nd St
Goose C
22nd St
22nd St
Goose C
Goose C
Outer L
22nd St
22nd St
Goose C
Poplar
22nd St
Goose C
Outer L
Outer L
Outer L
Poplar
Outer L
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
Test
Date
08-19-87
08-26-87
08-06-87
08-27-87
11-19-87
09-24-87
10-15-87
12-10-87
11-18-87
09-25-87
11-04-87
12-05-87
09-05-87
10-09-87
12-19-87
10-02-87
08-22-87
10-29-87
08-08-87
09-11-87
08-20-87
09-01-87
08-26-87
08-13-87
08-22-87
08-21-87
11-11-87
08-05-87
10-02-87
09-24-87
09-11-87
10-15-87
11-17-87
11-05-87
11-03-87
10-23-87
nrst Test
Time --HC--
10:24 0225 F
16:02 0645 F
09:50 0159 P
17:24 0889 F
10:43 0174 P
09:20 0241 F
11:08 0136 P
15:57 0130 P
13:28 0418 F
10:26 0260 F
15:10 0161 P
10:48 0188 P
10:04 0192 P
14:49 0161 P
13:26 0133 P
11:18 0325 F
13:10 0177 P
09:08 0230 F
13:49 0360 F
11:08 0054 P
16:49 0120 P
14:42 0035 P
13:19 0010 P
14:53 0148 P
10:55 0124 P
14:22 0467 F
11:43 0213 P
08:33 0147 P
12:09 0473 F
12:29 0497 F
09:01 0240 F
09:59 0134 P
08:17 0275 F
15:53 0068 P
16:22 0161 P
10:49 0074 P
—CO
1.12 P
0.45 P
3.73 F
3.01 F
1.73 F
3.77 F
1.61 F
3.30 F
6.30 F
0.03 P
4.45 F
4.12 F
2.56 F
1.95 F
2.43 F
1.13 P
2.56 F
3.88 F
1.49 F
1.23 F
3.73 F
1.54 F
1.88 F
2.98 F
2.68 F
7.19 F
5.03 F
2.51 F
7.70 F
5.02 F
3.96 F
3.56 F
4.69 F
1.54 F
4.27 F
3.44 F
second Test
Time
10:27
16:07
09:55
17:28
10:47
09:24
11:13
16:02
13:31
10:31
15:15
10:51
10:09
14:55
13:29
11:22
13:15
09:11
13:54
11:12
16:52
14:48
13:23
14:58
11:00
14:29
11:47
08:41
12:13
12:33
09:05
10:03
08:21
15:58
16:25
10:53
— HC—
0209 P
0524 F
0146 P
0846 F
0054 P
0249 F
0053 P
0007 P
0165 P
0231 F
0110 P
0292 F
0186 P
0215 P
0120 P
0239 F
0150 P
0246 F
0017 P
0026 P
0008 P
0019 P
0009 P
0015 P
0178 P
0196 P
0168 P
0049 P
0341 F
0340 F
0255 F
0160 P
0374 F
0001 P
0153 P
0059 P
—CO
1.02 P
0.16 P
3.35 F
2.09 F
0.64 P
4.87 F
0.50 P
0.00 P
1.83 F
0.00 P
2.57 F
4.63 F
2.11 F
1.49 F
1.87 F
0.93 P
1.58 F
3.67 F
0.00 P
0.60 P
0.00 P
1.67 F
0.17 P
0.26 P
2.41 F
6.69 F
3.53 F
0.24 P
5.83 F
3.70 F
4.54 F
0.66 P
7.21 F
0.04 P
4.29 F
2.52 F
Tnira Test
Time
10:31
16:12
10:00
17:31
10:51
09:28
11:15
16:07
13:36
10:34
15:20
10:54
10:12
14:57
13:33
11:26
13:18
09:14
13:59
11:16
16:57
14:52
13:28
15:02
11:04
14:34
11:51
08:45
12:17
12:36
09:09
10:06
08:24
16:02
16:29
10:56
— HC—
0217 P
0028 P
0136 P
0801 F
0099 P
0222 F
0042 P
0004 P
0345 F
0216 P
0104 P
0205 P
0013 P
0167 P
0115 P
0208 P
0124 P
0133 P
0001 P
0105 P
0092 P
0047 P
0027 P
0225 F
0157 P
0401 F
0286 F
0028 P
0398 F
0366 F
0263 F
0064 P
0178 P
0005 P
0111 P
0053 P
—CO
0.81 P
0.08 P
2.34 F
3.38 F
0.61 P
5.69 F
0.87 P
0.00 P
6.16 F
0.01 P
1.90 F
4.32 F
0.00 P
1.49 F
1.63 F
1.20 P
0.82 P
0.58 P
0.00 P
2.49 F
3.02 F
3.27 F
2.58 F
8.45 F
2.63 F
7.10 F
5.78 F
0.06 P
6.32 F
4.15 F
4.65 F
0.47 P
6.28 P
0.09 P
3.16 F
2.34 F
-------
ven
No.
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
11!
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
Make
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
,>
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
FORD
CHEV
CHEV
PONT
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
PONT
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
OLDS
na
Yr
84
86
83
83
83
83
84
85
86
86
86
86
82
82
84
86
81
81
83
86
84
82
82
82
82
81
81
81
81
81
82
82
84
85
85
84
.testing
Center
22nd St
Goose C
Outer L
Outer L
22nd St
22nd St
Poplar
22nd St
22nd St
Outer L
Outer L
Outer L
Outer L
22nd St
22nd St
Outer L
Outer L
Goose C
Goose C
Goose C
Outer L
Outer L
Poplar
Goose C
22nd St
Outer L
22nd St
Outer L
Outer L
Outer L
Goose C
Goose C
22nd St
Outer L
Outer L
22nd St
lest
Date
11-10-87
08-15-87
11-04-87
09-08-87
10-13-87
08-20-87
09-11-87
11-10-87
12-18-87
09-04-87
11-18-87
11-11-87
11-05-87
09-24-87
08-05-87
09-08-87
11-17-87
08-22-87
08-19-87
08-19-87
07-08-87
09-09-87
08-08-87
08-19-87
12-08-87
09-05-87
10-13-87
07-24-87
09-12-87
12-02-87
09-03-87
11-21-87
09-09-87
09-02-87
09-08-87
09-04-87
Time
15:59
11:36
17:09
14:12
09:13
10:41
16:04
17:07
11:16
10:51
14:06
10:36
17:03
12:20
10:23
13:24
15:22
12:19
09:19
14:34
10:18
15:51
10:53
08:55
13:58
13:43
14:50
10:12
12:34
09:45
14:28
10:09
14:27
16:23
09:24
10:20
--HC--
0115 P
0269 F
0268 F
0158 P
0251 F
0248 F
0240 F
0191 P
0140 P
0252 F
0146 P
0210 P
0670 F
0417 F
0387 F
0192 P
0273 P
0149 P
0271 F
0215 P
0093 P
0096 P
0275 F
0917 F
0171 P
0294 F
0091 P
0116 P
0112 P
0165 P
0083 P
0342 F
0498 F
0372 F
0489 F
0564 F
—CO
3.17 F
1.50 F
0.43 P
2.14 F
0.03 P
5.11 F
3.99 F
1.71 F
2.58 F
2.60 F
2.01 F
2.66 F
0.16 P
0.04 P
4.18 F
3.13 F
2.80 F
2.12 F
0.75 P
2.90 F
1.60 F
3.41 F
0.05 P
0.09 P
2.54 F
0.23 P
1.21 F
2.13 F
2.17 F
1.60 F
1.26 F
2.10 F
7.22 F
6.08 F
6.30 F
5.93 F
aecona rest
Time --HC CO—-
16:04 0222 F 3.71 F
11:40 0001 P 0.03 P
17:12 0455 F 0.76 P
14:16 0087 P 0.71 P
09:19 0289 F 0.04 P
10:46 0230 F 3.75 F
16:09 0175 P 1.76 F
17:11 0168 P 1.66 F
11:22 0123 P 1.12 P
10:55 0173 P 0.89 P
14:09 0168 . 1.51 F
10:41 0179 P 1.69 F
17:09 1023 F 0.15 P
12:25 0534 F 0.03 P
10:27 0381 F 3.85 F
13:33 0140 P 1.15 P
15:26 0311 P 4.73 F
12:25 0075 P 0.75 P
09:23 0068 P 0.00 P
14:41 0001 P 0.01 P
10:23 0078 P 0.36 P
13:56 0065 P 1.99 F
10:59 0283 F 0.57 P
09:03 0949 F 0.09 P
14:02 0202 P 2.60 F
13:48 0281 F 0.15 P
14:54 0074 P 0.68 P
10:17 0066 P 1.01 P
12:38 0052 P 0.23 P
09:49 0171 P 0.42 P
14:32 00' P
10:12 029'. . ..oJ F
14:31 0471 F 7.26 F
16:29 0430 F «5 ir> F
09:27 0029 i' '--.ul P
10:24 0804 , 6.62 F
inira Test
Time
16:08
11:45
17:17
14:20
09:22
10:50
16:12
17:14
11:26
11:00
14:14
10:46
17:14
12:29
10:30
13:37
15:31
12:29
09:28
14:46
10:28
14:00
11:04
09:07
14:05
13:52
14:57
10:23
12:42
09:54
14:36
10:16
14:34
16:33
09:31
10:28
--HC--
0252 F
0011 P
0135 P
0112 P
0188 P
0237 F
0098 P
0178 P
0141 P
0168 P
0134 P
0178 P
0645 F
0231 F
0258 F
0135 P
0271 P
0032 P
0041 P
0008 P
0047 P
008V •
0151 .
0701 F
0109 P
0581 F
0067 P
0040 P
0020 P
0141 P
0052 P
0210 P
0399 F
0303 F
0014 P
0150 P
—CO
3.86 F
0.05 P
1.12 P
1.71 F
0.03 P
3.88 F
1.21 F
1.45 F
2.18 F
1.24 F
2.47 F
2.62 F
0.30 P
0.01 P
2.64 •
1.31 F
4.23 F
0.04 P
0.00 P
0.00 P
0.00 P
T.69 F
1 n
*•
0.50 P
0.52 P
0.69 P
0.12 P
0.22 P
1.10 P
2.46 F
6.94 F
3.31 F
0.01 P
0.17 P
-------
ven
No.
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
» 158
vi, 159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
Make
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
BUIC
CHEV
BUIC
PONT
OLDS
PONT
PONT
CHEV
PONT
CHEV
BUIC
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
BUIC
CHEV
PONT
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
CHEV
BUIC
BUIC
OLDS
BUIC
PONT
BUIC
BUIC
OLDS
OLDS
OLDS
PONT
ra
Yr
82
82
82
84
83
84
86
81
85
85
85
86
87
81
81
81
82
82
83
84
81
81
81
82
82
83
86
86
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
Testing
Center
Goose C
22nd St
22nd St
Goose C
Goose C
Goose C
Outer L
Outer L
Outer L
22nd St
Goose C
22nd St
22nd St
Poplar
Outer L
Goose C
Outer L
Outer L
22nd St
Outer L
Goose C
Outer L
Outer L
22nd St
Goose C
Outer L
Goose C
Goose C
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
Outer L
Outer L
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
Outer L
Test
Date
08-19-87
10-28-87
11-12-87
11-19-87
12-03-87
11-19-87
08-26-87
08-13-87
11-12-87
09-02-87
08-20-87
11-05-87
12-03-87
07-10-87
11-07-87
11-20-87
09-24-87
11-13-87
10-08-87
11-05-87
11-20-87
11-19-87
11-10-87
11-18-87
12-15-87
09-03-87
11-11-87
08-13-87
10-13-87
09-24-87
12-18-87
08-05-87
11-05-87
08-28-87
11-11-87
08-20-87
09-24-87
first lest
Time --HC--
13:38 0418 F
12:14 0098 P
12:39 0144 P
14:06 0373 F
14:22 0081 P
16:07 0251 F
15:57 0225 F
16:10 0157 P
11:41 0330 F
10:09 0256 F
17:11 0325 F
16:39 0230 F
16:52 0306 F
09:04 0221 F
11:54 0111 P
16:09 0276 F
15:36 0282 F
11:41 0251 F
15:01 0218 P
12:05 0086 P
10:04 0276 F
11:20 0354 F
14:02 0190 P
10:22 0086 P
08:34 0318 F
12:23 0210 P
16:28 0101 P
10:28 0137 P
16:23 0124 P
11:35 0318 F
12:54 0184 P
09:32 0352 F
15:17 0119 P
09:24 0193 P
13:36 0012 P
16:35 0304 F
16:21 0253 F
—CO
5.73 F
3.02 F
4.25 F
9.43 F
1.35 F
2.12 F
0.15 P
5.83 F
1.08 P
0.23 P
0.23 P
0.17 P
0.15 P
6.18 F
1.84 F
4.82 F
4.70 F
6.29 F
6.75 F
1.70 F
4.00 F
6.70 F
2.86 F
1.57 F
6.53 F
2.74 F
1.28 F
2.46 F
2.68 F
1.05 P
6.23 F
6.50 F
1.64 F
1.85 F
1.37 F
7.89 F
10.00 F
secona rest
Time --HC--
13:42 0132 P
12:18 0094 P
12:43 0113 P
14:10 0401 F
14:26 0040 P
16:10 0199 P
16:01 0080 P
16:17 0123 P
11:45 0256 F
10:13 0080 P
17:15 0244 F
16:43 0132 P-
16:56 0000 P
09:09 0329 F
11:57 0111 P
16:12 0118 P
15:39 0330 F
11:44 0372 F
15:06 0038 P
12:09 0023 P
10:07 0260 F
11:23 0296 F
14:08 0181 P
10:27 0113 P
08:38 0299 F
12:26 0118 P
16:30 0088 P
10:32 0011 P
16:28 0141 P
11:39 0286 F
12:58 0154 P
09:36 1680 F
15:20 0120 P
09:29 0289 F
13:39 0002 P
16:39 0176 P
16:24 0208 P
—co
1.26 F
3.03 F
2.44 F
9.75 F
0.53 P
1.15 P
0.07 P
3.92 F
0.60 P
0.16 P
0.17 P
0.07 P
0.00 P
4.87 F
1.74 F
2.63 F
4.61 F
6.49 F
1.72 F
0.01 P
0.55 P
5.53 F
2.09 F
0.85 P
4.48 F
0.89 P
0.48 P
0.00 P
2.88 F
1.01 P
5.92 F
8.90 F
1.60 F
1.46 F
0.00 P
6.09 F
9.44 F
rnira test
Time
13:46
12:21
12:45
14:14
14:30
16:15
16:05
16:21
11:50
10:17
17:19
16:46
16:59
09:14
12:02
16:16
15:43
11:48
15:10
12:13
10:12
11:27
14:12
10:30
08:42
12:30
16:33
10:36
16:31
11:43
13:01
09:41
15:24
09:33
13:42
16:42
16:28
— HC—
0136 P
0085 P
0098 P
0217 P
0012 P
0245 F
0031 P
0114 P
0141 P
0033 P
0215 P
0001 P
0002 P
0861 F
0130 P
0371 F
0267 F
0333 F
0022 P
0085 P
0453 F
0260 F
0008 P
0141 P
0283 F
0157 P
0095 P
0013 P
0087 P
0245 F
0157 P
0338 F
0115 P
0088 P
0001 P
0166 P
0225 F
—CO
1.21 F
2.88 F
2.14 F
9.22 F
0.31 P
1.54 F
0.31 P
4.55 F
0.62 P
0.10 P
0.25 P
0.00 P
0.00 P
3.94 F
3.56 F
6.52 F
5.40 F
6.25 F
0.13 P
1.68 F
0.55 P
5.70 F
0.01 P
1.27 F
5.68 F
1.20 P
1.09 P
0.00 P
1.02 P
1.01 P
6.22 F
4.16 F
2.65 F
2.75 F
0.00 P
5.49 F
9.90 F
-------
ven
No. Make
178 PONT
179 PONT
180 OLDS
181 BUIC
182 OLDS
183 PONT
184 OLDS
185 BUIC
186 OLDS
187 OLDS
188 PONT
189 BUIC
190 CADI
191 CADI
192 PONT
193 BUIC
194 PONT
195 PONT
196 CHEV
197 PONT
198 BUIC
199 OLDS
200 PONT
201 OLDS
202 OLDS
203 BUIC
204 CADI
205 CADI
na
Yr
81
81
81
82
82
82
82
82
82
83
83
83
85
81
82
81
81
82
82
84
81
81
81
81
81
84
81
81
resizing
Center
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
Outer L
Poplar
Outer L
22nd St
22nd St
Outer L
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
Outer L
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
Poplar
Outer L
Outer L
Outer L
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
re s c
Date
08-15-87
09-01-87
08-20-87
12-09-87
09-24-87
11-04-87
08-08-87
12-08-87
08-20-87
08-13-87
10-16-87
09-02-87
11-21-87
11-18-87
08-22-87
09-09-87
08-06-87
11-06-87
08-27-87
11-06-87
09-04-87
12-03-87
08-27-87
10-01-87
12-09-87
11-25-87
10-28-87
11-20-87
rirst iest
Time --HC—
10:17 0242 F
11:39 0147 P
11:21 0137 P
16:06 0354 F
12:17 0239 F
12:53 0180 P
12:25 0447 F
11:46 0586 F
10:07 0413 F
16:26 1998 F
10:16 0092 P
09:17 0340 F
09:39 0222 F
12:39 0059 P
12:00 0086 P
09:40 0139 P
14:25 0302 F
10:02 0216 P
15:02 0234 F
11:46 0253 F
15:41 0041 P
16:27 0319 F
12:44 0141 P
13:53 0359 F
13:29 0110 P
14:33 0258 F
12:24 0560 F
12:26 1760 F
—CO
0.42 P
5.20 F
2.48 F
0.06 P
0.05 P
3.16 F
1.64 F
1.15 P
0.07 P
6.98 F
1.38 F
0.06 P
0.03 P
1.65 F
1.30 F
2.47 F
2.46 F
3.43 F
1.15 P
0.13 P
1.24 F
0.40 P
2.55 F
0.81 P
1.77 F
0.17 P
0.68 P
10.01 F
second rest
Time
10:24
11:43
11:25
16:10
12:21
12:58
12:28
11:50
10:10
16:31
10:21
09:33
09:44
12:43
12:04
09:44
14:30
10:07
15:07
11:52
15:45
16:32
12:49
13:57
13:34
14:37
12:29
12:30
--HC--
0166 P
0174 P
0103 P
0225 F
0356 F
0215 P
0317 F
0590 F
0348 F
1658 F
0084 P
0042 P'
0023 P
0010 P
0052 P
0124 P
0408 F
0315 F
0308 F
0251 F
0066 P
0307 F
0124 P
0414 F
0134 P
0059 P
0587 F
1504 F
--CO—
0.34 P
5.72 F
1.79 F
0.08 P
0.09 P
4.99 F
0.81 P
1.03 P
0.15 P
6.06 F
1.31 F
0.00 P
0.00 P
0.01 P
0.34 P
1.82 F
3.93 F
2.94 F
1.14 P
0.15 P
2.06 F
0.30 P
2.95 F
0.92 P
1.47 F
0.01 P
0.64 P
10.01 F
rnira rest
Time
10:28
11:47
11:30
16:14
12:24
13:03
12:32
11:54
10:14
16:35
10:24
09:36
09:47
12:46
12:07
09:47
14:34
10:10
15:10
11:55
15:48
16:36
12:53
14:02
13:37
14:39
12:31
12:34
— HC--
0432 F
0153 P
0123 P
0219 P
0182 P
0181 P
0424 F
0605 F
0280 F
1320 F
0080 P
0022 P
0030 P
0015 P
0086 P
0118 P
0311 F
0313 F
0168 P
0225 F
0016 P
0275 F
0105 P
0364 F
0134 P
0031 P
0332 F
1617 F
—CO
0.62 P
6.26 F
2.18 F
0.41 P
0.10 P
3.30 F
3.97 F
0.79 P
0.33 P
6.00 F
1.78 F
0.01 P
0.00 P
0.00 P
1.20 P
2.14 F
2.57 F
3.93 F
0.88 P
0.11 P
1.14 P
0.38 P
3.34 F
0.87 P
1.59 F
0.01 P
0.74 P
10.01 F
-------
CO
ven
No. Make
206 CHEV
207 CHEV
208 CHEV
209 CHEV
210 CMC
211 CMC
212 CHEV
213 CHEV
214 CHEV
215 CHEV
216 CHEV
217 CHEV
218 CHEV
219 CHEV
220 CHEV
221 CHEV
222 CHEV
223 HOND
224 HOND
225 HOND
226 HOND
227 HOND
228 HOND
229 HOND
230 HOND
231 HOND
232 HOND
233 HOND
234 HOND
na
Yr
82
85
85
82
82
83
82
86
86
88
86
86
83
83
83
85
81
85
82
81
83
84
86
85
85
86
86
86
86
Testing
Center
Outer L
Outer L
22nd St
Outer L
Outer L
Outer L
Outer L
22nd St
Goose C
Goose C
Goose C
Goose C
22nd St
Goose C
22nd St
Goose C
Outer L
Goose C
Goose C
Goose C
22nd St
Goose C
Goose C
Goose C
Outer L
Goose C
22nd St
Goose C
22nd St
Test
Date
11-13-87
12-09-87
11-05-87
07-09-87
11-04-87
07-09-87
09-11-87
11-18-87
10-22-87
10-06-87
09-09-87
10-08-87
08-26-87
12-08-87
08-26-87
09-24-87
08-20-87
08-22-87
09-11-87
08-22-87
11-20-87
07-23-87
07-17-87
10-20-87
07-16-87
08-19-87
11-20-87
09-08-87
08-18-87
First Test
Time — HC--
11:25 0114 P
16:48 0373 F
10:15 0064 P
10:53 0092 P
16:44 0236 F
10:13 0377 F
10:07 0103 P
13:39 0298 F
14:57 0274 F
16:49 0230 F
09:19 0243 F
14:10 0577 F
15:00 0583 F
12:03 0978 F
15:44 0921 F
11:16 0887 F
10:38 0655 F
11:39 0133 P
11:16 0131 P
13:30 0044 P
12:00 0225 F
10:09 0112 P
10:53 0264 F
16:08 0271 F
09:13 0234 F
12:37 0068 P
12:41 0200 P
11:44 0057 P
12:33 0212 P
— CO— -
1.85 F
1.00 P
1.32 F
1.52 F
0.44 P
0.01 P
1.31 F
1.62 F
0.71 P
0.80 P
0.01 P
0.08 P
0.01 P
0.07 P
0.21 P
0.53 P
9.39 F
2.57 F
2.31 F
1.38 F
0.99 P
2.94 F
6.13 F
0.72 P
2.07 F
2.19 F
2.02 F
2.32 F
1.47 F
second Test
Time
11:30
16:51
10:21
10:59
16:48
10:16
10:10
13:44
15:00
16:54
09:23
14:15
15:06
12:07
15:49
11:19
10:41
11:41
11:20
13:34
12:05
10:12
10:56
16:11
09:15
12:40
12:46
11:47
12:39
--HC—
0118 P
0199 P
0059 P
0084 P
0480 F
0337 F
0102 P
0208 P
0282 F
0146 P
0125 P
0525 F-
0390 F
1143 F
0529 F
0943 F
0630 F
0080 P
0140 P
0037 P
0246 F
0266 F
0359 F
0232 F
0273 F
0042 P
0007 P
0043 P
0165 P
-co —
1.38 F
0.49 P
1.09 P
1.95 F
0.33 P
0.00 P
0.72 P
2.03 F
0.43 P
0.76 P
0.00 P
0.06 P
0.01 P
0.10 P
0.15 P
0.48 P
9.08 F
1.59 F
1.96 F
1.25 F
1.30 F
4.04 F
8.74 F
0.78 P
1.71 F
1.34 F
0.00 P
1.47 F
1.12 P
mira rest
Time
11:34
16:55
10:25
11:04
16:52
10:21
10:14
13:47
15:04
16:59
09:28
14:19
15:09
12:10
15:53
11:23
10:44
11:45
11:24
13:38
12:08
10:18
11:02
16:15
09:20
12:44
12:49
11:52
12:42
— HC--
0209 P
0335 F
0060 P
0062 P
0182 P
0246 F
0324 F
0256 F
0242 F
0118 P
0015 P
0035 P
0086 P
0322 F
0505 F
0262 F
0755 F
0034 P
0135 P
0006 P
0250 F
0192 P
0205 P
0210 P
0219 P
0005 P
0007 P
0046 P
0007 P
—CO
1.93 F
0.93 P
1.22 F
1.18 P
0.32 P
0.00 P
4.31 F
2.13 F
0.81 P
0.91 P
0.00 P
0.00 P
0.00 P
0.03 P
0.25 P
0.61 P
9.66 F
0.63 P
1.82 F
0.40 P
1.66 F
2.84 F
4.22 F
0.60 P
2.12 F
0.42 P
0.00 P
1.84 F
0.00 P
235 ISUZ 84 Goose C 08-28-87 15:08 0324 F 0.16 P
15:11 0237 F 0.15 P
15:16 0117 P 0.14 P
236 JAGU 83 Goose C 08-08-87 12:08 0123 P 3.24 F
12:12 0005 P 0.01 P
12:16 0026 P 1.26 F
-------
Cd
I
00
ven
No.
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
Make
DODG
DODG
DODG
DODG
DODG
DATS
DATS
DATS
DATS
DATS
DATS
DATS
DATS
DATS
DATS
DATS
DATS
DATS
NISS
NISS
DATS
na
Yr
81
85
81
82
83
81
81
82
83
84
83
82
82
81
82
83
84
84
85
87
84
resting
Center
Goose C
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
Goose C
Goose C
22nd St
Poplar
Poplar
Goose C
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
22nd St
Outer L
Outer L
Poplar
22nd St
Goose C
22nd St
rest
Date
08-08-87
08-22-87
08-08-87
08-18-87
10-02-87
09-10-87
12-23-87
08-07-87
08-06-87
11-05-87
11-18-87
08-19-87
08-26-87
10-29-87
10-30-87
07-15-87
09-25-87
09-23-87
08-28-87
09-03-87
12-02-87
Time --HC—
12:21 0169 P
10:41 0229 F
11:25 0050 P
10:18 0084 P
13:26 0049 P
14:41 0463 F
13:43 0238 F
09:43 0419 F
09:53 0841 F
11:47 0199 P
11:46 0067 P
14:33 0050 P
13:30 0284 F
13:16 0406 F
11:06 0183 P
15:29 0252 F
11:56 0119 P
10:24 0131 P
15:42 1152 F
13:16 0655 F
12:31 0275 F
— CO—
4.17 F
6.44 F
1.42 F
3.88 F
1.85 F
0.45 P
0.19 P
6.59 F
10.01 F
4.99 F
2.62 F
2.65 F
0.59 P
7.75 F
4.71 F
5.51 F
2.61 F
1.35 F
0.32 P
0.24 P
0.75 P
Time --HC —
12:24 0155 P
10:46 0089 P
11:30 0046 P
10:23 0076 P
13:29 0053 P
14:44 0496 F
13:47 0214 P
09:48 0317 F
10:01 0550 F
11:49 0245 F
11:53 0052 P
14:38 0050 P
13:35 0208 P
13:20 0426 F
11:11 0179 P
15:35 0076 P
11:58 0119 P
10:30 0132 P
15:47 0010 P
13:19 0011 P
12:35 0040 P
—CO—
3.82 F
0.86 P
1.37 F
3.70 F
1.96 F
2.13 F
0.19 P
5.05 F
10.01 F
4.84 F
2.17 F
2.02 F
0.54 P
7.82 F
5.07 F
0.04 P
2.24 F
1.34 F
0.00 P
0.00 P
0.01 P
inira Test
Time
12:29
10:50
11:33
10:27
13:34
14:48
13:50
09:52
10:06
11:53
11:55
14:43
13:38
13:23
11:14
15:42
12:02
10:33
15:51
13:23
12:39
— HC--
0083 P
0080 P
0029 P
0047 P
0057 P
1091 F
0245 F
0354 F
0661 F
0214 P
0069 P
0033 P
0181 P
0472 F
0180 P
0089 P
0119 P
0126 P
1185 F
0010 P
0047 P
—CO
0.02 P
0.74 P
1.07 P
3.29 F
2.54 F
1.81 F
0.21 P
5.64 F
10.01 F
4.89 F
2.84 F
1.52 F
0.60 P
6.03 F
5.09 F
0.10 P
2.65 F
1.41 F
0.38 P
0.00 P
0.03 P
258 PEUG 85 22nd St 09-02-87 14:29 0183 P 6.65 F 14:34 0172 P 6.21 F 14:37 0178 P 6.37 F
259 PORS 83 Outer L 12-03-87 13:10 0058 P 2.27 F 13:13 0054 P 2.53 F 13:17 0062 P 2.27 F
260 MAZD 83 Goose C 08-08-87 10:29 0176 P 4.56 F
261 MAZD 84 Goose C 11-21-87 10:48 0108 P 1.83 F
10:33 0168 P 5.61 F
10:50 0109 P 1.55 F
10:39 0165 P 6.64 F
10:54 0006 P 0.35 P
-------
veil
No.
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
Make
TOYT
TOYO
TOYT
VOLV
VOLV
VOLK
VOLK
VOLK
OLDS
CADI
na
Yr
81
84
83
81
83
82
82
83
83
81
jesting
Center
22nd
St
22nd St
Goose C
Goose C
Goose C
Goose
Goose
Goose
22nd
22nd
C
C
C
St
St
mil
Date
09-04-87
09-10-87
10-02-87
08-21-87
08-15-87
12-09-87
10-02-87
08-18-87
08-22-87
08-18-87
Time —HC CO
12:23
14:17
14:03
14:10
12:36
12:18
09:51
13:25
11:13
13:07
0134
0110
0066
0042
0082
0098
0102
0114
0101
0405
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
F
3
3
1
1
1
5
6
7
2
5
.68
.05
.57
.28
.33
.84
.59
.76
.47
.77
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
CO
SO
Second Test
Time —HC— —CO—
12:28 0131 P 3.17 F
14:22 0131 P 4.00 F
14:00 0014 P 0.00 P
14:15 0046 P
12:41 0070 P
11:18 0101 P
13:12 0451 F
1.16 P
1.32 F
12:20 0104 P 6.07 F
09:55 0100 P- 6.69 F
13:28 0130 P 8.37 F
2.45 F
5.34 F
Third Test
Time —HC— —CO
12:31 0126 P 3.29 F
14:25 0109 P 2.79 F
14:12 0014 P 0.00 P
14:19 0040 P
12:45 0078 P
11:25 0104 P
13:15 0282 F
1.18 P
1.71 F
12:24 0120 P 6.49 F
09:59 0102 P 6.88 F
13:32 0118 P 8.10 P
2.44 F
3.67 F
------- |