United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Emission Control Technology Division
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
EPA 460/3-84-011
March 1985
oEPA
Air
Crankcase Emissions with
Disabled PCV Systems
-------
EPA 460/3-84-011
Crankcase Emissions with Disabled
PCV Systems
by
Daniel A. Montalvo
and
Charles T. Hare
Southwest Research Institute
6220 Culebra Road
San Antonio, Texas 78284
Contract No. 68-03-3162
Work Assignment 19
EPA Project Officer: Craig A. Harvey
EPA Branch Technical Representative: R. Bruce Michael
Prepared for
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Mobile Sources \
Emission Control Technology Division
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
March 1985
-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to report
technical data of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies are available
free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors and grantees, and
nonprofit organizations - in limited quantities - from the Library Services
Office, Environmental Protection Agency, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor,
Michigan 48105.
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by Southwest
Research Institute, 6220 Culebra Road, San Antonio, Texas, in fulfillment of
Work Assignment No. 19 of Contract No. 68-03-3162. The contents of this
report are reproduced herein as received from Southwest Research Institute.
The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed are those of the author and
not necessarily those of the Environmental Protection Agency. Mention of
company or product names is not to be considered as an endorsement by the
Environmental Protection Agency.
Publication No. EPA 460/3-84-011
ii
-------
FOREWORD
This project was conducted for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
by the Department of Emissions Research of Southwest Research Institute. The
project was begun in May 1984 and completed in September 1984. It was
conducted under Work Assignment 19 of Contract 68-03-3162, and was
identified within Southwest Research Institute as Project 03-7338-019.
Mr. Robert 3. Garbe of the Emission Control Technology Division, Office
of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control, Environmental Protection Agency, Ann
Arbor, Michigan, served as EPA Project Officer during the early part of the
project. Mr. Craig A. Harvey was named EPA Project Officer during the latter
part of the project. Mr. R. Bruce Michael, of the same division, was the Branch
Technical Representative. Mr. Charles T. Hare, Manager, Advanced
Technology, Department of Emissions Research, Southwest Research Institute,
served as the Project Manager. The project was under the supervision of Daniel
A. Montaivo, Research Scientist, who served as Project Leader.
ill
-------
ABSTRACT
This report describes the laboratory testing of nine in-use light-duty
gasoline passenger cars using up to four PCV disablement configurations. The
nine vehicles included 1975 to 1983 model years, with odometer readings
generally between 20,000 and 60,000 miles. No two vehicles were identical in
make and engine type, and engine displacements ranged from 89 to 403 inA
The vehicles were tested over the 1975 Federal Test Procedure, with sampling
for crankcase HC conducted during each individual cycle of the 3-bag FTP and
during the 10-minute hot soak. Emissions of crankcase HC are provided in g/mi
for the 3-bag FTP, and in g/min for the 10-minute soak.
Two PCV disablement configurations, identified as Al and A2 in this
study, contributed significant crankcase HC emissions. Disablement Al was
with the PCV valve disconnected from its orifice, but still connected to its hose
going to the carburetor or manifold. The A2 disablement was like Al, but with
the fresh air hose to the air cleaner completely removed. The 3-bag FTP
crankcase HC emissions of the nine vehicles ranged from 0.16 to 2.72 g/mi
(average 1.21 g/mi) using the Al configuration, and from 0.71 to 4.18 g/mi
(average 1.92 g/mi) using the A2 configuration. Overall, A2 hydrocarbon
emissions were about 59 percent higher than Al hydrocarbon emissions.
Crankcase HC emissions with A2 disablement were two times greater than their
respective Federal exhaust HC emissions standards, as averaged for eight cars.
The crankcase HC emissions did not correlate strongly with odometer reading or
engine displacement, although the larger-displacement engines (229 to 403 in^)
did produce most of the higher HC readings of the study. Highest crankcase HC
emissions during the 10-minute soak were 0.29 and 0.19 grams per minute found
with the Al and A2 disablements, respectively. Methane was not a major
constituent of crankcase emissions, the highest level detected during the FTP
being 0.02 g/mi.
IV
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD
ABSTRACT iv
LIST OF FIGURES vi
LIST OF TABLES vii
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 2
III. TEST PLAN, VEHICLES, FUEL, AND TEST PROCEDURES 4
A. Test Plan k
B. Test Vehicles 8
C. Dynamometer and CVS Sampling System 8
D. Sampling Interface System 13
E. Hydrocarbon Gaseous Emissions 16
F. Emission Test Procedure 16
G. Hydrocarbon Emissions Calculations 20
IV. GASEOUS HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS RESULTS 21
A. PCV Disablement Configurations Evaluation 21
B. Methane Analyses 21
C. Crankcase On-Line and Bag HC Emissions 25
D. FTP Crankcase On-Line HC Emissions 25
E. Crankcase HC Emissions During Soak 32
REFERENCES 3t
APPENDICES
A. WORK ASSIGNMENT NO. 19
SCOPE OF WORK AND MODIFICATIONS
B. LIST OF AVAILABLE TEST VEHICLES
AS OF JULY 1984
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 PCV Disablement Configurations with Emissions Sampling
System 7
2 Views of Gasoline Vehicles as Evaluated on
Dynamometer 12
3 Sampling System Interfaces for HC in Gasoline Crankcase
Gaseous Emissions 14
4 Views of the "Closed System" as Evaluated for Sampling
of the Crankcase HC using the Monte Carlo 15
5 Setup of Sampling Interface System on Test Vehicles with
PCV Disablements (Al and A2 Configurations) 17
6 Views of Gaseous HC Analytical Instruments 18
7 FTP Driving Cycle vs Time Trace 19
8 Crankcase HC Emissions of Nine Test Vehicles During
3-Bag FTP with PCV Disablement Configuration Al 26
9 Crankcase HC Emissions of Nine Test Vehicles During
3-Bag FTP with PCV Disablement Configuration A2 27
10 Crankcase On-Line THC Emissions of Nine Vehicles During
3-Bag FTP with PCV Disablement Configurations Al and A2 29
11 Crankcase On-Line THC Emissions of Nine Vehicles During
Individual Cycles of 3-Bag FTP with PCV Disablement
Configuration A2 31
12 Crankcase On-Line THC Emissions of Nine Test Vehicles
During 10-Minute Soak of 3-Bag FTP with PCV Disablement
Configurations Al and A2 33
vi
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table
1 Summary of Gasoline Vehicles Evaluated for Crankcase
Hydrocarbon Emissions with Disabled PCV Systems 4
2 Description of Gasoline Test Vehicles 9
3 Summary of Driving Schedule Parameters 19
4 Summary of Crankcase Hydrocarbon Emissions from
Various Vehicles with Disabled PCV Systems 22
vzi
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
The earliest form of gasoline automotive emission control was the
Positive Crankcase Ventilation (PCV) System. Gasoline engines produce
variable quantities of blowby gases during their operating cycle that escape
past the piston rings into the crankcase. These gases contain certain unburned
fuel and other pollutants that may adversely affect the environment. Since the
early 1960's, most gasoline vehicles have employed a PCV system to prevent
blowby gases from escaping to the atmosphere. Current EPA regulations
require systems which completely eliminate the venting of crankcase emissions
from gasoline-fueled vehicles. A PCV system works by routing crankcase gases
into a vacuum-controlled valve (PCV valve), and then through a hose into the
carburetor orifice or intake manifold, where they are subsequently burned in
the combustion chamber. Fresh air to the crankcase is normally drawn through
a hose connected between the valve cover and air cleaner housing.
An EPA tampering survey(D* has indicated that crankcase emissions from
some in-use light-duty gasoline passenger vehicles are uncontrolled, due to
disablement of the PCV system. Approximately 2885 vehicles were randomly
examined, and of these, 2.5 percent had disabled PCV systems. Although the
number of vehicles with disabled PCV was low, EPA is concerned that
crankcase emissions could still have a major impact on total vehicle emissions.
For example, if crankcase emissions are large, then the major gasoline vehicle
pollutants would be those emitted from the crankcase and not from the exhaust.
The study reported here measured crankcase HC emissions from nine in-
use 1975 and later model year light-duty passenger gasoline vehicles, with four
different configurations of PCV disablements. Crankcase hydrocarbon
emissions were measured using normal CVS bags, as well as an on-line heated
flame ionization detector (HFID). Methane analysis was also performed on the
CVS bags. The dynamometer driving schedule used in the study was the 1975 3-
bag Federal Test Procedure^), but included continuous HC sampling and a
fourth bag collected during the hot 10-minute soak period.
*Superscript numbers in parentheses refer to references at the end of this
report.
-------
IL SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The major purpose of this project was to quantify crankcase HC emissions
of nine in-use light-duty gasoline passenger vehicles with disabled PCV
emissions control systems. Model years of the vehicles were from 1975 to 1983,
with odometer readings generally from 20,000 to 60,000 miles. Engine
displacements ranged from 89 to 403 in.3, and no two vehicles were identical in
engine type or make. Sampling of crankcase HC emissions was conducted
during each cycle of the 1975 3-bag FTP Federal Test Procedure and during the
10-minute hot soak. Hydrocarbon emissions were measured using normal CVS
bags as well as an on-line heated flame ionization detector (HFID). Methane
analysis was also performed on the CVS bags.
Important observations and conclusions reached as a result of this project
(not necessarily in order) are as follows:
Of the four PCV disablement configurations (Al, A2, B3, and B4)
evaluated in this study, only Al and A2 were found to be significant
contributors (greater than 0.1 g/mi) of crankcase HC emissions.
Disablement Al is with PCV valve disconnected from its orifice at the
valve cover, and still connected to its hose going to the carburetor or
manifold. The A2 disablement is like Al, but also with the fresh air hose
to the air cleaner completely removed.
Crankcase HC emissions of the nine vehicles sampled indicated levels of
0.16 to 2.72 g/mi, with an average of 1.21 g/mi, employing the Al
disablement. Hydrocarbon emissions from the crankcase using the A2
disablement averaged 1.92 g/mi and a range of 0.71 to 4.18 g/mi. Eight of
the cars with A2 configuration produced an average of two times as much
crankcase HC as that specified for exhaust HC in their respective Federal
exhaust emissions standards.
Meaningful correlation of crankcase HC emissions with odometer reading,
engine displacement, or engine type was not evident, although the larger
displacement engines (229 to 403 in.3) did produce higher HC emissions
(greater than 1.0 g/mi by on-line analysis). The Cougar with 351 in.^
engine displacement was the highest HC emitter at 4.18 g/mi (A2), and
the Tercel with 89 in.3 displacement was the lowest with 0.16 g/mi (Al).
Overall, the A2 disablement provided about half the 10-minute soak HC
emissions obtained with the Al disablement. The Al configuration
averaged 0.15 g/min HC emissions with a range of 0.00 to 0.29 g/min,
while A2 varied from 0.02 to 0.19 g/min with an average value of 0.08
g/min. Highest crankcase on-line HC emitters during the 10-minute soak
with Al disablement were the Chevette and Cougar at 0.29 and 0.28
g/min, respectively. The Cougar and Skyhawk were the highest HC
emitters, at 0.19 g/min, using the A2 disablement.
-------
Methane was not a major constituent of crankcase HC emissions, the
highest ievel detected (from the Chevette, 98 CID) during the 3-bag FTP
being 0.02 g/mi. The 3-bag FTP methane ranged from O.'fl to 1.1 percent
of bag HC. No methane was detected, at a detection limit of 0.005
g/min, during the soak cycle on any vehicle.
-------
IIL TEST PLAN, VEHICLES, FUEL, AND TEST PROCEDURES
This section describes the test plan, vehicles, fuel, and test procedures.
The facilities and general instrumentation are also discussed.
A. Test Plan
A copy of the Scope of Work and subsequent additions for this Work
Assignment, are given in Appendix A. The intent of the test plan was to
evaluate or quantify crankcase HC emissions from gasoline passenger vehicles
with disabled PCV systems. Consequently, in this project, nine gasoline
vehicles were actually operated. The test plan called for ten vehicles, but only
nine were run because of costs incurred evaluating two added and distinct PCV
disablements identified later in this discussion. The vehicles employed in the
study are identified in more detail later in the report under Subsection B of
Section III. For the sake of discussion in this section, however, a brief
description of the vehicles with corresponding SwRI code is provided in Table 1.
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF GASOLINE VEHICLES EVALUATED FOR
CRANKCASE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS WITH DISABLED PCV SYSTEMS
Vehicle
Code
01
02
03
05
06
07
08
09
Year
Vehicle and Engine Description
Make
1982 Chevrolet
1978 Mercury
1982 Toyota
1975 Chevrolet
1977 Buick
1978 Oldsmobile
1983 Dodge
1978 Toyota
1978 Chevrolet
Model
Monte Carlo
Cougar
Tercel
Nova
Skyhawk
Delta 88
Aries
Celica
Chevette
Engine
Odometer Displacement,
Miles
20,983
45,770
31,875
58,156
57,234
69,418
20,728
52,214
44,139
l/in.3
3.8/229
5.8/351
1.5/89
4.1/250
3.8/231
6.6/403
2.2/134
2.2/134
1.6/98
The vehicles are not a statistical sample, but represent a wide range of cars.
Mileages were chosen to represent typical averages instead of extremes. As
specified in the test plan, no two vehicles were identical in make and engine
type, and their odometer readings were generally from 20,000 to 60,000 miles.
Only one vehicle, a 1978 Oldsmobile Delta 88, exceeded 60,000 miles; and it was
4
-------
tested with the Project Officer's approval. Two of the test vehicles used were
in each of the following displacement classes selected by the Project Officer,
except for the single vehicle in the 4.0-5.6 I class:
Vehicle Tested Displacement Class
03 and 09 under 1.7 A (<104 in.3)
07 and 08 1.8-2.5 A (110-153 in.3)
01 and 05 2.6-3.9 £ (159-238 in.3)
04 4.0-5.6 H (244-343 in.3)
02 and 06 greater than 5.7 I (>348 in.3)
The basic test sequence and HC emission measurements conducted on
each vehicle/PCV disablement combination were the following:
Test Sequence (3-bag FTP and 10-minute soak)
Emissions
Measurements
Continuous heated
FID THCa
CVS bag HC
CVS bag Methane
Cold
Transient
Xb
X
X
Cold
Stabilized
X
X
X
Hot
10-min. Soak
X
X
X
Hot
Transient
X
X
X
aTHC is total hydrocarbons
bx indicates a sample is taken
Continuous HC was obtained during the 3-bag FTP, and also during the hot 10-
minute soak. Concurrently, the normal CVS bag was obtained for each cycle
including the soak. The bags were used to determine HC and methane.
Emissions during the soak are reported separately from the 3-bag FTP. The
analytical instrumentation for continuous THC, bag HC, and bag methane is
described later in the report, in Section III, E.
Each vehicle was to be tested once over the "four-bag" FTP (as previously
described for the three normal bags plus a 10-minute fourth bag sampled during
the hot soak) with the following PCV configurations:
Disablements A. PCV valve disconnected from its orifice which
receives crankcase emissions, and still connected to
its hose going to carburetor or manifold.
Disablement Al. PCV disconnected; fresh air hose to air cleaner
connected.
-------
Disablement A2. PCV disconnected; fresh air hose to air cleaner
completely removed and no part of the system
plugged.
Disablements B. New disablements added
Disablement B3. PCV valve remains connected in orifice, but
disconnected from hose going to carburetor or
manifold; fresh air hose system intact.
Disablement B4. Fresh air hose to air cleaner completely removed;
PCV system properly connected.
The new disablements (B3 and B4) were added to Al and A2 as a technical
direction by the Project Officer (See Appendix A). A schematic representation
of these PCV disablements is found in Figure 1. Included in the figure are the
proposed emissions sampling points. As described later in the report under
Section IV, the B3 and B4 disablements were discontinued by the Project
Officer after preliminary testing showed that crankcase HC emissions with
these two disablements were not significant as compared to Al and A2.
Disablement configurations Al and A2 were each run with each vehicle,
using the four-bag FTP. The Monte Carlo was the only vehicle that was run
twice using the A2 disablement and "four-bag" FTP, to check the sampling
system repeatability. The Monte Carlo, Cougar, and Tercel were the only cars
run using the B3 and B4 disablements. Each of these three cars was run once
with B3 using a cold-505 cycle, and once with B4 using a hot-505 cycle.
Three techniques considered early in this project to measure crankcase
HC emissions included the following:
1. Measure HC concentration of gases emitted by collecting them in a
bag or with a continuous FID, and determine total volume emitted
separately to permit computation of mass emissions.
2. Introduce crankcase gases into a low-volume calibrated dilution
system and use bag sampling, with computation similar to that used
for a standard CVS to yield grams per mile.
3. Introduce gases into a standard CVS dilution system, and use
continuous or bag sampling to determine HC concentration, followed
by standard CVS computations to yield grams per mile.
Technique No. 3 was ultimately selected because it required the least complex
efforts to set-up, sample, and calculate emissions results. The technique also
provided bag samples of reasonable concentration for methane analysis. The
CVS system designated for use in this study is described later in this report
under Section III. C.
-------
Air
Cleaner
1
Valve
Cover(s)
Carburetor
or Manifold
TYPE IV SYSTEM
OT ouro
Typical PCV System with PCV and fresh
air hose properly connected
Air
Cleaner
t
Carburetor
or Manifold
^
<.
PCV
Valve
Cover (s)
+
Sampling
System
Air
Cleaner
I
Carburetor
or Manifold
PCV
Valve
Cover(s)
Sampling
System
CVS
Tunnel
CVS
Tunnel
Al-Disablement Configuration with PCV disconnected;
fresh air hose to air cleaner connected
A2-Disablement Configuration with PCV disconnected;
fresh air hose to air cleaner completely removed
and no part of the system plugged.
Air
Cleaner
±
Carburetor
or Manifold
Valve
Cover(s)
Sampling
System
CVS
Tunnel
B3-Disablement Configuration with PCV valve connected
in orifice, but disconnected from hose going to carburetor
or manifold; fresh air hose system intact.
B4-Disablement Configuration with air hose to
air cleaner completely removed; PCV system
properly connected.
Figure 1. PCV disablement configurations with emissions sampling points
-------
B. Test Vehicles
A request for vehicles that could become available for study in this
project was issued to staff members of Southwest Research Institute and its
sister organization, Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research. A copy of
the request, along with a listing of vehicles submitted by the staff members for
consideration, are found in Appendix B. This list proved very helpful in enabling
SwRI and the Project Officer to obtain vehicles that closely fitted the test plan
vehicle constraints identified earlier in Section III. A.
A full description of the vehicles is provided in Table 2. Prior to
accepting a vehicle for testing, the vehicle was run on the dyno to determine
driveability, and to check for exhaust system leaks that could affect laboratory
HC background. Any vehicle that had prior major engine repair, including a
valve job, was disqualified from testing. The emission control system was also
examined for proper connection. Of the nine vehicles tested, the Cougar,
Skyhawk, and Chevette required replacement of the muffler; and no vehicle
showed evidence of extreme negligence or intentional tampering with the PCV
system. After the preliminary checks were found in order, the fuel tank was
filled with unleaded gasoline, if needed, to a minimum three-quarter full level.
Makeup oil was added to the crankcase only if the oil level was found below
safe limits. During testing, only the Chevette showed a little oil leakage
underneath the engine region, but no oil makeup was necessary. Views of two
vehicles used in the overall 9-vehicle study are shown in Figure 2, as evaluated
on the dynamometer. No significant operating difficulties were experienced
with the nine cars during this project. Engine operation or response on the cars
was not noticeably affected by the Al, A2 and B4 disablements; but use of the
B3 disablement did produce some apparent roughness of the engines in the
Monte Carlo, Cougar, and Tercel. Although not requested, a measurement of
engine compression and cylinder leak-down time could have provided interesting
information to explain differences in crankcase emission levels.
C. Dynamometer and CVS Sampling System
A 50 hp Clayton ECE-50 passenger car dynamometer was used for the
emission testing on this project. The dynamometer has a direct-drive variable
inertia system for simulation of vehicle mass from 454 kg (1000 Ib) to 4082 kg
(9000 Ib) in 57 kg (125 Ib) increments.
The constant volume sampler (CVS) used for these studies was SwRI CVS
No. 3, ordinarily used for light-duty diesel applications. The diesel CVS was
selected over a gasoline CVS because the former incorporates a heated probe
used for on-line THC sampling by heated flame ionization detector (HFID). A
460 mm (18 in.) diameter by 5 m (16 ft) long dilution tunnel was used in
conjunction with the CVS, which operated at a nominal flowrate of 9.7 m^/min
(344 cfm). This flowrate compares to 9.1 m^/min. (320 cfm) used in the light-
duty gasoline CVS system at this laboratory. A sampling interface system was
prepared by SwRI for use between the normal PCV/fresh air hose orifice and
the sample inlet of the dilution tunnel. The sampling interface system is
described in Section III. D.
-------
TABLE 2. DESCRIPTION OF GASOLINE TEST VEHICLES
SwRI Vehicle Code
Vehicle Make
Model
Model Year
Body Type
Vehicle Identification No.
01
Chevrolet
Monte Carlo
1981
2-door
1G1A237K3BR456455
02
Mercury
Cougar
1978
2-door
8H93H697782
03
Toyota
Tercel
1982
2-door
3T2AL25G7C4465569
Chassis Dynamometer Setting:
Inertia, kg (Ibs) 1644(3625)
Power, kW (hp) 7.9(10.6)
2041(4500)
7.8(10.4)
1021(2250)
6.0(8.0)
Engine I.D.
Engine Displacement
Cylinders
Carburetion
(in.3)
3.8(229)
V8
2V
5.7(351)
V8
2V
3A1390788
1.5(89)
L4
2V
Emission Controls3
EGR/PMP/OXD/
3CL/CAN
EGR/PMP/
OXD/CAN
EGR/PLS/OXD/
CAN
Transmission
Tires
A3
P195/75R14
A3
GR78-S15
M5
165/70-SR13
Air Conditioning
Power Steering
Power Brakes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Vehicle Odometer, km (mi)
33759(20983)
73660(45770) 51298(31875)
aEGR (exhaust gas recirculation), PMP (air pump), OXD (oxidation catalyst),
3CL (three-way catalyst with closed loop fuel system), CAN (carbon canister storage
evaporative emissions), PLS (pulsating air system), EFE (early fuel evaporation)
-------
TABLE 2 (CONT'D). DESCRIPTION OF GASOLINE TEST VEHICLES
SwRI Vehicle Code
Vehicle Make
Model
Model Year
Body Type
Vehicle Identification No.
04
Chevrolet
Nova
1975
4-door
LX69DJL149542
05
Buick
Skyhawk
1977
2-door
4T07A72722472
06
Oldsmobile
Delta 88
1978
2-door
3N37K8C149929
Chassis Dynamometer Setting:
Inertia, kg (Ibs) 1814(4000)
Power, kW(hp) 8.9(12.0)
1588(3500)
9.2(12.3)
2041(4500)
10.4(14.0)
Engine I.D.
Engine Displacement
Cylinders
Carburetion
348675GM86
(in.3) 4.1(250)
L6
IV
3.8(231)
V6
2V
6.6(403)
V8
4V
Emission Controls3
EGR/OXD/EFE/
CAN
EGR/OXD/
EFE/CAN
EGR/OXD/CAN
Transmission
Tires
M3
P185/75-14R
A3
P165/80B13
A3
205SR/15
Air Conditioning
Power Steering
Power Brakes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Vehicle Odometer, km (mi)
93593(58156)
92109(57234) 111694(69418)
aEGR (exhaust gas recirculation), PMP (air pump), OXD (oxidation catalyst),
3CL (three-way catalyst with closed loop fuel system), CAN (carbon canister storage -
evaporative emissions), PLS (pulsating air system), EFE (early fuel evaporation)
10
-------
TABLE 2 (CONT'D). DESCRIPTION OF GASOLINE TEST VEHICLES
SwRI Vehicle Code
Vehicle Make
Model
Model Year
Body Type
Vehicle Identification No.
07
Dodge
Aries
1983
4-door
1B3BD26C50C176803
08
Toyota
Celica
1978
2-door
RA42044389
09
Chevrolet
Chevette
1978
2-door
1BD8E8Y267201
Chassis Dynamometer Setting:
Inertia, kg (Ibs) 1247(2750)
Power, kW(hp) 6.0(8.1)
1247(2750)
8.1(10.9)
1134(2500)
7.7(10.3)
Engine I.D.
Engine Displacement (in.3) 2.2(134)
Cylinders L4
Carburetion 2V
2.2(134)
L4
2V
1.6(98)
L4
IV
Emission Controls3
EGR/PMP/OXD/
3CL/CAN
EGR/PMP/
OXD/CAN
EGR/OXD/CAN
Transmission
Tires
A3
P175/75R13)
M5
185/70R14
A3
155/SR13
Air Conditioning
Power Steering
Power Brakes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Vehicle Odometer, km (mi)
33371(20736)
84030(52214) 71033(44139)
aEGR (exhaust gas recirculation), PMP (air pump), OXD (oxidation catalyst),
3CL (three-way catalyst with closed loop fuel system), CAN (carbon canister storage
evaporative emissions), PLS (pulsating air system), EFE (early fuel evaporation)
11
-------
1978 Mercury Cougar
1977 Buick Skyhawk
Figure 2. Views of gasoline vehicles as evaluated on dynamometer
! .'
-------
D. Sampling Interface System
Two sampling interface systems were evaluated for use between the
PCV/fresh air hose orifices and the CVS tunnel. Each system provides for fresh
air to be drawn through it, thus not creating an unrealistic vacuum at the
orifices. The two sampling systems are shown schematically in Figure 3. One
system is identified as a "closed system," and the other as an "open system."
Both systems were initially evaluated for proper operation in conjunction with
the Monte Carlo.
The "closed system" contains a stainless steel cylindrical mixing chamber
(4 in. O.D. x 6 in. long), which allows filtered makeup air, pumped out of the
CVS filter box, to mix with crankcase emissions before being drawn into the
tunnel via a heated (375°F) 1/2-inch Teflon line. Figure 4 provides views of the
"closed system" as evaluated on the Monte Carlo. At the start of testing with
the test vehicle, the sampling line at the PCV orifice is pulled out and capped,
while makeup air to atmosphere and mixing chamber is simultaneously adjusted
with the valve to provide a vacuum reading of 0.5 in. H20 at the orifice. Using
the "closed system" during a 2-bag FTP with the Al PCV disablement, the
tunnel draw through the small heated sample line did not sufficiently
compensate for observed crankcase positive pressure increases. Concern was
expressed that under these conditions, a "realistic" sampling of crankcase
emissions was not occurring, and that venting of some emissions to atmosphere
was likely. Therefore, no further evaluation of the "closed system" was
attempted.
In the "open system," a 2-inch diameter by 16-foot long rigid stainless
steel tube was prepared to reach from the tunnel to the engine compartment.
The tube sampling end was extended six inches with a tube assembly that
terminates at a 4-inch diameter. One end of a 5/8-inch Teflon sampling line
was used to sample emissions at the PCV orifice through a rigid tube that
matches the diameter of the PCV valve in order to form a close fit at the
orifice. Throughout this project, either a short, rigid metal tube or a rubber
hose was used at the end of the Teflon sampling line to attach snugly to the
PCV and fresh air hose orifices as each engine design required. The other end
of the Teflon line was inserted into the open end of the 4-inch line, thus
allowing ambient makeup air to also enter the tunnel (for use in on-line HC
emissions calculations, the tunnel HC background is measured as sampled at the
4-inch tube without insertion of the Teflon line). The required depth of
insertion into the 4-inch opening is determined by setting the pressure gauge to
0.5 in. H20 vacuum with the Teflon sampling line capped, and removed from the
PCV orifice. The cap is removed before the line is reinserted into the PCV
orifice. The Project Officer approved the continued use of the "open system"
after a trial 2-bag FTP test with the Al disablement configuration showed that
tunnel draw at the 2-inch tube was sufficient to prevent crankcase emissions
from escaping to atmosphere, even at positive crankcase pressures during
moderate-to high-rate accels.
Testing of front-wheel-drive vehicles required that the 2-inch diameter
rigid sampling tube be shortened to 8 feet in order to accommodate the open
end of the tube closer to their engine compartments. The 2-inch rigid tube was
shortened using two tube unions that were also used to reassemble the 16-foot
13
-------
CVS
CVS
Tunnel
Tunnel
Air
Filter Box
Vent
To Atmosphere
Pump
Heated 0.5 in. O.D. S.S. Tube
"CLOSED SYSTEM"
Air
Filter Box
2 in. O.D. S.S. Tube
"OPEN SYSTEM"
Valve
Engine
Valve
Cover
PCV
Orifice
Pressure
Engine
Valve
Cover
Makeup
Air
* PCV
/ Orifice
Pressure
Figure 3. Sampling system interfaces for HC in gasoline crankcase gaseous emissions
-------
•*'—*
Figure 4. Views of the "closed system" as evaluated for
sampling of crankcase HC using the Monte Carlo
! ,
-------
long sampling tube configuration as needed for use with rear-wheel-drive test
cars. The A2 disablement configuration also required two separate Teflon
sampling lines in order to simultaneously, but separately, sample at the PCV
and fresh air hose orifices as requested by the Project Officer. As with the Al
disablement, the Teflon lines were similarly inserted into the open end of the 2-
inch sampling tube to a sufficient depth (approximately 6 to 8 inches) to enable
setting the pressure gauge readings to 0.5 in. H^O vacuum with sampling lines
capped and removed from the orifices. Various views of the sampling interface
system used on test vehicles with the Al and A2 disablement configurations are
shown in Figure 5.
E. Hydrocarbon Gaseous Emissions
Once the crankcase emissions are introduced into the CVS tunnel; as
previously explained for the sampling interface system in Section III, D., the
emissions are collected and analyzed using the same procedures and equipment
described in the Code of Federal Regulations^/ for regulated exhaust
hydrocarbons. Hydrocarbon analysis of the sample was continuous, using a
heated flame ionization detector (HFID), as is normally employed for light-duty
diesel HC exhaust emissions. Electronic signal integration used with the HFID
provided average dilute hydrocarbon concentration for each test cycle. The
gaseous sample was taken directly from the diluted exhaust stream through a
heated probe in the dilution tunnel. The gaseous emissions, as obtained in
Tedlar bags at the CVS, were also analyzed for HC using the same HFID
instrument employed for the on-line hydrocarbons, but with direct injection into
the instrument after each 3-bag FTP test was completed. The same bags were
then used to analyze for methane emissions using a GC FID procedure similar to
that in the Recommended Practice SAE ail51.(3) Views of the HFID and
methane analytical instruments are given in Figure 6.
F. Emission Test Procedure
The emission test procedure utilized in this project, as briefly identified
earlier in Section III. A., is further defined as follows:
FTP - Federal Code of Regulations^2) - The FTP uses the Urban
Dynamometer Driving Schedule (UDDS), which is 1372 seconds in
duration. The FTP schedule is illustrated in Figure 7.
The UDDS, in turn, is divided into two segments; the first having 505 seconds
and the second having 867 seconds. The FTP consists of a cold-start 505 (cold
transient) and a stabilized 867 (cold stabilized), followed by a ten-minute soak
and then a hot-start 505 (hot transient). In this project, crankcase emissions
were also collected and measured during the 10-minute soak period in a fourth
bag. The HC emissions from the fourth-bag are reported separately, i.e., not
averaged in with 3-bag FTP results. A summary of the driving schedule
parameters is presented in Table 3.
16
-------
PCV Disablement (Al Configuration)
PCV Disablement (A2 Configuration)
PCV Disablement (Al Configuration)
PCV Disablement (A2 Configuration)
Figure 5. Setup of sampling interface system on test vehicles with PCV disablements
(Al and A2 configurations)
-------
Continuous and Bag HC Analyzer
Methane Analysis
Figure 6. Views of gaseous HC analytical instruments
18
-------
.TRANSIENT
PHASE
STABILIZED
PHASE
200
400
600 800
TIME, sec
1000
1200
Figure 7. FTP driving cycle vs time trace
TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF DRIVING SCHEDULE PARAMETERS
Driving Schedule
FTP:
Cold 505
Stab 867
10-min soak
Hot 505
Duration,
Seconds
505
867
600
505
Distance,
Kilometers
5.8
6.2
—
5.8
Average Speed
km/hr mph
41.3 25.7
25.8 16.2
—
41.3 25.7
1371
The step-sequence for running a 3-bag FTP/soak crankcase emissions test
with the Al disablement configuration on a vehicle was as follows:
Step 1 -Prep the vehicle with UDDS cycle
Step 2 -Just before cold-start next day, determine laboratory HC
background with on-line HFID as sampled through rigid 2-inch
sampling tube into CVS tunnel. This initial HC background
reading is used with a final on-line HC background reading after
test, to correct on-line HFID HC readings taken during the 3-bag
FTP and soak.
Step 3 -Insert one end of Teflon sampling line into open end of 2-inch
rigid tube to set tunnel draw at 0.5 in. H20 (vacuum), with the
other end of Teflon line capped and removed from PCV orifice.
Step 4 -Remove the Teflon line from the 2-inch tube. Uncap sampling
end and insert into the PCV orifice.
Step 5 -Immediately upon start of cold 505 cycle, insert the Teflon line
into the 2-inch tube to the required depth determined in Step 3
and secure with built-in clamp.
19
-------
Step 6 -Run the 3-bag FTP and 10-minute soak in the order shown in
Table 3. Continuously measure on-line HC with HFID, and obtain
one CVS bag per each cycle.
Step 7 -Remove Teflon sampling line at 2-inch tube as soon as the hot 505
cycle is completed.
Step 8 -Measure final laboratory HC background with on-line HFID as was
done in Step 2.
Step 9 -Measure CVS bag HC with HFID, and then bag methane with FID.
The preceding step-sequence is identical to that used with the A2 disablement
configuration; but in the case of A2, one Teflon sampling line is used at the
PCV orifice and another at the fresh air hose orifice in Steps 3, 4, 5, and 7.
G. Hydrocarbon Emissions Calculations
After each test and validation of correct test procedure, the crankcase
HC values in: 1) integrator counts from on-line HFID; 2) ppmC from bag HFID;
and 3) ppmC from the methane FID are entered into the CDC CYBER 172
computer via a data entry terminal. The emissions data are then processed
according to the data reduction procedures recommended in the Code of
Federal Regulations'2). Dummy values for CO, NOX, and CC>2 are entered in
the program to permit the program to run. Fuel carbon and density values used
are those specified for emissions type unleaded gasoline in the Code of Federal
Regulations/2) Separate runs are made on the computer for on-line HC, bag
HC alone, and both bag HC and bag methane together. The latter calculation
provides emissions results for nonmethane HC (NMHC). Crankcase HC
emissions are reported in g/mi for the 3-bag FTP, and in g/min for the hot soak.
20
-------
IV. GASEOUS HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS RESULTS
A discussion of the crankcase hydrocarbon emissions obtained with the
nine test vehicles evaluated in this program is presented in this section.
Included in this discussion is the initial study of the four PCV disablement
configurations proposed for evaluation, as well as results of the "3-bag FTP plus
Soak" crankcase HC emissions analyses by on-line continuous HFID, bag HFID,
and bag methane FID.
A. PCV Disablement Configurations Evaluation
The proposed disablement configurations of a PCV emissions control
system were identified earlier in Section III. A. as Al, A2, B3, and B4. The four
configurations were evaluated with the first three cars studied, which included
the Monte Carlo, Cougar, and Tercel. Crankcase HC emissions of the three
cars are summarized in Table ^ along with similar emissions of the remaining
six cars subsequently evaluated using only PCV disablements Al and A2. All
data in Table 4 were obtained employing the "open system" sampling interface
discussed in Section III. D.
Disablement A2 was run twice with the Monte Carlo to confirm sampling
system repeatability. Results in Table 4 show that emissions repeatability was
adequate. Disablements B3 and B4 were not significant HC emitters (not
greater than 0.01 g/mi) as measured under cold and hot FTP 505 cycles,
respectively. It would appear that with B3, the PCV spring is sufficiently
strong to stop vapors from reaching the sampling system (normally run at 0.5 in.
H20 vacuum). Under these conditions, the vapor may be preferentially drawn
into the carburetor via the fresh air hose. In B4, the PCV correctly allows most
vapors to enter the carburetor hose orifice as intended, thereby greatly limiting
emissions as sampled at the fresh air hose orifice on the valve cover. Based on
these results, the Project Officer requested that no further evaluation of B3
and B4 disablements be conducted, and that remaining emissions studies be
conducted using only the Al and A2 configurations.
B. Methane Analyses
Methane was not a major constituent of crankcase bag HC emissions as
determined in this study. The highest methane level detected during the 3-bag
FTP was 0.02 g/mi using the A2 disablement with the Chevette. Other vehicles
that produced crankcase methane, but at levels not higher than 0.01 g/mi, were
the Monte Carlo, Cougar, Nova, Skyhawk, Delta 88, and Aries. Overall,
methane was present rather sporadically during the 3-bag FTP, with no strong
trend established for its presence on a particular cycle or during the two PCV
disablements. No methane was detected (at detection limit of 0.005 g/min)
during the soak cycle on any vehicle.
21
-------
TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF CRANKCASE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FROM VARIOUS
VEHICLES WITH DISABLED PCV SYSTEMS
Date
7/10/84
7/11/84
7/17/84
Avg. of
7/11/84 &
7/17/84
7/12/84
7/12/84
7/20/84
7/23/84
7/24/84
Vehicle
Monte Carlo
Monte Carlo
Monte Carlo
Monte Carlo
Monte Carlo
Monte Carlo
Cougar
Cougar
Cougar
PCV
Disablement
Configuration
Al
A2
A2
A2
B3
B4
Al
A2
B3
HC Emissions, g/mi
HC
Measurement
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
Cold
Transient
0.59
0.57
0.00
0.76
0.76
0.00
0.79
0.75
0.01
0.78
0.76
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.00
__
—
0.98
0.90
0.01
1.52
1.46
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
Cold
Stabilized
2.44
2.35
0.00
2.43
2.34
0.00
2.52
2.37
0.00
2.48
2.36
0.00
-._
™~"
__
~—
3.68
3.32
0.01
5.51
5.03
0.00
— _
—_
Hot
Transient
1.55
1.51
0.00
1.65
1.54
0.00
1.77
1.65
0.00
1.71
1.60
0.00
— _
—
0.01
0.00
0.00
2.20
1.99
0.00
3.65
3.43
0.01
«»
3-Bag
FTP
1.82
1.75
0.00
1.87
1.80
0.01
1.96
1.84
0.00
1.92
1.82
0.01
__
—
.»—
—
2.72
2.46
0.01
4.18
3.86
0.00
__
— ^
Hot
Soak,
g/min
0.15
0.15
0.00
0.06
0.05
0.00
0.03
0.03
0.00
0.05
0.04
0.00
0.28
0.24
0.00
0.19
0.20
0.00
-------
Date
TABLE 4 (CONT'D). SUMMARY OF CRANKCASE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FROM VARIOUS
VEHICLES WITH DISABLED PCV SYSTEMS
Vehicle
7/24/84 Cougar
7/26/84 Tercel
K)
7/27/84
7/30/84
7/30/84
8/1/84
8/2/84
8/7/84
8/8/84
Tercel
Tercel
Tercel
Nova
Nova
Skyhawk
Skyhawk
PCV
Disablement
Configuration
B4
Al
A2
B3
B4
Al
A2
Al
A2
HC
Measurement
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
Cold
Transient
„
—
0.05
0.05
0.00
0.32
0.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
__
::
0.23
0.24
0.00
0.81
0.74
0.00
0.69
0.59
0.00
0.85
0.71
0.00
HC Emissions,
Cold
Stabilized
— *™
0.23
0.25
0.00
0.92
0.91
0.00
— _
"•"
_—
— ™
1.52
1.51
0.01
2.09
1.98
0.01
2.39
2.22
0.00
2.90
2.63
0.01
g/mi
Hot
Transient
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.10
0.12
0.00
0.60
0.60
0.00
_ —
—
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.89
0.84
0.00
1.56
1.49
0.00
1.46
1.39
0.00
1.76
1.64
0.00
3-Bag
FTP
—
0.16
0.17
0.00
0.71
0.70
0.00
— _
—
__
—
1.08
1.06
0.00
1.68
1.59
0.01
1.79
1.66
0.00
2.16
1.96
0.00
Hot
Soak,
g/min
—
0.06
0.06
0.00
0.04
0.05
0.00
M«.
__
—
0.10
0.08
0.00
0.04
0.06
0.00
0.18
0.17
0.00
0.19
0.19
0.00
-------
Date
TABLE 4 (CONPD). SUMMARY OF CRANKCASE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FROM VARIOUS
VEHICLES WITH DISABLED PCV SYSTEMS
Vehicle
8/9/84
8/17/84
8/20/84
8/22/84
8/23/84
Delta 88
8/10/84 Delta 88
8/14/84 Aries
8/15/84 Aries
Celica
Celica
Chevette
Chevette
PCV
Disablement
Configuration
Al
A2
Al
A2
Al
A2
Al
A2
HC
Measurement
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
Bag HC
Bag Methane
On-line THC
BagHC
Bag Methane
Cold
Transient
0.42
0.41
0.01
1.14
1.12
0.01
0.36
0.36
0.01
0.40
0.35
0.00
0.11
0.08
0.00
0.32
0.28
0.00
0.04
0.03
0.01
0.79
0.60
0.02
HC Emissions
Cold
Stabilized
2.11
2.02
0.00
3.23
3.07
0.00
1.43
1.39
0.00
1.44
1.39
0.00
0.90
0.79
0.00
1.04
0.98
0.00
0.33
0.29
0.00
2.98
2.62
0.01
, R/mi
Hot
Transient
0.94
0.89
0.00
2.16
2.01
0.00
0.97
0.94
0.00
0.99
0.93
0.00
0.32
0.33
0.00
0.78
0.73
000
0.11
0.16
0.00
1.63
1.43
0.01
3-Bag
FTP
1.45
1.38
0.00
2.51
2.38
0.01
1.08
1.05
0.00
1.10
1.05
0.00
0.57
0.52
0.00
0.82
0.77
0.00
0.21
0.20
0.00
2.16
1.88
0.02
Hot
Soak,
g/min
0.15
0.14
0.00
0.03
0.04
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.05
0.01
0.00
0.10
0.08
0.00
0.02
0.05
0.00
0.29
0.25
0.00
0.07
0.09
0.00
-------
In an earlier EPA study(^) of 1970 model year non-catalyst light-duty
gasoline passenger cars, SwRI determined that exhaust HC emissions contained
from 3.6 to 6.8 percent (average 4.8 percent) methane. The 3-bag FTP methane
levels in the crankcase in Table 4, by comparison, were 0.41 to 1.1 percent of
bag HC. Excluding the Chevette cold transient methane results, individual
cycles of the FTP produced methane in the range of 0.29 to 3.3 percent bag HC.
C. Crankcase On-Line and Bag HC Emissions
Crankcase HC emissions results in Table 4, determined on the 3-bag FTP
using on-line and bag HFID analyses, are illustrated in Figures 8 and 9 for PCV
disablements Al and A2. respectively. Included in the figures are the Federal
HC Emissions Standards for light-duty passenger vehicle exhaust emissions
which are 1.5 g/mi for model years 1975 through 1979, and 0.41 g/mi for model
years 1980 to present.
Figures 8 and 9 indicate that the 3-bag FTP on-line HC was generally
higher than bag HC throughout the study. The Al disablement with the Tercel
was the only time where 3-bag FTP bag HC was higher than on-line HC, and
that only by 6 percent or 0.01 g/mi. On-line HC ranged from one to 13 percent
(overall average 6 percent) higher than bag HC. The four vehicles showing
larger differences than 7 percent between 3-bag FTP on-line and bag HC were
the Cougar with Al (10 percent or 0.26 g/mi) and A2 (8 percent or 0.32 g/mi),
Skyhawk with A2 (9 percent or 0.20g/mi), Celica with Al (9 percent or 0.05
g/mi), and Chevette with A2 ( 13 percent or 0.28 g/mi).
Results for individual cycles of the 3-bag FTP in Table 4 also indicate the
tendency of on-line HC to exceed bag HC. The average difference of on-line
HC over bag HC was 8 percent. In a few cycles (Tercel-A1 and Nova-Al),
where bag HC was higher than on-line HC, the differences averaged 11 percent,
which translates to only about 0.02 g/mi.
On-line and bag HC readings during soak were generally similar, with four
tests showing equal readings. Nine tests had higher on-line HC than bag HC,
while seven tests had higher bag HC than on-line HC. However, all of the
differences between on-line and bag HC were within 0.04 g/min.
Since this study has shown that on-line HC is generally higher than bag
HC, subsequent discussions of crankcase emissions in this report will employ
only the on-line HC data for ease of comparison between different PCV
disablements during the 3-bag FTP and soak.
D. FTP Crankcase On-Line HC Emissions
Crankcase on-line HC emissions on the 3-bag FTP with the nine cars, as
shown in Table 4, are compared to Federal exhaust HC emission standards for
the same models in the following summary:
25
-------
5t-
0
Vehicle
Year
Odometer, mi
Eng.Disp. ,in."
Eng.Type
On-line THC
Bag HC
Figure 8. Crankcase HC emissions of nine test vehicles during 3-bag FTP
with PCV disablement configuration Al.
-------
5,-
On-line THC
Bag HC
Odometer, mi 32K
Eng.Disp.,in. 89
Eng.Type L4
Figure 9. Crankcase HC emissions of nine test vehicles during 3-bag FTP
with PCV disablement configuration A2
-------
3-bag FTP Crankcase
3-bag FTP On-Line HC Emissions, g/mi
Federal Exhaust HC PCV Disablement
Vehicle Emissions Standard, g/mi Al A2
Monte Carlo 0.41 1.82 1.92
Cougar 1.5 2.72 4.18
Tercel 0.41 0.16 0.71
Nova 1.5 1.08 1.68
Skyhawk 1.5 1.79 2.16
Delta 88 1.5 1.45 2.51
Aries 0.41 1.08 1.10
Celica 1.5 0.57 0.82
Chevette 1.5 0.21 2.16
Average 1.21 1.92
Cars with crankcase HC emissions exceeding their respective Federal exhaust
HC emission standards included the Monte Carlo (Al and A2), Cougar (Al and
A2), Tercel (A2), Nova (A2), Skyhawk (Al and A2), Delta 88(A2), Aries (Al and
A2), and Chevette (A2). Most cars showed higher crankcase emissions than the
0.41 g/mi (Federal Exhaust HC Emissions Standard for 1980 to present), with Al
showing 1.4 to 6.6 times this limit and A2 showing 1.7 to 10 times the standard.
The Tercel and Chevette with the Al disablement were the only two cases for
which crankcase emissions did not surpass the 0.41 g/mi standard.
In all cases, the A2 disablement produced higher HC emissions than the
Al disablement. Excluding the Tercel and Chevette, the remaining seven
vehicles produced from 5.5 to 73 percent more HC with A2 than with Al. The
Tercel and Chevette emitted more than four times as much HC with A2 than
with Al. Vehicles showing more than 50 percent HC increase from Al to A2
disablement were the Cougar (54 percent), Tercel (100 percent), Nova (56
percent), Delta 88 (73 percent) and Chevette ( 100 percent). The finding that
the A2 disablement HC emissions are generally higher than those with the Al
disablement is as might be expected, since blowby emissions should be more
readily emitted from the crankcase through two open orifices on the valve
cover rather than one.
Results of crankcase on-line hydrocarbon emissions with PCV disablement
configuration Al and A2 on the nine test vehicles are shown graphically in
Figure 10. Although a correlation of HC emissions with odometer mileage or
engine displacement is not easily discernable, the graph does show on closer
study that the larger displacement engines (229 in.^and larger) produced most
of the higher crankcase HC emissions. Engines in this displacement range all
had HC emissions rates greater than 1.0 g/mi. Moreover, the Monte Carlo (229
in.3), Skyhawk (231 in.3),and Cougar (351 in.3) had HC emissions greater than
1.5 g/mi using both disablements. The Nova (250 in.3) and Delta 88 (403 in.3)
also had HC levels greater than 1.5 g/mi, but only with the A2 disablement.
The Cougar with the 351 in.3 engine displacement produced the highest
HC emissions of the study, indicating 2.72 g/mi with Al disablement and 4.18
g/mi with A2 disablement. The smallest engine displacement studied in this
28
-------
5r-
to
O
•H
U)
cn
W
U 2
(IJ
w
a
u
Al Disablement
A2 Disablement
Vehicle
Year
Odometer, mi 32K
Eng.Disp.,in. 89
Eng.Type L4
Figure 10. Crankcase on-line THC emissions of nine vehicles during 3-bag FTP
with PCV disablement configurations Al and A2
-------
program, also produced the lowest Al and A2 disablement HC emissions overall.
This engine in the Tercel, with an 89 in.^ displacement, produced crankcase HC
emissions of 0.16 g/mi with Al disablement, and 0.71 g/mi with A2 disablement.
The Chevette, with 98 in.3 displacement, had the second lowest (0.21 g/mi) HC
emissions with the Al disablement, but also the highest (2.16 g/mi) HC
emissions with the A2 disablement of the 89 to 134 in.^ engines.
During this study, methylene chloride washings of the Teflon tube and 2-
inch rigid tube sampling system were conducted after some of the 3-bag FTP
crankcase emissions tests (the sampling system was also cleaned and dried prior
to testing). The washings were concentrated in weighing vials and dried under
nitrogen gas. Dried weights of the concentrate indicated that HC losses in the
sampling system were insignificant, since they constituted only two percent or
less of the respective crankcase emissions as determined during the 3-bag FTP.
Some of the concentrates were oily in appearance.
Crankcase HC emissions measured during individual cycles of the 3-bag
FTP tests with the nine vehicles were summarized in Table 4. Illustrated in
Figure 11 are the on-line HC results from Table 4, taken during the cold
transient, cold stabilized, and hot transient cycles using the A2 disablement
configuration of the PCV system. The data clearly indicate that the cold
transient and cold stabilized cycles, respectively, showed the lowest and highest
HC levels for each vehicles throughout the study. Not only did the three cycles
emit HC in a regular pattern, but they also showed a consistent relationship of
HC levels between them on each vehicle. This relationship is more clearly
demonstrated by listing the ratio of the cold stabilized and hot transient HC
emissions to cold transient HC emissions for each vehicle, as summarized
below:
Ratio of Cold Stabilized HC Ratio of Hot Transient HC
Vehicle to Cold Transient HC to Cold Transient HC
Monte Carlo 3.2 2.2
Cougar 3.6 2.4
Tercel 2.9 1.9
Nova 2.6 1.9
Skyhawk 3.4 2.1
Delta 88 2.8 1.9
Aries 3.6 2.5
Celica 3.3 2.4
Chevette 3.8 2.1
Avg. 3.2 2.2
Std. Dev. 0.41 0.24
30
-------
U)
tn
to
C
o
•H
w
0)
•H
g
W
U
0)
to
c
(0
)-l
U
5.51 g/mi
Vehicle
Year
Odometer, mi
Eng.Disp.,in.
Eng.Type
Tercel
1982
32K
89
L4
Chevette
1978
44K
98
L4
Aries
1983
21K
134
L4
Celica
1978
52K
134
L4
Monte Carlo
1982
2 IK
229
V6
Skyhawk
1977
57K
231
V6
Nova
1975
58K
250
L6
Cougar
1978
46K
351
V8
Delta 88
1978
69K
403
V8
Figure 11. Crankcase on-line THC emissions of nine vehicles during individual cycles
of 3-bag FTP with PCV disablement configuration A2
-------
The ratio of cold stabilized HC to cold transient HC for the nine cars ranged
from 2.6 (Nova) to 3.8 (Chevette), with an average of 3.2 and standard deviation
of 0.41. Similarly, ratios of the hot transient HC to cold transient HC varied
from 1.9 (Tercel, Nova, and Delta 88) to 2.5 (Aries), and averaged 2.2 with a
standard deviation of 0.24.
The essentially fixed ratios observed between the HC levels of the
individual cycles of the FTP appear not to be functions of engine displacement
or engine type or odometer reading, but rather of the combined effect of cycle
type and crankcase oil temperature. During the cold transient cycle, the
crankcase oil temperature apparently does not increase sufficiently to drive
condensed fuel out of the oil and permit HC vapor augmentation of blowby
gases. Under this condition, the oil temperature is also cool enough to allow
some of the blowby being generated to condense. By contrast, the oil during
the cold stabilized cycle is hot enough to both limit blowby condensation and to
also degas more efficiently, thus allowing increased HC vapor contribution to
the blowby gases. After the 10-minute soak, the scenario described for the cold
stabilized cycle is repeated with the hot transient cycle; but this time at a
higher oil temperature.
E. Crankcase HC Emissions During Soak
The on-line crankcase HC emissions obtained during the 10-minute soak
following the cold stabilized cycle were summarized in Table 4, separately from
the 3-bag FTP emissions results. The soak cycle is different from the 3-bag
FTP individual cycles because it is run with the engine off. Consequently, units
for the HC emissions during soak are g/min and not g/mi, as used with the 3-bag
FTP.
Results of the crankcase emissions during soak, using the Al and A2
disablements, are shown graphically in Figure 12. The HC emissions during the
10-minute soak generally diminished from those at the end of the cold
stabilized cycle, to levels close to tunnel background. Generally, the major
part of the HC emissions reduction occurred within the first three minutes of
the soak.
The highest soak HC emitters using the Al configuration were the
Chevette at 0.29 g/min and the Cougar at 0.28 g/min. Highest HC emitters
with the A2 configuration were the Cougar and Skyhawk at 0.19 g/min.
Generally, the A2 disablement provided lower soak HC emissions. The Aries
and Skyhawk were the only cases for which A2 emissions were higher than Al
emissions. The vehicles with A2 disablement soak emissions less than half those
for the Al disablement were the Chevette, Celica, Monte Carlo, Nova, and
Delta 88.
32
-------
OJ
OJ
01
c
o
•H
[fl
W
•H
0)
en
o
1
u
Al Disablement
A2 Disablement
0.0
Vehicle Tercel
Year 1982
Odometer, mi 32K
Eng.Disp.,in. 89
Eng.Type L4
Chevette
1978
44K
98
L4
Aries
1983
21K
134
L4
Celica
1978
52K
134
L4
Monte Carlo
1982
21K
229
V6
Skyhawk
1977
57K
231
V6
Nova
1975
58K
250
L6
Cougar
1978
46K
351
V8
Delta 88
1978
69K
403
V8
Figure 12. Crankcase on-line THC emissions of nine test vehicles during 10-minute soak
of 3-bag FTP with PCV disablement configurations Al and A2
-------
REFERENCES
1. Walz, L., "Motor Vehicle Tampering Survey 1982," EPA-330/1-83-001,
April 1983.
2. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 86, Sub part B.
3. "Methane Measurement Using Gas Chromatography-SAE J1151,"
Recommended Practice SAE J1151, 1977.
4. Urban, C.M., "Unregulated Exhaust Emissions from Non-Catalyst Baseline
Cars Under Malfunction Conditions," Final Report prepared for the
Environmental Protection Agency under Contract 68-03-2884, Task
Specifications 4 and 5, May 1981.
34
-------
APPENDIX A
WORK ASSIGNMENT NO. 19
SCOPE OF WORK AND MODIFICATIONS
-------
Scope of Work
Work Assignment No. 19 to EPA Contract 68-03-3162
"Crankcase Emissions with Disabled PCV Systems"
Introduction
This work assignment is intended to quantify crankcase
emissions from gasoline powered passenger vehicles with
disabled PCV systems. PCV systems have been found to be
disabled with the PCV valve disconnected from its orifice in
the valve cover and/or with the fresh air tube to the air
cleaner disconnected. This test program will initially test
vehicles in two ways: with only the PCV valve disconnected,
and with both the PCV valve and fresh air hose disconnected.
It is believed that the fresh air hose being disconnected
without the PCV valve being disconnected will not cause an
emissions change.
In-use vehicles of various engine sizes and model years will
be recruited and tested by the contractor. Crankcase
emissions will be measured over the- FTP cycle through a
modified CVS to yield emissions in grams per mile. Emissions
will also be measured during the 10 minute hot soak of the
FTP, in a separate bag. A heated FID will additionally
sample emissions during testing in order to ensure that all
HC emissions are accounted for. Methane analysis will also
be performed.
Test Apparatus
Crankcase emissions shall be measured through a CVS. A
system shall be fabricated by the contractor which will
attach to the normal PCV orifice which receives the crankcase
emissions. This system shall be made such that it can draw
fresh air through it, thus not creating an unrealistic
vacuum. The vacuum shall be measured as close to the PCV
orifice as possible within this system and maintained at
0.0-0.5 inches of water with the engine off and the CVS on.
The PCV valve shall remain attached to its hose going to the
carburetor or manifold and be outside of the fabricated
system.
A heated FID shall measure HC emissions and methane analysis
shall be performed.
Vehicles
The contractor shall obtain test vehicles from any source. \
broad mix of vehicle types is required. The contractor shall
obtain approval of the vehicle selection by the BTR prior to
testing. Requirements are listed below.
A-2
-------
-2-
1. Ten test vehicles, with no two vehicles identical in
make and engine size.
2. Odometers shall be between 20-60K miles for all
vehicles with an average of 40K miles.
3. Four to five vehicles shall be 1981 or later model
year. The others shall be 1975-1980 model year.
4. Two vehicles each shall have engine sizes in the
following categories:
a. Less than 1.7 liters.
b. 1.8-2.5 liters.
c. 2.6-3.9 liters.
d. 4.0-5.6 liters.
e. greater than 5.7 liters.
Test Conditions
In both conditions listed below, the PCV valve will be
disconnected from its orifice which receives crankcase
emissions and be left connected to its hose going to the
carburetor or manifold.
1. PCV disconnected, but fresh air hose to air cleaner
remains connected.
2. PCV disconnected, and fresh air hose to air cleaner
disconnected and plugged at the air cleaner end.
Emissions Tests
Each vehicle shall be tested once at each condition listed
above. Only crankcase HC emissions shall be measured.
1. Four Bag FTP
In addition to the normal three bags of the cold start
FTP, crankcase emissions shall be collected and measured
during the 10 minute soak period in a fourth bag.
Emissions from the fourth bag shall be reported
separately, i.e., not averaged in with the FTP.
2. Heated FID
A heated FID shall sample emissions during all testing.
3. Methane Analysis
Methane analysis is required for all testing.
A-3
-------
-3-
Option to Discontinue Testing
After two vehicles have been tested, the contractor shall
report the results verbally to the Branch Technical
Representative. If crankcase emissions appear to be
insignificant at either test condition, the BTR may delete a
test condition from further testing or may end the test
program altogether.
A-4
-------
MAY 9 1984
Mr. Charles T. Hare
Project Manager
Southwest Research Institute
P.O. Drawer 28510
6220 Culebra Road
San Antonio, TX 78284
Re: Work Assignment No. 19 of Contract 68-03-3162
Dear Mr. Hare:
The purpose of this letter is to provide technical
direction to Work Assignment No. 19, titled "Crankcase
Emissions with Disabled PCV Systems".
We have determined that there are two disablement modes
that could possibly cause crankcase emissions, other than the
two listed in the Scope of Work. Please add these two
disablement configurations to the other two. Also, we would
like to revise the second of the original modes (see below).
As before, we may delete one or more of the configurations,
depending on the results of the first two or three vehicles.
The two new configurations are listed below aftet the two
original ones.
Revised Disablement Configurations To Employ
A. PCV valve disconnected from its orifice which receives
crankcase emissions, and still connected to its hose
going to carburetor or manifold.
1. PCV disconnected; fresh air hose to air cleaner
connected.
2. PCV disconnected; fresh air hose to air cleaner
completely removed and no part of the system
plugged [this is a change].
B. New disablements
3. PCV valve remains connected in orifice, but
disconnected from hose going to carburetor or
manifold; fresh air hose system intact.
A-5
-------
-2-
4. Fresh air hose to air cleaner completely removed;
PCV system properly connected.
These changes are a reemphasis of the effort, but are
not an increase to the scope of the program. Adjustments may
have to be made in other areas, such as the total number of
vehicles, in order to maintain the overall effort. After the
first two or three vehicles have been tested, please contact
me for review of the effort required.
All other parts of the Scope of Work shall remain the
same. If you have any questions, please call.
.Sincerely yo
Robert Garbe, Project Officer
Technical Support Staff
cc: James Bzdusek, Contracts
A-6
-------
APPENDIX B
LIST OF AVAILABLE TEST VEHICLES
AS OF JULY, 1984
-------
SOUTHWEST RES EARCH INSTITUTE
INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM
TO: SwRl and SFBR Staff
t*
FROM: Daniel A. Montalvo - Dept. of Emissions Research
SUBJECT: Crankcase Gas Emissions Tests Using Gasoline Vehicles
DATE: June 20, 1984
We need to measure crankcase gas emissions from gasoline passenger
vehicles driven from 20,000 to 60,000 miles using only unleaded gasoline.
Model years from 1975 to present are required in the following engine
catagories:
a. less than 1.7 liters (<104 cu. in.)
b. 1.8-2.5 liters (110-153 cu. in.)
c. 2.6 - 3.9 liters (159-238 cu. in.)
d. 4.0-5.6 liters (244-342 cu. in.)
e. greater than 5.7 liters (>348 cu. in.)
The test will require approximately five (5) days. If your car is
used, you will be given $75.00, and will also be furnished a car for
transportation during its use. Your car will be returned to you with
a full tank of gasoline at completion of testing.
If you are willing to participate, please fill in the form and
return it to Daniel Montalvo at Building 87. Any questions concerning
this request may be directed to Daniel Montalvo at extension 2657.
Yes, I would like to participate in the crankcase gas emissions
tests to be conducted at the Department of Emissions Research.
My car has _ actual miles on the odometer and, to the
best of my knowledge, has run only on unleaded fuel.
Make _ Model
Engine Displacement . I/ cu. in.
Cylinder No. and Type
teS'
Dept. Telephone No.
B-2
-------
AVAILABLE TEST VEHICLES
Less than 1.7 liters (<104 cu. in.)
Year
1978
1978
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1982
1982
1982
1982
Make
Plymouth
Chevrolet
Toyota
Ford
Plymouth
Plymouth
Honda
Toyota
Chevrolet
Dodge
Mercury
Honda
Ford
Honda
Oatsun
Toyota
Engine
Model Displacement, I
Sapporo
Chevette
Tercel
Escort
TC3
Horizon
Civic
Tercel
Chevette
Colt
Lynx
Civic
Escort
Prelude
Sentra
Tercel
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.3
1.5
1.6
1.4
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.5
1.5
Cylinder
No.
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Odometer ,
Miles
39,000
43,600
39,120
58,000
70,200
58,731
46,000
26,400
27,426
38,000
46,599
67,000
34,372
25,300
40,000
31,867
1.8-2.5 liters (110-153 cu. in.)
1978
1978
1978
1979
1979
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
Volvo
Toyota
Toyota
Honda
AMC
Toyota
Chevrolet
Chevrolet
Ford
Honda
Buick
Mercury
244 DL
Celica
Celica
Accord
Spirit
Celica GT
Monza
Monza
Mustang II
Accord LX
Skyhawk
Capri
2.1
2.2
2.2
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.5
2.0
2.3
1.8
2.5
2.3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
45,000
51,320
44,000
92,787
45,873
52,093
41,239
58,260
31,000
43,467
56,100
41,000
B-3
-------
AVAILABLE TEST VEHICLES
1.8-2.5 liters (110-153 cu. in.) (Cont'd.)
Year
1980
1981
1981
1981
1982
1982
1982
1982
1982
1982
1982
1982
1983
1983
1983
1983
Make
Honda
Olds.
Honda
Volkswagen
Chevrolet
Peugeot
Dodge
Mazda
Toyota
Toyota
Toyota
Chevrolet
Oatsun
Toyota
Dodge
Honda
Engine
Model Displacement, £
Accord
Omega
Accord
Rabbit
Cavalier
505
Charger
626
Corona
Corolla
Corolla
Cavalier
Maxima
Corolla
Aries
Accord LX
1.8
2.5
1.8
1.7
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.0
2.2
1.8
1.8
1.3
2.4
1.8
2.2
1.8
Cylinder
No.
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
6
4
4
4
Odometer,
Miles
53,470
22,000
29,102
34,482
28,700
23,000
42,400
52,340
55,000
38,933
27,382
20,060
23,261
30,000
19,300
25,100
2.6-3.9 liters (159-238 cu. in.)
1977 Buick Skyhawk 3.3
1978 Pontiac Grand Prix 3.8
1978 Ford Fairmont 3.3
1978 Pontiac Sunbird 3.8
1980 Pontiac Grand Prix 3.8
1980 Ford Fairmont 3.3
1981 Dodge Challenger 2.6
1961 Dodge Challenger 2.6
1981 Ford Fairmont 3.3
1981 Pontiac Grand Prix 3.8
1981 Pontiac La Mans 3.8
1981 Chevrolet Monte Carlo 3.8
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
4
6
6
6
6
56,900
64,000
57,976
54,321
56,559
22,000
38,000
41,860
20,000
55,935
40,415
20,850
B-4
-------
AVAILABLE TEST VEHICLES
2.6-3.9 liters (159-238 cu. in.) (Cont'd.)
Year
1981
1982
1982
1982
1983
1983
Make
Mercury
Pontiac
Plymouth
Chevrolet
Oldsmobile
Toyota
Engine
Model Displacement,?,
Zephyr
Bonneville
Gran Fury
Celebrity
Cutlass Sup.
Cressida
3.3
3.8
3.7
2.8
3.8
2.8
Cylinder
No.
6
6
6
6
6
6
Odometer,
Miles
27,788
22,808
21,200
34,310
22,097
31,163
4.0-5.6 liters (244-343 cu. in.)
1975
1975
1977
1978
1978
1978
1978
1978
1978
1978
1979
1979
1979
1981
1982
1982
1982
Chevrolet
Chevrolet
Chevrolet
Mercury
Pontiac
Pontiac
Pontiac
Pontiac
Chevrolet
Pontiac
Oldsmobile
AMC
Ford
Pontiac
Oldsmobile
Oldsmobile
Chevrolet
Nova
Nova
Impala
Zephyr
Grand AM
Phoenix
Grand Prix
Grand Prix
Malibu
Firebird
Salon
DL
LTD
Catalina
Cutlass
Delta 88
Monte Carlo
4.1
4.5
5.0
5.0
4.9
5.0
5.0
4.9
5.0
5.0
4.3
4.2
5.0
5.0
4.3
5.0
4.4
1983
Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser 5.0
6
8
8
3
8
8
3
3
3
8
3
6
3
8
8
8
8
8
57,700
52,200
88,000
56,538
61,321
60,000
51,800
44,778
42,000
65,000
61,668
33,222
56,216
26,850
39,800
36,243
34,640
23,645
B-5
-------
AVAILABLE TEST VEHICLES
Greater than 5.7 liters (>348 cu. in.)
Year
Make
1975 Pontiac
1976 Oldsmobile
1976 Chevrolet
1977 Chevrolet
1977 Mercury
1978 Mercury
1978 Oldsmobile
1978 Chevrolet
1978 Cadillac
1979 Oldsmobile
Engine
Model Displacement,.
Gran Prix 7.5
Delta 88 7.5
Monte Carlo 5.7
Camaro 5.7
Grand Marquis 7.5
Cougar 5.8
Delta 88 6.6
Caprice 5.7
Sedan Deville 7.0
Delta 88 5.7
Cylinder
No.
3
8
8
8
3
3
8
8
3
Odometer,
Miles
135,000
114,777
60,000
102,000
65,000
44,820
63,000
45,000
59,432
66,315
B-6
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA 460/3/84/011
2.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
CRANKCASE EMISSIONS WITH DISABLED PCV SYSTEMS
7. AUTHOR(S)
Daniel A. Montalvo
Charles T. Hare
9. PERFORMING ORG '\NIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Southwest Research Institute
Department of Emissions Research
6220 Culebra Road
San Antonio, Texas 78284
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Prote ction Agency
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION- NO.
5. REPORT DATE
March 1985
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-03-3162
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final Report (5/1985-9/1984)
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
16. ABSTRACT
This report describes the laboratory testing of nine in-use light-duty gasoline
passenger cars using up to four PCV disablement configurations. The nine vehicles
included 1975 to 1983 model years, with odometer readings generally between 20,000
and 60,000 miles. No two vehicles were identical in make and engine type, and engine
displacements ranged from 89 to 403 in. 3. The vehicles were tested over the 1975
Federal Test Procedure, with sampling for crankcase HC conducted during each individual
cycle of the 3-bag FTP and during the 10-minute hot soak. Emissions of crankcase HC
are provided in g/mi for the 3-bag FTP, and in g/min for the 10-minute soak.
17.
a. DESCRIPTORS
Blowby
Crankcase PCV
Disabled PCV
Gasoline Engine
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release Unlimited
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
b-IDENTIFI
Gasol
Crank
Crank
Light
Cra
19. SECURI
Uncla
20. SECURI
Uncla
ERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COS AT I Field/Group
ine Engine PCV System
case HC Emissions
case Blowby
-Duty Vehicle
nkcase Emissions
TY CLASS (This Report) 21. NO. OF PAGES
ssified 53
TY CLASS (This page) 22. PRICE
ssif ied
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
1. REPORT NUMBER
Insert the EPA report number as it appears on the cover of the publication.
2. LEAVE BLANK
3. RECIPIENTS ACCESSION NUMBER
Reserved for use by each report recipient.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Title should indicate clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, and be displayed prominently. Set subtitle, if used, in smaller
type or otherwise subordinate it to main title. When a report is prepared in more than one volume, repeat the primary title, add volume
number and include subtitle for the specific title.
5. REPORT DATE
Each report shall carry a date indicating at least month and year. Indicate the basis on which it was selected (e.g., date of issue, date of
approve!, date of preparation, etc.).
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
Leave blank.
7. AUTHOR(S)
Give name(s) in conventional order (John R. Doe, J. Robert Doe, etc.). List author's affiliation if it differs from the performing organi-
zation.
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Give name, street, city, state, and ZIP code. List no more than two levels of an organizational hirearchy.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
Use the program element number under which the report was prepared. Subordinate numbers may be included in parentheses.
11. CONTRACT/GRANTNUMBER
Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Include ZIP code.
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Indicate interim final, etc., and if applicable, dates covered.
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
Leave blank.
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Enter information not included elsewhere but useful, such as: Prepared in cooperation with, Translation of, Presented at conference of,
To be published in, Supersedes, Supplements, etc.
16. ABSTRACT
Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summary of the most significant information contained in the report. If the report contains a
significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
(a) DESCRIPTORS - Select from the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms the proper authorized terms that identify the major
concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used as index entries for cataloging.
(b) IDENTIFIERS AND OPEN-ENDED TERMS - Use identifiers for project names, code names, equipment designators, etc. Use open-
ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.
(c) COSATI FIELD GROUP - Field and group assignments are to be taken from the 1965 COSATI Subject Category List. Since the ma-
jority of documents are multidisciplinary in nature, the Primary Field/Group assignment(s) will be specific discipline, area of human
endeavor, or type of physical object. The application(s) will be cross-referenced with secondary Field/Group assignments that will follow
the primary posting(s).
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Denote releasability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for example "Release Unlimited." Cite any availability to
the public, with address and price.
19. & 20. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
DO NOT submit classified reports to the National Technical Information service.
21. NUMBER OF PAGES
Insert the total number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but exclude distribution list, if any.
22. PRICE
Insert the price set by the National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known.
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73) (Reverse)
------- |