United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Emission Control Technology Division
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
EPA 460/3-83-010
December 1983
Air
v>EPA
Heavy-Duty Fuel Economy
Program Phase V—Investigation
of a Heavy-Duty 3-Way
Catalyst System
-------
EPA 460/3-83-010
Heavy-Duty Fuel Economy Program
Phase V—Investigation of a Heavy-Duty
3-Way Catalyst System
by
Charles M. Urban
Southwest Research Institute
6220 Culebra Road
San Antonio, Texas 78284
Contract No. 68-03-2220
EPA Officer: Larry C. Landman
Prepared for
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Emission Control Technology Division
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
December 1963
-------
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by
Southwest Research Institute, 6220 Culebra Road, San Antonio, Texas,
in fulfillment of Contract No. 68-03-2220. The contents of this
report are reproduced herein as received from Southwest Research
Institute. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed are
those of the author and not necessarily those of the Environmental
Protection Agency. Mention of company or product names is not to
be considered as an endorsement by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Publication No. 460/3-83-010
11
-------
FOREWORD
This project phase was initiated by the Emission Control Technology
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor,
Michigan 48105. Previous phases of this project have been reported in
previous final reports. The effort on which this report is based was con-
ducted by the Department of Emissions Research, Southwest Research Institute,
6220 Culebra Road, San Antonio, Texas 78284. This phase of the project,
authorized by Modification 11 to Contract 68-03-2220, was initiated August 10,
1979, and was terminated December 10, 1983. This project phase was identified
within SwRI as Project 05-4311-005.
The SwRI Project Leader was Mr. Charles Urban, who supervised all work
conducted in this phase of the project. Mr. Karl Springer was Project
Manager and was involved in the technical and fiscal negotiation of the
initial project and this project phase. The Project Officers for this project
phase were Mr. William M. Pidgeon and Mr. Larry C. Landman of the Emission
Control Technology Division, Environmental Protection Agency.
iii
-------
ABSTRACT
This report describes the laboratory effort toward evaluation of a
three-way catalyst and feedback fuel injection system with a heavy-duty
gasoline engine. Described are efforts toward obtaining a suitable
feedback fuel system and the limited test results obtained using the
subsequently selected throttle-body fuel injection system. Average emis-
sions values over the EPA transient test, with the system only partially
optimized, were 0.52 HC, 7.5 CO, and 3.4 NOX in grams per kilowatt-hour
(0.39, 5.6, and 2.5 g/hp-hr).
IV
-------
SUMMARY
The major objective of this project phase was to evaluate emissions and
fuel consumption with a heavy-duty gasoline engine using three-way catalysts
and a feedback fuel system. Initially, multipoint manifold fuel injection
was selected for use, but such a system subsequently could not be obtained.
Throttle-body fuel-injection, with feedback controls, was subsequently
selected and used in this project phase.
The system consisted of a 1975 Chevrolet 350 CID heavy-duty basic engine,
a throttle-body fuel-injection system with feedback fuel control (as used on
the 1982 Corvette 350 engine) , and three-way and oxidation catalysts obtained
from Engelhard. For these evaluations, dual exhaust systems were utilized.
Each bank of the exhaust system consisted of an exhaust manifold with
air injection, about three feet of exhaust tubing, a three-way catalyst,
(Englehard 112834), a short section of exhaust tubing with air injection and
an oxidation catalytic converter (Englehard 112833) . The exhausts from the
two banks were combined after the oxidation catalysts. In one of the exhaust
banks, an oxygen sensor was installed between the exhaust manifold and the
three-way catalytic converter. To provide sufficient oxygen to maximize
oxidation over the EPA transient heavy-duty cycle, it was necessary to utilize
two air pumps, each having a displacement of 0.3 liter (19 cu. in.).
After assembly, debugging, and minimal systems optimization, several
transient emissions evaluations were conducted. The average test values
with a system in a quasi-optimized configuration were as follows:
Composite Value Over the EPA Transient Cycle
Work
kw-hr
(hp-hr)
7.8
(10.4)
Emissions, g/kW-hr (g/hp-hr)
HC
0.52
(0.39)
CO
7.5
(5.6)
CO2
1169
(782)
NOX
3.4
(2.5)
SFC,
kg/kW-hr
(Ib/hp-hr)
0.37
(0.61)
Project Results
Project Goals — (1.30) (15.50) -- (4.5)
S" "~:ral emissions evaluations were then conducted using a transient cycle
obtained from MVMA. The average results for the MVMA transient cycle tests
are compared with the previous results as follows:
Composite Value Over the Transient Cycle
Cycle
MVMA
EPA
Work,
kW-hr
9.0
7.8
Emissions, g/kW-hr
HC
0.46
0.52
CO
9.8
7.5
C02
1103
1169
NOX
3.1
3.4
SFC,
kg/kW-hr
0.35
0.37
-------
The MVMA cycle had a higher composite power output and produced some reduction
of HC and NOX emissions and fuel consumption.
The stated emissions goals in g/kW-hr (g/hp-hr) of 1.9 (1.3) for HC,
20.8 (15.5) for CO, and 6.0 (4.5) for NOX were met. This project phase was
terminated, however, prior to attempts to achieving the goal of the lowest
emissions and fuel consumption practical, within the available contract level
of effort.
VI
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
FOREWORD iii
ABSTRACT iv
SUMMARY v
LIST OF FIGURES viii
LIST OF TABLES viii
I. INTRODUCTION 1
A. Phase V Objective 1
B. Phase V Scope of Work 1
II. EQUIPMENT, INSTRUMENTATION AND PROCEDURES 3
A. Engine 3
B. Dynamometer and Controls 3
C. Transient Test 4
D. Fuel 5
III. COMPONENT ACQUISITION AND APPLICATION 7
A. Acquisition of a Fuel System and Catalysts 7
B. System Assembly and Emissions Testing 8
REFERENCES 17
APPENDICES
vii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Exhaust CO vs Percent of Engine Maximum Torque 10
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 Properties of Gasoline for Emissions Testing 6
2 Power Output Comparison 1975 Model Chevrolet 350
Heavy-Duty Gasoline Engine 8
3 EPA Transient Cycle Test Results - Metric Units 12
4 EPA Transient Cycle Test Results - English Units 13
5 MVMA Transient Cycle Test Results - Metric Units 15
6 MVMA Transient Cycle Test Results - English Units 16
viii
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
This report covers the efforts toward obtaining a desired feedback fuel
system and the limited evaluations conducted using a three-way catalyst along
with the subsequently selected throttle-body fuel-injection system. Previous
emissions control phases of this Heavy-Duty Fuel Economy Program involved
methods other than three-way catalysts.(If2,3)*
A. Phase V Objective
The major objective of this project phase was to evaluate emissions and
fuel consumption benefits using a three-way catalyst and a feedback fuel system
with a heavy-duty gasoline engine. Five tasks, plus the final report, were
initially involved in this project.
B. Phase V Scope of Work
The scope of work for this Phase V of the project was divided into
several tasks, and underwent a number of major changes during the course
of this project phase.
1. Task 1 - Selection of Test Engine
An available 1975 model Chevrolet 350 heavy-duty (HD) engine
(Engine 1) was examined at the start of this project phase. This engine,
used in a previous phase of this project, was found to be in good condition.
According to a representative in the Chevrolet Engineering section,
there were no significant changes made to the basic 350 HD engine since 1975.
In accord with approval from the EPA Project Officer, it was decided to
utilize this available 1975 model engine in this project phase.
2. Task 2 - Component Acquisition
The intent of this project was to utilize the best available feed-
back fuel system. At the time this project was initiated, multipoint manifold
fuel-injection was seriously being considered by Bendix for heavy-duty engine
applications. Provisions were made for Bendix to provide such a system. Be-
fore the s/stem was provided, however, Bendix essentially disbanded their
entire leavy-duty fuel-injection operations, and an appropriate fuel-injection
system was no longer obtainable from them. Obtaining a suitable multipoint
fuel-injection system from another supplier was pursued, but this attempt was
unsuccessful.
At that point, this project was put into a hold position until an
alternate fuel system was selected. Throttle-body injection appeared to be a
very desirable candidate, but a system was not available at that time. Throttle-
*Numbers in parentheses are references listed at the end of this report.
-------
body injection was subsequently used on some 1982 model GM light-duty engines;
one such application being the 350 CID engine used in the Corvette. This
throttle-body fuel-injection system, with feedback fuel-control, was procured
and adapted to the 350 HD engine.
Three-way catalysts were obtained from Engelhard Industries for use in
this project. The exhaust configuration consisted of dual exhaust systems,
each involving a three-way catalyst followed by an oxidation catalyst.
Additional air was injected between the three-way and the oxidation catalysts.
3. Task 3 - System Optimization
A dynamometer test cell capable of operation over the HD transient
cycle was to be utilized for optimization evaluations of the engine with the
throttle-body fuel-injection system. The ultimate goal of this optimization
was to achieve the lowest emissions and fuel consumption practical, within
the proposed level of effort. It was initially desired to achieve emission
levels in grams per kilowatt-hour below 1.8 for HC, 20.8 for CO, and 6.0 for
NOX (in g/bhp-hr below 1.3 for HC, 15.5 for CO, and 4.5 for NOX) in the
transient test. In addition, it was desired that curb idle HC and CO emissions
be below 970 ppmC and 0.47 percent, respectively. This project, however,
was terminated shortly after meeting the stated transient test emissions goals.
Termination occurred prior to optimization toward achieving the lowest practical
emissions and fuel consumption.
4. Other Tasks
Other tasks included or considered at some point in this project
phase were optimized system testing, durability testing, and vehicle testing.
-------
II. EQUIPMENT, INSTRUMENTATION AND PROCEDURES
This section describes the engine, facilities, instrumentation, procedures
and fuel utilized in this phase of the project.
A. Engine
The Chevrolet 350-V8 heavy-duty gasoline engine utilized in this phase
of the project was a 1975 model used in Series 50-60 trucks and Series 60 buses,
except in California. This engine was originally equipped with a two-barrel
carburetor and the original displacement and bore and stroke were as follows:
Displacement 5737 cc 350 cu. in.
Bore & Stroke 102 x 88 mm 4.0 x 3.48 in.
This engine was identified as Engine 1 when utilized in the previous Phase II
of the project.
B. Dynamometer and Controls
The overall control scheme for the transient tests consisted of two
independently closed-loop systems. The speed was controlled by the dynamo-
meter, and the torque by the engine.
The dynamometer system consisted of an Eaton Dynamatic Model E-200, with
proprietary quick-unload circuitry. This dynamometer had a motoring capacity
of 150 kW (200 hp) and an absorption capacity of 373 kW (500 hp). This quick-
unload circuitry was necessary to speed up the ordinarily sluggish response
of this type of dynamometer. Although this dynamometer can absorb power at
speeds of up to 5000 rpm, the motoring speed was a maximum of 3500 rpm.
To provide transient command signals, an Ithaco CompuDAS 1/10 provided
essentially continuous analog output. Speed control feedback is provided by
a D.C. tachometer which is directly driven by the engine.
The torque control loop consisted of the following main elements:
• Analog command signal
• Servo amplifier
• Servomotor attached to throttle
• Driveshaft torquemeter
• Strain gage conditioner
The analog command from the CompuDAS I/10 is fed to the torque command inputs
of the servo amplifier. The signal from the strain gage conditioner goes into
the torque feedback input. An error amplifier decides the direction and
magnitude of the current to the throttle/servomotor. Two adjustments are
-------
available on the servo amplifier. The span control adjusts the torque command
level appropriately for the engine being tested. The gain control adjusts the
responsiveness of the system. It is adjusted to the position at which minor
oscillation begins at a couple of points in the cycle.
C. Transient Test
The transient test procedure, utilized in this project phase, is described
in detail in Reference 4. The elements of the procedure are described as
follows:
• The engine is mapped for maximum available torque versus speed
over the range of speeds encountered during the transient test.
This speed range is from 400 rpm (or 200 rpm below idle, whichever
is higher) to 15 percent above rated speed. The mapping is accom-
plished in a single sweep from low speed to high speed. These
data are used as determined, without correction to standard
atmospheric conditions.
• The required cycle is determined, at one second intervals, in
terms of rpm and torque.
• Practice runs are made to insure that the regression line
tolerances are being met.
• After an overnight soak, a cold-start transient test in run.
Whereas the procedure calls for only a single emissions sample
bag to be taken during the test, in this project four bags
were taken, dividing the 1167 second test into four subcycles
(272, 307, 316, and 272 seconds for the NYNF, LA.NF, LAP, and
NYNF). This breakdown of the cycle provides data to enable
more detailed analyses of the emission control system.
• After a twenty-minute soak, the cycle is repeated for a hot-
start test.
• The regression line data is analyzed to determine if the
cycles were run within required tolerance.
• The emission data is analyzed and results for the cycle computed.
The following four gaseous emissions were measured:
• Hydrocarbons (HC)
• Carbon Monoxide (CO)
• Carbon Dioxide (CC>2)
• Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX)
All emissions were measured from bagged samples.
-------
The test cell has two environmental control systems. The first is a
wall-mounted air conditioner which insures that the test cell is the proper
temperature for an overnight cold soak. A second system provides temperature
and humidity conditioned air to the test cell. Filtered air from outside the
building is passed through a chilled water spray chamber to establish the
proper absolute humidity level. The air then passes through a demister
followed by an electrically heated reheat section to establish a 25°C (77°F)
temperature. Temperature and dewpoint are monitored as closely as practical
to the engine inlet. Humidity control design requirements are 10.7±2.1 grams
of water per kilogram (75±15 grains of water per pound) of dry air. Generally,
the actual control of humidity is significantly better than these limits.
The CVS system used is essentially a scaled-up version of the system
used for emissions testing of light-duty vehicles. Nominal CVS flow rate
utilized was 40 m3/min (1400 CFM). This CVS flow is that necessary to pre-
vent water condensation in the bags for the high speed and power Los Angeles
Freeway (LAF) driving segment, without over diluting the exhaust during the
two New York Non-Freeway (NYNF) segments of the cycle. The remaining Los
Angeles Non-Freeway (LANF) segment involves intermediate speed and power.
D. Fuel
A single batch of EM-338 unleaded exhaust emissions fuel was used for
all evaluations conducted in this project. The properties of this fuel are
given in Table 1.
-------
TABLE 1. PROPERTIES OP GASOLINE FOR EMISSIONS TESTING
Code Number: EM-338
Produce Name: Amoco Indolene H01112R
(4)
Required Items
Octane, Research
Sensitivity
Lead (organic), g/gal
Distillation:
IBP, °F
10% point, °F
50% point, °F
90% point, °F
EP, °F
Sulfur, wt. %
Phosphorus, g/gal
RVP, psi
Hydrocarbon composition:
Olefins, %
Aromatics, %
Saturates, %
Other Items
Gravity, API, @ 60°F
Gravity, Specific, @ 60°F
Carbon, wt. %
Hydroaen, wt. %
ASTM Test
Method
D2699
Value
D86
D86
D86
D86
D86
D1266
D323
D1319
D1319
D1319
D287
D3178
D3178
97.7
8.2
<0.002
85
135
230
315
397
0.01
0.000
8.7
23.7
2.1
74.2£
59.5
0.741
85.61 ± 0.27
13.84 ± 0.07
Remainder
-------
III. COMPONENT ACQUISITION AND APPLICATION
This section describes the efforts expended in the acquisition and appli-
cation of three-way catalytic converters and a feedback fuel system. Also
included are the limited emissions test results obtained with these control
systems installed on a Chevrolet 350 HD engine.
A. Acquisition of a Fuel System and Catalysts
At the time the proposal was written, Bendix was active in the development
of fuel injection systems for heavy-duty gasoline engines and planned to pro-
vide a system for use in this project. However, by the time the contract
for this project was subsequently signed, the heavy-duty gasoline fuel injection
section at Bendix had essentially been disbanded. They no longer had any funds
that could be used to provide a system, but they offered to assemble a system
at cost.
After a period of time, approval was obtained to issue a purchase order
to Bendix for a fuel injection system. By that time, however, Bendix no
longer had any qualified personnel available that could be assigned to this
procurement. Bosch was then contacted to see if they could provide a fuel
injection system for use in this project. Indications were that they had
minimal interest in providing such a system.
With the lack of interest in heavy-duty gasoline fuel injection by the
potential manufacturers, it became apparent that a suitable system would not
become available for use in this project. Information was then obtained on
some other types of fuel systems for use in this project; one such system
being the Electrosonic Type 5 Engine Control System from Autotronic Controls
Corporation, another being the throttle-body fuel-injection.
Subsequently, a throttle-body fuel-injection system with feedback fuel-
control was used on some models of GM light-duty engines; one such application
being the 350 CID engine used in the Corvette. The decision was reached to
utilize that system in this project. A complete throttle-body fuel-injection
system was procured and adapted to the Chevrolet 350 CID heavy-duty engine.
Three-way and oxidation catalysts were obtained from Engelhard Industries.
The monoLicaic catalyst substrates were nominally 15 centimeters (six inches)
long, With nominally 47 cells per square centimeter (300 cells per square
inch). These units were identified by Engelhard as Exhaust Gas Purifier PTX
616 Mod 3, Cat. No. 112834 101 and 112833 101, E.I. Ser. No. 8260001, 8260004,
8260005, and 8260006. Two additional 112384 units (Serial No. 8260002 and
8260003) were provided as spares. Both the three-way and the oxidation
catalysts utilized noble metals.
-------
B. System Assembly and Emissions Testing
The system consisted of a 1975 Chevrolet 350 CID heavy-duty basic engine,
a throttle-body fuel-injection (TBI) system with feedback fuel control, and
three-way and oxidation catalysts obtained from Engelhard. All components of
the TBI system used in this project were the standard components used on the
1982 Corvette 350 engine. A good general description of the TBI system has
been provided by GM in SAE Paper 800164. No exhaust gas recirculation system
was used. For these evaluations, dual exhaust systems were utilized. Due to
installation interferences, and after it was determined that good mixture
balance existed between the two exhaust banks on the engine, the exhausts
were not combined and the single oxygen sensor was located in only one bank
of the exhaust.
Each bank of the exhaust system consisted of an exhaust manifold with air
injection, about three feet of exhaust tubing, a three-way catalytic converter
(Engelhard 112834), a four inch section of exhaust tubing with air injection,
and an oxidation catalytic converter (Engelhard 112833). The exhausts from
the two banks were combined after the oxidation catalytic converters. In one
of the exhaust banks, an oxygen sensor was installed in the pipe between the
exhaust manifold and the three-way catalytic converter.
Following assembly and a significant amount of debugging, the throttle-body
Electronic Fuel Injection system was fully functional, and engine operation
was very good with this system. Maximum power output with this system and with
the stock carburetor system are given in Table 2. These data were obtained
prior to installation of the emissions controls. At an engine speed of 3800
rpm, the power output was essentially the same with the EFI system as it was
with the engine in its standard configuration. At lower engine speeds, maxi-
mum power output was higher with the EFI system.
TABLE 2. POWER OUTPUT COMPARISON 1975 MODEL CHEVROLET
350 HEAVY-DUTY GASOLINE ENGINE
Maximum Power Output
Engine
Speed, rpm
1600
2000
2400
2800
3200
3800
Std.
kW
55
70
86
98
107
116
Conf.
BHp
74
94
115
132
144
155
EFI Sys.
kW
61
77
92
106
115
116
BHp
82
103
124
142
154
156
-------
The relationship between carbon monoxide emissions and engine power output
with the EFI system is shown in Figure 1. Based on these data, it appears that
the fuel-to-air ratio is controlled from the output of the oxygen sensor (i.e.,
closed loop operation) up to approximately 60 percent of maximum torque.
Between 60 and 90 percent of maximum torque, the CO emissions increased to a
value of two to three percent. When the Throttle Position Switch (TPS) was
left operable, the CO emissions increased to between six and eight percent
at maximum torque. With the TPS disconnected (i.e., no WOT signal to the
fuel control), the CO emissions decreased to approximately two percent at
maximum attainable torque. Maximum attainable torque decreased by a couple
percent with the TPS disconnected.
An effort was then made to determine the parameters associated with the
system going off control by the oxygen sensor (i.e., open loop operation). It
appears that the primary parameter is the intake manifold pressure as sensed
by the Manifold Air Pressure Sensor (MAP). In addition to controlling when
the system goes into open loop operation, however, the intake manifold
pressure also is used to establish the basic fuel flow. Therefore, controlling
the MAP signal to maintain closed loop operation is not applicable, since it
limits the torque attainable to 60 percent of maximum.
Additional effort involved the interface between the programmable read
only memory (PROM or engine calibration unit) and the electronic control
module (ECM). It was determined that control modifications apparently have
to come from within the PROM or the ECM, rather than at the interface between
them. At this point is was decided to provide sufficient air injection and
run some initial emissions evaluations prior to applying additional efforts
toward modification of the fuel control parameters.
To provide sufficient air to maximize oxidation over the transient cycle,
it was necessary to install a second air pump. Each pump had a displacement
of 0.3 liters (19 cu. in.) and a maximum rated output flow of 0.85 cubic
meters per minute (30 cfm). The resulting supplemental air system operated
as follows: The output of one air pump was injected into both exhaust mani-
folds during cold engine operation; the output of the other air pump was
supplied between the three-way and the oxidation catalytic converters on
one exhaust bank. After the engine was "warmed-up," the output of the one
air pump was switched from the exhaust manifolds to between the three-way
and the oxidation catalytic converters on the exhaust bank opposite to that
supplied b;- the other air pump. After "warm-up," the air was provided between
the three-way and oxidation catalytic converters during all engine operation,
including cut-throttle operation. During the limited operation with this
system, no backfires were apparent in the exhaust.
The air injection was partially optimized during several hot-start tests
and subsequently during a couple of cold-start tests. During these tests, the
exhaust oxygen and carbon monoxide (CO) levels were continuously observed.
Maximum throttle was restricted to the point at which the air supplied was
sufficient to achieve post-catalyst CO levels "at WOT" of essentially
-------
8
m
§
H
• - 1200 rpm
• — 2000 rpm
A — 2800 rpm
20
40 60
% of Torque
Without WOT
Signal from
the TPS
80
100
Figure 1. Exhaust CO vs percent of engine maximum torque
10
-------
negligible concentrations. This resulted in a reduction in maximum torque of
about two percent compared to EFI data in Table 2. Engine out CO levels were
not measured during these evaluations, but from previous evaluations, the
engine out CO levels are known to exceed several percent.
Difficulties encountered during these and subsequent emissions evaluations
included malfunction of the idle reset system (engine did not return to the
standard idle operation) and air leakage into the exhaust manifold after the
air supply switched from the exhaust manifold to the locations between the
three-way and oxidation catalysts. The malfunction in the idle reset system
was uncovered and repaired prior to the last two cold-start emissions tests.
The leaky air switching valve (the leak appeared to be intermittent and
therefore, the extent of leakage at any specific time is not known) was
discovered after completion of the initial emissions evaluations.
The results of the cold-start emissions evaluations, subsequent to
installation of the second air pump, are included in Appendix A, and are
summarized in Tables 3 and 4. In spite of the idle reset malfunction, and
the apparent inconsistent leakage of the air switching valve, the results
have reasonable repeatability. In some of the cold-start tests, minor
failure of one or two of the statistical requirements occurred; these pri-
marily resulted from the idle reset malfunction. It also appears that the
repair of the idle reset resulted in some reduction in fuel consumption
(i.e., BSFC in Tests 10 and 11).
Of interest is the percent contribution of the initial emissions sample
bag from each cycle (hot-start and cold-start) to the composite HC and CO
emissions values. Such results from Test 9, an apparently representative
test, are as follows:
Contribution to Total
Sample Cycle Composite Value, %
Bag Segment HC CO C02 NOX
1 NYNF 59 62 10 12
1 & 2 NYNF & LANF 87 76
Based 01. t:;ese results for Test 9, the initial emissions sample bags for the
cold- and hot-start cycles contributed about sixty percent of the total com-
posite HC and CO emissions. The fourth emissions sample bags (Bags 1 and 4
involve the same NYNF operating cycle) contributed approximately five percent
of the total composite HC and fifteen percent of the total composite CO.
Therefore, the initial starts, until the catalytic emissions control systems
reached maximum efficiency, accounted for approximately fifty-five percent
of the total composite HC and forty-five percent of the total composite CO.
Other major contributors to HC and CO emissions, appear to be the rapid
acceleration and deceleration movements of the engine throttle; this is based
on continuous visual observation of the HC and CO emission levels during the
cycle.
11
-------
TABLE 3. EPA TRANSIENT CYCLE TEST RESULTS
Metric Units
Composite*
Test
5
6
7
9
10
11
Avg
Test
5
6
7
9
10
11
Test
5
6
7
9
j.0
11
Work,
kW-hr
7.81
7.63
7.63
7.62
8.02
8.02
7.8
Work,
kW-hr
7.99
7.84
7.78
7.73
8.23
8.12
Work,
kW-hr
7.78
7.59
7.60
7.60
7.99
8.00
HC
0.55
0.68
0.49
0.54
0.33
0.53
0.52
HC
1.97
2.18
1.66
1.49
0.60
1.91
HC
0.31
0.43
0.30
0.38
0.28
0.30
Emissions,
CO
6.80
8.12
6.19
7.15
6.81
10.19
7.5
Cold
Emissions,
CO
20.87
22.43
24.52
21.02
11.15
23.49
Hot
Emissions,
CO
4.46
5.74
3.14
4.84
6.09
7.97
g/kW-hr
CO?
1172
1206
1202
1177
1113
1142
1169
Cycle
g/kW-hr
C02
1220
1234
1247
1219
1178
1210
Cycle
g/kW-hr
C02
1164
1201
1195
1170
1102
1131
NOX
3.01
3.03
3.95
3.61
3.29
3.31
3.37
NOX
2.71
2.84
3.47
3.16
3.30
3.27
NOX
3.06
3.06
4.03
3.69
3.29
3.32
SFC,
kg/kW-hr
0.373
0.385
0.383
0.375
0.355
0.366
0.373
SFC,
kg/kW-hr
0.397
0.402
0.407
0.396
0.377
0.395
SFC,
kg/kW-hr
0.369
0.382
0.379
0.371
0.351
0.361
Comments
a,b
a,b
a,b
a,b
a,c
a,c
Comments
a,b
a,b
a,b
a,b
a,c
a,c
Comments
a,b
a,b
a,b
a,b
a,c
a,c
*Composite = l/7*Cold + 6/7XRot
Intermittent leakage of the air switching valve
Malfunction of the idle reset system
cldle reset system was repaired and was functioning properly
12
-------
TABLE 4. EPA TRANSIENT CYCLE TEST RESULTS
English Units
Composite*
Test
5
6
7
9
10
11
Avg.
Test
5
6
7
9
10
11
Test
5
6
7
9
I.)
11
Work,
hp-hr
10.47
10.23
10.22
10.21
10.76
10.74
10.4
Work,
hp-hr
10.71
10.51
10.43
10.36
11.04
10.89
Work,
hp-hr
10.43
10.18
10.19
10.19
10.71
10.72
Emissions,
HC
0.41
0.51
0.37
0.40
0.24
0.39
0.39
CO
5.08
6.06
4.62
5.33
5.08
7.59
5.6
Cold
g/hp-hr
CO 2
874
900
897
877
830
851
872
Cycle
NOX
2.24
2.26
2.95
2.69
2.46
2.47
2.51
Emissions, g/hp-hr
HC
1.47
1.63
1.24
1.11
0.45
1.42
HC
0.23
0.32
0.23
0.28
0.21
0.22
CO
15.56
16.73
18.28
15.68
8.31
17.51
Hot
Emissions
CO
3.33
4.28
2.34
3.61
4.54
5.94
C02
910
921
930
909
878
902
Cycle
, g/hp-hr
C02
868
896
891
872
822
843
NOX
2.02
2.12
2.59
2.36
2.46
2.44
NOX
2.28
2.28
3.01
2.75
2.46
2.47
BSFC,
Ib/hp-hr
0.614
0.633
0.629
0.617
0.583
0.601
0.613
BSFC,
Ib/hp-hr
0.653
0.662
0.669
0.651
0.620
0.649
BSFC,
Ib/hp-hr
0.607
0.628
0.622
0.611
0.577
0.593
Comments
a,b
a,b
a,b
a,b
a,c
a,c
Comments
a,b
a,b
a,b
a,b
a,c
a,c
Comments
a,b
a,b
a,b
a,b
a,c
a,c
*Composite = l/7>
-------
The maximum exhaust temperature at the catalytic converters, during
operation over the transient cycle, was 870°C (1600°F). This maximum tem-
perature occurred at the entrance to the three-way catalytic converters during
the Los Angeles Freeway (LAP) portion of the test cycle. The maximum tempera-
ture is below the maximum short-term safe operating temperature of 1800°F
specified by Engelhard. No attempt was made to determine maximum temperature
during stabilized operation at maximum power of the engine.
At the request of the EPA Project Officer, system optimization was dis-
continued and several evaluations were conducted over a transient cycle
developed by the MVMA. The results of these evaluations are included in
Appendix B and summarized in Tables 5 and 6. There was no significant
difference between the results of the third test which met all statistical
requirements for speed and load control, and the results of the first two
tests which were slightly outside the statistical limits.
Average results for these MVMA transient cycle tests are compared with
the previous results as follows:
Composite Value Over the Transient Cycles
Emissions, g/XW-hr SFC
Cycle kW-hr
9.0 0.45 9.8 1103 3.1 0.35
7.8 0.52 7.5 1169 3.4 0.37
The MVMA cycle had a higher composite power output and produced lower HC and
NOX emissions and a reduction in BSFC.
With the exception of the very limited optimization of the system con-
ducted during the application of the system to the engine, optimization
evaluations were not conducted. Optimization would be expected to provide
additional reductions in emissions, and possibly fuel consumption.
14
-------
TABLE 5. MVMA TRANSIENT CYCLE TEST RESULTS
Metric Units
Composite*
Test
21
22
23
Avg.
Test
21
22
23
Test
21
22
23
Work,
kW-hr
9.02
8.91
8.96
8.96
Work,
kW-hr
9.15
9.03
9.15
Work,
kW-hr
9.00
8.89
8.93
Emission , g/kW-hr
HC
0.46
0.43
0.46
0.45
HC
1.66
1.33
1.39
HC
0.26
0.28
0.31
CO
9.86
9.93
9.68
9.8
Cold
Emissions,
CO
21.44
10.57
10.94
Hot
Emissions,
CO
7.93
8.32
7.97
C02
1097
1115
1097
1105
Cycle
g/kW-hr
C02
1160
1177
1165
Cycle
gAW-hr
C02
1087
1105
1086
NOX
3.00
3.14
3.09
3.08
NOX
2.94
2.86
2.89
NOX
3.01
3.19
3.12
SFC,
kg/kW-hr
0.351
0.357
0.351
0.353
SFC,
kgAW-hr
0.378
0.382
0.379
SFC,
kgAW-hr
0.347
0.353
0.346
* Composite = l/7xcold + 6/7xHot
15
-------
TABLE 6. MVMA TRANSIENT CYCLE TEST RESULTS
English Units
Composite*
Test
21
22
23
Avg.
Test
21
22
23
Test
21
22
23
Work,
hp-hr
12.10
11.95
12.02
12.02
Work,
kW-hr
12.27
12.11
12.28
Work,
hp-hr
12.07
11.92
11.98
Emissions,
HC
0.35
0.32
0.35
0.34
CO
7.35
7.40
7.22
7.3
Cold
Emissions,
'HC
1.24
0.99
1.04
HC
0.20
0.21
0.23
CO
15.99
14.59
14.87
Hot
Emission
CO
5.91
6.20
5.94
g/hp-hr
C02
819
832
818
823
Cycle
gAW-hr
C02
865
877
869
Cycle
NOX
2.23
2.34
2.30
2.29
NOX
2.19
2.13
2.15
, g/hp-hr
C02
811
824
810
NOX
2.24
2.38
2.33
BSFC,
Ib /hp-hr
0.577
0.587
0.577
0.580
SFC,
kgAW-hr
0.621
0.628
0.622
BSFC,
Ib/hp-hr
0.570
0.580
0.570
* Composite = l/7xcold + 6/7xnot
16
-------
REFERENCES
1. Ingalls, M.N., and Mason, R.L., "Heavy-Duty Fuel Economy Program -
Phase I, Specific Analysis of Certain Existing Data," Final Report
to the Environmental Protection Agency under Contract No. 68-03-2220,
Report No. EPA 460/3-77-001, January 1977.
2. Urban, C.M., amd Springer, K.J., "Heavy-Duty Fuel Economy Program
Phase II - Evaluation of Emission Control Technology Approaches,"
Final Report to the Environmental Protection Agency under Contract
No. 68-03-2220, Report No. EPA 460/3-77-010, July 1977.
3. Urban, C.M., "Heavy-Duty Fuel Economy Program Phase III - Transient
Cycle Evaluations of the Advanced Emissions Control Technology Engine,"
Final Report to the Environmental Protection Agency under Contract No.
68-03-2220, Report No. 460/3-78-005, May 1978.
4. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 86, Subpart N.
17
-------
APPENDICES
A. Computer Printouts for the EPA
Heavy-Duty Engine Transient Cycle Tests
B. Computer Printouts for the
MVMA Transient Cycle Tests
-------
APPENDIX A
Computer Printouts for the EPA Heavy-Duty
Engine Transient Cycle Tests
Note: These data are summarized, along with comments, in
Tables 3 and 4 of this report.
-------
TABLE
ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
C-TRANS.
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 1(350. CID) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 744.22 MM HG(29.30 IN H«O
DRY BULB TEMP. 17.8 DEG CC64.0 DEC M
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER OIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20ON. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TIME SECONDS
TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE
HC BCKGRD
CO SAMPLE
CO BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
C02 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
M DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LB)
KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
7.99 ( 10.71)
1.97 ( 1.47)
20.87 ( 15.56)
1220. ( 910.)
2.71 ( 2.02)
TEST NO.5 RUN1
DATE 1/10/83
TIME 12:45
DYNO NO. 2
RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY
GASOLINE EM-338-F
BAG CART NO. 1
, ENGINE-48. PCT , CVS-25. PCT
6.2 GM/KG( 43.4 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F.
.8708
1
NYNF
660.4 (26.0)
444.5 (17.5)
43.3 (110.0)
7168.
272.1
189.4 ( 6691.)
14. O/ 3/ 140.
1.4/ 3/ 14.
24. 9/ 3/ 577.
.4/ 3/ 9.
89.5/12/ .40
fl.9/12/ .04
7.9/ 2/ 8.
.8/ 2/ 1.
28.48
126.
559.
.36
7.1
13.82
123.37
1251.7
2.25
.470 1.04)
.67 .90)
20.53 15.31)
183.27 136.67)
1859.46 1386.60)
3.34 2.49)
.698 1.147)
2
LANF
685.8 (27.0)
457.2 (18.0)
44.4 (112.0)
8088.
307.1
212.7 ( 7512.)
24. 3/ 2/ 24.
14. I/ 2/ 14.
67.2/.12/ 151.
3.9/12/ 7.
70.3/11/ .62
7.5/11/ .04
16. 3/ 2/ 16.
1.0/ 2/ 1.
21.16
11.
141.
.57
15.3
1.33
35.01
2232.3
5.44
.722 ( 1.59)
1.52 ( 2.04)
.88 ( .65)
23.06 ( 17.19)
1470.22 (1096.34)
3.58 ( 2.67)
.476 ( .782)
3
LAF
711.2 (28.0)
469.9 (18.5)
46.1 (115.0)
8319.
316.1
217.3 ( 7674.)
15. 6/ 2/ 16.
13.9/ 2/ 14.
27.5/13/ 25.
5.4/13/ 5.
75. 9/ 3/ 1.38
3.8/ 3/ .06
34. 8/ 21 35.
I.I/ 2/ 1.
9.65
3.
20.
1.33
33.8
.39
5.06
5302.9
12.24
1.675 ( 3.69)
5.16 ( 6.92)
.08 ( .06)
.98 ( .73)
1027.54 ( 766.23)
2.37 ( 1.77)
.324 ( .533)
4
NYNF
660.4 (26.0)
444.5 (17.5)
43.3 (110.0)
7160.
272.0
189.2 ( 6684.)
14. 8/ 2/ 15.
13.2/ 2/ 13.
19.9/13/ 18.
3.5/13/ 3.
77.1/12/ .33
15.4/12/ .05
6.3/ 2/ 6.
,9/ 2/ 1.
40.33
2.
15.
.28
5.4
.21
3.26
961.0
1.71
.305 (
.64 (
.33 (
5.13 ( 3
1511.63 ( 1127
2.69 ( 2
.479 (
.67)
.85)
.25)
.83)
.22)
.00)
788)
Note: Intermittant leakage of the air switching valve and
malfunction of the idle reset system
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) .397 ( .653)
-------
TABLE
ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
H-TRANS.
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 743.71 MM HGC29.28 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. 20.0 DEG CC68.0 DEG F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20CIN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TIME SECONDS
TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES (SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
C02 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
P NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
I
w DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CO 2 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LB)
KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR )
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO2 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR )
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR )
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
7.78 ( 10.43)
.31 (
4.46 (
1164. (
3.06 (
.23)
3.33)
868.)
2.28)
TEST NO.5
DATE 1/10/83
TIME 13:25
DYNO NO. 2
RUN1
GASOLINE EM-338-F
BAG CART NO. 1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-44. PCT , CVS-27. PCT
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 6.5 GM/KG( 45.8 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F,
.8794
1
NYNF
660.4 (26.0)
444.5 (17.5)
43.3 (110.0)
7161.
271.9
189.1 ( 6680.)
2
LANF
685.8 (27.0)
457.2 (18.0)
44.4 (112.0)
8083.
307.0
212.4 ( 7502.)
3
LAF
711.2 (28.0)
469.9 (18.5)
46.1 (115.0)
8318.
316.1
217.1 ( 7667.)
4
NYNF
660.4 (26.0)
444.5 (17.5)
43.3 (110.0)
7161.
272.1
189.1 ( 6680.)
22
13
50
1
73
12
9
.9/ 21
.7/ 21
.7/12/
.3/12/
.2/12/
.3/12/
.6/ 21
.4/ 2/
41.75
10.
104.
.27
9.2
1.04
22.84
925.9
2.93
.304
.57
1.83
40.19
1628.81
5.15
.535
23.
14.
108.
2.
.31
.04
10.
0.
( .67)
( .76)
( 1.36)
( 29.97)
(1214.60)
( 3.84)
( .880)
20.9/ 2/
14. 3/ 2/
18.2/13/
2.3/13/
63. 8/1 1/
7. 3/1 1/
20. O/ 2/
,5/ 2/
24.72
7.
14.
.50
19.5
.88
3.53
1931.1
6.97
.611
1.46
.60
2.42
1324.06
4.78
.419
21.
14.
17.
2.
.54
.04
20.
1.
( 1
( 1
(
( 1
( 987
( 3
I •
.35)
.96)
.45)
.80)
.35)
.57)
689)
14. 2/ 21
12. 6/ 2/
15.5/13/
1.7/13/
74. 5/ 3/
3.1/ 3/
33.4/ 21
.4/ 2/
9.86
3.
12.
1.31
33.0
.36
3.08
5222.2
12.07
1.648
5.17
.07
.60
1010.43
2.33
.319
14.
13.
14.
2.
1.36
.05
33.
0.
( 3.63)
( 6.93)
( .05)
( .45)
( 753.48)
( 1.74)
( .524)
12. I/ 2/
11. 5/ 2/
27.8/13/
1.5/13/
76.4/12/
13.1/12/
6.0/ 2/
.3/ 2/
40.74
1.
24.
.28
5.7
.10
5.24
975.4
1.82
.310
.58
.16
8.99
1671.95
3.11
.532
12.
12.
25.
1.
.33
.04
6.
0.
(
<
(
( 6
(1246
( 2
(
.68)
.78)
.12)
.70)
.77)
.32)
874)
Note: Intermittant leakage of the air switching valve and
malfunction of the idle reset system
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) .369 ( .607)
-------
TRUE
ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
C-TRANS.
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CIO) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 747.52 MM HG(29.43 IN HtM
DRY BULB TEMP. 17.8 OEG C(64.0 DEG F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER OIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TIME SECONDS
TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
HC BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
CO SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
CO BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PCT
CO2 BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PCT
NOX SAMPLE METER/RANGE/PPM
NOX BCKGRD METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
CO2 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LB)
KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
*>•
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
7.84 ( 10.51)
2.18 ( 1.63)
22.43 ( 16.73)
1234. ( 921.)
2.84 ( 2.12)
TEST NO.6
DATE 1/11/83
TIME 8:35
DYNO NO. 2
RUN1
GASOLINE EM-338-F
BAG CART NO. 1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-55. PCT , CVS-40. PCT
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 7.1 GM/KG( 49.6 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F. .8935
1
NYNF
660.4 (26.0)
444.5 (17.5)
43.3 (110.0)
7170.
272.1
190.4 ( 6724.)
2
LANF
685.8 (27.0)
457.2 (18.0)
44.4 (112.0)
8090.
307.1
213.7 ( 7549.)
3
LAF
711.2 (28.0)
469.9 (18.5)
46.1 (115.0)
8324.
316.1
218.4 ( 7715.)
4
NYNF
660.4 (26.0)
444.5 (17.5)
43.3 (110.0)
7163.
272.1
190.2 ( 6718.)
15
1
27
.I/ 3/
.O/ 3/
.I/ 3/
.1/ 3/
151.
10.
630.
88.3/12/ .
12
6
1
.6/12/
.6/ 2/
.O/ 2/
28.55
141.
615.
.35
5.6
15.52
136.37
1224.5
1.83
.469
.65
23.85
209.57
1881.72
2.82
.721
*
(
<
(
(
(
(
(
2.
39
04
7.
1.
1
17
156
1403
2
1.
.03)
.87)
.79)
.28)
.20)
.10)
185)
18. 5/ 2/
10. I/ 2/
61.3/12/
2.7/12/
69. 8/1 1/
7.6/11/
13.4/ 2/
.9/ 2/
21.44
9.
127.
.57
12.5
1.09
31.60
2216.7
4.58
.716
1.52
.72
20.81
1459.98
3.02
.471
19.
10.
135.
5.
.61
.05
13.
1.
( 1.58)
( 2.04)
( .54)
( 15.52)
(1088.71)
( 2.25)
( .775)
11. O/ 2/
9.8/ 2/
25. 0/1 3/
5.0/13/
74. 9/ 3/
3.3/ 3/
37. 7/ 2/
.8/ 2/
9.80
2.
18.
1.32
37.0
.28
4.57
5276.2
13.81
1.666
5.09
.05
.90
1037.39
2.71
.328
11.
10.
23.
5.
1.36
.05
38.
1.
( 3.67)
( 6.82)
( .04)
( .67)
( 773.58)
( 2.02)
( .538)
11.5/ 2/
9.9/ 21
21.0/13/
4.5/13/
76.2/12/
14.6/12/
6.9/ 21
.6/ 21
40.96
2.
15.
.28
6.3
.20
3.29
958.8
2.05
.304
.58
.35
5.64
1643.45
3.52
.521
12.
10.
19.
4.
.32
.05
7.
1.
(
<
(
( 4
(1225
( 2
\ m
.67)
.78)
.26)
.21)
.52)
.62)
857)
Note: Intermittant leakage of the air switching valve and
malfunction of the idle reset system
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) .402 ( .662)
-------
TABLE
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CIO) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 747.78 MM H6(29.44 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. 20.0 DEG C(68.0 DEG F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20CIN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. CCDEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TIME SECONDS
TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC
HC
CO
CO
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
CO2 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CO2 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LB)
KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
7.59 ( 10.18)
.43 ( .32)
4.28)
5.74
1201.
3.06
896.)
2.28)
ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
H-TRANS.
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
TEST NO.6
DATE 1/11/83
TIME 9:15
DYNO NO. 2
RUN1
GASOLINE EM-338-F
BAG CART NO. 1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-46. PCT , CVS-32. PCT
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 6.8 GM/KG( 47.7 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F.
.8861
1
NYNF
660.4 (26
444.5 (17
.0)
.5)
43.3 (110.0)
7164.
272.1
190.3 ( 6721.)
29
11
66
1
74
14
9
.9/ 2/
.3/ 2/
.9/12/
.9/12/
.1/12/
.4/12/
.2/ 2/
.5/ 2/
40.53
19.
145.
.26
8.7
2.07
32.03
922.6
2.81
.309
.56
3.69
57.10
1644.74
5.01
.550
30.
11.
150.
4.
.31
.05
9.
1.
( .68)
( .75)
( 2.75)
( 42.58)
(1226.49)
( 3.74)
( .905)
2
LANF
685.8 (27
457.2 (18
.0)
.0)
44.4 (112.0)
8085.
307.1
213.7 ( 7547.)
17. 6/ 21
11.4/ 21
22.7/13/
3.4/13/
64. 0/1 1/
8.2/11/
18. 2/ 2/
.5/ 21
24.61
7.
17.
.49
17.7
.82
4.32
1930.4
6.42
.612
1.44
.57
2.99
1337.31
4.45
.424
18.
11.
21.
3.
.54
.05
18.
1.
( 1.35)
( 1.94)
( .42)
( 2.23)
( 997.23)
( 3.32)
( .696)
71
3
LAF
1.2 (28.
469.9 (18.
46.1 (115
8319.
316.1
0)
5)
.0)
218.4 ( 7713.)
12
11
16
3
75
3
32
.4/ 2/
.3/ 2/
.0/13/
.3/13/
.21 3/ 1
.7/ 3/
,9/ 2/
.6/ 2/
9.76
2.
11.
1.32
32.4
.28
2.88
5277.4
11.98
1.665
5.03
.06
.57
1049.98
2.38
.331
12.
11.
15.
3.
.37
.06
33.
1.
( 3.67)
( 6.74)
( .04)
( .43)
( 782.97)
( 1.78)
( .545)
4
NYNF
660.4 (26
444.5 (17
.0)
.5)
43.3 (110.0)
7162.
272.1
190.2 ( 6719.)
12
11
25
4
77
14
6
.O/ 2/
.7/ 2/
.7/13/
.2/13/
.7/12/
.6/12/
.8/ 2/
.6/ 2/
39.91
1.
19.
.28
6.2
07
4.31
987.4
2.00
.313
.56
.12
7.69
1760.25
3.57
.559
12.
12.
24.
4.
.33
.05
7.
1.
5
1312
( 2
(
.69)
.75)
.09)
.74)
.62)
.66)
919)
Note: Intermittant leakage of the air switching valve and
malfunction of the idle reset system
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) .382 ( .628)
-------
TABLE ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
C-TRANS.
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 736.85 MM HG(29.01 IN Hiij
DRY BULB TEMP. 17.2 DEG C(63.0 DEG F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER OIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TIME SECONDS
TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
TEST NO.7
DATE 1/21/83
TIME 8:10
DYNO NO. 2
RUN1
GASOLINE EM-338-F
BAG CART NO. 1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-56. PCT , CVS-27. PCT
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 7.1 GM/KG( 49.5 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F.
.8930
1
NYNF
698.5 (27.5)
406.4 (16.0)
43.3 (110.0)
7167.
272.0
188.1 ( 6645.)
2
LANF
711.2 (28.0)
431.8 (17.0)
44.4 (112.0)
8087.
307.0
210.9 ( 7450.)
3
LAP
723.9 (28.5)
457.2 (18.0)
46.1 (115.0)
8319.
316.0
215.3 ( 7603.)
4
NYNF
698.5 (27.5)
406.4 (16.0)
43.9 (111.0)
7160.
272.0
187.6 ( 6626.)
>
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
C02 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
HC
HC
CO
CO
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LB)
KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
7.78 (
1.66 (
24.52 (
1247. (
3.47 (
10.43)
1.24)
18.28)
930.)
2.59)
11
1
29
85
11
6
.I/ 3/
.O/ 3/
.9/ 3/
.3/ 3/
.3/12/
.9/12/
.3/ 2/
.4/ 2/
29.46
101.
681.
.34
5.9
11.00
149.22
1157.4
1.90
.450
.63
17.50
237.50
1842.16
3.02
.716
111.
10.
699.
7.
.37
.04
6.
0.
( .99)
( .84)
( 13.05)
( 177.11)
(1373.70)
( 2.26)
( 1.177)
21. 9/ 2/
10. 7/ 2/
65.6/12/
2.4/12/
69.9/11/
7.4/11/
16. 8/ 2/
,5/ 2/
21.35
12.
140.
.57
16.3
1.42
34.28
2197.3
5.88
.711
1.49
.96
23.03
1476.26
3.95
.478
22.
11.
147.
4.
.61
.04
17.
1.
( 1
( 2
(
( 17
(1100
( 2
I •
.57)
.00)
.71)
.17)
.85)
.95)
785)
11.5/ 21
10.6/ 21
24.1/13/
5.1/13/
77. 3/ 3/ \
3.8/ 3/
45. 9/ 21
.9/ 21
9.46
2.
17.
1.36
45.1
.25
4.30
5368.2
16 58
1.695
5.10
.05
.84
1052.38
3.25
.332
12.
11.
22.
5.
1.41
.06
46.
1.
( 3.74)
( 6.84)
( .04)
( .63)
( 784.76)
( 2.42)
( .546)
13
11
18
3
78
15
9
1
.O/ 2/
.2/ 2/
.3/13/
.5/13/
.6/12/
.6/12/
.3/ 2/
.I/ 2/
39.40
2.
13.
.28
8 2
.23
2.91
978.6
2.64
.310
.56
.40
5.19
1744.43
4.70
.553
13.
11.
17.
3.
.34
.05
9.
1.
(
<
(
( 3
(1300
( 3
* •
.68)
.75)
.30)
.87)
.82)
.51)
909)
Note: Intermittant leakage of the air switching valve and
malfunction of the idle reset system
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) .407 ( .669)
-------
TABLE
ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
H-TRANS.
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 737.11 MM HG(29.02 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. 20.6 DEG C<69.0 DEG F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H2OON. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TIME SECONDS
TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC
HC
CO
CO
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
CO2 SAMPLE
CO2 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CO2 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LB)
KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
7.60 (
.30 (
3.14 (
1195. (
4.03 (
10.19)
.23)
2.34)
891.)
3.01)
TEST NO.7
DATE 1/21/83
TIME 8:50
DYNO NO. 2
RUN1
GASOLINE EM-338-F
BAG CART NO. 1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-42. PCT , CVS-39. PCT
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 6.5 GM/KG( 45.7 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F.
.8788
698
406
43
188
20.
58l
3.
72.
12.
13.
•
1
NYNF
.5 (27.
.4 (16.
.3 (110
7163.
272.1
5)
0)
.0)
.1 ( 6643.)
I/ 2/
2/ 2/
2/13/
0/13/
9/12/
6/12/
4/ 2/
If 2/
42.68
9.
52.
.26
12.7
.99
11.38
911.7
4.02
.294
.55
1.82
20.84
1669.74
7.36
.539
20.
11.
56.
3.
.31
.04
13.
1.
( .65)
( .73)
( 1.36)
( 15.54)
(1245.13)
( 5.49)
( .885)
711
431
44
211
17.
10.
14.
3.
63.
7.
24.
1.
2
LANF
.2 (28.
.8 (17.
.4 (112
8087.
307.1
0)
0)
.0)
.0 ( 7453.)
7/ 21
8/ 2/
9/13/
4/13/
7/11/
4/11/
O/ 21
Q/ 21
24.80
7.
10.
.49
23.0
.89
2.53
1911.8
8.17
.605
1.44
.62
1.75
1324.41
5.66
.419
18.
11.
14.
3.
.54
.04
24.
1.
1.33)
1.94)
.46)
1.31)
987.61)
4.22)
( .689)
723
457
46
215
13.
12.
19.
4.
76.
4.
45.
1.
3
LAF
.9 (28.
.2 (18.
.1 (115
8318.
316.1
5)
0)
.0)
.3 ( 7605.)
4/ 2/
5/ 2/
2/13/
2/13/
5/ 3/ 1
O/ 3/
6/ 2/
3/ 2/
9.57
2.
13.
1.34
44.4
.27
3.37
5293.1
16.08
1.671
5.05
.05
.67
1048.43
3.19
.331
13.
13.
17.
4.
.40
.06
46.
1.
( 3.68)
( 6.77)
( .04)
( .50)
( 781.81)
( 2.38)
( .544)
698
406
43
188
13.
12.
36.
3.
77.
14.
8.
1.
4
NYNF
.5 (27.
.4 (16.
.3 (110
7160.
272.1
5)
0)
.0)
.0 ( 6640.)
4/ 2/
4/ 2/
6/13/
5/13/
0/12/
4/12/
6/ 21
2/ 2/
40.23
1.
30.
.28
7.4
.14
6.62
965.1
7.35
.308
.56
.25
11.80
1720.53
4.19
.548
13.
12.
34.
3.
.33
.05
9.
1.
(
<
(
(
(128
(
(
.68)
.75)
.19)
8.80)
3.00)
3.12)
.902)
Note: Intermittant leakage of the air switching valve and
malfunction of the idle reset system
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) .379 ( .622)
-------
TABLE ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
C-TRANS.
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 739.14 MM HG(29.10 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. 19.4 DEG C(67.0 DEG F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER OIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. OEG. C(OEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TIME SECONDS
TOTAL FLOW STO. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC SAMPLE
HC BCKGRD
CO SAMPLE
CO BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
C02 BCKGRD
> NOX SAMPLE
^ NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LB)
KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
7.73 ( 10.36)
1.49 ( 1.11)
21.02 ( 15.68)
1219. ( 909.)
3.16 ( 2.36)
TEST NO.9
DATE 1/25/83
TIME 3:23
DYNO NO. 2
RUN1
GASOLINE EM-338-F
BAG CART NO. 1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-30. PCT , CVS-26. PCT
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 4.3 GM/KG( 30.3 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F. .8262
1
NYNF
685.8 (27.0)
419.1 (16.5)
43.3 (110.0)
7165.
272.0
188.5 ( 6656.)
2
LANF
698.5 (27.5)
431.8 (17.0)
44.4 (112.0)
8086.
307.0
211.6 ( 7475.)
3
LAF
711.2 (28.0)
444.5 (17.5)
46.1 (115.0)
8317.
316.0
216.2 ( 7637.)
4
NYNF
685.8 (27.0)
419.1 (16.5)
43.9 (11J-.0)
7159.
272.0
188.0 ( 6639.)
10
1
25
83
11
7
.O/ 3/
.I/ 3/
.6/ 3/
.I/ 3/
.9/12/
.0/12/
.8/ 2/
.5/ 2/
30.78
89.
582.
.33
7.3
9.71
127.82
1142.0
2.18
.433
.64
15.10
198.71
1775.45
3.39
.673
100.
11.
594.
2.
.37
.04
8.
1.
( .95)
( .86)
( 11.26)
( 148.18)
(1323.95)
( 2.53)
( 1.107)
20.8/ 2/
11.9/ 2/
95.7/13/
2.3/13/
67. 0/1 1/
6.4/11/
19. 5/ 2/
,5/ 2/
22.81
9.
93.
.54
19.0
1.15
22.98
2091.1
6.36
.672
1.48
.78
15.52
1411.99
4.30
.454
21.
12.
97.
2.
.58
.04
20.
1.
( 1
( 1
(
( 11
(1052
( 3
1 •
.48)
.99)
.58)
.57)
.92)
.20)
746)
14. 3/ 2/
11.8/ 2/
31.0/13/
3.1/13/
74. 9/ 3/ 1
3.0/ 3/
41. O/ 2/
.9/ 2/
9.79
4.
25.
1.32
40.2
.46
6.31
5239.7
13.74
1.655
5.03
.09
1.25
1040.93
2.73
.329
14.
12.
29.
3.
.36
.05
41.
1.
< 3.65)
( 6.75)
( .07)
( .93)
( 776.23)
( 2.03)
( .541)
13.4/ 2/
11.8/ 2/
29.1/13/
2.3/13/
74.5/12/
12.1/12/
8. I/ 2/
.8/ 2/
42.01
2.
24.
.27
7.3
.20
5.33
946.3
2.17
.301
.57
.36
9.37
1664.71
3.83
.530
13.
12.
27.
2.
.31
.04
8.
1.
6
1241
2
t •
.66}
.76)
.27)
.99)
.37)
.85)
871)
Note: Intermittant leakage of the air switching valve and
malfunction of the idle reset system
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) .396 ( .651)
-------
TABLE
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 738.63 MM HG(29.08 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. 22.8 DEG C<73.0 DEG F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H2CHIN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C
-------
LE ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
C-TRANS.
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 742.44 MM HGC29.23 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. 19.4 DEG C(67.0 OEG F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20MN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TIME SECONDS
TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC
HC
CO
CO
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
CO2 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CO2 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LB)
KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
8.23 ( 11.04)
.60 (
11.15 (
1178. (
3.30 (
.377 (
.45)
8,31)
878.)
2.46)
.620)
TEST NO.10 RUN1
DATE 1/26/83
TIME 12:57
DYNO NO. 2
RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY
GASOLINE EM-338-F
BAG CART NO. 1
, ENGJNE-29. PCT , CVS-27. PCT
4.1 GM/KG( 28.6 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F.
.8210
1
NYNF
685.8 (27.
419.1 (16.
43.3 (110
7163.
271.9
0)
5)
.0)
189.3 ( 6686.)
39. B/ 2/
9.8/ 2/
40.
10.
72. 8/1 I/ 313.
.8/11/
92.3/12/
11.3/12/
6.5/ 21
.3/ 2/
29.68
30.
305.
.38
6.2
3.31
67.29
1316.8
1.85
.452
.91
3.66
74.35
1454.97
2.04
.499
2.
.42
.04
7.
0.
( 1.00)
( 1.21)
( 2.73)
( 55.45)
(1084.97)
( 1.52)
( .821)
698
431
44
212
17.
9.
62.
2.
67.
6.
21.
*
2
LANF
.5 (27.
.8 (17.
.4 (112
8083.
307.0
5)
0)
.0)
.5 ( 7507.)
I/ 2/
I/ 2/
5/13/
3/13/
6/11/
7/11/
6/ 2/
5/ 2/
22.68
8.
57.
.54
21.1
1.03
14.10
2121.1
7.05
.677
1.56
.66
9.06
1363.43
4.53
.435
17.
9.
60.
2.
.58
.04
22.
1.
( 1.49)
( 2.09)
( .49)
( 6.76)
(1016.71)
( 3.38)
( .715)
711
444
46
217
11.
8.
20.
2.
74.
3.
48.
*
3
LAF
.2 (28.
.5 (17.
.1 (115
8317.
316.0
0)
5)
.0)
.2 ( 7673.)
4/ 2/
7/ 2/
8/T3/
8/13/
7/ 3/ 1
O/ 3/
I/ 2/
9/ 2/
9.83
4.
16.
1.32
47.3
.45
4.06
5248.0
16.13
1.657
5.06
.09
.80
1036.41
3.19
.327
11.
9.
19.
3.
.36
.05
48.
1.
( 3.65)
( 6.79)
( .07)
( .60)
( 772.85)
( 2.38)
( .538)
4
NYNF
685.8 (27.
419.1 (16.
43
189
9.
8.
34.
2.
78.
13.
8.
•
.3 (110
7160.
272.0
0)
5)
.0)
.2 ( 6683.)
9/ 2/
7/ 2/
4/13/
8/13/
7/12/
8/12/
I/ 2/
9/ 2/
39.20
1.
29.
.29
7.2
.16
6.36
1010.9
2.15
.322
.71
.22
8.95
1422.70
3.02
.453
10.
9.
32.
3.
.34
.05
8.
1.
(
(
(
( 6
(1060
( 2
(
.71)
.95)
.16)
.68)
.91)
.25)
745)
Note: Interinittant leakage of the air switching valve
-------
TABLE
ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
H-TRANS.
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 742.19 MM HG(29.22 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. 20.0 DEG C(68.0 DEC F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TIME SECONDS
TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC
HC
CO
CO
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
CO2 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CO2 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LB)
KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR
-------
TABLE
ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
C-TRANS.
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 746.25 MM HG(29.38 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. 20.0 DEG C(68.0 DEG F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20
-------
TABLE
ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
H-TRANS.
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L{350. CID) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 745.49 MM HG(29.35 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. 21.7 DEC C{71.0 DEG F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20
-------
APPENDIX B
Computer Printouts for
the MVMA Transient Cycle Tests
Note: These data are summarized in Tables 5 and 6 of
this report.
-------
TABLE
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 742.70 MM HGC29.24 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. 20.0 DEG C(68.0 DEG ?
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20UN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. CCDEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TIME SECONDS
TOTAL FLOW STO. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
KJ
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
CO2 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LB)
KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
9.15 (
1.66 (
21.44 (
1160. (
2.94 (
.378 (
12.27)
1.24)
15.99)
865.)
2.19)
.621)
ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
C-TRANS.
TEST NO.21 RUN1
DATE 1/ 8/83
TIME 8:26
DYNO NO. 2
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
GASOLINE EM-338-F
BAG CART NO. 1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY
, ENGINE-52. PCT , CVS-39. PCT
7.7 GM/KG( 53.8 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F
.9094
1
NYNF
685.8 (27.
406.4 (16.
43.3 (110
7163.
272.0
0)
0)
.0)
189.6 ( 6697.)
14. O/ 3/ 1
I.I/ 3/
40.
11.
31. 4/ 3/ 736.
.I/ 3/
58. 2/1 1/
7.0/11/
8.7/ 2/
.6/ 2/
23.86
129.
718.
.44
8.1
14.16
158.47
1512.4
2.68
.569
.95
14.91
166.83
1592.17
2.82
.599
2.
.48
.04
9.
1.
( 1.26)
( 1.27)
( 11.11)
( 124.41)
(1 187.28)
( 2.10)
( .986)
711
431
45
212
16.
10.
51.
2.
77.
7.
17.
.
2
LANF
.2 (28.
.8 (17.
.0 (113
8082.
307.0
0)
0)
.0)
.2 ( 7495.)
O/ 2/
9/ 2/
8/1 2/ 1
3/12/
7/11/
2/11/
8/ 2/
7/ 2/
18.52
6.
103.
.67
17.1
.70
25.57
2604.8
6.33
.835
2.06
.34
12.39
1261.82
3.06
.404
16.
11.
10.
4.
.71
.04
18.
1.
( 1.84)
( 2.77)
( .25)
( 9.24)
( 940.94)
( 2.29)
( .665)
723
469
48
214
10.
10.
27.
4.
76.
3.
42.
•
3
LAF
.9 (28.
.9 (18.
.9 (120
8316.
316.0
5)
5)
.0)
.9 ( 7589.)
4/ 2/
4/ 2/
3/13/
6/13/
4/ 3/ 1
3/ 3/
I/ 2/
9/ 2/
9.58
1.
20.
1.35
41.3
.13
5.10
5312.3
15.43
1.677
5.24
.03
.97
1014.65
2.95
.320
10.
10.
25.
4.
.40
.05
42.
1.
( 3.70)
( 7.02)
( .02)
( .73)
( 756.62)
( 2.20)
( .527)
685
406
44
188
11.
10.
39.
5.
87.
14.
8.
1.
4
NYNF
.8 (27.
.4 (16.
.4 (112
7157.
272.0
0)
0)
.0)
.8 ( 6668.)
5/ 2/
2/ 2/
9/13/
4/13/
6/12/
0/12/
4/ 2/
O/ 2/
34.08
2.
32.
.34
7.4
.17
6.97
1182.1
2.44
.376
.90
.19
7.77
1317.01
2.72
.419
12.
10.
37.
5.
.39
.05
8.
1.
(
( 1
(
( 5
( 982
( 2
X *
.83)
.20)
.14)
.79)
.09)
.03)
689}
-------
TABLE
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 742.70 MM HG(29.24 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. 21.7 DEG C(71.0 DEG F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TIME SECONDS
TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC
HC
CO
CO
7
w
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
CO2 SAMPLE
C02 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LB)
KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC K6/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
9.00 (
.26 (
7.93
1087.
3.01
.347
12.07)
.20)
5.91)
811.)
2.24)
.570)
ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
H-TRANS.
TEST NO.21 RUN1
DATE I/ 8/83
TIME 9:06
DYNO NO. 2
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
GASOLINE EM-338-F
BAG CART NO. 1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-46. PCT , CVS-33. PCT
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 7.6 GM/KG( 53.2 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F.
.9072
1
NYNF
685.8 (27.0)
406.4 (16.0)
43.9 (111.0)
7163.
272.0
189.3 ( 6685.)
2
LANF
711.2 (28.0)
431.8 (17.0)
45.6 (114.0)
8084.
307.0
211.9 ( 7484.)
3
LAF
723.9 (28.5)
469.9 (18.5)
48.9 (120.0)
8317.
316.0
214.9 ( 7590.)
4
NYNF
685.8 (27.0)
406.4 (16.0)
44.4 (112.0)
7158.
272.0
188.8 ( 6669.)
22. 8/ 2/
11.0/ 2/
88.3/12/
2.0/12/
83.4/12/
13.5/12/
11. 5/ 2/
1.0/ 2/
34.58
12.
208.
.32
10.5
1.32
45.91
1106.6
3.46
.373
.88
1.51
52.46
1264.55
3.95
.426
23.
11.
216.
4.
.36
.05
12.
1.
( .82)
( 1.17)
( 1.13)
( 39.12)
( 942.97)
( 2.95)
( .701)
16. 4/ 2/
10. 8/ 2/
55.8/13/
4.6/13/
71.0/11/
7.3/11/
21. I/ 2/
l.O/ 2/
21.22
6.
48.
.58
20.1
.75
11.84
2262.2
7.41
.720
2.00
.37
5.91
1128.57
3.70
.359
16.
11.
53.
4.
.62
.04
21.
1.
( 1
( 2
(
( 4
( 841
( 2
(
.59)
.69)
.28)
.41)
.58)
.76)
590)
10.
10.
26.
4.
75.
3.
37.
1.
9/ 2/
5/ 2/
3/13/
6/13/
2/ 3/ 1
2/ 3/
9/ 2/
2/ 2/
9.75
1.
20.
1.33
36.8
.18
4.88
5220.8
13.73
1.648
5.24
.03
.93
997,18
2.62
.315
11.
11.
24.
4.
1.37
.05
38.
1.
( 3
( 7
(
(
( 743
( 1
(
.63)
.02)
.03)
.70)
.60)
.96)
518)
11. 8/ 2/
11.0/ 2/
47.4/13/
4.7/13/
87.8/12/
13.5/12/
8.6/ 2/
I.I/ 2/
33.91
1.
40.
.34
7.5
.12
8.72
1192.4
2.47
.380
.88
.14
9.89
1351.04
2.80
.431
12.
M.
45.
4.
.39
.05
9.
1.
{
( 1
(
( 7
(1007
( 2
I •
.84)
.18)
.10)
.37)
.47)
.09)
708)
-------
TABLE
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CID) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 734.57 MM HG(28.92 IN HC, >
DRY BULB TEMP. 20.6 DEC C(69.0 DtG F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20ON. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20ON. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(OEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TIME SECONDS
TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC
HC
CO
CO
03
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
CO2 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (L8)
KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
9.03 ( 12.11)
1.33 ( .99)
19.57 ( 14.59)
1177. ( 877.)
2.86 ( 2.13)
ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
C-TRANS.
TEST NO.22 RUN\
DATE 2/ 9/83
TIME 8:15
DYNO NO. 2
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
GASOLINE EM-338-F
BAG CART NO. 1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-55. PCT , CVS-56. PCT
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 8.6 GM/KG( 60.2 GRAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F,
.9350
1
NYNF
685.8 (27.0)
406.4 (16.0)
43.9 (111.0)
7164.
271.9
187.1 ( 6609.)
2
LANF
711.2 (28.0)
444.5 (17.5)
45.0 (113.0)
8084.
307.0
209.5 ( 7400.)
3
LAP
723.9 (28.5)
469.9 (18.5)
47.8 (118.0)
8317.
315.9
213.1 ( 7528.)
4
NYNF
685.8 (27.0)
406.4 (16.0)
44.4 (112.0)
7159.
271.9
186.7 ( 6593.)
1 1
1
29
58
6
8
.5/ 3/
.3/ 3/
.9/ 3/
.3/ 3/
.7/11/
.9/1 I/
.O/ 2/
.5/ 2/
23.90
103.
673.
.44
7.5
11.07
146.71
1513.4
2.52
.561
.93
11.93
158.19
1631.75
2.71
.605
115.
13.
699.
7.
.48
.04
8.
1.
( 1.24)
( 1.24)
( 8.90)
( 117.96)
(1216.80)
( 2.02)
( .994)
15. 8/ 2/
11. 9/ 2/
76.4/13/
2.9/13/
77. 0/1 I/
6. 9/1 I/
17. 8/ 2/
.5/ 2/
18.86
5.
70.
.66
17.3
.55
17.17
2542.9
6.49
.811
2.02
.27
8.50
1259.21
3.22
.401
16.
12.
75.
3.
.70
.04
18.
1.
( 1.79)
( 2.71)
( .20)
( 6.34)
( 938.99)
( 2.40)
{ .660)
11. 3/ 2/
11.4/ 21
26.5/13/
3.8/13/
77. 4/ 3/
3.2/ 3/
37. O/ 2/
.6/ 2/
9.44
1.
20.
1.37
36.5
.14
5.00
5355.4
13.90
1.691
5.20
.03
.96
1030.24
2.67
.325
11.
11.
24.
3.
1.42
.05
37.
1.
( 3
( 6
768
1
•
.73)
.97)
.02)
.72)
.25)
.99)
535)
13.0/ 2/
11.2/ 2/
42.7/13/
3.5/13/
89.1/12/
13.1/12/
9.2/ 2/
.5/ 2/
33.29
2.
36.
.35
8.7
.23
7.79
1210.2
2.91
.386
.88
.26
8.83
1371.23
3.30
.437
13.
11.
40.
3.
.40
.04
9.
1.
(
( 1
(
( 6
(1022
( 2
(
.85)
.18)
.19)
.58)
.52)
.46)
718)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR) .382 ( .628)
-------
TABLE
ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
H-TRANS.
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 LC350. CID) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 734.82 MM HG(28.93 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. 22.2 DEG C(72.0 DEG F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER OIF P MM. H20ON. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C(DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TIME SECONDS
TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC
HC
CO
CO
W
ui
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
CO2 SAMPLE
CO2 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CO2 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LB)
KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR
-------
TABLE
ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
C-TRANS.
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L{350. CID) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 737.11 MM HG(29.02 IN HG)
DRY BULB TEMP. 21.1 DEG C(70.0 DE6 F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER DIP P MM. H20ON. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. CCDEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TIME SECONDS
TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC
HC
CO
CO
00
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
CO2 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CO2 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LB)
KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
9.15 ( 12.28)
1.39 ( 1.04)
19.94 ( 14.87)
1165. ( 869.)
TEST NO.23
DATE 2/10/83
TIME 8:18
DYNO NO. 2
RUN1
GASOLINE EM-338-F
BAG CART NO. 1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY , ENGINE-45. PCT , CVS-28. PCT
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 7.2 GM/KG( 50.7 6RAINS/LB) NOX HUMIDITY C.F.
.8974
1
NYNF
685.8 (27.0)
406.4 (16.0)
43.3 (110.0)
7162.
271.9
188.1 ( 6643.)
11. 8/ 3/ 118.
1.2/ 3/ 12.
29. 8/ 3/ 696.
.I/ 3/ 2.
58. 7/1 1/ .48
7.1/11/ .04
8.4/ 2/ 8.
.5/ 2/ 1.
23.87
107.
681.
.44
7.9
11.55
149.24
1517.0
2.56
.564 ( 1.24)
.95 ( 1.27)
12.16 ( 9.07)
157.12 ( 117.16)
1597.03 (1190.90)
2.69 ( 2.01)
.593 ( .976)
2
LANF
711.2 (28.0)
431.8 (17.0)
45.0 (113.0)
8082.
307.0
210.5 ( 7435.)
17. O/ 2/ 17.
12.2/ 2/ 12.
88.7/13/ 89.
3.7/13/ 3.
77.5/11/ .71
7.1/11/ .04
18. 4/ 2/ 18.
.6/ 21 1.
18.64
5.
84.
.67
17.8
.66
20.56
2576.1
6.44
.823 ( 1.81)
2.05 ( 2.75)
.32 ( .24)
10.03 ( 7.48)
1257.04 ( 937.37)
3.14 ( 2.34)
.402 ( .660)
3
LAF
723.9 (28.5)
457.2 (18.0)
48.9 (120.0)
8317.
316.0
213.5 ( 7540.)
1I.9/ 2/ 12.
11. I/ 2/ 11.
22.7/13/ 21.
3.7/13/ 3.
77. 5/ 3/ 1.42
3.2/ 3/ .05
40. 8/ 2/ 41.
.7/ 2/ 1.
9.43
2.
17.
1.37
40.2
.24
4.23
5372.2
14.72
1.696 3.74)
5.27 7.07)
.05 .03)
.80 .60)
1018.82 759.73)
2.79 ( 2.08)
.322 ( .529)
4
NYNF
685.8 (27.0)
406.4 (16.0)
44.4 (112.0)
7159.
271.9
187.3 ( 6617.)
13. 5/ 2/ 14.
11. 2/ 2/ 11.
47.2/13/ 44.
5.1/13/ 5.
88.7/12/ .39
13.6/12/ .05
9.3/ 2/ 9.
.9/ 2/ 1.
33.45
3.
39.
.35
8.4
.28
8.55
1200.4
2.71
.383 (
.88 ( 1
.32 (
9.69 ( 7
1360.10 (1014
3.07 ( 2
.434 (
.84)
.18)
.24)
.22)
.22)
.29)
713)
2.89 (
.379 (
2.15)
.622)
-------
TABLE
ENGINE NO.
ENGINE MODEL 75 CHEV
ENGINE 5.7 L(350. CIO) V-8
CVS NO. 9
BAROMETER 737.87 MM HG(29.05 IN H6)
DRY BULB TEMP. 22.2 DEG C(72.0 DEG F)
BAG RESULTS
BAG NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
BLOWER OIF P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET P MM. H20(IN. H20)
BLOWER INLET TEMP. DEG. C{DEG. F)
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TIME SECONDS
TOTAL FLOW STD. CU. METRES(SCF)
HC
HC
CO
CO
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
SAMPLE
BCKGRD
C02 SAMPLE
C02 BCKGRD
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BCKGRD
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PCT
METER/RANGE/PPM
METER/RANGE/PPM
DILUTION FACTOR
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CO2 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
FUEL KG (LB)
KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KH HR (S/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KW HR (LB/HP HR)
TOTAL TEST RESULTS 4 BAGS
TOTAL KW HR (HP HR)
BSHC G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSCO G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSC02 G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSNOX G/KW HR (G/HP HR)
BSFC KG/KK HR (L6/HP HR)
6.93 (
.31 (
7.97 (
1086. (
3.12 (
.346 (
11.98)
.23)
5.94)
810.)
2.33)
.570)
ENGINE EMISSION RESULTS
H-TRANS.
TEST NO.23 RUN!
DATE 2/10/83
TIME 8:56
DYNO NO. 2
RELATIVE HUMIDITY ,
PROJECT NO. 05-4311-005
GASOLINE EM-338-F
BAG CART NO. 1
ENGINE-44. PCT
CVS-38. PCT
ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY 7.6 GM/KG( 53.0 GRAtNS/LB)
NOX HUMIDITY C.F. .9063
1
NYNF
685.8 (27
406.4 (16
43.9 (11
7161.
272.0
.0)
.0)
1.0)
187.9 ( 6638.)
23.9/ 2/
11.8/ 2/
83.6/12/
1.3/12/
85.4/12/
I2.8/12/
11. 6/ 2/
.9/ 2/
33.71
12.
194.
.33
10.7
1.35
42.50
1146.8
3.50
.384
.85
1.58
49.84
1345.03
4.10
.450
24.
12.
200.
2.
.38
.04
12.
1.
( .85)
( 1.14)
( 1.18)
( 37.17)
(1002.99)
( 3.06)
( .740)
711
431
45
210
18.
11.
51.
3.
72.
7.
21.
•
1
2
LANF
.2 (28.
.8 (17.
.0 (113
8082.
307.0
0)
0)
.0)
.7 ( 7444.)
3/ 2/
4/ 2/
9/1 3/
0/13/
0/11/
2/1 I/
5/ 2/
9/ 2/
20.81
7.
45.
.60
20.6
.91
11.13
2300.8
7.54
.732
1.98
.46
5.62
160.81
3.81
.369
18.
11.
49.
3.
.64
.04
22.
1.
( 1.61)
( 2.66)
( .34)
( 4.19)
( 865.62)
( 2.84)
( .607)
723
457
48
214
12.
11.
22.
3.
72.
2.
38.
1.
3
LAF
.9 (28.
.2 (18.
.3 (119
8316.
316.0
5)
0)
.0)
.0 ( 7560.)
4/ 2/
2/ 2/
0/13/
2/13/
7/ 3/ 1
6/ 3/
9/ 2/
2/ 2/
10.13
2.
17.
1.28
37.8
.28
4.17
5030.9
14.03
1.588
5.23
.05
.80
962.28
2.68
.304
12.
11.
20.
3.
.32
.04
39.
1.
( 3.50)
( 7.01)
( .04)
( .60)
( 717.57)
( 2.00)
( .499)
685
406
44
187
12.
11.
67.
3.
89.
13.
10.
1.
4
NYNF
.8 (27.
.4 (16.
.4 (112
7159.
271.9
0)
0)
.0)
.5 ( 6624.)
9/ 21
3/ 21
6/13/
6/13/
2/12/
2/12/
O/ 21
4/ 2/
33.04
2.
61.
.35
8.6
.21
13.35
1216.8
2.81
.390
.87
.24
15.39
1402.49
3.24
.450
13.
11.
66.
3.
.40
.04
10.
1.
(
( 1
(
( 11
(1045
( 2
(
.86)
.16)
.18)
.48)
.83)
.42)
740)
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read liutructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
460/3-83-010
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION>NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Heavy-Duty Fuel Economy Program Phase V -
Investigation of a Heavy-Duty 3-Way Catalyst Syste^n
6. REPORT DATE
December 1983
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7, AUTHOR(S) ~~~
Charles M. Urban
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
^PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Southwest Research Institute
6220 Culebra Road
San Antonio, Texas 78284
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-03-2220
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
Emission Control Technology Division
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final Report (8/79-12/83)
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
~6. ABSTRACT
This report describes the laboratory effort toward evaluation of a
three-way catalyst and feedback fuel system with a heavy-duty gasoline
engine. Described are the efforts toward obtaining a suitable feedback
fuel system and the very limited test results obtained using the
subsequently selected throttle-body fuel injection system. Average
emissions values, with the system only partially optimized, were
0.52 HC, 7.5 CO, and 3.4 NOX in grams per kilowatt-hour (0.39, 5.6,
and 2.5 g/hp-hr).
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Exhaust Emissions
Fuel Consumption
Spark Ignition Engines
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Monoxide
Nitrogen Oxides
Heavy-Duty Engines
Transient Cycle Emissions
Test
75. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
45
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA form 2220-1 (9-73)
------- |