-------
The potential for emissions reduction through careful control of engine-
operation conditions, through exhaust gas recirculation and catalytic reactors
is readily apparent.
EMISSIONS ATTRIBUTABLE TO ELECTRIC VEHICLES
When discussing automotive emissions, it is often proposed that the
electric vehicle is an especially attractive alternative in that is con-
tributes no contaminates to the atmosphere during operation. This is true.
However, electrical stored energy systems derive their power from electric
generating plants and a case can be made that the consumption of fossil
fuel by these facilities produce pollution which in turn can be attributable
to electric vehicle operation.
In introducing an investigation of the magnitude of this pollution,
it will be assumed that electric vehicles travel 1.6 miles per kilo-watt
hour consumed^. In allowing for power station efficiency, the thermal
energy required for this is 164 miles per million Btu.
If coal is used as a plant fuel, a conservative assumption is that
it is 10% ash and contains 2% sulphur. Its heating value is 26 x 106 Btu/
ton. Using a recognized source •*, the amount of pollution emitted by the
electrical generating plant in producing power for electric vehicle con-
sumption may be expressed in grams per mile as follows:
CQL H£ U0_x SQ.2 Particulate
.05 .02 2 8 0.3
By investigation, it is noted that although CO and HC emissions are
effectively eliminated, pollution by NOX, SQ2» and particulates becomes
critical.
Further areas of research on this issue might concern an evaluation
of the thermal pollution contributes by nuclear power plants or an evaluation
of equipment efficiency in eliminating contaminants caused by the combustion
of fossil fuels.
4. Average distance traveled by electric vehicles entered in the CACR.
5. Duprey, R. L., "Complication of Air Pollutant Emission Factors,"
Public Health Service, Department of Health, Education and Welfare,
1968.
-98-
-------
-------
IV. A DISCUSSION OF AUTOMOTIVE FUELS USED IN THE CLEAN AIR CAR RACE
ROLE OF THE COMMITTEE
The organization committee encountered several large-scale logistical
problems in preparing for the 1970 Clean Air Car Race (CACR) , one of which
was the supply of different fuel types to the entrant team test vehicles.
At first, the standard policy called for each team to assume individual
responsibility for securing and financing its own supply. By late spring,
however, the committee was in a position to arrange for distribution systems
for the most commonly used fuels. The committee had also accepted the
responsibility for the design and construction of a cross-country "electric
car expressway" along the CACR route.
With a rapid response from the CACR teams in returning their preliminary
applications, the committee noted that internal combustion engine powered
vehicles (Class I) appeared to dominate the entrant list, and that fuel
selection usually fell into one of three areas:
1. natural gas, both liquid, (LNG) and compressed (CNG)
2. liquid petroleum gas (LPG)1
3. gasoline, both leaded and unleaded
Although the actual breakdown of fuel types would remain unknown until the
entrants reported to MIT for the week of pre-race testing, initial plans
assumed that most teams would be using one of the three possibilities listed
above.
Concern for the hazards of transporting potentially dangerous fuels
led the committee to establish contact with the Federal government's
Department of Transportation (DOT) for the purpose of investigating national
and state safety regulations on this matter. Law required that a petition
be filed by any individual transporting fuel not in compliance with the
procedure described in the Federal Register (Volume 33, Number 108, parts
171-190). To assist entrant teams in this matter, the committee sent a
representative to the appropriate government offices for the purpose of
describing the CACR event, while simultaneously endorsing petitions received
by DOT from the entrants. Due to time limitations, the Federal government
gave special consideration to the CACR, and those entrants using hazardous
fuels obtained their permits with only minimal difficulty.
By mid-summer, the committee was setting up complete fuel distribution
systems for LNG, LPG, and electrically powered vehicles. It was unfortunate,
1. The primary component of LPG is propane.
-100-
-------
however, that time and manpower limitations did not permit the committee
from assisting all group fuel users, most of which did not experience any
insurmountable problems.
SUMMARY OF THE FUEL TYPES USED
The final breakdown on the number of teams using each fuel type is
shown in Table VI-1. The most common fuel, LPG, was used by sixteen of
the 43 entrants (37%).
Table VI-1; Fuel Type Breakdown of CACR Entrants
Fuel Type Total Users
Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG) 16*
Electricity 8b
Unleaded Gasoline 7°
Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) 4
Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) 3
Leaded Gasoline 2
Methanol 2
Diesel Oil 1
Lead Sterile Gasoline 1
Aviation Fuel (JP4) 1
Kerosene 1
Due to the unusually short development time (no more than five months
in most cases), many student teams were forced to utilize conventional
engine systems and a large number of ICE entrant applications were received
early in the competition. With low exhaust emissions being of prime im-
portance, a ready-made solution appeared to be the selection of a substitute
for gasoline, namely, a less complex hydrocarbon fuel such as LNG, CNG, or
LPG. These fuels are advantageous for two reasons: 1) There are fewer
problems with vaporization of the fuel prior to combustion during a cold
start of the engine, and 2) the engine can run leaner, thus admitting
fewer hydrocarbon chains to the combustion chamber.
Therefore, with only slight engine modifications necessary (some
standard conversion kits are available commercially), many entrants quickly
converted their power plants to run on one of these gaseous fuels. Had
the 1970 CACR been conceived and announced at an earlier date, the number
of entrants using other fuel types would very likely have increased.
a. Includes one hybrid and one steam entrant
b. Includes all three hybrid entrants
c. Includes two hybrid entrants
d. Steam entrant
-101-
-------
DISCUSSION OF THE FUEL TYPES USED
A comparison of the basic data on all fuel types used in the CACR can
be found in label VI-2.
The following sections will discuss the use of the various fuels used
in the CACR mentioning the entrants, supply source and distribution system
for each fuel. A description of each entrant's vehicle fuel system is
included in Appendix B.
A. Leaded Gasoline
With few exceptions, the automobile of today was designed to operate
on leaded gasoline. Tetraethyl lead is a gasoline additive used to in-
crease the octane rating and to permit higher operating temperature and
pressures within the engine cylinders. The initial use of tetraethyl lead
resulted from the discovery that engine knock could very easily be eliminated
with this additive. Another positive effect was the lead deposits on the
cylinder head which provided a cushion for the valves.
Two entrants in the CACR ran exclusively on leaded gasoline: LSU (31)
and WPI (33).2 Both vehicles were 1970 American-made automobiles containing
a standard internal combustion engine. Refueling for each was executed at
commercial service stations on the route, and fuel was carried in standard
tanks.
B. Unleaded Gasoline
Nearly all of the lead particulate emissions in the atmosphere are
attributable to the tetraethyl lead additive in commercial gasoline. In an
attempt to eliminate this and because they were using catalytic reactors,
seven entrants in the race ran on unleaded gasoline. They were: UC
Berkeley (30), WPI (32), Michigan (34), Michigan (35), Wisconsin (37),
MIT (70), WPI (71).
While unleaded gasoline has been made commerically available since
the CACR, it was unavailable at most common service facilities until and
including the race. During the spring, one entrant school (Wisconsin) was
able to solicit an adequate supply of unleaded gasoline from Chevron
(California) for use during the CACR. When additional applications were
received from entrants also considering unleaded gasoline, the committee
referred them to the Wisconsin team. The first two additional schools
doing so entered into a fuel sharing agreement; however, subsequent
entrants were asked by Wisconsin to make their own arrangements as the
Chevron fuel was not sufficient to supply all requesting test vehicles.
2. All entrants will be identified by their common abbrieviated name
and vehicle number in this chapter. See Appendix A for complete
name.
-102-
-------
Table VI-2: FUEL CHARACTERISTICS
I
»-'
o
I
Gasoline-leaded & unleaded
(values for isooctane)
Liquefied Petroleum Gas
(propane)
Compressed Natural Gas
Liquefied Natural Gas
(methane)
Methyl Alcohol
(raethanol)
Diesel Oil
Kerosene
Aviation Fuel (JP4)
Specific
Gravity
(H20=l)
0.69
0.5
0.3
0.79
___
Heating
Value
(Btu/lb)
20,556
21,484
23,650
23,650
9,770
19,600*
18,300*
18,300*
Boiling Temp.
at 1 a tin.
(°F)
211
-44
-259
149
475*
_.w«l.
Storage
Pressure
(p.s.i)
Atm.
75-150
2,200
75-120
Atm.
Atm.
Atm.
Atm.
Storage
Temperature
(°F)
Ambient
Ambient
Ambient
-259 (approx.)
Ambient
Ambient
Ambient
Ambient
Approximate values: +. 10%
-------
At this time the committee, on behalf of the unleaded entrants,
approached a large midwestern oil company and requested that additional
unleaded gasoline be donated to the CACR. The company refused. However,
after being informed of the situation, Engelhard Industries3 offered to
purchase and ship the necessary additional fuel.
Unlike the commercially available leaded gasoline, the unleaded fuel
was stored on or near the impound area at each host campus. Upon arriving,
the entrant vehicle would proceed directly to the refueling area and tank
up for the following day's run. The trail vehicle crew would then fill
several standard 5-gal. containers with enough additional fuel to sustain
the test vehicle for the entire leg. This "piggy-back" method was used
by all unleaded-gasoline entrants, with refueling taking place at various
locations off the interstate highway.
C. Lead Sterile Gasoline
One entrant - Wayne State (36) - used lead sterile gasoline. Unlike
unleaded gasoline, lead sterile fuel has had all traces of lead removed^
and is available only as a testing fuel. For this particular entrant,
fuel for the entire route was carried in the trail vehicle before being
transferred to an 18-gal. polyethylene tank that had replaced the con-
ventional tank in the test vehicle.
D. Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG)
As mentioned previously, the most commonly used fuel in the CACR was
LPG. The sixteen entrants using LPG included: San Jose State (10),
Stanford (11), UC Berkeley (12), USF (15), Evansville (16), Tufts (17),
WPI (18), Buffalo State (19), Villanova (20), SMU (21), Wisconsin (22),
St. Clair (23), Whitworth (24), Putnam City West (52), Toronto (75), and
UCSD (80). Fuel system modification procedure called for the entrants to
replace standard fuel tanks with ASME-approved pressure vessels to carry
the LPG (HD-5) under moderate pressure. The LPG can be handled and trans-
ferred from supply tank to vehicle fuel tank by means of pressure hoses
with quick-connect couplings. Putnam City West (52) also carried a pressure
vessel for CNG. This could be recharged overnight, and used as an alternative
to LPG for limited range travel.
When it became apparent that a large number of entrants would use LPG,
the committee contacted the National LP-Gas Association in Chicago and re-
3. This corporation had a strong interest in the CACR, as it had
donated catalytic reactors to many of the entrant teams.
4. The small amounts of lead present in the crude oil are not
removed from gasoline during the refining process.
-104-
-------
quested that it serve the CACR as a liaison in arranging refueling
facilities. The NLPGA subsequently contacted LP-gas dealers approximately
every 100 to 150 miles along the CACR route. In turn, the committee notified
all LPG entrants of the developments and called a general meeting for these
entrants during the pre-race week at MIT. During this session, an NLPGA
representative distributed a route guide describing the location and services
provided by some 62 cooperating LPG dealers.
Unfortunately, one major complication arose concerning the LPG provided
by many of the dealers. The CACR test vehicles required a clean form of
LPG to prevent regulator fouling. In many instances, impurities such as
compressor oil in the commerical LPG caused minor fuel system breakdowns.
E. Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)
Three of the entrants - Caltech (1), Caltech (2), and Georgia Tech (6) -
modified standard ICE's to run on compressed natural gas, which is almost
completely methane (CH4>. Each test vehicle's standard fuel tank was re-
placed by a series of high pressure vessels installed in the vehicle's
trunk, and the fuel system was adapted with a Pjieumetrics conversion kit to
accept natural gas.
Although CNG can be stored at ambient temperatures, high storage
pressure (over 2000 psi) is necessary for storage space considerations.
Even at these pressures, CNG requires over twice the volume of liquid
or liquefied gaseous fuel for the same amount of fuel (by weight).
For the these entrants the problem of obtaining a supplier was
critical, in that compressing the gas required both high-pressure storage
cylinders and a sophisticated compressor. The industrial sponsors for
these teams provided trucks in which an adequate supply of CNG for the
entire race route was transported, and refueling occurred at various exits
along the interstate highway.
F. Liquid Natural Gas (LNG)
The four entrant test vehicles running on liquefied methane (CH^) were
San Diego State (3), Lowell Tech (4), Northeastern (5), and Arizona
(51). With this fuel type, the standard gasoline tanks had to be replaced
by double-walled, vacuum insulated, stainless steel tanks to contain the
LNG (under moderate pressure). The conversion of the fuel supply system
in the vehicle required a different procedure than that used for CNG be-
cause the liquid natural gas had to be vaporized before being mixed with
engine intake air. The LNG is delivered to a carburetor (mixer) through
a series of valvas, pressure reducers, and a vaporizer.
The obvious advantage of storing the fuel in liquid form was trie
increased range of travel afforded by a single tank in the trunk. It
should be noted that pressure builds as the fuel absorbs heat from its
environment, and LNG cannot be stored for more than 24 hours without
venting to the atmosphere. A typical commuter vehicle using LNG would
probably use enough fuel daily to eliminate the necessity of venting.
-105-
-------
One entrant - Arizona (51) - had intended to use a hybrid fuel
of 90% methane (CH4) and 10% hydrogen (H2) by weight. Although this was
not done during the race, the hydrogen would have been carried in a press-
ure vessel, and mixed immediately before combustion. The advantage of this
plan is that methane-hydrogen mixtures can burn exceedingly lean and thus
substantially reduce emissions.
The problem of fuel supply was solved by the Lowell Gas Company (Lowell,
Massachusetts), which agreed to donate liquefied natural gas for the LNG-
fueled cars. The company, whl^e having the necessary license to transport
LNG in many northeastern states, found it necessary to secure permits for
all other states along the CACR route. The fuel was furnished from an
11,000 gallon tractor trailer which accompanied the race caravan. Vehicle
refueling was accomplished at each impound area.
G. Methanol
One entrant - Stanford (41) - used methyl alcohol (CH^OH), or methanol
as it is commonly called. A second entrant - Incline Village (50) - ran
on a half and half mixture of methanol and gasoline. Storage was by con-
ventional fuel tank, and as with unleaded gasoline, a master supply was
forwarded to each impound area where the entrant vehicle refueled at the
conclusion of a days run. The trail vehicle carried an excess supply
in the previously mentioned "piggy-back" method.
H. Diesel Oil
Although not common, automobiles are manufactured which run on
diesel fuel. One entrant, UCLA (42), using a Japanese-built diesel
engine (Diahatsu Co.), ran exclusively on this fuel type, which was
commercially available and easily stored in the vehicle's conventional
fuel tank.
I. Kerosene
One of the Rankine class entrants (class II), WPI (83), had planned
to use kerosene. While commercially available in many ordinary service
stations, the entrant did not go beyond the city limits of Boston.
J. Aviation Fuel
One entrant - the MIT turbine (90) - used JP4. However, the
engine itself was on loan from the U. S. Air Force, and as a result
was not intended to operate as an automotive power plant. Storage of
fuel on the vehicle itself was in an aluminum tank with baffles and
lined with reticulated foam. Refueling en route posed some problems,
as an airfield with fuel capabilities had to be located at each refueling
interval.
-106-
-------
K. Electric Power
The five entrant teams in the electric vehicle class included:
Georgia Tech (61), BU (62), lona (64), Cornell (65), and Stevens Institute
(66). Although the cross-country recharging station network was available
to all the electric entries, Georgia Tech and BU teams chose to demonstrate
the principle of "battery-pack switching." Each team employed two sets of
battery banks, one to operate the entrant vehicle while the other was being
recharged by a generator located in the trail vehicle. It should be
mentioned that the actual task of battery switching every hour was physically
demanding. The weight of a bank of the lead-acid batteries often approached
1500 Ibs. and required the services of all members of the driving team.
The other electric vehicle, entrants made use of recharging facilities
while the three electric hybrid carried optional connectors to these charg-
ing stations.
The problem of locating the new recharging facilities had been
reviewed by the participants in the 1968 Electric Car Race. In setting up
the final CACR cross-country route, the committee consulted with the part-
icipants in the 1968 Electric Car Race. With their recommendations, the
expanded plans called for a series of permanent "charging stations" every
50 to 70 miles along the route. Two members of the committee spent most
of the summer coordinating the placement of these charging stations while
the construction of the units was handled by Electric Fuel Propulsion,
Inc. of Detroit.
With assistance from the Edison Electric Institute and the National
Rural Electric Cooperative, the committee was successful in contacting
the individual utilities along the route and convincing them to purchase,
at cost of manufacture, the charging stations. Electrical power, while
accurately metered by these stations, would be provided at no cost to race
entrants. By late August, the nation's first "Transcontinental Electric
Expressway" had been completed from Boston to Pasadena.
A typical charging station (Fig. VI-1) consisted of weather-proof plastic
housing (61 x 2' 2" x 1'3"), reinforced with rectangual steel tubing,
and containing a Westinghouse 400-amp circuit breaker (LAB-3400 or equivalent).
The> connector was a Pyle-National 350-amp, 6-pin rectangular on ten feet of
4/0 insulated, flexible copper cable rated for 300 amps.
Sponsoring utilities were asked to purchase (@ $450 each), install,
connect, and maintain their respective stations. A list of these locations
is found in Table VI-3.
Actual recharging of the vehicles varied in length from 25 to 90 minutes.
Thus, it was apparent that the electric cars would take almost twice the
prescribed time to complete each leg, it not longer. Thus, those electric
cars which made it to California under their own power arrived two days later
than the race caravan. This emphasized the point that electric vehicles are
mainly proposed for transportation within urban areas and are not suitable
for transcontinental travel.
-107-
-------
.
Fig. VI-1: CACR Electric Charging Station
-108-
-------
Table VI-3
ELECTRIC CAR EXPRESSWAY
CHARGING STATIONS
LOCATIONS
Station Location
1. Cambridge, Massachusetts
2. Worcester, Massachusetts
3. Springfield, Massachusetts
4. Lee, Massachusetts
5. Albany, New York
6. Canajoharie, New York
7. Utica, New York
8. Syracuse, New York
9. Rochester, New York
10. Batavia, New York
11. Niagara Falls, New York
12. Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
13. Toronto, Ontario, Canada
14. Kitchener-Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
15. London, Ontario, Canada
16. Chatham, Ontario, Canada
17. Windsor, Ontario, Canada
18. Ann Arbor, Michigan
19. Jackson, Michigan
20. Kalamazoo, Michigan
21. Benton Harbor, Michigan
22. Gary, Indiana
23. Kankakee, Illinois
24. Rantoul, Illinois
25. Champaign-Urbana, Illinois
26. Mattoon, Illinois
27. Vandalia, Illinois
28. St. Louis, Missouri
29. Sullivan, Missouri
30. Rolla, Missouri
31. Lebanon, Missouri
32. Springfield, Missouri
33. Joplin, Missouri
Mileage to next station
45 miles
44 miles
50 miles
47 miles
53 miles
43 miles
53 miles
79 miles
37 miles
56 miles
42 miles
40 miles
64 miles
54 miles
69 miles
55 miles
50 miles
42 miles
64 miles
47 miles
68 miles
62 miles
62 miles
14 miles
49 miles
63 miles
68 miles
65 miles
40 miles
58 miles
48 miles
72 miles
45 miles
-109-
-------
Station Location
Mileage to next station
34. Vinita, Oklahoma
35. Tulsa, Oklahoma
36. Stroud, Oklahoma
37. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
38. Weatherford, Oklahoma
39. Sayre, Oklahoma
40. McLean, Texas
41. Amarillo, Texas
42. Plainville, Texas
43. Lubbock, Texas
44. Seagraves, Texas
45. Andrews, Texas
46. Odessa, Texas
47. Monahans, Texas
48. Pecos, Texas
49. Kent, Texas
50. Sierra Blanca, Texas
51. Fort Hancock, Texas
52. El Paso, Texas
53. Las Cruces, New Mexico
54. Deming, New Mexico
55. Lordsburg, New Mexico
56. Wilcox, Arizona
57. Tuscon, Arizona
58. Casa Grande, Arizona
59. Gila Bend, Arizona
60. Tacna, Arizona
61. Yuma, Arizona
62. El Centre, California
63. Ocotillo, California
64. Boulevard, California
65. Alpine, California
66. Del Mar, California
67. San Onofre, California
68. Santa Ana, California
69. Pasadena, California
56 miles
53 miles
54 miles
70 miles
59 miles
61 miles
72 miles
75 miles
50 miles
57 miles
46 miles
35 miles
37 miles
40 miles
51 miles
70 miles
35 miles
49 miles
53 miles
59 miles
60 miles
74 miles
79 miles
71 miles
62 miles
74 miles
44 miles
57 miles
32 miles
22 miles
24 miles
45 miles
40 miles
40 miles
40 miles
-110-
-------
COMMENTS AND IMPLICATIONS
The CACR managed to display 43 entrant vehicles that operated on 14
different fuels or combinations thereof. While the major thesis was directed
toward the system producing the least atmospheric contamination, it is most
difficult to evaluate the effects of the various fuels on exhaust emissions
for two reasons:
1) Some representative fuels were used in several entrant vehicles
while other fuels were used in but one vehicle. Therefore, statistical
comparisons between exhaust emissions data based on fuel type would not
be reliable.
2) The various types of modifications on individual power plants are
numerous in regard to the engine size, and displacement, number of cylinders,
and exhaust configuration. Thus, a cross-comparison would again be difficult
since the systems have no common standard.
However, certain general clarifications can be made between the fuels
in discussing the economic availability and distribution systems. The
committee has not attempted to investigate those issues of interest to the
economist in natural resource allocation, but several more obvious arguments
may be brought forward and the reader allowed to form his own opinions.
E conomi c Aval1ab ili ty
Note that the fuel types used in the CACR may be divided into three
somewhat general categories:
a) By-products or distillates of petroleum—gasoline, propane, diesel
oil, aviation fuel, kerosene.
b) Natural gas in either liquid (LNG) or gaseous (CNG) state.
c) Electrical power.
Note that the first two classifications are definitely derivatives
of what are referred to as fossil fuels. However, a complication arises
in that the production of electrical power—the third category—is still
almost completely dependent on electrical generating plants fired by fossil
fuels-*. Therefore, the first question appears to be which fuel do we wish
to produce from the natural resources we already have?
5. A small fraction of plants operate on hydro and nuclear sources.
-Ill-
-------
From a pollution standpoint, gaseous fuels (propane, natural gas)
appeared to contribute less to motor vehicle-contamination; however, no
attempt has been made to weight the industrial pollution caused by crude
cracking processes. Secondly, pollutants most critical in electrical power
production from a stationary source are the sulphur oxides, oxides of
nitrogen and particulates6. Thus, the issue of amounts emitted and comparative
toxicity arises. Are sulphur oxides more harmful to health and property
than carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons?
From a capital investment standpoint, the continuation of large-scale
production of conventional fuels would not require the retooling of existing
refinery facilities. Recognizing that the cracking process is quite complex,
a redefinition of product priorities available from crude would most assuredly
mean additional investments.
From a fuel modification standpoint, the most often discussed alternative
is the conversion from leaded premium to unleaded gasoline.
This raises the key issue of what octane rating must be maintained.
While no answer is quickly available, it should be remembered that a decrease
in the octane rating will lower thermal efficiency. Estimates have run from
six to ten per cent reduction from present values, and the cost to the
consumer due to this decreased efficiency would not be negligible.
Finally, from the viewpoint of natural resource reserves, it appears
that the presently discovered petroleum supplies will adequately support
America's accelerating consumption for several decades. A further economic
investigation would involved an assessment of the national oil import quota
policy.
Distribution Systems
While it was necessary for many of the entrants to "piggy-back" their
fuel supply each day, there is little doubt that the petroleum products
could be distributed in a service station facility network similar to those
that now exist for gasoline. Unleaded gasoline, diesel oil, kerosene,
aviation fuel, and methanol could use the existing distribution and storage
facilities with little or no revision.
The storage of compressed or liquid gases (LPG, LNG, CNG) presents a
critical investment, in that they require the installation of pressure vessels
in both the vehicle and the service locations. This raises an issue of safety.
Concerning vehicle storage vessels, the technical report of one CNG entrant
stated that his fuel system was constructed entirely with Underwriter's
6. See Chapter v for a analysis of electric vehicle emissions due to
electric generating plants.
-112-
-------
Laboratory and ASME approved components. In addition, a group of safety
engineers employed by an insurance underwriting firm adjudged that his
system "... should present no unusual operating problem or excessive
exposure to employees or guests."
In terms of distribution, it appears that electrical power shares the
same advantages as liquid petroleum by-products. A metered connector could
be installed at agent stations, and the power would be sold. Supporters
of the electrical vehicle concept are quick to point out that urban
commuters travel no more than 50-60 miles by car during the working day.
This is within the range of power storage requirements using today's
battery technology, and lends itself to the concept of recharging the
"urban" car overnight within the owner's garage or adjacent facilities.
Recharging timeS has been shown to be a handicap; however, the technique
employed by two entrants of switching battery packs is most interesting.
If battery configurations were standardized, then the vehicle carrying a
"spent" pack would simply "purchase" from the nearest agent a recharged
pack after pulling his pack and leaving it for a future consumer.
As a final point concerning electric vehicles, it was apparent that
stored energy electric cars were not a feasible solution for cross-country
(or intercity) travel. At present, it appears that the single most pressing
problem lies in the area of battery development'. The entrants ran on a
bank of conventional lead-acid batteries connected in series; these have
limited storage capacity and high weight.
The committee has attempted to correct the misconception that electric
vehicles did "poorly" in the 1970 CACR. The 3,600-mile trek was designed
to measure vehicle reliability, and was never intended that an electric,
car be compared with more conventional vehicles in Interstate highway
driving. They remain an interesting possibility for urban transportation.
In summary, the reader has seen that the issues surrounding fuel
selection are quite often the concern of the economist. When taken in con-
text with the remainder of this report, it is readily seen that picking the
"best" vehicle to operate on the "best" fuel is a problem of trade-offs
and requires more than just the skills of the engineer.
8. The CACR vehicles spent from 25 to 90 minutes per charge during
the race.
9. As of this writing, the automobile industry was experimenting with
a sodium-sulphur battery that would greatly improve the energy
density characteristics of a portable storage source.
-113-
-------
-------
VII. WHAT IT COST TO HAVE A CLEAN AIR CAR RACE
SUMMARY
The combination of planning for and staging the 1970 Clean Air
Car Race (CACR), as well as conducting a follov/-up documentation effort
has resulted in an accumulation of funds and services totaling on the
order of $.75 million. This figure is calculated on the basis of both
dollars and contributions of manpower and equipment which the committee
realized during its period of operation—February, 1970, to January, 1971.
Altogether, the teams involved in the CACR, including preliminary
entrants who never reached the starting line, numbered slightly over 100.
It is plausible to estimate that they spent between $.5 and $.75 million
in preparing their vehicle entries for the competition. The cost range
has been computed on the basis of estimates for hardware acquisition, use
of testing facilities, student-faculty manpower, and cross-country travel.
A cost estimate for the peripheral efforts of industrial and govern-
ment concerns has not been worked out. The figure could reasonably lie
anywhere between $.1 and $.5 million.
More than 1000 individuals from educational institutions participated
directly in either the design and construction of vehicle power plants or
the administration, public relations, and fund raising aspects of the
individual team efforts.
In summary, anywhere between $1.35 and $2.0 million is the total cost
estimate for the staging of the 1970 Clean Air Car Race. If as many as
1000 individuals from various educational institutions did in fact parti-
cipate in the CACR, then a reasonable cost per capita figure lies somewhere
between $1,350 and $2,000 for a year's worth of educational activity.
Interestingly enough, a year's worth of education at today's private
institutions, such as MIT, costs more than $2,000.
-116-
-------
SECTION A
A HISTORY OF THE CACR FUND RAISING CAMPAIGN
When the Clean Air Car Race was officially launched with a public
announcement in late November of 1969, financial support for the pro-
posed undertaking was practically non-existent. Dr. Milton Clauser of
the MIT Lincoln Laboratories had submitted a request to the General Motors
Corp. for a grant of $100,000 to cover the cost of organizing the compe-
tition and providing funds for distribution to some of the entrant teams.
Action had not been taken on Dr. Clauser's request at that time, and, as
matters turned out, a final decision would not be forthcoming until mid-
April of 1970.
Despite the lack of definite financial support, the organization com-
mittee was formed and the assistance of MIT's Corporation chairman,
Dr. James Killian. was immediately requested. Because the committee had
commenced its activities without any operating funds, Dr. Killian acted
quickly by seeking personal contributions from members of the MIT Corpora-
tion and Planning Committee. Convinced of the CACR's merits with respect
to engineering education in the university, Dr. Killian was able to secure
many pledges for support and several thousand dollars by early spring.
While these initial funds were being secured, the committee drew up a
preliminary budget to project the scope of CACR operations and assess the
corresponding financial need. The following major expense items added
up to roughly $125,000 as a reasonable first-cut estimate of what it
might cost to have a Clean Air Car Race:
1. Summer salaries for the organization committee members.
2. Salaries for other office personnel.
3. Office operations: materials, equipment, printing, xerox,
postage, and telephone.
4. Committee and observer travel expenses.
5. Pre-race activities at MIT: housing, seminars, banquets,
machine shop, etc.
6. Race operations: accommodations, meals, communications,
security, insurance, etc.
7. Post-race activities: seminars, awards, banquets, data analysis,
housing, and meals.
Please note that the above list had made no allowance for the
extensive performance and exhaust emissions testing to be conducted during
the competition. The expense involved had led the committee to hope that
the automotive industry would donate these services—including the
necessary equipment, facilities, and manpower—without which the CACR would
have been truly crippled.
-117-
-------
The need for increased funds and services continued as the scope of
the CACR expanded and formerly unconsidered details received attention.
The General Motors Corp. provided a very strong shot in the arm to the
overall event by presenting the committee with twenty 1970 Chevelles
plus a $2,000 research and development grant per vehicle for distribution
to the entrant teams. In addition, two Chevelles and a $4,000 grant were
given to the committee for its summertime activities, which included
several coast-to-coast trips in preparation for the CACR cross-country
travel. The Ford Motor Co. paralleled the GM contribution by making
available its Mobile Emissions Laboratory for the week of pre-race testing
in Cambridge, as well as two station wagons and an Econoline van for
committee use. The required service functions for the CACR were being
knocked off one by one, but the cash-in-hand outlook had still not pro-
gressed satisfactorily.
The Federal government's National Air Pollution Control Administration
within the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare (now the
Air Pollution Control Office within the Environmental Protection Agency)
agreed to foot the travel expenses for all committee members throughout
the period of organizational activity as well as the competition itself—-
the cost estimate being on the order of $20,000. Additional funds to
cover the travel expenses of all CACR observers came from NAPCA just as
the race was about to begin. NAPCA officials also provided the necessary
manpower to coordinate the exhaust emissions testing program for all CACR
vehicles both prior to and during the competition. A final long-range
support function was provided by this agency when they suggested and then
financed the CACR documentation effort, which included several films and
a number of publications.
During this time, MIT had come to the committee's aid with as great a
support capability as could have been desired. The key to committee finan-
cial problems was without a doubt provided by Dr. Killian, who had now done
the necessary groundwork for the committee to make a request to the founda-
tions; mainly through his efforts grants totalling $33,000 were eventually
obtained from the Rockefeller, Cabot, and Mellon foundations. From the
outset, MIT had allowed the committee the use of its public relations
office to disseminate information to the media and the CACR entrant teams.
The other necessary services for pre-race activity at MIT were also
arranged for and contributed with the expectation that the committee
treasury would need every donation that it could get.
The cost of vehicle performance testing was eliminated when the
Cornell Aeronautical Laboratories loaned the committee the necessary
equipment to make the test measurements. Part of the Hanscom Field Air
Force facilities in Bedford, Massachusetts, provided the committee with
adequate space to conduct the testing.
During July and August, members of the committee worked with the
Edison Electric Company and the National Rural Electric Cooperative to
arrange for the electric vehicle charging stations. Thirty-six utility
companies altogether were approached with the request that they purchase
and set up a total of sixty charging stations. Similar refueling facili-
ties were established for vehicles powered by liquefied petroleum gas (LPG)
-118-
-------
Numerous contributions of dollars and services from many other
industrial firms helped the committee complete its financing. An
assessment of total funds and services accumulated in staging the
CACR is presented in Section B of this chapter, and a statement of
actual committee operating expenses follows in Section C.
In conclusion, one point should be remembered:
At no time during the fund raising effort did the committee grant
"special favors" in return for assistance. The committee dealt with
industries in as non-commercial a fashion as possible and required
that any permissible advertising be discreetly done.
-119-
-------
SECTION B
ESTIMATE OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT ACCUMULATED
Financial support received by the CACR committee can be divided into
two distinct categories: actual funds donated and goods and services
supplied.
Actual funds contributed totaled nearly $.3 million and may be broken
down as follows.
I. MIT Corporation $ 17,400
II. Foundations 33,000
III. Federal Government 230,1001
IV- Industry 8,100
Total $288,600
The second category of support, that of goods and services, is not
as easily determined. The committee has reviewed the assistance received
through its requests, and has subdivided the contributions as follows:
I. MIT $ 6,100
II. Federal Government 73,000
III. General Motors Corporation 98,000
IV. Ford Motor Company 53,500
V. Other Industries 189,700
VI. Emission and Performance Testing
Facilities 39,000
VII. Host Universities and Communities 16,800
Total $426,100
1. Documentation contract awarded by NAPCA to MIT.
-120-
-------
SECTION C
COMMITTEE OPERATING EXPENSES
The following page provides an estimate of all expenditures incurred
by the CACR Organization Committee in preparing for, staging, and documenting
the 1970 Clean Air Car Race.
The table gives a total breakdown of the expenditures incurred, the
time period during which they occurred, and the approximate amount. The
four major categories of expenses are: Salaries and Wages, Operating Ex-
penses, Race Activities, and Documentation. The Race Activities class-
ification covers all those costs incurred by or because of the period
August 17 to September 4. The Documentation figures are estimates as
the final charges are uncompleted.
-121-
-------
CLEAN AIR CAR RACE COST SUMMARY
March-July August Sept.-Feb. Totals
Salaries & Wages
MIT students & faculty 5,730 3,000 13,240 21,970
Hourly Personnel 420 420 850 1,690
Secretarial & Clerical 2,740 3,140 5,670 11,550
Operating Expenses
Xerox & Graphic Arts 1,090 790 760 2,640
Audio Visual 30 300 170 500
Office Supplies 130 130 400 660
Telephone 1,750 1,510 1,740 5,000
MIT Entrant Teams 6,000 6,000
Publications 4,310 4,310
Housing 90 90 180
Postage & Shipping 280 130 410
Trophies & Plaques 1,340 1,110 2,450
Travel 1,800 1,800
Miscellaneous & Petty Cash 710 1,030 620 2,360
Committee 310 310
Race Activities
Insurance for Observers 930 930
Security & Police 1,760 1,760
MIT Physical Plant 20 2,550 20 2,590
Banquets 3,460 3,460
Housing 90 90
Parades 2,210 2,210
Race Execution 6,120 6,120
Documentation
Film Contract 42,630 127,370 170,000
Film Prints 10,000 10,000
Report 3,500 3,500
Computation 3,000 3,000
TOTALS 12,620 82,090 169,780 265,490
-122-
-------
APPENDICES
-------
APPENDIX A
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
10
11
12
15
16
17
18
19
20
CLEAN AIR CAR RACE ENTRANT TEAMS
School Engine/Fuel
California Institute of
Technology, Pasadena, Calif.
California Institute of
Technology, Pasadena, Calif.
San Diego State College
San Diego, Calif.
Lowell Technological
Institute, Lowell, Mass.
Northeastern University
Boston, Mass.
Georgia Institute of
Technology, Atlanta, Ga.
San Jose State College
San Jose, Calif.
Stanford University
Stanford, Calif.
University of California
Berkeley, Calif.
University of South Florida
Tampa, Florida
University of Evansville
Evansville, Ind.
Tufts University
Medford, Mass.
Worcester Polytechnic
Institute, Worcester, Mass.
Buffalo State University
Buffalo, N.Y.
Villanova University
ICE/CNG
ICE/CNG
ICE/LNG
ICE/LNG
ICE/LNG
ICE/CNG
ICE/LPG
ICE/LPG
ICE/LPG
ICE/LPG
ICE/LPG
ICE/LPG
ICE/LPG
ICE/LPG
ICE/LPG
Body
'70 Hornet
'70 Ford
Ranchero
'70 Ford
'70 Chevelle
'70 Fairlane
'70 Ford
sedan
'70 Toyota
'71 Mercury
Capri
'70 Plymouth
'70 El Camino
'69 Olds
Cutlass
'70 Chevelle
'70 Nova
'61 Sprite
'70 Mustang
Villanova, Pa.
A
-125-
-------
Number
21
22
23
24
30
31
32
School
Southern Methodist
University, Dallas, Tex.
University of Wisconsin
Madison, Wis.
St. Clair College
Windsor, Ont. , Canada
Whitworth College
Spokane, Wash.
University of California
Berkeley, Calif.
Louisiana State University
Baton Rouge, La.
Worcester Polytechnic
Engine/Fuel
ICE/LPG
ICE/LPG
ICE/LPG
ICE/LPG
ICE /unleaded
gas
ICE/ leaded gas
Boay
'70 Mustang
'69 Opel GT
'70 Dodge
Coronet
'70 Ford
Maverick
'70 Plymouth
'70 Pontiac
Lemans
Institute, Worcester, Mass,
33 Worcester Polytechnic
Institute, Worcester,
Mass.
34 University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Mich.
35 University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Mich.
36 Wayne State University
Detroit, Michigan
37 University of Wisconsin
Madison, Wis.
41 Stanford University
Stanford, Calif.
42 University of California
at Los Angeles, Calif.
50 Incline Village High Sch,
Incline Village, Nevada
51 University of Arizona
Tucson, Arizona
ICE/unleaded
gas '70 Saab
ICE/ leaded
gas '70 Mustang
ICE/unleaded
gas '70 Chevelle
ICE/unleaded
gas '70 Chevelle
ICE/lead-sterile,
gas
71 Mercury
Capri
Ice/unleaded
gas '70 Lotus
ICE/methanol '70 Gremlin
ICE/deisel oil '65 Mustang
ICE/methanol- '69 Dodge
gas wagon
ICE/ING and
hydrogen
'70 Plymouth
Duster
-126-
-------
Number
52
61
62
64
65
66
70
71
School
Putnam City West High School
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Georgia Institute of Tech-
nology, Atlanta, Ga.
Boston University
Boston, Mass.
lona College
New Roche lie, N.Y.
Cornell University
Ithaca, N.Y.
Stevens Institute of Tech-
nology, Hoboken, N.J.
Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Cambridge, Mass.
Worcester Polytechnic
Institute, Worcester, Mass.
Engine /Fuel
ICE/LPG
or LNG
Electric
Electric
Electric
Electric
Electric
Electric-ICE
hybrid/unleaded
gas
Electric-ICE
hybrid/unleaded
gas
Body
'70 Opel
Fabricated
Fabricated
'62 VW
'70 EFP
sedan
Fabricated
'68 Corvai:
'70 Gremlii
75 University of Toronto
Toronto, Ont., Canada
80 University of California at
San Diego
La Jolla, California
83 Worcester Polytechnic
Institute, Worcester, Mass.
90 Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Cambridge, Mass.
Electric-ICE
hybrid/LPG
S team/LPG
Gas turbine
Fabricated
'70 Javelin
Steam/kerosene '70 Chevelle
'70 Chevelle
C/10 pickup
-127-
-------
APPENDIX B
ENTRANT TEAM TECHNICAL REPORTS
This appendix includes, in outline form, the following information on
each entrant vehicle:
1. Vehicle technical description
2. Performance data
3. Emissions data
4. Fuel economy
The large numbers in the upper right hand corner are entrant numbers
and were inserted for easy reference.
Notes:
Hot Start tests; Minimum values used as cutoffs due to instrument
inaccuracy are very low concentrations were
CO 1000 ppm
HC 10 ppm
NOX 100 ppm
No reactivity factors were used for hydrocarbons.
Cold Start tests: Cutoffs were
CO 1.00 gm/mile
HC 0.12 gm/mile
NO 0.20 gm/mile
B
-129-
-------
1
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Entrant: #1
Class: I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain: Michael Lineberry
Thomas Lab
California Institute of Technology
East California Blvd.
Pasadena, California 91109
Body and Chassis; 1970 American Motors Hornet
Vehicle Weight: 3840 Ibs.
Power Plant: I.C.E. - standard 6-cylinder, 232 C.I.D.
Fuel: Compressed Natural Gas
Fuel System:
CNG - Variable venturi mixer, diaphragm controlled, mounted on
carburetor intake. Fuel supplied from 12 scuba-type tanks in trunk.
Two-stage pressure reduction from 2265 p.s.i. to 50 p.s.i. to 2 inches
of water pressure.
Exhaust System:
Standard single-pipe
Emission Control;
25% excess air in air-fuel mixture results in:
1) More complete combustion,reduce CO.
2) Cooler flame temperature, reduce NOX.
Vacuum spark advance eliminated to effect retarded spark -
reduces N(
Modifications:
reduces NOX and HC.
1) Passenger compartment sealed from trunk to keep out gas in case
of a leak.
2) Radial tires installed.
3) Brake automatic adjustment device removed to reduce rolling
resistance.
-131-
-------
4) Installed shock absorbers with adjustable air inflation system
in rear to level car.
5) Installed adjustable shocks in front, anti-sway bars, and faster
ratio steering box to improve handling.
6) Installed constant speed control to improve economy.
7) Equipped car with citizen's band transmitter-receiver.
-132-
-------
Performance Data: #1
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
30
51
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
Microphone Distance
50'
50'
10'
Time (sec.)
7.7
13.2
11.4
Stopping distance (ft.)
66
138
Best time (sec.)
79.2
86.8
dB (A)
80.5
64.0
63.5
Emissions Data: #1
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
0.42
1.00
0.47
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
11
1000
128
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
52
1000
100
Part, (gm/mile): 0.09
Fuel Economy; #1
146.0 miles/million Btu
-133-
-------
2
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Entrant #2
Class: I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain: Michael Lineberry
Thomas Lab
California Institute of Technology
East California Boulevard
Pasadena, California 91109
Body and Chassis; 1970 Ford Ranchero
Vehicle Weight: 4750 Ibs.
Power Plant; Internal Combustion Engine (I.C.E.), 351 C.I.D.
V-8 configuration
Transmission; 4-speed manual
Fuel: Compressed Natural Gas (or Gasoline, not used during CACR)
Fuel System;
1) CNG - Variable venturi mixer, mounted on carburetor intake.
Fuel supplied through pressure regulators and valves from
4 tanks in trunk.
2) Gasoline - Standard fuel tank, lines, and carburetor.
Exhaust System;
Standard Single-pipe.
Emission Control;
Excess air (25%) in air-fuel mixture -
1) More complete combustion, reduction of CO.
2) Cooler flame temperature, reduction of NOX.
Vacuum spark advance eliminated - retards spark (except at idle),
reduces NOX and HC emissions.
-135-
-------
Performance Data: #2
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
27
50
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
Microphone Distance
50'
50'
10'
Time (sec.)
6.3
10.0
7.6
Stopping distance (ft.)
36
120
Best Time (sec.)
79.0
82.4
dB (A)
80.5
63.0
59.5
Emissions Data: #2
EC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gin/mile)
3.02
2.76
0.74
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
40
1000
100
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
64
1000
192
Part, (gm/mile): 0.01
Fuel Economy;
104.4 miles/million Btu
-136-
-------
3
SAN DIEGO STATE COLLEGE
Entrant: #3
Class: I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain: Al Innis
c/o Dr. Robert Murphy
School of Engineering
San Diego State College
San Diego, California 92115
Body and Chassis; Ford Cortina
Vehicle Weight: 1825 Ibs.
Power Plant: I.C.E., 4 cylinder, 97.51 C.I.D.
Transmission: 4-speed manual, fully synchronized
Fuel: Liquefied Natural Gas
Fuel System;
Variable venturi (diaphragm) mixer, fed by vaporizer/pressure -
regulator from double-walled, vacuum-insulated fuel tank. Engine
water circulates through regulator to vaporize fuel. Fuel tank has
pressure-controlled vapor or liquid fuel feed.
Exhaust System:
Dual chamber catalytic reactor.
Emission Control:
1) Air/fuel ratio set at 19/1. Best balance to achieve low HC and
CO emissions without raising Nox-
2) Ignition timing retarded 4° from stock (8° to 10°) to control NO^
-137-
-------
Performance Data: #3
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
Time (sec.)
6.5
14.6
12.0
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
28
50
Stopping distance (ft.)
42
138
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver #1
Driver #2
Best time (sec.)
78.0
77.0
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 cruise
Idle
Microphone Distance dB (A)
50' 80.5
50' 69.0
10' 71.5
Emission Data://3
HG
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
1.02
6.38
0.59
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
66
2100
132
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
94
3600
414
Part, (gm/mile): 0.03
Fuel Economy: #3
228.0 miles/million Btu
-138-
-------
4
LOWELL TECHNOLOGICAL INSTITUTE
Entrant: #4
Class; I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain; Victor Baur
Operations Center
Lowell Gas Co.
Willie & Dutton Sts.
Lowell, Mass. 08153
Body and Chassis: 1970 Chevelle, 4-door sedan
Vehicle Weight: 3800 Ibs.
Power Plant: I.C.E., 350 C.I.D. stock V-8
Transmission; 3-speed turbohydramatic
Fuel: Liquefied Natural Gas
Fuel System:
Impco model 425 natural gas carburetor mounted on original throttle
plate housing. Supplied by two Impco P.E. pressure converters (in parallel)
Pressure converters receive fuel from vacuum-insulated tank through a heat
exchanger heated by engine coolant. Vapor from converters passes through
a gas meter before going to mixer. Pressure-regulated vapor or liquid fuel
feed provided by pressure actuated solenoid valves.
Exhaust System:
Dual exhaust (no crossover) with an Engelhard PTX-4D235 platinum
catalytic reactor just downstream of each manifold.
Mpdifications:
1) Exhaust gas heat riser passage blocked off - methane needs no pre-
heating .
2) Heat riser valve removed
3) 195°F thermostat replaced by 160°F thermostat
4) Spark plug gap reduced to .025"
-139-
-------
5) Timing set at 0° BTDC, vacuum advance eliminated
6) Air conditioning system removed to make room for conversion system
7) Gasoline tank & fuel pump removed
8) A 2.56/1 ratio rear end installed
9) Michelin "X" 195-15 steel radial tires installed
-140-
-------
Performance Data: #4
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
33
51
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Time (sec.)
6.8
13.1
12.2
Stopping Distance (ft.)
46
136
Best time (sec.)
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 cruise
Idle
Emissions Data: #4
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
EC 0.28
CO 9 . 21
NO 0.37
82.0
78.0
Microphone Distance dB (A)
50'
50'
10'
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
14
1000
100
75.5
63.0
61.5
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
34
1000
106
Part, (gm/mile): 0.02
Fuel Economy: #4
171.5 miles/million Btu
-141-
-------
NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY
Entrant; #5
Class; I.C. E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain: Gregory Travers
c/o Charles Buckley
Boston Gas Co.
144 McBride St.
Boston, Mass.
Body and Chassis; 1970 Ford Fairlane, 4-door sedan
Vehicle Weight; 3800 Ibs.
Power Plant; I.C.E., 250 C.I.D., 6-cylinder
Transmission; 3-speed automatic, factory stock
Fuel; Liquefied Natural Gas
Fuel System:
1) Storage - 20 gal. vacuum insulated tank mounted in trunk
2) Delivery - 1/2" copper tubes. Two tubes from tank, one for
liquid, one for vapor. Liquid or vapor feed controlled by
manually actuated solenoid valves. Driver reads tank pressure
gauge on dash and selects liquid or vapor feed.
3) Vaporization - liquid is passed through a vaporization coil
(warmed by forced air at ambient temperature).
4) Regulation and Metering - vapor delivered via 1/2" copper tubing
to primary regulator (Fisher type Y600). Pressure reduced from
150 P.S.I, max. to 12" of water column. Low-pressure vapor
passes through rubber tubing to a gas meter, then to an IMPCO
IT-11M pressure reduction valve, which reduces pressure to 5" of water
column. Vapor then is delivered to IMPCO CA125 air valve type down-
draft carburetor (mixer).
Exhaust System;
Single pipe conventional.
5
-143-
-------
Performance Data: #5
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph) Time (sec.)
0-30 7.8
0-45 13.0
2) Braking
Speed (mph) Stopping distance (ft.)
27 32
46 104
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Best time (sec.)
4)
Emissions
HC
CO
NO
Driver #1
Driver //2
Noise Levels
Test mode
30 WOT
30 cruise
Idle
Data: #5
Cold Start
Detroit
(gra/mile)
0.82
1.00
0.78
86.0
85.2
Microphone distance dB (A)
50'
50'
10 f
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
12
1000
809
74.5
59.5
57.5
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
22
1000
1004
Part, (gm/mile): 0.01
Fuel Economy; #5
169.0 miles/million Btu
-144-
-------
6
GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Entrant; #6
Class; I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain; Dr. Sam V. Shelton
School of Mechanical Engineering
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, Georgia 30332
Body and Chassis:1970 Ford, 2-door sedan
Vehicle Weight; 4350 Ibs.
Power Plant; I.C.E.
Fuel; Compressed Natural Gas
Fuel System;
Dual-fuel natural gas conversion kit (MFD. by Pneumerics, Inc.),
retains gasoline fuel system. Fuel stored in three DOT 3AA 2265 cylin-
ders in trunk. Two stage pressure reduction, 2265 P.S.I, to 135 P.S.I.,
then 135 P.S.I, to about 1/2 inch of water column. Fuel then enters a
variable venturi mixer (diaphragm controlled), with an air metering valve
to control the amount of natural gas reaching the engine by sensing the air
demand of the engine.
Exhaust System; Conventional system with catalytic reactor added.
Emission Control;
1) Ignition timing set at 6° BTDC to reduce NOX and HC.
2) Excess air in mixture to reduce CO.
-145-
-------
Performance Data: #6
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
Time (sec.)
7.4
13.5
11.8
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
31
52
Stopping distance (ft.)
56
150
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Best time (sec.)
82.0
86.0
Test mode Microphone distance dB (A)
30 WOT
30 cruise
Idle
50'
50'
10'
68.0
61.0
76.0
Emissions Data: #6
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
2.26
1.66
0.49
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
82
1000
100
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
130
1000
166
Part (gm/mile): 0.02
Fuel Economy: #6
107.0 miles/million Btu
-146-
-------
10
SAN JOSE STATE COLLEGE
Entrant: #10
Class; I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain; Robin Saunders
982 South Second Street
San Jose, California 95112
Body and Chassis; 1970 Toyota Corolla
Vehicle Weight; 1942 Ibs.
Power Plant; I.C.E., 73.3 C.I.D., 4-cylinder
Fuel: Liquefied Petroleum Gas
Fuel System;
Storage in pressurized tank. Fuel passes through pressure regulator
(heated by engine coolant) where it is vaporized. Vapor passes through a
heat exchanger, where it cools incoming air for the carburetor. Vapor con-
tinues to carburetor, where it is mixed with pre-cooled air.
Exhaust System;
Exhaust manifold reactor, followed by platinum-catalytic reactor.
Emission Control;
1) Exhaust manifold reactor (EMR), with air injection into exhaust ports.
Maintains high temperature (1000°F) and increased residence time for
oxidation of HC and CO.
2) Platinum catalytic muffler installed approximately three feet down-
stream from EMR. Additional air introduced at outlet of EMR to
aid further reaction of HC and CO.
-147-
-------
Performance Data: #10
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
28
52
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Time (sec.)
6.8
13.8
13.2
Stopping distance (ft.)
32
139
Best time (sec.)
4)
Driver #1
Driver #2
Noise Levels
Test mode
30 WOT
30 cruise
Idle
79.8
78.0
Microphone distance dB (A)
50'
50'
10'
69.5
62.5
56.5
Emissions Data: #10
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
0.44
20.48
0.71
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
23
1000
155
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
20
4800
100
Part, (gm/mile): 0.03
Fuel Economy; #10
205.0 miles/million Btu
-148-
-------
11
STANFORD UNIVERSITY
Entrant; #n
Class; I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain: Robert L. Byer
Hansen Labs
Stanford University
Stanford, California 94301
Body and Chassis; 1971 Lincoln-Mercury Capri
Vehicle Weight; 2438 Ibs.
Power Plant; I.C.E., 98 C.I.D., 4-cylinder
Fuel; Liquefied Petroleum Gas
Fuel System;
Storage in two 10-gallon LPG tanks at a pressure of 140 P.S.I.
Metered by IMPCO BJ liquid-to-vapor converter and carburetor.
Emission Control:
1) Water injection system - designed to reduce NO emissions. Intro-
duced water spray at 1/12 fuel rate at idle to 1/6 fuel rate at ,
60 mph. Injection rate controlled by venturi vacuum and controlling
needle valve. Water supplied to float bowl by gasoline fuel pump.
2) Thermal reactor installed to reduce HC emissions by oxidizing them
at high temperature. Operating temperature was 800°C to 950°C core
temperature.
3) Platinum catalytic reactor installed to control CO. Operating
temperature of about 750°C. Also helps further oxidation of HC.
4) Ignition timing set at 13° BTDC without vacuum advance to
control NOX .
5) Air/fuel ratio set at 17.5/1 to optimize emissions rather than
power.
-149-
-------
Performance Data: #11
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
32
53
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Time (sec.)
5.1
10.7
10.0
Stopping distance (ft.)
47
139
Best time (sec.)
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
75.
83.
0
2
Test mode Microphone distance dB (A)
30 WOT
30 cruise
Idle
50'
50'
10'
74.
62.
61.
5
0
0
Emissions Data: #11
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gin/mile)
0.41
1.00
1.17
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
10
1000
260
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
47
1000
471
Part, (gm/mile): 0.01
Fuel Economy; #11
224.0 miles/million Btu
-150-
-------
12
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT BERKELEY
Entrant; #12
Class; I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain; Floyd Sam
University of California
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
Berkeley, California 94720
Body and Chassis; 1970 Plymouth Belvedere, 4-door sedan
Vehicle Weight: 3980 Ibs.
Power Plant: I.C.E., 318 C.I.D., V-8 Configuration
Transmission; Stock automatic
Fuel; Liquefied Petroleum Gas (propane)
Fuel System;
Storage in pressure tanks of 34.6 gal. capacity at 100 to 120 P.S.I.
Fuel from tanks pass through fuel lock and then to liquid-to-vapor con-
verter and pressure regulator (IMPCO model E). Fuel exits at 1.5 inches
of water column through a hose to an IMPCO model 225 propane carburetor.
Exhaust System:
Two manifolds (one for each cylinder bank) followed by catalytic
reactors with balance line across pipes upstream of the reactors. Y-
connection into a regular muffler. Exhaust gas recirculation via 3/4"
copper tubing from below Y-connection.
Emission Control:
1) Exhaust gas recirculation - lowers peak combustion temperature,
reducing NOX emissions. Copper tubing (3/4") picks up exhaust below
catalytic reactors and delivers it to the carburetor. Butterfly valve
prevents flow during idle (prevents rough idle) and full throttle
(prevents power loss).
2) Englehard PTX-5 catalytic reactors - reduce hydrocarbon and CO
emissions by oxidation. Operating temperature of 800°F to 1400°F.
Installed about 2 feet downstream of exhaust manifolds.
Other Modifications;
1) Heat risers to intake manifold blocked to help reduce peak
combustion temperature.
2) Capacitive discharge ignition system installed to assure reliable
ignition at leaner fuel mixtures.
-151-
-------
Performance Data: #12
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
28
49
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Time (sec.)
6.2
10.1
8.4
Stopping distance (ft.)
33
127
Best time (sec.)
4)
Driver #1
Driver #2
Noise Levels
Test mode
30 WOT
30 cruise
Idle
86.2
82.7
Microphone distance dB (A)
50' 77-0
50' 63.0
10' 60.5
Emissions Data: #12
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
0.12
1.00
0.70
Hot Start Hot Start
Cambridge Pasadena
(ppm) (ppm)
10 25
1000 1000
108 179
Part, (gm/mile): 0.01
Fuel Economy: #12
114.2 miles/million Btu
-152-
-------
15
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
Entrant; #15
Class; I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain; Vernon Krutsinger
College of Engineering
University of South Florida
Tampa, Florida 33620
Body and Chassis: 1970 Chevrolet El Camino
Vehicle Weight: 4200 Ibs.
Power Plant: I.C.E., 454 C.I.D. V-8
Transmission: 4-speed manual
Fuel: Liquefied Petroleum Gas (propane)
Fuel System;
Pressure tank in bed of vehicle. Fuel passes to filter-fuel
lock, then to converter-pressure regulator. Vapor then is fed to
a variable venturi 4-barrel carburetor.
Exhaust System; Standard
Modifications: Replaced 5.13:1 rear end with 2.56:1 to lower engine
rpm at a given speed.
-153-
-------
Performance Data: #15
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
C-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
31
56
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver #1
Driver *2
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
Time (sec.
3.5"
7.2
4.5
Stopping distance
45 ~
134
Best time (sec.)
78.0
81.0
Microphone distance dB (A)
50' 77.3
50' 65.5
10' 63.0
Emissions Data: #
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gin/mile)
1.27
1.00
0.57
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
17
1000
155
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
113
1000
165
PART, (gin/mile): 0.09
Fuel Economy: #15
127.0 miles/million Btu
-154-
-------
UNIVERSITY OF EVANSVILLE
Entrant: #16
Class: I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain: Miss Cheryl Williams
P.O. Box 329
Evansville, Indiana 4770;
Body and Chassis; 1969 Oldsmobile Cutlass
Vehicle Weight: 4011 Ibs.
Power Plant: I.C.E., 350 C.I.D., V-8 configuration
Transmission: Factory Automatic
Fuel: Liquefied Petroleum Gas (propane)
Fuel System;
Storage in a double tank of about 35 gallons capacity. Fuel
conducted through 1/4" hose to a filter fuel lock (Century model
# STF-1614). Fuel then passes to Century model #M-5 converter, where
it is reduced to about atmospherie pressure and vaporized. Engine coolant
is used as a heat source for vaporization. Vapor passes to Century
model //3-C-705 DTLE duplex carburetor, where it is metered and mixed with
air.
Exhaust System; Single-pipe standard with catalytic converter added.
Modifications;
1) Gasoline tank removed.
2) Trunk sealed from passenger compartment.
3) Hot air risers in intake manifold blocked.
16
-155-
-------
Performance _Daita: #16
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
27
47
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver #1
Driver #2
3) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
Time (sec.)
5.2
9.0
7.6
Stopping distance (ft.)
46
100
Best Time (sec.)
106.2
96.2
Microphone distance dB (A)
50' 69.5
50' 63.0
10' 57.0
Emissions Data: #16
Cold Start Hot Start
Detroit Cambridge
(gm/mile) (ppm)
HC 0.40 21
CO 10.02 2200
NO 1.47 299
Hot Start
Pasadena
(pptn)
37
2500
314
PART, (gm/mile): 0.01
Fuel Economy; #16
104.4 miles/million Btu
-156-
-------
17
TUFTS UNIVERSITY
Entrant: #17
Class; I.C.E. (Gaseous)
Team Captain: Peter Talmage
105 Anderson Hall
Tufts University
Body and Chassis: 1970 General Motors Chevelle four-door sedan
Vehicle Weight: 3300 Ibs.
Power Plant; I.C.E., 250 C.I.D., 6-cylinders
Fuel: Liquefied Petroleum Gas (propane)
Fuel System;
Storage tank in trunk. Fuel flows through LPG line to filter fuel
lock, then to a Beam 400A pressure regulator-vaporizer. Propane vapor
passes on to the Beam carburetor, where it is metered and mixed with air.
Following the carburetor is a Kenics Corp. static mixing tube to insure
good air-fuel mixing.
Exhaust System:
2 1/2" O.D. tubing used to replace original 1 3/4" pipe. Engelhard
catalytic reactor installed about 5 feet downstream from manifold. A
modified Kenics Corp. static mixing tube (4 ft. x 4 in. diameter) was
employed as a combination muffler-reactor.
Emission Control:
1) Pressure equalizing line installed between the mouth of the carburetor
and the regulator low-pressure diaphragm. To eliminate overly-rich
mixture from fuel surge.
2) Air injection into exhaust ports by standard G.M. system helps oxidize
HC and CO.
3) Platinum-catalytic exhaust reactor to aid oxidation of HC and CO.
4) Exhaust static mixing tube plated with CuO to act as second catalytic
reactor.
5) Exhaust system insulated to maintain high temperature for oxidation
reactions.
6) Exhaust gas recirculation system installed to reduce NOX.
-157-
-------
Other Modifications:
1) All moving parts balanced and engine brought up to blueprint
specifications.
2) Valves and seats ground to 45°, and seating area increased to
improve heat transfer to head.
3) Special bearings (Clevite 77's) installed.
4) High-efficiency Silko oil filter installed.
5) Capacitor discharge ignition system installed to improve
spark characteristics.
6) Radiator core size increased by 100%
7) Transmission oil cooler and engine oil cooler installed.
8) Intake and exhaust manifold ports were internally smoothed
to increase flow.
9) Rear doors, rear deck, and hood replaced with fiber glass replicas.
10) Gasoline tank removed.
11) Volkswagen seats installed.
12) Steel-belted radial tires and heavy duty shock absorbers installed.
13) Aerodynamic front end added.
-158-
-------
Performance Data; #17
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
32
50
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Time (sec.)
7.8
13.2
9.9
Stopping distance (ft.)
52
127
Best Time (sec.)
82.8
82.6
Test Mode Microphone distance dB (A)
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
50'
50'
10'
74.0
64.0
62.5
Emissions Data: #17
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
0.28
1.00
0.61
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
24
1000
165
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
55
1000
154
PART, (gm/mile) 0.02
»
Fuel Economy; #17
162.5 miles/million Btu
-159-
-------
18
WINNER-CLASS I (Gaseous Fuel)
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Entrant ; #18
Class: I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain; Edward W. Kaleskas
24 Brooks Street
Worcester, Massachusetts 01609
Body and Chassis: 1970 Chevy II Nova, 4-door sedan
Vehicle Weight: 2960 Ibs.
Power Plant; I.C.E., 350 C.I.D. Chevrolet propane engine,
factory equipped with high temperature valves
and seats, and impact extruded pistons.
Transmission: Chevrolet turbohydramatic with kickdown linkage
disconnected.
Fuel : Liquefied Petroleum Gas (propane)
Fuel System;
Storage in 35 gallon pressure tank located in trunk. Fuel flows
through high pressure hose to the converter. In the converter, fuel
is reduced in pressure and vaporized. Vapor then passes to Ensign
variable venturi carburetor.
Exhaust System:
Standard single exhaust system, but with two Engelhard catalytic
reactors at the exits of the exhaust manifolds.
Emission Control;
1) Catalytic exhaust reactors used to oxidize HC and CO.
2) Double head gaskets installed to lower compression ratio, thereby
lowering flame temperature and reducing NOX-
3) Ignition timing set at 6° BTDC and vacuum advance eliminated to
reduce
4) Lean air-fuel ratio (23/1) used to reduce NOX by lowering flame
temperature.
-161-
-------
Performance Data: #18
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
2C-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
29
53
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver //I
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 cruise
Idle
Time (sec.)
5.6
8.6
5.2
Stopping distance (ft.)
35
127
Best time (sec.)
75.0
76.8
Microphone Distance dB (A)
50' 78.0
50' 62.0
10' 67.5
Emissions Data:
Cold Start Hot Start
Detroit Cambridge
(gm/mile) (ppm)
HC 0.24 10
CO 1.00 1000
NO 0 . 55 100
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
20
1000
100
Part, (gm/mile): 0.02
Fuel Economy; #18
111.2 miles/million Btu
-162-
-------
19
BUFFALO STATE UNIVERSITY
Entrant; #19
Class; I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain: John Schifferle
Rm. 312 Upton Hall
Buffalo State University
1300 Elmwood Avenue
Buffalo, New York 14222
Body and Chassis: 1961 Austin-Healey Sprite, with modified body and
frame.
Vehicle Weight; 1900 Ibs.
Power Plant; I.C.E., 58 C.I.D., 4 cylinder Austin-Healey
Drive Train: 4-speed manual transmission, 3.7:1 rear end ratio
Fuel; Liquefied Petroleum Gas (propane)
Fuel System:
Storage in 8-gallon aluminum tank located in trunk. Fuel passes
through pressure regulator and vaporizer to two Beam propane carburetors.
Exhaust System; Standard single-pipe and muffler
Modifications;
1) Additional frame members installed; roll bar added.
2) Collapsible steering column installed.
3) Engine parts trued and balanced, new head installed, and
manifold ports polished.
4) 2 quart reservoir added to cooling system.
5) Body modified to increase trunk volume and improve appearance.
6) 2-ply radial tires installed.
-163-
-------
Performance Data; #19
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
30
46
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
Time_(sec_.
6.0
11.2
11.2
Stopping distance (ft.)
36
81
Best Time (sec.)
75.0
75.0
Microphone distance dB (A)
50' 84.5
50' 79.5
10' 76.5
Emissions Data: #19
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gin/mile)
0.33
9.24
0.80
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
20
1000
428
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
73
1600
1085
PART, (gm/mile) 0.10
Fuel Economy; #19
254.0 miles/million Btu
-164-
-------
20
VILLANOVA UNIVERSITY
Entrant: #20
Class: I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain; M.J. Cafarella
c/o Mr. Bert Abrams
Norristown Auto Company, Inc.
Cooper Road and Main Street
Norristown, Pennsylvania
Body and Chassis; 1970 Ford Mustang, 2-door hardtop
Vehicle Weight: 3100 Ibs.
Power Plant; I.C.E., 351 C.I.D., Ford V-8
Transmission; Ford cruisomatic
Fuel; Liquefied Petroleum Gas (propane)
Fuel System;
29.5 gallon storage tanks, IMPCO pressure regulator-vaporizer,
IMPCO 4-barrel propane carburetor.
Exhaust System: Two Engelhard PTX-4 catalytic reactors added to
standard system; one 12" below each manifold.
Emission Control:
1) Catalytic reactors added to oxidize HC and CO.
2) Exhaust gas recirculation system installed to reduce NOX.
-165-
-------
Performance Data: #20
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
29
53
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Time (sec.)
5.0
12.4
No data
Stopping distance (ft.)
30
127
Best Time (sec.)
4)
Emisssions
HC
CO
NO
Driver #1
Driver #2
Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
Data: #20
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
0.93
2.72
1.39
81.7
78
Microphone distance dB
50' 74
50' 59
10' 58
Hot Start Hot Start
Cambridge Pasadena
(ppm) (ppm)
37 51
1000 1000
382 263
.8
(A)
.5
.5
.0
PART (gm/mile) 0.01
Fuel Economy; #20
136.2 miles/million Btu
-166-
-------
21
SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY
Entrant; #21
Class; I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain: James Tolbert
c/o Carlos W. Coon, Jr.
Institute of Technology
Southern Methodist University
Dallas, Texas 75222
Body and Chassis; 1970 Ford Mustang
Vehicle Weight; 3434 Ibs.
Power Plant; I.C.E., 302 C.I.D., Ford V-8
Fuel; Liquefied Petroleum Gas
Fuel System;
Storage in pressurized tank located in trunk. Fuel passes to an
Algas pressure regulator-vaporizer, and then to the Algas carburetor.
Exhaust System:
Dual exhaust system, with an Engelhard PTX catalytic reactor
behind each manifold,
Emission Control:
1) Catalytic reactors aid oxidation of HC and CO.
2) Distributor Modulator System (manufactured by Ford) installed to
eliminate vacuum spark advance at low speeds, thereby reducing NO
emissions.
3) Ford thermactor exhaust system (air injection)installed to provide
air for better oxidation of HC and CO.
4) Exhaust gas recirculation system installed to help reduce N0x-
Recirculated gases cooled in heat exchanger before entering
carburetor.
Miscellaneous Modifications;
1) Rear end ratio changed from 3.03:1 to 2.76:1 for better fuel
economy.
2) Stellite coated valves and seats installed in engine.
-167-
-------
3) Air scoop provided for intake air,
4) Instruments installed: Propane Fuel Gauge
Water Temperature Gauge
Tachometer
Oil Pressure Gauge
-168-
-------
Performance Data; #21
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
30
55
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Time (sec.)
5.2
8.2
6.7
Stopping distance (ft.)
38
158
Best Time (sec.)
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
77.4
73.4
Microphone distance dB (A)
50'
50'
10'
68.
64.
61.
0
0
0
Emissions Data: #21
EC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
0.62
4.42
2.56
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
16
1000
291
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
57
3300
339
PART, (gm/mile) 0.03
Fuel Economy; #21
147.2 miles/million Btu
-169-
-------
22
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN
Entrant: #22
Class: I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain: Bruce Peters, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
University of Wisconsin
Madison, Wisconsin 53706
Body and Chassis; Opel GT
Vehicle Weight; 2109 Ibs.
Power Plant: I.C.E.; 116 C.I.D., Opel 4-cylinder
Fuel: Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Propane)
Fuel System;
Storage in double tank located in rear or vehicle. Two-stage pressure
reduction takes place in Ensign regulator-vaporizer. Vapor then passes to
Ensign propane carburetor.
Exhaust System;
Standard Opel system with Engelhard PTX-5D catalytic reactor installed
18 inches below manifold.
Emission Control:
1) Catalytic reactor added to oxidize HC and CO.
2) Exhaust gas recirculation system installed to reduce NOX.
3) Air-fuel ratio set lean at 22/1 to reduce CO and NOX.
Miscellaneous Modifications:
1) Gasoline tank removed
2) Sheet metal bulkhead installed between passenger compartment
3) Heater fins milled off of intake manifold and radiation shield installed
to provide cooler air-fuel mixture.
4) Valves and seats reground for greater width to increase heat transfer
from valves to head.
-171-
-------
Performance Data: #22
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph) Time (sec.)
0-30 6.1
0-45 12.3
20-50 H-5
2) Braking
Speed (mph) Stopping distance (ft.)
34 55
49 116
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Best Time (sec.)
Driver #1 79.0
Driver #2 79.5
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode Microphone distance dB (A)
30 WOT 50' 77.0
30 Cruise 50' 66.0
Idle 10' 58.0
Emissions Data: #22
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
0.62
1.00
1.39
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
369
1000
470
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
87
1000
657
PART, (gm/mile) 0.01
Fuel Economy: #22
269.0 miles/million Btu
-172-
-------
23
ST. GLAIR COLLEGE OF APPLIED ARTS AND TECHNOLOGY
Entrant;
Class
Team Captain;
#23
I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Gene Durocher
c/o Jerry Ducharme
St. Clair College
2000 Talbot Road
Windsor, Ontario 42
Canada
Body and Chassis: 1970 Dodge Coronet
Vehicle Weight; 3610 Ibs.
Power Plant; I.C.E.; 318 C.I.D. Chrysler V-8
Transmission: Chrysler 3-speed torqueflite automatic
Fuel; Liquefied Petroleum Gas (propane)
Fuel System; Century propane conversion kit. Fuel tanks (18.5
imperial gallons) located in rear in vehicle.
Fuel passes through fuelock to converter, where it
is reduced in pressure and vaporized. Vapor then
passes to propane carburetor.
Exhaust System: Standard system modified to accept catalytic reactors
Emission Control:
1) Special emission control device added to reduce HC output during
deceleration. Throttle plates held open during deceleration
above 18 mph.
2) Two Engelhard PTX-6D catalytic reactors added to exhaust system
(one below each manifold) to oxidize HC and CO.
3) Air injection system installed to provide oxygen for catalytic
reactors.
4) Ignition timing set at 0° T.D.C. and vacuum spark advance
eliminated. Centrifugal advance characteristic changed to
reduce NOX emissions.
5) Exhaust gas recirculation system installed to reduce NOX .
6) Compression ratio lowered by using double head gaskets. This
lowers peak temperature and, therefore, Nox .
Miscellaneous Modifications; Pistons polished, new rings and head installed.
-173-
-------
Performance Data; #23
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph) Time (sec.)
0-30 4.9
0-45 8.4
20-50 7.6
2) Braking
Speed (mph) Stopping distance (ft.)
30 56
52 169
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Best Time (sec.)
Driver #1 81.6
Driver #2 88.6
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode Microphone distance dB (A)
30 WOT 50' 74.0
30 Cruise 50' 61.0
Idle 10' 59.5
Emissions Data: #23
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
0.12
3.19
1.00
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
24
1000
301
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
37
1000
299
PART, (gm/mile) 0.03
Fuel Economy: #23
132.3 miles/million Btu
-174-
-------
24
WHITWORTH COLLEGE
Entrant: #24
Class; I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain; George L. Borhauer
Whitworth College
Spokane, Washington 99218
Body and Chassis; Ford Maverick Grabber
Vehicle Weight; 2597 Ibs.
Power Plant I.C.E. ; 302 C.I.D., Ford V-8
Transmission: Standard Mustang manual 3-speed
Fuel: Liquefied Petroleum Gas (propane)
Fuel System:
Fuel stored in twin Manchester propane tanks with total capacity
of 34 gallons. Fuel passes through converter, where it is reduced in
pressure and vaporized. Vapor passes on to Century //3CG-705-DTLE car-
buretor where it is mixed with air.
Exhaust System: Dual exhaust, with catalytic reactor installed in each half,
Emission Control:
1) Engelhard PTX catalytic reactors installed to oxidize HD and CO.
2) Engine tuned on test stand for minimum NOX emissions. Parameters
not specified in original report.
Miscellaneous Modifications:
1) Gasoline pump removed.
2) Michelin radial-ply tires installed for lower rolling resistance.
3) Heavy-duty shock absorbers and extra leaf in rear springs installed.
-175-
-------
Performance Data: //24
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
28
48
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
Time (sec.)
3.8
7.0
6.0
Stopping distance (ft.)
37
116
Best Time (sec.)
79.2
77.3
Microphone distance dB (A)
50' 83.0
50' 62.0
10' 62.5
Emissions Data: #24
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gra/mile)
0.53
2.72
2.22
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
61
1000
288
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
43
1000
340
PART, (gm/mile) 0.02
Fuel Economy: #24
161.0 miles/million Btu
-176-
-------
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT BERKELEY
30
Entrant:
Class:
Team Captain;
Body and Chassis;
Vehicle Weight;
Power Plant;
Drive Train:
Exhaust System;
#30
I.C.E. (liquid fuel)
Peter D. Venturini
Thermal Systems Division
College of Engineering
University of California
Berkeley, California 94720
1970 Plymouth Belvedere four-door sedan
3700 Ibs.
I.C.E.; 318 C.I.D. Chrysler V-8
Torqueflight 3-speed automatic transmission; 2.76:1
rear end ratio
Unleaded gasoline
Standard, except for carburetor modification to
permit exhaust gas recirculation
Exhaust thermal reactors fastened directly to the cylinder heads.
Dual pipe combines before entering catalytic reactor. Conventional
muffler and pipe follow catalytic reactor.
Emission Control:
1) Exhaust thermal reactor built and installed in conjunction with
air injection system to oxidize HC and CO. Reactor composed of
an external steel shell, a layer of ceramic fiber insulation, and
a steel core to protect insulation from erosion. Air injection
synchronized with exhaust valve opening to improve mixing.
2) Exhaust gas recirculation system installed to reduce NOX.
Log type manifold used to distribute gases directly into intake
manifold. Alternate entry provided in carburetor. Control pro-
vided to eliminate recycle during choked operation, idle, and
full throttle.
3) Engelhard PTX6 catalytic reactor installed to further oxidize HC
and CO. Reactor and lead-in pipe insulated to maintain high
operating temperature.
-177-
-------
Performance Data: #30
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph) Time (sec.)
0-30 5.5
0-45 H.8
20-50 11.2
2) Braking
Speed (mph) Stopping distance (ft.)
29 34
51 116
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Best Time (sec.)
Driver #1 81.0
Driver #2 84.8
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode Microphone distance dB (A)
30 WOT 50' 71.0
30 Cruise 50' 61.5
Idle 10' 68.5
Emissions Data: #30
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gin/mile)
0.70
25.23
0.78
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
13
13,500
100
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
No data
No data
No data
PART, (gin/mile) 0.07
Fuel Economy; #30
99.8 miles/million Btu
-178-
-------
LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY
Entrant: #31
Classt I.C.E. (Liquid Fuel)
Team Captain; Michael V.Wall
c/o Dean Pressburg
College of Engineering
Louisiana State University
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803
Body and Chassis; 1970 Pontiac Le Mans, 4-door sedan
Vehicle Weight; 4100 Ibs.
Power Plant; I.C.E.; 400 C.I.D. Pontiac V-8
Transmission: Factory stocV automatic
Fuel: Leaded gasoline
Fuel System;
Standard gasoline tank. Electric fuel pump located in gas
tank. Standard fuel line leads to special carburetor developed by
Ethyl Corporation. Carburetor employs a single high-velocity primary
venturi to achieve improved fuel atomization. Two secondary Venturis,
normally closed, provide extra capacity for increased power demands.
Fuel mixture automatically enriched during high engine load. Enrich-
ment also provided during deceleration by means of a throttle bypass
controlled by manifold vacuum.
Exhaust System;
Exhaust thermal reactors mounted on cylinder heads. Large
diameter (up to 4") insulated pipes lead from reactors to a Y-connection.
Downstream from the Y-connection, a particulate trap was installed.
Emission Control:
1) Special carburetor designed to improve air-fuel mixture preparation
for low emissions. Better atomization allows leaner air-fuel
to be used, which results in lower NO and CO-emissions.
X
2) Exhaust reactors employed to oxidize HC and CO. Large diameter
insulated pipes installed to increase exhaust residence time and
temperature for further oxidation of HC and CO.
3) Inertial particulate trap used to collect particles in exhaust
stream.
31
-179-
-------
4) Ignition timing retarded 10° from stock setting at idle. Modified
vacuum advance system provides two-stage advance as vacuum increases
to reduce NOX emissions.
5) Exhaust gas recirculation system installed to reduce NOX emissions.
Relatively cool gases taken from below Y-connection in exhaust system
and passed through jacketed cooler using engine coolant for further
temperature reduction. Recycle rate is controlled by intake manifold
vacuum and speed sensing switches to provide proper recycle during
various operating modes.
-180-
-------
Performance Data; #31
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph) Time (sec.)
0-30 4.7
0-45 7.2
20-50 5.2
2) Braking
Speed (mph) Stopping distance (ft.)
29 44
50 119
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Best Time (sec.)
Driver #1 78.2
Driver #2 79.4
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode Microphone distance dB (A)
30 WOT 50' 87.0
30 Cruise 50' 66.0
Idle 10' 62.0
Emissions Data: #31
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gin/mile)
1.67
7.55
1.60
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
10
1100
185
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
32
1000
365
PART, (gm/mile) 0.09
Fuel Economy; #31
142.1 miles/million Btu
-181-
-------
32
WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE
Entrant;
Class;
Team Captain;
#32
I.C.E. (liquid fuel)
Robert Guertin
c/o Mechanical Engineering Department
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Worcester, Massachusetts 01609
Body and Chassis; 1970 Saab 99E
Vehicle Weight: 2500 Ibs.
Power Plant;
Fuel;
Fuel System;
Exhaust System;
I.C.E.; 113 C.I.D. modified Triumph 4-cylinder
engine
Unleaded gasoline
Standard Saab fuel system, except for modification of
the Bosch electronic fuel injection system.
Exhaust manifold thermal reactor mounted on cylinder
head. Exhaust pipe carries gases to a platinum
catalytic reactor, then out through a conventional
muffler.
Emission Control:
1) Engine displacement increased from 104 C.I. to 113 C.I.
Compression ratio lowered from 9:1 to 8:1 by installing
deep dish pistons. These modifications lowered peak
temperatures, thereby reducing NOX emission.
2) New injectors and a new computer installed in fuel injection
system to accomodate engine modifications and provide a richer
air-fuel ratio in an effort to reduce NOX.
3) Exhaust thermal reactor (designed by DuPont) installed in
conjunction with synchronized air injection system to oxidize
HC and CO.
4) Catalytic reactor employed to further oxidition of HC and CO.
5) Ignition timing retarded from standard to reduce NOX by lowering
peak combustion temperature.
-183-
-------
Performance Data: #32
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
26.5
52.0
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
Time (sec.)
5.0
10.0
8.2
Stopping distance (ft.)
32
126
Best Time (sec.)
76.3
82.4
Microphone distance dB (A)
50' 74.5
50' 69.0
10' 59.5
Emissions Data: #32
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
0.87
14.63
0.50
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
10
1000
491
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
36
2900
528
PART, (gm/mile) 0.11
Fuel Economy: #32
175.2 miles/million Btu
-184-
-------
33
WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE
Entrant;
Class;
Team Captain;
#33
I.C.E. (Liquid Fuel)
Walter V. Thompson
c/o Prof. R.R. Borden
C.A.C.R. Committee
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Worcester, Massachusetts 01609
Body and Chassis; 1970 Ford Mustang
Vehicle Weight; 3000 Ibs.
Power Plant;
Drive Train;
Fuel;
Fuel System;
Exhaust System;
I.C.E.; modified 302 C.I.D. Ford V-8
Ford C-4 three-speed automatic transmission, 3.08:1
rear axle ratio
Leaded Gasoline
Standard tank and lines. Carburetion replaced by
dual Volkswagen fuel injection system.
Standard manifolds. Poppet-type flow control valve
installed below Y-connection. Arvin slant-bed
catalytic reactor installed, followed by regular
muffler. Particle agglomerator and final filter added
below muffler.
Emission Control:
1) Fuel injection installed to allow very lean (18:1) air-fuel ratio
to be used. This helps reduce NOX, and provides excess oxygen
for reaction with HC and CO in the exhaust system.
2) Compression ratio lowered from 9.5:1 to 7.3:1 to lower peak
combustion temperature and reduce NOX.
3) Ignition timing retarded 5° from stock to help reduce NOX.
Timing set at 11° BTDC.
4) Vehicle weight reduced by 500 Ibs. to improve fuel economy and
lower total emissions. Steel-belted radial tires installed to
lower rolling resistance.
5) Catalytic reactor installed in exhaust system to oxidize HC and CO.
6) Particle agglomerator (inertial type) installed to increase particle
size, and a final filter added to remove the particles. Extra pipe
also added to cool exhaust before it reaches the agglomerator.
-185-
-------
7) Vapor collection dome added to gas tank, and charcoal filled
cannister installed to control evaporative HC emissions.
Cannister is purged by PCV and air into the air cleaner intake,
-186-
-------
Performance Data: #33
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
30
54
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Time (sec.)
7.5
15.4
14.4
Stopping distance (ft.)
41
145
Best Time (sec.)
Driver til
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
78
77
Microphone distance dB
so-
so'
10'
71
62
59
.2
.2
(A)
.0
.0
.0
Emissions Data: #33
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
2.10
11.67
1.11
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
57
9600
326
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
58
1200
234
PART, (gm/mile) 0.04
Fuel Economy; #33
128.5 miles/million Btu
-187-
-------
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Entrant: #34
34
Class;
Team Captain:
Body and Chassis:
Vehicle Weight:
Power Plant:
Exhaust System:
Emission Control:
I.C.E. (Liquid Fuel)
David A. Olds
321 Auto Lab
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
1970 Volkswagen square back sedan
2500 Ibs.
I.C.E.: 97.6 C.I.D. Volkswagen, 4-cylinder engine
Unleaded gasoline
Factory stock, with Bosch electronic fuel injection
systera.
Standard manifold. Two Engelhard platinum catalytic
reactors installed in series, followed by a conventional
muffler.
1) Catalytic reactors installed to oxidize KG and CO.
2) Variable air-fuel ratio control accomplished by inserting a variable
resistance in the manifold pressure transducer circuit, which
controls the discharge duration of the fuel injectors. Slightly
lean ratio used.
3) Water injection into the air-fuel mixture employed to reduce
NO . Water injected on the inside of the air cleaner cowling
by two injectors which are activated separately at two throttle
openings. One is activated just above idle, the other at about
half throttle.
4) Air injection at the exhaust ports installed to provide oxygen
for reaction with EC and CO. Exhaust system wrapped with in-
sulating tape to maintain high temperature and aid the oxidation
process.
5) Temperature-sensitive vacuum advance shutoff valve provide additional
spark retardation during engine warm-up. This results in hotter
exhaust and faster reactor warm-up. One of the water injectors
is also shut off during warm-up for the same reason.
-189-
-------
Performance Data; #34
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
30
52
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Time (sec.)
7.0
13.2
14.3
Stopping distance (ft.)
41
148
Best Time (sec.)
4)
Emissions
HC
CO
NO
Driver #1
Driver #2
Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
Data: #34
Cold Start
Detroit
(gin/mile)
0.67
4.91
1.41
Microphone
50'
50'
10'
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
13
1000
406
76.6
76.4
distance dB (A)
77.0
67.0
63.5
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
24
1900
314
PART, (gm/mile) 0.22
Fuel Economy: #34
228.0 miles/million Btu
-190-
-------
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
35
Entrant:
Class;
Team Captain;
#35
I.C.E. (Liquid Fuel)
Richard Waggoner
321 Auto Lab
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
Body and Chassis; 1970 General Motors Chevelle 4-door hardtop
Vehcile Weight; 3800 Ibs.
Power Plant;
Fuel;
Fuel System;
Exhaust System;
I.C.E.; 350 C.I.D. Chevrolet V-8
Unleaded gasoline
Conventional system for gasoline operation
Regular manifolds, One Engelhard platinum catalytic
reactor installed just downstream from each cylinder
bank. Pipe joins in Y-connection, where air is
injected, then continues to two more Engelhard reactors
connected in parallel. Conventional muffler follows
reactors.
Emission Control:
1) First set of catalytic reactors installed to reduce NOX by converting
NOX and CO to N2 and C02.
2) Second set of reactors, in conjunction with air injection, designed
to oxidize HC and CO.
-191-
-------
Performance Data: #35
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
26
48
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Time (sec.)
4.6
8.1
6.7
Stopping distance (ft.)
32
127
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
Best Time (sec.)
78.1
80.3
Microphone distance dB (A)
50'
50'
10'
89.0
65.5
63.5
Emissions Data: #35
HC
CO
NO
PART
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
1.38
25.70
1.06
. (gm/mile)
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
27
1000
233
0.15
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
48
1000
970
Fuel Economy: #35
126.4 miles/million Btu
-192-
-------
36
OVERALL WINNER
Wayne State University
Entrant; #36
Class; I.C.E. (Liquid Fuel)
Team Captain: Richard Jeryan
18261 Forrer
Detroit, Michigan 4P.235
Body and Chassis: 1971 Ford Capri
Vehicle Weight: 2300 Ibs. (approximately)
Power Plant: I.C.E.; 302 C.I.D. Ford V-8
Drive Train: Ford C-4 automatic transmission, 2.33:1 rear axle ratio
Fuel; Unleaded gasoline
Fuel System:
Polyethylene fuel tank (18 gal. capacity) with an in-tank electric
fuel pump installed. Insulated fuel lines led to modified carburetor.
Mechanical fuel pump retained for emergency use.
Exhaust System;
Conventional manifolds. Two Engelhard PTX-5 catalytic reactors
installed below each manifold. Air introduced below the first set (before
the second set) of reactors. Dual pipe combines, then enters conventional
muffler.
Emission Control:
1) Vehicle weight reduced to lower power demand, thereby lowering total
emissions, improving fuel economy and performance.
2) Low valve overlap(11°) camshaft installed to reduce hot residual gases
in cylinder «4 allow more cold exhaust gas recycle. This lowers
peak combustion temperature which reduces NOX emissions.
3) Combustion chambers contoured to reduce "dead" (non-burning) volumes,
which reduces HC emissions.
4) Projections on the head and piston were removed to eliminate hot spots,
thereby reducing NOX formation.
5) Time constant of Vacuum spark advance system increased to lower tran-
sient emissions.
-193-
-------
6) Exhaust gas recirculation system employed to lower NOx emissions.
Vacuum override system connected to spark advance line prevents
recycle when spark vacuum is below 4 or above 20 inches of mercury.
7) Air-fuel ratio stabilized between 14.5:1 and 15:1 by carburetor air
and fuel temperature control features. Air temperature controlled
by temperature-sensitive valve which mixes high and low temperature
inlet air. Fuel lines insulated, and carburetor insulated from
engine heat. Close air-fuel ratio control allows catalytic exhaust
reactors to function at maximum efficiency.
8) Dual power valve system added to carburetor to reduce bore-to-bore
imbalance, providing additional control of air-fuel ratio.
9) PCV valve replaced by .076 inch orifice to reduce effect of varying
crankcase flow rate on air-fuel ratio.
10) First set of catalytic reactors employed to reduce NOX.
11) Second set of reactors, in conjunction with air injection, installed
to oxidize HC and CO.
Miscellaneous Modifications
1) Hardened valve seats installed.
2) Oil pan and pump, front end belt drives modified to facilitate
engine installation.
3) Extra-capacity radiator installed, and extra air ports cut in front
sheet metal.
-194-
-------
Performance Data: #36
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
35
53
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Time (sec.)
3.6
5.2
4.2
Stopping distance (ft.)
59
124
Best time (sec.)
4)
Emissions
Driver #1
Driver #2
Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 cruise
Idle
Data: #36
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
HC 1.21
CO
NO
13.76
0.70
69.4
68.6
Microphone Distance dB (A)
50'
50'
10'
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
10
1000
100
73.0
63.0
59.0
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
16
1000
118
Part, (gm/mile): 0.04
Fuel Economy; #36
196.3 miles/million Btu
-195-
-------
37
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN
Entrant; #37
Class: I.C.E. (Liquid Fuel)
Team Captain; Harrison Sigworth
c/o Mechanical Engineering Department
University of Wisconsin
Madison, Wisconsin 53706
Body and Chassis: 1970 Lotus Europa
Vehicle Weight; 1760 Ibs.
Power Plant; I.C.E.; Renault R-16 4-cylinder engine
Fuel Unleaded gasoline
Fuel System; Conventional Lotus System
Exhaust System;
Air injected at three of the four exhaust ports. Part of the exhaust
gas from the fourth port is recirculated to the intake manifold. Conventional
exhaust manifold is followed by an Engelhard platinum catalytic reactor, a
thermal reactor and a resonator, in that order.
Emission Control;
1) Factory emission control features include special retarded spark timing,
blowby emission control, special top piston rings to minimize quench
volume, and special carburetion and intake manifold for lean operation.
2) Exhaust port air injection installed to provide oxygen for reaction with
HC and CO in exhaust system. Antibackfire valve routes air to pipe just
above catalytic reactor during severe decaleration. Air injected at
three exhaust ports.
3) Exhaust gas recirculation employed to lower NO^ emissions. Exhaust from
port without air injection is routed through a control orifice and a
distribution manifold to the intake manifold. Recirculation rate up to
25% of intake charge.
4) Catalytic reactor installed to oxidize HC and CO.
5) Thermal reactor designed, built, and installed by entrant team to
further oxidize HC and CO. Reactor is an insulated can designed to give
increased residence time at high temperature.
6) Spark timing further retarded to reduce NOX . A vacuum switch shuts off
all vacuum advance at intake manifold pressures above 9 psia.
7) Evaporative emission control system from a Ford Maverick installed.
System consists of a charcoal cannister, gas tank air bleed valve, and
a vapor-liquid separator and expansion chamber. Fuel vapors are routed
from the cannister to the engine intake.
-197-
-------
Performance Data: #37
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-44
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
34
55
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
Time (sec.)
5.5
9-6
7.0
Stopping distance (ft.)
50
136
Best Time (sec.)
78.3
79.2
Microphone distance dB (A)
50' 72.5
50' 63.0
10' 60.5
Emissions Data: #37
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
1.56
3.84
0.84
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
13
2000
190
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
17
1000
396
PART, (gm/mile) 0.10
Fuel Economy; #37
288.0 miles/million Btu
-198-
-------
41
WINNER-CLASS I (Liquid Fuel)
Stanford University
Entrant; 41
Class: I.C.E. (liquid fuel)
Team Captain; Dana G. Andrews
c/o Robert Byer
Hansen Labs
Stanford University
Stanford, California 94301
Body and Chassis; 1970 American Motors Gremlin
Vehicle Weight; 2569 Ibs.
Power Plant; I.C.E.; 232 C.I.D. American Motors 6-cylinder engine.
Drive Train; Three-speed manual transmission, 3.08:1 rear axle ratio
Fuel; Methanol (Methyl Alcohol)
Fuel System;
Standard fuel tank retained. Conelec electric fuel pump installed,
but malfunction necessitated use of lover capacity stock fuel pump.
Zenith model 32 NDIX two-barrel carburetor, mixture heater, and water
heated intake manifold installed.
Exhaust System;
Standard system augmented with an Engelhard Diesel Exhaust Purifier
(catalytic reactor). Exhaust gas recirculation system installed.
Emission Control;
1) Lean air-fuel ratio (8.5:1 at low speeds to 7.5:1 at full throttle)
used to reduce HC, CO, and NOX. Stoichiometrlc ratio is 6.5:1.
2) Heat exchanger (heated by engine coolant) installed in adapter plate
between carburetor and intake manifold. In conjunction with water-
heated manifold, this provides better fuel vaporization and distribu-
tion, which results in lower HC, CO, and NOX.
3) Catalytic reactor employed to oxidize HC and CO with excess air provided
by lean operation.
4) Exhaust gas from exhaust manifold recirculated into intake manifold to
lower NOX. Hot gases also help vaporize fuel.
-199-
-------
Performance Data: #41
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph) lime_ (sec.)
0-30 6.0
0-45 11. f>
20-50 10.2
2) Braking
Speed (mph) Stopping Distance (ft.)
29 40
50 122
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Best time (sec.)
Driver #1 83.8
Driver #2 81.0
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode Microphone Distance dB (A)
30 WOT50' 70,5
30 cruise 50' 59.0
Idle 10' 52.0
Emissions Data: #41
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
0.42
4.68
0.86
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
23
1000
279
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
44
2300
116
Part, (gm/mile): 0.02
Fuel Economy; #41
171.0 miles/million Btu
-200-
-------
42
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA IN LOS ANGELES
Entrant:
Class:
Team Captain;
#42
I.C.E. (Liquid Fuel)
Roberta Nichols
1723 Hickory Avenue
Torrance, California 90503
Body and Chassis; 1965 Ford Mustang
Vehicle Weight: 2800 Ibs.
Power Plant:
Drive Train;
Fuel:
Fuel System:
Diesel-I.C-E.; 138 C.I.D. Daihatsu light truck engine
(imported from Japan). Four cylinders, in-line, with
swirl-type combustion chambers.
Ford 4-speed manual transmission, 3.23:1 rear axle ratio
Diesel Oil
Bosch "A" type solid fuel injection with throttle type nozzles in
individual precombustion chambers. Pneumatic governor system (stock with
engine) allows constant-speed operation, regardless of load.
Exhaust System:
Conventional muffler removed. Airesearch model TO-4 Turbocharger
(driven by exhaust pressure) installed. Remainder of conventional piping
retained.
Emission Control;
Turbocharger added to provide excess air for more complete combustion,
reducing HC and CO emissions. Pneumatic governor atmospheric balance line
modified to compensate for increased pressure in intake manifold.
-201-
-------
Performance Data: #42
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-40
0-45
20-45
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
28
48
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
Time (sec.)
10.1
17.1
21.8
16.0
Stopping distance (ft.)
47
136
Best Time (sec.)
94.0
86.2
Microphone distance dB (A)
50' 78.0
50' 66.0
10' 63.0
Emissions Data: #42
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
1.60
3.40
2.30
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
141
1000
472
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
66
1000
480
PART, (gm/mile) 0.16
Fuel Economy; #42
260.0 miles/million Btu
-202-
-------
UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
51
Entrant;
Class:
Team Captain;
#51
I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Mark Carnes
c/o Electrical Engineering Department
University of Arizona
Tucson, Arizona 85721
Body and Chassis: 1970 Plymouth Duster
Vehicle Weight; 3500 Ibs.
Power Plant;
Transmission;
Fuel;
Fuel System;
I.C.E.; 318 C.I.D. Plymouth V-8
Three-speed manual
"Fuel Gas," a mixture of methane (CH^) and hydrogen (H2).
A mixture of 90% methane and 10% hydrogen was used in the
race events.
Liquid methane stored in 19-gallon cryogenic tank. Compressed hydro-
gen stored in tank of 220 cubic feet capacity. Conventional regulators of
the type used on welding equipment were used to set the output pressure of
each tank. Each gas line then passed through an electrically - controlled
valve. The two lines combined in a T - connection, and a single line
carrying the methane-hydrogen mixture passed through another valve and
entered in IMPCO regulator. Vapor from the regulator entered the carbure-
tor at a pressure between 0" and 6" of water column.
Exhaust System: Single-pipe conventional system.
Emission Control:
1) Output pressure of second-stage fuel regulator empirically set at
optimum for lox^est combined HC and NO emissions. Optimum setting
at about 1/2" of water column.
2) Ignition timing set at 0° T.D.C. to provide optimum balance
betx^reen HC and NOX.
3) Electronic fuel cut-off provided during deceleration to lower
HC emissions.
-203-
-------
Performance Data: #51
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-45
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
26
52
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Time (sec.)
4.3
7.4
6.0
Stopping distance (ft.)
32
155
4)
Emissions
HC
CO
NO
Driver #1
Driver #2
Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
Data: #51
Cold Start
Detroit
(gin/mile)
0.94
1.43
0.84
Microphone
50'
50'
10'
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
28
1000
168
Best Time (sec.)
78.0
80.2
distance dB (A)
78.0
62.0
63.5
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
76
1000
347
PART, (gm/mile) 0.01
Fuel Economy; #51
165.0 miles/million Btu
-204-
-------
PUTNAM CITY WEST HIGH SCHOOL
Entrant: #52
Class: I.C.E. (Gaseous Fuel)
Team Captain: Alan T. Axworthy
Putnam City West High School
8000 N. W. 23rd Street
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73127
Body and Chassis; Opel GT
Vehicle Weight: 2300 Ibs.
Power Plant: I.C.E.; 115 C.I.D. Opel 4-cylinder engine.
Transmission: Four-speed manual
Fuel; Compressed Natural Gas or Liquefied Petroleum Gas.
Vehicle can operate on either fuel.
Fuel System:
CNG stored in four 1500 cu.in. capacity tanks at 1000 p.s.i.
maximum pressure. Tank pressure reduced to 150 p.s.i. by single-stage
regulator, then further reduced to 2" of water column in a two-stage
regulator. Vapor from regulator passes to carburetor.
LNG stored in 14 water gallon capacity propane tank. Fuel passes
to a two-stage vaporizer-regulator, then to carburetor.
Solenoid valves control choice of fuel.
Exhaust System;
Conventional manifold followed by an Engelhard PTX catalytic
reactor and regular muffler.
Emission Control;
1) air-fuel ratios set very lean to reduce HC and CO emissions.
2) Catalytic reactor employed to oxidize HC and CO.
3) Air injection system installed to provide excess oxygen for
catalytic reactor.
4) Exhaust gas recirculation system installed to reduce NOX emissions.
5) Cold intake manifold used to reduce peak combustion temperature,
thus reducing NOX .
6) Vacuum spark advance eliminated to help reduce NOX formation.
Centrifugal advance retained.
-205-
52
-------
Performance Data: #52
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
0-40
20-50
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
26
-50
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Time (sec.)
6.3
10.3
15.1
Stopping distance (ft.)
47
139
Best Time (sec.)
4)
Emissions
HC
CO
NO
Driver #1
Driver #2
Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
Data: #52
Cold Start
Detroit
(gin/mile)
1.43
1.00
1.77
Microphone
50'
50'
10'
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
128
1000
780
81.4
82.4
distance dB (A)
74.0
65.5
57.0
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
727
1000
294
PART, (gin/mile) 0.02
Fuel Economy; #52
216.0 miles/million Btu
-206-
-------
GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
61
Entrant:
Class:
Team Captain;
Body:
Chassis;
Vehicle Weight;
Power Plant:
Drive Train:
#61
Electric
Dave Robinson
c/o Dr. Ronald Larson
School of Electrical Engineering
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, Georgia 30332
Fabricated steel tubing roll cage, with sheet metal
panels.
1967 Volkswagen Fastback
2900 Ibs.
Series would D.C. electric motor - develops 25.7 H.P.
at 5000 RPM and 120 volts.
Motor mounted on cantilever construction above and forward of
standard VW bell housing. Power transmitted to the clutch assembly by
2:1 reduction timing belt drive. VW transaxle retained in drive train.
Energy Storage;
Replaceable battery pack - 24 six volt Prestolite golf cart
batteries with total energy storage capacity of about 26 Kilowatt-hours.
Batteries arranged in removable trays of 3 each to facilitate quick change-
over to fresh batteries. Recharging accomplished at off-board stationary
or mobile facilities.
Energy Control System;
Full battery voltage (144v) applied in pulses to drive motor.
Voltage pulses gated through dual SCR network by multivibrator circuit
controlling pulse width from zero to 100% of vibrator pulsing period.
Miscellaneous Features;
Accessory power supplies by two 6v Prestolite golf cart batteries
to operate lights, windshield wipers, etc.
Instrumentation provided to monitor:
1) Battery temperature
2) Motor temperature
3) Motor voltage
A) Motor current
5) Auxiliary battery voltage
6) Ampere hours
7) Battery electrolytic
resistivity
-207-
-------
Performance Data: #61
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-25
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
30
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Not tested
Time (sec.)
22.1
Stopping distance (ft.)
55
Best Time (sec.)
105.0
106.8
Emissions Data:
Fuel Economy:
N/A
No data
-208-
-------
IONA COLLEGE
Entrant:
Class:
Team Captain;
64
Body and Chassis:
Vehicle Weight:
Power Plant;
Drive Train:
Performance Data:
Emissions Data:
Fuel Economy:
#64
Electric
Carl Borello
c/o Paul LaRusso
lona College
North Avenue
New Rochelle, New York
1962 Volkswagen "Beetle"
2300 Ibs.
Eight 2 horsepower D.C. Electric motors, arranged such
that two or four motors at a time transmit power to the
driveshaft.
Three successive drive ratios employed to start
vehicle motion.
1) First set of two motors drive at an 8:1 ratio. Other
motors idle on the drive shaft.
2) First set mechanically disengages, second set
(four motors) drives at 4:1 ratio. Two remaining
motors idle on shaft.
3) Second set mechanically disengages, third set
(two motors) drives at 1.14:1 ratio for cruising.
Maximum motor speed for all motors is 4000 r.p.m.
Each motor powered by its own 24-volt battery.
Not tested
N/A
No data
-209-
-------
65
WINNER-CLASS IV
Cornell University
Entrant: #65
Class: Electric
Team Captain: Mark Hoffman
224 Phillips Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, New York 14850
Body and Chassis; American Motors Hornet
Vehicle Weight; 5311 Ibs.
Power Plant; Electric motor, D.C. four pole configuration.
20 H.P. continuous rating, with overlaod capacity
to 120 H.P.
Drive Train: Standard Hornet 3-speed manual transmission, driveshaft
Energy Storage:
Battery pack consisting of 24 six-volt Electric Fuel Propulsion
lead-cobalt (variation of lead-acid) batteries. 34 kilowatt-hour
capacity.
Power Control;
"3 in 1" dual chopper: circuitry which pulses battery voltage to the
motor. Even harmonics of chopper frequency are cancelled, reducing A.C.
component and, therefore, heat losses in the motor. Pulse width and
frequency are modulated to control motor speed.
Chopper also functions as regenerative braking control. Motor acts as
a generator when accelerator is released. Pressing brake pedal brings
regenerative braking to its maximum, and actuates the hydraulic brakes.
Power generated by this process is returned to batteries.
Due to last-minute problems, the 3-in-l dual chopper was not used
during the Race. A ten-step series-paralled contactor controller was
used as a substitute. This controller provided levels of 12, 24, 36,
72, 108, and 144 volts to the motor, with a motor field weakening step
after each of the last four voltage levels.
Recharging Scheme:
On-board charger can accept 208 to 240 volts single-phase A.C.,
three-phase A.C., or D.C. and can supply up to 500 amps to the battery
pack. Charger regulation includes voltage, current, temperature, and
gassing controls.
-211-
-------
Performance Data: #65
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph) Time (sec.)
0-30 8.5
0-45 18.4
20-40 14.0
2) Braking
Speed (mph) Stopping distance (ft.)
30 61
49 186
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Best time (sec.)
Driver #1 89.8
Driver #2 87.8
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode Microphone Distance dB (A)
30 WOT 50' 62.0
30 cruise 50' 61.0
Idle 10' Not applicable
Emissions Data; #65
Not applicable.
Fuel Economy; #65
189.8 miles/million Btu*
Electrical Efficiency! #65
1.85 milea/kllowatt-hour
*includes correction for power plant efficiency of 35*
-212-
-------
66
STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Entrant: #66
Class; Electric
Team Captain; Henry Van Handle
c/o American Smelting & Refining
Central Research Laboratories
South Plainfield, New Jersey 07080
Body and Chassis; Built by the Kalmar Co. of Sweden as a delivery van
with gasoline engine. Modified by Electric Fuel
Propulsion, Inc. for battery power. Body of Fiberglass.
Vehicle Weight; 4200 Ibs.
Power Plant; D.C. electric motor, 15 H.P., four-pole, series traction
type.
Drive Train;
Power transmitted to two separate rear axles by belt drive system
with continuously variable ratio drive. Each of the two pulleys on motor
shaft coupled to a driven pulley on an axle. Pulley pitch diameter (drive
ratio) controlled by flyball governor.
Energy Storage;
Twenty 6 volt batteries, arranged in four banks of 30 volts each.
Batteries are tri-polar, lead-cobalt (a type of lead-acid) made by
Electric Fuel Propulsion, Inc. The battery pack can store 200 ampere
hours at the two hour rate, or 290 ampere hours at the twenty hour rate.
Total battery weight is about 2000 Ibs.
Power Control;
Hartman switching control which provides seven discrete power levels,
plus an "off" position. Control actuated by foot pedal.
1) All banks in parallel, 30 volts applied to motor through series
resistor to limit current surge to get vehicle started.
2) Same as above but without resistor.
3) Same as 2), but with shunt resistor on field winding for field
weakening.
4) 60 volts applied to motor, all resistance out of circuit.
5) Same as 4), but with field weakening.
6) 120 volts to motor, all resistance out.
7) Same as 6), but with field weakening.
-213-
-------
Recharging Scheme;
On-board charger uses 3-phase bridge network of 3 SCR's and 3 diodes,
Designed for power input of 240 volt, 3-phase, 150 amp service, but can
also accept 220 volt, single-phase service. Feedback loop in charger
control circuit limits voltage impressed on battery pack to 150 volts.
Batteries can be charged to 80% of capacity in 45 minutes, or 95% of
capacity in 90 minutes.
-214-
-------
Performance Data: #66
1) Acceleration
Speed range (tnph)
0-20
0-30
0-36
2) Braking
Speed (mph)
24
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Time (sec.)
11.2
17.0
29.2
Stopping distance (ft.)
30
Best Time (sec.)
95.0
95.0
Test Mode Microphone distance dB (A)
30 WOT
30 Cruise
Idle
Emissions Data: N/A
50'
50'
10'
62.0
61.0
Background
Fuel Economy:
146.4 mile/million Btu*
Electrical Efficiency;
1.43 miles/kilowatt-hour
* includes correction for power plant efficiency of 35%.
-215-
-------
70
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Entrant: #70
Class; Electric-I.C.E. Hybrid
Team Captain: William Carson
Room 13-3005
M.I.T.
Cambridge, Mass. 02139
Body and Chassis; 1968 Chevrolet Corvair
Power Plant; Shunt wound D.C. Electric traction motor. 20 H.P. rated,
100 H.P. peak output.
Drive Train; Corvair 4-speed manual transmission and axle assembly.
Batteries: Fourteen lead-acid batteries with total rated capacity
of 90 ampere-hours at 168 volts.
Power Control:
Power controller uses a 2 phase SCR chopper at low motor speeds and
shunt field control at high motor speeds. The chopper pulses battery
voltage through an inductor to the motor. Controller also allows motor
to be used as a generator for partial recharging of batteries during
deceleration or downhill rolling (regenerative braking). Controller
includes current limiting, voltage limiting, and motor speed limiting
circuits, as well as logic circuitry for automatic selection of operating
mode. Adjustable controller current and motor speed limits on dashboard.
Recharging Scheme;
Batteries can be recharged from an external power supply, or by the
on-board gasoline engine-alternator assembly. The power controller
functions as a battery charger to rectify alternating current. Voltage
and current limits for recharging may be set on the dashboard. External
power supply may be 208 volt or 240 volt, single phase or three phase
A.C. For on-board recharging, the gasoline engine is automatically
turned on and off by a controller which measures charge state of the
batteries, or by manual overrides. Engine may be left on to complete
charging cycle, even after removal of ignition key. Automatic turn off
and failure lights are provided in case of engine failure.
Engine; 4-cylinder Austin-Healey
Emission Control; Engine operates only at constant speed and full
throttle—avoids high emissions during acceleration
and deceleration.
Lean fuel-air mixture to reduce CO and HC.
-217-
-------
Compression ratio lowered to 6.9:1 to lower flame
temperature and reduce NOX.
Water injection system installed to reduce NOX.
Miscellaneous Features:
Freon cooling of batteries when gasoline engine
is operating.
Battery pack electrically floated with respect to
car ground, with siren warning in case of acciden-
tal grounding.
Fluid cooling of electronic controls.
Performance Data: Not tested
Emissions Data: #70
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
3.82*
82.73*
6.28*
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
no data
no data
no data
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
no data
no data
no data
Part, (gm/mile): No data
Fuel Economy; #70
No data
* These values obtained for first six cycles out of a total of
nine. Engine automatically shut off after sixth cycle, and vehicle
completed test in pure electric mode.
-218-
-------
71
CO-WINNER-CLASS V
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Entrant; #71
Class; Electric-I.C.E. Hybrid
Team Captain; Steven Clarke
Mechanical Engineering Department
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Worcester, Mass. 01609
Body and Chassis: 1970 American Motors Gremlin
Vehicle Weight: 4740 Ibs.
Power Plant; General Electric type BY401, 25 H.P., series wound
direct current traction electric motor. Battery
pack rated at 200 amp-hours at 20 hour rate.
Drive Train; Jeep drive shaft, heavy duty 5:1 ratio differential
Batteries:
Twenty Exide type 3EC-19, 6 volt lead-acid batteries, connected
in series for 120-volt power. Battery pack rated at 200 amp-hours
at 20 hour rate.
Power Control;
Modified General Electric model 300 SCR controller. Full battery
voltage applied to motor in pulses. Speed and torque controlled by
varying pulse frequency through foot-pedal potentiometer. Pulsing
circuit by-pass provided for top speed operation.
Recharging Scheme;
Batteries charged with current supplied by a General Electric tri-
clad brushless synchronous generator. The generator is driven by an
internal combustion engine. Control curcuits allow the batteries to accept
charge during low-power vehicle operation, or deliver power at greater
loads. The generator can provide 25 KVA of 3-phase A.C. power, which is
rectified to provide D.C.
Engine;
Jeep Dauntless V-6 I.C.E.
Emission Control:
1) Englehard catalytic reactors installed just downstream of exhaust
manifolds to oxidize HC and CO.
-219-
-------
2) Air injection on exhaust manifolds to provide oxygen for reactors.
3) Exhaust gas recirculation to lower NOX emissions.
Vehicle Modifica tion:
1) Suspension stiffened by installing coil and leaf springs from an
A.M. ambassador, and adding Booster coils to the shock absorbers.
2) Goodyear 15 inch radial tires and wheels to match installed.
3) Rear seat removed to make room for battery pack.
4) Ten-inch brake drums installed.
5) Hood Modified (raised) to provide clearance for engine components.
6) Instruments include tachometer, speedoment, odometer, water tempera-
ture gauge, oil pressure gauge, alternator voltmeter and ammeter,
motor voltmeter and ammeter, and watt hour meter.
-220-
-------
Performance Data: #71
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph)
0-30
2) Braking
Speed
46
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Driver #1
Driver #2
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 cruise
Idle
Time (sec.)
17.2
Stopping distance (ft.)
153
Best time (sec.)
106.0
104.5
Microphone Distance dB (A)
50167.5
50' 59.5
10' 49.5
Emissions Data:
HC
CO
NO
Cold Start
Detroit
(gin/mile)
0.59
1.67
6.09
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
27
1000
1041
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
20
1500
1000
Part, (gm/mile): No data
Fuel Economy: #71
147.6 miles/million Btu
-221-
-------
75
CO-WINNER-CLASS V
University of Toronto
Entrant; #75
Class; Electric-I.C.E. Hybrid
Team Captain; Douglas Venn
Mechanical Building
University of Toronto
Toronto 5, Ontario
Canada
Body; Fabricated fiberglass
Chassis; Custom built-constructed from 1970 Chevelle front end
and 1967 Corvair transaxle and rear suspension.
Vehicle Weight; 4160 Ibs.
Power System;
Propane-fueled I.C.E. used as prime mover, transmitting power through
an electric power system, or mechanically through a drive shaft, or in
parallel with electric drive. Electric drive may also be used on battery
power with I.C.E. shut down.
Electric Drive - Two Delco 12 £W motor-generators. One (used as motor)
drives the main driveshaft by a belt drive, the other (used as a genera-
tor) is mounted forward and driven by the engine. Ten 90 amp-hour lead-
acid batteries used for electric energy storage.
Electric power controlled by an SCR chopper with automatic control
logic circuitry.
Engine:
302 C.I.D. Chevrolet V-8, modified to run on propane.
Transmission;
4-speed manual (Corvair transaxle)
Fuel System;
Propane tank in rear of vehicle. Two ALgas gaseous carburetors
feed into a split plenum chamber which is mounted on a Weber intake
manifold. Balance line between plenum chambers provides uniform vacuum
and better mixture distribution.
-223-
-------
Exhaust System:
Dual system with regular manifolds. A platinum catalytic reactor
and a conventional muffler followed each manifold, in the order given.
Emission Control:
1) Engine intake and exhaust ports were ported and polished. Larger,
high temperature, valves were installed. Displacement of each
upper combustion chambers rendered precisely the same. These modifi-
cations provide better and more uniform breathing characteristics.
2) Catalytic reactors installed to oxidize HC and CO.
Additional Modifications:
1) Compression ratio raised from 7.1:1 to 11:1 to achieve more complete
combustion in the cylinders and lower exhaust temperature.
2) 1965 truck hydraulic lifter camshaft with short duration (252°) and
later opening and closing times installed.
3) Scintilla vertex magneto ignition system installed.
4) Dual electric fans installed to assist regular belt-driven fan in
cooling the 1970 Buick radiator.
5) Aluminum wheels and Dunlop six-ply radial 185 x 15 tires installed.
-224-
-------
Performance Data: #75
1) Acceleration
Speed ranee (mph) Time (sec.)
. 0-30 O -
0-45 12.4
20-50 10.6
2) Braking
Speed (mph) Stopping distance (ft.)
27.0 35
49.5
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Best time (sec.)
4)
Emissions
HC
CO
NO
Driver #1
Driver #2
Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 cruise
Idle
Data: #75
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
2.59
1.06
2.35
80.8
78.5
Microphone Distance dB (A)
50'
50'
10'
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
58
1000
336
82.0
72.0
66.5
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
46
1000
615
Part, (gm/mile): 0.01
Fuel Economy: #75
143.8 miles/million Btu
-225-
-------
80
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT SAN DIEGO
Entrant: #80
Class; Rankine Cycle (steam)
Team Captain; Ray Salemme
c/o Dr. Stanley Miller
Chemistry Department
University of California, San Diego
La Jolla, California 92037
Body and Chassis: American Motors Javelin
Vehicle Weight; 3600 Ibs.
Power System: Steam engine (boiler, expander, and condenser) built
by entrant team.
Water supply - Original gas tank used as water tank. Feed water pump,
adapted from hydraulic oil pump, can supply water at 1000 P.S.I, to boiler.
Boiler - Recirculating type, consisting of 300 ft. of copper pre-heat
tubing (5/16 in. o.d.) connected to 100 ft. of chromemolybdenum steel, tub-
ing (3/8 in. o.d.), which connects to a header pipe of mild steel (3 in.
o.d., 1-3/4 in i.d.)
32 u~tubes (1/2 in o.d.) extend down from header into boiler. Water
circulates through u-tubes, and steam exits from ports at top of header
pipe.
Pressure switch in header turns flame on or off.
Expander - Modified Harley-Davidson 74 C.I.D. motorcycle engine.
2 cylinders made, push rods and valves removed, and front plate with
timing pulleys and alternators added. Steam inlet valve is cam actuated
piston type, preceded by a throttle valve for speed control.
Exhaust ports with check valves at the bottom of each cylinder
allow exit of steam.
Condenser - Specially made auto-radiator type with electric fan
for air flow. Water is returned to water tank.
Drive Train;
Engine drives a 1962 Cheverolet 3-speed manual transmission through
a clutch. This allows the engine to idle and drive alternators when car
is stopped. Drive shaft delivers power to 2.87;1 rear end and wheels.
Fuel; Propane
-227-
-------
Fuel System;
35 gallon liquid propane tank in trunk for fuel storage. Fuel passes
through pressure regulator, them to vaporizer-burner. Burner consists of
combustion can inserted through the boiler u-tubes with forced air supplied
by electric fan. Spark ignition operates whenever burner is on.
Performance Data: Not tested
Emissions Data: No data
Fuel Economy: No data
-228-
-------
83
WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE
Entrant; #83
Class; Rankine Cycle (steam)
Team Captain: Allen Downs
Higgins Labs
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Worcester, Mass. 01609
Body and Chassis; 1970 General Motors Chevelle
Vehicle Weight: 4000 Ibs. (approx.)
Power System;
Closed cycle steam engine built by entrant team consisting of a
steam generator, expander, condenser, and feed water tank.
Steam Generator - Three-stage monotubular design. Incoming feed-
water is heated to just below its boiling point in the first stage.
Vaporization takes place in the second stage. The combustion chamber
is located above the tubing package. Fuel (kerosene) is atomized, mixed
with air supplied by blower, and ignited by modified spark plug. Combus-
tion air is preheated in an outer jacker. Fuel is burned with excess air
present for more complete combustion.
Expander - 99 C.I.D., 6 cylinder, modified Kiekhaefer-Mercury
marine engine. Steam, distributed by chain driven rotary valve, is
fed into spark plug openings and exhausted through intake ports.
Original exhaust ports were plugged.
Condensing system - Feed heater extracts heat from exhaust steam to
preheat feedwater. Exhaust steam then enters a spray-condenser, where a
water spray removes remaining superheat. Saturated steam and water then
enter a set of helicopter oil coolers connected in series. Condensed
water then enters the feedwater tank.
Steam pressure and temperature are automatically regulated by a
feedback control system which turns fuel and/or water on or off. Main
feedwater pump is driven by expander. Auxiliary electric pump provided
for low speeds.
Operator Control;
Hand throttle wheel opens or closes plug valve in steam line.
A cutoff lever varies portion of expander stroke during which steam
is admitted to cylinder. Cutoff of 0°-120° available, forward and
reverse. Cutoff is controlled in rotary valve which distributes steam
to cylinders. Brakes, steering, and ignition switch are operated as
in a conventional car.
-229-
-------
Drive Train:
Direct drive from expander to differential of 2.73:1 ratio,
which drives rear wheels.
Miscellaneous Features:
1) Accessories are driven by a pair of roots - type motors which
operate on exhaust steam from two expander cylinders.
2) Electrical system operates at 24 volts. Load varies from 65
to 145 amps.
3) Instruments include:
Steam pressure
Steam temperature
Exhaust gas temperature
Expander tachometer
Exhaust steam pressure
Condenser pressure
Feedwater temperature
Feedwater level
Fuel level
Ammeter
System elapsed operating time
Steam generator firing elapsed time.
-230-
-------
Performance Data: #83
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph) Time (sec.)
0-20 36.5
2) Braking
Speed (mph) Stopping distance (ft.)
20 44
21 33
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Not tested
4) Noise Levels
Test Mode Microphone distance dB (A)
30 WOT 50' 69.0
30 Cruise 50' 68.0
Idle 10' 62.0
Emissions Data: No data
Fuel Economy: No data
-231-
-------
90
WINNER-CLASS III
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Entrant: #90
Class; Brayton Cycle (turbine)
Team Captain; Michael L. Bennett
12 Lawrence Road
Brookline, Massachusetts 02146
Body and Chassis; 1970 Chevrolet C.10 half-ton pickup truck
Vehicle Weight; 5200 Ibs.
Power System;
Turbine-Electric configuration. Gas turbine drives an alternator
which provides A.C. power to a rectifier system. D. C. power from the
rectifier is delivered to a D.C. motor, which drives the rear wheels
through the 4.11:1 differential.
1) Turbine - Airesearch GTP-70-52 gas turbine. 225 horsepower maximum
output, rated at 136 H.P. at sea-level atmospheric pressure and
80°F.
2) Alternator - General Electric model 2CM 357A1. Provides 150 KW,
400 c.p.s. A.C. at 6000 r.p.m.
3) Motor-Inland M-12004-A series wound D.C. Motor. Rated at 100 H.P.
continuous, 600 H.P. maximum output.
4) Rectifier - Designed and built by entrant team.
Turbine, alternator, and rectifier are mounted in truck bed. Electric
motor is mounted in engine compartment.
Control Features;
Constant motor torque or current control. Turbine and alternator
run at constant speed, with output controlled by excitation applied
to field windings.
Fuel;
JP-1 or JP-4 (aviation fuel)
Fuel control unit of the turbine is controlled by mechanical,
thermal, pneumatic, and electronic feedback units. Fuel tank mounted
in bed.
-233-
-------
Miscellaneous Features:
1) Heavy-Duty wheels and tires mounted.
2) Aluminum camper shell installed over truck bed to cover turbine, etc.
3) Acoustic intake and exhaust mufflers installed.
-234-
-------
Performance Data: #90
1) Acceleration
Speed range (mph) Time (sec.)
0-30 12.0
0-45 27.1
20-45 21.0
2) Braking
Speed (mph) Stopping distance (ft.)
28 44
47 133
3) Urban Driving Cycle
Best time (sec.)
4)
Emissions
HC
CO
NO
Driver #1
Driver #2
Noise Levels
Test Mode
30 WOT
30 cruise
Idle
Data: #90
Cold Start
Detroit
(gm/mile)
5.73
78.50
6.24
114.0
110.6
Microphone Distance dB (A)
50'
50'
10'
Hot Start
Cambridge
(ppm)
no data
no data
no data
89.5
89.5
105.0
Hot Start
Pasadena
(ppm)
no data
no data
no data
Part, (gm/mile): No data
Fuel Economy; #90
24.0 miles/million Btu
-235-
-------
APPENDIX C
A HISTORY OF ORGANIZATION COMMITTEE ACTIVITY
or
HOW NOT TO ORGANIZE A CLEAN AIR CAR RACE
The large number of factors which contributed to the success of
the 1970 Clean Air Car Race (CACR) makes a complete journal of the event
very difficult to write. A chronological summary of the development of
CACR will provide some insight into the total organization of the compe-
tition. The history of CACR, however, is not a distinct sequence of
events, but, rather, a hazy collection of many complementary and some-
times conflicting actions.
THE GREAT ELECTRIC CAR RACE OF 1968
The chain of events leading up to the CACR really began in the
summer of 1968 when Wally Rippel, an undergraduate at the California
Institute of Technology (CIT or Caltech for short), challenged the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to a cross country electric
car race. Though the M.I.T. administration was doubtful about the value
of such an event, some enterprising students accepted Rippel's challenge.
Leon Loeb, David Saar, and William Carson, all mechanical engineering
(M.E.) undergraduates, took on the task of building an electric car with
faculty support from Professor Richard D, Thornton of the M.I.T. Elec-
trical Engineering (E.E.) Department.
After several delays, the race began on August 26th with the two
teams traveling in opposite directions over the same route between
Cambridge and Pasadena. Temporary electric charging stations had been
set up at more than 50 locations along the race route to provide the
electrical energy needed by the experimental vehicles' battery packs.
The M.I.T. car arrived at Caltech a little over a week later and the
Caltech entry at M.I.T. about 36 hours after that. Both vehicles had
experienced numerous mechanical and electrical failures en route, but
the penalty assessment for towing, which the Caltech team had managed
to avoid, ultimately cost the M.I.T. boys an apparent victory.
Eventually, this happening became known as the Great Electric Car
Race of 1968, but was considered by the media to have been more a college
stunt than a serious attempt to solve the automotive air pollution problem.
Although widespread public attention had not yet been drawn to the emis-
sions control problem of the internal combustion engine (ICE), the great
amount of publicity generated by this "stunt" was partially responsible
-237-
C
-------
for sowing the seeds of the Clean Air Car Race. Another major incentive
for pursuing a course of university involvement in the fields of auto-
motive propulsion and pollution emission control was the educational
experience which the student participants in the 1968 competition had
taken back with them to their respective schools.
EARLY DAYS OF THE CACR
The conceptual evolution of the Clean Air Car Race took place in
the fall of 1969- Correspondence between Professor Thornton at M.I.T.
and Professor Jerome Shapiro at Caltech speculated upon the possibility
for a more novel and practical type of automotive competition, not re-
stricted to electric cars but open to all forms of low-pollution vehi-
cles. Dr. Milton Clauser, then director of M.I.T.'s Lincoln Laboratory,
had followed the Great Electric Car Race closely and had talked frequen-
tly with Professor Thornton about the prospects for a sequel to the 1968
competition. In turn, Milton Clauser and his twin brother, Dr. Francis
Clauser, Dean of the Engineering School at Caltech, became prime movers
in laying groundwork for the new race by initiating contact with the
General Motors Corporation to determine whether significant industrial
support could be mustered.
By late fall (the end of November, 1969) , a public announcement
concerning the rules for participation in the CACR and a proposed struc-
ture for the recently formulated competition had been issued. The event
would be divided into three parts: vehicle performance testing in
Cambridge, a cross-country rally from Cambridge to Pasadena, and exhaust
emissions testing in Pasadena - all to take place in the late summer of
1970. Test vehicle entries could be designed and built by any group
of individuals, including commercial companies, but could be driven only
by college students. Early speculation projected that as many as 15 to
20 teams might eventually participate in the CACR.
No one had expected the unusually overwhelming enthusiasm which
greeted the proposed intercollegiate competition in engineering. By
mid-January, over 15 teams had already indicated intentions of partici-
pating and the faculty group could no longer effectively handle the
administrative load required to organize the CACR. It was decided to
make the organization of the race the responsibility of a student com-
mittee, composed of equal numbers of students at M.I.T. and Caltech,
with overlapping responsibilities. Robert G. McGregor, a master's
degree candidate in M.E., was soon chosen as the M.I.T. student chairman
through the screening efforts of the persistent Milton Clauser. Caltech
would not appoint its student chairman for a month and a half to come.
-238-
-------
THE EMERGENCE OF A STUDENT ORGANIZATION COMMITTEE
It soon became clear that the M.I.T. committee would play a
dominant role in organizing the CACR, largely because of a much larger
source of manpower and a greater initial commitment to the concept. By
early February, Bob McGregor had established a preliminary committee
structure which then consisted of an assistant to the chairman (Steve
McGregor, a junior majoring in history at Boston University), a direc-
tor of finances (Dick Holthaus from the M.I.T. Sloan School of Manage-
ment), a director of public relations (Ty Rabe, a sophomore in mechani-
cal engineering and business management at M.I.T.), and a director of
communications (Jason Zielonka, a senior in electrical engineering at
M.I.T.). Though titles and committee personnel would change between
then and the running of the race, each position with its associated
responsibilities was clearly defined from the outset to reduce confusion
when the juggling actually began.
Steve McGregor's initial role was to keep the chairman informed of
ongoing activities during the early planning stages of the race. In May
of 1970, he would become race director and, together with a to-be-
appointed race coordinator, would make all final arrangements connected
with cross-country travel of the CACR participants. These included over-
night accomodations for the entrant teams, impound areas for the vehicles,
storage areas for the wide variety of fuels used by the cars, and coordi-
nation with state and municipal officials to insure that all laws and
motor vehicle regulations were understood and adhered to.
The responsibilities of the finance director included raising the
necessary funding for the race, allocating the resources appropriately,
and serving as a liason between contributors and the race organization
committee. The original budget for Organization Committee activity and
staging the 17 day competition was estimated at $100,000 but the final
budget would be several times that much.
The mission of the public relations director was, as might be
supposed, to arouse public interest in the problem of automotive air
pollution and the potential afforded by the CACR in providing some of
the available solutions. A major consideration from the outset in con-
ducting an effective public relations effort was the establishment of a
Race Information Center which would compile and disseminate daily infor-
mation to the media during the cross-country rally.
The communications director, in addition to being the office
manager, was in charge of handling correspondence between race partici-
pants and the organization committee. At organization committee meetings,
Jason reported on all entrant team questions regarding qualification,
testing procedures, and general interpretation of race rules.
-239-
-------
THE FIRST MIT - CALTECH ENCOUNTER
On March 17, 1970, a meeting held at MIT in Cambridge brought
together for the first time the joint MIT-Caltech Committee to draw up
a detailed set of preliminary rules for the regulation of the CACR.
Prior to the meeting, Dr. Francis Clauser at GIT had succeeded in locat-
ing an interested student willing to assume responsibility for Caltechfs
role in organizing the event. And so Blair Folsom, a Ph.D. candidate
in mechanical engineering, became the first Caltech student to involve
himself in the already hectic task of preparing for the fast approaching
summer competition.
As a result of the March 17 meeting, final qualification require-
ments for official entry into the race were established. A schedule of
events for the competition was presented which included performance and
exhaust emissions testing of all the entrant vehicles during a week of
pre-race activity at M.I.T. The week of August 17-23 was set aside for
this purpose and would also include the presentation of technical papers
on the respective vehicle power plants by each competing team. Caltech
agreed to host a four-day symposium on its campus following the race to
assess CACR results and to review the state-of-the-art concerning the
control of ICE emissions and the future prospects of alternate automotive
propulsion systems. During this period, the test vehicles would undergo
final exhaust emissions testing to determine whether the various emission
control systems had deteriorated over the course of the race. Concurren-
tly, a panel of experts in the automotive field would subjectively select
an overall winner of the competition. The final event at Caltech would
be an awards banquet to be held the night of Wednesday, September 2nd.
The March meeting also established five categories of entrant
vehicle power plants for competition purposes: internal combustion
engines, steam engines, pure battery-powered vehicles (electrics),
electric-hybrid systems (see Chapter III for definition), and power
plants using either liquefied natural gas (LNG) or liquefied petroleum
gas (LPG - commonly possessing propane as the dominant constituent) for
fuel. An entry slot was later made available to turbine powered
vehicles employing a Brayton cycle of operation. In the competition,
a class winner would be selected for each vehicle power plant category
on the basis of a scoring formula devised at a later date by the
organization committee.
Wally Rippel, the instigator of the 1968 race, also attended the
March meeting. He had continued his work on electric vehicles at Cornell
University and believed that electrics would be at a disadvantage in a
race which included other types of power plants. He had organized an all-
electric competition which drew 10 to 15 entrants during the course of the
spring and was asked to consider merging his race with the CACR. Although
he refused in March, later difficulties in raising funds would force him
to disband the Cornell group. In mid-summer, some of those electric teams
were absorbed into the CACR.
-240-
-------
SPRING TIME ACTIVITY AT MIT
The tempo of organization committee activity accelerated
dramatically following the March meeting. Mike Martin (an M.I.T.
junior in E.E.) began the task of devising a suitable emissions scoring
formula and planning for the exhaust emissions testing to be done in con-
junction with the race. Craig Lentz (an M.I.T. graduate student in the
Sloan School of Management), who had originally joined the Committee as
an assistant to the Finance Director, was now appointed by Bob McGregor
to the key post of coordinator, where he became the chairman's equal in prac-
tically all matters. Two more M.I.T. students, Alberto Darna (a
junior in business management) and Ron Francis (a junior in civil engin-
eering) , were appointed to select the race route and set up the electric
charging stations respectively. In addition Dieter Herrmann (also a
junior in management) began to design the vehicle performance test
procedure.
Jason Zielonka, the communications director, had been literally
inundated with mail and questions. There was no doubt that CACR had
struct a responsive chord among university groups and private industry
across the nation. To speed up communications, a preliminary registration
form was drawn up and mailed to all who had expressed an interest in
participating as an entrant team in the competition. A steady flow of
press releases, not only from M.I.T., but also from universities which
planned to enter the race, kept a generally receptive public thoroughly
informed of progress.
During this time, Ty Rabe, with the help of the assistant direc-
tor of M.I.T.'s Office of Public Relations, Robert M. Byers, was focus-
sing his attention on the establishment of a Race Information Center -
(RIG). With more than 30 entrant teams already registered, there could
be up to 1,000 miles separating the first and last cars during cross-
country travel, thereby making it extremely difficult to provide the
media with a comprehensive view of what was happening on a daily basis.
A Race Information Center could certainly be used to collect data phoned
in daily by each of the entrant teams to be relayed in a solid chunk
form to the media, principally the wire services. Because national news
must compete with international news at the coastal headquarters of the
wire services, the Chicago outlet became the favored location for the
RIG. Attempts to draw funding from the media failed to succeed, and
consequently, RIC remained only a concept until about a month before the
August 24 starting data.
Another critical activity of the spring months was raising finan-
cial aid and securing industrial services for the CACR itself. A pro-
posal for funding the organization committee had been made by Milton
Clauser to the General Motors Corp., but had remained deadlocked for
several months. The M.I.T. administration recognized CACR as a student
activity but feared a budget policy conflict if GM were to make a direct
grant to the M.I.T. supported student committee. In April, a compromise
was reached whereby GM agreed to give twenty 1970 Chevelles with a
$2,000 cash grant per vehicle to the committee for distribution to race
participants.
-241-
-------
By submitting an application form drawn up by the organization
committee, student groups with sound engineering ideas but limited
finances could request one of the GM vehicle grants. The committee
screened 33 such applications and had awarded 15 grants by the end of
May, at which time the remainder were returned to GM. Aside from the
immediate assistance provided by this grant, the committee continued
to benefit from the interest and support of many people at the General
Motors Technical Center and Office of Education.
Though the GM grant was significant in promoting increased
participation in the race, it did not contribute to financing committee
activities, which were still in need of major support. For the time
being, the committee had to exist leading a rather hand-to-mouth life,
relying on personal contributions of $500 to $5,000 which were secured
through the personal efforts of the M.I.T. Corporation Chairman,
Dr. James R. Killian. In April however, CACR drew the interest of the
National Air Pollution Control Administration (NAPCA) which eventually
proved to be its largest source of monetary support. (NAPCA at the
time was an agency of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare
(DREW) and has since become the Air Pollution Control Office (APCO) of
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).)
NAPCA's original commitment consisted of an agreement to fund the
travel expenses of committee members and a guarantee of individual
$5,000 cash prizes to be presented to class winners and the overall
winner of the competition at the awards banquet in Pasadena. But the
agency's interest in the outcome of the race went beyond money. Various
people in NAPCA displayed a continuing willingness to help the committee
develop appropriate emissions testing procedures and devise a scoring
formula for rating the exhaust emissions data fairly.
Throughout the spring, the committee had also been in contact
with the Ford Motor Company requesting financial assistance. While
direct monetary support did not meet with their approval, Ford did
indicate a willingness to discuss other types of assistance, including
vehicles and the use of their Mobile Emissions Laboratory. This last
possibility provided the committee with the first real breakthrough in
the problem of how to conduct emissions testing in the Cambridge area
during pre-race activity.
The 1968 electric car race had illustrated that a better network
of charging stations would be necessary if electric vehicles were to be
at all successful in the 1970 CACR. Calculations revealed that as many
as 75 of these units, separated by distances varying from 40 to 80
miles, would be needed along the route. The help of the Electric Fuel
Propulsion Company of Detroit and the Edison Electric Institute of
New York was sought in laying plans for this elaborate network. Through
the efforts of Dave Saar and Ron Francis, both M.I.T. undergraduates,
a charging station was designed consisting of a circuit breaker, a
watt-hour meter, and a six-foot connector cable, all enclosed within a
metal container. The committee believed that the industries involved
would construct, sell, and install these units now that the design work
had been completed, but it later turned out that the committee had to
assume responsibility for the selling task - certainly not an easy
-242-
-------
undertaking with over 35 electric utility companies to be contacted.
Beginning in May, the pace of the CACR organization committee's
activities quickened despite the student strike and the postponement or
cancellation of classes and examinations at many Boston area colleges
and universities. From mid-May until the awards banquet in September,
the committee would continue to function as an almost round-the-clock
operation.
NAPCA's interest in the race also continued to increase during
May, for it felt that the CACR could contribute to its Clean Car Incen-
tive Program, designed to encourage the development of low-pollution
vehicle power plants capable of meeting the 1975 Federal exhaust
emissions standards. NAPCA indicated its willingness to support both a
professional publicity campaign for CACR and a thorough documentation
effort of race activities. The organization committee decided that
professional publicity was inconsistent with a competition that was to
be student-oriented and declined funding for such a campaign. The
offer to document the race, however, was greeted enthusiastically.
Documentation would include both written and filmed accounts of the race
and its participants. There would be three major films produced: two
for general audiences in 50 and 30-minute versions, a 30-minute techni-
cal film, and a 10-minute theatrical release for use as a selected short
in neighborhood theaters. Contracts for the general audience films were
awarded in July to Fournier and Pytka of New York and for the technical
film to the Tech Films Corp. of Watertown, Massachusetts. The organiza-
tion committee accepted the task of providing written documentation, the
result being this entire report which you are now reading.
By exam time in late May, the committee was still actively seeking
support in the nature of both funding and in-kind contributions, such as
the unconventional fuels being used by some of the entrants teams and
equipment capable of measuring vehicle exhaust emission levels accurately.
Negotiations had been opened with many industrial concerns, many of which
would eventually prove useful in preparing for the race.
SUMMERTIME ACTIVITY
The summer months absorbed the committee in carrying out original
plans and making new arrangements to cope with an ever —changing set of
situations. The committee was expanded as new tasks arose with every
attempt being made to do the best possible job despite a severely short
timetable and practically no prior experience in an undertaking of this
magnitude.
In June, the committee's full-time staff began receiving salaries
of $500 per month and working 12 to 16 hours a day just trying to keep
up with the mountains of paper work. More than fifty preliminary entrant
teams had registered, and the end was not yet in sight. A bi-weekly
newsletter was now being published in an attempt to keep competitors,
-243-
-------
donors, and other interested people informed of the current status of
the race.
As its first summer task, the committee moved into a larger office
to accommodate the ever-growing file system and staff of personnel. The
new organization committee domain was a vacated classroom. Since hardly
any equipment was available from M.I.T., the necessary desks, tables, and
chairs were removed from nearby classrooms during midnight raids.
The burden of trying to coordinate a dual-committee separated by
3,600 miles was eased somewhat in the summer by M.I.T.'s assumption of
responsibility for almost all pre-race activity. The activities of the
Caltech organization committee were still at a low level at the beginn-
ing of June. Because Caltech is a much smaller and more specialized
institute than M.I.T., it was difficult for Blair Folsom to arouse
enthusiastic support in either the administration or the student body.
In mid-July, Blair was forced to step down as chairman of the Caltech
group in order to meet his own project commitments as a student
research assistant. He was replaced by Hal Gordon,who then organized a
small committee to make arrangements for the post-race activities in
Pasadena.
By mid-June, Dick Holthaus had stepped down from his post as
finance director to accept an outside summer job. Bob McGregor
appointed Ron Francis to fill the vacated position in addition to continu-
ing with his former task of coordinating the arrangements for the construc-
tion,purchase, and installation of the charging stations. Soon thereafter,
Mary McNulty (a junior majoring in Health Dynamics at Boston University)
joined the committee to serve as general office manager, thereby giving
the communications director, Jason Zielonka, more time for the daily
phone calls requesting information, the mounting piles of unanswered
correspondence.
Mustering $$$ and Services
During the first weeks of the summer, agreement with NAPCA con-
cerning the details of the documentation contract consumed long hours
of negotiation between the legal staffs of M.I.T. and NAPCA. The
$220,000 contract was finally signed in a down to the wire effort on the
last day of the fiscal year, June 30th.
Early committee contact with local New England industrial firms
began to pay off during the summer as public interest grew. The Boston
Edison Company donated $3,000 to be used for organization committee
student salaries and the Automotive Division of the Fram Corporation of
Providence, Rhode Island, supplied $1,100 to purchase trophies for race
winners. The Lowell Gas Company of Lowell, Massachusetts, agreed to
send along an 11,000 gallon tanker during the race to supply liquefied
natural gas (LNG). Engelhard Minerals and Chemical Corporation of
Newark, New Jersey, whose catalytic reactors were used on many CACR en-
trant vehicles, purchased the unleaded gasoline required by a number of
the ICE test vehicles and shipped the fuel to predesignated locations
along the cross-country route. In addition, several smaller donations
-244-
-------
of equipment, manpower, and other services were offered to the committee
as the summer progressed.
While these gifts did much to improve the overall situation, a
lack of cash on hand still plagued the committee. In July, Bob McGregor
traveled to New York City at the request of M.I.T. Corporation chairman,
Dr. James Killian, with a prepared outline of plans and needs which he
would use in soliciting funds. He returned with an officer authoriza-
tion grant of $25,000 from the Rockefeller Foundation, thereby allevi-
ating the financial crisis for the time being.
COMMITTEE PROBLEMS
Communications activity crescendoes! as the number of preliminary
entrants soared to a peak of 93 in late June. With Mary McNulty manag-
ing the office, Jason Zielonka spent many work hours a day both answer-
ing questions from the entrant teams, and on the telephone in response
to queries for general information on the CACR. Although the bi-weekly
newsletters were lengthened in an attempt to clarify details on rules
and procedures, vast quantities of mail still poured into the office,
with each letter being handled individually.
By far, the most time consuming problem — and one which continued
right through the running of the race — was to arbitrate disputes and
give sound definitions of the often-ambiguous rules. The committee as a
whole sat in review on these matters, but consistently suffered from the
lack of a clearly formulated policy for rule interpretation. Conse-
quently, nearly all differences of opinion had to be settled on an indivi-
dual basis.
In addition, as the activities of the committee members increas-
ingly diverged into separate areas of responsibility, intra-committee
communications broke down. At the end of July, daily committee meetings
beginning at 6 p.m. were instituted to review all activities of the day
as well as to discuss upcoming plans. These meetings were often long
and tiring, but they did much to remedy th problem and were continued
until the entrant teams arrived in mid-August.
The CACR Public Relations Program
Public interest in the event rose steadily during the summer due
to a concerted effort by the M.I.T. Office of Public Relations to publi-
cize the event. In June Mike Martin and Ty Rabe departed on an eighteen
day, cross-country, publicity trip, beginning in Los Angeles and passing
through 19 major cities along the proposed CACR race route, en route to
Cambridge. Altogether, they visited more than 50 local and regional news
media stations as well as some 15 entrant teams during their travels.
News releases explaining different aspects of the competition were perio-
dically mailed to over 700 interested journalists. Lapel buttons, bumper
stickers, and posters depicting the CACR logo were ordered and distributed.
During late July and early August, a plan of operation for the
-245-
-------
Race Information Center (RIC) was formulated. Entrant vehicles would
call the RIC at least twice daily during cross-country travel on
Wide Area Telephone Service lines and report their progress. These
reports would be compiled and sent to the Associated Press and United
Press International bureaus in Chicago. The RIC would also display an
exhibit containing a large map of the U .S. to mark the race's progress
and color photographs of each entrant team and vehicle. A location for
the RIC was finally established when the Chicago Museum of Science and
Industry acknowledged the committee's request for assistance by supply-
ing both space and equipment. The Xerox Corporation donated a telecopier
system for relaying information from the RIC to the wire services.
The final major task of the public relations group prior to the
entrants' arrival at M.I.T. was to assemble press kits containing com-
plete information for distribution to the media. The kits, which
included a set of news releases, final race rules, buttons, stickers and
posters, were mailed in early August.
The Exhaust Emissions Test Procedures
While Mike Martin was accompanying Ty Rabe on the public relations
trip, Bob McGregor met with representatives from NAPCA, GM, and Ford to
establish the emissions testing procedures for the CACR vehicles. At
that time, more than 50 entrant vehicles were expected to compete in the
CACR, all of which had to be tested prior to arrival in Boston in order
to qualify for the competition and then three more times during the race
for scoring purposes. McGregor accepted NAPCA's offer to coordinate the
qualification testing program at 12 industrial laboratories across the
country. Because not all of these laboratories had the necessary
equipment to test vehicles according th the prescribed 1972 Federal test
cycle procedure and because this joint group had doubts about the entrants'
ability to meet the then-proposed 1975 Federal standards, it was agreed
to use a hot start, closed, seven-mode cycle (see Chapter IV, Section A)
and to evaluate these results as acceptable grounds for qualification in
lieu of the former entrance requirements. When these tests were run in
July and August, only a few teams were summarily disqualified.
The problem of pollution emission testing for race scores was a
bit more difficult to resolve. The best solution would have been to
conduct either two or three cold start tests using constant volume
sampling equipment as prescribed in the 1972 Federal procedure. However,
this would have meant a 12-hour "cold soak" for each car before each
test; in addition, the only location in the U.S. where the necessary
equipment could be found in sufficient quantity was Detroit. These
constraints forced a compromise solution whereby the CACR vehicles would
be given hot start tests in Cambridge and Pasadena using the continuous
sampling technique. The Ford Motor Co. agreed to donate the use of its
mobile emissions laboratory for the tests in Cambridge, while both the
Olson Laboratories and the California Air Resources Board would supply
the necessary mobile test equipment in Pasadena. The only cold start
CVS test for each team would be done in the Detroit area, where the
entrants would make a 24-hour layover; because of the limited time
available for such testing during cross-country travel, a 4-hour cold
-246-
-------
soak would be used rather than the specified 12-hour test. NAPCA, Ford,
GM, Ethyl Corporation, and Chrysler all donated their laboratories and
personnel to run these tests.
The addition of the two hot start tests considerably complicated
the emissions scoring formula (See Chapter IV, Section C); a new
formula had to be devised to incorporate the hot start test results.
After a long and occasionally heated three-way debate between the committee,
the entrants, and NAPCA advisors, it was decided that Pasadena and Cambridge
results would be compared against one another to show deterioration of the
vehicle emission control systems during the race, while the Detroit measure-
ments would constitute the most pertinent data in assessing vehicle potential.
Preparations for Cross-Country Travel
Meanwhile, Steve McGregor and Craig Lentz worked on the details
of accommodating 300 to 400 people (the CACR caravan) at six different
stopover locations for the period of cross-country travel. Early in the
summer, introductory letters were mailed to potential hosts and local
governments of these cities. Eventually, Steve and Craig established
contacts within a college or university at all the cities except Odessa,
Texas, where hotels turned out to be the only feasible housing facilities.
In July, they embarked on a two week drive along the CACR route to com-
plete arrangements and check driving times and mileage distances between
the stopover locations. The Universities of Toronto, Michigan, Illinois
and Arizona, as well as Central State College in Oklahoma, agreed to
provide low-cost dormitory rooms for race personnel. In Odessa, the Inn
of the Golden West, the Holiday Inn, and the Ramada Inn provided specially
reduced prices on rooms. In all cities, either the educational institution
or the Chamber of Commerce would also provide secured impound areas for
the 150 race and trail vehicles. In addition, many of the cities decided
to host banquets or barbeques for the entire race group. These arrange-
ments weregiven a final check in early August when McGregor and Lentz
each flew to three of the cities.
Ron Francis and a new member to the committee, Bill Charles (an MIT
electrical engineering senior), also made a cross-country trip in July.
Their job was to sell the electric charging stations to local and regional
utilities along the race route. During their three weeks on the road, they
sold more than 60 such stations, leaving only a few gaps in what was to
become the first permanent transcontinental electric vehicle highway.
Committee Membership on the Rise Again
In late July, two new members joined the M.I.T. work force. Professor
John B. Heywood from the M.I.T. mechanical engineering department became
the committee's faculty advisor upon Dr. Milton Clauser's departure to
assume his new position as academic dean of the Naval Post-Graduate School
in Monterey, California. Al Harger, an administrative assistant in M.I.T.'s
Division of Sponsored Research, was assigned to aid the committee full time
on any and all CACR-related projects. Professor Heywood had done prior
research work on automotive air pollution and consequently afforded im-
-247-
-------
measurable help to Mike Martin in understanding the technical aspects of
the problem. Al Karger at the same time proved himself invaluable in
arranging facilities for the committee and entrants in preparation for the
week of pre-race activity at M.I.T.
With the addition of Heywood and Harger, the work load momentarily
decreased. However, new jobs were constantly arising and often the
committee had to rely upon friends and even family to help out. Beth
McGregor and Mary Jane Lentz, the wives of the Chairman and Coordinator,
pitched in by typing a large part of the committee's correspondence
while Diane Lentz, Craig's sister, worked in a full time position as
committee secretary. Rob Rabe, Ty's twin brother, joined the committee
as a full time liaison with the two film companies, and Chris Exton, a
Tufts University senior and long time friend of the McGregor brothers,
handled all irregular jobs which did not clearly fall into any one area
of responsibility.
M.I.T. to the Committee's Aid
In order to begin the arrangements for pre-race activity at M.I.T.,
Bob McGregor called for a meeting of administrative representatives from
the various branches of M.I.T. in mid-July. The principal needs, as
defined at the meeting, were, rooms, dining facilities, parking space and
garage facilities, a location for the emissions testing lab, an information
center, a press room, and rooms for seminars. With Al Harger handling
most of the details, housing for the entrants was made available at both
M.I.T. and Northeastern University in Boston. One of M.I.T.'s multi-level
parking garages was reserved for CACR entrant team parking, and all other
needed space and facilities were located on campus.
Preparation for CACR Vehicle Performance Testing
The performance testing of the CACR vehicles during the pre-race week
had to be located off-campus, due to the great space requirement demanded
by this event. After a great deal of discussion in early spring, the
organization committee had decided to keep the performance tests as simple
in nature as possible since the CACR entrants were, in fact, competing
against the typical car on today's highways rather than designing a car for
the Indianapolis Speedway. Basic tests for braking, acceleration, and
road handling were established with maximum scores being awarded for per-
formance characteristics that were comparable to a slightly better than
average conventional automobile. Noise testing was to be done by the firm
of Bolt, Beranek, and Newman, Inc. under contract from the Department of
Transportation.
Bill Charles was placed in charge of the performance testing which
would undoubtedly constitute a full time schedule of activity during the
pre-race week. After a long search, he located the necessary space for
conducting the performance testing at the Hanscom Field Air Force Base
in Bedford, Massachusetts. He also secured test equipment which included
a "fifth wheel", an accelerometer, and a strip chart recorder from the
Cornell Aeronautical Laboratories in Buffalo, New York.
-248-
-------
Last Minute Arrangements
The final major tasks confronting the committee prior co the arrival
of the entrants at M.I.T. were the compilation of all CACR rules into a
single publication, the formulation of a plan for race command and control
during cross-country travel, and the selection of observers who would ride
with the entrant teams to record data, traffic violations, and other
pertinent information. A weekend effort in late July, headed by Craig Lentz
and Jason Zielonka, managed to consolidate all rules and ragulations published
to date into a single document; but despite a deliberate attempt to cover
all loopholes, last minute additions and changes still had to be made after
the final copy had gone to print. Command and control required a well
thought out plan for positioning the organization committee vehicles in
the CACR caravan. A remote computer console would be installed in an
econoline van, loaned to the committee by the Ford Motor Co. to be the
lead vehicle or "Mobile Headquarters Van" (MHV) as it came to be known; the
computer facilities would facilitate the computation of entrant team
scores while en the road. Coordination of all activities would be done
by telephone from the Race Information Center located in Chicago. Finally,
volunteer student observers were selected by the committee from the Cambridge
and Pasadena areas for the aforementioned purposes, as well as to provide
the needed manpower for various activities during the pre-race week.
As the race entrants converged upon Cambridge from across the country,
the committee re-evaluated its position. Charging stations still had to be
set up in more than 60 locations along the route due to delays in construction.
All arrangements at the stopover cities were tentatively complete. The
budget had been more or less balanced and the only remaining major expense,
observer travel costs, had been picked up by NAPCA. Fund raising efforts
had been discontinued and attention was redirected to the vast amount of;
accounting involved in securing travel advances for the 60 committee members
and observers. The pre-race schedule had been drawn up. Only a few other
minor details remained to be taken care of, or so it seemed.
PRE-RACE ACTIVITY AT MIT
On the weekend of August 15, the CACR entrant teams arrived at M.I.T.
to begin the most grueling 20 days of the summer. Despite previous attempts
to complete all necessary arrangements, committee members found a seem-
ingly never ending list of new and last-minute jobs. The daily schedule
had its share of crises, with work often continuing into the early morning
hours. Unexpected and sometimes uncontrollable problems had to be solved
at a moment's notice as mistakes in planning became evident. Despite the
mounting pressure, race activities went on.
The schedule for the pre-race week was an extremely busy one, sand-
wiched between a welcoming banquet which began the week's activities, and a
kick-off banquet which completed them, and a barbeque inbetween. In addition
to the performance and emissions testing scheduled to last the entire week,
-249-
-------
there were evening meetings for the team captains to vote on rule modifi-
cations, nightly meetings for observers to discuss their responsibilities,
and midnight hour committee meetings to review the planned activities for
the following day. Two days were devoted to a round of seminars in which
the entrant teams presented technical papers on their vehicle power plants.
There were two public showings of the CACR test vehicles during the week,
one for M.I.T. and Caltech alumni at M.I.T. and one for the general public
at the Museum of Science in Boston. On Saturday, August 22, a parade
with bands, drum and bugle corps, and the CACR test vehicles made its
way from the Prudential Center in Boston to M.I.T.'s Briggs Field in
Cambridge. Throughout these activities committee members were constantly
trying to find time for last minute details.
The hectic locus of activities during this week was the CACR Infor-
mation Center located in M.I.T.'s Student Union. There the entrants
received special picture identification badges for security purposes,
completed registration, paid for their pre-race housing, received a
detailed schedule of events, and picked up all messages and mail. The
center was manned by a full time staff of committee members and observers,
but extra help was often needed to answer phones or relay information.
Three large bulletin boards were constantly filled with news: changing
the messages on these boards created an almost full time job for one
observer. In short, the Information Center provided the only regular
means of communication between the committee and the entrants.
Throughout the week public relations was handled in a specially
arranged press room, staffed by Ty Rabe, Bob Byers and a secretary from
the M.I.T. Public Relations Office. Visiting press representatives
received identification badges and several phones were made available
for their use as well as comprehensive information packages on the CACR.
Emissions testing started on Monday, August 17, and continued
smoothly to its scheduled completion on Friday, August 21. The actual
testing was handled entirely by Ford's staff of engineers assigned to the
Mobile Emissions Laboratory- The only difficulty encountered was that
many experimental cars, especially the unconventionals, were not prepared
in time for the testing due either to late arrival at M.I.T. or unforeseen
breakdowns while on campus. Mike Martin spent the entire week scheduling
the emissions tests and helping a staff of NAPCA engineers analyze the
results.
Bill Charles did not have as much luck in coordinating the vehicle
performance testing. Heavy rains on two separate occasions during the
week created impossible conditions on those particular days for all phases
of the performance testing except the noise measurement. Because of
Monday's rainstorm, it wasn't until Tuesday when he discovered that all
the tests, especially the noise measurement, were taking longer than had
been anticipated. In addition, the fifth wheel used for monitoring
vehicle acceleration and speed broke when it slipped from one of the
vehicles during a trial run. It took half a day before testing could
be resumed to secure a portable radar rig to replace the fifth wheel
measurement system. Only by eliminating some of the noise tests and
working thereafter from dawn until dusk were he and his staff of observers
able to complete the testing on time.
-250-
-------
In the evenings, the race captains met with Bob McGregor and Craig
Lentz to vote on rule changes, discuss general complaints, and file protests,
The major item of debate throughout the week was whether or not to include
a fuel economy run as part of the CAGE competition. After several pro-
posals had been advanced and reviewed, the recommendation to measure
vehicle fuel consumption between Ann Arbor, Michigan and Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma, was voted on and passed at the Tuesday evening meeting.
At the observer meetings, Craig Lentz reviewed the CACR rules and
outlined the methods of command and control. Observers were to record
driving times, fuel consumption, and infractions of the traffic laws as
well as calling the RIG at least twice daily to report the location
and condition of their test vehicle. Craig Lentz and Ty Rabe compiled
written instructions and observer report forms containing all pertinent
information to be recorded and phoned in. At the same time, Steve
McGregor was completing the route guide document which contained detailed
maps of the race route and the locations of refueling stations for use
by the entrants. Ron Francis had already prepared similar guides pertain-
ing to the charging stations for the electric vehicle entrants. These
documents were finally completed distributed to tne entrants at the
command and control meeting held the day before departure from M.I.T.
The only major crisis of the pre-race week was the press's charge
of commercialism leveled at the CACR competition. As early as June,
Bob Byers had warned the committee about this possibility, but because
the original concept for a Clean Air Car Race had included both university
and industrial involvement, the problem was almost unavoidable. Entrants
were warned that their industrial backers could not use the test vehicle
as a public relations gimmick, but there was no way to stop companies
and advertising agencies from bombarding the media with press kits, re-
leases, and PR men.
When commentary occurred during the pre-race week, every attempt was
made to point out the worthwhile aspects of the event. The fact that the
race would have been impossible without industrial support and that only
a few of the multitude of industries supporting it had sought publicity
for themselves was clearly stated.
On the night before the start of the race, the committee held its
longest meeting. Committee vehicles and entrant test vehicles were assigned
starting time, observers were assigned to the various entrants teams,
and a few last-minute details concerning command and control were dis-
cussed. When the meeting broke up, the starting time of the race was
only three hours away.
-251-
-------
THE CROSS-COUNTRY RALLY
Thus, at 3 a.m. on August 24 the Clean Air Car Race became the mobile
exposition that it was intended to be. Forty-three vehicles had qualified
for the cross-country competition, having passed the rigorous testing of
the previous week. Starting line activity, despite the earliness of the
hour, revealed a high degree of entrant team enthusiasm and eagerness to
set out on the trans-continental journey.
To facilitate control of the race, the organization committee made
use of five special vehicles donated by Ford and General Motors. Pacing
the entrant teams was the committee's Mobile Headquarters Van (MHV) which
customarily departed two to three hours earlier then the main race body.
Its primary mission was to arrive at the daily destination with sufficient
lead time to ensure that arrangements had been made for the arrival of the
CACR cavalcade. Two other committee vehicles were dispersed among the
race pack for the purpose of establishing the normalized driving time for
each leg. Another committee car, keeping pace with the electric vehicles,
was used to finalize the installment of electric charging stations; con-
sequently, it lagged about twelve hours in general behind the CACR pack.
The fifth committee vehicle trailed the race by 24 to 36 hours. The
purpose of this backup car was to switch observers stationed with struggl-
ing entrants and to act as a liason with those teams forced to lag behind.
Race control while on the road was augmented by the Chicago-based
Race Information Center (discussed earlier in this appendix) which main-
tained a master chart listing of all CACR vehicle locations. A computer
console located in the MHV further aided the committee in updating race
results by tabulating entrant team rally scores for each leg. The afore*
mentioned observers were an extension of the committee in that they recorded
entrant team driving times and noted rule infractions. Observers were
assigned one to a car and were rotated daily. No entrant team received
the same observer more than once during cross-country travel and no
observer was assigned to a team which originated from the observer's
academic institution.
At the end of each leg, the committee set up an information and re-
porting center adjacent to the MHV. This area also constituted the impound
location for the CACR test vehicles and were of primary importance for two
reasons: they provided display areas where the cars could be inspected
by interested members of the public and they afforded the necessary security
for the overnight stopovers. Teams checked in with the committee upon
arrival at the impound area each evening while observers turned in their
reports for tabulation of the leg scores.
Race control, essential as it was, comprised only one major facet of
the cross-country jaunt, as there is much to be said about the actual
passage of the CACR caravan. The first vehicles to leave M.I.T. in the
early morning hours of August 24th were the electrics. The reason for this
early embarkment stemmed from the fact that 30 miles per hour (mph), in-
cluding time for recharging the battery packs, was an optimal average
speed for these entries. Thus, early starting times had been assigned to
-252-
-------
electric vehicles for the entirety of the race schedule in the hope that
they could keep up with the main race body. As the race progressed, this
effort proved fruitless as the electrics trailed further behind with each
ensuing leg.
Indicative of the plight of the electrics were the Stevens Institute
of Technology and the Cornell entries, the only electric cars to successfully
complete cross-country travel in the allotted time. Both endured multiple
charging problems due to reverse phase rotation at many of the charging
stations and spent over 24 hours travelling time on five of the seven legs.
It was not surprising when the Cornell team stopped in St. Louis for 12 hours
of enforced recuperation due to physical fatigue. Mechanical malfunctions
continually hampered the progress of the two cars: Cornell suffered an
engine burnout in San Deigo; S.I.T. underwent a similar burnout in Buffalo
and suffered from bent tie rods in California; in addition, both teams
sustained several flat tires during the race passage. Consequently, both
cars arrived in Pasadena more than forty-eight hours behind the main race
body.
Except for the electric entries, the CACR test vehicles departed from
M.I.T. between 5:30 and 7:00 a.m. on the morning of the 24th. This first
leg of the race was 541 miles and terminated in Toronto where the Canadians
received the CACR with open arms. An exhibition lasted from 8 to 10 p.m.
at the city hall complex and all CACR affiliated personnel became guests
at a cocktail mixer held at the display area. In addition, meals were
provided at no cost by the Ontario Department of Tourism. Overnight
accomodations were located on the University of Toronto campus while
the race vehicles were impounded until the next morning at the U. of
Toronto stadium.
The distance for the second leg was comparatively short: 243 miles.
The leg consisted of passage through Canada to the Detroit-Ann Arbor area.
As has been already stated, this was the sight of the cold start emissions
testing for all CACR vehicles. Arrangements had been made to conduct testing
at five seperate locations where adequate lab facilities had been established;
the test facilities were provided by General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, Ethyl
Corporation, and NAPCA. Each vehicle was required to undergo a four hour
soak period prior to testing, while the test itself required almost another
hour. Cars were displayed at the University of Michigan campus that same
evening and race participants were presented with a buffet dinner sponsored
by the Ford Motor Co. Dorm facilities for the night were also located at
the University of Michigan.
The 400 mile third leg from Ann Arbor, Michigan, to Champaign, Illinois.
began the CACR two-day fuel economy run. This testing constituted a dis-
tinct factor in overall scoring, and has been discussed thoroughly in
Chapter IV. Race vehicles were displayed at the University of Illinois
campus that evening where the race cavalcade bedded down for the night.
August 27 marked the longest leg of race passage. The more than
650 miles to Oklahoma City proved a rugged test for all vehicles still
in the competition. A reception provided by the Oklahoma City Chamber
of Commerce at the impressive Cowboy Hall of Fame greeted the CACR entrants
-253-
-------
at the end of that long day. Garage facilities for making minor vehicle
repairs were made available at Classic Motors Incorporated. After feasting
on buffalo meat and being entertained at the Hall of Fame, teams spent
the night at Central State College located ten miles away in Edraond,
Oklahoma.
The fifth leg of the race, 526 miles in length, terminated in Odessa,
Texas. Heat was becoming a critial factor as seasonal temperatures soared
above 100°. The Odessa Chuck Wagon Gang, in conjunction with the local
Chamber of Commerce, hosted the CACR to a hospitable evening full of
entertainment and relaxation. The race vehicles attracted many spectators
to the Odessa City Hall where the cars were displayed. Overnight accomodations
were in area motels due to a lack of college dormatory facilities.
On August 29th, the race pack departed Odessa bound for Tucson,
Arizona. A Clean Air Car Race day had been declared when the majority
of vehicles arrived in Tucson. Large crowds and a tasty barbeque offered
by the Tucson Chamber of Commerce helped to lift the spirits of the
exhausted CACR teams. Race cars were exhibited at the University of
Arizona campus where sleeping accomodations had also been arranged.
The final leg of the race extended 537 miles through the Arizona
and California deserts, over the California coastal mountains, and finally
up the coast from San Diego to Pasadena, the home of the Caltech campus.
Entrants were greeted at the finish line by a crowd of television and
newspaper reporters in addition to the Rose Bowl Queen. The media had
covered the race on both national and local networks for the entirety
of the 3600 mile route with the end of the race climaxing the news
coverage activity. Film crews from two different firms had recorded
the seven day journey on over one hundred twenty-five thousand feet of
film to be used in producing special documentaries on the event. Need-
less to say, all race participants were pleased with the national attention
they had drawn in their crusade for cleaner air.
To present the race as a smooth-functioning event for all entrants
would be misleading. No one team was free of difficulty; problems en-
countered were human as well as mechanical. Fatigue was a major problem
as the majority of cross-country legs took twelve to fifteen hours to
complete. Navigational errors often extended this time as did vehicular
malfunctions. The high degree of cooperation among all parties involved
helped to resolve many of the difficulties incurred.
Many examples of these problems can easily be recounted. The
University of Toronto entry lost a tailpipe and muffler while backing up
over debris on the ground in the University of Toronto stadium. In
addition, the Toronto team threw a connecting rod just outside of St. Louis
and had to rebuild half the engine. The University of Berkeley entry
discovered a loss of compression in its engine due to ring seizure when
attempting to leave Ann Arbor on the morning of the third leg. This
necessitated the installation of an entirely rebuilt engine. The
Worcester Polytechnic hybrid-electric experienced over-heating problems
and had to devise a makeshift air scoop scheme to cool the electric
motor. The M.I.T. turbine continually suffered from clogged fuel line
filters. The M.I.T. hybrid-electric sustained a burned out alternator
on the first leg and a burned out motor on the fourth leg due to mech-
_254-
-------
anical component failures, and were utimatley forced to withdraw from
the competition. All teams using LPG fuel discovered that compressor
oil had infiltrated many of the refueling tanks. In addition, some of
the designated LPG refueling facilities contained butane instead of
propane which caused extreme difficulties due to inherent pressure
storage differences. In retrospect, it is amazing that 85% of all
vehicles which started the race arrived, intact,in California.
ACTIVITIES AT CALTECH
Post-race activities at Caltech extended from August 31st to September
3d. For exhibition purposes, all entrants as they arrived in Pasadena
were parked along Caltech's rustic Olive Walk. A Clean Air Car Race
parade was held on September 2d which toured through Pasadena and was greeted
by the city mayor.
While at Caltech the entrant teams underwent a final hot-start emissions
test. The results of this test were combined with the earlier M.I.T. hot
start test to provide a deterioration factor for overall vehicular emissions.
Teams were also given a chance to discuss complaints or protests with the
organization committee and at the same time penalties for rule infractions
were dealt out. Other committee activities included the final tabulation
of race scores.
A final awards banquet was held on the evening of September 2d for
all CACR participants and trophies were presented to the five class winners
and the overall winner. The overall winner was selected by an impartial
board of judges chaired by Dr. David Ragone, Dean of tfte Thayer School
of Engineering. Other members included: William Gouse, a member of the
President's Office of Science and Technology; John Brogan, Director,
Division of Motor Vehicle Research and Development, NAPCA; Harry Barr,
President, Society of Automotive Engineers, and John Maga, Executive
Secretary, California Air Resources Board. A final seminar was conducted
on September 3d and was chaired by Dr. Haagen-Schmidt of the California
Mr Resources Board. The seminar, held at the Caltech Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, offered a platform for the judging panel to present their
reasons for choosing the Wayne State University ICE-powered Capri as the
overall winner.
WINDING UP COMMITTEE ACTIVITY
Following the post-race seminar at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in
Pasadena, committee members returned to the Boston area via a number of
routes. While some flew back for the start of school activities, others
vacationed in California before starting the journey home. By late
September, the committee had reconvened at M.I.T. to begin its final
work.
-255-
-------
Three self-assigned tasks remained for the committee's attention.
The NAPCA documentation contract had to be fulfilled. A presentation
format had to be devised for the purpose of disseminating general public
information. Finally, an overall evaluation of the event had to be made.
Since all of the committee except for Bob McGregor, Bill Charles, and
Diane Lentz had returned to academic curricula, work was assigned
principally on a part-time basis.
The written documentation containing a summary report of the event
was to be prepared by the committee. Bob McGregor assigned separate
segments of the report to various committeemen with the deadline for
completion being mid December. Editing would then require another month
before publishing the document.
The committee's job with regard to the films was to serve in an
advisory capacity. The most difficult aspect of this task proved to be
educating the film producers on the subject of automotive air pollution.
After long delays and several editing sessions, both the technical and
general films were completed in late January of 1971.
Craig Lentz took it upon himself to both design a suitable pre-
sentation on CACR activity and stimulate widespread national interest
in what the CACR had accomplished. With Steve McGregor's help, he put
together a general information slide show and devised a format for the
presentations, which were then offered at no cost to schools, civic
groups, and other associations. During the following six months, more
than fifty such presentations were made in all parts of the country.
Evaluating the results of the race proved to be a difficult job.
The committee, the judges, industry and government representatives, as
well as interested race participants all took part in the process. As
a result,several major criticisms regarding the organization of the
event were brought forth.
The most frequent comment centered upon the ambiguity of the test
data, particularly the exhaust emission measurements. Although seven
of the race vehicles had bettered the proposed 1975 Federal standards
using the CACR test procedure, a definite conclusion as to whether or
not these vehicles could meet the standards using the appropriate Federal
test cycle procedure was impossible using available test data. Any
public misconceptions were practically unavoidable since at least some
knowledge of the field would have been necessary to understand the difference
in test procedures.
The entrants made only one major criticism of the committee. They
felt that the failure to compile a final set of rules at an early date caused
innumerable problems in building and modifying the test vehicles. Once
again, the principal cause of this problem was lack of time. The committee
had been as ambitious as possible despite limitations of available funds
and facilities. Most of the late rule changes were due to the committee's
realization that earlier plans would be impossible to carry out. In addition,
the committee constantly tried to avoid an authoritarian structure by in-
corporating all useful feedback from entrants into general CACR activities.
-256-
-------
From within, the committee's organizational structure often seemed
chaotic. Many administrative tasks did not fall into any one area of
responsibility, often resulting in dual efforts or a delay of any positive
action. A pyramidal structure of clearly defined areas of responsibility
might have been more efficient, but it would have lacked a certain element
of cooperation among committee members. The lateral organizational structure
employed, in which everyone had an almost equal voice in planning, was at
times inefficient, but it avoided the authoritarianism which can stifle
a highly-motivated student effort.
In spite of these and other criticisms, the Clean Air Car Race must
be termed a success from an organizational point of view. It started with
two professors who had an idea and ended with 300 people and 150 vehicles
travelling a 3600 mile transcontinental route in seven days. The
phenomenal growth which it experienced and which caused so many problems
is a testimony to the importance of the problem which it attacked.
-257-
-------
OFFICIAL RULES
1970 CLEAN AIR CAR RACE
This publication shall be the official and sole source of
rules for the 1970 Clean Air Car Race. Any revision, modification,
or delineation of the rules contained herein, will be announced in
writing by the Clean Air Car Race Organization Committee.
It is the responsibility of each participant in the CACR
to become familiar with the Official Rules.
The exact course to be followed covers 3,562 miles and is
described in the CACR publication ROUTE GUIDE. One copy of the
ROUTE GUIDE will be distributed to all entrant teams prior to
departure.
CLEAN AIR CAR RACE ORGANIZATION COMMITTEE
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
California Institute of Technology (Caltech)
1970
D
-259-
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Objectives 5
A. Assess Vehicle Technology 5
B. Determine Emission Characteristics 5
C. Publish Technical Reports 5
D. Create Public Awareness 5
II. Scope £
A. Consistency 6
B. Responsibilities 6
1. Pre-Race 6
2. Race-Execution 6
3. Post-Race 6
C. Waiver Requests 7
D. Request Procedure ^ 7
E. Further Requests f 7
F, Liability 7
G. Class Winner 7
H. Overall Winner 7
III. Qualification Requirements 8
A. Classification 8
1. Class 8
2. Categories 8
B. Vehicle Qualification 8
1. Structural Standards 8
2. Pollution Emission Standards 9
3. Performance Standards 9
U. Safety Standards 9
5. Identification Standards 9
6. Appearance Standards 10
C. Participant Qualification 10
1. Team Affiliation 10
2. Individual Affiliation 10
3. Entrant Team Division 11
k. Driving Team 11
5. Technical Team 11
6. Team Captain 11
D. Technical Paper Requirement 12
E. Acceptance 12
IV. Race Control 13
A. Objectives.. 13
1. Driving Time 13
2. Energy Consumption 13
3. Vehicle Location 13
U. Rule Enforcement 13
B. Race Route 13
C. Drivers 13
D. Observers • • 13
1. Assignment • 13
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd)
2. Disinterested Party 13
3. Single Leg 13
k. Changes 13
E. Observer Responsibilities 13
F. Impounds 15
1. Check-In Point 15
2. Parking 15
3. Public Display 15
U. Security 15
5. Scores 15
6. Departure Time 15
7. Bulletins 15
8. Departure 15
G. Protests 15
H. Repairs 16
1. "On The Road" 16
2. "Repair Station" l6
I. Elapsed Driving Time l6
1. Definition l6
2. Procedure 16
J. Time Outs 17
1. Refueling 17
2. Emergency 17
3. Personal Injury 17
H. Property Damage 17
5. Observer Command 17
K. Traffic Regulations 17
L. Driving Formation 17
M. Withdrawal 18
V. Measurements 19
A. Scope 19
B. Exhaust Emission Testing 19
1. ICE, Steam, and Gas Turbine Vehicle Test Procedure 19
2. Hybrid-Electrics 22
C. Vehicle Performance Testing 23
1. Braking 23
2. Acceleration 23
3. Noise 23
U. Urban Driving Cycle 23
D. Entrant Qualification Test 2k
E. Vehicle Endurance Test 2k
F. Other Measurements 2k
VI. Scoring 25
A. Scoring Formula 25
B. Responsibility 25
C. Emissions Score 25
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)
1. Formula 25
2. Range 25
3. Bonus 25
D. Performance Score 26
1. Score Division 26
2. Range 26
E. Race Score 2?
1. Normalized Driving Time. 27
2. Scoring Curve 28
3. Penalty 28
U. Towing 28
5. Range 28
6. Disqualification 28
-------
OFFICIAL RULES
I. OBJECTIVES
A. ASSESS VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY — To assess the state of vehicle tech-
nology; specifically, research, and development efforts in educational
institutions, industry, and government must be ascertained and pub-
licized.
B. DETERMINE EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS ~ To determine pollution emission
characteristics for modified conventional and evolutionary propul-
sion systems.
C. PUBLISH TECHNICAL REPORTS — To publish technical reports and data
on vehicle technology and pollution emission characteristics respect-
ively in a compact document which delineates the present status of
automotive technology.
D. CREATE PUBLIC AWARENESS — To create public awareness of current prog-
ress in vehicle propulsion plant development and dispel any public
misconception of present engineering capabilities.
-------
I. SCOPE
A. CONSISTENCY — All events connected with the CACR, and all pre-race
qualificiation and other activities, and all activities connected with
the dissemination of information about the Race and Race entrants,
shall occur only in a manner consistent with the rules stated herein.
B, RESPONSIBILITIES — Prior to the CACR, all administrative and judicial
authority shall be vested totally in a committee, to be known as the
CACR Organization Committee ("the Committee")* The responsibilities
and duties of the Committee shall include the following:
1. PRS-RACE
a. The Committee shall be the sole authority responsible
for the modification, promulgation, and interpretation
of these rules.
b. The Committee shall be sole source of waivers for en-
trants, subject to the restrictions in Section II. C.
c. The Committee shall provide properly trained and qua-
lified observers for the CACR; these observers shall
act on behalf of the Committee during the Race, pro-
vided, however, that all such decisions may be subject
to review by the Committee upon request by the entrant
teams (ref: Section IV. G.).
d. The Committee shall have full and final responsibility
for handling any and all such matters which may, in
the normal course of events, arise and have a bearing
on the CACR.
2. RACE-EXECUTION
a. The Committee shall be the sole authority responsible
for assuring continued compliance with these rules and
adjudicating any disputes arising under them.
b. The Committee shall collect and verify any data compiled
concerning CACR vehicles and participants.
c. The Committee shall provide for and operate the Race
Information Center (RIC).
d. The Commitee shall continue to have full and final
responsibility for handling any and all such matters
which may, in the normal course of events, arise and have
a bearing on the CACR.
3. POST-RACE
a. The Committee shall select, using the criteria defined
6
-------
and discussed in Section V[,a winner in each vehicle
class, as defined in Section III. A.
b. The Committee will summarize all the data collected and
bear sole authority for publishing or making available
in some other graphic form the official reports of the
CACR.
c. The Committee shall serve as the base organization for
the administration of any future CACR event.
C. WAIVER REQUESTS — The Committee has final jurisdiction in accepting
or rejecting any entry. Groups who discover that their vehicle does
not meet the CACR requirements listed in Sections II. B. and II. C
should write to the Committee for special consideration. The Committee
is empowered to waive minor discrepancies from these rules, provided:
1) the entrant provides satisfactory evidence that a substantial effort
was made to comply with the rule in question; and 2) no such waiver
may be granted which would adversely affect compliance with the follow-
ing Sections: II. B. 2 - II. B, 4.
D. REQUEST PROCEDURE — Any group wishing the Committee to consider a re-
quest for special consideration should notify the Committee in writing
of the particular ruling involved and the full details of efforts made
to comply with the ruling. The group should then indicate the reasons
why compliance is not possible. The Committee, upon receipt of such
a request, shall determine the action to be taken, and notify the
group involved in writing.
E. FURTHER REQUESTS — While the decision of the Committee is final, the
availability of new and pertinent information regarding a situation,
may be considered sufficient reason for a further request for special
consideration. No more than three such requests concerning the same
point may be brought to the Committee by a single entrant group.
F. LIABILITY — The Committee cannot be held liable for any incidents
which befall an entry group participating voluntarily in the CACR.
G. CLASS WINNER — In each competitive class (described in Section III. A)
a winner will be determined using the scoring system described in
Section VI. Suitable trophies will be awarded by the Committee at
termination point.
H. OVERALL WINNER — The Committee will select a panel of five individuals
generally recognized to be experts in the area of automotive pollution
and technology. This panel will, using the information gathered by the
Committee and their own personal experience, select one entrant felt
to be outstanding in all vital characteristics ,and to be designated
as the overall winner.
-------
III. QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
A. CLASSIFICATION — Each vehicle participating in the race will be class-
ified by class and category, as follows:
1. CLASS — The Committee shall place each entry in one of the
following classes, Placement is based on fuel and power plant
description as provided by the entrant in his final registration.
Class I; Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) - includes all
types of fuels such as gasoline, LNG, LPG, etc.
Class II; Rankine Cycle - external combustion with heat trans-
fer taking place to the working fluid; examples include steam
piston and Stirling engines.
Class III; Brayton Cycle - gas turbine which includes a
variety of possible working fluids.
Class IV: Electric - battery is the primary energy source;
recharging occurs through off-board facilities such as
charging stations.
Class V; Hybrid Electric - battery is coupled to a separate
on-board energy source (such as a piston engine) which accom-
plishes the recharging function.
Class VIt Miscellaneous - novel power plants which do not fall
into any of the first five categories. This class contains
any vehicle which cannot be reasonably placed in one of the
other classes.
2. CATEGORIES — Vehicles participating in this Race will be
considered in three categories:
a. Committee vehicles, consisting of those vehicles being
operated by members of the Committee.
b. Entrant vehicles, consisting of those vehicles which
are entered in the Race, and upon which all measure-
ments will be made and tests performed.
c. Trail vehicles, consisting of those vehicles which are
entered in the Race for the purpose of carrying additional
personnel , equipment, fuel, etc. and acting in a sup-
port capacity for the entrant vehicles.
B. VEHICLE QUALIFICATION — Each vehicle must meet the following stand-
ards in order to participate as an entry in the CACR:
1. STRUCTURAL STANDARDS — Each vehicle must satisfy the
following:
-------
a. Must have a minimum of four wheels.
b. Must have a fully-enclosed passanger compartment with
minimum capacity of two adult passengers.
c. Must satisfy all inspection and registration require-
ments prescribed by the state in which the vehicle has
been developed and tested and present documentary
evidence of this to the Committee. Entrants other
than U.S. entrants must meet the Massachusetts State
Standards.
d. Must satisfy any additional requirements imposed by
the Federal Government, since cross-country travel
will take place on the Interstate Highway System.
No such requirements have been stipulated at present.
2. POLLUTION EMISSION STANDARDS — Documentary evidence must be
submitted to the Committee by 16 August 1970, which certifies
that the vehicle's exhaust complies with the 1975 Federal
Standards for acceptable levels of pollution emission. If
propulsion is such that there is no exhaust (e.g. vehicle
is in Class IV), then the vehicle will be deemed to have met
this requirement for registration purposes.
3. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS — Each entrant vehicle must meet the
following performance standards:
a. Acceleration: from 0 to 45 mph within 15 seconds.
b. Range: Travel 60 miles within 90 min. on a level
road without refueling or recharging.
4. SAFETY STANDARDS — Each entrant vehicle must meet the fol-
lowing performance standards:
a. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 49, Chapter 3, Part
371, Subpart b. Any additional safety standards req-
uired by the state in which the vehicle is registered
and inspected must also be met.
b. All vehicles are expected to meet any additional req-
uirements imposed by the Federal Government, since
travel will occur on the Interstate Highway System.
Such requirements include special permits and standards
for transporting hazardous fuels.
5. IDENTIFICATION STANDARDS — On every vehicle entered in the
CACR, the following areas are designated for the exclusive
use of the Committee:
a. On the front side panel of both sides of each vehicle,
an area approximately nine inches square shall be res-
erved for an entrant number to be assigned.
-------
b. The front door, on both sides of the vehicle, In Its
entirety shall be reserved for vehicle identification
and indication of Race participation. Such material
shall be specified and provided by the Committee.
c. A portion of the rear side panel, on both sides of the
vehicle, shall have placed upon it the name of the educat-
ional institution affiliated with the vehicle. This
name should be displayed in block letters; size and
coloring of lettering shall be at the discretion of the
entrant.
6. APPEARANCE STANDARDS — The Committee will require that
any other decorations, painting, or commercial messages
follow these guidelines:
a. Said decoration, painting, or message should occupy a
limited area, must be in good taste, and cannot inter-
fere with the areas described in Section III.B.5.
b. Any lettering used in the non-reserved areas must be
smaller in size that the lettering used in placing
the name of the educational institution on the rear
side panels.
c. Vehicles not meeting these standards may not partici-
pate in the CACR unless they can show, to the satisfaction
of the Committee, that the vehicle identification and
painting was done prior to the promulgation of a def-
inite ruling in this area (i.e., prior to 24 June 1970);
and the cost of correcting the situation is prohibitive
and would necessitate the withdrawal of the vehicle
from the Race. The Committee is hereby empowered to
adjudge vehicles under this regulation and execute its
provision.
C. PARTICIPANT QUALIFICATION — Entrant team members must meet the
following standards in order to participate in the CACR:
1. TEAM AFFILIATION — All entry groups must be registered
with the Committee under the name of an educational
institution. A letter certifying this relationship between
the entry and the school must come from the respective
school's Dean of Engineering or President (one for each
entrant). In the case of high schools, this letter should
come from the administrative head or principal of the school.
2. INDIVIDUAL AFFILIATION — All participants must affiliate
with an educational institution to the extent that the
conditions stated in Section III.C are satisfied. Should
this prove difficult or impossible, immediately contact
10
-------
the Committee so that they may give special consid-
eration to the situation,
3. ENTRANT TEAM DIVISION — All personnel officially affiliated
with a team must be designated as either part of the driv-
ing team or the techanical team. These will be the only
people authorized to operate within or on the vehicle in
any official capacity or to represent the team in any actions
or decision which may be necessary.
4. DRIVING TEAM ~ The driving team, containg not more than
four nor less than two members, each of whom:
a. Must be registered full time students.
b. Must have been registered for and completed the 1970
Spring semester at their respective school, which
must be accredited with the Department of Health, Ed-
ucation and Welfare.
c. Must draw up and present the technical paper concern-
ing their vehicle to the Committee and represent their
respective vehicle entry group at the seminar prior
to the Race.
5. TECHNICAL TEAM — The technical team is optional and con-
tains no limit on the number of personnel. The technical
team members:
a. May be passengers in the entrant vehicle.
b. May give advice, but not physical assistance, to the
driving team in making repairs on the road.
c. May give advice and physical assistance to the driving
team in making repairs at a designated repair station
(ref: Section IV.H.2).
6. TEAM CAPTAIN — The team captain shall be an individual
designated by the entrant team from either the driving or
technical team who shall:
a. Formally represent the entrant team in any communica-
tions with the Committee.
b. Assume responsibility for the operation of the vehicle
during the CACR.
c. Assume responsibility for the conduct of the members
of the entrant team during all phases of the CACR.
11
-------
d. Assume responsibility for providing the Committee
with all documentation requested.
D, TECHNICAL PAPER REQUIREMENT — Each entrant must submit a technical
paper describing, in complete detail, the vehicle's total operating
system. Particular emphasis should be placed on the usual aspects
of the vehicle. The paper should be written in a manner appropriate
for a paper to be published; the paper should describe, in suffici-
ent detail, the vehicle power plant so that a person unfamiliar with
the vehicle could understand its operating characteristics. The
style and quality of photos, and other graphic materials should be
those recommended by the major scientific and engineering socities.
E. ACCEPTANCE — Upon receipt of documentation which substantiates
that all of the above requirements have been met, the Committee will
notify the entrant of his acceptance.
12
-------
IV. RACE CONTROL
A. OBJECTIVES - The objectives of Race Control shall be:
1. DRIVING TIME — Compile the accurate elapsed driving time
for each entrant for each leg of the Race (reft Section IV.I).
2' ENERGY CONSUMPTION — Compile data from each entrant concerning
total energy consumed during each leg of the Race.
3- VEHICLE LOCATION — Locate the approximate position of each
vehicle at anytime during the Race.
4- RULE ENFORCEMENT — Assure that each entrant abides by the
Official Rules set forth by the Committee and stated herein
with any subsequent modifications.
B. RACE ROUTE ~ A detailed description of the Race Route will be
be given all entrants prior to the Race. This publication shall
be entitled the ROUTE GUIDE and will include maps, itineraries,
and general impound information for each leg of the Race.
C' DRIVERS — Only those persons on the entrant team who have pre-
viously been designated as members of the driving team (ref:
Section III. C.4) will be allowed to operate the vehicle during
the Race leg. Upon completion of the leg, any member of the
entrant team may operate the vehicle.
D. OBSERVERS — The Committee will select and instruct a group of
qualified observers. Committee control shall operate as follows:
1. ASSIGNMENTS — An observer is to be assigned to an entrant
by the Committee during the evening prior to that leg in
which he will be observing.
2. DISINTERESTED PARTY — An observer must be a disinterested
party to the entrant to which he is assigned.
3. SINGLE LEG — An observer will not be assigned to the same
entrant for more than one leg of the Race.
4. CHANGES — An observer's assignment may be changed by the
Committee at any time.
E. OBSERVER RESPONSIBILITIES — The observers are responsible for
diligently observing at all times the actions and conditions under
which the vehicle to which they are assigned is operating and for
accurately recording all required data on the Observer's Report.
The responsibility of the observer during the time in which he is
assigned to an entrant vehicle includes the following:
13
-------
1. The observer must sit in the entrant vehicle to which
he has been assigned.
2. The observer must remain with the vehicle to which he has
been assigned until he has been relieved or replaced.
3. The observer must have a reliable watch with a sweep second
hand.
4. The observer may not assist drivers in any way except in
an emergency (i.e. an accident).
5. The observer must record all data in detail on the Observer's
Report and must supply all pertinent information requested
including reports on any traffic violations. Whenever an
an entry is made, the time and odometer reading must be
recorded.
6. The observer must submit the Observer's Report to a designa-
ted Committeeman at the impound (ref: Section IV.F.I).
7. The observer must not interpret rules for participants, and
cannot say what work may or may not be done on entrant
vehicles, their duties being only to record required data
and to notify drivers of violations of traffic laws and
regulations (ref: Section IV.K.).
8. The observer must not attempt to interpret the ROUTE GUIDE
nor in any way comment on the navigation of the entrant
vehicle.
9. The observer must telephone the Race Information Center
and report the location and status of the entrant to which
he has been assigned, according to a call-in schedule to
be determined and posted by the Committee.
10. In addition to the surveillance of the cars in which they
are riding, observers shall be expected, insofar as possible
to make note of any other entrant vehicle which may be laid
up alongside the road and to note the extent of the work
being done upon it. Reports should show time, entrant
number of the car involved, and the odometer reading of
the car in which the observer is riding.
11. The observer must report to his assigned vehicle 20 minutes
prior to scheduled departure time. At this time, he must
make appropriate entries on the Observer's Report. These
entries will include entrant number, driver's names, odo-
meter reading and other facts that can be determined at
at this time.
-------
F. IMPOUNDS — All entrant vehicles are required to be parked in the
Official CACR Impounds during the period August 16 thru September
2, 1970. The Impounds for the evenings of August 24-29 shall be
designated Route Impounds. The following conditions will exist
at the Route Impounds:
1. CHECK-IN POINT — The Mobile Headquarters Van (MHV) will
be the official Impound Check-In Point. Observers will
turn in their Observer's Report to a designated Committee-
man at the MHV upon their arrival at the Impound.
2* PARKING — A Committeeman will direct the entrant vehicle
to a suitable parking location upon its arrival.
3. PUBLIC DISPLAY — The vehicles will be open for public display
at the Impound during the evening. Specific hours will be
posted by the Committee. Each entrant team is required to
have a minimum of one team member present at the vehicle
for the purposes of publicity and information.
4. SECURITY — The Committee will provide night security for
all entrant vehicles at the Impounds.
5. SCORES — Legs and cumulative scores for each entrant will
be posted at the Impound.
6. DEPARTURE TIMES — Departure times and observer assignments
will be posted for the next leg at the Impound.
7. BULLETINS ~ Bulletins and official rules modifications will
be posted at the Impound. It will be the responsibility of
the entrant or his representative to read and comply with
same.
8. DEPARTURE — Departure of all entrant vehicles will occur
from the Impound area and be under the direction of a
designated Committeeman.
G. PROTESTS — At any convenient time enroute, the Observer's Report
may be inspected by the Team Captain. Should any objection to the
Observer's Report arise, the observer must report such objection
to a designated Committeeman at the Impound Check-In point. In
the event of a dispute as to facts, the Committeeman may require
such persons to state their objections in writing.
Immediately following each leg, a panel from the Committee will meet.
At that time the Team Captain or his representative must register
any protest pertaining to that leg and submit proof in support
thereof.
The Committee will hear only protests registered on the leg just
completed.
15
-------
H. REPAIRS — Repairs to the entrant vehicle will occur at either
of the following locations:
1. "ON THE ROAD" — Should the vehicle become disabled while
on the race route, only those members designated previously
as on the driving team (ref: Section II.C.4) may physically
repair the vehicle. Repair "On the Road" will mean any
repair which can be made by the driving team alone at the
point where the vehicle disabled.
2. "REPAIR STATION" ~ Should the vehicle become disabled to
the extent that a repair "On the Road" is not possible, it
may be towed or otherwise moved to the nearest "Repair
Station". The "Repair Station" must be approved by the
observer as a facility in which major repairs may be per-
formed on automobiles. Any members of the entrant team
may perform repairs at the approved "Repair Station".
I. ELAPSED DRIVING TIME (EOT) -- The score for each leg of the Race
will be determined by the "Elapsed Driving Time." The "Elapsed
Driving Time" will be defined as the time taken by the vehicle
in completing the leg. This time includes all refueling, repair,
and all other time which was used to maintain the vehicle during
that leg.
1. DEFINITION -- The "Elapsed Driving Time" will be calculated
as follows:
EOT = TDT - MIN (ABT, NBT) - TO
Where: TDT * Total Driving Time, defined as the straight
difference between departure and arrival times
without corrections.
ABT = Actual Break Time, defined as the meal and
break time total as recorded by the observer.
NBT « Normalized Break Time. A calculation based
on 45 minutes per meal and 8 minutes for every
hour or fraction thereof taken in the total
driving time.
TO = Time Outs. Defined in Section IV.J.
2. PROCEDURE — All time will be noted from the observer's
watch (as required in Section IV.E.3). The observer will
synchronize his watch with the Committeeman responsible
for departure. The observer will in no way reset his
watch following this synchronization. This rule includes
time zone crossings.
16
-------
J. TIME OUTS — Only under extenuating circumstances will a "Time
Out" be called and noted by the observer. In such an instance,
the time so taken will not be charged against the EDT of the
entrant vehicle.
During a "Time Out" the vehicle must be completely stopped. No
maintainance or repair work may be performed on the vehicle during
the "Time Out".
"Time Outs" will only be granted for the following reasons:
1. REFUELING — A delay at the refueling station or facility.
The "Time Out" will be from the time the car comes to a
complete stop until the time the refueling facilities
become available. During the actual refueling, the time
is credited towards the EDT.
2. EMERGENCY — A necessary delay at a point on route caused
by a condition beyond the control of the entrant. Specif-
ically this does not include traffic congestion on the Race
route.
3. PERSONAL INJURY — A delay caused by personal injury to a
member of the entrant team, or to a third party as a result
of the entrant's personnel or vehicles. Such injury and
circumstances will be noted in the Observer's Report.
A. PROPERTY DAMAGE — A delay caused by damage to an entrant
vehicle by a third party, or to a third party by an entrant
vehicle. This includes damage that may occur between entrant
vehicles on the same team. Such damage and circumstances
will be noted on the Observer's Report.
5. OBSERVER COMMAND — The observer may demand the entrant
vehicle to be stopped at any time if, in his opinion, the
continuation of the vehicle would be unsafe for other than
mechanical reasons. This shall include the areas of driver
fatigue and adverse weather conditions.
K. TRAFFIC REGULATIONS — The Committee requires strict adherence to
all traffic laws and regulations in all states, cities and towns.
Observers must report length of time, distance, place and road
conditions when and if any flagrant infraction of this rule occurs.
An entrant violating this rule will be penalized if, in the opin-
ion of the Committee, the law was flagrantly violated.
L. DRIVING FORMATION — The entrant's test vehicle must precede all
other vehicles on the team. At no time or place during the route
may any car be used as a pace car, be lettered or painted similar
to an entrant vehicle or be so driven as to interfere with the
operation of any other vehicle.
17
-------
M. WITHDRAWAL — It shall be the duty of the observer under all
conditions to remain with the entrant vehicle (ref; Section IV.E.2)
or until the Team Captain officially announces withdrawal from
the CACR. In such a case, the Team Captain must sign the Observer's
Report at the designated location.
18
-------
V.
MEASUREMENTS
A. SCOPE — Several tests pertaining to a determination of each
entrant vehicle's operating characteristics include the follow-
ing:
1.) Exhaust emissions tests
2.) Vehicle performance tests
3.) Entrant qualification test
U.) Vehicle endurance test
5.) Other requirements
This section defines measurement techniques to be employed
in conducting the above-stated tests.
B. EXHAUST EMISSIONS TESTING — This part outlines the cold start
test cycle procedure to be used for vehicles entered in Class
I, II, III, and IV.
1. ICE, Steam, and Gas Turbine Vehicle Test Procedure
a. SETUP — To the empty weight of the fully fueled
vehicle will be added a 300 pound allowance for
passenger weight. The resulting weight will be used
to set the dynamometer inertia wheel and power ab-
sorption unit via the following tables:
Loaded Vehicle Equivalent Inertia
Weight (pounds) Weight (pounds)
Up to 1625 !500
1626 to 1875 1750
1876 to 2125 2000
2126 to 2375 2250
2376 to 2625 2500
2626 to 2875 2750
2876 to 3250 3000
3251 to 3750 3500
3751 to 1*250 ^000
1*251 to U750 *»500
1+751 to 5250 5000
5251 to 6000 5500
Loaded Vehicle Power Absorption
Weight (pounds) Unit Setting (hp)
Up to 2750 j*
2751 to 1*250 b
1*251 to 6000 10
19
-------
In order that no tire damage occur during the test,
tires will be inflated to ^5 psig. The vehicle, which
must have been in a power-down state for the pre-
vious four hours, will then be pushed onto the dyna-
mometer ; and the exhaust sample line will be attach-
ed. A fan will be positioned at the front of the
vehicle to maintain engine cooling.
b. OPERATING PROCEDURE ~ The vehicle will be started
on the dynamometer according to the entrants rec-
ommended starting procedure. It will then be driven
nine times through the following driving cycle:
Sequence Mode Acceleration Time In Cumulative
Number (mph/sec) Mode (sec) Time (sec)
1 Idle 0 20 20
2 0-25 2.2 11.5 31.5
3 25-30 2.2 2.5 3^
k 30 0 15 *+9
5 30-15 -i.U 11 60
6 15 0 15 75
7 15-30 1.2 12.5 87-5
8 30-50 1.2 16.5 101+
9 50-20 -1.2 25 129
10 20-0 -2.5 8 137
Vehicles with automatic transmissions will be driven
in "drive". Other vehicles will be shifted at speeds
recommended by the entrant. If no such speeds are
supplied, shifting will be at 15mph, 25mph, and (if
applicable) ItOmph.
c. HANDLING OF EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES
(i) If the vehicle cannot accelerate at the specified
rates, then it will be run at wide open throttle
until vehicle speed reaches the speed it would be
during the time of the test. Whenever vehicle
acceleration lags more than 3 seconds behind the
trace, the trace will be stopped until the vehicle
has a chance to catch up. Vehicles not capable
of meeting the 50mph maximum speed will be
accelerated to ^5mph and continued for 9 seconds
at wide open throttle before the trace is restarted.
(ii) If the vehicle will not start within a "reason-
able" time (10 seconds unless otherwise specified
by the competitor) the test will be shut down.
If the failure to start was an operational error,
the vehicle will be rescheduled for testing from
a cold start. If the failure was caused by
vehicle malfunction, corrective action of less
than 30 minutes duration may be taken, and the
20
-------
test continued. If corrective action is un-
successful, the test will be aborted. Other-
vise, sampling systems will be reactivated at
the same time the start up sequence is initiated.
(iii) If the engine false starts, the operator will
repeat recommended starting procedure. If the
engine stalls during an idle period, the engine
will be restarted soon enough to allow the
vehicle to follow the next acceleration, the
driving schedule indicator will be stopped;
when the vehicle restarts the driving schedule
indicator will be reactivated. If the engine
stalls during some mode other than idle, the
driving schedule indicator will be stopped; the
vehicle restarted, accelerated to the required
speed; and the test continued. If the vehicle
will not restart within one minute, the test will
be aborted.
d. SAMPLING SYSTEM
(i) Internal Combustion Engines — Constant Volume
Sampling (CVS) will be used for vehicles with
ICE's. In this system, all of the exhaust is
collected and diluted with enough air so that a
constant volume flow rate is maintained. A
portion of the dilute mixture will be drawn off
at a constant flow rate and collected in a bag.
Dilution air will be sampled similarly. The
pollutants in the bag will be analyzed within
10 minutes after the completion of the test. In
addition, the raw exhaust may be continuously
sampled, with the exhaust of the continuous
analysis cart fed into the inlet of the constant
volume sampler.
(ii) Steam and Gas Turbine Vehicles — If the exhaust
volume flow is low enough, constant volume sampling
will be employed. Otherwise raw exhaust will
be monitored continuously, including temper-
ature. In both cases, fuel flow rate will be con-
tinuously monitored.
e. CALCULATIONS
(i) CVS — Total exhaust volume (Vmix) will be determined
from the number of revolutions of the positive
displacement pump. This will be corrected to
528 degreesR and 760mm Hg. The final grams-per-mile
figure for each pollutant will be determined through
the following formulae:
21
-------
Where: P is density
C is concentration in ppm
K is concentration in per cent
E is emission in grams per mile
d is the distance driven in nine repititions
of the driving cycle
EHC " VMIX • PHC • CHC . 10-6
d
Eco = VMIX - PCO • Kco • 10~2
%0 = VMIX • PNO • CNO • 10~
(ii) Continuous Sampling — For each mode, an average
fuel flow rate will be measured, and converted
to an average carbon atom flow rate (in moles
per second). The average HC, CO, and CC^ reading
for each mole will be converted to mole percent,
and added. The average flow rate for each mode
is then R»tj- where F is the fuel flow rate in
moles carbon/seconds and S is the sum mole percent of
HC, CO, and C02« For each mole R is then con-
verted to Ry, a volume flow rate by l) converting
to 528 degrees R and j60 mm Hg; 2) multiplying
by a constant to convert from moles/sec, to
cubic feet/ sec.. Pollutant mass M for mole i
and pollutant K is then:
MK,i • RVi ' *i • CK - PK
Where t^ is the time spent in mode i, and P^ is the
density of pollutant K. The Mjf j are summed over
the 10 modes and nine repititions of the driving
cycle divided by the distance traveled over nine
cycles. This gives the final grams per mile
figure for each pollutant.
2. HYBRID - ELECTRICS
a. SETUP — The setup will be identical to that described
in Section V.B.I.a.
b. OPERATING PROCEDURE — The vehicle will be run at a con-
stant speed of 50mph for 10 minutes. The on-board
charging source will remain on throughout this period.
c. SAMPLING — Constant Volume Sampling will be employed.
d. CALCULATIONS — Test values will be converted to grams
22
-------
of pollutant per unit of fuel. Fuel consumption will be
taken over the length of the race. The final grams
per mile figure vill be found by multiplying fuel
consumption by the grams of pollutant per unit of fuel
and dividing by the total miles traveled.
C. VEHICLE PERFORMANCE TESTING — Four specific tests will be con-
ducted by the Committee to determine the entrant vehicle's per-
formance characteristics for scoring purposes.
1. BRAKING — The entrant vehicle braking time and distance will
be measured and recorded for two controlled stop situations:
a) SOmph to full stop; and
b) 60mph to full stop
The test will be conducted by running each entrant vehicle
in a 12 foot wide lane demarcated by pylons on a level
roadway. The test must be run a minimum of two times for
each controlled stop situation. If any pylons are knocked
over during the controlled stop, brakes may be adjusted
and the test must be repeated. If the entrant vehicle
fails to complete the test on more than two runs, the
vehicle's brakes must be repared and the entire braking test
must be repeated on the following day.
2. ACCELERATION — The entrant vehicle acceleration time and
distance will be measured and recorded for three speed range
situations:
a) Omph to 30mph
b) Omph to U5mph
c) 20mph to 50mph
A minimum of two separate test runs will be conducted for
each speed range.
3. NOISE — Noise measurements in units of dB(A) will be made
on each entrant vehicle according to the test procedure
specified in SAE J986a for the following driving situations:
a) 30mph open throttle,
b) 30mph cruising,
c) 60mph cruising, and
d) idle
k. URBAN DRIVING CYCLE — This consists of a driving course lay-
out on a paved flat surface with the route demarcated by pylons
so that memory will not be necessary to remain on course. This
route is designed to test entrant vehicle generalized per-
formance and manuverability by simulating an urban driving
cycle trip. Included in the course layout are straight
sections, corners, connecting turns, a back-up situation, and
a lane change. At least three members of each entrant team
are required to drive the vehicle in this event. The time
each team member takes to negotiate the route will be measured
and recorded by a Committee official. A vehicle safety
check will be conducted by Committee officials prior to
the entrant vehicle's first run on the urban driving cycle
course.
23
-------
D. ENTRANT QUALIFICATION TEST — The requirements for entrant vehicle
performance characteristics have been defined in Section III.
Measurements will be made of the pertinent parameters associated
with each requirement, and the information will be recorded in
the entrant's file. The specific tests to be conducted on each
entrant vehicle include the following:
1) Acceleration time and distance from 0 to k5mphi
2) Time to travel a 60 mile distance on a level roadway with-
out refueling; highway speed limits must be obeyed during the
test.
E. VEHICLE ENDURANCE TEST — CAGE cross-country travel will be
considered a measure of entrant vehicle endurance and reliability.
Specific parameters to be measured and recorded are the obser-
ver's responsibility and include the following:
1) Entrant vehicle fuel consumption: type of fuel and quantity
thereof;
2) Entrant elapsed driving time for each leg of the CACR route;
3) Repairs, adjustments, and modifications of any type to the
entrant vehicle.
This information will be recorded in the "Observer's Report" and
kept in the respective entrant's file which will be maintained
by the Committee. This procedure has been described in detail in
Section IV.E
F. OTHER MEASUREMENTS — Other information which will be recorded
by the Committee includes the following measurements:
l) Vehicle weight
2) Vehicle passenger capacity
3) Tires: make, dimensions, and pressures
It) Traveling range without refueling or recharging
-------
VI. SCORING
A« SCORING FORMULA — Each vehicle shall have a score derived from
the following formula:
S • E(P+R)
where:
E a emissions score
P = performance score
R = race score
The entrant obtaining the highest score in each class using the
above formula shall be declared the class winner. (Ref: Section
I.G.)
B. RESPONSIBILITY — The Committee will be responsible for determin-
ing the score for each entrant, and all scores so determined will
be considered final.
C. EMISSIONS SCORE — The emissions score shall be based entirely
on values obtained from the cold start test cycle procedure.
1. FORMULA — Each vehicle in classes I, II, III, V, and VI
shall have an emissions score as determined by the follow-
ing formula (all variable values will be recorded in grams
per mile):
1/3 f HC + CO + NOJ
L-5 11 .9 J
where:
HC - max [ncmeasured, 0.25J
CO - max [C0measured, 4.7 J
NOX - max[NOx measured, 0.4J
2. RANGE — The emissions score, E, shall have a maximum
formula value of 2.2.
3. BONUS — If the vehicle tested exceeds all the proposed
1980 Federal standards on pollution emissions
[HC 0.25; CO 4.7; and NOX 0.4], the Committee shall
award the entrant an emissions score value of 2.5.
25
-------
D. PERFORMANCE SCORE -- The performance shall consist of the
unweighted sums of four tests.
1.
SCORE
SCORE DIVISION ~ Scoring shall be divided into the
following:
a* BRAKING TEST — Braking distances will be measured
for two controlled stop situations. Two distance
measurements for each situation will be converted
to respective net deceleration rates. Points will
be awarded according to the following scoring curve:
250
•6g .85g
Average Net
Deceleration Rate
b.
ACCELERATION TEST — An average acceleration rate
measurement will be made for each of the three speed
ranges specified in Section V.C.2 . The three values
will be averaged in an unweighted sum to compute a net
average acceleration rate. Points will be awarded
using the following scoring curve:
250
SCORE
.35g
Average Net
Acceleration Rate
c.
NOISE MEASUREMENT TEST -- The dB(A) readings recorded
in the four noise measurement tests specified in Section
V.C.3 will be arithmetically averaged and the final
value rounded to the nearest dB(A). Points will be
awarded using the scoring curve illustrated below.
250
SCORE
r—
r— i
i
i i i ! — i
i i i i r— i ^
0 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90
26
Average
dB(A) Reading
-------
SCORE
URBAN DRIVING CYCLE EVENT — An average driving cycle
time will be computed for each entrant by determining
the unweighted average of the best recorded times for
each of three team members. Points will be awarded
usiftg the following scoring curve:
250
Average Driving
Cycle Time (seconds)
The constants c^ and 02 will respectively determine
the minimum and maximum average driving cycle times
and will be established by the Committee when the
final driving cycle course has been set up.
RANGE — The highest possible performance score value
is 1000 points. The max score value for the scoring
curves illustrated in the preceding section is 250.
Each test, then, has a range of 0 to 250 points for
scoring purposes.
B. RACE SCORE — The race score shall be based on a comparison of
the entrant elapsed driving time (Ref: Section IV.I.I) and
the normalized driving time.
1. NORMALIZED DRIVING TIME — The NDT is an unweighted
average of elapsed driving times compiled by a minimum
of three official Committee cars during the day in which
that particular leg is driven. The determination of
NDT will be as follows:
a. When the posted speed limit is 45mph or lower, the
official Committee cars will travel at the speed
limit.
b. When the posted speed limit is SOmph or higher, the
official Committee cars will travel at a speed of
5mph below the speed limit.
c. When the speed limit is not posted, the official
cars will travel at a speed of 65 mph.
d. The official Committee cars will follow the traffic
laws and regulations of all states, cities, and
towns.
27
-------
e. NOT shall include all time taken by the vehicle in
completing the leg. This time includes all refuel-
ing; however, it will not include time taken, if
any, for road repairs made on the official Committee
cars.
2. SCORING CURVE ~ Each entrant vehicle shall have its
leg score determined by the following curve:
I
.95NDT
1.05NDT
SCORE
.75NDT
l.ONDT
1.5NDT
Entrant Elapsed
Driving Time
3. PENALTY — Should the observer report a violation of
either traffic laws and regulations or the CACR Official
Rules, the entrant shall be penalized a percentage of
his score for that leg. Penalties shall not exceed
fifteen (15) percent for each violation. The penalty
shall be determined by the panel hearing protests at
the impound.
4. TOWING — Should the vehicle become disabled to the ex-
tent that it must be towed (Ref. Section IV.H.2), the
observer will note the actual length of time the entrant
is under tow. The tow time shall be doubled for pur-
poses of deriving the total driving time.
Upon repair, the vehicle will not be required to
return to the point of breakdown, but rather may con-
tinue from the "repair station."
5' RANGE — The highest possible race score value is 1000
points. The points will be distributed for each leg
according to the percentage of total official miles in
that leg.
6. DISQUALIFICATION — The entrant is expected to complete
a leg within 24 hours of his assigned departure time.
(Time-outs will not be counted.) Any entrant vehicle
not completing the leg in this period must be dropped
from the race.
END OF OFFICIAL RULES
28
-------
ADDENDA TO THE OFFICIAL RULES
The following should be added to the section of the rules as in-
dicated:
III.B.4.C. All entrant vehicles are expected to have a portable fire
extinguisher with the following capabilities:
(1) it must be easily accessible for a person sitting
in the driver seat position;
(2) it must be held securely in place during periods
of vehicle travel; and
(3) a dry chemical powder as recommended by Fire
Departments in suggested by the Committee.
V.B.l.e.(ii) Second and third sentences should read: "The average HC,
CO, and C0£ reading for each mode will be converted to mole
percent carbon atoms and added. The average flow rate for
each mode is them R » F/S where F is the fuel flow rate in
moles of carbon/sec, and S is the sum concentration of HC,
CO, and COp in terms of mole percent carbon atoms."
VI. A. Overall scoring formula should read:
S - E (P + R + FE)
where: FE = fuel economy score
VI. C.I Should be entitled: EMISSIONS SCORE FOR VEHICLES IN ALL
CLASSES EXCEPT CLASS IV.
VI. C. 2 EMISSIONS SCORE FOR VEHICLES IN CLASS IV — For vehicles in
class IV, the value of E shall be determined by the total
power consumed over the length of the Race, i.e. ,
(0.5) (3562)
where P total is the power consumed recharging the vehicle on
the Race, as measured in kwh by the observer.
VI.E.l.f. In addition to the NDT, the Committee will post an Announced
Driving Time (ADT) for all legs prior to the Race start.
29
-------
VI.E.2 Correct the scoring curve to read:
Leg Score
.95 min(NDTf ADT)
1.05 tnax(NDT, ADT)
I
,75 min(NDT,ADT)
NDT
1.50 max(NDT,ADT)
Entrant
Elapsed
Driving
Notes: The emissions score (Rule VI.C.) was modified to account
for system degragation by inserting deterioration factors. A
description of the final emissions scoring procedure is found
in Chapter V of this document.
A discussion of the fuel economy score after its inclusion into
the overall scoring formula is found in Chapter IV of this
document.
30
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Clean Air Car Race Organization Committee gratefully thanks
the following sponsors and contributors, without whose assistance our
task would have been impossible.
Ann Arbor Chamber of Commerce
American Institute of Mineral, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineering
Atlantic Richfield Company, Tulsa, Oklahoma
Automotive Research Association, San Antonio, Texas
Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Boston Edison Company, Boston, Massachusetts
Cabot Corporation, Boston, Massachusetts
Call-A-Computer, Minneapolis, Minnesota
The California Institute of Technology
Central State College, Edmond, Oklahoma
The Chrysler Corporation
The City of Odessa
The City of Toronto
Classic Motors, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Copper Development Association, New York, New York
Cornell Aeronautical Laboratories, Buffalo, New York
Country Gas Company, Danvers, Massachusetts
Department of Transportation
Dresser Industries, Dallas, Texas
E. I. DuPont Corporation, Wilmington, Delaware
Edison Electric Institute, New York, New York
Electric Energy Conversion Corporation, New York, New York
Electric Fuel Propulsion, Ferndale, Michigan
Electric Vehicle Council, New York, New York
Engelhard Minerals and Chemicals Corporation, Newark, New Jersey
Esso Research, Linden, New Jersey
Ethyl Corporation Research Laboratories, Ferndale, Michigan
Fairbanks Morse Scales Division of Colt Industries
The Ford Motor Company
Fram Corporation, Providence, Rhode Island
General Motors Corporation
Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company
Greater Oklahoma City Motor Car Dealers Association
Los Angeles Air Pollution Control District
Lowell Gas Company, Lowell, Massachusetts
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Members of the M.I.T. Corporation
M.I.T. Club of Southern California
Murchison Brothers, Dallas, Texas
The Museum of Science, Boston, Massachusetts
The Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago, Illinois
The National Air Pollution Control Administration (APCO)
National Cowboy Hall of Fame, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
National LP Gas Association, Chicago, Illinois
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, Washington, D. C.
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (continued)
Odessa Butane Company, Odessa, Texas
Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce
Olson Laboratories, Dearborn, Michigan
Ontario Department of Tourism and Information
Peter Fuller Cadillac-Olds, Boston, Massachusetts
Polaroid Corporation
Pyle National Company, Chicago, Illinois
Richard Mellon Foundation
Rockefeller Foundation
Scott Research, Plumsteadville, Pennsylvania
Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas
Standard Oil of California
Standard Oil of New Jersey
Suburban Propance Company, Brockton, Massachusetts
Sun Electric Corporation, Chicago Illinois
Texaco Research and Technical Department, Becicon, New Jersey
Texas Liquid Petroleum Gas Association
Tucson Chamber of Commerce
The University of Arizona
The University of Illinois
The University of Michigan
The University of Toronto
Vernitron Corporation, Maiden, Massachusetts
Westinghouse Electric Corporation
Xerox Corporation
The Organization Committee also wishes to thank the following
utility companies for their efforts in constructing the Transcontinental
Electric Expressway.
Arizona Public Service Company, Tucson, Arizona
Boston Edison Company, Boston, Massachusetts
Cambridge Electric Light, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Central Illinois Public, Mattoon, Illinois
Commonwealth Edison Company, Decatur, Illinois
Community Public Service Company, Fort Worth, Texas
Consumers Power, Jackson, Michigan
Detroit Edision Company, Detroit, Michigan
El Paso Electric Company, El Paso, Texas
Empire District Electric Company, Joplin, Missouri
Illinois Power Company, Decatur, Illionis
Imperial Irrigation District, Imperial, California
Indiana and Michigan Electric, Benton Harbor, Michigan
Lebanon Municipal Light Department, Lebanon, Missouri
Massachusetts Electric Company, Worcester, Massachusetts
Niagara Mohawk Power, Syracuse, New York
Northern Indiana Public Service, Gary, Indiana
Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Ontario-Hydro,Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Pasadena Municipal Light and Power Company, Pasadena, California
Public Service Company of Oklahoma, Tulsa, Oklahoma
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (continued)
Public Service of New Mexico, Albequerque, New Mexico
Rantoul Light and Power Department, Rantoul, Illinois
Rio Grande Electric Cooperative, Marfa, Texas
Rochester Gas & Electric, Rochester, New York
Rolla Municipal Utilities, Rolla, Missouri
San Diego Gas and Electric Company, San Diego, California
Southern California Edison Company, Los Angeles, California
Southwestern Public Service, Amarillo, Texas
Springfield City Utilities, Springfield, Missouri
Sullivan Municipal Light Department, Sullivan Missouri
Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Cooperative, Inc., Wilcox, Arizona
Texas Electric Service Company, Fort Worth, Texas
Tucson Gas and Electric Company, Tucson, Arizona
Union Electric Company, St. Louis, Missouri
Wellton-Mohawk Irrigation, Wellton, Arizona
Western Massachusetts Electric Company, West Springfield, Massachusetts
-------