EPA-460/3-78-005
May 1978
HEAVY DUTY FUEL ECONOMY PROGRAM
PHASE III - TRANSIENT CYCLE EVALUATIONS
OF THE ADVANCED EMISSIONS CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY ENGINE
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Emission Control Technology Division
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
-------
EPA- 460/3-78-005
HEAVY DUTY FUEL ECONOMY PROGRAM
PHASE III - TRANSIENT CYCLE EVAUATIONS
OF THE ADVANCED EMISSIONS CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY ENGINE
Charles M. Urban
Southwest Research Institute
P.O. Drawer 28510
6220 Culehra Road
San Antonio, Texas 78284
Contract No. 68 • 03 - 2220
EPA Project Officer: Andrew W. Kaupert
Prepared for
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Emission Control Technology Division
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
May 1978
-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to report
technical data of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies are
available free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors and
grantees, and nonprofit organizations - in limited quantities - from
the Library Motor Vehicle Emission Laboratory, Ann Arbor, Michigan
48105 or, for a fee, from the National Technical Information Service,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by
Southwest Research Institute, 6220 Culebra Road, San Antonio, Texas
78284, 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. EPA 460/3-78-005
ii
-------
ABSTRACT
This report describes the laboratory effort toward further evaluating
the emissions and fuel economy performance of the advanced emissions control
technology engine configuration optimized in Phase II of this project. An
additional intent of Phase III was to obtain data toward establishing a linking
mechanism between data generated previously using various different operating
cycles and test procedures. Project tasks included: examination and overhaul
of the engine used during Phase II, nine-mode and transient cycle emissions and
fuel consumption evaluations, and recommendations for future work. For the
transient cycle evaluations, which included light-duty FTP and experimental
CAPE-21 cycles, the engine was installed into an appropriate heavy-duty truck.
All transient cycle emissions and fuel consumption evaluations were conducted
on a heavy-duty chassis dynamometer and utilized a truck-size constant volume
sampler.
iii
-------
FOREWORD
This project, involving three separate phases, was initiated by the
Division of Emissions Control Technology, Environmental Protection Agency,
2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105. Phases I & II, which
involved an analysis of heavy-duty vehicle operating data from several
sources and an evaluation of emission control technology approaches, have
been discussed in separate final reports (EPA-460/3-77-001 and EPA-460/3-77-
010) and are only briefly summarized in this report. The Phase III evalua-
tions, identified as Southwest Research Institute project 11-4311-002, are
discussed in this report. The engineering effort on which this report is
based was accomplished by the Department of Emissions Research of Southwest
Research Institute, 6220 Culebra Road, San Antonio, Texas. This phase of
the project, authorized by Modification 7 to Contract 68-03-2220, began on
August 29, 1977, and was completed May 15, 1978.
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 pro-
ject and this project phase.
The Project Officer for this project phase was Mr. Andrew W. Kaupert of
the Technology Evaluation Staff, Environmental Protection Agency. He also
served as Project Officer for the laboratory analyses and evaluations con-
ducted in previous Phases I and II of this project.
iv
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT ll:L
FOREWORD 1V
LIST OF FIGURES vi
LIST OF TABLES vii
SUMMARY viii
I. Introduction 1
A. Phase III - Objectives 1
B. Input from Phases I and II 1
C. Phase III Scope of Work 2
II. Equipment, Instruments, Preparations and Procedures 3
A. Engine and Components 3
B. Dynamometers 3
C. Exhaust Sampling and Analysis 5
D. Emissions Test Procedures 5
E. Fuel and Lubricant 7
III. Overhaul of the Phase II Engine 13
IV. Inspection of the Emissions and Fuel Control
Components 19
V. Results of the Phase III Engine Testing Program 21
A. Engine Dynamometer Evaluations 21
B. Chassis Dynamometer Evaluations 24
C. Visual Examination of the Exhaust Thermal
Reactors 41
VI. Recommendations 4 3
List of References 46
Appendices
A. General Information
B. Engine Inspection Data
C. Engine Dynamometer Nine-Mode Results
D. Chassis Version Nine-Mode FTP Results
E. Chassis Transient Test Results - SC
F. Chassis Transient Test Results - ECS
G. Chassis Transient Test Results - ECSwC
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure page
1 Engine and dynamometer systems used in Phase III 4
2 Heavy-duty exhaust gas sampling and analytical train 6
3 CAPE-21 transient driving cycles 12
4 Cylinder heads from the Phase II engine 14
5 Cylinder Number 5 valves and valve ports 15
6 Deposition on valve heads 16
7 Fuel injectors and exhaust thermal reactors 20
8 Emissions and fuel consumption using nine-mode heavy-
duty gasoline engine procedures 25
9 Heavy-duty truck evaluation on a chassis dynamometer 26
10 CAPE-21 transient driving cycle HC and CO emissions 33
11 CAPE-21 transient driving cycle NOX emissions and fuel
consumption 34
12 Emissions and fuel consumption using the federal test
procedure for light-duty vehicles (LD-FTP) 35
VI
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 Description of nine-mode procedures 9
2 Transient cycle procedure used in Phase III 10
3 Description of the transient cycles 11
4 Engine dynamometer nine-mode emissions test results 23
5 Engine and chassis dynamometer nine-mode FTP results 29
6 Chassis version nine-mode FTP results 30
7 Summary of the transient cycle results in g/km 32
8 Comparison of CAPE-21H NY-NF and NY-F cycle results 37
9 Summary of the Phase III results in g/min 39
10 ESC results in percent of standard configuration values 40
VI1
-------
SUMMARY
In this project phase, the engine used in Phase II was examined and
overhauled. Then nine-mode and transient cycle evaluations were conducted
in the baseline and the Phase II emissions control system configurations.
This emissions control system consisted of: electronic fuel injection,
thermal reactors with air injection, exhaust gas recirculation, and a
high energy ignition system with vacuum advance. The optimization of
this system in Phase II utilized a nine-mode engine-dynamometer procedure,
which involves modal conditions based on percentages of maximum power out-
put at an engine speed of 2000 rpm.
In the examination of the Phase II engine it was found that the gaps
on both compression rings were lined up on several of the pistons; resulting
in longitudinal ridges on the cylinder walls. Also, there was a longitudinal
groove in one cylinder wall. The high oil consumption during the latter part
of the Phase II service accumulation demonstration was primarily attributed
to these factors. Deposits within the intake, exhaust and combustion chamber
areas were generally light to moderate. Sludge deposits were generally light
and varnish deposits were generally moderate. Some structural failure occurred
in the inner can of the thermal reactors. This was attributed to overheating
at some undefined time during the evaluations.
Initial evaluations conducted during this project phase involved nine-
mode tests on an engine dynamometer. The engine was then installed into an
appropriate heavy-duty truck and nine-mode FTP, light-duty FTP, and experi-
mental CAPE-21 cycle chassis evaluations were conducted. These evaluations
involved operation of the engine in the baseline configuration and in the
emission control system configuration, with and without an oxidation catalyst.
These are identified as Emission Control System With Catalyst (ECSWC) and
Emission Control System (ECS) in this report.
In general, significant reduction in emissions and fuel consumption were
obtained with the ECS and ECSWC configurations relative to the baseline con-
figuration. Operability over the transient cycles was essentially equal with
each of the three configurations.
Relative to the baseline results, the reductions in emissions and fuel
consumption with the ECS and ECSWC configurations were generally much greater
in the nine-mode evaluations than in the transient cycle evaluations. In
addition, with all three configurations, the relationship between the hydro-
carbon, carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen emissions were generally
different for the transient cycle results compared to the nine-mode cycle
results.
This project phase has demonstrated that the Phase II emissions control
system configuration also achieves a'reduction of emissions and fuel consump-
tion in transient cycle operation. The potential emissions reduction and
Vlll
-------
fuel consumption performance of the emissions control configuration has
not been established since the engine was not re-optimized for transient
operation. For these Phase III evaluations, the emissions control system
and its calibrations were essentially unaltered from the configuration
found to be satisfactory based on the steady-state testing done in Phase
II of this project. In addition, there is some concern about the service
life of the thermal reactors under the operating conditions utilized in
this project. Therefore, additional optimization and durability effort
would be required before the full potential of this type of emissions con-
trol system can be established. It appears, however, that further work
would not degrade the emissions and fuel consumption performance from that
reported here.
ix
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
This report covers evaluations conducted under Phase III of a three
phase Heavy-Duty Fuel Economy Program. Phase II involved further
evaluations using the emissions control engine assembled in Phase II of
this project. (D*
A. Phase III Objectives
The primary objective of this project phase was to ascertain the
emissions and fuel economy benefits obtainable utilizing the emissions
control engine configuration assembled in Phase II of this project. A
further objective was to identify relationships between the benefits as
obtained in several heavy-duty engine testing procedures utilizing both
engine dynamometer and chassis dynamometer protocols.
B. Input from Phases I and II
Phase I of this project^ was to provide the modal operating conditions
for use in Phase II, which could provide definition of a specific fuel con-
sumption (SFC) representative of fuel consumption in actual vehicle operation.
The Phase I study, however, showed that there was no simple correlation between
the nine-mode engine dynamometer BSFC and vehicle fuel economy, since variables
such as vehicle weight and power-to-weight ratio must be considered. The
correlation could not be significantly improved by change of FTP modal weighting
factors or by addition of a few steady state modes. Since Phase I did not
provide the anticipated input into Phase II, a recommended nine-mode procedure(3)
composite SFC was selected for engine optimization.
To the extent deemed practical, the "Recommended Heavy-Duty
Gasoline Instrumentation and Test Procedures," dated July 11,
1975 was utilized throughout Phases II and III of this pro-
ject. During Phase II, Proposed Rules were published in the
Federal Register on May 24, 1976. During Phase III, Final
Rules for the 1979 model were published on September 8, 1977.
The proposed and Final Rules contain a number of calibration
and procedural changes relative to the Recommended Procedure.
None of these changes have any significant effect on the
final emissions values.
Phase II of this project^ involved the evaluation of a number of
emission control technology approaches adapted to a Chevrolet 350 CID
heavy-duty gasoline engine. The fuel and emissions control system selected
for final optimization consisted of: electronic fuel injection, thermal
reactors with air injection, exhaust gas recirculation and a high energy
* Superscript numbers in parentheses refer to the List of References at the
end of this report.
-------
ignition system with vacuum advance. This system met the Phase II project
goals of 6.7 g/kWh for HC plus NOX, 33.5 gAWh for CO and a ten percent
improvement in fuel economy based on the nine-mode recommended procedure.
In addition, this optimized system completed 1500 hours of service accumu-
lation on an engine dynamometer and was subsequently determined to be drive-
able in a heavy-duty truck. An oxidation catalyst was included as an add-on
during the last 750 hours of the service accumulation demonstration to in-
vestigate its durability.
C. Phase III Scope of Work
The scope of work in Phase III was divided into four primary tasks.
!• Task I - Overhaul the Phase II Emission Control Configured Engine
The 350 CID Chevrolet engine, equipped with the emission control
technology components, was disassembled to determine and repair the cause(s)
of the high oil consumption exhibited during the latter stages of Phase II
testing. After documenting the condition of the engine, the engine was
overhauled to manufacturer's service specifications.
2- Task II - Inspect the Emissions and Fuel Control Systems
The advanced technology components were inspected and were photo-
graphed, cleaned, and adjusted as appropriate. The condition of these
components were reported to the EPA Project Officer along with recommenda-
tions for component replacement.
3- Task III - Complete the Engine Testing Program
The specified test program was then conducted with the overhauled
engine. This test program involved operation on an engine dynamometer and
on heavy-duty chassis dynamometers. Brake specific emissions and BSFC were
measured on engine dynamometer nine-mode tests, and mass emissions, fuel
economy, and continuous raw exhaust emissions were measured on the chassis
dynamometer transient tests.
4. Task IV - Recommendations
Based on the findings in this project, suggestions have been made
for additional work concerning the emissions control system and the test
procedures.
-------
II. EQUIPMENT, INSTRUMENTS, PREPARATIONS AND PROCEDURES
This section describes the engine, facilities, instrumentation, pro-
cedures and fuel utilized in this phase of the project.
A. Engine and Components
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 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 previously utilized in the Phase II evaluations and was over-
hauled in Task I of this project phase. Overhaul of this engine included
reboring the cylinders to the standard oversize of 0.762 mm (0.030 inch).
This engine and the major baseline and control system components are des-
cribed in Appendix Table A-l. Views of the baseline and the emissions con-
trol configuration are shown in Figure 1.
B: Dynamometers
1. Engine Dynamometer - An Eaton Dynamatic all-electric absorbing-
motoring dynamometer was used for all engine dynamometer nine-mode evalu-
ations. This dynamometer has 373 kW (500 hp) absorbing and 149 kW (200 hp)
motoring capability. This dynamometer is shown in Figure 1.
2. Chassis Dynamometer - Two chassis dynamometers were used in this
project. The dynamometer used for the chassis version nine-mode tests was
a Clayton CT-200 with 200 hp absorbing capability. To this was connected
a 50 hp electric motor which, by means of gear belt drive, provides the
2000±100 rpm engine speed required for the test. A similar dynamometer,
except without the 50 hp electric motor, was used in conducting the tran-
sient cycle evaluations. The high capacity Clayton water brake dynamometers
used in this project are similar to and have similar road load characteris-
tics to those used in the car size dynamometer for light-duty testing.
A view of the truck installed on the dynamometer used during the tran-
sient driving tests is shown in Figure 1. Figure 1 also shows the inertia
wheel combination used to simulate the weight of the vehicle and the rail-
road car brake shoes which were used to provide the additional braking ca-
pacity necessary for operation of vehicles of 7250 kg (16,000 Ibs) and over.
The inertia wheels were directly connected to a Clayton water brake dynamo-
meter through the 219 mm (8.625 inch) diameter rolls. This dynamometer
system had been previously utilized in evaluating the 30 trucks and buses
in a previous heavy-duty vehicle emissions project.^4)
-------
Baseline engine
Oxidation catalyst
Emissions control engine
Engine dynamometer
Truck on chassis dynamometer
Inertia wheels and brake
Figure 1. Engine and dynamometer systems used in Phase III
-------
C. Exhaust Sampling and Analysis
Two different exhaust sampling techniques and sets of instrumentation
were used in this project. One system was used for evaluating raw exhaust
and the other for CVS diluted exhaust.
1. Raw Exhaust - The same system previously used in the Phase II eval-
uations was utilized for sampling and analysis of raw exhaust in this phase.
This system, originally based on the system specified in the recommended pro-
cedure, ^' meets most of the requirements in the rules and regulations for
the 1979 and later model year heavy-duty engines. This procedure requires
the use of a heated flame ionization detector (FID) for measuring hydrocar-
bons (HC) and a chemiluminescence analyzer (CL) for measuring oxides of ni-
trogen (NOX). Nondispersive infrared (NDIR) instruments are used for mea-
suring carbon dioxide (CO2) and carbon monoxide (CO). A schematic of the
system, as specified in the recommended procedure and given as an example in
the final rules, is shown in Figure 2.
This system was used for all nine-mode evaluations and for obtaining
continuous recorder traces of the raw exhaust emissions during the transient
cycle evaluations. To eliminate error in the CVS diluted samples, essential-
ly all of the raw exhaust sample extracted for analysis during the chassis
evaluations was returned to the exhaust system. Only the very small amount
of gas sample utilized in the FID and CL instruments was not returned. The
resultant error from the exhaust gas flow to these two instruments was neg-
ligible.
2. CVS Diluted Exhaust - A truck size constant volume sampler (CVS),
with nominal 17 m^/min flow capacity was used to acquire dilute samples
during the evaluations on the chassis dynamometer. The diluted sample flow
rates were 0.5 m3/hr for the CAPE-21 evaluations and 0.34 m3/hr for the 1978
Light-Duty FTP and the nine-mode FTP evaluations. The bagged CVS diluted
samples were evaluated on a special instrumentation cart which is used ex-
clusively for measurement of bagged samples. This system is maintained in
strict accordance with the requirements in the Emissions Regulations for
New Gasoline-Fueled Light-Duty Vehicles. '
D. Emissions Test Procedures
The engine dynamometer procedures included the heavy-duty nine-mode cer-
tification procedure for 1975 model heavy-duty gasoline engines (9-FTP) and
the recommended nine-mode procedure (9-EPA). Procedures used on the chassis
dynamometer included a chassis version of the nine-mode certification pro-
cedure (chassis nine-mode FTP), a modified light-duty CVS FTP (LD-FTP), a
cold start CAPE-21 procedure (CAPE-21C) and a hot start CAPE-21 procedure
(CAPE-21H).
1. Nine-Mode Evaluations - The primary differences between the nine-
mode EPA and the nine-mode FTP procedures are: modes in the EPA are speci-
-------
Legend
FlowmtK
B.ckp.n.ur. «,,ul.lo, .,,h
lnl«n.l ConlrM loop Iho«
lux PIMIUI. Wtgul>lo> «ilh
lnl.,n.l CwillOl Loop Shown
' l^Sj ••" V.I,. o, tqy „.!.„
Cone.01 «t N.MI. V....
Plug V.lr. .. («I(,.|M|
(C.«t« Porl It Commo.1
|v\\\\\f *
Figure 2. Heavy-duty exhaust gas sampling and analytical train
-------
fled as various "percents of maximum torque", all modes in the EPA procedure
are of one-minute duration, and the EPA procedure has only two cycles of nine-
modes per test; whereas the FTP has four cycles. The nine-mode procedures
are briefly described in Table 1.
The chassis version nine-mode FTP evaluations were conducted on a chas-
sis dynamometer with the engine in the vehicle. Torque output from the en-
gine is not measured during this type of test and the composite results are
usually reported only in units of ppm or grains per minute. In this project
phase, however, the torque values obtained in the engine dynamometer evalu-
ations were utilized in calculating composite values in units of g/kWh for
the chassis version evaluations. This was done to enable reporting the values
in standard, familiar units. The primary reason for running the chassis ver-
sion nine-mode FTP evaluations, in this project phase, was to assure that no
gross change in engine operation occurred when the engine was installed in
the truck.
2. Transient Chassis Evaluations - The procedures for the three tran-
sient cycles evaluated are given in Table 2 and the cycles are described in
Table 3. The CAPE-21 cycles are illustrated in Figure 3. Since weighting
factors were not available for the individual bags of the CAPE-21 cycles,
the results for these evaluations could not be combined into composite values.
An inertia simulation of 7700 kilograms (17,000 pounds) and a power set-
ting of 17.0 kilowatts at 64 kilometres per hour (24 horsepower at 40 mph)
were used for all transient cycle operation. The 7700 kilograms inertia was
the same as that used in the driveability evaluations in previous Phase II
of this project. The 17.9 kilowatt power setting was determined by interpo-
lation of power settings for Trucks 2 and 5 evaluated under previous Contract
No. 68-03-2147. '
3. Calculation Procedures and Output Format - Test results were calcu-
lated and reduced to required units in accord with the applicable test meth-
ods. Primary exception to the preceding was the use of metric units in re-
porting the results (as specified in the contract). The output formats for
the computer printouts of the nine-mode test data are defined in Tables A-2
and A-3 in Appendix A.
E. Fuel and Lubricant
A commercially available Gulf Crest unleaded gasoline was used throughout
the Phase III evaluations. The physical properties of this gasoline (SwRI
code EM-237) were as follows:
Distillation Range °C (°F) IBP 32 (89)
10 Pet 52 (125)
50 Pet 103 (217)
90 Pet 170 (338)
EP 211 (412)
-------
Pet Recovered 97.9
Pet Residue 1.3
R.V.P., kPa (pounds) 62.7 (9.10)
Gravity, g/ml (°API) 0.739 (59.9)
Lead, mg/litre (g/gallon) <1.3 (<0.005)
Sulfur, weight percent 0.03
Hydrocarbon Composition, percent
Aromatics 26.4
Olefins 2.9
Saturates 70.7
Phosphorus, mg/litre (g/gallon) <0.3 (<0.001)
Octane Number Research 91.4
Motor 84.5
The lubricant used throughout the project was Texaco Havoline SAE 30
which was designated for API service SD, SE, and CC. This lubricant met
the engine manufacturer's viscosity and service specifications.
-------
TABLE 1. DESCRIPTION OF NINE-MODE PROCEDURES
Sequence Man.
No . Mode FTP
1 Idle
2 Cruise
3 PTA
4 Cruise
5 PTD
6 Cruise
7 FL
8 Cruise
9 CT
Total
Total
-
16"
10"
16"
19"
16"
3"
16"
-
time
time
Vac.
a
—
Hg
Hg
Hg
Hg
Hg
Hg
Hg
—
per
per
Percent of
Max. Torque
EPAb
25%
55%
25%
10%
25%
90%
25%
Cycle, minutes
Test, minutes
Time in Mode,
Seconds
FTP
70
23
44
23
17
23
34
23
43
5
20
EPA
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60_
9
18
Weighting
Factors ,
FTP & EPA
0.232
0.077
0.147
0.077
0.057
0.077
0.113
0.077
0.143
b FTP = Certification Procedure for 1975 Model Heavy-Duty Gasoline Engines
EPA = Recommended Procedure for 1979 Model Heavy-Duty Gasoline Engines(3)
-------
TABLE 2. TRANSIENT CYCLE PROCEDURES USED IN PHASE III
CAPE - 21C(7)(cold start)
• warm-up vehicle and dynamometer, set prescribed load into the dynamometer
and calibrate vehicle speed on the drivers-aid chart recorder.
• Soak vehicle at ambient temperatures between 15.6 to 26.7°C (60° - 86°F)for
not less than 8 hours and not more than 36 hours.
• Run the prescribed sequence of operation for the eight individual CAPE-21C
cycles.
• Calculate and report emissions and fuel consumption for each individual bag.
CAPE - 2lH(7)(hot start)
Warm-up the vehicle and dynamometer at a vehicle speed of 64 kilometers
per hour (40 mph), with the dynamometer power setting specified for a
minimum of 20 minutes. Then recheck the dynamometer power setting and the
vehicle speed on drivers-aid and readjust if necessary.
• Shut off engine and soak for 15 minutes.
Run the prescribed sequence of operation for the four individual CAPE-21H
cycles.
Calculate and report emissions and fuel consumption for each individual
bag.
LD-FTp(5)(cold start)
• Warm-up vehicle and dynamometer, set prescribed load into the dynamo-
meter and calibrate vehicle speed on the drivers-aid chart recorder.
• Soak the vehicle at ambient temperatures between 15.6°-26.7°c (60°-80°F)
for not less than 10 hours and not more than 35 hours.
• Run the prescribed sequence of operation for the three individual cycles.
• Calculate and report emissions and fuel consumption for each individual
bag and for the entire test.
10
-------
TABLE 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE TRANSIENT CYCLES
CAPE - 21C (7)
Operation
Shut off engine
Soak 15 minutes
Start engine
Bag 7 - LA-NF
Bag 8 - LA-F
CAPE - 21H
(7)
Operation
Start engine
Bag 1 - LA-NF
Bag 2 - LA-F
Bag 3 - NY-NF
Bag 4 - NY-F
LD-FTP (5)
Operation
Start engine
Bag 1 - Cold 505
Bag 2 - Stab. 867
Shut off engine
Soak 10 minutes
Start engine
Bag 3-Hot 505
Cycle Nominal
Start
Bag 1
Bag 2
Bag 3
Bag 4
Bag 5
Bag 6
engine
- LA-NF
- LA-F
- LA-NF
- LA-F
- NY-NF
- NY-F
_._
286
269
286
269
254
281
Time, Sec.
286
269
286
269
254
281
286
269
Time, Sec.
286
269
254
281
Time, Sec.
505
867
Distance, km
1.9
5.4
1.9
5.4
0.9
3.4
1.9
5.4
Cycle Nominal
Distance, km
1.9
5.4
0.9
3.4
Cycle Nominal
Distance, km
5.78
6.29
Speed, kmh
23
72
23
72
12
43
23
72
Speed, kmh
23
72
12
43
Speed, kmh
41.2
26.1
505
5.78
41.2
11
-------
SECONDS
300
300
Figure 3. CAPE-21 transient driving cycles
12
-------
III. OVERHAUL OF THE PHASE II ENGINE
The initial task in this project phase involved a systematic disassembly
and inspection of the Phase II emission control configured engine. The in-
spection involved rating, measuring and photographing the basic engine and
components. Primary emphasis in the engine inspection was to determine the
causes(s) of high oil consumption which occurred during the latter stages of
Phase II testing. At the time of disassembly, the engine had a total of over
2000 hours of operation. The Phase II operation on the engine included: 468
hours in the optimization evaluation phase, 1500 hours of service accumula-
tion plus over 23 nine-mode emission tests, and several dozen hours during
the driveability and performance demonstration.
Several views of the intake and combustion chamber areas of the engine
are shown in Figures 4 through 6. These figures illustrate that there was no
severe deposition within or on any of the areas shown. The number stamped on
the head of the valve was readable on the original of the lower photograph in
Figure 6.
Deposits within the intake, combustion and exhaust of the engine were
visually rated and descriptive results of the ratings are given in Appendix
B-l. There was no severe deposit buildup within or on any of these areas.
(General concensus has tended toward describing these deposits as being
rather mild. However, there is no accepted established data base on which to
reach a definite conclusion).
Of interest were the sludge-like deposits within the lower throat area
of the throttle body. Two potential sources of these deposits were crank-
case blowby and the recirculated exhaust. Any crankcase blowby in excess of
that which can flow through the PCV valve, enters the air intake system be-
tween the air filter and the throttle body. The recirculated exhaust was
introduced into the air intake system just below the throttle body.
A sludge and varnish rating of the engine was made, to the extent pos-
sible, using the SEQUENCE 5C data sheets and rating definitions.(8) It
should be emphasized that this engine was not a SEQUENCE 5C engine and was
not operated over the SEQUENCE 5C operating conditions. The results of the
rating are summarized in Appendix B-2. In general, all areas were essential-
ly clean from sludge. The varnish deposits on the piston skirts and valve
lifters and deposits on the intake valves could be described as moderate.
Other engine inspections primarily involved dimensional measurements of
the engine and components. These measurements are summarized in Appendix B-3.
Some items of interest are summarized as follows:
CYLINDER BORE
Cylinders 3 and 7 exceeded the allowed value of 0.127 mm
13
-------
Right side
Left side
Figure 4. Cylinder heads from the Phase II engine
I
-------
Valves
m^
Valve ports (port liner is in exhaust port)
Figure 5. Cylinder Number 5 valves and valve ports
15
-------
Cylinder Number 4
'-
Cylinder Number 5
Figure 6. Deposition on valve heads
16
-------
taper or wear and required reboring to the 0.51 mm minimum
oversize. Cylinder 3 also had a longitudinal groove ap-
proximately 0.05 mm deep.
Cylinders 1, 2 and 8 were marginally within the allowed
value, but had a longitudinal ridge the width of the
ring end gaps.
PISTON RINGS
Rings on pistons 3 and 7 showed much greater wear than the
rings on the other pistons. Compression rings on cylinders
1, 2 and 8 were axially lined up and left a longitudinal
ridge on the cylinder walls.
CRANKSHAFT
Bearing journals for connecting rods 7 and 8 were worn and
scored. This required regrinding the journals to 0.25 mm
minimum undersize.
Unfortunately, it was not possible to determine specific causes for
the areas of wear or damage. It should be noted that most of the problems
were essentially isolated occurrences. Also, in at least one area out of
the four listed, the problem does not appear to be even potentially re-
latable to the advanced technology aspects of the engine (e.g., the rod
journals on the crankshaft). Another factor that could be pertinent is
that ring-cylinder related problems were also experienced with the other
engine used in Phase II. The problem experienced with the other engine was
briefly discussed on page 30 of the Phase II Final Report.
-------
ling exhaust valve guide inserts/ and replacing components as applicable.
The valve stem to valve guide clearances on the exhaust valves were mar-
ginal. The approach taken was that all marginal components were either re-
worked or replaced.
Delays were encountered in attempting to obtain all components through
the local authorized Chevrolet dealer. Obtaining oversize pistons and rings
through the dealer, in any reasonable period of time, could not be assured.
Therefore, a replacement piston made by TRW was obtained and evaluated. After
determining that these replacement pistons are basically identical in design
to the original pistons, the decision was made to utilize TRW pistons and rings.
The rebuilding involved the following major components and operations
which were necessary on the basis of maximum allowable limits:
• Rebore cylinders to standard oversize of 0.762 mm (0.030 inch)
• TRW replacement pistons and rings of 0.762 mm oversize
• Grinding crankshaft to 0.254 mm (0.010 inch) undersize
• Crankshaft main and connecting rod bearings of 0.254 mm undersize
• New exhaust valves and valve guide inserts
• Valve job, new valve springs, knurl intake guides
The following items were replaced on the basis of either new component
tolerances or attempting to forestall potential problems during the emissions
evaluation task of this project:
• Replace oil pump, water pump and freeze plugs
• Replace camshaft and camshaft bearings
• Replace valve lifters, push rods and rocker arms
• Replace timing gear and chain
Also, plastigage was used to assure bearing clearances, rubbing surfaces
were coated with lubriplate, and all new gaskets were used. After the engine
rebuilding was completed, the engine started without difficulty.
18
-------
IV. INSPECTION OF THE EMISSIONS AND FUEL CONTROL COMPONENTS
The fuel and emissions control components (fuel injection, thermal
reactors and EGR) were given a detailed visual examination. No visually
discernible problems were detected with the fuel injection system. With
the exception of some deposits on the wire mesh screen filter in the back-
pressure EGR valve, the EGR valves had only minor deposits and appeared to
be in good operating condition. The deposit ratings for the thermal reactors
and the EGR valves are given in Appendix B-l. There were no areas of severe
deposition within these components. A view of two of the fuel injectors is
shown in Figure 7.
Significant deterioration of the exhaust thermal reactors was observed
as follows:
LEFT BANK REACTOR
Damaged inner can and a crack in the housing on the
back side; broken manifold bolt in the same area as
where the housing cracked.
RIGHT BANK REACTOR
Visually appeared to be in satisfactory condition except
for a small crack in the housing and an air injection tube
which had broken off.
Views of the thermal reactors showing these cracks in the housing are given
in Figure 7. These thermal reactors were subsequently inspected by the
Engineering Staff at General Motors. The verbal report from the General
Motors Technical Center was that overheating of the reactors had apparently
occurred.
Times at which overheating could have occurred were during periods of
misfire in the service accumulation demonstration and/or, probably even more
likely, during maximum speed and power operation in the driveability and
performance demonstration.
Taking into account the extent and type of operation on the engine, the
condition of all other fuel and emissions control components were generally
acceptable.
19
-------
I
Fuel injectors •• right manifold
Right exhaust thermal reactor
Left exhaust thermal reactor and broken bolt
Figure 7. Fuel injectors and exhaust thermal reactors
20
-------
V. RESULTS OF THE PHASE III ENGINE TESTING PROGRAM
The laboratory evaluations involved operation of the engine on an
engine dynamometer followed by operation on a chassis dynamometer with the
engine installed in a suitable heavy-duty truck.
A. Engine Dynamometer Evaluations
With the ignition timing, idle speed and idle mixture adjusted to
manufacturer's specifications, the engine was operated 25 hours using the
same break-in cycle as was previously used in Phase II. Following the
break-in operation, the maximum power output was determined at several
speeds. The results, corrected to 746mm and 29.5 °C per the formula in
the recommended proceduref)f were as follows:
Current Previous
Engine Phase III Phase II
Speed, Results Results
rpm kW bhp kW bhp
1600 57 76 56 75
2000 73 98 71 95
2400 89 120 86 115
2800 101 135 98 132
3200 109 146 107 143
3800 116 155 116 156
As shown, the power output values were somewhat higher (approximately 1.5
to 4 percent) for the rebuilt engine at all engine speeds listed, except for
3800 rpm. At 3800 rpm, the power output of the rebuilt engine was essen-
tially equal to the power output of the previous Phase II results (the
results differed by less than one percent).
An item of potential interest is that the 0.762 mm (0.030 inch) over-
size cylinders in the engine increase the cross-sectional area by 1.5 percent.
With the same stroke, an increase in bore results in an equivalent increase
in displacement.
1. Engine Dynamometer Nine-Mode Results
Following break-in operation and determination of maximum power, baseline
configuration nine-mode evaluations were conducted with the overhauled engine
in the standard configuration. The results of these baseline configuration
emissions tests are reported in Appendix C and are summarized in Table 4. The
previous Phase II baseline results are also included in the table. The pro-
cedure identified as 9-FTP is the certification procedure for 1975 heavy-duty
gasoline engines(6) and 9-EPA is the recommended version of the certification
procedure for 1979 model year heavy-duty enginesP* As previously discussed
in Section I, there are slight differences between the recommended version
and the final certification procedure for 1979 model heavy-duty gasoline engines,
21
-------
The nine-mode FTP emissions from the overhauled engine were well within
the 1975 certification requirements. The hydrocarbon (HC) and carbon monoxide
(CO) emissions and the specific fuel consumption (SFC) were lower and the
oxides of nitrogen were higher with the overhauled engine than with the engine
when new in Phase II.
In the Phase III nine-mode EPA evaluations with the engine in the baseline
configuration, all emissions and the SFC agreed quite well with the Phase II
baseline values. Run 3 of Test 2002 was conducted on a different day than
were Runs 1 and 2 and differences in CO and NOX emissions in Run 3 relative
to Runs 1 and 2 were observed. The differences were primarily due to differ-
ences in the 90 percent power mode. This same situation occurred in the Phase
II evaluations; where the differences in emissions between Test 211 and 212
were significant. The SFC results were a few percent lower with the Phase III
overhauled engine than with the engine when new in Phase II.
Upon completion of the evaluations in the baseline configuration, the
engine was converted to the Phase II emissions control system configuration.
The nine-mode evaluations conducted are reported in Appendix C and are sum-
marized in Table 4. For comparison purposes, Table 4 also includes some of
the average results obtained in the previous Phase II evaluations.
No significant difficulties were encountered with the fuel or emissions
control systems. Minor adjustment was required to the cold-engine, high-
speed idle system to enable attaining normal idle speed within the five
minute warm-up. Also, some adjustment of the EGR rate at the 90 percent of
maximum power mode was required. The engine operational characteristics
appear to be essentially equivalent to that experienced during the Phase II
evaluations. Areas discussed in the Phase II final report, such as the
relatively significant HC emissions during cut-throttle operation, also apply
to these current evaluations.
As shown in Table 4, the current Test 2007 nine-mode EPA test results
compare quite well with the Phase II average results of Tests 261, 262, 263,
and 265. The current hydrocarbon emissions are about 50 percent higher than
the Phase II average. On an absolute basis, however, the difference in hydro-
carbon emission levels is only 0.17 g/kWh.
The evaluations with catalyst were conducted using a new Engelhard Ex-
haust Gas Purifier PTX 7.25-2-3MOD3. This catalytic converter was obtained
at the same time and is identical in construction to the unit used during
Phase II. Due to the late arrival of the catalysts during Phase II, the
engine had over 1000 hours of operation before the catalyst was installed;
as compared with less than 50 hours in Phase III. Therefore, no data are
available to enable making direct comparisions between the Phase II and
Phase III results. The current results with the catalyst appear to be
significantly different from the results obtained during the Phase II
service accumulation evaluation. Although direct comparisons of these
results are not appropriate, differences in some of the emissions values
reported in Table 4 are relatively large and merit some discussion.
22
-------
TABLE 4. ENGINE DYNAMOMETER NINE-MODE EMISSIONS TEST RESULTS
ro
Test
No.
2001
210
2004
2005
2002
211 & 212
2007
261-265
S.A.
2006
S.A.
Type
Test
9-FTP
9-FTP
9-FTP
9-FTP
9-FTP
9-EPA
9-EPA
9-EPA
9-EPA
9-EPA
9-EPA
9-EPA
Gram/kW hr
Description
Standard for 1975 Model Year HD Engines
Phase III Baseline After Overhaul
Phase II Baseline Carb 6606
Emissions Control System
Emissions Control System with Cat.
Phase III Baseline After Overhaul
Phase II Baseline Carb. 6606
Emissions Control System
ECS Phase II Average
ECS Ser. Accum. Avg. 000-1500 hours
Emissions Control System with Cat.
ECS Ser. Accum. with Cat. Avg. 0-750 hours
HC
5.31
6.57
0.98
0.12
5.44
5.73
0.52
0.35
0.42
0.02
0.08
CO
C-3 C.A
-J J • O**
19.40
29.45
19.83
0.44
30.70
33.65
13.30
12.07
15.00
0.11
16.38
NOX
12.61
12.05
3.82
3.94
13.10
12.11
4.65
4.46
3.42
4.03
2.19
HC+NOX
O1 AC.
^X . 4D
17.92
18.62
4.80
4.06
18.54
17.84
5.00
4.81
3.84
4.05
2.27
kG/
kW hr
SFC
0.469
0.530
0.510
0.554
0.430
0.450
0.393
0.392
0.394
0.408
0.404
-------
On an absolute basis, the difference between the 0.02 and 0.08 g/kWh
HC values is not very significant. The one percent difference in specific
fuel consumption is also not very significant. The differences in the CO
and NOX values with the catalyst installed, however, are significant.
In the Phase II evaluations, it should be recalled that essentially
all of the test composite CO emissions occurred during the 90 percent of
maximum power mode and that the variation between tests was quite large.
This was indicative of a somewhat marginal situation relative to the avail-
ability of sufficient air to complete the oxidation reactions in this mode.
The causes for the low NOX values in the Phase II Service Accumulation
evaluations were not determined. One of several possible causes mentioned
in the Phase II final report was the catalyst acting as a reduction catalyst.
Determinations of specific causes for the variation in CO and NOX with the
oxidation catalyst installed was not within the scope of work in either of
Phases II or III. The current results, as obtained in Test 2006, are more
in line with what would normally be expected relative to the results obtained
without a catalyst.
Summary results of those nine-mode evaluations conducted during Phase
III are presented on bar charts in Figure 8. These charts clearly illustrate
the very substantial reductions in HC and NOX emissions that were obtained
with the emissions control configurations in the nine-mode evaluations.
B. Chassis Dynamometer Evaluations
Initially, a Chevrolet C-60 truck with a 1975 model 350-V8 engine was
obtained and operability of the truck over the CAPE-21 driving cycles was
demonstrated. Several views depicting the chassis dynamometer evaluations
are shown in Figure 9.
The truck, obtained for use in this project, is described as follows:
Truck Engine Transmission
Make Chevrolet Chevrolet New Process Gear
Model C-60 113-350 542
Iden. or Ser. No. CCE626V108145 V0930TMX
Model Year 1976 1975
Style or Type Van (4.9 metre) V-8 5 Speed
Source Budget 16Q02
Usage Rental
Odometer, km 34298
GVW, kg 9072
Empty Wt., kg 4468
Axle Ratio Single Speed
Tire Size 9.00-20
24
-------
I
o
ffi 2
30
0 - SC
D - ECS
• - ECSWC
20
10
110
cr>
X
o
5 -
0.6 _
0.5 -
CERTIFICATION PROCEDURE FOR 1975 MODEL YEAR (9-FTP)
Ul
tn
O
a
EJ - SC 30
Q - ECS
0 - ECSWC
jc, 20
tn
O
10
15 I—
10
O
* 5
0.5
0.4
0.3
r
/
/
RECOMMENDED PROCEDURE FOR 1979 MODEL YEAR (9-EPA)
Figure 8. Emissions and fuel consumption using nine-mode heavy-duty gasoline engine procedures
-------
Truck installed on heavy-duty dynamometer
Emissions instrumentation for continuous traces
Heavy duty CVS system
Labeco 5th wheel
Figure 9. Heavy-duty truck evaluation on a chassis dynamometer
26
-------
This truck (No. 16002) is the same model and was purchased by the rental
agency at the same time as the truck (No. 16001) used in the Phase II
driveability demonstration. This truck, however, appeared to be somewhat
more typical of used trucks evaluated in previous projects than was truck
No. 16001. For example, a couple of backfires were experienced during
the drive to this laboratory and after-run was experienced upon shutting
off the ignition whenever the engine was fully warmed-up. Overall,
based on previous project experience with used trucks, this truck was
considered as being in acceptable operating condition. The body and drive
train were considered as being in good condition.
This truck had five forward gears. First gear, however, is not normally
required or used in over-the-road operation (except possibly when fully
loaded or when operated in hilly terrain). Therefore, all starts were made
in second gear. The shift-point vehicle speeds shown on the Light-Duty
FTP cycle were found to be generally suitable for this truck. With this
truck, however, the transmission was always in one gear higher than shown
on the cycle (i.e., in fourth instead of third, in fifth instead of
fourth, etc.). The engine speed at each of the shift points was approx-
mately 3600 rpm, which approaches the governed speed of 3800 rpm. Similar
shift points were used for the CAPE-21 cycles, with some slight modifica-
tions to more properly coordinate the shift points to the specific cycle
operation.
No significant problems were observed in driving the truck at half load,
over the CAPE-21 cycles provided for this project. The inertia simulation
was 7700 kg (17,000 Ibs) and the power setting was 17.9kilowatts (24 hp)
at 64 kilometres per hour (40 mph). A few of the very steep accelerations
on the charts could not quite be attained. The accelerations which could
not be met are identified as follows (the CAPE-21 cycles were shown in
previous Figure 3).
Acceleration
km/hr Location in Cycle (sec)
40 to 50 190 to 195
NY-NF 20 to 30 200 to 205
45 to 55 210 to 215
NY-F 60 to 70 110 to 115
80 to 90 135 to 140
These deviations of the actual drivers trace from the prescribed trace were
slight and had essentially no effect on total distance or overall truck
operation over the cycles. The cycles could be considered as being some-
what lively for this truck at half load and required considerable driver
effort to remain on the trace (i.e., rapid acceleration, clutch and gear
shift operations). In summary, the CAPE-21 cycles provided were driveable
27
-------
and appear to represent realistic operation for at least one segment of
the truck driving population.
As determined in previous projects, the 505 segment of the light-duty
FTP cycle has a number of accelerations which are too demanding for a
truck of this type. For example, between 190 and 210 seconds from start
of the cycle, an acceleration from 30 to 75 km/hr is shown to require
about 15 seconds on the chart. With this truck, at half load, about twice
that much time was required. For purposes of this project, whenever the
acceleration could not be attained, wide-open-throttle operation was main-
tained until the actual truck speed reached the printed speed trace.
The evaluations, with the engine installed in the truck, included
duplicate determinations with the:
• Chassis version of the nine-mode FTP
' CAPE-21C and CAPE-21H cycles
• Light-duty FTP
These evaluations were conducted with the engine in the baseline configuration
and in the Phase II emission control configuration, with and without an oxida-
tion catalyst.
1. Chassis Version Nine-Mode FTP Results
The chassis version nine-mode FTP results are reported in Appendix D
and are summarized in Table 5. The tests with the engine in the emission
control system (ECS) configuration, with and without the catalyst, were the
first tests run on the chassis dynamometer and the tests in the baseline con-
figuration were the last tests conducted. Itshould be noted that the horse-
powers shown on the computer printouts were not measured in these chassis
evaluations. The average horsepowers obtained in the engine dynamometer
operation were utilized. This was done to enable reporting the results in
units consistent with those previously reported. As shown in Table 5, the
composite modal results on the chassis dynamometer agree reasonably well with
the results obtained on the engine dynamometer. This reasonable agreement
tends to validate the removal and subsequent installation of the engine into
the truck without having seriously modified its emissions behavior.
Nine-mode FTP emissions on the chassis dynamometer were evaluated using
the standard modal procedure and using bagged CVS diluted samples of the
total twenty minutes of the nine-mode FTP. The results of both methods, in
units of grams per minute, are presented in Table 6. Based on these data and
a review of the continuous emission charts, the following appear to be appli-
cable.
The major difference between the bagged HC results and the modal com-
posite HC results, for the system without catalyst, appeared to be due to the
28
-------
TABLE 5. ENGINE AND CHASSIS DYNAMOMETER
NOTE: This table reports results of evaluations conducted on both engine
and chassis dynamometers.
Engine
Emissions, g/kW hr
Fuel
Configuration
a
BL
BL
BL
d
ECS
ECS
ECSWC6
ECSWC
Dynamometer
Engine
Chassis
Phase IIC
Engine
Chassis
Engine
Chassis
HC
5.31
6.07
6.57
0.98
0.92
0.12
0.07
CO
19.40
25.82
29.45
19.83
18.27
0.44
0.30
NOX
12.61
13.57
12.05
3.82
3.30
3.94
3.05
HC + NOX
17.92
19.64
18.62
4.80
4.21
4.06
3.12
kg/kW hr
0.469
0.494
0.530
0.510
0.511
0.554
0.561
a
Essentially standard engine configuration as used to establish project
, baseline values
A chassis version of the nine-mode FTP; power was not measured in the
chassis version evaluations; average power values from the respective
stationary dynamometer evaluations were used to enable reporting the
c chassis version results in consistent, familiar units
Average results obtained with the standard configuration on an engine
d dynamometer in Phase II of the project
Emissions Control System
Emissions Control System plus an oxidation catalyst
29
-------
TABLE 6. CHASSIS VERSION NINE-MODE FTP RESULTS
Engine Sampling grams/minute
Configuration Method HC CO NOX Fuel
BL Modal 1.64 7.0 3.66 134
Bagged 1.66 7.8 3.18 132
ECS Modal 0.19 3.8 0.69 106
Bagged 0.64 4.9 0.72 101
ECS w/Cat. Modal 0.01 0.1 0.57 104
Bagged 0.12 0.8 0.67 102
30
-------
HC during cut-throttle (CT) operation. These HC emissions during CT do
not enter into the modal calculations due to there being no fuel flow. The
remaining difference appeared to be due to spikes which occurred during some
of the mode changes.
For the system with an oxidation catalyst, the entire difference appeared
to be due to spikes. The HC at cut-throttle consisted of a relatively severe
spike followed by a value of only a few ppm. An accurate average value during
CT could not be readily determined and was considered as not being essential
since the CT value does not enter into the calculations for these tests. With
and without the oxidation catalyst, the differences in CO values, for the
bagged relative to the modal results, appeared to be primarily due to spikes.
The differences in NOX, with the ECS configurations, appeared to be
largely a function of mode 7 (the 3 inches of vacuum mode) where the NO
value started out higher than the final value and decreased with time. The
NOX decrease in mode 7 without the catalyst was slight, whereas, with the
oxidation catalyst the decrease was significant. This also occurred during
the previous Phase II durability demonstration and was discussed in that
section of the Phase II final report. With the baseline configuration, the
NOX increased with time in Modes 3 and 7.
As previously mentioned, from the continuous raw emission traces, it
was noted that spikes frequently occurred during the mode changes; primarily
when going to the cut-throttle mode. With the ECS engine, plus the oxidation
catalyst, approximately 0.11 out of the 0.12 grams per minute HC measured
in the bagged sample appeared to be attributable to such spikes. Of the 0.64
grams per minute HC obtained in the bagged sample with the ECS engine, it
appears that approximately one third can be attributed to each of the
following: (1) the stabilized portions of modes 1 through 8, (2) the
stabilized cut-throttle emissions, and (3) the spikes which occurred at
mode changes. Of the 1.7 grams per minute HC obtained in the bagged sample,
with the baseline configuration, essentially all was accounted for in the
standard nine-mode results; which includes the initial spike at cut-throttle.
Including the initial spike at cut-throttle, however, it appears that at
least 0.1 out of the 1.7 grams per minute HC is accounted for by spikes.
The primary significance of the preceding appears to be the obvious
conclusion that spikes become increasingly more significant, on a relative
basis, as the composite emission level decreases. A point is reached at
which the spikes become a major contributor to the total HC emissions actually
emitted and should probably become an important optimization criteria.
2. Transient Cycle Results
The transient cycle results are reported in Appendices E through G
and are summarized in Table 7. Bar charts of the summarized results are
presented in Figures 10 through 12. Since no modal weighting factors were
available for the CAPE-21 cycles, no total or composite values could be
31
-------
TABLE 7. SUMMARY OF THE TRANSIENT CYCLE RESULTS IN G/KM
u>
to
Standard Configuration
Emissions,
Test
CAPE-21C
CAPE-21H
LD-FTP
Cycle
LA-NF
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
LA-NF
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
505C
867S
505H
TOTAL
HC
25.20
3.17
7.64
2.87
13.44
5.35
11.10
2.79
12.61
2.85
15.58
5.75
12.68
7.80
8.13
8.88
CO
216.2
107.2
80.6
106.2
124.3
121.3
77.2
95.0
81.6
98.7
128.9
116.0
198.3
76.8
156.0
123.1
g/km
NOX
4.70
7.38
5.25
7.11
5.94
5.26
5.91
8.19
5.30
6.86
5.39
4.78
5.59
6.40
6.22
6.19
Fuel
I/ 100km
58.5
44.6
40.7
44.4
57.2
41.1
42.6
44.7
43.9
43.5
56.7
39.1
54.9
46.4
47.4
48.40
Emission Control
Emissions,
HC
17.35
0.48
3.82
0.56
9.41
1.33
7.16
0.65
8.26
0.69
11.56
1.53
6.00
5.56
4.39
5.33
CO
104.8
16.3
15.3
22.3
22.0
10.1
21.8
17.8
24.1
23.7
32.2
14.3
50.3
17.5
22.2
25.5
g/km
NOX
3.06
5.47
2.71
4.42
4.79
4.25
3.24
4.65
3.08
4.96
4.30
4.13
5.82
4.65
6.66
5.43
System
Fuel
VlOOkm
53.5
43.6
38.2
42.4
50.1
36.1
40.3
41.1
40.7
43.5
52.1
38.4
52.2
46.3
46.2
47.5
Emis.
Cont.
Emissions,
HC
15.90
0.23
0.31
0.25
1.43
0.18
0.92
0.22
1.77
0.20
1.57
0.20
3.56
1.70
1.48
2.02
CO
97.8
28.2
7.2
33.6
8.6
9.2
5.1
29.6
6.0
22.3
6.8
9.2
41.2
8.5
16.1
17.2
Sys. w/Catalvst
g/km
NOv
&.
2.07
3.50
2.11
3.02
4.40
3.28
2.35
3.35
2.61
3.37
4.58
3.34
4.53
3.69
5.13
4.25
Fuel
VlOOkm
55.4
45.3
40.0
43.4
53.7
39.0
40.7
43.5
40.7
43.7
53.0
37.7
50.1
45.8
46.0
46.7
-------
2
O
s
W
U
ffi
|
25
20
15
10
C/l
I
i 100
H
&
W
LA-NF LA-F
oo 250 .-
200 -
150
50 -
LA-NF LA-F NY-NF NY-F
CAPE-21C
LA-NF LA-F
LA-NF LA-F NY-NF NY-F
CAPE-21C
LA-NF LA-F
LA-NF LA-F NY-NF
CAPE-21H
LA-NF
LA-F NY-NF
CAPE-21H
NY-F
Figure 10. CAPE-21 transient driving cycle HC and CO emissions
-------
10
tn
§
H
W
in
M
g
w
8 2
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F NY-NF
CAPE-21C
NY-F LA-NF LA-F
LA-F NY-NF
CAPE-21H
NY-F
70
I 60
o
o
•H
50
o
u
w 40
D
30
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F NY-NF
CAPE-21C
NY-F
LA-NF LA-F
LA-NF LA-F NY-NF
CAPE-21H
NY-F
Figure 11. CAPE-21 transient driving cycle NOX emissions and fuel consumption
-------
25
g 20
en
co
O
M
CO
co
M
s
w
u
15
10
- sc
- ECS
- ECSWC
250
200
150 -
100
50 -
STAB.
HST
COMPOSITE
STAB.
HST
COMPOSITE
OJ
Ul
I
CT>
co
2
O
M
CO
co
H
O
3
4 .
2 -
70
60 -
50 _
40 -
30
CST
STAB.
HST
COMPOSITE
CST
STAB.
HST
COMPOSITE
Figure 12. Emissions and fuel consumption using the federal test procedure
for light-duty vehicles (LD-FTP)
-------
calculated for the cold-start and hot-start CAPE-21 evaluations. Projects
to establish national baseline emission levels, using cycles developed
from CAPE-21, are currently in process. To avoid any potential confusion,
the term standard configuration (SC), rather than baseline configuration will
be used in the reporting of all transient cycle results.
In general, emissions and fuel consumption were lower with the ECS
and ECSWC engine configurations than with the standard engine configuration.
The differences in emissions between the two engine configurations, however,
varied considerably depending on the specific cycle being compared. Such
variations are apparent in the data summarized in Table 8. Refering to the
data in Table 8, the precentage reduction in HC in the NY-F cycle with the
ECS engine relative to the SC engine, was about three times the HC reduction in
the NY-F cycle, (i.e., 74 divided by 26). The reduction in fuel consumption
with the ECS engine was eight percent in the NY-F and only two percent in NY-NF.
(It should be pointed out that the repeatability and reproducibility of emissions
and fuel consumption have not been established for the CAPE-21 evaluations).
The LA-NF and the NY-NF cycles are relatively low speed with considerable
operation at idle. The LA-F and NY-F cycles are higher speed with very little
operation at idle. In general, HC emissions in g/km were significantly higher
in the -NF than in the -F cycles. Both HC and CO emissions were significantly
higher in the CAPE-21C cold start LA-NF cycle than in any of the other CAPE-21
cycles. There were no such broadly applicable trends apparent with the NOX
emissions, fuel consumption, or the CO emissions in other than the cold start cycles,
The CAPE-21C cold start LA-NF (Bag 1) had high HC and CO emissions relative
to emissions over the same LA-NF cycle after the engine was warmed-up. With
the engine in the standard configuration HC and CO emissions in Bag 1 were
generally two to three times the emissions over the LA-NF cycle with the engine
warmed-up. With the catalyst, HC and CO emissions in Bag 1 were generally
10 to 20 times the emissions over the LA-NF cycle with the engine warmed-up.
Following are several observations based on review of the raw emission
continuous traces:
(1.) With the oxidation catalyst installed, it was approximately two
minutes before effective catalytic control of the HC emissions was attained.
It is important to note that Cycle 1 in the CAPE-21C is a cold start and
initially has over one minute of idle operation before actual driving begins.
(2.) After the engine was warmed-up, the major source of the HC emissions
appeared to be related to the cut-throttle operation. With the emission control
system, with and without the catalyst, the major contributor of HC emissions
appeared to be the spikes that occurred immediately upon going to cut-throttle.
These spikes were significantly more severe without the catalyst than they
were with the catalyst installed. Therefore, with the emission control system,
the rate of HC emissions was greatest in those cycles having the greatest
number of rapid engine decelerations; such as during rapid gear shifting.
36
-------
TABLE 3. COMPARISON OF CAPE-21H NY-NF AND
NY-F CYCLE RESULTS
Engine
Configuration
SC
ECS
ECS w/Cat.
SC
ECS
ECS w/Cat.
SC
ECS
ECS w/Cat.
SC
ECS
ECS w/Cat.
Emissions, g/km
Cycle
NY-NF
II
II
NY-F
ti
11
In
NY-NF
II
II
NY-F
II
II
HC
15.6
11.6
1.6
5.7
1.5
0.2
Percent of
100
74
10
100
26
4
CO
129
32
7
116
14
9
Standard
100
25
5
100
12
8
NOX
5.4
4.3
4.6
4.8
4.1
3.3
Fuel,
VlOO km
56.7
52.0
53.0
39.1
38.4
37.7
Configuration
100
80
85
100
85
69
100
92
93
100
98
96
In Percent Reduction from Standard Configuration
SC
ECS
ECS w/Cat.
SC
ECS
ECS w/Cat.
NY-NF
NY-F
0
26
90
0
74
96
0
75
95
0
88
92
0
20
25
0
15
31
0
8
7
0
2
4
37
-------
(3.) The sources of the CO emissions appeared to be wide-open-throttle
operation and the spikes which occurred immediately after rapidly going to
cut-throttle. The primary source appeared to be the wide-open-throttle oper-
ation at higher engine speeds.
With the emission control systems, the major contributor of NOX emissions
appeared to be operation at or near wide-open-throttle. With the standard
configuration, the CO emissions were high (i.e., raw CO emissions greater
than six percent) and the NOX emissions were relatively low (less than 600
ppm) at WOT. The importance of this factor can be seen in comparing the
CO and NOX emissions results obtained with the standard configuration and
the emission control system configurations. The CO emissions with the
standard configuration were generally over four times greater than the CO
emissions with the emission control systems. Standard configuration NOX
emissions, however, were generally not greater than two times the NOX emissions
obtained with the emission control system.
3. Additional Analyses of the Phase II Results
In Table 9, the summarized results are listed in units of grams per
minute. A primary usage of data presentation in these units is that it
enables some relative comparisons between the nine-mode and transient cycle
results. The data in Table 9 show that HC and CO emissions were consistently
significantly lower in the nine-mode tests than in the transient cycles. There
were no such definite relationships apparent with the NOX emissions.
In Table 10, the data for the emission control system, without and
with the oxidation catalyst, are reported in terms of the percent of the
value for the standard configuration. The percent values were calculated
separately and individually for each cycle and/or composite value.
Referring to Table 10, the general trends of the transient evaluations
relative to the nine-mode FTP and EPA evaluations are summarized as follows:
Transient Emissions Relative to
Nine-Mode Emissions
co NOx
Standard Configuration Same* Same* Same*
Emission Control System Higher Lower Higher
Ends. Cont. Sys. w/Cat. Higher Higher Higher
* Assigned relationship for purposes of this illustration
Except for the CO emissions with the emission control system, these data
indicate that the emissions reduction achieved in the nine-mode cycles
were generally not achieved to the same degree in the transient cycles.
38
-------
TABLE 9. SUMMARY OF THE PHASE III RESULTS IN G/MIN
Standard Configur
Test
CAPE- 2 1C
CAPE-21H
LD-FTP
9-FTP
9-EPA
Cycle
LA-NF
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
LA-NF
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
505C
867S
505H
TOTAL
Modal*
Modal*
Emissions, g/min
HC
9.71
3.81
2.97
3.41
2.79
3.89
4.35
3.40
4.99
3.46
3.17
4.14
7.80
3.29
5.23
4.42
1.44
1.73
CO
83.3
129.0
31.3
126.1
25.8
88.3
30.2
115.5
32.3
119.7
26.2
83.6
124.6
29.8
99.5
59.6
5.27
9.78
NOX
1.81
8.87
2.04
8.45
1.23
3.83
2.32
9.96
2.10
8.32
1.10
3.44
3.71
2.95
4.36
3.37
3.43
4.17
ation
Fuel
g/min
166.4
396.0
116.8
390.3
87.5
220.9
123.3
401.2
128.5
389.5
85.3
208.1
264.5
150.2
237.5
187.3
127.4
136.9
Emission Control
Emissions / g/min
HC
6.64
0.59
1.48
0.67
1.90
0.97
2.74
0.79
3.18
0.82
2.38
1.11
4.00
2.42
2.95
2.78
0.20
0.16
CO
40.2
20.0
6.0
26.9
4.5
7.4
8.4
21.5
9.3
28.2
6.7
10.3
33.3
7.6
15.0
13.3
4.12
4.20
NOX
1.17
6.75
1.06
5.32
0.96
3.10
1.25
5.61
1.19
5.91
0.89
2.98
3.88
2.02
4.47
2.83
0.79
1.47
System
Fuel
g/min
151.1
398.0
109.5
373.1
74.6
194.4
114.2
366.4
116.1
382.5
79.2
204.7
256.9
148.9
229.4
182.9
106.0
124.0
Emis.
Cont. Svs. w/Catalvst
Emissions, a/min Fuel
HC
6.17
0.28
0.12
0.30
0.30
0.13
0.35
0.27
0.70
0.24
0.32
0.15
2.38
0.74
0.99
1.05
0.02
0.01
CO
37.9
33.9
2.9
40.5
1.8
6.7
2.0
35.8
2.4
26.8
1.4
6.7
27.5
3.70
10.78
8.97
0.08
0.03
NOX
•*
0.80
4.20
0.83
3.63
0.91
2.38
0.92
4.04
1.02
4.04
0.93
2.43
3.02
1.61
3.44
2.22
0.73
1.27
q/min
158.8
401.6
116.8
386.1
81.6
209.7
117.6
388.3
118.2
388.2
79.7
202.6
246.2
147.2
227.9
179.6
102.0
128.4
Engine dymamometer results (Reported in Appendix C)
-------
TABLE 10. ECS RESULTS IN PERCENT OF STANDARD CONFIGURATION VALUES
Percent of Values Obtained with the Standard Engine Configurations
Test
CAPE-21C
CAPE-21H
1975 FTP
LA-NF
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
LA-NF
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
Cycle
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
2
3
4
9-FTP *
9-EPA *
505C 1
867S 2
505H 3
TOTAL COMPOSITE
ENGINE DYNAMOMETER
ENGINE DYNAMOMETER
Emission Control System
HC
69
15
50
20
70
25
65
23
66
24
74
27
47
71
54
60
I 18
I 10
CO
48
15
19
21
18
8
28
19
30
24
25
12
25
23
14
21
102
43
NOx
65
88
52
62
81
81
55
57
58
72
80
86
104
73
107
88
30
38
Fuel
91
98
94
95
88
88
95
92
93
100
92
98
95
100
98
98
109
91
Emis.
HC
63
7
4
9
11
3
8
8
14
7
10
3
28
22
18
23
2
<1
Cont. Sys. with Catalyst
CO
45
26
9
32
7
8
7
31
7
23
5
8
21
11
10
14
2
<1
NOx
44
47
40
42
74
62
40
41
49
49
85
70
81
58
82
69
31
31
Fuel
95
102
98
98
94
95
95
97
93
101
93
97
91
99
97
97
118
95
*Based on units of g/kW hr for emission and kg/kW hr for fuel consumption
-------
Relative to fuel consumption, based on units of kgAWh there was no
apparent correlation between the fuel consumption values for the nine-mode
FTP and any of the transient cycles. With the nine-mode EPA, there was in-
sufficient data to determine whether any significant correlation exists
between the nine-mode results and the transient results.
In summary, some of the findings in these Phase III evaluations are as
follows:
1. The Chevrolet c-60 truck at half payload could acceptably follow
the CAPE-21 driving cycles used in this project. The prescribed
rate of acceleration could not be attained in a few areas, but
such deviations were minor.
2. in the transient evaluations, the emissions and fuel consumption
were generally lower with the emission control system than with the
baseline configuration. In most of the transient driving cycles
the reductions in emissions were very significant.
3. With the single exception of CO emissions, when using the emissions
control system without the catalyst, the reduction in emissions and
fuel consumption relative to baseline were generally greater in the
nine-mode procedures than in the transient cycles. It should be
noted that the engine was optimized for the nine-mode procedure.
4. As the HC emissions were controlled to lower levels, the HC spikes
that generally occurred during transient operation became a signi-
ficant factor in total cycle HC emissions.
5. There were no readily apparent direct relationships between the nine-
mode procedures results and the results obtained with the transient
driving cycles.
C. Visual Examination of the Exhaust Thermal Reactors
After completion of the evaluations on the chassis dynamometer, the
thermal reactors were visually examined. Some cracks were noted in the inner
can of the reactor used on the right exhaust bank in approximately the same
area in which severe cracking occurred during the Phase II evaluations Over-
all condition of these thermal reactors can not be readily determined, however,
without dissection.
During these Phase III evaluations, exhaust thermal reactor exit tem-
peratures were recorded during all evalutions. The temperatures were de-
termined at the axial centerline at the exit from the units. Recommended
maximum operating temperature was 1038°C; with allowance for very short-term
operation up to 1066°C. During a portion of the CAPE-21 LA-F cycle the
temperature consistently approached the 1066°c limit. Therefore, these
thermal reactors were being operated at the very limit of their maximum
specified exit temperature. There was no apparent exceeding of these tem-
perature limits.
41
-------
The cracks in the inner reactor occurred in the area in which exhaust
from all applicable cylinders passes prior to being directionally redirected
before final passage and exit from the thermal reactors. Therefore, the
temperature in the area in which the cracks occurred could possibly have been
somewhat higher than 1066°C.
A primary conclusion is that the thermal reactor operating temperatures
or conditions which occur with this system appear to be rather severe and
some reduction of the system operating temperature or severity of operation
may be required. One potential approach would be to limit the amount of air
injection during high speed WOT operation, or during any other condition at
which high thermal reactor temperatures or thermal stresses occur. Such an
approach would be expected to result in some increase in CO emissions. Other
emissions could also be affected.
42
-------
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS
This project has resulted in a significant reduction in emissions and
fuel consumption for a HD gasoline engine. These reductions were achieved
without degradation of engine operation and performance. The thermal reac-
tors, however, deteriorated under HD engine operation and need reduction in
maximum interior reactor temperatures or possibly further design improve-
ment. The goals of this project were met by means of electronic fuel in-
jection, exhaust gas recirculation and thermal reactors.
Throughout this project, a nine-mode procedure was used for optimiz-
ing and demonstrating emission and fuel economy targets. Current plans of
the EPA are to replace the steady-state nine-mode engine test with a transient
engine test for 1983. The transient cycle, based on the CAPE-21 HD "Truck
Driving Pattern and Use Survey," may include operation from a cold engine
start after overnight soak as is the current case for LD vehicles. As dis-
cussed in this report, the operation of the same vehicle and engine on the
chassis dynamometer transient cycles did not give the same improvement,
relative to the uncontrolled engine, as achieved in the nine-mode evalua-
tions. In short, a correlation between the two distinctly different proce-
dures has not been possible, to date.
With the above concluding statements of the three-phase project, sev-
eral suggestions are offered for consideration. These suggestions were pre-
pared in accordance with the requirements of Task IV in the Phase III Scope
of Work.
1. Future gasoline engine HD control technology evaluations should be
based on the transient procedure planned for 1983. This means that para-
metric and system optimization should be performed using the latest EPA cy-
cles representing road operation. The nine-mode FTP should be employed on
a selected basis to "bridge" advanced system levels to those by the current
procedure.
2. Currently, the transient cycles under study for 1983 involve four
separate nominal five-minute segments representing freeway and non-freeway
operation in Los Angeles and New York City. It would be helpful to have
weighting factors for each segment in order to obtain a total composite val-
ue. A composite self-weighting driving cycle that represents road operation
would be even more useful. Its main importance would be in evaluation of
currently unregulated emissions such as sulfate, particulate, polynuclear
aromatics, partially oxygenated materials, etc. The sample period of five
minutes is generally insufficient for trap or filter collection of the un-
regulated emissions of potential interest.
3. The importance of a "cold start" segment of the transient procedure
needs to be established. For the gasoline truck evaluated during this pro-
ject, high rates of HC and CO were produced during the first few minutes of
43
-------
operation following "cold start" after overnight soak. In this respect,
the emissions characteristics of the HD gasoline resembled that of the LD
vehicle. The frequency of "cold start" per mile of operation for HD gaso-
line vehicles, however, may be different from that for passenger cars.
4. The CAPE-21 transient test cycles used in this project were for
chassis dynamometer operated vehicles. Transient test cycles for gaso-
line (and diesel) HD engines have been derived from the CAPE-21 project
for engine dynamometer type testing. The engine cycles are understood to
be one of the methods under consideration for 1983. It is uncertain, at
this time, whether the same engine would give the same emission levels
when operated in a truck by the chassis cycles as when operated on an en-
gine dynamometer. To the extent that the chassis dynamometer vehicle test-
ing will be useful, some indication of correlation would be beneficial.
5. For the 1983 transient procedure, it is expected that mass emis-
sions will be expressed in terms of grams per cycle kW-hr. The major prob-
lem in performing equivalent chassis dynamometer testing, is the inability
to continuously measure the power produced at the engine flywheel. Other
items of concern are the determinations of appropriate road-load and iner-
tia simulation characteristics. At the present time, there is no simple
solution to any of these concerns. A chassis dynamometer test procedure
would be very useful in surveillance or development of in-use emissions
factors. Correlations per recommendation 4 would be needed, however.
6. Future gasoline HD emission control technology evaluations should
incorporate the latest advances from gasoline LD vehicles. An example of
a recent system which appears to have potential application to HD vehicles
is the 3-way catalyst with feedback carburetor. A project could be struc-
tured around this and other developments that would continue to demonstrate
the ability to reduce emissions and maintain fuel economy of HD gasoline
powered vehicles. Such additional experimental effort could profit from
recommendations 1-5.
7. Future emission evaluations of engines and control systems should
incorporate a provision for determination of unregulated emissions. These
include but are not necessarily limited to particulate, sulfate, polynuclear
aromatics, organic fraction of particulate, and aldehydes. Such determi-
nation should be limited to the base engine versus the optimized engine.
8. As newer gasoline emission control approaches materialize, it may
be instructive to evaluate the effect of malfunction conditions on both
regulated and unregulated emissions. Such a project could resemble that
being performed currently with light-duty gasoline vehicles under EPA con-
tracts 68-03-2499 and 68-03-2588. In addition to those items mentioned
in recommendation 7, sulfides, ammonia, organic amines, hydrogen cyanide,
and possibly nickel carbonyl may be of interest. This work could utilize the
methodology and qualification efforts under the two previously mentioned con-
tracts .
44
-------
9. The control equipped engine employed in this project was optimized
by the nine-mode procedure. With the advent of the transient cycles, fur-
ther investigations are not recommended until the system has been re-opti-
mized to the CAPE-21 transient cycles. Recommendations 1-5 covered the tran-
sient cycle needs as they would affect future work with this engine for
either unregulated (recommendation 7) or malfunction (recommendation 8)
emissions.
10. It is possible to operate HD gasoline trucks on a chassis dyna-
mometer by the 1975 FTP for LD vehicles. The speed-time trace, however,
is very demanding of the vehicle and it normally cannot follow the rapid
acceleration rates. Further use of the 1975 LD-FTP is not recommended for
HD vehicles unless the speed-time trace is "slowed-down". By slowing the
chart speed of the driver's aid, by 10 to 20 percent, the cycle would be
more driveable and could possibly approach that which would occur on the
road.
45
-------
LIST OF REFERENCES
1. Urban, Charles M. and Karl J. Springer, "Heavy Duty Fuel Economy
Program Phase II - Evaluation of Emission Control Technology
Approaches." Final Report No. EPA-460/3-77-010 to the Environmental
Protection Agency under Contract No. 68-03-2220, July 1977.
2. Ingalls, Melvin N. and Robert L. Mason, "Heavy-Duty Fuel Economy
Program - Phase I, Specific Analysis of Certain Existing Data."
Final Report No. EPA-460/3-77-001 to the Environmental Protection
Agency under Contract 68-03-2220, January 1977.
3. Environmental Protection Agency, "Recommended Heavy-Duty Gasoline
Instrumentation and Test Procedures, July 11, 1975. (This procedure,
with some modifications, was included in the proposed rules dated
May 24, 1976 and in the final rules dated September 8, 1977).
• Federal Register, Vol. 41, No. 101, Environmental
Protection Agency, "Proposed Rules for Heavy-Duty
Engines," May 24, 1976.
• Federal Register, Vol. 42, No. 174, Environmental
Protection Agency, "Certification and Test Procedures
for Heavy-Duty Engines for 1979 and Later Model Years,"
September 8, 1977.
4. Urban, Charles M. and Karl J. Springer, "Study of Emissions from
Heavy-Duty Vehicles." Final Report No. EPA-460/3-76-012 to the
Environmental Protection Agency under Contract 68-03-2147, May 1976.
5. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 85, Subpart
A, Sections applicable to 1977 Model Year Light-Duty Vehicles.
6. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 85, Subpart H,
Sections applicable to 1975 Model Year Heavy-Duty Engines.
7. Letter from Andrew Kaupert, Environmental Protection Agency, to
Charles Urban, Southwest Research Institute, dated November 28, 1977.
8. ASTM Special Publication 315F, "Multi-Cylinder Test Sequence for
Evaluating Automotive Engine Oils."
46
-------
APPENDICES
A. General Information
B. Engine Inspection Data
C. Engine Dynamometer Nine-Mode Results
D. Chassis Version Nine-Mode FTP Results
E. Chassis Transient Test Results - SCa
F. Chassis Transient Test Results - ECSb
G. Chassis Transient Test Results - ECSwCC
^Standard Configuration
^Emission Control System
Emission Control System with Catalyst
c
-------
APPENDIX A
GENERAL INFORMATION
Table A-l Description of Engine and Components
Table A-2 Explanation of Nine-Mode FTP Computer
Printout Sheets
Table A-3 Explanation of Nine-Mode EPA Computer
Printout Sheets
-------
TABLE A-l. DESCRIPTION OF ENGINE AND COMPONENTS
Baseline Components
Engine
Carburetor3
Distributor"
C4-a v-f-AV*
Optimization Components
Part Number
343678
7044134
1111364
fi£R797A
1 1 nn^/l'}
i i note,')
fi47O77Q
OQ1 T4T7
Make or
Model No.
C-60
Rochester
Delco Remy
R— AAT
Description or
Serial No.
V0827TMX
N6606
4H12
Electronic Fuel Injection
Thermal Reactors0
Back Pressure EGR Valves
Air Pump0
Air Filter
Diverter Valve
HEI Distributor
Spark Plugs
HEI Plug Wires
Catalytic Converter
d 2-Barrel
ECU-1607250
L-73641
698364
7029295
1112880
Bendix
GM
MX-4809
Saginaw
8908551
PTX 7.25-2-3MOD3
R44TX
Engelhard
Has centrifugal but does not have vacuum advance
Experimental Unit
Similar to 1975
Cadillac System
Phase 5 Assembly
254863V
6344002
A-2
-------
TABLE A-2. EXPLANATION OF NINE-MODE FTP
COMPUTER PRINTOUT SHEETS
COLUMN EXPLANATION
Column
1
2
3
Column Title
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
MODE
AS MEASURED HC-FID
AS MEASURED CO
AS MEASURED CO2
AS MEASURED NOX-CL
TOTAL CARBON
FUEL G/HR
CALCULATED G/HR HC
CALCULATED G/HR CO
CALCULATED G/HR NOX
WT. FACT.
WEIGHTED G/HR HC-FIC
WEIGHTED G/HR CO
WEIGHTED G/HR NOX-CL
KW
HP
Explanation
Mode number and manifold vacuum
Measured hydrocarbon emissions, ppmC
Measured carbon monoxide emissions in
percent
Measured carbon dioxide emissions in
percent
Measured oxides of nitrogen emissions in
ppm NOX
The percentage of exhaust gas that is
carbon containing gas
Engine Fuel consumption in Grams/Hr
Hydrocarbon emissions in Grams/Hr calcu-
lated from measured HC (HC by FID corrected
to a dry gas basis)
Carbon monoxide emissions in Grams/Hr
calculated from measured CO
Oxides of nitrogen emissions in Grams/Hr
calculated as NO2 from measured NOX
Weighting factor for each mode
Hydrocarbon emissions in Grams/Hr times
the weighting factor
Carbon monoxide emissions in Grams/Hr
times the weighting factor
Oxides of nitrogen emissions as NO2 Grams/
Hr times the weighting factor
Engine dynamometer power in kilowatts
Engine dynamometer power in horsepower
A-3
-------
TABLE A-2 (Cont'd). EXPLANATION OF NINE-MODE FTP
COMPUTER PRINTOUT SHEETS
LINE EXPLANATION
1st Line
2nd Line
ENGINE - (X)
TEST - (X)
Table number and Title
SwRI engine identification number
Test number. Tests numbered sequentially.
RUN - (X)
BETWEEN RUN & DATE
(XX) - (XX) - (XX)
K = (X.XXX)
HUM = (XX.X)G/KG
Line Starting
CYCLE COMPOSITE
AVERAGE SUM-(COMPOSITE VALUES
FOR CYCLES 1 & 2)
AVERAGE SUM-(COMPOSITE VALUES
FOR CYCLES 3 & 4)
FOUR CYCLE COMPOSITE
CORRECTED NO,
SFC
Run number of a specific test
Brief description of engine configuration
Date in month, day and year
Humidity correction factor for cycle com-
posite NO2- K = .634 + .00654 H - .000022 H2,
Where H = absolute humidity in grains/ib DA
Absolute humidity in grams/kilogram
Grams/kw-hr for cycle, summation of the
weighted emission for each mode divided
by the summation of the weighted power
for each mode, i.e.
I(Emission x W.F.)
E(kw x W.F.)
SUM (Cycle 1) + SUM (Cycle 2)
2
SUM (Cycle 3) + SUM (Cycle 4)
2
Composite of all four cycles in Grams/kW-hr
and (grams/bhp-hr) using formula shown
Four cycle composite NO as NO, times the
humidity correction factor, K
Calculated in the same manner as the emis-
sions using the formulas given for CYCLE
COMPOSITE EMISSIONS
A-4
-------
TABLE A-3. EXPLANATION OF NINE-MODE EPA
COMPUTER PRINTOUT SHEETS
COLUMN EXPLANATION (UPPER COLUMNS)
Column Column Title
1
2
3
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
MODE
AS MEASURED HC-FID
AS MEASURED CO
AS MEASURED CO,,
AS MEASURED NOX-CL
TOTAL CARBON
FUEL G/HR
CALCULATED G/HR HC
CALCULATED G/HR CO
CALCULATED G/HR NOV
A
WT. FACT.
WEIGHTED G/HR HC-FID
WEIGHTED G/HR CO
WEIGHTED G/HR NOX-CL
CKW
VAC.MM
Explanation
Mode number and % of max. torque
Measured hydrocarbon emissions in ppmC
Measured carbon monoxide emissions in
percent
Measured carbon dioxide emissions in
percent
Measured oxides of nitrogens emissions
in ppm NOX
The percentage of exhaust gas that is
carbon containing gases
Engine fuel consumption in Grams/Hr
Hydrocarbon emissions in Grams/Hr cal-
culated from measured HC (HC by FID
corrected to dry gas basis)
Carbon monoxide emissions in Grams/Hr
calculated from measured CO
Oxides of nitrogen emissions in Grams/Hr
calculated as N02 from measured NOX and
humidity corrected using factor K
Weighting factor for each mode
Hydrocarbon emissions in Grams/Hr times
the weighting factor
Carbon monoxide emissions in Grams/Hr
times the weighting factor
Oxides of nitrogen emissions as NO2
Grams/Hr times the weighting factor
Corrected engine dynamometer power in
kilowatts
Measured manifold vacuum in millimeters
of mercury
A-5
-------
TABLE A-3 (Cont'd). EXPLANATION OF NINE-MODE EPA
COMPUTER PRINTOUT SHEETS
COLUMN EXPLANATION (LOWER COLUMNS)
Column
1
2
Column Title
MODE
ID
3
4
5
6
7
8
MV
CHP
CTQ
FC
BSFC
BSNOX
9 F/A
10 SFC KG/KW HR
11 RPM
12 CALC A/F
13-17 PERCENT OF TOTAL
LINE EXPLANATION
1st Line
2nd Line
ENGINE - (X)
TEST - (X)
RUN - (X)
Explanation
Mode number and % of max. torque
Defined at bottom of the printout sheet
when column is used
Manifold vacuum in inches of mercury
Corrected brake horsepower
Corrected torque in ft-lbs
Fuel consumption in Ibs/hr
Brake specific fuel consumption in Ibs/bhp-hr
Brake specific NOX as NO2 emissions in
b/bhp-hr
Computed dry fuel to air ratio (computed
using HC and CO emission rates)
Specific fuel consumption in kg/kw-hr
Engine speed in revolution per minute
Inverse of the F/A in column 9
Percent contribution of that mode to the
total weighted composite value for that
cycle
Table number and Title
SwRI engine identification number
Test number. Tests numbered sequentially
Run number of a specific test
A-6
-------
TABLE A-3 (Cont'd). EXPLANATION OF NINE-MODE EPA
COMPUTER PRINTOUT SHEETS
LINE EXPLANATION
2nd Line (Cont'd)
(XX) - (XX) - (XX)
BETWEEN DATE & K
K = (X.XXX)
HUM = (XX.X) G/KG
Line Starting
CYCLE COMPOSITE
Date in month, day and year
Brief description of engine configuration
Humidity correction factor for cycle com-
posite NO2. K = .634 + .00654 H -
.0000222 H2. Where H = absolute humidity
in grainsAb DA
Absolute humidity in grams/kilogram
Grams/kW-hr for cycle, summation of the
weighted emission for each mode divided
by the summation of the weighted power
for each mode, i.e.
Z (Emission x W.F.)
E(kW x W.F.)
AVERAGE SUM - (COMPOSITE VALUES SUM (Cycle 1) + SUM (Cycle 2)
FOR CYCLES 1 AND 2 2
AVERAGE SUM - (COMPOSITE VALUES SUM (Cycle 3) + SUM (Cycle 4)
FOR CYCLES 3 AND 4 2
FOUR CYCLE COMPOSITE
SFC
Composite of all four cycles in Grams/kW-
hr and (grams/bhp-hr) using formula shown
Calculated in the same manner as the
emissions using the formulas given for
CYCLE COMPOSITE EMISSIONS
A-7
-------
APPENDIX B
ENGINE INSPECTION DATA
Table B-l Engine Deposit Rating
Table B-2 Engine Sludge and Varnish
Table B-3 Engine Wear Measurements
-------
TABLE B-l. VISUAL RATING OF ENGINE DEPOSITS AND ENGINE INTERIOR
METRIC UNITS-MILLIMETRE
Engine:
Engine Usage:
SwRI Project:
Date:
350 Chevrolet HD with Emission Control System
468 hours of Optimization, 1500 hours Durability and a
Driveability Evaluation
11-4311, EPA Contract No. 68-03-2220
September 11, 1977
Spark Plugs (New at Start of Driveability Evaluation)
All spark plugs had thin gray deposit on electrode, thin black deposit on
body, and 1.52 mm gap.
Combustion Chamber Interior Appearance
Cylinder
1L
3L
5L
7L
2R
4R
6R
8R
Deposit
Black colored carbonaceous deposit over most of area; 13 mm
by 76 mm area at the extremity of the squish area was es-
sentially free of deposits; deposits were generally 0.13
to 0.25 mm thick over most of the area; several small
patches (up to 320 sq mm total area) of deposits around
exhaust valve seat 0.51 mm thick.
Similar to 1L, except area essentially free of deposits at
extremity of squish area was about 10 mm by 50 mm and
total area with deposits over 0.51 mm thick was about
645 sq mm.
Black colored carbonaceous deposits 0.13 mm or less in
thickness over most of area; deposits at extremity of
squish area were 0.13 to 0.25 mm thick; approximately 645
sq mm of deposits around exhaust valve seat were gray
colored and 0.25 to 0.38 mm thick.
Black colored carbonaceous deposits 0.13 to 0.25 mm thick '
over entire area; deposits were generally the thicker .
value around exhaust valve seat.
Same as 3L.
Similar to 7L, except 320 93 mm of deposit was about 0.38 mm
thick.
Same as 4R.
Same as 4R.
Exhaust Valve Underheads and Stems
Cylinder
1L
3L
5L
7L
2R
Deposit
Hard gray deposit approximately 0.13
on 25 to 50 percent of area.
Same as 1L.
Same as 1L.
Same as 1L.
Same as 1L.
mm
thick; flaking off
B-2
-------
TABLE B-l (Cont'd.)
VISUAL RATING OF ENGINE DEPOSITS AND ENGINE INTERIOR
METRIC UNITS-MILLIMETRE
4R Same as 1L.
6R Same as 1L.
8R Same as 1L.
Intake Valve Underheads and Steins
Cylinder
1L
3L
5L
7L
2R
4R
6R
8R
Deposit
Hard black carbonaceous deposits up to 1.6 mm thick on
valve tulip; less than 0.13 mm thick on stem.
Similar to 1L, except deposit up to 0.25 mm on stem.
Hard black carbonaceous deposits up to 3.2 mm thick on valve
tulip; 0.25 to 0.38 mm on stem.
Similar to 5L, except deposits less than 0.25 mm on stem
and less total deposits on tulip.
Same as 3L.
Hard black carbonaceous deposits up to 2.4mm thick on
valve tulip; 0.13 to 0.38 mm thick deposits on stem.
Same as 5L.
Same as 3L.
Intake Port at Valve Opening
Cylinder
1L
3L
5L
7L
2R
4R
6R
8R
Deposit
Black carbonaceous deposits up to 0.8 mm thick near seat;
essentially clean in area around valve stem boss.
Same as 1L.
Black carbonaceous deposits up to 1.6 mm thick over an area
13 mm by 25 mm near seat; thin black deposits around
valve stem boss.
Same as 1L.
Same as 1L.
Black carbonaceous deposits up to 2.4 mm thick over an area
about 13 mm by 25 mm near seat; only thin film over most
of remaining area.
Same as 4R. •
Same as 5L.
Exhaust Port, at Valve Opening
Cylinder
1L
3L
5L
7L
2R
4R
Deposit
Black carbonaceous deposits less than 0.13 mm thick over
entire surface.
Black carbonaceous deposits up to 0.25 mm thick over most
of surface; patches of light gray deposit up to 1.6 mm
thick and 320 sq mm total area around valve stem boss.
Same as 1L.
Same as 3L.
Same as 1L.
Black carbonaceous deposits less than 0.25 mm thick near
seat; gray colored deposits from0.25 mm to 1.6 mm
thick over remainder of area.
B-3
-------
TABLE B-l (Cont'd.) VISUAL RATING OF ENGINE DEPOSITS AND ENGINE INTERIOR
METRIC UNITS-MILLIMETRE
6R Same as 3L.
8R Same as 3L.
Intake Ports in Head From Manifold
All coated with dull black deposit, hard, about 0.13 to 0.25 mm thick.
Exhaust Ports in Head to Manifold*
Cylinder . Deposit
1L Light gray deposit, hard, about 0.13 to 0.25 mm thick.
3L Light gray deposit, hard, ranging from 0.13 to 1.6 mm
thickness; 0.8 to 1.6 mm thick over about third of the
total surface area of port liner.
5L Similar to 1L, except less than 0.13 mm thick.
7L Same as 1L.
2R Similar to 3L, except less than 0.8 mm thick.
4R Same as 1L.
6R Same as 1L.
8R Similar to 1L, except up to 0.38 mm thick.
* stainless steel exhaust port liners
Piston Tops
Cylinder Deposit
1L Flaky black carbonaceous deposits from 0.13 to 1.02 mm
over about three fourths of total surface area; about one
fourth of surface area near perimeter was essentially
clean.
3L Flaky black carbonaceous deposits from 0.13 to 0.76 mm
over entire surface, except for very small areas where
" deposit had flaked off.
5L Similar to 3L except maximum deposit thickness was 0.38 mm
7L Same as 3L.
2R Same as 3L.
4R Similar to 3L, except more areas where the deposit had
flaked off.
6R Same as 3L.
8R Similar to 1L, except for less area that was essentially
clean and small area of deposit up to 1.27 mm
Intake Manifold Ports
All ports coated with dull black deposit, hard, about 0.13 to 0.25 mm
thick.
B-4
-------
TABLE B-l (Cont'd.) VISUAL RATING OF ENGINE DEPOSITS AND ENGINE INTERIOR
METRIC UNITS-MILLIMETRE
Exhaust Thermal Reactor Inlet Ports
Cylinder Deposit
1L Light gray deposit, hard, 0.25 to 0.76 mm thick; most de-
posit had flaked off after 25 mm from entrance.
3L Same as 1L.
5L Light gray deposit, hard, up to 0.13 mm thick; no flaking
off.
7L Similar to 5L, except 0.13 to 0.25 mm thick.
2R Similar to 1L, except very little had flaked off.
4R Same as 7L.
6R Same as 1L.
8R Same as 7L.
EFI Throttle Body
Soft, oily, sludge-like deposit approximately 0.25 mm thick coating on
bottom of throttle plate and on lower throat area of throttle body.
EGR Valves
Light gray deposit on orifice approximately 0.13 mm thick; dark gray to
black deposit about 0.13 mm thick on pintle and exit port.
Thermal Reactor Exits
Essentially no deposits.
B-5
-------
TABLE B-2. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE PORTIONS OP
SEQUENCE VC RATINGS
Note: Ratings are 1 through 10, with 1 as dirty or severe
and 10 as clean.
SLUDGE
Left Rocker Arm Cover
Right Rocker Arm Cover
Underside of Intake Manifold
Oil Pan
Left Valve Deck
Right Valve Deck
Push Rod Chamber
Timing Gear Cover
VARNISH
Piston Skirts
Valve Lifters
DEPOSITS
Intake Valves
CLOGGING
Oil Rings
Oil Screen
Rating
9.6
9.7
9.8
9.8
9.9
9.9
9.8
9.6
7.9
6.7
7.3
Percent
0
0
B-6
-------
TABLE B-3. SUMMARY OF MEASUREMENTS ON THE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
CONFIGURED ENGINE - METRIC UNITS-MILLIMETRE
CYLINDER BORE DIAMETER - MAXIMUM
___^__ Location
Cylinder
Number Top Bottom
4, 5 & 6 101.68-101.70 101.65-101.68
1, 2 & 8a 101.75 101.70-101.75
3b 101.90 101.80
7 101.88 101.73
On cylinders 1, 2 and 8 the compression rings were lined up
and a longitudinal ridge of metal remained on the cylinder
wall m the area of the lined up ring gaps. The ridge in
each cylinder was approximately 0.025 to 0.076 mm higlu
bCylinder 3 had a groove approximately 0.051 mm deep by 2.54 mm
T.T-1 Af* J
wide.
Note: If the cylinders have less than 0.127 mm taper or
wear they can be reconditioned with a hone and fitted with
0.025 mm oversize pistons.
PISTON DIAMETER - MINIMUM
Piston Location
Number Top Middle Skirt
4 « 5 101.52-101.55 101.50-101.52 101.55-101.57
2, 6 S 8 101.52-101.55 101.47 101.55-101.57
If 3 & 7 101.52-101.55 101.45 101.52-101.55
B-7
-------
TABLE B-3 (Cont'd). SUMMARY OF MEASUREMENTS ON THE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
CONFIGURED ENGINE - METRIC UNITS-MILLIMETRE
PISTON RING GAP
As measured
Piston
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
in a
Top
0.88
0.51
1.32
0.94
0.76
0.89
1.70
0.64
PISTON RING THICKNESS
Piston
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Top
1.91
1.91
1.73
1.93
1.89
1.93
1.85
1.91
cylinder bore of 101.63
Ring
Compression
Middle
1.75
1.30
3.84
1.70
1.45
1.24
3.86
1.83
- MINIMUM
Ring
Compression
Middle
1.96
1.98
1.93
2.03
1.96
1.96
1.89
1.96
nun diameter.
Oil
Upper
2.51
1.73
3.86
2.13
2.13
2.06
3.86
1.70
Oil
Upper
0.64
0.64
0.64
0.66
0.66
0.64
0.61
0.64
Assembly
Lower
1.75
1.50
2.46
1.91
1.91
1.85
2.46
2.13
Assembly
Lower
0.66
0.64
0.64
0.66
0.66
0.64
0.66
0.64
PISTON RING DIAMETRICAL WIDTH - MINIMUM
Piston
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Top
4.83
4.93
4.29
4.67
4.85
4.90
3.81
4.85
Ring
Compression
Middle
4.62
4.75
4.50
4.60
4.72
4.75
4.70
4.75
Oil
Upper
3.81
3.81
2.64
3.68
3.89
3.86
2.69
2.84
Assembly
Lower
3.48
3.94
3.00
3.86
3.53
3.99
3.48
3.94
B-8
-------
TABLE B-3 (Confd). SUMMARY OF MEASUREMENTS ON THE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
CONFIGURED ENGINE - METRIC UNITS-MILLIMETRE
CRANKSHAFT JOURNALS
Original
Specifications,
Measured minimum
Main 1 & 3 fio i 70
2 , 4 62.179 62.189
5 & 4 62.167 62.189
62.179 co
Connecting Rod 1-6 53.289 °
53'264
surfaces were grooved
CAMSHAFT
Bearing Surfaces - All were 47.473 ± 0.005 mm Dia
Across Lobes
1 & 2 38.86
7, 8, 9 & 10 38.81
15 & 16 38.76
3, 4 & 5 39'24
6 & 12 39-19
11 S 12 39'17
14 39.14
B-9
-------
APPENDIX C
ENGINE DYNAMOMETER NINE-MODE RESULTS
TABLE C-l Summary of the Results
TABLES C-2 through C-8 Nine-Mode FTP Results
TABLES C-9 through C-l7 Nine-Mode EPA Results
-------
TABLE C-l. ENGINE DYNAMOMETER NINE-MODE EVALUATIONS
O
to
Test
No.
2001
2004
2005
2002
2007
2006
Run
No.
1
2
3
2
3
1
2
1
2
3
1
2
1
2
Type
Test Description
9-FTP Phase III Baseline After Overhaul
Average
Standard Deviation
9-FTP Emissions Control System
Average
Standard Deviation
9-FTP Emissions Control System with Cat.
Average
Standard Deviation
9-EPA Phase III Baseline After Overhaul
Average
Standard Deviation
9-EPA Emissions Control System
Average
Standard Deviation
9-EPA Emissions Control System with Cat.
Average
Standard Deviation
Gram/kW Hr
HC
5.251
5.742
4.922
5.31
0.41
1.016
0.943
0.98
0.05
0.109
0.123
0.12
0.01
5.010
5.704
5.603
5.44
0.37
0.477
0.510
0.566
0.52
0.05
0.024
0.023
0.024
0.02
0.00
CO
18.371
18.888
20.953
19.40
1.37
20.144
19.543
19.83
0.43
0.625
0.258
0.44
0.26
26.241
28.218
37.632
30.70
6.09
13.377
13.150
13.359
13.30
0.13
0.092
0.198
0.047
0.11
0.08
NOX
12.723
12.563
12.552
12.61
0.10
3.824
3.813
3.82
0.01
4.137
3.745
3.94
0.28
13.163
13.891
12.245
13.10
0.82
4.079
4.928
4.934
4.65
0.49
4.478
3.522
4.081
4.03
0.48
HC+NOX
17.974
18.305
17.474
17.92
0.42
4.840
4.756
4.80
0.06
4.246
3.868
4.06
0.27
18.173
19.595
17.848
18.54
0.93
4.557
5.438
5.000
5.00
0.44
4.502
3.545
4.105
4.05
0.48
kG/
kw hr
SFC
0.475
0.467
0.465
0.469
0.005
0.512
0.508
0.510
0.003
0.553
0.554
0.554
0.001
0.429
0.429
0.432
0.430
0.002
0.390
0.394
0.394
0.393
0.002
0.410
0.406
0.409
0.408
0.002
-------
TABLE C-2. MASS EMISSIONS BY NINE-MODE FTP -METRIC UNITS
ENGINE-20 TF.St-2llfll RUN-l AASELIMF AFTE HI;
9 C.T.
1 IOLE
2 If, MR
3 in nr,
H if, Ht;
5 19 HR
b Ib MR
7 3 HG
8 Ib Hfi
9 C.T.
1 IOLE
2 Ib HR
3 lu MR
V Ib riC
5 )9 HC
b Ib HG
7 3 HR
B Ib HG
9 C.T.
» l/f D A ItF
A » t." ^ i» r
A UfO AfC
CONCENTRATION AS MEASURED TOTAL
HC-FID CM CO? M"X-r.L CArt^OH
3U«b .39!! 12.73 b7 13.429
32* .23(1 13.34 »10 13.S02
«i«7 ,2Bfi 13. Sit 1572 If. 109
2b3 .69.1 13.71 Hmi l*.02b
833 .ilhil 15.73 It5 1P.813
?S3 ,?7(t 13.59 *9fl 13.HB5
*,95 .21(1 13.7) 2f)SS 13.99||
271 .3311 13. B"* 5HO I1*. 187
19291 .38(1 10. 01 37 1?.319
151? .tbll l?.-»9 bR I3.3ni
397 .Sbn 13. »7 l?2 13.97S
£2h .?hll 13. «» «ii?5 l^.^S
?.?*#* .3RIJ IP.?? 37 1P.B49
»29b .tbl) 12. J7 71 l^.Jhll
331 ,?7(l 13.^7 <»«f5 13.773
hS7 .29H 13. «H 159» l«».19q
235 .3511 13.59 <»<»n 13.8b3
1*3 .nbll 12. B5 155 12.92*
2H» .2bll 13.59 f^O 13. S71*
704 .220 13.59 2159 13.88')
1^9 .210 13.71 SbO 13.9«H)
237»0 ,3Hil 10. ni 4fa 1?.72»
S293 ,4t,n 13.37 h? I3.15S
371 ,3»l) 13. '»7 tbn 13.H48
bbO ,31U 13.91 IStS l».?lb
2b2 .271) 13.59 535 lH.RHh
152 .0511 12.73 135 12.795
255 .2Pn 13. 59 510 13.833
b9b .290 13.71 Pill* l"*.i(7ri
190 .?lll 13.71 S/0 13.939
2S07? .?Hll iri.ni 5b l?.f,97
FUFL
G/HH
1P37
859(.
1333b
es9b
5P74
Rcqs
18?25
P?>9b
1RB?
1B3?
859b
1333b
8«iSb
5P74
BSSb
) R325
R59h
IflR^
1P37
«5.q(,
13^3h
as^b
SB7t
859b
18325
859b
1BR2
1H3?
959b
1333b
fl69b
5B?»
H59b
1R-V5
HS9b
18H2
CALCULATED
HC CO
»2
20
fa5
Ib
11
Ib
91
Ifa
295
*8
25
bl
1H
11
15
05
1*
329
bll
?1
bS
15
7
15
93
12
351
*b
it
b2
It,
7
15
91
1?
357
JriB
29*
532
3S9
5b
33B
S5h
392
117
128
328
S13
308
tb
323
S3u
320
112
129
3-»0
SSU
313
55
325
587
2b2
102
130
*2b
587
338
Hb
27b
7h3
2b2
RH
G/HR
N02
3
8b
»91
100
22
101
907
109
2
3
95
488
101
22
9*
92*
lOb
2
3
92
*97
101
23
101
9*b
115
2
3
95
*B2
110
21
105
910
117
3
"IT.
FACT.
.232
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
.232
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
.332
.1)77
.It?
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
.232
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
FOUR CVCLE COhPOSITf - MC- FID n.ISC *.9)
CO- HOIK 0.3S{
N02-CL 0.3S(
17.71
12.fi)
* n.bS{
+ O.h5(
+ o.bs(
5
1R
13
CORRECTED
.») =
.7) =
.0) =
N02 =
SFC s
5.251
18.371
13.9Sb
12.723
.«f7S
WEIGHTED G/HR
HC-FID CO N02-CL KK
9.P
l.b
9.5
1.2
.b
i.i
10.3
1.3
*2.1
u D
*. 0
11.3
1.9
9.0
1.1
.b
i.a
9.b
1.1
»7.1
S*
.1
13."
l.b
9.5
1.1
.*
1.2
10.5
.9
50.2
Sjr
• b
10.7
1.8
9.1
1.2
.*
1.1
10.2
.9
51. 0
52
. 3
*g
. "
Sli
• T
G/ KM
G/ KH
G/ KW
G/ KM
KG/ KW
25
23
78
28
3
2b
b3
30
17
18
30
25
75
2f
3
25
bO
25
Ib
17
30
2b
81
2*
3
25
bb
20
IS
1 O
AH
30
33
Bb
2b
3
21
8b
20
12
g n
cu
1 Q
i U
1 Q
IT
HR
HH
HR
HK
H*
.7
b.b
72.1
?.?
1.3
7.8
102. S
8.H
.3
12.6
.7
7.3
71.7
7.8
i.e
7.5
10».H
8.2
.3
12.9
.6
7.1
73.1
7. a
1.3
7.8
10b.9
8.8
.3
13 J
13. e
.7
7.3
70.9
8.S
i.e
a.i
102.8
9.0
.»
i -* n
12.9
13 fi
lc . o
13 11
19. U
( 3.91b
(13.b99
( 9.fabl
( 9.»B8
( .781
0
13
37
13
0
13
faO
13
0
0
13
37
13
0
13
bO
13
0
0
13
37
13
n
13
bO
13
0
0
13
37
13
0
13
faO
13
0
83)
BS)
BS)
as)
B3)
HP
0
1«
49
ID
a
Ifl
81
18
0
0
18
49
IS
0
18
81
18
0
0
IK
»9
18
fl
18
bl
18
0
0
Ifl
»9
18
0
18
81
18
0
-------
ENGINF.-2H
TAHLh C-3. "ASS EMISSIONS BY NINF-Mnf)E FTP -METRIC UNITS
TEST-201'1 KIIN-2 RASfLlNE AFTF.K DVEHHAULlU-l 7-77 K = .997
HUM = 10.b G/KG
n
MODE
1 IDLE
2 Ib HG
3 10 HG
4 Ib HG
5 IS HG
b IK HR
7 3 MG
8 Ib HG
9 C.T.
1 IOI.E
2 1*> HG
3 10 HG
4 lh HG
5 19 HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
8 Ib HG
9 C.T.
1 101 E
2 ib HG
3 10 HG
4 Ib HG
5 IS rtG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
8 Ib HG
9 C.T.
1 IDLE
2 Ib HP
3 10 HG
4 IS HG
5 IS HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
8 Ib HG
9 C.T.
AVERAGF
AVERAGE
CONCENTRATION AS MEASURED TOTAL
HC-F10 CO C02 NOX-CL CARBON
•U34 .2711 12.02
433 .280 13.4?
743 .320 13.97
2b3 .230 13.71
81 .0*11 12.73
248 .250 13.59
7h9 .300 13.84
?44 .340 13.71
28504 .350 1O.O)
3b] .3411 13J5S
b79 .270 13.97
2b2 .290 13.71
Iflfl .flbO 12.97
271 ,?M1 13.71
741 ,?7ll 13.71
22b .250 13.84
2^4HS .1211 10.01
2flhl .3411 1P.37
39? . 3?n 13.59
744 .340 14.09
271 .250 13.84
134 .050 12. 85
235 .250 13.71
774 .3?U 13. R4
217 .230 13. B4
2R845 .320 9.SP
33hh .370 12.49
379 .2811 13.59
734 .?sn 14.09
2b2 ,?20 13.71
1*7 .O5il 12.>»5
2b? ,2hll 13.71
751 .?5fl 13.84
21? .e5o 13. B4
2?4b9 .31.1 9.«)||
SUM.— (CHHPOSITE VALUES
SUM— (COMPOSITE VALUES
FOUR CYCLE COMPOSITE -
5b 12.703
420 13.7*3
1549 I4.1b4
480 1. 1.9bfc
1?5 12.788
455 13.Bb5
2008 14.217
500 14.074
38 1?.2SO
b7 I3.34U
430 I3.9bb
15S1 14.3119
510 14.02k
Ib5 13.il 41
490 13.997
2047 14.054
550 I».1I3
41 IP. ^79
71 JP..99I,
»bO 13.9511
Ihl5 14.5IJ4
510 I4.H7
140 12.91?
475 1*.98H
2113 14.237
580 14.09?
45 13.005
70 13.197
470 13.908
Ib2b 14.443
5il5 14.051,
130 lP.9P.ri
510 1*.99»,
2159 14.lh5
5bU 14.11?
4b IP.HS7
t ij {. i H *i MW
FURL
G/HR
IHbO
84R2
1329(1
B492
5752
84R2
182bh
R4R2
1814
IHMI
8482
1329.0
R4R2
5752
H492
IBPhb
84«2
1914
]ObU
84*2
13P90
84H2
5752
B4R2
18?bb
B4H2
1B14
IRhO
84R2
13290
94-12
5752
94BP
IRPKh
R4R?
1914
CALCULATED G/HR
HC CO N08
bl
27
b9
Ib
4
15
99
15
39b
bo
22
b3
Ib
5
Ib
9fa
14
37(1
41
24
bB
Ib
b
14
99
13
402
47
23
b8
Ib
9
It.
97
13
3RR
80
348
598
282
45
309
779
414
97
118
417
50?
354
53
318
70S
304
SO
98
393
b29
303
45
30b
R29
280
SO
105
345
520
3SO
45
3]B
b51
304
88
3
8b
47b
97
19
92
857
100
2
3
87
481
102
24
99
883
110
2
3
93
491
102
21
9b
900
lib
2
3
95
497
101
19
103
924
112
2
FACT!
.832
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.143
.232
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
.832
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
.232
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
. 1*3
FOH CYCLES 3 AN
HC- Ftl> 0.
CO- NIHR U.
NOP-CL 0.
3S( 5.8)
35( 18.9)
35( 12.2)
+ O.b5(
» O.bSC
t U.bSC
S
IB
12
CORRECTED
.7) s
.S) r
.8) s
N02 s
SFC s
5.742
18.880
12.bOO
12.5fa3
.467
HC-FID
14.0
2.0
10.1
1.2
.2
1.2
11.2
1.1
Sb.b
isis
1.7
9.3
1.2
.3
1.3
10.9
1.0
52.9
5.b
9.5
l.S
10.0
1.3
.3
1.1
11.2
1.0
57.5
5.7
11.0
i.a
9.9
1.2
.5
1.8
10.9
1.0
55.4
5.7
So
. 0
5.7
G/ KM
G/ KM
G/ KM
G/ KM
KG/ K<4
"U£0 G/HR
CO N02-CL KM
19
27
88
22
3
24
88
32
14
19
27
32
74
27
3
85
80
23
13
19
23
30
93
23
3
24
94
22
13
20
24
27
77
30
3
85
74
83
13
18
l a
IS
19
HR
HR
Hrt
Hit
MR
.b 0
b.b 13
b9.S 37
7.5 13
1.1 0
7.1 13
9b.B bO
7.7 13
.2 0
!? 0
b.7 13
70.8 37
7.9 13
l.» 0
7.b 13
99.6 bO
8.5 13
.3 0
.« 0
7.2 13
72.2 37
7.8 13
1.2 0
7.4 13
101.7 bO
8.9 13
.3 0
12.7
.8 Q
7.3 13
73." 37
7.8 13
1.1 0
7.S 13
104.4 bO
8.b 13
.3 0
12.9
13 3
Ic. e
12.8
( 4.262 BS)
(14.085 BS)
{ 9.39b BS)
( S.3b8 8S)
( .7b8 BS)
HP
0
18
49
18
0
18
81
18
0
0
18
49
18
0
18
31
18
0
0
18
49
IB
0
18
81
18
0
0
18
49
18
0
18
81
18
0
-------
ENGINE-?!)
e: c-4. *ASS KMTSSKINS BY NINE-MODE FTP -METRIC UNITS
TFST-?nni RU.M-3 BA5KL1NF aFTF" OVF.RHAULlil-1 7-77 K = .973 HUM =
9.b
G/KG
O
Ui
MODE
I IDLE
2 lh HG
3 111 HG
4 Ib hG
5 19 HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
8 Ib HO
Q r r
~ U.I.
1 IDLE
2 Ib HG
3 in HG
4 Ib HG
S 19 HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
8 Ib HG
9 C.T.
1 IDLE
2 Ib HG
3 10 HG
4 Ib HG
s 19 HG
b Ib HG
7 J HG
8 Ib HG
9 C.T.
1 IOLF
2 lh HC
3 in HG
4 Ib HG
5 19 HG
b Ib HG
7 3 Mr.
8 ib HG
9 C.T.
CONCENTRATION AS MFAROkED TOTAL
HC-FID co co? NOX-CL C*RRON
"277 .2811 IP.ne 53 JP.72R
325 ,31ii 13.59 430 H.933
b07 .310 13.97 Ib37 J4.341
244 .320 J3.7J 470 I1*. (154
81 .050 12.73 130 1P.7SR
b5j .370 13.71 21(14 14^)45
203 .290 13.84 5bU 14.151
?(»4b .3JO 12.37 b3 12.9b5
3*4 .311) 13.59 470 13.933
Mb .33.1 )3.97 IbHO 14.31,?
253 .3?i) 13.59 510 13.935
179 .r.bil ia.85 140 1?..9?R
244 .320 13.59 SUM 13.934
b33 .290 13.04 2195 14.193
208 .310 13. P4 550 14.171
20947 .320 9. BO 33 IP.P15
3b44 .320 12.25 K3 12.934
325 .310 13.59 4bO 13.933
b25 .37.) 13.97 Ib59 14.403
244 .330 13.59 510 13.944
179 .OhO 1?.73 140 IP.RIIB
22b .3211 13.59 4qo 13.933
b33 .?7l) 13. R4 diqs 14.173
22S .34t) 13. 5q 570 13.q53
21290 .320 9.RD 35 12.249
?Sh3 .320 12.4q 70 l3.09h
3Lb .370 13.59 41tl H.qH2
SHO .330 13.97 1S72 14.3SR
2h2 .34!) 13.5q 5(10 13.q5h
214 .050 12. bl IPS IP.bRl
235 .310 13.59 520 13.923
b51 .320 13.71 2l«b 14.U95
190 .31(1 13. H4 qejs 14.|b9
20bO? .31(1 9.8P 37 12.170
FOFL
G/HR
1PR2
131 on
5715
18P57
84bO
IHfti
1R82
R4bO
13100
84b(l
5715
84bU
18257
84t,0
1RR2
IRfi?
84bO
13100
84bO
5715
84bO
18257
84bO
1R82
18R?
R4bO
1 31110
Rtbo
5715
P4bO
18257
P4bll
IR82
CALCULATED
HC CO
b3
ao
55
IS
4
Ib
84
1?
34b
3ft
?n
5h
15
8
15
81
12
323
53
20
57
15
8
14
82
14
327
41
19
53
It-
Ill
14
84
11
319
84
380
572
389
45
4b4
9b5
350
97
97
380
b()R
392
54
392
754
374
100
94
380
b80
404
54
393
703
41b
99
93
452
b08
41b
4b
380
837
374
97
G/HR
N02
3
87
49b
94
19
98
902
111
2
3
95
509
103
21
101
937
109
2
3
93
501
103
21
99
939
115
2
3
98
47b
101
19
105
940
110
2
"T.
FACT.
.232
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.143
.232
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.143
.232
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.143
.23?
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.143
FOUR CYCLE COKPOSITE - HC- Ftl) 0.35( 5.0)
CO- MOIR 0.35(
N02-CL 0.35(
en. 9)
12. R)
+ n.bsc
+ o.bs(
+ O.bSC
4
ai
12
CORRECTED
.9) =
.0) =
.9) =
N02 =
3FC s
4.922
30.953
12.900
12.552
.4bS
"EIGHTED G/HR
HC-FID CO N02-CL KK
14.7
1.5
8.1
1.1
.a
1.2
9.5
1.0
49.4
5.3
8.9
l.b
8.3
1.2
.5
1.1
9.2
1.0
4b.2
4.7
12.3
1.5
8.4
1.1
.5
1.1
9.2
1.1
4b.8
S.O
9.5
1.5
7.8
i.e
.b
1.1
9.5
.9
45. b
4.7
5.0
4.9
G/ KH
G/ KM
G/ Kw
G/ KH
KG/ KM
19
29
84
30
3
3b
.109
27
14
21
gg
29
89
30
3
30
85
29
14
20
29
100
31
3
30
79
32
14
21
35
89
32
3
29
95
29
14
21
21
21
HR
HR
HR
HR
HR
.b
b.7
73.0
7.2
1 i
* • *
7.b
101.9
8.b
.2
12. b
m 7
7.3
74. b
7.9
1.2
7.8
105.9
8.4
.2
13.1
7
7.1
73. b
7.9
1.2
7.b
lOb.l
8.8
.3
13.0
.8
7.b
70. (i
7. 7
1.1
8.1
10b.2
8. 5
.3
12.8
12.8
12.9
( 3. (.71
(lS.b2S
( 9.bl9
( 9.3bO
( .7bS
U
13
37
13
Q
13
bl
13
0
13
37
1 3
o
13
bl
13
0
13
37
13
Q
13
bl
13
0
o
13
37
13
o
13
bl
13
0
PS)
BS)
BS)
BS)
BS)
HP
U
18
49
18
18
81
18
0
Ifl
if q
16
Q
1 fl
X O
81
Ifi
A O
U
18
49
18
p
18
81
18
0
18
49
18
18
81
18
0
-------
ENGINE-SO
TABLE C-5 MASS EMISSIONS BY NINE-MODE FTP .METRIC UNITS
TEST.ano* RUN.? EMISSIONS CONI. SYS. 11-22-77 K « ,938 HUM * s.a G/KG
MODE
i IDLE
2 ib HG
3 10 HG
* ib HG
5 IS HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
8 Ib HG
* C.T.
1 IDLE
a ib HG
3 JO HG
4 Ib HG
5 It HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
B Ib HG
7 1 C.T.
1 IDLE
2 Ib HG
1 10 HG
4 Ib HG
S 19 HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
8 Ib HG
•* C.T.
I IDLE
I Ib HG
a 10 HG
4 Ib HG
S 19 HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
8 Ib HG
S C.T.
AVERAGE
CONCPNTRATION AS MEASURED TOTAL
HC-FIri CO CO? NOX-CL CARBON
^sb .lie s.i7
S4S ,205 10, 55
94 .831 12.85
|90 .187 10.88
bbB .217 10.44
?f!3 .190 10.88
18 .319 14.48
3* .118 11.10
3974 .019 ,1H
fc9» .118 8.9?
703 .205 10.44
98 '.250 12.25
?07 ,lfl7 10.88
*74 .837 10.55
57 ,190 10.88
Rb .382 14.35
55 '.10*' 11.21
4lbb .019 ,1H
10»1 ,10b 8.97
721 .212 10.44
|07 .2?b 12. 25
?38 .193 10.88
528 .824 10. bb
?20 .184 10'.77
31 '.392 14.48
1)0 '.10b 11.10
*?30. .021 .14
S3* ^098 9.17
878 .218 10.33
|07 .2b3 12.37
?lb ,187 10,88
»40 ,22* 10. bb
?11 .187 10.77
31 ,950 14,48
bH ,098 11.10
4Jb8 .023 .18
3b 9.317
88 10.810
HSO 12.490
ins ii.QBb
35 10.74*
101 11.090
525 1».8D1
115 11.215
S .SSb
35 9.1S1
94 10.7jb
4*0 12.510
115 11.088
40 10,82*
100 11.07b
525 14.b81
130 11.324
S .575
37 9.180
88 10.72*
HBO 12.53b
120 11.097
40 10,937
ins 10.97b
510 1H.B75
120 11.217
b .584
37 S.3S1
88 10,b3b
485 12. bO
115 11.089
38 10.92B
102 10.978
520 14.833
120 11.20*
b .b20
SuM— (COMPOSITE VALUES FOR CYCLES 1 AND 2
FUEL
G/HR
1950
faS77
10841
bS77
4?b3
b5?7
17895
b577
0
1950
bS77
10841
bS?7
47b3
b577
17895
bS77
0
1950
bS77
10841
bS?7
47b3
bS77
17895
bS77
0
1950
bS77
10841
bS77
47b3
bS77
17895
faS77
0
FOUR CYCLE COMPOSITE • HC- FID 0,3S( .8)
CO' NDIR 0,3S(
N02>CL 0.3S(
19.2)
4.0)
CALCULATED G/HR
,'IC CO N02
7
33
8
11
30
12
2
2
0
15
43
9
12
Ib
3
11
3
0
22
44
9
14
23
13
4
b
0
17
54
9
13
IS
13
4
4
0
* 0
» 0
• 0
47
253
404
224
212
228
779
132
0
48
255
417
224
211
228
794
118
0
' 4b
2b2
481
231
197
283
953
18b
0
HI
272
455
224
197
287
853
lib
0
.bS( 1
,bS( 20
.bS( 4
CORRECTED
3
18
130
21
S
20
211
22
0
2
19
127
23
b
20
212
25
0
3
IB
138
24
b
21
204
23
0
3
17
138
23
S
20
208
23
0
.1)
.7)
.1)
N02
SFC
NT. WEIGHTED G/HR
FACT. HC-FID CO N02-CL KW
.232
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1H3
,232
,077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
.232
,077
.147
,077
,057
.077
.113
.077
.143
.232
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
l.Olb
ao.i44
»,077
3.82*
.512
1,'
2.b
1.2
.9
1.7
,S
,2
.2
0.0
B
. w
3,»
3.3
1.3
,*
.*
.3
1.2
.2
0.0
.0
. *
5.1
3.»
l.»
1.1
1.3
i.o
.»
.5
0.0
i i
* . *
».o
».e
i.»
i.o
1.1
1.0
.»
.3
0.0
1 1
* . *
.a
i |
* t A
G/
G/
G/
G/
KG/
11
19
59
17
12
IB
88
10
0
19
* "
11
20
bH
17
12
IB
90
10
0
19
11
20
71
18
11
17
108
10
0
21
10
21
b7
17
11
17
9b
9
0
20
19
2|
KM HR
KW HR
KN HR
KW HR
KM HR
,b 0
l.» 7
H.1 BB
l.b 7
.i 0
1.5 7
23.8 55
1.7 7
0.0 0
V 0
~ . u
.b 0
l.S 7
18. fa 28
1.7 7
.3 0
1.5 7
2«.Q 55
l.S 7
0.0 0
t.o
T . W
.b 0
l.» 7
20.3 28
1.8 7
.3 0
l.b 7
23.0 SS
1.8 7
0.0 0
4 I
^ . *
,b 0
1.3 7
20.3 28
1.7 7
.3 0
l.b 7
23.5 55
1.8 7
0.0 0
4 1
* . *
».o
1} 1
( .757 83)
(15,021 BS)
( 3.040 BS)
( 2.852 BS)
( .842 BS)
HP
0
9
38
9
0
9
73
9
0
0
9
38
9
0
9
73
9
0
0
9
38
9
0
9
73
9
0
0
9
38
9
0
9
73
9
0
-------
TABLE C-6. MASS EMISSIONS BY NINE-MODE FTP -METKIC UNITS
ENGINE-20 TE$T-?On» RUN-3 EMISSION CONT. SYS. 11-22-7? K • .407 HUM
G/KG
MODE
1 IDLE
2 lb HG
3 10 HG
4 lb HG
S 14 HG
b lb HG
7 3 HC
9 lb HG
<» C.T.
1 IDLE
2 lb HG
3 10 HG
4 lb HG
S 14 HG
b lb HG
7 3 HG
8 lb HG
1 4 C.T.
1 IDLE
2 lb HG
3 10 HG
4 lb HG
S 14 HG
b lb HG
7 3 HG
8 lb HG
4 C.T,
1 IDLE
2 lb HG
3 10 HG
4 lb HG
5 14 HG
b lb HG
7 3 HG
8 lb HG
4 C.T,
. i/co « re am
A V t " *** t JMJ
A U IT D A f? C* ^|||
fl V C " w » C vU"
FOUR CYCLE
CONCENTRATION AS MEASURED TOTAL
HC.FIn CO C02 NOX-CL CARBON
b50 .120 8.47
«12 '.205 10.44
83 '.234 12.25
t R3 , 1R4 10.77
457 .317 10.44
44 ,181 IP. 77
18 .102 14.73
33 '.104 11.10
35 4.15S
85 10.fa44
445 12.442
12(1 10.472
40 10.723
105 10.4b4
SbO 15.034
120 11.212
3?47. .014 .1* S .444
728 ,104 8.47 35 4.152
feflS .204 10.44
b2 ,27b 12.25
224 ,143 10.77
bib .243 10. bb
?24 .JH3 10.77
2b ,102 14. VB
3b .10b 11.10
85 10.717
440 12.532
115 10.48b
45 10,4bS
115 10,48b
SbO 14,785
125 11.210
3584 .014 .14 b .518
Alb '.101 4.07 3b 4.252
843 .505 10.33
lib .282 12.37
?27 ,187 10.77
?42 .211 10. bb
?42 ,143 10.77
34 ,350 14.73
»4 .I0b 11.10
Jfl4b .023 .14
»82 LolS 4.17
717 '.I4b 10.31
|21 ,282 12.37
P?0 .167 10.77
34b ,243 10. bb
«20 .184 10.77
35 '.3tb 14.48
50 ,112 11.10
3R47 .023 .18
^••» (COMPOST TE VALUES FOR
"(•••(COMPOSITE VALUES FOR
COMPOSITE -
40 lO.bSO
440 12.bb4
120 10.480
40 10,415
115 10.488
555 15.083
135 11,211
b ,5H8
37 4.343
45 ID.bOO
tflO I2.bb4
125 10.474
40 10.4*3
110 I0.47b
SbO 14.744
130 11.217
IS .588
FUEL
G/HR
1814
bS04
10773
bS04
4fa72
b504
17872
bS04
0
1814
bS04
10773
bS04
4b72
bS04
17872
bS04
0
181*
b504
10773
b504
4b72
faS04
17872
bSQ4
0
1814
bS04
10773
b504
4b72
b504
17872
bS04
0
CALCULATED
HC CO
13
32
7
11
20
b
2
2
0
14
H2
5
14
2b
14
3
2
0
lb
S2
10
13
10
14
4
3
0
IS
45
10
13
17
13
4
3
0
48
253
407
221
204
221
?2b
128
0
44
2Sb
474
231
204
231
738
124
0
40
254
485
224
144
231
B37
124
0
37
243
485
224
21(1
221
770
131
0
G/HR
N02
2
17
127
24
b
21
221
23
0
2
17
140
23
b
23
225
24
0
2
18
124
24
b
23
218
2b
0
2
14
13b
25
b
22
225
25
0
WT.
FACT,
.232
.077
,147
,077
,057
,077
.111
,077
,143
.232
.077
.147
,077
.057
,077
.113
,077
.143
.232
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.141
.232
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.143
HC" FID 0.3S( .8)
CO- NDIR 0.35(
N02-CL D.35C
18. 4)
4.2)
+ O.bSC
+ 0.bS(
+ 0.bS(
1
14
4
CORRECTED
.0)
!2)
N02
SFC
,4H3
14.543
4.203
3.813
,508
WEIGHTED G/HR
HC-FID CO N02-CL KW
3.0
2.5
1.0
.a
1.1
.5
.2
.1
0,0
.
3.3
3.2
.8
1.0
1.5
1.0
.4
.2
0.0
.
3.?
4.0
1.5
1.0
.b
1.1
.5
.2
0.0
1.0
3.5
3.5
1.5
1.0
1.0
l.o
.5
.2
0.0
In
. u
.
i n
* t u
G/ KW
G/ KM
G/ KW
G/ KW
KG/ KW
11
14
bO
17
12
17
82
10
0
1 O
IB
10
20
70
IB
12
18
83
10
0
4
20
71
17
11
18
45
10
0
4
14
71
17
12
11
87
10
0
an
c u
1 O
A t
Pfl
c u
HR
HR
HR
HR
HR
.5 0
1.3 b
18.7 2B
1.8 b
.3 0
l.b b
25.0 Sb
1.8 b
0.0 0
4.1
.5 0
1.3 b
20. b 28
1.7 b
.4 0
1.7 b
25.4 Sb
1.4 b
0,0 0
4.3
.5 0
1.4 b
IB. 3 28
1.8 b
.3 0
1.7 b
S4.7 Sb
2.0 b
0.0 0
»|
. 1
,b 0
l.S b
14,4 28
1.4 b
.3 0
l.T b
25.4 Sb
1.4 b
0.0 0
»3
t *
»3
• c
H it
( .703 BS)
(14,573 BS)
( 3.134 BS)
( 2.841 BS)
( .835 B3)
HP
0
8
38
8
0
a
75
8
0
0
B
38
B
0
B
75
8
0
0
a
38
8
0
8
75
8
0
0
8
38
8
0
B
75
8
0
-------
TABLE C-7. MASS EMISSIONS BY NIKE-MODE FTP -METRIC UNITS
ENGiNE-20 TEST-BOOB RUN-I EMIS. CONT. svs. w CAT. 11-22-77 K s
HUM
10.2
G/KG
o
GO
MODE
1 IDLE
2 lb HG
3 10 HG
* lb HG
S IS HG
b lb HG
7 3 HG
8 lb HG
•» C.T.
1 IDLE
t lb HG
3 10 HG
» lb HG
S IS HG
b lb HG
7 3 HG
B lb HG
S C.T.
1 IDLE
2 lb HG
1 10 HG
» lb HG
S IS HG
b lb HG
7 i HG
8 lb HG
1 C.T.
1 IDLE
2 lb HG
3 10 HG
» lb HG
5 IS HG
b lb HG
7 3 HG
8 lb HG
1 C.T.
AVERAGE SUM
A VFP Af*F 9llW
4 V C. K M U |. G U ™
FOUR CYCLE
CONCFNTRATION AS MEASURED TOTAL
HC-FIn CO C02 NOX-CL CARBON
1 .012 S.bS
38 .012 10.11
1 .012 12.1*
5 .012 10.55
24 .DOS 8.00
2 .DOS 10.**
1 .DOS 1*.*8
» .DOS 10.88
10 .DOS .b*
11 ,OOS S.b<»
83 ,OOS 10. **
10 .DOS 12.3?
25 ',007 10.77
107 ,007 7.81
23 ,00? 10. bb
t .007 1*.3S
3 ,007 10. SI
S .005 .72
11 .007 S.bS
8«» '.007 10.**
12 .007 12.»"»
28 .005 10.88
?13 .007 7.08
25 .007 10. bb
1 .005 l*.bO
1 .005 10. SS
5 .005 ,7b
1 ,005 S,5q
81 .005 10.55
11 .005 le.HI
31 ,005 10.77
in? .nns 7.35
2b .005 10. bb
1 ,005 1*,*8
I ,005 10. Sq
5 .005 .80
•— (COMPOSITE VALUES
COMPOSITE •
39 S.702
51 10,125
2*8 12,152
bS 10.5b2
22 8,012
bS IQ.ttS
b20 1*.*BS
85 10. BSD
B .faSO
*2 S.700
bO 10, 158
312 12,380
80 10.77S
25 7,828
70 lO.bbS
585 1*.3S7
8* 10.SS7
10 .72b
*3 S.bSB
b3 10,*5S
925 12,*qB
85 10.887
25 7,108
75 lO.bbS
520 l*.bDS
«b lO.qqS
S .7b5
*«» S.5S5
b2S 10.5b3
935 iS.HSb
85 10.778
25 7.3b5
75 10,bb7
500 1*.*85
S] 10.SS5
10 .BOS
FOR CYCLES 1 AND I
f no rvn F .3)
N02
SFC
NT, WEIGHTED G/HR
FACT. HC-FID CO N02-CL KW
.232
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
.232
,077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
,077
.1*3
.232
.077
.1*7
.077
,057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
.232
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
,10S
,b2S
*.1B*
*,137
.553
.0
,2
.0
.0
.1
.0
.0
.0
0.0
.
.0
,*
.1
.1
,H
.1
.0
.0
0.0
-
.1
,H
.1
.1
.8
.1
.0
.0
0.0
,
.0
,*
.1
.1
,»
.1
.0
.0
0,0
.1
1
G/ KW HR
G/ KW HR
G/ KW HR
G/ KW HR
KG/ KW HR
1
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
0
1
1
2
1
0
1
2
1
0
1
1
2
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
I
a
a
l
0
a
0
l
0
0
1
.b 0
.8 *
10.3 2b
1.0 *
.3 0
1.0 *
28. b S*
1.2 *
0.0 0
3M
,s
.b 0
.s *
12.7 2b
1.2 *
.3 0
1.0 *
27.2 5*
1.2 *
0.0 0
*•!
.b 0
u|l 2b
1.2 *
.3 0
1.1 *
23.8 S*
1.* *
0.0 0
3 B
!b o
S.3 *
13.5 2b
1.2 *
.9 0
1.1 *
2*.S S*
1.3 *
0.0 0
»«
• r
u 3
( ,081 BS)
( ,*bb BS)
( 3.120 BS)
( 3,085 BS)
( .SOS BS)
HP
0
S
35
S
0
S
72
S
0
0
5
35
S
0
S
72
5
0
0
S
35
S
0
S
72
5
0
0
S
35
S
0
S
72
S
0
-------
TABLE C-8. MASS EMISSIONS BY NINE-MODE FTP -METRIC UNITS
ENGINE-20 TEST-2nOS RUN.g EMJS. CONT. SYS. H C«T, 11-22-77 K "1.013
HUM * 11,3 G/KG
n
MODE
1 IDLE
( Ib HG
1 10 HG
H Ib HG
5 14 HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
8 Ib HG
4 C.T.
1 IDLE
2 Ib HG
3 10 HG
H Ib HG
5 IS HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
8 tb HG
4 C.T.
1 IDLE
2 Ib HG
1 10 HG
H Ib HG
S IS HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
8 Ib HG
4 C.T.
I IDLE
2 Ib HG
3 10 HG
H Ib HG
5 14 HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
II Ib HG
4 C.T.
A u CO A 12 ft? 4 111
CflNCFNTRATION AS MEASURED TOTAL
HC-FIn CO C02 NOX-CL CARBON
21 '.015 S.SS
I*H .ons 10.01
12 .005 12. 1H
3b .005 10. 55
Ib3 .005 7.72
33 ,005 10. »H
0 .005 1H.35
s .ons 10.77
35 S.SS7
H>» 10. 02^
8*0 12. lib
75 IO.SS8
20 7.7H1
bo 10.1H8
580 1H.35S
85 10,775
5 .002 .72 b .723
17 ,002 4.80 34 4. BOH
11H .002 10.2?
Ib ,002 12.37
38 .002 10. bb
Sb .002 7.81
H2 .002 10. 55
1 .002 1H.H8
3 '.002 10.86
SS 10.23H
280 12. 37*
80 lO.bbb
SO 7. 818
7Q lO.SSb
530 1H.HBZ
S 10.883
S .002 .72 b .723
13 .002 4. SO HI 4.SOH
43 .002 10. H«
13 ,002 12. H4
12 ,002 10. bb
H4 .002 b.22
H3 ,002 10.55
1 ,002 IH.bO
3 .002 10.88
S .002 .80
11 .002 4.40
44 .002 10. HH
IS .002 12. HS
HO ,002 10.77
H3 .002 7.25
HO ,002 10. bb
0 .002 IH.bO
3 .002 10.88
»._ .002 ,7b
J__ #f*MUf»ne*¥r U.I lire fnn
WCnAuC. O(J«-'-- — • 1 1.1 IT u^ i i c. T ** b»vc. j run
Al/POACP fiJlMww ffrtMPnQTTF l/AI *IF< F no
• V C T ** WC. "3t/™™"»lWn~rU3* PC V * t Ut O 'UK
FOUR CYCLE COMPOSITE •
b3 10.HS2
310 12.HSH
80 lO.bbS
Hn b,227
70 10,557
HSS lt,bQ2
85 10,883
8 .803
»1 4.403
5* 10.HS2
310 12.H4H
80 10.77b
50 7.257
70 lO.bbb
HBO lH.fa02
40 10.883
10 ,7b3
FUEL
G/HR
lb?8
b078
103*2
b078
H44*
b078
I?b40
b078
0
Ib78
b078
103H2
b07B
"*4<»H
b07B
17b40
b078
0
Ib78
b07B
103H2
b07B
H4H»
b078
17b40
b078
0
lb7B
b078
103H2
b078
tSH*
b07B
17fa40
b078
0
CALCULATED
HC CO
n
s
l
2
JO
2
0
0
0
0
7
1
2
H
2
0
0
0
0
s
1
2
H
2
0
0
a
0
b
1
i
3
2
0
a
0
2
b
B
5
b
S
11
5
0
1
3
H
3
3
3
b
3
0
1
3
-------
TABLE C-9. MASS EMISSIONS BY NINE-MODE EPA - METRIC UNITS
ENGINE-SMI TEST-2iMi2 RUN-I
1175 CHEVROLET 350-CIO HO ENGINE-— PHOJECT 11-H3U
10-18-77 BASELINE AFTER OVERHAUL
K= 1.027 HUrts 12.0 G/KG
CONCENTRATION
HUGE
1 IOLE
2 25 PCT
3 55 PCT
H PS PtT
5 HI PCT
b 25 PCT
7 10 PCT
8 25 PCT
1 C.T.
1 IDLE
2 25 PCT
3 S5 PCT
H 25 PCT
5 10 PCT
b 25 PCT
7 in PCT
B 25 PCT
1 C.T.
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
HC-FID
35211
33b
bbH
228
17b
221
872
18H
25277
313b
3?H
b32
22"
238
1b5
180
2103R
CO
.355
.111
.281
.2UO
.2b1
.217
.781
.2HO
,2b1
.330
.228
.305
.23H
.23H
.228
,18b
.222
.23*
AS MEASURED
C02
12. bl
13.51
1H.01
13.71
13.51
13.71
13. RH
13.71
1.10
12.73
13.51
1H.01
13.71
13.51
13.71
13. RH
13. RH
10.11
NOX-CL
bl
b85
1717
bso
3HO
b25
2231
b05
2b
81
bHO
17b5
b35
3b5
b75
2270
faSH
21
TOTAL
CARHON
13.351
13.82?
IH.HHb
13.135
13.R71
13.152
1H.728
13.170
12.13H
13.H11
13.855
IH.Hb?
13.170
13.8HH
I3.1b5
lH.13b
1 H . n 8 3
12.bH1
FUEL
G/HR
IP hi)
Ibb?
IHOlb
11b3
731H
102b
HOIb
8RI10
IBbO
1105
1117
13781
813b
7530
11h3
HOOb
8181
I7b1
CALCULATED G/HR WT.
HC
SS
2b
73
17
11
17
128
13
318
511
2H
btt
Ib
11
18
IHIl
13
322
CO
100
27H
551
2b5
281
283
20bb
31)5
78
15
3113
588
302
257
302
2S3H
2Rb
bb
NOX
3
Ib3
51H
l*b
b?
138
110
130
1
if
1HH
573
138
b8
151
1US
1H2
1
FACT.
.232
.1177
.1H7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1H3
.232
.077
.1H7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1H3
HEIGHTtD G/HR
HC-FID
12.7
2.0
10.7
1.3
.b
1.3
1H.5
1.0
Sb.1
11. b
1.1
10.0
1.3
.b
1 .H
15.8
l.U
_.!!:i
CO
23
21
81
20
Ib
22
233
23
11
22
23
8b
23
15
23
28b
22
9
NOX-CL
.7
12. b
87. H
11.2
3.5
10. b
111. a
10. U
.2
.1
11.1
8H.3
10.7
3.1
11. b
111.3
10.1
.2
CKrf
0.0
17.8
HO. 2
17.3
8.1)
17.2
bH.b
lb.7
n.o
o.u
17.2
HO. 3
Ib.b
8.0
17.2
bH.b
Ib.?
0.0
VAC.
MM
H22
3bb
23b
378
H37
378
bb
311
b!2
H1H
378
23H
38H
H32
378
bb
38b
b!2
UNITS AS SPECIFIED IN THE
MODE
I I
2 25
3 55
» 25
5 111
b 25
7 in
e 25
1 CT
1 I
2 25
3 55
<» 25
5 ID
b 25
7 in
8 25
1 CT
10 MV
Ib.b
!•».»
1.3
IH.i
17.2
1H.1
2.b
15. »
2H.1
lb.3
1H.1
1.2
15.1
17.0
11.1
2.b
IS. 2
2H.I
CHP
U.ll
23.8
53.1
23.1
10. 8
23.1
8b.7
22.3
O.U
II. 0
23.1
SH.O
22.3
10.8
23.1
8^.7
22. »
n.u
SUM (COMPOSITE
TMO
1C
SUM---ICI)'
ipuai ic
CTQ
U
b3
1H2
t.1
28
bl
227
51
0
0
bl
1H2
51
28
hi
227
51
0
VALUE FOH
VALUE FOR
CYCLE COMPOSITE -
) r
FC
».l
21.3
30.1
20.2
lb.3 1
11.1
H2.1
11. »
H.I
H.2
20.1
30. H
11.7
Ib.h 1
30.2
Hl.1
11.8
3.1
CYCLE 1)
F V f I f ^\
CYCLt 2J
HC- FIO
7-11-75
BSFC
R
.813
.573
,B73
.515
. Bbll
.HBh
.8b1
R
R
.871
.5K3
.883
.5*0
,R73
.HH3
.885
a
H.35(
CO- NDIR 0.35(
NOX-CL
0.35(
PROCEDURE- —
BSNOX
R
b.1
11.1
b.H
5.8
b.U
11. b
5.1
R
R
b.3
10.8
b.3
b.H
b.b
11.5
b.S
H
5.
2H.
13.
F/A
.Ubl
.Oh2
.Ob5
.Ob3
.Ob 3
.Ob3
.Ubb
.Ob3
.Ohl
.Ubl
.Ob2
.Ob5
.Ob3
.(Ib2
.lib. 3
.lib?
.llhl
.1)51
») t 1).
1) + n.
2) + II.
SFC
KG/Krt HR
R
.5H3
.3*1
.531
.122
.523
.215
.528
R
R
.530
.3H2
.537
.13b
.531
,21H
.538
R
b5( H
b5( 27
bS( 13
riC +
RPH
580
2000
2000
2000
1110
1115
2005
1115
1115
sen
1115
2000
1115
1115
1115
2U05
1115
2000
.8) =
.») =
.1) =
NOX =
SFC *
CALC
A/F
Ib.S
lb.1
1S.H
15.1
lb.0
15.1
15.0
15.1
lb.»
Ib.H
lb.0
15. »
15.1
lb.0
15.1
1H.8
IS. 8
lb.1
5.010
2b.2Hl
13.1b3
18.173
.fei
HC
le.b
2.0
10. b
1.3
.b
1.3
1».+
1.0
5b.3
12.1
2.1
11.2
l.»
.7
1.5
17. b
1.1
51. »
S.»
»o
• <•
G/KW
G/KW
G/KM
G/Km
KG/K1
CO
S.I
H.7
17.1
H.S
3.7
*.8
51. b
5.2
2.5
».3
H.b
lb.1
».b
2.1
».b
Sb.l
t.3
1.8
2H
p 7
C f
HR
HH
HR
Hrt
Hrt
NOX FUEL
.3 5.3
S.I 1.1
35.2 25.3
* BS)
PUNER
D.U
7.2
31.1
7.U
2.*
7.0
38.5
b.8
0.0
0.0
7.0
31.3
b.8
2.»
7.0
38. b
b.R
0.0
o
M
O
-------
TABLE C-10.MASS EMISSIONS BY NINE-MODE EPA - METRIC UNITS
ENGINE-21I TEST-2nti2 RUN-2
1S75 CHEVROLET 350-CIO HI) ENGINE—PROJECT 11-4311
lfl-18-77 BASFLINE AFTER OVERHAUL
K= 1.010 HUMa 11.2 G/KG
CONCENTRATION
MOOE HC-FID co
1 IDLE 4fa4IJ
S 25 PCT T 354
3 55 PCT T 700
* 35 PCT T 243
5 10 PCT T 19b
b 25 PCT T 252
7 9n PCT T 1072
8 35 PCT T 17b
9 C.T. 2bb9Q
1 IOLE 3072
2 35 PCT T 332
3 55 PCT T bbt
"» 25 PCT T 232
S 10 PCT T 17b
b 35 PCT T 23b
7 9n PCT T 103?
8 3«; PCT T 192
9 C.T. P«BMb
.305
.251
.343
.245
.240
.245
1.07b
.2b3
.281
.40b
.275
.349
.2b9
.241)
.234
.849
.275
.275
UNITS AS
MOOE ID HV CHP
1 I lb.4
3 25 14. b
3 55 9.5
4 25 14.9
5 10 17.1
fa 25 14. b
7 9(1 2.b
8 25 15.0
9 CT 34.1
1 I lb.9
3 25 14. h
3 55 9.b
4 25 14.9
S 1(1 17.3
b 25 14.9
7 91) 3.h
8 35 15.0
9 CT 34.1
(1.0
23.8
53.1
23.1
11.5
24. b
87.5
23.1
0.0
0.0
23.2
52.8
22.4
9.3
23.2
RB.l
22.5
0.0
AS HF.ASUKEO TOTAL
C02 NOX-CL CARHON
12.14 b3
13.59 b80
14.09 1797
13.71 bPS
13.59 375
13.59 730
13. "4 2392
13.71 700
9.b9 32
12.49 80
13.59 725
13.97 18b9
13.71 700
13.47 350
13.59 740
13.97 2511
13.71 70S
9.90 35
12.9b3
13.881
14.512
13.983
13.853
15.1138
13.993
13.88b
13.240
13.902
14.005
13.739
13.R5n
12.RR9
SPECIFIED IN THE 7-11-75
CTQ FC HSFC
0 3.9
b3 31.0
140 30.3
bl 20.1
30 lb.3
bS 30. b
230 42.5
bl 19. b
0 4.2
0 4.2
bl 3D.b
138 30.0
59 19.8
34 lb.0
bl 20.4
230 42.4
59 19. b
0 4.2
SUM---( CGMPOSI TE VALUE Foft CYCLE
SuM---(COMPOSI TE VALUE FOR CYCLE
TrtO CYCLE COMPOSITE - HC-
CO-
R
.R83
.5b9
.871
1.413
.HJ7
,48b
.848
R
R
.887
.5b8
.R82
1.732
.H79
.4R1
.871
R
FID 0.3SC
NOIR 0.35(
NOX-CL 0.35(
in s
FUFL
G/HR
17b9
9117
7394
19278
8R9II
1905
19115
13hf|S
8981
7257
9353
19233
8890
1905
CALCULATED G/HR
HC CO NOX
71
27
75
1R
13
19
13
431
49
35
73
17
111
18
151
401
84 3
348 ISb
b53 Sb9
323 ISO
258 b7
334 Ib3
2787 1038
338 149
84 2
118 4
373 Ib3
bbb 592
348 ISO
25b b2
31b Ibb
3307 1084
353 150
82 2
PROCEDURE SFC
8SNOX F/A KG/Krt HR RPM
R
b.7
10.8
b.b
5.9
b.7
11.9
b.fa
R
«
7.1
11.4
b.8
b.R
7.3
1?.5
b.8
R
fa.n)
29.8)
13.4)
.059
.OS3
,0b5
.Ob 3
,0b2
.Ob2
.Obfl
.ob3
.Obi
.obn
.nb3
.OhS
.Ofa3
.OS2 1
,0b3
.lib?
.OS3
.(IS I
t l).bS(
+ O.bSC
* O.b5(
R 5bO
.537 1990
,34h 1995
.530 1990
.859 1990
.509 1990
.29h 2000
.Sib 1990
R 1990
R 590
.540 2000
.34b 2005
.53b 2000
.048 2000
.535 2000
.393 2015
.530 2005
R 2005
5.5) =
27.4) =
14.2) s
HC f NOX =
3FC *
-T.
FACT.
.232
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.143
.232
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.143
CALC
A/F
lb.9
lb.0
15.3
15.9
lb.0
lb.0
14.7
15.9
Ib.S
Ib.b
lb.0
15.4
15.9
lb.2
lb.0
14.8
15.9
Ib.S
5.704
28.218
13.891
19.595
.439
"EIGHTED
HC-FIO CO
lb.4
2.1
ll.U
1.4
.7
1.5
17.7
1.0
bl.b
11.5
1.1
10.5
1.3
.b
1.4
17.1
1.1
57.4
20
27
9b
25
15
2b
315
2fa
13
27
29
99
37
15
24
349
27
12
G/HR
NOX-CL CKM
.7 Q.O
13.0 17.7
83. b 39. fa
11.5 17.2
3.6 B.b
13. 5 18.4
Ufa. 2 bS.2
11. S 17.2
.2 0.0
.9 0.0
13. b 17.3
87.1 39.4
11. b lb.7
3.S fa. 9
13.8 17.3
122.5 b5.7
11. b lb.9
.2 0.0
VAC.
rlH
417
371
241
378
434
371
fab
381
b!3
429
371
244
378
439
378
hb
381
b!2
HC
14.5
1.9
9.7
1.2
.b
1.3
15. fa
.9
54.4
11.2
1.9
10.2
1.3
.b
1.3
Ib.b
1.0
55.9
b.O
5.5
G/KM
G/KW
G/KH
G/KH
KG/KN
CO NOX FUEL
3.5
l?|l
4.4
2.b
4.b
Sb.2
4.b
2.1
5.4
5.7
19.3
5.3
2.9
4.8
49.1
5.3
2.3
30
27
HR
HR
Hrt
riS
HR
.3 5.U
4.8 9.0
33.2 24.8
4. fa B.b
l.S 5.2
5.0 8.8
4b.l 2S.8
4.b 8.4
.1 3.3
.3 5.4
4.8 8.9
33.1 24.7
4.4 8.5
1.3 5.1
4.9 8.8
4fa.b 2b.8
4.4 8.4
.1 3.4
13.*
14.3
( 4.353 BS)
(31.043 BS)
(10.3bB BS)
(14.bl2 BS)
( .7US 88)
POnER
U. II
7.1
30.5
b 9
W • T
2.b
7.4
38. fa
b.9
0.0
0.0
7.1
30.7
fa. 8
3.1
7.1
39.4
b.9
0.0
-------
TArtLE C-11.MAS3 EMISSIONS BY NINE-MODE EPA - HETRIC UNITS
1175 CHEVROLET 350-CIO HO FNGINE---PROJECT 11-*311
ENGINE-?il TEST-21102 HUN-3 1(1-11-7? HA3ELINE AFTF.R UVEHHAUL
1.015 HUMS 11.* S/KG
O
CONCENTRATION AS MEASURED TOTAL
MODfc
1 I OLE
2 ?5 PI"T
3 55 Pf.T
* 25 PCT
5 111 PCT
b 25 PCT
7 111 PCT
R 25 PCT
1 C.T.
1 IDLE
2 25 PTT
3 55 PCT
* 25 PCT
5 in PCI
fa 25 PCT
7 1U PCT
8 25 PCT
1 C.T.
HC-FIO
288(1
T 35b
T 712
T 2**
T IbO
T 2*b
T lllb
T 212
25277
2880
T 3*2
T b12
T 2*8
T 17b
T 2**
T 121b
T 1*8
CO CO2 NUX-CL CAHHON
.3«0 12. bl b* 11.311
.275 13.51 b3S 13.105
.313 l*.0l Ib70 lH.5bb
.2M 13.71 b20 lH.n<17
.217 13. *7 305 13.705
.281 13.51 b*5 13.P11
1.37* 13.71 21(15 15.21*
.305 13.71 bb3 1*. 1131
.310 1.10 31 12.117
.*bb 12.73 BS 13.520
.287 13.51 bb5 13. Hb
.311 13.17 Ib80 l*.1b()
,2b1 13.71 *bO 1*.007
.2h3 13.3* 310 13.b23
.211 13.71 b*5 1».03?
l.SM 13.51 21*7 15.218
.251 13.51 bh5 13.Rb3
.311 1.M 31 I?.b7?
FUEL
G/H«
lisn
1571
l*0bl
1*80
7*31
1525
11123
1117
1150
lllb
1525
138S5
13**
7212
1072
IBM)
CALCULATED G/HR
HC
*7
28
HI)
11
111
11
Ib*
Ib
*15
2b
75
11
HI
18
178
1*
311
UNITS AS SPECIFIED IN THE 7-11-75 PROCEDURE
MODE ID «V CHP CTO FC BSFC BSNOX F/A
i T
2 ?5
3 55
5 HI
7 In
8 25.
1 CT
1 I
2 25
3 SS
* 25
51 ii
b ?5
8 25
1 CT
lb.5
1*.5
1.2
1 u L,
17.3
2.5
1*.8
?*.!
1*.5
1.3
l*.h
17.*
l*.b
2 *
H.B
ll.ll 0 *.3 R
23.1 bl 21. 1 -HI
S*.2 1*2 11. n .572
2* O b3 20.1 .R?3
10.8 28 It..* l.SdO
2*U b3 21.0 .877
2*.0 fa3 2H.1 .P37
(1.0 0 ».3 R
2J.2 bl 21.0 .105
53.5 1*0 30.5 .S7H
2*.0 h3 20. b .851
1.3 2* 15.1 1.7lb
?3.2 bl ?0.b .8H8
23.2 bl 20.0 .Bb2
ll.O 0 ».l R
R
10.2
b.O
5.2
h. 3
10.*
"R
R
in.*
b.l
b.3
10. b
R
.OM1
.llbb
.Obi
.(Ib2
.Ob3
.(ibl
,nb3
.Obi
.Ubl
.Ob 3
.ObS
.Obi
!ob1
.(Ibll
CO
111
382
7b7
3b8
237
381
3525
*00
100
131
317
btlb
3b2
281
*02
332
12
SFC
KG/KW HR
R
.555
.1*9
.531
.125
.533
.21b
.501
R
R
.551
!522
1.0**
.5*1)
.215
.52*
R
NOX
3
1*7
5*3
1*1
Sb
1*1
101
1*5
2
*
153
SHS
103
55
1*5
121
1*7
2
RPM
510
2000
2005
2000
1115
2000
2005
2000
2000
510
2000
2005
"20DO
1115
2000
2005
2000
2000
HT.
FACT.
.212
.077
.1*7
.077
.US7
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
.232
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
CALC
A/F
Ih.S
lb.0
15.3
15.1
lb.2
lh.0
1*.S
15.8
Ib.*
lb.3
15.1
15.5
15. S
lb.3
15.8
1*.*
lb.0
1-5.8
SuM---(CO:iPOSITE VALUE FOH CYCLE 2)----
TWO CYCLE COMPOSITE - HC- FID 0.
CO- NOIR II.
rrt •
NOX-CL 0.
1S( 5
35( 12
.7) + M.
.1) + n.
.21 t 0.
t>5( 5
f>5( 38
b5( 12
HC t
.b) =
.5) =
.3) =
NOX =
SFC =
5.b03
37.b12
12.2*5
47.8*8
,*32
"EIGHTEO G/riS
HC-FID
11.0
2.1
11.8
1.*
.b
1.5
18. b
i.f
51.*
11.1
2.0
11.1
1.*
.b
1.*
20.1
1.1
Sb.l
HC
10. e
2.0
11.11
1.3
.5
1.*
17.3
1.1
55.8
10.5
1.1
10. b
.b
1.3
11.2
1.0
53.5
5.7
S.b
G/K«
G/KM
G/KW
KG/KB
CO
2b
21
113
28
1*
30
318
31
1*
32
31
81
28
Ib
31
*bO
2b
13
MOX-LL CK*
.7 0.0
11.3 17.2
71.8 *0.*
10. S 17.1
3.2 8.0
11.5 17.1
101.8 bS.3
11.2 17.1
.2 0.0
1.0 0.0
11.8 17.3
80.2 31.1
8.U 17.1
3.2 fa.1
11.1 17.3
IQS.t) bb.S
11.3 17.3
.2 0.0
CO NOX FUEL
3.8
Ib'.S
*. 1
2.0
*.*
SB. 3
*.5
2.1
*.*
12.3
3.8
2.2
*.3
b3.*
3.5
1.8
3b
38
HR
HR
Hrt
rtrt
HR
.3 5.4
*.1 8.1
3*.b 2*.1
*.7 8.8
l.» 5.1
5 . 11 8.8
**.! 2b.3
*.8 8.*
.1 3.*
.* S.b
5.1 8.1
3*.b 2*.b
3.* 8.7
1.* 5.0
•+.H 8.7
*5.3 2b.1
*.1 8.5
.1 3. a
12.2
12.3
( *.178 BS)
(?8.0b3 BS)
( 1.131 IS)
(13.310 8S)
( .710 BS)
VAC.
KM
*11
3bB
23*
371
*37
371
b3
37b
bl2
*17
3bB
371
371
bl
37b
PO^ER
0.0
b.l
30.1
7.1
2.*
7.1
38.*
7.8
0.0
0.0
7.0
30. fa
2.1
7.0
31.2
7.0
0.0
-------
1AHLEC-12. MAd!> EMISSIONS HY NINE-NODE EPA - NETKIC UNITS
ENGINE-2II TEST-8IUI7 KUN-1
H7S CHEVROLET 3511-CU) HO ENGINE PROJECT 11-1311
11-311-77 EMISSIONS CONTROL SYSTEM
K= .B28 HUMS H.8 G/KG
CUSCt*\KMION
MODE HC-FID CO
1 IDLE bHIl .1110
8 85 PCI T 2111 ,2Bb
3 55 PCI T 21 ,0111
1 85 PCT T MB .178
b 111 PCT I 178 .215
b 85 PCT T HI7 .2111
7 10 PCT T 13 .381
B 85 PCT f 87 .188
1 C.T. IblO .010
I IDLE 1155 .071
8 25 PCT T 311 .3b1
3 55 PCT T 58 .013
1 85 PCT T 113 .IB!
S HI PCT T 8118 .818
fa 85 PCT T 12b .810
7 Mil PCT T 81 .371
8 85 PCT T 10 .187
1C.T. IblO .1112
AS MEASUKED
TOTAL
C08 NUX-CL CAKBON
H.bl 1U
18.12 115
12. 18 hid
11.77 8b()
11.17 HO
II. hi 257
11.71 7b3
11. Bb 837
.12 1
1.1B 3b
11.83 111
18.17 717
11. bl 255
11.11) Ib
11.75 250
11.71 817
11.85 250
.01 b
I.Hbl
18.18H
18.878
11.158
11.101
11.1118
15.180
11.111
.515
1.b85
12.238
le.Sbl
11.B81
11.310
11.171
15. Ibl
11.181
.5b7
FUEL
G/HH
1518
8528
V87SI
H081
b211
8021
20QII3
7802
0
ISfltt
8188
12R88
7138
b2bO
8081
20011
7138
0
CALCULATED
HC
12
Ib
3
7
11
8
2
£
U
21
27
b
B
12
1
if
3
0
CO
31
31b
IBS
212
23b
273
1035
Ibl
0
2b
517
113
811
813
281
113
Ibl
0
G/HR
NOX
8
37
148
18
13
18
27b
12
0
8
3b
202
17
IS
Ib
218
Ib
0
WT.
FACT.
.838
.077
.117
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.113
.238
.077
.117
.077
.OS7
.077
.113
,077
.1H3
WEIGHTED G/HR
HC-FID
2.7
1.2
.1
.5
.b
.b
.2
.2
0.0
1.8
2.0
.1
.b
.7
.7
.1
.2
0.0
CO
7
30
2B
11
13
21
117
13
0
b
10
28
11
11
22
112
13
0
NOX-CL CKH
.» 0.0
2.U 18.2
21.1 31.0
3.7 17.1
.B 7.1
3.7 17.1
31.2 b3.S
3.3 17.1
0.0 0.0
."* 0.0
2.8 IS. 2
21.7 31.5
3.b 17.7
.8 7.1
3.5 17.7
33. b fa3.8
3.5 18.0
0.0 0.0
VAC.
M*
111
323
150
335
31b
938
18
310
511
122
320
150
338
31fa
338
18
338
511
__._(JNITS AS
I MODE ID KV CHP
W II lb.3 11.11
2 25 18.7 21.1
3 55 5.1 52.3
1 25 13.2 21.0
51 1) 15. b 1.5
b 25 13.3 81.0
7 111 1.1 85.8
8 25 13.1 83.3
1 CT 83. fa D.O
1 I tb.h 11. 11
2 25 12. b 81.5
3 55 5.1 53.0
1 85 13.3 83. B
S HI 15. b 1.1
b 25 13.3 23. B
7 111 1.1 85. b
8 25 13.3 21.2
1 CT 23. b 0.0
SPECIFIED IN
CTO FC
0 3.1
bl 18.8
137 88.2
b3 17.7
25 13.7
b3 17.7
223 11.1
bl 17.2
0 0.0
0 3.5
bl 18.7
131 88.1
b2 17.5
2b 13.8
b2 17.7
283 11.3
b3 17.5
0 0.0
SUM..... f rnMpnil TF VAI IIP Fnu rvn i
\ji»n v^i.'nnfOAit. »**l."i_ r \jn UICL.I
SUM"**— f COMPOS I T E V*1 '"" efia r~wi~i J
TWO CYCLE COMPOSITE -
n^wL. ' \S*« I'll'L.i
HC-
CO-
THE 7-1 1-75
BSFC
R
.778
.531
.736
1.138
.737
.518
.73H
I
R
. 7b1
.53h
.737
1.388
.71H
.SIR
. 721
I
FID 0.35(
NOIR 0.3S(
PROCEDURE---- -i v
nl_l>
A/F
22.1
17.7
16. G
18.1
11.3
18.5
1*. 7
18.1
350.5
28.5
18.0
17. b
18.5
11.1
18.1
I1*. 7
18.1
3b7.1
.177
13.377
1.071
1.SS7
. 310
HC
12.0
18.8
fc.1
7.1
1.5
l.b
3.1
2.3
0.0
Ib.O
11. b
8.1
b.2
b.7
b.1
3.S
8.8
0.0
3'
.
_
G/KW
G/KW
G/KW
G/KW
KG/KW
CO NOX FUEL
2.1
12^3
11.2
7.5
5.1
B.S
17.0
5.2
0.0
2.1
15.7
11.8
7.1
5.5
B.b
11.1
5.1
0.0
i T
U
HH (
HK (
HH (
HH (
HH (
.5 1.1
3.8 8.1
38. B 25. b
1.1 8.1
1.0 1.8
1.1 8.1
11.7 30.8
1.1 8.2
0.0 0.0
.5 5.0
3.b B.B
38. i 25. b
».b 8.3
1.1 t.B
13.1 30.8
».5 8.3
0.0 0.0
HH
.O
1.1
.35b BS)
1.175 BS)
3.012 BS)
3.318 US)
.fall BS)
POWER
0.0
7.1
30. B
7.3
2.2
7.3
38.2
7.1
0.0
0.0
7.1
30. b
7,2
2.2
7.2
38.0
7.3
0.0
-------
TABLE C-13.MASS EMISSIONS BY NINE-MODE ERA - METHIC UNITS
ENGINE-2II TEST-8IH); HUN-8
1S7S CHEVROLET JSO-CII) HD ENGINE PHOJECT 11-1311
EMISSIONS CONTROL SYSTEM
K= .HIS HUMs b
l!s
31. S
1.3
1.0
1.2
1b.2
1.1
O.U
.1
3.5
35.7
1.3
.s
1.1
Ib.U
1.7
O.U
i.s
H-J
• r
( ,37S
( S.318
( 3. lib
( 3.825
( .b18
FUEL
5.1
B.b
25.7
8.5
1.8
8.5
30. b
8. 2
0.0
1.1
8.7
25.7
8.5
1.8
B.b
30.5
8.1
0.0
BS)
US)
US)
BS)
BS)
POWER
0.0
7.3
30. b
7.8
2.1
7.3
38.2
7.2
0.0
0.0
7.2
30. b
7.8
8.1
7.1
38.8
7.1
0.0
-------
TABLE C-14.HASS EMISSIONS BY NINE-MODE EPA - METRIC UNITS
EN6INE-2II TEST-2DII7 RUN-3
1S7S CHEVHOLtT 3SO-C1D HI) ENGINE PROJECT 11-13J1
11-3(1-77 EMISSIONS COMTHDL SYSTEM
K= .800 HUM= 4.0 G/KG
CONCENTRATION AS MEASURED TOTAL
MODE HC-FID CO
I IDLE 718 .USB
2 25 PCT T IH1 .117
3 SS PCT T iS .IIHII
» 25 PCT T 111 .175
s n» PCT T 2*H .331
fa as PCT T 118 .ais
? sn PCT T it .asa
8 25 PCT T 311 .127
S C.T. 5218 .0117
1 IDLE 12Sh .071
2 25 PCT T 10U .183
3 SS PCT T b7 .OS7
t 25 PCT T IPS .1SS
s in PCT T asa .as?
b 35 PCT T las .227
7 Stl PCT T 2H .a8b
8 25 PCT T 10 ,12b
s C.T. siao .(ins
CU2 NUX-CL CAKBON
S.bl
12. Ill
ia.it
11.37
10.81
11. Sb
11.18
IK b3
.10
S.17
11.71
12. as
11. Sb
10. 7S
11.58
11. 3S
11. b?
.ns
3b S.7BS
IbB 12.53S
bS3 13.331
2SU 11.SS8
S2 11. ribs
2S1 11.788
SOS 11.771
2bO 11.7faO
S .b32
35 S.382
175 12.238
730 12.351
2b2 11.773
S7 11. OSS
2bO 11.831
Sb3 H.b7S
277 11.800
7 .bill
FUEL
U/HR
1SBH
87(|S
laaaa
eibS
b2bO
B21U
2U230
8071
0
1SBB
8751
13018
8210
bins
831b
20321
81bS
0
CALCULATED G/HR
HC
13
IS
<»
S
IS
s
2
2
0
31
32
8
1U
18
10
1
3
(1
CO
32
S8S
1S1
2SII
2b3
302
808
17b
0
21
bSS
20b
281
273
331
?sa
17b
n
NOX
2
30
1S»
17
It
1b
32S
17
0
2
33
201
IS
IS
IS
351
51
0
WT.
FACT.
.332
.077
.117
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.113
.232
.077
.117
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.113
WEIGHTED
HC-FIO
3.1
1.3
.b
.7
.S
.7
.2
.2
0.0
5.5
2.5
1.2
.7
1.0 '
.8
.1
.2
0.0
CO
7
IS
28
IS
IS
23
SI
It
0
b
51
30
22
Ib
25
SO
11
0
G/HR
NOX-CL CKH
.1 O.U
a. s IB. t
28.5 3S.2
3. fa 18.1
.8 b.b
3.b 17. S
37,2 bl.S
3.b 17. S
0.0 0.0
.1 0.0
2.b 18.1
30.0 3S.3
3.7 18.2
.8 b.b
3.8 18.2
10.0 bH.5
3.S 18.2
0.0 0.0
VAC.
MM
111
312
ISO
335
3Sb
330
tb
335
SS7
IIS
317
150
333
3Sb
330
tb
333
SSS
n UNITS AS SPECIFIED IN THE 7-11-75
1 MODE ID KV CHP
11 lb.2 It. (I
2 25 12.3 21. b
3 SS S.S Sa.b
t as is. a at. 3
S 111 15. H 8.S
b as 13. n 21. u
7 S(l 1.8 Bfa.S
8 25 13.2 at. II
S CT £3.5 II. U
1 I Ib.S 11. U
a as ia.5 ai.7
3 bS S.S 52.7
1 as 13.1 21.1
S ill IS.k H.S
b 25 13.0 21.1
7 SII 1.8 Bb.S
H 25 13.1 21.1
S CT 23. b 11.11
SUM---(CUrtPOSITE
SUM— — — CCUMPOSl TE
TWO CYCLE COMPOSITE -
ID =
CTO
U
faS
137
hi
23
b3
aas
fa3
0
0
bS
13R
bl
23
bt
aas
bt
u
VALUE FOK
VALUE FOR
FC BSFC
3.5 R
IS. 2 .78n
38.1 .510
18.0 .71)1
13.8 l.SSb
18.1 .755
It.b .Sib
17.8 .710
0.0 I
3.5 R
IS. 3 .782
?8.7 .511
1B.1 .719
13. S l.Sbb
18.1 .755
11. 8 .518
1H.O .738
0.0 I
HC- FIO 0.3S(
CO- NOIH 0.3SC
NOX-CL U.35(
PROCEDURE
BSNOX
R
1.2
3.7
l.S
l.b
a.o
3.1"
a.o
I
R
1.1
3.S
a.o
1.7
a.o
1.1
a.i
i
.1)
12. S)
1.3)
SFC
F/A KG/K« HR RPM
.015
.057
.055
.053
.OSlI
.051
.Ubb
.053
.003
.013
.OSfa
.OSfa
.053
.OSU
.051
.abb
.051
.U03
+ d.bS(
•» H.bS(
+ ll.bS(
H
.171
.338
.150
.S17
.Ibfl
.311
.ISO
I
R
.175
.331
.tsa
.SS3
. tss
.315
.its
I
13
1
HC t
SbS
2000
2010
2DOS
2000
2005
2030
aoio
2010
SbO
2UOO
2010
2005
2000
2005
2020
2005
2005
.7) =
.b) =
.5) =
NOX =
SFC =
CALC
A/F
22.3
17. b
18.0
1S.U
1S.B
18.7
15.1
18.7
32S.5
33.2
18.0
17. S
18.7
IS.B
18. b
15.2
18.7
311.3
.Sbb
13.35S
1.131
5.1)00
.3S1
„
HC
10.8
1S.1
8.0
S.I
11.?
S.3
3.3
2.3
0.0
11.8
1S.S
H.I
b.O
8.1
b.l
3.5
I.1*
0.0
.1
j
. *
G/KW
G/KH
G/KW
G/KH
KG/KH
CO
3.1
18.5
11.5
'.^
b.2
l.b
37. b
S.b
0.0
a. 2
21.0
11.8
B.S
b.l
S.8
35.3
S.3
0.0
13
It
HH
HH
HK
HH
HH
NOX FUEL
.1 l.S
2.S S.O
35. b 2S.1
l.b «.1
1.0 1.8
l.S 8.5
tb.b 30.7
l.b 8.3
0.0 0.0
.1 l.S
3.0 S.O
35.2 25. S
1.1 8.H
l.U 1.8
t.t B.b
17. U 30. b
l.fa 8.1
0.0 0.0
1.3
( .122 US)
( S.Sb2 BS)
( 3.3II? BS)
( 3.72S B3)
( .b17 BS)
HOHtK
0.0
7.1
30.3
7.1
2.0
7.2
38.1
7.3
0.0
0.0
7.1
30.3
7.3
e.o
7.3
38.2
7.3
0.0
-------
TABLE C-15.MASS tMlSSIONS BY NINE-MODE EPA - METHIC UNITS
ENGINE-80
1175 CHEVROLET 350-CIO HO ENGINE PROJECT 11-4311
TEST-anob HUN-G1 11-28-77 EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM WITH CATALYST
K=
HUM= 1.1 G/KG
CONCENTRATION
MODE
1 IOLE
3 25 PCI T
3 55 PCT T
4 a-i PCT T
S III PCT T
b 25 PCT T
7 Hi) PCT T
8 ?5 PCT T
1 C.T.
1 IDLE
a as PCT T
3 SS PCT T
4 as PCT T
5 in PCT T
b 85 PCT T
7 in PCT T
B as PCT T
S C.T.
HC-FID
5
S
0
7
8)
10
i
3
S
ao
aa
a
8
83
11
1
3
b
CU
. niu
.oni
. Ulll
.OU1
.(MIL
.0113
.(HI?
.una
.0(11
.001
.0111
.003
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
AS MEASURED TOTAL KIJEL
COa NOX-CL CARBON G/HH
1.10 4b 1.101 2177
10.17 331 10.S73 8754
8.30 4b5 8.301 13R80
10.88 383 10. RBI B074
111. 7S 87 111.713 b3SO
10.11 303 in.114 aibS
14.17 585 14.173 3-03bb
11.10 aim 11.103 BIBS
.be la .t>ai n
1.73 33 1.733 IKlS
11.37 831 11.374 8301
18.73 581 18.732 13b08
11.33 307 11.333 8301
10.84 17 10.843 b3SO
11.13 813 11.133 8074
14.11 b03 14.111 30b38
11. 13 310 11.181 7138
.78 11 .783 0
CALCULATED G/HR
HC
II
1
(1
1
1
1
I)
0
0
n
8
II
1
1
1
(1
u
0
CO
U
3
3
1
1
H
b
t
0
U
8
»
1
1
1
3
1
0
NOX
3
bO
853
fa 8
17
73
851
72
0
3
54
18H
. 73
11
bl
870
72
0
HT.
WEIGHTED G/HR
FACT. HC-FiD
.232
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.143
.838
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1H3
.11
.1
O.fl
.0
.1
.1
.0
.0
0.0
.1
.1
.0
.0
.1
.1
.0
.u
0.0
cu NOX-CL CKW
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
.b O.Q
4.b 18.3
37.8 31. b
S.3 17.?
1.0 b.i
S.b 17.8
31.3 b3.b
5.5 17.8
0 . U 0.0
.S 0.0
4.8 17.8
87.1 31.8
5. fa 17.8
1.1 b.3
5.3 17.8
30.5 b4.3
5.5 lb.7
0.0 0.0
VAC.
MM
311
317
132
340
401
338
43
340
574
404
333
137
335
401
33B
41
343
584
? HODE ID
°* 1 I
2 85
3 55
4 ?«;
S 111
b as
7 10
8 as
i CT
i i
a as
3 55
4 as
s in
b as
7 111
a as
S CT
UNITS AS
MV
15.7
18.5
s.a
13.4
15.8
13.3
1.7
13. H
aa. b
15.1
13.1
5.4
13. a
15.8
13.3
l.b
13.5
23.0
CHP
u.n
en. b
53.1
P3.ll
6.5
a3.8
BS.3
33.1
n.o
0.11
aa.i
52. b
33.1
B.S
83.1
Bb.'J
aa.3
u.n
SUM (COMPOSITE
SUM (COMPOSITE
TWO CYCLE
ID =
COMPOSITE -
SPECIFIED IN THE 7-11-75 PROCEDURE
CTQ FC bSFC BSNOX
0 4.8 R R
b4 11.3 .78fa a. 5
131 30. b .577 4.8
bl 17.8 .773 T.O
33 1H.O 1 .bSb a.O
b3 18.0 .755 3.1
883 44.1 .537 3.1
b3 1B.O .755 3.0
0 0.0 I I
0 4. a R R
bl 18.3 .713 3. 4
137 30.0 .571 3.5
b3 18.3 .7b7 3.1
38 1H.O l.bS4 8. 3
bl 17.8 .771 3.0
33-* HS.S .537 3.8
5S 17.5 .78H 3.3
0 0.0 I I
HC- FID 0.3SC
CO- NDIR 0.35(
NOX-CL 0.3SC H
F/A
.015
.050
.U38
.(ISO
|| U Q
.ll'tT
.1)50
,Ub7
.051
.1103
.OH 5
.053
.058
.1151
.OH1
.051
.Ob7
.051
.0113
.0) t 0.
.1) t 0.
.8) + 11.
SFC
KG/KH rin
H
."•78
.351
.H70
In ft T
• DO r
.H51
.330
.H51
I
H
.183
.3H7
.•>b7
l.OOb
.Hbl
.331
,*77
I
bS(
b5(
hS( 4
HC +
KPM
b70
8000
3005
8000
3000
3000
8015
aoon
8000
b3U
3000
2010
3000
8000
8000
8080
2000
3005
.0) =
.1) =
.3) =
NOX =
SFC =
CALC
A/F
ee.i
80.0
8b.8
80.3
3 n ?
cO . 3
30.0
14.1
11.8
308.1
82.5
11.4
17.4
11.4
30.3
11.8
14. S
11.8
811.1
.034
.013
4.478
4.508
.410
HC
1.U
11.7
o.u
14.8
3 C 11
cb » U
80.4
5.7
b.l
O.I)
11.5
8b.1
b.l
1.8
Ib.b
13.3
3.5
3.b
0.0
.U
.u
G/KW
G/KW
G/KW
G/KH
KG/KM
Cn
4.8
7.1
80.4
8.b
2Q
. B
14.8
33. b
14. b
0.0
5.7
1U.1
31.1
7.0
4.8
7.0
H.4
b.8
0.0
II
0
HK (
HK (
HK (
HK (
HK (
NOX FUEL
.1 b.b
5.8 8.7
41.7 8b.3
5.1 8.0
b.3 8.1
38.8 89. b
b.8 8.1
0.0 0.0
.b 5.8
5.3 8.4
33.1 8fa.8
7.1 6.4
1.3 4.7
b.7 8.1
38.8 30.5
7.U 8.0
0.0 0.0
4.8
4.3
.018 BS)
.Obi BS)
3.331 63)
3.357 BS)
.b?4 BS)
POHEH
U.U
7.S
30.1
7.0
7.3
38.8
7.3
0.0
0.0
7.1
30.8
7.3
1.1
7.1
38.1
b.l
0.0
-------
1 ABLE C-16. MASS LMISSIUMS BY NINE-MODE tHA - MUHIL UNITS
Ck,r nr , ,T IS75 CHEVROLET 350-CID HO ENGINE —PKOJECI 11-1311
ENSINE-20 TEST-etiOb RUN-U2 11-28-7? EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM WITH CATALYST
CONCENTRATION AS MEASURED TOTAL
MODE HC-FID CO C02 NOX-CL CARBON
1 IDLE S
2 25 PCT T 13
3 55 PCT T 0
1 25 PCT T b
S 10 PCT T 20
b 25 PCI T B
7 So PCT T o
8 25 PCT T 3
S C.T. S
1 IDLE Ib
2 25 PCT T 25
3 55 PCT T 1
1 25 PCT T 8
5 in PCT T 27
b 25 PCT T 12
7 So PCT T l
8 25 PCT T 3
S C.T. b
.OOb
.005
.005
.1)01
.001
.003
.001
.003
.001
.001
.003
.003
.003
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
0 UNITS AS
^ MODE ID MV CHP
1 I 15.8
2 25 12.1
3 55 5.3
1 25 13.1
5 10 IS.b
b 25 13.3
7 So 1.7
8 25 13.5
S CT 22. S
1 I lb.0
2 25 13.0
3 55 5.3
1 25 13.1
5 111 15.8
b 25 13.3
7 SO 1.7
8 25 13.5
S CT 23.3
n.o
21. b
52. 7
23.1
S.3
23. S
85. b
23.2
0.0
0.11
23.2
53.5
23.2
8.5
21.1
85. S
29.3
o.n
S.80 13 S.BOb
11.21 220 11.21b
12. bl 135 12. blS
10.81 25b 10.815
10.77 S3 10.77b
11.08 285 11.081
11. 8b 515 ll.flbl
10. SS 2S3 1(1. SSI
.72 7 .721
S.73 3b S.733
11. b3 1S1 Il.b3b
12.73 517 12.733
11.31 258 11.311
10.75 S2 10.751
11. Ib 255 11.1b3
11. SS 350 11.SSH
11.37 270 11.371
.7b S .7bl
SPECIFIED IN THE 7-11-75
CTQ FC BSFC
0 l.b R
b5 1S.S .7S1
138 311.5 .S7S
bl 17.5 .757
21 11. 0 1.513
b3 17. S .71S
223 11.8 .521
bl 17.1 .71S
0 0.0 I
u i.n R
bl 18. b .803
110 3(1.3 .Sbb
hi 17.7 .7b2
22 13.8 l.blS
b3 18.0 .718
223 15.2 ,52b
bl 17. b .755
n o.o i
FUEL
G/HR
20H7
13835
7S3H
b350
BUS
20321
78S3
II
1H11
B137
13711
802S
bgbO
Bibb
20502
7S83
0
CALCULATED
HC CO
II
1
0
1
II
0
0
0
2
0
1
2
1
n
0
0
2
7
111
b
1
5
S
(I
1
5
7
1
i
2
10
1
0
G/Hrt
NOX
3
Sb
155
bl
18
b8
22S
bU
0
2
IS
181
bO
17
SS
ISb
b2
0
PROCEDURE-- — SFC
BSNOX F/A KG/KW HR RPM
R
2.3
3.0
2.7
l.S
e.s
2.7
3.0
I
R
2.n
3.1
2.b
?. 1
2.5
1.8
2.7
I
.015
.051
.057
.01S
.ois
.0511
,0b7
.OSU
.1103
.(lib
.053
.058
.051
.U1S
.052
.Ob?
.052
.1101
R
.181
.352
.ibn
.S20
.155
.318
.155
I
R
.188
.311
.Ibl
SB5
.155
.320
.1SS
I
bfaO
2000
2010
2000
2000
2000
2015
2005
2000
bon
2UOO
2010
2005
2005
2010
2020
2010
2010
FACT!
.232
.077
.117
.077
.057
.1)77
.113
.077
.113
.232
.077
.117
.077
.057
.077
.113
.1177
.113
CALC
A/F
22.3
IS.b
17.5
20.3
20.1
IS. 8
15.0
20.0
esi.i
22.5
1B.S
17.1
1S.1
20 1
IS. 2
11. S
1S.1
27b.O
TWO CYCLE COMPOSITE - HC- FIl) 0.35{
ID =
CO- NOIH 0.35(
NOX-CL 0.35(
.0)
.2)
3.8)
+ D.bS(
+ ll.bS(
+ 0.bS(
3
HC +
.0) =
.2) =
.1) =
NOX =
SFC =
.023
.1S8
3.522
3.515
.10b
HEIGHTEN G/HN
HC-FID co NUX-CL CKW
.u
.1
0.0
.0
.1
.0
0.0
.0
0.0
.1
.2
.0
.0
.1
.1
.0
.0
o.n
1
1
1
0
0
U
0
0
0
n
0
l
0
0
0
i
0
0
.7 0.0
1.3 18.1
22.8 3S.3
1.V 17.2
1.0 b.S
5.2 17.8
25. S b3.8
53 17.3
n.o o.o
.5 0.0
3.5 17.3
2b.7 3S.S
l.b 17.3
1.0 b.1
1.5 18.0
17. b bl.O
1.7 17.1
0.0 0.0
VAC.
Mh
101
315
135
310
3Sb
338
13
313
582
10b
330
135
310
101
338
13
313
SS2
HC
S.2
2S.7
0.0
12.7
25.2
17.0
0.0
b.2
0.0
15.0
30.7
3.5
S.b
IS b
11.5
3.5
3.b
0.0
.0
.0
G/KW
G/KW
G/KW
G/KW
KG/KW
CO NOX FUEL
12.7
13.0
31. b
1(1.8
b.B
8.1
b.S
0.0
3.7
10. S
30. S
S.3
P 0
1.7
31.8
J.O
0.0
0
0
HR (
UK (
HH (
HK (
HM (
1.0 b . 3
b.2 8.0
32. b 2b.1
b.7 7.S
1.5 1.7
?.!> 8.1
37. U 2S.8
7.5 7.S
0.0 0.0
.H 5.5
5.5 B.S
12.3 2b.S
7.3 81
7.2 8.2
27. S 30.1
7.5 8.1
O.U 0.0
3.8
3.1
.017 BS)
.117 BS)
2.b2? BS)
2.b11 BS)
.bb8 BS)
POWER
0 0
7.5
30.7
7. 1
7.3
38.3
7.1
0.0
0.0
7 i
31.1
7 i
7.3
38.1
7.1
0.0
-------
TABLE C-17.MASS KMISSIONS BY NINE-MODE EPA - METWIC UNITS
ENGINE-20 TE3T-2(l()b kUN-03
1S7S CHEVROLET 350-CII3 HI) ENGINE — PROJECT 11-4311
11-2H-7? EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM WITH CATALYST
K= 1.U24 HUH= 11.8 G/K6
MODE
1 IDLE
2 25 PCI
3 55 PCT
4 25 PCT
S ID PCT
t> 25 PCT
7 SO PCT
8 25 PCT
S C.T.
1 IDLE
2 25 PCT
3 55 PCT
4 25 PCT
5 10 PCT
fa 25 PCT
7 SO PCT
8 25 PCT
S C.T.
CONCENTRATION
HC-FID CO
r
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
S
14
11
b
21)
S
0
3
5
14
30
1
S
2b
12
0
3
b
.0(11
.001
.001
.1100
.001
.001
.11(11
.002
.000
.0(11
.001
.001
.001
.001
.00(1
.001
.001
.0(11
AS MEASURED
C02 NOX-CL
S.bS
11. bS
12.73
10. SS
10.77
11.21
14. SS
11.25
.72
10.18
12. as
12.73
11.23
11. Ob
11. bO
14. SS
11. 4b
.7b
41
223
485
2SS
87
2SO
SfaS
2SO
**
47
143
512
252
lOb
240
535
2SO
10
TOTAL
CARHON
S.
11.
12.
10.
10.
11.
14.
11.
•
10.
12.
12.
11.
11.
11.
14.
11.
•
bS2
bS2
731
S51
773
212
SSI
253
721
182
2S4
731
232
nb3
bOl
SSI
4bl
7b2
FUEL
G/HR
22bM
aS3b
1378S
bl IS
b305
81 IS
20502
7S83
0
lb?8
B7S4
13172
7SR3
b18fa
0210
2U5S3
BlhS
0
CALCULATED G/HR
HC CO NOX
II
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
2
1
0
II
0
(1
1
1
0
1
1
2
3
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
2
1
(I
3
58
17S
74
17
71
2fa3
70
0
3
35
181
bl
21
58
250
bl
0
WT.
FACT.
.232
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.143
.232
.077
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.143
WEIGHTED G/HH
HC-FID CO NOX-tL
.1
.1
0.0
.0
.1
.1
0.0
.0
0.0
.1
.2
.0
.1
.1
.1
0.0
.0
0.0 "
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.6
4.5
2fa.2
5.7
l.U
b.b
2S.7
5.4
0.0
.b
2.7
27.1
4.7
1.2
4.4
28.2
4.7
0.0
CKW
0.0
18.4
3S.2
17.3
5.8
17. S
b3.B
17. S
0.0
0.0
18.5
38. S
lb.7
b.S
17.3
b4.1
17.4
0.0
VAC.
MM
3S1
312
IBS
338
401
338
43
340
584
4(Jb
315
137
343
3Hb
335
43
338
SS4
O
1 MODE
1 I
2 as
3 55
4 25
5 10
b 25
7 Sn
8 25
S CT
1 I
2 25
3 55
4 25
s in
b 25
7 SO
8 25
S CT
TWO
UNITS A3
ID KV
15.4
12.3
5.3
13.3
15.8
13.3
1.7
13.4
23.0
lb.0
12.4
5.4
13.5
IS.b
13.2
1.7
13.3
23.4
OIIM*— * ( mt
oun \uu»
CHP
0.0
24.7
52. b
23.2
7.7
24.0
85. b
24.0
0.0
0.0
24.8
52.1
22.5
S. 3
23. Z
85. S
23.3
o.n
jpnc I Tp
lr UO 1 It
4Pn«TTP
CYCLE COKP03ITE -
SPECIFIED IN THE 7-11-75
CTO
0
bS
138
bl
20
b3
224
b3
0
0
bS
13b
SS
24
bl
223
bl
0
VALUE FOR
FC
5.0
IS. 7
30.4
17. S
13. S
1?. S
HS.2
17. b
0.0
3.7
IS. 3
2S.7
17. b
14.3
18.1
45.4
18.0
0.0
p vn P
i. TCLC
r vn F
l> T l< L. k
HC-
CO-
BSFC
R
.7SB
.578
.773
1.7SS
.74?
.528
.733
I
R
.77S
.570
.784
1.S3S
.77S
.528
.773
I
FID 0.35(
NDIR 0.35(
NOX-CL 0.35C
ID
£
PROCEDURE
BSNOX
R
2.4
3.1*
3.3
2.3
3.0
3.1
3."
I
R
1.4
3. b
2.8
2.3
2.5
3.1)
2.b
I
.0)
.1)
4. a)
F/A
.044
.053
.US7
.050
.04S
.051
.Ob7
.051
.003
.04b
.USb
.1)58
.051
.050
.053
.Ob7
.U52
.004
t 0.
t (1.
t 0.
SFC
KG/KM
R
.485
.351
.470
1.US4
.455
.321
,44b
I
R
.474
.347
.477
,S3b
.474
.321
.470
I
bS(
bS(
bS(
HC
HR KPH
bSQ
2000
2005
2000
2000
2000
201Q
2000
2000
bOO
2000
2010
2000
2000
200M
2020
2009
2005
.0) =
.0) =
4.0) =
+ NOX =
SFC s
CALC
A/F
22.5
1B.S
17.4
20.1
20.4
IS.b
14. S
IS.b
2S1.4
21.5
18.0
17.4
IS.b
1S.S
IS.o
11. S
IS. 2
275.8
.024
.047
4.081
4.105
,40S
HC
lb.2
27.7
0.0
11. S
22.3
lfa.8
O.U
s.s
0.0
11.7
3b.b
3.5
10. S
IS. 2
14.5
0.0
3.fe
0.0
_
.
G/KH
G/KW
G/KH
G/KH
KG/KH
CO
S.I
10.2
IS. 3
1.1
3.2
S. 7
2b.8
24. e
0.0
S.O
7.1
20.2
12. e
4.3
1.4
3b.3
12.8
0.0
HH
Hk
HK
HH
HH
ENT OF T(
NOX
1.0
5.7
33.3
7.3
1.3
7.U
37.7
b.b
0.0
.b
3.b
3b.8
b.1
l.b
b.O
3H.H
b.3
0.0
4.2
it n
4 . u
( .018
( .035
( 3.043
I 3. Obi
( ,b?3
A T A 1
FUEL
b.8
8.8
eb.O
8.0
4.b
8.0
as. B
7.S
U.O
5.1
H.S
2b.O
8.1
1.S
8.3
30. b
8.3
0.0
BS)
flS)
BS)
BS)
BS)
POWER
0.0
7.5
30.7
7.1
1.7
7.3
38.3
7.3
0.0
0.0
7.b
30.5
b.S
2.1
7.1
38.7
7.1
0.0
-------
APPENDIX D
CHASSIS VERSION NINE-MODE FTP RESULTS
TABLE D-l Summary of the Results
TABLES D-2 through D-7 Raw Exhaust Modal Results
TABLES D-8 through D-l3 CVS Diluted Bagged Results
-------
TABLE D-l. CHASSIS VERSION 9-MODE FTP RESULTS
D
ro
Test
No.
01
02
09
01
02
09
01
02
09
Run
No.
2
3
2
3
1
2
2&3
2&3
1&2
2&3
2&3
1&2
Sampling
Method
Modal
Modal
Modal
Modal
Modal
Modal
Bagged
Bagged
Bagged
Engine
Emissions
ECS with
Baseline
ECS
ECS with
Baseline
ECS
ECS with
Baseline
Description HC
Control System 0.982
0.852
Average 0.92
Catalyst 0.066
0.069
Average 0.07
Configuration 5.945
6.190
Average 6.07
0.19
Catalyst 0.01
1.64
0.64
Catalyst 0.12
1.66
Emissions ,
CO
18.254
18.279
18.27
0.381
0.209
0.30
27.385
24.251
25.82
3.8
0.1
7.0
4.9
0.8
7.8
grams/kW hr
NOX HC + NO,,
3.292
3.302
3.30
2.782
3.322
3.05
13.571
13.573
13.57
grams/minute
0.69
0.57
3.66
0.72
0.67
3.18
4.274
4.154
4.21
2.848
3.391
3.120
19.516
19.763
19.64
Fuel
kg/kW hr
0.511
0.511
0.511
0.565
0.557
0.561
0.489
0.498
0.494
106
104
134
101
102
132
Stationary Dynamometer Results
grams/kW hr
2004
2005
2001
2&3
1&2
1-3
Modal
Modal
Modal
ECS
0.98
ECS with Catalyst 0.12
Baseline
5.31
19.83
0.44
19.40
3.82
3.94
12.61
4.80
4.06
17.92
kg/kW hr
0.510
0.554
0.469
-------
TABLED-2. MASS FHISSIONS BY NINE-MODE FTP -HETRIC UNITS
EN(;iNt-80 TES1-1 HUN-8 tMIS. CONN SYS. IN C-bn 13-81-77 K = .hBR
HUM
1.2
G/KG
D
J
U)
MOUE
1 IDLE
2 lb Hr,
3 111 Hfi
•» lb HR
5 IS MR
b If> HG
7 1 HG
8 lb HG
1 C.T.
1 IDLE
8 lb HG
3 in HG
» lb HG
5 is HG
b lb HG
7 3 HG
B lb HG
S C.T.
1 IDLE
8 lb HG
3 HI HG
» 11, HG
5 IS Hfi
b lh HG
7 3 Hf,
8 lb HG
S C.T.
1 IDLE
2 ib HG
a ni HG
i ib HG
s is HG
b ib HG
7 3 HG
B Ifa HG
S C.T.
AVERAGE
AVERAGF
CONCENTRATION AS MEASURED TOTAL
HC-FID CO C02 NOX-CL CARBON
(•11 .Uhb 8. IS
571 ,25h 10. HH
51 .1HS 12.37
1"»5 .ISb 10. SS
8b5 .157 10. B8
131 .18H 10.88
PO .350 1».»8
es .nbs 11.33
51Sb .03b .81
S28 .Obi B.no
82b .25b 10. 33
SO .212 18.37
ISf .1SS 10. RR
18S .lib IP. 77
IBS ,H3 10.77
»0 .3IIS 1H.»8
51 .07H 11.81
SUII3 .038 .?!
S5» .Obi B.nn
SOS .850 10.33
118 .815 18.85
815 .20M 10. B8
£80 .187 10.77
803 .181 10. R8
»S .3lb IH.m
b? .07* 11.33
fB7S .II3» .81
Sh3 .058 8.01)
878 .850 10.33
180 .887 18.85
818 .1S1 10. BR
317 .187 10.77
880 .113 10.77
55 .2Sb I».»B
57 ,H7» 11.81
•»?»? .03b .81
HO 8.317
85 10.753
550 18.575
105 11.801
35 ll.Ohf
S5 11. (178
bH5 If. 83?
1115 11.101
10 ,7b5
35 8.15*
P5 lO.bbS
»7n 18.5S1
loo u.nss
35 10.S35
S5 10.S88
b55 1H.7S3
105 11.88S
10 .7tR
35 H.lSh
«0 lP.b70
5(10 18.H7b
115 11.11(1
35 10.S7S
100 11.081
bSS 1H.RIJO
110 11. til)
10 ,73b
35 8.151
8ll lO.bbfl
SKI 18.H8S
1H5 11.101
35 10.SBS
1IIO 10.SB5
b75 1H.781
US I1.2SM
10 .7811
FUEL
G/HK
!Hb3
bhlll
1071t
bblll
»B5f
bhOl
IBRlt
bbul
U
Ifh3
bblll
107l»
bblll
HR5*
bhnl
1881H
bblll
0
I»b3
bblll
1 [I 7 1 »
bbdl
IBS*
bblll
IBBlt
bhOl
0
I»b3
bbUl
1II71H
bblll
IBS*
bbOl
1B811*
fabOl
n
CALCULATED
HC CO
11
35
H
S
18
8
3
1
(I
17
SI
8
18
8
11
q
3
[1
17
Sh
10
13
10
18
b
>»
II
17
5»
10
13
It
13
7
3
II
23
318
3»3
83f
13S
828
8S7
Bo
0
8?
380
3bf
8»ll
131
835
7S»
87
II
28
318
373
250
Ib?
818
Bill
Bb
II
21
31?
3Sf
8-tn
Ib7
835
7bH
S>
II
G/HR
N08
t
17
ISfa
81
5
IS
m
80
0
8
17
133
80
5
IS
877
20
0
2
lb
113
83
5
80
87b
21
0
8
lb
ns
81
s
80
885
82
0
NT.
FACT.
.838
.077
.1»7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.113
.838
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.113
.238
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
.838
.077
.1H7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
SUM---(COMPUSITE VALUES FOR CYCLES 1 AND 8)-------------- -------------------
FOUR CYCLE COMPOSITE -
HC- FID 0.35( .8)
CO- NOIR 0.35(
N08-CL n.3S(
18.3)
H.7)
+ tl.bSC
+ ll.bSt
+ O.bSC
1
1«
H
CORRECTED
.1) =
.2) =
.8) =
N08 =
SFC =
.SB8
18.2SH
t.787
3.8S8
.bll
KEIGHTED G/HH
HC-FID CO N08-CL KH
2.5
8.7
.b
.7
.7
.b
.3
.1
0.0
.7
3.S
3.S
1.1
.S
.5
.S
.fa
.8
0.0
1.0
f .0
H.3
l.»
1.0
.b
.S
.7
.3
0.0
1.1
».o
H.2
1.5
1.0
.8
1.0
.8
.3
0.0
1.1
• B
11
• i
G/ KM
(i/ KW
G/ KM
G/ KM
KG/ KM
5
2*
50
18
8
17
101
b
0
IS
s
85
53
18
7
18
SO
7
0
18
5
8*
55
IS
10
17
S2
7
0
18
5
8*
SB
18
10
18
8b
7
0
IB
18
1 8
HH
HR
HR
HR
HR
.!> 0
1.3 7
28. S 28
l.b 7
.3 0
!.*• 7
30.7 55
l.b 7
o.o n
».s
.5 0
1.3 7
1S.S 88
l.b 7
.3 0
1.5 7
31.3 55
l.b 7
O.U 0
».b
.5 0
1.3 7
21.11 28
1.7 7
.3 0
1.5 7
31.2 55
l.b 7
O.U 0
».B
.5 0
1.3 7
21. » 88
l.b 7
.3 0
1.5 7
38.2 55
1.7 7
0.0 n
f.S
•*. 7
H . H
( .738 BS)
(13. hi? HS)
( 3.570 BS)
( 8.Y55 BS)
( .8HO BS)
HP
Q
q
38
q
Q
q
7*
q
0
o
q
38
q
Q
q
7H
q
0
0
q
38
q
0
S
71
q
0
0
q
38
q
Q
q
7t
q
0
-------
TABLE D~3. MASS EMISSIONS BY NINE-MODE FTP -METRIC UNITS
ENGINE-20 1EST-1 RUN-3 EMI3. CONT. SYS. IN C-bO 13-81-77 K = .(,85 HUM = l.i G/KG
D
I
MODE
1 IDLE
8 lb HG
3 in HG
* lb HG
S IH HG
b lb HG
7 3 HG
8 Jb HG
S C.I.
i i oie
8 lb HG
3 10 HG
t Jb HG
5 IS HG
b lb HG
7 3 HG
8 lb HG
S C.T.
1 IDLE
8 ib HG
3 10 HG
H lb HG
5 IS HG
b lb HG
7 B HG
8 lb HG
S C.T.
1 IDLE
2 lb HG
3 in HG
* lb HG
5 IS HG
b lb HG
7 3 HG
8 Ifa HG
S C.T.
AVERAGE
AVERAGE , „„»._ ._,.„._„
CONCENTRATION AS MEASURED TOTAL
HC-FIO CO C08 NOX-CL CARBON
Hbl .079 8.38
*18 .337 10. bb
3b .IbS 1J.37
1117 .175 11.10
7S .188 11.10
85 .Ifab 10. SS
IH .350 1».HB
88 .Ob3 11. HI
HhlB .0*8 .18
8bS .Uh3 8. OS
757 .8bS 10.55
7B .8115 18. HS
Ibl .1SS 11. in
812 .157 10. RB
150 .18* 10. SS
3S .301 IH.Hfl
38 .ObS 11. **
HblB .OH8 .18
877 ,0b3 8.00
H87 ,87b 10.**
10S .1S3 13.37
1S2 ,8nS 10.SS
181 .ltd 10.88
17* .1S3 10.88
55 .357 1*.HB
HS .071 11. HH
HH8S .0*3 .18
BS* .Ob3 8. nil
7S1 .851) 10. H*
118 .8115 18.37
881 .1SS 10. SS
ISO .178 10.88
bl .143 10.88
b3 .33b 1H.H8
77 .ObS 11.33
H833 .038 .18
SUM---(COMPOSITE VALUES
SUM- — -frnMPn<% T if VAI nro
FOUR CYCLE COMPOSITE -
HO 8.505
SO 10.S39
530 12.5*3
11U 11.88b
35 11.83b
100 11.15S
bSO It. S3?
115 11.50b
S .btfl
35 8.8*0
85 10.BSS
H7S 18.703
11 11 1 1 . 3 1 b
35 11.050
105 11. 1R«»
785 1*.7S3
115 11.518
10 .bSO
30 8.15)
H5 10.7S8
535 18.57*
105 11.815
35 11.03R
100 11.0S1
b5n i*.e*8
115 11.51S
5 ,b7?
3D 8.153
85 ]0.7bS
HSS 18.587
110 11.811
35 11.071
100 11.07S
bbO 1H.R88
US ll.HOb
5 ,b*l
FUEL
G/HH
I*b3
bbOl
1071*
hbUl
*B5*
bbOl
IBBlf
bbOl
0
I*b3
bbnl
iri7i*
bbOl
*BS*
fabOl
18B1*
bt>01
0
I»b3
bbOl
1071*
bbOl
*B5*
bbOl
1BB1*
hhOl
II
I*b3
bhOl
1071*
bbOl
*85*
bblll
18B1*
bKlll
0
CALCULATED G/HR
HC CO NOJ
H
85
3
b
3
8
8
1
0
IS
*b
7
S
S
S
5
8
0
lb
51
S
11
8
10
7
3
IJ
lb
*B
10
13
8
*
8
H
' II
a?
88S
8se
807
118
ISM
8S7
73
0
83
38S
350
835
131
ais
7S*
7S
0
83
3*0
333
8**
18*
838
sit
85
0
83
SOS
353
837
158
833
8b8
Ril
0
S
18
15(1
81
S
80
87*
88
0
8
17
133
81
S
81
30b
88
0
e
17
151
81
5
80
87*
88
0
8
17
1HO
88
S
80
878
88
0
NT. WEIGHTED G/HR
FACT. HC-FID CO NOe-CL KM
.832
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
.832
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
.832
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
.838
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
HC- FIO 0.35( .b)
co- NDIR o.
H08-CL 0.
3S( 17. b)
35( *.S)
t 0
+ II
+ 0
.faSC 1
.b5( IB
.bS( *
CORRECTED
.0) =
.7) =
.8) =
N08 =
SFC =
.658
18.S7S
*.817
3.308
.511
1.8
l.s
.*
.5
.8
.1
.3
.1
n.o
.*
3. fa
3.5
1.0
.7
.5
.7
.b
.8
0.0
.S
3.7
3.S
1.*
.H
.5
.8
.8
.2
0.0
1.0
3.7
3.7
1.*
1.0
.5
.3
.S
.3
0.0
1.0
_
1.0
G/ KH
G/ KH
G/ KH
G/ KN
KG/ KH
b
82
*3
lb
b
15
101
b
0
17
5
85
51
IB
8
17
SO
b
0
18
5
8b
*S
IS
7
IB
103
7
0
IS
5
8*
58
18
S
18
S7
b
0
18
1 o
1 H
IS
HR
HR
HR
HR
HK
.5 0
l.H 7
22.1 28
l.b 7
.3 0
l.b 7
30. S 55
1.7 7
0.0 0
*.B
.5 0
1.3 7
IS.b 28
l.b 7
.3 0
l.b 7
3*.b 55
1.7 7
0.0 0
H.S
.* 0
1.3 7
88.2 88
l.b 7
.3 0
l.S 7
30. S 55
1.7 7
0.0 0
H.8
.H 0
1.3 7
80. b 88
1.7 7
.3 0
1.5 7
31. H 55
1.7 7
0.0 0
».7
* . 1
*.B
( .b3S BS)
(13.b31 BS)
( 3.5*48 BS)
( 8.*b8 BS)
C .8*0 83)
HP
0
q
38
S
0
s
7*
S
0
o
S
38
S
o
S
7*
S
0
(1
S
38
<\
0
S
7*
S
0
0
S
38
S
0
S
7*
S
0
-------
iABLtD-4. M»SS EMISSIONS BY NINE-MODE FTP -METRIC UNITS
ENGJ.NE-20 TEST-2 RUN-? EMIS. CONT. SYS. W CAT C-faU 12-21-77 K = .7*1 HUM =
a.s
G/KG
D
in
HOOE
1 IOLF.
2 Ib HG
3 111 HG
H Ib HG
S IS HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
8 Ib HG
S C.T.
1 IDLE
a ib HG
3 10 HG
H Ih HG
5 IS HG
fa Ih HG
7 1 HG
8 Ib HG
S C.T.
1 IDLE
2 Ib HG
3 1(1 HG
H Ib HG
S IS HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
B Ib HG
S C.T.
i IOLE
a ib HG
3 111 HG
-------
TABLE D-5. MASS EMISSIONS BY NINE-MODE FTP -METRIC UNITS
ENUINE-2H IFST-a RUN-3 EMIS. CONT. SYS. M CAT C-bn 12-33-77 K = .7bb
HUM = 3.1
G/KG
cn
MODE
1 IDLE
2 Ib HG
3 10 HG
t ib HG
S 19 HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HR
8 Ib HR
9 C.T.
I IDLE
2 Ih. Hr,
3 10 HG
t Ib HG
5 19 HG
b ih HG
7 3 HG
8 Ib HG
9 C.T.
1 IDLE
2 Ib HG
3 10 HG
t Ib HG
5 19 HG
fa Ib HG
7 3 HG
B Ib HG
9 C.T.
1 IDLE
2 Ib HG
3 111 HG
t Ib HG
5 19 HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
8 Ib HG
9 C.T.
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
CONCENTRA1ION AS MEASUHED TOTAL
HC-FID CO C02 NUx-CL CARBON
19 .002 8.77
t3 .002 10.88
t .11112 1P.73
13 .002 11.33
21 .002 11.21
It .002 11.21
3 .002 It. 99
3 .002 11.5k
.002 . RO
13 .002 8.77
57 .002 10.88
9 .002 12.73
19 ,0u2 11.21
2R .002 11.10
20 .002 11.10
b .002 It. 99
7 .002 11. tt
.002 .89
It .0112 R.b7
59 .002 10.88
11 .002 12.73
2t .002 11.33
to .00? 11.10
21 .0(12 11. in
b .002 it.qs
9 .002 11. tt
.IHI2 .93
13 .002 8.b7
57 .002 10. 8B
9 .002 12. bl
19 .002 11.10
31 .002 10.88
20 .002 11.21
5 .002 It. 99
21 .002 11. tt
.002 .93
SUM— (COMPOSITE VALUES
SUM---CCOMPOSITE VALUES
FOUR CYCLE COKPOSITE -
to 8.77t
85 10.RB7
t55 )2.733
ins 11.33t
35 11. Bit
95 l).21t
520 It. 993
100 ll.Sb3
5 .R03
35 R.77t
80 10.8BR
t90 12.733
100 ll.?lt
35 11.105
90 11. lot
t80 It. 993
100 Il.tt3
S .893
35 R.b7t
80 10.RRR
tHS 12.733
100 11.335
35 ll.inb
95 11. lot
tho lt.qt|3
loo n.tts
5 .933
35 B.b7t
RO 10.888
tBS 12.bl3
95 11. Kit
30 10.R85
95 11.21t
t9S It. 993
105 ll.HHt
S .933
FUEL
G/HR
Itq?
b2bO
1052t
b2b(l
tSHl
b2bO
18552
faZbO
0
its?
b?hO
in52t
bjfalj
tS81
h2bO
18552
b2bO
0
It97
b2bO
b2bO
tSRl
b2bO
18552
b?bO
It97
b2faO
10S2t
b2bO
tSBl
b2bO
1BSS2
b2hO
0
CALCULATED G/HR
HC CO N02
0
2
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
3
1
1
1
1
1
u
0
o
3
1
1
2
1
1
0
IJ
n
3
1
1
1
I
1
1
0
1
3
H
3
3
b
3
0
1
3
t
3
2
3
h
3
n
i
3
4
3
3
b
11
j
3
t
3
3
b
3
0
?"
Ib
125
19
5
IB
21t
18
0
2
is
13t
19
5
17
197
IB
0
2~
15
133
18
18
18
0
"
15
I3t
18
18
203
19
0
WT.
FACT.
»«W«HBWH
.077
.It7
.077
05 7
.077
• 077
.its
f!77
• U r f
.It7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
-It 3
.077
.It7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.It3
.232
.077
.It7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.It3
FOR CYCLES 3 AND t)
HC- FIO 0.35( .1)
CO- NOIR 0.35( .2)
N02-CL 0.35(
t.t)
t O.bSl
+ o.hs(
t
CORRECTED
.1) :
.2) =
.3) =
N02 =
SFC =
.Ob9
.209
t.33R
3.322
.557
"SIGHTED G/HR
HC-FID CO N02-CL KM
!i
.1
_
.
.
0.0
.0
_
.1
-
* 1
.1
.1
.0
o.u
.1
.3
.1
.1
.1
.1
.0
0.0
.1
.1
.3
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
0.0
.1
.1
.1
G/ KM HR
G/ KH H«
G/ KM HK
G/ KH Hr*
KG/ KM HR
"-•
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
Q
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
.--------...__.
.5 n
1.2 t
18. t 2b
l.b t
.3 0
l.t t
2t.l 5t
l.t t
U.O 0
t.t
.5 0
1.2 t
19. B 2b
l.t t
.3 0
1.3 t
22.3 5t
1 4 tt
•* . ' T
0.0 0
t.3
.S 0
1.2 t
19. b 2h
l.t t
.3 0
l.t t
21. t St
l.t t
0.0 0
t.2
.5 0
1.2 t
19.7 2b
l.t t
.2 0
l.t t
23.0 5t
l.b t
0.0 0
t.t
t.t
t.3
( .052 BS)
( .15b BS)
( 3.235 BS)
( 2.»77 BS)
( .91b BS)
HP
....
0
S
35
5
0
S
72
S
0
0
5
35
S
0
S
72
S
0
0
S
35
&
0
S
72
S
0
0
S
35
5
0
72
S
0
-------
1AHLF. D-6. MASS EMISSIONS PY NIHF-MUOE FTP -METRIC UNITS
ENGINE-2II IFT.F-9 HUN-1 RASELTNK EMGINF C-h(l nd-02-78 K = .93? HUM = H. 2 G/KG
0
MODE
1 IDLE
2 lb HG
3 111 HG
H Ib HG
5 19 HG
b lb MR
7 3 HG
8 lb HG
9 C.T.
1 IDLE
2 lb HG
3 KI HG
H ib HG
s 11 HG
b lb HG
7 3 HG
B ib HG
1 C.T.
1 IDLE
2 lb HG
3 in HG
i ib HG
s in HG
b lh HG
7 3 HC
B lb HG
9 C.T.
1 IDLE
2 lb HG
3 1(1 HG
» lb HG
5 19 HR
b lb HG
7 3 H(J
B lb HG
9 C.T.
AVERAGE
AVEHAGF
CONCENTRATION AS MEASURED TOTAL
HC-FIO CO C02 NUX-CL CAHBUM
5b78 .181 11. hi bO 12.359
352 .181 13.78 535 13.99b
899 .533 14.08 Ib37 14.753
308 ,2b3 14.08 b75 11.371
72 .1)93 13.21 195 13.310
22b .215 13.93 blO 11.1b8
Hlb .511 J3.93 22b5 11.523
308 .37b 11.08 711 H.IBb
2»241 .389 10.19 45 13.0(13
3993 .204 12.12 70 12.723
579 .312 13.93 590 14.300
9(18 .Sb9 11.08 IbRO 14.739
3HH .275 14.08 b50 14.39(1
PI .08ft 13.21 19o 13.30b
272 .2b3 11.08 h30 14.370
707 .402 13.93 2283 11.102
272 .337 14.08 7oO 14.144
22825 .337 10.19 40 12.810
42b8 .187 U. 8b bS 12.474
543 .337 13.93 b30 14.321
908 .540 H. OR 1734 14.71(1
H35 .275 11.08 faBO 11.399
81 .093 13.21 195 13.311
272 .239 1H.OB b40 ll.Slh
780 .501 13.93 2311) 14.512
272 .337 13.93 b75 14.294
22B07 ,3b3 10.07 45 12.713
412b .193 11. Rb 7(1 12.4h5
SRI) .102 13.93 hlS 14.390
909 .583 11.08 1734 14.754
3b3 .312 14.08 h90 14.428
72 .088' 13.21 J 90 13.305
3118 ,2b3 13.93 b7S 14.224
735 .128 14.08 235b 11.582
399 .3b3 11.08 730 14.183
22805 .550 10.07 50 12. 7(111
SUM-— .(COMPOSI IE VALUES FdK CYCLES 1 AND
SUM— { COMPOS IT F V4I UFS Fnh rvn CQ 1 tun
FUEL
G/HW
19|lS
88IHI
1312h
88(10
b2 I1*
88IUI
19051
88011
1950
1905
880(1
1392b
88m)
(,214
880(1
19051
88I1O
195U
1905
8 8 o n
1392b
RRIIO
b?) 4
881111
19051
8800
1950
19115
88110
139?b
88IUI
f, ?|4
8 Bill)
19051
RRIIO
19SO
FOUR CYCLE COMPOSITE - HC- FIO l).35( b.n)
co- MDIK o.3f
< ( 2b.9)
N02-CL U.35( 11.2)
CALCULATED
HC CO
R8
22
85
19
3
11
107
19
3b4
Ml
3b
Rb
?1
4
17
93
17
347
bS
33
Rb
27
4
17
102
17
35)1
1,3
35
8b
22
3
19
9b
24
350
+ K.bS(
+ Il.b5(
+ H.bS(
5b
23(1
1112
325
88
270
1354
4bl
118
b2
388
1085
340
83
325
1073
415
1(14
58
418
1032
3 + 11
N8
?9b
133b
H19
112
59
"9b
1112
384
83
329
11 30
lib
1IIH
s
S }
14
CORRECTED
G/MR
N02
3
112
513
137
3D
98b
143
2
3
121
527
132
29
128
1003
142
2
3
129
545
138
30
131)
11107
138
2
,
125
543
111)
29
139
11122
147
3
-9) =
• ? ) —
.bj =
Nl)2 =
SFC =
FACT]
.232
.1)77
.147
.077
.057
.077
.113
.1)77
.143
.232
.077
.117
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.It3
.232
.077
.117
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.143
.23?
.077
.147
.077
.OS 7
.077
.1)3
.077
.113
5.945
27.385
14.487
13.571
.489
WEIGHTED G/hR
HC-FlO CO NOe-CL KK
20.3
1.7
12.5
1.5
.2
1.1
12.1
1.4
52. U
b. 3
13.9
2.7
12. b
l.b
.2
1.3
lO.b
1.3
49.7
5.7
15.1
2.b
12. fa
2.0
.2
1.3
11. b
1.3
50.O
S.9 •
14. b
2.7
12. b
1.7
.2
1.5
111.9
1.9
50.1
5.9
b . II
&q
• T
G/ KM
G/ KM
G/ KM
G/ KM
KG/ KM
13
Ib3
25
5
21
153
35
1 7
en
14
30
IbO
2b
5
2S
121
32
15
2b
13
32
152
2b
5
i)
151
32
lb
2R
11
38
lb?
30
S
25
128
34
lb
28
3 -J
c f
a o
t a
Hrf
HR
HK
HH
HK
. 7
8 .b
75^4
111. b
1.7
9.7
111.5
11 .U
.3
14.1
.H
4.3
77.5
10.2
) .7
9.9
113.3
1U.9
.3
14.3
.8
9.1
80. 1
Hl.h
1.7
Hj.ll
113.8
10. b
.3
14. b
.8
9.b
79.9
10.6
1 . 7
10.7
115.5
11.3
.4
1». 7
la i*
1 4 . c
1 U L
1 4 . p
( 4.433
(20.481
t 10 . 8 (1 3
(111.120
( .8"4
o
1 3
37
13
j j
13
0
0
13
37
13
0
13
b(J
13
0
o
13
37
13
0
13
be
13
0
(I
13
37
13
U
13
bO
13
0
BS)
KS)
BS)
B3)
BS)
HP
1)
49
1 H
18
81
1 8
U
Ij
18
49
18
(j
81
18
U
It
18
4H
0
id
81
18
I)
0
18
49
IB
18
81
18
0
-------
r „.. TABLE D-7. M&SS EMISSIONS BY NINE-MODE FTP -METRIC UNITS
ENGINE-20 TEST--* RUN-? BASELINE ENGINE C-bO 02-03-78 K s .887 HUM • h.s C/KG
O
00
MODE
1 IDLE
2 Ib HG
3 10 HG
* Ib HG
S It HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
B Ib HG
1 C.T.
1 IDLE
1 Ib HG
3 10 HG
* Ib HG
5 It HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HIS
B ib HG
* C.T.
1 IDLE
2 Ib HG
I 10 HG
* Ib HG
S It HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
B Ib HG
1 C.T.
1 IDLE
t Ib HG
3 10 HG
» Ib HG
S It HG
b Ib HG
7 3 HG
B Ib HG
* C.T.
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
CONCENTRATION A3 MEASURED TOTAL FU£u
HC-F10 CO C02 NOX-CL CARBON G/HR
7*1* .170 11.00 55 11. tH It73
*15 .1*7 13. b* 5*5 13, Bet t02b
852 ,»bt 13. t3 lb*» 1*.*8* 1*152
28t ,?15 13. t3 b7o 1*.17* t02b
b3 .115 13.07 200 13.1tl b?8?
217 .251 13. b* blS 13.tl3 to?b
77t ,»bt 13.78 2288 1*.3?7 ltlB7
21)2 .233 13.13 785 l*.ltfl
2b251 ,38t t.75
5112 .210 11. bl
*33 .215 13.b*
8?5 ,*?8 13, t3
253 ,181 13.78
72 .08? 12. t3
217 .170 13.78
bbO .3b3 13. b*
253 .251 13. t3
855*8 ,37b t.75
2*8* .187 11. bl
»B8 .251 13. b*
91b ,»55 13, t3
271 .?Sl 13.78
tO .10* 12. t3
?2b .215 13.78
bbt .3Bt 13. bl
?b? ,?b3 13. t3
23)11 .331 t.8b
»2b8 .Its 11. 8b
*B8 .?57 13,78
8t8 ,*t? 13. t3
307 .275 13.78
72 .072 12. t3
271 ,??7 13.78
750 f**2 13. b»
308 .337 13.78
227bZ .337 t.Bb
SUM.., (COMPOSITE VALUES
SIIM.._ rrnMpn«TTr un nca
FOUR CYCLE COMPOSITE •
*0 12. 7b*
bS 12.331
bOS I3.8tt
I7b5 !*,**!
b85 13,t8b
200 13,01t
hSo 13,t72
2310 l*.0bt
7*0 l*.20b
7p 12, 0*5
b?5 13,t»D
1755 I*.*b7
b7» 1».05B
205 13,0*3
b*0 n.018
?35b I*,0t5
7*5 l*,?lt
50 12.502
70 12,*7t
b*0 l*.08b
17t> 1* .517
bto l*.08b
210 13.00t
bSO 1*,035
?378 1*,157
773 l».l*8
50 12,*73
t02b
?01t
It73
t02b
1*152
t02b
b28?
t02b
Itl87
tO?b
201t
lt?3
t02b
1*15?
t02b
b?82
t02h
Itl87
tQJb
201t
lt?3
tOJb
1*152
tOJb
b?R?
t02b
ltlB7
t02b
201t
CALCULATED G/HR
HC CO N02
27
83
18
3
17
*15
82
28
Bl
Ib
3
1*
to
Ib
*1
32
80
17
IS
tl
17
373
b7
31
88
20
3
17
10?
20
3b8
57
«2b
277
110
32t
12bt
300
12*
bfl
28?
8H8
23b
80
22?
ttt
3?2
121
b?
328
too
3?b
101
280
lObt
337
108
b?
333
t7t
3Sb
70
2tS
1210
*3*
110
3
118
535
32
132
1017
Ifab
2
3
130
57*
1*7
32
13t
10*b
15b
2
,
13*
570
1**
33
137
10b5
157
3
,
13b
SB?
1* 7
3*
13t
1070
Ib*
3
WT.
FACT.
|o77
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
.232
.077
.1*7
.077
.05?
,077
.113
.077
.232
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
,077
.1*3
.232
.077
.1*7
.077
.057
.077
.113
.077
.1*3
HC- FID 0.35( b.8)
CO- NDIR 0.
N02-CL 0.
3S( 23.2)
35( 15.0)
» 0.bS(
* O.bSf
* O.b5(
S
2*
15
CORRECTED
.8)
.8)
.5)
N02
SFC
b.ltO
2*. 251
15,308
13.573
,*tB
WEIGHTED G/HR
HC-FID CO N02-CL KM
28.5
2.1
12.2
!?
1.1
11.8
1.3
St.*
7.2
lt,0
8.2
11, t
1,3
,2
1.1
10.2
1.2
58.3
t**
2**
11.7
1.3
,2
1.1
10.3
1,3
53.*
S.b
15.7
12|t
1.5
.2
1.3
11.5
l.S
52.7
b.l
b.8
S.B
G/ KM
G/ KH
G/ KM
G/ KH
KG/ KM
13
15
13b
21
b
25
1*3
23
IB
25
Ib
22
125
18
s
17
113
17
22
1*
132
?S
b
a
121
?b
15
2»
?b
27
?3
137
33
Ib
2b
23
25
HR
HR
HR
HR
HR
.7 0
*.! 13
78. b 37
10. t 13
1.8 0
10.2 13
115.0 bO
12.8 13
.3 0
• B 0
10,0 13
8*,* 37
U3 13
. J 45
1 R n
* . o U
10,7 13
118,? bD
12 n ii
i c 9 u X 3
.3 0
15.3
t n
. ^ u
10, 3 13
83. B 37
11,1 13
l.t 0
10.5 13
120.3 bO
12.1 13
.* 0
15.*
.t 0
10.5 13
85.5 37
11.3 13
l.t 0
10.7 13
120. t bO
12. b 13
.* 0
IS.b
15.0
15.5
( H.blb BS)
(18,08* BS)
(ll.*15 BS)
(10.122 BS)
( .Bit BS)
HP
0
IB
«t
18
a
IB
a t
° &
I R
A D
0
18
if q
1 R
A o
18
81
1 R
A ~
0
1 R
* **
if q
18
Q
10
* D
81
18
0
o
IB
*t
18
0
18
81
18
0
-------
TABLE D"8 • EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG "SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 50
DATE 12/31/77
MODEL 1975 CHEV C-bO ECS
DRIVER KN
WET BULB TEMP 11 C
SPEC. HUM. 1.* GRAM/KG
DISTANCE
TIME -o nfis.
fl-FTP RUN-2
TEST WT. 0 KG.
DRY 8UL8 TEMP 2b C
tJARO. 751.3 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 1
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVW 0 KG
KEL. HUM. b.S PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
20.00 MINUTES
313.7 MM. H20
MM HSO
OEG. C
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER DIP. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /REV.
flAG RESULTS
MC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
nC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
MC BACKGRD PPM
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER HEADING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
COS BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METEH READING/SCALE
NOX 6ACKGRO PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PP«
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
502 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
302 MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
S02 5RAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
71. I/ 2
a
b3.8/ll
2bl
.8/11
2
bO.8/ 3
1.08
3.t>/ 3
.Ob
30. 7/ 2
30.7
2S3
1.03
30.3
0.0
12. 8b
17. 1b
b25b.3b
14.77
0.00
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL b.32
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL *8.1
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 307*
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 7.2b
S02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL o.oo
HC GRAMS/MIN ,b'+
CO GRAMS/MIN -».1
C02 GRAMS/MIN 313
NOX GRAMS/MIN .7t
S02 GRAMS/HIN fl.OO
CARBUN BALANCE FUEL 101.8 GFAMS/MIN
TOTAL CVS FLOw= 332.SSTO. CU. METRES
D-9
-------
TABLE D-9. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 12/21/77
MODEL 1175 CHEV C-fall ECS
DRIVER KN
WET BULB TEMP b C
SPEC. HUM. 1.2 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE
TIME -0 HKS.
9-FTP RUN-3
TEST *T. 0 KG.
Dt?Y BULB TEMP 22 C
bARO. 750.fa MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 1
ENGINE S.7 LITREV B
GVW 0 KG
REL. MUM. -7.5 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.BbO
RUN DURATION 20.00 MINUTES
BLOWER INLET PRESS, ssi.o MM. H20
BLOWER DIF. PRESS. f82.b MM H20
BLOWER INLET TEMP. 4b OEG. C
OYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS SZ*b*
SLOWER CU. CM /REV. IbSS?
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE 71.H/ i
HC SArtPLE PPM 7*
hC BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE B.I/ 2
HC BACKGRD PPM 8
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE bt.0/11
CO SAMPLE PPM 2b3
CO BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE .8/11
CO BACKGRD PPM 2
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE 5S.7/ 3
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT I-0*1
C02 BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE 3.2/ 3
COS BACKGRU PERCENT .05
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE 31.1/ 2
NOX SAKPLE PPM 31-1
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE .*/ 2
NOX BACKGRD PPM -1*
HC CONCENTRATION PPM fa7
CO CONCENTRATION PPM 25b
COa CONCENTRATION PCT 1.01
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM 3D.7
S03 COCENTRATION PPM 0.0
HC MASS (GRAMS) 12.8*
CO MASS (GRAMS) 98.SB
C02 MASS (GRAMS) blbS.10
NOX MASS (GRAMS) lt.03
802 MASS (GRAMS) 0.00
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
SP2 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL b.no
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL *R.3
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3072
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL b.ll
S02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
HC GRAMS/MIN .fat
CO GRAMS/MIN <*.9
C02 GRAMS/MIN 308
NOX GRAMS/MIN .70
S02 GRAMS/MIN 0.00
CARBON BALANCE FUEL 100.3 GRAMS/MIN
TOTAL CVS FLOw= 335.8STD. CU. METRES
D-10
-------
TABLE D-10. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FKOM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE ie/22/77 TIME -o HRS.
MODEL H7S CHEV C-bfl ECSWC1-FTP RUN-2
DRIVER KN TEST I*T. D KG.
WET BULB TEMP 12 C DRY BULB TEMP 27 C
SPEC. HUM. 2.9 GRAM/KG BAHO. 7*7.3 MM HG.
DISTANCE FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 2
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. 13.1 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.BbO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
SLOWER OIF. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /REV.
2U.OO MINUTES
378.5 MM. H20
tS2.1 MM H20
ffa OEG. C
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
6ACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGKO PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
MC SAMPLE
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO BACKGfiO PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGRO METER REAOING/SCALE
C02 BACKGftD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGftD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
hC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
S02 MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/hluE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
S02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
25. 7/ 2
2b
13. */ 2
13
b8.5/13
b7
2*. 3/13
23
b3.b/ 3
1.13
>».S/ 3
.ua
2b.q/ 2
2b.q
1.1X 2
1.1
13
»H
1.07
25. S
0.0
2.57
17.00
13.07
n.oo
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 1.25
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 8.3
COS GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3152
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL b.3b
S02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
HC GRAMS/MIN .13
co GRAMS/MIN .1
C02 GRAMS/MIN 32*
NOX GRAMS/MIN .bS
302 &RAMS/MIN 0.00
CARBON BALANCE FUEL 102.8 GRAMS/MIN
TOTAL CVS FLOWS 332.2SID. CU. METRES
D-ll
-------
D-ll. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE 'MJMBEK 20
TABLE
DATE 12/22/77 TIME -0 MRS.
MODEL 1175 CHEV C-bO ECSWCS-FTP RUN-3
DRIVER KN TEST WT. 0 KG.
WET BULB TEMP 12 C DRY BULB TEMP 27 C
SPEC. HUM. 2.* GRAM/KG BARO. 7ft.S MM HG.
DISTANCE FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 2
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. 10.7 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.SbO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER DIP. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
20.00 MINUTES
381.0 MM. H20
\ MM H20
»b DEC. C
22525
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. IblSI
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
CO SAMPLE METEK READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
C08 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
COS BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGND PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGSO PPM
MC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPw
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
302 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
S02 MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
COS GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
S02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
20. 2/ 2
20
10. 7/ 2
11
35.1/13
33
2.2/13
2
bl.1/ 3
1.10
3.8/ 3
.Ub
27. 8/ 2
27.8
.»/ 2
10
30
1.05
27.*
O.U
1.S8
11.73
b352.81
13. b3
0.00
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL .11
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL b.8
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3157
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL fa.78
S02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
HC GRAMS/MlN .10
CO GRAMS/MIN .b
C02 GRAMS/*IN 319
NOX GRAMS/WIN .b8
S02 GRAMS/MIN n.OO
CARBON BALANCE FUEL 100.7 GRAMS/MIN
TOTAL CVS FLO»»= 331.5S1D. CU. METRtS
D-12
-------
TABLE D-12.EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE bAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUWBfO 2tl
DATE fi/ 2/7B TIME -0 MRS.
MOPEL 1^75 CHEV C-b') BL s-FTP RUN-l
PRIVET KEN TEST WT. 7711 KG.
w£T BULfl TEMP i? C DRY BULB T£MP 24 C
SPEC. HUM. 8.7 GUAM/KG BAKU. 7*7.3 MM HG.
DISTANCE ' FUEL 73B.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. q
ENGINE S.7 LlT^Ev P
GVV< n KG
REL. HUM. HH.q PCT
MEASURED FUEL O.QH K
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8hU
PUN OURATION
6LOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER DJF. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OYNO REVnuiJTIUNS
REVOLUTIONS
20.00 MINUTES
508.0
MM H20
OEG. C
-0
22171
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. IbSQS
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
riC SAMPLE PPM
HC 3AC*GHD METER READING/SCALE
hC 8ACKGRD PPM
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
co BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
cog SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
COS BACKGRD M£T£R READING/SCALE
COa BACKGRO PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX 6ACKGKD METER PFARING/SCALE
NOX 3ACKGRD PPM
CONCENTRATION PHM
CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SOa CCCENTrfATION PPM
"C MASS (GRAMS)
CU ^ASS (GRAMS)
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
S02 MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO? GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRArtS/MHE)
SO? GP.AM5/KM (GKA«S/flLt)
rtC GRAM5/*G uF FUEL 12.b3
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL bl.2
COS GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3033
*OX GUMS/ivG OF FUEL 2*.15
S02 GRAMS/KG OF F«JtL 0.00
hC
CO
50.O/ 3
200
2.S/ 3
25
SI.2/11
11
77.b/ 3
S.S/ 3
.US
3b.7/ 3
11 n . 1
. -J/ 3
178
um.3
O.U
33.1*?
lbE.31
8041.80
b*.02
I). 00
HC
CO GRAi-tS/MIN
C02
l.b?
H.I
S02
3.20
O.iH)
CARBON «ALAMC£ FUEL 131.2 GRAMS/MIN
TOTAL cvs FLO«= 32b.«STo. cu. METSES
D-13
-------
TABLE D-13.EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE B/ 3/78
MODEL iq?s CHEV c-t>o
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP i? c
SPEC. HUM. 8.7 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE
TIME -0 HRS,
BL 1-FTP RUN-2
TEST K«T, 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 2H C
BARO. 7«H.b MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 1
ENGINE 5,7 LITREV 8
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. »».8 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC PATIO
so.oo MINUTES
•»H*.5 MM. H20
520.7 MM H20
13 OEG. C
-0
22127
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS'.
BLOWER OIF'. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU, C" /REV.
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
co SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRO PPM
cos SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C08 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRO PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRO M£TER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRO PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
302 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
MASS (GRAMS)
(GRAMS)
CO
C02 MASS
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
SOS MASS (GRAMS)
MC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
SO? GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 12.3b
co GRAMS/KS OF FUEL sb.o
C02 GRAMS/KS OF FUEL 31H8
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 23.57
S02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
9. 7/ 3
117
?.»/ 3
"US
1.3/11
4
77,b/ 3
.07
3b,2/ 3
108. fa
,3/ 3
39"*
1.3b
107,8
0.0
33.10
faB.01
0.00
HC GRAMS/MIN i.bs
co GRAMS/MIN 7.5
co? GRAMS/MIN «»o7
NOX GRAMS/MIN a.is
302 GRAMS/MIN o.oo
CARBON BALANCE FUEL 133-6 GRAMS/MIN
TOTAL CVS FLOW" 32h.«'STD. CU'. METRES
D-14
-------
APPENDIX E
CHASSIS DYNAMOMETER TRANSIENT TEST RESULTS -
STANDARD CONFIGURATION
TABLES E-l & E-2 Summary of the Results
TABLES E-3 through E-10 CAPE-21C - Run 1
TABLES E-ll through E-18 CAPE-21C - Run 2
TABLES E-19 through E-22 CAPE-21H - Run 1
TABLES E-23 through E-26 CAPE-21H - Run 2
TABLES E-27 through E-28 Light-Duty FTP
-------
TABLE E-l. CHASSIS DYNAMOMETER TRANSIENT EVALUATIONS WITH THE STANDARD CONFIGURATION-G/KM
Test Cycle
CAPE- 2 1C LA-NF
LA— F
LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
i.1 J. i-
LA-NF
H •""
I
N)
CAPE-21H LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
LD-FTP 505C
867S
505H
TOTAL
Baq
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
HC
24.33
2.75
7.05
2.57
12.78
5.49
10.28
2.48
12.65
2.75
15.14
5.83
11.77
7.62
7.78
8.51
Emissions
CO
215.25
88.31
70.23
91.47
116.55
112.24
66.50
85.19
78.13
95.82
128.56
116.10
188.01
69.12
148.03
114.83
g/km
NOX
4.46
7.11
5.22
6.75
5.61
4.84
5.36
7.68
5.49
6.93
5.56
4.90
5.60
6.84
6.48
6.49
CO2
978
871
828
884
1146
760
832
925
876
860
1112
723
920
959
848
921
Fuel
Jl/100km
59.47
43.48
41.01
44.21
58.45
40.73
41.35
45.51
44.36
43.51
58.14
39.41
53.47
46.61
47.19
48.17
Emissions , g/km
HC
26.06
3.59
8.22
3.17
14.10
5.20
11.91
3.10
12.57
2.94
16.01
5.66
13.59
7.97
8.48
9.25
CO
217.09
126.07
90.94
120.88
131.99
130.34
87.89
104.77
85.08
101.57
129.27
115.92
208.53
84.49
163.90
131.39
NOx
4.94
7.64
5.28
7.47
6.26
5.67
6.46
8.69
5.10
6.78
5.21
4.65
5.58
5.96
5.96
5.88
CO2
924
860
775
845
1059
748
852
852
843
848
1042
708
947
925
829
904
Fuel
H/ 100km
57.52
45.64
40.28
44.60
55.96
41.36
43.87
43.79
43.40
43.39
55.31
38.74
56.25
46.23
47.53
48.63
-------
TABLE E-2. CHASSIS DYNAMOMETER TRANSIENT EVALUATIONS WITH THE STANDARD CONFIGURATION-G/MIN
Emissions, g/min
Test Cycle
CAPE- 2 1C LA-NF
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
LA-NF
M LA-F
Ul
CAPE-21H LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
LD-FTP 505C
867S
505H
TOTAL
Bag
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
HC
9.39
3.29
2.76
3.08
2.58
4.00
4.01
3.02
4.97
3.33
3.10
4.23
7.76
3.27
5.20
4.39
CO
83.1
105.7
27.5
109.7
23.5
81.8
25.9
103.6
30.7
115.9
26.3
84.3
124.0
29.6
99.0
59.3
NOX
1.72
8.51
2.04
8.10
1.13
3.53
2.09
9.34
2.16
8.38
1.14
3.56
3.69
2.93
4.33
3.35
CO2
377
1043
324
1060
231
554
324
1124
345
1040
228
525
607
411
567
476
Fuel
g/min
169.4
384.7
118.6
391.9
87.1
219.3
119.1
409.0
129.1
388.9
88.1
211.7
260.4
147.5
232.9
183.8
Emissions, g/min
HC
10.02
4.33
3.17
3.74
2.99
3.78
4.68
3.77
5.01
3.58
3.23
4.04
7.84
3.30
5.25
4.44
CO
83.5
152.2
35.1
142.4
28.0
94.8
34.5
127.3
33.9
123.5
26.1
82.8
125.2
29.93
99.9
59.9
NOx
1.90
3.23
2.04
8.80
1.33
4.13
2.54
10.57
2.03
8.25
1.05
3.32
3.73
2.96
4.38
3.38
CO2
355
1038
299
996
225
544
335
1035
336
1031
210
505
613
415
573
480
Fuel
g/min
163.4
407.2
114.9
388.6
87.9
222.4
127.5
393.4
127.8
390.1
82.4
204.4
268.8
153.1
242.5
190.6
-------
TABLE E-3. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FRO* SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER go
DATE i/?b/78
MODEL 1975 CHEV c-bo BL
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP u C
SPEC. HUM. 2.7 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE I'.BSO KM
-0 HP.S,
RUN.l BAG-1 ?1C
TEST »T. 7711 KG.
DRy BULB T£MP gt» c
BARO. 7*5,0 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 10
ENGINE s.7 LITREV e
GVW o KG
REL. HUM. m.2 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
RUN DURATION "*,79 MJNUTES
BLOWER INLET PRESS. »57.? MM. H20
BLOWER OIF. PRESS. "»90.2 MM H?0
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER cu, CM /REV.
2b
o
DEG, C
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGBD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
co? SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
co? SAMPLE PERCENT
COS 8ACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO* BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX RACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
CO? CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SO? COCENTRATION PPM
MASS (GRAMS)
MASS (GRAMS)
95.*/ 3
95H
2.b/ 3
2b
75.2/ 2
H20b
.?/ ?
8
bB.l/ 3
3,5/ 3
.05
b5.3/ 2
b5.3
HC
CO
1.18
bS.O
0.0
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
SOS MASS (GRAMS)
1809. 3b
8.35
0.00
GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
tGRAMS/MRE)
HC
CO
CO? GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
SO? CRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 55.35
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL »89.7
coa GRAMS/KG OF FUEL es?5
NOX GRAMS/KG'OF FUEL 10.1»
so? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL o.oo
2H.33 ( 39.15)
915.25 (3
-------
TABLE E-4. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE l/Sb/7B
MODEL iq?s CHEV c-tn
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP u c
SPEC. HUM. g'.7 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE S'.37» KM
TIME -0 MRS.
BL PUN-l BAG-S SIC
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRv BULB TEMP 2H C
BAPO. 7*5.0 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 10
ENGINE 5,7 LITREV 8
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. l».S PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOKER OIF. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /REV'.
»,»q MINUTES
510.5 MM. H20
5*1.0 MM H20
fa5 DEC. C
-0
502b
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
HC
HC
co
CO
co BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
cog SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
cos SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGPO METER READING/SCALE
COS BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGPD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SOS COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MISS (GRAMS)
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
SOS MASS (GRAMS)
398
3.SX 3
35
S.l/ 1
11
73. i/
3.77
l.b/
.Ob
1.0
375
5053
3.73
3b8.3
0.0
38.21
0.00
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
COS GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
SOS GRAMS/KM
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
8.75 C
88.31 (1*3. 00)
871 ( 1»OS)
7.11 ( !!.»»)
0.00 ( 0,00)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 8.5b
co GRAMS/KG OF FUEL ?7*.n
COB GRAMs/KG OF FUEL 2711
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL ?2.12
SOS GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
GRAMS/MIN
GRAMS/MIN
HC
CO
Coz
NOX GRAMS/MIN
so? GRAMS/MIN
3.21
105.7
10*3
8.SI
0.00
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS PLOWS bfl.SSTD. CU. METRES
I 5.4J)
E-5
-------
TABLE E-5. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE l/3b/7B
MODEL i
-------
TA8LE E-6. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBEk ?n
DATE l/ab/78
MODEL 1S75 CHEV C-faU BL
DRIVER KEN
*ET BULB TEMP u C
SPEC. HUM. a.7 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE S.3SO KM
TIME -0 MRS.
RUN-I BAG-f aic
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP a* C
SARD. 7tS.O MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITfiE
TEST NO. 10
ENGINE 5.7 LlTREV 8
GVw o KG
REL. HUM. i*.2 PCT
MEASURED FUEL n.no KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bU
+ 1 MINUTES
* MM. H20
51U.5 MM H20
73 0£G. C
-tJ
SOff
HC
HC
co
CO
CO
CO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER GIF. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OYNO DEVOLUTIONS
SLOWER INVOLUTIONS
BLOWER cu. CM /REV.
BAG RESULTS
HC SAXPLE METES READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
SACKGfiD Mb'TER READING/SCALE
6ACHGRU PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
6ACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
6ACKGRD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METEH READING/SCALE
COS SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
coa 6ACi5 COCENTRATION
HC MASS (GKAMS)
CO .^ASS (G«AMS)
COS MASS (GKAMS)
NOX MASS (GKAMS)
MASS (GKAhS)
37. b/ 3
37b
3. I/ 3
31
b7.1/ 1
bSlb
.!/ 1
fa
75. fa/ 2
3.89
l.S/ 2
.05
3S.7/ »
357. 0
.a/ •»
a.o
35b
3.85
355.7
0.0
13.85
3b.3S
0.00
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAhS/flLE)
CO GRAMS/-VM (GRAMS/MILE)
COa GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GHAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
soa GRAMS/KM (&RAKS/MIUE)
HC GHAMS/KG OF FUEL ?.Bb
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL ST*.<*
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL ?70S
NOX GRAMS/Kf, OF FUF.L 20.fab
SO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
2.57 ( H.13)
-------
TABLE E-7. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
l/?f,/79
MODEL 1975 CHEV c-bo
DRIVER KEN
*ET BULB TEMP u c
SPEC. HUM. 2.7 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE '.Bb9 KM
TIME -0 MRS,
BL RUN-1 BAG.S SIC
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 31* c
BARO. 7*5.0 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 10
ENGINE s.7 LITREV 8
GVW o KG
REL. HUM. 14,a PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO
RUN DURATION 4,30 MINUTES
BLOWER INLET PRESS. »3b.s MM, Hao
'BLOWER OIF. PRESS. 4b9.9 MM HSO
BLOWER INLET TEMP. b5 DEG. C
DYNO REVOLUTIONS "0
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS 4848
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. Ib171
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
9ACKGPD METER READING/SCALE
8ACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO BACKGRO PPM
co? SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
COa SAMPLE PERCENT
coa 8ACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
coa BACKGRD PERCENT
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
NOX BACKGPO METER READING/SCALE
BACKGPO PPM
CONCENTRATION PPM
CONCENTRATION PPM
COB CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
soa COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAM
-------
TABLE E-8.
EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
MOOEL
DRIVER
WET BULB TEMP n c
SPEC. HUM. gp? GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 3.379 KM
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS'
BLOWER OIF; PRESS"
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DVNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER cu, CM /REV.
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
HC BACKGRD
WC BACKGRD
CO SAMPLE
CO SAMPLE
CO SACKGRD
CO BACKGPO
COg SAMPLE
COg SAMPLE
COg BACKGRD
COg BACKGPD
TIME -o MRS.
BL RUN-1 BAG-b 21C
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
OBY BULB TEMP 2* c
BARO. 7*5,0 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO, 10
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
6VW o KG
REL. HUM. It*.2 pCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO
*.b3 MINUTE3
*87.7 MM. H20
515.b MM H20
58 OEG. C
-0
520*
METEP READING/SCALE
»PM
READING/SCALE
PPM
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
METER BEADING/SCALE
POM
3. 1/ 3
31
80.8/ 2
READING/SCALE
PERCENT
METER READING/SCALE
PERCENT
,1' 2
H
*.*/ 2
.05
SA:KGPO
NOX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPW
CO CONCENTRATION ppv
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SOS COCENTRATION PPM
M
BEADING/SCALE
CO MASS rGRAMS)
COg MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS fGRAMS)
S02 MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
S02 GRAMS/KM .««...-
1*8,7
Q.O
18.55
U.37
0.00
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 18.23
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 37S B
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL «g!
NOX SRAMS/KG OF FUEL lb.09
S02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
S.^9 ( 8.83)
112.2* (180. bO)
7bO ( 122*)
*.8* ( 7.79)
0.00 ( 0.00)
HC GRAMS/MIN
co
C02
NOX
S02 GRAMS/MIN
00
J 8
~ w
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLOWS 7?.7ST0. CU. METRES
3 53
0'00
f 5.78)
E-9
-------
TABLE E-9. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE l/2b/78
MODEL im CHEV c-bo
DRIVER KEN
WET 8ULB TEMP 11 C
SPEC, HUM. j'.7 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE l'.883 KM
TIME -0 MRS.
BL RUN-l BAG-? 21C
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP I* C
BARO. 7H5.0 MM HG,
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 10
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 9
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. m.2 pCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.SbO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS,
BLOWER OIF'. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
t.as MINUTES
<*bt,8 MM. HSO
502.1 MM HSO
28 DEG. C
-0
S3«<8
BLOWER CU, CM /REV. Ib70<»
SAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACXGRO METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
co SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
co BACKGPD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PP"
COS SAMPLE «ETER READING/SCALE
COS SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGRD M£TER READING/SCALE
C08 BACKGRO PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRO PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SOS COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
soa MASS (GRAMS)
1S.7/ 3
»27
l.V 3
IS
5»,5/ 3
13SO
.!/ 3
2
bl.S/ 3
1.0«»
3.S/ 3
..OS
BI. a/ 2
81.8
.S/ 2
.5
1313
l.OH
81.3
0.0
n.3S
125.19
ISbS.Sb
10.0''
0.00
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
COS GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
802 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 33.fa3
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 217.b
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 2'21
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 17.5*
SOS GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
10.88 C
bb.50 (107.00)
832
S.3b
( 1336)
( 8.b3)
a.oo ( o.oo)
HC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/MIN
cos GRAMS/MIN
NOX
802
35. 9
3S»
2.0^
0.00
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS PLO^s 81.1STD. CU. METRES
»1.35
E-10
-------
TAflLE E-10. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMp,E
VEHICLE NUMBER 50
DATE l/Sfe/78
MODEL n?s CHEV c-
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP n c
SPEC. HUM. 2>7 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE S.«*0b KM
TIME -0 HRS.
BL RUN-l 8AG-8 SIC
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 31+ c
BARO. 7HS.O MM HG.
FUEL 738.5 G/LITRE
077,5
513.1
bb
•0
MINUTES
MM, HSO
MM HSO
DEG. C
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO
RUN DURATION
BLOwER INLET PRESS
BLOWER DIF'. PRESS
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. lb«»30
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
8ACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
-- BACKGRD PPM
cos SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
COS SAMPLE PERCENT
cos BACKGOD METER READING/SCALE
cos BACKGUD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM C
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRO PPM *'aLALt
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SOS COCENTBATION PPM
HC MASS (SRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
SOS MASS (GRAMS)
TEST NO. 10
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV B
GVW o KG
REL. HUM. if.2 pCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.BbO
3b,l/ 3
3bl
e.s/ 3
SB
b»,5/ 1
b355
.!/ 1
b
7B.1X S
<*.0b
1.8/ 3
.07
*0.5X 4
.S/
2.0
3*1
5825
*.OS
»03.7
0.0
13.4S
tbO.55
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
COS GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
Sos GRAMS/KM
01.53
0.00
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
5.08 ( 3.S<4)
85.19 (137.07)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 7 38
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL ?S3 2
COS GRAMS/KG OF FUEL S?»8
NOX GRAMJ/KG OF FUEL 3S 8«*
SOS GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
7.b8 ( 12.3b)
0.00 ( 0.00)
HC GPAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/MJM
COS GRAMS/MJM
NOX GRAMS/MIN
sos
3,02
103. b
112H
q.SH
0,00
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/JOOKM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLPAS b7.1STD. CU. "ETRES
05.51
S.17)
E-ll
-------
TABLE E-ll. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/30/78
MODEL 1*75 CHEV c-bo
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMp 15 C
SPEC. HUM. q'.i» GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 1.850 KM
TIME .0 MRS.
BL SUN-? BAG-1 SIC
TEST WT. 77ii KG.
DRY BULB TEMp is c
BARO. 7*8.0 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 10
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVW 0 KG
REL, HUM. 70.3 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.Bfatl
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS,
BLOWER OIF. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TE«P.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. Ifa7fa?
i.8i MINUTES
157.? MM, H20
508.0 MM H20
3? OEG. C
•0
53*3
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRO PPM
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO BACKGRO PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CD? SAMPLE PERCENT
co2 BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRD PERCENT
MFTER READING/SCALE
PPM
NOX BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
CONCENTRATION PPM
CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02 COCENTRATION PPM
HC M&SS (GRAMS)
CO MASS
C02 Mags
NOX MASS (GPAMS)
S02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX SAMPLE
NOX SAMPLE
HC
CO
10. b/ 1
lObO
.I/ 1
10
78. 0/ 2
1112
.3X 2
11
fab.8/ 3
1.20
1,1/ 3
.Ob
bl.9/ 2
bl,9
,8/ 2
.6
1025
bl.2
0.0
170". I1*
9.1*
0.00
HC GRAMg/KM (GRAMg/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
co2 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
S02 GRAMg/KM (GRAMg/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL bl,30
CO GRAMg/KG OF FuEL 510.b
CO? GRAMg/KG OF FUEL 2173
NOX GRAMg/KG OF FUEL 11.b2
502 GRAMg/KG OF FUEL 0.00
2b.0b ( HI.91)
217.09 (319.30)
921 ( 1187)
1.91 ( 7.95)
0.00 ( 0.00)
HC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/MIN
Co? GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
so2 GRAMS/MIN
in.o2
83.5
355
1,90
o.no
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
57.52 ( 1.09)
TOTAL cvs
Sl.bSTD. CU. METRES
E-12
-------
TABLE E-12. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER so
1/30/78
MODEL 1975 CHEV c-bo
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP 15 c
SPEC. HUM. q.i GRAM/KG
DISTANCE S.tOb KM
TIME -0 MRS.
BL RUN.? BAG-S SIC
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP iq C
BARO, 7H8.0 MM HG,
FUEL 738.8 G/LITRE
RUN DURATION
BLOwER INLET PRESS,
BLOWER DIF. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OVNO REVOLUTIONS
SLOWER REVOLUTIONS
TEST NO. 10
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVW o KG
REL. HUM. bb.s PC?
MEASURED FUEL 0,00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
•».»8 MINUTES
508.0 MM, H20
558.8 MM H30
fcS OEG. C
•0
50D1
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. Ib89b
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
-- BACKGRD PPM
cos SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
cos SAMPLE PERCENT
COS BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
cos BACKGRo PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
80S COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAM3)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
COS MASS fGRAMs)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
SOS MASS (GRAMS)
51. 7/ 3
517
3.B/ 3
38
'9,3/ 1
9*55
.3/ 1
17
73. b/ 3
3.75
1.7/ 8
.Ob
33. 3/ •»
333.0
,l/ »
1.0
8554
3.71
332.3
0.0
J9. »l
bBl.55
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
cos GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
SOS GRAwg/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
M.3S
0,00
3.59 (
lSb.07
8bO (
7,b<» (
0,00 (
5.78)
IS. 30)
0.00)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
co GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
COS GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
NOX GRAMg/KG OF FUEL
SOS GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
10. b»
373, b
S549
SS.bS
0.00
HC GRAMS/MIN ** 33
CO GRAMS/MIN 152,2
cos GRAMS/MIN 1039
NOX GRAMS/MIN 9,?3
80S GRAMS/MIN n nn
w , I.I u
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLOW* b8.»STO. CU. METR£S
5.15)
E-13
-------
TABLE E-13. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/30/78
MODEL 1S7S CHEV C-b()
DRIVER K£N
*ET dULS TEMP m C
SPEC. HUM. 1.5 GAAii
DISTANCE 1.634 Kh
BL
TIME -0
nuN-2 6AG-3 sic
TEST wT. 7711 KG.
OSY BULb TEMP 11 C
6AHO. 7H7.8 MM HG.
FUEL 738.a G/LITRE
TEST NIL in
ENGINE s.? LITREV B
GVw 0 KG
KEL. HUM. bb.7 PCT
MEASURED FUEL O.OU KG
FUEL HC SATIO l.Bbl)
RUN DURATION H.75 MINUTES
BLOWER INLET PKESS. *3i.s MM. HSO
8LOWER OIF. PHESS. *8S.b
BLOHE? INLET TEMP. 5t
DYNU REVOLUTIONS -U
BLOwER REVOLUTIONS
BLOwtR CU. CM /i?EV. Jb178
MM HSO
DtG. C
RAG
HC
hC
hC
HC
CO
co
co
CO
COS
COS
C02
COg
MOX
NOX
HESULTS
SAMPLE
hETFH »E AD I MG/SC ALE
bACKGHD MtTER HEAPING/SCALE
BACKGSO PPM
SAMPLE METER PEADING/SCALE
SAC.PLE PPM
BACKUHD METES READING/SCALE
fjACKGl^O PPM
SAKPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PERCENT
BACK5*»D METES Rfc AD ING/SCALE
SACKGriO PERCENT
SAC.PLE MtTE>< READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
fiACKGi^O METF^
riACKC.KD PPM
CONCENTRATION PPM
ClJ^CE^THATION PPM
COO.CENTKATION ^CT
CONCENTRATION PPM
COCENTRATION PPM
MASS (GKAMS)
rtASS (Gf'A^S)
MASS (&KANS)
MASS
MASS
37. 7/ 3
377
3.9/ 3
31
7H.5/ 3
1S70
.7/ 3
Ib
Ml. I/ 3
l.Ob
3.b/ 3
. Ub
70. S/ 2
711.3
l.b/ Z
l.b
HC
CO
COS
NOX
SOS
hC
CO
COS
NUX
SO?
MC tt?AMS/KM (GHAMS/'-'TL t)
CO (iRAMS/KM (GKAMS/MILE)
CO? GHAMS/K.M (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX G^ArtS/h" (GHArtS/MILE)
SOS GRAMS/KM IGR*.«S/MILE)
187<*
l.US
b8.8
0.0
15.07
lbb.80
1*21.25
O.bS
0.00
HC GSArtS/KG OF FUEL S7.5q
CO GRAf.S/Kli UF FU£L 3CI5.*
COS fiSAM5/-\G OF FUEL SbHS
NOX GRAMS/KG 0* FUEL 17. 7S
SOS GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
CAR60N BALANCE FUEL ECONUMY L/mOKM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLO«= 7b.5SlD. CU. KETHES
8.S3 ( 13.SS)
0.«H (l^b.32)
775 ( 12t7)
5.SS ( 8.ft)
o.no ( n.no)
HC RRAMS/MIN 3.17
CO (jf»AMS/MlN 35.1
COS GR4MS/MIN SIS
NOX GSAMS/MIN 2.UH
SOS GRAMS/MIN O.OU
( 5.84)
E-14
-------
TABLE E-14. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUM6ER 20
DATE 1/3G/7R
MODEL 1*75 CHEv C-fatl
DRIVER KF.N
"'ET BULB TEMP ib C
SPEC. HUH. 9.7 GRAr/KG
DISTANCE 5.42? KM
TIME -
BL RUN-S BAG-4 51C
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 21 c
DARO. 747.e MM HG
FUEL 738.5 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 10
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV
GV* o KG
«EL. HUM. fa3.
FUEL HC
FUEL o.on KG
RATIO
RUN DURATION
BLOwER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER OIF. PRESS.
BLO*ER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOwER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /KEV.
t.bO MINUTES
48?.b MM. H20
4 MM H20
82 OEG. C
-0
515b
BAG RESULTS
HC SAhPLE
HC
HC
HC
CO
CO
MtTER READING/SCALE
PPM
METER REAOING/SCALE
BACKGKt) PPM
MfcTER READING/SCALE
PPM
•tb.8/ 3
4b8
S.1'/ 3
3<*
78. 4/ 1
CO BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACrtGnD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAhPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGSD METER READING/SCALE
C02 8AC^&^(0 PERCENT
NOX SArPLE METER REAOING/SCALE
NOX SAnPLe PPM '^«Le
NOX BACivGnH) Mf.TER «EADIfiG/SCALE
NOX BAOUKO PPM /•Jk.ni.e
MC CONCENTS TION PPM
CO CO^CE^TSATION f>?»
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
505 COCE'JTR tT ION
HC MASS (GnAMS)
CO MASS CG«AHS)
C02 MASS (Gf-.AWS)
NOX MASS (&KAMS)
S02 MASS (GnAMS)
.*/ 1
22
73. 7/ 2
3.7b
1.9/ 2
.07
32. b/ 4
32b.U
.?/ 4
2.0
443
835b
3.71
324.7
U.O
I7.H
SS5.4b
4581.8?
40.48
0.00
(GRAMS/MILED
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO? GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/K-I (r,RAMS/i«ILE)
S02 GRAMS/.V,-,
HC GHAMS/KG OF FUEL
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
COS GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
NOX GRAMS/KC, OF FUEL
SO? GRAMS/ivG OF FUEL
3hb.b
2bb3
22 b«»
oioo
3.17 ( 5.10)
12U.88 (1^4.50)
S^S C 13bO)
'."»7 ( 12. (11)
". no ( n.nn)
HC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/MIN'
CO? GRA.XS/MIN
NOX
S02
14?.
p.BU
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
TUTAL CVS FLC)« b7.-STO. CU. METKkS
S.27J
E-15
-------
TABLE E-15. EXHAUST EMISSIUWS FKOM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/30X78
MOl^EL 1^75 ChEV C-bll
DRIVER KEN
rfET 9UL3 TE-IP 17 C
SPEC. HUM. 11.1
&L
TIME -U HRS.
RUN-2 BAG-5 21C
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TE*P 21 C
dAHO. 7tb.fl MM HG.
TEST NO. 10
ENGINE s.? LITKEV 8
GVta 0 KG
REL. HUM. 72.0 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
DISTANCE
.885
FUEL V3S.2 GXLITRE FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER DIF. PRESS.
SLOWER INLET TEMH.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLUwER REVOLUTIONS
CU. C*
t.l? MINUTES
Htt.S MM. H20
tqS.3 MM H20
bf) DEC. C
-0
AG REStLTS
HC SAf.PLE METER
nC SAK^Lt PF"
hC BACKuKD METER
HC SACKGHO PP*
CO SAc.PLt MtTEK
CO SArPuE PPH
CO SACKS^O METER
CO 6AC*Gr<0 PPM
COS SAMPLE METE*
READING/SCALE
KtADINGXSCALE
READINGXSCALE
READING/SCALE
READING/SCALE
COS SAhPLE PERCENT
COS 6ACKGRD METER
READINGXSCALE
COS SACKGKO PERCENT
NOX SAfPLt METER
NOX SAMPLE PP*<
NOX fiACKG^O METER
NOX BACKGKO PfK
HC CONC£.vTKATIOM
CO CONCENTRATION
COS CONCENTRATION
NOX cnNC£NT*ATIufi
502 COCEfJTNATICr. I
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (G«AMS)
COS MASS (G-'AhS)
NOX «ASS (G«Af'S)
SOS MASS (GRA«S)
PEAL' IN GX SCALE
READINGXSCALE
PPM
PPM
PCT
PFM
'PM
35.
3.3/ 3
33
bg.q/ a
1598
.b/ 3
It
H7.9/ 3
.83
3.5/ 3
.05
Hf.7X 2
Ht.7
1.3X 2
1.3
153*
.78
H3.5
11.0
12. f7
lib. 80
S37.10
0.110
HC
CO GRAMS/KM (GR«MS/MILE)
CdS &RAMS/^i>1
NOX GRAMS/KM
SO? GRAMS/KM (&RAMS/fILfJ
t«C GRAM5XKG QF FUEL
CO GRAMSx^G OF FUEL
CO? GriAMSx*5 OF FUEL
NOX GRAMS/i\'5 C«= FLEL
SOS GHAMS/^G OF FOcl.
It. 10 ( 22. b8)
31.^9 (SIS. 37)
15.1 +
O.OIJ
b.2fa ( 111.07)
o.no ( o.no)
HC GRAMS/MlN
CO &R4MSXMIS
COS tRAMSXMIN
NOX GRAM5XMIN
SOS
2.9S
c8.U
225
1.33
0.00
CARBON BALANCE FoEL ECONOMY LX1GOKK (». ILESXGALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLUWS m.^STD. CU. MET«tS
55.
( t.20)
E-16
-------
TABLE E-16. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER an
DATE 1/30/78
MODEL 1S75 CHEV C-fen
DRIVER KEN
*ET BULB TEMP 17 c
SPEC. HUM. 10.fa SRAM/KG
DISTANCE 3.3S5 KM
TlMt -n MRS.
BL RUN-e BAG-b 51C
TEST M. 771J KG.
DHY BULB TE^P aa c
6ARO. 7tb.S MM HG.
738.2 G/LITRE
TEST MO. 10
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GV* 0 KG
«EL. HUM. b*.H FCT
MEASURED FUEL o.ou KG
FUEL HC RATIO
SAMPLE
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER GIF. PRESS.
BLo-tR INLET TEMF.
OYNO REVOLUTIONS
RI.OKEK REVOLUTIONS
;« cu. CM /REV.
BAG
HC
MC
MC
MC
CO
CO
CO
CO
coa
cos
coa
coa
NOX
NOX
NOX
NOX
MC
CO
coa
NOX
S02
HC
CO
coa
NOX
S02
t.b? MINUTES
2 MM.
SOS.O MM
fa5 OEG. C
-o
523C
SAKPLt METEW REAOING/SCALE
PPM
MtTtR REAOING/SCALE
6ACKGRO PPM
METER READING/SCALE
HPh
METER READING/SCALE
6ACKGHO PPM
SAKPLt METER READING/SCALE
SAKPLE PERCENT
BAC^GSO METER READING/SCALE
6ACKG?D PERCENT
SAKPLt METER READING/SCALE
SAKPLE PPM
6ACKGRD MtTEW READING/SCALE
6ACK&KO PPM
CONCENTRATION FpM
CONCENTRATION PPM
CONCENTKATION PCT
CONCENTRATION PPM
COCENTRATION Hph
MASS (GRAMS)
MASS «,NAMS)
MASS (GRAMS)
MASS (GRAMS)
MASS (GRAMS)
HC .. iur>
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMs'/MlLE)
CO? GRArS/KM ( GKAMS/I". ILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (C,ffAMS/MlLE)
soa GRAMS/KM •-
3.5/ 3
35
so. q/ a
Sb2B
.*/ a
is
tt-.fa/ 5
1.S8
i.9/ 2
.07
t7.a/ 3
1*1. h
5284
O.I)
17. bb
2538.70
19. gb
".00
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
COa GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
i?.oi
«*5b.3
is. 55
fl.'oo
s.ao ( 8.373
130.3H
7f8 (
0.00 ( 0.00)
HC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/MIN
CC5 GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
GRAMS/MIN
3.78
CAPBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/10..KM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLOK= 72.0STO. Cu. METRES
E-17
-------
TABLE E-17. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMHER 30
DATE 1/30/78
MODEL 1^75 CHtV C-bil EJI
DRIVER KEN
«ET 8ULH TEMP 18 C
SPEC. MUM. 11.0 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 1.883 KM
TIME -i) MRS.
«uN-e BAG-? eic
TEST KT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 55 C
OARO. 7*b.3 MM HG.
FUEL 738.? G/LITRE
TEST NO. 10
ENGINE 5.7 LlTKEV 8
GV* o KG
REL. HUM. b^.8 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RaTIO l.BfaO
RUN DURATION *.?q HINUTES
BLOWER INLET PRESS. ^57.2 MM. HSO
BLOWER DIF. PRESS. 5H8.0 MM b?0
BLOwEH INLET TEMP. 35 OEG. C
OYNO REVOLUTIONS -l)
REVOLUTIONS 5335
CiJ.,CH
BAG RESULTS
HC
MC
HC
MC
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO?
CO?
CO?
CO?
NOX
SAMPLE
SAKPLt
iriACKGRO
3ACKGRD
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
&ACKGRD
oACKGHO
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
bACKGRD
SACKED
SAMPLE
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
MfcTfcR READING/SCALE
PPM
MtTER READING/SCALE
PPM
METER "FADING/SCALE
PPM
MFTER READING/SCALE
PERCENT
METtR READING/SCALE
PtSCENT
MtTER READING/SCALE
52. 2/ 3
NOX HACKGRD MtTER "EADIMS/SCALE.
fj 0 X B A C K U w 0 PPM
nC CONCEMTRATIQN PPM
CO CONCENTnATIGN PHM
CO? CONCENTKATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SO? COCENTHATICN PPM
MASS (GRAMS)
HC
CO
MASS
CO? MASS
NOX MASS (GNAMS)
SO? MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO? (jRAft.VK* (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX &KAKS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
SO? GKA«KS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
HC GKAMS/KG CF FUEL 3b.71
CO GRAMS/KC- OF FUEL <;7n.7
CO? GRAMS/M", OF FUEL ?b28
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 19.93
SO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
"» . U / 3
HO
71. 1/ 3
1857
.!/ 3
S
bH."*/ 3
1.15
H.n/ 3
.lib
7S.B/ a
79.8
1.2X 2
1.2
48b
1775
1.1D
79.7
II. 0
22. tl
Ib5.27
lhiit.17
12.17
il.no
11.91 ( 19.is)
R7.79 (1»1.25)
852 ( 1371)
b . H b ( 10 . •* 0 )
n.no ( n.no)
HC RRAMS/MIN 4.b8
CO GRAMS/MIN 3^.5
CO? GRAMS/MIN 335
NOX GHAMSXMIN 5.5*
SC2 GWAMSXMIN o.no
CARDON SALANQc FUEL ECUNOMY L/1DUKM (Ml LES/RALLON.)
5.3b)
TOTAL CVS
Ssj.OSTO. CU. METRES
E-18
-------
TABLE E-18. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE l/So/79
MODEL lq?5
DRIVER K£N
WET BULB TEMP
SPEC, HUM. n.o GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 5'.»0b KM
TIME -Q MRS.
C-bO BL RUN-3 BAG-B SIC
TEST WT, 7711 KG.
DRV BULB TEMP 2"» C
BARO. 7*5,7 MM HG,
FUEL 738,2 G/LITRE
IB C
TEST NO, 10
ENGINE 5,7 LITREV 8
GVW o KG
REL, HUM, 58,5 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO
•f.'+s MINUTES
Hbq.9 MM, H20
580,7 MM H20
71 OEG. C
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS
BLOWER OIF'. PRESS
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. lb
-------
TABLE E-19. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE
MODEL i«os CHEV c-to
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TE^P It C
SPEC. HUM. s'.b GRAM/KG
DISTANCE I'.Bbb KM
TIME -0 HRS,
BL RUN-1 BAG-1 81H
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRV BULB TEMP 2* c
BARO. 7*b,3 MM HG.
FUEL 738.? G/LITRE
TEST NO. 11
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. 28.8 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
RUN DUBATION
BLOwER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER OIF'. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DVNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
*,75 MINUTES
MM. H20
»82.b MM H20
35 OEG. C
-0
5303
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. Ib820
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGPD METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGPO PPM
co SAMPLE METE» READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
co BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGPO PPM
co2 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGPD METEP READING/SCALE
coa 8ACKGRO PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX 8ACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PP*
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
802 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
S02 MASS (GRAMS)
5*.b/ 3
S*b
3.b/ 3
3b
fa3.8/ 3
Ib2b
.!/ 3
bS.b/ 3
1.18
.Ob
79.b/ 2
71, b
l.l/ 2
1.1
51*
1572
78. b
0.0
23.bQ
1*5.82
Ib35.11
10.2*
0.00
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GHAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
so2 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FIJFL 38.5h
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 238.2
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 5b73
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL lb.73
S02 GRAMg/KG OF FUEL 0.00
12.bS C 20.35)
78.13 (125.71)
S7b ( 1*10)
5,*9 ( 8.83)
0.00 ( 0.00)
HC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/MIN
C02 GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
S02 GRAMS/MIN
30.7
3*5
S.lb
0.00
CAPBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
*».3b ( 5.30)
TOTAL CVS
79.7STO. cu. METRES
E-20
-------
TA6LE E-20. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBEP 20
DATE 1/27X78
MODEL H75 CHEV c-bo
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP i» c
SPEC. HUM. g'.l
DISTANCE S.*2? KM
TIME -n MRS,
BL RUN.I BAG-? 21H
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 2b C
B*RO. 7t»b,5 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. U
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV a
GVW o KG
REL. HUM. 2*.7 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
RUN DURATION n.ng MINUTES
BLOWER INLET PRESS. 508.0 MM. H20
BLOWER DIP'. PRESS. 5*b.l MM H20
BLOWER INLET TEMP, bs DEG. C
DYNO REVOLUTIONS -0
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CD. CM /REV. ib^O?
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRO METER READINGXSCALE
BACKGRO PPM
METER REAOINGXSCALE
PPM
METER REAOINGXSCALE
BACKGRO PPM
METER REAOINGXSCALE
.- PERCENT
cos BACKGRD METER READINGXSCALE
C02 BACKGRO PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READINGXSCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRO METER READINGXSCALE
NOX 8ACKGRD POM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
802 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
302 MASS (GRAMS)
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO
C02 SAMPLE
C03 SAMPLE
*0.5X 3
*OS
3.B/ 3
38
b8.8X 1
7133
.2X 1
11
7H,0/ 2
3. 78
1.7/ 2
.Ob
3».3X H
3*3.0
,2/ •*
2.0
380
b550
3.7*
3*1.7
0.0
1».92
51^.58
37. 5b
0.00
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
HC GRAMg/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMg/KM
SO? GRAMS/KM
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 8.55
CO GRAMs/KG OF FUEL 2"7 9
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 2fa7»
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 21.5*
SO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
3.75
95,82
8bO
t».«3
0.00
CIS*.18)
( 138*)
t 11.15)
( 0.00)
HC
CO GRAMS/MIN
C02
NOX GRAMS/MI^
SO?
US q
10;0
8(38
o.OO
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILESXGALLON)
TOTAL Cvs FLO.VJ .bs.ssTO. cu'. METRES
*3.51
5,*1)
E-21
-------
TABLE E-21. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/27/78
MODEL 1975 CHEV C-bO
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP IS C
SPEC. HUM. fe.i GRAM/KG
DISTANCE '.8b<» KM
TIME -0 HRS.
BL RUN-l BAG-3 21H
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRy BULB TEMP 2b C
BARO. 7*b.5 MM HG.
FUEL 738,a G/LITRE
TEST NO. 11
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVW 0 KG
PEL. HUM. 28.* PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo
FUEL HC RATIO
RUN DURATION ».2* MINUTES
BLOWER INLET PRESS. »31.8 MM. H20
BLOWER OIF'. PRESS. »B2.b MM H20
BLOWER INLET TEMP. 5* DEG. C
DYNO REVOLUTIONS -o
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS »7S3
BLOWER CU. CM /REV.
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
SAMPLE
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
HC
HC
HC
co
CO
co
CO BACKGRD PPM
cog SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
co2 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRO PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
302 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
C02 M«sS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
S02 MASS (GRAMS)
37.I/ 3
371
3,fi/ 3
38
Sfi.n/ 3
1H51
.!/ 3
2
.83
3.1/ 3
.Ob
"*»,<»/ 2
l.'b/ S
l.b
33b
.78
t2.«'
D.O
13.15
111.70
<1bb.32
O.OD
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
S02 GRAMS/KM
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MRE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 35.22
CO GRAVS/KG OF FuEL 2('(',1
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 258H
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 12,95
S02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
15.1* ( 2'*.3b)
128.Sfa (2Ub.S5)
1112 ( 1789)
S,5b ( B.'S)
o.no ( o.oo)
HC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/MIN
C02 GRAM3/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
S02
3.10
Sb.3
SiB
1.1»
n.oo
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/IOOKM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLO*s
b7.qSTD. CU-. METRES
E-22
-------
TABLE E-22. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/27/7B
MODEL 1175 CHEV c-bo
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP 15 C
SPEC. HUM. s.B GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 3.395 KM
TIME -0 MRS,
BL RUN-l BAG-4 21H
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRy BULB TEMP 27 c
BARO. 7tb.8 MM HG.
FUEL 738,2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 11
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVW Q KG
REL. HUM. 2b.S PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.SbO
"».b7 MINUTES
HIS.3 MM. nao
533.1* MM HBO
bO OEG. C
•0
522*
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS'.
BLOWER OIF. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP,
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. C" /REV.
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGRO MfTER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRO PPM
co SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
co BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
coa SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGRD M£TER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRO PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
802 COCENTRATION PPM
MASS (GRAMS)
MASS (GRAMS)
(GRAMS)
HC
CO
C02
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
sos MASS
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
CO? GRAMS/KM
NQX GRAMS/KM
SO? GRAMS/KM
(GRAMS/MILE!
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
5.83
lib.10
723
Y.10
0.00
SO.?/ 3
502
3.7/ 3
37
83, O/ 2
11
•»2.1/ 2
1.81
1.7/ 2
.Ob
Hb.7/ 3
UO.l
.5X 3
1.5
••72
1.84
138.1
0.0
11.78
2*53.02
Ifa.bH
0.00
( 1,383
(ISb.SO)
( Ilb3)
( 7.81)
( 0.00)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 20.00
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 318.5
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 2*80
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL lb.82
302 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
HC GRAMS/MIN
co GRAMS/MIN
Cos GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
502 GRAMS/MIN
8H.3
525
3.5b
o.on
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
31,HI ( 5,q7)
TOTAL cvs FLOWS
72.8STD. cu'. METRES
E-23
-------
TABLE E-23. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/27/78
MODEL 1975 CHEV c-bo
DRIVER KEN
WET BUL8 TEMP 13 c
SPEC, HUM. i».i» GRAM/KG
DISTANCE l.Bbb KM
TIME -0 HRS.
BL RUN.2 BAG-i 21H
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 54 c
BARO. 7*5.5 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 11
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV R
GVW 0 KG
REL, HUM. 2?,s PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO
RUN DURATION I»,b9 MINUTES
BLOWER INLET PRESS'. »3i.s MM. H20
BLOWER OIF. PRESS. *82.b MM H20
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER cu. CM /REV.
37
-o
s?st
DEC. C
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
co SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
co BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRO PPM
cos SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO? SAMPLE PERCENT
co? 8ACKGRO METER PEAOING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX 8ACKGPO METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRO PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
S02 MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM CGRAMS/MILE) i?.s?
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE) 85,08
CO? GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE) 8*3
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE) s.io
50? GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE) 0,00
55. 0/
550
3,5/
35
b9, I/
1793
< It
2
b3.9/
1.1*
3,3/
.05
77. 9/
77,9
1 •*/
!•»
519
1738
1.10
7b.b
0.0
23. *7
158.80
157*. 11
".5?
0.00
( 20.23)
(13b.90)
( 1357)
( 8.21)
( 0.00)
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 39.19
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL ?fa5.2
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 2b?9
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 15.90
SO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
HC GRAMS/MIN s.oi
CO GRAMS/WIN 33,9
C02 GPAMS/MIN 33b
NOX GRAMS/WIN 2,03
SO? GRAMS/MIN o.no
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/IOOKM (MILES>GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLOWS 7?,5STO. CU. MET«ES
( 5.H2)
E-24
-------
TABLE E-24.
EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE
MODEL 1975 CHEV c-bo
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP m c
SPEC. HUM. 5.7 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE S'.HSS KM
TIME -0 HRS,
BL RUN.2 BAG»2 21H
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 2h c
6ARO. 745.5 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO, n
ENGINE S.7 LITREV 8
GVW o KG
REL. HUM. a?.b pCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER DIF'. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. Ib93b
MINUTES
MM. H20
508,0 MM H20
bS OEG, C
•0
5020
METER READING/SCALE
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
HC 8ACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
co SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
co BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRO PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
c02 BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRO M£TER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
coa CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAM3)
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
S02 MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
S02 GRAMg/KM
(GRAM3/M1LE5
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
b.78
0.00
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL «i.i7
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 31b,7
CO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 2b»3
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 21.1*
S02 GRAMs/KG OF FUEL 0.00
3. 1/ 3
31
70. 8/ I
7525
,2/ 1
11
'3. n/ 2
3.71
1.8/ 2
.07
32. 8/ *
328.0
.I/ »
1.0
3.b7
327.3
0.0
Ib.OS
55*. 03
•*b23.58
0.00
101.57
C H.73)
(Ib3.<»3)
( 13b>M
( 10.91)
( 0.00)
CO GRAMS/MJN
C02 GRAMS/MI^
NOX
302
3.58
133.5
1031
8.25
0.00
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/JOOKM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLOW= bR,«STD, Cu'. METRES
E-25
-------
TABLE E-25. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FRO* SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/27/7B
MODEL i«75 CHEV c-bo BL
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP 15 C
SPEC. HUM. b.l GRAM/KG
DISTANCE .853 KM
TIME -0 HRS.
RUN.2 BAG'S
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRy BULB TEMP 2b C
BARO. 7»5.2 MM HG.
FUEL 738,2 G/LITHE
TEST NO. 11
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. 28.5 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO
RUN DURATION ».23 MINUTES
BLOrtER INLET PRESS. »»H.S MM. H*°
BLOWER OIF. PRESS. »82.b MM H20
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
orNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLO*ER CLI. CM
bO
-o
"»751
DEC. C
HC
HC
HC
co
CO SAMPLE
co
co
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRO PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
coe SAMPLE PERCENT
CD? BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRO PERCENT
NO* SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NO* 8ACKGRD "ETER READING/SCALE
NO* BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
302 COCENTRATION
MASS (GRAMS!
MASS (GRAMS)
(GRAMS)
(GRAMS)
302 MASS (GRAMS)
34. 3/ 3
3*3
t.OX 3
10
58. b/ 3
HC
CO
C02 MASS
NOX
11
5.7
.78
.Ob
l.b/ 2
l.b
35b
1»23
.73
»n.2
o.o
13. bS
110.2*
888.1*4
O.OC
MC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMJ/KM (GRAMS/MJLE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GPAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
SO? GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3««.i7
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 31b,2
co? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 2S»e
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 12.7»
302 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
lb.01 ( 25. 7b)
121.27 (208.00)
10*2 ( Ib7b)
5.21 ( 8.38)
o.no ( o.oo)
CO GRAMS/MJN
CC2
NOX
sc2
3.23
2b.l
210
1.05
0.00
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100*M ("RES/GALLON) 55.31 C
TOTAL cvs FLO** bb.bSTD. cu. METRES
E-26
-------
TABLE E-26. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE RAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER so
DATE 1/27/79
MODEL i<»75 C*EV e-tn BL
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP m C
SPEC. HUM. b.5 GRAM/KG
DISTifcCE 3.3*7 KM
-n HR3,
RUN.J BA6-» S1H
TEST «T. 7711 KG.
DRY 8ULB TEMP 87 C
BIRO. 7*5.2 MM KG,
FUEL 738,3 G/LITPE
TEST KO. 11
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 9
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. So.3 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO
RUN DURATION ».h<» MINUTES
INLET PRESS. U57.S MM, HSO
DIP. PRESS. »15.3 MM HSO
8LO*E» INLET TEMP, bS OEG. C
REVOLUTIONS -o
REVOLUTIONS 5250
BLO«Efl CU. CM /REV.
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
METER READING/SCALE
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC
HC
CO SAMPLE METER PEftOJNG/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO BACKGPD «ETER READING/SCALE
CO 8ACKGRO PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PERCENT
COS 9ACKSPO "ETER READING/SCALE
COS 8ACKGRO PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BAC«G<»C! METE" READING/SCALE
NOX 9ACKGSO PPM
MC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SOS COCENTRATION PPw
HC M4SS fGRAMg)
CO M4SS (GRAMg)
COS "ASS
»8.3X 3
»83
3.8/ 3
38
BS.1X i
a
07. I/ 3
1.83
3.«/ 3
,0k
»?.B/ 3
1.8
MC
CO
COS
MA3S
SOS MASS (GRAMS)
GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
S.bb (
1.78
127. »
0.0
387*9b
S3b8.0i>
15.55
0.00
«.ll)
1138)
sos
HC GRAMg/«G OF FUEL H.77
CO GRAVg/KG OF FUEL »0«»,B
CO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 51*?!
NOX GRAMg/KC OF FUEL lb.S3
SO? GRAMg/KG OF FUEL 0.00
708 (
».fc5 t 7.*8)
0.00 ( 0,00)
CO
cos
NOX
SOS
82.8
SOS
*.3S
o.no
CAR90N BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/IOOKM (MILES/GALLON)
39.71 ( fc.07)
TOTAL'CVS FLOWS
72.8STO. cu.
E-27
-------
w
to
00
UNIT NO. ?n
VEHICLE MODEL
TEST NO.
CHEV C-bO BL
TABLE E-27. VEHICLE EMISSION RESULTS
1978 LIGHT DUTY EMISSIONS TEST
ACTUAL DISTANCES USED IN CALCULATIONS
?-l DATE l/2b/7B MFGR. CODE
ENGINE 5.70 LITRE 8 CURB WT.
-0
0 KG
YR.
GVM
1<»75
o KG
BAROMETER 7»7.7B MM Qf HG.
DRY BULB TEMP. 20.0 OEG. C
REL. HUMIDITY sn PCT.
EXHAUST EMISSIONS
BLOWER OIF'. PRESS., 62. 18?.h MM. H?0
BAG RESULTS
BAG NO.
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
HC SAMPLE METER PEADING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRO PPM
co SAMPLE MFTER READING/SC*LE
co SAMPLE PPM
co BACKGRO METER RE»DJNG/SC*LE
CO BACKGRD PPM
co2 SAMPLF MFTER RE*OING/SC*LF
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
co? BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGPO PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE MF.TER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRO PPM
so? SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SO? SAMPLE PPM
so? BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
SO? BACKGRO PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
so* CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS PRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CO? MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
SO? MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMg/MU.E)
co GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO? GRAMS/KM (GBAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CR L/100KM (H»PG)
cvs FLOW STO. cu. METRES CSCFJ
CALCULATED DISTANCE
WEIGHTED FUEL CONSUMPTION LITRES/jnoKM
WEIGHTED MASS HC GRAMS/KM fGRAMS/WILE)
WEIGHTED MASS CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MUE)
WEIGHTED MASS CO? GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
WEIGHTED MASS NOX G»AMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
TOTAL CVS FLOW n H92.1 STO. CU. METRES
HET BULB TEMP 13.S OEG, C
ABS, HUMIDITY 7.» GRAMS/KG
COMMENTS
BLOWER INLET PRESS., Gl »t».S MM, H20
BLOWER INLET TEMP. bO DEG. C
90bl
88. ?/ 3
88?
?.b/ 3
2b
b^.O/ 1
720B
.2/ 1
11
»7.^/ 2
2.1b
1.5X 2
.05
05. 8/ 3
137.0
.if 3
.b
•0.0/-0
-0.0
-0.0/-0
-0.0
Bb?
b820
1 3b,9
0.0
bb.07
1055. 7b
Slfe(..3b
31.0?
0.00
11.77 ( IB.
188.01 (30?.
9?o.o (loBn
S.bO ( 9.
53.07 ( 0.
133.0 ctb<«<;
5.b? ( 3.
"8.17
8.51
1)0.83
IblH
38. b/ 3
38b
2.7/ 3
;7
bb.H/ 3
1707
.!/ 3
2
80. 5/ 3
1.08
3.?/ 3
.05
3b,»/ 3
109.2
.?/ 3
.b
-0.0/-0
-0.0
-0.0/-0
-0.0
3h2
Ib28
108.7
0.0
* 7,»b
*30. b?
597b.97
0?.hO
0.00
<«3) 7.b? ( 12. ?b)
51) b<».12 (111.22)
.3) 959. 0 (1503. b)
00) b.8» ( 11.00)
<»0) Ib.bl ( S.OS)
.») ?S7.1 (B020.7)
•»9) b.23 ( 3.87)
{ ».8B)
( 13ihf)
U8».7b)
9««9
bO.l/ 3
bOl
?.B/ 3
28
I?.*/ 2
577b
.2/2
a
OS,*/ 2
2,03
!.»/ 2
.05
53. 9/ 3
lbl.7
,3/ 3
,9
-0.0/-0
-0.0
-0.0/-0
-0.0
S7S
5051
lbl.0
0.0
00,30
B0?,b7
V828.77
3b.B9
0.00
7.78 ( 12. SS)
108.03 (238.18)
808.2 (13bO,8)
b.08 ( 10.03)
07.19 ( 0.99)
132.8 (ObBB.H)
5.b9 ( 3.50)
-------
to
VD
UNIT NO. ?0 TEST NO. 1J-S
VEHICLE MODEL CHEV C-bO BL
BAROMETER 7*5.»9 MM OF HG.
DRY BULB TEMP. ?7.2 DEC. C
REL. HUMIDITY 30 PCT.
EXHAUST EMISSIONS
BLOWER OIF. PRESS., G2, »82.b MM.
BAG RESULTS
BAG NO.
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
E-28. VEHICLE EMISSION RESULTS
197B LIGHT DUTY EMISSIONS TEST
ACTUAL DISTANCES USED IN CALCULATIONS
DATE 1/30/7R MF6R. CODE
ENGINE 5.7» LITBE 8 CU«B «T.
-0
0 KG
GVM
1975
o KG
H20
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
HC BACXGPD "ETER READING/3CALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
co SAMPLF METER READING/SCALE
co SAMPLF PPM
co BACKGBD METEP. READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
co2 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
cos SAMPLF PERCENT
C02 BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
C02 RACKGRO PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGHD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
so2 SAMPLF METES READING/SCALE
S02 SAMPLE PPM
S02 BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
302 BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCEMTPtTION PPM
co? CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
so2 CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CO? MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
S02 MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM {GPAMS/MUE)
co GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/IODKM
cvs FLOW STD. cu. METRES (SCF)
CALCULATED DISTANCE KM(MILES)
*ET BULB TEMP Jb.l DEC. C
ABS. HUMIDITY b.9 GRAMS/KG
COMMENTS
BLOWER INLET PRESS., Gl H»H.S MM, H20
BLOWER INLET TEMP, ho DEC. c
1
9»h3
10. */ *
10*0
,*/ *
*0
73. b/ 1
8110
,2/ 1
11
»9.5X 2
2.25
I.*/ 2
,05
»7.1/ 3
1*1.3
.2/ 3
.b
-0.0/-0
-0.0
-0.0/-0
-0.0
10P9
7b70
2.22
1*0.8
0.0
77.15
1183.73
537b.*7
31.70
0.00
13.59 ( 21.87)
208.53 (335.53)
9*7.1 (1523.9)
5.58 ( B.99)
5b.2S ( *.18)
132.5 (HbPo.8)
5.bB ( 3.53)
I
1M21
*l.b/ 3
*lb
3,S/ 3
35
7B.5/ 3
2108
.?/ 3
5
79. b/ 3
l.*b
3.9/ 3
.Ob
32. 9/ 3
98.7
,3/ 3
.9
-0.0/-0
-0.0
•0.0/-0
-0.0
385
202»
1 ,*1
97.9
0.0
50.19
532. OB
S82b.3»
37.5*
0.00
7.97 ( 12,82)
B*.*9 (135.9*)
925.2 (1*88. b)
5.9b ( 9.59)
*b.23 ( 5.09)
225. B (797*. 1)
b.30 ( 3.91)
3
9*3b
bb.5/ 3
bbS
3. 1/ 3
31
99. OX 2
b*5*
,3X 2
11
2.03
1.9/ 2
.07
51. 2X 3
153. b
.3X 3
.9
-o.ox-o
-0.0
-0.0/-0
•0.0
b*0
b!31
1.97
152.9
0.0
*8.79
9*3.30
*771,K7
3*. 31
0.00
B.*8 ( 13.
Ih3.90 (2b3.
B29.1 (133*
5.9b C 9.
»7.53 ( *.
132.2 (*(.bb
S.7b ( 3.
bH)
71)
.0)
59)
95)
. 1)
SB)
WEIGHTED FUEL
WEIGHTED MASS
WEIGHTED MASS
WEIGHTED MASS
WEIGHTED MASS
TOTAL CVS
CONSUMPTION LITRES/IOOKM
HC GRAMS/KM {GRAMS/MILE)
co GRAMS/KM CGRAMS/MJLE)
CO? GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
FLOW * »90.b STO. CU.
»R.b3 { t.8»)
9.25 ( 1».B9)
131.39 (211.»0)
903.5 (1*53.7)
5.BB ( 9.i»7)
-------
APPENDIX F
CHASSIS DYNAMOMETER TRANSIENT TEST RESULTS -
EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM
TABLES F-l & F-2 Summary of the Results
TABLES F-3 through F-10 CAPE-21C - Run 1
TABLES F-ll through F-18 CAPE-21C - Run 2
TABLES F-19 through F-22 CAPE-21H - Run 1
TABLES F-23 through F-26 CAPE-21H - Run 2
TABLES F-27 through F-28 Light-Duty FTP
-------
TABLE F-l. CHASSIS DYNAMOMETER TRANSIENT EVALUATIONS WITH THE EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM
Emissions,
Test Cycle
CAPE- 2 1C LA-NF
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
LA-NF
*j LA-F
I
CAPE-21H LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
LD-FTP 505C
867S
505H
TOTAL
Bag
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
HC
18.74
0.59
4.12
0.54
9.78
1.24
6.27
0.64
7.91
0.67
12.81
1.46
6.70
5.30
4.43
5.35
CO
111.94
17.83
15.15
22.07
20.55
9.41
22.89
18.05
23.33
24.61
33.87
13.26
46.06
18.45
24.73
25.8
g/km
NOX
3.14
5.71
2.74
4.73
5.21
4.42
3.06
4.95
3.09
5.28
4.60
4.25
5.86
4.83
6.47
5.48
C02
1044
993
852
958
1132
838
877
958
907
984
1115
876
1087
1050
1053
1058
Fuel
VlOOkrn
54.61
43.64
37.95
42.45
51.01
36.56
39.79
42.17
41.35
43.72
51.61
38.49
50.40
46.76
47.22
47.62
Emis sions , g/km
HC
15.95
0.37
3.51
0.57
9.04
1.41
8.04
0.66
8.60
0.70
10.30
1.60
5.30
5.81
4.34
5.31
CO
97.68
14.68
15.35
22.53
23.35
10.75
20.77
17.55
24.85
22.71
30.50
15.23
54.58
16.55
19.70
25.14
NOx
2.97
5.23
2.68
4.10
4.36
4.08
3.42
4.34
3.07
4.64
3.99
4.00
5.77
4.47
6.85
5.38
C02
1021
998
863
932
1086
816
900
908
872
976
1149
867
1161
1031
1015
1053
Fuel
VlOOkm
52.29
43.62
38.35
41.37
49.16
35.72
40.88
40.04
40.06
43.26
52.48
38.24
53.92
45.92
45.24
47.36
-------
TABLE F-2. CHASSIS DYNAMOMETER TRANSIENT EVALUATIONS WITH THE EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM
w
Emissions, g/min
Test
CAPE-21C
CAPE-21H
LD-FTP
Cycle
LA-NF
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
LA-NF
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
505C
867S
505H
TOTAL
Bag
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
HC
7.18
0.71
1.60
0.65
1.94
0.91
2.43
0.77
3.02
0.79
2.64
1.06
4.45
2.30
2.97
2.79
CO
42.9
21.4
5.9
26.6
4.1
6.9
8.9
21.7
8.9
29.0
7.0
9.6
30.6
8.0
16.6
13.4
NOX
1.20
6.85
1.07
5.70
1.03
3.24
1.19
5.96
1.18
6.23
0.95
3.08
3.89
2.09
4.33
2.86
C02
400
1191
331
1154
224
613
339
1152
347
1159
230
635
722
454
705
552
Fuel
g/min
154.6
387.1
109.0
378.0
74.6
197.7
113.8
375.0
117.0
380.9
78.7
206.2
247.1
149.3
233.4
183.4
Emissions, q/min
HC
6.10
0.47
1.36
0.69
1.85
1.02
3.05
0.80
3.34
0.84
2.11
1.15
3.55
2.54
2.92
2.77
CO
37.4
18.6
6.0
27.1
4.8
7.8
7.9
21.2
9.7
27.3
6.3
10.9
36.6
7.24
13.3
13.1
NOX
- --- - *•
1.14
6.64
1.04
4.94
0.89
2.95
1.30
5.25
1.19
5.58
0.82
2.87
3.86
1.95
4.61
2.80
C02
390
1265
335
1122
223
590
341
1098
339
1172
236
623
777
451
684
549
Fuel
g/min
147.6
408.9
110.0
368.1
74.6
191.0
114.5
357.8
115.1
384.1
79.7
203.1
266.4
148.3
225.1
182.3
-------
TABLE F-3. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE 5AG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/11/78
MODEL 1S75 CHEV C-fal) ECS
DRIVER KEN
*ET cJULfl TEMP 18 C
SPEC. MUM. q.q GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 1.BSU KM
TIME -o HRS.
RUN-3 BAG-1 21C
TEST «T. 7711 KG.
DRY 6ULB TE*P 27 C
dARO. 743.H MM HG.
FUEL 738.8 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 3
ENGINE 5.7 LlTREV 8
GVw o KG
*EL. HUM. 44.4 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.uo KG
FUF.L HC RATIO 1.8bO
RUN DURATION 4.83 MINUTES
SLOWER INLET PRESS, ssi.o MM. HSO
BLOWER DIF. PRESS. 424.2 MM HSO
SLOWER INLET TEMP. 37 OEG. C
DVNO REVOLUTIONS -0
PLOiER KEVOLUTIONS 5538
RLOwER CU. CM /REV. IblSO
BAG «ESI;LTS
HC SAMPLE METER PP.ADING/SCALE
MC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGRD METER WEAOING/SCALE
HC BACKGriO PPM
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO 6ACKGRD METER PEADING/SCALE
CO 8ACKGRD PPM
COS SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
COS SAMPLE PERCENT
COS BACKKRO METER WfcADING/SCALE
COS 6ACKUSD PERCENT
NOX SAKPLE METER READING/SCALE
Mix SAMPLE PPM
NOX HACKGPO Mfc"TF.« Wf.AD ING/SCALE
N 0 X ti A C K G ri 0 PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPH
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOn CONCF^TryAT ION PPM
SOS COCENTRATION
hC MASS (Gf'AMS)
CO r'ASS (.GKAMS)
CO? MASS (G«Al"S)
!JOX MASS (fcKAMS)
SOS MASS (GKAMS)
2. 1/ 3
Z\
8?.?/ 3
S239
73. O/ 3
1.33
3.q/ 3
.Ob
39. 0/ 2
38.0
.»/ 2
1.27
37. b
0.0
34 .b3
2117. 1?
1938. Ul
5.&1
n.uo
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO?. GriAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GrtAKS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
S02 C-RsMS/Mi ItRAMS/flLE)
OF FUEL »b.»3
CO Ci«A(«S/KG OF FUEL 277.3
COS bf'AMS/KG Of- FoEL 2587
L-PAMS/KG OF FlJtL 7.78
&SAMS/KG UF FUEL o.oo
18.7* ( S
11."1* (180.11)
in1** ( ibso)
3.1H ( 5.1)5)
n.ou ( o.on)
CO
COS
fJO>
302
401)
1.50
n.oo
CARbON BALANCE FutL ECtJNOMY L/100K" (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLOW= 83.USTO. CU. *ETRES
54.bl ( 4.3U
P-4
-------
TABLE F-4. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/11/78
MOOEL 1175 CHFv C-fall ECS
DRIVER KEN
"ET bULB TEMP iq c
SPEC. HUM. lu.l GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 5.31U KM
RUN OURATIUN
BLOKES INLfT PRESS.
BLOwER DIP. PRESS.
BLO*ER INLET TEMP.
DVNO DEVOLUTIONS
SLOWER REVOLUTIONS
CU.
BAR RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAhr>LE
HC 6ACKGRD
HC BACKGRD
CO SAMPLE
CO SAMPLE
CO BACKGHD
CO 8ACKGrlO
COS SAMPLE
COS
cos
COS riAC*GHO
NOX SAMPLE
NOX
/REV. IbShb
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
MtTER Rfc ADING/SC ALE
PPM
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
Mf.TER REAOING/SC ALE
PERCENT
METER READING/SCALE
PERCENT
METFR REAOING/SCALE
PPM
TIME -o HRS.
RUN-3 BAG-2 21C
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY RULB TEMP ?a c
6AKO. 7tS.<* HM hC.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
.»S MINUTES
."» MM. H20
.2 MM H20
82 OEG. C
-0
5081
TEST NO. 3
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVw o KG
KEL. HUM. ta.b PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.BbO
M.7/ 3
S7
2.2/ 3
ZS
55. fc/ 3
1382
.5/ 3
11
83. I/ g
•».*2
i.s/ a
.05
8S.3/ 3
PEAOING/SCALE
NOX 6ACKGHD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION ppM
Sl'5 COCENTRMION
HC MASS fGkAMS)
(GhAMS)
1.2
82
1238
H.38
CO
C02 MASS (GhAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
S02 MASS (GKAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/** (GRAMS/MILE)
CO? G*AMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
""- GRAMS/KM URAXS/MILE)
1.S2
55.3
3077
17.71
n.on
.51 (
17.63 (
5.71 (
O.riO (
0.0
3.17
5350.30
30.71
0.00
.15)
1517)
1.11)
n.on)
OF FUEL
co GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
co? «RA,MS/I\G OF FUEL
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
S02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
HC GRAMS/MlN
CO GKAMS/MIN
C02 GRAMS/MJN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
508 GRAMS/MIN
.71
?1.H
1111
b.BS
o.un
LARbON BALANCE FUEL ECL'NllMV L/IOUKC (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLU-ls fab.7STO. CU. METRES
( 5.31)
F-5
-------
TABLE F-5. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/11/78
MODEL H7S CHEV C-bU ECS
DRIVER KEN
*ET BULB TEMP is c
SPEC. HUM. g.t GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 1.850 KM
TIME -0 HRS.
RUN-3 BAG-3 21C
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 32 C
8ARO. 7H2.H MM HG.
TEST NO. 3
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV e
GVM 0 KG
REL. HUM. 28.5 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE FUEL HC RATIO l.SfaO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS
BLOWER DIP. PRESS
BLOwER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOwER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. 17050
•».7fa MINUTES
330.2 MM. H20
MM H20
381.0
bB
-0
DEG. C
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC SACKGiiD METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO 8ACKGSD METER READING/SCALE
CO 8ACKGKD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 6ACKGKD METER READING/SCALE
C02 6ACKGRO PERCENT
NO* SAMPLE METER REAUING/SC ALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX 6ACKGRO PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02 COCENTRATIGw PPM
HC MASS (GHAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
C02 MASS (GKAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
S02 MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRASS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GPAM5/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
S02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL l^.bl
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 5*. 11
C02 GrfAMS/KG OF FUEL 3038
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 1.77
S02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL U.OO
t.12
15.15
852
2.74
0.00
HC
CO
C02
NCX
S02
n.3/ 3
193
1.8/ 3
18
7S.b/ll
335
.1/11
3
b7.1/ 3
1.21
3. 1/ 3
.Ob
38. I/ 2
38.1
."/ 2
.9
177
322
1.15
38.1
0.0
7.b2
28.03
157b.13
5.07
0.00
( t>.b3)
( 24.38)
( 1371)
( t.Hl)
( O.UO)
GRAMS/MIN l.faO
GRAMS/MIN S.S
GRAMS/MIN 331
GRAMS/MIN 1.07
GRAMS/MIN o.oo
CARbON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMr L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLOWS 7Y.1STD. CU. METRES
37.15 ( fa.20)
F-6
-------
TABLE F-6.
EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER so
DATE 1/11/78
MODEL 1975 CHEV C-bP ECS
DRIVER KEN
»ET BULB TEMP is c
SPEC. HUM. 7.7 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 5.4Mb KM
TIME -o MRS.
RUN-3 BAG-1* 21C
TEST wT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 35 C
3ARO. 7f2.t MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 3
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV a
GVfc o KG
»EL. HUM. gl.7 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.SbO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS,
8LOKER DIF. PRESS,
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOwER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. Ib983
"t.fl MINUTES
381.0 MM. HSO
•m.8 MM H20
87 OEG. C
-0
5081
HC
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO
HAG KESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
6ACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
COS SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
COS SAMPLE PERCENT
cos BACKGRo METER READING/SCALE
COS BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SOS COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (Gr'AMS)
CO MASS (GSAMS)
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GrtAMS)
SOS MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
COa GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
SOS GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/KILE}
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUPL i.?s
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUtX 70.3
CO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3053
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 15.n?
502 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
(
33.U7 ( 35.51)
85.S/ 3
85
13.0/ S
13
bb.fa/ 3
1713
.S/ 3
5
81.1/ 3
4.33
l.b/ S
.Ob
333)5
.»/ 3
1.2
77
1SS5
3S3.7
0.0
3.IS
111.31
5171.81
35.57
0.00
.87)
158
t.73 (
0.00 (
15f3)
7.bl)
n.un)
HC GRAMS/MlN
CO GRAMS/MIN
COS GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
SOS GRAMS/MIN
.bS
Sb.b
115*
5.7U
0.00
CARB0^5 BALANCE FUEL ECONUMY L/lOOKM
TOTAL CVS FLO«
bS.SSTP. CU. METRES
F-7
-------
TABLE F-7. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/11/78
MODEL 1S7S CHEV C-bO ECS
DRIVER KEN
wET BULB TEMP 18 C
SPEC. hUM. fa.8 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE .853 KM
TIME -0 HRS.
RUN-3 BAG-5 21C
TEST *T. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 32 C
BARO. 7t2.H MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 3
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVM o KG
SEL. MUM. 22.3 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL hC RATIO 1.8bO
f.30 MINUTES
381.0 MM. H20
MM H20
*31.8
as
-0
DEG. C
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS
BLOhER DIP. PRESS
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOwER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. C« /REV. Ifa992
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METES READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO 6ACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
COS SAMPLE PERCENT
COg 6ACKGSD METER READING/SCALE
C02 6ACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX 6ACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
NOX 8ACK5KO PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
S02 MASS (GRAMS)
1.8/ 3
18
bO.f/11
2H2
1.1/11
3
SO.*/ 3
.87
H.O/ 3
.Ob
Hi.5/ 2
"1.5
.9/ 2
.9
22*
233
.82
•»0.7
tl.O
8.3t
17.52
0.00
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (Gf-AMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
S02 GRAMS/KM (GRArtS/MJLE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 25.92
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 5*.5
C02 GRAKS/KG OF FUEL 3002
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 13.81
S02 GHAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
9.78 ( 15.73)
20.55 ( 33.nb)
1132
5.21
0.00
1821)
8.38)
0.00)
hC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/MIN
C02 GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
S02 GRAMS/MIN
1.9H
1.03
0.00
CARSON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM CHILES/GALLON) 51.01 ( >».bl)
TOTAL CVS FLOws
b*.SSTD. CU. METRES
F-8
-------
TABLE F-8. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLF. BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 2U
DATE 1/11/78
MODEL 1S75 CHEV C-hO ECS
DRIVER KEN
»ET atJLB TEMP it C
SPEC. HUM. 5.1 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 3.37S KM
TJME -0 HRS.
RUN-3 BAG-fe 21C
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 30 C
BAKU. 7*8.* MM HG.
FUEL 738.S G/HTRE
TEST NO. 3
ENGINE s.7 LITREV a
GVW o KG
REL. HUM. 11.0 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.SbO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER DIP. PHESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOK.E8 REVOLUTIONS
*.fa8 MINUTES
330.2 MM. H20
MM H?0
381.0
b8
-0
523*
OEG. C
BLO*£R CU. CM /REV. 170*3
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGKO PPM
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
METEK READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
MC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO flACKGRD PPM
co? SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 8ACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRD PERCENT
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
NOX BACKGHD METER READING/SCALE
NO* 8ACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C03 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SO? COCENTRATION PPM
MASS (GRAMS)
MASS (GRAMS)
NOX SAMPLE
NOX SAMPLE
HC
CO
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
502 MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAM&/KM (G*AMS/MlLE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GPAMS/hlLE)
CO? GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GMAMS/MILE)
SOS GHAMS/KM (GWAKS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL *.bO
CO GR4MS/KG OF FUEL 3H.8
CO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3100
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUtL lb.37
SO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
11. */ 3
11*
l.b/ 3
Ib
8*.*/ll
3SS
1.1/11
3
48. P/ 2
£.18
l.S/ ?
.05
*a.s/ 3
188.7
.3/ 3
.9
101
377
2.1*
127.1
0.0
*.20
' 31.80
2831.13
0.00
i.e*
838 (
*.*2 (
O.CIO C
2.00)
15.1*)
13*8)
7.12)
0.110)
HC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/MIN
COS GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
S02 GRAMS/MIN
.11
h.S
b!3
3.2*
O.PII
CARdON BALANCE FUEL ECONUMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLO«= 72.*STD. CU. METRES
3b.Sb
b.*3)
F-9
-------
TABLE F-9. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/11/78
MODEL J<<75 CMfV C-bfl ECS
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP it C
SPEC. MUM. fa.* GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 1.650 *M
TIME -0 HRS.
RUN-3 BAG-7 21C
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 2* C
BARO. 7t2.t MM HG.
FUEL 738.a G/LITRE
TEST NO. 3
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV s
GV*. o KG
REL. HUM. 3*.3 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
t.78 MINUTES
3b3.3 MM. HSO
* MM HSO
35 DtG. C
-0
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET FHESS.
BLOWER DIP. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER cu. CM /REV.
BAG KESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
rIC SAMPLE PPM
MC BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO BACKGRD MtTER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
COS SAMPLE PERCENT
COS BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
COS 8ACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD MtT£R READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
riC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SOS COCENTRATICN PPM
HC MASS (GNaMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
SOS MASS (&HAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (G^AMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
COS GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
SOS GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
Sb.3/ 3
Sb3
l.S/ 3
11
-------
TABLE F-10. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAT, SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER ao
DATE a/n/78
MODEL 1975 CHEV C-bU f-CS
DRIVER KEN
*ET BULB TEMP lb C
SPEC. HUM. 7.0 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 5.390 KM
TIME -o HRS.
RUN-3 BAG-8 21C
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 2b C
BARO. 7f2.«t MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 3
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVW o KG
REL. HUM. 33.7 per
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.BbO
RUN DURATION i* 4
BLOWER INLET PRESS. 393.7
BLOwER DIP. PKESS. f3i.s
BLOWER INLET TtMP. 7b
DYMO REVOLUTIONS -Q
BLOKE* REVOLUTIONS SobO
BLOWER CU. CM /KEV. ib992
MINUTES
MM. H20
MM H20
OEG. C
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE fETER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
6ACKGWD PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
6ACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRO PPM
C08 SAMPLE MtTEH READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
CQ2 SACKGSD METER READING/SCALE
COa 8ACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKG*D METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGrtD PPM
CONCENTRATION PPM
CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SOa COCENTRAT10N PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
MASS (GKAMS)
HC
CO
CO
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GHAMS)
SOS MASS (GRAMS)
•KS/ 3
19
l.SX 3
15
55. I/ 3
13b7
.-*/ 3
q
sn.a/ a
».ai
1.8/ 2
.07
77. S/ 3
232.5
.•*/ 3
1.2
89
1235
».17
231.7
o.n
3.1*?
97.31
Rlbl.lb
o.no
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
COa GRAMS/KM
NCX GRAMS/KM
SOS GRAMS/KM
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
.fa1*
18.05
S58
t.95
0.00
C I.n3)
( 29.05)
( 15*1)
C 7.97)
( o.no)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
co GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
coa GRAMS/KG OF FUE'L
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
SOa GRAKS/KG OF FUEL
2.Db
57.9
3072
15.89
0.00
HC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/MIN
COS GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
S02 GRAMS/MIN
.77
21.7
1152
5.9fa
O.UO
CARHON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/1COKM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLOX= b7.7STO. CU. METRES
5.58)
F-ll
-------
TABLE F-ll. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/12/78
MODEL 1975 CHEV C-bU ECS
DRIVER KEN
I»ET BULB TEMP 13 C
SPEC. HUM. 5.7 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 1.83* KM
TIME -0 HRS.
RUN-* BAG-1 SIC
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 33 C
BARO. 7*1.3 MM HG.
TEST NO. 3
ENGINE s.? LITREV e
GVW o KG
REL. HUM. 32.b PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE FUEL HC RATIO l.BbO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER DIP. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
*.80 MINUTES
378.5 MM. H20
*1*.0 MM H20
31 DEG. C
-0
5*38
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. IbSP*
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRO PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO BACKGRD PPM
COS SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
COS BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SOS COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
SOS MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
802 GRAMS/KM CGRAMS/MILE)
bS.9/ 3
b29
1.8/ 3
IB
73.3/ 3
1930
.!/ 3
2
71.1/ 3
1.29
3.7/ 3
.Ob
-------
TABLE F-12. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/13/78
MODEL 1975 CHEV Obfl ECS
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP 13 C
SPEC. HUM. 5.5 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 5.3*5 KM
TIME -0 HRS.
RUN-* BAG-a aiC
TEST NT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 23 C
BARO. 71*1.2 MM HG.
FUEL 738.a G/LITRE
TEST NO. 3
ENGINE 5.7 LlTREV 8
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. 30.3 RCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.BbO
•».ai MINUTES
fOl.3 MM. H30
3 MM H30
83 DEG. C
-0
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER DIP. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /«£V.
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
COa SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
COa SAMPLE PERCENT
COa BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
COa BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGPD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S03 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
COa MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
305 MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
COa GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
SOa GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
.3? C
LH.bfl C
998 (
5.33 C
o.on (
bb.9/ a
b?
is. b/ a
11
H9.1/ 3
1198
.!/ 3
a
8b.9/ a
H.70
i.ax a
.07
91. S/ 3
.5
.*/ 3
i.a
55
1077
373.7
0.0
1.98
78. fl
5129.br>
37.95
o.on
.bO)
J3.b3)
IbflS)
o.no)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 1.15
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
COa GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL lb.?3
SOa GRAMS/KG OF FUEL O.flO
HC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/MIN
coa GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
sos GRAMS/MIN
18. b
o.on
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLOnir ba.bSTD. CU. METRES
5.39)
F-13
-------
TABLE F-13. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/12/78
MODEL 1S7S CHEV C-bO ECS
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP if C
SPEC. HUM. S.q GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 1.850 KM
TIME -0 HRS.
RUN-* BAG-3 21C
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 2» C
BARO. 741.2 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 3
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 9
GVW n KG
REL. HUM. 31.2 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.BbO
RUN DURATION H.7b MINUTES
BLOHER INLET PRESS. 320.0 MM. H20
BLOWER DIP. PRESS. 355.b MM H20
BLOWER INLET TEMP. 72 DEC. C
DYNO REVOLUTIONS -0
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS St29
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. 17070
METfcR READING/SCALE
PPM
8ACKQRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO BACKGRD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRD PERCENT
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
MASS (GRAMS)
NOX SAMPLE
NOX SAMPLE
CO
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
302 MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
S02 GRAMS/KM
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/HILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
lb.7/ 3
1.7/ 3
17
3*1
.3/11
1
b7.9/ 3
1.22
3.1*/ 3
.OS
.8
328
1.17
to. 5
0.0
b.tq
28. »0
1597. 3*
n.no
3.51 ( S.bS)
15.35 (
Sb3 (
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 12.38
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL S-».l
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 30*5
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 9.*S
S02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
0.00 ( 0.00)
HC GRAMS/MIN l.Sfa
CO GRAMS/MIN b.O
C02 GRAMS/MIN 335
NOX GRAMS/MIN l.Of
S02 GRAMS/MIN 0.00
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLO«= 7*.3STD. CU. METRES
38.35 ( b.13)
F-14
-------
TABLE F-14. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1X12/78
MODEL 1975 CHEV C-bO ECS
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP i* c
SPEC. HUM. 5.b GRAM/KG
DISTANCE S.tOb KM
TIME -0 HRS.
RUN-t BAG-t 21C
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRV BULB TEMP SH c
BARO. 7fl.a MM HG.
738.2 G/LITRE
MINUTES
MM. H20
MM H20
DEG. C
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO
RUN DURATION ^ H
BLOWER INLET PRESS. 393.'?
BLOWER DIF. PRESS. H2b.7
BLOWER INLET TEMP. 87
DYNO REVOLUTIONS ,0
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS snqn
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. ib<,87
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM 'o«.*i.t
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM '^ALt
SAMPLE METFR READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM 'auALt
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
COS SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
COS BACKGRD PERCENT 'al-»l-t
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM '3LALE
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRO PPM ""-ALE
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SOS COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
SOS MASS (GRAMS)
TEST NO. 3
ENGINE S.7 LITREV 8
GVW n KG
REL. HUM. 3R.o PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.BbO
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
COS GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
SOS GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
cos GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
SO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
92.*/ s
93
Ib.f/ S
Ib
b7.8/ 3
1751
.a/ 3
5
80.t/ S
*.ss
1.8X 2
.07
fa8.9/ 3
SOb.7
.5/ 3
1.5
81
iseq
H.18
SOS.7
0.0
3.09
131.79
5038.81
SS.18
n.oo
.57 {
52.53 (
93S (
*.10 (
o.oo (
.93)
3b.3S)
isno)
b.bO)
0.00)
1.87
73.7
30*8
13. *2
0.00
HC GRAMS/MIN ,b9
CO GRAMS/MIN
cos GRAMS/MIN
NOX G9AMS/MIN
SOS GRAMS/MIN o.Ofl
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLOWr b5.9STD. CU. METRES
S.b9)
P-15
-------
TABLE F-15. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAR SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER in
DATE 1/12/78
MODEL 1^75 ChEV C-b(l ECS
DRIVER KEN
WET 8ULB TEMP IH C
SPEC. HUM. b.O GRAM/KG
DISTANCE .8b=* KM
TIME -0 HRS.
RUN-* 6AG-5 21C
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 25 C
BARO. 7
-------
TABLE F-16. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER SO
DATE 1/12/78
HODEL 1175 CHEV C-bfl ECS
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP IS C
SPEC. HUH. b.* GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 3.371 KM
TIME -0 MRS.
RUN-f BAG-b 21C
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 2fa C
BARO. 7*0.1 MM HG.
FUEL 739.? G/LITRE
TEST NO. 3
ENGINE S.7 LlTREV 8
cww n KG
REL. HUM. 30.7 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.BbQ
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER DIP. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
SLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /REV.
H.b7 MINUTES
388.b MM. H20
MM H20
b5 DEC. C
-0
170ia
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRD METEK READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
SAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO BACKGRO PPM
COS SAMPLE METES READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGSD PERCENT
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGCO PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
302 COCENTRATION PPM
MASS (GRAMS)
MASS (GRAMS)
NOX SAMPLE
NOX SAMPLE
MC
CO
12. 7/ 3
127
1.7/ 3
17
90.8/11
'»s^
,9/U
3
fb.R/ Z
Z. 11
l.b/ Z
.Ob
37. B/ 3
113. »
113
112. b
0.0
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRA*S)
SOS *ASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE}
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
COa GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAKS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
S02 GRAKS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
13.77
0.00
10.75 ( 17.?q)
81b ( 1312)
1.0S C b.Sb)
o.oo C n.on)
HC
CO
GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
C02 GfUMS/XG OF FUEL
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
SOS GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
5.32 HC GRAMS/MIN 1.02
HO.7 co GRAMS/MIN 7.9
308«t coe GRAMS/MIN 510
15."M NOX GRAMS/MIN 2.^5
n.oo S02 GRAMS/MIN o.no
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLOVis 73.1STD. CLJ. METRES
35.72 ( b.5
-------
TABLE F-17. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/12/78
MODEL 1*7$ CHEv C-bi> ECS
DRIVER KEN
"ET 8ULB TEMP 15 C
SPEC. HUM. b.t GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 1.83«f KM
TIME -0 HRS.
RUN-t BAG-7 SIC
TEST inT. 7711 KG.
DRY BUL8 TEMP 2b C
SARD. 7*0.1 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 3
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV s
GVW o KG
REL. HUM. 30.7 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO l
RUN DURATION 1.8* MINUTES
BLOWER INLET PRESS. 370.8 MM. H20
BLOWER DIF. PRESS, til.5 MM H20
BLOWER INLET TEMP. 33 Q£G. C
DYNO REVOLUTIONS -0
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS S5U8
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. lbSb2
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
hC BACKGRD PPM
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAKPLE PPM
CO flACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER kEADING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02 CCCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (Gf-AMS)
CO MASS (&KAMS)
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
S02 MASS (GKAhS)
32. H/ 3
I.I/ 3
11
85. fa/11
f OS
1.3/11
t
b3.b/ 3
1.13
3. I/ 3
.Ob
H5.5/ 2
«*5.5
.b/ 2
.b
307
312
1.08
fS.O
0.0
1H.75
38.01
Ib50.21
0.00
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
S02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 5h.b2
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL b8.7
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 2177
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 11.32
S02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL o.oo
8.0» ( 12. It)
20.77 ( 33.41)
100 ( 14H8)
3.f2 ( 5.51)
0.00 ( 0.00)
HC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/MIN
coa GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
S02 GRAMS/MIN
3.05
7.1
s«u
1.30
0.00
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/10UKM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLO*«= 83.SSTD. CU. METRES
"*0.8B ( 5.75)
F-18
-------
TABLE F-18. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER ?0
DATE 1/1B/78
MODEL 1^75 CHEV C-bO ECS
DRIVER KEN
WET 9ULB TEMP 15 C
SPEC. HUM. fc.i GRAM/KG
DISTANCE S.fOb KM
TIME -0 HRS.
RUN-t BAG-8 21C
TEST HT. 7711 KG.
DRY 8ULB TEMP 2b C
8ARC. 7HG.<* MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 3
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVW a KG
REL. MUM. 28.fc PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO i.sbo
RUN DURATION
SLOWER INLET PHESS.
BLOWER DIF. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /REV.
f.*7 MINUTES
398.8 MM. H20
•HI.8 MM H20
7b OEG. C
-0
SOSb
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
HC BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO BACKGHD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
cos SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
COS 8ACKGRO PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRO PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
SOS MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE) .1
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
COS GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
SOS GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
10.2/ 3
102
1.5/ 3
15
S3.7/ 3
1327
.2/ 3
S
77.S/ 2
1.02
1.7/ 2
.Ob
70.I/ 3
eiQ.3
.•*/ 3
l.S
120S
3.«B
SOS. 5
0.0
3.5b
23.*8
0.00
HC GRAMS/KG IjF FUEL 3.23
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 59.3
COS GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 30b«l
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUF.L It.b?
SOS GRAMS/KG OF FUEL O.HO
.bh ( I.Ob)
17.55 ( 28.2*}
SOB ( l
-------
TABLE F-19. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/13/78
MODEL 1175 CHEV C-faO ECS
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP 13 C
SPEC. HUM. fa.2 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 1.83* KM
TIME -0 HRS. TEST NO.
RUN-3 BAG-1 21H ENGINE S,
TEST WT. 7711 KG. GVW
DRY BULB TEMP 22 C REL.
BARO. 745.0 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
7 LITREV 8
0 KG
HUM.
37.7 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
SLOWER DIP. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DVNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
4.80 MINUTES
370.8 MM. H20
MM H20
403.1
3b
-0
5421
OEG. C
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. IbllS
RAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
302 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
S02 MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
S02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
32. 3/ 3
323
1.8/ 3
18
12.4/11
4bb
.8/11
2
b4.B/ 3
l.lb
3.7/ 3
.Ob
42. 2/ 3
42.2
.8
307
448
1.11
41.5
D.O
14.51
42.80
Ibb3.13
S.bb
n.nn
HC GRAMS/KG QF FUEL 25.88
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 7fa.3
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 21b7
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 10.10
SO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL' 0.00
7.SI ( 12.73)
23.33 ( 37.54)
107 ( IfbO)
3.OS ( 4.17)
o.on ( n.oo)
HC GRAMS/MlN
CO GRAMS/MIN
C02 GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
S02 GRAMS/MIN
3.02
8.1
347
1.18
o.on
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
fl.35 ( S.bS)
TOTAL CVS
82.1STO. cu. METRES
F-20
-------
TABLE F-20. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER SO
DATE 1/13/78
MODEL 1^75 CHEV C-bO ECS
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP if C
SPEC. HUM. b.3 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE S.35b KM
TIME -0 HRS.
RUN-3 BAG-a aiH
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 23 C
8ARO. 7*5.0 MM HG.
FUEL 738.3 G/LITRE
TEST NO. f
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVW o KG
REL. HUM. 35.<* PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER DIP. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMH.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
f.SS MINUTES
fib.b MM. nao
, MM H20
aa DEC. c
-D
510b
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. lb<»72
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METF.R READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRO PPM
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
METER READING/SCALE
PERCENT
C02 BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
COS BACKGRD PERCENT
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
NOX BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPH
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COB CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SOS COCENTRATION PPM
MASS (GRAMS)
MASS (GRAMS)
HC
HC
CO SAMPLE
CO SAMPLE
CO
CO
COS SAMPLE
C02 SAMPLE
NOX SAMPLE
NOX SAMPLE
HC
CO
1U.3/ 3
103
1.7/ 3
17
70. 9/ 3
1851
.!/ 3
2
si. f/ a
f.30
l.b/ 2
.Ob
83. V 3
251.7
.f/ 3
1.2
S2
Ib75
COa MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
S08 MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
co GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KH (GRAMS/MILE)
S02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 2.Ob
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 7b.l
CO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 30f3
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL lb.35
SOB GRAMS/KG OF FUEL Q.OQ
o.o
3.55
131.05
sa38.?a
as. if
o.oo
,b7 ( 1.07)
sat (
5. as (
Q.OO (
1583)
8.50)
0.00)
HC GRAMS/WIN
CO GRAMS/MIN
COg GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
303 GRAMS/MIN
t.aa
o.oo
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLOWS b7.2STD. CU. METRES
S.38)
F-21
-------
TABLE F-21. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/13/78
MODEL 1975 CHEV C-bQ ECS
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP is C
SPEC. HUM. b.3 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE ,8b9 KM
TIME -ti HRS.
RUN-3 BAG-3 21H
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRV BULB TEMP Sb C
8ARO. 7tt.7 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. t
ENGINE s.f LITREV 9
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. 30.b PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
RUN DURATION
SLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER DIP. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
t.21 MINUTES
320.0 MM. H20
MM H20
DEC. C
353.1
73
-n
t?89
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. 17071
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
302 MASS (GRAMS)
31.f/ 3
31t
2.1/ 3
ai
St.3/11
398
.8/11
2
t9.8/ 3
.Bb
3.9/ 3
.Ub
37.it/ 2
37.H
l.n/ 2
1.0
29t
38b
.81
3b.S
0.0
11.13
29.t3
9b9.lt
3.99
n.on
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
CO? GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
502 GRAMS/KM
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
12.81
33.87
1115
t.bO
n.oo
( 20.bl)
( St.50)
( 1795)
( 7.tO)
( o.no)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 33.57
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 88 8
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 2923
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 12.05
S02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
HC
co GRAMS/MIN
C02 GRAMS/viN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
S02 GRAMS/"IN
2.bt
7.0
230
.95
0.00
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON) 51.bl ( t.Sb)
TOTAL CVS FLOK= bS.bSTD. CU. METRES
F-22
-------
TABLE F-22. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/13/78
MODEL 1175 CHEV C-faO ECS
DRIVER KEN*
WET BULB TEMP ib C
SPEC. HUM. 5.8 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 3.371 KM
TIME -0 HRS.
RUN-3 BAG-H 21H
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP SB C
BARO. 7ff.7 MM HG.
FUEL 738.? G/LITRE
TEST NO. «f
ENGINE 5.7 LlTREV 6
GVW n KG
REL. HUM. 23.7 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.BbO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS,
BLOWER OIF. PRESS,
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
t.b7 MINUTES
370.8 MM. HgO
HOb.t MM H20
b5 DEG. C
-0
5287
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. 17058
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMBLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
COS SAMPLE PERCENT
COS BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SOS COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
S02 MASS
13. 3/ 3
133
2.0/ 3
20
23. q/ 3
553
.!/ 3
2
HS.2/ 2
2.24
1.3/ 2
.05
31. 8/ 3
HS.f
lib
523
2.20
118.7
0.0
•».q«*
HH.79
?Sbl.08
14. 3b
o.on
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO! GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
S02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
302 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
s.
3DHO
n.oo
l.*b ( 2.35)
13.2b ( 21.33)
B7b ( 1410)
*.2S ( b.84)
o.oo ( o.no)
HC GRAMS/MIN
co GRAMS/MIN
CO? GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
SOS GRAMS/MIN
I.Ob
l.fa
h35
3.OS
0.00
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLOWr 73.bSTO. CU. METRES
38.
( b.ll)
F-23
-------
TABLE F-23. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/13/78
MODEL 1975 CHEV C-bO ECS
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP ifa C
SPEC. HUM. b.» GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 1.850 KM
TIME -0 MRS.
RUN-* BAG-l 21H
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 28 C
BARO. 7*».7 MM HG.
FUEL 738.8 G/LITRE
TEST NO. *
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV e
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. 2b.3 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
RUN DURATION
-------
TABLE F-24. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 30
DATE 1/13/78
MODEL 1S75 CHEV C-bO ECS
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP ib C
SPEC. HUM. b.O GRAM/KG
DISTANCE S.3HO KM
TIME -o HRS.
RUN-H BAG-2 JlH
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB TEMP 28 C
BARO. 7ft.7 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. »
ENGINE S.7 LITREV 8
GVW a KG
REL. HUM. gs.5 PCT
MEASURED FUEL Q.QO KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
t.%1 MINUTES
tOl.3 MM. H20
_3 MM HHO
7b DEG. C
-0
S077
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER OIF. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER cu. CM /REV,
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
co SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO BACKGRD METEfi READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
cos SAMPLE MFTER READING/SCALE
CO? SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX SACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPh
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
302 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
308 MASS (GRAMS)
11. 0/ 3
110
a. i/ 3
21
bb.2/ 3
1700
.!/ 3
2
en. i/ a
*.2b
l.b/ Z
.Ob
74. 3/ 3
222.9
.f/ 3
i.a
*!*>
IStb
» .22
222.1
0.0
3.7b
122. ft
25.03
0.00
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
co GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
COS GRAMS/K»1 (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
302 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 2.18
co GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 71.0
coa CRAMS/KG OF FUEL sosi
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL in.52
80S GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
.70 ( 1.18)
22.71 ( 3fa.5S)
17b ( 1570)
t.bf £ 7.»7)
o.nn { o.no)
HC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/MIN
C02 GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
S08 GRAMS/MIN
27.3
1172
5.SB
O.QU
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLOWS
bB.lSTO. CU. METRES
F-25
-------
TABLE F-25. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 30
DATE 1/13/78
MODEL 1975 CHEV C-bO ECS
DRIVER K£N
WET aULS TEMP 15 C
SPEC. MOM. s.b GRAM/KG
DISTANCE .8b9 KM
-0 HRS.
RUN-H BAG-3 HH
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULfl TEMP 37 C
BAKU. ?ft.S MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO.
-------
TABLE F-26. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE 1/13/78
MODEL H7S CHEV C-hM ECS
DRIVER KEN
WET BULB TEMP 1* C
SPEC. HUM. 5.0 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE 3.379 KM
TIME -0 MRS.
RUN-* BAG->* Slh
TEST WT. 7711 KG.
DRY BULB-TEMP 27 C
BARO. 7'»f.S MM HG.
FUEL 738.3 G/LITRE
TEST NO. t
ENGINE s.? LITREV s
GVN 0 KG
REL. HUM. 22.0 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.SbQ
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER DIP. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /REV. 1703h
t.bB MINUTES
3b0.7 MM. H20
3Sb.2 MM H20
bS DEC. C
-0
521H
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
HC BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
COS SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 8ACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO? BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX SACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NDX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
CO? CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
COB MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
SOS MASS (GRAMS)
Itl
1.7/ 3
17
27. I/ 3
b30
.!/ 3
2
»8.7/ 2
2.21
l.b/ 2
.Ob
38. O/ 3
1U.O
127
517
2.U
113.3
0.0
S.«K)
51. 2b
2118. It
13. tS
0.00
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
C02 GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
S02 GRAMS/KM
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
(GRAMS/MILE)
l.bO ( 2.57)
15.17 ( 2*.HI)
1390)
b.»0)
3."19 (
0.00 (
o.no)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL S.b7
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 53.1
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3llb7
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 1H.I3
S02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL O.no
HC GHAMS/MIN
co GRAMS/MIN
C02 GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
302 GRAMS/MIN
1.15
10.S
fa23
2.87
o.no
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
38.
( b.19)
TOTAL CVS FLO*=
73.BSTD. cu. METRES
F-27
-------
UNIT NO. an
VEHICLE MODEL
TEST NO.
CHEV C-btl ECS
TABLE F —27. VEHICLE EMISSION RESULTS
1178 LIGHT OUTY EMISSIONS TEST
ACTUAL DISTANCES USED IN CALCULATIONS
7-1 DATE 1/12/7B MFGR. CODE
ENGINE s.7* LITRE s CURB WT.
-o
o KG
YR.
GVH
0 KG
to
00
BAROMETER 7H1.73 MM OF HG.
DRY BULB TEMP. 23.1 DEG. C
REL. HUMIDITY 28 PCT.
EXHAUST EMISSIONS
BLOWER DIF. PRESS., G2, I3b.1 MM. H?0
HAG RESULTS
BAG NO.
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGRD METER REAUING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
CO SAMPLE HETER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRO PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
COe SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGHO METER READING/SCALE
CUe BACKGRO PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGKD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
SOS SAMPLE METFR READING/SCALE
SOS SAMPLE PPM
SOS BACKGKD METER READING/SCALE
SO? BACKGRO PPM
HC CONCENTRA1ION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
302 CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
COS MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
302 MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/10DKM (MPG)
CVS FLO* STD. CU. METRES (SCF)
CALCULATED DISTANCE KM(MlLES)
MET BULB TEMP 13.3 DEG. C
ABS. HUMIDITY 5.2 GRAMS/KG
COMMENTS
BLOWER INLET PRESS., 61 103.1 MM. H20
BLOWER INLET TEMP. bS DEG. C
1
1510
sn.b/ 3
SOb
1.7/ 3
17
bB.H/ 3
1783
.!/ 3
2
51. 1/ 2
2.57
1.7/ 2
.Ob
51. 1/ 3
15*. 2
.I/ 3
1.2
-o.n/-o
-n.n
-0.0/-U
-u.o
113
Ib77
2.S2
153. 2
0.0
37.52
257.92
b087.18
32.71
II. OU
b.7ll ( 1U.7H)
Ib.llb ( 74.12)
1087.1 (1701.8)
5.Rb ( 1.12}
Sfl.«»0 ( *.b7)
132.1 (1bb1.7)
S.blJ ( 3.18)
i
Ib332
2b.1/ 3
2b1
1.8/ 3
18
11.1/11
HS7
1.0/11
3
87. b/ 3
I.b3
3.7/ 3
.Ob
82. I/ 2
82.1
.I/ 2
.1
-0.0/-0
-u.u
-n.n/-o
-0.0
253
H3b
1.58
82.1
0.0
33.03
llH.Bb
bS3S.1H
30.08
11.0(1
5.30 ( 8.5H)
18. »5 ( 21. b8)
lOtH.b (IbBB.H)
».83 ( 7.77)
4b.7b ( 5.03)
22h.l (718b.l)
b.23 ( 3.87)
3
ISlb
33. I/ 3
331
1.2/ 3
12
00. S/ 3
Sb?
.!/ 3
2
S3.8/ 2
8.50
1.8X 2
.O1*
57. 3/ 3
171.1
.3/ 3
.1
-0.0/-0
-0.0
-0.0/-0
-0.0
321
110
2. 47
171.2
0.0
25.02
131. fat
S1H8.B1
3b.S3
0.00
».»3 ( 7.
20.73 ( 31.
1053.3 (IblH
b.»7 ( 10.
17.22 ( H.
131.7 CObS2
S.bS ( 3.
13)
78)
.8)
11)
18)
.3)
51)
WEIGHTED FUEL CONSUMPTION LITHES/HJOKM
WEIGHTED MASS HC GRAMS/KM (GKAMS/MlLE)
WEIGHTED MASS CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
WEIGHTED MASS CO2 GRAMS/KM (URAMS/MILE)
WEIGHTED MASS NOX GDAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
TOTAL CVS FLOW = 1SI1.0 STD. CU. METRtS
17.b2 ( ».11)
5.35 ( 8.bl)
25.77 ( 11.1b)
11)58.3 (1702.8)
5.18 ( 8.82)
-------
to
UNIT NO. ?0 TEST NO.
VEHICLE MODEL CHEV C-bll ECS
BAROMETER 7*b.?5 MM OF HG.
DRY BULB TEMP. ?s.* DEG. C
REL. HUMIDITY 20 PCT.
EXHAUST EMISSIONS
F-28. VEHICLE EMISSION RtSULTS
1978 LIGHT DUTY EMISSIONS TEST
ACTUAL DISTANCES USED IN CALCULATIONS
DATE 1/13/78 MFGR. CODE -0
ENGINE 5.7* LITRE CURB NT. 0 KG
HET BULB TEMP IS.b DEG. C
ABS. HUMIDITY 5.3 GRAMS/KG
COMMENTS
YR.
GVM
197S
U KG
BLOWER OIF. PRESS., Kg, lllb.» MM. H?0
BAG RESULTS
BAG NO.
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRO PPM
CO SAMPLE METER REAOING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO BACKGRO METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
COS SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO? SAMPLE PERCENT
CO? BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO? BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER REAOING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRO PPM
SO? SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SO? SAMPLE PPM
SO? BACKGHD METER REAOING/SCALE
SO? BACKGHD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
TO CONCENTRATION PPM
CO? CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SO? CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CO? MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
SO? MASS GRAMS
HC GKAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO? GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILF.)
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/10UKM (HPG)
CVS FLOa STO. CO. METRES (SCF)
CALCULATED DISTANCE KM(MILKS)
1
9539
»0.*/ 3
HO*
1.7/ 3
17
79. I/ 3
.b/ 3
If
57. 8/ Z
?.7*
l.b/ ?
.Ob
50. b/ 3
151.8
.3/3
.9
-0.0/-0
-0.0
-o.n/-o
-o.n
3m
199?
?.b9
151.1
n.u
?9.9S
308.?*
bSSS.lb
3?. 58
n.oo
5.30 ( R.53)
St. 58 ( 87.8?)
?
Ifa337
29. 5/ 3
?95
1.9/ 3
19
Bb.3/11
?!s/ll
7
Bb.*/ 3
l.bO
3.S/ 3
.05
7b.9/ I
7b.9
,9/ 2
.9
-0.0/-0
-0.0
-0.0/-0
-0.0
?78
393
1.5b
7b.l
11.0
3b.5b
10* .1*
b*88.91
?8. 1?
0.00
5.81 (
Ib.SS ( 2
llbll.7 (18b?.h)
5.77 ( 9.SB)
53.9? ( *.3b)
13?.9 (*b93.b)
S.bS ( 3.51)
BLOWER INLET PRESS., Gl 373.H MM. H?0
BLOWER INLET TEMP. bS DEC. C
3
9591
33.b/ 3
33b
2.0/ 3
?0
3?.*/ 3
7bl
.!/ 3
52.O/ 2
I.*/ ?
.05
bO.O/ 3
180.0
.3/3
.9
-0.0/-0
-0.0
-0.0/-0
-0.0
3?0
719
?.3b
179.3
0.0
11KB9
S7b5.92
38.88
0.00
*.3* ( b.98)
19.70 ( 31.70)
1015.? (Ib33.*)
b.85 ( 11.01)
*S.?* ( 5.20)
133.7 (1721.3)
S.bB ( 3.53)
9.35)
5 ( ?
1031.1 (Ib59.b)
*.*7 ( 7.19)
*5.9? ( 5.1?)
??7.8 (80*3.?)
b.?9 ( 3.91)
WEIGHTED FUEL CONSUMPTION LITRES/ldOKM (MPG)
WEIGHTED MASS HC GRAHS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
WEIGHTED MASS CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
WEIGHTED MASS CO? GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
WEIGHTED MASS NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
TOTAL CVS FLOW a »9*.» STD. LU. METRES
»7.3b ( H.97)
5.31 ( fl.SH)
?5.|!» ( »O.H5)
1053.3 (lb9H.8)
5.38 ( S.bS)
-------
APPENDIX G
CHASSIS DYNAMOMETER TRANSIENT TEST RESULTS
EMISSIONS CONTROL SYSTEM WITH CATALYST
TA G~3 ^ H
TABLES G-3 through G-10 CAPE-21C - Run 1
TABLES G-ll through G-18 CAPE-21C - Run 2
TABLES G-19 through G-22 CAPE-21H - R™ 1
TABLES G-23 through G-26 CAPE-21H - Run 2
TABLES G-27 through G-28 Light-Duty FTP
-------
TABLE G-l. CHASSIS DYNAMOMETER TRANSIENT EVALUATIONS WITH THE EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM WITH CATALYST
Emissions , g/km
Test
CAPE- 2 1C
CAPE-21H
LD-FTP
Cycle
LA-NF
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
LA-NF
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
505C
867S
505H
TOTAL
Bag
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
HC
16.97
0.24
0.25
0.20
1.57
0.17
0.82
0.22
1.46
0.11
1.67
0.22
3.91
1.51
1.41
1.97
CO
102.44
22.09
6.83
30.55
8.08
8.49
5.14
26.47
6.30
22.93
6.21
9.16
45.12
9.36
13.44
17.77
NOX
2.17
3.52
2.17
2.97
4.50
3.30
2.31
3.32
2.54
3.00
4.25
3.39
4.10
3.56
5.37
4.16
C02
1104
1015
939
963
1240
899
944
952
924
1004
1210
884
1088
1062
1037
1061
Fuel
VlOOkm
56.30
44.85
40.58
43.17
53.68
38.96
40.73
42.45
40.05
44.41
52.30
38.37
50.00
46.17
45.36
46.74
Emissions , g/km
HC
14.82
0.22
0.37
0.30
1.28
0.19
1.02
0.22
2.08
0.29
1.46
0.17
3.21
1.88
1.54
2.06
CO
93.19
34.39
7.61
36.73
9.18
9.96
5.14
32.78
5.71
21.69
7.28
9.19
37.35
7.64
18.70
16.66
NOX
1.96
3.48
2.05
3.06
4.30
3.25
2.38
3.37
2.67
3.74
4.91
3.28
4.96
3.82
4.88
4.34
C02
1081
1017
912
963
1238
898
940
991
952
973
1243
854
1105
1047
1057
1062
Fuel
&/100km
54.41
45.76
39.47
43.59
53.61
39.00
40.61
44.52
41.28
43.04
53.73
37.09
50.09
45.46
46.58
46.70
-------
TABLE G-2. CHASSIS DYNAMOMETER TRANSIENT EVALUATIONS WITH THE EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM WITH CATALYST
O
CJ
Test
CAPE- 2 1C
CAPE-21H
LD-FTP
Cycle
LA-NF
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
LA-NF
LA-F
LA-NF
LA-F
NY-NF
NY-F
505C
867S
505H
TOTAL
Bag
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
HC
6.56
0.29
0.10
0.24
0.32
0.12
0.32
0.27
0.58
0.13
0.34
0.16
2.62
0.65
0.95
1.03
Emissions, g/min
CO
39.6
26.4
2.7
36.7
1.7
6.1
2.0
31.9
2.5
27.8
1.3
6.7
30.2
4.06
9.02
9.26
NOX
0.84
4.21
0.85
3.57
0.92
2.38
0.90
4.00
1.00
3.63
0.87
2.47
2.75
1.55
3.60
2.17
C02
427
1214
369
1157
254
650
368
1148
365
1217
248
644
728
461
696
553
Fuel
g/min
160.9
396.5
117.9
383.5
81.3
208.3
117.4
378.3
117.0
397.8
79.2
206.7
247.0
147.9
224.7
179.8
Emissions, q/min
HC
5.77
0.27
0.14
0.36
0.27
0.14
0.40
0.27
0.81
0.35
0.30
0.13
2.13
0.82
1.03
1.07
CO
36.2
41.3
3.0
44.3
1.9
7.3
2.0
39.7
2.2
25.8
1.5
6.6
24.8
3.33
12.54
8.68
NOv
"V-TC
0.76
4.18
0.81
3.69
0.89
2.38
0.93
4.08
1.04
4.44
0.99
2.38
3.29
1.67
3.27
2.26
COo
v-'"'^
421
1223
361
1161
256
657
369
1199
372
1158
251
618
734
456
709
553
Fuel
cj /mi f\
y/ iiLLii
156.6
406.6
115.6
388.7
82.0
211.1
117.8
398.2
119.3
378.6
80.2
198.4
245.6
146.2
230.6
179.5
-------
TABLE G-3. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE I/ S/78 TIME -n HRS.
MODEL H7-5 CHEV C-bu ECSwCPUN-1 8AG-1 2lC
DRIVER KEN TEST *T. 7711 KG.
WET BULB TEMP 11 C DRY BULB T£MP S3 C
SPEC HUM. g.q GRAM/KG BARS. 7HS.R MM HG.
DISTANCE 1.850 KM FUEL 738.3 G/LITRE
TtST NO. 5
ENGINE 5.7 LITKEV 8
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUh. lb.5 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL MC RATIO l.BbCI
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER DIP. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOwER REVOLUTIONS
H.7B MINUTES
383.5 MM. H20
H" H20
2t OEG. C
-0
Sf 03
BLO*ER CU. CH /REV. Ib7-»b
PAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGK0 METER READ IMG/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
CO SAMPLE METES READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRO PPM
C02 SAK.PLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAC.PLE PERCENT
COS BACKGRO METEH READING/SCALE
C03 flACKGRO PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE HCTER REAJING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX 6ACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX 8ACKGND PPM
HC COKCENTKAtION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02 COCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS (G*AMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (G«AMS)
S02 MASS (6KAMS)
bS.f/ 3
bSH
I.?./ 3
1?
75. 1/ 3
1.3b
3.t/ 3
.05
31. b/ 2
31. b
.•»/ 2
1.3?
31.2
n.o
31.^0
18S.5H
S0t3. 22
».oe
u.no
hC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/HILE)
CO? GRAMS/RM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
SOS GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
lh.97 C 27.31)
11)2. »H Clb^.8?)
110H ( 1777)
2.17 ( 3.1*")
ii. no ( o.nn)
GRAMS/KG OK FUEL
GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
OF FUEL
HC
CO
COP
NOX GRAMS/!
-------
TABLE G-4. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE RAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER SO
DATE I/ S/78 TIME -I) HftS.
MODEL 1175 CHEV C-bli ECSWCRUN-l 8AG-5 2JC
DRIVER KEN TEST hT. 7711 KG.
NET BULB TEMP u c DRY dUL3 T£MP 3* C
SPEC. HUM. 5.9 GRAM/l\G BARO. 72
NOX GrtAMS/KS OF FUEL 10. b3
SOS (JRAlSMG OF FUEL O.flO
.2* (
3.US (
101S (
3.55 (
n.ito C
35.5*)
S.bb)
n.nn)
CC
GRAMS/MIN
GRAKS/MIN
CO? G«AM«/MIN
NOK GRAHS/MIN
SO?
,2S
?b.»
0.00
CAR30N 6ALANCE FUEL ECHNOMY L/100K" (MILES/GALLON)
•»H.85 ( 5.2-O
TOTAL CVS
. cu. METRES
G-5
-------
TABLE G-5. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE MUMBER 20
OATE I/ 1/?8 TIME -tl H«S.
MODEL 1^75 CHEV c-bn ECSWCHUN-I BAG-S sic
DRIVER K£N TEST *T. 7711 KG.
HET 6UL6 TEMP 11 C DRY SULu TEMP 23 C
SPEC. HUM. 2.b GRAM/KG bARO. 7f1.fa MM HG.
DISTANCE l.Sbb KM FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 5
ENGINE s.? LITHEV a
GVH o KG
REL. HUM. 1H.7 PCT
MEASURED FUEL U.OD KG
FUEL HC RATIU l.BbO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER DIP. psess.
BLONER INI.ET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTHU4S
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /REV.
«f.7b MINUTES
327.7
3faD.7
b5
-0
MM. HSO
MM HSO
OEG. C
17U72
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BAC*GRO MC:TF.« READING/SCALE
HC SACKGRO PPM
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
co SAMPLE PPM
CO BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
COS SAMPLE MtlTER READING/SCALE
COS SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGWU ^ETER READING/SCALE
CO? BACKGhfL) PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NQX SAMPLE PPM
NOX flACKGRD METER RF.ADIK6/5CALP
NOX 8ACKGRO PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
302 COCENTRATIOU PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
COS MASS (GRAUS)
NUX MASS (C.HAM3)
502 MASS
20. 7/ 2
31
11. 3/ 2
11
bfa.1/12
.7/12
1
72. I/ 3
1.31
3.b/ 3
.Ub
35. S/ 2
35. «*
.7/ 2
.7
11
l.2b
35.3
0.0
.
-------
TABLE G-6. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FBOM SINGLE SAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER SO
DATE I/ -4/78 TIME -o MRS.
MOTEL J.S75 CHEv C-*u eCS:lCWUN- 1 SAG-f aiC
DRIVER KEN TEST «T. 7711 KG.
WET f»ULs TEMP 11 C DRY HULH TE«P at C
SPF.C. HUM. a. 7 GrfAH/KG itAHU. 7»S.3 MM HG.
DISTANCE 5.3<»ll KM FUEL 739.5 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 5
ENGINE S.7 LITREV 8
GVw o KG
»EL. HUM. 14.1 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.uo KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8MI
RUN DURATION
SLOWER INLET PKESS.
BLOmEP DIP. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWtR 5EV
-------
TABLE G-7. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE I/ 1/7R
MODEL 1175 CHEV c-b
DRIVER KEN
WET 8ULB TEMP ie C
SPEC. nllM. 3.11 GRAM/KG
DISTANCE .8o1 KM
TIME -0 HRS.
-i BAG-S 2ic
TEST *T. 7711 «G.
DRY bULH TEMP 25 C
bARO. 7tS.3 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 5
ENGINE s.7 LITSEV R
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. IS.2 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8hO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PKESS.
BLOWER DIF. PKESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
RLOwER REVOLUTIONS
CU. CM
-».2S MINUTES
3H2.1 MM. H?0
375.1 MM H30
fa5 DtG. C
-n
METER READTMG/SCALE
SEADING/SCAUt
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
HC 3ACKGRD ,-lET£K READING/SCALE
HC 3ACKGir[; PPM
CO SAMPLE
CO SAMPLE
CO BACKGKO MfTt'K READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 9ACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
C02 dACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX 8ACKGRD METEK READING/SCALE
NOX tJACKG^u °PM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTHAlION PCT
NOX CONCEMTKATICN PPM
S02 COCENlf
-------
TAfluE G-8. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG
VEHICLE NUMBER ao
DATE i/ S/78 TIrtt -0 MRS.
MODEL 1^75 CHEV c-h» ECS*CKUN-I eAG-b aic
ORIVtR KEN TEST *T. 7711 KG.
«ET 6UL6 TEMP 13 C UHY BULfl TEMP at C
SPEC. HUM. ?.B GHAM/KG tiArtU. 7*1.0 MM H(J.
DISTAMCE 3.3?q KM FUEL ?38.S G/LITRE
TEST NO. 5
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVW Q KG
PEL. HUM. i3.b PCT
MEASURED FUEL O.OH KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bU
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET CHESS.
6LOHER [>IF. PKESS.
SLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER cu. CM /KEV.
t.b? MlNtiTES
38b.l MM. H?Q
•n««.i HM neo
b» DEC. C
-o
SS10
17033
BEADING/SCALE
READING/SCALE
"EAOING/SCALE
HAS RESULTS
MC SArtPLE
HC SAMPLE
HC BACt^GHO
HC 3ACKGHO PPM
CO SAKPLE
CO SArtPLE
CO fiACKGRO "tTKF; RtAOISfi/SCALE
CD SACKGRU PPM
CO? SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C05 SAMPLE PEHCENT
COS 8ACKGRP METER HEADING/SCALE
COS BACNGfiD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METEK READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX 3ACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX HACKG»D PPil
HC CO»iCEMTHATIOH PPM
CO CONCEHTPAIIGN PPM
coa ciiNCE^rftAiiON ^CT
NOX CUNCEHTHA TIliN PPM
S02 COCENTRATION
HC MASS (G***S)
CO MASS (GSAM5)
COS MASS (SSAhS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
303 MASS
GRAMS/KM
'3RAMS/KM (GKAMS/MILE)
HC
CO
CD? SRArtS/KM
NOX 5RAMS/K*!
SO? GRAMS/KM
HC GHAMS/KG OF FUEL
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
COa sJRAitS/KG OF fUEL
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL
S03 GSAMS/KG OF FUEL
.58
3^.5
3iai
11.-»H
n.oo
ei
10. u/ a
10
77.8/11
350
.5/11
2
SU.l/ 2
E.eq
i.?/ a
.Ob
33. 1/ 3
S9.3
.!/ 3
.3
13
33?
0.0
.Sb
28. b?
3037. 5b
11. 1H
'1.00
.17 ( .27)
B.fl ( 13.b5)
BS<1 ( 1H»»»)
3.30 ( 5.30)
n.nu C o.ou)
HC G^AMS/HIN .12
co GRA«S/MTN b.i
C02 GRAMS/MIN bSl!
soe GRAMS/MI.N o.on
FIJI-L tCCNOMY L/100KM (*«IL£S/r.ALLinO
TOTAL CV5 FLOWS 7-*.?STO. CU. METRES
38.Sb C ts.O-O
G-9
-------
TABLE G-9. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE HAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER en
DATE I/ S/7H TIME -0 HRS.
SODEL 1175 CHEV c-bn ECS^CRUN-I HAG-? 2ic
DRIVER KEN TEST iT. 7711 KG.
WET CJULB TEMP 12 c DRY BJLB TEMP 2? c
SPEC. HUH. a.3 (5KAM/KG rtARO. 7f8.8 MM HG.
DISTANCE l.Bfab KM FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
RUN DURATION *.7S MINUTES
BLOWER INLET PKESS. 378.5 MM. H20
BLOWER GIF. PRESS, tit.o nn H20
FLOWER INLET TMP. 31 DEC. c
HYNO REVOLUTIONS -0
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS 53*0
«LO«ER CU. CM /REV. Ib833
TEST NO. S
ENGINE 5.7 LITKEV s
GVW (j KG
HEL. HUM. 10.b PCT
MEASURF.D FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC KATIO l.SbO
METER Kt AOIMG/SC »LE
PAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE PPn
HC BACKGRD METEH READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRO PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
SACKGrtD METE* READING/SCALE
rtACKGKO PPrf
METER READING/SCALE
PERCENT
C02 flACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRO Phh'CENT
METEP REA01NG/SCALE
PPM
NOX BACKGWO METfR READ ING/ SCALE
NOX flAC*G*D Pf'M
HC CONCENTWAflOM
CO CONCENTRATION
CJg CONCENTRATION
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
502 COCENTHATIOK PPM
rlC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (G*Af'S)
C02 MASS
NOX MASS
302 MASS (GRAMS)
co
CO
CO
CO
COS SAMPLE
C02 SAMPLE
NOX SAMPLE
NIIX SAMPLE
HC GRAMS/KM (GRASS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
co? GRAMS/KM (('.RAMS/MILE)
NOX SRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
SO? GRAMS/KM CUrfA"lS/MLE)
HC BRAMS/KG OF FUEL g.73
co GRAMS/M; OF FUEL i?.i
CUP URAMS/KG Of FUEL 3134
NOX 3RAMS/*G OF FUEL 7.S3
SO? SHAMS/KG OF FUEL II.00
.82 (
5. If (
2.31 (
u. no (
4(1. 1/ 2
HO
8. a/ 2
q
103
.5/12
1
bb.b/ 3
l.SO
2.5/ 3
.04
35. 1/ 2
3b.l
.•»/ e
.H
32
qq
Lib
3f. 7
n.u
1.S3
17bl.PS
f.31
u.oo
1.3?)
8.27)
151?)
3.72)
o.nn)
HC
CO
CO?
GRAMS /
.32
2.U
3b8
502 GRAMS/MIN n.Uli
CARBON BALANCfc" FUEL ECONO-iY L/100KM (MILES/GALLON)
40.73 ( 5.7S)
TOTAL cvs KLO-=
. ru.
G-10
-------
TAHLE G-10. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FHPM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUWHEH 30
DATE I/ V78 TIME -0
MHPEL 1H75 CrtEV C-falJ tCS^CKUN-l 9AG-8
OklVER KEN TEST WT. 7711 KG.
«ET SULH TEiHP 12 C DRY HULd TEMP 2S C
SPFC. HUM. 2.if (JR/.M/KG bAKO. 7»8.S MM HG.
DISTANCE 5.3SQ l\M FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. 5
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV a
GVw i) KG
REL. HUH. 10.3 ?CT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC rune
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET UHESS.
SLOWER. OIF. PHE3S.
BLOWER INLET TF«P.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOKES REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CO. CM
.if? MINUTES
.q *1M. H20
.* Ml H20
7h OEG. C
-0
5030
HAG RESULTS
HC SAKPLF. MKTER READ! MG/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC 6ACKGPO METES KEAOI WG/SC4LE
HC flACKGRD PHM
CO SAC.PLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO 6ACKGRD ME TEH READING/SCALE
CD I1ACKGRD PPM
COa S.U,PLE METE* READING/SCALE
CUa SAMPLE PERCENT
COa tiACKGKO MUTES REAUING/SCALE
C02 flACKGRD PKRCEMT
NUX SA«PLE ntT£K REAOING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE P"M
NOX rtACKGRD MCTER READING/SCALE
NOX SAC^GfiLi PP«
nC CONCENTMATIau PPM
CO CONCENTRATION P*-M
COe CONCENTRATION PC T
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
502 COCElTHATlCN PPM
MC MASS (GRAdS)
CO MASS (GKAHS)
C02 MASS (GKAflS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
SUB MASS (CftAMS)
«C GRAMS/KM (Gi
-------
TABLE G-ll. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE l/HJ/78
MOPEL lt'7'J CHF.V C-bCi
DRIVER KEN
HET bULfl TEMP 12 C
S^EC. HUM. 3.9 GrfAM/KG
TIME -0 HRS.
N-? BAG-1 21C
TEST «iT. 7711 KG.
DRY RUL8 TEMP 23 C
3ARO. 7*9.0 MM HG.
TEST NO. 5
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV 8
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. 22.7 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
DISTANCE
l.fibb
FUEL 73H.2 G/LITRE FUEL HC RATIO l.BbO
DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS
SLOWER DIP. PRESS
BLOWE* INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
CU. C.1 /REV. Ib7b3
*.80 MINUTES
H03.9 MM. H20
.3 MM H20
28 OfcG. C
-0
METER READING/SCALE
PAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGHl) MFTER READING/SCALE
HC 8ACKGRU PP'1
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO aACKGRt) METE" READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRL) PPM
COa SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
COS BACiN PPM
•iC GKAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO i;RAMS/K!-l (GRAMS/MILE)
CO? GRAMS/*** (URAMS/f-ILE)
f-lOX G*AMS/KM
Sn2 GRAMS/KM
58. S/ 3
585
1.3/ 3
13
71. O/ 3
IBS'*
1.3b
3.0/ 3
.05
28. ?/ 2
2H.7
178b
1.32
£8.0
(l.U
27.be
173.93
2018.11
3.bb
o.no
If. 85 ( ?3.S5)
«C GRAMS/Kfi af FUEL 3b.8S
Ci) G3AMS/MJ UF FUEL
GHAMS/Ki? OF rljF.L
1081 ( 17*0)
1.9b ( 3.U)
11.00 ( O.nO)
HC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/MIN
C02
'•iOX
5.77
r,ii? I;:?AMS/;->G of FUEL n.on
:t FUEL tCo'^r.MY
•^= 83.7STO. CU.
.7b
O.OU
CHILES/GALLON)
C H.32)
G-12
-------
TABLE G-12. EXHAUST EMISSIONS
VEHICLE NUMBER
SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
20
DATE 1/10/79 Tint -0 HRS.
MODEL 117S CM£v C-bM ECSnCRUN-2 SAG-? SIC
DRIVER KEN TEST WT. 7711 KG.
WET oULB Tr*ip 15 c 0rtY BULB TEMP ?3 c
SPEC. HUH. -».3 GRAM/KG SA*U. 7"*s.(J Mrt HG
DISTANCE S.aii) KM FUEL 738.5 G/LITRE
TEST NO. s
ENGINE 5.7 LlTREV 8
GVW Q KG
REL. HUM. 23.7 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.BbO
RUN DURATION -».18 MINUTES
BLOWER INLET PKESS. nst.q MM. Hao
BLOWER DIF. PRESS. HSs.7 MM nao
HLOrtt« INLET TEMP. ?b DEC. c
DYNO REVOLUTIONS -o
SLOWER KEVOL'JTIUMS SijbB
BLOWER cu. CM /Re;v. ibs?i
HAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE MCTEK BEADING/SCALE
MC SAMPLE PPf.
MC BACKED MtTES READING/SCALE
HC SACKG^i) PPM
CO SAMPLE METE* READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO 3ACKGr*D ^'ETErt *EAuING/5CALE •
CO dACKGRQ PHM
C08 SAMPLE METEP RE AD INB/SC ALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
COa BAC*G«D METER KEAIJING/SCALE
C02 6ACKGHO PtRCENT
NOX SAMPLE M6TEH SE4DI^G/5C ALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRO METEl* ^EAOlNG/SCALE
NOX BACKRWO PPM
HC COf*0
17^. b
O.rj
1.21
185.35
5*8*. I)B
18.73
0.00
( .3b)
( 55.33)
( Ib37)
( S.5«O
C Q.OO)
RR*MS/MIM .27
GRAMS/MIN »1.3
GRAMS/M1M 1223
U9AMS/MIN 4.18
GRAMS/MIN O.OH
CA"oON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/lC.ilKM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL cvs FLOWS ba.i.sJo. cu. METRES
•»5.7b ( S.I1*)
G-13
-------
TABLE G-13. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 30
DATE 1/10/73 TIME -0 MRS.
"OOEL IS7S CHEV C-bO ECS4CHHN-3 BAG-3 SIC
DRIVER KEN TEST wT. 7711 KG.
*ET HULB TEMP 13 C DRY 6ULtf T£MP S* C
5P?C. HUH. H.9 GRAH/KG BARO. 7*1.11 MM HG.
OISTANCE 1.883 KM
RUM DURATION ».7b MINUTES
SLOWER INLET PRESS. 353.1 MM. H?O
BLOWER DIP. PRESS. 381. 0 M« HSO
SLOWER INLET TE*P. bb DEC. C
DYNO REVOLUTIONS -n
•?LCM£R REVOLUTIONS St'Jb
SLUxlER CU. CM /KEV. 17053
BAS RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
nC SAMPLE PPM
MC 3ACKGHO METER BEADING/SCALE
HC BACKGRl) PPM
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAKPLE PPM
CO BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
COS SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C05 SAMPLE PERCENT
COS BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
COa 8ACKGRU PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
MOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX 6ACKGWD METER
MOX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
TEST NO. 5
ENGINE 5.7 LITPEV 8
GVK o KG
HEL. MUM. S3.7 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL 738.3 G/LITRE FUEL MC RATIO l.Sbfl
SOS COCE^TRATION PPM
MC MASS (GKAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GrfAhS)
SOS MASS (G4AMS)
(GRAMS/MILE)
CO GHAMS/KM (GRAMS/iILE)
COS GSAMS/i
-------
TAdLE G-14. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE SAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
DATE: I/IO/?B TIME -n HRS.
MODEL lt»75 CHEV C-bf) ECS*CRUN-2 dAG-f gJC
[iHives KEN TEST «T. 7711 KG.
"*ET BULB TEMH 1H C UKY BULB TEMP 2S C
SPEC. HUM. 5.3 GRAiVKG OARO. 7YS.O MM HG.
DISTANCE 5.^22 KM FUEL 738.2 G/LITPE
TEST NO. 5
ENGINE 5.7 LlTREV 8
GVU 0 KG
REL. HUM. 2b.b PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.BbO
H.tS MINUTES
375.S MM, H20
Hll.S MM H20
95 OEG. C
-0
50^0
PUN DURATION
PLOVER INLET PRESS.
OIF. PRESS.
INLET TEMP;
REVOLUTIONS
9LO*ER REVOLUTIONS
»LO*ER CU. C>! /REV.
G HESULFS
HC SAKPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO
BACKG^O PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
BACKED METER HEADING/SCALE
6ACKGRO PPM
C02 SAMPLE MPTEW »EAOING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 flACKGiil) METER READINU/SC ALE
C02 SACKG»0 PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
MOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX SACKGHli METER f»t ADING/3C ALE
NOX 8ACKG«0 PPM
HC CONCENTRATION Pt>M
CO CONCENTRATION 9PM
CU2 CONCEi^T-iATION PCT
S02 COCENf*4TlON
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (G"*AMS)
COS "ASS (G^AfS)
NO* MASS (G^AMS)
SO? MASS
hC G«AMS/KM
CU fii»AMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO? S^AHS/KI1 (GHAMS/^ILE)
NOX G3AMS/K" (liRAMS/^ILE)
SO? G^AMS/KM (GRArtS/»HLE)
.30 (
3fa.?3 (
3. ob c
o.oo (
SO.?/ 2
51
U.P/ Z
12
57. ?/ 2
2BS2
.!/ S
*
82. <1/ B
».fO
l.b/ 2
.Ob
58. f/ 3
157.2
.*/ 3
1.2
t.37
0.0
I.b2
5220. 0<»
Ib.S?
0.00
n.no)
i>F FUEL .93
CO G«AMS/KG OF FUEL 11 "» . 0
C02 (JKAMS/KR Uc FUEL ?S8?
NOX G^AMS/KG OF FtlEL 9.*8
S02 GSiAMS/Ki; OP FUEL n.OO
HC
CO
COS
NiOX G3AMS/MIN
S02
3.bS
n.OO
M rtALA^CE FUEL r'CONUMY L/lOOKM (M1LES/5ALLON)
TOTAL CVS PL'.H= b5.3STO. C'J. METRES
5.
G-15
-------
TABLE G-15. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 90
DATE 1/10/78 TIME -0 MRS.
MODEL 1975 CHEV C-bO ECSWCRUN-2 BAG-S 21C
DRIVER KEN TEST WT. 77U KG.
WET 8ULB TEMP is C DRY BULB TEMP 2b C
SPEC. HUH. b.O GRAM/KG 6ARO. 749.3 MM HG.
DISTANCE .885 KM FUEL 738.2 G/LITfiE
TEST NO. 5
ENGINE 5.7 LlTREV 8
GVM o KG
REL. HUM. 28.4 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.BbU
RUN DURATION f.27 MINUTES
BLOWER INLET PRESS. 332.7 MM. H20
BLOWER CIF. PRESS. 3b3.2 MM H20
BLOWER INLET TEMP. 72 DEC. C
DYNO REVOLUTIONS -o
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS 4859
BLOWER CL". CM /REV. 170b5
BAG RESULTS
HC SAf.PLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAhPLE PPM
MC BACKGRD METEH READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAr.PLE PPM
CO BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGHD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGPD METER READING/SCALE
C02 6ACKGHD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX 8ACKGHD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02 COCENTRATICN PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
39. 3/ 2
3<1
10. 8/ 2
11
49.b/12
109
1.5/12
3
S3.8/ 3
.94
3.S/ 3
.05
3*.7/ 2
34. 7
.5/ 2
.5
29
104
.89
34.2
0.0
1.13
8.12
C02 MASS (GRAMS) 1095.24
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
S02 MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE) 1.28 ( 2. Ob)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE) S.18 ( 14.77)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE) 1238 ( 1991)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE) 4.30 ( b.qa)
S02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE) O.nO ( 0.00)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3.23 HC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 23.2 CO GRAMS/MIN
C02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3123 C02 GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 10. 8b NOX GRAMS/MIN
S02 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00 S02 GRAMS/MIN
3.81
n.oo
.27
1.9
25b
.89
D.OO
CARBON BALANCE KUEL ECONOMY L/IOOKM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLO>1= b7.SSTD. CU. METRES
SS.bl ( 4.39)
G-16
-------
TA6LE G-16. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE SAT, SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER ?n
DATE 1/10/79 TIME -0 MRS.
MODEL 1975 CrttV C-bfl ECSrfC*UN-S 8AG-b SIC
CHIVE* KEN TEST *T. 7711 KG.
">PT SULR TE1H ib C DRY BUL9 T£*P e? C
SPEC. HUM. (,.* GPArVKG 6ARO. 7*9 3 MM HG
DISTANCE 3.395 KM FU£L 73s!? G/LITRE
TEST NO. 5
ENGINE 5.7 LITKEV 8
GV« o KG
«EL. HUM. 29.e PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
•».b» MINUTES
375.9 M"!. H80
»03.S MM H30
bb OEG. C
-U
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS
BLOWER OIF. P4ESS
BLOWES INLET TEMP.
OYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
HLOWER CD. CM /REV. 17U31
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PPM
HC BACKGRD METEK READING/SCALE
HC tjACKGrtD PPM
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
CO 8ACKGRD MP.TER 'HEADING/SCALE
CO BACKGftD PPM
COS SAKPLE METtK READING/SCALE
COS SAKPLE PErtCENT
COS rtACKGRD MfTER RFAOING/SCA'_£
COS 3ACKGWO PERCENT
•'Iox SAKPLE METER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX flACKGRD MfTEK READING/SCALE
NOX 3ACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTh'ATIlIM PHM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION HPM
SO? COCENTftATION
HC MASS (GKAMS)
CO MASS (G>*AM3)
COS MASS
NOX 1ASS
SOS MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (URA1S/MILE)
CO? GrtAMS/K* (GRAMS/MILE)
.JOX GRAMS/KM (GRA.1S/MILE)
SO? GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL ,hb
CO GRAMS/KG UF FUEL 3-».b
CO? G*AMS/K5 OF FUEL 3113
NOX G^AIS/KG OF FUEL 11.28
sa? G4A1S/KG OF F;J£L P.OO
23. 3/ 3
53
9.fc/ S
10
87.1/11
.8/11
?
SU.HX 2
2.30
i.e/ e
.Ot
9n.*/ 5
9 1 1 . H
is
39b
2.27
99.0
O.U
.b5
33.83
30H7.09
11. US
n.oo
.19 (
898 (
3.35 (
ii.no (
HC
CO
coe
.31)
Ib.n3)
S.2H)
n. on)
7.3
b57
?,38
0.00
CiPrtO'J BALANCF FUEL f.'CONUMY L/l(i'IKM (*<
TUTAL CVS KLlJws 7S.*STO. CU. VFIHKS
3s.no
G-17
-------
TABLE G-17.
EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE 6AG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBF.rt ?U
OAT£ l/Ki/78
TIME
-0 HP.S.
MODEL
DRIVER KEN
*ET SUL8 TEMP
1^75 CHEV C-bd ECS«CRUN-2 3AG-7
TEST IT. 7711 KG.
b C DRY 8UL6 T£MP 27 C
SPEC. HUM. b.2 GRAM/KG cURO. 74S.3 MM HG.
DISTANCE 1.8S3 KM FUEL 738.g G/LITHE
PUN DURATION 4.80 MINUTES
BLOWER INLET pktss. 375.q MM. HSO
SLOWER OIF. PRESS. 411.5 MM H?0
[NLET Tt"lP. 34 OEG. C
REVOLUTIONS -0
SLOWER REVOLUTIONS
"LOXER CU. CM /*£V.
TEST NO. 5
ENGINE s.7 LITREV e
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. 27.S PCF
MEASURED FUEL o.oo KG
FUEL HC KATIO 1.8bO
METER READING/SCALE
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAKPLE
HC SACKGPO M£TEf< REACINU/SCALE
HC 9ACKGHO PPM
CO SAMPLE MtTtP "FADING/SCALE
co SAMPLE PPM
co SACI^GRO ME.TF.W READING/SCALE
CO 4ACKGMO PPM
cog SAKPLE HLTER READING/SCALE
COS SAMPLE PERCENT
cos 3ACK6RO METEK READING/SCALE
CO? HACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE '-tEfcS READING/SCALE
NOX SAKPLE PPM
NOX 8AC«G«D METER READING/SCALE
NOX SACKGWO PPM
HC CUNCENTKATIOfi PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PP"
co? co%C£NT«A i IMN PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
SO? COCEMTrtATION HP"
HC MASS
CO MASS
COg MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (G»A«S)
SOg MASS
47. s/ e
48
s. a/ e
8
47.7/12
105
.7/12
1
fab.q/ 3
1.20
2.5/ 3
.04
32. 8/ 2
32.8
.4/ g
.4
40
100
1.17
32.4
O.M
1.93
17b9.b7
4.47
o.no
rtC GRAMS/HI
CO GRAMS/KM
1.05 (
S.lt (
30? GPAMS/KM (GW4MS/KILE)
HC GRAMS/KG of-' FUEL 3.fi
CO GHAciS/Kl, OF FiJEL 17.1
C'l?. G&ftMS/KG OK FUEL 313g
f.'pv GRAMS/KG Of FiJrL 7.3]
50? SRAMSXKG OF FUcL 0.00
a. 3* c
0.00 f
l.bS)
3.27)
1513)
3.8?)
P.Ofl)
HC GSAHS/MIN
CO 6RAMS/HIN
CO? G
NOX S
302
.40
2.0
O.DU
CAfc'30M BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/lOilKM ("I LF.S/GALLON)
CV5 FLH«= 32.1STr». CO. ^iF.
40.bl ( 5.7
-------
TABLE G-18. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE HAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 2fl
DATE l/in/7B TlrtE -II HRS.
MODEL 1975 CHEv C-bO FCS*CWUN-2 BAG-8 SIC
OKIVEH KEN TEST XT. 7711 KG.
WET suia TEMP it c DRY HUL^ TEMP a? c
SPEC. HUM. h.a GSAM/KG SARG. 7*1.3 M HG.
DISTANCE 5.tee KM FUEL 733.2 IS/LITRE
TEST NO. 5
ENGINE 5.7 LITREv H
GV« 0 KG
REL. HUM. 27.2 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.un KG
FUEL HC RATIO
BUM DURATION
RLO*£R INLET P«ESS.
BLOWER DIF. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OY-40 REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
PLOwER CO. C'" /«t-~V.
MINUTES
»31.8
7b
-0
5052
MM H20
OEG. C
9AG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLt
flACKGRD MfT
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
MfTErt Rfc AD ING/SCALE
METEFf RE AOING/SU ALE
PPM
HACKGHD Ht TEK READING/SCALE
flACKGRO PHU
C02 SAMPLE wETER READING/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PFKCEiNr
CO? BACKGRU MKTEP Rt AiJING/SCALE
C02 8ACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE MtTER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PP«
NOX 8ACKGRD METEH HEADING/SCALE
NOX 8ACKGRO PKM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION =PM
C02 CONCEMTRATION PCT
NUX CONCENTRATION PPM
SOa COCENTRATION
HC MASS (G^AllS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
C02 MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
MASS
HC GRANS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GWAMS/KM (5HAMS/MILE)
CO? GP«MS/KM (GRA«S/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GHAMS/MILE)
GBAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
38. ?/ 2
38
11. 1/ 2
11
88. W 3
.!/ 3
2
BS.l/ 2
*.35
1.7/ 2
.Ob
St.O/ 3
1.2
31
22*0
*.31
lbl.2
0.0
1,21
177. 7H
5372. •*?
10.28
0.00
.22 ( ,3b)
3.37 ( 5.t?)
3.00 ( 0.00)
HC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/HIN
C02 GRAMS/-«IN
.27
39.7
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL .fa3
co GKAMS/KG OF FUEL is.b
CO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3011
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUF.L 10.2*
SO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00 SO? GSAMS/MIN 0.00
CAPdON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/10i)KM (MILES/GALLON)
TDTAt CVS rLn»-= e-S.aSTD. CU. i-ETRES
( 5.23)
G-19
-------
TABLE G-19. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER an
0»TE
MODEL
OhIVtR KEN
WET BULB TEMP
I/ 1/78 TINE -0
CHEV c-faii ECSI MINUTES
BLOWER INLET PRESS. 358. i MM.
RLOWER OIF. PRESS. 388. fa MM
SLOWER INLET TEMP. +a OEG. c
OYMO REVOLUTIONS -0
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS 53?S
PLOVER CU. C
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
BACKGRD
BACKGHO
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
MC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO
("HTfS READING/SCALE
PP1
REAOING/SCALE
READINfi/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRO Mt'TEH READING/SCALE
SACKG^O PPM
CO? SAMPLE ^ETER REAOIMfi/SCALE
C02 SAMPLE PtKCEN'T
C03 OAC^GRD MtTE>» READING/SCALE
C02 3ACKGHO PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METEK READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRO ("ETEH READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGhO PP'1
HC CONCEHTHATIfiH PPM
CO CONCENTftATION PPK
C02 CONCENTRAl IUN PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
50? COCENTHATION PPM
HC MASS (.GfcAUS)
CO MASS (GrA^S)
C02 MASS (G*AHS)
NOX rtASS (GKAHS)
S02 MASS (Gf-AMS)
b8.4/ 2
b8
10. 5/ 2
10
58.3/12
13°
.f/18
^
b7.f/ 3
i.21
2. 1/ 3
.OH
3^.2/ 2
3q«5
1. OX 2
1«°
5«l
12b
1.1'
38.3
». 0
S. 75
11.85
1739.17
4.78
0.00
iJRAM5/Krl
CO
coa GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM
S02 GRAMS/KM
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL f.q<*
co GRAMS/KG UF FUEL 21.3
co? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3120
NOX '5SAMS/KG OF KUtL P.57
S02 GRAMS/KG OF FL/EL n.OO
CARBON 6ALANCS FUF.L ECONOMY
l.tb C ?.3S)
b.3Q C 10.13)
0.00 (
.58
CO GRAMS/MIN 2.5
CO? GSAMS/MIN 3bS
1.00
0.00
(MILES/GALLON)
40.05 ( 5.87)
TOTAL CVS FLUrt=
m.eSTO. CU.
G-20
-------
TA6LE G-20. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER Sfl
DATE I/ S/78 TIME -0 MRS.
MODEL 1975 CHEV C-bll tCS4CRUN-l HAG-S ?1H
PRIVER KEN TEST «T. 7711 KG.
WET BULB TE^P 12 c DRV BULK TEMP Sb c
SPEC. HUM. 3.1 GRAM/KG SARD. 7*8.5 MH HG.
DISTANCE S.*23 KM
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS.
BLOWER UIF. PHESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
SLOWER cu. CM /REV.
TEST NO. b
ENGINE s.? LITREV B
GVW o KG
REL. HUM. It.b PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.on KG
FUEL 738.a G/LITRE FUEL HC RATIO
H.t7 MINUTES
tlb.b MM. H80
MM H20
f»«».fa
7b
-0
50*0
DEC. C
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO
COS SAMPLE
COS SAMPLE
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGKD METER READING/SCALE
RACKGRO PPM
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
OACKGHD METER READING/SCALE
F»ACKG«D "PM
METER READING/SCALE
PERCENT
COS 8ACKGRD *£TER READING/SCALE
COS 8ACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE MtTER READING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE P^M
NOX BAC^GRO METER READING/SCALE
NOX 3ACKGRD PPM
riC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION =>Ph
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION °PM
SOS COCtNTRATIOM HPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GBArtS)
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GHAMS)
SOS MASS (GKAiiS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GPAMS/MILE)
COS GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
SOS GRAMS/KM (GwAMS/MILE)
.11 (
32.H3 (
10D* (
3.00 (
O.no (
S2.<»/ 2
S3
12.S/ S
IS
b7.3/ 3
1735
.!/ S
t
83.S/ S
f ,*3
l.S/ S
.05
52.S/ 3
157.5
15
1577
ISb.S
0.0
.58
lb.25
0.00
.17)
n.no)
HC GRAMS/KG (JF FUEL .33
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL bS.t
COS SRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3051
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL s.13
soa GRAMS/KG OF FUEL n.no
HC GRAMS/MIM
CO GRAMS/MIN
COrf GPAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/MIN
502 GRAMS/MIN
.13
27.8
1S17
0.00
CARBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/IOOK* (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL C^S FLO«= b?.6STD. CU.
( 5.30)
G-21
-------
TABLE G-21. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER an
DATE I/ S/7«J
MODEL IR?S CHE\/ c-
DRIVER KEN
WET 9ULB TEMP 13 C
TIME -0 MRS.
ECS*CRUM-I HAG-^ 21 H
TEST IT. 7711 KG.
DRY B'JL* TEMP 27 C
SPEC. HUM.
DISTANCE
g.q GRAM/KG
.8b1 KM
BASO. 7*8.5 MM HG.
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
TEST NO. b
ENGINE s.? LITREV 9
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. 13.1 PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO 1.8KO
t.as MINUTES
337.8 MM. H?0
MM H?0
375.1
bS
-0
OEG. C
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PRESS
BLOWER DIP. PRESS
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DYNO REVOLUTIONS
BLOWEQ REVOLUTIONS
BLOwEf? CU. C^ /hEV. 17057
BAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
HC SAMPLE PP"i
NC B*CKG«U METER READING/SCALE
8ACKGRO PPM
SAMPLE METER RF.AOINU/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
8ACKGRD «ET£^ HE AD ING/SC ALE
8ACKGRO PPM
HC
co
CO
CO
CO
coa SAMPLE
COS SAMPLE
COa 8ACK6RIJ
C02 BACKGHLJ
NOX SAMPLE
NOX SAMPLE
METER READING/SCALE
riETER READING/SCALE
PERCENT
METtiK REAiilNG/SCALE
PPM
NOX BACKGHU M£T£« Rt AOING/SCALE
NOX OACKGBD PP.V.
HC CONCENTRATION PHM
CO CONCENTRATION PfM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION Pfl"
303 COCENTftATIC.N PPfc-
HC MASS (GRASS)
CO MASS (GRA".S)
COa MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (G*A-3)
SOa MASS
GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
GRAMS/KM
HC
CO
COa GRAMS/KM (GKA1S/MH.E)
NOy GRAMS/KM
SO? GRAMS/KM
HC GRAMS/KG OF FljfcL H.33
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL lb.1
coa GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3130
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL Un.qq
SOa GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
*8.3/ 2
tB
11. 9/ 2
12
72.<»/13
71
51. 7/ 3
.10
3.t/ 3
.05
37. 5/ a
37.5
l.b/ a
l.b
37
b
-------
TABLE G-22. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE HAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUM3E* 3i\
DATE I/ S/78 TIME -0 MRS.
MODEL i^s CHEV c-bo ECS-NCRUN-I SAG-** ein
DRIVER KEN TEST «T. 7711 KG.
w£T BULB TEMP 13 C DRY BULB TEMP 2S C
SPEC. HUM. 3.0 GRAM/KG BAtfO. 7*8.5 MM HG.
DISTANCE 3.
TEST NO. b
ENGINE s.? LITREV s
GVW o KG
REL. HUM. X2.7 PCT
FUEL O.on KG
FUEL 738.3 fi/LITRE FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
RUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PKESS. 375.1
BLOWER DIP. PRESS. t08.9
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
DVNO REVOLUTIONS
SLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /nEV. I703t,
t.fafl MINUTES
MM. HSO
MM H20
DEG. C
1,2
-0
MtTEH REAOINli/SCALE
BAG HESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
HC BACKGHO METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD P»*M
CO SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
CO SAMPLE PPM
co BACKGRD MF.TER READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRD PPM
C02 SAMPLE METER READIMG/SCALE
C05 SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 jiACKG^O METER READING/SCALE
C02 6ACKG»l>
NOX SAMPLE
NOX SAMPLE
NOX SACKGHD
NOX BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTOATIGN PPH
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02 COCENTRATIGN PPM
HC MASS (GHAM3)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
COS MASS (GRAMS)
NQX MASS (GMAnS)
SOS MASS (GKA«S)
25. b/ S
2b
•».»/ ?
S
81.8/11
ETER READING/SCALE
READING/SCALE
HC GRAMS/HM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/K« (GWASS/MILE)
COS GRAMS/KM (RPAMS/MILE)
NOX GftAnS/K* (GCAMS/MILE)
S02 GRAMS/KM (ORAM8/MILE)
HC GrtAMS/KG OF FUEL .7q
CO G«A"!S/KG OF KUtL 35.3
COS GHAMS/KG OF F05L 311b
NOX GRAMS/KG OF Fij£L 11.S7
SOS GRA1SMG OF FJSL O.OC
M.lfa (
3.31 ( S.fb)
(1.00 ( 0.00)
HC GRAMS/MIN
CO GRAMS/MIN
CO? GRAMS/MIN
NOX GRAMS/HIM
"JO?
.7/11
2
"H.5/ 2
2.25
l.feX 2
.Ob
3*.I/ 3
102.3
.2/ 3
.b
18
3bO
3.21
101.8
0.0
.77
31.25
3015.11
11.58
o.on
.3b)
. Lb
b.7
0.00
CARSON GLANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/lOUK'i (MILES/GALLONS
3H.3? ( b.13)
TOTAL CVS FLOw=
74.7STD. C'J.
G-23
-------
TABLE G-23. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE SAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUM8EP en
DATE I/ 8/78 TIME -0 HRS.
MODEL 1^75 CHEV C-bll ECSf'CHUN-5 SAG-1 21H
DRIVER KEN TEST «T. 7711 KG.
k-ET BULB TEMf> it! C DRY BULfi TEMP a1* C
SPEC. HUM. 3.5 GRAM/KG 6ARO. 7H8.3 MM HG.
DISTANCE l.Sfab KM FUEL 738.a G/LITRE
TEST NO. b
ENGINE 5.7 LITREV s
GVW o KG
REL. HU*. 18.8 PCT
MEASURED FUEL o.tm KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.BbO
PUN DURATION
BLOWER INLET PKESS.
BLOWER OIF. PRESS.
BLOWER INLET TEMP.
OYNO REVOLUTIDMS
SLOWER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /KEV.
f.78 MINUTES
37b." MM. He?0
HM HJO
31 OEG. C
-0
PPM
PAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAKPLE
HC BACHGPD
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
READING/SCALE
^ READING/SCALE
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO
coa SAMPLE
COS SAMPLE
NOX
SAMPLE
METE** RtAOING/SCALE
PPM
SACKGHO METER READING/SCALE
8ACKGRO PPM
METER READING/SCALE
PERCENT
BACKGHB MfcTEN READING/SCALE
COa BACKGRD PERCENT
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
NOX BACKGWD METE* READING/SCALE
NOX SACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
coa CONCENTPAT ION PCT
MOX CONCENTRATION PPM
303 COCENTHATION PP*
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRAMS)
COa MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (GRAMS)
302 MASS (GRAMS)
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
co GPAMS/KW (GRAMS/WILE)
C02 G«AMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
soa GRAMS/KM
88. «/ 2
Bi
8.S/ 2
9
51.5/12
lit
.1/12
0
d?.7/ 3
i.aa
3.S/ 3
.05
3S.3/ 2
3S.3
.^/ 2
.»
81
110
1.17
38. S
0.0
3.81
!U.b5
177b.Clfa
0.110
•J.08 (
5.71 (
?.b7
ii.no
3.35)
".19}
1531}
H.30}
n.on)
GRAMS/MIN
CO
coe
HC G3AMS/KG OF FUEL b.82
co GSA^S/KG OF FUEL is.?
CO? GRAM5/KG OF FUEL 311B
NOX GSAM5/^G OF FUEL B.7b
SO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
CARBON tiALAMCE FUEL ECONOMY L/IO^K!' (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLUAS ft3.0S10. CU. ,-fETRES
.81
5.7H)
G-24
-------
G-24. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBER 20
OATE I/ S/78 TIME -0 HRS.
MODEL 1^75 CHEV c-bo ECSWCRUM-S SAG-S ajn
DRIVER K£N TESI .IT. 7711 KG.
*ET 8UL3 TEMP ie C DRY BULu TEMP 2b C
SPEC. HU?1. 3.1 ^RAM/KG BARO. 748.3 MM HG.
TEST NO. fa
ENGINE s.? LITREV a
GVM 0 KG
BEL. HUM. It.b PCT
MEASURED FUEL ".00 KG
DISTANCE 5.35R
PUN DURATION
FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE FUEL HC RATIO 1.8bO
t.50 MINUTES
INLET PWF.SS. tos.s
DIP. PXF.SS.
HSO
SLOWER INLET TE«P.
OYNO RESOLUTIONS
HcVULUTIONS
CU. C"
71 DEC. C
-0
S09Q
SAG RESULTS
HC SAf^LE
riC SAMPLE
HC SACKGRO
HC 3ACKGKD
CO SAMPLE
CO SAMPLE
CO 9ACKGRD
CO 3ACKGKO
C05 SAMPLE
C02 SAMPLE
C03 9ACKGWO
COS 3ACO.G*:)
NOX SAMPLE
NOX SAMPLE
NOX 5ACKGPD
Kt"40IMG/SCALE
HETEf! READ ING/SC AuE
PPM
*ET£R READING/SCALE
HETER READING/SCALE
NE7ER READING/SCALP
PERCENT
rl£TP» «F.AOIiNG/SC ALE
PERCENT
"tTE* READING/SCALE
PPM
METER READING/SCALE
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
COS CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
302 COCEUTKATIQM
MASS (GRAnS)
MASS (GBA>'S;
MASS (GRAMS)
NOX MASS (ii«A"'3)
soa MASS (&*A*3)
HC
CO
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM
co? GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM (6KAMS/KILE)
SO? GRAMS/KM (GH*MS/MILE)
HC GRAMS/KG OF FUEL .93
CO 3«AMS/<5 OF FueL b8.2
COe GRA-lS/^G OF FUEL 3059
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL u.v»
soa GRA-IS/HG OF FUF;L o.oo
B.I/ Z
8
hl.<)/ 3
15t>8
.a/ 3
5
7S.O/ 3
"t.13
1.5/ S
.05
b2.7/ 3
188.1
.!/ 3
-3
31
1*33
H.01
187.
-------
TASLE G-25. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUMBED 20
DATE I/ S/78 TIME -0 HPS.
MODEL 1^75 CHEV C-bl) ECSWCRUN-3 SAG-3 21H
DRIVER KEN TEST «T. 7711 KG.
WET HULB TEMP 13 C DRY riiJLH TEMP 27 C
SPEC. HUM. 3.8 GRAM/KG BARO. 718.0 MM HG.
DISTih4CE .353 KM FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
RUN DURATION t.22 MINUTES
PLOHER I^LET PRESS. 3fO."* MM. H?0
BLOWEH CIF. PRESS. 375.R MM HgO
BLOWER HLE.T TEMP. bH DEC. C
OYNO REVOLUTIONS -0
BLOWER KEVULUTIONS
CD. CM /REV. I70b2
TEST NO. b
ENGINE s.7 LITREV e
GVW 0 KG
REL. HUM. ib.? PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC RATIO l.HbO
METE-< FADING/SCALE
PAG RESULTS
HC SAMPLE
HC SAMPLE
HC SACKGKO' MF.TER READING/SCALE
HC SACKGRO PpM
CO SAMPLE METEW SEAOING/SCALE
co SAK.PLE PP«
CO 9ACKGRD HETtR READING/SCALE
CO BACKGRO PPM
COS SAMPLE METEK READING/SCALE
COS SAKPLE PEKCEMT
COS BACKGRD "ETEP READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGnD PERCENT
NOX SAKPLE MKTE« HEADING/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PpM
MC CONCENTNATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
coe CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02
HC MASS
CO MASS
COa MASS
NOX MASS (GHAMS)
S02 MASS (GRAMS)
11.a/ 2
11
82.f/13
82
1.3/13
1
51.57 3
.90
2.7/ 3
.U't
*0.f/ 5
to.1*
.b/ 2
.b
32
71
.8h
3"1.8
O.U
1.J5
b.21
1051.81
».19
n.no
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAHS/MILE)
CU GKAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CC2 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GffAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
SOP
MC GRAMS/KG UF FUEL s.b*?
CO GRAMS/KG Or FUEL IB.3
CO? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3129
MGX GPAMS/KG OF FUEL ia.3b
ST.? GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 0.00
l.*b ( 2.3S)
7.28 ( 11.71)
12*3 ( 2000)
•f.«U ( 7.90)
U.UO ( P.DO)
HC GRAMS/MIN .30
CO GRAMS/MIN 1.5
CO? GRAMS/MIN 251
S02 GRAMS/MIN 0.00
BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY L/10UKr iMILES/SALLON)
TOTAL CVS FLO«= b?.5STO. CU. MftRgs
53.73 ( 4.38)
G-26
-------
TAoLE G-26. EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM SINGLE BAG SAMPLE
VEHICLE NUM3KR 20
OATE I/ 1/78 TIME -0 MRS.
MODEL 1175 ChEv C-bt> ECSwCKUN-3 BAG-t 2)H
DRIVER KEN TEST *T. 7711 KG.
wET 5ULH TEMP 1H C DRY OULb TF.MP 30 C
SPEC. HUM. 3.g GRAM/KG tSAR.0. 7f8.0 MM HG.
DISTANCE 3.371 KM FUEL 738.2 G/LITRE
PUN DURATION "».fa7 MINUTES
BLOWER INLET PRESS. 379.5 MM. Hao
BLOWER, DIF. PRESS, fii.s HM
BLOwER INLET TEMP.
DYNO RESOLUTIONS
HLOwER REVOLUTIONS
BLOWER CU. CM /«EV.
TEST MO. b
ENGINE s.7 LITKEV e
GVW ci KG
REL. HUM. is.a PCT
MEASURED FUEL 0.00 KG
FUEL HC HATIO l.SbO
h7
-0
537?
17022
DtG. C
METE* RtAOlNG/SCALE
BAG RESULTS
. HC SA^^LE
HC SAMPLE
HC BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
HC BACKGRD PPM
co SAMPLE METEK READING/SCALE
co SAMPLE PPM
co BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
co SACKGSD PPM
COa SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
COa SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGrtO "ETER READING/SCALE
COg BACKGKD PEKCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER READINU/SCALE
NOX SAMPLE
NOX BACKGWO
NOX flACKGRO PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S03 COCENTnATlON PPM
HC MASS (GRAMS)
CO MASS (GRANS)
coe MASS
NOX MASS
S02 MASS (GRAMS)
SEAOING/SCiLE
2H.3X 2
2«f
la.1*/ z
12
8a.3/ii
383
.5/11
a
H8.1*/ a
e.ii
1.3/ 2
.05
33. 2/ 3
11. b
,3/ 3
.1
If
2.15
18.8
0.0
.51
31.04
5885.85
11.01
0.00
HC GRAMS/KM
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
cos GRAMS/KM
NOX GRAMS/KM
SO? GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
HC G-»AMS/»vG OF FUEL ,b>»
CO GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 33.5
COR GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 3US
NOX GRAMS/KG OF FUEL 11.97
SU2 GRAMS/KG OF FUEL U.C10
.17 (
S.11 < 14.79)
137f)
5.28)
n.on)
3.28 (
3.00 (
1C
CO
so? G
.13
b.b
b!8
J.38
o.co
CAPBON BALANCE FUEL ECONOMY LAlUflKM (MILES/GALLON)
TOTAL CWS FLO^s 73.8STO. CU.
37.01 I b.3H)
G-27
-------
UNIT NO. en
VEHICLE MODEL
TEST NO. 8-2
CHEV C-bU ECSWC
BAROMETER 7"»b.7b MM OF HG.
DRY BULB TEMF. 23.3 DEC. C
REL. HUMIDITY 2H PCT.
TABLE G-27. VEHICLE EMISSION RESULTS
1178 LIGHT DUTY EMISSIONS TEST
ACTUAL DISTANCES USED IN CALCULATIONS
DATE 1/10/78 MFGR. CODE -0
ENGINE 5.7* LITRE 8 CURB NT. 0 KG
WET BULB TEMP 12.2 DEG. C
ABS. .HUMIDITY t.3 GRAMS/KG
COMMENTS
VR.
GVM
1175
0 KG
O
10
00
EXHAUST EMISSIONS
BLOHER OIF. PRESS.,
BAG RESULTS
BAG NO.
BLOWER REVOLUTIONS
HC
HC
HC
HC
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO?
G8» «2*.2 MM. H20
METEK READING/SCALE
PPM
CO?
C02
CO?
NOX
NOX
NOX
NOX
SO?
SO?
SO?
SO?
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
BACKGRD HETER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
BACKGHD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PERCENT
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PERCENT
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
METER READING/SCALE
PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPK
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
CO? CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
302 CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
CO? MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
SOS MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO? GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAKS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM (MPG)
CVS FLO* STD. CU. METRES (SCF)
CALCULATED DISTANCE KM(MILES)
WEIGHTED FUEL CONSUMPTION LIIRES/IUOKM (hPG)
WEIGHTED MASS HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
WEIGHTED MASS CO GRAMS/KH (GRAMS/MIl F.)
WEIGHTED MASS C02 GfiAMS/KH (GRAMS/MILE)
WEIGHTED MASS NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
TOTAL CVS FLOW s YOt.t STO. CU. METRES
BLOWER INLET PRESS., 61 388.h MM. H20
BLOWER INLET TEMP. b» DEG. C
1
1557
21. S/ 3
215
l.O/ 3
10
b7.S/ 3
17*2
.2/ 3
5
5*.7/ 2
2.55
l.H/ 2
.05
3b.8/ 3
110.*
.?/ 3
.b
-O.D/-0
-U.O
-0.0/-0
-0.0
287
Ib31
2.51
101.1
0.0
22.01
25* .bfl
112.11
23. Ib
u.on
3.11 ( b.
*5.12 ( 72.
1(188.? (1751
H.10 ( b.
sn.no ( *.
133.5 (*713
S.b* ( 3.
*b.7*
1.17
17.7?
lOfaO.8
H.lb
i
Ib317
82. 2/ 2
82
12. 2/ 2
12
13.1/12
230
.5/12
1
88. O/ 3
l.b*
3.S/ 3
.05
b2.b/ 2
b2.b
.I/ 2
.1
-O.D/-0
-0.0
-0.0/-0
-o.u
72
2211
1.S1
bl.B
0.0
1.*0
58. *5
bb32.0h
??. ?*
0.00
30) 1.51 ( 2.H2)
bO) 1.3b ( IS. Ob)
.U) 10b2.3 (1701.3)
bO) 3.Sb ( 5.73)
70) *b.!7 ( 5.01)
.1) 227.1 (80*7.7)
51) b.2* ( 3. 88)
( 5.03)
( 3.17)
( 2B.S1)
(17Mb. 1)
( (-.711)
3
15?1
11. 3/ 3
113
l.l/ 3
11
22. b/ 3
522
.!/ 3
2
53. O/ 2
2.»S
l.S/ 2
.05
*8.*/ 3
1*5.2
.?/ 3
.b
-0.0/-0
-0.0
-0.0/-0
-0.0
10*
*11
2.»1
1**. 7
0.0
7.18
7b.O*
5BfaR.07
30.38
0.00
l.*l ( 2.
13. »* ( 21.
1037.3 (Ibbl
5.37 ( 8.
*5.3b { 5.
133.0 (*b15
S.bb ( 3.
27)
b3)
.0)
b*)
11)
.5)
52)
-------
IO
10
UNIT NO. 20
VEHICLE MODEL
TEST NO. 8-3
CHEV C-hO ECSHC
BAROMETER 7"»b.51 MM OF HG.
DRr BULB TEMP. 27.8 DEC. C
REL. HUMIDITY 23 PCT.
TABLE G-28. VEHICLE EMISSION RESULTS
1978 LIGHT DUTY EMISSIONS TEST
ACTUAL DISTANCES USED IN CALCULATIONS
DATE 1/11/78 MFGR. CODE -0
ENGINE 5.7-» LITRE 8 CURB HT. 0 KG
HET BULB TEMP 15.0 DEG. C
*8S. HUMIDITY S.f GRAMS/KG
COMMENTS
YR.
GVH
197S
0 KG
EXHAUST EMISSIONS
BLOWER OIF. PRESS.,
BAG RESULTS
RAG NO.
SLOWER REVOLUTIONS
HC
HC
HC
HC
CO
CO
CU
CO
C02
C02
G2, »31.8 MM. H20
SAMPLE MF.TER READING/SCALF
SAMPLE PPM
BACKGHD MF.TER READING/SCALE
HACKGHD PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PPM
BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
BACKGRD PPM
SAMPLE METER READING/SCALE
SAMPLE PERCENT
C02 BACKGHD METER READING/SCALE
C02 BACKGRD PERCENT
NOX SAMPLE METER REAOING/SCALF
NOX SAMPLE PPM
NOX BACKGRD METER READING/SCALE
NOX BACKGRD PPM
302 SAMPLE MF.TER READING/SCALE
SO? SAMPLE PPM
S02 BACKGRD METER HEADING/SCALE
802 BACKGRD PPM
HC CONCENTRATION PPM
CO CONCENTRATION PPM
C02 CONCENTRATION PCT
NOX CONCENTRATION PPM
S02 CONCENTRATION PPM
HC MASS GRAMS
CO MASS GRAMS
C02 MASS GRAMS
NOX MASS GRAMS
S02 MASS GRAMS
HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
FUEL CONSUMPTION BY CB L/100KM (MPG)
CVS FLOW STU. CU. METRES (SCF)
CALCULATED DISTANCE KM(MILES)
WEIGHTED FUEL CONSUMPTION LITRES/IUPKH (MPG)
WEIGHTED MASS HC GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MHE)
WEIGHTED MASS CO GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
WEIGHTED MASS C02 GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
WEIGHTED MASS NOX GRAMS/KM (GRAMS/MILE)
TOTAL CVS FLOW = »9S.b STD. CU. METRES
BLOWER INLET PRESS., Gl 393.7 MM. H20
BLOWER INLET TEMP. b2 DEG. C
1
9521
2».H/ 3
2->»
1.3/ 3
13
57. 3/ 3
1H31
.a/ 3
s
55. O/ S
a. 57
!.»/ a
.05
»2.9/ a
128.7
.3/ 3
.9
-O.O/-0
-0.0
-0.0/-0
-0.0
a3»
13tb
a. 53
128.0
II. 0
17.99
209. ai
blRb.Sa
27.78
n.no
3.21 ( 5.
37.35 ( bU.
UOH.b (1777
*.9b ( 7.
SO. 09 ( ».
133.5 C«7J»
S.bO ( 3.
Hb.70
2. Ob
Ib.bb
lUbl.5
•».3»
2
Ib30»
10. O/ 3
10U
1.2/ 3
12
81.2/12
180
.7/18
1
87. 2/ 3
I.b2
3.B/ 3
.ob
bS.O/ 2
bS.O
.b/ 2
.b
-0.0/-U
-0.0
-0.0/-U
-0.0
89
180
1.57
bt.S
0.0
11.80
H7.90
bSbS.80
23. 9b
0.00
17) 1.88 ( 3.03)
10) 7.b» ( 12.29)
.3) 1017.1 (lfaBH.8)
98) 3.82 C b.15)
70) HS.Yb C 5.17)
.1) 228. b (8073. t)
»8) b.27 ( 3.90)
( 5.01)
( 3.31)
( 2b.80)
(1707.9)
( b.98)
3
9518
12. it 3
122
l.l/ 3
11
31. O/ 3
72b
.3/ 3
7
53. b/ 2
2.H9
1.5/ 2
.05
H2.b/ 3
187. B
,3/ 3
.1
-0.0/-0
-0.0
-0.0/-0
-O.D
113
bUO
2.»5
127.1
0.0
8.70
105.71
597».98
27.57
D.OO
1.5* ( 2.
»8)
18.70 ( 30.09)
1057.1 (1700
».B8 ( 7.
Hb.58 ( 5.
133. » cme
S.hS ( 3.
.8)
85)
OS)
.3)
51)
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
EPA -460/3-78-005
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
Heavy Duty Fuel Economy Program
Phase III
5. REPORT DATE
May 1978
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
11-4311-002
Charles M. Urban
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS'
Southwest Research Institute
6220 Culebra Road
San Antonio, Texas 78284
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-03-2220
2. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Phase III Final Report
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/200/05
This report describes the laboratory effort toward further evaluating the emissions
and fuel economy performance of the advanced emissions control technology engine
configuration optimized in Phase II of this project. An additional intent of Phase
III was to obtain data toward establishing a linking mechanism between data gener-
ated previously using various different operating cycles and test procedures.
Project tasks included: examination and overhaul of the engine used during Phase II
nine-mode and transient cycle emissions and fuel consumption evaluations, and rec- '
ommendations for future work. For the transient cycle evaluations, which included
light-duty FTP and experimental CAPE-21 cycles, the engine was installed into an
appropriate heavy-duty truck. All transient cycle emissions and fuel consumption
evaluations were conducted on a heavy-duty chassis dynamometer and utilized a
truck-size constant volume sampler.
Fuel Consumption
Exhaust Emissions
Trucks
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Unlimited
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
Heavy-duty Vehicles
9-mode emission tests
Transient cycle
emission tests
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
21. NO. OF PAGES
190
22. PRICE
------- |