PE85-126126
EPA-600/3r.84-108
November 1984
CHARACTERIZATION OF EMISSIONS FROM
ADVANCED AUTOMOTIVE POWER PLANT CONCEPTS
by
Daniel A. Montalvo
Charles T. Hare
Southwest Research Institute
6220 Culebra Road
San Antonio, Texas 78284
Contract No. 68-02-2703
Project Officer
Ronald L. Bradow
Emissions Measurement and Characterization Division
Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NORTH CAROLINA 27711
-------
TECHNICAL REPOHT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
r. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/3-84-108
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
PRg
l 2 fe
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
CHARACTERIZATION OF EMISSIONS FROM ADVANCED AUTOMOTIVE
POWER PLANT CONCEPTS
6. REPORT DATE"
November 1984
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
D.A. Montalvo, and C.T. Hare
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Southwest Research Institute
6220 Culebra Road
San Antonio, Texas 78284
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
C9YA1C/01-04S7 (FY-84)
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-2703
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory - RTP, NC
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/09
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
Emissions from three diesel cars using two fuel formulations were assessed.
The three diesel cars included a prototype naturally-aspirated Fiat 131, a prototype
turbocharged Fiat 131, and a 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme. Each Fiat was tested
with and without a prototype catalytic trap. Vehicle operating procedures used for
test purposes included the 1981 Federal Test Procedures as well as the Highway Fuel
Economy Test, the New York City Cycle, and an 85 km/hr steady-state cruise. Both
regulated and unregulated gaseous and particulate emissions were measured. Organic
solubles in particulate were analyzed for various constituents and characteristics
including fractionation .by relative polarity, benzo(a)pyrene (BaP), and mutagenic
activity by Ames bioassay.
Application of the catalytic trap oxidizer system to the Fiat prototypes
resulted in significant reductions of organic and carbon monoxide emissions under
all transient driving conditions examined. Total particulate emissions were reduced
an average of 55 percent with the turbocharged engine and 65 percent with the
naturally-aspirated engine. The Ames assay mutagenic response (revertants/yg) of
the particulate phase organics was elevated by the catalytic exhaust aftertreatment
device, however the emission rates (revertants/km) were reduced an average of 66
percent with the turbocharged and 73 percent with the naturally-aspirated engines.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report I
UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES
486
20. SECURITY CLASS fTMspagel
UNCLASSIFIED
tPA Form 2220-1 (R«v. 4-77) PREVIOUS COITION is OBSOLETE
-------
NOTICE
This information in this document has been funded wholly or in part by
the United States Environmental Protection Agency under Contract 68-02-2703 to
Southwest Research Institute. It has been subject to the Agency's peer and
administrative review, and it has been approved for publication as an EPA
document. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use.
ii
-------
PREFACE
This project was conducted for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
by the Department of Emissions Research, Southwest Research Institute. The
laboratory testing phase of the work began ir> April 1977, and was completed
in December 1981. This project was conducted under EPA Contract No.
68-02-2703, and was identified within Southwest Research Institute as
Project Number 05-4874-001. The EPA Project Officer was Dr. Ronald L. Bradow
of ti?«s Mobile Source Emissions Research Branch, Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. The Southwest Research
Institute Project Manager was Charles T. Harp,who also acted as Project
Leader from the inception of the project to March 1981. The Project Leader
from March 1981 to December 1981 was Daniel A. Montalvo. Karl J. Springer
was- overall supervisor of the effort.
Many of the analytical procedures used in this program for characterizing
the unregulated emissions were developed and validated earlier in the program.
Methods of collection and analyses for aldehydes and ketones, hydrogen cyanide
and cyanogen, hydrogen sulfide, carbonyl sulfide and organic sulfides, ammonia,
organic amines, nitrous oxide, sulfur dioxide, individual hydrocarbons,
and phenols were studied in detail. Interference studies and proof-tests
in diesel engine exhaust wereconducted with each procedure. Qualification
tests were conducted by introducing known quantities of these pollutants
into the exhaust of a diesel engine operating on a standard emissions test
CVS tunnel. The development and validation of the analytical procedures
begau-in April, 1977 and were completed January 1980. The results of these
iii
-------
experiments were published April 1980 in EPA report, "Analytical Procedures
for Characterizing Unregulated Emissions from Vehicles Using Middle-Distillate
Fuels, Interim Report," EPA-600/2-80-068.
We would like to express our appreciation to Mr. B».E... Enga and Mr.. M. F.
Buchman of Johnson-Matthey Company in Wayne, Pennsylvania for their assistance
in supplying the catalytic traps used in this project, as well as suggestioned
regeneration techniques. Appreciation is also expressed to Dr. Rinaldo Rinolfi
of Fiat, Italy, for his help in supplying engine specifications to enable
proper catalytic trap installation.
The prototype naturally-aspirated and turbocharged Fiat 131 diesels
used in this project were received from Fiat (Italy) for their initial study
at the Department of Transportation, Transportation Systems Center (DOT/TSC),
Cambridge, Massachusetts. The emissions studies at DOT/TSC were under
sponsorship of the United States Department of Energy as managed by NASA
Lewis Research Center under Interagency Order C-32817-D* Prior to their
shipment to SwRl, the vehicles were also studied at the Department of Energy,
Bartlesville Energy Technology Center, Bartlesville, Oklahoma. We gratefully
acknowledge the cooperation of Fiat (Italy), DOT/TSC, and the Bartlesville
Energy Technology Center in supplying the vehicles and relevant emissions
data for use in this program.
iv
-------
ABSTRACT
Emissions from three diesel cars using two fuel formulations were
assessed. The three diesel cars included a prototype naturally-aspirated Fiat
131, a prototype turbocharged Fiat 131, and a 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme.
Each Fiat was tested with and without a prototype catalytic trap. Vehicle
operating procedures used for test purposes included the 1981 Federal Test
Procedure as well as the Highway Fuel Economy Test, the New York City Cycle,
and an 85 km/hr steady-state cruise. Both regulated and unregulated gaseous
and particulate emissions were measured. Organic solubles, in particulate were
analyzed for various constituents and characteristics including fractionation
by relative polarity, benzo(a)pyrene (BaP), and mutagenic activity by Ames
bioassay.
Application of the catalytic trap oxidizer system to the Fiat prototypes
resulted in significant reductions of organic and carbon monoxide emissions
under all transient driving conditions examined. Total particulate emissions
were reduced an average of 55 percent with the turbocharged engine and 65
percent with the naturally-aspirated engine. The Ames assay mutagenic
response (revertants/yg) of the particxtlate phase organics was elevated by the
catalytic exhaust aftertreatment device, however the emission rates
(revertant/Ton) were reduced an average of 66 percent with the turbocharged and
73 percent with tha naturally-aspirated engines.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE
ABSTRACT v
LIST OF FIGURES &
LIST OF TABLES xi
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 2
III. VEHICLES, FUELS, AND TEST PROCEDURES 9
A. Test Vehicles 9
B. Test Fuels 13
C. Test Procedures and Equipment 16
D. Test Plan 28
IV. ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES FOR UNREGULATED EMISSIONS 32
A. Description of the Analytical Procedures 32
B. Validation and Qualification of Analytical Procedures 50
C. Minimum Detection Values for Unregulated Emissions 52
V. CATALYTIC TRAP-OXIDIZER REGENERATION 54
A. Fiat Naturally-Aspirated Diesel 56
B. Fiat Turbocharged Diesel 66
VI. REGULATED EMISSIONS AND FUEL ECONOMY RESULTS 72
VII. UNREGULATED GASEOUS EMISSIONS RESULTS 80
A. Individual Hydrocarbons 80
B. Aldehydes 83
C. Ammonia 86
D. Phenols 87
E. Total Cyanide 91
F. Trap-Collected Gaseous Hydrocarbons 92
G. Organic Sulfides 98
H. Hydrogen Sulfide 100
I. Organic Amines 100
J. N-Ni t ros ami nes 10 2
vii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd).
VIII. UNREGULATED PARTICULATE EMISSIONS RESULTS
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
Visible Smoke Emissions
Particle Size Distribution
Particulate Composition
Sulfate
Trace Elements
Percent Organic Solubles
Organic Solubles Composition
Organic Solubles Boiling Range
Organic Solubles Polarity Profile
Benzo(a)pyrene in Organic Solubles
Mutageaic Activity of Organic Solubles
104
104
106
106
110
112
114
118
118
125
128
133
138
A. Test Res-ults,Trap Regeneration on Fiat Naturally-
Aspirated Diesel with Catalytic Trap Fuel EM-469-F
B. Test Results, Fiat Naturally-Aspirated Diesel
Without Aftertreatment Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-F
C. Test Results, Fiat Naturally-Aspirated Diesel
With Catalytic Trap Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-F
D. Test Results, 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesel
Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-F
E. Test Results, Fiat Turbocharged Diesel Without
Aftertreatment Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-F
F. Test Results, Fiat Turbocharged Diesel With
Catalytic Trap Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-F
G. Test Results, Individual Hydrocarbons Obtained on
Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass
Diesels, Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-F
H. Test Results, Aldehdyes and Ketones Obtained on
Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass
Diesels Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-F
I. Test Results, Phenols Obtained on Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C.,
and 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels Fuels EM-329-F
and EM-469-F
J. Test Results, Paraffin Peaks Obtained on Fiat N.A.,
Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels,
Fuelsl EM-329-F and EM-469-F
K. Test Results, Organic Sulfides Obtained on Fiat N.A.,
Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsmobile Catlass Diesels,
Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-F
L. Formal Reports for Analysis of N-Nitrosamines Obtained on
Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels,
Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-F
viii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd).
APPENDICES (Cont'd).
M. Visible Smoke Data of Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981
Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-F
N. Elemental Anlaysis of Particulate Matter Obtained on
Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C. and 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels,
Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-F
O. Organic Solubles Boiling Range and Chromatograms
P. Formal Ames Bioassay Reports Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981
Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels, Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-F.
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
1 FTP Organic Emissions of Fiat N.A.. Fiat T.C., and 1981 2a
Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesel Vehicles with EM-329-F and EM-469-F
Fuels.
2 FTP and HFET Organic Emissions of Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and l?oi ?b
Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesel Vehicles with EM-329-F Fuel.
3 FTP and NYCC Organic Emissions of Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 2c
Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesel Vehicles with EM-329-F Fuel.
4 FTP and 85 kph Organic Emissions of Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 2d
1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesel Vehicles with EM-329-F Fuel.
5 Views of Diesel Vehicles as Evaluated on Dynamometer 11
6 Schematic Diagram of Exhaust Dilution Tunnel 18
7 Views of Regulated Particulate Sampling System 20
8 Emissions Sampling System 22
9 Views of the Emissions Sampling System 23
1C FTP, HFET, and NYCC Driving Cycles vs Time Traces 25
11 Schematic Diagram of Gaseous HC Sampling System 39
(for boiling range analysis)
12 Installation of Particle Sizing Iroactor in 41
Dilution Tunnel
13 Particle Sizing Impactor Disassembled 41
14 Johnson-Matthey JM-13 Catalytic Trap-Oxidizer 55
15 Cumulative Particle Size Distributions by Impactor with 107
Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsaobile Diesels,
Fuel EM-329-F
16 Cumulative Particle Size Distributions by Irrpactor with 108
Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsrsobile Diesels,
Fuel EN-469-F
17 HPLC Chromatograms of Benzo(a) pyrer.e, 9-f luorenone, 129
and Acridine
18 KPLC Chromatograms of 4-bag FTP Organic Solubles from 129
1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesel, Fuel EM-329-?
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Cont'd)
Figure Page
19 HPLC Chromatograms of 4-bag FTP Organic Solubles from 130
Fiat N.A. diesel without aftextreatment, Fuel EM-329-F
20 HPLC chromatograms of 4-bag FTP Organic Solubles from 130
Fiat N.A. Diesel with Catalytic Trap, Fuel EM-329--F
21 HPLC Chromatograms of 4-bag FTP Organic Solubles from 131
Fiat T.C. without Aftertreatment, Fuel EM-329-F
22 HPLC Chromatograms of 4-bag FTP Organic Solubles from 131
Fiat T.C. Diesel with Catalytic Trap, Fuel EM-329-F
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 Description of Diesel Test Veliicles 10
2 Properties of Test Fuels 15
3 Summary of Driving Schedule Parameters 24
4 Test Cooing System 28
5 Test Sequences and Emission Measurements to be Conducted
on Each Vehicle Configuration and Fuel 30
6 Sampling and Analysis Methodology for Unregulated
Emissions 33
7 Analytical Procedures Validated and Qualified 51
8 Minimum Detection Values (MDV) for Unregulated Gaseous
Emissions 53
9 Maximum Inlet and Outlet Temperatures of Johnson-Matthey
Catalytic Trap Used on Fiat Naturally-Aspirated Diesel
with EM-329-F Base Fuel 59
10 Maximum Inlet and Outlet Temperatures of Johnson-Matthey
Catalytic Trap Used on Fiat Naturally-Aspirated Diesel
with EM-469-F Fuel 60
11 Catalytic Trap Backpressure Determined at Various
Intervals During Emissions Testing with Fiat Naturally-
Aspirated Diesel 61
12 "High Idle" Trap Regeneration Test Sequence Used on
Naturally-Aspirated Fiat with Catalytic Trap and
EM-469-F Fuel 64
13 Maximum Inlet and Outlet Temperatures of Johnson-Matthey
Underfloor Catalytic Trap used on Fiat Turbocharged
Diesel with EM-329-F Fuel 69
14 Maxinum Inlet and Outlet Temperatures of Johnson-Matthey
Underfloor Catalytic Trap used on Fiat Turbocharged
Diesel with El*-469-F. Fuel 69
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Cont'J).
Table Page
15 Catalytic Trap Backpressure Determined at Various
Intervals During Emissions Testing with Fiat Turbocharged
Diesel 70
16 Vehicle, Fuel, and Test Cycle Comparisons for Average
Hydro carbons 7 3
17 Vehicle, Fuel, and Test Cycle Comparisons for Average
Carbon Monoxide 73
18 Vehicle, Fuel, and Test Cycle Comparisons for Average NOX 74
19 Vehicle, Fuel, and Test Cycle Comparisons for Average
Particulate 74
20 Vehicle, Fuel, and Test Cycle Comparisons for Average
Fuel Economy 75
21 Summary of Average "Total" Individual HC Results for
Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels 82
22 Summary of Average "Total" Aldehydes Results for Fiat N.A.,
Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels 85
23 Ammonia FTP Results for Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981
Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels 87
24 Average "Total" Phenol (Filtered and Unfiltered) Results
by Test Cycle and Fuel, Fiat N.A. with no Catalyst 88
25 Summary of Average "Total" Phenol (Filtered) Results for
Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels 90
26 Total Cyanide Results for Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981
Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels 91
27 Summary of Gas Chromatograph Analysis of Trap-Collected
Gaseous Hydrocarbons, Fiat N.A. Diesel with and without
Exhaust After-treatment 93
28 Summary of Gas Chromatograph Analysis of Trap-Collected
Gaseous Hydrocarbons, Fiat T.C. Diesel with and without
Exhaust Aftertreatment 94
29 Summary of Gas Chromatograph Analysis of Trap-Collected
Gaseous Hydrocarbons, 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesel,
Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-F 95
-------
LIST OP TABLES (Confd).
Table
30 Summary of Gas Chromatograph Analysis of EM-329-F
and EM-469-F Diesel Fuels 95
31 Summary of Average "Total" Organic Sulfide Results
for Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsonibile Cutlass
Diesels 99
32 Summary of Organic Amines Results at 85 kph Steady-State
with Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass
Diesels 101
33 Visible Smoke Data for Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981
Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels 105
34 Carbon, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen in Exhaust Particulate
Matter from Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsmobile
Cutlass Diesels 109
35 Sulfate Results for Fiat N.A. and Fiat T.C. Diesels-
with Fuel EM-329-F. 111
36 Methylene Chloride Solubles of Particulate Samples
from Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass
Diesels 115
37 Benzene-Ethanol Solubles of Particulate Samples from
Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels 116
38 Carbon, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen in Exhaust Particulate
Organic Solubles from Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981
Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels 119
39 Gas Chromatograph Analysis of Organic Solubles in
Particulate Matter, Fiat T.C. Diesel, No Aftertreatment,
Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-F 122
40 Gas Chromatograph Analysis of Organic Solubles in
Particulate Matter, Fiat T.C. Diesel with Catalytic Trap,
Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-F 123
41 Gas Chromatograph Anlaysis of Organic Solubles in
Particulate Matter, 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesel,
Fuels EM-329-F and EM-469-? 124
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd).
Table
42 Normalized HPLC Chromatograph Peak Data of Particulate
Organic Solubles from Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981
Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels 127
43 Benzo(a)pyrene in Organic Solubles of Particulate
Matter, Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsrcobile
Cutlass Diesels 132
44 Ames Bioassay Response of Organic Solubles in
Particulate, Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981
Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesels 135
45 Ames Bioassay Results in Revertants per Kilometer,
Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass
Diesels 137
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
Continuing concern for diminishing worldwide petroleum supplies has
prompted a renewed interest in more efficient engine designs as alternates
to gasoline engines now in wide use. Advanced-concept engines initially
considered for emissions and fuel economy studies in this program were gas
turbines, Stirling cycle, turbocharged and naturally-aspirated diesels,
Rankine cycle, stratified charge, and advanced Otto-cycle. Actual engine
availability only permitted evaluation of a prototype naturally-aspirated
diesel, a prototype turobcharged diesel, and a 1981 regular production
naturally-aspirated diesel. Each prototype diesel was also evaluated with
catalytic trap. A "National Average" No. 2 fuel served as the "primary
fuel" or base fuel. Although a "wide boiler" was initially considered as
a "second" fuel, it became apparent that the test vehicles would need a
higher-cetane distillate to run well. Consequently, 4 "second" fuel which
is bascially a No. 2 home heating oil was chosen to provide a "worst case"
comparison.
Because all exhaust emissions have a potential impact on the public
health, the study reported here also measured a substantial number of
unregulated exhaust emissions along with the regulated emissions (HC, CO,
NOX, and particulate). Dynamometer driving schedules used in the study
(1) «
included the 1981 Federal Test Procedure (3-bag FTP), 4-bag FTP (cold
23-minute FTP plus hot 23-minute FTP), Highway Fuel Economy Test (HFET),
New York City Cycle (NYCC), 85 km/hr steady-state, and the "cold 505" (fiz
505 seconds of a cold-start FTP, used for smoke evaluation only).
*Superscript numbers in parentheses designate references at end of report.
-------
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The major purpose of this project was to evaluate many different
emissions during dynamometer operation of a prototype naturally-aspirated
Fiat 131 diesel with and without catalytic trap, a prototype turbocharged
Fiat 131 diesel with and without catalytic trap, and a 1981 regular production
Oldsmobile Cutlass diesel. Transient and steady-state cycles incorporated
into the study were the 3-bag FTP, 4-bag FTP, HFET, NYCC, 85 kph and cold 505.
All test vehicles were operated using a "National Average" No. 2 fuel
(SwRI Code EM-329-F) and a Couch No. 2 fuel (SwRI Code EM-469-F) which is
basically a home heating oil.
The overall evaluations were planned principally to collect a substantial
amount of information on regulated and unregulated emissions, with minimum
repetitive testing. Tne total number of tests completed with the five
vehicle configurations was still very extensive, however, including 36
sequences consisting of a 4-bag FTP, HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph cycle each.
In addition, more than 138.supplementary tests were also completed consisting
of ten 4-bag FTP's, thirty hot FTP'S,, seventeen HFET's, thirty-nine NYCC's,
twenty-five 85 kph's, seventeen cold 505's, and various trap regeneration tests.
An important finding in this project was the success of the catalytic traps
in significantly reducing various regulated and unregulated organic emissions
of the naturally-aspirated and turbocharged Fiats. A good illustration
of the trap oxidizer effectiveness in organic emissions control is provided
in Figures 1 through 4, where emissions of soluble organic fraction (SOF) ,
individual hydrocarbons (IHC), aldehydes and ketones, and phenols.are com-
pared to HFID total hydrocarbons. Figure 1 indicates how the FTP emissions
-------
A:
«
2
o
H
01
m
a
400 |
350 -
300
250
200
150
100
50
|i| EM-329-F
r*"J EM-469-F
b
I
tn
-------
400
350 -
FTP
Ht'ET
300
250
e
*
*^v
0)
3 200
c
o
m
in
U 150
100
50
0
i
0
s
*
p
i$
?;:
ft
X
X-
:£
*X"
1
;':
If
X
f$
X-!
;£:
a
Q
n
fa
1
o
X
fa
o
(A
JS
^V
i
[A
IV
C tn
HI O
X ^
Q (U
CJ C fa
X 3 K T3
H 1 C
tn U i o :₯;: t: o>
x-iiSy x; js ::: o x c
"»*" '*P*»* D Q* 'I**'!' 0"4 EC rC ft*
X'l"! *^* JvX Wv ^
*** ^x|: iii Si "* ra
1
^
1
tn
HI
C
s
(U
X
o
c
10
fa tn
O 0) n
01 CJ -O -!
K >. O
wi M x; c
.'.V11, ffi /i»
-feaa-S g
_j ,^
^ ;-M
Fiat N. A. Fiat N.A./trap Fiat T.C. Fiat T.C./trap Cutlass
Figure 2. FTP and HFET organic emissions of Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and
1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass diesel vehicles with EM-329-F fuel.
2b
-------
491 rag/km
FTP
NYCC
400
350
300
250
e
\
e
o
«j 200
C
o
en
Vti
659 inq/km
^
t
o
G 2
= 2
M X
W
>«J
u
X
IH
b
>vCj
1
'&"
1
^
01
0
01
TJ 0
nj 01 O
^ -M
in o Q u
a) c M ^
a ai fe
>i JS X *O
"r-T " o § "
rt p Ji-s s
~ *X fei pJ >, X
:W: o x; a.
>X; W V
?5? f w SiS * [m
x^1
:?-
§:
i|
^
i
i
jx:
fx-
I
1
:|:|:
t'x
^ u
^ X
H
^ S
M X . <0
PL, V) C
o n "> i i °
MC 4J
__ ,. o v
54 *O
W C
*O i4 (0
'CO mm
n3 C Xv «
0) t% QJ
rf Is . I y 1
SS:^5 >^n I-'*' M oi in
v'.v ::S ^ -S; __ "° H
'.::::::j-:::;: 13 __ :₯: o < c
cVftWS -" 33 ₯x w 0)
;::*:: "* ;:::; :::: 33? 1 £
^S-S^Si-:::^ S-i $: x^feS b53
-';'
%
V."
1
1
L,_JSOF
(IHC
tiydes and Ketones
Phenols
ifc 2F
yxfcxfe; ^, x"
Fiat N. A. Fiat N. A./trap Fiat T.C. Fiat T.C./trap
Cutlass-
Figure 3. FTP and NYCC organic amis.sions of Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and
1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass diesel vehicles with EM-329-F fuel.
2c
-------
FTP
85 kph
4
er>
V
4J
C
O
H
to
in
-H
w
400 1
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
Cu
X
1
O
X
1
:$
38
$
!£
::;:::
Sx
>x
1%
1
i
y>
:j:j
>?i
O
Cu
X
X
Cu
O
CO
I'x'jVrra
::£&
$:$:₯£
''
i
^
.. '
VI
4)
c n
0 01
AJ C
to o
i^/ i i
Q 01
a M «
o e cu
X
w u ffl
??3 o) x
X<- *O «___ W (0
X-; >i 01 ~ 0) r-t
::^ js * ::x; o-oo
>:? o o x-'/ x >i c
I'X *O C i'X'1 M rC U^
:.';; 1-1 01 xo cu 01 si
** 3%Z33 v^^l^l^
w!
*::
*I'X'
Xvi
:::;:
1
*::
:W
1
"*«*
I
;.;,;.
ft'
|
U)
01
o
JJ
o
:">£lvnji "O c
iipl ^
/X*vX*l rH P??3
vSjfi'B ^ p53
i^ss|^
Q
M
Cu
X
0
Q n
M 01
? §
u a>
DC ^
W5 T3
II S
::: tn
;:: u >, o
'X% o M o a)
>:: tOp.jP!. 'Q ^-
sl^^ ^ESJ
I
"*
Jjjj
(Q
g
S
IV
«
o
Cu U)
O 0) U)
CO CJ , O
H .C C
>₯:' a) 41
J-v J53 "O -G
i tf
j Pv3
Fiat N. A. FiatN.A./trap Fiat T.C. Fi?t T.C/trap Cutlass
Figure 4. FTP and 85 kph organic emissions of Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and
1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass diesel vehicles with EM-329-7 fuel.
2d
-------
varied with fuel and vehicle; while Figures 2 through 4 provide a comparison
of emissions between the FTP and the other cycles used with each vehicle
for fuel EM-329-F only. The total HC emissions are from the 3-bag FTP.
and the emissions of the remaining four pollutants are from the 4-bag
FTP (0.43 times 23-minute cold FTP plus 0.57 times 23-minute hot FTP).
The FTP emissions shown in Figure 1 were generally higher with
EM-469-F than with EM-329-F, but not by substantial amounts. The highest
emissions of HC, SOF, IHC, and aldehydes and k^cones were from the Fiats
without aftertreatment. The SOF was the largest portion of the total
HC obtained using the Fiats without aftertreatment, ranging from 25 to
46 percent of the total HC. Catalytic trap use on the two Fiats signifi-
cantly reduced emissions of total HC, SOF. IHC, and aldehydes. Total
hydrocarbons alone were reduced by an average of 83 percent on the
naturally-aspirated Fiat, and by an average of 64 percent on the turbo-
charged Fiat. Average reductions of SO" with catalytic traps were 96
and 88 percent for the Fiat N.A. and T.C. diesels, respectively.
All vehicle emissions shown in Figure 2, except for the phenols of
the Fiat T.C./trap configuration, were lower on the HFET than on the FTP.
The HFET total HC was less than 50 percent of the FTP total HC on all the
Fiat vehicle configurations. The highest fraction of the HFET total HC
on the Fiats without afuertreatment was SOF, emitted at an average of
55 percent of the total HC emission rate. The HFET SOF emission rate of
thf» trap-equipped Fiats, was 21 percent (average) of the HFET total HC
emission rate. The HFET total hydrocarbon and SOF reductions with trap
use on the naturally-aspirated Fiat amounted to 91 and 97 percent,
respectively. Corresponding HFET total hydrocarbon and SOF emissions
2 e
-------
reductions with trap on the turbocharged Fiat were 73 and 84 percent.
The majority of vehicle emissions shown in Figure 3 were higher on
the NYCC than on the FTP, especially total hydrocarbons from the Fiats
without aftertreatment and the Cutlass. Highest total hydrocarbons, SOF,
and IHC in the NYCC evaluations were emitted by the Fiats without after-
treatment. The SOF emission rates on the NYCC were 22 and 16 percent of
the total hydrocarbon emission rates on the Fiat N.A. and T.C. diesels
without aftertreatment, respectively. Significant reductions in NYCC
total hydrocarbon and SOF emissions occurred with trap use on the Fiats -
total hydrocarbons were reduced by 95 percent (Fiat N.A.) and 82 percent
(Fiat T.C.). while SOF was reduced by 81 percent (Fiat N.A.) and 85
percent (Fiat T.C.).
Total hydrocarbon, SOF, IHC, and aldehyde emissions from each vehicle
were all lower on the 85 kph than on the FTP as shown in Figure 4, most
clearly with the trap-equipped Fiats. The SOF emission rates were 84 and
33 percent of the total hydrocarbons emitted at 85 kph using the Fiat N.A.
and T.C. vehicles without aftertreatment, respectively. Total 85 kph hydro-
carbon and SOF reductions with trap use on the Fiats were greater than
96 percent.
Other important observations and conclusions reached as a result of
this project (not necessarily in order) are-as follows:
Catalytic trap use on the naturally-aspirated and. turbocharged
Fiats provided acceptable engine operation on all cycles and
with each test fuel. Over its 1686 km (1048 mi) of use, the
catalytic trap -on the naturally-aspirated fiat required regeneration
2f .
-------
every 422 km (261 mi) on the average, while the trap on the
turbocharged Fiat required no regeneration over the entire 1141 km
(877 mi) of its use.
Emissions of CO by the Fiat N.A. and T.C. vehicles were reduced
by an average of 91 percent on the Fiat N.A. diesel and 80 percent
on the Fiat T.C. diesel when the catalytic traps were used.
With trap use and both fuels, the NOX emissions of the naturally-
aspirated Fiat were increased by an average of 17 percent. Trap
operation on the turbocharged Fiat reduced NOX emissions slightly
with EM-329-F and increased them slightly with EM-469-F. The
effect of trap backpressure on the NOX emission changes observed
is not known, since trap backpressure was not monitored continuously
during emissions testing performed on the Fiats.
Regulated particulate emissions of the Fiats were, lower for every
cycle and fuel combination with catalytic trap than without, by an
average of 65 and 55 percent on the Fiat N.A. and T.C. diesels,
respectively. No major differences in particulate emissions with
respect to fuel type were generally found by vehicle or driving
cycle.
-------
Highest fuel economy overall was obtained with the two naturally-
aspirated Fiat configurations, and lowest economy overall with
the Cutlass. With each test vehicle and fuel, fuel economy was
highest in the HFET and 85 kph, as expected. Mo obvious trends
were noted for fuel economy jetween fuels in most of the vehicle
configurations. Although fuel economy decreased somewhat with
trap use on the Fiat N.A. diesel in the HFET and 85 kph with
EM-329-F, no substantial change in fuel economy was evident
between the two different exhaust configurations of the turbo-
charged Fiat.
Methylene chlorida soluble organics were significantly lower with
the catalytic traps on the Fiat N.A. and T.C. diesels than without.
Over tne five cycles and two fuels, the average percent by weight
of solubles decreased from 58 percent with no aftertreatment to
9 percent with trap for the naturally-aspirated Fiat, and from
34 percent with no aftertreatment to 10 percent with trap for the
turbocharged Fiat.
Weak to strong positive mutagenic responses were obtained on all
organic solubles from particulate emitted by the five vehicle
configurations and two fuels. Highest overall mutagenic response in
revertants/yg was obtained with the trap-equipped Fiats. On the
basis of revertants/km, however, the trap-equipped Fiats generally
indicated the lowest mutagenic activity. Revertants/km of the
Fiats with traps were reduced by an average of 73 percent on the
naturally-aspirated Fiat and by an average of 66 percent on the
turbocharged Fiat as compared to corresponding cases without aftertreatment.
-------
Benzo(a)pyrene emission rates ranged from "non-detected" to 30.8
ug/km, with most BaP emission rates less than 7.8 Mg/km. Highest
BaP emissions on each cycle and with each fuel were associated
with the two Fiats without after-treatment. Employing the catalytic
trap on the Fiats, however, generally reduced their BaP emissions
by more than 82 percent on the naturally-aspirated Fiat, and by
more than 53 percent on the turbocharged Fiat.
Fractionation of organic solubles by HPLC determined that their
normalized relative response was generally lowest in the transitional
region and highest in the polar region. Correlation between the
normalized peak area and the results of Ames and BaP was not
discerned.
Ethylene usually accounted for at least half of the "total" IHC
for each vehicje, cycle, and fuel combination. The average
reductions of "total" IHC emissions with catalytic trap was 70
percent on the Fiat N.A. diesel and 48 percent on the Fiat T.C.
diesel.
Aldehyde emissions showed overall low concentrations and con-
siderable scatter. Formaldehyde was generally the largest portion
of the "total" aldehydes evaluated, and at times was the only
aldehyde detected. Highest formaldehyde emissions were those from
the Fiats without aftertreatment. With trap use, formaldehyde was
reduced by more than 53 percent on the naturally-aspirated Fiat
and by more than 43 percent on the turbocnarged Fiat. The FTP
formaldehyde emissions of the trap-equipped Fiats were low (from
-------
"none detected" to 2.4 rag/km), and compatible to those obtained
in a separate EPA study using low mileage 1978 oxidation catalyst-
equipped gasoline cars.
Ammonia emission rates ranged from 0.43 to 118 mg/km, with most
emissions measuring under 10 mg/km. The cold FTP and hot FTP
ammonia emissions were reduced using the trap catalyst on the
Fiat N.A. diesel.
5a
-------
The phenol compound appearing most consistently and found in
largest quantities throughout the study was 2,3,5,6-tetramethyphenol.
Although "total" phenol emissions indicated considerable variation
overall, the results did indicate some reduction of phenols with
the trap-equipped Fiats.
Most total cyanide emissions were above the minimum detectable
limit (MDV) by at least a factor of three. Catalytic traps on
the Fiats were usually associated with slightly higher total
cyanide emissions.
Analysis of "trap-collected" gaseous hydrocarbons showed a strong
tendency towards lower temperatures-of boiling range and light
ends than found with the fuels themselves. The Fiat N.A. diesel
with catalytic trap consistently indicated lower HC -boiling ranges
with EM-469-F than with EM-329-F. The Light-end boiling temperatures
of the Fiat T.C. diesel were consistently lowered with use of the
catalytic trap.
Carbonyl sulfide and methyl sulfide were always present in exhaust
with all vehicle configurations, fuels, and test cycles at emission
rates ranging from 1.5 to 206 mg/km, and from 0.15 to 43 mg/km,
respectively. No strong emissions trends of "total" sulfides with
fuels on most vehicles, or with trap use on the Fiats were apparent.
Hydrogen sulfide was not detected in dilute exhaust of any vehicle
evaluated during tha 4-bag FTP (-0.34 mgAm MDV), HFET (0.24 m'g/km MDV),
or NYCC (2.16 mgAm MDV).
-------
Organic amines, when detected, were generally found at low concen-
trations. An indication of increased organic amines emissions was
apparent on the Fiat T.C. diesel with trap use.
No N-nitrosamines were detected in dilute exhaust of any test
vehicle tested over an entire test sequence consisting of a 4-bag FTP,
HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph steady-state. The average MDV for nitrosamines
ranged from 0.90 Ug/km to 4.4 Ug/km depending on the analytical
procedure used.
Strong fuel trends did not emerge in the visible smoke emitted from
the test vehicles. The use of catalytic traps on both Fiats
generally reduced their visible smoke. Overall, the lowest and
highest smoke emitters were the Fiat N.A. with catalytic trap and
the Fiat T.C. without after-treatment, respectively.
Particles aerodynamically-sized by an inertial impactor indicated
that catalytic trap use generally increased particle size on the
Fiat N.A. diesel with both fuels, and on the Fiat T.C. diesel
with EM-469-F. The Fiat N.A. diesel with trap emitted the largest
particles overall, with about 60 percent, of its particles measuring
more than 0.1 aicron ECD (Effective Cutoff Diameter).
Low hydrogen content, indicative of dry or soot-like particulate
material rather than an oily material,-was found in most particulate
matter by elemental analysis. Significant elemental content
differences between fuels were not apparent. Carbon content for
the trap-equipped Fiats was decreased in the HFET and 85 kph.
Nitrogen in particulate .matter averaged 0.5 percent overall.
-------
Sulfate emissions with the trap and fuel EM-329-F were increased
in the HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph using the Fiat N.A. diesel, but
were decreased in all cycles using the Fiat T.C. diesel with trap.
The largest increase in sulfate, as percent of particulate, >
occurred on the HFET and NYCC with the Fiat N.A. diesel using
the trap.
Trace elements most commonly found in particulate matter from the
test vehicles were sulfur, magnesium, aluminum, zinc, silicon,
calcium, iron, barium, and phosphorus. Sulfur and iron generally
accounted for more than fifty percent of the "total" trace element
emission ratn in each cycle. Overall, the elements emitted made
up from 1.2 to 11.8 percent of the particulate emission rate.
Trace element emission rates greater than 3 percent of the parti-
culate emission rate were emitted only by the trap-equipped Fiats.
Analysis for carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen in -organic solubles
indicated the presence of hydrocarbon-like materials with numeric
H/C ratio between 1.58 and 1.95. The catalytic trap-equipped
Fiats were associated with the lowest H/C ra,tio for the 4-bag FTP,
which may indicate that a higher content of unsaturated hydro-
carbons was present with trap than without trap.
Determination of organic solubles boiling range was significantly
limited by what appeared to be sample polymerization or actual
degradation of sample during G.C. analysis. Resultant boiling
range data more successfully interpreted indicated no major or
consistent differences of solubles boiling range with fuel type.
Both Fiat T.C. diesel configurations and the Cutlass indicated an
overall upward shift- in solubles boiling range as compared to fuel
boiling ranges.
8
-------
III. VEHICLES, FUELS, AND TEST PROCEDURES
This section describes the vehicles, fuels, test procedures and test
plan used in this project. The facilities, general instrumentation, and
overall sampling system for unregulated emissions are also discussed.
A. Test Vehicles
Examples of engine types initially considered for testing included
gas turbines, Stirling cycle, turbocharged and naturally-aspirated diesel,
Rankine cycle, stratified charge, and advanced Otto-cycle. Actual vehicle
availability during the program permitted only three'diesel-powered auto-
mobiles to be evaluated in this project. The automobiles-included a pro-
totype naturally-aspirated Fiat, a prototype turbocharged Fiat,- and a
regular production 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass coupe as described in Table 1.
The Fiat diesels were obtained from the Department of Energy (DOE),
Bartlesville Energy Technology Center, Bartlesville, Oklahoma, after
(4)
various emissions studies with the two cars were completed there. A
local search for a rental 1981 Oldsmobile Delta 88 diesel car was not
successful, so with the Project Officer's approval, an available 1981
Oldsmobile Cutlass coupe with less than 4827 km (3000 mi) was rented.
The Oldsmobile was equipped with optional equipment consisting of automatic
transmission, air conditioning, power steering, and power brakes. Standard
rear axle ratio and tires were provided on the Cutlass. Respective rear
axle ratios and tire sizes for the Fiats are listed in Table 1. Views of
the three diesel test vehicles as evaluated on the dynamometer are shown
in Figure 5.
-------
TABLE 1. DESCRIPTION OF DIESEL TEST VEHICLES
Vehicle Model
Model Year
Vehicle Identification No.
Engine Model No.
Chassis Dynamometer Setting ta
Inertia, kg (Ibs)
Power, kW (hp)
Engine Displacement £(in^)
Turbocharger
Cylinders
Combustion Chamber
Compression Ratio
Injection System
J Maximum Power kW (hp)
EGR
Catalytic Trap
Transmission
Axle Ratio
Tire Type
Tire Size
Initial Distance
on vehicle, km (mi)
Final Distance
on vehicle, km (mi)
Fiat 131 Naturally-Aspirated
Prototype
131AZ4275399
8140.61
1361 (3000)
8.2 (11.0)
2.4 (146)
No
In-Line 4
Prechamber
22
Bosch
52.2 (70) @ 4200 rpm
No
No
5-speed manual
3.2
steel-belted radial
165SR13
9879 (6140)
12501 (7769)
Fiat 131 Turbocharged
Prototype
131AZ4280788
8140.81
1361 (3000)
8.2 (11.0)
2.4 (146)
Yes
In-Line 4
Prechamber
22
Bosch
63.4 (85) @ 4000 rpm
No
No
5-speed manual
3.6
steel-belted radial
165SR13
7659 (4760)
9764 (6068)
Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme
1981
1G3AM47N5BR481685
181* (4000)
8.6 (11.5)
5.7 (350)
No
V-8
Prechamber
22.5
Roosa Master
78.3 (105) @ 3200 rpm
Yes
No
3-speed automatic
standard
steel-belted radial
P195/75R14
4233 (2631)
5081 (3158)
achassis dyanmometer settings selected on basis of settings used by the Department of Energy at
Bartlesville, Oklahoma for the Fiats and by the EPA for certification of 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass.
Each Fiat was initially studied without exhaust aftertreatment, but was also tested with a catalytic
trap-oxidizer provided by Johnson-Matthey.
-------
Prototype Fiat Naturally-Aspirated Diesel
Prototype Fiat Turbocharged Diesel
1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesel
Figure 5. views of diesel vehicles as evaluated on dynamometer
-------
Preparation of each test vehicle upon arrival at SwRI included draining
of its fuel tank and fuel filter, and refilling them with the baseline fuel
used in the program. The crankcase oil was also changed to new Quaker
State SAE 30 SE/CC grade oil, and the oil filter was replaced with a new
filter. Before actual testing was begun on each car, it was conditioned on
the dynamometer at alternating speeds of 48, 64, and 80 kph for approximately
80 km.
The Fiats were initially studied without exhaust aftertreatment, and
subsequently with catalytic trap-oxidizers. Installation of traps on the
Fiats and their evaluations are described in Section V of this report.
Apart from the traps used on the Fiats, no other modification to the exhaust
systems or engines was performed on the three test vehicles. The injector
pump timings on the Fiats were left as last used at DOE; one degree ETC on
the naturally-aspirated Fiat, and three degrees after TDC on the turbocharged
Fiat at the manufacturer's specified pump lift. At the Project Officer's
request, the injector timing on each Fiat with and without exhaust after-
treatment was not altered so as to not cloud or bias the emission results
between the two.different exhaust configurations.
No significant operating difficulties were experienced with the three
test vehicles during this project. Some initial periodic rough idling and
stalling after cold start on the turbocharged Fiat was .caused by a loose
retaining nut on the throttle linkage, which in turn allowed excessive play
in the idle adjustment. The trouble ceased when the retaining nut was
retightened. Also on the same vehicle with catalytic trap, the engine
abruptly lost power during the hot FTP cycle of the initial test sequence.
12
-------
The difficulty was traced to a plugged fuel filter, and was subsequently
corrected by replacing the filter with an identical filter purchased
locally. A total of two fuel filter changes were made on the T. C. Fiat
diesel during its study.
Of the three test vehicles, only the Oldsraobile Cutlass required
more than the ordinary exhaust pipe adaptation to the dilution tunnel of
the CVS sampling system. Since the Cutlass employed a dual exhaust system,
a special exhaust extension tube to route the car exhaust to the dilution
tunnel was manufactured. The exhaust tube consisted of a 99 cm (39 in)
length of 5.1 cm (2 in) O.D. stainless tubing connected to each exhaust
pipe on the car. The two lengths of 5.1 cm tubing were then welded in a
y-arrangement to a single 7.6 cm (3 in) O.D. stainless tube, which in turn
was connected to the dilution tunnel. The entire extension tube assembly
was slightly less than 366 cm (12 ft) long and therefore did not require
insulation.
B. Test Fuels
Several fuel options were initially presented to the Project Officer
for use as test fuels in this project. For the primary fuel or base fuel,
a "National Average" No. 2 material similar to those used for other EPA
projects ' and a 2D emissions test fuel were considered. Several SwRI
fuels proposed for the second fuel of the study, either the same one for
all vehicles, or different fuels based on some reasonable criterion,
included the following:
"13
-------
SwRI Code No. Fuel Type
EM-395-F "H320" clean straight run Mo. 1
EM-401-F JP-7 highly refined No. 1
EM-242-F premium quality No. 2
EM-241-F mimimum quality No. 2
EM-390-F shale-derived No. 2
It was originally planned to use a "wide boiler" as the second fuel for
this project, in all the vehicles which would burn it satisfactorily.
Once it became apparent that all the vehicles needed a higher-cetane
distillate to run well, however, other options were considered. If it were
desired to look at a "best case" situation in addition to the No. 2 primary
fuel, one of the first three materials listed above was deemed appropriate.
The EM-241-F would provide a "worst case" comparison, and the results with
EM-390-F fuel could not be reliably anticipated.
The two test fuels ultimately selected by the Project Officer for use
in characterizing the advanced powerplants are described in Table 2. The
fuel coded EM-329-F, was designated to be the primary or base fuel, and
is a "National Average" No. 2 fuel supplied by this laboratory. The
material was originally a Gulf No. 2 diesel whose sulfur content was
adjusted to 0.24 weight percent by addition of ditertiary butyl disulfide.
Twenty drums (55 gallons ea) of the Couch No. 2 fuel was received at SwRI
from EPA-RTP in early 1979 for particulate accumulation on an Olds diesel
(Contract 68-02-2703). The Olds program did not materialize, so in late
1980, 18 drums of the Couch fuel were shipped back to RTF. The remaining
two drums were coded EM-469-F, and were retained for use as the "second
fuel" in this project on recommendation of the Project Officer. The Couch
fuel is basically a No. 2 home heating oil.
14
-------
TABLE 2. PROPERTIES OF TEST FUELS
Fuel Code
Description
Cetane Number
Cetane Index
Gravity, "API
Density, g/mJl
Cloud point, °C (°F)
Flash point, °C (°F)
Viscosity, cs
Gum, mg/100 mH
Total solids, mg/i
Metals in fuel, x-ray
Carbon, %
Hydrogen, %
Nitrogen, ppm
Sulfur, %
Aromatics , %
Clef ins , %
Saturates , %
DS6, IBP
°C, 5% point
(°F) 10% point
20% point
40% point
50% point
60% point
80% point
90% point
95% point
EP
EM-329-F
"Nat'l. Avg."
No. 2
50.1
52.1
37.5
0.837
-8 (18)
65 (149)
2.36
14.3
7.4
0
85.8
13.0
48
0.24
21.3
1.7
77.0
191 (377)
211 (412)
' 219 (427)
231 (448)
251 (484)
269 (517)
290 (554)
307 (585)
323 (613)
340 (644)
EM-469-F
Couch No. 2 Fuel
SwRI Analysis
48.1
35.2
0.849
12.9
0.18
172 (342)
206 (402)
219 (426)
231 (448)
252 (486)
262 (504)
272 (522)
297 (567) '
315 (599).
332 (629)
344 (651)
EPA 6/30
48.0
48.1
35.2
0'.849
84.60
14.81
<100a
0.30
39.1
.. 0.9
60.0
182 (360)
218 (424)
262 (504)
309 (588)
337 (638)
15
-------
used ASTM D-1266, "lamp" method).
On all emissions studies conducted during this project, each vehicle
was fueled directly out of a 18.9 t (5 gal) can through auxiliary fuel
lines installed in the vehicle. At each fuel change, the vehicle fuel
filter was removed and purged with the test fuel. Afterwards, the vehicle
was conditioned on the dynamometer for I" km (30 mi) at alternating speeds
of 48 kph (30 mph), 64 kph (40 mph), and 80 kph (50 mph). At the start of
the conditioning, the auxiliary fuel return line from the vehicle was
removed from the test fuel can and directed to fill a separate waste-fuel
2000 mi container. Upon filling the container, the fuel return line was
reconnected to the test fuel can to continue the conditioning and sub-
sequent 23-minute FTP prep prior to testing. In this manner, an effective
conditioning of the exhaust system ar.d proper flush of the engine fuel
filter and lines was assured each time a fuel was changed in a vehicle.
C. Test Procedures and Equipment
The regulated gaseous and particulate emissions tests conducted on the
vehicles were performed following the approcriate Federal Regulations
applicable to light-duty diesel vehicles for 1981. Sampling and
analyses of unregulated emissions were conducted according to procedures
discussed in a subsequent section of this report.
16
-------
1. Dynamometer and CVS Sampling System
A 50 hp Clayton ECE-50 passenger car dynamometer was used for all
emissions 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
Southwest Research Institute CVS Number 3. 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 12.9 m /min (455 cfm). The
dilution tunnel used is shown schematically in Figure 6. Additional dilution
of 3.5 m /min (124 cfm) needed to maintain the tunnel sampling zone temperature
below 125°F, as stipulated by the 1981 FTP , was provided by a 500x500 mm
(20x20 in.)filter sampling system as identified in Figure 6. The large
filter system is ordinarily used to obtain 500x500 mm Pallflex partic'ilate
filters for various gravimetric and chemical analyses. The large filter
system is attached at the downstream end of dilution tunnel and consists
of a positive-displacement blower with associated in-line '500x500 mm
filter holder, temperature readouts and controls, and flow controls. The
nominal flowrate (3.5 m /min) is held constant by temperature control using
a heat exchanger and by maintaining constant pressure drop across the blower.
All emission tests discussed in this report were run using the CVS and 500x
SCO mm filter sampling system in combination to provide a total nominal
flowrate of 16.4 m /min (579 cfm).
2. Regulated Gaseous Emissions
Regulated emissions were collected and analyzed using procedures
17
-------
r
610mm
(24In)
610mm
(241 n)
450mm
(17.7Sn)
DBLUTBON AIR
FILTER ENCLOSURE
76mm (Sin) HAW
EXHAUST TRANSFER TUBE
230mm (Sin)
ORIFICE
TO CVS
114mm
(4-1/2in)DIA
700mm (27.Sln)
114mm
(4-1 /2in) DIA
FILTER HOLDER
Figure §. Schematic diagram of exhaust dilution tunnel
-------
and equipment described in the Federal Register. Hydrocarbon analysis of
the sample was continuous, using a heated flame ionization detector (HFID).
Electronic signal integration used with the HFID provided average dilute
hydrocarbon concentration for each run. The gaseous sample was taken
directly from the diluted exhaust stream through a heated probe in the
dilution tunnel. The bagged gaseous emissions, as obtained at the CVS,
were analyzed for CO, NO , and CO-. Nondispersive infrared (NDIR) analyzers
were used for determination of CO and C0_, and a chemiluminescence (CL)
ft
analyzer was used for NO evaluation.
3. Regulated Particulate Emissions
A particulate sampling system, connected to the dilution tunnel
and meeting the basic design requirements of the Federal Register , was
used to simultaneously collect particulate on various 47 mm filter types.
The sampling system employed the four sampling probes identified in Figure 6.
Along with the usual filter holders, pumps, rotometers, temperature sensor,
and dry gas meters, the system also employed an electro-pneumatically-
controlled valve connected to one of the four probes. This solenoid valve
enabled fast remote switching between two sets of paired primary test and
back-up test filters. In this manner, the regulated particulate emissions
in the different cycles of a test sequence, were sampled easily and
separately, especially at the point of rapid transition between the cold
or hot 505 and the subsequent stabilized phase of the FTP. The arrangement
of the switching-solenoid valve and 47 mm filter holders is shown in
Figure 7, View A. View B, shows the temperature recorder, dry gas meter,
rotometer, and Magnehelic pressure gauges of the particulate sampling cart.
19
-------
A. Switching solenoid valve with 47 mm filter holders
^^^fc '"J^..*? " " "£=?'5$
i, / .a. -" x&i'^ '" ,v"'". ^
Li-fczfe-1: ^
-JUi..^!-^?!^ fe'--- ;
.- « »,
a uifi^S'i^1'.
[V ^"jli-TJ^*^.^ ^,
.r^cr-*'
(,y^=-«3 wi-^f pjr-'Jv-1;"; .-i
'^JKJTTWhr'ffe? i' /-1'*''
;, ---' "~ri'-1<;f!2>*"j^:
-^s^-^^% ,.<«
^Ws^W^W-^-v "XH --' ""' '--.5^
,/2;.::u'-t"':,'j*4. e- ^ .. -.'7, ':$?£
t^fe^Q- .^SKl
B. Particulate sampling cart
Figure 7. Views of regulated particulate sampling systen
-------
The commercially-available 47 mm Palllfex filters designated
type T20A60, used in the determination of regulated particulate emission
rates, are made of glass-fiber coated with fluorocarbon. The filters were
weighed before and after use on a microbalance of one yg sensitivity.
Before weighing, the filters were properly conditioned in a temperature-
and humidity-controlled chamber which also housed the microbalance. The
controlled airflow, temperature, and humidity provided an absolute humidity
of 75±5 grains water per pound of dry air in the chamber.
4. Exhaust Sampling
Exhaust sampling was conducted employing the system shown sche-
matically in Figure 8. The system was used in accordance with the guidelines
established in various EPA projects conducted at SwRI. The major difference
between this system and similar systems used in other projects is the
number of sampling probes and systems required to collect the unregulated
emissions samples. This complexity is illustrated in several views of the
system as shown in Figure 9. View A of Figure S shows the overall sampling
system with a test vehicle as run on the dynamometer. View B, Figure 9,
shows the arrangement of various sampling carts near the dilution tunnel.
In View C of Figure 9, some of the wet chemistry sampling carts, with im-
pingers in place, are shown. The ThermoSorb/N trap used for sampling
N-nitrosamines is shown connected to the outlet side of a 47 mm filter
holder in View D of Figure 9.
This section had described the CVS and dilution tunnel system,
and has provided some insight into the overall sampling system assembly.
More details on each of the individual sampling systems for the unregulated
21
-------
(Bags)
Exliaust
M
to
CO, NOX, CO2,
Individual Hydrocarbons (IHC)
iti
CVS
Constant
AP
Control
Orifice
Sampler
(47 mm Filters)
Particulate Gravimetric
Particulate C, H, and N
Trace Elements
Sulfate
N-nitrosamines (ThermoSorb/N trap)
Filtered
Air In
PL
(Impingers)
Aldehydes & Ketones
Phenols
Hydrogen Sulfide
Total Cyanide
Ammonia
(Traps)
Organic Sulfides
Gaseous HC
Pi
Impactor
Sizing
"~ Dilution Tunnel ^ C **
' 460 mm (18") I.D. p f
' || Continuous
|| HC Analyzer
t i r\\~\ ^1-R
OrificeX
Mixing Plate
\
\
Amines
Exhaust
from
Test Vehicle
(500x500 mm
filters)
Percent
Organic
Solubles
Ames Bioassay
Benzo(a)pyrene
Polarity Profile
G.C. Boiling Point
C, H, and N
Figure 8. Emissions sampling system
-------
tip
.^,#|pp$gg
** ' *-*->' ^' -'vV* ' ' ' ^t*" ^i^^'
|p«^^»
"* ^"^,.4^-^
fc>:&1
^>,-.:-! '
yi.'/'-f.'^p''1' ''.:;:;; i^f'«v&i
^yH^:^:^^
Ibat^^ft,
;, *&: -:':', :^i.i^'. :.:(-,.>. ..ViJi'.-.'^
^.5-^f psi^'ft^
Mlfei^M^^'^
A. Overall Sampling System
B. Arrangement of Sanqpling Carts to Dillution Tunnel
N]
CJ
C. Wet Chemistry Sampling Carts D. ThermoSorb/N Trap for N-nitrosamines
Figure 9. Views of the emissions sampling system
-------
emissions are given in Secfci a IV of this final report.
5. Emissions Test Procedures
Tho emissions test procedures utilized in this project are defined
as follows:
FTP - 1981 Federal Test Procedure (uses the Urban Dynamometer
Driving Schedule).
HFET - Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule.
(3)
(2)
NYCC - New York City Cycle.
85 kph Cruise - 85 kph Steady-State (the test cycle is of 20
minutes duration, and begins immediately after
Stable 85 kph speed is reached).
The HFET and NYCC are hot-start, single-segment driving cycles.
The FTP, however, involves cold-start and hot-start, multi-cycle with
multi-segment operation. The FTP, HFET, and NYCC schedules are illustrated
in Figure 10. A summary of the driving schedule parameters is presented in
Table 3. In addition, in this project,a four-bag FTP was utilized for
TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF DRIVING SCHEDULE PARAMETERS
Driving Schedule
FTP:
505
867
UDDS
HFET
NYCC
85 kph
Duration,
Seconds
505
867
1372
765
599
1200
Distance,
Kilometers
5.8
6.2
12.0
16.5
1.91
28.3
Average Soeed
km/hr
41.3
25.8
31.4
77.6
11.5
85.0
mph
25.7
16.2
19.5
48.2
7.1
52.8
24
-------
100
80
£0
40
20
Ol 0
200
400
600 800
TIME, sec
1000
1200
1371
100
80
60
40
20
0
60
765
s.
\
E
100
80
60
40
20
0
60
40
20
NYCC
200 400
TIME, sec
600
Figure 10. FTP, HFET and HYCC driving cycles vs tipe traces
25
-------
the unregulated emissions,- rather than the three-bag FTP specified in the
Federal Test Procedure. Therefore, before proceeding, it is important to
clarify the meaning of FTP as used in this program:
FTP - The FTP uses the Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule (UDDS)
which is 1372 seconds in duration. 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 and a
stabilized 867, followed by a ten-minute soak and than a hot-start
505. In this project, the hot-start 505 was followed by another 867
segment. Sampling of the regulated and unregulated emissions during
the 4-cycle or 4-bag FTP was as follows:
Duration, seconds
Regulated Emissions, 3-bag
Regulated Emissions, 4-bag
Unregulated Emissions:
Individual Hydrocarbons
Impingers (except Amines)
47 mm filters:
dulfate
C,H,fiN
trace elements
500 x 500 mm filters
N-nitrosamines (trap)
Gaseous Hydrocarbons (trap)-
Organic Sulfides (trap)
Particulate Impactor Sizing
Four-Cycle
Cold UDDS
505 867
xa x
X X-
X X
*f
X___
X__
FTP
Hot UDDS
505 867
X X
X X
X X
X
X
X
.X designates an individual sample taken
Same trap used for 4-bag FTP, HFET, NYCC, and'85 kph test sequences
26
-------
A composite value in mass per distance for the three-cycle, three-sample
FTP regulated emissions is calculated using the following formula:
MASS _ 0.43 * (MASS 1 + MASS 2) + 0.57 x (MASS 3 + MASS 2)
DISTANCE 0.43 x (DIST. 1 + DIST. 2) + 0.57 x (DIST. 3 + DIST. 2)
Assuming Distance 3 is equal to Distance 1, this equation can be reduced to:
3-FTP M/D = °'43 x (Ml + M2) + 0.57 x (M3 + M2)
~ Dl + D2
For the four-cycle FTP, two sample, composite values determined in this
project, the following formula was used:
MASS _ 0.43 x M(l + 2) + 0.57 x M(3 + 4)
DISTANCE 0.43 x (Dl + D2) + 0.57 x (D3 + D4)
Assuming Distance 3 is equal to Distance 1 and Distance 4 is equal to
Distance 2, then this equation can be reduced to:
4-FTP M/D = °'43 x "(1 + 2) + 0-57 x M(3 + 4)
Dl + D2
Therefore, with the assumption that the changes in distance traveled are
negligible, the composite results with the four-cycle FTP relative to
results with the three-cycle FTP will differ only as the mass emissions
emitted during Cycle 4 differ from that emitted during Cycle 2.
For single 4-bag FTP sampling obtained in this study, a composite
value (not weighted) was obtained using the following formula:
. _ _ _ . Total Mass _ _
4-bag FTP Composite = - ; - : - r~~: -
Total Distance Driven
27
-------
6. Test Coding System
The test coding system generally used in this project is described
in Table 4.
TABLE 4. TEST CODING SYSTEM
Order: VCFTSE *
Codes
V: Vehicle Number; 1 - Naturally-Aspirated Fiat, 2 » 1981 Oldsmobile
Cutlass, 3 = Turbocharged Fiat
C: Vehicle Configuration; A - without exhaust aftertreatment, B = with
catalytic trap-oxidizer
F: Fuel; 1 = EM-329-F, 2 - EM-469-F
T: Test Type; F => FTP, H - HFET, N = NYCC, S = 85 kph steady-state
V = Cold 505 smoke test, R =» Trap Regeneration
SB: Sequential Test No.
*Shorthand version initially used only with Fiat N.A. diesel and fuel
EM-329-F was VC329T, where V = vehicle number, C = vehicle configuration,
329 - fuel EM-329-F, and T = test type.
D. Test Plan
The intent of the test plan was to evaluate as many emissions as
possible during vehicle operation, allowing a significant amount of
information to be collected with minimum repetitive testing. Consequently,
in this project, five diesel vehicle (engine) configurations and two test
fuels were run in the test plan. The vehicles employed in this study were
earlier identified in Section III, A of this report.and included a prototype
naturally-aspirated Fiat with and without catalytic trap., a prototype turbo-
charged Fiat with and without catalytic trap, and a 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass.
The two fuels selected were coded EM-329-F and EM-469-F as discussed earlier.
28
-------
The basic test sequences and emission measurements to be conducted on
each vehicle configuration-fuel combination are summarized in Table 5.
Not included in Table 5 were the various tests conducted to collect
additional 500 x 500 particulate filters and to regenerate one of the
catalytic traps used in this program as described under Section V., A of
this report. Most emissions in Table 5 were sampled during a test sequence
composed of a 4-bag FTP, HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph steady-state cycle. -Soak'
periods consisted of ten minutes between cold and hot 23-minute FTP'S,
and generally twenty minutes after the 4-bag FTP and each of the subsequent
test schedules. The twenty-minute soak periods permitted the many impinger
and filter changes, as well as sampling equipment preparation required
between the different test scnedules. Individual sampl. inn dr. regulated
and unregulated emissions during the 4-bag FTP was carried out as described
in Section III, C. 5. All emissions were obtained from CVS diluted exhaust,
except for organic amines and visible smoke obtained from raw exhaust.
Although a reasonable effort was made to test each vehicle confi-
guration and fuel per the test plan outlined in Table 5, some circumstances
prevented complete- adherence to it. Various repeat tests were run to replace
erroneous data or to supply missing information. The previously-mentioned
trap regeneration tests also required expansion of the project effort.
In particular, many repeat tests that could not be fully anticipated .in
the test plan were run, to collect sufficient particulate sample amounts
when these emissions were significantly reduced in.the vehicle employing
catalytic traps. Consequently, only some of the material- and labor-intensive analyses
29
-------
TABLE 5. TEST SEQUENCES AND EMISSION MEASUREMENTS TO BE CONDUCTED
ON EACH VEHICLE CONFIGURATION AND FUEL
Exhaust Constituents
Measured or Characterized
Regulated gaseous, particulate,
and fuel economy
Unregulated gaseous
individual hydrocarbons
aldehydes
phenols
hydrogen sulfide
total cyanide
ammonia
organic sul fides
organic amines
nitrosamines
hydrocarbons (trap)
Unregulated particulate
mass
size distribution
trace elements
CHN
sul fate
Particulate Organic
Solubles (mass)
BaP
boiling point
CHN
Ames
polarity profile
Visible Smoke,
PHS meter
Test Sequences
FTP, cold & hot
1
J
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
J
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
2
J
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
3
^
/
/
HFET
1
^
/
/
/
/
/
j
/
/
/
^
/
/
/
/
/
/
2
^
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
NYCC
1
^
/
/
/
/
/
/
^
/
/
/
^
/
/
/
/
/
/
2
^
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
85 kph
1
^
/
/
/
/
/
J
/
/
/
^
/
/
/
/
/
J
2
^
/
^
1
'
/
/
/
Cold
505
/
30
-------
deemed more significant were selected tor implementation in order to remain
within the effort allocated to the project. Even so, t.he total number of tests
completed in the program was very extensive, requiring a total of 36 test
sequences consisting of a 4-bag FTP, HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph cycle each.
Other supplementary tests run were as follows:
Number of
Tests Conducted Test Type
10 4-bag FTP
30 hot 23-minute FTP
17 HFET
39 NYCC
25 85 kph
17 Cold 505
various Trap Regeneration
The majority of the emissions samples generated in th'j project were
analyzed in the Emissions Laboratory at SwRI. Other laboratories .assisting
in the analyses of the remaining samples are identified in a subsequent
section (IV, A.) of this report. During the initial portion of the program,
the Project Officer directed that extraction of the 500 x 500 mm filters
and subsequent Ames and BaP analysis be conducted at this laboratory,
rather than at EPA under the in-house measurements program as originally
provided for in the contract. To accommodate the unexpected effort, careful
changes were made to the test plan as reflected in the corresponding
reduction of effort on the catalyst-equipped Fiat prototype cars. For
the same reason, only screening tests for nitrosamines, total cyanide,
amines, hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, and sulfate evaluations were included
in the formally approved test plan of Table 5.
3)
-------
IV. ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES FOR UNREGULATED EMISSIONS
The analytical procedures used to measure the unregulated emissions
are summarized in this section. A detailed description of the individual hydro-
carbons, aldehydes, phenols, hydrogen sulfide, total cyanide, ammonia, organic
sulfides, ...jenes, and sulfate procedures along with a~discussion of their develop-
ment, validation and qualification is available in the Interim Report, "Analytical
Procedures for Characterizing Unregulated Emissions from Vehicles Using
(8)
Middle-Distillate Fuels." The procedures were developed in our laboratory,
during an earlier phase of this project.
A. Description of the Analytical Procedures
The unregulated emissions evaluated in this project, along with the
methods of sampling and the procedures used in the analyses, are listed in
Table 6. Individual hydrocarbons, aldehydes, phenols, organic sulfides,
organic amines^ N-nitrosamines, and trace elements are categories consisting
of groups of compounds or elements. The corresponding procedures separate
and identify a number of individual compounds within each of the groups.
The analytical procedures involved in this project are described briefly
as follows:
1. Individual Hydrocarbons
For measurement of the individual hydrocarbons, methane (CH.),
ethane (C,H ), ethylene (C^) / acetylene (C^), propane (C-jHg), propylene
(C H,.), benzene (C-H.) , and toluene (C H }, a sample of CVS-diluted exhaust
36 60 ' o
is collected in a Tedlar bag. This bagged sample is then analyzed for
individual hydrocarbons using a gas chromatograph system containing four
32
-------
TABLE 6. SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY FOR UNREGULATED EMISSIONS
Exhaust Emissions
Sampled
gases
particulate
particulate
organic
solubles
smoke
Const! tuent(s)
Analyzed
individual hydrocarbons
aldehydes
phenols
hydrogen sulfide
total cyanide
ammonia
organic sulfides
organic amines
N-nitrosamines
gaseous hydrocarbons
size distribution
trace elements
carbon, hydrogen, and
nitrogen
sulfate
organic solubles
benzo(a)pyrene (BaP)
boiling point
carbon and hydrogen
nitrogen
biological response
polarity profile
smoke (visible)
Sampling Method
sample bag (CVS)
impinger
impinger
impinger
impinger
impinger
trap
impinger
ThermoSorb/N trap
trap
in.pac tor- filter
filter, 47mm Fluoropore
filter, 47rran Glass
filter, 47mm Fluoropore
500x500, mm filter
optical
Analysis Method
injection, GC/FID
DNPH, GC/FID
extraction, GC/FID
methylene blue derivative,
spectrophotometer
cyanogen chloride derivative,
GC/ECD
ion chromatograph
injection, GC/FPD
GC/NPD with ascarite pre-column
GC coupled to TEA analyzer*
extraction, GC/FID
gravimetric
x-ray fluorescence
combustion/TC analyzer
barium chloranilate derivative
(BCA) , HPLC/UV
soxhlet extraction, gravimetric
HPLC/fluorescence detection
GC/FID
combustion/TC analyzer
oxidation pyroplsis/chemiluminscence
Ames bioassay
HPLC/fluorescence and UV detection
EPA smokemeter (continuous)
*If interferences occurred with GC/TEA analysis, a further analysis using HPLC/TEA was required.
-------
separate columns, and a flame ionization detector. The peak areas are compared
to an external calibration blend, and the individual hydrocarbon concentrations
are obtained using a Hewlett-Packard 3354 computer system.
2. Aldehydes and Ketones
The collection of aldehydes (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, isobutyr-
aldehyde, hexanaldehyde, crotonaldehyde, and benzaldehyde) and ketones (acetone
and methylethylketone) is accomplished by bubbling CVS diluted exhaust through
glass impingers containing 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH) in dilute
hydrochloric acid. The aldehydes and ketones (also known as carbonyl com-
pounds) react with the DNPH to form their respective phenylhydrazone deri-
vatives. These derivatives are insoluble or only slightly soluble in the
DNPH/HC1 solution, and are removed by filtration followed by pentar, extractions.
The filtered precipitate and the pentane extracts are combined, and then the
pentane is evaporated in a vacuum oven. The remaining dried .extract contains
the phenylhydrazone derivatives. The extract is dissolved in a quantitative"
volume of toluene, which contains a known amount of anthracene as an internal
standard. A portion of this dissolved extract is injected into a gas chroma-
tograph and analyzed using a flame ionization detector.
3. Phenols
The collection of phenols (phenol; galicylaldehyde; m-cresol/p-cresol;
p-ethylphenol/2-isopropylphenol/2,3-xylenol/3,5-xylenol/2,4,6-trimethylphenol;
2,3,5-trimethylphenol; and 2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol) is accomplished by
bubbling CVS-diluted exhaust through two Greenburg-Smith impingers in series,
each containing 200 m& of 1 N KOH chilled in an ice bath. The contents of
each impinger are acifidied and extracted with ethyl ether. The samples are
34
-------
partially concentrated, combined, and then further concentrated to 1 mH. An
internal standard is added, and the volume is adjusted to 2 m£. The final
sample is analyzed wioh a gas chroraatograph (GC) equipped with a flame
ionization detector. Concentrations of individual phenols are determined by
comparison to external and internal standards.
4. Hydrogen Sulfide
The collection of hydrogen sulfide is accomplished by bubbling
CVS-diluted exhaust through glass impingers containing a buffered zinc
acetate solution, which traps the sulfide ion as zinc sulfide. The absorbing
solution is then treated with N,N-dimethyl-paraphenylene diamine sulfate
and ferric ammonium sulfate. Cyclization occurs, forming the highly-colored
heterocyclic compound methylene blue (3,9-bisdimethylaninophenazothionium
sulfate). The resulting solution is analyzed with a spectrophotometer at
667 mm in a 1-cm or 4-cm pathlength cell, depending upon the concentration.
5. Total Cyanide (Hydrogen Cyanide plus Cyanogen)
The collection of total cyanide is accomplished by bubbling
CVS-diluted exhaust through glass impingers containing a 1.0 N potassium
hydroxide absorbing solution. This solution is maintained at ice bath
temperature. An aliquot of the absorbing reagent is then treated with KH_PO.
and Chloramine-T. A portion of the resulting cyanogen chloride is injected
into a gas chromatograph equipped with an electron capture detector (ECD).
External CN~ standards are used to quantify the results.
6. Ammonia
The' collection of ammonia is accomplished by bubbling CVS-diluted
exhaust through ircpingers containing dilute sulfuric acid at ice bath tem-
35
-------
perature. A sample from the impinger is then analyzed for ammonium ion (NH+)
using an ion chromatograph, and the concentration in the exhaust is calculated
by comparison to an ammonium sulfate standard solution.
7. Organic Sulfides
The collection of the organic sulfides, carbonyl sulfide (COS),
methyl sulfide ((CH ) S), ethyl sulfide «C H ) S), and methyl disulfide
J fc fc O Ib
((CHjJ.Sj) is accomplished by passing CVS-diluted exhaust through Tenax GC
traps at -76°C. At this temperature, the traps remove the organic sulfides
from the dilute exhaust. The organic sulfides are thermally desorbed from
the traps into a gas chromatograph sampling system, and injected into a gas
chromatograph equipped with a flame photometric detector for analysis.
External organic sulfide standards generated from permeation tubes are used
to quantify the results.
8. Organic Amines
The collection of organic amines (monomethylamine, monoethylamine
and dimethylamine, trimethylamine, diethylamine, and triethylamine) is
accomplished by bubbling CVS-diluted exhaust through glass impingers con-
taining dilute sulfuric acid. The amines are complexed. by the acid to form
stable sulfate salts, which remain in solution. A portion of this solution is
then injected into a gas chromatograph equipped with an ascarite loaded pre-
column and a nitrogen phosphorus detector (NPD). External amine standards in
dilute sulfuric acid are used to quantify the results. On this project, the
organic amines procedure was modified only as necessary to sample amines
from raw exhaust instead of dilute exhaust.
36
-------
9. N-nitrosamines
The collection of ti-nitrosamines, N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA),
N-nitrosodiethylamine (NDEA), N-nitrosodipropylamine (NDPA), N-nitroaodi-
butylamine (NDBA), N-nitrosopiperidine (NPIP), N-nitrosopyrrolidine (NPYR),
and N-nitrosomorpholine (NMOR) is accomplished by passing CVS-diluted
exhaust through a ThermoSorb/N trap designed by the Thermo Electron
Corporation especially for trappingH-tiitros amines. The ThermoSorb/N trap
air sampler cartridge has been reported in the literature to be free of
artifact formation and capable of retaining 100 percent of preloaded
(9)
nitrosamines.
An 83 mm ( 3 1/4 in) length of 3.2 .mm (1/8 in) I.D. x 6.4-iran
(1/4 in) O.D. Teflon tube was fitted to the ThermoSorb/N trap inlet. The
Teflon tube was then inserted into a thermocouple connector commonly joined
to the exit side of a 47 mm filter holder containing a Pallflex filter.
In this manner, only a snail portion of the total exhaust flowing through
the filter was diverted through the trap. The filter holder was attached
to one of the four 47 mm filter sample probes used in conjunction with the
dilution tunnel as described in Section III. C. 3., and as illustrated in
Figure 3, View A of this report. An actual ThermoSorb/N trap as adapted to
the filter holder was illustrated in View D of Figure 9. The outlet side
of the ThermoSorb/N trap was connected to a pump, rotometer with flow control
valve, and a dry gas meter to cbtain the proper sampling rates of 2 £/min.
For analysis, the sealed traps were sent to the Thermo Electro'n
Corporation in Waltham, Massachusetts. Each trap was then eluted with
25:75 percent methanolidichloromethane organic solvent to provie a 1.8 m&
37
-------
sample. For optimum sensitivity, the sample was primarily analyzed using
a Hewlett-Packard HP5710A gas chromatograph coupled to a Model 543 TEA
analyzer. If sample interferences were noted in GC-TEA analysis, the sample
was further analyzed using an Alltech 110 HPLC coupled to a Model 502 TEA
analyzer.
10. Gaseous Hydrocarbons
For use in boiling range analysis, gaseous hydrocarbons were
collected from filtered, dilute exhaust using the sampling system of an
earlier EPA Project. A schematic of the sampling system which, is also
generally employed in diesel odor analysis (DOAS) is shown in Figure 11.
A multi-opening stainless steel probe directs the CVS-diluted exhaust to
the oven, where it passes through a fiber glass filter, then into a metal
bellows pump which directs the exhaust into a collection trap. The trap
is a 51 mm (2 in) x 9.5 mm (3/8 in) O.D. stainless steel tube fitted with
a connector on each end. Approximately one gram of Chroraosorb 102 is
packed into the trap and retained by stainless steel frits on each end.
The dessicant removes moisture prior to the rotometer and dry gas meter.
The flowrate employed in the system was 6 £/min.
After use, the collection trap was eluted sufficiently with
cyclohexane t<-> obtain a 2 mJl sample. Each eluted sample was submitted to
the U. S. Army Fuels and Lubricants Research Laboratory of the Fjiergy
Systems Research Division at SwRI, and analyzed qualitatively by gas
chromatograph for boiling range and for paraffin peaks. The chromatograph
procedure was run according to ASTM D2887-73, which simulates distillation
to 538°C (1000 °F) at atmospheric pressure. The equipment used for this
38
-------
PROBE
LEAK CHECK VALVE
THERMOCOUPLE
OVEN
T = 190°c
HEATED
SAMPLE
LINE (190'C)
CHROMOSORB 102
TRAP, MAXIMUM
T = 38°C
DESSICANT
DILUTE
EXHAUST
FLOW
Figure 11. Schematic diagram of gasec-js HC sampling system
(for boiling range analysis).
39
-------
gas chromatograph analysis was .a Hewlett-Packard 5700 Series unit, equipped
with dual hydrogen flame ionization detectors. Its column was 1.8 m (6 ft)
long by 3.2 mm (1/8 in) diameter stainless steel, packed with 5 percent
SE-30 on 80/100 mesh Chromosorb-G. It was programmed from 0°C to 390°C at
16*C per minute. Data processing was performed on a Hewlett-Packard 3350
Laboratory Automated System.
11. Particle Sizing
Particle sizing was accomplished using a Sierra Series 220 radial-
slot impactor. The impactor system contained stainless steel stages on
which. particulatR matter was fractionated by size,-and a final Pallflex
backup filter. The impactor was located at the downstream end of the
dilution tunnel. Figure 12 shows the impactor system protruding on the left
side of the tunnel. Figure 13 shows the impactor system disassembled with
the stages, plates, and filter removed from their holder for clarity. In
Operation, each stage was placed on a plate such that the slots in each
stage decreased in width from sample entrance down to the filter. Each
stage was rotated 45 degrees so the particular matter passing through
the slots impacted on a solid portion of the following stage. Particle
retention characteristics were related to the slot size and flowrate through
the impactor. The flowrate was controlled using a metal bellows vacuum
pump, pressure guage, and flowmeter. The flowrate was selected to achieve.
a particle sizing range from 6,9 to 0.09 microns effective cut-off
diameter (BCD). The fluorocarbon-coated glas's fiber filter, used as a
back-up filter, collected particulate smaller than O.Oy microns ECD.
The mass of particulate matter collected on sample filters and impactor
discs was determined using the microbaldnce -housed in. a controlled-
humidity chamber, as described in Section III. C. 3.
40
-------
-T?JSrK7&K%
[fi&jgtf?* ^'.".r . .
- -^^
"'-{ I
&S8
Figure 12. Installation of particle sizing
impactor in dilution tunnel.
^^sfeaki^^^,^2i^1;i^i4i£;il^^^
Ficfure 13. Particle'sizing impactor disassembled.
41
-------
12. Trace Elements
The trace elements (metals and sulfur) were collected as part
of the particulate on 47 mm Pluoropore filters. The CVS-diluted exhaust
samples were taken from the dilution tunnel. Weight gain on the filter
was determined by weighing the filter on a microbalance before and after
sampling. The filter samples were sent to EPA-Research Triangle Park
(RTP) for analyses by x-ray fluorescence, using a Siemens MRS-3 x-ray
spectrometer.
13. Particulate, Carbon, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen
Particulate was collected on 47 mm Type A (Gelman) glass-fiber
filter for the purpose of determining the carbon, hydrogen and nitrogen
weight percentages. The CVS-diluted exhaust samples were obtained from
the dilution tunnel. Weight gain on the filter was determined by weighing
it on a microbalance before and after sampling. The required analysis on
the particulate samples was performed by Galbraith Laboratories, using a
Perkin-Elmer Model 240B automated thermal conductivity CHN analyzer. In
order to accommodate the particulate sample on a filter, the filter had to
be folded or rolled over itself. As the temperature was increased, the
glass fiber media collapsed on itself, sometimes locking in some of the
particulate. For this reason, significant inaccuracies can occur, but
may be moderated by increased filter particulate loadings (Galbraith
recommends at least 2 mg particulate loading on each filter to improve
precision of analysis). To circumvent this difficulty, Spang Laboratories
was initially considered for analysis of CHN in particulate. Spang
required a particulate filter sample no larger than 15 mm in diameter.
42
-------
Cutting or punching out the 15 nun filter discs from regular 47 nun filters
introduced errors in the determination of part-.iculate loading. These errors
were believed to be as much or greater than those experienced with CHN
analysis at Galbraith using 47 mm filters.
14. Sulfate
Automotive exhaust is routed into a dilution tunnel, where it is
mixed with a flowing stream of filtered room air. In the tunnel, the 8.03
reacts rapidly with water in the exhaust to form sulfuric acid aerosols.
The aerosols grow to a filterable size range within the tunnel, and are
collected on a fluorocarbon membrane filter. Particulate sulfate salts
are also collected on the filter.
Sulfuric acid collected on the filter is then converted to ammonium
sulfate by exposure to ammonia vapor. The soluble sulfates are leached
from the filter with a measured volume of an isopropyl alcohol'- water
solution (60% IPA). A fixed volume of the sample extract is injected into
a high pressure liquid chromatograph (HPLC) and pumped through a column of
strong cation exchange resin in Ag+ form to scrub out the halides (Cl~, Br~),
and then through a column of strong cation exchange resin in H+ form to
scrub out the cations and convert the sulfate to sulfuric acid. Passage
through a reactor column of barium chloranilate crystals precipitates out
barium sulfate/ and releases the highly UV absorbing .chloranilate ions.
The amount of chloranilate ion released is proportional to.the sulfate in
the sample, and is measured by a sensitive liquid chromatograph UV detector
at 3"0-313 nanometers. All the reactions and measurement take plact in a
flowing stream of 60% IPA. The scrubber and reactor columns also function
43
-------
as efficient filter media for any solid reaction products formed during
passage of the sample through the column system.
15. Organic Solubles
The soluble fraction of particulate was obtained by solvent
extraction from '500x500 mm Pallflex filters. Particulate on the large
filter was collected from CVS-diluted exhaust using the 500x500 mm filter
sampling system described in Section XII. C. 1. of this report. The 500x500 mm
filters were weighed before and after test to determine the weight of
particulate matter collected. Each filter was extracted using methylene
chloride in a Soxhlet apparatus (at times a large Soxhlet apparatus
capable of holding up to sixteen filters was used to save time, effort,
and materials in extracting filters combined from identical test schedules).
Capacities of the regular and large Soxhlets were 400 mSL and 3.8 £,
respectively. Solvent recycling periods were 15 minutes for eight hours
with the regular Soxhlet and one hour for 48 hours with the large Soxhlet.
The solvent volume was reduced under vacuum. The remaining solvent/solubles were
transferred to a preweighed container, and the solvent was evaporated
by nitrogen purging. The total mass of solubles was determined gravi-
metrically, and the percent of solubles in the particulate matter calculated.
If needed, a weighed organic soluble sample was again redissolved in methylene
chloride for splitting into separate samples. These samples were transferred
into preweighed vials and dried for use in boiling point, CHN, Amas, and
polarity profile analyses discussed subsequently in this section.
16. Benzo(a)pyrene (BaP)
Separate 500x500 mm particulate filters were employed in this
44
-------
program for benzo(a)pyrene analysis. In this case, the particulate was
also collected from CVS-diluted exhaust using the same 1500x500 mm filter
sampling system previously discussed. Using a procedures developed at General
Motors , the BaP is removed from the particulate by Soxhlet extraction
with benzene/ethanol. The benzene/ethanol extract is re-extracted in hexane/
methylene chloride. The solvent is then evaporated and the sample is re-
dissolved in acetonitrile for analysis. BaP is analyzed with an HPLC
system coupled to a fluorescence detector. The instrument used was a
Perkin-Elmer 3B liquid chromatograph equipped with an MPF-44 fluorescence
spectrophotoraeter. Excitation was at a wavelength of 383 nm, and emission
was read at 430 nm.
17. Solubles Boiling Range and Individual N-Paraffin Analysis
Organic solubles extracted with methylene chloride from 500x500 mm
particulate filters were subjected to analysis for boiling point range by
FID gas chromatograph. The analysis was conducted by the U.S. Army Fuels
and Lubricants Research Laboratory of the Energy Systems Research Division
at SwRI. The aas chromatograph procedure used was a high-temperature
variation on ASTM D2887-73 previously used on various SwRI projects '
for EPA. The procedure provides a simulated distillation up to 600°C.
Each aliquot was dissolved in methylene chloride, and an internal standard
(Cg through C-- paraffin composite) was added for quantitative results.
The gas chromatograph used was a custom-built u_iit, equipped with dual
hydrogen flame ionization detectors. Its column was 1.8 m ( 6 ft) long by
3.2 mm (1/8 in) diameter stainless steel, packed with 10 percent Dexsil 300
on 45/60 Oiromosorb P, AW. It was programmed from 0° to 450°C at 15°C per
45
-------
minute after 2 minutes isothermal at 0°C. Data processing was performed
on a Hewlett-Packard 3354 Laboratory Automated System.
18. Organic Solubles Carbon, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen
Aliquots of the dried, weighed methylene chloride soluble extract
were submitted to Galbraith Laboratories and analyzed for carbon and hydrogen
by the technique and instrumentation described in Section IV.A.13. (Perkin-
Elmer 240B). Respective aliquots of the same samples were submitted to the
U.S. Army Fuels and Lubricants Research Laboratory of the Energy Systems
Research Division at SwRI for nitrogen analysis by oxidative pyrolysis
and chemiluminescence.
19. Ames Bioassay
The Ames bioassay tests on organic solubles extracted from
500x500 mm Pallflex particulate filters using methylene chloride were
conducted at the Southwest Foundation for Research and Education (SFRE),
a sister organization of SwRI.
The Ames test as employed in this program refers to a bacterial
mutagenesis plate assay with Salmonella typhimurium according to the method
of Ames. This bioassay determines the ability of chemical compounds
or mixtures to cause mutation of DNA in the bacteria, positive results
occurring when histidine-dependent strains of bacteria revert (or are
mutated) genetically to forms which can synthesize histidine on their own.
The observable positive indication of mutation is the growth of bacterial
colonies on plates of nutrient media containing minimal histidine, with
the number of revertants per amount of substance tested (or "specified
activity") being the quantitative .result. The observable negative indi-
cation is the lack of such growth. A third result occurs when the substance
tested is toxic to the bacteria, but this result can not be interpreted in
46
-------
terms of mutagenesis.
SFRE used the Ames test procedure in detail, incorporating all
recommended modifications since the original description. As provided
for in the procedure, the tester strains were checked at recommended inter-
vals for maintenance of stability and validity. Each selected extract was
solvent exchanged with dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), a standard solvent com-
patible with the microorganisms. A solvent control run with each batch
of test samples consisted of a blank filter extract treated in a manner
similar to a test sample including solvent exchange with DMSO. The sample
to be tested was diluted in DMSO to provide several different doses for
each assay. Each does was assayed in triplicate with each of four tester
strains selected in consultation with the Project Officer to be used in this
program with respective test schedules as follows:
FTP extracts - Tester strains TA1535, TA1537, TA1538, TA98, all run
with and without S-9 activation, except for TA1537
run without S-9 only.
HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph extracts - each run using tester strain TA98
without S-9|
The Aroclor-induced rat liver S-9 used for tester strain activation was
checked to insure that enzyme activity was within the desired range, and
was used within three months of preparation. Positive controls consisted
of: sodium azide for TA1535 (0.5 micrograms per plate), 2-nitrofluorene
for TA1538 and TA98 (5 micrograms per plate), and 9-aminoacridine for TA1537
(50 micrograms per plate). In the presence of the metabolic activation
47
-------
activation system, 2-aminoanthracine (3 micrograms per plate) was used as
positive control with all tester strains.
Several range-finding studies were conducted at SFRE with repre-
sentative extracts obtained in this program. The range-finding studies
are necessary to determine an appropriate range of concentrations to be
used in definitive assays. An optimum range of concentrations to be
used in obtaining dost-response information would include at least one.dose
level of the test material which is toxic to the tester organisms, and a
range of concentrations sufficient to yield at least four points in the
linear portion of the dose-response curve. On the basis of the range-
finding studies, concentrations of 20, 60, 100, 200, 400, 600, and 1000
micrograms per plate were selected for use with all samples. Each sample
was assayed twice in triplicate at each of the preceding concentrations,
with or without S-9 activation as designated earlier in this 'discussion.
20. Polarity Profile
Soluble fractions of particulate extracted with methylene chloride,
as described in IV.A.15, were used to determine polarity profile. The
analysis method employs a high-performance liquid chromatograph with-
a variable solvent program, which permits separation of the solubles into
a series of fractions of increasing polarity. Instrumentation used in the
analytical procedure included a Perkin-Elmer Series. 3B HPLC utilizing a
Perkin-Elmer MPF 44A fluorescence detector, and a Perkin-Elmer LC65T
ultraviolet detector. BaP, 9-fluorenone, and acidine standards are
injected to indicate the types of compounds eluted in each region of the
chromatogram.
48
-------
Initially, the solvent is composed of 95 percent hexane and 5
percent methylene chloride, a relatively non-polar mixture. This solvent
mixture is used from the start of the chromatogram to 17 minutes into the
elution period. During this period, non-polar compounds elute. BaP elutes
at eight minutes into the run. Many non-polar PNA compounds also elute
during this period, and give ultraviolet and fluorescence responses. After
17 minutes, the polarity of the solvent is increased at a rate of 5 percent
methylene chloride per minute. During this transition period of solvent
polarity, more polar compounds are eluted, giving fluorescence and ultra-
violet spectra. At the end of this transition period (36 minutes into the
run), the solvent is 100 percent methylene chloride and 9-fluorenone
elutes. With 100 percent methylene chloride, even more polar compounds
elute. Acridine elutes during this polar period (at about 70 minutes).
21. Exhaust Smoke Measurements
Exhaust smoke measurements were made using an optical light-
extinction smokemeter, of the type specified in Federal regulations for
(1'4)
heavy-duty diesel engine smoke certification. The smokemeter was
mounted on a 51 mm (2 in) O.D. tailpipe extension when in use. The control/
readout unit for the smokemeter was mounted remote fron the vehicle under
test, and continuous recordings of smoke opacity were made concurrently
with vehicle speed traces. Smoke measurements were made over the first
505 seconds of the cold-start FTP cycle, while the vehicle was operated
on the chassis dynamometer. This procedure was developed for research
purposes on an earlier EPA Contract, No. 68-03-2417.
49
-------
B. Validation and Qualification of Analytical Procedures
Validation and qualification experiments were carried out, as described
(8)
in the Interim Report in Section IV, for the purpose of determining the
suitability of the analytical procedures initially selected for dilute
exhaust analysis conducted on this project. The validation experiments
determined if the sampling and instrument parameters were appropriate for
the quantitative analysis of dilute exhaust. The qualification experiments
determined if the compounds of interest could be quantitatively recovered
from the CVS tunnel with and without the presence of exhaust in the tunnel.
The analytical procedures validated and qualified are listed in Table 7
along with methods of sampling and analysis.
The sampling parameters for all procedures were found to be adequate
for the collection of each of the unregulated emissions. All samples, with
the exception of the organic sulfides and hydrogen sulfide are stable for
several days and can be stored and rerun within hours after sampling to
prevent loss of sample integrity. All instruments demonstrate linearity
of response for expected concentration ranges (sample concentrations above
the linear range must be diluted to concentrations that fall within the linear
range of the instrument). The organic sulfides must be monitored carefully
as traps containing over 200 ng of sample fall beyond the linear range of
the FPD. The sample flow rate can be lowered to prevent overloading the
Tenax trap. Test-to-t<*:;t repeatabilities for all procedures are documented
in this report. In most cases, repeatability is difficult to obtain at the
lower concentrations, while the repeatability at high concentrations is
easily obtained. Interferences were checked and documented for each
50
-------
TABLE 7. ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES VALIDATED AND OUALIPIED
Compounds
Aldehydes and Ketones
Organic Amines
Individual Hydrocarbons
Hydrogen Sulfide
Total Cyanide
Organic Sulfides
Ammonia
Sulfate
Phenols
BaP
Sampling
Impinge rs
Impingers
Bags
Impingers
Impingers
Traps
Impingers
Filters
Impingers
Filters
Analysis
DNPH, GC/FID
GC/NPD
GC/FID
Meth. Blue,
Spectrophotometer
GC/ECD
GC/FPD
Ion Chrom.
BCA
GC-FID
Fluorescence,
HPLC
Validation
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Not' required
Yes
Not required
Qualification
Yes
Yes
Not required
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Not required
Yes
Not required
-------
procedure. Phthalates were found to interfere with the aldehyde and ketone
procedure and may cause erroneous results for crotonaldehyde. In the
hydrogen sulfide procedure, sulfur dioxide decreases the apparent hydrogen
sulfide concentration, and its presence or absence must be recorded. The
other procedures have interferences that can be avoided if care is taken.
Qualification experiments were carried out on the aldehyde and ketone,
organic amine, hydrogen sulfide, total cyanide, organic sulfide, ammonia
and phenol procedures to determine the recovery of known amounts of each
pollutant from the CVS tunnel witv and without exhaust (phenols CVS tunnel
with exhaust only). Aldehydes and 'c-i-.^nes, total cyanide and phenols can
be recovered qualitatively from the CVS tunnel with and without (not done
for phenols) exhaust. There is a 10 percent loss of hydrogen sulfide with
and without exhaust present. The organic amines, ammonia, and the organic
sulfides experience significant losses in the CVS tunnel with and without
exhaust. These losses must be taken into account when determining the con-
centration of these compounds in exhaust.
C. Minimum Detection Values for Unregulated Emissions
The minimum detection values (MDV) for various unregulated emissions,
as determined in this project following gv-idelines discussed in other EPA
programs ' ' , are included in Table 8. The MDV is defined as the
value above which it can be said that the compound has been detected in the
exhaust (i.e., the accuracy is equal to plus or minus the MDV at a measured
value equal to the MDV). The MDV varies from one test cycle to another
for the same pollutant because of variations in thfc sampling times (the
shorter the sampling time, the larger the MDV).
52
-------
TABLE 8. .MINIMUM DETECTION VALUES (MDV) FOR
UNREGULATED GASEOUS EMISSIONS
Emission Type
Individual Hydrocarbons
Aldehydes and Ketones:
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Isobutyraldehyde
methy lethy Ik e tone
crotonaldehyde
hexanaldehyde
benzaldehyde
Phenols
Hydrogen Sulfide
Total Cyanide
Ammonia
Organic Sulfides :
carbonyl sulfide
methyl sulfide
ethyl sulfide
dimethyl disulfide
Organic amines
methylamine
ethylamine
trimethylamine
diethylamine
triethylamine
Minimum Detected Emission Rates , mg/km
FTP
0.93
0.19
0.27
0.33
0.39
0.39
0.38
0.48
0.50
0.20
0.34
0.08
0.17
0.05
0.05
0.07
0.08
HFET
0.38
0.14
0.19
0.24
0.28
0.28
0.27
0.35
0.36
0.14
0.24
-b
0.04
0.04
0.05
0.06
NYCC
2.58
1.23
1.70
2.10
2.47
2.47
2.42
3.09
3.20
1.23
2.16
0.31
0.32
6.47r
0.49
--
--
85 kph
0.33
0.08
0.11
0.14
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.20
0.21
0.08
-
3
4
5
6
8
MDV of organic amines is Vg/m in raw exhaust
Pollutant not sampled during this cycle
53
-------
V. CATALYTIC TRAP-OXIDIZER REGENERATION
Catalytic trap-oxidizers used on the Fiat diesels were provided by the
Johnson-Matthey Company branch located in Wayne, Pennsylvania. Messrs.
Fred Enga and Miles Buckman of Johnson-Matthey provided technical assistance
needed for the design, installation, and regeneration techniques of the
traps. Mr. Enga described the two traps used in this program as, "JM-13
design incorporating a radial flow wire-mesh filter with a.catalytic bed."
The trap-reactors were similarly designed in stainless steel, and resembled
conventional mufflers in shape. They both had diameters of 14.6cm (5 3/4in.)
but different effective reactive lengths of 54.9cm (21 5/8 in.) for use with
the naturally-aspirated diesel and 71.1cm (28 in.) for use with the turbo-
charged diesel. The trap used on the naturally-aspirated diesel illustrates
the typical outer design and dimensions of the two traps, as shown in Figure
14. Each reactor was baffled to allow exhaust gas to flow around the
perimeter of the can, enter the filter, flow radially through the annular
active material into the hollow central core, and out the exit. The annular
zone is of 11.7cm (4 5/8 in) outer diameter with a 5.1cm (2 in) diameter hole
through its center. The active zones were 53.6 and 69.8 cm long in the
traps used for the naturally-aspirated and turbocharged diesels, respectively.
This section describes the trap installations, trap temperatures and
backpressures, and also, the techniques employed in regenerating the trap
in the Fiat N.A. vehicle. Although' some mention is made herein of the regu-
lated gaseous and particulate emissions detected during trap regneration,
the actual overall regulated and unregulated emissions results obtained
54
-------
&;. '-i.ii-.'.;-: :. .-.^v-s«.v.-;r.
Figure 14. Johnson-Matthey JM-13 catalytic trap-oxidizer.
55
-------
with the two traps are reserved for discussion in Section VI, VII and VIII
of this report.
A. Fiat Naturally-Aspirated Diesel
The catalytic trap on the Fiat N.A. diesel was designed for use
in close proximity to the engine exhaust manifold. The large dimensions of
the trap and the limited space in the engine compartment made it quite
difficult to adapt it to the vehicle exhaust system. The installation
required that a 61 cm long extension of 5 cm O.D. mild-steel tubing be
used between the trap inlet and engine exhaust manifold. A flange was
welded to each end of the trap and corresponding ends of the extension
tube and exhaust pipe. The extension tube was flared on its opposite end
to connect it to the exhaust manifold. The extension was formed in a
roughly helical shape to provide the shortest distance between trap and
exhaust manifold, and to eliminate acute angle bends within the extension
tube. A type K thermocouple was located at the immediate inlet and another
at the outlet end of the trap to monitor temperatures. A second port was
provided adjacent to the inlet thermocouple to provide access to the trap
for pressure monitoring. A third port was installed on the extension tube,
near the trap inlet thermocouple region, for propane injection during trap
regeneration, if necessary.
A material obtained from Refractory Products and identified as
WKP-X-AQ 2300°F ceramic fiber felt was employed for the trap insulation.
Each sheet (61 x 91 x 0.64 cm) of the insulating material is packaged wet in
a closed plastic container. One thickness of the wet material was formed
around the entire trap, extension tube, exhaust manifold and assembly
connectors. Several lengths of wire were wrapped around the insulation at
appropriate locations to hold the insulation in place while it air-dried
56
-------
and hardened.
The initial conditioning of the trap was performed on the dynamo-
meter at 80 kph steady-state for 32 km. The car exhaust was directed to
outside air to avoid contamination of the CVS tunnel. According to Mr.
Enga, the initial conditioning served to purge loose packing material
retained in the trap during its manufacture. The backpressure of the trap
ranged from 7.5 (initial) to 8.7 kPa (final). Trap temperatures averaged
about 293"C for the inlet and 285° for the outlet.
After the trap was purged, the car exhaust was connected to the CVS
tunnel and the following trap pressures and temperatures were recorded at
indicated vehicle speeds:
Trap Trap Temperature, °C
Vehicle Speed, kph Back Pressure, kPa Inlet Outlet
64 5.0 226 209
80 7.5 279 229
96 10.7 367 288
Mr. Enga mentioned that for this type of trap, he expected approximately
6.0 kPa trap back-pressure at 64 kph, with regeneration required when back-
pressure reachedapproximately 10.0 kPa at the same steady-state speed.
Trap self-regeneration occurred when the trap outlet -temperature exceeded
350°C. The trap could also be regenerated with the car in neutral and the
engine at full rack (high idle) for two minutes, if it were deteremined that
no engine damage would result.
The trap back-pressure and teniperature were measured to monitor its
operating characteristics during the proposed test plan with this car.
Inlet and outlet trap temperatures were measured continuously using a two-
57
-------
pen recorder. The trap back-pressure was checked at 64 kph steady-state
after each test sequence, using a Magnehelic guage calibrated in inches of
water to determine regeneration requirements.
Summaries of the mav-i mum inlet and outlet temperatures determined at
the catalytic trap used with the Fiat N.A. dieael ch iring the EM-329-F and
EM-469-F fuel studies are found in Tables 9 and 10, respectively. Mileage
accumulation on the trap during Runs 1 through 4 on each fuel amounted to
approximately 216 mi (348 km). During all runs, there were few instances
where the trap outlet temperatures exceeded 300°C. When trap outlet i-emper-
atures exceeded 300°C, such as in the HFET and 85 kph cycles with EM-469-F,
the subsequent higher trap back-pressure did not indicate that significant
trap regeneration had occurred. As noted in Tables 9 and 10, trap back-
pressure as measured in fourth gear and at 64 kph steady-state after each four-
run test sequence indicated backpressure was generally increasing. Additional
testing besides that shown in Tables 8 and 9 was accomplished using the
trap, mainly to generate 500 x 500 mm particulate filters. The resulting
trap backpressures measured during the entire use of the trap with the Fiat
N.A. diesel are listed in Table 11.
During the initial prep of the test car with EM-469-F at 11206 km,
it was noted that the trap backpressure had increased to 9.5 kPa, as opposed
to 6.7 kPa obtained at the end .of EM-329-F testing. The abrupt and unex-
plained increase in trap backpressure required that trap regeneration be
accomplished prior to proceeding with the EM-469-F tests in Table 10. As
explained earlier, Mr. Enga recommended that trap regenertation be performed
with the car in neutral and the engine at "high idle" (open rack) for two
58
-------
TABLE 9. MAXIMUM INLET AND OUTLET TEMPERATURES OF
JOHNSON-MATTHEY CATALYTIC TRAP USED ON
FIAT NATURALLY-ASPIRATED DIESEL
WITH EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
Trap Maximum
Temp., °C.
Inlet
Outlet
Test Code
Pest Type
)ate (1981)
lun No.
'rap Maximum
'emp., "C
Inlet
Outlet
lackpress.,*
kPa
1B1F46
3-b FTP
4/6
1
»
318
202
1B1F50
3-b FTP
4/7
2
368
198
1B1F54
3-b FTP
4/9
3
360
210
1
1B1F58
3-b FTP
4/10
4
339
210
1B1H47
HFET
4/6
1
335
274
1B1H51
HFET
4/7
2
348
289
1B1H55
L HFET
4/9
3
348
291
1B1H59
HFET
4/10
4
342
285
1B1N48
NYCC
4/6
1
198
236
1B1N52
NYCC
4/7
£
233
253
131N56
>IYCC
/9
.)
210
245
1B1N60
NYCC
4/10
4
210
245
_
1B1S49
85 kph
4/6
1
282
229
5.5
1B1S53
85 kph
4/7
2
291
279
6.0
1B1S57
85 koh
4/9
3
305
293
6.7
1B1S61
85 kph
4/10
4
293
285
6.7
The trap backpressure was determined at 64 kph steady-state after each 85 kph cycle
was completed; backpressure prior to initial testing with EM-329-F was 5.0 kPa.
55
-------
TABLE 10. MAXIMUM INLET AND OUTLET TEMPERATURES OF
JOHNSON-MATTHEY CATALYTIC TRAP USED ON
FIAT NATURALLY-ASPIRATED DIESEL
WITH EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
Trap Maximum
Temp., °c
Inlet
Outlet
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
Trap Maximum
Temp. , °C
Inlet
Outlet
Backpress. ,a
VPs
1B2F64
3-b FTP
4/15
1
325
204
1B2F68
3-b FTP
4/16
2
3-25
198
1B2F72
3-b FTP
4/20
3
365
243
1B2F76
3-b FTP
4/21
4
325
245
1B2N66
NYCC
4/15
1
210
236
1B2N70
NYCC
4/16
2
51 r\
222
1B2N74
NYCC
4/20
3
245
249
1B2N78
NYCC
4/21
4
224
274
1B2H65
HFET
4/15
1
342
283
1B2H69
HFET
4/16
2
331
268
1B2H73
HFET
4/20
3
360
314
1B2H77
HFET
4/21
4
331
314
1B2S67
85 kph
4/15
1
289
274
7.7
1B2371
85 kph
4/16
2
293
285
7.7
1B2S75
85 kph
4/20
3
b
__b
8.7
1B2S79
85 kph
4/21
4
291
314
9J2
The trap backpressure was determined at 64 kph steady-state after each 85 kph cycle
was complsted; backpressure prior to initial testing with EK^Sg-F was 7.5 kPa.
Data not acceptable
60
-------
TABLE 11. CATALYTIC TRAP BACKPRESSURE DETERMINED AT VARIOUS INTERVALS DURING
EMISSIONS TESTING WITH FIAT NATURALLY-ASPIRATED DIESEL
Vehicle
Odometer, km
10823
10892
10966
11051
11124
11206
11330
11402
11484
11557
11646
11711
11831
11991
12109
12224
12271
12417
12509
Trap Cumulative
Distance, km
Initial Conditioning
69
143
228
301
383
507
579
661
734
823b
888
1008
1168
1286.
140 lb
1448
1594
1686°
Trap Backpressure
kPaa
__
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.7
9.2
7.5
7.7
7.7
8.7
10.2
7.7
8.0
8.5
9.5
10.7
7.7
8.7
12.4
p backpressure measured at 64 kph steady-state
Approximate accumulated kilometers where trap regeneration
was reguired according to indiaated high backpressure
No further trap regeneration was attempted at completion
of Fiat N.A. diesel testing
61
-------
minutes. To forestall possible engine damage at full speed, an alternate
trap regeneration procedure was tried. The procedure consisted of running
the car in fifth gear and at 80 kph steady-state with incremental dyna-
mometer horsepower increases. The dynamometer loading was continued to
20 hp (indicated) and the trap outlet temperature was '.noted to have increased
to 394°C (inlet 430°C)- The same test conditions were then sustained for
an additional two minutes before the procedure was terminated with accom-
panying reduction of vehicle speed and dynamometer loading. A subsequent
measure of trap backpressure showed no change from 9.5 kPa. Consequently,
it was decided to regenerate the trap by using the car in neutral and the
engine at "high idle'1. Howaver, to help moderate the effect of maximum rpm
on the engine, the engine was operated at this speed for one-half minute
instead of two minutes. The procedure reduced the trap backpressure to
7.5 kPa, a value confirmed by Mr. Buchman to be adequate for,.resuming
evaluation of the trap. Since the trap outlet temperature did not exceed
268°C (inlet 3288C) during the high idle procedure, it is conjectured that
the decrease in trap backpressure occurred mostly through particulate
purging instead of "light-off.
At 11646 kilometers and prior to starting the additional particulate
sampling mentioned earlier for 500 x 500 mm filters, the catalytic trap
backpressure on the Fiat N.A. diesel was 10.2 kPa. It was therefore neces-
sary to regenerate the trap before beginning actual particulate sampling.
With the Project Officer's approval, the Johnson-Matthey "high idle'1 (open
rack) regeneration procedure of two minute duration was conducted, following
a test sequence that allowed for repeated "high idle" test cycles. In this
62
-------
manner, sampling of regulated emissions could be similarly accomplished
during "high idle" cycles for comparison during and after trap regeneration.
The "high idle" trap regeneration test sequence is shown in Table 12, and
corresponding computer sheets for the listed emissions tests are found in
Appendix A.
Although three "high idle'1 cycles were completed, the trap back-
pressure was not greatly affected, as seen in Table 12. The first two
"high idle1' cycles demonstrated significantly higher emission rates gener-
ally than those found with the same car configuration and fuel on the 85 kph
test cycles as reported later in Section VI of this report. The 85 kph
average emission rates in grams/hr were HC (0.33), CO (0.92), NOX (60),
and particulate (4.6). The HC and particulate diminished after each "high
idle" cycle in Table 12. The NOX increased slightly after the first test,
but remained rather uniform thereafter. The CO decreased and then stabil-
ized after the first test. During each "high idle" cycle, the trap back-
pressure increased rapidly to the peak values noted in Table 12. It is
interesting to note that the trap inlet temperature did not exceed 416°C
during the "high idle" cycles. Studies conducted with a non-catalyzed trap
/ T O \
at Ford Motor Company indicated that trap regeneration could be achieved
generally if the trap inlet temperature exceeded 482°C and if sufficient
oxygen (2% or more) and time were provided. They showed that the actual
exhaust temperature required for fast regeneration was usually higher than
the nominal 482°C level to compensate for heat loss from the trap and
exhaust system. Also, the same study indicated that catalysts did not lower
the regeneration temperature of a particulate trap, nor did they accelerate
the particulate oxidation process.
63
-------
TABLE 12. "HIGH IDLE" TRAP REGENERATION TEST SEQUENCE USED
ON NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT WITH CATALYTIC TRAP AND EM-469-F FUEL
Test
Sequence
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Test
Code
1B2R81
1B2R82
1B2R83
Test Cycle
23 minute FTP
4 minute 64 kph S.S.
4 minute soak
2 minute "high idle"
4 minute soak
4 minute 64 kph S.S.
4 minute soak
2 minute "high idle"
4 minute soak
4 minute 64 kph S.S.
4 minute soak
2 minute "high idle"
4 minute soak
4 minute 64 kph S.S.
Emissions Rate, g/hr
HC
_ a
8.9
I
1.7
0.21
CO
16.0
4.3
::
4.3
NOX
_..
81.
86.
86.
Part.
--
59.
33.
27.
Catalytic Trap
Max. Temp. ,°C
Inlet
371
314
204
411
340
379
233
416
356
396
212
416
c
411
Outlet
222
212
202
329
297
324
257
349
314
340
272
349
c
337 '
Max. Back-
pressure
kPa
10.2
34.9
9.7
37.3
10.5
36.6
10.2
,-Emissions not sampled, trap backpressure not noted
4-minute soak also provided time for changing of particulate filters
Data not acceptable
64
-------
After the second "high idle" test in Table 12 failed to achieve trap
regeneration, Mr. Buchman was contacted for further advice. His recommen-
dation was to try a third "high idle" test before trying a. different
regeneration procedure. Mr. Enga was later advised of the
results in Table 12. He recommended that a fast accel under
an open rack engine condition be tried to regenerate the trap while oper-
ating the vehicle on the dyno. Since the Fiat N.A. diesel has a five-speed
manual transmisson, it was decided to first carefully determine the open
rack vehicle steady speeds in first, second, and third gears without
ad lally regenerating the trap. 'This determination would later allow the
fast and proper shifting of gears under open rack conditions, and would
also permit measurement of regulated emissions during'.and after the trap
regeneration. After running a preliminary 23-minute FTP and a 64 kph steady
state of less than one minute, the car was returne'd to idle speed, with
full rack in first gear, the car was carefully accelerated until its speed
stabilized for twenty seconds before easing off open rack to shift to
second gear, and then third gear, to also similarly determine their stabil-
ized speeds.- The first, second, and third gear stabilized speeds reached
were 42, 73, and 108 kph, respectively. Maximum inlet (outlet) tempera-
tures obtained at the three stabilized speeds were 382°C (256°C) in first
gear, 46i°C (348°C) in second gear, and 651°C (439°C) in third, gear. A
subsequent check of the trap backpressure, as normally performed at 64 kph,
indicated a value of 7.7 kPa. This trap backpressure was close to the value
observed after the trap regeneration conducted at 11,330 kilometers. Since
the opportunity for obtaining regulated emissions during the trap regeneration
65
-------
was lost, the car was subsequently prepped to continue sampling particulate
on 500 x 500 mm filters.
The final trap regeneration was accomplished at approximately 12,224
Kilometers by vehicle operation on the dyno. After an initial fifteen-
minute warm-up at 64 steady-state speed, the vehicle was brought to idle.
From idle, the vehicle was quickly accelerated at full rack in a first,
second, and third gear succession to reach a steady-state speed of 108 kph
for thirty seconds. Four consecutive accels were necessary using the same
trap regeneration accel procedure in order to reduce the trap backpressure
from 10.7 to 7.7 kPa in steps of 1.0, 0.7, 0.5, and 0.8 kPa, respectively.
The average maximum inlet temperature of the trap was 642°C (462°C outlet)
during the third gear portion of the trap regeneration procedure.
No further trap regenerations were attempted, as shown in Table 11, for
the remainder of the test plan on the trap-equipped Fiat N.A. diesel. After
completion of the tests run for particulate accumulation, the catalytic
trap was removed from the Fiat N.A. diesel and saved for future shipment
to Johnson-Matthey. The Fiat N.A. diesel exhaust system was then restored
to. its original configuration. At the request of Miss Sharon Quayle, and
with the approval of the Project Officer, the vehicle was shipped to the
Department of Transportation in Cambridge, Massachusetts> on June 22, 1981.
B. Fiat Turbocharged Diesel
The catalytic trap-oxidizer for use on the Fiat turbocharged diesel
was designed for "underfloor" installation because of the vehicle's
limited engine compartment space. A flange was welded to each end of the
trap for its underfloor installation immediately past the firewall of the
66
-------
Fiat T.C. diesel. Prior to installation, the trap was fitted with a type K
thermocouple at its inlet and outlet. A separate port was provided near
the inlet thermocouple for pressure monitoring. Insulation of the trap was
with a single layer of Refractory Products WRP-x-AQ 2300°F ceramic fiber
felt. The same type insulation was used to cover the exhaust pipe section
extending from the turbocharger down to the trap. The asbestos tape
originally wrapped around the pipe section was left intact underneath the
fiber felt layer. Both the trap and pipe extension fiber felt insulation
was wrapped with several lengths of wire and then with asbestos and glass
tape for increased protection. The size and installation of the trap on
the vehicle permitted only a few inches clearance between the trap and
laboratory floor.
The trap was conditioned on the dynamometer for 80 kilometers at
alternating vehicle speeds of 48, 64, 80 and 96 kph. After trap conditioning,
the car exhaust was connected to the CVS tunnel, and the trap pressure and
temperature were recorded at the following vehicle speeds:
Trap Trap Temoera't-iirp. T
Vehicle Speed, kph Back-Pressure, kPa Inlet Outlet
64 4.5 283 307
80 7.2 293 272
96 12.4 339 301
The clean trap back-pressure, according to Mr. Buchman, should have
been approximately 3.5 kPa at 64 kph. Trap regeneration is recommended
at or close to 8.7 kPa. For this study, trap inlet and outlet temperatures,
were measured continuously using a two-pen recorder. The trap back-pressure
was checked in fourth gear and at 64 kph after completion of each test.
67
-------
sequence consisting of a 4-bag FTP, HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph.
The maximum inlet and outlet temperatures measured at the catalytic
trap during regulated and unregulated emissions testing are found in Table
13 for EM-329-P, and in Table 14 for EM-469-F. Mileage accumulation on the
trap during Runs 1 and 2 on each fuel amounted to approximately 159 kilo-
meters . As indicated in Tables 13 and 14, the highest trap inlet temperatures
(290 to 300°C)-with each fuel occurred during the HFET cycle; but they were
short of the approximately 480°C or higher temperature needed for self-
regeneration of the trap.
Total distance accumulated on the trap during all testing conducted,
including repetitive testing for particulate. accumulation using 500 x 500 mm
filters, was 1,411 kilometers, as summarized in Table 15. No trap regenera-
tion was required during the extended period of emissions testing with the
Fiat T.C. diesel using catalytic trap and the two test fuels. In the single
instance where trap backpressure actually approached the proposed upper limit
of 8.7 kPa for the trap (at 9.308 km), a subsequent run employing a NYCC
proved sufficient to reduce trap backpressure to 7.2 kPa. Thereafter, the
trap backpressure remained at 7.2 kPa or slightly below, as indicated in
Table 15.
An earnest effort was also made to run the Fiat T.C. diesel with a
manifold .catalytic trap. Mr. Buchman visited SwRI on June 9, 1981 to
take preliminary pictures and measurements of the Fiat T.C. engine com-
partment. Johnson-Matthey was to design and manufacture a catalytic trap-
oxidizer to use in place of the engine exhaust manifold. The design would
allow the trap to be located immediately ahead of the turbocharger. During
68 '
-------
TABLE 13. MAXIMUM INLET AND OUTLET TEMPERATURES OF JOHNSON-MATTHEY
UNDERFLOOR CATALYTIC TRAP USED ON FIAT TURBOCHARGED DIESEL
WITH EM-329-F FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run NO.
Trap Maximum
Temp. , °c
Inlet
Outlet
Trap Backpressure
kPaa
3B1F01
3-b FTP
9/17
1
255
210
-
3B1F05
3-b FTP
9/18
2
255
212
--
3B1H02
HFET
9/17
1
285
255
3B1H06
HFET
9/18
2
290
265
3B1N03
NYCC
9/17
1
210
193
3B1N07
NYCC
9/18
2
215
192
3B1S04
85 kph
9/17
1
274
265
5.0
3B1S08
85 kph
9/18
2
278
270
5.0
The trap backpressure was determined at 64 kph steady-state after each 85 kph
cycle was completed; backpressure prior to initial testing with EM-329-F
was 4.5 kPa.
TABLE 14. MAXIMUM INLET AND OUTLET TEMPERATURES OF JOHNSON-MATTHEY
UNDERFLOOR CATALYTIC TRAP USED ON FIAT TURBOCHARGED DIESEL
WITH ZM-469-F FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
Trap Maximum
Temp., °C
Inlet
Outlet
Trap Backpressure
kPaa
3B2F35
3-b FTP
9/23
1
268
220
_-»
3B2F39
3-b FTP
9/24
2
262
218
3B2H36
HFET
9/23
1
300
274
3B2H40
HFET
9/24
2
298
270
3B2N37
NYCC
9/23
1
195
220
3B2N41
NYCC
9/24
2
198
220
3B2S38
85 kph
9/23
1
284
275
6.7
3B2S42
85 kph
9/24
2
285
275
6.5
The trap backpressure was determined at 64 kph steady-state after each 85 kph
cycle was completed; backpressure prior to initial testing with EM-469-F
was 6.7 kPa.
69
-------
TABLE 15. CATALYTIC TRAP BACKPRESSURE DETERMINED AT VARIOUS INTERVALS
DURING EMISSIONS TESTING WITH FIAT TURBOCHARGED DIESEL
Vehicle
Odometer, km
8355
8497
8571
8656
8796
8951
9022
9110
9257
9308
9310
9328
9596
9766
Trap Cumulative
Distance, km
Initial Conditioning
142
216
301
441
596
667
755
902
953
955
973
1241
1411
Trap Backpressure,
kPaa
4.5
5.0
5.0
5.5
6.7
6.7
6.5
7.7
8.5
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.0
Trap backpressure measured at 64 kph steady-state
70
-------
his visit to SwRI on June 17, 1W3. Dr. Rinaldo Rinolfi of Fiat (Italy)
agreed to provide Mr. Buchman with essential engineering drawings of the
engine, exhaust manifold, and turbocharger to assist him further in the
manifold trap design. Fiat was also to supply SwRI with the necessary
gaskets required for fitting the completed manifold trap to the engine.
The Fiat engineering drawings and gaskets were received at SwRI on
August 6, 1981. The drawings were quickly forwarded to Mr. Buckman, who
subsequently determined that the drawings were not applicable to the Fiat
T.C. diesel at SwRI. Fiat was alerted of the mistake, and the correct
drawings were finally received by the Project Officer in late October 1981.
After studying the drawings, Mr. Buckman determined that the trap was more
complex than anticipated, and could therefore not be completed until late
1981 or even early 1982. The Project Officer, along with SwRI,- determined
that the projected delay in the trap acquisition was too long t.o accommodate
within the present time and monetary constraints of the..project. Therefore,
it was decided that the underfloor trap configuration of the turbocharged
Fiat diesel would be the final vehicle configuration evaluated, and that
the remaining project effort would be applied to data analysis and prepara-
tion of the Final Report.
71
-------
VI. REGULATED EMISSIONS AND FUEL ECONOMY RESULTS
A discussion of the regulated emissions and fuel economy results obtained
during the testing conducted in this project is presented in this section.
The testing for regulated emissions provided a. large amount of data gener-
ated using a four-cycle test sequence, coirposed of a 4-bag FTP, HFET, NYCC,
and 85 kph steady-state. The omissions evaluations included five diesel
vehicle configurations (Fiat N.A., Fiat N.A./trap, 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass,
Fiat T.C., and Fiat T.c./trap and two test fuels (EM-329-F and EM-469-F).
The regulated emissions and fuel economy data for individual runs and
respective computer sheets for each vehicle configuration/fuel type are
found in Appendices B, C, D, E, and F for the five vehicle configurations
in the order listed above. The individual run data have been grouped,
averaged, and tabulated in this section in order to effectively compare the
pollutants and fuel economy, by vehicle, driving cycle, and fuel. These
data for HC, CO, NOX, particulate, and fuel economy are sumrarized in Tables
16 through 20 respectively.
Test-to-test repeatability of emissions and fuel economy data used in
the preparation of Tables 16 through 20 was generally good. However, some
significant variations in particulate emission rates were noted for the
Fiat N.A./trap configuration with both fuels in the NYCC and 85 kph, as
shown in summary tabulations on pages C-2 and C-19. In the IIYCC, fc.^ example, the
test-to-test particulate rate of the Fiat N.A./trap vehicle varied by a
factor of three with EM-329-F, and by a factor of two with EM-469-F. The
reason for the sporadic variation in particulate rate in some driving cycles
72
-------
TABLE 16. VEHICLE, FUEL, AND TOST CYCLE COMPARISONS
FOR AVERAGE HYDROCARBONS
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A./
trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C./
trap
Cutlass
Average HC Emission Rates (g/mi) by Cycle and Fuel
3-bac
EM-329-F
0.49
0.08
0.39
0.12
0.19
FTP
EM-469-F
0.57
0.10
0.48
0.19
0.21
HFET
EM-329-F
0.23
0.02
0.11
0.03
0.13
EM-469-F
0.25
0.03
0.12
0.03
0.16
NYCC
EM-329-F
0.79
0.04
1.06
0.19
0.45
EM-469-F
1.10
0.04
1.26
0.30
0.52
85 kph
EM-329-F
0.19
0.00
0.07
0.00
0.13
EM-469-F
0.19
0.01
0.10
0.01
0.13
TABLE 17. VEHICLE, FUEL, AND TEST CYCLF COMPARISONS
FOR AVERAGE CARBON MONOXIDE
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A./
trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C./
trap
Cutlass
Average CO Emission Rates (g/mi) by Cycle and Fuel
3-bag FTP
EM-329-F
1.66
0.29
1.35
0.43
1.05
EM-469-F
1.90
0.41
1.58
0.43
1.11
HFET
EM-329-F
0.67
0.05
0.45
0.08
0.70
EM-469-F
0.70
0.07
0.30
0.08
0.72
NYCC.
EM-329-F
2.93
0.15
3.08
0.64
2.42
EM-469-F
3.80
0.20
3.47
0.72
,2.51
85 kph
EM-329-F
0.55
0.03
0.31
o.or.
0.66
EM-4fod-F
0.54
0.02
0.43
0.05
0.70
73
-------
TABLE 18. VEHICLE, FUEL, AND TEST CYCLE COMPARISONS
FOR AVERAGE NO,,
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A./
trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C./
trap
Cutlass
Average ITOV Emission Rates (g/mi) by Cycle and Fuel
3-baq
EM-329-F
1.32
1.4C
2.04
1.87
1.03
FTP
EM-469-F
1.40
1.59
2.02
2.09
1.05
HFET
EM-329-F
0.88
1.10
1.27
1.15
0.60
EM-469-F
0.98
1.16
1.28
1.34
0.61
NYCC
EM-329-F
2.02
2.36
2.73
2.6J
2.32
KM-469-F
2.25
2.2C
2.74
2.92
2.40
85 kph
EM-329-F
0.86
1.11
1.30
1.18
0.59
EM-469-F
0.96
1.13
1.22
1.35
0.58
TABLE 19. VEHICLE, FUEL, AND TEST CYCLE COMPARISONS
FOR AVERAGE PARTICULATE
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A./
trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C./
trap
Cutlass
Average Particulate Emission Rates (g/mi) by Cycle and Fuel
3-bag FTP
EM-329-F
0.41
0.11
0.26
0.10
0.38
EM-469-F
0.45
0.07
0.33
0.09
0.44
HFET
EM-329-F
0.27
0.09
0.13
0.06
0.21
EM-469-F
0.34
0.06
0.13
0.07
0.21
NYCC
EM-329-F
0.43
0.36
0.41
0.15
0.57
EM-469-F
0.62
0.16
0.52
0.17
0.66
85 kph
EM-329-F
0.25
0.12
0.11
0.06
0.16
EM-469-F
0.30
0.09
0.11
0.08
0.14
74
-------
TABLE 20. VEHICLE, FUEL, AND TEST .CYCLE COMPARISONS
FOR AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A./
trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C./
trap
Cutlass
Average -Fuel Economy (mi/gal) by Cycle arid Fuel
3-Bag FTP
EM-329-F
27.6
28.2
22.7
23.4
22.0
EM-469-F
27.4
28.8
23.0
23.7
22.1
HFET
EM-329-F
42.2
37.9
36.6
37.9
31.6
EM-469-F
39.3
38.9
37.0
36.9
32.7
NYCC
EM-329-F
19.0
18.1
14.5
14.7
11.3
EM-469-F
16.6
18.6
14.7
14.8
11.3
85 koh
EM-329-F
43.0
38.4
37.3
38.3
32.1
EM-469-F
39.9
39.7
37.5
38.2
33.5
is not known. However, it is conjectured that different levels of sulfate
and/or particulate purged from the overall exhaust system may have contrib-
uted to the observed different particulate emission rates.
Comparative FTP regulated emissions and fuel economy data obtained
from DOE-Bartlesville*4' for the two Fiats without exhaust aftertreatment
and from the EPA Certification Division for a 19'81 Oldsmobile Cutlass
diesel were as follows:
FTP REGULATED EMISSIONS RATE, g/mi
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat T.C.
Cutlass
. Fuel
2D
"European"
2D
Emissions 2D
1981 Federal Standard*23'
HC
0.68
0.49
0.55
0.41
0.41
CO
2.32
1.64
1.80
1.13
3.4
NOX
1.61
1.45
3.12
1.30*
1.0
Particulate
p. 34
0.45-
0.32
(not sampled)
0.6
Fuel Economy, mi/gal
27.3
27.8
23.7
21.7
*NOv waived to 1.50 g/mi for 1S81
A
75
-------
The 2D fuel at DOE was higher in aromatics and density than EM-329-F. The
"European" fuel was more similar to E'?-329-F, except for its wider boiling
range. The ".European" fuel results are very close to the SwRI results with
the same car, perhaps due to fuel similarity. The FTP 1981 Federal Stanr..._
dard^23' for HC (0.41 g/mi) was exceeded by the Fiat N.A. (no trap/both
fuels)' and Fiat T.C. (no trap/EM-469-F), as shown in Table 16. In addition,
the 1981 NOX limit (1.0 g/mi) was exceeded by each vehicle/fuel combination
in the FTP, as indicated in Table 18. For 1981, however, the Cutlass was
granted a NOX waiver of 1.50 g/mi.
With each fuel, as shown in Table 16, the highest HC was obtained using
the naturally-aspirated diesel without trap in the FTP, HFET,' and 85 kph,
and using the, turbocharged diesel without trap in the NYCC. The trap-equipped
Fiats consistently provided the lowest HC in the study, with the Fiat
T.C./trap vehicle showing higher HC in the FTP and NYCC. On a fuel-to-
fuel basis with all vehicles, HC emissions were generally higher with
EM-469-F than with EM-329-F, but not substantially so. On all vehicles
and test fuels, HC was highest in the FTP and NYCC, with the NYCC dis-
playing the higher values overall.
The use of trap-catalysts served to reduce the Fiat N.A. and T.C.
diesels' KC emissions in all cycles and with both fuels as show in Table
16. The effective reduction pf HC with the trap was greater than 82
percent (91 avg.) and 60 percent (78 avg.) on the Fiat N.A. and T.C.
diesels, respectively. The Cutlass HC on the FTP was lower than the Fiats
without aftertreatment, but higher than the same vehicles with aftertreat-
ment.
In the summary of average CO emissions in Table 17, CO was generally
higher, although not appreciably so, with EM-469-F. With both fuels, the
76
-------
Fiats without aftertreatment provided highest CO during the FTP and NYCC.
The Cutlass produced somewhat higher CO than the Fiats without traps in
the HFET and 85 kph using each fuel. The decrease in CO emissions ob-
tained with the traps for all cycles and fuels was greater than 78 percent
(91 avg.) and 68 percent (80 avg.) on the Fiat N.A. and T.C. vehicles,
respectively.
Most vehicles and test cycles listed in Table 18 indicated slightly
higher NOX with EM-469-F than with EM-329-F. The Fiat T.C. vehicle produced
the highest NOx in each cycle with EM-329-F, while the same vehicle with
aftertreatment had the highest NOX in each cycle with EM-469-F. The use
of the catalytic trap on the naturally-aspirated diesel with both fuels
consistently increased NOX emissions on the average of 17 perctnt over
the same vehicle without aftertreatment. The Fiat T.C. diesel with trap
had consistently lower NOX (average of eight percent) with EM-329-F, but
consistently higher NOX (average of six percent) with EM-469-F over the
same vehicle without exhaust aftertreatment. The effect of trap backpressure
on NOX emissions reported in Table 18 for the Fiats is not known, since trap
backpressure was not monitored continuously during any emissions testing
performed in this study.
The highest particulate emissions, as summaried in Table 19, were pro-
duced by the Fiat naturally-aspirated diesel in the FTP, HFET,.and 85 kph with
both fuels. The Cutlass had the highest particulate rate on both test fuels "
in the NYCC. Generally, the catalytic trap-equipped Fiats had the lowest
particulate emissions levels as shown in Table 19. These same vehicles
also demonstrated nearly identical particulate emissions in tho FTP with
EM-329-F, and in the KFET, NYCC, and 35 kph with E!i-469-F.
77
-------
Although no major differences in particulate emission with respect to
fuel type are generally found in Table 19, by vehicle or driving cycle, some
trends in particulate rates can be noted. Slightly lower particulate emis-
sions were shown with EM-329-F than with EM-469-F for the Fiat N.A. diesel
without aftertreatment in all test cycles, and for both the Fiat T.C. diesel
without aftertreatment and, the Cutlass in the FTP and NYCC. The Fiat N.A.
diesel with catalytic trap emitted more particulate in all cycles with EM-329-F than
with EM-469-F. On. the NYCC with EM-329-F howaver, the same' vehicle showed
more than twice the particulate rate obtained with EM-469-F. This substan-
tial difference in particulate rate between fuels is attributed to the
noticeable spread of particulate emissions obtained on the NYCC with the
Fiat N.A./trap vehicle, as discussed earlier in this section.
Particulate emissions of the Fiats were lower in every cycle and fuel
combination with the catalytic traps than without them. With trap use, -the
particulate emission rates of the Fiat N.A. and T.C. diesels were reduced
by an average of 65 to 55 percent, respectively. The largest particulate
decreases with each trap-equipped Fiat occurred in the FTP using EM-469-F,
where the Fiat N.A. showed an 84 percent reduction and the Fiat T.C.
exhibited a 73 percent reduction.
Fuel economy results in Table 20 indicate that generally the highest
fuel economy was obtained by the naturally-aspirated Fiat with and without
exhaust aftertreatmont. The Cutlass had the lowest fuel economy overall,
although it was only slightly less than that obtained with either exhaust
configuration of the turbocharged Fiat in the FTP with the two fuels. With
each test vehicle and fuel in the study, fuel economy was highest in the
85 kph and lowest in the NYCC, as expected.
78
-------
No obvious trends were observed for fuel economy between fuels, although
the Fiat N.A. without aftertreatment showed the largest differences betwean
fuel types. The result may be seen in Table 20 under the HFET, NYCC, and
85 kph procedures, where EM-329-F showed the higher mileage per gallon,
but by not more than 3.1 mi/gal in any cycle.
When the trap was put on the Fiat N.A. diesel, fuel economy with the
test fuels increased very slightly in the FTP, but decreased in the HFET,
the NYCC (EM-329-F). and at 85 kph. The largest fuel economy decreases
noted in the trap studies of the Fiats occurred using the Fiat N.A. diesel
in the HFET and 85 kph with fuel EM-329-F. No significant change in fuel
economy occurred between the different exhaust configurations of the Fiat
turbocharged diesel with either fuel.
79
-------
VII. UNREGULATED GASEOUS EMISSIONS RESULTS
This section is devoted to the discussion of the unregulated gaseous
emission results which included sampling and analyses, of individual hydro-
carbons, aldehydes, ammonia, phenols, total cyanide, trap-collected gaseous
hydrocarbons, organic sulfides, hydrogen sulfide, amines, and N-nitrosamines.
The respective pollutants are discussed separately, usually with individual
run data grouped, averaged, and tabulated. Where an analysis includes
several pollutants, as in the case with individual hydrocarbons, aldehydes, phenols,
organic sulfides, amines, and N-nitrosamines, comparison of pollutants to
vehicle, driving cycle, and fuel relied more on the average "total"
emissions for simplicity.
A. Individual Hydroc?rbons
The emission rates, of eight individual hydrocarbons (IHC) consisting
of methane, ethylene, ethane, acetylene, propane, propylene, benzene, and
toluene were measured in this project. The summaries of individual
runs obtained with each vehicle configuration, driving cycle, and fuel
are found in Appendix G, Tables G-l through G-10.
Replicate runs in Appendix G using the cold FTP and hot FTP indicated
good repeatability of the more highly concentrated IHC species identified
as methane, ethylene, acetylene, and propylene. Methane, ethylene, and
ethane were the only pollutants found consistently with each vehicle and
fuel combination. Although data scatter in the overall study made it
difficult to identify precise trends, it was found that ethylene was
generally present at the highest concentration among the IHC species for
80
-------
each vehicle, cycle, and fuel combination. Usually, the ethylene accounted
for at least half of the "total" IHC. While there were a few exceptions,
such as indicated in Tables G-l and G-3 for the FTP'S, most IHC species
detected for the Fiat vehicles without catalytic traps were found at lower
levels for these vehicles with catalytic traps. In most cold and hot FTP'S,
the Cutlass emitted lower concentrations of all the IHC except toluene than
did the Fiats without exhaust aftertreatment. In the cold FTP and hot FTP,
ethylene was slightly higher with EM-469-F than with EM-329-F for all vehicle
configurations.
Table 21 summarizes the average "total" IHC emission results prepared
from individual run data in Appendix G. For comparative purposes, the
summary includes the average "total IHC" obtained via continuous heated FID.
The "total" IHC or just IHC, as used in this discussion, was highest on the
Fiat N.A. vehicle without aftertreattnent, and with both fuels in the hot FTP,
HFET, and NYCC. Displaying highest IHC emissions in the cold FTP were the
naturally-aspirated Fiat with no aftertreatment using EM-469-F, and the
turbocharged Fiat with no aftertreatment using EM-329-F. With both fuels,
IHC was highest in the 85 kph with the Cutlass. The lowest IHC ranged from
0.96 to 26 mg/km, and was mainly associated with the turbocharged Fiat/trap
and Cutlass diesels. The lowest IHC emissions in the study were generated
by the Fiat T.C./trap configuration in the hot FTP with both fuels, and in
the HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph with fuel EM-329-F. The Cutlass "total" IHC was
lowest on the cold FTP with both fuels and in the NYCC with EM-469-F.
On a fuel comparison basis, -the EM-469-F fuel gave higher IHC emissions
in eighty percent of the cases. The differences between fuels were rather
81
-------
TABLE 21. SUMMARY OF AVERAGE '"TOTAL" INDIVIDUAL HC RESULTS FOR
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESLES
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
FID "Total"
HC", mgAm
Fiat N.A. /trap
FID "Total
HC" , mgAm
Fiat T.C.
FID "Total
HC", mgAm
Fiat T.C. /trap
FID "Total
HC" mgAm
Cutlass
FID "Total
HC" , mgAm
Average "Total" IHQ Emission Rates (mgAm) by Cycle and Fuel
Cold FTP
EM-329-F
65
a
28
56
68
276
31
98
23
118
EM-469-F
82
398
29
53
76
367
46
162
26
134
Hot FTP
EM-329-F
56
2U
'36
36
227
9.6
51
20
134
EM-469-F
69
388
25
49
47
263
11
66
18
158
HFET
EM-329-F
20
6.2
10
10
70
2.4
10
17
80
EM-469-F
27
140
8.1
20
5.4
70
13
20
16
100
NYCC
EM-329-F
157
41
30
120
690
36
120
39
320
EM-469-F
153
700
44
40
6fl
800
81
190
37
320
85 kph
EM-329-F
13
2.4
7.0
4.7
50
0.96
b
16
70
EM- 4 GO-"
6.8
130
1.1
b
4.6
60
4.3
b
13
80
CD
N)
data not acceptable
less than 5 mgAm
-------
minor, however. Also IHC was noted to vary with test cycle for the majority
of vehicle configuration with both fuels. In this respect, rank ordering of
"total" IHC emissions by test cycj.e was fairly consistent in the order
NYCC, cold FTP, hot FTP, HFET, and 85 kph, from highest to lowest "total"
IHC.
Trap-catalysts reduced the IHC emissions of the Fiat N.A. and T.C.
diesels in all cycles and with both fuels, except in the NYCC and 85 kph
using EM-469-F with the Fiat T.C./trap configuration. For some reason,
propane in larger quantities than usual was found in these two cycles,
thereby causing greater "total" IHC values. Nevertheless, the average
effective reduction of "total" IHC emissions with the use of the catalytic
traps on the Fiat N.A. and T.C. diesels amounted to 70 and 48 percent,
respectively. By comparison, the average reductions in FID "total" HC
with catalytic trap (Table 21) were 91 percent on the Fiat N.A. diesel
and 79 percent on the Fiat T.C. diesel.
B. A3 dehydes
The emission rates of ten aldehydes and ketones consisting of form-
aldehyde, acetaldehyde, acetone, acrolein, propionaidehyde, isobutyraldehyde,
methylethylketone, crotonaldehyde, hexanaldehyde, and benzaldehyde were
measured in this project. The aldehydes and ketones are formed by the
partial oxidation of the fuel hydrocarbons. Acetone, acrolein, and pro-
pionaidehyde were not resolved from each other using the normal gas
chromatographic operating conditions and all tnree have been reported
together as acetone.
The individual run summaries for aldehyde emissions from each vehicle
83
-------
configuration, cycle, and fuel are presented in Appendix H, Tables H-l
through H-10. The only aldehydes detected in the vehicles exhaust during
this study were formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acetone, isobutyraldehyde,
methylethyIketone, and benzaldehyde. The emission rates of benzaldehyde
could not be measured accurately in this project due to interferences in
the analysis procedure. In addition, as seen in Tables H-2 through H-6
and Table H-10, the isobutyraldehyde emissions were much higher than
expected. These unexpectedly high isobutyraldehyde emission rates were
of concern to the Project Officer, and at this request, the two NYCC
aldehyde samples listed in Table H-2 were dried and shipped to Mr. Frank
Black at EPA/RTP for their analysis using HPLC and mass spectroscopy
techniques. A copy of the letter to Mr. Black describing the two NYCC
samples and their drying technique is presented in Appendix H. Since the
identities of the isobutyraldehyde and benzaldehyde have not.been confirmed
in this study, their emission rates in various summaries of Appendix H are
included for information only. Further, the two compounds are not included
in the "total" aldehyde emission rates found in the same summaries.
Formaldehyde was the only aldehyde detected <
-------
portion of the "total" aldehydes evaluated, and at times was also the
only aldehyde detected. The highest formaldehyde emissions were those
from the Fiats without aftertreatment, but more so with the naturally-
aspirated configuration. With trap use, formaldehyde was reduced by
more than 53 percent on the naturally-aspirated Fiat, and by more thar
43 percent on the turbocharged Fiat. The FTP formaldehyde emissions on
the Fiats without after-treatment were generally comparable to those
found with a 1977 non-catalyst gasoline car in another EPA study
conducted at this laboratory. In the same study , low mileage 1978
oxidation catalyst-equipped gasoline cars produced FTP formaldehyde
emissions similar to those found with the trap-equipped Fiats and the
Cutlass.
"Total" aldehydes were consistently highest overall from the
naturally-aspirated
84a
-------
TABLE 22. SUMMARY OF AVERAGE FORMALDEHYDE AND "TOTAL" ALDEHYDES EMISSIONS FOR
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A./
Trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C./
Trap
Cutlass
Measured
Aldehydes
Forma Idehyde
"Total"
Formaldehyde
"Total"
Formaldehyde
"Total" '
Formaldehyde
"Total"
Formaldehyde
"Total"
Average Aldehydes Emission Rates (mg/km) by Cycle and Fuel
Cold FTP '
EM-329-F
8.0
12
1.7
1.7
2.2
7.0
0
0
1.0
1.0
SM-469-F
7.8
8.1
2.4
2.4
5.3
5.3
0.55
0.55
1.1
1.1
Hot FTP
EM-329-F
6.5
12-
0.75
0.75
1.8
11
0
0
1.2
1.2
EM-469-F
12
13
1.4
1.4
5.2
5.2
0
0
0
0
HFET
EM-329-F
4.4
7.2
0
0
0.55
1.4
0
0
0
0
EM-469-F
1.6
1.6
0.75
0.75
0.10
0.10
0
0.49
0
0
NYCC
EM-329-F
13
40
0
0
6
6
3.4
20
0
6
EM-469-F
19
24
0
0
9
9
0
12
0
0
85 ken
EM-329-F
1.5
5.2
0
0
0.31
3.1
0
0
0
0
EM-469-F
2.0
3.3
0
0
0
0
0
0.70
0
0
-------
Fiat without aftertreatment. The turbocharged Fiat without aftertreatment
gave second highest "total" aldehyde emissions in the cold FTP and hot FTP with both
fuels. The lowest "total" aldehydes were mainly associated with the Fiat
N.A./trap, Fiat T.C./trap, and Cutlass diesels. Although fuel and driving
cycle influences on "total" aldehydes were not too apparent, the
available data show clearly that the highest "total" aldehydes with the Fiat
iM.A. diese^ and also the Fiat T.C. trap configuration occurred in the NYCC with both
fuels. Also, aldehydes on the Cutlass were found only during the cold FTP
with both fuels, and on the hot FTP with EM-329-F.
The use of a catalytic trap on the Fiat N.A. diesel reduced "total"
aldehydes overall by 53 percent in one case, and by more tnan 86 percent in most
cases. On tne Fiat T.C./trap configuration, "total" aldehydes were reduced by
90 percent or higher in the co.ld and hot FTP with both fuels; however some aldehyde
increases were obtained on the NYCC with both fuels for the same vehicle configuration
C. Ammonia
Ammonia is a toxic gas found in diesel engine exhaust by the reduction
of nitrogen. In this project, ammonia was sampled only during the cold FTP
and hot FTP but using all vehicle configurations and both test fuels. The
ammonia results are listed in Table 23.
With both test cycles and fuels, ammonia emissions were highest from
the naturally-aspirated Fiat having no aftertreatment. The vehicle's
ammonia emission rates of 118 mg/km on the cold FTP and 27 ing/km on the
hot FTP EM-469-F were substantially larger than those from the other
vehicles, none of which exceeded 10 mgAm. No other strong trends were
apparent.
86
-------
TABLE 23. AMMONIA FTP RESULTS FOR FIAT N.A. , FIAT T.C., AND
1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A. /trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C. /trap
Cutlass
Ammonia Emission Rates (mg/k.nO by Cycle and Fuel
Cold FTP
EM-329-F
8.3
3.8
3.7
0.70
0.0
EM-469-F
118
5.4
0.43
1.2
9.3
Hot FTP
EM-329-F
8.1
3.8
4.5
3.1
3.2
EM-469-F
27
1.5
1.5
3.1
6.3
D. Phenols
Twelve phenols were measured in this project, namely phenol,
salicylaldehyde, m-cresol, p-cresol, p-ethylphenol, 2-isopropylphenol,
2,3-xylenol, 3,5-xylenol, 2,4,6-trimethylphenol, 2-n-propylpnenol,
2,3,5-trimethylphenol, and 2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenoi. Several phenols
were grouped together because they could not be resolved individually with
the present G.C procedure. The compounds m-cresol and p-cresol formed one
group, and p-ethylphenol, 2-isopropylphenol, 2,3-xylenol, 3,5-xylenol, and
2,4,6-trimethylphenol formed a second group herein designated "Group Five".
The individual run summaries for phenols from each vehicle configuration,
cycle, and fuel are presented in Appendix I, Tables 1-1 through 1-10.
At the initiation of this project, both filtered and unfiltered
sampling of phenols was conducted to determine which sampling procedure
would provide better results. It was believed that filtering the parti-
culate out of the exhaust sample at 190°C (375°F) could help to keep the
sample-clear of particulate, thereby causing less interferences. The
87
-------
unfiltered sample was also considered because it was thought that the phenols
present in the particulate would be extracted in the sampling impinger.
However, no clearly defined trend emerged from the study to establish either
sampling procedure as providing smaller interferences or greater sensitivity.
This conclusion is better illustrated in Table 24 by. comparing average
"total" phenols calculated from individual phenols results in Tables 1-1
and I-2. The phenols were obtained in the filtered and unfiltered sampling
modes, using the two test fuels and the naturally-aspirated Fiat without
aftertreatment.
TABLE 24. AVERAGE "TOTAL" PHENOL (FILTERED AND UNFILTERED) RESULTS
BY TEST CYCLE AND FUEL, FIAT N.A. WITH NO CATALYST
Fuel Code
EM-329-F
EM-469-F
Filtered
Sampling
Yes
No
Yes
No
Composite 4-bag
FTP , mg/km
8.0
8.3
16.
13.
HFET,
mg/km
2.9
5.8
9.4
10.
NYCC,
mg/km
,§3
63
68
64
85kph,
mg/km
2.0
2.6
9.8
2.8
Based on Table 24 results, the Project Officer approved the suggestion
that the phenol sampling remaining to be completed on the project be conducted
only in the filtered mode in order fco reduce costly, sample preparation and
analysis. Therefore, the subsequent discussion on phenols refers to results
obtained using filtered sampling only.
All phenols were detected at least once during this study, as seen in
Appendix I summaries. However, the phenol compound appearing more consis-
tently and found in largest quantities throughout this study was 2,3,5,6-
tetrame-thylphenol. Also more apparent than most other phenols in the overall
88
-------
tests were "Group Five" and 2,3,5-trimethylphenol. The obvious data scatter
found in Appendix I for most phenols made it difficult to discern a clear-
cut trend in their concentrations and distribution. However, 2,3,5,6-
tetramethylphenol as compared with the two test fuels among the different
driving cycles was generally highest on the NYCC, and second highest on the
cold FTP.
A summary of average "total" phenol results prepared from individual
runs in Appendix I is presented in Table 25. As found with the individual
runs, the average "total" phenols also indicated considerable variation
overall. Consequently, each vehicle was represented by highest and lowest
"total" phenols found in the study in the various driving cycles. The
Fiat N.A. vehicle without aftertreatment was the single vehicle showing
increased phenols with EM-469-F throughout the five test cycles. Increased
phenols were also found with the Cutlass using EM-469-F in the hot FTP,
HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph. "Total" phenols were highest on the NYCC using
both fuels with the Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and Cutlass diesels. Phenols
were decreased an average of 73 percent with catalytic trap on the Fiat
N.A. diesel on all cycles and fuels, except the cold FTP (EM-469-F), hot
FTP (EM-329-F), and 85 kph (EM-329-F). Reduction of phenols with the Fiat
T.C./trap configuration was less apparent throughout the cycles, but it
still averaged 60 percent on the cold FTP (EM-329-F), hot FTP (EM-329-F),
HFET (EM-469-F), and NYCC (both fuels).
89
-------
TABLE 25. SUMMARY OF AVERAGE "TOTAL" PHENOL (FILTERED) RESULTS
FOR FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A./
trap
Fiat T.C.
Tiat T.C./
trap
Cutlass
Average "Total" Phenol Emission Rates (rag/km) by Cycle and Fuel
Cold FTP
EM-329-F
12.
6.6
17.
5.6
7.0
EM-469-F
25.
42.
14.
18.
6.6
Hot FTP
EM-329-F
4.9
11.
34.
6,6
9.7
EM-469-F
8.6
1.9
4.9a
13.
12.
HFET
EM-329-F
2.9
0.74
0.163
23.
0.18
EH-469-F
9.4
1.6
7.2
6.0
11.
NYCC
EM-329-F
63.
24.
48.
oa
24.
EM-46y-F
68.
7.5
58.
37.
65.
85
EM-329-F
2.0
14,
oa
7.8a
0.72
kph
EM-469-F
9.8
2.3
3.0
4.3
1.5
single value, not averaged
-------
E. Total Cyanide
Total cyanide sampled in this project included hydrogen cyanide and
cyanogen. The gases are both flammable and toxic, with the characteristic
odor of bitter almonds. The cyanides are formed by the reduction of
nitrogen or nitrogen oxides. The total cyanide emission- rates determined
for the cold FTP and hot FTP cycles are listed in Table 26. Some total
TABLE 26. TOTAL CYANIDE RESULTS FOR FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND
1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A. /trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C. /trap
Cutlass
Total Cyanide Emission Kates
\mg/km) by Cycle and Fuel
Cold 'FTP
EM-329-F
0.12
1.0 .
0.30
1.1
0.21
ill-469-F
0.56
0.65
0.87
1.4
0.32
Hot FTP
K*-469-F
.0
.42
0.21
0-47
0.28
EM-469-F -
0.01
0.44
0.37
0.'44
0.13
cyanide emission rates in Table 26 were at the MDV, but most were above
the MDV by at least a factor of three. The Fiat T.C./trap configuration
emitted highest total cyanide in the cold FTP with both fuels and in the
hot FTP with EM- 329-F. Also showing lower but very similar total cyanide
emissions was the Fiat N.A./trap vehicle. The lowest total cyanide of the
study occurred with the Fiat N.A. configuration on the cold FTP with
EM-329-F and on the hot FTP with both fuels. On the 'cold FTP, total cyanide
was slightly higher with EM-469-F than with EM-329-F on all vehicles except
the Fiat N.A./trap configuration. Total cyanide differences between fuels
91
-------
in the hot FTP were not too apparent on most Fiat configurations. Catalytic
traps on the Fiat were generally associated with slightly higher total
cyanide emissions.
F. Trap-Collected Gaseous Hydrocarbons
Hydrocarbons were collected from filtered, dilute exhaust on traps,
and the cyclohexane elutions were analyzed qualitatively by gas chromatograph
for boiling range and for paraffin peaks. Trap sampling for hydrocarbons
was conducted during the 4-bag FTP, NYCC and 85 kph for each vehicle confi-
guration/fuel combination. A single trap was employed for each test cycle,
including one trap for the entire 4-bag FTP.
Summaries of the trap-collected gaseous HC data are given in Tables
27, 28, and 29 for the naturally-aspirated Fiat with and without aftertreatment,
the turbocharged Fiat with and without aftertreatment, and the 1981 Oldsmobile
'Cutlass, respectively. Since it is expected that gaseous HC are closely
related to "unburned" fuel, gas chromatograph analysis of the test fuels in
similar format is given in Table 30 for comparison. The test fuels were
blended in cyclohexane for G.C. analysis. The data in Table 30 show little
difference in boiling range between fuels, but most of the fractional
distillation points a few degrees higher for EM-469-F.
The HC boiling range of the Fiat N.A. diesel without aftertreatment
in Table 27, as compared to the fuel data in Table 30, had a higher heavy
end for each cycle and fuel. The average end point temperature of the HC
was 463°C, compared to 436°C obtained for the two fuels themselves.
Generally, trapped hydrocarbons showed a tendency towards lower boiling
temperatures for light end than the fuels themselves, especially in the NYCC.
92
-------
TABLE 27. SUMMARY OF GAS CHROMATOGRAPH ANALYSIS OF TRAP-COLLECTED
GASEOUS HYDROCARBONS, FIAT N.A. DIESEL WITH AND WITHOUT
EXHAUST AFTERTREATMENT
Weight
% off
4-Bag
EM-329-F
Temperature in C°
FTP
EM-469-F
by Cycle and Fuel
NYCC
EM-329-F
EM-469-F
85 kph
EM-329-F
EM-469-F
Without Aftertreatment
0 (IBP)
5
10
20
40
60
30
90
°b
100 (EP)
157
218
231
247
278
309
364
398
416
466
154
197
208
232
2bS
305
368
398
416
453
154
156
195
197
230
265
320
368
401
458
152
155
166
197
265
312
382
420
440
465
153
173
196
229
258
296
358
395
418
472
153
156
195
216
275
329
393
420
439
463
With Catalytic Trap
0 (IBP)
5
10
20
40
60
80
90
95
100 (EP)
153
184
196
2JO
265
320
395
427
442
463
127
138
166
226
341
385
415
427
432
437
193
215
259
323
371
412
453
475
490
513
127
137
159
257
359
396
419
429
433
437
193
212
254
328
373
412
449
470
483
506
127
133
147
203
348
391
418
428
433
437
ASTM D2887-73 simulated distillation
93
-------
TABLE 28. SUMMARY OF GAS ''HROMATOGRAPH ANALYSIS OF TRAP-COLLECTED
GASEOUS HYDROCARBONS, t'lAT T.C. DIESEL WITH AND WITHOUT
EXHAUST ftFTERTREATMENT
Weight
% off
Temperature in C° by Cycle and Fuel
4-bag FTP
EM-329-F
EM-469-F
NYCC
EM-329-F \ EM-469-F
85 kph
EM-329-F
EM-469-F
Without Af
0 (IBP)
5
10
20
40
60
80
90
95
100 (EP)
133
138
150
176
229
271
309
346
367
402
133
139
152
178
229
271
309
347
370
404
132
136
140
153
192
'245
300
337
367
504
tertreatment
132
135
139
150
181
232
289
320
350
406
132
135
139
154
205
280
352
405
494
504
132
135
140
156
209
275
327
364
403
502
With Catalytic Trap
0 (IBP)
5
10
20
40
60
80
90
95
100 (EP)
112
121
131
164
204
242
289
326
375
'419
112
112
113
116
130
' 178
250
289
310
356
112
113
116
122
142
181
252
308
348
414
112
114
117
124
148
197"
270
322
367
399
112
115
119
128
166
262
376
393
411
420
112
114
116
122
139
171
249
306
345
392
ASTM D2887-73 simulated distillation
94
-------
TABLE 29. SUMMARY OF GAS CHROMATOGRAPH ANALYSIS3 OF TRAP-COLLECTED
GASEOUS HYDROCARBONS, 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESEL,
FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
Weight
% off
0 (IBP)
5
10
20
40
60
80
90
95
100 (EP)
Temperature in C° by Cycle and Fuel
4-baq FTP
EM-329-F 1 EM-469-F
94
114
140
205
305
471
490
496
499
500
93
99
118
138
194
244
302
339
360
385
NYCC
EM-329-F
92
98
108
137
226
308
491
497
499
500
EM-469-F
92
96
102
120
168
212
262
298
313
348
85 kph
EM-329-F
92
97
102
122
179
242
295
323
347
385
EM-469-F
93
97
110
141
214
275
320
350
364
385
ASTM D2887-73 simulated distillation
TABLE 30. SUMMARY OF GAS CHROMATOGRAPH ANALYSIS
EM-329-F AND EM-469-F DIESEL FUELS
OF
Weight
% Off
0 (IBP)
5
10
20
40
60
80
90
95
100 (EP)
Temperature in C° by Fuel
EM-329-F
155
200
217
244
276
300
330
359
376
435
EM-469-F
153
204
224
251
280
305
345
368
386
438
ASTM D2887-73 simulated distillation
95
-------
Changes in HC boiling range were apparent with catalytic trap use
on the naturally-aspirated Fiat as compared to the same vehicle without
aftertreatment in Table 27. With the trap and fuel EM-329-F, the boiling
range was similar on the FTP, but was shifted higher on the Ni'CC and 85 kph.
Using the catalytic trap, the EM-469-F HC heavy and light end coiling tem-
peratures were shifted lower on all cycles by about 24°C, but the mid-range
components showed boiling temperature increases.
A comparison of HC boiling range in Table 2(3 obtained for the turbo-
charged Fiat without aftertreatment and the fuel data in Table 30 shows a
consistently lower initial boiling point for HC than for fuels. With the
gaseous HC, the end point was lower than that of the fuel in the 4-bag FTP
with both fuels, and in the NYCC with EM-469-F. Somewhat higher HC end
points than fuel end points were noted in the NYCC with EM-329-F, and in
the 85 kph with both fuels. Mid-range boiling temperatures were lower for
the HC than for the fuel especially in the 4-bag FTP and NYCC, with both
fuels.
The use of a catalytic trap on the turbocharged Fiat (Table 28)
generally lowered the gaseous HC boiling ranges. The decrease in the
initial boiling point for each cycle and fuel was very consistent at 20°C.
An increase in the end point was noted for the vehicle with trap in the
4-bag FTP.
The gaseous HC initial boiling point of the Cutlass (Table 29), as
compared to fuel boiling range results (Table 30), was lower by about 60°C
on each cycle and test fuel. The end point w^s also approximately 60°C
lower for gaseous HC in the FTP and NYCC with EM-469-F, and in the 85 kph
96
-------
with both fuels. The mid-range and heavy-end HC temperatures in the 4-bag
FTP and NYCC with fuel EM-329-F were higher than the fuel.
Summaries of the paraffin peaks detected during the boiling range
determination of trap-collected gaseous hydrocarbons are provided in
Appendix J, Tables J-l (EM-329-F) and J-2 (EM-469-F). Generally, more
paraffin peaks were detected in the 4-bag FTP, which may have been related
to sample size, since more dilute exhaust is passed through the traps
during this cycle than the other cycles.
Data in Tables J-l and J-2 indicated that the type and relative amount
of paraffin peaks between fuels alone were very similar.- The fuels indicated
paraffin peaks between Cg and C,/ with the. strongest peaks concentrated
between C.. . and C1ft. In the HC study, more paraffin peaks were detected
using the Fiat N.A. diesel without aftertreatment, and they were very
consistently of the same type found with the too f'jels between C' and C_..
Compared to fuel results, the relative abundance of C.., through C.g HC peaks
for the Fiat N.A. diesel without aftertreatment was. lower with all cycles
and fuels. Results for the catalytic trap-equipped Fiat N.A. diesel,
compared to the same vehicle without aftertreatment indicated fewer
paraffin peaks especially for the 4-bag FTP with EM-469-F and the NYCC and
85 kph with both fuels.
Trapped HC from the Fiat T.C. without aftertreatment showed the same
number and type of paraffin peaks as the corresponding fuels between C
and C on the 4-bag FTP. When the trap was used with fuel EM-469-F,
fewer peaks (only C.. , C and C..,.) were found.
J.Z J.4 f J.O
On the Cutlass, more paraffin peaks were found overall with EM-469-F
than with EM-329-F. Idenitcal peaks detected ort the 4-bdg FTP with both
97
-------
fuels were Cg, C^, C^, Clg, and C24. The NYCC with fuel EM-469-F had
more peaks than with EM-329-F and they were mostly concentrated in the C _
through C.g region.
G. Organic Sulfides
Organic sulfides measured in this project were carbcnyl sulfide, methyl
sulfide, ethyl sulfide, and diwethyl disulfide. The organic sulfides are
malodorous compounds, producing odors similar to rotten eggs. Individual
test results for organic sulfides as obtained with the five vehicle confi-
gurations, two test fuels, and four test cycles (cold FTP, hot FTP, HFET,
and NYCC) are provided in Appendix K. A single run at 85 kph, obtained
early in the program, is included for comparison in Table K-l.
Dilute exhaust sampling at 125 m£/min for organic sulfides, as used
at the initiation of this program, collected so much sample in the traps
that-the FPD detector was saturated. Subsequently, the sampling flowrate
was reduced to 41 mZ/min. Some samples continued to be saturated, but
further reduction of sample flow rate would have unnecessarily lengthened
the residence time of the sample in the sampling interface. Other sampling
configurations were tried, but gave inconsistent data. The Project Officer
concurred with the plan that no further procedural development work for
organic sulfide sampling take place, and that the sampling rate be main-
tained at 41 mVmin during the remainder of the program.
Individual test results for organic sulfides included in Appendix K
indicated that carbonyl sulfide and methyl sulfide were found consistently
.in the dilute exhaust with all vehicle configurations, fue.ls, and test cycles.
In addition, carbonyl sulfide was generally present in noticeably larger
98
-------
concentrations than methyl sulfide. Ethyl sulfide and dimethyl disulfide
were found in low concentrations but only for the Fiat N.A. diesel with and
without aftertreatment, using fuel EM-329-F as shown in Tables K-l and K-3.
A summary of average "total" organic sulfide results prepared using
emissions data in Appendix K is presented in Table 31. The highest organic
TABLE 31. SUMMARY OF AVERAGE "TOTAL" ORGANIC SULFIDE RESULTS
FOR FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A./
trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C./
trap
Cutlass
Average "Total" Organic Sulfide Emission Rates (mg/kmj by Cycle and Fuel
Cold FTP
EM-329-F
14. a
39.
32.
16.
44.
EM-469-F
16.
27.a
20.
39.
81.
Hot FTP
EM-329-F
16.a
31.
33.
23.a
34.S
EM-469-F
22.
19.a
28.
23.
56.
HFET
EM-329-F
16.
8.5
22.
13. '
25.
EM-469-F
8.9
14.3
13.
18...
. 27. a
NYCC
EM-329-F
152.
172.
160.
130.
163. a
EM-469-F
120.
93. a
111.
178. .
196.
Single test only
sulfide emissions were those of the Cutlass for all cycles and fuels except
in the NYCC withEM-329-F. The Fiat N.A. diesel with ar.d without aftertreatment
usually emitted the lowest organic - sulfide emissions of the study.
On all vehicles and fuels, higher concentrations of organic sulfides were found in
the NYCC than in the other driving cycles. Although strong emission trends
did not develop between the two test fuels, the Fiat T.C. diesel without
aftertreatment did emit lower organic sulfides with EM-469-F than with
EM-329-F in all cycles. Organic sulfides were also higher over all cycles
99
-------
with the Cutlass using EM-469-F. No emission trends were apparent with
catalytic trap use on the Fiat N.A. and T.C. diesels.
H. Hydrogen Sulfide
Hydrogen sulfide was measured during the cold FTP, hot FTP, HFET, and
NYCC driving cycles employed in this project. Hydrogen sulfide is a toxic
gas with the characteristic: odor of rotten eggs, and one of the lowest odor
thresholds known.
Although early tests in this project using the naturally-aspirated Fiat
without aftertreatment indicated the vehicle emitted hydrogen sulfide,
later findings showed that sulfur dioxide was more clearly the pollutant
actually detected. Overall, no hydrogen sulfide was found in the dilute
exhaust of the five test vehicle configurations employed. The compound,
if present in the dilute exhaust, was well below the MDV listed in Table 8
for hydrogen sulfide.
I. Organic Amines
The organic amines are possible reduced nitrogen exhaust products
havir.g an offensive fish type odor at low concentrations. The amines may
also be intermediates in the formation of nitrosamines, known carcinogens.
Organic amines, analyzed for in vehicle raw exhaust during the 85 kph
steady-state in this project, included methylaaine, ethylamine, dimethyl-
amine, trimethylamine, diethylamine, and triethylamine. Ethylawine and
dimethylamine could not be analyzed separately, so that emission rates
for these two components are both reported under ethylamine in this
discussion.
A summary of organic amines results obtained with the five vehicle
configurations and the two test fuels is presented in Table 32.
100
-------
TABLE 32. SUMMARY OP ORGANIC AMINES RESULTS AT 85 KPH STEADY-STATE
WITH FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A./
trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C./
trap
Cutlass
Organic Amine
Measured4
Methylamine
Ethylamine
Trimethy lamine
Methylamine
Ethylamine
Trimethy lamine
Methylamina
Ethylamine
Trimethy lamine
Methylamine
Ethy lamina
Trimethy lamine
Methylamine
Ethylamine
Trimethy lamine
Organic Amines Emission Rates in Ug/ra3 (ppm)
Raw Exhaust bv Fuel
EM-329-F
9.2
19.
12.
0
5.2
6.4
0
0
0
21.
107.
0
0
0
0
(0.007)
(0.01)
(0.005)
(0)
(0.003)
(0.003)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0.016)
(0.057)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
EM-469-F
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
1.5 (0.001)
0 (0)
6.4 (0.003)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
20. (0.015)
90. (0.048)
2.8 (0.001)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
diethylamine and triethylamine sampled for, but were not found in any
vehicle
Diethylamine and triethylamine were not detected throughout the study.
Organic amines, when detected, were generally found at low concentrations.
Qualification of the organic amj.nes procedure, conducted earlier at this
(8)
laboratory , showed that recovery (particularly of methylamine) was
quite low when sampling from a dilution tunnel. It is assumed that the
raw samples are faced with the same problem, but no attempt was made to
correct for losses.
No organic amines were detected with the Fiat N.A. diesel without
aftertreatrerit using EM-469-F, the Fiat T.C. diesel without aftertreatment
101
-------
using either fuel, or the Cutlass using either fuel. The highest concen-
trations of methylaniine and ethylamine found during the study were emitted
by the Fiat T.C. with catalytic trap.
J. N-Ni.trosamines
Seven N-nitrosamines measured in this project using ThermoSorb/ N traps
were earlier identified in this report (Section IV, A) as N-hitrosodimethyl-
amine (NDMAl, N-nitrosodiethylamine (NDEA), N-nitrosodipropylamine (NDPA)
N-nitrosodibutylamine (NDBA), N-nitrosopiperidine (NPIP), N-nitrosopyrrolidine
(NPYR), and N-nitrosomorpholine (NMOR). The N-nitrosamines were sampled
over a test sequence consisting of a 4-bag FTP, HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph.
In order to enhance the detection of" the N-nitrosamines in the dilute
exhaust of the various test vehicles, one ThermoSorb/N trap was used during
an entire test sequance employed with each vehicle configuration and fuel
combination as follows:
Test Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A./trap
Cutlass
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C./trap
Fuel Code ThermoSorb/N Trap Code
EM-329-F
EM-469-F
EM-329-F
EM-469-F
EM-329-F
EM-469-F
EM-329-F
EM-469-F
EM-329-F
EM-469-F
17700
.17701
17703
17692
17693
17694
17695
17696
17698
11824
102
-------
All ThermoSorb/N Traps used in this project were analyzed by the Thermo
Electron Corporation in Waltham, Massachusetts employing either GC-TEA or
HPLC-TEA instrumental analysis, as each sample required. Each trap sample
was first analyzed with GC-TEA? and if sample interferences occurred, those
samples were again analyzed with HPLC-TEA. Interferences were noted in
all samples, except those obtained using the turbocharged Fiat without
aftertreatment. A detailed list noting sample preparation and instrument
condition used is presented in Appendix L.
No N-nitrosamines were detected in the ten trap samples previously
described in this section. Formal reports prepared by Thermo Electron
Corporation on the various trap analyses are provided in Appendix L, and
include the lower limits of detection for the N-nitrosamines employing the
GC-TEA and HPLC-TEA analytical procedures. The average MDV for N-nitrosamines
using GC-TEA was 0.90 yg/km, and that with HPLC-TEA was 4.4
103
-------
VIII. UNREGULATED PARTICULATE EMISSIONS RESULTS
The discussion of the unregulated particulate emissions results is
included in this section. Specific topics considered individually include
visible smoke emissions, particle size distribution, particulate composition,
sulfate, trace elements, percent organic solubles, organic solubles compo-
sition, organic solubles boiling range, organic solubles polarity profile,
benzo(a)pyrene in organic solubles, and mutagenic activity of organic
solubles. Where possible, individual run data axe grouped, averaged, and
tabulated.
A. Visible Smoke Emissions
Visible smoke emissions were measured over the first 505 seconds of
the FTP using an EPA smokemeter. The smoke opacity and vehicle speed
were simultaneously recorded using a 2-pen strip chart recorder. The
recorder traces were analyzed manually, and are provided in Appendix M,
Pages M-2 through M-ll. The results are summarized in Table 33.
Although no strong fuel trends emerged in the smoke data, the Fiat N.A.
diesel with and without aftertreatment did produce slightly lower smoke
with EM-469-F. The cold start peak and cold idle smoke were highest for
the Fiat T.C. diesel without after^.reatir.ent on both fuels. Highest smoke
on the 1st accel peak was emitted by the Fiat T.C. diesel without aftertreatment
on EM-329-F and by the Cutlass with EM-469-F. Overall, the lowest and
highest smoke emitters using both fuels at the conditions of Table 33,
we-e the Fiat N.A. dies-el with catalytic trap and the Fiat T.C. diesel without
aftertreatment, respectively. The use of catalytic trap on the naturally-
aspirated and turbocharged Fiats generally reduced visible smoke emissions
with both test fuels.
104
-------
TABLE 33. VISIBLE SMOKE DATA FOR FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND
1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
Condition
Cold start peak
Cold Idle
(after start)
1st accel. peak
Idle @ 125 sec
Accel, peak @
164 sec.
Smoke, PHS % by Vehicle and Fuel
Fiat N.A. .
EM-329-F
55.5
1.0
17.5
1.0a
13.53
EM-469-F
38.0
1.0
23.0
1.0
7.0
Fiat N. A. /Trap
EM-329-F
18.0
1.0
5.5
1.0
5.0
EM-469-F
13.0
0.3
3.8
0.2
3.5
Fiat T.C.
EM-329-F
69.0
25.0
46.2
0.6
12.0
EM-469-F
82.7
40.0
33.0
0.6
18.2
Fiat T.C. /Trap
EM-329-F
18.0
22.0
1.7a
0.2a
4.73
EM-469-F
34.2
20.0
0.7
0.5
2.8
j
Cutlass
EM-329-F
3.2
1.5
21.5
5.4
18.0
EM-469-F
4.5
1.5
44.5
4.5
17.0
-------
B. Particle Size Distribution
Aerodynamic sizing of the particulate matter, performed during the
4-bag FTP with the five vehicle configurations and two fuels, was accom-
plished using a Sierra Model 220 cascade impactor. The precision of particle
sizing by the impactor may have been decreased by the occasional sticking
of the back-up filter to its o-ring seal, and by difficulty in weighing
some very small net weight gains on individual impactor stages. One reason
for using the impactor during an entire 4-bag FTP was to enhance the parti-
culate collection on each stage enabling more precise weight determinations.
Particle size determinations for the 4-bag FTP with each vehicle con-
figuration are presented in Figures 15 and 16 for EM-329-F and EM-469-F,
respectively. The least change in particle diameter between fuels was
observed with the Cutlass. Catalytic trap use generally increased particle
size en the Fiat N.A. diesel with both fuels, and on the Fiat T.C diesel
with EM-469-F. With fuel EM-329-F, particle size was mostly decreased
when the trap was used on the turbocharged Fiat. One might anticipate that
as the sulfate content of particulate is increased, particle size would
decrease. The opposite effect was observed, however, since the FTP sulfate
studies with EM-329-F (in Section VTII, D of this report) indicated a higher
fraction of sulfate in particulate with the Fiat N.A./trap configuration and
a lower fraction of sulfate in particulate with the Fial T.C./trap configur-
ation. ...'Therefore, the particle size shifts with the trap-equipped Fiats may
depend more strongly on the different physical and operating parameters of
the vehicles.
A summary of the carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen content of the parti-
culate matter collected on 47 mm glass fiber filters is presented in Table 34.
106
-------
9.0
5.0
1
0)
r-l
0
1.0
1 1 =} . 1
1
p
±=
T"
H Leqend
i Fiat N.A. i=
^ Fiat N. A. /trap -)-*-
:=r _..._ Fiat T.C./trap =±=
M- Olds Cutlass T-
4-t-p
.
. ,
i
i j
i
j --
,
|
i i
i
1 i
i '
I
1 . ,
L'
i '
|!'
II
p '
t"1 1"1"
1 ' '
! !
i
i
i i
i 1
1
:
j
P|
II
I
II
! i
]
-rr
' ' '
j
I
.
1
.
i 1
i 1
: ,
~r"
t ;
I :
i 1 !
i
t ' '
h- /
ft-
^ Tf
1
1
..]-; (J
I 1 i
t
I
l
pH
' ! '
1
1
i '
i
!
i i
i
1 '
I
i
, i
i !
1
1
i
«.
1 i3
i
/
/
i
i *
\
i
1
L1
^ ' i
i i ! r,
i
'II
i
'
i
-------
9.0
5.0
n
2
o
8
Ed
a
a
r~i Legend
H5 Plat N.A./tran
="=*
3
l i
| : T-
"iT"
..U-.
' '
1
TT
1 1 1
-TT-
1 . '
1 ! .
! I : i
1 < I
: 1
-
Ttf1
1 ' 1
| '
i 1 .
' |
'
|
; i
, .
1 i
j :
. II
1 t h .
: i
! ;
j !
i !
1 i i
i i
i
1 i i
i ; '
!
Fiat T.C. =
Fiat T.C. /trap =
Olds Cutlass =
, ' 1
1 1
1 ! 1 >
! ; :
I1 '
III1
Mil
'ill
i
i ; - '
; i
. ;
i
1
i
I
i
1 1 1 1
!
;
; |
; '
' 1 '
j-p
i ' ;
! j j
1!
-L
I-
Ff
4
4
-i
-i
! ' !
1 1
1
;
1
1
1
-
|
1 '
/ !
-It
1 ' '
,1
ll :
B i ( '
[i
/ ; !
/! ill
-r ' 1
1 ii
m
r
-
' ' i J
F
' 1 r , 1
r
'| | ; |
* *
/i
' /I ! !
1 1
t
/i
i !
1 1
~Jlt\ \ '''
N
(-
i
=?=
1
r|
*i i
i '
; i t
'ii|
,'M
'''
1 i
"H
i '
i '
! 1 '
1 [
| 1
}\\ J
Z-#-
2
, ' ]
1 !
1 '
/==
~^~
:r=^
i"l
1 1
i t
f.
1
/\
1 1
l 1 i
1 1 i
^
i
! 1
,
j
i
|
i
i
i
,
' ' _i
; - !
i l
i
_,_
> *
1
' ' .
1
1 i
!
(
^
,=
; i ]
: ! i
! 1
1 1
i i 1
, . '
, : i
1 i
1
=
"vT
i
i
!
' '
l <
I !
; i
i i
1 l
!
' '
i
!
i
i
j
> , ,
ill
1
1
1 '
i
>
0.5
0)
a,
0.1
20 40 60 80 90 95 98 99
Cumulative Percent Smaller tha-n ECD
99.9
Figure 16. Cumulative particle size distributions by impactor with
Fiat N.A., Fiat T.C., and 1981 Oldsmobile diesels. Fuel EM-469-F
108
-------
TABLE 34. CARBON, HYDROGEN, AND NITROGEN IN EXHAUST PARTICULATE
MATTER FROM FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
Vehicle
Fiat N.A. '
Fiat N.A. /trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C. /trap
Cutlass
Test Cycle
4-bag FTP
HFET
NYCCa
85 kph
4-bag FTPC
HFt:Tc
NYCCa
85 kph
4-bag FTP
HFET
NYCCa
85 kph
4-bag FTPa
HFETa
NYCCa
85 kphb
4-bag FTP
HFET
NYCCa
85 kph
Weight Percent of Particulate by Element and Fuel
Carbon
EM-329-F
78.73
78.32
70.00
81.36
71.24
36.14
45.44
23.35
66.31
57.56
41.98
63.62
90.23
50.64
23.03
49.19
85.60
68.48
63.38
72.62
EM-469-F
75.61
79.70
64.49
81.43
83.75
36.93
68.12
29.89
69.08
58.78
40.80
64.56
87.06
27.51
8.91
32.44
79.02
76.19
70.95
73.07
Hydrogen
EM-329-F
7.12
9.14
6.10
8.96
3.86
3.45
4.57
2.06
5.16
2.95
2.04
2.58
6.91
8.63
11.93
6.05
1.88
2.24
1.69
2.86
EM-469-F
7.03
8.75
5.78
9.14
4.59
4.44
9.97
3.31
5.43
3.51
2.87
3.70
6.97
5.64
12.86
4.90
1.66
2.25
0.86
2.93
Nitrogen
EM-329-F
0.65
0.38
1.00
0.39
0.64
0.62
1.12
0.49
0.54
0.38
0.37
0.59
0.85
0.50
0.29
0.53
0.44
0.39
0.38
0.52
EM-469-F
0.60
0.49
0.87
0.34
0.97
0.61
1.13
0.95
0.55
0.43
0.36
0.48
0.75
0.16
<0.1
0.29
0.28
0.26
0.34
0.49
£ CHN
EM-329-F
86.50
87.84
77.10
90.71
75.74
40.21
51.13
25.90
72.01
60.89
44.39
66.79
97.99
59.77
35.25
55.77
87.92
71.11
64.45
76.00
EM-469-F
83.24
88.94
71.14
90.91
89.31
41.98
79.22
34.15
75.06
62.72
44.03
68.74
94.78
33.31
<21.87
37.63
80.96
78.70
72.15
76.49
o
VO.
less than 2 mg total particulate on filter with EM-329-F and EM-469-F
Dless than 2 mg total particulate on filter with EM-329-F
"less than 2 mg total particulate on filter with EM-469-F
-------
The elemental data for the five vehicle configurations generally showed a
low hydrogen content, indicative of a dry or soot-like particulate material
rather than an oily material. The carbon content varied somewhat, but most
cases of low carbon content (such as found in the NYCC) may have been more
indicative of decreased precision in the analytical method. All samples
in the NYCC contained less than 2 mg particulate/filter, and the particulate
content was least on the trap-equipped Fiats. Significant elemental content
differences between the two fuels were usually not apparent, especially for
hydrogen and nitrogen. Carbon content for the trap-equipped Fiats was
decreased in the HFET and 85 kph, as was hydrogen content with the trap-
equipped naturally-aspirated Fiat. Hydrogen increased in the turbocharged
Fiat with catalytic trap in the HFET and 85 kph. Part of the particulate
matter unaccounted for by the sum of carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen in the
HFET and 85 kph with the trap-equipped Fiats may have been sulfate (S04" ).
Sulfate studies with EM-329-F as, discussed in Section b below, indicated a higher
fraction of sulfate in particulate for the Fiats with catalytic trap in the
HFET and 85 kph.
D. Sulfate
Sulfate is a toxic substance when in the form of sulfuric acid, and
it results from the catalytic oxidation of sulfur dioxide to sulfur trioxide.
Sulfur trioxide, in turn, is hydrated to sulfuric acid. The sampling of
sulfate on this project was performed on all Fiat configurations during the
4-bag FTP, HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph with fuel EM-329-F only. Sulfate results
are summaried in Table 35.
110
-------
TABLE 35. SULFATE RESULTS FOR FIAT N.A. MID FIAT T.C.
DIESELS WITH FUEL EM-329-F
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A. /trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C. /trap
Measurement
SO^ , mg/km
SO4= , % of Part.
% Fuel S in SO4=
SC4= , mg/km
SO4= , % of Part.
% Fuel S in S04=
SO£, mgAm
SO4~, % of Part.
% Fuel S in SO4=
S04= , mg/kn
SO =, % of Part.
% Fuel S in SO4=
Sulfate Emissions by Cycle
4-bag FTP
3.1
1.4
0.60
1.6
2.4
0.32
8.7
5.2
1.4
1.7
2.9
0.28
HFET
0.69
0.37
0.18
7.7
18.
2.1
7.8
8.8
2.0
3.3
9.4
0.88
NYCC
3.8
1.3
0.43
6.5
4.9.
0.86
9.0
3.9
0.92
2.3
2.8
0.24
85 kph
0.65
0.43
0.17
18.
29.
5.0
6.5
8.4
1.7
5.9
15.
1.6
On both Fiats, sulfate emission rates for the HFET and 85 kph, as
compared to those for the 4-bag. FTP and NYCC, were lowest without after-
treatment and highest with trap configuration. The highest sulfate rates
of the study were emitted by the Fiat naturally-aspirated diese-1 with
catalytic trap during the -85 kph, and by the Fiat turbocharged diesel
without aftertreatment during the 4-bag FTP, HFET, and NYCC. The catalytic
trap reduced sulfate smission rates on the 4-bag FTP with the Fiat N.A.
diesel, and on all'cycles with the Fiat T.C. diesel. Sulfate, measured as
percent of particulate, increased with the trap on the Fiat N.A. diesel
during all cycles, and on the Fiat T.C. diesel during the HFET and 85 kph.
The largest increases in sulfate, as percent of particulate/ occurred on
the HFET and NYCC with the trap-equipped naturally-aspirated Fiat.
Ill
-------
E. Trace Elements
Sampling of particulate matter for analyses of trace elements was con-
ducted during the 4-bag FTP, HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph using the five vehicle
configurations and two test fuels. One 47 mm Fluoropore i-ilter was used
to collect particulate during each test cycle, including the use of a
single filter for the entire 4-bag FTP. The. emission rates of thirty-one
metals and other elements were determined in this project. The metals and
other elements measured included sodium, sulfur, vanadium, nickel, cadmium,
mercury, magnesium, chlorine, chromium, copper, tin, lead, aluminum,
potassium, manganese, zinc, antimony, silicon, calcium, iron, selenium,
barium, phosphorus, titanium, bromine, platinum, strontium. molybdenum,
tungsten, arsenic, and cobalt.
Results of the elemental analyses conducted on particulate matter from
each vehicle configuration with two test fuels are presented in Appendix N.
Emission rates below 0.01 mg/km were not reported for elements studied in
this project.
Nickel, mercury, platinum, arsenic, and cobalt were the on''.y elements
not detected at 0.01 mg/km or above. Fourteen elements detected at emission
rates as high as 1.0 mgAm were sodium, sulfur, chromium, aluminum,
manganese, lead, zinc, silicon, selenium, calcium, iron, phosphorus, bromine,
and molybdenum. Only sulfur and iron were emitted at or above 1.0 mg/km,
with emissions not exceeding 3.62 mgAm for sulfur and 1.07 mgAm for iron.
Over the four cycles and two fuels, the clients detected made up from
1.3% to 2.1% of particulate rate for the naturally-aspirated Fiat without
. aftertreatment, 3.1% to 11.8% for the naturally-aspirated Fiat with catalytic
112
-------
trap, 1.2% to 1.7% for the Cutlass, 1.3% to 3.0 % for the turbocharged
Fiat without aftertreatment, and 1.8% to 9.5% for the turbocharged Fiat
with catalytic trap.
Trace elements found most commonly in particulate matter were sulfur,
magnesium, aluminum, zinc, silicon, calcuim, iron, barium, and phosphorus.
Most of the sulfur emitted was likely derived from fuel sulfur, while
possible sources of magnesium, aluminum, and iron include wear products
from the engines and corrosion products from the exhaust, systems, zinc,
calcium, barium, and phosphorus are possibly derived from lubricating oil.
Over the four cycles and two fuels, more different types of trace elements
were emitted by the two Fiat N.A. configurations and by the Cutlass, than by
the two Fiat T.C. configurations.
Sulfur and iron generally accounted for more than fifty' percent of the
"total" trace element emission rate in each cycle. Iron emission'rates were
regularly higher in the 4-bag FTP and NYCC than in the HFET and 85 kph
with each vehicle configuration and test fuel. Higher sulfur was regularly
emitted on the 4-bag FTP and NYCC than in the HFET and 85 kph using the
Fiats without aftertreatment and both fuels. The reverse trend in sulfur
emissions was noted for the trap configurations of the Fiats, that is,
decreased sulfur emissions were emitted on the 4-bag FTP and NYCC, and
increased sulfur emissions were emitted for the HFET and 85 kph. There
sulfur emission trends with cycle type closely paralleled.those of sulfate
observed with the respective Fiat configurations as discussed earlier
in this report.
113
-------
F. Percent Organic Solubles
Organic solubles were extracted from particulate collected on 500x500 mm
filters during the 23-minute cold FTP, 23-minute hot FTP, HFET, NYCC, and
85 kph. The organic solubles obtained were used in the analyses of percent
organic solubles, major elements (C, H, and N) .- G.C. boiling range, HPLC
polarity profile, BaP, and mutagenic activity by Ames bioassay. Solubles
for use on all analyses except BaP were extracted with methylene chloride.
All solubles for BaP analyses were initially extracted with benzene/ethanol
and were then re-extracted with hexane/methylene chloride according to the
procedures of Section IV, A, 16 of this report. The discussion in this
section is restricted to the results obtained for percent organic solubles,
while discussions on the other solubles analyses will follow in later
sections of thi^ report. Representative data on the percent organic solubles
extracted are found in Table 36 for methylene chloride, and in Table 37 for
' (
benzene/ethanol.
The use of catalytic trap on both Fiats as discussed earlier in Section
VI, effectively reduced particulate emissions on most cycles with both
fuels. Consequently, a substantial number of additional cold FTP, hot FTP,
HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph tests had to be run using the catalytic trap-equipped
Fiats with both fuels to collect sufficient particulate for extraction of
organic solubles. Employing the multiple testing ultimately provided
enough organic solubles to meet ail the sample needs for analyses of HPLC
polarity profile and Ames bioassay, plus some of the more important sample
needs for analyses of major elements and G.C. boiling range. Additional
tests beyond those shown in Table 37 to collect organic solubles for BAP
analyses were not required.
114
-------
TABLE 36. METHYLENE CHLORIDE SOLUBLES OF PARTICULATE SAMPLES FROM
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A./
trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C./
trap
Cutlass
Measurement
Total Part, g
CH2C12 Solubles, o
Percent Solubles
Total Part, g
CI12C12 Solubles, g
Percent Solubles
Total Part, g
CH2C12 Solubles, g
Percent Solubles
Total Part, g
CH2C12 Solubles, g
Percent Solubles
Total Part, g
CH2Cl2 Solubles, g
Percent Solubles
Organic Solubles Data by Cycle and Fuel
Cold FTP
EM-329-F
Ov6464
0.3404
52.7
0.85163
0.1036
12.2
0.4525
0.1448
32.0
0.1775b
0.0233
13.1
0.7805
0.0774
9.9
EM-469-F
0.5662
0.2824
49.9
0.68223
0.0715
10.5
0.6209
0.2522
40.6
£
0.1595
0.0233
14.6
0.7876
0.0883
11.2
Hot FTP
EM-329-F
0.6534
0.3721
56.9
0.66313
0.0780
11.8
0.3505
0.1442
41.1
b
0.1205
0.0241
20.0
0.5628
0.0762
13.5 ;'
EM-469-F
0.5383
0.3221
59.8
0.57183
0.0749
13.1
0.4230
0.1907
45.1
f>
0.1208'
0.0083
6.9
0.5418
0.0837
15.4
HFET
EM-329-F
0.6756
0.4500
66.6
0.78103
0.0402
5.1
0.2899
0.0798
27.5
a
0.6446
0.0620
9.6
0.5211
0.0827
15.9
EM-469-F
0.5821
0.3759
64.6
0.32993
0.0336
10.2
0.3099
0.1002
32.3
a
0.7053
0.0453
6.4
0.4917
0.0937
19.1
NYCC
EM-329-F
0.1170
0.0461
39.7
0.30363
0.0276
9.1
0.1105
0.0458
41.4
a
0.6766
0.1159
17.1
0.1667
0.0248
14.9
EM-469-F
0.1282
0.0732
57.1
0.38433
0.0343
8.9
0.1290
0.0457
35.4
a
0.3956
0.1598
40.4
0.70703
0.1062
15.0
85 kph
EM-329-F
0.8935
0.5726
64.1
2.02123
0.0411
2.0
0.4514
0.0939
20.8
a
4.4841
0.0626
1.4
0.6489
0.1176
18. 1
EM-469-F
0.8521
0.5711
67.0
0.73403
0.0331
4.5
0.4395
0.1156
26.3
a
3.7903
0.1072
2.8
0.5809
0.1286
22.1
multiple tests run to obtain sufficient particulate for use in required analyses
Dadditional cold and hot FTP'S run and combined to collect a total of 1.7598 g
particulate with 16.5% solubles
°addJ 'onal cold and hot FTP'S run and combined to collect a total of 1.8072 g
part culate with 23.0% solubles
-------
TABLE 37. BENZENE-ETflANOL SOLUBLES OP PARTICUTATE SAMPLES FROM
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat H.A./
trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C./
trap
Cutlass
i
Measurement
Total Part, g
C6H6-ETOH Sol', g
Percent Solubles
Total Part, g
C6M6-ETOH Sol., g
Percent Solubles
Total Part, g
CeHg-ETOH Sol. g
Percent Solubles
Total Part, g
C6H6-ETOH Sol. g
Percent Solubles
Total Part, g
C6H6-ETOH Sol. g
Percent Solubles
Organic Solubles Data by Cycle and Fuel '
Cold FTP
2M-329-F
0.6770
0.3177-
46.9
0.1915
0.0269
14.0
0.5348
0.1884
35.2
0..1587
0.0323
20;4
0.7229
0.1039
14.4
EM-469-F
0.5104
0.2258
44.2
0.1906
0.0225
20.5
0.5800
0.3331
57.4
0.1614
0.0301
18.6
0.7555
0.1044
13.8
Hot FTP
EM-329-F
0.5909
0.3699
62.6
0.2387
0.0228
9.6
0.3799
0.1617
42.6
0.1177
0.0258
21.9
0.5380
0.0913
17.0
EM-469-F
0.5163
0.3528
68.3
0.0814
0.0148
18.2
0.3909
0.2187
55.9
0.1194
0.0342
28.6
0.5550
0.0973
17.5
HFET
EM-329-F
0.6500
0.4493
69.1
0.2686
0.0972
36.2
0.3173
0.1049
33.1
0.1032
0.0186
18.0
0.4899
0.1297
26.5
EM-469-F
0.5573
0.3876
69.5
0.1191
0.0300
25.2
0.3096
0.0995
32.1
0.1339
0.0407
30.4
0.5.036
0.1129
22.4
NYCC
EM-329-F
0.1166
0.0613
52.6
0.2^44
0.0178
7.9
0.1127
0.0478
42.4
0.0331
0.0072
21.8
0.1558
0.0256
16.4
EM-469-F
0.1411
0.0759
53.8
0.0413
0.0072
17.4
0.1255
a
a
0.0304
0.0140
46.1
0.1595
0.0346
21.7
85 kph
EM-329-F
0.8897
0.6941
78.0
0.6199
0.2825
45.6
-0.4598
0.1185
25.8
0.1989
0.0377
19.0
0.6377
0.1753 .
27.5
EM-469-F
1.0112
a
a
0.2925
0.1010
34.5
0.4460
0.1423
31.9
0.2650
0.0815
30.8
0.5820
0.1432
24.6
data not acceptable
-------
In Table 36, solubles data show that the catalytic trap clearly reduced
the organic solubles content in particulate obtained with both Fiats on
the five cycles and two fuels, but most noticeably on the 85 kph. The
vehicles associated with highest percent of organic solubles in the overall
methylene chloridei study were the two Fiats without aftertreatment. The
Fiat vehicles with catalytic trap gave the lowest percent of organic
jlubles at 85 kph with both fuels. No clearly defined trends for
quantity of organic solubles with fuel type were apparent in the methylene
chloride data.
A comparison of the range of percent organic solubles extracted using
methylene chloride (Table 36) and benzene/ethanol (Table 37) with the five
vehicle configurations is provided below.
Range of Percent Solubles by Solvent
Vehicle
Fiat
Fiat
Fiat
Fiat
N.
N.
T.
T.
A.
A. /trap
C.
C./trap
Cutlass
Methylene Chloride
39
2
20
1
9
.7
.0
.8
.4
.9
- 67.
- 13.
- 45.
- 40.
- 22.
0
1
1
4
1
Benzene/Ethanol
44
7
25
18
16
.2
.9
.8
.0
.4
- 78.
- 45.
- 57.
- 46.
- 27.
0
6
4
I
5
As found with methylene chloride, the benzene/ethanol extracts were also
highest using both Fiats without aftertreatment. Moreover, the catalytic
trap similarly served to reduce benzene/ethanol solubles in both Fiats.
Compared to methylene chloride data, the benzene/ethanol solubles were
higher for each vehicle configuration, but more significantly on the
trap-equipped Fiats. This finding may indicate, especially for the trap-
117
-------
equipped Fiats, that a further quantity of polar compounds nob extracted
with methyiene chloride were more efficiently extracted with benzene/ethanol.
G. Organic Solubles Composition
Separate samples of organic solubles from the 4-bag FTP, HFET, NYCC,
and 85 kph, run with each vehicle configuration and each test fuel, were
analyzed for carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen. Organic solubles from the
cold FTP and hot FTP were combined to provide a 4-bag FT? sample prior to
elemental analyses. The results are given in Table 38, and indicate that
sufficient organic solubles were not available for overall cycle analyses
using the naturally-aspirated and turbocharged Fiats with catalytic traps.
All of the elemental data are indicative of hydrocarbon-like materials
with numeric H/C ratio between 1.58 and 1.95. The catalytic trap-equipped
Fiats, and especially the turbocharged Fiat, were associated with the
lowest H/C ratio for the 4-bag FTP. This result may be indicative of higher
content of unsaturated hydrocarbons present for the Fiats using catalytic
traps. Also noted with the same Fiats using the catalytic traps were higher
nitrogen content and lower sums of the carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen
content (Z CHN). The lower E CHN may be indicative of catalytic action
on hydrocarbons, possibly resulting in more oxygenated products.
H. Organic Solubles Boiling Range
The organic soluble material obtained during the cold FTP, hot FTP,
HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph using the five vehicle configurations and two fuels
was submitted for boiling range determination by gas chromatography. Each
sample aliquot, provided according to vehicle, cycle, and fuel combination,
was redissolved in methyiene chloride prior to analysis (original extraction
118
-------
TABLE 38. CARBON, HYDROGEN, AND NITROGEN IN EXHAUST PARTICULATE
ORGANIC SOLUBLES FROM FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMODILE CUTLASS DIESELS
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A. /trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C. /trap
Cutlass
4-bag FTP
HFET
NYCC
85 kph
4-bag FTP
HFET
NYCC
85 kph
4-bag FTP
HFET
NYCC
85 kph
4-bag FTP
HFET
NYCC
85 kph
4-bag FTP
HFET
NYv-C
85 kph
Weight Percent of Organic Solubles by Element and Fuel
Carbon
EM-329-F
84'. 74
85.14
85.13
84.75
83.05
a
85,29
85.36
85.17
85.25
71.78
84.33
84.19
79.64
84.99
EH "}9-F
83.90
78.94
85.03
83.88
77.96
85.48
85.25
85.18
85.34
76.63
84.32
84.91
84.69
84.27
Hydrogen
EM-329-F
12.51
13.12
13.02
13.17
12.69
13.28
13.34
13.35
13.41
9.51
12.58
13.78
11.61
:13.12
EM-469-F
12.67
12.08
12.95
12.82
11.22
13.19
13.31
13.08
13.06
10.5.0
12.51
13.05
12.76
13.21
Nitrogen
EM-329-F
0.11
0.10
0.25
0.05
0.49
0.48
0.41
0.24
0.16
0.48
0.16
0.49
;
0.29
0.28
0.68
0.19
EM-469-F
0.13
0.08
0.12
0.05
0.42
0.50
0.41
0.22
0.19
0.29
0.16
0.43
0.92
0.27
0.30
0.43
0.39
0.24
£ CHN
EM-329-F
97.36
98.36
98.40
97.97
96.23
98.81
98.86
99.00
98.82
81.78
.97.20
98.25
91.93
98.30
EM-469-F
96.70
91.10
98.10
96.75
89.60
98.89
98.75
98.55
98.56
87.56
97.13
98.39
97.84
97.72
organic solubles not available for analysis
-------
was also in methylene chloride. The cold FTP and hot FTP solubles were
combined to provide a composite 4-bag FTP sample for analysis. A number
of blanks and standards were also run to provide background and calibration
information.
The modified ASTM D2887-73 simulated distillation procedure with gas
chromatograph has been successfully used in this laboratory to determine
the boiling range distribution of lubricants and middle-distillate fuels.'5'6^
The same procedure as applied to organic solubles has not been adequately
qualified. Therefore, using the procedure to analyze organic solubles has
at times resulted in unacceptable data based on what appears to be polym-
erization of samples during storage or even sample chemistry alteration
during actual G.C. analytical runs. Polymerization apparently limits
sample solubility. To minimize possible sample storage polymerization
during this prograra, steps were taken to run samples as soon as possible
after preparation or to store them at low temperature while awaiting analysis.
In spite of these precautions taken, some samples analyzed for boiling range
determination showed possible evidence of sample alteration.
Boiling range data obtained were tabulated according to each vehicle
configuration, four test cycles, and two test fuels. Results on the Fiat
N.A. diesel without after-treatment and with catalytic trap are found in
Appendix O, Tables 0-1 and O-2, respectively. Tables 0-1 and 0-2 are
provided for information only since very low recovery of the soluble material
with the gas chromatograph was observed on the Fiat N.A. diesel without
aftertreatment, thus generally obviating comparison of its solubles boiling
range results with--chose of the same vehicle using the trap catalyst.
Boiling range results of solubles from the Fiat T.C. diesel without
120
-------
aftertreatment, Fiat T.C. diesel with catalytic trap, and Cutlass are pro-
vided in Tables 39, 40, and 41, respectively. Chromatograms given in
Appendix 0, Figures 0-1 through 0-3, respectively include an "Altamont"
crude oil standard, a 4-bag FTP solubles sample from the Fiat T.C. diesel
without aftertreatment, and a 4-bag FTP solubles sample'from th^iat T.C.
diesel with catalytic trap. The turbocharged Fiat solubles used for the
Chromatograms were obtained with EM-329-F and include a C -C paraffin
composite internal standard. Included in Appendix 0 as Figure O-4 is a
chromatogram of fuel EM-329-F obtained with the ASTM D2887-73 procedure
programmed from 0°C to 390°C. Each chromatogram in Appendix 0 was referenced
to C-0 through C_g paraffin peaks for ease of comparison.
The recovery of soluble material by the chromatograph procedure ranged
from 75.4% to 109.8% for the Fiat T.C. vehicle without aftertreatment,
48.1% to 70.9 % for the Fiat T.C. vehicle with catalytic trap, and 76.7%
to 99.4% for the Cutlass. Previous studies indicated that the recovery
of the material ranged between 60 and 90 percent.
The boiling temperature of the light-end regions as compared between
the turbocharged Fiat without aftertreatment and the Cutlass were more
similar in the HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph than in the 4-bag FTP. The 4-bag
FTP light-ends of the Cutlass boiled at lower temperatures than those of
the turbocharged Fiat without catalytic trap. Major or consistent differences
of boiling range with fuel type were not observed.. The limited boiling
range results obtained with the Fiat T.C. diesel with catalytic trap did not
provide a strong basis for comparison with boiling range results of the same
vehicle without aftertreatment. The trap-equipped Fiat T.C. diesel, however,
121
-------
TABLE 39. GAS CHROMATOGRAPH ANALYSIS OP ORGANIC SOLUBLES IN PARTICULATE MATTER,
FIAT T.C. DIESEL, NO AFTERTREATMENT, FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
Distillation
Point
IBP
10% point
20% point
30% point
40% point
50% point
60% point
70% point
80% point
90% point
EP
Recovery, %
@ Temperature, °C
4 -bag FTP
EM-329-F
310
374
395
416
440
466
496
546
76.9
640
EM-469-F
264
3G4
387
411
438
467
502
564
75.4
640 .
Temperature in C° by Cycle and Fuel
HFET
EM-329-F
256
377
400
422
446
472
497
532
595
84.6
640
EM-469-F
242
372
395
416
437
459
480
502
534
592
94.8
640
NYCC
EM-329-F
227
335
360
377
395
417
446
476
509
552
594
109.8
595
EM-469-F
256
346
363
380
401
429
464
507
574
88.7.
640
85 kph
EM-329-F
236
369
391
410
429
452
477
506
550
608
94.4
640
EM-469-F
263
375
395
413
432
453
476
504
552
640
89.9
640
ro
to
modified ASTM D2887-73 simulated distillation
-------
TABLE 40. GAS CHROMATOGRAPH ANALYSIS OF ORGANIC SOLUBLES IN PARTICULATE MATTER,
FIAT T.C. PIESEL WITH CATALYTIC TRAP, FUELS EH-329-F AND EM-469-F
Distillation
Point
IBP
10% point
20% point
30% point
40V point
50% point
60% point
70% point
80% point
90% point
EP
Recovery, %
@ Temperature, °C
-Temperatures in C° by Cycle and Fuel
4-bag FTP
EM-329-F
292
374
403
434
476
524
58.4
562
EM-469-F
303
371
394
439
467
506
68.6
562
HFETb
EM-329-F
EM-469-F
NYCC
EM-329-F0
EM-469-F
292
349
366
384
406
437
486
557
70.9
562
85 kph
EM-329-F&
EM-469-F
296
403
436
470
511
48.1
562
KJ
LJ
by modified ASTM D2887-73 simulated distillation
insufficient sample for analysis
-------
TABLE 41. GAS CHROMATOGRAPH ANALYSIS3 OF ORGANIC SOLUBLES IN PARTICULATE MATTER,
1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESEL, FUELS EH-329-F AND EM-4G9-F
Distillation
Point
IBP
10% point
20% point
30% point
40% point
50% point
60% point
70% point
80% point
90% point
EP
Recovery, %
@ Temperature, °C
Temperature in C° by Cycle and Fuel
4-bag FTP
EM-329-F
250
352
372
394
420
460
512
586
76.7
640
EM-469-F
240
348
366
384
407
440
484
536
600
87.2
640
IIFET
EM-329-F
267
364
384
403
424
453
492
547
639
80.1
640
EM-469-F
249
366
386
405
126
456
497
554
78.8
640
NYCC
EM-329-F
240
346
365
386
419
472
523
585
78.2
640
EM-469-F
251
344
359
372
388
414
455
502
548
591
640
99.4
640
85 kph
EM-329-F
247
369
390
408
424
445
472
505
550
607
95.4
640
EM-469-F
268
368
387
403
420
442
472
510
573
87.1
640
to
by modified ASTM D2887-73 simulated distillation
-------
did show somewhat higher boiling temperatures for the light-ends using fuel
EM-469-F on the 4-bag FTP and 85 kph. The boiling ranges of the fuels, on the
average, extended from 154°C to 436°C. Consequently, test results with both
configurations of the Fiat T.C. diesel and also the Cutlass indicated an
overall upward shift in solubles boiling range as compared to the boiling
range of the fuels.
I. Organic Solubles Polarity Profile
Organic soluble samples extracted from particulate with methylene
chloride were studied to determine their polarity profile (fractionation
by relative polarity). A solubles sample from each vehicle, cycle, and
fuel combination was analyzed using HPLC as described earlier in this report,.
Composite 4-bag FTP samples were prepared for analysis using the cold FTP
and hot FTP samples in combination. Background and calibration information
was obtained using a number of solvents ^nd standards specific to the HPLC
procedure.
.The complexity of organic solubles composition makes their chromatographic
separation into individual compounds very difficult. The principal use of
HPLC enables the separation of the organic- solubles into a series of
fractions of increasing molecular polarity. The HPLC procedure as employed
in this study was only qualitative, mainly because of the differing response
factors for each compound and the quantities of samples injected. Although
an attempt to quantitate the data was considered impractical, each sample's
HPLC chromatogram was divided into regions of similar polarity for sake of
comparison (each chronatogram contains three traces, one representing the
solvent composition, a second representing the ultraviolet detector response,
125
-------
and the other representing the fluorescence detector response). The first
17 minutes of a. chromatogram was identified as the nonpolar region, and the
polar region was determined to start after 32 minutes. The transitional
region was the section of the chromatogram between 17 and 32 minutes.
The total area for the peaks in each region of polarity was determined with
a planimeter. A total area for each region of polarity was divided by the
sum of the total area for each chromatogram. This value when multiplied
by 100 resulted in a percentage that normalized the chromatogram.
CRC and related studies ' suggest that the transitional region
compounds display the highest Ames activity, while the nonpclar region
compounds give the lowest Ames activity. Generally, as discussed in the
same studies, indirect-acting mutagens were associated more with the nonpolar
region and direct-acting mutagens more with the transitional and polar
regions.
Table 42 presents the HPLC data prepared to include the normalized
percent of chromatogram peak areas with fluorescence and UV detection.
Although the UV data was included only for supplementary information in
this discussion, the UV response like the fluoresence response -"as least
in the transitional area. In some cases, the UV .response wa.«j respectively
opposite to the fluorescence response in the nonpoiar .and polrjr regions.
For simplicity, the remaining discussion of HPLC results in Table 42 is
concerned only with fluorescence data.
The highest peaks in the transitional region were found in the
NYCC for the Fiat N.A; vehicle with and without aftertreatment using
EM-329-F. Overall highest response Wc:s seen in the polar region
especially as found with each vehicle using EM-329-F on the
126
-------
TABLE 42. NORMALIZED HPLC CHROMATOGRAM PEAK DATA OF PARTICIPATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES
FROM FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A. /trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat- T.C. /trap
Cutlass
Chroma tog'raiu
Region"
Nonpolar
Transitional
Polar
Nonpolar
Transitional
Polar
Nonpolar
Transitional
Polar
Nonpolar
Transitional
Polar
Nonpolar
Transitional
Polar
Normalized Percent of Peak Areas by Cycle and Fuel
4-bag FTP
EM-329-F
30b(60)c
14 (1)
56 (39)
31 (62)
14 (2)
55 (36)
27 (62)
14 (3)
59 (35)
39 (49)
13 (4)
48 (47)
37 (65)
1 (2)
62 (33)
EM-469-F
61 (50)
~d<«)
39 (50)
69 '(38)
-- (1)
31 (61)
22 (40)
12 (4)
66 (56)
38 (53)
6 (3)
56 (44)
54 .(37)
(__)
46 (63)
HFET
EM-329-F
51 (76)
7 (1)
42 (23)
28 (54)
-- (4)
72 (42)
50 (53)
-- (4)
50 (43)
66 (61)
-- (-- )
34 (39)
28 (62)
(5)
72 (33)
EM-469-F
68 (70)
(")
32 (30)
10 (41)
12 (8)
78 (51)
42 (63)
1 (1)
57 (36)
25 (44)
2 (3)
73 (53)
40 (38)
-- (4)
60 (58)
NYCC
EM-329-F
36 (70)
21 (1)
43 (29)
13 (52)
23 (4)
64 (44)
24 (44)
(--)
76 (56)
44 (42)
14 ;7)
42 (51)
41 (67)
5 (3)
54 (30)
EM-469-F
22 (67)
12 (2)
66 (31)
-- ( )
( )
-- (--)
77 (44)
-- ( )
23 (56)
59 (48)
4 (3)
37 (49)
30 (67)
4 (3)
66 (30)
1 85 kph
EM-329-F
19 (52)
13 (3)
68 (45)
18 (46)
~ (9)
82 (45)
44 (47)
( )
56 (53)
21 (36)
(7)
79 (57)
23 (62)
3 (2)
74 (36)
EM-469-F
59 (91)
11 (1)
30 (8)
9 (40)
7 (9)
84 (51)
19 (55)
4 (2)
77 (43)
6 (21)
4 (8)
90 (71)
20 (62).
2 (2)
78 (36)
a Chromatogram region: first 17 minutes is designated nonpolar, 17 to 32 minutes is designated transitional,
and beyond 32 minutes is designated polar.
b The first value represents the normalized percent of the peak area with a fluorescence wavelength of 418
run and an excitation wavelength 'at 313 nm..
c. The second value in parenthesis represents the normalized percent of the sample peak area with a UV
absorbance at 254 run.
^ No peak detected
-------
4-bag FTP and both fuels at 85 kph. Sample area response between the same
chromatograph regions for the Fiats with and without af tertreatment, shown in
Table 42, were not significantly different aa obtained during the 4-bag FTP
with EM-329-F. The chromatograms, however, did show some differences
in sample characteristics between the naturally-aspirated and turbocharged
Fiats. These differences plus other sample chromatographic characteristics
may be seen in Figures 13 through 22, which include chromatograms of a
standard, and of samples from the five vehicle configurations used during the
4-bag FTP with EM-329-F.
J. Benzo(a)pyrene in Organic Solubles
Benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) is an indicator of the many PNA compounds considered
potential carcinogens in diesel exhaust particulate. Analysis for BaP was
conducted with organic solubles extracted from particulate using benzene/
ethanol as previously described in this report. Sufficient organic solubles
extracts were obtained to represent each vehicle configuration, cycle, and
fuel combination used in this program. The cold FTP and hot FTP samples
were combined to provide a 4-bag FTP sample for BaP analysis. The percent
solubles of each particulate sample analyzed for BaP were discussed earlier
in Section VIII, F of this report.
The BaP emission rates obtained for the various vehicle configurations
are listed in Table 43. The MDV's of various samples where BaP was not
detected are listed in Table 43, and include results obtained with two
different HPLC fluorescence detectors as identified in the same table.
Most of the BaP studies were conducted usii.g a fluorescence detector with
an improved detection limit, eg., 0.002 yg BaP/filter, employed later
128
-------
== fluorescence =
60
50 40 30
Time, minutes
20
10
Figure 17. HPLC chromatograms of benzo(a)pyrene, 9-fluorenone,
and acridine.
Solvent Polarity = = ^
80
70
60
50 40 30
Time, minutes
20
10
Figure 18. HPLC chromatograms of 4-bag FTP organic solubles,
from 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass diesel, fuel EM-329-F.
129
-------
=*=; i r
=M=Sp^=
4 ^"t-^-jV
71";;, |.~Tr±:\
aviolet
1 i'\-{ I
1 ! \ r"
PHEE
iiliy=?
^*j :1 ^j^* (
frM psp^
_j |- j-Ify
=scence
^T^31^
Sr
V
i
\
^^
s;
3
~
1 1
.".
A-
r^
j=.
^
^^
ii
^.
VP
it;
^V
...
-
~
fl
^.
\£
?f
^^
-
T''*'
t*
rr
^_
^l
=.
'v
=
V-
s
pr
^rr
Tt
=.
F^
V
3
1
^ -
=.
f^-
SK
^ r
z;
=1
rTr
^
3 t
!%
rs
=
5
P
1=
^
3=
rr-
r~^
i!
i
^
N
33
y
2
s;
Si
N
P;
;~
rtH
i
=.
=
-
^
T
i
-/j
z^:
j=
"i*
~'.
2
zj
*-
**.
60 50 40 30
Time, minutes
20
10
Figure 19. HPLC chromatograms of 4-bag FTP organic solubles from
Fiat N.A. diesel without aftertreatment, fuel EM-329-F.
80
70
60
50 40 30
Tine, minutes
20
10
Figure 20. HPLC chromatograms of 4Tbag FTP organic solubles from
Fiat N.A. diesel with catalytic trap, fuel' EM-329-F.
13Q
-------
Solvent Polarity = =
70
60
50 40 30
Time, minutes
20
10
Figure 21 . HPLC chromatograms of 4-bag FTP organic solubles from
Fiat T.C. without aftertreatment, fuel EM-329-F.
₯Solvent Polarity-
fluorescence' =
50 40 30
Time, minutes
Figure 22. HPLC chromatograms of 4-bag FTP organic solubles
Fiat T.C. diesel with catalytic trap, fuel EM-329-F.
from
131
-------
TABLE 43. BENZO(a)PYRENE IN ORGANIC SOLUBLES OF PARTICULATE MATTER,
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
Vehicle
Fiat N.A.
Fiat N.A. /trap
Fiat T.C.
Fiat T.C. /trap
Cutlass
Bap Emission Rates (pg/Jun) by Cycle and Fuel
4-bag FTP
EM-329-F
2.0
N.D.a
1.1
1.3
0.31
EM- 469- 1'
1.1
0.20
3.4
1.6
0.45
HFET
EM-329-F
0.67
i1.D.a
N.D.d
0.02
0.03
EM-469-F
0.86
N.D.d
0.12
0.02
0.15
NYCC
EM-329-F
7.8
N.D.b
3.0
0.12
1.1
EM-469-F
2.9
0.10
30.8
0.20
1.8
85 kph
EM-329-F
0.06
N.D.C
N.D.e
0.007
0.005
EM-469-F
0.23
N.D.e
0.05
0.001
0.05
a O.OlUg/km HDV
b 0.12vig/km MDV
c 0.008|jg/km MDV
limit O.OSyg BaP/filteras analyzed with Perkin-Elmer Model MPF-44A
detector; used on Fiat N.A. (both fuels) and Fiat N.A./trap
samples
d 0.0006yg/km MDV ) detection limit 0.002;jg BaP/filteras analyzed with Eerkin-Elmer Model 650
e 0.0003)Jg/km MDV / fluorescence detector; used on Fiat N.A./trap (EM-469-F), and Fiat T.C.,
Fiat T.C./trap, and Cutlass (both fuels) samples
-------
in the study versus 0.05 yg BaP/filter employed early in the study.
Benzo(a)pyrene emission rates given in Table 43 ranged from O.OOlUg/km
to 30.8 pyA«. "Ji^e BaP emission rate of 30.8 pg/km was obtained on the NYCC
using EM- 469-F ia the turbocharged Fiat without aftertreatment, and was
the single Ba? emission rate higher than 7.8 ygAm in the study. The
extensive use of stop-and-go operation employed on the NYCC may have con-
tributed to the noticeably large BaP emission rate observed. . BaP emission
rates obtained were generally representative of those obtained in an
earlier study at this laboratory using a 1975 Mercedes 240D diesel and
a 1977 Rabbit diese).
Highest BaP emissions on each cycle and with each fuel were associated
with either of the two Fiats using no aftertreatment. Although no strong
relationship was established between BaP emission and fuel type, BaP
emissions were consistently highest on.. EM-469-F for . the turbocharged
Fiat without afteztreatment, and for the Cutlass. Overall BaP emissions as
compared between the two configurations of the naturally-aspirated Fiat,
were reduced by more than 82 percent with catalytic trap use. Reduction of
BaP emissions with use of catalytic trap on the turbocharged Fiat was
53 percent on the 4-bag FTP (EM-469-F), 83 percent on HFET (EM-469-F),
97 percent (average)' on the NYCC (both fuels), and 98 percent at 85 kph
(EM-469-F).
K. Mutagsnic Activity of Organic Solubles
Methylene chloride extracts of particulate collected on-500x500 mm
filters, as previously discussed in this report, were prepared for Ames
bioassay. The separate cold and hot 23-minute FTP extract samples for each
133
-------
run were combined to provide a 4-bag FTP sample for Ames analysis employing
tester strains TA1535, TA1537, TA1538 and TA98. The four strains used on
the FTP samples were run with and without S-9 activation, except for TA1537
run without S-9 only. The HFET, NYCC, and 85 kph organic extracts for each
vehicle and fuel combination were tested using tester strain TA98 without
S-9 only. TA1535 detects base pair substitutions, while TA1537, TA1538,
and TA98 respond to frameshift mutagens.
The Ames bioassay response of the organic solubles is summarized in
Table 44. Detailed Ames bioassay formal reports for each vehicle configuration-
fuel combination shown in Table 44 were prepared by the Southwest Foundation
for Research and Education. These formal reports are located in Appendix P,
and are individually coded to correspond to the respective vehicle configuration-
fuel code provided in the vehicle column of Table 44.
All samples showed weak to strong positive mutagen.ic response in Table 44.
TA1535 had the weakest response and TA98 the strongest response generally.
Highest mutagenic response overall was observed with the trap-equipped
Fiats using TA1537, TA1538, and TAS8. TA98 displayed the strongest response
of the four strains with either fuel in the 4-bag FTP using most vehicles.
On either fuel overall, the 4-bag FTP revertants/ug showed a tendency to
increase with S-9 on TA1535 (only slightly) and TA1538, and a tendency to
decrease with activation of TA98. Although no consistent trends for fuel
effects on reventants/yg were noted in the overall study, sample responses
using EM-469-F were somewhat stronger than those using EM-329-F, especially
as noted on the naturally-aspirated Fiat without afterrreatment, the turbo-
charged Fiat without aftertreatment, and the Cutlass.
134
-------
TABLE 44. AMES BIOASSAY RESPONSE OF ORGANIC SOLUBLES IN PARTICULATE,
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
Vehicle
Plat N.A.
(1A329S.1A4G9)C
Flat N.A. /trap
(lD329klH4C1)
Fiat T.C. /trap
(3B329i3U469>
Cutlass
(^A3i'll.2A460)
S-9
Activation
w/o
w
w/o
w
w/o
w
w/o
w
w/o
w
Aver aye Ravertante/|ig Extract9 by Cycle, Fuel, and Teeter Strain
4-baq
EM- 32
TAIS3S
0
0.04
0
0.04
-O.O01
O.U6
O.O2
0.06
-0.02
0.05
TA1537
0.17
--b
1.46
--
0.76
--
2.10
0.71
-F
TA1538
0.40
0.85
2.20
1.92
1.06
1.41
4.22
1.05
1.39
1.40
TA98
0.82
1.02
3.70
3.00
3. on
1.03
4.06
2.68
3.12
1.07
FTP
EH-169-P
TAIS35
0
0.07
0
0
0
O.06
0
0.06
0.03
0.04
TA1S3V
0.26
1.86
1.17
1.29
1.08
TA1518
0.60
1.20
2.18
2.81
2.81
2.36
2.54
2.84
1.94
2.33
TA90
1.24
1.32
5.22
3.93
4.03
3.05
2.84
2.42
3.24
3.42
HFET
EM-329-P
TA98
0.77
~
13.86
2.08
8.42
4.45
EM-469-P
TA98
1.09
10.56
i.22
--
a. 72
4.80
HYCC
EH-329-P
TA98
0.88
5.04
1.46
8.04
2.00
--
EH-469-P
TA98
0.86
3.63
-
1.09
"
l.51d
~
2.96
85 kph
EM-329-F
TA98
0.42
11.60
--
1.16
8.62
2.83
EH-469-P
TA38
0.52
9.10
4.90
8.84
4.70
d slope of dose-response curv«
^ no bioaspay was [xirforMed
c vehicle-fuel code in parenthesis can be referred to sinilarly coded Ames Pon»al
Report provideU in Appendix P
d
low Ames response possibly related to sample dilution as indicated by high organic extract
fraction in Table 36.
-------
As discussed above, the mutagenic response (rev/tig)' was"found to be significantly
stronger with the trap-equipped Fiats than with the same vehicle configurations
without after-treatment. It must be kept in mind, however, that the trap-
equipped Fiats also produced less particulate and organics than the.same
vehicles without exhaust aftertreatment. Therefore, mutagenic response
data in revertants/yg in Table 44 were converted to revertants/km in Table 45
to better assess the mutagenic activity of the organic solubles.
Approximate high to low ranking order of vehicles with respect to
overall revertantsAm were the turbocharged Fiat without aftertreatment,
the naturally-aspirated Fiat without aftertreatment, the Cutlass, the
turbocharged Fiat with catalytic trap, and the naturally-aspirated Fiat
with catalytic trap. General reduction of revertants/km were obtained on
the two Fiats with catalytic trap. RevertantsAm using the catalytic trap
and two fuels on the Fiat N.A.. diesel were reduced by an average of 83
percent on the 4-bag FTP, S3 percent on the HFET, 83 percent (EM-469-F only)
in NYCC, and 62 percent in the 85 kph. Corresponding reductions of
revertantsAm using the trap on the turbocharged Fiat were 75 percent on
the 4-bag FTP, 68 percent on the HFET, 32 percent on the NYCC, and 88 percent
on the 85 kph.
136'
-------
TABLE 45. AMES BIOASSAY RESULTS IN REVERTANTS PER KILOMETER,
FIAT N.A. , FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
Vehicle
Plat N.A.
(lA329klA469)c
Plat N.A. /trap
UB329SJB469)
Fiat T.C.
OA329S.3A469)
Fiat T.C. /trap
<3B329i.3B4t>9)
Cutlass
<2A329(.2A469)
S-9
Activation
w/o
w
w/o
w
w/o
w
w/o
w
w/o
w
10^ RevertmitB/kn* by Cyclo, Fuel, and Tester Strain
4-bag FTP
EH- 3 29- F
TA153S
0.0
6.
0.0
0.3
0.0
3.
0.0
0.6
0.0
1.
TA1S37
24.
--b
12.
44.
21.
19.
TA1S38
5f>.
119.
18.
16.
61.
83.
42.
IB.
37.
38.
TA98
1J5.
143.
30.
25.
177.
106.
40.
27.
B4.
53.
EM-469-P
TA153S
0.0
11.
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.
0.0
o.u
1.
1.
TAT5TT
41.
9.
102.
17.
38.
TA153B
92.
184.
11.
14.
140.
206.
33.
37.
68.
82.
TA93
190.
20).
27.
20.
403.
265.
36.
31.
114.
120.
BFET
EH-3I9-T
VA9B
86.
40.
64.
30.
92.
EH-4b9-P
TA98'
149.
40.
136.
24.
120.
NYCC
JM-329-F
VA98
93.
103.
153.
128.
106.
EM- 469- F
TA98
189.
32.
125.
64.
182.
85 kph
EH-329-F
TA98
41.
17.
48.
4.5
51.
EM-469-F
TA98
66.
23.
ae.
12.
90.
a calculation Includes particulate mass rates based on 47 mm Pall flex filters
b no bioassay was performed
c vehicle-fuel c--le in parenthesis can be referred to similarly coded Ames Formal
Rc(xirt provided in Appendix t
-------
REFERENCES
1. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 85, Subpart H.
2. Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule (Federal Register, Vol. 41,
No. 100, May 21, 1976, Appendix I).
3. New York City Cycle, Designed to simulate driving in downtown New
York City.
4. Naman, Ted. M., "Exhaust and Particulate Emissions from Light-Duty
Diesel Vehicles", Report of 1981 Investigation?! at Bartlesville Energy
Technology Center, Final. Report pending.
5. Hare, Charles T., "Characterization of Gaseous and Particulate Emissions
From Light-Duty Diesels Operated on Various Fuels." Final Report,
Contract 68-03-2440, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, July 1979.
6. Bykowski, Bruce B., "Characterization of Diesel Emissions as a Function
of Fuel Variables." Final Report, Contract 68-03-2707, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, April, 1981.
7. Federal Ragister, Vol. 45, Wednesday, March 5 1980.
8. Smith, L. R., Parness, M. A., Fanick, E. R., and Dietzmann, II. E.,
"Analytical Procedures for Characterizing Unregulated Emissions from
Vehicles Using Middle-Distillate Fuels." Interim Report to the
Environmental Protection Agency under Contract 68^02-2497, Report
No. EPA-600/2-80-068, April 1980.
9. Rounbehler, D. P., et al, Anal. Chem., Vol. 52, pg 273, 1980.
10. Levins, P. L., and Kendal, D. A., "Application of Odor Technology
to Mobile Source Emission Instrumentation." CRC Project CAPE-7-6C
under Contract 68-03-0561, September 1973.
138
-------
11. Swarin, S. J., and Williams, R. L., "Liquid Chromatographic Determination
of Benzo(A)pyrene in Diesel Exhaust Particulatei Verification of the
Collection and Analytical Metnods", Research Publication GMK-30.27,
General Motors Research Laboratories, Warren, Michigan, October 197V.
12. Ames, B., J. McCann and E. Yamasaki, "Methods for Detecting Carcinogens
and Mutagens with the Salmonella/Mammalian-Microsome Mutagenicity
Test." Mutation Research, 31, pp. 347-J64, 1975.
13. "Measurement ana Characterization of Diesel Exhaust Emission" (CRC-APRAC
Project No. CAPI-1-64), Chemical Characterization Panel, CRC-Program
Group on Composition of Diesel Exhaust, Coordinating Research Council,
Inc., December 1980.
14. Federal Register, Vol. 40, No. 126, June 30, 1975. Subparts I S J.
15. Springer, Karl J., and Baines, Thomas M., "Emissions from Diesel Versions
of Production Passenger Cars." SAE Paper No. 770818, Detroit, Micnigan,
September 1977.
16. Uroan, Charles, "Regulated and Unregulated Exhaust Emissions from
Malfunctioning -Non-Catalyst and Oxidation Catalyst Gasoline 'Auto-
mobiles." Final-Report to Environmental Protection Agency under
Contract 68-03-2499, January 1980.
17. Smith, Lawrence R., "Characterization of Emissions from Motor Vehicles
Designed for Low NOX Emissions." Final Report to Environmental
Protection Agency under Contract 68-02-2497, July 1980 (ouolished
March 1981).
139
-------
18. Smith, Lawrence R., and Black, Frank M., "Characterization of Exhaust
Emissions from Passenger Cars Equipped *'ith Three-Way Catalyst Control
Systems," SAE Paper 800822, Presented at the Passenger Car Meeting,
Dearborn, Michigan, June 1980.
19. Wade, W. R., White, J. E. and Florek, J. J., "Diesel Particulate Trap
Regeneration Techniques," Paper 810118, Presented at the International
Congress and Exposition, Detroit, Michigan, Feoruary 1981.
20. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, P.«rt 85, Subpart A,
Sections applicable to 1981 Model Year LIqht-Duty Vehicles.
21. Schuetzle, D., Rilev, T. L., Prater, T. J., Salmeen, I..and Harvey, T. M.,
"Tl.d Identification of Mutagenic Chemical Species in Air ^articulate
Samples," Proceedings of the 2nd international Congress on Analytical
Techniques in Environmental Chemistry, Barcelona, Spain, November 2J, ly81.
140
-------
APPENDIX A
TEST INSULTS,
TRAP REGENERATION ON
FIAT NATURALLY-ASPIRATED DIESEL.
WITH CATALYTIC TRAP
FUEL EM-469-F
-------
TEST NO. 1D2R01 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 730,12 MM 110(29.06 IN HO
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 40. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20CIN, 1120)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEO. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STIi. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC KCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM-
CO BCKCRU METER/RA.'IGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE NETER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRU METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
a, HC CONCENTRATION PPM
i CO CONCENTRATION PPH
M C02 CONr.EKTRATIOfl PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
IIC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS CRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS CRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC. UET (DRY)
SCF» UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SC«>
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETERf rtM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE* DEG C
CARBON IiIOXIBEf G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTIONf L/100KM
HYDROCARSONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDEt G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGENf G/KM
IDLE. Vr.ltlC.LC iXICCIONS RESULTS
PKOJCCT 11-4C74-001
VEHICLE NO. Hi
DATE 5.' 7/01
BAG CART NJ. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVC NO. J
DRY BULB TEMP. 27.0 BEG C(C2,0 BEG F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 9.6 Grt/KG
IDLE
706.1 (27,fli
569.0 (22.4.1
36.1 ( 97.0)
3469.
33.7 ( 1107.)
2.5/14/ 20,
4,0/ I/ .').
17.7/13/ li,
1.5/13/ 1,
79.O/ 3/ 1.47
3.4/ 3/ .05
45.9/ 2/ 4ri.
,5/ 2/ 1.
9.12
16.
14.
1.42
45.5
.31
.56
074.8
2.C2
2.05
126.
.890 ( .377)
1.000 ( ,974)
33.7
7.11
1C2RC1
730.1
9.6
27.8
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LhS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 i!f>
DIESEL EM-469--F
ODOMETER 11656 KM(7244
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .'76
-------
TEST NO. 1B2R02 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 730.12 MM HG(29,06 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 35, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(BEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPH
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKCRD METER/RANGF/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
> HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
w C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULAR MASS CRAMS
KUN TIME SECONDS
DFCr UET (DRY)
SCF» UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCH)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBERF
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUHIDITYr 0/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
IDLE VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4074 001
VEHICLE NO.IB
DATE 5/ 7/B1
BAG CART f!0. 1
DYNO NO, 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 20.9 DEG C(04,0 DEG F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 9,1 GM/KG
IDLE
706.1 (27,C)
569.0 (22.1)
40.6 (105.0)
3445.
33.2 ( 1172.)
TEST UEIGIIT 1361. KG( 3000. LftS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 11661 KM(7247 MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .95
7.
5.
5.
1.
fl,
1.
9/14/
4.3/ I/
5.8/13/
1.4/13/
80.7/ 3/ 1.40
3.0/ 3/ .06
50.5/ 2/
.O/ 2/
9,02
3.
4,
1,43
49.8
.06
.15
870.2
3.00
1.15
125.
00V ( .879)
000 ( .975)
33.2
7.10
1B2R02
730.1
9.1
20,9
1
-------
IDLE VEIIICLC CMISSION3 RESULTS
11-4074 001
TEST NO. 1B2R03 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 737.37 MM 110(29.05 IN IIG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 36. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST. CYCLE
SLOWER DIF P MM. II20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H2QUN, H20)
MOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG, F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD, CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
IIC DCNCRD hETER/RANGE/FPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/FFM
C02 CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD MCTER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
> IIC CONCENTRATION PPM
' CO CONCENTRATION PPM
CO? CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
IIC' MASS CRAMS
CO MAGS GRAMS
1 C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS CRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC» UET (DRY)
SCF, UCT (DRY)
VOL (SCM) '
SAM DLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETERr MM HG
HUMIDITY* 6/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEO C
CARBON DIOXIDE> G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION? L/100KM
HYDROCARBONSF G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROCE-NF G/KM
VEHICLE NO. IB
DATC 5, 7/01
SAG CART 110. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP, 27.4 DEG C(05,0 DEC F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 9.6 GH/KG
IDLE
706.1 (27. f;)
569,0 (22.4)
37.0 (100.0)
344i.
33.4 ( HfO.)
.1/14/ 1.
4.0/ I/ 5.
5.9/13/ 5.
1.5/13/ 1.
70. 7/ 3/ 1.44
3.2/ 3/ .05
49. 2/ 2/ 49,
.6/ 2/ 1.
9.20
"3 #
4.
1.40
40.7
-.06
,15
056.1
3.00
.74
125,
,092 ( .3C2)
1.000 ( ,9/5)
33.4
7.13
1D2R03
737.9
9,6
29.4
TEST U'EIOHT 1361, KG< 3000, LIiG>
ACTUAL f;OAD LOAD 0,2 KW( ll.O HP)
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 11666 K«(7250 MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR ,96
-------
APPENDIX B
TEST RESULTS,
FIAT NATURALLY-ASPIRATED DIESEL
WITHOUT AFTERTREATMENT
FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
-------
SUMMARY OF REGULATED EMISSIONS FROM FIAT N.A. DIESEL
RESEARCH VEHICLE, EM-329-F BASE FUEL, NO CATALYST
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1980)
Run No.
HC, g/mi
CO, g/mi
NOX, g/mi
Particulate , g/mi
Fuel , mi/gal
1A329F
3-bag FTP
12/20
1
0.48
1.63
1.34
0.47
25.6
12/22
2
0.52
1.67
1.32
0.38
28.6
12/23
3
0.48
1.69
1.20
0.38
28.6
1A329H
HFET
12/20
1
0.24
0.72
0.89
0.25
42.2
12/22
2
a
a
_a
a
a
12/23
3
0.24
0.66
0.89
0.29
41.6
12/23
4
0.21
0.63
0.85
0.26
42.9
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1980)
Run No.
HC , g/mi
CO, g/mi
NOx, g/mi
Particulate , g/mi
Fuel , mi /gal
1A329N
NYCC
12/20
1
0.55
2.69
2.01
0.35
20.0
12/22
2
0.76
2.99
2.00
0.42
19.3
12/23
3
1.00
2.93
2.03
0.46
19.0
12/23
4
0.84
3.11
2.03
0.49
17.6
1A329S
85 kph steady-state
12/20
1
0.18
0.55
0.87
42.8
12/22
2
0.21
0.56
0.87
0.25
42.5
12/23
3
0.19
0.55
0.85
0.25
43.6
12/23
4
0.18
0.55
0.85
0.26
43.2
data not acceptable
B-2
-------
TEST NO. 1A329F RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 755.14 MM HG<29.73 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 19. PCT
BAG RESULTS
PAG NUMBER
INSCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20CIN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(D£G. F).
BLOblER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLCU STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC CAMPLE hETER/RANGE/FPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION POT
*OX CONCENTRATION PPM
Hu MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
. C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
DFCi UET (DRY)
SCFr UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER ' 1A329F
BAROMETER MM HG 755,1
HUMIDITY G/KG 3,3
TEMPERATURE DEG C 22.8
PROJECT 11-4074-001
VEHICLE NC.lrt
DATE 12/20/80
BAG CART NO, 1
DYNO NO, 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULB 1EMP. 22.8 DEG C(73.0 DEC F)
ABS. HUMHITC 3.3 GM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1361. K6( 3000. LHS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU< 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 9879.. KM( 6140 MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .CO
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
716.3 (28,2)
579.1 (22. £)
37.8 (100.0)
13858.
137.7 ( 4S(f3.)
30.0/11/ 30.
2.5/ I/ 3,
42.1/13/ 29.
.8/13/ 1.
38. 4/ 3/ .65
3.5/ 3/ .05
25. 4/ 2/ 25.
.5/ 2/ 1.
20.46
28.
38,
,60
24.9
2.20
6.07
1505.6
5.2D
3.31
,38
1.05
261,2
.92
11,08
504.
5,76
,965 (
liOOO (
2
STABILIZED
723.9 (20.5)
563.9 (22.2)
35.0 ( 95.0)
23768.
237.7 ( 8394.)
15.8/11/ 16.
2.5/ I/ 3.
28.2/13/ 26.
.7/13/ 1.
21, 6/ 3/ .35
3.0/ 3/ .05
15. 5/ 2/ 16,
,6/ 2/ 1.
37.96
13,
25,
,30
14.9
1.84
6.90
1324.0
5.46
1,23
.30
1.11
212.4
.88
9,02
867,
6.23
.959)
,990)
375.4
80-. 42
12.00
10.01
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
716.3 (28.2)
579.1 (22.0)
35.0 ( 95.0)
13874.
138.5 ( 4G90.)
19.7/11/ 20.
2.5/ I/ 3.
31.6/13/ 29,
.7/13/ 1.
29. I/ 3/ .48
3. I/ 3/ .05
19. 3/ 2/ 19.
.6/ 2/ 1.
27.66
17,
28.
.43
18.7
1,38
4.52
1100,1
3,99
1,46
.24
.78
190,8
.69
0.09
505.
5.77
,971 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICIPATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
723,9 (28,5)
584.2 (23.0)
34.4 ( 94.0)
23735.
237.5 ( 6Z&6.)
15.3/11/ 15.
2.8/ I/ 3.
28.0/13/ 26.
.8/13/ 1.
20. 7/ 3/ .33
3.0/ 3/ .05
14. 7/ 2/ 15.
.?/ 2/ 1.
39.69
13,
25.
.29
14.2
1,72
6. -82
1255.8
5.20
0.00
.28-
1.10
202,3
.84.
0.60
866.
6.21
,965)
.990)
376,0
80,43
11.97
3.35
3-BAG (4-BAG)
216.6 ( 213.6)
9.19 ( 9.06)
.30 ( .29)
1,01 ( 1.00)
.83 ( .82)
.290 ( 0.000)
-------
TEST NO. 1A329H RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT NOCAT
.ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 754.89 MM HG(29,72 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 20. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER RESOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT-
C02 BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METTR/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASO GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC. WET (DRY)
SCFi WET (DRY)
VOL (5CM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
CD
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE. TEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE. G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
MFET VEHICLC EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT H-4074-001
VEHICLE ND.1A
DATE 12/20/00
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULD TEMP. 23.3 BEG (74.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 3.6 GM/KG
HFET
716.3 (20.2)
579.1 (22.8)
43.3 (110.0)
21015.
208.3 ( 73157.)
23.7/11/ 24.
2.8/ I/ 3.
34.4/13/ 32,
1.0/13/ 1.
39.4/ 3/ .67
2.B/ 3/ -04
28,4/ 2/ 28.
,7/ 2/ 1.
19.94
21.
30.
.63
27.7
2.53
7.35
2387.5
8.96
2.56
766.
.950 ( .944)
1.000 ( .907)
20Q.3
47.07
16.43
1A329H
754.9
3.6
23.3
145.3
5.57
.15
.45
.55
TEST UEIGKT 1361.
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER9902. KM(6154.
KG( 3000. LKS)
0.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
MILCS)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .81
-------
TEST NO. 1A329N RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION H5
BAROMETER 754.89 MM HG(29.72 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 24, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP f MM. H2CKIN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM", H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG, C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. METRES
-------
TEST NO. 1A329S
VEHICLE MODEL
ENGINE 2,0 LU22,
TRANSMISSION M5
RUN 1
NA FIAT NOMT
CID) L-4
BAROMETER 754.89 MM HG(29,72 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 24, PCT
SAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM, H20aN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)'
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR.
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX,CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFCi WET (DRY)
. SCF* WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
ca
a\
TEST NUMBER*
BAROMETER*
HUMIDITY*
TEMPERATURE*
CARBON DIOXIDE*
.FUEL CONSUMPTION*
HYDROCARBONS*
CARBON MONOXIDE*
OXIDES OF NITROGEN*
MM HG
G/KG
DEG C
G/HM
L/100KM
G/KM
G/KM
G/KM
05 KPII VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4874-001
VEHICLE N0.1A
DATE 12/20/80
BAG CART NO, 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 23,3 DEO C(74.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 4.2 GM/KG
35 K
736.6 <29.0)
584,2 (23.0)
45,6 (114.0)
32954,
323.4 <11418.)
19.5/11/ 19.
2,6/ I/ 3,
29.8/13/ 27.
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LCS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 9922 . KM( 6167, MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR ,82
43, O/ 3/ .73
2.7/ 3/ .04
31. 4/ 2/ 31,
,9/ 2/ 1,
18.15
17.
26.
.69
30,5
3.18
9,03
4113,6
15.56
1200.
.945 ( .933)
1.000 ( ,986)
323.4
72.43
28.68
1A329S
754.9
4.2
23.3
143.4
5.49
.11
,34
,54
-------
CD
-J
TEST NO. 1A329F RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL . , NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. C1D) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 751.08 MM HG(29.57 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 22. PCT
BAG RESULTS
FAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIF P MM, H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG, F)
DLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC PCKGRLi METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX 6CKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAriS/KH
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
DFCi WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM DLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 1A329F
BAROMETER MM HG 751.1
HUMIDITY G/KG 4.0
TEMPERATURE DEG C 23.9
VEHICLE N0.1A
DATE 12/22/80
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO, 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 23.7 DEG C(75.0 DEG F)
ABS, HUMIDITY 4,0 GM/KG
TEST UEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
OBOMETER9963 . KM( 6192 . MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .82
1
;OLD TRANSIENT
713,7 (28,1)
531.7 (22.9)
36,1 ( 97,0)
13849,
130,6 < 4092.)
25.6/11/ 26,
4,5/ I/ 5,
38.0/13/ 35,
1.4/13/ 1,
34, 9/ 3/ .58
3.4/ 3/ .05
22. 7/ 2/ 23.
.7/ 2/ 1.
22,71
21.
33.
.53
22.0
1.70
5,39
1354.9
4.78
1,43
.30
.94
235.5
,83
9,04
505.
5.75
.967
1.000
2
STABILIZED
713.7 (28.1)
584.2 (23.0)
36.1 ( 97.0)
23005,
238,1 ( 0407.)
19,0/H/ 19,
4,3/ I/ 4,
30.7/13/ 28,
1.6/13/ 1.
22, I/ 37 .36
3,3/ 37 .05
15.57 2/ 16.
,8/ 2/ 1.
37.00
15,
26.
,31
14.7
2.04
7.33
1343.9
5,49
1,27
,33
1,18
216.6
,89
8.34
867,
6,20
( ,960)
( ,989)
376.6
83,69
11.96
8.68
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
713.7 (28.1)
584.2 (23.0)
36.1 ( 97.0)
13007.
138,9 ( 4904.)
26,1/H/ 26.
4.3/ I/ 4,
34.1/13/ 31,
1.1/13/ 1.
29. 2/ 3/ .48
3.4/ 3/ .05
19. O/ 2/ 19.
,9/ 2/ 1.
27.51
22,
30,
,43
18,1
1,76
4.86
1096.5
3.95
1.58
,31
.85
191.4
,69
7.36
506.
5.73
.970 (
1,000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KH
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STADILIZED
713,7 (28.1)
584.2 (23.0)
32,8 < 91,0)
23736,
239.3 ( 8451.)
18.3/11/ 10.
4.0/ \l 5,
28.8/13/ 26,
1.0/13/ 1,
21.67 37 ,35
3,57 37 .05
14.87 27 15.
1.07 27 1.
37.72
14,
25.
.30
13,8
1,89
7.02
1300.0
5.18
0.00
,30
1.13
209.6
,84
8.07
867.
6.20
.963)
,989)
378.2
83,69
11.93
7.73
3-BAG (4-BAG)
213,6 ( 211.5)
0.22 ( 8.14)
.32 ( .31)
1,04 ( 1.03)
.82 ( .81)
.233 ( 0.000)
-------
TEST NO. 1A329N RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122, CID) L-A
TRANSMISSION MS
BAROMETER 740,28 MM HG<29,46 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 25. PCT
HAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN, H2Q)
BLOWER INLET P MM. HL'QUN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. C
-------
TEST NO. 1A329S RUN 2
VEHICLE.MODEL NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION «5
BAROMETER 748.03 MH HG<29,45 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 23. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIP P MM. H2Q9,
1.6/13/ 1.
43.7/ 3/ .75
3.I/ 3/ .05
31.4/ 2/ ol.
1,4/ 2/ 1,
17.01
19,
27.
,70
30,1
3.60
10.17
4155.4
15.38
4.43
1200.
.944 ( ,937)
1,000 ( ,9K6)
323.2
71.72
28,68
1A329S
748.0
4.4
24,4
144.9 -
5,54
.13
.35
.54
TEST WEIGHT 1341. KG( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD B.2 KU( 11,0 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 10018. KM( 6226 . MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .83
-------
01
TEST NO. -JA329F RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION MS
BAROMETER 743.97 MM HG(29.29 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 42. PCT
BAB RESULTS
PAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG, F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD, CU. METOSOCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RAMGE/PPM
HC- BCMiRD MET'JR/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 &CKGRD M.ITER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX CCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX.CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PART1CULATE MASS GRAMS
HC CF;AHS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RJN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
DFCt UE7 (DRY)
SCF. U'ET U.RY)
VOL
-------
TEST NO, 1A329II
VEHICLE MODEL
ENGINE 2.0 L(122,
TRANSMISSION M5
RUN 3
NA FIAT NOCAT
CID) L-4
BAROMETER 742.70 MM IIG<29.24 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 40. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. CtBEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE M£TER/RANGE/PPM
HC EiCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
Co' DCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCNGKD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CD CO CONCENTRATION PPM
' C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
i- NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC 'MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFCr WET (DRY)
SCFr WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETERr MM HG
HUMIDITY. G/KG
'TEMPERATUREr DEG C
CARBON UIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL CO,Nf)UMPTIGN» L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
HFET VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.1A
.DATE 12/23/80
BAG CART NO, 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULB TEMP, 25.6 DEG C<78.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 0.3 CM/KG
HFET
711.2 (28,0)
563,9 (22.2)
39.4 (103.0)
21026.
204.6 < 7224.)
25.6/11/ 26,
4,6/ I/ 5.
32.5/13/ 30.
.70
..05
26,
1,
TEST WEIGHT 1361.
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
DIESEL EM-329--F
ODOMETER 1012U KHC 6290
KG( 3000. LBS)
8,2 KU( 11.0 HP)
MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .93
41, I/ 3/
3,5/ 3/
26, 2/ 2/
l.l/ 2/
19,04
21,
28,
.65
25,2
2,51
6,77
2424.8
9.12
3,01
765.
,947 <
1.000 (
204,6
44.62
16.44
1A329H
742,7
8,3
25 .'6
147,5
5.65
,15
,41
.55
935)
9B1)
-------
TEST NO. 1A329N RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION H5
BAROMETER 742.70 MM HG(29,24 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 40. FCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BI.OUCR DIF P MM. II20UN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(BEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STH. CU. METRCS(GCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE HE1ER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
Nf)X SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NLX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MAGS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FrtRTICULAH MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCFf WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETERr MM HG
HUMIKITYr G/KG
TEMPERATUREr DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION* L/100KM
G/KM
G/KM
DXIDES bF'NITROGENf G/KH
HYDROCARBONS*
CARDOrf MONOXIDE
NYCC VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.1A
DATE 12/23/00
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.6 DEG C(78.0 DEG F)
APS. HUMIDITY 0.3 CM/KG
NYCC
711.2 (28.0)
566.4 (22.3)
32.2 ( 90.0)
16465.
162.7 ( 5744,>
16.9/11/ 17,
4.4/ I/ 4.
21.4/13/ 20.
1.0/13/ 1.
16.2/ 3/ .26
3.5/ 3/ .05
9.4/ 2/ 9.
l.l/ 2/ 1.
51.27
13,
18.
.21
8,3
1,18
3.46
611,0
2.40
.54
599.
.980 ( .9^,8)
1.000 ( .905)
162.7
35.30
1.90
1A329N
742.7
8.3
25.6
320.9
12.38
,62
1.82
1.26
TEST WEIGHT 1361, KG( 3000. LDS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8,2 KW( tl.O IIP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 10136.KM(6300 , MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR ,93
-------
TEST NO. 1A32PS
VEHICLE MODEL
ENGINE 2.0 L(122.
TRANSMISSION M5
RUN 3
HA FIAT NOCAT
CIIO L-4
BAROMETER 741.93 MM HG(29.21 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 40. F'CT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20UN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC, C(DEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
85 KFH VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.1A
DATE 12/23/80
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
TOT FLQU
METRES(SCF)
DRY BULB TEMP.
ABS, HUMItlTY
85 K
713.7 (20.1)
561.3 (22.1)
41,1 (106. 6)
32967.
319,9 (11295.)
25.6 DEO C(70.0 DEG F)
0,3 GM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1361, KG( 3000. IBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8,2 KU< 11.0 HP)
ODOMETER 10138. KM( 6301 MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR ,93
CO SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR .
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS CRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFCi UCT (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL
-------
TEST NO, 1A329N RUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 743.71 MM HG(29,28 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 37, PCT '
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20UN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP, LEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TUT FLOW STD. CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD MET£R/RA,V'GE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
a CO. CONCENTRATION PPM
L C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
> . NOX CONCENTRATION PPM .
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME . SECONDS
DFCr UET (DRY)
SCf-r UET (DRY)
VOL
-------
TEST NO. 1A329S RUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 743.71 MM HG<29,28 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 40. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIP P MM. K20(IN, H20)
BLQUER INLET-P MM. H20UN, H20)
&LOUER INLET TEMP. DEG, C(DEG, F)
BLOUCR REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD, CU. METRES
-------
TEST NO. 1A329H RUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2,0 LU22, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION h5
BAROMETER 743.71 MM HG(29.28 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 40. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOULR INLET TEMP. DEG. CtDEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STB. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX liCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
a CO CONCENTRATION PPM
L C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
* NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASG GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASG GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DKC, UET (DRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)
VOL (GCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY. G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
HFET VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4874-001
VEHICLE N0.1A
DATE 12/24/80
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.6 DEG CC78.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY C.3 CM/KG
HFET
711.2 (28.0)
571.5 (22,5)
40.6 (105.0)
2102G.
204.7 ( 7227.)
21.8/11/ 22,
4.5/ I/ 5,
30.4/13/ 28,
.5/13/ 0,
39.O/ 3/ .47
3.I/ 3/ .05
25.7/ 2/ 26.
1.5/ 2/ 2.
19.74
17,
27.
.63
24.3
2.07
6.39
2357.0
8.BO
2.70
765.
.949 ( .937)
l.COO ( ,981)
204.7
45.10
16.45
1A329H
743.7
8.3
25.6
143.2
5.48
.13
.39
,53
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 10146. KM( 6306. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .93
-------
SUMMARY OP REGULATED EMISSIONS FROM FIAT N.A. DIESEL
RESEARCH VEHICLE, EM-469-F, NO CATALYST
Test code
Test type
Date (1981)
Run No.
HC, g/mi
CO, g/mi
NOX, g/mi
Part, g/mi
fuel, mi/gal
1A2F25
3-b FTP
2/16
1
0.63
1.93
1.40
0.44
26.9
1A2F29
3-b FTP
2/18
2
0.61
1.92
1.40
0.45
27.2
1A2F33
3-b FTP
3/11
3
0.48
1.85
1.40
-a
28.2
1A2H26
HFET
2/16
1
0.23
0.68
0.93
0.32
40.5
1A2H30
HFET
2/18
2
0.29
0.71
1.01
0.35
38.8
1A2H34
HFET
3/11
3
0.26
0.71
0.97
-
39.1
1A2H38
HFET
3/13
4
0.23
0.71
1.00
-
38.7
Test code
Test type
Date (1981)
Run No.
HC, g/mi
CO, g/mi
NOX, g/mi
Part, g/mi
fuel, mi/gal
1A2N27
NYCC
2/16
1
1.13
3.67
2.04
0.62
16.6
1A2N31
NYCC
2/18
2
1.17
3.96
2.32
0.62
16.6
1A2N35
NYCC
3/11
3
1.13
4.12
2.37
-
15.5
1A2N39
NYCC
3/13
4
0.95
3.43
2.25
-
17.9
1A2S28
85 kph
2/16
1
0.21
0.56
0.93
0.29
40.3
1A2S32
85 kph
2/18
2
0.18
0.55
0.98
0.30
40.1
1A2S36
85 kph
3/11
3
0.19
0.53
0.95
-
39.7
1A2S40
85 kph
3/13
4
0.19
0.53
0.98
-
38.9
- indicates regulated particulate not sampled
B-17'
-------
TEST K'O. 1A2F25 RUN' 1
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 LC122. CID) L 4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 745.74 MM IIG(29.36 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 30. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NiJMMIK
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER Dir P MM. H20(IN. H20)
B'.OUER INLET P MM. II20(IN. H20)
SLOWER INLET. TEMP. BEG, C<£iEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES
-------
TEST NO. 1A2H26 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL ' HA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 746.00 MM 110(29,37 IN KG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 3Q, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM, II20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. BEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
? NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
L HC MASS GRAMS
o CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC. WET (DRY)
SCFr WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY. G/KG
TEMPERATURE. BEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE. G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN. G/KM
PROJECT 11-4B74-001
VCHICLC N0.1A
DATE 2/16/01
DAC CART t.O. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY DULB TEMP, 24.4 DEG C(76,G DEC F)
ADD, HUMIDITY 7,5 CM/KG
HFET
723.9 (20.5)
504.2 (23.0)
36.7 ( 90.0)
21027.
207.5 ( 73?6.)
25.7/11/ 26,
7,4/ I/ 7,
33.0/13/ 30.
1.2/13/ 1.
42.2/ 3/ .72
3.2/ 3/ .05
27.3/ 2/ 27,
,5/ 2/ 1.
18.50
19,
29.
.67
26.B
2.23
6.92
2554,3
9.62
3.26
765.
,946 ( ,934)
1.000 ( ,981)
207,5
44.60
16,45
1A2II26
746.0
7.5
24.4
155.3
5.C1
.14
.42
.58
TCGT WEIGHT 1361.
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
DIESEL EM -469- F
ODOMETER 10470. KM<
KG( 3000. LDS)
0.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
6511, MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .90
-------
TEST NO, 1A2N27 RUN
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
KCCAT
BAROMETER 746.00 MM HG(29.37 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 23, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H2n
-------
VUIICLE MODCL NA FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION MS
NOCAT
BAROMETER 745.49 MM MG(29,35 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 35, PCT
HAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
SLOWER DIF P MM, II20UN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, 1120, IN, 1120)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEC, C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW GTD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE flETER'/RANGE/PPM
HC [fCKGRti METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANfiE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANCE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE (1ETER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC hASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NDX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
HFCf UET (DRY)
SCF, UET-(DRY)
VOL (SCM)
GAM BLR (SC.1)
KM (MEASURED)
w
TEST NUMBERF
BAROMETER, MM HB
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEC C
CARBON DIOXIDE. G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONSr , G/KM
CAR&ON MONOXIDEi G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN. G/KM
_ .__
DATE 2/16/01
BAG CART NO, 1
PYNC NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP, 24,4 DEC C<76.0 DEC F)
ADS, IJUMIMTY 6.0 DM/KG
85 K
710,0 (20.3)
501,7 (22,9)
38.9 (102,0)
32947,
324,2 (11447.)
25,0/il/ 25,
6,1/ I/ 6,
30.0/13/ 20.
TEST WEIGHT 1361. K0< 3000. LI
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
DIESEL EM-46? F
ODOMETER 10496. Kh( 6522. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR ,09'
45. 5/ 3/
2.9/ 3/
30. 3/ 2/
,5X 2/
17,04
19,
26,
.74
29,0.
3,60
9.C5
4307,9
16.40
5.18
1201.
,941 ( .
1.000 ( .
324.2
70,34
20,40
1A2S20
745.5
6.0
24.4
154.5
5.77
.13
,35
,50
,70
,04
30.
I ,
931)
981)
-------
7TST NO. 1A3F29 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 741.63 MM 110(29.20 IN IIG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 46. PCT
BAG RESULTS
PAG NUMBER
INSCRIPTION
BLOUCR DIP P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. II20(IN, M20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEB. C(DEG, F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
(1C SAMPLE METER/RANGF/PPM
HC BCNGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO 8CKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RAHOE/PCT
C02 BCKGKD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX DCKGRH METER/RANGE/PPM
DHUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS CRAMS
CO? MASS CRAMS
NOX MASS CRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
IIC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX CRAMS/\M
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
co
to
10
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASUREn DISTANCE KM
SCf» DRY
DFC» U'ET (DRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)
VOL (SCH)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 1A2F29
BAROMETER MM IIG 741.7
HUMIDITY G/KG 9.3
TEMPERATURE DEC C 25.0
FTP VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4074 001
VEHICLE N0.1A
DATE 2/10/81
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.0 BEG C<77.0 BEG F>
ABS. HUMIDITY 9.3 GM/KG
TEST UEIGUT 1361. KG( 3000.
ACTUAL KOAD LOAD 0.2 KU< 11.0 (IP)
DIESEL EM-469-F
OBOMCTER 10530. KM( 6548. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .96
1
IOLD TRANSIENT
713.7 (20.1)
579,1 (22.0)
37.2 ( 99.0)
13055.
135.7 < 4791.)
37.0/11/ 37,
9.3/ I/ 9,
45.6/13/ 43.
.3/13/ 0.
36. 5/ 3/ .61
3.5/ 3/ .05
20. 5Y 2/ 21,
l.l/ 2/ 1.
21.50
26.
41,
.56
17.5
2.20
6.53
1396.1
4.02
1.83
.38
1.13
242.1
.04
9.10
505.
5.77
,980
,965 (
1.000 (
2 3
STABILIZED HOT TRANSIENT
713,7 (2C.1) 711,2 (28.0)
579.1 (22.0) 576.6 (22.7)
35.6 ( 96.0) 30.9 (102.0)
23005. 13051.
233.7 ( 0252.) 135,0 ( 4760.)
27.0/11/ 27. 36.8/11/ 37.
10. O/ I/ 10. 10, O/ I/ 10,
34,3/137 32, 37.5/13/ 35.
.2/13/ 0. .1/13/ 0,
23. 6/ 3/ .38 32, 9/ 3/ .55
3.4/ 3/ .05 2.B/ 3/ .04
14. 5/ 2/ 15, 17. 9/ 2/ 13.
,8/ 2/ 1, .6/2/1.
34,44 24,16
17, 2/, '
31. 34.
.33 .51
13.7 17.3
2,33 2.12
8,30 5.32
1423.7 1252.5
5,B6 4.27
1.37 2.06
.38 .37
1.36 .93
230.7 219.7
.95 ' .75
8.69 8.26
867. 505.
6.17 5.70
.902 .980
.950) .967 (
.931) 1.000 (
369.4
70,74
11.94
8.09
CARBON DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYBROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
CARBON MONOXIBE G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
711.2 (28.0)
574.0 (22.6)
36.1 ( 97.0)
23707.
233.1 ( 0230.)
30.4/11/ 30-
10. I/ I/ 10.
32.7/13/ 30.
.5/13/ 0.
22. 6/ 3/ .37
2.9/ 3/ .04
13. 5/ 2/ 14,
.8/ 2/ 1.
36.02
21,
29.
,32
12,7
2.77
7. 89
1370.1
5.42
0.00
.45
1 = 29
225.6
.89
8.51
867.
-.6.11
,982
,953)
.931)
368,1
78.12
11.81
8.39
3-BAG (4- BAG)
230.0 ( 22S.5)
8.66 ( (3.60)
.38 ( .40)
1.19 ( 1.17)
.87 ( .05)
,2CO ( O.COO)
-------
TFST NO. 1A2JI30 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODuL HA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 740.41 MM HC(29.15 IN HG>
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 50. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MK, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEO. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RAN3E/PPM
HC BCKjRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO .CAMPLE METLK/RAN6E/PPM
CO DCKiRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKtJRD METER/RANCE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
IIC. MASS CRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS CRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONBS
BFC, UET (DRY)
SCF> WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM) .
SAM DLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
03
TEST NUMBERF
.BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITYr G/KG
TEMPERATUREF BEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTIONF L/100KM
HYDRflCARDCNSF G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE» G/KM
.XIDCS OF NITROGENf G/KM
NiibUL I a
PROJECT 11-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.1A
DATE 2/18/01
BAG CART HO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 26.1 DEO C(79,0 BEG F)
HFET
711.2 (28.0)
574.0 (22.(,)
30.9 (102.0)
21002.
204.6 ( 7224.)
34.3/11/ 34.
10.I/ I/ 10.
33.B/13/ 31,
4/13X 0,
43.5/ 3/ .74
2.0/ 3/ .04
26.0/ 2/ 27.
.7/ 2/ 1.
17.87
25.
30.
.70
26.1
2.92
7.13
2632.4
10.31
3.52
766.
.944 ( .91-9)
1.000 ( ,977)
204.6
43.83
16.26
1A2H30
740.4
11,0
26.1
161.9
6,06
.18
,44
.63
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KC( 3000. LEG)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD Q.2 KW< 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-4.69 F
ODOMETER 10567. KM( 6566. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.01
-------
TEST NO. 1A2N31 RUN 2
VEHICLE HQtJEL /YA flAT
EVGINE 2.0 LU22, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
NQCAT
BAROMETER 739.90 MM H6<2?.i3 IN no
RELATIVE HI/MIDI TY 53. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN, H20)
DLOUER INLCT P MM. H20CN. H20)
&LOWE* INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F)
BLOUE.t REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRESfSCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
Wl SAMPLE METEh/RANGE/PCT
CO? ItCKG^D METER/RANPE/PCT.
HOX SAMPLE METER/RANf.E/PPM
NOX ECKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
Hf CONCENTKATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCLNTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS CRAMS
CO MAiiS GRAMS
f02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS CRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
PUN ,JME SECONDS
E.KC. WET (DRY)
SCF. WET (DRY)
VOL (5CM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
0)
M
lEST NUhBER,
HIJMIDTTYf
TEMPERATURE ,
CARBON DIOXIDE ,
FUEL CONSUMPTION.
CARBON MONOXIDE »
OXIDES OF NITROGEN;
MM hC
?/KG
DEG C
G/KK
L/iOOKM
G/KM
G/KM
G/KM
PROJECT 11-4074 001
VEHICLE N0.1A
DATE 2/10/81
BAG CART KO. 1
DYNO NO. "i
CVS NO. 7
DRY BULB TEriP. 25.0 DEG C(77.0 DEG F)
ABF. HUMIDITY 10 7 Gh/KG
NYCf
713.7 (20.1)
576,& (22.7)
36.1 ( 97,0)
16437.
161.0 ( 5605.)
27.5/U/ 20,
12.O/ I/ 13,
2B.1/13/ 24.
,1/13/ 0,
17,8/ 3/ ,20
2.7/ 3/ ,04
9.7/ 2/ 10,
,8/ 2/ 1,
46,24
15.
25,
,24
0.9
1,39
4.71
719.6
2.75
,74
599,
.V70 < .962)
1,000 ( ,980)
lil.O
34.49
1.9?
1A2N31
739.9
10,7
25.0
376.2
14,20
.73
2. '16
1.44
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG< 3000. I.DS)
ACTUAL ROAD L3AD 8.2 KU( 11.0 UP)
DIESEL EM--469-F
ODOMETER 10583, KM( 6576. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOFj 1.00
-------
TEST NO. 1A2S32 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT NQCAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 739.65 MM HG(29.12 IN IIG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 47, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIE P MM, H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. I!20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STB. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC [iCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPH
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
!IC CONCENTRATION PPM
CG CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
to
t
M
Ul
MAGS GRAMS
SECONDS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME
DFC, UET (DRY)
SCFr UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBERi
BAROMETER* MM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATUREi DEO C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION* L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS* G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE* G/KM
OXIPES OF NITROGEN* G/KH
85 KPH VEHICLE EMISSIONS RCiUILTS
PROJECT 11--4D74-001
VEHICLE N0.1A
DATE 2/10/C1
HAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO, 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULB TEMP, 26.1 BEG C(79,0 DEC F)
ABS, HUMIDITY 10.2 GM/KG
85 K
716.3 (20,2)
579,1 (22,0)
30.9 (102,0)
32919.
319.7 (11200.)
31,1/H/ 31,
14.5/ I/ 15.
29.3/13/ 27,
.1/13/ 0.
46.O/ 3/ .91
3,I/ 3/ ,05
29.5/ 2/ 30.
,9/ 2/ 1.
16.51
17.
26,
.76
28.7
3.23
9.68
4455.3
17.25
5.22
1200,
.939 < .925)
1,000 ( ,977)
319'. 7
69.10
20.36
1A2S32
739.6
10.2
26.1
157.1
5.07
,11
,34
.61
TEST WEIGHT 1361, K0( 3000. LEG)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
BIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 105B5. KM( 6577. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .98
-------
TECT NO, 1A2F33 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL , NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2,0 L(122, CID) L--4
TRANSMISSION MS
BAROMETER 747,52 MM HG(29,43 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 42, PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPH
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
w . CO CONCENTRATION PPM
' C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
£ NOX"CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM ' .
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CD L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS.
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCFi DRY
.DFCF WET (DRY)
SCFr WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 1A2F33
BAROMETER MM IIG 747.5
HUMIDITY G/KG 8.5
TEMPERATURE DEG C 25.0
FTP VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-40X4-001
VEHICLE N0.1A
DATE 3/11/31
BAG CART NO, 1 / CVC NO, 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP, 25,0 BEG C(77.0 DEG F>
ADG, HUMIDITY 0,5 CM/KG
TECT WEIGHT 1361, KG( 3000, I.HS)
ACTUAL RflAD LOAD 0,2 KW( 11,0 lip)
riTCCr.L CM-469 F
ODOMETER 10626. KM( 6603. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR ,73
1
lOLD TRANSIENT
716.3 (28.2)
5Q1.7 (22.9)
35,6 ( 96.0)
13065.
136.4 ( 4016.)
30.1/11/ 30.
6.6/ I/ 7,
45.1/13/ 42.
.8/13/ 1.
35. I/ 3/ ,59
2.8/ 3/ ,04
20. O/ 2/ 21,
>4/ 2/ 0.
22.53
24.
41.
.55
20.4
1.07
6.43
1364.9
4.96
.33
1.12 '
237,0
.86
0.93
505. -
5.74 '
.981
.966 (
1,000 (
1
STABILIZED
710,0 (20,3)
501,7 (22,9)
33.9 ( 93.0)
23816.
234.9 ( 0295.)
21.1/11/ 21.
7,0/ I/ 8.
33.9/13/ 31,
.0/13/ 1,
22. 6/ 3/ .37
2.6/ 3/ ,04
14. 4/ 2/ 14.
.5/ 2/ 1.
36.10
14.
30.
.33
13,9
1,83
0.19
1408.2
5.33
.29
1.32
226.9
.94
8.54
866.
6.21
.903
,953)
.902)
371.3
79,95
11.95
0.73
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
710,0 (20.3)
581,7 (22,9)
35.6 < 96.0)
13855.
136.3 ( 4012.)
27.9/11/ 23.
7.0/ I/ 8,
34.7/13/ 32.
.6/13/ 1.
30. 2/ 3/ .50
2.4/ 3/ .04
17. O/ 2/ 10.
,5/ 2/ 1.
26.53
20,
31,
.46
17.3
1.60
4.89
1157.5
4.21
.28
.85
201.3
.73
7.56
505.
5.75
- .982
: .970 (
1.0.00 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
4
STABILIZED
710,8 (20,3)
501.7 (22. V)
33,3 ( 92.0)
23811.
235.2 ( 8304.)
26.4/11/ 26,
IA.5/ I/ 15.
32. 6/1 3/ 30.
.5/13/ 0,
71. 5/ 3/ ,35
2.6/ JX .04
13. 3/ 2/ 13-
,5/ 2/ 1.
37.98
12.
29.
.31
12.8
3.66
7.94
1328.2
5.37
.27
1.28
213.8
.86
3.04
868.
6.21
.933
,956)
',9S3>
371.4
79.90
11.96
7.01
3-BAG (4-BAG)
222.1 ( 218.2)
0.35 ( 8.20)
.30 ( .29)
1.15 < 1.14)
.87 ( ,04)
-------
TEST NO. 1A2H34 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT . NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122, CID) L-4
TRANGMISSION M5
BAROMETER 747.01 MM 110(29.41 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 42. PCT
BAG REGULTS
TEST CYCLf
BLOWER DI*F P MM; II20UN, 1120)
EILOUER INLET p MM. H20dN, 1120)
EILOUER INLET TEMP. DEO. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW GTD, CU, METRES(GCF)
HP, SAMPLE MCTCR/RANGE/PPM
IIC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
IIC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS CRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE, !-LG C
CARBON DIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
tt>
M
HFET VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.1A
DATE 3m/Gl
BAG CART NO, 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.0 DEC C(77,0 DEC F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 0.5 GM/KG
HFET
710,0 (20,3)
504,2 (23.0)
36.7 ( 90,0)
21002,
205,6 < 7260.)
30.4/11/ 30,
O.O/ I/ 9,
33.4/13/ 31,
0.
,75
.05
27.
0.
TEST UEIGMT 1361. KG( 3000. LDS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 SIP)
DIESEL EM-449-F
ODOMETER 10651. KM( 6610. HILEG)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR ,93
43, 7/ 3/
3.4/ 3/
27, I/ 2/
,2/ 2/
17,79
30,
.70
26.9
2.62
7.11
2627.0
9.S7
765.
,944 ( .931)
1.000 ( .979)
205.6
44.10
16.33
1A2II34
747.0
0.5
25.0
160. V
6.02
.16
.44
,60
-------
TEST NO. lrt2N35 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL. NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CIIO L~4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 746.51 MM HG(29,39 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 44. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER MF f MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, h'20)
SLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO .BCKGRD METER/RANfiE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANCE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RM3E/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
IIC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
HFC. WET (DRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (GCM)
KM (MEASURED)
to
CD
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY. G/KG
TEMPERATURE, HER C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDEr G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
NYCC VEHICLE: EMISSIONS RCSULTS
PKOJCCT 11-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.1A
DATE 3/11/31
BAG CART MO, 1
BYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
BRY BULB TEMP. 23.3 DEO C<74,0 BEG F)
ABC. HUMIDITY 7,9 GM/KG
NYCC
713.7 (20.1)
579.1 (22.0)
34.4 ( 94.0)
16452.
161.7 ( 5710.)
21.0/li/ 21.
6.0/ I/ 7,
29.3/13/ 27.
.4/13/ 0.
19.5/ 3/ .31
3.6/ 3/ .06
10.2/ ?./ 10.
.3/ 2/ 0.
42.15
14,
26.
.26
9.9
1.34
4.90
767.6
2.01
600,
,976 ( .963)
1.000 ( ,9C3)
161.7.
34.60
1.91
1A2N35
746.5
7.9
23.3
401,6
15.14
.70
2.56
1.47
TCST UCIGHT 1361. KG< 3000. LBf,)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0,2 KU< 11.0 IIP)
DIESEL EM-465--F
ODOMETER 10667. KM( 6623, MILES)
NOX HUMIBITY CORRECTION FACTOR .92
-------
TEST NO, 1A2S36 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 746,76 MM HG(29,40 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 44. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER BIF P MM. H20(IN. 1120)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, 1120)
BLOWER INLET TEMP, BEG, C(BEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STB. CU. METRES(GCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
IIC BCKGRD METER/RAN1E/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
co CO CONCENTRATION PPM
J, C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
vp NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MAGG GRAMS
CQ MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC. WET (DRY)
.SCFr WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
GAM BLR
-------
TEST NO. 1A2H3D RUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT NOCAT
ENfilNE 2.0 L(l.?2. CIID L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 742,70 MM HG(29,24 IN 110)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 30. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER BIF P MM. II20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEO. C(BEC. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC 5CKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKfiRB METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RAN6E/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANI5E/FCT
NOX SAMPLE MEi'ER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFCr UET (DRY)
SCF. UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM DLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
OJ
U)
O
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETERr MM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION* L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE* G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
HFET VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.1A
DATE 3/13/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULD TEMP, 24.4 DEG C(76.0 DEG F>
ABG, HUMIDITY 7.5 GM/KG
HFET
-713.7 (20,1)
579,1 (22,C)
37.2 ( 99.0)
21010.
205.0 ( 72::?,)
22.9/11/ 23.
4.0/ I/ 4.
33.5/13/ 31,
.1/13/ 0.
43.3/ 3/ .74
2.I/ 3/ ,03
28.6/ 2/ 59.
,!/ 2/ 0,
17,99
19.
30.
,71
28.5
2.26
7.16
2661.9
10.11
765.
,944 ( .923)
1.000 ( ,9ei)
205.0
44.41
16.37
1A2H38
742.7
7.5
24.4
162.6
6,00
,14
.44
,62
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. I.Viiii
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 I
DICSEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 10717, KM( 6659. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .90
-------
TEST NO. 1A2N39 RUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL " MA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 742.19 MM 110(29.22 IN IIG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 3G. F'CT
HAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER IHF P MM. H20CIN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H20UN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEC. F)
RLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU, METRES(SCF)
Hi: SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METF-R/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKCRB METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 GAMFLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKCRD METE.VRANGE/FCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
IIC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
IIC MASS GRAMS
CO MAGS GKHho
C02 MAGS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRf-MG
RUN TIME SECONDS
nFC» UET (DRY)
SCFr UET (DRY)
VOL (SCH)
GAM BLR (GCM)
KM (MEASI'RED)
Ul
TEST NUMBER»
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/K6
TEMPERATURE, DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDEF G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION; L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS» G/KM
CARPON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGENr G/KM
wrcc vciiir ;: EhissroNG RESULTS
PROJECT H-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.1A
DATE 3/13/01
BAG CART NO. 1
fiYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TUMP. 23.9 DEG C<75.0 DEG F)
ADS. IIUMIDfTY 7.1 CM/KG
NYCC
713.7 (20.1)
579,1 (22.0)
33.3 ( 92.0)
16476.
161,1 ( 5680.)
15.5/11/ 1,',.
3.7/ I/ 4.
23.8/13/ 21'.
.1/13/ 0.
U.7/ 3/ .27
3.0/ 3/ .05
9.7/ 2/ 10.
,2/ 2/ 0.
49.67
12.
21.
,77
9.5
1.10
3.99
652.1
2,62
600.
.900 ( ,961))
1.000 ( ,901i)
161.1
34.25
1,,07
1A2N39
742.2
7.1
23.9
340.9
13.15
.59
2.13
1.40
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. UBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 10733. KM( 6669. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR ,09
-------
TCSf NO, 1A2C40 RUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT NOCAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION MS.
BAROMETER 741.93 rtM (10(29.21 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 36. PCT
HAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER nil- P MM. H2Q(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEO. C(BEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU GTD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC nCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRli MFTER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 KCKGRD MFTER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS CRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFC» WET (DRY)
SCF. UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
CO
M
TEST-NUMBER*
BAROMETER» MM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEC C
CARBON nroXIDF* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS* G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE* G7KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
05 KPII VdilCLC EMISSIONS RCCULTS
PROJECT 11--4074-001
VEHICLE N0.1A
DATE 3/13/01
BAG CART NO. 1
BYNO NO. 2
CV5 NO. 3
DRY BULB TiIMP. 25,0 BEG C(77.0 BEG F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 7.3 CM/KG
85 K
710.8 <20.3>
579,1 (22.0)
30.9 (102.0)
32947.
319.1 (1124:1.)
2'2.1/H/ 22.
3.4/ I/ 3.
28.9/13/ 27.
.3/13/ 0.
47.0/ 3/ .02
2.5/ 3/ .04
32.1/ 2/ 3'?,
.5/ 2/ I.
16.15
19.
26.
.79
31.6
3.49
9.49
4610.0
17,35
' 1200.
.930 ( .927)
1.000 ( .90J.)
319,1
63.73
20.51
1A2S40
741.9
7.3
25.0
161.7
6,04
.12
.33
.61
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LDC)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU< 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM--469 F
QBOMETER10735, KM( 6672. hlLEG)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .V'O
-------
APPENDIX C
TEST RESULTS,
FIAT NATURALLY-ASPIRATED DIESEL
WITH CATALYTIC TRAP
FUELS EM-329-F A1ID EM-469-F
-------
SUMMARY OF REGULATED EMISSIONS FROM FIAT NATURALLY-ASPIRATED DIESEL
RESEARCH VEHICLE, EM-329-F BASE FUEL, WITH CATALYTIC TRAP
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run Mo.
HC, g/mi
CO, g/mi
NOX, g/mi
Par ticul ate , g/mi
Fuel, mi/gal
1B1F46
3-b FTP
4/6
1
0.06
0.27
1.40
0.13
28.2
1B1F50
3-b FTP
4/7
2
0.06
0.31
1.46
0.11
28.9
1B1F54
3-b FTP
4/9
3
0.10
0.35
1.51
0.09
27.7
1BLF58
3-B FTP
4/10
4
0.08
0.23
1.54
0.10
28.1
1B1H47
HFET
4/6
1
0.02
0.05
1.08
0.06
38.5
1B1H51
HFET
4/7
2
0.02
0.06
1.11
0.07
38.3
1B1H55
HFET
4/9
3
0.02
0.06
1.11
0.09
37.0
1B1H59
HFET
4/10
4
0.02
0.03
1.09
0.12
37.8
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
HC, g/mi
CO, g/mi
NOX, g/mi
Particulate , g/mi
Fuel, mi/gal
1B1N48
NYCC
4/6
1
0.06
0.13
2.32
0.51
17.2
1B1N52
NYCC
4/7
2
0.00
0.16
2.38
0.22
19.0
1B1N56
NYCC
4/9
3
0.03
0.24
2.43
0.17
17.3
1B1N60
HYCC
4/10
4
0.08
0.08
2.32
0.53
18.8
1B1S49
85 kph
4/6
1
0.00
0.02
1,05
0.06
39.1
1B1S53
85 kph
4/7
2
0.00
0.03
1.09
0.10
39.4
1B1S57
85 kph
4/9
3
0.00
0.05
1.16
0.16
36.6
1B1S61
85 kph
4/10
4
0.00
0.00
1.14
0.16
38.6
C-2
-------
TEST NO. 1B1F46 RUN 1
VEHICLE H.iriEL ; NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 I (122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
PARDMETER 750.32 HH HG(29.54 IN HG>
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 27, PCT
FAG RESULTS
PAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN. M?CM
BLOWER INLET P MM. II20(IN. H20)
PLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
F" OUF.R REVOLUTIONS
FLOW GTD. CU. METRES(SCF)
SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPH
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
CQ2 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NQX SAMPLE METER/RANCF'PFM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RAN^r/ppM
DILIITTHN FACTOR
HC rwrr.NTRATIQN PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION- PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MAG'S DRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MAGS GRAMS
BARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
n
u>
HC
HC
CO
CO
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GPVtS/KM
NOX GKAHS/KN
F.UEL CONSUMPTION BY. CD L/1'OOKH
RUN TINE SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF> DRY
DFCi UET (DRY)
SCFr k'ET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (f>n>
Kr1. (MEASURED)
Fl'D. CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 1B1F46
BAROMETER MM IIG 750,3
HUMIDITY C/KG 5.3
TEMPERATURE DEG C 25.0
VEHICLE NO. IB
DATE 4/ 6/01
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNO NO, 2
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.0 DEG C(77.0 BEG F)
A3G. HUMIDITY ^.3 CM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. tPS>
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 UP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 10892, Kh( A760. ttllFH)
NOX MUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .85
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
716,3 (20,2)
579.1 f22.0)
35.0 ( 95.0)
13066.
137,9 ( 4069.)
10.2/11/ 10.
4,0/ I/ 4,
19.U13/ 17.
,3/13/ 0,
32. 5/ 3/ .56
2.9/ 3/ .04
21, I/ 2/ 21,
,!/ 2/ 0,
23.08
6,
17.
.52
'M ,0
.50
2,69
1302.6
4.70
.66
.09
.40
234,1
.85
0,94.
505.
5.56
.986
,948 (
: 1,00.0 (
2
STABILIZED
721.4 (2fl,4>
504.2 (23,0)
7°.2 ( 90.0)
23009 .
230,0 ( 0403, >
4,6/117 5,
4.0/ I/ 4.
2.1/13/ 2,
,2/13/ 0.
21. 7/ 3/ ,35
2,7/ 3/ .04
15. I/ 2/ 15,
,!/ 2/ 0,
30.15
1 .
2.
.31
15.0
.10
,47
1352,5
5.80
.37
,02
,00
020.5
.95
8.39
667,
6.13
,980
,960)
,907)
375.9
80.17
11.70
0.65.
CARBON
3
HOT TRANS TFMT
7U,3 (28,2)
579,1 (22.8)
36.1 ( 97,0)
. 13070.
137,7 ( 4061.)
7.1/11/ 7.
4.0/ I/ 4,
5.5/13/ 5,
,2/13/ 0,
30. 9/ 3/ .51
3, 1/ 3/ .^c>
19, O/ 2/ "0,
,3/ 2/ 0,
26,13
3.
5,
.47
19,5
,26
,75
1174,7
4,36
.49
.04
.13
205.3
,76
7.82
505.
. 5.72
.907
.969 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KH
CARDON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULAR'S 0/KN
4
STABILIZED
721.4 (28.4)
504,2 (23,0)
33.9 ( 93,0)
23001.
-M7.0 ( 0370.)
«; .o/u/ 5,
4.0/ I/ 4,
1.0/13/ 1,
,1/13/ 0.
21.7'
.37 ( ,07)
,079 ( 0,000)
-------
TEST NO. JPJIM7. RUN 1
I'HIICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
FNGINE 2.0 LU22. DID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 740.20 MM IIG(29.46 IN HO)
RELATIVE IIUKU.ITY 26. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM. II2CKIN. !I20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. II.?P(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU f.TD. CU. METRE5
HC EAMPI JT METER/RANGE/PPM
!IC BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPN
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/f'CT
C02 BCKGRD HETER/RANGE/PCT
MOX CAHPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANCE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MAGS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MAGS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFC, WET (DRY)
SCF, 1JCT (DRY)
VOL (GCM)
f.AM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
o
i
TEST NUMBERr
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITYf G/KG
TEMPERATUREi BEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTIONr L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS* G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF" NITROGEN* G/KM
PROJECT11-4074 001
VEHICLE NO.IE
DATE 4/ 6/01
DAD CART NO. 1
DYNO NO.. 2
CVS NO, 3
BRY BULB TEMP. 25.6 DEG C(73.0 DEG F)
AEiS. HUMIDITY 5.7 GM/KG
HFET
711.2 (28,0)
574.0 (22.6)
37,3 (100.0)
20990.
207.5 < 7328.)
5.1/11/ 5.
4.I/ I/ 4.
2.3/13/ 2.
.1/13/ 0.
43.2/ 3/ .74
3.3/ 3/ .05
32.4/ 2/ 7,2.
,3/ If 0.
10.15
1.
2.
.69
32.1
.15
.47
2620.9
10.74
.59
765.
.945 ( .936)
1.000 ( .984)
207.5
44.57
16.32
1B1H47
740.3
5.7
25.6
160.i
6.11
.01
.03
.67
TEST HEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LBC)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
DICSEL EM-329 F
ODOMETER 10913 KM( 6782 MILEG)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .06
-------
TEST NO. 1B1N48 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL . NA FIAT CAT,
ENGINE 3.0 l.<122, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION MS
BAROMETER 747.52 MM 110129,43 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 20, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TE5T CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN, H20>
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. BEG. C(BEG. F)
FLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STB. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
IIC BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
IIC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
IIC MASS GRAMS
CO. MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC. WET (DRY)
SCFr WET (DRY)
' VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
o
i.
in
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETER» MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDEf G/KM .
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS» G/KM
CARBON MONOXIBEi G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
NYCC VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4074-001
VEHICLE NO,IB
DATE 47 6/01
BAG CART NO, 1
DYNO NO, 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULB TEMP, 26,1 DEG C<79,0 DEG F)
A6S, HUMIDITY 6,1 CM/KG
NYCC
711,2 (28,0)
558,8 (22,0)
37.2 ( 99,0)
1(5437,
142,6 ( 5741,)
TEST WEIGHT 1361, KG<
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0,2
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 10931, KM(
3000, IBS)
KU( 11.0 HP)
6792. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR ,C7
4,8/n/
4,1/ I/
1.0/13/
5.
4.
1,
0,
17,2/ 3/ .27
3.2/ 3/ .05
10.5/ 2/ 11.
.5/ 2/ 1.
40.73
1.
1.
.23
10.0
,08
,15
674,1
2,70
.60
599.
.979 ( .970)
1.000 ( .983)
162.6
34.86
1.8S
1B1N48
747.5
6.1 '
26.1
359.1
13,66
.04
.08
1.44
-------
TEST NO, 1B1S4? RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 747.27 MM KG(29,42 IN HG>
RELATIVE HUMILITY 25, TCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM.' II20CIN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEO. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STB. CU. METREG(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANfiE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/FFK
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD KETER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPN
NOX BCKCRE' HETER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
hC CONCENTRATION PPH
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MAGS fiRAMC
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC» WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL vSCM)
SAM PLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBERi
BAROMETER* MM HG
HUMIMTYr G/KG
TEMPERATURE. ICG C
CARBON DIOXIDEr G/KM
FUEL. CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS* G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE» G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
65 KPM VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4074-001
VEHICLE NO,IB
DATE 4/ 6/01
BAG CART NO; 1
BYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP, 27.8 DEO C(Q2,0 BEG F)
ABS, HUMIDITY 6.0 GM/KG
85 K
711.2 (20.0)
574.0 (22.6)
37.3 (100.0)
32934.
324.8 (11463.)
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG< 3000. LUG)
ACTUAL ROAD LDA* 3.2 KW( 11.0 IIP)
DIESEL Ett-3Z,-F
ODOMETER 10335 KM( 6795 HILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR ,07
4,0/n/
4.6/ I/
1.1/13/
,1/13/
46. 4/ 3/
2. a/ §/
34. 7/ 2/
,4/ 2/
16.70
-0.
1.
.76
34.3
-.06
,33
4506.6
10.47
.99
1200,
.940 ( ,
1.000 ( .
324.8
69.73
20.47
1D1S49
747,3
6,0
27.8
150,3
6.02
-.00
.01
,65
4.
5.
1.
0.
.30
.04
35,
0.
933)
904)
-------
TEST NO. 1B1F50 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. C1I» L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 738.89 MM HG(29.09 IN MG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 49. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER PIF P MM. N20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. M20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG, F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD, CD. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC DCKGKD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPIE METFR/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METtR/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPIE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX ECKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
n
HC
no
C02 MAS
NOX MAC
MASS GRAMS
MAG3 GRAMS
CRAMS
GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
HC CRAMS/KM
CO GK'AHC/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CD L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCFr DRY
DFC» UET (DRY)
SCFr UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (ECM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 1B1F50
BAROMETER MM MC 738.9
HUMIDITY G/KG 10.0
TEMPERATURE DEG C 25,0
VEHICLE NO.1C
PATE 4/ 7/81
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVG NO. 3
DYNO NO. 2
PRY BULB TEMP. 25.0 DEG C(77.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 10.0 CM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1361, KG( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 10966. KM( 6814. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .98
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
706.1 (27. e)
571.5 (22.5)
36.1 ( 97.0)
13076.
134.9 ( 4763.)
8.2/11/ 8.
4. I/ I/ 4.
10.2/13/ 17.
.2/13/ 0.
34. 3/ 3/ .57
2.6/ 3/ ,04
19. 9/ 11 20.
,3/ 2/ 0.
23,29
4,
16.
,53
19.6
.33
2.50
1321,1
4.95
,52.
,06
,43
-22 9, -7
,86
8,76
505.
5.75
,979
,968 <
1,000 (
2
STABILIZED
711.2 (20.0)
574,0 (22.6)
34,4 ( 94,0)
23018,
232,1 ( 0196.)
4,1/H/ 4,
3, I/ I/ 3.
3.3/13/ 3.
,3/13/ 0.
21. 0/ 3/ ,35
2,6/ 3/ ,04
14, 4/ 2/ 14,
.3/ 2/ 0.
37,96
1,
3,
,31
14,1
,14
,72
1332. B
6,12
,32
,02
,12
216,8
1,00
8,25
867.
6,15
,901
,952)
.900)
367,0
76.91
11.90
8.50
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
706,1 (27.8)
571,5 (22.5)
35,0 ( 95,0)
13375.
135,1 ( 4771.)
6.1/11/ 6,
3, I/ I/ 3,
5.5/13/ 5,
,1/13/ 0,
30, O/ 3/ .50
2,8/ 3/ ,04
19, I/ 2/ 19,
1,1/ 2/ 1,
26,98
3,
5.
,45
13.0
,24
,75
1124,1
4.56
,41
.04
,13
195,0
,79
7.46
505.
5,74
.900
,970 (
l.QOO (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS \(THC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICIPATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
716.3 (20,2)
579,1 (22.0)
34.4 ( 94.0)
23027.
232.1 ( 0195.)
4.1/11/ 4.
3.2/ I/ 3.
2.0/13/ 3,
,2/13/ 0.
21. O/ 3/ ,34
2,7/ 3/ ,04
14, 9/ 2/ 15,
1,2/ 2/ 1,
39.49
1,
2,
,30
13,7
,13
,62
1260.0
,9 5.96
0,00
,02
.10
207,1
,97
7,00
868,
6.12
,901
,955)
,980)
367,2
76.92
11,06
7,67
3-DAG . (4-DAG)
213,7 " ( 210.8)
8,14 ( 8.03)
,04 ( .04)
.19 ( ,18)
,91 ( .91)
.066 ( 0,000)
-------
HPET
VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4074-001
TRANSMISSION M5
U(
en
) L-4
BAROMETER 730,12 MM 116(27,06 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 44, FCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
DLOWER DIF P MM, H2CKIN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(GCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD.METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NQX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
IIC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO 'CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
'HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS. GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, UET (BRY)
. SCFr WET (DRY)
VOL- (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
o
CD
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY; G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDEF G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION* L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
C.ARBON MONOXIDE? G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN? G/KM
VEHICLE NO,IB
DATE 4/ 7/01
BAG CART NO, 1
DYNO NO,
CVS NO, 3
DRY DULD TEMP. 26,1 DEG C(79,0 DEG F)
ABS, HUMIDITY 9.6 GM/KG
HFET
711,2 (20,0)
571,5 (22,5)
37,2 ( 99.0)
21015,
203.5 ( 7104,)
4,7/H/ 5,
3/5/ I/ 4,
3.1/13/ 3,
.1/13/ 0,
44,I/ 3/ .75
3.1' 3/ .05
31,I/ 2/ 31,
1,0/ 2/ 1,
17,74
1,
3,
.71
30.2
,17
,62
2644.6
11,31
,69
' 765.
.944 ( ,930)
1.000 < .979)
203.5
42.60
16.39
1D1II51
738.1
9.6
26.1
161.4
6,14
,01
.04
.69
KG( 3000. LBS)
0,2 KU< 11,0 HP)
DIESEL EK-329--F
ODOMETER 10909. KM( 6820, MILEO
TEST WEIGHT 1361.
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .96
-------
1B1N52
MODEL
?.0 L(122.
TRANSMISSION M5
RUN 2
NA FIAT CAT
CID) L-4
BAROMETER 737.07 MM HG(29.05 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 44, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(BEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STB. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RAMGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
o NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
' HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS CRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VGL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE, if/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
VEHICLE NO.IB
DATE 4/ 7/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO, 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 26.1 DEG C(79.0 BED F)
ABS. HUMILITY 9,6 CM/KG
NYCC
711.2 (20.0)
569,0 (22,4)
34,4 ( 94,0)
16456.
160.0 ( 5650,)
3.6/11/ 4,
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
DIESEL EM-327 F
ODOMETER 11005, KM( 6030. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR ,96
3.9/ I/
1.2/13/
, 1/13/
16, 21 3/
3. I/ 3/
10. 5/ 2/
l.O/ 21
5t,90
-0.
1.
,21
9.5
-.02
.18
618.8
2.81
.26
599.
.981 ( ,
1,000 ( ,
160.0
33.35
1,90
1B1N52
737,9
9.6
26,1
326,1
12,40
-.01
,10
1.4&
4,
1,
0.
,26
,05
11,
1,
967)
903)
-------
TEST NO. 1B1S53 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 737.62 MM HG(29.04 IN KG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 41. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN, H2Q)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H?C(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEHP. DEC. C(DEC. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW GTD, CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RAWE/PPM
HC BCKCRll METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 GAHPLE HETER/RANCE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
9 NDX CONCENTRATION PPM
M HC MAGS GRAMS
0 CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFC, WET (DRY)
SCFr WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM DLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMDERr
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATUREF DEG C
CARDON DIOXIDEr G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100NM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARDON MONOXIDEr G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
85 KPH VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4074-001
VEHICLE NO.IB
DATE 4/ 7/81
BAG CART NO. 1
BYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 26.7 DEG C(00.0 DEO F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 9.3 CM/KG
65 K
711.2 (20.0)
574.0 (22.6)
37.0 (100.0)
329(53.
318.6 (11249.)
TEST HEIGHT 1361. KG< 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
DIESEL EM--327-F
ODOMETER 1100B. KM( 6040. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .96
0,
01
05
4.
1.
3.6/11/
4.0/ I/
2.1/13/
.1/13/
47.I/ 3/
3.2/ 3/
33.9/ 2/
,7/ 2/
U.50
-0.
2.
.77
33.2
- .02
.65
4464.5
19.37
1.77
1200.
.939 < .927)
1.000 < .979)
310.6
66477
20,41
1B1S53
737.6
9.3
26.7
157.1
5.97
-.00
.02
,60
-------
TEST NO. 1B1F54 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2,0 LU22, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION MS
BAROMETER 742,44 MM HG<29,23 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 60. PCT
PAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOUER DIP P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H2CKIN. H2Q)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG, C(DEG, F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD, CU, METRES(SCF)
IIC GAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RAN3E/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION P-PM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS CRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
O
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NQ.X GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100.KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF.. DRY
DFC> WET '.DRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM DLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
' TEST NUMBER 1B1F54
BAROMETER MM'HG 742,4
HUMIDITY G/KG 12.7
TEMPERATURE DEG C 25.6
VEHICLE NO.ID
DATE 4/ 9/Q1
BAG CART NO, 1 / CVS NO, 3
DYNO NO, 2
DRY BULB TEMP, 25.6 DEO C(70.0 DCG F)
ACS. HUMIDITY 12.7 CM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
DIESEL EM-329 F
OBOMETCR 11051. KM( 6067. MILES)
NOX HUMIBITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.07
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
711.2 (20,0)
571,5 (22,5)
35,6 ( 96.0)
13073,
136,1 ( 4C06.)
10.3/11/ 10,
3,9/ I/ 4,
23.2/13/ 21.
"1.5/13/ 1,
35, 9/ 3/ .60
3.2/ 3/ ,05
19, O/ 2/ 19,
,6/ 2t 1,
22.14
7,
17.
,56
10.4
,52
3.05
13S3.9
5,13
,40
.09
.53
240.6
.09
9,19 '
505,
5.75
.975
. .966 (
i.ooo- (
2
STABILIZED
711.2 (28,0)
501,7 (22,9)
33,9 ( 93,0)
23824,
234.2 ( 8271.)
5.6/11/ 6.
3.7/ I/ 4.
4.0/13/ 4.
1.4/13/ 1.
22, 7/ 3/ ,37
3,0/ 3/ ,05
13, O/ 2/ 14.
,5/ 2/ 1,
36,34
2,
3,
,32
13,3
,28
,82
1305,9
6,37
,32
.04
,13
224,9
1,03
8,56
868,
6,16
.977
,947)
,976)
370,4
70,57
11.91
8.87
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
711,2 (28.0)
579.1 (22. G)
35,6 ( 96,0)
13079,
136,1 ( 4005, >
7,3/H/ 7.
3,7/ I/ 4,
7.4/13/ 7,
1.3/13/ 1.
31, 3/ 3/ .52
3,3/ 3/ ,05
17. 2/ 2/ 17.
,5/ 2/ 1,
25.76
4.
5.
,47
16.7
.30
.85
1171.7
4.65
.30
,05
.15
205.7
.82
7.83
506,
5,70
,976
,969 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULARS G/KM
4
STABILIZED
711.2 (28.0)
579.1 (22,0)
33,9 ( 93,0)
23027,
234,3 ( 0273.)
5.6/11/ 6.
3.9/ I/ 4,
4.2/13/ 4,
1.2/13/ 1.
22. 4/ 3/ .36
3.5/ 3/ ,05
13. 5/ 2/ 14.
,5/.2/ 1,
36,86
2,
3.
.31
13.0
,25
.72
1331,7
6.23
0.00
.04
.12
218.3
1.02
8.31
868.
6.10
.977
.950)
.977)
370.4
78.56
11.80
8.08
3-BAG (4 BAG)
222.9 ( 220.9)
8.49 ( 8.42)
.06 ( .06)
,22 ( .22)
,94 ( ,94)
.056 ( 0.000)
-------
TEST NO. 1B1U55 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22, CTIO L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 742.70 MM HG<2?.24 IN HG)
RELATIVE IIUrtlDITY 54. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. U20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
DLOUF.R IN'LET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW S"iD. CIJ. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC SCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 GAMPIE METCR/RANGE/PCT
L02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGC/PPM
NQX DCKGRD -METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
IIC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MAGS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, MET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
o
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG C
CARDON DIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION! L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/K'M
CARDON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
HFET VEHICLE: EMISSIONS RGSULTS
PROJECT U-4074-001
VEHICLE NIMB
DATE *.,' 9/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 26.1 DEC C(79.0 DEG F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 11.7 GM/KG
IIFET
711.2 (28.0)
571.5 (22.ti)
40.0 (104.0)
21029.
204.3 ( 7215.)
5.5/11/ 5.
3.0/ I/ 4.
4.3/13/ 4,
1.1/13/ 1.
45.2/ 3/ .70
3.3/ 3/ .05
28.7/ 2/ 29.
,7/ 2/ 1,
17.26
2.
3.
.73
28.0
.23
.67
2722.3
11.31
.96
766.
.942 ( .926)
1.000 ( .976)
204.3
43.46
16,30
1B1II55
742.7
11.7
26.1
167,0
6,35
.01
.04
.69
TEST HEIGHT 1361. KB( 3000. LCS>
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD B.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 11074. KM( 6001. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.03
-------
TEST NO. IB1N56 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(I22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 742.70 MM HGC29.24 IN IIG>
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 54, PCT
DAC RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN. H2Q)
BLOUCR INLET TEMP. DEO, C(DEG, F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW GTD. CU. METRE5
4.9/11/ 5,
4,6/ I/ 5.
2,5/17.' 2,
.0/13/ 1,
17.5/ 3/ .28
3.4/ 3/ .05
9.4/ 2/ 9.
,6/ 2/ 1.
47,83
0,
2,
,23
8.8
,04
.20
675.8
2,06
.20
600,
,979 ( .962)
1,000 ( ,900)
161,6
34,14
1,89
1B1N56
742,7
12,2
26.7
356.0
13,57
,02
,15
1,51
TECT WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 11090. KM( 6891. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1,05
-------
TEST NO. 1B1S57 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L<122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION H5
BAROMETER 742.70 MM flC(29.24 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 51. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIP P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD, CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
IIC BCKGSD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAhPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NGX BCKGRD METER/RAKGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO' CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
IIC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DEC* UET (PRY)
. SCF> UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY. G/KG
TEMPERATURE. DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE. G/KM
FUEL'CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN. G/KM
n
05 KPH VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
Pf.'OJFST 11-4074-001
VEHICLE NO.IB
DATE 4/ 9/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULD TEMP. 26.7 BEG C<80.0 DEG F>
ABS. HUMIDITY 11.4 CM/KG
85 K
711.2 <20.0)
571.5 (22.5)
40,6 (105.0)
32397.
314.2 (11095.)
5.2/11/ 5.
6,5/ I/ 7.
3.1/13/ 3.
.0/13/ 1.
50.21 3/ .87
3.4/ 3/ .05
33.7/ 2/ 34.
.O/ 2t 1.
15.37
-1,
2.
.82
33.0
-.15
.75
4730.3
20.27
2.72
' 1100.
.935 ( .920)
1.000 ( .976)
314.2
66. CO
27.99
1B1S57
742.7 :
11.4
24,7
169,0
6,42
-.01
.03
.72
TEST UEIGHT 1361. KG< 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EH-327 F
ODOMETER 11092. KM( 6092. HILEC)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.02
-------
TEST NO. 1B1F50 KUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL ' NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L<122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 742.70 MM HG(29,24 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 70. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMFER
DESCRIPTION
BLOUER DIF F MM. H20UN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEHP. DEG, C(DEG,
Bl.OUlTR REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STB. C«J. MCTRES(GCF)
IIC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKIiRn METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCNGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 KCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
o
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
Cf)2 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CD L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF, DRY
DFC» UET (DRY)
SCF. UET (DRY)
VOL fSCM)
SAM ILK (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 1B1F58
BAROMETER MM HG 742.7
HUMIDITY G/KG 12.9
TEMPERATURE DEG C 23.3
VEHICLE NO.ID
PATE 4/10/01
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY DULD TUMP. 23.3 DEO C(74.0 DEB F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 12.9 CM/KG
1
COLD TRANSIENT
711.2 <2G,0)
571.5 (22.5)
35.6 < 96.0)
13065.
135,0 ( 479.'),)
10.1/11/ 10,
5,0/ I/ 5,
20.3/13/ 26,
12.1/13/ 11,
34,3/ 3/ .58
3,0/ 3/ .05
19.7/ 2/ 20,
,7/ 2/ .1.
22.08
5.
15.
,54
19,0
,42
2,35
1330.1
5,32
,39
,07
.41
233,1
,93
8.89
505,
5,74
.972
I'.OOO (
TEST WEIGHT 1J61. KG( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
DIEGCL EM-329-r
ODOMETER 11124, KM( 6912. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.08
2 3
STABILIZED HOT TRANSIENT
716.3 (28,2) 711,2 (20,0)
574,0 (22.6) 571,5 (22,5)
33.9 ( 93,0) 36,1 ( 97,0)
23012, 13074,
233,0 ( 0257.) 135,0 ( 4794.)
6.0/11/ 6, 7,7/H/ 8.
4.4/ I/ 4, 4,4/ I/ 4,
10.6/13/ 10, 10.2/13/ 9,
9.6/13/ 9, 5.7/13/ 5,
22. 2/ 3/ ,36 31, 3/ 3/ ,52
2,8/ 3/ ,04 3,2/ 3/ ,05
13, 7/ 2/ 14, 18. O/ It 18.
.5/ 2/ 1. ,9/ 2/ 1,
37,15 25.74
2. 3,
1, 4.
,32 ,47
13.2 17,1
,23 .27
.29 ,65
1359,4 1172.7
6,36 -i.79
,33 ,44
.04 ,05
,05 ,11
221,7 205,1
1,04 ,04
8,43 7.81
867, 505,
6,13 5.72
,974 ,973
.945) ,969 (
,973) 1,000 (
369.6
77.76
11.87
8.66
CARBON DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KN
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/Krt
CARBON MONOXIDE G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
716,3 (28.2)
574,0 (22,6)
35.0 ( 95,0)
23814.
233,4 ( 0241.)
5,4/H/ 5.
4, 1/ I/ 4,
5, 0/13/ 5,
4.7/13/ 4.
22, O/ 3/ ,36
3,2/ 3/ ,05
13, 5/ 2/ 14,
,4/ 2/ 0.
37,55
1,
1,
.31
13.1
.20
.28
1316,4
6.30
0,00
,03
,05
214.7
1.03
8.17
868.
6.13
,974
.947)
,974)
369,2
77,78
11.05
7,99
3-BAG (4-BAG)
219.5 ( 217.4)
8.36 ( 8.20)
,05 ( .05)
.14 ( .14)
.96 ( ,96)
,063 ( 0,000)
-------
TEST NO. 1C1H59 RUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 Li 122, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 742,19 MM HG<29.22 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 53. PCT
HAG RESULTS
1ESI CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H2CKIN, 1120)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20UN, H2U)
BLOUFR INLET TEMP, BEG. C(DEG, F)
BLOUFR REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. «F.TRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METCR/RANGE/PPM
IIC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RAMGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE MFTFR/RANGE/PCT
C02 fiCNGRD METER/RAHGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NQX DCNGRD HETER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MAGS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONBS
DFC» UET (BRY)
SCF. WET (BRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
o
CTl
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIUITYr G/KG
TEMPERATURE? BEG C
CARDON DIOXIBEr G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCAR3f)N5» G/KM
CARBON MONOXIBE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
VEHICLE: NO.ID
DATE 4/10/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
BRY BULB TlTMP. 25.6 DEO C(70.0 DEC F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 11.2 GM/KG
HFET
721,4 (20,4)
584,2 (23,0)
41,1 (106,0)
21016,
203,5 ( 7187.)
5.7/11/
-------
TRANSMISSION M5
RUN 4
NA FIAT C
CID) L-4
BAROMETER 742.19 MM HG(29,22 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 66, PCT
BAG RCGULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIP P MM, H20(IN. H20) .
BLOUER INLET P MM. II20CIN. H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEC. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT Fl.OU GTD. CU, METRES(SCF)
HC CAMPLE METER/RANfiE/PPM
MC BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CD SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS fiRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MAGS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM PLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED) , '
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETER» KM .HG
HUMIDITY. G/KG
TEMPERATURE. BEG C
CARDON DIOXIDE. G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100NM
HYDK'OCARDONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/Ktl
OXIDES OF HITROGEN. C/KM
o
VEHICLE NO.ID
DATE 4/JO/B1
BAD CART NO, 1
DYNO. NO. 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULB TEMP, 23.3 BEG C(74.0 BEG D
ADS, HUMIDITY 12,i CM/KG
NYCC
711.2 (20.0>
571,5 (22,5)
37.6 (100,0)
U452.
160,0 ( 567f,',)
TEST UEICiHT 1361. K0< 3000. LB(3>
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
DIESEL EM-327-F
ODOhCTER 11164, KH( 6937. HIttS)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1,05
S.
4,
05
9,
1.
1
4.9/11/
4,0/ I/
2.3/13/
1.7/13/
6.U 3/
3,4/ 3/
9,I/ 2/
,6/ 2/
50.55
1.
1,
.21
8,5
,09
.10
620.3
2.75
.63
599.
.9GO < .959)
.000 ( .974)
' 160.8
34.24
1,91
1B1N60
742.2
12.1
23.3
329.2 .
12.52 '
,05
.05
1.44
-------
AT"7
EN
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 742.19 MM HG(29.22 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 57. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD, CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAhPLK MCTER/fVANCE/PPM
HC BCKGRD ME1ER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE MFTER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD HETER/RANGE/FFN
C02 GAMPIE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/FPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/FPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
O NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
,1 HC MASS GRAMS
oo CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TiME SECONDS
DFC. UET (DRY)
SCF. WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER.
BAP.OMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY. G/KG
TEMPERATURE. DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE. G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN. G/KM
VEHICLE NO.IB
flATE 4/10/81
DAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY DULB TCMP. 25.6 DEG CC7Q.O DEG F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 11.9 CM/KG
85 K
711.2 (28.0)
579.1 (22.8)
41.1 (106.0)
32939.
310.9 (11260.)
4.5/11/ 4.
4.0/ \/ 4.
1.1/13/ 1,
1.0/13/ 1.
47.7/ 3/ ,C2
2.9/ 3/ .C4
32.3/ 2/ 32.
.5/ 2/ 1.
16.27
1.
0.
.78
31.8
.14
.05
4561.6
20.21
2.76
1200.
.939 ( .921)
l.COO ( .974)
310.9
60.18
20.42
1D1S61
742.2
11.9
25.6
160.5
6.10
.00
.00
.71
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KC( 3000. LBQ)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD B.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM--329 F
ODOMETER 11166. KM( 6730. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.04
-------
SUMMARY OF REGULATED EMISSIONS FROM FIAT NATURALLY ASPIRATED DIESEL
RESEARCH VEHICLE, EM-469-P FUEL, WITH CATALYTIC TRAP
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
BC, g/mi
CO, g/mi
NOjj, g/mi
Particulate, g/mi
Fuel, mi/gal
1B2F64
3-b FTP
4/15
1
0.08
0.35
1.51
0.08
28.5
1B2F68
3-b FTP
4/16
2
0.08
0.39
1.56
0.05
28.7
1B2F72
3-b FTP
4/20
3
0.11
0.48
1.61
0.07
28.9
1B2F76
3-b FTP
4/21
4
0.11
0.42
1.69
0.06 ,
29.0.
1B2H65
HFET
4/15
1 '
0.03
0.05
1.14
0.07
38.0
1B2H69
HFET .
4/16
2
0.03
0.08
1.16
0.06
39.1
1B2H73
HFET
4/20
3
'0.03
0.10
1.19
0.05
39.5
1B2H77
HFET
4/21
4
0.03
0.05
1.14
0.06
39.1
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
EC, g/mi .
CO, g/mi
HOx, g/mi
Particulate, g/mi
Fuel, mi/gal
1B2N66
NYCC
4/15
1
0.05
0.23
2.25
0.23
18.5
1B2N70
NYCC
4/16
2
0.08
0.24
2.27
0.10
18.6
1B2N74
NYCC
4/20
3
a
0.18
a
1B2N78
NYCC
4/21
4
0.00
0.14
2.25
0.12
18.8
1B2S67
85 kph
4/15
1
0.00
0.00
1.13
0.08
39.5
1B2S71
85 kph
.4/16
2
"0.00
0.00
1.14
0.11
33.7
1B2S75
85 pltfi
4/20
.3
0.02
0.05
1.13
0.07
40.6
1B2S79
85 pkh
4/21
4
0.02-
0.02
1.11
0.09
40. 1
Data not
acceptable
-------
TFTGT NO. 1H2F64 RUii 1
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 H122. CTD) L 4
1RANCMIGGION H5
BAROMETER 749.55 MM 116(29,51 IN IIG)
REIAFIVE HUMIDITY 52, PCT
HAG RESULTS
HAG NUMBER
BESCSVIPTION
BLGUER DIP P MM. H20(IN. 1120)
FtlOUER INI FT P MM. II2(1
34,4 ( 94.!))
2J822.
236.3 ( C344,)
5.2/11/ 5.
3.7/ I/ 4.
2.4/13/ 2.
.3/13/ 0.
22. LV 3/ .36
3.4/ 3/ .05
14. O/ 2/ 15,
l.H/ 2/ :.'.
3 7. 2.5
2.
C. *
.31
13,3
,T?
.51
1334.7
5.99
0.00
.04
.00
213.5
.76
7.V3
868.
6.25
.900
.953)
.979)
373.5
79.29
12.05
7.73
3- DAG (i DM})
CARBON DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE G/'KM
oxrncr. or NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATCS G/KM
221.6 ( ;.'17
3.25 ( 0,
.05 i.
.22 (
.94 C
,050 ( i>.i)
. y)
ID
OS)
20)
92)
iVO)
-------
TEST NO. 11121165 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22, CID) L--4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 749.55 MM !IG<27.51 IN !IG>
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 50. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P hM. 1120(IN. 1120)
DI.OUCR INLET P MM, H20(IN. 1120)
Bl.OUER INLET TEMP. BEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD, CU. METRES(SCF)
HC CAMPLE rtETER/RANOE/PPM
IIC fcCKGRB MEIER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO KGKGRD METER/RANGE/PPH
C02 CAhPLE METCR/RANGC/rCT
C02 I:CKr,!VD HETCR/RANGE/PCT
NOX GAHPLC METER/RANGE/PPM
N'OX DCKCiRD hETCR/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION1 FACTOR
IIC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
CO? CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
IIC MAGS GRAMS
CO . hAGG GRAMS
C02 MAGS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE HACG GRAMS -
RUN TIME SECONDS
fiFCr UET (DRY)
SCr» WET (DRY)
VOL (GCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
n
NJ
TEST NUMBER»
BAROMETER r MM 116
HUMIDITY G/KG
TEMPERATURE» DEC C
CriRDON DIOXIDE» G/KM
FUEL CONtiUMPHONj L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDEi G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROfiCN, G/KM
HFET VOIICLE EMISSION:; fvCGULTS
PSOJJTCl 11-4074 001
VEHICLE NC.1H
DATE 4/15/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. ?.
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULD TEMP. 25.4 BEG C(70.0 DEO D
ADS, HUMIDITY 10.Z KM/KG
HFET
711.2 (1'C.O)
576.6 (22.7)
3?.4 (103.0)
21007.
206.6 ( 72f6.)
5.9/11/ 6.
4.0/ I/ 4.
2.7/13/ 2.
.1/13/ 0.
45.O/ 3/ .77
3,1/ 3/ .05
30.C/ 2/ 31.
' .O/ 2/ 1.
17.35
O
L 4
2.
,7J
30.0
.25
.55
2749,5
11.71
.76
765.
,742 ( .727)
1.000 ( .977)
'206.6
44,14
16.52
1021165
749.6
10.3
25.6
166,5
6.19
,02
,03
.71
TCGT UCir.HT 1361. M5< 3000. iliii
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0,2 KW< 11.0 IIP*
UICSEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 11352. KM( 7054. MILES>
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION fflCTOk
-------
TEST NO. 1E2N66 RUN 1
VEI.'ICLG MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 LO22. CID) L--4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 749.55 MM 110(29.51 IN IIG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 52. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
GLOWER DIF P MM. H2QUN. 1120)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H20(IN, 1120)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEC. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW GTD. CD, METRES(SCF)
HC CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
IIC DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO EiCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
CO? BCKGRD METER/RANTiE/PCT
NOX CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX 8CKGRD NETER/RA'NGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION FTM
HC' MAGS GRAMS
CO MASS GR,iMO
f.02 HA3S GRAMS
NOX MACS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIMF SECONDS
DFC» UET (DRY)
3CF, UET (DRY)
VOL (GCM)
SAM f.'LR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
n
i.
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETER. MM IIG
HUMIDITY» G/KG
TEMPERATUREF DEC C
CARBON DIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL CUNGUMPTIONr L/100KM
HYDROCrtRCONCF G/KM
CARIiOf.' MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF .NITROGEN. G/KM
NYCC VCillCI.C EMISSIONS ftCGULTS
PRO.ICCT 11-4074-001
VClilCt.E NO. IK
HATE 4/15/01
BAG CART NO, 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVG NO. 3
DRY BULU TcMP. 25,0 LEG C<77.0 HEG Fi
ADC, HUMIDITY 10.5 CM/KG
NYCC
711.2 (20.0)
576.L (22.7)
35.0 ( 95.0)
16450.
163,2 ( 5764.)
Tl-ST U'EIOIIT 1361. K0< 3000. l.B:;>
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD B.2 KIH 11.0 i;P)
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 1136G. KM( 7064, «Iir:;.'
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .99
5.
4.
2,
0..
,27
.05
10.
1,
4.7/11/
4.I/ I/
1.7/13/
.I/I,!/
17.I/ 3/
3,4/ 3/
9.6/ 2/
,9/ ?./
49.02
1.
1,
8.7
.OA
.27
662.7
2.71
,27
600.
,900 ( ,963)
1.000 ( ,931)
163.2
34.. 64
1,93
1B2N66 -.
749.6
10,5
25.0
342.5
12.73
.03
.14
1.40
-------
TEST NO. 1C2S67 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE- 2.0 1(122, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
,'iARllMF.TER 749,30 MM H0(27.50 IN IIC)
RELATIVE HUMiniTY 50. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TCST CYCLL
BLOWER DIF P MM. II20UN. 1120)
DI.OUER INLET P MM. IIPOdN. 1120)
HLOUER INLET TEMP, DEC. C(DEG. F)
OLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW GTD. CU. Mi.TRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGLVPPM
HC CCKGRD METER/'RANGE/PPM
CO CAMPLE MCTFR/RANBE/PPM
CO BC'KGRO METuR/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE ME7ER/RANCE/PCT
C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX CAMPLE METER/RANfiE/PPM
NOX DCKGRD hETER/RANGE/PPh
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
CO? CONCI-NTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
IIC MAGS GRAMS
CO MACC GRAMS
C02 HAGC GRAMS
o
to
PARTICULAR. MAGS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
HFC, WET (DRY)
SCF» WET (DRY)
VOL (CCriJ
SAM BLR CGCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMDERf
BAROhr.TtT>
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.7 K.tH 11.0 li
DIESEL EM 469 F
ODOMETER 11370. KM( 7065^ hll.i:1';/
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.00
4.
0.
0,
01
04
4A.9/ ?,/
2.7/ 3/
32, Lt 2/
,9/ 2/ 1.
16.50
-0.
0.
.77
31.0
-,03
.10
4549.0
19.75
1.34
1200.
.940 ( ,?:'4)
1.000 ( ,v76)
324.4
69.01
20.38
1D2C67
749.3
10. 6
26.1
160.3
5.95
-.00
.00
,70
-------
TEST NO. JD2F6P RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 740.54 MM 110(29.47 IN HO
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 56. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIE P MM. II20(IN, 1120)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IN. 1120)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F)
niOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FI.OU STB. CU. METRES(SCF)
!IC SAMPLE METER/RANCE/PPM
HC BCKGRD MCTER/RANGE/PPM
CO GAMPIE METER/RANGE/PPM
CD DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/'RANCE/PPM
NOX DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
j CO CONCENTRATION PPM
' C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
£ NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS CRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/lOOKrt
SECONDS
KM
RUN TIME
MEASURED DISTANCE
SCFr DRY
HFC, UET (DRY)
SCF» UET (DRY)
V0!_ (CCM)
SAM DLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESI/l.TS
TEST MUMPER
BAROMETER MM IIG
HUMIDITY G/KG
TEMPERATURE DEO C
1B2F68
740.5
11.0
25.6
FTP VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PKOJCC1 11 4074-001
VEHICLE HO.1C
HATE 4,14/01
BAH CART 1:0, 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY BULD 1EMP. 25.6 DEC C(70.0 DEC F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 11.8 CM/KG
TECT UEICIIf 1361. KG( 3000. !.!;$>
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD to,2 NU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM 469-F
ODOMETER 11402. KM( 7005. MILL'S)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.04
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
716. 3 (20,2)
574.0 (22.,',)
36.1 ( 97.0)
13997.
137.8 ( 40^5, >
9.2/11/ 9.
4.5/ I/ 5.
20.0/13/ 13.
1.5/13/ 1.
34. 5/ 3/ .58
3.3/ 3/ .05
20. 9/ 21 :i.
l.O/ 2/ 1.
23.13
5,
1A.
.53
19.9
.39
2.63
1332,6
5.45
.13
.07
, .46
231.7
.95
3,64
510,
5.75
,976
,9o7 (
1.000 <
2
STABILIZED
721.4 (20.4)
534,2 (23.0)
33.9 ( 93.0)
23745.
234.4 ( B27C.)
6.6/11/ 7.
4.9/ I/ 5.
4.6/13/ 4.
1.2/13/ 1.
22. 7/ 3/ .37
3. I/ 3/ .05
14. 5/ 2/ 15.
.7/ 2/ 1.
36.33
2.
3.
.32
13,8
,25
.32
1300.5
6.42
.21
.04
,13
225.0
1.05
0.37
865.
6.14
.970
.949)
.970)
372.2
77.74
11. G9
8.50
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
716,3 (20,2)
574.0 (22.6)
36.1 ( 97.0)
13049.
136.3 ( 4013.)
9.3/11/ 9.
1.9/ I/ 5.
11.1/13/ 10.
.5/13/ 0.
31. 2/ 3/ .52
3.4/ 3/ .05
13. 4/ 2/ 13,
,8/ 2/ 1.
25,02
5.
9.
.47
17.6
,36
1,48
1165.5
4.76
.1?
,06
.26
202.8
.03
7.55
505.
5,75
.977
.969 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARDONS (TIIC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STAfilLi.-'l.'iJ
721.4 (20.4)
504.2 (1'3.0)
34.4 ( 94.0)
23303.
234.7 ( G200.)
6.7/11/ 7.
4,9/ I/ S,
3.4/13/ 3.
.6/13/ 1.
21.9,' 3/ .35
3.2/ 3/ .05
14. O/ 2/ 14.
,9/ 2/ 1.
37.75
2.
2.
,31
13.1
.26
.67
1316.5
6,11
0.00
$04
.11
214.0
.99
7.96
867.
6.15
.970
,951)
,973)
371.0
77.51
11.90
7.76
3-DAG (4 DAG)
220.3 ( 217.0)
8.20 ( 0,03)
.05 < .05)
.24 ( .23)
.97 < ,95)
.031 ( 0.000)
-------
TEST NO. 1B2IW9 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL MA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L<122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 740.20 MM HO(29.46 IN 110)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 65. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER niF P MM. II20(IN. M20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20CIN, 1120)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
BCKGRD METER/RANHE/PPM
Cfl2 SAMPLE METtK.'RAMRE/PCT
C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
MASS GRAMS
MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS CRAMS
NOX MAGS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MAGS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFC* WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (GCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
o
NJ
HC
HC
CO
CO
IIC
CO
TEST NIIMPERf
BAROMETER* MM IIG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATUREF DEC C
CARDON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTIONi L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. G/Krt
CARSON MONOXIDEr G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
I VLIUL1.L LMISSIONS RESULTS
FTCOJECV ll-4!37-»-001
VEHICLE NO. IB
BATE 4/16/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVG NO. 3
BRY BULB TEMP. 22.0 BEG C(73.0 BEG F)
ADS. IIUMIMTY 11.5 CM/KG
HFET
711.2 (20.0)
571,5 (22,5)
35.6 < 76.0)
21007.
207.0 ( 73(9.)
7.5/11/ 7.
. 4,9/ I/ 5.
4.3/13/ 4,
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG< 3000. LJJG)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAB 0,2 KW( 11.0 !!!')
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 11425. KM< 7099. MILEG)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.03
43. I/ 3/ .74
3,0/ 3/ .05
29, 7/ 2/ 30,
l.O/ 2/ 1,
10.19
3.
3,
.69
28,0
,34
,76
2623.5
11,70
.59
765,
.945 ( .925)
1.000 ( .972)
207,0
43,29
16.21
1B2II69
740.3
11.5 '
22.8
161.9
6.02
,02
.05
.72
-------
TEST NO. IB2N70 RUN 2 ,
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122, CID) t-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 740.03 MM 110(27.45 IN 110)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 46, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TCGT CYCLC
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
EH.OUCR INLET P MM. II20UN. H20)
DL.OUCR INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG, F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS.
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
KC SAMPLE METER'RANGE/PPM
IIP. BCKGRD METER/RANOE/PPM
CO CAMPLE ME1ER/RANCE/PPM
CO DCKCRD METER/RANOE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX SCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
IIC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASH GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MAGS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DEC. UET (DRY)
SCF. UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM PLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
o
to
cn
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETERi MM HG
HUMIDITY. G/KG
TEMPERATURE. DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE. G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARDONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE? G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN. G/KM
NYCC VEHICLE EMISSIONS RECULTS
PROJECT H-4074 001
VEHICLE NO, IB
DATE 4/16/01
BAG CART HC, 1
DYNO NO, 2
CVS NO, :<
DRY BULB TEMP,
ADS, HUMIDITY
NYCC
711,2 (20,0)
574,0 (22,6)
35,6 ( 76.0)
16452,
162,0 ( 5721.)
5.5/11/
4.5/ I/
1.9/13/
.1/13/
17. O/ 3/
3.3/ 3/
10, 1/ 2/
1,0/ 2/
49,30
1.
9.1
.10
.30
657.3
2.73
.12
600,
.900 (
1.000 (
162,0
33,92
1.94
1E2N70
740.0
9.6
25.6
339.5
12.62
.05
.15
1.41
5,
5,
2,
0,
.27
.05
10.
9f.3)
25.6 BEG C(70,0 DEd F)
9,6 CM/KG
TEGT WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000, IJiG)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11,0 HP)
DIESEL EM- 469-F
ODOMETER 11441, KIU 7109, Mil EG)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .97
-------
TEST NO. UI2G71 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22, CIIO L--4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 743.03 MM HG(29.45 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 47. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEGT CYCLE
BLOWER LiIF P MM. II20(IN. H20)
PLOUCR INLET P MM. H20(IN. 1120)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F)
DLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANBE/PPN
IIC BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PFM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PFM
CO HCKGRB METr:R/RANCE/PFM
C02 CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
CG2 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANCE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
IIC CONCENTRATION PPH
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MAGS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MAGS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MAGS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFCr WET (DRY)
SCFr UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM DLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
o
to
TEST NUMBERf
BAROMETER. MM IIG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATUREi BEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE. G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION* L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIHE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN? G/KM
05 KT-JI VEIIICLC EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11 4074 001
VEHICLE NO.ID
DATE 4/14/01
BAG CART NO. 1
PYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB VEMP. 26,I BEG C(79.0 BEG F)
ADS. IIUMIMTY 10.1 CM/KG
85 K
716,3 (20,2)
579.1 (22.1;)
37.0 (100.0)
32947.
323.4 (11421.)
4.B/11/ 5.
4.5/ I/ 5,
.6/137 1,
.4/13/ 0.
48.I/ 3/ .03
3.2/ 3/ .05
34.O/ 2/ 24.
.O/ 2/ 1.
16.12
1.
0.
.78
33.2
.11
.07
464i,4
20,15
1.95
1201.
.933 ( .9/4)
1.000 ( .977)
323.4
67,99
20.37
1B2S71
740.0
iO.l
26.1
163.0
6.08
.00
.00
.71
TEST WEIGHT 1361. K0( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11,0 IIP)
DIESEL EM-469 F
ODOMETER 11442. KMf 7110. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .90
-------
TEST NO, 1B2F72 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL . NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) LA
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 7.10.63 MM HG(29,03 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 52. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOUER DIF P MM. H20UN. H20)
[(LGUER INLET P MM. II20(IN, M20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. BEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STB. CU. METRES(SCF)
I1C SAMPLE METFR/RANGE/PFM
HC DCKGRD METcR/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 ECKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
MASS GRAMS
n
to
CO
HC
CO
MAG
GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX I1A3Q GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
IIC GRAMS/KM
CO. GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM ' .
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CD .L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCFi DRY
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCr, UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM DLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION.L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 1B2F72
BAROMETER MM IIC 730.6
HUMIDITY G/KG 12.6
TEMPERATURE BEG C 27,8
fTP VCIIICI.C CMICfilONC RCSULTS
PROJECT 11-4074 -001
VEHICLE NO.IB
DATE 4/20/01
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP, 27.0 DEC C«J2.0 DEC F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 12.6 CM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LUS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 Ml< II.0 SIP)
MEOEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 11404. KM( 7136. MILIER)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.06
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
706.1 (27. C)
566.4 (22.3)
37.0 (100.0)
13362.
134.9 ( 47(f.2.)
15.4/11/ 15.
'6. I/ I/ 6,
20.7/13/ ::6.
1.6/13/ 1.
34. O/ 3/ .58
2,9/ 3/ .04
19. O/ 2/ 20.
.!/ 2/ 0.
22.06
10.
24.
.54
19.7
.75
. 3.01
1332.4
5.41
,35
.13
.67
234.3 '
.95
0.76
505.
5.69 -
,P7S '
.967 (
1.000 (
2
STABILIZED
711,2 (20.0)
571.5 (22.5)
34.4 ( 94.0)
23004.
232.6 ( 0214.)
0.5/11/ 0.
6.4/ I/ 6,
6.3/13/ 6.
1.4/13/ 1.
22. C/ 3/ .36
2.6/ 3/ .04
14. 2/ 2/ 14.
.!/ 2/ 0.
37.52
2,
4.
,32
14.1
.30
1.18
1350.4
6.68
.23
.05
.19
220.7
1.09
0.21
867.
6.12
.900
.951)
.979)
367.5
70.50
11.00
8.47
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
706.1 (27.8)
566.4 (22.3)
37.2 ( 99.0)
13865.
135.0 ( 4766.)
11,6/H/ 12.
6.4/ I/ 6.
13.3/13/ 12.
4.0/13/ 4.
31, O/ 3/ ,51
3.2/ 3/ .05
10, 6/ 2/ 19.
,5/ 2/ 1.
25.98
5.
0.
.47
18.1
.43
1.31
1152.5
4.98
.26
.07
.23
201.3
.07
7.50
505.
5,73
.970
.969 (
1.000 I
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THE) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KN
4
STABILIZED
711.2 (20.0)
571.5 (22.5)
34.4 ( 94.0)
23704.
232.4 ( B206.)
9.2/11/ 9.
6.6/ I/ 7.
6.9/13/ 6.
3.2/13/ 3.
21. O/ 3/ .35
3.2/ 3/ .05
14. 5/ 2/ 15.
.O/ 2/ J.
37.37
3.
3.
.30
13.7
.30
.90
1296.1
6.49
0.00
.06
.15
209.0
1.05
7.01
867.
6.18
,900
,953)
,979)
367,4
70.41
11.90
7,66
3-BAG (4 -BAG)
210.2 ( 215.0)
8.13 ( 0.01)
.07 ( .08)
.30 < .29)
1.00 ( .99)
.044 ( 0.000)
-------
o
to
vo
TEST NO, 1B2H73 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2,0 L(122. CID) I.-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 737,07 M!1 (10(27,05 IN MB)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 49, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P fiM, II2CKIN. H20)
DLOUrR INLET P MM, II30UN, 1120)
niOUER INLET TEMP, DEO, C(DEO, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STB, CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
IIC nCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
rn tiCKGRn MFTER/RANOE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE ME1ER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
fIC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, UET (BRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (PCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBERi
BAROMETERi
HUMIDITYi
TEMPERATURE.
CARBON DIOXIDE,
FUEL CONSUMPTION,
HYDROCARBONSF
CARBON MONOXIDE?
OXIDES OF NITROGEN,
MM HG
G/KG
BEG C
G/KM
L/100KM
G/KM
G/KM
G/KM
HFET VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11--4074-001
VEHICLE NO.ID
DATE 4/20/01
BAG CART NO, 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
BRY BULB TEMP, 20,3 BEG C(03.0 DEO F>
HFET
706.1 (27.(I)
546,4 (22,;;)
40,6 (105.0)
21000,
202.6 ( 71J.5.)
9,2/H/ 9,
6,6/ I/ 7,
6.1/13/ 6,
1,0/lV 2,
43,9/ 3/ .75
3,2/ 3/ .05
29,9/ 21 30,
,6/ 2/ 1.
17,01
3.
4,
.70
29,3
,35
,90
2613,6
12,00
,53
765,
,944 ( .927)
1.000 ( ,977)
202,6
43,61
16,30
1B2II73
737,9
12.3
20.3
160.3
5.96
.02
.06
.74
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LUD)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL CM-469-F
ODOMETER 11507. KM< 7150. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.06
-------
o
u>
O
TEST NO. 1C2N74 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 737.11 MM 110(29.02 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 46. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. II20UN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
DLQWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RAK'GE/PPM
CO BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 CCNGPD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PP1
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
IIC MAGS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS CRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC. UET (DRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM DLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBERt
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE. DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN. G/KM
NYCC VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4074-001
VEHICLE NO.IB
DATE 4/20/01
DAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 27.0 DEG C(02.0 BEG F)
NYCC
706.1 (27.0)
566.4 (22.:»
36.1 ( 77,0)
16452.
159.9 ( 56-15.)
6.9/11/ 7.
5.0/ I/ 5.
4.0/13/ 4.
1.0/13/ 1.
16.3/ 3/ ,26
2.6/ 3/ ,04
8.0/ 2/ 0.
,3/ 2/ 0.
51.45
2.
3.
.22
7.7
.18
.50
445.3
2.30
.21
599.
-901 ( .9
1.000 ( ,9f!3)
157.9
34.01
1.93
1B2N74
737.1
11.0
27.8
334.4
12.44
.09
.26
1.23
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG< 3000. IMS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 I if)
DIESEL EM 46?--F
ODOMETER 11523. KM( 7160. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.01
-------
TEST NO. 1B2S75 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 736,05 MM HC(29,01 IN HG)
RELATIVE IIUMIDITr 46, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLQUER DIE P MM, II20(IN, H20)
DLOUER INLCT P MM. II20(IN. 1120)
Dl.OUER INLET TEMP. DEC, C(DEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW GTD. CU, METRES(SCF)
HC CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PFh
C02 CAMPLE HFTER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANCE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METEKVRANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
IIC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCfNTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
IIC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CD2 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, UfT (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM NR (SCM>
KM (MEASURED)
o
co
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETERF MM HG
HUMIDITY? 6/KG
TEMPERATURE. DEC C
CARBON DIOXIDE? G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONSr G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE? G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
US KI'H VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJCCT 11-4C74--001
VEHICLE NO,IB
DATE 4/20/B1
BAG CART NO, 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVG NO, 3
DRY BULB TEMP, 27,0 DEC C(02,0 DEG F)
ABS, HUMIDITY 11,0 CM/KG
05 K
706,1 (27,CD
566.4 (22,?)
41,1 (106.0)
32943.
316,0 (11107.)
6,1/H/ 6.
. 5,5/ I/ 6,
4.2/13/ 4,
1.6/13/ 1.
46.9/ 3/ .01
3.I/ 3/ .05
32.9/ 2/ 23.
.3/ 2/ 0.
16,57
1.
2,
,76
32,6
,16
.86
4426.2
19.9C
1,28
1200,
.940 ( .926)
1,000 ( .970)
316.8 . .
68.13
28,35
1B2S75
736.9
11.0:
27,8
156.1
5.30
.01
.03
.70
TEST HEIGHT 1361. K0( 3000. LD3)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
DIESEL CM-467-F
ODOMETER 11526. KM( 7162. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.01
-------
TEST NO. 1C2r76 RUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
.ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION MS
BAROMETER 739.14 MM 116(29.10 IN h'G)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 67. PCT
BAG RESULTS
PAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. I!20(IN. 1120)
KLOUER INLET P MM. H20UN, M20)
EtLOUCR INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F)
HLOWCR REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. METRES(SCr>
(1C GAMBLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX GAMPIE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX DCMiRD HCTCR/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION rACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CC CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
MACS GRAMS:
n
u>
. to
HC
CO MAGS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MAGS GRAMS
IIC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CD L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF. DRY
DFCt UET (HRY)
SCr, L'ET (DRY)
VOl (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 1B2F76
BAROMETER MM HG 739.1
HUMIDITY G/KG 13,8
TEMPERATURE DEG C 25.0
vi_,,1^1-1- unic,ailir<^ KLOULIb
PROJECT 11 4074-001
VCIIICLE NO. ID
DATE 4/21/01
DAG CART |JO, 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.0 DEG C(77.0 DEG F)
ADS, HUMIDITY 13,0 CM/KG
TEST UCIGIIT 1361. KG( 3000. Ll-S>
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 II
DICGEL CM 469--F
ODOMETER 11557. KM< 7131. HHEU)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.11
1
lOLD TRANSIENT
706.1 (27.0)
566,4 (22.3)
36.7 ( 90.0)
13073,
135.2 ( 4774.)
11.7/11/ 12.
4.9/ I/ 5,
30.6/13/ ro,
8.4/13/ 8,
34, 9/ 3/ .58
2,9/ 3/ .04
21, 5/ 2/ ::2,
1,5/ ?/ 2,
22.00
7,
20.
.54
20.1
,56
3.17
1340.3
5,76
.28
.10
.55
233.8
1,01
0,73
505,
5.73
.973
,766 (
1.000 (
2
STABILIZED
711,2 (28.0)
571.5 (22.5)
33.9 < 93,0)
23797,
232,9 ( C223.)
7.3/11/ 7,
4.97 I/ 5.
13.0/13/ 12,
9.5/13/ 9,
22. 7/ 3/ .37
3.2/ 3/ ,05
15. 5/ 2/ 14.
1,4/ If 1,
36.24
3,
4.
.32
14.1
.34
1.08
1365,0
7.00
.23
.06
.17
221.3
1.13
0.24
867.
6.17
.975
,745)
.974)
360.1
7C.39
11.90
8.47
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
706.1 (27.0)
566.4 (22.3)
36,7 ( 98.0)
13066.
135,1 ( 4771.)
9.6/11/ 10,
4.9/ I/ 5.
14.4/13/ 13.
6.2/13/ i,.
30. 3/ 3/ .50
2.7/ 3/ ,04
17, I/ 2/ 19,
1,1/ 2/ 1.
26.63
5.
7.
.46
in.o
.33
1.16
1141.0
5,18
,20
.07
.20
200.0
,91
7.45
505,
5.71
.974
,970 (
1.600 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
711.2 (20.0)
571.5 (2?,5>
34,4 ( 94,0)
23000.
232.6 ( 0214.)
7.0/11/ 7.
5.0/ I/ 5.
0.6/13/ 0.
6.4/13/ 6.
21. 4/ 3/ .35
2.0/ 3/ .04
14, 6/ 2/ 15.
,9/ 2/ 1.
30.62
2.
2.
.30
n,?
.20
.55
1293.7
6.73
0.00
.05
.09
210.4
1.10
7.02
867,
6.15
.975
.749)
.975)
367.7
7C.33
11.05
7.64
3 -DAG (4 BAG)
21C.1 { 214.8)
8.12 ( G.OO)
.07 ( ,06)
,26 ( .24)
1.05 ( 1.04)
.039 ( 0,000)
-------
TEST NO. 1B2H77 RUN A
VEHICLE MODEL NA FIAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 730.63 MM 110(29.00 IN IIG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 53, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM. II20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. BEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METREG(SCF)
HC GAMPLE METER/RANCE/PPM
IIC tCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR '
IIC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION rTM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASG GRAMS
CTO MASG GRAMS
C02 MACG GRAMS
NOX' MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFCi UET (DRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)'
'VOL
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
o
TEST NUMBERF
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE, BEG C.
CARBON DIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, ' G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
HFET VEHICLC EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4074-001
VEHICLE NO.IB
BATE 4/21/81
BAG CART NO. 1
BYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.6 BEG C(70.0 BEG F)
ABS. UUMIIHTY 11.2 GM/KG
HFET
706.1 (27. fl)
566.4 (22.3)
30.9 (102.0)
21015.
203.7 ( 7193.)
7.5/11/ B.
5.6/ I/ 6.
6.1/13/ 6,
4.2/13/ 4.
43.C/ 3/ .75
3.I/ 3/ .05
29.9/ 2/ M,
l.O/ 2/ 1.
17.06
2,
2.
.70
29.0
.26
.43
2625.9
11.40
.65
765.
.944 ( .9J'3)
1.000 ( .976)
203.7
43.59
16.19
1B2II77.
733.6'
11.2
25.6
162.2
6.02
.02
.03
.71
TEOT WEIGHT 1361, KG< 3000. I.CS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
BIEGEL EH-469-F
OBOMETER 11501. KM( 7196. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.02
-------
o
TEST NO, 1B2N70 RUN 4
VEHICLE MOfltL NA FIAT CAT
ENOINE 2.0 L(122, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 730.30 MM UG<29,07 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 48. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
8LOUER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
DLOUER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TcMP, DEG. C(DEG. F)
DLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU GTD, CU. METRES(SCF)
HC CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
IIC [iCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO HCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
I!C CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MAGS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS CRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFCr WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST Nl/MIO»
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY! G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG C
CARDQN DIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION! L/100KM
HYDROCARHONS. G/KM
CARKON MONOXIDET G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
NVCC UEIIICLC: EMISSIONS KEGULTS
PROJCCT 11 4074 001
VEillCLE NO, IB
DATE 4/21/01
DAO CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 27.2 DEO C(01.0 DEG F)
ABS. 1,'UMIMTY 11.3 GM/KC
NYCC
706.1 (27.0)
566.4 (22.:i)
35.6 < 96,0)
16446.
160.4 < 56.1.4.)
6.0/11/ 6,
6.2/ I/ 6.
3.7/13/ 3.
2.7/13/ 2.
16.7/ 3/ ,27
3.2/ 3/ ,05
9.7/ 2/ 30.
1.2/ 2/ 1.
50.19
-0.
1.
.22
8.5
-.01
.17
640.4
2.66
.14
599.
.900 ( .965)
1.000 ( .902)
160.4
34.17
1.90
1D2N7C
730.4
11.3
27.2
337.7
12.54
-.00
.09
1.40
TEST UEICHT 1361. K0( 3000. LU3)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11,0 IIP)
DIESEL EM-469--F
ODOMETER 11597. KM( 7206, MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1,02
-------
TEST NO. 1B2S7? RUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL NA HAT CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L--4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 730,3f MM NO(29.07 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 45. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(BEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
!IC BCKGRD MEfER/RArtGE/FPM
CO SAMPLE ME~ER/RANGE/FPM
CO BCKGRD MEVER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANCE/FCT
C02 BCKGKB METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PfM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
IIC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
n
IIC MAGS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFC* UET (DRY)
SCF* UET (PRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER*
BAROMETER» . MM HG
HUMIDITYf G/KG
TEMPERATUREF BEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS* G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE* G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
85 KPH VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 11-4874-001
VEHICLE KO.lFi
PATE 4/21/81
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO, 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 27.2 DEG C(01.0 DEG F)
ADS. 1,'UMIDITY 10,5 CM/KG
85 K
706,1 (27,0)
566,4 (22.3)
39.4 (103.0)
32944.
310.7 (11262.)
6.4/11/ 6.
5.0/ I/ 6.
2.1/13/ 2,
1.6/13/ 1,
47,4/ 3/ .82
3.5/ 3/ .05
33.I/ 2/ 33.
.07 2/ 1.
16,38
1.
1,
,77
32.3
.17
.19
4477,9
19,60
1.59
1200,
.939 ( .925)
1,000 ( ,970)
'310.9
60.00
28.34
730,4
10,5
27,2
158.0
5.07
.01
,01
,69
TEST HEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LD3)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
DIESEL EM-469--F
ODOMETER 11599 KM 7209 MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR ,99
-------
APPENDIX D
TEST RESULTS,
1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESEL
FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
-------
SUMMARY QP REGULATED EMISSIONS FROM 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS
DIESEL VEHICLE USING EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
HC, g/mi
CO, g/mi
NOX, g/mi
Part. , g/mi
Fuel, mi/gal
2A1F01
3-b FTP
5/21
1
0.19
1.01
1.08
0.35
22.1
2A1F05
3-b FTP
5/22
2
0.19
1.06
1.03
0.41
22.3
2A1F09
3-b FTP
5/25
3
0.14
1.05
1.03
0.37
22.4
2A1F13
3-b FTP
5/27
4
0.19
1.08
1.03
a
21.7
2A1F38
3-b FTP
6/25
5
0.23
1.05
1.00
0.40
21.4
2A1H02
HFET
5/21
1
0.13
0.69
0.63
0.21
31.6
2A1H06
HFET
5/22
2
0.14
0.68
0.56
0.22
32.1
2A1H10
HFET
5/25
3
0.13
0.69
0.60
0.21
31.5
2A1H14
HFET
5/27
4
0.13
0.71
0.60
a
32.4
2A1H39
HFET
6/25
5
0.14
0.71
0.60
0.20
30.2
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
HC, g/mi
CO , g/mi
NOX, g/mi
Part. , g/mi
Fuel, mi /gal
2A1N03
NYCC
5/21
1
0.51
2.49
2.51
0.56
11.1
2A1N07
NYCC
5/22
2
0.45
2.24
2.28
0.59
11.6
2A1N11
NYCC
5/25
3
0.45
2.37
2.25
0.59
11.7
2A1N15
NYCC
5/27
4
0.42
2.45
2.35
a
11.3
2A1N40
NYCC
6/25
5
0.42
2.32
2.28
0.54
11.4
2A1N42
NYCC
6/25
6
0.45
2.53
2.25
0.57
11.0
2A1N43
NYCC
6/25
7
0.47
2.57
2.33
0.58
10.8
2A1S04
85 kph
5/21
1
0.11
0.66
0.60
0.17
32.0
2A1S08
85 kph
5/22
2
0.14
0.66
0.58
0.16
32.4
2A1S12
85 kph
5/25
3
0.13
0.66
0.58
0.15
32.4
2A1S16
85 kph
5/27
4
0.13
0.66
0.61
a
31.9
2A1S41
85 kph
6/25
5
0.13
0.68
0.56
0.15
31.9
aParticulate not sampled
-------
TCfeT NO. 2A1F01 RUN I
VEHICLE MOlir.L 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CII» V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 742,19 MM HG(29,22 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 53. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H2Q(IN. H20)
BLOiJER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPH
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
o NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
i HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCFr DRY
BFC. WET (DRY)
SCF» WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 2A1F01
BAROMETER MM HG 742.2
HUMIDITY G/KG 10.7
TEMPERATURE DEG C 25.0
VEHICLE NO.2A
DATE 5/21/81
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.0 DEG C(77.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 10.7 CM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1814.
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 4233. KM(
KG( 4000. LDS>
8.6 KU( 11.5 HP)
2630. HILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.00
1
,'OLD iRANSIENT
701.0 (27.6)
571.5 (22.5)
36.7 ( 90.0)
13062.
135.6 ( 4788.)
13.4/11/ 13.
5.2/ I/ 5.
28.5/13/ 26.
2.S/13/ 3.
42. 7/ 3/ .73
3.3/ 3/ .05
13. 6/ 2/ 14.
,7/ 2/ 1.
10.30
B.
23.
.63
12.9
.66
3.63
1689.3
3,35
1.54
,11
.63
^92,2
,58
11.16
505.
5.78
,976
,958 (
1.000 (
2
STABILIZED
696.0 (27.4)
569,0 (22.4)
33.9 < 93.0)
23806.
234,1 ( 8264.)
10.9/11/ 11.
5.2/ I/ 5.
9.0/13/ 17,
2.4/13/ 2,
*0,1/ 3/ ,46
3, I/ 3/ .05
11, 2/ 2/ 11.
,7/ 2/ 1,
28.83
6,
15.
.42
10.5
,79
4.03
1783.2
4,71
1.30
.13
,65
287,4
,76
10,98
867,
6,20
,979
,942)
.978)
369,7
78,91
11.99
11.07
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
698. 5 (27.5)
571.5 (22.5)
35,6 ( 96.0)
13862.
135.9 ( 4797.)
13.9/11/ 14.
5.2/ I/ 5.
26.1/13/ 24.
1.9/13/ 2.
37. 6/ 3/ .63
3.2/ 3/ .05
13, O/ 2/ 13.
,7/ 2/ 1.
21.03
9.
22.
.59
12,3
,70
3.42
1459.2
3.20
1.19
,12
,5?
253,2
,56
9.67
505,
5,76
.977
.961 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KH
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
696.0 (27.4)
569.0 (22.4)
34,4 ( 94.0)
23813.
233.9 ( 8259.)
11.2/11/ 11,
4.7/ I/ 5.
19.5/13/ 13.
1.7/13/ 2.
27. 2/ 3/ ,45
3.0/ 3/ .05
10. 9/ 2/ 11.
,8/ 2/ 1.
29.85
7,
16.
.40
10.1
,90
4.31
1720,2
4.52
1.29
.15
,69
277.3
.73
10.60
868.
6.20
.979
.945)
.978)
369.7
78.95
11,97
10,15
3-BAG (4-BAG)
279.0 ( 276.0)
10.66 ( 10.55)
,12 ( ,13)
,63 ( ,64)
,67 ( ,66)
,220 ( ,220)
-------
TEST NO. 2A1H02 RON 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L<350. CID) V-B
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 741.43 MM HG(29.19 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 48. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM. H2CHIN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN. H30)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. BEG, C(DEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPN
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
h'C CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
-> NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
[ HC MASS GRftHf
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRflMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, UET (DRY)
SCF» WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED) .
TEST NUMBERr
BAROMETERi MM HG
HUMIDITYi G'/KG
TEMPERATURE» 'DEC C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONSr G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
VEHICLE N0.2A
DATE 5/21/81
BAG CART MO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
BRY BULB TEMP. 26.7 DEG C(00.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 10.7 CM/KG
HFET
690.9 (27.2)
563.9 (22.?)
37.2 ( 99.0)
21011.
205.6 ( 7261.)
16.1/11/ 16.
4.7/ I/ 5.
33.8/13/ M,
1.2/13/ 1.
51.4/ 3/ .89
3.I/ 3/ .05
16.7/ 2/ 17.
,6/ 2/ 1.
14.91
12.
29.
.85
16.1
1.39
6.99
3199.0
6.34
2.13
765.
.933 < .919)
1.000 < .976)
205.6
43.00
16.42
2A1H02
741.4
10.7
26.7
194.8-
7.44 '
.08
.43
.39
TEST WEIGHT 1814. KG< 4000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.6 KU( 11.5 IIP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 4257. KM( 2645. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.00
-------
TEST NO. 2A1N03 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 741.43 MM HG(29,19 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 51. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM, H20UN. H2G)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(lN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C
-------
TEST NO. 2A1S04 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 741.43 MM HG<29.19 IN HG>
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 45, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20CIN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOJER INLET TEMP. DEO. C(DEC. F)
BLQUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD, CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PC"
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
i HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
LiFC» WET (DRY)
SCF» WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER*
BAROMETER! MM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATUREt DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDEr G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION! L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS! G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE! G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN» G/KM
VEHICLE NO.2A
DATE 5/21/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY DULB TEMP. 27.2 DEG C<01.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 10.5 GM/KG
85 K
696.0 (27.4)
563.9 (22.2)
36.7 < 98.0)
32921.
321.9 (11365.)
16.1/11/ 16.
5.B/ I/ 6.
35.2/13/ 33.
.6/13/ 1.
55.B/ 3/ .98
3.3/ 3/ .05
10.O/ 2/ 18.
,0/ 2/ 1.
13.61
11.
31,
.93
17.3
1.99
11.60
5498.7
10.53
3.07
1200.
.927 ( .913)
1.000 ( .976)
321.9
68.83
20.53
2A1S04
741.4
10.5
27.2
192.7
7.36
.07
.41
.37
TEST WEIGHT 1614. KG( 4000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.6 KW( 11.5 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 4274. KM( 2656. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .99
-------
TEST NO. 2AIF05 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 737.42 MM HG(29.04 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 60. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM, H20(IN. H20)
DLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEC, C(DEG. F>
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD, CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD liETER/RANGE/PCT
NQX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX ECKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION P-PM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
? NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
1, HC MASS -GRAMS
CO MASS CRAMS
' C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/lOOKM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF. DRY
DFCr WET (DRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
' TEST NUMBER 2A1F05
BAROMETER MM HG 737,6
HUMIDITY G/KG 12.8
TEMPERATURE DEG C 25.6
VEHICLE ND.2A
DATE 5/22/81
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO, 3
DY.NO NO, 2
DRY BULB TEMP, 25.6 DEG C(78.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 12,0 CM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1814. KG( 4000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.6 KU< 11.5 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 4308. KM( 2677. JULES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.07
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
698.5 (27,5)
569,0 (22,4)
36,1 ( 97.0)
13065.
134.4 ( 4744.)
13.B/11/ 14.
5, 1/ I/ 5,
30.5/13/ 28,
2.3/13/ 2.
42. 5/ 3/ .72
3.5/ 3/ .05
12, 7/ 2/ 13.
,7/ 2/ 1,
10.39
9.
25,
.67
12.0
.70
3.94
1657,2
3.32
2.07
.12
,68
284,2
,57
10,86 '
505.
5.83
.974
: ,958 (
1.000 (
2
STABILIZED
698.5 (27,5)
569.0 (22.4)
34,4 ( 94.0)
23835.
231,6 ( 8178.)
10,1/H/ 10.
5, 1/ I/ 5.
20.4/13/ 19,
2.0/13/ 2.
28, 8/ 3/ ,47
3,6/ 3/ .06
10. C/ 2/ 10.
.5/ 2/ 1.
28.08
5,
16,
,42
9,5
,69
4.41
1785,7
4,52
1.43
.11
,71
285,9
,72
10,92
868,
6.25
.976
,939)
.975)
366.0
77.11
12.00
10.89
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
690.9 (27.2)
561.3 (22,1)
36.7 ( 98.0)
13866.
134.4 ( 4746.)
14.2/11/ 14.
5, I/ I/ 5,
25.3/13/ 23,
1.1/13/ 1.
38. O/ 3/ .64
3. I/ 3/ .05
12. I/ 2/ 12.
.5/ 2/ 1.
20.80
9,
21,
,60
11.6
.72
3,36
1465.6
3.20
1,31
.12
.58
251.4
.55
9.60
505.
'5,83
.975
.961 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L.'IOOKM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/Kff
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
693.4 (27.3)
561.3 (22.1)
36.1 ( 97.0)
23820.
231.1 ( 8160.)
11.2/11/ 11,
4,8/ I/ 5,
17.9/13/ 16,
1.0/13/ 1.
27. 5/ 3/ .45
2.B/ 3/ .04
9.0/ 2/ 10.
,3/ 2/ 0.
29.51
7.
15,
.41
9,5
.88
4.02
1734.7
4.51
1.58
.14
.65
279.0
.72
10.66
868.
6,22
.976
.942)
.976)
365.5
77.22
12.05
10.15
3-BAG (4-BAG)
276.1 ( 274.0)
10.55 ( 10.47)
.12 ( .13)
.66 ( .65)
,64 ( ,64)
.253 ( .261)
-------
its I nu, i.'fllH06 RUN 2
VEHICLE HODEL Bl OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 737,62 MM HG(29.04 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY so. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC, C(BEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(GCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD HETER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NQX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PFM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFC» WET (DRY)
SCFr UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
V
CO
TEST NUMBER*
BAROMETER. HM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KO
TEMPERATURE* DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION* L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS* G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE* G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
VEHICLE NO. 2 A
DATE 5/22/81
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY DULD TEMP. 25.6 DEG C<70.0 DEG F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 10.5 CM/KG
HFET
608.3 (27.1)
558.0 (22.0)
30,9 (102.0)
20998.
203.3 ( 7179.)
17.4/11/ 17,
4,8/ I/ 5,
34.1/13/ 31,
TEST WEIGHT 1814. KG< 4000, LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.6 KU< 11.5 HP)
ODOMETER 4332?~KM< 2692. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR ,9?
51. 9/ 3/ ,90
3,0/ 3/ ,05
15, 7/ 2/ 16.
,4/ 2/ 0,
14,75
13,
30,
,86
15,3
1,51
7,03
3205,3
5,92
2,24
765,
,932 ( ,917)
1.000 ( .976)
203,3
43,18
16,70
2A1H06
737.6
10,5
25.6
191,9
7,33
,09
.42
.35
-------
TEST NO. 2A1N07 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CIO) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 737.62 MM HG(29.04 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 50. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOU'ER INLET P MM, H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. METRESiSCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC ECKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPH
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
r.02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PFM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
fiC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
D NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
' HC MASS GRAHS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCF. WET (DRY)
VOL (GCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY. G/KG
TEMPERATURE. DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE. G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN. G/KM
VEHICLE NO.2A
DATE 5/22/81
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.6 DEG C(78.0 DEG F>
ADS. HUMIDITY 10.5 CM/KG
NYCC
690.9 (27.2)
561.3 (22.1)
35.0 ( 95.0)
16478.
160.7 ( 5674.)
10.9/11/ 11.
5,1/ I/ 5.
17.1/13/ 16.
.7/13/ 1,
25.O/ 3/ .41
3.6/ 3/ ,06
9,8/ 2/ 10,
,7/ 2/ 1.
32,67
6,
15,
.35
9,1
.56
2.72
1041.7
2.79
.72
600.
,969 ( .954)
1.000 ( .900)
160.7
34,27
1,97
2A1N07
737,6
10,5
25.6
530,1
20.27
,28
1.39
1.42
TEST HEIGHT 1814. KG( 4000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.6 KU( 11.5 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 4350. KM( 2703. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .99
-------
i to i ttu* ^Mj.ouu ivun Jt
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L<350, CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAf\OMETER 737,87 MM HG(29,05 IN KG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 50, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM, H2CKIN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20
-------
TEST NO. 2A1F09 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-fl
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 738.12 MM HG(29.06 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 50, PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOUER DIP P MM. H2Q(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. BEG. CtDEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CD. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAhS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
o
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCFi DRY
DFC. UET (DRY)
SCF. WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM DLR (SCM)
Kfl (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION 1/100KN
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 2A1F09
BAROMETER MM HG 738.1
HUMIDITY GAG 11.0
TEMPERATURE DEG C 26,1
1-KUJLl.r U
VEHICLE N0.2A
DATE 5/25/01
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP. 26.1 DEO C<79.0 DEG F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 11.0 CM/KG
..__ ... 1814.
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
TEST WEIGHT
KG< 4000. LBS)
8.6 KU( 11.5 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 4397. KM( 2732. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.01
1
lOLD TRANSIENT
690.9 (27.2)
558.0 (22.0)
35.6 ( 96.0)
13079.
135.0 ( 4767.)
7.2/12/ 14,
7. 8/ I/ 3.
30.0/13/ 28.
1.1/13/ 1,
43. 4/ 3/ .74
3,3/ 3/ .05
12. 9/ ?/ 13,
.2/ 2/ 0.
17.98
7.
26.
,69
12.7
,55
4.06
1714.3
3.31
1.90
.10
.70
295.1
,57
11,27
505.
5.81
.977
.958 (
1.000 (
2
STABILIZED
690.9 (27.2)
561,3 (22.1)
33.9 ( 93.0)
23815.
232.3 ( 8202.)
5.1/12/ JO,
6,8/ I/ ',
17.9/13/ 16.
1.0/13/ 1.
27. 7/ 3/ ,45
3.2/ 3/ .05
10. O/ 2/ 10.
,2/ 2/ 0.
29.29
4,
15.
.41
9.8
.49
4.06
1733.4
4.40
1.24
,08
.65
279,8
,71
10.68
868.
6,20
.980
.942)
,979)
367.3
78.02
12.00
10.97
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
690.9 (27.2)
561,3 (22.1)
35,6 ( 96.0)
13864.
134.9 ( 4762.)
13.9/11/ 14,
6.8/ I/ 7.
25.8/13/ 24.
.8/13/ 1.
38. 4/ 3/ .65
3.9/ 3/ .06
12. 9/ 2/ 13.
.6/ 2/ 1.
20.56
7.
22.
.59
12.3
.58
3.49
1459.6
3.21
1.25
,10
.60
252.1
,55
9,63
505,
5,79
.978
.961 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/NM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KN
4
STABILIZED
693,4 (27,3)
563,9 (22,2)'
33,9 ( 93.0)
23821,
232.3 ( 8203,)
10.5/11/ 11,
5,2/ I/ 5.
18.1/13/ 16,
1.0/13/ 1.
27. 2/ 3/ .45
3.7/ 3/ .06
10. 6/ 21 11.
,5/ 2/ 1.
29.86
6.
15.
.39
10.1
,74
4,11
1664.2
4.54
1.23
.12
.66
268.4
.73
10.26
868.
6.20
.980
.945)
.979)
367.2
78.06
11.99
9.95
3-BAG (4-BAG)
275.3 ( 272.0)
10.52 ( 10.39)
,09 ( ,10)
.65 ( ,65)
,64 ( .64)
.231 ( .230)
-------
D
TEST NO. 2A1H10 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L<350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 737,36 MM HG(29.03 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 44, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEC, C(DEG, F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
fIC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD HEJER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
CG2 BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTJCULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC. UET
-------
D
TEST NO. 2A1N11 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L<350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 737.11 MM KG(29.02 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 44, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER 1JIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(GCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD MFTER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC» UET (DRY)
SCF» WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEbl NUMBER,
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATURE! BEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION! I./100KM
HYDROCARBONS» G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE* G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN/ G/KM
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE NO.2A
DATE 5/25/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 26.1 BEG C(79.0 DEO F)
NYCC
690.7 (27.2)
558.8 (22.0)
35.0 ( 95.0)
16471.
160.3 ( 5662.)
ll.l/ll/ 11.
5.5/ I/ 6.
18.0/13/ 16.
.9/13/ 1.
24.6/ 3/ .40
3.7/ 3/ .06
9.9/ 2/ 10.
,B/ 2/ 1.
33.22
6.
15.
.35
9.1
,54
2.84
1014.6
2,70
,71
600.
.970 ( .956)
1.000 ( .902)
160.3
34.25
1.93
2A1N11
737,1
9.6
26.1
525.7
20.10
,28
l.<7
1.40
TEST WEIGHT 1014. KG( 4000. LBS>
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.6 KM( 11.5 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 4437. KM( 2757. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .96
-------
TEST NO. 2A1S12 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 736.85 MM HG(29,01 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 47, PCT
0 BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM. H20
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RftNGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RAHGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
7 NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
M HC MASS GRAMS
*" CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFCr UET (DRY)
SCF» UET (DRY)
VOL
-------
TEST NO. 2A1F13 RUN 4
VEHICLE HOBO. 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 737.87 MM HG(29,05 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 43. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOUER DIP P MM. H20UN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C
-------
TEST NO. 2A1H14 RUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLBA CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350, CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 736,85 MM HG(29,01 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 44, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
D'.OWER DIP P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20UN, H20)
DLOUER INLET TEHP. BEG, C(DEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE HE1ER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION. FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
? NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
- HC MASS GRAMS
71 CO rtASS GRANS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC* WET (DRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBERt
BAROMETERr MM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATURE* DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION* L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE* G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
PROJECT 05-4874-001
VEHICLE NO.2A
DATE 5/27/81
BAG CART NO, 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULD TEMP. 20,7 DEG C(84,0 DEG F)
ABS, HUMIDITY 11,3 CM/KG
IIFLT
690,9 <27.2)
563,9 (22.2)
37.8 (100,0)
20999,
202,6 ( 7153.)
22,2/H/ 22,
11,3/ I/ 11,
35.0/13/ 32,
t.4/13/ 1,
50,21 3/ ,37
2.7/ 3/ ,04
15,9/ 2/ 16,
,6/ 2/ 1.
15,29
12,
30.
,83
15.3
1.36
7.12
3087.2
6.06
765,
,935 ( ,921)
1,000 ( .978)
202.6
43.25
16.24
2A1H14
736.9
11.3
28.9
190.1
7.26
.08
.44
.37
TEST WEIGHT 1814. KG( 4000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.6 KU( 11.5 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 4505. KM( 2799. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.02
-------
TEST KO. 2A1N1P RWJ 4
VEHICLE MODEL Ul OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350, CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 736.85 MM HG(29.01 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 40. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPrt
HC BCKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPN
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/FFM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
3 C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
i NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
j HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL
-------
TEST NO. 2A1S16 RUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5,7 L(350, CID) V-B
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 736.60 MM HG(29.00 IN HB)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 57. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOIJER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C
-------
TEST NO. 2A1F30 RUN 5
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-0
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 744.47 MM HG(29.31 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 65. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBFR
DESCRIPTION
BLOUER DIF P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. M20UN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEC, C(DEG, F)
DLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METL-R/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPl.F MC1ER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
0 CO CONCENTRATION PPM
i C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
S NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MACS GRAMS
CO MAGS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRATIS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCFf DRY
BFCr UET (DRY)
SCFr UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM SIR (GCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KN
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 2A1F38
BAROMETER MM HG 744.5
HUMIDITY G/KG 11.6
TEMPERATURE DEC C 22.8
FTP VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074 001
VEHICLE N0.2A
DATE 6/25/01
DAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY BULD TEMP. 22.0 DEC C(73.0 DEC F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 11,6 GM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1014.
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 4970. KH(
KG( 4000. LBS)
0.6 KU( 11.5 tlf>
3093. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.03
1
.'OLD TRANSIENT
698,5 (27.5)
563.9 (22.2)
35,0 ( 96,5)
13053.
135,2 ( 4775.)
17.0/11/ 17.
7, I/ I/ 7,
32.2/13/ 30.
4.3/13/ 4.
44. I/ 3/ .75
3,4/ 3/ ,05
12. 5/ 2/ 13.
.4/ 2/ 0.
17.65
10.
25.
.71
12.1
.00
3.94
1746.5
3.23
2.21
.14
.68
303.0
.56
11.58
504.
5.76
.972
.957 (
1.000 (
2
STABILIZED
706,1 (27,8)
571,5 (22,5)
32.2 ( 90,0)
23026.
234.1 ( 0265.)
12.5/11/ 12;
5.7/ I/ 6,
?0.7/13/ 19,
3.7/13/ 3,
20. O/ 3/ .47
3. I/ 3/ .05
9.0/ 2/ 10,
,5/ 2/ 1.
20.07
7.
15.
,43
9.3
.94
4.12
1836.6
4.30
1.30
,15
,67
296.9
.69
11.34
860.
6.19
,975
.936)
.974)
369.3
77.85
11.95
11.45
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
706.1 (27.8)
566.4 (22.3)
35.0 ( 95,0)
13065,
135,5 ( 4704.)
14.3/11/ 14,
5.7/ I/ 6,
26.1/13/ 24,
2.1/13/ 2.
38. I/ 3/ .64
3.0/ 3/ .05
11. 7/ 2/ 12,
,3/ 2/ 0,
20,73
9.
21.
.60
11.4
.69
3.36
1485.6
3.05
1.28
,12
.59
250.8
.53
9.09
505,
5.74
.973
.960 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/K'M
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICIPATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
706.1 (27,0)
571,5 (22,5)
31.9 ( 09.5)
23020.
234.2 ( 0269.)
ll.O/ll/ 11.
5.0/ I/ 5.
19.5/13/ 10.
2.1/13/ 2,
20. 3/ 3/ .47
3.0/ 3/ .05
9.6/ 2/ 10.
.4/ 2/ 0.
20.61
6.
15.
.42
9.2
.83
4.20
1805.7
4.25
1.22
.13
,6B
293.2
.69
11.20
868.
6.16
.975
.940)
.974)
369,7
77.88
11.90
10.57
3-PAG (4-D
287.7 ( 206
10,99 ( 10.
.14 (
.65 (
.62 (
.250 ( .2
.14)
5)
.62)
246)
-------
TEST NO. 2A1H39 RUN 5
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-0
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 744.73 MM HG(29.32 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 56. PCT
BAD RESULTS
BLOWES; DIF P HH. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SrMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC UCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/FCT
C02 BCKGRD METCR/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/Pi'M
NOX HCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
fIC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, UET (DRY)
SCF» U'ET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM DLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
Nl
O
TEST NUMBERr
BAROMETERT MM HG
HUMIDITY. G/KG
TEMPERATURE» DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KH
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDEi G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN? G/KM
HFET VEHICLE EMICSIONC RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.2A
DATE 6/25/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BIO TEMP. 25.0 DEG C<77,0 DEO F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 11,4 GM/KG
HFET
698,5 (27,5)
566,4 (22,3)
36.4 ( 97,5)
21023.
205,4 < 7254.)
16.4/11/ 16,
5.0/ I/ 5,
35.2/13/ 33.
1.5/13/ J,
53,2/ 3/ .93
3.I/ 3/ .05
15.3/ 2/ 15.
.!/ 2/ 0.
14.35
12.
30.
.08
15.2
1.39
7.21
3320.8
6.10
2.06
765.
.930 ( ,913)
1.000 ( ,973)
205.4
43.83
16.35
2A1H39
744.7
11.4
25.0
203.6
7.78
.09
.44
.37
TEST WEIGHT 1014. KG( 4000. LfcS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.6 KU( 11.5 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 5003. KM< 3109, MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.02
-------
TEST NO. 2A1N40 P'lN 5
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLiiU Co CLASS
ENGINE 5,7 L<350. CID V-B
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 744.73 MM HG(29.32 IN MG>
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 59. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM. H20(IN. M20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG, C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE MtTER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/FCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
_. HC CONCENTRATION PPM
i CO CONCENTRATION PPM
2 C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
11C MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MACS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, U'ET (DRY) ' .
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM>
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBERF
BAROMETERF MM MG
HUMIDITY. G/KG
TEMPERATURE. DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE. G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KN
' HYDROCARBONS> G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN. G/KM
NYCC VGHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.2A
PATE 4/'.'5/01
BAG CART N.], 1
BYNO NO, 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 23.9 BEG C(75.0 BEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 11,1 GM/KG
NYCC
706.1 (27.Qi
571.5 (22.5)
33.6 ( 92,5)
16456.
161.3 < 569o.)
10.2/11/ 10.
5.0/ I/ 5,
18.0/13/ 16..
1.6/13/ L.
24.2/ 3/ .39
3.I/ 3/ .05
8.7/ 2/ 9.
,!/ 2/ 0.
33.01
5.
15.
.35
8.6
.50
2,73
1026.7
2.69
.64
600.
,970 ( .95!?)
1.000 ( ,97V)
161.3
34.13
1..09
2A1N40
744.7
11.1
23.9
542.0
20.72
.26
1.44
1.42
TEST UEIGIIT 1014. KG( 4000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.6 KU( 11,5 IIP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 5020. KM< 3119, MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.01
-------
TEST NO, 2A1S4I RUN 5
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 744.73 MM HG(29,32 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 53. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIE P MM. H20(IN, 1120)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H20UN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. BEG. C
-------
to
Ul
TEST HO, 2A1N42 RUN 6
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V 8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 744.47 MM (16(29.31 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 55. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
DLOUER DIF P MM. H2CKIN. 1120)
BLOUER INLET P MN. H20(IN. H20)
FLGUER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER TV-EVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
IIC DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 GAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
, IIC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
IIC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MAGS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC. UET (DRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY. G/KG
TEMPERATUREF DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE. G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONSf G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN. G/KM
NYCC VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4C74--001
VEHICLE N0.2A
DATE 6/25/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO, 2
CVG NO, 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 23.9 DEG C<75.0 DEG F)
NYCC
706.1 (27.C)
571.5 (22.5)
33.9 < 93.0)
16471.
161.5 ( 5703.)
10.4/11/ 10.
5.0/ I/ 5.
1B.9/13/ 17.
1.3/13/ 1.
24.7/ 3/ .40
3.3/ 3/ .05
8.9/ 2/ 9.
,3/ 21 0.
33.08
6.
16.
.35
8.6
,52
2.94
1044.9
- 2.63
.67
600.
.970 ( .953)
1,000 ( .979)
161.5
34.36
1.88
2A1N42
744.5
10.4
23.9
557.3
21.31
.28
1.57
1,40
TEST WEIGHT 1814. KG( 4000. LCS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.6 KU( 11.5 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 5050. KM( 3130, MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .99
-------
TEST NO. 2A1N43 RUN 1
VEHICLE MOIUTL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-B
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 744.22 MM HG(29,30 IN H6)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 55, PCT
HAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN. H20)
DLOUER INLET TEMP, DEC, C(DEG, F)
EfLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. HETRES
-------
SUMMARY OF REGULATED EMISSIONS FROM 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS
DIESEL VEHICLE USING EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
HC , g/mi
CO, g/mi
NOX, g/mi
Part., g/mi
Fuel, mi/gal
2A2F18
3-b FTP
6/4
1
0.21
1.14
1.05
0.42
22.4
2A2F22
3-b FTP
6/5
2
0.21
1.09
1.08
0.46
22.2
2A2F26
3-b FTP
6/19
3
0.24
1.05
1.01
0.46
21.8
2A2F30
3-b FTP
6/22
4
y.19
1.17
1.01
0.43
22.1 .
2A2F34
3-b FTP
6/23
5
0.21
1.11
1.09
0.43
21.9
2A2H19
HFET
6/4
1
0.16
0.74
0.58
0.20
34.3
2A2H23
HFET
6/5
2
0.14
0.72
0.63
0.21
32.0
2A2H27
HFET
6/19
3
0.16
0.69
0.60
0.20
32.1
2A2H31
HFET
6/22
4
0.18
0.74
0.61
0.21
32.5
to
Ul
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Ron No.
HC, g/mi
CO, g/mi
NOX, g/mi
Part . , g/mi
Fuel, mi/gal
2A2N20 I 2A2N24
NYCC
6/4
1
0.53
2.46
2.41
0.73
11.4
NYCC
6/5
2
0.47
2.41
2.43
0.70
11.2
2A2N28
NYCC
6/19
3
0.51
2.37
2.41
0.59
11.2
2A2N32
NYCC
6/22
4
0.48
2.61
2.35
0.68
11.1
2A2N35
NYCC
6/23
5
0.58
2.56
2.37
0.62
11.8
2A2N36
NYCC
6/23
6
0.56
2.67
2.40
0.61
11.2
2A2S21
85 kph
6/4
1
0.14
0.77
0.58
0.14
34.8
2A2S25
85 kph
6/5
2
0.14
0.71
0.60
0.15
32.7
2A2S29
85 koh
6/19
3
0.13
0.66
0.56
0.13
33.1
2A2S33
85 kph
6/22
4
0.11
0.66
0.58
0.14
33.4
-------
TEST NO. 2A2F18 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5,7 L(350, C1D) VH3
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 736,35 MM HG(28,99 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 57, PCT
BAG RESULTS
PAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM, H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEC, C(DEG, F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD, CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NDX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX HASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
' C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCFi. DRY
DFCf UET (DRY)
SCF» UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM PLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
CSM^OSITE RESULTS
' TEST NUMBER 2A2F18
BAROMETER MM HG 736,3
HUMIDITY G/KG 12.5
TEMPERATURE DEG C 26,1
ro
cr>
VEHICLE N0.2A
DATE &/ 4/81
BAG CART NO, 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNO NO, 2
DRY BULB TEMP. 26,1 BEG C(79.0 DEO F)
ABS, HUMIDITY 12.5 CM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1814. KG< 4000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.6 KM( 11.5 HP)
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 4595. KM( 2055, MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1,06
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
690,9 (27,2)
561.3 (22,1)
35,0 ( 95,0)
13039,
134,2 ( 4738.)
12. Vll/ 12.
5.8/ I/ 6,
32.2/13/ 30.
' 1.6/13/ 1,
42, ?/ 3/ .73
3,2/ 3/ , ,05
12. 6/ 2/ 13,
,5/ 2/ 1,
10,30
7.
27.
,68
12.1
,53
4.28
1675,0
3.31
1,94
,09
,74
291.0
.58
10,86 '
505,
5.76
,975
,958
'1.000
2
STABILIZED
693,4 (27,3)
563.9 (22.2)
33,3 ( 92,0)
23012,
231,5 ( 8176.)
10,6/H/ 11,
4,6/ I/ 5.
20.2/13/ IB,
1.5/13/ 1,
20, 6/ 3/ ,47
3, I/ 3/ ,05
10. I/ 2/ 10,
,5/ 2/ 1,
28,29
6,
17.
,43
9,6
,82
4.48
1801.7
4.53
1.50
,13
. ,73
293.7
,74
10,96
868.
6.13
.977
( .940)
( ,976)
365.7
77.25
11.09
10.91
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
690,9 (27,2)
561.3 (22.1)
35,6 ( 96.0)
13843,
134.1 ( 4736.)
14.6/11/ 15.
4.6/ I/ 5.
27.7/13/ 25,
1.4/13/ 1,
37, 2/ 3/ .63
3, I/ 3/ ,05
11, 6/ 2/ 12,
,4/ 2/ 0,
21,27
10.
23.
.58
11.2
,79
3,66
1426.0
3.06
1.36
.14
,64
249.4
.54
9.31
505.
'5.72
.976
.961 (
1.000 <
DIOXIDE G/KH
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) 6/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/Kh
4
STABILIZED
690.9 (27,2)
561.3 (22.1)
33.9 ( 93.0)
23814.
231.4 ( 8171.)
10.9/11/ 11.
4,5/ I/ 5.
19.5/13/ 18.
1.0/13/ 1,
27, 5/ 3/ ,45
3, I/ 3/ ,05
10, O/ 2/ 10,
,4/ 2/ 0.
29.50
7.
16.
.41
9,6
,88
4,42
1718. D
4,53
1.33
.14
.72
279.6
.74
10.44
868.
6.14
.977
.944)
.977)
365.5
77,29
11,86
9.90
3-DAG (4-BAG)
280.9 ( 276.8)
10.49 ( 10.33)
.13 ( ,13)
.71 ( .70)
.65 ( ,65)
,262 ( .254)
-------
TEST NO. 2A2H19 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 736.09 MM flG(20,9Q IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 51. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
['LOWER DIP P MM, H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
DLQUER INLET TEMP, DEC, C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
tlO CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFCr WET (DRY)
SCF. UET (DRY)
VCL
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.03
-------
TEST NO. 2A2N20 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 736.35 MM HO(28,99 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 54. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER BIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. METRES
-------
TEST NO. 2A2S21 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350, CIB) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 736.35 MM HG<20.99 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 51. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H2Q(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. C
-------
VtHJCLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 LC350. CID) V-B
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 736.35 MM I IP(28.99 IN HG)
RELATIVE MHMIDITr 60, PCT
BAG RESUI TO
BAG NMMPER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC, C(DEG, F)
DLOWCR REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANfT/PPM
HC BCKGRD HETER/MMRE/PPM
CO SA^riE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO Eri-nr.'D METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
HOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCLNTRATION PPM
HC HAS? GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MAGS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
a
U)
o
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF, DRY
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCF. UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 2A2F22
BAROMETER MM HG 736,3
HUMIDITY G/KG 12,8
TEMPERATURE BEG C 25.6
DATE £/ 5/81
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP, 25,6 DEB C(7B.O DEO
ABO, HUMIDITY 12,0 CM/KG
ie»i HtlUHl 1(114. KG( 4000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD B,f t'U( 11.5 HP)
DIESEL EM 469-F
ODOMETER 4,'i67. KM( 2900. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.07
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
693.4 (27,7)
561.1 (22.1)
34,4 ( 94,0)
13856,
134,5 ( 4749.)
16,6/11' 17,
5, I/ I/ 5,
33.5/13/ 31,
4.0/13/ 4,
42. 6/ 3/ .73
3. I/ 3/ ,05
12, 4/ 2/ 12,
,6/ 2/ 1,
10.33
12,
27.
,60
11.8
.91
4.16
1670.1
3.27
2,29
.16
,72
289.9
.56
10,82
505,
5,79
,974
,757
1,000
2
STABILIZED
690,9 (27,2)
561.3 (22,1)
33,3 ( 92.0)
23017.
231,7 ( 8102.)
10.6/11/ 11,
5,0/ I/ 5.
21.4/13/ 20,
3,3/l.V 3,
20, O/ 3/ ,47
2.9/ 3/ .04
10. 5/ 2/ 11.
,6/ 2/ 1,
28,08
6,
16.
,43
9.9
,77
4,35
1830,8
4.72
1.61
.13
.70
295.7
.76
11.04
868.
6,19
.976
( .939)
< .975)
366.2
77.40
11.98
10.93
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
690.9 (27.2)
561,3 (22.1)
34.4 ( 94.0)
13852.
134,5 ( 4750.)
14,3/U/ 14.
5.0/ I/ 5,
27.5/13/ 25.
2.1/13/ 2,
38, 6/ 3/ .65
3, I/ 3/ .05
12, I/ 2/ 12,
,4/ 2/ 0,
20,44
10,
23.
.61
11.7
.74
3.55
1494.0
3,24
1.50
.13
,61
258..'.
.56
9.65
505.
5,78
.975
.961 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) 6/KM
CARDON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
690.9 (27.2)
561.3 (22.1)
33.3 ' 92.0)
21020.
231.0 ( 8105.)
10,8/tl/ 11,
4.7/ I/ 5.
19.7/13/ 18.
2.1/13/ 2.
27, 21 3/ .45
3.0/ 3/ ,05
10, 11 2/ 11,
,8/ ?./ 1,
27.05
6.
16.
,40
9,9
.83
4.22
1705.0
4,72
1,24
,13
,68
275,3
.76
10.28
868.
6.19
.976
.942)
.976)
366.3
77.51
11.97
9.98
3-BAG (4-BA6)
204.3 ( 278.3)
10.61 ( 10.39)
.13 ( .14)
.68 ( .68)
.67 < ,67)
.288 ( .271)
-------
TEST NO. 2A2H23 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5,7 L(350. CID) V-0
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 736.60 MM HO(29,00 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 54, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP, BEG. C
-------
TEST NO. 2A2N24 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L<350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 736,60 MM HG(29.00 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 54, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP, BEG, C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
_ C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
i NDX CONCENTRATION PPM
» HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS CRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFC, WET (UPY)
SCF* UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER*
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATURE, BEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION* L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE* G/KM
' OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.2A
DATE 6/ 5/81
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY DULB TEMP. 26.1 DEO CC79.0 DEO F)
ABS, HUMIDITY 11.8 CM/KG
NYCC
690.9 (27.2)
561.3 (22.1)
32,8 ( 91,0)
16476.
160,7 ( 5674.)
10.0/11/ 11,
5.I/ I/ 5,
18.4/13/ 17,
1.4/13/ 1,
24.O/ 3/ ,40
3,0/ 3/ ,05
9.7/ 2/ 10,
,B/ 2/ 1.
32.94
6.
15.
.36
8,9
,54
2,83
1058.0
2,84
,82
600.
..970 ( .953)
1.000 ( .979)
160,7
34.01 .
1.88
2A2N24
736,6
11,8
26,1
561,6
20.77
.29
1,50
1,51
TEST WEIGHT 1014.
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
DIESEL EM-469--F
ODOMETER 4707. KM(
KG( 4000. LBS)
8.6 KU< 11.5 HP)
2925. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.04
-------
TEST NOi 2A2S25 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350, CID) V-B
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 736,60 MM HG(29,00 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 51. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
KLGUER DIF P MM, H2QUN, H2C)
BLOUER INLET P HFI, M20CIN, H20)
BLQUER INLET TEMP, DEO, C
-------
iti>l NU. 2A2F26 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V~0
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 741.93 MM HG(29.21 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 50. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOUER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG, F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MAGS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCFr DRY
DFCf UET (DRY)
SCF, UET
-------
TCST NO. 2A2H27 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5,7 1(350. CIIO V-0
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 741.93 MM HG(29.21 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 56. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM. H20(IM, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H20UN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEC. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STB, CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
-T NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
£ HC MASG GRAMS
' CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFCf UET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
. VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM) ' .
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBERr
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL. CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
KLSULTS
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.2A
DATE 6/19/fll
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO, 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 24.4 DEG C(76,0 DEO F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 10.9 CM/KG
HFET
703.6 (27.7)
571.5 (22.5)
37.2 ( 99.0)
20996.
204,7 < 7227.)
1B.4/11/ 19,
5.3/ I/ 5,
34.6/13/ 32,
1.3/13/ 1.
52.2/ 3/ .91
3.4/ 3/ .05
15.9/ 2/ 16.
,5/ 2/ 1,
14,65
13,
30,
,06
15,4
1,58
7.09
3227.0
6.00
2.03
765.
'.932 ( ,915)
1.000 ( .974)
204.7 .
43.60
16.43
2A2H27
741.9
10,9 :
24,4
196,4
7,33
,10
.43
,37
TEST WEIGHT 1814. KG< 4000. IBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.6 KU( 11.5 HP)
DIESEL EM-467-F
ODOMETER 4700. KM( 2970. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.01
-------
ltl>r NO. 2A2N28 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL Bl OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5-7 L(350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 741.60 MM tlG(29.20 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 55. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP, DEG. C(DEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STB. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH
HC BCKGRD KETER/RANGE/PPH
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE NETER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD HETCR/RANGE/PCT
NOX GAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPrt
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX' MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
La
(Ji
TEST NUMBER*
BAROMETERf MM HG
HUMIDITYf G/KG
TEMPERATUREi DEG C
CARBON BIDXIBEr G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONSF G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDEF G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
VEHICLE NO.2A
PATE 6/19/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO, .1
DRY BULB TEMP, 23,9 BEG C(75.0 DEG F)
ADS, HUMIDITY 10,5 CM/KG
NYCC
703,6 (27,7)
571.5 (22,5)
33.9 ( 93.0)
16470,
161,4 ( 5701.)
10,8/H/ 11.
4,5/ I/ 5,
17.7/13/ 16,
1.1/13/ 1,
24,7/ 3/ ,40
3,1/ 3/ ,05
9,6/ 2/ 10.
.4/ 2/ 0,
33.08
6.
15,
,36
9,2
,60
2.77
1053.3
2.82
,69
600.
.970 ( .953)
, 1.000 ( .979)
161.4
34.28
1.83
2A2N28
741.7
10.5
23.9
561.3
20.97
,32
1.47
1.50
TEST WEIGHT 1814. KG( 4000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.6 KU( 11.5 HP)
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 4796. KM( 2980. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .99
-------
TEST NO. 2A2S29 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 741.60 MM KG(29.20 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 53. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
DLOUER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
PLOUER INLET P UM, H20UN, H20)
BLOU-ER INLET TEMP. BEfi, C(DE6. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NQX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
D
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS
RUN TIME
DFC» UET (DRY)
SCF. WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETER.
HUMIDITY.
TEMPERATURE.
CARBON DIOXIDE.
Fi.'EL CONSUMPTION.
HYI'ROC ARSONS.
CARBON MONOXIDE.
OXIDES OF NITROGEN.
GRAMS
SECONDS
MM HG
G/KG
BEG C
G/KM
L/100KM
G/KM
G/KM
G/KM
VEHICLE N0.2A
DATE 6/19/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP, 25.0 DEG C(77.0 DEO F)
85 K
701.0 (27.6)
563.9 (22.2)
30.9 (102.0)
32005,
319.3 (11273.)
16,9/H/ 17.
5.0/ I/ 5,
35.5/13/ 33,
.7/13/ 1.
55.5/ 3/ .97
3.V 3/ .05
16.6/ 2/ 17.
.5/ 2/ 1.
13.69
12.
31.
.93
16.1
2.27
11.56
5411.5
9.84
2.35
1190,
,927 ( ,911)
1.000 ( .974)
319,3
67.96
28.43
2A2S29
741,7
10.7
25.0
190,4
7,10
,08
.41
,35
TEST UEIGHT 1014. KG< 4000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 3.6 KM( 11.5 HP)
DIESEL EN-469-F
ODOMETER 4799, KM( 2902. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.00
-------
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CJD) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 739.65 MM HG(29,12 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 59. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOUER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P «M. H20(IN. H20J
BLOUER INLET TEKP. BEG. CfflEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STB. CU. METRES(SCr)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPH
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION FCT
? NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC. MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS-
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF, DRY
BFC, WET (PRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KH
COMPOSITE RESULTS
. TEST NUMBER 2A2F30
BAROMETER MM HG 739.6
HUMIDITY G/KG 11.2
TEMPERATURE DEG C 23.9
DATE 6/22/81
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP. 23.9 DEB CC75.0 DEB F)
ABS, HUMIDITY 11.2 GM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1814. KG( 4000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.6 KU< 11.5 HP)
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 4054. KM( 3016. HILCS)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.02
OJ
CO
1
TOLD TRANSIENT
690.5 <27,5)
563,9 (22.2)
35.3 ( 95.5)
13057.
135.0 ( 4760.)
17.7/11/ 18.
7.9/ I/ B.
34.3/13/ 32.
2.9/13/ 3.
43. 5/ 3/ .74
3.4/ 3/ .05
12. 5/ 2/ 13.
.!/ 2/ 0.
17.91
10.
20.
.69
12.4
.80
4.43
1715.7
3,26
2,23
,14
,77
298,9
.57
11,16
505,
5,74
,974
,957
1,000
2
STABILIZED
706,1 (27,8)
571.5 (22.5)
31.7 ( 09,0)
23035.
233,8 ( 8255,)
14,3/li/ 14.
10. O/ I/ 10.
21.6/13/ 20.
2.6/13/ 2.
20. 4/ 3/ ,47
3,0/ 3/ .05
9,7/ 2/ 10,
.!/ 2/ 0.
28,47
5,
17,
.42
9.6
.63
4,61
1810,5
4,36
1.45
,10
.75
294.6
471
11,00
868,
6,14
,977
( .939)
( ,976)
. 368,8
77.94
11.09
11.08
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
690.5 (27.5)
563.9 (22.2)
35.6 ( 96,0)
13853.
134.9 ( 4765.)
19,0/il/ 19,
10, O/ I/ 10,
29.1/13/ 27,
1.8/13/ 2.
30. O/ 3/ .64
2,9/ 3/ .04
12. I/ 21 12.
.4/ 2/ 0.
20,77
10,
24.
.60
11,7
.74
3,03
1478.5
3,07
1.34
.13
.67
258.2
,54
9.64
505.
5,73
,975
.960 (
1,000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/K'M
CARPON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/NM
4
STABILIZED
706.1 (27.8)
571,5 (22.5)
31.9 ( 89.5)
23836.
233.7 ( 8251.)
15.1/11/ 15.
7,2/ I/ 7,
20.7/13/ 19,
1.5/13/ 1.
28. 3/ 3/ .47
3. I/ 3/ .05
10, 3/ 2/ 10.
,4/ 2/ 0.
28.58
8.
17.
.42
9,9
1.09
4.64
1795.6
4.50
1,24
.18
.76
293.2
,74
10.95
869.
6.12
.977
.942)
.976)
368.6
77.97
11.85
10.32
3-BAG (4-BAG)
285,5 ( 285.1)
10.66 ( 10.64)
,12 ( .14)
,73 ( .73)
.63 ( .64)
.267 ( ,258)
-------
TEST NO. 3A2H31 RUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L<350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 739,65 MM HG<29.12 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 59. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
tl.OUER DIF P MM, H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20UN, H20)
U)
ID
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC, C(DEG.
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD, CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPIE NETER/RANGE/PPM
HC PCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPH
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCNGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NQX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MAGS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, UET (DRY)
SCF. UET (DRY)
VOL (SCH)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY, GAG
TEMPERATUREi BEG C
CARBON DIOXIDEr GAM
FUEL CONSUMPTION! L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS* GAM
CARBON MONOXIDE* GAM
OXIBES OF NITROGEN* GAM
F)
VEHICLE NO.?A
DATE 6/32/81
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 24.4 BEG CX76.0 DEC F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 11,7 GMAG
HFET
690,5 (27,5)
541,3 (22.1)
3
-------
TEST NO. 2A2H32 RUN 4
viryrciE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350, CID) V-B
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 737.65 MM H0(29,12 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 55, PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM, H20UN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CCi BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION 'PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NDX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MriSS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFC» UET (DRY)
SCFr UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
a
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER,
HUMIDITY*
TEMPERATURE,
CARBON DIOXIDEr
FUEL CONSUMPTION,
HYDROCARBONS,
CARBON MONOXIDE,
OXIDES OF NITROGEN,
MM HG
G/KC
DEG C
G/KM
L/100KM
G/KM
G/KM
G/KM
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.2A
DATE 6/22/ai
BAG CART NO, 1
DYNO MO, 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULB TUMP, 23,9 DEC C<75.0 DEG F)
MS, HUMIDITY 10,5 CM/KG
NYCC
690,5 (27,5)
563,9 (22,2)
33,9 ( 93,0)
16440,
160,6 < 5672.)
11.9/11/ 12,
6,0/ I/ 6,
'19.6/13/ 10,
1,2/137 1,
25,It 3/ ,41
3,2/ 3/ .05
9,4/ 2/ 9,
.A/ 2f 0,
32.37
6,
16,
.36
9,0
,56
3.06
1069.4
2,75
,80
599,
,969 ( ,952)
1.000 < .970)
160,6 .
34,02
1,88
2A2N32
739.6
10,5 .
23.9
567,4
21,20
,30
1,62
1,46
TEST WEIGHT 1814. KG( 4000, IDS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.6 KU( 11.5 UP)
DIESEL Eh-469-F
ODOMETER 4074. KM( 3041. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR ,99
-------
TEST NO. 2A2S33 RUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL 81 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350, CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 739.65 MM HG(29,12 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 53. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20CIN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEC. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. METRES(GCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RAHGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
D:LUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
.. C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC. tIET CJRY)
SCF, U'ET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETERi MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE? DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE* 0/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS* G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDEi G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
85 KPH VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4874-001
VEHICLE N0.2A
DATE (5/22/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY DULB TEMP. 25.0 DEG C(77.0 DEO F)
ADS, HUMIDITY 10.7 GM/KG
85 K
690,9 (27.2)
558.8 (22.0)
37.2 ( 99.0)
32944.
320.3 (11310.)
16,5/H/ 16.
5.7/ I/ 6.
35.7/13/ 33,
.9/13/ 1,
54.6/ 3/ ,96
3.0/ 3/ ,05
17.O/ 2/ 17.
,5/ 2/ 1.
13,94
11,
31,
,91
16,5
2.07
11.61
5359.0
10.13
2,52
1200.
,928 ( .912)
1.000 ( ,974)
320,3
67,80
28,39
2A2S33
739.6
10.7
25.0
188,8
7.04
.07
.41
,36
TEST WEIGHT 1814,
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 4897. KM( 3043
KG( 4000. LBS)
0.6 KU( 11.5 HP)
MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1,00
-------
TEST NO. 2A2F34 RUN 5
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 742.19 MM HG(29.22 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 59. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIF P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG, C(DEG, F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
IIC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PFM
C02 SAMPLE ttCTER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PFM
NOX DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
n C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
T NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
£ HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS CRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAHS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAHS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCFf DRY
DFCf UET (DRY)
SCF» UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 2A2F34
BAROMETER MM HG 742.2
HUMIDITY G/KG 11.2
TEMPERATURE DEG C 23.9
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.2A
DATE 6/23/81
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNO NO, 2
DRY DULB TEMP, 23.9 DEG C(75.0 DEG F)
ADS, HUMIDITY 11.2 CM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1014. KG< 4000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0,6 KU< 11.5 HP)
DIESCL EM-467-F
ODOHETER 4925, KM< 3060. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.01
1
;OLD TRANSIENT
703,6 (27,7)
571,5 (22.5)
35.0 ( 95.0)
13058,
135.5 ( 4705.)
16.0/11/ 1A,
6,7/ I/ 7,
32.2/13/ 30.
2.0/13/ 2,
43. 2/ 3/ ,74
2,9/ 3/ ,04
13, 9/ 2/ 14,
,6/ 2/ 1,
10.06
10,
27.
,70
13,3
.75
4.26
1726.1
3,51
2.34
.13
.74
299.6
.61
11,10
505.
5,76
,974
.958
1.000
2
STABILIZED
706.1 (27,0)
571.5 (22.5)
32,2 ( 90,0)
23019,
234,3 ( 8271.)
11.6/11/ 12,
5,7/ I/ 6,
19.9/13/ 18.
1.9/13/ 2,
20, 2/ 3/ ,46
2,5/ 3/ ,04
10. 9/ 2/ 11,
,5/ 2/ 1,
20,72
6,
16,
.43
10,4
.83
4.36
1030,6
4.74
1,41
.13
.71
297.3
.77
11.10
868.
6,16
,977
( .940)
( .776)
367.8
78.25
11,92
11.14
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
703.6 (27,7)
569,0 (22.4)
35,6 ( 96,0)
13053.
135,4 ( 4700.)
14,7/H/ 15,
5,7/ I/ 6,
26.4/13/ 24.
.7/13/ 1.
30. 7/ 3/ .65
3,2/ 3/ ,05
12, O/ 2/ 13,
,6/ 2/ 1,
20,38
9.
23.
.61
12.2
.72
3.60
1504.5
3.21
1.40
,13
,63
262,3
,56
9.79
505.
5.74
.975
,960 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/K«
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
700.7 (27,9)
574.0 (22.6)
32.8 ( 91.0)
23011.
233.8 ( 8256.)
11,3/H/ 11,
5.0/ I/ 5.
18.5/13/ 17.
,0/13/ 1.
20. O/ 3/ ,46
3.0/ 3/ .05
10. 7/ 2/ 11.
,4/ 2/ 0.
20.95
6,
16.
.42
10.3
,87
4,26
1760.2
4.68
1.28
.14
,69
289,3
.76
10.00
868.
6.15
.977
.942)
.976)
369.2
78.27
11.89
10.31
3-BAG (4- DAG)
288.2 ( 285.8)
10.76 ( 10.67)
.13 ( .13)
.69 ( .69)
.68 ( .68)
.269 ( .264)
-------
TETCT NO. 2A2N35 RUN 5
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350, CID) V-0
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 742.70 MM HG<29,24 IN KG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 56, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM, II20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP, DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRTi METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
-. C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
?. NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
^ HC MASS GRAMS
CO- MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS CRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFCi UET (DRY)
SCFr UET (DRY)
WL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER*
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE* I'tG C
CARBON DIOXIDE? C/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION* L.100KM
HYDROCARBONS * G/KM
' CARBON MONOXIDE* G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
NYCC VEHICLE r.:MICDIOWS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074 001
VEHICLE N0.2A
DATE 6/:!3/81
DAG CART NO, 1
DYNO NO, 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULD TCMP, 24,4 DEG C(76,0 DEO F>
ABS, HUMIDITY 10,9 Gft/KG
NYCC
700,7 (27,9)
571,5 (22,5)
33,3 ( 92,0)
16441,
161.4 ( 5699.)
J2.5/11/ 12,
5.0/ I/ 5.
19.6/13/ 10,
1.0/13/ 1.
24.4/ 3/ .40
3,I/ 3/ .05
9.6/ 2/ ID,
,4/ 2/ 0,
33.49
8.
17,
,35
9.2
.71
3.10
1037.6
2.06
.75
599.
,970 ( ,953)
1,000 ( ,97D)
161.4
34,20
1,95
2A2N35
742.7
10.9
24.4
532.7
19,92
.36
1.59
1.47
TEST WEIGHT 1014. KG( 4000, LPS>
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.6 KU( 11.5 fIP)
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 4949, KM< 3075, MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1,01
-------
TEST NO. 2A2N36 RUN 6
VEHICLE MODEL 01 OLDS CUTLASS
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-fl
TRANSMISSION A3
BAROMETER 742.95 MM HG(29.25 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 55, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
DLOUER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. PEG. C(DEG, F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU GTD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
" NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
*. HC MASS GRAMS
* CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCF* WET (DRY)
VOL (5CM)
SAM ULR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER*
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATURE* DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION* L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS* G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE* G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.2A
DATE i/;'3/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 2
DRY BULB TfMP. 24.4 BEG C(76.0 BEO F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 10.9 GM/KG
NYCC
708.7 <27.9)
571.5 (22.5)
32,8 ( 91,0)
16434,
161.6 < 5706.)
TEST WEIGHT 1014. KG( 4000. LH5)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.6 KU( 11.5 HP)
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 4950. KM( 3076. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.01
4.0/ I/
19.2/13/
5.
17,
,05
9.
0.
24, 7/ 3/
3.3/ 3/
9.3/ 2/
,4/ 2/
33,07
7.
16.
.35
8.9
.64
3.07
1045.5
2.77
.70
599.
.970 < .952)
1.000 ( .970)
161.6
34.22
1,05
2A2N36
743.0
10.9
24.4
563,8
21.07
.35
1,66
1,4?
-------
APPENDIX E
TEST RESULTS,
FIAT TURBOCHARGED DIESEL
WITHOUT AFTERTREATMENT
FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
-------
SUMMARY OF REGULATED EMISSIONS FROM FIAT TURBOCHARGED DIESEL
RESEARCH VEHICLE, EM-329-F BASE FUEL, NO CATALYST
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
HC, g/mi
CO, g/mi
NO g/mi
Part., g/mi
Fuel, mi/gal
3A1F01
3-b FTP
6/26
1
0.40
1.37
1.98
0.24
23.0
3A1F05
3-b FTP
6/29
2
0.37
1.32
2.09
0.28
22.2
3A1F09
3-b FTP
7/2
3
0.40
1.29
2.04
0.26
23.2
3A1F13
3-b FTP
7/6
4
0.37
1.40
2.04
0.27
22.5
3A1H02
HFET
6/26
1
0.11
0.47
1.27
0.12
36.6
3A1H06
HFET
6/29
2 .
0.10
0.47
1.22
0.12
37.1
3A1H10
HFET
7/2
3
o.ii
0.43
1.32
0.13
36.5
3A1H14
HFET
7/6
4
0.10
0.43
1.27
0.14
36.0
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
HC, g/mi
CO, g/mi
NO , g/mi
Part. , g/mi
Fuel , mi/gal
3A1N03
NYCC
6/26
1
1.06
3.17
2.74
0.39
14.5
3A1N07
NYCC
6/29
2
1.08
3.22
2.65
0.47
14.7
3A1N11
NYCC
7/2
3
1.11
3.01
2.77
0.40
14.3
3A1N15
NYCC
7/6
4
0.97
2.91
2.75
0.37
14.6
3A1S04
85 kph
6/26
1
0.08
0.40
1.27
0.11
37.2
3A1S08
85 kph
6/29
2
OV05
0.39
1.30
0.11
38.0
3A1S12
85 kph
7/2
3
0.08
.0.37
1.32
0.11
37.3
3A1S16
85 kph
7/6
4
0.08
0.39
1.30
0.12
36.5
E-2
-------
w
I
TEST NO. 3A1F01 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L~4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 745.24 MM IIG(29,34 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 59. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOUER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUCR INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLFT TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOIJ STD, CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKORn METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BChGRH METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE M.rTER/RANGE/PCT
C03 BCKGRD METER/RANfiE/PCT
?:riX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PPT
NIIX CONCCNtRATION PPM
DC MADS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO CRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF. DRY
DFC» UET (DRY)
SCFf UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 3A1F01
BAROMETER MM HG 745.2
HUMIDITY G/KG 11,1
TEMPERATURE BEG C 23,9
FTP VEHICLE ['MISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE NO.3ft
DATE 6/:i6/01
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO, 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY BULD TIMP. 23.9 DEC C(75,0 DEB F)
ABS, HUMIDITY 11,1 GM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1361, KG( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EH-327-F
ODOMETER 7659, KM< 4759. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.01
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
698,5 (27,5)
566,4 (22, 3>
36,1 ( 97,0)
13853.
135,0 ( 4794.)
20,0/H/ 29,
5,9/ I/ 6.
35.2/13/ 33,
,9/13/ 1.
38. 4/ 3/ .65
2.C/ 3/ ,04
25, 5/ 2/ 26,
,4/ 2/ 0,
20,49
23.
31.
,61
25,1
1.02
4.07
1510,4
6,61
,99
.32
.06
266.4
1,17
10.22
505.
5.67
.975
.961 (
1,000 (
2
STABILIZED
706,1 (27,8)
571,5 (22,5)
35,6 ( 96,0)
23021,
233,6 ( 8250,)
16.9/11/ 17,
4,8/ I/ 5,
25.8/13/ 24,
.9/13/ 1,
27. 3/ 3/ .45
2.B/ 3/ .04
10. 3/ 2/ 18,
,4/ 2/ 0,
29,66
12,
22,
,41
17,9
1,65
6,04
1738.7
Q.ll
,95
,27
.99
206.5
1.34
10,90
868.
6.07
,977
.943)
.976)
369.5
78.43
11.74
10.61
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
703.6 (27.7)
571.5 (22,5)
37.2 ( 99,0)
13855,
135,6 ( 4786.)
16.0/11/ 16,
4,fl/ I/ 5,
24.5/13/ 22,
,0/13/ 1,
34. I/ 3/ ,57
2,9/ 3/ ,04
23, 5/ 2/ 24,
,5/ 2/ 1,
23,38
11.
2«;
,33
23,0
.89
3.32
1307,7
6,05
,72
,16
.59
230.9
1.07
B.C3
505.
5.66
.976
.963 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KN
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
690,5 (27.5)
571,5 (22.5)
36,1 ( 97,0)
23014.
233,4 ( 0241.)
16,5/H/ 17,
4.7/ I/ 5.
26.0/13/ 24.
.9/13/ 1,
27. I/ 3/ .44
2.6/ 3/ .04
17. 9/ 2/ 10.
,5/ 2/ 1,
29.89
12,
22,
,41
17,4
1.61
6,08
1734.4
7,87
,92
,26
1.00
2E5.2
1.29
10,93
868,
6.08
.977
.945)
.977)
368.9
78.33
11,75
9.92
3- BAG (4-BAG)
267.0 ( 266,6)
10.23 ( 10.22)
.25 ( .25)
,85 ( .06)
1.23 ( 1.21)
,152 ( .151)
-------
M
I
TEST NO. 3A1H02 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 744,47 MM HG<29.31 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 52. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOUCFc INLET TEMP. DEG. C(LEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH
HC BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
CO GAhPLE hETER/RANBE/PPM
CO DCNGRD hETER/RANCE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANCE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
MC MAGS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULAR MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFCi WET (DRY)
SCF. UET (DRY)
VOL (5CM)
SAM BLR (SCH)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER»
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITYr G/KG
TEMPERATUREi DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION* L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIBEr G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGENf G/KM
HPET VCHICLE: EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4874-001
VEHICLE N0.3A
DATE 6/26/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
BRY BULB TCMP. 25.0 DEG C(77.0 DEG F)
ACS. HUMIDITY 10.6 CM/KG
HFET
-------
TEST NO. 3A1N03 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 744.22 MM MG(29.30 IN HGX
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 52. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLQyER DIF P MM. II20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STB. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRIi METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION'FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
? CO CONCENTRATION PPM
w C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MAGS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, UET (BRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER, MM KG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG.C
CARBON DIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
NYCC VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4874-001
VEHICLE NO.3A
DATE 6/26/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULD TEMP. 24.4 DEC CC76.0 DEO F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 10.2 GM/KG
NYCC
690.5 (27.5)
571.5 (22.5)
33.9 ( 93.0)
U439.
161.6 ( 5706.)
17.6/11/ IB.
4.5/ I/ 5.
22.P/13/ 21.
1.0/13/ 1.
19.2/ 3/ .31
2.9/ 3/ .04
10.9/ 2/ 11.
,5/ 2/ 1.
42.97
13.
20.
.26
10.4
1.23
3.60
703.3
3.16
.45
599. '
.977 ( .960)
1.000 ( .900)
161.6
34.27
1.86 -
3A1N03
744.2
10,2
24.4
420.2
16.17
.66
1.97
1.70
TEST HEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EH-329-F
ODOMETCR 7696. KM( 4782. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .90
-------
TCST NO. 3A1S04 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 744.22 MM HG(29.30 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 48. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TFST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWEP INLET TEMP. BEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STB. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE MLTER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE-METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
i CO CONCENTRATION PPM
* Ct)2 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, UET (DRY)
SCFf UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST DUMBER»
BAROMETER* MM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATURE* BEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS* G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE* G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
05 KPH VEHICLE CMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE N0..3A
DATE 6/26/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP, 26.7 BEQ C<80,0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 10.6 CM/KG
85 K
706.1 (27.0)
576.6 (22.7)
36.7 ( 90.0)
32930.
321.9 (11367.)
11.3/11/ 11.
4.2/ I/ 4.
22.6/13/ 21.
1.2/13/ 1.
40.5/ 3/ .£.4
2.7/ 3/ .04
37.2/ 2/ 37.
.5/ 2/ 1.
15.93
7.
19.
.00
36.7
1.36
7.11
4712.5
22,56
1.79
1200.
.937 ( .923)
1,000 < .977)
321,9
60.53
28.41
3A1S04
744,2
10.6
26.7
165.9
6.33
.05
.25
.79
TEST WEIGHT 1361.
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 7697, KM(
KG( 3000. LDS)
0,2 KU( 11.0 HP)
47G3. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.00
-------
-J
TEST ND. 3A1F05 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 743.46 MM HG(29.27 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 53. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER-
DESCRIPTION
BLOUER DIF P MM. II20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP, BEC, C(DEG. F)
EiLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/P^M
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD MEFER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS CRAMS
HC GRANS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SLTr DRY
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCFr UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (5CM>
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KK
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 3A1F05
BAROMETER MM HG 743.5
HUMIDITY G/KP 11.1
TEMPERATURE DEG C 25.6
. ^..»^i_i_ LII.liJO.lUPO KL^ULIS
PROJECT 05-4074--001
VEHICLE N0.3A
DATE 6/J9/81
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO, 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY BULB TCMF. 25.6 DEG C(78,0 DEG F)
ABS, HUMIDITY 11,1 GM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU< 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-329--F
CriOMETER 7736. KM( 4807. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.01
1
;OLD TRANSIENT
703,6 (27,7)
571,5 (22,5)
37,2 ( 99.0)
13037,
134,9 ( 4764.)
10,7/H/ 19,
4,2/ I/ 4,
23.1/13/ 21,
.9/13/ 1,
44. U 3/ ,76
2.B/ 3/ ,04
32, 5/ 2/ 33,
,3/ 2/ 0,
17,45
15,
20.
.72
32.2
1,15
3.09
1787.3
Q.43
1,30
.20
,54
313.0
1.40
11,95
504.
5,71
,976
.957 (
1,000 (
2 3
STABILIZED flOT TRANSIENT
690,5 (27,5) 701,0 (27,6)
566.4 (22,3) 571,5 (22,5)
36,7 ( 90,0) 36,7 ( 90,0)
23037, 13046.
232.7 ( 8216.) 135.1 ( 4770.)
16,7/H/ 17, 16.0/11/ 17,
4.4X I/ 4, 4,4/ I/ 4.
27.7/13/ 25. 25.6/13/ 23,
1.1/13/ 1, 1.2/13/ 1,
27. 7/ 3/ ,45 34. 3/ 3/ ,57
2.97 3/ ,04 3.0/ 3/ .05
10, 7/ 2/ 19. 24. O/ 2f 24,
,4/ 2/ 0, ,7/ 2/ 1,
29,1? 23,23
12, 13,
24, 22,
,41 ,53
10,3 23,3
1.67 ,90
6,45 3.42
1755,4 1308,4
0,27 6.11
1.06 .02
,27 .17
1.05 .60
206.7 229.4
1.35 1,07
10.99 0.77
860. 504,
6.12 5.70
,979 ,970
,941) .963 (
,970) 1,000 (
367,6
77.00
11.03
11.46
CARBON DIOXIDE 6/KH
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KN
HYDROCARBONS (THC) 6/KN
CARBON MONOXIDE G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICIPATES G/KH
4
STADILIZED
690,5 (27.5)
571,5 (22.5)
36.7 ( 90,0)
23020.
232,4 ( 0206.)
16,5/H/ 17.
4,0/ I/ 4.
26.6/13/ 24.
1.0/13/ 1,
27. 2/ 3/ .45
3.0/ 3/ ,05
17, 5/ 2/ 16.
,8/ 2/ ;.
29. "»
13,
23.
,40
16.7
1.70
6.19
1709.3
7.54
.93
,28
1.01
279.7
1,23
10.73
868,
6.11
,979
,946)
.978)
367.5
77,75
11,81
9.78
3-FAG (4-DAG)
276.4 ( 274.3)
10.58 ( 10.50)
,23 ( .23)
.82 ( .01)
1,30 ( 1,27)
,176 ( .170)
-------
TEST NO. 3A1HO& RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CIO) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 742.95 MM HC<29,25 IN 116)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 50. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM. H2Q(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. II20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG. C(DEO. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STFi. CU. METRES(GCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKCRD METCR/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANDE/PCT
C02 BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRB METCR/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO -MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS CRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFC. WET
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 7759. KM( 4021. MILEO)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .99
-------
TEST NO. 3A1NO 7 RUN 2
VEHICLE MOUEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.C U122. CID) L--4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 742,95 MM IIG<29.25 IN HO)
RELATIVE HJMIPITY 50, PCT
PAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM, H20(IN. H20)
BLOU'ER INLET P MM,' H20^IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG, C(DEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD, CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PLT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MAGS GRAMS
NOX MASS G..ArtS
PARTICUIA7E MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, UET (DSY)
SCr, UET (DRY)
VOL 'SCM)
SAM tLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
M
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER. MM Hfi
HUMIDITYi G/KG
TEMPERATURE. DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE. GAM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS> G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDf.1 G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN. G/;,M
N*CC VEHICLE CMISGIONG RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074 001
VEHICLE N0.3A
DATE 6/29/01
BAG CART NO, 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULB TEMP, 25,6 DEG C(7B.O DEO Fi
ABS, IIUMJDITY 10,4 CM/KG
NYCC
690,5 (27.5)
571,5 <22,5)
35,0 ( 95,0)
16442,
161,0 ( 5685.)
17.3/11/ 17,
J.R/ I/ 4,
23.4/13/ 21,
1.0/13/ 1.
19.O/ 3/ .30
2.7/ 3/ ,04
10.?/ 2/ 11,
,6/ 2/ 1,
43.43
14.
20,
.26
10.1
1.26
3.75
779.2
3.00
.55
599.
,977 ( ,961)
1.000 ( .981)
161.0
34.21
1.87
3A1N06
743,0
10.4
25.6
415.7
16.00
.67
2,00
1.65
TEST UEIGUT 1361. KG( 3000. LB5)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KW( 11.0 IIP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 7773, KM( 4830. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .99
-------
TEST NO. 3A1S08 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2,0 H122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 742.70 MM HG(29.24 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 47. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
DLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(TEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
~ HC CONCENTRATION PPM
i CO CONCENTRATION PPM
5 C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
0 NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICUi-ATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, WET (DRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE,' G/KM,
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/IOOK'M
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
fl5 KPH VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.3A
DATE 6/;:9/01
BAG CART ND. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TFMP. 2,5.1 DEG C(79.0 BEO F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 10.2 GM/KG
85 K
703.6 (27.7)
571.5 (22.5)
30.3 (101.0)
32692.
318.2 (11235.)
8,8/H/ 9.
4.0/ I/ 4.
22.5/13/ 21.
1.3/13/ 1.
48.3/ 3/ ,t3
2.9/ 3/ .04
39.I/ 2/ 39.
.4/ 2/ 0.
16.00
5.
19.
.79
38.7
.93
6.96
4618.8
23.16
1.96
1200.
.930 ( .923)
1.000 ( .977)
318.2
67.94
28.44
3A1GOB
742.7
10.2
26.1
162.4
6.19
.03
.24
.81
TEST WEIGHT 1361.
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
DIESEL EM-327-F
ODOMETER 7776. KM(
KG( 3000. LB5)
0.2 KU( 11.0 (IP)
4032. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .98
-------
TEST NO, 3A1F09 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 740.66 MM HG<29.l4 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 66. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIF P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
T01 FLOW STD, CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANOE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANCE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
M C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
M ' NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
^ HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
HC .GRAMS/KM
CO GRAHS/KM ' .
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCFf DRY
DFCi WET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 3A1F09
BAROMETER MM HG 740.7
HUMIDITY G/KG 12.7
TEMPERATURE DEG C 23.9
FTP VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT C5-4874-001
VEHICLE N0.3A
DATE 7/ 2/81
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY BULB TEMP. 23.9 DEG C(75,0 DEB F)
ABS, HUMIDITY 12.7 CM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1361.
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
DIESEL EH-329-F
ODOMETER 7824. KM(
KG( 3000. LDS>
8.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
4861. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.07
1
;GLD TRANSIENT
701.0 (27.6)
571.5 (22.5)
37.8 (100.0)
13063.
135.0 ( 4760.)
28. 0/1 I/ 2fl,
5.4/ I/ 5.
36.6/13/ 34.
3.1/13/ 3.
38. 5/ 3/ ,65
2.8/ 3/ .04
26. O/ 2/ 26,
.3/ 2/ 0,
20.43
23.
30.
,61
25.7
1.78
4.74
1506.0
7,10
1,27
,31
,83
262.5
1.24
10,07
505,
5.74
r973
.960
1,000
2
STABILIZED
701,0 (27.6)
571.5 (22,5)
37,8 (100,0)
23001,
231,8 ( 8186.)
16,0/H/ 17,
4,4/ I/ 4,
26.6/13/ 24,
2,9/l.V 3,
27, 7/ 3/ ,45
2.67 3/ .04
18. 3/ 2/ 10.
.3/ 2/ 0.
29.20
13.
21.
.42
18.0
1.68
5.71
1767.8
8.53
.95
.27
.93
286,8
1.38
10.99
867.
6,16
.974
( .940)
( .974)
366.9
77.94
11,90
10,54
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
701.0 (27,6)
571,5 (22.5)
38.9 (102,0)
13842,
134,5 ( 4748.)
17.4/11/ 17,
4,3/ I/ 4,
25.0/13/ 23.
3.2/13/ 3.
34. 6/ 3/ .58
3.2/ 3/ .05
23. 5/ 2/ 24,
,5/ 2/ 1,
23,01
13.
19.
.53
23.0
1.03
3.04
1308,7
6,33
,76
.18
,53
226,7
1,10
8,67
505.
5.77
.973
.963 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
%
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
698.5 (27.5)
571.5 (22.5)
37,8 (100,0)
23796.
231.8 ( 8184.)
17.0/11/ 17.
4.3/ I/ 4.
25.5/13/ 23.
2.8/13/ 3.
27, 5/ 37 ,45
3,0/ 3/ ,05
18, O/ 2/ 18.
,6/ 2/ 1.
29.43
13.
20.
.41
17,4
1,71
5.46
1727.3
8.25
.86
.28
.88
278.9
1.33
10.69
868.
6.19
.974
,942)
.974)
366.3
77.82
11.97
9.71
3-BAG (4-BAG)
265.2 ( 262.9)
10.16 ( 10.07)
.25 ( .26)
.80 ( .78)
1.27 ( 1.26)
.161 ( .157)
-------
TEST NO. 3A1H10 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION MS
BAROMETER 740.16 MM HG(29.14 IN 116)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 57. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE:
BLOUER BIF P MM. H20
-------
TEST NO. 3A1N11 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 740.16 MM HG(29.14 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 50. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER BIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. BEG. C(DEG, F)
BLC'JER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE liETER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
*? C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
M NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
w HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFCF WET (BRY)
SCFF WET (DRY)
VOL (GCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBERF
BAROMETERF MM HG
HUMIDITYF G/K6
TEMPERATUREF BEG C
CARBON DIOXIDEr G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONSF G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDEF G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGENF G/KM
NYCC VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4874-001
VEHICLE N0.3A
DATE 7/ 2/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 26.1 DEC C<79.0 DEO F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 11.0 CM/KG
NYCC
706.1 (27.8)
576,6 (22,7)
35.0 ( 91..0)
16425.
160.3 ( S.'5v.)
1B.1/11/ 10.
4,3/ I/ 4.
24.8/13/ 23.
4.0/13/ 4.
20,2/ 3/ .33
3.6/ 3/ ,06
10.B/ 2/ 11.
,4/ 2/ 0.
40.72
14.
19.
.27
10,4
1,28
3,49
795.7
3,22
.46
599,
,975 < .960)
1.000 < .901)
160.3
33.09
1.06
3A1N11
740,2
11.0
26,1
426,7
16,41
,69
1,07
1,72
TEST DEIGUT 1361, KG(
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2
DIESEL EH-329-F
ODOMETER 7861. KM<
3000, LBS)
KU( 11.0 HP)
4C34. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.01
-------
TEST NO, 3A1S12 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID> L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 740.16 MM HG<29.14 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 53. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. BEG, C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STB. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE ME7ER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKfiRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
. CO CONCENTRATION PPM
? C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
£ NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
*" HC M'ASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFC. UET (DRY)
SCF. WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY. G/KG .
TEMPERATURE. BEG C
CARBON DIOXIDEr G/KM.
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIBE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
,.i ir vuniout tnJbblUNU RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE NO.3A
DATE 7/ 2/01
DAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO, 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY DULD TEMP. 25,6 DEO C<78.0 DEO F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 11,2 CM/KG
B5 K
701,0 (27.6)
571.5 (22,5)
37.0 (100,0)
32099,
319,7 (11290,)
11.4/11/ 11,
4,0/ I/ 4,
23.7/13/ 22,
3.6/13/ 3,
49,3/ 3/ .05
3.5/ 3/ ,05
38,I/ 2/ 38,
,5/ 2/ 1.
15,64
0.
18.
.00
37.6
1.41
6.68
4703.4
23,39
1.95
1200.
.936 ( .920)
1.000 ( .975)
319,7
67.90
20.42
3A1S12
740.2
11,2-"
25.6
165,5
6.31
,05
.23
.82
TEST M,T
?KO(
UAL ROAD LOAD 8.2
8IESEL EM-329-F
DOMETER 7863. KM( 4086
3000. LB3)
KU( 11.0 HP)
MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1,02
-------
7TST NO. 3AJF13 RUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2,0 L(122, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 739,14 MM MG(29.10 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 59, PCT
DAG RESULTS
BAR NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. M20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD ML'TER/RANOE/PPM
CO SAMPLE MCTER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 CAMPLE MET.I'/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCNGRn METEK/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRfi MErER/RANGE/PPH
DILUTION FACTOR
IIC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
w C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
L NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
en HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF, DRY
DFCr WET (DRY)
SCFr UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM PLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 3A1F13
BAROMETER MM HG 739.1
HUMIDITY G/KG 11.7
TEMPERATURE DEC C 24.4
FTP VEHICLE (MISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.3A
DATE 7/ 6/01
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY DULD TUMP. 24,4 DEG C<76.0 DEO F)
ADO, HUMIDITY 11,7 GM/KG
TCST WEIGHT 1361. KG< 3000. LDR)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
DIECEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 7902. KM( 4910. MILESi
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1,03
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
693,4 (27,3)
546,4 (22,3)
37.5 ( ?9,5)
13051,
134,7 ( 475,4.)
28.6/11/ 29,
6.5/ I/ 7.
43.0/13/ 40.
4.0/13/ 4.
40. 7/ 3/ ,o9
3.3/ 3/ .05
27. 7/ 2/ 21).
.6/ 2/ I,
19.21
22,
36.
.64
27.1
1.75
5.57
1505,3
7.22
1.23
,30
.97
275.3
1.25
10.56
505.
5.76
.974
.958 (
1.000 (
2
STABILIZED
696.0 (27,4)
569.0 (22,4)
35,6 ( 96.0)
23800,
2,12.1 ( 8194.)
16.4/11/ 16.
5.5/ I/ 6.
29.0/13/ 27,
3.7/13/ 3.
20. 7/ 3/ ,47
3.0/ 3/ .05
10. 9/ 2/ 19,
.4/ 2/ 0,
28.10
11.
23.
.43
18.5
1,49
6,14
1819.7
8,49
1.02
.24
.99
293.1
1.37
11.23
860,
6.21
.977
.940)
.976)
366,0
77.54
11.97
10.91
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
693,4 (27,3)
566,4 (22.3)
37.2 < 99.0)
13062.
134.0 ( 4760.)
17,0/H/ 17,
5,5/ I/ 6,
26. 2/1 3/ 24,
3.0/13/ 3.
34. 9/ 3/ .50
3. I/ 3/ .05
24. O/ 2/ 24,
,5/ 2/ 1.
22.79
12,
21,
.54
23.5
.91
3,25
1329,3
6.27
.76
.16
.57
232.6
1.10
8,89
505.
5.72
,975
,962 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARDONS (TIICJ G/KH
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
696,0 (27.4)
569.0 (22,4)
36.7 ( 90,0)
23700.
231.5 ( 8174.)
16.9/11/ 17.
4.9/ I/ 5.
26. 2/1 3/ 24.
2.7/13/ 2.
28. O/ 3/ .46
3,6/ 3/ .06
17.fi/ 2/ 10.
,4/ 2/ 0.
20.87
12.
23.
.41
17.4
1.62
5.66
1724.5
7.97
.96
.26
.92
281.6
1.30
10,79
867.
6.12
.977
.944)
.976)
366.3
77.48
11.84
9.87
3-BAG (4-DAG)
272.9 ( 269.4)
10.45 ( 10.32)
,23 ( .24)
.87 ( .05)
1.27 ( 1.25)
.166 ( .164)
-------
TfTCT NO. 3A1H14 RUN 4
VEHICLE MOriEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 730.09 MM HG(29,09 IN IIG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 53. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM, H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TFMP. DEG, C(DEG, F)
DLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH
BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
HC
HC
CO
CO
CAMPLE MFTER/RANGE/PPM
BCKGRD -'
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
(1C MAGS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MAGS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULAR MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC* WET (DRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER*
BAROMETER* MM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATURE* DEG C
CARDON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION* L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS* G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE* G/KM
OX I TiES OF NITROGEN. G/KM
....^vt-i. i_ii.t~Jt»xijnfO r\L.ijUL. f £>
PROJECT 05-4071-001
VEHICLE N0.3A
DATE 7/ i/Ot
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO, 2
CV,<> NO, 3
DRY BULB TEMP, 25.6 DEG C(70,0 DEO F)
ABO, HUMIDITY 11,2 GH/KG
HFET
698.5 <27,5)
563,9 (22,2)
37,0 (100.0)
21014,
204.3 ( 7214.)
13.1/11/ 13,
4,7/ I/ 5.
23.1/13/ 21,
2.1/13/ 2.
46.2/ 3/ ,79
3.5/ 3/ .05
33.2/ 2/ 33,
l.O/ 2/ 1.
16.00
?.
19,
.74
32.3
1,02
4.44
2702.4
12.32
1,45
766,
.940 ( .724)
1.000 ( .975)
204,3
43,30
16.25
3A1II14
738.9
11.2
25,6
171.2
6.53
.06
,27
.79
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG< 3000. LBC)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 7926, KM( 4925. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1,02
-------
TEST NO, 3A1N15 RUN 4
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L--4
TRANSMISSION «5
BAROMETER 739.14 MM HG(29.10 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 56. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER BIF P MM, II20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P ; NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
J HC MAGS GRAMS
CO ' MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFC, UET (DRY)
' SCF* WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER*
BAROMETER* MM IIG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATURE* BEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION* L/100KM
. HYDROCARBONS* G/KM .
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KM
NYCC VntllCLE irMISSIOMO RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE NO.3A
DATE 7/ A/01
BAD CART NO, 1
DYNO NO, 2
CVS NO, ;5
DRY BULD TF.MP. 24.4 DEG C(76,0 DEO F)
ADS, HUMIDITY 11.0 GM/KG
NYCC
701.0 (27.6>
571.5 (22.5)
34.4 ( 94.0)
16420.
160.4 ( 5663.)
17.1/11/ 17.
4,6/ I/ 5,
22.6/13/ 21.
1.5/13/ 1.
20.4/ 3/ ,33
3,5/ 3/ ,05
11,2/ 2/ 11.
.5/ 2/ i.
40.34
13.
19,
.28
10.7
1.14
3.51
010..8
3.31
.45
. 599.
,975 < ,95fi)
1,000 ( .979)
160.4
33. C6
1.94
3A1N15
739.1 "
11.0
24,4
410.4
16.08
.60
1,81
1.71
TEST WEIGHT 1361. K0< 3000, LB3)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
DIEGEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 7942, KM( 4935. MILCS)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.01
-------
TFST NO. 3A1S1& RUN 4
VEHICLE: MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION MS
BAROMETER 739.39 MM HC(29.11 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 53. PCT
BAC RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
PLOUCR DIF P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG, C(DEG.
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRIi METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
" C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
M NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
00 HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, UET (DRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)
VOL
-------
SUMMARY OF REGULATED EMISSIONS FROM FIAT TURBOCHARGED DIESEL
RESEARCH VEHICLE, EM-469-F FUEL, NO CATALYST
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
HC, g/mi
CO, g/mi
NO , g/mi
Part., g/mi
Fuel, mi/gal
3A2F20
3-b FTP
7/9
I
0.51
1.58
2.00
0.30
23.3
3A2F24
3-b FTP
7/10
2
0.50
1.59
2.06
0.35
22.7
3A2F28
3-b FTP
7/13
3
0.42
1.58
2.01
a
23.1
3A2H21
HFET
7/9
1
0.11
0.50
1.27
0.13
37.5
3A2H25
HFET
7/10
2
0.13
0.51
1.27
0.13
35.9
3A2H29
HFET
7/13
3
0.11
0.48
1.30
a
37,5
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
HC, g/mi
CO, g/mi
N0x, g/mi
Part, g/mi
Fuel, mi/gal
3A2N22
NYCC
7/9
1
1.29
3.64
2.82
0.49
14.4
3A2N26
NYCC
7/10
2
1.26
3.51
2.70
0.55
14.9
3A2N30
NYCC
7/13
3
1.24
3.27
2.70
a
14.8
3A2S23
85 kph
7/9
, 1
0.10
0.40
1.21
0.11
38.0
3A2S27
85 kph
7/10
2
0.10
0.47
1.16
0.11
37.0
3A2S31
85 kph
7/13
3
0.10
0.42
1.29
a
37.6
particulate not sampled
E-19
-------
FTP
TEST NO. 3A2F20
VEHICLE MODEL
RUN 1
TC FIAT
BAROMETER 746,51 MM HD(29.39 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 55, PCT
BAG RESULTS
DAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P Mil. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD, CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PFM
HC BCKGR-:1 METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC. CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASC GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
M
10
O
HC GRAMS/KM
CO- GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAKS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF» DRY
DFC» UET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION 4./100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 3A2F20
BAROMETER MM H& 746.5
HUMIDITY G/KG 10,8
TEMPERATURE DEG C 24,4
VEHICLE NO. 3 A
DATE 7/ 7/01
BAG CART NO, 1 /
DYNO NO, 2
DRY BULB TEMP, 24
ACS, HUMIDITY 10,
1
COLD TRANSIENT
698.5 (27.5)
571.5 (22.5)
37.2 ( 99.0)
13845.
136,3 ( 4812.)
36.4/11/ 36.
6.6/ I/ 7,
47.9/13/ 45,
5.9/13/ 5,
40, 4/ 3/ .69
3,2/ 3/ ,05
28, O/ 2/ 20.
>2t 2t 0,
19.33
30.
39.
.64
27.8
2.37
6,14
1593,7
7,20
1.57
.41
1.07
277.1 '
1.27
10,40
505,
5.75 ;
,976
.959 (
1.000 (
CVG NO. 3
.4 DEG C(76.0 DEG
8 GM/KG
2
STABILIZED
701.0 (27,6)
571,5 (22,5)
37,8 (100,0)
23810,
234,2 ( 8270.)
21,6/H/ 22,
5,8/ I/ 6,
33.5/13/ 31,
5.3/13/ 5,
27,9' 3/ ,46
2.9/ 3/ ,04
18. 8/ 2/ 19,
,4/ 2/ 0,
28,91
16.
26,
,42
18,4
2.15
6,97
1782,2
8,28
1,04
,35
1.12
286.7
1.33
10.75
868.
6.22
.978
,942)
,977)
370,5
79.05
11.97
10,58
CARBON
TEST WEIGHT 1361
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
DIESEL EM-469-
ODQMETER 8048. K
F)
. KG( 3000. LBS)
0.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
p
M< 5001. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1,00
3
HOT TRANSIENT
701,0 (27.6)
571,5 (22,5)
37,2 ( 99,0)
13846,
136.3 ( 4812.)
19.3/11/ 19.
4.9/ I/ 5.
30.4/17/ 28.
4.0/13/ 4,
35, I/ 3/ ,59
3,6/ 3/ .06
23. 5/ 2/ 24.
,2/ 2/ 0.
22,63
15.
24,
.53
23,3
1.15
3,77
1334,2
6,10
,87
,20
.66
232.1
1.06
8,68
505.
5,75
,977
.962 (
1,000 (.
DIOXIDE GA'M
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KH
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KH
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
690.5 (27.5)
571.5 (22.5)
37,2 ( 99.0)
23806.
234.3 ( 8273.)
19.2/11/ 19.
4.9/ I/ 5,
30.0/13/ 20,
3.6/13/ 3,
27, 5/ 3/ .45
3.5/ 3/ .05
18, 7/ 2/ 19,
,4/ 2/ 0.
29,39
14,
24,
,40
18,3
1,95
6,48
1714.0
8,24
.96
.31
1.04
276.3
1.33
10.36
868.
6,20
.978
.945)
.977)
370,6
78.96
11.95
9.55
3-BAG (4-BAG)
269,8 ( 266.7)
10.11 ( 9,99)
,32 ( .31)
,98 ( ,96)
1.24 ( 1,24)
.185 ( ,101)
-------
TEST NO. 3A2H21 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 LC122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION H5
BAROMETER 746,25 MM HG(29.38 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 52. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM, M20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, -H20UN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP, BEG, CCBEG.
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD, CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAfiPLE METER/RANGE/PPH
CO ttCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGKD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAHS
PARTICIPATE MARS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONBS
DFC» «ET (BRY)
SCF. WET (BRY)
VOL
-------
w
to
to
TEST NO, 3MN22 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 746.00 MM HG(29.37 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 52, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM. H20CIN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H2Q
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METFR/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE MEfER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC 'MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
MX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS-
' BFC, WET (DRY) '
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (GCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETERt MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE, BEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE, G/KH
FUEL CONSUrtPTIGN, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIBES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
NYCC VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4874-001
VEHICLE NO.3A
DATE 7/ 9/01
BAG CART Nl). 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. J
DRY BULB TEMP, 24,4 DEG C<76,0 BEG F)
ABS, HUMIDITY 10.1 CM/KG
NYCC
706,1 (27.0)
574,0 (22,6>
35,0 I 95,0)
16423,
161,7 ( 5700.)
20,5/1I/ 21,
4,7/ I/ fi,
27.1/13/ 25,
2.2/13/ I!,
20,1/ Z/ ,:»2
3,4/ 3/ ,05
10,9/ 2/ 11.
,2/ 2/ 0,
40,00
16,
22,
,27
10,7
1.48
4,21
004.6
3,25
,57
599.
.976 ( ,959.)
1,000 ( ,900)
161,7
34,20
1.86
3A2N22 '
746.0
10.1
24.4
433,7
16.33
,<30
2.26
1,75
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KC(
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 0003, KM( 5024
3000. LDS)
KU( 11.0 IIP)
MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .98
-------
TEST NO. 3A2S23 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2,0 LU22, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 746,00 MM HG<29.37 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 50, PC'/
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLODER INLET P MM, H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NQX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
,d CO CONCENTRATION PPM
j C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
J NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS CRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, WET (DRY)
PCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
DAROMETERr MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
85 KPH VEHICLE CHI S3 IONS RESULTS
PRO-fCT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE NO, 3 A
DATE 7/ 9/01
BAD CART NO, 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 25,6 DEG C(7B,0 DEO F)
ADS, HUMIDITY 10,4 CM/KG
85 K
706.1 (27.0)
576,6 (22,7)
30,9 (102,0)
32905.
321. 5 (11352.)
12,0/H/ 13,
4,5/ I/ 5,
22.7/13/ 21.
.04
,05
35.
0.
TEST HEIGHT 1361. KG< 3000. LDS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KM( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM 467-F
ODOMETER OOD7. KM( 5025. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR ,99
48, O/ 3/
3,0/ 3/
35, 2/ 21
,2/ 2/
15,01
9.
19,
.80
35,0
1.59
7,22
4715.1
21,29
2.08
1200.
.937 ( .921!)
1.000 ( .976)
321.5
68.45
20,37
3A2S21
746,0
10,4
25. 4
166,2
6,19
,06
.25
.75
-------
FTP
TEST NO. 3A2F24 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION H5
BAROMETER 745.74 MM HG(29.3& IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 60. PCT
BAB RESULTS
HAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP i MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H2CKIN. H20)
SLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C
ELOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW GTD. CU. METREG(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC KCKGRD METER/RANCE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPH
CO DCXGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCI
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MAGS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CD L/100KM
n
ro
SECONDS
KM
RUN TIME
MEASURED DISTANCE
SCFf DRY
DFCr UET (DRY)
SCF» UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 3A2F24
BAROMETER MM HG 745.7
HUMIDITY G/KG 12,1
TEMPERATURE DEG C 25.0
VEHICLE N0.3A
DATE 7/10/81
BAG CART NO. 1 / CV;
DYN3 NO. 1
TEST WEIGHT 1361,
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
KG( 3000. LDS)
8.2 KU< 11.0 HP)
NO. 3
PRY BULB TEMP. 25.0 DEO C(77.0 DEO F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 12.1 CM/KG
ODOMETER 0121. KM( 5046. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.05
1
IOLD TRANSIENT
698.5 (27.5)
571.5 (22.5)
37.0 (100.0)
13052.
135.8 < 4794.)
35.4/11/ 35,
8.5/ I/ 9.
48.8/13/ 46.
6.5/13/ 6.
40. 9/ 3/ .69
3.6/ 3/ .06
28. O/ 2/ 28,
.6/ 2/ 1.
19.00
27.
39.
.64
27,4
2.14
6.17
1596.4
7,46
1,05
.37
1,07
276,2
1,29
10,36
505.
5.78
,974
,950 (
1,000 (
2
STABILIZED
701.0 (27.6)
574,0 (22.6)
37,8 (100.0)
23815.
233.4 ( 8241.)
22.1/11/ 22.
6.2/ I/ 6,
34.1/13/ 31,
5.8/13/ 5.
29. I/ 3/ .4C
3.3/ 3/ .05
10, B/ 2/ 19,
,6/ 2/ 1.
27.63
16,
26,
,43
18,2
2.17
6,97
1041,4
0,52
1.68
.35
1.13
297.9
1.38
11.17
868.
6,18
,976
,939)
,976)
369,2
78.57
11.96
10.70
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
698,5 (27,5)
571,5 (22,5)
37.2 ( 99.0)
13849.
135.8 ( 4796.)
20.6/11/ 21.
6.2/ I/ 6,
31.6/13/ 29,
4.7/13/ 4.
36. I/ 3/ .61
3.5/ 3/ tt05
23. 6/ 2/ 24,,
,4/ 2/ 0.
21,94
15.
24.
,55
23.2
1.15
3,83
1379.2
6,31
,87
.20
.66
238.1
1,09
8,90
505.
5.79
.975
.961 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (THC) G/KM
CARB3N
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
701.0 (27.6)
574.0 (22.6)
37.8 (100.0)
23807,
233.3 ( 8237.)
19,7/H/ 20,
5.5/ I/ 6.
31.5/13/ 29.
4.0/13/ 4,
20, 3/ 3/ .47
3.6/ 3/ .06
17, 8/ 2/ 18,
,5/ 2/ I.
28.49
14.
25.
:41
17.3
1.94
6.73
1760.7
8,09
1,05
.31
1.08
283.1
1.30
10.61
868.
6.22
.976
.943)
,976)
369.1
78.53
12,01
9.79
3-BAG (4 -BAG)
276.9 ( 272,6)
10,38 ( 10.21)
.31 ( .30)
.99 ( .97)
1.28 ( 1,26)
.219 ( ,189)
-------
TEST NO. 3A2H25 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 745.49 MM HG(29.35 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 56, PCT
DAG RESULTS
TESf CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP, BEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STB, CU, KETRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
? CO CONCENTRATION PPH
C02' CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS'
DFCf UET (DRY)
SCFr UET (DRY)
VOL
-------
TEST NO. 3A2N26 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. DID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 745.47 MM HG(27.35 IN KG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 55. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20
BLOUER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STB, CU. METREG(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPH
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKCRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
i CO CONCENTRATION PPM
£ C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, UET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (BCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KH
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
NVCC VEHICLE OMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.3A
DATE 7/10/01
DAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 23.9 DEO C(75.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 10.4 CM/KG
NYCC
690.5 (27,5)
571,5 (22,5)
35,0 ( 95,0)
16437.
161,5 < 5702.)
20,7/H/ 21,
4.9/ I/ S.
27.6/13/ 25,
2.0/13/ 3.
20.5/ 3/ .33
3,9/ 3/ .06
11,07 2/ 11,
,5/ 2/ 1.
40,04
16,
22,
,27
10.5
1.49
4.19
003,5
3,21
,66
599.
,975 ( .950)
1.000 ( .979)
161,5
34.24
1,92
3A2N26
745.5
10.4
23,9
419,1
15,78
,7S
2.10
1.60
TEST HEIGHT 1361. KQ( 3000. LfcS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU< 11,0 HP)
DIESEL EM-4A9-F
ODOMETER 0159. KM( 5070, MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .99
-------
TEST NO. 3A2S27 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE ?.0 LC122, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 745.49 MM HO(29.35 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 56, PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/FPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/FCT
NOX SAMPLE METEP/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
* CO CONCENTRATION PPM
j C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
J NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MAGS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFCr UET (DRY)
SCF* UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM ELR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER*
BAROMETER* MM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATURE. DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE? G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS* G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE* G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
05 KPH VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.3A
DATE 7/10/01
BAG CART NO, 1
DYNO NO, 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 25,0 DEO C(77,0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 11,3 GM/KG
85 K
706,1 (27.0)
579.1 (22,0)
37.0 (100.0)
32903.
322,0 (11369.)
13,3/H/ 13,
4,9/ I/ 5,
27.0/13/ 25.
2.6/13/ 2.
50,4/ 3/ ,07
3,0/ 3/ .06
33,3/ ?./ 33,
,7/ 2/ 1,
15,25
9,
22.
,02
32,6
1.63
8.14
4036,0
20,53 .
1,94
1200,
,934.( ,910)
1,000 ( ,974)
322,0
60,44
20,38
3A2S27
745,5
11.3
25.0
170.4
6.35
.06
,29
,72
TEST UEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 0161. KM( 5071. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.02
-------
TEST NO. 3A2F28 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122, JID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 742.19 MM HG(29.22 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 46. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOUER DIF P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. PEC. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW CTD. CU, METRES(SCF)
MC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC KCKGRD METER/RMGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
«? C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NJ- NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
03 HC MASS CRAMS
'CO MASS CRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCFi DRY
DFCr UET (DRY)
SCFi UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (3CM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 3A2F28
BAROMETER MM HG 742.2
HUMIDITY G/KG 9,3
TEMPERATURE DEG C .25.0
FTP VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4874-001
VEHICLE N0.3A
DATE 7/13/01
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO, 3
DYNO NO. 2
DRY BULB TEHP. 25,0 DEC C(77.0 DEG F)
ABS. HUMIDJTY 9,3 CM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1361.
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 0191. KM< 5090. MILES)
KG( 3000. LBS)
8.2 KU< 11.0 HP)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .95
1
IOLD TRANSIENT
698,5 (27.5)
543.9 (22,2)
37,2 ( 99,0)
13049,
135,1 < 4770.)
30.2/U/ 30.
4,4/ I/ 4.
45.7/13/ 43,
1.5/13/ 1,
40, 4/ 3/ .69
3,2/ 3/ ,05
28, 6/ 2/ 29.
,7/ 2/ 1,
19,35
26,
40.
,64
27.9
2,03
6,35
1579.8
6.89
,36
' 1,11
276.5
1,21
10.37
505.
5,71
.979
,959
1.000
2
STABILIZED
698.5 (27.5)
566.4 (22.3)
37,2 ( 99.0)
23025.
232,4 ( 0205.)
17, 8/11/ 10.
6.6/ I/ 7,
30.3/13/ 28.
2.4/13/ 2,
28, 4/ 3/ .47
2,9/ j/ ,04
20,17 2/ 20,
,5/ 2/ 1.
28,40
11,
25,
,42
19,6
1,54
6,80
1805,6
8.32
,25
1,10
292.9
1.35
10.97
860,
6.17
,981
( ,945)
( .900)
367,5
78,26
11,88
10.68
CARBON
3
MOT TRANSIENT
703.6 (27.7)
571,5 (22.5)
37,8 (100,0)
13854.
135,0 ( 4765, >
20,9/U/ 21.
6,6/ I/ 7,
28.8/13/ 26,
3.4/13/ 3,
34, 5/ 3/ .58
3.0/ 3/ ,05
26, 7/ 2/ 27,
1.4/ 2/ 1,
23,05
15.
23,
,53
25,4
1,13
3,59
1316,3
6.25
,20
,63
230,6
1,10
0.62
505,
5.71
.980
,942 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (TUC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
4
STABILIZED
703.6 (27.7)
571.5 (22.5)
35.6 ( 96.0)
23810.
232,6 ( 8214.)
21.1/11/ 21,
8,7/ I/ 9.
28.9/13/ 27.
3.0/13/ 3,
27, 9/ 3/ .46
2,9/ 3/. ,04
20, O/ 2/ 20,
1,6/ 2/ 2,
20.93
13,
23,
,42
18,5
1.71
6.32
1770,0
7.84
.28
1,03
287,4
1.27
10.77
868,
6.16
,981
.948)
.981)
367.6
78,24
11.86
9,74
3-BAG (4-BAG)
272,4 ( 270. B)
10.20 ( 10.14)
,26 ( ,27)
,98 ( ,95)
i,25 ( 1.23)
-------
TEST NO. 3A2H29 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 741.60 MM 110(29.20 IN MG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 46. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INL.!.; P MM, H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. BEG. C(DEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPH
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PFM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
MASS GRAMS
CRAMS
NJ
VO
HC
CO MASS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFC, WET (DRY)
SCFf WET (DRY)
MOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KH
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KH
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
HFET VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4874-001
VEHICLE NO. 3 A
DATE 7/13/81
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP.
ADS. HUMIDITY
HFET
690,5 (27.5)
571.5 (22.5)
37.8 (100.0)
21000.
204.3 ( 7214.)
18.7/11/ 19.
9.0/ I/ 9,
25. 0/1 3/ 23.
1.9/13/ 2.
45. 2/ 3/ .78
3.2/ 3/ .05
35. 7/ 2/ 36.
l.O/ 21 1.
17.19
10.
21.
.73
34.8
1.20
4.90
2727.5
13.16
766.
.942 ( .928)
1.000 ( ,978)
204.3
43.42
16.21
3A2H29
741.7
9,7
25.6
168,2
6,27
.07
.30
.81
25.6 DUG C(78.0 DEG F)
9.7 GM/KG
TEST UEIGHT 1361. K6( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 8222. KM( 5109, MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .97
-------
TEST NO. 3A2N30 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 741.60 MM HO(29.20 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 43. PCT
BAB RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, II20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C
o
HC
CO
CO.
CCP
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY. G/KG
TEMPERATURE, LEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS» G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN. G/KM
NVCC VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE NO.3A
DATE 7/13/01
DAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.6 DEG C(78.0 DEO F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 9.0 GM/KG
NYCC
708.7
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 UP)
DIESEL EM-469--F
ODOMETER 0237. KM( 5118. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .95
9.
22.
1.
.32
.04
12.
ii
24.4/13/
1.4/13/
19.7/ 3/
2.9/ 3/
12.O/ 2/
l.l/ 2/
41.72
16.
21.
.27
10.9
1.45
3.85
802.1
3.18
599.
.976 ( .962)
1.000 ( ,983)
160.3
33,97
1,89
3A2N30
741.7
9,0
25,6
423,4
15,93
.77
2.03
1,60
-------
TEST NO, JA2S31 RUN 3
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT
ENGINE 2.0 L022. CID) L- 4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 741,43 MH HG(29,19 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY
PAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
PCT
7
u>
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20CIN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IN. H20)
DLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. HETRES
-------
APPENDIX F
TEST RESULTS,
FIAT TURBOCHARGED DIESEL
WITH CATALYTIC TRAP
FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
-------
SUMMARY OF REGULATED EMISSIONS FROM FIAT TURBOCHARGED DIESEL
RESEARCH VEHICLE WITH UNDERFLOOR CATALYTIC TRAP,
EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
HC, g/mi
CO, g/mi
HOX, g/mi
Part. , g/mi
Fuel, mi/gal
3B1F01
3-b FTP
9/17
1
0.13
0.43
1.88
0.10
23.5
3B1F05
3-b FTP
9/18
2
0.11
0.43
1.85
0.09
23.2
3B1H02
HFET
9/17
1
0.02
0.08
1.16
0.05
37.6
3B1H06
HE*ET
9/18
2
0.03
0.08
1.14
0.06
38.1
3B1N03
NYCC
9/17
1
0.19
0.66
2.53
0.16
14.5
3B1N07
NYCC
9/18
2
0.19
0.61
2.72
0.13
14.8
3B1S04
85 kph
9/17
1
0.00
0.05
1.14
0.05
38.4
3B1S08
85 kph
9/18
2
0.00
0.05
1.21
0.06
38.1
F-2
-------
TEST NO. JBlfOjl RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT U-CAT
ENGINE 2,0 LU22. CJD) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 743.20 MM HG(29.26 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 36. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP, DEG, C(DEC, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD, CU. METRES(GCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RAHGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
7 Cq 'CONCENTRATION PPM
v C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
co2 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/.100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCFf DRY
DfCr WET (DRY)
:SGF» UET (DRY)
VDL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 3B1F01
BAROMETER MM HG 743,2
HUMIDITY G/KG 7.3
TEMPERATURE DEG C 25,0
FTP VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT O5-4O74-OO1
VEHICLE NO.3D
DATE 9/17/01
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 3
OYNO NO, 2
DRY BULB TEMP, 25,0 DEG C(77.0 DEG F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 7.3 GM/KO
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG! 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU< 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 0497. KM( 5200. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .90
1
IOLD TRANSIENT
708.7 (27.9)
581,7 (22,9)
136,1 ( 4806.)
15,7/U/ 16,
3;6/ 1 4,
22.5/13/ 21,
,5/K'V 0,
39, 1/ :/ ,66
3,5/ 3,' ,05
29, O/ 2/ 29,
,3/ 2/ 1.
20.16
12,
20.
.61
20.5
,95
3.11
1520.1
6,67
,47
.17
.54
264.3
10*10
505.
5.75
,982
.960 (
1,000 (
2
STABILIZED
711.2 (20.0)
504,2 (23.0)
3423005?<'0)
234,0 ( 0261,)
6,5/H/ 7,
3,9/ I/ 4,
6.2/13/ 6.
,6/13/ 1.
27, 6/ 3/ .45
3.2/ 3/ ,05
19, O/ 2/ 20,
,3/ 2/ 0,
29.49
3.
5.
.41
19.5
,37
1,35
1738,1
7,04
.37
.06
.22
282,6
1.27
10.76
868.
6.15
.984
,949)
.903)
370.1
78.98
11.90
10,44
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
708.7 (27,9)
581,7 (22,9)
36.1 ( 97,0)
13061.
135,9 ( 4797.)
6.6/11/ 7.
3.6/ I/ 4.
B.3/13/ 7,
2.3/13/ 2.
33, 7/ 3/ .56
3,2/ 3/ ,05
24, 3/ 2/ 24.
,3/ 2/ 0,
23,78
3,
5,
.52
24,0
.25
.85
1281.5
5.60
.29
.04
.15
222.5
.97
8., 47
505.
5.76
.9C3
.964 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (TKC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
700,7 (27.9)
581.7 (22,9)
34237^9?7<0>
233.3 ( 8237.)
5.8/11/
-------
TEST NO. 3R1.H02 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT U-CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L022. CID> L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 750.06 MM H0(29.53 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 30. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
DLOUER INLET TEMP, BEG. C(DEG, F)
nLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FIOU STB. CU. METRESAG CART N'O. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO, 3
DRY BULB TEMP,
AP.S. HUMIDITY
HFET
706,1 (27,0)
579,1 (22.8)
37,8 (100,0)
21009.
207,5 ( 7325.)
25.6 DEO C(7Q,0 DE6 F)
6.3 GM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG I 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KUC 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 0521. KM( 5295. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .87
5,
4.
5.
1.
,75
,05
34,
0.
5.3/11/
3,5/ I/
5.3/13/
1.3/13/
43,O/ 3/
3,0/ 3/
34,O/ 2/
,2/ 2/
17.87
2,
4,
.71
33,0
,86
2679,7
11,71
,54
766,
.944 < .935)
.000 ( .983)
207.5
44,61
16,31
3B1H02
750.1
6,3
25.6
164,3
6,25
°J-
',72
-------
TEST NO. 3B1N03 RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT U-CAT
ENGINE 2.0 LC122, CIB) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 749.55 MM HG(29.51 JN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 30. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER D1F P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. BEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STB. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
i CO -CONCENTRATION PPM
^ C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
.NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX hASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
. RUN TIME '. SECONDS
BFC. WET (DRY) ' .
SCF. WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM>
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETER.
MfflffiRE,
CARBON DIOXIDE.
FUEL CONSUMPTION.
MM HG
G/KM
L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. ' G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES BF NITROGEN. G/KM
NYCC VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE NO.3D
DATE 9/17/81
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULD TEMP. 25.0 DEO CC77.0 DEO F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 5.9 CM/KG
NYCC
711.2 (20.0)
584.2 (23.0)
35.0 ( 95.0)
16497.
163.3 ( 5767.)
5.9/11/ t>,
3.6/ I/ 4.
5.5/13/ 5.
.9/13/ 1.
19.5/ 3/ .31
2.8/ 3/ .04
11.4/ 2/ 11.
,3/ 2/ 0.
42.64
2.
4.
.27
11.1
.23
,78
811.4
3.00
.19
601.
.977 ( .967)
1.000 ( .988)
163.3
34.80
1.91
3B1N03
749.6
425.1
16.20
.12
.41
1.57
TEST WEIGHT 1361. K0( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KM< 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 6536. KM( 5304. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .86
-------
USKPH
VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4874--001
TEST NO. 3£>;S04
VEHICLE MODEL
ENGINE 2.0 L(122.
TRANSMISSION H5
RUtt 1
TC FIAT U-CAT
CID) L-4
BAROMETER 749.30 MM HG(29.50 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 33. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIP P MM, H20UN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H?0)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEli. F)
PLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD hETER/RANGE/PPM
C02 CAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANCE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFC. WET (DRY)
SCFi WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
cr>
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER/
BAROMETERi MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE» DEG C
CARBON DIOXIIiEf G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
JIYBROCARBOMSr G/KM
CARBON MONOXIBE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROCENr G/KM
VEHICLE N0.3B
DATE 9/17/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.0 DEO C<77.0 DEO F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 6.5 CM/KG
B5KP
700,7 (27,9)
581.7 (22.9)
38,3 (101,0)
32965,
324,9 (11472.)
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LDS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.C HP)
DIESEL EH-329-F
ODOMETER 0530. KM( 5305. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .03
4,
4.
5,
3,
,01
,04
30,
0,
4.1/11/
3,8/ I/
5,<5/13/
2.9/13/
47.O/ 3/
2.0/ 3/
37.5/ 2/
,3/ 2/
16,53
0,
2,
.77
37.2
,09
.94
4576.2
20.33
.95
1201.
.940 ( .930)
1.000 ( .902)
324.9
69.90
20,45
31 S04
749.3
6.5
25.0
160,9
6.12
.00
.03
.71
-------
FTP
VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074-001
TEST NO. 3B1F05 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT U-CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 753.07 MM HG(29.6B IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 38. PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG, C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. HETRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANOE/f'CT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
rq HC CONCENTRATION PPM
i CO CONCENTRATION PPM
-1 C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 CRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF> DRY
DFCf MET (DRY)
SCF» UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 3B1F05
BAROMETER MM HG 753.9
HUMIDITY G/KG 7,3
TEMPERATURE DEG C 24.4
VEHICLE NO. 3D
DATE 9/10/01
BAG CART NO. 1 /
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULD TCMP. 24.4 DEG C(76,0 TEG F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 7.3 CM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 0.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 0571. KM( 5326. MILCS)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .90
1
;OLD TRANSIENT
708.7 (27.9)
501.7 (22.9)
35,0 < 95,0)
13063,
138.0 ( 4872.)
13.7/11/ 14,
4.4/ I/ 4,
28.0/13/ 26,
7.6/13/ 7.
38. 7/ 3/ ,65
3,2/ 3/ ,05
27. 6/ 2/ 20.
,5/ 2/ 1,
20,38
10.
19,
,61
27.1
.76
3.11
1533,6
6,44
,45
,13
.54
'266.9
1.12
10.19
505,
5,74
.982
.961 (
1.000 (
2
STABILIZED
. 711.2 (20.0)
504,2 (23,0)
35,0 ( 95,0)
23026.
237.1 ( 0372,)
6,3/H/ 6,
3,6/ I/ 4,
11.4/13/ 10,
6.0/13/ 5,
27, I/ 3/ ,44
2,7/ 3/ ,04
19, I/ 2/ 19,
,5/ 2/ 1.
30.05
3.
5.
,40
18,6
,30
1,36
1755.6
7.60
.35
.06
.22
285.5
1.24
10.07
860.
6.15
,904
.949)
.983)
375.1
79.77
11,89
10,55
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
711,2 (28.0)
584.2 (23.0)
36.1 ( 97.0)
13851,
137.6 ( 4058.)
6.7/11/ 7.
3.4/ I/ 3.
9.7/13/ 9.
3.2/13/ 3.
34. 3/ 3/ .57
3.4/ 3/ ,05
24, 9/ 2/ 25.
,7/ 2/ 1.
23,32
3.
6,
,52
24.2
,28
.93
1317.7
5,74
.29
,05
.16
229,7
1,00
0.75
505.
5.74
,902
.963 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS (TKC) G/KM
CARBON
OXIDES
MONOXIDE G/KM
OF NITROGEN G/KM
PARTICULATES G/KM
4
STABILIZED
708.7 (27,9)
501.7 <22.9)
36.7 ( 98.0)
23808.
236.4 ( 8346.)
6,1/H/ A,
3,4/ I/ 3,
7.6/13/ 7,
2.6/13/ 2,
26. 9/ 3/ .44
3.3/ 3/ .05
10. 7/ 2/ 19.
.7/ 2/ 1.
30,31
3,
4,
,39
18,0
,38
1,23
1696.0
7,33
.31
,06
.20
274.0
1.18
10.43
868.
6.19
,984
.952)
,983)
373.9
79.67
11.93
9.62
3 -BAG (4-BAG)
266,3 ( 263.0)
10.15 ( 10.02)
,07 ( ,07)
,27 ( .27)
1.15 ( 1,13)
,059 ( .057)
-------
TEST NO. 3D1H06 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT U-CAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22, CID) L~4
TRANSMISSION H5
BAROMETER 753.07 MM HG(29.68 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 36. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER Dlf P MM. H20
-------
TEST NO. 3D1H07 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT U-CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 753.07 MM HC(29.68 IN HO
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 40. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIP P MM; H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MH. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEHP. DEO. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STB. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
HC DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
EO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASG GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS CRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC. UtT (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
vo
TEST NUMBER*
DAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY. G/K6
TEMPERATURE> DEC C
CARDON DIOXIDEf G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN. G/KM
NYCC VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4874-001
VEHICLE N0.3B
DATE 7/10/01
HAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY DULD TEMP. 23.9 DEC C(75.0 DEG F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 0,9 CM/KG
NYCC
711.2 (20.0)
584.2 (23.0)
33.3 ( 92.0)
16405.
164.3 ( 5001.)
5.6/11/ 6.
3.2/ I/ 3,
5.4/13/ 5.
1.1/13/ 1.
19.6/ 3/ ,31
3.I/ 3/ .05
11.5/ 2/ 12,
,5/ 2/ 1.
42.42
2.
4.
.27
11.0
,23
,73
807.7
3.26
.16
598.
,976 ( .961)
1,000 ( .902)
164.3
35.18
1.93
3D1N07
753,9
8.9
23.9
417.4
15,90
.12
,38
1.69
TEST HEIGHT
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
DIESEL EM-329-F
ODOMETER 0610. KM(
KC( 3000. LBS)
0.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
5350. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .94
-------
TEST NO. 3B1508 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT U-CAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION H5
BAROMETER 753.36 MM HG(29.&6 IN HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 38. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEC, C(DEG, F)
BLQUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD, CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METEC./RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
m HC CONCENTRATION PPM
i CO CONCENTRATION PPM
o C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MAGS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC, UET (DRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)
VOL (GCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE, G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
05 KF'H VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-4074-001
VEHICLE N0.3B
DATE 9/1Q/01
BAG CART NO, 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULD TEMP. 24,4 PFG C(76,0 DEO F)
ABS, HUMIDITY 7.4 CM/KG
85 K
700,7 (27,9)
501,7 (22,9)
37,8 (100,0)
32925,
327,0 (11546,.)
TEST HEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 HP>
DIESEL EM 329-F
ODOMETER 8612. KM( 5351. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .90
4,
4,
3,
1,
.01
.04
38,
0,
4.0/11/
3,5/ I/
3.5/13/
,0/13/
47,I/ 3/
2,9/ 3/
30,2/ 21
,3/ 2/
16.50
1,
2,
.77
37.9
.13
.71
4600.5
21,35
1.11
1199,
.939 ( .928)
,000 ( ,900)
327.0
70,37
20.41
3B1SOB
753.4 "
7,4
24,4
U2.2
6.17
,00
,03
,75
1
-------
SUMMARY OP REGULATED EMISSIONS FROM FIAT TURBOCHARGED DIESEL
RESEARCH VEHICLE WITH UNDERFLOOR CATALYTIC TRAP,
EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Date (1981)
Run No.
HC, g/mi
CO, g/mi
NOX, g/mi
Part., g/mi
Fuel, mi/gal
3B2F35
3-b FTP
9/23
1
0.18
0.43
2.C6
0.09
23.8
3B2F39
3-b FTP
9/24
2
0.13
0.43
2.11
0.09
23.5
3B2H36
HFET
9/23
1
0.03
0.08
1.35
0.07
36.8
3B2H40
HFET
9/24
2
0.03
0.08
1.32
0.06
36.9
3B2N37
NYCC
9/23
1
0.31
0.76
2.98
0.16
14.8
3B2N41
NYCC
9/24
2
0.29
0.68
2. '85
0.18
14.8 .
3B2S38
85 kph
9/23
1
0.00
0.05
1.37
0.-08
38.1
3B2S42
85 kph
9/24
2
0.02
0.05
1.32
0.08
r .38.3
F-ll
-------
rrsr NO. 3B2rs5 . RUN j -
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT U-CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L<122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION MS
BAROMETER 743.97 HH HG(29.29 IN HO
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 59, PCT
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOUER DIF P MM. H20CIN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM, H20(IM. H20)
B1.0WFR INLET TEMP, DEC, C(DEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD, CU, METRES(GCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
HC
CO
CO
C02
3AMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/PANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
i C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
tt NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
M HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS CRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICIPATE MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KH
RUN TIME SECONDS
MEASURED DISTANCE KM
SCF, DRY
DFC, UET (DRY)
SCF» UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KM
COMPOSITE RESULTS
TEST NUMBER 3B2F35
BAROMETER MM HG 744.0
HUMIDITY G/KG 11,6
TEMPERATURE DEG C' 24,4
VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT OS-4874-OO1
VEHICLE NO. 3D
DATE 9/23/01
BAG CART NO. 1 / CVS NO. 3
DYNQ NO. 2
DRY HULK TEMP. 24.4 DEG C(76,0 DEC F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 11.6 CM/KG
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KGC 3000. LDS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
DIESEL EH-469-F
ODOMETER 0751. KM( 5562. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1,03
1
:OLD TRANSIENT
693,4 (27,3)
566,4 (22,3)
36,1 ( 97,0)
13046,
135,9 ( 4797.)
26,5/H/ 27,
8. 1/ I/ 0,
30.1/13/ 35,
11.7/13/ 11,
40, O/ 3/ ,iB
3,5/ 3/ ,05
20, 3/ 2/ 2B,
,0/ 2/ 1,
19,60
19,
24,
.63
27,5
1,40
3,86
1559,2
7,37
,43
,25
,66
268,2
1,27
10,03
504,
5,81
,975
.959 (
1.000 (
2
STABILIZED
690,5 (27,5)
571.5 (22.5)
37,2 ( 99,0)
23C30,
233,4 ( 0240.)
10.3/11/ 10,
6,5/ I/ 7,
14.2/13/ 13,
9.7/13/ 9.
20, O/ 3/ ,47
3,3/ 3/ .05
19, 7/ 2/ 20,
,4/ 2/ 0.
20,12
4,
4.
,43
19,3
,54
i»n
1818,4
8,80
.33
,09
,18
291,8
1,43
10,86
860,
6,23
,977
.940)
,976)
369.2
70,36
12,05
10,46
CARBON
3
HOT TRANSIENT
693,4 (27,3)
566,4 (22.3)
37,2 ( 99,0)
13044,
135,6 ( 4789.)
10,2/H/ 10.
6,5/ I/ 7.
12.2/13/ 11.
6.3/13/ 6,
33, O/ 3/ .55
3,5/ 3/ .05
22, 5/ 2/ 23,
,4/ 2/ 0.
24.30
4,
5,
,50
22.1
,31
,05
1236,7
5.91
,29
,05
,15
213,3
1,02
7,93
504,
5,80
.97A
.963 (
1.000 (
DIOXIDE G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION L/100KH
HYDROCARBONS (TKC) G/KM
CARBOM
OXIDES
MONOXIDE C/KM
OF NITf
-------
TEST NO. 3B2H3t RUN 1
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT U CAT
ENGINE 2.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 744.22 MM HG(29,30 IM HO)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 52. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(DEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC
HC
CO
CO
SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CQ2 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
CQ2 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
. CO CONCENTRATION PPM
? C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
M NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
w HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MAGS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
PFC, UET (DRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCri)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
EXCHANGE PACKAGE/MEMORY DUMP ON FILE ZZZDUMP.
BAROMETER, MM HG
HUMIDITY, G/KG
TEMPERATURE, DEG f.
CARBON DIOXIDE, G/tfM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS, G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN. G/KM
HFET VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT O5-4O74-001
VEHICLE N0.3B
DATE ?/23/01
DAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.0 DEO C<77,0 DEG F)
ADS. HUMIDITY 10.6 CM/KG
HFET
690.5 (27.5)
571.5 (22.5)
37.8 (100.0)
21000,
205.5 < 7255.)
0.9/11/ 9.
6,5/ I/ 7.
7.4/13/ 7.
3.3/13/ 3.
47.O/ 3/ .01
3.0/ 3/ .06
35.6/ 2/ 36,
,5/ 2/ 1,
16.52
4.'
.75
35.1
.33
,09
2039,5
13.77
.60
765,
,939 < .924)
1,000 ( .976)
205,5
43,52
16,48
3D2H36
744.2
10.6
25.0
172.3
6.40
,02
,05
.84
TEST WEIGHT 1361.
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
DIESEL EH-469-F
ODOMETER 0974, KM(
KG( 3000. UBS)
8.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
5576. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.00
-------
TEST NO. 3B2H37 RUN 1
VEHICLE NOBEL TC FIAT U CAT
ENGINE: 2.0 LU22, cno L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 743.97 MM HG<29.29 IN HB>
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 52. PCT
DAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H2CKIN. H20)
BLOUER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
DLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU, METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGR'D METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE HETER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CD2 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANfiE/PPM
NOX BCNGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
1 C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
i ' NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
*- MC .MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFCF UET (DRY) .
SCFr UET (DRY) ' ,
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER! MM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATUREr DEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE. G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
.HYDROCARBONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGENr G/KM
NYCC VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT 05-1074-001
VEHICLE NO.3D
DATE 7/23/81
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.0 DEO C(77.0 DEO F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 10.6 GM/KG
NYCC
703.6 (27.7)
576.6 (22.7)
35.6 ( 96.0)
16379.
160.7 ( 5674.)
9.4/11/ 9.
5,6/ I/ 6.
7.3/13/ 7,
l.G/13/ 2.
20.2/ 3/ .33
3,I/ 3/ .05
12,I/ 2/ 12.
,5/ 2/ 1.
41.03
4.
5.
.28
11.6
.36
.91
020.0
3.56
.19
597.
.976 < .959J
1.000 ( .980)
160.7
34.13
1.92
3B2N37 .
744.0
10.6
25.0
426.4
15.00
.19
.47
1.05
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG( 3000. LDS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD B.2 KU< 11.0 HP)
ODOMETER C980. KMC 5505. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.00
-------
TEST 'NO. 3B2S3Q RUN 1.
VEHICLE MODEL ' TC FIAT U-CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L<122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION «5
BAROMETER 743.97 MM HGC29.29 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 52. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOtO DIF P MM, H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H,?0(IN, H20>
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEO. C(DEC, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STB. CU. METREG(SCF)
HC SAMPLE flETER/RANGE/PPM
HC DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
M CO CONCENTRATION PPM
7 C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
i- NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
01 HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MAGS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC» WET (BRY)
SCF, WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM ELR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY. G/KG
TEMPERATURE. DEC C
CARBON DIOXIDE. G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION, L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE, G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN. (5/KM
PROJECT O5-4O74-OO1
VEHICLE NO.3B
BATE 9/23/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
BRY BULD TEMP. 25.0 DEG CC77.0 DEO F)
ABS, HUMIDITY 10,6 CM/KG
85 K
698.5 (27.5)
571.5 (22.5)
38.3 (101.0)
32940,
321.6 (J1357.)
5.9/11/ 6,
5,8/ I/ 6,
4.0/13/ 4.
1.2/13/ 1.
49,I/ 3/ .05
3.4/ 3/ .05
39.7/ 2/ 40.
,5/ 2/ 1.
15,75
1,
2.
,00
39,2
.09
.93
4717.1
24.08
1.34
1200.
.937 ( ,921)
1.000 ( .975)
321.6
60.31
28.40
3B2S38
744.0
10,6
25.0
166.1
6,17
.00
.03
.05
TEST UtIGMT 1361. KG< 3OOO. LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL EM-469-F
ODOMETER 0990. KM< 5586. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1,00
-------
TEST NO. 3B2F39 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT U-CAT
ENGINE 2,0 LU22, CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
PAROMETER 745,24 MM HG(29,34 IN HB)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 5V. PCT
HAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOUER DIP P MM, H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20
-------
TEST NO. 3D2I140 RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT U-CAT
ENGINE 2.0 L(122. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION ,M5
BAROMETER 745,49 MM HO(29.35 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 52. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER BIF P MM. H20(IN, H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. BEG, C(DEu, F)
BLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
11C BCKGRD HETER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRB METER/RrtNOE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 DCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE MtTER/RAfJGE/PPH
NOX BCKGRB METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
M CO CONCENTRATION PPM
I C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
*-, NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
~° HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFC, UET (DRY)
SCF. UET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM BLR (CCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER.
BAROMETER. MM HG
HUMIDITY. G/KG
TEMPERATURE. BEG C
CARBON DIOXIDE. G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION. L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS. G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE. G/KM
OXIDES OF NITROGEN, G/KM
PROJECT OS -1374 -OO1
VEHICLE NO. 3D
DATE 9/24/01
BAG CART NO. 1
OYNO NO. 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP. 25.0 DEC C(77.0 BEO F)
ADS, HUMIDITY 10.6 CM/KG
HFET
718. G (20.3)
584,2 (23,0)
37.2 ( 99.0)
20967.
205.1 < 7242.)
7.3/11/ 7.
5. I/ I/ 5,
4.6/13/ 4,
TEST WEIGHT 1361. KG« 300O. .LBS)
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 HP)
DIESEL CM-467-F
OBOMCTER 9045, KM( 5620. MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.00
, 2/ 3/ .79
3, 1/ 3/ .05
35. 2/ 2/ 35,
,7/ 2/ 1,
16,05
3,
3,
.75
34.5
.30
,70
2015.2
13,51
,65
765,
,941 ( ,925)
1,000 ( .976)
' 205.1
43.40
16,40
3B2H40
745,5
10.6
25.0
i71,7
6,38
,02
,05
,02
-------
TCST NO. 3P2N4J "RUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT U--CAT
ENGINE 3.0 LU22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 745,49 MM HG(29,35 IN HG)
RELATIVE HUMIDITY 52. PCT
BAG RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER DIF P KM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM, H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP, DEC, C(DEG, F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD, CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD hETER/RANGE/PPM
oo
(1C
CO
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PFM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION f CT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
MAGG GRAMS
MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MAGS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
DFC. WET (DRY)
SCF* WET (DRY)
VOL (SCM)
SAM DLR (SCM)
KM (MEASURED)
TEST NUMBER,
BAROMETER* MM HG
HUMIDITY* G/KG
TEMPERATURE* DEC C
CARBON DIOXIDE* G/KM
FUEL CONSUMPTION* L/100KM
HYDROCARBONS* G/KM
CARBON MONOXIDE* G/K'M
OXIDES OF NITROGEN* G/KK
C VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT OS-4874--O01
VEHICLE N0.3B
DATE 9/24/01
BAG CART NO. 1
DYNO NO. ' 2
CVS NO. 3
DRY BULB TEMP, 25.0 DEC CC77.0 DEO F)
ABS. HUMIDITY 10,6 CM/KG
NYCC
723.9 (20.5)
504,2 (23,0)
35,6 ( 96,0)
16376,
160,6 < 5672.)
TEST WEIGHT 1361.
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD
DIEiiCL EM-469--F
ODOMETER 9061. KM( 5630
KGC 3000. LBS>
0.2 KU( 11.0 MF-)
MILES)
NOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR 1.00
8,5/H/
4,?/ I/
9,
5,
5.
1,
32
05
1,
20,O/ 3/
3,0/ 3/
11,6/ 2/
,6/ 2/
41,49
4,
4,
,28
11,0
,35
,81
014.1
3,37
,21
590,
,976 ( ,959)
1,000 ( ,900)
160,6
34,03
1,90
3B2N41
745,5
10.6
25,0
427,4
15,92
,10
,42
1.77
-------
85KPH
VEHICLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
PROJECT O5-4074-001
TEST NO. 3D?"42 HUN 2
VEHICLE MODEL TC FIAT U-CAT
ENGINE 2.0 LO22. CID) L-4
TRANSMISSION M5
BAROMETER 745.24 HM HG(29.34 IN 110)
RELATIVE I.'JMIDITY 50. PCT
BAD RESULTS
TEST CYCLE
BLOUER BIF P KM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOUER INLET P MM. H20(IN, R20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEC. C(BEG. F)
DLOUER REVOLUTIONS
TOT FLOU STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
IIC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METEP/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
? C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
- NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
0 HC MASC GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
PARTICULATE MASS GRAMS
RUN TIME SECONDS
BFC, WET (DRY)
SCF, UET (DRY)-
VOL
ACTUAL ROAD LOAD 8.2 KU( 11.0 IIP)
ODOMETER 9062.9KM( 5631. MILES)
WOX HUMIDITY CORRECTION FACTOR .99
-------
APPENDIX G
TEST RESULTS,
INDIVIDUAL HYDROCARBONS
OBTAINED ON
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
-------
TABLE G-l. INDIVIDUAL HC RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-ASPIRATED
FIAT DIESEL, NO AFTERTREATMENT, EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Measurement : :
Methane, mg/km
Ethylene, rag/Ton
Ethane, rag/km
Acetylene, mg/km
Propane, mg/km
Propylene, mg/km
Benzene, mg/km
"Total" IHC, mg/kma
FID "Total HC", mg/kmb
1A329F
Cold FTP
4
1/26
7.5
37.
0
5.7
4.9
11.
3.8
70.
_
5
1/30
7.0
34.
0.49
5.5
0
9.8
3.6
60.
__
Hot FTP
4
1/26
6.4
34.
0
4.7
2.6
12.
3.0
63.
__
5
1/30
O.fll
33.
0.09
4.1
0
9.5
0
48.
__
1A329H
HFET
5
1/26
2.8
14.
q
1.2
0.82
0.36
0.80
20.
__
1A329N
N*CC
5
1/26
.15.
68.
0
14.
0
29.
11.
157.
__
1A329S
85 kph
6
1/30
0
8.6
0
1.3
0
2.1
0.66
13.
__
.toluene was analyzed for, but not found
data not acceptable
TABLE G-2. INDIVIDUAL HC RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-AS PI RATED
FIAT DIESEL, NO AFTERTREATMENT, EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Measurement:
Methane , mg/km
Sthylene, mg/km
Ethane, mg/km
Acetylene , mg/km
Propane , mg/km
Propylene, mg/km
_ Benzene, mcr/kro
"Total" IHC, mgAma
FID "Total HC", mg/km
1A2F25
C-FTP
1
2/16
18.
40.
1.5
7.7
2.9
13.
3.0
86.
417.
1A2F29
C-FTP
2
2/18
11.
41.
0.54
7.9
0
12.
4.5
77.
380.
1A2F25
H-FTP
1
2/16
16.
37.
1.5
6.2
0
12.
1.8
75.
361.
1A2F29
H-FTP
2
2/18
6.4
38.
0
5.9
0
11.
1.4
63.
416. |
1A2H26
HFET
1
2/16
5.9
13.
0.61
2.2
0
3.8
1.1
27.
(140.
1A2N27
NYCC
1
2/16
43.
75.
3.4
12.
0
20.
0
153.
700.
LA2S28
85 kph
1
2/16
6.6
0
0.27
0
0
0
0
fi.8
130.
uene was analyzed for, but not found
G-2
-------
TABLE G-3. INDIVIDUAL HC RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL
WITH CATALYTIC TRAP, EM-329-P BASE FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Measurement :
Methane, mg/km
Ethylene, mg/km
Ethane , mg/km
Propylene, mg/km
Benzene, mg/km
"Total" IHC, rngAm3
FID "Total HC", mg/km
1B1F46
C-FTP
1
4/6
14;
18.
1.4
2.2
1.2
37.
50.
1B1F54
C-FTP
3
4/9
11.
4.9
2.3
0
0.54
19.
62.
1B1F46
H-FTP
1
4/6
9.4
10.
2.4
0
0.51
22.
29.
1B1F54
H-FTP
3
4/9
8.7
9.0
0.78
0
0
18.
44.
1B1H47
HFET
1
4/6
3.7
2.2
0.71
0
0
6.6
10.
1B1II55
HFET
3
4/9
3.4
1.6
0.78
0
0
5.8
10.
1B1N48
NVCC
1
4/6
_
33.
9.6
5.4
0
0
48.
40.
1B1N56
N*CC
3
4/9
22.
7.5
4.3
0
0
34.
20.
1B1S49
85 kph
1
4/6
2.3
0
0
0
0
2.3
4.
1B1S57
85 kph
3
4/9
1.8
0
0.56
0
0
2.4
10.
''Acetylene, propane, and toluene were analyzed for, but not found
TABLE G-4. INDIVIDUAL HC RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL
WITH CATALYTIC TRAP, EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Measurement:
Methane, mg/km
Ethylene, mg/km
Ethane, mg/km
Acetylene, mg/km
Propane, mg/km
"Total" IHC, mgAm*
FID "Total HC", mgAm
1B2F64
C-FTP
1
4/15
6.5
18.
0.78
1.4
0
27.
53.
1B2F68
C-FTP
2
4/16
. 8.5
18.
2.2
0
2.3
31.
53.
' 1B2F64
H-FTP
1
4/15
6.4
12.
0.77
0
0
19.
'.49.
1B2F68
H-FTP
2
4/16
8.2
15.
0.78
0
7.2.
31.
49.
1B2H65
HFET
1
4/15
2.5
2.7
0
0
0
5.2
20.
1B2H69
HFET
2
4/16
2.3
4.3
0.88
0
3.5
11.
20.
1B2N66
NYCC
1
4/15
22.
14.
0
0
0
36.
30.
1B2N70
NYCC
2
4/16
22.
16.
0
0
14.
52.
50.
1B2S67
85 khp
1
4/15
1.1
0
0
0
0
1.1
__b
1B2S71
85 khp
2
4/16
0.73
0
0
0
0.34
1.1
b
b.
Propylene, benzene, and toluene were analyzed for, but not found
'less than 5 mg/km
-------
TABLE G-5. INDIVIDUAL HC RESULTS FOR 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS
DIESEL WITH EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Measurement :
Methane, mg/km
Ethylene, mg/km
Ethane, rag/km
Acetylene , mg/km
Propane, mg/km
Propylene, mg/km
Benzene , mg/km
"Total" IHC, mg/kma
FID "Total HC", mg/km
2A1F01
C-FTP
1
5/21
2.?.
13.
0.25
3.0
0
4.9
1.5
25.
121.
2A1F05
C-FTP
2
5/22
0.61
15.
0.05
1.5
0
3.2
0.49
21.
114.
2A1F01
H-FTP
1
5/21
0.96
14.
0
1.2
0.57
2.7
0
19.
137.
2A1F05
H-FTP
2
5/22
0.52
14.
0
1.2
0
6.4
0
22.
131.
2A1H02
HFET
1
5/21
0.27
9.8
0.19
1.7
0
4.1
0.88
17.
80.
2A1N03
NYCC
1
5/21
0
31.1
0
0
0
7.5
0
39.
320.
2A1S04
85 kph
1
5/21
0.14
8.8
0.11
1.8
0
3.3
1.3
16.
70.
Toluene was analyzed for, but not found
TABLE G-6. INDIVIDUAL HC RESULTS FOR 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS
DIESEL WITH EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Measurement :
Methane , mg/km
Ethylene , mg/km
Ethane , mg/km
Acetylene, ing/km
Propylene , mg/km
Benzene , mg/km
"Total" IHC,mg/kma
.FID "Total HC", mg/km
2A2F26
C-FTP
3
6/19
1.4
18.
1.9
3.5 '
0
0
25.
151.
2A2F30
C-FTP
4
6/22
1.7
18.
0.58
1.3
3.3
1.3
26.
117.
2A2F26
H-FTP
3
6/19
0.28
16.
1.5
0
0
0
18.
156.
2A2F30
H-FTP
4
6/22
0.76
17.
0
1.2
0
0
19.
159.
2A2H27
HFET
3
6/19
0
11.
0.54
1.8
3.0
0
16.
100.
2A2N23
NYCC
3
6/19
0
37.
0
0
0
0
37.
320.
2A2S29
85 kph
3
6/19
0
9.0
0
1.6 y
2.8
0
13.
80.
Propane and toluene were analyzed for, but not found
G-4
-------
TABU: G-7. INDIVIDUAL HC RESULTS FOR TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL,
NO AFTERTREATMENT, EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Measurement :
Methane , mg/km
Ethylene, mg/km
Ethane , m«r/km
Acetylene, jag/km
Propane , mg/km
Propylene , mg/km
Benzene, mg/tan
"Total" IHC, mgAma
FID "Total HC", mg/km
3A1F09
C-FTP
3
7/2
7.8
29.
1.4
6.3
0
9.9
2.2
57.
287.
3A1F13
C-FTP
4
7/6
15.
35.
1.2
7.8
1.1
12.
5.5
78.
266.
3A1F09
H-FTP
3
7/2
3.1
21.
0.24
3.7
0
6.2
0
34.
237.
3A1F13
H-FTP
4
7/6
1.8
22.
0.07
4.0'
0
9.6
0
37.
217.
3A1H10
HFET
3
7/2
1.2
6.1
0.03
1.3
0
1.5
0
10.
70.
3A1N11
NYCC
3
7/2
14.
64.
0.63
10.
0
23.
8.4
120.
690.
3A1S12
85 kph
3
7/2
0.49
4.2
0.03
0
0
0
0
4.7
50.
toluene analyzed for, but not found
TABLE G-8. INDIVIDUAL HC RESULTS FOR TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL,
NO AFTERTREATMENT, EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Measurement :
Methane , tug/tan
Ethylene , mg/km
Ethane, ng/km
Acetylene , mg/km
Propane , mg/km
Propylene, mg/km
Benzene, mg/km
Toluene , mg/km
"Total" IHC, mg/km
FID "Total. HC", mg/kai
3A2F20
C-FTP
1
7/9
16.
36.
2.1
5.9
0
5.2
3.7
0
69.
375.
3A2F24
C-FTP
2
7/10
13.
37.
1.2
8.2
0.56
16.
5.4
1.0
82.
359.
3A2F20
H-FTP
1
7/9
a
-
263.
3A2F24
H-FTP
2
7/10
.1.9
25.
0.45
5.5
0
13.
1.0
0
47.
263.
3A2H21
HFET
1
7/fl
0.11
5.3
0
0
0
0
0
0
5.4
70.
3A2N22
NYCC
1
7/9
7.2
61.
0
0
0
0
0
0
68.
800.
3A2S23
85 kph
1
7/9
0
4.6
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.6
50.
data not acceptable
G-5
-------
TABLE G-9. INDIVIDUAL HC RESULTS FOR TURBOCHARGED FIAT
DIESEL WITH CATALYTIC TRAP, EM-329-F FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Sun No.
Date (1981)
Measurement:
Methane , rag/tan
Ethylene , mg/km
Ethane, mg/km
Acetylene, ing Am
Propylene , mg/km
Benzene, mgAm
"Total" IHC, rag/km5*
FID "Total HC" , mg/kn
3B1F01
C-FTP
1
9/17
7.1
17.
0.78
2.0
2.9
1.9
32.
107.
3B1F05
C-FTP
2
9/18
5.8
16.
1.8
2.4
2.8
1.4
30.
90.
3B1F01
H-FTP
1
9/17
2.1
8.8
0
0
0
0
11.
46.
3B1F05
H-FTP
2
9/18
0
7.8
0.39
0
0
0
8.2
56.
3B1H02
HFET
1
9/17
0.50
1.9
0
0
0
0
2.4
10.
3B1N03
NYCC
1
9/17
9.9
23.
3.2
o
0
0
36.
120.
3B1S04
85 kph
1
9/17
0.29
0.67
0
0
-o
0
0.96
__b
^Propane and toluene were analyzed for, but not found-
Less than 5
TABLE G^IO. INDIVIDUAL HC RESULTS FOR TURBOCHARGED FIAT
'DIESEL WITH CATALYTIC TRAP, £M-469-F FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Measurement;
Methane , mgAm
Ethylene, mgAm
Ethane , mgAm
Acetylene, mgAm
Propane, mgAm
Propylene, rag Am
Benzene , mgAffl
"Total" IHC, mgAm
FID "Total HC" , mgAn
3B2F35
C-FTP
1
9/23 '
10.
22.
1.0
3.3
0
4.8
3.2
44.
159.
3B2F-J9
C-FTP
2
9/24
12.
23.
1.2
3.4
0.6
4.3
2.9
47.
165.
3B2F35
H-FTP
1
9/23
1.9
8.3
0.06
0
0
0
0
10.
61.
3B2F39
H-FTP
2
9/24
2.3
9.1
0.44
0
0
0
0
12.
71.
3B2H36
HFET
1
' 9/23
0
1.5
0
0
11.8
0
0.
13.
20.
3B2N37
NYCC
1
9/23
2.6
23.
0.62
0
55.
0
0
.81.
190.
3B2S38
85 kph
1
9/23
0
0
0
0
4.3
0
0
4.3
__b
^Toluene analyzed for, but not found
Less than 5
G-6
-------
APPENDIX H
TEST RESULTS,
ALDEHYDES AND KETONES
OBTAINED ON
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
-------
TABLE H-l. ALDEHYDE RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT
DIESEL, NO AFTERTREATMENT, EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Coda No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Formaldehyde , rag/km
Acetaldehyde, ing /km
Ace tone ,a mg/km
I sobuty r al dehyde , mg/km
Methylethylketone, mgAm
"Total" aldehydes, mg/kn\
1A329F
Cold FTP
4
1/26
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
1/30
16.
6.7
0
0
0
23.
Hot FTP
4
1/26
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
1/30
13.
6.4
3.4
0
0.2
23.
1A329H
HFET
5
1/26
1.8
2.5
0
0
0
4.3
6
1/30
6.9
3.6
0
0
0
10.
1A329N
NYCC
5
1/26
0
47.
0
18.
C
4?.
6
1/30
26.
7.9
0
0
0
34.
1A329S
85 k
5
1/26
0 0
1.6
0
0
0
1.6
ph
6
1/30
3.0
2.5
3.3
0
0
8.8
.includes propanal and acrolein
does not include isobutyraldehyde
TABLE H-2. ALDEHYDE RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL,
NO AFTERTREATMENT, EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Formaldehyde, mg/km
Acetaldehyde, mg/km
Acetone ,a mg/km
Isobutyraldehyde, mgAm
"Total"b aldehydes, mg/km
1A2F250
C-FTP
1
2/16
1A2F29
C-FTP
2
2/18
6.9
0
0
4.7
6.9
1A2F33
C-FTP
3
3/11
fi.6
0.7
0
17.
9.3
1A2F25
H-FTP
1
2/16
18.
3.9
0
7.6
22.
1A2F29
H-FTP
2
2/18
7.2
0
0
0
7.2
1A2F33
H-FTP
3
3/11
10.
1.1
0
26.
11.
1A2H26
HFET
1
2/16
1.2
0
0
20.
1.2
1A2H30
HFET
2
2/18
2.1
0
0
20.
2.1
1A2N27
NYCC
1
2/16
20.
3.3
0
220.
23.
1A2N31
NYCC
2
2/18
17.5
7.2
0
165.
25.
1A2328
85 kph
1
2/16
2.8
0.23
2.3
0
5.3
1A2S32
85 kph
2
2/18
1.3
0
0
7.4
1.3
aincludes propanal and acrolein
does not include isobutyraldehyde
ctest voided due to sampling pump failure
-------
TABLE H-3. ALDEHYDE RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL
WITH CATALYTIC TRAP, EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Formaldehyde, mg/km
Isobutyraldehyde, mg/km
"Tolal"3 aldehydes, mg/km
1B1F46
C-FTP
1
4/6
0.90
0
0.90
1B1F54
C-FTP
3
4/9
2.5
1.9
2.5
1B1F46
H-FTP
1
4/6
. 0.10
7.9
0.10
1B1F54
H-FTP
3
4/9
1.4
1.6
1.4
1B1H47
HFET
1
4/6
0
0
0
1B1H55
HFET
3
4/9
0
2.7
0
1B1N4S
NYCC
1
4/6
0
72.
0
1B1N56
NYCC
3
4/9
0
59.
0
1B1S49
85 kph
1
4/6
0
1.3
0
1B1S57
85 kph
3
4/9
0
0.24
0
does not include isobutyraldehyde
TABLE H-4. ALDEHYDE RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL
WITH CATALYTIC TRAP, EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code No.
Test' Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Formaldehyde, mg/km
Isobutyraldehyde, mg/km
"Total"3 aldehydes, mg/km
1B2F64
C-FTP
1
4/15
2.9
1.4
2.9
1B2F68
C-FTP
2
4/16
2.0
0
2.0
1B2F64
H-FTP
1
4/15
2.0
8.5
2.0
1B2H68
'H-FTP
2
4/16
" 0.78
1.2
0.78
1B2H65
HFET
1
4/15
0
15.
0
1B2H69
HFET
2
4/16
1.5
0
1.5
1B2N66
NYCC
1
4/15
0
32.
0
1B2N70
NYCC
2
4/16
0
65.
0
1B2S67
85 kph
1
4/15
0
2,3
0
1B2S71
85 kph
2
4/16i
0
3.6
0
.does not include isobutyraldehyde
-------
TABLE H-5. ALDEHYDE RESULTS FOR 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESEL
WITH EM-329-rF BASE FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Formaldehyde , mg/km
Isobutyraldehyde,
mg/km
"Total" Aldehydes,
mg/kma
2A1F01
C-FTP
1
5/21
2.0
20.
2.0
2A1F05
C-FTP
2
5/22
0
7.4
0
2A1F01
H-FTP
1
5/21
2.5
9.8
2.5
2A1F05
H-FTP
2
5/22
0
13.
0
2A1H02
HFET
1
5/21
0
8.1
0
2A1H06
HFET
2
5/22
0
20.
0
2A1N03
NYCC
1
5/21
0
90.
0
2A1N07
NYCC
2
5/22
0
164.
0
2A1S04
85 kph
1
5/21
0
5.1
0
2A1S08
85 kph
2
5/22
0
18.
0
does not include isobutyraldehyde
TABLE H-6. ALDEHYDE RESULTS FOR 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTALSS DIESEL
WITH EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Formaldehyde, mg/km
Isobutyraldehyde ,
mg/km
"Total" Aldehydes,
mgAma
2A2F26
C-FTP
3
6/19
0
0
0
2A2F30
C-FTP
4
6/22
2.2
0
2.2
2A2F26
H-FTP
3
6/19
0
0
0
2A2F30
H-FTP
4
6/22
0
5.4
0
2A2H27
HFET
3
6/19
0
0
0
2A2H31
HFET
4
6/22
0
4.2
0
2A2N28
NYCC
3
6/19
0
36.
0
2A2N32
NYCC
4
6/22
0
0
0
2A2S29
35 kph
3
6/19
0
0
0
2A2S33
85 kph
4
6/22
0
0
0
does not include isobutyraldehyde
-------
TABLE H-7. ALDEHYDE RESULTS FOR TURBOCIIARGED FIAT DIESEL,
NO AFTERTREATMENT, EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Forma Idehyde , mg/km
Ace ta Idehyde, mg/km
Acetone a , mg/km
Me thy le thy Ike tone, mgAm
"Total"aaldehydes, mgAm
3A1F09
C-FTP
3
7/2
1.1
0
0
0
1.1
3A1F13
C-FTP
4
7/6
3.2
3.9
5.5
0
13.
3A1F03
H-FTP
3
7/2
1.3
0
0
5.0
6.3
3A1F13
H-FTP
4
7/6
2.2
4.3
8.4
0
15.
3A1H10
HFET
3
7/2
0
1.6
0
0
1.6
3A1I114
HFET
4
7/6
1.1
0
0
0
1.1
3A1N11
NYCC
3
7/2
0
0
0
0
0
3A1N15
NYCC
4
7/6
11.5
0
0
0
12.
3A1S12
85 kph
3
7/2
0
2.1
0
0
2.1
3A1S1G
85 kph
4
7/6
0.62
0.44
3.0
0
4.1
a.
includes propanal and acrolein
TABLE H-8. ALDEHYDE RESULTS FOR TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL,
NO AFTERTREATMENT, EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Formaldehyde, mg/kn>
Isobutyraldehyde, mg/km
Benza Idehyde, mg/km
"Total" a aldehydes, mgAm
3A2F20
C-FTP
1
7/9
4.3
0
0
4.3
3A2F24
C-FTP
2
7/10
6.3
9.0
0
6.3
3A2F20
H-FTP
1
7/9
9.0
0
2.7
9.0
3A2F24
_H-FTP
2
//10
1.5
0
0
1.5
3A2H21
HFET
1
7/9
0.19
0
3.4
0.19
3A2H25
HFET
2
7/10
0
0
0
0
3A2N22
NYCC
1
7/9
17.9
0
6.4
18.
3A2N26
NYCC
2
7/10
0
0
0
0
3A2S23
85 kph
1
-I /0
'/ -^
0
0
0
0
3A2S27
85 kph
2
7/10
0
0
0
0
does not include isobutyraldehyde and benzaldehyde
-------
TABLE H-9. ALDEHYDE RESULTS FOR TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL
WITH CATALYTIC TRAP, EM-329-F FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Formaldehyde , mg/kra
Methy lathy Iketone, mg/km
Benzaldehyde, mg/km
"Total" a aldehydes.
mg/km
3B1F01
C-FTP
1
9/17
0 .
o
0
0
3B1F05
C-FTP
2
9/18
0
0
1.5
0
3B1F01
H-FTP
1
9/17
0
0
1.5
0
3B1F05
H-FTP
2
9/18
0
0
0
0
3B1H02
HFET
1
9/17
0
0
0
0
3B1H06
HFET
2
9/18
0
0
1.2
0
3B1N03
NYCC
1
9/17
6.8
33.
7.5
40
3B1N07
NYCC
2
9/18
0
0
10.8
0
3B1S04
85 kph
1
9/17
0
0
0.89
0
3B1S08
85 kph
2
9/18
0
0
0.62
0
does not include benzaldehyde
TABLE H-10. ALDEHYDE RESULTS FOR TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL
WITH CATALYTIC TRAP, EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981) .
Formaldehyde, mgAm
Isobutyraldehyde, trig/km
Muthyle thy Ike tone, mg/km
Benzaldehyde, mg/km
"Total"aaldchydos, mg/km
3B2F35
C-FTP
1
9/23
0
0
0
0
0
3B2F39
C-FTP
2
9/24
1.1
24.
0
0
1.1
3B2F35
H-FTP
1
9/23
0
0
0
0
0
3B2F39
H-FTP
2
9/24
0
4.9
0
. 0
0
3B2H36
HFET
1
9/23
0
8.3
0
0
0
3B2H40
HFET
2
9/24
0
0
0.97
1.2
0.97
3B2N37
NYCC
1
9/23
0
0
25.
0
25.
3B2N41
NYCC
2
9/24
0
210.
0
0
0
3B2S38
85 kph
1
9/23
0
9.9
0
0
0
3B2S42
85 kph
2
9/24
0
0
1.4
0.33
1.4
sdoes not includq isobutyraldohyde and benzaldehyde
-------
SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE
POST OFFICE DRAWER 2BS1O «22O CU .ESN A ROAD SAN ANTONIO. TEXAS 782B4 (512)684-8111
May 13, 1981
Mr. Frank M. Black
Mobile Source Emissions Research Branch
Environmental Protection Agency
Mail Drop 46 FTP
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
Dear Frank:
Please find two sample vials, Samples A and B, enclosed. These are the
two NYCC samples discussed in our phone conversations which supposedly con-
tain large amounts of isobutyraldehyde - DNPH derivative. I hope that these
samples are suitable for the HPLC and mass spectral confirmational analyses
that we discussed in our phone conversation.
These samples were run using our GC system and found to contain 0.38 (A)
and 0.33 (B) mg of isobutyraldehyde - DNPH derivative. Other aldehydes
derivatives found in the initial analyses included formaldehyde (~0.07 mg)
and acetaldehyde (<0.01 mg) . The two samples were taken to dryness in a
vacuum oven (70°C, 27 inches of mercury vacuun) . To determine if the drying
procedure altered the sample integrity, sample A was rerun on the GC system.
Two (2) ml of toluene was added to the sample, followed by a routine analysis.
The second analysis gave <0.01 mg formaldehyde-DNPH derivative and 0.39 mg
isobutyraldehyde derivative, indicating a loss of formaldehyde derivative
and essentially no change for the isobutyraldehyde derivative. After
analysis, the sample was returned to dryness using the above conditions.
Both samples contain 0.1 mg of anthracene as an internal standard.
If I can provide you with any other information, please call me at
512-684-5111 ext. 2977.
Sincerely,
/?
Lawrence R. Smith
Senior Research Scientist
Department of Emissions Research
LRS:kh
H-7
SAN ANTONIO, HOUSTON, TEXAS, AND WASHINGTON. D C
-------
APPENDIX I
TEST RESULTS,
PHENOLS
OBTAINED ON
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDEMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
-------
TABLE 1-1. PHENOL RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL,
NO AFTERTREATMENT, EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Filtered
Date (1981)
Phenol, mg/km
Salicylaldehyde, mg/km
m-, p-cresol, mgAm
Group Five,a mg/km
2-n-propylphenol , mg/km
2,3, 5-trimethylphenol ,
mg/km
2,3,5, 6-tetramethy Iphenol ,
mg/km
"Total" Phenols, mg/km
1A329F
C-FTP
4
No
1/26
0
0
0
0.75
0
0
2.5
3.2
C-FTP
5
No
1/30
0
0
0.47
2.2
0.49
0
9.0
12.
1A329F
C-FTP
4
Yas
1/26
0
0
0.32
0.39
0
0
7.7
8.4
C-FTP
5
Yes
1/30
0
0
0
1.2
0
0
14.
15.
1A329F
H-FTP
4
No
1/26
0
0
0
1.5
0
0
5.8
7.3
H-FTP
5
No
1/30
0
0
3.1
1.1
0.12
0.29
5.7
10.
1A329F
H-FTP
4
Yes
1/26
0
0
0
0.63
0
0.22
4.1
5.C
H-FTP
5
Yes
1/30
0
0
3.1
0.53
0
0
1.3
4.9
Test Code No.
' Test Type
Run No.
Filtered
Date (1981)
Phenol, mg/km
Salicylaldehyde , mg/km
m~, p-cresol, mg/km
Group Five,a mg/km
2rn-propy Iphenol , mgAm
2,3,5 ,-trime thy Iphenol ,
rag/kia
2 , 3,5 , 6-tetramethy Iphenol,
mg/km
"Total" Phenols, mgAm
1A329H
HFET
5
No
1/26
0
0.31
1.0
1.3
0.74
0
2.5
5.8
Yes
1/26
0
0
0
0.52
0
0.11
2.3
2,9
1A329N
NYCC
5
NO
1/26
0
0
7.9
21.
2.4
3.4
28.
63.
Yes
1/26
0
0
0
5.4
0
0
58.
63.
1A329S
85 kph
5
No
1/26
0
0
0
0.82
0
0.20
1.6
2.6
Yes
1/26
0
0
0
0.12
0
0
1.9
2.0
aGroup Five includes p-ethyIphenol/ 2-isopropyIphenol/ 2,3-xylenol/
3,5-xylenol/ 2,4,6-trimethylphenol
1-2
-------
TABLE 1-2. PHENOL RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL, NO AFTERTREATMENT, EM-469-F FUEL
M
UJ
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Filtered
Date (1981)
Phenol, mg/km
Salicylaldehyde, mg/kro
m-,p-cresol, mg/km
Group Five,3 mg/km
2-n-propylphenol, mg/km
2,3 , 5-trimethy Iphenol ,
mn/km
2,3,5 ,6-tet rame thy Iphenol ,
mg/km
"Total" Phenols, mgAm
1A2F25
C-FTP
1
NO
2/16
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.2
3.2
1A2F29
C-FTP
2
NO
2/18
0
0
0
5.7
0
0
7.4
13.
1A2F25
C-FTP
1
Yes
2/16
0
0
0
1.4
0
0.30
10.
12.
1A2F29
C-FTP
2
Yes
2/18
0
0
0
11.
0
13.
14.
38.
1AZF25
H-FTP
1
No
2/16
0
0
0
1.5
0
0.45
14.
16.
1A2F29
H-FTP
2
No
2/18
0
0
0
0
0
8.7
9.4
18.
1A2F25
H-FTP
1
Yes
2/16
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.0
2.0
1A2F29
H-FTP
2
Yes
2/18
0
0
0
6.6
0
0
8.6
15.
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Filtered
Date (1981)
Phenol, mg/km
Salicylaldehyde, mgAm
m-,p-cresol, mgAm
Group Five,3 mg/km
2-n-propylphenol, mgAm
2,3, 5-trimethylphenol ,
mgAm
2,3,5 ,6-tetrame thy Iphenol ,
mgAm
"Total" Phenols, mgAm
1A2H26
HFET
1
No
2/16
0
0
0
0.69
0
0.83
5.2
6.7
1A2H30
HFET
2
No
2/18
0
0
0
4.1
0
5.0
5.3
14.
1A2H26
HFET
1
Yes
2/16
0
0 .
0
0
0
0
5.9
5.9
1A2H30
HFET
2
Yes
2/18
0
0
0
0
0
6.3
6.7
13.
1A2N27
NYCC
1
No
2/16
0
0
0
9.5
0
5.0
62.
76.
1A2N31
NYCC
2
No
2/18
0
0
0
0
0
0
52.
52.
1A2N27
NYCC
1
Yes
2/16
0
0
12.
10.
1.8
0
55.
79.
1A2N31
NYCC
2
Yes
2/18
0
0
0
0
0
0
57.
57.
1A2S28
85 kph
1
No
2/16
0
0
0
0.25
0
0.12
2.2
2.6
1A2S32
05 kph
2
No
2/18
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.0
3.0
1A2S28
85 kph
1
Yes
2/16
0
0.40
0.27
0.77
0.35
0.15
7.4
9.3
1A2S32
85 kph
2
Yes
2/18
0
0
0
2.9
0
3.5
3.8
10.
*Group Five includes p-ethyIphenol/ 2-isopropyIphenol, 2,3-xylenol/ 3,5-xylenol/ 2,4,6-trimethylphenol
-------
TABLE 1-3. PHENOL (FILTERED) RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT
DIESEL, WITH CATALYTIC TRAP, EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Phenol, ing/km
Salicylaldehyde, mg/km
B-, p-cresol, mg/km
Group Five,a mg/km
2-n-propylphenol, mg/km
2,3,5-trimethylphenol, mg/km
2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol, mg/km
"Total" Phenols, mg/km
1B1F46
C-FTP
1
4/6
0
0
0
0
0
0
12.
12.
1B1F54
C-FTP
3
4/9
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.3
1.3
1B1F46
H-FTP
1
4/6
0
0
0
0
0
0
19.
19.
1B1F54
H-FTP
3
4/9
0
0
o.
0
0
0
3.1
3.1
1B1H47
HFET
1
4/6
0
0
0
0
O.J5
0
0.68
0.73
1B1H55
HFET
3
4/9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.75
0.75
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Phenol, mg/km
Salicylaldehyde, mg/km
m-f p-cresol, mg/km
Group Five,a mg/km
2-n-propylphenol, mg/km
2|3,5-trimethylphenol, mg/km
2r3|5,6-tetramethylphenol, mg/km
"Total" Phenols, mg/km
1B1N48
NYCC
1
4/6
0
0
0
0
0
0
22.
22.
1B1N56
NYCC
3
4/9
0
0
0
0
0
0
27.
27.
1B1S49
85kph
1
4/6
0
0
0
0
0
0
17.
17.
1B1S57
85kph
3
4/9
. 0
0
0
0
0
0
12.
12.
Group Five includes p-ethylphenol/ 2-isopropylphenol/ 2,3-xylenol/ 3,5-xylenol/
2i4,6-tr ime thy Iphenol.
1-4
-------
TABLE 1-4. PHENOL (FILTERED) RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT
DIESEL, WITH CATALYTIC TRAP, EM-469-F
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Phenol, mg/km
Salicylaldehyde, mg/km
n-, p-cresol, mg/km
Group Five,a mg/km
2-n-propylphenol , mg/km
2,3,5-trimethylphenol, mg/km
2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol, mg/km
"Total" Phenols, mg/km
1B2F64
C-FTP
1
4/15
0
0
0
0
0
0
74.
74.
1B2F68
C-FTP
2
4/16
0
0
0
0
0
1.8
8.9
11.
132F64
H-FTP
1
4/15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.91
0.91
1B2F68
H-FTP
2
4/16
0
0
0
0
0
0.20
2.7
2.9
1B2H65
HFET
1
4/15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.68
0.68
1B2H69
HFET
2
4/16
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.5
2.5
Test Code No.
Test Type
.Run No.
Date (1981)
Phenol, mg/km
Salicylaldehyde, mg/km
n-, p-cresol, mg/km
Group Five,a mg/km
2-n-propylphenol, mg/km
2,3,5-trimethylphenol, mg/km
2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol, mg/km
"Total Phenols , mg/km
1B2N66
NYCC
1
4/15
0
0
0
0
0
0
7.1
7.1
1B2N70
NYCC
2
4/16
0
0
0
0
0
0
7.9
7.9
1B2S67
85kph
1
4/15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.30
0.30
1B2S71
85kph
2
4/16
0
0
0
0.59
0
0
3.V
4.3
Group Five includes p-ethylphenol/ 2-isopropylphenol/ 2,3-xylenol/ 3,5-xylenol/
214,6-trimethy Iphenol.
1-5
-------
TABLE 1-5. PHENOL (FILTERED) RESULTS FOR 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS
DIESEL WITH EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No .
Date (1981)
Phenol, mg/km
Salicylaldehyde, mg/km
m-,p-cresol, mg/km
Group Five,a mg/km
2-n-propylphenol, mg/km
2, 3,5-trimethylphenol, mg/km
2,3, 5,6-tetramethylphenol, mg/km
"Total" Phenols, mg/km
2A1F01
C-FTP
1
5/21
0
0.45
0
0
0.09
0
13.
13.5
2A1F05
C-FTP
2
5/22
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.46
0.46
2A1F01
H-FTP
1
5/21
0
0
0
0
0
0
13.
13.
2A1F05
H-FTP
2
5/22
0
0
0
0
0
O
6.4
6.4
2A1H02
HFET
1
5/21
0
0.17
0
0
0
0
0.10
0.27
2A1H06
HFET
2
5/22
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.10
0.10
2A1N03
NYCC
1
5/21
0
0
0
0
0
0
40.
40.
2A1N07
NYCC
2
5/22
0
0
0
0
0
0
8.4
8.4
2A1S04
85 kph
1
5/21
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.88
0.88
2A1S08
85 kph
2
5/22
0
0
0
0
C
0-
0.55
0.55
Group Five includes p-ethylphenol/2-isopropylphenol/2,3-xylenol/3,5-xylenol/2,4,6-trimethylphenol
-------
TABLE 1-6. PHENOL (FILTERED) RESULTS FOR 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS
DIESEL WITH EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Phenol ; mg/km
Salicylaldehyde, mg/km
m-,p-cresol, mg/km
Group Five,a mg/km
2-n-propylphenol, mg/km
2, 3, 5-trimethylphenol, mg/km
2 ,-3 , 5 , 6-tetramethylphen.oi, mq/km
"Total" Phenols, mg/km
2A2F26
C-FTP
3
6/19
0
2.3
0
0
1.2
0
4.9
8.4
2A2F30
C-FTP
4
6/22
0.29
0
0
0
0.13
0
4.3
4.7
2A2F26
H-FTP
3
6/19
0
0
0
0
0
0
3. .7
3.7
2A2F30
H-FTP
4
6/22
0
0
0
0
0
0
20.
20,
2A2H27
HFET
3
6/19
0
0
0
0
0
2.0
15.
17.
2A2H31
HFET
4
6/22
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.8
4.8
2A2N28
NYCC
3
6/19
0
0
0
0
0
6.4
61.
67.
2A2N32
NYCC
4
6/22
0
0
0
0
0
0
63.
63.
2A2S29
85 kph
3
6/19
0
0
0
0
0
0.33
1.1
1.4
2A2S33
85 kph
4
6/22
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.5 _
1.5
H
I
3Group Five includes p-ethylphenol/2-isopropylphenol/ 2,3-xylenol/3,5-xylenol/2,4,6-trimethylphenol
-------
TABLE 1-7. PHENOL (FILTERED) RESULTS FOR TUROBCHARGED FIAT DIESEL,
NO AFTERTREATMENT, EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1901)
Phenol, mgAm
Salicylaldehyde, mgAm
m-,p-cresol, mg/kra
Group Fivea, mgAm
2-n-propylphenol, nig/km
2,3,5-trimethylphenol, mgAm
2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol, mgAm
"Total" Phenols, mgAm
3A1F09
C-FTP
3
7/2
0
7.8
0
0
1.0
0
0.35
9.2
3AJLF13
C-FTP
4
7/6
0
0
0
0.43
0
0
24.
24.
3A1F09
H-FTP
3
7/2
0
36.
0
0.61
2.1
1.6
20.
60.
3A1F13
H-FTP
4
7/6
0
0
0
0
0
0.18
7.0
7.2
3A1H10
HFET
3
7/2
0
0
0
0
0.16
0
0
0.16
3MH14
HFET
4b
7/6
i
3A1N11
NYCC
3
7/2
0
0
0
3.6
1.4
6.7
42.
54.
3A1N15
NYCC
4
7/6
0
0
0
0
0
0
43.
43.
3A1S12
85 kph
3
7/2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3A1S16
85 kph
4b
7/6
-
-
-
-
M
I
00
Group five includes p-ethylphenol/2-isopropylphenol/
2,3-xylenol/3,5-xylenol/2,4,6-trimethyIphenol
sample contaminated.
-------
TABLE 1-8. PHENOL (FILTERED) RESULTS FOR TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL,
NO AFTERTREATMENT, EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Phenol, mg/km
Salicylaldehyde, mg/kra
n-,p-cresol, mg/km
Group Fivea, mg/km
2-n-propylphenol, mg/km
2,3, 5-trimethy Iphenol , mg/km
2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol, mg/km
"Total" Phenols, mgAm
3A2F20
C-FTP
1
7/9
0
0
0
0
0
0
6.4
6.4
3A2F24
C-FTP
2
7/10
22.
0
0
0
0
0
0
22.
3A2F20
H-FTP
lb
7/9
__
-
3A2F24
H-FTP
2.
7/10
0
0
0
0
0
0.15
4.7
4.9
3A2H21
HFET
1
7/9
0
0
0
1.0
0
0.55
4.5
6.1
3A2H25
HFET
2
7/10
0
0
0
1.1
0
0.31
7.0
8.4
3A2H22
NYCC
1
7/9
0
0
0
0
0
0
47.
47.
3A2N26
NYCC
2
7/10
0
0
0
12.
0
0
58.
70.
3A2S23
85 kph
1
7/9
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.6
2.6
3A2S27
85 kph
2
7/10
0
0
0
1.2
0
0
2.2
3.4
H
I
Group five includes p-ethylphenol/2-isopropylphenol/
2,3-xylenol/3,5-xylenol/2,4,6-trimethyIphenol
sample contaminated'
-------
TABLE 1-9. PHENOL (FILTERED) RESULTS FOR TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL,
WITH UNDERFLOOR CATALYTIC TRAP, EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Phe no 1 , mg/km
Salicylaldehyde, mg/km
in-,p-cresol, mg/km
Group Five3, mg/km
2-n-propylphenol, mgAm
2,3,5-trimethylphenol, mg/km
2, 3,5,6-tetramethylphenol, mg/km
"Total" Phenols, mg/km
3B.IF01
C-FTP
1
9/17
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3B1F05
C-FTP
2
9/18
0
6.0
0
0.50
1.6
0.90
2.2
11.
3B1F01
H-FTP
1
9/17
0
0
0
0
0
0.26
2.1
2.4
3B1F05
H-FTP
2
9/18
0
1.7
0
2.0
0
0
7.1
11.
3B1H02
IIFET
1
9/17
_b
3B1H06
HFET
2
9/18
0
0.70
0
1.4
0
0.36
21.
23.
3B1N03
HYCC
1
9/17
3B1N07
NYCC
2
9/18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3B1S04
85 kph
1
9/17
.
__.
3B1S08
85 kph
2
9/18
0
1.3
0.14
0.72
0.07
0
5.6
7.8
H
O
five includes p-ethylphenol/2-isopropylphenol/
2,3-xylenol/3,5-xylenol/2,4,6-trimethylphenol
. Samples lost through -sampling difficulty
-------
TABLE 1-10. PHENOL (FILTERED) RESULTS FOR TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL,
WITH UNDERFLOOR CATALYTIC TRAP, EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
Phenol, mgAro
Salicylaldehyde, mg/km
m-,p-cresol, mg/km
Group Five3 , mg/km
2-n-propylphenol, mg/kim
2,3,5-trimethylphenol, mg/km
2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenol, mg/km
"Total" Phenols, mgAm
3B2F35
C-FTP
1
9/23
0
0.36
0
1.4
0
0
23.
25.
3B2F39
C-FTP
2
9/24
0
0
0
3.3
0
0.21
7.9
11.
3B2F35
H-FTP
1
9/23
3.6
0.29
0
0
0.79
0.57
14.
19.
3B2F39
H-FTP
2
9/24
0
0
0
0
0
0
7.6
7.6
3B2H36
HFET
, 1
9/23
0
0
0
0.52
0
0
6.7
7.2
3B2H40
HFET
2
9/24
0
0
0
0.63
0
0.19
4.0
4.0
3B2N37
NYCC
1
9/23
0
0
0
5.6
0
0
28.
34.
3B2N41
NYCC
2
9/24
0
0
0
1.7
0
0
38.
40.
3B2S38
85 kph
1
9/23
0
0
0
0.82
0
0
2.3
3.1
3B2S42
85 kph
2
9/24
0
0
0
0.86
0
0
4.7
5.6
Group five includes p-ethylphenol/2-isopropylphenol/
2,3-xylenol/3,5-xylenol/2,4,6-trimethylphenol
-------
APPENDIX J
TEST RESULTS,
PARAFFIN PEAKS
OBTAINED ON
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
-------
TABLE J-l. PARAFFIN PEAKS OF TRAP-COLLECTED GASEOUS HYDROCARBONS FROM
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS, FUEL EM-329-F
Carbon
Number
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 .
19
'20
21
22
23
24
Carbon
Number
tot-^1
Percent of Peak Area
Fuel
EM-329-F
0.03
0.3
1.1
2.4
4.1
5.7
6.7
6.4
6.1'
4.2
1.7
0.1
39.
Fiat N.A.
4-bag
FTP
2.3
2.3
0.2
7.2
5.4
3.0
3.6
0.9
1.7
0.6
,
27. '
NYCC
17.
6.1
0.6
5.1
2.3
0.9
1.6
0.1
0.3
0.4
34.
85 kph
6.9
2.9
0.5
5.9
4.2
2.0
2.8
0.8.
1.5
1.7
29.
Fiat N.A. /Trap
4-bag
FTP
10.
2.5
1.9
9.0
0.7
4.2
1*8
2.5
33.
NYCC
9.7
14.
34.
15.
. 7.0
80.
85 kph
4.1
6.9
23.
8.2
42.
Fiat T.C.
4-bag
FTP
14.
1.7
1.0
4.1
3.9
9.0
6.0
2.9
1.6
44.
NYCC
18.
24.
42.
85 kph
14.
5.5
20.
Fiat T.C. /Trap
4-bag
FTP
1.7
0.5
6.3
12.
5.5
2.7
0.4
1.1
30.
NYCC
42.
16.
58.
85 kph
3.5
70.
74.. .
Cutlass
4-bag
FTP
14.
1.5
4.3
4.2
1.9
26.
NYCC
17.
11.
53.
81.
85 kph
23.
6.6
22.
52.
-------
TABLE J-2. PARAFFIN PEAKS OF TRAP-COLLECTED GASEOUS HYDROCARBONS FROM
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESEL, FU3L EM-469-F
Carbon
Numlior
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Carbon
Number
Total
Percent of Peak Area
Fuel
EM-329-F
0.05
0.2
0.7
1.9
3.9
5.0
5.6
6.2
6.2
4.8
2.3
0.2
37.
Fiat N.A.
4-bag
FTP
7.9
1.8
0.3
4.9
8.6
1.0
2.1
0.1
1.7
1.0
29.
NYCC
18.
1.9
0.7
4.0
8.4
2.0
3.3
2.7
1.2
0.8
43.
05 kph
16.
1.6
3.5
8.3
1.0
3.6
1.6
2.6
38.
Fiat N. A. /Trap
4-bag
FTP
5.5
8.4
8.4
11.
12.
45.
NYCC
100
100
B5 kph
29.
7.0
36.
Fiat T.C.
4-bag
FTP
11.
2.9
1.4
7.2
4.2
4,7
8.5
2.9
2.9
5.9
52.
NYCC
12.
65.
77.
85 kph
6.7
3.5
4.6
19.
34.
Fiat T.C. /Trap
4-bag
FTP
2.8
3.3
1.5
7.6
NYCC
10.
38.
48.
05 kph
7.3
2.2
18.
28.
Cutlass
4-bag
FTP
6.6
1.7
1.7
2.5
2.3
1.8
2.3
17.
NYCC
10.
26.
16.
6.7
18.
7.4
2.1
86.
85 kph
15.
4.5
20.
U)
-------
APPENDIX K
TEST RESULTS,
ORGANIC SULFIDES'
OBTAINED ON
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
-------
TABLE K-l. ORGANIC SULFIDE RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-ASPIRATED
FIAT FIESEL, NO AFTERTREAThENT, EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code No.
Test iTpe
Run No.
Date (1981)
COS, mg/km
(CH3)2S, mg/km
(C2Hs)2S, mg/tan
(CH3)2S2» mg/km
1A329F
Cold FTP
4
1/26
9.8
4.6
0.06
0
Hot FTP
4
1/26
11.
5.2
0
0
Comb. FTP
5
1/30
7.0
9.8
0
0
1A329H
HFET
5
1/26
12.
4.9
0.03
0.03
6
1/30
8.2
6.4
0
0
1A329N
NYCC
5
1/26
200.
30.
0
0
6
1/30
64.
9.5
0
0
1A329S
85 kph
6
1/30
5.5
1.1
0
0
TABLE K-2. ORGANIC SULFIDE RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-ASPIRATED
FIAT DIESEL, NO AFTERTREATMENT, EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
COS, mg/km
(CR.) S, mg/km
(C.HgKS, mg/km
(CH,).S_, mg/km
w ^ ^
1A2F25
C-FTP
1
2/16
16.
2.2
. 0
0
1A2F29
C-FTP
2
2/18
12.
2.5
0
0
1A2F25
H-FTP
1
2/16
15.
4.3
0
0
1A2F29
H-FTP
2
2/18
20.
4.0
0
0
1A2H26
HFET
1
2/16
5.8
4.3
0
0
1A2H30
HFET
2
2/18
6.4
1.3
0
0
1A2N27
NYCC
1
2/16
140.
12.
0
0
1A2N31
NYCC
2
2/18
100.
8.8
0
0
K-2
-------
TABLE K-3. ORGANIC SULFIDE RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-ASPIRATED
FIAT DIESEL, WITH CATALYTIC TRAP, EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Coda No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
COS, rag/km
(CH3)2S, mg/km
(C2H5)2S, rag/km
(03) 282, mg/km
1B1F46
C-FTP
1
4/6
37.
9.0
0
0
1B1F58
C-FTP
4
4/10
13.
18.
0.40
0
1B1F46
H-FTP
1
4/6
28.
7.9
0
0
1B1F58
H-FTP
4
4/10
17.
10.
0.03
0
1B1H47
HFET
1
4/6
1.5
2.9
0
0
1B1H59
HFET
4
4/10
8.7
3.8
0
0
1B1N48
NYCC
1
4/6
206.
39.
0
0
1B1N60
NYCC
4
4/10
64.
35.
0.15
0
TABLE K-4. ORGANIC SULFIDE RESULTS FOR NATURALLY-ASPIRATED
FIAT DIESEL, WITH CATALYTIC TRAP, EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
COS , mg/km
(CH3)2S, mg/km
(C2H5)2S, mg/km
(CH3)2S2, mg/km
1B2F64
C-FTP
1
4/15
16.
11.
0
0
1B2F64
H-FTP
1
4/15
16.
3.3
0
0
1B2F65
HFET
1
4/15
8.5
5.0
0
0
1B2F66
NYCC
1
4/15
61.
32.
0
0
K-3
-------
TABLE-K-5. ORGANIC SULFIDE RESULTS FOR 1981 OLDSHOBILE CUTLASS
DIESEL WITH EH-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
COS, mg/km
(CH3)2S, mg/km
(C.H-) S, mg/km
(CH, ) S , mg/lm
2A1F05
C-FTP
2
5/22
35.
10.
0
0
2A1F09
C-FTP
3
5/25
38.
5.1
0
0
2A1F05
H-FTP
2a
5/22
__
2A1F09
H-FTP
3
5/25
30.
4.4
0
0
2A1H06
HFET
2
5/22
22.
9.5
0
0
2A1H10
HFET '
3
5/25
16.
1.8
0
0
2A1N07
NYCC
' 2a
5/22
__
-
-
2A1N11
NYCC
3
5/25
140.
23.
0
0
Sample lost
TABLE-K-6. ORGANIC SULFIDE RESULTS FOR 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS
DIESEL WITH EM-469-F FUEL
Tesf Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
COS, mg/km
(CH3)2S, mg/km
(C2E5}2S' mg/lan
(CH ) S , mg/km
J £. £.
2A2F26
C-FTP
3
6/19
35.
3.8
0
0
2A2F30
C-FTP
4
6/22
107.
17.
0
0
2A2F26
H-FTP
3
6/19
38.
4.2
0
0
2A2F30
H-FTP
4
6/22
57.
12.
o
0
2A2H27
. HFET
3
6/19
23.
3.6
0
0
2A2H31
HFET
4
6/22
--
2A2N28
NYCC
3
6/19
153.
19.
0
0
2A2N32
NYCC
4
6/22
186.
33.
0
0
Sample lost
K-4
-------
TABLE K-7. ORGANIC SULFIDE RESULTS FOR TURBOCHARGED FIAT
DIESEL, NO AFTERTREATMENT, EM-329-F BASE FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
COS, mg/tan
(CH3)2S, mg/km
(C2H5)2S, mg/km
(CH3)2S2, rag/tan
3A1F09
C-FTP
3
7/2
32.
5.9
0
0
3A1F13
C-FTP
4
7/6
21.
5.8
0
0
3A1F09
H-FTP
3
7/2
28.
5.2
0
0
3A1F13
H-FTP
4
7/fi
26.
6.4
0
0
3A1H10
HFET
3
7/2
20.
4.3
0
0
3A1H14
HFET
4
7/6
15.
4.8
0
0
3A1N11
NYCC
3
7/2
145.
34.
0
0
3A1N15
NYCC
4
7/6
107.
35.
0
0
TABLE K-8. ORGANIC SULFIDE RESULTS FOR TURBOCHARGED FIAT
DIESEL, NO AFTERTREATMENT, EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
COS, mg/km
(CH3)2S, mgAm
(C2H5)2S, mg/km
(CH3)2S2, mg/km
3A2F20
C-FTP
1
7/9
27.
5.0
0
0
3A2F24
C-FTP
2
7/10
2.9
4.1
0
0
3A2F20
H-FTP
1
7/9
26.
3.4
0
0
3A2F24
H-FTP
2
7/10
20.
5.9
0
0
3A2H21
HFET
1
7/9
17.
2.8
0
0
3A2H25
HFET
2
7/10
.1.5
2.0
0
0
3A2N22
NYCC
1
7/9
118.
15.
0
0
3A2N26
NYCC
2
7/10
75.
14.
0
0
K-5
-------
TABLE K-9. ORGANIC SULFIDE RESULTS FOR TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL
WITH UNDERFLOOR CATALYTIC TRAP, EM-329-F FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
COS, mg/km
(03)28, mg/Toa
(C2H5)2S, mg/km
(CH3)2S2, mg/km
3B1F01
C-FTP
1
9/17
20.
0.51
0
0
3B1F05
C-FTP
2
9/18
8.3
2.2
0
0
3B1F01
H-FTP
1
9/17
__a
3B1F05
H-FTP
2
9/18
21.
2.1
0
0
3B1H02
HFET
1
9/17
L3.
3.0
C
0
3B1H06
HFET
2
9/18
9.6
1.1
0
0
3B1N03
NYCC
I
9/17
113. ,
26.
.'0
0
3B1N07
NYCC
2
9/18
94.
26.
.0
0
Sample lost during analysis
TABLE K-10. ORGANIC SULFIDE RESULTS FOR TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL
WITH UNDERFLOOR CATALYTIC TRAP, EM-469-F FUEL
Test Code No.
Test Type
Run No.
Date (1981)
COS, mg/km
(CH3)2S, mg/km
(C2Hs)2S, mg/km
(013) 282, mg/km
3B2F35
C-FTP
1
9/23
34.
0.15
0
0
3B2F39
C-FTP
2
9/24
35.
8.3
0
0
3B2F35
H-FTP
1
9/23
24.
0.23
0
0
3B2F3S
H-FTP
2
9/24
19.
3.1
0
0
3B2H36
HFET
1
9/23
18.
1.0
0
0
3B2H40
HFET
2
9/24
15.
2.6
0
0
3B2N37
NYCC
1
9/23
164.
12.
0
0
3B2N41
NYCC
2
9/24
137.
43.
0
0
K-6
-------
APPENDIX L
FORMAL REPORTS
FOR
ANALYSIS OF N-NITROSAMiNES
OBTAINED ON
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
FUELS EM-329-F.AND EM-469-F
-------
IP Thermo
K Electron
CORPORATION
Analytical Services Laboratory
101 First Avenue Telex: 92-3323
Waltham. Massachusetts 02164 Cable: TEECORP
(617)890-8700
Decanter 9, 1981
D. Maritalvo
Southwest Research Institute
P.O. Box 28510
6220 Culebra Road
San Antonio, Texas 78284
Dear Mr. Montalvo:
In response to your recent inquiry regarding the analysis of
Thermosorb Air Samplers by TEA Analyzer, I have outlined the conditions
under which the analyses were performed. Should you desire further
information, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Wing CJ Yu
Manager, Analytical Services
WCY/sdg
Enclosure
L-2
-------
SAMPLE PREPARATION;
Thermosorbs were eluted with a solution of 25% methanol in
dichloromathans. 1.8ml of the eluant were collected and aliquots were
analysed by GC-TEA or HPLC-TEA, whichever is applicable.
A. SAMPLE ANALYSIS
Chromatograph:
OoLmn:
Column Tenperature:
Carrier:
Detector:
Attenuation:
Integrator:
Amount Injected:
Hewlett Packard 571QA Gas Chroratograph and
7671A Automatic Sampler
1/4" x 6' Glass 10% Carbowax + 0.5% KDH on
Chroiosorb WHP 800/100 mesh
130eC - 170°C at 4*C/min.. 2 minute hold
at 1708C
He @ 20 cc/min.
TEA" Model 543 Analyzer (Thermo Electron
Corporation, Analytical Instruments, Waltham,
MA 02254)
x 1
Spectra Physics SP 4000
4.5 ul
B. SAMPLE ANALYSIS
Chromatographs:
Column:
Solvent:
Flow Rate;
Chart Speed:
Detector:
Attenuatjcv:
Amount Injected:
High Performance Liquid Chromatograph
10 pro 4.6 x 250 mm Lichrosorb Si60
7% acetone, 93% iscoctane
2.0 ml/rain.
0.2 inch/min.
TEA" Model 502 Analyzer (Analytical
Instruments, Thermo Electron Corporation,
Waltham, MA 02254)
x 8
20 ul
L-3
-------
Thermo
Electron
CORPORATION
Analytical Services Laboratory
125 Second Avenue
Waltham. Massachusetts 02154
(617) 890-8700
Telex: 92-3473
Cable: TEECORP
FORMAL REPORT OF ANALYSIS
FOR
N-NfTROSO COMPOUNDS
Prepared for
Date:
Southwest Research Institute
P.O. Box 28510
6220 dulebra Road
San Antonio, TX 78284
Attn: Karl Springer
May 18, 1981
Report No,
Notebook Page: A_1020-57
Approved by:.
-t-fc
..
^_
Laboratory Supervisor / /
-------
SUMMARY OF RESULTS Thermosorbs
Customer Sample NDMA1 NDEA1 NDPA1 NDBA1 NPIP1 NPYR1 NMOR1
Number ng ng ng ng ng ng ng
17692 -2
17700
17701
.17703
1. N-nitroso compounds in nanograms per thermosorb cartridge.
2. N.D.: none detected.
Lower limit of detection: LLD 10 ng per cartridge for NDMA
10 ng per cartridge for NDEA, NDPA, NPIP, NPYR, NMOR
10 ng per cartridge for NDBA
3. Trace: less than 3 x LLD
.Date of Analysis: 4/29/81, 5/12/81
Method of Analysis: HPLC-TEA
Analyst: Pat Stebbins
Thermo
Analytical Services Laboratory
L-5
-------
ABBREVIATIONS:
NDMA - N-nitrosodimethylamirie
NDEA - N-nitrosodiethylamine
NDPA - N-nitrosodipropylamine
NDBA - N-nitroaodibutylamine
NPIP - N-nitrosopiperidine
NPYR - N-nitrosopyrrolidine
KMOR - N-nitrosomorpholine
NDE1A - N-ni.trosodiethanolami.ne
NDP1A - N-nitrosodipropanolamine
NDiPlA- N-nitrosodiisopropanoIamine
NNN - N-nitrosonornicotine
NDCHA - N-nitro8odicyclohexyl.ami.ne
NMA - N-nitroso-N-methylaniline
NDPhA - N-nitrosodiphenylamine
NPhBA - N-nitrosophenylbenzylamine
NMBA - N-nitrosomethylbenzylamine
NMDoA - N-nitrosomethyldodecylamine
NMAA - N-nitrosomethylalkylaraine
NDAA - N-nitrosodiamylamine
ppt - parts-per-thousand (wg/g or mg/ml)
ppm - parts-per-million (ug/g or ug/ml)
ppb - parts-per-billion (ng/g or ng/mi)
N.D. - None Detected
i Thermo
Electron
CORPORATION
Analytical Services Laboratory
L-6
-------
IP Thermo
K Electron
CORPORATION
Analytical Services Laboratory
125 Second Avenue Telex: 92-3473
Waltham. Massachusetts 02154 Cable- TEECORP
(617) 8903700
FORMAL REPORT OF ANALYSIS
FOR
N-NITROSO COMPOUNDS
Prepared for. Southwest Research Institute
P.O. Box 28510
6220 Culebra Road
San Antonia, Texas 78284
Attn: Karl Springer
Date: July 13, 1981
Report NOJ 5510-2849
Notebook Page: A1020-94
Approved by:.
-------
SUMMARY OF RESULTS Thermosorbs
Customer Sample ND11A1 NDEA1 NDPA1 OT-BA1 NPIP1 KPYR1 NMOR1
Number ng ng ng ng ng ng ng
17693
17694
1. N-nitroso compunds in nanograms per thermosorb cartridge.
2. N.D.: none detected.
Lower limit of detection: LID 10 ng per cartridge for NDMA
10 ng per cartridge for NDEA, NDPA, NPIP, NPYR, NMOR
10 ng per cartridge for NDBA
3. Trace: less than 3 x LLD
Date of Analysis: 7/10/81
Method of Analysis: HPLC - TEA
Analysits: Liuda Cantor
L-8
-------
Thermo
Electron
CORPORATION
Analytical Services Laboratory
125 Second Avenue
Waltham, Massachusetts 0?i54
(617)8903700
Tetex: 92-3473
Cable: TEECOR
FORMAL REPORT OF ANALYSIS
FOR
N-NITROSO COMPOUNDS
Prepared for South Research Institute
8500 Culebra
San Antonio, TX 78284
Date:
September 10, 1981
Report No.: 5510-3029
Notebook Page: A-1040-26
Approved by:.
7
L-9
-------
SUMMARY OF RESULTS Tharmosorbs
Customer Sample NDMA1 NDEA1 NDPA1 NDBA1 NPIP1 NPYR1 NMOR1
Number ng ng. ng ng ng ng ng
17695
17696
1. N-nitroso compounds in nanograms per thermosorb cartridge.
2. N.D.: none detected.
Lover limit of detection: ?.Trr> 5 ng per cartridge for NDMA
8 ng per cartridge for NDEA, NDPA, NPIP, NPYR, NMOR
10 ng per cartridge for NDBA
.3. Trace: less than 3 x T.T.T>
Date of Analysis: 9/1/81
Method of Analysis: GC-TEA
Analysts: Patricia Stebbins
Thermo
"" Anary«cal
-------
ABBREVIATIONS;
NDMA - N-nitrosodimethylamine
NDEA - N-nitrosodiethylamine
NDPA - N-nitrosodipropylamine
NDBA - N-nitrosodibutylamine
NPIP - N-nitrosopiperidine
NPYR - N-nitrosopyrrolidine
NMOR - N-nitrosomorpholine
NDE1A - N-nitrosodiethanolamine
NDPLA - N-nitrosodipropatvolami.no
NDiPlA- ' N-nitrosodiisopropanolamine
NNN - N-nitrosonornicocine
NDCHA - N-nitrosodicyclohexylamine
NMA - N-nitroso-N-methylaniline
NDPhA - N-nitrosodiphenylanine
NPhBA - N-nitrosophenylbenzylamine
NUBA - N-nitrosomethylbenzylamine
NMDoA - N nitro8O«ethyldode:cylamine
NMAA - N-aitrosomethylalkylamine
NDAA - N-nitrosodiasylamJne
ppt - parts-per-thousand (mg/g or mg/tal)
ppm - parts-per-million (ug/g or ug/ml)
ppb - parts-per-billion (ng/g or ng/ml)
N.D. - None Detected
mw Thermo
wz Bectron
CORPORATION
L-ll
Analytical Instruments
-------
Thermo
Electron
CORPORATION
Analytical Services Laboratory
125 Second Avenue
Waltham, Massachusetts 02154
(617) 890-8700
Tetex: 92-3473
Cable: TEECORP
FORMAL REPORT OF ANALYSIS
FOR
N-NfTROSO COMPOUNDS
Prepared for Southwest Research Institute
8500 Culebra
San Antonio, Texas 78284
Attn: D. Montalvo
Date:
November 11, 1981
Report No.:
Notebook Page:
5510-3191
A1040-53
Approved by:.
L-12
-------
SUMMARY OF RESULTS: Thermosorbs
Customer Sample
Number
17698
11824
NDMA1
ng
_2
_
NDEA1
ng
NDPA1
ng
_
NDBA1
ng
NPIP1
ng
_
NPYR1
ng
j^
NMOR1
ng
l_l
1. N-n±troso compounds In nanograns per thermosorb cartridge.
2. N.D.: None Detected
Lower Limit of Detection: LLD 40 ng per cartridge for NDMA
50 ng per cartridge for NDEA, NDPA
NPIP, NPYR, NMOR
80 ng per cartridge for NDBA
Date of Analysis: 11/9/91
Method of Analysis: HPLC-TEA
Analyst: Linda Cantor
Thermo
Analytical Services Laboratory
L-13
-------
ABBREVIATIONS;
NDMA - N-nitrosodimethylardne
NDEA - N-nitrosodiethylamine
NDPA - N-nitrosodipropylaninn
MDBA - N-nitrosodibutylamine
NPIP - N-nitrosopiperidine
NPYR - N-nitrosopyrrolidine
NMOR - N-nitrosomorphoLine
NDE1A - N-nitrosodiethanolamine
NDPIA - N-nitrosodipropanolamine
NDiPlA- N-nitrosodiisopropanolamine
NNN - N-nitrosonornicotine
NDCHA - N-nitrosodicyclohexylamine
NMA - N-nitroso-N-taethylaniline
NDPhA - N-nitrosodiphenylamine
NPhBA - N-nitrosophenylbenzylamine
NHBA - N-nitrosomethylbenzylamine
NMDoA - N-nitrosomethyldodecylamine
NMAA - N-nitrosomethylalkylamine
NDAA - N-nitrosodiamylamine
ppt - parts-per-Chousand (mg/g or tag/ml)
ppo - pcrts-per-million (ug/g or ug/ml)
ppb - parts-per-billion (ng/g or ng/ml)
N.D. - None Detected
< Thermo
Electron
CORPORATION
L-14
Analytical Services Laboratory
-------
APPENDIX M
VISIBLE SMOKE DATA
OF
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
-------
I
fo
n
a
o
-------
y
o
(0
0)
O
0)
(Q
Figure M-2. Smoke opacity and vehicle speed vs time for the first 505 seconds of a
cold-start FTP, Fiat, N.A. diesel, no aftertreatment, EM-469-F fuel, 3-23-81
-------
rl
O
* .
i
-------
Start
End
0 sec.-
505 sec.
Figure M-4. Smoke opacity and vehicle speed vs time for the first 505 seconds of a cold-
start FTP, Fiat, N.A. diesel with catalytic trap, EM-469-F fuel, 4/22/81
-------
Start
End
0 sec.-
sec.
Figure M-5. Smoke opacity and vehicle speed vs time for the first 505 seconds of a cold-
start FTP, 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesel, EM-329-F fuel, 5/28/81
-------
o
.c
I
W
0)
o
0)
ft
Start
End
0 s'ec.
505 sec.
Figure M-6. Smoke opacity and vehicle speed vs time for the first 505 seconds of a. cold-
start FTP, 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesel, EM-4G9-F fuel, 6/24/81
-------
f
CD
I
V)
-------
O
HJ
8-
Start
End
0 sec
505 sec
Figure M-8. Smoke opacity and vehicle speed vs time for the first 505 seconds of a cold-
start FTP, Fiat T.C. diesel, no aftertreatment, EM-469-F fuel, 7-16-81
-------
h-1
O
14
HI
ft
0)
r-t
*
0 sec
Figure M-9 . Smoke opacity and vehicle speed vs time for the first 505 seconds of a
cold-start FTP, Fiat T.C. diesel with catalytic trap,. EM-329-F fuel, 9-22-81
-------
f
>.
+j
d
(S
I
a
o
M
S,
01
ta
-o
-------
APPENDIX N
ELEMENTAL ANALYSES
OF
PARTICULATE MATTER
OBTAINED ON
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
-------
TABLE N-l. ELEMENTAL ANALYSES OF P ARTICULATE MATTER FROM
NATURALLY-ASPIRATED 'FIAT DIESEL, NO AFTERTREATMENT,
FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
Teat Type
Test Code
Fuel Code
Run No.
Date (1981)
Elements, ag/ka
Sodium
Sulfur
Vaeadium
Nickel
Mercury
Magnesium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Tin
Lead
Aluminum
Potassium
Manganese
Zinc
Antimony
Silicon
Calcium
Iron
Selenium
Sariua
Phosphorus
Titanium
Bromine
Platinum
Strontium c
Molybdenum0
Tungsten c
Arsenic c
Total Percent
of Particulate
Rate
Vehicle
Particulate
Rate, ng/tair*
4-bao FTP
1A329F
EM-329-F
5
1/30
-**
1.6s
-
-
0.04
0.01
-
-
-
-
0.03
0.01
-
0.16
-
0.09
0.17
0.34
-
0.02
0.10
0.01
-
-
.
.
-
-
1.7
120.
1A2F29
EH-469-P
2
2/18
0.02
0.81
-
-
0.04
0.01
0.04
-
0.01
-
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.17
0.01
0.06
0.13
0.22
-
0.01
0.09
0.01
0.03
-
_
.
-
-
1.5
116.
HT
1A329B
EM-329-F
5
1/30
0.31
-
0.01
0.01
o.oa
-
-
0.01
-
0.04
-
0.01
0.02
0.04
0.04
-
0.01
0.02
-
0.00
0.00
.
-
-
-
1.5
40.
ET
1A2H30
EH-469-F
2
2/18
0.02
0.48
-
-
0.01
0.01
-
-
-
-
-
0.01
-
0.07
-
0.02
O.O3
0.08
-
.0.01
o.os
-
0.08
-
-
-
-
-
1.3
67.
NYCC
1A328H
EM-329-F
5
1/30
0.21
1.87
-
'"
-
0.09
-
0.41
-
-
-
O.OS
-
0.22
0.33
0.04
0.21
0.35
0.57
-
0.09
0.25
-
-
-
-
-
-
2.1
228.
1A2N31
EM-469-F
2
2/18
-
1.47
-
-
-
0.09
-
0.18
-
-
.
-
-
-
0.29 '
-
0.16
0.17
0.36
-
0.03
0.22
-
0.36
-
-
-
-
-
1.6
207.
85 knh
1A329S
EM-329-F
5
1/30
-
0.2!
-
-
_
0.01
-
0.06
0.01
-
_
_
0.01
-
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.03
..-
-
0.02
-
0.09
-
-
-
-
-
1.7
30.
1A2S32
EH-469-F
2
2/18
0.01
0.11
<-.
-
.
0.01
-
0.04
0.01
-
.
_
0.01
0.02
0.02
-.
0.01
0.01
0.02
-
-
o.oi
-
o.os
-
-
-
-
-
1.7
21.
Abased on data from 47mm Fluoropore filter data
_0.00 nxj/tan
"elements studied, but not sought in this particular analysis
Note: Cobalt analyzed for, but not found.
N-2
-------
TABLE N-2. ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS OP PARTICULATE MATTER FROM
NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL WITH CATALYTIC TRAP,
FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
Test Type
T«it Cod*
Fuel Cod*
Run No.
Date (1981)
Element*, ogAa
Sodiua
Sulfur
Vanadium
Nickel
r»*mi trm
Mercury
Magaeeiua
Chlorine
Chromiua
Copper
Tin
Lead
Aluainua
Pota»iua
Manganese
Zinc
Antiaony
Silicon
Calcium
Iron
Selenium
Bariua
Phoephoru*
Titanium
Bromine
Platinum
Strontium
Molybdenum
Tungsten
Arsenic
Total Percent
of Particulate
Bate
vehicle
Particulate
Sate, ng/tan*
4-bag FTP
1B1F54
EM-329-F
3
4/9
_b
0.25
-
-
-
-
0.03
-
-
0.01
-
0.05
0.01
«_
0.04
-
3.11
0.07
0.26
*
0.01
0.06
0.01
-
-
-
-
-
-
3.4
27.
1B2F72
EM-469-F
3
4/20
-
0.23
-
-
-
-
0.03
0.01
-
-
-
-
0.04
0.01
-
0.05
-
0.11
0.11
0.26
-
0.01
0.01
0.01
-
-
-
-
-
3.1
23.
HFET
1B1H55
EM-329-F
3
4/9
-
1.72
-
-.
-
-
0.01
-
-
-
-
0.01
-
-
0.03
-
0.02
0.03
0.08
-
0.01
-
0.01
-
-
0.01
-
0.06
6.6
30.
1B2H73
EM-469-P
3
4/20
-
1.32
-
-
-
-
0.01
'
-
-
-
-
0.01
-
-
0.04
-
3.02
0.04
0.04
-
-
0.01
-
-
-
-
-
-
6.5
23.
HYCC
1B1N56
EM-329-F
3
4/9
-
0.70
-
-
-
-
0.08
-
-
-
-
-
0.15
-
-
0.10
-
0.35
0.27
0.39
-
0.06
-
0.04
-
-
-
-
-
"
4.1
64.
1B2N74
EM-469-F
3
4/20
-
0.70
-
-
0.02
-
0.08
-
-
-
-
-
0.12
-
-
0.11
-
0.31
0.39
1.07
-
0.06
-
0.04
-
-
-
-
-
"
5.5
53.
85 kph
1B1S57
EM-329-F
3
4/9
-
3.62
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.01
-
-
-
-
0.04
-
0.31
0.01
0.01
-
0.01
0.01
-
-
-
-
0.03
"
6.6
57.
1B2S75
EM-469-F
3
4/20
-
2.64
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
0.03
-
0.01
0.01
0.01
-
0.01
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
"
11.3
23.
Jbaaed on data from 47nm Fluoropore filter data
0.00 ng/tan
Notei Cobalt analyzed for, but not found.
N-3
-------
TABLE N-3. ELEMENTAL ANALYSES OF PARTICULATE MATTER FROM 1981
OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESEL, FUEL EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
Test Typ«
Test Coda
Fuel Code
Run Mo.
Date (1981)
Elements, tag/km
Sodiun
Sulfur
Vanadiua
Hi deal
Cadmium
Hercury
Magnesium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Tin
Lead
Aluminum
Potassium
Manganese
Zinc
Antimony
Silicon
Calcium
Iron
Saleniua
Barium
Phosphorus
Titanium
Bromine
Platinum
Strontium
Molybdenum
Tungsten
Arsenic
Total Percent
of Particulate
Data
Vehicle
Particulate
Pate, mg/lon*
4-bag FTP
2JUF01 I
EM-329-F
1
5/21
_b
0.78
0.01
-
-
-
0.01
0.01
0.01
-
-
-
0.01
-
0.01
0.03
-
0.01
0.04
0.16
-
-
c.os
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1.2
97.
EM-469-F
3
6/19
-
0.92
0.01
-
-
-
0.01
0.02
-
0.01
-
-
0.01
0.01
-
0.06
-
o.os
0.14
0.49
-
0.01
0.05
0.01
-
-
-
-
-
-
1.3
136.
HTET
2A1H02 1
EN-329-F
1
5/21
-
1.09
-
-
-
-
0.01
0.02
0.09
-
0.01
-
-
-
0.06
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.04
0.09
-
0.01
0.04
0.01
-
.
-
-
-
-
1.5
100.
2A2H27
EM-469-F
3
6/19
-
0.98
-
-
-
-
-
0.01
0.06
0.01
-
0.10
0.01
-
0.05
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.04
0.18
-
0.01
0.03
0.01
-
-
-
-
-
-
1.4
110.
NtCC
2A1N03
EH-329-F
1
5/21
-
1.79
0.09
-
-
-
0.04
0.03
0.39
-
-
-
-
-
0.22
-
-
0.05
0.1S
0.22
0.35
0.67
0.16
0.03
-
-
-
-
-
1.7
217.
2A3N28
EM-469-F
3
6/19
-
2.29
-
-
-
0.08
0.04
0.53
-
-
0.98
-
-
0.32
0.07
-
0.09
0.18
0.29
-
.
0.21
-
- 0.51
.
.
-
-
-
1.7
322.
as kph
11 '2A1S04 '
EM-329-F
1
5/21
-
0.79
-
-
-
-
-
0.02
-
0.01
-
-
-
-
-
0.01
-
-
0.01
0.01
- '
-
0.01
0.04
-
.
-
-
-
-
1.4
66.
"JAZSTg1"
EM-469-F
3
6/19
-
0.79
.
-
-
-
0.01
-
-
0.01
-
-
-
-
0.01
0.03
.
0.01
0.01
0.03
-
.
0.02
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1.3
72.
Abased on data froa 47na Fluoropore-filter data
0.00 ing/km
Note: Cobalt analyzed for, but not found.
N-4
-------
TABLE N-4. ELEMENTAL ANALYSES OF PARTICULATE MATTER FROM TURBOCHARGED
FIAT DIESEL WITHOUT AFTERTREATMENT, EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
Test Type
Test Code
Fuel Code
Run Mo.
Date (1981)
Elements* mg/ka
Sodium
Sulfur
v&n&diun
Nickel
Mercury
Magnesium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Tin
Lead
Aluminum
Potassium
Manganese
Zinc
Antimony
Silicon
Calcium
Iron
Selenium
Barium
Phosphorus
Titanium
Bromine
Platinum
Strontium
Molybdenum
Tungsten
Arsenic
Total Percent
of Particulata
Rate
Vehicle
Parti cnlate
Rate, ng/km*
4-bao FTP
3A1F01
EM-329-F
1
6/26
Jo
1.21
0.01
-
-
0.02
-
0.01
-
0.01
-
0.03
-
-
0.08
-
0.04
0.11
0.50
.
0.01
0.06
0.01
-
-
_
0.01
-
-
3.0
71.
3A2F20
EM-469-F
1
7/9
-
0.79
-
-
0.02
-
-
0.01
-
-
0.01
-
-
0.09
-
0.01
0.09
0.19
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2.1
58.
H7ET
3A1H02
EM-329-F
1
6/26
-
0.83
-
-
-
0.01
-
-
-
-
0.01
-
-
0.01
-
0.01
0.02
-
-
-
0.02
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2.2
41.
3A2U21
EM-469-F
1
7/9
-
O.S9
-
-
0.01
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
0.04
-
-
0.01
-
-
-
0.01
-
-
-
0.04
0.04
-
2.5
30.
NYCC
3A1N03
EM-329-F
1
6/26
-
1.44
-
-
0.07
-
-
-
-
- .
0.04
-
-
0.02
3A1N22
EM-469-F
1
7/9
-
0.94
-
r.
0.06
-
-
-
-
-
0.01
-
. -
85 kph
3A1S04
EM-329-F
1
6/26
-
.0.77
0.01
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.16 ! 0.01
i
0.09
-
0.28 { 0.19
0.40
_
-
0.11
0.01
-
-
~
0.30
0.04
.
-
0.09
"
-
-
-
-
-
i
2.4
118.
1.3
114.
-
-
0.01
0.01
-
-
0.01
-
-
-
-
-
-
2.6
31.
3 JUS 2 3
EM-469-F
1
7/9
-
0.56
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.02
-
0.01
-
-
-
0.01
-
-
-
-
-
-
"
2.0-
30.
rbased on data from 47ran Fluoropore filter data
0.00 mg/taa
Note: Cobalt analyzed for, but not found.
N-5
-------
TABLE N-5. ELEMENTAL ANALYSES OF PARTICULATE MATTER FROM TURBOCHARGED
FIAT DIESEL WITH CATALYTIC TRAP, FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
Test Type
Test Code
Fuel Cod*
Run No.
Date (1981)
Elements , mg/ka
Sodium
Sulfur
Vanadium
Nickel
Mercury
Magnesium
Chlorine
Chromium
Copper
Tin
lead
Aluminum
Potassium
Manganese
Zinc
Antimony
Silicon
Calcium
Iron
Selenium
Barium
Phosphorus
Titanium
Bromine
Platinum
Strontium
Molybdenum
Tungsten
Arsenic
Total Percent
of Particulate
Rate
Vehicle
Particulate
Rate, mg/Jcm*
4-bao FTP
3B1F01
EM-329-F
1
9/17
-
0.44
-
-
.
o.oi
0.01
0.01
-
-
-
0.26
-
-
0.09
-
-
0.07
0.41
-
-
0.04
-
-
_
_
-
-
-
2.6
51
3B2P39
EM-469-F
2
9/24
-
0.51
-
-
.
0.02
-
-
-
-
-
0.08
-
-
0.11
-
-
0.06
0.16
-
-
0.03
-
-
.
_
-
-
2.0
49
HFET
3B1H02
EM-329-F
1
9/17
-
0.37
-
-
-
-
0.01
0.03
-
-
-
0.01
-
0.04
0.03
-
-
0.03
-
0.01
-
-
-
-
-
-
1.8
30
3B2R40
EM-469-F
2
9/24
-
1.77
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.04
-
-
-
2.63
-
-
0.01
-
-
-
-
-
"
9.5
47
HYCC
3B1H03
EM-329-F
1
9/17
-
0.59
-
-
.
-
-
0.1-3
-
-
-
0.45
-
-
0.30
-
-
-
0.65
-
-
0.08
-
-
-
-
-
"
2.9
75
3B2N41
EM-469-F
2
9/24
-
0.74
-
-
_
-
-
0.37
-
-
-
0.12
-
0.19
0.14
0.02
-
-
0.26
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2.4
76
85 fcph
3B1S04
EM-329-F
1
9/17
-
1.01
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.05
-
-
-
0.01
-
-
0.01
-
*
-
0.05
0.11
"
3.9
32
3B2S42
EM-469-F
2
9/24
-
2.26
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.02
-
-
-
0.02
-
-
-
-
-
"
7.0
33
based on data from 47mm Fluoropore filter data
bo.00 ag/ka
Notes Cobalt analysed for, but not found.
N-6
-------
APPENDIX O
ORGANIC SOLUBLES BOILING RANGE
AND CHROMATOGRAMS
-------
TABLE O-l. GAS CHROMATOGRAPH ANALYSISa OF ORGANIC SOLUBLES IN PARTICULATE MATTER,
FIAT N.A. DIESEL, NO AFTERTREATMEtJT, FUELS EK-329-F AND EM-469-F
Distillation
Point
IBP
10% point
20* point
30% point
40% point
50% point
60% point
70% point
80% point
90% point
EP
Recovery, %
@ Temperature, °C
Temperature in C° by Cycle and Fuel,
4-bag FTP
EM-329-F
301
_..
4.2
64O
EM-469-F
322
440
17.5
S31
HFET
EH-329-F
338
423
489
640
29.9
640
EM-469-F
306
401
445
492
--
36.3
531
NYCC
EM-329-F
372
400
420
442
464
496
56.4
530
EM-469-F
301
372
388
401
413
425
437
449
463
477
492
120
493
85 kph
EM-329-F
316
411
464
29.0
530
EM-469-F
324
378
396
413
430
449
468
493
525
621
90.6
640
by modified ASTM 02887-73 simulated distillation
-------
TABLE O-2. GAS CHROMATOGRAPH ANALYSIS OF ORGANIC SOLUBLES IN FARTICULATE MATTER,
FIAT N.A. DIESRL WITH CATALYTIC TRAP, FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
Distillation
Point
IBP
10% point
20% point
30% point
40% point
50% point
60% point
70% point
80% point
90% point
EP
Recovery, %
@ Temperature, °C
Temperature in C* by Cycle and Fu<»l
'4-bag FTP
EM-329-F
340
389
412
435
464
508
557
589
75.6
603
EM-469-F
319
380
402
424
451
492
557
615
--
72.0
640
HFET
EM-329-F
361
426
470
530
582
47.0
603
EM-469-F
378
423
466
566
615
~
41.6
639
NYCCb
EM-329-F
^^
__
-
EM-469-F
^,m
__
85 t
EM-329-F
350
425
471
525
582
45.0
603
cph
EM-469-F
400
476
597
26.2
638
\>y modified ASTM D2887-73 simulated distillation
insufficient sample for analysis
-------
5 ftin II 0 I) 0 0 Tl 0 3 11 3 u if Dili i 0 0 u 0 Ifn II 'I 0 1 mi ifi ii
Figure O-l. "Altamont" crude oil chromatogram..
-------
ctccr c c t. c t c i" ; ; c c ( c (
Figure 0-2. Chromatogran of organic solubles from particulate matter, Fiat T.C. vehicle
without exhaust aftertreatment opeirated on 4-bag FTP with EM-329-F fuel.
-------
?
a\
Figure O-3. Chromatogram of organic solubles from particulate matter, Fiat T.C: vehicle
with catalytic trap operated on 4-bag FTP with EM-329-F fuel.
-------
I ) I 1 )
Figure O-4i Chromatogram of EMi-329-F fuel.
-------
APPENDIX P
FORMAL AMES BIOASSAY REPORTS
FIAT N.A., FIAT T.C., AND 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESELS
FUELS EM-329-F AND EM-469-F
-------
SOUTHWEST FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION
i I FO. BOX 28147 W. LOOP 410 AT MILITARY DR. SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 78284 TELEPHONE (5121 674-1410
April 10, 1981
Final Report
1A329
In Vitro Ames Salmonella/microsomal Mutagenicity Assay of Four
Samples Received from Southwest Research Institute and Generated
from a Naturally Aspirated Fiat w/o a Catalyst using EM-329-f Fuel
Submitted by:
Arnaldo J. Noyola, M.A.
Assistant Research Scientist
Southwest Foundation for Research and Education
P. 0. Box 28147
W. Loop 410 at Military Drive
San Antonio, Texas 78284
/>*
//
«/-
Nathan D. Greene, Ph.D.
Principal Investigator
Department of Behavioral and Environmental Sciences
p-2
-------
Introduction
Southwest Foundation for Research and Education examined four samples
for mutagenicity using the Ames Salmonella typhimurium bioassa.y. The
samples were identified as 4874-1 filters no. 24 and 25 with a weight of
0.709 g, 4874-2 filter no. 21 with a weight of 0.450 g, 4874-3 filter no.
22 with a weight of 0.0464 g, and 4874-4 filter no. 35 with a weight of
0.573 g. An aroclor 1254-stimulated, rat liver homogenate metabolic
activation system (S-9 mix) was included 1n sample 4874-1 filters no. 24
and 25 using tester strains TA 98, TA 1535, and TA 1538. In addition,
the same sample was tested in the absence of a metabolic activation system
using tester strains TA 98, TA 1535, TA 1537, and TA 1538. Samples no.
4874-2 filter no. 21, 4874-3 filter no. 22, and 4874-4 filter no. 35 were
tested using tester strain TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activation
system.
All samples were dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and tested
at seven levels of sample concentration consisting of 20, 60, 100, 200,
400, 600, and 1,000 yg/plate. Each sample concentration was tested in
triplicate plates with and without.a metabolic activation and on specific
tester strains as indicated in the above paragraph. A complete set of
positive and negative controls was incorporated into the bioassay to
illustrate that the system is working well within expected optimum ranges.
Finally, an identical repeat of the above samples and controls was con-
ducted as a standard procedure to compare and evaluate the data.
Results
In the initial bioassay, the results indicate that the negative and
positive controls are well within the optimum range established for our
laboratory. The known positive mutagens which we routinely.use on specific
tester strains with and without a metabolic activation system clearly
illustrate the ability, of the tester strains to .incorporate mutagens into
their genetic structure causing a significant increase in the number of
revertants over the negative controls (Table 1).
Sample 4874-1 filters 24 and 25 showed a negative mutagenic response
using tester strain TA 1535 when exposed to the seven sample concentrations
in the absence of an S-9 mix. TA 1537 minus S-9 mix shows an almost linear
mutagenic response progressively up to a sample concentration of 400 yg/
plate. TA 1538 minus S-9 mix illustrates a higher mutagenic response when
treated with the same sample concentration. TA 98 minus S-9 mix shows an
even higher mutagenic response with a slope of 0.79 which is four times
greater than the slope for TA 1537.
In the presence of a metabolic activation system, sample 4874-1
filters 24 and 25 shows a weak mutagenic response on tester strain TA 1535.
However, the same sample with S-9 mix at identical chemical concentrations
produced strong mutagenic responses on TA 1538 and TA 98 with slopes of
0.87 and 1.05, respectively.
P-3
-------
REPORT 1A329
TABLE 1. AMES BIOASSAY (INITIAL) OF NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL (NO CATALYST)
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-329-F BASE FUEL DURING FTP
Sample Identification
Media Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(filter blank)
Metabolic
Dose (pg)/
plate
Nuinbcr of Rcvcrtanta Per Plate
Activation
S-9
No
Yes
No
, TA 1535
1
25
11
24
2
25
22
23
3
24
18
19
Avg
25
17
22
1
7
11
TA 1537
2
11
15
3
7
15
Avg
8
14
1
15
15
24
TA 1538
2
a
16
24
3
6
11
26
Avg
10
14
25
1
25
30
41
TA
2
20
28
45
98
3
20
37
41
Avg
22
32
42
Positive Controls
NaN-,
9AA
2NF
2AA
Sample 1,
P20-24 & 25
Bevertants/tig extract"
Sample 1,
P20-24 & 25
Revertants/Ug extract*
0.5
50
5
3
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
No
No
No
YDS
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
293
268
20
16
25
15
24
21
33
277
292
20
24
30
27
27
23
25
285
319
24
19
26
18
24
18
27
285
293
21
20
27
20
25
21
28
148
13
13
17
37
94
146
IB')
146
12
14
23
56
76
152
190
132
7
13
26
40
78
127
161
142
11
13
22
44
83
142b
180b
1825
380
28
39
46
118
227
264
291
1824
382
26
43
60
100
237
287
290
1803
304
17
34
66
90
212
237
240
1817
355
24
39
57
103
225
263b
274b
1984
2652
36
56
93
142
351
475
542
1744
2687
38
59
86
128
332
412
501
1891
2695
34
63
88
146
329
423
472
1873
2678
36
59
89
139
337
437b
505b
0.00
0.19
0.53
0.79
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Yes
Yea
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
8
16
19
18
29
44
66
11
15
15
23
9
35
59
8
19
17
17
17
41
57
9
17
17
19
18
40
61
36
69
92
160
380
475
551
34
78
90
203
340
429
610
16
55
94
149
366
469
649
29
67
92
171
362
458b
603b
57
123
122
238
493
657
954
60
105
115
222
482
684
902
37
97
95
239
447
601
936
51
108
111
233
474
647
931b
0.05
0.87
l.OS
This value is the slope of the regression line based on various extract dose levels and does not identify response at a particular extract since
.the response is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
Not included in slope determination.
-------
Table 2 shows the results obtained from lha other three samples
tested using TA 98 in the absence of an S-9 mix. In the initial bioassay
sample 4874-2 filter 21 illustrates an almost linear mutagenic response
with a resulting slope of 0.77 revertants/wg extract. Sample 4874-3
filter 22 shows a slightly higher mutagenic response than the previous
sample. Finally, sample 4874-4 filter 35 shows the lesser mutagenic
response than the other two samples tested on TA 98.
Table 3 and Table 2 show the results of the complete identical
repeat of the four samples tested in the bioassay. The repeated positive
and negative controls almost conclusively duplicate the revertant numbers
specific for each tester strain as compared to the initial bioassay
described in Table 1. In the repeat study without S-9 mix, TA 1535 showed
a negative response to sample no. 4874-1 filters 24 and 25 which is in
agreement with the results obtained in the initial study. TA 1537 minus
S-9 mix shows a resulting slope of 0.15 which is similar to slope of 0.19
obtained earlier in the initial study. TA 1538 shows a lesser mutagenic
response to sample 4874-1 filters 24 and 25 in the repeat study as compared
to the initial assay; however, TA 98 in the repeat study shows an average
number of 347 revertants at a sample concentration of 400 ug/plate and in
the initial study under identical sample concentrations TA 98 showed an
average number of 337 revertants.
In the presence of a metabolic activation system the above sample
results compared favorably with the results obtained from the initial
bioassay. In the repeat study TA 1535 shows a slope of 0.04 which is in
agreement with a slope of 0.05 of the initial assay. TA 1538 illustrates
a slope of 0.83 as compared to a slope of 0.87 obtained in the initial
bioassay and finally, TA 98 shows a slope of 1.00 as compared to a slope
of 1.05 of the initial study.
Table 2 shows the results of the initial and repeat studies on sample
4874-2 filter 21, 4874-3 filter 22, and 4874-4 filler 35 using tester
strain TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activation system. The data 1n
Table 2 clearly illustrate the reproducibility of results. Sample 4874-2
filter 21 shows a slope of 0.77 in both the initial and the repeat study.
Sample 4874-3 filter 22 shows a slope of 0.86 and 0.90. The last sample,
4874-4 filter 35 shows a slope of 0.39 and a slope of 0.44 in the repeat
study.
P-5
-------
REPORT 1A329
TABLE 2. AMES BIOASSAY (INITIAL 6 REPEAT WITHOUT S-9) OF NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL
(NO CATALYST) EXHAUST PARTICULARS ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-329-F BASE FUEL
DURING HFET, NYCC, AND 85 KPH
TA98, Number of Revertanta Pnr Plate
Dose.(Mg)/nlato
Initial0
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Rovertants/pg extract*
Repeatd
20
. 60
100
200
400
600
1000
Revertants/ug extract*
Metabolic
Activation
S-9
.No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
HFET
, Sample 2,
1
28
45
77
175
321
468
681
32
44
70
167
330
483
781
2
33
58
67
168
289
D15
725
38
34
65
196
339
449
770
, P20-21
3
34
48
61
166
259
458
600
28
43
64
167
292
460
672
Avg
32
50
68
170
290
480
669b
0.77
33
40
66
177
320
464
741b
0.77
NYCC
Sample 3
1
29
66
68
194
345
538
709
20
52
C2
166
366
514
763
2
28
66
72
178
337
493
754
23
57
57
185
361
557
735
, P20-22
27
60
81
172
386
524
703
27
59
68
190
408
514
690
Avg
28
64
74
181
J56
510
722b
0.86
23
56
62
180
378
52B
729b
0.90
05 kph
Sample 4
1
21
38
36
67
166
248
437
21
26
45
70
194
290
481
2
18
42
57
87
161
254
412
12
31
41
04
155
273
408
, P20-35
3
20
51
45
73
141
252
391
22
24
42
89
168
23B
366
Avg
20
44
4k
76
156
251
413b
0.39
18
27
43
81
172
267
418b
0.44
This value is the. slope of the regression line based on various extract dose levels and does not identify
response at a particular extract since the response is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
bNot included in slope determination.
clnitial TA-98 media, solvent, and positive controls used'as per Table 1.
^Repeat TA-98 media, solvent, and positive controls used as per Table 3.
-------
REPORT 1A329
TABLE 3. AMES BIOAWWAY (REPEAT) OF NATRUALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL (NO CATALYST)
EXHAUST PARTICIPATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-329-F BASE FUEL DURING FTP
Dose pef'
Sample Identification Plate
TJ
-J
Media control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Positivo Controls
NaN3
9AA
2NF
2AA
Sample 1 ,
P20-24 6 25
Revertants/lig extract*
Sample If
P20-24 i. 25
0.5
50
5
3
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Metabolic
Activation,
S-9
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Voa
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Povertants/Ug extract*
TA 1535 TA 1537
1 2 3 Avg 1 2 3 Hvg
Number of Bevertanta Per Plate
TA 1538
TA 98
2 3 Avg 1 2 3 Avq
22
16
18
253
11
7
13
9 14
11 11
7 13
268 254 258
10
134
10
101 120
10
7
29
10
8
23
10
11
20
10
9
24
17
20
32
17
27
38
16
23
37
118
314 287 317 306
17
23
36
1358 1400 1404 13B7 1538 1621 1495 1551
938 862 1015 938 2189 2159 2145 2164
11
IS
12
18
13
14
15
12
13
9
22
21
30
42
9
17
14
14
13
16
15
12
a
11
13
20
32
43
11
11
15
14
12
16
11
10
12
12
12
23
33
59
11
14
14
15
13
15
14
0.00
11
11
11
16
21
32
43
7
14
16
34
78
92
173
10
10
18
27
57
75
132
12
12
16
30
65
79
13J
10
12
17
30
67
82b
148b
0.15
20
30
51
91
97
205
265
42
69
83
166
386
970
589
12
37
37
59
125
174
241
34
61
94
167
356
471
604
13
30
35
76
136
185
209
31
54
96
175
308
471
608
15
32
41
75
119
188b
230b
0.27
36
61
91
169
350
471b
600b
38
51
91
189
331
451
452
50
78
99
212
447
617
845
21
57
101
171
325
410
436
45
64
97
217
429
585
847
24
64
72
176
385
413
425
38
71
107
233
472
596
831
28
57
88
179
347
425b
438b
0.85
44
71
101
221
449
599
84 lb
0.04
0.83
1.00
This value is the slope of the regression line based on various extract dose levels and docs not identify response at a particular extract since
the response is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
bNot included in slope determination.
-------
SOUTHWEST FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION
-r P.O. BOX 28147 «. LOOP 410 AT MILITARY OR. SAN ANTONIO. TEXAS 78284 TELEPHONE (512) 674-1410
^vV
April 10, 1981
Final Report
1A469
In Vitro Ames Salmonella/microsomal Mutugenicity Assay of Four
Samples Received from Southwest Research Institute and Generated
from a Naturally aspirated Fiat w/o a Catalyst using EM-469-f Fuel
Submitted by:
Arnaldo J. Noyola, M.A.
Assistant Research Scientist
Southwest Foundation for Research and Education
P. 0. Box 28147
W. Loop 410 at Military Drive
San Antonio, Texas 78284
Approved by:
Nathan" D." Greene, Ph.D.
Principal Investigator
Department of Behavioral and Environmental Sciences
p-8
-------
Introduction
Southwest Foundation for Research and Education examined four samples
for mutagenicity using the Ames Salmonella typhimurium bioassay. The
samples were identified as 4874-5 filters no. 51 and 52 with a weight of
0.593595 g, 4874-6 filter no. 53 with a weight of 0.375945 g, 4874-7
filter no. 54 with a weight of 0.073181 g, and 4874-8 filter no. 55 with
a weight of 0.571060 g. A aroclor 1254-stimulated, rat liver homogenate
metabolic activation system was included in sample 4874-5 filters no. 51
and 52 using tester strains TA 98, TA 1535, and TA 1538. In addition,
sample 4874-5 filters no. 51 and 52 was tested in the absence of a metabolic
activation system using tester strains TA 98, TA 1535, TA 1537, and TA 1538.
Samples no. 4874-6 filter no. 53, 4874-7 filter no. 54, and 4874-8.fiHer
no. 55 were tested using tester strain TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic
activation system.
All samples were dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and tested
at seven levels of sample concentration consisting of 20, 60, 100, 200,
400, 600, and 1,000 yg/plate. Each sample concentration was tested in
triplicate plates with and without a metabolic activation and on specific
tester strains as indicated in the above paragraph. A complete set of
positive and negative controls was incorporated into the bioassay to
illustrate that the system is working well within optimum ranges. Finally,
an identical repeat of the above samples and controls was conducted as a
standard procedure to compare and evaluate the data.
Results
In the initial bioassay, the results indicate that..the negative and
positive controls are well within the optimum range established for our
laboratory. The known positive mutagens which we routinely use on specific
tester strains with and without a metabolic activation system clearly
illustrate the ability of the tester strains to incorporate mutagens into
their genetic structure causing a significant increase in the number of
revertants over the negative controls .(Table 1).
Sample 4874-5 filters 51 and 52 showed no mutagenicity on tester
strain 1535 when exposed to the seven chemical concentrations in the absence
of an S-9 mix. TA 1537 minus S-9 mix shows an almost linear increase in
the number of revertants up to a chemical concentration of 600 yg/plate.
At 1,000 yg/plate, toxicity is evident as the number of revertants begin
to decline. TA 1538 minus S-9 mix illustrates a slope of 0.54 revertants/yg
extract at chemical concentrations up to 400 yg/plate. At higher chemical
concentrations toxicity is observed. TA 98 minus S-9 mix 'illustrates a .
strong mutagenic response as evident in the slope of 1.39 revertants/yg
of extract.
In the presence of an activation system, TA 1535 shows a weak mutagenic
response over its negative control background. TA 1538 and TA 98 in the
presence of an S-9 mix show a strong mutagenic response as evident in their
slopes of 1.30 and 1.48, respectively.
p-9
-------
REPORT 1A4S9
TABIJ-; 1- AMES BIOASSAY (INITIAL) OF NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL (NO CATALYST)
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-469-F FUEL DURING FTP
Sample. Identification
Media Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Positive Controls
Naltj
9AA
2NF
2&A
Sample 5
P20-51 £ 52
1
° Hevortants/lig extract8
Sample 5
P.'p-Sl £ 52
Dose
-------
Table 2 shows the results obtained from the other three samples tested
using TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activation system. In the initial
bioassay, sample 4874-6 filter no. 53 shows the highest mutagenic response
of the three samples tested. At 600 yg/plate, there were an average of
746 revertants/plate with a given slope of 1.18 revertants/yg of extract.
Sample 4874-7 filter no. 54 shows a lesser mutagenic response than the
previous sample. Sample 4874-8 filter no. 55 shows an even lesser mutagenic
response than the previous two samples, consequently showing a reduction
in the slope of 0.61 revertancs/yg extract.
Table 3 and Table 2 show the results of the complete identical repeat
of the four samples tested in the bioassay. The repeated positive and
negative controls almost conclusively duplicate the reyertant numbers
specific for each tester strain as compared to the initial bioassay
described in Table 1. In the repeat study without S-9 mix, TA'1535 .showed
a negative response when exposed to sample no. 4874-5 filters no. 51 and
52 at seven different chemical levels. The same sample minus S-9 mix
using TA 1537 showed a slope of 0.27 which is almost identical to a slope
of 0.26 of the initial bioassay. The repeat study of the same sample
using TA 1538 showed an average of 280 revertants/plate at a chemical
concentration of 400 ng/plate which is similar to the results obtained
from the initial study of 229 revertants/plate'at the same chemical con-
centration. Finally, in the absence of the S-9 mix TA 98 shows the highest
level of mutagenicity when exposed to sample 4874-5 filters 51 and 52.
In the presence of a metabolic activation system the above sample
results compared favorably with the.results of the initial bioassay. TA
1535 shows a slope of 0.07 as compared to 0.07 of the initial study. TA
1538 illustrates a slope of 1.11 as compared to 1.30 of the first study
and finally, TA 98 shows a slope of 1.17 as compared to 1.48 of the initial
study.
Table 2 shows the results of the initial .and repeat bioassays on
samples 4874-6 filter no. 53, 4874-7 filter no. 54, and 4874-8 filter
no. 55 using tester strain TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activation
system. The repeat study confirms sample 4874-6 filter no. 53 as having
the highest-mutagenic response when compared to the other two samples;
Sample 4874-7 filter no. 54 shows a slope of 0.87 revertants/yg extract in
the repeat study which compares favorably with the slope of 0.85 for the
initial bioassay. Finally, the lowest mutagenic response is illicited by
sample 4874-8 filter no. 55 as evident in both the initial and repeat studies.
p-ll
-------
REPORT 1A469
TABLE 2. AMES BIOASSAY (INITIAL & REPEAT WITHOUT S-9) OF NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL
(NO CATALYST) EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-469-F FUEL
DURING HFET, NYCC, AND 85 KPH
TA98, Number of Revortanta Per Plate
Metabolic
I1PET
NYCC
Activation, Sample 6 , P20-
Dose, (u
-------
REPORT 1A469
TABLE 3. AMES BIQASSAY (REPEAT) OF NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL (NO CATALYST)
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-469-F FUEL DURING FTP
Sample Identification
Media Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Positive Controls
NaN3
9AA
2NF
2AA
Sample 5
P20-51 fi 52
Revertants/pg extracta
Sample 5
P20-51 & 52
Dose (pg)/
plate
0.5
50
5
3
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Metabolic
Activation
S-9
No
Yes
No
No
No
Nil
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yon
Number of Revertants
TO. 1335 TA 1537
1
27
19
'.6
300
353
33
34
25
23
25
27
23
27
19
17
27
49
79
69
2
32
20
35
266
368
26
28
15
24
30
25
26
12
15
21
30
34
69
82
3
30
25
26
267
395
25
14
26
32
23
23
22
19
17
22
24
46
68
70
Avg
30
21
30
278
372
28
25
22
26
26
25
26
0.00
19
17
20
27
43
72
80
1 2
10 9
10 15
802 839
18 20
28 29
27 29
61 55
131 159
166 156
149 159
3 Avg
9 9
8 11
758 800
17 18
27 28
32 29
58 58
136 142
161 161
107 138b
0.27
1
14
16
15
2149
1046
46
60
80
143
257
327
363
67
91
154
303
470
627
775
Per Plate
TA
2
13
18
18
2045
1046
31
48
76
132
309
315
308
48
76
153
291
451
590
708
1538
3
12
25
26
2031
1071
20
56
78
160
273
342
365
55
86
154
278
487
613
795
Avq
13
20
20
2075
1054
32
55
78
145
280
328b
34 5b
0.66
57
84
154
291
469
610b
786b
1
23
35
34
2200
2665
58
80
98
278
440
538
529
59
87
143
266
497
675
995
TA
2
26
41
40
2110
2825
64
84
110
268
457
539
562
50
84
120
279
472
698
951
98
3
17
34
35
1846
2790
46
78
115
249
470
543
555
56
71
135
252
494
627
942
AV2
22
37
36
2052
2760
56
81
108
265
456
540b
549b
1.10
55
81
133
266
488
66 7b
96 3b
Revertants/Mg extract3
0.07
1.11
1.17
*This value is the slope of the regression line based on various extract dosr levels and does not Identity response at a particular extract since
the response is not completely linear over tho entire concentration uoad.
Not included in slope determination.
-------
SOUTHWEST FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION
P.O. BOX 28147 W. LOOP 410 AT MILITARY DR. SAN ANTONIO. TEXAS 78284 TELEPHONE 15121 674-1410
July 20, 1981
Final Report
1B329
In Vitro Ames Salmonella/mlcrosomal Mutagenicity Assay of Four Samples Received
from Southwest Research Ir.acitute and Generated from a Naturally Aspirated Fiat
with Catalytic Trap using EM-329-F Fuel
Submitted by:
Arnaldo J. Noyola, M.A.
Assistant Research Scientist
Southwest Foundation for Research and Education
P. 0. Box 28147
W. Loop 410 at Military Drive
San Antonio, Texas 78284
Approved by:
r f "»"'-'/ rf*>~~r r r_ ^t , , ^
Nathan D. Greene, Ph.D.
Principal Investigator
Department of Behavioral and Environmental Sciences
P-14
-------
Introduction
Southwest Foundation for Research and Education examined four samples for
mutagenicity using the Ames Salmonella typhimurium bioassay. The samples were
received on June 1, 1981, and were identified as Cycle FTP sample 9(a) vial 418
with a weight of 0.168596 g, HFET sample 10 vial 420 with a weight of 0.037859 g,
NYCC sample 11 vial 421 with a weight of 0.025536 g, and 85 kph sample 12 vial
422 with a weight of 0.036737 g. A range-finding study was conducted on sample
9(a) utilizing tester strain TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activation
system (S-9 mix) to determine sample dosage on the initial and repeat bioassays.
The range finding study incorporated the following sample dosages in ug/plate:
1, 10, 100, 500, 10CO and 2000. In the initial and repeat bioassays, an aroclor
1254-stimulated rat liver homogenate metabolic activation system was included in
sample 9(a) using tester strains TA 98, TA 1535, and TA 1538. In addition,
the same sample was tested in the absence of a metabolic activation system using
tester strains TA 98, TA 1535, TA 1537, and TA 1538. Samples No. 10, 11, and 12
Were tested using tester strain TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activation
system.
All samples were dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) prior to testing.
The initial and repeat bioassays were tested at seven levels of sample concentra-
tion consisting of 20, 60, 100, 200, 400, 600, and 1,000 yg/plate. Each sample
concentration was tested in triplicate plates with and without an S-9 mix and on
specific tester strains as indicated in the above paragraph. A complete set of
positive and negative controls was incorporated into the bieassay to illustrate
that the system is working well within expected optimum ranges. Finally, an
identical repeat of the above samples and controls was conducted as a standard
procedure to compare and evaluate the data.
P-15
-------
Results
Results from the range-finding study (Table 1) indicated that the negative
and positive controls are well within the expected optimum range. Sample 9(a)
shows a positive mutagenic response to TA 98 in the absence of an S-9 mix. At
sample concentrations of 1, 10, 100, and 500 ug/plate, TA 98 illustrates an
almost linear mutagenic response with an average of 1,577 revertants at a sample
concentrations of 500 ug/plate. At higher concentrations of 1000 and 2000
ug/plate the linear response is broken as the number of revertants begins to
decline, indicating sample toxicity at high concentrations. Based on the results
of the range-finding study, it was determined that the sample concentrations to
be used in the initial and repeat bioassays would consist of 20, 60, 100, 200,
400, 600, and 1000 ug/plate. These sample concentrations compare favorably with
previous bioassays conducted on other samples received from the same project.
In the initial bioassay (Table 2), the results indicate that the negative
and positive controls are well within the optimum range established for our lab-
oratory. The known positive mutagens which we routinely use on specific tester
strains with and without an S-9 mix clearly illustrate the ability of the tester
strains to incorporate mutagens into their genetic structure causing a signifi-
cant increase in the number of revertants over th2 negative controls.
Sample 9(a) showed a negative mutagenic response using tester strain TA 1535
when exposed to the seven sample levels in the absence of an S-9 mix. However,
TA 1537 minus S-9 mix shows an almost linear mutagenic response up to a sample
level of 400 ug/plate with a resulting slope of 1.43 revertants per ug of sample
extract. TA 1538 minus S-9 mix shows a slightly higher mutagenic response with
P-16
-------
REPORT 1B329
TABLE 1. AMES BIOASSAY (RANGE-FINDING) OF NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL (WITH CATALYTIC TRAP)
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-329-F BASE FUEL DURING FTP
Sample Identification
Media Control
Madia Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Positive Controls
NaNj
9AA
2NF
2AA
Sample 9
^ Revertants/lJg extract*
J
Sample
Dose (pg)/
plate
0.5
50
5
3
1
10
100
500
1000
2000
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Metabolic
Activation,
S-9
No
. Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No'
No
No
No
' No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Number of Revertantn Per Plate
TA 1535
TA 1537
TA 1538
TA 98
2 3 Avg. 1 2 3 Avg.
21 21 21
26 20 23
2002 2047
22 16
40 47
339 290
1541 1613
2089 1990
1066 1745b
2025
19
44
315
1577
2044°
1806&
3.13
Revertants/yg extract
a
This value is the slope of the regression line based on various extract dose levels and. does not identify response at a particular extract since
bthe response is not conpletely linear over the entire concentration used.
Not included in slope determination.
-------
REPORT IB329
TABLE 2. AMES BIQASSAY (INITIAL) OF NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL (WITH CATALYTIC TRAP)
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-329-F BASE FUEL DURING FTP
Sample Identification
Media Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Positive Controls
NaN3
9AA
2NF
2AA
Sample 9
a
JjJ Revertants/ug extract8
Sample 9
Dose (P9>/
plate
O.S
50
5
3
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Metabolic
Activation,
S-9
No
Yos
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Number of (tovertantf Per Plate
TA 1533
i
14
9
21
2
IS
14
18
-i^
19
10
13
Avg.
16
11
17
I
IS
13
TA 1537
2
12
9
3
11
10
Ava
13
11
1
12
18
16
TA 1538 tX
2
a
25
IS
3
14
19
19
Ava
11
21
17
1
39
29
19
Z
37
27
32
93
3
20
37
28
Avg
32
31
26
O.S
50
5
3
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
330
549
26
31
19
24
31
29
20
347
508
22
20
22
30
30
32
8
301
527
25
19
17
27
33
32
10
326
528
24
26
19
27
31
31
13
703
30
76
16O
310
584
594
333
516
36
79
130
286
612
607
385
449
31
97
139
315
515
641
399
556
32
84
143
304
570
614b
372b
2166
253
50
133
234
394
580
487
384
2113
275
49
160
240
381
672
484
391
2002
253
67
134
262
428
613
532
379
2094
260
55
142
245
401
622b
501b
385b
2186
2485
118
227
387
780
1295
1601
1924
2237
2587
96
275
315
793
1421
1983
1943
2255
2723
90
263
350
863
1437
1534
2047
2226
2598
101
255
351
812
1384
1706b
1971b
1.43
1.91
3.42
22
25
18
44
44
57
42
10
24
25
33
53
58
41
14
27
25
43
42
49
43
Revertants/pg extract9
15
25
23
40
46
55
42
0.03
61
130
193
461
732
1146
9S4
53
144
196
421
862
1133
1020
63
168
192
367
813
900
807
59
147
194
416
802
1060b
964b
77
157
221
599
1354
1756
2282
73
173
250
575
1196
1677
2225
63
161
241
545
1227
1666
2258
71
164
237
573
1259
1700b
2255b
1.96
3.18
This value is the slope of the regression line based on various dose levels and does not identify response at a particular extract dose since
the response 1- not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
Not included in slope determination.
-------
an average of 401 revertants at a sample level of 200 ug/plate and a resulting
slope of 1.91 revertants/pg of sample extract. TA 98 minus S-9 mix shows an even
higher mutagenic response with a slope of 3.42.
In the presence of a metabolic activation system, sample 9(a) shows a weak
mutagenic response on tester strain TA 1535. However, the same sample with S-9
mix at identical chemical concentrations produced strong mutagenic responses on
TA 1538 and TA 98 with slopes of 1.96 and 3.18, respectively.
Table 3 shows the results obtained from the other three samples tested using
TA 98 in the absence of an S-9 mix. In the initial bioassay, sample No. 10-HFET
illustrated a strong mutagenic response at the lowest level of 20 ug/plate with a
resulting average of 469 revertants present per plate. At 60 ug/plate, there was
an average of 1,173 revertants present per plate. At 100 ug/plate there was an
average of 1,729 revertants present per plate. The resulting slope was 15.75
revertants present per wg of sample, which illustrates a strong mutagenic
response. Sample 11-NYCC shows a resulting slope of 5.59 and sample 12-85 kph
shows a resulting slope of 12.64 revertants/ug of sample extract.
Table 4 and Table 3 show the results of the complete identical repeat of the
four samples tested in the bioassay. The repeated positive and negative controls
almost conclusively duplicate the revertant numbers specific for each tester
strain as compared to the initial bioassay described in Table 2.
In the repeat study minus S-9 mix, TA 1535 showed a negative response to
sample 9a which parallels the results obtained in the initial study. TA 1537
minus S-9 mix shows a resulting slope of 1.49 which is similar to the slope of
P-19
-------
REPORT IB329
TABLE; 3. AMES BIOASSAY (INITIAL AND REPEAT WITHOUT s-9) OF NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL
(WITH CATALYTIC TRAP) EXHAUST PARTICIPATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES WITH EM-329-F BASE FUEL
DURING HFET, NYCC, AND 85 KPH
TA98, Number of Rovertantg Per Plate
Dose, (Ug)/plate
Initial0
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Revortants/lig extract*
NJ
O
Revertante/yg extract*
Metabolic
Activation,
S-9
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
' No
No
No
HFET
Sample 10
1
482
1198
1633
2315
2588
2685
2839
323
988
1253
2049
2516
2529
2704
2
481
1190
1759
2306
2746
2B51
2889
398
978
1372
2093
2464
2412
2751
3
445
1132
1796
2320
2891
2821
2826
385
953
1356
2172
2590
2617
2734
Ayg
469
1173
1729
2314b
2742b
2786b
2851b
15.75
370
973
1327
2105b
2523b
2519b
2730b
11.96
1 _
142
496
618
1131
1608
1724
1967
122
318
489
916
1227
1304
1716
NYCC
85 kph
Samnle 11 RAtnnl
j
154
471
627
1010
1809
1785
207?
127
305
495
927
1201
1320
1679
3
184
427
576
1152
1683
1751
2224
126
340
468
977
1321
1443
1810
Avg
160
465
607
1098b
17()0b
1753b
2088b
5.59
125
321
484
940b
1250b
1358b
1735b
4.49
1
525
1131
1460
2217
2707
2918
2817
432
917
1250
1938
2436
2459
2583
2
498
1061
1543
2313
2824
2748
2850
459
1061
1236
2135
2543
2657
2603
fi 12
3 Avg
537 520
1107 HOP
1591 1531
2305 2245b
2752 2761b
2828 2831b
2910 2859b
12.64
455 449
900 959
1392 1293
2034 2036b
2502 2494b
2618 2578b
2408 2531b
10.55
This value is the slope of the regression line, based on various extract does levels and does not identify resnnnse
at a particular extract dose since tne responue is nut completely 'linear over tno entire concentration used.
cNot included in the slope determination.
^Initial TA-98 eedia, solvent, and positive controls used as per Table 2.
Repeat TA-98 media, solvent, and positive controls used as per Table 4.
-------
REPORT 1B329
TABLE 4. AMES BIOASSAY (REPEAT) OF NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL (WITH CATALYTIC TRAP)
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-329-F BASE FUEL DURING FTP
Sample Identification
Media Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(Filter BluiuO
Positive Controls
NaNj
9AA
2NF
2AA
Sample 9
Dose (|jg)/
platu
Notabolio
Number of
Activation, . , T» 1S«
S-9 1
No
Yea
No
28
17
18
2
20
19
22
3
21
16
23
Avg
23
17
21
1
10
6
TA 1
2
13
12
«m
3
10
19
Revertanta Por Plate
Av£
11
12
1
10
17
17
T* H
2
11
16
19
«nn
3
7
10
10
Avg
10
14
15
1
26
27
20
Ta
2
27
39
25
i OH
3
22
41
32
Avg
25
36
26
to Revortants/ug extract*
Sample 9
Dose (|Jg)/
platu
0.5
SO
s
3
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Notabolio
Activation,
S-9
No
Yea
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
378
522
407 383 389
492 454
489
17
33
26
35
26
19
19
16
13
18
32
41
68
43
27
34
19
23
37
18
18
10
14
20
34
45
61
47
27
25
27
22
27
18
15
17
21
18
30
48
61
41
24
31
24
27
30
18
17
0.00
14
16
19
32
45
63
44
615 651 673
646
2419 2305 2153 2319
339 467 462 423
2290 2237 2487 2338
2178 24U8 2265 2284
32
02
36
86
47
43
65
62
85
(19
157 160 164 163
3'JO 357 320 356
5U4 588 597 590
619 661 714 665b
514 521 539 525b
1.49
71
U3
216
494
669
370
417
54
178
255
548
746
160
237
482
687
355
407
67
167
229
549
824
162
225
519
644
374
3113
72
208
257
501
770
152
226
49B
667b
366b
402b
2.48
64
184
247
533
780
2(>8
368
989
1538
1813
2072
85
186
265
633
1180
222
422
1015
1594
1755
2002
84
161
284
590
1110
275
560
1041
1564
1B07
2055
70
152
273
576
1108
255
450
1015
1565
1792b
2043b
3.98
80
166
274
600
1133
1060 1041 994 !O32b 1586 1576 1702 1621b
981 1001 944 975b 2068 1810 1903 1927b
Revertants/yg extract*
0.04
1.88
2.82
This value is thn slope of the regression line based on various dose levels and does not identify response at a particular extract dose since
the response is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
Not included in slope determination.
-------
1.43 obtained earlier in the initial bioassay. TA 1538 and TA 98 showed a
slightly higher mutagenic response in the repeat assay as compared to the initial
study with resulting slopes of 2.48 and 3.98, respectively.
In the presence of a metabolic activation system, the above sample results
compared favorably with the results obtained from the initial bioassay. In the
repeat study TA 1535 shows a slope of 0.04 which is in agreement with the slope
of 0.03 obtained in the initial bioassay. TA 1538 shows a slope of 1.88 as com-
pared to the slope of 1.96 obtained in the initial study. TA 98 illustrates a
slope of 2.82 as compared to the slope of 3.18 obtained in the initial study.
Table 3 shows the results obtained from the initial and repeat study on
sample 10-HFET, sample 11-NYCC and sample 12-85 kph. Both initial and repeat
studies compare favorably. Sample 10-HFET shows a slope of 15.75 on the first
study followed by a slope of 11.96 on the repeat bioassay. Sample 11-NYCC illus-
trates a slope of 5.59 on the initial study as compared to 4.49 of the repeat
study. Finally, sample 12-85 kph shows a slope of 12.64 on the first bioassay as
compared to 10.55 of the repeat study. In summary, Table 3 illustrates the
strong mutagenic responses of the above three samples in the absence of an S-9
mix.
P-22
-------
SOUTHWEST FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION
f'°- 80X M147 * L°°P «'0 AT MILITARY DR. SAN ANTONIO. TEXAS 78284 TELEPHONE 1512) 674-1410
July 20, 1981
Final Report
1B469
In Vitro Ames Salmonel1a/m1crosomal Mutagenicity Assay of Four Samples Received
from Southwest Research Institute and Generated from a Naturally Aspirated Fiat
NA/Catalytic Trap using Fuel EM-469-F
Submitted by:
Arnaldo J. Noyola, M.A.
Assistant Research Scientist
Southwest Foundation for Research and Education
P. 0. Box 28147
W. Loop 410 at Military Drive
San Antonio, Texas 78284
Approved by:
' ' ' -^'-* " -
Nathan D. Greene, Ph.D.
Principal Investigator
Department of Behavioral and Environmental Sciences
P-23
-------
Introduction
Southwest Foundation for Research and Education examined four samples for
mutagenicity using the Ames Salmonella typhimurium bioassay. The samples were
received on June 11, 1981, and were identified as sample 13 vial 453 with a
weight of 0.141085 g, sample 14 vial 392 with a weight of 0.033589 g, sample 15
vial 454 with a weight of 0.033431 g, and sample 16 vial 407 with a weight of
0.033096 g. An aroclor 1254-stimulated rat liver homogenate metabolic activation
system (S-9 mix) was included in sample 13 vial 453 using tester strains TA 98,
TA 1535, and TA 1538. In addition, sample 13 vial 453 was tested in the absence
of an S-9 mix using tester strains TA 98, TA 1535, TA 1537, and TA 1538. Samples
No. 14 vial 392, 15 vial 454, and 16 vial 407 were tested using tester strain TA
98 in the absence of a metabolic activation system.
A range-finding study was not conducted on the above samples because a
previous bioassay had been conducted on the same automotive configuration using
fuel EM-329-F- All samples were dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and
tested at seven levels of sample concentration consisting of 20, 60, 100, 200,
400, 600, and 1000 pg/plate. Each sample concentration was tested in triplicate
plates with and without an S-9 mix and on specific tester strains as indicated in
the above paragraph. A complete set of positive and negative controls was
incorporated into the bioassay to illustrate that the system is working well
within optimum ranges. Finally, an identical repeat of the above samples and
controls was conducted as a standard procedure to compare and evaluate the data.
P-24
-------
Results
In the initial bioassay, "the results indicate that the negative and positive
controls are well within the optimum range established for our laboratory. The
known positive mutagens which we routinely use on specific tester strains with
and without an S-9 mix clearly illustrate the ability of the tester strains to
incorporate mutagens into their genetic structure causing a significant increase
in the number of revertants over the negative controls (Table 1)*
Sample No. 13 vial 453 showed a negative mutagenic response on tester strain
TA 1535 when exposed to the seven chemical levels in the absence of an S-9 mix.
At the higher chemical concentration of 1000 yg/plate, toxicity was prevalent as
the bacterial lawn was inhibited. TA 1537 minus S-9 mix.illustrated a positive
mutagenic response showing an almost linear response up to a chemical concentra-
tion of 400 ug/plate with a resulting slope of 2.04 revertants per ug of sample
extract. TA 1538 minus S-9 mix showed a slightly higher mutagenic response than
TA 1537. At 400 ug/plate, there was an average of 917 revertants per plate. The
resulting slope was 2.32 revertants/ug of sample extract. In the absence of S-9
mix, TA 98 illustrated the highest mutagenic response on the above sample. At
200 ug/plate there was an average of 913 revertants per plate with a resulting
slope at 4.50 revertants/wg of sample extract.
In the presence of an activation system, the same sample Illustrated .a
negative mutagenic response on tester strain TA 1535. However, mutagenfcity was
observed in tester strains TA 1538 and TA 98. At 200 ug/plate, TA 1538 responded
with an average of 494 revertants/plate with a resulting slope of 2.39. TA 98
shows the highest mutagenic response to.the sample with an average of 1,442
P-25 '
-------
REPORT 1B469
TABLE 1. AMES BIOASSAY (INITIAL) OF NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL (WITH CATALYTIC TRAP)
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-469-F FUEL DURING FTP
Positive Controls
NaN3
9AA
2NP
Sample
Revertanta/pg extract3
Sample 13
0.5
50
5
3
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Metabolic
Activation,
S-9
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
1
23
10
29
406
353
18
26
29
24
22
15
TA
2
29
19
25
336
435
26
22
19
28
26
17
1535
3
23
11
39
353
365
21
36
26
27
22
16
Avg
25
13
31
365
384
22
28
25
26
23
16
Toxictty
22
13
34
41
87
56
16
17
20
21
48
60
53
21
12
27
26
34
64
41
17
0.00
17
20
27
41
70
50
18
1
12
12
490
27
74
165
471.
749
873
438
Number of Rovortanta
TA
2
7
9
541
44
66
187
448
773
774
536
1537
3
,,
11
522
23
91
156
447
812
864
581
Avg
9
11
518
31
77
169
455
778
837b
518b
2.04
1
10
16
11
1444
600
48
134
287
623
917
745
424
75
152
312
460
837
1198
1080
Per Plata
TA
2
10
11
13
1654
948
43
166
293
6O3
979
669
412
66
151
301
492
898
1139
945
1530
3
15
16
10
1745
56S
60
134
228
592
855
755
476
62
170
279
529
864
1215
952
TA 90
Avg
12
14
11
1631
705
50
145
269
606
917
723b
437b
2.32
67
158
297
494
866b
1184°
992b
1
24
29
25
1838
2552
02
344
501
884
1578
1941
2148
81
186
287
745
1489
1992
2553
2
29
39
29
1825
2447
89
315
557
94O
1591
lana
1998
56
155
309
732
1430
2017
2492
3 Avj
21 25
37 35
20 25
1822 1828
2419 2473
93 9O
305 321
562 540
911 913
1523 1564b
1865 1871b
2164 2103b
4.50
73 70
157 166
315 304
702 726
1407 1442
1843 1967b
2461 2502b
Revertants/ug extract*
0.00
2.39
3.70
"This value is the slope of the regression line based on various dose levels and does not Identify response at a particular extract dose since
the response is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
Not included in slope determination.
-------
revertants per plate at a sample concentration of 400 ug/plate. The resulting
slope was 3.70 revertants per wg of sample extract.
Table 2 shows the results obtained from the other three samples tested using
TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activation system. In the initial bioassay,
sample 14 vial 392 illustrated a strong mutagnnic response in the absence of an
S-9 mix. At 200 yg/plate TA 98 showed an average of 2,319 revertants per plate
with a resulting slope of 10.63 revertants/ug of sample extract. Sample 15 vial
454 illustrated a slope of 3.88 revertants per ug of sample extract with an
average of 838 revertants at a sample concentration of 200 ug/plate. The last
sample in the initial bioassay illustrated a strong mutagenic response. Sample
16 vial 407 in the absence of S-9 mix showed an average of 2,315 revertants at a
sample concentration of 200 ug/plate with a resulting slope of 10.36 revertants/
ug of sample extract.
Table 3 and Table 2 show the results of the complete identical repeat of the
four samples tested in the bioassay. The repeated positive and negative controls
almost duplicate the revertant numbers specific for each tester strain as
compared to the initial bioassay described in Table 1. The spontaneous mutation
rate for TA 98 in the repeat bioassay was.higher than the initial study; however,
the positive controls illustrate the ability of TA 98 to revert upon exposure to
a known mutagen. In the repeat study minus an S-9 mix, TA 1535 showed a negative
response when exposed to sample No. 13 vial 453. At the highest sample concen-
tration of 1,000 ug/plate, toxicity was observed in the repeat study as it was in
the initial bioassay. TA 1537 minus S-9 showed a positive mutagenic response
with a resulting slope of 1.67 in the repeat study as compared to 2.04 in the
initial bioassay. The same sample minus S-9 mix using TA 1538 showed a slope of
P-27
-------
REPORT 18469
TABLE 2. AMES BIOASSAY (INITIAL AND REPEAT WITHOUT S-9) OF NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL
(WITH CATALYTIC TRAP) EXHAUST PARTICULAR ORGANIC SOLUBLES WITH EH-469-F FUEL
DURING HFET, NYCC, AND 85 KPH
TH98, Huiriaur of Rovcrtants Per Plata
13
NJ
CO
Dose, yq/ Plata
Initial0
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Revertants/Mg extract'
Repeat
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Revertants/pg extract*
Metabolic
Activation,
S-9
No
Ho
No
No
No
No
Ho
No .
Ho
Ho
No
No
No
No
HFET
Sample 14
. 1
360
912
1419
2418
2993
3023
2023
3
395
875
1488
2242
2067
3060
2827
3
402
861
1387
2296
2853
3038
2983
Avq
394
083
1431
2319
2904
3040
2878
_1_
122
302
500
885
1473
1673
1902
NYCC
Sample 15
3
117
313
483
815
1371
1835
1684
3
126
328
497
814
1521
1712
2059
Ava
122
341
493
B3B
1455°
1740^
1882b
JL_
361
1030
1443
2354
2655
2983
2930
85
kph
Samuln 16
~
369
1044
1407
2140
2694
3070
2943
3
402
1041
1361
2451
2852
2906
2973
Avg
377
1038
1404
2315
2734b
2986
2949°
10.63
416 368 405 396
943 865 899 S02
1496 143S 1392 . 1441
2310 2275 2)18 2301
97
416
471
719
72
450
475
771
73
418
491
771
2939 2890 2')60 2930 1473 1530 1443
30B7 3025 2'J83 3032?' 1721 1679 1733
3044 3063 3062 3056 1709 1809 1912 1810
3.88 10.36
81 -398 427 439 421
928 1057 1073 1003 1044
479 1290 1270 1548 1369
754^. 2036 1913 1814 1921
2512 2445 2522 2493^
2848 2888 2836 2857*'
3061 2999 2978 3013
10.48
3.38 7.85
aThia value is the slope of tha regression line based jon various extract does levels and does not Identify response
at a particular extract dose since the response is not completely linear over tne entire concentration used.
Not Included in the slope determination.
^Initial .TA-98 media, solvent, and positive controls used as pet Table 1 .
Repeat TA-98 media, solvent, and positive controls used as per Table 3.
-------
REPORT IB469
TABLE 3. AMES BIOASSAY (REPEAT) OF NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL (WITH CATALYTIC TRAP)
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-469-F FUEL DURING FTP
Sample Identification
Media Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Positive Controls
NoN3
9AA
2NF
2AA
Sample 13
Doso, My/
Plato
0.5
50
5
3
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Hatabollo
Number of
Activation,
S-9
No
Yea
No
No
No
No
Yea
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
1
20
11
24
385
467
17
17
22
25
21
22
TA 1535
a
27
12
21
402
349
29
25
24
27
25
21
3
33
10
19
402
371
30
31
15
26
11
19
Avg
2V
11
21
396
396
2r>
2
-------
2.04 in the repeat study which is almost identical to the slope of 2.32 of the
initial bioassay. In the repeat study, TA 98 elicited a strong mutagenic res-
ponse to sample 13 vial 453 in the absence of an S-9 mix. A resulting slope of
5.93 revertants/yg of sample extract was obtained in the repeat study using TA 98
as compared to a slope of 4.50 in the initial bioassay.
In the presence of a metabolic activation system, the above sample results
compared favorably with the results of the initial bioassay. TA 1535 illustrated
an identical negative response to sample 13 vial 453 in the repeat study as com-
pared to initial bioassay. TA 1538 in the presence of an S-9 mix showed a strong
mutagenic response to sample 13 vial 453 as was observed earlier in the initial
bioassay. In addition, TA 98 illustrated a strong mutagenic response to sample
13 vial 453 in the presence of an S-9 mix. The resulting slope was 4.26 in the
repeat study as compared to 3.70 in the initial bioassay.
Table 2 shows the results of the initial and repeat bioassays on samples .No.
14 vial 392, 15 vial 454, and 16 vial 407 using tester strain TA 98 in the
absence of a metabolic activation system. The repeat study illustrates that
sample 14 vial 392 has the highest mutagenic response when compared to the other
two samples. Sample 15 vial 454 shows a slope of 3.38 in the repeat study which
compares favorably with the slope of 3.88 obtained in the inital bioassay.
Finally, sample 16 vial 407 shows a strong mutagenic response with a resulting
slope of 7.85 as compared to a slope of 10.36 obtained in the initial bioassay.
P-30
-------
SOUTHWEST FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION
P.O. BOX 28147 W. LOOP 410 AT MILITARY DR. SAN ANTONIO. TEXAS 78284 TELEPHONE 16121 674-1410
October 8, 1981
Final Report
2A329
In Vitro Ames Salmonella Mutagenicity Assay of Four Samples Received from
Southwest Research Institute and Generated from an Oldsmobile Cutlass Diesel
using EM-329-F Fuel
Submitted by:
Arna/ldo d. toyola/M/A.
Assistant Research Scientist
Milton V. Marshall, Ph.D.
Associate Foundation Scientist
P-31
-------
Introduction
Southwest Foundation for Research and Education Genetic Toxicology Labora-
tory examined four samples for mutagenicity using the Ames Salmonella typhlmurlum
bioassay. The samples were received on June 25, 1981, and were identified as
sample 17 (vial 481) with a weight of 0.150515 g, sample 18 (vial 415) with a
weight of 0.082663 g, sample 19 (vial 416) with a weight of 0.024751 g, and
sample 20 (vial 417) with a weight of 0.117650 g. An aroclor 1254-stimulated rat
liver homogenate metabolic activation system (S9 mix) was included with sample 17
(vial 481) using tester strains TA 98, TA 1535, and TA 1538. In addition, sample
17 (vial 481) was tested in the absence of an S9 mix using tester strains TA98;
TA 1535, TA 1537, and TA 1538. Samples No. 18 (vial 415), 19 (vial 416), and 20
(vial 417) were tested using tester strain TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic
activation system.
All samples were dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and tested at seven
levels of sample concentration consisting of 20, 60, 100, 200, 400, 600, and
1,000 pg/plate. Each sample concentration was tested in triplicate plates with
and without an S9 mix and on specific tester strains as indicated in the above
paragraph. A complete set of positive and negative controls was incorporated
Into the bioassay to illustrate that the system is working well within expected
optimum ranges, Finally, duplicate bioassay of the above samples and controls
was conducted as a standard procedure to compare and evaluate the data.
P-32
-------
Results
In the initial bioassay, the results indicate that the negative and positive
controls are well within the optimum range established for our laboratory. The
known positive mutagens which we routinely use on specific tester strains with
and without a metabolic activation system clearly illustrate the ability of the
tester strains to incorporate mutagens Into their genetic structure causing a
significant increase in the number of revertants ov.»r the negative controls
(Table 1).
Sample 17 (vial 481) showed a negative mutagenic response using tester
strain TA 1535 when exposed to the seven sample concentrations in the absence of
an S9 mix. TA 1537 minus S9 mix shows an almost linear mutagenic response
progressively up to a sample level of 200 ug/plate. The resulting slope is of
0.81 revertants/wg. TA 1538 minus S9 mix illustrates a higher mutagenic response
when treated with the same sample concentration. The res.ulting slope is 1.55
revertants/yg. TA 98 minus S9 mix shows an even greater mutagenic response with
a slope of 3.3 revertants/ug which 1s four times greater than the slope for TA
1537.
In the presence of a metabolic activation system, sample 17 (vial 481) shows
a weak mutagenic response on tester strain TA 1535. However, the same sample
with S9 mix at identical chemical concentrations produced mutagenic responses in
TA 1538 and TA 98 with slopes of 1.56 and 2.20 respectively. In TA 1538, the
slope for the sample was identical to that obtained without metabolic activation
whereas the slope obtained with TA 98 was lower 1n the presence of S9.
P-33
-------
REPORT 2A329
TABLE 1. AMES BIQASSAY (INITIAL) OF 1901 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESEL EXHAUST PARTICUIATE
ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-329-F FUEL DURING FTP
Sample Identification
Media Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Positive Controls
NaNj
9AA
2NF
2AA
Sample 17
P20-137 s 138
X) . >
1 Revertants/Vg extract
Eauple 17
P20-.137 I 138
Dose (ug)/
Plate
0.5
SO
5
3
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
20
CO
100
200
400
600
1000
Metabolic
Activation.
S-9
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
TA 1535
Number of Revertanta Per Plata
TA 1537
21
14
20
19
9
21
14
12
22
IB
12
21
TA 153B
2 3 Avg.
TA 98
2 _3_ Avg.
U
20
12
13
24
15
11
20
16
12
21
14
22
29
26
20
21
28
20
32
24
-0.02
O.B1
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
21
14
24
29
45
60
61
17
14
26
36
.49
51'
57
14
13
23
26
54
58
40
17
14
24
30
49"
56
53
44
117
216
343
584
823
845
43 SB
96 131
179 201
325 320
583 576
836 750
776 723
1.55
48 59
115 121
199 261
329 536
0.04
1.56
21
27
27
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
4B6
666
23
21
12
IB
19
5
480 468
628' 695
14 21
21 16
16 17
20 20
17 21
6 5
Toxicity
478
663
19
19
IS
19
19
5
551
22
55
94
181
232
202
546 510
20 21
46 04
76 84
172 144
240 257
201 213
Toxicity
536
21
52
B5
166
243j>
205
2536
219
27
80
157
199
278
149
2295 2215
223 21S
41 34
72 b9
1GB 149
197 176
223 267
153 144
Toxicity
2.149
219
34
74
158b
191b
256b
149°
265B
2908
51
170
291
492
937
696
2557 2561
2421 2432
46 47
163 157
321 324
5.18 453
678 053
656 683
Toxicity
2592
2587
48
163
312b
494°
889b
676b
3.30
75 64 66
142 128 130
284 266 270
446 455 479
SBlb 956 899 832 896
B03b 1319 1268 1253 1280b
781*> 16B4 1495 1517 15G5b
Revertants/ug extract
This valua is the slope of the regression lino based on various extract dosa levels and does not identify response at a particular extract since
the response is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
Not included in slope determination.
2.20'
-------
Table 2 shows the results obtained from the other three samples tested using
TA 98 in the absence of an S9 mix. In the initial bioassay sample 18 (vial 415)
Illustrates an almost linear mutagenic response with a resulting slope of 4.85
revertants/ug extract. Toxicity was observed at levels greater than 200
vg/plate. Sample 19 (vial 416) shows a lower mutagenic response than the pre-
vious sample, with a slope of 2.32 revertants/ug. Finally, sample 20 (vial 417)
shows an intermediate mutagenic response compared to the other two samples tested
on TA 98 with a slope of 3.18 revertants/ug. In the repeat study, slightly lower
values were obtained, but the relative ranking remained the same.
The duplicate positive and negative controls specific for each tester strain
are given in Table 3. In the repeat study without S9 mix, TA 1535 showed a nega-
tive response to sample 17 (vial 481) which is in agreement with the results
obtained in the initial study. TA 1537 minus S9 mix shows a resulting slope of
0.61 compared to slope of 0.81 obtained in the initial study. TA 1538 shows a
lesser mutagenic response to sample 17 (vial 481) in the repeat study compared to
the initial assay. The resulting slope is 1.23 revertantr/pg in the repeat study
compared to 1.55 in the initial bioassay. In the repeat study, the mutagenicity
in TA 98 was slightly lower than in the initial study. Under identical sample
concentrations TA 98 showed an average slope of 2.94 revertants/ug compared to
3.3 initially.
. In the presence of a metabolic activation system the above sample results
compared favorably with the results obtained from the initial bioassay. In the
repeat study TA 1535 shows a slope of 0.06 revertants/ug which is 1n agreement
.with a slope of 0.04 in the initial bioassay. TA 1538 illustrates a slope of
1.24 compared to a slope of 1.56 obtained in the initial bioassay and finally, TA
98 shows a slope of 1.74 as compared to a slope of 2.20 in the initial bioassay.
P-35
-------
REPORT 2A329
TABUE 2. AMES BIOASSAY (INITIAL & REPEAT WITHOUT S-9) OF 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESEL
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-329-F DURING HFET, NYCC, AND 85 KFH
TA98, Nmiber of Revartants Per Plate
Posa (|ig)/plate
Initial0
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Revertants, pg extract*
Repeat**
20
60
100
200
400
COO
1000
Revertanta, Vg extract*
Hetobollc
Activation,
S-9
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Ho
No
No
No
No
No
Sample 18. P20-139
1 2 3 Avg
NYCC
Sample 19. P20-140
1 23 Avg
85 fcpti
Saaple 20. P20-141
1 2 3 Avg.
203 209 195 202
421 354 382 386
664 653 593 637
110'J 10SB 1042 1070
1671 1603 1576 1617b
1828 1894 1B33 1852b
1797 1812 1730 17BOb
4.85
46
141
252
476
824
1060
1275
31
115
226
417
827
1028
1101
43
129
314
472
B77
981
1104
40
128
231
455
6
-------
REPORT 2A329
TABLE 3. AMES BIQASSAY (REPEAT) OP 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTIJVSS DIESEL EXHAUST PARTICULATE
ORGAHIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-329-P FUEL DURING FTP
Sample Identification
Media Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Positive Controls
NaN3
9AA
2NF
2AA
Sample 17
P20-137 & 138
Revertants/Vg extract*
Sample 17
P20-137 i 138
Dose (|i<|)/
plate
0.5
50
5
3
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
tatabollc
Activation.
S-9
No
Yea
No
No .
No
No
Yea
No
No
No
No
No
No
NO
Yea
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No .
No
No
Yea
No
No
No
No
No
No
NO
453
585
29
22
24
13
19
474 495
561 613
22 IB
15 27
21 24
26 29
17 24
Toxicity
Toxicity
474
58G
23
21
23
23
21)
653
27
32
73
143
144
90
631 550
18 17
45 44
84 62
123 120
175 '.59
61 98
Toxicity
611
21
40
73
129
159b
83b
2524
583
41
76
141
178
225
137
2472 2331
692 510
30 25
88 77
118 131
165 182
224 274
156 159
Toxicity
2442
595
32
81
130
175b
241b
ISlb
2319
2724
54
97
281
495
731
807
659
2297
2838
58
114
310
485
839
825
560
2341
2920
52
150
280
451
783
925
653
2319
2827
55
120
290
477b
784b
B52b
624b
-0.01
0.61
1.23
Yea
Yes
Yea
Yes
Yea
Yes
Yes
9
14
29
28
52
58
61
10
14
33
32
41
S3
66
15
14
27
32
54
54
77
11
14
30
31
49
55
6J
2.94
47
81
146
263
421
673
34
82
162
268
512
670
46
80
156
251
427
632
42
81
155
261
453b
6S8b
48
121
185
353
768
1019
62
119
179
355
667
835
69
129
184
342
718
904
60
123
183
'350
718
936b
757 . 736 691 728b 1213 1152 1151 1172b
0.06
1.24
Revertants/yg extract
This value is the slope of the regression'line based on various extract 'dose levels and does not identify response at a particular extract since
^the response is not conylately linear over the entire concentration used.
Not ii-luded in slope dotermination.
1.74
-------
In summary, sample 17 (vial 481) 1s nonmutagenic In TA 1535 without meta-
bolic activation and only weakly mutagenic In the presence of S9. No increase in
mutagenic activity was observed 1n TA 1538 with metabolic activation, but without
metabolic activation the activity was greater than that observed in TA 1537. The
highest activity was observed in TA 98 without metabolic activation and this
activity decreased in the presence of 59. The relative mutagenicity of the other
samples in TA 98 without metabolic activation 1s sample 18 (vial 415) > sample 20
(vial 417) > sample 19 (vial 416).
P-38
-------
SOUTHWEST FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION
P.O. BOX 28147 W. LOOP 410 AT MILITARY OH. SAN ANTONIO. TEXAS 78284 TELEPHONE (512) 674-1410
September 29, 1981
Final Report
2A469
.In Vitro Ames Salmonella/microsomal Mutagem'city Assay of Four Samples Received
from Southwest Research Institute and Generated frpm a 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass
Diesel using Fuel EM-469-F
Submitted by:
Arnaldo J. Noyola, M.A. -Nathan D. Greene, Ph.D.
Assistant Research Scientist Associate Foundation Scientist
Milton V. Marshall, Ph.D.
Associate Foundation Scientist
P-39
-------
Introduction
Southwest Foundation for Research and Education examined four samples for
mutagenicity using the Ames Salmonella typhimurlum bioassay. The samples were
received on August 8, 1981, and were identified as sample 21 (vial 526) with a
weight of 0.170525 g, sample 22 (vial 512) with a weight of 0.093687 g, sample 23
(vial 602) with a weight of 0.027680 g, and sample 24 (vial 513) with a weight of
0.128568 g. An Aroclor 1254-stimulated rat liver homogenate metabolic activation
system (S9 mix) was included in sample 21 (vial 526) using tester strains TA 98,
TA 1535, and TA 1538. In addition, sample 21 (vial 526) was tested in the
absence of an S9 mix using tester strains TA 98, TA 1535, TA 1537, and TA 1538.
Samples No. 22 (vial 512), 23 (vial 602), and 24 (vial 513) were tested using
tester strain TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activation system.
All samples were dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and tested at seven
levels of sample concentration consisting of 20, 60, 100, 200, 400, 600, and 1000
ug/plate. Each sample concentration was tested in triplicate with and without an
S9 mix and on specific tester strains as indicated in the above paragraph. A
complete set of positive and negative controls was incorporated into the bioassay
to demonstrate that the system was working well within optimum ranges. Finally,
a duplicate bioassay of the above samples and controls was conducted as a stan-
dard procedure to compare and evaluate the data.
P-40
-------
Results
In the Initial bioassay, the results indicate that the negative and positive
controls are well within the optimum range established for our laboratory. The
known positive mutagens which we routinely use on specific tester strains with
and without an S9 mix clearly illustrate the ability of the tester strains to
Incorporate mutagens into their genetic structure causing a significant increase
1n the number of revertants over the negative controls (Table 1).
Sample No. 21 (vial 526) showed a negative mutagenic response on tester
strain TA 1535 when exposed to the seven chemical levels in the absence of an S9
mix. Toxicity was observed at levels greater than 200 ug/plate. TA 1537 minus
S9 mix illustrated a positive mutagenic response showing an almost linear
response up to a chemical concentration of 200 ug/plate with a resulting slope of
0.96 revertants per yg of sample extract. Toxicity was observed at levels
greater than 200 ug/plate. TA 1538 minus 59 mix showed a greater mutagenic
response than TA 1537. At 100 ug/plate, there was an average of 183 revertants/-
plate. The resulting slope was 1.71 revertants/ug of sample extract. Toxicity
was observed at higher levels of extract. In the absence of S9 mix, TA 98 demon-
strated the greatest mutagenic response on the above sample. At 400 ug/plate
there was an average of 1336 revertants/plate with a resulting slope of 3.18
revertants/ug of sample extract.
In the presence of an activation system, the same sample illustrated a very
weak mutagenic response on tester strain TA 1535. Mutagenicity was observed in
tester strains TA 1538 and TA 98. At 200 ug/plate, TA 1538 responded with an
average of 490 revertants/plate with a resulting slope of 2.27. TA 98 exhibited
P-41
-------
REPORT 2A469
TABLE 1. AMES BIOASSAY (INITIAL) OF 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESEL EXHAUST PARTICULATE
ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-469-F FUEL DURING FTP
Sample Identification
Media Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Positive Controls
NaN3
9AA
2NF
2AA
Sample 21
P20-1B1 s. 182
Revertants/ug extract*
Sample 21
P20- 181 & 182
Dose lug)/
elate
0.5
50
5
3
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Metabolic
Activation,
S-9
Ho
lea
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
.Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Revertants/yg extract*
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
390
453
18
IB
23
22
390 329
444 439
19 19
22 26
19 20
23 10
Toxicity
Toxicity
Toxicity
370
445
19
22
21
18
1043
38
75
95
203
137
723 643
34 34
70 47
113 100
214 197
170 212
Toxicity
Toxicity
803
35
64
103
205
173b
2485
1/61
41
161
187
190
2372 2514
1666 1543
49 47
159 123
176 186
235 217
Toxicity
Toxicity
Toxicity
2457
1657
46
148
183
214b
2476
1873
77
278
556
762
1413
1316
1256
2498
2277
71
289
493.
801
1369
1434
1367
2S54
2074
59
281
536
741
1227
1510
1391
2509
2075
69
283
52H
768
1336
1420b
13 38"
-O.01
0.96
1.71
YOB
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
IS
29
30
35
62
69
30
13
11
32
47
70
.49
38
12
27
34
41
62
49
39
13
22
32
41
65
56
36
0,02
2.27
3.18
76
187
301
555
897
1002
904
80
164
263
495
847
1030
798
90
167
303
420
845
990
731
82
173
289
490
863b
1007b
81 lb
70
207
396
799
1472
1784
2151
93
174
342
743
1305
1719
2108
105
196
411
644
1346
1632
2004
89
192
333
729
1374
1712b
2O88b
3.42
This value is the slope of the regression line based on various extract dose levels and does not identify response at a particular extract since
kthe response is not conpletely linear over the entire concentration used.
Not included in slope determination.
-------
an increased mutagenic response to the sample when S9 was employed with an
average of 1374 revertants/plate at a sample concentration of 400 ug/plate. The
resulting slope was 3.42 revertants/yg of sample extract. The S9 fraction
appeared to protect the TA 98 strain from toxicity observed without an activation
system.
Table 2 Illustrates the results obtained from the other three samples tested
using TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activation system. In the initial
bloassay, sample 22 (vial 512) illustrated a fairly strong mutagenic response in
the absence of an S9 mix. At 100 wg/plate TA 98 showed an average of 819
revertants/plate with a resulting slope of 6.21 revertants/wg of sample extract.
Sample 23 (vial 602) had a slope of 3.36 revertants/ug of sample extract with an
average of 663 revertants at a sample concentration of 200 ug/plate. Sample 24
(vial 513) in the absence of S9 mix showed an average of 1035 revertants at a
sample concentration of 200 yg/plate with a resulting slope of 4.76 revertants/yg
of sample extract.
Table 2 also shows the results of the repeat bioassays on samples No. 22
(vial 512), 23 (vial 602), and 24 (vial 513) using tester strain TA 98 1n the
absence of a metabolic activation system. The repeat study of sample 24 (vial
513) demonstrated the highest mutagenic response when compared to the other two
samples. Sample 23 (vial 602) exhibits the lowest mutagenicity of these samples
with a slope of 2.55 in the repeat study which compares favorably with the slope
of 3.36 obtained in the im'tal bioassay. Finally, sample 22 (vial 512) shows an
intermediate mutagenic response in the repeat bioassay with a resulting slope of
3.38 as compared to a slope of 6.21 obtained in the initial bioassay. Lower
values were obtained with sample 22 (vial 512) and sample 23 (vial 602) in the
P-43
-------
REPORT 2A469
TABLE 2. AMES BIOASSAY (INITIAL & REPEAT WITHOUT S-9) OF 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESEL
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-469-F DURING HFET, NYCC, AND 85 KPH
TA98, Number of Hevertanta Per Plate
Dose (tig) /Plata
Initial0
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Re vert ants, ug extract*
Metabolic
Activation,
S-9
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
HFET
NYCC
Revsrtants, Vg extract*
Sample 22, P20-J83
299 364 30J 322
517 480 '.;/ 491
911 795 750 819
1342 1320 1252 1305b
1940 1942 1930 1937b
2112 1982 2046 2047b
2070 2107 211'J ;r)Q9b
6.21
Sairplo 23, P20-Varlous
1 23 Avg.
85 kph
67
174
301
645
1019
1216
1353
69 65
162 170
288 273
697 646
67
169
287
663
1087 1083 1063b
1190 1112 1173b
1275 1393 1340b
3.36
Sample 24, P20-185
1_ 2 3 Avg.
182 179 173 178
380 366 364 370
594 596 541 577
1100 1049 956 1035
1605 1567 1464 1545b
1955 2044 1861 1953b
1868 1969 1993 1943b
4.76
765
381
558
715
2018
2293
2109
279
399
560
694
1982
2212
2107
281
412
493
721
193B
2159
2073
275
397
537
71011
1979b
2221b
2096b
62
187
284
52b
867
1086
853
66
171
240
532
923
1016
976
63
146
273
515
837
1112
1046
64
168
266
524
876b
1070b
958b
138
350
510
1031
1474
1811
1733
137
328
518
992
1438
1808
1640
170
276
540
917
1445
1611
1488
148
318
523
980
1452b
174 3b
1620b
3.28
2.55
4.65
This value is the slope of the regression line based on various extract dose level* and does not identify
response at a particular extract since the response is not conpletely linear over the entire concentration used.
^Mot included in slope determination.
clnitial TA-98 media, solvent, and positive controls used aa per Table 1.
dRepeat TA-98 oedla, solvent, and positive controls used as per Table 3.
-------
repeat assay but sample 24 (vial 513) was nearly identical. Toxicity was
observed in all samples at levels greater then 200 ug/plate and in sample 22
(vial 512) at levels greater than 100 ug/plate.
Table 3 demonstrates the results of the duplicate bioassay of the four sam-
ples tested. The positive and negative controls nearly duplicated the revertant
numbers specific for each tester strain as compared to the initial bioassay
described 1n Table 1. However, a reduced number of mutants was observed with
2-aminoanthracene in the repeat bioassay. The spontaneous mutation rate for TA
98 in the repeat bioassay was greater than in the initial study; however, the
positive controls illustrate the ability of TA 98 to revert upon exposure to a
known mutagen, 2-n1trofluorene. In the repeat bioassay minus an S9 mix, TA
1535 showed a weakly positive response when exposed to sample. No. 21 (vial 526).
At a sample concentration of 400 ug/plate, toxicity was observed in the repeat
study as it was in the initial bioassay, although less toxicity was observed in
the repeat study. The slope for sample 21 (vial 526) in TA 1537. 1.21 was some-
what greater than that obtained in the initial bioassay, 0.96. The same sample
minus S9 mix using TA 1538 demonstrated a slope of 2.16 in the repeat study which
Is greater then the slope of 1.76 in the initial bioassay. In the repeat study,
TA 98 elicited the greatest mutagenic response to sample 21 (vial 526) in the
absence of an S9 mix. A resulting slope of 3.30 revertants/ug of sample extract
was obtained in the repeat study using TA 98 as compared to a slope of 3.18 in
the initial bioassay.
In the presence of a metabolic activation system, the above sample results
compared favorably with the results of the initial bioassay. TA 1535 Illustrated
a nearly identical weak response to sample 21 (vial 526) in the repeat study as
P-45
-------
REPORT 2A169
TABLE 3. AMES BIOASSAY (REPEAT) OF 1981 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS DIESEL EXHAUST PARTICULATE
ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-469-F FUEL DURING FTP
13
Sample Identification
Media Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Positive Controls
NaN3
9*A
2NF
2AA
Sample 21
P20-181 S 182
Revertants/pg extract*
Sample 21
{20-181 £ 182
Doae (Mg)/
plate
0.5
50
5
3
20
60
100
200
400
GOO
1000
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Metabolic
Activation/
S-9
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
405
266
22
29
36
38
24
20
368
258
IB
30
33
33
24
29
443
274
21
24
30
31
34
24
405
266
20
28
33
34
27b
24b
1152
36
83
140
264
332
Toxicity
1191 1153
13 37
80 84
121 132
265 229
313 307
Toxicity
Toxicity
1165
35
82
131
253
317b
2732
492
62
133
237
383
237
2644 2813
453 465
65 57
144 133
240 225
339 316
264 264
Toxicity
Toxicity
2730
470
61
137
234
346D
255*>
2515
407
83
215
557
825
1341
1473
1422
2739
470
79
245
505
080
1387
1512
1548
2499 2584
504 460
94 85
236 232
541 534
903 869
1329 1352
1444 1476&
1627 1532b
0.07
1.21
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
27
29
33
61
78
91
55
20
33
33
67
102
102
67
12
27
32
51
89
92
57
20
30
33
60
90
95
60
97
193
353
520
1029
91 80
188 192
344 306
497 541
341 981
2.16
89
191
334
519
94
185
417
793
3.30
80 100 91
236 20B 210
369 353 380
730 731 751
984b 1365 1464 1305 1378
1097 1120 1131 1116b 1541 1697 1680 1739b
1009 924 839 924& 2264 2115 2147 2175b
C.05
2.39
Revertants/yg extract
This value is the slope of the regression line based on various extract dose levels and does not identify response at a particular extract since
fathe response is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
Not included in slope determination.
3.41
-------
compared to initial bioassay. TA 1538 in the presence of an S9 mix showed a
slightly greater mutagenic response to sample 21 (vial 526) as was observed
earlier in the initial bioassay. In addition, TA 98 exhibited the strongest
mutagenic response to sample 21 (vial 526) in the presence of an 59 mix. The
resulting slope was 3.41 in the repeat study as compared to 3.42 in the initial
bioassay.
In summary, sample 21 (vial 526) was very weakly mutagenic in TA 1535 with
or without activation, although the presence of S9 elevates the slope slightly
over baseline. A positive response was obtained in strains TA 1537 (without
activation), and TA 1538 and TA 98, with and without activation. In TA 1538
and in TA 98, S9 enhanced mutagenic activity. Samples 22 (vial 512), 23 (vial
602), and 24 (vial 513) were mutagenic in TA 98 without metabolic activation.
P-47
-------
SOUTHWEST FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION
P.O. BOX 28147 W. LOOP 410 AT MILITARY DR. SAN ANTONIO. TEXAS 78284 TELEPHONE 15)21 674-1410
September 24, 1981
Final Report
3A329
In Vitro Ames Salmonella/microsomal Mutagenicity Assay of Four Samples Received
from Southwest Research Institute and Generated from a Turbo-charged Diesel Fiat
(No Catalyst) using Fuel EM-329-F
Submitted by:
Arnaldo J. N^yola, M.A. Nathan D. Greene, Ph.D.
Assistant Research Scientist Associate Foundation Scientist
Milton V. Marshall, Ph.D.
Associate Foundation Scientist
P-48
-------
Introduction
Southwest Foundation for Research and Education examined four samples for
mutagenicity using the Ames Salmonella typhimurium bioassay. The samples were
received on August 8, 1981, and were identified as sample 25 (vial 587) with a
weight of 0.287070 g, sample 26 (vial 545) with a weight of 0.079832 g, sample 27
(vial 546) with a weight of 0.045799 g, and sample 28 (vial 547) with a weight of
0.093887 g. An aroclor 1254-stimulated rat liver homogenate metabolic activation
system (S9 mix) was included in sample 25 (vial 587) using tester strains TA 98,
TA 1535, and TA 1538. In addition, sample 25 (vial 587) was tested in the
absence of an S9 mix using tester strains TA 98, TA 1535, TA 1537, and TA 1538.
Samples No. 26 (vial 545), 27 (vial 546), and 28 (vial 547) were tested using
tester strain TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activation system.
All samples were dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and tested at seven
levels of sample concentration consisting of 20, 60, 100, 200, 400, 600, and 1000
ug/plate. Each sample concentration was tested in triplicate plates with and
without an S9 mix and on specific tester strains as indicated in the above para-
graph. A complete set of positive and negative controls was incorporated into
the bioassay to illustrate that the system is working well within optimum ranges.
Finally, an identical repeat of the above samples and controls was conducted as a
standard procedure to compare and evaluate the data.
P-49
-------
Results
In the Initial bioassay, the results indicate that the negative and positive
controls are well within the optimum range established for our laboratory. The
known positive mutagens which we routinely use on specific tester strains with
and without an S9 mix clearly illustrate the ability of the tester strains to
incorporate mutagens into their genetic structure causing a significant Increase
in the number of revertants over the negative controls (Table 1).
Sample No. 25 (vial 587) showed a very weak mutagenic response on tester
strain TA 1535 when exposed to the seven chemical levels in the absence of an S9
mix. TA 1537 minus S9 mix illustrated a positive mutagenic response showing an
almost linear response up to a chemical concentration of 600 ug/plate with a
resulting slope of 0.757 revertants per ug of sample extract. TA 1538 minus S9
mix showed a slightly higher mutagenic response than TA 1537. At 400 ug/plate,
there was an average of 421 revertants per plate. The resulting slope was 1.04
revertants/ug of sample extract. Toxicity was observed at 600 and 1000 ug/plate.
In the absence of S9 mix, TA 98 illustrated the highest mutagenic response on the
above sample. At 400 ug/plate there was an average of 1242 revertants per plate
with a resulting slope at 3.17 revertants/ug of sample extract.
In the presence of an activation system, the same sample illustrated a very
weak mutagenic response on tester strain TA 1535. Mutagenicity was observed in
tester strains TA 1538 ard TA 98. At 600 ug/plate, TA 1538 responded with an
average of 900 revertants/plate with a resulting slope of 1.50. TA 98 exhibited
a decreased mutagenic response to the sample when S9 was employed with an average
of 1837 revertants per plate at a sample concentration of 1000 ug/plate. The
P-50
-------
REPORT 3A329
TABLE 1. AMES BIOASSAY (INITIAL) OF TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL (NO CATALYST) EXHAUST PARTICULATE
ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-329-F FUEL DURING FTP
Sample Identification
Media Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
U'iltor Blank)
Positive Controls
NaN3
9AA
2NF
2AA
Sample 25 .
P20-197 & 198
Revertants/Ug extract*
Sample 25
P20-197 's 198
Dose (pg)/
plate
0.5
50
5
3
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
20
60
100
200'
400
600
1000
Metabolic
Activation.
S-9
No
Yea
No
No
No
No
Yon
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
0.5
50
5
3
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
No
No
No
Yon
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
329
240
20
20
15
30
19
21
29
350
226
20
21
19
20
21
26
26
325
249
21
19
22
20
30
21
21
.135
230
20
20
19
2(1
23
23
25
344
12
30
62
179
318
471
629
446
14
37
5J
167
326
470
591
505
20
43
55
140
300
368
488
433
15
37
57
162
315
436
569b
2315
443
44
76
120
301
431
625
625
2241
631
30
79
124
2G5
405
609
665
2366
442
41
76
120
277
428
610
594
2307
505
38
77
127
288
421
615)
628>
11
11
11
21
43
61
65
8
IS
17
27
41
58
54
13
14
22
29
42
56
53
0.005
11
13
17
26
42
58
57
0.05
0.757
73
89
149
366
55
92
156
343
66
93
145
348
62V 666 Cn6
1.04
65
91
150
352
660
55
55
62
70
130
160
438
1.50
2332 2397 219(1
2943 2985 2900 2943
57
185 174 179 179
261 252 2!i4 256
662 675 657 665
1235 1249 1243 1242
615b 1644 1538 1417 1533b
628b 1-16 1BB5 1826 1849b
3.17
80 62 75
107 106 -114
151 148 153
399 367 401
942 939 886 922
928' 925 848 900 1266 1229 1190 1228
1307 1229 1171 1236b 1980 1889 1643 1837.
Revertants/jig extract
a
This value is the slope of the regression line based on various extract dose levels and does not identify response at ' particular extract since
bthe response is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
Not Included in slope determination.
1.83
-------
resulting slope was 1.88 revertants per pg of sample extract. The S9 fraction
appeared to protect the TA 98 strain from toxicity observed without an activation
system.
Table 2 shows the results obtained from the other three samples tested using
TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activation system. In the initial bioassay,
sample 26 (vial 545) illustrated a mutagenic response in the absence of an S9
mix. At 600 yg/plate TA 98 showed an average of 1712 revertants per plate with a
resulting slope of 2.93 revertants/ug of sample extract. Sample 27 (vial 546)
Illustrated a slope of 1.39 revertants per ug of sample extract with an average
of 814 revertants at a sample concentration of 600 ng/plate. The last sample in
the initial bioassay exhibited the strongest mutagenic response. Sample 28 (vial
547) in the absence of S9 mix showed an average of 1405 revertants at a sample
concentration of 400 ug/plate with a resulting slope of 3.40 revertants/yg of
sample extract.
Table 3 and Table 2 show the results of the replicate testing of the four
samples tested in the bioassay. The repeated positive and negative controls
nearly duplicated the revertant numbers specific for each tester strain as com-
pared to the initial bioassay described in Table 1. The spontaneous mutation
rate for TA 98 in the repeat bioassay was higher than the initial study; however,
the positive controls illustrate the ability of TA 98 to revert upon exposure to
a known mutagen. In the repeat study minus an S9 mix, TA 1535 showed a negative
response when exposed .to sample No. 25 (vial 587). At the highest sample concen-
tration of 1,000 yg/plate, toxicity was observed in the repeat study as it was in
the initial bioassay. The slope for sample 25 (vial 587) in TA 1537, 0.766, was
nearly identical to that obtained in the initial bioassay, 0.757. The same
P-52
-------
REPORT 3A329
TABLE 2. AMES BlOASSAY (INITIAL AND REPEAT WITHOUT S-9) OP TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL (NO CATALYST)
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-329-F FUEL DURING HFET, NYCC, AND 85 KPH
TAOM, Numbor of Ravcrtanta Far Plata
171
Ul
Done (I'll/Plato
Initial0
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Revertanta, u>
2.93
78
199
403
687
1383
1650
NVCC
Sample 27
1
52
78
187
325
'32
SIS
1131
51
119
241
352
732
956
2
44
91
155
337
671
833
1214
37
110
210
342
702
932
, P20-200
3
66
92
175
319
b94
794
1111
46
108
220
318
676
849
Avg.
54
07
172
327
666
814.
1152b
1.39
45
112
224
337
703
912
85 kph
Eanplo2U
1
127
260
395
851
1417
1833
1993
119
252
397
797
1471
1743
2
100
286
368
815
1399
1050
21C9
90
281
385
810
1313
1800
, P20-201
j
123
264
404
724
1400
1781
1981
123
223
393
697
1308
1720
Avq.
117
270
389
797
1405
1021b
2028b
3.40
111
252
392
768
1364
1754°
1950 2022 2115 2029b 1210 1262 1151 1208b 1992 1875 1815 1894b
2.82
1.52
3.31
This value la the elope of the regression line based on various extract dose levels and does not Identify
response at a particular extract since the response is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
''Not Included in slope determination.
clnitial TA-98 nedia, solvent, and positive controls used as per Table 1'.
"Repeat TA-98 media, solvent, and positive controls used as per Table 3.
-------
REPORT 3A329
TABLE 3. AMES BIOASSAY (REPEAT) OF TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL (NO CATALYST) EXHAUST PARTICULATE
ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-329-F FUEL DURING FTP
Sample Identification
Media Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Positive Controls
Hat) 3
9AA
2NP
2*A :
Sample 25
P20- 197 & 198
*j> Rev«rtantB/|Jg extract*
Ln
* Sample 25
P20- 197 S 198
Dose (pg)/
plate
O.S
50
5
3
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Metabolic
Activation,
S-9
No
Yea
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Number of favcrtants Per Plate
TA 1535
31
10
23
TA 1537
TA 1538
TA 98
3 Avg. 1 2 3
25
22
26
33
17
31
30
16
27
16
13
13
13
14
10
21
21
9
14
21
21
20
22
24
18
21
18
28
29
27
40
40
38
31
43
30
238 220 254 237
436 384 432 417
399
366 301 355
2395 2483 2529 2469
1527 1418 1668 1538
0.06
1.36
Avn.
33
37
32
2361 2473 2446 2-M7
2341 2644 2540 2508
32
23
24
33
23
24
19
20
20
18
37
J8
,59
77
29
30
28
25
25
25
IB
17
28
17
15
43
68
68
33
24
30
34
29
25
20
29
15
19
26
41
56
65
31
26
27
31
26
28
19
-O.OOB
22
21
18
26
11
f.l
70
20
36
71
181
356
433
509
22
42
54
150
368
463
540
21
42
58
166
302
420
545
21
40
61
166
342
439
0.766
39
88
93
231
442
566
556
72
119
173
339
688
837
1177
54
81
115
279
432
547
545
58
121
156
328
602
872
1202
38
89
107
248
442
464
528
59
95
146
350
583
7/2
1145
44
86
105
269
439
526»>
54 jb
1.07
63
112
153
339
624
827
117Sb
79
173
288
628
1268
1512
1761
75
146
175
481
929
1187
1811
66
154
263
662
1112
1326
1704
77
131
138
496
821
1190
1755
54
141
240
577
1070
1371
1711
64
110
138
437
858
1150
1708
66
156
264
622
1150
I006b
1725b
2.92
72
131
150
471
869
1176
1758
Revertants/pg extract
This value is the slope of the regression line based on various extract dose levels and does not identify response at a particular extract since
bthe response is not confiletely linear over the entire concentration used.
Not included in slope determination.
1.77
-------
sample minus S9 mix using TA 1538 showed a slope of 1.07 in the repeat study
which is almost Identical to the slope of 1.04 of the initial bioassay. In the
repeat study. TA 98 elicited the greatest mutagenic response to sample 25 (vial
587) 1n the absence of an S9 mix. A resulting slope of 2.92 revertants/yg of
sample extract was obtained in the repeat study using TA 98 as compared to a
slope of 3.17 1n the initial bioassay.
In the presence of a metabolic activation system, the above sample results
compared favorably with the results of the initial bioassay. TA 1535 illustrated
an Identical weak response to sample 25 (vial 587) in the repeat study as com-
pared to initial bioassay. TA 1538 in the presence of an S9 mix showed a
stronger mutagenic response to sample 25 (vial 587) as was observed earlier in
the Initial bioassay. In addition, TA 98 exhibited the strongest mutagenic
response to sample 25 (vial 587) in the presence of an S9 mix, although this
value was lower than that obtained without the S9 mix. The resulting slope was
1.77 1n the repeat study as compared to 1.88 in the initial bioassay.
Table 2 shows the results of the initial and repeat bioassays on samples No.
26 (vial 545), 27 (vial 546), and 28 (vial 547) using tester strain TA 98 in the
absence of a metabolic activation system. The repeat study illustrates that
sample 28 (vial 547) has the highest mutagenic response when compared to the
other two samples. Sample 27 (vial 546) shows the lowest mutagenicity of these
samples with a slope of 1.52 in the repeat study which compares favorably with
the slope of 1.39 obtained in the inital bioassay. Finally, sample 26 (vial 545)
shows an intermediate mutagenic response with a resulting slope of 2.82 as
compared to a slope of 2.93 obtained in the initial bioassay.
P-55
-------
In summary, sample 25 (vial 587) was nonmutagenic in TA 1535 with or without
activation, although the presence of S9 elevates the slope slightly over base-
line. A positive response was obtained in strains TA 1537 (without activation),
and TA 1538 and TA 98, without and without activation. In TA 1538, S9 enhances
mutagenic activity, while in TA 98, the activity decreased with S9. Samples 26
(vial 545), 27 (vial 546), and 28 (vial 547) were mutagenic in TA 98 without
metabolic activation. The relative activity obtained was sample 28 (vial 547).>
sample 26 (vial 545) > sample 27 (vial 546).
P-56
-------
SOUTHWEST FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION
P.O. BOX 28147 W. LOOP 410 AT MILITARY OR. SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 78284 TELEPHONE (5121 674-1410
September 30, 1981
Final Report
3A469
In Vitro Ames Salmonella/microsomal Mutagenicity Assay of Four Samples Received
from Southwest Research Institute and Generated from a Fiat Turbocharged Diesel
(no catalyst) using Fuel EM-469-F
Submitted by:
Arnaldo J. Noyola, M.A. Nathan D. Greene, Ph.D.
Assistant Research Scientist Associate Foundation Scientist
Milton V. Marshall, Ph.D.
Associate Foundation Scientist
P-57
-------
Introduction
Southwest Foundation for Research and Education examined four samples for
mutagenlcity using the Ames Salmonella typhimurlum bioassay. The samples were
received on August 20, 1981, and were identified as sample 29 (vial 630) with a
weight of 0.411470 g, sample 30 (vial 594) with a weight of 0.100163 g, sample 31
(vial 579) with a weight of 0.045719 g, and sample 32 (vial 590) with a weight of
0.115647 g. An Aroclor 1254-stimulated rat liver homogenate metabolic activation
system (S9 mix) was included in sample 29 (vial 630) using tester strains TA 98,
TA 1535, and TA 1538. In addition, sample 29 (vial 630) was tested in the
absence of an S9 mix using tester strains TA 98, TA 1535, TA 1537; and TA 1538.
Samples No. 30 (vial 594). 31 (vial 579), and 32 (vial 590) were tested using
tester strain TA 98 In the absence of a metabolic activation system.
All samples were dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and tested at seven
levels of sample concentration consisting of 20, 60, 100, 200, 400, 600, and 1000
ug/plate. Each sample concentration was tested in triplicate with and without an
S9 mix and on specific tester strains as Indicated in the above paragraph. A
complete set of positive and negative controls was incorporated into the bioassay
to demonstrate that the system was working within optimum ranges. Finally, a
duplicate bioassay of the above samples and controls was conducted as a standard
procedure to compare and evaluate the data.
P-58
-------
Results
In the initial bioassay, the results indicate that the negative and positive
controls are well within the optimum range established for our laboratory. The
known positive mutagens which we routinely use on specific tester strains with
and.without an S9 mix clearly illustrate the ability of the tester strains to
Incorporate mutagens into their genetic structure causing a significant increase
in the number of revertants over the negative controls (Table 1).
Sample No. 29 (vial 630) showed a negative mutagenic response on tester
strain TA 1535 when exposed to the seven chemical levels in the absence of an S9
mix. TA 1537 minus S9 mix illustrated a positive mutagenic response showing an
almost linear response up to a chemical concentration of 400 pg/plate with a
resulting slope "Of 1.22 r-evertants/yg of sample extract. Toxicity was observed
at levels greater than 400 ug/plate. TA 1538 minus S9 mix showed a greater
mutagenic response than TA 1537. At 200 yg/plate, there was an average of 422
revertants/plate. The resulting.slope was 2.14 revertants/yg of sample extract.
Toxicity was observed at higher levels of extract. In the absence of S9 mix, TA
98 demonstrated the greatest mutagenic response on the above sample. At 200
yg/plate there was an average of 978 revertants/plate with a resulting slope of
5.0 revertants/yg of sample extract.
In the presence of.an activation system, the same sample illustrated a very
weak mutagenic response on tester strain TA 1535. Mutagenlcity was observed 1n
tester strains TA 1538 and TA 98. At 200 yg/plate, TA 1538 responded with an
average of 509 revertants/plate with a resulting slope of 2.46. TA 98 exhibited
a decreased mutagenic response to the sample when S9 was employed with an average
P-59
-------
REPORT "3A469
TABLE 1. AMES.BIOASSAY (INITIAL) OF TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL (NO CATALYST) EXHAUST PARTICULATE
ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-469-F FUEL DURING FTP
Dose (\ig)/
Sample Identification plate
Media Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Metabolic
Activation.
S-9
NO
Yea
No
Number of Revortants Per
TA 1535
1
19
10
1G
2
IB
9
15
3
21
17
17
Avq. 1
19 14
12
16 8
TA 1537
2 3 Avg .
959
898
Plate
TA 1538
1
14
7
10
2
9
13
10
3
9
13
12
Avg.
11
11
11
1
17
29
21
TA 98
2
10
21
14
3
15
28
14
Avg.
14
26
20
Positive Controls
2NF
2AA
Sample 29
P2U-225 6 226
Revertants/Ug extract8
O Sairplo 29
P20-225 & 226
0.5
50
5
3
20
60
100
200'
400
600
1000
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
No
No
No
Yea
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
310
322
7
16
14
18
11
18
14
315
285
8
IB
15
12
10
22
10
301
251
10
10
21
11
9
23
16
309
286
B
14
17
14
10
21
13
678
31
65
87
278
472
514
409
771
29
49
104
304
434
501
441
831
26
75
103
236
525
487
446
762
29
63
98
273
477
501b
432b
2435
1717
43
117
222
429
606
561
337
2309
1646
34
140
196
438
566
595
292
2345
1587
32
116
193
398
609
560
312
2363
1650
36
124
204
422
594b
579b
314b
2382
2323
83
272
525
989
1515
1957
2107
2279
2185
93
248
498
962
1579
I860
2213
2505
1965
84
275
524
984
1548
1863
2123
2389
2158
87
265
516
978
I547b
1893b
2148b
0.00
1.22
2.14
Yes
Yen
Yen
Yen
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
18
19
39
49
69
51
19
13
13
34
42
55
46
16
Q
13
32
35
64
55
15
13
15
35
42
63
51
0.05
2.46
5.00
84
129
265
539
886
66
157
257
496
897
65
168
249
492
837
72
151
257
509
87 3b
61
173
292
794
13S5
66
140
293
742
1313
73
145
310
702
1346
67
153
298
746
1341
1217 1138 1061 1139b 1383 1796 1892 1892
1343 1304 1150 126615 2472 2340 2269 2360b
Rever^ants/pg extract .'
This value is the slope of the regression line based on various extract dose levels and does not identify response at particular extract since
^the response is not cotipletely linear over the entire concentration used.
Not included in slope determination.
3.22
-------
of 1341 revertants/plate at a sample concentration of 400 vg/plate. The result-
ing slope was 3.22 revertants/yg of sample extract.. The S9 fraction appeared to
protect the TA 98 strain from toxicity observed without an activation system.
Table 2 Illustrates the results obtained from the other three samples tested
using TA 98 1n the absence of a metabolic activation system. In the initial bio-
assay, sample 30 (vial 594) Illustrated a fairly strong mutagenic response in the
absence of an S9 mix. At 200 ug/plate TA 98 showed an average of 1118 rever-
tants/plate with a resulting slope of 5.34 revertants/ug of sample extract.
Sample 31 (vial 579) had a slope of 1.07 revertants/pg of sample extract with an
average of 449 revertants at a sample concentration of 400 pg/plate. Sample 32
(vial 590) 1n the absence of S9 mix showed an average of 1060 revertants at a
sample concentration of 200 yg/plate with a resulting slope of 5.02 revertants/ug
of sample extract.
Table 2 also shows the results of the repeat bioassays on samples 30 (vial
594), 31 (vial 579), and 32 (vial 590) using tester strain TA 98 in the absence
of a metabolic activation system. The repeat study of sample 30 (vial 594)
demonstrated the highest mutagenic response when compared to the other two
samples with a slope of 5.11 revertants/yg compared to 5.34 in the initial bio-
assay. Sample 31 (vial 579) exhibits the lowest mutagenic response of these
samples with a slope of 1.11 in the repeat study which compares favorably with
the slope of 1.07 obtained in the Inital bioassay. Finally, sample 32 (vial 590)
demonstrated a mutagenic response slightly lower than sample 30 (vial 594) in the
repeat bioassay with a resulting slope of 4.78 as compared to a slope of 5.02
obtained in the initial bioassay. Slightly lower values were obtained with
sample 30 (vial 594) and sample 32 (vial 590) in the repeat bioassay but sample
P-61
-------
REPORT 3A469
TABLE 2. AMES BIOASSRY (INITIAL & REPEAT WITHOUT S-9) OF TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL (NO CATALYST)
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-469-F FUEL DURING HFET, NYCC, AND 85 KPH
TA9B, Number of Bevcrtnnta Per Plate
ffi
to
Pose (tig) /plater
Initial
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Revertants, yg extract"
..d
Metabolic
Activation.
S-9
No
No
Mo
No
No
No
Ho
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
IIYCC
Saaple 3O. P2O-227
I 2 _3_ Avg. 1 2 ~1
kph
142
350
599
1110
1809
245J
2648
159
396
551
1135
1956
2253
2556
171
363
584
1101
1863
2254
2630
157
370
578
1118
1676b
2319b
2611b
56
B7
148
265
475
689
860
44
91
97
221
416
597
838
45
78
137
236
456
608
832
48
85
127
241
449
631b
84 3b
5.34
141 160 137 146
304 328 309 314
553 545 551 550
1059 1048 1056 1054
1615 1566 1548 I576b
2068 2036 1868 1991b
1.07
Saaple 32. P20- 229
_!_ _2_ 3 Avq.
148 157 164 156
408 365 321 365
630 601 617 616
970 1100 1111 1060
1659 1708 1730 1699*>
2002 18J7 2123 1987b
2305 2329 2357 23iOb
5.02
S3
92
143
273
465
666
61
83
150
264
481
658
61
72
117
250
459
614
58
82
137
262
468
646b
174
352
537
1057
1680
1976
163
405
615
994
1563
1985
178
309
604
1034
1511
1940
172
355
585
1028
1585b
1967b
2162 2420 2341 2308b 929 930 876 912b 1825 2094 2051 1990b
Revert&nts, vq extract*
5.11
1.11
4.78
Tills value Is the slope of tha regression line based on various extract dose levels and does not Identify
response at a particular extract since the response Is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
bNot included in-slope determination.
clnitial TA-98 aedia, solvent, and positive controls used as per Table 1.
dRepeat TA-98 Dedia, solvent, and positive controls used as per Table 3.
-------
31 (vial 579) was nearly Identical. Toxicity was observed in all samples at
levels greater then 200 pg/plate.
Table 3 demonstrates the results of the duplicate bioassay of sample 29
(vial 630). The duplicate positive and negative controls are within experimental
range for each tester strain as compared to the initial bioassay described in
Table 1. However, a greater number of mutants was observed with 2-aminoanthra-
cene in the repeat bioassay. In the repeat bioassay minus an S9 mix, TA 1535
again showed a negative mutagenic response when exposed to sample No. 29 (vial
630). At a sample concentration of 600 ug/plate, slightly less toxicity was
observed in the repeat study. The slope for sample 29 (vial 630) in TA 1537,
1.12 was somewhat less than that obtained in the initial bioassay, 1.22. The
same sample minus S9 mix using TA 1538 demonstrated a slope of 1.08 in the repeat
study which is less than the slope of 2.14 in the initial bioassay. In the
repeat study, TA 98 elicited the greatest mutagenic response to sample 29 (vial
630).in the absence of an S9 mix. A resulting slope of 4.26 revertants/ug of
sample extract was obtained in the repeat study using TA 98 as compared to a
slope.of 5.0 in the initial bioassay.
In the presence of a metabolic activation system, the above sample results
compared favorably with the results of the initial bioassay. TA 1535 illustrated
a nearly identical weak response to sample 29 (vial 630) in the repeat study as
compared to initial bioassay. TA 1538 in the presence of an 59 mix showed a
mutagenic response to sample 29 (vial 630) that was nearly identical to that
observed in the initial bioassay. In addition, TA 98 exhibited a decreased
mutagenic response to sample 29 (vial 630) in the presence of an 59 mix. The
resulting siope was 2.88 in the repeat study as compared to 3.22 in the initial
bi oa.s say. p_63
-------
REPORT 3A469
TABLE 3. AMES BIQASSAY (REPEAT) OF TUKBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL (NO CATALYST) EXHAUST PARTICULATE
ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-469-F FUEL DURING FTP
S>
29jb
244D
2223
2630
69
135
246
807
1242
1515
1950
2265
2828
55
132
220
813
1266
1565
1979
1760 2083
2865 2774
4G 57
152 140
279 248
787 802
1137 1215b
1522 1S34>>
2113 2014»>
4.26
U3
159
298
705
811° 1231 1256 1226 1238
968° 1694 1723 1709 1709
926b 2276 2148 2177 2200**
Revertants/gg extract
This value is the slope of the regression line baaed on various extract dose levels and does not identify response at a particular extract ainca
^the response is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
Not included in slope determination.
2.88
-------
In summary, sample 29 (vial 630) was very weakly mutagenic 1n TA 1535 with
metabolic activation; the absence of S9 reveals no mutagenic activity. A posi-
tive response was obtained in strains TA 1537 (without activation), and TA 1538
and TA 98, with and without activation. In TA 1538 but not in TA 98, S9 enhanced
routagenic activity. Samples 30 (vial 594), 31 (vial 579), and 32 (vial 590)
were mutagenic in TA 98 without metabolic activation.
P-65
-------
SOUTHWEST FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION
P.O. BOX 28147 W. LOOP 410 AT MILITARY OR. SAN ANTONIO, TEXA8 78284 TELEPHONE (5121 674-14'0
November 25, 1981
Final Report
3B329
In Vitro Ames Salmonella/microsomal Mutagenlcity Assay of Four Samples Received
from Southwest Research Institute and Generated from a Flat Turbocharged Diesel
(with underfloor catalytic trap) using Fu
-------
Introduction
Southwest Foundation for Research and Education examined four samples for
mutagenldty using the Ames Salmonella typhimurium bioassay. The samples were
received on October 3, 1981, and were identified as sample 33 (FTP 691) with a
weight of 0.169580 g, sample 34 (HFET 698) with a weight of 0.026566 g, sample 35
(NYCC 704) with a weight o\ 0.027415 g, and sample 36 (85 kph 705) with a weight
of C. 028934 g. An Aroclor 1254-stimulated rat liver homogenate metabolic activa-
tion system (S9 mix) was included in sample 33 using tester strains TA 98, TA
1535, and TA 1538. In addition, sample 33 was tested in the absence of an S9 mix
using tester strains TA 98, TA 1535, TA 1537, and TA 1538. Samples No. 34, 35,
and 35 were tested using tester strain TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activ-
ation
All samples were dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide -(DMSO) an.d tested at seven
levels of sample concentration consisting of 20, 60, 100, 200, 400, 600, and 1000
wg/plate. Each sample concentration was tested in triplicate with and without an
S9 mix and on specific tester strains as indicated in the above paragraph. A
complete set of .positive and negative controls was incorporated into the bioassay
to demonstrate that the system was working within optimum ranges. Finally, a
duplicate bioassay of the above samples and controls was conducted as a standard
procedure to compare and evaluate the data.
p-67
-------
Results
A range finding study was conducted on sample no. 33 in tester strains TA 98
and TA 1535. The range finding study as shown 1n Table 1 disclosed that sample
no. 33 was reactive in tester strain TA 98, both with and without metabolic
activation, although the reactivity was enhanced by the presence of metabolic
activating enzymes. The sample was toxic to the tester organisms at 1000 ug/
plate. Consequently, it was determined that an upper limit of 1000 pg/plate
would be appropriate for definitive testing, and a range of concentrations from
20 to 1000 ug/plate was selected. In TA 1535, no mutagenlcity was observed with-
out metabolic activation. Using an S9 fraction for metabolic activation,
increased mutagenic activity was observed. Again, toxicity was observed at
1000 pg/plate.
In the initial bioassay, the results indicate that the negative and positive
controls are within the optimum range established for our laboratory. The known
positive mutagens which we routinely use on specific tester strains with and
without an S9 mix clearly illustrate the ability of the tester strains to incor-
porate mutagens into their genetic structure, causing a significant increase in
the number of revertants over the negative controls (Tables 2 and 4).
In Table 2, sample no. 33 showed a weak mutagenic response in tester strain
TA 1535 when exposed to the seven chemical levels in the absence of an S9 frac-
tion. Toxicity was observed at 400 ug/plate, and the slope was 0.07 revertants/
wg extract. TA 1537 minus S9 demonstrated a greater mutagenic response than TA
1535 with a resulting slope of 1.72 revertants/ug extract. Toxicity was also
observed at levels above 200 pg/plate. TA 1538 minus S9 showed a greater muta-
genic response than both TA 1537 and TA 1535. At 400 ug/plate, there was an
£-68
-------
average of 489 revertants/plate. The resulting slope was 2.60 revertants/ug of
sample extract. Toxicity was observed at higher levels of extract. In the
absence of S9 mix, TA 98 demonstrated the greatest mutagenic response to the
above sample. At 400 ug/plate there was an average of 1947 revertants/plate with
a resulting slope of 4.93 revertants/pg of sample extract.
In the presence of an activation system, decreased mutagenidty was observed
for sample no. 33 in strains TA 1535, TA 1538, and TA 98. Sample no. 33 illus-
trated a very weak mutagenic response on tester strain TA 1535 with a resulting
slope of 0.06 revertants/ug extract. At 400 pg/plate, TA 1538 responded with an
average of 567 revertants/plate with a resulting slope of 1.40 revertants/pg. TA
98 exhibited a decreased mutagenic response to the sample when S9 was employed
with an average of 1041 revertants/plate at a sample concentration of 400 pg/
plate. The resulting slope was 2.66 revertants/wg of sample extract.
Table 3 Illustrates the results obtained from the other three samples tested
using TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activation system. In the initial bio-
assay, sample 34 illustrated a strong mutagenic response in the absence of an S9
mix. At 200 pg/plate TA 98 showed an average of 2202 revertants/plate with a
resulting slope of 10.76 revertants/pg of sample extract. Sample 35 had a slope
of 7.36 revertants/pg of sample extract with an average of 1591 revertants at a
sample concentration of 200 pg/plate. Sample 36 showed an average of 2190 rever-
tants at a sample concentration of 200 pg/plate with a resulting slope of 9.82
rsvertants/pg of sample extract.
Table 3 also shows the results of the repeat bloassays on samples 34, 35,
and 36 using tester strain TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activation system.
P-69
-------
The repeat study of sample 34 demonstrated a decreased mutagenic response when
compared to the initial bioassay with a slope of 6.08 revertants/pg compared to
10.76 1n the initial bioassay. Sample 35 exhibited an increased mutagenic
response in TA 98 with a slope of 8.71 in the repeat study which compares favor-
ably with the slope of 7.36 obtained in the inital bioassay. Finally, sample 36
demonstrated a decreased mutagenic response 1n the repeat bioassay with a result-
Ing slope of 7.42 as compared to a slope of 9.82 obtained in the initial bio-
assay. Toxicity was observed in all samples at levels greater than 200.ug/plate.
Table 4 demonstrates the results of the duplicate bioassay of sample nc 33.
The duplicate positive and negative controls are within experimental range for
each tester strain as compared to the initial bioassay described in Table 2. In
the repeat bioassay minus an S9 mix, TA 1535 showed a negative mutagenic response
when exposed to sample No. 33. At a sample concentration of 200 ug/plate, 23
revertants/plate were observed. The slope for sample 33 in TA'1537, 2.49 was
higher than that obtained in the initial bioassay, 1.72. The.same sample minus
S9 mix using TA 1538 demonstrated a slope of 5.85 .in the repeat study which was
nearly twice the slope of 2.60 observed in the initial bioassay. Nearly twice
tne number or mutants were observed in.the repeat assay although the positive
controls were nearly the same. In the repeat study, TA 98 elicited a lower muta-
genic response to sample 33 in the absence of an S9 mix. A resulting slope of
3.19 reverta'nts/yg of sample extract was obtained in.the repeat study using TA 98
compared to a slope of 4.93 in the initial bioassay.
In the presence of a metabolic activation system, the above sample results
compared favorably with the results of the initial bioassay. TA 1535 illustrated
an identical weak response to sample no. 3"3, 0.06 revertant/yg, in the repeat
P-70
-------
REPORT 3B329
TABLE 1. AMES BIOASSAY (RANGE-FINDING) OF TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL (WITH UNDERFLOOR CATALYTIC TRAP)
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-329-F BASE FUEL DURING FTP
Swple
Identification
tedla Control
Media control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Positive Controls
NaNj
9AA
2NF
2AA
Sairple No. 33
Dose,
-------
REPORT 3B329
TABLE 2. AMES BIAOSSAY (INITIAL) OF TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL (WITH UNDERFLOOR CATALYTIC TRAP)
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-329-F BASE FUEL DURING FTP
Sample
Identification
Media Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Metabolic
Dose,
(|iq)/plate
Activation,
S-9
No
YOU
No
1
15
10
19
TA
2
IB
7
13
1535
3 Avg
12 15
6 8
9 14
' TA 1537
1
7
8
2
9
6
3 Avg
5 7
5 6
1
14
21
19
TA
2
17
21
13
1538
3
15
23
7
TA 98
Avg
15
22
13
1
22
24
24
2
25
24
18
3 Avg
19 22
23 24
22 21
Positive Controls
9AA
2HF
2AA
Sample No. 33
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
No
No
No
Yes
No
NO
No
No
No
No
No
227
480
11
12
15
29
11
10
221
497
12
23
13
27
8
9
228
514
18
15
15
29
12
11
Toxicity
225
740
497
14 31
17 46
14 128
28 298
10b 331
lO*1 346
973 760
25 17
54 52
99 156
310 355
317 380
317 321
Toxicity
831
2089
281
24 35
51 9D
128 204
321 524
34 3b 426
328b 459
1970 2075
275 214
40 40
86 78
222 182
460 483
428 468
463 431
Toxicity
2045 2017
257 2581
38 83
85 297
203 583
489 1135
441b2023
451b2128
2042
1916
2420
98
264
641
1230
1915
2329
2132
1932 1955
2461 2487
71 84
249 270
610 611
1139 1168
1904 1947
2354 227015
2108 2094b
-J
N)
Revertants/ug
extract3
Sample No. 33
Revertants/Ug
extract*
0.07
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
13
13
17
23
36
47
38
14
20
18
43
42
52
42
13
15
20
32
38
49
39
13
16
18
33
39
49
401
O.O6
1.72
39
78
135
264
588
50
54
139
243
573
40
63
152
260
539
2.60
43
65
142
54
129
227
550
4.93
53 47 51
123 106 119
212 211 217
483 490 508
567 1119 1048 955 1041
851 846 755 817b1768 1575 1573 1639b
1197 1177 1048 1141b2543 2383 2227 2384b
1.40
2.66
Itiis value is the slope of the reqression line based on various extract dose levels and does not identify response at a partic
tne response is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
^ot included in slope determination.
since
-------
REPORT 3B329
TABLE 3. AMES BIOASSAY (INITIAL AND REPEAT WITHOUS S-9) OP TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL
(WITH UNDERFLOOR CATALYTIC TRAP) EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES WITH EM-329-P
BASE FUEL DURING HFET, NYCC, AND 85 KPH
TA 98, Number of Revertants Per Plate
Dose, (lig) /plate
Initial
20
GO
100
200
400
600
1,000
Metabolic
Activation,
S-9
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
lirET
Sample 34
123 Avg
249 252 286 262
720 708 732 720
1406 1101 1225 1244
2294 2173 2140 2202
2245 2886 2750 2627b
2646 2791 2593 2677°
2705 2711 2867 2761
NYCC
Sample 35
1 2_ 3 Avg
275 285 228 263
589 580 525 565
919 789 827 845
1180 1514 1580 1591
1886 1963 2021 igS?1*
1774 1742 1789 1768°
1058 981 1150 106 3b
US kph
<)j)imilf> Ifi
123 Avg
363 393 419 392
919 BOO 989 903
1447 1345 1303 1365
2123 2211 2236 2190
2270 2466 2583 2440b
2344 2569 2629 2514b
1076 1972 2003 1894b
Revertants/us extract
Ropeatd
20
60
100
200
400
600
l.OOO
Sever tan ts/lig extract
10.76
7.36
6.08
8.71
9.82
No
No.
No
No
No
No
No
222 200 237 220
413 444 405 421
683 699 669 684
1365 1331 1211 1302
1932 1998 1852 1927b
2083 1893 1906 1961b
1094 1508 1316 1306b
260 325 '290 292
576 636 634 615
1139 1114 1097 1117
1802 1891 1842 1845
2278 2214 2214 2234b
2204 2327 2395 2309b
2416 2510 2634 2530b
349 333 321 334
799 802 765 789
1309 1302 1311 1307
1470 1796 1849 1705
2473 2306 2431 2403b
2099 2414 2371 2295b
1838 2119 2072 2010b
7.42
This value is the slope of the regression line based on various extract dose levels and does not identify
response at a particular extract since the response is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
"Hot included in slope determination.
^Initial TA-98 media, solvent, and positive controls used as per Table 2.
"Repeat TA-98 nedia, solvent, and positive controls used as per Table 4.
-------
REPORT 3B329
TABLE 4. AMES BIOASSAY (REPEAT) OF NATURALLY-ASPIRATED FIAT DIESEL (WITH CATALYTIC TRAP)
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-329-F BASE FUEL DURING FTP
Sample
Identification
HeJla Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Positive Controls
NaN3
9AA
2NF
2AA
Sample NO. 33
Metabolic
Dose,
jug)/plate
Hurcbcr of Bevettanta Per Plate
Revertants/pg
extract*
Sample No. 33
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Activation,
S-9
No
Yea
No
Ho
No
No
Yes
Mo
No
No
No
NO
No
No
1
42
22
34
383
300
IB
33
25
TA 1535
2
23
15
26
319
308
41
20
30
28 30
30 23
11 9
Toxicity
3
23
18
32
363
296
24
31
27
10
25
28
Avg 1
29 12
18
31 U
355
733
301
28 41
28 85
27 265
TA 1537
2 3
17 8
11 11
418 426
32 25
71 102
233 216
23 477 422 499
26b 364 433 444
16b 269 273 264
Toxicity
-0.03
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
18
20
34
42
54
52
11
34
27
34
46
67
62
19
26
40
39
42
55
56
22
26
29
36
43
59
57
17b
Avg
12
13
526
33
86
238
466
414b
269b
2.49
TA
1 2
16 8
31 24
16 12
2335 2358
353 254
60 57
188 170
460 538
1538
3
10
28
ia
2255
275
54
209
464
1132 1094 1006
822 1014 1253
684 417 513
Toxicity
81 67
235 202
330 353
654 588
993 918
1436 1159
827 774
82
196
360
615
Avg 1
11 38
28 33
15 17
2316 1885
294 2503
57 69
189 193
487 449
1077 994
1030b1352
538b1925
1913
5.85
77 45
211 89
348 254
619 549
987 966 1135
1125 1240b1449
819 807b2231
TA 98
2 3
20 32
42 32
28 21
1863 1784
2562 2401
80 71
198 209
475 460
945 956
1165 1261
2015 2059
2083 1946
66 56
98 91
265 236
528 466
1056 990
1604 1515
1995 2035
AV9_
30
36
22
1844
2489
73
200
461
965
1259
2000b
1981b
3.19
56
93
252
514
1060
1523b
2087b
Revertants/Mg
extract*
0.06
2.30
2.71
This value is the elope of the reqresslon line based on various extract dose levels and does not identify response at a particular extract since
the response is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
^ot included in slope determination.
-------
study compared to the initial bioassay. TA 1538 in the presence of an S9 mix
showed a mutagenlc response to sample 33 that was greater than that observed in
the initial bioassay. The resulting slope was 2.30 revertants/ug in the repeat
study, compared to 1.40 In the initial bioassay. In addition, TA 98 exhibited a
increased mutagenlc response to sample 33 in the presence of an S9 mix. The
resulting slope was 2.71 in the repeat study which compares favorably to 2.66 in
the Initial bioassay.
In summary, sample 33 was very weakly mutagenic in TA 1535 with metabolic
activation; the absence of S9 reveals little or no mutagenic activity. A posi-
tive response was obtained in strain TA 1537 without activation. A positive
response was also observed in TA 1538 and TA 98 both with and without metabolic
activation. In TA 1538 and in TA 98, S9 decreased mutagenic activity. Samples
34, 35, and 36 were mutagenic in TA 98 without metabolic activation.
P-75
-------
SOUTHWEST FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION
P.O. BOX 28147 W. LOOP 410 AT MILITARY DR. SAN ANTONIO. TEXAS 78284 TELEPHONE (512) 674-1410
December 9, 1981
Final Report
3B469
In Vitro Ames Salmonella/microsomal Mutagenicity Assay of Four Samples Received
from Southwest Research Institute and Generated from a Fiat Turbocharged Diesel
(with underfloor catalytic trap) using Fuel EM-469-F
Submitted by:
^ f .
Arnaldo J. Noyo-Ta, M.A. Milton V. Marshall, Ph.D.
Assistant Research Scientist Associate Foundation Scientist
P-76
-------
Introduction
Southwest Foundation for Research and Education examined four samples for
mutagenicity using the Ames Salmonella typhimurium bioassay. The samples were
received on November 5, 1981, and were identified as sample 37 (FTP 723) with a
weight of 0.192871 g, sample 38 (HFET 726) with a weight of 0.035294 g, sample 39
(NYCC 728) with a weight of 0.047145 g, and sample 40 (85 kph 731) with a weight
of 0.031133'g. An Aroclor 12C4-stimulated rat liver homogenate metabolic
activation system (S9 mix) was Included 1n sample 37 using tester strains TA 98,
TA 1535, and TA 1538. In addition, sample 37 was tested in the absence of an S9
mix using tester strains TA 98, TA 1535, TA 1537, and TA 1538. Samples No. 38,
39, and 40 were tested using tester strain TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic
activation system.
All samples were dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and tested at seven
levels of sample concentration consisting of 20, 60, 100, 200, 400, 600, and 1000
ug/plate. Each sample concentration was tested in triplicate with and without an
S9 mix and on specific tester strains as indicated in the above paragraph. A
complete set of positive and negative controls was incorporated into the bioassay
to demonstrate that the system was working within optimum ranges. Finally, a
duplicate bioassay of the above samples and controls was conducted as a standard
procedure to compare and evaluate the data.
P-77
-------
Results
A range finding study was conducted on sample no. 37 in tester strains TA 98
and TA 1535. The range finding study as shown in Table 1 disclosed that sample
no. 37 wes reactive in tester strain TA 98, both with and without metabolic acti-
vation, although the reactivity was enhanced by the presence of metabolic acti-
vating enzymes. The sample was toxic to the tester organisms at 2000 ug/ plate.
Consequently, it was determined that an upper limit of 1000 pg/plate would be
appropriate for definitive testing, and a range of concentrations from 20 to 1000
ug/plate was selected. In TA 1535, no mutagenicity was observed without meta-
bolic activation. Using an S9 fraction for metabolic activation, increased
mutagenic activity was observed. Again, toxicity was observed at 2000 jig/plate.
In the initial bioassay, the results indicate that the negative and positive
controls are within the optimum range established for our laboratory. The known
positive mutagei.s which we routinely use on specific tester strains with and
without an S9 mix clearly illustrate the ability of the tester strains to incor-
porate mutagens into their genetic structure, causing a significant increase in
the number of revertants over the negative controls (Tables 2 and 4).
In Table 2, sample no. 37 showed a negative mutagenic response in tester
strain TA 1535 when exposed to the seven chemical levels in the absence of an S9
fraction; toxicity was observed at 600 ug/plate. TA 1537 minus S9 demonstrated a
greater mutagenic response than TA 1535 with a resulting slope of 1.27
revertants/yg extract. Toxicity was also observed at levels above 400 ug/plate.
TA 1538 minus S9 showed a greater mutagenic response than both TA 1537 and TA
1535. At 400 ug/plate, there was an average of 1120 revertants/plate. The
P-78
-------
REPORT 3B469
TABLE 1. AMES BIOASSAY (RANGE-FINDING) OF TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL (WITH UNDERFLOOR CATALYTIC TRAP)
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH F.M-469-F FUEL DURING FTP
Sample
Identification
Media Control
Ho J 1,1 Control
Colvant Control
(Filtor Blank)
Positive Controls
NaNj
9AA
2NK
2AA
Sample 37
Revertants/ug
extract3
Sample 37
Revertants/pg
extract"
Dose,
(l)q)/plato
1
10
100
500
1000
2000
1
10
100
500
1000
2000
v
Metabolic
Activation,
S-9
No
No
No
No
No
Yea
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Number of Rcvcrtants Per Plate
TA 1535
1 2 3
42 23 23
22 IS 18
34 26 32
383 319 3C1
100 108 296
28 22
32 33
26 22
17 30
8 15
Toxiclty
19 29
17 21
32 22
47 54
35 29
Toxlcity
Avg 1
29
18
11
355
101
25
33
24
24
12
24
19
27
51
32
TA 1537 TA 153B TA
2 3 Avg 1 2 3 Avg 1 2
38 20
11 42
17 28
1885 1861
2501 2562
30 33
40 42
417 342
1526 1409
1777 1718
1710 1411
41 42
57 57
196 195
1015 1U03
1820 1673
2154 2071
.
98
3 Avg
32 10
12 16
21 22
1784 1844
2401 2489
32
41
380
1468
1748
1561b
42
57
196
1009
1747
2113b
This value is the slope of the regression line based on various extract dose Ievel3 and does not identify response at a particular extract since
the response is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
Tlot included in slope determination.
-------
REPORT 3B469
TABLE 2. AMES BIOASSAY (INITIAL) OF TUROBCMARGED FIAT DIESEL (WITH UNDERFLOW CATALYTIC TRAP)
EXHAUST PARTICUIATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-469-F FUEL DURING FTP
TJ
Sample
Identification
Media Control
Media Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Positive Con'trols
Metabolic
Dose,
(pg)/plate
Number of Ravertants Per Plate
9AA
2NF
2AA
Sample 37
Revertants/yg
extract3
Sample 37
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
fcjvertants/Ug
extract*
Activation ,
S-9
No
Yes
No
1
19
10
17
TA 1535
2
21
12
11
3 Avg
13 IB
16 13
18 15
1
6
10
TA 1537
2
4
8
3 Avg
6 5
5 B
1
14
24
16
TA
2
9
23
14
1538
3 Avg
13 12
19 22
10 13
TA 98
1
9
15
14
2
10
32
15
3 Avg
17 12
27 25
17 15
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
NO
No
No
NO
No
210
219
30
22
17
18
26
18
12
204
232
19
13
16
15
18
26
13
221
183
22
19
12
16
14
19
17
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
212
1653 1913 1725 1764
211
2186 2030 2048 2088 1383 1560 1489 1477
2097 2252 2192 2180 1838 2042 1934 1940
30
22
17
18
26
18
12
19
18
19
18
33
46
22
19
13
16
15
18
26
13
IB
15
21
15
32
51
29
22
19
12
16
14
19
17
-0
19
12
23
19
33
47
30
24 21
Jfi 56
IB 91
16 214
i9 500
21b 518
14b 281
.01
19
15
21
17
33
48
27b
IB
49
91
219
4B3
533
321
15
42
80
234
481
56 "
297
18 41
49 148
87 353
222 747
488 1148
539b1125
300b 387
1.27
88
235
353
662
1282
1339
1424
42
152
356
651
1100
1240
408
76
237
343
628
1113
1612
1396
46
149
356
706
1113
1137
380
80
211
331
620
1082
1483
1385
43 44
150 174
355 305
701 629
1120 1140
1167b1510
392b1567
2.86
81 57
228 134
342 232
637 446
1159 905
1478b1508
1402b1901
58 48
192 131
353 289
592 543
1126 994
1504 1449
1664 1646
52 51
128 124
255 200
444 445
1023 964
1435 1400
1906 1241
50
166
316
588
1087
1488b
1626b
2.72
53
129
229
445
964
1448
1683°
0.05
2.80
2.43
This value i= the slope of the regression lino based on various extract dose levels and does not identify response at a particular extract since
the respoi.ae is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
Ttot included in slope t-j<-.e- ination.
-------
resulting slope was 2.86 revertants/ug of sample extract. Toxicity was observed
at higher levels of extract. In the absence of S9 mix, TA 98 demonstrated a
slightly lower mutagenic response to the above sample than TA 1538. At 400
ug/plate there was an average of 1087 revertants/plate with a resulting slope of
2.72 revertants/ug of sample extract.
In the presence of an activation system, decreased mutagenicity was observed
for sample no. 37 in strains TA 1538 and TA 98. Sample no. 37 illustrated a very
weak mutagenic response on tester strain TA 1535 with a resulting slope of 0.05
revertants/ug extract. At 400 ug/plate, TA 1538 responded with an average of
1159 revertants/plate with a resulting slope of 2.80 revertants/ug. TA 98 exhib-
ited a decreased mutagenic response to the sample when S9 was employed with an
average of 964 revertants/plate at a sample concentration of 400 ug/plate. The
resulting slope was 2.43 revertants/ug of sample extract.
Table 3 illustrates the results obtained from the other three samples tested
using TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activation system. In the initial bio-
assay, sample 38 Illustrated a strong mutagenic response in the absence of an S9
mix. At 200 ug/plate TA 98 showed an average of 1715 revertants/plate with a
resulting slope of 8.53 revertants/ug of sample extract. Sample 39 had a slope
of 1.55 revertants/ug of sample extract with an average of 621 revertants at a
sample concentration of 400 ug/plate. Sample 40 showed an average of 1879
revertants at a sample concentration of 200 ug/plate with a resulting slope of
8.96 revertants/ug of sample extract.
Table 3 also shows the results of the repeat bioassays on samples 38, 39,
and 40 using tester strain TA 98 in the absence of a metabolic activation system.
P-81
-------
13
CD
M
REPORT 3B469
TABLE 3. AMES BIOASSAV (INITIAL AND REPEAT WITHOUT S-9) OP TURBOCHARGED PIAT DIESEL
(WITH UNDERFLOOR CATALYTIC TRAP) EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES WITH
EM-469-F FUEL DURING HFET, NYCC, AND 85 KPH
TA9Q, Number of Bovertants Per Plate
Dose,
late
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Revertants/pg extract9
_d
Revertants/yg extract3
Metabolic
HFET
Activation,
S-9
Nf>
No
NO
No
No
No
No
1
186
499
1048
1874
2336
2737
2658
Sample 38
2
208
473
943
1681
2408
2631
2673
3
201
516
924
1590
2357
2641
2678
Avg
198
496
972
1715
2367b
2670b
2670b
1
43
86
131
303
687
840
800
NYCC
Sairplc 39
2
39
98
137
291
546
846
874
3
38
97
137
310
629
639
821
Avq 1
40 239
94 674
135 1092
301 2024
621 2330
775b 2684
832b 2067
85
kph
Sample 40
2
275
630
1004
1788
2432
2720
2184
3
265
616
892
1825
2470
2652
2089
Avg
260
640
996
1879
2411b
2685b
2113b
8.53
1.55
8.96
No
No
NO
No
NO
NO
NO
201
542
930
1877
2127
2722
2484
247
470
884
1774
2458
2744
2448
187
518
650
1743
2471
2617
2393
212
510
888
1798
2453b
2694b
2442b
45
98
159
392
580
876
853
46
91
164
364
585
806
859
36
90
151
338
593
746
853
42 285
93 783
158 1042
365 1955
586 2479
809b 2693
855b 2162
344
813
1188
1834
2289
2576
2244
30 i
821
1141
1981
2437
2596
1647
311
806
1124
1923
2402b
2622b
2018b
8.91
1.47
8.72
aThis value is the' slope of the regression line baaed on various extract dose levels and does not identify
response at' a particular extract since the response if not completely linear over the entire concentration
used. ' '
Not included in slope determination.
"Initial TA-98 media, solvent, and positive controls used as per Table 2.
Repeat TA-98 media, solvent, and positive controls used as per Table 4.
-------
The repeat study of sample 38 demonstrated an increased mutagenic response when
compared to the initial bioassay with a slope of 8.91 revertants/yg compared to
8.53 in the initial bioassay. Sample 39 exhibited a decreased mutagenic response
in TA 98 with a slope of 1.47 in the repeat study which compares favorably with
the slope of 1.55 obtained in the inital bioassay. Finally, sample 40 demon-
strated a decreased mutagenic response in the repeat bioassay with a resulting
slope of 8.72, compared to a slope of 8.96 obtained in the initial bioassay.
Toxicity was observed in samples 38 and 40 at levels greater than 200 pg/plate;
sample 39 was toxic at levels above 400 yg/plate.
Table 4 demonstrates the results of the duplicate bioassay of sample no. 37.
The duplicate positive and negative controls are within experimental range for
each tester strain as compared to the initial bioassay described in Table 2. In
the repeat bioassay minus an S9 mix, TA 1535 showed a mutagenic response slightly
above background when exposed to sample No. 37. At a sample concentration of 400
ug/plate, 30 revertants/plate were observed. The slope for sample 33 in TA 1537,
1.31 was nearly identical to that obtained in the initial bioassay, 1.27. The
same sample minus S9 mix using TA 1533 demonstrated a slope of 2.23 in the repeat
study which was nearly Identical to the slope of 2.86 observed in the initial
bioassay. In the repeat study, TA 98 elicited a higher mutagenic response to
sample 37 in the absence of an S9 mix. A resulting slope of 2.95 revertants/ug
of sample extract was obtained in the repeat study using TA 98 compared to a
slope of 2.72 in the initial bioassay.
In the presence of a metabolic activation system, the above sample results
compared favorably with the results of the initial bioassay. TA 1535 illustrated
similar weak response to sample no. 37, 0.08 revertant/ug, in the repeat study
P-83
-------
REPORT 3B469
TABLE 4. AMES BIOASSAY (REPEAT) OF TURBOCHARGED FIAT DIESEL (WITH UNDERFLOOR CATALYTIC TRAP)
EXHAUST PARTICULATE ORGANIC SOLUBLES OBTAINED WITH EM-469-F FUEL DURING FTP
CO
Sample
Identification
Kjdia Control
htedla Control
Solvent Control
(Filter Blank)
Positive Controls
NaNj
9AA
2NF
2AA
Sample 37
Metabolic
Dose,
(gg)/plate
Number of Rovortants Per Plate
Revertants/pg
extract"
Sample 37
Revert an ts/ug
extract8
Activatioi
No
Yes
No
i.
30
8
20
TA
24
20
23
1535
26
17
25
Avg_
21
15
23
13
9
TA 1
7
7
537
3
8
8
Avg
9
8
13
20
13
TA
6
22
22
1538
12
21
14
Avg
10
21
16
16
27
21
TA <
2
9
30
17
)B
3
17
30
21
14
29
20
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
314
249
29
20
29
32
31
22
13
298
336
24
25
24
27
26
19
17
326
305
21
22
26
20
32
28
15
313
1721
297
25
22
26
26
30
"b
15b
27
58
122
288
540
526
401
1357
26
76
131
333
530
516
341
1758
27
70
124
279
472
437
434
1612
2491
2123
27 53
68 157
126 226
300 525
514 951
493b1151
392b 796
2385
1996
64
167
333
540
941
1160
898
2574 2483 1937 1891 2100 1976
2034 2051 1773 1615 1659 1682
55 57 42 59 54 52
144 156 162 177 165 108
249 269 419 397 328 381
433 499 683 619 647 650
836 909 1256 1196 1096 1183
969 1093b1580 1462 1394 1479b
811 835b1536 1647 1681 1638b
0.01
1.31
2.23
2.95
20
60
100
200
400
600
1000
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yea
Yes
Yes
14
14
21
27
68
61
33
20
13
21
32
50
46
30
13
24
32
43
52
59
36
16
17
25
34
57
55
33b
99 93 84 92 66 45 60 57
232 226 203 220 137 127 130 131
241 324 322 329 248 241 214 234
653 684 633 657 420 463 427 437
1188 1183 1187 1186 1010 983 976 990
1604 1595 1556 1585b1491 1392 1422 1435
1620 1587 1536 1581b2124 2158 2115 2132b
0.08
2.88
2.42
aThis value is the elope of the reqression line based on various extract dose levels and does not identify response at a particular extract since
the response is not completely linear over the entire concentration used.
included in slope determination.
-------
compared to 0.05 in the initial bioassay. TA 1538 in the presence of an S9 mix
showed a mutagenic response to sample 37 that was similar to that observed 1n
the Initial bioassay. The resulting slope was 2.88 revertants/ug in the repeat
study, compared to 2.80 in the Initial bioassay. In addition, TA 98 exhibited a
decreased mutagenic response to sample 37 in the presence of an S9 mix. The
resulting slope was 2.42 in the repeat study which is nearly identical to 2.43
obtained in the initial bioassay.
In summary, sample 37 was very weakly mutagenic in TA 1535 with metabolic
activation; the absence of S9 reveals little or no mutagenic activity. A posi-
tive response was obtained in strain TA 1537 without activation. A positive
response was also observed in TA 1538 and TA 98 both with and without metabolic
activation. In TA 98, S9 decreased mutagenic activity. Samples 38, 39, and 40
were mutagenic in TA 98 without metabolic activation.
P-85
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Pteast read Instruction! on the reverse before completing!
1. REPORT NO.
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
5. REPORT DATE
CHARACTERIZATION OF EMISSIONS FROM ADVANCED AUTOMOTIVE
POWER PLANT CONCEPTS
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
D.A. Montalvo, and C.T. Hare
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME ANO
Southwest Research Institute
6220 Culebra Road
San Antonio, Texas 78284
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
C9YA1C/01-0457 (FY-84)
It. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-2703
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME ANO ADDRESS
Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory - RTP, NC
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/09
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
Emissions from three diesel cars using two fuel formulations were assessed.
The three diesel cars included a prototype naturally-aspirated Fiat 131, *a prototype
turbocharged Fiat 131, and a 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme. Each Fia^t was tested
with and without a prototype catalytic trap. Vehicle operating procedures used for
test purposes included the 1981 Federal Test Procedures as well as the Highway Fuel
Economy Test, the New York City Cycle, and an 85 km/hr steady-state cruise. Both
regulated and unregulated gaseous and particulate emissions were measured. Organic
solubles in particulate were analyzed for various constituents and characteristics
including fractionation .by relative polarity, benzo(a)pyrene (BaP), and mutagenic
activity by Ames bioassay.
Application of the catalytic trap oxidizer system to the Fiat prototypes
resulted in significant reductions of organic and carbon monoxide emissions under
all transient driving conditions examined. Total particulate emissions were reduced
an average of 55 percent with the turbocharged engine and 65 percent with the
naturally-aspirated engine. The Ames assay mutagenic response (revertants/vg) of
the particulate phase organics was elevated by the catalytic exhaust aftertreatment
device, however the emission rates (revertants/km) were reduced an average of 66
percent with the turbocharged and 73 percent with the naturally-aspirated engines.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lOENTIFIEHS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Croup
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
EPA Form 2220-1 (R»». 4-77) pmvioui «DITION is OBSOLETE
19. SECURITY CLASS (Till! Rtport)
UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES
20. SECURITY CLASS (Tllitpagt)
UNCLASSIFIED
22. PRICE
-------
IMPORTANT NOTICE
Effective on orders received June 1, 1985, the following
NTIS shipping and handling charges apply:
U.S., Canada, Mexico, - ADD $3 per TOTAL ORDER
All other Countries - ADD $4 per TOTAL ORDER
Exceptions - Does NOT apply to:
ORDERS REQUESTING NTIS RUSH HANDLING
ORDERS FOR SUBSCRIPTION OR STANDING ORDER PRODUCTS ONLY
NOTE: Each additional delivery address on an order requires a separate
shipping and handling charge.
-------
^^^^^^^'^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^f^^^^i
*'j$:11."-* r~' : '^$^'^~'-'':'-^& '^;-:>^^',-'V'
-p.,..W -tf»^.r,^-it.s r'iit^.. ( ^^^^^^
^T^r^' TJ fm-'-1»Jw\r'< ^\ (j P"^oc*"--y-w
------- |